HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 06/08/2000June. 8, 2000 Vol. 35, Page 61
1 City of Petaluma, California
a Minutes of a Special
3 City Council Meeting
4
5
6 Thursday, June 8; 2000
Council Chambers
a
9 The Petaluma City Council .met on this day in the Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m.
to
11 ROLL CALL
rz
13 PRESENT: Caller-Thompson, Healy, Keller, Maguire, Thompson, Torliatt
la ABSENT: Hamilton
15
16 PUBLIC COMMENTS
17
is None
19
zo COUNCIL COMMENTS
zl
az Council Member Keller asked, the Council to add an urgency item to the agenda for
z3 discussion and recommendation to the, Sonoma County Transportation Authority
za (SCTA). .SCTA. was:. to consider Rohnert Park's General Plan revision at their Monday,
zs June 12 meeting. There was specific language i.n the General Plan recommendation
26 that SCTA.was to make decisions involving traffic~congestion, particularly in Penngrove.
27 The proposal included a recommendation for joint confributions from a number of cities,
zs including the City of Petaluma, towards traffic mitigation in Penngrove to be considered
z9 as a part of their General Plan.
30
3~ Mayor Thompson riofed that SCTA's staff report accompanying the agenda item, set
3z forth no action was requested at this time on the matter.
33
34 Co.unci,l Member Keller added that there would be a recommendation as RohnertPark
3s was on a fairly fast track with finishing up their General. Plan.
36
3~ Mayor Thompson queried if SCTA could provide a recommendation since no :action
3a was requested. at this time.
39
ao Council Member Keller replied that, to the best .of his understanding, there was ,to be a.
al discussion and general recommendation but not necessarily an action .for what direction
az SCTA would be moving forward. It broke new territory in that finally, regional .impacts
a3 regarding traffic .were being brought to SCTA for the first time. He expressed that it
as merited Council's full attention.
as
Vol. 35, Page 62 June 8, 2000
Motion: C.ouneil Member Maguire• rnoved, seconded by Healy to ;add an urgency item
at the end of the agenda for discussion and possible recommendation(s)'; °to the
Sonoma County. Transportation Authority"s (SCTA) consideration of reviaions to
Rohnert: Park's General Plan at their Monday;, .June 12 meeting that included a
recommendation for joint contributions from a number of cities, including :the City of
Petaluma, towards traffic mitigation in Penngrove.
a nllotion Passed: 6/0/1 ,(Hamilton absent)
to COUNCIL AIVD CITY''MANAGEMEIVT REPORTS
I1
r2 None
13
14 Agenda Changes, Additions, .And Deletions
Is
I~ None
17
is UNFINISHED BUSINESS.
19
zo 1. Discussion and Possible Direction Regarding Fiscal Year 00=01 Budget'Hearing.
zl (Stouder/Cornyn)
zz
23 Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT)
24
Zs Interim Finance Manager Paula, Cornyn presented the TOT Budget that. included all of
z~ the requests the City .had received for the TOT tax. She: thought. the Cify,~ Manager had
z? provided Counc :with a memo that addressed changes to the budget documenf since it,
za was initially printed.,; such as the Petaluma Downtown Association withdrew their
29 request for $25.:,00.0 loan, the Petaluma Area.. Chamber of Commerce%Petaluma,
30 1Naterfront Jazz, Festival requested $4,.000, the Sonoma.'(ounty :Music Association
31 relinquished the: current year's :allocation in the amount of $1;2,000' with a request that° it
32 be carried over' and. brought; up to a total of $,18,000 for .the. coming budget year.: The
33 current. requests; including, the changes: totaled -$4$1.,851. "fhe beginning cash "figure
34 would increase by $;12,OQ0, as there was a possibility that the Sonoma; County Music.
35 Association may ask for their money between today and June 30; they have. said they
3b would not. There .had been very few changes to TOT from the prior year. 'The City was
3~ asking for a little more money to coyer the costs of peciaf events, for example,, the
3s Public Works crews that. went ou ,the Police Department; .and other City employees
39 who assist with public evenfs'in-the City..
40
41 Council Member Healy asked for clarification on whether City Management was
4z recommending~ahe.full amo.untthat each organization requested or had there .been
43 reductions or deletions.
44
as Ms~. Cornyn replied.. that prior to the changes, the' recommendation .was slightly under
46 what was requested. Since the Petaluma Downtown. Association withdrew. their request
June 8, 2000 Vol. 35, Page 63
1 for $25;000 and; tle~Sonoma'County Music Association changes. to their request, the
a recommendation from: City Management was to fund all of their requests.
3
4 Council Member Healy inquired what the rationale for TOT funding, where had HC2
s been funded from in the past.
6
~ Ms. 'Cornyn replied that- HG2 had been funded this year from the General Fund by
s adoption of a resolution by the Counci . This year he City, recommended the funds
9 come from TOT. She did' not recall whether that had .received monies in prior years.
to
11 Vice Mayor Torliatt indicated they had received monies in prior years.
12
13 Council Member Healy continued that with all of the other requests, such as events,
14 tourist related, promotional for the community, that HC2 did not come under that
is category.
16
17 City Manager Fred Sto.uder added that: the TOT funds are often put into aGeneral
la Fund. He agreed that TOT funds .may be targeted for tourist related activities andthat
19 this had been Council's practice. Council may come to view TOT to include community
ao enhancements, special projects; that is, an enhanced community, promoting thequality
21 of life for tourists as well as residents, and therefore a logical. place for HC2 funding.
az
23 Vice Mayor Torliaft expressed. that she :did not have .any concern with funding H.C2 fron
a4 TOT funds. VVhat~ had bothered`'her i'n the past was transferring funds out of the
_..
zs General Fund for certain services: She was of the: opinion that TOT funds should be
i6 used for promotions•and for certain events; however, she wanted to see the funding
2~ amount reduced and that was hot reflected in this budget.
zs
i9 Council Member Maguire disagreed and,.atated that he would like to see the amount
3o stay the same or~ increased until ahe City°could find other sources of reliable revenue for
31 the General, Fund. • His. rationale was that tou-risfs visiting the community relied on the
3z City's infrastructure just like the"residents~~but they did not pay property taxes or user
33 fees as residents do to support~the infrastructure.
34
35 Council Member ,Keller agreed-with Council Member .Maguire :in that there was certainly
36 an expense to the public seetor~for visitors. who, dial not pay property taxes. He was
37 willing to ;have a, discussion regarding the, amours#s; however, he believed transfers to
3s the General Fund' for ahis purpose were not inappropriate.
39 - . ~ ,.
4o Council Memb'er~~-Healy recalled a . ,discussion last year wherein Council Member
4i Hamilton made %a y `suggestion similar to~ what Ms. Torliatf just suggested. He
42 remembered the 'result of the discussion was that Council was in favor of trying to cap
43 the transfers. He believed the~number one priority was increase to TOT funds. and for
44 Council to have livelydiscussions~on how to use those funds in the community.
45
Vol. 35, Page 64 June 8, 2000
Vice Mayor Torliatt clarified, thattfl`e~ more funds pent~from:°l"OT.on promotions for the
City, more people will visit and more TOTrevenueswill come into the;,community.,
4 PUBLIC C.OMIVIEIVT
6 Linda Buffo,. Event Coordinator, Petaluma Waterfront Jazz Festival, 841 Sehu_rnan
7 Lane,-spoke in favor,of`the `City contributing $4,000 of TOT funds Towards The Petaluma
s ,Waterfront Jazz Festival and acknowledged the.:continued support ,for the. Petaluma
9 Butfer Eggs Day Parade.: ..Relevant to qualifications for funding from TO.T funds, she
ro encouraged the Council: to revisit Ordinance 94 2$1 IV.C.S. that addressed transienf
~ r occupancy taxes;
iz
13 Vice: Mayor Torliatt recognized .Linda Buffo for her efforts inconnection with the ;Butter
14 and Eggs Day festivities. -
is -
~~ Council Member Heaiy agreed and„asked Ms. Buffo to read Ordinance 94-281 N .C:S: if
she had it with her. _
is
~g Ms, ,Buffo proceeded fo read the Ordinance.
zo
z~ City Clerk .Budget
z3 City Clerk Beverly Kline noted the significant change in the, City .Clerk's budget.#or.--~ Fiscal
z4 Year 200.0-200.1 was due to two significant projects,, the. Year 2000 General Municipal
zs Elections scheduled for ~Noyember 20..0:0, and the arelocation of -#hey.'City`s information
26 assets to an offsite. facility. She highlighted accomplishments during the past year as
z~ follows: ~ .. .
zs
z~ •. Completed migration,. of the City 'Cierk~'s proprietary: database- stored on
3o equipmenT. no longer .supported. into a robust standardized: database- that. allows
3] quicker refneval and wider use through°out'the City •and shared with~rfhe public.
3z Update.d the G;ity"'s Conflict. of Interest Code and initiated the City's.efrst:annual
;33 FP,PC Filers' Workshop .open to the,publie. ~ •
34 • Revised and updated. policies and p,rocedures-fo"r.: appointing Board, Committee,
3s and Commission Members: ~ ~ . - -
36 Deyelop.ed the City ,Internet Master • wPlan and initiated administration and
37 facilitation of'the City'sJnternet and Intranet. programs.. ~: -•~
3s Deve oiled the City Records and. I'nformatiori Management {RLM) Program
39 Manual and initiated. ad .ministration and,. facilitation of~the City`s~RIM Prograi~n.
ao • Assisted with . the .relocation of the: 1Nater Resources •and Conservation
41 Department •at City Hall on the lower'Ievel by inventorying and moving,.all of the
42 City's records located there to an interim .holding f,acilit~i. .=- -.
43 _-
44 Vice Mayor Torliatt, asked the. Clerk. to provide the: Citya we,b bite address'#orthc-':b'enefit
4s of the public and acknowledged her efforts towards: the improvement of the City!s
46 Internet presence.
June 8, 2000 VoL 35, Page' 65
z Ms. Kline replied that the .address of the City's homepage was:
3 //www.ci.petaluma.ca.us. The Council's schedule as well as a schedule of City
4 meetings was updated and posted. on Friday,. each week: and. could be accessed from,-
s the City's homepage. The link. to the information is .entitled. "Schedule of Meetings:"
~ She reported that recently, a new page had been, posted with additional information
_ . .
7 about the City Council Members including'their pictures, -bins, and how to contact''th~em:
s 1Neekly; the current agenda for the next. scheduled Council meeting was posted. ~~ A
9 Council Member .had .request that she remind the public when communicating with the
to Council by e-mail to please provide a name and telephone number for Council in order
la to contact you.
lz
13 Council Member Cade,r-Thompson asked 'that the City Clerk's .Office ask the Petaluma
14 Community Access Channel (RCA) to post irifo,rmation about the City`s website.
15
1~ Ms. Kline replied yes.
17
is Council. Member Ke'Iler ,thanked Ms. Kline for her- work through the Clerk's Office in
19 getting things organized and well on the way to being comprehensive and
ao understandable.
zl
az Mayor Thompson. agreed and indicated that Council concurred.
23
24 Vice Mayor T.orliatt aClded an acknowledgement for Ms. Kline's attendance and..
is reporting of the countless hours of Council`s rneefings and minutes.
z6
z~ Council Member Keller asked Ms. Kline what the total amount of time. was spent at
Za Council meetings.
29
3o Ms. Kline replied the total was two hundred thirty hours since July 1, 1999.
31
3z City Council Budget,. Cty• Manager Budget; General Plan Budget
33
34 City Manager Fred Stouder noted that the General Plan Administration budget; while
3s there was money in the budget, was an issue Council, would focus on when adopting
36 the work plan.
37
3s Council Member- Cader-Thompson asked if the ,4,:00.0 requested by 'the Petaluma.
39 River Jazz Festival could be shared between the City of Petaluma and the Pef_alu.ma
ao Area Chamber of Commerce.
41
42 Ms. Buffo replied that she, would be glad to do that. She stressed the importance of the.
43 City's support to organizations sponsoring these events such as the Chamber of
44 Commerce, Petaluma Downtown Association, and the Petaluma Ballet, to name a few:
as Without the City's support, they would not happen.
46
Vol. 35, Page 66 June. 8, 2000
. p~ 9
2 th ne Mtha r adlibteen a comheshed Mn sager for hel in the Council accomplish all the
g p ,year as he stated earlier in his address and
3 noted she was ;glad that Mr. Stouder was the City Manager.
4
g ~ ~ ~ ~g. ~ ~ ~ p . ~ ty
6 Mana lementbncludeetabs andhotr s b tabs nnthe G;ene~lcGo a nment sect on b;
Y
?.department or'grouping, plus an index that stated where each section began.
a ~
4
r. Stouder thanke
.9 M' ;d Council Member Torliaff `for her comments and added, that Council
.io "may"want `to weigh din and add to the nar[ative that was presented.
~~
~2 Council Member Keller mentioned that he had a conversation that afternoon with, the..
13 City ,Clerk. She had asked hirrm_ to clarify .:a previous request to make 'the :budget
14 document available online. The discussion eptaile:d what kind ~of format would b:e useful,
~s how .many people would acfually go through the entire. budget, and that perhaps .the
P6 documentahould be .made avail'abfe in its printed form and on a com:,,pact disc (CD,) next
r7 year. The incorporation of CD technology fo .this process was en~iconmentally sound,
~s and offering online summary budget pages going back three to five years::and available
r9 projections by department. The departmental goals and objectives would be well placed
zo on the de ~ artmental a es' with a reference or link to the budget summary p g e
p P 9 a e wher,
2~ those items were. shown. The.budget.section would. be in a shorter form, cross-indexed
zz to the departments, fully searchable by program;, that 'is, if someone wanted to: find out
i3 what was going on with the ,Polly Klaas; Center.,. did not krio_w what deparfinent `was
as responsible for it, they would beable to find this out, as well ,as information about the.
is budget, program, and objectives were; to name a #ew. He wanted the formatting. done:
z6 this year so That within the next year or two integrating the budgets and' 'the.
27 departmental pages would be very nice and very .helpful.
zs
z~ Mr. Stouder replied that City Management. was approximately two-thirds of the way
3o through the transition to; ;the format they thoughf .they needed to use to make if
31 comprehensive but' simple.. He 'indicated. that ;Council Member Kelley's comments could
3i be incorporated into that process and may appear tas a rneasurernent f.or next. yea_r.., If
33 that can be easily adjusted to and transferred online, that' meant they had accomplished
34 that measurement.
35
36 Service Level: Enhancement Requests
37
3s Mr. Stouder referred to the City's Budget Message; noting the. inclusion of a Service
39 LevefEnhancement folder with projects totaling, $5 million. Deliberately, City
4o Management: recommended. 'not -funding any of them. He then provided: a background
4~ summary of the' program and elarifie,d its purpose,. The :,program .was a tool to identify
4a what City Management. needed to actually do'the;.job that was currently expected' or to
43 meet quality of ;life .objectives. that Council had' identifier~j and associated costs..
44 Instead; the increased ~reve,nues at year-end were placed into_ reserves resulting ih.. a
4s true
46
June 8, 2000
Vol. 35, Page 67
i five percent General Fund Reserve of $1.4 million, $600,000 in Equipment
2 Replacement. Also, past loans or transfers .had been replaced and the Accrued- Liability
3 Risk Management ,Fund increased., He concluded that his .recommendation was not to
a fund. any of the Service Level. Enhancements as submitted and review them at :mid-
s year. If there were compelling needs at that time, it would be brought back to Council''s
6 attention. There was. a $371;Q00 year-end balance, not obligated, for this fiscal year.;
~ That amount was in addition to the reserves.
8
9 Council Member Healy concurred with the City Manager's recommendation. He
to continued that the previous evening there had. been discussion about an increase in
11 staff positions for the Water Resources and Conservation Department that had been
lz included with the ;Service Level Enhancements,, but he understood that City
13 Management. was- addressing those separately.
14 ~`
is Mr. Stouder replied yes.
16
17 Vice Mayor Torliatt added that the Service iLevel Enhancement document provided
la information for people in the community wfo. wanted to donate money or items.
19 R
zo
21
zz
23
24
2s
26
27
zg
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
as
46
Council Member Keller thought if was important to consider the staffing. He read from
page 165 of -the budget. document; "at two thousand, seven hundred and: thirteen
requests fore service, ~emecgency medical responses. constitute seventy-one percent of
the total emergency calls by/in the Petaluma .Fire D"epartment.;.Further call analysis:
reveals that eight Hundred fifty ~of,~ahose~responses were to scenes of accidents: On.
approximately two hundred seventy occasions. oast year,;,. because of multiple
simultaneous emergencies', `the~.Fire:~Department was without the ALS ambulance.. This
was a fifteen.. percent increase from the previous year. -These lapses in coverage ranged
from a few moments up to an hour or ,more. We are= regularly; .at an increasing rate,
failing to meet an Ambulance Division'Goal'. of maintaining ,available ALS resources
within our response area. Petaluma Fire Department is- running out of ambulances two
hundred seventy times per year. During. these instances, Petaluma relies on ALS
coverage from ambulances based out. of Santa Rosa. Core area response time is
twenty to thirty minutes longer, clearly .well above the four-minute response time
standard recognized by this community. The necessity of transporting patients to out-of-
area hospitals exacerbates the chances of` a resource shortage due to the. ,exposure.
caused 'by the lengthy transport times. Currently„ two hundred .eighty-five of our calls,
thirteen percent, result in transports to out-of=area hospitals. Regional. Traarna Center
will soon be opened at one of Santa Rosa area's hospitals. As a result ofi the
application of trauma triage criteria to patients in the field,. it is reasonable to expecf that
the number ofi patients transported. to Santa Rosa. will .increase."
He wanted to see what the staffing requests were from the Fire Department in order to
take a closer look at this situation and so the public understands, very clearly; to what
level of service the City was willing to commit for the community. Currently, there were
gaping holes. This request was first on his list to #und from the Service Level
Enhancements presented.
Vol. 35, Page 68 June 8, 2000
2 NEW BUSINESS.
Added as an :urgency item- by vote:. of the Council at the: beginning of` the meeting:
Discussion. and: Possible. .Action Regarding Direction to the Sonoma County
Transport_ation:,Authority Regarding Comments on City of'Rohnert Park's General
Plan; Section TR-21A and TR-2113 (Transportation Cha{ater), Interyurisdictonal
Coordination.
io .Council .Member Keller referred to an excerpt, from SCTA's agenda. He noted he would
~~ not be able to attend the meeting, however, Vice Mayor Torliatt would be~ there. An
iz issue had come ,up ih the revisions to `Rohnert~ Park's Ge.ne,ral Plan with regard to their
13 annexation. The traffic figures provided ,by .C.rane Eng:ineer.ing indicated that in fwerity
~4 years there would be a IeveP of: service. rating of "F" going through Fenngrove:, He then
~s referred to TR 21--A in Chapter~4~ of the Transportation Chapter:
16
~~ ...work with Sonoma County,,, Cify.of Santa Rosa; City of Cotati, City- of
~ s Petaluma,. as contributing ,jurisdictions: and SCTA to plan and ~rr-plement
19 selected improvements ,necessary ~to mitigate improvements of increased
zo traffic congestion on major roads and intersections in Penngrove. The city
z~ shall contribute its fair share of .thee dotal cost of regiana/ mitigation plan
a2 provided that city's part-,cipation is roughly proportional to traffic i_rnpacts
z3 from new development from Rohnert Park: City's payment of its fairshare
24 or other contribution, is .based on the ~regio. nal rnitigatic~n plan adopted by
zs the Board of ~Supervisoirs and each o_f the contributing jurisdictions. A
z~ financing plan for ahe regional mitigation ,plan approved by fhe ,Sonoma.
z~ County Board` of~ Supervisors and ,each of the:' contributing jurisdictions. -
zs New deve/opment,~that confribu#es to the traffic impacts .to be mitigated by
29 the project receives ,final approval byth'e city and each of the-contributing
3o jurisdictions hasp appropriated its fair share to the regional mitigation:
3 ~ project.
32 -
33 He expressed the importance of the C:ty,being clear about what it was trying to pursue;
34 what direction should be pursued; through.SCTA.
35
36 Council.. Member Maguire thought an issue.: -that..would come up was whether the
3? Supervisors wanted. to relinquish that authority allowing SCTA to function as -a."decision
3s making body. He supported SCTA. being a decision making body.
39
4o Vice Mayor Torliatt .had been the unofficial represen"tative for the City for a gr..oup in
4~ Rohnert Park working. on their Environ:merifal Impact ;Report° (EiR). The group. had
42 approved th:e language: ,included in. the EI.R in this ,concept. She would fake the
43 message to SCTA and report back to the Council based on. their input.
44
45
June 8, 2000 Vol. 35, Page: 69
1 PUBLIC COMMENT
z
3 Bryant Moynihan stated that, as a point of order, Council's discussion on this topic was
4 ,inappropriate as he did not believe there was any urgency and voiced his objections to
s City Management's administrative handling of the agenda relative to getting information
6 to the public in an organized, timely manner.
s IVlayor Thompson responded that as a result of Council. not having the opportunity to
9 have a special meeting to discuss the issue. prior t`o SCTA's meeting the following
to Monday afternoon, they .had agreed they wanted to have the discussion then.
11
12 Council Member Keller noted for the record that -there 'had been a unanimous vote ey
13 the Council that this was. an urgency item. There~~was a. policy direction to be discussed.
14 at SCTA on. Monday. The SCTA agenda .and packet was .not delivered to the Council:
is until yesterday, (June 7}. That did not .allow sufficient time to schedule the item on an
16 agenda and have a full public discussion. There would be opportunity for full public
1~ discussions and decision-making future agenda. ;He welcomed the public's
is participation at SCTA on Monday afternoon at 3:15 p.m. at the planning office and
19 conference room.
zo
21 Council Member Healy referred to the substance of the issue and queried whether it
zz was appropriate for Rohnert Park ao include as a mitigation measure. in its EiR, a
z3 mechanism that. required. ,buy-in by other jurisdictions and~a mechanism to -be placed
24 that was not `in place. He thought it was premature. for Rohnert Park to proceed with
zs their other plans without agreement from the other jurisdictions.
26
a~ Vice Mayor Torli.att stated Rohnert Park was trying to ,get through its EIR process. They
as had stated .their willingness to contribute to the fund. The other jurisdictions were not
29 obligated until there was an agreement. It was recommended as a step forward in
3o working together.
31
3z Council Member Healy replied that the interesting conundrum was that if no one
33 challenged. the legal adequacy of the EIR, Rohnert Park could proceed to build out their
34 General Plan with no assurance that any of the mitigation measures would happen.
35
36 Vice Mayor Torliatt noted that had occurred in almo f every city with most~of the traffic
3~ studies for E(R's on Highway 101. She wondered what would happen if it was athree-
3s lane highway instead of a two=lane highway.
39
4o Council Member Keller stated EIR's existed that for Highway 101 were CalTrans'
al concern. He thought this situation presented ,a significant step in changing that Thinking. .
4z He agreed with Councif Member Healy that. mitigation for a project or an adverse.
43 condition/impact, as in this case, in a General Plan, could be legally mitigated by an
44 intention to have a plan to address the mitigation, especially one that depended on
4s other jurisdiction's cooperation and assent. He wanted the language, "The city shall
46 contribute its fair share of the total cost of a regional mitigation plan provided that city's
Vol. 35, Page 70
June 8,.2000
~ participation is roughly proportional to, trafific impacts. from ,new development in, Rohnert
z Park" to be changed.: I;t was Rohnert Park's existing development baseline contribution
3 and additional, contributions for new development for'Petal'uma, Penngrove, .Cotati, and
4 the County.
6 Councif Member Maguire acknowhedged that this was a tep 'forward for Rohnert Park.
~ It did present legality issues as far as California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).was
s concerned. Rohnert Park had committed to pay a fair share; even if, if is just. an
9 additional increment; To go back and assess for mitigations oii things That had. alf ready
io been approved was impossible,
~~
rz Council Member Keller- .noted that was where he questioned the definition of ~a
13 "contributing jurisdiction.share.."
ra
~s Council :Member Maguire did not see that` (herewould be significant progress on this in. .
~6 .the next few years. -
~~
~9 they would : dderess theirepled that SCTA had stated that;. in tf~~e next couple of .months,,
ole i'n the County with transportation planning.
zo
z~ Council Member`Magure supported th..at.
zz
z3 Council Member Cader-Thompson expressed the 'importance of identifying then origin of
z4 traffic. It was not. all coming from Petaluma going into PenngYave. Traffic patterns in the
zs morning 'on Old Adobe Road arid. Lakeville had increased nfilow into the; area, where
z~ previously; it went in the opposite. direction.
za
..
zs Council Member Healy referred to point made by Council Member Torliaft that he found
z9 ~interesting,'that is, the tie-in to Highway 101. Old Adobe Road, PetaLGma'..Hill Road, ..and
3o Stony Point Road; Alano Road were used as 'by-passes to the congestion on Highway
31 101. He preferred the. emphasi's be on the Highway 101 corridor rather than .on ;the by-
sz pass roads creating other problems.
33
3a ADJOURN
35
36 The meeting,adjourned' at 8:15 p.m.
37
38
39 - E. C ar Thompson, `Mayor
4o ATTEST:
41
42
Beverl J. Kline Cit Ci r
Y_,
Y y
45
nc >k ~k >k ~k >1=