HomeMy WebLinkAboutRA Minutes 1998-02-17SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 1
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1998 AT 7:35
PM
Regular Meeting: Present: Albert J. Boro, Chairman
San Rafael Redevelopment Agency: Paul M. Cohen, Member
(arrived during Agenda
Item #4)
Barbara Heller, Member
Cyr N. Miller, Member
Gary O. Phillips, Member
Absent: None
Also Present: Rod Gould, Executive Director
Gary T. Ragghianti, Agency Attorney
Jeanne M. Leoncini, Agency Secretary
CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 PM
None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: 7:45 PM
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Member Phillips moved and Member Miller seconded, to approve the following
Consent Calendar items:
ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of Approved as
submitted.
Monday, February 2, 1998 (AS)
2. Unapproved Minutes of Citizens Advisory Accepted report.
Committee Meeting of Thursday, January 8,
1998 (RA) - File R-140 IVB
3. Monthly Investment Report (Admin. Svcs.) Accepted report.
- File R-123
AYES: MEMBERS: Heller, Miller, Phillips and Chairman Boro
NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: Cohen
AGENCY CONSIDERATION:
4. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING STAFF TO NEGOTIATE A DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT WITH MONAHAN PARKER, INC. FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE "B" STREET
PROJECT AREA (RA) - File R-406 x R-384 x R-381
Executive Director Gould reported the purpose of this meeting was for the
Agency to receive public comment and a presentation from Monahan Parker
Inc. of a proposal to redevelop a portion of "B" and Second Streets, known
as the "B" Street Redevelopment Project Area. Mr. Gould stated that,
unfortunately, many people were under the impression this was actually
about the relocation of the St. Vincent de Paul Dining Room. Mr. Gould
pointed out the City Council and Redevelopment Agency have set a special
meeting for Monday, February 23rd, at 7:00 PM, strictly for the purpose of
discussing the relocation of the Dining Room. He stated if people were
interested in discussing the Monahan Parker proposal, this would be the
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 1
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 2
meeting to do so, but if they were interested in discussing the relocation
of the St. Vincent de Paul Dining Room, then next Monday night would be the
proper time to provide those comments.
Economic Development Director Jake Ours reported the Agency, by Resolution,
had directed staff to seek proposals for the development of portions of
"B", Second, and "A" Streets. He stated the Agency also authorized staff
to solicit development proposals to assemble the "B" Street Project Area
parcels, and redevelop them in a manner consistent with the Agency's
Redevelopment Plan and the City's General Plan.
Mr. Ours noted that in October staff issued a Request for Proposals to over
sixty potential developers, including all the property owners in the "B"
Street area. He reported the Agency received one proposal for the
development, which came from one of the property owners, Monahan Parker,
Inc.
Mr. Ours reported the objectives for this project were to create a high
quality, active Mixed -Use project, and to revitalize "B" Street, consistent
with the Vision for Downtown. He recalled that when the Visioning process
was done, one of the things discussed was revitalizing the retail, living,
and shopping experiences along the corridors of "A", "B", and "C" Streets.
He noted redevelopment began on "C" Street, and was now moving on to "B"
Street. Additional objectives were to retain and enhance the historic
character and pedestrian friendly nature of the frontages on "A" and "B"
Streets, provide affordable and market rate housing in the Downtown,
eliminate or rehabilitate sub -standard housing units, create well designed
buildings for a significant entry statement to the new "A" Street entrance
(Andersen Drive), eliminate blight, create jobs and improve the economic
vitality of the area.
Mr. Ours referred to the site plans, included in the staff report as
Attachment D, noting the project was divided into three areas. In Area 1,
which is on the "A" Street frontage and on Second Street, the residential
and commercial buildings would be removed, and new retail would be put in,
along with office above. In Area 2, which is the "B" Street area, the
buildings would be rehabilitated, and the rear portions opened up for
retail, with the ground floor being retail, and a courtyard established in
the back. In Area 3, which is now a small office building and a vacant
parking lot across the street to the west, new residential would be
developed, consisting of approximately twenty-four residential units, with
retail on the ground floor.
Referring to the developer, Mr. Ours reported Monahan Parker, Inc. has
developed other projects in San Rafael, noting they have done Maxwell the
Cleaners, they are currently doing the Oasis Software building on the north
end of "B" Street, and they are also doing the proposed Kaiser Permanente
building. Mr. Ours noted they have done quite a few projects, and are very
qualified to do this development.
Mr. Ours explained that in order to make the project complete, all the
properties in the Project Area must be acquired, on both sides of "B"
Street. He reported the Agency was looking at subsidizing the project in a
way that will allow the Agency to provide affordable housing, and also
maintain the historic nature of "B" Street, noting these would both require
subsidies from the Agency. Therefore, the Agency will be negotiating this
as part of the Disposition and Development Agreement with Monahan Parker,
Inc.
Mr. Ours pointed out staff had provided a brief schedule of the project,
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 2
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 3
noting the Agency's goal is to begin with the selection of the developer at
this time, and be leased -out by the year 2000. He stated staff was
recommending the Agency authorize the negotiation of the Disposition and
Development Agreement with Monahan Parker, Inc., and staff will bring the
results of those negotiations back before the Agency at a later date.
Chairman Boro asked for more detail on what that would entail, what it
would mean if the Agency approves this tonight, and how it fits into the
timeline of the entire process. Mr. Ours stated the Disposition and
Development Agreement would include all the business terms between the
Redevelopment Agency and Developer, and would include such things as the
manner in which the Agency acquires the property, the subsidy, the timeline
for the project, and later on it would also include who the retail tenants
were going to be, the number of residential units, and what the rental
rates would be. He stated a general mix of retail and rental would be
described.
Member Phillips noted RFP's had been sent to a number of developers, yet we
received only one response, and he asked Mr. Ours what that was indicative
of. Mr. Ours stated this was likely because Monahan Parker Inc. already
owned real estate in the area, and they also had a "leg up" on any other
developer, in order to start the project, because they had already done the
groundwork, and they were ready to start. In addition, he noted this was a
very busy time, and there was no telling what other developers were doing
at any given time. Mr. Ours stated he was very satisfied with the proposal
we received, because it was from a known, local developer, someone the
Agency is familiar with, and has dealt with in the past. He noted those
were all things in favor of Monahan Parker, Inc., and even if there had
been other proposals, they likely would have been at the top of the list.
Member Phillips referred to Page 3 of the staff report, regarding Property
Acquisition and Relocation, noting it states, "The property owners will
receive ample notification of the Agency's or Developer's intent to acquire
property". He asked what the timeline would be regarding adequate
notification and acquisition? Mr. Ours reported that, first of all, every
owner in the area had been sent a copy of the Request for Proposal, and
asked to participate, although the Agency did not receive any Affirmative
Requests to the response. He noted, as far as the acquisition of
properties, if the Agency is authorized to begin the project, the first
step they would take would be the appraisals of the properties, and the
negotiation of a purchase price with the property owners. Therefore, as
soon as the Agency authorizes staff to go forward, they would be notifying
property owners.
Member Phillips asked, if the project were to go forward, what type of
retail would be on the site, and what the redeveloped area would look like
and feel like. Mr. Ours stated the retail, as proposed, would be basically
small retail with a "Downtown flavor". He noted the Downtown Vision talks
about strolling along "B" Street, and noted the shops would likely be a mix
of types, similar to those found on Fourth Street. Mr. Ours pointed out
one nice thing would be that the shops would be new retail space, which is
a rare thing in San Rafael, noting most of the City's retail spaces are
old, and the configuration of them is not the best. Therefore, we would be
building a new product that would have a very high demand in the market.
Member Heller asked if the Agency would actually be adding any housing, or
only enhancing the current housing? Mr. Ours reported there would be an
increase in housing units, noting there would be 24 new units, and the
existing apartment units on the upper floors of the buildings on "B" Street
would be "rehabed", with the actual configuration of those dependent upon
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 3
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 4
how the rehab turns out. He stated there were sub -standard units on the
"A" Street side, which would be taken out, but they would be replaced by
new units.
Member Cohen noted Mr. Ours had reported the DDA would come back before the
Agency, with further descriptions of the tenants in the retail spaces. Mr.
Ours stated one of the things staff would ask for would be some type of
approval over the retail tenants, as we have done with the former Macy's
site. Mr. Ours pointed out that since there are so many small retail
tenants here, it would not be the same type of proposal the Agency has with
the former Macy's site; however, he noted the Agency would want to make
sure we had some say over who the retailers would be.
Member Cohen noted, overall, he liked the proposal and the approach being
taken; however, he felt some concern over the proposal for a Rite-Aid
Pharmacy at the corner of "A" Street. He believed one of the things this
project offered was the opportunity to enhance the new gateway to Downtown
San Rafael, with the connection of Andersen Drive to the foot of "A"
Street, and he wondered if a Rite-Aid Pharmacy on that corner would be
making the best use of what should be a very high profile retail corner.
Also, he wondered what the implications of that would be, with a Rite-Aid
Pharmacy currently in the Montecito Shopping Center? He stated a year or
two ago he would have been concerned, and would have asked if it was really
an advantage to have a drug store in the Downtown; now, there is already a
Walgreen's Drug Store project moving forward, and he felt this was an issue
the Agency needed to look at closely.
Chairman Boro introduced Lee Rosenthal, Attorney for the Redevelopment
Agency. Mr. Rosenthal stated that in terms of a Disposition and
Development Agreement, this was only a first step, and any agreement would
have to come back before the Redevelopment Agency, at which time the Agency
would hold a Public Hearing, and then vote and decide on the DDA, and the
particular terms that are brought forward.
Chairman Boro invited members of the public to address this item. He
reminded those in attendance that the television reports which stated the
Agency would be discussing the relocation site for St. Vincent de Paul had
been erroneous, reiterating that was not the issue before the Agency.
Chairman Boro stated the only issue now before the Agency was whether or
not we should go forward to investigate the redevelopment of "B" Street,
and he asked that any public comment be held to those points.
Sue Brown, Chief Executive Officer of St. Vincent de Paul Dining Room,
stated she was requesting the Agency postpone the approval of the
Developer's project for the "B" Street area, in order to give St. Vincent's
time to explore with the Developer the possibility of having a dining room
incorporated into the "B" Street project. She stated St. Vincent's
understood they could not afford to develop the entire project, but they
would like to explore with the Agency and the Developer the viability of
having the dining room incorporated into the project. She suggested one
possibility would be to have the entry to the dining room located on Second
Street, with an interior courtyard, which would then provide privacy for
the guests, as well as getting people off the sidewalk, so it would not
adversely impact the merchants, or the small retail shops the Agency plans
on developing.
Ms. Brown stated she had letters from residents of San Rafael who are in
support of having the dining room incorporated into the "B" Street project,
and members of the audience delivered copies of the letters to each of the
Agency Members. She then introduced Margo Rubinowitz, an Attorney
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 4
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 5
representing St. Vincent de Paul.
Margo Rabinovitz, Attorney with the law firm of Broebeck, Phleger &
Harrison, stated she was part of a coalition of lawyers who have been asked
to assist St. Vincent de Paul in commenting on the project now being
considered by the Agency. She stated their main point was to urge the
Agency to delay consideration of the action before them at this time
regarding the redevelopment proposal, pending full compliance with Eminent
Domain law, as well as Community Redevelopment law. Ms. Rabinovitz stated
California's Eminent Domain law establishes very specific circumstances
under which public agencies can acquire property by eminent domain. She
noted a condition preceding the exercise of that power is that Agencies
must hold a Public Hearing, at which they consider whether those factors
have been met, and if so, then adopt a Resolution of Necessity. She stated
that for an Agency to make a decision to condemn property in advance of
holding that hearing would render the hearing nothing more than a sham, in
which the Agency merely "rubber stamped" at the hearing a decision that had
been made long ago.
Ms. Rabinovitz stated that in this case, it is clear from the evidence that
the Agency has committed to condemn St. Vincent's property, in order to
make way for the development project being considered this evening. She
believed the Agency's records showed ample evidence of this
predetermination, dating back to as early as 1981, when the Agency,
somewhat adverse to the request of the City Attorney at that time,
attempted to force St. Vincent's to agree to operate under a Conditional
Use Permit, notwithstanding the City Attorney's advice that the dining room
was a Permitted Use at the time. She noted when that effort was
unsuccessful, the Agency moved on to try to require St. Vincent's to
relocate, pointing out that those conversations have been going on for
quite a long time. However, as recently as a year ago, or even less, the
Agency reaffirmed its predetermination, stating to a local merchant that
the City Council was 100% committed to getting St. Vincent's outside of
Downtown, and if, after selecting a Developer, St. Vincent's was unwilling
to sell its property, the Redevelopment Agency would have an opportunity to
condemn the property.
Ms. Rabinovitz stated the Agency had apparently committed to this
condemnation proceeding with the Developer, who states in their proposal
that they understand the Agency is willing to acquire, and convey to them
at no cost, the St. Vincent de Paul building. Ms. Rabinovitz stated, based
on the foregoing evidence, they felt acceptance of the Developers proposal
at this time would render any hearing the Agency might later hold, with
respect to condemnation of the St. Vincent de Paul property, to be a sham.
Ms. Rabinovitz stated they were also urging the Agency to delay
consideration of the Developer's proposal until proper compliance with the
Eminent Domain law, and until a hearing with respect to the appropriateness
of the Resolution of Necessity has been undertaken.
Referring to the Community Redevelopment law, Ms. Rabinovitz noted the law
requires that every redevelopment plan provide for participation by owners
in the redevelopment of property within a project area, and every
Redevelopment Agency is required to extend reasonable preferences to owners
within a project area to re-enter into the business within the project
area, once the redevelopment is completed.
Ms. Rabinovitz reported San Rafael's Redevelopment Plan specifically
requires the Agency to extend reasonable preferences to persons engaged in
business in the project area, to re-enter business in the project area.
Furthermore, neither the Redevelopment Plan, the Implementation Plan, nor
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 5
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 6
the Agency's Owner Participation Rules provide a process for the Agency to
assemble property without owner participation; instead, the Redevelopment
Plan specifically provides that the Agency may not exercise its power of
eminent domain unless an owner refuses to rehabilitate or redevelop their
property, pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan. She stated that in this
case, there is no proposal to eliminate the building in which St. Vincent's
is located, rather the Developer's proposal would rehabilitate the existing
building.
Ms. Rabinovitz pointed out St. Vincent's representatives had indicated they
were more than willing to meet with the Agency and the Developer to discuss
their participation in the redevelopment process. However, the Agency has
failed to provide St. Vincent's with an opportunity to participate in the
redevelopment process. She stated neither the RFP nor the Proposal make
any provision for owner participation by St. Vincent's; moreover, in
response to St. Vincent's specific written request to participate in the
redevelopment process, as a component in the Master Plan proposed by the
Developer, Agency staff who responded stated that would be a severe
departure from the Agency's plans, which, as she has previously indicated,
appear to contemplate acquisition of the St. Vincent de Paul property for
reconveyance to the Developer. Ms. Rabinovitz reported the Developer
clearly believes the Agency has committed to this, because the Developer's
proposal identifies the St. Vincent's parcel as being vacant, and
attributes a cost of $ -0- to the acquisition of that property.
Ms. Rabinovitz stated that although participation by St. Vincent's may not
be consistent with the determinations the Agency has made in the past,
regarding condemnation of this property, it is explicitly required by
Redevelopment law, and by the Agency's own Redevelopment Plan,
Implementation Plan, and Owner Participation Rules. Therefore, Ms.
Rabinovitz reiterated that St. Vincent's is prepared to meet immediately
with the Agency and the Developer to discuss a process whereby St.
Vincent's could participate in the redevelopment process. She stated St.
Vincent's has come up with a conceptual plan for that participation, which
they feel would be consistent with the Redevelopment Plan, would reduce the
impact of St. Vincent's facilities on the community, and would allow St.
Vincent's to continue to provide the vital community services it has been
providing for so many years.
On behalf of St. Vincent's, Ms. Rabinovitz urged the Agency to delay
consideration of the Developer's proposal, until the Agency has taken time
to meet with St. Vincent's and the Developer, to discuss opportunities for
St. Vincent's participation, as well as for full and complete compliance
with the Eminent Domain law, as well as the Community Redevelopment law.
Chairman Boro asked Mr. Rosenthal to first respond to Ms. Brown's question,
regarding whether or not, if this process were to proceed, and if St.
Vincent's was interested in participating with Monahan Parker, Inc., could
that idea be pursued at that time; and also to respond to the questions
regarding the issues of Eminent Domain and the Community Redevelopment law.
Mr. Rosenthal, stated Ms. Brown's question was whether or not St. Vincent's
could explore the possibility of incorporating some kind of facility in the
Parker Monahan project, and the answer is that nothing the Agency is doing
tonight would preclude exploring that, between now and the time, if there
is a time, when there is a DDA with the Agency. Mr. Rosenthal explained
this was something that could go forward, and could be explored, even if
the Agency approved going forward with negotiations with Monahan Parker,
Inc. at this time.
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 6
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 7
With regard to the Eminent Domain law, Mr. Rosenthal stated the point Ms.
Rabinovitz made was that somehow the Agency has already acted, and intends
to acquire the St. Vincent's property. He stated that was not the case,
there has been no formal action or Resolution expressing an intent to
condemn the property. He noted the Agency had not even entered into a DDA
with the Developer, let alone considered a Resolution of Necessity where
that kind of intent would be expressed. Mr. Rosenthal reported the Agency
has been involved in an owner participation process, which is, in fact,
required by law, and is a predicate to even considering Resolutions of
Necessity to Condemn. Mr. Rosenthal pointed out that was exactly what the
Agency did not do in the case cited by Ms. Rabinovitz, and that is what got
them in trouble, because they did not follow that process. Mr. Rosenthal
reported the San Rafael Redevelopment Agency has been following that
process since Fall of 1996, beginning with the Agency's initial
determinations regarding this property.
Regarding owner participation under the Redevelopment law and the
Redevelopment Plan, Mr. Rosenthal stated the law does require the Agency
offer opportunities for owner participation. He noted, as Mr. Ours had
pointed out, Request for Proposals were sent to all the property owners,
including St. Vincent de Paul, and they all had an opportunity to submit a
proposal; however, as he understood it, St. Vincent's did not, although
they were given an opportunity for owner participation.
Lauren Hallinan, Director of Legal Aid of Marin, stated they were also
representing St. Vincent de Paul on this issue, noting they have also been
involved previously on some of the pre -determinations. Ms. Hallinan stated
her comments at this time were related to environmental issues, and noted
she, too, was requesting the Agency delay making a decision on the
Disposition and Development Agreement proposal. First, she stated they
believe additional environmental review is required, pointing out the only
environmental document in the program is the Program Environmental Impact
Report for the General Plan, and there is nothing specifically on this
project. Second, there is no environmental review document that analyzes
the significant environmental effects on a condemnation and relocation of
St. Vincent de Paul. Third, any Environmental Impact Report on the
Disposition and Development Agreement would be meaningless, in their view,
because St. Vincent's does anticipate that the City will proceed with
Eminent Domain, and a taking; therefore, any later environmental review
would have no impact, and would be, again, just a sham action. She stated
the relocation, itself, of St. Vincent's could have a variety of
environmental impacts that need to be addressed, if the Agency is looking
at whether or not it is going to be in the project. For example, she noted
there would be impacts on traffic, housing, and public transportation.
Melany Kramer, resident of Harbor Center, stated that trying to dress this
up as two separate issues was nonsense, noting that when the Agency has a
Developer with a specific plan that eliminates an existing building owner,
there is a little more going on than people want to admit. Ms. Kramer
stated the Agency Members needed to listen to their constituents, noting
that if there was a Downtown church, or a charitable organization that was
not represented, they would be present next week. She reported she had
served at several different St. Vincent locations, as a volunteer, noting
the homeless people have to eat, and this problem was not going to go away,
because the Agency cannot tell people to go starve. Ms. Kramer reported
she had contacted (Attorney General) Janet Reno's office, to see if her
office could assist in clarifying this situation for people, noting we were
talking about civil rights, and about the homeless, and the Agency could
not win on this issue.
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 7
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 8
Margaret Jacobson, of Protection in Advocacy, Inc., a non-profit law firm
providing advocacy and legal services to people with disabilities, stated
her organization had been contacted by, and on behalf of, people who are
patrons of St. Vincent's Dining Room, noting they represent some of those
patrons in their interests in what happens to the Dining Room. She stated
it was their analysis that what has been happening with the Dining Room
probably violates Federal and State anti -discrimination laws against people
with disabilities. She reported, to the best of their understanding, the
needs of those people with disabilities have not been taken into
consideration in deciding what will happen with the redevelopment of the
Downtown area.
Ms. Jacobson reported a substantial portion of people who use St. Vincent's
are people with disabilities, noting that would include people with
developmental disabilities, people with physical disabilities, and people
with mental disabilities. She explained those people have problems
utilizing services that are going to be moved, and many of the services
which the people with disabilities use are closely connected or nearby
where the Dining Room is currently. She stated, in order to accommodate
people with disabilities, it was incumbent upon the Agency to consider
maintaining St. Vincent's in its current location, so people with
disabilities will not be disadvantaged or unfairly impacted by any sort of
move. She noted that if they do need to move, then they would request the
Agency take certain things into consideration in deciding where it would be
relocated, including such things as a location not being any further than
ten minutes from its current location, for a walk, or a push in a
wheelchair; that it be in a safe location; that it be in an area that is a
place where dining rooms and restaurants normally occur, because that would
prevent unnecessary segregation or isolation of people with disabilities;
that it be on a path of travel that is safe and acceptable, and would
include curb cuts and be wheelchair accessible; and be on an accessible
public transportation line for those who might have to use public
transportation, and who would not even be able to travel a ten minute walk.
Ms. Jacobson stated that by not taking those needs into consideration, the
Agency was potentially violating Federal and State anti -discrimination laws
which protect people with disabilities, noting that would include such laws
as the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Chairman Boro asked Agency Attorney Rosenthal if he had any comments to the
letter the Agency had received from Protection Advocacy? Mr. Rosenthal
stated that in looking at the law, as far as the decision being made at
this time, he did not feel the Americans with Disabilities Act impacted any
decision the Agency might make here tonight. He stated this conceivably
was an issue if St. Vincent were to move, with regard to the location;
however, it would not have an impact on the decision the Agency was being
asked to make this evening.
Frank Ross, spoke on behalf of St. Vincent de Paul, and all those who, like
himself, have at one time been homeless, helpless, and hungry. He stated
the people of Marin, whether they be just passing through or here to stay,
feel it is necessary to offer a place of welcome, such as the St. Vincent
de Paul Dining Room. He reported, throughout time, Marin has asked the
homeless and those not so well off, such as the real natives of Marin, to
go elsewhere. Mr. Ross stated this issue was about humanism in Marin,
noting the supporters of the kitchen are asking only for a fair chance to
compete with competitive forces that be. He noted there were issues that
had to be dealt with, but first they had to secure a foundation, which they
have with St. Vincent's; however, once St. Vincent's is forced to move,
that foundation will be lost. Mr. Ross felt the current location was a
vital place for the kitchen, as it was very centralized, and he hoped to
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 8
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 9
see it remain where it is.
Kim Petrini, stated she was addressing the Agency on behalf of small
business owners in San Rafael, and read a letter from her mother, Kit Cole,
quoting, "I am a business owner who has been involved in commerce all her
adult life, and who has been involved with and operated successful
businesses in Downtown San Rafael for the past twenty years. I appreciate
the efforts which the City administration is making to revitalize San
Rafael, and make my job, and those of my fellow business owners, easier and
even more pleasant. At the same time, I would clearly state that I am one
of many business owners of the silent majority who are not in agreement or
represented by City officials who want to force the closure of St. Vincent
de Paul at the present location, and drive it entirely from the Downtown
area.
"Daily, it seems, I read stories which say the City administration is
trying to force the Dining Room out of the Downtown for the sake of the
merchants whose businesses are adversely impacted by the Dining Room
clients. No one representing San Rafael has ever asked me how my business
has been impacted by the Dining Room clients, and thus far, I have never
commented to them on the subject. I would suspect that I am one of the
silent majority of Downtown merchants to have not yet been surveyed, but
who are being counted as constituents who support the actions of officials
of San Rafael. The truth is, we have homeless persons every night on or
about our premises. I suspect that many of these persons get their single
hot meal each day at the Dining Room. Yes, it is sometimes unsightly and
inconvenient, and incongruent with the ambience of the thriving financial
businesses. Sometimes we have even had to contact the Police. For the
most part, though, these are simply poor unfortunate persons, without even
the most meager of daily comfort we all take for granted.
"Has the presence of the homeless adversely affected our business?
Perhaps, but we have been able to sustain growth rates of up to 30% per
year, which suggests the cordial and prompt service to our clients, and
quality of the offering are the determining factors which drive this
success. In a perfect world, there are neither homeless nor hungry
citizens, I suppose, but we don't live in a perfect world, and it is not
consistent with my human values to be a party of actions which make the
world even less perfect.
"From my knowledge of the community, the present location of the Dining
Room seems appropriate, and it seems that there is no dearth of talent to
redesign the facility to mitigate the issue of four persons being out in
front. However, if there are compelling reasons, which can be agreed upon
by the entire community, that the Dining Room cannot remain at 820 "B"
Street, it should not be moved far away, but should remain within a short
walk from the neighborhood, and close to the persons who are currently
using it. It seems astounding to me that a very small but vocal group of
Downtown merchants can create such dislocation, and be so insensitive to
the plight of these people that they cannot act in a collaborative way to
be part of this humane solution. As a part of our contribution to the
community of Marin, we have donated financial support to the Dining Room,
and I have visited, personally, several times to serve meals there. I was
caught somewhat off -guard to see that diners, generally, were strikingly
similar to the rest of us, not always even reflecting their poor economic
status, well educated, polite, articulate, and local. Their current status
is a product of some unseen chain of events. What went through my mind was
that many, many residents of Marin might just be a paycheck or two away
from that status. They were neither threatening or scary, simply hungry
and appreciative.
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 9
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 10
"I strongly urge all the members of the City Council, and Mayor Boro, to go
to the Dining Room, to serve a meal, and to see for themselves who is
served and how they act. It seems that prior to taking any action, the
Council and Mayor Boro should experience for themselves, personally, the
congenial community spirit which prevails in the Dining Room, and to
witness the local character of the diners. Their decisions would be even
better informed, certainly more so than relying upon the noisy influence of
a few. This seems a small request for a decision with such a large impact
on so many San Rafael residents who are not able to represent themselves.
Under every circumstance, however, I think it is important for the Mayor
and the City Council to recognize that it is a faulty assumption that all,
or even the majority, of the Downtown merchants want the Dining Room moved
out of the Downtown area. There are several of us, who believe as I, that
part of our individual and Corporate responsibility is to serve the most
needy among us, not make them invisible. For us, that means St. Vincent de
Paul should remain where it is most accessible to its constituents, which
is near, or at, its present location".
Helen Luck, an 84 year old resident of San Rafael, noted she still lives in
the house she was born in here in San Rafael. She urged the Agency not
take the Dining Room away, stating she wants to stay out of a rest home,
and she can get to the dining room now, but she could not get to a new
location if it meant a long walk. She stated she goes to St. Vincent's to
be with other people, noting they have been very good to her at St.
Vincent's, and are always happy to see her and concerned with her
wellbeing.
Phillip Casey Fields, biology student and resident of San Rafael, noted
Helen also raises her grandchildren. He introduced Ed, a disabled homeless
man, who has had an accident and now has a crippled leg. Mr. Fields stated
Ed is homeless, disabled, and has no money for transportation, noting Ed is
one of the people who needs the dining room and he, along with other
homeless people, would have no money to take the bus if the dining room
were moved.
Chairman Boro reminded those still wishing to address the Agency to keep to
the issue that is actually being considered by the Agency at this time,
noting there would be plenty of time to address the issue of the potential
relocation of the St. Vincent de Paul dining room at the special Public
Hearing to be held February 23rd.
David Shelton, stated he was representing the disabled, and noted
Protection in Advocacy were his attorneys. He reported he had become
involved in this issue three months ago, because when the public
negotiations moved to private negotiations between the City and St. Vincent
de Paul, there was no one representing the disabled. He noted now there
was someone representing them, and he had a whole team of attorneys willing
to go all the way to the Supreme Court, and tie the Redevelopment Agency up
for years. He stated they would like a postponement before Monahan Parker
Inc. does anything further, and noted they have five questions they would
like to have answered: 1) Does the movement seek a genuine solution? Mr.
Shelton stated that, so far, it has failed in that; 2) When a question of
choice is forced upon an opponent, is the stress it thereby generates fully
recognized? He stated this, too, had failed; 3) Is the effort one of
support and reassurance to the opponent, whose change of habit and behavior
is so much desired? He believed that had failed; 4) To what degree has the
encounter established or suppressed communication? Mr. Shelton noted Mr.
Rosenthal had mentioned there were no formal issues going on, but Mr.
Shelton believed there have been a lot behind the scenes, with nothing in
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 10
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 11
writing, but a lot of "table pushing"; 5) Has the method embraced an
adequate process of inquiry? Mr. Shelton stated the letter written by Kit
Cole, and read into the record by her daughter, was a testimony to the
failure of adequate inquiry. He stated this must be done before anything
else goes forward, and noted he had another team of attorneys if that did
not work.
Elizabeth Campos, disabled person who utilizes St. Vincent's Dining Room,
stated she works in San Rafael, is homeless in San Rafael, and votes in San
Rafael. Ms. Campos noted the staff report used the word "blight", and
stated she had also read minutes of City Council meetings in which the word
"blight" was used in discussions regarding St. Vincent de Paul. She
reported that in 1957 she watched a television news program show the
bulldozing of a family's home in Chavez Ravine in the name of
redevelopment, so Dodger Stadium could be built there; now, she wondered
how long it would be before television cameras show this community
bulldozing the Council out of office, because of the actions they are
taking here.
Ron Kovic, Vietnam veteran and author of the book, "Born on the Fourth of
July", stated he wished to speak regarding the humanity of this situation,
noting what is happening in San Rafael is a microcosm of what is happening
all over the United States of America right now. He stated we have tens of
thousands of homeless, many of them Vietnam veterans, and veterans of the
Gulf War, who just came home the other day, noting, God knows how many
veterans will be on the streets, and in need of shelter, from this next
hideous war being planned right now. Mr. Kovic stated we must care for
these human beings. He asked, "Did you ever think for a moment that the
person you call homeless, that non -person you do not recognize, or seem to
be able to see, might have lived down the block, might have gone off to a
war, might have come home wounded psychologically or physically?" Mr.
Kovic stated he has gone to St. Vincent's, and sat down and had lunch there
many times, and been deeply touched and deeply moved by the humanity, the
beauty, the intelligence, and the compassion; and he was also moved by the
caring, which is so lacking in our society, the caring and the concern and
sensitivity which we need so desperately. He stated that when a country is
about to unleash tons and tons of bombs on human beings, who have done
absolutely nothing but starve for the last nine years, under hideous
sanctions, when our nation is about to kill, maim and destroy innocent
civilians by the thousands and thousands, it makes him really wonder what
has happened to our country, what has happened to ourselves, and what has
happened to our souls. Mr. Kovic asked, "Where is our humanity, where is
our love, caring and concern, what happened to our compassion, our
community mindedness, and when are we going to reclaim that?" He stated he
knew it was better to reclaim that, because it is better to reclaim our
country than abandon it. He stated he did not want to abandon our country,
and he does not want to abandon our people or our homeless. He believed
every single human being in our society, and here in San Rafael, is
valuable and important.
Mr. Kovic stated the homeless were valuable resources, valuable, precious,
and in many cases, brilliant resources who remain unseen and unheard. Mr.
Kovic asked everyone in the room, everyone who cares, and everyone who
believes that this country can change its course and live again, feel
again, breathe again, believe again, have compassion and trust again, to
commit themselves to a major homeless civil rights march down Fourth
Street, sometime this Spring, a major civil rights march on behalf of the
homeless. He stated we must do this, and he was calling for that homeless,
civil rights march tonight, calling for people to come, not only from
Marin, but from the San Francisco Bay Area, from all over the country, if
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 11
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 12
possible, to Fourth Street to march down the street of this City, so the
whole country can see that we are willing to stand up and fight for the
rights of our fellow human beings.
William French, resident of Fourth Street, stated he believed there was a
problem here, noting he felt many people believed those in the audience,
and those in the community, do not support the "B" Street Redevelopment
Project. He stated the truth is he has overwhelmingly heard that the "B"
Street Project is good for this community, and the only issue is the St.
Vincent de Paul Dining Room. Mr. French stated he had the opportunity to
speak with Senior Redevelopment Specialist Nancy Mackle, and discussed what
has been proposed thus far. He felt it was a really great idea, and
believed restoring the buildings on "B" Street would be wonderful, noting
his real concern would have been if they were going to be torn down.
However, Mr. French asked that the Redevelopment Project be postponed,
because he believed St. Vincent's should be dealt with first, before this
is approved. He stated he was afraid that if the project is approved at
this time, then whatever negotiations are done with St. Vincent's are not
going to mean anything, because the project will already be approved to go
through. He noted his fear was that St. Vincent's would not mean anything
to the Redevelopment Agency, and the majority of those in the community,
who support St. Vincent's being Downtown, would be run over by the
Redevelopment Agency.
Mariah Baird thanked those who had spoken out on behalf of St. Vincent's,
stating she had not expected to hear that tonight, and noting what we were
hearing was moral leadership. She stated this was what we needed, and what
she had come to ask the Agency for, as a constituent, as a resident of the
Bret Harte neighborhood, as a voter, and as a taxpayer. Ms. Baird noted
the Monahan Parker proposal, and the staff report, appeared to be another
step in the ongoing, closed door effort to relocate St. Vincent's out of
the Downtown. She stated St. Vincent's has asked to remain, noting they
have substantial support, and with good reason, and she, as a resident of
San Rafael, supported St. Vincent's remaining Downtown. She stated she
believed that, beyond sales tax and beyond commercial growth, there is a
traditional function of the City, and that is to house social services, to
serve all of the members of the community, and to be a place where the
burden of that service is shared equally by all members of the community.
She stated, contrary to what Mr. Rosenthal appears to have said, this
proposal and the staff report are premised upon removing St. Vincent's from
the project area; in addition, the City has continued to state its
determination to remove St. Vincent's from the Downtown, entirely. She
reported that in her review of City documents to obtain information on what
the City is doing on her behalf, it was evident that, long ago, the City
embarked on a program to remove St. Vincent's from the Downtown, and to use
the redevelopment process as a means of doing that. For example, there is
a 1991 petition against St. Vincent's, spearheaded by the very Developer
who stands to profit from this project, submitted to the former Mayor of
the City. She reported the Mayor at that time, in a notation at the bottom
of the petition, responding to Mr. Monahan, informed him that there was a
long-term goal of removing St. Vincent's from the Downtown. Ms. Baird
stated she would be giving the Agency Members a copy of that petition for
their review, as she believed it was indicative of the long-term strategy,
which is unacceptable. She reported there was also a memo in July, 1994
from Mr. Ours to then City Manager Pam Nicolai, which reflects talks on the
purchase of "B" Street, and contains the statement, "I think it will be the
only legal way we will ever get them off "B" Street". Ms. Baird stated she
did not believe this was moral leadership, and was not what she wanted from
the Agency Members, as her elected representatives. Ms. Baird stated there
really was no difference or separation in the issue of St. Vincent's and
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 12
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 13
this redevelopment proposal, and she felt everyone had to admit to that.
Ms. Baird stated she believed it was highly inappropriate, and illegal for
the Agency to take this kind of predetermined course, targeted at a
particular property owner, and a social service, under the guise of
redevelopment. She pointed out it had already been mentioned the City's
Implementation Plan contains a goal that there be a minimum of
displacement; however, she stated what she sees here is the maximum of
displacement, and she seriously questioned that. Ms. Baird stated, as a
result of this proposal and staff recommendation tonight, St. Vincent's
would be pushed out of the Downtown, noting it is expressly stated in the
staff report that St. Vincent must go, despite the fact that this has been
disclaimed by some of the Agency representatives. She noted the Agency
Members have not yet even heard from the public regarding the relocation of
St. Vincent's; therefore, she would support the earlier comment that the
issue of St. Vincent's be resolved before they steamroll
ahead with a redevelopment proposal that is aimed at dislocating them from
their present location, without there being another location for them to go
to that is appropriate, i.e., in the Downtown.
Ms. Baird stated she really expected more from the elected representatives,
noting she wants responsible and fair civic leadership. She believed the
Agency should take the opportunity to put the brakes on, and show some
moral leadership, stating they owed it to their constituents.
Bob Semple, San Rafael homeowner, taxpayer, voter, stated he was not
homeless, and he was not hungry; however, he could not believe the Agency
was not innovative enough to be able to put this redevelopment project
together, and leave St. Vincent's where it is.
Anise Turina, resident of Terra Linda since 1963, urged the Agency to
postpone approval of the redevelopment, so St. Vincent's can talk with the
Developer about incorporating the Dining Room in their plan. She stated
she believed the Agency should leave St. Vincent's where it is, noting
there was no reason it could not be enlarged, improved, and added to, with
the entrance changed so it is no longer on "B" Street. She stated the
Agency is not planning to move the people who live upstairs from St.
Vincent's, noting the developmentally disabled occupy many of the rooms,
and pointing out they use the Dining Room, as they do not have a kitchen,
they have to go down the hall to the bathroom, they do not have enough
money to really go out and eat, or to do a greater distance. She believed,
no matter where the Agency tries to move the Dining Room, they will get
resistance, noting they have been trying for a long time, now. She stated
there would be a lot of "Not in my neighborhood", just as there is with
affordable housing. However, she believed affordable housing was a good
thing, and this dining room was a good thing, pointing out it feeds a lot
of people. She stated we need to take care of the poor, and we cannot
ignore that, because we will have the poor among us always. She stated it
is not the responsibility of the churches or Whistle Stop to take on this
service, noting this is a big business, serving 300 people per day. Ms.
Turina noted the churches are doing a little bit with emergency housing,
and taking their turns on a monthly basis; this, however, is a big
undertaking, it is a restaurant, and we cannot expect the churches or
Whistle Stop to take on the job, which is currently being done very well.
Ms. Turina acknowledged the St. Vincent de Paul Dining Room would not make
money for the Developers; however, she stated money is not everything,
pointing out the Developers would be making enough on the rest of the
development. She agreed finding another site would be very difficult, and
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 13
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 14
she believed the Agency could solve the problem, not by moving it
somewhere, but by finding a solution to it, leaving it where it is, and
doing whatever we need to do to mitigate the problems. Ms. Turina pointed
out there were no vacancies in San Rafael right now, the economy is
thriving; therefore, she did not believe the homeless were hurting the
City's businesses very much.
Nicole Skivola stated that as a citizen of Marin County and daughter of a
private business owner in San Rafael, she felt St. Vincent de Paul was an
essential part of the community. She believed the problem lies not with
the people who tend the kitchen, but with those who are too selfish to
tolerate the needs of the mentally ill, the disabled, and the low income
people who make use of this important facility. She stated she has spent
many long, hard hours working at the kitchen, and has witnessed the comfort
and sense of community it has offered in this centralized location. She
recalled the week before Christmas a couple of years ago, they wrapped mugs
for the people at St. Vincent's, and a man in rags walked up to the piano
and began playing Silent Night, while everyone stood and sang together.
She stated it was very easy for the elite of Marin to push a filthy
nuisance out of their view and contact; however, she stated we had to
remember that these, too, are humans, who feel the pain of loneliness,
depression, and homelessness. She noted the Dining Room was also a very
important experience for youth to see what life is like outside the walls
of "white bread" Marin, pointing out the area of its current location is
very accessible to youth like herself, who can take the bus or walk from
their homes. She stated that if we want to prevent problems there in the
future, it would be necessary to educate those who would be most
influential, those with knowledge and experience. She believed it was
time, especially now, in the middle of Winter, to remember how fortunate
those of us are who have the luxuries of food, shelter, and warmth, and
then to think of the complications that living in a shelter would cause,
and how it would affect those most in need. She asked, as citizens of
Marin, that we not become part of the statistics that those who have more
always give less, stating it is our duty to face the problem, not to push
it away.
Linda Pearson, native of San Rafael, stated she knew the "A" and "B"
Streets area very well. She stated she believed the redevelopment of this
area was a wonderful idea, as were the plans currently underway for the
Fourth Street area. She stated the redevelopment idea was a good one,
provided the Agency take into account what she pictures her town as being,
which is a city that reaches out and helps, and acknowledges openly, to the
residents of the community, and the residents of the rest of the United
States, that all are important. She urged the Agency to reconsider, to
take St. Vincent's proposals into account, and to listen to the residents
of this community, both long-term and short-term residents, and what they
want to see. She stated the residents want to be known as a city of love
and acceptance, where everyone is encouraged to be.
Ann Song -Hill, resident of North San Rafael, thanked the Agency for the
work they have done on behalf of the citizens. She pointed out there has
been a lot of scolding and lecturing going on during the meeting, which she
did not feel was deserved, and noted she believed the Agency Members truly
have the interest of all the residents of San Rafael at heart. Ms. Song -
Hill reported she, too, had been a volunteer at St. Vincent's Dining Room,
and she knows the good work they do, and also that the Agency has been
involved in a very long and arduous process trying to come to some kind of
an agreement as to what to do, pointing out it has been more than five
years. She stated she knows the leadership at St. Vincent's, and knows
they are very well intentioned, good people; she stated she also feels she
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 14
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 15
knows the members of the City Council, and knows they are well intentioned
and very good people who give hours and hours of their time, uncompensated,
to try to make San Rafael a better place for everyone, noting she thanked
them for that. She stated she did not like the tone of some of the
comments she had heard this evening, and did not believe the Councilmembers
deserved to be lectured. She believed the Members were very well informed
about the issues, but somehow, someway, things have broken down, so that
good people, well intentioned people like the Council, and well
intentioned, good people like the leadership at St. Vincent's, somehow have
been unable to come to a mutually agreeable solution. She stated one of
the things that was so wonderful about our democratic process was the
public hearing process, and noted the Council had designated a week from
yesterday as the date of a public hearing (February 23, 1998) devoted to
the St. Vincent's issue; therefore, she was respectfully requesting Council
defer from making any decision on the redevelopment process, until they
have been able to hear from the entire community, after the public hearing.
Elissa Giambastiani, CEO of the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce, seconded
Ms. Song -Hills comments, noting she, too, knows the Councilmembers to be
kind, compassionate, thoughtful people, and she did not feel they needed to
be lectured.
Ms. Giambastiani stated she felt the current proposal was in keeping with
the Downtown Vision, pointing out it has been five years since the Vision
was completed. She noted they have undertaken many projects to revitalize
the Downtown, and she saw this as a continuation of the process. She
stated the other reason she particularly liked this project was because it
is a Mixed Use project, and she believed it would improve the economic
vitality of the area, provide sorely needed office space, rehabilitate sub-
standard housing units, and create additional housing units. She noted she
also liked the fact that the historical buildings were going to be
renovated, because the Vision Committee had talked a lot about the
historical character of "B" Street, and how that could be enhanced. She
stated she believed this project would enhance "B" Street.
Ms. Giambastiani noted she was very passionate about affordable housing,
and stated she was very concerned about losing any housing in the
redevelopment of this area, especially units that are affordable;
therefore, she was pleased the project addressed rehabilitating and
preserving the existing units through rent restrictions, to keep them
affordable. She pointed out a number of these units are occupied by people
with disabilities; therefore, she strongly encouraged the Agency to do
that. She was also pleased there would be new units coming on the market,
and that the Agency has agreed that 15% of these would be affordable. Ms.
Giambastiani stated she would like to see the Agency maintain the
affordability of these units at no more than 50% of median, if that is
possible. She stated she would like to know what would happen to the
people living in the units at the time of the renovation, noting she would
like to discuss that with the Members at a later date. Ms. Giambastiani
stated the Chamber of Commerce believed this was a good project.
Bob Vander Meer, property owner, voter, and citizen of San Rafael, referred
to the staff report, which stated the recommendation was to adopt the
attached Resolution. He pointed out that on Page 3 of the attached
Resolution, there is a sentence which states, "Monahan Parker, Inc. has
commented that the proposal, as presented to the Agency, would not be able
to be completed if the Dining Hall continued to be a tenant in the project
area". He stated, as he understood it, if this Resolution were accepted,
it would preclude any further discussion about St. Vincent's. Chairman
Boro explained the actual Resolution before the Agency was located at the
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 15
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 16
back of the staff report, and does not make
stated he, too, had asked that question at
noting he had asked if the adoption of this
any of the discussions, as requested by Sue
from the Agency Attorney was that it would
was his recommendation that the Resolution
that comment.
the beginning of
action tonight
Brown, pointing
not. Mr. Vander
decision be postponed.
Chairman Boro
the meeting,
would preclude
out the answer
Meer stated it
Lillith Thorsen, stated she was representing a class of students from the
College of Marin, who became involved in this issue last semester when they
were assigned to interview people on all sides of the issue. She stated it
ended up with a classroom full of young, inquisitive students, all who felt
the people at St. Vincent's needed to be taken care of, and that the best
thing that could be done was to find a way for them to stay where they are.
On behalf of the students in her class, she stated she hoped the Agency
would respect what they are hearing from the people at this meeting,
postpone their decision, and take care of those people.
John Auer, minister from First United Methodist Church, noted the people
who had come out to speak and be part of the process of being a city. He
stated they all wanted to help the Agency Members restore the heart of San
Rafael, for San Rafael is the heart of Marin, and "B" Street is the heart
of San Rafael. He stated they pledged themselves not only to be at this
meeting, they also pledged themselves not to go away. He stated it was
important to noted that the Spirit has moved through the community,
religious and otherwise, to bring people together who have never been
together before, people who are here for the first time, participating in
their role as citizens, and persons who have a heart and care for this
City. He stated this was to be applauded and celebrated, and also
encouraged. He reported there were new clergy leaders in all of the
Downtown churches, and all of those Downtown churches had been participants
in collecting the letters presented to the Agency members, noting they had
all worked together. He asked the Agency to allow everyone to give back to
St. Vincent's, and give back to the people who have been the volunteers,
staff and supporters of St. Vincent's for the past fifteen years, giving
back to them the love they have given to all of us.
Bob King, Homeless in Action, stated he is in support of keeping St.
Vincent's Downtown. He noted it was wonderful to have the new leadership
from the clergy, in support of homeless issues, stating these people were
bringing a lot of compassion and love, and he hoped the light they were
shining tonight could shine in each one of the Councilmembers' hearts, so
they can see that St. Vincent's needs to be exactly where it is, it needs
to stay Downtown, and the Council needs to postpone this development. He
stated we have lots of big businesses popping up, we have lots of money
coming into San Rafael, and we can certainly afford to keep St. Vincent's
exactly where it is. He stated the citizens had to stand fast and be
strong, and they had to come back each time the City Council says, "No",
until the City Council, in their compassion and love, finally understand
the wonder that St. Vincent's is.
Michael Rawson, attorney with California Affordable Housing Law Project,
representing St. Vincent de Paul, referred to the public hearing scheduled
for next week. He stated that if the City Council is sincere in
considering that St. Vincent's stay where it is, and staff has indicated
that is a possibility, then it really make no sense to go ahead with a
hearing next week that is advertised as a hearing for the relocation of St.
Vincent's, because if it is going to stay here, there won't be any
relocation. Chairman Boro stated that while that issue was not being
discussed during this meeting, he wished to clarify that point. He stated
the City has been working with St. Vincent's for a number of years, to
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 16
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 17
relocate them from the Downtown, noting the City has had an understanding
that this was St. Vincent's goal, as well as the City's goal. He stated
that is something that will be discussed next week, and the Agency will
state reasons why it feels it is important to do that. Therefore, the
Agency is going forward with the hearing next week, to discuss the
relocation of St. Vincent's, and, hopefully, it can be done in a way that
the City, St. Vincent's, their clients, and the entire community are all
winners, noting that was the goal of all the Agency Members. He stated the
Agency has never argued against the mission of St. Vincent's, and they
support that. However, he noted they have always said they have the
obligation to talk about how it is conducted and where it is conducted, and
that is what will be discussed next week. Mr. Rawson asked if it would
permissible next week to discuss keeping St. Vincent's where it is?
Chairman Boro stated that was certainly fair to talk about.
Tad Looyen addressed the Agency, stating he wished to discuss what was
appropriate for the present location. He noted the people who had spoken
tonight were the people who voted the Councilmembers into office, and they
are the ones who care. He stated these were the voters, and these were the
people who want the Councilmembers to act and do what it is they want. He
believed there needed to be some real consideration, noting the Council
talks about having discussions with St. Vincent de Paul for many years, and
he believed that to be true; however, all these talks have been in closed
meetings, without informing the public and the concerned voters who had
spoken tonight. He requested no decision be made tonight, out of courtesy
for all the voters who have attended the meeting to show their concern. He
stated now was the time for change.
Georgeanne Munton, child care provider in San Rafael, stated the Agency
may, on some technicality, decide to go forward with this project tonight;
however, as the Agency Members heard, Ron Kovic is going to lead a national
march in San Rafael, and numerous lawyers are going to keep the Agency in
court until the next millennium; therefore, the wonderful vision for this
redevelopment is going to fall apart, unless the Agency resolves the St.
Vincent's issue. She stated that regardless of the Agency's ability to
technically go forward with this tonight, its political ability to carry it
off, and the damage done to the Vision and the Agency's work, would be
great. She stated she, personally, did not want her tax dollars spent on
endlessly defending in court whether the Agency can go forward tonight.
She noted the Agency Attorney stated he did not feel that would be a
problem; however, she stated it was going to cost the Agency a lot of money
to find that out, and while the Agency may prevail, their plan will be in
shambles. She stated the Agency needs
to resolve the St. Vincent's issue, and then the people will be here
cheering the City on, and supporting the development; however, she noted
that without that, the Agency was hurting itself.
Barbara Dolan, stated she has been active in the community for the past
thirty years, noting she is currently a Trustee for the College of Marin.
She recalled in years past they have opened their gym and showers to the
homeless, and believed it was important to look at what services are
provided to people. She urged Council to delay its decision, and come
forward with a plan worked out together with St. Vincent's, before
proceeding with anything concerning redevelopment. She stated she has also
served as President of the Marin Coalition, and has heard many speakers
from the City address this issue. She suggested looking at other cities
that have successfully resolved these issues, noting there are excellent
examples, particularly if we look outside California, noting we did not
need to limit ourselves. Ms. Dolan stated she had a distinct feeling, and
has found in talking to people who have served there, that St. Vincent's is
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 17
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 18
looked at as a place of compassion, and she encouraged it. She did not
believe it should be lightly treated, or done away with, noting the problem
would not go away. She stated the people needed the Agency's help and
support, and look to the Agency in offering solutions and working with them
to make St. Vincent's even stronger and brighter. She encouraged the
Agency to delay making this decision, stating there are good people willing
to work with the Agency on this issue, and see this issue resolved.
Richard Bernstein noted that according to the staff report, the Agency
issued an RFP to 60 developers and interested parties, and got only one
response. Mr. Bernstein stated he was a businessman, and had issued a lot
of RFPs, noting if he had issued an RFP to 60 individuals or parties, and
got only one response, the first thing he would ask himself is, "What did I
do wrong?" Further, if the one individual who responded made the
statement, as shown in the staff report, that the proposal could only
succeed if the dining hall did not continue to be an agency in the project
area, he would be quite concerned. He suggested the Agency postpone its
decision, reissue the RFP to a wider circle of developers, to see if they
could possibly get more than one response, and have some alternatives to
choose from. He believed this would be the prudent business thing to do,
the prudent political thing to do, and on a project of this size, this
scope, and this depth of community interest, the responsible thing to do.
Deborah Stapleton, resident of San Rafael, stated that for many years she
had been participating in some way regarding this topic. She suggested
both the RFP and the resulted proposal are deficient, noting it occurred to
her the Agency is developing approximately half a block of "B" Street, when
the next half block, which would go from Second Street to approximately
Safeway, is equally in need of repair and upgrading. She asked how much
worse would that half block look if the other half block is improved,
noting it seemed as though something had been left out. She pointed out
the same must be said of "A" Street, referred to in the documents as "The
Gateway". She stated the very first block, where Andersen Drive will run
into "A" Street, is not even in this redevelopment proposal, which caused
her to wonder about the scope of this, and the actual planning of the
project, itself. Referring to the Rite-Aid Pharmacy, which has been
proposed for the corner of "A" and Second Streets, Ms. Stapleton questioned
the wisdom of that, noting there is a proposal for a Walgreen's Drug Store
to go in just a couple of blocks away, where we now have the empty First
Interstate Bank. Ms. Stapleton felt a little more investigation needed to
go into the Monahan Parker, Inc. proposal, noting she did not see anything
in their resume or list of accomplishments that was a "Multi -Use", "Multi -
Building" project; therefore, she would like to see a little more evidence
that they have the experience to do a project such as this. In addition,
she noted they owned the corner of "B" and Second Streets, and pointed out
that building had been listed in the Agency's original staff report as a
blight. She wondered at the wisdom of choosing a Developer who "rehabed" a
building that is now a blight.
Ms. Stapleton stated she had a very hard time accepting the fact that her
tax dollars are suggested to be used by the Redevelopment Agency to
purchase the building housing the St. Vincent de Paul Dining Room, and then
give it to the Developer, which is what she reads in the proposal. She did
not believe the taxpayers would stand for that, noting they should not be
in the businesses of subsidizing a Developer to that extent. Ms. Stapleton
asked for clarification of a point brought up earlier by Mr. Vander Meer,
which referred to Monahan Parker, Inc.'s statement that the project could
not be done if St. Vincent's stays there. She asked for reassurance that
the Agency, or Monahan Parker, Inc., themselves, would withdraw that
statement.
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 18
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 19
Bruce Bramlett, Pastor of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in San Rafael,
suggested that while most of the people in the room would stand and cheer
the Agency Members in the redevelopment of the City, to be a model City,
the model must include all of its citizens. He stated the turning of San
Rafael into a Disneyland of commerce and trade, as a suburban wasteland,
was not exactly a vision that he suspects anyone in this City want. He
stated the vision of this City, that this redevelopment plan seems to
presume, is a redevelopment plan and a vision of the City devoid and swept
clean of the blemishes of poverty, addiction, homelessness, disability, and
all the other things we would so like, and so wish, would be gone from our
midst. He pointed out that was not the perfect world that we live in, the
world, in fact, that we do live in demands that we serve those in all
forms, and in all needs, of life. He invited the Agency to provide, for
all the City, for all the constituencies of the City, the kind of moral
leadership that is willing to step back, to reconsider, to give
compassionate and kind thought to a project that seems to have been
steamrolled all the way down the road, a project that seems, in fact, to be
driven by the most morally base, economic and political forces he could
think of. He acknowledged that may just be an image, noting he did not
accuse the Agency of that, and he believed they were good people; however,
he also felt the image this City was going to have, very quickly, and the
image they will have as a Council, will be very much connected to a sort of
image he did not feel they would want. He urged them, as a Council, for
everyone's sake, as a City, for everyone who willed and wished this City to
be a model for all people, to please reconsider. He asked the
Councilmembers to look at the new partners they have to talk with, and at
the new constituency, noting that if the mess around St. Vincent's and the
five years of bickering has done nothing else, it has brought this to a lot
of people's attention,people of goodwill, who he did not believe
necessarily liked what they were waking up to see from the City Council.
He felt the Council needed to take some time and find the partners and the
voices that want to be in dialogue with the City.
Father Paul Rossi, Pastor of St. Raphael's Catholic Church, stated he was
born and raised in San Rafael, as was his father. He noted he had been
away from San Rafael for many years, in different works and ministries
during the past twenty-four years as a priest. He stated that since his
return on July 1st, one of the things that struck him in being involved in
some of the negotiations, and in listening to the different sides of this
issue, which he had kept up on by reading and listening to people over the
years, was the big division that had occurred over the years between the
City of San Rafael and St. Vincent's, which he felt was sad. However, he
noted that over the past eight months or so, he realized how much each side
now distrusts each other, noting both come from the angle that no one is
really of goodwill or good intention. He stated that saddened him, because
in a City as good as this, and as beautiful as this, we have people who
basically mistrust each other, and he believed there was really something
evil about that. However, he believed history was just that, it was about
the past, noting we could get broken by it, or we could build from it, we
could develop and grow from it, and we could be stronger for it. He
believed it might be time for new people, noting there is now a new Board
at St. Vincent's, a new Director, and new Clergy representatives, new
representatives who have never been before the Agency. He referred to the
petitions that had been distributed to the Agency Members, and noted it
really was a new day, and a new dawn was beginning, so he encouraged and
urged the Agency to consider postponing this Resolution until after it has
been mutually and collaboratively decided how, together, we can deal with
the St. Vincent de Paul Dining Room in a constructive way, hopefully where
it is, or in a place very similar to Downtown San Rafael. He pointed out
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 19
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 20
San Rafael was named after the Arch Angel Raphael, in the Old Testament in
the Jewish Scriptures, and explained Rafael means "God heals"; however, he
stated what he saw here tonight was not healing, but devisiveness. He
stated perhaps we should all be inspired by that great angel, Raphael, and
begin to be healers, and rather than tearing us apart, reconciling and
bringing the community together. He stated those in attendance were there
to make the Agency look good, to look like great, moral leaders.
Therefore, he encouraged and urged the Agency to please postpone a decision
on this Resolution, and allow the citizens to take an active part and
participate in the discernment of the process in the months to come.
Vincent Drucker, business owner in San Rafael, stated his company is
considered one of the preeminent companies in the Country in terms of
management services for the elderly. He reported they operate frail
elderly care in California, Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, and New
Jersey, for the largest hospital chain in the Country, Columbia, as well as
for many non -profits and other companies. He stated he was very concerned
with the implication of the relocation of a community based support service
for the frail elderly, noting approximately 100 to 150 people who are being
served by St. Vincent's are elderly, with over half of them living in the
immediate area. He stated the statistics on the frail elderly, and the
need for community services, are probably terrifying for all of us as we
get older. He noted it was well proven that as people age in place, their
cognizant problems increase, malnutrition is a terrible problem, and
depression is probably the largest undiagnosed illness of the elderly.
Mr. Drucker stated the services St. Vincent's provides, not only the needed
nutrition, but the chance for sociability, are key to keeping the elderly
out of nursing homes, and this concerns him because the cost of putting
someone in a nursing home in California, under Medi -Care and Medi-Caid, is
staggering. He reported it costs over $50,000 per year if someone goes
into a nursing home, noting a woman will be there, on average, for 23
months, and a man for 19 months. Therefore, we are looking at a potential
expense of $100,000 for every person we cannot continue to support in the
community, remaining independent. Mr. Drucker reported his figures, based
on crude numbers from St. Vincent's, show we are looking at a cost to this
community, if half those persons can no longer use the services available
and slide down that trail, of well over $3 million per year to the
taxpayers. He believed the public health aspects of this were terrible,
noting we need to assess this service, which provides much needed community
based support to help the frail elderly survive in our community. He
stated he did not believe those issues had been addressed.
Charlie Garfink, President of the Downtown San Rafael Business Improvement
District, stated he was addressing the Redevelopment project. He reported
the Downtown Vision was completed in 1993, although the work actually
occurred years before that. He explained the Downtown Vision was a
document designed by all the people of San Rafael, as a Vision of what the
City of San Rafael should be in the next century. He truly believed this
redevelopment project encompassed many of the elements necessary to bring
this area of town into line with the Downtown Vision, noting it has the
housing units, the Mixed Retail, and the highly needed office space, and it
also provides a nice buffer from the mainly commercial retail core on
Fourth Street to the mainly residential neighborhood of Gerstle Park. He
noted it was a nice transitional project.
Mr. Garfink
he recalled
it was going
Downtown San
stated as far as this being railroaded or steamrolled through,
this was first discussed in November, 1996, so he did not feel
too quickly. He noted there were a lot of projects in
Rafael at this time, and there was a good momentum going,
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 20
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 21
which he did not want to see slowed down at this point. He believed
everyone would agree that Downtown San Rafael was really beautiful. Mr.
Garfink stated it was his understanding the proposal now before the Agency
was to open negotiations with the Developer, and nothing was being set in
stone. He noted, if the Agency felt it was necessary to delay this
decision for a couple of weeks, so be it, but he did not want to see the
momentum lost. He urged the Agency to accept the proposal.
Alfred Petrovski, resident of San Rafael for over thirty years, stated he
was the recently retired chairman of a civil engineering firm. He pointed
out that no one had really addressed the fact that the Agency had received
only one response to the proposal, noting the brief response to Member
Phillips question concerning this was not satisfactory. Mr. Petrovski
stated approximately 60% to 80% of his business during the past ten years
had come from responding to proposals, noting these are very expensive to
do, in order to get a job that a company really wants, so a business wants
to be very careful, and respond only to the ones they believe they have an
honest chance of winning. He noted he had backed off from a lot of
proposals where his intelligence service told him there was a favorite of
the particular owner. He stated he had heard there was a favorite for this
project, although he did not mean to impugn the honor of the Developer or
City staff; however, he believed the Agency should go back and find out why
no other developers submitted proposals. Mr. Petrovski suggested the
proper thing for the Agency to do would be to postpone any action, and
added that whatever action the Agency decided to take tonight, he was
requesting a roll call vote.
Chairman Boro thanked all the speakers for participating and helping in
this process. He pointed out there would be a meeting next week to discuss
the relocation of St. Vincent's, in which the City would need a lot of
help, noting there were a lot of issues to deal with. He agreed with one
of Father Rossi's earlier comments, noting the issue of trust between the
City and St. Vincent's is at a very low tide, for a lot of reasons, and
that needs to be resolved. Chairman Boro reiterated it has never been the
intention of the Agency or the Council not to have this service continued
in San Rafael, noting it is the City's goal to continue that. He pointed
out the City has led the way with Ritter House, we have the only two
homeless shelters in the County here in San Rafael, and there are many
social service agencies in the City. He stated the City was very proud of
that, and proud of how the City has partnered with these different
providers. He stated that, hopefully, with the citizens' interest and
creativity, which the City is going to need, as the City cannot continue to
do things the same way we have always done them, perhaps we can find a
better way to deliver the service. He stated that next week, when they
hear about some of the issues and concerns the City has heard from
citizens, other than those here tonight, regarding the impacts on the
dining room and how it affects the people in the community, he hoped they
would all listen to that, and work with the City to try to find solutions.
Chairman Boro noted the overwhelming outpouring tonight, and while pointing
out that these were two distinctly separate issues, he believed there would
be a true credibility issue if the Agency moved forward on the proposal
tonight. He recommended the item be carried over for two weeks to the
meeting of March 2, 1998, in order to have a very thorough discussion at
the special meeting next week regarding St. Vincent's and its relocation,
its operations, and how it interacts with the community, and addresses
those issues from the point of view that the City really wants to serve the
people who need the service, and maintain the dignity of the people who
receive that service, and also the dignity and respect of the rest of the
community in providing that service.
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 21
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 22
Member Cohen stated we so often hear of government being incapable of doing
anything, until we attempt to do something, at which point we are accused
of steamrolling. He reported he has been having discussions with
representatives of St. Vincent's since he was elected to the City
Council/Redevelopment Agency seven years ago, sometimes directly, sometimes
through other members of the community, sometimes through staff, and
sometimes through a mediator, trying to find common ground and
understanding. Therefore, he hardly felt the Agency had steamrolled this
issue, noting he, and the City, have tried to discuss how we could balance
the desire of St. Vincent's, which he truly respects, to feed and help the
most needy among us, with the needs of the community, and the desires of
those people who live here, who are not in that situation, to feel safe,
comfortable in their own community, and to feel their children are safe
walking around. Mr. Cohen acknowledged that many of those who spoke may be
right, that it may not be appropriate for people to react the way they do
to some of the clients of St. Vincent's. However, the fact of the matter
is, those reactions exist in people's hearts, and people do feel concern
and fear for their safety, and they expect the City to address those
concerns. Mr. Cohen stated the City was trying to balance those concerns
with the ability of St. Vincent's, and the ability of all of us, to show
compassion for our fellow human being. He noted the other irony is to hear
someone call for a march on San Rafael, when San Rafael was the only
community in Marin County to house a dining room for the homeless. He
noted previous discussions and a Countywide effort to expand these services
floundered on the rocks of intolerance in the rest of this County, yet he
pointed out, no one marches on Novato, no one marches on Tiburon or
Sausalito, demanding they take their share. He stated we read constantly
in the newspapers from other communities within Marin County, shaming San
Rafael for not opening our hearts, and noted his only request was that they
open their hearts and their doors, as well.
Member Cohen stated he has been proud to be part of a City that has opened
its doors to as many social services as San Rafael, pointing out this City
has supported services for the poor and the needy among us, to the point of
being sued for approving Ritter House in the Downtown. He stated the City
stood and took a law suit for the right of a social service to locate in
the Downtown, and serve the needy among us, noting he believed that was one
of the City's finest days, and he was very proud of that action; however,
he pointed out we need to find a balance somewhere on this issue. He noted
we would continue to discuss this issue next week, and he hoped those who
had attended tonight's meeting would keep these points in mind, as well,
stating there were reasonable points of view on all sides of this issue.
Mr. Cohen did not believe the City could take the stand that everything was
fine, and just back off, noting that, somehow, we have to strike a
reasonable balance. He urged those in attendance to look at all aspects of
the issue.
Member Cohen stated he did not believe the Resolution the Agency was being
asked to act on would mean the Agency was committed to a course of moving
St. Vincent's, closing their doors, or forcing them out of San Rafael;
however, that was clearly the sense and the fear, and he agreed that to
send that message in advance of the meeting to be held next week, at which
he hoped there could be a sincere discussion, would be the wrong move to
make. Therefore, he felt the Agency would be best served by continuing
this action until the regular Redevelopment meeting two weeks from now.
Member Phillips thanked those in the audience for their input, noting we
are all impacted by the decision the Agency is faced with making. He
agreed that while there is unanimity within the Council Chamber, there are
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 22
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 23
other viewpoints the Agency Members must listen to, to collect their
thoughts and make their decision the best way they can. He referred to
earlier comments regarding the Downtown Vision, noting a considerable
amount of time and effort was put in by a large segment of the residents of
San Rafael, and he believed that had to be taken into account. He noted
the Agency had been asked to make improvements to San Rafael, and had
already done some things with regard to the former Macy's building, Fair,
Isaac's, the Rafael Theater, as well as the sidewalks and street lights.
He noted there is still a lot more to do to make it better for everyone
within the City, and part of the Agency's consideration, with regard to "B"
Street, is what will be in the best interest of the City. He acknowledged
he was still wrestling with that issue, and he appreciated Chairman Boro's
leadership with regard to this issue. He did not believe the Redevelopment
proposal was being delayed to the extent that the Agency would not act upon
it, but rather so the Agency can perhaps give it additional thought, and
take into consideration the viewpoints of those who have spoken before the
Agency.
Member Heller stated she was surprised when she first learned St. Vincent's
had planned to have a large contingent at this meeting, because a couple of
weeks ago they had been looking into site locations, and welcoming a Use
Permit and rules and regulations. She noted tonight was a turnaround from
what she had heard at her Rotary Club, and came as a surprise. She
believed that in working together, perhaps next week we could begin to look
at the issues of whether they should move, where they should move, and why
they should move. In addition, she wanted to look at such issues as
personal responsibility, and being a good neighbor, which are things she
hears about from residents who telephone her. She believed perhaps it
might be in the best interest of the entire City to look at ways to change
the services given to the poor, the homeless, and to the clients of St.
Vincent's. She applauded St. Vincent's, stating she felt they gave
excellent service.
Member Miller thanked everyone for attending the meeting, noting this was a
great exercise in community building, and what government, and the Agency,
were all about. He stated that as we come together, we must try to ferret
out the problems, and see the balances between productive justice and
distributive justice, the balances between public safety and civil
liberties. He stated these were great and marvelous issues to grapple
with, and noted that as we grapple with the issue of location, we should
not forget the greater systemic issues, the issues of homelessness. He
stated if we could take this energy that we have, and apply it to the great
systems, and begin to march to that, and transfer that energy to the great
systemic issues, we would make a difference, and make this a great City and
a great Country.
Chairman Boro asked Mr. Gould when the staff report regarding St. Vincent's
would be available to the public? Mr. Gould stated it would be available
by the close of business on Thursday. Chairman Boro asked that a couple of
hundred extra copies of the report be produced, and suggested they be
provided to the four Downtown ministers, and they get them out. He stated
he had seen a draft of the report, noting it is a very thorough report, and
goes into a multitude of issues. He pointed out this was not a simple
problem, and it was not a matter of "Yes" and "No", it was a matter of
"How", and re -invention, and a lot of different issues. He asked that
everyone be prepared to be creative when the issue is discussed next week,
because it is not a matter of "this is how it's always been, and this is
how it's going to stay". He stated there were a lot of issues here, and
the members of the public owed it to themselves to read the report, noting
it goes through the history, some alternative solutions, and evaluates the
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 23
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 24
various locations that have been discussed.
Member Cohen moved and Member Heller seconded, to continue this item to the
meeting of March 2, 1998.
AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Chairman Boro
NOES: MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: MEMBERS: None
5. AGENCY MEMBER REPORTS:
None.
There being no further business to come before the Redevelopment Agency, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:45 PM.
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Agency Secretary
SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 2/17/98 Page 24