HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 03/26/2001 (8) DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT
•1.
2 City'of Petaluma, California
3 Draft.Minutes of a
4 City'Council Meeting
5
6
7 Regular•Meeting
8 Monday, January 22, 2001.
9 Couneil.Charnbers
10
11 The Petaluma City Council met on this date at,7:00 p.m. in the'Council Chambers.
12
13 ROLL CALL •
14
15 PRESENT: Vice-Mayor Cader-Thompson, Council Members'Healy, Maguire, Moynihan,
16 O'Brien, Mayor Thompson, and Council Mernber'Torliatt
1.7 •
18
19 ABSENT: None
20
21 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
22 •
3 . At the;request of Mayor Thompson, Jane Hamilton led the Pledge of Allegiance.
yr 4
25 MOMENT OF SILENCE
26
27 At,the request of Mayor Thompson, a'Moment of SilenceLwas observed. .
28
29 PUBLIC COMMENTS
30
31 Beth Meredith, 104 Fifth Street, spoke regarding an upcoming event to take place on.
32 February 16, 2001; a slide presentation and:discussion-with.Chris.Field at City Hall"in the
33 Council Chambers`regarding:environmental issues.-
.
34
35 Robert Ramirez, 611 West, spoke regarding an upcoming event at the Phoenix Theater;.an
36 event to celebrate the first anniversary of the new ownership, a social event and meeting to
37 help chart.theAtture..of'the Phoenix such as retrofitting; programs, fund raiing.
38
39 GeoftCartwright, 56 Rocca Drive, spoke in opposition toa cross-town connecter at Rainier.
4.0
41 Jane Hamilton, 110 '3' Street„spoke regarding°the Lynch;;Creek bike path and asked •
42 Council to continue'the path downtown along the Petaluma River.
43
44
445
• Draft Minutes of a
City of Petaluma, California
City Council Meeting
Monday, January 22,2001 '
Page 1,
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT . •
1 COUNCIL COMMENTS
2
• 3 Council Member Torliatt:
4 • Noted ra letter.received from the North Bay Area of Realtors association regarding
s housing policies; she asked Council Member O'Brien to provide the Planning
6 Commission with the,documents.
7
8 - Council Member.Healy: •
• 9 • Reported that Supervisor Kerns was the Chair and Bob Jean from Cloverdale`was the
10 Vice Chair•on the SCTA,(Sonorria County Transporfation Authority,) Board. Supervisor
ii Kerns was working towards a ballot measure in 2002 regarding transportation funding.
12
13 Council Member'Moynihan:
14 Thanked the neighborhood at Westridge for their generosity and support forthe annual
15 Girl"Scouts cookie sale.
16 •
17 Council Member Maguire:
18 e Thanked Jane Hamilton for her comments and reiterated Mr. Ramirez:s invitation •
19 encouraging public participation at the event.
20
21 Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson:
22 a Reported on a recent local government:;forum:and conference, encouraged the-:new
• 23 council members to attend, and'gave a:brief overview of what was discussed.
24 Regarding the Lynch Creek trail, she noted'that she was happy to)hear that the Bicycle-
• 25 Advisory Committee was to focus on extending it
26 : She noted that the Freeman Gray property on. McDowell was sold, she asked City
27 • Management to•:find out:who bought it and what plans theyhad•for the property:
28 • She attended 'the'R'ecreation Music and Parks Commission meeting and noted there
29 was a lot of public participation.;regarding Oakhill'Park. She encouraged the Park'and
30 • Recreation Department to continue getting neighborhoods involved with their ,loc_al
• 31 parks,.
32
3'3 'CITY'MANAGEMENT COMMENTS
:34
3s• None
36 •
37 UNFINISHED'BUSINESS
3,8
39 1. Discussion, Possible Direction and Possible Action Regarding" Regional Water
40 Supply and ;Transmission,_Issues with Sonoma, County Water Agency Including
• 41 Amendment 11 (Eleventh A nended 'Agreement).
42
43 Mayor Thompson introduced Clinton J. Wilson„Northwestern-Utility Billing Service •
4.4 and his partner, Vincent Denietolis, who in addition, .serves as a member of the
• Draft Minutes:of a
City of"Petaluma,`California
City;council Meeting
Monday?January;22: 2001
• Page 2
DRAFT • DRAFT DRAFT ,;
1 Santa Rosa P-lanning•Commission.
2
-. 3 Mr. Denietolis gave an overview of a ,produ'ct 'that was developed with water
4 conservation. and 'efficiency in mind as well asother benefits of the "product. `He
5 explained how the product worked and answered Council'siquestions
6
7 Council Member Healy•wanted City Management to obtain information regarding
8 rates.
9 '
PUBLIC COMMENT,
11 -
12. David Keller, 1327 'I' Street, offered suggestions for future planning by
13. implementing a program requiring water conservation'and efficiency products.
14 .
rs Mayor Thompson noted that he asked,for the presentation as the City received a
16 number of applications for building apartment complexes.
17
18 Water Resources and Conservation Director Tom ;Hargis provided. background '
19 information, a statuSt report, and summary ofthe project to date. •
20 •
21 Council Member Healy asked ifthere was a process in place to move forward and
22 where the leadership was going to corrie'from:
13
4 Mr Hargis replied no and•that perhaps leadership would'. come from the Mayors'
25 . and Coundilmembers' Association.
26
27 Council Member Healy' asked for clarification of Santa Rosa's reason for
28 reconsidering.their approval of Amendment 11:, he wanted to know if it was because
29 they wanted more'water
3.8
31 Mr. Hargis replied that he.understood it hadito do!with,volume.of water but was riot
32 certain.'
33
34 Council Member Maguire noted that in January;Council moved forward with MOU
35 (Memorandumcof Understanding), and that the Operating Agreement was signed in
36 October; the:MOU had to be approved°in orderforthe Operating Agreement to take
37 effect.. At the Water Forum, all'of the contractors agreed that they needed unity.
38 -
39 Water Resources'and Conservation SupervisoriSteve Simmons:provided a handout
40 from a.seminar held June 22, 2000,the`Urban'Water Management:Plan Community
41 Workshop, and presented slides from a handoutthat addressed Petaluma's water
42 conservation programs. .
43
44 Mayor Thompson asked,ifthere was a way to measure how much,water was saved
5 because of these programs.
Draft Minutes of a l
City of,:Petaluma,'California
'City council Meeting
Monday;January 22,,2001
Page 3
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT
2 Mr: Simmons replied it was about8%;
•
'3
4 Vice Mayor Cadet-Thompson asked that M r. Hargis to provide ..additional
5 information,to the Council about the program.
6
7 • • Council MemberMaguireasked if'there'was a way to get above the 8%
8
a Mr Simmons replied that two tiered rates were a consideration and agreed to return
0 with a report to the.Council with options.
li
1-2 Scott Hess, 100 Union Street, Sustainable Petaluma, read.the following remarks for
13 the record:
• 14
is Tonight you will be discussing direction and possible action
16' regarding'regionaf'water supply and transmission issues with
17 ithe,Sonoma County Water Agency.
18
19 l would like to be brief here,:because of the constraints of time
2o and place, but I did want to make a short:statement of support
2 r for the work that David Keller, Pamela Torliatt and, other
22 Council Members, past and present, have done to raise the
23 awareness of Water Policy in our town and county. Petaluma •
24 . ,hastaken soine,dissension fortheir:Stand, but we canfinowSee!
25' that;the.questions raised about Amendment 11 were valid and
26 .revealing. We are now-hittingseveral natural,ecological limits,.
27 and,we need a new'vision for protecting and managing the
28, • watershed from top to bottom:
•
2 9'
30 lam-in touch,with activist&and elected,officials throughout;the•
31 county,who are deeply grateful that Petaluma has:instigated;a
32 new level' of investigation into county water policy. We do.
33', need to reflect on;our relationship with°the'.natural systems that
34 support us and give life'to our,entire bioregion. Thefact;that
3.5 the Coho and Steelhead have,nearly vanished from our•once
•
36_ .great Russian. and Eel Rivers should be sad 'and shocking:
37 The fact that our waste, carelessness, and disconnection._from
38 • other species, are polluting and degrading our common life.
39 support-system shouldbe,a huge wake up callto reexamine
•
40 our •habitual practices and outlook. That is what David,
41 - -Pamela, Matt, Jane, and others were highlighting in various
42 ways,.it'is=time now fora new look at:our situation.
43
Draft Minutes of a •
city of Petaluma, California
•
`City Council Meeting
Monday;January 22; 2001
Page 4
DRAFT DRAFT. • DRAFT
f In brief, we ate.still dfveiting hug&quantities,of water from the
12, Eel Riyer That diversion is killing the .Eel Watershed' and .
3 • eventually we=will have to.pay fort/fat unjust extraction. If`the
4 SC WA ends up buying the Potter Valley Project as they so •
5 earnestly desire-WE could be .sued for huge amounts of
6 money for ecosystem damages. This isa'great unknown that
7 never getsdiscussed: I have'been to nteetings`wlth Eel'River , '
8 activists and believe'me, they will never give.up. They have a
9 just case, they know it, and they will eventually Win 'in- one ,
10 arena or another ifwe'blindly`sign on'with;the,'wateragencyS
:11 semi-consbidUs MasterPlan,.we;will'become•a partyloa grand
12 mistake thafwill,have financial consequences',
.13
14 Do not underestimate. the power of the fish; and their .
15 protectors. The=fish themselves, do,not lobby,,and do not play
16 PR games. They simp_ly vanish-=and;weare left alone;with our.
17 pollutants, artificial flo
' ws, mined out aquifers and gravel•bars;
18 and our cement and asphalt world full of short sighted'
19 convenience: Eventually- if we care' anything for future
20 generations; we will Iiave to repair the damage we have
21 caused to ourriversystems. Why notwake up,n,ow, and work -
22 on protecting the watershed? • ,
3
4 You notice that;the Water Agency is already'talking about a '
25 new half billion-dollar treatment plant: They carefullyavoid'any •
26 :link with the'destruction of our natural,aquifer/filte"r for short`- '
27 term gravel mining profits: They allude to other reasons'for the
28 plant- ,related, to our escalating demands-but there is a.
29 connection andwe;should acknowledge:the reality. • '
30
31 If Petaluma is the first city to stand up and'ask the hard
32 questions then it is to our credit Isn't it:common sense to I.
33 focus heavily-on conservation and muse rather than more 1
3.4 extraction` from a severely degraded river system? Isn't it
35 common sense to create a real ;working Watershed
36 Management Plan;that protects habitatuall along,our Russian
37 River lifeline from headwaters'to the river'smouth°atJenner?
i8 Isn't it common •sense; to ask-questions about our financial' i
39 liabilities if we:are called to repay our debts,-and damages;to i
40 the Eel River inhabitants, and about'the other unknown
41 financial io.is that come with mechanistic mega projects'
42 entering an uncertain future? .
43
• Draft.Miriutesfof'a
"City;ofPet'aluma, California':.
cityCouncil Meeting
Monday;January'22, 2001
Page'5
•
DRAFT . DRAFT DRAFT .
1 Pamela Torliatt has ;spoken to these. issues clearly and
2 eloquently in recent;months: I hope you will give her your
3
•
whole-headed;sup port'in:continuing to do so as_she heads into
4 her,discussions at the county level. And I hope we can,give
s some backing to the that has been put forward atthestate
6 • level by Virginia Strom Martin- AB 38- that will make the
7 `directors of the Sonoma County Water, Agency an
8 independentlyzelectedbody as they should be. This bill would
9 • be;a,.great step in bringing the light of public awareness to
10' an office of great public importance:
11
12 One final note; I wouldlike to,thank.councilman Mike Healyfor,
13 •his recent proposal to ban the use of.Russian River gravel in
14. Petaluma construction:projects. It'is,a wonderful ideaiand from
1•5 What.lunderstand legally;possible.. Please support him/in:this
16 • endeavor. Let's be.bolcLenough to LEAD wherecwe know we
17 have to.:go.
18'
19 Geoff Cartwright,56 Rocce Drive, spoke in opposition totthe pipeline to Mann,the
20 availability of water and,the County's insistence to cut back'15%, and the:challenges
21 • to the Potter Valley Project, Amendment 10 and 11 costs incurred by the SCWA
22 (Sonoma County Water Agency).
2r3:
24_ Terence Garvey, 83 Maria Drive, 'asked Council to read the EIR (Environmental
25 Impact Report) 'prepared for the SCWA, it provided information about the
26 -.consequences when'there was rio water. He added that surface water needed a
27 treatment.plant..
28 •
29 Beth.Meredith, 104 Fifth Avenue,,spoke regarding the importance of the public's
30 involvement in the process and the ability to be involved in the dialogue; involving .
31 thepublid ih' public forums.
32 .
33 Andy Rodgers, 1151 Debbie Hill Road, spoke regarding the importance of a
34 regional policy the importance of education for the, community and its
35 representatives.
36
37 Scott Vouri, 1,557 Mauro Pietro, spoke,regarding Council discussing and developing
38 a water,policy for'Petaluma. .
39
40 David:Keller, 1327 I'' Street, spoke;regarding how the City was to insure a water
4.1 . supply forever. Watershed management vs. exploitation of the resources needed to
' 42 be dealt with by all the stakeholders.-,at least 30 - 40 stakeholders were identified;
43 Identify otherstakeholders,,"deal with!other water users, surplus:and otherwise, and !
44 try.to insure that when-there was a,reduction'of use that the water agency didn't turn
-45 around and sell it somewhere else, he asked why the City didn't-get a rebate, He
Draft Minutes of a •
City of:Petaluma,,California 4
•
CityCouncil Meeting .
Monday, January 22; 2001
Page 6
•
•
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT .
- continued that identification of'objectives and goals tb the conservation plan; the
2; water agency needed to establish daily use rates.
•.3
4. John Mills, 1'315 'D''Street, Spoke lin support.;ofthe City having'a comprehensive
s plan regarding grayy water and other planning and conservation ;methods. He
6' supported a;regional,approach to water issues:
7
s END OF PUBLIC-COMMENT
9
10 Recess: 9:05 p.m..
11
12 Reconvene: 9:15 p.m...
1-3 .
'14 Council Member Maguire wanted.a discussion and presented .what-he defined as
1s the problems:.
16
17 • Peak pumping problems;addressed'in MOU.
18 • Conservation - neededto be pursued.
19 • Storage.
20 • Habitat and watershed health/aquiferand infiltration.
21 • Cost to ratepayers. '
22 • Process and policy.
03,
4 Mayor Thompson:+
25 •
26 • Did not want the issue to languish.
27 • Did not want to be isolated from the remaining'contraetors.
28 a Wanted to send a message to the Board of Supervisors'that Petaluma was
29 moving with them, as one unit.
30 • Noted that he was+,a supporter of Amendment 11: •
31
32 Council Member Healy:
33
34 • Thought conservationwas.somethihg that would be'ongoing;an&builtlbased on
35 water resources..
36 • Was concerned about process'issues'. There was no process in place and no
37 prospect of a, process to bring this issue to closure SCWA started sending
38 letters for bilateral'contracts and was declined.by all contractors., .•
39 a Environmental community, Santa•Rosa.wanted..more',water.
40 • The CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) process"was complete within
41 Amendment 11`with alt its flaws:
42 • Agreed,aboutgetting,theword to'the CountythatPetaluma wanted be a team
43 player: He noted that Petalumaireceivedwater from a 39-year old;pipeline with'a
44 50-year life span. He supported a pipelinejust above'the minimum and stressed
� Draft Minutes or a
City of Petaluma,'California
City:council Meeting
"Monday;January22, 2001
Page 7
•
DRAFT DRAFT • DRAFT
1 the need'for a,parallel aqueduct.
2 • Wanted a presentation by SCWA regarding their-plans for moving forward.
3 • Stated the,WAC (Water,Advisory:Committee) representatives wanted to move
4 forward°sooner rather than later..
'5 • Noted'steps were needed;to protect gravel filtration in the Russian River.
6 • Regarding Potter Valley, he noted that..the City was committed pursuant to
7. Amendment 1.0:
3 • Thought` it was appropriate,'to underscore the willingness of the. City to
9 participate and do so byrapproving Amendment 11 tonight.
10
1 Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson expressed that the City had always wanted to be a
12 team player; the long-term issue was conservation. She wanted to address the
13 issue looking at results for the long-term. She noted the following problems with
i4 Amendment 11::;
1.5
16' • Stora9e`was'needed.
17 • Pipeline was necessary but not atthe size recommended.
18 • Gravel mining was a major issue; the natural system`was being degraded:every
19 day: , •
20 • She supported AB .38; the water board should be elected members of the
21 community, not the Board of Supervisors.
22 • She thought if'the Council was to vote Amendment 1.1 tonight, it was short
23 sighted and explained.
24
25. Council Member'O'Brien: .
26 •
27 • iStated'..conservation was the major issue.
28 e , Mentioned that a Department of Health Advisory had indicated an inadequate
29' water supply by.year 2010,.
3 o • Thought prolonging a decision any, longer was not the way to go.
3'1
32• Council Member Moynihan
33
34 •. Noted the 'importance of compliance with ABAG (Association of Bay 'Area
35 Governments)allocations in order'to obtain funding fot housing..
36 • 'Regarding conservation', he noted the need'for improvement:
37 • He thought,it was time to make decision.
3`8
39 . Council MemberTorliatt: '
41 • The City needs to protect'thelwatershed and be good stewards of the land.
•: .Conservation,identify the finite resources to this area.:
43 • Water filtration plant, if;no, from the,dam coming to the ,collectors one
44 would have-to be built; itmayhave to•be built anyway if no commitment to take
Draft Minutes of a
City,of Petaluma, California.
City;Councill Meeting
Monday,•January 22 2001
Page 8
;DRAFT DRAFT' DRAFT
care of the river.,
r2 • Tiered rates for contractors and'citizens. •
3 • Vision of'the Potter Valley -'yes or'no for participation.
.4 • Water filtratiOnrpresentation-at'tne WAC'anleeting ' impact to::the,ratepayers'.
5 • She believed in unanimous votes,'the Council was split: ,
6 • Development of a water policy by the contractors;
7 • Watershed management included renewable;water supply. SCWA did not have
8 the approvals to obtain the:water - (National Marine Fisheries Services-NMFS)
9 - a Mandatory, conservation.
10 • Policy for stewards of the water, not users of'the'water:
.
it • Discuss,AB 38;and`take a'Stand on it. •
12 • The public forum needed to occur to.have input by=the public.'
13 • Sewer discharge -if Windsor was to.become a contractor, how healthy was it
14 • What is happeningrin NMWD (North Marin•Water District) and MMWD,(Marin
15 Municipal Water District)- Maybe they did not need;more-water;NMWDheeded
16 more water but maybe there was an opportunity'to resolve that,issue.
17 • Moving water from one;"watershed to another to be discussed as a policy.
18 • Gravel mining, issue coming up in 2004 for.authorization for the Aggregate
19 Resource Management Policy/Ordinance;'(ARM) Education first,•and then make
20 recommendations.. -
21 .
�
2 Council MeniberMaguire continued:
3
24 • Agreed with Sonoma County Conservation%Action;Committee about,diversion
25 issues.
26 • Regarding Santa Rosa the City •of 'Petaluma had brought± .a greater'
27 . understanding of:Amendment 11.
28 • He supported AB:38,; .
29 • Identification of limits to the;resources wasneeded. •
30 • Section 7, consultations would. become ;increasingly expensive for the water
31 agency:
32 • Maximize mandatbry";conservation.
33 • Storage:and,conServation. ..
34 • Xeriscape.
•
35 • He did not support"approving ofAmend`ment 11 Withoutra public hearing., .
36 .
37 'Council Member Torliatt continued: •
38 '
•
39 • A strategic vision was necessary for,watershed,management.
40 • Reduce the cost to-the'ratepayerand practice•conservation. •
41
42 Council Member Healy continued;
43 •
• oraft;Minutes of a
City of Petaluma, California
City Council Meeting
, Monday, January 22;s2001
'Page 9
•
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT
1 a Potter Valley was,;problematic; it did nottome up inthe'years Amendment 11
2 was being developed; he thought the;City was committed under Amendment 10.
3 • Humboldt County. people would not ;give up on. Eel 'River diversion issues;
4 Governor Davis was,going to prohibit selling any natural assets:
5 • His overall:coocern'was that There was.no process in place.and''to get closure.
6
7 MOTION: •Council Member Healy moved, seconded;. by O'Brien, to adopt
a Resolution 2001- N.C.S. authorizing Mayor Clark Thompson to
9 sign,the Eleventh Amended Agreement for Water Supply By and
10 Between Sonoma County Water Agency, City of Cotati,. City of
11 Petaluma, City-of pohnert Park; City of Santa Rosa,4City,of'Sonoma,
12 Forestville Water District; North Marin Water District Valley of the
13 Moon'Wattr District.
14
15 Vice Mayor Cader=Thompsoristated that this'action'was an injustice to the public.
16
17 Mayor Thompson agreed with Council Member Healy
18
19 Council Member Maguire.stated that thissaction played right into:the water agency
20 and;explained. He wanted public input before-the Council voted on the matter.
2:1
22 Council. Member Moynihan called'for the-vote.
23
z4 Vice Mayor' stated The public was not Included;' she asked for
25 anotherspecial meeting so the public could be involved:
-26
27 Council Member Maguire expressed that if the vote was 473 .it Hsent a weak
2,8 message. He suggested voting'the motion "down and.that Petaluma propose
29 Amendment 12:
30
• 31 . MOTION: . •
'3'2 PASSED: 4/3/0 (Cader-Thompson, Maguire, and Torliatt voting "No")
33
34 Council Member'Maguire and Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson'.left thet meeting.
35
3(e :APPROVAL OF PROPOSED AGENDA.
37
3's 2. Discussion and Possible Action to.Approve Proposed Agenda for the Council's
39 Regular Meeting.scheduled for February 5, 2001.
40 .
41 - Council Member Moynihan,wantedia discussion.regardiing an Investment Advisory •
42 Committee toiassist.the Finance Director in thetevaluation of investment alternatives
43 to:maximize the City's,benefits: He wanted it;scheduled,on an agenda,intwo weeks
44 oras soon as;possible thereafter. He:stated he was not looking'for a lot of.work on
Draft.Minutes;of a •
'City of Petaluma,:California
City,Council Meeting
Monday, January,22, 2001
Page 10
' DRAFT DRAFT' DRAFT`' .
•
1 behalf of City Management; he wanted a recommendation, so:that Council;could
Ill'z have a discussion. •
3 . • • .•
• 4 Council Member Torliatt did'not curreritlytsupport creating another;advisory board.
s The Council was looking at ways to reduce CityiManagement'sworkload,
6
7 Council Member Moynihan was-not sure the result would be the`Creatlon of another
a advisory committee He wanted it scheduled"o i an agenda:so a conversation could
9 take place and the Council could weigh whether or notitwas a good idea or netas
o other municipalities in the area:had'done something' imilar. It:rnade`sense.to him
it ;to look`at it;
12
13 Mayor Thompson stated he had no problem with a discussion but he agreed with ,
14 Council Member Tertian that he did not favor,increasing the workload of the Finance
1s Director.
16 '
17 Council Member Moynihan agreed that might be the case. He .asked the City
.
18 Manager to advise the Council when it Made ,sense'to put it on an agenda',in
19 consideration of the Finance Director's schedule.. If not°onIthe:next'agenda, place'it
20' on a future agenda'•:and advise the Council;'of that date. He understood that during
21 the Mid-Year Review, by virtue of the way the item was titled, it was open,ended
22 enough to allow theiCouncil tareallocate somefunds and authorize some funds for
NW3 things near and dearto his heart, such as the purchase of the.ALS equipment for
4 'the fire engines.
25
26 City Manager Stouder replied`th_at he was correct, The:agenda title•referred to the
27 existing ordinance that adopted the budget and was on the agenda as a public
28 hearing in order'td allow'for amendments to"thesbudget; was the intent.
29
30 Council Member Moynihan replied that it'appeared it was not necessary to have a
31 separate item on the agenda for the purchase±ofrthe ALS equipment for the fire
32 'engines;because,it would come underthe .Mid-Year Budget review. Hewanted'at
• 33 some time in the future, If'not next meeting, some time in the.not,too distant”future;.
34 to bring back the discussion he mentioned at the last meeting about the fire;
35 department, the aerial ladder truck and'wherethe'City wanted to go with th'at asttar
• 36 as staffing; and what recommendations the fire department had If that was
37 satisfactory, he wanted that brought badkt and he looked•to the City Manager;to
38 suggest,an.appropriate date: He also,'though,he believed'it was not soi7lething that
39 was going to happen in the near future,wanted the mitigation fee report; he knew
40 the.Finance Director needed time'to•work,onff'it. City Management'.needed to go
41 back and:recreate seven years;,he wanted to.;putthat;on'a hit list of future agenda t -
42 items and,again, evaluate t or revaluate tha the moneywent where it was supposed
43 to go. He added that he thought:it•was second:fiddle,to getting out the new budget. •
44 and he saw'that happening afterwards. He did not want to push Mr. Thomas too
05 hard but certainly he did not want to lose that, he wanted to keep that on the radar
Draft.Minutes of a
I
City:of Petaluma, California
City•Councii Meeting ,i
ii
Monday,January 22, 2001
. Page 11
•
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT .
1 • screen.
2 0 3 Also, at the Council retreat, he did plan to talk about a street repairs upgrade
4 program and 'to budget some time at the next 'couple of meetings to ,allow the
5 appropriate people on staff,,'such as Mike Evert or Jim Ryan, or'whoever'the City
6 Manager,deemed appropriate', to come forward; and discuss'.where the,City had
7 , been He'apologized and stated that he thought Rick Skladzien•was the.correct
8 person. He wanted to discuss what was necessary to have an adequate
9 maintenance program and maybe how to get from whererthe City wa"s;at today to
10 where it=.needed to be: He wanted it;to.be more,specific.as far'as a program. He
11 acknowledged that he knew{City Management was hard at work`behind.thescenes,
12 but he:thought it would.be good to havea public hearing to get the information out
i3 He wanted to, make sure. it got the appropriate priority, and from;`the, public's
14 , . perspective,:,in addition to making,sure;the;Council was•well aware,of it and gave it
1s the right priority. He requestedthe-additions to,the agenda for February 5,:2000'and
16 then future agendas-and asked for Council concurrence.
17 . -
is Council Member Torliatt agreed with Mr. Moynihan that an update: from Rick
19 Skladzien about the;City's•streets andrroads was necessary. She had asked at the
1
p Council meeting that'City Management give a presentation including-an
2 update for the public and Council;on how the City could finance.some of the road
22 improvements.and•if the•City was to go forward with some sort.of assessment that
23 ' they would ask for the public's assistance. She wanted to fast track the completion sij
24 of the Central Petaluma^Specific Plan., In addition,she wanted the implementation
25 of the Petaluma _River Enhancement Plan scheduled on san agenda. and fast
26 tracked.
27
28 Council Member Healy sensed the new process for approval of theagenda for the
29 next meeting`spinning out of control. He agreed that all the issues his colleagues '
30 mentioned;were worthy ones for discussion. However, he acknowledged that City
31 Management.was working very hard and,there must be an orderlytway to bring the ,
32 items forward,,-There had to be a discus"sionaf.Council's retreat on Saturday'with
33. the,City'Marfageron how to accomplish this.
34.
3'5 iCity Manager Stouder appreciated Council Member Healy's comments:; A draft
36 was distributed at place of iseven items at the previous meeting that would be
37 potential City Council agenda items, some were.mentioned again°and several more
38' have been added.'The intent be sure that City Management'a had d-a list of
39 items the Council wanted scheduled onanagenda that.may not bescheduled in the
' 4.0 .next„three to,.six months. If;the'proposed:list of futureitemstwas a:good start, City
41 Management'would update;the;Council with information about when they could be
42 `scheduled with a thorough report.
43' .
44 Mayor that he.was interested in moving street and street
45 .repair forward , -
Draft Minutes of.a
II
City.of Petaluma, California
City Council leeting
Monday;,January 22,x2001
Page 12
•
• ,DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT
111, MOTION: Mayor Thompson moved, seconded by Healy to Approve the
J. Proposed Agenda for the Council's *regular'meeting scheduled for
4 February 5,2001 .
5
6 PUBLIC COMMENT
7
a Geoff Cartwright,,56 Rocca Drive, spoke regarding the possibility of some members
9 of Council violating fair political.practices; he noted conflicts of interests.
MOTION.
12 PASSED: 5/0
.13
14 ADJOURN
15
16 Mayor Thompson adjourned the meeting at 10:30 p.m.
17
18
i9
20 E. Clark Thompson, Mayor
21
2 2
1103 ATTEST:
•
4
•
2 5
2 6
7 Beverly J. Kline, City Clerk
28
•
•
Draft Minutes of a
. ,
City of Petaluma, California
City Council Meeting
Monday, January 22„2001
Page 13