HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 2002-11-18SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Pagel
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2002 AT 8:00 P.M.
Regular Meeting:
San Rafael City Council
Also Present: Rod Gould, City Manager
Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk
OPEN SESSION — COUNCIL CHAMBER — 7:00 PM:
Vice -Mayor Cohen announced Closed Session items.
CLOSED SESSION — CONFERENCE ROOM 201 — 7:00 PM:
Present: Paul M. Cohen, Vice -Mayor
Barbara Heller Councilmember
Cyr N. Miller, Councilmember
Absent: Albert J. Boro, Mayor
Gary O. Phillips, Councilmember
a) Conference with Legal Counsel — Existing Litigation
Government Code Section 54956.9(a)
Case Name: MHC Financing, et al. v. City of San Rafael, et al.
U.S. District Court, Northern Dist. of CA, Case No. C003785
b) Conference with Labor Negotiator (Government Code Section 54957.6)
Negotiators' Names: Ken Nordhoff, Daryl Chandler, Lydia Romero
Employee Organizations:
San Rafael Fire Fighters' Association
Marin Association of Public Employees, Supervisory Unit, SEIU Local 949
Marin Association of Public Employees, Miscellaneous Unit, SEIU Local 949
City Attorney Gary Ragghianti announced that no reportable action was taken.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: 8:11 PM
a) Re: Tenant Parking: - File 13-16 x 13-7-1
Reporting that she is a member of the tenants' union, Margarita Reyes stated they wished to bring to
Council's attention a disturbing practice occurring at some apartment buildings. She instanced the
landlord at 21 Marian Court, subsequent to signing the voluntary agreement, not only increased the rent
but also is now charging $100 - $150 for every parking space. Ms. Reyes stated that other landlords
are also charging tenants for parking spaces and this practice is forcing people to park in the street
where there is an existing parking shortage. She encouraged the City Council to investigate this matter
and generate an ordinance to prohibit such a practice.
Vice -Mayor Cohen stated he would like to receive a report on this as should the information be
accurate, it made a mockery of the rent stabilization agreement. He also expressed interest in
ascertaining how widespread the practice is and what, if any, action the City could take.
City Manager Gould stated staff would investigate and include the results in the annual report to
Council on the Fair Rental Practices Program. With regard to how widespread the problem is, he
suggested contacting Jessuina Perez-Teran, Tenant Organizer, to ascertain whether this is a common
practice.
b) Re: Potential Sale of College of Marin: - File 103 x 9-1
Fielding Greaves, San Rafael resident, on his own behalf and that of Marin United Taxpayers
Association, invited Council's best efforts in support of blocking any attempt to sell the properties of
College of Marin. While recognizing the importance of real estate, he stated it is much more important
that the College retains these properties.
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as
follows:
ITEM
2. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meetings of
Monday, October 21, 2002 and Monday,
November 4, 2002 (CC)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Minutes of 11/04/02 approved as
submitted. Approval of Minutes of
10/21/02 continued to meetina of
12/02/02, due to lack of quorum —
Councilmember Miller absent from
meeting of 10/21/02
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 1
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 2
3. Call for Applications to Fill One Unexpired Term Approved staff recommendation:
on the Cultural Affairs Commission Due to the
Resignation of Susan W. Davis, with Term to a) Called for applications for
Expire End of April, 2005 (CC) — File 9-2-24 appointment to fill one
unexpired term on the
Cultural Affairs Commission
to the end of April, 2005;
b) Set deadline for receipt of
applications for Tuesday,
December 10, 2002 at 12 Noon
in the City Clerk's Office,
Room 209, City Hall; and
c) Set date for interviews of
applicants at a Special City
Council meeting to be held on
Monday, December 16, 2002,
commencing at 6:30 p.m.
4. Introduce Ordinance and Set Date of Public
Introduced and passed to print
Hearing for December 2, 2002 - Consideration of
Ordinance No. 1791, and set Public
an Ordinance Amending Title 12 of the Municipal
Hearing for December 2, 2002.
Code of the City of San Rafael by Amending and
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
Adopting Chapter 12.12 "2001 California Building
SAN RAFAEL AMENDING TITLE 12
Code", Volume 1 and Volume 2, (Based on the
OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE
Uniform Building Code, 1997 Ed.), Chapter 12.14
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL BY
"2001 California Mechanical Code" (Based on the
AMENDING AND ADOPTING
Uniform Mechanical Code, 1997 Ed.), Chapter
CHAPTER 12.12 "2001 CALIFORNIA
12.16 "2001 California Plumbing Code" (Based
BUILDING CODE," VOLUME 1 AND
on the Uniform Plumbing Code, 1997 Ed.),
VOLUME 2, (BASED ON THE
Chapter 12.20 "2001 California Electrical Code"
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, 1997
(Based on the National Electrical Code, 1999
Ed.), CHAPTER 12.14 "2001
Ed.) and Uniform Administrative Code Provisions
CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE,"
for the National Electrical Code (1996 Ed.) (CD)-
(BASED ON THE UNIFORM
File 1-6-1 x 1-6-2 x 1-6-3 x 1-6-5 x 1-6-6 x 1-6-7
MECHANICAL CODE, 1997 Ed.),
CHAPTER 12.16 "2001 CALIFORNIA
PLUMBING CODE," (BASED ON THE
UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, 1997
Ed.), CHAPTER 12.20 "2001
CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE,"
(BASED ON THE NATIONAL
ELECTRICAL CODE, 1999 Ed.) AND
UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
PROVISIONS FOR THE NATIONAL
ELECTRICAL CODE, (1996 Ed.), WITH
AMENDMENTS"
5. Monthly Investment Report for Month Ending
Accepted Monthly Investment Report
September, 2002 (MS) — File 8-18 x 8-9
for month ending September, 2002,
as presented.
6. Resolution Authorizing the Deposit and
RESOLUTION NO. 11198 —
Withdrawal of Monies and Authorizing Officers or
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
their Successors to Order Deposits or
DEPOSIT AND WITHDRAWAL OF
Withdrawals of Monies in The Local Agency
MONIES AND AUTHORIZING
Investment Fund (MS) — File 8-18
OFFICERS OR THEIR SUCCESSORS
TO ORDER DEPOSITS OR
WITHDRAWALS OF MONIES IN THE
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUN
7. Resolution Amending Resolution No. 10448
RESOLUTION NO. 11199—
Pertaining to the Compensation and Working
RESOLUTION AMENDING
Conditions for Police Department Personnel (4
RESOLUTION NO. 10448
year agreement from July 1, 2002 through June
PERTAINING TO THE
30, 2006) (MS) — File 7-8-3 x 9-3-30
COMPENSATION AND WORKING
CONDITIONS FOR POLICE
DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL (4 year
agreement from July 1, 2002 through
June 30, 2006)
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 2
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 3
8.
Report on Bid Opening for the San Rafael
RESOLUTION NO. 11200 —
Community Center Lobby and Reception
RESOLUTION REJECTING ALL BIDS
Remodel, Project No. 10718 (Bid Opening Held
FOR THE SAN RAFAEL COMMUNITY
Tuesday, November 5, 2002) and Resolution
CENTER LOBBY AND RECEPTION
Rejecting all Bids and Rebid the Project (PW) —
REMODEL
File 4-1-554
9.
Resolution Approving Map of Subdivision Entitled
RESOLUTION NO. 11201 —
"Map of 119 Laurel Place Condominium" (PW) —
RESOLUTION APPROVING A MAP
File 5-1-345
ENTITLED "MAP OF 119 LAUREL
PLACE CONDOMINIUM" (APN 011-
184-13)
10.
Resolution Authorizing the Director of Public
RESOLUTION NO. 11202 —
Works to Accept and Expend $30,240 in
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
Matching Funds from the California Energy
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO
Commission (CEC) for the Installation of Battery
ACCEPT AND EXPEND $30,240 IN
Backup System (BBS) at 12 Key Signalized
MATCHING FUNDS FROM THE
Intersections (PW) — File 11-10 x 11-1
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION
(CEC) FOR THE INSTALLATION OF
BATTERY BACKUP SYSTEM (BBS)
AT 12 KEY SIGNALIZED
INTERSECTIONS
11.
Resolution Accepting Grant of $35,000 from the
RESOLUTION NO. 11203 —
Marin Community Foundation to Support
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
Falkirk's Art Education Outreach Program
MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN
"Learning to Look" and the Visual Arts Exhibition
AGREEMENT WITH THE MARIN
Program (Lib/Cult.Affs) — File 194 x 9-3-84
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
ACCEPTING A $35,000 GRANT TO
SUPPORT THE ARTS EDUCATION
OUTREACH PROGRAM "LEARNING
TO LOOK" AND THE VISUAL ARTS
EDUCATION PROGRAM
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Heller, Miller and Vice -Mayor Cohen
None
Phillips and Mayor Boro
12. Public Hearing — RE PARKING MATTERS: (MS) — File 9-3-87 x 12-14 x 9-10-2
a) CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 9705
ESTABLISHING NEW PARKING METER RATES
b) CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION REVISING CERTAIN PARKING PENALTIES
AND LATE PAYMENT PENALTIES FOR NOTICES OF PARKING VIOLATIONS
Parking Services Manager Chad Lynn stated the staff report addresses the past two and one
half years and the CUB Management Company parking study, which updates the proposed
parking rates and the need for capacity, i.e., a 400 space, 5'/2 story, parking garage at Third
and C Streets. Currently completing design, Mr. Lynn stated the plan is to be out to bid in
January, 2003, with completion, hopefully, by the summer of 2004.
Mr. Lynn explained the rate increase is a means of funding the construction with revenue
bonds on the Parking Services Fund. He stated the report speaks to this as a self-sufficient
fund, funding operations of a parking nature in San Rafael.
Mr. Lynn stated the other part of the study, also part of the rate increase, pertains to the
modernization of parking equipment, and he identified an example of the new parking meter on
display this evening. He explained the housing would have a slightly different aesthetic
appearance and would be painted black with a somewhat different lower part. He indicated
that Councilmembers had seen the multi -space equipment and the garage equipment at study
sessions.
With regard to the rate increase, Mr. Lynn reported that staff had spent a substantial amount of
time in public outreach to not only ascertain the areas of concern to the public, but also to
discuss the actual rates with the community. He stated that inter -departmentally, staff
discussed the equipment and rates and their effect on departments and the community. He
indicated there were discussions with the Business Improvement District and Chamber of
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 3
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 4
Commerce, who issued a joint letter of their official support. Mr. Lynn reported it was also
presented to the Park and Recreation Commission, Planning Commission, North San Rafael
Rotary Club, Coalition of North San Rafael Residents and the Federation of San Rafael
Neighborhoods.
Mr. Lynn reported the concerns that materialized largely pertained to the downtown area with
increased turnover on street, and in high -turnover, short-term parking areas off-street. He
explained it was endeavored to create a rate that promotes off-street long-term parking by
making the rate lower, such as in the Third and A Street garage. He confirmed that in the
proposed rate schedule, the current off-street higher rates would be lower than on -street
parking, to encourage long-term parking in off-street areas.
With respect to short-term parking convenience, Mr. Lynn stated that at the request of the City
Council at study sessions, staff had investigated and recommend a 30 -minute no charge
period in the Third and A Street garage, and the Third and C Street garage would carry this
rate upon completion.
Regarding monthly parking and San Rafael workers' long-term parking areas, Mr. Lynn
reported that currently, one half to two-thirds of available monthly parking is sold and the City
is obligated to keep the remainder open. He stated the new equipment would permit more
creative rates, such as the multi -card, explaining this card would allow an organization with,
say, ten people, to purchase five cards at full rate and five at a reduced rate, which would allow
them to park any five of the ten vehicles in the garage at any one given time.
A further convenience would be pre -paid cards and Mr. Lynn explained that those unable to
procure monthly parking would be able to purchase a pre -paid card to eliminate the necessity
for cash and the attendant; however, this would be based on a transient parking rate.
Mr. Lynn reported that staff conducted substantial testing of the equipment and the community
was notified by mail of the rate increase. Indicating that some calls were received, he noted
most were inquiry based rather than an opinion. The other concerns voiced pertained to
construction of the new garage, and Mr. Lynn stated these would be addressed in the public
notification phase and the community outreach for that project.
Before identifying the new rates, Mr. Lynn stated the ultimate goals for the Parking Services
Fund are to fund operations and create adequate reserves to promote stability within the fund.
Explaining there are three reserves, he stated that anything above these operating expenses
goes into these reserves for facility maintenance, future equipment needs and a catastrophic
reserve, such as the costly replacement of a disabled elevator. In this way, he stated, the
funds could remain self-sufficient even in unanticipated situations.
Mr. Lynn explained the rates were arrived at by evaluating present and future expenses, and
enhanced service and equipment over a ten-year period. He stated the rates had been
adjusted to meet the needs of financing for both the meter modernization and the garage. He
identified the rates as follows:
On -Street Parking
Off -Street Parking
Current Rate
30 cents per hour
35 cents per hour
Proposed Rate
60 cents per hour
30 minutes — no charge
50 cents for next 30 minutes
50 cents per hour thereafter
In line with this, Mr. Lynn explained that when parking rates and monthly parking rates are
raised, i.e., from $45 to $60, it would also be necessary to adjust parking fines and penalties.
He identified these as follows:
Current Rate Proposed Rate
Expired Meter Rate $15.00 $20.00
Overtime Parking $18.00 $22.00
Expired Meter with $20.00 $25.00
Overtime
With regard to the pre -paid card, Councilmember Heller inquired whether this could also be
used on the street. Responding, Mr. Lynn stated that although meters are being purchased
that have that capability, in discussions with some merchant groups, staff learned they did not
wish to carry another card. He explained staff believed the pre -paid card could be of benefit to
garage users who as regular parkers not wishing to deal with machines, could purchase a
card similar to a monthly parking card. He further explained that staff is presently in
discussions with the Business Improvement District and Chamber of Commerce regarding
the possibility of using a token.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 4
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 5
Responding to Councilmember Heller's question as to the type of purchaser, Mr. Lynn stated
these could be people who park in lots in a ten-hour area that may not necessarily have a
change machine. He indicated tokens could also be used by merchants as validation for
customers; however, this is in the preliminary stages.
Councilmember Miller inquired whether the new sample meter was still installed. Responding,
Mr. Lynn stated that a slightly different housing had been installed on this meter; however, the
look is similar. He confirmed that Councilmember Miller was referring to an example proposed
for the Fourth Street area that is presently installed at the San Rafael City Plaza, on the north
side of the street.
Mr. Lynn further explained that all meters in the City would get new mechanisms. He stated
that in order to keep with the beautification project on Fourth Street, an ornamental pole that
matches the lighting will also contain the housings. He added that due to installation needs,
this may not be implemented until after January 1, 2003; however, it is being purchased as
part of the project.
Councilmember Heller inquired whether this had been presented to the neighborhood
associations. Mr. Lynn reported they had been given the proposed rates. With regard to the
proposed rate increases, he stated an internal survey of neighboring and similar cities had
been conducted and was included in the packet, and in all cases, these rates are either in line
with or below current market rates. He stated it is also in line with the CUB Parking Study
projections for these fiscal years; implementation was delayed beyond the timeframe
recommended by the study.
Mr. Lynn reported that in each of the community meetings he addressed the equipment,
garage and new rate structures. Councilmember Heller confirmed they had been well
informed in advance. In addition, Mr. Lynn stated that prior to tonight's meeting, a letter was
forwarded to all merchants from Mission Avenue to Second Street and from Irwin Street to H
Street.
Councilmember Heller stated she was on the list for quite a few of the neighborhood
associations and in monitoring over the past six months, had not seen any problems or
criticisms with this coming forward. Mr. Lynn confirmed that concerns were addressed by staff.
In terms of short-term parking, staff believed the 30 free minutes addresses this issue.
Regarding the fiscal impact, Vice -Mayor Cohen stated the beginning of the staff report
indicates that $6.5 million comes from revenue bonds supported by the Parking Services Fund.
Debt service begins in fiscal year 02/03, ramps up further in 03/04 and continues at that rate,
and he requested clarification on this.
Responding, Mr. Lynn stated the debt service had not yet been decided on. He indicated the
idea is being entertained of either capitalizing interest, in which case no debt service would be
paid until the structure is open and operating, or use reserve funds. He stated that the figures
in the fiscal impact area include debt service.
Vice -Mayor Cohen noted the staff report lists the revenues and expenses for the current fiscal
year, and projected revenues, expenses and debt service for 02/03. Mr. Lynn clarified that the
debt service also includes the equipment, which could be a different type of funding. Vice -
Mayor Cohen stated it then continues to ramp up to almost $2 million in fiscal year 03/04. Mr.
Lynn explained that January would only be half of a fiscal year; therefore, the rate increase
was only realized for six months. Vice -Mayor Cohen stated the debt service that takes
expenses from $1.2 million to $2 million per year assumes that debt service is being carried on
the revenue bonds. He stated there could possibly be a different way to restructure this;
however, these numbers assume debt service.
Noting that revenues go up each year, Vice -Mayor Cohen stated he assumed this was not just
due to the rate increase, rather also due to the increase in the number of parking spaces, as
the new structure adds 400 spaces. Mr. Lynn concurred, noting the structure adds monthly
and transient revenue. As meters do not operate at 100% capacity, Mr. Lynn stated an
increase in the percentage of usage of meters had been observed, realizing a small gain in
actual usage.
Vice -Mayor Cohen declared the public hearing opened and invited comment from the
audience.
Nancy McCarthy, President, Marin United Taxpayers Association, stated it was their belief that
in large part, redevelopment created the need for this parking. She stated that approximately
four — five years ago at a League of Women Voters meeting, someone from the
Redevelopment Agency spoke of how great redevelopment would be, and she, Ms. McCarthy,
having raised the issue of parking, was informed by Redevelopment Agency staff that parking
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 5
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 6
would not be an issue. Ms. McCarthy stated this is not the case and redevelopment has not
paid for the parking.
She stated the Macy's building that came on line two years later than it should have, with a
different developer from the one selected by Vision 2000, has no anchor tenant, which was a
requirement of the contract, and there is virtually no significant income from this building. She
reported that San Jose is contemplating not allowing further office buildings as they are not
providing any revenue. She stated San Rafael is filled with office buildings, insufficient parking
and increased parking rates, and she believed it to be inappropriate to infer this is not going to
cost the taxpayers money. Ms. McCarthy stated taxpayers would be hit with a much higher
dollar amount because redevelopment did not, as it should have, pay for this type of
improvement. She stated this is the type of planning that was discussed at the beginning;
these concerns were raised at the outset and now the consumer of public goods is having to
pay.
Aside from this issue, Ms. McCarthy questioned that subsequent to someone receiving two or
three parking tickets whether they would return to downtown San Rafael. She reported there
had been multiple letters to the Marin IJ concerning people receiving parking tickets for parking
in front of See's Candy, indicating they would not return to downtown. With regard to the free
30 minutes, she stated it was not possible to get from a car in this new parking lot to some
store downtown and back in 30 minutes.
Working at 1010 B Street, Ms. McCarthy stated there are many people who have left that office
building because of parking problems. She noted meter maids hover to issue tickets for
expired meters, as clearly, this is how the new building would be funded. She believed it to be
shortsighted to consider people would continue to come to the downtown and pay this higher
rate, rather that go to nearby malls.
Since certain portions of the City are overdeveloped, Ms. McCarthy suggested evaluating the
Redevelopment Agency to determine whether cuts should be made in staffing, etc., and use
those funds to pay for the parking issues.
Fielding Greaves, San Rafael resident, Marin United Taxpayers Association member, echoed
Ms. McCarthy's sentiments. Contrary to Mr. Schonbrunn's comments, he stated he could not
commend the actions over the past few years of development, as the problem had been
exacerbated in a number of respects. He instanced Fourth Street where width had been
added to the sidewalk in a number of places, which usurped previous parking spaces in order
to create sidewalk cafes, etc. Because of the redevelopment and development in the City, he
stated traffic is almost at gridlock. He reported that on Third Street on occasion in the
afternoon, he had to wait for three changes of a traffic signal to proceed one block, and this he
found unacceptable.
He recalled that in tonight's Redevelopment Meeting when discussing development, it sounded
as if more development was being encouraged, looking forward to continuing the growth of the
City. Mr. Greaves suggested it had gone too far already.
With regard to the 30 minutes free in the parking structure, Mr. Greaves did not believe this
would accomplish what was intended. He expressed his fear that in the long term, small
businesses would be driven out of business as people would frequent malls where there is
adequate parking. Personally, he stated he did not favor attempting to park downtown
presently.
Mr. Greaves stated the problem lies with too much development and he urged the City Council
not raise the parking fees and reconsider the entire issue of the parking structure.
There being no further comment from the audience, Vice -Mayor Cohen closed the public
hearing.
Councilmember Miller stated he found the development of downtown had made it better. He
stated development pertains to betterment and he believed the downtown had grown
beautifully according to the Vision of the citizens over the past few years. He noted that as the
downtown had grown, more people were attracted to it, thereby necessitating the provision and
hospitality of a parking place. Councilmember Miller stated he viewed parking as part and
parcel of a better downtown and continued what he believed citizens requested in the Vision.
With regard to parking meter rates, Councilmember Miller believed these to be reasonable,
understandable and lower than most. He commended Parking Services Manager Chad Lynn
for the work done and the outreach carried out, indicating his support for the plan.
Councilmember Heller concurred with Councilmember Miller's comments, noting the process
had been underway for almost two years with the community, taking input on all aspects every
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 6
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 7
step of the way. She stated she was happy with the outcome, which would continue to move
the City forward and furnish the necessary parking.
Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to adopt the Resolution.
Before voting, Vice -Mayor Cohen stated he recalled in the early to mid 1990s criticism leveled
at the City of San Rafael was to the effect that not enough was being done for downtown. The
problem was not the availability of parking, rather finding an open store; downtowns were dead
and San Rafael was the latest victim. He stated the community had done a remarkable job,
not only in turning this around, but despite some of this evening's comments, making
downtown San Rafael a model to be emulated around the Bay Area. Vice -Mayor Cohen
reported that his file of articles concerning downtown San Rafael and how communities
throughout the Bay Area are looking to San Rafael as a model, is large.
Noting Ms. McCarthy and Mr. Greaves had left, Vice -Mayor Cohen stated it was quite ironic
that the Marin United Taxpayers would be arguing that consumers should not be asked to pay
for parking. If consumers did not pay, he inquired who would, and suggested this would be
taxpayers who do not use the service. Believing that a fee for service approach should be
right in line with what a taxpayers group should be advocating, Vice -Mayor Cohen stated this is
exactly what is proposed.
Noting Mr. Greaves stated that should he be unable to find parking he would go to Northgate
or the Village at Corte Madera, where adequate parking exists, Vice -Mayor Cohen stated
adequate parking is exactly the intended goal for downtown San Rafael. Being unaware of who
made the comment Ms. McCarthy referred to that "parking would never be a problem," he
recalled studies being conducted approximately every ten years on the need to add parking to
the downtown, and this is an indication of success rather than failure.
Commenting on Mr. Schonbrunn's points, Vice -Mayor Cohen stated he continues to find the
Vision compelling in the sense of taking the smart growth approach and encouraging people
not to drive in favor of using transit. He stated that some of the problems faced meant he
would pass on the opportunity to do this in this case. Explaining, Vice -Mayor Cohen stated he
believed a shuttle system without a transit system behind it would not get the job done as it
would be necessary to ascertain who the customers of the shuttle system would be. Should
shoppers be asked to drive from, for instance, Fairhills, park and take the shuttle, Vice -Mayor
Cohen pondered whether once in their car with no parking available downtown, they would
drive to the mall. Unless there was a shuttle to serve suburban development, which might
never be achievable, he believed people coming from Point San Pedro Road, for instance,
would just pass by if they considered there to be insufficient parking.
Vice -Mayor Cohen commented that if a shuttle were to serve employees, thereby reducing
parking demands, it would only work in conjunction with transit, and he was not hopeful of
seeing this in the near-term future of Marin County. To top off recent events in Marin which led
him to that conclusion, he indicated having read a public opinion survey, just published by the
Public Policy Institute of California, which suggested that although smart growth is discussed a
lot, Californians as a group, by overwhelming numbers, like driving alone in their cars. While
there is a need to give people alternatives to that choice and change their minds, Vice -Mayor
Cohen stated the City Council also had an obligation to wrestle with continuing to make
downtown San Rafael a success. In that vain, he believed it was necessary to give consumers
what they desired and the conclusion was that consumers in downtown San Rafael want
adequate parking, to enjoy all the sidewalk cafes.
a) RESOLUTION NO. 11204 — RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PARKING RATES
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller, Miller and Vice -Mayor Cohen
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Phillips and Mayor Boro
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the
Resolution.
b) RESOLUTION NO. 11205 — RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A NEW SCHEDULE OF
PARKING PENALTIES AND LATE PAYMENT
PENALTIES FOR NOTICES OF PARKING VIOLATIONS,
AND RESCINDING ANY PREVIOUS SCHEDULE OF
PARKING PENALTIES AND LATE PAYMENT
PENALTIES
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller, Miller and Vice -Mayor Cohen
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Phillips and Mayor Boro
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 7
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 8
Vice -Mayor Cohen congratulated Parking Services Manager Chad Lynn.
13. Public Hearing —
CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING SAN
RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8.34 REGULATIONS FOR MASSAGE AND/OR
BODYWORK OFFICES AND ESTABLISHMENTS, OWNERS AND PRACTITIONERS, AND
SECTION 1.08.020 REGARDING DEFINITION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER
(PD) — FILE 9-10-3 x 10-3 x 9-3-30
Vice -Mayor Cohen declared the public hearing opened
Lynne Ohlson, Management Analyst, Police Department, reported that Police Chief Cronin
could not be in attendance this evening and Lieutenant Kelly would substitute. Permit Officer,
Warren Taylor, was also unable to attend. She explained that Warren Taylor had processed
the massage ordinances, and many of the changes were brought about by issues he identified
as needing clarification in the current ordinance, needing changes, or just being added.
To assist in further identification of a massage applicant, Ms. Ohlson stated staff contacted
several other cities and evaluated other ordinances to locate language, which could assist in
addressing the problems. She reported that Milpitas, Cathedral City, Millbrae, several cities of
similar size and some larger cities, had some very good language, which afforded direction in
terms of fingerprinting, testing, notification of property owners and general language to assist
with these details.
Having drafted language, with the assistance of the City Attorney's office, Ms. Ohlson reported
that she and Warren Taylor again met with the same group as twenty-one months ago, and
having perused the proposed changes, invited the group to provide feedback. They were also
requested to assist in drafting a very basic test, to include:
• a test that anyone who had completed 100 hours would be able to pass;
• could be easily administered;
• translated into the predominantly required languages of those making application; and
• a test that could be scored immediately.
Having generated a draft test, Ms. Ohlson reported that a public hearing took place on October
24, 2002. She indicated that from 192 notices sent out for this meeting, the attendance
numbered approximately 20. Subsequent to this meeting, further refinements were made to
be in a position to present the ordinance to Council this evening.
Councilmember Heller requested clarification on the testing administered by the Police
Department. Ms. Ohlson explained there would be approximately 30 questions on basic
anatomy, which would reveal whether the applicant had actually completed 100 hours in
classes on anatomy. She stated staff intends to have this test translated to offer it in different
Chinese dialects, Spanish and Vietnamese, and also a test that could be administered orally.
In order to obtain a massage therapist license, Councilmember Heller inquired as to the type of
licensing authority. Ms. Ohlson explained this is a permit to offer massage services and
presently the permit authority is the Police Department. She confirmed it is necessary to have
100 hours of massage classes from any certified school.
Lieutenant Kelly explained the reason for the test is the belief that several schools are so-
called diploma mills, not located in San Rafael. He stated there is one in California, which the
State has been requested to investigate (has not yet occurred), and another in New York
State, where the Police Department has no authority. Although sometimes a certificate is
presented to the effect that 100 hours have been completed, Lieutenant Kelly indicated there is
reason to believe the 100 hours were not completed.
Councilmember Heller inquired as to the appeal process. Ms. Ohlson explained that language
in the original ordinance presented stated the appeals process was to commence with the
Police Chief, as the Permit Authority, and would then go to the City Manager. She stated this
ordinance specifies times for the Department to respond to an appeal, length of noticing, etc.,
together with affording the City Manager, or any Code Enforcement official, the right to state it
should be heard by an Administrative Officer. This, she explained, is the reason for the
addition of the section defining the role of an Administrative Hearing Officer.
Vice -Mayor Cohen invited comment from the audience.
V. Roy Leftcourt, attorney, representing a number of massage establishments in San Rafael,
requested Council to take no action at this time on this legislation. Explaining his objections to
the process, he indicated having learned this evening for the first time that 192 notices were
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 8
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 9
mailed out for the October 24th meeting. He advised Council that those notices were mailed
out on or about October 17, 2002 and his clients received them on or about October 18 and
19, 2002. He stated the notice indicated that comments in writing needed to be submitted by
October 15, 2002, a deadline that had now passed.
Mr. Leftcourt stated the meeting was scheduled for October 24, 2002 (a World Series night)
and it was endemic as to why such a small audience was present, as from 192 notices,
perhaps, 20 plus people attended. He did not believe this to be a fair representation of the
massage bodywork community and considered the reason to be lack of notice and the night on
which it was held.
Stating a final objection, Mr. Leftcourt reported it was a very active meeting; a number of
people spoke and made numerous suggestions, and his impression was that those comments
were being well received and he interpreted they would be written into the legislation.
Representing primarily minority women speaking English as a second language, Mr. Leftcourt
stated he was firstly concerned about the test, believing it should be given in the spoken
language, and while it appeared interpretation would be embodied, he did not see it included in
the current legislation.
Mr. Leftcourt reported that Permit Officer Taylor's suggestion was that everyone who already
had a permit license would be "grandfathered" in and would not be required to take the test,
and again, he stated this did not appear to be in the legislation.
With regard to Division 6 in the ordinance, he reported a very heated debate in terms of
landlord interests and noted the staff report indicates the revised ordinance addresses the
concerns on notification of property owners and testing requirements; however, a number of
issues were raised by the massage/bodywork community, such as "who was entitled to know
and why was the Police Department enforcing landlord/tenant law, instead of the Civil Courts."
Mr. Leftcourt stated his understanding was that after the sparsely attended meeting, there
would be at the very least, one other meeting regarding the proposed changes to permit
community input on approval or disapproval; therefore, he was somewhat surprised to learn
this was before the City Council this evening. He believed the community was not adequately
noticed as to the proposed legislation.
Finally, Mr. Leftcourt stated this legislation had only been in effect since February of this year
and most legislation is usually given at least one year for evaluation, at which time, should
there be problems, the various parties would confer in an effort to reach resolution. He
respectfully requested that the City Council take no action at this time, the Permit Department
of the Police Department once again, should contact the community, schedule a meeting,
receive full input, and should legislation be needed, the ordinance could be brought back to the
City Council, subsequent to full community input.
Kate Kinsey stated she had just moved to San Rafael this year from Sonoma County, where
she had to close her business because of ordinances similar to this. She indicated this was
done by a Police Department with very good intentions and reason. Ms. Kinsey stated that of
those she had spoken with in the past two and one half weeks since the original meeting, the
feelings were of great respect, both for the Police Department and the community of
bodyworkers who voluntarily gave a tremendous amount of time to support the Police
Department and provide input. She stated this small group represented a very vast and
diverse community.
Other issues she encountered included a tremendous amount of fear that signing a petition the
Police Department might see would place the signatory under suspicion or make them the
subject of police harassment. Ms. Kinsey reported an issue she encountered almost
universally was that this was a futile effort because the City Council would not listen to anyone
other than the Police Department. Not wishing this to be a reflection on the City Council, Ms.
Kinsey stated this is part of the apathy that there is no point in fighting City Hall.
With regard to a petition she possessed, she reported having received approximately 52
signatures to date, with at least three other petition sheets still being circulated.
She read the petition:
"We, the undersigned, request that the City Council of the City of San Rafael delay their
approval of the proposed revisions to Ordinance No. 1761. We recognize that legislation takes
time, effort and money to create, and even more of the same to repeal. It is naturally I wish
that all City legislation be created with great care for her citizens. We recognize that the
proposed changes were presented to this community of legitimate small business owners with
insufficient notice and without adequate statistical and legal information." Ms. Kinsey stated a
lot of this was due to minor human error and certainly, not intentional; however, it did happen.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 9
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 10
She continued
"We recognize that Ordinance 1761 has been in effect for only one fiscal year and this is not
enough time to adequately review and analyze its effects on the community, nor its long-term
effectiveness. We, therefore, request that the City Council delay the passage of any
amendments to Ordinance 1761 until at least the 2004 fiscal year and that full legal, financial
and community impact be made to the Council, as well as the community, well in advance."
Rhonda Kutter, Acting -Chair for the Massage Ordinance Advisory Committee, noted several
members of the community mentioned they did not feel they had adequate notice, and this was
a concern. She indicated they had been working with Warren Taylor and the Police
Department since the implementation of this ordinance. She stated that Police Chief Cronin
brought the fingerprinting issue to their attention right away and she believed everyone in the
community had worked through this and understood that the Police Department, for proper
identification, required fingerprinting.
Ms. Kutter expressed appreciation that the City was willing to work with them, and in particular,
with the passage of the last ordinance. She stated it was a huge relief to the bodywork
community to have the local zoning ordinances changed. Her concern was the repeated
feedback from other bodyworkers that having gone through the permit process, they were
informed they could not do zoning in a particular area that was properly zoned. She reported
having since notified Community Development Director Bob Brown who was attempting to deal
with this, and she had not received any recent comments of this nature.
With regard to some of the current changes, Ms. Kutter stated all professional bodyworkers
would prefer to have no local ordinance; however, they understand that since there is no state
regulation at this time, the City believes it needs to act.
Regarding the test, she stated that although the Massage Ordinance Committee did work on
the test, it still was her intuition that the City could regret ever instigating it. She favored
keeping it simple; however, was not completely comfortable with it.
With regard to the hours, Ms. Kutter stated that instead of a yearly renewal, the continuing
education could be extended to include a longer workshop every two years. Presently, the
requirement is 6 hours of continuing education annually. She stated this is a problem for her
as she has been on maternity leave for a year; therefore, keeping her permit, etc., active had
been somewhat of a challenge. Should this not be written into the ordinance, Ms. Kutter
proposed there be some policy for a case-by-case basis, under special circumstances.
Ms. Kutter stated there had been some confusion regarding when the licenses and permits are
due for renewal and she requested an assurance that this be clarified by the conclusion of the
process. She stated they had been attempting to coordinate this with licensing so that
business licenses and permits expire simultaneously, and she would like to ensure this is no
longer an issue.
Ms. Kutter requested the grandfathering issue also be clarified. She expressed appreciation for
the inclusion of at least a partial exemption for those who are nationally certified for the test.
Ms. Kutter also expressed appreciation for this opportunity and indicated she understood there
were many members of the community unable to attend this evening.
Kay Lawson, San Rafael resident and bodyworker, reiterated the comments of the previous
speakers to the effect that the time between the last somewhat informal meeting and this
evening's meeting was too short, as so many interesting ideas arose. She suggested the
proposed ordinance be delayed until these issues were reviewed, noting a larger turnout would
better reflect the legitimate bodyworkers of San Rafael.
Fritzie Schnel stated she had been a bodyworker and massage therapist for approximately
twenty-three years, and thirteen years in San Rafael. She reported having been a part of the
Massage Ordinance Advisory Committee believing that as ethical bodyworkers, they needed
protection, and found the Police Department, Lynne Ohlson, Police Chief Cronin and Warren
Taylor, to be extremely amicable in understanding the needs of their community. Ms. Schnel
indicated that the statements of other speakers were valid and they as ethical bodyworkers,
believed somehow, they had been caught up in the controversy the Police Department is
seeking to clear from San Rafael, and were required to be fingerprinted and take tests. She
reported that most of those with whom she had spoken in their community believed that those
people who attended state regulated and approved schools had already taken their tests and
procured certification. She stated this is, therefore, a controversial issue concerning the
effectiveness or efficacy of a test for those with different modalities and may not be able to
pass a test.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 10
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 11
For her personally, Ms. Schnel stated she regretted the ethical bodywork community was
involved; however, she deeply respected the process undergone with Lynne Ohlson and
Warren Taylor, to arrive at a point where at least the ordinance was reasonable and as
respectful as it could be, given the circumstances that it does disrespect them to begin with.
She indicated her appreciation for what had been done so far, and expressed the hope the
City Council would take into consideration the sentiments concerning the timeframes. She
stated that with more people speaking out, the massage community would feel less
disrespected, which is important to them, as well as the Police Department.
There being no further comment from the audience, Vice -Mayor Cohen closed the public
hearing.
Lynne Ohlson, Management Analyst, explained that on the night of the public hearing it was
learned the gap between the letters leaving the Police Department and the date of mailing
was much wider, and while there was a question on this, it was probably close to the required
ten days notice. She reported she and Warren Taylor answered telephone questions and
believed those with concerns had an avenue to address these concerns.
With regard to grandfathering, Ms. Ohlson explained there is a capacity in the permit
procedure to deal with issues on a case-by-case basis. On the question of the 6 hours per
year being carried over to another year, Ms. Ohlson stated they would prefer this not be part
of the ordinance, in favor of having something to evaluate and review.
On the issue raised by Mr. Leftcourt regarding landlord/tenant notification, Ms. Ohlson
explained the City of San Rafael does not require a special Use Permit for a massage
business, rather new applicants could self -certify they have notified the landlord, as well as
have the landlord present something to the Police Department, to maintain flexibility while
obtaining the information deemed necessary for properly processing the permit.
On the question of testing, Ms. Ohlson stated staff did indicate that those who possessed the
national certificate were not required to undergo the anatomy test; however, there would be
testing on the local ordinance, which would be comprised of approximately three questions on
how to operate in the City of San Rafael, and the required regulations.
Lieutenant Kelly stated Ms. Kinsey had made a statement concerning those who signed a
petition being in fear of police harassment. He expressed assurance to Ms. Kinsey and those
signing the petition, that this would absolutely not occur and offered his personal guarantee.
He encouraged anyone signing the petition who believed this did happen to file a citizen's
complaint, indicating he would be glad to supply forms, etc. He stated that should someone
believe this had happened, it would be thoroughly investigated.
With regard to the comment that Ordinance 1761 had only been in effect since February, 2002,
Lieutenant Kelly stated processing of applications was initiated in July of 2001, and at this
time, over 200 applications had been processed and permits issued. He stated staff had a
great deal of experience in the whole process and probably had been contacted by everyone
wishing to operate a bodywork business in San Rafael.
Ms. Ohlson clarified the date of February 2002 in the staff report should have read February,
2001.
With regard to testing, Councilmember Miller inquired whether this primarily related to the
substance of the ordinance or the science and art of bodywork. Ms. Ohlson explained there
are approximately thirty questions, which were generated by the Bodywork Advisory
Committee. Seven questions would relate to a combination of hygiene, anatomy, physiology,
etc., with three relating to the ordinance, making a total of approximately ten questions. She
added that someone who had been through certification would be deemed to have gone
beyond the seven basic questions.
Noting several requests for a delay for further discussion, Councilmember Heller inquired
whether the procedures had been made available to everyone in the bodywork community. As
Warren Taylor was not in attendance, Ms. Ohlson indicated her belief this had been done. Ms.
Ohlson stated that when the 30 days was considered, which could appear somewhat rushed,
this was also to address Ms. Kutter's concern regarding the licensing. She explained that
business licenses end on December 31; therefore, staff was endeavoring to combine the
massage and business licenses for the calendar year. Because so much pertains to renewal,
staff was attempting to ensure the ordinance was in effect at this time.
Noting the continuing education portion appeared to be a problem to some, Councilmember
Heller requested clarification. Ms. Ohlson explained it was six hours per year and as was
explained in the original ordinance dated February, 2001, this could be anything from business
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 11
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 12
practices, as well as specifically massage and massage modality, to also afford the opportunity
to operate in a small business to enhance those skills as well. While recognizing at the time
that most of the classes were longer, Ms. Ohlson stated staff wanted to ensure it was being
kept current; however, not making it onerous to go through a lengthy period of time to keep
licenses current.
Councilmember Heller inquired as to where this particular type of education is offered. Ms.
Ohlson explained there are a variety of schools available locally, as well as taking any type of
course to assist in operating a business, through community colleges, etc. She added that an
on-line course would also be acceptable, provided evidence of completion could be furnished.
On the timing issue, Vice -Mayor Cohen inquired whether it was staff's concern that the
licensing gets off this year or is it on an ongoing basis. Ms. Ohlson confirmed it would be on
an ongoing basis. Vice -Mayor Cohen inquired whether a way could be found to address this
and get back in sequence next year, suggesting perhaps, there was no reason to rush. The
community response generally had been fairly supportive, or at least recognized the City's
legitimate concern relating to licensing. He commended the Police Department and the
bodyworkers for working together on these issues. He believed it would be regrettable if there
were an impression of a rush to judgment from tonight's meeting, when perhaps somewhat
more discretion would leave people feeling more comfortable. Vice -Mayor Cohen stated that
from his general experience, it is a mistake to rush into something that does not need to be
done so quickly. While understanding the timing issue on licenses, he inquired whether a way
could be figured out to get them back in sequence so that by the end of next year, both
licenses would become due at the same time.
Ms. Ohlson indicated her understanding and appreciation of this and explained that it was
several months into the year when staff first began issuing licenses. She indicated people
were inquiring as to how they would know when licenses were due and requested staff attempt
to coordinate this. She stated that Warren Taylor is now ready to issue notices to Finance to
be mailed with the business license renewal notice.
Councilmember Miller stated he was attempting to weigh the public process with the urgency
of the ordinance. He indicated his understanding of the severe reluctance of new immigrants
with English as a second language, to come forward, especially when the document contained
some errors and the meeting was scheduled for an inappropriate night. He noted it had been
a wonderful process to date; however, everyone who testified this evening indicated they were
being rushed. In terms of the urgency of the ordinance, Councilmember Miller suggested
figuring out a means of holding a further meeting in a month or two to maintain the good faith
generated to date.
City Manager Rod Gould stated Council was not hearing this evening of the frustrations of
some residents and nearby business owners concerning the City's inability to use the current
ordinance to force illegitimate massage therapists out of town. He indicated these people
believed the current ordinance had been somewhat effective in some areas; however, utterly
ineffective in others, and some people had been able to exploit the loopholes to continue to
offer illegitimate massage and bodywork services. Mr. Gould stated these people were quite
angry and as staff had heard from them, he was surprised they had not been heard from this
evening. He explained this whole effort was an attempt to work with the legitimate bodywork
community to close the loopholes in as respectful a manner as possible to the community, and
make good on the commitments to the remainder of the community desiring enforcement of
the laws and regulations.
Concurring with Ms. Ohlson, Mr. Gould stated to get off schedule would make it very difficult to
catch up in less than a year on the need for simultaneous permit and license renewal. As an
alternative, he suggested allowing this ordinance change to go to print while directing a further
public meeting be held sometime after the first of January, 2003 to have a full airing of
bodyworkers' concerns relating to the amended ordinance and permit further changes. He
indicated this would permit the maintenance of permits on schedule with business licenses and
close some of the loopholes that have become apparent in the current ordinance.
Councilmember Miller stated this appeared reasonable and especially if there was a positive
proposal to return to this issue on a date certain; however, he was still somewhat
uncomfortable.
Councilmember Heller indicated her understanding of staff's problems and the community's
dissatisfaction with the process, which made her uncomfortable. She inquired when the
business license was due for renewal. Assistant City Manager Ken Nordhoff confirmed this to
be February 16, 2003. Councilmember Heller inquired whether the ordinance needed to be
passed to print this evening.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 12
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 13
City Manager Rod Gould explained that in two weeks, the renewal notices would normally be
mailed out and should Council take action this evening, a notification could be included with
this to the effect that the permit, as well as the renewal of the business license, was necessary
in order to practice in San Rafael, hence the urgency of this evening's action. Regarding
coming back in two weeks and whether this would miss the deadline, City Manager Gould
informed Councilmember Heller this could potentially be done in two weeks should it be ready
and the bodywork community could hold a meeting in that two weeks.
Deputy City Attorney Eric Davis stated that to wait another two weeks would mean the
ordinance would not become effective until the middle of January, 2003, which raised an issue
in terms of whether or not it could be combined with the business license.
Vice -Mayor Cohen inquired whether a permit was currently required under the existing
ordinance. Ms. Ohlson confirmed a permit is required and the mailing is the renewal notice for
those currently holding permits. She confirmed for Vice -Mayor Cohen that in renewing their
permit they would be required to be fingerprinted if they were not fingerprinted before. She
explained there is a procedural plan to conduct a modified test if necessary; however, from her
last conversation with Warren Taylor, it was her understanding he wanted to grandfather the
existing people in.
Vice -Mayor Cohen stated the specific concerns articulated pertained to the landlord notification
and grandfathering. He was satisfied with the response on these and also on the concern
relating to the testing process and the desire to discuss some refinements. He indicated not
having heard much on the fingerprinting or the administrative officer issue, and the clarification
of language, which he assumed were the issues under scrutiny pertaining to loopholes. He
inquired as to the language in the draft ordinance that closed the loopholes.
Lieutenant Kelly stated it also addresses those who have not been fingerprinted and explained
that while not including fingerprinting in the original ordinance, voluntary compliance was
requested and paid for by the City. Under the revised ordinance, he explained it would be
mandatory for anyone not fingerprinted to be fingerprinted upon renewal, at their own expense.
With regard to Division 3 in the proposed ordinance, Deputy City Attorney Davis stated this did
not provide terms for grandfathering, and it would be amended to do so. Interpreting Division
6, he stated this is a grandfather provision as it indicated that new applicants after January 1,
2003, would be subject to this; however, testing was not. Mr. Davis stated this could be
amended or be a provision that is not part of this ordinance. He stated it was his understanding
the primary loophole is fingerprinting, which is a real concern.
Vice -Mayor Cohen inquired whether a portion of the amendments could be acted upon.
Deputy City Attorney Eric Davis stated it was his opinion the ordinance could be passed to
print without a particular Division, which could be deferred for a later amendment.
Vice -Mayor Cohen stated he had some questions regarding the whole testing issue. He
suggested perhaps a resolution would be to go ahead and act on the fingerprinting and
administrative changes, deferring the language on testing and landlord negotiation, have a
follow-up meeting with those who expressed concern on these items and bring that back to
Council as quickly as was reasonably possible, thus permitting fair public process. He
believed this would maintain the renewal schedule. He commented that the idea of adopting
the ordinance changes while scheduling a further series of meetings in a few months did not
appear to him to be the correct approach.
City Manager Gould stated that Council could approve the ordinance amendments as
proposed; however, stipulate that before the City could administer a test, it would be necessary
to meet with the bodywork community and bring the test back for Council approval via
resolution. This would dispense with the necessity of the entire process of amending the
ordinance again; however, that portion of the ordinance pertaining to the test would not be
effective until a) staff had again met with the bodywork community, and b) it was brought back
to the Council for consideration, before the test was administered.
Councilmember Heller stated this helped as she believed there still needed to be some
discussion with the community. She believed the timeframe was somewhat off for the
community and she did not wish to pass the ordinance in its present form, believing there was
insufficient public input.
To entertain that approach, Deputy City Attorney Eric Davis stated Division 3 would now read
"Written proof that an applicant has successfully completed by a 70% or higher passing score,
a written examination in a form approved by the City Council by resolution..." For it to become
effective, it would have to be approved by a resolution of the City Council.
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 13
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 14
Councilmember Heller confirmed the language could be passed now; however, a disclaimer
would be inserted to the effect that nothing would happen until a resolution was passed. Mr.
Davis confirmed that should the resolution not be approved by the City Council, there would
not be a test to implement. Mr. Davis stated this was one approach to Division 3 of the
ordinance.
Councilmember Heller inquired about the grandfathering.
Deputy City Attorney Davis stated that should this be desired, language to address this would
be required. To make this applicable to new applicants, not renewal applicants, this language
would need to be inserted.
City Manager Gould stated staff would agree with this stipulation should this be Council's
desire. He stated it would make it explicit that existing permit holders would be grandfathered.
Regarding Division 3, Mr. Davis stated the language could be further modified to read:
"Written proof that a new applicant applying after January 1. 2003."
From the audience, Mr. Leftcourt, attorney, inquired whether new legislation needed to be
returned to Council for consideration.
Vice -Mayor Cohen responded in the negative, explaining that the ordinance had not yet been
passed to print and he deferred to the City Attorney.
City Attorney Gary Ragghianti concurred, explaining that Council had the right to modify a
proposed piece of legislation as deemed appropriate; however, changes made after the matter
was passed to print was a different matter.
Mr. Leftcourt questioned whether there could be public comment subsequent to the changes
Mr. Ragghianti stated this would be a matter for the Chair.
With regard to the modification to Division 3, Deputy City Attorney Eric Davis clarified the
language could be as follows:
"Written proof that a new applicant applying after January 1, 2003, has successfully
completed..."
He stated this would address the grandfathering
Councilmember Heller confirmed that the process was laid out in the set of procedures and
inquired how people would know about this. Ms. Ohlson confirmed they receive a copy of the
ordinance and instructions defining the steps to be followed, together with the application and
business license application and pertinent information on fingerprinting, etc.
Councilmember Heller confirmed that to include this language the ordinance could be passed
to print. Thereafter, a public meeting could take place, with subsequent approval of the test by
Council, thus maintaining staff's timeframe.
Stating his concern was for the public process, Vice -Mayor Cohen stated the comments
received pertained primarily to the testing and landlord issue. He inquired whether it would be
possible to adopt the changes relative to identification, fingerprinting and administrative
procedures, and not adopt testing or landlord notification language until there had been an
opportunity to have further discussion with the bodywork community concerning the content of
those suggestions, rather than "shoe horn" it in and return to it. While acknowledging it would
require a further ordinance amendment, he suggested it could make people feel better about
the process and their ability to speak and obtain some response and change.
Vice -Mayor Cohen confirmed staff's concern was to get the language on identification into the
ordinance and adopted prior to the existing permits becoming due for renewal, and to have this
done simultaneously with the business license renewal on February 16, 2002. City Manager
Gould added that as soon as possible staff wished to be in a position to act on what are clearly
viewed as fraudulent certificates of education.
Vice -Mayor Cohen inquired as to the number of new applications received per month. Ms.
Ohlson stated that Warren Taylor figured he was receiving 20 — 25 applications monthly, much
higher than anticipated. Should the ordinance not be adopted, Vice -Mayor Cohen inquired
whether the problem was that those currently holding permits would renew their business
license and permit without this language, or whether the schedule would be upset.
Responding, Ms. Ohlson confirmed that with the proposed changes to the ordinance, those
renewing and not already fingerprinted would have to be fingerprinted; however, the sections
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 14
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 15
in Division 3 concerning testing and landlord would only affect new applicants
Vice -Mayor Cohen inquired as to the consequences of not acting this evening and whether
those renewing permits would be in a position to continue for a further year without the
proposed provisions. City Manager Gould responded affirmatively, adding that permits would
have to be issued to new applicants without fingerprinting or testing, and he believed some of
these people were not conducting legitimate bodywork and massage.
Councilmember Heller indicated her satisfaction with the proposed compromise, i.e., passing
the ordinance to print, and qualifying the language, which she believed would protect the
citizens of the City by ensuring the operators were legitimate.
Councilmember Miller stated he was still somewhat curious regarding how the testing could be
postponed pending further discussion.
City Manager Rod Gould stated the suggestion to Council was that the testing could not
become effective until approved by Council subsequent to a meeting with the members of the
bodywork community to further discuss the issue, as this appeared to get most of the attention
this evening. He confirmed that the City Council would control when testing would commence,
under what circumstances and the form it would take.
Councilmember Miller indicated he was comfortable with postponing the testing in order to
return to it subsequent to further discussions with the community.
With regard to continuing education, Vice -Mayor Cohen inquired whether there would be an
opportunity to address this issue. Councilmember Heller stated she was comfortable on the
continuing education issue as there were so many venues where this is available constantly.
Having tested the ordinance for a year or so, the issue could be revisited.
The title of the ordinance was read.
- "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING SAN RAFAEL
MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 8.34 REGULATIONS FOR MASSAGE AND/OR BODYWORK
OFFICES AND ESTABLISHMENTS, OWNERS AND PRACTITIONERS, AND SECTION
1.08.020 REGARDING DEFINITION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER"
(as amended — Division 3 — First sentence paragraph 2 to read)
"Written proof that a new applicant applying after January, 2003, has successfully
completed, by a 70% or higher passing score, a written examination in a form approved
by the City Council by Resolution, that tests the applicant's basic knowledge of
anatomy, physiology, hygiene, massage and the requirements as stated in Section
8.34.090. "
Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to dispense with the
reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and to refer to it by title only, and pass Charter
Ordinance No. 1792 to print, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller, Miller and Vice -Mayor Cohen
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Phillips and Mayor Boro
COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS:
14. LAFCO — Local Agency Formation Commission: - File 149
Councilmember Heller reported having attended a LAFCO conference last week, participating
on one of the Boards and discussing Marin County. She stated she hoped to again attend in
two or three years.
There being no further business, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF 12002
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC Minutes (Regular) 11/18/2002 Page 15