HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1995-12-18SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 1
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1995,
AT 8:00 PM
(CLOSED SESSION NOT HELD)
Regular Meeting: Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor
San Rafael City Council Paul M. Cohen,
Councilmember
Barbara Heller, Councilmember
Gary O. Phillips, Councilmember
David J. Zappetini, Councilmember
Others Present: Suzanne Golt, Acting City Manager
Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE:
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to approve the
recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items:
ITEM
3. 1994/95 City Audit (Fin) - File 8-1
5. Report on Bid Opening and Authorization to
Purchase Four New 1996 Mid -Size Four -Door
CITY OF
Sedans (Bid Opening Wednesday, December 13,
1995) (Fin) - File 4-2-286
FOR POLICE UNDERCOVER USE FROM
CAPITOL FORD, INC. IN AMOUNT OF $63,307.53.
7. Acceptance of Redevelopment Agency 1994/95
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Accepted report.
RESOLUTION NO. 9525
A RESOLUTION OF THE
SAN RAFAEL AUTHORIZING THE
PURCHASE OF FOUR ( 4 ) SEDANS
Accepted report and
approved
Audit and Annual Report (RA) the Annual Report and Audit
- File 140 x (SRRA) R-62 from the San Rafael
Redevelopment Agency; to be forwarded to the State Controller.
8. Agreement with WESCO to Conduct the 1995 RESOLUTION NO.
9526 -
Phase II Biological Monitoring of the A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
OF
Spinnaker Lagoon (PW) - File 4-10-252 SAN RAFAEL AUTHORIZING THE
SIGNING OF AN AGREEMENT WITH WESTERN ECOLOGICAL SERVICES COMPANY, INC.
(WESCO) TO CONDUCT 1995 PHASE II MONITORING OF THE SPINNAKER LAGOON.
9. Resolution Extending Subdivision Agreement - RESOLUTION NO. 9527
Baypoint Lagoons Unit Two Subdivision (PW) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
- File 5-1-292 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
EXTENDING TIME FOR THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENT WORK - BAYPOINT LAGOONS
UNIT TWO SUBDIVISION (EXTENDED TO AND INCLUDING DECEMBER 19, 1996).
11. Re: 132 Park Street, AP #14-032-09, Patrick J. a. RESOLUTION
NO. 9528 -
Gaffaney (Owner): (PW) - File 2-4-20
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
a. Resolution Accepting Grant of Storm Drain
STORM DRAIN
Easement
b. Resolution Accepting Grant of Easement for
STREET,
Access to Storm Drain
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
ACCEPTING GRANT OF
EASEMENT - PATRICK J.
GAFFANEY, 132 PARK
SAN RAFAEL.
b. RESOLUTION NO. 9529 -
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL ACCEPTING GRANT OF
EASEMENT FOR ACCESS TO STORM DRAIN - PATRICK J. GAFFANEY, 132 PARK STREET,
SAN RAFAEL.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 1
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 2
12. Resolution of Appreciation to RESOLUTION NO. 9530
Thomas J. Orovich, Jr., Office Engineer,
APPRECIATION TO
Public Works Department (PW) - File 102 x
OFFICE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.
RESOLUTION OF
9-3-40 THOMAS J. OROVICH, JR,
15. SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION OF
adoption of
ORDINANCE NO. 1691 - An Ordinance of the
City of San Rafael Amending Title 12 of the
Municipal Code of the City of San Rafael by
Amending and Adopting Chapter 12.12 "Uniform
Building Code" Volume 1, Volume 2, and
Volume 3 (1994 Ed.), Chapter 12.14 "Uniform
Mechanical Code" (1994 Ed.), Chapter 12.16
"Uniform Plumbing Code" (1994 Ed.), Chapter 12.20
"Electrical Code" (National Electrical Code,
1993 Ed. and Uniform Administrative Code Provisions
for the National Electrical Code, 1993 Ed.),
Chapter 12.26 "Uniform Housing Code" (1994 Ed.),
Chapter 12.28 "Uniform Code for the Abatement of
Dangerous Buildings" (1994 Ed.), and Chapter 12.32
"Uniform Swimming Pool, Spa and Hot Tub Code"
Approved final
Ordinance No. 1691.
(1994 Ed.) (PW) - File 1-6-1 x 1-6-2 x 1-6-3 x 1-6-5 x 1-6-6 x 1-6-7
16. SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE Approved final
adoption of
NO. 1692 - An Ordinance of the City of San Ordinance No. 1692.
Rafael Amending Title 4 of the Municipal Code
of the City of San Rafael, Adopting a Uniform
Fire Code and Prescribing Regulations Governing
Conditions Hazardous to Life and Property from
Fire, Explosion, and Other Dangers, and
Establishing a Fire Prevention Bureau and
Providing Officers Therefor, and Defining
Their Duties and Powers (FD) - File 1-6-4 x 9-3-31
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion:
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF MONDAY, DECEMBER 4, 1995 (CC)
Councilmember Heller stated she was abstaining from the minutes of December
18, 1995 as she was absent from the meeting.
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to approve the
minutes of the Regular Meeting of Monday, December 18, 1995 as presented.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSTAINING: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller (due to absence from meeting)
2. MONTHLY INVESTMENT REPORT (Fin) - File 8-18 x 8-9
Councilmember Zappetini cited that portion of the report which refers to selling
U.S. Treasury Notes and purchasing Agency Notes to obtain a better yield,
and asked how much better the yield was on the Agency Notes. Finance Director
Ransom Coleman responded the bond proceeds were initially invested in U.
S. Government Treasury Notes, which later were swapped into Agency Notes.
He stated the increase is approximately .25o to .50o higher than what we
would have received if we had continued with the Treasury Notes. Mr.
Zappetini asked how large an investment this increase was based on, and Mr.
Coleman responded all of the investments would be a minimum of a $1 million
purchase. Mr. Zappetini asked how many Agency Notes we have at this time,
and Mr. Coleman reported $2.5 million had been swapped out from the Treasury
Notes into Agency Notes.
Councilmember Phillips referred to the list of investments as of November 30,
1995, noting the City has invested almost $1 million with Wachovia Bank,
yet they provide the lowest interest rate. He stated he would feel more
comfortable with Fannie Mae notes, or other instruments with higher yields,
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 2
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 3
and asked how the City had selected that bank at 5. 010% interest? Mr. Coleman
responded the interest rate was a good yield at the time the investment was
made in February, 1994, as interest rates were considerably lower than they
are today.
Councilmember Zappetini moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to accept
the Monthly Investment Report.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
4. RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH EQUITAX FOR AUDIT OF CITY'S UTILITY
BILLS (Fin)
- File 4-10-284 x 8-1
Councilmember Zappetini asked if he was correct in interpreting the report
as stating the City would save 50% per year for two years? Finance Director
Coleman responded the agreement is that Equitax would collect 500 of whatever
savings the City receives in the form of a refund or credit from the utility
company, and would also receive 50% of the savings realized by the City over
the first twenty-four months. Mr. Coleman reported there are a half a dozen
companies who perform these types of audits, and this type of agreement seems
to be standard in all of their contracts. He stated he had checked the
references of Equitax, and felt they provided good references from other
cities and private companies for whom they have conducted such audits. Mr.
Zappetini noted the estimated savings due to changes in the method of billing
was expected to be approximately $40,000 per year, with 500 of that figure
being paid to Equitax. He asked if the City had considered conducting an
in-house audit? Mr. Coleman reported he had reviewed the billing procedures
with Pacific Gas & Electric Company, and the $20,000 figure reflects annual
savings the City will realize from changes he and P.G. & E. had discovered;
therefore, this savings will not be shared with Equitax. He stated Equitax
will now come in and review what P.G. & E. has already done, and see if there
might be additional savings that they can determine. He reported Equitax
has software that can be used to compare the City's rates to other rates
P.G. & E. is charging, and then make a determination as to whether the City
is receiving the correct service for the rates that are being billed, and
in some cases suggest a cheaper method of billing.
Councilmember Zappetini asked if Equitax would go back to P.G. & E. if a cheaper
method of billing was found, and Mr. Coleman stated that after reviewing
a year's worth of billings, Equitax would present their findings and
recommendations to the City, pointing out any services we might be billed
for but not receiving, or changes in the rate schedules that should be used.
Once the changes and savings have been identified, the City would then
negotiate with P. G. & E.
Councilmember Phillips stated he agreed with the concept and thinks the audit
would be a good idea. He asked for clarification regarding the anticipated
$20,000 savings per year because of the billing method. Mr. Coleman
explained that he had called P. G. & E. a couple of months ago, and that
they had reviewed all of the bills and the method, or rate schedule, they
were using to bill the City. He stated that after this review, P. G. & E.
suggested some changes which they estimated would save the City $20,000.
Mr. Coleman reported P. G. & E. is now in the process of implementing those
changes, and noted that the $20,000 is P. G. & E.'s own estimate at this
point.
Councilmember Phillips stated the City has used a certain amount of power during
any given time period, and if P. G. & E. has been using a higher billing
factor, could the City approach them and determine if we have been overbilled
because an incorrect billing rate has been used? Mr. Coleman responded that
he did not know if the City would be able to go back to P. G. & E. and tell
them we feel they have been overcharging us, but he would explore that option.
Mr. Phillips stated he would encourage the Finance Department to go back
and look at the past billings, noting it bothered him to some degree, as
the City is a substantial user of P. G. & E.'s services, and that the City
has been charged $20, 000 per year more than we might have been. Mr. Coleman
stated this was one of the issues they would be looking at in conjunction
with the audit, and noted they may find even more suggestions that
were not identified by P. G. & E. Mr. Coleman felt it was appropriate to have
someone other than P. G. & E. checking their billing records.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 3
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 4
Mayor Boro asked if he understood correctly that P. G. & E. had not discovered
a billing error, they discovered that there was an option as to whether the
City was billed at a flat rate or a variable rate, and that they are now
recommending we switch to a different method of billing that will save money?
Mr. Coleman stated that was correct. Mayor Boro felt it was important to
monitor the billing and determine if other billing methods are more
advantageous. Councilmember Phillips reiterated he felt that since the City
used a specific amount of power, he would hope that we would be billed at
the lowest rates that apply.
Councilmember Phillips asked if Mr. Coleman had spoken with any other auditing
firms, perhaps those that might have a more favorable rate to the City, or
maybe even a better track record? Mr. Coleman reported that during the past
eighteen months he had spoken with representatives from three or four
different firms, and noted all of them have the same standard contingent
basis, whereby they would conduct the audit based on a percentage of whatever
savings they find. He stated all of them provided references, which he
checked, noting he opted to go with Equitax.
Councilmember Phillips asked if there were any other firms that were more local
to the area, and Mr. Coleman stated none of the firms were based in San
Rafael, although there was one firm from Sausalito. He did note, however,
that the representative from Equitax lives in San Rafael, and he stated he
felt Equitax has a good track record.
Councilmember Heller stated she had assumed that if it was determined there
was a substantial savings that the City should have been receiving, they
would help us get a refund from P. G. & E., along with the restructuring
of the billing method.
Mr. Coleman stated that was part of the service provided by Equitax, noting
they would negotiate a refund of credit for what has occurred in the past,
which they would share, and also share in any savings seen during the next
twenty-four month period. He noted the City would initially get a credit
or refund on what we had previously paid. Ms. Heller asked how long the
audit would take before we receive the final figures, and Mr. Coleman stated
it would probably take them three months to complete the audit.
Councilmember Zappetini moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt a
Resolution approving an agreement with Equitax for an audit of the City's
utility bills.
RESOLUTION NO. 9531 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF AN AGREEMENT
WITH EQUITAX FOR AUDIT OF UTILITIES.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor
Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
6. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE PLAN TO REDUCE SMOKING AMONG CHILDREN THROUGH
REGULATION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS (CM) - File 13-4 x 13-1
Councilmember Phillips stated he was in favor of anything that might reduce
smoking among children, but was concerned about what the Resolution was
actually saying. He stated the Resolution seemed to address the problems,
with observations that a number of people do, in fact, die from smoking,
and the number of new smokers who are children. Mr. Phillips noted we should
try to do some things to avoid that. He cited that portion of the Resolution
which states "The State of California, as well as many cities and counties,
have enacted Ordinances to reduce illegal tobacco sales to minors and conduct
public education efforts to discourage tobacco use among children;" and
asked how those efforts are being made. He also referred to the statement
that President Clinton has proposed a comprehensive plan to reduce smoking
among children and adolescents by 50 percent, and stated he was not informed
about that program; also, he was uncertain as to what the Council would be
accomplishing in passing this Resolution, noting the Resolution does not
clearly state what is taking place, and how that relates to the City of San
Rafael. He stated he is not opposed to the Resolution, but does not see
what the City would be accomplishing.
Mayor Boro stated that a year or more ago the Council passed an Ordinance with
respect to cigarettes, noting one of the laws currently being enforced in
San Rafael is the ban on cigarettes being available in vending machines,
and noted that in supermarkets they are locked -up, and customers must request
them from one of the clerks. He stated that, on a local level, this is how
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 4
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 5
the City has tried to address illegal sales to minors, at least toward the
reduction of illegal sales. He felt this Resolution is about the President
sponsoring a program to reduce, by 500, the sale of cigarettes, nationwide,
to children, noting the City is being asked to support this in concept, via
this Resolution.
Councilmember Phillips stated he agreed with the action taken by the City in
the past, but felt he was being asked to support the Clinton Plan, although
he was not familiar enough with that plan to support it. He stated perhaps
the plan would be more complete and more restrictive than he would prefer.
Acting City Manager Suzanne Golt stated she had previously discussed this issue
with Councilmember Phillips, and had contacted the County's Department of
Health and Human Services, noting they have a Tobacco Education Program that
the City has participated in during the past couple of years. She stated
the Resolution is suggesting that the City of San Rafael support this plan,
and noted that the
Resolution could be rewritten to be more explicit if the Council preferred.
She stated this plan, which is under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug
Administration, is proposing to establish eighteen years of age as the
Federal minimum for the age of purchase, and prohibits vending machines,
free samples, mail order sales, and self-service displays. The plan would
require retailers to comply with certain conditions regarding the sale of
tobacco, in particular, verifying the age of people purchasing tobacco as
being at least eighteen years of age. In addition, the proposed plan would
limit advertising and labeling, to which children and adolescents are
exposed, to a text only format; ban the sale or distribution of branded
non -tobacco items, such as hats, tee-shirts, etc., and would restrict
sponsorship of events to the Corporate name only. Ms. Golt stated this plan
is trying to reduce the types of ads that appeal to the younger people, such
as the Joe Camel logo, noting these were the specifics of the Clinton plan,
and that if the City of San Rafael supports the efforts along these lines,
this is what we would be supporting.
Councilmember Phillips asked if the City would be required to pass any additional
Ordinances that have not already been enacted, and Ms. Golt responded that
we would not, as this plan is under the jurisdiction of the Federal Food
and Drug Administration. She stated the cities and counties are not being
asked to pass additional ordinances, or to engage in additional enforcement,
noting this was only a show of support for the Federal plan.
Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt a
Resolution supporting the plan to reduce smoking among children through
regulation of tobacco products.
RESOLUTION NO. 9532 - A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE PLAN TO REDUCE SMOKING
AMONG CHILDREN THROUGH REGULATION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
10. BAY AREA STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AGENCIES ASSOCIATION (BASMAA) REGIONAL
ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (PW) - File 4-4-6b
Councilmember Phillips referred to the amount of $429,350, and asked how much
of that amount was the City of San Rafael' s share, and if that item had been
budgeted.
Public Works Director David Bernardi stated the amount of $429, 350 is the amount
for the entire contract and covers all of the counties in the BASMAA Program
(Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association). He reported Marin
County's contribution is approximately $35,000, 250 of which is San Rafael's
share. He stated the City's share has already been paid with our fee into
the County's Stormwater Program, noting the money that all of the cities
pay into the Stormwater Program pays Marin County's share of this program.
Councilmember Phillips asked if the Resolution should show a dollar amount
other than $429,350, since that is the amount of the entire program. Mr.
Bernardi stated that is the correct amount to use in our Resolution, as San
Rafael is the lead agency for all of the Bay Area jurisdictions, and we are
the ones entering into the contract.
Councilmember Heller noted much of the work being done by the advertising agency
is being done pro bono, stating she felt this was a wonderful thing to be
doing. She asked how the advertising agency had been selected. Assistant
Civil Engineer Steve Zeiger, Manager of this program for Marin County,
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 5
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 6
responded BASMAA has a work group, from which the City selected this agency.
He stated this agency is headquartered in the Los Angeles area, and the
reason they are doing so much pro bono work is because they are attempting
to expand their work in the Bay Area. Ms. Heller noted this appeared to
be a very comprehensive advertising campaign.
Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Zappetini seconded, to adopt
a Resolution adopting an agreement for professional services between the
City of San Rafael and Pacific/West Communications Group, Inc.
RESOLUTION NO. 9533 - RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
ADOPTING AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
AND PACIFIC/WEST COMMUNICATIONS GROUP, INC. NOT TO EXCEED THE TOTAL OF
$429,350.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
13. SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1689 - AN ORDINANCE
OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION 14.05.020, TABLE
14.05.020, LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR THE COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE DISTRICTS,
TO DELETE MOTOR VEHICLE RENTALS AS A USE PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONING DISTRICT (Pl) - File 10-3
Councilmember Zappetini stated he was abstaining from this item due to conflict
of interest.
The title of the Ordinance was read:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE SECTION
14.05.020, TABLE 14.05.020, LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR THE COMMERCIAL AND
OFFICE DISTRICTS, TO DELETE MOTOR VEHICLE RENTALS AS A USE PERMITTED BY RIGHT
IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC) ZONING DISTRICT"
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to dispense
with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title
only and approve final adoption of Ordinance No. 1689, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS:
interest)
Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
None
Zappetini (due to conflict of
14. SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1690 - AN ORDINANCE
OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY SECTION 14.01.020 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
OF SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA, SO AS TO RECLASSIFY CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THE
CIVIC CENTER NORTH AREA (RE: ZC95-3 - 1 McINNIS PARKWAY, AP 180-410-06) (CIVIC
PLACE OFFICE PROJECT) (Pl)
- File 115 x 10-3 x 10-5 x 10-7
Councilmember Zappetini stated he was abstaining from this item due to conflict
of interest.
The title of the Ordinance was read:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY
OF SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY SECTION 14.01.020 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE OF SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA, SO AS TO RECLASSIFY CERTAIN REAL
PROPERTY IN THE CIVIC CENTER NORTH AREA (RE: ZC95-3 - 1 McINNIS PARKWAY,
AP 180-410-06) (CIVIC PLACE OFFICE PROJECT)
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to dispense with
the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only
and approve final adoption of Ordinance No. 1690, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 6
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 7
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini (due to conflict of
interest)
SPECIAL PRESENTATION:
17. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO THOMAS J. OROVICH, JR.,
OFFICE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (PW) - File 102 x 9-3-40
Mayor Boro presented the Resolution of Appreciation to Thomas J. Orovich, Jr.
Mayor Boro stated Mr. Orovich had worked for the City of San Rafael for
the past twenty-eight years, noting he had been Public Works Department Chief
of Administration, Purchasing Agent, and represented the City on the San
Rafael Sanitation District. Mr. Orovich stated it had been a great
twenty-eight years for him, and felt that was due primarily to the people
he had worked with, especially Public Works Director Bernardi. On behalf
of the Council and the City of San Rafael, Mayor Boro thanked Mr. Orovich
for his outstanding service to the City.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
18. PUBLIC HEARING - A PROPOSAL BY THE MARIN HISTORICAL SOCIETY TO ENTER INTO
A DEVELOPMENT AND DISPOSITION AGREEMENT (DDA) FOR A PORTION OF BOYD PARK.
THIS AGREEMENT, IF APPROVED, WOULD ALLOW THE SOCIETY TO APPLY FOR PERMITS
TO BUILD AND OPERATE A ONE STORY, 7500 SQUARE FOOT HISTORICAL MUSEUM IN BOYD
PARK,
AP NO. 11-131-03 (Pl) - File 236 x 9-3-66
Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing opened and asked for a report.
Planning Director Robert Pendoley reported this agreement would allow the Marin
Historical Society to lease a portion of Boyd Park and build a 7,500 square
foot historical museum. Mr. Pendoley stated the Development and Disposition
Agreement (DDA) has a couple of pre -conditions that would need to be met
by the Society before the City would enter into a lease agreement with the
Society. He noted they would need to secure permits for the building, and
demonstrate that they have the financing to build and operate the facility.
Mr. Pendoley added that most importantly, they would participate with the
City and the neighborhood in the preparation of a new Master Plan for the
park, noting this plan would focus on restoring the park, redeveloping it,
and determining how fast the plan for the museum could be integrated with
the park. Mr. Pendoley felt that a very important component of this would
be citizen participation. He stated one of the objectives of this project,
as recommended by the Planning Department and the Recreation Department,
is to help the neighborhood re -take control of the park, by inviting other
people into the park so that people feel more comfortable and secure in the
park.
Mr. Pendoley stated that once those pre -conditions have been met, it would
then be appropriate to enter into a lease agreement, noting the proposed
terms are 55 years, at no cost. He noted, however, the Society would be
responsible for the cost of rebuilding the tennis court, which has been
proposed to be located on top of the roof. Mr. Pendoley reported the museum
would be open to the public at a reasonable cost, and would also be available
to the City for up to 120 hours per year for various civic events.
Mr. Pendoley felt this agreement offered a number of opportunities to the City,
stating it is an opportunity to build a first class museum for the public,
it is a chance to enter into a wonderful partnership with both the Marin
Historical Society and the neighbors, and finally it is an opportunity to
revitalize the park and attract more people, so that the park will be safer
for families.
Mr. Pendoley stated a neighborhood meeting was held last week, but only two
people were able to attend, due to the storm. However, the two people who
did attend the meeting were very concerned about the condition of the park,
particularly the number of homeless people and their sometimes threatening
behavior. Mr. Pendoley noted they did feel that the museum had a lot of
potential toward addressing these problems.
Councilmember Cohen referred to Page 4 of the DDA, and Mr. Pendoley acknowledged
that the word "finance" was omitted from the text. Mr. Cohen asked Mr.
Pendoley what the general timeframe would be, and in particular, when the
Master Plan might be completed in relation to when the building permit might
be applied for. Mr. Pendoley stated they would like to begin the Master
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 7
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 8
Plan in February, stating this would take a couple of months, no more than
four, to complete. He did not believe the application for the building permit
would be submitted for several years, as the Society will need to raise $2
million and have a complete set of working drawings. Mr. Cohen asked if
this meant the City would do the Master Plan, and the Society would then
incur a debt of $20,000, to be paid at some point in the future when they
apply for a building permit. Mr. Pendoley stated this would be at the option
of the Council, noting this would give the Society the option of coming before
the Council with only part of the funds and asking for a loan on the balance,
to be paid back prior to the building permit being issued. Mr. Pendoley
stated the terms of the agreement were broad at this point, so that everyone
would have options. Mr. Cohen noted the staff report did not suggest there
were other options available, it simply states that the Society pay $20,000
prior to the issuance of a building permit, which could happen as late as
1999.
Mr. Cohen referred to that section of the report discussing performance bonds,
and asked Mr. Pendoley if the City would have the right to call in these
bonds if something were to happen during the fundraising and construction
were to fall short? Mr. Pendoley stated this was correct, and that was the
point of that section of the agreement.
Mr. Cohen stated the DDA refers to the fact that obligations of the Marin
Historical Society under this lease are similar to the obligations contained
in the Boyd House lease, and then continues to state in Section 2.4 that
"Effective on the commencement of the term of the Lease, the Boyd Gate House
Lease shall be of no further force and effect." Mr. Cohen stated it seemed
as though this meant the Boyd Gate House lease drops off the face of the
earth at this point. He felt we should incorporate those conditions by
reference into this document, or maintain the original document, noting those
same conditions, which are not being listed in the new lease, are the same
as in the other lease, yet we are now saying the other lease is no longer
in force and effect. Mr. Cohen stated the intent was clear, and this was
a very technical point, but he felt that we need to have that document
incorporated into this one, or maintained in a way to clearly state the
obligations to the Marin Historical Society with respect to the Boyd House.
Mr. Pendoley referred to page 9 o the Development and Disposition Agreement,
which states "The premises covered by the Lease shall consist of the property
on which the Museum Building is to be constructed, the premises covered by
the Boyd Gate House Lease, the landscaped areas adjacent to the Museum
Building and Boyd Gate House, and the landscaped areas of the Park designated
in the Master Plan for use primarily by patrons of the Museum Building."
Mr. Pendoley stated he could expand on that language if it needed to be
more detailed.
Councilmember Heller referred to that portion of the staff report which states
staff would be prepared at this time to make the recommendation between a
55 year lease or a 99 year lease. Mr. Pendoley stated a 55 year lease had
been agreed to.
Lionel Ashcroft, President of the Marin Historical Society, addressed the
Council, reporting the Marin Historical Society was prepared to enter into
a Development and Disposition Agreement in order to begin the process of
gaining a site in Boyd Park for the erection of an additional museum. Mr.
Ashcroft stated there has been much concern that a considerable amount of
the County's heritage, including documents that date back as far as 1846,
and copies of all the newspapers that were published in this County since
1861, are housed in a wooden structure, noting there is an additional concern
that this structure is in a park that currently is undergoing a certain amount
of transient population, and that does have some hazardous implication for
the structure. He reported sterno stoves and sleeping bags have been found
on the porch of the Gate House, and stated that although they are not concerned
about the homeless per se, they are concerned about the hazard that is
associated with this type of use. Mr. Ashcroft stated that once these
concerns were made known, the Marin Historical Society received a grant in
the amount of $300,000 to encourage the Society to build a safe, fireproof,
climate controlled facility for housing these resources so that they will
be here not just for ourselves, but for our children and our children's
children. Mr. Ashcroft stated the members of the Marin Historical Society
truly feel they have a responsibility to future generations to make sure
that these same resources we all enjoy looking at will be available for the
children in the future.
Mr. Ashcroft reported that with these concerns in mind, the Marin Historical
Society decided to plan for and try to build a new site in Boyd Park. He
felt that Boyd Park fits the bill perfectly for a number of reasons, noting
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 8
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 9
it is associated with the Historical Museum that currently exists, and this
is a perfect opportunity to revitalize the park and bring it back for the
community. Mr. Ashcroft stated the idea of this project is to provide a
museum/park complex, and because the Marin Historical Society is so concerned
with that focus, the Society is willing to be responsible for a Master Plan
that will take all of the elements of the current park and propose different
ideas so the park can become a major resource for the City of San Rafael.
Mr. Ashcroft stated the Society hopes to be working with the neighborhood
groups, associated service groups, and the City's Park and Recreation
Department, in order to make something vital for the entire community.
Mr. Ashcroft stated that the Marin Historical Society has attempted to include
all of the working details in the Development and Disposition Agreement.
Mr. Ashcroft acknowledged there are many technical variations which will
need to be addressed, but noted the Society was asking the Council to approve
the agreement, recognizing there are technical areas that will need to be
reviewed or adjusted as time goes on. Mr. Ashcroft noted the lease term
was designated at 55 years, as that is currently the legal maximum imposed
on the City of San Rafael on any lease of City property. Mr. Ashcroft stated
there is an exemption to this law that would allow a 99 year lease for certain
types of institutions, but it is not known at this time if a museum would
qualify for this type of exemption. Mr. Ashcroft noted that although the
Marin Historical Society has agreed to the 55 year lease, they would like
the City to be open to further discussion to determine if this project would
qualify for a 99 year lease.
Referring to Mr. Cohen' s concern of the need to incorporate the Boyd Gate House
lease as part of this agreement, Mr. Ashcroft acknowledged there are a number
of issues that need to be addressed and further defined, but noted they are
primarily legal technicalities. Mr. Ashcroft stated he hoped the Council
would move ahead with this project, with the understanding that the wording
in the agreement is based on the Society's best guess at the moment, and
what they perceive as the best way to move forward. Mr. Ashcroft stated
he has repeatedly noted the value to the City in this type of arrangement,
and suggested perhaps the Marin Historical Society could form a partnership
with the City, which would perhaps allow them to apply for a grant or seek
other funding in order to finance the Master Plan. Mr. Ashcroft stated the
Master Plan not only enables the Marin Historical Society to move forward,
it also enables them to realize the primary goal of creating a complex where
people will take their children to the park, and feel safe enough to leave
them playing in the playground while their parents visit the museum.
Mr. Ashcroft stated they plan to showcase the technical innovations that are
currently being developed in Marin County, to have the very finest in
technical presentations that are available, and they hope to draw some of
the best resources in the County to present history in the more sophisticated
way we have come to expect.
Councilmember Cohen stated that the language relating to the funding of the
Master Plan states the Marin Historical Society plans to finance the plan
at some time prior to the issuance of the building permit. Mr. Cohen noted
it could be two to four years before the building permit is issued, yet the
Master Plan is supposed to be completed sometime this Spring. He asked Mr.
Ashcroft when he anticipates the Society will be able to contribute to the
cost of the Master Plan? Mr. Ashcroft noted the agreement specifically
states the Society has up to thirty months to present the finance plan, and
does not have to pay for the Master Plan until the finance plan is completed.
However, he reported it is the intention of the Society to immediately make
applications to several foundations, noting they had already contacted the
Cultural Facilities Fund, the Marin Community Foundation, and several other
foundations who specialize in funding grants of this type. He stated the
Marin Community Foundation had recently awarded a $10,000 grant to Falkirk
for the gardens. He felt that if the Marin Historical Society could get
together with the City, they would have a much better opportunity of obtaining
the grants. Mr. Ashcroft noted the Society has a specialist on their payroll,
whom they pay $20, 000 per year to obtain grants for the Society, and stated
he did not feel the Society would need three years to pay for the Master
Plan, noting it could be as soon as six to nine months. He stated he was
not in a position to guarantee how long it would take, but noted they have
promised the money between now and the time the building permit is issued.
Councilmember Zappetini stated he liked the plan and the idea of it, but was
concerned about overflow parking, and asked Mr. Ashcroft if there was any
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 9
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 10
type of agreement with WestAmerica Bank to use their parking lot? Mr.
Ashcroft stated he had spoken with James Walker of WestAmerica Bank, and
although there is no written agreement, there has always been an informal
agreement that allows for the use of the parking lot at WestAmerica Bank.
Mr. Zappetini asked if there would be a problem with pedestrians crossing
the street, and Mr. Ashcroft responded that he hoped to speak with Public
Works Director Bernardi about repainting the crosswalk at that location,
and perhaps have a new sign installed. He noted he had already had
discussions with the traffic engineer about the sidewalk crossing.
Councilmember Heller asked what would happen to the Boyd Gate House, and
Mr. Ashcroft stated the Marin Historical Society intends to maintain the Gate
House, noting the basement will be used for classrooms, and the upper two
levels will be used as a period museum.
Councilmember Phillips complimented the Marin Historical Society on their
efforts, particularly the aspect of making the park more enjoyable for a
greater number of families. Mr. Phillips stated it was his understanding
that the Society would maintain the museum during the lease period, whether
it be 55 years or 99 years, and asked if the City had an assurance of the
level or the standard of the maintenance, noting that if there is ever a
problem in the future, it will undoubtedly be due to maintenance. Mr.
Pendoley stated those were the types of details that should be specified
in the terms of the lease, noting there will not be a lease agreement until
the project has all of the permits and financing. Mr. Phillips asked if
there was an adequate understanding, and Mr. Pendoley stated there was.
Mr. Ashcroft noted the Marin Historical Society has a broad agreement to
maintain all of the landscaping they install, and the details of that
maintenance are to be specified in the actual lease agreement.
Jim Ring, architect for the project, addressed the Council, stating this was
a very exciting project for the City, but noting he felt there was one aspect
that was being overlooked. He stated that a museum is like poetry, it is
pure and requires an accurate presentation of facts. Mr. Ring felt this
was very important in maintaining our heritage in this County, noting there
are many things in the museum that would give people a better understanding
of the way in which we have passed time. Mr. Ring reported that the historical
information is very concise because the items in the museum must prove those
points. He noted the Marin Historical Society has attempted to provide a
very poetic approach, and noted that it is very romantic, because to go back
in time is very romantic.
Beginning his slide presentation, Mr. Ring stated there were three things he
wished to point out, which he felt the Council may not have noticed. First,
in referring to the location, Mr. Ring noted this was a very large site,
which had been surveyed from the street to the reservoir. He stated that
by deciding to build under the existing tennis court, the City will gain
double use of the land, as well as replacement of a sub -standard tennis court.
Mr. Ring reported that fourteen parking stalls will be installed under the
lid, as well as the museum. Mr. Ring stated the museum will not link up
with the Boyd Gate House, as it is a historical monument, noting they will
connect the two visually rather than physically.
Mr. Ring stated it had been the Marin Historical Society's suggestion to replace
and relocate the tennis court on top of the museum, but noted the City might
decide they do not want a tennis court as part of the project. Therefore,
he suggested the language in the Disposition and Development Agreement be
changed to read "Installation of a tennis court, or an equivalent amount
of money", allowing the City the option of using that space for something
else. Mr. Ring did note that if the tennis court is installed, it will be
a legal size, competition court.
Mr. Ring reported the landscaping calls for only seven, non-native trees to
be removed from the site, noting the side yard will also be protected. Using
a slide to illustrate his second point, Mr. Ring explained that the original
grade line goes from the existing tennis court to street level; however,
by raising only eight feet for the new tennis court level, the distance from
the existing grade down to the top of the new grade will be reduced. He
stated they would then like to repeat the concrete and wrought iron period
fence, which now surrounds the Boyd Gate House, perhaps installing the same
fencing around the tennis court area.
Displaying a slide of the Boyd Gate House, Mr. Ring pointed out that it is
a frail wood building, stating it is a delightful structure, but noting that
frail architecture is hard to relate to; therefore, he felt the massive single
plane running horizontally eight feet above the ground would just do the
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 10
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 11
job, particularly with the concrete and wrought iron fence repeating the
concrete appearance. He noted they will need to correct the wall, correct
the sidewalks, and comply with ADA accessibility requirements, and felt the
period fence would bring everything together. He stated there will be no
other views of the building, as it is underground.
Mr. Ring stated this will be a place to educate the children, a place to bring
the old families back, and a way to retain and maintain the park. Mr. Ring
reported that the museum will be quite large, 7,500 square feet placed
underground. He explained the floor plan will include "streets" and
"avenues", with graphics and interactive displays. As an example, he noted
that someone could walk down a "street" representative of a street in San
Rafael in the year 1890, and see what the street was like at that time.
Mr. Ring stated this is a state of the art feature, and no other museum or
library has such a feature, noting the City will be far advanced. He reported
they have researched and studied this feature, they know their product, they
have something to sell, and that product is history.
Councilmember Cohen complimented Mr. Ring and stated that, given the decision
that was reached on where to locate the museum, they had done a fascinating
job of fitting the museum in under the tennis court space and making it all
work. Mr. Cohen noted one of the additional benefits of this project will
be the increased activity in Boyd Park. He felt this might be enhanced if
the museum were located at the same level as the park. Mr. Cohen acknowledged
that raising it to street level at the current location would be too imposing,
causing a two-story bulk that would seal -off the park. However, he asked
Mr. Ring if he thought there might be another location within the interior
of the park grounds where the museum could be built at grade, where people
would be more aware of the museum and further increase the level of activity
in the park. Mr. Ring responded they had done sixteen to twenty-two studies,
in an attempt to locate the museum elsewhere in the park. He stated the
topography is very severe, and placing the museum in another location within
the park would result in the loss of much of the flat recreational areas,
as well as the parking. Mr. Ring reported they had considered opening up
onto the park with big glass windows and skylights, but stated the museum
actually needs few windows, noting they actually did not want to relate to
the kids that much, as they want them to come into the museum to explore.
Dr. Eric Sher, 320 Laurel Place, addressed the Council, stating he and other
members of the community had been included in the planning of this project
from the beginning, and have been ecstatic over the proposals for the museum.
He stated that currently Boyd Park is really an atrocity, and noted that
as a father of young children, he has a whole different perspective of the
things that go on down in the park. He stated some of the things that his
child has seen and been involved with at the park make him ashamed, as a
father, to even be around this area. Dr. Sher stated he truly believes the
museum will bring people to the park and to the area in a very classy,
educational, and cultural way, noting it has much beauty. He agreed that
the plan proposes the best location for the museum within the park, noting
there is not much truly flat area for the children to use. He noted Mr.
Ashcroft and Mr. Ring were very receptive when the residents of the community
were concerned about the location of the parking and the safety of the entrance
traffic, noting they had modified their original plan. Dr. Sher felt that
parking was very important, stating it is currently very difficult to take
children to Boyd Park because there is only street parking, and it is not
easy to get children and strollers and toys into the park. He stated parking
was an important issue, as the parks that parents choose to take their children
to are the ones they can get to with their cars. Dr. Sher stated he applauded
this project, noting the entire neighborhood is excited about it. He felt
the only downside to the project is that it might not be completed until
1999, and he urged the Council to approve this plan.
Robert Baughm, 341 Laural Place, addressed the Council, stating Boyd Park is
basically his park, as his front door directly faces the park. He stated
he wanted to assure the Council there is currently a danger factor to the
Gate House, noting he has had to call the Police Department numerous times
because of drunk and disorderly people. Mr. Baughm stated this is a very
good proposal, and he is for anything that will attempt to make the park
usable for the children and others who want to enjoy the park, noting it
currently is not a very usable park.
Jim O'Callahan, resident of San Rafael, addressed the Council, stating he had
fond childhood memories of playing in the park and using the facilities,
but noting those are not things that a child can do now. He stated that
he would like to be able to take his own children to Boyd Park, but feels
this is something he cannot do. He stated his mother has purchased a
condominium in the Boyd Condominiums, and when family members visit from
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 11
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 12
out of town, the park is a disgrace and an embarrassment to them. Mr.
O'Callahan stated he hoped this was a project that could turn that situation
around. He noted he is a Police Officer for the City of Fairfax, and even
being in that position he would not take his family or his children into
Boyd Park. Mr. O'Callahan felt this project was one step, along with many
others, that the City should undertake in order to revitalize and clean-up
the City's image.
There being no further public comment, Mayor Boro closed the Public Hearing.
Mayor Boro stated he was pleased there seemed to be such broad support from
the Council for this project. He felt the City had two assets, the Boyd
House and the park, both of which need help. Mayor Boro stated Mr. Ashcroft
had been discussing this project for at least the past year, ever since the
grant came into existence. Mayor Boro acknowledged the Board of Directors
of the Museum, as well as City staff, have had some concerns over this project,
and stated that he is very pleased that over the past year, with Bob Pendoley
representing the City and Lionel Ashcroft representing the Marin Historical
Society, we have come to the point where there is a Development and Disposition
Agreement which will allow the Society to show that they have land on which
to build this building, which in turn will facilitate their fundraising,
and City staff will have a guarantee that a Master Plan will be done for
this area, because that is the first step of this project. Mayor Boro stated
that although the City has not been able to do more of these types of projects
as quickly as we would like, the City does plan similar projects in all of
the parks throughout the City where there has been cooperation between the
local neighborhoods. He felt the completion of this project will be a
tremendous asset to the City's downtown area, noting he hopes this can be
completed prior to 1999.
Councilmember Cohen referred to the obligation for the maintenance and repair
of the Boyd Gate House, and asked Mr. Pendoley to see that those obligations
are defined in the new lease. Mr. Cohen stated he was very excited about
this project, and felt it was a tremendous opportunity not only for the
cultural impact, but also for the partnership that has been developed. Mr.
Cohen stated such partnerships are going to be the way the City will get
things done in the future.
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the
Resolution certifying a Negative Declaration and approving the Development
and Disposition Agreement with the Marin County Historical Society.
RESOLUTION NO. 9534 - RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AND DISPOSITION AGREEMENT
WITH THE MARIN COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY FOR A PORTION OF BOYD PARK.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor
Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
19. PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF DISABLED ACCESS REQUIREMENTS - 171 CARLOS
DRIVE (PW) - File 13-1-1
Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing opened and asked for a report.
Public Works Director David Bernardi reported the appeal document submitted
by Peter Walz, representative of the owner of the property at 171 Carlos
Drive, outlined the request for the appeal. Mr. Bernardi explained that
the new handicapped regulations require 200 of the cost of the project be
spent on providing accessibility
improvements, even though the entire building will not be made accessible.
Mr. Bernardi stated the building was constructed in 1981, and at that time
complied with all regulations; however, the building does not meet current
standards. Mr. Bernardi reported there would be approximately $6,300 spent
on providing a path of travel to the building, which would consist mainly
of the installation of new front doors that would meet the new requirements.
Mr. Bernardi recommended the Council grant this appeal, and direct staff
to come back before the Council with a Resolution authorizing the granting
of the appeal.
Mayor Boro asked for comments from the public regarding this issue.
Peter Walz, representative of the property owner, addressed the Council, stating
he was prepared to answer questions regarding this request.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 12
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 13
There being no public comment, Mayor Boro closed the Public Hearing.
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, that the City
Council, sitting as the Board of Appeals, grant the appeal and direct staff
to prepare the appropriate Resolution.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor
Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
OLD BUSINESS:
20. MCPAS FINAL REPORT (CM/Lib) - File 234
Vaughn Stratford, Library Director, stated the City's participation in MCPAS,
along with staff's recommendation, are an effort to take a pro -active stance
toward the use of new technologies in providing information to the public.
Councilmember Heller noted the Council had appropriated $5,000 for this, and
noted we were at the end of the pilot project. She asked if the City was
still online in the same way, or if the City needed to appropriate more money
to remain online in providing City information?
Scott McCowen, consultant from Marinfo, addressed the Council, and reported
the City is still online. He stated the issue of publishing online, whether
it be on the InterNet or a dial-up bulletin board service, does not rely
on the technology, but rather the internal capacity to deliver that
information in a timely fashion. He stated the service is available, and
they are anxious to have the cities and other agencies use the service.
He noted there are no charges associated with the dial-up service.
Councilmember Phillips stated he felt this was a good idea, and that he was
very excited about it. He asked what kind of budget recommendation staff
was proposing.
Mr. Stratford stated staff was considering at least two alternatives, ABAG
Online and MIDAS. He reported staff is getting cost figures from the County,
which are still being developed, noting that although the cost is not great,
the real cost is in the staff time to publish the information online. Mr.
Stratford stated it is being recommended that staff level procedures and
policies be put in place that make electronic publishing part of the daily,
ongoing activity of the staff. As an example, rather than staff members
typing reports and issuing information from those reports, the City needs
to incorporate the new technologies into our way of doing business right
now.
Councilmember Heller asked if the City had the technology to scan the minutes
into the system? Mr. Vaughn stated that almost everything the City publishes
at this time, such as Council reports and minutes, are on word processors,
so that it would be only a matter of coordinating the activity and being
organized about how we provide that information.
Mr. McCowan stated that as an outsider looking in when he was working with
the various agencies on this project, he felt the major issue is having the
elected officials backing the concept, noting that although it is not terribly
difficult, it is a change in culture and the way things are currently being
done. He stated that unless the leadership states they want this to be done,
it probably will not be done.
Councilmember Cohen stated the issue came down to only two key points, which
are content and access. He stated he had used the Marinfo Bulletin Board
during his campaign, noting the service provides local E-mail, and that he
and his campaign staff had basically conducted a significant part of their
communications electronically through Marinfo. He stated he was grateful
to have been able to use this type of service during the campaign, and that
it provided very rapid communication. Mr. Cohen felt the City now needs
to determine how this type of inter -activity fits in with what the City is
trying to do in communicating with the constituents. He reported his
experience with examining the content that had been posted to Marinfo was
that, even as an insider, he did not find it either appealing or particularly
informative, or easy to access. He stated the City really needs to decide
what we want to accomplish in terms of content, and determine if there is
really enough interest. He felt this should be more than an electronic
version of just ink on paper, and that it would be a mistake to look at it
that way. Mr. Cohen stated that given the tremendous growth of the Worldwide
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 13
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 14
Web, the City should look into participating through the ABAG Online or the
County system, noting they would provide broader access than Marinfo. He
felt there were real opportunities to use the interactive nature of the
medium, and stated he would like to see the City explore the idea of putting
some of our forms on the Worldwide Web, allowing people to submit information
electronically and begin the process without having to come to City Hall.
Mayor Boro stated there are many things that people currently have to come
to City Hall for that they should be able to do from their homes, such as
obtaining permits and paying fees. He felt this would evolve as the City
moves forward, and agreed that it should be more than just making copies
of things that are already available. Mayor Boro felt it was important that
the Council endorse this program, so staff will continue to pursue the issue,
and the City makes a shift in its culture and moves forward.
Elissa Giambastiani, Executive Director of the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce,
addressed the Council, and noted that San Rafael has been on the Worldwide
Web since last April. She stated there was the possibility of increasing
the amount of information on the Chamber of Commerce's page, at no cost to
the City other than staff time. She reported the Chamber of Commerce is
currently online with SBT and Netcom, and noted the Council needs to determine
how much information they would like to have on the Chamber of Commerce's
page.
Councilmember Cohen thanked Scott McCowan for his work on this project, stating
he had found it both very helpful and educational to have the information
and involvement that we had in this project, and noted it had encouraged
him to think about the direction the City should be taking. Mr. Cohen stated
he felt this had been a very helpful project, and time and money well spent.
Councilmember Zappetini moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to accept
the MCPAS report and staff recommendations.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
NEW BUSINESS:
21. DISCUSSION OF DRAFT ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
TO ADD CHAPTER 8.35 TO THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE PROHIBITING GRAFFITI,
ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR GRAFFITI REMOVAL, AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR
VIOLATIONS (CA)
- File 13-9
Acting City Manager Suzanne Golt stated this draft was being brought to the
Council as a follow-up to previous discussions with the Council regarding
a variety of issues relating to graffiti abatement. She recalled that some
of the discussions had taken place during the budget hearings, and noted
that $10,000 had been allocated in the Public Works budget and a number of
other activities relating to graffiti abatement were planned. She reported
that at that time, the Council had given initial instruction to staff,
particularly the City Attorney's office, with comments on certain elements
of an Ordinance that they would like to consider, and she noted this is the
draft Ordinance being presented for discussion. Ms. Golt stated she had
made a point of notifying the Chamber of Commerce, the Business Improvement
District, and the Federation of Neighborhoods, noting there were three people
in the audience from the Federation of Neighborhoods' Graffiti Abatement
Program (GAP), whom she felt might like to comment on the Ordinance.
City Attorney Gary Ragghianti addressed the Council, reporting that he and
Assistant City Attorney Gus Guinan had reviewed the graffiti Ordinances of
other cities in the preparation of this draft. He pointed out that this
draft was only being presented to the Council for discussion, and that no
action was to be taken at this time. He stated it was staff's intention
to come back, upon the request of the Council, with a proposed Ordinance
for a formal Public Hearing.
Mayor Boro referred to that portion of the report entitled "Intent and Purpose",
and stated someone had leaped to conclusions in stating "Graffiti has caused
a decline in property values." Mayor Boro did not believe this was a
documented fact, and felt it was an opinion and not a fact. He stated he
would challenge that statement, and felt it was not an appropriate statement
unless it could be substantiated. Mayor Boro acknowledged that graffiti
does contribute to blight and detracts from the image, but he does not believe
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 14
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 15
that it has been proven that graffiti has caused property values to decline.
Mayor Boro stated he would like to have some discussion regarding Paragraph
D on Page 7, which states that if a private property owner fails to remove
graffiti within a specified time, the City will go in and do something.
Mayor Boro felt this was quite a departure from what the City normally does,
such as asking why the lot on Third and "B" or "C" Streets has been sitting
there in the shape it has been in for years, or asking why the City is not
doing something about it, and the response is always that there is only so
much the City can do. He stated it takes an act of God to get anything
accomplished, and yet the City is saying it is going to jump on people's
property and clean it up for them. He stated he was trying to understand
how practical that is, and wonders if there is not another way to make it
happen. Mayor Boro stated he truly believed that the issue of graffiti must
be a reflection of what the people who live in the community think about
their community, noting that if you own or rent a building, or live in a
building, and are concerned about graffiti, then that is where the impetus
should come from. He stated that, obviously, the City can prod, but he did
not know if the City should jump in and do it, instigating a whole cycle
of appeals.
Ms. Golt stated there were a number of aspects and elements in this Ordinance
that may or may not appeal to the Council, noting she felt this might be
one of the key ones. She recalled that when this was last discussed, the
Council's aim at that time had been to have a relatively low-key Ordinance,
not to penalize the victims of graffiti, and to place a lot of emphasis on
having graffiti paraphernalia limited in terms of sales to individuals under
eighteen years of age. Ms. Golt noted some of the provisions in this draft
Ordinance could pose enforcement problems, in terms of placing additional
demands upon code enforcers and police officers, although she did not feel
this would be something the Police Department would enforce, but rather would
fall upon the shoulders of an already overtaxed code enforcement unit.
City Attorney Ragghianti reported he had not had the opportunity to review
this in detail, but he assured the Council that when this draft is reviewed
in depth by his office, it will be reviewed for internal consistency and
for many additional issues that they did not take the time to include in
this draft, as the information being presented at this time was only compiled
for the purpose of generating discussion, and not for the purpose of
presenting a product such as would be presented if they were coming before
the Council with an Ordinance for Public Hearing and introduction.
Elissa Giambastiani, Executive Director of the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce,
addressed the Council, stating she was concerned with that portion of the
draft that refers to retail sellers which states, "Any person who owns,
conducts, operates or manages a commercial retail establishment which offers
for sale aerosol containers, as defined by this Chapter, shall keep, store
and maintain those aerosol containers in a location and/or manner which
renders them inaccessible to the public, without employee assistance, pending
legal sale." She reported she had called five members of the Chamber of
Commerce who sell paint in aerosol containers, and noted all of them had
told her it would be very difficult for them to comply with such a regulation.
She reported that Marin Color Service had told her they had no space behind
their counter to store aerosol containers; however, their containers are
set-up opposite the front counter, so they would be visible to the people
who are staffing the counter. Ms. Giambastiani reported that none of the
five businesses sell paint in aerosol containers to individuals under
eighteen years of age. She reported that Long's Drug Store has also stated
they do not have an area where they could keep aerosol containers under
supervision; Orchard Supply has responded that some Orchard Supply Stores
have done this, but the store in San Rafael does not, stating they would
need to install new fixtures and reconfigure the store in order to comply;
Rafael Lumber stated this would be a real problem for them because they have
no back-up storage, and they noted they do not have a problem with teen-agers
coming into the store, so they feel this would be an unnecessary and burdensome
Ordinance. Ms. Giambastiani noted it was interesting that Rafael Lumber,
which is on Andersen Drive, has never been tagged with graffiti, while
Yardbirds Lumber Company, which is in the West End of the City, is being
tagged all the time.
Ms. Giambastiani reported she had spoken with the assistant manager of Yardbirds
Lumber Company, and he has stated the store is so open that it would be very
difficult for them to comply with a regulation of this type, and if the aerosol
cans were locked up, he would have to hire an additional person just to run
back and forth to retrieve the paint. She stated that Yardbirds also keeps
their aerosol cans of paint near the counter so that they can maintain some
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 15
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 16
observation of it, but noted they had reported they sell approximately 500
- 600 aerosol cans of paint per week.
Mayor Boro noted that some of these stores, especially Yardbirds, have scanners
at the counter, and asked if perhaps it could be set-up so that a notice
would come up on the register each time a product of this type is sold, which
warns that identification and verification of age is required for such a
purchase. Mayor Boro felt that just the intent of showing the stores are
paying attention to who they are selling such items to should have an impact.
Ms. Giambastiani stated the stores are doing that now, and all seem to be
very aware of not selling aerosol paint to individuals under eighteen years
of age. She did not feel any of the stores would have a problem with
displaying a sign, or in enforcing the regulation of not selling to minors.
Ms. Giambastiani reported that none of the business owners she spoke with
had a problem with the requirement of penalizing the victim of graffiti,
as they all maintain their properties and clean graffiti as soon as it is
placed on their buildings. Ms. Giambastiani referred to that portion of
the report which suggested the public agencies would be responsible for the
enforcement of the graffiti removal regulations, and wondered if that would
include CalTrans, as a majority of the graffiti is done on CalTrans property.
Ms. Giambastiani suggested that rather than adopt this particular section
of the draft Ordinance as it has been presented, the City might talk to some
of the business owners and try to implement a better course of action that
would not be so burdensome for them.
Albert Barr, member of the steering committee of the Federation of San Rafael
Neighborhoods and member of the Graffiti Abatement Committee, addressed the
Council, and stated he agreed with Ms. Giambastiani that the portion of the
draft Ordinance regarding the regulations imposed on retail sellers may not
be necessary. He felt that was probably adopted from another city where
there was a great deal of shoplifting of aerosol spray cans, noting it had
been necessary in New York to force retailers to put graffiti material behind
glass cases. He did not feel that we had this kind of problem in San Rafael.
However, he felt the rest of the draft Ordinance was very appropriate, and
thanked the City and staff for putting this together at a preliminary stage,
noting he hoped they would carry through and refine the Ordinance,
substantially as it is. Mr. Barr stated everyone agrees that graffiti is
a terrible nuisance, which affects not only the immediate property owner,
but affects the whole City and reflects upon the downtown area. He felt
that when people see graffiti, it gives the appearance of an undesirable
neighborhood, and it becomes the kind of downtown area that will not induce
people to come and do their shopping. Mr. Barr felt the City must make every
effort to remove graffiti promptly from both public and private property,
noting the major challenge will have to do with private property, including
public agencies such as Pacific Bell and Pacific Gas & Electric Company,
as well as individual property owners.
Mr. Barr felt this Ordinance would go a long way toward motivating private
property owners to remove graffiti promptly, stating that once the Ordinance
is put into effect and people know they are required to remove the graffiti,
they will do so. He stated he does not believe enforcement will actually
be much of a problem, although currently people do not put much of a priority
on removing graffiti. He stated the Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods
maintains a hotline to receive reports of graffiti, and noted about a year
ago they received a call from the manager of the building in which the Chamber
of Commerce is located, and they told her it was her responsibility to remove
the graffiti. He stated the woman was put out, and felt that the City should
do it, but they told her that it was her responsibility as a property owner.
He stated her response is somewhat pervasive among property owners, noting
that while some property owners remove the graffiti from their buildings,
many do not, as they feel it should be the City's responsibility. Mr. Barr
stated that this is why the portion of the Ordinance motivating private
property owners to remove graffiti from their property is very necessary,
and will become a key plan in the overall strategy to combat graffiti. Mr.
Barr reported the City, the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Improvement
District had sent letters to their constituents asking them to remove
graffiti, noting the response to that correspondence was very disappointing.
Mr. Barr stated that once this Ordinance is enacted, and people are motivated
by the Ordinance to remove graffiti, then the City and the Federation of
San Rafael Neighborhoods will be able to formulate a strategy in cooperation
with property owners to fund a more efficient and cost effective way of
removing graffiti, such as funding a van that is dedicated to removing
graffiti promptly, and the staffing of that van. Mr. Barr felt that once
people realize they have to remove graffiti, then they would be willing to
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 16
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 17
participate in a program of that nature, which will be cost effective for
them and more effective for the City. Mr. Barr stated this is part of the
strategy for further on down the road, and that this Ordinance is a necessary
part of that strategy. On behalf of the Federation of San Rafael
Neighborhoods, he urged the City to adopt such an Ordinance in the near future.
Hugo Landecker, 127 San Rafael Avenue, addressed the Council, stating there
were a couple of items that concern him about this issue. First, he stated
that when the City talks about forcing a property owner to promptly remove
graffiti, the City should not forget that graffiti is now getting into the
neighborhoods, and we are no longer just talking about downtown types of
property, we are talking about people's residences. He stated he did not
know how effective it was going to be to try to force a neighbor to immediately
remove graffiti within a twenty-four hour period. In addition, he stated
there is also the problem of code enforcement, and getting the code
enforcement officer to do something. He felt that if the Council was actually
going to adopt this Ordinance, they needed to get some money into the code
enforcement office and make it more effective than it is. Mr. Landecker
reminded the Council that a lot of graffiti was being left in the parks,
noting the trees in Gerstle Park have been painted, as well as City owned
street trees in Mr. Landecker's neighborhood. Mr. Landecker stated this
was demoralizing, and he felt that anything the City could do to punish the
people that are doing this would be great, and noted he hopes this Ordinance
will go in the right direction. He wondered if a twenty-four hour requirement
to have residents remove graffiti from their property was actually included
in the Ordinance, would the City also remove the graffiti from trees in the
City Parks within twenty-four hours? He stated he has seen some of the
graffiti in Gerstle Park that has been there for six months or a year. He
stated he would like to see the City fund some type of vehicle that would
go around and remove the graffiti, and have a color matching capability.
Tom Obletz, President of the Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods, addressed
the Council, reporting he had spoken to a number of retailers who sell paint
products, and noted he was pleased to see that Councilmember Phillips had
contacted Bill Loskutoff of Jackson's. Mr. Obletz stated the issue of
remodeling the store or providing new fixtures, or in some way putting paint
in an area inaccessible to the public is a real issue to the retailers, and
he felt that stolen paint seemed to be a bigger issue than purchased paint.
Mr. Obletz felt there might be a need to look into broadening the items
covered in the Ordinance, to go beyond just aerosols. He stated that if
an Ordinance is indeed passed, and it addresses only aerosols, he felt the
young minds at work here might come up with other products that are not covered
in the Ordinance. Mr. Obletz felt that Councilmember Cohen's viewpoints,
which were published in the Marin Independent Journal, were well taken, and
that the City really needs to have its act together and set the example,
and provide some leadership to the community at large. Mr. Obletz stated
he felt that it would have been helpful, as a procedural item, to have shown
in the chart a summary of how San Rafael's draft Ordinance compared with
the Ordinances of other cities. Mr. Obletz felt the twenty-four hour
requirement for the removal of graffiti was a good start, although he did
not know how realistic that would be, noting that in looking at the chart,
seven days seems to be the norm in the other jurisdictions, with some going
as many as twenty days. With respect to code enforcement, Mr. Obletz stated
he agreed with Mr. Landecker, stating he felt the code enforcement officer
in Public Works is extremely overtaxed, and noted that perhaps this was an
opportunity to get some additional funding and staffing within that
department, which might also include graffiti abatement. Mr. Obletz
encouraged the Council to consider implementing a program offering rewards
for information leading to the conviction of individuals responsible for
the graffiti, claiming this has seemed to work in other jurisdictions.
Mayor Boro recalled that Mr. Obletz had once spoken with the County Supervisors
to determine if there was a way to fund a van to be used County -wide for
graffiti abatement, and asked if anything had been done concerning that.
Mr. Obletz stated Supervisor Brown has encouraged them to get back in touch
with the County, noting there might be a possibility of having a van with
color matching capabilities that could be available to various jurisdictions
on a reserved basis, noting it did not appear that the need in San Rafael
was great enough for full-time use, but perhaps we could share it with the
other cities.
Mayor Boro stated he had seen this type of operation work successfully in Brea,
California, but noted Brea was a large enough city to provide its own service.
He stated that a County -wide program might be of interest, and stated the
City could pursue this through the Mayors and Councils, as well as through
the Supervisors, and perhaps through a Joint Powers Agreement to have a staff
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 17
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 18
that could actually go out and do this. Mayor Boro stated he was concerned
that if we are able to do this, and the City passes an Ordinance, the
community's expectations will be high that something is actually going to
happen. He noted that with our current staff, nothing is going to happen
in the timeframe we are talking about, so even if the City chooses to implement
this program, he is not certain how the City could actually affect the program.
Mayor Boro felt the Council needed to think a little bit before just putting
this out as something the City is going to do, noting they must consider
how they are going to accomplish this rather than just saying this is how
it is going to be.
Mr. Obletz stated Supervisor Brown has been very supportive and has encouraged
them to come back with additional ideas. He also noted that in some of the
material Councilmember Heller had provided from the League of California
Cities and Association of Bay Area Governments there was discussion of other
jurisdictions that have similar shared resources.
Councilmember Phillips asked Mr. Obletz what message he felt the retailers
were sending, noting he felt there was considerable concern about having
aerosols under lock and key. Mr. Phillips felt this would become very
expensive for the retailers, and would be impractical for the City to enforce
that part of the provision. Mr. Obletz agreed that these were the same
responses he received from the retailers when he spoke with them regarding
this issue, noting they had stated compliance would require refixturing or
additional storage space, and additional personnel to actually unlock storage
spaces to get the products for the customers. He stated representatives
from Jackson's, Rafael Lumber and Yardbirds indicated they felt a majority
of the products that potentially are used to create graffiti were being
acquired by adults, or at least individuals over the age of eighteen. Mr.
Obletz noted that most of Jackson's business is with those in the trades,
and they do not have many youngsters coming into their establishment to buy
one or two cans of paint, noting when they do, it sends up a red flag. He
noted they were very strong in their statement that if they feel there is
something not right about the individual seeking to acquire these products,
they will not sell to them. Mr. Obletz stated Jackson's, Rafael Lumber and
Yardbirds have stated they have denied sales to individuals who they felt
might misuse the products. Mr. Obletz felt there was good help in the
community, stating that what brought out that fact for him was the awareness
he found at the retail level, noting the retailers know it is a problem,
they are trying not to contribute to the problem, and at the same time they
are trying to serve their customers.
Patrick Driver, an employee of Yardbirds, addressed the Council, stating Section
835, referring to retail sellers, had been brought to his attention only
this evening. He stated he was concerned with his company being required
to make the products inaccessible to customers. Mr. Driver stated he did
not understand to what extent the retailers were expected to make the product
inaccessible, but stated that if it were to be under lock and key, it would
be a major inconvenience to the customer. He stated it would also likely
bring up the cost of the product because of the added expense the retailer
would incur in needing additional personnel to monitor that section of the
store. Mr. Driver stated that his business caters to quite a few customers
who are involved in home improvement projects, and to be required to pay
so much attention to that specific area of monitoring the sale of aerosol
paints would require them to hire at least one extra person just to monitor
those sales on each regular shift, and they have two shifts per day. Mr.
Driver reported that since they sell an abundance of paint and paint related
products in the store, they dedicate a large space area to those products.
He stated that to be required to put that entire area under lock and key
would have a tremendous impact, as they would have forty feet of area under
lock and key, and that would not be very feasible. Mr. Driver stated the
employees at Yardbirds have discouraged the sale of these products to
individuals under the age of eighteen, and have gone so far as to put up
signs and have younger people bring their parents in to assist them in buying
these products. Mr. Driver reported he has addressed these issues with the
people in the corporate office, and they requested he come before the Council
to express their views, and noted they would be interested in any future
discussions of this issue. Mr. Driver stated his store has been tagged with
graffiti a number of times, and noted they have spent a lot of time, money
and man-hours in cleaning and patching the building, and have even repainted
the entire exterior sidewall of the building.
Councilmember Heller asked if it would be feasible to have a warning flash
on the cash register advising the sales staff to check I.D.'s when these
items are purchased? Mr. Driver stated they were not set-up with scanners,
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 18
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 19
but noted everyone in the store has a personal interest, as well as a business
interest, in making the graffiti problem as minimal as possible, and they
are always on the lookout for minors attempting to purchase these products.
Councilmember Phillips asked if there was any reluctance, from a business
standpoint, to checking the customer's age? Mr. Driver responded they were
very open about this, and if there was someone who appeared to be under the
age of eighteen they definitely encourage the employees to ask for
identification.
Gayden White, 1023 Las Gallinas, addressed the Council, to discuss the issue
of the selling of these products. He stated that Safeway, Lucky' s, and other
grocery stores are not required to isolate the liquor in such a way, and
he felt that this was no different than selling liquor. Mr. White stated
the basic responsibility, once the product leaves the store, is on the person
who ultimately is selling it. He does not see why the store owner should
be required to have the products placed under lock and key, as suggested.
He felt this was not a realistic approach. Mr. White stated he had been
in law enforcement, and noted this was just like liquor law enforcement,
and if there is a problem, the person who is the target of the enforcement
is the one selling the product. He stated there is also the problem of the
child who steals the product from his parents or from another source.
Referring to graffiti, Mr. White noted that the biggest problem with graffiti
in San Francisco is the use of felt pens, and asked if the City is going
to go to Office Depot and Ideal Toy Company and try to restrict the use of
felt pens? Mr. White also felt that the timeframe for the removal of graffiti
by the property owner was very unrealistic, stating that requirement should
be reviewed. Mr. White pointed out that we need the efforts of law
enforcement, stating the law enforcement personnel have the responsibility
to protect people, property, and assets, and noting that this comes under
the protection of property.
Mayor Boro cited that portion of the report which states that any person applying
graffiti would have twenty-four hours to remove it, and noted he did not
have a problem with that requirement. He noted that further in the same
section it addresses the consequences of failure to remove the graffiti within
that time period, yet another section of the draft Ordinance states that
a property owner so notified has seven days to remove graffiti from their
property. He wanted to clarify that the twenty-four hour time period applied
only to the person who had applied the graffiti, and not to the property
owner, and Ms. Golt stated that this was her belief. Mayor Boro stated this
sounded more reasonable.
Councilmember Zappetini asked is there were any statistics showing the age
group involved, and if it was, in fact, basically those individuals under
eighteen years of age? Ms. Golt stated she did not have any statistics,
but noted that Police Officer Jeff Franzini had a grant which focused on
graffiti abatement, and explained that most of the people who worked with
Officer Franzini were under eighteen years of age. She stated her awareness
from Officer Franzini was that most of those involved with graffiti were
between the ages of fourteen and eighteen years old, and noted it was unusual
to have anyone older than that. Mr. Zappetini stated that at the time his
property was hit, he had a younger person working for him. He asked this
young man what the graffiti meant, and the young man interpreted the graffiti
to read "UM" for Upper Marin, which designates a group in Novato, and "OF",
for Ocean/San Francisco, which designates another group. Mr. Zappetini
stated that as it appears different groups are moving through the area,
perhaps the age limit should be sixteen, rather than eighteen. He felt this
was a gang type of activity, and they are transporting as a group, noting
this was also something the City should look into.
Mayor Boro stated Paragraph D on Page 7 of the report, which refers to the
responsibility of the property owner to remove the graffiti, needed to be
explored further. He cited the sentence which states, "Upon failure of
property owner to remove graffiti within the time required, the City may
remove the graffiti applied to privately owned property", and stated that
if this portion of the Ordinance was passed, he was concerned as to what
the expectation of the public will be, and also concerned with the City's
ability to respond and the City's ability to actually do this. Mayor Boro
acknowledged this issue was only being presented for discussion at this time,
but noted that aside from the legal issues which must be addressed, the
practical issue of the City having the ability to respond within such a
timeframe and having the funds for enforcement must be discussed. He felt
the issue of locking -up the material was not very practical, mainly because
of the size of the display spaces in the various stores. However, he did
note that there has been no opposition from the store owners to having their
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 19
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 20
employees assume an obligation for the sale of the material, and he felt
that perhaps if the City passed an Ordinance, then signs could be posted
and the City could look to the stores to enforce the sales restrictions.
Mayor Boro reported the City has used lock-up for cigarettes, and that
has been successful, but he noted that cigarettes are a much smaller product
and are more restricted. He did not feel that an attempt to control the
paint products in the same way would be very practical.
Mayor Boro asked Ms. Golt how she planned to proceed with this issue, noting
that the Federation of San Rafael Neighborhoods and the San Rafael Chamber
of Commerce have both been involved, and asking if that would continue?
Ms. Golt stated she felt it would be good to have additional input from those
groups, as well as some of the retailers, but noted that eventually this
draft would need to go back to the City Attorney's office. She stated the
first thing she would do would be to discuss the comments and input received
tonight with Assistant City Attorney Guinan, and ask him to re -draft the
draft Ordinance, and then review the new draft with members of the Graffiti
Abatement Program and the Chamber of Commerce and ask for any additional
input they might want to add. She also noted the importance of getting
additional input from the retailers who might be affected by such an
Ordinance.
Councilmember Heller stated the whole section on the property owner's
responsibility for the removal of the graffiti was a huge problem of
enforcement, and felt we really need to look at this issue and decide what
is feasible for our City. She stated we probably cannot have a lot of police
enforcement on the issue at this point. She stated that we need to decide
if we can really do this, and if not, why include it in the Ordinance? Ms.
Golt agreed that this was a critical point that needed to be looked at, noting
that, in her opinion, the City would not be able to enforce it.
Councilmember Heller referred to the examples of graffiti Ordinances from other
cities, and stated she would like to see how long these Ordinances had been
in effect and if they are actually working, and also if the cities feel they
are worth the money they have spent to print the Ordinances, or if they are
just a salve to the conscience that are not really doing a bit of good.
Referring to that portion of the draft which addresses the responsibility
of the property owner for the removal of the graffiti, she stated that she
had a problem with punishing the victim, although she felt she could probably
work that through if it appeared as though it would really work. She stated
she would really like to explore the possibility of rewards, noting that
if a program could be developed of snitching on your best friend, with a
good bit of money behind it, she felt this might go a good deal of the way
toward lowering this problem. She added that she would like to find out
if this type of program has worked in other cities.
Councilmember Cohen stated he had spoken earlier with Ms. Golt regarding the
retail aspects of this Ordinance, and noted it appeared that through the
efforts of a number of people, many of the retailers had been contacted about
this issue. Mr. Cohen stated the City should have learned from the experience
of the truck parking Ordinance that the City must be pro active, and he felt
it should not be difficult to identify 95% of those engaged in selling paint
within the City limits of the City of San Rafael. He suggested the City
notify those retailers and let them know that there is a graffiti problem,
that there is a lot of community concern about it, and that the City feels
they have a role to play as part of the solution. Mr. Cohen agreed that
locking -up all aerosol paints is not going to be a solution, and felt that
we have heard enough about that already to know that this is not going to
work. However, he did feel the City needs to engage the retailers in a
discussion about the role they can play.
Mr. Cohen felt he might be in a different position than some of the others
on the abatement issue. He stated he has some concern about "blaming the
victim", but felt that balancing that is the responsibility of property
ownership. Mr. Cohen stated the implied message, if the City does enact
an Ordinance, would be that it is the City's expectation that this is a
responsibility that the property owner will undertake, and that part of the
responsibility that goes with owning property is the responsibility to clean
it up when this happens, because the look has a negative impact on the
community as a whole. Mr. Cohen noted that most of the communities listed
on the chart do include an abatement and lien process, which means that most
of the cities at least have it on their books that they will go in and remove
the graffiti if need be, and lien the property to recover the funds. Mr.
Cohen stated the model he would refer to is what the City has started doing
with hazardous fuel conditions on vegetation. He explained the intent is
not for the City to go and clean up every overgrown yard, noting there is
no expectation on the part of the City, and he hopes there is none on the
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 20
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 21
part of the community, that the City is now going to undertake the cleaning
up of all the weeds on every bit of overgrown property in the community.
He stated that what the City is actually saying is that in the worse cases,
where a property owner, after being notified by the neighbors and ultimately
by the City, refuses to deal with the problem and refuses to take
responsibility for their part in cleaning it up, ultimately the City will
order them to do it, or finally the City will go in and do it and charge
the property owner for it.
Mr. Cohen reported the City has not seen a flood of these situations, noting
there has been only one case where the City actually had to do this. Mr.
Cohen stated he could think of a couple of buildings around town where it
might be appropriate for the City to tell the owner that it has become a
real problem, that there is no evidence that it has been dealt with over
a period of months, and that it is the City's expectation that the owner
will take care of the problem. Mr. Cohen stated he did not believe that
it was an obligation of the City to clean-up private property, and noted
the City could not afford to do that, nor did he believe the City could afford
rigorous enforcement of that. However, he felt the City might want to have
this as a tool for the worst cases, as a way to get the message out that
the City expects people to behave responsibly. He stated that with this
comes the City's responsibility for its own property, noting that at the
time the Council adopted the Resolution giving the Fire Department the
authority to order a clean-up, the Council also agreed that the City needed
to look at the open spaces and identify hazardous conditions on City owned
property. He stated the City needs to show the same kind of responsibility.
Mr. Cohen stated the City will have to do the same thing on City property
with respect to graffiti, if we are going to expect this to have any meaning.
Mr. Cohen stated that he is comfortable with the City having an Ordinance,
noting that if we really feel that graffiti is a problem and want to make
it a priority to have it dealt with, he feels it will be a good tool to have
in the tool box.
Mayor Boro stated the abatement by the Fire Department was an issue of public
safety, while this was not a public safety issue. Mayor Boro agreed there
were buildings around town that are in disrepair and need paint badly, but
asked how do you differentiate between a building that looks bad and takes
away from the value of a neighborhood or makes it look unsafe because it
has not been maintained, versus a building that has been tagged with graffiti?
Mayor Boro felt there were some issues here that the City Attorney's office
would need to pursue, and that was why he had asked how realistic it was
to pass such an Ordinance, and what the expectations are going to be. Mayor
Boro stated this is a very large issue, noting that if there is a law on
the books people are going to expect the City to enforce it. He noted the
City had many times discussed the lots on Third Street, but to abate those
lots seems to take an act of Congress, and the City has not had much luck.
He stated it seemed pretty flip to him that the Ordinance states the City
will just go in and paint someone's private property and then bill them for
it, noting that if the City truly can do this, then it becomes an option
and it should be talked about, but he does not think it will be that easy.
Councilmember Zappetini stated another question that might arise would involve
rental property. He stated that if the renter was notified and the owner
was not, there would be a time lapse problem, and the owner could say that
he was not notified prior to the City doing the abatement for which he is
being charged. Mr. Zappetini also asked what would happen if a person's
house was tagged with graffiti and the owner was on a limited income and
could not afford to have the graffiti removed? Ms. Golt stated this was
a good question, for which she did not currently have an answer. Mr.
Zappetini stated it was possible that someone's house could be tagged so
badly that it could cost them $500 to have the graffiti cleaned -up, and then
a week later they could be tagged again. He felt the City could not just
force this on the property owner.
Mayor Boro stated he had two items he wanted the staff to pursue. First, he
wanted staff to pursue the idea of the City helping to facilitate the
acquisition of the graffiti abatement van through some kind of County
cooperation. He noted that if the City is going to do anything, even if
it is on a volunteer basis if the people want it to happen, it would be helpful
to have a vehicle like this where the paint can be matched and applied.
Secondly, he noted that some communities, such as the City of Fairfax, have
used television cameras to monitor trouble spots. He suggested we contact
the City of Fairfax to find out what success they have had.
Councilmember Heller reported the City of Fairfax was also paying Boy Scout
troops to help clean-up the graffiti, and noted this was another place the
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 21
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 22
City could look for labor. Ms. Golt confirmed this was a program that was
being used in Fairfax, and noted there were a lot of places the City could
look.
Mayor Boro stated there had been a lot of reactions to the proposal, and thanked
the community for their input. He stated the Council will continue this
issue to a future meeting, and noted that the issue will be brought back
before the Council.
22. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
None
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 PM.
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 12/18/95 Page 22