Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1995-11-20SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 20,1995, AT 8:00 PM Regular Meeting: San Rafael City Council Barbara Heller, Councilmember David J. Zappetini, Councilmember Absent: Gary 0. Phillips, Councilmember Others Present: Suzanne Golt, Acting City Manager Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk OPEN SESSION - 7:00 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBER Mayor Boro announced Closed Session item: Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor Paul M. Cohen, Councilmember CLOSED SESSION AGENDA ITEM - 7:00 PM - CONFERENCE ROOM 201 • Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9 (c)): The Council then met in Closed Session in Conference Room 201 to discuss the above mentioned item. IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 6,1995 AT 8:00 PM RE: CLOSED SESSION ITEM City Attorney Gary Ragghianti announced that no reportable action was taken. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: RE: COMPLAINT ABOUT DOGS - FILE 100 Dr. Altom, 175 Greenfield, San Rafael, addressed the Council and expressed his anger over pet owners who do not clean up after their pets. Dr. Altom stated he was tired of his yard being used as a toilet by the pets of inconsiderate pet owners, and asked why he should have to clean-up after these pets? He stated he would like a "pooper scooper" law in San Rafael, and would like it enforced. Mayor Boro asked Acting City Manager Golt to research the current status of this issue with animal control, and report back to the Council. RE: CONCERN ABOUT MACY'S LEAVING SAN RAFAEL AND VAGRANTS/HOMELESS IN DOWNTOWN - FILE 233 Donald Landwirth, San Rafael resident and business owner, addressed the Council, stating he was concerned after reading an article in the Marin Independent Journal reporting that Macy's was going to be moving out of the downtown location. Mr. Landwirth urged the Council to contact Macy's parent company, Federated Department Stores, to see if this action could be delayed. He stated that when other cities lose major anchor tenants, they try to work with the corporations in an attempt to maintain the tenant. Mr. Landwirth felt part of the reason for the large turnover rate in downtown San Rafael is because of the homeless in the downtown area, and because some of the merchants are allowed to have their wares strewn across the sidewalks in front of their stores, which he felt was very unsightly. Mr. Landwirth stated there is a general lack of enforcement in getting vagrants off of the street, and he felt the article regarding Macy's closure really drove home this point. Mayor Boro stated there had been another article in the Marin Independent Journal reporting on the changes that are being made by Macy's, noting the corporation that bought the Macy's chain of stores had also recently purchased the Emporium. He reported there had been great concern over what would happen at the Northgate Shopping Center, as the Emporium is a huge anchor at Northgate, and noted it has been decided that Macy's will have a full service store at that location. Therefore, from a corporate point of view, it would not make sense for Macy's to have a full -line department store two miles away from another Macy's in downtown San Rafael. Mayor Boro reported that Acting Redevelopment Executive Director Jake Ours has been in contact with Macy's corporate office in New York, and they had advised him that this was the decision they were going to make. Mayor Boro stated that although the City is sorry to see Macy's leave, in light of the SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 1 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 2 performance of that store in recent years, and with the interest that has been expressed by at least two potential developers for that location, he is confident something very positive will develop at this site. Mayor Boro stated the City had two potential vulnerabilities, one at Northgate Shopping Center and one downtown. He noted the site at Northgate was the most difficult site to contend with, and stated he is pleased that it now appears that Macy's will take over that location. Mr. Landwirth noted that in looking at other towns that have been going through major transitions, many of them have become very vibrant. In comparing San Rafael's downtown area, Mr. Landwirth stated that even well established, popular businesses, whose other locations are normally packed with customers, do not attract customers to their downtown locations. Mr. Landwirth acknowledged the corporate rationale in choosing the Northgate Mall location, but felt that if the downtown were a bustling area and the existing store had been busy, they would not have considered closing the store. RE: CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE - 11/7/95 GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION - FILE 9-4 Gayden White, resident of San Rafael, congratulated the winners of the Mayoral and City Council elections, noting they were the people's choice and wishing them the best of luck. As a concerned citizen, Mr. White stated he was available to the Council and at their service at any time that he may be of help. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Zappetini seconded, to approve the recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items: CONSENT CALENDAR RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approval of Minutes of Special Joint Approved as submitted. Workshop of July 31, 1995, Regular Meeting of Monday, November 6, 1995 and Special Meeting of Tuesday, November 14, 1995 (CC) 2. Legislation Affecting San Rafael (CM) Approved staff recommendation - File 9-1 to OPPOSE S.1357 re: making Medicare contributions mandatory for all existing uncovered employees, effective 1/1/96. 3. Resolution Authorizing New Contract with RESOLUTION NO. 9493 - RESOLUTION Insurance Consulting Associates, Inc. (ICA) AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF AN for Liability Claims Administration (CM) AGREEMENT WITH INSURANCE CONSULTING - File 4-10-184 ASSOCIATES, INC. (ICA) FOR ADMINISTRATION OF THIRD -PARTY LIABILITY CLAIMS AND FOR RISK MANAGEMENT CONSULTATION (Three year agreement from 12/1/95 through 11/30/98). 4. Monthly Investment Report (Fin) Accepted report. - File 8-18 x 8-9 6. Resolution Appointing Finance Director RESOLUTION NO. 9494 - RESOLUTION or His Designee to Represent and Appear OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL in Small Claims Court on Behalf of the AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 8161 TO City of San Rafael (Fin) APPOINT THE FINANCE DIRECTOR OR HIS - File 3-2 x 9-3-20 DESIGNEE TO REPRESENT AND APPEAR IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL. 8. Resolution Accepting Grant Deed for an RESOLUTION NO. 9495 - RESOLUTION Exclusive Roadway and Pedestrian Easement, ACCEPTING GRANT DEED FOR AN Southeast Corner of Mission Avenue and EXCLUSIVE ROADWAY AND PEDESTRIAN "B" Street, from Marin/Sonoma Investment EASEMENT FROM MARIN-SONOMA Company (PW) - File 2-5-37 x 2-2 INVESTMENT COMPANY. 9. Report on Bid Opening and Award of Contract RESOLUTION NO. 9496 - RESOLUTION OF for Clorinda Avenue Drainage Improvements AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR CLORINDA Project No. 042-4210-424-8000 (PW) AVENUE DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT - File 4-1-477 TO ALAMO ENGINEERING (Lowest responsible bidder in amount of $47,993.40). 10. Renewal of Lease Agreement with San Rafael RESOLUTION NO. 9497 - A RESOLUTION Pop Warner Football Club Re: Storage Space/ AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF AN Albert Park Stadium (Rec) - File 4-10-127 AGREEMENT WITH POP WARNER FOOTBALL CLUB FOR STORAGE SPACE IN ALBERT PARK STADIUM (from 7/1/95 through 6/30/97). SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 2 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 3 11. Approval of Street Closure for Third Approved staff recommendation. Annual Italian Street Painting Festival on June 2, 1996 and June 7 through June 9, 1996 (RA) - File 11-19 15. Request for Fee Waiver for St. Isabella's RESOLUTION NO. 9498 - RESOLUTION OFSenior Housing Project (PI)THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL WAIVING - File 115 x 10-3 x 10-5 x 10-7 PAYMENT OF FEES FOR THE ST. ISABELLA'S SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT. 16. Resolution Amending Resolution No. 9418 RESOLUTION NO. 9499 - RESOLUTION Extending the Time Frame for Planning AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 9418 Commission Review of Priority Projects EXTENDING THE TIME FRAME FOR (PI) - File 115 (PPP) PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW OF PRIORITY PROJECTS.(by April 1, 1996 Planning Staff Shall Evaluate All Applications Timely Submitted, Prepare Staff Reports and Recommendations, and Notice Planning Commission Public Hearing(s) Concerning the Same). 17. Resolutions of Appreciation for Members RESOLUTION NO. 9500 - RESOLUTION OF of the Community Contributing to the APPRECIATION TO DAVID HILLIER- Montecito/Happy Valley Neighborhood Plan: DAVIDSON FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE (PI) - File 102 x 227 MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. a. David Hillier -Davidson; b. Theresa Cox; c. Robyn Anderson of Moore lacofano Goltsman; RESOLUTION NO. 9501 - RESOLUTION OF d. Nando Llacuna; e. Lt. Dan Williams; APPRECIATION TO THERESA COX FOR f. Scott Kaplan; g.Marla Hastings; h. Jackie CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY Deane Schmidt; i. Blanche Fiesel Donaldson; VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. j.Sid Waxman; k. Vickie Hatos; I. Richard P. O'Brien. RESOLUTION NO. 9502 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO ROBYN ANDERSON OF MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. RESOLUTION NO. 9503 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO NANDO LLACUNA FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. RESOLUTION NO. 9504 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO LT. DAN WILLIAMS FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. RESOLUTION NO. 9505 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO SCOTT KAPLAN FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. RESOLUTION NO. 9506 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO MARLA HASTINGS FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. RESOLUTION NO. 9507 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO JACKIE DEANE SCHMIDT FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. RESOLUTION NO. 9508 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO BLANCHE FIESEL DONALDSON FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. RESOLUTION NO. 9509 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO SID WAXMAN FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. RESOLUTION NO. 9510 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO VICKIE HATOS FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. RESOLUTION NO. 9511 - RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO RICHARD P. O'BRIEN FOR CONTRIBUTING TO THE MONTECITO/HAPPY VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 3 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 4 18. Resolution Adopting Revised City of RESOLUTION NO. 9512 - A RESOLUTION San Rafael's Personnel Rules and OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF Regulations (Per) - File 7-2 SAN RAFAEL AMENDING RESOLUTION NO.1694 AND 5802 PERTAINING TO PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Phillips The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion: 5. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE CAL CARD CREDIT CARD PROGRAM (Fin) - File 8-13-7 X 9-3-20 Councilmember Heller stated she was pleased to see that this new program was going to be in place, and requested an estimate of the savings be presented to the Council at the beginning of the next budget cycle. She asked Mr. Coleman for the definition of a "small purchase", and also how we are getting the cards for free. Finance Director Ransom Coleman explained that a small purchase will be a maximum of $1,000, and in some cases will be a lower limit, depending upon the employee and other specific information. He stated the cards will be free, with only a charge of 1/10 of 1 % of any purchases made. Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt the Resolution to participate in the Cal Card Credit Card Program for credit purchases. RESOLUTION NO. 9513 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF AN AGREEMENT WITH ROCKY MOUNTAIN BANKCARD SYSTEM AND COLORADO NATIONAL BANK AND STATE OF CALIFORNIA (CAL CARD PROGRAM). AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Zappetini & Mayor Boro None Phillips 7. RESOLUTION EXTENDING TIME FOR COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENT WORK - THE GABLES SUBDIVISION (EXTENDED TO AND INCLUDING NOVEMBER 4, 1997) (PW) -File 5-1-321 Councilmember Zappetini stated he was abstaining from this item due to conflict of interest. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution extending time for completion of improvement work. RESOLUTION NO. 9514 - RESOLUTION EXTENDING TIME FOR THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENT WORK - THE GABLES SUBDIVISION (EXTENDED TO AND INCLUDING NOVEMBER 4,1997) (PW) AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS Cohen, Heller & Mayor Boro None Phillips Zappetini (due to conflict of interest) 12. ADDENDUM TO AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY SERVICES WITH BRIGHT STAR SECURITY, INC. (RA) - File 4-3-282 Councilmember Zappetini stated he was abstaining from this item due to conflict of interest. Councilmember Heller stated she is very pleased that the added security has reduced vandalism in this particular parking lot. However, she noted the cost of this security is very expensive, and asked how much revenue the City is generating from the use of the parking lot, and if the City is breaking even or losing money by having this extra security? Acting Redevelopment Executive Director Ours explained the income from the parking lot is over $100,000 per year, and more than pays for the cost of the extra security. Mr. Ours stated this has proven to be extremely successful, noting the usage of the lot has increased, and users have told the City they are very happy to have the security. Councilmember Cohen asked if the level of coverage provided on weekends consisted of four random drive-throughs, and Mr. Ours responded that was correct, noting this has been successful and there have not been any complaints. Mr. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 4 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 5 Ours stated the drive-throughs seem to disburse any groups of people that have begun gathering in the parking lot. Mr. Cohen stated there had been suggestions by members of the B.I.D. (Business Improvement District) that the security coverage be extended on the weekends, and he felt he would like to follow-up with the merchants and see if they have had any feedback from their customers. Mr. Cohen felt the Council might want to look at expanding the hours of security provided on the weekends. He stated lack of parking remains a recurrent complaint, and noted he believes this parking lot is under-utilized because people are often concerned about going into parking structures. After further discussion, Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to renew the contract for security services with Bright Star Security, Inc. for the Third and "A" Streets parking structure. RESOLUTION NO. 9515 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXTEND THE EXISTING AGREEMENT FOR SECURITY SERVICES FOR THE THIRD & "A" PARKING STRUCTURE WITH BRIGHT STAR SECURITY, INC. (through June 30, 1996). AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS Cohen, Heller & Mayor Boro None Phillips Zappetini (due to conflict of interest) 13. SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1687 - 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, SO AS TO RECLASSIFY CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY (RE: ZC95-4 - 4144 AND 4150 NORTH REDWOOD HIGHWAY, AP NO. 155-072-01 and -02; LUCAS VALLEY ROAD, AP NO. 165-010-89; 615 LINDARO STREET, AP NP. 13-061-49) (PI) -File 115x10 -3x10-6 Councilmember Zappetini stated he was abstaining from this item due to conflict of interest. The title of the Ordinance was read: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA ADOPTED BY REFERENCE BY SECTION 14.01.020 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, SO AS TO RECLASSIFY CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY (RE: ZC95-4 - 4144 AND 4150 NORTH REDWOOD HIGHWAY, AP NO. 155-072-01 AND -02; LUCAS VALLEY ROAD, AP NO. 165-010-89; 615 LINDARO STREET, AP NO. 13-061-49)" Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to dispense with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only and approve final adoption of Ordinance No. 1687, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS Cohen, Heller & Mayor Boro None Phillips Zappetini (due to conflict of interest) 14. LUCASFILM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) COMMENTS (PI) - File 10-7 Mayor Boro expressed his concern that the City must be strong enough with the County that we protect the potential monies that should come as mitigation, and be sure that the funds are truly used for projects that are within the City's sphere of influence. Mayor Boro stated the project was fine, but felt the potential mitigation fees should be used in the area in which there are problems, and not elsewhere in the County. Acting Redevelopment Executive Director Ours stated he would include a stronger statement in the City's comments to the County, expressing the City's views on the use of these funds. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Zappetini seconded, to approve staffs comments to the County, as amended. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: Cohen, Heller, Zappetini & Mayor Boro None Phillips 19. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTIONS OF APPRECIATION TO: SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 5 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 6 DAVID HILLIER-DAVIDSON, THERESA COX, ROBYN ANDERSON OF MOORE IACOFANO GOLTSMAN, NANDO LLACUNA, LT. DAN WILLIAMS, SCOTT KAPLAN, MARLA HASTINGS, JACKIE DEANE SCHMIDT, BLANCHE FIESEL DONALDSON, SID WAXMAN, VICKIE HATOS, RICHARD P. O'BRIEN (PI) - File 102 x 227 Mayor Boro made presentations to Theresa Cox, Scott Kaplan, Blanche Fiesel Donaldson, Sid Waxman, Vickie Hatos and Richard O'Brien, who were involved with the planning process of the Montecito/Happy Valley Neighborhood Plan, thanking them on behalf of the City for their work and dedication to this project. Resolution for Lt. Dan Williams was accepted by Elizabeth Rafferty. Those unable to attend were: David Hillier -Davidson, Robyn Anderson of Moor lacafano Goltsman, Jackie Deane Schmidt, Nando Llacuna, and Marla Hastings. Mayor Boro stated this was a very good example of our community coming together to accomplish something very positive. He recalled that in the past the City had been lobbied by the neighborhood to develop a neighborhood plan, and noted he was very proud of the work that has been done by both staff and members of the neighborhood, and the fact that they were able to come together as a community and develop the plan being presented to the Council for adoption. PUBLIC HEARING: 20. PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT TO THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE -- "ELEVATOR REQUIREMENTS IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES" (PW) - File 1-6-1 x 13-1-1 x 13-16 Mayor Boro opened the Public Hearing and asked for the staff report. Public Works Director David Bernardi stated the Council was being asked to consider an Ordinance to revise the Uniform Building Code to require the construction of an elevator at the time of construction of multiple unit dwellings dedicated to housing the elderly and the disabled, or a combination thereof. Mr. Bernardi stated this Ordinance was being proposed to accommodate the request by Mercy Charities Housing of California, sponsors of the St. Isabella's senior housing project on Trinity Way. He explained the adoption of this Ordinance was being requested to facilitate HUD financing. Mr. Bernardi stated staff had written the Ordinance with the provision that any housing project of more than eight units be provided with an elevator; however, he referred to a letter from the Ecumenical Association for Housing which states that if this were to be required, the City would essentially eliminate any low income housing in San Rafael, as the cost of an elevator in an eight unit building cannot be amortized. He noted the Ecumenical Association for Housing had recommended a minimum of fifty units, but in further conversations agreed that forty-five units would be adequate. Therefore, Mr. Bernardi stated staff is recommending a change to the proposed Ordinance from eight to forty-five units. Councilmember Zappetini noted the City is building a new fire station, which includes a cost of $22,000 for an elevator. He felt that would be a minimal investment for an eight unit apartment building that would be required to install an elevator. Mr. Bernardi responded that $22,000 was not an accurate reflection of the cost of installing an elevator, as the City had requested the contractor on the fire station to include the basic framework for the elevator, the tower and the shaft, and all of the electrical costs as part of his base bid. He noted the extra $22,000 was actually to bring in the cage, motors and cables. Mr. Bernardi stated a more accurate cost would be based on the installation of the elevator in the City's library, which was approximately $70,000. Mr. Zappetini stated the cost would be less if the elevator was installed during new construction, but felt the cost to be incurred for a forty-five unit building did not jibe. Mr. Bernardi stated he had been told the cost for installation of an elevator would be approximately $45,000 - $60,000, depending on the way it was configured. Councilmember Cohen referred to that portion of the Ordinance which states that at least one elevator shall be required in every multiple unit residential structure of eight units or more, which will be changed to read forty-five units or more, dedicated to exclusively house the elderly and disabled. He noted there was also an alternative for buildings with less than eight units, in which the Building Official may approve a substitute for an elevator. He asked if this meant that for any project meeting this description, regardless of the number of units, if the building is less than forty-five units may the Building Official approve a substitute? Mr. Bernardi responded the Building Official could approve a substitute, or not require an elevator. Mr. Cohen asked if the unit was under forty-five units, could the requirement be waived, and Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Mr. Cohen referred to Mr. Zappetini's question that if there was not a reasonable alternative, and the financial impact does not appear to be great, can the City still require an elevator for a project of less than forty-five units? Mr. Bernardi stated that as the Ordinance is currently written, it does not provide for that, as it states buildings with forty-five units or more are required to have an elevator, and with buildings less than forty-five units the Building Official may look at substitutes or waive the requirement. Mr. Bernardi pointed out that Paragraph D states that ADA requirements will still apply regardless of any waivers the City may grant, and therefore there may be situations where an elevator or second floor access may be mandatory, independent of what the City would or would not require. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 6 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 7 Councilmember Zappetini asked if forty-five units was the "magic number" for deciding if a building must have an elevator? Mr. Bernardi responded that forty-five units was the recommendation of the Ecumenical Association for Housing, which they felt would allow them to amortize the cost over a large enough number of units and still keep the units in the low income range. Mr. Bernardi reiterated that this would apply only to senior housing and disabled housing. Mayor Boro agreed with Councilmember Zappetini's concerns regarding the economics of this requirement, and stated that a forty-five unit building designated for seniors would surely be multiple stories, and that they would need elevators. It concerned him to say that the City could not require elevators for such a building. He asked what requirements for elevators were currently in place, excluding those required by the ADA. Mr. Bernardi stated that currently the City had no requirements in place. Mayor Boro asked if there had been any problems concerning this issue, and Mr. Bernardi responded that, to date, there had not been any complaints. Councilmember Heller asked if the requirement on buildings with forty-five or more units was in line with the State's CEQA (California Envirnmental Quality Act) requirement, and Mr. Bernardi explained that if a building was forty-five units or less, the issue would be considered categorically exempt under CEQA. Mayor Boro invited members of the public to address the Council regarding this issue. LaFavette Noah, 96 Elena Circle, San Rafael, addressed the Council, stating he had lived at this address for the past thirty-five years, and noting his property adjoins St. Isabella's Church. He stated he and his neighbors have been referred to as NIMBY's (Not In My Back Yard), which he felt was very unfair, as he plans to install a back gate from his yard to the church property, and will welcome new friends from the senior housing units to join him on his patio. Mr. Noah stated his concern was having a facility that everyone can be proud of. He referred to Mr. Cohen's previous statement that he wants quality work done on this project, and Mr. Noah agreed that this must be a quality building. He stated he had previously addressed the Council expressing his objections after the Design Review Board proposed changes to the original design in an attempt to cut costs, noting he was disappointed that the building will not be as originally planned. He stated he does, however, agree that the building should have an elevator. Mr. Noah stated this has been a very long process, which was begun in 1991, noting all of the CBDG (Commuinity Development Block Grant) loans have been drawn and used, and the home loans from 1991 are still being held. He reported he had wanted to ask that this hearing be postponed, as he wanted to contact HUD, but was unable to reach them. Mr. Noah stated he had wanted to look into the financing of this project, and determine the amount of funds that would be available from HUD. He noted that previously the City had been attempting to reduce the cost of this project as much as possible, but now the cost of the building will be greatly increased, with someone else paying for it. Mr. Noah stated that included in the money designated to the housing funds is a large payment for the land. He suggested that if there is not enough money, perhaps the land could be donated, as it would still be a part of the church property and one of their projects. Mr. Noah stated he is very concerned about the care that will provided, noting home care had originally been promised. He cited a letter he had received from the Marin Community Foundation which outlined the way in which they grant funds. He stated one of the criteria is that all of the various permits for the building must be obtained, and noted that the permits designated this building as a facility with home care. Mr. Noah stated the letter from Marin Community Foundation also reported that in an attempt to reduce the expenses of this project, it had been decided that there was not enough money for home care. Mr. Noah stated he would like to know the amount of money that has been set aside by HUD each year since 1991. He felt it was very important to determine if this money was being used to the best advantage, particularly if it now appears that there is not enough money to make it work. Mr. Noah stated that if the Council approved the passing of this Ordinance to print without first looking into the funding, he hoped he would have the opportunity to address the Council again when the Ordinance was presented for final adoption, as he would still attempt to obtain financial information from HUD. Mr. Noah stated he felt all buildings of this nature should be equipped with elevators, but noted when the building plans received final approval in February of this year he did not see a space or notation in the plans for an elevator. Mayor Boro stated this building will have an elevator. Mayor Boro stated a discussion regarding the financing of this project would not be appropriate during the second reading of the Ordinance, as that is not what the Council will be approving. Mayor Boro explained the Council will be addressing an Ordinance change with respect to the requirement for elevators. Mr. Noah stated that each time this issue has been discussed the plans have been changed. Mayor Boro explained that the Council was not changing the plans, only the Ordinance that identifies when elevators are required. Mr. Noah asked to be shown on the plans where the elevator is to be located. Mayor Boro responded that staff could show him that designation on the plans. Planning Director Pendoley stated that he did not have the plans with him, but would be SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 7 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 8 happy to review them with Mr. Noah tomorrow. Mr. Noah suggested perhaps the City could have another homeowners meeting, such as the picnic that was held in 1991 at which the plans for this project were originally displayed at St. Isabella's. Betty Paget, representing the Housing Council, addressed the Council. She stated the Housing Council would like to see this kind of clause added to the Uniform Building Code; however, they join with the Ecumenical Association for Housing and Mercy Charities Housing in suggesting that eight units is too low a threshold. She stated this did not mean that smaller buildings might not have an elevator, noting the Lincoln Avenue Apartments, a seven unit building for seniors and the disabled, is equipped with an elevator. Ms. Paget stated the real issue is the requirement, and how that changes the planning, noting a higher threshold makes it easier in terms of requirements. She explained the number of forty-five units was arrived at not by looking at the financing, but by looking at CEQA law, and she noted that California law states forty-five units. Again, she stated this did not mean that smaller buildings serving that specific population would not have elevators, it would just be a matter of what the law requires, and putting together the financing to achieve it. Mayor Boro stated that he felt if there were a two or three story building with forty-five people living there, it would not be practical if an elevator were not installed. Ms. Paget agreed, although she noted HUD would not accept applications for funding on buildings of less than forty units. Ms. Paget noted that in most cases the buildings designated for seniors would not be small buildings, and any time seniors were living on second or third floors, there would need to be an elevator. Mayor Boro stated he was trying to justify tying this project to the CEQA and HUD funding requirements versus what is real and practical. Ms. Paget stated that adopting this Ordinance would assist them in competitive applications for funding. Councilmember Zappetini asked if he was correct that HUD does not actually fund, they underwrite the funding? He stated it was his understanding that when using HUD guidelines, a representative does an analysis of the property and an appraisal, then charges for the appraisal, charges a three stage fee, underwrites the amount of the loan, and then with that underwriting the borrower can go to one of HUD's lenders, because HUD secures the loan. Ms. Paget stated that there were several different types of funding programs, and they are constantly changing. She felt the real issue was being able to develop a law that is flexible and yet puts the City in the position of having safe housing. She stated the Housing Council was suggesting that this Ordinance would be a good addition, but noted if the threshold is too low, it might hamper what is actually possible. Merle Malakoff, Project Coordinator for Mercy Charities Housing, addressed the Council, encouraging the Council to adopt the proposed Ordinance, and stating this was important public policy. He felt that particularly in an era of heightened awareness of mobility impairments and other disabilities, as well as the aging of our population, providing housing that is multi -story but does not provide mechanical conveyance to upper level units is not appropriate, noting it is certainly appropriate for the City to require the elevator. Mayor Boro asked Mr. Malakoff if he could respond to Mr. Zappetini's questions regarding HUD funding. Mr. Malakoff responded that Mr. Zappetini was correct, with the single exception of the HUD 202 Program, which is the program that is funding the St. Isabella's project. He stated this was the last remaining HUD program that directly funds capital improvements, explaining that the site will be acquired simultaneously with the closing, and HUD will then set up a construction account and the United States Treasury will disburse funds for the construction. Mr. Malakoff noted Mr. Zappetini was correct that most of the other HUD programs are basically insurance programs, which provide affordable housing by offering reduced mortgage rates. He stated that the HUD 202 and 2-811 Programs, which fund housing for the elderly and the disabled, are the last programs that directly finance the development of affordable housing. Elissa Giambastiani, Executive Director of the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Council, stating that when she had been asked to review this legislation to determine whether or not the Chamber of Commerce would be in support of the Ordinance, she was initially concerned about the eight unit requirement. She stated she felt it might be prohibitive to include a requirement that was too low, because it might discourage the conversion of smaller properties to senior housing if the owner was required to comply with this Ordinance. Ms. Giambastiani stated she felt the City was giving an assist to the development of affordable housing for seniors, and that after the length of time that the St. Isabella's project was on hold and the amount of money that needed to be spent on the lengthy litigation, she believed they deserved to get this kind of assistance from the City in order to qualify for funding from HUD for the elevator. Ms. Giambastiani felt that keeping the requirement at forty-five units was a good idea because the City would not be interfering with anything that might transpire at a lower level of development. There being no further public comment, Mayor Boro closed the Public Hearing. Councilmember Cohen felt the Council needed to be careful in attempting to solve a problem that they did not even know existed until this Ordinance was presented, noting there is no requirement that any project of this nature have an SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 8 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 9 elevator. He stated he was comfortable with setting the number at forty-five units for this requirement, and felt there were a couple of possibilities if the City wanted to address buildings with fewer units. First, he stated the City could include an exception in Paragraph C of the Ordinance addressing financial hardship, which would allow a waiver for smaller projects, or the City could amend Paragraph C to change the wording of the requirement. Mr. Cohen stated it was not clear to him why the requirement states that if the building is under forty-five units an elevator is not required, yet then states that a building official may approve a substitute. He felt there was no need in making that statement if there was no requirement at all. Mr. Cohen suggested including in Paragraph C the statement "For projects meeting the requirements of Subsections (a) and (b) containing less than forty-five dwelling units the building official may require an elevator, unless it is demonstrated that an alternative means of accessibility is provided to the elderly and persons with disabilities." He stated this would leave an option for the City to require an elevator if there was a smaller project where an elevator clearly should be provided. Mr. Cohen felt this was a solution for a problem that did not really exist, noting the City has found that the people putting together these types of projects have been doing their best to make them accessible. Councilmember Heller stated she felt this would be a good solution. She agreed it was important public policy to require provisions of this type, noting that the amount of available land will become smaller and smaller, and with in -fill the City may be facing more of these types of projects in the future where the building may be less than forty-five units and the owner does not want to install an elevator. She felt that if the City could enact this Ordinance now, it would be a good way to take care of future problems. Mayor Boro clarified that what was being suggested was a requirement on buildings with forty-five units or more, and the option, at the discretion of the building official, to make a conscious decision not to have an elevator in buildings of less than forty-five units if the alternatives being offered were sufficient, and if the alternatives were not sufficient, an elevator could be required. Councilmember Zappetini stated he could not rationalize someone building more than ten or fifteen units without having an elevator. Councilmember Cohen agreed that it was unlikely that situation would arise. Councilmember Cohen suggested the following statement to modify Paragraph C: "Alternatives (Less Than Forty -Five Units . For projects meeting the requirements of Subsections (a) and (b) containing less than forty-five dwelling units, the Building Official may require an elevator under this Subsection unless it is demonstrated that a suitable alternative means of accessibility above the first floor is provided to the elderly and persons with disabilities." Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution of Findings pursuant to Health and Safety Code Sections 17958.5 and 17958.7 relative to the adoption of an amendment to Title 12 of the Municipal Code of the City of San Rafael. RESOLUTION NO. 9516 - RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTIONS 17958.5 AND 17958.7 RELATIVE TO THE ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO TITLE 12 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.12 "UNIFORM BUILDING CODE (1991 ED.) BY ADDING SECTION 5109 - "ELEVATOR REQUIREMENTS IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES." AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: The title of the Ordinance was read: Cohen, Heller, Zappetini & Mayor Boro None Phillips "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING TITLE 12 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF SAN RAFAEL BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.12 "UNIFORM BUILDING CODE (1991 ED.) BY ADDING SECTION 5109 -- "ELEVATOR REQUIREMENT IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES." Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Zappetini seconded, to dispense with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only and pass Charter Ordinance No. 1688 to print, as amended, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Phillips SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 9 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 10 NEW BUSINESS 21. INTRODUCTION OF MONTECITO NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN (PI) - File 227 Planning Director Pendoley reported the City's goals at the beginning of this process had been to develop an action oriented plan, offering a process in which the neighbors would find values they shared in common, and enable them to turn those values into an agenda for their future. He stated the City hoped to offer a process that would be community building, and noted they had wanted the first phase of the process, which was the completion of the neighborhood plan, to be completed within six months. Mr. Pendoley reported these goals have been accomplished, noting the City feels this process has been a model in partnership between the City and neighborhood residents. Mr. Pendoley acknowledged that there were many people who deserved special thanks for their participation in this project, particularly the residents of the Montecito Neighborhood who were willing to take a chance with the City and give so much of their time to this project. Mr. Pendoley especially wanted to commend the outstanding services of the firm of Moore lacofano Goltsman, who were the project consultants, particularly acknowledging the work done by Robyn Anderson. Mr. Pendoley reported that Ms. Anderson had developed the citizen participation process, and did the facilitation work for almost all of the planning meetings. He felt this project would not have been the success that it is without Ms. Anderson's guidance and hands-on involvement. Mr. Pendoley explained that citizen participation processes involving large groups, such as this project, require special knowledge and expertise if neighbors are to be enabled to articulate their aspirations and turn them into a vision. He stated that Moore lacofano Goltsman and Ms. Anderson had been particularly skilled at all aspects of this process, noting they had been very innovative in providing techniques for problem solving and opening up communication, and provided a safe environment for people to share their differences and negotiate their way to consensus. Mr. Pendoley stated Ms. Anderson had been especially instrumental in making this project work, with her special insight and genuine concern for people and their need to be heard. Mr. Pendoley felt the aspirations of Montecito/Happy Valley would not have come together as they have without the special talents of Robyn Anderson and the entire team at lacofano Moore Goldsman, noting it would be difficult to overstate the importance of the expert facilitators and process designers when involved in a large participation process such as this. Mr. Pendoley extended special thanks to planners Jean Hasser and Linda Jackson, noting they are always anxious to try something new, and brought their usual commitment to excellent to this project. He stated they had done an extraordinary job providing user friendly background reports and other support to the many neighborhood meetings over the past six months. Mr. Pendoley felt the plan document itself was a model of clarity and craftsmanship, thanks to their efforts, and noted, as always, it was a pleasure to work with these professionals. Sid Waxman, participant in the Montecito/Happy Valley Neighborhood Plan, addressed the Council, noting it was very refreshing to see a government that is truly part of the community. He noted the Planning Department, Police and Fire Departments, and Public Works Department all are emblematic of a Civil Service that sees the public as a clientele as opposed to a problem. Mr. Waxman presented an overview of the vision addressed in the Montecito/Happy Valley Neighborhood Plan, noting this is how they see their neighborhood in the year 2010. Mr. Waxman stated the vision defined goals for the neighborhood's appearance, diversity, safety and security. He noted that defining the vision was the groundwork for everything that followed on the project. Mr. Waxman reported that the project was divided into small parts that would be recognizable and would capture the interest of various segments of the community, such as beautification, community safety, land use, traffic and parking. He stated separate meetings were held, first to identify the issues and the principles to be used to guide them, and then to define which actions could be taken by the City and which actions they could take as a community. Mr. Waxman stated that once the actions and activities to be taken were identified, the priorities were set. Mr. Waxman reported the written plan was reviewed and developed into a formal document, which was presented to the members of the community on October 25th, when they made their commitment to the vision and to the plan. Mr. Waxman reported on the plan's issue of beautification, stating the vision identifies the community as beautiful, architecturally diverse, tree shaded, clean and attractive. He noted they envisioned neighborhood pride, pride in the way the neighborhood looked, as well as being pedestrian oriented. Scott Kaplan, participant in the Montecito/Happy Valley Neighborhood Plan, addressed the Council, stating he was pleased to be presenting the land use plan of the program. He stated he was pleased because, in spite of Bob Pendoley's warning that the land use section of the plan would have to be written in technical language, it is readily comprehensible. He stated he was also pleased to be presenting a plan that balances a neighborhood that was built in the 1930's, expanded in the 1950's, re -zoned in the 1980's, and still manages to balance all of that with the vision for the next century. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 10 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Pagel l Mr. Kaplan stated the plan features a zoning approach that protects and expands single family uses, preserves the commercial areas, and keeps high density land use while better reflecting parking regulations, height limitations and landscape guidelines. Mr. Kaplan noted that, conspicuous by its absence in the land use section of the plan, is a lengthy list of neighborhood actions. He stated this sounded too good to be true to those in the community, and noted perhaps it was. As an example, he cited what he felt was a weathermark decision in this process, in the development of a recommendation for the 1.8 acre surplus school district property at Fourth and Union Streets. Mr. Kaplan stated this turned out to be an exercise in participatory democracy; participatory because it involved representatives from the Redevelopment Agency, School Board Officials, Planning Department members, Planning Commission members, and widely divergent viewpoints from the neighborhood; democratic because the recommendation they arrived at certainly did not fit into anyone's criteria for an ideal use of the site, but it was a recommendation that an overwhelming majority of the parties involved could live with. He felt this pointed out the unwritten neighborhood action, that citizen participation is necessary at the Design Review Board, the Planning Commission, at City Council and at the Neighborhood Associations. Vickie Hatos, participant in the Montecito/Happy Valley Neighborhood Plan, addressed the Council and presented that portion of the plan relating to traffic, safety and parking, and also the section on the community. Ms. Hatos reported people in the community wanted to feel safe and secure from crime, fire, and natural disasters, noting this was one of the guiding principles that was developed in their meetings. She stated several City and neighborhood actions have been listed in the plan, such as the City adding street lights and working on a drainage plan, and the neighborhood developing a disaster plan. She noted a sub -committee of the Neighborhood Association has already been formed and begun work on this item. Ms. Hatos stated they plan on improving the lighting in the area around the street lights by having the neighbors work together to trim the trees around the lights. Regarding traffic, Ms. Hatos reported they are looking at City actions for the development of a plan for sidewalks and paths, and to adopt many of the traffic improvement policies listed in the neighborhood plan. She stated the plan also includes an "I Drive 25" campaign, which they are modeling after a similar campaign being conducted by the Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association. Ms. Hatos stated the guiding principle in regard to the community section of the plan was to work together as a community, and she reported there have already been several community affairs. She stated the community has begun working on the landscaping of the neighborhood, including the re -landscaping at the Head Start Center beginning December 9th, at which time they will be planting four or five new trees. Ms. Hatos thanked the City, particularly Mr. Pendoley and his staff, for all of the work that they have done on this project. She stated it felt as though it was a long time since the project started six months ago, but noted the time went quickly and everyone has really enjoyed the work that they have all done together. Mayor Boro stated that in the planning process, six months is not a very long time. He felt that to have gone as far as they have, and to have produced a document such as this that everyone could agree to, is a tremendous accomplishment on behalf of the neighbors and City staff. Mayor Boro felt this showed the environment in which this project had been set up, and the neighbors' willingness to get in and get involved had really paid off. He referred to the interviews that were held last week to find someone to fill the position of overseeing a Volunteer Program. He noted there had been three members of the community on the interview committee, causing him to comment to Councilmember Cohen that the City had come a long way when there are citizens interviewing applicants. Mayor Boro stated this project has shown that the City has taken another big step by going through the vision process, taking it to a particular neighborhood, and having the neighborhood become involved and develop their own plan to present to the Council. Mayor Boro felt they had all done a tremendous job, thanking them on behalf of the City and congratulating them on a job well done. Councilmember Cohen stated this was an example of everyone working together to make the City a great place, by keeping the good things and improving the things that need improving. He noted he has expectations, and looks forward to seeing the members of the neighborhood at future Council meetings, and welcomes their participation. Councilmember Zappetini felt the participants in this project had set an excellent example for the rest of the community, noting he hoped some of the other neighborhood groups follow their example. Councilmember Heller complimented Planning Director Pendoley and his staff for their work on this project. She noted she had enjoyed meeting the people in the neighborhood and watching them come together and look at their neighborhood in a different light as they learned to understand the limitations and opportunities that were available to them from the City. She asked them to continue to be there, and stated the City would continue to be there for them. Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Zappetini seconded, to accept the Montecito/Happy Valley Neighborhood Plan and forward it to the Planning Commission for formal public review. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Zappetini & Mayor Boro SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 11 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 12 NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Phillips 22. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS: a. RE: CITY MANAGER RECRUITMENT PROCESS - FILE 9-3-11 X 9-1 Councilmember Cohen stated he and Mayor Boro had been serving as the sub -committee working on selecting a recruitment firm. He reported Personnel Director Daryl Chandler had identified twelve firms that work in California and specialize in this area, noting RFP's (Requests for Proposals) had been sent out, and eight responses were received. Mr. Cohen stated it was the sub -committee's recommendation to review the applications and choose three applicants to be interviewed by the Council. Mr. Cohen felt it was important for everyone on the Council to feel comfortable with the firm that is selected, as the interplay between the consultant and the Council is going to be critical in making this crucial decision now facing the City. He felt it was important to establish this relationship, and noted that each of the applicants' proposals had expressed their intent to interview each member of the Council to get a clear sense from the Council as to our intent and exactly what we are looking for in a City Manager. Mr. Cohen stated it is the sub -committee's intent to bring back recommendations for the three finalists at the first Council meeting in December, and then conduct the three final interviews at the second Council meeting in December, beginning at approximately 5:00 PM and spending half an hour with each consultant. He noted he hoped the Council would be able to make a decision at that time, and then immediately begin the recruitment process. Councilmember Heller stated the timing sounded good, and felt the process should work well. Councilmember Cohen stated one of his concerns was how to open up this process and find appropriate ways to encourage community involvement, but he noted the Councilmembers must remember that they are the ones who will ultimately make the final decision, as the City Manager works directly for the Council and that relationship is a very important one. He stated one of the key elements is to define exactly what it is the Council is looking for in an ideal candidate, defining the characteristics the Council seeks. He suggested the Council might want to seek community involvement in answering this question, prior to asking the consultant to begin their search for the candidates. Mr. Cohen noted that all of the firms had indicated they would be prepared to begin the recruitment process immediately upon signing the contract with the City, and suggested the Councilmembers might want to begin spending a little time during the next couple of weeks thinking about what they would like to see in terms of community participation in this process. Councilmember Zappetini asked if Mr. Cohen was suggesting the Council would hire a professional recruitment firm, who will recommend certain criteria, then also ask the public to recommend more criteria? Mr. Cohen responded that all of the consulting firms had stated that they are not the ones to be setting the criteria, they would be told what the Council wants and then begin the recruitment process in a way that they feel will have the most chance of finding a candidate to meet the Council's description of the type of candidate they are looking for. Mr. Cohen explained the Council can set whatever standards they want, but noted he was not interested only in the candidates' qualifications, but more the type of person the Council is looking for and what qualities and abilities the Council expects the candidate to bring to the job. Mr. Cohen reported the recruitment firms all stated that, if chosen, they would want to interview the Councilmembers and anyone else the Council directs them to interview, in order to get a sense of the type of person they should be looking for in this recruitment process. Mayor Boro stated that when addressing the issue of having the community involved in the recruitment process, this should also include the City's employee body as well, because the employees will certainly be affected by the choice of a City Manager. He stated he plans to tell the consultant that he would like some type of process involving input from the community, including the employee body, as to the characteristics that a City Manager should have and what the ideal City Manager type would be. He would then look to the consultant to tell the Council how they would implement this type of involvement. Mayor Boro stated that ultimately, the Councilmembers were the ones who would be making the final decision. He noted it will be interesting to interview the three finalists, but he also realizes there is much work to be done upfront, prior to the actual selection of the three finalists to be interviewed. Acting City Manager Suzanne Golt stated the consultant the Council chooses to work with will make recommendations as to basic standards, such as education and experience. However, she noted the key will be identifying what the Council is looking for in terms of a City Manager, and she felt the consultants would be able to help the Council in this area. She reported that she had ordered a publication for the Council, distributed by the League of California Cities, which discusses recruiting for a City Manager, some of the pros and cons of using an in-house personnel department versus a consultant, identifying internal and external candidates, and how to decide what to look for in a candidate. Councilmember Heller stated that in thinking about the criteria, she felt that when the process is completed, the Council will find that the entire criteria has been set by the community rather than their own expectations, noting the members of the SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 12 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 13 community will likely make suggestions that the Councilmembers had not thought of. Her concern was how the process of involving the community would be accomplished. Mayor Boro stated this was a question the Council would be asking the consultants during the interview process, to determine how they have handled community involvement in the past, and how it could be implemented in this case. Councilmember Cohen stated he did not have a clear vision as to how he expected the process to work; however, he felt the Councilmembers needed to think about how they wanted this process to be accomplished and not rely only on the consultant to tell the Council how to do it. Mr. Cohen stated one suggestion might be inviting groups the Council felt were important, such as the employee groups, to attend a workshop with the consultants to discuss the characteristics the Council should look for in a City Manager. b. RE: ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS GENERAL ASSEMBLY ON NOVEMBER 9, 1995 - FILE 111 Councilmember Heller reported she had attended the Association of Bay Area Governments General Assembly on November 9th, stating they discussed an analysis of Proposition 62, the recent Supreme Court decision on voter approval on general taxes, and the implications for local government finances. She stated they reviewed the recommendations from the California Constitutional Revision Commission, which she felt would have a very large impact on the cities and counties, particularly regarding the concept of community charters. She stated a summary of the Commission's recommended proposals for changes to the State Constitution will be sent to the Councilmembers on Friday. c. RE: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM - FILE 147 Councilmember Heller reported there will be a meeting of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Priorities Setting Committee on Wednesday, December 13, 1995, noting that at this meeting they will be focusing on the funding criteria and project priorities for the allocation of these community funds. She stated that last year $347,939 in funds were made available to the San Rafael Planning Area, noting $20,000 of that went to St. Isabella's, which shows that this program impacts the City in a very positive way. She asked the Councilmembers to give her any suggestions they may have for setting priorities. d. RE: CITY COUNCIL/MANAGEMENT TEAM RETREAT -FILE 9-1 Mayor Boro referred to the retreat held last April, which was attended by the Councilmembers and the department heads, and reported he and Acting City Manager Golt had spoken with facilitator Marilyn Snider in regard to planning another retreat. He stated they felt that rather than just have a get-together where everyone sat around and discussed goals, it would be worthwhile to have a serious strategic planning session, and to invite someone like Ms. Snider to actually lead the Council and department heads through this type of session. Mayor Boro stated that such a session would involve meeting the first day to hear presentations from the department heads and input from the Council, collectively reach a decision as far as identifying goals and objectives, and then at the end of the day the participants would be given a document summarizing the day's discussions, which they would take home for review. He stated the participants would meet again the next morning, after reviewing and thinking about the issues that had been discussed the previous day, to reaffirm the suggestions that had been made, and also to establish a process for periodic review and follow-up by the Council and staff of the goals and priorities that have been established. Mayor Boro stated he hopes to have the retreat during the second week of January, and he will contact everyone to work out the specific date. He noted that everyone had agreed that it would be useful to have such retreats twice a year, and he felt the timing was good to have the next meeting in January, as it would set the objectives for the next fiscal year, noting that when Ms. Golt is preparing the budget she will know those areas where emphasis is being placed. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:40 PM. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk APPROVED THIS DAY OF MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL 1995 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/20/95 Page 13