HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 01/24/2005January 24, 2005
L
City, o California
� f Petaluma,
MUTING OF THE, PETALUMA CITY COUNCIL/
PETALUMA POMMUNITY'DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City Council/PCDC Minutes
Monday January 24, 20115 " 3:00 P.M.
Regular Meeting
Vol. 40, Page 405
MONDAY, JANUARY 24.2005
2
3 CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 p.m.
4
5 A. Roll Call
6
7 Conevoro, Mayor Glass, Vice Mayor Harris, Healy, Nau, O'Brien, Torliatt
8
9 B. Pledge of Allegiance - Council Member O'Brien
10
11 Council Member Nau read. a.stdtement regqrding her vote on the Selection of
12 Contractor for Refuse Collection and Disposal Services and. Authorization for City
13 Manager to Complete Franchise Agreement Negotiations, and made a MOTION for
14 reconsideration of the action taken at the January 18, 2005 meeting.
15
16 Council Member Nau's Statement: (Begin verbatim transcription)
17
18 Our goal is to serve the entire community to the best of our ability. it is our
19 responsibility as City Council Members to represent the best interests of the
20 people of Petaluma. Lost week's action, of the majority of us, when we
21 selected the provider to collect our trash, has caused a maelstrom of
22 discontent among the voters of our city,
23
24 1, for one, cannot go anywhere in PetalbMo since the vote was cost
25 without someone stopping me and wanting to know why we voted for the
26 most expensive choice. Additionally, I have ,received countless phone
27 calls and e-mails. While I know a certain amount of the phone calls were
28 orchestrated, the vast majority were sincere concerns expressed by their
29 astonishment that we voted as we did.
30
31 The angst expressed by so many people has caused me to rethink my
32 position. Lost Tuesday, as I understood it, I had to make a selection
33 between the three remaining contractors bidding on our 10 -year contract
34 for garbage service. As a result, I voted'in favor of Norco/.
35
36 1 voted in favor of Norco/ because I am committed to protecting the
37 environment for our community, our children, and our future generations. 1
38 felt that their proposed 70%o recycling rate was the best recycling proposal
39 in front of us. I still believe that they are a,quality company that provides
40 outstanding service.
ri
Vol. 40, Page 406
January 24, 2005
1
2 What I didn't understand wass theprocess which occurred before I was
3 elected to the. City Council. Consequently, / have some checking on my
4 own. it appears that the -criteria by which the proposals ,were, judged Was
5 constantly changing and did not provide clarity, to the Council or to the
6 contractors.
7
8 1 do not believe we have made either the best or the right decision; The
9 City extende . d the Waste Management contract once already to
10 continue the selection process. I belie9e that should remain in place.
11
12 1 believe we should reopen the competitive bid process,. requiring a 70%
13 recycling rate, and at the lowest cost possible
sible to insure the best possible
14 deal for our environment and our ratepayers. We must empathize with
15 those in our community who are struggling economically.. The poor, the
16 elderly, the young families all must be considered, (End verbatim
17 transcription)
18
19 M/S Nau/Healy.
'20
21 City Attorney Rudnonsky explained that Council's Rules,. Policies, and 'Procedures .-states
22 that when a Council Member makes a motion for reconsideration, that motion, may be -
23
p -23 seconded at the time the motion is made, or at the next
ext meeting., In this case, 'sinice-
24 Council Member Healy has seconded the motion-, it will be brought back for voting, at.,
25 the February 7, 2005 meeting. If the motion,passes,,, the actual reconsideration'Wil be at
26 the next regular Council Meeting, potentially February 28.
27
28 Mayor Glass asked that Council Member Nau's, statement be entered into the minutes
29 verbatim. He also asked the. Public Comments.regarding the garbage franchise be
30 transcribed verbatim..
31
32 Council Member Torli affencouraged thos,e who had come for Public Comment to tell
33 the Council what they think, even though there was a motion for reconsideration.
34
35 PUBLIC COMMENT (Begin verbatim transcription)
36 Donald Davis, Petaluma:' We presently have a very. excellent garbage pickup,. Theydo a
37 good job, they're very congenial,and I have been wondering why you would vote for
38 the highest contractor. Either there.dre items we don't know, or you want,to shock us
39 and then when you select one we don't feel. quite so bad about it. Before I retired, 1
40 worked fora company where I sat in on contract meetings!and the= contractors - the
41 ones thatw'drited the contract - they had competitive bids. The ones that didn't' want
42 the contract, they made it 100% more, and said, "Well if we get it, that's cream on the
43 pig." But if somebody can,db a: goad job at a lesser price, I think you ought -to go there.
44
45 Howard Calmer; Petaluma: * * I'm a retired teacher for the Old Adobe School District. 1
46 haven't gotten
n involved in politics very much. In light of how things have been going -
47 the President being reelected and we've got an Action Figure Governor- ' I guess 1
48 shouldn't be surprised that we?d decide to have the Cadillac of garbage service when
49 we can't fix ourstreets. We've been waiting for a cross-fowa connector forever. And you
50 all decided we should pay double for garbage service. I don'tgefit. We certainly have
51 other things thatwe need to fix. Since the Governor is using the City money to balance
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1.0
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
4.4
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
January 24, 2005 Vol. 40, Page 407
the State's budget, we're going to have to pay for police and fire and many other things
down the.road, perhaps. We need to start thinking about fiscal responsibility. We could
have done a lot to improve our garbage and recycling over the last ten years. We could
have fined people who didn't recycle. I've got,neighbors that throw everything into the
same can, and nothing ever happens. There are other ways to save and recycle. Sixty
percent isn't bad for half the price. You need to rethink it.
John Legnitto, General Manager, Norcal Waste: I: hope the process will play out, because
what we're offering here is to managewaste costs through recycling. We've always
offered that and we've always offered to work with the City to come up with the right
rates. The fact of the matter is, our intent is to put together this type of arrangement,
which would be $12.09 a month. No matter what anybody's telling you. At the end of the
day, when you're all set, most people have a current arrangement - over 64% of the City
- that looks like this [showing photo] with the three bins, that they're paying $15.33 for
today. In the longterm, we would work with the Council to negotiate the rates. We take
care of our seniors in all the communities that we're in. We provide for all the different
aspects of our rates, so that people will be able to subscribe to, the services they need,
and our company has never once tried to mislead anybody -..It's very frustrating to hear
the things that are have been coming out over the last few days: Because all we want to
do is the right thing for your City. Thank you very much.
Colleen. Dunaway, Petaluma: I voted for all four of :the Council Members who just voted
for this garbage thing, and I'm appalled. I'thirik going from 50 to 60% [diversion] is fine.
We don't need to go to 10% now. Saying that our rates will go down later.is "pie in sky."
No one knows. At that point; the price of energy'will probably. be higher for the gas in ,the
trucks. My bottom line is, I think the, Council needs to vote for -what the people want, and
not what you, think you want for us. You are not our teachers or our parents. You need to
vote for what we want. Thanks.
Ken Foley, Operating Engineers Local No. 3: Last week, Ken Oku, our district rep from San
Francisco/San Mateo spoke before you: I'm hear today representing him, and wish to
repeat what Ken said to you then. Operating Engineers District 1 is in support of Norcal
Waste Systems in their efforts to achieve the Petaluma contract. Operating'Engineers
represents workers at numerous, Norcal facilities in Northern California. We find them to
be an excellent employer, we have found them to be excellent to negotiate with, to
arrive reasonable and cost effective contracts with, people we represent. We'd like,
once again, just to suggest that you move forward with appointing Norcal as your waste
hauler. Thank you.
Martin Pozzi, Petaluma: This year I will be 36 years at my current residence. I've lived in the
city limits for the past 55 years. I'm a retired general contractor. A brief statement about
Empire Waste: Empire Waste has done a great job for me over the years. In construction,
they furnished debris boxes at a reasonable price. Their pick up day has been always
prompt. Sometimes a relief driver misses a pickup: you can call the company, and
usually that day it's taken care of. To change to another company at this time and to
cost us double for the service we are getting would be a grave mistake. Please listen to
the people of Petaluma and continue to have Empire Waste be your garbage
company. They have given us good service in the past, and probably will continue to
give us good service in the future. Thank you.
Dewey Thomas, Petaluma: I have lived in Petaluma for 52 years. Mr. Pozzi, if he lives until
next month, will be here for 80. First of all, I want to apologize to Karen Nau for what I put
Vol. 40, Page 408 January 24, 2005
1 in this letter that you have in front of you. I was going to bring up the fact that if you
2 change your mind; it.doesn't mean you're waffling - it means that you're here. to listen.
3 You are certainly listening. Thank you. I do want to say one thing. I resent Norcal coming
4 up here and speaking, at every meeting, when they're going to be in contract
5 negotiations with the Councilaater on. This is public comment, 1 think, for the citizens of
6 Petaluma ,on issues that concern Petaluma. I think cost should enter into everything you
7 think about; including City business - especially when it's other people's money! Mr.
8 O'Brien,. I;question the legality of your vote, when you.'re campaigning forreelection;
9 you're in. negotiations, with a company that you take .campaign money from, I don't
10 know1f`that's legal or not. Apparently, you've researched it because you did it.
11
12 '[Mayor Glass interjected here, telling Mr. Thomas it was "absolutely legal and that the.
13 representative from Norcal had a "first amendment right to address the Council."]
14
15 Mr. Thomas, continued: Not much to say to you, Mr. Harris, I guess. Thank you, Mr. Healy,
16 Pam Torliatt, and David Glass Mr. Bierman has. been working .on this for three years. You
17 can study something to death, and you won't come up with any new answers.
18
19 Julio Ercolini, Petaluma: Recently, I lost my wife. I had ,the paramedics come to my house
20 four times. They 'treated my wife the way a person should be treated.
21
22 Ernie Carpenter, Industrial Carting and Green Waste: I wasn't going to speak, but I
23 noticed that the,other companies did. We consider ourselves, viable bidders. We. don't
'24 want to. take a back seat to anyone in this process. We tried .to play the.game straight
25 up., I promise you that we will continue to move ahead with integrity and°with a
26 commitment to do what we say. When we talk about being able to start with 70%
27 recycling tomorrow, we: mean that: It's not something that's contingent upon other
28 issues. We respecf your process,_and we'd like to congratulate Council Member Nau on
29 being,able to articulate a change of opinion. I, for one, which a lot of elected people
30 (and no reflection on this group) would change their minds- on alot ofthings.'So it does
31 come .as a breath of fresh air, even though we obviously stand to gain. Thank you.
32
33 Robert O'Connor;, Petaluma, I have only .four quick questions for you, and I know I won't
34 get answers now„but if you willconsider them, I'll appreciate that. I'd like to know if the.
35 CouncR has documented proof from any reliable: source that the new refuse company is
36 recycling .70% of its,trash anywhere, else. Does the contract that Will be.signed by the City
37 have a guarantee that the new company will, after a. certain period, recycle 70%2 If not,;
38 is there a stipulation that they can befined monetarily for -breach of contract? One of
39 the great services we get in Petalumd'is from Waste Management. Twice a year, they let
40 us bring our unusual and odd 'bad stuff' to special places in the City at no charge. We
41 can bring whatever we need to get rid of and they take it, free of charge. I'm not even
42 thinking about Christmas trees, which they also do free. We havea quiet sweeper, that
43 comes every week and has for many, many years to clean the trash off of the streets. We
44 really appreciate that it. I hope that's in the contract also. Thank you very much.
45 (End verbatim .transcription)
46 COUNCIL COMMENT
47 Mayor Glass thanked the members of thepublic. He said he had been pretty vocal - his
48 concerns were strictly financial, and were based on, expert. analysis.- not necessarily on
49 his opinion. The consultant has said that the rates would .go up with Norcal for 88% of the
January 24, 2005 Vol. 40, Page 409
1 customers during the first 16 months. After that, the rates would either stabilize or go up
2 even more. He thought the Argus -Courier had accurately reported the concerns
3 outlined in the staff report. The consultant expressed concern about the way the
4 proposed contract is financially structured. In order to "sleep at night," he needed to
5 make sure there is contract locked in that is in the best interest of the rate payers. Norcal
6 is an excellent company with a great ability to recycle. He was not sure, however, that
7 Petaluma could afford the price. He wished Petaluma had the money to do what Norcal
8 proposed.
9
10 Council Member Canevaro stated that the public had a misconception that he had said
11 at the January 18th meeting that he didn't care.:about price. He•asked to read back from
12 his notes from that meeting, for the record. What he actually said was, "Forme it was
13 never just about price. I asked for alternatives at 50, 60, and'70%, along with pricing, so
14 that we could consider the best product." He felt he had been done a bit of a disservice,
15 but said he would stick by his decision. Council gave direction to the City Manager to
16 negotiate.a contract with Norcal. He emphasized that there is no set fee structure yet.
17 The negotiated contract would come back to Counci( for final approval. He hoped the_
18 public would reserve judgment until that time.
19
20 Vice Mayor Harris agreed with Council Member Nau that Council needs to reconsider
21 the matter, with all the residential rates for all the can. sizes for -each proposer• clearly laid
22 out for'each citizen to do his own analysis, and all the commercial rates laid out for every
23 business. The senior discount rate needs to be specified as well. He looked forward to
24 that, but noted that he will not available for the February'28th meeting, and hoped the
25 matter could be agendized for a different date.
26
27 Mayor Glass asked the City Manager to determine when :a Special Meeting could be
28 scheduled for this item.
29
30 Council Member Torliatt explained that her vote was based on `-'simple math." The
31 numbers Council had in front of had of them for a ten-year garbage contract were $50
32 million for Waste Management, $59 million for Green Waste, and $101 million Norcal
33 Waste Systems. Staff recommended the $50 million option; Council chose the $101 million
34 contract. She appreciated Council Member Nau requesting a reconsideration'Vote, but
35 stressed that she is not in favor of issuing a new RFP and starting the bidding process over
36 again. A choice should be made between the two remaining bidders based on'the
37 lowest rates a.nd highest°recycling levels they could provide. She pointed out that Waste
38 Management could provide the service with a 10% increase in recycling. She felt Council
39 had, many other projects to be working on; there were a number of redevelopment
40' projects, the new wastewater'treatment plan, and many development proposals that
41 would. be coming before them soon. She asked the public to give Council feedback on
42 whether they want to reopen, the bidding process or move forward with one of the
43 current bidders.
44
45 Mayor Glass shared Council Member Torliatt's concerns.
46
47 Council Member O'Brien told Mr. Ercolini he was sorry for his loss. The City Attorney had
48 cautioned tCouncil not to discuss the merits of the garbage, issue at this meeting, as it was
49 not on the agenda. He hoped everyone heard the $12.09 per month that Norcal has
50 quoted. That would not double the garbage rates. He said everyone had been scared
51 by what was reported in the newspaper, but that was not what was going to happen.
52
Vol. 40, Page 410 1 January 24, 2005
I Council, Member Healy was in favor of scheduling a Special Meeting for Monday;
2 January 31' to vote on .the motion,for!recbnsideration,,dn ' d another Special M ' eefihg in
3 early February to revisit th, e issue. He made extensive comments at fhe,Safurday, January
4 22 meeting,, which were reported in the newspaper yesterday,. To summarize what's "in
5 front of the Council'at'thi t s point: There are three companies that ,are proposing to get
.6, the City'�s•ten-year franch, jse-. The City hired d very experienced' firm to help, analyze the
7 proposals, and'prepare an unbiased, side-by-side comparison of what those proposals
8 really meant. That's what Council had,before them on January] 8th. He believed Council
9 should base their decision on that, analysis. The figures for the three companies were
10 basically: Norcal Waste, Systems,. Inc. 170%,recycling with a 11,6% increase In. rates; Green,
11, Waste - 70% recycling with ,an,18% increase in rates; and Vicisfe, Managbmenf, the
12 current,coriipany in Petaluma
0ma 60,'7�o,recycling with a 3.8% rate hike. He asked' for a show
13 of hands from the7audient'e regarding which company should be awarded the
14 contract.
15 CITY MANAGER COMMENT - None,.
16
17 AGENDA CHANGES AND DELETIONS. (Changes to current agenda only).
18
19 city, Manager'Bierhidn: removed, Item 3.13 from the Consent Calendar. It will be re -
20, agendizecl.cft''q later date;;
21
22 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
23
24 A. City Council/PCDC Minutes of January 3,2005.
25
26 Councile
: Mmber Tbrliatt asked that page 5, line 24 be changed to read,
27 "She mentioned that Morin Municipal Water District (MMWD) was
28 discussing exercising an option to use an additional 5,000 acr& feet of
29 -water for their system." MOTION to approve the minutes of January 3;
30 2005, as, amended. M/S Torliatt/Healy
31 CARRIED. UNANIMOUSLY.
32
33 2. APPROVAL OF' PROPOSED AGENDA
34
35 A. Approval of Proposed Agenda for Council's Regular Meeting of'February
36 7, 2005. :
37 MOTION'. to approve the February 7, 2005,agenda as received at -the dais.
38 M/S Torliatt/Hedly
39 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
40
41 3. CONSENT CALENDAR
42
43 A. Resolution 2005-013 N.C.S. Accepting the Claims and Bills from
44 December, 2004. {Netter)
45
46 B. App�evGll ef Coopim6tive AgreefAept with. County of Sohorrid f6r
47 'Petaluma 4Bansit Mail
48 (FYG�P16t444 - This itemwas removed from the agenda.
49
50 C. Resolution 2005;.014 N.C.S., Amending the Classification sand
51 Compensation Plan by Establishing the Classifications of Human Resources
January 24, 2005
Vol. 40, Page 411
1 Assistant 1/II, Human Resources Specialist, and Human Resources
2 Manager and Establishing the Pay Ranges and Unit Assignments for
3 Human Resources Assistant 1/II, Human Resources Specialist, and Human
4 Resources Manager, and Abolishing the Classifications of Benefits
5• Administrative Assistant, Human Resources Analyst, Personnel Technician
6 and Human Resources Director. (Netter)
7
8 MOTION to approve the balance of the Consent Calendar (items A and C).
9 M/S Glass/O'Brien
10 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
11
12 4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
13
14 A. Discussion and.Direction Regarding City Council Liaison Appointment to
15 Animal Services Advisory Committee.
16
T7 Council Member Torliatt volunteered for this liaison position.
18 MOTION to appoint Council Member Torliatt•as Council Liaison to the
19 Animal Services Advisory Committee for 2005.
20 M/S Glass/O'Brien
21 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
22
23 5. NEW BUSINESS
24
25 A. Resolution 2005-015 N.C.S. Approving the 2005 Investment Policy. (Netter)
26
27 Interim Administrative Services Director Joe Netter presented the staff
28 report.
29
30 MOTION to approve the 2005 Investment Policy. M/S O'Brien/Harris
31 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
32,
33 ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION - 3:45 p.m.
34
35 PUBLIC COMMENT - None.
36
37 CLOSED SESSION
38
39 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to Government Code §54957(e): City
40 Manager.
41 CONFERENCE' WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR: Government Code §54957.6. Agency Negotiator:
42 Michael Bierman/ Unrepresented Employees - Unit 8.
43 a CONFERENCE WITH. LEGAL COUNSEL -- ANTICIPATED LITIGATION: Significant Exposure to
44 Litigation Pursuant to Subdivision (b) of Government Code §54956.9 (One Matter)
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
Vol. 40, Page 412 January 24, 2005
2
3
MONDAY. JANUARY. 24,..2005
EVENING SESSION - 7:00 P.M.
4 CALL TO ORDER -- 7:00 p.m.
A. Roll Call
Canevaro, Mayor Glass, Vice Mayor Harris, Healy, Nau, O'Brien, Torliaft
B. Pledge of Allegiance - Matt'White, Basin Street Properties
C. Moment of Silence '
REPORT, OUT OF CLOSED SESSION -There was no reportable action taken..
PUBLIC COMMENT
Libby FitzGerald; Petaluma, representing the Rotary Club of Petaluma Valley; wanted to
publicly thank PCA for caring about Petaluma students and their teachers. PCA went out
of its way to quickly schedule a live interview about "Lend 6 -Hand to Education;" an
event taking place this:Saturday, January 29. This is a benefit1for Pet.alurna area school
classroom projects, student scholarships, and literacy programs and is being hosted' by
the Rotary Club of Petaluma Valley.. There will be more than 35 exhibits of teachers'
projects needing funding:of $200 and. under. It will be held at the Community Center
from 10 a.m., to 3 p.m'. Admission is $12; kids 12 and under are free, food and beverages
will be served, and there will be live entertainment and an auction She hoped to see
everyone there on Saturday.
Mayor Glass added that Saturday would be a "great day of eating," because that
evening there is an alkyou=can-eat crab feed at the Boys and Girls Club, cost: $40.
John FitzGerald;'Petaluma, Petaluma River Festival Association Board of Directors,
welcomed returning ,and newly elected Council Members Canevaro, Nau, O'Brien and
Torliatt. The. River'Festival association for the last 19 years has organized and brought,up
the Alma, the City's official ship, to Petaluma, to coincide with the Butter and Eggs' Day'
festivities. Before that it was handled by the Adobe Days Association. He has been
notified bythe National Parks Service.of a conflict that may interfere with the arrival of
the Alma -.'He asked the Council to send a fetter to the Parks Service asking them to
resolve the conflict and not break the almost 30 -year record of the Alma arriving here in
Petaluma.
Jennine Lanouette, Executive Director, Petaluma Community Access (PCA -)'.spoke,
regarding her vision of' thefuture of PCA: Petaluma has its own television station with
three cablecost channels 24/7., In the access world, there has been a shift toward
fostering community voice, dialogue, and exchange of ideas and culture. She hopes
PCA will become the channel to tune into to find out what's going on in. Petaluma. PCA
has new equipment, new training, classes, a consistent, dedicated staff and a very
active, committed board of directors. They currently have four open seats on the board.
PCA would like to bring in new board members who will expand PCA's-reach-into the
community. PCA is located at Casa Grande High School on Ely Boulevard. Their hours are
3:00-9:00 p.m. M -F; 11 a:m. - 2:00 p.m. Saturdays. The phone number is 773-31.90. Anyone
interested in serving on the Board of Directors may contact PCA at board@oca.ty.
January 24, 2005
Vol. 40, Page 413
1 Rich Poreiriba, Boys and Girls Clubs of Petaluma, spoke about Cruisin' the Boulevard, an
2 art event taking place in Petaluma this summer, and sponsored by the Boys and Girls
3 Club. Four -and -one-half foot long cruiser cars adorned by local and national artists will
4 be placed around town from late May through August. He thanked Mayor Glass for
5 mentioned the Crab Feed. Tickets are still available by calling Mr. Poremba at 769-5322,
6 extension 12.
7
8 Mayor Glass asked that the Public Comment regarding the garbage contract be
9 transcribed verbatim. He also invited those who did not wish to speak to write their
10 comments on a Speaker Card. Those comments would-be entered into the minutes by
11 the City Clerk.
12
13 (Begin verbatim transcription)
14
15 Terence Garvey, Petaluma: I believe giving It. is contract, where there is very little
16 difference in the service we're going to getfor this great increase in price is
17 unconscionable - a travesty. If nothing else, you. should put it to vote: Council Member
18 Healy suggested putting it to the vote of the people. We'regetting-these kinds of
19 increases everywhere - the sewer plant is going to go up and up because of delays and
20 prices are going up. We don't need another,price increase. Thank you.
21
22 John Legnitto, General Manager, Norcal Waste Systems„ Inc.: I would like to again
23 emphasize the fact that Norcal's plan is to change the 7recycling system currently in
24 Petaluma which uses mini -bins, at $15.33 per month, tb'our system, which we are
25 proposing at $12.09 a month. I know there's a lot of confusion, and I'm sure hoping that
26 someone will ferret those things out. Based ori what I heard, Norcal was to work with the
27 Council on a base proposal and move forward. That's.what I heard. Sounds like
28 everybody's heard a lot of things different. The other thing I''d like to say is, I can't find a
29 place to put this tonight [holding up empty soda can]. Nowhere in this building can I find
30 a recycling container. With Norcal, there would be a recycling container. I'd like to
31 reemphasize the fact that we are committed to the citizens of Petaluma, we have
32 provisions in all our communities to manage senior rates, fixed incomes,'and anything
33 along the way. If you do business with Norcal, you will' pay more if you don't recycle. If
34 you recycle, you can manage yourwaste bill. We've proven that in the communities
35 that we serve. Thank you.
36
37 Jeff Mayne, Petaluma Downtown- Association: The Downtown;Association would like to let
38 you know that the merchants of downtown certainly are interested in and committed to
39 recycling, but we feel recycling of 60% is sufficient, given that Norcal would cost
40 considerably more. We feel that is an undue burden. We also want to let you know that
41 Empire Waste and traditionally been a tremendous partner of the downtown, helping us
42 with different events ranging from the Butter and Eggs Day Parade to the antique faires,
43 the Art and Garden Festival as well. They've stepped up as a sponsor in kind, as well as in
44 other ways, and we would like to see them continue as our partner downtown. Thank
45 you.
46
47 Spence Burton, Petaluma: I want to thank the over 5,000 people who voted for me in this
48 last election. My second thank you is to Mike Healy, because without him, we would be
49 stuck with this outrageous, garbage increase. I do have some questions. In October, you
50 threw out the lowest bid, which was from North Bay. They were going to come in 30%
51 less. The lowest rate I've seen from Norcal is $.12.09. That still a 33% increase - and those
52 are the ones you're going to give a break to - not the big cans for people who have a
Vol. 40, Page. 414 January 24, 2005'
1 big family. That doesn't give a break to families which, are, already doing recycling.
2 They're already doing their job, and they're going to be penalized - by at least, 30%.-1
3 disagree with that. I think it's goingto be 1OT.%, but I'll go along with what people are
4 saying. I want to thank Karen also, publicly, for changing her mind. But I'll read you back
5 an exact quote from the Argus -Courier from October 1`5: "The ratepayers are, paying so
6 much for water and sewer. To add an additional cost for garbage service is just
7 incredible," she said. "Everybody I talk to is mad about it. They don't want to pay
8 anymore." I give you credit for coming back and, changing your mind. Only someone
9 with guts would come back and change their position when they.realized they were
10 wrong. Thank you.
H
12 Tod Ferro, Petaluma:, I live, on the easf side of Petaluma, and I support the Council going
13 with Norcal. I have them for a property] own in San Francisco and they do a very good
14 job.'They accommodate us when we have overages and they take -care of us very well. I
15 also think it's in the best;interests of the`residents when Norcol takes,over and they
16 maximize all their,recycling as best they can. I'Id hate to see the decision be changed
17 from Norcal to someone else. I understand that Waste Management is now making
18 phone,callsJo, pressure residents to complain.and be on their side. I think that's a scare
19 tactic that we don't need !in the, City of Petaluma. Thank you.
20
21 Bob Figoni, Petaluma: I am•a 25-yearrresident of Petaluma and have participated in
22 recycling programs since they started', I even spent $15 of my own money to buy the
23 recycling bins in the early 1980's. There have been very few changes in the recycling
24 program here since then, even though the industry has changed greatly. I also recall
25 that when automation, came to Petaluma, we were all given the .907gallon cans and
26 paid the 90 -gallon rate,.,and it wasn't until certain members of the City .Council"realized
27 that -the 54, 32, and 20 -gallon cans existed that we were given,the•option to use smaller
28 cans and pay less. That's riot what I call an enGirohMental.leader. I know that Norcal has
29 the best recycling programs to meet the future environmental challenges to our
30 community, and I urge you to give Norcal a chance to negotiate a contract with the
31 City Manager. Thank you.
32
33 Marcia Keasler, Petaluma: I'm here this,evening as a resident in support of the City
34 Council's'decision to direct the staff to start,negotia,tions with Norcal Waste Systems. I:
35 lived in Novato before l came to Petaluma. They"went to single stream recycling; in
36 Novato, and they were amazed at the difference that it made in the amount of
37 garbage that the citizens were putting in the landfill. I think we can't,not afford to
38 increase garbage rates a bit if it means single -stream recycling, because we can't afford
39 to dump our landfills full of garbage that could be recycled and made into paper
40 products and other things. I urge you to continue negotiations with Norcal.
41
42 Council Member Torliatt clarified that every single contractor was required to provide
43 single -stream recycling.
44
45 Kelly.Sepich, Petaluma: I am a student in Petaluma, representing many young voters in
46 town. In all my,years,, I was taught to protect 2the environment. I was proud of the City
47 when they voted for Norcal, but the vote has been retracted. It's money versus the
48 environment. Ten years from now do we want to be facing fees to create new dump
49 sites? Recycling is one of our last ways of preserving the. environment; Norcal is, the best
50 recycling program offered to Petaluma.'Was'te Management hasn't updated in 20 years.
51 Recycling change is needed in Petaluma: Thank you for -your consideration.
January 24, 2005
Vol. 40, Page 415
I Sherry Marcia, Petaluma: |wanted to commend Ms. Naufor changing her vote and
9 looking deeper into the issue, and |would hope that the other three Council Members
3 would also come tothe some conclusion. | w ouldhope that whoever ispicked for the
4 garbage contract would beaSonoma County employer. | also support onarts
5 commission formed here inPetaluma. ThonKyou.
6
7 Paul C|oeyssems'Petaluma: Have vve c�nlmiMed'toanybody any pnrhou|orrate yet?
8 No? YYa`rejust talking aboutnego���io�-wUh-snmot}ody. |wonted to get that clear. |
4 would like to have you negotiate with the most capable company as far as getting our
10 recycling done, vvhateverro.eyou might �et.I've heard the te/rn"fuzzy rnofh''thnDvvn
-^ Il around here. For me, the analysis th��vv �dO by the consultant is"fuzzy mOfh.''$l0l
12 million versuS`36Omillion with imaginary rates, imaginary figures -itreally doesn't make
13 much sense to nn8. |fivvere on a fixed V[low income, |'d like to know that |wOu|d be
14 getting some' specialconsideration, and I'have heard that Norcal say that they would do
15 that. Towhat ex#e�ht1don't know, butliVmwho ' I've heard from people, they doseem
16 todovvhot1hes9they�e,going toi��.[have �piece Ofproperty here intown where
17 we have two 65-g-/bn cans. )'nn looking forward to being able to get 6d ofthose two,
18 having one 35--aUohcan, ond'Vne big b|uecan, s8that \ could have amuch lower
19 Pote.\also have poonnrnercia[ 1-1/2'ya�d'dunn t and \Vndemhzndthe stuff inthere is
20 eo. toreprocess, and I'm |oV-ingforward tnAe#in'a better rate onthat, too, with
21 NorcO|.From what \ can te||^th�y�[e the,most capable., think that they numbers that
22 are being thrown around are -scaring everybody'. I would much rather have some who is
23 d
capable Ofdoing the bejob ofrecycling. Thank you.
74 ^
75 | City Council Mb
26 and I'm somewhat Ocquointed'o||��bit, more than the overage citizen, with the oins
27 and outs of garbagecontracts. I'm rea|k/g| d1oheorthotyou'n*goingh]revisitthe
28 decision fhafyoum` mdelast . eek,b8c aUs(�inrnyopinion, there iSnnlegitimate
29 'ushfico8Qnfor that vote. The shallow n�sonsthat y[)uput forward onthis dais last vv8ek
30 justification
demonstrated tOmethat
]l you are not understanding fhe-[altion§hipbehweenofhznchiseConfrnctondtheFote
32 structure. The City states the rate structure, nottheCo0pany.EverybOdyvvosto|kinQ
33 about, "Just go toa lower rate. " Therels an equation: you have to do the math, You
34 don't know the answers�yet.'After the lost Council Meeting, Council Members canevaro
35 and O'Brien and Brian Sobel went to Andresen's, with representatives from Norcal who
36 were here atth&Council Meeting fohove: drinks-nnoneyonthebo['havingOBreot
37 tirne-ce|ebroting. Most people would know that this isnot approphotefor a City
38 Council Member to do when you're. in negotiations. The contract isn't finalized. It's not
39 party time. You should be defending and protecting the citizens, and not drinking with
4,0 buddies. I thought that this Council had givena directive that Council. Members were not
41 to engage with the representatives of the componies,'except as -a group. I'm
42 complaining about that, and it really offends me. And-doWt embarrass this town, any
43 further bysuggesting that vvebring North Bay back Into the bidding process, orthat vve
44 do a referendum on this. Rumor has it that Norcal is'trying to buy North Bay, they have
45 safety violations, we don't need it, ancfit-� messy. Just move forward. Empire Waste can
46 doo707Coption and compare that toGreen Waste and make adecision tomove
47 forward. The really bad thing about this decision iuthotit's osimple thing: agarbOge
48 contract. There are much more complex things coming to this City in the next year, and
49 vvewant toknov/,thatyou're going tVmake sound decisions based onour benefit, not
50 somebody else's.
51
52
Vol. 40, Page 416 January 24, 2005
I Darrell Ortmann, Petaluma:- I talked to Mayor Glass, for about. ;'Y2 hour the other,day, and I
2 really appreciate that you tookfhe time to do that. I was very impressed. Also, I emailed
3 everyone of you people, and,I"got a response from Karen and [got a response from
4 Mike. Also, Karon, I appreciate your changing
hanging your point of view. I think, that's very big of
5 you. I wish our President could do that sometimes.
m, es. 1, just. had two root canals at about 4-:00.
6 this afternoon, and my day'lis still "probably more pleasant than yours! I was watching on
7 TV the other nighf,,and I was really shocked when half -way through the process;
8 somebody asked, "Do we have,a comparison of,th
the= small, rriiddle_andlarge cans?"
9 You guy
,s.went for three years Without any kind o(c " omparison to know what you were
10 comparing - apples, oranges, bananas, whatever I couldn't believe money hadnot
14 even come up until half -way through you asked staff
ff to go.d6some, quick numbemcind
12 they did, in about ten. minutes. Viewing it on TV, it looked like there was an ambush here,
13 the other night. It looked like our Mayor, our City Mandger, many of the staff; and some
14 of the City Council Members were just in shock on the -vote. Perc.e0tion is reality, and]
,
151 don't think any of - you guys are doing anything V(:td and I don't1hink you have mean
16- spirits, but I think the perception of the people ln thecommunitv. is. that there was some
17 kind- of last minute, behind the, scenes- decision, making the bthernight_-, 1 don't believe
IS that,. but if'peopie are thinking that ... welli perception. is reality-We,don't need the
19 Cadillac. We all recycle. We're all trying to do our best.- Sixty percent, seventy percent, I'
ZO think they're pretty even., I'm a teacher, f don't have a lot Of money, oftey, and for my7tates to
21 be, going up that much" is just truly outrageous, and I hope you will consider my -and! the
22, -rest of the peoples' - ideas. Thank- you..
23
24 Bill Donafiue; Petaltima: I reside at Sandalwood Estates Mobile Home Park here in
25 Petaluma. f want to acknowledge whd..f I've heard from some, Council Members here
26 today that .they are reconsidering "the, decision,., and We truly appreciate -that. I represent
27 many homeowners within the mobile home parks,in Petaluma. I'm also an, associate
28 manager for the Golden.State Mobile and Manufactured Homeowners Association. In
29 the simplest terms, the decJsions that were mad01 know were. made With the best
30 interests.of the people of Petal . Uma at heart. I don't qyestich the integrity of any Council
31 Member here; nor the integrity of those I've heard,'. from the difterent,waste-colloction
32 companies. However, itis price. Many -of us cannot afford to use the "Cadillac." We
33 have to find a happy medium, and I urge those: of you who. are not reconsidering your
34 vote to do so, and come up with a lower number. When it comes to the highest number
35 there of Norcal, I pay' $8.76 a month for a 32-galloh can. I will not be abife to do anything
36 better-thdn'that, because I do recycle, and even, have My own in -park program to
37 handles those materials.
38
39 John Thomas, Petaluma-., Thank God for PCA, Petaluma Community Access television, So
40 that these City"Council Meetings see thelight of day. I believe all the Council Members
41 realize that,there :are several thousand people at home -watching these meetings on; a'
42 weekly,basisj Want to speak fo the Council Majority who, voted for the N.orcal, contract.
43 Something really stinks,hero., You certainly not following your past voting records, or for
44 one, campaign promises. Certainly none Of the four of,, you have, fever been
45 environmental champions,, but ihybur comments in.,su,pP,*Qrt of Notcai, it was; all, about
46 the 70% recycling- and the environment: Empire Waste offered 60% recycling icitbasically
47 the same current rates, yet you -voted to double our gdrbdge,,rates With Norccil. Did any
48 of you think,dbout the..Impact on small businesses in our community, or the many
49 residents struggling in the current economy? Is this, really representative government?
50 Your vote leads to only one conclusion: there's political gain inyolved.,There are several
51 lines that come to mind here - ''You dance,w. with the one'. that brought you," and "the
52 politics behind the politics." Does it have to do with the sale of propertyto Nofcbl to build
January 24, 2005
Vol. 40, Page 417
1 their proposed new facility? Does it have to do with the promised support of wealthy
2 individuals, businesses, or powerful political groups? Your vote certainly shows no sign of
3 concern for the citizens and businesses of our community. You're not going to be able to
4 hide from this. We will make sure that as time goes on, the.reasons for your support see
5 the light of day, whether it's property sales, campaign donations, you can't hide. This is
6 really reminiscent of the vote two years ago to trash our campaign finance ordinance,
7 and you all know how the community rose up in that situation. How about a little
8 representative government? Your vote will have huge ramifications for your political
9 future.
TO
11 Kristin Winter, Petaluma: I'd like you to consider the unintended consequences of what is
12 likely to come forward if you raise the garbage rates by that substantial an amount. A
13 certain percentage of the population in Petaluma are going to be faced with some
14 hard economic choices, and probably what th;ey're,going to consider doing, is to start
15 their own "ad hoc" recycling program. I think we'll probably find their garbage recycled
16 in the creeks, along the roads, behind commercial enterprises, where the poor business
17 owner has to then deal with cleaning up for the people who can't afford to pay the
18 higher rates. At some point, the City and the businesses will spend more money cleaning
19 up that which people leave lying .along the side of the road. If you have any doubt that
20 this will happen, I would invite all of 'you to take a drive out extended I Street some time
21 towards San Antonio Road, and just see what people dump along side the road. With
22 that substantial an increase, the problem will only grow. Thank you.
23
24 Betty Mazzucchi, Petaluma: People of Petaluma, come forward and tell the four Council
25 Members - Keith Canevaro, Karen Nau, Mike Harris, and Mike O'Brien - we did not
26 approve pf their votes for Norcal, the highest priced of all three companies vying for the
27 garbage service contract for Petaluma. Just watching these four'Council Members on
28 Saturday, the 22nd, at 9:00. a.m. here in City Hall, when the public speaking took place,
29 these four Council Members were just plain arrogant. This is no way for those Council
30 Members to act. It shows that have no feeling for community people, only for their own
31 personal beliefs and thinking. This is really shocking because they are put in the Council
32 seats by the people and they're working for the people of Petaluma. Please remember,
33 residents: Write your letters to the editor of the Press Democrat and the Argus -Courier and
34 state your views on the voting of these four Council Members. Also call them and tell
35 them how you feel about their votes for Norcal. We already have a great garbage
36 service here in Petaluma: Empire Waste Management, with a very small increase of 3.8%.
37 The City Manager, Mr. Bierman, recommended the City Council go with Empire Waste
38 Management, which. was ignored by the four Council Members. As I have said before,
39 what is wrong with you.people doing this to our community? I resent yourremarks,'Karen
40 Nau,_ about WalMart when you were talking about this situation on Saturday, and yes, 1
41 do shop at WalMart, and always will, as my pocketbook loves it. I'm all for the
42 referendum taking place and then the whole City of Petaluma can show you people
43 how we feel about your votes for Norcal.
44
45 Cynthia Learned, Petaluma: These are the reasons I strongly object to decision on the
46 new garbage contract made by Mike O'Brien, Keith Canevaro, Karen Nau, and Mike
47 Harris. Keith Canevaro's quote, "For me it was never about the price,," is an extremely
48 callous statement. He shows no regard for the residents of Petaluma. We all care about
49 recycling, but cost does matter. this sudden drop to $12.09 from the original $19.26 is a
50 smoke screen to quiet us all down. It is an initial fee only. In the blink of an eye, our costs
51 with Norcal will skyrocket. Mike O'Brien is friends with John Legnitto, a Norcal executive,
52 and should never have been allowed to vote on this issue. This does not sit right with me
Vol. 40, Page 418 January 24, 2005
at all. Waste Management has been a good company. I'm been very satisfied with their
service and they have been fair and, decent with their fees. As for as I'.m concerned, you
four Council Members should never be serving on the City Council. You have no
empathy or regard for what the people want or can afford. The impact of your decision
to -go with Norcal.is going to be horrendous to businesses and residents alike: I support
Mike Healy's vow to take this to the ballot box, if you four do not come to your, senses. If
City Council'Members all up: and down Sonoma County don't make reasonable
decisions, they are going to. price the middle class right out.of Sonoma County. At this
point, my vote is very powerful, l hope, and [will use it. Thank you.
Stephanie Dietrich, Petaluma: I've lived. in Petaluma along with my husband since, 1978.
I'm also an active teacher at one ,of the high.schools. I' m' here, tonight as, one of the
many people to express a, concern over the negotiations for the trash contract. Mr.
Canevaro, [do have concerns about your comment about money, and the next time
you go out shopping ,and you want to kind of pat yourself on the back and ,say, "Look at
the great deal.1 just made," how dare- you not say it's about money and value:- The trash.
contract IS about moneY and the best value. I'm not going- to lie and say that Empire
Waste Management has been the best company. I've given them phone calls when my
trash has been missed, but the Most part, I think the recycling that -they can provide for
Petaluma is worth the cost and,what most of the. community can afford. We're already
priced out of housing - don't price us out of garbage collection.
Joanne Huhn, Petaluma: For 41 years, Waste Management has handled our trash. I. take
my responsibility,. I get it out there, they pick it up. They've always done a .good job.. I put
it out there. We already have oneperson in our.neighborhood who will,not pay .for trash
pick up. He waits until nighttime; and goes out and puts'hisgarbage in everybody else's
can. I can guarantee you there.are going to a. lot of others who follow suit. Waste.
Management has done a very:good job. The only. time I've -had to call them, they were
there promptly, Please, please reconsider. Thank you.
Cindy Thomas,, Petaluma: Welcome, Karen. I came here prepared to really give you a
wallop, but will spare you in light of what happened atthe meeting this, afternoon. We'll
have another opportunity to discuss garbage in the future. I'm going to take advantage
of,the fact that it seems, like the Environmental Fairies have come to visit a few of, -you. I'm
going to ask you in the future. to please consider discussion and adoptionof community
impact reporting as a planning tool so that can. avoid situations like this on development
and other items that will be coming to the City in the future. I'm hopeful that we're going
to see a little bit different behavior here. I didn't see a lot of comments in last week's
meeting that matched the campaign platforms and past voting records, and I hope I'm
not going to see that in the future: Remember, there are no ri)ulligans in this game of
politics. Also, Prn hopeful Jhat you're going to take advantage of the fact that the Labor
Fairies also came to visit and maybe take a little bit different position on the living wage,
should that ordinance: ever,come to this Council for decision. Thank you.:
John Hanania, Petaluma: I have: never seen the Council Chambers this full other'than
when we're dealing with junk carsJunk in.the streets, and garbage. I'be,lieve those who
make mistakes should have- the .opport.unity to fix their mistakes. Fie had a very pleasant
discussion with. Karen Nau oh.Saturday. In the City of Petaluma there are lots of people
who fantasizeabout dining in 5=star restaurants, and having Dorn Perignon champagne
and caviar, but can only'afford McDonald's. Any increase in rates will affect them. I am
very confused. I hear there's 120% increase. I hear there's no increase. I hear,:Mr. O'Brien
stating rates will be going down. A few minutes later, Karen Nau said they're.going to go
January 24, 2005
Vol. 40, Page 419
1 up. My suggestion to the Council: Have a town meeting, outside of the Chambers. We
2 have done it in the past. This is a serious issue in town. Two wrongs don't make a right. 1
3 think a lot of people here are getting a beating for making a mistake. I think we all need
4 to work together as a community. If you watch PCA, their motto is, "Building Community
5 Through Communication." It's ourjob as members of the community to work with you to
6 fix the problem. Thank you.
7
8 Ted Eshleman, Petaluma: Rising expenses are really something. I live on the east side,
9 and I have been satisfied with the garbage service as it has been, and it's expensive
10 enough. Many other people have been up here before, a lot more eloquent than 1, but
11 just looking at this at face value, and knowing that the City Manager and staff had
12 made a very strong recommendation after some study of this issue, I just think that the
13 price is just too dear for most of the average people here in town. I urge you to
14 reconsider, and keep this issue in front where people can see what's going on.
15
16 Joe'DurneY, Petaluma: Two brief'points: all the bills have just gotten so big - water and
17 everything - and I don't Pike it. But as we strive to save money, let's be sure we don't do it
18 on the backs of our people. Cindy- [Thomas] said something about the living wage, and I
19 think that's important. Seeing that these companies have collective bargaining isn't a
20 horrible thing, is it? The other thing is, some years ago, anew City Council tried to make
21 progressive changes with our Animal Shelter, but the intense bureaucracy wouldn't have
22 anything to do with it, and a lot of good people got hurt. Is that what's happening here?
23 1 think you have some good ideas, and I know you're thinking about it hard.
24
25 Diane Reilly Torres, Petaluma: I cam down here to tell you all how proud I am of you and
26 how glad I am that you're representing me. She really enjoyed Mike Healy's comment
27 about "putting lipstick on a pig:" That must'be something an attorney would say. Karen,
28 thank you for thinking it over and listening to everybody. Keith, I've been misquoted in
29 the newspaper many times and I would bet my bottom dollar that you didn't say that
30 verbatim. Without Bryant Moynihan here, I don"t have anyone to kick around. Thank you
31 all for listening to the public. Maybe the garbage companies, at their expense, could
32 hold workshops where citizens can come and ask questions. Next time something like this
33 happens, I encourage to use your resources: there are lot of intelligent people in town
34 who would like to give you recommendations.
35
36 Janice Cader-Thompson, Petaluma: As a former Council Member, I too learned a lot
37 about garbage when Irepresented this community. I have common sense approach
38 when it comes to the taxpayers' dollars. I don't like government spending my hard -
39 earned money, especially when you can purchase the same product at half the cost. I
40 was one of the few residents who attended last week's Council Meeting to speak on the
41 garbage issue. I am back tonight to tell you how irate and surprised I was that you chose
42 Norcal and their 116% increase to the residents and business community. A good
43 business mind would have looked at the three bids and then would have eliminated the
44 bid that was not in line with the other two bidders, especially if they wanted to continue
45 in business. The City Council hired the firm Hilton Farnkopf and Hobson at a cost of
46 $233,000 to evaluate the three proposals. Their recommendation and our City Manager's
47 recommendation was to stay with Waste Management, because they offered a good
48 service at the lowest cost to the ratepayer. I've been pleased with Waste Management
49 and their employees. Who is this Council working for? The citizens of this community or
50 special interests? What are you getting in return for the vote to gouge the citizens of this
51 community? It's time to put an end to this episode, and even though members of this
52 Council were pressured to ask for a reconsideration of their vote, how can we trust your
Vol. 40, Page 420 Jahuary,24, 2005
I judgment? Therefore, I support a referendum so the citizens can decide for them -selves
2 which garbage service they prefer. I would also ask for a State t0te and Federal investigation
3 into this matter.Something stinks ... and it,'s not garbage. I would also like to say that
4 some of the i ' ndi.viduals. who come up to speak and; have been members of .our
5 community for manyyedrs failed to say that they worked for Norcal. Thank you very
6 much.
7
8 Wayne Eckttrom, Petaluma: I've been a residentJocten years, and I am a -registered
9 voter. This issue all started
tarted with your- consulting firm: Why did it take= you §o'long to come
10to a decision on who you wanted to pick for your garbage contractor? I feel it"s an
11 excessive amount - almost a quarter of a million dollars - just for an opinion. Somebody
12 shoold.have put his foot down, a lot sooner and said, "Enough's enough -you need to
13 come, to the toblb.with -the work thdPwasput to, yo.u. " The City Council has. dragged their
14 feet on this issue-for_quitesdme time, and now we've come to this impasse. Now we're
15 picking the lesser of evils. Who are we .going to, decide on.? I'm working class ,man, and if
16 it comes
s down to it, I will take My own garbage to the dump. I.do recycle. I don'tsee4he
17 pi . an that you guys are proposing is enough. it's an excessive amount to. be paying for
18 garbage, and if Jhat isn't enough, I notice the City was also fined. $87,000 for its
19 wastewater treatment center. All'these fines are being transferred onto the taxpayers,
20 and I am tired of absorbing the cosf of this negligent thinking-Jhdnk you.
21
22 Mattie Christensen, r Petaluma Tomorrow, Petaluma: Petaluma Torncirrow is a'public
23 interest advocacy organgation that promises open goverhment, responsible growth, and
24 sustainable watershed . management in the 'Petaluma area. You can check (is out at
25 www.petalumd-tomo1rrow,.org., Open government means that the people have the
26 opportunity to understand'how decisions are made, and, ii
if any improper influence s
27 exerted aver those decision. As: someone, else said tonight, "if you dance with the on ' e
28 who brung -ya -. who brung, ya to the dance." Let's look at
t the numbers. The cost of
29 running for a virtually unpaid City office has :escalated' over.'recent years to as much as
30 $60,000. Why? Why are donors. willing to contribute so much money? Because ."there's -
31 gold in them than hills:'"Golci in the, form of a.garbage contract, and sewage treatment
32 plant contract, an outlet mail, etc;;etc. In the
he interest of, o,pqn government, we c,`dII for
33 full disclosure. To start'.Wit . h,.'we ask. Council. Members to disclose all theircontacts.-with all,
34 the garbage companies involved and their paid , consultants for the February 7 meeting..
35 Thank you.,
36
37 Stan. Gdfd, Petaluma:. One of the early,speakers this,evening used the ex,press,ion,
38 "Perception Js Reality" and indeed itis. there's a responsibility that all elected officials
39 have, and with .t that comes the trust of �the people.. Consider -this: .you have. a
40 congressman in the.U.' corporation. Later
Congress. He accepts campaign funds from a �(:�o p
41 on, he -sits oh,a coi-nmitte& that gives aMUlti7million dollar government contract to that
42 corporation. How does the community feel about that? Well, back in. his homedistrict,
43 they're up in arms. They-sqy this is terrible! There "appears to be d conflict of interest. He
44 may be a perfectly� honesHellow. That's beside the Point. Appearance. is indeed reality.
45 It didn't pen in the U.S. Congress. It happened right here in Petaluma Mike O'Brien,dn!1'hap "
.
46 Council Mernber,. took $800 from the company that got the contract. When, that
47 occurred, it was known to all, and money given to two other candidates for City
48 Council, Pam Torliatt and Cindy Thomas. Both, of them appreciated the fact that there,
49 was an issue of, ethics invoNed,of ethical perception-, They did the right thing- they gave
50 the money, back, becaute they knew, pretty
ty soon, whoever won would have -to be,
51 sitting in judgment of ,giving a, contract to the company that ha 'just given them -funds.
52 Mr. O'Brien remained silent. At the lost City Council Meeting, I pointed this but to Mr.
January 24, 2005
Vol. 40, Page 421
} O'Brien.Not wanting focause him any embarrassment, | didn't call him byname. |said
2 the City Council Member who did not return the funds should recuse himself. Again, Mr.
]
O'Brien
4 No/ooiThonk you.
5
6 David Keller, Petaluma: |vvas one of the Council Members who asked for garbage
7 rebidding five years ago. As we go through the selection of monopoly waste hauling
8 and recycling firm, I hear echoes of the early 1990's when Petaluma, proposed privatizing
q our wastewater treatment plant. What we found then was that ratepayers were about to
10 get gouged, and the environment would suffer, too. VVefixed thotafter stopping the City
-' }l at the California Public Utilities Commission. We produced strong ratepayer protection
12 through aggressive contract negohations and rate setMng oversight, which needs tobe
13 putj o place for garbage service as well. | o/ndbappoinfe�d that this Council majority
14 chose to do business with Noroo|. Not on|yhove they proposed doubling the costs mfthe
15 other two bidders, but Norcal was also recently convicted of bribery by senior executives
16 in San Bernardino County ofSan Bernardino County administrators. Several of them have
17 served jail time. Those offers and those bribes were in �
ash, some of it paid inbars, in
18 cash, under the table. Some ofif was through consulting jobs. 3Ome`ofitwas done
19 through trips and other gifts. Further' Norco|wants our ratepayers 10 pay for n recycling
20 facility, yet they still keep title toit, even though oyrrcfepoyen have paid for it. | am
21 disappointed that the P.R.flacks for NnrCd|are trying to preoentNDrC(2l as"green." Yet in
22 Green Washington, the price to be paid for vespOnsib|e�recycling and environmental
23 stondordsond|oborsfandordsi6exorbitanf.ThusfoUovystheno1iono|Repub|icon
24 conservative strategy Ofclaiming that protecting the environment and paying fair and
25 living wages is "too expensive." This is nonsense. This is false, and an affront to a town that
26 does care. Those kind 0fnational rnovern�ntsare looking for obac�oshagainst labor
27 and against envlrOnnnent�dprotechon.ThoishOU|dnot, happen here. What vveneed is
28 effective rate structures, effective oversight. That isvvhero�hedetdib0fthe costs will
29 become clear, and I look forward to seeing those'details before you vote on it. Thank
30 you. .
31
37 Bryant Moynihan, Petaluma: | would like tocommend mynap|oCerient^ Karen Nau' on,
33 having' intestinal fortitude to OctVo||y make motion -for reconsideration, The way { see it,
34 politically, we have three in the comp of Noroa|' three in the camp of Empire Waste, and
35 Karen in the middle, who isasking |o getting some public input, and asking to have o
36 competitive bid process. I think that's great. There was a little poll faken','at the meeting
37 this afternoon, and I'd like toask this group here: Who here supports m 117% rate
38 increase? Show ofhands, please. DK. By show of hands, who here would like to see o
39 3O%reduction inyour current rates? (}K! That que'stionwasn't asked this afternoon, and
40 |'rn asking itright now, beCquse guess what? North Bay made that proposal months
41 ago, and the majority OffheCounci|-o|thoftime&&r'Camevav4 and Ms. Nawwere not
42 there-iOsteod of accepting d bid with o,3O%reduction iDrates, we' re going togoout
43 and rebid and we're going to want 50% and 60% and 7O%- in addition to the State
44 mandated recovery rotas. And guess what vve ended opwith? This rneSs, right here,
45 today. Ladies and Gentlemen, ||idened to88ayorG|ass on the radio today. Mayor Glass,
46 great presentation. You said it was, "all about fates." Well, if it was all about rates, you
47 would have accepted the North Bay rate eight months ogo- o 30% reduction. But you
48 chose not todOthat. Unfortunately, you suggested that Council Members who
49 Suppo�edNOrco|had other motivations. | don't thinkthat shows good leadership. I'd like
50 to suggest that they people here want o good economic deal, and | think that North Bay
51 offered that. The only way that yoU folks are going to get out of this mess is to
52 competitively bid otOset recovery rate.
Vol. 40, Page 422
January 24, 2005
I The following are written comments left by citizens at the meeting who did not wish to
2 speak:
3
4 David Reid, Petaluma: I feel that the current recycling,service and cost is far preferred to
5 the proposed
posed change. The. existing company (Waste Management) has spent
6 considerable effort to efficiently recycle as much material as practical.
7
8 Barbara. Harden, Petaluma: I am very much against the Norcal contract - too much
9 money for only 10176 , more:re cycling.
10
11 Paul Sherman; P611alUmd: 1 thihk'it is important for the City Council to consider recycling as
12, an important component of the new contract. Landfills*,must be conserved; we can't
13 build mare, ' 1we most recycle. Please,make sure you consider the original 70% goal for
-14 recycling of Our waste:
15
16 Art and Lori I e Muting, Petaluma: - We object -t6 the. proposed contract with Norcdl that will
17 double the price'ofgarbage collection. My records show that Waste Management has
18 served us Well since: 1988 with modest increases and rates from. $1.8.60 to current rate of
19 $25-30. They'have,done d'fine job in our opintgni. We assume this is the same company as
20 Waste Management. We feeltheirrecyclii-4is adequate and. feel it would be unfair to
21 impose a cost. of $50-$60 per month for garbage, pickup on the people of Petaluma -
22 especialliwithout their.-to.nsenf.
23
24 Paul Agazzi, Petaluma: Petaluma ne.eds'be.#,er`recycfing.
25
26 Jacqueline garros, Petaluma: I am against the new
ew garbage company. I do not feel that
27 the increased costs are justified. - Ther' , e are too many people living in Petaluma on fixed
28 incomes and/or have lost,jobs or are working for lower wages during the past four years.
29 Empire Waste has done a good. job..,
30
31 Linda Postenrieder; Pelican Art Gallery, Petaluma: I would like to see the recycling
32 extended to the shopping centers. Currently, I have to carry all my recycling from my
33 business to the house where rit'.PUI it out for collection. Please extend recycling to the
34 businesses.
35
36 Irving Schuermdn, 'Petaluma.- I am against giving the trash collection contract -to Norco! if
37 the most important -factor is the 10% increase in recycling over the next competitor.
38
39 (End vOrbatiin transcription)
40
41 COUNCIL COMMENT
42
43 Mayor Glass explained that he had let'everyone know, he was going to be on the radio
44 everywhere he . went. H - e did not think a. referendum was necessary. He would be glad to
45 go out and make sure the'voters get :o chdnceJo choose a quality garbage contract, if
46 necessary. He thought Council could get the job done without dragging out the process
47 any longer. Council had three proposals in front of them that, provided a full menu of
48 choices. He noted that Gree ' n Waste offered an excellent recycling programthat is
49 much less expensive than Norcal. He read statements from the consultant's report about
50 the rate that'wbuld result from each proposer' tr scenario. Waste Management offered a
51 60% diversion rate, a 10%* increase from what the City currently has. Council could
h I
52 accept their offer and put an end to "this nonsense." He told'the audi6nce, 16 1 ran to
January 24, 2005 Vol. 40, Page 423
I represent you - not the garbage company. " The consultant's report stated that if the
2 City awarded the.garbage contract to Norcal, huge rate increases would result. He has
3 tried to return every ,call and e-mail he has received about this issue, but because he
4 does not have a campaign staff, it has become overwhelming: He commended reporter
5 Joe Sanchez of the Press-Demducit, saying that every story he does is substantiated by
6 fact, and he quotes the source.
7
8 Council Member Healy thought the,mqst salient comment come from [former Council
9 Member] Jane Hamilton - rate design is separate from revenue requirements. With any of
10 the companies, we canjail&'rates as the Council deems fit, but when we "start
11 squeezing the balloon in one place, it 0.6gs out somewhere else." That is the challenge. If
12 you discount the rates for.one type of customer, then something else has to go up to
13 make up the difference. . Becaose of Council's concern for not awarding the contract on
14 the basis of a slick sales . presentation they, engaged a very sophisticated consulting firm.
15 Council needs to rely primarily on that information, and come to closure on the issue. He
16 asked: for a show of hands from the audience, after which he said his sense was that the
17 majority wouldlike to see, Council award,th, e contract to Waste Management. However,
18 he believed he, was -:the only Council Member,who was publicly committed to Waste
19 Management.,He told�the aud-ienc&they would probably need to come to several more
20 Council Meetingis'to,speak to'the issue before it was resolved.
21
22 Council Member N4u noted that she was a PCA board member in the past and she
23 encouraged. parents to participate. She thank6d all the citizens who had called her and
24 said she enjoyed talking to them. When she come into process, she eliminated Waste
25 Management because they didn't project a 70% recycling rate. Since then, after
26 listening to the,'public, she had. decided she made a mistake. She was pleased that
27 Waste Managementicame ta,the school where she teaches with lesson plans and
28 educational package. S She mentioned that her college-age daughter is an avid recycler
29 because Waste Management came,to,her school and tauaht'her class about recycling.
30 She would like to see more. recycling in public facilities and parks.
31
32 Vice Mayor Harris agreed with Council Member Nau's motion for reconsideration
33 because he has spoken'fo many member& of the public and thinks the three proposals
34 and the rate structures need to be explained more. clearly.
35
36 Council Member Torliaft, explained that all the bidders were required to offer single -
37 stream recycling; that was part of the RFP. That service would begin as soon as a new
3.8 Contract was in place. She has made every attempt to respond to all the e-mails and
3 - 9 phone calls she had received. She told anyone who had. no * t yet ireceived a response
40 from her that she would be getting back to them soon. She outl1ined the three proposals
.41 and said,. referring to Norcal's $101 million bid, that there was "no reason this City needs
42 to pay $50 million more than the lowest bidding contract." Shewas concerned that
43 when Council Member Nou made her motion for reconsideration, she talked about
44 reopening competitive bidding. She is not in favor of reopening and discussing the issue
45 again. There are two proposers on the table- Green Waste Recovery and Waste
46 Management. They are good bids, and Council can make a decision to go with a
47 company that will not increase the rates and will have at least 60% diversion- which is
48 10% higher than the City currently has. She would like to "put this to bed" because there
49 are many concerned citizens, and she doesn't want them to have to continue worrying
50 about what the City Council is going .to do about their garbage rates.
51
Vol. 40, Page 424
January 241, 2005
I Council Member Canevaro, quoted from. his notes .from the January 138, meeting as he
2 did at the afternoon session: 'T&,.me it was never just about price. I asked, for alternatives
3 at 50, 60; and 707o, along with pricing, so that we could consider the best product.,".As a
4 marketing professional, he knew it was possible, to, "make the numbers look any way
5 you want them to loo . k." Council needed to lbbk.,and companies arid rafes,and decide
6 what -was best for this longnterm contract. He thought Mr. Hanania',s- suggestion of a
7 public workshop was a good one.
'9 Council Member O'Brien thought everything that could be said had already been, said.
10 As this was hot an agenclized issue, he'Would refrain from any further comment.
11 CITY MANAGER COMMENT'- None.
12,
13 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
14
15 A. Public Hearing to Consider a Proposed Public. Art: Program- for,the. City of
16 Petdiuma (Moore),:
17 Introductiomof Ordinance No. N.C.S. AmendingOrdinance
18 1072 N :C..S. (The Zoning Ordinance) to Add Article 19.6.,. Public Art,
19 Requiring Public. Art 'as t'
Part of,All New Development Certain Zones in
20 the City of Petaluma
21 • Resolution Establishing -Procedures and Guidelines for the City of
22 Petaluma Public Art Program and the Public Arts Committee.
Community Development -Director. Mike Moot e presented the staff report,
draft ordinanceL and resolution. Per direction from Couri61 in February'
2004, staff with'input'from the Petaluma Arts Council, and relying
,extensively, on,legislation passed in. other communities, have put the
materials before Council for. their review and consideration this evening.
The ordinance would amend the Zoning Ordinance and would require
public art in certain commercial and industrial zones. An indi I eO fee may
be paid by appliccinfs°who do not wish -to provide public art. The art or
the in -lieu fee is equal to Mof the construction cost arid applies to
projects with a value of $500,000 or �more. He made the distinction that this
is n , at an impact fee, and does nof require- an analysis under State law.. He
discussed the make-up and purview -of the proposed Public Arts
Committee.
37
38
Vice Mayor,Harri-s asked --in respect to, keeping'track of, staff time before
39
fee m backfilled led when the money
money is received - would that time be
40
was received?
41
42
Mr. Moore thinks Council Will have -to decide,what'happens in the, interim
43
until there insufficient -money to provide for a staff :person. Perhaps one
44
option would be to do: something similar to what Community
45
Development now doe's with the contract: planners: When a project
46
comes in and an applicatioh is filed, the cost to hire a contract planner to
47
process that application is carried by the applicant.
48
49
Council Member Torliattwanted to Clarify that the staff recommendation
50
was to introduce the public art ordinance and the accompanying
51
resolu,tion,of procedures and guidelines.
January 24, 2005
Vol. 40, Page 425
Mr. Moore agreed.
2
3
Council Member O'Brien asked the I% was based on initial proposed
4
costs or final costs, and what happened if there were cost overruns.
5
6
Mr. Moore explained that the definition refers to costs associated with
7
construction. Typically an estimate is provided when the applicant files a
8
building permit. This is then reviewed to see if the numbers look like "real"
9
numbers.
10
11
Council Member Healy noted that Parks and Recreation Director Jim
12
Carr's memo stated that the Recreation, Music, and Parks Commission
13
"unanimously approved a motion supporting the 'concept' of an
14
ordinance for public art." He asked for more information.
15
16
Mr. Moore said he not talked to Mr. Carr about that.
17
18
Council Member Nou stated that she was a member of the Recreation,
19
Music, and Parks Commission when this item was, discussed, and said that
20
at the time, she didn't realize it would only apply to commercial
21
developments. She thought it would include housing developments.
22
23
Mr. Moore replied that staff was given specific direction from Council that
24
the ordinance would not apply to residential development. However,
25
there is a provision that says that residential developments of a certain size
26
may participate in the program if they choose to, but it's not.a
27
requirement.
28
29
Council Member Nau clarified that she was in favor of it at the time
30
because she thought it would include housing developments.
31
32
Mayor Glass understood that the Lomas Development was going to
33
volunteer to include some public art in their project.
34
35
Mr. Moore could not confirm that. Southgate is doing public art.
36
37
Mayor Glass explained that this has been a volunteer effort for more than
38
a year at the direction of the Council, and asked the volunteers if they
39
would like to make statements.
40
41
Murray Rockowit , Petaluma read a brief statement regarding the arts.
42
43
Alison Marks, Petaluma, Petaluma Arts Council, thanked those in the
44
audience who had waited through the lengthy public comment about
45
the garbage contract to hear the Public Art item. She thanked Council for
46
their vote of confidence and leadership position when they directed the
47
volunteers to work with staff last February on draft legislation to include
48
public art in new commercial development. She thanked City Manager
49
Mike Bierman and Community Development Director Mike Moore for their
50
support. She explained the process used to develop the proposed
51
ordinance. She emphasized that it would be a self-supporting program.
52
When they made a presentation to the Recreation, Music, and Parks
Vol. 40, Page 426
January 24, 2005.
Commission, they recommended that a separate
parate i committee of interested
citizens be formed to work, specifically on the public art issue. She
introduced Lynn, Baer, a public art specialist who has worked with other
cities to establish public art programs for over 15 years.
Ms. Baer commended the City staff and volunteers for the ordinance.: they
put together. She reminded the audience that the fee would be I % Of, the
construction budget on a project, not the overall budget. That I % covers
all the administration' costs of the art. She said the public art can make a
community, "feel very comfortable in new development, if it's: done
correctly.
Vice Mayor Harris mentioned that some municipalities have a 2% or 3%
fee.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Matt White, Basin Street Properties, said he did not oppose the, concept,
but it needed a lot of work'. He agrees developers should be involved in
the guidelines. He stated that Petaluma is a very expensive city to do
business with. He, said that'dll fees charged to developers are passed on
to the public. He thought'it Was great that Petaluma has matured, to the
point where it heeds public art.
Barry; gussewitz, Petaluma, believes that those who live in Petaluma live
here'because they love the beauty, and that aesthetic beauty nourishes
the community.
Larry Jonas, Petaluma, has seen public. art. in. different cities and
Wholeheartedly supports it.
Bill Phillips,, Petaluma, endorsed the public arts ordinance.
Stephanie McAllister, Petaluma, thought this was a "huge opportunity!' for
art, as .there will be lots of development in the future.
opportunity.
Scoff Hess, Petaluma, local photographer and on board of Arts Council,
endorsed the public arts ordinance.
Marilee Ford, Petaluma, artist, on board of Petaluma Arts, Council,
endorsed the public arts ordinance.
Diana ,Farao e, Petaluma, has lived within walking distance of downtown
Petaluma for 17 'years, and is proud to live' in community considering such
a, program. She commended the Mayor and Council.
Geri Digiomo, Peta.lurild, director of"Pe.taluma Poetry Walk, endorsed the
public arts ordinance.
January 24, 2005
Vol. 40, Page 427
I
Edwin Hamilton, Petaluma, board of Arts Council, read a brief statement
2
endorsing the public arts ordinance.
3
4
Sandra Reed, Petaluma, landscape architect, spoke of what it means to a
5
project to briing art to it.
6
7
Linda Postenrieder, Petaluma, Owner, Pelican Art Gallery, and President of
8
Petaluma Arts Association, endorsed the public arts ordinance,
9
10
Jim March, Petaluma, father of six, three still at home, has enjoyed walking
11
around, the City with his children. He thinks City should support this type of
12
program, which he said would leave a legacy for future generations
13
14
Larry Reed, Petaluma, member of SPARC, endorsed the public arts
15
ordinance.
16
17
Marjorie Heim, Petaluma, small business, owner and member of Arts
18
Council Board, endorsed the public arts ordinance.
19
20
Sally Denman, Petalu mia, arts therapist, endorsed the public arts
21
ordinance.
22
23
Janice Cader4hompson, Petaluma, urged support of ordinance, and said
24
the Arts Council has done a tremendous job.
25
26
John Kinsella, Petaluma, endorsed the public arts ordinance.
27
28
COUNCIL COMMENT
29
30
Council Member Torliatt asked if it would be -possible to appeal decisions
31
made by the committee, as it is with SPARC or the Planning Commission.
32
33
Mr: Moore responded that an appeal provision was not included,
34
because Council had made a comment about not wanting to be the
35
final arbiter on art choices.
36
37
Council Member Torliatt asked'if developers would be represented on
38
committee or be part of the process.
39
40
Mr. Moore clarified that as part of passing the ordinance, Council would
41
direct the art committee to set up guidelines with, input from developers.
42
43
Council Member Torliatt asked if'those guidelines would come back to
44
Council for final approval.
45
46
Mr. Moore confirmed that they would.
47
48
Mayor Glass noted how pleasant it was to discuss something where the
49
cumulative impacts' will be positive. He supported the I% for public art.
50
51
Council Member Torliatt stated that process there has been a tremendous
52
amount of support from the community. She thinks a lot of art can be
Vol. 40, Page 428 January 24, 2005
functional - something for everyone. Having the ordinance in place
would raise the awareness of art in the development community. She, is
Open to discusing inclusion of an appeal process. She, sees this as an
opportunity to connect the east and west sides of'Petaluma, and. for the
City to "grow our transient occupancy tax." When itwas time for a,
motion, she would be happy to move it.
Council Member Canevdro noted the need for more ballflEilds in
Petaluma. He suggested that instead of putting the ordinance into, effect,
C .
the itycreate a commission t . oSuggest appropriate places for,public art
and come to Council on acase by case basis. He was not in favor of
Mandating I % across the board.
Council Member O'Brien -thanked, Staff and. the -volunteersfor the -work
they've put into this. He did not -want to .be involved in an appeal process.
subjective. He: thought SPARC should, have the ' final decision. He
supported formation of a commission but not I %across the board.
Vice Mayqr,l ' farris said he felt conflicted, but would not support passing
the ordinance at this time because of funding concerns
Counci[Member Nau said She
community had a need for,publit art but a
bigger need for b�allfi6lds. She would not be supporting the ordinance.
Councli'Member Healy noted the "huge amount of positive energy here
in the room.," He said Petaluma is very clearly "behind the curve" w-henit
comes to public art. He wanted 10 try to salvage a positive outcome at
tonight's.meldting. He -thought the ordinance with *Very minorchanges
could gain widespread support. He would like Staff to arrange a public
workshop within the next couple of weeks.. He said he would.likelo discuss
the make up of the, committee further.
Council Member Torliaft pointed out thatrCouncil discussed this February
23' '2004. It -was -back a year later. A "ton of work" had been put into this
ordinance. If only minor changes were needed, she wanted tobrib, g it
back and hopesthere would be majority Council suppqrt. She views it as
a TOT revenue source. To characterize it, as a tax was not-at'.all fair. She
Made a,.MOTION to .direct Staff to arrange. a workshop, and to have the
agenda item em come back at the March 21, 2005 Council Meeting.
Mayor Glass seconded the MOTION.
Council Member Canevaro asked if there was Council supportr to form a
commission.
Mayor Glass replied that he did' not want to have "ano.thbr layer of
bureaucracy." He said he was disappointed that
anota there'wds noa majority
Council support for the ordinance, He didn't mind making, minor changes,
but he didn't want to see it "watered down." He said everyone had
worked, too hard to see this end up as a "meaningless commission.
January 24, 2005
Vol. 40, Page 429
I Council Member Healy agreed that he would rather see a- bigger buy in
2 and not just a committee.
3
4 M/S Torliatt/Glass
5 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
6
7 B. Ellis Creek Water. Recvclina Facilitv: Resolution 2005-016 N.C.S. Approving
8 a General Plan Amendment; Infroduction'of -Ordinance 2199 N.C.S.,
9 Approving a Prezoning and Rezoning to PCD - Planned Community
10 District; and Resolution 1005-017 N.C.S. Approving Annexation for the New
11 Water Recycling. Facility . located at 4104 Lakeville Highway, APN 005-009-
12 023, 068-001-023, 024 & 025; 068-010-026, and 0l 7-170-002, File-04-ANX-
13 0698 -CR.
14
15 Irene Borba, Senior Planner, presented the staff report.
16
17 MOTION to introduce Ordinance 2199 N.C.S. and adopt Resolution 2005-
18 016 N.C.S. and Resolution 2005-017 N.C:S,
19 M/S VBrien/Healy.
20 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
21
22 C. Consideratioh of and Possible Action on a Memorandum from the City
23 Manager, in Response to City Council Direction to the City Manager to
24 Negotiate with Chelsea Property Group, Setting Forth a Proposal to
25 Amend thea RiVer. Oaks/Petaluma Factory Outlet Village Master Plan to
26 Allow the City. to Acquire Parcel C and Other Terms and Procedures
27 Pertaining to the, Further'Consideration of and Possible Action on the
28 Pending Master Plan Amendment for the Proposed Development of
29 Parcel B. (Bierman)
30
31 MOTION to continue this item to the February 28, 2005 Council Meeting,
32. confirming the request of the Chelsea Property Group.
33
34 M/S' Glass/Canevero
35 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
36
37
38 ADJOURN
39
40 The meeting was adjourned at I 1:19 p.m.
41
42
43
44
45
46 avid Vl�rss�MLayo��r
47
48
49
50
51
52 ATTEST:
Vol. 40.Page 430 Jonuory�24"2085
l
2 '
]
�
Claire Cooper, Interim City Clerk v
7 `