Loading...
1966/02/07 City Council MinutesROE�IERT PARK CITY COUNCIL MINUT1 February 7, 1966 The Council of the City of Rohnert Park met this date at .8:00 PM. -in reglar session at. the City Offices 435 ; _ Southwest .Bo1ievardy Rohnert Park, with Mayor Rogers presid- ing:;_ The regular session was preceded by a work session which commenced .at -7 s15 Po N. and at which a film entitled __ "Tamorrow3s Government Toda y was shown. Call to Order. Wyor Rogers :called.the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance, Roll Call Present: (4) mayor Rogers, Councilmen Pezonella, C. Smith and V. Smith - Late: (_:) Councilman Buchanan, time of arrival is noted in minutes being approximately 10 :00 PM Absenty (0); Staff Present: City Manager Callinan, City Attorney Yaxwell and George: Powell., Sonoma County Planning Staff representa- t ive.. .goy " -oats of Mayor Rogers advised those present that February 7 through .4.mer.ica February 11, 1966 was Boy Scout Week.and that there were four boy scouts, present tonight, who were going to take over the duties. of Councilmen and-conduct a Council Meeting. Mock- Council Meeting. The oath of office was administered by the clerk to Scouts Lester..Fogg, Robert Johnston Richard Oldridge and John Sharrett. Upon motion by acting Councilman. - Johnston, seconded by acting Councilman Fogg and unanimously approved, acting Councilman $harrett was .elected Mayor. -City attorney ftptwell explained the procedure and rules governing action taken by the City Council. City Manager Callinan suggested the acting Council discuss the recrea- tional needs of teenagers in the area. Acting Y.yor Sharrett suggested that a night club for teen" agers be started which would give _the teenagers a place to ,dance and - socialize in the evenings. Acting Councilman Johnston stated he felt this type of club would not be,good and ;that it would only develop into a hangout for the trouble _mal ers* Acting Mayor Sharrett stated he felt the club would be better than,the pool hall.:. There being no.further comments and upon motion by acting Councilman Oldrid e seconded<by acting Mayor Sharrett and 'oturn to Regular I eeting Page 2 February 7, 10,66 unanimously approved, it was recommended that a night club for teenagers be, started:'. The meeting was turned back to the regular Council and Nhyc Rogers thanked the boys for attending and doing a fine job. 'Nh,yor Rogers informed those present that the boys would be returning Tuesday morning to spend the entire day with the various department heads to see City Government inaction. City Imager Callinan read two communications from the Petaluma Board of Education, one dated January 26, 1966 and the other February 4, 1966 in which the Board suggested a dinner meeting with the Council to discuss the high school site. City Nb,nager Callinan also read a resolution, dated January 215 1966, from the Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce and a revolution from the Rohnert Park Home Owners' Association urging the City Council and the Board of Education to meet and settle their differences. Mr. John Collins, Scoutmaster of Troop x#23 was recognized and thanked the Council for their time and for the invita- tion to spend a. day at City Hall. Approval of Ninutes Upon motion -by Councilman Pezonella, seconded by Councilman VV; 'Smitki. and unanimously approved, the minutes of Januaryl7, 1966 were approved as submitted.. Approval of Bills Upon motion by Councilman V. Smith, seconded by Councilman Pezonella, and unanimously approved, the bills, per the attached list, approved for payment as amended. Communications Communications, per the attached list, were brought to the attention of the Council. No action was taken except as specifically noted in these minutes. 1. Letter from S. Belhumeur tendering resignation from the Recreation Commission. Mayor Rogers requested the City M� nager write Nfr. Belhumeur a letter expressing apprecia- tion for his hard work, 2,. Notice of Intent to Sell Property Owned by Dorado - Pacific Investment Corporation was received from the United States District Court by Donald. R. Franson, Referee in Bank- .... rizpt 0,y • Councilman Pezonella requested the City Mhnager conduct a study into the feasibility of the City acquiring the golf course and make a report back to the Council on his findings. Jublic Hearing Annex - Mayor Rogers declared the public hearing open on Annexation ation 3-A High School 3-A and asked for comments from, the Council. Site Councilmn V. Smith made a statement expressing the views and feelings of the Council at this point. City Imager Callinan read two communications from the Petaluma Board of Education, one dated January 26, 1966 and the other February 4, 1966 in which the Board suggested a dinner meeting with the Council to discuss the high school site. City Nb,nager Callinan also read a resolution, dated January 215 1966, from the Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce and a revolution from the Rohnert Park Home Owners' Association urging the City Council and the Board of Education to meet and settle their differences. on 9-A _A at ive I Iap Page 3 February 71 1966 The City Manager then presented to the Council petitions, given to him by Mr. Goff, Arlen Drive rewi.dent. The petitio ns contained signatures representing over 500 persons dissatis- fied with the location of the proposed high school and re-- questing that the Board of Education cease all negotiations fur construction of a high school on the existing site. Mr. Nore Thiesfeld, resident and Building and Planning Coordinator for Sonora. State College was recognized and mado a- presentation to the Council outlining objections to the proposed site on Snyder Lane. Dr. W.m. :Oord, resident and Chairman of the Academic Senate cr.' Sbiaoma State College., was recognized and advised that he con- curred completely with Mr. Thiesfeld and fu-::'-�2or stated that he wrs completely opposed to the location of a high school next to the college. Dr. Cord further informed the Council that -he had taken a poll of the residents of Rohnert Park who work at Sonoma State College, asking the question: "Do you bel-1 re a site which places a high.school and the college in a side by :side location is proper location ?" The result of the pc. "'_`w s`81% negative to the existing location. Mr. Jack Smack, 'resid`ent, was recognized and stated to the Counc h that ho .beli- -od many - of the people of Rohnert Park w6re-against the site, as 'evidenced by the petitions, and he urged the Council to meet with the School Board to settle this proble. t. There being no further comments frnm thb floor, Mayor Rogers continued the public hearing to the next regular meeting. Mr..Spivock the subdivider was present. City Yanager Callinan reviewed his memorandum outlining the conditions he recommend- ed be apart of the approval of the tentative mp. He further recommended that another condition be added, that being re- quiring the dedication of the necessary right -of -way for the full width of Southwest Boulevard from Burton Avenue to Cope- land Creek `. Upon motion by Councilman V. Smith, seconded by Councilman Pezonella and unanimously approved, Council approved the tentative map for Subdivision 9-A subject to the conditions as recommended by staff and on file in the City N.s.nager's office. G; Mitchell Mr. Powell reviewed for the Council the signs requested by U_ Por-,Office Mr. Mitchell for his office building at 7300 Commerce Blvd. Mr. Mitchell was present and introduced Mr. Bill Jerome of United Sign Company of Santa Rosa. Mr. Jerome commented on the signs being requested. A discussion was held with the. Council, Mr. Powell, Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Jerome participating. Page February 7, 1966 Councilman. Pezonella moved the granting of a permit for all the signs except the 18 sq. ft. sign on top of the building. City Attorney Nhxwell advised 'the Council that since they wore in effect considering, granting a variance they must therefore pass ffirmatively and'unanimously on certain find- ings outlined in the zoning ordinance. The City Attorney read tle' necessary findings contained in the zoning ordinance. Couno atmari V. 'Smith moved that she Council rake the findings ;nee�ssary.as read ;by`the City ittorney and as required by the zoning... ordinance. A brief -di.eussion followed. Councilman Pezonella withdrew his motion, Mayor Rogers seconded Councilman Smith's motion which failed try be approved by the follota.ing doll call votes Ads (2)Councilmn Pez6nel]a and Mayor Rogers ES s . (.l) Councilman' VP Smith ABS ENT: (1) ' Councilman Buchanan ABSTAIN: (1) Councilman C. Smith :.+ -Counc Iman V. Smith moved `approval of those signs that con- formed t:o the zon'ing.ordinance. .,.gity nager`.Callinan pointed. but' that Council action was 'necepsatyr, -to approve signs permitted b T the ordinance. Counoilrrsn V. Smith agreed and',wthdrew his motion. ail Company.., City Nh.nager Callinan advised the Council that he had received ___ry a request from Gulf Oil Company regarding the required set- back and street width at the Wilfred Avenue and Commerce Boulevard North intersection. Mr. Callinan stated that Gulf Oil Company is.interested in putting in a service station at t.his:;:ntersection. Mr. Powell displayed, a sketclr of his recommended layout for the intersection. He recommended the dedication of a 20 foot setback along. the northern property line, of property front- ing on 'Wilfred front- Avenue, 'which would the n provide aii 80 foot right -of -way for the street; and in order to create an a opriato corner, the rounding out of the corner. City manager Csllinan asked that the Council endorse Mr. Powell's layout. Upon motion by Councilman V. Smith,, seconded by Councilman Pezonella and.unanimously approved., the Council endorsed the layout submitted by Mr. Powell for the Wilfred Avenue - Commerce Boulevard intersection. Use Drive- A discussion was held concerning the possibility of a joint .:zfoty Building use driveway with the apartment complex scheduled for con- struction west of the Public Safety Building. Art Roberts Sign Request Arrival of Councilman Buchanian. Page 5 p February 7, 1966 -Upon'.mdtion, by Councilman V*­ Smith, seconded by Councilman -Pezonella and unanimously approved, approval was granted for the joint use 'driveway.., City AttorhQ'y*.1hxwell suggested that the wording of the motion , -bechanged stating that theTouricil go on record as indicat- ing their willingness to cooperate with the property--owners of the apartment complex for joint use of a driveway, Councilman V. Smith modified his . motion to conform to the wording recommended by the City Attorney, Councilman Pezonella seconded the modified motion, and the motion was unanimously approved, 'Arthur Roberts, the applicant was present and .-requested the-eroction of three V x 8t signs plus a 3 foot strip sign to be put on the existing golf course billboard to advertise the election campaign of Senator Randolph Collier. Counci lman Bucharia :arrive'd-at the meeting at this point, the time being a-0proximately 10:00 P.M. &'br:Lef discussion was held regarding Mr. Robert's request. Upon motion by Councilman"V.:Smith, seconded by Councilman `Baehanan and unanimously approved, approval for the requested signs was granted for a 60 day period, at which time the Council will review the request again ,""and.: consider.-an. exten- Sion. Ro7gers/tavis City Phnager Gallinan advised the Council that sometime ago .Building the Council approved the use permit for the construction of the Pizza Parlor Delicatessen Building on Southwest Blvd. At this point Mayor Rogers turned the gavel over to Vice- Mayor C. Smith. The -City.Yanager continued that-Aho City Planning Commission had given approval to Mr. Davis and Mr. Rogers to expand the existing building but the City Council had not taken any ..,-action . on this. Upon motion -.b-�;- Councilman V. Smith, seconded by Councilman Buchanan, the Council reaffirmed ,' I the action taken by the Planning Commission concerning the proposed addition to the existing Rogers/Davis Building, by the following vote: AYES: (4), Councilman Buchanan, Pozonella, C. Smith and V. Smith • ABSEM: (o) ABSTAIN: (1) Mayor Rogers Subdivision 19•B City Mhnager Callinan advised the Council that underground Acceptance of Improve- improvements had been installed by the subdivider and in- ments Installed and spectol and approved by the Director of Public Works., Mr. Partial Release of Wiggins. Security Bond rf -n February 7, 1966 Upon motion by Councilman V; . Smith, seconded by Councilman Buchanan and unanimously approved the Council accepted the _. . . underground improvements installed to date in Subdivision 9- B and authorized the release, of ,$3G00 of the security posted by the subdivider. improvements The City Yanager reported that the 35 day lien period would Project 1965 -1. expire on approximated February.15): 1966 and that final payment would be ms.de to Arthur.,$iri, Inc. He advised the Council that the telephone polo..in front of the Mitchell building had boon, removed, - Extension -of Project; City Manager Call nan advised :tlo Council that he had a 1965 -3 Commerce Blvd., .. c..orrocted deed for ' thur Aventae_ which was prepared, by Mr: Hudis and signed by Nor. Spivock. Resolution No. 307 A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING GIV01T DEED. Upon motion by Councilman: C. Smith and seconded; by Counc l- p�n Pozonella •bad reading of Resolution No 307 was waive said ' said resolution adopted -:by .the.. fallowing votes AYES: 7; Councilmen Buchanan Pezonella C. Smith . and 'Ihyor Rogers NOES"', (0) ABSENT: (1) Councilman V. Smith IT. Y YkN&MR IS REPOR,T City Insurance. Program A discussion' was held�coneern ng the City's ins urancd cover- age. City Manager Callinan advised the Council that Imo, Feeney had advised him that Pacific Indemnity did not wish to carry anything other than the:City's liability insurance and that Mr. Feeney had.`recommended that the City continue its fire, vandalism, etc. insurance with General Insurance Companye Ybr. Feeney, the City insurance: :.gent, was present and explain- ed the method of determining rates and percentages of covorage. Mr. Ga.11inan ''requested approval from the Council to work with Mr. Feeney or this and ,choose the coverage best suited to the City's needs in order to put a. new policy into effect on February 19, 19660 Upon motion by Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Pezonella and unanimously approved, the Council gave approval to this procedure but requasted.the City Manager to present the details in a memorandum to the Council, City ' ' =ttorney Wxuiell spoke briefly on: tkLC _: broad i'orm; coverage availablb- from Pacific Indemnity and stat.�d,' that the Council would be well advised . to purchase_.the' "broad.... form coverage. The additional cost of such coverage was discussed by the Council. Page 7 February 7, 1966 Upon motion by Councilman V. Smith, seconded by Councilman Buchanan and unanimously approved, the Council requested :,that the City's liability insurance be written to provide the broad !form cover-age.. r SWIFT Telephone. Lf discussion was held concerning,,the fact that -the southern Exchange for Entire . ''half of' the City was in the SWIFT' telephone exchange but City that the `industrial area was in, :the LIBERTY exchange and :A his presents certain problems.'.which can only get more oinpler . Nir, Callinan asked t4 at the Council go on record as requesting Vle Telephone Company to study this situation. Mr. Brown, District Nhnager of the Telephone Company in Petaluma was � present and stated that he would be most happy to discuss this trotter. Mayor Rogers and the City Nh.nager were requested and author- ized by the Council to pursue this matter with Mr. Brown. Well #1 ;,:- Corrected City Manager Callinan advised the Council that a corrected Deed deed' for Well #1 site had been .prepared and signed. by Nor. Golis" In'executing the.d cd Mr. Golis requested the City Council goon record as indicating a willingness to swapping of land.if such is desireable at -the time of development of the,land surrounding Well. #1., Mr. Callinan stated that Mr. Golis was making this request because the parcel described in the deed is odd shaped and it would be difficult at this time to determine exactly what the road pattern will be. Resolution No. 308 L. RESOLUTION i.CCEPTING G LNT -. DBED City; Manager Callinan read the -resolution. Upon motion by Councilman V. Smith, seconded by Councilman Buchanan and un- animously approved the Council adopted Resolution No. 308, subject to the City L►ttorney's review. . The City Manager was further requested to advise Tyr. Golis that the Council would work with the developers in the swapping of land when it became necessary to do so. Well No. 5 City Manager Callinan explained the need for an additional well and pointed out on a-mp, several sites which had been discussed with Mr. Wiggins and Mr..Hudis and requested authorization for the following: 1. Authorization for the City staff to negotiate for the well site they believed most desireable. 2. Liuthorization for Mr. Hudis to design and do the necosa- ary engineering for the well.- 3. !authorization for the City Nhnager to Mke application for any Federal programs which he feels the City may be able to take advantage of to help defray the costs of the new well. I February 7, 1966 Upon motion by Councilman V. Smith, seconded by Councilman Buchanan and unanimously approved, the Council approved all three requests of the City Nh,nager. Periodic Newsletter City Nh.nager Callinan requested Council permission to use --no of the fiuidi ' bq — gbt`ed f6i advertising and publication to have - .published a newslet,ter`:to residents every four months or so, aril that the`Ccuncil: appoint one or two members to proof the material -in the newsletter. Upon motion by Councilman Pezonella, seconded -by Councilman V-0 Smiti and unanimously a--oproved, the request was granted. 'The Council stated that any or all members available would bd proof the material upon request. Meeting Room l!t Callinan displayed'a plan of the proposed meeting room Lddition addition to the Public Safety Building prepared by Nkr. Hudis. T1zc new room would, measure approximately 201 x 39'• Mr. Callinan asked for.Counczl permission to make changes in the plans- as deemed necessary and to move ahead with the project, The Council so approved. NM, C6111nan stated that Mr. Carlson and Mr. Logue 4�Lvs_ approached the City concerning construction 'of the biding either on an hourly wage scale ora firm contract basis. The City; I tnager advised the Council .that both YT. Wiggins and Mr. _. Koch had volunteered their time to work with Mr. Carlson and Ir Zogue and that this method should reduce the cost of con- stru.etIdn con'3iadtably_. below, the.estimated $)7000.00 figure thereby le v, , mo ., g n3 es: ;for . i mpro�rement of the inside of the • .,, ,. groom. ;:. . ,. Upon motion by Councilman V. Smith, seconded by Councilman Buchanan and unanimously approved,, the City IV nager was authorized to proceed on this project subject to City lxttorney Nh.xwell confirming the legality .of, hiring 1,1r. Carlson and Mr. Logue -and' subject.-to no objocti.;on from the bond counsel who ie handling the financing of Jhe Public Safoty Building. l rinual 'Report from Nkr. Cailinan 'briofl'y discussed the annual report submitted by Department of Public Chief Koch. Counc_i_1.mn V. Smith stn,ted he felt it was a fine Safety report and should be relayed to the press. Income Comparison Mr.' Callinan reported to the Council that during 1965 the total Building Permits building valuation.according to permits issued amo'unted to $11219, 532 as compared . to 1964's amount of $225, 690 or an approxiiriately increase in building valuation of $1,000,000° College Dormitory Mr. :Callinan stated that representatives of Sonama College Campus, Inc. requested ;a .building pormit for a dormitory but that he had advised their to submit a detailed road plan for the area, snO-Cif is plot plan and to consult with the County Flood Control on drainago, ..He reminded the Council that while City services was.being talked about for 25 acres the City - needed to work out a program for the entire 500 plus acres east of the railroad and sough ;of. the Sonoma. State Expressway right. -of -way; , Page 9 February 7, 1966 Entrance Road Foot 11, discussion was held concerning the letter submitted sometime Traffic ago by the Ro_-Pen -Co Optimist Club regarding the part of the entrance.road.lying in.the Cityy.of.Cotati and the Optimist's concern..over.the foot traffic between the Old Redwood Highway and-Commerce Boulevard.. in Rohnert Park. The letter requested the Council to pursue the matter of having the road annexed to Rohnert Phrk so it could be upgraded. Mr. Callinan reported that. the possibility of having:..this.protion of road annexed the.the City of.Rohnert Park was remote, and he recommended that.the Council.go.on record as requesting the Cotati City Coup il.to improvo.the road and construct a sidewalk from where the sidewalk stops in Rohnert Park -to the Old Redwood Highway. Upon mot on.by Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Pezonella and unanimously approved the Council, requested the Mayor write' 8. letter- to the CottLtl ' ty Council requesting that,their'Amptove Commerce,BouldVa rd'and install a sidewalk. Commendation of City Manager Callinan informed the Council that Chief Koch Officer Peters had broughV"to his attention the.fine'police work that had been done by'Off!:cer Raymond': Peters resulting in the appre- herision of .tho'_Ijuveni.ies' Vho robbed Glenn Butcher's service station in the amount of132.00 sometime ago. Mr. Callinan reported. that �ChU —f Kash. 'stated =.that Officer Peters: had spent much o ;r_his off=- dutyhours on th.0 case. Tyr. Callinan re- quested the Couricil g ' on record as commending Officer Peters for thq _,tzme and. effort ,gut in on this. case. Upon rriot.ion by',Councilman :V, Smith seconded by Councilman C. 1915 .pct Bonds Smith_and unanimously a -oproved, t;he. Council commended Officer Peters for the fine police..work done by him and for his extra time and effort he put in to solve this case. City Manager Callinan advised the.Council that the County was having some problems in. meeting the 1915 Let Bond coupons and were in need of more money.: He reminded the Council that sometime ago the City had.loaned the.County $5000. They now need,tn additional $3;/18.00 to meet the January 2, 1966 coupons which would make;a total.advance of approximately $8900.00. The City K1niager requested approval of the Council to advance funds.to the County from the General, Fund with the stipulation that they be returned prior to the end of the fiscal year. He further requested approval to advise the bond counsel to solicit payment, on the larger delinquencies and advise the property owners that foreclosure proceedings w.11.be instituted unless payment is made in full. Upon.motion.by Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman V. Smith and unanimously approved, the City Manager was authorized to advance the necessary funds from the General Fund to the County of Sonoma in order to meet the January 2, 1966 coupons on the 1915 Act Bonds and to advise the bond counsel to institute collection action on the delinquencies. 91e 10; _ February 1, Prop6sit`ions :on The City l ttotr ey advised the Council .that it is usual to have April 'Ballot:: arguments on proposition issues Mil©d.to the voters with their ballots. He further advised that he would prepare the arguments supporting the propositions.but would need authori_ zation to have them executed. Upon, motion by Councilman Pezonella, seconded by Councilman V. Smith and unanimously. approved, Mayor Rogers was authorized to execute, on behalf of the City Council, the arguments .. ,supporting the propositions put on the April ballot by the / Counlc�. .. ... .. I)Drainage- :southwest City Att -8iney.Ijaxwell :reported. that he had talked with Young Blvd. Right -of. -way America Homes concerning the water accumulation problem and that they had indicated that as soon as`the weather permitted they would fill the future fight -of way, and alleviate the situation;. Councilman V. Smith" requested;' that the City �Sttorney have Young ";merica Homes ;put this acceptance of their responsi- bility in writing for presentation At the next Council meeting. Zoning Violations The Cty'lttorney reported that:- had .directed registered 305 Burton Court letters to the owners of this property.. advising them of the • - complaints received. The City Nh,nager stated that he had driven by the property today and that;;a great deal of im- provoment °had been made. Mr. Callinan; advised the Council that the, staff 'would continue to observe this property and report any lack of cooperation `or violation to the City littornev for further follow -up. _. ,.,.. Mr. Harold Wallis, residents was recognized and advised the - Council. that'he ha:d been a _ pprbached by the owners of property on the corner of Buiton.:and Bruce regarding speeding vehicles, apparently being test.- driven by the owners of the property under discussion. He stated that the persons who had contacted him could furnish license numbers and would sign a complaint. *0 Callinan requested Mr. Wallis pass on the names of these residents to him for follow -up. Hardin Law. Suit Mr. Nh.xwell reported that the Hardin Law Suit was still await- ing a decision by the court. Zoning Violation City l- ttorney Nh.xwell irformed the Council that at 342 Alison 342 Alison Avenue llvenue a single family unit was being used as two residences. He stated that he had talked with the owner of the property -; and was advised that the apartment-unIt was being vacated. He. furth nfotm-c d the Council that he had written the owners advising that use of the pr�operty,as a duplex was a non -con -- forming use and any use: Qther than as a singly family residence must cease. Removing City Property The City ! =ttorney advised the Council that any time after from Tax Rolls property is acquired as City property, it can be removed from the tax rolls by a simple resolution. The City Lttorney and City Manager were requested to follow up on this and have the necessary resolutions prepared for adopt -ion. Page 11 Mi�TTERS FROM COUNCILMEN February 7, 1966 Councilman V. Smith Speaking as Chairman of the Sonoma County Mayor's and Council - mens' i1esoeiation, Councilman V. Smith advised the Council that with the resignation of Sam Houser from the Co" ' -'_ City Council a vacancy was created on the County Community fiction Council. He asked the members of the Council to consider suggesting a candidate for consideration to fill the vacancy created with Mr. Houser's retirement. PUBLIC YIPPELWXCES Norman Spivock Mr. Norman Spivock appeared and stated that he had a buyer for one of the lots in the area included in tentative Sub- division 9-li and he therefore, requested approval for a lot split. The proposed lot would be the one shown on the tenta- tive map for the northwestern end of 11rthur Drive. City Mb nager Callinan recommended that the Council give tentative approval to the lot split with the understanding that any use on the property will require rezoning of the area. Upon motion by Councilman Buchanan, seconded by Councilman Pezonella and unanimously approved, tentative approval was given for the lot split requested subject to Mr. Spivock submitting further details necessary for rezoning or a use permit. 'djournment There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 11 :45 P.M. Deput ity Clerk liTTEST STATEMENT BY THE ROHFERT PARK. CITY COUNCIL CONCERNING PROPOSED HIGH Sd14OO1 SITE ON SNYDER LANE With all the rov6ht publicity.being given to the difference in opinion of this City Council and the Petaluma Board of Education con - cerning the proposed high school on Snyder Lane, a review of the position of this Council would appeat to be. in order along with a review of certain past eventsi, First of all, we wish to assure everyonei and especially the citizens of Rohnert Park, that the City Council actions in disagreeing with the Petaluma Board of Education should in no way be construed as being anti - education, The one accusation that is habitually leveled at those who "dare" to disagree with any school district or Board of Education is that "you are holding up the education of your kids." We reject such accusations and submit that our concern over the location of this high school stems from our concern for future educa- tion of the-youth of our community. Let us briefly say this with reference to the location of the proposed high school" (?) The Petaluma High School District has yet to demonstrate why the -site that they chose for the high school is the proper one; (2) Every professional planner that has discussed this matter before this City Council has indicated that the site chosen by the School District is a poor one and that it does not fit into the overall planning pattern for the City of Rohnert Park.. Let us also remind everyone that Rohnert Park is what we term a "Master Planned Community.." This simple statement means that the City Council does not allow any development to take place until a complete master plan of the area being.proposed for development is prepared and approved,. The Petaluma School District, evidentally feels.that it is immune to any master planning and demonstrates a complete lack of interest in Rohnert.,Park's Master Plan. Reviewing our files we find that at meetings of our City Council both the Sonoma County Planning Director and his assistant have in- dicated that they felt that the decision of the Petaluma High School % stri.ct in choosing this site was a poor one. Also, recently, the Building and Planning Coordinator for Sonoma State College indicated, in'co?spondence to the Council, that he felt the site was not the best available. Also at one of our most recent Council meetings the Statement Page -2- Chairman of the Sonoma State College Academic Senate spoke out in opposition, to the site. Indeed then, with these feelings being pre - ssnted to the City Councii, would we not be derelict in our obliga- tions to the community which we represent if wo did not take time to further study the matter? The one eri.tism that is perhaps just towards us is why we waited so long.' This, there is no question is deserving critism and we accept it. However, in delaying our action are we now wrong in wanting to take a few months to study the matter and to try and re- locate a school and hold up its construction for six months when we may have to live with it for thirty to fifty years. We think not! It should also be remembered that the School District never officially requested City approval of the site even though they intended to re- quest annexation. With all the statements the Petaluma administrative staff and the Board of Education make concerning the site, they.fail to express any specific reasons for the site or why the site should be next to the College. They continually state that the County Planning Commis- sion approved the site. They know, however, that this approval by the Sonoma County Planning Commission was simply a technical approval and not an endorsement of the site. Indeed the Commission's resolu- tion granting such approval contained the following reservation - "from the standpoint of community design, it might be well to locate_ maJor facilities, such as- colleges and high schools apart, so as to create two public open areas and community - focal points,.with separate identities,_" How then, with a statement like this in -the approving resolution, can the Petaluma Board of Education say that the Sonoma County Planning Commission itself did not have grave'reservations concerning the site. Another consideration with reference to the location of the site selected is that if we analyze from where the students will come I think we would readily agree it is not the best site. For example, the school district boundary lies less than 1/2 mile to the north and this area is shown in the Rohnert Park Master Plan as being set aside for office centers, college student housing and the types of uses that will not generate many high school students. The area to Statement Page -3- the immediate east of the site is the 914 acre Ot*4 Of Sdhibma State College. This site, we hope the school district Will agree; will produce no high school studontsi Thus; the vast majority of the students that will be attending school on this site have to come from the west and the south, Why then is the site located in the most northeastern section of the school dtstrtot? It confuses this CounciY'\ and the School District has failed to even indicate a willingness to explain their reasons for the location of the school, Another point that should be kept in mind by the residents is the lack of respect for good planning or cooperation displayed by the School District in their recent statements to the effect if they don't get sewer service from R6hnert Park then they will put in their own plant o I r leaching fields on the hi !tchool site. Indeed, is this an attitude of desiring to cooperate, if not with the City of Rohnert Park, then how about their neighbors -66 the immediate east of the site, Sonoma State College, which is right in the path of the prevailing wiiads? The fact that such action will also cost taxpayers. thousands of dollars more doesn't seem to bother the School District, apparently because the s . chool is'being constructed under the State Aid program. Indeed, we wonder why the site is not even in the Cotati Elemen- tary School District. Doesn't it asai0d strange that the Petaluma Board of Education should choose a site in the former Penngrove School District area, request that it receive services from and be annexed to Rohnert Park, and be called Cotati. Confusing - we think SO. One other reason that causes this City Council some concern is the name of the proposed school and we would be less than honest if Statement Page -4- we did not state soa The School District's B©Ard of Education, has yet to convince anyone in Rohnert Park that we know of that a high school which the,. requested be annexed to Rohnert Park and the services for which they desire to obtain from Rohnert Park should be named Cotati. Let no one construe our disagreement with the name as in any way meaning offense towards the community of Cotati. This is de- finitely not our intent and indeed if the school was going to be in Cotati, we would not express ourselves on the name for it. We do, however, feel that the school board is, in effect, doing nothing other than attempting to embarrass the City of Rohnert Park by locating a school in our City and naming it for an adjacent City. What would their reasons for doing this be ?(-Their action certainly is not designed to create harmony either between the City and the School Board or to continue the harmony that has started to materiali�-. between Rohnert Park and Cotati. Lone could ask why the School Board acted in �t'�e�I�. an arrogant manner, but alas, such an inquiry might be construed as being "anti- education." It should aleo be remembered that Rohnert Park residents or or- ganizations have never requested that the school be named Rohnert Park High. They simply requested the School Board to name it any- thing other than Cotati High School and this was done before the school board named the school. For the benefit of any new residents who may think that the City Council's action in holding out for a name change is something being done just to be arbitrary, it should be pointed out that the City Council that existed in December of 1963, and which was comprised of several different individuals who are not on the present City Council, adopted ,a resolution recommending that the proposed high school be named the John F. Kennedy High School. Then, later,. in September of 1964, the Rohnert Park,.Chamber of Commerce went on record to the effect that they could find no justifi- cation for the proposed naming of the high school Cotati High and requested the Board of Education not to embarrass the City of Rohnert Park by so doing. At about the same time, the Rohnert Park Homeown- _:ssociation adopted a resolution to the same effect, as, indeed, did the Rohnert Park Women's Associati.nn. So with this brief background, we hope that Rohnert Park residents will realize that the accusation Statement Page -5- that the Rohnert Park City Council is just being stubborn is not.so. We are in effect, we feel, holding out for the wishes of a majority of our community. This area of disagreement would not have materializ- ed had the School Board used better judgement. Oftentimes, a City Council has to take stands which it, believe me, does not like to do. We are not in the business of creating havoc or confusion with other elected bodies and anyone thinking that such situations are enjoyable is indeed mis- informed. We do know, however, that as the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park we are the one body which represents the total community of our City The Petaluma Board of Education has no representatives from Rohnert Park on it. The last two appointments, they saw fit to make, were a representative from Cotati and another one from Petaluma who works in Santa Rosa. This was done even though the City Council and Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce and other interested parties in Rohnert Park respectfully requested the appointment)t of one of the several pro- fessional individuals from Rohnert Park willing to serve. But alas, as is so often the case, a request from the second largest City in the school district was ignored. We, as a City Council, find that we must continually scrutinize actions of the School Districts. The local elementary school district for example, has one representative on the board from Rohnert Park and the rest from the Cotati area. Thus, we find that Rohnert Park generates sixty to seventy percent of the students; has two - thirds of f�,L the facilities; and only one -fifth of the voice on the board. Re- lationships with the elementary school district, however, are quite good . For those interested, an examination of the City - School District relationships will show that the City has continually had to the School Districts to cooperate with us in offering programs to the community: This lack of .interest on the schools may be due to the fact that the large majority of the staffs in the schools live out- side of the City of Rohnert Park and do not share the enthusiasm and interest in the community as do the members of the City Council, City staff and local service organizations. With the present high cost of education and more than 52% of the property tax dollar going to education, why then all the furor because ,( �-. Statement Page -6- the City Council desires to make sure that the proposed site is in the best interests of our community and that the actions of an absentee board, insofar as they affect out 6mmunity, are also in the best interests of our community. CWe too often are led to believe that every dollar spent by a school district is in the interest of educa- tion. Investigation will show that in many instances this is not so and that with a little interest and enthusiasm many dollars could be shaved from school costs. Some questions that the Rohnert Park residents might ask them- selves as they read this statement or excerpts from it is who re- presents them on the Petaluma High School. Board and the Cotati Elementary School Board. I believe that you will find in Rohnert Park more people can tell you the.names of the City Councilmen than I can tell you the names of either the members of the Board of Educa- tion or the Elementary School District Board of Trustees. This is ! not a good sign, nor an egotistical suggestion on the part of the City Council. Tt only points up that the City Council, by the very I fact that it represents the entire community, is exposed to more con- troversial issues and unless we.examine them we would be remis8 in I our obligations. Whereas School Districts and School Boards can 1 sail right along hoping that no one will create any ripples. - -- - �Well, we feel we have created.a ripple, we feel that there are some questions that the Petaluma Board of Education should answer to the Community of Rohnert Park, these are: I. What is good from a planning viewpoint about the site that is being Proposed on Snyder Lane? 2. What makes it desirable to have the site next to the College when the Building and Planning Coordinator for the College doesn't think so and the Chairman of the Academic Senate of the College doesn't think so? 3. How many dollars could be saved in reducing transportation costs by moving the site in closer to Cotati and Rohnert Park so that the existing school population will be within walking distance of the new highschool. These are just some of our thoughts on this school matter. We have agreed that annexation will be held over until we receive some answers from the school district. We take this opportunity to Statement Page -7- publically invite the School Board of Eduoation to meet with us at our -rext dity Council meeting iP they are interested in resolving this latter;