HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1994-02-071
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
IN CONFERENCE ROOM 201 OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1994, AT 7:00 PM
CLOSED SESSION
1. DISCUSSION OF LITIGATION AND LABOR NEGOTIATIONS - File 1.4.1.a
No. 94-3 (a) - #1 - Robert W. Copple et al v. City of San Rafael, et al.
No. 94-3 (b) - #7
No reportable action was taken.
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1994, AT 8:00 PM
Regular Meeting:
San Rafael City Council
Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor
Paul M. Cohen, Councilmember
Barbara Heller, Councilmember
Joan Thayer, Councilmember
David Zappetini, Councilmember
Absent: None
Others Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, City Manager
Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE
RE: COPPLE - 157 WOODLAND AVENUE - File 3-2-77
Dwayne Love, 179 Woodland Avenue, speaking for himself and neighbor Darcy McDonald of 171
Woodland Avenue, stated they are concerned about the number of residential units to be
built at 157 Woodland Avenue, owned by Robert Copple. Mr. Love felt that Mr. Copple will
settle the civil rights lawsuit if the City will permit him to build a certain number of
residential units on this property, but asked that the Council hold a public hearing so
the neighbors can give their input.
RE: COMPLAINTS - File 100
Irving Litchfield, resident of San Rafael, stated he has been before the Council many
times regarding the homeless and other issues concerning San Rafael and asked Council to
answer his concerns.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to approve the recommended
action on the following Consent Calendar items:
ITEM
ACTION
2. Approval of Minutes of Special Meeting (CLOSED Approved as submitted.
SESSION) of July 8, 1993, Regular Meeting of
January 3, 1994, Special and Regular Meetings
of January 18, 1994 and Special Joint Meeting
with San Rafael and Dixie School Board of
January 20, 1994 (CC)
3. Acceptance and Affirmation of Confidentiality Approved staff recommendation.
of Closed Sessions for Clark E. Guinan,
Assistant City Attorney (CC) - File 9-1-2
4.
5.
Acceptance of Statements of Disclosure for:
(CC) - File 9-4-3 x (SRRA) R-140 #8
Barbara Heller, Councilmember
David J. Zappetini, Councilmember
Clark E. Guinan, Assistant City Attorney
Cyr N. Miller, Planning Commissioner
Deborah Paolino, Redevelopment Citizens Advisory
Committee
Resolution Approving Electrical Maintenance
Agreement with CALTRANS (PW) - File 4-8-24
Accepted report.
RESOLUTION NO. 9086 - APPROVING THE
COST SHARING AGREEMENT WITH CALTRANS
FOR SHARING COSTS OF ELECTRICAL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
1
2
N
7
Resolution Approving Final Map of Rafael
Business Center (PW) - File 5-1-323
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
FACILITIES ON STATE HIGHWAYS IN SAN
RAFAEL
RESOLUTION NO. 9087 - APPROVING
FINAL MAP OF CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION
ENTITLED "MAP OF RAFAEL BUSINESS
CENTER"
Resolution Approving Final Map of Meyer Road RESOLUTION NO. 9088 - APPROVING
Subdivision (PW) - File 5-1-318 FINAL MAP OF SUBDIVISION ENTITLED "MAP
OF MEYER ROAD SUBDIVISION"
9. Authorization of Funding for Implementation of RESOLUTION NO. 9089 - APPROPRIATING
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System $17,123 FROM UNAPPROPRIATED RESERVES
(NPDES) Program (PW) - File 4-4-6 x 8-5 AND AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF SAME
TO FUND THE CITY'S SHARE OF THE
NPDES PROGRAM
10. Resolution of Appreciation to Hollie A.RESOLUTION NO. 9090 - RESOLUTION OF
Stanaland, Children's Librarian, Employee APPRECIATION FOR HOLLIE STANALAND,
of the Quarter (October 1, 1993 throughEMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER (10-1 TO
December 31, 1993) (CM) - File 7-4 x 102 x 12-31-93)
9-3-61
14. SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION - ORDINANCE Approved final adoption of Ordinance
NO. 1658 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN No. 1658.
RAFAEL AMENDING TITLE 10 OF THE SAN RAFAEL
MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 10.85
ENTITLED "POLICE ROTATIN TOWING SERVICES" -
File 9-3-30 x 11-8
16. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to RESOLUTION NO. 9091 - AUTHORIZING
Sign Contract Agreements for Grant Funds for THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN CONTRACT
Child Care Services with the State Department AGREEMENTS FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR 93/94
of Education for FY 93-94 (Rec) - FISCAL YEAR WITH THE STATE DEPART -
File 4-10-238 MENT OF EDUCATION
17. Approval of City Audit by C. G. Uhlenberg & Accepted report.
Company for Fiscal Year 1992-93 (Fin) - File 8-1
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Cohen,
Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
None
ABSENT:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
None
ABSTAINED:
COUNCILMEMBERS:
Heller
and Zappetini from minutes of July 7, 8, and
12,
1994 only, due to nonattendance at meetings.
The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion:
8.RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH SAN QUENTIN PRISON (PW) - File 4-10-224
Councilmember Thayer stated it was wonderful that we will get an 8-10 man crew and asked
how often it would be. Public Works Director David Bernardi answered that it would
be four times between now and July, then approximately ten weeks a year at $1,149 per
week. Ms. Thayer asked how many hours they are on duty, and Mr. Bernardi answered it
is about a 32 hour week.
Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt the Resolution as
recommended by staff.
Councilmember Cohen questioned the language of the requirement for emergency vehicle
network and felt it was too open-ended. Mr. Cohen stated that the intent is that we
will provide emergency vehicle services while the inmates are working for the City.
Mr. Cohen also had a concern regarding the payment, and wanted to insure that the
City would not be required to pay for time during which work is not performed due to
prison scheduling or staffing levels. Mr. Bernardi agreed and stated he had spoken
with the Warden's staff and explained to them that the City would pay only for actual
time that the prisoners are working for the City. Any time there is a lock -down or a
holiday or any other reason that the prisoners do not work on a scheduled day, the
City will not pay.
RESOLUTION NO. 9092 - AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND APPROPRIATING AND
AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF $4,500
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
2
3
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen,
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
ll.RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES WITH LIEBERT, CASSIDY AND
FRIERSON (CM) - File 4-3-214
Councilmember Zappetini stated we have used this firm for seven years and asked if other
firms are entitled to apply for this job. Assistant City Manager Golt noted we do
have agreements with several other firms for matters regarding labor relations. City
Manager Nicolai explained that we have no commitment to use them, but if we do, they
are agreeing up front what the rates will be per hour. Mr. Zappetini asked how much
we spent with them last year and Ms. Nicolai replied "nothing".
Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Zappetini seconded, to adopt the Resolution
authorizing an agreement for legal services with Liebert, Cassidy and Frierson (Re:
Labor relations).
RESOLUTION NO. 9093 - AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF AN AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL SERVICES
BETWEEN THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AND THE LAW FIRM OF LIEBERT,
CASSIDY AND FRIERSON (from March 1, 1994 through February 28,
1995) (Re: Labor relations)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
12.RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE CONTRACT WITH PERSONNEL PERFORMANCE CONSULTANTS, INC., FOR
CONTINUATION OF EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (EAP) FOR CITY EMPLOYEES THROUGH JUNE 30,
1995 (Per) - File 4-3-199
Councilmember Thayer asked if was a budgeted item. Personnel Director Chandler stated it
is budgeted through June 30, 1994, and has been an ongoing part of the Personnel
Department budget since the inception of the program. Ms. Thayer suggested reviewing
these items as a part of the budget process and asked why this item is being brought
before Council at this time. Mr. Chandler stated that the EAP group has extended
this offer to go on a two-year agreement, and with that has provided certain
enhancements to the program. Ms. Thayer agreed that the program is good for employee
morale, but since we are in a "bare bones economy", it is important to look at each
item. Mr. Chandler added that the agreement does allow for us to get out of it with
90 days notice.
Councilmember Zappetini asked how much of the budgeted $10,000 have we used. Mr. Chandler
answered that we pay a flat fee based on number of employees; it is not based upon
usage. He stated that is the charge whether anyone uses the service or not. City
Manager Nicolai stated there are a whole series of programs they offer that we have
used, such as training opportunities. Mr. Zappetini asked if there is any way to
determine how many employees used the EAP services. Mr. Chandler stated that this
past year our utilization has been running at about 6%, or approximately 20
employees. He indicated that what it has saved us in terms of personal problems of
those 20 employees, which have hopefully been resolved and not manifested on the job,
would be difficult to determine. Mr. Chandler felt it has more than made up the
$10,000.
Mayor Boro pointed out that the $10,000 is not just for counseling services for 20
employees, but also includes the other services they provide.
Mr. Zappetini asked if an employee takes advantage of the counseling services, is it done
on their own time or on City time? Mr. Chandler stated that if it is a self -referral
by the employee, it is done on an individual's own time. However, if it is a
supervisory referral as a result of a problem that has manifested itself on the job,
we may require them to attend on City time.
Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to extend the contract with
Personal Performance Consultants.
RESOLUTION NO. 9094 - EXTENDING THE CONTRACT WITH PERSONAL PERFORMANCE CONSULTANTS,
INC., FOR CONTINUATION OF EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (EAP)
FOR CITY EMPLOYEES THROUGH JUNE 30, 1995 (not to exceed
$10,000 per fiscal year)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
3
4
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
13.RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT BY THE CITY MANAGER FOR SPECIAL SERVICES
BETWEEN CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AND THE LAW FIRM OF LIEBERT, CASSIDY AND FRIERSON TO
PROVIDE SUPERVISORY TRAINING AND OTHER SPECIAL SERVICES TO THE EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY
OF SAN RAFAEL (One Year Commencing February 15, 1994) (Pers) - File 4-3-214
Councilmember Zappetini asked how many people participate in this program. Personnel
Director Chandler stated there are 15-30 employees at each workshop and five work-
shops a year. Mr. Zappetini asked if the workshops are held on City time, to which
Mr. Chandler replied, "Yes".
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution as
recommended by staff.
RESOLUTION NO. 9095 - AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT BY THE CITY MANAGER FOR
SPECIAL SERVICES BETWEEN CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AND THE LAW FIRM
OF LIEBERT, CASSIDY AND FRIERSON TO PROVIDE SUPERVISORY TRAIN-
ING AND OTHER SPECIAL SERVICES TO THE EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF
SAN RAFAEL (ONE YEAR, COMMENCING FEBRUARY 15, 1994)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
15.AGREEMENT WITH DONALD L. BLAYNEY FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR PICKLEWEED
PARK PLAYGROUND (Rec) - File 4-10-275
Councilmember Thayer asked if there have been any other proposals for this. Recreation
Director McNamee stated there was one other proposal, but it was more money, and even
though the qualifications were the same, Donald L. Blayney was more reasonable in
cost. Ms. Thayer asked if she had gone out for bids. Ms. McNamee answered that they
are not required to go out for bids for professional services, so she asked for
proposals based on a list of criteria she had developed.
Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Zappetini seconded, to adopt the Reso- lution
authorizing an agreement with Donald L. Blayney for Landscape Architectural Services
for Pickleweed Park.
RESOLUTION NO. 9096 - AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF A CONTRACT, LEASE OR AGREEMENT WITH
DONALD L. BLAYNEY FOR LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR
PICKLEWEED PARK PLAYGROUND
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen,
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
SPECIAL PRESENTATION:
Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO HOLLIE STANALAND, CHILDREN'S LIBRARIAN,
EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER (October 1, 1993 through December 31, 1993) (CM) - File 7-4
x 102 x 9-3-61
Mayor Boro explained that once each quarter the employees choose an Employee of the
Quarter who receives $100 plus a Resolution of Appreciation from the City. This
quarter the Employee of the Quarter (for October 1, 1993 through December 31, 1993)
is Hollie Stanaland, Children's Librarian. Mayor Boro stated that when we went
through the budget hearings about two years ago, it was not a matter of restoring an
item in the Library budget, it was bringing Hollie back to the Library. Mayor Boro
read a portion of the Resolution and presented it to her.
Councilmember Cohen stated his daughters love Storytime, and when they heard Ms. Stanaland
won the award, they were thrilled. He also noted that his wife has stated that Ms.
Stanaland really puts her heart into what she does, going far beyond what people
would expect her to do and inspires children to read.
Ms. Stanaland expressed her appreciation for the award and gave some of the credit to
Vaughn Stratford, Library Director and Gail Lockman, Librarian and her co-workers.
She stated she appreciates the opportunity to work for the City of San Rafael and
commented on the enormous support the Council has given to the Library.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
4
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
km
18.PUBLIC HEARING - NEGATIVE DECLARATION, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, USE PERMIT,
ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW, SUBDIVISION, AND TRIP PERMIT FOR A 62 UNIT
AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT LOCATED AT 1 TRINITY WAY; (ST. ISABELLA'S) ROMAN
CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP OF SAN FRANCISCO, OWNER; JANE GRAF/CATHOLIC CHARITIES, REPS., AP
#175-181-26 (Pl) - File 10-6 x 10-3 x 10-5 x 10-7
Planning Director Pendoley gave a brief history of this project which has been before the
Council on several occasions. He stated Catholic Charities first submitted their
application in September, 1991, applying for a 62 -unit affordable housing project for
low and very low income seniors. The Planning Commission considered the request in
January, 1992, and unanimously recommended approval. The Council considered it on
appeal in March, 1992, and gave unanimous endorsement. In April, 1992, Mr. Alan
Titus filed a petition for a writ of mandate in Superior Court challenging the
approval. The Court ruling came back in October, 1992, in which the Court granted
the petition on two counts, 1) the deficiency of certain noticing and 2) the City's
misinterpretation of four General Plan policies. Subsequent to that, the Council
rescinded the approval. Catholic Charities modified their application to include a
General Plan Amendment which would propose to correct the Court's findings that the
Council and Planning Commission had misinterpreted. Catholic Charities also made
several technical changes to the proposed zone change, the use permit and the
subdivision application, as well as filed for a trip permit. The issue was brought
back to the Planning Commission in September, 1993. The Commission adopted a
Resolution on a unanimous vote recommending adoption of the Negative Declaration and
approval of the General Plan Amendment, as well as all of the other permits. In
October, 1993, the Council considered this, and at that time, the Council focused its
attention on the General Plan Amendment, asking for several alternatives to be
brought back. On November 15, 1993, Council directed staff to take Alternative 1 back
to the Planning Commission. The Commission held hearings in January, 1994, and
reheard the entire package of applications and recommended approval. The General
Plan Amendment is essentially the same as that considered in November, 1993, with a
minor change to H-37, relating to density bonuses for senior citizens. A minor
clarification was made to make it clear that it was available in low and medium
density districts so it would conform to the other General Plan Amendment. The
remainder of the project is exactly as proposed in September, 1991.
Mayor Boro asked about a revision that was received tonight, and Mr. Pendoley stated there
had been some minor typographical errors which had been corrected, and this replaces
the Ordinance which would accomplish the rezoning, Exhibit 6.
Councilmember Thayer asked about the rewording of the various policies dealing with low
residential areas which state it has to be within 1500 feet of transit stops and
services such as grocery and pharmacy. Ms. Thayer questioned attaching that to the
low density and not medium density projects if the purpose is to accommodate the
elderly. Mr. Pendoley stated that the density program bonus is incorporated in two
policies, LU -10 and H-20 which cover a range of land use designations and a range of
types of affordable projects, not just projects for the elderly. Therefore, we would
not want to apply the criteria to all types of affordable projects that qualify for a
density bonus. Those criteria are available for reference. Ms. Thayer noted that it
does not specify that this is likewise applicable to medium and high density areas,
and she was afraid someone might find this inconsistent.
Councilmember Cohen stated that in Exhibit 3, the specific rewording of H-37 reads "Senior
residential projects locations, low and moderately priced senior housing may be
developed on medium and high density residentially designated flat sites within
walking distances of services and transit routes." Mr. Cohen suggested that we could
add to that language a more specific definition of flat sites being less than 10%
slope and walking distance being defined as 1500 feet. Ms. Thayer felt this did not
address the point and is not consistent with what is required in medium density
areas; in other words, a lesser standard is required in medium density areas. Mr.
Cohen did not agree, stating they both require flat sites and both require walking
distance. He noted that if we amend H-37 tonight, it would have to go back to the
Planning Commission.
Mayor Boro asked City Attorney Ragghianti if we were applying different standards to
medium and high density areas. Mr. Ragghianti stated that if it was the consensus of
the Council to include the language that Councilmember Thayer wants in H-37, he did
not believe it would have to return to the Planning Commission; it could be included
in the definition H-37.
Mr. Pendoley confirmed that the specific criteria being discussed is being within 1500
feet of transit stops and services such as grocery and pharmacy. The other criteria
about flat site is already included. Ms. Thayer stated that her concern is that the
standard should be applicable to both low density and medium density since the
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
5
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
rationale behind it is to accommodate the elderly, noting that while it would not
affect this project's approval, at some later date someone could challenge that for a
medium density senior housing project.
Councilmember Cohen noted some typographical
stated that there are a number of errors
ties) will provide the corrections.
Mayor Boro opened the public hearing.
errors in Exhibit A. City Clerk Leoncini
and Tay Via (Attorney for Catholic Chari -
Merle Malokof, Catholic Charities Project Manager, stated there has been a change in the
financing from two years ago. Originally, some funding had been received which was
used primarily for planning and development expenses. They anticipated certain
financing packages, applications were made, but they were not awarded the funding.
Subsequently, they applied for funding from a Federal program, HUD Supportive Housing
for the Elderly, Section 202 and were awarded that grant. Mr. Malokof stated what
was significant about that grant is that the funding comes on a per unit basis and
that it comes not only with the development grant ($4.5 million), but it also comes
with a commitment for funding to subsidize the operations across time which will
allow the very lowest income elderly to be reached. It requires the limit of eligi-
bility to be set at very low income because HUD will directly subsidize the operation
of the project. Residents will be charged rent equal to 30% of their adjusted income.
If a resident had medical expenses or certain other expenses, the rent could be
lowered. Mr. Malokof stated this is the ideal affordable housing program. He
acknowledged the tremendous support from the community and St. Isabella's parish,
noting most of them are residents of Terra Linda. He asked them to stand and be
recognized for their commitment to affordable housing.
Alan Titus, neighbor of the project, stated he had brought suit the first time and re-
emphasized that the neighbors believe this is a good site for affordable senior
housing. Their complaint is that there would be too many units on too small a space
with too small a setback, as little as 14 feet from neighbors' fences. Mr. Titus
spoke of his letter of September 13, 1993, noting the questions raised had been
answered on page 5 of the staff report. However, he felt the answers did not do his
claims justice and wanted to speak to that. First, Mr. Titus stated the need that a
General Plan state the standards of density and intensity for all areas of the City.
The General Plan (Amendment) before the Council tonight does not do that. He stated
the answer in the staff report is that the General Plan (Amendment) does state
standards. Mr. Titus agreed that it does state standards for everything but bonuses
used. His claim is that standards also need to be set when a density bonus is used.
Second, he addressed the environmental problems and cited a case from December,
1993, Desmond vs. the County of Contra Costa, which clarified an issue that was
present the first time this came up. It said that the neighbors' viewpoints on
issues such as the land use, noise and parking are considered substantial evidence.
Mr. Titus stated that the Council has stated that there has been no substantial
evidence put before them of environmental impacts. However, there has been numerous
public testi-mony from neighbors of concerns they have and of the inconsistency of
the project. However, two of the present Councilmembers did not hear that testimony
because they are newly elected, and the transcripts are not a part of the record.
Mr. Titus asked how a decision could be made when they have not heard that testimony.
Lastly, he stated the neighbors are still very dissatisfied; they feel they have not
been heard or answered.
Jeff Kirchmann, stated he objects to the construction of a massive, high density, multi-
family apartment building in established neighborhoods of single family homes. He
noted the density of this project fails to respond to prevailing densities of
adjacent developed areas as required by the provisions of the General Plan 2000, page
16. The proposed structure does not enhance existing residential development through
appropriate building scale as required by policy LU -34. Mr. Kirchmann questioned the
failure to specify standards in terms of population density (the number of people who
reside in the area) and intensity of use (the number of units per acre). He stated
when he reviewed the files, he could not find evidence that the currently proposed
General Plan Amendment had been summarized and sent to various adjacent jurisdictions
and other governmental agencies as required by the City's General Plan Amendment pro-
cedures. Mr. Kirchmann agreed with the comments of Councilmember Thayer and asked
that the provisions of Policy H-37 be harmonized with the other amendments. Speaking
of zoning considerations, Mr. Kirchmann stated he had trouble understanding how this
project satisfies the specific purposes of planned development district which are set
forth in Section 14.07.010 of the Zoning Ordinance. Those specific provisions which
he felt are not applicable in this case are:
- to promote and encourage cluster development on large sites to avoid sensitive
areas of property;
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
6
7
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
- to encourage innovative design on large sites by allowing flexibility in property
development standards;
- to encourage establishment of open areas in land development;
- to encourage assembly of properties that might otherwise be developed in
unrelated increments to the detriment of surrounding neighborhoods;
- to establish a procedure for development of large lots of land in order to reduce
or eliminate the rigidity, delays and conflicts that would otherwise result from
application of zoning standards and procedures designed primarily for small lots;
- to accommodate various types of large-scale, complex, mixed-use, phased
developments;
- to enable affected governmental bodies to receive information and provide an
integrated response to both the immediate and long-range impacts of such proposed
developments.
Therefore, Mr. Kirchmann stated he did not believe the matter before the Council complies
with Section 14.07.060m or 14.07.100. He was also concerned that many of the studies
performed in 1991 have not necessarily been updated to take into account intervening
developments in the neighborhood. In the January, 1992, Planning Commission hearing,
the point was made that there would be a 5% or 6% increase in traffic in the
immediate area in the afternoon hours. The staff report indicates the traffic impact
would be less than 1% during peak hours.
Clark Allen, 25 year Terra Linda resident, stated that the neighbors would welcome a
senior housing project; however, their concern is the magnitude for the small piece
of property. He felt this project is not compatible with the character of the
neighborhood. Mr. Allen noted that in recent months there have been attempts in
downtown San Rafael to change the general makeup to allow for residential units which
have been turned down because they do not conform with the long-term goal. However,
an oversized project is being attempted in Terra Linda in a single-family residential
neighborhood.
Jay Tillotson, President of San Rafael Housing Corporation, addressed the Council in
support of this project. He stated that this country has lost a sense of the common
good, and this project serves the common good of the City of San Rafael, although it
may not, in the opinion of some neighbors, serve their common good. The Board of the
San Rafael Housing Corporation voted unanimously to support this project; 2/3rds of
those voting are residents of Terra Linda. Mr. Tillotson believes the neighbors are
only concerned about their own property values.
Robert Nalducci, resident of Elena Circle, stated that originally a 40 -unit proposal was
submitted to the City, but in January, 1992, the project grew to 72 units and three
stories, being reduced to 62 units and two stories in July, 1992. He agreed with the
concept of the project, but with 40 units. Mr. Nalducci stated this is the second
set of story poles that have been erected and they only show one story ele-ments for
25 feet at either end of the project, barely showing the two-story elements for the
400 feet in the middle. The story poles obliterate all views of the hills and
neighbors' homes and backyards. Mr. Nalducci noted that when the second set of story
poles were restructured, two members of the Design Review Board expressed concern
about the setbacks on Freitas Parkway. At the September 14th Planning Commission
Meeting, Commissioner Phillips, after seeing the story poles, wanted the Design
Review Board to look at the project again. Mr. Nalducci showed slides of the story
poles and pointed out that they are 11 feet 8 inches from Freitas Parkway and stated
the project is too large for the area. Mr. Nalducci also discussed the Environmental
Initial Study. He pointed out inconsistencies between this project and the Copple
project, including light and glare. Street and building lights will be visible off-
site at the Copple project. The St. Isabella's project will incorporate appropriate
means to insure that new light and glare will not result in a potentially significant
impact. The Copple project will result in a substantial alteration of the present
land use area; the present use is single family homes; the St. Isabella project will
not result in a substantial alteration of the present land use area. The Copple
project will generate substantial additional vehicular movement and increase in
traffic hazard to motor vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians; St. Isabella's will
not. The Copple project will result in the creation of an aestheti-cally offensive
site open to public view; the project will be visible from below and from San Rafael;
St. Isabella's will not. The Copple project will require an EIR; the St. Isabella's
project will not. Mr. Nalducci stated that the overwhelming opinion of the
neighborhood is that the St. Isabella's project is too large for the neighborhood and
is incompatible with low density surrounding it. He also stated there is polarity in
the neighborhood with the church being for the proposed project and the neighborhood
being against the 62 unit facility and he believes if the project is approved, the
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
7
Rl
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
polarity will be continued. Mr. Nalducci showed slides of the Smith Ranch Health
Care Center to be used for comparison. He read a neighborhood resolution which
stated..."it is time for you to diffuse the polarity. This can be done with a 40 -
unit facility with minimal amendment to the General Plan. The desired goals are met.
The General Plan still protects neighbors, the church will still have a seniors'
facility, the community will have a seniors' facility, the neighbors will have a
seniors' facility that is in scale with the neighborhood."
Victor Pazarro, resident of Novato, two blocks from the homeless tent, stated he has
followed this project because this is the kind of project he wishes had been
considered in his neighborhood. The homeless tent has 60-90 residents. He stated
that those who object to the St. Isabella's project should think with their hearts
and realize this can be a great boon to the community and particularly to the elderly
who need our assistance.
Tay Via, attorney for Catholic Charities, clarified that there is no State law requiring
that there be a cap on density bonuses. Also, she addressed the case that Mr. Titus
raised, Desmond vs. Contra Costa County, noting that case does not stand for the
proposition that neighborhood comments necessarily rise to the level of substantial
evidence, but rather that they may. It is up to the Council to determine which
testimony is opinion or unsubstantiated statements and which are significant
evidence. Regarding the slide material and initial studies, Ms. Via pointed out that
it is inappropriate from a legal standpoint to compare different initial studies
because there are differences in each project, and different project sponsors are
more or less willing to incorporate mitigation measures and other items that will
result in different impacts on the project once it is incorporated.
Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
Mayor Boro asked City Attorney Ragghianti about the question raised by Mr. Titus regarding
the eligibility of two of the Councilmembers. Mr. Ragghianti quoted a Latin maxim,
"He (or she) who votes must hear", which means in this case that the Councilmembers
who were not here before, must have familiarized themselves with the record of the
proceedings and they should so state before they undertake the vote.
Mayor Boro asked, regarding the circulation of the General Plan Amendment to other
jurisdictions, have we complied with all requirements? Mr. Pendoley answered that we
have.
Mayor Boro asked Councilmembers Heller and Zappetini if they had reviewed the records of
this project and feel qualified to vote based on what they know. Councilmember
Zappetini stated that he has gone through the material. Councilmember Heller stated
that she was on the Planning Commission since the beginning of this project, has
discussed and voted on this project several times and is familiar with all of the
material that has been given to her.
Councilmember Thayer stated that an argument was made that somehow this project failed to
qualify under planned development standards. Mr. Pendoley answered that it does
comply with criteria for planned development. He noted that Mr. Kirchmann read the
purposes of the planned district. The purpose most clearly addressed was projects
for which the standard site development criteria and the single family district would
not be appropriate. This allows for site development criteria tailored to the
project. This meets all technical requirements.
Councilmember Zappetini stated he has talked with many neighbors in Terra Linda, and they
mostly agree that they want senior housing, but the biggest point of disagree-ment is
the difference in the number of units. Mr. Zappetini stated that a 40 -unit project
is marginal financially, 62 units provides a cushion. Therefore, he agrees with a
62 -unit facility.
Councilmember Thayer stated she is convinced it is not economically feasible to have a 40 -
unit project, especially since the units are for very low income seniors. She
believes this project, at 62 units, is an asset to the community. Ms. Thayer pointed
out that the additional 22 units of elderly, frail residents will not create a
traffic burden.
Councilmember Heller asked if a request was actually ever received asking for a 40 -unit
project? Mr. Pendoley answered that the only application received was for a 62 -unit
project.
Councilmember Cohen stated that Mr. Tillotson put it very well, that the Council is
compelled to seek the common good. He stated it was not fair to say the neighbor-
hood's concerns have been pushed aside and not been given serious consideration. He
assured Mr. Titus that he and his colleagues have given the objections and concerns
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
8
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
very serious consideration. However, he feels the common good outweighs the
objections and therefore supports the project.
Mayor Boro agreed that we have heard the comments of the neighbors. He noted that San
Rafael Commons is 82 units on less space than St. Isabella's, and he believes that
since St. Isabella's is 62 units on 2.67 acres, the design will accommodate the
neighborhood. He stated the story poles show sufficient setback for the second story
from the street. He addressed the statement that projects have been turned down in
San Rafael, noting that he cannot think of any. Centertown, with 62 units opened last
year, 40 units at the One "H" Street telephone company building site, and 26 afford-
able for purchase condominiums a block from City Hall (Boyd Court). Mayor Boro
stated that no one part of the community is being picked on for affordable housing.
Councilmember Thayer moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt a resolution
adopting a Negative Declaration.
RESOLUTION NO. 9097 - ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW FOR AFFORDABLE
SENIOR HOUSING PROJECTS IN CERTAIN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS (GPA93-2); AND FOR A ZONE CHANGE, USE
PERMIT, ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT, SUBDIVISION,
AND TRIP PERMIT FOR A 62 -UNIT AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING
PROJECT (St. Isabella), 1 Trinity Way, AP175-181-26, San
Rafael
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, to adopt a Resolution
approving a General Plan Amendment.
RESOLUTION NO. 9098 - ADOPTING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DENSITY BONUSES IN
CERTAIN LOW DENSITY LAND USE DESIGNATIONS (GPA 93-2)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen,
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
The title of the Ordinance was read:
Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
"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 TERRA
LINDA AREA RE: Z91-6 - 1 TRINITY WAY - A 62 -UNIT AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT,
AP 175-181-26, ST. ISABELLA'S SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT"
Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to dispense with the reading
of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only, and pass Charter
Ordinance No. 1659 to print by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, to adopt the Resolution
approving a Use Permit, Environmental and Design Review Permit, Trip Permit and Small
Subdivision.
RESOLUTION NO. 9099 - APPROVING A USE PERMIT, ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW
PERMIT, SUBDIVISION, AND TRIP PERMIT FOR A 62 -UNIT AFFORDABLE
SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT (St. Isabella), Z-91-6, UP91-53, ED91-
69, s91-6, T93-1, 1 Trinity Way, AP175-181-26, San Rafael
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
19.PUBLIC HEARING - APPLICATION FROM KDL FOR A NEW CERTIFICATE TO OPERATE TAXI SERVICE IN
SAN RAFAEL (Fin) - File 9-9
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
9
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
10
Mayor Boro explained that the Council has a duel role, not only to receive input and make
a decision, but also a regulatory role. He indicated that the staff report asks
Council to consider several points, and they have received a considerable amount of
correspondence from opponents to this application, plus a response from the applicant
to the allegations made. Mayor Boro asked City Attorney Ragghianti to explain what
needs to be done and what the focus needs to be.
Mr. Ragghianti stated that the charge of the Council tonight is to sit as a fact -finder to
determine if the public convenience of the City of San Rafael requires that this
license be granted. He stated there are some criteria which are specified in the
ordinance which is attached to the staff report in Section 10.60.030, which
says..."You shall issue such a certificate or refuse to do so in your own judgment if
the public convenience of the City, in your opinion, requires that the license be
issued or that it not be." Mr. Ragghianti indicated that Finance Director Coleman
has a problem with Findings A and F, indicating that he believes B through and
including E may be made. Mr. Ragghianti stated it is within the Council's discretion
to determine which they wish to admit and consider. Finding F is evidence you can
consider advisable and helpful to the decision. Finding A sets forth the conclusion
that must be reached, whether the demands of the public require that there be addi-
tional transport services. He stated it is not necessary for Council to consider all
of the information presented, only the information they believe will be helpful to
the consideration of the issue of whether the public convenience requires this
license be issued.
Finance Director Coleman stated he was involved in the staff reports of 1984 and 1991, at
which time he recommended that the Council consider the applicants for a new taxi
service in both cases. He provided the reasoning in both of those previous requests.
In 1984, there was a recommendation that Radio Cab be approved as a taxi service in
San Rafael because there was only one taxi service at that time. It was felt that
competition was needed. In 1991, it was recommended that Belaire Cab be approved to
operate in San Rafael because of competition. Mr. Coleman felt that Yellow Cab,
under previous ownership, was not providing a quality product; the condition of the
vehicles was less than satisfactory. Also, Radio Cab had just received permission to
operate in Mill Valley. Belaire then came back to San Rafael and asked to operate in
San Rafael. Both the 1984 and 1991 applications were approved by Council.
Mr. Coleman stated there are several factors to be considered in the current applica-tion.
He stated that the qualifications were met in Findings B through E, although the
financial resources of the applicant is adequate but marginal. The main issue is
whether there is a demand or need for the service. The definition of demand or need
includes the number of cabs, the quality of the cabs and the quality and type of
service. Mr. Coleman stated that if Council is not satisfied that there is a demand
for the service, they can either deny the application or let the free market deter-
mine the number of cab companies that should be in San Rafael. He stated there are
legal issues involving KDL, Radio Cab and Yellow Cab, as well as other issues
involved in the split between the old Yellow Cab and the new owners of Yellow Cab.
Councilmember Thayer asked if these companies have adequate insurance and workers'
compensation. Mr. Coleman answered that we do not get involved in workers' comp, but
we do get involved in liability insurance, noting that during the last two years we
have had considerable problems with Yellow Cab's liability insurance. He indicated
Yellow Cab has gone from 12 or 14 vehicles to 3 vehicles which were authorized at the
time the previous owner was operating the company. During the last two years, there
have been constant problems with cancellation of insurance due to lack of payment of
the premium. Also during the last year, there have been problems where all cab
companies were required to change their insurance because they were all insured with
an off -shore insurance company, and the code requires that they be insured by
somebody authorized to do business in the State of California. Last Spring, the
State of California indicated these insurance companies were no longer eligible to do
business in the State.
Councilmember Thayer asked the purpose of regulating these companies other than to verify
insurance and if the City had any liability in case someone was injured. Mr. Coleman
stated he had spoken with Assistant City Attorney Walker who felt the City did not
have legal liability in that area; however, a person could sue the City or the City
could be named in a suit. He stated that has been our only involvement in the taxi
business for the last several years. Ms. Thayer asked if we are obligated in any way
to regulate. Mr. Coleman stated there are several cities in Marin County who do not
get involved at all in the regulation of taxis, noting only four cities make any
attempt at regulation. The other three cities besides San Rafael do not get involved
in insurance issues and only get involved as far as who operates in their
communities. Ms. Thayer suggested that a regulatory function might increase the
City's risk.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
10
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
11
City Attorney Ragghianti stated we have immunity under the government code as do all
California cities for the issuance or refusal to issue a license. The decision on
the part of a public agency to get into this area is usually borne out of making
certain that when this type of transportation is offered to the residents, it is
adequate, that public health and safety are protected. He stated there is also money
involved sometimes in terms of permits that generate revenue to defray the cost of
regulation. Mr. Ragghianti stated he agrees with Mr. Coleman that he does not see
any exposure.
Councilmember Heller asked whether we are immune from problems regard mechanical fitness,
and Mr. Ragghianti answered that we are. He stated that anyone who wants to operate
a vehicle for hire in San Rafael must obtain a license, but we have no obligation to
inspect the vehicles.
Councilmember Zappetini asked what kind of money a taxi generates for the City. Mr.
Coleman stated there is only the original one-time application fee of $250. The
ongoing revenue would be for a business license, which at most would be no more than
$200 a year.
Mayor Boro concluded that historically we have done this primarily to insure residents
receive consistent service.
Councilmember Cohen asked if the license is granted to the operator or to each cab. Mr.
Coleman answered that it is granted to the company itself.
Mayor Boro reiterated that what the Council should be interested in is the applicants
stating why they feel there is a need for this service, and pointed out that they are
not interested in any items such as pending lawsuits between the companies. He stated
that since there is nothing the Council can do about those issues, it will do no good
to hear about them. He also noted that Council is not here to hear allegations of
unethical or illegal practices.
Mayor Boro declared the public hearing opened.
Ian Lambton, one of three partners of KDL Taxi Services, stated he has had 4-1/2 years of
experience in the taxi service. He indicated one of the principal concerns in
meeting transit services in San Rafael has to do with the decline of Golden Gate
Transit local bus service which has been considerably curtailed due to budget
restraints. He stated it is virtually impossible to get bus service after 7:00 p.m.
to outlying areas of San Rafael including Peacock Gap, Terra Linda, Sun Valley and
parts of the Dominican area. Limousine and van services are to a large extent de-
regulated and are free of restriction in San Rafael. They are allowed to succeed or
fail according to the free market. The rates set by these companies are set by the
market place. He noted that these businesses appeal to a considerably more upscale
market than taxi services. However, the elderly, disabled or average working person
cannot afford such transportation, and competition in the taxi market would tend to
bring prices down. Mr. Lambton explained that KDL is a group of cab drivers and
dispatchers who are currently out of work because they want to work with KDL rather
than the new Yellow Cab Company. He feels there is an increased need in the local
market for taxis because there are times when a person has to wait 40 minutes to an
hour for a taxi. The ratio of cabs to people varies greatly throughout the country.
In San Francisco there are 800 taxis to 680,000 people, or a ratio of 850 people per
cab, and there are many complaints there about the difficulty in obtaining a cab. In
San Rafael, there are 16 properly insured cabs to about 60,000 people, or a ratio of
3750 people per cab. He also noted that the population in San Rafael is on the
increase, and the population is changing to more elderly people, who use more taxis.
The Santa Rosa Airporter is increasing the number of busses they will run to the
airport which will bring more people to the San Rafael Transit Center. Competition
for services between smaller companies increases both the availability and the
efficiency of overall services. Mr. Lambton indicated the following as benefits to
San Rafael if taxi service were increased: no public costs beyond licensing
requirements covered by the fees paid to the City; free market fosters the demand for
quality; fill the gap left by public transportation; possibility of increased
competitive para -transit services, offers some relief of ambulance services in
providing comparatively low cost emergency transit; reduces incidences of drunk
driving, therefore relieving police services; relieves traffic congestion and
pollution services with fewer vehicles on the roads; reduces demands for parking
space; employs local people.
Councilmember Thayer clarified that KDL is comprised of drivers from what was once Yellow
Cab. Mr. Lambton said that as Yellow Cab was looking at a significant decline in
recent years, some employees were interested in purchasing that company.
Councilmember Cohen asked where the number of 16 licensed cabs came from. Mr. Lambton
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
11
12
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
answered that the information came from the City Clerk's office, 10 from Radio Cab, 4
from Belaire and 2 from the new Yellow Cab. Mr. Cohen asked how many cabs KDL has.
Mr. Lambton replied there are 5 brand new cabs, 3 are sitting idle and 2 are
operating in the border communities around San Rafael. Mr. Cohen asked if there were
any figures for similar communities pertaining to ratio of cabs per population. Mr.
Lambton did not have additional figures. Mr. Cohen asked if KDL had plans to offer
para -transit services; Mr. Lambton replied they did not. Mr. Cohen asked if there is
a certain number of cabs a company has to operate to provide a reasonable profit.
Mr. Lambton stated that since a company acquires all of its income from the drivers
who are either employees of the company or who lease cabs by the company and not from
the paying customer, it is important to have a minimum of five cabs.
Councilmember Heller asked the total amount of cabs we have had in the past. Mr. Coleman
stated that between Radio Cab and Yellow Cab, there were as many as 16-20 at one
time. Mr. Lambton stated if a company has a high ratio of cabs to incoming business,
individual drivers make less money. Therefore, their objective, rather than to put
as many cabs on the street as possible is to increase business so there is a
rationale for increasing the number of cabs.
Councilmember Zappetini asked what kind of a maintenance program KDL had. Mr. Lambton
indicated there is a move towards owner -operators. The company would not own any
vehicles, but drivers would contract with KDL who would be more of a dispatch and
management service. Two things they are pursuing are an extended space as a parking
space or a space for cleaning and minor maintenance, and the other is to develop more
specific contracts with local auto shops to provide these services. Technically, as
owner -operators, the cab owner has the choice to maintain his vehicle as he chooses.
Mr. Lambton stated KDL does not have a maintenance program, nor do they intend to.
Lawrence Harvey, owner of Belaire Cab and President for 20 years, stated they have been
successfully operating in Southern Marin since 1955. Approximately two years ago
they were granted permits to operate in San Rafael. Since that time, they have been
providing extensive marketing, advertising and promotional programs. With all that
effort, they have created only enough clientele to warrant 2-3 cabs. Mr. Harvey
stated that since they are in the public transport business, they are open 365 days a
year and receive no government subsidies. He stated the only power the Council has to
help them stay healthy and solvent is to limit the number of existing cab companies
in the area. They cannot create a need for business, and there is a limited amount of
business, and that is why there are restrictions.
Councilmember Zappetini asked Mr. Harvey how many cabs Belaire Cab owns? Mr. Harvey
answered they own 13 taxis; however, they only generate enough business for 2-3 cabs.
There are 7-9 taxis covering Southern Marin.
Don Tope, owner of Radio Cab, and one of the principals in the acquisition of Yellow Cab,
gave a history of the taxi business in San Rafael. He stated that until 18 months
ago, there were only two cab companies serving San Rafael, both in a precar-ious
state of finances. At that time, the Council permitted Belaire Cab to enter the
market. The old Yellow Cab has since gone bankrupt. Mr. Tope and his associates
have acquired that company, and he is very concerned about admitting yet another cab
company, KDL. Mr. Tope clarified that Yellow Cab is not an extension of Radio Cab,
but rather a complete separate entity. However, given the present market, they have
been forced to piggy -back Yellow Cab with Radio Cab until it can be fully revived,
hopefully within six months. Mr. Tope explained that Yellow Cab is a completely
owner -operator company. Yellow Cab will provide maintenance services if the driver/
owner wishes. Otherwise, the driver/owner must submit to inspections so the cab will
be suitable for service. Mr. Tope stated he is very concerned about having another
cab company in San Rafael because the business is not there to support it. He
disagreed with Mr. Coleman in that suitability to operate in this business, fair
business practices, obedience to the rules, unsafe and unsound business practices,
etc. are something the Council should be concerned about.
Councilmember Coleman asked what Mr. Tope thought was an operable number of cabs for San
Rafael and how many cabs it took to justify a license. Mr. Tope answered that it
takes 10-12 cabs to justify a maintenance facility and to be able to operate 100-130
shifts a week to make it marginally profitable. He stated they are presently running
two Yellow Cabs and are planning to increase to five in the next two months, and he
believes San Rafael is at a near saturation level.
Al Weiser, KDL employee and a San Rafael cab driver for six years, stated some of his
experiences as a driver. He had letters from local businesses stating they need good
cab service for their customers, drivers who are honest, helpful, courteous. Mr.
Weiser also stated older people especially depend on cabs, and they want to see
familiar drivers. Also, he stated that the condition of the old Yellow Cabs was
terrible; now KDL has new cabs. He stated he notified the District Attorney last year
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
12
13
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
regarding the condition of the cabs. The District Attorney contacted both the San
Rafael Police Department and the California Highway Patrol, but was told they had no
jurisdiction to inspect the cabs. Mr. Weiser felt that the quality of the driver and
the cab is of primary importance. By approving KDL's request for a permit, it will
be putting ten drivers/dispatchers back to work.
Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
Mayor Boro stated there has been a change in transportation in San Rafael over the past
year or so primarily because of the transit center, and felt what we are dealing with
right now is that we have a company that was here, and now has a change of ownership.
They have been providing a service under an old name, and want to continue under a
new name.
Councilmember Thayer noted that if the drivers that were with Yellow Cab are now with this
new company, there would not be any additional drivers on the road. She stated she
believes in a free market, and whether this company makes it or not is going to be up
to them; there is nothing the City can do to foster that. We should not try to hurt
their chances. Ms. Thayer stated that the services of Golden Gate Transit are not as
good as they used to be, a lot of routes have been cut, and it is hard to get public
transit at night. Therefore, Ms. Thayer sees a need for the additional service.
Councilmember Zappetini recommended something be done about KDL's maintenance program, but
otherwise, he supports the request for a permit.
Councilmember Cohen asked if there is any historical data relating to the number of cabs
which have insurance? Finance Director Coleman answered that there may be a record
if we look at the certificates of the cabs that were covered. The biggest
fluctuation was in Yellow Cab which has gone from 14 cabs down to 3. Radio Cab has
gone from 5 cabs in 1984 to 10, presently. Belaire has been in the range of 2-4 cabs.
There is no limit on the number of cabs except for the number that the cab companies
wish to insure. Mr. Coleman noted that both Radio and Belaire Cabs have been
providing good service with good vehicles. The biggest complaint has always been
with the old Yellow Cab with very poor equipment even though they had their own
maintenance yard. Mr. Cohen stated there are good reasons, in the interest of public
safety, to regulate this particular business. The market will determine how many
cabs are appropriate, but the threshold of profitability is one which the Council
should take into consideration. The competition and quality of cabs and service
should dictate who wins the market; however, Mr. Cohen was concerned about the con-
dition the old Yellow Cab got into. He stated that if another license is going to be
granted, what is being risked is that at least one of the companies may not be viable
because of the demand or lack of it. He suggested putting forth some additional
regulations that would allow a license to be revoked when a company got into the
condition that the old Yellow Cab was in.
Mayor Boro suggested that at another time the issue of regulating cabs should be
discussed, including funding. However, tonight the decision is whether to issue a
Certificate of Convenience to KDL Taxi to operate within San Rafael.
Mr. Coleman stated that one of the main concerns is the condition of the cabs, and it
would be a good idea if we would require the cab companies to have their vehicles
inspected by a third party.
Councilmember Cohen asked if there is a time limit on a license once it is issued. Mr.
Coleman stated that previously there has been no limitation in terms of length of
time or number of cabs. Mr. Cohen suggested we put a time limitation, at which time
they would need to reapply.
City Manager Nicolai suggested that if we have the ability to revoke, we should have some
criteria, such as a certain number of complaints or if the insurance expires more
than twice that we would pull the permit and bring it back to Council. Ms. Nicolai
stated we can set up some criteria under the existing authority we have; it just
needs to be established procedurally at the staff level, and the periodic inspection
of the cabs by a third party would also be a good idea.
Councilmember Heller stated she concurs with the rest of the Council and asked if we get
regular notifications from the insurance companies when something is cancelled. Mr.
Coleman answered that the insurance companies are required to notify the City if the
insurance is cancelled for whatever reason. Ms. Heller asked if KDL Taxi has
insurance on file with us for all of their cabs. Mr. Coleman stated that no insurance
is required at this point because they have not as yet been approved by the Council
to operate.
Mayor Boro asked if there are enough spaces at the Transit Center for the cabs. Mr.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
13
14
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
Coleman stated there are 2 or 3 spaces for taxis at the Center, although they are not
marked for any particular cab company so anyone can park there. The cab companies
have requested signs identifying spaces for each cab company.
Councilmember Zappetini moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, to adopt a Resolu-tion
issuing a Certificate to operate taxi service in San Rafael, and asked the City
Manager and Finance Director to bring a recommendation to the Council within 6 months
to insure the maintenance and safety of the vehicles.
RESOLUTION NO. 9100 - ISSUING A CERTIFICATE OF CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY TO KDL TAXI
SERVICES, dba MARIN CAB COMPANY
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen,
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
OLD BUSINESS
Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
20.FORMATION OF BUDGET OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (CM) - File 9-2-48 x 8-5 x 9-2
City Manager Nicolai stated the biggest change in her recommendations over the January 3,
1994 meeting, relates to the recommendation that we stick with just a "Blue Ribbon"
Committee and not consider having employee representatives. Ms. Nicolai felt it
would be too difficult to have six bargaining units choose two people and have any
fair representation, and noted if each unit has one person on the Committee, it will
completely outweigh the Committee. She noted the meetings would be open to all
interested groups. Therefore, Ms. Nicolai recommended seven members, either
residents and/or those whose business is in San Rafael. She supported the idea of
advertising for members, but at the same time inviting people to apply. She
recommended the Committee be formed for four years because some of the ongoing
analysis will take time, although any individual member would not be obligated to be
on it for the four full years.
Mayor Boro asked if Ms. Nicolai envisioned the Committee would begin with more of a policy
approach. Ms. Nicolai answered that issues may come up such as a cost benefit
analysis of contracting out for our garage services and next to analyze contracting
out for all the parks, or the paramedic program. She stated there are a number of
issues that cannot all be done at once, and noted it will require dedicated time to
be focused on the analysis, then to move onto another opportunity.
Councilmember Heller asked for clarification regarding the time length. Ms. Nicolai
stated that the Committee, as an entity, should exist for four years to have a chance
for things to happen. However, an individual could be on the Committee for whatever
length of time they are willing to commit to. A person might join the Committee who
has expertise on a particular subject, but might not be an ongoing member. There
should be a core group to look at things from a global point of view, get their
orientation, focus on some of the issues they would really like to tackle, then allow
subcommittees to expand and contract, but give them a long enough period of time that
they can get things done.
Councilmember Cohen stated it makes good sense to try this for the next four years to get
a good base to evaluate it from, but he believes it should be clearly stated that
people are not being asked to accept a four-year appointment; one year is reasonable
because that coincides with a budget cycle. Mr. Cohen felt that the Committee should
decide what services they should provide and the most official way to provide those
services. They should decide what approach to take. Mr. Cohen stated that although
it was previously suggested that the Committee not be limited to a line item review,
they should somewhat participate in the budget process. He also felt that the
members, in addition to having some business history, should also have some community
involve-ment.
Mayor Boro stated that in the charge to the Committee, the Council should come up with
some criteria regarding what we want accomplished, then within those parameters they
find a way to provide it. Ms. Nicolai stated there should be certain standards we do
not want changed; however, the Committee should be able to look at options of reduced
levels of service and make recommendations to Council. All matters will go back to
the Council to make the final determination.
Councilmember Thayer asked how the Committee charge differs from what the Hughes -Reiss
Report did? Ms. Nicolai stated that the Hughes -Reiss Report was done in a three-
month time frame rather than an indepth analysis. They were looking for big things
worth investigating and globally comparing us with other jurisdictions. Ms. Nicolai
stated that the suggestion came from Shirley Fischer that we have some exper-tise in
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
14
15
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
the community look at the City from a different point of view and do some cost
benefit analyses. Mayor Boro noted this Committee goes a step further than the
Hughes-Heiss Report to get us to implement some of this things suggested.
Councilmember Cohen pointed out that it would cost thousands of dollars to have a
consultant firm come in every year, and this Committee would be more cost effective.
Mr. Cohen noted that Hughes-Heiss is in the business of analyzing public entities in
terms of how other public entities operate. He noted the Committee will be made from
the private sector and indicate whether there are some lessons to be learned from
what they have done. Ms. Nicolai stated that there have also been a lot of changes
since the Hughes-Heiss Report, and we went through two budget cuts before the Report
was finalized.
Albert Barr, Co-chair, San Rafael Federation of Neighborhoods, suggested the Council first
of all produce a Mission Statement. He pointed out that the Committee would report
directly to the Council. He stated he felt it would be useful to have the employees
represented formally on the Committee since they will be impacted. He believed that
nothing of any significance will be accomplished without the employees' cooperation.
Mr. Barr suggested the Police and Fire Departments be represented directly and
perhaps a third representative from one of the other smaller groups. He was afraid
that with a 4 -year charge, even though individuals will serve for a lesser time, the
process might be stretched out. If they have a one year or eighteen month charge,
they will be more inclined to meet more frequently and to come up with
recommendations on a more expeditious basis. They should have subcommittees to look
at several issues at a time so things can get accomplished.
Ms. Nicolai stated she did not intend for any charge to take four years, rather individual
issues that the Council wanted an analysis done on, would have its own independent
time frame.
Mayor Boro stated that although he originally suggested employees be represented on the
Committee, he has gone back and forth on the issue. He is looking for someone who
does not have a vested interest to look at what we should be doing and felt if we
have people with something at stake, it could cloud the issue.
Councilmember Zappetini agreed that if we are going to target the private sector, we
should not have employees on the Committee, noting there will be a more impartial
look at issues if there is no influence.
Councilmember Heller strongly suggested that the employee groups are free to send someone
to monitor the Committee, but not in a voting capacity.
Councilmember Cohen stated that at some point when we talk about implementing sugges-
tions, we need to involve the people who are actually going implement them and get
their enthusiasm if it is to be workable. He suggested that employee organizations
participate as ex -officio members, to get their involvement and suggestions but not
as voting members.
Councilmember Thayer stated we should have one or two employees on the Committee. Also,
she suggested that we do not just look for CEOs of organizations, but also those from
other areas of government who have managed to save money because they are familiar
with the government process.
Mayor Boro agreed to the suggestion to have employees as ex -officio members, to
participate at the appropriate time, but it be done on a volunteer basis on their
part.
Councilmember Cohen suggested that the employee groups be officially notified that the
Committee is being formed, its charge, and invite them to participate.
Ms. Nicolai agreed with specifically inviting employees to be involved in the process on a
volunteer basis, and noted that if the Committee wants to tap into the employee's
expertise, they could do that. However, the original purpose was to get private
sector expertise involved.
Councilmember Cohen agreed with Ms. Nicolai and explained his viewpoint is to tell
employees that the Committee is going to look at a broad range of issues that may be
of interest to them, and they are invited to attend.
Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Thayer seconded, that the report be accepted
with the discussions as noted.
City Manager Nicolai and Albert Barr will work on the charge for the Committee and bring
it back to the Council.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
15
16
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Thayer, Zappetini & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
NEW BUSINESS
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
21.None.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 12:05 PM.
City Council went back into Closed Session to discuss Labor Negotiations and adjourned at
12:50 AM.
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF , 1994
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 2/7/94 Page
16