HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/26/1999June 26, 1999 ~ Vol. 33; Page'251`
1 -
2 City of Petaluma,,~C.alifornia, .. , ~. ..
3 Mihutes of a Regular ~ -
4 City Council Meeting
5
6
7 ~"
8 Monday; July 26, 1999
9 Council Charrabers
to
11 The City Council, of th`e City of Petaluma met on this date in the Council Chambers
12 at 6:00 p.m.
13
14 ROLL CALL
15
16 Present: Cadet-Thompson, Healy, KeNer, Maguire, Thompson
1~ (Hamilton and Torliatt arrived during the Closed Session)
is Absent: -None
19
20 PUBLIC COMMENTS
21
22 None
23 -
24 CLOSED SESSIO'IV
25
26 City Atforney Richard Rudnansky, announced the Closed Session items on the
27 Agenda as follows.:
28 ~~..
29 1. CONFERENCE 1NITH LEGAL COUNS'E~L -Anticipated Litigation.
3o Sigriificanf exposure to litigation pursuant to sub_di~ision (b) of Government
31 Code Section 54956:9 (1 matter)
32
33 2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR pursuant to
34 Government Code Section 54956.8 ~`
35 Property: 4.104 Lakeville Highway, APN'-017 170 and 068-01 Q=Q~26
36 Negotiating. Party:. Fred Stouder " , ~ ;; ..
37 Under Negotiations: Price, terms of payment; or both (Gray Property).
38 '
. _ - <-
39 Mayor Thompson asked the Council, .to adjourn to the City Manager'`s Conference
4o Room for discussion and possible- acfion on Closed 'Session items.
41
42 ;; ADJOURNMERIT
43 +
44 The meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m. ~ ~ .
45
Vol. 33, Page 252 July26, 1999
i RECQNVENED
2 ~-
3 The City Council reconvened the adj'o;urned Regular Meeting at 7:05 p.m. in the
4 City Council Chambers.
5
6 Mayor'Thompson an'hounced that no reportable ;action was taken on either of the
~ Closed Session items:
8
9 ROLL'CALL.
io
it Present::fader-Thompson, Hamilton,:Healy, Keller, Maguire., Thompson, Torliatf
12 Absent: None '
13
1°4 PLED'G'E OF` ALLEGIANCE'
is ,
i6 At the. request of Mayor Thompson, Rich Johnson 'led the Pledge of .Allegiance.
i~
i8 MOMENT OF SILENCE.
At the request. of Mayor Thompson,. a Moment of Silence was observed.
PUBLfC COMMENTS
•: Terrence: Garvey, 83 Maria Drive,, spoke regarding the wastewater sewer facility
and felt the earlier bids for design construction should' be accepted.
27 • Bill.. Hammerman,, Peta_I;uma Net, 443 Black Oak Drive, spoke, regarding
28 Petaluma'CocnmunityAccess and Telecommunications and gave suggestions.on
29 how the City could pay for the;aelecommunications.
30 ~ r
31 Onita Pellegri'ni, Petaluma Area Chamber of Commerce; 799 Baywood
32 Drive, spoke regarding the upcoming 1Naterfronf :Jazz Festival on Friday 8/13/99,.
33
34 • John Fitzgerald, Petaluma Ri~er..~Fesfival'. Associatimn, 1010 Lakeville Street-,
3s spoke regarding the Petaluma ~W'aterfcont Jazz .Festival. and fhe schedule of the
36 ALMA, which would arrive on ~ Friday, August. 13, and dock at: the .Foundry Wharf'
37 for the jazz `festival, and-:Saturday would dock at the Turriirig Basin for visits.
38
39 • Bob Marfin,a 171 Payran Street,, spoke regarding the work at;the Payran Bridge
4o area and aasked when, the ninety-.day watershed study would be available. at the
4,1 library.
42
43 •Director of,..Engineeri'ng Tom Hargis; reported that a. meeting. would be
44 held Thursday-night fo`r'~a presentation of preliminary information and receipt
45 of public, input.. The item was tentatively scheduled for a Council meeting in
46 late August and the report should be available for the .public two weeks
June 26, 1999
Vol. 33, Page 253
i before the Council '.meeting:. The meeting is of the Kenilworth Teen Center,
2 7:00-9:30 p.:m.
3
4 ® Bryant Moynihan, P.O. Box C, spoke regarding the agenda preparation. .
s and distribution, the schedule of meetings, and the budget. He referred to a
6 budget summary he submitted last Wednesday and stated. he felt the PCDC;
~ Redevelopment Agency, and the CIP (Capital Improvement Program)
s budgets should be reviewed concurrently with-the City Budget, ..not after the
9 fact, as they intertwine and the City is spending more than what is being
io taken in.
~~
i2 COUNC9L COMfVIENTS
13
14 Council Member Cader-Thompson commented about the vegetation growth by
is the Beacon station since the.. tanks were taken out. She also commented that she
16 had visited Northern California and noticed how well kept the roads were above the '
i~ county line. She wanted to know where Sonoma County tax dollars were going: " •
is
19 Council Member Torliatt reported on the-Sub .Committee meeting of SCTA (Santa
20 Clara Transportation Authority) -where Vision 2020 was discussed. She stated they -
21 would update the Congestion Management section that. has not been updated since
22 1995. She reported on the Tulsa 1•:996 Sales Tax Expenditure Policy on which the
23 citizens vote every five, years:.
24 -
2s Council Member Healy reported on a communication from the Napa County
26 Chamber of Commerce asking. for the City's support for Napa and Sonoma
27 Counties to continue using the 707 area code.
2s
29 Council. concurred that a letter of support should be written.
30
31 Council Member Keller reported on a communication from Sonoma Count"y
32 Transportation Authority regarding ahalf-cent sales tax increase for the November
33 ballot. He :asked that it be agendzed soon. He reported that he received a fax
34 from Dan Aguilar about a meeting with Supervisor Mike Kerns and May` or
3s Thompson regarding development of seventeen acres. He .asked:. what'. 'it was
36 about.
37
3s Mayor Thompson explained it was an information gathering meeting with the
39 neighbors on the Magnolia Avenue vacant site.
40
41 GOOD NEWS.
42 .
43 Mayor Thompson reported that the Caltrans "Petaluma Historic Downtown District"
44 signs had been: installed in ,June. There was a sign at Petaluma Boulevard North
4s and at Petaluma Boulevard South with directional signs off each exit.
46
Vol. 33, Page 254
July 26, 1999
i The. City Council had passed a resolution in March: supporting the installation of the
2 signs:. The cost;. including installa#on, was :$_3;000. Heritage Homes of Petaluma.
3 paid one thousand five hundred: dollars of the cost', Petaluma Downtown
4 Association paid' one thousand dollars, ,and the Petaluma Visitor Program paid five
s` hundred.
In January of this~year; a median island was installed on McDowell Boulevard North
from 'Old. Redwood Highway southerly past the .Orchard Supply Hardware driveway.
Theinstallation was necessary:, as vehicle collision`s at` the location constituted. the
highest concentration in `the City of Petaluma.
During .the twel a ;months prior to installation, of the .median :island at this location,
there had been twenty reported collisions. In the six months following installation;
there has been only.one reported collision at this location. The results of this action
were rewarding.
i~ CONSENT CALENDAR.
is
r9 3. Resolution ~99: 1;49 N:C.S.approving an Application for Funding 'from. the
°20.: State. Community ~peveloprrient Block Grant Program for Funding from Disaster
21 Recovery Initiative (DRL) funds. (Gaebler)
22
23`_ MOT10N;; Council'. Member Maguire moved, seconded by Gader-Thompson,
24 ~ to adopt Resolution 99-1.49 N.C`.S~. approving an. Application .for Funding .from the
Zs: State Community Development Block- Grant Program. for Funding from Disaster
26 -. Recovery Initiative: (DRI) funds.
27~
2s MOTION PASSED: 7/0/0
29 Ayes: Gader-Thompson, Hamilton, Healy, Keller, .Maguire, Thompson, Torliatf
3o Noes: None
31 Abstain: None
32 Absent: None
33
34 UNFINISHED'B:USINESS
35
36 4. 'Discussion 'and Possible Action:: on the Rainier Gross-Town Connector and'
37 Interchange Project Regarding the Project's Wor-k Plans, the Assessment. District.
38 Feasibilify Study; and Funding. (Evert)
39 5.
40 ..(Verbatim.. Transcription of Minutes Begins Here)
4i Council' Member .Gader-Thompson: Mayor, I will Abe leaving for this time .and I'm
42 sorry' not to be here. l see Mr: Evert' name at~the end of this, is there, Mr. Stouder,
43 was there going to be a presentation?'
44
June 26, 1999
Vol. 33', Page 255
1 C:ify Manager Stouder No; this `is a continuation discussion at your request. Tom
2 Hargis is here along with other, 'members to field any questions,. but this is at your'
3 request to continue deliberation with possible action.
4
s With the Council's permission it would be my thought to 'immediately go right to get
6 public .comment on this and if I find any disagreement, is there any disagreement
7 with thaf?
s
9 Council Member .Maguire: 'Mr. Mayor;,, how many people do we have that want to
to speak, and has everyone that wants to speak filled out'a card?
11
12 Mayor Thompson: There are about twelve so ~tl;e_re will be about fifteen to twenty
13 people. Anyone who spoke the last time on th`is' item and feels that it is imperative
14 that they :get., up and speak, be my guest, but _ please' be very briefi and if it is
is something that you have repeated .before the Council we'were all here the last time
i6 so we've heard it. I would like. to :expedite this,;matter and hopefully be done with
17 this by eight-thirfy as we have another agenda,item we .need ao get. onto. So I'm
is going to begin and; I'm going to call the first speaker and'the first speaker is Dr.
19 Charles Sayers.
20 .:.
21 PUBLIC COMMENT
22 ~ , _
z3 Dr. Charles Sayers, P.O. Box 1879, San,Mateo: I want to'.cornpliment the
z4 Council on their continued ~ and ,'~ diligent actiori on fixing
2s 1Nashington/McDowell, etc., and I have been doing all my homework and
26 reading on Rainier and. I just think`Rainier is ,a dead fiish, a:nd it's starting to
27 smell and I Think you should bury iftonight: Thank:you.
2s
29 Geoff Cartwright, .56 Rocca Drive: This- is the:.'General Plan', `Page one
,: . .
3o hundred eight rnentions Caulfield as a possible cros"s-town ;connec-'tor. This
31 is the draft section 205 Reconnaissance Report Flood Control Improvement -
32 Petaluma California. Let's all get a' ':clue: There's :a flood problem in
33 Petaluma, -~
34 .: -.
3s This is the BKF (Brian Kangas Foulk) report. I# shows 'a forty= year storm
36 euent producing a one hundred-year flood depth level. This is the .agenda
_,
37 bill; detention ponds or alternatives, the RMI Study, which will be snot .her
3s piece of the puzzle. This is the U.S: Army Corps of Engineers Detail Project
39 Report and that indicates-with the continued development up stream that
4o downtown will flood by the year 2005.
41
42 This is the Federal Emergency Map Act (FEMA) Firm insurance rate map,
43 out of date: They were last revised in 1989. This is all of the development..
44 that has occurred since that time.. We need. to get those updated. Here's a
45 map of tll~at, same thing and it indicated a good deal of building in the
46 floodplain. This is FEMA Engineering Principal and Practices for retrofitting
47
Vol. 33, Page 256 July 26, 1999
1 flood prone residential b.uildings.. f don't believe FEMA encourages building in
2 floodplains. They put this together. because building, in floodpiains. results in
3 flood damage.. This is the- Environmental Lmpact Report (E~IR) on River Oaks;;
4 Petaluma Oaks Village; building 'in the floodplain~. This is the Redevelopment
s Plan for the Petaluma. Community Development Project.
~ I have never believed and I do not believe that the building of commercial .,and
s industrial development in the floodplain is a propex use for redevelopment funds.
9 This is he ,budget. Ain't no money for Rainier: fn fact you're going o end up
io having to tax th`e tar out of eve
ry man, woman: and child in Petaluma fo -pay fo:r
ii that thirty to forty million dollar debt. .Here's the EIR for Rainier and I don't
12 believe that this makes it. It.:calls it a traffic solution. 'You will still, have to do 'th'e
13 necessary retrofits at those locations that are mentioned in this EIR.
14
is I do not believe that;the pubhic, the voters are going to study all this and corne to
16 know what we know:, I be;le~e'you. do have the responsibility to .protect Phis
i~ community: You'have the: sword,, l give you the beast, .kill. Rainier,:..
i s -.
i9 Vince, Landoff, 12 'Cordelia Drives ::Referencing recent articles printed in fhe
Zo newspapers cautioning. certain Councif Members .that, "if they don't favor'
2i construction•.of the Rainier Cross Town. Co"nnector, then the next re-election bid
z2 wily be `in. serious jeopardy:" I'; too, wish to emphasize a point. that should you
23 particular, Council Members have: they common sense.an, d audacity to vote down
24 Rainier~toriight then thereahall b.e a ground swell of support for your re=election
,,
Zs bids by the knowledgeable arid' happy citizens:'gf this town who will show their
26 appreciation of not .being. ripped. off for perhaps u.p to fifty million dollars to pay°
27 for Rainier to make a few very filthy rich. Thank yo.u.
Zs ,
29 Onta: Pellegrini, 799 Baywood, Chamber of Commerce: 'm :here tonight to
3o just say that the Chamber .has: long had' a stand on. the Rainier Over crossing :and
31 Interchange and. we s,uppo:rfi -moping forward. and choosing, the design so the
32 work can be started to find the funds. and' to build. fhe project.
34 Jerry Price, 411 D' Sfreet #3, I ~-spoke on this mafte.r on July 6 and so I will be
3s very brief tonight. After that July 6 meeting and ,having listened to all the- things
36 that: I have heard and.,read ab.out;this issue,;, f. just came through that all very.,. very
37 encouraged with a dream that I 'truly believe. That. dream happens to be this: a.
38 proper alternative interchange and freeway access at Corona as, an ,alternative to
39 this. other .project. J truly believe that the players; the people involved;;. can be
4o greatly enhanced:
42 It seems ;to me that the auto mall, factory outlet mall; could have conceivably as
43 much as a twenty-five: percent ..increase in sales without developing one. inch:. of`
44 additional space simply by having direct clear `access to their properties. from a
45 proper .~interehange .and access road. In addition if you could add. to this dream
46 the fact that there are some very lovely op:e.n spaces down south o.f that .area.
June 26, 1999 Vol. 33', Page 257'
1 where 'the Johnson people have their property. I think they're looking to develop
2 residentially; and true, we have to~ be very careful. how we do that.
3
4 What I truly .believe is that if an amenity such as a park-like: setting that enhances
s that beautiful.. area of our community were pursued, and if the interchange at
6 Corona were pursued, than everybody would feel, well, gee, we are moving
~ ahead here ~w'ith something that is viable and something that is attractive. f think.
s you would find 'that this Council could probably find a way to increase the space
9 at the factory outlet malls so they can get an economic return on their land. I
to think that the Johnson property could be developed in some fashion that would
11 allow them to: have utilization of that land and get it going and it would be a great
12 amenity to the city.
13 -
14 I think that if they stop and look at that dream they'll say, "Hey, I agree
is wholeheartedly; let's get going, and let's move. forward." So all I would say to this
16 Council is this: ~ If you believe that an alternative to Rainier can accomplish an
1~ even betfer result and actually look toward the future traffic needs of the city not
is just 'the present traffic needs, I hope you will state so clearly tonight. If you
19 believe fhaf the things I've just stated make sense, I hope all of you will state that
20 tonight. So thank you very much, I know this 'is a difficult decision to make:.
21 Thank you.
22
23 Vivian .Bauer, 1736 E. Madison: 'My husband was to be here. tonight to talk to
24 you; but fie. couldn't be here and I would like permission to relate a few
2s comments if I could from him. His name is Dr. Kenneth Bauer. My brief
26 comments go in four different directions and I hope you will bear with me. First, I
2~ am concerned about the way one of the citizens was treated in the July meeting
2s because you didn't -like: the way that he said. something.. Of course, we citizens
29 usually operate without full information, but you asked for our input and you are
3o not Judge Judy.
31
32 Second, one of you .made a statement about. the ,past :mismanagement of the
33 City Council, I believe in regard to the fair share proposal to build the
34 infrastructure needed for the development along Sonoma Mountain; Parkway.
3s 1Nhat I think was being said was; "How do you. expect us 'fo overcome the
36 problems that we inherited?" Some of us are calling for an external audit of the
3~ funds that we believe were specifically designated for the Rainier ~ 1'0.1.
38 Interchange and are not to be used at the Council's discretion elsewhere in
39 Petaluma.
40
41 Thirdly, I .hear repeated resentment from some- of you that the owner or
42 developer of the land west of Rainier may make a big profit. What's going on
43 here? The issue 'is whether the Rainier Lnterchange is right for Petaluma. Let's.
44 get back on the issue.
4s
Vol. 33, Page 258
July 26, 1999
Fourth,, I think that ;it ought to cause some pause that:; a voter,_too, can kill
2 Rainier. The careful research on the. Corona Ely Specific Plan required the
3 .Rainier Interchange before. full build, out: The .Citizens of Petaluma
4 emphatically ~wanf Rainier completed. T. he California, Department of
_, ,
s Transportation, >after studying both :the Corona aril the .Rainier Interchanges.,
6 was adamant ;that the City Council think. of Rainier :Interchange only,
~ anderlining, the word only.. For one .or '.two people: o..dismiss all this history is
s very scary: It, looks- like a decision best shouldered fjy public vote. Thank
9 ~ you very much.-
io 4
ii Judy Hillery, 1;745 E. Madison Street: 1 have spoken to many people regarding
12 this subject both. Eastside. and 1Nestside and'. the feeling is the same. If' ,you kill
13 ,Rainier you hav..e essentially divided 'the town. There are ..many people: `from the
r4 V1/estside That shop in .Novato to my surprise for their basics so "they don't' have
is to sit in,ahe. Washington overpass traffic. So there goes oux money out of town::
i6 The `VVests'ide. business. needs the. Eastside support and the. Eastside ;business
i~ .needs the people .from. the 1Nestside. Neither. can stand alone: Petaluma's
is economy can't continue with this division. Much money has. ;been spent on
19 studies. The General Plan,, Corona Ely Specific Plan;. are in place::,, The people
?o hake spoken.. I say your- decision is not to build or, not to build; I say your
21 decision is how and when.
22
23 .,David Glass,, 41 Oxford. Court: Jerry Maguire's movie was: one- That struck.
24 °accord with America. The,,greatest line '.in that movie: was "follow the money."
._
2's came,across-an article'that "was written May31.,, 1994'in the Argus Courier by Jay'
26 :Camel. You ,each ,have a co that is bein laced in. front of ou. at. this time.
py 9 p y
27 For the folks that are: at home. or may see this on a tape replay, I°d like to read a
2s few. paragraphs .from this.. '.I've highlighued them for you folks so you kind of follow
29 along. ,
30
31 One of the things: -when 1 ,lived in Florida; people always said I'd like to sell you
32 .some swampland and everybody would laugh. But, here in California, what we
33 say is: we would ,like to, sell you some :floodplain land,. ttaen it rezone it, mitigafe `it,
34 build on it and rake in the ,money: Th"is two-page arficl2 that'I put in front'°of you,
3s no where in there. does it mention "traffic relief"' about' Rainier. The headline is
__
36 "Rainier~~Sp:urs 'Land Boom." For the folks that are looking. for traffic relief, and
37 yes;... there are many of our citizens. that are looking for traffic relief; this is not.
3s going: to solve their problem. ~~
39
a.o I found it ironic. From July 14 until. November 3, until I had a chance.fo talk to
4.1 rnan. y of our citizens about ;this particular project. Those that were'in favor of _.
42 .Rainier were in. favor of traffic relief. They were also in favor of what~now is '
43 commonly called "smart .growth,. slow rowth;`' and many of them fell in' the -
9
44 category of "no growth: 1Nhen the ~ found out thaf Rainier involved
y
4s explosive growth they immediately ..lost 'interest in Rainier: So this is an
46 education process: The poll that the Chamber tookwhere 70% of'the: people
June 26, 1999
Vol. 33'; Page 259
1 ~ ` ~wa~nted Rainier built, was based on knowing this and nothing else: Do you
2 ` _,want Rainier'built? Yeah, if I knew nothing I would want Rainier built, but if I
3 :studied the: documents #hat Geoff Cartwright brought up here, I probably
4 a would have second questions.
5 .. .
6 :Now in'vterms"of this two-page arficle that was. written back in 1994, Jay
~ ~Gamel writes~that,most of the vacant two .hundred acres have been bought
a _ by real estate i'n~est~ment firms and de_ velopers in a dizzying series of
9 transactions. involvingcorporations and numerous limited partnerships of
to investors., 'and developers who are local and from other states. It's no
11 surprise that these"' "people are looking forward to having the Rainier
12 " Interchange built.. "
13
14 He goes on to page ;two to say that County records reflect that sixty-five
is ;~ acres comprising lots =five, six, seven, 'and nine were bought by Petaluma
=:16 ~"B"oulevard Redevelopment parties for about a one. dollar and twenty cents a
~ ~ square foot;.; or three million, four hundred. thousand dollars. The- partners
is -~ paid a premium of thirty cents per square foot to pay off the factory outlet
r9 ". property early, adding "another three hundred thirty thousand dollars. A 1.989
20 appraisal' ~of` :the entire sixty-five acres by A. Clive King Associates of
21 _ Sausalito, paid for by Leonard Jay Enterprises, Inc., estimated the value of
22 the.. property of fifteen million dollars in an undeveloped state.. 1Nith
23 - Chelsea'splans approved. and the development company fully committed to
24 building out the outlet center, the property's worth was estimated at twenty-
2s _ seven million five hundred thousand dollars. The property's value was
26 expected to soar to thirty-five million.. dollars when the outlet center was
2~ operating. and the Rainier' Interchange extension was guaranteed according
2s to the appraisal
29
3o I find it sad that Janice .Caller-Thompson, who ell all of the vote-getters in
31 the Council .race, is excluded because of a potential conflict of interest.
32 We're going to hear testimony from a number of people who have a vested
33 interest in the ou'teome ;of this: an .investment where they put in, less than. four
34 million. dollars and are hoping to get up to thirty-five million dollars.. Now,
3s normally in the business that I work in, you .have to invest in an .Internet stock
36 t0 do that, :but.. if you can get floodplain property and gel it rezoned to
37 commercial redevelopment, you've got a chance to make a lot of bucks.
38
39 The. closing couple of paragraphs here.,. "The Anderson property., lots thirfeen
4o arid fourteen on the map, is zoned for light commercial development, but 'the
41 owners have no plans to do anything with'.it' at this time. "Our family has owned
42 this property for over a one hundred years and I kinda like if the way it is," Ms.
43 Anderson. said. `Of course it depends on what kinda money is offered. UVe'r„e-
44 _ not gefti"ng any younger."' And there is the crux for those who are following this
4s 'issue. If it goes to a ballot, and in some way, shape., or form there probably will.
46 be some kinda of voting on this, whether it's for
e
Vol. 33, :Page 260
July 26, 1999
i Council. people..or whatnot, I hope the: citizens of thin: townw are wise enough. to
2 understand that; this is about money.. In these two pages (here's not:~one.word
3 about traffic relief.
_ ., .
9 ,
s One of the fin'ancin mechanisms for this project is a 1915 Bond. Act. This~is an
6 assessment district bond, which mandates, that the property come in appraised
7 at: a minimum ~of three times more than the bonded debt. ;The- higher the
.., ,.
s appraisal, of` that property; the lower ,the. '.interest rage involved. on borrowing the
9 money ~fo,r. that property, on that, oan. There's a tremendous amount of
io motivation. here to bring as much development ;as possible;. Think about it.
i i People don't build roads to go nowhere; they build, roads to go somewhere. And , .
i2 what do we get with this is thirty=two million, eight hundred thousand dollars if the
i-3 guesstimates are right on building the project? .~
What :,really. scares me is, ~we won't :know what itb.costs until` we build; this thing - _ .:~
half' way through.. The estimate of the auto mall infrastructure. was :$9:60„000: ~ .
The actual cost on that. very small job was :two million, one'.hundred ,thousand
..v ,,
dollars. Kill it fonight. Thank you.
. _ -
Joh"n Cheney; 55 Rocca, .Drive. : I sat ;here `ands lstenedr to Glass:.. ~ 1 °fhi'nk.
everybody went thro_ ugh the redevelopment effect. It's ;going to ,p,ut. money down
(here; there's noquestion about`ahat: I don't'.know how many of you got a;ehance
the other night: I asked ';you to go out and take a .look at what` "they're doing on
Payran. I don't know whether you guys got a chance ta. If you`do; it's a mess:
26 It's a' shame :what we .have to :do to the river to correct a wrongdoing of~the~'past.
27 If you vote fo:r Rainier and don't vote this. thing dead where it belongs, you''re
2s going to end up doing the rest of the; river jusf the same with what; we're doing .on
29 Payran. You're ,gonna .have a flood ,project before, long, along, the. auto.. mall
3o section, there between Corona Road and Petaluma Boulevard: Those
31 businesses ;are .going to. continue.-'to flood. They. flooded'in 1998; they're going to
32 go again:.. It's just a. matter of time and they're going to be down here looking, for a.
33 flood fix and if' you turnaround' and build Rainier :and .you develop that I'and you'll
34 have :no other choice buf to -wall that whole section off in there.
3s
36 Leave it alone.. Make it hay fields,. if we .can, afford' it. .Leave it undeveloped for
37 the time being. if some day we cah afford. it,, it sure would be a wonderful place
3g to develop; but. for the time being it's the wrong place..;, it's floodp ai'n. It was left
39 alone since the city was forrne~d in the 1800's and it was .left- alone :fora :reason.
ao If we had done that twenty years ~ ago we woiald,n't be spending twenty-three
4;i million dollars on, a damn bunch of floodwalls to `make the river look terrible: So
42 let's stop. this one :anyway: Let's -'save that, part' of 'the .river.. Thank you.
43
44 • .Bill Kortum,:1.80 EIy Road: l thought' I would just; have.a few words about some
4s of the history of Rainier, .not thaf you're not bored with that, .but some High.points.
46 In winfer of '93 the Rainier issue started to surface. Ou,r conservation action.
47
June 26, 1999 Vol. 33, Page 261
i canvassers canvassed the whole town of Petaluma .and found great pockets
2 of people that didn't agree. with Rainier because they didn't feel it would
3 serve. them. Thee. feedback 'was negative and so we learned of the
4 neighborhood group that was opposed ~fo Rainier and we helped them put
s the initiative on the ballot known as "Washington First" and helped them with
6 that issue.
s We walked during that campaign with the editorial writer Pete Golis of the
9 Press Democrat and with Dick C-arlisle; who was the number one engineer
io firm of the county at this time. He was the young engineer that redesigned
ii Washington fo where it is right now and we walked that. afternoon up the
12 length of E: Washington Streef and Dick Carlisle said, "I made a mistake; I
13 could get twice as much traffic through Washington by new design
14 standards." So we were encouraged that maybe the public would buy into. a
is Washington First proposition. But as you know that was decisively defeated,
i6 but in that is a lesson learned.
i~
is You saw this stack of docum. ents. You. can't possibly ask the citizens of this
19 town to know what's in those documents. We couldn't possibly get across
20 the comtp ex issue of 1ashington '.First: Money was spent to defeat that and
2i it was defeated. Thaf doesn't mean it wasn't a good idea. And that's why I
22 would urge you not to take this fo the vote of the people because it is too
23 complex an issue. All of you should be a student of those complexities and
r 24 make your own decision.
25
26 Another little. piece of history. Talked to a former City Councilman about two
2~ years ago .and he said, "You. know at the time these projects came along we
Zs were hurting for revenue, we wanted more .growth in Petaluma and we gave
29 the former 'City Manager a kind of entrepreneurial license, to start these
3o projects." I'm not sure City Managers should b'e .made into entrepreneurs., but
31 that remains to be seen. But. as a result of that you'"ve had at least a half
32 dozen projects that now have come back to haunt you including the Marina
33 Project, the Auto Mall, the privatization of the sewer plant, and of course, the
34 Rainier Interchange. This Council has had to tackle and wrestle with all
3s those enfrepreneurial projects. In the Marina you've had to abandon. the
36 payment .schedule. You saw redevelopment money for the .Auto Mall
37 misspent. with a "one-sided agreement, .and it was great headlines when the
3s Press Democrat said you killed the private building of a sewer plant.
39
4o And now you have. a chance to kill Rainier. f think that's an example of too
41 much entrepreneurial. license for a City Manager. You corrected most of
42 those problems and' this is the one remaining one. There are monuments to
43 some of those projects, some good. J think .the Marina is a great entry to
44 Petaluma. Some bad, the .Auto Mall sign, but for goodness sake Pets not
45 build a project that's the equivalent. to a six-story building stretching across
46 our valley floor as a monument to a bad decision. Thank you.
Vol. 33, Page 262 .July 26, 1999
2 o Leon; Beck, 11395 Valley Fond. Road: I thank you fo_ r your.attenfon, Because.
3 others have said some factual things I would; have said, I will not repeat them: I'il.
4 save- your time. and mine.. I do have some information that may make :yo.ur
s decision making easier and that's why- I'm here. Your staff was very good to me.
6 They gave me documents and I went through them and I asked questions and.
~ they answered questions.
s
9 .And comparing .the 'data that:. was in 'the, documents that ,have been used by the.
io City Council and the City .staff in, the past;. and the experiences thaf we have had
ii with: flooding, my son's house was flooded, o,n Rocca Drive.: Going back and
i2 looking at the areas., we know' those :documents have inaccurate information.
13 The decisions;based on the offerings of mitigations. did not happen the way they
'14. were supposed to. happen because if wasn.'t;_right. Now ,engin;eers, are intelligent;
is but: engineers are human, and even with the best. of computers, mistakes are
i6 made.
i~
is Okay, you can't. use the :documents, so don't: rely on them for the decisions
19 yo.u're go.i'ng to make here; especially on Rai~rie.r. '.Remember; water does not
Zo seem to: remain contained or channeled by engineers. It ,finds ifs way over:, and'.
2'1 under -and around' all of the,~restraints and constraints #hat. engineers have put on
22 it. In ome: places. in his country -today dams -are being taken. out, levees are
23 beingtaken down, old r,,iver channels. are being opened up for safety and ;to ave
24 the government money. You've heard of the government wanting to save .
Zs money.. ~ 4
26
27 I maintain stop attempting to follow failed practices; because if you keep ,doing
2s the same thingover again.;, you're .going to get. the same results: You can'f help
29 it. :Now personally, I lived and, ,worked in construction. I worked on high rises.
3o First' day on the- job they said, "We have safety :rules.. If' you don't. wanf. to follow
3 i them; go gel: your paycheck now".
32
33 ,And not only did; we .have afety rules, ,I w. ent to school,. and I had. to learn. the
34 building codes,. and .I had to follow those. And there were times when.so.rne hot
3s shots came in from, other areas and they'd work.<on a job with .us and .then: the:
36 .boss would say,: "Leon,. go take your crew :and fix'. such and uch." I'd say,. "Hey,.
37 your hot shot ,did that. Don't worry about w.ho is to blame. Fix it so the buyer will
3s pay us:"
39
4o The point.. is that if you don't follow the rules and regulations for the best safety
41 and use ahe- best materials and the best workmanship you're going to have
a2 problems. Andthis is what ,.you: can do, you. can say these documents are not
43 adequate; so we'll. put this down now.. You don't listen to those. that are in to
44 make a quick.buck and they do shoddywork besides.
45
June 26, 1999
Vol. 33', Page 263
Hank Flum, 1721 Stonehenge Way;,.Over three years ago I stood before a
i m ,
2 prior City Council. to exp,ress• ny concerns about wthe enormous impact :and
3 cost of Rainier. Trying to e'vafuate~ the claimed traffic benefits. I found that
4 they d_idn't hold water. I suggested that there might be less costly and, more
s beneficial alternatives to Rai'ni'er.. By scratchi"ng my head and talking to city
6 staff I found there were ways, to improve traffic flow in Petaluma.
~ ~ .,
s Here are sortie of the alternatives. And; thanks to the City Council, now
9 hopefully waiting for signal changes at 'Washington and McDowell will be
io reduced b,y 50%. Thee Council has already authorized money to do the
ii engineering work.. Perhaps in eighteen to twenty-four months that traffic fix
12 will be completed.
13
14 The other<alternative, by extending. Caulfield to `the west, and. I can show it
is on the picture .here, by extending. Caulfield to the -west, over the river to
16 South Petaluma 61vd, we get a new cross town connector route to take cars
i~ off of Washington. Southeast Petaluma gets connected to all points west.
is Southwest Petal,u_ma gets connected to Eastside shopping, parks and Adobe
i9 Road without being on VSlashington. The Cau field extension would be built
20 on City-owned property, reducing costs by using the vacated sewer
2i treatment: plant. after we have a new plant. Corona Road can be made to
22 have freeway on/off .ramps at a modest cost.
23
24 This particular map was printed. in 1993 and we can see what is now called
2s Corona Eiy where. I live is practically all built out. Corona is already a
26 ,principal east/w.est connector, and with a freeway access would be preferred
27 by forty to fifty percent of the current V1/ashingtoh interchange users.
2s ~ ~.
29 The alternatives mentioned offer incremental improvement that can be
3o phased in in sine with t"raffia needs~~and available funds. None of~ these
31 .require enormous amounts of indebtedness. Nor do they add to our flooding
32 ,problems: It is ,my guess tl1at'if or when, all of these suggested alternatives
33 would be built, the total cost for three real traffic improvements would be one
34 half the current cost for Rainier. As a,tax payer.. in Petaluma,that~would put a
3s real smile on my face to see tax. money being,:'spent wisely.. I hope this
36 Council has "the courage to say, "Nq; we: won't build Rainier and we'll look for
37 alternatives:" Thank you. ~,
38 ~ y
39 ® Mark Johnson, 125 Willow .Road; Menlo Park:. l have to say that I resent
4o the emotional rhetoric that was displayed that classifies this overpass as a
41 way for a~•developers to• line their pockets with money. We've been in this
a2 city now for about thirty years. As„a matter of fact,. the first project we did in
43 this city was on `°D", Street and ,we d'd.another lttle:.commercial area near "D"
44 Street.. We've owned this property~over_here for about twenty-five years. and
4s we built a project" in 1:982 that I think'enliances this: community wonderfully.
46
Vol. 33, Page 264 July 26, 1999
2 Matter of #act, there~.is such a fremendous need for housing in this community;
:. _ ,.
3 we could_ show, you waiting Li"sts.,of literally hundreds of people who are waiting for
4 an apartment in this community: ..Petaluma. needs housing. When ;the Urban
s Growth Boundary '(UGB,) was,:passed last year, there wexe surveys ,that were
6 conducted of the vacant land available in Petaluma. in order to determine :the
7 housing stock. if a UGB'was passed. Well;'fhey determined that there was barely
s enough 'infill property to substantiate that Urban. Growth Boundary: A sizeable
9 portion of that property is located right in the,~Corona. Reach area- and' I feel 'it's
to imperative that. thi's City Council respect that'study and allow that infill property to
11 be used for what it, calls for right now in the General Plan,. ,because that same
12 property was used to justify passage of the Urban. Growth'Boundary last. year:
13
14 Another point-that Iwould -.like to talk about is people talk about the beauty of that
is property,. butwho's really benefiting from it right now? You might be able to, as
16 you':re driving down 101, look. of the weeds. and uncontrolled :habitat that's
17 currently existing on that. property. The area needs resources.: By the way,
18 think, it's wonderful that the Corps project' has begun. That',s a twenty-fwo million
19 dollar projectand it's ..going to do a lot to help th'e p"roperty values of those who
20 live in the'Payran area:. -
22 But I'll tell.. you, resources are needed in that area, .and Rainier would provide
2.3 resources into that area that would further increase the values of the properties;
24 especially `those in the Payran, area,. Man, y people think that: we're 'just going in
2s there and just maximize density ,and 'b.uild hundreds of units and that's not 'the
26 case. 1Ne want .to work very closely with the City Council ;and the Planning
27 Commission t'o create a proj'eet that has 'bike trails.,. pedestrian paths, that
2a beautifies that river, creates public open spaces;. so that the area can really be
29 an asset to Petaluma. 1Nho is benefiting from that area right now?` Nobody. ft
3o needs resources.
~,
31 ~ -
32 The last thing I would like: to point out is ,flooding. I addressed this: a little 'bit on
33 the 6th of July,. because ther.,e? appears to be; a misnomer- about flooding. That
34 twenty-two: million :dollars that is being spent° o widen the charine'I; fo elevate the
35 banks, that has been `calcula'ted by~'the Corps as a one hundred. ;year flood f_ix,
36 but in, addition to that; I talked fo Mr, Hargis,: the walls Piave been, raised. another
3? three feet above. what would be considered one hundred year flood. protection to
3s p.rovide. additional protection. n, addition to that, ;that study,. that. calculation, was
39 - based on the General Plan being,'builf out, as it exists ri;g'hf now with .the density
40 levels that exist and with those developments being built: with no flood mitigation
4.i at all. ~ ~ `
43 As you know:,; RMI 'is doing ~a study right now, acid when that study is con:clutled°,
44 I'm sure it will come. up with reco.mmend'ations for development to provide
45 extreme: flood. mitigation, which would,~everr enhance~4wh:at the Crops project has
46 calculated as one hundred year protection. I disagree the flooding is an issue.
47
:
June 26, 1999 Vol. 33, Page 265`
i This twenty-two million dollars that's being spent there plus the. flood
. ,
2 mitigation on any deve opment won't create any flooding.
3
4 The last' thing: f would'. like to say is f really #eel that on this issue, 'the polls
s seem to indicate that theres a seventy percent pp oval rating in the City of -.
a, r
6 Petaluma, This issue in my opinion needs to go before the people. An
~ initiative. needs to be put. together, not.: laced with aself-taxation. clause in
s order to fund it, but ask the Petalumans, "Do you want Rainier?" because as
9 we all know, once Rainier is an approved project, then you can go. about
io finding the financing for it. You can't. put the cart before the .horse. Once the _
ii project is approved, then you go about getting the funding. I won't reiterate .
12 some points I addressed last time about cost and how I feel cost can be
13 mitigated on this overpass to .get. at a more reasonable Ievel.:The bottom line ~ .
14 to this is I chink that ,Petalumans want Rainier. It's good, for Petaluma and it
is shou d be put to them for a vote.. l appreciate yourtime.'
16 ~ ~ ,. _
i~ Matt Connolly, 2200 Petaluma Blvd. North: As I've sat in the audience the
is last couple of weeks :in .meetings, it's been kinda. difficult because of all the
i9 shots that we've. and I've been taki"ng f;rom the community and some of the
20 Council Members, and it's unfortunate I think because, I think we all, at least
21 Chelsea has been a good corporate citizen in the. community _ 1Ne have . .
22 performed.:everyth.ing "ghat: we've been obligated to do when we~came to the.
23 community.- : ~ ~,
24
2s There ..have ,been. some discussion about all these values and all these
26 things that may have been realized and I think that the problem is that there
2~ has been a lot of misinformation..) don't know where Mr. Glass has come up
2s with these: values and.. discussed. that, .and I think that if it was true and this
29 was somewhere to Internet stock,. I think there would be a lot more .people
3o standing before you beating down the city door to develop the property. And
31 with. the risks we've taken and the commitment. that we've done, and
32 improvements we've done to the community,) think that we have stepped up
33 and followed through with our obligation to not only be a good. corporate
34 citizen as we have been., but to maybe .not continue to be berated: the. way
3s that we'have been in the pasf.
36
37 The-cross town connector, I'm just.. going to briefly read a letter to just cut it
3s short and I':II submit, it to you, but one of the reasons I think this has been
39 difficult is this :has been such a long pr..ocess and: such an approved project
4o within the community: In 19.62 the cross town connector and: interchange
4t project was identified in the City General Plan. In 1977 the City Planning
42 Department identified the major transportation problems anticipated with
43 future growth and development northeast Petaluma and the City :Council
44 amended the General Plan to include an extension of Rainier A~e.nue with
4s the new interchange.
46
Vol. 33, Page 266
July 26, 1999
i fn 1985-a traffic study in~oluing build out of the. northeast. section. :of .Pefaluma
2 and-seven differenf over crossing -and transportation alternatives :were evaluated.
3 The Rainier ;project, was the only viable alternative. It's also 'been discussed, that
4 _ ` ' what.commitment the -City'made to us regarding Rainier overpass, we have 'two
s ~~ conditions of approval That require. us to contribute towards an east/west
6 ` _. overpass and iriterehange,, and at that time,,. when we had our approvals, and
~ .. , during the:. process Rainier-was. the :only approved project. The. Rainier project
s has not, only been :Petaluma's optimum ;location since 1977. for the Corona
9 Reach property owners, 'the optimum .cross: town project was located at' Rainier
io as .;if can, address long term .impacts as a new cross town interchange: p,roperfy
ii spaced:..betwee,r Redwood. and Washington interchanges, and to serve ~ the
12 Eastside. extensive residential commercial, industrial hospital and school
13 ~ irnprovernents.~ ,~
14 .
as , Of course the ~ Corona Reach project and the Petaluma Village project would
16" benefit; but that's not why it was identif'i'ed there.- That was well before we .came
i~ around: Regardless, thee, Corona Reach.- area, should. be developed and' be
is ,improved as infill"projects with, or without the Rainier project with ultimate benefit
19 ~ realized, to the community of. Retaluma. The increase sales and property tax, ahe
20 river and bike trail access improve"ments,; and. increased detention to reduce
21 flooding impaots°:all should 'be achieved: The approved Rainier project .will allow
22 for taff~to pursue funding which will available firom federal',. state an'd county
2.3 " ~ sources.. 'There is also potentials to reduce 'the cost with a smaller structure or
?4 alternate .route... Ire,
uest,, and Ohelsea re.quest's, that ou a rove the Rainier,
q y pP
ZS .cross fown connector and. interchange project as it will be a benefit to ahe ;entire
26 community. Thank you.
zs Bruce: Hagen, 145 Grevillia: This is :my first and probably last ,chance to talk
29 about this. I .have. yet to come u~p here and di'seuss `it because honestly over the
3o couple of•;years I've had really mixed feelings about"th`e projecf. Only .recently.,
31 after looleirg of some of the stuff, `I decided it' was not a. good idea.: On Saturday
32 1 attended, 'a conference. Some gf you were there: Bigger not.'Better, a workshop
33 on grappling with growth 'in Sonoma County,. There's a couple of stats in here
34 wanna put, in context. to this that's different from anything else .I'be :heard'. U:S.
3s has four point seven percent of the world's people," thirty-five ,percent of the cars
36 and trucks.. Cars used' 'for eighty=six. percena. of all `trips in: the United :States
37 compared to forty.-five percent in most western European countries. Seventy-five
_.
3g percent of community cars: carry only one 'person,, motor vehicles kill thirty-nine
39 thousand. people: a 'year;. fifteen million accidents, quite a big hit to the: Gross
40 • National Product (G'NP). Fifth percent of the .air pollution in the United `S,tates
4a and I won't talk about global warming, that's` quite a su"kject.. Federal, State a_nd
42 local government auto subsidies ~in the US tonal' of least three hundred billion
43 dollars a year, almost five percent of the-country's GNP.
44 '
4s Getting-~~a little clgser to home„ how much are ,we driving? Sonoma, County
46 weekday. daily vehicle miles traveled in 19.95 it was seventeen vrnt {vehicle miles
47
June 26, 1999
Vol: 33"; Page 267'
i traveled) per person, tlat'.'s gone up seven "percent in five years. Actually,
2 from 1995' to eighteen `point :one percent. So it's not: a: mafter of just. more
3 people; people are dnung m., ore. The reason for this is gas is cheap; we're
4 not paying the price. We're -riot accounting for the cost, all those other costs
s I spoke of in the price. of gasoline..
6
~ ~ Now, fine, as long as we want to get away from this, we can defer the cost of
8 projects that increase dependency on the use of the automobile. 1Ne push
9 them down stream as it were and that's: just not down stream in terms of the
io flooding that: might happen in Petaluma 'ifi Phis :flood plain area is developed,
ii but also down stream in, time. My .nine-year-old son, is gonna come back in
12 forty years when the sea Ieve;l is a couple of feet higher because we didn't
13 curb global warming and this area is going to flood regularly unless we can
14 turn it around quick. ~~ ` ~ ~ -
15
i6 Now maybe'you can say Petaluma doesn't have a role in this. I don't want to
i~ be a ,part of the problem; I want to be a part of. the solution. The General
.._
i8 Plan, the biggest problem I had with- opposing ;this :was that it has been in the
i9 General Plan for so long.. V1Fell I used to work,at PG and E and we planned
Zo to have 'four units. at Diablo Canyon, not one and'~two, but three and four as
Zi well. Right now,; everybody 'is paying' about ten cents on the dollar in their
22 utility bill to yeti"re that strandetl asset because ~if turned. out we didn't need to
23 have one and two mucli`less:three Viand four. ~ At the time, everybody said we
24 had to have it;. our,quality".of life was af-risk: Well `the same thing is apparent
as here, we've got~a project thirty-two million dollars, there's a lot of alternatives,
26 they're not as big .-and as grand as one big ~ power plant, but just. like
27 conservation, solar. renewabjes and, wiser use of electricity allowed us to. get
28 away with"out .having to use those power plants, we can do the same thing
29 herein Petaluma with that~money. '
30 ~ ~ ~ '
31 We can't take :it both ways: '1Ne can't spend thirty-two million or forty million
32 dollars or whatever it costs on this. project and. then go ahead. Say we want
33 to fund bikeways so I cane ride safely to work and' a lot of other people who
34 , are afraid to get out there. could also do `that. People can do a lot of things to
3s avoid trips across town and"`th`ere are some really good high tech ideas out
36 there,. They won't 'go any"whe're without. m~oriey and we need to put- money
37 'towards those things. . "" ~~
38
39 Now one thing I want to say about the developers. I don't care if they make
ao money on this. V1/hat I don't want,.. and the history of development in California is
41 ripe with, is .examples where people pay for the benefit of a few people to make
42 a lot of money and they're tricked. I don't want that to happen. here.. What I don't
43 want to have .happen is if this thing is put to a ballot, if the supporters will agree
44 to a ten dollar limit; if they can guarantee that tonight, then I would be willing to
45 do that, but I have seen too many initiative campaigns get washed away a lot of
46 good arguments get washed
Vol. 33, Page 268 July 26, 1999
i away in a flood of misinformation by ,people who stand. to make .an awful lot of
2 money orr the project.. It's okay if. they make, rno:ney; but if :they°:take ten percent
3 of that and put it into fooling the; people that's not a fair way to make money.
4 Thank;you.
6 • Joan Johnson; 308 South Ely Bled: I'm a thrfy-one-year Yesident of Petaluma
~ and always lived on the Eastside. and seen a lot of growth. 1Nhen we first moved
a there; there wasn't much, but over the years I; was here for the Supreme Courf
9 decision that allowed .Petaluma to :do; it's thing on how i# grew sand when the
io implementation of the twenty-year -plan in growth and with that the promise of the
i i Rainier overpass... _ ,
12
13 As Petaluma developed,.. eue_rythng was .developed .around 'tfe Rainier
r4 overpass, the placement of the hospital, the placement of the college, the-;homes
is and the promise. of 'the interchange..Well, it should 'have been built 1,0 years ago
i~ and we really need it.
ig I've heard you refer to if, as the .road. that goes .nowhe.re. 1Ne,ll, if you have. ever
~.
19 stood, o.n Washington Street-about quarter to seven at night when all the kids. are
20 trying to get to .the. college and' the ,traffic is ;backed up past- Maria to make a left
zi hand turn `when they ,coul'd` be coming;.up Rainier from the. other side of town and
22 from. Novato and other areasfthey come to our community college,. it's a'road that:
23 would go somewhere.. ,lt would take us across town;, ;you could jump on' the
24 freeway and ,get off on the Blvd: , As it'is now 1' jump ~on the freeway 'at :B:aywood
2s and go up; to he other.~end~of town because my'son'lives up there, jusf.to avoid
26 the traffic in town.
27 .. ~ -~
.
2s So if would be a road that would accomplish a lot. of things. As far as the building
29 around it you have the ;power to not' allow the. building to go on or to limif the
3o amount of building because the pavement. of -the road is certainly not going to
31 cause flooding. _ ,
~-
32 '
33 It's a project that was ,promised to us, it wenf :to the vote of the. people. Thee
34. people want.. `it. I think I. am .speaking for the ilent majority of the people in
3s Petaluma. We want the Rai ,Hier overpass. sand;{I yes, I"m ..having a hard time
36 unde,rstand'in,g what. gives you the right- to stop it:.. It°s already gone to the vote of
37 the people. It's been decided. All the: studies have.~been done. It's been st'udi'ed
ss to death. l think it needs to be built and- I'm encouraging you to please get it done.
39 and. let's move on: I:f the .people would take all this .,negative energy- and put it
4o into. finding the money to build it I think we :could get it .done -and we could get it
41 done soon. Thank. you..
42
43 • Bob Martin, 171. Payran Street: I might have kind of a stupid question,. but' what
44 is holding up 'the develop""meet :of all those properties around Rainier? I mean
4s there's,. I mean the Factory Outlet is built., V1/hy is, l mean there's ;property owners
46 that own that pro.pe,rty and they're just sitting on if. Now why is that? lt's kinds
47
June 26, 1999 Vol: 33 Page"269
2
3
4
s
6
7
8
9
to
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2s
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
puzzling to me: UU,hat's holding things up for them.? Are they just
speculating or what?' Thank you.
® 'Pat Thompson, 151'6 Sunrise Parkway: I have (ivied in Petaluma for
thirteen yea"rs and during that time I have expected Rainier to arrive and
living on the Eastsi'de of'fown I have #ound now that I can't go to lunch on the
other side; of town because it takes twenty minutes to get there and twenty
minutes back.. So there is not enough time to eat or order or do anything.
I'm very. much in favor of Rainier. I really don't understand why we don't
have it today. However, I think since we are sort of a small majority that
perhaps if you did another poll, but one that was., a little less expensive, dike
maybe putting an ad in the. newspaper and allowing people to write in their
vote; an opinion poll; Yes, I'm in favor, No, I'm not, I need more information
to decide. Then :you would. get more of a consensus of what the community
at large really needs. But for me personally I have no problem with the
developers.. I mean.;, we need them. They've done a very fine job so far and
I would like to see a lot.more. Thank you.
® F3ichard' :Braun, 141 Grevillia Drive: Unfortunately we hear the same old
song from -people who want to develop is that it is going to be better. And it
doesn't always turn. out that way. I moved. to Petaluma because. I wanted to
live in a small .town. That is my vested interest. I want to -live in a small town.
because I get to know people, you .have the police force that works,
everything works much better. You can talk. to. the City Council and be
heard, you can get things done. So that's ,my vested interest, I want to live in
asmall-town.. Rainier, while it offers away of':getting across the city,, it is not
going to substitute for having a whole series of smaller bridges that will take
people across the freeway.
My other objection to this is this is a disguised tax increase. It is nothing but
a tax increase because it is going to soak all of the money out of the
operations fund and .it's going to -take the money out of the capital funds and.
we're not going to build these. other things that are needed: _ I don't want, to
see the people faced with having. a choice of having retluced services,
reduced capital investment just so that we can have Rainier. Thank you.
® Patricia Tuttle Brown, 513 Petaluma 'Blvd South: Gosh, I feel the need to
say I. don'f mind people making money either. I mean, look at Mr. McNear, in
.Petaluma., Mr. McNear made a lot of money: My daughter .goes to McNear
School and plays at McNear Park. I don't think that's the issue.:. I think if it
gets polarized. IiKe that it's dumb. I think we have to look at what is best for
the whole community and we have to .use today's wisdom to do it.
So I just want to say one thing on the issue of traffic relief. Traffic .relief is a
need in Petaluma. It's very real. People; I mean Washington Street is a
Vol. 33, Page 270 July 26, 1999
mess... I. do drive it numerous Times, a week and I don't think it's as big a mess: as
people say, but what I want. to say is this whole issue, brings to, ..mind the
Dumbarton Bridge in Palo Alto and the South Bay-Menlo Park area. For years
the battle ha's raged to connect, because Dumbarton; you know there's the 'Bay
Bridge, there's the San Mateo Bridge and then there's. the Dumbarton .Bridge,
and it dumps right into..;:well; it's, basically a bridge that goes. nowhere: Just like
we're talking ,about here.
9 W,hy does it go nowhere? It ;goes nowhere because .basically the. political
io leade.rs in the. communities of Palo Alto and Menlo Park have over the years had
ii ,the courage in m.y view from watching it to say "no" we wilC not: connect the
12 .Dumbarton Bridge #0 1'0:1 to 28Q. and the people who want traffic relief, which ,is a,
i3 lot :of :the ,people who live. down there and eomrnute;; they say, "Look, this is
14 crazy." You get. off the Dumbarton Bridge ;and you know they fixed that part: by'
is the old. mental .:hospital,. but still it's a little: street:. Well to me it's a similar issue.
i6 It's an i"ssue of° values and I would' call;, so "to speak, "higher.°walues." There, is a
i~ higher va_lu_e in the peop a that. fight the Dumbarton Bridge connection .because
is they're. trying to protect. neighborhoods. They':re saying, "Loo- k; these
i9 neighborhoods will be totally decimated if you put this big road through to
zo connect these. two big 'freeways which we've built.'' But the people, the ,political
21 leaders have had the courage to say no.
22
23 Now in Petaluma; I believe there is also higher values,at play. 1Ne have the thing
24 comes:'b.efore neighborhoods in this area. Before neighborhoods there's land'.
Zs believe this is th'e largest stretch of undeveloped land in Petaluma. It has
26 incredible riparian, 'potential and. so what I would like to ay here:; is there are
a~ higher values at play and we as political,. l mean :not rne; you, as political' leaders
2s have the ability to not let. this .happen. and go with .the higher values which is
29 riparian ..land, and which is respect for mother nature and 'h`er floodplam. Admit'
3o it's there, acknowledge it, acknowledge why it's been undeveloped and embrace
31 it, embrace it. It w:on't come back and I believe Rainier will be growth:. inducing,
32 and has to be 'funded by some infill there.. So go for the higher value.. Thank
33 yOU.
34 '
3s Patricia. Delzell, 56 Cordelia :Drive:.. Mayor and, Council Members. I'm still, I :get
36 shook up when, T come here. You. guys know me by now; right? I, wasn't. going to
37 come: Here, tonight; yo,u can. tell that by the way I'm dressed, but after lisfening to
3s everyone talk I just wanted to say. a few words.
4o And that is; I don't .know what to do° about- the traffic. I don't know what to do
41 about bare nand :or to build or anything else. All f do know is that there are
42 people .who ,live. in Payran.that go with us every year that panic during the sp-ring
43 and'thesummer,` because winter is coming.. I worry about the pets that. are there;
44 and' how many nights do ~we have to go without sleep while the water's: coming 'in
4s and hope to God it comes in just tq get it over with. Where are we going to go
46 when it does come,'in?
June 26, 1'999
Vol 33; Page 271
1 I hope that the teenage kids are. home, that maybe if it's going to flood it
2 floods when the kids are home and not while they're off to their friends.,. Or
3 ~ do ,you let them go to friends? We're talking a whole neighborhood that lives
. 4 _ like this every" year.
s_.
. - 6 _ I don't know how to even say this nice, I appreciate, I-won't even say it: lt's
. ~ ~ not_ about lunches or how far it takes you to get or will it add five more
s minutes, all~that tome is irrelevant. We're talking abouf people and. lives and
9 the fact. that nobody has died down there is a miracle that. I thank God for all
y to the tirne, but is: that what it's going to take? Not .personally you guys, but this
11 whole+concept of'the higher 'thing and'#f1`ebigger picture. There is no bigger
12 picture without the people that live here and we all live here and we've all
13 been- here a really long time and we're tired and we're frightened and were
14 _ counfirig on qou to do whatever it takes so that we don't have to live like. this
is anymore.
16
. 1~ I'rn sure we can figure out some way the people can get back and forth over
rs to the Easfside. There's. got fo be ih this modern technology. I can't believe
i9 ~ we're stuck with' one road' than we, have to build. Thank you for listening to
" ~ 20 me and putting up with me all these years.
21
22 ~. ;, °®` Rob McGaughey: Good evening. l for one have lived here- for thirty-six
23 ~ . ' years: all my ;life. Listened to Rainier for ,probably at least twenty, whetfler it
24 should be built or not. I for one am.,just finally glad we're getting to it tonight
2s when were. actually going to see where each.. Council Member stands. It's
26 not an election year, so everyone s..going to vote on how they feel and we're
27 just going to see what happens. Every Council Member is voting and
Zs hopefully you've heard th`e citizens one way or another through phone calls
29 or letters or poll,: or whatever and I' for one hope you vote for Rainier tonight
3o because l think we need it. Thank you.
31
32 Charlie. Carson,. 608 ,Jonas Lane: I kind of resent the reference of "bridge
33 to nowhere."' For tho .e of us.who have lived .here at .least 20 years, have
34 heard a lot of the .reference to .Rainier and how this was planned to facilitate
35 the traffic downtown. I was just .looking at the city of ours, a town of ours;
36 which ,is over fifty. thousand. people, seeing just two off ramps basically as
37 .you're coming. north before you get to the Hwy 116 off ramp. That's just not
3s enou,gh~ for .obvious reasons. 1Ne're seeing tremendous amounts of traffic
39 over Washington Street. l don't know how many. addtional_ lanes can be
4o widened on the Washington'over crossing. fo address this problem without
41 getting into any of the' other environmental considerations of the drainage
42 ditches, flood channels.
43
44 The .General Plan that all of us. spent a lot of time on quite a few years ago
4s included the consideration of that the whole area around Corona Ely, the
Vol. 33, Page 272
July 26, 1999
hospital, :etc.., was banking on ,the existence of this interchange and again, I say,.
this is, going to be facilitating those.. of us who are here now.
4 We're talking about. facil.ifati.ng, a lof of the growth. 1 think you .can: pretty well feel
s confident with the Urban Growth Boundaries; the" additional growth is slowed as
6 it„relates to housing,; so that's covered. You know what°s going to be happening.
~ I think.there are very few. parcels left-that will: be; facilitated~,by this. I think it's for
8 those of us who are ,here and I'im; just; not ready to put up with these traffic snarls
9 anymore on McDowell Blvd. as They -are .on Petaluma Blvd North.
io
i i Puffing on my other hat .as representing the Home E3uilders Association.. 1N:e
i2 wece contacted in 1'.-..989 regarding a fee that the. City of-Petaluma wanted to
13 institute for traffic with. a~ budget; I think about twenty=five percent='of all capital
14 improvement, programs designed' for the :city were ,going, ao covered'. by Rainier
is and. this 'was going to be new housing, and new camrnercial covering these
16 expenses to the very large majority of those funds so perhaps it's not incorrect to
i~ say the Home Owners ,Association has supported this all along. I would certainly
is not accept the. idea that this ,Co:uncil wants to trash.this idea now..-Tf1"is-needs to
i9 be continued. I think also it might be good :just to, see an accounti:rg{ of the fees
20 that have' taken place, too. -
21
22 It rnight be 'interesting to see how much. money. actually-..has .come into the city'
23 from new home buyers relating to this.. 1 think if you were to poll them they would,:
..
24 :not,, I'm. just, I think it would be a fairly. safe bet; fo say 'if you w"e're to ask .~tlem
Zs they would not say lets just widen Washington or' put..n some other over
26 crossing,, but they would want to go with the original plan of Rainier. Thank you
z~ very much:
28 -
a9 Bryant Moy",nihan, P.0. Box C; Our City faces.,. ~as major cities do,,; a number of
3o problems.- O'ur city .has a financial problem. I just spoke about that earlier: 1Ne
31 have. a population growth problem.. "1Ne have a housing shortage problem, we
32 have: a sewer capacity problem., we have: a trahsporfation problem; we have a
33 flood control problem.. I"would.-suggest that your legacy as a Council would' not.
34 ' be what projects you kill; if will be what' problems "you solve..
35
36 Fifteen. years ago the: City Council. recognized ~ a community problem: And
37 resolved to solve that prob°Lern. The Payran flood fix Army :Corps of .Engineers,
38 .__
project was born. If has struggled for fifteen years, fifteen "years in w_hieh staff
39 has worked weary hard to bring, it to fruition.. Fifteen .,years that the Council .has
40 .had to support;ahe project. ",Fifteen years where no one was :ever sure whatthe
41 funding sources were:-and in' fact it felC twelve million dollars. shy .of °the. revenues
42 projected from the Zone.. 2A. Now"f.fteen years later we're seeing the fruits of`
43 that project that was born back then.. We're rapidly-approaching .gridlock in our
44 major corridors: :I ask you.,. what is the solution to the. problem? f suggest killing
4s this project is'n'ot part of-that solution. Thank-you:,
46 .
June 26, 1999 Vol.. 33, Page 273
1 Mr. Bloom: l would like to go on record as saying, 'I'm for the Rainier over
2 crossing. ~ I remember approxi_rnately `twelve fo fourteen years ago I heard it
3 was. approved .and it .was going to .cost $8 million. I don'f know what we're at
4 now. 1Ne're over thirty-five million or something. I've heard proposals
s tonight. to get another area. Caulfield someone talked about, Corona Road.
6 Okay, all those we'd be looking at five to six million dollars today. By the
~ time it's talked about, discussed, studied. to death it will be up to fifty million.
s And somebody will say, "Don't build it now, there's a better solution." You
9 know where it_is? Corona. This is the problem,. the problem is the Council,
to the Mayor at that time, all decided this 'is what .we wanted, was brought to a
11 vote like I think somebody said and. it was all, talked and discussed and.
12 studied, E1R everything and it was all a go. All_of a sudden now, it stopped.
13
14 Now it's a foregone conclusion., that this is .gonna be a flood monster. I don't
is know if that's true. I really don't. 'Those houses on Payran, I don't live there,
16 I'm sorry fo say I wouldn't want to. live there and I know that people do and
17 know they don't.. want. to be flooded again. ,Nobody does, nobody wants to
is see them flooded again.. I'm not sure if this is a conclusion, that if Rainier is
19 built they're gonna flood. again. Has anybody read that? Does anybody know
20 that for sure? I'm look. ing to you .Council Members. That's all I have to say,
21 I'm all for it and if you aren't gonna turn if down, at least put it to the vote of
22 the people.
23
24 I think most of the people here.,: or the majority of them, seem to be talking
2s that it's a foregone conclusion that it''s gonna flood. They don't want to be
26 flooded, nobody does. Nobody would want to be flooded and they're coming
27 from that light and I don't know if it is. I don't. think that's: the end result. The
2s end result I think people will cross over back.. and. forth from the Eastside to
29 Wesfside. of town, which includes an ambulance, I've heard people talk that
3o they could flood and somebody could. die. When an ambulance ca_n't get
31 across Washington at 5:00 p.m. in the afternoon because there is bumper-
32 to-bumper traffic for twenty minutes someone could die in the ambulance.
33 Just another thought.
34
3s IVlayor'Thompso,n: I'm going to read one letter by someone who couldn't be
36 here.. I received it on Saturday. It's fo Mayor Clark Thompson, Petaluma Gity
37 Council. from Robert Ostroff, MILD., Medical Dir..ector of Emergency
3s Department. Subject, traffic. delays on transportation of patients to
39 Emergency Department at Petaluma Valley Hospital:
40
41 Dear Council Members, I .have :been an emergency physician at Petaluma.
42 Valley Hospital since 1975 and the Director- of-the Emergency .Department
43 since 1977. I am unable to attend the meeting: this evening and have asked
44 that this letter be read for me. Petaluma is fortunate to have an excellent
4s Fire Department based on Paramedic Service.. Our Paramedics provide
46 excellent care to the community. In most .instances of critical illness or injury,
47
Vol. 33, Page 274 July 26, 1999
they are able to,stab,ilze patients so than sur~ival,to the hospital can be. assured
and patients can b,e: further evaluated. and treated' for their specific problems.
.For major. injuries, this transportation is to; a trauma center. For medical 'illnesses
such as heart attack, stroke:, bleeding, drowning et cetera. the transportation is to
Petaluma Valley Hospital.
~ I am unable to #ell you whether a. `long; transport time through difficult Washington
s Street traffic. has actually .caused a death or significant illness of a patient. I can
9 say, though, that the potential has been there for :this to be the: case: and as
ro Petaluma grows and traffic:.delays worsen it is certain Phis will: be "the ca_ se in th`e
ii fufure.
12
13 Paramedics are able. to .stabilize most. patients', buf not all. -Some patients, for
14 various reasons; are unable: to,: have intravenous lines placed or airway protection
is to -secure breathing p aced in 'the field by Parame~dics.~ There are (hose patients
16 who require the skills of the personnel, at the Emergency bepartment in 'order to
i~ resuscitate or' .stabilize. It is not uncommon to. ..receive a patient in the
ig Emergency Department in whom an Intravenous (IV) in the field was attempted
i9 but unable to be started., It is also .not uneornmori t~ receive. a patient in, the
Zo Eme_rgeney Department in whom a breathing tube into the lungs was
,21 appropriated and atte.rnpted but could not succeed.
23 The facts; are ;not to :mean to cast any aspersions or sense ofi dissatisfaction with
..
24 Paramedic: care in Petaluma. It :is only to mean to have an understanding' that
,2s certainn patient"s require a higher level of skill and experience than thee-
;26 Paramedics have.
. 27 .
. Zs There are :certain rnedicati'ons currently 'in use. for. treatment in specific 'illnesses
29 that are extremely time .dependent.. The most. sensitive of these: is 'thee:
3o medication we' use; to treat. patients who are having a heart. attack. 1Nith this:
31 pa:rficular medication, every minute of delay from. the time the patient has chest
32 pains to the time they medication is adminis.fered can result, in an increasing risk
33 of death, an increasing risk ofi chronic disability from loss ;of heart, muscle, and,
34 loss of future patient function.
35
36 Stroke is another disease that is time dependent;' although we have a more
37 liberal time for that particular treatment. None the less, the delay of minutes in
38 route to the emergency room because of traffic ,problems will be disastrous for
39 certain patient's. 'In some way I hope the. City Council. takes into account ahe
4o health needs of the. community as it makes its decision. about an alternate cross
41 town connector to relieve traffic. down Washington Street. Stabilization of mpst
42 patients. in the #ield by Paramedics is not a substitute for ready access 'to the
43 Emergency Departmenf and to the treatment available by the p'hysieians and'
44 nurses.
45
46 Sincerely yours; Robert Ostroff.
June 26; 1999
Vol. 33; Page 275
~ ~ ~ PUBLIC COMIVIEfVT CLOSED
2 ..
3 v .. x. - C'QU(VCIL C:OMI~ENT
4
s Council Member. Keller: Let me start .off with a couple of things here. First of all,
6 I'm deeply aware:andT_ I~ think the rest of this Council is deeply aware that we have
~ one Council Member who is not present this evening and cannot, under current
s legal opinion, participate in this discussion or, frankly, in discussions having to do
9 with anything with- circulation in Petaluma on Washington, on Corona, in the
io General Plan update or$ rewrite. Anything.. that might affect the viability of the
ii Rainier project. We'll get an. FPPG (:Fair Political. Practices Commission) advisory
i2 on that at some: point; 'b"ut it seems likely at this point that legal advice will be that
13 she. will not be eligible to participate. So as long aS this decision is not made, we
14 have disenfranchised; this Council Member. I am very sorry to hear that, and very
is sorry to be sitting here with this Council under these circumstances. It's unfair to
i6 the voters who voted for Janice Caller-Thompson, and it's unfair 'to her as an
i~ elected representative who has a questionable definition of a conflict of interest.
rs She lives within three hundred feet of some road widening and striping on
19 McDowell.
20
21 Given that, let's-take a look at this project. and do we go forward with this project or
22 not. In my mind, this is a bad .project. Even if the money was sitting on the counter
23 right now, this is a bad project. It's a bad project for a whole host of reasons. Mr.
24 Ostroff, Dr. Ostroff,; raises some very good questions .about transport time to the
2s hospital. As we all know; the :response time from the call to get the ambulance and
26 paramedic crew to-,your house or to your business or to the scene of an accident,
2~ that's the first critical time. And modern medicine has turned that info being the
2s most critical response time for most events.
29
3o Then we do have. the question of ,how long does. it take to get to the ER
3i (Emergency Room~`j;. We'ce Lucky to 'have a good ER in town; we're Lucky to have
32 this facility as a new .hospital iri,'town. We've paid for it. It's: been self-supporting.
33 So what does the' Rainier project?. do for 'that., does it improve it? Does it help the
34 prospects of getting to the hospital in a faster transport. time? And the answer;
3s according to the EIR,' is definitively' no." And that is because Rainier does not
a6 improve the congestion at.lNashington' :and McDowell. That' remairis a Level of
37 Service `F' at peak p:m. times.' That ids something that this Council has gotten into
3s action., to address. A'few months ago.~we p,ut the 'improvements on that intersection
39 back in the CIP Wand we're having that~m;oveahead as fast as possible so that we
~~
4o can make the.tlirough lanes, fhe~"turn.,lanes where they'should be for that volume of
4r intersection ~~and we're also going ~ toy look at improved access to 101 from
42 Washington looking at a free right hand turn lane '.into northbound 101. Rainier
43 does nothing for that intersection.
44
as How about Rainier and McDowell? And th'is' is really the critical piece that has gone
46 by quietly in all this'hullabaloo.about how:we:~need the access to the hospital. What
47 Rainier does is make it worse,,. 'Right now that traffic at that intersection I believe is
48
Vol. 33, Page 276 July 26,.1999
i a high; Level ofi C or low B Service. Ramier~rnoves, that down'to a b or E because of
2 the additional development that comes with Rainier and the induced traffic flows
3 from people moving off of Washington and off of Corona and off of any other way
4 getting through town. .And all the new development would have to come with
s Rainier to help finance it under the. current scheme; that intersection at Rainier is
6 diminished: :And so the hospital; instead of having improved access, gets worse
7 access from the north and from the south. .
9 This is not my'op`nion. I didn't..write it, It's in the EIR: It's.,an. EIR that I disagreed
io with tremendously; but -there it is. 'So this is not a traffic fix .for fhe hospital. It's; not
ii a traffic fix ,for police access: You. don't have,:all the police cars parked at.the. sfation
iz and then send them out like a Buster. Keaton. movie when there's a call, They're on
13 the street, they're on -foot patrol, and they're on ,b:ieycle patrol.. They are. placed.
14 around-the City, on patrol. So let''s get those arguments off the table to beg"in wifh:
is They are wrong;, they,'re wrong-headed and in fact if .you: look at those arguments,
r6 the .information, ,is one hundred, eighty degrees opposite supporting Rain'ier' as a
17 project. So that's what: I will start off with.
ig
i9 Councif Member Torliatt: I'm probably :gonna' be tattered' at the beginning just.to
20 address some of 'the. issues: that came up from members of the public as they
Zi addressed them here this evening. There was. an issue regarding re-election,
22 making decisions based on being re-elected. and I just want people 'to know that. if'
23 I'm making, my decisions; based on my next re-election bid that. I would be doing. a
24 great disse,rviee to the. people: of this community. That is not how I ;make my
2s decisions. I make, my decisions based on ~-the. facts and the current information than
26 is prodded to. us. This. !isn't. going 'to 'b'e an easy decision, it .hasn't ;been an easy
27 decision for me to make. No matter which way I cast. my vote, there. are going, to :be
2s people in this community that aren't ,going to 'be happy.. I think. that's one of the
29 things thaf we ,would' like to see is this community fo be united.
30
31 There:'was an; issue that was raised regarding, "we ~n'eed this interchange because
32 we need the :resources here ;iri: ou.r comm:unity.;,.." `And what I tfiinac is a-.fallacy in ou.r
33 .community and a belief that we keep being told is that the money that's going, to be
._
3a provided by development.:is going to h_ elp this community solve its problems. I
3s started ,questioning that when I was on the. Planning 'Commission and I continue to
36 question 'it to this day, because I don't, believe it;. Especiall,y.. of#er looking at our
37 budget. There'was an issue; or statement made thatsaid flooding is :not an issue. I.
3a will sif here today and tell you flooding is a, huge issue: for me. It's a, huge issue for
39 this community and it`s not just based upon the- development that 'occurs ~in o.ur
40 `community: It°s based upon the development that ,occurs: upstream'in fhe: County
41 and that's- somewhere viihere we need fo co_nt'nue to fry and work, together with the
42 County to, provide a, solution to it.
43
44 There's also been :issues raised regarding .b ing berated and the.'argument has
4s been posed as: the developers against they environmentalists,, and/or people .are
46 going to make money off of this. It has rioth"ing to do, at least for me, with money;,
47 :. .. ,.
June 26, 1999 Vol. 33, Page`277
i folks. If has to do with good planning and our City has been;.. our Council has been
2 put in a really bad position because that type of argument keeps getting thrown at
3 us and ~tha#' not what we're up here making our decisions on. It's. making it upon
4 informationprovided to us. ~ `' ~ " .
s ..-
6 There'a also a person that came. up h-ere and talked abvout problems that are traffic,
~ just land use and' development and growth and sighting all of"these issues that
s we're facing in Petaluma. I thi,nk`we need`to~"focus on the fact that every City`iri this
9 County, every City in the. Bay Area is facing all ofi these issues. This is not ;just
io Petaluma. Go up to Santa Rosa, I mean, it's a mess up there. I mean, you know;
i i and I'm not. saying it's good and. I'm not going ao "sit here, and tell you~.it's gonna ,get
12 any betfer cause it's gonna get worse. If we can maybe even try` aril keep it at..the
i3 same level because the reality is.; more people` are";going to come here because.':the
14 population continues to-:expand,, and we're :gonna have fo provide for housing, we're
is going to have=to provide for all the businesses and all the jobs.
16 <.
i~ And then there were two individuals that came. up 'that -have talked about, and .I'll
-. ,
is address it again and 1've said if again, one 'of the hardest things I think this Council
I9 has is to provide information fo the: public. To get the -real understanding of.the
20 issue across.. A lot. of people believe that folks: voted on Rainier. They did not- vof'e
21 on Rainier, they .never voted on Rainier. What was on the 1992 ballot was an
22 initiative to complete the East Washington corridor improvements first. It did :not
23 say anything about .Raini'e.r in that initiative. So I want . to ;address ;that again so
24 people understand that. ~ `~
25
26 The other issue: that has come up is that folks that live oh th'e Eastside that have
27 lived there for- 30 years or a long time- and have seen the development grow around
2s them with the Corona-Ely Specific Flan, :it's that they have been promised 'Rainier
29 for a long time, and I, agre.e:;~ They have .been promised some sort of connector to
3o the Westside. The problem 'is that 'it was a vision. If it was a reality, they would.
31 have built it then .because there is no money for it.
32
33 If you look at the current staff .report we maybe have five million dollars for this
34 project of City money .and there would. be an assessment, disfrict based on
35 development in that area which would cover about fourteen million dollars, maybe;
36 if we "stretched 'it, .and. this is. a thirty-three million dollar project. We can go out for
37 other` money but the money just isn't there, and that means that every other project
3s in this City probably won't happen... So I have some other comments, but I didn't
39 know if, any of the. other .Council IVlembers wanted to .respond to some of the other
4o comments made.
41
42 Council Member Hamilton: I have a few responses.. I am opposed to having this
43 City go ahead with the :Rainier project and I have. been opposed to it from beginning
44 to end. I voted.againstthe EfR. It's not adequate.- It did not ask the right questions
4s and it didn't mitigate the problems that it did raise.
46
Vol. 33, Page 278
July 26, 1.999
i As far as F was concerned,, somebody talked about making decisions based on a
2 bid for re-election and. l ,just 'want to saq~ that this .decision is so much, b.igge:r than
3 any person's re-election. it's .a big, decision.; for this town: Forty million dollars,
4 when you include the debt service; 'is just, an enormous amount of money and to .me
s it represents all the things we .could do in this community to improve :our quality of
_.
6 life. I'm not willing tasspend forty million dollars to degrade our.guality of life. The
~ Rainier EIR, shows that "Rainier .Avenue. is gonna. have the. same problem that
s Washington and McDowell ,has right now, at Rainier and' McDowell.. I'm riot willing
9 to do that. 1'm,pp t willing fo bring, he development, that will undo the congestion
io relief`fhat its .su osed to solve.
ii ~ "
12 Rainier does .not solve .the problems :and I do w,anf to'solve problecns~. f want us to
: , , .,
i3 take the money ~we have available ao us and; spend it ontrue: congestion relief in
1.4 thin-, town, and fhere; is a number .of ways we :can do that. I would ,like us to put
is Rainier behind us,: because I .think, that 'it will. take everything this community has
16 and it won't ;give.. I: really 'think. that developers who. do excellent projects should
i~ prosper and, l .applau'd them. ~ . I''m; not willing to. allow people to develop at the
i8 expense of the citizens of Petaluma and the .quality of` life that. we have. here.
19
20 Talkingabout the .ambulance and the hospital and safety: Right now we have 'a two
Zi and a half minute response. time,, which is excellent. That;is a wery,good :response
22 time. If we: had 'the money and if vvasn't socked away., if we had the money we
23 could ;get two more ambulances and have. one in every quadrant of the: city .and
24 probably our' response. 'time would be a `lot better: ,Like ,David said, with reduced
2s traffic, people would be able. to get to the hospital .faster, but Rainier is riot going to
26 reduce traffic.. .
27 s , .
zs I think; when, people are thinking about Rainier and envisioning it, they're .imagi'ning
z9 it's going to be: an empty road and fhey'rejust going to be driuing,their.car on it and
3o they'll be able to ,go ;fast and get right across town and it really isn°t going, to be' that..
31 way. Rainier has to be paid f.or by development and, people are going to ,be drawn
32 to .Rainier as a destination not as a means' to get' across own and it' will be :clogged
33 just like Washington:and McDowell., It's not going to be an empty road.
3s You .know,, abouf getting across ;town fo,r lunch, I regularly go from Second and. H
36 Streets. up Petaluma, Boulevard across Corona to::Cafe Giostra or ;the .Redwood':
37 Paaza, fifteen minutes. S'o the woman.,. whoaaid it took twenty minutes to ,go across
3s Washington and McDowell, maybe should try Corona: We do have three. over
39 ero"slings in this town and I think we can utilize them, in a different way than we :are
40 .right now:... ,And w.e can work on trip ;generation and ~ source reduction in this
41 community and have an enormous impact :on the traffic'in this town. Rainier''is not
42 going to give us congestion relief`..
43
44 Mayor Thompson: I would just, like.:to respond. I don't, hate the...l see there are
4s copies of'the E'IR around,.. of the Rainier EIR, buf to talk.~aboiat, when. the project is
46 done and the intersection ,of what would be Rainier and McDowell at a Service
June 26, 1999
Vol.. 33; Rage 279
1 Levef "F''; I don't know if that is when the project. is referred to as Rainier `only 'or
2 Rainier in conjunction with the: improvement of'1Nashington and in conjunction" with
3 the improvement of the intersection. at Corona. But that's just wfh'Rainier only, but
4 and I think there ,is another something in here that if we also improve Washington;
s which were doing, and we do the intersection of Rainier and McDowell, that actually
6 that intersection does-improve. A traffic situation of "F" -for me there's a very low
7 "F" -and then there's a high "F." You could'be there for fifteen minutes on a low "F"
s and maybe three minutes with a high "F" so I definitely think there is going to be
9 some improvement and .I don't ,have an EIR in front of me, but I could research that.
to Anyone.
11
12 Council Member Healy: I, of course, ran for office saying that I supported Rainier.
13 I continue to adhere:~to that, position and I'll reserve any more detailed comments on
14 specifics until such. time as someone makes a motion..
1s -
16 Council. Member Maguire: Interesting thing happens if I'm in a hurry and I'm trying
r~ to get across town \ it.could'take"five minutes and it's an aggravating experience. If
is I know there's going~to be traffic because it's mid-day and I know that this town is
19 the same as any town in~.,this~ state .of same size and it takes me fifteen minutes,
20 and I know that's what it's going to take, I go right through, I come across and. I'm
21 calm. It's just to illustrate the subjective r%ature of driving your car.
22
23
24
2s
26
27
2s
29
I think that, `Bruce Hagen did a commendable job. summing up the context of this
situation... .Today in America we have. b`eeome the. dominant political country in the
world and.'it's based on petroleum and it's based on armaments and our military
might and "we preserve .a way of,"political, intercourse in. the world, if you will., based
on might makes right: We've seen it i'rn the Gulf War, we've seen it in the covert
and overt support or opposition of :governments throughout the world ever since
World War II
.. ~
30
31 What's it getting, us? It's getting us a .greater stratified society of haves and have
32 Hots, not only iri•; this. country.;"~ but throughout the world. It's getting us an
33 increasingly and:: dari'gerously degraded environment where you know you can't pry
34 peoples' hands off ,heir sfeering,wheels even if it means their kids are going to die
3s n a toxic soup because we're poisoning the world with. our cars.
36
37 Down. here at the~:rrmcrocosm level we're looking at Rainier. What is it? 'It's huge,
3s it's ugly and it's environmentally .destructive. I mean the thing is gonna 'be ugly,!
39 Where have you seen, ya know, a_ massive road. structure like this. that doesn't
4o make .your heart sink? There's not one. in the world I will warrant. you. If. you can
41 find it, point it out to me, brut 1'll .#e(I you it's not in "a. situation like what we have here..
42
43 So what. are we gonna .get; and what's the cost. going to be? .Forty million dollars is
44 going to be conservative,. and you can say, o.h, yeah, th"at's because you guys have
4s been dithering. forever. Well, nonsense. As Pam pointed out, if this was such a
46 great idea, how come Mike Davis and Brian Sobel and Patty Hilligoss didn't get the
47
Vol. 33, Page 280
July 26, 1999
1 damned thing built? Well; they didn't,, because the money wasn't there. Now they
2 pushed it ahead as fast.. as they could; -but you go through These docurrients and'.
3 you find out.that .this thing is a pig in' a poke.
4
s You ,know., read. the. documents,, folksf If you're worried about getting 'to ;lunch
6 across. town, and yo:u think Rainier is ;going :to solve your problem, read the EIR.
~ .Now this 'is an EI'R that a former City Council said., "We want an EI;R based, on'the
s fact ,that we already know we want Rainier." So, tell- us flow to mitigate it. Now, an
9 E'IR is not a planning document. And .if a City Council says; "Do an ELR on a project
to that we know we want;" you're gonna get a certain sef of answers. V11ell„ .even in.
11 that ease; this thing is so full of holes it makes. Swiss cheese look solid, you know?
12 You start digging underneath the surface; and: it's really appalling Th''s is not going
13 to work:. a'll say it again.: if you, could build your way out of congestion, Los Angeles
14 would be; a paradise on Earth. And 'as somebody who, escaped from Lose .Angeles
rs decades ago, I tell ,you; it isn't.. Check it out if' you don't believe me,
16 _
1~ Okay, so .even if' we built it, 'there is a pent-up desire to.d~rive `As,Jane says; people
is imagine they're going to: go sailing over the freeway- on Rainier. ;Isn't this, lovely? 1
1.9 our car.. In 'our sport utility vehicles, than have; you know, lousy gas. mileage arid,
20 you know, poison 'the ai'r. Not very conscious... I: thinK we're better at this, most of us.
21 I"n this'town, :most of us, care a lot more about our community an;d the world at large
22 and 'the future of :our children,'whether, we have there oc not. ~`
23
24 So, that ofher is not an attitude we scan maintain. That ~'is ffie ;antithesis of
:.. .
Zs sustainable community,. and sustainable :economy. It w,on't pay in the. long, ,run. How
26 many wars, do we .have to fightto p.rese.rve our access'°to oif throughout the world,
27 slaughtering innocent people? I don't want':a part of it. i don't``think you folks want a
2s part of it. ..
29 -
3o Comment from Audience: You need to run for a higher office.
31
32 Council Member Maguire: O.h,, please! N'o. Thank you, I'm :flattered, but. i've got
33 plenty to do .right here. As David~'has pointed outs. and 'if you read the document;
34 ;you're oin to see that we have a degraded level!,of service in- many areas. As
9. 9
ss Council Member Thompson's pointed out, ~ even. with ~ Rainier, these are
36 requirements to improve 1Nashington and McQ'owel ~, if' we're going to make this;
37 you know, pig in a poke fly,; well,;. we're already saying we..re going to make those
3s improvemen"ts gat `Vl/ashington and 'McDowell, and along with than a free northbound..
39 on ramp,, I Think we're going ~to g'et, the lion's share. of improvements there. at a
4o fraction of. the cost. If it were ,to' ,go to ;a vote of the ~p.ubJc; 1 think .it would be a
41 disservice: to the public, because, ,as Mr. Cartwright pointed out, wh'o wants to. read.
42 this boring crap anyway? You know? I' don'f, I hake, b"uf don't ask me wh.y.; I d,on:'t
_.
43 think you're going to adequately inform yourself and make a good decision if' it; goes
44 on the ballot. Even if .,you. can't. do that, you're going to be relying; like everybody
4s does, on whore you know and whom you -trust. Then it becomes a battle. of budgets.,..
46 and a battle of m._is:nforrnation. I,s that, anyway fo run a, city? I don't think so. l can't
47
June 26, 1999 Vol. 33, Page-281
i support that if you were going, to put it~ on the ballot., the only way I could support it
2 would be if it had a tax. measure attached with it, or a funding components.. Now, if
3 you have a funding component,, 'it's gonna take atwo-thirds majority. Well, even
4 with a lot of money behind it; even if all the development interests think it's a great
s idea, you know, and` pu't their money behind, it,' and fund this thing and there's a
6 great, you know, propaganda war, it would be hard to pass that thing. I, personally,
7 would be out on the st-rest corner' fighting, it, because if's still goring be huge, ugly,
s and environmentally damaging! 1 just can't support that, in my hear of hearts. It's
9 not a good plan.
io
ii There are a number of alternatives. All .along I've said that the thing to do about.the
i2 circulation in this town, is to take little steps one at a time. There is no magic silver
13 bullet when it come's to transportation. When it comes to automobile circulation,
i4 there is no magic bullet. 1Ne, if we put our money into one big project thinking that
is this is the magic- silver bullet; and it fails, where does it leave us? Boy! It leaves us
i6 in a terrible state:. Terrible shape! V11e .have committed our funds for the next two
17 decades at least'. The discretionary funds that the City has to run the City, which, I
ig will tell you; are a small portion of our budget.
T9
20 We do not have: a lot of discretionary funds in this City to do all those things that
21 need to . be done. Now, we're trying to stretch a buck and we get .pretty good
22 sometimes, but 1 think this thing would be just ruinous for this City. Again, we've
z3 already given approval to the Washington McDowell interchange that includes
24 trying to put on a free northbound on ramp. I think that'll help out things.
as
26 The biggest thing than can be done.,. has already' been done. We've adopted an
27 Urban Growth Boandary. 1Ne've said, "1Ne don't want to keep sprawling out." .And
as that sprawl. is what 'has caused us to get here in the first. place.. That is a huge thing.
z9 You're 'not going to see benefits from that for a few years; because how can you
3o measure it? 'How can you measure the decrease in pain? You can't.
31
32 I think. probably the worst thing that can happen is that the City Council does
33 nothing. We've gone .back and forth, we've''had Janice Caller-Thompson re.cuse
34 herself, which. is a shame. I personally, ultimately think that the Fair .Political
3s Practices Commission will come. back and say, yes; she can vote on this because it
36 affects the. community widely and equally. And that, to my way of thinking, is
37 undeniable. It's as: clear as the nose on my face. That being the case, if Janice
3s were to come back, I think it would be clear how the vote on this Council would go
39 on this project. That's how I feel about it. I'd be happy to hear further discussion.
40
41 Mayor Thompson: I'd like to make one quick .comment on the funding.
a2 Everybody's taking shots at the funding,. and I, myself 'have questions regarding the
43 funding. But we don't have a final design. So, therefore, we do not have any~.final
44 funding figures, how are we going to do this. Which. way are we going to go? We've
4s got some preliminary 'information from the: Department of Finance, and everybody's
46~ just pulling it apart. It's easy to do. If we have a final design, a final project, then we
47
Vol. 33, Page 282
July 26, 1999
could look at if. Maybe we couldn:'t find. the .funding,. -but we've never given :it an
afternpt.
4 Council Member Torliaft:. I just want to be "ve;ry clear that my opposition on l3Rainer
s` and to going ahead with the project. has nothing to do with -the funding: If we had
6 the :money, I would want to spend it .on. true traffic relief and congestion relief i.n this
town, and, I would .not. want to spend it on Rainier.., So .I agree with, what Mike said
_. ,
s the last, time we falked about ;it. `Yeah, we could rune after this money;, and we could
9 probably get it, you know; eventually; but I':d like to run after the money and actually
io ~ get it for something else; for something that. really will improve our ;quality of life
ii here.
12
13 Council. Member- Keller: Thank you.. I agree. L think,.. you know, the way that prior
14 Councils did their.- work whether it was the Marina, which we're still paying for, or by
is borrowing :money :from the PCDC from, .redevelopment, or the Auto Mall, which
16 we're still making back .payments on to the owners; or the Rooster Run Golf
i~ Course, wh, ich we''re doing as a subsidy for ten years:; and there is, tremendous
is outflow of money`there.
19
20 Yeah., there pare _aII. these huge projects that were ;brought. in on John Sclaarer's
21 management, under the prior Councils. These were: going to ,be the, golden. lights. to
z2 make Petaluma sparkle: 1Nell; the only things that's sparkling is the Auto. Mall sign.
23 And we 'paid a lot .of money for'thatl
24
2s Rainier is just another star i'n than calendar.. It wasn't: a good.. calendar! it' : °not; a
26 good. ,plan,,. it's pay for it (unintelligible). It's a ,nice prospect. if you're in the private
27 sector and. you, stand to reap the benefits of: shareholders and. you go belly up and'
zs bankrupt ifyou don't. Who. cares? But this is a pub:l_ic institution. We don't; have that
29 option..'1Ne have the trust~of your .money,; and, the services that you expecf. And to
3o bet this farm on paying. for Rainier; and being a profitable venture, no one has
31 presented how that's going to work.
32
33 We've bar,.ely'talked about'the financing costs,, another eigh# to ten `million: dollars of
34 financing,. on .borrowing that money. That cranks the number up over forty million:
3s dollars. And then,.. if 'it'`s .a, locally owned project; which is what it is,. there's-
36 mainte_ Nance. So all this new development. is suppo"sed #o pay for the.. capifal,;
. ..
37 expenses, fjut what happens ~to the maintenance .budget? Where does. that come
3s ;fr,.om'? Nobody's ever even proposed w' here that maintenance budget. is coming
39 from.
:40
4i So maybe we could go after money and we could maybe get a couple of Christmas
42 'presents ouf of the Burton BiIL or. some: other source of money, but it doesn't pay in
43 the'long run. Again, even if there was money sitting on the table right now, this is a
44 'bad project., I couldn't do it.
45
-June 26, 1999
Vol. 33, Page 283
i I need to respond a little bit to the question abouf Corona or Rainier being -on the
2 books for years,: for :generations.,. for twenty years, thirty years,, fifty ,years, who
3 knows, probably back in the Pomo Indians' Plan._ I need to, .you know, talk from the
4 written documents. The 1962 General Plan. Everybody says that Rainier was in
s there. 1Nell, it's note! What was in there is Corona ,Road/Skilman Lane connecting
6 four lane to Bodega Expressway,,. and a n°ew diamond interchange at the freeway;
_ 7 that's Corona. Road/Skilman Lane. That was the freeway interchange they were
- _ stalking about.
~9
to The only other freeway "nterchange :you're talking ,about, Sonoma Mountain -Road
- i i (not Sonoma Mountain. Parkway) connecting Ely to Adobe .Road and then to the
i2 freeway. There is no Rainier freeway interchange in 1962's General Plan. How
~= 1~3 about 1.987? This is the document (I feel like Nancy Read) before it was amended
- ~ 14 in 19.89, and it lists four' specific east/west route. improvements as recommended.
rs The first one in the list: This plan recognizes the need. for and recommends a
16 Corona Road interchange with U.S. 1'01.. Once. the interchange is constructed, the
17 widening of Corona `wi.ll be' required,, although more by the expected turning
` rs' movements and safety considerations `than by sh`ee.r volume. of traffic. This plan
1,9 recommends widening Corona Road to five; lanes from Petaluma Boulevard fo
20 North McDowell Boulevard and three lanes from North McDowell to Ely. Okay?
21
22 Down the list vice: have Washington Street improvements. Rainier is the third one
23 down the lisf, as a four-lane divided arterial! and then linked east to west is the
24 Caulfield. Extension. Okay? So, Corona, was .not deleted from the General Plan until
2s 1988., and 89, when it -was amended: Until then, it was a half interchange at
26 Corona, half interchange at Rainier.. Cal-Trans said we don't like half interchanges
27 anymore, and b'esides' which, Rainier is too close to Washington, so -pick one.
28
29 Well, in 1988, what else happened? We got the new redevelopment project area
3o put in place. A third of the City put into redevelopment. And probably an .illegal
31 amount of undeveloped .land was put' into. redevelopment. What were the projects'
32 goals? Help -pay for Rainier, .help build the Auto Mall, the Marina, and a host of
33 other big wish projects that came through prior :administration. It was a funding
34 scheme.
35
36 Was it good planning? No. Was it good economics? Nobody in this document,
37 nobody in staff has been able to show the good .economics. So let's get off this Holy
3s Grail of Rainiex: It's. not the Holy Grail. It was just a development project. ,Nothing'
39 more, nothing less.. There's nothing wrong with development, if it's good
4o development..There's nothing wrong with development if it pays its own way. And
41 that's really where, the funding question comes in for me. And the question of who's
42 making money on this.
43
44 It's an equity question. If you have landowners- vVho stand to make many, many
45 millions of dollars by having ...Rainier approved and built as a project, they benefit.
46 The problem forme is that the public is being asked to shoulder far more of the
47
Vol. 33, Page 284 July 26,.1999
i b.urden: That's the equity question. ,in the funding., .It's not; "Is (here money?" ;It's..,.
2 "Who's paying for it?" And that's" ,my problem with the fiunding schemes that. have
s come to us to dafe. ~ "
4
s If we ;get 'the money, let's say Burton passes in the, November 2Q00 and there's a
6 sales fax, a half cent: sales tax,, and let's say'the fifteen million dollars, that would be
~ on the project lisf 'for Rainier would come. through,.. and let's say we .could' leverage
s another ten million" dollars out of the, Board of Supes~ by .giving up other Petaluma =:
9 projects, because that's what it would take. .
io
i i Let's say, w,e could, get a'Il of that money out. of ;the sales tax, It's, still ,a~ question of ..
12 equify: Why should people who shop and live and work in. Petaluma; and :Sonoma
13 Coanty, bail out, subsidize huge tlevelop`ments that. are raking, in large. money that
14 should be paying their share?~ Chelsea has made:'it very,clear that they will note. pay
is more than., one: million, two hundred thousand dollars , which was "the privately .~
16 agreed-upon amount that theq got when they signed their .development agreements ". .
i~ with ;the City. Our Finance Director says it's likely that,'the real :assessment. on that
i8 project would be af: least double that. They've. said; flat .out,,. so; we're not ;going :fo ;
i9 pay anym'grethanthis. That's the agreement:
20 _ _ , ,
zr Olcay. ;It's an equity .question.. Let's get clear where the financing is coming from; as°
22 well as if there is financing. 'Because. to my mind, they're bo-th unsatisfactory
23 answers...
Council `Member IViaguire ,IVIr. Mayor? 1Ne have on, our desks a draft resolution.
thaf:D'avid 'Keller' supplied to us, and I'm .going; to read through it. It's two. pages,; so
please bear with. me, if you would. It°s titled`,. "Resolution to Remove the Rainier
Avenue Cross-Town Connector and U:S;; 101 Interchange Project from the Cify'_s;
and Petaluma Community D;evelopmenf C.ommission's List of Capital. Irnprovernent
Projects and., Traffic Circulation Improvements."
32 It reads;
33.
`34 Whereas the Cify Council of Petaluma did certify the :final environmental
35 impact reporf and approve the Rainier Avenue Cross-Town Connector
36 and U. S: `1,01 Interchange Project on October .1'7, 1994 ,(Resolutions 94---
37 284 NCS and 94-285 NCS); and
38
39 VI/hereas; the City Council and PCDC ha,~e in other pasf actions
4o approved and' included this project .on its list of capital projects and traffic:
41 circulation iinprovernents;..and
42
43 Whereas; the objectives of the pr"ojectw.ere sfated in the draft EIR as to
44 `provide a new:cross-town connector east/west route, fa relieve congestion
4s along the Washington Street corridor and to provide an interchange ,with
46 Highway 1Q1 to serve both east and west~Petalunia,' "and .
June 26, 1999
Vol. 33; 'Page-:285:
1 •'..Whereas; subsequent examination of existing; changed and new
2 information has. raised significant doubts about and problems with the
3 assumptions and conclusions of th. e final E/R; and
4
s
6
~ 1•
s •
9 2.
to
11 _ r3.
12
13 "
Whereas;: the.-.City Council finds such problems to include the following:
The ~projec't induces new growth anal does just accommodate growth
as claimed in the final E/R;
The project induces and supports significant growth in occupancy of
the floodplain;,
The' project was based on floodplain mapp"ing and constraints from the
flood insurance, rate map of September 1989, which is now over ten
years out~of date;
Such new floodpla'in development .creates an increased risk to the
,public .and private`~'health; safety and welfare that is unaddressed by
the final"EIR; ~ ~~.
The project and ,E/R does not account for impacts of the new traffic
gerie'rafed on pair and 'water quality;
The,, project final ~ EIR did not include up-to-date traffic figures;
4.
y
5.
6.
zo calculafions and modeling; that is., not including the likely uses of
21 ~ several key parcels in .the project area;
22 .~ 7. The new traffic induced, generated and accommodated by the project
z3 will .cumulatively, in a short period of time, overcome any congestion
24 'relief benefits of the project alone, including those at the critical
2s - . , Washington ;and McDowell intersection;
,._
26 .- 8. The new traffic induced; generated and accommodated by the project
27 will adversely affect the .intersections of Rainier Avenue and Highway
zs 101- and McDowell Boulevard, resulting in .access to Petaluma Valley
29 Hospifal thaf is more difficult from the north,than it is now;
30 9. The projecf was approved as .the key component for congestion relief;
31 however, the City did not and still does not have a Comprehensive Trip
32 Reduction Plan, .nor a Land Use/Transportafion/Circulation. Plan, nor
33 other non-structural means of reducing congestion and delays
34 throughout the circulation system. The results of these efforts could
3s likely cost less; be less environmentally damaging, and produce longer
36 lasting congestion relief for the City;
37 10. The project, .locally fur-ded; is dependent upon significant new
3s development: This, in effect, mandates maximum development in open
39 lands; floodplains, and riparian corridors, wetlands and habitat
4o corridors of the Corona. Reach to yield the assessment revenue
41 necessary to. provide funding-for.the project;
42 11. Because of the limitations imposed by Proposition .218 on Special
43 Benefit Assessments, there would be significant inequities in sharing
44 - ;the cost burdens .between the properties which are accessed and
4s r:. benefif directly from the project and. from the general public, thus
Vol. 33, Page 286
July 26, 1,999
1 providing a significant public subsidy to the development of those
2 properties;,
3 12. These ..inequities, and ;local funding regairements for the ;project and fits
4 long-term maintenance will drain substantial public .resources of 'the
s City and .the PCDC from. other .urgent ,and identified needs in the City
6 for many years to come;
~ 13. The project' further ~ fragments the critical habitat corridor along tithe
g Petaluma River,: especially in the reach- identified ~as the best rema,'ining~
9 riparian corridor,and oak-dominated, valley bottom woodland along the
ro river;
11 1.4. The project final E/R does -not address potent-al impact to migrating
12 sfeelhead; no.w a Jisted species;.. and other identified endangered,,
13 threatened orspecial=status species within the projec_ t area:-
14 ,. _
is Now,, therefore, tie it resolved that .for .these and other reasons and
16 findings;, this City Council does hereby eliminate ~ ~ the Rainier A.ve'nue .
1~ Cross-Tgwn Connector at U. S. 101 Interchange Project fro-n its prioritylisf _
is of Capita'I Improvement Projects and Traffic; Circulation' Improvements.
19 •.
zo I would so move that draft. - ` ~ ~'
21
:~ ~,
22 Council Member Keller: Second:
23 r `
24 Mayor Thompson: Any discussion?
26 Council Member ;Iiealy:.Now it's my turn. I'll, start by aaying that=even; if~ this
2~ resolution, were- passed tonight we~ have .not wriften'the final' chapter .on Rainier in
2s my view. It's ,going to have to be sorted. out by the, voters in one manner or another:
29 It seems to me that the_re's no ,need to rush to a decision on this. 1Ne were told
3o earlier tonight, that. RMI's Ninety-.Day Study will' be presented three days from now,
31 on Thursday night. The draft. resolution ihcludes findings about flood impacts. I
32 don't see how we can, "'Number four: Such. new floodp'lain development creates an
33 increased..risk to'the ,public."
34
3s Council Member. Keller.: I'll be happy to explain that; after you'.re finished,.
36
37 Council .Member Healy: "okay. 1N,e have: commissioned a study to look at flood
38 mitigation issues. JNe were fold, of course, at: the- beginning, that the consultants
39 expected the result to be that. water falling in this po.rt.ion of the watershed .should be
4o moped through the riper as quickly as possible: I have not heard, any results Rorie
41 way or another about .what ;the consultants were: gging to come up with, but it
42 seems to me that'if that is the. result, thaf the engineers are going to come up with: in
43 three days time; that Council majority may be proceeding on a' false premise.:.
44
45 Moving. on, I have made suggesti9ns that. are listed in some of the memos that we
46 have received for exploring design options for making Rainier less costly,. And that
47 -
June 26, 1'999
Vol. 33', Page 2$7'
1 includes looking at .options for having fewer lanes, for incorporating traffic circles:
2 We now have a memo stating Cal-Trans is open to traffic circles, contrary to what
3 might have been believed previously. fn .fact;. Cal-Trans: itself is proposing two `traffic
4 circles. on the Novato Narrows section of` the road. One of the benefits of traffic
s circles., if you can incorporate them into the design of a .project. such as Rainier, is
6 that you have the ability to proceed with fewer lanes, which means the potential for
~ significant cost sayings, and" the City Traffic Engineer has confirmed that that
s possibility is very real. We've been told 'that for the expenditure of additional
9 monies, fifty thousand dollars, one hundred thousand. dollars, in that range, we can
to further explore those. design opportunities. Given that the City has already spent
11 one million,. one hundred thousand dollars on Rainier, I think that would be prudent.
12 to do.
13
14 The Johnsons, in connection. with their development;,. have raised the possibility of
is an at-grade crossing `at Shasta. Thaf also holds the possibility of substantial cost
16 savings.. So those are things I think should be explored in more detail before a final
1~ decision is-.made on'this project.
is
19 With respect to the money :issue, I've heard some, but not all, of the Council
20 Members who have spoken against Rai,riier say that even if money was at hand;
21 they would still bey against the project. Let me just go on that subject a .bit more. To. .
22 the extent that money is a decision. point. in peoples' minds, I would remind you that
23 we also have no money for widening 101.;, we have no .money readily, of hand~fo;r -
24 implementing night rail.. All three of these are projects that 1 believe~the public wants,.,.
zs and our mandate as elected officials. is to try to find ways to make it happen. n
26
2~ A referenc_ a has been made to .Senator Burton's Bill, and also to Measure B, .and of
2s course, if SCA3 goes forward next year with either the Measure B allocation or
29 something similar to it; that would incfude fifteen million dollars for Rainier or
3o alternative to Rainier, and taken together with the .opportunities for designing a less
31 costly project than the one- before us, I think those two items taken together would`
3z give us the opportunity to go a long ways towards ,getting the funding for across-
33 town connector and intersection at Rainier.
34
3s There has been discussion tonight of a full. interchange at Corona Road. I've stated`
36 before, and f still believe, that in the tong term, a full interchange of Corona would
3~ be more growth. inducing. Of :course,. we have the Urban Growth Boundary in place
3s for the next twenty years. l~ hope to be here in town for more than twenty years, so I
3a would rerriind people Thaf there will be life after the Urban Growth Boundary.
40
41 There have been references to; well, in addition to Corona, there has been
42 discussion of the possibility of building a connector only at Southpoint; and .that
43 issue has been discussed previously, of course, but I would just point out that that
44 would also involve adding fill. The point isn't that you don't have fill at these kinds of
4s projects. The point is you mitigate them.
46
Vol. 33, Page 288
July 26; 1999
i I'll conclude with:. obis.; Mark Johnson raised another point that 'I raised :during the
2 campaign,. and that :is the relationship of Rainier and the Corona Reach .area. to the
3 Urban Growth Boundary:. In my view., the. easy part; of the: Urban Growth .Boundary
4 Measure was enacting it.-The more difficult .challenge is successfully implementing
s it over :ifs twenty-,year 'life and as Mr.. Johnson pointed out, and as I poinfed .out
6 during th,e campaign, there was a, survey conducted by Planning Department staff'
~ of vacant land in the City; :and that study concluded that. there was enough
s residential :.land,, enough commercial land, enough. industrial land to meet the Cify's
9 needs for the twenty-year .life ~of the; Urban: Growth Boundary. And I broaght a copy
io of it with me tonight, and I won't bore you with it, but if anyone wants to looks at the
ii maps,;. or would like to be reminded, it specifically included land in all three,of those.
i2 categories'in the Corona Reach area, and land that would be opened up by Rainier.
13
14 As an exampae, the analysis :concluded "that Petaluma.. naeds another eighty `acres
is of commercial and retail land for the next twenty years.; and that there are ones
~i6 -hundred twenty-six acres of such land inside the Urban Growth B,oundary.::;" Which.
i~ sounds ,great, but eighty-six acres Hof than land is located in the floodplain, or near
i8 .Rainier, leaping only forty acres, half ,of what's :needed, outside of that area. And
i9 similarly, making, the- floodplain and Rainier land off limits would drive the~avai,lable
20 inventory of, both. industrial and ;residential land below what is projected to be
2i needed:
22
23 .:All ,.four "of, the Council Members who have spoken tonight in opposition to Rainier
'24 signed' the: balloty„statement ',in favor of that measure, t_he Urban Growth Boundary
2s ~ Measure,,which'referenced that.very study and promoted that to the citizens, as one
26 of the, reasons. why ii was okay to pass the Urban Growth.. Boundary: So, I'm
2~ concerned that we would be changing the rules 'in #he. middle of: the game ~and-
28 'setting up. the Urban .Growth Boundary for ultimate failure down. th'e road, if we.
-29 proceed along this path. And I'll stop there. -
30
31 `Mayor Thompson: Mr: Keller.
32
33 .Council IVlember' Keller: Qkay. On the resolution, it say. s that the project "induces
. 34 and supports significant. growth and occupancy of the floodplain," was based on
_.
3s outmoded flood insurance rate maps to define the floodplain; and, "new floodplain
36 development creates an. increased risk to the public and private. health, safety, Nand
37 ~ .welfare that is unaddressed by the final EiR." And that is all true.
38
39 The R.MI study is being touted. as the new fix, the new flood fix. ,It's not,.okay? RMI's
4o study; if you read the .contract;. it's tasked, l hate that word; they were given thee. task
4.1 of a very narrow set of obligations. That is, 'tell us,, .for the: interim where we: could
42 use detention or~ retention. basins,.. if at all, possible, to help alleviate flood problerrms
43 until we get ;a surface water management program:. Okay? That's all. It doesn't say
44 anything .about any other flood management policies. Or structures.
45 -
. June 26, 1999 Vol. 33, Page 289
. _ i And it may well be that RMI cornea back with the modeling that they have available.,
2 which is based on incomplete information that we have to date, and says, Hey, stick
3 detention and retention. basins on the .outlying parts of the City that won't change
4 the timings, and that'll help. Will it cure things? No. Is if the answer? No.
5
6 Mr. Healy and others have referred to this as kind of another "flood fix." It's not..
~ Because it still doesn't address the central policy question that this Council has
s never wrestled with, which is: Do you build in the floodplain, and if so, who takes
9 the. risk? And so, the staterpent in here in the setting of findings, "New floodplain
io development creates an increased risk to 'the public and private health, safety and
ii welfare that is unaddressed," speaks to those properties that will...not could.... will
12 be flooded irr ~ the floodplain. And those- occupants, be they commercial or
13 residential or visitors or anything else in the floodplain if we go ahead with
i4 floodplain development. That's what I'm speaking abouf.
is
i6 I'm not going to take on the question of whether or not this is an area that will
r~ produce downstream flooding, which, by the way, is not a question that RM1 is
is addressing; they're not ,given that task, they're riot doing that analysis, so anybody
i9 in the public who is: listening to this, be very clear That is not a question that is being
20 asked of RML. They are not researching. it. They will not give us that answer.
21
a2 But we can see from observation and from experience that in fact, the existing
23 Outlet Mall, which .was supposed to have building .pads two feet above the 100-year
24 flood leuel, five. or six of those pads flooded at a :fifty to sixty year storm. Somebody
2s goofed. Somebody ..goofed. when the prior Council approved Payran. Okay?
26
27 Let's not do it again. Let's. not put additional people. and structures in harm's way by
2s encouraging or demanding construction in the floodplain_, and that is what Rainier
29 requires. Thank you.
30
31 Council Member- .Maguire:: -Yes, the RMI Study is due to come back to us soon,
_ 32 and. in a very preliminary discussion our consultant did say that it may well be that
33 what they will' tell us 'is that, .,yes, the best thing to do to alleviate. the threat of
34 flooding is that waters. collected in the Corona Reach area should be passed down
3s river quickly. However, we haven't .got that information yet. ~1t remains to be seen:
3'6 But I ..have a hard time .going from that fact, even it's true, to the fact that Rainier is
37 going fo be an improvement o.n that situation.
38
39 Mr. Healy has suggested some. cost reductions :and reconfigurations as proposed.
ao Certainly, I'm' interested in hearing and.. considering; those things. I've thought about
- 4i it since I -had the discussion with him and. Mr,, Johnson earlier, a few weeks back.
42 They may end up presenting a better Rainier project per se, but if we were to then
43 pursue that line of thought, are we then ..going, to redesign the project? Are we going
4a to redesign the .project .and put it on the. ballot? Could we .redesign the project and
-4s. get it on the ballot in time? I don't think we can do that. i don't think time will allow
46
Vol. 33, Page 290 July 26, 1999
i that. There are. significant enough problems with this project,.that just 'reducing it in~
2 sze.and_scope does not seem to be a solution in my estimation.
3
4 Nbw, Mr.. Healy's. brought up that" iYs: true that we don't have immediate funding.
s available for the widening of 1°01 or light tail. Certainly I think that, most people who
6 think, of "chi's in the contextual, larger picfure situation, recognize. -that, widening 101,
7 again.; is a short-term measure. As a society, if we're going to b,e responsible.,,, and'
s honest to Goal; we should be thinking one hundred years in the future., :are we going
9 to; just:,keep widening the ,freeway? One, hundred years.in the future "thaf becomes
io an ok~iously ludicrous sol"ution. We need alternative Transportation solutions. So we
i i "don't have money for rail.. But guess what? Getting money for" rail is a lot more
i2 important than::" Band-Aid" solutions that only alloanr"people to continue being "auto.
13 centric;" you .know, .hung up on their ears, unable to get .away from the: dependency
14, on the automobile, which is choking us.. I think,. there's a distinct qual,itat~e
is difference. there.
16
17 The Urban Growth., Boundary.. Mike. is right. 'The hard` part' is the implementation'. I _
ig agree. And I certainly signed on and supported that initiative enthusiastically, and
19 still do, And l ..haven't heard anybody~uhere say,, "We're: not ever gonna let: :an"y
?o building, happen in any floodplan--ever :again:" 1Nhat I've heard. people say is;
2~1 "UVe're not gonna do it as long as we can't really"mitigate it."
22
,.
23 So, you know, -the purpose of "the RMI Study is fo move in thaf direction;; we're
24 ..recognized'' in this body that. that: is a very cursory look: A true drainage plan and
Zs water- run-off plan is something that's likely to take: two or three years,. but J think it',s
26 the responsible, thing to: do. 1, personally, arrm interested 'in seeing us do. that. I think
27 once we do that then we can responsibly begin to address how to build in the
Zs floodplai`n,
29
3o And just' to finish, Mr. Mayor, the question of whether it goes :on the~`ballof for the
31 public fo wrestle.-with, or whether. it is decided here.,. I .would just plead with my peers.
32 here on the Council, :and. it's .obvious th'af I don't think there are enough votes to
33 move :ahead.. with #his project; so I would say fhaf we need to d'o the best thing
34 possible, -and clear the boards of this project so we start' with a "clean .slate, and
3s then IooK. at the other alternatives, whether it be Corona; Southpoint Mike',s
-: _ ,_
36 ,proposed reduction in size, all those things, on a level playing field:.
37
3a Mayor Thompson: Thank you. 1've got one quick thing. On number nine on this
39 Resolution, it says, "The project was approved. as a key component for
4o congestion relief; however, the- City did, '.not have,, and still does not' .'have a
4r Com4prehensive Trip Reduction Flan, nor a :Land Use Transportation Circulation '
42 Plan. I would Like to,s_ay thaf this Council, approximatelythe en.d of last year, agreed. '
43 to spend money on the engineering of. McDowell and' Washington; without that
44 same plan. 'So, I mean.'if at"~one: point we need it,, and another point. we don't need
45 it, what this is~ all about for me is I liken it to:, you know, getting divorced or sfayng, '
46 :married. It's very easy to get divorced, but it's very difficult to stay mar"rigid in some:: "
June 26, 1999 Vol. 33, Rage 291`
1 situations.: You really have towork through the issues. We have to stay together,
2 we have to work and. see if. we can get this project done..lt's very easy to-caricel it.
3 For rne, it's fhe easy way out. There's a lot to do .here, there are a lot of problems;
4 and we need to address them. The people of Pefaluma deserve better.`They've.
s asked us to correct. the congestion situation. So, if it doesn't end up being Rainier : '-
6right where, as we see it, we may, as we_ go through, redo the EIR or go over it
7 again, or add some components #o it...it may be able to work in another area very
s close. What happens. if ~we can't build in the floodplairi? We may have to. 'go for
9 State money and for .Federal money. I mean, these are fhe things that'we have to
to start pounding on. Just to end it is, it's not a satisfactory situation for the people..lf
..
11 we end this right now; it' my suggestion that we're probably ten to twelve years
12 away from ever getting another solution going on the situation. ~'
13
14 Council fVlember Keller: My last comments on this and then. I'll call for the
is question. I think ~ we need to .make a decision. I think the `public expects
16 improvements. They've been getting some- improvements. Some of ahem 'are not as
17 dramatic as Rainier. .Synchronizing the lights, on ~ 1Nashngton~ produced,: ~a one
is minute improvem°ent in getting across Washington. lt's not something youu go out-
19 and do a ground ,breaking for; it just gets. done. Those are the kinds of things that..,
20 we need .to be looking at. The crude destination survey that was done a couple of ~`
21 years ago with Rainier and the Washington/McDowell intersection indicated'that the
zz largest single use of that ;intersection at peak p.1n. times .(somebody referred. to that
23 earlier) was, in fact, people going fo and from public facilities. Games, schools,
24 library, airport. Not commercial Not commuting, but to and from public facilities.
2s What if we were to take some of this- traffic mitigation money, and instead of
26 pouring concrete.,. we were to. build more ball fields that you didn't have;. to ~: use
27 Washington to ,get. to. That's a traffic. relief. That's a. congestion relief. And, it gets
2s us more fields; which we need. Okay? It's awin-win solution. You don't have to
29 pour concrete: to .get there. I think we need to-make a decision if the valid question
3o as was proposed last session were to actually 6e taken up because of the Burton
31 Bill, if there was afifty-one percent vote in favor of Rainier, but without the .money,
32 what would-that mean? 1Ne'tl back at ths:dais .have the same discussion: Do we go
33 forward with it, and try to find the money,. or not? Money is not the issue. The issue
34 is what kind of project-this is.
3s
36 Counc.'l Mem-ber Hamilton: I just~want to respond to the marriage-analogy and, the
37 easy route. I think That you've stated it backwards, because to me, the easiest route
3s would be to.go ahead and fulfill what's been laid out for us, and f think it's extremely
39 difficult to stop sornething.tha_t people have bought. into, when you know it's wrong.
4o And it's been extremelyhard for me, because I .like to go along. And I tried, when I
41 first got on the Council, to bring myself around to- say, okay, it's not my favorite
42 project, .but if.it really does what it's supposed to do; then I'd like to go along with it.
43 And it doesn"t do what it's. supposed fo do, And for me, that's the bottom line. It
44 does not fulfill the costjbenefit ratio test. It fails.
4s
46 Mayor Thompson: There's a motion on the floor.
47
~,
Vol. 33, Page 292 .
July 26, 1999
i Council ;Member Torlatt: ,I'd likes to make some.comrnents; please... I feel the need
z 'to acknowledge the fact that.when I ran'for the City Council, I ran on.a plafforrn that
3 endorsed ,Rainier. And J feel 1 need to acknowledge this 'because..based on the
4 information before us, I cannot endorse it any ;longer.
s '
6 Many ,people i'n the :community .are looking for leadership, and decisiveness, not
7 divisiveness. l "believeduring my Council term, this Council has tied up many loose
s ends., and made .clear decisions,, This Council hired a; new Gity Manager.; ;brought
9 . }the citizens an Urban Growth; Boundary; decided after ten years of studying to build
io ~a publicly owned sewer treatment facility: 1Ne have initiated, or will be initiating,.
i hopefully tonight;. a watershed study to address flooding in our community. VVe
i2 have .kept -thee Payran Reach Flood Control `Project on schedule, and, we ;have
13 tackled head ;on; transportation improvements:
14 ~~
is There has '.been :a.lot of .time and energy and moneyfoeused on the Rainier- project..
. gy;; and . mone. was to r
i6 ..All of ,the time, ever y p oxide the ,Council and the community
17: with th_e~ best information, as Mr. Cartwng,ht showed ,us tonight :again, and there.'is
is much more in; addition to that, to make: an educated decision on whether the
i9 'Rainier project was a good; viable solution for traffic`congestion.
20. - -
21 Unfortunately, with a project like Rainier,. issues regarding land use, flooding
22~- `potential, ;traffic congestion., environmental and financial impacts come along as
23 well. -The 'more I read the facts about these issues; the more concerned I am about
24 the long=terr;n ramifications of this project; I also know the citizens' frustrations with
2s traffic; andits'impact on our.quality of. life. ,Unfortunately, this frustration is shared in
26every city i~n ~the.Bay .Area:
27
2s I firmly believe building Rainier will not alleviate or addre s the problem,. l believe
a9 something, must be done to improve cross=fown mobility, but City leaders and staff
3o haven't, even :had an opportunity ;to address other alfe;rnatives because they're
31 'focused :on analyzing Rainier. The City needs, to address tf1.e bigger picture of
32 citywide transportation. improvements.; T believe if the citizens of this, community
33 spent the. ;time .and the ..energy to analyze the:: documentation. we have before ~us;
34 they would come to the. same: conclusions:.
35
36 For years; the City has needed 'to. reassess its current financial obligations '~to get a
37 handle .on comrnitte.d projects:, .and to know where the money is coming ,f rom,. Our
38 City 1Vlanager, Mr. Stouder,~ was hired to get his arms, around this ,gorilla;; :and he
39 and the staff have only been dealing with the tip, of the -iceberg Rainier will only sink
4o the: City deep.-y into debt. Over .committing and,. underachieving; all of the potential
4r development impact fees, ,sales tax dollars, ,and assessments Rainier would bring,
42 will not even come close "to covering the costs.
43
44 One of the hardest tasks a City Council member has today 'is educating the pu_ blic.
4s As a person who is afourth=generation Petaluman, living here all my'life except for
46 four years„away at college, I .have learned, through experience; and from many old'-
47
June 26, 1999 Vol. 33, Page,293
1 timers ..here in the communityr, about the changes our community has experienced:
2 What I'm faced ''with'. is making a decis'on that could change the. face- of my
3 community fo;re~er., and I 'cannot 'allow my community to settle for more bad .land
4 use. planning decisions. It may not be good politics at the time,, but I can sleep
s better knowing 'that people trusted me to read the material and make the best
6 decision possible. Time will only tell us whether our decisions are for better or for
7 worse, like in a marriage, Mr. Mayor. And I hope this one is for the better.
8
9 Mayor Thompson: Call 'for the question again. 1Nould you please, just a quick
to review, the voting on thi ,ayes vote is to adopt the Resolution, and a no vote, of
11 course, would be to reject it. Please vote. Thank you.
12
13 MOTION: Council Member Maguire moved, seconded .by Keller, to adopt a
14 Resolution 99.-150 N.C.S. to remove the Rainier Avenue Cross=Town Connector
is sand US Highway 1.01 Interchange Project from. the City's and Petaluma Community
16 Development Commission's (PCD.C) .list of capital improvement projects and traffic
17 circ"ulation improvements.
is
19:~.-MOTION PASSED: 4/2/1
20 AYES: .. Hamilton, Keller, Maguire, Torliatt
21 ".
22 NOES: Healy, Thompson
23
24 ;ABSTAIN ~~" Cader-Thompson due to a potential conflict of interest
as - .
26.~ABSENT:~ :NONE;
27
28 RECESS
29~
30 . Y0;00 p.m, , ~, , .
31
32 ~ RECONVENED,
33
3'a 10:10 p.m.
35~
36 7. Discussion, Status Report and Possible Action Regarding Work Program,
37 Budget, and Schedule for General Plan Review. (Stouder/Tuft)
38
39 IVlayor Thompson: The next item on this evening's agenda is number six,
40. Discussion and' Status Report,..please!~ Let's go!, number 6: Discussion, Status
41 .Report and Possible Action Regarding 1Nork Program, Budget, and Schedule for
42 General Plan Review. I'm sorry, Mr. Keller.
43
44 Council Member Keller: What I .Like to do as follow up so that the public is clear
4s that this Council is not intending to do nothing about transportation or traffic
46 solutions, I'd like to put on the table for consideration in the near future three things:
47
Vol. 33, Page 294
July 26, 1999
1 One is to start a project: for a freeway interchange at Corona, the intent of which, is
2 to provide an additional ~ freeway access. for Northern; Petaluma. It's a direct
3 ;connection. to. the freeway; it's be.e.n in many General. Plans prior. I think that it
4 offers a m_ucf less; expensive and easily accessible route: to the freeway fior
s Sonoma Mountain Parkway; Corona-.Ely, Petaluma Boulevard North, the J.C. and
6 everything else..
7
8
9
to
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1g
19
20
21
22
23
24
2s
26
27
2s
29
30
31
32
33
3'4
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
This brings me tb the second point on that, which is that I'd like this Council to
consider changing the name of Corona. Road, between Sonoma Mountain Parkway
and Petaluma Boulevard to Sonoma :Mountain Parkway, or Sonoma. Mountain
Parkway West, rafh°e,r. This is a suggestion from Marian Sullivan; .bless her: It would
continue the _ plan that is envisioned .and written on thee. Corona-Ely annexation,
which is that Sonoma '.Mountain Parkway would make a radius curve onto: what is
now Corona, and continue across as a widened'sfreet to the Boulevayrd ~~.
Again,, as i read., earlier, thin is something that's been around wince, the 1962
General Plan. It was adopted in the current Ely Annexation, and I think if we: change '
the name of Sonoma' Mountain :Parkway for that reach,. if °in fact le"ts ~pe~ople know
~:
that their Parkway, Sonoma Mountain Parkway, which runs through all of that'..
annexation area, 'from the J..C. (junior college), from all the retail and residential
development, it runs .directly to the freeway,. and I think we' need ,to finish that
connection:
And then the third thing that I'd 'like put on the- table for consideration in the .:near
future is reconstituting the Corona Reach :Committee as a~ new Blue Ribbon
Committee; whose tasks are to help sort out land uses in the ;Corona Reach, 'with
access via the freeway frontage, Corona,.. and. the- Boulevard, to see what's
available and ,give them six months to come back with their recommendations. This.
would be a .committee that would have a very clear task ~to do, which is; to provide,,
this Council information on what 'the options would ikely :be And then to ask that
committee to do work on recommendations. on land use for thatr.reach, with a
different crculaton,pattern that does not depend upon Rainier and. have...that back
to us in atme-limited. segment; so w.e can get on with o:ur planning, and use that to
fold into the General Plan and circulation elements.
Mayor Thompson.: Thank:you. Mc, Stouder?
City Manager Stouder Yes, the next issue is the discussion of the General'Plan.
You have. had available to you,, for the last three weeks ar so, a draft work program
for the General F?Ian. This, is a refinement of precious drafts that the Council was
provided with last fall, and it's been a continuing working document.
Beginning in January of the year; Pamela Tuft assumed. full-time resporlsibilitq as
Director of General .Plan Administration: This was.made in recognition, that,.even the.
development of the workprogram, let alone the management' of a two, or three:, or
z June 26, 1.999 Vol. 33; Page 295
1 four year process required full-time attention ,of a seasoned professional in .the, Cify
2 to develop .the process and manage what" wo_ultl unfold' at' the Council's direction.
3
4 What you see is the ,evolution of the last; six and aeven months of very, very
s detailed work by her, department directors, other ,City personnel and other
6 professionals: iri the field, to put in front of you adraft ,scope of services, work
7 program, schedule., outline, all those words can be used~'interchangeably: To use a
s well-worn and o~efly used phrase, this is a diving, evolving document, this is your
9 first time formally to have discussed and; !hear ;about-this draft, but as we've said,
to you have had the opportunity to review this; as has the public, for the last three
11 weeks or so.
12
13 We have also placed in front of you some of the comments and suggestions that
14 have been provided. us by you, during, your initial reviews, and we would ask that
is you incorporate these or attach these to that draft. What we are seeking from you
16 tonight, if you so desire,, is after a brief presentation and overview of the outline by
17 Ms. Tuft, is direction to proceed with a Request for Proposals to qualified
is individuals, professionals and firms for contract services to develop these sections
19 of the plan. The work to be done would be done under contract by professionals, be
20 they .engineers, planners,. economists, hydrologists, traffic engineers., and we'd like
21 the go ahead to begin that. process- recognizing thaf once. p"roposals are submitted
22 in response to this; that, interaction, those ideas will further refiine and add to the
23 information in front bf you to lead an enhanced scope of services and a schedule,,
24 and ultimately a contract for services over the next eighteen to thirty-six months; or
Zs what the Council ultimately chooses.
26
27 So with that, I'II turn it over fo Ms. Tuft to go through.,an overview of what this is, and
as then we're seeking: -your questions and comments.and directions on how we should
29 proceed. Thank you. '
30
31 Ms. Tuft: Thank you, Mr. Stouder. Mr. Mayor, '.Council°Members, your General Plan
32 Management- Team is pleased to present; to `you this evening the draft 1N,ork Plan
33 and I can't emphasize the word draft anymore emphatically than I already have,
34 and Mr. Stouder has. ~ _
36 Vf/e .presenf it to you. to commence the discussion on,.the community's .next General
37 Plan. This effort came about in response to City Council priorities: The Council
3s priorities were. discussed in January of 1999. At that time., we.~'received a direction to
39 your decisions. It was time to do somefhing,.about~ the maturation of our existing
40 1987-2005 General Plan.
41
42 Just a .little bit of..background;. In 1997, the concept of 'a General .Plan Update was
43 presented to :the Council using a house, remodel analogy. You will remember 'the
44 four alternatives:. 'Spring Clean-.Up,. Minor . Remodeling, Major.r~Remodeing, or
45 Demolish and Rebuild. The CouriciF~ then indicatetl ~tleir interest at that time in
46 undertaking either a major update,. or a complete new. General PI'an.
47
Vol. 33, Page 296 July 26,1999
i This Work Plan.,presented to you. provides three alternatives: :for your dscussio,n.
., ,
2 These alternatives cane.. be summarized: as follows:
Y
3
4 Approach One: Policy .revisions, with .particular .emphasis placed on the ,elements
s .pertaining to Surface 1Nater and. 1Nate"rs-hed Management; `Transportation
6 Circulation ,Priorities,, and Economic Stability. And again; in the draft `V11ork. Plan, Phis
~ would be subject.to suppo:rf; revision,,'modification and addition by the community,
s bythe City Council and through the visioning effort.
9
io Approach 1"wo:'. -Use:. of selected portions of the existing General Plan.;. ,but, with a.
i i more extensive: policy analysis and addition of a number of new elements.
12 Assumed to include Surface. Wafer and Watershed: Management and re-writing of
13 the Transportation and Local Economy elements. Also include a rather significant .
14 overhaul of the document to .insure: internal consistency„ revamping of ala ,goals and
is objectives fo more clearly reflect the resu t of our community Visioning effort:
16
i~ Approach. Three. is very brief: A new General Plan, .new structure., new format, a;nd
is new content, based ~on all of the input over the next period of time.
i9 .
Zo Beyond these alternatives; is a f ourth. approach: One that. could bey custom-crafted
2i by you as elected officials, blending any ofi'the components. presented i'n the .draft.
22 1Nork Plan before' you; :or other concepts and .ideas gleaned from our co:mmunt~y.
23 1Ne= also recognize that. this Work Plan will be fine-tuned through that community
24 visioning process, and through discussions with our selected contract services firm,
2s and with othe"r organizations.
26
27 All of the approaches include various degrees of community visioning,... oufreach;
2s statisfiical research, and use of contract services for completion of components of
29 our Plan. Each of the three alternatives include the .same draft Work. component,
3o which. were set apart; in fourteen.. identified tasks: These UVorkcomponents are
31 suggested to start the dialog,w_ith the Council, the community; .and: contract service
32 professionals. :.
33
34 As with each of the. three, alternafi~e approaches; task. topics cane be~".expanded
35 upon. The. General Plan'effort. is estimated to have a range in cost from
36 a roximatel $925,000 to :nearly. $3,,0 P ,000. The work gffort is suggested. to
PP Y
3~ involve a two to: `four- ear effort, but is" resented; for bud ~ et comparison; to b.e
3s within a 'three.-,year time frame. ;
39
4o At Phis- point, I'd ;like 'to tell you that; I. promise, to., learn PowerPoint~ .Since moving
4i over to the City Manager's-office.;: I have fine-tuned by Excel spreadsheet" (I was
42 very spoiled by a secretary. who knew everything; over in 'Planrii"rig) and ,I, have now
..
43 learned Project;. Manager :fo prepare the G.antt~ charts, but I'm still working on
44 ,perfecting .my skills ,i'n Pgw,erPoirt; and I was_ri't willing. to subject myself` to public
4s display yet. `So, we're still doing, the :old "hand grab" approach.
46
~. ,, ''~
June 26, 1999
Vol. 33, Page 2:97'
- ~ i So, of this point in time,this graphic shows the three=year budgeting for the three
,-- 2 alternatives, Alternatives One, Two; and T.hree.. The budget can be spread. over the
3 term...of the General Plan, again, in this' instance, athree-year effort, with yearly
4 fscal~~commitrnents ranging from two hundred thirty-one thousand dollars to one
s million, -seven hundred thousand dollars.. Those three are included in your Work
6 :Plan, fjut here is ~Altecnative-One, ranging between iow two hundred thousands to
~ high three hundred thousand dollars,.. Approach Two, which ranges from low four
s hundred thousands to nearly nine .hundred thousands dollars in yearly commitment
9 for the three-year period; and Alternative Three, which ranges from just under six
io hundred thousantl .dollars to one million,. seven hundred thousand dollars over the
i i `three-year period, for the effort.
12
r3 Funding options :are also presented for each of the three alternatives, with
14 suggestions 'for`~funding this effort from. the General. Fund, Special Revenue Funds,
is which. primarily consist of Development Impact Fees,. Enterprise Funds, for
- 16 example, Airport, 1Nater,; Marina and Ambulance. fore those portions of the Plan
v addressing corrimunity concern, and the Redevelopment Funds.
i s -'
19 These pie~~charts° illustrate funding options fore Council discussion or consideration.
20 That's Alternative One; Policy' Revisions, showing, the four funds which correlate to
21 Excel spreadsheets 'in your 1Nork Plan that identify the specific funding sources,
22 particularly of interest in the Enterprise Funds.
23 ~ -
24 Mayor Thompson: If I could, I'd like to interrupt to make a point about the cost of
2s General Plans., I'm reminded of'my work in' other places when this issue of the. cost
26 of General Plans; whether it's five 'hundred thousand or three million or four million
27 dollars over a period of two or three years, ,and I think it's important, regardless. of
2s the dollar .amount,. 'to put this in the context: of the City's future. If you look at the
29 ,most expensive„ elaborate .cost here., two million or three- million over athree-year
3o period, it's less than one percent of the General Fund over that three-year period
31 combined.
32
33 Any corporation that spends less. than one percent in Research and Development
34 in ,its future- is not` ,going. very far. Cities historically, unfortunately, do spend less
3s than that, but putting 'this. in context of the City's assessed valuation 'in multi-
36 hundreds of .millions, or the General Fund, whatever course you choose is :a very
3~ small percentage of investment for the future of this City over the next twenty years.
38
39 Council. Member Torliatt:- I would like. to ask if this addresses all issues or a
4o widespread amount of issues in our community. It's not just spending funds on one
41 single thing. It's a planning tool `for transportation; it's a .planning tool for many
42 different things, as you stated.
43
44 Mayor Thompson: I have a quick question. Maybe you already said it and I wasn't.
4s paying attention, which could be anyway. What did our last General Plan cost us?
46
Vol. 33, Page 298
.July 26, 1999
i Ms. Tuft: I believe it was just over two hundred thousand dollars; if l~recall correctly:. ;
2 '
3 City Manager Sfouder: No, it was more than that. It was three quarters of a million,
4 I. believe. But we can provide that figure,, and the issue,; of course;: that's .a good
s figure to get to bring current so you can see both the contenfs and the process, - .
6 .There were; also fewer elements, but- we'll pua thaf in .the chart. There we,~e fewer
~ elements than being proposed in this:. ~ ` . , ,_
g
9 The .most exgensi~e components in this section,, as:.you, .know, :are, ;the Surface
io 1Nate~r Management, and Transportatioh Circulation. There was; :not' a Surface _
i i Vllater Management. ,element in the previous Plan, and Transportafon,:Circul-atop
i2 was much more limited than whaf's;being proposed. -` .
13 _.
14 ;Mayon Thompson:, Please eontin;ue, and I apologize for interrupting,,you', but- it just
is came to me, and I might have forgotten't. ~- -
16 ~.~ ~ ,
i~ Ms. Tuft: That's okay. A .draft time-line! was developed .using Alternative Three as,~a
is typical model,. so the Gantt chart,. the time. frame draft time line iri your~lNOrk :P,lan
i9 uses dust: Alternative Three, The time.- Line starts. upon. Council direction, with., the
20 distribution of Requests for .Proposals RFP's, beginning the community •visionng
21 .:and outreach effort before. the e.nd. of 1,99.9, and moving into the various. elements of
22 work components: byspring :of 2000. A11-work components are ;reflected to :ran.~either
23 currently or sequentially, depending upon their direct relatonship'to each otfer~ -
24
Zs After your initial review of this draft~Work Plan, L had the opportunity to receive your
26 preliminary comments.,: and. today 1. ~ summarized those comments, ;and that was
27 distributed to ~ .you right. before ah'is item this evening. Following the: Council
2a diseuss.ion, we look forward 'to revising the 1Nork Plan to reflect, your input. ,and
29 direction„ :and taking, the first step of many toward;.;our. new General ,Plan. ,I'd b.e
30 -paease.d to~,hear'comments,, answer your questions; o:r take 'lots of notes to respond
31 to your direction.
32
33 COUnCII Member .fader-Thompson: Pamela,. I ,just have one question as far as
34 one of the components for the General Plan, is there going to be, well,, I'd like there
3s to be an art component? I'd just maybe.; you know, incorporate `it in with the park?
36 '
37 Ms. Tuft: ;I believe-art was addressed' very,. very briefly,. in ,Public Open Spaces, but
3g also, in the comments I received: from Council; there are comments that, Cultural
39 Arts need to: be addressed. .
41 Council IVlembe.r fader T, ho:m."pson: I hard falked„ with you at one point. getting a
42 copy of the Sunnyvale General Plan?
43
44 Ms. Tuft: Yes.
4s
June 26, 1999
Vol. 33, Page.299
i Council Member Keller: Just another perspective on this...well; first of all, Pamela,
2 thank you so much. for putting so much effort -into this. The current Plan expires in
3 2005. We, would be .required to have a new Plan in place by 2005. Is that correct?
4 Is that how the law reads on that, or can you let it expire and just kind of slide for a
s while?
6
~ Ms. Tuft: 'You .can slide for a while; but I don'f think a community of the stature of
8 Petaluma wants to have an outdated General Plan, in my opinion.
9
io Council Member Keller: And; so, even if we were to say...we wait until the end of
i i the General Plan. to do this, because this is some of the .questions. that have come
12 up from the public. Essentially; we need athree-year-lead time to• make it by 2005.,
13 anyway. So that would mean `starting, of the latest, in 2002. And° at' that point, in
14 replacing the existing General Plan, is the law on. General Plans, does: it mandate
is the type of replacement, if it's an overhaul or a remodel, or a demolition and ,redo,
i6 or are there any legal parameters on that, or that's our option? •
1~
i8 Ms. Tuft: It is certainly the City Council's option. The law states it has~to be current,
i9 and reflective of current information. Alternative- One proposes toR update ,the
20 statistics, touch base with the community `values.,, and try to bring a of of what is
21 now our General Plan to reflect: today's needs., and carry•.,it to,2020.. That's whaf
22 would suggest would be the absolute minimum would be~ needed to defend the
23 General PIan~as a legitimate. document.
24
2s Council Member Keller: Thank you.
26
27 Council Member Maguire; .Thank you. Pamela, as I've stated before, this. is a
28 great running, start; I mean, this is a good; solid foundation #or `us to work with, and I
29 really appreciate it.
30 _
31 I like the general layout, of the draft work components. As you've 'heard me 'state'
32 before; I do want to see a separate. ,element of Sustanability, and just want~:_ao~ say
33 that publicly, which is a separate, element, .against which the other'elements can; be
34' measured, so that we're aware of the impacts of everything that we. do-here in the`
3s City.: And along with that, as aside note, I'd like us to remove the word
36 "sustanability" from Twelve, which says, "Economic Health/Sustainability." Ithink
3~ that's a vague and undefined term in that context, so if we could take that.out.
38
39 Ms. Tuft: Economic?
40
41 Council ~Mernber Maguire: Yes, on Twelve. And then,, is this. an appropriate time?
4z Do you want us to go ahead and give direction to go for an RFP?
43
44 Ms. Tuft: That would be wonderful.
4s
Vol. 33, Page 300 July 26, 1999
i Council Member Maguire: 1Nill this be coming back#or refinement as fo what :we
2 want in the RFP?
3
4 City Manager Stouder It depends on your action and direction, this eve.ning.. I,f you
s feel comfortable with the comments you make this .evening;. we" will do one of two
6 things, or both. 1Ne will put them in the:-feat of the work program, scope of services
7 draft, and/or w.e would attach it,, saying,. "These comments have. been added to th
s original draft,"~ o .those of you professional, firms and ''individuals -who 'resp,ond to
9 this know that this is the direction this work program has been refined to in your
io proposals to us.
ii
i2 And `then, `based. on those proposals to us, to: you, they'll be a review selection
13 process;, they411 .be engaged ih the nterv.iews,, and so forth:... So: we- can do 'this
14 however precisely, and in as many steps as ;you want to ,go through with: this: before
is ewe; send something out,, or, we can add' comments to this and send it, out. I think..
... .
16 eith"er way~will~ach'ieve the objective.
17
is Council .Member Maguire: All right, thank you. Then,. in That case...... .
Council Member Torliatt W:e did receive some :comments from Site Plan ..and
:Architectural Re~iew,(SPA'F3C,), is that.what I see attached here,, and I don't know if
they Pfanni~ng Commission has formally had a public hearing on it, as well, but I'd
like toy see ;the feedback .before we malee a deci"s_ ion here,; from the corrimittees and
commissions and I'm not sure who in the community has been ,provided with the
draft Work Plan; so maybe Parneia could articulate: thaf, as well, for comments.
26
27 City Manager Stouder, W'e can do than.. I would caution you... that that's- going to
2s further delay. this process. The real refinement in, direction will be based upon "the
29 responses.
30
31 If this rings true.generally, this is a very expansive Work Program a~t this stage< of
32 ~ the game. This, is a very expansive scope of services, Requests for Proposals at
33 `this stage of',the .game., and; we're happy to run it through that process and bring it
34 back'; with that the un,dersfandirg that, and this is ,your. choice,, that it's likely than
3s that it wou'Id probably until November=December, a,nd it probably wool"dn't get under
36 contr..act until the: spring or summerof next year.
37
...,
3s 1Nhere, if you #eel comfortable, it could be sent out. at the end, of this conversation,,
39 or in `the near future, and those additional comments and reviews- could occur as we
4o receive draft responses from the professional team. My experience is: hat once you
41 hear those firms' 'and individuals, That have ,gone through the. Gen.er..al Flan
42 p"reparation in i•ecentyears, they will lend you a lot:of new ideas and; suggestion"s to
43 this 1Nork, .Program. But, again, .it's you choice,. We°re trying to, respond to your
44 interest in moving. this along. ,but it's up to you on how you want to receive if.
45
June 26, 1999
Vol. 33, Page 301:
i Ms. Tufty If I could just. answer Council Member Torliatt's comments. In answer. to
2 the question about the numbers .distrib.uted of this report, the initial mail-out for
3 appointed officials., commissions, cornmiftees and interested citizens was just under
4 eighty, and then we also mailed out letters of availab'il_ity to over six hundred.
s ,Everyone who participated ih the. Urban Growth Boundary discussions last year
6 received a letter saying, "thank you again, and since you were interested in that,
~ you might be interested _in the General Phan, the draft Work Plan is prepared and is
8 available,'' and wee distributed just under one hundred in response to~that. Everyone
9 who calls and asks for a General Plan is being added to the General Plan mailing
to list, so we've tried real hard' to get it out to the public.
it
12 Council Member Torliatt: And ifi folks want to be added to the mailing list, how do
13 they contact you?
14
is Ms. Tuft: They can easily call the City .Manager's Office. and Madeline, the woman
16 who answers the phone., will automatically add them: All they have to do is leave a
1~ message after hours at 778-4345, and you can leave your name and address on
18 the machine, or you can fax us a Kittle note at '778-441.9, or you can a-mail the
19 .General Plan,. because we have an a-mail address:
20 generalplanCci.petaluma.ca.us. And we hope to develop a web page on the City's
21 web site that is General Plan specific, and we hope to be able to put all of the
22 General Plari documents, as they are prepared on the web page.
23
24 Council Ilnember Maguire: So, Mr. Mayor, if I may. With all that good information,
2s J'rrl comfortable with us, you know, giving input to staff tonight, hopefully to get this
26 thing going. Because I do want to get it started, and contend- with changes as we go
27 along. So, again; "the Sustainability element, the change, in the Economic. Health
2s title, those were the main things that I wanted to give as feedback, although I do
29 want to see a ..more involved community-wide visioning process; rather than less.
30
31 Council Member Hamilton: Pamela, thank you... I really appreciate. the way you've
32 laid it out,, the choices, you've done a lot of work. l also want, to see Sustainability as
33 a separate element; .but I think that we have a. lot. of work to do o.n clarifying what,
34 that means, and what we want out of it. I mean, "sustainability" is just a: word, and if
3s can be interpreted in so many different. ways. It could ,be, as you put. here;
36 sustainable. economic development, which is a very important component of
37 sustainabilify. So,, I want us to,_be clear about what criteria we use in that element..
38
39 Council Member 1-lealy: 1'I_I join the chorus, and. thank you, for .all the hard work
ao that's being brought before us tonight. My personal `preference would be to focus on
41 the specific issues. that we want to .really focus our' attention, and resources on,
42 rather than attempting to re-do some. parts of the current General, Plan, which ,I.
43 think are still.; for the most. part, valid.. 1Nith that thought in mind; my preference
44 would actually be for an .update of the current General Plan, rather than for a new'
4s General Plan.. But: not sensing that I'm going to .have a majority for that, I will go
46 straight to my fall-.back position.
47
Vol. 33, Page 302 July 26, 1999
i Mayor Thompson: I'd vote with you on that one, Mike::.
2
3 Council .Member Healy: Thank you,. Clark. I would suggest, thaf :it would be
4 appropriate to :have the length of .this General Plan tied. to, the expiration of the
s Urban Growth Boundary because I think it's clear that. the community, in. the year
6 about 2018 or a couple; of years before that; is going to be starting a-new General
~ Plan ,process :and trying to put together a new lJtban Growth Boundary to take:- the
s community he next twenty years,. and I think.. we would.. perhaps be confusing that
9 process if we chose. something that didn't: terminate at the name time.
io
i i f would also° tend to favor Alternative One, which is the aeast costly of the three;
12 although. I would b:e open: to looking at_aspects of Alternatives T.wo and Three., for
13 particular pl'aees that might 6e appropriate:, but I ,agree with the comments that we
14 shquld~ have more community outreach and community input;, so.1 would add that to
is .Alternative One; I generally support the':. Surface Water element ;as drafted. It
t6 certai'nly pulls together some long-term issues, Myprimary co.mment:on that one is
i~ that I wanted:. to get the County at the table.as a participant; rather' than just
is presenting them: with something' at the. end, ofi the. process; and. asking them to
19 "implement''it, pretty please."
Zo
21 I would; on the Traffic and. 'Circulation element, and I only brought the binder with
22 me tonight,, I didn't 'bri'ng the. other document,- but my recollection of it .was that it
23 was- riot really atwenty-year focus on transportation circulation issues. It was more
24 focused on the 'immediate- question.:of what to do for' a ..cross-town .connector ,and
2s interchange ..and different alternatives for that. I don't necessarily have: any
26 particularproblem with thaf but I .would' ask thaf some .of the kinder, genfler--,
2~ cheaper Rainier-approach .concepts thaf we talked about earlier tonight, That staff
2s has said could be studied further, be included as part of that..
29
3o And then; lastly;. on th'e Economic aspecf; I. was hoping for something when I raised
31 this issue back in our workshop in: January. I was hoping for something that was
32 more substantial than 'what's, proposed ;here.. Basically, as I' read. this; it's ~a fifteen
33 thousand to twenty thousand dol.l'ars, eighty-day-long effiort; and that's really moire;
34: perfunctory than what I was hoping to see: I'm looking for something that w:ould'tell .
3s us whaf kind of industry; what kind' of jobs we want'. t'o 'create' in the community, .and
36 -how we ,go about aftracting them here.: And I also. don't .want to see `that effort
_..
37 delayed until 2002, which, is .how it's ahown. under the. schedule, here; basically
3s because. it was. only going to be .done after the Surface: Water~element, .,and to the
39 extent that there are zoning issues thatfall out from the Surface Water element, f
4o think those should perhaps more appropriately addressed as part of the Cor"ona-
41 Reach Specific: area, and not tie up the economic analysis for-three years waiting
42 fo.r the Surface Water Study to be done.
43
44 I wanted to share one sef 'of theughts; and l shared 'this with Pamela earlier today..
4s One thing 'I want to have us look' at in~ the Sustanabilty or Economic issues is how''
a6 our .little fown 'fifs into the "region,, because I think one .ef the shertcomings, to my'
June 26, 1999 Vol. 33, Page 303
i view., of some of the work that's been done in the past is ~that'it implicitly assumes
2 that Petaluma. is a little "island;" and we can do our thing in Petaluma, and we're not
3 necessarily directly affected by'the area.
4 .,
s One thing that caught my eye in this document was a reference to the ,idea that
6 Petaluma's current plans are to .grow jobs at a faster ,pace than housing in .the
~ future and 1've actually' gone and looked at some ABAG (Association of Bay Area
s Governments) numbers: ABAG is projecting for the twenty-five year period from
9 1995 to 2020 that Petaluma woultl grow to about fifty-nine thousand people, which
io is an eighteen percent growth over the period, but that our total jobs in,town would
i i grow by severity-six percent. - .
i2 __, ~ _ _
13 The explanation, kind of the accepted rationale `in' the community for. that kind of
14 growth pattern is that we would be .giving ,people. who currently commute out from
is town the opportunity to give Up the commute and get:~a job in town. And~that makes
16 a certain amount of intuitive sense,. until look at what°'every.community in the region
r~ is planning on doing: I'll just share this table with people and: you car, ..
is Council Member Torliatt There should. be a new one of these coming out. ~ °~
F9
20 Council Member Healy: These numbers about one and' one-half years old, but
21 they're consistent and. I `know ,it's a fot of numbers to look' at,".but it's extracted from
22 this, so I'm doing you a favor by showing it to you in this form.'~And`~ I wound
23 encourage you to look. at the percent. change numbers for'`~~the different
24 communities. So you: have Clogerdale, for example, with~`a .population growth of
2s seventy-one percent for the period, but job growth of one'hu.ndred thirty-six percent.
26 And then you go .down the. line, and you can see h'ow different communities are all
27 doing the same thing, with the one exception of "the small town of Sonoma. And
2s then overall for the County, for the period,. there's an expectation of thirty-four
29 percent population :growth, but sixty-eight percent job. growth, and Marin County
3o and its communities are projecting something very similar.
31
32 I am, as I -said. before, a great believer;in the law of unexpected consequences, and
33 if every community'in our region builds to this plan, f think we're going to have some
34 problems. So, L'd like the regional mix added to what we're looking a#~ in terrns~ of
3s .what we're trying to do in our community.
36
37 City Manager ;Stouder: If I could, Mayor, I have some questions or clarifications for
3a the addition or refinement of this. You commented you'd. like to see, in the
39 Economic .element,, what kinds of industries and jobs do we want'to affraet here.
4o For clarification, I would ask. thaf question two .different ways,. really in two. different
41. questions, so it's really awo different questions. What the Council and the.
42 community want in terms of,jobs and income, which is a visioning or hope or wish:
43 list question when it comes down fo it, which.is: important, and/or what wilt existing
44 land uses, infrastructure; growth patterns support, attract, .and accommodate. And..
4s one blends in on the other, but I'm trying to get a sense of` where your emphasis is,
46 or if it's on both of those. Because they're entirely two separate questions, but are
47 ,
Vol. 33, Page 304 July 26;.1.999
1 related. You're also interested m based on as we are today in waterline widths:and
2 lengths, and street networks; ,and land .use, what we. could attract in today's kind of
3 economy and businesses; as well as based upon a visioning or citizen process,
4 what the. expeetations;,and hopes would require in land' uses., water sewer systems;
s okay. ~ _
6 ..
~ -The. other part of that,,.too, just as a reminder, "th'e Central Petaluma Specific Plan
8 ~has.a lot of both of those in there, as: you may recal_I, That's .in. draft form. An.d
9 'these's Borne. good base i;nform.ati:on °there: about what the rezoning, or new'
io .suggested ;uses- would create in jobs. Is that "the kind, of thing that you sense,, then.,
11 would be "mportatrt overall i,n~ all, of .the General .Plan, assuming you read that oast
12 night at rnidn'ight :and recall exactly what was. in the Central Petaluma Specific
13 .Plan? Bute:that might be a good point of` reference as this conversation continues..
.,
14 -
is .Council Member, Healy: Well; dyes. I mean, I was on the Central Petaluma Specific
16 Plan Committee, so: I:'m. familiar with. it, but.this isn't ..going to answer :your question,
v but I''m interested in~ what the; fobs/fiousrig balance means for the region.; and' how
is that .affects., us..
19
20 Mayor Thompson:. That. helps. My emphasis would definitely go to. Twelve;
21 "Economic Health"...and ;we're still calling it "Sustainability;," or whatever we decide
~-
22 to call.. it 1N~hat kind of'_busitresses, do~ we need to olicit, that will pay their way,; :as
23 Mr. Keller, spoke of earlier. H,ousing'~situations; I;'mean what kind of housing,: I'm
24 sure we';II identify what we need, but .what can we afford?' What can we ,sustain?
Zs These are the kinds of `things that would peak, my interest.. And I'd like to spend a
26 majority of "the money_ in that area, because we go through approving projects;
27 approving businesses to.come in; b,ut are' we making the right decision when .we're
2s doitrg this..l don't know that. And 1'd 'like to get some answers from this. Because:,
29 for me, a lot of `this land use, 'I' mean, what comes, first? LDo we need the money or
30 on t we . I mean
' ,how are we go
~ rn ten years Wing to .operate its 1Nhere are we gong'to be with
31 the General :Fund"' ~ .hat I'm not looking for'is surp'ri'ses in ten or fifteetr
32 years, when we :realize we approved, all these projects and now have no money fo.r
33 services to maintain them.
34
3s Council Member Keller: I .like the way` this discussion is going on the `Economic
36 Health or Sustainability or whatever we're going to call: it;, because I tliirik-youjust
37 raised; and Fred also .raised an issue that will.. need .to be:,addressed;; which is, with
3s all the desires for a particular type of ;employme:nt or retail facilities, what we need
39 with this .is the: strategies to get that to' happen. It's the same kind of questions that
ao we had with the' redevelopment. I think. we could. do a lot ref' leartring there.
4.1
42 Part o'f that, to me; involves, marketing. ,If. we.'re. going to market the City and go
43 solicit. and..: go try -and find those kinds of occupancies, we need to: leartr how to do
44 that an;d budget for it. You, can't do it"fo,_r free..,
4s ~ . '
June 26, 1999
VoL 33, Page 3Q5'
i is there and what we're going to have to do in order to upgrade it. But if we're going
2 to focus on areas of :development, we may want to do some more in-depth study on
3 certain types of infrastructure..
4
s Tnac As I mentioned to Ramela when she talked to me., part` of the economic health
6 -and vitality of the area is really dependenf upon education, and 1 really want to see
~ education incorporated within this section.,, as well as elsewhere. If we have an
s educated. population, from child to adult, and opportunities to advance education
9 and support to .do that from the public and private sector, it's going to be a much
io better community ih the long run, and that's a lifetime goal, it's a lifetime component
i i to this. I really wa_ nt to make sure that it doesn't;get overlooked in Economic Health..
12
__ 13 Council Member Hamilton: Just want. to interject that if you have excellent
-~ ~ i4 schools, it atfracfs good employers, because it's their employees' number one
is concern.
16..
r~ Council Member Keller: So how do we make that mesh? How do we get that
- ~ is connection, because the school impact fees will be decreasing as housing starts
i9 area fewer, and property taxes are always a question for schools, so is there a
20 parallel` track to get funding into educational resources from the private sector that
. 21 doesn't' depend on going through taxes: I think the answer is "yes," but we need to
Za figure: out how to get there, and to try and make sure that that happens.
23
24 Council. IViember .Maguire: On a slightly .different facet of the jewel, one of the
2s things that I'd like us, as a body, to keep .in mind, is that once we go through this
26 process, which of .course.; will be lengthy; we need to keep in mind that as far as the
2~ land usage in the City:, we .need to ultimately make the zoning consistent with the
as General Plan, which. _is something that: didn't ~ really happen with the last adoption,
_ ~ 29~ and has caused. many hours of interesting discussion, by many different bodies in
~3o the administration: So, I've asked Pamela to keep a timeline in there and notice. to
31, us so that when that is going through. the process we have an awareness of what's
3? :involved after the adoption of a new- General. Plan.
_ -33 `
34 Council ..Member Torliatt: Mr. Mayor? Pd expressed that same concern to .Pamela
3s about implementation .and .how we're. going to make that happen after our visioning
36 process. It doesn't stop with the three years of making a General Plan, it's how do
37 we make it consistent afterward. Has a copy of this been distributed to the school
3g boards? If we're. trying to work. together here, and. they're going to be a component
39 of ,it; and the. Health Care District to .get them„ you know, on board and giving input
4o to this. 1Ne've been talking about economic visioning for years now: I was talking
41 about it back. on Planning Commission, and trying. to get some connection between.
42 land use and economic development. So I am thrilled that this has finally made 'it
43 here, and we're going; to look at some implementation of this, because when I was
44 on the Planning Commission it wasn't really well-received, I think, by the Council at
4s that time. So, I'm glad that we're moving forward with that.
46
Vol. 33, Page 306 July 26, 1999
1 The other component; of this is looking at, infrastructure that we have. in the. City and
2 maybe ther;,e are areas that we need.. to analyze as far as Council ,Member Healy
3 and Mr. Stouder were talking about, 'in connection with. what can, we support. And I .
4 don't know if there are target areas like the Central Petaluma Specific Plan Area;
s which~.we have done some . roundwo,rk, I believe through..the study, :on what type. of
g.
6 infrastructure maybe rolls into one of th:e:other issues that I' ',had asked, Pamela
~ about,: that is, how are we going to wrap technology .into this?' Be°cause that
s obviously is what we're going fo be alf about,. from. now and. for forever,. is.,e-mail.,
9 are we hardwiring, are: we wireless. How are we going. to address that issue within
to our community; ;to maybe get, us out of our cars more,. and maybe help us
11 communicate bettee with our citizens as far as Council- level,, working through
12 Electronic Town HaIC Meeting type of visioning. Because that's definitely going to be
13 in our future,, so I'm not s;u:re how thatwraps in .there, but I think we need to address
14 technology in that: infrastructure as well..
15
16 Mayor Thompson: I've got some citizens who would like to speak, if we can take a
17 couple of minutes :and ,get" that
is
19 PUBLIC COMMENT' ;~ ~~ '
20
21 s Bruce;liagen, 145 Grevillia: First question,,,do"you have a budget for tflis,;:and if
22 so, what is it!? And you. don't have to. answer me now, but along those'; lines; I''m .
23 wonder..in a cou , le of thin s from a Parks stand oint I m on the Parks .:and Rec
24 Commission and that section looks fine): V1Le'ce in the process of forrnin.g a. Blue
2s or a Green Ribbon Committee to investigate a park bond .measure. for the
26 possible November ballot next year and a lot of that. kind of work'tliat would go
2~ :into a Genera_I Plan Parks component we want to do, VUe might be ab,le.to do t~
2s with vofui=steers o,r some leverage assistance ~rathEr than having tfi's. come
29 through the General Plan update process. There may be other .efforts dike #hat ~,
3o go.ing on, and that may -help bring the cost..down.
31
32 The other component, this "Sustainability" "thing you're hearing so much about;
33 you get sick of. it after awhile, but:l went tq a conference. on Saturtlay, and there's "
34 a: real interest among organizations around the country;, in "Sonoma County, "and
3s maybe even ~n Petaluma, si"nce we're the. leader in growth .management, back "`
36 from the. 70's, we may ~ be able to get some people here who .have a lot of.
37 knowledge; of that, cowld contribute to it in kind, or ..maybe some funding from
3a some foundations that might hel"p us beef that component 'up, which.. really
39 relates. to the entire. Plan `without the .City ...having. to spend money on 'it.S.o, I'm
4o wondering if,'in our RFR's; we might ask these people to come ;back.and identify
41 potential funding sources -for than type of work. 1'f we're going t"o~ be a model
42 trendsetter we might as well get ,some freeb,ies..
43
44 ® Bryant Moynihan, P.O, Box C: Good. evening". I also think. it's a good start.
4s There were a couple of suggestions that came out" in an EDC '(.Economic
46 Development Committee] Meeting in 'the Chamber for a couple of potentiaf
1
2
3
4
s
6
7
s
9
to
11
12
13
14
is
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
2s
26
27
2s
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
June 26, 1999` '
Vol. 33, Page 307
new elements; and I; would like. fo see maybe some consideration given. to
those. ;_ -.
As 'far as new chapte"rs; and I guess;there are, is if :eight chapters required in
the General Plan? Seven? Six? Okay, but there are a few that are optional
and we have some in there now: And L~ think there are a couple of areas that
could use more attention.' ~ '
Education is number .one, in: the business community, surprisingly, to some
people, but when, you .go and you talk to .small businesses like I had recently,
up in Sacramento, the message is very clear:. education is a big concern.
You go down to AFC and other companies ,you hear the business people
there talking about finding good schools for the kids, not only at the primary
.level, but particularly at the'. junior high and high school level as being a real
concern. And their desire to relocate to this area often has to do with the
available education in this area for their kids.
Also education from the point of view of the junior college as a training
ground or the local colleges in providing employees with the skill sets that
are necessary. 'I .know this Council has done an outreach program, and
should be commended for this and for working. with the City schools. I think
this is a good opportunity to work on .one element of the new General Plan
where. you' guys can work together with the City School District, the Board of
Directors, or, excuse me, Education Board, and develop a chapter which is
meaningful and integrates with the rest of our growth plan. Having adequate
public facilities for schools, for education, for recreation, to support those is
all very much necessary., and ,should fit in. So; I would hope that maybe
education would be one element that you would add.
Another element that's 3key to Petaluma.; especially with. our history, is
agriculture. And agriculture is what we're built up around. V1/e grew .around
the river .as ~ a transportation center, around the subject of agriculture.
Agriculture is very important i'n our community:. It is what keeps most of the
:green spaces around Petaluma ,green. Agriculture (Ag) is a community. unto
itself. `It's not well understood. As people~move:'in herethey don't necessarily
appreciate the roots we've had. in 'agriculture, nor its importance in our
community. In particular, 'supporting with~Ag businesses in our City limits, the
outside agricultural uses is key for, these businesses to exist and continue
and as a result fgr these Ag uses to continue and the current land uses to
-..•
continue'. Agriculture~is very key from ari historic point of view and a future
point of` view in °Petaluma, .and I think it,.-'too, warrants a separate element
and separate chapter in this General Plan.
I also agree thatthe economic' vision is overdue. We've been talking about it for
three years: FI'm very disappointed to see fifteen thousand dollars allocated. to
something like that. That .does not signify to me a serious
Vol. 33, Page 308 July 26, 1999
i attempt to do an economic model , or an economic vision. We've, been 'here
2 before. We're talked about how other:cities have done it such as San Rafael, or
3 Napa's come out. with a' fair one...-There are a lot of there, Santa Rosa, of course;
4 just in o.ur area..And some fcorn a distance. that were done even better: They're
s not perfect.. They could be :improved~~upon, 1've heard good ideas about how we
6 can improve upon. them, but the.,idea; is to have a community-based vision,. to
~ develop that from the, grass .roots;.. to :get e~eryon~e. buying into where we want to
s take the City and how we're going to.get.there.
9
io It's one :thing to set ,.goals, it's anothe_.r to have an .action plan, and an action plan
it has to _be based initially on facts, which means a eomprehensi~e ,Economic Fact
12 Report, which means more data-gathering than I think, has been. budgeted for
13 thin whole issue. The whole issue that Ms., Torliatt brought, ..up :about the
14 infrastructure is key. There's a b,ig issue, there that flits into any economic model....
is A cursory' review„ or slapp_ ing together a chapter that refers to economic terms,,.
16 that's ignored immediately :upon completion of the General Plan; is not. 'in the
i~ best interests of the. co.mmunity~. It's what we've suffered from in some respects
is this last twenty years or not even twenty; the. fifteen years of':the current General.
i9 Plan. I would 'strongly suggest that that. section be beefed up, ,.and than ari
20 economic model be developed outlining the community's goals and'focuses,,:And
21 than that economic model .have some. quantitative goals attached to it that w,e're
22 .seeking to reach, have an economic model that's built up so when we make
23 major infrastructure decisions,: or major spending decisions.;.. that model can be
24 looked at; can be tweaked, and; we can. understand the economic 'implications of
Zs that decision.
26
2~ Right now;, we're guessing. 1Ne're shooting from the hip. And I think the :more we
2a can understand.. how that fits into the overall goals. of the General Plan,, the betfe:r
29 we are. I don't know what "sustainablity" means;, I've heard 'it used' a lot,: It
3o se,ems to me it> means no:growth. So, I_don't know,- if we're going to define it, let's
31 define it. But let's not mix terms.in this"chapter:.'. ;
32 ~ '
33 Mayor Thompson: Thank you.. You've, got~a couple-~,of good ideas.
34
35 Cify Manager .Stouder: Just., in terms of ihformation for the Council, again, and I
36 appreciate Mr,: Moynihan's comments about an _economic model and the
37 investment in the economic :activit'y as; seen on th~`s chart. At this time,- part of that.-
3s estimafe is in the context, of, two-fold, first. of, all getting some clarity and
_.
39 expansiveness. fro.rn you, wh'ieh_;is the:. point of this sessi'on_and various p"reyiou_s
4o sessions, and ,also, importantly, recogr:izmg the .thre'e iundre,d thousand, dollars
41 spent to date, or five hundred thousand dollars budgeted for~the,Gentral Petaluma
42 Specific Plan. ~ ~ ~ .
43
44 A large piece of that; covering .a third of the City's geography, probably -the
4s geography most amenable to economic development, is for~tlie:kind of things that
46
June 26, 1999
Vol. 33; Page 309
1 Mr. Moynihan suggested, And to take, advantage of that,. there has been a lot of
2 work done there, both in land use and .economies.
_ 3
4 Geoff Cartwright, 56 Rocca Drive: Mr. Mayor, Council. My name's Geoff
s Cartwright,, 56~ Rocca Drive'. I would like to suggest, that you go with Option
6 Three.. I was a little ~aeery when I saw those figures. However, with. the
~~ discussion that I've .heard, I think Option Three'is the appropriate way to go.
s have concerns about keepings parts of the o.ld, award-winning General Plan.
. ~ 9 Under the old, award-winning General Plane, we've ended up with a flood
to problem,, a traffic problem, an economic problem, so I think we're going to
l lh have to look at this from all ofi its angles. Thank you.
12
13
14
PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED
is Mayor Thompson,: Thank you. Mr. Stouder? What. do you actually want from us
16, this evening in towns of a decision?
17
.- _ is"City Manager Stouder: We can do direction on how to proceed, we can bring this
19 back with these questions or suggestions. folded into the Work Program and have
20 another session like this: 1Ne can take this document. as-is as the basis for
21 Requests for Proposals; add in the attachments that come from what was .put in
22 front of you #his evening, plus the minutes of this meeting. What I would actually do
23 and have done before at this stage of the p'roeess is actually include in the
- 24 Requests for Proposals at the receiver's .request, a copy of the video of this
2s meeting, so they could hear ,your comments directly as well as read the minutes.
26 We would also bring #o you, regardless of how you want to proceed from tonight, a
2~ suggestion on~ the corifract -services -review process; that is; we'll suggest some
zs options as far as the Planning Commission,.. other citizen committees and the
z9 citizens' participation in review of the proposals, .and the interview of the teams that
3o might be presented, and some ways to go about that. That can be, done
31 concurrently with the actual contract services, individuals or firms, spending their
32 thirty to forty-fine days to respond to these. What we would likely do, regardless or
33 your direction. 'thi's .evening,., but after you say, "Go for it!" in that thirty to forty-five
34 day preparation time for return of ,proposals, we would .have a proposal. review
3s session about the second week into it, 'in which we would invite aII those'that' picked
36 up this or were mailed this, to come in and hear a presentation and ask questions
37 for answers. `Tha#: would be something that other people could participate 'in, and
3s the point of all that: is to make this whole recruitment, review;. selection process part
39 of the refinement of. the document. Qnee people who have to do the work put on
4o paper what that work entails in steps, schedule"s and dollars, then there's more of a
41 reality check before we even get the contract. ln.myexperience, that's really, really
42 critical. V1%e're doing this biased upon our cerise and your sense of what we need
43 and what it would cost, "but it's almost;.. today in particular, it's .almost like an
44 eng`ineer's estimate, even less so, on a very complex project. An engineer's
as estimate of..time and chedule, when it's in a preliminary stage, not in final zone.
46
Vol. 33, Page 310
July 26, 1999
i And I think you have an appreciation: for that- analogy. So you can give us any sort.
2 of direction you want,, just;. so we want. some:
3
4 Council ;Member Tor,liatt Mr. Mayor. When_ I was the Planning Commission°liaison
s before Council Member Healy, we ,had talked' about: the :G-eneral Plan process.,.. and
6 they had specifically asked to be. involved from the get-go in the. framework of this.
7 We received comments from SPARC, which were very- positive, and hopefully it,
8 would be the same from the Planning .Cornrnssion. Iwould like to have that before
9 we decide that we're going to p"roceed forward.
io
i i Council Member Maguire::- Mr. Mayor. I, would just ask Council Member Torliatt; do
12 you think. that there would be something that: would_ come up that would keep us: •
13 from wanting to go forward? Because. in my estimation, you know., let°s get this`
14 thing going.. Certaihly 1'd be happy i'o hear input from the Planning .Commission
is maybe in paralleFwhle~'if we direct staff to, go >ahead and put out the: RFP now; with
16 the comments that. we've given them,,, ask -the .Planning Commission 'to. look at the
17 draft so far and see what they have to say; by .the tune- the responses: to the R:F.P~
i8 ,come back, then:if there's any significant ;issue in that case,, we could 'do.~etail in the.::
i9 Planning Cornrnssion's response and save the time still..
20 ~ .,
2i Council Member Torliatt I .just; d,on'f think it would, take. that long to go through
22 with th. e Planning Commission. That's why I just, you know, suggesfed, it. It may be
23 substantial, but C feed that having.,ser~ed on the F~lanning Commission at one. point
24 in time.; I. would have appreciated it'being inclusive at times.
2'S
26 City ,Manager Stouder, Vin Smith informs; me that the next Planning Commission
27 meeting is August 10. The agenda goes out 'in ,a week`. They have access to the
28 .document now: They ;already all. have it. Put it on the. agenda. Thee reality also, is
29 probably that the preparation of the formal letter, the expansive meeting list,. mailing
3o this out is probably a, week or soaway; so we can have all of that .ready, and then,
31 the attachments or refinements ;along. with .your .attachments from .the Planning
32 Commission as the August 1.0 meeting:- So:, I don't see `that as a significant delay at
33 all. That's probably, in reality; about tw.o weeks`away.
34
3s Council. Member Cader=Thoinpso;n; I would support that., The .other thing;;is, when.
36 Cm .looking ~at Alternative Two or Three,. are those samples of'.other General' Plans:
37 that we could look,at so I could. see.whatthe difference in the forrnatfing would be?
38
39 City Manager Stouder: Yes, we'.can provide copies of'lots of~other General Plans.
4o I' think. that',s. somewhat helpful, but I also think. if can, be ;misleading. But we'll be
41 happy fo ,provide you with. that. My .view. of General Plans ultimafely isthat they're
42 often.. minutes ,of the meetings. An.d, it's the actual meetings themselves and ahe
43 dialogue. Th,e documents may or may not accurately reflect Ghat in various
44 communities. But. you can. get a sense 'of variefy' and we can .:provide you' a lot, of
4s recent :ones. from. this 'state. and oth. e~r states that will give.: you a sense of the .
46 differences. of Gen."eral. `Plans, 'including some General Plans 'of forty years ago
47
June 26, 1999 Vol. 33; Rage 3.1'1
1 when-#hey were Less than twenty pages, as opposed to the General .Plans of today,
2 that .probably have fourfeet of policy studies behind them and'three hundred pages
3 of final d`raff.
4
s Council IVlembeir Cad,er-Thompson: That would b'e helpful. to. me. And the other
6 thing is when we"re looking at education, to include fh'e junior college and also
~ Sonoma State in that process., and just a comment that Mr. Healy made at the
s beginning that Petaluma,.. you know, isn't an island and, for the years that I've been
9 involved I've always felt that .Petaluma was created as this little island, and we really
to were not looking at being parf of Sonoma County, and I think it's really important
11 that we get out of the i'sPand attitude., and really be ..part. of the bigger picture, so
12 appreciate that.
_ '~
13 '
r~._ -
14 Mayor Thompson: Mr. Stouder? If we were to go give direction for the Request for
is Proposals, we are' still not committed at that point.as to the amount of money we
16 want to spend on this Plan at that point, are we? ~ ~ .'
1~ `
is City Manager Stouder..: No. Not until you actually have in front of you; probably
19 four or five months from. now, as you see: even in the' tight .schedule, contracts
20 wouldn't be until the end of the; :quarter of this year, probably the of next year: Until
21 you have a 1N.ork Program and schedule and minimum .and maximum cost of each
22 section of the General Plan, or work secfrori ~of the Plan, you're :not nicking any
23 commitment at all.
_. :~
24 _ .' _
2s Mayor Thompson: So; can I,' realizing the lateness of the hour,:, get agreement.
26 from the Council'to instruct the City Manager:ao~go out for Requesfs for~Proposals,
27 after the August 10 meeting? ~. - .
2s
29 Council Member Keller: Do we need to indicate to you which approach we~~want?
30 .
:..:~
31 City Manager Stouder: No. Not necessarily. If the ~Gouricil feels comfortable with
32 direction that City Council, with concurrence of.fhe Planning C.omm'ission, appears
33 most likely to favor Option One or Two or Three, I think; that,,would'~be helpful for
34 those that respond to fhis. If the Council is not ready to make 'that, than that would
_..
35 be so noted for the:: records, and chose responding would` Then have ao submit real
36 distinctions and differences in how they'd go -about this:.the number of contract
37 service. hours, the number of meetings; theachedule, and take what we have dome;
3s and say, "You're way off;" or "You're way. on," and: here's how we've broken it down
39 into hours, schedules, dollars.
40
41 Council Member Keller: My own preference at this .point would be to eliminate
42 Alternative Qn.e. I'm leaning toward Alternative Three; because I think, actually,
43 when we get. into it, I think what would happen :.if we were on Track Two is that it
44 would expand to the point where the add-ons would take it to where Three is. Just
4s trying to get everything integrated as a unified document. My preference is; if you're
46
Vol. 33, Page 312
July°26, 1999
i going to; send out RFP's, is to skip Alternative One., antl. develop it for Two and
2 Three, sand as [ said, I'm inclined to Th"ree. ~ -
3
4 Council Member Maguire: Mr:. Mayor? Thank. you. l second thaf e_mo~tion..l don't
s think One is going to be generally thorqugh enough. I can see. where we :might be
6 able: to do with Alternative. Two., but- I uspect that,. as David says;; there may be
7 enough, changes that we'd. find, .ourselves using Alternative Three by default, But
s given that, I';d say; let°s eliminate. Alternative One.
9
io Council Member Ham'ilton;. Mr. Mayor, I'm in favor of Alternative Three.
li ~ __
iz Mayor- Thompson: Okay I'd` like to get a real handle on the economic vision :and
13 the economic health and. I'd Like to spend the majority of the money on that; ;and
14 then.. go from there., So,. I'mJooking at ^spending one hundred thousand, maybe .two
is hundred thousand dollars on One :and. Two' right off`the :bat, and :get some. kind of
i6 indication there:' I'd hate to spend tw.o million, eight hundred thousand dollars, and if
17 we go right to Alternative; 'Three., it ultimately would be, you know, three million,:
is three; million,,"two hundred thousand dollars, would be my opinion.
19 `
20 Council .Member° Cader=Thompson: I was actually looking at ,Alternative Two,;; but
21 I agree ~that.:we,.will_ probably end up with Alterna#ive. Three because of default, buf l
z2 ..don't support Ore. I'm .still looking'at Two and Three.
23 - .:.
24 Council Member Torliatt: I .j,ust want' o say that for all. three. alternatives; our staff
2s has provided us with some 'i`nitial. fending sources., and they are identified: So we're
26 looking at identified f_.un.ding, sources. L~mean, irmagi'ne that, for one of 'the first time_ s!'
27 Mr. Stouder "had .said he doesn't really. ineed an indication 'night now.
2s
29 City Manager S$ouder:; (Nell, unless you want to:.1Ne; would. say in the RFP, '"The;
3o City Council. has not. decided: upon which strategy;" ,and .request that "those that
31 respord help illwminate and,be~ expansive on each of the three efforts.
32 ~-
33 Council' Member Torliatt:. I'm looking at Two.,. myself, if you want an answer at this
34 point in time. I ::definitely think we need to spend a. little bit more money on
3s implementation; and 1 don't" know how that works into the mix, as opposed; to the
36 study aspect of it, especially with. economic visioning and with infrastructure studies.
37
. ; ., _;
3s :Council ;.Member Healy As I said before, I think my p_refe,rence is kind. of ,O.ne plus,
39 but at this point, .I think. it would be prematur..e: to take anything off the table, and. just
4o remind people that. every one million dollars we spend on consultants'is orie million
41 dollars we're not. spending on other needs,. community-wise..
42
43 City .Manager Stouder: l think I :know how to~ word'this, and you'll se.e.a. draft of this,
44 for cornrnent. And, :again, we're going to provide those- that requested a copy of the
45 video of this session,, in. addition to other things in #heir response, in addition to the
46 pre-p"roposal conference, so. I think they',II get a Handle on the sense that.they have
47
June 26, 1999 Vol. 33, Page 313
1 a lot ofi room to make proposals and suggestions, and budget options. You're.
2 looking for them to help put meat on the bones :here, to the proposals, even of this
3 stage.
4
s Council Member Cader-Thompson: I just wanted to thank Pamela and it was.just
6 really easy when f was going through this to walk into your office and just sit down
7 and talk with you about that, and I really appreciate all your hard work and time, and
8 other meetings that we got to this point and weren't- able to discuss, thanks for your
9 time on that also.
to
11 Ms. Tuft: Thank you, on behalf of the whole team. Thank you very much.
12
13 COUNCIL AND MANAGEMENT REPORTS
14
1"s None
16
17 REPORTS. OF COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIOfVS
18
19 None
20
21 CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
22
23 None
24
2s ADJOURN
26
27 The meeting was adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
28
29
30
31 ~ E. Clark Thompson, Mayor
32
33
34
3s ATTEST:
36
37
38
Beverly J. Kline, City C k
0
41
42 ******