Loading...
2008/03/11 City Council Agenda PacketJudy Hauff City Clerk City Hall CITY OF ROHNERT PARK OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 6750 Commerce Boulevard - Rohnert Park, California 94928 Phone: (707) 588 -2227 FAX: (707) 588 -2274 WEB: vnvnvxpcity.org NOTICE of SPECIAL MEETING of the ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a SPECIAL MEETING of the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF ROHNERT PARK will be held on the 11`t' day of March, 2008, commencing at 5:00 p.m. at the Rohnert Park City Hall - Council Chambers 6750 Commerce Boulevard, Rohnert Park, California Said special meeting shall be for the purpose of the following: AGENDA 5:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING — Call to Order Roll Call (Breeze_ Smith_ Stafford_ Vidak - Martinez_ Mackenzie-J Unscheduled Public Appearances /Comments For public comment on items listed on the agenda, (limited to 3 -5 minutes per appearance and a 30 minute total time limit, or allocation of time based on number of speaker cards submitted) - PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD PRIOR TO SPEAKING - 1. TOUR OF NEW CITY HALL PROJECT SITE Council members will meet at City Hall Council Chambers, 6750 Commerce Boulevard, to walk to project site at 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park. ADJOURNMENT of Special Meeting no later than 6:00 p.m. This notice is posted in compliance with Section 54956 of the Government Code of the State of California. Dated: March 5, 2008 City Clerk Judy Hauff DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability which requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this City Council meeting, please contact the City Offices at (707) 588 -2227 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation by the City. Please make sure the City Manager's office is notified as soon as possible if you have a visual impairment requiring meeting materials to be produced in another format (Braille, audio -tape, etc.). Distribution of above Notice and Agenda as follows: POST: (1) City Hall (2) Public Safety Department (3) Community Center (4) Library via e -mail to (kathyd @sonoma.lib.ca.us) For R.P.Website Postings (www.rpcity.org) Terri Griffin, Deputy City Clerk VIA E -MAILS & /or FAXES to: cc: City Council Members Stephen R. Donley, City Manager Daniel Schwarz, Assistant City Manager Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney Benjamin D. Winig, Assistant City Attorney James J. Atencio, Assistant City Attorney Beth Lidster, Secretary/City Manager's Office Community Voice /Jud Snyder, Reporter via fax Community Voice /Yatin Shah, via e -mail Press Democrat /Bleys Rose, Reporter via e -mail JHiTG: 031 IOS AGENDANOTICE- SPECIAL- RPCityCouncil.doc (2) COURTESY AGENDA 03/11/08 cc: J. Hauff, City Clerk (2) T. Griffin, Deputy City Clerk K. Leonard, Shorthand Reporter Kathy Dennison RP Community Library 6250 Lynne Conde Way Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Jonathan White SSU — Associated Students Inc. white*on(&sonoma.edu Kelly Sutton c/o Linda Sutton 466 Landsdown Circle Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Sarah Shaeffer Sonoma County Asthma Coalition ncvolunteernalac.org NOTE: Place marker on agenda for each individual recipient. Linda Beltz 6182 San Bruno Court Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Holly Butler, Field Representative Senator Carole Migden Holly.Butler(&sen.ca.2ov Tina Montgomery tinam(&codding com Heather Hanson University Affairs Director SSU — Associated Students Inc. hansonheAsonoma.edu Mrs. Nancy Crawford 300 Enterprise Drive, Apt. #207 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Don Codding donc(&coddin com Page I of I Griffin, Terri From: Griffin, Terri Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 2:02 PM To: 'donc @codding.com'; 'tinam @codding.com' Subject: 3/11/08 Rohnert Park City Council Meeting - Mayor's Presentation to Sonoma Mountain Village Attachments: 031108 AGENDA- RPCity Council- CDC- RPFA.pdf Mr. Codding & Ms. Montgomery: Attached for your information is the March 11, 2008, City Council Agenda, which includes presentation of a resolution by Mayor Mackenzie recognizing the endorsement of Sonoma Mountain Village as the first One Planet Community in North America (see Item No. 3). Congratulations! We look forward to seeing you on March 11tH Terri A. Griffin Deputy City Clerk CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 (707) 588 -2225 g (707) 588 -2274 ® tgriffin @rpcity.orq 3/5/2008 Christmann, Melanie From: Christmann, Melanie Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 2:01 PM To: 'whitejon @sonoma.edu'; 'hansonhe @sonoma.edu' Subject: Updated City Council Agenda for 3/11/08 Attachments: 031108 AGENDA- RPCity Council- CDC- RPFA.pdf Hello, Please disregard the last email as there was a mistake that needed to be corrected. Attached is the City Council Agenda for March 11, 2008. If you have any questions, you can call Terri Griffin at (707) 588 -2225. Thank you, City Clerk l c rnp City of Rohnert Park 6750 Commerce Blvd Rohnert Park, CA 94928 707 588 -2227 7077- 588 -2274 Page 1 of 1 Griffin, Terri From: Griffin, Terri Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 2:31 PM To: 'Butler, Holly' Subject: March 11, 2008, Rohnert Park City Council Meeting Attachments: 031108 AGENDA- RPCity Council- CDC- RPFA.pdf Holly: Attached is the March 11th Rohnert Park City Council Meeting Agenda. Please note that Senator Migden's presentation is listed as Item No. 1. Thanks, Terri Terri A. Griffin Deputy City Clerk CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 (707) 588 -2225 r (707) 588 -2274 ® tgriffin &pcity.org 3/5/2008 Page I of I Griffin, Terri From: Griffin, Terri Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 4:13 PM To: 'ncvolunteer @alac.org' Cc: Schwarz, Dan; Espino, Sonia Subject: Rohnert Park City Council Meeting - 3/8/08 - Presentation by Sonoma County Asthma Coalition Attachments: 031108 AGENDA- RPCity Council- CDC- RPFA.pdf; Item No. 7.pdf Sarah: Attached for your information is the March 11th Rohnert Park City Council agenda and the staff report for this item. (Please note that your presentation is listed as Item No. 7.) We will have a laptop and projector set up for your use in the Council Chamber. In addition, we would request a hard copy of your presentation for retention in the City Clerk's meeting records. If you would prefer to send it to me via e- mail, I would be happy to print a copy for that purpose. If you need any further assistance, you may contact me at 588 -2225 or Beth Lidster at 588 -2226. Thanks, Terri Terri A. Griffin Deputy City Clerk CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 (707) 588 -2225 8 (707) 588 -2274 ® tgriffin @rpcity.org 3/6/2008 CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: ��� /U� Item #: Name: Address: J--7 QL,-- ?� 6111- Phone: 70 TOPIC: S; d/_ - Brief Summary of Com e ts: G, e IS See Reverse —> Clearing the Decreasing Secondhanc in Multi -Unit Housing A FREE forum for landlords, housing a attorneys, county and city policy makers, planners Er others who want to learn about • the health effects of drifting secondhand smoke in the home • the economic impact of tobacco smoke on the home • successful strategies to protect renters from secondhand smoke • legal aspects of voluntary smoke -free housing policies • successful public policy measures to protect non - smokers in their homes When: Thursday, March 20, 2008 1:00p.m. - 4 :00P.m. Where: Sonoma County Health Services Conference Center 475 Aviation Blvd., Ste. 230 Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Registration is required To register go to www.nccwb.org and click on Special Events. Follow registration instructions for the Clearing the Air forum. Or call Michelle at 575 -6043 ext. 19. Speakers Mary Maddux- Gonzalez, MD, MPH Sonoma County Health Officer: Secondhand Smoke, a Public Health Issue Warin,J. Parker, CLU, ChFC Councilmember and former mayor of the Town of Windsor: Protecting the Community Dian Kiser, PhD Education Er Advocacy Specialist, California Clean Air Program1Co- Director, RESPECT: Smoke -free Housing - Good for Business fr Good for the Community Panel Members - Moderator, Dian Kiser Robin Salsburg,,J.D. - Staff Attorney for California's Technical Assistance Legal Center. Expert on legal aspects of addressing drifting secondhand smoke in multi -unit housing Robin Schmitt, Vice President of Operations for USA Multifamily Management Property management company for Terracina at Santa Rosa - A 100` smoke -free community Dave Osborn, WLS, CMR, CAPS, CDRT - Paul Davis Restoration Getting Rid of Smoke Odor - Tricks of the Trade Dave Warden, Former Belmont City Councilmember Co- sponsor of the city's groundbreaking ordinance regulating smoking in multi -unit housing Sponsored by: �s dMIM MA COUNTY .�' �y Sm �� northern California SONO}[.,, r ,p*'� (• •. Center for Well-Being Mt ma ° 4.��C�Iflion COALITION FOR A 5 "° TObACCO,FREE SONOMA COUNTY Healthy Choices for Landlords & Tenants How to renovate and ��." W �- . w I,- :3 prepare rental units using envi cc: cc: Americans spend approximately 90% of their t rpge: indoors, where air quality can be much worse File: than outside air quality. More than 1 out of 5 children in Sonoma County have been diagnosed with asthma, which can be triggered by poor indoor air quality in the home. Creating a healthier home environment for tenants can help retain tenants and reduce complaints. Common Indoor Pollutants What can landlords do to improve Indoor Air Quality when preparing a unit for rental? • Replace old carpets with healthy flooring • Use low VOC indoor paints • Perform maintenance on heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) systems • Use green cleaning methods The city of Rohnert Park encourages all rental owners and managers to utilize the following recommendations to improve indoor air quality in your rental units. ucts and practices mendations Local Retailers and Resources: These are just a sample of businesses and resources. Call your contractor and suppliers to discuss product choices. No- premium low VOC paints, sealants and adhesives: Home Depot, Lowes Premium low VOC paints: Most paint stores carry low VOC paints, including Frazee Paint (707) 585- 8705, Kelly -Moore (707) 584 -4012, Sherwin - Williams (707) 542 -2192 Flooring: Carpet padding that has been factory off - gassed is available at Home Depot. Low VOC and no- adhesive Pergo laminate is available at Lowes. Conklin Bros. carries several types green flooring and has a recycling program. (707) 592 -4981 www.conklinbrosfloors.com. Flor, www.flor.com, easy to replace single carpet squares recycled content, low VOC and no adhesive. Mead Clark (707) 576 -3333 carries FSC and reclaimed wood. Rugworks (707) 584- 7847offers bamboo, linoleum, CRI carpet and reclaimed wood. Home Equity r Energy Loan: Low interest rate loans are available for green upgrades through Exchange, First Community, North Coast, and Sonoma Banks. www.greenenergyloan.org Great info on product options: www.greenbuildermag.com Green Seal certifies less and non toxic alternative products www.geenseal.com Multiunit Housing green building resource: www.stopwaste.orq /home /index.asp ?pa ec e=291 Green Affordable Housing Coalition: http: // frontierassoc .net /greenaffordablehousing /lnde x.shtml The City of Rohnert Park Community Development Department has resources to assist city dwellers with going green. Contact Sonia (707) 588 -2240 to obtain a copy of The Weekend Warriors Guide to Making a Greener and More Energy Efficient Home Prepared by Sonoma County Asthma Coalition, www.sonomaasthma.org (707) 527 -5864 SONOMACOUNTY Asthma a[it an M M 00 O O N zz 0 O 9 ITEM NO.3 F. oa �a .N Q w U O �U s7 .Q b s. 0 i ev U s� ca 2� A Council X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 315108 -TG opyt : o to vii c �� C''� (Lf tU U N C O O C Y 0 0 ui :3 ti o W > a) O `= C U CD = z ' o -a O O L lA E C� 'a N E Q� O O U �C�a4L �O a? � EC Co�oo,- C N N 'a O (� .O -0 U O U O cc = -C L- N o -0 vi Q O 8 ,. o ° CL C;) O N (Li E � 2 L �% 0 C EM U N O O O O � O O O Cn 0 (n C r- z E., W�. n- �C,,��5.r- =C o z �,W Lrn� a�L o���..� �x n C a cri -0 U O N N 00 U} Q O O a L W c cu Ca 44- U ? U 4- N N O 0 Cr L M O to M Q to tQ M O + � s (n U ? oE L O E v- (� L O U C i O � 00 O -F J C 0 0 O C o cn oC: U °mot MLOo O «. CO Z F. oa �a .N Q w U O �U s7 .Q b s. 0 i ev U s� ca 2� A Council X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 315108 -TG opyt : E-F H A >W.,I WI Et d � O N �W x U o d W a, CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CONCURRENT MEETING MINUTES FOR: City Council Community Development Commission Rohnert Park Financing Authority February 26, 2008 Tuesday The Concurrent Meetings of the City of Rohnert Park for the City Council, the Community Development Commission and the Rohnert Park Financing Authority met this date for a Regular Meeting to commence at 6:00 p.m. at the Rohnert Park City Hall, 6750 Commerce Boulevard, Rohnert Park, with Mayor Mackenzie presiding. REGULAR MEETING Call to Order: Mayor Mackenzie called the Regular Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Roll Call: Breeze, Smith, Stafford, Vidak- Martinez, Mackenzie Staff present for all or part of the Regular Meeting: City Manager Donley, Assistant City Attorney Winig, Assistant City Manager Schwarz, Director of Public Works /City Engineer Jenkins, Management Analyst Tacata, Deputy City Clerk Griffin, and Videographer Beltz. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Jennifer Herrera and Monica Guitierrez, students from John Reed Elementary School, were not present. Mayor Mackenzie led the Pledge of Allegiance. 1. SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONS: Mayor's Presentation of Resolution No. 2008 -17 Commending United Parcel Service (UPS) for Use of the Zap Car in Day -to -Day Delivery Operations and Acknowledging UPS Employee and Rohnert Park Resident Sherie Almond: Mayor Mackenzie READ AND PRESENTED Sherie Almond, UPS Driver, and Josh Young, Petaluma UPS Operations Manager, with Resolution No. 2008 -17. 2. SONOMA STATE UNIVERSITY (SSU) STUDENT REPORT: Mayor Mackenzie stated that Heather Hanson, SSU Associated Students, Inc. Legislative Representative, was not present at this time, but that she may show up later in the meeting to provide a report. City of Rohnert Park CONCURRENT MEETINGS At4enda (2 of 7) February 26, 2008 for City Council /Community Developinent Commission /Rohnert Park Financing Authority 3. UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES /COMMENTS: a. Linda Beltz expressed concerns about the City's water - billing practice of rounding off to the nearest 500 gallons. Staff addressed Ms. Beltz's concerns, and Council CONCURRED to refer said matter to the Water Issues Subcommittee for review. b. Rich Steiner of Concerned Citizens of Rohnert Park (C -CORP) DISTRIBUTED AND REVIEWED announcements regarding C- CORP's first annual Rohnert Park Green Day, April 19, 2008, 11 -3 p.m. at the Rohnert Park Community Center Courtyard, and he INVITED Mayor Mackenzie to introduce 6"' District State Assemblyman Jared Huffman. At the request of Mr. Steiner, Council CONCURRED to direct staff to work with C -CORP regarding a loan of 30 tables for the event. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR: Council Member Breeze signified removal of the City Council Portion of Special Concurrent Meetings — February 12, 2008, and the City Council Portion of Regular Concurrent Meetings — February 12, 2008, as well as Resolution 2008 -33. Assistant City Attorney Winig noted that on the signature line on the Settlement Agreement approved by Resolution 2008 -31, the signature indicated for "Mayor" shall be changed to "City Manager." 2. Approval of City Bills /Demands for Payment in the amount of $620,023.49 3. Resolutions for Adoption: 2008 -25 Calling for Sealed Proposals for Janitorial Maintenance for Various City Facilities 2008 -26 Calling for Sealed Bids for the Landscape Maintenance Services Contract — Rohnert Park North 2008 -27 Calling for Sealed Bids for the Landscape Maintenance Services Contract — Rohnert Park South 2008 -28 Authorizing and Approving an Agreement with RMC Water and Environment to Develop and Implement an Outreach and Financial Assistance Program for Sewer Lateral Inspection and Repair 2008 -29 Authorizing and Approving Amendment Number Three to the Agreement for Services with ESA Regarding the Environmental Impact Report for the Northeast Area Specific Plan 2008 -30 Approving Various Classifications and Fees for the Use of City -Owned Athletic Fields 2008 -31 Authorizing and Approving a Settlement Agreement and Release between O.W.L. Foundation and City Of Rohnert Park Relating to O. W.L. Foundation v. City Of Rohnert Park (Sonoma County Superior Court No. SCV- 241090) 2008 -32 Rejecting the Claim of Stacy Lindell [Alleged Tire Damage from Construction Site] City of Rohnert Park CONCURRENT MEETINGS Agenda (3 of 7) February 26, 2008 for City Council /Conannunity Development Commission/Rohnert Park Financing Authority Upon MOTION by Vice Mayor Stafford, seconded by Council Member Vidak- Martinez, and UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED, reading was waived, and the Consent Calendar, with the exception of the City Council Portion of Special Concurrent Meetings — February 12, 2008, and the City Council Portion of Regular Concurrent Meetings — February 12, 2008, as well as Resolution 2008 -33, was ADOPTED. Items for consideration: 1. Approval of Minutes for: City Council Portion of Special Concurrent Meetings — February 12, 2008 City Council Portion of Regular Concurrent Meetings — February 12, 2008 Council Member Breeze made a MOTION calling for the inclusion of more detail in the February 12`x' minutes regarding her inquiry during approval of the Consent Calendar about the Public Safety Bay /tribal funds discussion at the January 22nd City Council meeting. Said motion FAILED for lack of a second. On page 3 of the February 12, 2008 City Council portion of the Regular Concurrent Meetings minutes, under "Items for consideration," first sentence, Council Member Breeze indicated that "Council Member Breeze" should be amended to read "Council Member Vidak- Martinez." Upon MOTION by Vice Mayor Stafford, seconded by Council Member Breeze, the City Council Portion of Special Concurrent Meetings — February 12, 2008, and the City Council Portion of Regular Concurrent Meetings — February 12, 2008, were UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AS AMENDED. 2008 -33 Recognizing the Endorsement of Sonoma Mountain Village as the First One Planet Community in North America In response to Council Member Breeze's concerns about certain wording in the resolution, Assistant City Attorney Winig recommended amending language in the resolution to make the statements conditional. Upon MOTION by Council Member Breeze, seconded by Council Member Smith, and UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED after brief Council discussion, reading was waived and Resolution 2008 -33 was APPROVED AS AMENDED per staff recommendation. 5. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE UPDATE: Consideration of Proposed Increases to Certain Engineering Department Fees: 1. Staff Report: Management Analyst Tacata reviewed the contents of the Staff Report, and she responded to Council questions and comments. 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Mayor Mackenzie opened the Public Hearing at 6:33 p.m. There being no members of the public interested in speaking, Mayor Mackenzie closed the Public Hearing at 6:34 p.m. City of Rohnert Park CONCURRENT MEETINGS Agenda (4 of 7) February 26, 2008 for City Council /Community Development Commission/Rohnert Park Financing Authority 3. Resolution for Adoption: 2008 -34 Approving the Updated Engineering Fee Schedule Upon MOTION by Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Breeze, and UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED, reading was waived and Resolution 2008 -34 was ADOPTED. AGENDA CHANGE: With the arrival of Ms. Hanson, Mayor Mackenzie called for the SSU Report. 2. SONOMA STATE UNIVERSITY (SSU) STUDENT REPORT: [Taken out of agenda order] Heather Hanson, University Affairs Director, DISTRIBUTED copies of The Star following a brief report regarding activities at SSU, including efforts to prevent drunk driving with a Casey's Pledge event; formation of a risk management team; passage of a resolution regarding the Northern Illinois University shooting tragedy; upcoming performances of "The Vagina Monologues "; and the "World of Work" Fair scheduled for February 28. 6. SEWER RATES INITIATIVE: Consideration of California Elections Code Section 9212 Report pertaining to the proposed "Initiative Measure to Reduce Rohnert Park Sewer Rates ": 1. Staff Report: City Manager Donley reviewed the contents of the Staff Report, and staff responded to Council questions and comments. 2. Public Comments: None. 3. Council discussion /direction: Council discussion concluded with a MOTION from Council Member Smith, seconded by Council Member Breeze, (1) to direct staff to prepare an impact report in accordance with California Elections Code Section 9212, for distribution as soon as legally possible, to cover all potential impacts, including the health and safety implications of an under - funded sewer system infrastructure; and (2) to direct the City Attorney to review the factual underpinnings of the ballot initiative, as presented, for legal sufficiency. 7. COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND /OR OTHER REPORTS: 1. Water Issues Subcommittee meeting, 2/13: Mayor Mackenzie provided a brief report. 2. Creek Master Plan Subcommittee meeting, 2/13: Vice Mayor Stafford and Mayor Mackenzie provided a brief report. 3. Mayors' and Councilmembers' Association meeting, 2/14: Mayor Mackenzie indicated Council would cover this item later on in Council Committee Reports. 4. Santa Rosa Plain Conservation Strategy Implementation (California Tiger Salamander) Committee meeting, 2/20: Mayor Mackenzie provided a brief report. 5. Sonoma County Waste Management Agency meeting, 2/20: Council Member Smith provided a brief report. City of Rohnert Park CONCURRENT MEETINGS Ay-enda (5 of 7) February 26 2008 for City Council /Community Development ConimhvsionlRohnert Park Financing Authority 3. Mayors' and Councilmembers' Association meeting, 2/14: [Out of agenda order] Mayor Mackenzie and Council Members Vidak - Martinez and Smith provided a brief report. Council Member Vidak - Martinez noted that she will be representing Rohnert Park at bimonthly meetings of the Gang Prevention Task Force at the request of Santa Rosa Council Member Jane Bender. 6. Other informational reports, if any: Councilmember Smith: Other reports, if any: Association for the Arts (AFTA) Art Show, 2/19; Committee on the Shelterless (COTS) Mary Isaak's Celebration, 2/23; "Turning Lives Around Tour," 2/21, with DISTRIBUTED flyer. Council Member Breeze: Other- reports, if any: None. Council Member Vidak-Martinez: American Legion Speech Contest Judging, 2/16; North Bay Real Estate Association meeting, 2/19; Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster Seminar, 2/20; Association for the Arts (AFTA) Art Show, 2/21; Committee on the Shelterless (COTS) Mary Isaak's Celebration, 2/23. Other reports, if any: American Legion Speech Contest Judging, 2/16; North Bay Real Estate Association meeting, 2/19; Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster Seminar, 2/20; AFTA Art Show, 2/21; COTS Mary Isaaks Celebration, 2/23. Vice -Mayor Stafford: Other reports, if any: AFTA Art Show, 2/21; Senior Extravaganza; Kaiser's Fifth Anniversary Celebration. Mayor Mackenzie: Other reports, if any: Solar Sonoma County, 2/21. Future meetings: Russian River Watershed Association, 2/28; upcoming meetings with various businesses in Rohnert Park; meeting with Sonoma State University Vice President Dan Condron, 2/27; Miss Sonoma County event, 3/1; and Sonoma County Adult and Youth Development (SCAYD) Volunteer of the Year event, 3/1. 8. COMMUNICATIONS: Letter from Workforce Investment Board (WIB) noting the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors' appointment of City Manager Donley to the WIB: Council Member Smith acknowledged City Manager Donley's appointment. Letters regarding state budget impacts on state parks and universities: At the suggestion of Council Member Smith, Council CONCURRED to authorize City Manager Donley and Mayor Mackenzie to send a letter to the Governor regarding said proposed cuts. Correspondence from Jonnie Perrot regarding Disaster Planning re Mobilehome Parks: Council Member Smith called attention to said matter. Council CONCURRED (1) to direct staff to research the City's legal authority to impose temporary rent reductions for mobilehome residents in the event of an emergency; and (2) to report their findings to Council for further direction. 9. MATTERS FROM /FOR COUNCIL: 1. Calendar of Events: Document provided in Council agenda packets. Mayor Mackenzie highlighted two meetings: General Plan Update Steering Committee meeting on 2/28, 2 -4 p.m. at Spreckels and open to the public; the City Council's special meeting with Dr. Mathis regarding budget, economic development, and Council interactions on 3/10, 10 -4 p.m. at the Community Center. City of Rohnert Park CONCURRENT MEETINGS Agenda (6 of 7) February 26 2008 for City Council /Community Development Commission /Rohnert Park Financing Authority 2. City Council Agenda Forecast: Document provided in Council agenda packets. 3. Consideration of Resolution Supporting Extended Producer Responsibility Council Member Smith explained the letter from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), and staff responded to Council questions and comments. Council direction: Council CONCURRED (1) to place the proposed resolution regarding Extended Producer Responsibility on the March 11'h City Council Consent Calendar; and (2) to discuss electronic devices during the review of Council Protocols to be considered at the April 8`' City Council meeting. 4. Other informational items, if any: None. 10. CITY MANAGER'S /CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS: 1. Update regarding Filing of Community Development Commission Audit: City Manager Donley provided an update regarding the filing of the Community Development Commission audit by the deadline set by the State Controller's Office. 2. Other informational items, if any: None. 11. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. ADJOURNMENT: Mayor Mackenzie adjourned the City Council meeting at 7:44 p.m. to consecutively and separately convene the meetings of the Community Development Commission and the Rohnert Park Financing Authority. MINUTES FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Tuesday, February 26, 2008 Call to Order: 7:45 p.m. Roll Call: Breeze, Smith, Stafford, Vidak- Martinez, Mackenzie Also present: Executive Director Donley, Assistant General Counsel Winig, Deputy Secretary Griffin, and Videographer Beltz Unscheduled public appearances: None. 1. CDC CONSENT CALENDAR: Approval of Meeting Minutes for: CDC Portion of Regular Concurrent Meetings — February 12, 2008 2. Approval of CDC Bills /Demands for Payment in the amount of $125, 879.97 City of Rohnert Park CONCURRENT MEETINGS Ap_enda (7 of 7) February 26, 2008 for City Council /Community Development Commission /Rohnert Park Financing Authority A MOTION was made by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Vidak- Martinez, to approve the Consent Calendar. After the motion, reading was waived, and the CDC Consent Calendar, as outlined in the agenda, was UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. 2. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, Chairperson Mackenzie adjourned the CDC meeting at 7:45 p.m. MINUTES FOR THE ROHNERT PARK FINANCING AUTHORITY Tuesday, February 26, 2008 Call to Order: 7:45 p.m. Roll Call: Breeze, Smith, Stafford, Vidak- Martinez, Mackenzie Also present: Executive Director Donley, Assistant General Counsel Winig, Deputy Secretary Griffin, and Videographer Beltz Unscheduled public appearances: None. 1. RPFA CONSENT CALENDAR: Approval of Minutes for: RPFA Portion of Regular Concurrent Meetings — February 12, 2008 A MOTION was made by Member Breeze, seconded by Member Vidak- Martinez, to approve the RPFA Consent Calendar. After the motion, reading was waived, and the RPFA Consent Calendar, as outlined in the agenda, was UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. 2. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, Chairperson Mackenzie adjourned the meeting of the RPFA at 7:46 p.m. *Katy Leonard Certified Shorthand Reporter C.S.R. 11599 *(Minutes written in absentia) Jake Mackenzie Mayor City of Rohnert Park CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BILLS FOR APPROVAL March 11, 2008 REVISION NO. 1 175894 - 176286 Dated February 27 - March 5, 2008 Eastside Trunk Sewer Project Phase I - Proj. No. 2004 -05 North Bay Construction Bank of Petaluma Retention Escrow Account RECEIVED MAR 12 2008 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK l Council: -� Copy to: Coy to: $2,859,347.23 $1,713,539.52 $190,393.28 TOTAL $4,763,280.03 bi CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BILL$ FOR APPROVAL March 11, 2008 REVISION NO. 1 175894 - 176286 Dated February 27 - March 5, 2008 Eastside Trunk Sewer Project Phase I - Prof No, 2004 -05 North Bay Construction Bank of Petaluma Retention Escrow Account RECEIVED MAR 12 2008 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Council: X� to: to: $2,859,347.23 $1,713,539.52 $190,393.28 TOTAL $4,763,280.03 61 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BILLS FOR APPROVAL March 11, 2008 175894 - 176286 Dated February 27 - March 5, 2008 AL Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3 /5 /0 8-TG Copy to: /59,k34'7.23 $2,859,347.23 Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3 15 /08 -TG Copy to: RESOLUTION NO. 2008-35 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REJECTING THE CLAIM OF JESSICA HUSSEY [Alleged Automobile Damage from Construction Site] BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that that Claim for alleged damages dated February 12, 2008 and received February 19, 2008 is hereby rejected. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 11th day of March, 2008. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Mayor City Clerk Ref: Claim No. 2008 -04 Agenda Packet Preparation TIMELINES for Regular City Council Meetings held on the 2"d & 4h Tuesdays of each month: Resolutions (other than standard formats for authorizations and approvals), Ordinances & Agreements to Assistant City Attorney via email for review and approval as to form DUE no later than NOON Three (3) Mondays prior to Council meeting date Agenda Items w /attachments via email and hard copy to City Clerk DUE no later than NOON Two (2) Mondays prior to Council meeting date Agenda Draft review by Mayor, City Manager, Assistant City Attorney, City Clerk no later than Tuesday morning One (1) week prior to Council meeting date Agenda Packets distributed to City Council and Agendas posted/distributed/mailed on Wednesday afternoon One (1) week prior to Council meeting date in compliance with Rohnert Park Municipal Code Section 2.08.050 {This section for City Clerk Use Only} RESO. NO. 2008-36 Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3/5108 -TG Copy to: CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT Meeting Date: March 11, 2008 Department: Public Safety Submitted By: Thomas R. Bullard, Director Submittal Date: February 21, 2008 Agenda Title: Sonoma County Public Safety Joint Powers Authority Requested Council Action: Consent Item Summary: The Public Safety Department entered into a cooperative agreement as a member of the Sonoma County Law Enforcement Consortium (SCLEC) on July 1, 1997 for the purposes of securing grant funding to purchase an integrated, county -wide system of Computer Assisted Dispatching/Records Management System/Mobile Data Communications (CAD/RMS/MDC) technology through a county- wide agreement. The City of Santa Rosa acted as the lead agency in this first agreement. Upon expiration of the first agreement, the SCLEC entered into a second cooperative agreement for the purpose of entering into and managing contracts on behalf of the SCLEC — again, the City of Santa Rosa acted as lead agency on behalf of the SCLEC. The second cooperative agreement had an initial four -year term, and thereafter, was ongoing and continuing, unless or until it was amended or suspended. The members of the SCLEC desire to continue to operate, maintain and improve the System and add additional members by entering into a new agreement establishing a separate Joint Powers Authority entity called the Sonoma County Public Safety Consortium pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Sections 6500, et seq. It is recommended by the Public Safety Department that the City Council, by resolution, authorize the Mayor to sign the Joint Powers Agreement that establishes a separate public agency to operate and maintain a public safety communication system in Sonoma County. Enclosures: Staff Report from Director Bullard; Draft Resolution; Joint Powers Agreement Establishing a Separate Public Agency to Operate and Maintain a Public Safety Communication System in Sonoma County CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: -_0 Consent Item ( ) Regular Time . 7\pproval ()Public Hearing Required ( ) Not Recommended O Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by Council ( ) City Comments: The JPA document before the Council is the product of a lengthy collaborative draft and review process between the managers and public safety executives of the member agencies. As the CAD /RMS/MDC project has evolved and grown, a need has developed for greater formality in the relationship between the participating agencies. A JPA was selected as the vehicle to elevate this partnership because JPA law establishes clear governing authority over the operation of the CAD /RMS system and offers direct accountability for its management. A JPA also centralizes risk associated with the system. The day -to -day management and direction of the JPA will be the responsibility of the public safety executives or their designees. The board of the JPA shall be comprised of the managers of the member agencies. The JPA board will adopt a budget and provide direction. There is an opt -out provision that the board of a member agency may exercise. - Dan Schwarz, Asst. City Manager City Manager's Signature: Date: A (ReviseB"0105)7) JH:TG- S:05 -b City of Rohnert Park DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY MEMORANDUM TO: Steve Donley, City Manager DATE: February 21, 2008 FROM: Thomas R. Bullard Director of Public Safety SUBJECT., Joint Powers Agreement Establishing a Separate Public Agency to Operate and Maintain a Public Safety Communication System in Sonoma County ISSUE Shall the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park authorize, by resolution, the Mayor to sign the Joint Powers Agreement that establishes a separate public agency to operate and maintain a public safety communication system in Sonoma County? BACKGROUND The Public Safety Department entered into a cooperative agreement as a member of the Sonoma County Law Enforcement Consortium (SCLEC) on July 1, 199Y. SCLEC was formed for the purpose of securing grant funding to purchase an integrated, county -wide system of Computer Assisted Dispatching /Records Management System /Mobile Data Communications (CAD /RMS /MDC) technology through an agreement entitled, "County Wide Multi - Agency Agreement for Procurement of Computer Assisted Dispatch, Records Management Systems and Mobile Data Communications ". The City of Santa Rosa, on behalf of the SCLEC, successfully obtained grant funding and subsequently purchased an integrated public safety communication system that provides CAD /RMS /MDC technology (System) for its members. Upon expiration of the first cooperative agreement, the members of the SCLEC entered into. the "Second Cooperative Agreement for County Wide Multi- Agency Procurement of Computer Assisted Dispatch, Records Management Systems and Mobile Data Communications" (Second Cooperative Agreement), which continued to provide for the City of Santa Rosa to act as Lead Agency for the purpose of entering into and managing contracts on behalf of the SCLEC members, to apply for and administer the grant, and to bill the members for costs associated with purchasing and maintaining the System. The Second Cooperative Agreement had an initial four -year term, and thereafter was ongoing and continuing, unless or until it was amended or superseded. The members of the SCLEC desire to continue to operate, maintain and improve the System and add additional members by entering into a new agreement establishing a separate Joint Powers Authority entity called the Sonoma County Public Safety Consortium (SCPSC) pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Sections 6500, et seq. The Members of SCPSC include the Cities of Cotati, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sonoma, Town of Windsor, County of Sonoma, the Sonoma County Junior College District (SRCCD), and the Redwood Empire Dispatch Communications Authority ( REDCOM), a joint powers authority agency, as well as future members admitted according to the provisions of the Agreement. ANALYSIS 1. The Joint Powers Authority entity called the Sonoma County Public Safety Consortium (SCPSC) will begin operating as a separate agency on July 1, 2008. 2. As of July 1, 2008, the City of Santa Rosa will no longer serve as the Lead Agency for the purpose of entering into and managing contracts and applying for and administering grants, and will no longer provide procurement and billing services to members for the costs associated with purchasing and maintaining the System. 3. The Sonoma County Public Safety Consortium (SCPSC) will operate under an approved fiscal year budget adopted by the Board of Directors comprised of the City Manager from each Member agency, the Sonoma County Administrator, an appointed representative of the REDCOM Board of Directors, and the President of the Sonoma County Junior College District, or their respective designees. 4. Members shall share the entire operating cost of the SCPSC. 5. The budget for fiscal year 2008 -2009 was approved by the members of the SCLEC on February 15, 2008. 6. Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety's estimated assessment of $388,274 for Fiscal Year 2008 -09 under the Joint Powers Agreement is a 10.04% decrease from the assessment for 2007 -08 under the Second Cooperative Agreement. 7. The Public Safety's assessment for Fiscal Year 2008 -09 will be appropriated in Account No. 2200 -6101 (contractual services) through the Department's budget process for Fiscal Year 2008 -09. 8. The Proposed Joint Powers Agreement has been reviewed and approved by our City Attorney. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Public Safety Department that the City Council, by resolution, authorize the Mayor to sign the Joint Powers Agreement that establishes a separate public agency to operate and maintain a public safety communication system in Sonoma County. Attachments: Joint Powers Agreement Establishing a Separate Public Agency to Operate and Maintain a Public Safety Communication System in Sonoma County RESOLUTION NO. 2008-36 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT THAT ESTABLISHES A SEPARATE PUBLIC AGENCY TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM IN SONOMA COUNTY WHEREAS, the Sonoma County Law Enforcement Consortium ( "SCLEC ") was formed effective July 1, 1997, for the purpose of securing grant funding to purchase an integrated, county -wide system of CAD/RMS/MDC technology through an agreement entitled "County Wide Multi - Agency Agreement for Procurement of Computer Assisted Dispatch, Records Management Systems and Mobile Data Communications" ( "First Cooperative Agreement "); WHEREAS, the City of Santa Rosa, on behalf of the SCLEC, successfully obtained grant funding and subsequently purchased an integrated public safety communication system (System) that provides CAD/RMS /MDC technology for its members; WHEREAS, upon expiration of the First Cooperative Agreement, the members of the SCLEC entered into the "Second Cooperative Agreement for County Wide Multi- Agency Procurement of Computer Assisted Dispatch, Records Management Systems and Mobile Data Communications" ( "Second Cooperative Agreement "), which continued to provide for the City of Santa Rosa to act as Lead Agency for the purpose of entering into and managing contracts on behalf of the SCLEC members, to apply for and administer the grant, and to bill the members for costs associated with purchasing and maintaining the System; WHEREAS, the Second Cooperative Agreement had an initial four -year term, and thereafter was ongoing and continuing, unless or until it was amended or superseded; WHEREAS, the members of the SCLEC desire to continue to operate, maintain and improve the System and add additional members by entering into a new agreement establishing a separate Joint Powers Authority entity called the Sonoma County Public Safety Consortium ( SCPSC) pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Sections 6500, et seq.; WHEREAS, SCPSC members will include the Cities of Cotati, Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sonoma, Town of Windsor, County of Sonoma, the Sonoma County Junior College District, and REDCOM, a joint powers authority agency, (individually referred to hereinafter as "Member Agency "), as well as future members admitted according to the provisions of the Joint Powers Agreement Establishing a Separate Public Agency to Operate and Maintain a Public Safety Communication System in Sonoma County ( "Joint Powers Agreement "); WHEREAS, the SCPSC will operate under an approved fiscal year budget adopted by the Board of Directors comprised of the City Manager from each Member Agency, the Sonoma County Administrator, an appointed representative of the REDCOM Board of Directors, and the President of the Sonoma County Junior College District, or their respective designees; WHEREAS, Members shall share in the entire cost for the operation of the SCPSC pursuant to the terms in the Joint Power Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety's assessment for Fiscal Year 2008 -09 will be appropriated in Account No. 2200 -6101 (contractual services) through the Public Safety's budget process for Fiscal Year 2008 -09. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does authorize and approve the Joint Powers Agreement Establishing a Separate Public Agency to Operate and Maintain a Public Safety Communication System in Sonoma County. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed to execute documents pertaining to same for and on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 1 lth day of March, 2008. ATTEST: City Clerk (2) CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Mayor JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING A SEPARATE PUBLIC AGENCY TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATION SYSTEM IN SONOMA COUNTY The purpose of this Joint Powers Agreement ( "Agreement ") is to create a separate public agency to operate, maintain and improve a public safety communication and data management system currently comprised of Computer Aided Dispatch ( "CAD "), Records Management System ( "RMS "), and Mobile Data Computing ( "MDC ") technology among the undersigned county, cities, districts, and other public entities, all of whom are collectively referred to in this Agreement as "Members ". RECITALS WHEREAS, the Sonoma County Law Enforcement Consortium ( "SCLEC ") was formed effective July 1, 1997, for the purpose of securing grant funding to purchase an integrated, county -wide system of CAD /RMS /MDC technology through an agreement entitled, "County Wide Multi - Agency Agreement for Procurement of Computer Assisted Dispatch, Records Management Systems and Mobile Data Communications" (hereinafter, the "First Cooperative Agreement "); WHEREAS, the City of Santa Rosa, on behalf of the SCLEC, successfully obtained grant funding and subsequently purchased an integrated public safety communication system that provides CAD /RMS/MDC technology (hereinafter, the "SYSTEM ") for its members; WHEREAS, upon expiration of the First Cooperative Agreement, the members of the SCLEC entered into the "Second Cooperative Agreement for County Wide Multi - Agency Procurement of Computer Assisted Dispatch, Records Management Systems and Mobile Data Communications" (hereinafter the "Second Cooperative Agreement "), which continued to provide for the City of Santa Rosa to act as "Lead Agency" for the purpose of entering into and managing contracts on behalf of the SCLEC members, to apply for and administer the grant, and to bill the members for costs associated with purchasing and maintaining the SYSTEM; WHEREAS, by its terms, the Second Cooperative Agreement had an initial four -year term, and thereafter was ongoing and continuing, unless or until it was amended or superseded; and WHEREAS, the members of the SCLEC desire to continue to operate, maintain and improve the SYSTEM and add additional members by entering into a new agreement establishing a separate Joint Powers Authority entity pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Sections 6500, et seq. (hereinafter, the "JPA Act "). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants contained herein, the Members and parties hereto agree as follows: 1 AGREEMENT 1. General Purpose of Agreement. The purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the terms and conditions under which the Members will operate, maintain and improve a public safety communication and data management system through a joint powers authority. 2. Effect of Previous Agreements. The Second Cooperative Agreement is hereby terminated and superseded, except that all financial obligations the parties incurred under that agreement (up to the Effective Date of this Agreement) continue to remain in full force and effect. 3. Joint Powers Authority Entity Created. Pursuant to the JPA Act, the Members create a public entity, separate and apart from the Members to this Agreement, to be known as the Sonoma County Public Safety Consortium ( "SCPSC "). SCPSC shall assume such duties and responsibilities as are set forth herein. 4. Limitation of Joint and Several Liability. Except as provided in Government Code Section 895.2, the debts, liabilities, and obligations of the SCPSC shall not be the debts, liabilities, or obligations of any of its Members. 5. Powers and Duties. a) Authority. The SCPSC shall have the powers common to its Members, including but not limited to: making and entering contracts; employing agents and employees; obtaining legal, financial technical, or other services; acquiring, holding, managing, transferring and /or disposing of property; incurring debts, liabilities and obligations in its own name; and the right to sue and be sued in its own name. Further, pursuant to Government Code Section 6504, the SCPSC is empowered, and by this Agreement required, to assess its Members fees to finance the operation of the SCPSC in the manner set forth in this Agreement. All such powers shall be exercised as necessary to further the nature and purpose of the SCPSC in the manner provided in the JPA Act, subject only to such restrictions as set forth in this Agreement and as imposed upon the Members in the exercise of similar powers. b) Limitation on Authority. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the issuance of new SCPSC debt or increases in debt service payments required from Members must first be approved by the governing bodies of each affected Member before becoming effective. 6. Membership. a) Members. Members of the SCPSC are the Cities of: Cotati , Petaluma Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Sonoma, Town of Windsor, County of Sonoma, the Sonoma County Junior College District ( "SRCCD "), and REDCOM, a joint powers authority agency, as 2 well as future members admitted to the SCPSC according to the provisions of this Agreement. b) Application for Membership. Non - member public safety agencies located within the County of Sonoma may apply to the SCPSC to become a member. New members shall be admitted to the SCPSC upon a majority vote of the Board of Directors and upon approval of an amended budget (if deemed necessary to admit the new members). Each agency accepted as a new member shall be required to pay all required impact costs as well as sign a copy of this Agreement, or an acknowledgement that it is bound to all the terms and conditions herein. C) Removal of Member. Any Member may be removed from the SCPSC for good cause, including but not limited to, failure to pay assessed fees, contributions or charges, failure to maintain training standards, failure to keep system secure, and /or improper release of information. Such removal can be effectuated only upon a supermajority vote (at least 2/3) of the Board of Directors after providing the affected Member with at least 30 days written notice of the intended removal and an opportunity to be heard. A Member removed from the SCPSC shall be subject to the financial obligations set forth in Sub - sections (i) through (iv) of Section 13(a). 7. Management Structure and Proceedings. All Members agree to work cooperatively to further the purpose of the SCPSC. The SCPSC shall be structured and operate as set forth below. a) Board of Directors: There shall be a Board of Directors of SCPSC which shall be comprised of the City Manager from each city /town Member agency, the Sonoma County Administrator, an appointed representative of the REDCOM Board of Directors, and the President of the Sonoma County Junior College District, or their respective designees. The Board of Directors shall have the authority to take the following actions: i) Approve and adopt annual. SCPSC budgets, and any modifications or amendments thereto; ii) Approve the addition or removal of member agencies; iii) Create and appoint ad hoc or single - purpose committees or workgroups, and delegate responsibilities thereto; iv) Adopt By Laws, and any modifications thereto, related to the conduct and administration of the Board of Directors, the operation of SCPSC, or delegation of duties; v) Acquire, construct, manage, maintain or operate any building, works or improvements; vi) Enter into contracts; �3 vii) Hire agents, employees, or representatives; viii) Engage consultants or experts to provide advice or assistance; ix) Purchase, hold or dispose of property; X) Incur debts, liabilities or obligations in accordance with the terms and provisions of Section 12, below; and xi) Sue and be sued in the name of the SCPSC. b) Oversight Committee: There shall be an Oversight Committee of SCPSC which shall be comprised of the Sheriff of the County of Sonoma, and either the Chief of Police or the Fire Chief from each of the city and district Members, and a representative from REDCOM, or their respective designees. New Members shall designate a representative to be a member of the Oversight Committee. The Oversight Committee shall have the collective authority to take any actions that are inherent in the public safety offices of the individual members of the Committee, and shall also have the authority to take the following actions: i) Administer the operation and business of SCPSC generally, including but not limited to, overseeing SYSTEM operations and managing contracts; and ii) Enter into contracts and Memoranda of Understanding (MOD's) within approved budget and purchasing authority that do not have long -term budget impacts, and as otherwise limited by the SCPSC By Laws. C) Voting: Neither the Board of Directors nor the Oversight Committee shall take any action without a quorum present. A quorum shall consist of at least 51 % of the total number of Members of the Board and Oversight Committee. Except as expressly authorized herein, all actions taken by the Board of Directors or Oversight Committee shall be by majority vote (at least 51 %) of the total number of Members. Each Member of the Board of Directors and Oversight Committee shall have one vote. Members of the Board and Oversight Committee must be present to vote. d) Meetings and By Laws. The Board of Directors shall hold meetings at least once a year. Additional meetings may be called by the chairperson on an as- needed basis. Minutes on actionable items shall be prepared and maintained. The Board of Directors shall adopt By Laws that shall address how to conduct its meetings, coordination and communication by and between the Board and the committees, and other business administration issues. SCPSC committees may similarly adopt By Laws for their own meetings and administration issues. All meetings of the Board of Directors or committees including, without limitation, regular, adjourned regular and special 4 meetings, shall be called, noticed and conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act (commencing with Section 54950 of the Government Code). 8. Appointed Agencies and Officers. a) Lead Grant Agency. The City of Santa Rosa is appointed as the Lead Grant Agency of SCPSC for the sole purpose of complying with the auditing and other management /administrative requirements of the federal grant received from the United States Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services ( "COPS "), which funds have already been fully expended in purchasing part of the CAD/RMS /MDC system. Each Member agrees to cooperate with and assist the City of Santa Rosa in any way necessary to respond to an audit of the COPS Grant. The City of Santa Rosa is entitled to compensation in connection with the services /expenses it provides as Lead Grant Agency, which shall be set by the Board of Directors. b) Treasurer. The Auditor - Controller /Treasurer -Tax Collector of the County of Sonoma is appointed as the Treasurer for SCPSC pursuant to Government Code Section 6505, and shall take all such actions required therein and as otherwise required by law. C) Auditor /Controller. The Board of Directors shall appoint one of its members (or designee) to be the Auditor /Controller for SCPSC pursuant to Government Code Sections 6505 and 6505.5, for the purposes of carrying out the actions required therein, including but not limited to, authorizing disbursement of SCPSC funds pursuant to the approval of the Board of Directors, and engaging the services of a certified public accountant or public accountant to perform an annual financial audit. The Auditor /Controller may, from time to time, designate another public employee or agent to act on his /her behalf with respect to the duties required herein. d) Compensation for Officers. In accordance with Government Code Section 6505.5, the governing body(ies) of the same public entity(ies) as the Treasurer and /or Auditor /Controller shall determine charges to be made against SCPSC for the services of the Treasurer and /or Auditor /Controller, if any. Such charges, if any, will be applied to offset assessments /contributions due from such entity(ies). 9. Annual Financial Audit. The Auditor /Controller shall engage the services of a certified public accountant or a public accountant to perform a financial audit of SCPSC for each fiscal year of its operation. Such services may be donated by a member of the SCPSC, or may be engaged for hire. The annual financial audit shall not include an audit of .operations, unless so designated by the SCPSC Board of Directors. 10. General System Support. The Board of Directors shall select and contract with a public or private entity to perform SYSTEM maintenance, improvement, and various support services. The entity performing General System Support for the SCPSC may be considered a third -party beneficiary under this Agreement if expressly set forth in the services contract. 5 11. Administrative Support. The Board of Directors may also delegate or contract for various other support services including, but not limited to, providing administrative staff support to the Board and /or any committees or sub - committees. 12. Fiscal Year and Annual Budget /Financing a. Fiscal Year. The SCPSC's fiscal year shall be the twelve (12) month period commencing each July 1, except if the effective date of this Agreement is other than July 1, the first fiscal year shall be the short year commencing the effective date and ending the following June 30. b. Annual Budget. The SCPSC shall operate only under an approved fiscal year budget as adopted by the Board of Directors. It may not operate at a deficit. Members shall pay for the entire operation of the SCPSC: the annual or modified /amended budget shall determine the total amount of assessment required to be paid by each Member. When determining assessments, the Board of Directors shall allocate all costs fairly and equitably among the Members, and should consider usage and System connections, among other factors, as allocation bases. Once adopted annually for each fiscal year, the total annual budget may only be increased by supermajority (2/3) vote of the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors shall approve the cost allocation methodology by January 15 for the following fiscal year, and shall thereafter adopt a preliminary annual budget no later than February 15 and a final budget in accordance with applicable state law. C. Budget Elements. The Board of Directors, in adopting an annual budget, thereby fixes the assessments against the Members, which is binding thereon. The budget shall include, but is not limited to, the following components: i) Operational and Maintenance Expenses. The costs of operating and maintaining the public safety CAD/RMS/MDC system, and the cost of services of the General System Support, shall be billed to the Members quarterly in accordance with and not to exceed the budget categories of expenditures as set forth . in the annual Budget (or modifications /amendments thereof). Members shall pay SCPSC within thirty (30) days after receipt of such invoice. SCPSC may charge interest on any past due payments at the rate . of interest paid by the County of Sonoma Treasurer /Tax Collector for County departments or public entities participating in the pooled funds account for the period of time for which the payment is past due. SCPSC may proceed with the offset process for any past -due payments in accordance with Government Code section 907. ii) Capital Expenditures. Capital expenditures shall include the. costs of original purchase of communications and computer equipment, hardware, software and other fixed asset items typically having a useful life of more than one (1) year, including equipment 0 improvements and additions, as opposed to replacement parts for ordinary maintenance during the useful life of the capital items. All costs associated with such purchase, such as installation, shall be capitalized. Replacement of equipment at the end of its useful life shall be a capital item. Capital expenditures shall be shared by the Members as determined by the Board of Directors, except capital expenditures which are incurred for and are unique to a minority of the Members, in which case such minority shall share the expense as determined by the Board of Directors. 13. Term of Agreement and Termination. This Agreement shall be deemed to go into effect on July 1, 2008 (the "Effective Date "), and shall continue in full force and effect until rescinded or terminated, as set forth below. a) Termination of Individual Membership. Any Member may terminate its participation in this Agreement by giving written notice to the Board of Directors not less than one hundred twenty (120) days before the beginning of the next fiscal year, which termination shall be effective only on the beginning of the next fiscal year. i) If a Member terminates its participation in this Agreement, it shall pay its portion of costs for which it is responsible for paying up to the date of termination. ii) Upon termination of a Member's participation in this Agreement, the Board of Directors shall determine the terms and conditions pursuant to which each Member shall retain SYSTEM equipment or related assets acquired in connection with its participation in the SCLEC or the SCPSC, including determining whether any compensation is owed for contributions or costs. No terminating Member is entitled to receive refunds for monies paid to SCPSC, regardless of whether such monies have been allocated or not. iii) Liquidated damages shall be assessed against any Member terminating its participation in this Agreement based on the impossibility of determining the actual damages of such termination on the SCPSC and its members. Such liquidated damages shall be in an amount equal to one hundred twenty -five percent (125 %) of all monies that the Member was obligated to pay to the SCPSC (or SCLEC) during the fiscal year immediately prior to the effective date of termination. iv) Any monetary obligations assessed under this section shall be due to be paid to the SCPSC within ninety (90) days after the effective date of termination. b) Effect of Termination by Less than All Members. Termination of this Agreement by any Member shall not be construed as a completion of the purpose of this Agreement 7 and shall not require the repayment or return to the Members of all or any part of any contributions, payments, or advances made by the Members until this Agreement is rescinded or terminated as to all Members. c) Termination of Agreement by All Members. At any time, this Agreement may be rescinded and terminated, and the SCPSC may be dissolved, by a unanimous vote of the Members or a vote of all but one of the Members (i.e., a single Member cannot prevent termination). In such an event, the remaining assets and liabilities of the SCPSC shall be apportioned among all Members according to the relative contributions made by those Members up to the point of termination, which shall be determined by the Board of Directors. 14. Consolidations Divisions and Annexations of Members Consolidations of Members with other Members or with non - member agencies, divisions of Members into two or more entities, and annexations of portions of Members shall have no adverse effect on the cost assessments of uninvolved Members. In the event that involved Members cannot reach an agreement with regard to adjusting cost assessments among themselves, and the Local Agency Formation Commission does not determine the cost assessments, the Board of Directors shall resolve the matter after considering and hearing the affected Members. 15. Insurance. The SCPSC shall be required to obtain insurance, or join a self - insurance program(s) in which one or more of the Members participate, appropriate for its operations. Any and all insurance coverages provided by the SCPSC, and/or any self - insurance programs joined by the SCPSC, shall name each and every Member to this agreement as an additional insured for all liability arising out of or in connection with the operations by or on behalf of the named insured in the performance of this Agreement. In addition, any insurance program shall include coverage for the General System Support services vendor contract, and the vendor shall be named as an additional insured. Minimum levels of the insurance or self - insurance program shall be set by SCPSC in its ordinary course of business. The SCPSC shall also require all of its contractors and subcontractors to obtain appropriate insurance and to name the SCPSC as an additional insured by way of express endorsement. 16. Cooperation in Joint Defense If SCPSC and a Member are Defendants in a Lawsuit The SCPSC and each Member shall cooperate in the defense of any claim or lawsuit arising from the performance of this Agreement or operation/maintenance of the SYSTEM in which both the SCPSC and a Member are sued. The required cooperation shall include, but not be limited to, the following: a) Mutual exchange of all relevant non - privileged documents without the need for subpoena or formal discovery; b) When considered to be in their mutual best interest, access to all employees with relevant knowledge of the subject matter for the purpose of interviewing those employees without the need for subpoena or formal discovery; C) Early discussion between the SCPSC and a Member or Members in an attempt to reach an agreement as to the most cost - effective strategy for defense; and d) Early discussion as to whether it would be cost effective for one of the defendants to assume the defense of the other defendant in the action in an effort to avoid duplication of attorney's fees. 17. Indemnity. The SCPSC and each of its Members agree to accept all responsibility for loss or damage to any person or entity, and to defend, indemnify, hold harmless and release each other (including their respective supervisors, officers, agents, and employees) from and against any and all actions, claims, damages, disabilities, or expenses that may be asserted by any person or entity, including themselves, resulting from their own respective negligence or willful misconduct arising out of or in connection with the performance of this Agreement. This indemnification obligation is not limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages or compensation payable to or for the Members hereto or their agents under workers' compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee benefit acts. 18. Property Use and Ownership. Property owned by each of the Members and used in connection with the operations .of the SCPSC shall continue to remain their own respective property throughout the term of this Agreement, unless the Member expressly transfers its ownership interests in such property to the SCPSC or another Member in writing. 19. Amendments to Agreement. Except for the admission or removal of a member, this Agreement may be amended. only by a unanimous vote of the SCPSC Members. Any amendments to the Agreement shall be in writing and signed by all Members. 20. Notice of Creation. A notice of the creation of SCPSC as a Joint Powers Authority entity by this Agreement shall be filed by SCPSC with the Secretary of State, pursuant to Government Code Section 6503.5. 21. Notice. Any notice required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing. Delivery of such notice shall be conclusively taken and sufficiently given forty -eight (48) hours after deposit in the United States Mail, return receipt requested, with the postage thereon fully prepaid. Such notices shall be mailed to the Member's principal place of business. 22. Construction. To the fullest extent allowed by law, the provisions of this Agreement shall be construed and given effect in a manner that avoids any violation of statute, ordinance, regulation, or law. The Members covenant and agree that in the event that any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remainder of the provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired, or invalidated thereby. The Members acknowledge that they have each contributed to the making of this Agreement and that, in the event of a dispute over the interpretation of this Agreement, the language of the Agreement will not be construed against one Member in favor of the other. The Members further acknowledge that they have each had an E adequate opportunity to consult with counsel in the negotiation and preparation of this Agreement. 23. No Third Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly set forth herein, nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed to create and the Members do not intend to create any rights in third parties. 24. Successors. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors of the Members hereto. 25. Merger. This writing is intended both as the final expression of the Agreement between the Members hereto with respect to the included terms and as a complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the Agreement, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1856. 26. Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in any number of counterparts, which collectively shall be considered the Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Members hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed and attested by their proper officers thereunto duly authorized, as of the day and year identified below. 10 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK: C Jake Mackenzie (Date) Mayor Per Resolution No. by the City Council on ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney adopted 11 Agenda Packet Preparation TIMELINES for Regular City Council Meetings held on the 2 "d & 4`h Tuesdays of each month: Resolutions (other than standard formats for authorizations and approvals), Ordinances & Agreements to Assistant City Attorney and Assistant City Manager via email to review for "approvals as to form" and agenda planning DUE no later than NOON Three (3) Mondays prior to Council meeting dates Agenda Items with related attachments via email to City Clerk DUE no later than NOON Two (2) Fridays prior to Council meeting dates Agenda Draft review by Mayor, City Manager, Assistant City Attorney, City Clerk no later than Tuesday mornings One (1) week prior to Council meeting dates Agenda Packets distributed to City Council and Agendas posted/distributed /mailed on Wednesday afternoons One (1) week prior to Council meeting dates for compliance with Rohnert Park Municipal Code Section 2.08.050 {This section for City Clerk Use Only) RESO. NO. 2008-37 Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3/5/09 -i9 Copy to: CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT Meeting Date: March 11, 2008 Department: Public Safety Submitted By: Angie Smith, Purchasing Agent Submittal Date: February 29, 2008 Agenda Title: Authorization to Purchase Three (3) Ford Crown Victoria Police . Interceptors for the Department of Public Safety. Requested Council Action: Approve Resolution Authorizing Purchase of Three (3) Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptors for the Department of Public Safety. Summary: The Department of Public Safety has budgeted for three (3) new police interceptor vehicles in the 2007/2008 fiscal year. Funds are available for these vehicles through the Traffic Safety Fund and the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria (FIGR) monies. "These are not General Fund monies but specific funds for Public Safety purchases. The 2008 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptors (CPVI) are rated a Flexible Fuel Vehicle (FFV) and earn the City Energy Policy Act (EPAct) credits for our fleet. Therefore, these vehicles are keeping our City streets and the earth cleaner. Said police vehicles are available through the cooperative purchasing program on the State of California Multiple Award Schedule (CMAS) # 1- 08- 23 -14. The dealer that is awarded the state contract is Folsom Lake Ford of Folsom, California. The total cost for the three (3) vehicles is $72,411.50. , As per the City Ordinance, Section 3.04.080 allows for Cooperative Purchasing, the City is exercising the right to purchase said police interceptors by way of cooperative purchasing. Therefore, it is staff's recommendation to purchase said vehicles through CMAS Contract #1 -08- 23-14, from Folsom Lake Ford of Folsom, California in the amount of $72,411.50. Enclosures: Resolution CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. .CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: Consent Item Approval O Public Hearing Required ( ) Not Recommended () Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by ou ( ) City Comments: - �( City Manager's Signature: ( ) Regular Time Date: (Revised 62806) JH- S:OS -b RESOLUTION NO. 2008 -37 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF THREE (3) FORD CROWN VICTORIA POLICE INTERCEPTORS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY WHEREAS, the Department of Public Safety, has budgeted in fiscal year 2007/2008 for the purchase of three (3) new police interceptor vehicles; WHEREAS, the 2008 Ford Crown Victoria Police Inceptors (CPVI) are rated a Flexible Fuel Vehicle (FFV) and earn the City Energy Policy Act (EPAct) credit for our fleet; WHEREAS, said vehicles are available for purchase through the cooperative purchasing program on the State of California Multiple Award Schedule (CMAS) #1- 08- 23 -14; WHEREAS, the dealer that is awarded the state contract is Folsom Lake Ford of Folsom, California; and WHEREAS, the total cost for the three (3) police vehicles is $72,411.50. NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park hereby authorizes the City Manager to handle all details and execute any and all documents relative to the purchase of three (3) new police interceptor vehicles from the following authorized State of California vendor: Contractor Name Contract Total Folsom Lake Ford $72,411.50 Folsom, California DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 11 th day of March, 2008. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 2008-38 Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3 /5 /08 -7G Copy to: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK RE- AFFIRMING SUPPORT OF RESOLUTION NO. 2001-021 OF THE SONOMA COUNTY WASTE MANAGEMENT AGENCY IN SUPPORT OF EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby reaffirm that certain Resolution No. 2001 -021 of the Sonoma County Waste Management Agency dated June 20, 2001, supporting Extended Producer Responsibility. Rohnert Park, as a participating member of the Sonoma County Waste Management Agency, approved the initial 2001 Resolution, attached hereto. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 11`" day of March, 2008 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -021 Dated: June 20, 2001 RESOLUTION OF THE SONOMA COUNTY WASTE MANAGEMENT AGENCY("AGENCY ") SUPPORTING EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY CzEPW') WHEREAS, more consumer goods and products are being designated or determined to be hazardous waste upon disposal; and WHEREAS, it is important to remove hazardous waste from disposal in Sonoma County's Central Landfill to protect the environment and public health; and WHEREAS, Agency has a limited budget to manage hazardous wastes, and a limited ability to raise more funds without imposing unreasonable costs on county residents; and WHEREAS, Agency supports the premise that coiisumers•should be made aware of the full cost of their purchases at the time of purebase, allowing far more informed_ choice; and WHEREAS, Agency believes that less toxic formulations, "alternative products and/or greater durability, recyclability and reusability of products will increase.becaimse manufacturers have responsibility for their products tat the end of their useful life; and WHEREAS, in the interest of long-term-economic health;- resource sustamability, environmental protection, public health and safety, and limiting Agency's future liability, it is desirable to support efforts that extend manufacturer respongiliility, for goo�and products they create to include their final disposition. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Agency hereby declares its support for Extended Producer Responsibility policies and supports governmental and non - governmental organizations in the effort to develop such policies. MEMBERS: AYE Santa Rosa AYE Sebastopol AYE Cloverdale AYE Petaluma AYE AYE AYF� County Sonoma Windsor AYE AYE Healdsburg Cotati AYES -10-NOES -O- ABSENT -o- ABSTAIN -0- AYE Rohnert Park The within instrument is a correct copy of the original on file with this office. ATTE T: QA E: /201 Clerk of0 he Sonoma County Waste Management Agency of the State of California, in and for the County of Sonoma. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ITEM 5.4 Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3/5/08 -TG Copy to: COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT Meeting Date: March 11, 2008 Department: Community Development Submitted By: Ron Bendorff, Director of Community Development Submittal Date: March 4, 2008 Agenda Title: Letters Supporting Applications for the Northern Section, California Chapter of the American Planning Association (NSCCAPA) Awards 2008 Requested Council Action: Approve Mayor's Signing of Letters of Support for Applications to the NSCCAPA Awards 2008 Summary: The Northern Section, California Chapter of the American Planning Association (NSCCAPA) sponsors a yearly awards program that honors outstanding planning efforts in the region. Staff intends to submit two local projects to the NSCCAPA for consideration: the "Arbors" mixed use development in the category of "Planning Project Award" and the City's (green Building Ordinance as an "Innovation in Green Community Planning" (see attached Program Policy). Applications are due by Friday, March 21, 2008 and must be accompanied by at least one (1) letter of support. Staff has prepared the required letters of support for the Mayor's signature and is requesting that Council approve the Mayor's signing of these letters. Attachments: -Draft Letters of Recommendation Supporting Applications for the Northern Section, California Chapter of the American Planning Association (NSCCAPA) Awards 2008 - Program Policy for 2008 NSCCAPA Awards CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: -g) Consent Item( ) Regular Time Approval () Public Hearing Required ( ) Not Recommended ( ) Sun", itted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by Council O City Comments: 1\ r, City M Signature: Date - JH-S:05-b City Council Jake Mackenzie Mayor Pamela Stafford Vice -Mayor Arnie L. Breeze Tim Smith Vicki Vidak - Martinez Council Members Stephen R. Donley City Manager Daniel Schwarz Assistant City Manager Judy Hauff City Clerk Michelle Marchetta Kenyon City Attorney James J. Atencio Benjamin D. Winig Assistant City Attorney Thomas R. Bullard Director of Public Safety Ron Bendorff "ector of Community Development Darrin W. Jenkins Director of Public Works / City Engineer Sandra M. Lipitz irector of Administrative Services March 12, 2008 NSCCAPA Awards Co- Director c/o LSA Associates 601 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 1270 South San Francisco, CA 94080 Subject: Letter of Support for 2008 NSCCAPA Award; for "The Arbors" Mixed Use Project, Rohnert Park, CA As the Mayor of the City of Rohnert Park, I am writing to support the City's application for a 2008 NSCCAPA award for "The Arbors" mixed- use project. The City Council is justly proud of this project, which has helped to implement the City's vision for the developing "City Center Area." The mixed -use nature of the project reflects the City's intention for this Area to become the "Heart of the City," providing a wide -range of housing and commercial opportunities in a smart growth, pedestrian- oriented environment. It should also be noted that project's fifty -six (56) income - restricted units represent an important contribution to the City's affordable housing inventory, particularly due to the inclusion of a number of units designed for larger households. I am therefore very pleased to recommend this project as a worthy candidate for the "2008 Planning Project Award" and request your consideration of its merits. Sincerelv 6750 Commerce Boulevard • Rohnert Park CA • 94928 • (707) 588 -2226 • Fax (707) 588 -2263 www.rocit.org City Council March 12, 2008 Jake Mackenzie Mayor NSCCAPA Awards Co- Director Pamela Stafford c/o LSA Associates Vice -Mayor 601 Gateway Boulevard, Suite 1270 South San Francisco, CA 94080 Arnie L. Breeze Tim smith Subject: Letter of Support for 2008 NSCCAPA Award for City of Rohnert Vicki Vidak- Martinez Council Members Park Green Building Ordinance As the Mayor of the City of Rohnert Park, I am writing to support the City's application Stephen R. Donley for a 2008 NSCCAPA award for the City's Green Building Ordinance. The City City Manager Council is very proud of this project, as it reflects the City's commitment to the creation of a community that is truly sustainable. The Ordinance is the first in Daniel Schwarz Assistant City Manager Sonoma County, possibly the State to require the mandate inclusion of green y' p y q mandatory g building methods in virtually all new residential and non - residential construction, Judy Hauff ensuring that all new projects will incorporate some level of green construction in their City clerk design. This could not have been accomplished without the collaboration of the Michelle Marchetta Kenyon building community, other local government officials, representatives from non - profit City Attorney groups, consultants and the public. It should further be noted that this Ordinance has become a template for green building programs in other communities, due to its James J. Atencio Benjamin D. ncio comprehensive nature and its ease of implementation. Assistant City Attorney Thomas R. Bullard I am therefore very pleased to recommend this project as a worthy candidate for the Director of Public Safety 112008 Innovation in Green Community Planning and request your consideration of its merits. Ron Bendorff rector of Community Development Sincerely, Darrin W. Jenkins Director of Public Works / City Engineer Sandra M. Lipitz Jake Mackenzie �irector of Administrative Services Mayor City of Rohnert Park'' 6750 Commerce Boulevard • Rohnert Park CA • 94928 • (707) 588 -2226 • Fax (707) 588 -2263 www_rPcitymorg --fl. ap c 'Affi x oo8 NSCCAPAAWARDS PROGRAM POLICY The purpose of the Northern Section, California Chapter of the American Planning Association (NSCCAPA) Awards Program is to encourage quality in planning and increase the public's awareness of the planning profession through recognizing outstanding achievement in the planning field. Each year, NSCCAPA awards dozens of Planning Awards to honor the most outstanding efforts in planning in the Section. The program honors innovative plans and projects, distinguished APA members, and lay contributors to planning and achievements of the NSCCAPA. I. AWARD CATEGORIES A. OUTSTANDING PLANNING AWARDS Nominations for Outstanding Planning Awards must be first submitted to the Section where the project, plan or work occurred first prior to being submitted to the State for consideration. Only the first place Section Award winners (no ties) for that year are eligible for nomination for the in Chapter (State) Outstanding Planning Awards Categories below. _Comprehensive Planning Award: (Corresponds to APA's Daniel Burnham Award) a) Large Jurisdiction: To a comprehensive plan of unusually high merit completed within the past 3 years for, by or within a jurisdiction with a Census 2000 population of 100,000 or more. b) Small Jurisdiction: To a comprehensive plan of unusually high merit completed within the past 3 years for, by, or within a jurisdiction with a Census 2000 population of less than 100,000. Planning Implementation Award: (Corresponds to APA's Outstanding Planning Award for Implementation) a) Large Jurisdiction: 'For an effort that demonstrates a significant achievement for a jurisdiction with a Census 2000 population of 100,0oo or more in accomplishing positive change as a result of planning. This award is for long -term, measurable results to demonstrate that sustained implementation makes a difference. Nominated efforts should have been in continuous effect for a minimum of five years. Nominations can include, but not limited to, plans for smart growth, signage, farmland preservation, urban design, wetland mitigation, resource conservation, capital improvements, citizen participation, neighborhood improvement, transportation management, and sustained economic development. b) Small Jurisdiction For an effort that demonstrates a significant achievement for a jurisdiction with a Census 2000 population of less than 100,000 in accomplishing positive change as a result of planning. This award is for long -term, measurable results to demonstrate that sustained implementation makes a difference. Nominated efforts should have been in continuous effect for a minimum of five years. Nominations can include, but not limited to, plans for smart growth, signage, farmland preservation, urban design, wetland mitigation, resource conservation, capital improvements, citizen participation, neighborhood improvement, transportation management, and sustained economic development. 2) Planning Project Award: To a specific planning project of unusually high merit that is in the process of being constructed or has been completed within the last year. 1 I-) Innovation in Green__Community Planning: (Corresponds to APR's Innovation in Green Community Planning Award) To an innovative plan, program, tool, or related effort that demonstrates advancement in planners' efforts to address the serious consequences of development and everyday living on the environment. Focused Issue Planning Award: For a planning `document of unusually high merit completed or published in the past 3 years, dealing with a specific aspect of the planning process. For example, an environmental impact report or housing needs assessment. 6) Best Practices Award: (Corresponds to APA's Best Practice Award) For a specific planning tool, practice, program, project, or process that is a significant advancement to specific elements of planning. This category emphasizes results and demonstrates how innovative and state -of- the -art planning methods and practices helped to implement a plan. Nominations may include such things as regulations and codes, tax policies or initiatives, growth management or design guidelines, transferable development rights program, land acquisition efforts, public /private partnerships, applications of technology, handbooks, or efforts that foster greater participation in community planning. 7)_Grassroots Initiative Award (Corresponds to APA's Grassroots Initiative Award) For an initiative that illustrates how a community utilized the planning process to address a need that extends beyond the traditional scope of planning. Emphasis is placed on the success of planning in new or different settings. Nominated projects should expand public understanding of the planning process. This could include such efforts as community policing or drug prevention, neighborhood outreach initiatives, programs designed for special populations, public art or cultural efforts, community festivals, environmental or conservation initiatives, summer recreational initiatives for children, or focused tourism ventures. 8 Education. Project Award: (Corresponds to APA's Public Outreach Award) To an individual, project or program that uses information and education about the value of planning and how planning improves a community's quality of life to create greater awareness among citizens or specific segments of the population. This may include, but is not limited to, broad community efforts showing how planning can make a difference, curricula designed to teach children about planning, neighborhood empowerment programs, initiatives designed to include new individuals and groups in the planning process, use of technology to expand public participation in planning, outreach programs to the media, or comprehensive campaigns to renew or initiate a plan Neighborhood Planning Award: (Corresponds to APA's Neighborhood Planning Award in Honor of Jane Jacobs) This award will go to a neighborhood plan, program, design, or related effort that demonstrates innovative planning principles and measures that create sustainable neighborhoods that have lasting value. B. LEADERSHIP AND SERVICE AWARDS The following awards are given to individuals, programs or organizations for sustained and significant contributions to the planning profession. Nominations for Leadership and Service Awards will be accepted from any person, including members of the California Chapter Board of Directors. Individuals, programs or organizations nominated for the Leadership and Service awards do not have to be a Section award winner. Candidates may not self- nominate, except for Ic. I) Distinguished Leadership Awards a) Professional Planner: (Corresponds to APA's Leadership Award for a Professional Planner) To a professional planner, . currently employed in the planning profession, for a sustained contribution to the profession through distinguished practice, teaching, or writing. 2 b) Elected Official: (Corresponds to APA's Leadership Award for a Planning Advocate) To an individual elected to public office for a significant contribution to excellence in public planning. c) Planning Firm, Department or Agency: To a planning firm, planning department or planning agency for outstanding achievement in public or private planning over a sustained period. Self - nominations are allowed for this award category. d) Citizen Planner /Layperson: (Corresponds to APA's Leadership Award for a Planning Advocate) To a person who is neither a professional planner nor an elected official for a significant contribution to excellence in the planning field. e) Student Planner: (Corresponds to APA's Distinguished Leadership Award for a Student Planner) To a student in a Planning Accreditation Board approved planning program for outstanding achievement during the respective nominee's academic career in planning. f) Organization: To an organization whose efforts have contributed to elevating planning principles, creating greater awareness of the value of planning, and improving the quality of life in one or more communities. Only open to non -APA related organizations. Distin ished Service Award: (Corresponds to APR's Distinguished Service Award) To an Section member who has made a substantial contribution to the development and objectives of the Section and /or Chapter (State) over a sustained period. S) Distinguished Contribution Award: (Corresponds to APA's Distinguished Contribution Award) Recognizing a Section member who has contributed to the goals and objectives of the Section and /or Chapter (State) and to its strategic plan through an extraordinary effort over a short period of time. C. PLANNING ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS The following awards are given to individuals, programs or organizations for outstanding planning achievement. Nominations for Planning Achievement Awards will be accepted from any person, including members of the Section and Chapter (State) Board of Directors. Individuals, programs or organizations nominated for the Planning Achievement Awards do not have to be a Section Award winner. 1) Advocacy /Social Change /Diversity Planning Award: (Corresponds to the APA Paul Davidoff Award) To a project, group or individual reflecting a sustained social commitment to advocacy planning in support of the needs of society's less fortunate members, or for efforts or specific projects by individuals belonging to a minority group or organizations whose membership, staff, or focus is on minority concerns and such individuals or organizations have successfully promoted and helped expand diversity within the planning profession or have promoted and helped expand planning and diversity. 2) Contribution to Women and Families Award: (Corresponds to the APA Diana Donald Award) For a significant contribution to planning issues related to women and the family. 3) Hard -Won Victories: (Corresponds to APA's Hard -Won Victories Award) For a planning initiative or other planning effort undertaken by a community, neighborhood, citizens group, or jurisdiction in the face of difficult or trying circumstances. This award recognizes the positive effect of hard -won victories by professional planners, citizen planners, or both working together under difficult, challenging, or adverse conditions because of natural disasters, local circumstances, financial or organization constraints, social factors, or other causes. 4) Academic Award: (Corresponds to APA's Student Project Award) To faculty and /or students to recognize outstanding work done in planning schools on an individual or collective basis. Recipients of any Leadership, Services or Achievement Award are ineligible to receive the same award for ten years after accepting it. 3 Recipients of any Leadership, Services or Achievement Award are ineligible to receive the same award for ten years after accepting it. D. JOURNALISM /MEDIA AWARDS The following awards honor newspapers and other media "for public service rendered in the advancement of city and regional planning through outstanding journalism or coverage of a topic." Nominations for Journalism /Media Awards will be accepted from any person or organization. Individuals or organizations nominated for the Journalism /Media awards do not have to be a Section Award winner. Candidates may not self - nominate. I) Journalism Award (Corresponds with APA's Journalism Awards) a) Circulation over 100,000: To a publication with circulation over 100,000 for outstanding coverage of planning or environmental issues. b) Circulation 35,000 to 100,000: To a publication with circulation between 35,000 and 100,000 for outstanding coverage of planning or environmental issues. c) Circulation under 35,000: To a publication with circulation under 35,000 for outstanding coverage of planning or environmental issues. 2) Individual _Journalist Award: To an individual writer or editor for an article or series of articles of exceptional merit on planning or environmental issues. 3) Media Award: For outstanding coverage of a planning topic through other than the journalism (e.g., television, radio, video, the internet, literature, etc.). E. SECTION ACTIVITY AWARD The Chapter is composed of eight Sections in California. Each Section has its own officers and develops its own programs and activities to serve the needs of their members and the community in their region /section. The Sections serve as the primary vehicle through which many members participate. The Section Activity Award recognizes the outstanding work of a Section that has established or implemented an activity or program of unusually high merit within the past two years. Section Activity Award winners are only eligible to receive the award once every three years. Any person, including a member of the Section and /or Chapter Board, can make nominations for this award. Self- nominations are allowed only for this award category. F. PLANNING LANDMARK AND PIONEER AWARDS Nominations for Planning Landmark Awards may only be submitted for those projects, initiatives, or endeavors located in the Section, and nominations for Pioneer Awards may only be submitted for those individuals that are current, retired, or deceased Section members. Special criteria have been established for these two award categories. 1) Planning Landmark Award • (Corresponds with APR's National Planning Landmark Award) The Planning Landmark Award is for a planning project, initiative, or endeavor that is historically significant and that may be used or accessed by the public. 2) Planning Pioneer Award: (Corresponds with APA's National Planning Pioneer Award) Presented to pioneers of the profession who have made personal and direct innovations in American planning that have significantly and positively redirected planning practices, education or theory with long -term results. 4 II. NSCCAPA NOMINATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS I) Nominaiions lacking any submittal materials will be deemed incomplete will not be considered, and will not be returned. The following submission materials are required: Six (6) electronic copies on CD -ROM and one (I) bound paper copy (for display at the Awards Ceremony if the submittal is selected for an award) of the entire "NSC CAPA Planning Awards Application" submittal. 2) Six (6) CD -ROM sets and one (I) bound paper set of the following items must be submitted, and one CD -ROM must be labeled, Master Copy. Please place each of the following items in separate folders on the CD -ROM. Each award submittal CD -ROM must labeled with the appropriate award category. The following items must be submitted: o APPLICATION: The completed NSCCAPA Planning Awards Application Form. o SUMMARY DESCRIPTION: One (I) page summary of the submission, or in the case of an individual, a one (I) page resume. n AWARD CRITERIA: One (I) or two (2) page explanation demonstrating how the submission specifically meets each criterion in the order listed under each award category. o LETTER (S) OF SUPPORT: A least one (I) but no more than five (5) one -page letters in support of the entry from someone familiar with the nomination but other than the nominator and /or staff /consultant. • PROJECT OR PLAN: One (I) digital copy in PDF format on CD -ROM of the document for which the nomination is submitted. The document can be submitted as a separate CD -ROM. If submitted as a separate CD -ROM, please make sure to label each CD -ROM. All winning documents may be posted on the NSCCAPAwebsite. • IMAGES: Ten (io) digital images in JPEG format. No PowerPoint Presentations. The images should be representative of the nomination, as they will be used during the Awards Ceremony. Please include a brief one (I) sentence identification or description for each slide. Leadership Award nominations need only to supply two (2) to three (3) images of the individual nominated. Please remember to include one (I) CD -ROM labeled, Master Copy. 3) All submissions must be received by the deadline and strictly follow the requirements outlined in the NSCCAPAAwards Policy and Awards Application Form. 4) Submissions received before the deadline not meeting the requirements may be resubmitted before the deadline at the discretion of the NSCCAPAAwards Program Co- Director. 5) Submissions may be entered in only one (I) awards category or subcategory. 6) Specific program, projects, reports, processes, and ordinances may only be nominated for an NSCCAPA award once. III. NSCCAPAAWARDS SELECTION PROCESS i) NSCCAPAJURY COMPOSITION A NSCAPA jury of shall be appointed by the Section Board to judge the entries. Jurors are chosen to represent different areas of expertise, geographic locations, and professional experiences in the private /public sector, to achieve an overall balance of the jury. The diversity in jurors will also be considered. The decision of the majority of the jury shall be final. 2) NSCCAPA JURY MAY MOVE NOMINATIONS TO A DIFFERENT CATEGORY Normally, nominations will be evaluated for the award category in which they were submitted. However, the NSCCAPA jury may, upon majority vote, move a nomination to a different category if appropriate. 3) CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING AWARD ENTRIES Entries shall be judged according to the following criteria: OUTSTANDING PLANNING AWARDS CRITERIA The following criteria will be used in evaluating all Outstanding Planning Awards submittals, except for the Neighborhood Planning Award: a) Originality: Is there a visionary approach or innovative concept that results in a meaningful advance in the planning process? b) Transferability: To what extent is there a potential application in other areas or to other projects? c) Quality: To what extent is there excellence of thought, analysis, writing, graphics, and ethical planning process? d) Implementation: How did the project address the need or problem that prompted its initiation? What is the level of effectiveness as evidenced by the project's degree of post - completion or post- adoption activity? What level of effectiveness do you anticipate over time? How much local support is there for the plan and its implementation? e) Comprehensiveness: To what extent have planning principles been observed, especially consideration of the projects' effects in other public objectives? f) Public Participation: To what extent was the public involved in this project and how both public and private support was obtained. g) Role of Planners: What role did planners play in the project? 0 THE FOLLOWING ARE ADDITIONAL CRITERIA FOR SPECIFIC AWARDS: Planning Implementation Award: a) Sustained Improvement: Indicate the level of consistency of this implementation effort since its start. Detail any changes, derailments, or improvements throughout the implementation phase. b) Funding: Identify funding challenges or support for this effort. Report any political changes that might affect, for better or worse, the effort's long -term funding. c) Community Acceptance and Support: Describe how the longevity of this effort has increased the community's appetite for planning and the pursuit of similar initiatives. d) Environmental Planning and Impacts. How has the nominated effort identified, evaluated, and addressed potential beneficial and adverse consequences of implementing a project, development, or program on the surrounding environment. What mitigation measures were undertaken and how effective have they been. Innovation in Green Community Planning_ a) Planning and Innovation: What critical green planning elements are addressed by the nominated effort in terms of lessening and mitigating adverse impacts from development and everyday living? In what ways does the plan or planning effort seek to create a community that is truly sustainable and compatible with the natural resources and environmental system upon which its existence depends? b) Plan Compatibility: How is the green community planning integrated into a corresponding comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, capital improvement program, or other related initiative? In what ways does the green planning support the broader needs of the community and surrounding region or address community -wide objectives? c) Citizen Participation: What was done to ensure the widest variety of resident and stakeholder participation in the plan and planning process? d) Collaboration and Partnerships: What strategic partnerships or alliances were developed to help meet the goals and objectives of the nominated effort? e) Social and Economic Concerns: How does the nominated effort address not only a community's physical realm, but also its social and economic concerns and issues? How have the efforts to improve a community's quality of life been integrated into older neighborhoods and brownfields? Grassroots Initiative Award: a) Education: Establish that your entry has encouraged community leaders to revise their opinions about varied uses and broad applications of the planning process. State the influence your entry has had on public awareness beyond those immediately affected. 7 b) Collaboration: Describe the level of collaboration between leadership and competing interests. Explain how those affected were brought into the planning process for this initiative. Education Project Award: a) Education: Show how the program has increased the understanding of planning principles and the planning process. Explain how the results have been measured and internalized. Neighborhood Planning Award: a) What critical planning elements are addressed by the nominated effort in terms of creating new neighborhoods and redesigning older neighborhoods? As an example, but not limited to, how does the nomination contribute to residents doing more walking, biking, or taking part in other physical activities? Does the plan call for placing schools closer to the homes where students and their families live? How are smart growth principles used to guide design of new neighborhoods as well as reinvestment decisions affecting older areas? How does the plan help create more diverse housing opportunities and address affordable housing needs? b) Plan Compatibility: How is the neighborhood plan, project, initiative, or other nominated effort compatible with the corresponding city comprehensive or master plan, district or special -use plans, city recreational plans, economic development plans, conservation area plans, environmental planning, capital improvement programs, zoning ordinances, or other related planning initiatives? In what ways does the neighborhood plan or planning effort support the broader needs of the community and surrounding region or addresses citywide objectives? c) Collaboration and Partnerships: What formal and informal steps were taken for neighborhood leaders to meet among themselves and with local officials to discuss the plan and plan implementation? What strategic partnerships or alliances were developed to help meet the goals and objectives of the nominated effort? d) Social Concerns: How does the nominated effort address not only physical conditions of the neighborhood, but also issues involving the diversity and social make -up of the neighborhood? Does the plan or effort facilitate the development of mixed - income neighborhoods? LEADERSHIP AND SERVICE AWARDS CRITERIA The following criteria will be used in evaluating all leadership and service submittals: a) Length of Leadership /Service: How has there been a sustained contribution to planning; length of outstanding leadership. b) Support of Planning /Planners: How has the nominee's work increased the understanding of the planning process and /or profession? c) Ethics: How has exemplary ethical behavior been demonstrated? M PLANNING ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS The following criteria will be used in Planning Achievement submittals: Advocacy /Social Change /Diversity ard: a) Advocacy: Describe to what extent the nominee addressed the needs of those that society typically overlooks during the planning process. b) Effectiveness: Specify how the nominee's effort has had an impact on the lives of those the nominee is working to help. Indicate how those efforts have touched a wider audience. c) Diversity: For nominations addressing diversity issues and concerns, what has the individual, organization, or undertaken effort done to promote diversity. within the planning profession or to advance and sustain sound, ethical, and inclusionary planning in communities, regions, states, or the nations? Contribution to Women and Families Award: a) Support of Women and the Family: Describe how the nominee's efforts addressed the concerns of women through specific actions or contributions to planning initiatives in the community. b) Effectiveness: Specify how the nominee's effort has been effective in furthering the cause of women's issues through planning. Indicate how those efforts have touched a wider audience. Hard -Won Victories: a) Challenges or Barriers: What obstacles, whether physical, natural, social, or a combination thereof, were faced and addressed by the nominated effort? What is the extent of these challenges or other adversarial conditions, and what steps were undertaken to meet the difficult circumstances? b) Available Resources: What resources were available and how were these resources (financial, personnel, consultants, etc.) managed, leveraged, and deployed? c) Progress and Positive Effects: What are the lasting effects the effort has had or is likely to have on planning in the community? Has the effort removed or mitigated the barriers and obstacles? How has or will the effort shape the future in the community or locale? What influence has the nominated effort had on community leaders and their views about the value and effectiveness of planning? Academic Award: a) Purpose: What was the purpose of the project? What was learned or accomplished by the students? b) Research and Resources: Please detail what and how research was completed to prepare for producing the final product? What resources were available to the students to prepare the paper or document? c) Challenges: Please describe the challenges the student(s) face during the project. K d) Results: What was the basis for the paper or the project? What was the final outcome? How was the final product used? JOURNALISM /MEDIA AWARDS CRITERIA The following criteria will be used in evaluating journalism /media submittals: a) Originality: Innovation in theme, topic, or treatment; establishment of a point of view; development of a new angle on an existing problem. b) Topicality: Relation to issues that are current, noteworthy and significant; relationship to the issues, topic areas of interest of citizens, community leaders, or the planning profession at large. c) Craft: Writing style; application of journalistic skills and standards to develop the topic; adherence to principles of objectivity, if applicable, research techniques and methods; level of documentation. d) Presentation: Use of photography, typography, layout, graphics and other design tools to communicate with the audience. e) Interpretation. Manner in which planning concepts are interpreted or expressed to aid reader understanding and ability to draw important conclusions. PLANNING LANDMARK AND PIONEER AWARDS The following criteria will be used in evaluating Planning Landmark and Pioneer awards: a) Historical Significance: What is the nomination's historical significance in terms of at least one of the following: being a pioneering work or a documented first; being historically significant, unique, and outstanding; having initiated a new direction in planning that had a lasting effect or other impact; or having impact on American planning, cities, or regions during a broad range of time, space, or both time and space? Nominated landmarks must be at least 25 years old as of the submittal deadline. b) National Significance: What effect or impact did the nominated landmark have on planning in the United States as a whole? What is the nominated landmark's national importance and influence in helping create communities or other, places of lasting value throughout the country? c) Persons Involved: Who were the significant planners or others who were involved and responsible for the accomplishments of the nominated landmark? 10 IV. SECTION AWARDS INFORMATION A. SECTION AWARDS PROCESS Only one (1) first -place award may be granted per category each year. When exceptional circumstances warrant, one (1) Award of Merit may also be given per category. If the jury finds that none of the nominations in a particular category meets the desirable standards of excellence, they may grant only an Award of Merit or grant no award in that category. Because only first -place winners of Section Awards Programs are eligible for nomination for the Chapter's Outstanding Planning Awards, the Section Awards Programs are vital to the success of the Chapter's Awards Program. Nominations for Outstanding Planning Awards must be submitted to the Section where the project, plan or work occurred prior to being submitted to the Chapter (State) for consideration. All Sections are strongly encouraged by the Chapter to support and promote their local Awards Programs. P. HONORING THE SECTION AWARD RECIPIENTS Award recipients will be honored at the annual NSCCAPA Awards Ceremony event, typically a luncheon or dinner. First place winners will be honored with a trophy, plaque, or framed certificate. Award of Merit winners will be honored with a certificate. One trophy, plaque, or framed certificate per award will be provided to the recipient, at no cost. Upon request, additional awards trophies, plaques and framed or unframed certificates will be provided for individuals, firms or groups affiliated with the award winning project or program, but the recipients must pay for the cost. C. SECTION AWARDS POLICIES The NSCCAPA may establish Awards Policies different from those of the Chapter at their discretion. In order to participate in the Chapter's Awards Program, the NSCCAPA Board shall appoint an Awards Chairperson(s) or Awards Director(s) to serve as contact with the Chapter's Vice President for Administration or Awards Coordinator, concerning Awards Program matters and to coordinate awards activities for the Section. 11 Smoking Ordinance Update TO FOLLOW ON FRIDAY,` 3/7/08 WITH SUPPLEMENTAL � 9MIlTel rN Agenda Packet Preparation TIMELINES for Regular City Council Meetings held on the 2 "d & 4`'' Tuesdays of each month: • Resolutions (other than standard formats for authorizations and approvals), Ordinances & Agreements to Assistant City Attorney via email for review and approval as to form DUE no later than NOON Three (3) Mondays prior to Council meeting date • Agenda Items w /attachments via email and hard copy to City Clerk DUE no later than NOON Two (2) Fridays prior to Council meeting date • Agenda Draft review by Mayor, City Manager, Assistant City Attorney, City Clerk no later than Tuesday morning One (1) week prior to Council meeting date • Agenda Packets distributed to City Council and Agendas posted /distributed/mailed on Wednesday afternoon One (1) week prior to Council meeting date in compliance with Rohnert Park Municipal Code Section 2.08.050 {This section for City Clerk Use Only} ITEM NO.6 Council: X Department: Miscellaneous Submitted By: Stephen Donley, City Manager Communications March 7, 2008 Agenda: 3/11108 X 3/7/08 -TG Copy to: CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT Meeting Date: March 11, 2008 Department: Administration Submitted By: Stephen Donley, City Manager Submittal Date: March 7, 2008 Agenda Title: SMOKING ORDINANCE UPDATE Requested Council Action: Provide direction to staff regarding amendments to Rohnert Park Municipal Code Chapter 8.32, Use of Tobacco in Public Places Summary: The Council has asked staff to provide a survey of the anti - smoking laws adopted in the State of California and the City of Rohnert Park ( "City ") and to indicate whether and to what extent the City's anti- smoking laws conform with state laws. Smoking Prohibitions in "Places of Employment" California Law: State law presently regulates smoking in the workplace pursuant to California Labor Code ( "CLC ") section 6404.5, which was adopted as AB 13 in 1994 and fully enacted in 1998. CLC section 6404.5(g) provides that the purpose of the state anti- smoking workplace laws is to provide a prohibition that constitutes "a uniform statewide standard for regulating the smoking of tobacco products in enclosed places of employment." The legislature's intent in enacting the statute was to "supersede and render unnecessary the local enactment or enforcement of local ordinances regulating the smoking of tobacco products in enclosed places of employment. "' CLC section 6404.5 prohibits smoking tobacco products in all parts of enclosed "places of employment," as that term is defined in the statute, with fourteen specified exclusions. The statute provides that "[n]o employer shall knowingly or intentionally permit, and no person shall engage in, the smoking of tobacco products in an enclosed space at a place of employment. i2 An employer that permits non - employee access to his or her place of employment, on a regular basis, must take certain steps to establish that he or she "has not acted knowingly or intentionally" to permit smoking.' ' CLC section 6404.5(g). 2 CLC section 6404.5(b). 3 CLC section 6404.5(c). The steps an employer must take are: (1) posting clear and prominent signs regarding the smoking restrictions; and (2) requesting that non - employees refrain from smoking City Law: Chapter 8.32 of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code ( "RPMC ") regulates the use of tobacco in public places and places of employment within the City. In December 1994, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 596, which amended certain sections of Chapter 8.32 in response to the passage of AB 13. RPMC section 8.32.070 establishes the prohibition of smoking in places of employment, and RPMC section 8.32.080 provides specific exception for "smoking optional areas." The exceptions set forth in RPMC section 8.32.080 are similar to state law exceptions, but with some significant differences. RPMC section 8.32.080 provides that "Bars" and "Gaming clubs" are not deemed a "place of employment" and thus, are exempt from the City's smoking prohibition. While state law initially provided that "Bars" and "Gaming clubs" are not a "place of employment,"' state law also established that smoking would be prohibited in "Bars" and "Gaming clubs" effective on January 1, 1998.5 The delayed prohibition on smoking in bars and gaming clubs provided under state law is not reflected in the City's anti - smoking laws. Accordingly, the exemption of "Bars" and "Gaming clubs" from the City's anti - smoking laws is superseded by state law, which prohibits smoking in those places. Smoking, Prohibitions in "Public Buildings" California Law: In September 2003, AB 846 was adopted by California, which expanded earlier laws prohibiting smoking in state buildings. California Government Code (CGC) section 7596 became effective January 1, 2004, and provided that any public employee and members of the public are prohibited from smoking in any public building; within twenty feet of entrances and exits of public buildings; within twenty feet of an operable window in a public building; and in any state -owned vehicles. Finally, Government Code section 7597 provides that any city is entitled to adopt and enforce additional smoking and tobacco control ordinances, regulations or policies that are more restrictive than state law. City Law: RPMC Section 8.32.050 prohibits smoking tobacco products in all enclosed facilities and vehicles which are owned, leased or operated by the City or under the control of the City Council. However, RPMC does not prohibit smoking in the expanded zones outside public buildings as is established by state law. Since state law prohibiting smoking outside public buildings is applicable to City facilities, it is not necessary for the City to adopt a similar law unless there is a desire to go beyond the state law prohibitions. Recently Enacted California Laws There are two new state laws that have recently taken effect which are not addressed in the RPMC. AB 2067, signed into taw in 2006 and effective January 1, 2007, was adopted to include common -use areas such as lobbies, lounges, waiting areas, elevators, stairwells and restrooms as "places of employment" where smoking is prohibited. AB 2067 also prohibits smoking in covered parking lots at public buildings. More recently, California adopted SB 7 which, effective January 1, 2008, serves to impose a $100 fine on drivers and passengers cited for smoking in a car with a passenger aged 17 or younger. The City has not adopted any ordinances to reflect these recently enacted state laws. 4 CLC section 6404.5(d). 5 There are exceptions to the effective date set forth in statute relating to any adoption of a regulation by the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board or the federal Environmental Protection Agency that would have, in effect, superseded state law. UItimately, there was no federal regulation adopted and the state's anti - smoking ban in bars, taverns and gaming clubs took effect on January 1, 1998. Conclusion There are a few key differences between the California and City anti - smoking laws. State law prohibits smoking in bars and taverns, and gaming clubs. City law expressly provides that those places are not "places of employment" and thus, are not subject to the City's anti - smoking laws. Additionally, state law prohibits smoking in and around public buildings, including those owned, operated and controlled by cities. The City's prohibition of smoking in City facilities and City vehicles does not extend to areas outside of City facilities. Finally, recently enacted state laws which prohibit smoking in certain common -use areas and ban smoking in cars with minors are not reflected in the City's laws. State law provides that state's anti - smoking laws supersede local laws, unless such local laws are more restrictive. Thus, it is not necessary for the City to revise its smoking laws unless there is a desire to make the City's anti - smoking laws more stringent that state law. Enclosures: Rohnert Park Municipal Code Chapter 8.32, Use of Tobacco in Public Places CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION:( ) Consent Item (X) Regular Time ( ) Approval () Public Hearing Required ( ) Not Recommended () Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by Council ,��( '') City Comments: A -f ity Manager's Signature: 044, Date: (Revised 01 07) JH:TG- S:05 -b Chapter 8.32 USE OF TOBACCO IN PUBLIC PLACES Page I of 7 Title 8 HEALTH AND SAFETY Chapter 8.32 USE OF TOBACCO IN PUBLIC PLACES Article 1. Administrative Provisions 8.32. 010 Title. 8.32.020 Findings and purpose. 8.32.030 Definitions. 8,32,040 Enforcement. Article 2. Standards and Prohibitions 832,050C,ity owned facilities. 8.32.060 Prohibition of smoking in enclosed daces. 8.32.062 Prohibition of smoking in unenqlosed places. 8.32.070 Places of employment. 8.32.080 Smoking_ optional areas. 8.32.090 PostingreqLArements. ARTICLE 3. LEGAL PROVISIONS 8.32.100 Penalties. 8.32.110 Nonretaliation. 8.32.120 Other applicable laws. 8.32.130 Effective date. 8.32.140 Statutory severabilitv. Article 1. Administrative Provisions 8.32.010 Title. This chapter shall be known as the Smoking Ordinance of the City of Rohnert Park. (Ord. 509 § 1, 1989) http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/rohnert/—DATA/TITLE08/Chapter-8-3... 3/7/2008 Chapter 8.32 USE OF TOBACCO IN PUBLIC PLACES Page 2 of 7 8.32.020 Findings and purpose. The city council, city of Rohnert Park, state of California does hereby find that: A. Numerous studies have found that tobacco smoke is a major contributor to indoor air pollution; and B. Reliable studies, including by the Surgeon General of the United States, have shown that breathing sidestream or secondhand smoke is a significant health hazard; particularly to elderly people, individuals with cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired respiratory function, including asthmatics and those with obstructive airway disease; and C. Health hazards induced by breathing sidestream or secondhand smoke include lung cancer, respiratory infection, decreased exercise tolerance, decreased respiratory function, bronchoconstriction, and bronchspasm; and D. Non - smokers with allergies, respiratory diseases and those who suffer other ill effects of breathing sidestream or secondhand smoke may experience a loss of job productivity or may be forced to take periodic sick leave because of adverse reactions to same; and E. Persons, particularly employees, have a right to a smoke free environment if they desire. Therefore the council finds it in the public interest to regulate smoking in enclosed places, including places of employment. (Ord. 509 § I, 1989) 8.32.030 Definitions. The following words and phrases, whenever used in this chapter, shall be construed as defined in this section, unless it is apparent from the context that they have a different meaning. A. "Bar" means an area which is devoted to the serving of alcoholic beverages for consumption by patrons on the premises and in which the serving of food is only incidental to the consumption of such beverages including a cocktail lounge or tavern. Although a restaurant may contain a bar, the term "bar" shall not include the restaurant dining areas. All or a portion of an establishment may be deemed a "bar" for a portion of a twenty -four hour period although at other times the establishment is a restaurant. A "bar" for the purpose of this definition does not include any establishment where smoke can filter into a restaurant through a passageway, ventilation system or any other means. B. "City" means the City of Rohnert Park, State of California. C. "Employee" means any person who is employed by any employer in consideration for direct or indirect monetary wages or profit. D. "Employer" means any person, partnership, corporation, including municipal corporation, who employs the services of more than three persons. E. "Enclosed" means closed in by roof and four walls with appropriate openings for ingress and egress. F. "Restaurant" means any coffee shop, cafeteria, sandwich stand, private and public school cafeteria, including any associated outdoor eating area, and any other eating establishment which gives or offers for sale food to the public, guests, or employees, as well as kitchens in which food is prepared on the premises for serving elsewhere, including catering facilities, except that the term "restaurant" shall not include "bar" as defined herein. G. "Place of employment" means any enclosed area under the control of a public or private employer which employees normally frequent during the course of employment, included but not limited to, worts areas, employee lounges, conference rooms, vehicles, and employee cafeterias or eating places. A private residence is not a place of employment for purposes of this chapter, unless it is used as a child care or health care facility. H. "Smoking" means the carrying or holding of a lighted pipe, cigar, cigarette of any kind, or any other lighted smoking equipment or the lighting or emitting or exhaling the smoke of a pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind. I. "Sports arena" means sports pavilions, gymnasiums, health spas, boxing arenas, http: / /municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com /codes /rohnert/ DATA /TITLE08 /Chapter_8_3... 3/7/2008 Chapter 8.32 USE OF TOBACCO IN PUBLIC PLACES Page 3 of 7 swimming pools, roller and ice rinks, bowling alleys, and other similar places where members of the public assemble to engage in physical exercise, participate in athletic competition or witness sports events. (Ord. 574 §§ 1 -3, 1993: Ord. 509 § I, 1989) 8.32.040 Enforcement. A. Any owner, manager, operator or employer of any establishment subject to this chapter shall have the responsibility to inform any apparent violator, whether public or employee, about any smoking restrictions in said establishment. B. This chapter shall be enforced by local law enforcement agencies including but not limited to, the city manager or his /her designee, herein described as "administrative authority," and the health officer. C. Any citizen who desires to register a complaint under this chapter may initiate the complaint with the administrative authority. D. The city manager shall require, while an establishment is undergoing otherwise mandated inspections, a "self- certification" from the owner, manager, operator or other person having control of such establishment that all requirements of this chapter have been complied with. (Ord. 596 § 1, 1994: Ord. 509 § I, 1989) Article 2. Standards and Prohibitions 8.32.050 City owned facilities. All enclosed facilities and vehicles owned, leased, or operated by the city of Rohnert Park or under control of the city council shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 509 § 1, 1989) 8.32.060 Prohibition of smoking in enclosed places. Smoking shall be prohibited in the following places within all areas of the city of Rohnert Park: A. All enclosed areas available to and customarily used by the general public and all businesses patronized by the public, including, but not limited to, retail stores, hotels and motels, pharmacies, banks, attorneys' offices and other offices. B. Within restaurants, provided: 1. Bars in restaurants that sell alcoholic beverages shall be exempt. Such bars shall: (i) be enclosed on at least three sides in an area separate from the restaurant dining areas, (ii) generate no more than twenty percent of revenue from food during the prior year, and (iii) not permit individuals under the age of twenty -one in the bar area unless for the purpose of using restrooms and only for that purpose. The bar shall not be the sole waiting area for patrons in the restaurant. 2. Outdoor dining areas shall be exempt from this section. 3. All other dining areas shall be smoke -free. C. Waiting rooms, hallways, wards, and semi - private rooms of health facilities, including, but not limited to, hospitals, clinics, physical therapy facilities, doctors' offices and dentists' offices, except that health facilities shall also be subject to the provisions of Section 8.32.070 of this chapter regulating smoking in places of employment. D. Elevators, public restrooms, indoor service lines, buses, taxicabs, public airports, and other means of public transit under the authority of the city, and in ticket, boarding, and waiting areas of public transit depots; provided, however that this prohibition does not prevent: (1) the establishment of separate waiting areas for smokers and nonsmokers; or (2) the establishment of at least fifty percent of a given waiting area as a nonsmoking area. E. In public areas of museums and galleries. http: / /municipalcodes.Iexisnexis.com /codes /rohnert/ DATA /TITLE08 /Chapter_8_3... 3/7/2008 Chapter 8.32 USE OF TOBACCO IN PUBLIC PLACES Page 4 of 7 F. Enclosed theaters, auditoriums, and halls which are used for motion pictures, stage dramas and musical performances, ballets or other exhibitions, except when smoking is part of any such production. G. Enclosed sports arenas and convention halls; provided however that this prohibition does not prevent the designation of smoking areas not to exceed fifty percent of the seating capacity and floor space. H. Retail food marketing establishments, including grocery stores and supermarkets, except those areas of such establishments set aside for the serving of food and drink, restrooms and offices, and areas thereof not open to the public, which may be otherwise regulated by the chapter. I. Public schools and other public facilities under the control of another public agency, which are available to and customarily used by the general public, to the extent that the same are subject to the jurisdiction of the city of Rohnert Park. J. Bingo halls operated within the city of Rohnert Park under the authority of Chapter 9.66, Bingo Games, of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code. K. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, any owner, operator, manager or other person who controls any establishment subject to this chapter may declare that entire establishment as a non - smoking establishment. (Ord. 588 §§ I, 2, 1994: Ord. 574 § 4, 1993: Ord. 509 § I, 1989) 8.32.062 Prohibition of smoking in unenclosed places. Smoking shall be prohibited in the following locations within the city of Rohnert Park: That strip of land within one hundred feet of the northerly boundary line of the University Park Subdivision which lies immediately adjacent to southerly property of the Rancho Cotati High School extending from the east curb line on Snyder Lane easterly to the Sonoma State University west property line inclusive. (Ord. 538 § 1, 1994) 8.32.070 Places of employment. A. No employer shall knowingly or intentionally permit, and no person shall engage in, the smoking of tobacco products in an enclosed space at a place of employment. B. For the purposes of this section, an employer who permits any nonemployee access to his or her place of employment on a regular basis has not acted knowingly or intentionally if he or she has taken the following reasonable steps to prevent smoking by a nonemployee: 1. Where smoking is prohibited throughout the building or structure, posted clear and prominent signs stating "No Smoking" at each entrance to the building or structure. 2. Where smoking is permitted in designated areas of the building or structure, posted clear and prominent signs stating "Smoking is prohibited except in designated areas" at each entrance to the building or structure. 3. Has requested, when appropriate, that a nonemployee who is smoking refrain from smoking in the enclosed place of employment. C. For the purposes of this section, "reasonable steps" does not include the physical ejection of a nonemployee from the place of employment or any requirement for making a request to a nonemployee to refrain from smoking under circumstances involving a risk of physical harm to the employer or any employee. D. "Enclosed places of employment' shall be any place of employment with walls and a ceiling surrounding the space including conference and meeting rooms, classrooms, auditoriums, restrooms, medical facilities, hallways, elevators, cafeterias, lunchrooms, employee lounges, and partitioned individual offices and offices with doors within a larger office space. Outdoor patios, outdoor stadiums, outdoor malls, parks or other nonenclosed places are not designated enclosed places of employment. E. Employers with a total of five or fewer employees, either full -time or part-time, may permit smoking where all of the following conditions are met. http: / /municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com /codes /rohnertl DATA /TITLE08 /Chapter_8_3... 3/7/2008 Chapter 8.32 USE OF TOBACCO IN PUBLIC PLACES Page 5 of 7 1. The smoking area is not accessible to minors. 2. All employees who enter the smoking area consent to permit smoking. No one, as part of his or her work responsibilities, shall be required to work in an area where smoking is permitted. 3. Air from the smoking area shall be exhausted directly to the outside by an exhaust fan. Air from the smoking area shall not be recirculated`to other parts of the building. 4. The employer shall comply with any ventilation standard or other standard utilizing appropriate technology, including, but not limited to, mechanical, electronic, and biotechnical systems, adopted by the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board or the federal Environmental Protection Agency. If both adopt inconsistent standards, the ventilation standards of the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board shall be no less stringent than the standards adopted by the federal Environmental Protection Agency. 5. This section shall not be construed to require employers to provide reasonable accommodation to smokers, or to provide breakrooms for smokers or nonsmokers. (Ord. 596 § 2, 1994: Ord. 509 § I, 1989) 8.32.080 Smoking optional areas. For the purposes of this chapter, "place of employment" means any place so defined in Section 6303 of the Labor Code with the following exceptions: A. Sixty -five percent of guest rooms in a hotel, motel or similar transient lodging establishment. B. Areas of the lobby in a hotel, motel, or other similar transient lodging establishment designated for smoking by the establishment provided that the area does not exceed twenty -five percent of the total floor area of the lobby, or, if the total area of the lobby is two thousand square feet or less, that the area does not exceed fifty percent of the total floor area of the lobby. For the purposes of this paragraph, lobby means the common public area of such an establishment in which registration and other similar activities are conducted and in which the establishment's guests and members of the public congregate. C. Conference, meeting and banquet rooms in a hotel, motel, or other transient lodging establishment, while those places are being used exclusively for private functions, except while food or beverage functions are taking place including setup, service, and cleanup activities, or when the room is being used for exhibit purposes. D. Retail or wholesale tobacco shops and private smokers' lounges in or attached to a retail or wholesale tobacco shop that is dedicated to the use of tobacco products, including, but not limited to, cigars and pipes. Retail or wholesale tobacco shop means any business establishment the main purpose of which is the sale of tobacco products, including, but not limited to, cigars, pipe tobacco, and smoking accessories. E. Cabs of motortrucks as defined in Section 410 of the California Vehicle Code, or track tractors, as defined in Section 655 of the California Vehicle Code, if no nonsmoking employees are present. F. Warehouse facilities with more than one hundred thousand square feet of total floor space and twenty or fewer full -time employees working at the facility, but not including any area within such a facility that is utilized as office space. G. Gaming clubs as defined in Section 19802 of the California Business and Professions Code but not including bingo parlors. H. Bars. I. Theatrical production sites, if smoking is an integral part of the story in the theatrical production. J. Medical research or treatment sites if smoking is integral to the research and treatment being conducted. K. Private residences, except for private residences licensed as family day care homes, during the hours of operation as family daycare homes and in those areas where children are present. http: / /municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com /codes /rohnerU DATA/TITLE08 /Chapter_8_3... 3/7/2008 Chapter 8.32 USE OF TOBACCO IN PUBLIC PLACES Page 6 of 7 L. Patient smoking areas in long -term health care facilities as defined in Section 1418 of the California Health and Safety Code. M. Breakrooms designated by employers for smoking, provided that all of the following conditions are met: 1. Air from the smoking room shall be exhausted directly to the outside by an exhaust fan. Air from the smoking room shall not be recirculated to other parts of the building. 2. The employer shall comply with any ventilation standard or other standard utilizing appropriate technology, including, but not limited to, mechanical, electronic, and biotechnical systems, adopted by the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board or the federal Environmental Protection Agency. If both adopt inconsistent standards, the ventilation standards of the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board shall be no less stringent than the standards adopted by the federal Environmental Protection Agency. 3. The smoking room shall be located in a nonwork area where no one, as part of his or her work responsibilities, is required to enter. For purposes of this paragraph, "work responsibilities" does not include any custodial or maintenance work carried out in the breakroom when it is unoccupied. 4. There are sufficient nonsmoking break -rooms to accommodate nonsmokers. 5. This section shall not be construed to require employers to provide reasonable accommodation to smokers, or to provide breakrooms for smokers or nonsmokers. (Ord. 596 § 3, 1994: Ord. 574 § 5, 1993: Ord. 509 § I, 1989) 8.32.090 Posting requirements. "Smoking" or "No Smoking" signs, whichever are appropriate, with letters of not less than one inch in height or the international "No Smoking" symbol (consisting of a pictorial representation of a burning cigarette enclosed in a red circle with a red bar across it) shall be clearly, sufficiently and conspicuously posted in every building or other place where smoking is controlled by this chapter, by the owner, operator, manager or other person having control of such building or other place. Every restaurant regulated by this chapter shall have posted at its entrance a sign clearly stating that a non - smoking section is available, and where escorted seating is provided, every patron shall be asked as to his or her preference. (Ord. 509 § I, 1989) ARTICLE 3. LEGAL PROVISIONS 8.32.100 Penalties. A. It shall be unlawful for any person who owns, manages, operates or otherwise controls the use of any premises subject to this chapter to fail to: properly post signs required hereunder; to provide signs for the use of employees in designating their areas; to properly set aside "No Smoking" areas; to adopt a smoking restriction policy; or to comply with any other requirements of this chapter. B. It shall be unlawful for any person to smoke in any area restricted by the provisions of this chapter. C. Any person or business that violates Sections 8.32.060 through 8.32.090, or any other provisions of this chapter shall be guilty of an infraction, punishable by: 1. A fine, not exceeding twenty -five dollars for first violation; 2. A fine, not exceeding fifty dollars for a second violation of this chapter within one year; 3. A fine, not exceeding one hundred dollars for each additional violation of this chapter within five years. (Ord. 509 § I, 1989) 8.32.110 Nonretatiation. http:// municipalcodes .lexisnexis.com /codeslrohnertl DATAITIT'LE08IChapter_8_3... 3/7/2008 Chapter 8.32 USE OF TOBACCO IN PUBLIC PLACES Page 7 of 7 No person or employer shall discharge, refuse to hire, or in any manner, retaliate against any employee or applicant for employment because such employee or applicant exercises any rights afforded by this chapter. (Ord. 509 § I, 1989) 8.32.120 Other applicable laws. This chapter shall not be interpreted or construed to permit smoking where it is otherwise restricted by other applicable laws. (Oral. 509 § I, 1989) 8.32.130 Effective date. The provisions of this chapter shall be effective thirty days from and after the date of its adoption and publication or posting as required by law. (Ord. 509 § I, 1989) 8.32.140 Statutory severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this chapter is, for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the chapter. (Ord. 509 § I, 1989) < <_previous I next» http: / /municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com /codes /rohnert/ DATA/TITLE08 /Chapter_8_3... 3/7/2008 Agenda Packet Preparation TIMELINES for Regular City Council Meetings held on the 2"a & 4`h Tuesdays of each month: Resolutions (other than standard formats for authorizations and approvals), Ordinances & Agreements to Assistant City Attorney via email for review and approval as to form DUE no later than NOON Three (3) Mondays prior to Council meeting date Agenda Items w /attachments via email and hard copy to City Clerk DUE no later than NOON Two (2) Mondays prior to Council meeting date Agenda Draft review by Mayor, City Manager, Assistant City Attorney, City Clerk no later than Tuesday morning One (1) week prior to Council meeting date Agenda Packets distributed to City Council and Agendas posted/distributed /mailed on Wednesday afternoon One (1) week prior to Council meeting date in compliance with Rolinert Park Municipal Code Section 2.08.050 {This section for City Clerk Use Only) ITEM NO. 7 Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 315/08 -TG Copy to: CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT Meeting Date: March 11, 2008 Department: Building Submitted By: Dan Schwarz, Assistant City Manager Submittal Date: March 5, 2008 Agenda Title: Green Building — Healthy Choices for Landlords & Tenants Requested Council.Action: Direct staff to finalize and circulate the attached information under the logos of the City and the Sonoma County Asthma Coalition and authorize inclusion of a modified version in a future utility billing mailing. Summary: Staff of the Sonoma County Asthma Coalition and the City of Rohnert Park have met several times recently to discuss methods for increasing awareness within the rental community (with landlords being the primary target) of green approaches to building maintenance. The attached "Green Maintenance Recommendations for Rental Homes" offers several suggestions. as to how to improve the Nome environment. Although the target audience for this flyer is the rental community, the suggestions contained within are of use to any residents. Staff is seeking direction from the Council on two issues. First, staff recommends that the final form of this flyer display the logos of the City and the Asthma Coalition to formalize both organizations' commitment to the information. The Community Development Department will make the literature available to landlords. Second, because the information can be applied to any dwelling unit, staff recommends that a modified version be developed for circulation in a utility billing insert. The modified version would speak to a broader audience, rather than targeting landlords. As the City would be a partner in this literature, it qualifies for circulation through the utility billing mailers. Under the current schedule, the mailer would circulate in 2009. Staff is evaluating if there would be any opportunity to circulate it sooner. CITY ATTORNEY'S REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION: ( ) Consent Item SReguIar Time 4) Approval O Public Hearing Required ( ) Not Recommended O Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by ouncil ( ) City Comments: / - f r City Manager's Signature: Date: (Revise 010 7) JH:TG- S:05 -b Green Maintenance Recommendations for Rental Homes Americans spend about 90% of their time indoors, where air quality can be 10 x worse than outside air quality. Nearly 1 out of 5 children in Sonoma County have been diagnosed with asthma, which can be triggered by poor indoor air quality in the home. Creating a healthier home environment for tenants can help retain tenants and reduce complaints. Common Indoor Pollutants What can landlords do to improve Indoor Air Quality when preparing a unit for rental? • Replace old carpets with healthy flooring • Use non -toxic indoor paints • Perform maintenance on heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) systems • Use green cleaning methods The City of Rohnert Park encourages all rental owners and managers to utilize the following recommendations to improve indoor air quality in your rental units. Recommendations Local Retailers and Resources: Home Depot: Carpet padding that has been factory off - gassed. Basic low VOC and formaldehyde paint, sealants and adhesives. Ecoclean: Santa Rosa commercial janitorial and maintenance company that offers non -toxic service: www.ecocleaned.com 707 - 527 -5400 Lowes: No VOC paint (Olympic brand is available at no premium), sealants and adhesives, Pergo laminate (low VOC, no adhesive). www.flor.com easy to replace single carpet squares recycled content, low VOC and no adhesive. Build -it -Green has resources and how -to's: www.builditgreen.org Green Seal certifies less and non toxic alternative products www.geenseal.com Multiunit Housing green building resource: http://www.stopwaste.org/home/index.asp?paqe=2 91 Green Affordable Housing Coalition: http: / /frontierassoc. net /greenaffordablehousing /lnde x.shtml City of Rohnert Park: The Community Development Department has resources and staff to assist city dwellers with going green. www.rpciy.org 707 -588- 2200. Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3/5/08 -TG Copy to: ROHNERT PARK GENERAL PLAN UPDATE STEERING COMMITTEE AGENDA Thursday, February 28, 2008 2:00 to 4:00 P.M. Spreckels Performing Arts Center - Community Room 5409 Snyder Lane, Rohnert Park, CA 94928 CALL MEETING TO ORDER • Roll Call: ❑ Chairperson Mackenzie ❑ Ahanotu ❑Kilat ❑ Vidak- Martinez • Approval of Minutes — December 13, 2007 • Acknowledgment of Planning staffs report on the posting of the meeting's agenda. Agenda has been posted in three public places: Community Center, Public Safety Building and City Hall. Item #1 1 Follow -Up to December 13, 2007 Meeting Item #2 1 Buildout Numbers /Policy Issues Related to Specific Plans and Other Development Plans Item #3 ( Joint City Council/Planning Commission Meeting Date /Topics Item #4 1 Public Comment Adjournment Disabled Accommodation: If you have a disability which requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this Steering Committee Meeting, please contact the City Offices at (707) 588 -2236 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to insure arrangements for accommodation by the City. Please make sure the Planning Division is notified as soon as possible if you have a visual impairment that requires the meeting materials be produced in another format (Braille, audio -tape, etc.). R U S S I AN R I V E R WATERSHED ASSOCIATION RUSSIAN RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS February 28, 2008, 9:00 AM Windsor Council Chambers 9291 Old Redwood Highway, Windsor, CA 95492 AGENDA 1. Call to Order and Introductions 2. Approval of the Agenda 3. Approval of Standing Items A. Minutes: January 24, 2008 Board of Directors Meeting Council: X Miscellaneous Communications _ Agenda: 3111108 X 3/5/08 -TG Copy to: 4. Guest Speaker Ann Hancock, Executive Director, Climate Protection Campaign 5. BOD Business A. IRWMP Update (Renton) B. Approve 2008 -2009 Work Plan (Richardson /Grow) 6. Working Group Activities A. Working Group Activities (Grow) Next meeting: March 11, 2008 (8:30 AM —10:00 AM) 7. Items of Interest 8. Public Comment 9. Adjourn The Russian River Watershed Association complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. Please contact Christy Kennedy at (707) 833 -2553 with any questions. FOR ACCESSIBLE MEETING INFORMATION CALL: (707) 543 -3350 ADD: (707) 543 -3031 WATER ADVISORY COMMITTEE Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3 /5 /08 -TG Copy to: MONDAY: MARCH 3, 2008 Laguna Treatment Plant 4300 Llano Road, Santa Rosa, CA 9:00 am (Estuary ! Wetlands Conference Room) Note: TAC will not be held 1. Check In 2. Public Comment 3. Approval and Recap from the November 5th Meeting 4. TAC Reports 5. Consider Proposed (FY 2008/09) SCWA Budget and Prudent Reserve Recommendation 6. Consider Sonoma — Marin Saving Water Partnership — MOU 7. Consider Support of Salmon Coalition Watershed Approach per SWRCB Proposed Instream Flow Policy 8. Update on Report to State Water Resources Control Board re: 2007 Temporary Urgency Change 9. Biological Opinion Status Update 10. Water Project EIR Status Update 11. Update of SCWA Climate Protection Initiative 12. Regional Planning North Coast Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (NCIRWMP) 13. ACWA — DC Trip 14. City of Santa Rosa / SCWA Biodiesel Joint Project 15. Potter Valley Project 16. Items for next Agenda's (TAC: April 7, 2008 and WAC: May 5, 2008) 17. Check Out �Z -Pe `zou are incited to a reception honoring Supervisor 1�illy cognizing him for his service 9 commitment CUUf1Cll: X Wcellane,cus l.Cfil(t"1!1�ii.SliUi i Agenda: L11108 Agenda: 3111108 X 3/5163 -TG � X � CaPY to: 1 Copy to: ��_ C To the tourism industry in Sonoma Country Thursday, February 28 4: 00 p. m. - 7:00 p. m. Tides Wharf at Bodega Bay gfosted � 6y Sonoma County TouAsm Bureau 'lease PS. V �P. 6y 2118 to Maureen 2unheim at SCE 522 -5807 or mtunheimL sonomacoun .. com �1 COUNTY OF SONOMA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 575 ADMINISTRATION DRIVE, RM. 100A SANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA 95403 (707)565 -2241. FAX (707) 565 -3778 RECEIVED CITY Or ROHNERT PARK Dear Community Member: February 12, 2008 TIM SMITH THIRD DISTRICT SUPERVISOR o tsmith @sonoma- county.org �� a 4° j . Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3/5/0 8-TG Copy to: You are invited to obtain timely and essential infoimation for your business at the seventh - annual Business Environmental Alliance (BEA) Business Breakfast on February 29`h. The program features local executives sharing the "best practices" that have helped them operate more efficiently. This Breakfast also provides an outlook for the supply and price prospects of water, energy, and waste disposal in Sonoma County. You'll also be alerted to new opportunities in these arenas, including the emerging "clean and green" sector here in Sonoma County. In addition, you can meet one -on -one with local resource groups to learn ways your business can take advantage of new rebates and other opportunities. I have a strong interest in these issues and how they impact businesses in Sonoma County. The growing awareness and concern regarding climate change offer new opportunities for local business. Therefore, I am excited to be speaking on these and related topics during the Breakfast as well. About 250 businesspeople attended last year, so advance registration is offered on a first -come, first- served basis. Please return the enclosed response form by February 22, 2008. I look forward to seeing you there. Enclosure: Response form Cordially, TIM SMITH Third District Supervisor Untitled document Page 2 of 3 Council: X Miscellaneous Commpnications Agenda: 3111108 X 315/08 -TG Copy to Sonoma County Adult & Youth Development www.scayd.org 707.793.9030 in partnership with the cities of Rohnert Park and Cotati For more information, go to scayd org If you no longer wish to receive these emails, please reply to this message with "Unsubscribe" in the subject line or simply click on the following link: Unsubscribe Click here to forward this email to a friend { 1/8/2008 COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS (3/11/08) Distributed Communications with Miscellaneous 1: tS 4 � ' ���'19 ,C' .tc T"�'' ��9'^ - �+�'+i,.S-"X "'i,��+�' � ,'i"•,. �Ck,6.. .z,"1.3��<� *�� ,G '.'cy � y -, � 1. Clarissa (last name illegible) Letter in opposition to potential State Park closures 2. Jack Atkin / The Watchful Eye Consolidation of policing agencies 3. Mayor Mackenzie Response to Jack Atkin letter on consolidation of policing agencies 4. State Water Resources Control Board Amendment of Monitoring & Reporting Requirements pertaining to Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems 5. SFGate Article: Bay Area Vallejo, others face cash crunch 6. SFGate Readers' Platform: City on the edge 7. Bloomberg.com California City Moves Closer to Bankruptcy Filing 8. Amy O'Gorman Capitol Weekly Article re: Rent Control Ordinance Repeal Communications Distributed 1: 9. So. Co. Department of Transportation 2121/08 letter re: divestiture of some solid waste facilities 10. Nancy Crawford / Resident 2/28/08 letter re: Request for Reinstatement of Sunshine Bus Driver 11. Harvey Bell / Resident 3/1/08 letter re: Horizon Air flight patterns 12. Jerrie Vaughn / Resident 3/3/08 letter re: Request to Reinstate Senior discount for Cable services 13. Viviane Isabeau / Resident 3/4/08 letter re: Water shut -off issues REQUEST to AGENDIZE 14. 1 League of California Cities Interested in Serving on the League Board of Directors? 15. Nancy Crawford / Resident Letter she will discuss at 3.11.08 Council meeting "16B!ad Bollinger /Nort!Bay Business Stephen Donley selected as one of top "Forty under 40" Journal 17. Gerard Giudice / Sally Tomatoes Testimonial on behalf of Sonoma Mountain Village ok, gdqzb FEB 2 2 2008 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK tALnGI: Miscellaneous Conv to: Y Zg�tB i cu',GtioJ�✓NOr�'�re�" et' t� 1 1 � P� J ° ^+I (d V �/ert �jo '�� f � rCallCa�6vv L VVQ,6�k q�.� � -� tw_lr(oo\p r"r / 1A - Pk*- J)D ell Council: Miscellaneous Communications January 11, 2008 Tim Smith Council Member City of Rohnert Park 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Dear Mr. Smith, .2g.og b� So:no,ma county Taxpayers':`Associat�on mom www 4onic,n*t/«taxpayor Balancing your budget may be the biggest and most consistent challenge you face. Part of the reason this is such a challenge is because none of the normal solutions, onu f7ce cutting services or raising taxes is politically desirable. It ought to be good news then that there may be an opportunity for you to get more bang for the taxpayers buck from consolidating and/or out sourcing policing services. A little background, ten years ago the Sonoma County Law Enforcement Association endorsed pursuing a federal grant to fund a study to explore the benefits of consolidation and cooperation among the County's policing agencies. While the grant was never obtained and the study did not take place, we have had two real life examples of consolidation in the ensuing years. The town of Windsor and the City of Sonoma both outsourced their police services to the County Sheriff. In the case of Sonoma the City is reported to have saved $6K000 per year from that decision. Our Association believes that this is a topic that deserves serious consideration as a way to use the limited taxpayer resources more efficiently.. This is a topic that needs to originate with the Council, rather than within the police departments and we urge you to snake this a priority to explore. We are not naive enough to imagine there will be no opposition to any move to consolidate policing services. Opposition may come from police executives who see their jobs at risk or from citizens or public employee unions who envision a loss of local control and jobs. In truth, neither needs to be the case. Promoting this. idea and resisting the opposition is what you were elected to do. It's not every day that good ideas emerge that offer an opportunity to deliver key government services more efficiently and at a lower cost. This is one that deserves your immediate attention. The Sonoma County Taxpayers' Association is willing to back you on this pursuit for cost savings. . cerel , ark Atkin President P.O, Box 14241 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 {h. (707) 461.1089 bL (707) 576 -1460 e-mat: taxpaywaswk net City Council Jake Mackenzie Mayor Pam Stafford Vice -Mayor Amie L. Breeze Tim Smith Vicki Vidak- Martinez Council Members Stephen R. Donley City Manager Daniel Schwarz Assistant City Manager Judy Hauff City Clerk Michelle Marchetta Kenyon CityAttomey James J. Atencio Benjamin D. Winig Assistant City Attorneys Thomas R. Bullard Director of Public Safety Ron Bendorff Director of Community Development Darrin W. Jenkins Director of Public Works / City Engineer Sandra M. Lipitz Director of Administrative Services February 3, 2008 Jack Atkin President, Sonoma Co. Tax Payers' Association P.O. Box 14241 Santa Rosa, CA 95402 Dear Mr. Atkin: C:ouncit: Miscellaneous to: TIT- Thank you for your recent letter recommending the Rohnert Park City Council consider consolidating and/or out sourcing our police services as a means of reducing our budget and using limited financial resources efficiently. While the City Council is appreciative of your recommendation and wholeheartedly agrees that public officials have a duty to continuously examine budgets and look for ways to be more efficient, the concept of consolidating or out sourcing public safety services is not new to Rohnert Park. With respect to consolidating services, Rohnert Park essentially was founded on such a concept as our city is the only true public safety department in Sonoma County where the police and fire departments are combined into one department creating a substantial cost savings to our community. Our Public Safety Officers are crossed trained in police and fire services receiving accreditation from the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training, as well as, the California State Fire Marshal's Office. Having fully crossed trained Public Safety Officers significantly reduces the number of emergency personnel typically required to staff traditionally separate police and fire departments; there are other considerable financial savings as well. To ensure Rohnert Park is managing its resources in an efficient and effective manner, the City Council has explored the notion of out sourcing public safety services on numerous occasions; department heads have not only examined the issue for benefits and detriments, but they have also been involved in serious conversations with other jurisdictions to determine the viability of such a proposition. After considerable review, the City Council has determined that out sourcing our public safety services would not be the best method of providing these services to our community. We believe Rohnert Park is doing an excellent job of providing pubic safety services in an efficient and effective manner. Not only have we combined our police and fire services into one department, but also our Public Safety Department either currently, or in the past, has participated in several multi - agency programs. Examples of this participation includes a partnership in the 6750 Commerce Boulevard . Rohnert Park CA . 94928 . (707) 588 -2226 . Fax (707) 588 -2263 www.rpcity.org Sonoma County Public Safety Consortium for the 'consolidation of computer aided dispatching, records management, and mobile data computing; participation on the Sonoma County Narcotics Task Force, the Multi - agency Gang Enforcement Team, and the pervious Sonoma County Special Weapons - - Assault Team (SWAT). Additionally, our city contributes financially to the Sonoma County Sheriff's Department Bomb Unit, relieving our Public Safety Department of the financial burden of having its own program. Should Rohnert Park need the services of SWAT, we rely on the Sonoma County Sheriff's Department as well. Our Public Safety Department also participates in reciprocal agreements for automatic aid and mutual aid for police services and fire services as well. As you can see, Rohnert Park is very engaged in sharing public safety services as a way of reducing costs and delivering services in an effective and efficient manner; however, fully consolidating our Public Safety Department with another jurisdiction is not beneficial to our city. Thank you for taking the time to write the City Council. Sincerely, Jake ackenzie or cc: City Council State Water Resources Control Board Linda S. Adams Executive Office Secretary for Environmental Protection Tam M. Dodue; Chair 1001 I Street • Sacramento, California 95814 • (916) 341 -5615 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 100 • Sacramento, California • 95 812-0 100 - Fax ( 916) 341- 5621 • http:llwww:waterboards.ca gov .0 Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor TO: All Dischargers Subject to State Water Board Order No. 2006 - 0003 -DWQ (Statewide General Waste D'srnarnP QAr.� �,��m�n -- itary Sewer Systems) COUNCIL: it DECEIVED , COMMUNICATIONS Zia9,0 bi FEB 2 5 2008 FROM: Doro�Ric AGENDA Execu #ive D ctor CITY OF COPY Tel: ROHNERT PARK DATE: February 20, 2008 COPY TO: SUBJECT: AMENDMENT OF MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR ORDER NO. 2006- 0003 -DWQ Please be advised that, as of this date, I have amended the Monitoring and Reporting Requirements for State Water Board General Order No. 2006 - 0003 -DWQ pertaining to Sanitary Sewer Collection Systems. Those amendments are set forth on Attachment 'A to Order No. WQ 2008 - 0002 -EXEC, a copy of which is attached. The amendments address the time within which a discharger must notify the Office of Emergency Services (OES), local public health officials, and the appropriate regional water quality control board of a spill or overflow that affects a drainage channel or surface water body. The requirements that have been in effect until today allowed too much time to pass before a report. Further the required report did not apprise the local regional water quality control board of whether the Office of Emergency Services had already received its required notice. The attached amendments add two notification requirements to rectify these problems. Should you have any questions about these amendments, please contact Eric Maag, Water Resources Control Engineer, at (916) 445 -9260. Attachment cc: Executive Officers California Environmental Protection Agency n Recvcled Paner STATE OF. CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD ORDER NO. WQ2008 -0002 -EXEC ADOPTING AMENDED MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR STATEWIDE GENERAL WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS The State of California, Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) finds: 1. The State Water Board is authorized to prescribe statewide general waste discharge requirements for categories of discharges that involve the same or similar operations and the same of similar types of waste pursuant to Water Code 13263, subdivision (i). 2. The State Water Board on May 2, 2006; adopted Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems, Order No. 2006 - 0003 -DWQ, pursuant to that authority. 3. The State Water Board on May 2, 2006, adopted Monitoring and Reporting Requirements to implement the General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems. 4. State Water Board Order No. 2006- 0003 -DWQ, paragraph G.2., and the Monitoring and Reporting Requirements, both provide that the Executive Director may modify the terms of the Monitoring and Reporting Requirements at any time. 5. The time allowed in those Monitoring and Reporting R* equirements for the filing of the initial report of an overflow is too long to adequately protect the public health and safety or the beneficial uses of the waters of the state when there is a sewage collection system spill. An additional notification requirement is necessary and appropriate to ensure the Office of Emergency Services, local public health officials, and the applicable regional water quality control board are apprised of a spill that reaches a drainage channel or surface water. 6. Further, the burden of providing a notification as soon as possible is de minimis and will allow response agencies to take action as soon as possible to protect public health and safety and beneficial uses of the waters of the state. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: Pursuant to the authority delegated by Resolution No. 2002 -0104 and Order No. 2006-0003 - DWQ, the Monitoring and Reporting Requirements for Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems No. 2006 - 0003 -DWQ is hereby amended as shown in Attachment A, with new text indicated by double - underline. Dated: W/ W08 Ovl"Lj1- k Dorothy Ri Executive erector ATTACHMENT A STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM - NO.2006-0003 -DWQ (AS REVISED BY ORDER NO. WQ 2008 - 0002 -EXEC) STATEWIDE GENERAL WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS FOR - SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS This Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) establishes monitoring, record keeping, reporting and public notification requirements for Order No. 2006 - 2003 -DWQ, "Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Sanitary Sewer Systems." Revisions to this MRP may be made at any time by the Executive Director, and may include a reduction or increase in the monitoring and reporting. NOTIFICATION Although State and Regional Water Board staff do not have duties as first responders, protect public health and beneficial uses. 1, For any discharges of sewage that results in a discharge to a drainaae channel or a surface water. the Discharger shall as soon as possible, but not later then two 2) hours after becoming aware of the discharge, notify the State Office of Emergency Services, the local health officer or directors of environmental health with jurisdiction over affected water bodies, and the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board, 2. As soon as possible, but no later then twenty -four (2 4) hours after becomin aware of a discharge to a drainage channel or a surface water. the Discharger shall submit to the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board a certification that the State Office of Emergency Services and the local health officer or directors of environmental health with jurisdiction over the affected water bodies have been notified of the discharge. A. SANITARY SEWER OVERFLOW REPORTING SSO Categories 1. Category 1 - All discharges of sewage resulting from a failure in the Enrollee's sanitary sewer system that: A. Equal or exceed 1000 gallons, or B. Result in a discharge to a drainage channel and /or surface water; or C. Discharge to a storm drainpipe that was not fully captured and returned to the sanitary. sewer system. Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 2006 - 0003 -DWQ Statewide General WDRs for Sanitary Sewer Systems Page 2 of 5 Revised 02/20/2008 4 2. Category 2 - All other discharges of sewage resulting from a failure in the Enrollee's sanitary sewer system. , 3. Private Lateral Sewage Discharges - Sewage discharges that are caused by blockages or other problems within a privately owned lateral. SSO Reporting Timeframes 4. Category 1 SSOs — Except as provided above, all SSOs that meet the above criteria for Category 1 SSOs must be reported as soon as: (1) the Enrollee has knowledge of the discharge, (2) reporting is possible, and (3) reporting can be provided without substantially impeding cleanup or other emergency measures. Initial reporting of Category 1 SSOs must.be reported to the Online SSO System as soon as possible but no later than 3 business days after the Enrollee is made aware of the SSO. Minimum information that must be contained in the 3 -day report must include all information identified in section 9 below, except for item 9.K. A final certified report must be completed through the Online SSO System, within 15 calendar days of the conclusion of SSO response and remediation. Additional information may be added to the certified report, in the form of an attachment, at any time. The above reporting requirements are in addition to do not preclude other emergency notification requirements and timeframes mandated by other regulatory agencies (local County Health Officers, local Director of Environmental Health, Regional Water Boards, or Office of Emergency Services (OES)) or State law. 5. Category 2 SSOs - All SSOs that meet the above criteria for Category 2 SSOs must be reported to the Online SSO Database within 30 days after the end of the calendar month in which the SSO occurs (e.g. all SSOs occurring in the month of January must be entered into the database by March 1 st). 6. Private Lateral Sewage Discharges — All sewage discharges that meet the above criteria for Private Lateral sewage discharges may be reported to the Online SSO Database based upon the Enrollee's discretion. If a Private Lateral sewage discharge is recorded in the SSO Database, the Enrollee must identify the sewage, discharge as occurring and caused by a private lateral, and a responsible party (other than the Enrollee) should be identified, if known. 7. If there are no SSOs during the calendar month, the Enrollee will provide, within 30 days after the end of each calendar month, a statement through the Online SSO Database certifying that there were no SSOs for the designated month. 8. In the event that the SSO Online Database is not available, the enrollee must fax all required information to the appropriate Regional Water Board office in Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 2006 - 0003 -4WQ Page 3 of 5 Statewide General WDRs for. Sanitary Sewer Systems Revised 02/20/2008 accordance with the time schedules identified above. In such event, the Enrollee must also enter all required information into the Online SSO Database as soon as practical. Mandatory Information to be Included in SSO Online Reporting All Enrollees must obtain SSO Database accounts`and receive a "Userrlame" and "Password" by registering through the California Integrated Water Quality System (CIWQS). These accounts will allow controlled and secure entry into the SSO Database. Additionally, within thirty (30) days of receiving an account and prior to recording SSOs into the SSO Database, ail Enrollees must complete the "Collection System Questionnaire ", which collects pertinent information regarding an Enrollee's collection system. The "Collection System Questionnaire" must be updated at.Iaast every 12 months. At a minimum, the following mandatory information must be included prior to finalizing and certifying an SSO report for each category of SSO: 9. Category 2 SSOs: A. Location of SSO by entering GPS coordinates; B. Applicable Regional Water Board, i.e. identify the region in which the SSO occurred; C. County where SSO occurred; D. Whether or not the SSO entered a drainage channel and /or surface water; E. Whether or not the SSO was discharged to a storm drain pipe that was not fully captured and returned to the sanitary sewer system; 'F. Estimated SSO volume in gallons; G. SSO source (manhole, cleanout, etc.); H. SSO cause (mainline blockage, roots, etc.); I. Time of SSO notification or discovery; J. Estimated operator arrival time; K. SSO destination; L. Estimated SSO end time; and M. SSO Certification. Upon SSO Certification, the SSO Database will issue a Final SSO Identification (ID) Number. 10. Private Lateral Sewage Discharges:_ A. All information listed above (if applicable and known), as well as; B. Identification of sewage discharge as a private lateral sewage discharge; and C. Responsible party contact information (if known). Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 2006.- 0003 -DWQ Page 4 of 5 Statewide General WDRs for Sanitary Sewer Systems Revised 02/20/2008 11. Category 1 SSOs: A. All information listed for'Category 2 SSOs; as well as; B. Estimated SSO volume that reached surface water, drainage channel, or not recovered from a storm 'drain C. Estimated SSO amount recovered; D. Response and corrective action taken; E. If samples were taken, identify which regulatory agencies received sample results (if applicable). If no samples were taken, NA must be selected. E. Parameters that samples were analyzed for (if applicable); G. Identification of whether or not health warnings were posted; H. Beaches impacted (if applicable). if no beach was impacted, NA must be selected; I. Whether or not there is an. ongoing investigation; J. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the overflow and a schedule of major milestones for those steps; K. OES control number (if applicable); L. Date OES was called (if applicable); M. Time OES was called (if applicable); N. Identification of whether or not County Health Officers were called; O: Date County Health Officer was called (if applicable); and P. Time County Health Officer was called (if applicable). Reporting to Other Regulatory Agencies These reporting requirements do not preclude an Enrollee from reporting SSOs to other regulatory agencies pursuant California state law. These reporting requirements do not replace other Regional Water Board telephone reporting requirements for SSOs. The Enrollee shall report SSOs to OES, in accordance with California Water Code Section 13271. Office of Emergency Services Phone (800) 852 -7550 2. The Enrollee shall report SSOs to County Health officials in accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section 5410 et seq. 3. The SSO database will automatically generate an. e-mail notification with customized information about the SSO upon initial reporting of the SSO and final certification for all Category 1 SSOs. E- mails will be sent to the appropriate County Health Officer and /or Environmental Health Department if the county desires this information, and the appropriate Regional Water Board. Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 2006- 0003 -DWQ Page 5 of 5 Statewide General WDRs for Sanitary Sewer systems Revised 02/20/2008 B. Record Keeping 1. Individual SSO. records shall be maintained by the Enrollee for a minimum of five years from the date of the SSO. This period may be extended when-requested by a Regional Water Board Executive Officer: f2. Omitted.l 3. All records shall be made available for review upon State or Regional Water Board staff's request. 4. All monitoring instruments and devices that are used by the Enrollee to fulfill the prescribed monitoring and reporting program shall be properly maintained and calibrated as necessary to ensure their continued accuracy; 5. The Enrollee shall retain records of all SSOs, such as, but not limited to and when applicable: a. Record of Certified report, as submitted to the online SSO database; b. All original recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation; c. Service call records and complaint logs of calls received by the Enrollee; d. SSO calls; e. SSO records; f. Steps that have been and will be taken to prevent the SSO from recurring and a schedule to implement those steps. g. Work orders, work completed, and any other maintenance records from the previous 5 years which are associated with responses and investigations of system problems related to SSOs; h. A list and description of complaints from customers or others from the previous 5 years; and i. Documentation of performance and implementation measures for the previous 5 years. 6. If water quality samples are required by an environmental or health regulatory agency or State law, or if voluntary monitoring is conducted by the Enrollee or its agent(s), as a result of any SSO, records of monitoring information shall include: a. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements; b. The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements; C. The date(s) analyses were performed; d. The individual(s) who performed the analyses; e. The analytical technique or method used; and, f. The results of such analyses. Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 2006 - 0003 -DWQ Statewide Genera! WDRs for Sanitary Sewer Systems Page 6 of 5 Revised 02/2012008 C. Certification 1. All final reports must be certified by an authorized person as required by Provision J of the- Order. _: 2. Registration of authorized individuals, who may certify reports, will be in accordance with the CIWQS' protocols for reporting: Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 2006 -0003 will become effective on the date of adoption by the State Water Board. The notification requirements added by Order No. WQ 2008- 0002 -EXEC will become effective upon issuance by the Executive Director. CERTIFICATION The undersigned Clerk to the Board does hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of an order amended by the Executive Director of the State Water Board. Je Cl e Townsend o the Board BAY AREA / Vallejo, others face cash crunch Crraft.rnm RECEIVED BAY AREA FEB 2 6 2008 Vallejo, others face cash crunch CITY OF Carolyn )ones, Chronicle Staff Writer ROHNERT PARK Sunday, February 24, 2008 Page 1 of 3 Vallejo, which is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, may have company in cities and counties around the Bay Area that are also being hit with the double whammy of vanishing tax revenue and ballooning payroll and retiree costs. Reduced library services, fewer recreation programs, rotating fire station closures and deferred maintenance to streets, parks and buildings will become realities in many Bay Area cities over the next few years, officials say. "Vallejo is certainly not alone," said Cynthia Kroll, senior regional economist at the Fisher Center for Real Estate and Urban Economy at UC Berkeley's Walter A. Haas School of Business. "The pressures of public safety and retirement costs are real. The fallout won't happen immediately, but we'll see it over the long term." Vallejo has been particularly slammed by the downturn in the economy. The dismal housing market has meant a steep drop in transfer taxes, building and inspection fees, and supplemental property taxes. Transfer taxes, for example, are down by 70 percent in the city since 2005. Meanwhile, police and fire costs make up 8o percent of Vallejo's general fund budget - about 30 percent more than the state average. Many cities, including Oakland and San Francisco, have had to continually raise public safety salaries to entice people to take jobs. The Vallejo City Council is expected to vote Tuesday on whether to declare bankruptcy and slash funding to the library, museum, swimming pool and community groups. The city is also in last- minute negotiations with the police and fire unions to rescind a 15 percent pay raise. Meanwhile, Vallejo police on Friday asked residents to call 911 only to report the most serious crimes, such as shootings, robberies or missing persons. Emergency dispatchers are in such short supply that non - life - threatening incidents should be reported on a nonemergency phone line or on the city Police Department's Web site, vallejopd.com, beginning. March 1, said William Powell, the department's support services manager. "If your garden hose has been stolen, call the main number" - (707) 648 -4321 - "and leave a http: / /www.sfgate.com/cgi- bin /article.cgi ?file= /c /a/2008 /02 /24 /BADLV 78KJ.DTL... 2/26/2008 'I: st .Ov 'Vpog BAY AREA / Vallejo, others face cash crunch message," Powell said. Page 2 of 3 A city hiring freeze has reduced the number of 911 dispatchers from 27 to 21, and cut the number of clerks in the records department from 19 to 5, he said. The main lobby hours are also being cut by two hours a day beginning March i. The new hours are 9:3o a.m. to 5 p.m. The lobby will be open until 6:30 p.m. on Tuesdays. "We don't want to discourage people from calling the police - we just want people to be smarter about when they call," Powell said. Vallejo library services haven't been cut yet, but branch manager Linda Matchette expects the bad news any day. Slashing library services would hurt thousands of Vallejo residents, she said. "Our computers are booked solid, seven days a week," she said. "Circulation is up 3 to 4 percent every month. Our classes are packed. I don't see anything that can be easily cut." Cities that are most vulnerable to financial crisis are.those that relied heavily on property tax revenue during the real estate boom, Kroll said. Cities with strong industry, business and commercial districts are likely to fare better, experts said. A city's budget problems can have a ripple effect in the long run, she said. Cuts to the police department usually translate to higher crime rates, while deferred maintenance leads to more potholes and overgrown parks. To raise money, cities often increase fees and taxes, which hurts local businesses and homeowners, Kroll added. Over time, property values decline and tax revenue falls even further. Bay Area cities are hoping to avoid that fate by keeping services as efficient as possible and living off reserves. "We're weathering the storm, so far," said Harriet Commons, Fremont's finance director. "But the slowdown does have an affect on our budget. If the state continues having budget problems, we're all going to have budget problems." Antioch has seen a drop in transfer taxes, sales tax and inspection fees, but has skirted disaster by dipping into its reserves, said Finance Director Dawn Merchant. "We're all kind of in the same boat, but as long as we're fiscally responsible and monitor our expenses, we should be OK," she said. http: / /www. sfgate.comlcgi- binlarticle.cgi ?file = /c /a /2008 /021241BADLV 78KJ.DTL... 2/26/2008 BAY AREA / Vallejo, others face cash crunch Page 3 of 3 Things aren't so stable for Contra Costa County, which will have to make deep cuts over the next few years to pay its burgeoning retiree bills, said county Auditor - Controller Steve Ybarra. Supplemental taxes are down 50 percent from last year, he said, while property taxes did not rise as much as expected. Meanwhile, retiree health care costs have skyrocketed. The county needs to put away $216 million a year over the next 30 years to cover its retiree health care bills. The outlook looks grim as Baby Boomers begin to retire, Ybarra said. The county has about 8,000 employees and 4,000 retirees, but over the next 10 years the numbers are expected to be equal. "Things have got to change," said Ybarra. "We're all going to have to look at this, from the federal level on down. But so far in Contra Costa County, we're not going bankrupt, and that's the bottom line." How to get involved -- Monday: Council members will hold a community meeting at 7 p.m. at JFK Library, 505 Santa Clara St., Vallejo. -- Tuesday: The Vallejo City Council meets at 7 p.m. at City Hall, 555 Santa Clara St., Vallejo, to discuss ways of dealing with the city's fiscal crisis. E -mail Carolyn Jones at carolynjones @sfchronicle.com. http: / /sfgate. com /cgi- bin / article. cgi ?f = /c /a /2008 /02 /24 /BADLV78K]. DTL This article appeared on page B - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle http: / /www. sfgate. com / cgi - bin / article .cgi ?file= /c /a/2008 /02 /24 /BADLV 78KJ.DTL... 2/26/2008 Readers' Platform: City on the edge rS a .aom Readers' Platform: City on the edge Wednesday, February 27, 2008 Council: Miscellaneous Communications Agenda Copy to: Copy to: Page 1 of 2 Plenty of finger pointing, at the unions and others, when it comes to the travails of Vallejo. Below is a sample, edited for space, of recent comments posted on SFGate. To read more, go to sfgate.com /ZCOB, sfgate.com /Z000, and sfgate.com /ZCOD The fact of the matter is, the city council has been more than happy to approve the contracts of the safety unions when they've come up for a vote. In the meantime the same city council has spent millions of dollars on contracts with developers to "redevelop" downtown with absolutely nothing to show for it; has virtually given away the incredibly valuable Mare Island property to builders of expensive McMansions instead of developing it as industrial/business property; and wasted millions more in failed lawsuits against the same public safety unions it now wants to negotiate with. Vallejo's government is totally and wholly to blame for the problems facing the city now. - Dave Abston, 49, Vallejo Dave, because of binding arbitration, the city council has approved safety union contracts. The unions have the city OVER A BARREL. And what about our chamber of commerce? Do you expect 7 part-time council members to be responsible for all economic development? - Katy Miessner, 49, Vallejo I'm surprised the firefighters and police in Vallejo don't seem to understand that once the city responsible for their contracted -for salaries declares bankruptcy, the judge will be rewriting their compensation anyway. Those guys who retired early are looking pretty prescient right about now. - Mark Colombo, 45, Corte Madera U.S. military personnel after 30 years of service, including frequent relocations to often very inhospitable places, can retire at 70% of their base pay. California police officers and fire fighters, whose job is no more important or dangerous than our military, retire at go% of their base pay after 3o years of service. Virtually every city and county in California has signed a contract that pays police, fire, etc., more to retire than they make working. Needless to say this is literally a recipe for bankruptcy. - Peter Christiansen, 65, South San Francisco Too many yahoos bashing city employees rather than focus on what's hurting http: / /www.sfgate.com/cgi- bin /article.cgi ?file= /c /a/2008/02/27/BA7TV 90PA. DTL... 2/28/2008 Readers' Platform: City on the edge Page 2 of 2 cities like Vallejo and keeping us from being able to afford. to live near our families: the economic distortions caused by Prop i3. It's past time for the state to appoint a commission made up of stakeholders (not packed solely with business interests, or seniors) to come up with a reasonable property tax scheme to replace Prop ig within the next 3 -5 years. A fair, stable, flexible property tax funding mechanism will help cities like Vallejo weather bad economic times. - Tim Slavin, 48, Cave Creek, Ariz. After Mare Island Navy Shipyard closed in the 1980s, Vallejo failed to gentrify and rehabilitate the downtown area. Now that property tax revenues are decreasing, the city doesn't have enough to pay for services. Downtown Vallejo is rundown. There are enough residents of Vallejo to support expanded gentrification, but if Vallejo residents are shopping in Fairfield, then the city managers need to lure them home. - Nichole Bonsteel, 36, Concord I recall flying to Vallejo for a shooting, (I was a flight nurse for an EMS helicopter) back in'93, and was puzzled, as we had never had any gang type flights. Then those flights became routine. Up until now, firefighters and cops (and nurses, too) were considered to be heroes, and therefore untouchable. [But] with the mortgage crisis, the tax base is being further decimated. So now we have a town requiring more services from EMS /police, and a strong union for firefighters that has been given what they want forever. This was going to happen eventually, and yes, this will be played out in other towns. - Janice Hudson, CRNA MSN, 48, San Mateo What happened to the days of the locals volunteering? Have a minimal staff and recruit volunteer citizens with pagers for when duty calls. I'm sure there would be no problem with the locals protecting their city. - Steven Sims, 42, Vallejo Time for the city to play the lottery. Four bucks a week is not that bad. - Aaron Kitashima, 24, San Francisco http: / /sfgate.com /cgi- bin / article. cgi ?f= /c/a /2008/02/27/BA7TV90PA. DTL This article appeared on page B - 9 of the San Francisco Chronicle http:// www. sfgate. com/ cgi - bin /article. cgi? file=/ c /a/2008 /02 /27 /BA7TV90PA.DTL... 2/28/2008 Bloomberg Printer - Friendly Page [Council: i { I Miscellaneous to: California City Moves Closer to Bankruptcy Filing (Update3) By Michael B. Marois and William Selway Page 1 of 3 bl Feb. 27 (Bloomberg) -- Vallejo, a city of 135,000 outside of San Francisco, moved closer to bankruptcy after negotiations with its labor unions collapsed. Bondholders will likely be asked to sacrifice some of their investment if the city seeks bankruptcy protection, an attorney for the municipality said last night. Vallejo faces ballooning labor costs and declining housing - related sales - tax revenue, leaving budget officials projecting that money will run out within weeks. The city council is scheduled to consider a resolution tomorrow to file for Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection, after negotiations with labor unions to win salary concessions broke down Monday. if approved, Vallejo would become the biggest city and second - largest local government in the state after Orange County to file for bankruptcy. Municipalities throughout California are grappling with billions of dollars in labor and pension cost increases incurred during the late 1990s. The crisis comes as the worst housing slump in the U.S. in 26 years saps tax revenue. The state's own $16 billion deficit led Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger last month to declare a fiscal emergency. Bondholders are ' 'creditors who would have to come to the table and it may be possible to adjust how much you are paying them and on what time period, which would, in effect, free up money that could be used as part of the plan to resolve the city's problems on a longer -term basis." John Knox, a public finance attorney with the law firm Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, told the city council last night. 'Last Resort' Vallejo faces a $6 million shortfall and won't have money left to pay salaries as of March 31, according to the city manager's office. The deficit is expected to grow to $13 million during the coming fiscal year, beginning July 1, according to budget documents. Police and firefighting salaries, pension and overtime consumes $63.1 million, or about 74 percent of the city's $85 million general fund budget. The city has slashed $13 million in spending since December 2006, firing 47 workers. ' ' Bankruptcy is a last resort," said councilwoman Joanne Schivley. ' ' But guess what folks, that's where we are now at." Standard & Poor's on Feb. 21 changed its outlook to negative from stable on $59 million of city bonds. That debt, backed by water - system revenue, motor vehicle license fees and special district property assessments, is rated A and A -, the sixth- and seventh - highest investment grades. Big Impact http: / /www.bloomberg.com/apps /news ?pid = 20670001 &refer = home &sid= a.wD4KB... 2/28/2008 Bloomberg Printer - Friendly Page Page 2 of 3 Clark Stamper, who oversees $600 million of municipal bonds at Stamper Capital & Investments, including Vallejo debt, said a bankruptcy filing could encourage other California communities to consider the step should the city persuade a judge to reopen labor agreements. What happens in Vallejo is going to be the model for what happens across the state," Stamper said yesterday. ' ' It will have a big impact." Chapter 9 of the federal bankruptcy code deals specifically with municipal governments such as cities, counties and school districts, allowing them to reorganize their debts and come up with a way to pay them off. If the city seeks bankruptcy protection, basic government services such as police and firefighting, would continue. The filing would freeze all creditor claims while city officials devise a plan to solve the financial troubles. That plan would need approval by the court, which could dissolve the labor contracts that aren't set to expire until 2010. Compounded Woes Vallejo was home to the West Coast's first naval shipyard, which was shuttered in 1996. The area has been one of the hardest hit in Northern California by the housing market slump. Home prices in Solano County dropped 19 percent in January from the year before, according to DataQuick Information Systems, a firm that tracks real- estate in the state. Compounding the city's woes is lost tax revenue when above- normal rains damped attendance at a local Six Flags Inc. marine world amusement park, one of the 10 largest employers in the county. Orange County in Southern California filed the biggest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history in December 1994 after former Treasurer Robert Citron's wrong -way bet on interest -rate derivatives sold by Merrill Lynch & Co. lost $1.6 billion. The county of 3 million people is the third -most populous in California after Los Angeles and San Diego. Bankruptcy Stigma Desert Hot Springs, a town of 20,000 people north of Palm Springs, filed for bankruptcy in 2001, when it couldn't afford a legal judgment of almost $6 million. Both Orange County and Desert Hot Springs sold municipal bonds to pay creditors and emerge from bankruptcy. Three years ago, the threat of bankruptcy loomed in San Diego as three mayoral candidates said a filing was one option for dealing with the city's soaring pension indebtedness to police and other employees. Jerry Sanders, who won the election, never pursued that step. Half Moon Bay, a small town south of San Francisco, has also considered bankruptcy because of a legal judgment handed down in November in a dispute with a real estate developer. ' ' Bankruptcy is a bad idea," Vallejo resident Andy Russo told the council during a standing - room -only informational hearing last night in city hall. ' 'The stigma of bankruptcy will stick to us for a long, long time." To contact the reporter on this story: Michael B. Marois in Sacramento at mmarois @bloomberg.net ; William Selway in San Francisco at wselway @bloomberg.net . Last Updated: February 27, 2008 16:01 EST 0 http: / /www.bloomberg.com/apps /news ?pid = 20670001 &refer = home &sid= a.wD4KB... 2/28/2008 RECEIVED Lidster, Beth From: Amy O'Gorman [aogorman @cacities.orgj CITY OF Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2008 10:13 AM ROHNERT PARK To: Amy O'Gorman Page 1 of 3 Council: I M iscellaneoU W to: Subject: Capitol Weekly Article: Prop 98's passage could land $15 million for Sam Zell's firm P 0 . IT LWEEK,1.vL fkif NEWIPAPER O] CAA+fO ANIA 00VERNMEMT AND P ^_L!Tt($ Prop 98's passage could land $15 million for Sam Zell's firm By John Howard and Anthony York (published Thursday, February 28, 2008) A company run by Sam Zell, the new chairman of the Los Angeles Times' corporate parent, stands to gain up to $15 million if an eminent domain initiative on the June ballot is approved by California voters. The initiative, Proposition 98, would repeal rent control ordinances across California, which could lead to a boon for Zell. Zell, the Tribune Co. chairman, is also chairman of Equity Lifestyle Properties Inc., a Chicago - based company that owns more than 112,000 residential units across the United States and Canada. The company's 28 properties in California include a dozen rent - controlled mobile home parks. But Proposition 98 would phase out those rent - control laws. And that could lead to a windfall over time for Zell and his company, according to documents that Equity Lifestyle has filed with the Security and Exchange Commission. "Certain of our properties located in California are subject to rent control ordinances, some of which not only severely restrict ongoing rent increases, but also prohibit us from increasing rents upon turnover," Zell's company told SEC regulators in its 2006 annual financial report. "The company estimates that the annual rent subsidy to tenants in these jurisdictions may be in excess of $15 million," Equity Lifestyles stated in the report. "In a more well - balanced regulatory environment, the company would receive market rents that would eliminate the subsidy and homes would trade at or near their intrinsic value." Equity Lifestyles has contributed $50,000 to the Yes on 98 campaign, according to documents at the secretary of state's office. 2/28/2008 ,g.4 k. Page 2 of 3 Zell made his bid for Tribune Co. last spring, and the bid received final approval from the company's shareholders in December. The Times has written about Proposition 98 and disclosed Zell's contribution in a Jan. 29 story. The account did not mention the potential windfall for Zell. The Times will take an editorial position on the initiative closer to Election Day and will not consult Zell or take his role in the campaign into account, said Jim Newton, the Times' editorial page editor. "We do intend to make an endorsement in the Proposition 98 race, and we will come to our position as we do with other ballot propositions. The decision will be made by the editorial board," he said, "but we will not include Zell in that conversation. We will not consider his role in the campaign or any of his financial interests." Zell, who was traveling, was unavailable to comment, said his spokeswoman, Terry Holt. The rent - control fight is not a new one for Zell. Zell's company has filed several lawsuits against cities across California in efforts to repeal local rent - control ordinances. The company settled a suit with the city of Santa Cruz; the settlement allows the company to increase rents after existing tenants move out. The company has also been engaged in an ongoing battle with the city of San Rafael in federal court and has been sued by tenants' rights groups in Marin in response to the company's efforts to raise rents. Zell has made a name for himself purchasing what are considered to be undervalued or distressed properties, and seeking changes in laws and regulations to increase their value. A 1995 New York Times article on Zell, who once tried to acquire Rockefeller Center, described him and his late partner as "classic 'vulture' investors — they bought faltering properties or businesses at cents on the dollar, betting that with a little prudent management and upturns in the business cycle, the value of their bargain - basement purchases would rise." Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which is sponsoring Proposition 98, says the rent control provisions are a minor piece of the Proposition 98 campaign. He says opponents of the initiative, including the League of Cities, is focusing on the rent control provisions of the initiative for political reasons. "I can tell you that the two top contributors to the initiative are the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and the California Farm Bureau, neither of which are that focused on the rent - control element," Coupal said. "All this crap from the other side that the whole thing is about rent control is just not true. The core of our initiative is the eminent domain reform." According to documents at the secretary of state's office, the Yes on 98 campaign has raised more than $2.4 million. The Jarvis group has given more than $323,000 to the effort. The farm bureau has donated $290,000. But other major funding has come from mobile home parks and other property groups. 2/28/2008 Page 3 of 3 The Apartment Owners Association PAC has given $291,000. Apartment owners stand to benefit from both the elimination of rent control and the eminent domain measures in the initiative. A fundraising flyer for the AOA talks about the measure and "how to end rent control." "When passed by the voters, the (initiative) will have a dramatic impact on rent control laws in the state of California, the flyer states. It calls rent control "the most egregious example of private property taking for the purpose of conferring an economic benefit on another private individual." Various mobile home park owners and interests, including Equity and the Manufactured Housing Educational Trust, have donated tens of thousands more. "This measure was created for landlords, paid for by landlords, for the financial benefit of landlords," said No on 98 spokeswoman Kathy Fairbanks. "Rent control provisions were specifically included to attract funding — otherwise it wouldn't have even made it on the ballot. Landlords and the groups that represent them have contributed 85 percent of the funding so far. Clearly their motivation is rent control, not eminent domain." Amy O'Gorman Regional Public Affairs Manager League of California Cities P.O. Box 623, Sonoma, CA 95476 Cell: (707) 291 -3270 Fax: (707) 939 -8703 aogorman@cacities.org 2/28/2008 COUNTY OF SONOMA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC WORKS 2300 COUNTY CENTER DRIVE, SUITE B -100 SANTA ROSA, CALIFORNIA 95403 Phillip M. Demery, Director February 21, 2008 Stephen R. Donley, City Manager City of Rohnert Park 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park. CA 94928 Dear Mr. Donley: RECEIVED FEB 2 2 2008 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AREA CODE (707) ROADS .................... 565 -2231 TRANSIT .................. 585 -7516 REFUSE ................... 565 -7940 AIRPORT .................. 565 -7243 AIR POLLUTION............ 433 -5911 FAX ....................... 565 -2620 www.sonomacountypublieworks.com This letter serves to update you on the County of Sonoma's (the County) ongoing process regarding the divestiture of some its solid waste facilities. In addition, we wish to make you aware of certain provisions that are in -place which place conditions on direct communications by short- listed parties with stakeholder groups; including the City of Rohnert Park. On January 8, 2008, the County received Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) from interested parties in response to its November. 7, 2007 Request for Qualifications. The County has reviewed these SOQs and has developed 'a confidential short-list of responding parties to participate in detailed discussions and exchange of information to further develop the parameters for a possible divestiture of the County's solid waste facilities. The County anticipates initiating confidential discussions and other communications in the near future with each short- listed party (referred to as "industry review ") in an attempt to develop a Request for Proposals (RFP) and a divestiture agreement for consideration by the Board of Supervisors. If the Board of Supervisors decides to issue the RFP, each of the short- listed parties will have the opportunity to submit a proposal for the acquisition of some or all of the solid waste assets. In addition, the County will also continue outreach efforts to stakeholders and the public regarding the divesture process and the County's preliminary goals, which are attached. The County and each short- listed party have also agreed to certain provisions that restrict direct communication with certain stakeholders during the industry review and RFP stages of the process. These stakeholders include your city as well as other cities and regulatory agencies. The short-list parties are required. to coordinate through the County any and all contact with the .identified stakeholders, including your city, to discuss anything, related- to: (i) the proposed divestiture; or (ii),. or regulatory issues associated with the solid waste assets. The .County may, at rt`s ,discretion; facilitate such contact. The reason for these provisions is that the County wants to maximize the fairness of the divestiture, process and is attempting to ensure that short- listed parties, receive equitable and equivalent access to information. In addition to protecting the confidentiality of the short- listed parties, the County is concerned that the public agencies potentially involved in the process, including your agency, are not overwhelmed with information requests during the industry review and RFP stages of the divestiture process. The County is providing a significant amount of information to the short- listed parties for due diligence purposes during industry review. The County desires that the short- listed parties have access to all reasonably necessary information relevant to their proposals to acquire the solid waste assets; however, it also believes that it is important, for the reasons outlined above, that there be some structure and control over the process. Should any solid waste companies contact you or your staff regarding divestiture, the assets or solid waste permit issues in Sonoma County, I would ask that you contact me at 707 -565 -3651. I appreciate your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, Jay Jalp se, P.E. Divestiture Project Manager Enclosure (1) cc: Phillip M. Demery Jim Andersen County of Sonoma Preliminary Divestiture Goals The County's primary goals for the Divestiture are as follows: • Maximize the monetary return for divestiture of the Facilities; • Reduce or eliminate exposure for past, current and future environmental, operational and closure /post - closure liabilities related to the Facilities; • Provide a location for solid waste disposal of the municipal solid waste stream at reasonable prices; • Transfer, through a divestiture, all of the Facilities; • Assure that the Facilities be operated in the future in an environmentally sound and safe manner consistent with applicable law and Regulations; • Assure that the facilities are operated in the future in a manner that reduces greenhouse gases, complies with the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) and other County climate protection initiative, such as through the use of rail or other appropriate means; and • Support diversion goals consistent with AB 939 and the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan The County's secondary goals for the Divestiture are as follows: • Achieve an in- county Central Landfill solution, if the Divestiture terms are such that they substantially alter the findings of the BVA study, which led to the County Board of Supervisor's decision to move towards a permanent out -haul solution; • Assist impacted employees to compete for and find employment with the successful Purchaser; • Involvement in tip rate setting process; and • Preserve capacity at the Central Landfill for the County- generated waste stream. 300 Enterprise Drive, Apt. 207 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 MAR 0 3 2008 February 28, 2008 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Mr. Donley, City Manager of Rohnert Park 6750 Commerce Blvd. Council: Rohnert Park; CA 94928 Miscellaneous Communications Agenda 6/ Mr. Donley Copy to Copy to: Re: Sunshine Bus Drive It is my understanding that because the Friday driver of the Sunshine Bus received a speeding ticket in Maidocino County(the-first in 15years )-you'liave`barred l im M6m driving the bus! Sadly, for whatever reason, there are only 4 in the entire community willing to donate their time to provide this invaluable service for those disabled and no longer able to drive themselves! As you know, the bus operates mornings only Monday, Wednesday, and Friday locally and to Santa Rosa for doctor appointments Thursdays! Each of the 4 volunteers covers one of those days! My fear is that by eliminating his driving it will throw too big a strain on the others to compensate the loss, and make it impossible to continue operation. For the 2 years since I have been unable to drive, each Friday he has taken me to market and home safely and competently adhering to all the rules of the road. Having driven for over 50 years, I can attest to this. I hope that you will reconsider your action and reinstate him as a driver - particularly inasmuch as his error in judgment was'not while driving the bus, but on his own time in another county! I might add that in sports events players are benched for rule infractions rather than being eliminated altogether from playing! Sincerely, Mrs. Nancy Crawford r cc:131tnt Park City Count 5 Rohnert Park Senior Center Lidster, Beth From: Harveybell @aol.com Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2008 6:08 PM To: Lidster, Beth Subject: City Council- Horizon Hi Beth, Please forward to the City Council: Dear Jake Mackenzie and the City Council, RECEIVED MAR 0 3 2008 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Council: Miscellaneous Communications Agenda Copy to: Copy to Thanks for all that you do for us, our city and our environment. Page i of 1 3 -S-- 8 b/ I am concerned about the flight pattern of planes flying into Santa Rosa (Horizon Air). Their northbound flight pattern that I notice in the late evenings seems to travel along the path of Highway 101. Their elevation is such that they are adding distinct noise pollution. Also, depending upon wind conditions, they add air pollution. Can we as a city enforce upon them a higher elevation required for flight patterns over our city limits? I am bothered by their noise as they seem to descend early for landings. If Horizon continues to increase their number of flights and routes, we might wish in the future that we had accomplished this while they are at their present level of business. Thanks for discussing and hopefully taking up this issue. Harvey Bell 700 Lindsay Ave Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Phone: 707 - 795 -0650 Fax: 707 - 795 -0655 harveybell @aol.com Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living. (http:/ /living. aol.com /video/ how -to- please - your - picky- eater /rachel - campos- duffy/ 2050827 ?NCI D= aolcmp00300000002598) 3/3/2008 j31 v 24 -a� - - -------- --- f 11 A �11 Wlh�.M-"l0-m-r lrllmffxwwm�� o- n I S Council Miscellaneous Communications Agee a Copy to: Mr. Stephen Donley City of Rohnert Park 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Re: Water shut -off issues Dear Mr. Donley: March 4, 2008 RECEIVED MAR 0 5 2008 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Council: Miscellaneous Communications AL)enda to: to: V I met with Christina on Friday, January 25, 2008, to review the city's shut off records for 2007. Thank you for making the arrangements for me to review the records. I have finally completed my analysis based on the computer - generated records provided to me by Christina; attached is a copy. I have not included an analysis of the commercial shut -offs because Christina told me that the majority of these shut offs are for non- payment of refuse charges and that is not my concern. I am primarily interested in the city's history of residential shut -offs of water service. Initially, ,my focus was on the injustice of having my water services. terminated, for-non- payment of penalties only and I wanted to prevent this from happening to anyone else. Now, my focus has shifted in that I believe charging a penalty for late payments is inherently wrong and the city should do away with the practice entirely. My analysis shows that in 2007 the city shut off water services to 824 residences; 45 of those owed balances less than $100; and the smallest balance owing which resulted in shut off of services was $45.62. The highest balance owed resulting in a shut off of services was $913.92. The total balance owed by the 824 residences for 2007 was $202,109:90. Because the city's records do not differentiate between the balance owed for water services and the balance owed for penalties only, I was unable to determine if any of the shut -offs were for non - payment of penalties only. However, since my services were shut off for accrued penalty charges only I can make a reasonable assumption that other residences also had services terminated for accrual of penalty fees only. In fact, I suspect that all those residences with balances of less than $100 had their water shut off for accrual of penalties only. I also did. an'. analysis 'of how much revenue the city is generating from penalty fees and reconnection charges. If we assume a 10 % penalty on; the total balance of 1 J -$02�, Or $202,109, that would generate $20,210 in fees.' This does not take into account those residences who are assessed penalties and pay them without termination of services. In addition, the city charges a $35 "reconnection" fee for each residence whose services have been terminated and then reconnected. 824 shut -offs times $35 equals $28,840 in "reconnection" fees alone in 2007. Therefore, the city generated a total of approximately $49,050 in penalties and reconnection fees related to terminating residential water services in 2007. It is hard to believe that the city incurs $49,050 in administrative costs in connection with water shut -offs and reconnection. Based on the City of Rohnert Park's website, salaries at the high end for water quality specialist, public works inspector, public works services supervisor and maintenance worker I and II range from $61,152 to $88,656 annually. Salaries at the high end for an administrative assistant and utility billing rep range from $43,860 to $58,752. The annual reconnection fee of $28,840 more than pays for the cost of labor involved in having a city maintenance worker shut off and turn back on residential water services, working perhaps a total of 12 days out of the year. Any administrative costs incurred to send out reminder bills and generate lists of delinquent balances is also probably minimal, especially since. everything is computer generated in this day and age. Thus, the $35 per residence reconnection fee more than pays for costs incurred by the city in terminating and reconnecting water service to residences. So, if the reconnection fees covers the city's administrative and labor costs, why is the city charging penalties on unpaid balances? Penalizing folks who have a hard time paying their water bill by charging a 10% fee is mean - spirited at best. These are the folks who can, most likely, least afford to pay an additional charge, which only serves to increase the amount of the balance due the following month and causing further distress. I understand that since I first brought up this issue, the City has raised the amount a resident can owe before shut off occurs to $100 rather than the prior $50. Christina mentioned that she was concerned this would cause residents to carry over to the following month an even greater balance, thus incurring even greater penalties. If that is the concern, then why increase their hardship by charging additional fees in the first place? The city may make the argument that assessing penalties for late payments raises revenue for the city, the same as assessing a fine for an expired parking meter. However, this argument does not fly, because, unlike parking meters, residents have no choice but to hook up to the city's water system and must pay whatever rates the city decides to charge. It is inherently wrong to raise further revenue off the backs of those folks who can least afford it. If the penalties are intended to "motivate" residents to pay their bill in a timely fashion, why not give us a real incentive, like a discount for paying on time? And, in the event a resident does not pay his or her water bill in a timely fashion, for ' The total penalties generated are probably somewhat less than $20,210 but not knowing what portion of the total balance owed is for penalties vs. charges for service, I used this figure. N whatever reason, the city always has the option of terminating services, thus forcing the resident to come up with the money somehow. 2 In conclusion, water services should not be terminated for non - payment of penalties only, which may mean the city will need to change the manner in which it itemizes information. But, if the practice of charging a penalty for late payments is voided, then the issue of terminating services for accrued penalties only is moot. If Rohnert Park truly wants to be the "friendly city" it might start by cancelling the practice of charging residents penalties for late payments for water service. As I have stated in previous correspondence, other utilities, such as PG &E and cable, are forbidden by the PUC to charge penalties for late payments, although they do retain the right to terminate services. I respectfully request the city council to take up this issue. I understand that only the mayor can add an item to the city council's agenda, but that the public is entitled to the floor for 3 minutes at the end of the scheduled city council meetings. Discussing this matter will take more than 3 minutes. Please let me know how this can be placed on the agenda. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Viviane Isabeau 5311 Coronado Ct. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 (h) 792 -6837 (w) 524 -1900 cc: City Council enclosures 2 I don't believe any municipality should have the right to terminate water services for non- payment of charges. Water is a human right; not a commodity that is purchased by only those who can afford it. But that is the subject of another debate. 3 t� O O 7N G w I=, O H �i Cl� W H a d H z W W[Q G� w O C/] a z � o O N � N O � p N I�oq ch 00 fl N O Ob90 •� �.' 4-4 'b U O O .� .N •� ,p U 0 o U y O�'', N U 0 tn C> b4. CS "C3 QOi 3 N O 00 M CY 0 00 00 O �,D t-� 06 O d' d' t- kn M ct O H -; Oi d M t1 v i o M M N M M M N N U f O M N N ^C3 N Vl U .Ed O 0 000 D C 01) C Q) U 03 ,o V) ON �O 00 00 N >~ 3 oo c•i �f ti v; vi iJ „y .3 cd ti o to O\ W 4r O O o �,��00 kr N �O �--+ M d M N 00 U U c> �O CO N a kf) Cr N C/a N � 0000 . . F-+ � o O N � N O � p N I�oq ch 00 fl N O Ob90 •� �.' 4-4 'b U O O .� .N •� ,p U 0 o U y O�'', N U 0 tn C> b4. CS "C3 1400 K STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 PH: (916) 658-8200 Px: (916) 658 -8240 MAR 0 6 2008 March LEAGUE 10 CITIES ( Miscellaneous j I Communications INTERESTED IN SERVING ON THE Agee LEAGUE BOARD OF DIRECTORS? copy to: Conv to. The League of California Cities welcomes nominations from elected officials interested in serving in five at -large positions (the at -large positions have two -year terms), or Second Vice President (one -year term). All nominees for Second Vice President must have previously served on the Board of Directors. The League Board of Directors consists of the League officers (President, First Vice President, Second Vice President, and Immediate Past President), a representative from each of the League's sixteen divisions, a representative from each of the League's eleven functional departments, the mayors or designees of the mayors of the eight largest cities by population (listed as Large City appointments), and ten At -Large positions, at least one of which shall be a small city representative (under 10,000 population). City officials serving on the National League of Cities Board of Directors also serve on the League of California Cities Board of Directors for the duration of their term on the National League board (two -year term). Travel expenses to attend League board meetings are reimbursed by the League. The League Board of Directors typically meets on a quarterly basis at locations throughout the state. Nominees are expected to make a commitment to attend all meetings. League officers also serve automatically as members of the board of directors of the City/County/School (CCS) Partnership, which meets a minimum of four times a year. Travel expenses to attend CCS Partnership board meeting are reimbursed by the League. After the deadline for applications has passed, the Nominating Committee' will review all applications and informational materials and decide on 10 finalists for the five open at -large positions. The 10 finalists for at -large positions, as well as all candidates for 2nd Vice President will be asked to interview with the nominating committee in person, the morning of Friday, July 25, 2008 this year at lire Chaminade Resort in Santa Cruz. The at -large finalists and 2nd Vice President applicants will be contacted by mail with their interview time and interview location. During the League's 2008 Annual Conference (September 24 -27, 2008), the Board of Directors Nominating Committee will recommend a slate of city officials for consideration by the Board of Directors for election to serve on the 2008 -2009 Board of Directors. Nominees will be contacted by mail prior to the Annual Conference. If you are interested in submitting your name (or another elected official's name) for nomination to the League Board of Directors, please provide the information requested on the attached Nomination Form, along with a bio and letter requesting consideration, to the League's Sacramento headquarters on or before end of business on Friday, May 16, 2008. Questions may be referred to League staff Mimi Sharpe at (916) 658 -8232 or sharpem@cacities.org. 1 Jere Melo (Chair), Council Member, Fort Bragg; James Ridenour, Mayor, Modesto; Sedalia Sanders, Council Member, El Centro; Stephany Aguilar, Mayor, Scotts Valley; Mike Segala, Council Member, Suisun City; Richard Dixon, Mayor, Lake Forest; Robert Jehn, Council Member, Cloverdale; Miguel Ucovich, Council Member, Loomis; Art Madrid, Mayor, La Mesa; Terry Henderson, Council Member, La Quinta; and Kay Vinson, City Clerk, Murrieta. League of California Cities 2008 -2009 Board of Directors NOMINATION FORM FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS "AT -LARGE DIRECTOR" Please print clearly or type - Attach additional sheets as needed, not to exceed 6 pages total Letters of Endorsement/support may be sent as well, and are not required to adhere to the 6 page rule — but they must be sent along with all supporting materials by the deadline date! Name of Person Nominated Elected Official Title Years in this position City Hall Address City /Zip Code. City Elected or Appointed Positions Previously Held CANDIDATE'S PREVIOUS LEAGUE INVOLVEMENT /PARTICIPATION [Please share dates and specific involvement- - Examples: 1) Jan. 1998 to present, Revenue and Taxation Policy. Committee, 2) Feb. 2001 to Nov. 2004 Department Officer -- held offices of 2nd Vp, 1st VP and President' 3) Jan. 2004 to Dec. 2005, NLC Community & Economic Develop. Steering Committee Current or Previous State League and NLC Involvement [Please specify dates of participation]: (use separate paper or back of page for more information) CANDIDATE'S EFFORTS TOWARD LEAGUE STRATEGIC GOALS AND PRIORITIES Specific -goals for this year. 1) Expand Housing Supply and Affordability; 2) Expand Investment in Infrastructure; 3) Protect Critical Redevelopment Funding. {use separate paper or back of page for more information} please Iriuih dvdrlo, complete form Does Nominee give funds to CITIPAC, please state contributions: Does Your City Impose Term Limits? Yes No Date Current Term of City Office Expires (monthidate/year) If eligible, next election date (month /date /year) Reasons why person nominated should be considered by the Nominating Committee If you are nominating another city official, does that official consent to this nomination? Your Name (please print clearly) City [0 Signature DATE; PLEASE RETURN NOMINATION FORM (accompanied by resume or bio, if available) BEFORE END OF BUSINESS ON FRIDAY, MAY 16, 2008 to: League of California Cities Attn: Mimi Sharpe 1400 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 sharpem @cacities.org FAX (916) 658 -8240 League of California Cities 2008 -2009 Board of Directors NOMINATION FORM FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS "SECOND VICE PRESIDENT" Please print clearly or type - Attach additional sheets as needed, not to exceed 6 pages total. Letters of Endorsement/support may be sent as well, and are not required to adhere to the 6 page rule — but they must be sent along with all supportinq materials by the deadline date! Name of Person Nominated Elected Official Title City Hall Address Years in this position City Elected or Appointed Positions Previously Held City /Zip Code CANDIDATE'S PREVIOUS LEAGUE INVOLVEMENT /PARTICIPATION [Please share dates and specific involvement- - Examples: 1) Jana 1998 to present, Revenue and Taxation Policy Committee; 2) Feb. 2001 to Nov. 2004 Department Officer - -- held offices of 2nd Vp, 1st VP and President 3) Jan. 2004 to Dec. 2005, NLC Community & Economic Develop. Steering Committee Current or Previous State League and NLC Involvement [P /ease specify dates of participation]: (use separate paper or back of page for more information) ******** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** CANDIDATE'S EFFORTS TOWARD LEAGUE STRATEGIC GOALS AND PRIORITIES Specific _goals for this year: 1) Expand Housing Supply and Affordability; 2) Expand Investment in Infrastructure; 3) Protect Critical Redevelopment Funding. (use separate paper or back of page for more information} please turnover to complete�form Does Nominee give funds to CITIPAC, please state contributions: Does Your City Impose Term Limits? Yes No Date Current Term of City Office Expires (month /date /year) If eligible, next election date (month /date /year), Reasons why person nominated should be considered by the Nominating Committee If you are nominating another city official, does that official consent to this nomination? Your Name (please print clearly) City 23 Signature DATE: PLEASE RETURN NOMINATION FORM (accompanied by resume or bio, if available) BEFORE END OF BUSINESS ON FRIDAY, MAY 16, 2008 to: League of California Cities Attn: Mimi Sharpe 1400 K Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, CA 95814 sharpem @cacities.org FAX (916) 658 -8240 300 Enterprise Drive, Apt. 207 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 March 4, 2008 Secretary to City Manager City Hall 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park CA 9r928 Dear Beth, RECEIVED MAR 0 6 2008 CITY OF ROHNERT PARIi Council: — -� Miscellaneous W to: FO. I plan to appear at the City Council meeting March 11. Unfamiliar with the procedure, I am enclosing a copy of what I plan to say for distribution to each Council member feeling that a visual aid is helpful. I hope, too, that speaking to the Council will reinforce my concern that the invaluable service the Sunshine Bus provides remains available to those of us who depend so heavily upon it! Most sincerely, )7k4j I Mrs. Nancy Crawford Attachments .?. or March 11, 2008 RECEIVED MAR 0 6 2008 CITY OF RO NERT PARK My reason in appearing before you this evening is to either acquaint you or to refresh your memories as to the invaluable service the Sunshine Bus provides to those Seniors in Pohnert Park who are disabled and cannot drive themselves to shop or to doctor appointments.. It operates mornings only Monday, Wednesday, and Fridy locally and on Thursdays to Santa Rosa for doctor appointments only. If enough sign up, it will go to Santa Rosa the last Tuesday of each month for shopping. In a population of over 41,000 only 4 have been willing to volunteer their time to make this possible!!. I learned that one driver received a speeding ticket in Mendocino County. My understanding is that it was the first in 15 years. For this reason, the City Manager, Mr. Donley, has denied his continuing to drive the bus! For over 2 years I've ridden with this driver to market each Friday. Having driven over 50 year, I feel qualified to attest to his competency, carefulness, and at all times adhering to the rules of the road! Realistically my fear is that the Sunshine Bus would cease to operate if the remaining 3 drivers would have to devote more time to compensate for his absence. With the City struggling to juggle increased costs and too few driver in keeping the bus operating, I hope Mr. Donley will reconsider his position and allow this driver to continue VOLUNTEERING his time!. It is unfortunate that he received a speeding ticket, but it was on his own time in another county NOT WHILE DRIVING THE BUS! Mrs. Nancy Crawford The Altamont Senior Apartments 300 Enterprise Drive, Apt. 207 Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Lidster, Beth From: Donley, Steve Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 3:59 PM RECEIVED To: Lidster, Beth; Griffin, Terri MAR 1 1 2008 Subject: FW: Forty under 40 winners CITY OF Please add to communications. ROHNERT PARK From: Noelani Price [mailto:nprice @busjml.com] Sent: Mon 3/10/2008 2:18 PM To: Donley, Steve Subject: Forty under 40 winners Dear Stephen, Page 1 of 1 Council: �( Miscellaneous Communications ICopy to: (� Copy to: —� We are pleased to inform you that you have been selected as one of the top Forty under 40 to be honored at the NORTH BAY BUSINESS JOURNAL'S 2008 gala awards reception. This is truly an honor. After several weeks of gathering nominations and extensive review of your survey submission, our selection committee found you to be among the most outstanding young business and community leaders in the North Bay. The event will take place Thursday, April 17, 2008 from 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Fountaingrove Inn in Santa Rosa. We invite you to attend the reception as our guest. Please RSVP to Linda Perkins at 707 -579 -2900 ext. 211 or events @busjrnl.com no later than April 11. This inaugural event will recognize both the 2008 winners as well as the winners from our first -ever Forty under 40 awards in 2007. It will be an opportunity to network with the other 79 of the North Bay's most remarkable up- and - coming professionals. Additional seats may be purchased for $45 and a winners' package including a table of 10 at the event is also available. In addition, you will be featured in the BUSINESS JOURNAL's Forty under 40 special publication in our April 14 issue. If you have any other questions regarding the event, please contact our event development manager, Noelani Price, at 707 -579 -2900 ext. 203. A formal letter with this same information will also be sent to you by mail. Again, congratulations! Sincerely, Brad Bollinger Editor in Chief Associate Publisher Sue Wildermuth -Adams Director of Advertising Associate Publisher 3/11/2008 b► RECEIVED MAR 10 2008 ui O p 'OELt cwmrt NO :- GOURMET FOQG TO GO Honorable Mayor City Council Members City of Rohnert Park Dear Council Members, March 8, 2008 j Councii:_ X f Miscellaneous A 3.II,Dfl 0,.4 14AP16 7Pkc5ENT*r'O' rreM ex I apologize for not being able to deliver this letter in person but I am out of town at a Food Show in San Jose. My partner Bill and I wanted to take the opportunity to share with you our history and enthusiasm with our new home at Sonoma Mountain Village. We use the word home because it so perfectly fits our experience. Bill and I have worked for many developers and corporations in the past twenty years and have never come across a more genuine, dedicated, committed and visionary group of people than the ones at Codding Enterprises. We have also never partnered with a company that has given so much to so many different local charities and organizations. Ed Foundation, SCYAD, Rotary, Early Learning Institute, Woman in Christ, MS, American Lung Association, Chernobyl Children's Project, Cross and Crown, Sarah Baker Concert, Active 20/30 Club, Lions Club, and Rohnert Park Public Safety are just some of the organizations which have benefited from SMV. What is truly remarkable are not just the organizations that have benefited but the way they have benefited. The Coddings have taken a personal interest in this organizations by not only donating cash and in kind but by attending, and working the events. SMV is a community partner in the true sense of the word. Bill and I are also very grateful for our business partnership with the Coddings by thinking outside the box to bring Sally Tomatoes in as a tenant to SMV. I know first hand that not many large developers would have taken such an interest in a small developing company. They really embrace the spirit of the entrepreneur. We have witnessed the same skill in developing the SMBC, a truly remarkable and exciting non profit. I'm sure you will hear many testimonials in the near future with regards to our commitment to the environment, and the ground breaking cutting edge development that this project is bringing to Rohnert Park, a true honor to you all as well for having the vision to work with them. We will leave those testimonials for more knowledgeable and articulate individuals. Bill and I both live just blocks away from SMV, we are proud to call it home and embrace its vision for the future of Rohnert Park. Unequivocally, Gerard Giudice and Bill Pettibone Sally Tomatoes Calendar of Events Next Council Meeting March 11, 2008 Thursday, 3/6 League of CA Cities meeting Sacramento (JM attending) Monday, 3/10 Meeting with Dr. Mathis Community Center 10am -4pm. (full council attending) Thursday, 3/20 CEQA and Climate Change Workshop 9:30am- 4:15pm. 1515 Clay St., Oakland. (PS attending) Friday, 3/21 Free Information Seminar: Water & Wastewater Infrastructure City of Santa Rosa: Public Works Department, Conference Room 5 69 Stony Circle 9:30am -noon (lunch provided at noon) Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3/11108 X 3/5/08 -TG Copy to: Tuesday, 3/25 Institute of Transportation Studies at UC Berkeley and UC Davis GHG Emissions Workshop 10am -4pm. CalTrans District 4. 111 Grande Avenue; Oakland (JM attending) Wednesday, 3/26 Foxtail Golf Club "Swing into Spring" Open House 5:00 -9:00 p.m. 100 Golf Course Drive RSVP herlindaCcci)-playfoxtail.com 206 -1199 Wednesday, 3/26 ACWA 2008 Legislative Symposium 9am- 3:30pm. Sheraton Grand Sacramento Hotel (TS attending) April 1, 2008 Toxic Waste Collections at the Sports Center Parking Lot 4:00- 8:OOpm. 795 -2025 Friday, April 4 North Bay Water Association Conference The Power of Water 8:30am- 4:30pm. Sheraton Petaluma (JM/VVM attending) April 10 Mayors & Councilmembers meeting Petaluma (Santa Rosa plans programs] April 16 -17 League of CA Cities: North Bay Division Legislative Action Days Sacramento Saturday, April 19 Rohnert Park Green Day 11 am -3pm. Community Center AGENDA FORECAST Tuesday, March 25, 2008 NOTE: STEVE WILL NOT BE AT THIS MEETING Pledge of Allegiance- Brandon Boccaleoni Sonoma State University Student Report — Heather Hanson, ASI Representative Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3 /5 /08 -TG Copy to: 5:00 p.m. Work Session ■ Joint Council / Parks & Recreation Commission meeting ■ PROS Report to the City Council Consent Calendar 2008- Ca1PERS Contract Amendment 2008 - Approving Request to the MTC for an Allocation of TDA Art. 3 Bike /Ped Project Funds for FY 2008 -09 2008 - Authorizing Submittal for all Grants for which the City is Eligible to the CIWMB 2008 - Approval of Project List for Proposition 1B Funding 2008 - Temporary Debris Box Contract 1 -year Extension 2008 - Approving and Adopting the Memorandum of Agreement with Service Employees International Union (S.E.I.U.) Local 1021 2008 -Parks & Recreation RFP re: Playground Design Garbage Contract Mayor's Presentation Individual Items Annual Report on the General Plan — 2007 Ordinances Ordinance Introduction: Alcohol Ban In City Parks — Consideration of Amending Chapters 9.34 and 9.62 of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code to Establish an Alcohol Permit Program in City Parks Commission/Committee/Board Appointments Council Committee and /or other Reports Other: CEQA and Climate Change Workshop, 3/20 — JM /PS Matters from/for Council Community Development Approving and Adopting CalHome Program Guidelines 2008 Purchase — Sell Agreement Rohnert Park Financing Authority ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS Representing City and County Governments of the San Francisco Bay Area February 26, 2008 Dear General Assembly Delegate: 0 ABAG ITEM NO. 10.3 Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3 /5 /08-TG Copy to: Enclosed are the Agenda and FY 2008 -09 Work Program and Budget for your review prior to the Spring General Assembly and Business Meeting on April 24, 2008, in San Francisco at the Palace Hotel (formerly the Sheraton Palace). We look forward to your -- participation in both the Business Meeting and the General Assembly Program. If you are unable to attend, please notify your alternate immediately and forward this letter and attachments. Should you have questions prior to the meeting, please do not hesitate to contact me at 510 464 -7988 or by e -mail at HenryG @abag.ca.gov or Patricia Jones, Assistant Executive Director at 510 464 -7933 or Patj @abag.ca.gov We look forward to seeing you on April 24th Sincerely, \ H y L. ardner xecutive Director Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2050 Oakland, California 94604 -2050 (510) 464 -7900 Fax: (510) 464 -7985 info @abag.ca.gov Location: Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter tot Eighth Street Oakland, California 94607 -4756 IN.- ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS Representing City and County Governments of the San Francisco Bay Area ABAG A G E N D A GENERAL ASSEMBLY BUSINESS MEETING 12:15 P.M., Thursday, April 24, 2008 Palace Hotel (Formerly Sheraton Palace) 2 New Montgomery Street San Francisco, California Status 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. CONFIRMATION OF QUORUM 3. PUBLIC COMMENT 4. APPROVAL OF SUMMARY MINUTES ** April 19, 2007, General Assembly Business Meeting Action 5. PRESIDENT'S REPORT 6. PRESENTATION ON ABAG STRATEGIC PLAN Information 7. PROPOSED ANNUAL BUDGET AND WORK PLAN ** Fiscal Year 2008 -2009 Including Member Dues Action 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS 9. ADJOURNMENT H ry L. G rd r, Secretary- Treasurer * *Attachment included. Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2050 Oakland, California 94604 -2050 (510) 464 -7900 Fax: (510) 464 -7970 info @abag.ca.gov Location: Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter tot Eighth Street Oakland, California 94607 -4756 SUMMARY MINUTES ABAG General Assembly Business Meeting, April 19, 2007 Palace Hotel San Francisco, CA 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by President Dave Cortese at 12:10 p.m. 2. CONFIRMATION OF QUORUM Discussion of agenda items was delayed until Clerk of the Board Fred Castro announced that quorum was achieved at 12:35 p,m. County Delegates and Alternates Present Jurisdiction Supervisor Bill Dodd County of Napa Supervisor Scott Haggerty County of Alameda Supervisor Rose Jacobs Gibson County of San Mateo Supervisor Mark Kerns County of Sonoma Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi County of San Francisco City/Town Delegates and Alternates Present Jurisdiction Mayor Maria Alegria City of Pinole Vice Mayor Mike Anderson City of Lafayette Councilmember Ana Apodaca City of Newark Councilmember Newell Arnerich Town of Danville Councilmember Tom Bartee City of Vallejo Councilmember Louis Becker City of Los Altos Councilmember Chris Becnel City of Brentwood Councilmember Ronit Bryant City of Mountain View City Manager Carl Cahill Town of Los Altos Hills Councilmember Don Callison City of American Canyon Councilmember Laurie Capitelli City of Berkeley Councilmember Jerry Carlson Town of Atherton Councilmember Ken Chew Town of Moraga Councilmember Larry Chu City of Larkspur Vice Mayor Paul Cohen City of San Rafael Vice Mayor Dave Cortese City of San Jose Mayor Ron Cox City of Foster City Mayor Pro Tem James Davis City of Antioch Councilmember Lara Delaney City of Martinez Vice Mayor Maryann Derwin Town of Portola Valley Mayor Carole Dillon- Knutson City of Novato Vice Mayor John Dunbar Town of Yountville Senior Advisor Mike Farrah City of San Francisco Mayor Kelly Fergusson City of Menlo Park Councilmember Helen Fisicaro Town of Colma Councilmember Alice Fredericks Town of Tiburon Mayor Daniel Furtado City of Campbell Summary Minutes, April 19, 2007 Mayor Jack Gingles City of Calistoga Vice Mayor Pedro Gonzalez City of South San Francisco Councilmember Robert Gottschalk City of Millbrae Vice Mayor Surlene Grant City of San Leandro City Administrator Geoffrey Grote City of Piedmont Vice Mayor John Hanecak City of Pleasant Hill Councilmember Mike Hudson City of Suisun City Councilmember Marie Gilmore City of Alameda Mayor Ben Johnson City of Pittsburgh Vice Mayor Carol Klatt City of Daly City Councilmember Marj Leider City of Livermore Mayor Robert Lieber City of Albany Mayor Janet Lockhart City of Dublin Councilmember Shawn Marshall City of Mill Valley Vice Mayor Bonnie McClung City of Half Moon Bay City Manager Herb Moniz City of San Ramon Councilmember Leticia Moore City of El Cerrito Mayor Catherine Mullooly City of Hillsborough Councilmember Anu Natarajan City of Fremont Vice Mayor Jim Navarro City of Union City Mayor Warin Parker Town of Windsor Councilmember Julie Pierce City of Clayton Mayor Barbara Pierce City of Redwood City Vice Mayor Lee Pierce City of Santa Rosa Mayor Harry Price City of Fairfield Mayor Pro Tern Gwen Regalia City of Walnut Creek Councilmember Sep! Richardson City of Brisbane City Manager George Rodericks City of Belvedere Councilmember Carol Russell City of Cloverdale Councilmember August Sebastiani City of Sonoma Councilmember Gregg Sellers City of Morgan Hill Vice Mayor Anthony Spitaleri City of Sunnyvale Councilmember Pam Stafford City of Rohnert Park Councilmember Matt Sullivan City of Pleasanton Mayor Pam Torliatt City of Petaluma Councilmember Bill Ward City of Hayward Vice Mayor Joanne Ward City of Hercules Councilmember Mike Wasserman City of Los Gatos County Delegates Absent Jurisdiction Supervisor Susan Adams County of Marin Supervisor Federal Glover County of Contra Costa Supervisor Barbara Kondylis County of Solano Supervisor Pete McHugh County of Santa Clara City/Town Delegates Absent Jurisdiction Mayor Sam Pierce City of Sebastopol Mayor Paul Albritton City of Sausalito Councilmember Helen Allen City of Concord Councilmember Ruth Atkin City of Emeryville Vice Mayor Larry Bragman Town of Fairfax Councilmember Russ Cohen City of Burlingame Mayor Wayne Cooper Town of San Anselmo PA Summary Minutes, April 19, 2007 Councilmember Paul Correa City of Gilroy Councilmember Peter Drekmeier City of Palo Alto Mayor Jose Esteves City of Milpitas Mayor Coralin Feierbach City of Belmont Vice Mayor Erin Garner City of Monte Sereno Mayor Pre Tern Steve Glazer City of Orinda Councilmember Carole Groom City of San Mateo Councilmember Steve Hardy City of Vacaville Mayor Aileen Kao City of Saratoga Councilmember Patrick Kwok City of Cupertino Vice Mayor Michael Lappert Town of Corte Madera Vice Mayor Brad Lewis City of San Carlos Mayor Patricia Mahan City of Santa Clara Councilmember Leonard McNeil City of San Pablo Mayor Steve Messina City of Benicia Councilmember Irene O'Connell City of San Bruno Councilmember Janet Orchard City of Cotati Vice Mayor Gary Plass City of Healdsburg Councilmember Jean Quan City of Oakland Councilmember Carol Rios City of Oakley Councilmember David Tanner Town of Woodside Mayor Jill Techel City of Napa Vacant City of Richmond Vacant City of St. Helena Vacant Town of Ross Vice Mayor Gilbert Vega City of Dixon Councilmember Jim Vreeland City of Pacifica Mayor Eddie Woodruff City of Rio Vista Mayor David Woods City of East Palo Alto 3. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments. 4. APPROVAL OF SUMMARY MINUTES, April 20, 2006, General Assembly" President Cortese recognized a motion and a second to approve the minutes of the General Assembly of April 20, 2006. The motion passed unanimously. 5. PRESIDENT'S REPORT President Cortese reported that the Executive Board and staff have been hard at work on a number of important initiatives including Focusing our Vision and the Regional Housing Needs Allocation process for which one sub- region in San Mateo County was formed. The 30 -day comment period for review of San Mateo County's RHNA numbers began on April 16th; ABAG, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's Joint Policy Committee (JPC) has begun to explore ways that the regional agencies can assist local governments with climate protection initiatives and information. 3 Summary Minutes, April 19, 2007 6. PROPOSED ANNUAL BUDGET AND WORK PLAN - Fiscal Year 2007 -2008* President Cortese recognized Executive Director Henry Gardner who presented a brief summary of the Annual Budget and Work Program for fiscal year 2007 -2008. Executive Director Gardner reported that the Finance and Personnel Committee and the Executive Board have recommended that the base rate for membership dues be increased from $300 to $600. The membership dues base rate has been at the lower rate for the past 17 years. President Cortese recognized a motion and a second to approve the budget and work program. The county vote on the motion was five ayes, zero nays, and the motion passed unanimously. The city vote on the motion was 62 ayes, three nays (including Martinez and Pleasant Hill), and the motion passed. 7. PROPOSED BYLAW CHANGE* Executive Director Gardner reported that the Finance and Personnel Committee and the Executive Board have recommended that the per diem rate be increased from $100 to $150. The per diem has been at $100 for the past 14 years. President Cortese recognized a motion and a second to approve the proposed bylaw change. The county vote on the motion was five ayes, zero nays, and the motion passed unanimously. The city vote on the motion was 62 ayes, three nays (including Martinez and Pleasant Hill), and the motion passed. 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS Vice Mayor Jake Mackenzie, City of Rohnert Park, announced that the Bay Area Water Form will sponsor a workshop in April 23rd from 9:15 a.m. to 3:30 p.m, on water resources and land use decision- making. For information, go to www.lgc.org. President Cortese announced that a county by county outreach is underway to discuss priority development areas and priority conservation areas as part of the Focusing our Vision initiative. He encouraged participation by elected officials. There were no other announcements. 9. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at about 12:40 PM. He rdn r, Secr ary- Treasurer * Indicates attachments. E RESOLUTION NUMBER 5655 ITEM NO. 10.4 Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 315108 -TG Copy to: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Sebastopol Supporting the Save Our State Parks Campaign WHEREAS, The California state park system is home to 278 state parks, beaches, historic parks, recreation areas, and other park units; WHEREAS, Annually, over 77 million visitors take advantage of the myriad low -cost opportunities for recreation, education, fitness and other outdoor pursuits in state parks; WHEREAS, Many of the state's most unique natural, cultural, and historic resources and artifacts are contained within the state park system; WHEREAS, Our community relies on state parks for bringing California's history to life for schoolchildren, allowing families and friends to enjoy recreation and solace in nature, and Protecting irreplaceable resources for future generations; WHEREAS, State parks are an important economic engine to the local communities in which they are located and studies have shown that every $1 invested in the state park system returns $2.35 to the state's General Fund, largely in the form of economic activity in local economies; WHEREAS, The proposal in the Governor's 2008 -09 State Budget proposes an unprecedented closing of 48 state parks and drastic lifeguard reductions on 16 popular state beaches; WHEREAS, The 48 state parks slated for closure represent 17 percent of the entire state park system and visitation at the 16 state beaches that will have reduced lifeguard staffing represents more than 30 percent of the visitation to state parks;. WHEREAS, The closing of Armstrong Redwoods State Reserve and Austin Creek State Recreation Area will affect over 1 million visitors, including 5,000 school children, who visit these parks annually for education., recreation, and personal inspiration; WHEREAS, The closing of Petaluma Adobe State Historic Park will affect over 27,000 visitors, including 4,200 school children annually who visit the park for an historic educational experience; WHEREAS, Such a proposal creates considerable harm for local governments that rely on tourism from state parks for their community's livelihood and gommunity identity; WHEREAS, Closure of these state parks will jeopardize Californians' access to treasures that were specifically set aside to be experienced by the public; WHEREAS, Lifeguard staffing reductions will endanger public health and safety on California's state beaches; WHEREAS, The funding required to keep state parks open and restore lifeguards on state beaches represents a mere fraction (0.00006 percent) of the entire budget proposed by the Governor; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council ofthe City of Sebastopol hereby supports the Save Our State Parks Campaign and urges the Legislature.to reject Governor Schwarzenegger's proposal to close 48 state parks and drastically reduce lifeguard staffing on 16 state beaches, to uphold the public's trust in protecting and preserving public access to the treasures in the state park system, and to identify funding to enable all 278 state parks to remain open for the public's access and enjoyment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Sebastopol City Council does hereby adopt this resolution this, the 19th day of February, 2008. Copies Of this resolution will be transmitted to the Save Our State Parks Campaign, the Governor, and the state Legislature. IN COUNCIL DULY PASSED this 191' day of February, 2008. 1, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by City of Sebastopol City Council following a roll call vote: City of Sebastopol City Council: Ayes: Councilmembers Robinson, Gurney, Pierce, Kelley and Mayor Litwin Noes: None Abstain-None. Absent:None e APPROVED: Craig Litwin, Mayor ATTEST: ai M Go ley, ity Cler NO. .ITEM Public Safety Briefing. Policy TO FOLLOW ON FRIDAY, 3/7/08 WITH SUPPLEMENTAL PACKET 19 ,aO};NERT PAP ®�ALIF0RN1® 62) MEMORANDUM Office of the City Manager DATE: March 11, 2008 TO: Mayor Mackenzie and Members of the City Council FROM: Stephen Donley, City Manager SUBJECT: PUBLIC SAFETY BRIEFING POLICY ITEM NO. 11.1 Council: X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3 /7 /08 -TG Copy to: To ensure the City Council is aware of public safety incidents that it will be directly informed of, staff recommends establishing a briefing policy of public safety incidents. This policy would not limit incidents which the Council would be briefed on by the City Manager or the Director of Public Safety, it merely establishes known briefing standards. In summary the following incidents will be briefed to the City Council: 1. Major injury or death of a City employee, an employee's immediate family member, or a prisoner in custody by the Department of Public Safety 2. Officer - involved shooting 3. Traffic collision involving a City vehicle resulting in a serious injury requiring hospitalization 4. Hostage or barricaded subject 5. Riot or other major disturbance (e.g., violent protest) 6. City participation in disaster response to other jurisdictions (e.g., strike teams sent to the San Diego fires) 7. Homicide, or any unusual event leading to death 8. Major fire resulting in the loss of a structure 9. Assault where the victim may expire 10. Robbery with serious injury 11. Major sex crime with bodily injury 12. Kidnapping 13. A substantial school - related incident 14. Felony arrest of any City employee, or political figure 15. Any event resulting in substantial media coverage (e.g., discovery of improperly stored bodies by funeral home) 16. Any Public Safety event involving an elected official, City Manager, department head that comes to the attention of the Department of Public Safety 17. Activation of the City's Emergency Operations Center. Requirements in existing law (e.g., juvenile information, notification of immediate family members) or the need to protect crime victims may restrict the ability to provide information. This policy is not intended to circumvent legal limits to law enforcement restricted information. In cases where incidents not requiring Council action occur during the hours of 9:00 P.M. through 8:00 A.M., Councilmembers will be contacted the next morning or shortly thereafter. CDC X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111/08 X 3 /5 /08 -TG Copy to: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION BILLS FOR APPROVAL March 11, 2008 Checks 4962 - 4970 Date February 21 - March 5, 2008 $29,359.88 TOTAL $29,359.88 RBI-02:4 *11-01 RR-j I [full [Z lisle • Enhancement Program TO FOLLOW ON FRIDAY 317 14,11TH F;jUOIN Agenda Packet Preparation TIMELINES for Regular City Council Meetings held on the 2 "d & 4rh Tuesdays of each month: Resolutions (other than standard formats for authorizations and approvals), Ordinances & Agreements to Assistant City Attorney via email for review and approval as to form DUE no later than NOON Three (3) Mondays prior to Council meeting date Agenda Items w /attachments via email and hard copy to City Clerk DUE no later than NOON Two (2) Mondays prior to Council meeting date Agenda Draft review by Mayor, City Manager, Assistant City Attorney, City Clerk no later than Tuesday morning One (1) week prior to Council meeting date Agenda Packets distributed to City Council and Agendas posted/distributed /mailed on Wednesday afternoon One (1) week prior to Council meeting date in compliance with Rohnert Park Municit)al Code Section 2.08.050 {This section for City Clerk Use Only) CDC RESO. NO. 2008-04 CDC X Miscellaneous Communications Agenda: 3111108 X 3/7/08 -TG Copy to: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT Meeting Date: March 11, 2008 Department: Community Development Commission Submitted By: Dan Schwarz, Assistant Executive Director Submittal Date: March 6, 2008 Agenda Title: Neighborhood Enhancement Program Requested Council Action: Approve Attached Resolution Summary: As part of its mid -year budget review, the Commission appropriated $5,000 for a neighborhood enhancement program. The intent of the program is to provide community groups and organizations with a grant source for small projects within the residential neighborhoods of the redevelopment project area that are deemed to have a tangible aesthetic or structural benefit to the area. This grant program was inspired by the demonstrated success of C -CORP (Concerned Citizens of Rohnert Park) in combining a small contribution from the Commission with other resources to complete a beautification project on Adrian Drive. Staff recommends the establishment of a CDC Neighborhood Enhancement Program that would offer two forms of grants. A group could request up to $500 to fund all or a portion of its project costs or a group could request up to $1,000 in matching funds for a project. The intent of this scheme is to encourage groups to seek cash, materials, or in -kind services from multiple sources. To qualify for the grant, the applicant would need to be a group or organization recognized in the community (or sponsored by such a group) and would have to demonstrate that the project would have a significant, visible impact on the neighborhood. If the project would require on -going maintenance after completion, the applicant would need to address who would be responsible for that maintenance. Projects would not be eligible if they would create a significant, on -going expense for the City or if the lack of a maintenance plan might negatively impact the neighborhood aesthetic over time. Grants would be distributed on a first -come, first -served basis until funds are exhausted. To ensure that more than one group or organization has the opportunity to obtain funding, it is recommended that no one group or organization be able to receive more than 25% of the Program fund in any given quarter of the fiscal year. Enclosures: Draft Resolution GENERAL COUNSEL'S REVIEW: Relevant documents for this agenda item have been reviewed and approved as to form by the General Counsel. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: () Consent Item () Regular Time Approval O Public Hearing Required ( ) Not Recommended (} Submitted with Comment ( ) Policy Determination by Co it ( ) City Comments: Executive Director's Signature: Date: 5 D (Revise 010 07) JH:TG- -SO S -b RESOLUTION NO. 2008 -04 RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ESTABLISHING A NEIGHBORHOOD ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission ( "Commission ") has determined that partnerships with local community groups and organizations can greatly benefit the residential portions of a redevelopment project area by improving the aesthetic and /or structural components of the neighborhood; WHEREAS, the Commission has determined that partnerships with local community groups and organizations on projects that enhance a neighborhood's aesthetic and /or structural components can be a significant deterrent to the onset of blight; WHEREAS, the Commission wishes to encourage community groups and organizations to invest in the residential portions of a redevelopment project area; WHEREAS, the Commission wishes to encourage community groups and organizations to collaborate on projects in the residential portions of the redevelopment project area; WHEREAS, the Commission has established a fund for neighborhood enhancement; and WHEREAS, the Commission wishes to make neighborhood enhancement funds available through a simplified grant process (the "Neighborhood Enhancement Program" or "Program "). NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Commission that it hereby establishes the Neighborhood Enhancement Program. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Program shall provide small, one -time grants for community -based projects designed to improve the aesthetic and /or structural conditions within neighborhoods in the redevelopment project area. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that it is the intent of the Commission that the Program be guided by the following statements: 1) Applicants must be or be sponsored by groups or organizations recognized in the community. 2) Projects must have a significant, visible impact on neighborhoods in the redevelopment project area. 3) Projects must have minimal short or long -term cost implications for the City. 4) Applicants may be awarded up to $500 to fund all or a portion of a project. 5) Applicants maybe awarded up to $1,000 to match cash, materials, or in -lieu services obtained from other sources. 6) Applicants may submit and have awarded multiple proposals, but no one group or organization shall receive more than 25% of the Program fund in any one quarter of the fiscal year. This provision shall not apply in Fiscal Year 2007 -2008. 7) Projects must be completed within 6 months of the award of a grant. 8) Each fiscal year, grants shall be distributed on a first -come, first - served basis until the Neighborhood Enhancement Fund is exhausted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Executive Director is authorized to create and implement an application and review process for Neighborhood Enhancement Program grants. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 1 Ph Day of March, 2008. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF ROHNERT PARK Chair ATTEST: Secretary