HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1997-06-02SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 1
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, JUNE 2, 1997 AT 8:10 PM
Regular Meeting: Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor
San Rafael City Council Barbara Heller,
Councilmember
Cyr N. Miller, Councilmember
Gary O. Phillips, Councilmember
Absent: Paul M. Cohen (through Agenda Item #12)
Also Present: Rod Gould, City Manager
Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk
CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 PM
1. 0 Conference with Labor Negotiator (Government Code Section 54957.6)
Negotiators: Daryl Chandler/Suzanne Golt/Kenneth Nordhoff
Mayor Boro announced Council met in Closed Session to discuss labor negotiations,
and gave instructions to the labor negotiators.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: 8:00 PM
MARIN MEDIATION SERVICES - File 102 X 240 (Verbal)
Eleanor Spader, Coordinator of Mediation Services for the County of Marin, and Rosa
Maria Hayden, Bilingual Volunteer, thanked the Council for the City's support in
the Canal area. Ms. Spader noted that for some time there have been severe
habitability problems in the Canal, and she particularly thanked City Manager Rod
Gould for hearing her concerns about what was happening in the Canal. She noted
she has been working closely with two of the City's new Code Enforcement Officers,
and thanked Council for passing the new Code Enforcement regulations. Ms. Spader
and Ms. Hayden presented a rose to each of the Councilmembers and to City Manager
Gould.
NORTH SAN RAFAEL VISION - File 238 x 9-3-17 x 10-2 (Verbal)
Francis Nunez, Vice President of the Santa Venetia Neighborhood Association, thanked
Council for funding the North San Rafael Vision process. She reported two of the
three major Land Use opportunity sites involved in the process are located in
residential areas, noting Santa Venetia and the three incorporated neighborhoods
near the airport had been involved in this process from the beginning, as a partner
group, and were able to adequately communicate their vision for the site; however,
the neighborhoods adjacent to the seventeen acre P . G . & E. site had no idea the Land
Use designation was going to be changed. She stated a few of them found out at
the eleventh hour, and managed to attend the second workshop, but there was very
little time or opportunity to discuss any site in depth, because there were twenty
sites on the grid. Ms. Nunez noted there was a lot of frustration on the part of
the community because of this, and urged Council to hold another public meeting
regarding the P.G.& E. site, so the community most familiar with and most impacted
by the site can provide their visions, their concerns, and their insights, noting
it would help to maintain the integrity of the process in the eyes of the public.
Dil Kazzaz, resident of San Rafael Meadows, stated he lived near the P.G.& E. site,
and was very concerned about the speedy process and the possible change to the General
Plan, without the residents' participation. He stated the General Plan discusses
the lack of recreational areas in his neighborhood, noting the areas north of his
neighborhood have plenty of recreational areas, and even more money is going to
be appropriated for them. Citing the General Plan, Mr. Kazzaz reported there are
no public recreation facilities within the neighborhood to serve the 1,800 residents,
and noted the General Plan refers to the neighborhood as being "Unserved population".
He asked that the residents of these neighborhoods be included in any further
discussions regarding a change to the General Plan concerning the zoning of this
public parcel.
Blair Judson, newly elected President of the Los Ranchitos Home Improvement
Committee, stated the members of her community were also concerned about the P.G.
& E. site currently up for sale. She pointed out there were already areas of high
density housing along Lincoln Avenue, but limited space for public gatherings, noting
the gathering places that are available must be reached by crossing under Highway
101, and it was very unsafe. She referred to Code 851 of the Public Utilities
Commission, which states that in order to transfer title of that piece of property
the PUC would need to have general consensus.
Jay Morse, resident of the San Rafael Meadows community, stated the residents had
only found out at the eleventh hour about the proposed General Plan changes, and
they are seeking a temporary halt to the process of changing the designation of
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 1
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 2
this property so that another community meeting can be held, and input from the
residents can be obtained. Mr. Morse noted such a meeting had been discussed at
the March 27th Vision Process at Terra Linda High School, but they had not had any
further word that a meeting was to be
held. He stated such a meeting should take place so those who live in the area
and may be impacted by flooding conditions, traffic changes, and the need for
recreation facilities will have an opportunity to find out more about those issues,
and to make their voices heard. He stated they would like to see such a meeting
take place before the Planning Department sends a recommendation to the Land Use
Sub -committee.
Mayor Boro reported a meeting of the North San Rafael Vision Steering Committee
would be held on Thursday, June 5th, at 5:00 PM at Terra Linda High School, pointing
out that what is happening with the Vision process right now is only the beginning
of what will ultimately happen, not the end. He stated there would be many more
public hearings at the Planning Commission and City Council before the Vision is
adopted. He stated the residents' concerns and interest were important, and urged
them to attend future meetings. Planning Director Robert Pendoley reported the
Land Use Sub -committee had a meeting scheduled for June 3rd, beginning at 4:30 PM
in the Public Works Conference Room, and noted that when the Vision Steering Committee
meets on June 5th they will be discussing their schedule, which they have agreed
to extend to allow for more citizen input, including another community meeting,
probably to be held in July.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to approve the
following Consent Calendar items:
ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION
2. Call for Applications to Fill Two Four-year Terms Approved staff
recommendation:
on the Design Review Board, Due to Expiration of a) Called for applications to
Terms of Richard H. Olmsted, Architect, and Peder fill two, four-year terms on
Pedersen, Landscape Architect (CC) the Design Review Board, due
- File 9-2-39 to expiration of terms of Richard
H. Olmsted, Architect, and Peder Pedersen, Landscape Architect; b) Set deadline
for filing applications Tuesday, June 24, 1997 at 12:00 Noon in the City Clerk's
Office, and set date for interviews of applicants at a Special City Council meeting
to be held on Monday, July 7, 1997, commencing at 6:30 PM, to fill two, four-year
terms to the end of June, 2001.
3. Call for Applications to Fill Two Four-year Terms Approved staff
recommendation:
on the Planning Commission, Due to Expiration of a) Called for applications to
Terms of Richard O'Brien and John Starkweather (CC) fill two, four-year terms on
- File 9-2-6 the Planning Commission, due to
expiration of terms of Richard O'Brien and John Starkweather; b) Set deadline
for filing applications Tuesday, June 24, 1997 at 12:00 Noon in the City Clerk's
Office, and set date for interviews of applicants at a Special City Council meeting
to be held on Monday, July 7, 1997, commencing at 6:30 PM, to fill two, four-year
terms to the end of June, 2001.
5. Resolution Authorizing Execution of the RESOLUTION NO. 9853 -
Maintenance Agreement Between Tarrant & Bell RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
Properties and the City of San Rafael and CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
Accepting the Extension of Professional OF SAN RAFAEL TO EXECUTE
Center Parkway (PW) - File 4-10-301 x 2-2 THE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
TARRANT & BELL PROPERTIES AND THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, AND TO ACCEPT THE EXTENSION
OF PROFESSIONAL CENTER PARKWAY - NORTHVIEW SUBDIVISION.
6. Resolution of Appreciation to Jeff Blackwell, RESOLUTION NO. 9854 -
Superintendent of San Rafael City Schools (CM) RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION
TO
- File 102 x 9-2-1 JEFF BLACKWELL, SUPERINTENDENT OF
SAN RAFAEL CITY SCHOOLS.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
8. Memorandum of Understanding - Marin RESOLUTION NO. 9855 -
Operational Area, Re: Emergency Services (FD) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
- File 4-13-99 x 13-11 x 9-3-31 CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN
AGREEMENT (MOU) WITH COUNTY OF MARIN OPERATIONAL AREA TO PROVIDE EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT SERVICES.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 2
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 3
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen
The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for further discussion:
7. a. RESOLUTION DENYING APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION OF FEBRUARY 11, 1997,
RE: ED96-67, ENVIRONMENTAL AND DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATION
(PANEL ANTENNAS FOR GROUND EQUIPMENT) AT 1 WELLBROCK HEIGHTS, SAN RAFAEL, CA;
APN 175-606-56; ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, OWNER: WHALEN & CO.,
REPRESENTATIVES; ALEIDA HELLE, ROSALIND KATZ, CAROL RUSSELL, ET AL., APPELLANTS
(P1) - File 10-5 x 10-7
AND
b. RESOLUTION DENYING APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION OF APRIL 15, 1997,
APPROVING USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES AT
ALDERSGATE CHURCH, 1 WELLBROCK HEIGHTS, SAN RAFAEL, CA; APN 175-606-56; ALDERSGATE
UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, OWNER; WHALEN & CO., REPRESENTATIVES; ALEIDA HELLE,
ROSALIND KATZ, CAROL RUSSELL, ET AL., APPELLANTS (P1) - File 10-5 x 10-7
Carol Russell, 5 Wellbrock Heights, addressed the Council on behalf of the Terra
Linda Neighbors United, stating they had come to report that, contrary to what
has been claimed, Sprint itself may not support the placement of its antennas
at the base of a cross on a church in a residential neighborhood, where a restriction
has been firmly in place for many years. Ms. Russell stated they knew this through
conversations the last few days with Sprint's Executive Headquarters in Kentucky.
She reported Sprint clearly indicated the possibility that their outsource,
Whalen & Company, may not be carrying out the official policy of Sprint.
Ms.
Russell stated the Terra Linda Neighbors United believed they had finally cut
through all the bureaucracy and confusion, to be able to initiate an in-depth
review of this project, carried out in its name by Sprint's top executives, their
lawyers, and by their public relations officials. In light of this, and in light
of what they knew would be escalating dire publicity, media coverage, and public
consternation surrounding the possible approval of the commercialization of the
church site, the Terra Linda Neighbors United asked that Council exercise its
judgment and power merely to call a moratorium, a cooling -off period, prior to
a final vote, at least until Sprint is able to clear the air by expressing its
official policy, and until each of the stakeholders, Mayor Boro, the City Council
members, Whalen & Company, the City Attorney's Office, and Aldersgate Church,
have a chance to decide once and for all where each wants to be in this looming
public relations disaster.
In addition, Ms. Russell stated it had come to their attention that the City Council
never saw their original petition, signed by sixty families, nor did they see
the appeal signed by eighty families. Therefore, she felt they may not have known
the full depth and extent of the neighborhood feeling. She urged the Council
to consider a cooling -off period.
Mayor Boro asked for the City Attorney's opinion on a request for a moratorium on
an item that was before Council for final adoption. City Attorney Ragghianti
noted the Public Hearing was closed, the vote had been taken, and there was now
a Resolution before Council for action. He stated if Council did not wish to
act upon the Resolution it had that right; however, the request for moratorium
was an entirely different matter. Mayor Boro noted his question came because
there had been a representation that one part of Sprint did not know what the
other was doing. Mr. Ragghianti stated the time for the presentation of
information and evidence has been concluded, noting the Code of Civil Procedure
provides for notice and an opportunity to be heard, and this had been done at
the Planning Commission and on appeal before the Council. Therefore, the fact
that new information has, arguably, been discovered does not mean Council ought
not to vote on the Resolution before them, and while Council has the right to
continue the issue if they wish, it is another matter to get the information that
has been referred to into the record. Mr. Ragghianti stated there were only two
exceptions contained in the Code of Civil Procedure to allow such information
into the record: One is if it could not, with the use of reasonable diligence,
have been discovered before; and the other is if it was offered during the Public
Hearing and denied admission into the record. Mr. Ragghianti stated if neither
of those instances apply in this case, he would urge Council to adopt the
Resolution.
Councilmember Heller asked if this was now a matter between Sprint, Whalen & Company,
and the church? Mr. Ragghianti stated he supposed it was, but the matter before
Council has nothing to do with whether it is between Whalen, Sprint, and the church,
the matter before the Council has to do with the procedural event, namely the
adoption of a Resolution that memorializes action that was taken the last time
Council met.
Mayor Boro noted if Sprint wishes to change its mind, and they already have approval,
they certainly do not have to exercise what they have been given, and Mr. Ragghianti
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 3
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 4
stated that was absolutely correct.
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution
denying appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a Use Permit Amendment
to allow installation of wireless communications facilities at 1 Wellbrock
Heights.
a. RESOLUTION NO. 9856 - RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES, 1 WELLBROCK HEIGHTS, AP 175-606-56.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Phillips
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen
Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to adopt the Resolution
denying the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a Design Review Permit
for installation of wireless communications facilities at 1 Wellbrock Heights.
b. RESOLUTION NO. 9857 - RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF A DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT FOR INSTALLATION OF WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES, 1 WELLBROCK HEIGHTS,
AP 175-606-56.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller, Miller & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Phillips
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen
4. REPORT ON BID OPENING AND AWARD OF CONTRACT RE: SECOND, THIRD, AND "A" STREET
UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS, PROJECT NO. 912-9012-8809 TO GHILOTTI
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,825,434 (BID OPENING HELD ON
TUESDAY, MAY 20, 1997) (PW) - File 4-1-488 x 11-7 x 12-18-13
Councilmember Miller asked why the re -bid on this project was higher than the original
bid had been? Public Works Director Bernardi reported there had been two items
in the original bidding that were inaccurate. He reported the first error was
a quantity which should have been listed as approximately 57,000 lineal feet of
plastic pipe that the wires are to go inside of, but this was listed as 14,000
lineal feet on the original bid sheet, and that made a difference in the price.
He noted the second issue was the language in the specifications referring to
the requirement to test and deal with the excavated material that comes out of
the trench. He stated staff felt the language in the original bid material was
too loose, and tightened up the specifications and the language so the City would
be able to control who had responsibility for dealing with the excavated material.
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to adopt the
Resolution awarding the contract to Ghilotti Construction Company in the amount
of $2,825,434.
RESOLUTION NO. 9858 -RESOLUTION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR SECOND, THIRD, AND "A"
STREETS UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS TO GHILOTTI CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY (Lowest Responsible Bidder, in amount of $2,825,434).
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen
SPECIAL PRESENTATION:
9. INTRODUCTION OF DAVID GUIGNI AND JOHN KATELEY, NEWLY -HIRED POLICE OFFICERS
(PD)
- File 9-3-30
San Rafael Police Captain Tom Boyd introduced newly appointed Police Officer Dave
Guigni. Captain Boyd reported Officer Guigni was a 1996 graduate of the Napa
Valley Police Academy, and had spent the past two years as a Paramedic and a seasonal
Firefighter.
Captain Boyd introduced John Kateley, also newly appointed to the Police Department,
noting Officer Kateley had graduated from the Santa Rosa Police Academy in 1996,
having run his own business as a General Contractor for the past ten years.
PUBLIC HEARING:
10. PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL FOR RELIEF FROM THE BUILDING OFFICIAL'S ENFORCEMENT
OF STATE MANDATED DISABLED ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS AT 851 IRWIN STREET, SAN RAFAEL
(APN 14-125-15), BRIAN HODGES, REPRESENTATIVE (PW) - File 13-1-1
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 4
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 5
Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing opened, and asked for the staff report.
Public Works Director Bernardi reported this was an appeal from the representatives
of Mechanics Bank who wish to open a bank at 851 Irwin Street, which is a
multi -tenant office building. Mr. Bernardi stated the proposed remodeling would
cost approximately $65,000, and Mechanics Bank is proposing to provide disabled
access to their space by installing a ramp and revising the entry to their space
at a cost of approximately $15,000.
Mr. Bernardi reported State law provides that when the cost of providing full access
improvements to a site exceeds 20% of the cost of improvements, there are grounds
for the filing of an application of Undue Hardship, which is now before Council.
Mr. Bernardi stated the building met the access requirements at the time it was
built; however, it does not meet today's standards, and in order to meet today's
standards they would have to add another $25,000 to the cost of the project, in
addition to the $14,000 currently being spent for access. Mr. Bernardi reported
the law also provides that when this is the case, the specific area being remodeled,
repaired, or added to shall be made accessible, the next priority would be that
the primary entrance and path of travel to the area of operation be made accessible,
and as a third priority, sanitary facilities, drinking fountains, and public phones
would be made accessible. Mr. Bernardi stated two of these areas would be
addressed under this application, but not the third, and that would be in compliance
with State law.
Mr. Bernardi stated it was staff's recommendation that this application be approved,
noting Kim Blackseth, the City's access consultant, had reviewed the request,
and also recommended Council grant the relief requested.
Mayor Boro referred to a letter from Robert Roberts, Director of the Marin Center
for Independent Living (MCIL), which had been received only this afternoon. Mr.
Bernardi stated in the first sentence of the letter Mr. Roberts indicates MCIL
generally concurs with staff's recommendation. Mr. Bernardi pointed out Mr.
Roberts was raising a number of issues that relate to Federal law, and noted we
do not enforce the Federal law. Mayor Boro stated it was his impression Mr. Roberts
was merely putting the applicant on notice that they may have other problems outside
of dealing with the City, and Mr. Bernardi stated that was exactly correct.
There being no public comment, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, that the City
Council, acting in its capacity as the Board of Appeals, adopt the Resolution
providing relief from State mandated requirements for disabled access at 851 Irwin
Street.
RESOLUTION 9859 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL (IN
ITS CAPACITY AS THE BOARD OF APPEALS) GRANTING CONDITIONED APPROVAL OF AN APPEAL
FROM STATE ACCESS REQUIREMENTS AT 851 IRWIN STREET, SAN RAFAEL.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCIL ERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen
MONTHLY REPORT:
11. CITY WORK PLAN REVIEW (CM) - File 237
Assistant City Manager Golt presented the monthly review, which she noted was a
progress report of a wide variety of programs, projects and activities, some of
which are on-going, and others that have already been completed, as indicated
by the shaded areas. She pointed out item #3, Community Outreach, stating she
was particularly happy to report the City Hall Concierge Program had gotten
underway on Friday, with our first volunteer in the lobby. Ms. Golt noted there
was a schedule of nine or ten volunteers who have signed up for different shifts,
and after they have completed one rotation, she will meet with them and get their
input as to how the program is working out.
Councilmember Phillips noted there had been a meeting on May 27th with the management
of Northgate Mall to discuss City Hall at the Mall, and the Assistant City Manager
will be obtaining a cost proposal for professional assistance with a computer
presentation. Mr. Phillips asked how this was progressing, and how receptive
the Mall representatives were to this idea? Ms. Golt stated management at the
Mall was very receptive, and would very much like for us to be there. She pointed
out the City already had a presence at the Mall because of the Police Department
Sub -station, but the Mall would like to have more of a City Hall type presence.
Ms. Golt added positive interest has been expressed through the North San Rafael
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 5
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 6
Vision, and she is looking at how we might establish an appropriate City Hall
presence at the Mall.
Ms. Golt stated we would probably start out the first year or so by establishing
a presence in one of the kiosks in the center part of the Mall, noting there is
already a large Customer Service kiosk staffed by Mall employees, and we are looking
at sharing the kiosk with them. She stated we could have a variety of hard copy
information available, a personal computer on which someone would touch the screen
to operate it. She noted we would also have some special presentations, such
as "Meet Your Mayor", "Meet Your Councilmember", and continue with programs to
present the Fire Chief, Police Chief, and City Manager. Ms. Golt reiterated the
Mall is very receptive to this concept, and will be giving her final information
later this week on just how much the Mall will contribute to this particular
endeavor. Ms. Golt stated she believed this was a very viable program, and she
will be presenting detailed information to the Council very soon.
NEW BUSINESS:
12. REQUEST BY HARRY WINTERS, WEST END NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, FOR PUBLIC ACCESS
ALONG TERRACE LANE (P1) - File 13-14.1 x 10-2 x 11-1
Mayor Boro stated the Councilmembers had all had an opportunity to visit and walk
the site, and were looking to the testimony to be given this evening to provide
further information.
Planning Director Robert Pendoley stated this was a very complicated subject, and
was before Council at the request of Harry Winters, who is representing the West
End Neighborhood Association. Mr. Pendoley reported this issue represented a
dispute between the West End Neighborhood Association and some of the property
owners on Terrace Lane, a private street in the West End neighborhood.
Mr. Pendoley stated this issue came to the Planning Department's attention almost
a year ago when Mr. and Mrs. Bradshaw, recent purchasers of a home on Terrace
Lane, found that members of the West End Neighborhood Association and other
neighbors were using the street. He noted Mr. and Mrs. Bradshaw believed they
had purchased the house with the understanding that Terrace Lane was private,
and did not have a public access easement. He reported City staff was asked to
become involved by the West End Neighborhood Association. Mr. Pendoley reported
the Planning Department and City Attorney' s Office had done a great deal of research
into the background, and in March he sent a letter to Mr. Winters and to Mr. and
Mrs. Bradshaw' s attorney informing them the result of that research was that there
was no public access easement on Terrace Lane, and that it would not be possible
for the City to condition an application that was then pending for a home on one
of the lots in the subdivision to require the dedication of such an easement.
Mr. Pendoley reported the City's involvement with the issue goes back to 1976 when
an application to sub -divide in the area was received. He stated the initial
study, which was part of the environmental documentation for the project, shows
that the City seemed to be contemplating some kind of public access pedestrian
oriented easement on private roads in the neighborhood to assure access to the
Open Space that was then being contemplated for dedication. He noted there was
also a condition labeled "AA" on the tentative map which stated non-exclusive
access easements would be established on the private roadways, and there was
companion condition "T" which required that the private roadways be part of the
private building lots in the area. However, by the time the final maps were
recorded for the relevant parts of the project, Units 4 and 5, it was determined
that those conditions could be satisfied through the CC & R's for the project.
He noted public pedestrian access easements were not required to be recorded,
and pointed out there was a note on the map for Units 4 and 5 to the effect that
access would be strictly private on those private roadways. Based on all of this,
the City Attorney's Office concluded that regardless of what the intent appeared
to have been at the beginning of the process, in fact no public access easements
for pedestrians were dedicated on Terrace Lane.
Mr. Pendoley noted Council had correspondence from Mr. Winters contending that the
facts are to the contrary, and the intent all along was to have public access.
Mr. Pendoley stated staff recommended that in addition to the issues raised by
Mr. Winters, Council consider that if they were to decide to pursue his request
to
condemn public pedestrian access easements, they may need to look at Spring Grove
Lane, where a similar situation exists. He noted it was also likely that
condemnation proceedings would result in litigation, which would be costly. Mr.
Pendoley noted that while it should be possible to have an appraisal done to
determine the likely value of a public pedestrian access easement, it was likely
that litigation could determine a higher value.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 6
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 7
Councilmember Heller noted it had been suggested the City use Open Space funds to
buy access, and asked if that was something legally allowed, and if there was
money in the Open Space account to handle something like this? City Attorney
Ragghianti stated he would review that issue. Administrative Services Director
Ken Nordhoff reported there was approximately $400,000 remaining of the bond
proceeds, to be used for Open Space acquisition.
Councilmember Miller stated it was his understanding that pedestrians may walk and
have access through Spring Grove Lane. Deputy City Attorney Eric Davis stated
that while the public may be walking in that area, as a matter of law the City
Attorney' s Office was not aware of an existing public access easement in the sense
of a recorded deed to that affect. Mr. Miller asked what the difference was between
public access, in terms of walking along Terrace Lane between Lots 39, 40, and
41, and what does the note on the final map actually mean? He stated he understood
it to mean that someone could walk along Terrace Lane, but once they got to Lot
40 there was a sign that said "End", and another sign stating that was private
property and no one may walk across the lot. Mr. Davis stated the note and map
Mr. Miller was referring to was specifically limited to those three lots, and
did not apply, by its terms, to Spring Grove Lane. He reported the note states
that ingress and egress rights across the private portion of Terrace Lane are
limited to the specific lots 39, 40, and 41, and does not apply to Spring Grove
Lane.
Mr. Miller asked why people could walk on Terrace Lane all the way up to that point
but not further, and why they could not walk along Spring Grove Lane, noting he
did not understand what this exclusive access is stopping? Mr. Ragghianti stated
anyone could walk anywhere, anytime they want, unless someone objects to it, noting
that is what has happened here. He pointed out the issue was the legal right
to public access over private property, versus someone walking any day, any week,
any month during the year over Terrace Lane. He noted if no one stops them, they
can do that, and if no one stops them on Spring Grove Lane, they can do that,
too. Mr. Ragghianti stated the property owner argues that the notes that appear
on the final map specifically exclude anyone other than the owners of those three
lots from passing over that property, and there is no recorded easement that burdens
those three lots indicating that the public can pass over them.
Mr. Ragghianti noted they were talking about the difference between a legal right
for the public to pass over private property versus individuals simply walking
there of their own free will. Mr. Miller asked if there was anything that would
stop someone further down on Terrace Lane from saying they did not want people
walking on the easement? Mr. Ragghianti stated only the owners of Lots 39, 40,
and 41 could exclude other people, because that portion of Terrace Lane is private,
as stated in the note on the final map. Mr. Davis noted there were two portions
of Terrace Lane, a public road portion and a private road portion, with Lots 39,
40, and 41 on the upper portion being private. Mr. Miller asked if there was
a private road on Spring Grove Lane? Mr. Davis stated Spring Grove Lane had both
public and private sections, noting the upper section, closest to the Open Space
land, is a private section. Mr. Miller asked if the owners in that section could
come forward and say they did not want people walking through that portion of
Spring Grove Lane? Mr. Davis stated he believed they could, noting that while
there was not the similar note on the map for Spring Grove Lane, there also was
no recorded public access easement over the private portion of Spring Grove Lane.
Mr. Miller asked if a property owner on Spring Grove Lane wished to exercise
their right to say, "No, you may not walk along here", could they then cut off
access to the public? Mr. Davis stated someone could certainly assert that, noting
whether or not it would ultimately cut off access gets into further questions
in terms of prescriptive easement issues, but certainly someone along the private
portion Spring Grove Lane could assert that it was not open to the public. Mr.
Miller asked which portion of Spring Grove Lane was private? Mr. Pendoley pointed
out on the map that the private portion began at Lot 25.
Mr. Miller stated he could not understand the difference between the rights of people,
whether it was on the map as exclusive or not, and asked Mr. Ragghianti to explain.
Mr. Ragghianti stated there were two things that were important: first, so far
as the City is aware, no one is objecting to the public passing over the private
portion of Spring Grove Lane, and this distinguished that particular area from
the Terrace Lane portion before Council; second, Mr. Ragghianti stated he was
not certain whether there was a note, such as the note that has been described
in correspondence as Note One, that appeared as a part of the final map in connection
with the approval of Units 4 and 5 of the Oakwood subdivision, which includes
this
private part of Terrace Lane. Mr. Ragghianti stated apparently there was an express
note attached to the final map that indicates ingress and egress rights to the portion
of Terrace Lane that lie within these three lots are pertinent to those lots only,
with the exception of emergency and maintenance vehicular use. Mr. Ragghianti
stated he did not believe that same language was attached to the final map in
connection with Spring Grove Lane; nevertheless, that portion of Spring Grove
Lane shown by Mr. Pendoley is, in fact, private.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 7
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 8
Harry Winters, President of the West End Neighborhood Association, stated the
difference between Spring Grove Lane and Terrace Lane is that there is no Note
One prohibiting public access for the Spring Grove portion, or Upper Toyon, the
other private road. He noted that in the CC & R's, which the developer stated
addressed this issue, there is a guarantee of access for each of those property
owners along the private roadway, but there is no prohibition against the public
using it, and there is no Note One, as there is for Terrace Lane, that actually
creates a prohibition.
Mr
Mr
Winters noted his earlier correspondence had stated the Oakwood subdivision
included provisions for private dead-end roads, and he clarified that these were
not actually dead-end roads, they were connected roads. He stated the City
Attorney had asked the Association if there was any proof that those roads existed
before the subdivision was built, and Mr. Winter reported the 1977 initial study
states, "existing fire roads interconnecting Clorinda, Greenwood, Upper Toyon,
Spring Grove, and Terrace Avenues", noting there clearly was a network of
connecting fire roads up there, and there has been ever since he has lived there,
which is almost fifty years. Mr. Winters pointed out there were no new roads
on the subdivision, there were simply improvements on the existing fire roads,
including Terrace Lane.
Winters stated one of the issues is Condition AA, which is mandatory and states,
"There shall be non-exclusive access easements on the private roadways". He noted
that condition existed from the very beginning of the eight year process leading
to the final map, and was written as part of the initial study, specifically to
address pedestrian hiking. Mr. Winters stated in 1984 the City Council approved
the final map, approving it on the basis of a staff report which indicated Condition
AA had been accomplished. He stated the residents went home from that meeting
believing they had the right to walk on Terrace Lane, as they had for over half
a century, and he stated they believed the City Council and the Planning
Commission thought so, too. He stated that in all of the records and all the
discussions there was never any reference to Note One, reporting no one in the
neighborhood had ever heard of it until the Bradshaw's brought it up in their
objection when they moved into their house last year. Mr. Winters reported the
developer's attorney stated the CC & R's providing access for the owners along
that Lane was not exclusive, and also addressed Condition AA, non-exclusive access;
however, later on Note One showed up, and it was quite different from the CC &
R's, as it was exclusive and exclusionary. Mr. Winters pointed out that no one
on staff has been able to tell him where that note came from.
Mr. Winters reported that when the City certified the final map, the certification
stated the final map was substantially the same as the tentative map; however,
Mr. Winters noted there was a very substantial difference, because Note One exists
on the final map, but did not exist on the tentative map. He stated that after
a meeting last July with the City Attorney's Office, the Bradshaw's, and
representatives of the Neighborhood Association, they submitted their arguments
to the City Attorney's Office. He noted the Association finally received a letter
last month which stated the City Attorney' s Office had decided there was no public
access, and they had to keep off the road. Mr. Winters stated he asked Planning
Director Pendoley if the San Rafael Police Department would respond to a
trespassing call, and Mr. Pendoley informed him that they would. Mr. Winters
stated he had told the neighbors not to walk on the road until this issue has
been resolved, because they did not want any confrontation, although he noted
there were some people who still walk there, and others who do not know anything
about this issue who also walk there.
Mr. Winters stated the dilemma is that the City has approved both the requirement
for non-exclusive access, which goes back to pedestrian hiking, and also the
exclusive Note One, pointing out that these are totally contradictory. Referring
to recourse that might be available, Mr. Winters noted the neighborhood had been
discussing the issue, and he wished to expand on the two recourse options he
included in his letter. The first was to attack Note One legally, as it may be
faulty, noting no one knows where it came from; and the second was to suggest
Eminent Domain. He stated Note One on the final map could be challenged because
it contradicts Condition AA, and it was not on the tentative map. He further
stated there may be an implied easement across Terrace Lane by the intent of the
City through this whole approval process of eight years to provide public
pedestrian access easement. He noted it was possible for the City to use Eminent
Domain, noting they had that right if they could show public benefit and safety.
Mr. Winters stated there were two ways to walk up to this area; one was to walk
up Spring Grove, which is a long, straight street, very gradual, and children
can ride
bikes up the road; or, walk up Terrace Lane, which for the first 2/10ths of a mile
is narrower than standard road and with no sidewalks, not even any shoulders,
and there are two blind hair -pin turns on it. He noted anyone would prefer and
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 8
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 9
be safer by walking up Spring Grove and back across Terrace Lane. He stated anyone
coming on foot who wanted access to those houses, whether they are friends,
neighbors, relatives, a process server or bill collector, would want to walk up
Spring Grove to Lots 39, 40, and 41, right in front of the BradshawI s house, which
is perfectly legal, because the right of ingress and egress does not apply only
to the people who live in those houses, it applies to anyone who has any business
talking to them. Therefore, the Bradshaws do not have the privacy they assume
they have, and there are going to be people walking by who they do not know, but
who are legitimately associated in one way or another with Lots 39 and 41.
Referring to the issue of Eminent Domain, Mr. Winters stated he felt a negotiated
compromise which recognizes the validity of both Condition AA, non-exclusive
access, and Note One is possible, as he believed Note One pertained to vehicular
access because the other two private roads, Spring Grove and Upper Toyon, which
do not have a Note One, are wide roads, there can be two-way traffic, and there
is a turnaround at the end of each of those roads. On the other hand, Terrace
Lane is a narrow, one -lane road with no turnaround, and you are stuck if you go
down there. He reiterated that was why he believed Note One referred to vehicular
access. He stated he believed Condition AA referred to pedestrian access, and
although both of them are worded broadly and could cover both types of access,
he felt they were compatible if they are considered from the point of view that
one covers pedestrian access and the other covers vehicular access, and noted
that in looking at the history behind these, that is what it appears to be.
Mr
Mr
Winters reported the staff report states the tentative map Condition AA for
non-exclusive access is ambiguous, but noted he did not agree, as the language
is unequivocal, it is mandatory, and states "non-exclusive access easement shall
be established over the private roadway". He noted that if traced back to the
original EIR (Environment Impact Report), it was clearly related to public
easements. Mr. Winters noted Planning Director Pendoley had suggested perhaps
there was a special connotation about the non-exclusive clause that was particular
to this case, so Mr. Winters went to the man who wrote Condition AA, Matt Guthrie,
former Planner in the Planning Department, and asked him what he had meant when
he wrote "non-exclusive access easement shall be established over the private
roadways", and Mr. Guthrie had told him it meant exactly what it stated. Mr.
Winters asked Mr. Guthrie if there had been any special meaning or connotation
to that, and Mr. Guthrie told him, "No, it is straight English". Mr. Winters
suggested perhaps it might be helpful for City staff to verify this with Mr.
Guthrie.
Winters also noted the staff report states Spring Grove Lane is affected by
the same issues as Terrace Lane, and stated he did not believe this was the case.
He pointed out there is no Note One applying to Spring Grove Lane, and those
people, in their CC & R's, are guaranteed access, but there is no exclusion, it
is open to public use. He noted Deputy City Attorney Davis stated there was no
provision for public use, but neither was there a prohibition, which Mr. Winters
stated left Spring Grove open to use.
Terry Vei, 218 Spring Grove Lane, stated Spring Grove Lane is a private road, but
he allows anyone to walk on it. He recalled living in Hawaii as a youth, and
noted that in Hawaii they have long had a problem with Land Use, and one of the
biggest problems was access to the beach. He reported it had been determined
a long time ago that from the high tide mark of the beach property to the water
was public property, and built into any development the right of the people to
get to that public property, because it was the right of the people to have access
to that. Mr. Vei stated that while we are not in Hawaii, we are in a prominent
place with people who have the intelligence that the Hawaiians did. He pointed
out this agreement was been determined before litigation got serious, and simply
said that people have the right to exercise on the beaches. He stated this issue
was the same, noting we were again dealing with the right of the people to exercise,
and to continue to exercise as they always have. He pointed out there was the
expectation of exercise and the ability to do recreational walking, and that is
all they were doing. He stated just as the people in Hawaii have the right to
the beaches, he felt the people here should have the right to continue to exercise
as they have for years.
Chris Bradshaw, 53 Terrace Lane, stated they bought their home with the full
expectation that Terrace Lane was a private lane, and that there was no public
access. He reported they had that expectation from both the seller and the Title
Company, and had they known about this issue, and that there was such a mound
of paperwork associated with this house, they would never have bought the house,
and if they had known that there was public access down the lane, they would never
have bought the house. Mr. Bradshaw stated it was sad, acknowledging that he
has seen what this has meant to the neighbors; however, he noted all of the open
spaces and all of the decks on their house are approximately three feet from the
lane, and stated they bought with the expectation that this was a private lane.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 9
Mr
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 10
Bradshaw acknowledged that all three properties have an easement across them,
noting people walk up and down the lane visiting people who live up the street
from his home, and he recognizes that they have an easement across his lane, noting
all three of the properties have that right. Mr. Bradshaw stated they were not
trying to be the "baddies" in this, they were just trying to protect their
investment, reiterating that had they known the property was tied up in the issue
of public access, they would never have bought this house. He stated public access
would drastically change the value of the house, and they would move, because
that was not what they wanted, noting they wanted a private place where they could
enjoy their privacy. He stated they feel bad for what has happened, but noted
it does not change the way they feel or what their expectations were.
Tom Brown, 125 Spring Grove, stated he had written to Council setting forth some
of the legal arguments, noting he had not intended to sound threatening, he wanted
only to give context to what he believed was a bigger issue than perhaps had been
considered. He stated he had the highest level of respect for the City Attorney's
Office, which was known all over the State of California as one of the finest
City Attorney's Offices in the State.
Mr. Brown felt the thing that needed to be considered was what had given rise to
the claim that the neighbors cannot walk back and forth on this portion of Terrace
Lane? He pointed out it was only the note that appeared on the final map; however,
he stated a note cannot be placed on a final map that is inconsistent with the
process by which the tentative map was approved. He reported State law states
a city cannot approve a final map unless it is consistent with the tentative map,
noting it is not just that they must find consistency, they are prohibited from
approving the final map if it is inconsistent with what was done in connection
with the approval of the tentative map. Mr. Brown stated he felt Mr. Winters
had done an outstanding job of detective work, noting everyone was looking back
at a pile of documents twenty years old, and it was very difficult to piece that
together. However, he felt it was very clear, from just the little amount he
had reviewed with Mr. Winters, that the intent was always that the neighbors were
going to have this pedestrian access. Mr. Brown emphasized the note had no legal
significance if it was attached to the final map inconsistent with the tentative
map approval.
Mr. Brown noted he knew this neighborhood, and they were all respectful, sensitive
people. He stated they respect the Bradshaw's privacy and their needs, and he
could not see any of them using that access in a disrespectful, insensitive way.
He noted with his family it has always been their intention to simply go quietly
in front on a Sunday afternoon walk, although he had adhered to Mr. Winters' warning
that they not walk by there since this dispute arose, except on the one occasion
when his five year old daughter needed to go to the bathroom, and it was too far
to walk back around the other way. Mr. Brown noted that was the practical reality
for many of them, that going all the way back around was simply impractical.
Mr. Brown stated he hoped Council would direct staff to work with the neighborhood,
and he offered to work with the City Attorney' s Office to try to do further research,
not only on some of the factual issues, but also on the legal issues that apply
in this case. He believed the City did have options, and as suggested in his
letter, he believed it was not simply to comply with the Bradshaw's request or
be sued by them, there were other options. He stated that from his standpoint,
he was perfectly willing to work out a mediated or negotiated resolution to this
issue, with reasonable limitations on the use of this access, noting he had called
the Bradshaw's attorney and suggested that. Mr. Brown felt that would be fully
consistent with what obviously went into the tentative map approval twenty years
ago.
Lynn Kline, resident of Hillside Avenue, addressed the issue of the value of the
neighborhood, stating that for the neighbors, the value of the neighborhood has
really gone down when they cannot walk around. She noted she walks with her
children around the streets of Ross, and all over Marin, as she has for the past
seven years, and she cannot understand why they would have the only non -pedestrian
roadway in their neighborhood, stating the City was taking from the value of their
neighborhood because of an error on a final map. She pleaded with Council to
look at the Open Space and the undeveloped lot, and work out a compromise, stating
it should not be all or nothing because the Council was taking from the value
of everyone in the neighborhood.
Mayor Boro asked staff to acknowledge the letter received from Mr. Brown, responding
paragraph by paragraph so they can all see the questions and the answers. He
noted Councilmember Heller had brought up the question of the use of Open Space
funds for
the acquisition of an easement, and asked staff to research that possibility.
MayorBoro stated if the neighbors and Mr. Bradshaw wish to discuss mediation,
that was certainly something they could choose to entertain amongst themselves.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 10
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 11
Councilmember Miller asked for a strong clarification that the access to the Open
Space is in perpetuity, through Spring Grove, noting that is the essential item,
and it would be critical to him in any decision he would make.
Councilmember Phillips referred to one of Mr. Brown's suggestions, stating it
appeared as though there may be no winners in this situation, noting the immediate
neighbors were most affected, and perhaps most capable of reaching something that
works for their immediate vicinity. Therefore, he encouraged them to attempt
to reach a mediated or negotiated resolution to this issue, stating he felt that
would result in the most satisfactory conclusion, and while he did not believe
there could be a "perfect" solution, it would likely be the best approach. He
acknowledged the Council could certainly make a decision, and may be in the position
where they will be forced to do that; however, he would encourage Mr. Brown and
the neighbors to pursue what Mr. Brown had suggested.
Mayor Boro asked that staff take this item back, and to notify Mr. Winters and Mr.
Bradshaw, who in turn can notify the entire community, when this issue will come
back before Council. Mayor Boro asked staff to assume this item would be brought
back at the meeting of July 7, 1997.
13. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION APPROVING QUITCLAIM DEED RE: PORTION
OF OPEN SPACE LANDS SUBJECT TO ADVERSE POSSESSION RIGHTS (163 McNEAR DRIVE) (PW)
- File 2-7 x 2-5-36 x 13-14.1
(Councilmember Cohen arrived at the meeting).
Public Works Director Bernardi reported this was a request from Mr. & Mrs. Warner
Scharf of 163 McNear Drive, asking the City to quitclaim to the Scharf's
approximately 1,400 square feet of land that has been dedicated to the City as
Open Space. He reported that during the course of staff's investigation they
had worked very closely with the City Attorney's Office, and staff felt there
was sufficient evidence to support the Scharf's claim that this land be
quitclaimed, primarily because there are a number of elements necessary to acquire
title by Adverse Possession. He reported the required elements are 1) open and
notorious use or possession; 2) continuous and uninterrupted use for a period
of at least five years; 3) hostile to the true owner under a Claim of Right, 4)
and payment of taxes.
Mr. Bernardi stated the evidence staff has found indicates the fencing and yard
improvements of the Open Space were completed at some time around 1973,
approximately ten years before the City received title to the land. He stated
at the time the land was encroached upon it was privately owned. Mr. Bernardi
reported the property was sold in 1976 after the fence and yard improvements were
constructed, and accordingly there is a natural inference that the tax assessment
of the property included the value of the land and the improvements covered by
the encroachment; therefore, the fourth element, "Tax Payment", has also been
satisfied.
Mr. Bernardi stated the quitclaim deed and the Resolution have been reviewed and
found acceptable by the City Attorney's Office, and pointed out the map included
in the staff report, which defines the area that has been encroached upon, on
what had formerly been private property.
Mayor Boro asked if the title search at the time the Scharf purchased the property
showed this area as part of the property parcel? Terrell Mason, Attorney
representing Mr. and Mrs. Scharf, reported a title report only shows property
as it is defined on a map, and on-site inspections usually are not done. Therefore,
the title report shows the legal description of the deeded property as shown on
the plat map, which did not show the improvements. Mr. Bernardi explained the
assumption Mr. Mason was making was that when the property was purchased, the
assumption was that the property being acquired was inside the fences; however,
in this particular case the fences actually went out beyond what is the legal
lot as established on the final map, although the Scharf's and previous owners
have occupied this land since 1973.
Mr. Mason pointed out that at the time the Scharf's purchased this property, the
sellers were not even aware that this was not part of their property, and only
discovered it as part of the disclosure. In order for the sale to proceed at
that time, Mr. Mason obtained an encroachment permit, and then began discussions
with the City regarding a grant of landscape easement or possible fee title
acquisition. He reported it was during these initial discussions with the City
Attorney's Office that the possibility arose of acquiring a fee title by way of
adverse possession, based on the fact that improvements were made to the property
in 1973, long before the City acquired it.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 11
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 12
Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to adopt the
Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a quitclaim deed, and the City Clerk
to record such quitclaim deed in the Office of the Marin County Recorder.
RESOLUTION NO. 9860 -RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF QUITCLAIM DEED TO PORTIONS
OF THE CITY'S OPEN SPACE LANDS BASED UPON ADVERSE POSSESSION RIGHTS (163 McNEAR
DRIVE).
AYES: COUNCIL ERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCIL ERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
14. DISCUSSION OF CITY'S ACTIONS REGARDING THE HOMELESS IN OPEN SPACES (CM) - File
233 x 13-14.1
City Manager Gould stated it was important to recognize the City's relationship
with the homeless people was not limited to law enforcement; therefore, this report
would be a multi -departmental report, reflecting the City's multi -departmental
response. He explained it begins with the fact that the City recognizes there
is not sufficient housing or shelter in San Rafael, or in Marin County, for all
who need it, noting the City itself has taken on its own role in providing affordable
housing and temporary shelters for those who need them, as well as assisting service
providers in the provision of services to the homeless in our community.
Economic Development Director Ours reported the City has done many things in providing
actual shelter for the homeless, noting one of the more interesting ones is 39
Mary Street, where the City contributed money to a homeless family recovery center.
He explained this center had been in operation for approximately six years, and
usually assisted single mothers and their families by putting them back into paying
jobs. He reported the City contributed heavily to the Harbor Center, a forty
bed facility which has been very successful, and also contributed our share to
the Novato Shelter. Mr. Ours noted that for many years the City has been operating
a renters rebate program, which assists people in San Rafael who are on the edge
of not being able to pay for their rental units, and keeps them in those units.
He reported the City also provides money for the Marin Mediation Services, so
when there are problems between tenants and landlords there is a place to go to
mediate the problems. Mr. Ours stated that if it is approved in the budget, the
City would be contributing money to Ritter House this coming fiscal year, to assist
in operating another program to help the homeless.
Referring to affordability, Mr. Ours reported the City had contributed money to
One "H" Street, Boyd Court, and Centertown, and noted construction on Lone Palm
Court would begin within the next week or two, which will provide an additional
twenty-four units at approximately 50% to 60% of median income. Mr. Ours reported
the City has also contributed to the Marin Center for Independent Living, and
Ecology House. Mr. Ours pointed out the City has done a number of inclusionary
things through the Planning approvals, to make certain there are affordable units,
noting the City has been fighting this on-going battle to provide actual beds
for homeless people, and to keep those on the verge of homelessness off the streets,
and this was an effort the City will continue to fight for.
City Manager Gould stated the City recognizes that when homeless people live in
the Open Spaces it creates a fire hazard to neighboring property owners and
wildlife, noting in that case the City has an affirmative duty to try to mitigate
that hazard.
Fire Chief Robert Marcucci stated at this time of year people begin to think about
the wildland fire season that is upon us, noting the Open Space lands have the
potential for wildland fire problems simply because of the vegetation. However,
he pointed out that fires do not start by themselves, noting he could not think
of a fire in San Rafael during the past twenty years that started by itself, noting
they always had a human factor. Chief Marcucci explained the use of Open Space
land for inappropriate behavior or uses, such as camping or camp fires, was a
potential for fire problems. He recalled the fires on San Rafael Hill in the
past few years, which were attributed to the homeless camping out and camp fires
being left unattended. Chief Marcucci reported it was not uncommon for both Fire
Department and Police Department personnel to hike into the San Rafael Hill area
at night, looking for the homeless and their camp fires. Chief Marcucci recalled
last year the City closed down San Rafael Hill because of the potential for wildland
fires, noting there had actually been a fire right behind the Falkirk Cultural
Center.
Chief Marcucci stated the City had not been unresponsive in dealing with the
vegetation on the Open Space lands, noting since the beginning of this year the
City has spent $17,000 through grants with the Conservation Corps and City money,
taking care of the vegetation problems in the Gerstle Park neighborhood. He
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 12
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 13
reported the City has also spent approximately $15,000 working on San Rafael Hill,
and another $10,000 working with the Dominican Neighborhood Association. Chief
Marcucci reported the Fire Department was working hand in hand with the
neighborhoods, pointing out the neighborhoods were giving an "in lieu"
contribution of their time
and effort pulling out Scotch Broom and other vegetation. He noted the Fire
Department had purchased Broom pullers, which the Department rents to the Homeowner
Associations to use to pull out the Scotch Broom, and also hires a chipper to
come
in and dispose of the vegetation once the neighbors have cleared it. Chief Marcucci
stated the objective was to create a "defensible space", space around a structure
which, if a fire does start in Open Space land, will give the Fire Department
the opportunity to respond and protect the home before it is threatened by the
fire. He pointed out no matter what the Fire Department does, they have
difficulty, in that under the cover of darkness people enter the City' s Open Space
lands. He stated the City has become very serious in dealing with these people;
however, it is a persistent problem, and he believed one of these days we were
going to have major problems if we do not take an aggressive stand.
Chief Marcucci stated that although he understands the homeless are having difficulty
in their lives, at the same time he has a responsibility to protect structures
from wildland fires, and he must do all he can to prevent people from getting
into the Open Space. He noted people are welcome to hike on the roads and enjoy
the Open Space, but not to camp or start camp fires, and he asked that everyone
be fire safe and fire conscious.
City Manager Gould stated the City also recognizes that it is unlawful to live or
camp in public Open Space or public parks, and that is where law enforcement must
come in. He pointed out the City has contacted various services providers, such
as Ritter House and Homeward Bound, to try to communicate with those who are living
or camping in the Open Spaces, to let them know the City's concerns and the fact
that the City will enforce the law. Mr. Gould displayed a flyer which had been
provided by the Human Concern Center to people who were thought to be camping
in the Open Space.
Captain Tom Boyd reported the Police Department had worked very closely with the
Fire Department to enforce the provisions of the closing of San Rafael Hill last
year, noting there were problems with people starting camp fires, and in addition
to the fire danger, they found a lot of littering and human waste problems in
the Open Space, created by people camping in those areas. Captain Boyd stated
the Police Department would continue to work with the Fire Department on those
closures to make sure people can enjoy the Open Spaces; however, they do not want
them camping there because it does create a very significant safety problem.
Referring to enforcement, Captain Boyd reported the Police Department has a Ranger
who works during the day and also at night, noting he takes referrals from the
Public Works Department crews, from the Police Department's Patrol Officers, and
from citizens who call to complain, or to inform the Police Department of a
particular camp site where people are congregating. Captain Boyd stated the
Ranger drives a 4 -wheel drive vehicle, pointing out it is surprising how
inaccessible many spaces in San Rafael are, and noting accessibility for the Police
Officers is very difficult. He reported that while the Ranger can get out into
these areas, it is very time consuming to walk those areas, and very difficult
to do.
Captain Boyd reported the Police Department has begun having the Police Officers
from the graveyard shift working overtime in the morning, doing early morning
patrols of the parks, particularly Gerstle, Boyd, and Albert Parks, in an attempt
to clear the parks of anyone who should not be there. He noted the Downtown Foot
Patrol Officers' beats have also been expanded, so they spend a lot of time in
those three parks. He reported that during the past three or four weeks the Foot
Patrol Officers had issued between thirty and forty citations for the possession
of alcohol in a park, being drunk in a park, and other violations of that nature.
Captain Boyd stated the Police Department has also been working with the City
Attorney's Office, noting last year they had a very extended situation in the
Dominican Hills area, where someone had lived for a long period of time and had
built quite a structure in the Open Space. He reported the City had to serve
an eviction notice, and it was a long and extended process for which the Police
Department had to enlist the help of the Public Works Department in clearing the
encampment.
Captain Boyd reported he and Public Works Director Bernardi had discussed
streamlining the process for the Police Department making referrals to the Public
Works Department, so they can go in and clean-out those areas; however, part of
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 13
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 14
the problem they have is that one person' s property may look to be another person' s
refuse. He stated the Police Department has a real problem with this, noting
they have a legal obligation to make sure they do not throw away people' s property.
He stated they try to videotape as much as they can as a permanent record before
asking the Public Works Department to clear -out an area, and if the property looks
like it is something that would actually belong to someone, the Police Department
does try to hold it for a certain period of time to see if anyone comes to claim
it, or if the identity of the owner can be determined, the Police Department will
contact the owner.
Captain Boyd stated the Police Department would continue and likely step up their
efforts, due to the fact that everyone knows we are going to have an early fire
season, and this is a critical issue for the safety of San Rafael.
City Manager Gould acknowledged the City recognizes the homeless problem is not
confined to San Rafael, and that there are many who need shelter and currently
do not have it. He stated that while the City is taking steps to provide shelter
for those who need it, in no way can the City eradicate homelessness from our
community. However, the City does recognize that it has an affirmative duty to
protect the residents from the public health and safety hazards of homeless people
living in the Open Spaces. Therefore, the Fire, Police and Public Works
Departments are working in concert to enforce the law, and provide for public
safety.
Councilmember Heller asked how the City interacts with the other landowners in the
area, the County and the State, and if they take responsibility for their fair
share of assisting with the homeless in these areas? Mr. Bernardi stated they
did. Pointing to the area near Gerstle Park as an example, he explained the City
and the County each own 50% of the land, and noted the County has been very good
about sharing the cost of the maintenance with the City. Mr. Bernardi reported
the State has been aggressive in dealing with their lands, noting they patrol
their lands regularly, and are insistent that no one camp other than in designated
camping areas, such as China Camp.
Councilmember Phillips asked, when someone is found camping or residing in some
of these sensitive areas, what steps are taken with regard to the individual?
City Manager Gould stated the City has found it is most effective when the Ranger
or Police Officers encounter someone they have not dealt with before to inform
the individual that it is unlawful to camp there, before citing the individual.
However, if they encounter the same person again, then they have to cite them,
and if we have further refusal, that may mean going to jail. He pointed out we
try to take it one step at a time, to inform before enforcing the law, and noted
we also enlist the services of the social services providers to help get out the
word.
Mr. Phillips stated he hoped people were not drawing the wrong conclusion, noting
the flyer warning people of the fire danger is addressed, "Attention to anyone
camping in the hills in Marin County", and he was concerned this might sound
tantamount to approval, and a request for people to be careful while they are
camping. City Manager Gould stated this pointed out the difficulty of different
positions on homelessness, noting that particular flyer was put out by the Human
Concern Center. He stated if the Human Concern Center or anyone else asks the
City where it is lawful to camp, other than in designated State parks, there is
no place in the Open Space where it is lawful to camp. He stated that was the
City's position, and that is what the City must enforce.
Phillip Fields, disabled and homeless, felt the issue should be re-educating the
people who are using the Open Spaces. Mr. Field stated there was not a person
among those at the meeting, unless they were independently wealthy, who could
not lose everything in a bad business deal or be laid -off from their job, which
could lead to homelessness, and asked them to please try to understand that not
all homeless persons are bad people.
Mayor Boro stated the City was not trying to say that the homeless people are not
welcome here; however, there is a law in the City which states that camping is
not allowed in the Open Spaces. He stated that is the issue now before the Council,
and Council intends to enforce that law.
Mr. Fields stated he was sorry Mr. Landecker had been assaulted, noting he, too,
had been assaulted. However, he stated that to blame all the homeless in the
Open Spaces for fires, and to brand them as criminals, was an indiscriminate way
to generalize and demonize them. Mr. Fields respectfully urged the City Council
to order the Police Department to enforce the laws that are already on the books,
and forget about signing a Resolution that will stir up political and social unrest.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 14
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 15
Elizabeth Campos stated she was a disabled, homeless resident of San Rafael, and
was also employed by the Marin Interfaith Homeless Chaplaincy as a Chaplain
Assistant. Ms. Campos stated it was wonderful to hear the reports about what
the City has done and how it supports agencies working to assist or protect the
homeless; however, Ms. Campos stated the shelter system was inadequate because
it was not accessible to physically disabled people. She reported she had been
kicked out of the Mill Street Center, which is in the City of San Rafael, for
taking her wheelchair inside and tracking mud on a rainy day. She further reported
she had attempted to get into the Hamilton Shelter, which is out of San Rafael,
and was told that it was not
accessible, and that she should look for housing in another County. Ms. Campos
stated all of the places mentioned tonight for which the City has contributed
money for housing do not have physically accessible housing for the disabled such
as
herself. City Manger Gould asked if she had gone to the Marin Center for Independent
Living? Ms. Campos stated she had been working with them for several months,
but they have been unable to obtain physically accessible housing for her.
Ms. Campos agreed with the City and encouraged the enforcement of laws against
camping, against cooking or lighting fires in Open Spaces. However, she noted
there had been a discussion last week about the St. Vincent de Paul Dining Room
moving further away from the Downtown, and pointed out that the further away it
is moved, the more people there will be attempting to cook on their own, because
they will not be able to reach the dining room if it is too far away from where
they are already camping.
Ms. Campos pointed out communication between all the agencies was really important,
and stated she would like to see a copy of the report sent to the homeless
Chaplaincy, the Center for Independent Living, Homeless in Action, and Ritter
House, so everyone really understands the concerns of the City. She also
discouraged Council from adopting a special Resolution regarding this issue at
this time, because the City of San Rafael already has laws in place. She stated
there were already several agencies working very hard to alleviate the problem,
and felt that enacting a Resolution was making a political statement against the
homeless.
Hugo Landecker, resident of the Gerstle Park neighborhood, stated he was an Open
Space volunteer with approximately 1000 hours of volunteer time invested in the
Open Space above Gerstle Park, noting he had been working there for approximately
six years. Mr. Landecker emphasized he was a volunteer, working for the good
of the community, and was not an activist as he was painted to be in the newspaper.
Mr. Landecker stated he was also the victim of an unprovoked attack, which happened
while he was doing volunteer work.
Mr
Landecker stated he was not saying that homeless
was not saying that all the homeless people living
bad campers; he was simply stating that the homeless
laws, just like the rest of the citizens.
people were bad people, and
in the Open Space area were
people need to abide by the
Mr. Landecker noted he had spoken with Rob Simon from Human Concern, and Mr. Simon
had stated that getting the homeless out of the Open Space was not realistic,
because they did not have any place to go. Mr. Landecker stated he hoped that
was not going to be true, but noted that if we move them out of one area and they
have no place to go, they will probably just go somewhere else in the Open Space.
Mr. Landecker noted that in the past few weeks the Police Department has been
patrolling the area above Gerstle Park, noting they had made big inroads in getting
the people to move one, and stating the City needed to continue those efforts.
Mayor Boro thanked City Manager Gould, Public Works Director Bernardi, Chief
Marcucci, and Captain Boyd for their reports, noting it was not Council's intention
to take any action, but rather to provide an update on what the various departments
are doing with respect to this issue. He pointed out the City does have a law
which prohibits camping in Open Spaces, and we intend to carry out that law, noting
the City is very concerned about fire, and intends to deal with that issue. He
stated these reports gave the Council and the public a very good idea as to how
we are working as a City, and how the department heads interact.
15. REPORT ON PRELIMINARY PROPOSED BUDGET (Admin. Svcs.) - File 8-5
Administrative Services Director Ken Nordhoff noted there are two catalysts in
developing the Budget: one is the Council's Goals and Objectives, which were
established last year and reviewed this Spring, and the second is the success
in working with Council in developing a series of fifteen financial management
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 15
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 16
policies, which the Council adopted by Resolution. Mr. Nordhoff reported these
two items were being used as the matrix for developing the budget in the coming
year.
Highlighting some of the major changes, Mr. Nordhoff reported staff has been working
diligently over the past several months restructuring some of the City's accounts.
In particular, he noted we have had a large number of funds, approximately 119,
and this number has been cut by more than half, just in consolidating some of
the activities in these funds. He stated the budget also reflects inclusion of
all the funds, noting that in the past we have not included such things as Debt
Service Funds or Assessment Districts, and he felt it was important for Council
to have a full understanding of all the expenditures of the City, even though
some may be routine, or legal in nature. He believed full disclosure made them
aware of everything the City does, with respect to money that comes in and goes
out on behalf of the City, and when staff does an analysis of the actual results
at the end of the year and compares that back to the budget, they will have more
meaningful information because those figures have been put into place.
Mr. Nordhoff reported that while some funds have been consolidated, new funds have
also been put in place, stating they have identified Street Maintenance, Street
Cleaning, and Sewer Maintenance, which the City provides on behalf of the San
Rafael Sanitation District, as separate funds. He explained the intention was
to show those funds and the services provided need to be self supporting.
Additionally, Mr. Nordhoff stated funds have been established as Internal Service
Funds for our two major insurance functions, Workers' Compensation and Liability,
and again this is to provide information regarding the comprehensive costs required
to administer these programs.
Referring to Revenues and Expenses, Mr. Nordhoff reported that in the past we had
not necessarily assigned assessments, fees, or charges to the activities that
generated them, and that is something we will begin doing. He stated this was
an outcome of the Business Cost Study, noting staff wished to make Council fully
aware of the extent to which fees cover the costs of various programs, or in some
cases, where that does not occur.
Mr. Nordhoff stated staff had spent considerable time reviewing the structure of
the budget and the level of detail, noting the City is moving more toward an
activity -based costing environment, so staff has provided more delineation of
some department activities. He pointed out they have also redefined the
distribution of staff time as part of that reallocation.
Referring to the Internal Service Funds on the insurance, Mr. Nordhoff pointed out
that part of sustaining those funds is developing user charges that come back
to the departments; therefore, those are new costs to the departments' budgets,
with the expectation that charges for the services cover the cost of claims,
administration reserves, and the like.
Mr. Nordhoff reported on major Revenue trends, noting staff had spent a significant
amount of time reviewing tax issues. He stated staff was projecting Sales Tax
to be up 2.67% in the coming year, exceeding $12 million for the first time in
the City of San Rafael, and also expect Secured and Unsecured Property Taxes to
climb approximately 4.67%. He noted the overall property tax effect will be
somewhat negated by the fact that we have had excess ERAF (Educational Revenue
Augmentation Fund) monies available to us for the past five years, and this past
year, to the tune of approximately $216,000; that legislation goes away. He
pointed out there was a bill pending in Sacramento which may reinstate this, and
while he hopes that is successful, it has not been assumed in the budget.
Overall, Mr. Nordhoff reported we are seeing a strong recovery from the recession
the City felt in the early part of this decade, noting we are seeing new highs
in Occupancy Tax, Business License Tax, and Motor Vehicle Fees. He stated Fees
and Charges have been projected at the current fee schedules, pointing out staff
is working on a Business Cost Study, and would be bringing some items before Council
regarding fees and cost recovery; however, the fee projections at this point assume
fairly constant levels of service, and current rate structures.
Referring to Expenses, Mr. Nordhoff stated they have built several things into the
budget, the most important being that we have incorporated all of the MOUIs with
bargaining groups, building in approximately 3,5% and 4.4% increases for the
various Associations, and to the extent that some groups, such as part-time or
management, did not have multi-year agreements, similar assumptions have been
made in those areas. He stated a 2.5% Cost of Living adjustment has been calculated
in our Operating Expenses for such things as supplies, contracted services, and
equipment repair, and no new General Fund positions have been included in the
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 16
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 17
budget at this time. Mr. Nordhoff reported the item that has most contributed
on the Expense side to balancing the budget is the reduction in the retirement
rates, which were instituted last January based on actuarial information. He
reported those rates are going to save the General Fund approximately $1 million
per year.
Mr. Nordhoff referred to the General Fund, which is the largest Operating Fund and
deals with Fire, Police, Parks and Library Services, noting the Fund is balanced
at this time, with the inclusion of full funding for the Code Enforcement Program
Council established last year, including additional staff effort in the City
Attorney's Office, as well as the three Code Enforcement personnel.
Mr. Nordoff reported some things have been added which he felt were important to
balance out some long-term issues for City, stating he had set aside $220,000
of the $1 million savings he mentioned as a hedge, so if retirement rates should
go back up we will have some way of funding this.
Mr. Nordhoff pointed out that in the past Council has been setting aside $100,000
of tax money for Americans With Disabilities Act projects and needs, noting the
City has a fairly substantial list. He noted he had built $100, 000 into the budget,
assuming Council wishes to continue meeting those needs.
Based on the City' s most recent audit of last year, we have approximately $2. 7 million
of accumulated leave, and no current funding to pay for that. Therefore, Mr.
Nordhoff suggested setting aside $200,000 to begin to accumulate funds, noting
this is a real expense to the City when people leave. Mr. Nordhoff also pointed
out that in the MOU's with the employee groups the City is committed to bringing
them to
being the highest paid employees in the County, and slightly ahead of our survey
cities, which we use when discussing total compensation. Mr. Nordhoff explained
part of this had to do with agreements with groups that had multi-year contracts,
noting we had revenue sharing arrangements in which they would receive two-thirds
of the excess money over most of the major tax resources, and Mr. Nordhoff estimated
there was approximately $520,000 which he thought would be available for next
year to help us achieve that goal, although he noted we would not know the exact
figure until the books were closed at the end of the year.
Mr. Nordhoff stated it was important to note with the General Fund that we are
maintaining our 10% reserve, a financial management policy established by the
Council. He reported we have also set aside $215,000 for the County's analysis
regarding cable TV assessed valuations, noting that money was disbursed to us,
but the cable TV industry is presently in litigation with the County, and it is
likely we will lose approximately 60% to 90% of that figure.
Mr. Nordhoff reported we have slightly over $1 million in grant based activity,
representing a lot of work getting done in a lot of places, and noted if it were
not for the grants we would have to find other ways to pay for this work or it
would stop. He stated the most significant was signalization work at Fourth and
Fifth Streets, which was approximately $447,000. He stated the balance of the
$1 million is spread between Recreation, Police, Falkirk, and Library activities.
Mr. Nordhoff reported there were two stormwater projects, MCSTOPPP and the Bay
Area Ad Campaign, which will be shifted to the County, so we will wind those down
at the end of this year, and transfer any excess funds back to the County. He
reported he has included in the Hazardous Material Fund both the fact that the
Fire Department is now a CUPA Agency on behalf of the State, and the Household
Hazardous Waste Program.
Mr. Nordhoff reported we are continuing to maintain a modest level of capital for
infrastructure improvements and modifications, noting he had appropriated
$600,000 for storm drains, $900,000 for street work, $150,000 for sidewalks, and
$60,000 for park improvements.
Mr. Nordhoff stated there were several issues they would be working on with the
City Manager and other staff for Council's consideration. The first is that there
have been some accounting changes in the way we accrue our tax revenues, and to
the extent that this occurred in our last audit, he was estimating there was
approximately $780,000 of one-time excess monies, above and beyond the 10% reserve
requirement, and this could be used for one-time expenditures, such as Capital
needs, additional radio replacement requirements, or whatever Council feels is
appropriate. Mr. Nordhoff stated he would be working with the City Manager to
develop a list to bring before the Council.
Mr. Nordhoff reported staff would be conducting the final review of the Cost Study
during the next couple of weeks, and he will come back before Council with policy
direction and recommendations. He pointed out we can look at individual or group
based services that are presently subsidized by tax dollars, make fee
recommendations where that is appropriate, and free up tax dollars for enhanced
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 17
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 18
or additional new services. He noted the City Manager had asked for a list of
where and to what extent we might free -up some of that money, so that it might
be better used.
Mr. Nordhoff reported the City was working with five other districts and agencies
regarding refuse rate fees for the coming year, and part of that for San Rafael
will include the institution of a franchise fee, which will be new money for the
City that could be used for such things as Capital Improvements and Infrastructure.
Mr. Nordhoff pointed out a series of meetings were scheduled for the end of June,
noting on June 23rd and 24th the departments would be prepared to discuss their
goals and objectives, and we will be prepared to adopt the City and Redevelopment
Agency budgets on June 30th.
Mr. Nordhoff stated the total budget, as it is estimated at this time, is approximately
$50 million, and includes all the activities of the City. He stated he believed
the budget was balanced, and probably in the best position it has been in for
several years, given the recession and various other factors. Mr. Nordhoff noted
there were no new or enhanced services built into the budget at this time, and
stated staff was in the process of completing a final review with the departments,
and expected to have everything buttoned down within the next couple of weeks.
Mayor Boro referred to Property Taxes, and recalled a number of years ago he had
spoken with the former County Assessor, who pointed out that the valuation of
many properties throughout the County had been reduced as a result of the recession
and the market conditions at that time. Mayor Boro explained that something has
to happen to re-establish those assessments, as it does not just happen
automatically, and the Assessor cautioned Mayor Boro to make sure the City
followed-up with the Assessor's Office to make certain the former valuations were
brought back on-line. Mayor Boro asked Mr. Nordhoff to pursue that issue.
Mayor Boro acknowledged the fine work of Assistant City Manager Suzy Golt in working
with the Retirement Board, getting the City's contribution reduced by $1 million,
and creating more realistic rates.
Councilmember Phillips asked what Parkland Dedication funds represented? Mr.
Nordhoff stated these were fees collected over a period of time as different
projects throughout the community have been developed and designated, or set aside
to be used for such things as park acquisition and improvements. Mr. Nordhoff
stated it was estimated that we would begin the year with approximately
$1 million in Parkland Dedication funds, and have estimated using some of that money
for the Hoffmann ballfields, as well as other projects during the coming year.
Mr. Nordhoff explained this amount represents what we expect to spend next year
under this category. Mr. Phillips asked what the assumption was with respect
to the Hoffman ballfields? Mr. Nordhoff reported the assumption was that the
City would make a $200,000 down payment, and finance $15,000 a year for the next
ten years to pay the balance.
Councilmember Phillips asked about the Police radio system. Mr. Nordhoff reported
we had not assumed any expenditures for the Police radio at this time, given the
volatility of the issue; however, there is $1.2 million set aside in the Capital
Improvement fund for this purpose. City Manager Gould reported Vice -Mayor Heller
had chaired a committee meeting of elected officials from throughout Marin County
to discuss this issue, noting there was a very high consensus among the elected
officials on the committee that there is a real problem, and the major agencies
throughout the County are going to have to replace their public radio systems
in the near future. He pointed out the method of financing this will likely be
with a lease purchase, which would be preferable to a one-time bond issue that
would have to go before the voters. He noted San Rafael had a huge advantage,
in that we have already set aside funds to purchase a new Police radio system,
and would only need to find a way to lease purchase the Fire Department and Public
Works systems to compliment it. Mr. Gould pointed out that until the Council
allocates the money, which they can do at any time when we are ready to go, it
would be inappropriate to show it as an expenditure during this fiscal year.
Mayor Boro asked if the $49,811,000 was what Mr. Nordhoff would be bringing to Council
at the budget hearings, with the various departments sharing with Council what
they intend to do with their budgets next year, and a separate document showing
the balance in all the other funds, such as Parkland Dedication and Reserves?
Mr. Nordhoff stated that was correct, noting the information identifying all
the balances and reserves has already been prepared.
16. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
a. COUNTYWIDE RADIO SYSTEM - File 9-3-30 x 9-3-31 x 9-3-40 (Verbal)
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 18
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 19
Councilmember Heller reported on a meeting of elected officials from throughout
the County to discuss a Countywide radio system, noting the cities of Corte Madera,
Fairfax, San Anselmo, and Ross were not represented. Ms. Heller stated she would
be sending two reports from the meeting to the Councilmembers on Wednesday, an
Executive Report on the Countywide System, and the response to comments from the
four Councilmembers who had special questions and comments on where the radio
system was going. Ms. Heller stated that while the meeting answered a lot of
questions, it also opened up many new questions, and she felt there was going
to be much more interest generated among the elected officials. She reported
financing may be a lease purchase rather than a bond issue.
b. TRAFFIC MITIGATION IN THE BELLAM/EAST FRANCISCO AREA OF SAN RAFAEL
- File 11-1 x 11-13 x 9-3-40 (Verbal)
Mayor Boro reported a special study session had been held earlier this evening at
which the issue of traffic mitigation in the Bellam/East Francisco area was
discussed. He reported Associate Traffic Engineer Nader Mansourian has presented
some excellent solutions to the traffic problems, and urged Councilmembers Cohen
and Phillips, who were unable to attend the special study session, to meet with
Mr. Mansourian to review these suggestions. Mayor Boro and Councilmembers Heller
and Miller gave Mr. Mansourian their tacit approval, and directed him to come
back to Council with additional information.
c. COMMUNITY POLICING - File 9-3-30 (Verbal)
Councilmember Phillips reported members of the City/School Liaison Committee met
with Police Chief Sanchez to discuss community based policing. He reported Chief
Sanchez did a good job in describing what the City is doing, and felt there would
be closer ties to the School District in this process.
d. RECEPTION FOR JEFF BLACKWELL, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS - File 102 x 9-2-1 (Verbal)
Councilmember Phillips reported a reception would be held at the Falkirk Cultural
Center on Monday, June 9th to honor Jeff Blackwell, Superintendent of Schools.
e. POLICE CHIEF SANCHEZ INJURED - File 9-3-30 (Verbal)
City Manager Gould reported Police Chief Sanchez had been injured this afternoon
in an automobile accident.
f. WATER POLLUTION EDUCATION PROGRAM - File 4-4-6.b (Verbal)
Mayor Boro reported he would be speaking to a group of second grade students at
Bahia Vista School on Thursday to discuss pollutants in the water.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:40 PM
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1997
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/2/97 Page 19