HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 06/07/2000June 7, 2000 Vol. 35, Page 43
1 City of Petaluma, California
2 Minutes of a Special City Council Meeting
3 Preliminary Budget Hearing
4
5
6 Wednesday, June 7; 2000
7 Council Chambers
s
9
10 The City Council of the City of Petaluma met on this day at 7:00 p.m.
11 .
12 ROLL CALL
13
14 PRESENT-,, Cader-Thompson, Healy, Keller.(8:10 P.M.), Maguire, Thompson, Torliatt
15 ABSENT: Hamilton',•Keller
16
17 PLEDGE OFALLEGIANCE
1s -
19 At the request .of Mayor Thompson; Victor Chechanover led the Pledge of Allegiance.
20
21 PUBLIC COMMENTS
22
23, None
24
25 COUNCIL.COMMENTS
26
27 Council Member Cader-Thompson congratulated all the seniors graduating from high
28 school this, week and .encouraged them to go -on to college in order to have good
29 careers.
30
31 COUNCIL AND CITY MANAGEMENT REPORTS
32 r
33 None
34
35 AGENDA.CHANGES, ADDITIONS. AND DELETIONS
36 r
37 None
38 UNFINISHED BUSINESS
39
40 1. Discussion and Possible Direction Regarding Fiscal Year 00-01 Budget Hearing.
41 (Stouder/Cornyn)
42
43 City Manager Fred Stouder thanked Assistant City Manager Gene Beatty, Housing
44 Administrator Bonne Gaebler, and in particular Management Consultant Paul
45 Marangella, for creating a simpler, easier to understand budget document format. The
46 document was consistent and necessary to all the work done on the Army Corps of
47 Engineers flood project and the bond issue.
Vol. 35, Page 44 June.7, 2000
1 Redevelopment Budget
2
3 Assistant City :Manager Gene Beatty reviewed the accomplishments of the Petaluma
4 Community Development Commission (PCDC) during Fiscal -Year 1999-2000 as
5 follows:
6
7 PCD Proiect Area -
8
9 i Completed 2000 Tax. Allocation Bond Financing
10 . Completed "Five Year Implementation Plan"
11 . Completed PCDC Project Area Plan Amendment
12 • Completed Project Area Alternatives Analysis
13 ® Significantly Improved the,PCDC Budget and Forecast ,
14 . Completed Seismic Retrofits (Un -Reinforced Masonry (U;EiM) for Two Buildings)
15
16 Central Business District Proiect Area:
17
18 . Supported Formation of f a. Business Improvement District
19 . Completed Phase I of CBD (Central Business District) Plan Amendment Process
.20 . Completed Reimbursements for Seismic Retrofits (URM) The Five Buildings
21
22 Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund:
23
24 ® Completed Construction on Vintage Chateau:
25 --- 240 units of low-income senior housing
26 ® Received two HOME Grants to provide:
27 -- 23 units of low-income senior, housing
28 --- 87 units,of."workforce housing
29 9 Provided, through the Shelter, 13,000 -bed nights for homeless families
30 ® Rehabilitated 19 homes of low-income seniors
31
32 Management Consultant Paul Marangella reviewed the Summary of "the Proposed
33 Budget for the Redevelopment Agency as follows:
34
35 Beginning Fund Balance: ($15..4 Million)
3636 Revenues: ($ 7.2 Million)
37 Transfers In: ($,4:9 Million)
38 Appropriations: ($.10.5' Million)
39 Transfers Out: ($ 3.6 Million)
4o Ending Fund Balance: ($13.4 Million)
41
42 Significant developments of the Petaluma Community Development Commission Work
43 Plan were presented as:
44
45
46
June 7, 2000 Vol. 35, Page 45
1 Proposed Petaluma Comm unitv'Development Proiect Area: "
2
3 • Obtain Congressional Authorization and Appropriation for Payran Reach Flood
4 Management Project at 75%
5 ® Complete Central Petaluma Specific Plan
6 ® Acquire Easements. for Pedestrian/Bike Trail from Lakeville Bridge to East
7 Washington Street
s • Complete the Engineering Safety Study for the Water Street Trestle
9 ® Complete Renovation of the Polly Klaas Center
10 ® Complete Analysi''s of the Highest_ and Best Use of City Owned Properties at the
11 Auto Niall location
12
13 In the Central Business District Area, Mr. Marangella summarized the significant plans
14 as follows:
15
16 ® Focus on the Plan Amendment and Adding Two Areas to the District
17 ® Seismic Retrofitting of Five Buildings
la • Completion of the Keller Street Parking Garage (scheduled to be completed during
19 the next fiscal year and hopefully increase the parking lot revenue)
20
21 Housing Administrator Bonne Gaebler addressed low and moderate. incp"me houising
22 and recalled that the Housing Budget had been approved on May 1' 2000, and asked if
23 Council had any questions.
24
25 Council had no questions at this time.
26 -
27 Mr. Marangella then referred to the Debt Service Fund and indicated a proposal to
28 replace a reserve as required by the bond issue. Approval had been received to
29 replace that with a surety thereby freeing up $600,000.00 from the 1992 bonds. A
3o number of things had occurred since Council had first received the budget document
31 and changes included:
32
33 e The bonds sold on June 6, 2000 and the final figures were now available, that is; the
34 debt service numbers, the debt service reserve, and replacement of the reserve_ with
35 a surety that provided the City with the use of $1.6 million for.projects.
36 There had been an increased cost of issuing the bonds due to the: purchase, of
37 insurance to qualify for a triple "A" rating.
38 The Payran Flood Management Project figures were updated based on Council's
39 recent action.
40
41 A revised, detailed spreadsheet reflecting the changes was provided toa the Council. At
42 the request of the City Manager, Mr.. Marangella provided a brief overview ofl the.
43 analysis of the proceeds of the bonds, $17.8 million, the cost of issuance was $569,000
44 (that included the insurance and surety purchased). At the beginning of the fiscal year,
45 the City had a $1.9 million deficit in the Project that had been paid and,an additional
Vol. 35, Page 46 June 7, 2000
1 $5.3 million during the year, and established. a $6.8 million reserve for the balance of
2 the Project, leaving a $3.2 million dollars available ,for other projects.
3
4 Mr. Stouder pointed out that the efforts of the City Council to take a lead on the
5 authorization, appropriation was worth a minimum of $12.1 million dollars.
6
7 Mr. Marangella continued 'that taking into account all 'funds; that is, the- tax"increment
s funds the City had, corning into the large district, during, the, current year,1here was. a
9 total of $10.5 million 'in reserves: $6.8 million from the flood reserve and' $3:7 million
10 from the remaining fund balance. 'Next year, those figures were, projected at $8.8
u million, the following year, $7.3 million, indicating a fairly healthy reserve: 'Depending
12 on the extent to which the City received. additional .federal funding,- the bottom line
13 would go up substantially.
14
15 Vice Mayor Torliatt questioned Mr. •Marangella regarding the. Proposed Petaluma
16 Community_ Development Project Area Plan, "Acquire Easements for Pedestrian/Bike
17 Trail 'from ,Lakeville :Bridge to East Washington Street," and asked if that was on
18 Lakeville Street.
19
.20 Mr. Marangella replied that it was not on Lakeville Street; it was. along the western side
21 of the River.
22
23 Vice Mayor Torliatt clarified that,that was south of the .bridge. She thought: that as the
24 next step, pending reimbursement of flood control money, the Council needed to make
25 & list' of projects they wanted to have implemented.
26
27 Mr.-;Stouder concurred: The sequence would be the final or official review:and adoption
28 .by the.,Council. of_?the Central. Petaluma Specific Plan, then the Capita[, Improvement
`29. Plan,.,followed by actual projects.
30
31 Council Memb.er., Healy noted that the materials provided indicated there was, hope or
32- an expectation that the Armory replacement could' be ready in two years. He wanted
33 Council to be updated in the future.
34-
-35
4-35 Ms. Gaebler replied thaf,she would be happy to provide the information.
36
37 PUBLIC COMMENT
38
39 Victor Chechanover,, 23201 Marylyn, asked, regarding debt service. on the tax allocation
4o bonds, what the termof the bonds were.
41
42 Mr. Marangella replied, "thirty years."
43
44 Mr..,Chechanover inquired, how thatcompared to other municipal -bonds.
45
June 7, 2000 Vol. 35, Page.47
1 Vice Mayor Torliatt noted that the Council had received information regarding the tax
2 allocation bonds that reflected_ a triple "A" rating and offered to provide copies of the
3 material to Mr. Chechariover.
4-
5 Mr.' Stouder noted that the bonds sold at four hundred basis points below the original
6 estimate.
7
s Mr. Marangella concurred. The true interest cost rate was 5.785%. There had been
9. seven bidders competing for the bonds. The financial advisors were surprised and
to pleased. Stone and, Youngberg was purchaser.
I1
12 Executive Director Samantha Dougherty, Petaluma Downtown Association, Inc., asked
o if Council.had any questions regarding the Redevelopment Budget.
. k
14
15. Council had no questions.
1'6" -
17 'END OF PUBLIC COMMENT
1s
19 Water Resources and Conservation Budget
20
21 Mr. Stouder reviewed the sphere of responsibilities of the newly created Department of
22 Water Resources and Conservation as part of the City's reorganization accomplished
23 during the last fiscal year. Included was the design, engineering, and construction .of
24 the $55 million+ wastewater facility over the next three to.five years, the completion of
25 the $34 million flood control project, water source and quality, surface water
26 management among others.
27
28 Director of Water Resources and Conservation Tom Hargis, assisted by Water
29 Operations Supervisor Steve .Simmons; provided a PowerPoint presentation of excerpts
30 of the department's budget. The reorganization combined all water issues as the
31 responsibility of the department that provided interaction, interrelation, and blending of
32 solutions for problems. The department had twenty-nine personnel and was providing
33 cross training, among, field people to increase efficiency in ,operations.
34
35 One challenge the department faced was funding for preventative maintenance of the
36- storm drain system, pollution prevention, and surface water, management. Mr. Hargis
37 expressed that a huge priority was having a Finance Manager Within .the department
38 who. could look at sources of funding for projects, revenue streams, rate increases,
39 flow -,proportionate billing, for water and sewer, and project the needs of the department
4o ten to twenty years in the future to get the City, on a sound financial' basis. There also
41 was a need .for an additional Associate Civil Engineer in order for the department to
42 continue with an Inflow and Infiltration (1/1) Program, for example, to do additional
43 capital projects, and to manage all existing projects. Participation in the General Plan
44 -update was another area of major activity.
45
Vol. 35, Page 48 June 7, 2000
1 Effective July 1,, the Sonoma County Water Agency would charge; the City a .little.•less
2 than seven percent more than what the City currently paid. for- water. The City fast'
3 increased water rates in 1994. The rates 10 the City had gone.,up, approximately t\nienty-
4 two percent since the City had raised rates. A ten percent water rate iricrease to the
5 customer was proposed in the budget to fund a portion of :the staffing and equipment to
6 keep from depleting reserves, and to pass along some of the rate increases that
7 occurred. The same wastrue with sewer rates.
s
9 Mayor Thompson stated. the report was .very revealing, in that it. indicated a twenty, -two
to percent increase in the cost of the water since 1994 that the City had•:absorbed.;
u -
12 Mr. Hargis replied that it caused the City to rely on reserves. ...There had been some .
13 increase in water sales: that helped. The •department had done -anumber of, things,, to .
14 improve efficiency such as capital projects, leak protection; preventative maintenance,,'
15 and the incorporation of technology rather than increased staffing_ . a
16
17 Mayor Thompson asked if the twenty-two, percent increase included, the seven percenf
is Sonoma County Water Agency increase. r
19 .
20 Mr. Hargis .confirmed that it did. His understanding was that the Sonoma County Water,.
21 Agency had raised the rates a little less than seven percent.
22
23 Mayor Thompson inquired rif another rate increase was anticipated next.year.
24
25 Mr. Hargis replied that there was. The Water Agency had indicated that every year for
26 the next five years there would be a similar increase.
27
28 Mr. Stoude.r added that a joint water -sewer comprehensive. rate study was planned that
29 would sort some of the costs out. An initial, incremental increase would reduce the
3o amount of a larger increase in about two to five years and catch up With the capital
31 improvements.
32
33 Mayor Thompson replied he thought City Management should come. forward .with :a
34 twelve percent increase and the following year, an -other twelve percent increase to catch
35 up.
36
37 Council Member Healy pointed out that in looking at the, breakdown of costs of the
38 water utility, the purchase of water was one-third to one-fourth of the total, costs ;of the
39 water service provided to the community. A twenty-two percent increase multiplied by
40 one-third of the cost structure was about a seven percent overall increase. However, it
41 was certain that there: had been general inflation with respect to the oth-er two-thirds. It -
42 could not be sorted out in this discussion. "
43
44 Mr. Stouder added that one could :argue surplus :revenue as having true'reserves and,
45 .advised that using down the reserves not be considered.
46
June 7, 2000 Vol. 35; Page 49
1 Vice Mayor Torliatt wanted Mr. Hargis to review some of the projects, such as 1/1, and
2 their associated costs.
3
4 Mr. Hargis replied that the department had obtained a computer software system that
5 monitored specific study areas. This program would enable them to determine
6 requirements and costs of .an 1/1 capital improvement program. An additional Associate
7 Engineer was needed to spend time on that project as well as with the field crews to
8 develop specific projects, design and implementation. He would propose working with
9 the real estate community toward a condition on re -sales that required an upgrade for
10 water conserving fixtures, a sewer lateral inspection for repair, and/or do an 1/1 on the
11 sewer lateral.
12
13 Vice Mayor Torliatt stated that was a significant step for 1/1 with little cost to the City.
14 She wanted to know what other projects were considered for 1/1 on the City streets.
15
16 Michael Ban noted that the City had looked at other 1/1 programs had been effective. In
17 El Cerrito, the sanitary district had a very successful program. The City hoped. to
18 emulate their model program next year. Laying the groundwork to resolve significant
19 problems was a long-term project. Once significant problems had been identified, 'the
20 investment of dollars towards those solutions would prove to be far more effective and
21 economical.
22
23 Vice Mayor Torliatt asked whether City Management was able to quantify the reduction
24 in amounts to the sewer treatment facility.
25
26 Mr. Ban replied that the sanitary district in EI Cerrito had established program savings
27 of about eighty percent over a fifteen -year period. It could be included with our GIS
28 program.
29
30 Council Member Maguire asked if the community they studied had older pipes and
31 streets.
32
33 Mr. Ban replied the system was old. and similar to Petaluma's. The program; as
34 envisioned, would 'int _egrate with the City's geographic information :s.ysterri (GIS,):
35 Conceivably, sewer crews would have computers with them that monitored problems
36 and could relay the information directly to the City's GIS and keep their logs in that.
37 manner.
38
39 Council Member Maguire asked if the City currently had the tools to accomplish the
40 groundwork necessary.
41
42 Mr. Ban replied that it did not', adding that what was required was beyond the scope of
43 the sewer crew. The City would probably contract out the television work.
44
45 Council Member Maguire asked Mr. Ban to clarify if there would be an ongoing contract
46 until the data was assembled.
Vol. 35, Page 50 June 7, 2000
2 Mr. Ban replied- that initially the City would contract out for the services.: When. the
3 database was established and depending on how the -,program evolved, conceivably,
4 the City could take it, over.
5
6 Council Member Maguire asked if the database could I be assembled in less than fifteen
7 years.
8
9 Mr. Ban. repli'edthat it would take about fiVe or six years to model the entire system due
to to the amount.of pipe.
11
12 Council Member Maguire added that the City would then be able to prioritize and repair.
13
14 Mr. Ban agreed. - Ideally,duringspring and summer, monitoring and television.
15 inspections would take 0106 . a and as the- information came in, a prioritization list of
16 project would I d be developed.. , The design. would, occur in_ the late fall, and early winter
17 and the project put out:. to bid in spring, simbl taneou.sly modeling part of the system
ig while repairing other parts.
19
20 Council Member Healy agreed that additional, positions would be a wise long-term
21 investment. He inquired, regarding capitalim ' provements, about a reference, on Page
,22 471 of the budget document, the. $.5.4. millibn for two railroad bridges. He wanted the
23 City to pursue funds for this project from Washington, D.C..
24
25 Mr. Stouder ;indicated that the project was part of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
!6 project funding, was apart of that budget, and the outcome of the authorization.
'27
28 Council Member Healy understood that. What he heard from, Mr. Stouder was that this
29 issue would be ongoing depending- on development in Washington. He clarified: that
30 City Management was not asking the Council to approve the $5.4 million.
31
32 Mr. Stouder replied th'at, he was, correct. He reiterated from his earlier comments that
33 other than projects that were currently underway, or -clearly -identified' in the one-year
34 ex r n the Capi tal Improvement
expenditure -budget, the City was, 'providing a disclaime o-
35 Budget. It was aCapital Improvement Plan; a `true capit,alj improvement program was
36 not in place, that is, a clear . �five7yeAr project list Where the money was in the bank,
37 coming and/or guaranteed.
38
39 Council Member Cader-Thompson thanked Mr. Hargis for planning for the future to
40 improve the City's infrastructure., Relative to Water, And sewer, rate increases, she.
41 suggested that Council make one decision -about yearly increases so the matter 'did' not
42 need to be reviewed and acted upon every.year,
43
44 Mr. Hargisreplied-t that, was one of the areas a Finance Manager'fot the department was
45 needed tohelp guide the department.
46
June 7, 2000
Vol. 35, Page,51
1 Council Member Cader-Thompson was pleased that a Finance Manager position for
2 the department was being considered.
3
4 Mr. Stouder clarified the position was not a Finance Department or financial
5 management position. It .was a Financial Project Manager, that is, grants, strategies,
6 and possibly rate studies, but it was closer to a Financial Analyst Grant Manager than a
7 traditional Finance Manager.
8
9 Vice Mayor Torliatt noted that the river dredging was not included in the Fiscal Year
l0 2000 - 2001 and asked about the department's approach to this matter in the future in
11 addition to the flood control' project as both projects involved the U.S. Army Corps of
12 Engineers
13
14 Mr. Hargis replied that he was obtaining applications from the California Maritime
15 Navigation Association, a lobbying group that works on the Army Corps of Engineers in
16 Congress., to fund navigational projects. Mr. Marangella included the Redevelopment
17 Agency's budget, funds for a two-year cycle to try to take the island out in between the
18 four-year cycles. The City Manager `and Congresswoman Woolsey's Office were
19 currently looking at a way to get an appropriation back into the budget or some way of
20 funding the two-year dredging cycle. 2000 was the year the Corps should be on the
21 four-year cycle of dredging the Petaluma River. Typically the dredging would start in
22 the fall. There were no funds in the congressional budget.
23
24 Vice Mayor Torliatt asked that if. some of the 'funding was coming from the PCDC
25 budget- it be: 'shown as a transfer into the Water Resources and Conservation budget
26 and a budgeted item in the capital improvement projects.
27
28 Mr. Stouder replied that it could be or it could be a capital improvement project in the
29 Redevelopment Agency: In a conversation he had with Congresswoman Woolsey's
30 office recently, mention 'Was made that generally there were some rivers that. were
31 automatically part of the President's administrative request budget listed for dredging
32 every year. There were hundredsof other rivers that were dredged in cycles, randomly
33 selected dependent upon ,the U.S. Army Corps of. Engineers' funding. The current
:34 efforts of the Congresswoman were to get this year's dredging specifically authorized in
3s the supplemental appropriations, or named, and potentially have it added to the
36 administrative list for automatic funding on a regular basis. 'He asked Council to recall
37 recent conversations with the State Water Resources Agency, avenues that the City
38 had not pursued, to work in concert with other governmental entities and districts to
39 purchase and' share the equipment necessary for dredging.
40
41 Mr. Hargis thanked Mr._ Simmons for putting together the PowerPoint presentation for
42 the department's budget presentation.
43
44
45
46
Vol. 35, Page 52 June 7, 2000
1 PUBLIC COMMENT
2 , o
3 Victor Chechanover, 23201 Marylyn, asked the following questions :regarding the
4 Redevelopment Agency and the Marina.
5
6 1. What provisions were in-place to secure the repayment of loans to the. Marina and
7 Central Business District?
a
9 2. What was the total amount of the Marina loan still'outstanding?
10
r1 3. Was there a ;plan to make up the difference 'in the MOPA payments when they are
12 reduced by half next year?
13
14 Mr..Stouder. replied that there was ,not. an agreement with the state agency for the,
15 repayment of the loan;. there was not a revised schedule; and yes, the MAPA issue had
16 not been, resolved.. The City was working on it.
17
18 Council. Member Maguire noted that, a Supervisor told -him at a meeting he had
19 attended that recently they, had done a management study of Spud Point and 'it was
20 determined that the State Boating Agency could not do any better job of managing .the
Zi Marina than the County did' because of the state of the fishing_ industry. The State may
22 be forgiving the loan to the County and allowing the County to keep the Marina as well.,
23
24 Mr. Chechanover asked if there was a provision to repay the loan from the. PCDC
25 budget to'the'Marina fund during the, past eight years.
26
27 Mr. Stouder, replied that the 'State had met with the City several times over. the past,year
28 and had been very patient with the .City in attempting to work this out. The Marina loan
29 and, development of the Marina was predicated on additional° development occurring
3o allowing for taxes and revenues to pay the loans back. . The development had not
31 occurred.
32
33 Mr. Chechanover inquired, if the, Marina initially was. part of the Enterprise Fund; 'that is,
34 was it to pay its own way just like water and sewer.
35
36 Mr. Stouder replied that it was.
37
38 Mr. Chechanover continued. his inquiry with regard to ,'the Auto Center Special
39 Assessment. He had noticed that, there was an annual payment of $123,000 ,(inthe
40 PCDC Budget). and wanted, to know what had been spent, this ,year for the special
41 assessment subsidy. He asked if there was a, way to determinethe financial benefit to
42 the City, versus the cost of'this project or, in other words, what the bottom ;line, was ,on
43 this subsidy.. Regarding the. City's budget and with respect to. 'water recycling,
44 irrigation/disposal, he extracted a figure of $627,000 and asked. if that�was the total cost
45 to dispose of recycled wastewater. He was happy with the new format of the budget
46 document.
June 7, 2000 Vol. 35, Page -53
1 Mr. Ban replied to that the total budget for the water -recycling program was, shown
2 under the Water Resources and Conservation tab, WP 7, page 392, which outlined the
3 expenditures for the program. $500,000 was for the ranchers' management for
4 irrigation of their lands and $127,000 was for U.S. Filter monitoring the program., for
5 compliance with the permit.
6
7 Mr. Chechanover queried user fees. He could not find the revenue from the users for
s the fund. Also, there was a statement that the department had "continued meetings
9 with users during the year," and he wondered if there had been any progress in coming
10 to an amicable agreement to boost revenues, as opposed to costs. r
11
12 Mr. Hargis replied that the long-term vision of the City was to bring tertiarytreated
13 wastewater into the City, use it to offset potable water demands, irrigate Prince. Park
14 and Weissman, sell the water to the two golf courses, and get away from having .to pay
15 the ranchers to take ;the water. Until a_ new plant was operational, the City still. }had a
16 discharge prohibition 'to the River and needed a way to get rid of the water. The City
17 would continue to work with ranchers until there was an alternative supply.
18 Negotiations were to begin by July 2000 with the ranchers to see if an agreement could
19 be reached.
20
21 Bryant Moynihan spoke to what he perceived to be inaccuracies in the preliminary
22 budget document and expressed that he did not know how the Council could consider
23 adopting a budget that wasn't correct.
24
25 END OF PUBLIC _COMMENT
26
27
28 Public Facilities.and Services Budget
29
3o Director of Public Facilities and Services Rick Skladzien reported that his department
31 was also part of the City reorganization and would continue to undergo transition over
32 the next twelve to eighteen months. The department was challenged with developing a
33 mission statement that .described who they were,, what, they were going to do, and how.
34 they would function. They were also looking at their responsibilities for existing ,systems:
35 and facilities; that is, how .to maintain and improve, them,, and .how to .develop
36 information to produce reports and studies on what. needed' to be done to maintain
37 existing systems and facilities. A part of their transition included internal reorganizations
38 and a change in the number of divisions that made up .the .department. Development. of: _
39 strategies to increase: revenue sources such: as management of grants, and ,_special
40 programs to augment revenue shortages that had occurred was a priority. One of the
41 enhancements to the department included. a. Transportation Grants and ,.Budget
42 Manager who would provide the department with. an opportunity to aggressively, seek
43 and secure grants, integrate them with projects, and, in a timely manner, acquire ;the
44 funds by the time the project was completed. Another improvement to operational
45 efficiency had been coordination of the sign section and the signal tech division to. do
46 striping and painting simultaneously. Inventories would be done of the system, such -as
Vol. 35, Page 54 June 7, 2000
the.. street light inventory and a sign and signal inventory, to ascertain the number,
condition, and determine future, needs for replacement and/or' enhancement.
Vice May,.o"r T,orliatt stated the next istep, after thebudget was approved, was for
departments ;that had Capital Improvement Projects to develop a timeline of when the
projects would start and their anticipated completion. She asked if a calendar was
being generated with,whichthe Council monitor projects.
9 `Mr. 'Skladzien �repli'ed that the department had taken some preliminary steps in that
10 direction. With the assistance of an organizational development consultant, the
u department was .taking a look. at where. they were:, where they needed to go,. and
12 develop a calendar that consisted of not only of ,how the organization would develop
13 and train to meet the objectives .for multiple activities but to help plan for C,P (Capital
14Improvement Plan) improvements.
15
16 Mr. -Stouder noted that.a document had been provided.'to, the Council that elaborated on
17 the initial steps that the department had undertaken.
18
19 Vice Mayor Torliatt .expressed' that she thought one of the exciting features of 'this
20 budget was that it identified'. ,and tracked projects and she congratulated 'City
21 Management for their work. Their efforts supported the. Council representatives to .the
22 Transportation .Authority to lobby for the correct projects, at the correct times, and have
23 the political strength to get a'proj`ect funded.
24
25 Council Member, Cader-Thompson expressed her appreciation for all the work ,done .by
26 the Public Facilities and Services Department and noted her concern about the.. City's
27 ability to address necessary improvements and suggested .consideration of putting a
28 measure on the ballot at some time in the -future that, would increase revenues to get
29 these projects done. The City of Novato had recently approved a ballot. measure and
30 she suggested the City familiarize itself' with their process.
31
32 Mr. Skladzien responded that was an option to explore. Ha indicated that as the
33 department came- forward - with street condition, :traffic, and 'transportation facility
34 reports, they would provide a comprehensive approach to funding, such .as a
35 combination of using sales- tax; existing ,revenues, and grants, coming into the City.
36 The challengefor the department was :to use a ballot measure as the last resort- for a
37 funding mechanism.
38
39 . Council Member C.ader=Thompson agreed that it would be the last resort and stated the
40 citizens needed to take responsibility for the community and 'it took money to do that.
41
42 Council. Member Keller .acknowledged and thanked Mr. Skladzien and- City
43 Management for their efforts putting together the budget and. getting programs into
44 shape. Regarding, long-term ;street, maintenance ;issues,; he wanted to, see the fees for
45 trenches, any cuts into existing pavement, increased,,significantly by linear Ifoot. cut, as
Y
June 7, 2000
Vol. 35, Page 55
1 opposed to square foot, in order to establish a sinking fund for maintenance on them as
2 trench failures seemed to be one of the first failures in the street surface.
3
4 Mr. Skladzien indicated he had received information from another city in the State that
5 used that same approach. The department had discussed going into the boring,.
6 requiring/requesting boring wherever possible among other options.
7
s Council Member Keller wanted to know the cause of the condition of two City streets,
9 one being the South.. McDowell extension and related streets going into the business
10 and industrial parts in the, area, the other being the street going through Redwood
11 Business Park One. He wondered if the failures were a result of inadequate design,
12 roadbed preparation, or construction, and why the roads had failed so miserably. He
13 asked if there was potential to create ,a maintenance assessment district within the
14 business park. In the future, when business parks are developed, special maintenance
15 districts should be established to help defray future costs
16
17 Mr. Skladzien explained why he believed the streets, had failed and explained what he
18 recommended as remedies: He added that; the City had the latitude to improve the
19 design standards. `
20
21 Council Member Maguire'acknowledged'Mr. Sklad'zien's presence as a positive for the
22 community. He wondered if there was -a possibiliiy4jor increasing, revenues by enforcing
23 littering laws.
24
25 Mr. Skladzien replied1hat;this had not been his. experience.
26
27 Council Member Healy expressed his concern' regarding funding to address the
2s deterioration of the City's streets and 'echoed -Council Member Cade r-Thompson's
29 comments encouraging City Management.to be..innovative and bring back ideas to help
30 the City out of this box to estop the .deterioration. He was willing to consider taking
31 action such as the ballot measure the Cityof Novato had taken.
32
33 Mr. Skladzien agreed.
34
35 Council Member Healy asked about the $10,000 budget allocation for Stony Point Road
36 reconstruction.
37
38 Mr. Skladzien responded that he understood it to be a joint project with the County
39 providing they could get their issues resolved, with the two-inch overlay and allowing for
4o additional water holdings so they didn't create any further flooding upstream.
41
42 Council Member Healy thanked Mr. Skladzien.
43
44 Vice Mayor Torliatt questioned road improvements, specifically on East Washington at
45 Payran and Fourth at `D' Street. She wanted to see the incorporation of transportation
Vol. 35, Page 56 June 7;.2000
1 alternatives, .such as bicycle lanes, when significant 'street improvements were
2 developed.
3
4 Mr. Skladzien elaborated about, :how the City was looking at how to increase efficiency
5 and cut delays at locations. Key intersections with a lot of congestion, it was :important
6 to look at doing intersection rehabilitation., That would entail a CIP, as it was too
7 massive to accomplish what was being, proposed. This proposal, an interim solution;,
s was focused on; improvement_ to the flows, efficiencies,. within the existing rights -:of -way.
9
10 Vice Mayor Torliatt stressed that she wanted to make sure. the. City was, including, the
11 bicycle ,improvements from 'the_ Bike .Plan in coordinating significant intersection
12 improvements.
13
14 Mr. Skladzien agreed.
15 =
16 Council Member Cader-Thompson noted that the - Rainier Over -Crossing was, included
17 in the budget as a zero line item and that traffic, congestion relief, such as the Corona
18 Reach Cross -Town Connector, needed to be addressed 'by the Council and .that City
1g Management should budget for traffic, congestion solutions in -'this magnitude.
20
'21 Council Member Healy added thaf.•the:.-opportunity for discussion of proceeding with
22 cross-town connector issues was to: be part of the General Plan update process.
23 -
24
25 Finance Department Budget
26
27 Interim Finance Director Paula Gornyn ,gave a: brief , Overview • of the Finance
28 Department's, budget and highlighted,.challeh*- for the future year.
29 _
3o Council Member Cader-Thompson thanked. Paula and h`er•staff for their excellent work.
31
32 Mr. Stouder acknowledged Ms. 'Cornyn's .efforts .and elaborated on the improvements
33 made as a credit to her.
34
35
36 Human Resources Budget
37
38 Michael Acorne, Director of Human Resources/Risk Management reviewed briefly the
39 highlights sand successes, the department had achieved. over the past year. He noted
40 the major impact to, the department's budget was in Risk Management and their goal
41 was to increase reserves.
42
43 Mr. Stouder noted that $500,000 was put into ther Risk Management Fund to weigh in
44 against the $1-1L2 million in potential- liabilities,
45
June 7, 2000 Vol. 35, Page 57.
1 Council Member Healy acknowledged the progress of the department over the year anti
z he questioned the Performance Measure related to the sidewalk program.
3
4 Mr. Acorne deferred to Mr. Skladzien who elaborated on the status of the program.
5
6 Council Member Keller wanted to see Risk Management more proactive in its response
7 to programs that would alleviate some of the City's risks, that is, "trip -and -falls."
s
9 Mr. Acorne was looking at the transition of his department to include a Risk
10 Management Division.
11
12 Council Member Cader-Thompson read a. newspaper article regarding the pay for the
13 Council.
14
15 Mr. Chechanover questioned whether there were any employees for the City who made
16 less than $10.00 per hour'.
17
18 Mr. Acorne answered Mr. Chechanover questions.
19
20 Mr. Chechanover encouraged the City to continue to make sure the employees of the
21 City were paid the living wage.
22
23
24 Airport Budget
25
26 Assistant City Manager .Gene Beatty reported that Airport was in transition again this
27 year, with the Airport Manager position open. The City was to hold interviews for the
28 position the following afternoon. The budget for the Airport presented was .not
29 balanced. The Airport Commission had approved it and noted in a memorandum
30 submitted at places that,set forth some remedies to bring the budget into balance. The
31 City was behind in getting reimbursements for some earlier projects at the airport and
32 City Management was addressing that at this time. He was optimistic that r
33 shown in the past would be reimbursed in the coming fiscal year. He reviewed,.staffing
34 for the operation and noted that it was "bare bones." One of the recommendations that
35 he set forth was to increase rents; there had been an increase in the previous year.
36 City Management hoped to have Council approve the division's budget at this time with
37 the understanding they would come mid -year with an update on, how activities were .
38 going. The Airport was an Enterprise Fund and they needed to pay their own way.
39
40 Council Member Maguire, as Council liaison to the Airport Commission, had advised
41 the Commission at the time the last increases were considered for the hangars that this
42 would come about. As a small group, it was difficult to approve raising rents on
43 themselves. He had encouraged them to do a higher rent increase. Though they could
44 not quite bring themselves to do it, the groundwork had been laid to move forward and
45 recommend an increase.
46
Vol. 35, Page 58 June 7, 2000
1.
2 'Council Member Keller recommended that, .the rent increase not be considered. to'.cover
3 actual costs 'but include reserve monies for th.e• enterprise fund. Heexpressed his
4 dismay that users of the airport facilities were parking equipment in excess of $1'00;00.0
5 - $300,000 and the rental fees they paid did not cover the cost of day-to-day operations.
6 As an enterprise, the. program had to be. self-sufficient.
7
8 Council Member Maguire, agreed to relay that information to the Commission.
9
10 Council Member Cader-Thompson noted the importance of the airport to the
i1 community.
12
13 Council Member Healy asked City Management about the Administrative Support
14 charge.
15
16 Mr. Beatty deferred to Ms. Cornyn, and noted that it was a charge, assessed to all City
17 departments, for administrative overhead.
1s
1g Council Member,Healy-asked for clarification that City Management had recommended
20 a reduction. of $75,000 to $50,00.0, that $50,000 was higher than in, the recent, past,
21
22 .Ms. Cornyn replied that he was correct.
23
24 Mr. Beatty replied that that was his understanding. He added that once, the .nate
,25 increase was looked at that it _might have to ,be doubled to ten. percent with or r without
'26 concurrence of' the Airport Commission. The impact affected other areas of the City's
operation.
2s
29 Mr. Stouder reiterated that as an Enterprise Fund, it needed to be managed as such.
30
31 Mr. Beatty noted that `the rents were not ,much in :consideration of what was involved.
,32 -The City was 'ba_lancing, what was competitive with other airports and making the, facility
33 pay for, itself. If there were sufficient rate - increases,, the waiting list to tie -down in
34 Petaluma! would not be as long.
35 r:
36 Council Member Maguire added that Petaluma was nowhere near what the market
37 could bear..
38
39 Mr. Chechanover asked how much the shortfall of the Airport operation took from the
40 General Fund.
41
42 Council Member Keller responded $52,4..'00
43 ,
44
45
46
June 7, 2000
1
2 ADJOURN
3
4 At 9:100. m. the"meeting was adjourned
5
6
7
s ATTEST:
9
10
11 -
12 Beverly J. Kline, 'City Clerk
13
14
15
E. Clark Thompson, Mayor
16 ******
Vol. 35, Page 59