HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 1.C 02/23/2004February 23, 2004
'
City of etalu a, C if ®n id
I85s MEETING OF PETALUMA CITY COUNCIL
Draft City Council Minutes
Monday, February 2, 2004 - 100 P.M.
Regular Meeting
1
CALL TO ORDER
2
3
A. Roll Call
.
5
Present: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, Vice Mayor Moynihan, O'Brien, Torliatt
6
Absent: C_anevaro
7
8
B. Pledge of Allegiance :'Harris
9
10
PUBLIC COMMENT
11
12
Jim Ricci, Petaluma, Old East, Neighborhood Association, spoke regarding the past five
13
years of promises .of'the City toTepair sidewalks in the - neighborhood, particularly Payran,
14
Vallejo, Edith, Wilson. and Jefferson Streets,,Which are in. the redevelopment district.
15
Sidewalks have been marked twice for "replacement and. each time have been
•
16
removed from thel budget. New bights, trees, and sidewalks were promised over 5 years
17
ago. The redevelopment funds are there and should be the number one project. Their
18
November 2001 newsletter mentioned sidewalk improvements would be moving forward
19
next spring (of 2002). Also mentioned the sidewalk�across from the Opportunity Center
20
on from East D Street to. approximately 1.50 feet north on Payran Street. People who visit
21
the Center park their cars on the sidewalk, forcing pedestrians to walk in the street..
22
Believes solution is to replace the:swale gutter with a. standard curb to discourage
23
people from parking on the sidewalk.
24
25
COUNCIL COMMENTS
26
_
27
Council Member Torliatt ;has exchanged several emails with Mr. Ricci and told him the
28
City would be looking, at the midterm budget review, the redevelopment' budget
29
coming up. soon. The sidewalks were part of a prom.. ise that the City made when the
30
Opportunity' Center was relocated to its,existing location. She hoped to see it back in the .
31
budget. She thought it was a $75;000 allocation at the time, and would like to see -this
32
move forward in the Redevelopment Agency when the budget comes back in the next
33
fiscal year.
34
35
She attended' the Water Advisory Committee (WAC) meeting this morning. The
36
committee discussed what should be left in the O &M fund for the Water Agency, and
37
the possibility of increasing from a three month to a four -month reserve for the Water
38
Agency budget. They also .discussed the 2004 -2005 water transmission system budget,
39
and Will be bringing that back at the next WAC meeting for a final approval. Council will
40
probably need dgendize that for action between now and the next meeting in March.
•
41
The committee discussed the Santa Rosa wastewater disposal options; specifically, the
42
option to discharge in° the Russian River upstream of the Water Agency collectors that
1 provide our drinking water. Many of the contractors expressed concern about that
2 option, especially if it resulted in the water quality being degraded a level that
3 required a service water treatment facility.
4
5 Santa Rosa. talked about their proposed allocation methodology for water supply
6 shortage. The will be. meeting with all the contractors to discuss concerns with their initial
7 proposal, which calls for the Petaluma to pump well water during a shortage;,
8 while Santa Rosa would not. She thought the City of Petaluma and the other contractors
9 had'significant issues with that proposal.
10
1 1 Vice Mayor Moynihan wanted to acknowledge that the Finance Department has
12 undergone some significant changes in the last year and has successfully brought the
1.3 CAFR in- house, which is a cost savings. They have converted, for the most part, to the
14 new Pentamation financial software system. Any conversion to a. new system is a major'
15 undertaking. On top_ of that, there are some new government regulations that had to be
16 implemented.
17
18 He received a letter from George Schaeffer regarding Cify.streets. The City responded
19 rapidly to Mr. Schaeffer's concerns, thanks to Director of.Public Facilities and Services
20 Rick.Skladzien. He reminded Council and staff that, "we are being watched," If :the City
21 can provide more 'funding to maintain them properly, it should definitely need do so.
22
23 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS
24
25 City Manager Bierman announced that City Clerk Gayle Petersen was, injured in a fall
27 therece d ved e on the dai s ,reatment. He called Council's attention to. information
tod
y including a revised ordinance for item 4B
28. ("Waterways"), which revises old titles; and additional information on the Aquatics
29 Program.and Boulevard Apartments items on tonight`s agenda.
30
31 Regarding Mr.'Ricci'.s comments about the Payran sidewalks, 'he noted that in last June's
32 budget discussions. Council, agreed to make the adjustments for the sidewalks at mid -
33 year. They will be programmed to be paid for and done this fiscal year. We said we'd do
34 it and we'll do it. That doesn't include the thing, fhat's, a new one, so we`ll have to
35 think about that.
36
37 Mayor Glass noted this is a very challenging time fiscally for the City of Petaluma, and for
38 every municipality, and for every special agency, and every county in the .State of'
39 California. It will be more challenging if the bond issue, which will be presented to the
40 voters on March 2, should fail. The whole situation for California iis literally ".up in the air"
41 and it will be up to the voters.
42
43 AGENDA CHANGES AND DELETIONS (Changes to current agenda only).
44
45 Vice. Mayor Moynihan requested. that Council, take no action on the appropriations item
46 until after the budget hearings and the reviews.
47
48 City Manager Bierman clarified that today's item followed direction he received from
49 Council. lit was the introduction of an ordinance. It would come back to Council ,on
50 February 23rd, leaving the interval between the meetings for review. It does follow the
51 direction received from the City Council to bring the deficit from $1.9 down to $1.21 by •
52 using two sources of funds. It also moves some money from gas tax to street rehabilitation
February;2, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 3
1
for street maintenance, and makes changes in the CIP program that will allow the City to
2
spend more money this year in capital improvements, including about $500,000 more in
3
water main work, and moving a project'up from 2006.to this fiscal year. These are fairly
4
simple changes. There will be more changes fo the budget, especially if the March bond
5
issue fails.
6
7
Vice Mayor Moynihan thought Council needed to have amore thorough discussion
8
before making a decision. When;an ordinance such as this is introduced, it needs to state
9
what the changes and appropriations are. across all, departments. He reminded Council
10
that he was looking fora 5% reduction in compensation expenditures this mid -year
11
budget.
12
13
Council! Member Torliatt asked to have the discussion deferred until the item was
14
reached, on the agenda.
15
16
Mayor Glass summarized that Council Member Moynihan was asking that the item be
17
removed from the agenda. As there did not appear to be support for that from the other
18
Council Members, if would remain on the agenda and would be discussed at the
19
appropriate time.
20
21
PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS
22
23
Declaring February ]4,20b4 as "Mrs. Grossman's Day "' Mayor announced; no one here
24
to accept.
25
t
26
27
"Free E -Mail Sign -Up Da,y "'- Bill Hammerman accepted with brief comments.
28
APPOINTMENTS
29
30
A. Recommendation to the Mayors' & Councilmembers' Association for
31
Appointment to the -ABAG Regional, Planning Committee (two positions; both
32
terms will expire September 2005).
33
34
Mayor Glass explained that two positions are open, but he had not received any
35
information about applicants.
36
37
Council Member Torliatt answered thaf.Janet Kurvers of Cotati had applied, and
38
Jake Mackenzie, who currently serves on fhe committee, and was looking for
39
reappointment. I would make a motion to move those two people,forward:
40
41
MOTION to recommend Janet Kurvers and Jake Mackenzie for appointment to
42
the ABAG .Planning Committee. M/S Torliatt /Healy.
43
44
AYES: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, 'O,' Brien, Torliatt
45
NOES: None
46
ABSENT: Canevaro
47
ABSTAIN: Vice Mayor Moynihan
48
49
B. Sonoma County Tourism Council's Investor's Committee - One City Council
50
Representative Needed for 2004 Calendar Year.
•
51
1 Council Member O'Brien said he would be more than happy to continue on this
2 committee.
3
4 MOTION to appoint Council Member O'Brien to the Sonoma County`Tourism
5 Council's Investor's Committee. M/S Torliatt /Healy.
6
7 MOTION carried unanimously (Canevaro absent).
8
9 1. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED AGENDA
10
1.1 A. Approval of Proposed Agenda for Council's Regular Meeting of February
12 23, 2004.
13
14 Council Member Healy asked if the prequalification of'bidders item was
15 ready for action and should it be dgendized as Discussion and Possible
16 Action oronly for discussion.
17
18 City Manager Bierman believed it was just for discussion. Council would
19 need to give direction on some items.
20
21 Council Member Healy thought the last item on the evening calendar for
22 'the possible Arts fee would be for discussion and direction.
23
24 City Manager Bierman concurred_.
25
26 . Vice Mayor Moynihan ,asked to agendize a special meeting to:discuss the
27 budget.. •
28
29 City Manager Bierman told Council he would inform them when he had
30 determined a possible date for that meeting.
31
32 MOTION to approve the tentative agenda for February 23, 2004. M/S
33 Torliatt /Healy.
34
35 MOTION carried unanimously (Canevaro absent).
36
37 2. PUBLIC HEARING
38 -
39 A. Resolution 2004 -011 N.C.S. Amending Resolution No. 2002 -129 N.C.S. and
40 Resolution No. 2003 -128 NC.S. Setting the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal
41 Years 2003 2004. ,(Thomas) (This item was continued from the January "
42 26, 2004 City Council Meeting.)
43
44 Bill Thomas, Finance Director, provided a brief staff report. '
45
46 MOTION to adopt Resolution 2004-011 N.C.S. M /S`'O'Brien /Torliatt.
47
48 PUBLIC HEARING OPEN
49 .
50 Mayor Glass opened the Public Hearing. Hearing no one wishing to speak,
51 the Public Hearing was closed. •
52
n , February 2,.2004 Vol. XX, Page 5
1
• 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
MOTION carried unanimously (Canevaro absent).
3. CONSENT CALENDAR
(None)
4. NEW BUSINESS
A. Fiscal 2003 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (Thomas)
12
13
14
15
16
17
1.8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Bili Thomas, finance Director, gave a brief overview of the CAFR, which
changed significantly in 2003. The CAFR implemented GASB 34, which was
a significant undertakingaby. the Finance Department. The City complied
with ali aspects of GASB 34. Mr: Thomas acknowledged Cinde Rubaloff,
Accounting Manager, and Chris Jones, Administrative Secretary, for their
efforts in working with the auditors and producing this document in- house.
Mayor Glass. appreciated the work, and the easy-to- read report.
B. Introduction- (First Reading) of Ordinance 2173 N.C.S. Amending Chapter
13.24 of the Petaluma Municipal Code,,, Entitled "Waterways" to Restrict
Mooring or Anchorage on Certain Sections of the Petaluma River
Waterways, as well as Vessel Size /Leng;th - Upstream of the Balshaw Bridge.
(Skladzien)
Rick Skladzien, Public Facilities and :Services Director, gave brief overview
of amendment to Waterways Ordinance.
PUBLIC 'COMMENT - None.
Vice Mayor Moynihan asked' if the, City's original waterways ordinance,
adopted about 15 years ago, was not submitted to Boating and
Waterways. and was therefore not enforceable.
Mr, Sklgdzien said that could very well -be: This ordinance has been
submitted-for their approval.
Vice Mayor Moynihan asked if the provision in the original ordinance
which empowered the Harbor - Master to carry guns and board boats had
been eliminated.
Mr. Skiddzien agreed.
MOTION to introduce Ordinance 2173 N.C.S., with the revisions presented
to Council. M/S O'Brien /Healy.
MOTION carried unanimously (Canevaro absent).
U
C. Presentation by Jeff Mayne of the Petaluma Downtown Association on .
Results of Survey of Downtown Merchants /Antique Vendors Regarding •
Number of Permitted Antique Faires.
Jeff Mayne, .Petaluma Downtown Association, reported on the last antique
faire. Two surveys were conducted: one to merchants in town and
another to the antique dealers that participated in the last faire. Of the
174 surveys sent to the downtown merchants, 49 were returned. Most
supported two faires each year. Of the 170 surveys sent to the antique
vendors who participated in the September 2003 faire, 63 were returned.
All but one supported two faires each year.
Council Member'Torliatt thanked,Mr' Mayne for coming to speak to
Council and the , community on this issue. She asked if any information
regarding total sales at the 'faire was elicited in the surveys.
Mr. Mayne explained that they found that most merchants don't track the
actual sales on a day -to -day basis. Antique dealers coming to town are
afraid'to tell of their actual sales because they anticipate a fax or levy for
coming to, town.
Council Member Torliatt wanted to be.sure the City reaped the, benefit of
dealers from outside the community coming and selling their wares here.
She believed - the State of California required that they report those sales,
so she didn't know why they would be opposed to giving the City that
information. She asked Mr. Mayne to continue to try to get that
information from the vendors.
Mr. Mayne replied that the PDA would try to compile that data for the
antique faire scheduled for the day after the Butter and Eggs Day Parade.
Vice Mayor,Moynihan mentioned that a couple of downtown businesses
have had some on -going problems with the antique faires in the past'-
Couches, Etc., Petaluma Market, in particular. He asked Mr. Mayne if they
were included in the survey and if their concerns were addressed.
Mr. Mayne explainedthat 'was an apparent miscommunication in
the past between the Downtown Associafionand the two merchants.
They believed the intent was to "land lock''- them with the faire and block
off not only Western Avenue, but 4th and Kentucky Streets, so they would
be prevented from doing business on a major sales day. We have
assured.,them we have no such intent and Western Avenue. At this point,
they are supportive of the faire.
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
5.
PUBLIC COMMENT —None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Introduction (First Reading) of an Ordinance 2174 N.C.S. .Amending
Ordinance,2155 N.0 -.S. to Change Certain Appropriations for Operation of
the City of Petaluma. (Thomas) •
February 2, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 7
1
Bill Thomas, Finance Director, gave a brief,introduction to the amending
•
2
ordinance that allocated funds for the 2003 -04 budget and the changes
3
that are reflected in the amendments The'overall financial impacts to all
4
funds, is $972,850. This is fhe'inifial amendment to the appropriations
5
ordinance.
6
7
City Manager Bierman noted that this the first of many am'endments you
8
will. be seeing to the budget as we go through the remainder of.thestate
9
budget and'the remainder of what the state plans to do to us on, the
10
11
PCD'C budget also.
12
Mr: Thomas explained that instead of appropriating to individual
13
departments,.appropriations are being made to a general "fund
'14
expenditure contingency. That allows the City Manager the flexibility to
15
appropriate funds when and where they are, needed. Unused funds go
16
back to the fund. balance. The Ciity'Manager and he will'be having
17
meetings with the departments to 4o over the numbers and the vacant
18
positions °and cut out some unnecessary, spending.
19
20
Vice Mayor Moynihan thought that during this mid -year budget review
21
process,Jhe: appropriations should actually be reduced and money taken
22
from department budgets, instead of waiting until next year.
23
24
City.Manager Bierman pointed out that instead of changing
25
appropriations; :the City is "forcing the savings." Expenses are being
i
26
27
controlled, with the -help of variance reports. It wouldn't be reasonable to
bring ordinance changes before Council every time there was a savings
28
in a departmental budget.
29
30
Mr. Thomas commented that he would like to see the City Charter
31
amended so this process could be accomplished through resolutions.
32
33
Vice Mayor Moynihan asked Mr. Thomas if he would bring back a, year -
34
end change in appropriations.
35
36
Mr. Thomas answered that there'would be many changes coming to
37
Council over the course.of the. next five months.
38
39
Vice Mayor Moynihan thought it important to identify the "important"
40
vacant positions in each department; those that are.backfilled with
41
contract labor or overtime, and either #ill the positions or adjust the
42
budgets appropriately: If any of the vacant positions are going to be
43
eliminated, it should,happen'at the mid= yearbudget.review with
44
adjustments to the departments' budgets. The variance reports can show
45
each department head exactly how they. fail on their budget.
46
47
If the City's compensation expenditure is lowered by 5 %, or 2-1/2%, as
48
applied to the second half of this fiscal year; the City will be better
49
positioned for the increase in, PERS next year.. He stated again'that he
50
thought it should be possible to identify the critical and non - critical
51
positions for this midyear budget review. Elimination of those should be an
52
alternative. The City has a financial problem right now, and if these
adjustments are not made now, more lay offs may come in July. He was •
trying to save positions by controlling expenditures now. He asked the
Council for feedback.
Council Member O'Brien thinks Mr. Thomas shows a great deal of
leadership for the City. He works very closely with the City,Manager. Their
teamwork and their leadership are invaluable. He moved I to follow the
Cit __.y'Manager's-recommendations on the compensation policy%
Council.Member Toriiat# seconded. Council Member O'Brien's motion. She
-told. Mr. Thomas he had done a ,great.job at,identifying some major issues
that we''ve had to deal with as for as liabilities for the city. She believes all
positions in the City I think are critical. Ever every single department is
understaffed for the amount of service that this community really needs.
She what Council Member Moynihan believed to be the "non-
critical" positions in this community. 'She values every job done
everybody who comes to work for this City everyday._ Obviously,
emergency services are a very high priority, but there is a'lot of work that
gets.done in this City in every, department, and all those positions are
"critical: "
Council Member Harris commented on the many uncertainties and
complexities to this process. Council and staff are, looking at the future
budget while simultaneously adjusting the current budget. Hard choices
have already been and they'll continue to b.e made. The City Manager
and "Finance Director and staff should "definitely be commended with
what they are going through with the cards that have been dealt to the
City:. He looks forward to the ongoing discussions throughout the process.
Vice Mayor Moynihan thinks the City Manager and Finance Director are
doing a fine job. He clarified that when he said it was time to show some
leadership, he was referring to the Council. For Council to show
leadership, they must weigh in and give direction. The City Manager and
Finance Director generally offer very good recommendations that should
be followed, .but Council should also show some foresight and make the
appropriate changes and adjustments. If .Council directed the City
Manager and City Finance Director to reduce ,compensation by 5%, and
eliminate the non - critical vacant positions, he thought it would b& possible
to not lay anyone off. That would be a policy decision this Council is quite
entitled to make and a direction that would show the leadership
necessary to start trimming the fat out of the budget, what little fat there
is. No budget is perfect, and not every position is critical if it can be left
vacant without service ievels suffering.
City Manager Bierman countered that all budgeted positions are critical
positions. If they are vacant because somebody left, they are still critical
position, but because of these economic times they are not being "filled.
Vice Mayor Moynihan reiterated that if adequate- - service levels are being
maintained with positions vacant, those positions are non- critical. If
vacant positions are being back- filled with overtime or contract labor
•
•
1
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
.28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39'
40
4.1.
42
43
44
45
46
47
4'8
49
50
February 2, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 9
they should either be filled, or the budget should be adjusted to reflect
the money being spent on contract labor or overtime. ..
Mayor Glass enumerated some of the things that have been
accomplished'in the last few years through the leadership of this Council,
from the development community, from City staff. That's -the beginning of
getting well. There are 28 vacant positions right now. The City Manager
will do an evaluation; he will have a meeting with City staff, and City staff
will offer their alternatives. Everybody at City Hall certainly knows the
situation that not. only this City is in but the entire state. The. agendized
item here is a motion and a second on the initial step toward dealing with
the budget crunch._ The City Manager's responsibility is.t.o. take steps to
present a'balanced budget for next year and to make prudent steps
toward moving this budget this year somehow into balance, and it may
require some reserves.
Council.Member Healy supported'the ordinance. He thought it likely, as
events,cl'evelop at the state level; that:more steps that will be needed.
The' City is being proactive in dealing with the situation and exhibiting
leadership. This is a very solid step'forward. He looks forward to more
discussion on, the subject in the near future.
Vice-Mayor Moynihan didn't see this ordinance as leadership because it is
not proactive in making the necessary reductions in expenditures to keep
the City fiscally sound.
Mayor Glass clarified that the City - Manager was given direction by this
Council to deal with specific issues. This: ordinance is the initial step.
MOTION'to introduce Ordinance 2174 N.C.S. M/S O'Brien /Torliatt.
AYES: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, O'Brien, Torliatt
NOES: Vice Mayor Moynihan
ABSENT: Canevaro
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.
' MONDAY, FEBRUARY 2, 2004 - 'EVENING SESSION
7:00 P.M.
CALL TO.ORD'ER
A. Roll CaK
Present: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, Vice Mayor Moynihan, O'Brien, Torliatt
Absent: Canevaro
•
2
B. Pledge of Allegiance: Council Member Healy
3
C. Moment of Silence
4
5
PUBLIC COMMENT
6
7
Mr. Huarte, no other information given, told Council he is a business owner. He. and
8
several other business owners have received complaints, from customers about a
9
panhandler, "who harasses those who refuse his requests. Mr. Huarte asked Council for
1 0
11
more police presence in the downtown. area.
12
Vince Landof, Petaluma, spoke regarding completion of the Payran Flood Control
13
project and removal of the railroad trestles.
14
15
COUNCIL COMMENTS
16
17
Council Member Torliatt believed the bid for the flood control project had gone out or
18
was going out shortly, and the City was well on its way to securing a contract to
19
complete the work�within 12 to 18 months.
20
21
Mayor Glass referred to his trips to Washington D.C. and stated the City is using every
22
diligence to see that the project is completed. Both the House and Senate have agreed
23
on the full funding of $7:3 million. - By the end of the rainy season of next year, the project
24
will be completed.
25
26
Vice Mayor Moynihan reported that the Library Advisory Board met last week. The
27
Community Room Expansion project is moving forward. The library bookstore is being
28
expanded as well, and will be called "Dorothy's Place" in honor of Dorothy Bertucci.
29
He noted that a number of parks:are coming online about which he is. He will give
30
information to the City Clerk for circulation to Council.
31
32
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS - None.
33
34
6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
35
36
A. City Council Discussion and Possible ,Action Regarding the Request for
37
Early Opening of the Swim Center. (Carr) .
38
39
Jim Carr "Parks and Recreation Director, presented the staff report. When
40
the, 2003 -2004 budget was prepared, budget cutbacks were already
41
being faced. Late closure of the pool had been funded. In the budget
42
narrative, he had_ indicated there were not available funds for an early
43
opening of the swim center, and also for fireworks. At Council's last
44
meeting they requested information regarding the cost .to open ,the pool
45
early. Reports were provided to Council outlining the costs for the' entire
46
season, as weli•as the actual month-to-month costs. He compared current
47
costs and revenue to figures from 2001.
48
49
Council Member Healy asked if the $7,000 /month for aquatic staff in the
50
51
report given to Council today reflected the full schedule or the
abbreviated schedule.
•
52
February 2, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 1 1
1
Mr. Carr replied that the numbers were based on the full schedule,
• 2
.morning, afternoon, and evening. For the audience's information, he
3
- explained, that an abbreviated schedule of opening in the late afternoon
4
and a few hours on Saturdays was also being considered.
5
6
Councii Member Healy asked what the costs would be with the
7
abbreviated schedule.
8
9
Mr. Carr said that the cost would be about-$4,000 /month.
10
1 1
Vice Mayor Moynihan noted that as' Council liaison on the Recreation,
12
Music,and' Parks Commission he had worked with Mr. Carr, Parks and .
13
Landscape Manager Ed Anchordoguy,; and' Recreation Supervisor Don
14
Phoenix. He thanked them for "faking the fiak" from frustrated members of
15
the public. He referred to a cost analysis provided with the report that
16
showed the cost of electricity and gas as higher in the early months of the
17
year. He thought,some of the program costs might be lower, but the
18
operating costs were as high if not higher.
19
20
Mr. Carr explained that the "constant", cost is electric, as the electric
21
pumps run.24 hours per day, year round. Gas is the variable. The cost goes
22
down as the becomes warmer The solar collectors are used
23
beginning in April, and are helpful, if obsolete. In the fall, the gas prices
24
start to rise again.
25
26
Vice Mayor Moynihan asked about discussion of modifying and /or
• 27
upgrading the solar collectors, and other potential capital improvements
28
to the pool.
29
30
Mr. Carr explained that all options -have been considered, including not
31
heating the - pool at all, or using the solar collectors only. It would cost
32
$11,000415,000 to replace all the solar panels; however, with new panels,
33
cost of gas would go down appreciably.. The replacements should pay for
34
themselves in1welve to eighteen months. Council' will also be asked to
35
approve application for Proposition 40 funds.
36
37
Council Member Healy pointed out that, if the electric cost would be the
38
same regardless of when the pool opens, that figure should be deduced
39
from the total cost of early.opening, because it would be. spent in any
40
case. That would reduce the total cost from about $30,000 to about
41
$23,000.
42
43
Council'Mernber Torliatt noted thdt the Aquatics Committee put together.
44
a plan in 2001 to try to get the pool' open year round by 2004. The plan
45
included many suggestions for revenue .,enhancement. She asked how
46
`the City has solicited and pursued additional revenue sources for the
47
pool,, such as additional swim teams, diving classes, and ways to increase
48
interest in the pool and programs.
4,9
50
Mr. Carr described the system of individual passes that was developed
51
with the committee's help. He knew of no other swim clubs in the area
52
that might be interested in using the pool
Council Member Torliatt thought Petaluma's was the only 50 -meter pool in •
the County'and would be in high demand.
Mr. Carr noted there are two pools in Santa Rosa that are open year -
round. Swim teams don't come to the Petaluma pool, except for
countywide:meets.
Vice Mayor Moynihan asked for clarification about suggestions from the.
Aquatics Committee about adjusting the current fee schedule.
Mr. Carr•explained that.the suggestion was for a series of passes for early
season, lap swim, and late season, and in another category, during the
June through Labor Day season, passes for recreation and lap swim. These
are going through the City Manager's Office for approval.
Vice Mayor Moynihan asked if significantlyhidher revenues were
anticipated from the passes.
Mr. Carr answered' that revenues were expected; however, he couldn't
predict an amount at this point.
Vice Mayor Moynihan had heard discussion of people getting into the
swim center without paying.
Mr. Carr had also heard such comments. The Swim Center has a good •
staff this year, and they have been made aware of the problem.
Council Member Toriiatt remembered that Council had discussed the
Swim Center broiler, and the possibility of applying for`Proposition 40 funds .
to replace it, during last year's budget meefings. She asked Mr. Carr what
the status was on this issue.
Mr.; Carr explained that a Resolution would come before Council on
February 23 to allow the City to seek from the state. about 30
different maintenance projects throughout the Parks an Recreation
system.
Public. Comment
The following individuals spoke in support of early opening of the Swim
Center.
Scott Goulding, Twin Valley Aquatics, Petaluma
Andy Eber, Aquatics Advisory Board, Petaluma
DeeAnn Joslin, Twin Valley Aquatics and Private Instructor, Petaluma
Kay Drew, Petaluma
Lori Matthews, Twin Valley Aquatics, Petaluma
Annie Matthews, Twin Valley Aquatics, Petaluma
Lisa Gott; TwinValley Aquatics, Petaluma
February 2, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 13
1
COUNCILCOMMENT
2
3
Mayor Glass noted the City has a lot of challenges. One of the goals of
4
th_e City's. General Plan is to effectively use facilities to serve the greatest
5
number, of Pefalumans. He believes in order to have programs such as the
6
Swim Center, °fees will haye fo be increased. The Parks and Recreation
7
Department currently issues City Resident cards that enable the holder to
8
save,money on green fees at local golf courses: With these cards, Mayor
9
Glass suggested using two�scales on a swimming pass - City resident and
10
out -of -town. Although the City Residenf cards'cosf $15.00; it currently
11
costs,only $,1,.00 to renew fhe. card each year, thought that amount
12
was too low. He added that this yedr would be unique in terms of what
13
the -City faces.
14
15
Council Member Healy thought that the fact that Council had learned
16
this evening that somei costs rare irrelevant for decision making because
17
they are incurred whether the pool is opened or not, "changed the face
18
of things:" This reduced the expected cost of early opening by about
19
$10,000 per month. This could be lower if the abbreviated schedule were
20
adopted.. He agreed with Council Member Torliatt's desire to move
21
forward .to increase the capacity of the solar heating system,. so that the
22
City does not face these kinds of'he'ating costs in future years. He
23
reminded Council they had made:well.over $500,000 in budget
24
adjustments in the - afternoon session. He prepared to move forward
25
with early opening of the pool.
26
27
Vice Mayor Moynihan countered that not many expenditures were cut,
28
and Parks and Recreation was over budget at mid - year. He was
29
sympathetic to the need for a good swimming facility. Unfortunately, the
30
City clearly did not have the cash in this year's budget to open the pool
31
early. He thought the capital improvement projects to upgrade the boiler
32
and'solar heating system would definitely help. He would like further input
33
from the Recreation, Music and Parks Commission regarding the possibility
34
of enclosing the pool andpotential.cost savings, at least during the winter
35
months, from'lower heating costs. He agreed that some of the fees could
36
be increased, and thought swimming,lessonswere definitely a possible
37
moneymaker. He could not recommend .opening the pool early this year.
38
39
Council Member O'Brien mentioned that in written Chinese, two
40
characters represent "crisis" danger and opportunity. The City is facing a.
41
crisis about recreation and finances. Thedanger in this case is the
42
possibility of losing the swimming-progrom The opportunity is for the
43
aquaticcommunity to raise at least a portion of the $20,000 to make an
44
early opening of'the.swimming pool possible. He did not want to say "no"
45
to an early opening, but. did not see how the City could afford it. He
46;
would love to hear more ,ideas about possible fundraisers. Without any
47
way to raise the additional fund's; and with five City police officer job
48
openings unfilled, he could not say "yes."
49
50
Council Member Torliatt pointed out that.no one wanted to say no to an
51
- early opening. The Aquatics Committee has worked since 2001 to put a
•
52
plan together: She would like Council and staff to be committed to
having ,a March 1 opening in 2005 and work to in revenue
and awareness of pool's existence. She added that Proposition 40 funds •
to fix the, boiler would lower costs significantly. This year, the City'is forced
with cutting $1.2 million from the budget. Opening the pool on March l It
this year would add $20,000 that would hawe'to be1ound by making cuts
in other places. Other revenues would have to be found in order for the
pool to. open March 1.
Council Member Harris hadbeen prepared to vote "no on this tonight in
light of the City's current fiscal situation. However, the discussion about
deducting the electric cost from the ,cost of early opening, the
abbreviated schedule, the additional: revenue ideas, the potential for
Increasing some fees, and the cost savings to be realized with the repair
of`the boiler, he felt that it might be possible to open the pool on March 1.
Mayor Glass also came to the meeting prepared to say that- the pool.
could not °open early. The best argument he heard for. opening the pool
on March 1 came from Annie Matthews, who said,: "It's the only pool you
can go to without being a member. He thought there was some interest
on the part of the Council to explore the issue further.
Mr. Carr explained, that if the City followed the recommendations in
Revenue Cost Study, there would be an" additional $10,000 in revenue
during normal swim season. When the study was released, Council chose
not to fully implement the recommended increases.
Council MemberTorliatt wondered if it would be possible to get corporate' •
sponsors to help offset costs. She encouraged the community to solicit
that kind of revenue, so the City can make - a commitment for an early
opening in 2005'. Council had received three different sets of cost'figures.
She would like to see some refined numbers based on tonight's discussion,
from both an expense and revenue point of-view.
Mr. Carr explained that the�different figures are the result of the switch in
finance software from Profund to Pentamation. Utility costs came straight
from the- utility companies. He felt confident that the figures Council
.received tonight were as accurate as possible.
Council Member Healy pointed out that if an additional $10,000 revenue
was realized by following the recommendations in the Cost Study, the
cost of opening the pool early dropped to $12,000 - $18,000.
Vice Mayor Moynihan noted that a comparison of last and this year
would need to include an adjustment of utility- rates. Referring to the
Aquatics Report that came out in 2001,. he said. that many of the ideas it
contained were .sp.eculative in nature. The suggestion to hire: a full =time
Aquatics Manager and develop a marketing program may be the answer
in the long run, but not yet. In order to achieve 100 %s cost recovery, fee
increases would have to be quite steep.
City Manager Bierman said that based on the abbreviated hours, there
would be about $22,000- difference for the two months. If there were an
February 2, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 15
1
additional $10,000 in revenues, the difference would be reduced to
• 2
$12,000. At that point, help must be solicited from the corporate and
3
aquatics communities. If that support were not .forthcoming, the program
4
would shut down forthe last two months of the season.
5
6
Mayor Glass asked how many recreation cards the City sells.
7
8
Mr. Carr replied that he'would get that information. The cost of the cards
9
is $12 initially and $1.00 to renew.
10
1 1
Council Member Healy had one concern with the abbreviated schedule,
12
which wasz Monday through Thursday,.3 p.m. to 7 p.m., and Saturdays 11
13
a.m. to 1 p.m. If wondered if thaf'was a little too restrictive. He asked Mr.
14
Carr what the full schedule hours were.
15
16
Mr. Carr, replied that the hours would be 5 a.m. to 7 or 8 p.m., Mondays -
17
Thursdays, and 1 1 a.m, to 1 p.m. on Saturdays.
18
19
Mayor Glass would be willing to look at the abbreviated schedule with
20
extended' hours during school vacations if the weather was nice.
21
22
Council Member Torliatt summarized that she thought Council was willing
23
to go with the. abbreviated hours, and raise between the aquatics
24
community, and the corporate-secfer about $12,000. She would be happy
25
to have staff look at raising additional funds, but without them, she did not
26
think the extended. hours could be considered.
• 27
28
Mayor Glass 'stressed that it is not just the City's responsibility to raise
29
money - it also the swimmers,'.
30
31
Council Member O'Brien was willing to support the City Manager's
32
recommendation and challenge the aquatics community with the
33
challenge to go out and -raise the difference before the next Council
34
Meeting. He thought it was possible. If that happened, Council could look
35
at the extended hours. The time has come, with the City's budget deficit
36
problems, for the community to help themselves, as well.
37
1
38
MOTION to open the Swim Center on March 1 on an abbreviated
39
schedule of Monday through Thursday, p.m. to 7 p.m.; and Saturdays 11
40
a to 1 p.m. If fund raising efforts on the part of the aquatics community
41
and the City are effective in offsetting the additional cost to the City, the
42
Swim .Center hours may be extended. If the fund raising efforts are not
43
successful, the abbreviated - schedule will remain in place-and the Swim
44
Center may be closed prior to the end of the regular swim season. M/S
45
O'Brien /Healy.
46
47
Vice Mayor Moynihan stated that it's -very difficult to say "no, " but
48
sometimes it is the responsible thing to do. The City is facing the possibility
49
of laying off employees in July and underfunding key maintenance areas
50
right.now. He thought some of the suggestions made were good, and
• 51
could be used to come back with. a winning program next year.
52
Mayor Glass replied that the pool has a quality, lasting impact, •
particularly for children; in the community. To have the pool sit idle when
people are be to use it make sense. He encouraged the
community_ to go out and help raise money and to support the fee
increases..
Council Member Torliatt clarified that with corporate sponsorship, the
expenses would be offset with revenues and donations.
AYES: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, O'Brien, Torliatt
NOES: Vice Mayor Moynihan
ABSENT: Canevaro
7. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Boulevard Apartments (Buckelew Programs,) Request. Mitigated Negative
'Declaration; Rezone to PUD Adopt Proposed Unit Development Plan;
Adopt Proposed Development Standards for PUD. (Gaebler)
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration,. Including a
.Mitigation Monitoring Plan for the Boulevard Apartments Project.
Introduction (First Reading) of an Ordinance_ Rezoning the Property
Located at 945 Petaluma Blvd. North (APN 006 - 450 -018) from the, CH-
Highway; Commercial to the PUD- Planned Unit District. •
Resolution Approving a Planned. Unit Development: Plan and
Development Standards and Associated Conditions of Approval for the
Boulevard Apartments Project.
Bonne 'Ga_ebler, Housing Administrator, presented the staff report, with
help from Lynn Goldberg, Project Planner; and Katie Crecilius, of Buckelew
Programs.
Public Comment
The following individuals spoke in support of the Boulevard Apartments
Project:
Lynn Berdrd, Petaluma
Vera Ciammetti, Petaluma, Petaluma Ecumenical Properties
Carol Cinquini, Santa Rosa
Paula Cook, Petaluma, Petaluma Ecumenical' Properties
Dianne Davis, Petaluma
Duane DeWitt, Santa Rosa, Community Builders Corporation
Daymon Doss, Petaluma, Petaluma Health Care District
Helana, FitzGerald, Petaluma
Cathy Geary, Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, Division of Mental Health
Majida Gibson, Petaluma, affordable housing consultant
Dev Goetschius, Petaluma •
Guy Guillon, Petaluma
February 2, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 17
1
Gabe Kearney, Petaluma, Sonoma County Mental Health Board
2
Jennine Lanouette, Petaluma
3
Jim Leddy, Santa Rosa, Sonoma County Housing Coalition
4
Regie Livingston, ,Peta.luma
5
Jim March, Petaluma
6
•Michele McCabe, Petaluma, Marin County Public Guardian
7
Margo Warnecke Merck, Healdsburg,. Community Housing Development
8
Corporation of Santa Rosa and Sonoma County Housing Coalition
9
James C. Mobley, Jr., Petaluma
10
John Morgan, Petaluma
11
Julie Morgan, `Petaluma
12
Corinne Muelrath",'Petaluma
13
Debi; Nunes, Petaluma
14
Dorothy O 'Brien city not given
15
John Records, Petaluma
16
Noreen Ringlein, Petaluma
17
Kenneth. T. Schmidt, Petaluma
18
Kendall Smith, Petaluma
19
Richard Speel, Petaluma
20
Len Svinth, Petaluma, Petaluma, Petaluma Ecumenical Properties
21
22
The: following individuals spoke in opposition to the Boulevard Apartments
23
Project:
24
25
Rubio Amramov, Petaluma
•
26
27
Angelina Arrington, Petaluma
Anita Flett, Petaluma
28
Doug Frampton, Petaluma
29
Norm: Hilliard, Petaluma
30
Tamara Miller, Petaluma
31
Russel Pleech, Petaluma
32
Jeff Ray -,: Pefaluma
33
Cliff Stock : Petaluma
34
Marcie Stock, Petaluma
35
David' Wriglit, Petaluma
36
Dawn: Wright; Petaluma
37
38
At the request of Council Member Healy, the reminder of the meeting minutes
39
is a verbatim transcription.
40
41
Response to Public Comment
42
43
MayorGldss Would staff or the applicant wish to respond to any of the
44
Public Comment?
45
46
Ms. Gaebler introduced' Jay Zlotnick; Executive Director of Buckelew
47
"Programs.
48
49
Mr: Zlotnick responded -to the following issues raised during Public
•
50
51
Comment:
Supervision: There will be a person on site to do the property
management and collect the rents.. Vera Ciametfi' [Petaluma
Ecumenical Projects] spoke to that issue. They're not there to do
mental'bealth counseling. The people who hopefully will live at
Boulevard Apartments don't need '24 -hour supervision -just like the
folks, who live at our Novato project, our Fairfax project, and several
apartment buildings in San Rafael. if they needed 24 -hour supervision,
they would not be at Boulevard Apartments. If they're living at
Boulevard Apartments, they don't need it. If their situation
deteriorates, such that they do need 24 -hour supervision, then we will
intervene and arrange that for them. Of the 19 people who have lived
at Olive Avenue Apartments in Novato'in 6 years, 3 are no longer
'there` one died, one moved to New'Jersey, and one was hospitalized.
The one that was hospitalized was the one who made most of those
calls. My,point being, if people"are notable to maintain independent
living, We intervene, sometimes with the help of the police;, sometimes
with the help of social services,: with mental health departments, and
we get the person the care that they need. So while there isn't a
mental health person on the grounds 24 hours a day, that's not what's
needed.
Staff Contact. Everyone who lives at Boulevard Apartments will have a
staff member from Buckelew Programs assigned to them; and that
staff member will see the client as'often as necessary. We have some
programs where our staff is seeing people several times a.day;, we
have programs were people see our clients once a week or once •
every two weeks. It totally depends on what the client needs, and
we're there to respond to that.
Medication: First of all, not everyone who has a psychiatric disorder
goes off his medication. But, it does happen. When'that happens,
we find out about it. They either tell us, or their roommates or
housemat.e.s or neighbors tell us, their friends tell us, orwe figure it out,
because we r know our clients well, and we know when they're
deteriorating. When that happens, we intervene. Many times, our
clients are very receptive to this, and we get them back on their
medications, or a different medication,, or, if need be, we help them
get more supervision in a more intensive facility.
Screening Process: There are many levels of screening before
someone's going to live at Boulevard Apartrnents.'The first screening
happens`at the County Mental Heal fh Department level. Cathy Geary
and her staff know what it takes for someone to live independently,
and they will not refer someone to Buckelew Programs unless theyfeei
that person is ready to live independently. Then we meet with the
client, sometimes with Cathy's staff, sometimes, on our own, and we'll
do an informal meeting, just kind of explain the rules and doing an
assessment right there. Then well talk again with Cathy's staff, read all
sorts of reports, ;get a good idea of fhe history of the person, and only
after that will we have a final interview with the client, and d "very
thorough interview. If there are any gaps in the history, any questions
we have, we'll fill those gaps. So it's a very thorough screening.
February 2, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 19
r 1
2 1
1'm.very confident in our screening process. There have been
3 s
suggestions here that Buckelew Programs: can't make guarantees,
4 c
can't make, promises about peoples' future behavior. There are many
5 p
promises and. many guarantees; I can make to you. I can guarantee
6 t
that our screening will be= thorough. I can guarantee that if there's a
7 p
problem, we'll follow through; -and I can make.these, guarantees
8 b
because that's exactly "what °we.'ve done for the 31 years we've been
9 i
in existence, it's exactly what we've done, in - San;Rafael, and Fairfax,
10 a
and Novato-and once have we had a complaint from a public
l 1 s
service agency, a fire , department;,or police department, of abuse of
12 t
their services. In fact, we're in the same business as they are: the
13 b
business of public service.
14
15 1
1 wanf °to tell you a brief story abcut.a client who was in one of our
16 p
programs many, many years ago, who, because of her paranoia,
17 w
would. periodically pull ;the alarm and call the fire department,
18 b
because she thought she was going to be harmed. After awhile, the
19 f
fire department said to us, "You know, we want to help, but every time
20 w
we roll those `trucks, it causes real liability. What can we do ?" We
21 w
worked with the fire department, we' figured out a great plan for the
22 c
client. Part of the fire department's suggestion was that when they
23 w
were on a routine call, they would stop by and. check in with the
24 c
client, rather than waiting for a problem. That's an example of how
25 B
Buckelew works with other organizations in the community, to make
26 o
our clients successful.
• 27
28 Y
You''ve heard some comments from several nurses and a marriage
29 a
and family counselor about, frankly, horror sto.ies, about someone
30 w
with, a mental illness: Unfortunately, those horror stories exist, They are
31 r
rare, b0f they do happen'., There are not the folks Buckelew Programs
32 w
works with. That goes back to our screening process. The whole
33
purpose of the screening at the, County level and our level into insure
34 t
that those issues will not be happening in your community.
35
36 m
m Property , Values: You've also heard comments about property values.
37 T
There, are numerous studies that show that a well- managed affordable
38 . h
housing project has no impact on property values: In fact, I'suspect
39 t
that fhe project will help sustain, if not'increase properfy values,
40 b
because it will be well managed.
41
42 I
In closing, I want to say that I can't guarantee you fhat:there won't be
43 p
problems, but I don't think any of you could guarantee me -that in any
44 e
enterprise you're involved in, there won't be problems. It's the nature of
45 a
any kind of human - interaction that there will be problems. What I can
46 g
guarantee you is that we will follow through in a professional, thorough,
47 c
collegial, and responsive way, like we've done for the past 31 years.
48 T
Thank you.
49
50 V
Vice Mayor Moynihan: Who are the current owners of the site?
51
Ms. Gaebler: The City of Petaluma purchased it, and Buckelew has an •
option on it.
Vice Mayor Moynihan: And is this a contract? i don't' see the contract as
part of the agenda packet. Has that been negotiated?
Ms. Gaebler: What contract? The option?
Vice Mayor Yes
Ms. Gaebler: The option was negotiated probably a year or two Years
ago.
Vice Mayor Moynihan: Has if ever been approved by Council?
MSjr Gaebler: It's been approved by the City Manager. I don 'r remember
if it ever came to Council. I don't think it did. I know that any of our
options have.
Vice Mayor Moynihan: I would think, based on our Charter...mosf of ;our
City assets, when we go to purchase them or sell them, there's a, contract,
which has? to be approved by the Council.
Ms. Gaebler: We've had options with most of our - probably all ofour
non - profits over time. I don't know that they've come to Council. They
clearly state that once the Council has allocated, funds for a non - profif, •
there's an agreement that`within X "number of'years,`affordable housing
will be built or the land refers back to the City.
Vice Mayor Moynihan: But didn't the City purchase this property, in part
y Y
for an expansion of the police station?
Ms. Gaebler: The site was, purchased. in 199.7 or 1996 for $267,000, as a
housing opportunity site.
Vice Mayor Moynihan: And that was in cooperation with Burbank
Housing?
Ms. Gaebler: Burbank did. the actual purchase because I don't have the
expertise to, do all of that, and they do.
Vice Mayo "r Moynihan: The proposed project, at that time, included an
expansion of the police station on a portion of that site.
Ms. Gaebler: Council Member, all I can tell -you is that the resolution that-
we have states that it was purchased by the housing division of PCDC as
a housing opportunity site. Am I saying °that nobody has ever looked at
that and said it seems to make sense that if the police were to expand,
they would go in that direction? I've talked to the police about this
probably five-times, with various chiefs. We had originally designed this, as
a matter of fact, so that police could share parking with us. That was not a •
site plan anybody liked. Quite frankly, the police have no money to
February 2, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 21
1
expand or construct. As I said, we've -tried to work that out with them a
2
number of times. First of all, it's my job to help the police expand. No
3
police chief has said that's something fhat:'s in the cards in any
4
reasonable time.
5
6
Vice Mayor Moynihan: Are you familiar with the police facilities plan?
7
8
Ms: Gaebler: No, I'm not. I'`m, only Op affordable housing. I'm sorry.
9
10
11
Vice Mayor Moynihan: Thank you.
12
Councii;Member O'Brien: Ms.. Gaebler, just a real quick question. You said
13
that there was a memo from CaptainHood that was in the packet,
14
regarding the calls in Novato. I, couldn'f.find one. We did get one on the
15
dais that was dated January 30 and received into the City Manager's
16
Office today.'The.re is absolutely no recommendation inhere, one way or
17
the other, that I can find.
18
19
Ms. Gaebler: And actually,, just a conclusion, which is what Captain Hood
20
said, and he spent a lot of time with 'th'e Novato police department. I
21
thank him and Chief - Simms for'this.'We went down every single incident
22
that happened. That's on the sheet that they put out with all the names
23
crossed. out. It is true; there was that large number, in the year mainly .
24
2002, done by one resident.,And so, in terms of a recommendation, it was
25
just conclusion, more than a recommendation, that it wasn't anything
26
27
out of the ordinary_
28
Council Member O'Brien; I hope we're talking about the same document.
29
Actually, f was written on the 29th, your cover memo was dated the 30th,
30
and it was received into the City Manager's Office on the 2nd. I can't find
31
a concfusion in OR a recommendation.
.32
33
Ms. Gaebler: The conclusion was from Captain Hood to me.
34
35
Council Member• O'Brien: Also, the staff report says he would be here
36
tonight to answer questions.
37
38
Ms. Gaebler: I apologize. This is-Captain .Hood's day off, and he could not
39
be here.
40
41
Council Member Torliatt: Mr. Zlotnick.addressed the screening process. He
42
addressed the supervision issue. The other couple of issues that came up
43
were the cosf of the project, and from the City's, standpoint, where that is
44
coming from. I think the community and the people in the audience need
45
to understand the dollar amount and where it originates, because a lot of
46
people in the community think that the City is just handing over $300,000
4.7
or $500,000 of general fund money that we could use on many different
48
City services, and that isn't, in fact, the case, so I'd like Ms. Gaebler to
49
v_ erify that with the redevelopment funds and the housing set - aside.
50
51
Also, there was a question about medications and criminal records and
•
52
how that factors into the people that may occupy this facility and what
type of criminal records people have because I'm not sure whether it's •
shoplifting or disturbing the peace or what, and I would also like Ms.
Gaebler to clarify the neighborhood meeting issue; because I believe
someone had said there was one neighborhood meeting and no more
and they were promised. I know I attended the first' neighborhood
meeting, which was at Old Elm Village, but 1 believe there was a second
neighborhood meeting, and meetings of the Planning Commission, and
obviously of the City Council level.
Ms. Gaebler: Regarding the money - there were two Council allocations
to Buckelew Apartments. The first one was block grant. I think that was
approximately $80;200. That's the only amount that has been drawn
done. The second amount was two allocations given - from, as you stated,
the redevelopment low =mod housing set- aside, and that's housing by
state 'law that can only be spent on low and moderate income housing,
and that was in the amount of $300,000. To date, they've drawn down just
the block grant'funds.
We did have two neighborhood meetings, one at Old Elm Village and
one at Elim Lutheran Church. The first one was well attended, the second
not so, so we did not have a third one; until the Planning'Commission,
which was noticed, and this one, which was noticed.
Regarding the criminal records, and so forth, I would not have the answer
to that, but I know Mr. Zlotnick , does:
Mr. Zlotnick: Some people who are in Buckelew Programs have a criminal •
record'. Most don" t, but some do. I think a lot of other folks in the room,
somewhere back there, ran afou`I of the law one way or another. With
most of the folkswho have a criminal record at Buckelew Programs ,it's for
things like pettytheft, defrauding an innkeeper, which is not paying a bill
in a hotel or a, restaurant. It might be , o drug offense. Those are the sorts of
criminal records that bring people to. Buckelew Programs. There was an •e-
mail floating around about a week ago that 1 know at least, one of you
saw, and it .used the term "ex- convicts." Especially referring to people in
our FACT - Forensic Assertive Community Treatment Program. I can assure
you that people in that program are not hardened criminals, ex- convicts
who have'done hard time. They are people who have had the kinds of
experiences I already talked about. But whether or not , o person has. a
criminal record, there's something that's much more important to us: Is the
person ready and able and appropriate to live, independently in the
community? Is the person going to impose a threat to the neighbors, to
themselves, ourrstaff2 That's where our screening comes in. And I would
submit to you that that is, in fact, a much more important criteria to look
at than someone's criminal record. I think', in my comments, Ms. Torliatt,
addressed the medication issue, but was there something else? I talked
about medications...
Council Member ,Torliattt Could you speak more to the issue of how often
Buckelew checks in with people who live at the facility? I'm assuming that
they have regularly scheduled appointments with folks to check in about •
taking their medication.
February 2, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 23
1'
2
Mr. Zlotnick: It varies, as I said be It could be several times a day,
3
4
several times a week,-once a week, or every couple of weeks. It totally
depends on how the client is doing, level
and what of assistance they
5
need,.and we're staffed in such a way- we have people on call 24 hours
6
a day, 7 days a week. We have staff on duty 7 days a week. The staffing is
7
such that we can flex the staffing,, so if a particular person needs greater
8
attention, then we're able to do that.
9
10
Council: Member Healy: I adtuallywanted to ask the City Attorney, whose
11
previous advice was honored primarily in the breach,. to perhaps be a
12
little less subtle this time, and go .over, both for the Council, and for the
13
community,, what some of the constraints are on the Council's legal
14
inabilify to exercise discretion. In particular, of course, as Council Members
15
know, we've received an attorney /client memorandum late last week
16
setting iforth some. rather black letter law propositions that would not be a
17
secret to any attorney who delved into this.
18
19
City Attorney Rich Rudriansky: As a legal advisor to the,City, it's not my
20
role to, nor do I intend to weigh in on.some of the emotional issues that
21
were brought up on either side. Certainly, it was a very respectful
22
presenfation by both sides. My role is with ,respect to the legal issues, and
23
as Iread the law, state and federal housing laws, the issue ofdisability,
24
mental or physical, is not an issue that should be taken into account when
25
del - iberatin;g relative to a land use issue, such as affordable housing. It's
26
clear that to deny a project merely'because it's for - disabled individuals
•
27
could be interpreted as discrimination, and the cases have held that. So,
28
to the extent that any'kind of decision has some kind of disparate effect
29
on ;orientally handicapped physically disabled - and there's a variety of
30
other categories- in my view, would be risky. The issue here is affordable
31
housing, as I.said in the beginning, and whether or not you approve or
32
disapprove an affordable housing project such as this should.rise and fall
33
on the facts relative to the planning laws and the.zoning issues that exist
34
and dre applicable to this project: That's the way I read the law, and I
35
think'if's pre_ :tty clear.
36
37
Vice Mayor Moynihan: Could I ask the Planning Department- the parking
38
was discussed, and there's a letter, in the packet outlining why we're
39
having 12 stalls of parking on the site.'I'rn curious, for the 15 units on this
40
size acreage, what would the normal number of parking installs be?
41
42
Mr. Moore: The parking ratio for multi- family housing, I believe, is 1 -1/2
43
spaces per unit.
44
45
Vice Mayor Moynihan: So we're looking at 22 -23 parking stalls?
46
47
Mr. Moore: Yes.
48
49
Vice Mayor Moynihan: The access, .as it's designed ... would it be a right
50
turn 'in off Petaluma Boulevard.soufhbound, and a right turn out? Because
•
51
52
1 notice that there's an island or a barrier to cross the two lanes to go north
at that point.
Mr. Moore: Yes, that':s correct. 0
Vice Mayor Moynihan:, That's not a normal access, is it, for a project like
this? Does th'at°require a variance of any type?
Mr. Moore: No. As part of °the environmental review, there was a traffic
analysis done. That would Look at that access as being a potential issue.
Mayor Glass: In terms of the parking, when we get into low income
housing, there are statistics that do verify that there is less of a need for
parking spaces for this type of housing and quite often there are
exceptions made on the number of parking spaces, as a matter of
course, isn't that right?
Mr. Moore .Under the Planned Unit District zoning, the Planning
Commission and the Council have the ability to modify or waive certain
requirements, and this would apply to any project that is zoned under that
category. Typically, parking is one of the issues that is looked at. For
exarn.ple, -in most PEP projects, because they're for seniors; there is
informationto support =the fact that you can reduce. the parking ratio; and
I think the same kind of consideration was given here due to the clientele.
Council.Member Healy: I raised that same issue at the Planning
Commission level and had concerns similar to what Vice Mayor Moynihan
is voicing here; and was persuaded that the experience with Buckelew's
- other projects in Marin County led to a justification of this kind of a parking
level and if the applicant or staff would just like to brieflyrepeat'that, but I
think we were talking about your facilities in Novato and Fairfax, and
particularly the Novato one where, if I recall correctly, most of the tenants
do not have their own automobiles.
Mr. Zlotnick'That's correct, Council Member Healy. In your packet,
attachment 6 discusses the' justification for reduced parking requirements.
This issue actually came up on Friday, when Daymen Doss [Petaluma
Health Care District] visited the site with Ms. Gaebler and me and we
actually asked' one of the tenants who was there, "How many people
here have cars? "There are 15 units, and I think she came up with 8
people. That site has been there since 1997. About half the folks have
cars.
Council Member O'Brien: To continue on the parking, you had mentioned
before that the way you find about problems is that sometimes peoples'
roommates call you. Is there going to be more than one individual to a
unit here?
Mr. Zlotnick: Conceivably, there could be. In our experience, in all of our
affordable housing, it hasn't been. But; if someone formed a 'relationship
with someone else, there is nothing prohibiting him or her from bringing in
someone-they're having a relationship with. When I was talking about
roommates who will tell us about people who are off fheir medications, I •
was thinking of a congregate living situation that we have in Fairfax,
February 2, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 25
1
where people are sharing living room and dining room,.and in many of
2
•
our 24 -hour facilities'there are roommates. That's how we .often find out.
3
4
Vice Mayor Moynihan: Following up on the parking, if we're not to
5
consider`the use, as: such, specifically ,as mental health, I'm kind of curious
6
why,,;in, looking at this as a land use situation, we wouldn't consider other
7
potential uses or similar uses,,.or potential subsequent uses in determining
8
whdt a proper parking ratio is. Whyare we relying simply on the
9
experience of a like-kind health facility or housing facility for this
10
11
particular clientele?.
12
Mr. Moore: When we present this information to the Planning Commission
13
as we, do to the City Council, the parking ratio "is; what it is," as provided
14
by the zoning ordinance. As I mentioned previously, the Planned Unit
15
District allow -the Commission and the Council to waive or modify certain
16
requirements. That, informaf ion is presented to the Commission and the
17.
Council and they have the discretion to address that, as they deem
18
appropriate.
19
20
Vice _ Ma' or Moynihan: So we're looking at roughly half the parking of
21
what the normal ratio would be. If we were looking beyond this use, and 1
22
know if ;it's a 40 -year loan it could be way beyond the normal time frame,
23
but if we're looking, for normal residential use of apartments, market
24
rate, we would be enforcing the 22.or24 stalls?
25
26
Mr. Moore: All I would say at this point is you would have the discretion to
• 27
make that a requirement, if you'felt that was appropriate. It could be, in
28
forty years, that you wouldn':t need , any, parking stalls at all.
29
.30
Council Member O'Brien: 1 feel 'the some concerns, on the parking. In
31 .
reading the staff report, approximately 50% of the people would have
32
cars. So with, 14 residents,'we're talking 7 cars. You've got a manager. I'm
33
going to assume he has a car.. It also says PEP or some property
34
manager's going. to be stopping by. That's nine-spots. That leaves three
35
spots for visitors. I feel 12 is way too low: 'I'm in agreement with Vice Mayor
36
Moynihan on the parking. I don't think 22 or 23 is reasonable_ , but I think 12
37
is too few.
38
39
Vice Mayor - Moynihan: The other issue I had is the way they'.re positioned,
40
relative -to the lot. You're driving in °on a. driveway, and you're snaking
41
around .one.building and going to these..others, and asa result, you have
42
a lot of driveway, and a lot of parking lot. I think I read it's 50% asphalt
43
coverage of the site, just to accommodate what appears to be less
44
parking. I'm not sure if this is a design problem-: If we didn't have three
45
separate - buildings, but had one building, for example, and it was set
46
back from the street and had parking at the front as a buffer - could that
47
.
be a more efficient use of the site, and we're not looking_ at all this asphalt
48
as a percentage of the property.
49
50
Mr. 'Moore: I think I would let Katie Crecilius from Buckelew and perhaps
51
their architect address'thatissue> relative to the site design.
52
•
Katie Cre.cili Buckelew Projects It's'.a long, narrow site, and very
constrained in termsof parking a circulation on the site, for a number of •
reasons. Number one; we needed to put the driveway on the south side
to avoid conflicting with the police department driveway on the north
side. We also wanted to put the garden and the landscape area on the
south side, which was SPARC's recommendation, and we also concurred
with it. We need: to enter from the south, and get to -- the parking on the
north. The other problem, 'we've had is the'fire department increased the
size of their fire trucks and increased the size of the fire truck "turnaround.
So the large area in the middle is all fire truck turnaround. We don''t like it,
either.
Vice Mayor Moynihan: What about garbage trucks ?'How are those going
to be accommodated?
(Christine Vargas, Kodama Diseno, Architects: The garbage trucks would
use the same turnaround as the fire trucks so that we're not providing
extra pavement.
Vice Mayor Moynihan: Is there going to be a location for a community
dumpster?
Ms.. Vargas: `There is, It's located on the north side of the'site (walks to
easel to point out location).
Vice Mayor Moynihan: I'm a little concerned because it's a right turn in •
and aright turnout of the boulevard. I actually took the time to go down
to Novato and look at the Olive facility and;l can see it's a roughly similar
site layout,, but you had two single -story units 'there and it looked like two
two -story units to "the back, with the gardens and the parking; in a
residential area. It was of the ,edge of an older residential neighborhood,
which had a residential, road, which you could turn in, and out of in both
directions, and it seemed like local traffic. It's kind of a quiet area but it
backs up against a commercial building that does front on some major
corridor similar to this, 'Redwood Boulevard. I just see the turning in and
funning out is not as easy a movement as people think. Especially if you're
trying ito head north, of course, you'd have to pull a U somewhere and
get around. There used to be access off Magnolia, and there was
Hawthorne Court. Is that' not available?
Ms. , Vargas: It doesn't go through at this point, and I don't know that there
are plans for it to go through.
Vice Mayor Moynihan: Other than that, there are a lot of similarities
between this and the project in Novato. We're being asked, in approving
a project under a mixed =use land -use designation and a PUD zoning, to
find, 100% residential. I understand that this.is now being driven by the HUD
financing requiring no commercial or mixed use like was originally
proposed. But the project is supposed to be designed'to be compatible
"with the surrounding areas and neighborhood. This seems to me quite in
contrast with'the uses at least adjoining and certainly down the corridor. •
February 2, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 27
1
It`s residential. in a ; pocket next'to a big institutional building next to old
2
commercial storefronts, across.fro,m a shopping center.
3
1
4
Ms. Vargas: I would argue, against that. We have a two -story building in
5
the front that has similar setbacks to'the commercial and the police
6
station properties adjacent to it: We've also incorporated perforated steel
7
and storefront windows fo.fit into that context. In the rear portion of the
8
site, you do have more residential development surrounding it, so those
9
buildings in the interior portion reflect that. They're smaller in nature. They
10
11
are mostly single story with one two -story element incorporated.
12
Vice Mayor Moynihan: So you believe this is compatible with the adjoining
13
uses?
14
15
Ms. Vargas: Yes.
16
17
Vice Mayor Moynihan: I had one other. question that dealt with the City's
18
inventory b f commercial land. It seems to me that we're doing a General
19
Plan.update and we have a limited supply of commercial land. Can we
20
address. that:? It seems to me this is a' place we're taking from commercial
21
and we're making it residential, and. we do have rather an insatiable
22
appetite for sales tax revenue at ,this point in our lives, municipal -wise.
23
What is the available inventory.of commercial property and does this
24
have an impact on that?
25
26
Mr. M_ oore: Only the zoning is commercial. The underlying land -use
27
designation is mixed use„ which, does allow for the development of a
28
residential project. on'the property. The Council, when it made the
29
decision iseveral years ago to purchase the property as a housing
30
opportunity site, atleast that Council, at that point, made the
31
determination that housing was appropriate for that location.
32
33
Vice Mayor Moynihan: Do you know what the available commercial land
34
is
35
36
Mr. Moore: Not off the top of my head.
37
38
Council Member O'Brien: In the report, it says there was- originally a
39
headstone carving business located there. What kind of chemicals do
40
they�use in that type of operation, and has any soil analysis been done?
41
42
Mr. Moore: I believe there was,a Phase 1 andlysis done when the property
43
was purchased.
44
45
Council Member O'Brien: There. was a Phase 1 done on Washington
46
Street, took. and now we've got problems.
47
48
Ms. Gaebler: There was a Phase l study done when we purchased the
49
property, and it was my understanding that the only problem with the soil
50
right now is compaction - not toxics. This problem can be solved during
51
construction.
• 52
Council MemberO'Brien: So we don't °really know what contamination
there is down there. •
Ms. Gaebler: There is a clean, current Phase 1 study on the site.
Vice Mayor Moynihan: John Galliaci, North Bay Monument, was the
owner at one time.
Council Member O'Brien: Also in, the staff report, it says, "Superior design
Will ,ensure an attractive comfortable and healthy living environment." I'
don't want to saythis project is not of superior design, because it's 'a good
project. °But where is the superior design? 1 see a normal design. I don't see
superior.
Mr. Moore: I think the project architect ca_n speak to this, but the"
will be subject to SPARC review. They will look at all of the elevations, 'the
landscaping",, and all of that. They've already looked at it twice on 'a
preliminary basis, and have given recommendations, which Buckelew has
followed in preparation of this site plan. They - will have discretionto review
the project and make any other recommendations that they feel are
necessary, once this project moves on.
Council Merriber O'Brien: I'm asking for a definition of what "superior"
would be. It's a nice word to use, but I'd like to know what qualifies it, as
it's a condition in the report. .
Mr. Moore: It would be superior design if the Council adopts those findings
in approval of the project, with the expectation that SPARC will follow
through on that when they approve it at the appropriate, time.
Council Discussion
Council,Member Healy: I first became involved in local government here
because issues in my neighborhood, so I've always been very solicitous
neighborhood concerns on whatever issues may come forward. Certainly,
here tonight, `I think that the fears of the greater' neighborhood are very
heartfelt and very palpable, but in my opinion, in the final analysis, the
weight of the evidence indicates "that -those fears are misplaced;. primarily
for two reasons: One, as Dr. Gullion and Mr. Zlotnick have indicated, the
screening process that is going to take place her will assure that
appropriate individuals are given the opportunity to live in this project,
and the kind of care that goes into that has been discussed with some
detail here tonight. Secondly, Buckelew has a very strong track record ,in
running similar programs in Marin County and here in Sonoma County
over the years. This speaks to their ability to run this kind of a program in a
way that's compatible with the existing community.
Another point that was very eloquently spoken to by several speakers is
that the need for this kind of housing opportunity in our own community
here is very strong, and the fact that, . on average, something like 5% of
the general population suffers from serious mental 'illness, would mean •
something in the neighborhood of 2,500 -3,000 people already in Petaluma
February 2, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 29
1
are.suffering from serious mental illnesses. The screening process that will
2
take place will assure, that only the tiny handful, the very best qualified
'population
3
individuals within . that - w ill be chosen to live in this kind of an
4
operation.
5
6
I, actually think this is a good location. It's close to transit, shopping,
7
walking distance to downtown, and I've been struck by the fact that.a lot
8
of the _folks in the neighborhood who are opposed actually don't live
9
terribly close to it —in fact; -they live-several blocks away, up side streets.
10
For the life, of me, 1 can't understand why a resident; of this project would,
1 1
with any frequency at all, find a. need to walk up to White Oak Circle.
12
Quite ;frankly, and speaking as the Council Member who lives closest to
13
thisl project, if people living. here choose to walk downtown and back,
14
they'll ;be walking in front of my: front door, and I have no problem with
15
that. This Council and previous Council have allocated hundreds of
16
thousands of dollars of our low and moderate- income set -aside funds for
17
this project. We have also invested hundreds and hundreds of hours of
18
staff, time. I think it would be huge waste to abandon this project at this
19
time.
20
21
Council Member Harris; We've done many things in the community that
22
we should be proud of to help the less fortunate. We passed the most
23
talked;'about linkage fee for .housing; we've come up with low income
24
housing opportunities throughout the City. We have the new homeless
25
shelter coming on board.
26
• 27
As everyone's seen tonight, applicant Buckelew has a proven track
28
record and 'they're good neighbors'in their regions with their properties
29
and :programs. There are a lot of things to look at with respect to this
30
proposal: One, what is the community's needs at large, what are the
31
neighbors needs at large, what are the needs of people living at this
32
proposed.site, and finally, is this,fhe best and most appropriate site in the
33
community. rersgnally, I do thin. k that it is appropriate that the
34
government does have. a small roll in those: less fortunate; however, after
35
hearing all the.. ; sides tonight and having all these. facts put together, I just
36
can't reconcile.. all of this with being the correct and appropriate location
37
for this affordable housing opportunity at this time. So, it's with a heavy
38
heart that I will not be voting in favorof ;this project tonight.
39
40
Vice Mayor Moynihan:, I, want to acknowledge people in the audience
41
who got up and,spoke on both sides of this and their fears. The neighbors'
42
fears are justifiable. I know that Buckelew has a tremendous program and
43
a great reputation. What Council'. is being asked, .even though we seem to
44
be talking about pros and cons in'terms of mental health, is to adopt a
45
I'and -use project. The questions I asked were to determine if the project
46
made sense for the site. I also asked if this, was the highest and best use of
47
a City asset? The mixed -use findings for make a 100 residential project, !
48
don't believe had been found. Specifically,.) don't think the project's
49
design is, compatible with the surrounding area. I don't think it would have
50
a beneficial impact, and to the extent that it eliminates commercial land,
51
it would have a detrimental impact. This site is on highly traveled four -lane
• 52
Petaluma Boulevard. The Buckelew project -in Novato is built in a
residential area. The site proposed for Boulevard Apartments is too noisy
place for a residential project. Moving the buildings back, from the front of
the property and dealing with the parking in a different way could have
mitigated this. I understand why the parking lot was designed the way it
was, but I do not support the design. I don't believe HUD financing should
be driving the General Plan or the zoning ordinar ee. When you look at a.
project of'this magnitude, you have to find the right site for it. At one point
I looked of the - roughly $160;000 a unit of taxpayer money. HUD is
corning up with some money, and we're coming.up with some local
money, but to me, it's all taxpayer money; and I like to see decent value
for a project. Old Elm Village was'about $143,000 a unit, and that
included the eight studios that are partly occupied by Buckelew clients
now; but also,. that is , a different. style product'. It's a family product, larger
Units, not one bedroom or studio units. $160`,000 versus $148,000 is a
substantial increase.
I had suggested about a year ago that Buckelew, together with COTS
and. Burbank Housing, consider purchasing the Casa Grande Hotel. To use
that as.a comparison, because a,tthat time, for $1.2 million; which is half
the cost, you could get like 23 units - about 150% of the units. It's =not
apples to apples, by any means. Modifications would have to be done,
but to give idea about proximity to shopping and to the new transit
mall, and the.like, (thought it was: a very central location. It's closer in to
downtown. For whatever reason - maybe HUD didn't support it, maybe it
didn't work for the design alternatives, but I was told in part that the
shopping wasn't:close enough to that site. And then I find out that •
Aibertson's,, which is across the street from this [the proposed site for
Boulevard Apartments]; has got a lease that's up in July. They're not, at
this point, renewing, and, I don't know who's going to go in there. They
may, or maybe another market will .come in there. But we don't know
that, and' if you look at second market bpportunities, it could be a very
long walk.
A little of the history of the site: North Bay Monument had sold it,' and at
one point,a project proponent was coming ,forward for this particular site. I
believe it, was mini- storage that was proposed. That applicant was told,
"That'.s our police station expansion site." Then somehow we worked our
way out to purchase that site, and it sounds like we did it with PCDC
funds, and certainly- I understood Burbank was interested, but also the
police expansion was "taken into the criteria. When I call and I talk to the
police station and people there, and find out they're converting closets
for offices so that the officers can have a place to sit, I have a very hard
time disrespecting the fact °that the facility needs to. be expanded.
Apparently, Dick ,Lieb; when he was still with us, was' looking for ways to
expand if at that time.. So it's not new, and how we're going to come up
with the funds, I don't know. But it would be terribly short sighted for us to.
take a Cityasset:ond dispose of it and prevent the expansion of the
police station. People even point out that this,is a, great place for
Buckelew to go because it's next to a: police, station, and I always retort,
"Well, it didn't seem to do Bar Ale. much good being next door do the fire
station!" If you really look at the situation, and they do move in there, and •
there's not expansion space, they're going to be compelled to relocate
February 2, 2004
Vol. XX, Page 31
1
at 'a very large cost,. If you look at the, land use and trying to put a square
2
peg in ,a round hole, I don't think this particular site works for it. I would
3
welcome thisJype of program in Petaluma. I just think we need to find a
4
better `site for it.
5
6
Council Member °O'Brien: I think that with the neighborhood there is a lot
7
of fear of the unknown, and, that's what's driving a lot of the
8
neighborhood comment. As far as property values 'being reduced, I
9
honestly,don't see it happening, When was sitting on the Planning
1.0
Commission we-approved one project that was low income, and we had
1 1
a "qualified, realtor" get up .and say if we approved the project, every
12
house in there would be worth 50% of market value. After the project was
13
built the house directly behind it was, put on the market and they got into
14
a bidding war, and got more than they were asking.
15
16
1 looked through this binder- I got ,from-the neighborhood group, and I
17
would like to make a very serious comment about_ the petition that was in
18
here. I'm sure a lot of people•.signed it in good faith, Somebody who was
19
circulating the petition went in to one of 'the local merchants, and said,
20
-You need to sign this, because the City's fast tracking this project and
21
everybody on. the City Council is making money off of this deal." Now, we
22
know this project has been around for at least 3 -1/2 years, and I know I'm
23
not making any money off of it, and 1 think I can speak with absolute
24
certainty that nobody else: on this dais. is, either. So I don't believe this
25
petition was circulated in good faith by some of the circulators. Also, I
26
• 27
found people who signed it more than once.
28
That said, I also want to add that 'being retired from law enforcement in
29
Morin, "I had a of contact with Buckelew Programs and their residents.
30
They do run a good- program. Nobody's perfect, but think they do better
31
than most. So, I wob like to acknowledge that. I have problems with the
32
project fhe way it's laid out. I have problems with the parking; I feel it's
33
underrated: I,',m gun shy, :after the project down on Washington, where we
34
found: out there was a tanker. buried in the ground, which ended up
35
delaying things. If we're underrating parking, and .they're asking to build
36
higher- than other things in the area, I don't see where this is superior
37
design.
38
39
The big thing is, I'm looking at expansion of the' police department. They
40
are bursting at the seams at this point. 1.'ve been in that facility. They need
41
to expand. With today's budgetary uncertainty, I don't see locking them
42
in to where they can't go anywhere else. Those are the concerns that
43
have over this, and I do agree with Mr. Healy, the need here is very strong
44
for a project like this, but we don't have to support it here, in this location,
45
or the way 'it''s designed. I think this could probably go back to the
46
drawing board, because I'm not- buying the HUD deadlines that are
47
driving this. I heard that once before when I was sitting on the Planning
48
Commission. It was, "You have to approve this tonight, or this project is
49
going to lose its funding." It took two years for them to get their funding
50
after that night.
• 51
I
Council Member Torliatt: I' d like to get .a couple of clarifications from staff
2
on two different issues. One is this police station issue, because my •
3
understanding is that this ;piece of property was purchased by thebousing
4
fund, it can only be used for housing unless the City decided to sell the
5
property to the General' Fund and the General Fund would have to come
6
up with the current value dollar amount, which I would think would be
7
well in excess of $1 million at this point. Perhaps the City Manager can
8
address the issue of the police station expansion, and whether or not the
9
City was looking at this site for potential police station expansion in the
10
11
very near future; l don't know where we'd get•the money buy it.
12
City Manager Mike Bierman: Eventually, we will have to do "something with
13
the police station. It is reaching its capacity. We also have dispatch in
14
there. When? 1 can't even begin to tell you when we would have enough
15
money to make, that happen, but the land is there at this,point in time.- I
16
don't know when we could do it, but some time in the future, we will have
17
to expand that. police station.
18
19
Council Member Torliatt: Our existing police station is a one -story facility.
20
There couldbe potential expansion on site, I would think. The second issue
21
is the HUD deadline. What is the HUD deadline for funding on this project?
22
23
Ms. Crecilius: The HUD deadline, established by the San `Francisco office,
24
to start construction, is November 17, 2004. If we don't start construction
25
by November 17, which would mean; having to go ahead right away with
26
preparation of construction drawings, we would have to go to
27
Washington D.C. for an extension. That is a discretionary extension, which •
28
they do not have to grant.
29
30
Council Membe(Torliatt: Does construction include site preparation,
31
including grading and installing pads?
32
33
Ms. Crecilius Yes,'but the way that it's done With HUD is that the
34
.entire
permit needs to be approved, the entire - building permit, not just ia
35
grading permit.
36
37
Council Member Torliatt: I read the staff report, read the. information that
38
was provided by the residents. l read the many letters on both sides of this
39
issue,, I visited the..Buckelew'project in Novato this past weekend, and saw
40
what the site; looked like. If there were parking issues, I didn't see any. It
41
was very quiet - It was in - a residential neighborhood, but very near
42
commercial property..l,t looked like any other neighborhood. I think from a
43
land -use standpoint, the integration of a project like this as a housing
44
project on this site is an applicable use. It- currently'is near services that
45
people need: a grocery store, transit, and it's.near enough to walk to
46
other services in the downtown. It "s -an infill.site. I think the density that
47
we, 've been trying to promote in this community of 'infill instead of just
48
sprawl, at 1'9 units per acr,.e, is more than an appropriate density for this.
49
50
1 don't have that much, of the issue with the parking on, the site. The site
51
doesn't need a lot of parking and in the low - income housing projects •
52
we've seen throughout this community,, parking has' been appropriate,
February 2, 2004 Vol. XX, Page 33
1
even though we've decreased the actual requirements pursuant to City
• 2
standards, I think there were some really compelling people here at the
'I
3
microphone tonight, and really appreciated both sides of the issues. I
4
know that people do have real fears about these projects; and I don't
5
want to discount that, because we're all afraid of the unknown, no matter
6
what it is. Some of the folks spoke tonight about making sure that we're
7
inclusive in the community, we accommodate people that we know are
8
already here, in our community, „that may have been born and raised
9
here, or maybe not. But they live in the community, and have a mental
10
illness; and they deserve -a place to live, just like you and me. I think a lot
1 1
about these projects, and this weekend, I was thinking about this project,
12
and I was in my own home, thinking;' "Ho lucky am I to be here in a
13
home the rain coming down and a Toof over my head and friends and a
14
good place to live! Who am I, to say that somebody else can't live in this
15
community who, needs this type of housing ?" I think that the neighbors, if
16
this project got' approved, I think the 'anger you might have or the fears
17
you might have' would subside if you met some of the people who would
18
live in this facility. I've dealt with people, with this kind of issue, and they're
19
people, just like you or me.
20
21
Mr. Mayor, I would move forward with this application at this time,
22
because I think that we're all going to find, if it moved forward, which it
23
doesn't look like.,it's going to, would benefit the community as a whole,
24
and l think it would benefit the neighborhood.
25
26
Mayor Glass: Our Housing Element, if you go to the General Plan, is one of
27
the elements that are required by law to be certified. On page 77, it says,
28
"The single. goal of this chapter is to achieve an adequate' supply of safe,
29
decent housing for all Petalumans.” Mr. Healy quoted the numbers; one of
30
the medical workers quoted the numbers - 5 -20% of the community of
31
56,000 people - so somewhere "between 2,800 and 11,000 may have a
32
need for this. I could see where we could use 14 u nits= in the community.
33
Continuing to look at the General. Plan, `'Housing Variety: The City is
34
committed to "maintdiriing a range of housing types to meet the.needs of
35
all Petalumans." Page 96 of the General Plan, Program 27: "Provide a
36
referral. service #o link those experiencing discrimination in housing. "' I can't
37
help but think-that there is a discriminatory element about this. It is fear. I
38
recognize, and I understand the fear. I also am aware that some of the
39
people that spoke adamantly against this tonight, will one, day
40
don't know who'they'II be -find mental illness inside their family, and
41
they'll suddenly have the need' -but nobody will be there to answer that
42
need. If the City can't, and the government won't, and the people refuse
43
to; the need will go unfilled. So, is the community safer knowing that the
44
problem exists? Because it does. Or is the community safer trying to have
45
some kind of program, some kind &decent housing for all Petalumans. I
46
would move forward with this, l can see -that it appears we're
47
deadlocked. So it's late, that's enough. Where do we go with it now?
48
49
Vice Mayor Moynihan: I think we need to take a vote, Mr. Mayor.
50
51
City Manager Bierman: It appears to be a deadlock, which means that
52
•
you can take the vote, and need to take the vote, but then it fails.
1
3
4
5
6
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
5'1
52
CounciVMember Healy: Mr. Rudnansky, can we take all three of the •
requested actions all at once?
City.Attorney If the votes are going to be the same for all
three actions, then you can take `them all'together.
[MOTION to Adopt Resolution Adopting a' Mitigated Negative Declaration,
Including a Mitigation Monitoring Plan . for the Boulevard Apartments
Project; Introduce (First Reading) an� Ordinance Rezoning the Property
Located at 945 Petaluma Blvd. North (APN, 006 - 450 -01:8) from the CH=
Highway Commercial to the PUD- Planned Unit District;' and Adopt
Resolution Approving a Planned Unit Development Plan and
Development Standards and 2Associat6d Conditions of Approval for the
Boulevard Apartments Project. M%S Healy /Glass.]
AYES: Mayor Glass, Torliaft
NOES: Harris, Healy,, Moynihan, O'Brien
ABSENT: Canevaro .
Verbatim transcription continues:
Mayor Glass: Motion is defeated 4 -2. Did you vote against your motion,
Mr. Healy?
Council Member Healy: I did. The reason that I voted against my own •
motion is this. As the Council is aware, our rules.allow a Council Member
voting in the majority to make a motion for reconsideration at the next
meeting, and that's what I intend to do.
Mayor Glass: Our next scheduled meeting is February 23. You can expect
a motion to reconsider, so itwill.be discussed at the February 23 meeting. .
So that's fair notice to the public.
Council Member Healy: I'll "make a motion on the 23rd; it'will be voted on
at the following meeting.
Mayor GIass: February 23, there will be a motion to reconsider; it will go
offs into March. Thank you. We're adjourned.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
David Glass, Mayor
ATTEST:
•
U
February 2, 2004
1
3
4
5 Katie Crump
6 Executive Assistant to the City Manager
7
8
9
10
11 Claire Cooper
12 Deputy City Clerk
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Richard R. Rudnansky
City Attorney
Vol. XX, Page 35