Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Minutes 1996-03-04SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, MARCH 4,1996 AT 8:00 PM Regular Meeting: San Rafael City Council Barbara Heller, Councilmember Gary 0. Phillips, Councilmember David J. Zappetini, Councilmember Absent: None Present: Albert J. Boro, Mayor Paul M. Cohen, Councilmember Others Present: Suzanne Golt, Acting City Manager Gary T. Ragghianti, City Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, City Clerk OPEN SESSION - 7:00 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBER Mayor Boro announced Closed Session items: CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 PM - CONFERENCE ROOM 201 1. 0 Conference with Labor Negotiator - (Government Code Section 54957.6): Negotiators: Suzanne Golt/Daryl Chandler City Attorney Gary Ragghianti announced that no reportable action was taken. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: None CONSENT CALENDAR 8:00 PM Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to approve the recommended action on the following Consent Calendar items: ITEM 2. Approval of Minutes of Special Joint Workshop Meeting with Planning Commission of January 31, 1996 and Regular Meeting of February 20, 1996 (CC) 3. Call for Applications to Fill One Four -Year Term on the Fire Commission Due to Expiration of Term of Charles I. Daniels, Jr., Chairman (CC) - File 9-2-5 Tuesday, 3/26/96 at 12:00 Noon in City Clerk's office. b) Set date for interviews of applicants for Monday, 4/1/96 at 6:30 PM to fill one four-year term, to end of March, 2000. 4. Call for Applications to Fill One Unexpired Term on the Cultural Affairs Commission Due to the Resignation of Cynthia Pepper, Term to Expire End of April, 1999 (CC) - File 9-2-24 Noon in City Clerk's office. b) Set date for interviews of applicants for Monday, 4/1/96 at 6:30 PM to fill one unexpired term, to end of April, 1999. RECOMMENDED ACTION Approved as submitted. Approved staff recommendations: a) Called for applications with deadline set for Approved staff recommendations: a) Called for applications with deadline set for Tuesday, 3/26/96 at 12:00 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 1 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 2 5. Swearing -In of Colleen Ferguson, Newly Appointed City Clerk swore in newly Member of the San Rafael Board of Education (CC) appointed School Board Member - File 9-2-1 Colleen Ferguson, on February 26,1996, at a Board of Education meeting held at Bahia Vista School. 6. Acceptance of Statement of Disclosure for: Accepted report. (CC) - File 9-4-3 Judy Tipple, Planning Commissioner 8. Renewal of Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) RESOLUTION NO. 9557 - With ORCA Swim Club for 1996 Swim Season (Rec) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE - File 4-10-172 x 9-3-65 SIGNING OF AN AGREEMENT WITH ORCA SWIM CLUB FOR 1996 SWIM SEASON. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None The following items were removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion: 7. RE: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS JPA- REPORT ON BID OPENINGS FOR PURCHASE OF: (Fin) - File 4-2-287 x 9-3-31 a. ONE NEW 1996 CAB AND CHASSIS TRUCK (BID OPENING MONDAY, MARCH 4, 1996) b. ONE UTILITY BODY (BID OPENING THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 29, 1996) (Councilmember Zappetini stated he was abstaining from this item due to conflict of interest.) Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt the resolution authorizing the purchase of a 1996 Cab and Chassis from ISI, Inc. for $40,604.00. RESOLUTION NO. 9558 - RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A 1996 CAB AND CHASSIS FOR THE HAZ MAT JPA RESPONSE UNIT FROM ISI, INC. FOR $40,604.00 (lowest responsible bid). AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini (due to conflict of interest) Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt the Resolution authorizing the purchase of a utility truck body from Gregory Truck Body Company for $34,298.55. RESOLUTION NO. 9559 - RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A UTILITY TRUCK BODY FOR THE HAZ MAT JPA RESPONSE UNIT FROM GREGORY TRUCK BODY FOR $34,298.55 (only bid received). AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DISQUALIFIED COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: None COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini (due to conflict of interest) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) WHEEL CHAIR RAMP CONSTRUCTION- 1996 (PW) -File 4-1-480 x 13-1-1 x 9-3-11 Councilmember Heller noted we are going to be spending $112,000 on this project, and it appeared as though there are quite a few ramps to be installed. She asked if it looked as though ramps will be installed at Northgate, and also if the $112,000 includes the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) funds? Public Works Director Bernardi responded the CDBG funds were included in the $112,000, stating he was not certain whether ramps would be SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 2 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 3 installed at Northgate at this time, as he does not yet know how much each ramp will cost. Mr. Bernardi reported the ramps will initially be installed in the Downtown area, and if there is funding left over, we will then concentrate on the Northgate area. Ms. Heller asked if the funding was for this year, with the anticipation of a like amount in next year's budget, and Mr. Bernardi responded that was correct, noting he and Acting City Manager Golt will be making recommendations to the Council at budget time for projects similar to this for the next fiscal year. Ms. Heller asked when this project would begin, and Mr. Bernardi stated he expects the construction to begin by May 1 st, with the work completed by the end of May. Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to approve staff's recommendation to call for bids for Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) wheel chair ramp construction - 1996. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS MONTHLY REPORTS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro None None 10. CITY WORK PLAN REVIEW (CM) -File 237x9-1 Acting City Manager Suzanne Golt reviewed the monthly report on the goals and objectives developed during the City Council/Management Team retreat in January, noting this report shows much more information regarding the progress of the various goals. She reported the first of the monthly reports to the Council by the various department heads would be given during this meeting by Library Director Vaughn Stratford. Ms. Golt stated the Councilmembers would be contacted this week regarding recommendations for the Council to consider regarding annual meetings with the various Boards and Commissions. Councilmember Cohen referred to Item 4.E regarding the Freitas Advisory Committee, noting the Current Status and Comments columns were blank, and stated the adoption of the traffic model, which is now being presented for approval, has really been one of the key steps they have been waiting for. He stated the Council had previously approved reconvening the Committee, and asked that the necessary steps now be taken to do that, noting they need to finalize the arrangements for consultant services and then schedule a time when the Committee can get together. Public Works Director Bernardi reported staff has already been working with the consultant to refine the proposal that was submitted a month ago, noting they have taken quite a bit of time to be certain that what the consultant is going to be presenting to the Committee is appropriate and meaningful. He stated staff should have a document for the Council at the next Council meeting, outlining the proposal and what the fee will be for the next few meetings with the consultant. Councilmember Heller referred to Item 2-E, asking if this referred to the Wise Consultants report, which the Councilmembers will be receiving under Item 2-B? Ms. Golt responded that under Item 2-B, the Council would be receiving the Wise Consultants report at the next Council meeting, noting 2-E does relate to the recommendations included in the Wise Consultants report. Mayor Boro noted this would be an ongoing report, and a motion need not be made to accept this report. 11. DEPARTMENT REPORT - LIBRARY/CULTURAL AFFAIRS (Lib/Cult. Aff.) - File 237 x 9-1 x 9-3-61 x 9-2-24 Mayor Boro explained this item is a direct result of the City Council/Management Team retreat held in January, where it was agreed that each month a status report would be presented at the City Council meeting by one of the department heads, to discuss things going on in the department that the Council might not otherwise have the opportunity to hear about. Mayor Boro thanked Ms. Golt for developing the schedule of reports to be given throughout the year, and complimented Library Director Vaughn Stratford on the report he is presenting, noting it is very thorough, informative, and easy to read. Library Director Stratford stated he had tried to provide an overview of the everyday activities in the two departments, Library and Cultural Affairs, which are sometimes overlooked among the reports of special projects or problems, noting this report shows there is a lot going right in both departments. Mr. Stratford highlighted the fact that both Falkirk Cultural Affairs and the Library have done quite a bit to generate revenue SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 3 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 4 outside of the General Fund Revenues, noting they have aggressively pursued grants and fundraising at Falkirk, particularly private fund raising. He stated there are several projects that are the beneficiaries of this type of funding, one of which being the painting of Falkirk, where an extraordinary private fundraising campaign raised $98,000 in private funds to repaint the building. Mr. Stratford cited the Literacy Program as another example, reporting $80,000 to $100,000 is generated annually in grants and private donations for this program, noting no General Fund money is being used to fund the Literacy Program. Mr. Stratford stated the automation project, MARINet, is something they are very proud of, noting this project spanned five years and four jurisdictions working together, was funded by the Marin Community Foundation in the amount of $500,000, and culminated in a joint system that cost approximately $1 million. He reported all of this was accomplished with no expenditure of General Fund monies, explaining the City of San Rafael bought into the system and acquired the system as part owner for an expenditure of $108,000. Mr. Stratford stated that in all of these cases, in the face of budget cuts and declining budgets, his department has had to look other places to fund the necessary services this department delivers. Mr. Stratford recognized the members of the Library Board and Cultural Affairs Commission who were in the audience. Councilmember Heller complimented Mr. Stratford on an excellent report. She referred to the report which stated the Library Board of Trustees is going to be looking at the way the Library provides services, and asked if they have considered having the Library open on Sundays, noting the City has no place for students to go on a Sunday. She acknowledged she did not know if this was feasible, or if it was something the community would want, but felt it was something that should be considered, as we need to provide the very best service that we can to the community. Mr. Stratford stated that at the last Library Board of Directors meeting he discussed the preparation of the budget with the Board, and reported there were two things they agreed should be costed out, one being Sunday hours, and the other reopening on Mondays. Mayor Boro explained the Library and Cultural Affairs were the first two commissions to be discussed before the Council, and stated he felt this had been an excellent report. He felt the beauty of this type of report is that the Council gets to hear about the many things that are working well, but that the Council does not normally hear about. He stated it was great to see these things quantified, such as the number of members of the Friends of the Library has grown from 40 or 50 members to 450 members in just a short period of time. Linda Spackman addressed the Council, noting she has been a member of the Cultural Affairs Commission for four years. Ms. Spackman noted the Council will be reviewing candidates for a vacancy on the Cultural Affairs Commission, and stated she would personally like to make a request of the Council on behalf of the Commission. She explained the Cultural Affairs Commission is a small, extremely active Commission, with much personal time dedicated to the Commission on the part of Falkirk Director Carol Adney and Mr. Stratford, as well as the members of the Commission. Ms. Spackman asked that when the Council is considering the applicants, they make certain the applicants make a commitment of the time that can be fulfilled. She stated this was crucial, as it is often difficult to have enough members for a quorum. She also noted the members of the Commission participate in as many of the City's cultural affairs as possible, and have a tendency to spread themselves thin. Ms. Spackman stated she felt the members have done a lot in the past couple of years, and noted they would like to do even more, but they need strong people who will be available. She stated the Commission appreciates the Council's continued support, and they look forward to a new Commissioner. Councilmember Phillips stated this was an interesting point, and asked if it might be helpful to have the applicants contacted by members of the Commission to discuss the actual requirements and outline what is currently being done. Ms. Spackman stated there is a level of expectation, and the time commitment is not only to the Commission, but also to the City of San Rafael. She stated members of the Commission must show up when they say they will, having already read the minutes and being prepared ahead of time. She explained the Commission meets once a month, with a lot of phone calls in between, and attendance at cultural affairs events. Mr. Stratford stated the Cultural Affairs Commission, unlike other commissions, has very active subcommittees, so they are dealing with a lot of different issues. He noted the Friday Memo would contain a very impressive list of the Commission's accomplishments during the past year. Mayor Boro recalled the Council had received a draft of goals and objectives from the Commission, and the intent was that those would be shared with anyone applying for the membership on the Commission so they understood the scope of the work. He stated he hoped that the applicants would take it upon themselves to contact the Director, and noted that now that this issue had been discussed, the Councilmembers would discuss the issue of time commitment with the applicants. Mr. Phillips felt it might be a nice outreach, as well, if someone from the Commission volunteered to contact the applicants, thanking them for applying and outlining the requirements. Mayor Boro stated the applicants would be given a list of goals and objectives, and perhaps the issue of time SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 4 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 5 commitment could be incorporated into that list. Mr. Stratford stated it was important for people to have their eyes open as to what is actually required. Mr. Phillips agreed, noting perhaps this is something that should be applied across the board, for all Commissions and Boards. Phyllis Thelen, Chair of the Cultural Affairs Commission, addressed the Council, pointing out that the Cultural Affairs Commission had become very active. She reported there are now four ad hoc committees, noting they do meet between regular meetings, and as a result are generating a lot of activities. She stated the Council will receive a report on Friday which points out all of the activities that have taken place this year that address their goals and their mission. She noted the report will also outline what the Commission plans to do in the coming year, so no one will be caught by surprise. Ms. Thelen thanked Mr. Stratford and Ms. Adney, stating they have been very open about keeping up with the Commission, and have been as supportive as possible, acknowledging the Commission had pioneered a whole new area that Mr. Stratford and Ms. Adney had not been prepared for. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to accept the report. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None Councilmember Cohen stated it appeared the new format had already brought benefits, not only in the increased knowledge of the activities of this department, but also in terms of an exchange of ideas between the Council and a couple of our Boards and Commissions. He felt that perhaps we should explore asking members of the various Boards and Commissions to draft job descriptions when there are openings on the various Boards and Commissions. He stated this comment had also come up from another Advisory Commission very recently, and he felt it might be worthwhile, noting that when someone applies for a position on a Commission or Citizens Advisory Board, they might not necessarily be aware of what the job involves. He stated people who are serious about the job take the time to attend a couple of meetings and talk to people, but he did not feel it would be terribly difficult for us to put together a brief description of what is involved and, from the Commissioners' perspective, what kind of commitment is being made by the other members, so that people will go into this with their eyes open in terms of knowing what kind of commitment will be expected of them by their peers. Acting City Manager Golt stated she agreed completely with Councilmember Cohen's comments, stating she and the City Clerk had already discussed this topic, and she felt it would be extremely helpful to have something like this, noting it could easily be put together with input from the various Boards and Commissions. She stated she would develop something for the Council to look at, and then to be used as future openings come up. Councilmember Heller noted we do have brochures describing the City and each department, and felt that might be looked at as a beginning spot, as it also gives a description of the various Boards and Commissions within the City. She stated this would also be a good way for a little self -education, as well. Councilmember Cohen stated the issue of expectations of fellow Commissioners is one that is important and needs to be incorporated. OLD BUSINESS 13. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DOWNTOWN/EAST SAN RAFAEL AND NORTH SAN RAFAEL TRAFFIC MODELS AND ANALYSES (PW/PI) -File 4-3-289 x 10-2 x 11-13 x 11-1 Mayor Boro stated this item was being discussed prior to Public Hearing Item #12, as the Public Hearing assumes this item has already been adopted. Councilmember Zappetini stated he was abstaining from both Item #12 and Item #13 due to conflict of interest, and left the Council Chamber. Assistant Public Works Director Matt Naclerio reported the City Council and Planning Commission had held two joint traffic workshops to discuss Downtown/East San Rafael traffic model and the North San Rafael traffic model where staff and consultants described the traffic model preparation, the new analysis methodologies, and the trip generation rates, which were tailor made for San Rafael. Mr. Naclerio reported there was general agreement at the workshops that the new traffic models and the methodologies were better tools to analyze traffic and future land use scenarios, and it was emphasized that the model and the analyses were tools that would enable the Council to investigate different circulation alternatives, as well as different land use alternatives. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 5 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 6 Mr. Naclerio reported that at the North San Rafael Traffic Model Workshop the Councilmembers asked that additional traffic information be brought back, specifically to see how much discretion the City Council had in relationship to the Priority Project Procedures. Staff consulted with the City Attorney, and was advised that under the Priority Project Procedures, the Council has the discretion to allocate all or a portion of the circulation capacity. He noted that in addition to making that decision, the Council may also consider any of the additional information provided by the new methodologies. Mr. Naclerio stated that with that interpretation from the City Attorney's office, staff requests the Council approve the recommendation and Resolution accepting the traffic model and the analyses. Councilmember Cohen stated he had spent quite a lot of time on this issue, noting he and Mayor Boro had met with staff last week, and also had met with representatives of the North San Rafael Coalition to discuss the traffic model, particularly as it relates to the issues in North San Rafael, which has been a long standing concern. Mr. Cohen stated he felt there really is a consensus that this is a much better tool than we have ever had, although there are still questions about how it relates to reality. Mr. Cohen noted the hardest thing to get a handle on is realizing that this is a model, and we will never be able to make it replicate reality, because then it would not be reality. He stated this represents our best guess, noting he and those he has been working with are convinced this is really state of the art, and whatever its flaws and shortcomings may be, this is as good as it gets. Mr. Cohen stated there are a couple of issues that arise out of this that are not really issues or questions about the adequacy of this model, and therefore represent no impediment to adopting the model and working with it. He stated, however, that adopting this model raised a couple of policy questions he was asked to put on record; first is the question about understanding the analysis of arterial segments. He stated this is fairly new technology for us, noting one of the points he had made in earlier discussions was that we have never had the ability in the past to measure capacity on arterial segments, and stating any measurement of that is bound to be an improvement. However, there were still some questions and a lingering lack of clarity as to how the analysis is applied and how certain standards have been arrived at. Mr. Cohen stated he would like to ask staff to pursue a meeting with a couple of representatives from the North San Rafael Coalition to discuss this, noting that in particular there were some questions about the analysis and the input used for the Redwood Highway section, which is that portion from the Freitas Interchange up toward Smith Ranch Road on Redwood Highway. Mr. Cohen noted this model is going to be recalibrated when the Merrydale Overcrossing opens and the new northbound onramp opens, noting there will be an ongoing opportunity to do some of that recalibration and look at what inputs are used and what assumptions were made in accessing that particular segment. Mr. Cohen reiterated the questions that remain have nothing to do with the model itself, but rather with the way it is applied to that particular segment. He stated the people he had met with would like an opportunity to raise those questions. Councilmember Cohen stated there were two other policy issues, one that has been raised by the abilities that this model has given us and that we have not had to address in the past, and the other being an issue that has been there for some time. He reported the first issue is one that has been raised by having the ability to analyze the different legs of an intersection. He stated he is satisfied with the staff report assessment of our discretion under the Priority Projects Procedures, in terms of being able to allocate some or all traffic capacity and being able to assess new traffic information as well as existing. He noted the issue is when we discuss taking the average of an intersection Level of Service versus different Levels of Service at individual legs of the intersection. Mr. Cohen did not feel we were in a position at this point to say that we are going to apply a blanket policy that, for example, Level of Service on each leg of an intersection should be Mid-level D, because there are times, such as at Freitas, where we do not meet that goal now, and he stated he did not know what the impact of such a policy would be. He stated that as we go forward, perhaps as part of the next General Plan update as part of the Circulation Element, we need to look at this issue and come up with a standard for when we are going to accept a slightly lower Level of Service on a minor leg to an intersection. Mr. Cohen stated these were questions we could not even analyze before, or even discuss, noting no one is going to say we need to jump in and have the answer today or tomorrow. However, he felt this was something we needed to be aware of as we begin to prepare for the next round of the General Plan update. Councilmember Cohen reported the other question that has been discussed and was brought up at the workshop had to do with other peak periods, such as AM Peak and Noon Peak. Mr. Cohen stated he is satisfied, and believes the people who have asked him this question are satisfied, that it is pretty much the National standard for traffic modelings to use the PM Peak. Therefore, he stated the fall back question to that is what potential exists within our General Plan, or within our policies, should a project come along that clearly has a different peak impact; do we have a basis for saying we want to analyze the AM impact or the Noon impact of a particular project, or, if by saying we are using the PM Peak, are we committed to only analyzing the impact on PM Peak traffic? SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 6 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 7 Planning Director Pendoley stated we do have the ability to look at this on a case by case basis, and noted the authority to do that is basically the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Mayor Boro reported he and Councilmember Cohen had met with Mr. Naclerio, and he had also met with residents regarding this issue. He stated the one issue that has plagued us in the past about our traffic modeling has been its credibility, noting some of the issues raised by Mr. Cohen are still there. However, he believes that, overall, there is good buy -in to this model, which he felt was very important, noting that if we are going to use a tool like this the last thing we want is to constantly be challenging the tool. Mayor Boro stated he believes we are beyond that point now, and is very pleased about that, noting the fact that there is no one in the audience tonight challenging this, which is further evidence of that. Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt the Resolution accepting the Downtown/East San Rafael and North San Rafael traffic models and analyses for future studies and plans. RESOLUTION NO. 9560 - RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL ACCEPTING THE DOWNTOWN/EAST SAN RAFAEL AND NORTH SAN RAFAEL TRAFFIC MODELS AND ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES FOR USE IN CITY TRAFFIC STUDIES AND PLANS. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini (due to conflict of interest) PUBLIC HEARING: 12. PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING AMENDMENT PACKAGE AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION: (RE: DOWNTOWN VISION) (PI)- File 115X 10-3X 10-2 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FOR THE DOWNTOWN AMENDMENTS. RESOLUTION ADOPTING NEW, AND AMENDING EXISTING, GENERAL PLAN POLICIES FOR DOWNTOWN. C. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES. ORDINANCE CHANGING THE ZONING CHAPTER 14 AND SUBDIVISION CHAPTER 15 OF THE SAN RAFAEL MUNICIPAL CODE. (Having previously stated he was abstaining from this item due to conflict of interest, Councilmember Zappetini remained absent from the Council Chamber.) Mayor Boro declared the Public Hearing opened and asked for the staff report. Planning Director Robert Pendoley reported that in June, 1993 the Council received the Vision for Downtown San Rafael, and several months later appointed the Downtown Advisor Group, charging them with translating our Vision of Downtown San Rafael into General Plan policies, and Zoning Ordinance regulations and guidelines. He reported that last May, the Advisor Group delivered the completed project, noting the Downtown Advisor Group has crafted an innovative package of incentives to encourage development consistent with the Vision, and controls to protect the very best of Downtown's character. He stated the City owes a debt of gratitude to the members of the Downtown Advisor Group, who labored so tirelessly to prepare the basic package that is now before the Council. Mr. Pendoley noted that since delivering this package to the Council in May, the group has continued to work, advising staff and the Planning Commission on how to fine tune language for the issues developed, and in helping to answer questions. Mr. Pendoley introduced Roger Smith, Co -Chair of the Downtown Advisor Group. Mr. Smith addressed the Council, stating he was pleased to be presenting the Downtown Advisor Group's package of general plans and policies, and Zoning Ordinance guidelines for Council approval. Mr. Smith noted the Downtown Advisor Group has been working over two years, through dozens of meetings and hearings, to turn the Vision into reality. He stated their SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 7 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 8 diverse group of community members labored, with the conviction that their efforts would make a difference for the Downtown San Rafael of the future. Mr. Smith stated they are all very happy now that the end is in sight. Mr. Smith recognized fellow Downtown Advisor Group members in the audience, introducing Gladys Gilliland, Cyr Miller, Dirck Brinckerhoff, and Co -Chair Linda Bellatore. Mr. Smith stated the Downtown Advisor Group is gratified that the Planning Commission had passed their work on to the Council with relatively few significant alternations, noting this was very important because the Downtown Advisor Group had made a special effort to craft an amendment package that is pragmatic, and reflects reality without diminishing the spirit of the Vision. He stated the members all recognize that over -regulation can stifle the basic goal of the Vision, which is to encourage change and to make things happen in Downtown San Rafael. Mr. Smith reported the Downtown Advisor Group resisted the temptation to over -regulate, and felt they had successfully balanced the varying community needs in a way that will allow Downtown San Rafael to change with the times, without losing those wonderful characteristics that are so important to all of us. He noted that, in fact, they have used this opportunity to streamline the bureaucratic process and to make it easier to turn the Vision into reality. Mr. Smith thanked and complimented the Planning staff for their fine work on the project, especially Jean Hasser and Linda Jackson. He stated that as a group of independently minded individuals, the Downtown Advisor Group members required all the patience Ms. Hasser, Ms. Jackson and Mr. Pendoley could muster, but they never lost their poise. Mr. Smith stated this package is a fine tribute to their capabilities and their professionalism, and noted that on a personal note, he wished to thank the Council for giving him the opportunity to serve on the Downtown Advisor Group, stating it was a great experience, and one that he enjoyed immensely. Mayor Boro asked Principal Planner Jean Hasser to explain the two addendums to this item, which were distributed just prior to the meeting. Ms. Hasser explained that one of the addendums was a summary of P.G. & E. information presented in the Planning Commission's report of February 27, 1996, so it is not actually new information being presented to the Council. She stated the second addendum was the complete zoning text, which is needed to adopt the Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Hasser stated the development of the Downtown Vision had involved many people and groups, and felt that this consensus building at the front-end has really helped the smooth adoption process during the past few months. She reported the Vision document describes the Downtown as a healthy economic center in the future, with a full range of housing, shopping and employment activities. She explained the Vision also refines the City's descriptions of various parts of Downtown, noting some areas have great potential for change, such as the Lindaro District, while others, such as the West End, are likely to remain much as they are. Ms. Hasser stated the Downtown Advisor Group's translation of the Vision has been distributed as part of the report being presented to the Council. Pages 7-25 include the new goals, policies and programs from the Vision, to replace the existing Downtown section in the City's General Plan; Pages 25-56 include related changes to other changes to the General Plan, such as changes to the City's Circulation Element, to assure that our Downtown amendments are carried consistently throughout the General Plan. Pages 57-106 contain the proposed zoning changes and some Condominium Ordinance changes, and Attachment C on Page 107 describes the City's new, discretionary Downtown Design Guidelines. Chapter 14, the Design Overlay District for Downtown, which is in the current Zoning Ordinance, will be replaced with these new, discretionary design guidelines. Ms. Hasser reported that on Pages 60-62 of the staff report there is a summary of some of the more major amendments that are being proposed, noting they include the new Downtown policies and revised Land Use and Zoning Districts, consistent with the descriptions in the Vision, noting that in general, there is a greater emphasis on office and residential development, and less emphasis on retail development, than in the City's current General Plan. The amendments encourage non-residential economic development through such changes as new height and intensity standards, to allow some larger buildings in areas closest to the freeway, and also office parking revisions, and more streamlined permitting. The amendments also address protecting existing businesses by making some changes to the City's non -conforming rules, so that existing businesses can stay as interim uses in areas that are planned for eventual change, such as the Hetherton Office District. Ms. Hasser stated the amendment package promotes housing, reporting this was a very strong emphasis in the Vision, and noting it does this through changes such as increased densities in the Fourth Street, Netherton, and Second and Third Street Mixed Use East districts, as well as through some revised parking standards that are more consistent with actual Downtown housing and parking demands. Ms. Hasser reported changes also include revising the City's intersection traffic standards Downtown to Level of Service E, and also grandfathering the intersection of Mission at Irwin at its current Level of Service F, recognizing that Downtown is an urban area, as well as a crossroads with a great amount of through traffic, and permitting greater flexibility for economic activity Downtown. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 8 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 9 Ms. Hasser stated height bonuses have been proposed for some areas, as incentives to encourage desired public amenities, such as public parking. She stated it is important to note that the same amount of development is projected in this plan amendment as under the City's current General Plan; however, it is hoped the new changes will help encourage this new development to happen. She reported that from 1988 to 1995 only 5% of the Downtown development that had been projected in the current General Plan was actually constructed. Therefore, she noted this plan was more strategic and makes it easier for things to happen in different parts of Downtown. Ms. Hasser reported staff had prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact in November, and during the thirty day public comment period there was only one written comment received, which pertained to the proposed Level of Service E traffic standard. She stated the Planning Commission agreed that the changes in the Downtown traffic standards do not create a significant impact, for many reasons, including the fact that there are only three intersections which are projected to operate at Level of Service E during peak periods in the future, and the difference of 8 to 28 seconds of delay at these three intersections, between Level of Service D and E, is minor in terms of the effects of overall future planning Downtown. Ms. Hasser reported the Negative Declaration also found that the traffic from all projected development in the Vision contributes only a 5% increase over the baseline traffic conditions, explaining that baseline means existing plus any approved projects that have not been occupied yet. She stated that most traffic Downtown will continue to be from already existing and from through traffic. Ms. Hasser reported the Planning Commission held two Public Hearings on the merits of the plan, on January 9, 1996 and February 13, 1996, and recommended several changes to the Downtown Advisor Group's proposal, noting many of these changes were minor or simply clarifications. She stated all of the recommended changes are listed on the last page of the Planning Commission Resolution, and in Attachment "A" of the Resolution, as well as in Pages 17 to 24 of the staff report. Ms. Hasser noted the more substantive changes are summarized on Page 3, such as lowering the height limits near the neighborhoods and revising some of the area in the West End Village from the "2nd/3rd District" to "West End Village", which was at the request of the West End Neighborhood Association. Ms. Hasser reported there are four new items for the Council, three of them being staff initiated changes which are basically clarifications and not substantive, and the fourth is listed as #1 on Pages 3 and 4 of the staff report, which addresses the final, revised wording for the Lindaro Office District. She stated the Planning Commission had discussed this, but requested the Council to finalize the wording on this. Ms. Hasser stated that at the February 13th Planning Commission meeting, representatives from the P. G. & E. site owners asked that the Lindaro Office District language, which addressed retail uses, be revised. She reported they felt there needed to be more flexibility regarding retail uses, and that the language that prohibits competition of retail uses with Fourth Street retail should be deleted from the policy language. They also requested that retail be allowed in free-standing buildings, noting they were concerned about when permitted types of retail would be determined. Ms. Hasser noted that while the Planning Commission was open to providing some flexibility about retail uses on the P. G. & E. site and the Corporation Yard, they and others present wanted it to remain clear that retail is to be subservient to, and to service, the office complex that is the primary use. Free-standing retail is o.k. as long as it is not the first phase, with other uses to follow later. Ms. Hasser reported the revised language for policies was to be reviewed with the Downtown Advisor Group members, and to consider comments from the property owners and the City Attorney. She stated the property owners did provide some revised language, which the Downtown Advisor Group members discussed, but felt did not quite meet the Vision's intent regarding retail on this site, because it could result in substantial amounts and a great variety of retail uses. Ms. Hasser stated that after considering that the Lindaro area has changed in size, from the large area described in the Vision, and after re -reviewing the language in the Vision itself, the revised language recommended by the Downtown Advisor Group does meet some of the property owners' concerns, noting it provides additional flexibility regarding location of retail, as well as alternate uses to an office complex, such as a hotel, which the Vision language also includes. She noted it also eliminates the "competition" wording that was objected to, which the City Attorney agreed was important, and it defines the type of retail permitted as being limited, incidental, and office serving. Ms. Hasser noted these descriptions are similar to terms that have been used elsewhere, for example, in the Office Zoning District. Ms. Hasser stated decisions regarding appropriate types of retail uses would be decided, typically, when the planned development zoning is approved and the range of permitted retail uses would be established. Ms. Hasser reported that on February 27th the Planning Commission reviewed the revised language, which is identified on Page 4, and agreed to the proposed language provisions. Mayor Boro clarified the P. G. & E. Addendum presented to the Council showed the Lindaro Office District, the changes proposed by the property owners, and then the final changes, as approved, on Page 3, and Ms. Hasser responded that was correct. Mayor Boro asked if there would be a possibility of a combination of office and residential use in the Hetherton Office District, and Ms. Hasser stated that was a possibility; residential is not precluded, but not on the ground floor. Mayor Boro noted Ms. Hasser had directed Council's attention to Page 107, the Downtown San Rafael Design SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 9 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 10 Policies and Guidelines, and asked what the interaction has been with the Design Review Board concerning this? Ms. Hasser reported the Design Review Board had reviewed this along with the many focus groups of the Downtown Advisor Group, and were pleased with the design guidelines. Councilmember Heller noted the issues of gun shops and public art had been raised, and asked if this had been settled with the final zoning amendments? Ms. Hasser referred to Page 17 of the Planning Commission Resolution, noting the issue of gun shops was resolved for the Downtown amendment, but they specifically stated in their Resolution that the issue of gun sales in the City was a significant social issue, which the Commission is willing to review further, as directed by the Council. Referring to the issue of public art, Ms. Hasser reported they had recommended that this program, which is a current program in the General Plan, be a Priority Two rather than a Priority Three. Councilmember Phillips asked the significance in going from a Priority Three to a Priority Two? Ms. Hasser explained that a Priority Two project has an actual time frame of two to five years after plan adoption, while a Priority Three project is longer term. Mr. Phillips stated we had made an issue out of retail, citing the statement "Free-standing retail building is o.k., provided it is not included in the first phase of construction", and noted that throughout the report we also talk about it being built concurrent or subsequent to the project. He asked why we cannot lead with retail? Ms. Hasser reported there had been a lot of concern that we would end up with retail and nothing else, and that was not the intent, noting the intent was to build an office complex, with retail built to serve the office complex. Mr. Phillips asked would most of the projects not be designed first for a site and, therefore, preclude retail being dominant, if it was not already in the plan to begin with? Ms. Hasser explained the wording permits retail to be part of the first phase, it just says that it cannot be exclusively the first phase. Mayor Boro asked if anyone in the audience would like to address the Council. Harry Winters, President of the West End Neighborhood Association, addressed the Council, stating he believed theirs was the only Neighborhood Association that had submitted comments during the time the Planning Commission was working on this project. He stated the West End Neighborhood Association supports the final revisions proposed by the Planning Commission for the San Rafael Vision, as reflecting the comments and concerns of the West End Neighborhood Association about the West End Village. He noted the Downtown Advisor Group had made some changes in the original Vision, but the West End Neighborhood Association likes the original Vision. He stated staff had been open to their discussion, and the Planning Commission made some revisions, noting they were satisfied with the revisions being proposed at this time with respect to the boundaries of the West End Village, the height limits, parking, and the general concepts, noting the West End Neighborhood Association felt these were acceptable and responded to their comments. Mr. Winters noted one of the comments that had been made several years ago has been incorporated by the Downtown Advisor Group, which refers to the issue of gun shop use permits. Mr. Winters reported this issue originally came up because a gun shop opened in the West End neighborhood without a use permit, and they wondered at the time why they had not been notified. Mr. Winters stated the West End Neighborhood Association proposed that gun shops be added to the types of businesses requiring a use permit, and when this came up for hearing, the type of use permit which staff recommended is one that does not include public notice or public hearing, which had been one of the important issues to the West End Neighborhood Association, as they want to know what is going on in their neighborhood. Mr. Winters stated that, rather than argue the point within the Downtown Plan, the Planning Commission agreed it was an important social issue, not only for the Downtown but for the entire City of San Rafael, and they recommended the Council treat this as a separate issue, beyond what is in the amendments, for discussion with respect to the importance of this issue to the rest of the City, and to shops elsewhere than Downtown. Mr. Winters reported he had spoken with Finance Director Coleman, who identified possibly thirty to forty different locations where gun sales are being made from private homes in residential neighborhoods, and only three have business permits. Mr. Winters stated these are the kinds of issues that are important, and urged the Council to pursue the Resolution presented by the Planning Commission. Mr. Winters stated there was only one issue remaining that the West End Neighborhood Association was uncomfortable with, and that was the proposal that the Level of Service for traffic be lowered from Mid -D to E, which is the lowest level before gridlock. Mr. Winters noted that in reading the 1988 General Plan, on Page 6, it specifically states that the public surveys made at that time identified traffic congestion as the number one liability of San Rafael, and Traffic Management as the top issue. Mr. Winters stated he did not believe this had gone away since 1988 and, in fact, felt it was probably even more in the public's mind today than it was then. He stated he did not feel that lowering the traffic level from Mid D to E, which was argued considerably before the City Council, was going to meet the public's perception of what is going on here. He noted staff had identified three intersections where they felt it would be necessary to lower the Level of Service, from Mid -D to E, and felt it should be limited to only those three intersections, and not done with a broad paint brush over the whole City. He stated the statement had been made that people are willing to accept worse traffic in order to make the City a better place to live, but stated he did not know if the City was a better place to live if the traffic is worse, noting a lot of people did not think so. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 10 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 11 Mr. Winters thanked staff and the Planning Commission for being courteous and listening and responding to their concerns. Ann Weston, Chair of the Vision Committee, addressed the Council. She heartily endorsed the work of the Downtown Advisor Group, stating their work had been exhaustive and certainly inclusive. Ms. Weston urged the Council to adopt their recommendations, noting they have been long awaited. She stated her committee looks forward to proceeding with the Vision, based on these recommendations. Tom Lollini, 39 Octavia Street, addressed the Council, stating he thought this project was great. He noted it had been a long time in coming, and involved a lot of work by a lot of people, and was a compliment to everyone's effort that this has been put together. Mr. Lollini referred to the modifications to the covered parking requirement, stating he was not sure why those were included for Downtown housing, since it is likely to be covered anyway. He suggested the City might want to think about a way to address this issue, since there will be people looking down on parking areas once housing is developed in the Downtown area, and that should somehow be screened or landscaped, which could be done by trees and would not necessarily need to be done by a structure. Referring to the discussion of Level of Service E, Mr. Lollini stated he did not feel this was a bad thing to let all of the intersections go to Level of Service E, noting there is a lot of thinking going on in urban planning circles throughout the world that congestion in high pedestrian traffic areas is actually a good thing. Therefore, Mr. Lollini believed that when the City is thinking about reversing street direction, changing one-way streets to two-way streets, or looking at diagonal parking on "B" Street near Albert Park, the City might find that we are getting into a Level of Service E, and this might not necessarily be a bad thing in areas like that. Roger Smith, Co -Chair of the Downtown Advisor Group, addressed the Council, responding to Mr. Winters concerns regarding traffic, noting a change in the Level of Service was an important part of the package being presented to the Council. Mr. Smith stated the Downtown Advisor Group is not throwing out the things that were done in 1988, they are refining them. He reported Level of Service E recognizes two things; one, the special urban characteristics of Downtown, which was not really taken into account in 1988; and two, that traffic means, and is equivalent to, the success of Downtown San Rafael, noting that if there are people in Downtown San Rafael shopping, working, living, then there is going to be more traffic, and he noted that without more traffic and more success, Downtown will be a problem rather than a jewel for our City. There being no further public comment, Mayor Boro closed the Public Hearing. Mayor Boro complimented Linda Jackson, Jean Hasser and particularly Planning Director Pendoley for their efforts. Addressing the Downtown Advisor Group, Mayor Boro stated it was very rewarding to see a committee such as theirs labor for the past two years, and to take their charge and develop such a thorough package, while at the same time achieving so much consensus building along the way, noting all of the testimony had been very positive. Councilmember Heller congratulated and thanked the members of the Downtown Advisor Group for persevering and wading through the technical reports, noting she was very impressed with all of the time and effort put in by all of the members. Councilmember Cohen added his thanks to the Downtown Advisor Group, noting that not only was the volume and quality of the work very impressive, but the consensus that has been created was outstanding. Mr. Cohen stated he truly does see this as building on what the City did in the updated General Plan, creating the Vision, and translating this into reality. Mr. Cohen stated recognizing Downtown San Rafael as an urban space, and starting to apply some of those concepts to what it should look like and be like, will be the key to success in keeping Downtown a thriving place. Councilmember Phillips expressed his appreciation to the Downtown Advisor Group for their outstanding efforts. Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to adopt a Resolution adopting the Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for the Downtown Amendments. RESOLUTION NO. 9561 - RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ADDENDUM FOR GENERAL PLAN (GPA95-3) AND ZONING ORDINANCE (ZC95-5) AMENDMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS RELATED CHANGES TO IMPLEMENT OUR VISION OF DOWNTOWN SAN RAFAEL. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES; COUNCILMEMBERS: None SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 11 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 12 ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini (due to conflict of interest) Councilmember Cohen moved and Councilmember Heller seconded, to adopt a Resolution adopting new, and amending existing, General Plan Policies for Downtown. RESOLUTION NO. 9562 - RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE GENERAL PLAN (GPA95-3) CHANGES TO IMPLEMENT OUR VISION OF DOWNTOWN SAN RAFAEL. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini (due to conflict of interest) Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Cohen seconded, to adopt a Resolution adopting the Downtown Design Guidelines. RESOLUTION NO. 9563 - RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES. AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini (due to conflict of interest) The title of the Ordinance was read: "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AMENDING TITLES 14 AND 15 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL AS THEY APPLY TO DOWNTOWN WITH NEW ZONING DISTRICTS, CHANGED PARKING STANDARDS FOR OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL USES, DIFFERENT HEIGHT LIMITS AND FLOOR AREA RATIO STANDARDS, REVISED CONDOMINIUM REQUIREMENTS, NEW DESIGN GUIDELINES AND MISCELLANEOUS CHANGES TO HELP IMPLEMENT OUR VISION OF DOWNTOWN SAN RAFAEL AND MINOR RELATED PERMIT STREAMLINING CHANGES APPLICABLE CITYWIDE." Councilmember Heller moved and Councilmember Phillips seconded, to dispense with the reading of the Ordinance in its entirety and refer to it by title only and pass Ordinance No. 1694 to print, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips & Mayor Boro NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini DISQUALIFIED: COUNCILMEMBERS: Zappetini (due to conflict of interest) (Councilmember Zappetini returned to the Council Chamber.) COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: NEW BUSINESS 14. SELECTION OF AUDITOR (Fin) - File 8-1 Finance Director Ransom Coleman stated it has been the City's policy to request proposals for audit services every five years, noting he had received eight proposals after his request last month. He stated he had taken the four lowest cost proposals, studied each of the four firms, and determined that three of those four firms had enough experience to qualify for consideration. He then outlined the pros and cons of each firm. Mr. Coleman reported the lowest cost firm was Odenberg, Ullakko, Muranishi & Company, but noted they have the least amount of experience and estimated the least number of hours to perform the audit. He stated this was his main concern in considering this firm, noting they have never audited a city the size of San Rafael, and may not have a good grasp on the number of hours it would take. However, he did note that they have since sent a letter assuring SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 12 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 13 him they would complete the audit for the price quoted, no matter how many hours it took. Mr. Coleman referred to the next firm, C. G. Uhlenberg, who currently performs the City audit. He stated they probably have the best idea of how long it takes to complete our audit, as they have been doing it for five years, noting they are very experienced, and have indicated they would have a lower cost based on the actual number of hours. He stated that because of their experience, he felt that if they did get the proposal for another three years, we probably could reduce the cost slightly from what the bid is. Mr. Coleman reported the third firm he would consider is Caporicci & Larson, noting they are very experienced and have done several audits, although only one in the Bay Area, for the City of Danville. He pointed out that in addition to total cost, there are some differences between the City Audit and Agency Audit, and if we wanted to concentrate only on the City Audit, the least cost is Odenberg, Ullakko, Muranishi & Company, followed by C. G. Uhlenberg, and then Caporicci & Larson. Mr. Coleman stated it is his recommendation that we stay with the current auditing firm of C. G. Uhlenberg. Councilmember Zappetini asked why there would be such a discrepancy in the number of hours bid on the different proposals. Mr. Coleman responded he had been surprised at the differences, noting most of the firms had bid within a 500 - 600 hour range except the one firm, which bid only 400 hours. He noted each firm had the opportunity to come in and look at the City's records and discuss procedures with staff, stating he does not know why Odenberg, Ullakko, Muranishi & Company would have such a low bid, or why there are such major differences. However, he noted that in the past the eight big National firms have always proposed more hours than the smaller independent firms, probably because of the review process they have to go through. Mr. Zappetini asked if Odenberg, Ullakko, Muranishi & Company was aware of the difference in hours, and Mr. Coleman reported he had contacted the firm and informed them of the hours bid by the other firms and that he was concerned about the low number of hours they had bid, and that prompted them to submit the letter indicating they would stand by their bid cost regardless of the number of hours it took to complete the audit. Councilmember Phillips stated his prime concern would be the same as Mr. Coleman's; if they are coming in with a bid of only 400 hours, it might indicate their lack of familiarity with government audits, and might leave us on the short end as well. Mr. Phillips stated he was most comfortable with Mr. Coleman's recommendation that the City continue to use C. G. Uhlenberg, noting he had been impressed with the work that they have done in the past, and the fact that they work well with staff, noting the amount of staff time they consume is also important. Mr. Phillips stated that, particularly in looking at the cost for the City Audit, his first choice would also be C. G. Uhlenberg. Councilmember Cohen asked if the Redevelopment Agency carried the cost of the Agency Audit, and Mr. Coleman responded that was correct. Mr. Cohen asked, if Child Care was being self-funded, where was that portion of the audit pertaining to Child Care charged? Mr. Coleman responded that is a separate grant that Child Care administers, and the audit of that grant is required by the State. Mr. Cohen pointed out that C. G. Uhlenberg is very competitive on their bid for the City Audit, and given that have the opportunity to go with a firm that we are comfortable with and that has the experience, he would agree with accepting Mr. Coleman's recommendation to stay with this firm. Councilmember Heller asked what "Single Audit" represents, and if the "Total Audit" is a yearly fee or the fee for three years? Mr. Coleman explained the totals are three year totals, and the "Single Audit" is something that is required by the federal government. He explained that if the City has any grants that exceed $25,000, the federal government requires that we complete a compliance audit. Councilmember Phillips moved and Councilmember Zappetini seconded, to adopt a Resolution authorizing the signing of an agreement with C. G. Uhlenberg for audit services in the amount of $109,840. RESOLUTION NO. 9564 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF AN AGREEMENT WITH C. G. UHLENBERG FOR AUDIT SERVICES (for 3 years - fiscal years 1995/96 through 1997/98). AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS 15. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS: Cohen, Heller, Phillips, Zappetini & Mayor Boro None None FURTHER DISCUSSION CONCERNING MOTION ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL ON 2/20/96 REGARDING COUNCILMEMBER ZAPPETINI - File 9-1 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 13 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 14 Mayor Boro stated he had asked that this item be put on the Agenda for a couple of reasons; one reason being there had been an article in the News/Pointer newspaper this past week which discussed the fact that Councilmember Zappetini was continuing to gather information, and the acknowledgement of perceived wrong doing and how it hurts the rest of the Council. In addition, Mayor Boro stated there has also been some discussion, both in the press and among the Council, regarding Mr. Zappetini seeking advice from his attorney regarding this matter. Mayor Boro asked Councilmember Zappetini for an update as to his position on resolving the situation of his possible conflict of interest. Mr. Zappetini reported his attorneys are currently looking into various options, noting they will be meeting with John Shellenberger, who is working with the attorneys on one possible option, noting he will not know the result of that meeting for another day or two. Mr. Zappetini reported he has also been meeting with former District Attorney Michael Anthony, who represented a gentleman from Albany in a similar situation, noting Mr. Anthony will also have some input into the direction Mr. Zappetini is headed. Mr. Zappetini stated he is working on this matter as hard as he can, noting that at this time there are eight attorneys working on this and advising him. Mr. Zappetini stated he felt he does have options, and that he owes it to his constituents to pursue all options. Mr. Zappetini stated that he will notify the Council as soon as he has arrived at a solution, which he hopes will be by the end of the week. Councilmember Heller asked Mr. Zappetini if he felt he would have an answer for the Council by the end of the week, noting that when he first mentioned this issue he had stated he would have a decision by the end of January. Mr. Zappetini stated he has asked for certain information, which he was told he would have by the end of the week. He also noted that as they go through different options, other questions are raised which need to be explored. He stated he did hope to have an answer by the end of the week. Mayor Boro stated he would continue to place this item on the agenda, based on the fact that Mr. Zappetini is near closure on this matter, and also based on the fact that there seems to be a lot of interest regarding this issue, particularly in the press. He felt they owed it to themselves, as a Council, and to the public, to continue to follow-up on this and reach a conclusion. Mr. Zappetini noted the basis of the law is to do away with the perception that someone is doing something illegal, and he stated he is sorry that it gets to the point where it reflects on everyone involved, but it is something that he just does not have any control over at this point. b. DEVELOPMENT OF FIVE-YEAR PROJECTION WITH BUDGET OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE - File 9-22-48 X 8-1 Councilmember Phillips reported he has had discussions with Finance Director Coleman and Acting City Manager Golt regarding the Budget Oversight Committee and the development of the Five -Year Projection. He noted the Budget Oversight Committee will be meeting on Thursday, and he would like to suggest the Council provide them with a specific charge to give them direction on this matter. Mr. Phillips stated he has outlined items he felt should be part of that charge, and with the Council's agreement, he proposed to discuss it with them and have them proceed. He stated he envisions five steps, including the review of financial projections of various cities, and other reports as relevant; developing a list of critical financial assumptions for review by the City Council pertaining to direction; develop a financial projection model and report the format to the City of San Rafael that includes current operations, long term maintenance and capital project sections; recommend method of data collection processing with Finance Director and City Council, if necessary; and review the results of the projection model with the City Council for adoption. Mr. Phillips suggested that once this projection model is put together, it should be brought to the Council for approval. He stated that if the Council agreed, he would discuss this in more detail at the Budget Oversight Committee meeting on Thursday. Mayor Boro stated he felt it was important that we also get some risk analysis, citing as an example that in a five-year projection one of the items will be the police radio system, noting we are all aware of what the risk is if we do not do that. He noted that, on the other hand, we may get some very aggressive approaches to data processing, and he stated he will need to know more than just what the consultant is recommending; he also needs to know what the downside is if we do not follow a recommendation. Mayor Boro thanked Councilmember Phillips for pursuing this issue. C. DISCUSSION OF CONSOLIDATION OF CENTRAL MARIN SANITATION AGENCIES - File 12-7 Councilmember Cohen stated he had been asked about an article which appeared in the News/Pointer regarding the discussion of consolidation of the Central Marin Sanitation Agencies. Mr. Cohen reported he and Mayor Boro sit on the Board of Directors of the San Rafael Sanitation District, representing the City of San Rafael. SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 14 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 15 Councilmember Cohen stated the San Rafael Sanitation District is responsible for the transport of sewage from residences and commercial buildings within the City of San Rafael, south of Puerto Suello Hill to Cal Park, noting there is no distinction between City and County jurisdictions, although there are small pockets that are not annexed to the District, just as there are pockets that are not annexed to the City. Mr. Cohen reported the District is party to a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with several other sanitary districts and cities, that make up the Central Marin Sanitation Agency. He reported the JPA was formed approximately fifteen years ago, and approximately ten years ago the Central Marin Sanitation Agency's plant, at the end of Andersen Drive, came on line. He noted that plant processes and treats sewage for all of the member agencies, and that as representatives of the San Rafael Sanitation District, he and Mayor Boro sit as members of the commission that runs the Central Marin Sanitation Agency. Mr. Cohen reported the Central Marin Sanitation Agency has been going through some reorganization recently, noting the General Manager is retiring, and has been asked to spend his last six months with the Agency looking at the issue of consolidation. Mr. Cohen stated the members of the Central Marin Sanitation Agency felt there existed the potential for the kind of efficiency people point to as being achievable through consolidation of the various sanitary districts into one agency. Mr. Cohen reported it seemed as though there was potential for consolidation of the services, of maintaining the lines and the pump stations, which is what the San Rafael Sanitation District does, and also maintaining the plant. Mr. Cohen reported the Central Marin Sanitation Agency has engaged in a study of the possibility of consolidating, acknowledging that it is somewhat controversial. Mr. Cohen stated he would be interested in pursuing this issue only if it meets LAFCO's goals as far as reducing the cost and increasing service. He stated there are different organizational philosophies involved, and somehow, in a consolidated agency, those differences would have to be resolved. Mr. Cohen felt that ten years from now we would probably look back at the consolidation and say what a good idea it was. However, he reported there have been several debates within the Central Marin Sanitation Agency about how important an issue this is, and noted people do not really care who provides the service, they just want it done, they do not want to have to think about it, they want it taken care of efficiently, and they want to pay as little as possible for the service. Mr. Cohen noted that in this case, public safety is an issue, as well. Mr. Cohen stated there may be some cost implications for the City of San Rafael in a consolidation, and noted that if this proceeds much further, he will ask Public Works Director Bernardi to put together a report for the Council to review. Mr. Cohen reported the City of San Rafael actually contracts for and provides a number of services to the San Rafael Sanitation District, so there are certain overhead expenses borne by the San Rafael Sanitation District that the City of San Rafael would no longer be able to charge for if the districts were consolidated. Mr. Cohen felt it was incumbent upon him, as a member of the Board of Directors of the San Rafael Sanitation District, to look at the best way to deliver services for the rate payers, noting that as a member of the San Rafael Sanitation District, the City of San Rafael would also have to look at that. He stated the driving force should not be whether or not it is going to cost $20,000 in lost income to the City of San Rafael, but what will be the overall service level that we will be providing. Mr. Cohen stated he would bring a report to the Council if this issue continues forward. Mayor Boro reported that when he speaks to various groups around the City and County, one of the issues that is always brought up by the taxpayers is the issue of consolidation of the more than fifty boards and agencies that are elected, such as school districts, fire districts, and sanitary districts. He felt that if we could deliver the same level of service, and perhaps effect a decrease to the rate payer, the structure should be evaluated. Public Works Director Bernardi reported that in his capacity as District Administrator for the Sanitation District, he had met with Ned Ongaro from Sanitary District No. One, and Phil Frye, Acting General Manager of Central Marin Sanitation Agency, and they analyzed the staffing arrangement under a consolidation scenario. He reported he and Mr. Frye will meet tomorrow to prepare a staff report for the Central Marin Sanitation Agency's Board of Directors, noting he felt there would be some interesting information that will be put together regarding this issue. Councilmember Heller asked if there were four different agencies that were being considered for consolidation, and Mr. Bernardi responded that was correct. Mr. Cohen stated this would clearly meet the goal of bringing some rationality to it, noting the Central Marin Sanitation Agency is made up of levels of complexity that we do not need in government, and stating he favors a directly elected Board of Directors to deal with the aspects of sanitary sewers in the region. DISCUSSION RE: BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS - File 9-1 Councilmember Phillips stated he has felt for some time that it would be appropriate for the Council to address some of the Boards and Commissions and provide them with direction. Noting the Budget Oversight Committee as an SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 15 SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 16 example, he stated the Council had established the Committee, but now needed to provide additional direction. He gave, as another example, the volunteer group, which he noted is a new entity and should have direction from the Council. Mr. Phillips stated he was most concerned with the Councilmembers having the opportunity to say to each other, "What is it we wish to accomplish, what are our priorities, and what are our thoughts on some of those issues?", and noted he did not feel they have had an opportunity to do this, but that he felt it would be beneficial. Mayor Boro reported he had discussed this with Councilmember Phillips, and did not feel it was a bad idea at all. He stated we had started a very positive process this year with the City Council/Management Team retreat, with another retreat scheduled for July. Mayor Boro stated he felt it would be more productive to wait until the new City Manager was in place, noting we are currently going through a transition with the City Manager's position, and stated he felt the City Manager would be the one he would look to in implementing such a program, and felt that if we start now, and then make a change, it would be unproductive. He stated if there was a specific issue, such as the volunteer coordinator, the Council could just take up the issue and discuss it. He did not feel there were any other issues at this time that would push the Council into a new process. Councilmember Cohen agreed the idea is a good one and something the Council needs to do, but felt it would be more beneficial to wait until the new City Manager was in place, because it really is the City Manager who is responsible, on a daily basis, for turning the policy into departmental actions and priorities. He stated a real understanding of the priorities of the Council, as a group, is needed by the City Manager. He stated it is a practical matter, pointing out the Council has a number of special things coming up, such as the process the Council will need to go through to interview and hire the next City Manager, stating this will consume a lot of energy over the next couple of months. He noted the Council is also planning to meet again with the Police Radio Committee, a not insignificant problem and an issue that must be addressed, and the Council will also be entering into labor negotiations. He stated the Council will be very busy with these issues for the next couple of months, noting the timing dovetails with Mayor Boro's suggestion that the Council wait until the new City Manager is in place before beginning this new process. Councilmember Phillips stated he could see the benefit of waiting and including the City Manager in this process and discussion, noting it would be beneficial for the Councilmembers, as a body, to sit around and have a collection of thoughts on some of these issues. Mr. Cohen agreed, stating he felt the Council should point out that any such meeting would be a public meeting, open to any members of the public or the press who wished to attend. Mayor Boro stated this issue might be incorporated into the interviews of the finalists for the City Manager position, asking them how they would assist the Council in orchestrating this process. There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Boro adjourned the meeting at 9:55 PM. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, City Clerk APPROVED THIS DAY OF 1996 MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL SRCC MINUTES (Regular) 3/4/96 Page 16