Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1999-11-01SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 1999 AT 8:00 PM Regular Meeting: San Rafael City Council Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor Paul M. Cohen, Vice -Mayor Barbara Heller, Councilmember Cyr N. Miller, Councilmember Gary O. Phillips, Councilmember Absent: None Also Present: Rod Gould, City Manager Gus Guinan, Assistant City Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk CLOSED 1. a. b. SESSION: Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(a)) City of San Rafael v. Leonard D. Stein, et al. Marin County Courts Case No. CV 991571 City of San Rafael v. Christopher Bradshaw, et al. Marin County Courts Case No. CV 991569 Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation (Government Code Section 54956.9(a)) City of San Rafael v. Engleberg, et al. Marin County Courts Case No. CV 992896 Mayor Boro announced the Council would continue Closed Session at the conclusion of the City Council meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: 8:45 PM RE: PROPOSED CPI RENT INCREASE AT CONTEMPO MARIN MOBILEHOME PARK - File 13-7-1 X 9-3-16 Tom Davis, 22 Yosemite Road, recalled that at the last City Council meeting he brought to Council's attention the calculation of the rent increase formula. Since that time he has spoken with fifteen residents whose rents have been frozen, and found that of those fifteen residents, two were now on long-term leases, and seven were on long-term leases that expired within the past two to three years. Therefore, he concluded there was persuasive evidence that lots which should have been excluded in calculating the rent increase have mistakenly been included, and not just for the present application, but for prior years, as well. Mr. Davis believed the base rents of all the lots subject to the Ordinance were incorrect, and were, on average, too high. He asked Council to give policy direction to the City Manager, as a result of having this information, and require that the base rents of all lots at Contempo Marin which are subject to the Ordinance be adjusted, based on a correct application of the provisions of the Ordinance, and that the park owner be prohibited from increasing rents under Section 20.04, until the corrections have been made and verified. Mr. Davis stated the homeowners at Contempo Marin were entitled to the protection of the rent control Ordinance, not only through enactment of an amendment, where appropriate, but also through proper enforcement. He noted, even supposing the error is only $5.00 per month, per space, that would be $60.00 per year, per space, and if there are 350 spaces subject to the Ordinance, that would be $21,000 of the tenants money. He asked Council to help the residents in preserving that money, and having it returned to them. Mr. Davis asked that Council direct staff to look at the way the rents should properly be calculated, see that the rents are adjusted accordingly, and ensure that be done before any future increases are put in. Mayor Boro asked Assistant City Attorney Guinan to respond. Mr. Guinan stated he would investigate this issue, and prepare a report for the Council. Mayor Boro pointed out it was now the first of November, and the rents were scheduled to go up on January 1st. Mr. Guinan stated that in the six years he has been with the City, the computation has always been the same, with 396 spaces divided by the gross rents; however, he noted that if there are spaces on long-term leases, which are exempted, then the figure would be incorrect, and it would have to be re -calculated to determine exactly what the difference was, and a determination would have to be made regarding how to approach rectifying the problem. Mayor Boro noted this was not an issue to be discussed during Urgency Time. He asked Mr. Davis to work with Mr. Guinan, and involve the Homeowners Association, so there can be an understanding of how the calculation is based that will be to everyone's satisfaction. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 1 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 2 Councilmember Cohen stated he would like Mr. Guinan to work directly with some of the park residents. He pointed out the minutes of the last Council meeting included a statement from Mr. Jensen, attorney for the mobilehome park, in which he reported there were no residents subject to long-term leases at Contempo Marin and, therefore, no exempt leases. Mr. Cohen stated that subsequent to that meeting, he had spoken with a resident at Contempo Marin who informed Mr. Cohen he was on a long-term lease, and was not subject to the rent stabilization Ordinance, although he wishes he were. Mr. Cohen noted Mr. Davis was alleging there were other individuals who were on long-term leases. He felt the City needed to get to the bottom of the factual matter. Mr. Guinan stated he would look into the matter, and asked Mr. Davis and the representative from the park, who was also in attendance, to meet with him after the Council meeting to arrange a time to discuss the matter in more detail. Coleman Persily, Past President of the Contempo Marin Homeowners Association, asked Council to bear in mind that what the Association was really trying to do in San Rafael was to keep the rents down for people living in mobilehome parks. Mr. Persily reported the residents had already received notice that their rents would be increased by $25.00 per month, although with the final adoption of the Ordinance on tonight's Council Agenda, that would be reduced to approximately $18.00 to $20.00 per month, reiterating the whole purpose was to keep the mobilehome parks affordable. Mr. Persily stated there were a number of things that might have to happen, and considering the problems with the calculations, as well as other issues, he felt Council should direct staff to inform the park owner to postpone the rent increase until the issues are settled. CONSENT CALENDAR: Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to approve the following Consent Calendar items: ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION 2. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of Monday, Minutes approved as October 18, 1999 (CC) submitted. 3 SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE Approved final adoption of NO. 1743 - An Ordinance of the City of San Rafael Ordinance No. "An Amending Sections 20.04.020(M) and 20.08.010(B) of the San Rafael Municipal Code Concerning Mobilehome Rent Increases (CA) - File 13-7-1 x 9-3-16 1743 - ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING SECTIONS 20.04.020(M) AND 20.08.010(B) OF THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE CONCERNING MOBILEHOME RENT INCREASES". 4. Request for Closure of City Hall and Library to Approved staff recommendation: the Public and Cancellation of Redevelopment Agency City Hall and the Library to and City Council Meetings of Monday, January 3, to be closed to the public, 2000 (CM) - File 9-1 x 9-3-61 x (SRRA) R-140 #8and Redevelopment Agency and City Council meetings of Monday, January 3, 2000 to be cancelled. 5. Resolution of Appreciation to Linda Jackson, RESOLUTION NO. 10520 Senior Planner, and Ulla Jonsson, Permit Clerk, RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO Co -Employees of the Quarter for Period Ending ULLA-BRIT JONSSON AND LINDA September 30, 1999 (CM) - File 102 X 9-3-85 x 7-4 JACKSON, CO -EMPLOYEES OF THE QUARTER FOR PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1999. 6. Monthly Investment Report - File 8-18 x 8-9 Accepted report. 7. Resolution Authorizing the Mayor to Execute RESOLUTION NO. 10521 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 2 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 3 Agreements with the County of Marin and the College of Marin for Funding, Operation, and Instructional Support of the Education Resource Center at 2955 Kerner Boulevard (Lib) - File 4-13-105 x 246 x 9-3-61 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH THE COUNTY OF MARIN AND THE COLLEGE OF MARIN FOR FUNDING, OPERATION AND INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT OF THE EDUCATION RESOURCE CENTER AT 2955 KERNER BOULEVARD. 8. Request for Approval of Street Closure for the Approved staff recommendation: 20th Annual Parade of Lights and 10th Annual Street closures: "A" Street Winter Wonderland and Snow (RA) - File 11-19 x 104 between Fourth Street and Fifth Avenue, and Julia Street between "A" and "B" Streets, from 8:00 AM on Friday November 26, 1999 to 6:00 PM on Saturday, November 27, 1999 for the snow play area; "A" Street between Fourth Street and the entrance to the City Parking Structure from 8:00 AM to 9:00 PM on Friday, November 26, 1999 for the ponies and horse drawn carriage; Fourth Street between Lootens and "B" Streets for the tree lighting event and special Holiday Market on Friday, November 26, 1999 from 3:00 PM to 9:00 PM; Fourth Street between "B" and "E" Streets for the Parade of Lights event on Friday, November 26, 1999 from 5:00 PM to 6:30 PM; and "E" Street between Fourth Street and Fifth Avenue from 5:00 PM to 5:30 PM for parade assembly. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS: 9. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO LINDA JACKSON, SENIOR PLANNER, AND ULLA-BRIT JONSSON, PERMIT CLERK, CO -EMPLOYEES OF THE QUARTER FOR PERIOD ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 (CM) - File 102 x 9-3-85 x 7-4 Mayor Boro explained that each quarter the employees select an Employee of the Quarter, who receives recognition for the work he or she has done, and also receives a star and a $100 bill. In addition, once a year an Employee of the Year is chosen, and that person receives a $500 award. Mayor Boro announced Ulla -Brit Jonsson, Permit Clerk, and Linda Jackson, Senior Planner, were each receiving recognition as Co -Employees of the Quarter for the period ending September 30, 1999. He explained Ms. Jonsson and Ms. Jackson have worked on a very unique project, and having mastered the issue of facilitation, they have employed those skills publicly, as well as internally with the City's employees, teaching such things as how to conduct meetings, how to get people in the audience involved, and how to truly make sure all thoughts are represented. Mayor Boro stated there were many examples of where they have done this, including the Choices group, where staff took the budget out and around the City, and with the St. Vincent's/Silveira Task Force. He pointed out Ms. Jonsson has also taken a great lead in training her fellow employees. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 3 On behalf of the Council, Mayor Boro with Resolutions of Appreciation, a they have done for the City and the SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 4 presented Ms. Jonsson and Ms. Jackson star, and $100, thanking them for all citizens of San Rafael. Ulla -Brit Jonsson thanked the City on behalf Ms. Jackson and herself, noting that in particular, this would not have happened without the support of City Manager Gould in developing the facilitation class program. They also thanked those who had been on the initial committee, including Assistant Director of Management Services Daryl Chandler, former City Manager Suzy Golt, and former Fire Prevention Officer Forrest Craig, their bosses, who let them do this work, and the people who took the training. Ms. Jonsson stated it had been really exciting at the beginning of the year when they went into the community meetings involving the budget, and the people who had taken the training were able to use those skills. Ms. Jackson reported that when she and Ms. Jonsson first began collaborating, the project they had been interested in was working with San Pedro Elementary School. She explained the school had wanted to develop a plan, and they met and discussed how to do the planning in a community where people spoke English, Spanish, and Vietnamese, and where there were both newcomers, and those whose families had been here a long time. Ms. Jackson stated she and Ms. Jonsson wanted to recognize San Pedro School, and they each presented Principal Wendy Feltman with their $100 awards, as a donation to the school, thanking Ms. Feltman for giving them the opportunity to get started. PUBLIC HEARING: 10. PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3.34 OF THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE, ESTABLISHING A FEE AND SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE/COST COMPARISON SYSTEM AND PROPOSED RESOLUTION ADOPTING MASTER FEE SCHEDULE AND PROPOSED RESOLUTION ADOPTING SCHEDULE OF PARKING PENALTIES (MS) - File 9-10-2 x 11-8 x 11-18 Mayor Boro announced the Public Hearing was being continued from the City Council meeting of October 18, 1999, and remained open. He asked for the staff report. Assistant City Manager Ken Nordhoff explained that at the request of the Marin Builders Exchange and the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce, he and Community Development Director Bob Brown had spent additional time discussing this issue with them last week. He noted those groups had presented Council with an Addendum which states their support for this item. Mr. Nordhoff reported this project had begun in 1996, and Council first took action in November, 1997, asking staff to provide information concerning the full cost of providing all of the services within the City. Mr. Nordhoff explained his report was an update to that project, noting he had highlighted some of the changes adopted since the first study, including such things as costs of salaries and benefits, as well as operating expenses; expanded services; new services, such as outdoor dining agreements, archeological references, and administrative towing fees in the Police Department; and fees related to tobacco retailing permits. Mr. Nordhoff stated the item now before Council was actually a two -fold recommendation. First, he explained the Ordinance reflects the percentage of cost recovery, after having fully identified the cost of service. He stated staff was asking Council to set those as a matter of policy, noting that translated to the fees proposed in the Resolution. He reported that upon request from the City Attorney's office, staff had separated the parking schedule and penalties from the rest of the Master Fees; therefore, two separate Resolutions were being presented for Council's approval. Mr. Nordhoff noted that separating the parking schedule and penalties was consistent with actions required in the Ordinance. Mr. Nordhoff referred to changes of significance, which he noted had been the catalyst for several meetings with members of the business community. He stated there were minor adjustments in most of the fee areas, noting that in some cases this was caused by either increases in time, or reductions in the time involved in the services required; however, for the most part, that remained unchanged. Mr. Nordhoff pointed out a couple of things had occurred in the area of Planning Services, noting new staff had been hired, the volumes of service were increased, and in some cases, they had to look at the number of hours provided, which might include not only the Planner's time, but also such things as traffic modeling and engineering reports, which are legitimate costs in providing some of the services. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 4 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 5 Mr. Nordhoff stated the Master Fee Schedule now being presented to Council encompassed everything the City does that is supported through fees. He noted there were a number of services, such as paramedics, fire suppression, park and street maintenance, which are supported through taxes, and because increases in those areas would require a vote of the people, that was not part of Council's consideration this evening. Mr. Nordhoff stated this new fee schedule would take effect thirty days after (final) adoption, with the exception of the building and planning fees, which would take effect in sixty days. Mr. Nordhoff reported Assistant Director of Financial Services Dennis Shives had spent a considerable amount of time working on the Master Fee Schedule, and had done a great deal of analysis. He stated staff believed the proposed Master Fee Schedule was consistent with the policies Council adopted two years ago. Councilmember Cohen noted the report shows, particularly in Planning Services, that staff was doing time tracking and billable hours, and asked if staff was looking at those processes over time? He stated he understood those items were laid out to show a particular client how much time was spent on a particular project, and why their bill was a certain amount; however, he asked if staff was also looking at, over time, the number of hours being spent on certain types of projects, and whether there might be ways to streamline that, or at least understand why certain projects required a certain number of hours? Mr. Nordhoff believed the data now before Council was a start, although staff had not felt there was enough history on some of these projects to make adjustments either upward or downward, nor that the data, at this point, justified it. Mr. Nordhoff noted Community Development Director Brown was very aware of this issue, and one of the next steps they wanted to take, after getting another nine to twelve months of history, would be to look at what the data tells them, and to what extent there is some influence going on in Planning, or other areas, that might dictate that the fees should be reduced because efficiencies have been gained. Community Development Director Brown noted the billing system the Finance Department has put into place would give them a great deal of data, as will the permit tracking system, which will go into effect by the end of the year. Councilmember Heller noted that in their letter the Chamber of Commerce asked that staff conduct a review in six months, She asked if that would be satisfactory, or if they would need a longer period of time? Mr. Nordhoff noted a review was already scheduled on the work calendar for sometime in the year 2000, and it was his feeling staff would probably report back to Council in the Fall, keeping it somewhat within the cycle of the budget. Councilmember Heller suggested staff notify the Chamber of Commerce, Marin Builders Exchange, and the Marin Association of Realtors that a review would be done within six to twelve months. Mr. Nordhoff stated he intended to write a response to their letter. Mayor Boro invited public comment. Herb Neinstedt, Marin Builders Exchange, stated he was delighted to speak on behalf of the coalition, and particularly to hear the reaffirmation of Mr. Brown and Mr. Nordhoff regarding the study and further consideration of the hours being designated to various functions. He explained they were primarily concerned from the standpoint of the Planning and Building departments, as those were the ones they were most familiar with. Mr. Neinstedt stated they appreciated the meeting with Mr. Brown and Mr. Nordhoff, noting that as a result of that meeting, many things were better understood with regard to what the City was attempting to do. On behalf of the three organizations, Mr. Neinstedt expressed thanks and appreciation to Mr. Nordhoff and Mr. Brown, and also took the opportunity, on behalf of the Marin Builders Exchange, to express their appreciation to the Building Department, with whom they have the most contact, noting that over the years, the cooperation and understanding of their mutual problems could not have been better than that given by the people of that department. There being no further public comment, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing. Mayor Boro commended Mr. Nordhoff, Mr. Shives, Mr. Brown, and the rest of the staff for the fine work they had done, and for discussing the issues in detail with the Chamber of Commerce, the Marin Builders Exchange, and the Marin Association of Realtors, resulting in their letter of support. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 5 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 6 Councilmember Phillips noted the fee schedule under Maintenance Services lists Downtown Parking, with a footnote which states it is currently at 85%, and is expected to increase to 100%. He asked for the anticipated timeframe for that increase? Mr. Nordhoff stated he was not certain there was a specific timeframe, noting this tied into the study that had been mentioned earlier, in which they will do a comprehensive review of the management, operations and needs of the Parking District. He believed recommendations would come out of that review, and because of that, staff had not proposed increasing parking citations, or hourly rates in the garage or at the meters. He noted it was his understanding Council's intention was to make the parking enterprise self -funding, and that was staff's expectation. Councilmember Phillips asked if that meant this issue was on hold, until the parking study is done? Mr. Nordhoff stated that was correct. The title of the Ordinance was read: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING CHAPTER 3.34 OF THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING A FEE AND SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE/COST COMPARISON SYSTEM, BY REVISING SECTIONS 3.34.020(B), 3.34.030(D) AND 3.34.040". Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to dispense with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only, and pass Ordinance No. 1744 to print, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to adopt the Resolution establishing a new Master Fee Schedule. RESOLUTION NO. 10522 - RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A NEW MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE VARIOUS CITY DEPARTMENTS AND RESCINDING THE EXISTING RESOLUTIONS ESTABLISHING THE PRE-EXISTING MASTER FEE SCHEDULE. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt the Resolution establishing a new schedule of parking penalties and late payment penalties for notices of parking violations. RESOLUTION NO. 10523 - RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A NEW SCHEDULE OF PARKING PENALTIES AND LATE PAYMENT PENALTIES FOR NOTICES OF PARKING VIOLATIONS, AND RESCINDING THE PREVIOUS SCHEDULE OF PARKING PENALTIES AND LATE PAYMENT PENALTIES. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None OLD BUSINESS: 11. DISCUSSION RE: ADEQUACY OF THE PHASE II ASSESSMENT AT CONTEMPO MARIN MOBILEHOME PARK (CA) - File 13-7-1 x 9-3-16 Assistant City Attorney Gus Guinan noted that at the last City Council meeting, staff was directed to prepare a report regarding an issue raised by Tom Davis during Urgency Time, concerning the second Capital Improvement Assessment of $7.50. Mr. Guinan stated, specifically, the issue he was to look at was whether or not the imposition of the additional $7.50 could only occur after all of the documentation had been provided, and then a 90 - day notice had been given. Mr. Guinan stated that during the past two weeks he had attempted to contact Ms. Ponticiello, the arbitrator who drafted the decision and could best speak to interpreting it, to answer this question. He stated he had not been successful in contacting her, although he had FAX'd her a copy of the agreement, and asked her to respond with her thoughts on it. Not having her input, Mr. Guinan looked at the agreement, and he interpreted the language to mean that a 90 -day notice was SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 6 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 7 required; however, he pointed out there was no specific reference to timing the notice to the presentation of the documentation. Mr. Guinan stated it was clear that before imposition of the second assessment, documentation must be provided by the park owner, and shown to the Homeowners Association. However, he believed the 90 -day notice was merely a requirement to ensure that prior to the imposition of the second assessment, the park tenants have been given notice that this is to occur. Mr. Guinan reported that in obtaining this information he had spoken with Whitfield King, President of the Contempo Marin Homeowners Association, and also Jeff Renner, Regional Manager for Manufactured Home Communities, both of whom were present this evening. Regarding the question of whether documentation has been provided, Mr. Guinan stated it was his understanding, based on conversations with both Mr. Renner and Mr. King, that some documentation has been provided; however, according to the Homeowners Association, not all of the documentation has been provided. Mr. Guinan stated the agreement clearly specifies that the documentation must show that certain amounts have actually been spent, and that the aggregate amount, the total amount actually spent, does not exceed the amount of the assessment. He noted that until he has heard from Ms. Ponticiello, he cannot give a definitive interpretation, or a feeling as to whether his interpretation is correct. He pointed out the City was not a party to this particular settlement agreement; however, under the City's Ordinance, if there is a dispute between the park owner and the tenants with regard to rent increase, the dispute is referred to an arbitrator, and the arbitrator hears both parties and makes a determination, which can be appealed to the Council. He noted that in this instance, the matter did not proceed to a hearing, and the parties reached a settlement, which was entered into a settlement decision by Ms. Ponticiello. Therefore, she would be the ultimate determiner of what was meant by the agreement. Mayor Boro stated one of the issues for Council's consideration was the 90 - day notice, and asked if it was Mr. Guinan's current position that the 90 - day notice could be given, and that verification could be given anytime within that period of time, and did not have to be completed and verified prior to the notice being given? Mr. Guinan stated that was his current position. Mayor Boro then asked, once that has been resolved, who would be responsible for determining whether or not the work has been done, and all that has been represented is true? He noted that since the City had not been a party to the agreement, he assumed that was something that would be between the arbitrator, the residents, and the park owner. Mr. Guinan stated that was correct. In addition, he was also seeking direction from Ms. Ponticiello, in anticipation that there might be some dispute as to the adequacy of the documentation presented, and to perhaps establish a procedure by which she could reconvene the parties to discuss the issue, review the material, and make a determination as to whether it is adequate or not, so both parties can have a decision and move on. Councilmember Cohen stated he understood Mr. Guinan's analysis concerning the presentation of the documentation; however, he believed it was clear that the expenditures had to be made before the residents are actually billed, and he did not believe the fact that the contractor had billed MHC constituted an expenditure. Therefore, the documentation the City has seen, so far, really only states that they signed a contract for the work, and that some of the work has been performed and they have been billed; however, it does not state that they have expended the funds. He pointed out the language specifies they actually have to expend the funds before they can bill the residents, noting that was also clear in the arbitration agreement. Councilmember Cohen referred to the question of how they arrived at the amount. He referred to the Contempo Marin Pass -Through Analysis spread sheet, included in the staff report, which shows interest rate assumptions, including the 7.38% interest rate referenced in the arbitration decision. It also shows another calculation, which leads to a total payment of $4.93, not the $7.50 per month. In addition, a subsequent calculation shows an assumed interest rate of 17.5%. He asked what this spread sheet means, noting he was interested in who sits in judgment of whether or not the $7.50 is justified, based upon the $244,000 presumably expended. As an observation, he believed that if it was in any way based upon an assumed interest rate for a loan of 17.5%, that was absurd, and if the City had anything to say about it, he did not see how that could be allowed to stand. Mr. Guinan stated the document Mr. Cohen referred to had been provided by Whitfield King, noting he believed Mr. King and the park owner had met last Monday, and the documents had been exchanged at that time. Mr. Guinan acknowledged he did not understand the document either. He explained the SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 7 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 8 original worksheet for the first assessment was apparently discussed at the original arbitration settlement negotiations in 1997, and in earlier discussion with Mr. Renner, he had indicated that the same calculations and computations were used, merely with a different figure for the Capital Expenditure for the Phase II portion of the project. Mr. Guinan believed the City should not get involved in trying to interpret these documents, as they were originally discussed by the arbitrator in negotiations with both parties, and until the ultimate decision is made as to how that will work out, he felt it should be in the arbitrator's hands. He noted that without being able to speak with her, he did not have a reaction, and could not provide more information at this point. Councilmember Cohen stated he was highly frustrated, as he was sure Mr. Guinan was, by the City's inability to get a response from the arbitrator, and wondered if there was anything Council could do to move that along, pointing out everyone was in limbo until the arbitrator chose to respond to the City. Mr. Guinan stated he had one brief conversation with the arbitrator on Monday of last week, and explained the situation to her. He reported the arbitrator had not had the file with her, so Mr. Guinan FAX'd her a copy of the agreement to review, and she promised to provide him with an interpretation. However, since that time, his calls have had no response. Mr. Guinan stated he had no explanation for why the arbitrator had not called back, noting there had been no indication last Monday that there would be any problem with her getting a response to Mr. Guinan. Mr. Guinan stated he could, if need be, go to Sonoma and attempt to find her office, and get her to respond. Mayor Boro stated he believed it was important for Mr. Guinan to do something to get her response, because, as Mr. Cohen pointed out, everyone was in limbo, and he was concerned that there was frustration among the Contempo Marin residents, and also park management. Mayor Boro believed there were two questions that needed to be answered; when does the clock start, and what is the status of what is being alleged on the part of the park owners not having met all the commitments they were supposed to meet? He noted the arbitrator was the one who was supposed to review those questions and come up with those answers. Mayor Boro acknowledged there were people in the audience who wanted to address the Council, although he did not know that anything could be done after they had spoken, as the City was actually in the role of "facilitator" regarding this matter, not in the role of a "resolver". Mayor Boro invited the representative from the park to address the Council. Jeff Renner, Regional Manager with MHC (Manufactured Home Communities), stated he had spoken with the arbitrator, Ms. Ponticiello, earlier in the day, explaining she has been between offices, and that was why neither he nor Mr. Guinan had been able to contact her to discuss this issue, as she had recently moved her office and changed her FAX and telephone numbers, and has been unreachable for several days. Mr. Renner stated he explained the issues to her, and the gist of Mr. Guinan's letter requesting clarification. Referring to the adequacy of the documentation provided to the Homeowners Association, Mr. Renner noted the agreement, itself, did not address specifics in terms of what documents need to be provided to prove the job is completed. He noted that in his last two discussions with the Homeowners Association, they wanted to make certain the documentation showed that the money had been expended, and he believed the documentation would show the money has been expended. He explained the documentation he has shown to date included invoices signed by the contractor, Linscott Engineering, which provide for amounts that have been paid by Contempo Marin. He noted one document that was not included in Council's packet was a document which showed the amounts paid to date, less a 10% retainer, which he was requiring be held back from the contractor until management is satisfied with the job, pointing out there were some miscellaneous items the contractor needed to repair to management's satisfaction. Mr. Renner stated the only thing he could do to provide documentation, in terms of expenses, that the money has actually been paid, was to contact their banks, noting the banks were now copying checks they have written for periodic payments throughout the course of the project. He noted they were requesting copies of the cancelled checks the contractor has cashed as proof of payment. He stated if this did not suffice, in terms of their actual expenditure, he did not know what else to do. Regarding the 10% retention he was holding, he noted that would not show up as a cancelled check through the bank until the contractor actually receives the money; therefore, this might remain an issue between himself and the Homeowners Association, as far as meeting the terms of the agreement. However, Mr. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 8 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 9 Renner stated he would be willing to put that money into an escrow account, setting up an escrow for those items management felt needed to be addressed by the contractor, and as those items are completed, they could pay the contractor from the escrow account. Mayor Boro stated he did not want the Council to get involved in something it had no authority over, and he did not see that Council had any authority over this issue. He stated he was looking for a forum the City could suggest to take care of this issue, with the representatives of the mobilehome park, the residents and the arbitrator really sitting down and working through this. He noted the park owners had to satisfy the arbitrator and the homeowners. He felt that to bring this matter to the City was unfair to the Council, as well as to the public, because the City would not be able to deliver anything. City Manager Gould stated that was correct, with one qualifier, pointing out the City had an affirmative duty to enforce the rent control Ordinance, and that required documentation before the assessment could be applied. Mayor Boro stated that was one thing the City could enforce; therefore, the City would try to encourage a "meeting of the minds" between the three parties. Mr. Renner reported that in his discussion with Ms. Ponticiello earlier today, he had stated that if his next meeting with the Homeowners Association was unsuccessful, he would be interested in meeting with Ms. Ponticiello and representatives from the Homeowners Association, to review the settlement and clarify some of the issues that are sticking points. He noted Ms. Ponticiello had stated she would be ready to do that, given her relocation schedule, probably within the next week. Mr. Renner reported he had met with the Homeowners Association in August, and outlined the scope of the work, showed them the plans and contracts, and basically tried to include them in the project in its entirety. In addition, he reported he met with them last week to discuss the costs paid to date. He noted the contractor's payment schedule had not been included in the Councilmembers' packets, but he could provide that for Council's review. Mayor Boro stated the problem was that there were expectations the Council was not able to deliver; however, he noted the City could get the parties together. Councilmember Cohen stated that if he understood the City Manager correctly, the City had an obligation to enforce the rent stabilization Ordinance, which includes the requirement of documentation before an increase based on capital expenditures. Therefore, Mr. Cohen believed the City did have some authority over the submission of documentation, and presumably, the right to weigh in with an opinion as to what constitutes sufficient documentation. Mr. Cohen stated he thought the documentation was not a function of the settlement agreement ruled on by the arbitrator, that it was the Ordinance which required the documentation to justify the increase for capital improvements. Mr. Guinan stated he had been operating under the understanding that the documentation was directly required under the agreement reached in 1997. He noted he would review the Ordinance to determine whether there was a separate indication regarding capital improvement, although he did not recall such a requirement. Mr. Cohen stated he would be satisfied with trying to get a response from the arbitrator, and getting the arbitrator and the two parties together to try to reach some resolution. However, he felt that if the City's Ordinance stated that for the owner to impose additional rents based on capital improvements they had to make their case to the City, and if that included documentation, then if the arbitrator was unresponsive, the City still might have some authority. He asked Mr. Guinan to examine that further. Mayor Boro pointed out it had been stated that this had been a special arrangement, on this special effort, regarding the second $7.50 that had been agreed to by the arbitrator, the park owners, and the residents. City Manager Gould stated Mr. Guinan had reminded him the City's Ordinance was silent on the requirement to provide documentation for the assessment, although that requirement was included in the settlement. Therefore, Mayor Boro's question as to whether or not the Council could weigh in on the sufficiency or adequacy of the documentation was moot. He pointed out this was not Council's jurisdiction, it was an issue strictly between the parties and the arbitrator, and he did not believe there was any action the Council could take regarding that question. Mayor Boro stated the action Council could take was to make sure the City uses whatever powers it has to get the three parties together. Mr. Gould stated he was pleased to hear the arbitrator had stated she would be willing to meet with the parties as early as next week, and Mr. Guinan stated he would make every effort to facilitate that. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 9 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 10 Councilmember Heller referred to a letter to Mr. Renner from the Contempo Marin Homeowners Association, which had been included in Council's packet, and appeared to contain a list of specific issues between the residents and the owners of the park. She did not feel the letter had anything to do with what the Council was considering at this time, which was the assessment, and she did not want the letter to be considered as part of that issue in the public record. Mr. Guinan explained the reason the letter had been included was because that was the documentation provided by Mr. King, and Mr. Guinan had wanted to included everything the City had received. However, he stated Ms. Heller was correct in her assumption that the letter did not address the particular issue Council had asked him to look into, noting most of the areas covered by the letter were areas beyond the jurisdiction of the City. Commenting on the letter, Mr. Renner stated it had always been his feeling, in working with resident groups, that they should resolve such issues between themselves, so they do not escalate to this extent. He noted the letter had originally been received by him when they adjourned the October 25th meeting, with the understanding that it would be discussed at a future meeting for possible resolution of some of the issues. He stated he did not want the letter, in any way, to paint a bad picture of Contempo Marin's management or owners, noting they had checked out some of the items, and were unable to find deficiencies. Mr. Renner stated he always encourages the resident groups to contact him, or the park managers, before submitting a document to the City Council for review of operational issues, noting, as Mr. Guinan had pointed out, the operation and maintenance of the property is under the jurisdiction of the State, not the City. Mr. Renner stated he wished the homeowners had approached him first regarding the items in the letter, noting there have apparently been a lot of items brought to the attention of the Homeowners Association by the residents of the park property, which have not trickled down to either his on-site managers or himself to be addressed, and they have apparently been culminated into the letter given to Council. Mr. Renner believed that if management had been given the opportunity to address those items, there would not be any problems. Councilmember Heller stated she had raised the issue of the letter only to make certain it was identified as a separate issue in the minutes. She believed this was something Mr. Renner and the Homeowners Association should discuss, not something the Council had any need to be involved with at this point. Mr. Renner stated he wanted to be on record as stating these issues were not on-going maintenance complaints, noting the first complaint they received had been on October 25th. Tom Davis, 22 Yosemite Road, noted the issue before Council was the adequacy of the notice prior to the implementation of the $7.50 charge. He stated the park owner had not completed the repairs or capital improvements, and they have not been paid for; therefore, the residents were asking that the City delay the notice, until there is either a report from the arbitrator, or a consensus report from the park owner and the Homeowners Association that the issues have been resolved. Mr. Davis stated there was also the very serious matter that approximately half the money being charged was for interest on the return of investment. He noted the park owners, when presenting their case to the arbitrator, had discussed both the need to have a return on capital, and the interest rate; however, the settlement itself did not address those things, and referred only to recovery of the capital expenditure. Mr. Davis believed they needed to go back with the arbitrator, and make clear what was to be covered by the second assessment of up to $7.50 per month for 240 months. He explained what has been proven so far is the expenditure of approximately $223,000, which is nothing like $7.50 for 396 units for 240 months. Therefore, the Homeowners Association was asking Council to hold off on certifying the notice until the parties have told the Council whether they agree, or need arbitration. He believed it was sensible to direct staff not to approve the 90 -day notice, until such time as compliance has been demonstrated. Mr. Guinan reported the park owner has already submitted his rent increase notice, which included the original $7.50 assessment, the CPI adjustment and the computation therefor, and an indication that the second $7.50 Capital Improvement assessment would be assessed. Mr. Guinan stated he reviewed the computation and it appeared to be correct, and he confirmed with the Finance Department that the CPI was 4.1%. He noted he had already written to the park owner indicating the increase was in compliance; however, he did point out in the letter that the second increase could only be imposed as long as the provisions of the settlement agreement had been met. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 10 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 11 Coleman Persily stated that for a $400,000 project, the park owner was charging the residents approximately $700,000. He reported he had been President of the Homeowners Association at the time the agreement was negotiated, and he knew what was in the agreement. He noted that as part of the agreement, the Homeowners Association had agreed the residents would pay for the construction; however, they had not agreed to pay for the interest. He pointed out there was now $400,000 in construction costs, and in addition, the owners were going to charge the residents $300,000 for interest. He believed that amount should be knocked off, as the residents never agreed to pay for interest, only for the cost of construction. Whitfield King stated he has been working with members of the Council and staff, and had provided Mr. Guinan with the information he received from the management of Contempo Marin, which they had stated was their method of determining that their costs were going to exceed the $7.50. Mr. King pointed out the documentation had been provided to the City for information only, to determine whether the items had been paid for, and did not include the retention. He explained one line showed the amount paid, another showed the amount billed, and a third showed the total amount now due. He pointed out it did now show that the amounts billed had been paid. Mr. King stated he had been elected to the position of President of the Homeowners Association, and he did not intend to be recalled because he did not follow the letter of the law regarding the agreement, noting the agreement states "funds expended", meaning they have spent the money. Mayor Boro stated the answers Mr. Guinan needed to get from the arbitrator were clear, and he asked Mr. Guinan to impress upon Ms. Ponticiello the importance, not just of a meeting with the parties, but that the meeting reach a conclusion both parties can live with. He pointed out there were a number of issues, including the new issue of the interest, and whether that was to be part of the calculation. Mayor Boro stated all Council was looking for was to get a clear understanding of the agreement, for both the Council and the residents, and hopefully coming away with an agreement everyone can agree to. NEW BUSINESS: 12. SAN RAFAEL BOCCE CENTER: (CS) - File 202 x 12-5 x 9-3-66 a. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A LOAN OF $10,000 TO THE MARIN BOCCE FEDERATION FOR THE REPAIR OF COURTS E AND F AT THE SAN RAFAEL BOCCE CENTER b. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A LOAN OF $10,000 TO THE MARIN BOCCE FEDERATION FOR THE COMPLETION OF EXTERIOR FENCE AT THE SAN RAFAEL BOCCE CENTER Community Services Director Carlene McCart stated she was presenting two requests for loans from the City's General Fund to the Marin Bocce Federation. She explained the Bocce Federation was seeking $10,000 to supplement their own funds for repair of courts E and F at the San Rafael Bocce Center, and in addition, another $10,000 to complete the exterior fencing at the Bocce Center, which they can accomplish this year if they receive a short-term loan of $10,000 from the City. Ms. McCart recalled that in 1993 Council authorized the use of a portion of Albert Park for the San Rafael Bocce Center, and extended a $40,000 loan to the Marin Bocce Federation to assist with funding the installation of the Bocce Center. Six courts were installed at that time, and since then, two more have been added. Ms. McCart reported they have now noticed the two courts at the lowest elevation of the site are experiencing damage, because the water table is intruding into the courts, causing the surfaces to split, which make the surfaces unplayable. She explained this affected the Federation's ability to effectively run their leagues, private rentals, and the various programs they have successfully organized, stating the bottom line was that it affected their revenue picture. Ms. McCart stated the Federation was seeking to correct the design flaws on these two courts during the off-season, which is November, December, and January, and before they begin Spring play in February. She reported the Federation had $15,000 to apply toward the reconstruction of the courts, and was seeking $10,000 from the City, in order to do the work now. Ms. McCart explained the second request was for a short-term loan to complete the exterior fence, which has been in various stages of completion since the Center was installed. She stated that with a short-term loan of $10,000, they could complete the work by the end of 1999, and would be able to repay the loan by September, 2000, when they have finished their League programs, and have received their revenues for the year. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 11 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 12 Councilmember Cohen noted the staff report did not address the source of funds. Ms. McCart stated money would have to come from the City's General Fund, as there were no funds in Parkland Dedication, and no other operating funds that would cover these loans at this time. Councilmember Phillips asked if there was a high degree of certainty that the City would be repaid $5,000 per year? Dolly Nave, Marin Bocce Federation, stated the Federation had already planned to increase their annual payment to the City from $1,000 to $5,000 per year. Mayor Boro asked if they were in agreement that the League's annual payments would be increased to $5,000, and if the League receives the second loan of $10,000, that would be paid off by next September? Mrs. Nave stated that was correct. She pointed out the reason the Federation wanted to put the fence up was because the City did not want a construction site in the park during the Millennium Party. She stated the Federation was willing to do that now, for the City, rather than next September. Councilmember Heller asked if they would be reconstructing the two courts and raising them above the water table? Mrs. Nave explained it would be a matter of sealing. Ms. Heller asked if there was any recourse against the person who designed the courts? Mrs. Nave stated there was not, noting the courts had been designed by a person from Switzerland, who did not fully realize the type of weather we have here, and unfortunately, the two courts only lasted five years. However, Mrs. Nave stated the Federation would be able to fix these two courts, and they should last for another twenty years. a. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to adopt the Resolution authorizing a loan of $10,000 to the Marin Bocce Federation for the repair of Courts E and F. RESOLUTION NO. 10524 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A LOAN OF $10,000 TO MARIN BOCCE FEDERATION FOR THE REPAIR OF COURTS E AND F AT THE SAN RAFAEL BOCCE CENTER. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None b. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution authorizing a loan of $10,000 to the Marin Bocce Federation for the completion of the exterior fence at the Bocce Center. RESOLUTION NO. 10525 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A LOAN OF $10,000 TO THE MARIN BOCCE FEDERATION FOR THE COMPLETION OF THE EXTERIOR FENCE PROJECT AT THE SAN RAFAEL BOCCE CENTER ON OR BEFORE DECEMBER 24, 1999 (as amended, to specify that this loan is to be repaid by September 30, 2000). AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None MONTHLY REPORT: 13. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT (CM) - File 9-3-11 City Manager Gould thanked the Community Services Department, Councilmember Miller, and Assistant to the City Manager Lydia Romero for the best ever Day of the Dead celebration on Saturday night, noting it was a huge success. He reported the celebration had continued through today, with 650 school children coming to see the altars, taking part in baking and drawing, and celebrating this cultural festival. Mr. Gould extended an invitation to Vice -Mayor Cohen, Councilmember Phillips, and City Clerk Leoncini to attend the Department Directors' meeting on Wednesday morning, explaining the Department Directors would like to hear what the candidates and their campaign workers have heard while out on the campaign trail, what the City's residents and businesses are saying, and whether it is different from what staff has picked up in recent surveys and meetings. He believed staff would benefit from their insights. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 12 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 13 COUNCIL ER REPORTS: 14. None. There being no further business, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 9:55 PM. Mayor Boro announced the Council would reconvene in Closed Session. The City Council adjourned Closed Session at 10:55 PM, and Assistant City Attorney Guinan announced no reportable action was taken. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1999 MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 11/1/99 Page 13