1990/02/12 City Council MinutesRohnert Park City Council Minutes
February 12, 1990
GENERAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
The Council of the City of Rohnert Park mt this date in
adjourned regular session commencing at 7:00 p.m. in the City
Offices, 6750 Comrerce Boulevard, Rohnert Park, with Mayor
Hollingsworth presiding.
Call to Order Mayor Hollingsworth called the adjourned regular session
to order at approximately 7:01 p.m. and led the pledge
of allegiance.
Roll Call Present: (4) Council members Eck, Hopkins, Spiro, and
Hollingsworth
Absent: (1) Council member Cochran
Staff present for all or part of the meeting: City Manager
Callinan, City Attorney Flitner, Planning Director Skanchy,
Director of Public Works /City Engineer Brust, Director of
Administrative Services /Assistant to City Manager Netter, and
Assistant to the City Manager Leivo.
General Plan Mayor Hollingsworth welcomed citizens to the City Council's
first public meeting for the General Plan.
Assistant to the City Manager Leivo gave opening comments
regarding previous public meetings and the Planning Commission
Draft of the General Plan. He said that after Planning
Commission closed its process, the City received additional
comrents which have been compiled and presented tonight for
Council's review. He said that people should be willing to
disagree without being disagreeable. Mr. Leivo reviewed
highlights of the issues as a result of the input for the
Draft General plan, explained how these comrents were printed
on multi - colored sheets for use at the Planning Commission's
Open House for the General Plan on February 3rd and provided
for tonight's meeting, and how said sheets worked in
correlation to Draft General Plan. He stated that the major
issue that needs to be resolved is how much growth will there
be in Rohnert Park. Mr. Leivo explained the suggested
procedure for tonight's public meeting and format as outlined
on the agenda.
Discussion followed regarding the complexity of tieing in
addition Open House comrents to Draft General Plan confirming
these additional comments included proposals from a large
variety of sources that came in after the Planning Commission
had completed its process. Council agreed these additions
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (2) February 12, 1990
GENERAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
should be entered into the record as part of tonight's
public meeting, as well as the letter received today and
any other comments received as a result of the
citizen's survey.
Mayor Hollingsworth said that the City Council is gathered
tonight to hear public comments regarding the General Plan and
that the purpose is not for the Council to engage in dialogue,
but to listen to input. He said that Council would try to
answer questions for clarity if desired, but would refrain
from involvement in dialogue.
Open Public Feting Mayor Hollingsworth opened the public meeting at approximately
7:30 p.m. and asked if there was anyone in the audience
wishing to speak regarding the General Plan.
1) Harvey Bell, 700 Lindsay Avenue, was recognized and commended
the Planning Commission, as well as staff for efforts. He
thanked all the residents that have been involved. He said
that without the Sierra Club lawsuit, there would be no
general plan. For that reason only it, has been worth having
the lawsuit. He said that four months is not a long time for
such a process. It takes time for people to know where they
are going and some came late for input in the process. He
referred to State's guidelines for a general plan. He said
that more time should be taken since 120 days are allowed to
complete the process. He said the maximum amount of time
should be utilized so nothing is left out. Mr. Bell referred
to a printed statement prepared in response to Draft General
Plan, distributed to Council (a copy of which is attached to
orignial set of these minutes) and explained the major
issues therein.
Discussion followed in which a request was made for aroster of
Concerned Citizens in order to know the number of people
involved. W. Bell said he would have to ask the Concerned
Citizens group for approval. Mayor Hollingsworth advised that
each person speaking tonight could feel free to mention their
affiliation, if desired.
2) Jim Clark, 80 Walnut Circle, was recognized and said he vas
not a member of Concerned Citizens but represented himself. He
would like to see the word affordable put in under housing
since young and old have to be taken care of whether we like
it or not. He said that funds have been provided by President
Bush, that there are 27 million in poverty in the U.S. and
that it may be necessary for the City to set up a City housing
group and consider selling bonds. We should not get into the
short term leases like ten years and gave Copeland Creek as an
example. He said that developers are needed and should not be
turned away and that a ceiling should be put on growth and
expanded on in the next general plan. Regarding conservation
and open space, a cemetary could be put in and considered as
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (3) February 12, 1990
GENERAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
open space. He said he did not know what should be done about
circulation since it would be 10 to 20 years before any
circulation could be done on Highway 101 or light rail. He
said he was not here to debate Harvey Bell's sheet but felt it
contained a lot of improprieties. The City should not be in
the realm of proposing other new cities. He commended the
Planning Commission on a job well done, and said that at
future Council meetings on the General Plan he would provide
further specifics.
3) Mindy Young, Sonoma Grove /22 Barta, was recognized and said
she was concerned about statements in the Draft General Plan
about phasing out Sonoma Grove. tudent housing is an issue
that needs to be addressed. Sonoma Grove has a much different
population than student dorms since they are older, not full
time, and all low income. She proposed that the residents of
Sonome Grove be involved in the General Plan process regarding
low income housing. They may have input regarding design.
There are 150 dwelling units in Sonoma Grove that would
probably not be able to afford such housing so without the
Grove there would be many households that would become
homeless. She thanked the Council for this oppportunity
to speak.
4) Chip Worthington, 8080 Mitchell Drive, was recognized and said
that he has worked, pastored, owned homes, has had students in
the school system and a wife who spends money in Rohnert Park
and would like to see more shopping opportunities. He said
that Rohnert Park could easily grow to 60,000, the City should
beware of elitism, as part of a metropolis its an illusion to
say we connot have growth, and the City could have 50% more
growth. He said the City should pay fair market value to
developers for preserving open space and that green space is
an illusion in our county. He said if affordable housing is
wanted, he recommends subsidizing by a non - profit corporation.
Without it. there would be no middle class but only rich and
poor. He is for growth of the middle class. He said that in
the next 10 years there's a need to consider social problems
in the General Plan due to alcohol and drugs. Public Safety
does a very good job, but if counseling is needed, a person
has to go outside of Rohnert Park. He said regarding
circulation that he would like to see a loop expressway or
rail system around the City like San Jose's. He appreciates
the City fathers' approach to problems being more like
Ronald Reagan's in that nuch is done without necessarily
writing it down.
5) Alice E. McAdams,
16
Alexis Drive, was recognized and said
that she is a
45 year
old student at SSU and that no
matter
what kind of low income housing is provided, she could
not go
to school and
afford
it. She said there are rmany
working
parents who are trying
to put themselves through school
in the
same situation.
Her plumbing works, she has a garden,
and
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (4) February 12, 1990
GENERAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
regarding comments that trailers look dilapidated she said
that Sonoma Grove has beautiful parks and is a peaceful place
to study and live. She said that student housing was supposed
to be provided all along. She has never heard if there's even
such a plan for low income housing.
6) Patricia Cantu', #2 Alexis Drive, was recognized and said
she's been a teacher's aid and had gone to Jr. College for
three years but settled in Sonoma Grove for the past year and
a half because it's the only affordable housing. She cannot
get on the list for Section 8. Without the Grove she would
not be able to st:y ark~ teach as in the past, and that she
loves her place.
7) Bambi Dennett, 5349 Daniel Drive, was recognized and said that
the City has worked hard to efficiently and cooperatively
update the General Plan. The lawsuit has slowed down the real
work that needs to be done. She asked why hasn't the Sierra
Club dropped its lawsuit and wondered if there's not an
alternate goal. The real citizens of Rohnert Park are not
members of the Sierra Club of which the majority live
elsewhere. Outsiders think they're coming in to protect our
town but the lawsuit should be stopped. She said if
development had been held up like this over the years, we
would still be in A Section. This has hurt in the loss of
commercial development. She referred to several items on the
flyer distributed by Concerned Citizens and closed in saying
that the citizens of Rohnert Park should be given their true
say in these matters and that progress has to go on.
8) Dennis Tatman, 1174 Santa Cruz Way, was recognized and said
that the City has grown into a good place to live and listed
advantages from schools to sports and recreation centers,
parks, movies, YNCA, etc. The City has shown a lot of
independence in the last 15 years. Some people have a hard
time letting us go.
9) George Horwedel, 7660 Camino Colegio, said that the City had
been warned about the lawsuit and that the recommendation of a
citizen's committee had been tabled as Council could not
decide on the size of the committee. He pointed out
discrepancies in the time frames of the General Plan. It
seemed to be backwards to designate permanent buffers by 1995.
The greenbelt should be set and then we should determine land
that would be developed for residential and commercial use.
He said that the plan doesn't say Rohnert Park is in any
danger of earthquakes but according to reports the City is in
danger and needs to plan for a serious earthquake. He said
that 4,000 to 5,000 alone would be homeless if a similar quake
to Santa Rosa's last one hit. He thanked Council for this
opportunity to speak.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (5) February 12, 1990
GENERAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
10) Jim Thomas, 4405 Hamlet Court, was recognized and said that he
has lived in a variety of places in the U.S. When he
retired, he left his property in Texas and chose to live here
because he liked the wide streets and parks. He hopes Rohnert
Park continues to be a happy home for many people. He said
he's a member of Concerned Citizens but was speaking for
himself tonight. He said that the word affordable is loosely
thrown around regarding housing, subsidized housing
deteriorates fast as people do not take care of them, and we
do not need to take government money for subsidizing
housing. He said he would like to see this comnmity
continue to be a good place to live.
11) Herb Ray, 1383 Middle Brook Way, was recognized and said he
decided Rohnert Park was a nice place to live and came here
about a year and a half ago. We owe mach to developers,
planners and the City Council. He said the Concerned
Citizens want this empty and that empty and so many
restraints, He said the Concerned Citizens want so many
restraints, but how will we pay the bill except from
development or residents. A tax base is needed to bring in the
good things that we want. There will have to be give and take
in this matter. There is still resentment in him that such a
small number of people have caused so many problems and so
much cost. The residents should take over and not let
outsiders bulldoz and take over. He said he thought the City
would continue to do a great job.
12) Jake MacKenzie, 1536 Gladstone Way, was recognized and said he
was Interim Vice President of Concerned Citizens but that his
remarks tonight on the General Plan were his own. He said
that a great amount of work has gone into the plan, that we
have seen some real progress, and that full citizen
participation has occurred. The end results have surprised us
all but we still have a long way to go. He said that as Earth
Metrics gets involved the draft EIR will need to be considered
regarding the recommended changes. The 120 day time frame to
is actually a short time for all the State requirements to be
met. The Council should remove any objectives from the
general plan that go beyond 1995 since it does not seem
appropriate to consider beyond 1995. He said there are
mechanisms that could be used in the next five years to draw
up a plan thereafter. He said that to have neighborhood
meetings should be added in the General Principle. Regarding
Land Use objectives, additional single family dwellings should
not be built on the northern boundary as in Cannon Manor.
There needs to be a discussion of the purpose of the school
bond issue. Boundaries need to be identified within the
context of a new general plan. He said there seems to be a
contradiction regarding upgrading or planned growth at some
time in the future versus retaining a small town atmosphere.
On the Conservation Element, Mr. MacKenzie said the water
supply objectives and the expansion of wastewater treatment
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (6) February 12, 1990
GENERAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
capacity and pupping capacity implies growth prormtion. We
should add toxic data. He suggested that the creeks be
considered for adoption by children as part of an
environmental educational program. He said in closing that
the plan should talk to the year 1995, no more, no less as
Council goes through it line by line. In response to a
question from Council regarding a number for growth control,
Mr. MacKenzie said it would have to be limited. He asked if
the City would be able to dispose of its wastes through the
year 2,000. He would suggest that the pace of growth should
relate to public facilities with a modest increase over the
next 20 years. The growth in the next five years should be
set doen in the general plait, but he could not give
an exact number.
13) Barbara MacKenzie, 1536 Gladstone Way, was recognized and said
she was concerned about the polarized atmosphere but believes
that all things are possible. She's never been involved like
this before and thought that in requiring a conplete review a
concensus can be reached. Things that are happening
presuppose growth like the school bond, additional space for
City Hall, and wastewater capacities. The survey indicated
that people want to control growth. There are mixed messages
in the plan which don't clearly express whether it is long
term or short term. She personally would like to know the
ultimate size.
14) Beth Robertson, 4722 Fairway Drive, was recognized and said
that officials were elected
to quickly handle these decisions.
That was the purpose in electing
them. She is tired of
spending her money in Santa Rosa and driving on clogged
Highway 101. She said
light industry and commercial
development is needed and
that the architectural committee
would bog down the process.
The plan should look beyond five
years to handle the growth
that's ahead. She would like to
see her family stay here.
Safety needs to be provided for
circulation and funds for
transportation inprovements come
from developers.
15) Leffler Brown, 4438 Hollingsworth Circle, was recognized and
said that he was Chairman of the School Bond Committee. The
letter circulated by Concerned Citizens includes false
statements about the school bond issue. The school bond is
designed to serve students for buildout in the city limits and
for the existing population including the new school needed in
M Section, libraries, storage for teachers, computer rooms.
The Jr. High and High Schools are not adequate for upcoming
students with no new growth. An article in yesterday's Press
Detmcrat said that California ranks last in the U.S. on the
percent per capita spent for public schools. The thousand new
class rooms that were built in the State in the 80's is still
not enough. The State faces twenty years of neglect. The
Recess
Reconvene
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (7) February 12, 1990
GENEPAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
State Department of Finance projects a 1.4 million endowment
increase by the year 2,000 and that 11 billion dollars will be
needed just to house those students. The money mast come from
bond issues, and the effort now is to try and raise that money
needed. He said that 85 million dollars is needed for the
existing educational needs. If we don't invest in education,
we might as well throw it all away. He confirmed that the
last three schools built in Rohnert Park were financed through
development fees. Said fees won't be able to handle it
in the future.
16) Anella Barbour, 7367 Belita Avenue & 4100 Snyder Lane, was
recognized and asked why are people coming from the outside
telling us what to do. There are parks and schools in every
section. The tax base from a shopping center is needed. We
should not get bogged down with details. We did it twenty
years ago and we can do it again.
Council concurred to continue public meeting until 10:00
Mayor Hollingsworth declared a recess at approximately
8:55 p.m.
Mayor Hollingsworth reconvened the Council meeting at
approximately 9:05 p.m. with all Council members present
except for Councilman Cochran.
17) Coralia Serafim, 761 Lincoln Avenue, was recognized and said
she is glad that the Planning Commission has beefed up the
environmental section of this plan and regional input has been
solicited. The review process needs to be rare thorough.
She's glad to hear all the different points of view. All
points should be considered and people need to listen to one
another. She said that it's crucial to have a formal growth
management plan. Growth can't be stopped but needs to be done
responsibly. The EIR should be taken seriously. She supported
alternatives to automobiles including bike paths and rail.
There's a need for low income housing. Sonoma Grove provides
diversity of housing which should be encouraged. She would be
willing to pay to reserve open space. Options need to be
studied such as how mach it costs and how to get the money.
She said the survey gave no option for growth of less that
40,000 and believed a good majority would go for less. The
plan needs to be internally consistent.
18) Tom Roberts, 4655 Willis Avenue, was recognized and said he
owns property on the north side of the City. He would like to
see the City annex more area and he complimented the City on
fine building that has taken place. He said he would like to
get the same treatment that others receive. If the City
annexes a street it should take in properties contiguous to
the street. He asked to be annexed in and was turned away
while others came in behind him and were annexed. He said
people should pay for open space rather than steal it through
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (8) February 12, 1990
GENERAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
zoning just to provide visual relief for the motoring public
on Highway 101. A big price would be paid by those who paid
for what they have and then are not able to develop their
property. Rohnert Park's Planning Department has beuilt a
beautiful city. This City is made up of doers. He would like
to see them develop the whole north Bay Area because such a
great job has been done. He issued a challenge to the Sierra
Club to quit cheating Rohnert Park citizens and
withdraw the lawsuit. He would like to see everyone work
together so no one is forced out. It is a supply and demand
economy in there is a big demand for housing and a low supply.
19) Michael Tippett, 31 Alexis, was recognized and said that he's
a student from out of town who decided to live at Sonoma Grove
because it's more affordable than the dorms. The dorms are
$300 or more a month while the Grove is only $140. He said
that low income or affordable housing could bring in different
types of people. Sonoma Grove is an intellectually
challenging place to live. Dilapidation is a matter of
opinion. He finds his trailer beautiful. If people moved
from Sonoma Grove, would there be other affordable housing.
Tract housing is all the same with no trees and nothing
identifiable but Sonoma Grove has developed an identity
Of its own.
20) Dale Trowbridge, 6039 Elsa Avenue, was recognized and said
he's a member of Concerned Citizens and that he was amazed to
see how many responded to the survey. It needs to be taken
seriously. It is the Council's job to sort out the
contradictory responses. He said there's a lot of diverse
things in the survey such as requests for more commercial
development and also a strong statement to remain a town
rather than become a large city. Open space is wanted and
must be part of the plan. It doesn't really matter if we want
buffers if this place is swallowed up by others. Development
of commxnity buffers has to be a part of the plan if an area
is to retain any open space at all. He said that owners
should be properly paid for land that provides open space. He
could never return to the congestion of Southern California.
Aggressive decisions need to be made to determine what the
City's future will be.
21) Frank Willis, 44 Vanda, Sonoma Grove, was recognized and said
Sonoma Grove provides diversity in cost of housing. There is
mix of people in the Grove with low incomes including nurses,
teachers, and single parents with no place else to go. He
said there's a lot of civic pride in Sonoma Grove. It is a
nice commtmity, safe for children and a place where low income
people can take care of themselves. He invited everyone to
walk through the place to see how nice it is. It is like an
oasis. He said a problem would develop if people had to
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (9) February 12, 1990
GENERAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
move out of Sonoma Grove. There is a need to provide housing
for low paid workers. The residents of Sonoma Grove are civic
minded which would not happen in Section 8 housing. Closing
Sonoma Grove would only increase the chances for homelessness
or cause people to leave the county. He said that technical
assistance should be provided to Sonoma Grove like other
mobile homes.
22) Tracy Fields, 742 Racquet Club Circle, was recognized and said
that she was currently looking forward to purchasing her first
home in Rohnert Park. She is among the group that represents
the future. She said if growth is halted many young people
would not be able to reach their goals or partake in the
future of the City.
23) Gerald Griffin, 1514 Garfield Court, was recognized and said
he really liked the quality of life present in Rohnert Park.
The quality of growth needs to be retained as well as
open space.
24) John Lthguren, 4380 Fairway Drive, was recognized and said his
wife and family have lived here since 1981. He thinks the
City has done a fantastic job with the planning process and
would expect the same in the future. He said he wanted to
develop a spirit of cooperation. The lawsuit should be
removed and everyone should work together to solve problems.
He said everyone needs to supply input for the future
development including developers and the City Council.
Without the developers there would not be anyone here. He
took offence to the white sheet distributed tonight that
stated under Land Use "'residents ", not "the City or
Developers" should decide how big or fast our city should
grow'. He said the planning process should look beyond 1995.
No more time should be wasted with new city ideas. There has
been reasonable, controlled growth and it should continue.
25) Charlie Artman, 25 Alexis, Sonoma Grove, was recognized and
said he would wait to give his comments at the next meeting.
26) Robert Davis, 53 Varda Street, was recognized and said he's an
artist who has worked for the past 30 years in many places and
was also an actor. He said he moved to Sonoma Grove in 1982
and there seems to be a monster lurking around there. They
will be eaten by developers who have forgotten that we are
people, too. We've been attacked for years but the deal's
been done and greed is the reason. For the most part people
in Sonoma Grove want to keep the place intact and would like
to be left alone and let us live.
27) Ray McKenzie, 7729 Montero Drive, was recognized and said he
was concerned about stopping projects like the Price Club. He
could not understand the difference between shopping in Santa
Rosa and flushing toilets there or doing the same here. He
said that building permits are where the money comes from for
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (10) February 12, 1990
GENERAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
education. It doesn't come from those not working here and
not involved in development. He said progress can't be
stopped and people can't be stopped from coming to
Rohnert Park.
28) John Giertz, 455 Alta Avenue, was recognized and said that an
architectural design review committee should not be
established. Santa Rosa and Cotati have had such committees
and did not work well. There were too many people involved.
Rohnert Park gets things done. He said planning can't be
stopped after five years because things would come to a
complete halt and a five year plan would fall on its face.
The City has to go on toward its goal to develop because of
the need to go forward and not backward.
30) Dawna Gallagher, 7342 Rasmassen Way, was recognized and said
she is a residential real estate agent. There is a housing
crisis in California. It is the worst state as far as
affordability is concerned. She expressed concern about
considerations for mass transit and asked who would ride it.
She said she was from a southern California comninity where
development was halted. It seemed to work for a certain
period of time but soon development was forced by default.
Four motels were built within 3/4 miles. She said a tax base
needs to be created. Enployees at State Farm and Hewlett
Packard cannot buy homes here. She said there's a need to
balancd jobs and housing. The only way it can be done is in
other ways like subsidies. There will be rewards for those
cities that plan and develop low cost housing. The cities
that don't will suffer.
30) Dennis G. McCormack, 1431 Jasmine Circle, was recognized and
said he would be willing to pay for his part of a regional
Park on Snyder Lane across from the new church development.
He said he's not against another golf course if it's wanted.
He would like to see another regional park which should be
planned now wiiile the land is vacant. He agreed that the
Sierra Club should drop the lawsuit and that everyone should
work together. He was a member of the Sierra Club. but
dropped out when he heard about the lawsuit. He said he has
nothing against the people at Sonoma Grove and that those
concerned about the condition of their housing should go out
and take a look at the place.
There being no one further desiring to speak, Mayor
Hollingsworth closed the public meeting at 9:50 p.m.
Councilman Hopkins said that he attended a meeting for the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) last week in which
it was pointed out that an effort is being made to give
regions planning powers. If responsible planning is not done
at the local level, the State will do it. Those who have been
critical of what Rohnert Park has done, won't like it. Such
action is not far away if we don't get our act together.
Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (11) February 12, 1990
GENERAL PLAN
Adj.Reg.Mtg.
Discussion followed regarding the need for affordable housing,
the affect of building restrictions and the planning process
on the cost of housing, and affordable high density housing.
It is imperative to look beyond 1995. There is a need to be
assertive regarding things like the wastewater plant.
Everyone should work together to accomplish oat's necessary.
Mayor Hollingsworth conplimnted the audience for the way they
handled themselves tonight.
Adjournment There being no further business, Ibyor Hollingsworth adjourned
the public meeting for the General Plan at approximately 10:00
p.m. to be continued on February 20, 1990 at 7:00 p.m.
DeputJ Ci Clerk r Mayor
i fir
_f
Dear Editor: Please print the following article as soon as possible. Thank you
From: Harvey Bell, Rohnert Park Resident
ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL FOUND GUILTY / SIERRA CLUB WAS RIGHT
Superior Court Judge Lawrence Sawyer, after nearly three months of study,
announced his findings that the Sierra Club was right in its suit and
that Rohnert Park's General Plan was not in compliance with the law and
that proper environmental review was not being done prior to approving
new development there.
The verdict declared that every element of the general plan was outdated,
inaccurate, inconsistent and out of compliance with the law. These elements
include guidelines that, when followed, allow us to develop a well planned
and healthy city for the future. The Rohnert Park City Council was not
properly or legally being responsible for the planning of Land Use, Traffic
Flow (Circulation), Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Noise and Safety.
In fact, Judge Sawyer added that they "abused their discretion ".
As a result of the verdict against the city, Rohnert Park now has 120
days to update its General Plan and bring it in compliance with the law.
In the meantime, no approval of any significant development project, zoning
changes or subdivision changes can be given until the General Plan complies
with the requirements of the law. The Price Club and any further development
in the Northwest Program area can not proceed without proper environmental
review and a legal General Plan. (the Good Night Inn, Red Lion II expansion
and Roberts Lake Road extension, already in progress, may proceed.)
What this means is that a thoughtful, mainstream judge, a former District
Attorney, after thorough evaluation confirmed that there are serious
deficiencies in our City Council. They did not comply with the laws designed
to protect the health of our city in the future. They hindered our progress
in commercial development, thus stopping the addition of potential tax
revenues. They abused their discretion, in favor of the wishes of outsider
developers. They did not provide good and legal planning in Rohnert Park.
Our City Council had advice from their own City Attorney - they ignored
it. They also ignored requests from residents. Then Mayor, Charlie Cochran,
who as a lawyer should be knowledgeable of proper legal conduct, even
denied people their right to speak during Council discussion. Thanks
to the Sierra Club and local residents, this "Outlaw Council" was brought
to account for refusing to obey the laws.
The Sierra Club's win in this case is a win for the city - the real city,
not the council members who respond only to developers wishes. It is
a win for the people who live here who are tired of traffic congestion,
noise and overcrowded schools and who want to save and permanently protect
the open space around our city. Thanks to the Sierra Club, we residents
get to participate in the updating of our General Plan, a process that
our current City Council did not want us to do. They have been shutting
people out of local government long enough. the Sierra Club helped open
the door.
It is now time to keep the door open; to have the future of Rohnert Park
really be what the residents want it to be - a healthy city for the future.
It is time to start looking ahead to replacing Council members who opposed
following the law - replacing them with good, law abiding people who care
about what residents want and who are not responsible to outside developers.
please see page two
Dear Editor, From Harvey Bell, page two
Our 'Outlaw City Council" cost us the Price Club. If left unchecked,
they would also have cost us all the open farmland that surrounds us.
It is the local residents who deserve to have the final say in the future
of our city. Two great opportunities exist to express our desires: the
City Council hearing Monday, February 12th at 7:00 pm at City Hall where
people can tell the Council what they want for the future of their city;
and the November election where two new City Council members can be elected
who will more fairly, and legally, represent the true will of the people.
Thanks to the Sierra Club, the residents of Rohnert Park can now reclaim
their city and insure the future of the lifestyle and quality of life
that they desire.
q0
Vey'
a
KA
0
V1fj
Py.
February 8, 1990
THE FOLLOWING AREAS OF CONCERN ARE SUGGESTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION BY
THE CONCERNED CITIZENS FOR ROHNERT PARK
WHO HOPE THAT YOU WILL EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AND CONCERNS AT THIS MEETING
PURPOSE OF THE GENERAL PLAN
No annexation without a thorough (1 to 2 year)
Plan update (including neighborhood meetings
citizens advisory committee).
LAND USE
PAGE ITEM #
General Support "General-
and a Principal"
pl.2
Stop promoting new cities elswhere.
p4.21
Delete
p2.23
#21
Address SSU's growing needs directly.
Include the
p4.20
#4
Delete
SSU Environs Study in this plan and address
their needs.
p2.11
No heliport in Rohnert Park - who needs the
noise.
Delete
p2.22
#22
"Residents ", not "the City or Developers ",
should decide
how big or fast our city should grow.
Support
p2.20
# 9
No development plans outside the current city limits.
p2.8
Provide for adequate Open Space and
a buffer to
Support
p2.19
#14
neighboring development.
Support
p2.20
#10
Develop an architectural and design review committee Add to p2.22 & 4.23
with professional and citizens input for housing and
commercial /industrial development
Change the building height limit to a 3 -story maximum Add to p2.22 & 4.23
for all buildings (including the new City Hall)
Add an "agricultural /open space" zoning to the kinds Add to p2.22 & 6.4
of land uses al l oT.,7able in Rol next Park.
(See also notes under "Open Space ", below)
n TrVITTT TMTnTT
Provide for safe and free flowing traffic movement
prior to the building of congestion causing developments
HOUSING
We don't "need" to build all the houses that ABAG projects.
No planning now for housing sites for after 1995 in
this 5 -year plan.
Stop wasting our time and energy with new city ideas.
OPEN SPACE
p3.16 -3.18
p4.2 #lb
Delete
p4.21
#3,4,5
Delete
p4.19
#2 (on left;
Delete
p4.20
#4
Delete
p4.22
#24
Form an Open Space committee to identify desirable Add to p2.22
Open Space for permanent protection and to develop Add to p6.4
a plan and action steps to create desired buffer zones. Support p6.3 #5,9,12
add a deadline such as 1995 p2.22 #17
CONSERVATION
Provide (in this 5 -year plan) only for the sewage treatment
capacity and water supply needed for our city of 40,000
people that this plan defines. Add "up to the current capacity needed" p5.13 #12 & 13
SAFETY i
1
Require that an "Above Ground Hazardous Materials"
ordinance be enacted with a deadline (like 1 year) p8.11
PLEASE EXPRESS ALL YOUR OPINIONS TODAY, EVEN IF SOMEONE ELSE SAID IT FIRST
The next City Council Meeting on the General Plan will be Tuesday, February 20th at 7 pm
w lJ
Dear Editor: Please print the following article as soon as possible. Thank you
From: Harvey Bell, Rohnert Park Resident
ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL FOUND GUILTY / SIERRA CLUB WAS RIGHT
Superior Court Judge Lawrence Sawyer, after nearly three months of study,
announced his findings that the Sierra Club was right in its suit and
that Rohnert Park's General Plan was not in compliance with the law and
that proper environmental review was not being done prior to approving
new development there.
The verdict declared that every element of the general plan was outdated,
inaccurate, inconsistent and out of compliance with the law. These elements
include guidelines that, when followed, allow us to develop a well planned
and healthy city for the future. The Rohnert Park City Council was not
properly or legally being responsible for the planning of Land Use, Traffic
Flow (Circulation), Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Noise and Safety.
In fact, Judge Sawyer added that they "abused their discretion ".
As a result of the verdict against the city, Rohnert Park now has 120
days to update its General Plan and bring it in compliance with the law.
In the meantime, no approval of any significant development project, zoning
changes or subdivision changes can be given until the General Plan complies
with the requirements of the law. The Price Club and any further development
in the Northwest Program area can not proceed without proper environmental
review and a legal General Plan. (the Good Night Inn, Red Lion II expansion
and Roberts Lake Road extension, already in progress, may proceed.)
What this means is that a thoughtful, mainstream judge, a former District
Attorney, after thorough evaluation confirmed that there are serious
deficiencies in our City Council. They did not comply with the laws designed
to protect the health of our city in the future. They hindered our progress
in commercial development, thus stopping the addition of potential tax
revenues. They abused their discretion, in favor of the wishes of outsider
developers. They did not provide good and legal planning in Rohnert Park.
Our City Council had advice from their own City Attorney - they ignored
it. They also ignored requests from residents. Then Mayor, Charlie Cochran,
who as a lawyer should be knowledgeable of proper legal conduct, even
denied people their right to speak during Council discussion. Thanks
to the Sierra Club and local residents, this "Outlaw Council" was brought
to account for refusing to obey the laws.
The Sierra Club's win in this case is a win for the city - the real city,
not the council members who respond only to developers wishes. It is
a win for the people who live here who are tired of traffic congestion,
noise and overcrowded schools and who want to save and permanently protect
the open space around our city. Thanks to the Siena Club, we residents
get to participate in the updating of our General Plan, a process that
our current City Council did not want us to do. They have been shutting
people out of local government long enough. the Sierra Club helped open
the door.
It is now time to keep the door open; to have the future of Rohnert Park
really be what the residents want it to be - a healthy city for the future.
It is time to start looking ahead to replacing Council members who opposed
following the law - replacing them with good, law abiding people who care
about what residents want and who are not responsible to outside developers.
please see page two
Dear Editor, From Harvey Bell, page two
our 'Outlaw City Council" cost us the Price Club. If left unchecked,
they would also have cost us all the open farmland that surrounds us.
It is the local residents who deserve to have the final say in the future
of our city. Two great opportunities exist to express our desires: the
City Council hearing Monday, February 12th at 7:00 pm at City Hall where
people can tell the Council what they want for the future of their city;
and the November election where two new City Council members can be elected
who will more fairly, and legally, represent the true will of the people.
Thanks to the Sierra Club, the residents of Rohnert Park can now reclaim
their city and insure the future of the lifestyle and quality of life
that they desire.
February 8, 1990
U'
V"
WV
W
THE FOLLOWING AREAS OF CONCERN ARE SUGGESTED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION BY
THE CONCERNED CITIZENS FOR ROHNERT PARK
WHO HOPE THAT YOU WILL EXPRESS YOUR FEELINGS AND CONCERNS AT THIS MEETING e,�Pt A4V
PURPOSE OF THE GENERAL PLAN
PAGE
ITEM If
No annexation without a thorough (1 to 2
year) General
Support
"General-
Plan update (including neighborhood meetings
and a
Principal"
citizens advisory committee).
We don't "need" to build all the houses that ABAG projects.
pl.2
#1b
LAND USE
Delete
p4.21
#3,4,5
this 5 -year plan.
Stop promoting new cities elswhere.
p4.19
Delete
p2.23
#21
Address SSU's growing needs directly.
Include the
Stop wasting our time and energy with new city ideas.
Delete
p4.22
SSU Environs Study in this plan and address
their needs.
p2.11
No heliport in Rohnert Park - who needs the
noise.
Delete
p2.22
#22
"Residents ", not "the City or Developers ",
should decide
how big or fast our city should grow.
Support
p2.20
9
No development plans outside the current city limits.
p2.8
Provide for adequate Open Space and
a buffer to
Support
p2.19
##14
neighboring development.
Support
p2.20
#10
Develop an architectural and design review committee Add to p2.22 & 4.23
with professional and citizens input for housing and
commercial /industrial development
Change the building height limit to a 3 -story maximum Add to p2.22 & 4.23
for all buildings (including the new City Hall)
Add an "agricultural /open space" zoning to the kinds Add to p2.22 & 6.4
of land uses allowable owabil e i n Rol-Lnert Park.
(See also notes under "Open Space ", below)
CIRCULATION
Provide for safe and free flowing traffic movement
prior to the building of congestion causing developments
p3.16 -3.18
HOUSING
We don't "need" to build all the houses that ABAG projects.
p4.2
#1b
No planning now for housing sites for after 1995 in
Delete
p4.21
#3,4,5
this 5 -year plan.
Delete
p4.19
#2 (on left;
Delete
p4.20
#4
Stop wasting our time and energy with new city ideas.
Delete
p4.22
#24
n,nLTT C17T('L
Form an Open Space committee to identify desirable Add to p2.22
Open Space for permanent protection and to develop Add to p6.4
a plan and action steps to create desired buffer zones. Support p6.3 #5,9,12
add a deadline such as 1995 p2.22 #17
CONSERVATION
Provide (in this 5 -year plan) only for the sewage treatment
capacity and water supply needed for our city of 40,000
people that this plan defines. Add "up to the current capacity needed" p5.13 #12 & 13
SAFETY i
Require that an "Above Ground Hazardous Materials"
crdinance be enacted with a deadline (like 1 year) p8.11
PLEASE EXPRESS ALL YOUR OPINIONS TODAY, EVEN IF SOMEONE ELSE SAID IT FIRST
The next City Council Meeting on the General Plan will be Tuesday, February 20th at 7 pm
CCSI
CITY OF ROHNERT PARK PERFORMING ARTS CENTER
FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Purpose of Study: To determine the feasibility of raising funds to endow the
city of Rohnert Park Performing Arts Center.
2. Study Period: Five weeks from January 2, 1990 through February 2,
1990.
3. Study Participants: CCS conducted personal, confidential interviews with 47
individuals representing civic, social, cultural, business,
professional, and corporate leaders. All participants were
very cooperative. A color -coded direct mail survey was also
sent to 446 individuals. The response rate of 25% was
exceptionally high, particularly for a municipality. CCS also
researched corporations and foundations for possible
support.
4. Factors Evaluated: CCS evaluated the strengths and weaknesses of six factors.
They are:
1. Image: Perceptions and interest in the
project.
2. Case: The needs plans, costs and
priorities
3. Leadership: Individuals willing to advocate the
case
4. Prospects: Individuals, foundations,
businesses willing to give
5. Resources: Office staff, budget to sustain a
campaign
6. Plan: Management and procedures
CCS
S. Consultants Evaluation
linage and Perceptions: Raring "10" on a scale of ten
Without exception, the City of Rohnert Park Performing Arts Center is viewed as a benefit
to the City of Rohnert Park and the surrounding area. People are proud and excited that
such a state -of -the -art Center has been built in their city. These positive feelings will
obviously benefit any campaign for funds to insure the continuation of the Center. This is
further evidenced by the indication that nearly nine of every ten respondents to the survey
will use the facility.
Case: Rating "8" on a scale of ten
The greatest strength of the case is that the proposed new Center would benefit and be used
by many groups in the community: schools, church affiliated organizations, clubs, local
arts groups, and civic organizations, not to mention bringing fine, professional
performances and events to the City. Secondly, and even more significantly, the entire
Center has already been paid for and the endowment fund would preclude any additional
taxes over and above operational costs.
Leadership: Rating "9" on a scale of ten
The most positive aspect of the evaluation is the leadership and potential leadership for a
campaign. It is unusually high to find over one -half of all community leaders who are
personally interviewed as well as nearly one - quarter of respondents to an anonymous direct
mail survey indicate they would be willing to assist on a committee to raise funds. Nearly
50 people, including city officials, would be willing to help raise funds.
Prospective Donors: Rating "6" to "8" on a scale of ten
CCS' evaluation discloses that a list of about 250 "prospective" donors can be developed to
include individuals, merchants, clubs, associations, foundations and corporations. CCS'
recommended plan would try to raise a minimum of $1.5 Million from the least amount of
donors. This plan would not exclude a general "community phase," however, few
campaigns can succeed by relying on support from nominal gifts in a community phase. In
addition, a number of key major gift prospects' opinions and thoughts on the project are
still pending.
Resources
The City of Rohnert Park does have, and could provide, the management resources
necessary to mount and sustain a campaign. Such resources would include a budget for
office space, equipment, supplies, staff, materials and management services.
Plan
The one factor that is missing is a plan to raise the funds. The purpose of the survey is to
design a plan for consideration by the City of Rohnert Park. The recommended plan is
included in this report.
CCS
Immediate Priorities of the Organization Phase
Image and Perceptions
• A slide presentation be prepared for clubs, groups and businesses, depicting the
state -of -the -art concepts and features of the new Center explaining how the
proposed endowment will ensure usage by, and benefits to, the community. The
presentation would demonstrate that other facilities, such as the Luther Burbank
Center, serve their particular purpose, but could not be expected to handle the need
for state -of- the -art performances and events.
Case Priorities
• The slides, Information Statement (fact sheet) and major gift "prospectus"
(brochure) be prepared to identify and explain the benefits of the endowment and
the dollar needs and allocations. Explanations about continuity of use and possible
disruption of events should be prepared.
• Steps should be taken to explain how management and marketing responsibilities of
the Center will assure successful operations.
Prepare for the Gala Opening in April, with plans for a private reception for the
the "top ten" key prospects.
Leadership
• The City of Rohnert Park (mayor, manager, staff, council) has an exceptionally
good image among community leaders. Surveys for municipalities usually disclose
degrees of criticism of elected and professional officials. This is not the case in
Rohnert Park. City officials can, and should, remain active in leading the project,
however, immediate steps should be taken to set up a 501(c)3 with a small group
of these civic leaders as well as community leaders taking a predominant role.
• A significant large "pool" of prospective leaders exists from which to
immediately form a campaign cabinet and steering committee. Additional
endorsements of the project should be sought immediately from civic, social,
cultural and business leaders.
Prospective Donors
• The survey disclosed several strong indications of major gift support and
sufficient potential has been indicated to design a campaign strategy to raise a
minimum of $1.5 Million from approximately 200 prospective donors.
CICIS
7 Gift Analysis to Achieve $1.5 Million
NUMBER OF GIFTS
GIFT AMOUNT
TOTAL AMOUNT
1
$250,000
$250,000
2
$100,000
$200,000
4
$50,000
$200,000
11
$25,000
$275,000
20
$10,000
$200,000
30
$5,000
$150,000
50
$2,500
$125,000
100
$1000
$100,000
TOTAL 218
$1,000 - $250,000
$1,500,000
The study has disclosed sufficient prospects for a successful endowment campaign for the
City of Rohnert Park Performing Arts Center. At present, we believe approximately 200
donors should be targeted to achieve the minimum endowment fund goal of $1.5 Million.
C CIS
8. Recommendations
1. An Advisory Cabinet of 3 -5 civic, cultural, business and community leaders be formed
to approve or disapprove the recommendations of CCS.
2. If approved, announce a campaign to endow the City of Rohnert Park Performing Arts
Center at the April gala at which time at least 20% of the goal or approximately
$300,000 will be raised from one or two gifts. The goal of the campaign will be a
minimum of $1.5 Million.
3. The Endowment Fund campaign would be conducted by CCS in "phases" according
to a plan and timetable as follows:
PHASE GOAL TIMELINE
I. PLANNING SURVEY Feasibility Jan. 2 to Feb. 2 (5 wks.)
(complete) (option) (complete)
1. ORGANIZATION $300,000 (20 %) Feb. 5 to May 4 (13 wks.)
(option)
III. SOLICITATION $1,050,000 (70 %) May 7 to Aug. 3 (13 wks.)
(option)
IV. CONT. /CLOSEOUT $150,000 (10 %) Aug. 6 to Nov. 2 (13 wks.)
V. PLEDGE PAYMENT $1,500,000 minimum Nov. '90 to Oct. '93 (3 yrs.)
4. An operating budget controlled by the City is estimated at $30,000.
5. Progress of the campaign would be reviewed every 30 days and the City would have
the option to proceed accordingly with or without the on -site management of CCS.
9. Campaign Costs
There will be two sets of costs required for the campaign:
A. The Professional Service Fee
B. The Operating Budget
The service fee includes the living expenses of the CCS director who will manage the
campaign on a daily, full -time basis. It also includes the expenses of a CCS executive who
will supervise and participate in key activities on a monthly basis.
The service fee for the 39 week campaign from February 5, 1990 through November 2,
1990 is scheduled. The campaign operating budget is anticipated to be $30,000.
HALF
ORGANIZATION
TD ME, L_
Feb. 5 - May 4
(option)
CCS
W EED MINIMUM GOAL EE.F
13 $300,000 $45,000
SOLICITATION May 7 - Aug. 3 13 $1,050,000 $45,000
(option)
CONT. /CLOSEOUT Aug. 6 - Nov. 2 13 $150,000 (option)
PAYMENT PERIOD Nov. 190 - Oct. '93 (3 yrs) $1,500,000 (no fee)