HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 02/05/2001~~~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
February 5, 2001
City of Petaluma, California
Minutes of a Regular
City Council Meeting
Vol. 35, Page 443
IVlonday, February 5, 2001
Council Chambers
The Petaluma City Council met on this date at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Council Members O'Brien, Healy, Torliatt, Maguire, Moynihan; Vice Mayor
Cader-Thompson; Mayor Thompson
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC COMMENT
Harvey Goldberg, Petaluma River Property owner, voiced his concerns regarding grant
money being used to do studies that have already been done; he would like to see any
grant money secured used for repair of the Petaluma River. He has resided at the
same location for 25 years, would like to retain his privacy and the historical
background of his property.
He explained that he had hired a consultant. and developed a 12-year plan in 3-year
increments to eradicate any plant species that don't belong and replace with native/non-
invasive species to help beautify the property.
Mary Crawford, 12 Parkside Terrace, has contacted many residents in her area who
were not informed of the Public Hearing regarding dogs off-leash at Oakhill Park. She
brought with her a signed petition asking Council to enforce leash laws in the park.
Park users would like to be assured that health and safety measures are being taken to
protect them.
Jesse VanGardner, Petaluma Visitors Program, invited Council Members to a luncheon
on Thursday, March 8, 2001, at 1:30 p.m. for Film and Location Scouts, location to be
announced. She announced that on February 20, 2001 The Sonoma County Tours
and Program would make a presentation to Council and at that time she would speak
about ways that Petaluma partners with Sonoma County and how other industries are
partnering with the San Francisco CBD and the State of California.
~~
Vol. 35, Page 444
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
February 5, 2001
Council was apprised as to the progress of Petaluma River Authority. It is basically a
Citizens Advisory Group at this point, coming from the Petaluma area Chamber of
Commerce and Petaluma Visitors Program.
COUNCIL COMMENT AND LIAISON REPORTS
Council Member Maguire:
^ Requested response from Bonne Gaebler regarding the letter received from the
Citizens of an Economically Viable Community. They had questions regarding the
Eden Housing Project and would like a copy of Bonne's response to the Council.
^ In response to Ms. Crawford, he had not gone out to the property but wanted that
issue addressed more fully through the Music, Parks and Recreation Commission.
Council Member Moynihan:
^ Announced an upcoming community project on Saturday February 24, 2001, 8:00
a.m. to 3:00 p.m. for Tree Planting along the Lynch Creek Trail. There will be a
barbecue and about 100 trees will be planted.
Council Member Torliatt:
^ Noted that the tree planting project was possible because of completion of the $1.1
million bike/pedestrian project that runs under Highway 101 connecting the East and
West sides of the City. The project was funded through City redevelopment funds
and Federal funds.
^ Extended appreciation to Rusty Resneck for his organization of the project.
^ Informed Council that she had been appointed to the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission as the Association of Bay Area Governments Representative. She was
appointed on January 18,2001, by unanimous vote of elected officials representing
nine Bay Area counties. This nineteen-member commission distributes the State
and Federal dollars to our transportation authority for projects.
^ Regarding Council Member Moynihan's request to establish a Financial Advisory
Committee formed for the Finance Department, she wanted to consider, at the same
time, forming a Rate Payers Advisory Committee to help in understanding the costs
to the community resulting from Council's approval of the 11'h Amended Water
Agreement.
^ Discussed the review of the Petaluma Bicycle Advisory Committee, described the
committee as "very active," and thought it had been proactive for the community.
February 5, 2001 Vol. 35, Page 445
1 Discussed the liaison report on the Airport Commission meeting of Thursday,
'
2 s proposal to plant grapevines on approximately
February 1, and Charles Spongberg
3 40-60 acres at the airport. The Commission had quite a few questions, including
4 where water would come from for the project. Apparently, a recycled water pipeline
5 was planned for the vicinity that they hoped to tap into; in the meantime, they were
6 considering drilling a well. The Commission asked Mr. Spongberg to look at other
7 uses for the land, as they were concerned about the safety of the stakes and wire
8 used with grapevines.
9
10 ~ Regarding the Oakhill Park issue, a member of the public who was concerned about
11 dogs in the playground area had contacted her.
12
13 Asked to agendize for the next Council Meeting, if possible,. discussion of the water
14 rate increases.
15
16
Made a clarification as to an article in the Argus-Courier regarding the 11 t" Amended
17 Water Agreement, saying she did not "shut down" Public Discussion on that agenda
18 item, but called for the motion because it was made clear by the Mayor that there
19 would be no additional discussion.
20
21 Council Member Healy:
22
23 Was at Oakhill Park this weekend with family and friends and had an enjoyable
24 time.
25
26 Suggested that the Community Development Department could assist with noticing
27 of Music, Parks and Recreation Commission meetings regarding the park, as they
28 are very familiar with the process for noticing citizens within a certain radius of a
29 particular property. Stated he was hopeful that the issue could be resolved amicably
30 at the Parks and Recreation Department level.
31
32 Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson:
33
34 Explained that as the Council liaison to the Music, Parks and Recreation
35 Commission liaison, she attended their last meeting. The Commission decided to
36 form anine-member committee to deal with the dogs at Oakhill Park issue. She
37 thought that providing property owners within 300 feet of the. park with notice of
38 meetings might not be adequate. She suggested that interested. citizens contact the
39 City Clerk's Office to be added to a list of those to be notified.
40
41 Council Member O'Brien:
42
43 Thanked Jennifer for organizing the film crew project.
44
45
46 APPOINTMENTS
~~~
Vol. 35, Page 446 February 5, 2001
1
2
3
4
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Recommendation to the Mayors' and Councilmembers' Association for a representative
to serve on the Water Advisory Task Force.
Mayor Thompson suggested appointing Council Members Torliatt and Healy as co-
representatives.
Council Member Healy had suggested the same and stated that it was consistent with
something the Council did about a year ago (three members were appointed) when
Council was invited to appoint a member to the Prop 10 Tobacco Tax Committee. He
thought this was a similar, purely an advisory body, and that Mayor Thompson's
suggestion was appropriate.
Council Member Maguire was concerned about possible voting situations: which
representative would vote?
Mayor Thompson clarified that if there was an issue to be decided, Council would
decide and direct the individual or individuals, but only one would vote.
Council Member Maguire would prefer to leave the appointment with Council Member
Torliatt and invite Council Member Healy to attend when he had an interest, as had
been done in other cases.
Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson asked to discuss Council Member Torliatt's appointment
by Council to three of the Water Commissions.
Council Member Moynihan asked if Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson was concerned that
Council Member Torliatt's workload was too heavy.
Mayor Thompson stated that Council could either let Council Member Torliatt's
appointment stand as-is, or bring back all three appointments for discussion.
Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson clarified her concern that everything the previous Council
voted on was being brought back and changed. She thought that was where the
discussion needed to start.
Council Member Maguire asked Mayor Thompson why he would want to have all three
come back. He saw no harm in leaving it the way the Council decided in January.
Mayor Thompson stated that he was trying to get a consensus of what Council would
like to do.
Council Member Healy noted that at the time the Council made the appointments in
2000, there was an acknowledgment that the Council could revisit them after the
beginning of the New Year.
~- d
February 5, 2001 Vol. 35, Page 447
1 Council Member Torliatt thought the idea behind the three appointments was to have
2 one person serve on all three bodies, to serve focus on regional issues through the
_ 3 North Bay Watershed Association, the contractors that make up the body that contracts
4 with the water agency through the Water Advisory Committee, and to develop uniform
5 policy recommendations for water usage through the Water Task Force, which is made
6 up of representatives from nine cities in the County. She was appointed to represent
7 the Council on all three bodies. Subsequently, the North Bay Watershed position was
8 reassigned to Council Member O'Brien. She was not sure why Council would choose to
9 further change the representation, but it would be at the pleasure of the Council.
10
11 Council Member Maguire thought there was some benefit to the continuity gained by
12 having one person in all three positions, particularly during the discussions between the
13 Mayors' and Councilmembers' Advisory Committee and the Contractors Advisory
14 Committee. He recommended that Council continue with Council Member Torliatt's
15 appointments on the Water Advisory Committee and Water Task Force.
16
17 Council Member Moynihan thought that both Council Members Torliatt and Healy could
18 contribute.
19
20 MOTION: Council Member Moynihan moved, seconded by O'Brien, to recommend
21 to the Mayors' and Councilmembers' Association an appointment of both
22 Council Members Torliatt and Healy to serve as representatives on the
23 Water Advisory Task Force.
24
25 Council Member O'Brien thought that it was an advantage to have different
26 perspectives represented on the bodies.
27
28 Council Member Torliatt thought that since the other nine cities of the Mayors' and
29 Councilmembers' Association would be appointing only one person, Petaluma should
30 follow suit; if two people were appointed, only one should vote.
31
32 Mayor Thompson supported the appointment of both Council Members Healy and
33 Torliatt, and hoped that Council Member Torliatt would work with Amendment 12 as she
34 had with Amendment 11.
35
36 Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson did not support that suggestion.
37
38 Mayor Thompson asked for a show of hands those in favor of two people being on the
39 Mayors' and Councilmembers' Association for a representative to serve on the Water
40 Advisory Task Force.
41
42 Result of show of hands not stated.
43
44
45 MINUTES
__ 46 February 22, October 16, November 20, December 11, 18, 2000 and
~~t
Vol. 35, Page 448
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
January 2, 2001
February 5, 2001
Council Members Moynihan and O'Brien announced that they would abstain from the
vote regarding minutes for the year 2000, as they were not Council Members at that
time.
MOTION: Council Member Maguire moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Cader-
Thompson, to approve the City Council Meeting minutes of February
22, October 16 as corrected, November 20, December 11, and December
18, 2000.
MOTION
PASSED: 5/0/2 (Moynihan and O'Brien abstaining)
MOTION: Council Member Maguire moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Cader-
Thompson, to approve the City Council Meeting minutes of January 2,
2001.
MOTION
PASSED: 6/0/1 (Thompson abstaining)
Council Member Torliatt had heard that verbatim minutes were being requested for
certain meetings. She wanted that request brought before the full Council. She pointed
out that there were sixty-two Council Meetings during 2000.
Council Member Healy agreed, adding that at the Council Workshop on Saturday,
February 3, there was a consensus those attending that the City Clerk should produce
"action minutes" and that the video tapes be retained for a longer period.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Resolution 2001-026 N.C.S. Approving Claims and Bills.
Council Member Moynihan asked for clarification of a number of items.
Finance Director Bill Thomas provided this, and informed Council Member
Moynihan that copies had been provided to all Council Members before the
meeting.
Council Member Maguire suggested that some of these things needed to be
addressed before the meeting and that some of the burden lies with Council
Members to preview the information provided beforehand and take up some of
these issues directly with City Management.
MOTION: Council Member Moynihan moved, seconded by Healy to adopt
Resolution 2001-026 N.C.S. Approving Claims and Bills.
l~.
February 5, 2001
Vol. 35, Page 449
2 MOTION
3 PASSED: 7/0
4
5 2. Resolution 2001-025 N.C.S. Approving the Completion of the Re-Roofing of
6 Fire Stations 2 and 3 by Henris Roofing Company for $126,326.32.
7
8 MOTION: Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson moved, seconded by Council
9 Member Moynihan, to adopt Resolution 2001-025 N.C.S.
10 Approving the Completion of the Re-Roofing of Fire Stations 2
11 and 3 by Henris Roofing Company for $126,326.32.
12
13 MOTION
14 PASSED: 7/0
15
16 3. (Removed) Adoption of Ordinance Approving Ground Lease for Private
17 Hangar at Petaluma Airport. (First Reading -continued from January 16)
18 (Beatty)
19
20 UNFINISHED BUSINESS
21
22 4. Report regarding Status of Payran Project and Discussion and Possible
23 Direction Regarding Payran Flood Management Project Financing and Budget.
24
25 City Manager Stouder provided a verbal report of last week's meetings in
26 Washington, D.C. He explained that one year ago, the City was obligated for at
27 least another $8-10 million for this project; in the form of an open-ended contract
28 with the Army Corps of Engineers stating that the City pay any cost to complete
29 the project. That agreement, dated 1996, was in effect up until December 2000,
30 when the President authorized the project. The City has now learned that $1
31 million has been reprogrammed to the project, which reduces the City's
32 obligation by that amount. Nothing is guaranteed, but there is a commitment by
33 the Army Corps to consider this as part of the President's request above and
34 beyond the programming of funds. So the major issue financially is how much
35 and how frequently will it be for reimbursement. While in Washington D.C., he
36 and Paul Marangella drafted a letter to the Army Corps identifying things that
37 need to be done immediately. They were hoping to have a meeting with the
38 District Office Staff this week, if possible.
39
40 The last meeting they had was with the program manager of the legal counsel for
41 the Army Corps National office. He will be working with the legal counsel in the
42 district office to make sure the PCA (Project. Cooperative Agreement) moves
43 forward quickly.
44
45 The negotiations to appropriate new funds for the remaining balance will
46 continue through the calendar year.
~~~
Vol. 35, Page 450
February 5, 2001
2 Mr. Marangella added that they did discuss dredging as it affects the hydrology
3 of the river. They suggested that we speak with the local district to make sure
4 that is a priority. Headquarters is not making that decision: it is being made
5 locally.
6
7 Council Member Maguire asked when the $1 million from the reprogramming
8 would be received.
9
10 Mr. Thomas had heard that morning that the district had already been instructed
11 to spend the reprogramming funds to complete the design of the transition
12 channel. Without the completion of the design, the City could move forward with
13 the bid..
14
15 City Manager Stouder stated that he met with Brian Bryson, Harvey Goldman
16 and another gentleman and the issue of whether or not reprogramming funds
17 can be spent without a Partnership Cooperation Amended Agreement was
18 discussed. Since these are design dollars and not construction dollars, this may
19 be possible.
20
21 Council Member O'Brien extended his appreciation for all the hard work by Mr.
22 Stouder, Mr. Hargis and Mr. Marangella in Washington, D.C. and thought it was
23 amazing what. they had accomplished.
24
25 Council Member Cader-Thompson commented on an article in today's paper
26 about the Pentagon getting less money and hoped it was not connected to the
27 Army Corps of Engineers.
28
29 5. Status Report, Discussion and Possible Action Authorizing the City Manager to
30 Enter into an Agreement with Mardell, LLC, Regarding the Adobe Creek Weir
31 and Diversion Channel and Directing City Management to send a Letter to
32 FEMA Withdrawing the City's Appeal of the Letter of Map Revision Upon
33 Execution of Said Agreement.
34
35 City Manager Stouder informed the Council Members that the agreement was
36 not available in draft form until the previous Friday, February 2. Even though the
37 Council was to have two weeks to consider the negotiations, City Management
38 felt it was appropriate for Council to receive the draft for their comments at this
39 stage of discussions. If Council concurred, the item would be brought back for
40 action at the meeting of February 20, 2001.
41
42 City Attorney Rudnansky explained that last week he met with the developers to
43 discuss the contract. He received a version of it in late January 2001, and
44 understood it to be the agreement /negotiations that had been reached between
45 all parties. He forwarded a letter to Mr. Hudson regarding two main legal issues
46 with the contract:
1
[]
February 5, .2001 Vol. 35, Page 451
1
2
Establishment of the special tax in a timely manner with correct wording. He
3 referred the matter to the Bond Counsel; they responded and provided
4 language that has been added to the document.
5
6 Access to the Golf Course Property. He suggested that building permits not
7 be issued until this was assured. The developer indicated it would not be a
8 problem; we ran out of time in term of contacting the Golf Course.
9
10 Council Member Maguire pointed out a conflict in the wording of the contract
11 regarding the obtaining of permits and permission of property owners in order to
12 commence and complete construction.
13
14 City Attorney Rudnansky stated that he did not participate in the discussions or
15 negotiations but that Mr. Maguire was correct, the building permits would not be
16 issued until after the bonds were posted.
17
18 Council Member Healy questioned why the amount of the annual assessment on
19 the twelve lots is left for future determination.
20
21 Council Member Maguire informed Mr. Healy that it was to be based on the
22 maintenance plan, which the City does not have.
23
24 Council Member Healy questioned if there was an estimate.
- 25
26 Mr. Moore. addressed the question on the special tax, informing Council that
27 there was a separate process to establish that tax. At this point, the City was
28 seeking a commitment from the developer to set up the tax. They had been
29 dealing with a bond counsel familiar with this type of action, and that information
30 would be disclosed at the time the City set up the tax.
31
32 Council Member Healy asked if there was an estimate of what the annual
33 maintenance costs would be.
34
35 Mr. Moore replied that there was no estimate at this time.
36
37 Council Member Maguire clarified that the contract stated that if the City did not
38 complete its obligations by July 1, 2004, the applicant would only be required to
39 pay $50,000..00.
40
41 Mr. Moore explained that the City had until July 1, 2001 to set up the special tax.
42 The attorney with whom they had been consulting did not think this would be a
43 problem. The process typically takes 45 -60 days to complete.
___ 44
e~ ~,~,
Vol. 35, Page 452
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
February 5, 2001
Council Member Maguire confirmed that a plan and price are necessary in order
to develop figures. He did not like the way the plan was designed, as it left the
risk and the burden on the City for all future maintenance and flooding liabilities.
Council Member Cader-Thompson asked Mr. Moore if the special tax was only
for the maintenance of the creek.
Mr. Moore stated that it actually only covered the Weir and Diversion Channel,
not the Creek Channel.
Council Member Cader-Thompson misunderstood that the homeowners would
be responsible for creek and property maintenance and is concerned about that.
Mr. Moore stated that the intention was to provide a funding mechanism for the
Weir and Diversion Channel only.
Council Member Torliatt questioned the length of the term of the Mello-Roos
Tax. Was it "in perpetuity"?
Mr. Moore confirmed that to be correct.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Rich Rudnansky announced that Council would adjourn to Closed
Session for the following items:
Conference With. Legal Counsel, Anticipated Litigation, Significant Exposure to
Litigation Pursuant to Subdivision (b), Government Code §54956.9. (One Potential
Case)
Conference With Legal Counsel, Existing Litigation, Subdivision (a) of Government
Code §54956.9, City of Petaluma v. Holmberg, Sonoma County Superior Court Case
Number. 222739.
ADJOURN
Council adjourned to Closed Session at 4:53 p.m.
RECONVENE
The Petaluma City Council reconvened its regular meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers.
~~~
February 5, 2001 Vol. 35, Page 453
1 ROLL CALL
2
3 PRESENT: Council Members O'Brien, Healy,. Torliatt, Maguire, Moynihan; Vice Mayor
4 Cader-Thompson; Mayor Thompson
5
6 ABSENT: None
7
8 REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
9
10 Mayor Thompson announced that there was no reportable action taken during Closed
11 Session.
12
13 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
14
15 At the request of Mayor Thompson, Terrance Garvey led the Pledge of Allegiance.
16
17 MOMENT OF SILENCE
18
19 At the request of Mayor Thompson, a moment of silence was observed.
20
21 PUBLIC HEARIfVGS
22
23 6. Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and
24 Necessity to Gary and Paul Brown Authorizing the Operation of Hometown
25 Taxi of Rohnert Park, aSix-Cab Taxi Service Inside Petaluma City Limits.
26 (Edwards/Parks)
27
28 MOTION: Council Member Maguire moved, seconded by O'Brien, to adopt
29 Resolution 2001-27 N.C.S. Authorizing the Issuance of a Certificate
30 of Public Convenience and Necessity to Gary and Paul Brown
31 Authorizing the Operation of Hometown Taxi of Rohnert Park, a
32 Six-Cab Taxi Service Inside Petaluma City Limits.
33
34 MOTION
35 PASSED: 7/0
36
37 7. Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and
38 Necessity to Malcolm D. Jacobson Authorizing the Operation of Rohnert Park
39 Taxi of Rohnert Park, aFive-Cab Taxi Service Inside Petaluma City Limits.
40 (Edwards/Parks)
41
42 MOTION: Council Member Torliatt moved, seconded by Maguire, to adopt
43 Resolution 2001-28 N.C.S. Authorizing the Issuance of a Certificate
44 of Public Convenience and Necessity to. Malcolm D. Jacobson
45 Authorizing the Operation of Rohnert Park Taxi of Rohnert Park,
46 aFive-Cab Taxi Service Inside Petaluma City Limits.
~ 5Q~
Vol. 35, Page 454
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
February 5, 2001
MOTION
PASSED: 7/0
8. Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and
Necessity to Kevin T. Kroh Authorizing the Operation of A-C Taxi Service of
Santa Rosa, a Six-Cab Taxi Service Inside Petaluma City Limits.
(Edwards/Parks)
MOTION: Council Member Maguire moved, seconded by Healy, to Adopt
Resolution 2001-29 N.C.S. Authorizing the Issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to Kevin T. Kroh
Authorizing the Operation of A-C Taxi Service of Santa Rosa, a
Six-Cab Taxi Service Inside Petaluma City Limits.
MOTION
PASSED: 7/0
NEW BUSINESS
9. Presentation of the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open
Space District Acquisition Plan 2000 and Discussion of Funding Possibilities
by Executive Director Andrea Mackenzie.
Manager of Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District
Andrea McKenzie gave a presentation on the Land Conservation Program of the
District, Acquisition Plan 2000 and Competitive Matching Grant Program of
Sonoma County. She stated that the mission of the Open Space District is to
presence .permanently agriculture, greenbelts, natural resources and recreation
land in Sonoma County for future generations. She described plans for the next
ten years.
Council Member Maguire thanked Ms. McKenzie for her cooperation with the
project and for bringing it forward.
Council Member Healy thanked Ms. McKenzie for taking the leadership in the
Open Space District and looked forward to discussion of the McNear Peninsula
project. He suggested that they consider the use of signs on the protected
property to inform the public of the Open Space District's accomplishments. He
suggested a couple of partnering opportunities for river trails.
Vice Mayor Coder-Thompson was not in favor of Petaluma Poultry's desire to
expand the urban growth. boundary for a plant, as there had been a breech at the
levy the area could not be used as is. She invited Ms. McKenzie to walk the
_.~ ~''
February 5, 2001 Vol. 35, Page 455
1 entire Petaluma River to view the 100-year-old oak trees and the beautiful
2 surrounding areas.
3
4 Council Member Torliatt looking forward to the public's input. Regarding the
5 implementation of the River Enhancement Plan, she agreed with Vice Mayor
6 Cader-Thompson that along the entire stretch of river property there was
7 tremendous opportunity to participate, especially if redevelopment funds were
8 received from the government and funds were shifted from drainage fund to
9 redevelopment. She hoped Council would prioritize implementation of the River
10 Enhancement Plan.
11
12 She looked forward to acquiring the entire Gray property as a buffer. She
13 envisioned using ratepayer dollars resulting from the new sewer treatment facility
14 as matching fund to create a fabulous recreational component to link with
15 Shollenberger.
16
17 Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson wanted to work with the Open Space District to
18 take advantage of the many opportunities provided by the interconnectedness of
19 the area from Shollenberger park, where the sewer plant will be, down to the
20 McNear Peninsula, the Corona Reach area, and then over to Magnolia Park.
21
22 Council Member Torliatt would like to revisit Council's priorities for open space
23 purchase.
24
25 Council Member Moynihan thanked Ms. McKenzie for her presentation and Mr.
26 AI Alice for his dedication and time on the open space project.
27
28 Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson thought the Open Space District had been very
29 political as far as what projects moved forward, when in fact the focus should be
30 on what's best for the entire community.
31
32 10. McNear Peninsula:
33
34 A. Resolution Authorizing City Management to Submit a Formal Application
35 for a $2 Million Matching Funds Grant From the Sonoma County
36 Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District (SCAPOSD) to Fund
37 Acquisition of the Central Portion of the McNear Peninsula, Consisting of
38 Approximately 21 Acres; and
39 B. Authorization to Execute Agreement with SCAPOSD if Grant Application
40 is Successful.
41 C. Authorization to Pursue Additional Grant Funds From Various Funding
42 Agencies for Costs Associated with the Land Purchase, Park
43 Improvements, and Environmental Site Enhancements of McNear
44 Peninsula Park.
45 D. Authorization to Set Aside Remaining $200,000 Proposition 12 Per-Capita
46 Funds to this Project. (Tuft)
35~
Vol. 35, Page 456
February 5, 2001
Director of General Plan Administration Pamela Tuft demonstrated the Power
Point Presentation given to the Open Space District Advisory Committee to
which unanimous support was given for the proposal. Primary goals for the
purchase of portions of the McNear Peninsula include:
^ Public Ownership
^ Habitat Enhancement
^ Interpretation and Education
^ Passive Recreation.
Public Ownership would afford the opportunity to create a community resource.
The acquisition priority is stated in the General Plan and is a very important part
of the river access pathways from Downtown to Shollenberger Park. It is also
heavily focused within the Central Petaluma Specific Plan and the Sonoma
County Agricultural Preservation Open Space and Acquisition Plan.
Habitat Enhancement would offer an opportunity to create more bird rookeries
on the Peninsula side. Once cattle are removed and hay cropping has ceased
the work of bank stabilization, needed vegetation planting and feeding habitat
enhancement can begin, as set forth in the River Access and Enhancement
Plan.
Interpretation and Education gives an opportunity to educate the public, as they
visit the site, on the compatibility of industrial river dependent uses with passive
open space activity.
Passive Recreation, which is called for in the plan as follows:
^ Creation of an emergent marsh.
^ Provide for a trail and public access.
^ Provide docks to overlook the marsh and give access to kayaks and small
boat, and rowing, sailing and other activities on the inlet side without
interfering with larger boats in the area.
f
~~~~
,--
February 5, 2001 Vol. 35, Page 457
2 At this time they have a willing seller; SCWA completed last summer, field visits
3 with perspective funding agencies, appraisal, including geo-technical studies in
4 progress, a Resolution for the Council to consider and a fund raising plan if
5 Council will give the direction to proceed.
6
7 Council Member Torliatt restated that she would like to see the Open Space
8 District help the City fund this project. She expressed concern that the funds
9 being allocated are from the Prop 12 fund ($200,000) and while she is agreeable
10 to using it to pay for staff costs, grant writing and other expenses, she would like
11 the Open Space District to consider reimbursement of the funds so that the City
12 might get matching grant money from the Coastal Conservancy.
13
14 Ms. Tuft stated that eligible funds and eligible activities had been discussed and
15 the appraisal is eligible and will be included.
16
17 Council Member Monyihan asked Ms. Tuft to explain any concerns regarding the
18 geo-technical evaluations and soil evaluation - if any fill was used, other than
19 naturally.
20
21 Ms. Pamela Tuft replied that historically the entire peninsula is `fill' and did not
22 exist with the original alignment of the river so there is a question of soil stability.
23 The General Plan designates the site as a proposed park but zoning designates
24 it as light industrial. A realistic projection of costs is necessary to affect the
25 conclusion of that land appraisal.
26
27 Council Member Moynihan asked if any toxins had been found in the soil or if
28 tests had been done.
29
30 Ms. Tuft replied that to her knowledge there are no toxins on that site, but the
31 City will want to be certain as they move into the negotiations phase. Another
32 question that needs to be answered is that of State Lands Commission
33 jurisdiction on the site.
34
35 Council Member Healy wanted to know if under the open space guidelines the
36 City's matching of funds could take place in the form of park improvements after
37 the land is purchased.
38
39 Ms. Tuft answered, "yes."
40
41 Council Member Healy clarified that a diagram would be put up showing the
42 possible sculpting down of existing banks to create some marshes around the
43 edges of the property which creates negative net-fill in the floodplain. He stated
44 that since the Planning Commission is looking at fine tuning the Zero-Net Fill
45 Ordinance, that might be an opportunity that property owners in the Central
46 Pacific Plan area can take advantage of also.
35R
Vol. 35, Page 458
February 5, 2001
Ms. Tuft stated that regarding soil sedimentation reduction, the existing steep
banks have been eroded by past cattle grazing and heavy storms. The plan is to
create emergent marsh restoration areas and stabilize the banks and provide a
more natural habitat.
Council Member Moynihan stressed the importance of maintaining amicable
waterways and the ability to do commercial tonnage on the river.
Ms. Tuft replied that they continue to work with Jericho .
Director of Parks and Recreation Carr wanted to reiterate the importance of
working together with Pomeroy and Jericho companies to maintain amicable
waterways as they play an important part in preserving the river.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Geoff Cartwright, 56 Rocca Drive, would like to Council give the go-ahead on
the General Plan but is concerned about the watershed issues and would like to
see them fully addressed before proceeding further.
Mr. John Mills, 1315 'B' Street, encouraged Council to continue with this project
and asked if the project would become a City owned project, with the City being
responsible for maintenance and future development. He also wanted to know if
there would be a conflict with the park being specified as a "passive park" vs.
"semi-active park'," since boat rowing, walking paths and dogs would be allowed.
He encouraged Council to act in a timely manner so as not to lose the
opportunity to purchase the land. He is looking to the County in hope that they
might donate funds as well.
Ms. Tuft replied to Mr. Mills that the City would hold the title~to the property and
the Conservation District will hold a conservation easement. One of the items
before the Council this evening is the authority to negotiate the contract and the
issue of "passive park" will be negotiated. Tonight's Resolution is the last step in
order for us to begin negotiations and discussions.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Cader-Thompson moved, seconded by Council Member
Torliatt to approve items 10A and 10B.
MOTION
PASSE®: 7/0
MOTION: Council Member Maguire moved, seconded by Torliatt to approve
items 10C and 10D.
MOTION
~~~.
February 5, 2001 Vol. 35, Page 459
1 PASSED: 7/0
2
3 11. Review Mid-Year Budget Results for FY 2000/2001. (Thomas)
_ 4
5 Finance Director Bill Thomas presented the Mid-year Budget Report. The
6 current projections for the general fund will end the year with a small refund;
7 expenditures of the fund are projected not to exceed the appropriated level.
8 Overall general funds are expected to meet estimates. Property taxes are
9 projected to be approximately $32,000.00 less than what was estimated based
10 on receipt of supplemental taxes at year-end. They are down due to the last
11 repayment of the disaster relief payment made to the County in the amount of
12 $63,500.00.
13
14 Sales Tax: This is the largest single revenue source for the General Fund.
15 Receipts for the first four months were over $4 million; they are estimated to
16 exceed the budget by approximately $480 thousand; the ten-year projection is a
17 leveling off in 2001 due to the uncertainty of the economy at the present time.
18
19 ®evelopr~ent Fees: Projected to be down from budget estimates; dependent
20 upon building permits being issued; projects in the pipeline but potential for
21 actual permitting is in question for receipts by June 30, 2001.
22
23 General Fund Revenue: Sales and Property taxes make up approximately 50%
24 of the total General Fund revenue with sales taxes making up 34%.
25
26 General Fund Expenditures: Most are in line with the normal 50% expenditure
27 rate; mid-year adjustments are required: An appropriation will be required on
28 February 20, 2001 in the amount of $141,000.00 for inter-fund loan interest
29 which was budgeted but not appropriated; an appropriation for the previously
30 approved cost allocation plan.
31
32 Special Revenues: The revenue information is provided in the schedules. The
33 indication is that the timing of receiving these funds may not be consistent with
34 the beginning and ending of the City's fiscal year; all appear to be in line with the
35 estimates.
36
37 Enterprise Funds: All of the funds are expected to exceed their revenue
38 estimates; water rates were increased in November and sewer rates were
39 increased in January. Expenditures are in line with expectations.
40
41 Internal Service Funds: These are revenues generated by charges against
42 other operating departments. They consist of: Information Services, General
43 Services, Liability and Workers' Compensation. Charges will be revised by the
44 Cost Allocation Study, which will begin tomorrow.
45
Vol. 35, Page 460 February 5, 2001
1 Fiscal Year 2000 Results: The City ended the year 2000 with a surplus in the
2 General Fund of $1,804,000.00. As a result, the Unreserved General Fund
3 balance has risen to over $3 million.
4
5 Use of Surplus: The first recommendation is to increase reserves for Vehicle
6 Equipment Replacement; Community Reserve; Liability, Workers' Compensation
7 and Street Improvements:
8 A contribution of $400,000.00 to the Vehicle Replacement will increase the
9 reserve to $1 million.
10 A contribution of $200,000.00 to the Community Reserve will bring this
11 reserve to $1.6 million.
12 A contribution to the Risk Reserve Fund of an additional $400,000.00 will
13 bring the Workers' Compensation deficit to approximately $1.1 million
14 depending on the current year activity in that fund.
15 We recommend that a Street Improvement Reserve Fund be established with
16 seed money of $250,000.00.
17
18 The second recommendation is to increase departmental budgets in the General
19 Fund:
20 An increase of $60,000.00 for the Community Development Community
21 Rating Plan.
22 ^ An increase in the Police Training budget of $30,000.00.
23 ^ An increase in the budget for Leased Vehicles by $6,500.00.
24 An increase in the budget for Motorcycle Conversion by $3,600.00
25 ^ An increase for Human Resources by $28,000.00 to provide temporary
26 employment of an .Administrative Secretary.
27 In Non-Departmental overall increases in gas and charges by $25,000.00 and on
28 February 20.,2001 we will recommend appropriated increases to Enterprise Fund
29 for the same additions.
30
31 Non-General Fund Additions: Recommendations are to:
32 Purchase a replacement ambulance out of the Vehicle Replacement Fund for
33 $150,000.00.
34 ^ Purchase Tasers for Police out of the Asset Forfeiture Fund for $16,120.00.
35 Purchase backup server from the Internal Services Fund. for $9,000.00.
36 Purchase office equipment for City Clerk for $15,000.00 from the Information
37 Services/Internal Service Fund as well as the General Services Service Fund.
38
39
40
41 COUNCIL COIViMENT
42
43 None
44
45 APPROVAL OF PROPOSE® AGEN®A
46
~~~~_
February 5, 2001 Vol. 35, Page 461
1 12. Motion to Approve Proposed Agenda for Council's Regular Meeting of
2 February 20, 2001..
3
4 No action taken.
5
6 ADJOl1RfV
7
8 The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
9
10
11
12
13 . Clark Thompson, Mayor
14
15
16 ATTEST:
17
18
19
20
21 Paulette Lyon, Deputy City Jerk
22
23
24
25 ******
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33