Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Bill 6.A 05/17/2004N CITY OF PETA LtMA,'CALIFORNIA AGENDA BILL � j4 r Agenda Title: Meetine. Date: Public hearing to hear testimony -regarding the, formation of a M_ av .17, 2004 Landscape & Lighting Assessment D I istrict; for Washington ,Creek Village Subdivision and the counting of ballots:. Meeting Time: ❑ 3:00 PM 7:00 PM .Category (check one): ❑ Consent Calendar' ,X Public Hearing ❑ New Business ❑ Unfinished Business ❑l Pre„ke Lion Department: Direct4: Contact Person: Phone Number: Parks & Recreation I Jim Cz ' = 41d,Anchordoguy 707-778-4321 Cost of Promsal: $0 for FY 04 5 i Account Number: 25xx Amount Budgeted: $0 Name of Fund: Landscape Assessment Districts Attachments' to Agenda 'Packet Item: a. Agenda Report b. Engineer.'s Report. c. Resolution Declaring the Results of Balloting Tabulated in Accordance with Article 39IID of the California Constitution and California Government Code Section 53753, Ordering Improvements and Confirming the Diagrams and Annual Assessments for the Washington Creek Village Subdivision Pusuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Summary Statement: The Community Development Department has required a Landscape & Lighting Assessment District be established for the Washington 'Creek Village Subdivision to 'maintain the public or common landscaped areas within the subdivision. A base amount has been established and once .approved cannot be raised more than the CPI without a vote from the property owners. The Washington Creek Village Subdivision base annual assessment is estimated at $347.00 per home based on 37 residential lots. The base year annual cost of $12,821 will maintain landscaping and irrigation systems in medians and common areas that are separate from the residential water meters and street lighting. The level of maintenance is consistent with the -Landscape ,Assessment District landscape maintenance specifications under .the current contract adopted by the City Council on March 3, 2003. The individual property owners will be responsible for the landscaping and street trees in front of their houses. As required by state law, the public hearing, the counting of ballots; and approval of this resolution will finalize the formation of the Washington Creek Village Subdivision. Landscape & Lighting Assessment District. Recommended Citv Coi0cil:Action/Suggested Motion: Open the public hearing, count the. ballots, and adopt the resolution to form the Washington Creek Village Subdivision Landscape :& 'Lighting Assessment District. reviewed, by -Finance Directoit Reviewed by'City Attornev: ADDroxe,®�b. Xity Manager: Dater (� Date: I` % 1 U/ /� Date: Tdda, 'l Date: I Revision 9 and Date Revised: File Code: CITY OF PETAL>< MA; CAL1FORMA MAY 17, 2004 AGENDA REPORT .FOR PUBLIC HEARING. TO HEAR TEST IMONYREGARDING; THE FORMATION OF A:LANDSCAPE & LIGHTING ASSESSMENT°DISTRICT'.FOR WASHI'NG.TON. CREEK' VILLAGE SUBDIVISION AND THE COUNTING OF'BALLOTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Community Development;Department has required a Landscape & Lighting Assessment District be established for- the Washington Creek Village Subdivision to maintain the public or common landscaped areas within the subdivision: Abase amount has been establi'shed'and once approved cannot be raised more than the" CPI •without a vote from the property owners. This base amount can be lowered when estimated costs of any given year are calculated. As required 'by state law, the resolution included with this staff report and the counting of ballots, will finalize the process to form the Washington Creek Village Subdivision Landscape & Lighting Assessment District. Staff .is recommending that the resolution be approved and that the Washington Creek Village Landscape & Lighting Assessment District be formed. 2. BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department has a policy to establish landscape, assessment districts (LAD) for all new subdivisions that have common public laridscaped.areas. The requirements are identified iri-the tentative map conditions prior to development of the .subdivision. These districts maintain various amenities on°public. land such as landscaped: remnants, islands, medians, pathways, riparian. mitigations, soundwalls; fences and street lights. The costs are spread among all of the private parcels within the district. A homeowner's association maintains any landscaping of common areas on private land. The Washington Creek Village Subdivision base annual assessment is estimated at $347.00 per home based on 37 residential lots. The:base year annual cost 6f'$1.2,821 will maintain, landscaping and irrigation systems in medians, and common areas that are separate from the residential water meters and street lighting. This base amount; includes utilities, supervision, renovation and repairs, and will establish a reserve. The $5913 estimated for annual landscape maintenance is determined on a square foot basis using current,landscape industry costs and estimates from three landscape contractors and consulting`with a California licensed Landscape Architect. The landscape is not currently in existence and estimates were made from the final.approved landscape plan for the subdivision. The actual annual landscape maintenance cost will be determined through the bid process by. selecting the lowest, responsible bidder. The level of maintenance is .consistent with the Landscape Assessment District landscape maintenance specifications under`the current contract adopted. bythel City Council on March 3, 2003.' The individual property owners will be responsible for the landscaping and street trees in front of their houses. The public hearing,, counting of -ballots and approval of the resolution will form the assessment district and, set the base assessment per parcel. This base annual assessment may be increased each year no greater than the CPI without a vote of the property owners. The actual annual assessment will be set each year by the City Council,af a noticed public hearing and can be set ;at a lower amount to cover the estimated costs. If it `is necessary to increase the assessment above the allowed amount, a formal 45 day notice period with a vote of the property, owners is required. 3. ALTERNATIVES: Require the Developer to establish a Homeowners Association and transfer ownership of the properties dedicated to the City to the Homeowners Association to maintain all the landscaping. Do not establish a district.and maintain the landscapes with General Fund resources. 4. I'+INANCIAL IMPACTS: • The estimated base year cost of $12,821 includes the cost of -landscaping and tree maintenance, utilities, street lighting; direct supervision by City Staff and miscellaneous improvements and..repairs. If also includes indirect City Staff support and a reserve. This will provide a reserve to build to a maximum of 50% of the annual landscape raintenance-cost. The estimated annual Base year assessments will be $347.00 per house. The base. assessment may be increased each year by up to the CPI without a vote of the property owners. The, attached. Engineer's Report is required by law and contains a summary of the estimated first year base cost and estimated annual assessments: Staff.support costs for the formation of the LAD is. estimated at 16 hours (1 hour Finance Director, 4 hours Accounting Assistant, 1 hour Parks znd Recreation Director, 10 hours Parks and Landscape Manager). The:formation costs, including a reviewwby the City Engineer, City Attorney, for the LAD is paid from a -formation deposit of $5,000 by the developer. The clerical' staff support costs, including the annual assessment process, are estimated at over 100 hours per year for all of the <LADs. These costs are included in each of the LAD budgets. The, estimated clerical support,costs for Washington Creek Village Subdivision LLAD is estimated at2% of the landscape maintenance costs. The remaining r3% of city administration fee funds support provided by the Parks &'Recr"eation Dept. 5. CONCLUSION: Establish .the Washington Creek Village Subdivision .LLAD in order to generate' sufficient revenues for the maintenance of the public landscaping and street° lighting .in the subdivision. The ,base annual assessment of $347.00 per.parcel is sufficient,, with annual inflation increases; to, adequately maintain the public landscaping that is required as :a condition of development and provide for reserves for replacement or repair of the landscaping. 6. OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL.IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR COMPLETION: Public :satisfaction with the .landscape .maintenance will be measured through the positive or negative feedback. received through phone calls; letters; and emails. 7. RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing, count the ballots, and adopt: the, resolution to form the Washington Creek Village Subdivision Landscape & Lighting Assessment District. g:/forms/2003 agenda bill 0 0 ENGINEER'S REPORT WASH.JNGT.ON CREED VILLAGE ,SUBDIVISION LANDSCAPE/LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT • Submitted: May 3, 2004 0 CITY OF PETALUMA Prepared under the direction of: Craig Spaulding, City Engineer 'LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT ENGINEER'S REPORT • WASHING'TON CREEK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT 1972 The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed report as directed by the City Council. Dated: , 2'004 Craig Spaulding City Engineer City of Petaluma. County of Sonoma, CA I HEREBY CERTIFY thatahe,enclosed Engineer's Report; together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was filed with me on the day of 2004. Gayle Peterson City Clerk City of Petaluma County of Sonoma, CA By I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report; .together with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was approved and confirmed by the City Council of the City of Petaluma California; on the day of 12004. Gayle Peterson - 'City Clerk City of Petaluma County of Sonoma,. CA LOM I HEREBY CERTIFY that the enclosed Engineer's Report, together -with Assessment and Assessment Diagram thereto attached, was filed with the County Auditor of the County of Sonoma on .the day of , 2004. Gayle Peterson City Clerk City of Petaluma County of Sonoma, CA LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT ENGINEER'S REPORT ENGINEER';S REPORT WASHINGTON CREEK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION LANDSCAPING, AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 Craig Spaulding, City Engineer and Engineer of Work.for Washington Creek Village Subdivision. Landscape Assessment District, City of Petaluma, Sonoma County, California, makes this report; as directed by the City Council, Resolution No.. N.C.S., pursuant to Section 22585 of the Streets and.Highways Code (Landscaping, and Lighting Act of 1972). The improvements which are: the subject of this report, are briefly -described as follows: The maintenance ;ofall the public landscaping improvements as part of "Washington Creek Village Subdivision" consisting of,plant material, trees,;outdoor furniture, pathway lighting, irrigation systems,-soundwall and street lighting located, in the following public areas. Public landscape areas are defined as those areas'tliat are irrigated from water meters separate from residential water meters. Public landscape Area 1 includes the Washington Creek area,bouiided by Prince Park on the: east, and a line continuing from the western lot line of lot 15across the, creek to Linnet Lane on the west. This area is bounded omthe north side of the creek by lots 16 through 20 and,22 through 27 and the south side of the creek by lots -1, 2, 15,'and Catenacci Court. Public landscape Area 2 includes the,north�side of East Washington St. from back of curb to the soundwall both east and west of Catena.ncci Court and bounded on the north by lots 3 through 11. Public landscape Area 3 includes the :landscaped islands within the cul-de-sac of Catenacci Court. In addition; the:Landscape and Lighting Assessment District shall maintain the street lighting located within the boundaries of Washington Creek Village on Hawk Drive, Noriel Lane and: Catenacci Court. 0 LANiDSCAPE ASSESSMENT"DISTRICT ENGINEER'S REPORT EXHIBIT A WASHINGTON CREED VILLAGE SUBDIVISION LANIDSCAPING/I.,I61ITING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 CITY OF PETALUMA PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, THOUGH BOUND SEPARATELY, ARE FILED AS A PART OF THIS RECORD • U LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT ENGINEER'S REPORT EXHIBIT B WASHINGT®N CREEK VILLAGE' SUBDIVSION LANDSCAPING'ILIGIITING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT CITY OF PETALUMA FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT ANNUAL, COSTS Estimate Of Costs for twelve (12) months Maintenance of Landscaping $5,913 Utilities $1,700 Supervision $500 Improvements & Repairs $500 Other Services $500 Street Light Maintenance $1,000 Total Maintenance Costs $10,113 Incidental Costs County Collection Fee (1/4%) $25 City Administration (15%)' $1,517 Total Estimated Costs for Maintenance and Incidental Costs $11,655 Reserve for Delinquent, Cash Flow, unusual repairs $1,166 TOTAL BASE ANNUAL COSTS SA2„821 Number of Parcels to be Assessed 37 Total Costs Per Parcel to be. Assessed UE 0 LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT ENGINEER'S REPORT EXHIBIT C WASIIIN.GTON CREEK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION LAND8CAPINGALIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT CITY OF PETALUMA FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 ASSESSMENT ROLL: Assessment Amount of Assessor's Number Assessment Parcel Number 1-37 $12,821 (See Attached Property Owner's List) • L� LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT`DISTRICT ENGINEER'S REPORT . EXHIBIT D WASRINGTON CREEK VILLAGE SUBDIVISION LANDSCAPING/LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT CITY OF'PETALUMA FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 BASIS OF ALLOCATION'ASSESSMENTS AND ANNUAL ,INDEXING FACTOR All benefits of the improvements, are special benefits to land with the district. General benefits to the public generally are nominal or non-existent. Allocation of Assessments The total maintenance costs per year�'were .estimated, and incidental;administrative expenses added to yield a total annual cost. This cost was then prorated equally to the 37 lots, so that each lot will share equally in the annual landscape maintenance expenses. Annual Indexing Factor In any year the. assessment ,shall..not be deemed to have been increased if the amount of the increase is not more than the percentage of the increase in the U:S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Prices Indexes, Pacific Cities and the U.S. City Average, San Francisco -Oakland -San Jose from February 1 to the February 1. The first fiscal year 2006-07 assessment levy increase, shall be .determined: from the percentage increase from February 2005 to February 2006. 0 LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT ENGINEER'S REPORT EXHIBIT E WASHIN,GTON CREED VILLAGE SUBDIVISION LANDSCAPINGIL,IGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT CITY .OF°PETALUMA FISCAL YEAR 2005-06 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST: Assessment Property Owner's Assessor's Number Name & Address Parcel Number 1-37 (See Attached.:Property Owner's List) (See Attached Property Owner' is 0 WASRINGTON CREEK VILLAGE PROPERTY OWNERS LIST Lot 1 149-180-018 John & Sharon Roehm, 1950 Catanacci Court, Petaluma, CA 94954 Lot 2 149-180-019 Richard & Colleen Grant, 629 Sartori Drive, Petaluma, CA 94954 Lot 3 149-180-020 Xianhong Bai & Ying Ying Wang, 2284 Malachite Way, Santa,Rosa; CA 95404 Lot 4 149-180-021 Scott,& Ling Reily, 1431 Capri Ave. Petaluma, CA 94954 Lot 5- 149-180-022 Peter & Maria Aguilar, 5744 Rei'sling Road, P.etaluma,CA 94954 Lot 6 149-180-623 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 7 149-180-024 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400.N.;Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 8 149-180-025 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 9 149-180-026 Timothy J. & Maria Murphy, 15-11 Cero.Sonoma Circle, Petaluma, CA 94954 Lot 10 149-180-027 Kesnel.& Ginette.Jacket, 1918 Catenacci Court, Petaluma, CA 94954 Lot 11 149-180-028 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 12 149-180-029 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 13 149-180-030 James & Donna Beels, 1909 Cantenacci Court, Petaluma, CA 94954 Lot 14 149-180-031 Michael & Joanne Murphy, 460 Casa Verde Circle, Petaluma, CA 94954 Lot 15 149-180-032 Robert.& Andrea Balf, 1917 Catenacci Court, Petaluma, CA 94954 Lot 16 149-180-033 Miguel & Georgina Sandino, 108 Rose. Petal Court, Petaluma, CA 94954 Lot 17 149-180-034 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 18 149-180-035 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 19 149-180-036 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 20 149-180-037 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 21 149-180-038. Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 22 149-180-039 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 23 149-190-040 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 24 149-180-041 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N..Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 25 149-180-042 Cobblestone_Homes.Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 26 149-180-043 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 . Lot 27 149-180-044 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 28 149-180-045 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa; CA 95401 Lot 29 149-180-046 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 30 149-180-047 Cobblestone.Homes Inc., 1400 N-Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa; CA 95401 Lot 31 149-180'-048 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 32 149.-.180-049 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 33 149-180-050 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 34 149-180'-051 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 35 149-180-052 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 36 149-180-053 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400'N. Dutton. Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Lot 37 149-180-054 Cobblestone Homes Inc., 1400 N. Dutton Ave., Suite 1, Santa Rosa, CA 95401 • 03 09:12a 707 5421645 p.2 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE, RESULTS OF BALOT.TING TABiTLATED-IN ACCOR DANCE' WITH ARTICLE XIIID OF THE` CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION AND CALIFORNIA :GOVERN_MENT CODE SECTION 53753, ORDERING'IMPRO VEMEN.TS AND CONFIRMING THE DIAGRAMS AND: ANNUAL,ASSESSMENTS FOR, TIME WASHINGTON CREED VILLAGE' SUBDIVISION PURSUANT TO THE, LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING' ACT OF 1972 FOR THE' 2005-2006 FISCAL YEAR WHEREAS, the Landscape -and Lighting "Act of 1972 ("1972 Act"), codified in California Streets arid. Highways Code Section 22500 et seq.,, establishes procedures whereby local agencies -whose annual taxes. are carried on the county assessment roll and are collected by the county may fund the construction and maintenance of improvements by formation of assessment districts; l and WHEREAS, the general procedures for formation of an:assessrnent district under the 1972 Act include_: adoption of a resolution initiating proceedings, proposing formation :of a .district and ,ordering an engineer's report; approval of the engineer's report; adoption of a resolution of 'intention to form an assessment district; levy and collect assessments, and, `if�desired, issue bonds or notes- and, following canvassing of balloting thathas been noticed and conducted in accordance with California, Government Code Section 53753, and a noticed public hearing" on the assessment, adoption of a 40' resolution ordering the improvements and formation of the district and confirming the diagram and assessment; 2`and WHEREAS, improvements. that; may be funded under. the 1972.Act include: installation or construction of landscaping, ornamental structures; .public lighting facilities, appurtenant structures- or facilities, park or recreational ;improvements, acquisition of land or existing improvements for park, recreational or open space purposes; and acquisition or construction of community centers; auditoriums, halls or similar public,facilities, for indoor presentation of"performances and events, including public and private events; 3' and WHEREAS, by. Resolution No. adopted May 3; 2004, the City Council of the City of Petaluma initiated proceedings for formation of the Washington Creek Village Subdivision Landscape & Lighting Assessment District. ("D.istrict"),'.designated' Craig Spaulding, City Engineer-, as the Engineer ofRecord ("Engineer.") for the proposed District, and° ordered the Engineer to prepare and file a report pursuant to the 1972 Act; and WHEREAS; the Engineer prepared,a report ("Report") concerning the District, District improvements ("Improvements") and the proposed assessment("Assessment") in ' Cal. St. & High".:Code '§§2250.0 - 22501 2 Cal. St. & High. Code §§23585 - 22587, 22594 3 Cal. St. & High. Code §22525- accordance with the requirements ,of ;the 1972 Act, filed a copy ofthe.Report with' the • City Clerk and submitted a copy of the Report.to the City Council for consideration; and WHEREAS,, at its regular meeting on May 3, 2004, the City Council of the City of Petaluma duly considered the Report: and found that it complied with a11.applicable requirements of the 1.972, Act and other applicable law;. including the requirements that the: Report:refer to the assessment district by its designation, specify the. fiscal year to which the reportl applies, and contain improvement plans and specifications, an estimate of the,improvement costs, a diagram of the district, anassessment of the estimated costs of the improvements, and estimate of the principal. amount of improvement bonds or notes to be issued, if any; and . WHEREAS,, by Resolution No.' adopted May 3, 2004, the City Council of the CityofPetaluma preliminarily<approved the Report subject to pending proceedings, including balloting proceedings and noticed hearing proceedings concerning the District in accordance with California Constitution Article XIIID, California Government Code Section 53753 and the 1972.Act; and WHEREAS, by Resolution,No. adopted May 3, 2004, the; City Council of the City."',of Petaluma, declared its intention to order the levy and collect assessments for the District and set a public hearing on the formation of the District and levy of the proposed assessment pursuant to the 1972 Act;:and WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 53753 (which implements California Constitution Article XIIID, known as.Proposition 218) requit sthat p ' r-to levying a new or 1increased assessment local agencies must provide mailed notice, including balloting materials and instructions as specified in Section 53753, to each record owner of a parcel withinthe, proposed assessment at least 45 dayspriorlo' a,public hearing on the assessment; and WHEREAS, on April 2, 2.004, City staff mailed notices and ballotingmateria_ls and instructions to eachrecord owner, of a parcel within the District announcing that ballots would be, canvassed.:and a hearing"'conducted on May 17, 2004 on the .formation of the District and levy and collection of the Assessment for the 2005 _ 2006 fiscal year, . and, for each future -year following establishment of the District, of the percentage increases specified in the U.S. {Department of :labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Prices Indexes, Pacific Cities and the U.S. City Average, San Francisco -Oakland- San Jose from February I;and WHEREAS,,the mailed notices included: the total amount of the: proposed Assessment chargeable to the entire District, the'amount chargeable to the record owner's parcel, the duration of the payments; the reason for the Assessment and the basis upon which the amount of the -proposed Assessment was calculated, the date, time and; location of a public hearing on -the proposed'Assessment, a.summary of the procedures for the completion; return, and tabulation of the Assessment ballots, including, a statement that the Assessment shall not: be imposed if the ballots submitted in opposition to the ' assessment exceed the ballots: submitted in favor of the Assessment, with ballots weighted according .to the proportional financial. obligation of the affected property, an assessment ballot, including'the City's address for receipt of ballots,. aplace for the person returning the, ballot to indicate his or her name, reasonable identification of the parcel, and his or her support of opposition to the proposed Assessment;4 and WHEREAS, the 1972;Act requires°one published notice. at least 10 days before the public hearing on the Assessment; and WHEREAS, on.May 7,; 2004, City staff published notice in accordance with California Government Code :Section 6061 of the public hearing on the: Assessrrient; and WHEREAS, ballots mailed concerning the proposed Assessment were in a form that concealed their content&. once sealed by the person submitting the ballot, and all assessment ballots were received at the address indicated on the ballot for tabulation; and WHEREAS, .on May 17, 2004, at a regularly schedule meeting:at the time date and place stated in the mailed and the published notices, the City Council of the City Petaluma conducted a hearing on the proposed Assessment, permitted any interested person to present written or oral testimony, and considered, all objections or protests to the proposed Assessment, including any objections to the Improvements, maintenance of the Improvements, the extent of the District, and/or any zones within the District, the District diagram, and the Engineer's cost estimate, and the City Council of Petaluma fully considered any such written or oral testimony concerning the proposed Assessment;5 and WHEREAS, ballots on the Assessment were permitted to be submitted, changed or withdrawn by the person who submitted the ballot until the conclusion of the public testimony at the hearing .on the proposed Assessment, and ballots:remained sealed until the City Clerk commenced tabulation of the ballots following the conclusion of public testimony;6 and WHEREAS, if there is a majority- protest against the imposition of a new assessment or the extension•or increase of anexisting, assessment, the assessment may not be imposed, extended, or increased;? and WHE1tEAS,: a.majority protest exists if assessment ballots submitted and not withdrawn in opposition to the proposed assessment exceed the assessment ballots submitted; and not withdrawn, in favor of the assessment, weighting the assessment ballots by'the amount of the proposed assessment to be imposed on the identified, parcel for whicheach assessment ballot was submitted;$ and 4 Cal. Gov't. Code §53753(b), (c) 5 Cal. Gov't. Code §'53753(d) 6 Cal. Gov't. Code §53753(c), (e) Cal. Gov't. Code §53753(e)(3) s Cal. Gov't. Code §53753(e)(2) WHEREAS; following the conclusion of the public testimony on the proposed Assessment, the City Clerk tabulated ballots submitted and.not withdrawn in support of the proposed Assessment, and ballots submitted and not withdrawn Jn opposition to the proposed Assessment; and WHEREAS, when weighted according to the amount of the proposed Assessment to be imposed upon the parcel for: which each assessment ballot was submitted, the ballots submitted and not withdrawn in opposition to the proposed Assessment did not exceed the ballots submitted and not withdrawn in,:support of the proposed Assessment; and thus a majority protest does not exist concerning formation of the Assessment; and WHEREAS, if a majority protest.has not been filed concerning a proposed assessment, the legislative body may adopt a resolution ordering the improvements and. the .formation.,of the assessment district and confirming the diagram and assessment either as, originally proposed by the legislative body or as changed by it, and adoption of the resolution constitutes levy of an assessment for the first year referred to in the assessment;9 and Findings WHEREAS, the City Council of the Cityof-:Petaluma finds, based on substantial evidence in the whole record before the .Council, as follows: • 1. Formation of the proposed District and levy 'of the proposed Assessment is for, the purpose of meeting operating, expenses of maintaining the District and the. Improvements in accordance with the 1972,Act, and/or for the purpose of obtaining funds for capital projects necessary to maintain services within existing service areas in accordance with Title 14, Section 15273, subsection (a)(4) of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQX) Guidelines. 2. Maintenance of the Improvements funded pursuant to the- Assessment constitutes maintenance of existing landscaping in accordance with Title 14, Section 15301, subsection (h) of the CEQA Guidelines. 3. The Improvements -constitute minor public alterations in the condition of land; water and/or vegetation that do not involve removal of healthy, mature: scenic, trees in the form of new gardening or landscaping in accordance with Title 14; Section 15304, subsection (b). NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council. of the City of Petaluma does resolve as follows: 1. The above recitals are true and correct and hereby declared .to be findings ofthe City Council of the City of Petaluma. 9 Cal. St. &.High. Code §22594 2. Formationofthe proposed District:and levy of the proposed.Assessment, the Improvements and maintenance of fhe Improvements are exempt, from CEQA in accordance witli Title 14, Section ;1527,3,. subsection (a)(4), Section 15301, subsection (h) and .Section 15304, subsection(b) of the CEQA, Guidelines. 3. All protests against the Improvements, the proposed District and annual Assessment proposed.for Fiscal year..20.05-2006,.including protests against maintenance of the Improvements, the extent of the District and/or any zones in_the District, the District diagrams or the Engineer's estimate of the cost of the Improvements and/or their maintenance have been, received and considered. 4. The District that will benefit from and be assessed rfor the Improvements and their construction and/or installation and maintenance is situated in the City of Petaluma, California and is more particularly described in the diagrams of the District contained in the Engmeer,',s Report -on file in the office of the City Clerk. The Engineer's Report is attached to and made a part of this.resolution as Exhibit A. The diagram of the District indicates by a, boundary line :the extent of the territory` included in the District and any zone within the District 'and the general location of the District. 5. The plans and specifications for the Improvements (both existing and proposed) within the District as contained in the Engineer's Report are adopted and approved. 6. The Engineer's estimate of the cost of the Improvements, and of - constructing and/or installing, and maintaining the Improvements as ,contained in the Engineer's Report is adopted and' approved. 7. The public interest, convenience and necessity require and the City Council of the City of Petaluma hereby orders thedinprovements to be made and/or installed and maintained as described in the Engineer's Report. 8. , The public interest, convenience and necessity require and the City Council of the City of Petaluma hereby or the formation of the District and the levy and collection of assessments, including the annual Assessment proposed for the 2004- 2005 fiscal' year pursuant to the 1-972 Act and other applicable law for the construction and/or installation and maintenance of the improvements as described in the Engineer's Report. 9. The diagram showing the exterior boundaries of the District and the boundaries of any zone within the District and the lines and dimensions.of each lot or parcel of land within the District as such lot or parcel is shown on the County Assessor's map for the applicable fiscal year, each lot or parcel of land of which has been given a separate number on such diagram, as contained in the Engineer's Report, is approved and ® confirmed. 10. The Assessment of the total amount of the costs and expenses, including incidental expenses, concerning the Improvements fairly distributes such costs amount all assessable lots or parcels of land within .the :District in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by such lots or parcels fromkthe Improvements and from the maintenance of the Improvementsa.as contained in the Engineer's Report, -and such Assessment is approved and confirmed. 11. The, entire Engineer's Report concerning the District, the Improvements, related costs and .the Assessment is adopted.and approved. 12. The City Clerk is directed ta. ofle with the Auditor -Controller of Sonoma County 'the Assessment and any attachments and diagrams as confirmed by the City Council of the City of Petaluma along with a certificate of such confirmation to be attached to the Assessment. 13. The. Sonoma County Auditor -Controller and the Sonoma. County Tax Collector are directed pursuant to the 1972..Act to 14pply the Assessment filed with the Auditor -Controller as contained in the Engineer's Report on file with the City Clerk to the tax`roll and the Sonoma County Tax Collector is directed in pursuant to the 1972 Act to collect the Assessment in the same manneras all other such assessments collected -by the Sonoma County Tax Collector. • C:\NrPortbl\EBMATN\ERIC\658609—I.DOC