HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1986-09-15SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 1
In Conference Room 201 of the City of San Rafael, Monday, September 15, 1986
at 7:00 PM.
Regular Meeting:
CLOSED SESSION
1. CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS LITIGATION - File 1.4.1.a
No. 86-24(a) - (#2); No. 86-24(b) - (#2); No. 86-24(c) - (#1) Landmark
Insurance Company vs. City of San Rafael; and No. 86-24(d) - (#2).
No action was taken.
In the Council Chambers of the City of San Rafael, Monday, September 15, 1986
at 8:00 PM.
Regular Meeting: Present: Lawrence E. Mulryan, Mayor
Dorothy L. Breiner, Councilmember
Gary R. Frugoli, Councilmember
Richard Nave, Councilmember
Absent: Jerry Russom, Councilmember
Also Present: Pamela J. Nicolai, City Manager; Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk;
Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE:
REPORT ON SHUTTLE BUS (JITNEY) SYSTEM IN EAST SAN RAFAEL - File 11-33
Mayor Mulryan called upon Ms. Mara Gortner, who wanted to thank Council for
the City's contribution toward the shuttle bus system which started today in
East San Rafael. Ms. Gornter was not present at the meeting.
CITIZEN'S COMPLAINT REGARDING ALLEGED BROWN ACT VIOLATION - File 9-1
Mrs. Alice Garbarino Vipiana, resident of the Dominican area spoke on the Brown
Act,stating that she did not think that Council was adhering to its rules on
Closed meetings.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Item
Recommended Action
2. Approval of Minutes of Special Joint Approved as submitted.
City Council/Planning Commission
Meetings of July 1 and 2, 1986 and
Special Meeting of September 2, 1986
(CC)
3. Resolution of Findings - Appeal of
Handicapped Access Requirements -
1914 Fourth Street (Lady Baltimore
Bakery) (PW) - File 13-1-1
4. Request to Proceed with Pavement
Management Program (PW) -
File 4-10-201
5. Resolution of Appreciation for John
Rucker, Retired Street Maintenance
Supervisor, Public Works (PW) -
File 102 x 9-3-41
RESOLUTION NO. 7429 - CITY COUNCIL
(IN ITS CAPACITY AS BOARD OF
APPEALS) GRANTING APPEAL FROM
STATE ACCESS REQUIREMENTS - 1914
FOURTH STREET
RESOLUTION NO. 7430 - AUTHORIZING
THE ACCEPTANCE OF A PROPOSAL FOR
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT ENGINEERING
SERVICES (FROM INFRASTRUCTURE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS - FIVE YEAR
PROGRAM)(Not to exceed $75,000)
RESOLUTION NO. 7431 - RESOLUTION
OF APPRECIATION TO JOHN RUCKER
(who worked for the City of San
Rafael for 26 years)
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 1
SRCC MINUTES (Regula 9/15/86 Page 2
6. Authorization to Apply for a Grant
From the State Office of Historic
Preservation for Exterior Painting
and Repairs at Falkirk (Lib/Cult.
Affs) - File 4-10-208
7. Resolution of Appreciation to Marin
Heritage for Restoration of the
Falkirk Greenhouse (Lib/Cult. Affs)
File 102 x 4-10-185
9. Resolution Approving the Application
for Third Year Grant Funds Under the
Regional Competitive Program of the
California Park and Recreation
Facilities Act for 1984 for Terra
Linda Recreation Center Renovation
Project (Rec) - File 12-15 x 202 x
9-3-65
RESOLUTION NO. 7432 - AUTHORIZING
FALKIRK STAFF TO APPLY TO THE
CALIFORNIA STATE OFFICE OF HISTORIC
PRESERVATION FOR A GRANT OF $42,000
IN MATCHING FUNDS FOR EXTERIOR
PAINTING AND REPAIRS OF FALKIRK
(Council authorized $28,000 in
matching funds for the grant
which is 400 of the projected
$70,000 cost of the project. To
be part of 1987/88 Budget)
RESOLUTION NO. 7433 - RESOLUTION
OF APPRECIATION TO MARIN HERITAGE
- FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE FALKIRK
GREENHOUSE
RESOLUTION NO. 7434 - APPROVING
THE APPLICATION FOR THIRD YEAR
GRANT FUNDS UNDER THE REGIONAL
FACILITIES ACT OF 1984 FOR TERRA
LINDA RECREATION CENTER RENOVATION
PROJECT ($140,000 Application
Grant to be submitted to the State,
due October 1, 1986)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
8. ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT WITH MOORE, IACOFANO AND GOLTSMAN TO PREPARE GRAPHICS
FOR REVISED SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN (Pl) - File 4-3-161 x 115
Councilmember Breiner directed staff to have more defined maps available
for Council and the public.
RESOLUTION NO. 7435 - ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE CONTRACT OF MOORE,
IACOFANO, GOLTSMAN (Hereinafter, Consultant)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
10. PUBLIC HEARING - ED85-117; APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF
DESIGN REVISIONS TO THE CALIFORNIAN (FORMERLY CENTERTOWN) - 63 UNIT
SENIOR CITIZENS CONDOMINIUM; 855 "C" ST.; UNITED/HIBERNIA BANK (U.F.
SERVICES CORP.), OWNER; CIC ASSOC., INC./BERT BERNHEIM, REP. AND APPEL-
LANT; AP 11-254-18 (Pl) - File 10-7 x 5-1-286
Mayor Mulryan declared the public hearing opened.
Planning Director Moore indicated that the public hearing was
continued from meeting of August 18, 1986 with staff directed
to work with Applicants concerning further revisions to be made
to the project, which changes were then to be discussed with
the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. She stated
that the Design Review Board did not support the changes but noted
that a majority of the Design Review Board members were not on the
Board when the original project was approved. The Planning Commission
had concerns with some of the changes made in the design and were
also uncomfortable with other modifications to the project.
Principal Planner Jensen stated that the Applicants were very receptive
to the revisions discussed when he met with them on the project.
The list of positive points were as follows:
(1) The extended height of the elevator tower.
(2) The "sculptured" and "cut-out" design appearance of the eleva-
tions (the present revisions appear as a flat wall with extended
balconies and projections. In the original design, balconies
and windows are cut out from varying planes).
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 2
SRCC MINUTES (Regula-, 9/15/86 Page 3
(3) Angled features and greenhouse windows.
(4) A lighter color palette for the exterior building materials.
(5) Establishing a "bookend" or "cornerstone" effect so that the ends
of the building, specifically along the Third Street frontage,
appear independent, helping to introduce interest and reduce mass
and bulk of the entire elevation.
(6) Eliminating the covered roof on the top floor balconies and decks.
Staff expressed willingness to support the proposed revisions
provided both the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission
approved; however the revisions were rejected by both.
The Design Review Board expressed concern that the elevations
do not provide enough interest or articulation to reduce building
mass and bulk. One member suggested that the project's basic
design could be improved by incorporation of small peaked roof
elements along the Third Street frontage.
The Planning Commission's comments were as follows:
(1) There was opposition expressed about the loss of the second
elevator, although a second elevator is not required by code.
(2) The loss of two of the three original roof gardens/decks
that were approved as part of the initial project.
(3) The loss of the greenhouse windows (part of the initial
approved design) is unfortunate because they provide a soften-
ing effect on the roofline profile.
(4) Several Commissioners stated that the acceptability of the
project should not be limited to the elevations only but
to all aspects of the proposed development.
Mr. Jensen stated that staff's recommendation is that Council
deny the appeal based on the Design Review Board and the Planning
Commission reactions to the revisions; however, if Council chooses
to approve the revisions, staff should be directed to prepare
a Resolution with a list of permit conditions.
Mr. Bert Bernheim of CIC Associates stated that although the
Design Review Board does not approve of the basic design, the
foundation is already in place and not much can be done at this
time, indicating also that the plan has been revised five times.
He went on to state that they stand on the design as presented,
and will not revert back to the original proposal for the follow-
ing reasons: (1) It is not saleable if it is to be built as
is because the floor plans are not acceptable. (2) Although
the original proposal would produce units that are not really
acceptable, it would cost more than the final proposal.
In response to Councilmember Breiner's concern about the second
elevator not being in the revision, Mr. Bernheim stated that
the one elevator has twice the capacity allowed for apartment
houses, and indicated that the idea of senior citizens not being
able to get along with one elevator is not justified. Assuming
there would be 126 occupants, the building could be emptied
in round trips of 110 seconds in less than five minutes.
Councilmember Frugoli commented that he would like to have more
roof gardens and landscaping done in the inner court of the
two buildings.
Councilmember Breiner reiterated her concern of having two elevat-
ors and inquired as to why the one elevator was not positioned
in the center of the building.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 3
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 4
Mr. Bernheim responded that the reason it was not in the center
was because it creates a more crowded atmosphere and would be
"chopping" the center courts into two small courts which is
not desirable. However, he added that the one elevator could
be moved into the center of the building.
There being no further comments, Mayor Mulryan closed the public
hearing.
Councilmember Breiner moved and Mayor Mulryan seconded, to direct
staff to prepare a Resolution denying the appeal and upholding
the Planning Commission's action, based on the fact that there
is no second elevator and concerns over some of the design elements.
Under discussion, Planning Director Moore reiterated that the
project originally was a high density 93 unit building which
was reduced because it was found that small units would not
be marketable; also the parking was slim for a housing project
and it was for that reason that a van was offered by the Applicant
as a mitigating factor which was incorporated in the Zoning
approval and as a condition for the project.
Councilmember Frugoli stated that
citizens, they are concerned that
and indicating they would like to
because of the location.
in talking with some senior
there are no rentals for seniors,
move into such a building
Councilmember Nave agreed that there were some problems with
the design but noted that by working together, staff and Appli-
cant have come up with a nice looking revised plan which will
help senior citizens and be an asset to San Rafael.
Councilmember Breiner stated that the second elevator is a key
element for seniors, and the City should keep in mind the age
of the people who will be using the building.
Mayor Mulryan commented that the small differences in the design
are not of substance, but noted he would vote for granting the
appeal if the elevator could be centralized.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
Motion failed.
Councilmember Nave moved and Councilmember Frugoli seconded,
to grant the appeal and directed staff and the Appellant to
work together on centralizing the elevator and come back to
Council.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
Staff to prepare a Resolution with a list of conditions.
11. NINETY DAY REVIEW OF USE PERMIT FOR EVENING USE OF DON TIMOTEO
SCHOOL, AS REQUIRED BY CITY COUNCIL ACTION ON JUNE 16, 1986;
39 TRELLIS DRIVE; DIXIE SCHOOL DISTRICT, MARION DANSIE, OWNER;
AP 11-254-18 (Pl) - File 10-5 x 10-2
Planning Director Moore stated that on June 2, 1986, Council
held a public hearing on the appeal of the Planning Commission's
approval of the Use Permit, and the fact that the Use Permit
did not include a condition allowing any nighttime use which
was the matter of the appeal. After public testimony, the Council
granted the appeal with conditions to allow nighttime use for
a single tenant under stringent conditions for a 90 day trial
period. Parents United commenced their operation on June 11, 1986,
with meetings held every Wednesday evening ending at 9:45 PM, so
they would be out of the area by 10:00 PM. On July 7, 1986, a status
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 4
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 5
report was submitted to staff by their Executive Director. Ms.
Moore noted it also appears that there have been some incidents
with neighbors who have been watching the operation very closely,
almost interfering with it.
Ms. Moore went on to state that since action was taken by Council,
there have been no letters, calls or verbal complaints filed by
neighbors and additionally, that the Code Enforcement Officer did
an independent investigation to insure that they are complying with
the conditions of approval.
Staff recommends that the Use Permit be extended with minor modifica-
tions to conditions (c) and (j): Condition (c) so it is clear that
any of the outdoor sports programs are permitted during daylight
hours; Condition (j) To extend the Use Permit for six months or
until March 8, 1987 and thereafter be reviewed on an annual basis
by the Zoning Administrator. If at any time the evening use becomes
a nuisance, the matter shall be referred to the Planning Commission
for consideration.
Mr. John Ruskald, resident near the Dixie School, stated that although
he is not opposed to Parents United, he objected to any nighttime
use because his bedroom and living areas in his home are adjacent
to the school's parking lot.
Mayor Mulryan questioned if it is appropriate to allow use of a
public facility on an on-going basis supported in part by the City
and not allow the public to use the parking lot to get to the facility.
Ms. Moore asked Ms. Marion Dansie, Business Manager of the Dixie
School District, to describe the portion of the site used as a parking
lot.
Ms. Dansie stated that the parking lot is on Trellis Drive set back
from the street. She noted that they have never denied any athletic
groups from using the fields or coming onto the site nor has Parents
United. Ms. Dansie indicated they may walk down or drive in, and
added that her office has not had any phone calls from athletic
groups stating they have been denied the opportunity of using the
field.
Mr. Bill Wilhelm, resident across the street from the Dixie School
stated that people are not being denied use of the playground, but
have no place to park their cars. He had a note which was written
by a member of Parents United stating that it is a private parking
lot on Wednesday nights and should not be used by others. Mr. Wilhelm
objected to this and added that there are others using the parking
lot on other nights up to as late as midnight.
Ms. Dansie stated that the Dixie School Special Education children
have been turned over to Marin County, who are using the facilities
at this site, indicating that it is necessary to have counseling
meetings with parents periodically, and this is probably one of
the nights when the facility was used other than Wednesday nights.
Also, Ms. Dansie commented on another incident whereby another tenant
was working on a grant with another person and lost track of the
time, taking them past 10:00 PM, but they were contacted the next
day about their having to be out of the building before 10:00 PM.
Councilmember Breiner indicated that the problem the neighbors have
is that the school is allowing nighttime use other than Wednesday
nights.
Ms. Sue Beittel spoke on behalf of Parents United, asking Council
to extend the one night a week use of the facility at Dixie School,
adding that Council should come back at a later date and reconsider
what is appropriate use for a building that was paid for by the
citizens of San Rafael as a school facility.
Mayor Mulyran recognized there is a problem with the public facility
not being used as a school, but indicated that conflicts have to
be considered where legitimate concerns are raised which have an
impact on the community.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 5
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 6
Ms. Beittel concluded that she did not think there was any differ-
ence between the use of Dixie School, Oakview School, Santa Margarita
School or other schools where there are reasonable ongoing activities,
but agreed that they need to be monitored and guided. She added
that the parking lot at Dixie School is never full, that some neighbors
are using the lot to make repairs to their cars, and that public
facilities should not be used as an amenity for the neighbors but
should have public use.
Mr. Robideaux, resident across the street from the Dixie School
did not agree that there is little use of the school during the
day, adding that there is a lot of traffic generated because of
the use of the school and that the neighbors should have peace and
quiet in the evenings.
Mr. Dave Sexton, Board member of Parents United stated that they
were warned of the guidelines on night use and that the people were
being very careful in adhering to the limits set by the Council.
He added that the reason they meet on Wednesday nights as opposed
to meeting on Saturdays, daytime or late afternoons is because most
people work during the day and Wednesdays have been convenient and
traditional.
After further discussion, Councilmember Breiner moved and Councilmember
Nave seconded, to direct staff to investigate how the Dixie School
District is utilizing its nighttime uses other than the Wednesday
one night a week use as permitted by Council on a 90 day trial basis,
with staff to bring a report back to Council on its findings at
the next meeting. Parents United to be allowed to meet for one
additional month.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
12. STATUS REPORT ON EAST FOURTH STREET PARKING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
(PW) - File 6-41 x (SRRA) R-230
City Manager Nicolai stated that formation of the Parking
Assessment District in the East Fourth Street area has been worked
on with Attorney David Hellman and some of the businesses in the
area who have indicated they are willing to assess themselves to
create what, at the time, was considerd to be a significant mitigation
measure for a traffic problem in the area. The recent estimate
submitted by the Project Engineer's office to complete the project,
including the parking lot and surveying the area to determine whether
meters should be installed in the District to help offset the cost,
would be $940,000. The City has already committed $100,000 from
redevelopment funds and also committed to pay half the ongoing annual
debt service of approximately $45,000. Not included is the cost
of enforcement, collection, meter maintenance, painting, striping,
etc. needed to maintain the 180 additional meters, projected to
be approximately $17,000 per year, for a total estimated annual
cost to the City of $62,000, with a construction cost of $47,000
per space as detailed in the staff report.
Ms. Nicolai pointed out in discussion with Mr. Hellman regarding
acquiring the County Garage site, that the Marin County employees
who worked at that site no longer are parking in the area; in addition,
more efficient modifications have been made to the viaduct parking.
Therefore, during the time staff has been working on creating the
District, changes have taken place and it is not certain if the
magnitude of the problem still exists.
Mr. David Hellman, representative of the property owners in the
East Fourth Street area commented that the need for parking in the
Third and Fourth Street areas is still evident and has not dissipated
even though CalTrans has converted the viaduct parking to a free
"Park and Ride". People still prefer to walk one or one and a half
blocks to get to their destination and all the outlying parking
is beyond that distance. He noted that for the last several months,
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 6
SRCC MINUTES (Regula -L, 9/15/86 Page 7
the Marin Conservation Corps has been using the old County garage
site and their people are parking on the streets causing the same
problem the garage employees were causing when they were there.
Enforcement is only approximately once a week. Another concern is
that if the lot were to be used as commercial development there
would be a demand for more parking than would be available and similar
problems would exist. Alternatives such as not putting in additional
street meters could be reviewed to lessen the cost per stall, but
a substantial contribution by the City would still be required.
In response to Councilmember Breiner's question on what the highest
cost for parking spaces has been, Public Works Director Bernardi
stated that the cost was $11,000 per stall at Third and A Streets,
which included the cost of the land, and without the land included
it would be $6,800 per stall.
After further discussion, Council accepted the status report, without
motion, and asked Mr. Hellman to continue working with the Public
Works Department on the project.
13. STATUS REPORT ON LINCOLN AVENUE/LOS RANCHITOS ROAD CONNECTOR (PW)
- File 4-10-66 x 9-3-40 x 11 - 19
Public Works Director Bernardi stated staff is recommending that
Council adopt a Resolution revising the Five -Year Federal Aid Urban
Program as recommended by the Marin County Urban System Committee,
noting that the Public Works Directors in the County have reviewed
this project and the majority feel that based on the community -wide
benefit, it is a worthwhile project and should be included in the
County of Marin Regional Transportation Program. It would then
go to the Board of Supervisors for final approval, then to the Metro-
politan Transportation Commission and then to Sacramento for inclusion
into the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Mr. Bernardi
stated that up to this point, the project has been verified for
constructability and funding has been secured. When it has been
approved for inclusion into. the STIP program, the next step would
be to perform all environmental documentation and then a decision
would be made as to whether the City would go forward with the project
or not.
Mayor Mulryan indicated that before the City commits itself to closing
the road, we want to know when Caltrans will have the permanent
linkage that is needed; also, funding is a concern.
In response to the concern about funding, Mr. Bernardi stated that
there are three sources; CalTrans is putting up half with the City
sacrificing the extension project for the West Francisco Boulevard
Area by taking it off the Federal Aid Urban (FAU) list and substituting
this project which will provide approximately $695,000, with the
remaining $100,000 to be paid through the County of Marin through
its Urban Thoroughfare program, and it would be the County of Marin's
Gas Tax money that would be the local share for the project.
Mayor Mulryan asked Mr. Bernardi to clarify what the Resolution
would mean and he responded that if the City adopted the Resolu-
tion, the City would not be committed to closing Los Ranchitos Road
or to any particular plan other than that they are supporting the
movement of the funds. Also, CalTrans has agreed that they will
not close Los Ranchitos Road but instead will do the widening work
that is necessary to ultimately have the four lanes over the hill
but will not stripe the freeway until all environmental documentation
has been done with regard to the extension of Lincoln Avenue.
Councilmember Breiner directed staff to make a correction on their
September 9, 1986 report to have the appropriate title changed to
"Lincoln Avenue Extension" relating to whether Los Ranchitos Road
or Merrydale Road would be the road that would be closed.
Mr. Jerry Craner of 16 Oakridge Road stated that he was against
the adoption of the Resolution and did not want Los Ranchitos Road
closed.
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 7
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 8
Mrs. Alice Garbarino Vipiana, resident of the Dominican area was
against the closing of Los Ranchitos Road, and again reiterated
her earlier concern about the alleged violation of the Brown Act
with regard to the Council participating in Closed Meetings on this
subject.
Mr. Bernardi commented that the California Transportation Commis-
sion will meet on September 27, 1986 to discuss this project along
with other projects in the State, and that the commitment by CalTrans
will be made at that time, which meeting will be open to the public
and held in Sacramento.
Mayor Mulryan denied any wrongdoing by Council and advised Mrs.
Viapiana to discuss this matter with City Attorney Ragghianti.
Mr. John Richard of Los Ranchitos also asked that Los Ranchitos
Road not be closed.
Councilmember Frugoli moved and Councilmember Nave seconded, to
adopt the staff's recommendation to adopt the Resolution Modifying
the Five -Year Federal Aid Urban Program Commencing FY 1986-87 Recommend-
ed by the Marin County Urban System Committee.
RESOLUTION NO. 7436 - MODIFYING THE FIVE-YEAR FEDERAL AID URBAN
PROGRAM COMMENCING FY 1986-87 RECOMMENDED
BY THE MARIN COUNTY URBAN SYSTEM COMMITTEE
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILEMMBERS: Russom
14. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FROM MARIN SYMPHONY FOR CONTRIBUTION TO
POPS CONCERT HELD AT DOMINICAN COLLEGE CAMPUS - File 105
Staff was directed to have this item continued to the meeting of
October 6, 1986 due to the absence of Councilmember Russom who had
requested this matter be on the agenda.
15. VOTING AUTHORIZATION FOR CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY
(CJPIA) BOARD MEMBER (Fin) - File 4-10-202
Finance Director Coleman stated that for several months the California
Joint Powers Insurance Authority's Board of Directors have been
voting on various matters including new membership, and the question
was raised concerning the voting authority of Board Members being
able to vote while representing their agency. The Board then asked
its members to come back to Council for clarification on their voting
authority as to whether or not they are able to represent their
agency when voting on certain matters, such as new memberships.
Councilmember Frugoli moved and Councilmemer Nave seconded, to accept
the staff's recommendation authorizing the City's Board member (Ransom
E. Coleman, Finance Director, or Pamela J. Nicolai, City Manager,
alternate) to the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority to
vote on behalf of the City and to bind the City on all matters except
for the approval of amendments to the Joint Powers Agreement and
By Laws and the election of new Board members.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulyran
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
16. CONSIDERATION OF COUNTY OF MARIN'S REQUEST FOR CITIES TO SHARE COSTS
FOR COUNTYWIDE ANIMAL CONTROL PROGRAM (CM) - File 13-3
City Manager Nicolai stated that a committee of City Managers, the
County and the Humane Society have worked for six months on this
issue and although they are not totally comfortable with the concept,
they do feel that in all jurisdictions, the Humane Society does
an excellent job with very few complaints. She went on to state
that a contribution is worthy for this year and that next year the
program will be re-evaluated, with the hope that sources will be
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 8
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 9
created to help offset the costs County -wide, if not State-wide,
noting that this could become an annual ongoing obligation.
RESOLUTION NO. 7437 - AUTHORIZING AN APPROPRIATION OF $31,009 TO
THE COUNTY OF MARIN AS SAN RAFAEL'S SHARE
OF AN OPERATIONAL SUBSIDY FOR THE COUNTYWIDE
ANIMAL CONTROL AND INJURED ANIMAL CONTROL
PROGRAMS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1986 - 1987 (One
time subsidy expenditure)
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Breiner, Frugoli, Nave & Mayor Mulryan
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Russom
ADD ITEM
1. PG&E STREET LIGHTS - File 4-4-6 x 11-4
Public Works Director Bernardi informed Council that the Cities of
Marin County have prevailed in the lawsuit against PG&E and have
been favored to the lower value of the PG&E street light costs.
L.
JEANNE .NLEONCINI, C'\ty Clerk
APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1986
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 9/15/86 Page 9