HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1999-06-07SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 1
IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, JUNE 7, 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
Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk
CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 PM
None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE:
PM
8:25
RE: AFFORDABLE HOUSING - File 13-16 x 229
Gregory Taylor addressed the issue of workforce housing, stating he was against
any type
of housing subsidized by the government, whether it be County, State, or
Federal. He stated he favored giving Policemen, Firefighters, and those in the
medical industry a raise, as opposed to any type of government influence on
where people live, and more importantly, how they live. He stated he was in
favor of the "flat tax", and believed if the government taxed spending, and did
not tax earnings, property and inheritance, we would have a much happier
society.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to approve the
6. Monthly Investment Report (MS) - File 8-18 x 8-9 Accepted Monthly
Investment
Report for month ending
April, 1999, as presented.
7. Report on Rebid Opening and Award of Contract to RESOLUTION NO. 10416 -
Ghilotti Construction Company Re: Second Street RESOLUTION OF AWARD
OF
Widening and Lindaro Street Rule 20A UndergroundCONTRACT FOR REBID OF
SECOND
Utility District, Project No. 048-4810-471-8000 STREET WIDENING AND
LINDARO
(Re -Bid Opening Held May 18, 1999) in an Amount STREET RULE 20A
UNDERGROUND
Not to Exceed $3,486,965.75 (PW) UTILITY DISTRICT TO
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 1
following Consent
Calendar items:
ITEM
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1.
Approval of Minutes of Special Joint Meeting Minutes approved as
submitted.
and Regular Meeting of Monday, May
17, 1999 (CC)
2.
Resolution Approving a Certificate
of Acceptance RESOLUTION NO. 10415 -
of the Grant of a Drainage Easement
at 31 Palm RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL
Avenue (CA) - File 2-4-22
OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
APPROVING A CERTIFICATE OF
ACCEPTANCE OF THE GRANT OF
A DRAINAGE EASEMENT AT 31
PALM AVENUE.
3.
Summary of Legislation Affecting San Rafael (CM)Approved staff
recommendation:
- File 9-1
SB 887 (Ortiz), Group
Homes: SUPPORT; SB 15
(Polanco), Firearms:
SUPPORT; AB 1612 (Florez),
Repair Local Streets and
Highways: SUPPORT.
4.
City Work Plan Review (CM) - File
237 This item was removed
from the agenda at the
request of staff.
6. Monthly Investment Report (MS) - File 8-18 x 8-9 Accepted Monthly
Investment
Report for month ending
April, 1999, as presented.
7. Report on Rebid Opening and Award of Contract to RESOLUTION NO. 10416 -
Ghilotti Construction Company Re: Second Street RESOLUTION OF AWARD
OF
Widening and Lindaro Street Rule 20A UndergroundCONTRACT FOR REBID OF
SECOND
Utility District, Project No. 048-4810-471-8000 STREET WIDENING AND
LINDARO
(Re -Bid Opening Held May 18, 1999) in an Amount STREET RULE 20A
UNDERGROUND
Not to Exceed $3,486,965.75 (PW) UTILITY DISTRICT TO
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 1
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 2
GHILOTTI
- File 4-1-501 x 12-18-12 CONSTRUCTION COMPANY IN
AMOUNT OF $3,486,966
(Lowest Responsible
Bidder) .
8. Resolution Authorizing Execution of an AgreementRESOLUTION NO. 10417 -
with Harris & Associates for the Second Street RESOLUTION TO ENTER
INTO AN
Widening and Lindaro Street Rule 20A UndergroundAGREEMENT WITH HARRIS &
Utility District for Construction Management ASSOCIATES FOR SECOND
STREET
Services in an Amount Not to Exceed $231,000 (PW) WIDENING AND LINDARO
STREET
- File 4-3-360 x 12-18-12 RULE 20A UNDERGROUND
UTILITY DISTRICT FOR
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT
TO EXCEED $231,000.
9. Second Street Widening - Resolution Approving the RESOLUTION NO. 10418
Purchase of an Easement from Golden Gate Bridge,RESOLUTION APPROVING GRANT
OF
Highway, and Transportation District in the Amount EASEMENT AND
AGREEMENT FOR
of $10,000 and Authorizing Execution of Agreement SECOND STREET
WIDENING PROJECT
(PW) - File 2-2-1 x 112-2 x 11-1 ON LAND OWNED BY
GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE,
HIGHWAY, AND
TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT
(GGBHTD).
10. Renewal of City/County Community Development Block RESOLUTION NO. 10419
Grant Cooperation Agreement (CM)
- File 4-13-38 x 147
RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING
EXECUTION OF A COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
PROGRAM AND HOME PROGRAM
COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH
THE COUNTY OF MARIN.
11. Second Reading and Final Adoption of Ordinance Approved final
adoption
No. 1737 - An Ordinance of the City of San Rafael of Ordinance No. 1737
Amending the Zoning Map of the City of San Rafael, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF
California, Adopted by Reference by Section SAN RAFAEL AMENDING
THE ZONING
14.01.020 of the Municipal Code of San Rafael, MAP OF THE CITY OF
SAN RAFAEL,
California, so as to Reclassify Certain Real CALIFORNIA, ADOPTED
BY
Property from the Planned Development District to REFERENCE BY SECTION
14.01.020
the Planned Development (PD Ordinance No. 1737) OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF
SAN
District to Allow for Six Single -Family Residential RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA,
SO AS TO
Lots (Re: ZC98-3, End of Fernwood Way and Fernwood RECLASSIFY CERTAIN
REAL
Drive, AP No. 185-030-01) (Fernwood Estates) (CD) PROPERTY FROM THE
PLANNED
- File 10-3 x 10-4 x 10-5 x 10-7 x 10-8 DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
(PD ORDINANCE NO. 1737)
DISTRICT TO ALLOW FOR SIX
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
LOTS (RE: ZC98-3, END OF
FERNWOOD WAY AND FERNWOOD
DRIVE, AP NO. 185-030-01)
(FERNWOOD ESTATES).
13. City's Exercise of Marin Housing Authority's Council declined to
exercise
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 2
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 3
Options to Purchase Two Below Market Rate ("BMR") option to purchase
two BMR
Units at the Marin Lagoon Condominium Project: units.
33 Mariners Circle and 29 Mariners Circle (RA)
- File 229 x 9-3-16
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for further
discussion:
5. APPLICATION FOR FEE WAIVER FOR STRETTON DESIGNS FOR FREEWAY MURAL OVERPASS
PROJECT (CM) - File 9-10-2 x 9-2-24
Mayor Boro noted the staff report referred to Resolution 84-8, asking if
that was a Resolution that had been adopted in 1988? He also pointed out
Ms. Stretton was currently in the process of going before the Cultural
Affairs Commission and the Design Review Board, and asked, if Council were
to approve the waiver of fees, would Ms. Stretton not begin painting the
mural until after she had received approvals from those Boards? City
Manager Gould explained Resolution 84-8 did refer to public art, and was
adopted in 1984. In addition, he confirmed the applicant did have to go
before the Cultural Affairs Commission, the Design Review Board and the
Planning Commission for a decision, and to date, no decision has been made,
or implied, by City staff. Mayor Boro asked if the action now before
Council was in anticipation of something eventually happening, and the fee
eventually being waived? Mr. Gould explained the fee waiver was for the
cost of the processing of the application only.
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Miller seconded, to allow the
application to go forward with the waiver of fees, and to adopt the
Resolution granting the request of waiver.
RESOLUTION NO. 10420 - RESOLUTION WAIVING FEES FOR THE MURAL ON THIRD
AND HETHERTON.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
12. SECOND READING AND FINAL ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE N0. 1738 - AN ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL REPEALING SECTIONS 8.12.030,
8.12.220 & 8.12.230, AND ADDING CHAPTER 8.18 TO THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL
CODE TO REGULATE THE POSSESSION AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON
PUBLIC AND CERTAIN PRIVATE PROPERTY (CA)
- File 13-8 x 13-9 x 9-3-16 x 9-3-30
Mayor Boro stated Linda Pratt had requested to address the Council
concerning this item.
Linda Pratt, member of the Marin County Intra -Coalition on the prevention
of alcohol and other drug problems, explained they were a group of
concerned community members who work to prevent alcohol-related problems in
Marin County, and were very much in support of this item. Ms. Pratt noted
the Coalition had followed other communities where similar Ordinances had
been adopted, and saw the importance of partnerships between law
enforcement and community members as being essential to the effectiveness
of the Ordinance. She believed it was important to monitor the
implementation of the policy, and ensure it is monitored with equity, not
targeting one neighborhood and disregarding another. Ms. Pratt reported
they had also learned this was an effective Ordinance for addressing
people's behavior, once alcohol has been obtained or purchased. Equally
important, they felt the City had to look at the serving and sales
practices of the local merchants who sell and promote alcohol, and in that
regard, she noted the Coalition would like to have future conversations
with the City about designing a Conditional Use Permit Ordinance within the
City of San Rafael.
Mayor Boro reported that during the first hearing regarding this Ordinance,
Police Chief Cam Sanchez discussed how the Police Department would work
closely with all City agencies and the entire community, enforcing this law
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 3
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 4
on an equitable basis throughout the community.
The title of the Ordinance was read:
" AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL REPEALING
SECTIONS 8.12.030, 8.12.220 & 8.12.230, AND ADDING CHAPTER 8.18 TO THE SAN
RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE THE POSSESSION AND CONSUMPTION OF
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON PUBLIC AND CERTAIN PRIVATE PROPERTY."
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to dispense
with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety, and to refer to it by
title only, and approve final adoption of Ordinance No. 1738, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
14. PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 1736 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING TITLE 12 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF
SAN RAFAEL BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.12, ADOPTING THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE,
1997 EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS; BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.14, ADOPTING THE
UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, 1997 EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS, BY AMENDING CHAPTER
12.16, ADOPTING THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, 1997 EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS;
BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.20, ADOPTING THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, 1996
EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS; BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.26, ADOPTING THE UNIFORM
HOUSING CODE, 1997 EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS; BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.28,
ADOPTING THE UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, 1997
EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS; AND BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.32, ADOPTING THE
UNIFORM SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE, 1997 EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS
(CD)
- File 1-6-1 X 1-6-2- X 1-6-3- X 1-6-5- X 1-6-6 X 1-6-7
Mayor Boro declared the public hearing opened, and asked for the staff
report.
Community Development Director Bob Brown stated the action before Council
was the adoption of the latest Uniform Construction Codes, noting the 1997
Codes had recently been adopted by the State of California Building
Standards Commission. He reported there were no significant revisions in
terms of local amendments.
Mayor Boro invited public comment, and there was none.
There being no public comment, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
The title of the Ordinance was read:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING TITLE 12 OF THE MUNICIPAL
CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.12, ADOPTING THE
UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, 1997 EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS; BY AMENDING CHAPTER
12.14, ADOPTING THE UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, 1997 EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS,
BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.16, ADOPTING THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, 1997
EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS; BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.20, ADOPTING THE NATIONAL
ELECTRICAL CODE, 1996 EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS; BY AMENDING CHAPTER 12.26,
ADOPTING THE UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, 1997 EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS; BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 12.28, ADOPTING THE UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF
DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, 1997 EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS; AND BY AMENDING CHAPTER
12.32, ADOPTING THE UNIFORM SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND HOT TUB CODE, 1997
EDITION, WITH AMENDMENTS . "
Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to dispense
with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety, and to refer to it by
title only, and approve final adoption of Ordinance No. 1736, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
15. PUBLIC HEARING - CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 4
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 5
SAN RAFAEL'S CARD ROOM ORDINANCE (SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 10.36)
TO ADD A NEW SECTION 10.36.130 ADOPTING REGULATIONS REQUIRED FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE STATE GAMBLING CONTROL ACT (BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE SECTION
19851), AND TO DELETE SECTION 10.36.070 RELATING TO A PROHIBITION OF
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT CARD ROOMS (CA) - File 9-10 X 9-3-16 X 9-3-20
Mayor Boro declared the public hearing opened, and asked for the staff
report.
City Attorney Gary Ragghianti explained the issue before Council was in two
parts. The first referred to additional regulations necessary to comply
with the provisions of the State Gambling Control Act, essentially adding
new and additional requirements to the City's Card Room Ordinance, as
listed in the staff report. Mr. Ragghianti pointed out this proposed
Ordinance had been submitted to the State for review and approval, and was
approved with regard to the matters the City is required to place in the
Ordinance. The second matter involves the deletion of Section 10.36.070,
which is an alcohol prohibition that has existed for some time. Mr.
Ragghianti stated this was a prohibition staff believed, in part, may be
pre-empted by the Constitution of the State of California, which confers
exclusive jurisdiction and power upon the State to license and regulate the
sale and purchase, as well as the possession of alcohol on premises. It
also deals with consumption, which cities and counties may legislate;
however, with regard to that, staff believes that as there is only one card
room still in existence within the City, and since staff has submitted the
proposed deletion to the Police Department, and it has been determined that
the enforcement of the provision would be problematic and unwarranted under
the circumstances, staff was requesting the Ordinance include deletion of
that Section. Mr. Ragghianti stated there would be no fiscal impact, and
the proposed changes would bring the City's Ordinance into compliance with
State law, and delete a Section that did not appear to be practical any
longer, with respect to the operation of the sole remaining card room.
Councilmember Heller stated this was the City's one and only card room, and
had a special permit. She asked how long that permit ran, if it ended with
this particular club, or if it was transferrable? Mr. Ragghianti stated
the permit ended with this club, noting the permits were not transferrable,
and when this business ends, the card room ends.
Councilmember Cohen noted the staff report addresses the issue of alcohol
consumption, pointing out Mr. Pellolio had raised that issue during the Use
Permit hearing. Mr. Cohen asked if the Police Department had any problems
with regard to this change, or if they had experienced any problems? He
also asked if it was possible to reserve the right, should there be
problems in the future, to review this under the conditions of the Use
Permit? He wondered whether the consumption of alcohol had been part of
the Use Permit discussions, and if there would be an option in the future,
if there was a problem, to raise the issue of regulating the consumption of
alcohol in the card room? Mr. Ragghianti stated there would be an
opportunity for the City to address that issue, although not under the Use
Permit, if Council were to delete this Section of the Ordinance. He
explained the reason was that if a nuisance was created, the City would
have full authority to go in and abate it, and if a crime was being
committed, the Police had the opportunity, as well as the jurisdiction, to
go in and make arrests, if necessary. However, when Mr. Pellolio moved the
card room, he made improvements to the club which permit the passing -
through of alcohol from a back area, where it is stored and chilled, to the
area where cards are played; whereas before, there was a separate room
where someone would have to go to obtain it. Mr. Ragghianti noted Mr.
Pellolio had indicated he had done that because during the Use Permit
process, he stated that was what he was going to do, and no one said
anything to him about it. Mr. Ragghianti explained years have past, and
the City was faced with the prospect of whether or not to abate it, which
is why staff sought the advice of the Police Department; and after
recognizing that it is the only card room left, and there really has not
been a problem, staff included the deletion of that section, in hope of
cleaning up the Ordinance, and making it consistent with what is actually
going on.
Mayor Boro invited public comment, and there was none.
There being no public comment, Mayor Boro closed the public hearing.
The title of the Ordinance was read:
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING
CHAPTER 10.36 RELATING TO CARD ROOMS, TO ADD A NEW SECTION 10.36.130
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 5
F0.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 6
ADOPTING REGULATIONS REQUIRED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE GAMBLING
CONTROL ACT, AND TO DELETE SECTIONS 10.36.070 RELATING TO A PROHIBITION OF
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES".
Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to dispense
with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety, and to refer to it by
title only, and pass Ordinance No. 1739 to print, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO UPHOLD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION REGARDING ANCILLARY RETAIL
USE IN THE FIFTH/MISSION RESIDENTIAL /OFFICE DISTRICT AT 835 FIFTH AVENUE
(CD)
- File 10-5 X 10-2
Mayor Boro declared the public hearing opened, and asked for the staff
report.
Community Development Director Bob Brown explained this was an appeal of a
Zoning interpretation made by himself, and most recently by the Planning
Commission upon the appeal, regarding whether Retail uses were
"grandfathered" at 835 Fifth Avenue.
Mr. Brown reported a Use Permit had been issued to Mr. Dickens in October,
1989, for Professional Office use of the entire building at 835 Fifth, and
a condition of that permit was that any subsequent changes in use would
require modification of the Use Permit. Mr. Brown noted the only Business
License issued for this property since 1989 was for Mr. Dickens'
Architecture and Planning firm, and no Business Licenses were applied for,
or granted, for Retail uses during that timeframe.
Mr. Brown reported that in 1996 the site was re -zoned, as part of the
implementation of the Downtown Vision, to a District which did not allow
Retail uses on Fifth Avenue. He explained that since any Retail use in the
building was not sanctioned or permitted by the City, the Retail use was
not a legally existing use at the time of the 1996 re -zoning; therefore,
staff and the Planning Commission did not consider this a legal, non-
conforming use.
Mayor Boro noted the staff report pointed out the two surrounding
properties, Beverly's and Grand Auto, which do have Retail uses on Fifth
Avenue, had been in existence in 1996 when the Ordinance was adopted, and
were "grandfathered".
Councilmember Cohen asked whether the current operator of Beverly's had
been in operation at that time, or if it had been another Retail use at
that location? Mr. Brown stated he believed Beverly's was in existence at
that time, although he was not certain. Mr. Cohen stated it was at least a
comparable Retail use, and what was grandfathered was the Retail use, not
that a specific operator was in place. Mr. Brown stated the use runs with
the land.
Ray Hackett, son of owner Clare Hackett, stated he had worked on this issue
with Mr. Brown for some time, noting he stood by the information provided
him by Mr. Dickens.
There being no further public comment, Mayor Boro closed the public
hearing.
Councilmember Cohen stated he was surprised Council had not heard more from
Mr. Dickens, acknowledging that in reading the staff report, Mr. Dickens
had made an argument that there were several Retail uses in operation
there, and while he understood they did not necessarily have Business
Licenses from the City, he agreed they should have. Mr. Cohen asked, if
Mr. Dickens had provided any evidence, other than his statement, that those
businesses were operated, and if so, had the City made any effort to
determine, through other means, whether or not there were businesses being
operated? Mr. Cohen noted that in the material he submitted, Mr. Dickens
pointed out they paid sales tax and other taxes, based on the operation of
those businesses. He asked if staff had made any effort to investigate
whether or not taxes were paid, based upon those businesses being operated
on the Fifth Avenue
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 6
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 7
side of the building? Mr. Brown acknowledged Mr. Dickens had provided
information, including sales information, and staff did believe retail
sales were occurring on the site; however, the question for staff was
whether those were legal, lawfully existing uses at the time? He stated
staff could not make that determination, because the only Use Permit for
the site specifically precluded any use other than Professional Offices.
He noted the fact that the Use Permit precluded such use, and there were no
Business Licenses issued, led staff to conclude this was not a legally
existing business at the time of the re -zoning. Mr. Cohen stated it was
his understanding Mr. Dickens was alleging the Retail operation pre -dated
the zone change. Mr. Brown explained that was the case with some of the
operations, such as the Project Gallery, a framing business, and he noted
all the Uses preceded the 1996 re -zoning. Mr. Cohen asked if those would
have been illegal as Retail uses, prior to the re -zoning? Mr. Brown
stated, but for the fact that the Use Permit precluded them, they would not
have been. Mr. Cohen asked, if someone had come in and stated they wanted
to amend the Use Permit to include Retail uses, and wanted to obtain a
Business License, would that have been an over-the-counter transaction?
Mr. Brown stated such a Permit would have been processed either through a
Zoning Administrator or a Planning Commission hearing. Mr. Cohen asked if
sales tax had been generated? Mr. Brown stated he could not be certain of
that.
Councilmember Cohen stated he was prepared to vote in favor of the motion;
however, he was a little uncomfortable, and while he did not want to state
it was all right to change the uses without modifying the Use Permit, or to
operate a business without obtaining a Business License, the question
regarding the sales tax still concerned him. He felt if there was sales
tax being generated, and the City accepted that revenue, then the City did,
on some level, buy -in to the understanding that there was Retail being
operated there, and benefited from it. He stated that was the only issue
which caused him concern. City Manager Gould explained the City was
remitted sales tax from the State of California in a lump sum, and while
the City employs sales tax auditors to track sales tax from major
generators, they track the top 100 generators, and this particular use
would not have come close to being in the top 100. Mr. Cohen asked if that
meant the City would not have had a method for determining whether sales
tax was paid by any of these businesses? Mr. Gould stated that was
correct.
Mayor Boro stated it was his understanding, from reading through the staff
report, that when the property was re -zoned, Mr. Dickens, the owner at that
time, was put on notice, and nothing happened, even though hearings were
held. Mr. Brown reported Mr. Dickens received a notice of the re -zoning,
as did other property owners in the Downtown.
Councilmember Miller moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt the
Resolution denying the appeal.
RESOLUTION NO. 10421 - RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE
PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO UPHOLD THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION
REGARDING ANCILLARY RETAIL USE IN THE FIFTH/MISSION
RESIDENTIAL/OFFICE DISTRICT AT 835 FIFTH AVENUE, AP
#11-224-16.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Mayor Boro
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
OLD BUSINESS:
17. DISCUSSION OF PRELIMINARY CITY TWO-YEAR BUDGET FOR 1999/2001 AND APPROVAL
OF CITY COUNCIL PRIORITIES (MS) - File 8-5 x 9-1
Assistant City Manager Kenneth Nordhoff explained his report was a summary,
based on all the action steps taken to this point, with regard to
developing the City's first two-year budget. He pointed out staff had put
together a variety of Service Options, and asked Council to consider them
over the past several days. He reported those had been re -summarized for
Council, and a separate handout had been prepared.
Mr. Nordhoff referred to Page 2 of the staff report, which highlighted a
few of the items staff felt were key issues, noting those items included
consideration of several options for the funding of medians; a cost detail,
time table, and deliverables regarding the General Plan Update; and further
explanation regarding a Police/Civilian Mid -Management position,
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 7
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 8
information which was provided by the Police Department as part of their
weekly report through the City Manager's office. Mr. Nordhoff recalled
Mayor Boro had particularly asked for information regarding levels of
staffing, noting the report provided a summary sheet, as well as details
over a five-year period for each of the major departments.
Mr. Nordhoff stated there had been some discussion about restructuring the
Parking District, noting there has been an ongoing issue of trying to make
sure that operation is self -balanced. He recalled the question had come up
that rather than restructuring all the fines and all the costs, if Council
would consider moving a couple of Foot Beat Officers back into the General
Fund?
Mr. Nordhoff noted Councilmember Phillips had discussed how much revenue
had been raised over the last several years, with regard to the funding of
additional Capital needs and opportunities. He pointed out he had listed
some of the critical items he had seen over the past three years, such as
Franchise Fees, a series of fees regarding the City's Business Cost Study,
and some proposed additional Police Department revenues within the coming
two years. Lastly, Mr. Nordhoff reported there had also been a question
regarding funding for the Chamber of Commerce, noting that issue had been
addressed as part of the Redevelopment Agency budget. Mr. Nordhoff felt,
overall, all the funds appeared to be balanced, as noted during the budget
hearings last week, although there was an issue to resolve concerning the
Parking District.
Mr. Nordhoff pointed out staff had also included what they interpreted to
be Council's thoughts on the final City Council Priorities for the coming
two years, noting he would like to validate those this evening.
Mayor Boro invited public comment.
Steven Polland, Engineering Contractor in the City of San Rafael, addressed
the sound barrier on Greenfield Avenue, where he resides. He stated the
neighbors would like a study done on the soundwall, which was originally
built in 1975, noting they would like it to be improved. He stated the
traffic was very bad there, the noise was incredible, debris is thrown over
the soundwall, and areas of the wall itself are failing and overgrown. He
stated it was not aesthetically pleasing, and they would like to see if the
noise quality and the aesthetics of the soundwall can be improved.
David Lee, President of the Spinnaker Point Homeowners Association,
addressed the Council on behalf of the Association, which is comprised of
225 homes on or around Baypoint Lagoon. He urged Council to take immediate
steps to appropriate funds in the upcoming budgetary process, to be used
for the immediate mechanical removal of the cattails in the lagoon, in a
way consistent with protecting the lagoon as a wildlife sanctuary and
breeding area. He stated his Association supported the efforts of the Bay
Point Lagoon Association to have their funds released to pay into their
Special Tax Assessment District Fee for this purpose, and to cease using
that money to pay consultants to merely monitor the growth of the cattails.
He stated that inasmuch as the Lagoon is a precious natural resource, adds
immeasurably to the beauty of the area, is the major reason why many of
them purchased homes there, and is a main support for property values in
South San Rafael, they believed it was vital to take immediate steps to
prevent the Lagoon from becoming a swamp. Mr. Lee reported efforts would
soon be underway in Spinnaker Point to raise money on a voluntary basis, to
assist in the removal and control of the cattails; nevertheless, the
residents felt the City of San Rafael, by virtue of the fact that it owns
the Lagoon, had a major responsibility to budget and utilize tax dollars in
the most cost efficient way, in order to maintain the lagoon.
Marsha Hartor, Member of the Spinnaker Point Homeowners Association Board
of Directors, stated she had been an owner in Spinnaker Point for
approximately five years. She reported in 1992 there had been a decision
made by the City to change from a saltwater lagoon to a freshwater lagoon,
by creating a barrier from the bay, which would be left permanently in
place. She believed this was what had triggered the growth of the cattails
in the lagoon, to the point where the depth of the lagoon was now only four
feet, and the cattails could grow entirely across it. Ms. Hartor stated
that in the past two years they had lost approximately four feet in radius
of the open area of the lagoon, and she believed it was only a short matter
of time before the lagoon would be entirely grown over with cattails, and
any open water that would be available for wildlife would not be there.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 8
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 9
Bernice Moore, resident of Greenfield Avenue, raised several points
regarding the soundwall, and asked what the long-term plan was for the
Miracle Mile; and what the City's plans were for traffic flow from Highway
101 for cars, trucks, and buses using Second and Third Streets and the
Miracle Mile as their main thoroughfare to reach the Valley or Point Reyes
National Seashore? She also referred to the expense of the soundwall,
noting they needed someone to study the utilization of the current base of
the wall, and asked if anyone had examined the wall to check its
durability, to see if this could even be used as a base? Ms. Moore also
recommended the City consider denser planting of trees and shrubbery in the
dividers to absorb sound from both eastbound and westbound traffic, noting
that action would be in addition to improving or replacing the soundwall.
Ms. Moore noted the City had been improving the aesthetics of the gateways
to San Rafael; however, the existing soundwall has been ignored, and has
become an eyesore. She stated property values were negatively affected in
the West End Neighborhood, due to an increase in noise and heavy traffic,
and that seemed to affect every area plagued with heavy traffic and noise.
Ms. Moore stated the West End Neighborhood Association felt they were a
unique and integral extenuation of the Downtown Restoration Project,
pointing out they were centrally located between San Rafael and San
Anselmo, public transportation was convenient, the feeling of their
neighborhood was congenial, and they were thinking about the future.
Bud Strauss, member of the Greenfield Avenue Stonewallers, stated the whole
world seemed to be increasing in speed, population, costs, prices of homes,
taxes, communications, automobiles, trucks, and on and on. He noted the
only exception seemed to be their homes on Greenfield Avenue, which were
going down in value. He stated they were subjected to an ever-increasing
din and the vastly increasing speed of motor vehicles, particularly when
they are confined in a narrow, concentrated stream of main traffic routes.
He asked Council to at least make the so-called Miracle Mile an example of
miraculously good government.
Brian Walsh, member of the West End Neighborhood Association, reported he
lived on the other side of the soundwall being proposed. He stated he did
not believe this was a unilateral problem to the people on Greenfield,
noting the sound was transmitted up both sides of the valley. While he
felt it was a problem they all experienced, he did not believe the problem
should be transferred from one side of the neighborhood to the other,
noting they should be able to work on a more equitable solution. He
suggested lowering the speed limit, which has recently been increased to 35
miles per hour, and perhaps the planting of trees. Mr. Walsh did not
believe a soundwall was the solution, and he felt, before any decisions
were made, the people from the other side of the valley needed to become
involved in the planning.
Harry Winters, President of the West End Neighborhood Association, recalled
that three years ago the Association identified this issue as one of the
three top priority problems in the West End neighborhood, noting it was a
problem along the entire length of Greenfield Avenue, on the southern side,
and those backyards were directly against what amounts to a six -lane
freeway. At the same time, the people on the north side were concerned
that if a real soundwall were put up, the sound would affect them. Mr.
Winters stated there were at least thirty affected properties along the
entire block, and he pointed out that several years ago there was a lot
less traffic on the Miracle Mile than there is today.
Mr. Winters believed there was a solution to the problem, which may not be
a soundwall, but at least a higher barrier that would protect them more
from things being thrown over the fence, and people looking down into their
yards. He hoped the City could identify funding for a comprehensive study
to determine just what the problem is, and how it can be solved to the
satisfaction of everyone in the neighborhood.
Mike McNair, 132 Greenfield, addressed the issue of the soundwall in
relation to the trees. Mr. McNair stated his property was the most densely
tree -populated area on the street, and while he was totally blocked off
from seeing the traffic, it did not seem to affect the sound at all. He
believed that while the trees were nice and soaked up some of the exhaust,
what they needed was a soundwall. He pointed out traffic speed was not
really a problem during the morning and evening hours, noting the cars were
not moving the speed limit because they back-up on that road; however, the
neighbors were breathing a lot of exhaust, and hearing a lot of noise. He
did not believe they needed a study, and rather than waste any money, they
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 9
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 10
should just put up a wall.
John Pinney, resident of the West End, noted his property did not back up
to the Miracle Mile; however, he was a resident of the neighborhood, and
had spoken with many of the residents whose properties do back up to the
Miracle Mile, and he was very concerned with what he has seen. He pointed
out there was a wall already there, not a new wall, but rather a wall that
was committed to some twenty-five years ago when there was much less of a
problem, and which was probably adequate, at that time, to serve the needs
it was built to meet. However, this was a wall built out of wood, which
was now twenty-five years old and rotting. He noted people were trying to
buttress the wall with their own wood, but have been told by the City that
they should try planting trees to block the sound. Mr. Pinney explained
that in looking at engineering reports on how soundwalls should be built,
it was noted that if vegetation was used, 100 feet of densely planted
vegetation was needed to block any noise. Reiterating the experience of
neighbors who have planted trees, trying to mitigate the problem on their
own, he stated it just was not going to work. In addition, he reported
they were seeing an increase in development, planned by the City, that was
going to increase the use (of the Miracle Mile) throughout both daytime and
nighttime. He noted there would be office parks, theaters, and the
Farmers' Market, all things that were going to extend both nighttime and
evening traffic. Mr. Pinney stated it was not just the point that the wall
was already there, but that the City had already committed to maintaining
that wall. He stated this was an existing structure, which the City needed
to look at, and recognize what the commitment was to the neighborhood, and
to the plans the City has made regarding the traffic.
Bill Day, resident of Greenfield Avenue, stated he had empathy for the
people on the north side of the Miracle Mile; however, he was speaking on
behalf of those living on the south side. Regarding the existing wall, Mr.
Day explained it was a two-part wall, with a concrete base structure
authorized by Caltrans, and a top part that was supposedly a noise barrier,
put up in 1975, and consisting of 1 inch thick redwood planks, which he did
not believe helped reduce the noise level. He urged further study, taking
into account the needs of the people on both the south and the north sides.
Beverly Stevens, resident of Spinnaker Point, stated she had been attracted
to her property because of the lagoons and the beautiful waterways. She
praised the City for what it had done in the development, recalling there
had been an article in the Marin Independent Journal four years ago which
pointed out that developments, environmentalists, and habitats could work
so beautifully together. Ms. Stevens urged the City to help them maintain
this beautiful property.
Candy Lawson, resident of Spinnaker Point, stated she has been a member of
a committee formed by the Spinnaker Point Homeowners Association and the
Baypoint Lagoon Homeowners Association, which was trying to come up with
solutions to the cattail problem in the lagoon. She reiterated the
cattails were rapidly destroying this property, and she believed an effort
needed to be made to eradicate them, by turning the lagoon back to a
saltwater, brackish water lagoon, to inhibit the growth, along with the
mechanical removal of the cattails, because unless they removed the ones
that are there, they would never get rid of the problem. She stated they
were not asking that all the cattails be taken out, but that they be kept
under control. She also asked for the release of the tax money being
collected from Baypoint, for the purpose of getting rid of the cattails,
and rather than being used for additional studies, allowing them to use the
money so they will have wildlife in the future; otherwise, there will not
be anything left to study, anyway.
Marsha Hartor referred to the Canal Neighborhood Capacity Building
component of the budget. She stated she has been a participant in three
focus groups which have taken place in the Canal over the past few years,
and in each of those three groups, both parks and paths had been mentioned
as very high priorities, safe and aesthetically pleasing
bike/pedestrian/and electric cart paths, to get people to the services they
need, and open space, so people can have better access and enjoy more of
the unique environment in which they live. Ms. Hartor noted that in the
budget, under Capacity Building in the Canal Neighborhood, there was no
mention of these issues; however, there was a section in the budget,
"Transportation and Traffic", and she asked that the City refocus this
issue, not to traffic, but rather to transportation, and getting people to
the services they need. She pointed out automobiles were only one way of
doing that, as people can live and work in the same environment, noting the
City was doing much work to try to make that happen in Downtown San
Rafael, for which she commended the City. She urged Council to think about
the children who try to get to school, whose parents have to drive them
because they are afraid that if their children are walking or biking it is
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 10
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 11
not safe for them; to think about the seniors, who can no longer drive
because they no longer have driver's licenses. She noted they were
extremely restricted, and the quality of their life could be considerably
improved if they had access to the services they need with paths that were
safe and aesthetically pleasing. She also asked them to think about the
families who cannot afford cars. Ms. Hartor stated she believed it was
possible to completely connect all the neighborhoods in San Rafael with the
Downtown and the parks, with such paths, and she urged Council to think
about that component of transportation, in addition to just planning for
more cars.
Josephine Lewis, resident of Spinnaker Point, referred to Ms. Hartor's
comments, and pointed out the overpass over Francisco Boulevard, which had
been discussed during a meeting with City officials last Fall. Ms. Lewis
stated the worst part of getting out of Spinnaker Point was the
intersection of Bellam Boulevard crossing Francisco Boulevard. She stated
it was a very dangerous place, and one of the reasons many of the residents
do not attempt to walk to the Post Office, or take a bicycle across. Ms.
Lewis stated the residents had been assured a study would be done of this
intersection, and that it would be made safer for pedestrian crossing;
however, the residents have not yet heard anything about it. She noted she
had volunteered to work on such a committee, when it was formed, and would
still like to participate.
Steve Polland asked if there was a point or a time when the residents would
be told if there would be a study regarding the soundwall? Mayor Boro
stated there would be discussion at the conclusion of the public comments.
Mayor Boro noted there had been three main issues discussed by the public,
and asked City Manager Gould to address those items. Mr. Gould referred to
pedestrian improvements in and around the Canal, pointing out that last
year, when the City was considering traffic improvements in the area known
as "the Loop", Council earmarked a quarter of a million dollars for
pedestrian and bicycle improvements to that area. At the same time, the
Council appointed the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, to help
layout a plan for improving bicycle and pedestrian access throughout San
Rafael, with the specific goal of being able to seek and win grant funding
from other governmental agencies, to leverage what the City could put into
these efforts. He reported that Committee had been meeting, and since that
time, the County has also appropriated money to do a Countywide Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan, and the money was still earmarked for that purpose. Mr.
Gould reported Community Services Director Carlene McCart recently informed
Council that Baypoint Lagoon had put up some money to complete another
section of the Shoreline Trail, from Baypoint to Murphy's Rock, and that
would be another piece of that trail, which was bicycle and pedestrian
friendly. Mr. Gould stated the City understood there was a serious need to
provide better bike and pedestrian access in and out of the Canal; in fact,
staff was considering studying a proposal to provide a floating bridge
across the Canal, to make that connection, as well.
Mayor Boro asked Assistant to the City Manager Lydia Romero, who oversees
the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee, the time and location of the
Committee's meetings? Ms. Romero reported the Committee meets the second
Monday of every month, at 7:00 PM in Conference Room 201. Councilmember
Miller asked if it was the City's intention that when "the Loop" is
completed, there will be enhanced pedestrian access? Mr. Gould stated that
was correct.
Mayor Boro stated there were three components to this issue. First, there
is a Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, which meets regularly, and
is looking for access, not only at this part of town, but other areas, as
well. Second, once "the Loop" is completed, the concerns that have been
expressed regarding the intersection of Bellam and Francisco Boulevards
will be addressed. Third, the City is continuing to work on the trails
along the shoreline. Mr. Gould reported that even though it is frightfully
expensive to make these types of improvements, especially in an area such
as this, which is so dense and heavily congested, he was encouraged by the
fact that the City was recently recommended for a $550,000 grant from the
MTC (Metropolitan Transportation Commission) for the bike and pedestrian
trail along Mahon Creek. He stated if the City could maintain those types
of applications, and apply them to this area, the City might have
additional success in winning regional grants for these types of
improvements. He noted that while it was very expensive, the need was very
clear.
Councilmember Cohen referred to comments made concerning Canal Community
Building, and the request that Council look at other areas, as well, noting
the speaker had touched on the issues of recreation and public spaces, as
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 11
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 12
well as transportation. He reported that earlier this evening the Council
approved issuing bonds for another phase of the Redevelopment projects, and
the project list for that issuance included approximately $2.5 million for
improvements to public recreation facilities in the Canal neighborhood,
including substantial improvements to Pickleweed Park. Therefore, he
believed there were many areas in which improvements would be coming.
Regarding the issue of the soundwall, Mr. Gould acknowledged that a year
and a half ago staff attended a meeting in the West End neighborhood, and a
number of concerns were raised. He reported the residents wanted to see
new street markings on the Miracle Mile, a signal change at Ross Drive,
increased traffic enforcement, and they wanted to see the City take
affirmative steps to win pedestrian access on Terrace Lane, as well as
refurbishing the soundwall. Mr. Gould stated on all those issues, with the
exception of the soundwall, the City had taken affirmative action, and he
disagreed with the earlier speaker who did not believe traffic enforcement
was occurring in that location. He stated that during the AM and PM peak
periods the City stations Motorcycle Officers in that area, noting they
were writing a lot of tickets, and having a very salutary effect on the
traffic flow. He acknowledged the traffic was heavy, but noted the City
was providing the traffic enforcement, due to the stepped-up funding
through grants and Council action.
Mr. Gould stated he also agreed with the comment that landscaping alone
would have little effect on the acoustics and the sound attenuation in the
area. He recalled when the City first looked at this issue, staff believed
that to completely rebuild the wall, from the ground up, would cost
approximately $700,000. Since then, staff has considered that it might be
possible to maintain the concrete base and build above it, using new
acoustic materials that might provide some relief to the residents in the
area. Mr. Gould pointed out there were engineering, construction, and
acoustic factors that would need to be considered, and if Council agreed,
Public Works Director Bernardi and his staff would seek consultants who
could provide ideas concerning what would be the best cost-effective means
of providing that level of relief. Mr. Gould stated the City would also
seek to involve the County of Marin, as the County also had responsibility
in this area, and it was hoped that perhaps the County would share the cost
of the study with the City. Mayor Boro also suggested Mr. Bernardi meet
with the County Assistant Public Works Director Farhad Mansourian,
specifically about the Congestion Management Agency and its role, as this
was a Countywide thoroughfare, and funds were available through that Agency
for roads of this type. Mayor Boro believed the County might be able to
help with the study, as well as the possible construction. He suggested
the City pursue that, and discussions with County Supervisor Hal Brown, as
well.
Councilmember Heller asked who had jurisdiction over that section? Mr.
Bernardi stated the City had jurisdiction. Ms. Heller asked how the County
was involved? Mr. Bernardi stated the County was involved because that was
a major thoroughfare, as described by Mayor Boro, under the Congestion
Management Agency. Ms. Heller asked if the County directed what could
happen or not happen, as well as the speed levels on that street? Mr.
Bernardi stated the County had the ability to fund projects that affect
traffic capacity or sound attenuation, or anything else associated with
that particular corridor. Ms. Heller asked who set the speed limit? Mr.
Bernardi reported the City did.
Referring to the issue of the cattails at Spinnaker Point, Mr. Bernardi
stated staff had spent a lot of time talking to the residents of Spinnaker
Point and Baypoint Lagoon. He noted the Baypoint Lagoon Homeowners
Association, as part of the original conditions of approval, was required
to form a Landscaping and Lighting District to fund an ongoing study
analyzing the health of the drainage pond. He reported the studies have
been going on for approximately four and half years, and one of the results
of the study, and the original environmental review, was that the pond
should become a freshwater pond, instead of remaining a brackish saltwater
pond. He noted that in the past, they used to maintain the water surface
elevation by opening the gates inside the pump station, letting the high
tide saltwater come into the pond, maintaining a certain water level in the
pond, and the saltwater had the effect of not allowing the cattails to
grow. However, once they stopped doing that, pursuant to the Pond
Management Plan, this problem started to appear. Mr. Bernardi explained
that every year Council looks at the budget for the Baypoint Lagoon
Homeowners Association Landscaping and Lighting District, allocating the
funds collected as part of their property tax. He explained the homeowners
were asking that this year Council not designate the funds for additional
studies, but rather use the funds to begin a program of removing the
cattails. Mr. Bernardi stated it would take a long time, and they could
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 12
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 13
not be removed all at once, because there was not enough money.
Mr. Bernardi stated the other inequity was that there is no such District
in Spinnaker Point, and they were not required to pay for any part of the
Pond Management Plan. Consequently, pursuant to Proposition 218 and other
laws, they could not be assessed without their consent. Mr. Bernardi
reported that in his discussions with both groups, he suggested some kind
of voluntary effort on the part of the Spinnaker Point residents, at least
those who live directly adjacent to the pond, to consider volunteering some
amount for the eradication of the cattails. Addressing why the City was
not involved, Mr. Bernardi explained the City has always had a policy of
maintaining the pond for storm drainage purposes; however, the pond, as an
amenity, was delegated to the homeowners, who enjoy the pond on a daily
basis. Mr. Bernardi stated that had been a policy decision made as part of
the development review process; therefore, the Homeowners Association was
responsible for maintaining the pond, and the City was responsible for
maintaining the pump station, and had the responsibility of pumping the
water out when it gets too high. Mr. Bernardi stated, unless Council
wanted to change its policy, the request for additional funds to eradicate
the cattails all at once was something that would have to be considered.
Mr. Bernardi stated the other issue was an environmental one. He noted
staff has had discussions with members of the environmental community, and
to remove all of the cattails would not be appropriate because they provide
a certain amount of habitat value for water fowl in the area; therefore,
there had to be a balance regarding how much was enough. Mr. Bernardi
noted there was an expert on cattails who would be providing advice as to
just how much to remove. Mr. Bernardi felt, realistically, it was going to
be a four or five year process, noting the District raises approximately
$15,000 per year. He stated one of his suggestions to the Baypoint Lagoon
residents was that they might wish to consider raising the assessments to
get it done more quickly; however, there was no consensus among the group
that they could get 50% of the vote within the Homeowners Association,
which would be needed in order to comply with Proposition 218.
Recapping, Mayor Boro noted there was a funding source in Baypoint Lagoon,
but not in Spinnaker Point, and in both cases, it appeared there were
environmental issues that needed to be addressed. He wondered whether the
City could consider discussing this with the Conservation League, see what
other groups might want to help on the environmental issue, and pursue
potential grant funding for the Spinnaker side, to see if some help could
be found. Mayor Boro asked what kind of cost was involved? Mr. Bernardi
stated he believed it was approximately $70,000. Mayor Boro suggested
staff pursue this, and return to Council in a couple of months. Mr.
Bernardi stated staff would be bringing the Baypoint Lagoon Homeowners
Association Landscaping and Lighting District to Council within the next
six weeks, and that would be an opportunity to discuss this issue in
greater depth, and provide Council with an update.
City Manager Gould suggested that in addition to the City looking for funds
to help eradicate the cattails on the Spinnaker side, that the Spinnaker
Homeowners Association consider how it might contribute to that effort.
Councilmember Cohen noted the point had been raised by one of the speakers
that the City bears some responsibility because of the City making the
decision to let the pond go freshwater. He believed it might be
interesting to revisit why that decision was made, and whether this problem
was anticipated when that was discussed. Mr. Bernardi stated staff would
research that. Mr. Cohen felt that if it was done for environmental
reasons, it lent weight to the suggestion that the City speak with some of
the environmental organizations, noting someone must have championed the
idea in the first place, and he doubted the City simply decided to make it
a freshwater pond. He stated he would like some background on why that was
done, and then perhaps speak with those who championed the idea regarding
some help in dealing with the problems that resulted from the City agreeing
to do that.
Councilmember Heller asked if staff could include in the report the
downside and/or advantages of going back to a brackish pond? Mr. Bernardi
stated one of the options, for a limited period of time during the non -duck
nesting season, was to allow the water to become brackish for a short
period of time. However, one of the questions was whether that would be
coincident to the growing time of the cattails, and that was something
staff would have to determine.
Mayor Boro suggested that in the case of the soundwall, staff return to
Council at the second meeting in September with preliminary ideas, and
notify the neighborhood groups. Councilmember Cohen stated he agreed the
City should pursue funding, particularly with the Congestion Management
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 13
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 14
Agency. He noted that after listening to accounts of the increase in
traffic, he did not believe it was primarily due to the success of San
Rafael's Downtown during the past couple of years, as much as it was due to
growth in West Marin, particularly the neighboring communities immediately
west of San Rafael, with no growth in the traffic capacity along other
major access to those communities, such as Sir Francis Drake Boulevard.
Mr. Cohen believed this was a regional issue, and felt it was entirely
appropriate for the City to speak with CMA. In addition, Mr. Cohen pointed
out it was important to remember our experience with soundwalls along
Highway 101, and take seriously the comments about those who live on the
other side of the soundwall. He believed any engineering study needed to
include the potential for noise impact, because we did not want to transfer
the problem from the immediate neighbors on Greenfield Avenue to the people
on the other side, particularly those who live slightly up the hill. He
stated any solution was going to have to address all these concerns.
Having concluded the public comment, Mayor Boro asked Mr. Nordhoff to
continue with his report.
Referring to the City Council Priorities, Mr. Nordhoff stated staff was
asking for Council's approval of the Priorities, in order to formalize and
incorporate them into the budget document for the coming two years. Mr.
Nordhoff believed the Priorities reflected the changes mentioned during the
Budget Hearings last week, and codified what the Councilmembers had put
forth as their key issues for the coming two years. Councilmember Cohen
noted that although there was no specific funding for it, and it was
premature to discuss specific amounts and funding sources, he wanted to
touch on something listed in the third line under Transportation and
Traffic, which states, "Evaluate public shuttle system in partnership with
private businesses". Mr. Cohen stated he really wanted the City to pay
attention to that issue, noting he had spoken with people who have had very
successful experiences with public/private partnerships. He noted there
had been some effort in this area ten years ago, and he felt the City
should revisit this, given that we do have a starting place with the
redevelopment of the Commerce Clearinghouse building, and the shuttle
service proposed there. He stated he has had conversations with the people
at Northgate (Mall), and at some point, he felt it might be appropriate for
the City to step up to the plate with a small amount of funding, in
partnership with private providers, noting there has been discussion of
expansion at Northgate, and another significant project, and there might be
other opportunities to leverage additional private funding. He believed it
would be appropriate if, at some point, the City was prepared to make a
financial commitment, as well. He hoped that over the next two years this
could either be moved from "evaluate" to "operate", or the conclusion drawn
that it was not feasible. He stated he had been offered the opportunity to
visit Emeryville and look at the shuttle system that runs there, which is a
public/private partnership, noting he would like to take City Manager Gould
with him, and report to Council as they get more information. He pointed
out one of the impacts of a two-year budget cycle was that they had to
think in longer terms, and given that we are in a two-year cycle, he was
cautiously optimistic that the City was going to have to begin looking for
dollars for something real that would move people around, outside of
single -occupant vehicles.
Mayor Boro stated he wished to clarify that when they discussed planning
and providing additional Downtown parking, that included looking at private
parking space that is available after hours.
Councilmember Cohen noted he and Mayor Boro have continued to work with
those seeking regional solutions to transportation issues, which he
believed was a real priority of the Council, and he wondered if Council
might want to include a statement in the Council Priorities that this
remains a Council priority? Mayor Boro and the other Councilmembers
agreed. Mr. Cohen suggested stating that Council should support and work
toward regional solutions to transportation issues facing Marin County.
Mayor Boro pointed out that although the City will now be on a two-year
budget cycle, the Council would continue to receive periodic performance
reports, and also a review at this time next year. Mr. Gould noted once
Council adopts its priorities for the two-year period, he would draft
objectives for them to track the accomplishments of the overall priorities
set by Council.
Mr. Nordhoff noted there had been a question regarding some of the staffing
levels, and how they had been funded in the past, explaining he had put
together a list, and also attached the various levels of staffing for the
last several years. Mayor Boro asked how many of the approximately 400
positions, excluding child care, were funded with the double asterisk
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 14
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 15
approach, dependent upon either grant funding or other sources of revenue?
Mr. Nordhoff stated there were approximately eight to twelve such
positions.
Mr. Nordhoff referred to the handout, which he had prepared based upon
Council's consideration of the uses of the one-time and ongoing moneys
discussed earlier. Beginning with the one-time list, he reported there
were a total of eight items, totaling $8.6 million, and staff had
recommended seven of those items, based on available funds of $1.225
million, and had asked Council to consider what they felt were the highest
and best use of those funds. He noted there were five items where there
seemed to be unanimous consensus concerning how to spend some of the funds:
updating the CEQA procedures; re -writing the Subdivison Ordinance;
finishing the space remodeling on the third floor; and completing the
General Plan, all of which fall under the Community Development Department;
and also fully funding the City's Workers' Compensation claims, based upon
the City's estimated liabilities at the end of the current fiscal year.
Mr. Nordhoff stated that left two remaining items Council could choose to
fund. He noted there were some differences, in that some Councilmembers
felt perhaps they would like to put more or less money into the remaining
two items, the first being the replacement of the BRC mainframe systems for
Police, Fire, and Finance, and the second being beautification of the
City's entrances and medians. He asked Public Works Director Bernardi to
comment on the three options he had listed regarding median projects and
funding.
Public Works Director Bernardi explained it was his understanding that
staff was to review three different locations, reporting on how they would
spend $105,000 at each of the three locations, if Council were to approve
that amount. He noted the staff report contained maps of three locations
where median upgrading was being considered, along with staff's
recommendations for each of those areas.
Councilmember Cohen asked if what staff was proposing for all three
locations could all be accomplished for $105,000, or if what he had
presented could be accomplished for $105,000 at each location? Mr.
Bernardi stated each of the locations totaled $105,000. Mr. Nordhoff noted
Mr. Bernardi had planned to present recommendations as to how $105,000
could be spent at each of the locations, and then give staff's final
recommendation. Mayor Boro stated he would rather just have staff's final
recommendation.
Mr. Bernardi stated staff proposed the City spend $105,000 on Freitas
Parkway. Referring to the map in the staff report, he noted there were two
islands, which are maintained by Caltrans, and staff was recommending the
community and the City go together to Caltrans, to try to influence their
decision to landscape the islands within their jurisdiction, in conjunction
with an overall plan for the City to do the improvements on the medians
that it maintains. Mr. Bernardi noted if Council chose to spend additional
money at that location, in increments of $25,000, staff could also consider
doing the area past Northgate Drive.
Mayor Boro noted the two Caltrans pieces, adjacent to the improvements the
City would be making, were the first things that are seen upon entering
Terra Linda from the North. He stated if the City made its improvements,
but Caltrans did not improve their portion, people would think the City was
not being very thorough. He pointed out people were not going to
understand, or care, which portions belong to Caltrans and which belong to
the City, and they were not going to understand why the City did not do the
whole thing. Mayor Boro suggested Council allocate the $105,000, and at
the same time go to the VIA Committee, and have the VIA Committee and Mr.
Bernardi contact Caltrans and ask them to finish the project on their
pieces. He noted the City's commitment has always been that we cannot do
it all ourselves, and that we would be looking for other sources of
funding. Councilmember Cohen referred to a memo dated June 3rd, which
states that for $105,000 the City could do the median island, and improve
the large "bull nose" median with a lower level design, which would exhaust
the $105,000; therefore, he understood that to mean that for $105,000 the
City could do both of those areas. Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct.
Mr. Cohen clarified that for an additional $25,000, they could do the
improvements on Del Presidio Boulevard, or those on Las Gallinas Avenue,
and Mr. Bernardi stated that was correct. Mr. Cohen asked for
clarification on the Caltrans property. Assistant Public Works Director
Frank Prim explained that was the actual median coming across the overpass,
the first approach exiting the freeway, and the small triangular piece of
land.
Councilmember Heller asked if Caltrans had funding for enhancement projects
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 15
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 16
such as this, and how the City could persuade them to help us out? Mr.
Bernardi stated Caltrans did have limited funding, but the City would have
to convince them to spend it here. Mr. Gould noted the City would also ask
the VIA Committee to try to influence Caltrans. Councilmember Phillips
noted this issue had come up at a recent VIA Committee meeting, and there
had been considerable interest in approaching Caltrans; therefore, he felt
Mayor Boro's suggestion was good, and was in concert with their thoughts,
as well.
Mr. Bernardi referred to the Bellam Boulevard location, noting staff was
not recommending Council spend any money on this location, as the City
would be doing extensive improvements in that area to complete "the Loop"
project. He suggested, as part of the implementation of the last phase of
"the Loop" project, the City look at landscaping the medians as part of
that project. Regarding the median adjacent to Montecito Shopping Center,
he felt the City should take advantage of the landscaping that was already
there, noting they could remove some of the plants that were very old,
replace them with denser landscaping, and fill in some of the areas where
people jay -walk. He felt this could be done for a minimal amount, probably
not more than $50,000 for both of the islands.
Councilmember Heller asked if staff had looked at Miracle Mile? Mr.
Bernardi stated they had not. She asked if he thought that area was in
fairly good condition, in relation to other locations? Mr. Bernardi
stated, compared to other areas of San Rafael, it was in very good shape.
Mr. Nordhoff stated staff was seeking to determine how Council would
allocate the remaining one-time funds, between the use of medians, and the
replacement of mainframe computer systems. Councilmember Cohen stated,
with regard to the $105,000, he felt Council should focus on staff's
recommendations for the Freitas Parkway location. He noted he would like
to hear more concerning what could be done at Montecito, and ways to reduce
that cost. He stated, if the choice was to do more with the medians, and
the only way to do that was by nibbling away at the computer system
replacements, he opposed that, noting he had been concerned when he saw the
staff recommendation reducing the allocation from $750,000 to $439,000.
Mr. Cohen stated the City has known for several years that it was running
out of time with regard to the lifespan of these systems, and the support
for the systems, and he was concerned that since it was not something that
had a lot of public appeal, it was not going to be addressed until
something breaks, and then Council would be asked why they had not taken
care of it.
Councilmember Cohen stated he had accepted the staff recommendation to
reduce the amount from $750,000 because there were potential sources of
funding for some of the public safety systems, and he felt Council should
direct staff to aggressively pursue those funding sources. He noted if the
City did not get that funding, Council would have to revisit this decision,
and he cautioned Council against taking further money away from this item,
noting he felt it was critical. He stated the money was in the budget, and
he recommended at least making a major downpayment on this major equipment,
before it becomes a crisis.
Mayor Boro stated he did not downplay that issue; however, there were times
he felt it was important that the Council do something that can be seen and
appreciated. He referred to the one-time expense for Workers'
Compensation, and a General Plan that was going through the sky as far as
its cost, but from the average citizen's point of view, did not deliver a
lot. He noted the issue of the local medians has come before the Council
in the past, and the individual communities have not been able to do
anything. He stated he did not want to get into that arena; however, as
far as the entrance medians, he noted that particularly at the triangle in
the Montecito area, with United Markets, Trader Joe's, and Whole Foods,
there were people from all over the County coming to that part of town, in
addition to the people who live there, and travel through the area each
day. Therefore, rather than suggesting the $50,000 version, he suggested
$25,000 be put toward that location, and then try to "nibble away" at BRC,
because in the larger scope, that was not going to be what makes or breaks
BRC, and the City was still going to have to find a much bigger solution.
He stated he was not, in any way, downplaying that; however, he felt there
was enough activity at the Montecito location, from a City point of view,
that this might make some difference.
Councilmember Phillips agreed; however, he was concerned about modifying
staff's recommendation regarding the BRC system, because staff was most
closely involved with the system. He asked, if they were to move $25,000
from the BRC system to the medians, while it was not a major, significant
number, how would that impact staff's recommendation?
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 16
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 17
Mr. Gould stated staff believed that to complete the migration from the BRC
proprietary software to modern systems running on the City's mini -
mainframes would cost between $750,000 and $1 million. He explained staff
could not complete that migration in two years; therefore, staff was hoping
to get a major downpayment on this necessary expenditure, although he
acknowledged it would be accomplished in either case, and he could not
argue that $25,000 here or there was going to make or break that effort.
He suggested, as the budget is reviewed every six months during the two-
year period, and again at the end of the two year period, that if they find
there are one-time funds that become available, Council consider allocating
those funds to this project, because just like the General Plan, and the
City's commitment to purchase new radios, this was a commitment the City
must make, and he asked for Council's assistance in stepping up to do so.
Councilmember Heller stated she would be comfortable with that, agreeing
that in the future, when there was extra money, Council should look at this
as a first priority. Ms. Heller stated she would also like updates during
future budget reviews of those medians staff find to be critical, and in
need of improvement, to see if they can be worked into the budget.
Mr. Gould asked if Council's direction was to fully fund the BRC migration,
and then move to further median landscaping? Mayor Boro noted, as Mr.
Gould had done on other major issues, such as the radio system and the
General Plan Update, as opportunities come up and extra money becomes
available, that should get the first call, and while he did not want to
automatically commit it all, he noted the Council understood what Mr. Gould
was telling them, and supported that.
Councilmember Cohen asked if the $439,687 was just to make everything
balance out? Mr. Nordhoff stated that was the number they had used given
the last available funding. Mr. Cohen stated he hoped his comments had
been noted, and that everyone would keep in mind that the trade-off was not
going to get any easier, and it was always going to be more appealing to do
flowers than to do computer systems that are in some back room. However,
the problem was not going to go away, and the farther we go down the road
without funding it, the worse it is going to get. He stated that was his
concern, pointing out that having to fix it in "crisis mode" was always
more expensive than being able to do it with a good systems analysis, and a
plan for something that was going to last. He stated he would support the
other Councilmembers' decision to fund an additional $25,000 from the BRC
allocation to median enhancements, applying that money toward improvements
along Montecito.
Councilmember Miller asked if that brought the total for median landscaping
to $125,000? Councilmember Cohen stated it would be a total of $130,000,
with $25,000 of that to be used for a scaled-down renovation of the
Montecito location.
Mayor Boro noted the City had an additional assessment of $16,500 coming
from the CMA, and asked if that had been included in the budget? Mr.
Nordhoff stated it had. Mayor Boro clarified that was a one-time charge,
and Mr. Nordhoff agreed, noting it was funded through the City's Street
Maintenance and Gas Tax programs.
Councilmember Cohen referred to the discussion about the soundwall, asking
if the study would be done through existing staff time? Mr. Gould stated
they would have to determine what it would take to do a thorough study,
noting this issue has been raised for a number of years, and it required a
definitive study, so Council knows exactly what it would cost to make a
significant improvement. He stated he was not certain that could simply be
folded into the work plan, noting staff may have to return to Council for
supplemental funding, at which time the City would also seek assistance
from the County.
Mayor Boro felt one of the things the City needed to get, before adding
money for BRC, was a more specific order, magnitude, and timeline of
exactly what they were looking at. He pointed out there were ranges of
between $750,000 and $1 million, and he believed it would help if they
could have a little more specificity concerning the magnitude of this, in
dollars, time, and effort. Mr. Nordhoff stated it was staff's intention to
work through updating the Information Technology Strategic Plan, and as
part of that, they would be able to refine the estimates for these
projects, as well as others.
Mr. Nordhoff referred to the options concerning ongoing services. He noted
the Councilmembers had been given additional information regarding the
Police Department's Civilian Mid -Management position. Regarding the
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 17
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 18
Parking District, he reported the question had been raised as to whether,
rather than restructuring the entire District, the City could, or should,
consider moving some of the Downtown Foot Beat personnel back as a cost of
the General Fund and have the General Tax dollars pay for that cost,
recognizing that was probably an assignment under Community Policing, just
as Neighborhood Beats were. Mr. Nordhoff stated there was financial
indifference for him as to how the City achieved getting the Parking
District balanced; however, he reminded Council that some policy decisions
had been made, over several years, to fund those positions. Referring to a
staff report from September, 1996, he noted the parking meter rates were
increased in 1991 from $.10 to $.20 per hour in order to fund two Foot Beat
positions; staff then returned to Council in 1996 and again raised the
rates an additional $.10 to fund a third Foot Beat Officer, as well as
ongoing operating costs, eliminating the one -penny meters, replacing the
gears, and making the necessary improvements. Therefore, the policy
decisions to fund those positions had been made over a period of time. He
noted, whether Council chose the recommendation of putting all costs,
including the Foot Beat Patrol, into the Parking District, and off -setting
that with the parking fines, or moving the Officers back, was really a
fiscal indifference. He stated he and City Manager Gould had discussed
this, and felt it would be fine if Council wanted to move the Officers back
to the General Fund, noting it was essentially the same number, and staff
would still be recommending the $137,000 "fix" in the second year. Mayor
Boro noted the "fix" would primarily be to the General Fund, not to the
Parking District. Mr. Nordhoff stated it would be fixing the Parking
District, because the current cost of two Officers was a cost of the
Parking District, and those costs would then become a cost of the General
Fund.
Mayor Boro stated this was such a policy issue, having adopted these fees,
it made sense to just keep it that way, and then recover it as they move
forward, evaluating the parking needs and parking fees in the future. He
pointed out this had emanated from raising the meter rates from $.10 per
hour to $.20 per hour, and either way, they would have to shift the money
back and forth, so there was no added cost. Mr. Gould stated if there was
some likelihood that Council was going to reconsider its allocation to the
Foot Beat Patrol in the Downtown, he would fully concur. However, as the
Downtown develops, traffic patterns change, and we see greater usage of the
Downtown, he could not imagine cutting back on the Foot Beat Patrol, noting
it was absolutely crucial, and to the merchants who recalled that policy
decision, in order to justify raising the meter rates, as long as the Foot
Beat was there, he did not believe they cared whether it was in the General
Fund or the Parking District. Councilmember Heller stated she believed it
had been an excellent policy decision by the Council at that time, and was
the way in which the Council chose to address a real problem in the
Downtown; however, she did not believe they had that need anymore, and now
the need was more to balance the Parking District, giving a better picture
of what the expenses were and what the City needed to do. Therefore, she
suggested moving the funding back to the General Fund. Councilmember
Miller concurred with Councilmember Heller. Mayor Boro noted, currently,
this was a service that was identified and kept separate, which he believed
was an advantage, being called out as a separate service the City was
providing. Mr. Nordhoff noted it was still presented in the budget as a
separate service, noting "Downtown Foot Beat Patrol" was called out
separately because its focus and mission were different.
Mr. Nordhoff stated there was a series of items for Council's
consideration, and available funding of almost $600,000 in Year One, and
$937,000 in Year Two. He noted there appeared to be consensus on
approximately two-thirds of those items, including the funding of
implementation of the staff reports (on the Internet) in the City Clerk's
Office; the package of Community Service programs; funding for Falkirk
opening on Mondays; an additional Canal Learning Center Librarian; no
increase in the Library's materials budget; the Parking District; the
ongoing cost of replacing the BRC business license software; no funding for
the Safety Officer; an increase in an MIS Technician from half-time to
full-time; using a funding option to set aside additional monies to pay for
the MERA system, with the expectation that this had to be fully funded in
the year 2003; additional revenues to increase a Crime Analyst from half-
time to full-time; funding for a Civilian Mid -Manager and Dispatcher in the
Police Department; taking care of the ongoing maintenance costs related to
Andersen Drive; and beginning traffic signal maintenance and an additional
preventative maintenance program in 2002. Mr. Gould stated it was staff's
understanding that Council had been unanimous regarding support for those
service enhancements, and asked if staff could proceed on that basis?
Mayor Boro noted the Youth Services Librarian had also been an option
Council was going to consider. Mr. Nordhoff stated that item was listed in
another section, noting there was an Adult Services Librarian, focusing on
technology, and while staff had proposed this during the second year,
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 18
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 19
Council suggested that begin earlier on; however, there had not yet been
consensus on the issue. He noted there were also issues regarding to what
extent the City should fund emergency supplies, and also requests that
perhaps there should be some funding for the Critical Incident/Stress
Management, Fire road maintenance, which had not been staff
recommendations, and funding of the Librarian. He noted the infrastructure
was included because, to the extent some of the other numbers might be
moved around, that would likely impact the ultimate amount of infra-
structure funding. He noted there had also been discussion regarding the
Training Coordinator, and whether that could be deferred for part of a
year, in order to fund a Librarian, or some other need, There was also a
cost consideration regarding the job classification review.
Mayor Boro noted that in an earlier conversation, City Manager Gould had
felt Fire Chief Marcucci could find the money for the Critical Incident
Stress Management. Mr. Gould stated he had been incorrect in that
assessment, noting he had spoken with Fire Chief Marcucci, and understood
there was no funding source for that item. Mayor Boro asked Chief Marcucci
if that item was primarily for the Paramedics? Chief Marcucci explained it
would be for all Fire Department personnel, anyone who was exposed to a
situation such as a vehicle accident, or child death, and felt they needed
some assistance. He noted the money would train the Department's Peer
Group Review to assist the Firefighters or Paramedics. Mayor Boro recalled
that when there have been horrific accidents on the freeway, the Fire
Department has had to call-in those types of services. Mr. Gould reported
people in the Fire Department have been provided training to supplement
that service. Mayor Boro asked if Chief Marcucci considered this
important? Chief Marcucci stated he believed it was important to provide
ongoing training to those they have already trained, so they are current,
and can do the job they were trained to do, which was to work with
personnel in the Department when they have a difficult situation. Mayor
Boro suggested Council defer $25,000 from the Training Coordinator, split
that between the Adult Librarian and the Critical Incident Stress
Management, and start the Training Coordinator the second half of the year,
noting that would balance the budget. Mayor Boro clarified they would cut
the $50,000 to $25,000, and do it a half a year, rather than a full year
during the first year. Councilmember Phillips noted that would free -up
$25,000, with $5,000 going to Critical Incident Stress Management, and
asked where the other $20,000 would go? Mayor Boro stated that would be
used for the Adult Services Librarian.
Mr. Phillips noted Council had been discussing Infrastructure for a long
time, and he believed, now that they had some additional funding, they
should step to the line in favor of Infrastructure, to bring it up to the
recommended amount of $228,000. Mr. Nordhoff noted one of Councilmember
Phillips' issues was to reduce the level of funding for Emergency Supplies,
which would have brought the Infrastructure amount up to the level he was
seeking. Mr. Phillips stated that was correct, noting that while he did
not want to argue against Emergency Supplies, in context, he felt strongly
that Infrastructure was something the City should fund, making a strong
statement that the City was going to fund Infrastructure in these times
when we can, perhaps, afford it.
Councilmember Cohen asked how staff had come up with the amount of $228,000
in the Ongoing Program Cost? Mr. Nordhoff stated he took the tax dollars
from the major tax sources of funding, noting the City was spending
slightly over 2% of those tax dollars per year for Capital Improvement
types of needs, and pointing out that amount would increase it to 3% of the
tax dollars the first year, and 4% the second year, committing a higher
level of taxes toward those purposes. Councilmember Cohen clarified that
instead of getting the 3%, the City would be at 2.9% in the first year?
Mr. Nordhoff reported it would be a very small difference. He explained
this would provide for some sidewalk replacement, and enhance some of the
other items discussed in the Five -Year Financial Forecast, which were
deficient. He pointed out the City did not have adequate funding for all
the street work, storm drains, and parks, and there had also been a
discussion regarding medians.
Councilmember Cohen asked the amount being suggested for Emergency
Supplies. Mr. Nordhoff stated that was $15,000 over two years. Mr. Cohen
asked what that amount would buy? Mr. Nordhoff stated that would provide a
number of supplies related to the various City facilities, outfitting the
City so that in the event the City had to function as an EOC (Emergency
Operations Center), we would have such things as cots, blankets, water, and
food at all the Fire Stations, in order to survive for 72 hours, or
slightly longer. Mr. Cohen asked if the City currently had those supplies?
Councilmember Heller stated it was her understanding that none of the Fire
Stations had those supplies; therefore, if the City did have an emergency,
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 19
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 20
we would not have anything to give out, or to use for City staff. Mr.
Cohen stated he agreed with Mr. Phillips' concerns regarding Infrastructure
funding, noting he had been concerned someone would recommend decreasing
the funding amount, now being proposed as $214,000, even further, which he
would oppose. He suggested going with Mayor Boro's recommendation, and as
they discussed with the one-time funds, recognize there may be some
additional ongoing funds available, and make a commitment and direct staff
that as those additional resources arise, all, or a significant portion, of
any additional ongoing funds be earmarked for Capital Improvements. He
felt perhaps the first priority should be that when the first $14,000
identified as ongoing funds becomes available, it be earmarked to bring the
funding for Capital Improvements to the 3% number, and then do the same
thing next year to bring it to the 4% number. He believed making an
ongoing commitment to Capital Improvement was very important; however, in
this instance, given the number before them, he would prefer to fund
Emergency Supplies, and fall just a couple points short of the mark on
Capital Improvements, noting the City was already much further, with this
budget, than it has been in quite a while.
Mr. Gould pointed out the City was actually making even more progress,
noting if the additional Infrastructure spending was combined with the Fire
Hydrant Replacement in the second year, the restructuring of the Parking
District, which allows the City to do better Infrastructure maintenance on
the City's parking facilities, the replacement of the BRC Business License
Software, the Andersen Drive Utilities and Traffic Signal Maintenance,
there was $547,000 of new Infrastructure spending in the second year.
Mayor Boro pointed out there was additional money being put in for
Infrastructure, noting staff had reported at least $250,000 would be put
into Capital Improvements each year, through the Franchise Fee. Mr.
Nordhoff stated that was being done through the City's ongoing monies.
Councilmember Cohen noted there was an issue not included in the document
now before the Council, but had been included in the previous budget
hearings, which he felt deserved additional discussion. He referred to
the proposal to spend the remaining Parkland Dedication Fees on necessary
repairs and improvements to the pool at the Terra Linda Recreation Center.
Mr. Cohen asked if that item was built-in to the current document? Mr.
Nordhoff stated it was, explaining that based on the Capital Improvement
list staff reviewed last week, they had committed a combination of those
funds, as well as some ADA and Facility Maintenance Funds, over the next
two years. Councilmember Cohen stated he was not suggesting those funds be
earmarked for something else; however, he felt Council should defer making
a final decision. He pointed out, in looking at the information received
from San Rafael Choices, the City was basically precluding some of those
decisions by what they were doing here. He noted one of the things that
had come up in San Rafael Choices was something the VIA Committee had been
spending time on, the notion of a skate park somewhere in San Rafael. Mr.
Cohen stated spending all of the Parkland Dedication Fees on the pool
precluded that, unless there was some external source of funding. He noted
it also precluded Freitas Park Phase II, recalling the Council had agreed
to fully fund Phase I from Parkland Dedication Funds; however, spending the
remaining Parkland Dedication Funds precluded Phase II without an external
source of funding. Mr. Cohen stated it also limited options with regard to
the P.G. & E. site, in terms of the City's ability to leverage, should we
decide to put any additional money into that to expand the parkland above
and beyond what was ultimately proposed by the Developer, and achieved
through approvals of any development of that 17 acre park.
On balance, Mr. Cohen felt, rather than doing any of the things that would
be an expansion of services, the City was probably headed in the right
direction, and should invest in an existing asset, one which would not be a
very good asset if the money was not put into it. However, he also
believed it was important the City do that "in the light of day", with
public discussions with the people who would be impacted by it. He asked
if this proposal had gone before the Park and Recreation Commission and had
they commented on it, noting he would like to see that in writing; and had
it been discussed with the VIA Committee? Mr. Cohen felt those things
needed to be done, making sure everyone agrees before Council spends the
money. He stated he was not opposed to the proposal, and likely supported
it; however, he believed there had to be more public input and discussion
before finalizing it. He asked, to the extent it would be included in the
budget, that it be marked with an asterisk, noting there would have to be a
couple of meetings regarding this, where it was discussed publicly.
Councilmember Phillips stated he wanted to be clear on the issue, because
he believed there were some trade-offs. He stated it was his impression
the funds earmarked for the pool and pool area were fairly critical, if not
absolutely critical, with regard to the maintenance of the pool, and it was
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 20
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 21
something that was strongly recommended by staff. Mayor Boro noted Council
had been told it was a major crisis beginning to happen. Councilmember
Phillips stated it appeared to be critical, and if that was, in fact, the
case, he felt it should be included in the budget. Mayor Boro clarified
that Mr. Cohen had meant for that item to be included in the budget, but
was recommending that before Council committed to it, have some further
airing of the issue. He pointed out Ms. McCart was stating the Park and
Recreation Commission had discussed this issue and approved it; however, he
noted it should also be discussed with the VIA Committee, the people
interested in Freitas Park should know this is going to be discussed, and
the Swim Club and people who support the swimming pool should know this is
an issue. He stated it was his understanding that if Council did not do
this, the City was going to lose the pool, and would have to shut it down;
therefore, the question was whether the City shuts the pool down, or does
some of the other things. Councilmember Cohen pointed out the City had
done a great deal in an attempt to open up these dialogues with North San
Rafael, and he felt they would be doing a disservice to what they have done
so far if they did not have a more public discussion.
Councilmember Phillips agreed this issue had not been widely discussed
within the community; however, he did not believe the approach was to state
to the VIA Committee, for example, that it was either the pool or the
skateboard park; instead, if, in fact, this is the position Council is
taking, the City should state it needs to spend the funds on the pool to
maintain that asset, and the consequence was that the City might not be
able to do some of the other things. He did not believe it should be a
discussion of the City's options. Mr. Phillips stated it was his
understanding the City did not really have an option with regard to that
facility. Mr. Gould reported the pool could be closed anywhere from one to
four years from now, stating the City was on borrowed time with the Health
Department as it now stood, and staff believed the City needed to step up
and design it, and probably do the work next year. Mr. Cohen agreed the
City needed to make that information clear; however, as he understood what
was being proposed, Council was being asked to spend the remaining Parkland
Dedication Funds for North San Rafael, and he pointed out the City would
not be getting more Parkland Dedication Funds of any significance
whatsoever. He noted even with the 17 acre P.G.& E. site, P.G.& E. was not
going to be paying Parkland Dedication Fees, they were going to be giving
the City a park. He stated once the City spends it, it is gone, and he did
not know where the City was going to get additional Parkland Dedication
money. Therefore, he believed the City needed to be open about it, telling
people publicly, when they are focused and paying attention to this issue.
He agreed there was not a lot of choice regarding this issue, and he did
not believe anyone else would think so; however, he wanted a full airing of
the issue before Council started spending the money and signing contracts
to do the work.
City Manager Gould suggested, as a way of meeting his concern, that staff
place this item on the next VIA Committee meeting agenda, bring a
delegation from the City Council, Park and Recreation Commission, the Swim
Club and City staff, to explain the immediacy of the need, the emergency
nature of it, Council's and the Park and Recreation Commission's thinking
on this issue, and fully explain the ramification of the uses of those
funds. Mayor Boro directed staff to also invite those people who were
interested in Freitas and the skateboard park, noting they might not be
part of the VIA Committee. Mr. Cohen suggested someone representing San
Rafael Meadows be invited, as well. Mayor Boro asked Councilmembers Cohen
and Phillips to represent the Council at that meeting.
Mr. Nordhoff clarified his understanding of Council's wishes: Year One
changes would include $15,000 for Emergency Supplies; $5,000 for Stress
Management; $20,000 for the Adult Services Librarian in Year One;
Infrastructure remains at $214,000; $25,000 to begin the Training
Coordinator for a half-year; and $15,000 for the Job Class Review. The
changes in Year Two would include $15,000 for Emergency Supplies; another
$5,000 for Critical Incident Stress Management; the Adult Services
Librarian will continue to fund; the ongoing review will remain the same at
$15,000; and Infrastructure will be adjusted by $5,000 to balance the
budget. Mr. Nordhoff stated he would return to Council with a final set of
figures to approve at the next Council meeting.
MONTHLY REPORT:
18. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT (CM) - File 9-3-11
City Manager Gould reported the City had received notice from the League of
California Cities and Ken Emanuels, the City's lobbyist in Sacramento, that
the State Legislature would be working up until 9:00 PM this evening on
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 21
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 22
Legislative proposals for Local Fiscal Relief. He stated there were still
seven pieces of Legislation pending, noting they had various proponents,
and some would mean a lot of benefit for the City, and others not so much.
Mr. Gould reported Governor Davis has stated he would veto measures that
provide ongoing relief to local government, and at most, he would consider
one-time fiscal relief for local government, as part of this budget
package. Mr. Gould reported Assistant to the City Manager Lydia Romero
began making telephone calls to State Legislators this evening, indicating
San Rafael's support for all of the budget measures that would assist local
government. He stated he would keep the Councilmembers apprised of
developments in the next week or so, which he felt appeared to be critical.
Councilmember Heller asked if these bills had been introduced by the
Senate or the Assembly? Mr. Gould stated they were introduced in both, as
part of the State Budget Conference.
COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS:
FWINNEWIVC'S'iT_
There being no further business, the City Council meeting was adjourned at 10:30
PM.
JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1999
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 6/7/99 Page 22