1996/06/11 City Council Minutes (3)Rohnert Park City Council Minutes
June 25, 1996
The Council of the City of Rohnert Park met this date in regular session commencing at
6:00 p.m. in the City Offices, 6750 Commerce Boulevard, Rohnert Park, with Mayor
Flores presiding.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Flores called the regular session to order at approximately 6:15 p.m. and
led the pledge of allegiance.
ROLL CALL Present: (4) Councilmembers Eck, Reilly, Spiro and Mayor Flores
Late: (1) Councilwoman Gallagher (arrival time as signified in these minutes)
Absent: (0) None
Staff present for all or part of the meeting: City Manager Netter, City Attorney Flitner,
Assistant City Manager Leivo, Planning Director Skanchy and Director of Public Safety
Rooney.
CLOSED SESSION report: Mayor Flores reported on the closed session which commenced this
evening at 6:00 to discuss matters listed on the agenda attachment, representing an
update, with no additional action taken at this time.
Councilwoman Gallagher arrived during the preceding report at approximately 7:19 p.m.
APPROVAL OFMINUTES: Councilwoman Spiro referenced page 5 and said she did not believe her
motion included "and east to Petaluma Hill Road "; referenced preceding paragraph on
the same page pertaining to the idea of establishing UGB's, that her response to
Councilman Reilly's comments were for the record, "to require a simple majority vote of
the Council, as opposed to a 4 to 1 vote, which has been supported by the State
Assembly and the vote of the people "; and on page 9, change designated "payroll
position" to "payroll function ".
Council concurred with above - reviewed corrections with the exception of pending review
of the meeting video for clarity of the motion referenced on page 5.
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Eck, seconded by Councilman Reilly, with abstention by
Councilwoman Gallagher due to absence from the meeting, minutes of June 11, 1996
were unanimously approved as amended.
APPROVAL OF BILLS: Upon motion by Councilwoman Spiro, seconded by Councilman Reilly, with
Councilwoman Gallagher signifying her no vote on the payment to the Wine Center, City
bills presented per the attached list in the amount of $756,955.43 were unanimously
approved.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 2 ) June 25 1996
NON - AGENDAED MATTERS: Mayor Flores asked if Councilmembers or staff had any non - agendaed
items to add to the agenda. Vice Mayor Eck signified adding an item under Council
Committee reports for the Performing Arts Center. Councilman Reilly signified adding
one miscellaneous item. Councilwoman Spiro and Councilwoman Gallagher requested
moving the General Plan item forward on the agenda due to needing to leave early for
signified personal reasons.
PRESENTATION OF RETIREMENT RESOLUTION TO LOUIS D. YEOMANS, JR
Mayor Flores shared contents of this resolution expressing appreciation to Mr. Yeomans
for his twenty -six and a half years of dedicated service to the City as a Public Safety
Volunteer. The Mayor presented the resolution and extended best wishes to Mr.Yeomans
and his wife, Gladys, on the occasion of his retirement.
City Manager Netter advised a retirement resolution has been prepared for presentation
to Allagene Brown, who is retiring from the City's Finance Department. Ms. Brown was
unable to attend this Council meeting and her presentation will be made at a later date.
PRESENTATIONS OF RECOGNITION & APPRECIATION re Used Oil Collection Program
Mayor Flores recognized efforts of members of the Boys & Girls Club of Rohnert Park for
their participation in this program by creating the Used Oil Posters on display in the lobby
at City Hall. The Mayor requested Council *Liaison Member Linda Spiro to express
appreciation to the Boys & Girls Club, on behalf of the entire Council, for these efforts.
*CORRECTION ABOVE from 7/9/96 City Council meeting: Per Councilwoman Spiro (deletion lined out/addition underlined)
Mayor Flores reviewed the proclamations prepared expressing appreciation to signified
businesses in the community for serving the public as a Used Oil Collection Center as
follows: Acur -It Honda Tech; Chevron Oil Stop; Kragen's Auto Works; Rohnert Park
Exxon; Rohnert Park Tire & Auto Service Center; and SpeeDee Oil Change & Tune Up.
The Mayor presented the proclamation to Rohnert Park Exxon representative present at
the meeting, and advised the remaining proclamations would be forwarded to the other
representatives signified herein.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES.
Jake Mackenzie, 1536 Gladstone Way, referenced his written recommendations distributed at the
previous Council meeting regarding General Plan matters, including UGB's;
complimented the recent event at the Wine Center for the new railroad passenger train in
cooperation with the Chamber of Commerce and the City; and shared further comments
pertaining to County's Land Use Study in process and related possibilities regarding land
use patterns related to railroad tours.
UNSCHEDULED PUBLICAPPEARANCES: Mayor Flores stated that in compliance with State Law
(The Brown Act), citizens wishing to make a comment may do so at this time. Under
legislation of the Brown Act, in most cases, the Council cannot handle an item without
agendizing. To ensure accurate recording, "Speaker Cards" are provided at the entrance
of the Chamber and persons speaking under unscheduled public appearances are
requested to submit completed cards to the recording clerk.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 3 ) June 25, 1996
Joy Wheeler, 8647 Lord's Manor Way, reviewed concerns regarding the proposed Fire Services
Assessment Tax including financial aspects; training factors for fire services; and that
she did not expect separate police and fire services but recommended stopping
assignment rotation for most effective benefit from training efforts for fire services. --
Mayor Flores responded this item was scheduled for review later on this agenda.
2. Marie Vinsick, 38 Estrella Drive, reviewed concerns related to an anonymous form letter mailed with
postage due urging petitions opposing the proposed Fire Services Assessment District.
She provided a copy of the letter to City Hall for informational purposes.
3. Cindy Walsh, 4409 Glacier Court, reviewed concerns regarding letters she received from the City
responding to her previous questions related to building construction concerns of her
home, referencing a Herzog report and a particular letter from Mr. George Allen of
Condiotti Enterprises -- City Attorney Flitner responded that if public records and plans
were submitted, the public record would be available for review. -- Ms. Walsh also
expressed concerns related to Morton Phillips qualifying as an outside, independent
inspector as he was plan checking in Rohnert Park in 1977. -- Discussion included City
Manager Netter and City Attorney Flitner responding to Council questions. City Manager
explained this item has developed into a difficult and complex issue involving
certain legalities needing consideration. Discussion concluded with Mayor Flores
advising Ms. Walsh should put her request in writing to the City Manager for further
review to see if the referenced items can be obtained for Ms. Walsh.
4. Loretta Harris, no address given, referenced the City's General Plan and reviewed reasons for the
importance of expanding the City's sphere of influence over the next 20 years. Her
reasons included that the west side could provide unique possibilities to both the City and
property owners; a transitional area is needed between the City and the County; and
provide the opportunity for the City to control its own destiny.
5. Jack L. Buchanan, 5750 Davis Circle, referenced the proposed Fire Services Assessment District and
reviewed concerns related to the recent Press Democrat article commenting on the annual
rate of $64.30 for residents, but did not signify the 5% increase every year thereafter. --
Mayor Flores responded that the newspaper provides a general representation of items
and the reporter does a good job of representing items for Rohnert Park. It is the City's
responsibility to publish related legal documents as required.
6. Jim Groom of Groom Equipment, 85 Scenic Avenue, Santa Rosa, reviewed his background
experience with his business in the area and the excellent insurance ratings received as a
result of the City's combined department for public safety and fire protection services,
which has equal or better response time comparatives to surrounding communities. He
shared contents of his letter provided to Council which complimented the effectiveness of
Rohnert Park's existing Department of Public Safety, and explained his reasons for
protesting the proposed Fire Services Assessment District.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 4 ) June 25, 1996
7. Mike Dolcini, 1758 Lander, referenced his five acre parcel on the west side, clarified that he was not a
developer, and reviewed reasons in support of expanding the City's sphere of influence
west to Stony Point Road to create the opportunity for industrial tax base combined with
the possibility of a hospital and fire station on the west side, as well as various sports
facilities that would be compatible with open space needs. This would result in not only
serving the City but also the public.
8. John Hudson, 399 Bonnie Avenue, expressed concerns reviewing his reasons for feeling the City of
Rohnert Park has created a General Plan commission generally comprised of designated
individuals outside the City to provide input toward development related to the General
Plan process, signifying the results of a population for the many controlled by a few.
9. Cindie Fahy, no address given, presented questions pertaining to the proposed Fire Services
Assessment District which included responses from Council as follows: the resulting
funds would be for full time employees, not volunteers; review of the item with time
allotted for public comments is scheduled later on tonight's agenda and a public hearing
has been duly noticed and scheduled during the next City Council meeting of July 9th; a
protest response of 10% would signify the need to go to the vote of the people; notices in
the English language are legally sufficient but the concern regarding other languages
needs to be addressed; consultants will review the question raised regarding existing
taxes for police and fire services compared to the proposed assessment; and the City is
going into the second year of deficit finances and must consider revenue alternatives.
Ms. Fahy commented it would help citizens if Council would consider a three to five year
time limit on this assessment versus on- going.
10. Jim McGinnis, 119 Circulo Chupalla, reviewed reasons for concerns related to the importance of
efficient response times for fire services and recommended forming a citizens' group to
study the City's fire service needs.
Mayor Flores advised that time allotted on the agenda for unscheduled public
appearances is a forum for the public to address the Council but would like to comment
that the City has a fine Public Safety Department and suggested that citizens with
concerns expressed herein should meet with the Director of Public Safety as he thought
they would find the City has a very strong Public Safety Department.
11. Ken Emad, 6650 Commerce Blvd., reviewed reasons protesting the need for the p oposed Fire
Services Assessment District which included only being a benefit to insurance companies
and not property owners, as he was not aware of any violations of fire services and
thought a four to five minute response time is fine.
Mayor Flores expressed appreciation for the above speaker's comments as, from the
numerous letters received on this item, he has noticed quite a few people are saying they
are pleased with the City's services.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 5 ) June 25, 1996
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Flores asked if Councilmembers had any questions regarding the matters on the
Consent Calendar which were explained in the City Manager's Council Meeting Memo.
Acknowledging the City Manager /Clerk's report on the posting of the agenda.
Resolution Nos:
96 -116 PROCLAIMING TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1996 AS "NATIONAL NIGHT OUT"
96 -117 SUPPORTING THE "CHARACTER COUNTS" PROGRAM
96 -118 ACCEPTING COMPLETION AND DIRECTING CITY ENGINEER TO FILE
NOTICE OF COMPLETION, COMMERCE BOULEVARD SOUTH BIKE PATH,
PROJECT NO. 1991 -1
96 -119 AWARD OF CONTRACT, COLEMAN CREEK PIPELINE & CHANNEL REPAIRS,
PROJECT NO. 1996 -3
96 -120 AWARD OF CONTRACT, FLORES AVENUE STORM DRAIN, PROJECT NO.
1996 -5
96 -121 AWARD OF CONTRACT, COMMERCE BOULEVARD NORTH WIDENING,
PROJECT NO. 1996 -6
96 -122 AWARD OF CONTRACT, GLADSTONE WAY CHANNEL RECONSTRUCTION,
PROJECT NO. 1996 -7
96 -123 AWARD OF CONTRACT, GOLF COURSE DRAINAGE SWALE RECON-
STRUCTION, PROJECT NO. 1996 -8
96 -124 ESTABLISHING THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR THE CITY OF ROHNERT
PARK FOR THE 1996 -97 FISCAL YEAR PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIII B OF THE
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
96 -125 REJECTING THE CLAIM OF SAM GIUNTA (re. alleged flood damages)
Upon motion by Councilman Reilly, seconded by Councilwoman Spiro, the Consent
Calendar as outlined on the meeting's agenda, was unanimously approved.
**************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Ordinance
No. 619 AMENDING SECTION 9.66.260 OF CHAPTER 9.66 OF THE ROHNERT PARK
MUNICIPAL CODE REVISING REQUIREMENTS FOR BINGO AUDITS AND
CITY MONITORING OF BINGO LEGAL COMPLIANCE
City Manager Netter explained the ordinance, as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo,
and responded to Council questions. This ordinance was introduced at the previous
Council meeting with minor revisions as signified, except for retaining the word "all" in
Section 3 -A as agreed to by the bingo operator's CPA following recent discussion with
staff. If adopted, this ordinance would become effective thirty days thereafter.
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Eck, seconded by Councilwoman Gallagher, and
unanimously approved, including correction of the word "charity" to "charities" in
Section 1 -C, reading of Ordinance No. 619 was waived, and said ordinance was adopted.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 6 ) June 25, 1996
PROPOSED FIRE SERVICES BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT - PUBLIC MEETING
City Manager Netter referenced explanation of this item as reviewed in the Council
Meeting Memo. This represents the first in a series of public meetings on the proposed
Fire Services Benefit Assessment District. City Manager acknowledged the Consultants
from Berryman & Henigar, were present at this Council meeting, as well as City staff, to
respond to questions and/or solicit input from citizens. A Public Comments section has
been agendized at this time to hear public testimony. Council has been provided with
approximately 143 letters to date signifying opposition to the Fire Services Assessment.
COUNCIL COMMENTS included the following:
*Councilman Reilly responded, for the record, to concerns expressed earlier during this
evening's unscheduled public appearances, that the Council has been struggling with
ideas for additional funds for fire services based on citizen concerns expressed on specific
fires one to two years ago. This is not something that would just come up within the
Council but a proposal did come up earlier from citizens. There are procedures to
follow. Council can wait for the signified 10% to put the proposed Fire Assessment on
the ballot or it can be done for less, but the idea that this Council has some other interest
other than to review the options is incorrect. The questions and concerns expressed by
citizens are being presented to Council for its review and consideration including the
concerns presented in reading the recent newspaper article. This is the citizens'
opportunity to help the Council make a decision.
*Mayor Flores referenced the many protest letters received from citizens on this issue but,
as mentioned earlier, he noticed very strong support for the City's Department of Public
Safety. The Mayor advised the consultants of Berryman & Henigar, Dennis Klingelhofer
and Joe Francisco, are available at this time to report on this item and to respond to
further questions.
*Councilwoman Gallagher commented that she has expressed from the beginning that the
public will not vote itself to pay another tax. From the letters Council has received from
the people, not all have expressed being against an assessment, but they want to know
what they are getting for the money if it goes to a vote, like something that more
resembles separate fire and police services. Ms. Gallagher signified she was glad to have
these public hearings.
1. Consultant report - Berryman & Henigar -- Referencing previous report provided to Council and
available to citizens, Dennis Mingelhofer of Berryman & Henigar reported on various
requirements and legalities pertaining to the assessment process. Mr. Klingelhofer
responded to Council questions and to citizen questions presented earlier this evening. --
Assistant City Manager Leivo also responded to Council questions including
confirmation that approximately 16,000 notices for this assessment proposal were mailed
to each individual property owner, which included property owners living both within and
outside the City. Notices were also sent to the residents of mobile home parks and to
renters residing in Rohnert Park, as previously requested by Council. Mr. Leivo also
clarified that the 10% factor of protests, mentioned earlier this evening for ballot measure
considerations, is based on the dollar amount of total assessments. As well as copies of
the protest letters provided to Council to date, staff plans to provide a listing of all the
parcels to enable percentage determinations.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 7 ) June 25, 1996
2. Staff report - Right to vote on Taxes Act -- Assistant City Manager Leivo referenced this staff report,
as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo, informing the Council that the "Right to Vote
on Taxes Act" has qualified for the November ballot. Mr. Leivo shared contents therein
pertaining to the impact this initiative may have on the proposed Rohnert Park Fire
Suppression Benefit Assessment District.
3. Sample resolution establishing Benefit Assessment (for information at this time) -- Assistant City
Manager Leivo explained this item provided to Council. Following the formal protest
hearing scheduled during the next Council meeting of July 9, 1996, the resolution would
be presented for consideration, in the event Council decides to proceed. Mr. Leivo asked
if Council had further direction for staff regarding proposed language for the resolution
to address some of the issues that have been raised during this evening's Council meeting.
Discussion included Council consideration of Councilwoman Spiro asking if the rate
could be tied to the CPI annually versus the 5% which seemed rather high, and
concluded in Council agreement to wait until after the public hearing on July 9 to decide.
-- Assistant to the City Manager Leivo responded to additional Council questions related
to the above - referenced initiative on the "Right to Vote on Taxes Act" that has qualified
for the November ballot. Council speculated on various alternatives to consider related
to whether or not this initiative passes and options available for the City's proposed Fire
Services Assessment District. -- City Manager Netter suggested there may be a way of
adopting the assessment with a zero amount for the first year which could work to be
compatible with the other initiative.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Flores opened the meeting to receive public comments at
approximately 8:07 p.m. Public comments were submitted on speaker cards or other
written and/or verbal communications expressing concerns related to this item as follows:
Charles Kitchen, 4945 Fern Place, provided to Council additional copies of the previously referenced
unsigned letters from concerned citizens with recommendations for this item. Mr.
Kitchen and explained reasons for concerns expressed related to financial aspects of the
training process for fire services. Mr. Kitchens referred to the report from the
consultants and asked about cost comparisons therein. -- Dennis Klingelhofer of
Berryman & Henigar reviewed aspects of the City's current Public Safety Department
and explained reasons for the team function of public safety and fire services as a viable
concept. Fire services have changed drastically over the years and with less than 10% of
time going to fire services, personnel trained as public safety officers can provide other
services as well as fire services. The Fire Suppression Assessment would provide
necessary funding and it is possible to consider some other classification, but there is still
the need to find funding to augment the fire suppression services.
Councilwoman Gallagher left the Chamber during the preceding speaker's comments at approximately
8:14 p.m. and returned at approximately 8:18 p.m.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 8 ) June 25, 1996
Director of Public Safety Rooney explained the extended training procedures
implemented for fire services since the acceptance of his position with the Department of
Public Safety, as signified by the training records of the last two years. He further
explained Rohnert Park's situation is different from others and the City's combined
department serving public safety and fire services does a great job; reviewed examples of
effective response times; and complimented efforts comparable to any fire department.
Unidentified lady, no address given, referenced fire station staffing previously mentioned during above
consultant comments pertaining to two stations stared twenty -four hours a day and
asked which station was signified to be staffed for one shift. -- City Manager Netter
responded it was the main station signified for one shift due to other public safety staff
available at that location, and the two fire stations staffed for twenty -four hours a day
referred to the northern and southern stations. --
Cindie Fahy, no address given, requested clarification of the duration and percentage rate of the
proposed assessment; asked about use of the funds for fire services; and commented
further on specific training necessary for fire services to sufficiently meet the needs of this
community regardless of comparatives with other areas. -- Council comments signified
consideration could be given to the possibility of a limited duration and flexibility to the
percentage rate. -- Consultant Dennis Klingelhofer further clarified that whether or not
public safety officers serve as fire fighters and/or whether a decision is made for
reclassification of titles, the proposed assessment funds could only be used for fire
assessment activities. -- Mayor Flores advised the training record referenced above by
the Director of Public Safety would be presented for public review at the next Council
meeting when the public hearing is scheduled for the item. -- Consultant Klingelhofer
responded to the Mayor's inquiry regarding how Rohnert Park compares with other
cities in terms of number of fires and dollar amounts related to fire losses, that for the
3 to 4 year period reviewed, Rohnert Park was either at an average level or below in
both total dollars for fire losses and number of structure fires.
Above unidentified lady, reviewed further concerns related to the hours of training provided for fire
services and the current rotation system of the Public Safety Department. She expressed
the continued preference for a separate fire department in Rohnert Park.
Gary Delevati, Santa Rosa,explained his experience as a volunteer fireman of ten years in Bennett
Valley. He reviewed the successful effort related to the fire assessment district in that
area with a five year plan and the ease of set rates for residents at $60 per year and
industrial at $120 per year. He referred to Rohnert Park's population expanding to
approximately 40,000 which he felt merited consideration of changing Rohnert Park's
system to have a separate fire department.
Marie Vinsick, 38 Estrella, reviewed concerns regarding fire services for the west side of the freeway
including timing factors of getting equipment across the freeway due to increased
population, and requested consideration of provisions for the west side.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 9 ) June 25, 1996
Linda Branscomb, 6585 Commerce Blvd., #188, referred to the City's General Plan Update in process
and emphasized the importance of fully considering infrastructure needs related to the
City's growth. She asked if the previous question raised about the possibility of double
taxation could be answered. -- Mayor Flores referenced the two fire stations being
staffed 24 hours a day which is causing considerable financial burden on the City and
its current tax base. If not an assessment district, the City will have to look at other areas
to cover the additional need for fire services, as the City's budget is basically in deficit
and the expenditure for the fire services will have to come from elsewhere. -- Vice
Mayor Eck added that the City does not have any other kind of specified taxes and the
existing services are funded out of the General Fund. The City does not have any other
direct financial support.
2nd unidentified lady, no address given, reviewed her prior background experience as a Public Safety
Dispatcher in the 80's. She explained training procedures throughout her seven years
with the Department and handling responsibilities of three separate jobs to signify support
of the concept that both public safety and fire services can be effectively separated and
handled by the same person. Her concern was that there is no top end to the proposed
fire services assessment.
Greg Brogdon, 8471 Lancaster Drive, reviewed examples and reasons from a professional firefighter's
standpoint for automatic responses and on -going training specifically related to fire
services. He expressed appreciation for the efforts of public safety officers doing the best
they can in the dual capacity but, referencing citizen concerns previously expressed,
agreed a decision may need to be made to change Rohnert Park's system to separate
public safety and fire services.
There being no one further desiring to speak, Mayor Flores closed the public comments
at approximately 8:57 p.m.
FURTHER COUNCII. COMMENTS included the following:
*Mayor Flores advised the duly noticed public hearing for the proposed Fire Services
Benefit Assessment District will proceed as scheduled during the next City Council
meeting of July 9, 1996. Questions related to this item are presented to staff for further
review and response. As indicated earlier by Councilman Reilly, Council has not made a
decision regarding this matter. The consultants were hired to provide related background
and information on this proposal.
•Councilwoman Spiro referred to concerns expressed herein and while staff will be
compiling information as requested, the public needs to be aware of what a separate fire
department would cost. She expressed support of the City's Department of Public Safety
and did not advocate separate departments. In any system, there's always room for
improvement and Ms. Spiro recommended continued progress in that direction as
compared to considering a separate fire department.
•Councilwoman Gallagher expressed agreement with above public comments of the last
speaker and thought he got right to the point. None of us have been saying the Police
Department has been doing a bad job but it has egos to deal with. She said change is
hard; she has to say it's not working; has to say what's in the best public interest; and it
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 10 ) June 25 1996
seems really obvious to her that unless we say it in determination of time and years and
spell it out specifically, she would not vote for the proposed fire services assessment
herself unless it says exactly what we are going to get. She thought it was time to
separate the departments which has not been explored sufficiently. Actually, many of the
citizen letters signified support of hiring firemen and expressed concern about being short
staffed. She thought the City needs to explore possibilities of saving money by doing it
the right way and egos have to be laid to rest.
*Councilman Reilly signified it is always tough to follow an emotional appeal but Council
has been working on this for two years related to the effect of signified fires not being
handled properly. He reviewed his past experience of having a choice to do fire fighting
versus law enforcement and he chose law enforcement. He has met many full time fire
fighters that did an excellent job as well as those that have fully handled doing both police
and fire services. He did not believe that simply because a person is only a fire fighter, it
is more effective, as a person can do two jobs, referencing above - reviewed example of
Bennett Valley volunteer fireman. If training is lacking, that's what is important, and if
the training is being done, it does not matter what other jobs are also handled.
Councilman Reilly gave examples supporting his disagreement with comments that a
system is lacking if there are no full time fire fighters. Whether doing a fire assessment is
a way to circumvent Proposition 13, is the issue, especially since November is close and a
ballot measure needs to be set up. If considerations are going to be given to a full time
fire department, then real costs need to be discussed. This is one of the few cities where
traffic enforcement is not the number one job of the police department. Rohnert Park's
Public Safety Department is out there doing other things in the community. Just moving
over to a full time fire department is not the answer. Other things must be weighed
like willingness to give up the DARE program, youth programs, and other such
beneficial programs, in order to have a separate, full time fire department. Even so,
Councilman Reilly doubted if the City could come up with the significant increased
expense of $1 to $2 million to pay for a separate fire department.
*Vice Mayor Eck commented that discussions of this issue seem to focus more on the
debate of whether to have full or part time fire services, which is very emotional, and
also found it ironic the huge disagreements generally pertained to opinions related to
minimal response times and yet see other major cities with reports on major fires and loss
of lives. He signified support of the City's Public Safety concept as he thought it works
well and is cost effective. Vice Mayor Eck expressed the preference to focus in on the
assessment process for a ballot measure, then if the voters vote it down, `.ey had a good
opportunity to consider it. He further signified preference for a cap au timely review
with consideration of a 5% rate, but an open end on a rate or time was not - .oceptable.
*Mayor Flores thought members of the community will see a dramatic Chan:,.: in regard to
training the officers are getting. Separating departments is a very expensiv, proposition
and everything looked at is not affordable to Rohnert Park. Requiring thf: public Safety
Department to focus on training and other aspects in the community is important.
Rohnert Park has been fortunate with regard to fires and though fires are dramatic and
there is no such thing as a minor fire, additional training will do nothing but enhance the
situation. Whether or not the decision is made to have a fire services assessment district,
the direction will be to move toward the best interests of the community.
Rohnert Park Citv Council Minutes ( 11 ) June 25 1996
RECESS Mayor Flores declared a recess at approximately 9:12 p.m.
RECONVENE - Mayor Flores reconvened the Council meeting at approximately 9:21 p.m. with all
Councilmembers present.
GENERAL PLAN matters:
1. Continued Council discussion following June 11 1996 work session included comments as follows:
*Vice Mayor Eck reviewed contents of his letter dated June 25, 1996 provided to Council
(copy attached to original set of these minutes) explaining that his previously proposed
compromise allowing for some limited growth in exchange for acquisition of permanent
open space may raise the perception of a conflict of interest on his part because of the active
role the University is playing in the General Plan process. Therefore, he recommended
Council approval to submit a ballot measure for the voters of the City to be entitled the
Rohnert Park Urban Growth Boundary Initiative. His letter outlined the purpose, elements
and findings of the proposed initiative. He also referred to UGB document of City of
Sebastopol provided as a model for Council's review and information. Since neither the
Council or the General Plan Committee have been able to agree on the City's spheres of
influence, Vice Mayor Eck recommended having the voters of Rohnert Park decide with
preparation of the draft UGB initiative prepared for Council review during its next meeting
of July 9, 1996.
•Mayor Flores advised Council has had the opportunity to review several UGB documents
from several cities.
*Councilman Reilly shared reasons for agreeing with above - reviewed memo from Vice
Mayor Eck. If Council prefers to wait until the July 9th Council meeting to make the
motion, he would wait until then, but indicated he would make the motion accordingly at the
July 9th Council meeting.
*Councilwoman Gallagher reviewed reasons for being in agreement with the above intended
motion, which she felt was compatible with her previously expressed views of wanting a 20
year master plan, since the City cannot afford to grow any larger over the next five years
anyway and there is the need to check these things first (referring to above - reviewed
UGB /General Plan memo from Vice Mayor Eck).
*Councilwoman Spiro reviewed numerous reasons opposing the above proposal emphasizing
that putting a UBG on the ballot is doing things backwards. There is no place left in
Rohnert Park to build and there is the need to do an economic development plan. She
restated her position which has always been the spheres should be put back to where they
were before. She did not deny voters their right to vote and would like to go on record
saying she was really proud of the Press Democrat article which was very good on the
Conservation Act pertaining to the greenbelt. They are very organized, and others should
be so organized, making this a major issue. It is going to go on the ballot in a lot of cities
and the message has been signified regarding the possibility of not getting the signatures in
Rohnert Park, but if they have already been told months ago that they have the three votes
necessary from this Council, they don't need to go out there and ask if that's what the
citizens want. Councilwoman Spiro further referenced discussions about public safety needs
and having to do an assessment district, as well as the Proposition 13 issue, and now people
are coming to grips with what was talked about then. She expressed further concerns
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 12 ) June 25 1996
pertaining to companies interested in coming to this City and being told to wait to put an
initiative on the ballot. Councilwoman Spiro also signified Rohnert Park does not have an
approved housing element to which Vice Mayor Eck responded we have a plan to meet our
fair share requirements. Ms. Spiro pointed out the plan has not been certified `Y either the
City or the State of California and, even if you wanted to, there's no place build. She
further explained taking information to SSU showing everybody's point of Vic )ecause she
knew one of the people planning to talk on UGB's and greenbelts who refus . _ to have the
other side of the issue presented, so she came to provide the other side of '-ie issue. Ms.
Spiro commented she was probably saying more than she needed to say, b.�.t hoped people
realized if this goes on the ballot and if it is voted out, asked if anyone wanted to know what
will happen to the price of houses, and gave examples of prices currently too high for
average households. Councilwoman Spiro signified she just wanted to say if we start doing
things like locking up the City for 20 years, what kind of process are we putting on the
residents. She listed numerous factors needing consideration including neighborhood parks,
public safety, the need for retail and encouraging voters to look at both sides of the issue
toward retaining the nice community that Rohnert Park has always been.
*Mayor Flores referred to considerations for a 20 year plan and the need to look at different
points of view with a realistic spirit of compromise. He referenced the master plan in place
on Santa Rosa Avenue, recently reported in the newspaper, and thought Santa Rosa did a
wise thing regarding this. Mayor Flores commented on the $400,000 deficit they were
facing and after a complete analysis, turned out to have $1/2 million in the black and have
been able to enhance benefits. Also, he was aware roles sometimes get confused with recent
references to Vice Mayor Eck being a professor at SSU and the letter Mayor Flores
received with reference to his position as a school superintendent, to which concerns City
Attorney Flitner responded at the previous Council meeting. Mayor Flores referred to his
map distributed at the previous Council meeting for this item, and enlarged map on display
for tonight's meeting, pointing out signified lines to the east on Petaluma Hill Road, to the
north on Horn Avenue, and to the west on Stony Point Road. He referred to the area of
location for the Bellevue School District, of which he is the Superintendent, and advised the
School Board has agreed to transfer this land to the Cotati - Rohnert Park School District,
recommending signified surrounding area be designated to open space retaining view of the
foothills looking directly to the east. Mayor Flores signified SSU vicinity areas possible for
residential development with comment that Vice Mayor Eck had indicated areas just north
and south of SSU as open space. Mayor Flores further explained designating the Laguna
Channel area as open space and next to it as industrial. The City is looking at a $660,000
deficit with another year using reserves and really needs to have ideas responding to "what
are we going to do if we do nothing and run out of reserves, which will run out in two
years ". Far sighted intelligence is needed for the benefit of our economy and consideration
needs to be given, in the spirit of compromise, that will help the City be effective. Mayor
Flores responded to questions from Council related to his proposed map including
possibilities related to the Bellevue School transfer that someone might recommend the
open space include the signified 1 -B & C map areas. He also confirmed that tonight's map
does not show going down as far as the map he presented at the previous Council meeting,
which could still be discussed, and represents a compromise for consideration.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 13 ) June 25, 1996
Discussion included a motion by Councilwoman Spiro, to support the Mayor's revised
proposal, in the spirit of compromise, as long as the revised line does not go past the G
Section, seconded by Mayor Flores, followed by further Council discussion expressing
differing views related to this matter with efforts toward remaining open to allow for
compromise.
Van Logan, 2560 West Dry Creek Road, Healdsburg, shared contents of his letter dated June 21, 1996
(copy attached to original set of these minutes) pertaining to three specific plan areas that
could be created using the pre -1989 sphere of influence line as the planning area for a 20
Year General Plan.
Above motion on the table failed with Vice Mayor Eck, Councilwoman Gallagher and
Councilman Reilly dissenting.
Further discussion concluded upon motion by Vice Mayor Eck, seconded by
Councilwoman Gallagher, and approved with Councilwoman Spiro dissenting, for staff to
proceed with the outlines presented in his above - reviewed memo for a ballot measure
working document. -- Mayor Flores recommended Vice Mayor Eck work with staff on
this effort.
Councilwoman Gallagher and Councilwoman Spiro left the meeting at approximately 10:10 p.m.
DEFERRAL OF REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS -- Due to the lateness of the hour, remaining
agenda items were deferred to the next regular City Council meeting of July 9, 1996, with
the exception of the following items reviewed as signified in these minutes.
SONOMA COUNTY PROFESSIONAL BASEBALL (Sonoma County Crushers) re request for
additional loan for unexpected costs of bleacher installation -- City Manager Netter
explained this item, as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo, and responded to Council
questions. Mayor Flores acknowledged Mr. and Mrs. Fletcher, representatives of this
item, were present at this Council meeting. -- Discussion concluded upon motion by
Vice Mayor Eck, seconded by Councilman Reilly, with absence of Councilmembers
Gallagher and Spiro, to proceed with this loan in the amount of $33,980 for a two (2)
year period at an interest rate of 6.5 %, as recommended by staff, and include the option
presented by the Sonoma County Crushers to pay off the loan sooner if financially able,
was unanimously approved. -- City Manager Netter confirmed the item would be
prepared for formal adoption on the Consent Calendar of the next Council meeting.
MOBILE HOME PARK matters: The following items were provided for Council's information:
1. Mobile Home Park Conversions -- a) Letter from Shirley J. Manary regarding this item; and
b) Staff report re. Ordinance 567 adopted on 9/22/96
2. P. G. & E. response letter and attached update on SB 577 from Legislative Counsel's Digest
regarding seismic safety for gas shut off devices
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 14 ) June 25, 1996
FLOOD CONTROL ZONE IA BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT for BALLOT MEASURE
City Manager Netter referenced the staff report provided to Council for this item, as
reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo, regarding proposal of the Sonoma County
Water Agency to establish a new Benefit Assessment District for flood control and
drainage related purposes to be able to continue funding when the existing Benefit
Assessment District program expires in fiscal year 1996 -97. Mr. Netter shared contents
therein and responded to Council questions.
Discussion concluded upon motion by Mayor Flores, seconded by Vice Mayor Eck, and
unanimously approved with absence of Councilmembers Gallagher and Spiro, the City
Manager was directed to prepare a response letter for this item signifying conditional
support based upon the pending possibility of a ballot measure for Rohnert Park's
proposed Fire Services Assessment District, due to probable ineffectiveness of both
measures on the same ballot.
COMMUNICATIONS: Communications per the attached outline were brought to the attention of the
City Council. No action was taken unless specifically noted in these minutes.
CITYATTORNEY'S REPORT.•
1. Any items from closed session -- City Attorney Flitner advised the Mayor's report on this item was
sufficient.
2. Response to conflict of interest concerns -- City Attorney Flitner distributed to Council his written
response on this item referencing concerns expressed in letter from R. Chevalier as listed
on tonight's communications. Mr. Flitner explained that this response applied to both
Mayor Flores and Vice Mayor Eck pertaining to concerns related to voting on UGB's in
that there is no financial conflict for either as neither receives related income and,
therefore, there is no conflict of interest. The only exception would be for Vice Mayor
Eck in the event that there would be a land exchange related to SSU and then only
because of a possible perception of conflict. Otherwise, it was his opinion there was
no conflict of interest regarding this matter.
3. B.I.A. vs. City of Livermore -- City Attorney Flitner referenced this case for Council's information
and reported the Supreme Court of Appeals ruled in favor of requirement for residential
fire sprinklers for new or substantially remodeled single family dwellings.
MATTERS FROM/FOR COUNCIL:
1. Frozen Food Distributor Facility site - Wetlands issue -- Councilman Reilly referenced informational
material provided to Council on this item addressing condemnation concerns. He
commented that the Governor's Office of Planning, Department of Fish and Game, and
U.S. Army Corp of Engineers all seem to be saying something slightly different.
Councilman Reilly signified he would like to review this item more thoroughly at the next
Council meeting. -- Planning Director Skanchy responded that the Water Quality Control
Board was only putting a designated site on notice. Their letter was accepted even
though it was past the deadline, conditional upon satisfying certain mitigating factors,
which is part of the resolution.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes ( 15 ) June 25, 1996
2. Honevbrook Subdivision - building compliance -- Councilman Reilly referenced informational report
from Planning Director Skanchy provided to Council for this item and signified on the
agenda under the City Manager's report. He reviewed concerns expressed by resident
letter listed on tonight's communications and requested review of related meeting
minutes and/or video tape.
3. Recognizing contributors of provisions to Senior Center -- Councilman Reilly reported on being
aware of the Alverado Bakery providing carts of loaves of bread to the Senior Center for
the dining program. He requested preparation of proclamations expressing appreciation
to such contributors of provisions to the Senior Center.
CITYMANAGER'S REPORT.•
1. Tennis Courts - life expectancy -- This report was provided to Council for its information.
3. Citv Manager vacation, July 3 -14 1996 -- Provided for informational purposes.
UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES: Mayor Flores asked if there were any additional
unscheduled public appearances at this time.
Marie Vinsick, 38 Estrella Drive, referenced the response letter from P.G. &E. and update listed earlier
on tonight's agenda under Mobile Home Park matters and shared reasons urging Council
to support the Mobile Home Park main gas line automatic shut off. -- Discussion
included City Manager's response regarding consideration of this possibility for Rancho
Feliz, which is the mobile home park owned by the City, and he is checking into the
amended language for SB 577 regarding seismic safety for gas shut off devices. City
Manager anticipated the process for the bill would take at least a month.
ADJOURNMENT. Mayor Flores adjourned the meeting at approximately 10:45 p.m. to 8:00 a.m.,
Friday, June 28, 1996 and to 8:30 a.m., Tuesday, July 2, 1996 for continued 1996 -97
Budget Work Sessions.
//
jh
, A=/�- --
Mayor
1A A 11
June 25 1996
Re: UGB /General Plan �►j
It appears that any attempt to reach either a consensus or a working compromise on the matter of the
UGB and General Plan will be difficult if not impossible. My proposed compromise allowing for some
limited growth in exchange for acquisition of permanent open space may raise the perception of a conflict of
interest on my part because of the active role the University is playing in the General Plan process.
Therefore, I am recommending for Council approval the submission f a ballot measure for the voters of the
qjbi- It would be entitled the u�ftent park Urban Growth Boundary Imtiative(uPfpn- nrinm�
se: The initiative would amend the General plan to establish the City of Rohnert Park's UGB for a
period of 20 years. This initiative, with two exceptions, would set the City's UGB at the current boundaries
Ze a erio of 5 ears. It would allow, with voter approval, possible expansion of the UGB at the end of
five year term using the City's S n nrriinatt -. The planning areas that could be studied would
be presented in Exhibit A. It would allow the City Council to make minor changes in the UGB to
accommodate uses that would fulfill an overall community good, such as: 1) Parks, open space and
recreation. 2) meeting certain unmet housing needs. 3) Commercial and industrial that would have an
signicant contribution to the local economy. 4) Settle issues of constitutional takings
Elements
• It would set the UGB at the current City Limits with two amendments
1. The Middle school site on Snyder Lane
2. If there is a resolution with LAFCO, the 22 acres currently within our spheres
• It would trigger a review of the UGB at the end of the term of the current General Plan
• It would achieve the goal for housing of meeting the "fair share" as compiled by ABAG or some other
planning agency
• It would require any major expansion of the UGB go to the vote of the people after the completion of
the following elements.
1. A Specific Plan containing elements on housing, open space, recreation, infrastructure etc.
2. The appropriate environmental documents
3. An economic cost/benefit analysis the proposed addition would have on the City
Findings
Whereas, The Rohnert Park City Council has recently adopted an updated General Plan
• Whereas, that General plan contains a Housing Element that will allow the City to meet its State
mandated fair share housing requirement until the year 2000.
• Whereas, the General plan contains has as a General Principle the goal of not exceed a population of
45,000 residents
• Whereas, the City is at its capacity in the regional sewage treatment facility and further plant
expansion is unlikely by the year 2000.
• Whereas, the 101 traffic corridor is highly congested and is currently being studied as part of the
regional transportation plan.
• Whereas, the voters of the community have through repeated polls and surveys expressed their
interest in maintaining the small town atmosphere of Rohnert Park.
• Whereas, the City of Rohnert Park in its General Plan is dedicated to the preservation of productive
agriculture and open space.
&AI - II - JO rah ,;•tin [Ld
B. Amendment of City Services Policy
Land Use Policy P.S, set forth in the Ci WnNL*AN rat Plan Land Use Element (Chapter I,
Land Use) adopted May 31, 1994, as ame pril 9. 1996, is hereby reaffirmed, readopted,
and amended as set forth below (in this section 2.B of this initiative, text to be inserted into the General
Plan is indicated in bold italic type while text to be stricken is presented in strikeout; text in standard
type cunm ly appears in the General Plan):
P.8 FxtMion of City Services Outside Urban Growth Boa Prohibit
extensions of wastewater, wear, and other City services to ntw development iteese eeori at
awes outside the Urban Growth Boundary (UGH"pherrafinfk ettcc, except as allowed
wider extraordinary circumstances pursuant to other applicable General Plan policies.
Fardseordbwy circumstances justiyeRa extension of C* sen*es outside of the UGB shall be
darned to exist only if am City Council makes all of the following findings:
a. That the land use to which the Chy service would be extended is consistent with all
applicable policies of the City's General Plan; and
b. That the land use to which the My service would be extended is conqutdble with open
space uses at def ited its Government Code section 65560 as of April 9,19%, dons
net interfere with accepted agicuftural practices, and does not adversely affect the
askilty of land use patterns in the area; and
e. That the property to whidk the City service would be extended is ir+tahedfately ah(jaeent
to And a&rady served by the serviee(s) to be extended; and
d That specific circumstances, unique to the property to which the City service would be
extended, would otherwise deprive the property of priviftes enjoyed by other
damWarrable properly outside the UGB and in the vicinity of the property to be served,
and
e. That substantial evMence &wrom*Wa that the proposed City service extension wiA
trot cause the Levels of Service spedxjied in PhWmn 1.4 of the Land Use Element
(Clkgwer 1, Laird Use) and Policy P..16 of the Circulation Element (Chapter 11,
Transpormdon) of the City of Sebastopol General Pfau adopted May 31, 1994, as
mended Abrough April 9, 1996 to be exceeded with respect to water, wastewater,
pwb, lire senlen, police sernioes, storm *u1nage, schools, and &gJJfie.
C. Amendment of Urban Growth Boundary PoNcy.
i •,,A Th-* V•. %;.'j. ? a. iii ro"#I% ;41 I r;,,. .%r rususP•in VI -'ass T •....n Ttor i.1w.ar.d (rtroj.ir.• r,
Land Use) adopted May 31, 1944, as amended through April 9, 1996, is hereby reaffirmed, readopted,
and amended as set forth below (in this section. 2.0 of this initiative, text to be insetted into the General
plus is indicated in bold italic type while text to be stricken is presented in stAkeent; text in standard
type currently appears in the General Plan):
3
'u-C' . J & v v , - , r 1 G. I -
p.9 U&an Growth Boundary: An Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) is established.
The Urban Growth Boundary is a line beyond which development will not be allowed,
except for public paths and public schools. Except as set forth in policy P. 9A,
below, the UGB shall be in effect until December 31, 2016.
D. Adoption of Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Polley.
The following text is added to the Lattd Use Element of flue PWWhapter I,
P.9A tIGB Administration. Until December 31, 2016, the foregoing policies P.8 and P.9,
and the Urban Growth Boundary designated on the Land Use Designations Map of the4k*W
NkGeneral Plan adopted May 31, 1994, "
readopted by Urban Growth Boundary Initiative, s&H be amended only by a
vote of the people or pursuant to one of the procedures set forth in paragraphs (a) through (d),
below.
a. The City Council may, if it deems it to be in the public interest, amend the UGH
designated on the Land Use Designations Map provided that the amended boundary is
within or coextensive with the limits of the UGB as designated on the Land Use
Designations Map as of April 9, 1996.
b. To comply with state law regarding the provision of housing for all economic segments
of ft community. the City Couml may amend the UGB in order to accommodate
lands to be designated for residential uses. No snore than 3 acres of land may be
brought within the UGB for this purpose in any calendar year. Such amendment may
be adopted only if the City Council makes all of the following fivadings:
(1) That the land to be included within the UGB is not designated as Land Intensive
Agriculture, Land Extensive Agriculture, Diverse Agriculture, Community
Separator, Scenic Landscape Unit, or Critical Habitat Area in the Sonoma
County General Plan adopted March 23, 1989, as amended through April 9,
1996; and
(2) That the land is immediately adjacent to (a) the existing UGB, and (b)
serviceable water and sewer contxctions; and
(3) That the proposed development will consist of primarily low and very low
Income housing pursuant to the Housing Element of this General Plan, and
(4) TIW there is no existing vacant or underdeveloped residentially designated land
within the UGB to accommodate the proposed development and it is not
seasonably feasible to accommodate the proposed development by redesigaating
lauds within the UGB for low and very low income housing; and
4
Jill L J. H V . •l . .- L i 1-
(S) That the proposed development is necessary to comply with state law
requirements for provision of low and very low income housing and the area of
land within the proposed development will not exceed the minimum necessary
to comply with state law; and
(6) That substantial evidence demonstrates that the proposed development will not
cause the Levels of Service specified in Program 1.4 of the Land Use Element
(Chapter 1, Land Use) and Policy P.16 of the Circulation Element (Chapter 11,
Transportation) of the City of Sebastopol General Plan adopted May 31, 1994,
as amended through April 9, 1996 to be exceeded with respect to water,
wastewater, parks, fire services, police services, storm drainage, schools, and
traffic.
C. The City Council may amend the UGB to accommodate lands to be designated for
Office or Light Industrial uses to improve local employment. No more than a total of
23 acres of land may be brought within the UGB for this purpose prior to December
31, 2016. Such amendment(s) may be adopted only if the City Council makes all of
the following findings:
(1) That the land to be included within the UGB is not designated as Land Intensive
Agriculture, land Extensive Agriculture, Diverse Agriculture, Community
Separator, Scenic Landscape Unit, or Critical Habitat Area in the Sonoma
County General Plan adapted March 23, 1989, as amended through April 9.
1996; and
(2) That the laird to be included is immediately adjacent to (a) the existing UGB,
and (b) serviceable water and sewer connections; and
(3) That there is no existing office or light industrial designated land available
within the UGB to accommodate the proposed development and it is not
reasonably feasible to accommodate the proposed development by redesignating
lands within the UGB for office and light industrial uses; and
(4) That substantial evidence demonstrates that the proposed development will not
cause the Levels of Service specified in Program 1.4 of the Land Use Element
(Chapter 1, land Use) and Policy P.16 of the Circulation Element (Chapter 11,
Transportation) of the City of Sebastopol General Plan adopted May 31, 1994,
as amended through April 9, 1996 to be exceeded with respect to water,
Wastewater, parks, fire services, police services, storm drainage, schools, and
tnflie; and
(S) That the proposed development would:
(i) be consistent with (a) prowcting and increasing the economic vitality
of tine Downtown, and (b) maintaining the Downtown as the retail
cettaer of the community and as a place for Oommunity and cultural
activities; and
5
ithi -j: -yb Cxi J.40 rig
(ii) pay its "fair share" of capital improvements for public services and
facilities to maintain adequate Levels of Service in the City; and
(iii) make a significant contribution to local employment and provide a
significant and sustainable economic benefit to the community
consistent with the goals and policies of the Economic Vitality
chapter (Chapter VI) of the City of Sebastopol General Plan.
d. The City Councii may amend the UGB if it makes both of the following findings:
(1) That the application of arty aspect of Land Use policies P.8, P.9, or P.9A
would constitute an unconstitutional taking of a landowner's property, and
(2) That the amendment and associated land use designation will allow additional
land uses only to the minimum extent necessary to avoid said unconstitutional
taking of the landowner's property.
C. For the purposes of implementing Land Use policy P.9, the following uses shall, not be
considered "development," and shall be permitted beyond the UGB:
• IV
(1) Open space used for agriculture or any of the purposes set forth is Government
Code section 65560 as of April 9, 1996; and
(2) Community facilities developed to implement the goals and policies set Earth in
Chapter 111(Cot mvation, Paints and Open Space) or section 1 of Chapter V1
(Safety) of the City of Sebastopol General Plan adopted May 31, 1994, as
amended through April 9, 1996.
f. Any general plan amendment, rezoning, specific plan, subdivision trap, conditional use
permit, or any other discretionary entitlement approved by that City on land brought
within the UGB pursuant to paragraphs (b), (c), or (d) of this Policy 9A must be
consistent with the findings made in connection with that land's inclusion within the
UGB.
g. The General Plan may be reorganized, and iudividuai provisions may be renumbered
or reordered in the course of ongoing updates of the General Plan in accordance with
the requirements of state law, but Laud Use Policies P.8, P.9, and P.9A shall continue
to be included in the General Plan until December 31, 2016, unless earlier repealed or
arnended pursuant to the procedures set forth above or by the voters of the City.
A. Bt%etive Date. Upon the effective date of this initiative, the provisions of section 2 of the
initiative are hereby inserted into the Land Use Element of the City of Sebastopol General Plan
as an amendment thereof, except that if the four amendments of the mandatory elements of the
general plan permitted by state law for any given calendar year have already been utilized in
1996 prior to the effective date of this initiative, this geenaal; plan amendment shall be the lust
6
VAN NORDEN LOGAN
2560 WEST DRY CREEK ROAD
HEALDSBURG, CA 95448
TEL. & FAX 707 - 431 -1665
June 21, 1996
Rohnert Park City Council
6750 Commerce Boulevard
Rohnert Park, CA 94928
RE: 20 Year General Plan
Dear Councilmembers:
The location of an Urban Growth Boundary and /or new Sphere of Influence line can be
accomplished through a logical, planning process.
Three Specific Plan areas could be created using the pre -1989 Sphere of Influence line as the
planning area. The goals and objectives for these Specific Plan areas would then be established
by the Council drawing from the current General Plan, the Citizens Committee report and any
specific goals and objectives of the city councilmembers.
Consultants would be retained to prepare Specific Plans and accompanying EIR's reflecting the
goals and objectives. In conjunction with the Specific Plans, an Economic Plan would be
prepared. Periodic review of this process would be made by a council committee and /or the full
council.
When these documents are completed in draft form, public review processes would allow the
citizens of Rohnert Park to comment. After final completion of this review and after any
modifications are made, the City Council would set an Urban Growth Boundary and /or Sphere
of Influence line.
The above procedure would provide for an orderly, professional planning process and environ-
mental evaluation, and would determine the amount and location of the land which would be
appropriate for development over the next 20 years. This procedure would also satisfy LAFCO,
which is now requiring an EIR to be submitted along with any request for a change in a Sphere
of Influence line.
The landowners within each Specific Plan would be responsible for paying for the cost of the
Specific Plan for their area. A weighting of this financial burden could be done after the uses of
the land within each Specific Plan area are determined.
Sonoma State University has expressed an urgency to proceed with the planning process now.
The current financial condition of the city also supports the need to find a solution for
successful financing of the Rohnert Park city government. The timing of any annexation of land
to the city can always be controlled by the City Council, but development of a 20 year plan
should not be delayed any longer.
VNL /mm
Very truly yours,
Van Norden Logan
A RCHrrEcruRE • LAND PLANNING • REAL ESTATE BROKERAGE