Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPJT Minutes 2002-07-15SRRA/SRCC (Spec. Jt.PH) 07/15/2002 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, JULY 15, 2002 AT 8:00 PM Special Joint Public Hearing San Rafael Redevelopment Agency and San Rafael City Council Present: Albert J. Boro, Chairman/Mayor Paul M. Cohen, Vice-Chair/Vice-Mayor Barbara Heller, Member/Councilmember Cyr N. Miller, Mem ber/Councilmember Gary O. Phillips, Member/Councilmember Absent: None Also Present: Ken Nordhoff, Assistant Executive Director/ Assistant City Manager Lee C. Rosenthal, Agency Attorney Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, Agency Secretary/ City Clerk 8:00 PM SPECIAL JOINT PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT (RA — FILE (SRRA) R-140 XIX x (SRCC) 140 Providing background, Economic Development Director Nancy Mackle explained that the Redevelopment Agency has been in existence since 1972 and the Agency Board had authorized projects, too numerous to mention; however, Ms. Mackle indicated she would comment on a few of these to identify the types of projects the Agency is involved with and how it benefits the community, as follows: • Flooding improvements have been completed in East San Rafael and along West Francisco Boulevard; • Parkside Childcare Center; • Pickleweed Park Improvements and Playing Fields; • Shoreline Masterplan; • Circulation deficiencies, including widening Bellam Boulevard, constructing Andersen Drive and work along West Francisco; • Downtown — Improving Fourth Street appearance, including new sidewalk, street trees, twinkle lights, undergrounding utilities, parking lots, and embarking upon a parking structure, together with downtown events. Ms. Mackle reported on working to encourage economic development in so many ways, including: • Toys R Us Shopping Center; • Purchase of the Macy's building, now the Rafael Town Center; and • The Rafael Theatre, which the Agency purchased and assisted the Film Institute in putting together. Ms. Mackle stated that the Agency Board had been very proactive on affordable housing and indicated that 20% of funds are used to promote affordable housing. She reported great improvements, again too numerous to mention this evening, had been achieved in this regard. Making brief introductory comments, Ms. Mackle stated that the Agency puts funds towards these projects and this basically leverages private dollars. She reported a lot of private investment in the community in some of the projects referred to, together with some of the affordable housing projects, and the Agency dollars leverage and make those dollars go so much further. Ms. Mackle stated the Agency has ten years remaining to complete its activities and to this end is requesting a Plan Amendment. Stephanie Lovette, Economic Development Coordinator, stated that Ms. Mackle had outlined some of the activities undertaken by the Agency since 1972, all of which were undertaken pursuant to the Redevelopment Agency Plan. She explained that the Plan provides the Agency with the duties, powers and obligations to implement the redevelopment program. Ms. Lovette stated that the main duty of the Redevelopment Agency is to eliminate the blighting influences in the project area. She explained that Blight has a very specific definition under California State Redevelopment Law. Ms. Lovette reported that the Third Amended Plan, the subject of this evening's public hearing, is not substantially different from the Second Amended Redevelopment Plan, the current Redevelopment Plan. Explaining the differences, she stated that 1) staff is requesting an increase in the amount of tax increment that can be allocated to the Agency; and 2) staff is requesting an increase in eminent domain authority from SRRA/SRCC (Spec. Jt. PH) MINUTES 07/15/2002 Page 1 SRRA/SRCC (Spec. Jt.PH) 07/15/2002 Page 2 2011 to 2012. As explained by Ms. Mackle, Ms. Lovette reported there are approximately ten years remaining and the Agency's activities have to be completed pursuant to State law by 2012; therefore, the eminent domain authority would run until such activities had been completed. In order to increase the amount of tax increment allocated to the Agency, Ms. Lovette explained there must be a documentation of ongoing blight. She stated that Section IV of the report on the Plan contains information regarding ongoing blight. Evidence of ongoing blight found in the project area includes unsafe and unhealthy buildings for persons to live and work, buildings with substandard or defective design, impaired investments, residential over -crowding, potential hazards, circulation deficiencies, flooding, lack of recreational facilities and lack of affordable housing. Ms. Lovette stated that Section V of the report on the Plan sets forth the activities the Agency might undertake to address those ongoing blighting influences, and the projected costs. She indicated that the report also addresses the need to increase the amount of tax increment allocated to the Agency in order to address those identified blighting influences. Ms. Lovette explained that Section VI of the report shows the economic feasibility of the projects and programs the Agency may undertake, as outlined in Section V of the report. Ms. Lovette reported that at the conclusion of her testimony she would submit some items to the Agency Secretary/ City Clerk, specifically, records the Agency staff utilized to evaluate the blighting influences in the project area. Reporting that a Negative Declaration was prepared for this project, Ms. Lovette indicated it was mailed to the State Clearinghouse, there was a thirty -day (30) public comment period, and all other interested parties also received it. She reported it was published in the Marin Independent Journal and the notice was mailed to 10,000 business owners, property owners and occupants of the project area. Ms. Lovette stated that the Planning Commission recommended City approval of the Negative Declaration at their meeting of July 9th, 2002. Ms. Lovette reiterated that approximately 10,000 notices were distributed to all property owners in the project area, as well as businesses and residents, and the notice of this evening's public hearing was published for four successive weeks in the Marin Independent Journal. She indicated she would submit an affidavit of publication and mailing to the Agency Secretary/City Clerk upon completion of her testimony this evening. Ms. Lovette reported that staff also personally contacted each of the taxing entities located in the project area to discuss the Plan Amendment and she would submit the record of the log of communications with the taxing entities to the Agency Secretary/City Clerk. She reported that the Citizens Advisory Committee on Redevelopment met in June to discuss the Plan Amendment and recommended City Council approval. This recommendation is contained in Section X of the Report on the Plan. Reporting that a Community Meeting was held on Monday evening, July 8, 2002, Ms. Lovette stated that particulars on this meeting were included in the information mailed to the 10,000 people located in the property area, as well as in the notices published in the Marin Independent Journal. She reported that the main concern at this public meeting was the Agency's potential use of eminent domain in the project area. She commented there appeared to be some confusion between the General Plan process and the Redevelopment Agency Plan, specifically involving the Design Charettes that were done for some of the industrial areas. Ms. Lovette reported she did explain the Design Charettes were a visioning process and that none of the activities envisioned were actually set forth in the Redevelopment Plan or any of the documents the City has adopted to date. Ms. Lovette stated that In response to questions, she explained to those present that the Agency had not used, or rarely used, eminent domain authorities since commencing in 1972, and responding to further questions, she indicated she briefly outlined the eminent domain process pursuant to State Law, to the effect that the Agency would be required to pay fair market value for any property acquired and it would be necessary to have a use for that property prior to acquisition. She reported she explained the process is lengthy and indicated Lee Rosenthal, Agency Counsel, was present this evening to respond to any questions from the Agency Board/City Council on this process. Chairman/Mayor Boro declared the public hearing opened and inquired whether the Agency Secretary/City Clerk possessed any material to be read into the record, to which Ms. Leoncini responded in the negative. Harry Winters, San Rafael resident, indicated he was not too familiar with the Redevelopment process, although he had been evaluating the Citizen Guide to Redevelopment, a booklet distributed by the Redevelopment Agency in Sacramento. Mr. Winters stated that the City had been involved in redevelopment for thirty years and a ten-year extension SRRA/SRCC (Spec. Jt. PH) MINUTES 07/15/2002 Page 2 SRRA/SRCC (Spec. Jt.PH) 07/15/2002 Page 3 to complete the process was under discussion this evening. He noted this was originally established by the government to assist deteriorating cities; however, San Rafael is probably one of the most vital cities in one of the richest counties in the State and after thirty years, the results are evident. Mr. Winters stated his concern was that this could be one of those governmental issues that assumes a life of its own and at the conclusion of the next ten years in 2012, a fourth process could be instigated to add a further ten years to completion. He stated all of the achievements by Redevelopment alluded to this evening could be found in the best cities in the world. He believed care should be taken when considering a budget at the present time when the paving program in the City is being cut by 50%, and all departments were being requested to eliminate all non -essentials, yet Redevelopment is re -directing tax monies to redevelopment rather than fund the normal essentials of the City, such as paving. Mr. Winters stated it was his hope this is the end of the "marvelous revitalization" of San Rafael and that it is reflected in this evening's action. There being no further comment from the audience, Chairman/Mayor Boro closed the public hearing and requested staff to address the issue of re -directing tax dollars. Firstly, Economic Development Director Nancy Mackle clarified that the Agency is not requesting an extension this evening, as the 2012 date is already set to complete activities, and 2022 to terminate the Agency, with no further extensions. Regarding redirecting tax dollars, Ms. Mackle confirmed this is not a new tax that relates to Redevelopment, rather an ability to take current tax increment dollars and put it in one place. She explained that the advantage of this is that the Agency is then in a position to bond against those dollars and capitalize those funds to make major improvements to the City that otherwise, would be required to be done on a "pay as you go basis" which could require a substantial amount of time. She indicated this is an infusion of dollars that can leverage private dollars, and believed it works to the City's best advantage to maintain the Agency for a longer period, maintaining its financing structure as is. Chairman/Mayor Boro added that the City does not decide on its own how these monies are spent; this must be coordinated with the Marin County Board of Supervisors, the two San Rafael School Districts and the College of Marin, since they are also impacted. Chairman/Mayor Boro stated that the City goes through a hearing process on the projects undertaken and he issued an assurance they are beneficial projects for the community, whether in the downtown, which is pretty much completed, or other areas, specifically parts of the Canal, that need to be evaluated going forward. Chairman/Mayor Boro stated these projects would receive full public review and everyone was welcome to participate in this review. For clarification, Member/Councilmember Cohen stated the Agency Board/Council was being requested to extend the eminent domain authority for the Agency for one year from 2011 to 2012, not extend the life of the Redevelopment Agency in any fashion. He believed that even in a time when City budgets were being cut, the Redevelopment Agency affords one place where it is possible to be proactive and look to the future. Regardless of whether or not San Rafael is the County seat in one of the richest counties in the state, a healthy downtown cannot be taken for granted. He alluded to many other downtowns around the state, including the downtown of a city in Marin County, that went through a similar economic cycle as San Rafael in the last eight or ten years; however, has been unable to reopen its historic theatre or attract and maintain a vital atmosphere in its downtown. Member/Councilmember Cohen believed that a lot of the steps taken by this community have been made possible by the Redevelopment Agency, which has been a tool used effectively. Member/Councilmember Heller requested Economic Development Director Nancy Mackle to assist in explaining the 20% which must go into housing funds, as she believed this is sometimes lost with regard to the benefit to the City. Ms. Mackle explained that 20% of the funds are required to go to housing. These funds have provided new construction, assisted with rehabilitation of housing, helped to provide grants to non -profits, the Downtown Arts Center, organizations such as Homeward Bound, Marin Center for Independent Living, Buckelew, Canal Community Alliance, together with assisting with new construction, such as Lone Palm downtown. She indicated these funds have been used in many ways to create and retain affordable housing throughout the project area. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MAKING FINDINGS AND APPROVALS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT IN CONNECTION WITH THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, AND MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING THE EFFECT OF THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT AMENDED PLAN ON TAX REVENUES TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (RA) Member Phillips moved and Member Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution SRRA/SRCC (Spec. Jt. PH) MINUTES 07/15/2002 Page 3 SRRA/SRCC (Spec. Jt.PH) 07/15/2002 Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2002-18 — RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MAKING FINDINGS AND APPROVALS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT IN CONNECTION WITH THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, AND MAKING FINDINGS REGARDING THE EFFECT OF THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT AMENDED PLAN ON TAX REVENUES TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None 2. TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL PREPARED IN CONNECTION THEREWITH (RA) Member Cohen moved and Member Miller seconded, to adopt the Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-19 — RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVING THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL PREPARED IN CONNECTION THEREWITH AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None CITY COUNCIL: TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL MAKING FINDINGS AND APPROVALS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT IN CONNECTION WITH THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (RA) Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 11131 — RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL MAKING FINDINGS AND APPROVALS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT IN CONNECTION WITH THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREPARED FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE THIRD AMENDED AND RESTATED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None There being no further business, the Special Joint Public Hearing of the San Rafael Redevelopment Agency and San Rafael City Council was adjourned at 8:16 p.m. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, AGENCY SECRETARY/ CITY CLERK APPROVED THIS DAY OF .2002 MAYOR OF THEY CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SRRA/SRCC (Spec. Jt. PH) MINUTES 07/15/2002 Page 4