The URL can be used to link to this page

1992/03/24 City Council Minutes• • • -M- ROLL CALL Rohnert Park City Council Minutes March 24, 1992 The Council of the City of Rohnert Park met this date in regular session commencing at 6:00 p.m. in the City Offices, 6750 Commerce Boulevard, Rohnert Park, with Mayor Spiro presiding. Mayor Spiro called the regular session to order at approximately 6:30 p.m. and led the pledge of allegiance. Mayor Spiro advised that a closed session commenced this evening at 6:00 p.m. to discuss personnel matters. She said no action was taken and there was nothing to report at this time. Present: (5) Councilmembers Eck, Hollingsworth, Hopkins, Reilly, and Mayor Spiro Absent: (0) None Staff present for all or part of the meeting: City Manager Netter, City Attorney Flitner, Assistant to the City Manager Leivo, Director of Public Works /City Engineer Brust, Director of Recreation Pekkain, Youth Services Specialist Park, Community Resource Specialist Vander Vennet, and Tobacco Project Coordinator Woodward Approval of Minutes Upon motion by Councilmember Hopkins, seconded by Councilmember Hollingsworth, with two corrections by Councilman Reilly to 1) change his comment in second paragraph, second sentence on page 9 to "it would take equal courage to be on the negative or positive side" and 2) at the bottom of page 12 to add the second by Councilman Hopkins for Resolution No. 92 -52, the minutes of March 10, 1991 were unanimously approved as submitted. Approval of Bills Upon motion by Councilmember Hopkins, seconded by Councilmember Hollingsworth, and unanimously approved, the bills presented per the attached list in the amount of $610,637.95 were approved. CDA bills presented per the attached list in the amount of $171,909.07 were approved. Non- agendaed There was no acknowledgment by Councilmembers or staff of any matters non - agendaed items to add to the agenda. Unscheduled Public Mayor Spiro stated that in compliance with State Law (The Appearances Brown Act), anyone in the audience who wished to make a comment may do so at this time. In most cases under legislation of the new Brown Act, the Council cannot handle an item without agendizing. To ensure accurate recording, "Speaker Cards" are provided at the entrance of the Chamber and unscheduled public appearances are requested to fill out the cards and present to recording clerk after speaking. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (2) March 24, 1992 Paul Golis Paul Golis, 202 Sundown Road, Thousand Oaks, Ca. 91360 said he had two matters to address regardinq 1) reversion of certain property rights to the City and 2) presentation of Simi Valley ordinance pertaining to Neighborhood Councils, as an approach for Rohnert Park to consider, expanding on concerns he expressed at the previous Council meeting. Regarding the first item, Mr. Golis said he holds a reversionary right to approximately 23 acres of City land where the sewer plant is sited, wherein terms were stated that, if the property were to be used otherwise, it would revert back to the Rohnert Park Industrial Development Corporation to which he is heir. Mr. Golis said he was asked by the City Manager to discuss the matter regarding proposed intention of the property to build a new animal shelter to replace an existing shelter that is also on said property. W. Golis confirmd his agreement to the proposal and said the project should not be delayed. The Animal Shelter people are doing an efficient job that is necessary and needed. Mr. Golis said he plans to execute a deed exenQting the property upon which the City plans to build the new animal shelter, plus a reasonable portion of land for expansion at no cost to the City for that purpose. He said he was hoping that the project could be accelerated. Mayor Spiro expressed appreciation to W. Golis on behalf of the Council and community, as well as the benefit to the animals, for his cooperation and generosity regarding this matter. W. Golis said his second item to review expanded on his remarks at the previous Council meeting relating to the City's deficit and Council decision to continue programs that caused the deficit. W. Golis shared contents of his written remarks (copy attached to original set of these minutes) expressing his concerns regarding this matter and recommendations toward establishing Neighborhood Councils in Rohnert Park similar to Simi Valley. He distributed to Council copies of Simi Valley flyers, Neighborhood Council By -Laws, and ordinance relating to the establishment of Neighborhood Councils (copies also attached to original set of these minutes). C O N S E N T C A L E N D A R Mayor Spiro queried if anyone had any questions regarding the matters on the Consent Calendar which were explained in the City Manager's Council Meeting Nbmo. City Manager Netter referenced Resolution No. 92 -58 and said the City did have a protest from the second lowest bidder, Mike Brown Electric Company, due to lowest bidder's failure to list subcontractors for specific line items. Mr. Netter indicated that a lump sum for several of the line item was consolidated and are being completed by one contractor was noted in the lowest bid from F. B., Inc. and, therefore, net the criteria of the bid specifications. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (3) March 24, 1992 Acknowledging the City Manager /Clerk's report on the posting of the agenda. Resolution No.92 -54 RESOLUTION COMMENDING DELANE E. PATTON ON THE OCCASION OF HIS RETIREMENT Resolution No.92 -55 A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO ARCH STEWART Resolution No.92 -56 A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CONGRATULATING THE COUNCIL ON AGING OF SONOMA, COUNTY ON ITS SILVER ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION AND PROCLAIMING JUNE 13, 1992 AS "COUNCIL ON AGING DAY" IN THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Resolution No.92 -57 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK DESIGNATING THE MONTH OF APRIL 1992 AS "EARTHQUAKE PREPAREDNESS NDNTH" Resolution No.92 -58 A RESOLUTION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT, "A" PARK BALLFIELD LIGHTING, PROJECT NO. 1990 -5 Resolution No.92 -59 A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACTS (COMBINATION SEWER AND STORM DRAIN RODDING AND VACULM CLEAN -UP VEHICLE) Resolution No.92 -60 A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACTS (EXERCISE EQUIPMENT FOR THE EXERCISE ROOM IN THE NEW PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING) Upon motion by Councilmember Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilmember Hopkins, the Consent Calendar as outlined on the meeting's agenda was unanimously approved. Scheduled Public Appearance: Hazel Brubaker Hazel Brubaker, 959 Hacienda Circle, representative for Council on Aging of Sonoma County, said she was here tonight regarding the above resolution on the Consent Calendar proclaiming June 13, 1992 as "Council on Aging Day ". She invited Councilmembers to the ice cream social to be held on this date at Alicia Park and said the cones will be 25 cents each in recognition of the 25th /Silver Anniversary Celebration. Mayor Spiro extended congratulations to the Council on Aging for its Silver Anniversary and expressed appreciation for the invitation to Council to attend the ice cream social celebrating the event. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (4) March 24, 1992 SQUIRES Program Jim Park, Department of Public Safety Youth Services Spe- cialist, said copies were provided to Council of pamphlet entitled "S.Q.U.I.R.E.S. -San Quentin's Utilization of Inmate Resources, Experiences and Studies ". He shared contents therein to explain the program, including comments reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo, and responded to various Council questions regarding same. Mr. Park further explained the program and invited Councilmembers to observe the program for themselves by attending the next scheduled programs on July 11 & 18, 1992 at San Quentin. Councilman Reilly asked Jim Park to sign him up for the next SQUIRES program. Councilman. Reilly noted that Jim Park is sending a letter of appreciation to the Warden at San Quentin and made a motion, seconded by Councilman Eck, and unanimously approved, directing a letter also be written over the Nbyor's signature to let the Warden and participants of the program know that people do appreciate the program. Parks and Recreation City Nbnager Netter said copies were provided to Council of matters: staff report dated March 12, 1992 from the Recreation 1) Hot Weather Department regarding Hot Weather Policy at City Pools pursuant Policy at to recent Council request. He said Recreation Director City Pools Pekkain was available at tonight's meeting to respond to Council questions regarding this matter. Discussion followed during which Councilman Hollingsworth recommended flexibility in pool policy to accommodate weekday swimming on the rare occasions due to hot weather, even if other programs are interrupted for a day or two. Recreation Director Pekkain responded to Council inquiries and reviewed the history of the current policy. Council concurred this item to be an administrative matter and directed City Nbnager to work with Director Pekkain regarding matters related to the policy and encouraged flexibility in the Hot Weather Policy at City Pools. 2 ) Rancho Cotate City Mmmaer Netter referenced cot)ies urovided to Council of High School staff memo dated March 18, 1992 with various attachments "Spirit Leaders" regarding Rancho Cotate High School "Spirit Leaders" request for funds in the amount of $660.00, and shared contents therein as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo. W. Netter said the Parks and Recreation Commission has recommended approval of this request to be used for travel expenses to the National Cheerleading competition in Los Angeles, March 27 -29, 1992. He responded to Council inquiry that this request is in keeping with City policy. A motion was made by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Eck, funding in the amount of $660.00 to Rancho Cotate High School "Spirit Leaders" was unanimously approved as recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (5) March 24, 1992 Sonoma County City Manager Netter said copies were provided to Council of Tennis Assn. re. letter with attachments dated March 8, 1992 from Sonoma County 1992 Open Tennis Tennis Association requesting financial assistance toward Championships the Open Tennis Championships to be held from June 27 to July 5, 1992. He responded to Council questions that funding in the amount of $500 each year has been provided to the Association for the past three years, but this item was not discussed at the last budget session and, therefore, funds were not provided in the 1991 -92 City budget for this year's event. Mr. Netter introduced Jay Potter, Executive Director of Sonoma County Tennis Association and said he was available to respond to further Council questions regarding this matter. Councilman Hopkins made a motion, seconded by Councilman Eck, and unanimously approved, to refer this funding request from the Sonoma County Tennis Association to the Parks and Recreation Commission for consideration and recommendation based on procedures as previously established. Mayor Spiro recommended to W. Potter that the Sonoma County Tennis Association provide information for future funding requests to the City by the end of May to enable participation in the normal budget cycle. Pot Bellied Pigs Mayor Spiro said the item regarding pot bellied pigs will be continued to the April 14th Council meeting, pending Planning Commission action. Tobacco matters City Manager Netter displayed a plaque for Council's observation as an example of one currently being given to all businesses in the community that are participating in the smoke -free tobacco program. Mayor Spiro leaves Mayor Spiro left the Council Chamber at approximately 7:02 p.m. due to a conflict of interest regarding this agenda item. City Manager Netter said copies were provided to Council of letter dated March 18, 1992 from STAMP (Stop Tobacco Access for Minors Project) that was received after publication of tonight's agenda and, therefore, not reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo. He shared contents therein listing support from the Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce Executive Comnittee, Food 4 Less, the Price Club, and K -Mart, and reviewed the minor modifications recommended in the draft tobacco ordinance, which was submitted for Council's consideration at its previous meeting. The changes included lettering require- ment of at least 1" high on posting signs, and various word changes throughout the context of the ordinance exempting cartons of cigarettes, cigars and pipe tobacco from the ban on self - service merchandising and sales, but specifying that said ban applies to "single cigarettes, single packs of cigarettes, and containers of smokeless tobacco (chewing tobacco and snuff) ". Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (6) March 24, 1992 City Mhnager Netter said a public hearing has been scheduled at this time, pursuant to Council's direction, to receive input regarding the possible adoption of the above - referenced ordinance to regulate the sale of tobacco products to minors. Public Hearing Vice Mayor Hollingsworth opened the public hearing at approximately 7:06 p.m. Sonoma County For the record, copies were provided to Council of letter Associates for dated March 18, 1992 from Cecelia Belle, Executive Director of Youth Development Sonoma County Associates for Youth Development expressing support for the passage of the proposed tobacco ordinance pertaining to youth (copy attached to original set of these minutes). Chris Hartigan Chris Hartigan, 7287 Cairo Court, said she was president of the local chapter of the Heart and Lung Association, a practicing nurse, and parent of two teen - agers. She requested Council's approval of the ordinance regulating the sale of tobacco products to minors for many reasons. Smoking is a major cause of heart disease, is responsible for 87% of victims of lung cancer and the number one killer of Amer i can women. 90% of all smokers started by age nineteen. Cutting down on ways of getting nicotine products will help prevent availability to our youth. Even though the responsibility as a parent is realized, speaking for herself and other parents, the help of Council is needed in regard to limiting access of nicotine products to minors. As an oncology nurse, she has experienced the fight with lung cancer in many cases. Such patients have repeatedly shared with her that it was impossible for them to "kick the habit" after they started smoking, and the main message all of them have expressed the desire to give to others is "don't start ". Information from the American Cancer Society has established that smoking is a major problem in our society. Dawna Gallagher Dawna Gallagher, 7342 Rasmussen Way, said she was speaking as Chairperson of Government Relations Committee for Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce. She said she participated in the Local Government Subcommittee of the Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce that met. rerrarrIi nrr '---- -- - -y tii i c m a + + .vr , ti a a w_- T _ t � %t uy .J UUy Erickson, Comnmity Education Specialist of STAMP that worked to establish a voluntary effort on the part of local merchants and businesses. The Subcommittee took the matter to the Chambers Executive Committee which unanimously supported the ordinance regulating the sale and distribution of tobacco products to protect minors because it does not infringe on other tobacco sales, but helps enforce the law already established to prevent tobacco sales to minors. Councilman Hollingsworth responded to Ms. Gallagher's comments and said it would be helpful to the City if the Chamber of Commerce would provide a letter showing its support of this tobacco ordinance so the City has something on record that can be put in the files. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (7) March 24, 1992 There being no one further desiring to speak, Vice Mayor Hollingsworth closed the public hearing at approximately 7:10 p.m. Discussion followed during which City Attorney Flitner responded to Council inquiry that there would be no problem with introducing the ordinance tonight specifying above - referenced proposed amendments to be included in the ordinance at the time of its adoption at the next Council meeting. Councilman Hollingsworth said, if the ordinance is introduced, the motion should include notification by mail of the proposed ordinance and provide a copy of same to all businesses that make tobacco sales. Councilman Hopkins compared this tobacco ordinance to attempts to regulate and restrict alcohol in this country. He questioned governm--nt interference and enforcement of such an ordinance. Ordinance No. 555 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REGULATING THE SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS TO PROTECT MINORS Upon motion by Councilman Eck, seconded by Councilman Reilly, with stipulation that an additional public hearing will be scheduled at the next Council meeting, wherein consideration will be given to adoption of the tobacco ordinance, and all affected businesses noticed accordingly, reading of Ordinance No. 555 was waived and said ordinance was introduced by the following vote: AYES: (3) Councilman Eck, Hollingsworth, and Reilly NOES: (1) Councilman Hopkins ABSENT: (1) Mayor Spiro Mayor Spiro returns Mayor Spiro returned to the Council Chamber at approximately 7:15 p.m. DOROTHY ROHNERT SPRECKELS PERFORMING ARTS CENTER: Rohnert Park Symphony - City Manager Netter updated Council on the Rohnert Park Symphony matter as reviewed in the Council Meeting Nbmo pertaining to Council's direction at its previous meeting that a proposal be submitted to the City by tonight's meeting outlining the Symphony's interest in creating a non - profit corporation for its operations. This direction was prompted by the receipt of preceding resignation letter from Symphony Conductor J. Karla Lemon, as well as numerous letters from citizens requesting the City's assistance to help speed up the non - profit procedure for the symphony and retention of J. Karla Lemon as Symphony Conductor. Copies were provided to Council of City Manager's letter to Ms. Lemon dated March 11, 1992 requesting a complete proposal outlining her interest in creating a non - profit corporation for the operation of the symphony, along with a detailed explanation as to what was expected from the City. Ms. Lemon responded to the letter via communication with City Manager Pro - Tempore Brust, in the absence of City Manager Netter, followed by her Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (8) March 24, 1992 letter dated March 13, 1992 (copies provided to Council) signifying that she was not interested in submitting a proposal, but that two Rohnert Park volunteers were spearheading the effort, namely Thomas and Suzanne Anderson. Copies were also provided to Council of the referenced proposal from the Andersons dated March 19, 1992 outlining their approach to the creation of a 501(c)3 non - profit status for the Symphony (copy attached to original minutes). City NLanager Netter said this proposal was not in the context of what the City had originally discussed, but was a fund raising type of corporation to augment what the City is currently doing so the Symphony would have funds to pay participants. Mayor Spiro said the Symphony Council Committee, comprised of herself and Councilman Eck, net to review the status of the symphony which was to be considered and split off as a non - profit corporation, kept under the non- profit status. Prior to the recent hullabaloo and articles in the press, the Council Committee had already discussed the possibility of separating the symphony into a non - profit entity for fund raising purposes. The City has filed for a 501(c)3 which may accommodate a separate structure for "Friends of the Symphony" to act as a vehicle for separate fund raising. THis umbrella corporation would accommodate separate committees with separate control, one for the Symphony, the Stage Company, and the ballet. This plan would be parallel with SSU's system whereby academic funds are free to set up its scholarship account, but does not have to set up coverage on administrative costs. Mayor Spiro said, as a Committee Member, she recommended moving forward in this direction. Councilman Eck agreed, but suggested the structure accommodate future symphonies, if Karla Lemon decided to leave. NLayor Spiro said public comments could be made at this time. Darrell Wore - Darrell Wore, 190 Queens Lane, Petaluma, Ca., said he was a member of the Rohnert Park Symphony, shared contents of the above - referenced proposal letter dated March 22, 1992 from the Symphony (copy attached to original set of these minutes) confirming willingness to proceed as outlined. He said, from above Council Committee report, that it seemed efforts were being made toward establishing the non - profit corporation for the entire Performing Arts Center. Mr. Wore said he was not sure he could speak for the orchestra as it exists now, but it seemed reasonable to him to proceed as reco nded. He said the orchestra is basically willing to put its faith in additional funds from its audience, but needs to know that it will be able to keep those funds that do come in specifically for the orchestra. Council Committee Member Eck responded to Mr. Nbore's convents that the desire of the Committee is to put something in place as quickly as possible that would enable giving the Symphony a separate board within the City's existing non - profit status, which should be done for whatever symphony is in place. He said two things need to be done, namely, clear up the non- profit status and negotiate what has been said here tonight by working with the Symphony regarding its proposal letter. Discussion followed. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (9) March 24, 1992 A motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilman Eck, and unanimously approved, for Council Committee and staff to proceed with Symphony negotiations after meeting with City Attorney Flitner to work out preliminaries on the non - profit status procedures. Terrie Baune Terrie Baune, P. O. Box 856, Occidental, Ca. 95465, said she attended Rohnert Park Cultural Arts meetings wherein she essentially understood, from Director trice's explanations, that the sole purpose for establishing the umbrella for Cultural Arts Corporation non - profit status was to set up funds in the General Fund. She said if negotiating conditions are the same as they were several months ago, then it is meaningless to proceed unless provisions can be made for the Symphony to receive funds from public and private foundations. Discussion followed whereby Council and staff answered questions to clear up the confusion. J. Karla Lemon J. Karla Lemon, 33 Edge Croft Road, Kensington, Ca. 94707, expressed appreciation to Council for all the time given this matter, which she said was beautifully sumned up in the above closing comments. Ms. Lemon said she was willing to commit to one more transitional year and willing to continue negotiations in the hopes of working out a proposal that can make both the City and the Symphony happy. RECESS Mayor Spiro declared a recess at approximately 7:39 p.m. RECONVENE Mayor Spiro reconvened the Council meeting at approximately 7:52 p.m. with all Councilmembers present. Pride in Rohnert Park Programs: 1) Christmas in City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council of April Program staff report dated January 8, 1992 regarding the "Christmas in April" program and shared contents therein as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo. He said it is a one -day "blitz" to repair and rehabilitate homes in the older areas of towns and unites people from the community in an effort to assist those in need. W. Netter said staff recommends contacting various service clubs in the community to see if an organization can be found to spearhead this endeavor. A motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilman Eck, and unanimously approved, directing staff to contact various community service clubs regarding interest to spearhead the Christmas in April program as recommended by staff. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (10) March 24, 1992 2) A & B Sections City Manager Netter said copies were provided to Council of Driveway Survey staff report dated October 28, 1991 regarding "A" & "B" Section Driveway Survey and shared contents as reviewed in the Council Nbeting Memo explaining percentage of homes affected in the referenced areas, severity of damage, and estimated cost of repair at the various levels. He said this item has been discussed previously and there are some funds in the Redevelopment Agency that could be utilized for these needed improvements. Mr. Netter recommended this item be reviewed during the upcoming budget sessions in July wherein staff could develop a program like grants through the Community Development Agency. He responded to Council inquiry that consideration of low interest loans could be incorporated into the program as part of the review during budget sessions. Council agreed this matter should be reviewed during the next budget sessions. Ordinance No. 556 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AMENDING CHAPTER 2.60 OF THE ROHNERT PARK "ICIPAL CODE TO PROVIDE FOR CURRENT REGULATION AND STANDARDS GOVERNING CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA POLITICAL REFORM ACT City Attorney Flitner reviewed the Conflict of Interest laws with City Council and how it applies to elected officials. He suggested that Councilmembers call him directly regarding whether or not a particular situation could be a conflict of interest, since it is hard to review this matter explicitly. He then explained the ordinance as reviewed in his memorandum dated March 5, 1992 with his attached letter dated February 18, 1992 and responded to various Council questions regarding same. Mr. Flitner recommended amending the Minicipal Code to include updates in the California Political Reform Act to provide current regulations and standards regarding conflicts of interest. Discussion followed during which Councilman Hopkins said he would vote no on this issue until State standards are the same as those put on local officials because it is hypocritical to put requirements on city officials that. are not -.-,+- on the State legislators or, in other words, have one set of standards for themselves and another set for us. Councilman Eck responded that since this matter was passed by the voters, it would seem the legislators would be under the same requirements, and the reason it was passed. Upon motion by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilman Reilly, reading of Ordinance No. 556 was waived and said ordinance was introduced by the following vote: AYES: (4) Councilmen Eck, Hollingsworth, Reilly and Mayor Spiro NOES: (1) Councilman Hopkins ABSENT: (0) None Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (11) March 24, 1992 Transportation Director of Public Works /City Engineer Brust said copies were matters: provided to Council of letter dated February 27, 1992 sent to Proposed Trip various businesses with attached Transportation Trip Reduction Reduction Ordinance Ordinance for consideration at tonight's scheduled public hearing. He shared contents therein, including comments reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo regarding mandated State law that a Trip Reduction Ordinance be adopted by May 2, 1992 by local agencies to become eligible to receive Section 2105 gas tax funds allocated under the recently voter - approved Proposition 116 legislation. W. Brust responded to various Council questions regarding the proposed ordinance. Discussion followed during which Councilman Hopkins questioned administrative costs and Councilman Eck said he would like to see SSU added to the list because that campus is becoming a sea of parking lots. W. Brust said it is recommended that schools participate, but cannot mandate schools. Councilman Eck said it goes back to previous statement by Councilman Hopkins that the State can place mandates on the City, but the City cannot place mandates on the State. Council reviewed the percentage of trip survey response rate with staff recon rendation to change from 80% to 60% with comments that the "desired goal" should be stipulated 100 %, even if it might not be obtainable, to fully encourage the 100% participation. Public Hearing Mayor Spiro opened the public hearing at approximately 8:17 p.m. Dawna Gallagher Dawna Gallagher, 7342 Rasmussen Way, said she was here on behalf of the Government Relations Committee for Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce wiaich called a meeting of about twelve representatives of various businesses to examine this proposed TRIP ordinance and met on March 6 as well as attending the scheduled meeting held on March 9 regarding this matter. These businesses included Fireman's Fund, Hewlett Packard, Rohnert Park School District, State Farm, and Chamber of Government Relations, to name a few. Realistic measures were requested with comments that most of these larger businesses were already doing the best they can at reducing the number of trips and have already set up programs to help with traffic congestion. Some have worked successfully with RIDES. The conclusion was that they were already contributing in efforts toward traffic reduction and felt 60% participation was a reachable and obtainable goal. The recommended 1.2 ratio number for average occupants per vehicle came from this group. Ms. Gallagher said this group of businesses requested that she be here tonight to represent their report to Council. This recommendation for minimum standards was felt to be the best they can do right now with cost being a big factor. However, this would be one more step in the right direction. There being no one further desiring to speak, Mayor Spiro closed the public hearing at approximately 8:24 p.m. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (12) March 24, 1992 Discussion followed during which Council questioned the logic of reducing the percentage rate of the desired goal for the trip survey response to 60% and responded to Ms. Gallagher's request that this rate does not refer to 100% trip reduction participation, but simply to the number of employees responding to an annual survey. Each business should strive for a 100% trip "survey response" rate as a "desired" goal, whether or not achieved due to employee absence, neglect, etc. Such a survey simply provides a way for those people that contribute to, or complain about, traffic congestion to at least participate in analysis toward solutions. A motion was made by Councilman Hopkins to introduce the TRIP Reduction Ordinance but to delete D and E pertaining to designation of a "Transportation Administrator" for implementation, unless the State is willing to pay the cost for administering that service, and establish the desired goal for trip survey response rate at 100 %. Director of Public Works /City Engineer explained that D & E referenced in the above motion is required by the Transportation Authority, without which the City would not be meeting requirements to be eligible to receive Section 2105 transportation funds allocated under Proposition 116. This would amount to an annual lose of approximately $150,000. Councilman. Eck seconded the above motion by Councilman Hopkins without deletion of sections D and E. Councilman Hopkins said the problem is it is going to cost the City more than $150,000 somewhere down the line and withdrew his motion to delete sections D & E, but changed his motion to sunset this ordinance making it null and void when administra- tive costs exceed revenues received from 2105 funds. Discussion followed. Councilman Eck confirm his second without the deletion of D and E, but with a sunset clause. Ordinance No. 557 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AMENDING TITLE 10 VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC OF THE R(li-NE"RT PARK T,I I r l 7-) 7% rODli ADOPTING TRIP RED(=ION AND TRAVEL DEMAND REQUIRsvENTS Upon above motion by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Eck, with sunset clause to reconsider this ordinance when costs exceed results and establishing 100% trip survey response rate as a desired goal, reading of Ordinance No. 557 was waived and said ordinance was introduced by the following vote: AYES: (3) Councilmen Eck, Hopkins and Mayor Spiro NOES: (2) Councilmen Hollingsworth and Reilly ABSENT: (0) None Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (13) March 24, 1992 Seed Farm Drive City Attorney Flitner referenced copies provided to Council of Petition re. proposed Initiative Measure regarding extension of Seed Farm Initiative Measure Drive as reviewed in the Council Meeting D&-w. He said the question was raised at the previous Council meeting regarding the legality of amending the General Plan through the ballot initiative process. He said the referendum measure can be placed on the ballot and conpared the case involving Walnut Creek in 1990. The Council has some discretion since growth issues usually uphold the voting power of the people and it is questionable whether or not the courts would deny the referendum because this was a growth control measure. Mr. Flitner referenced a court decision on another unnamd case and said, if Council wishes to test it, he thought the proper way to proceed would be to file in Court under Declaratory Relief, or Council may wish to let it go. He said the General Plan was adopted and unchallenged pertaining to the referenced Seed Farm Drive extension and that would be the issue regarding this measure. Discussion followed during which City Attorney Flitner responded to Council questions that, assuming the petition is successful, it would be placed on the General Election Ballot rather than calling for Special Election. Regarding the reference to an error on the Proof of Publication for the initiative measure in the amount of $5 million instead of $500,000, Mr. Flitner said the validity would be challenged if not submitted properly or if it does not follow procedure, but that would be considered procedural rather than circumstantial. Council confirmed the right of citizens to circulate petitions. City Manager Netter said no Council action was necessary on this item unless it wanted to send it to the courts. He confirmed no action would siqnify title acceptance of the referendum measure and a Declaratory Relief Action could be filed. Open Space District Councilman Eck referenced copies of flyers and agenda packets Workshop provided to Council pertaining to the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open space District workshop held on March 19, 1992 at the Rohnert Park Council Chambers and reported on same. He said it was a good meeting, fairly well attended with lots of nice maps, and was fairly successful. Councilman Eck recommended a letter be written over the Mayor's signature expressing appreciation from Council to Dave Hansen for his efforts involved toward the preparation and success of this workshop. Council agreed. Councilman Hopkins said he is a firm believer of paying for open space through the Open Space District as this plan proposes. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (14) March 24, 1992 General Plan matters: City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council of 1) Mitigation General Plan Mitigation Monitor Annual Report for May 1, 1990 Nbnitor to June 30, 1991 and shared comments as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo. He said this is the first Annual Report the City has had for its growth General Plan which summarizes the items completed. Discussion followed during which City Manager Netter responded to various Council questions regarding the referenced report confirming suggestion that space could have been better utilized by putting two reports on one page, and the statement "report is missing" inferred there was no activity for that item. Mayor Spiro suggested putting page numbers at the bottom on future reports for easier reference. She referred to the Land Use Element and anticipated growth of 40,000 in connection with High School capacity and said she just wanted to make sure the City would be under that figure. City Manager Netter confirmed 1991 Census population was 36,986. Mayor Spiro referenced page 13 of General Plan Update and questioned the meaning of the term "by" in the statement "will investigate and evaluate up to 1300 housing units by ". City Manager Netter responded the term means "up to" the time specified. Councilman Hollingsworth commented that since what the City is doing now is considered part of the condition "by 1995 ", then the current process is following the General Plan. Mayor Spiro referenced Chapter 14 on Housing regarding "the City will investigate to fill specific housing needs" and asked if the City would be doing that by staging. Councilman Eck asked if the City met the principle goal, as he did not see information regarding that in the report. Councilman Reilly said the report talks about "investigate and evaluate" but does not talk about "building ". Councilman Hollingsworth said he had asked the City Attorney to prepare a response regarding the General Plan process because there's been a lot of articles written in the newspaper that are half truths, having one -sided information that is not true, indicating that the City is going to violate the population stipulation of 40,000. He said even if the City did go with the proposed annexation project, the population would not exceed 40,000, and he wanted to know if there is any danger of putting the City in the same position it was in prior to the Sierra Club lawsuit. City Attorney Flitner °,u — vv^ ^pies 'vvcrc prvVlded to Council of his l memorandum dated March 24, 1992 responding to Councilman Hollingsworth's inquiry regarding whether the City has done anything illegal, or whether City Attorney was aware of anything it proposes to do that is illegal in the upcoming General Plan update. W. Flitner shared contents of the memo (copy attached to original set of these minutes) establishing that, as far as he is concerned, there's been nothing done that would circumvent the law. Mayor Spiro said copies were provided to Council of her memo dated March 24, 1992 regarding the General Plan Update (copy attached to original set of these minutes). She read contents therein responding to suggestion of citizens at the recent Town Meeting that the General Plan process should be stopped inTrediately, contending that there should not be General Plan debates until around 1995. The memo Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (15) March 24, 1992 explained, in her interpretation by reading the General Plan, that the General Plan does not contain a promise that the City will not revise the General Plan until 1995, but it does state that there would be a thorough General Plan review and update if and before land is annexed. Discussion followed during which Councilman. Eck said Council made its decision regarding a General Plan update and he did not see the need for further statements to be made regarding the matter. Councilman Hopkins said it is true that one newspaper has not done a very accurate job reporting on this situation and it is clear that there is disagreement, but it is still necessary to proceed. 2) Staff Reports: Assistant to the City Manager Leivo said the newly formed a) General Plan General Plan Committee held its first meeting on March 16, Committee 1992 with Councilmen Hollingsworth and Eck in attendance. The Meeting Committee elected Barbara Mackenzie as Chairperson and Armando Flores as Vice Chairman. Meetings will be held on the 2nd and 4th Nbnday of each month, plus a meeting has been scheduled b) Town Nbeting for March 30th, wherein review of the Town Meeting held on March 21 will be included on the agenda. Discussion followed during which Mayor Spiro asked if the Committee could be shown a copy of the original survey whereby citizens established the 40,000 to 50,000 population limit, which is important information revealing Council's decision to set the number at 40,000 even though citizen consent was between 40,000 and 50,000. Assistant to the City Manager Leivo confirmed the results of that survey could be made available to the Committee and said the General Plan Committee will also be reviewing additional surveys. Councilman Hopkins said it needs to come out that several people have told him they do not want to retrofit houses in A or B neighborhoods, and it should be clarified that anyone interested in retrofitting will have the opportunity, but no one will be forced to do it, even though it could be in the best interest of everyone. as he understands it, under the Condiotti proposal, all retrofitting is totally voluntary. Council Committee Member Hollingsworth confirmed that he and Council Committee Member Eck met with the General Plan Committee and said he wanted to compliment them on taking on this task that will not be easy. W. Hollingsworth said their efforts will not go unnoticed, their time and energy is appreciated, and Council looks forward to their recommendations. 3) Earth Nbtrics, Inc. - Contract Proposal City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council and explained the resolution and contract with Earth Metrics, Inc. provide consulting services relative to the preparation of a thorough update of the General Plan as reviewed in the Council Nbeting Memo. Discussion followed during which Councilman Reilly referenced C. Michael Hogan's attached Statement of Work and pointed out that part of their work scopes listed under Public Participation can be compilation of technical data from City staff research. He questioned the procedure for estimating hours for research and said it has been Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (16) March 24, 1992 his experience that any kind of work done on compilation and technical data is usually not included in estimates. Assistant to the City Manager Leivo responded that this matter was addressed specifically during negotiations and confirmed the two items brought up represent a compromise between the two positions, and that the research work will be shared by staff and the Consultants. Discussion followed. Mayor Spiro queried if consideration could be given to doing a "not to exceed amount ". City Manager Netter said the proposal is based on an hourly rate and that the $21,000 is an estimate based on the number of meetings proposed with flexibility of type of meetings since the contract does not specify type of meetings, but rather the number of meetings. Acknowledgment was given that there would be further opportunity for Council to review instructions regarding this matter. Mr.Van Hoesen - Mr. Van Hoesen, resident from M section, said he attended the General Plan Town Meeting last Saturday and thought that Earth Metrics was going to make a presentation to City Council at tonight's meeting regarding the comments of the Town Meeting. He said that certain people want this update stopped with no further annexation. Discussion followed among the Council on the accuracy of printed materials on this matter in the local newspaper from which Mr. Van Hoesen was basing his facts. Discussion continued on the additional students this proposed area would generate with confirmation that the Cotati- Rohnert Park Unified School District has taken this area into account in its projection for "M" School. A motion was made by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Hollingsworth, and unanimously approved to call for the question. Resolution A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROPOSAL FROM EARTH METRICS, INC. AND No. 92 -62 AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT Upon motion. by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Hollingsworth, reading of Resolution No. 92 -62 was waived and said resolution was adopted by the following vote: AYES: (4) Councilmen Eck, Hopkins; Hollingsworth; an3 Mayor Spiro NOES: (1) Councilman Reilly ABSENT: (0) None SEWAGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL SERVICE - Proposed Rate Increases City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council, as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo, of resolution for consideration regarding proposed rate increase for sewage treatment and disposal service with attached staff report dated March 5, 1992 and letter dated February 21, 1992 from the City of Santa Rosa regarding the Anticipated 1992 Bond Sale for the Long -Term Wastewater Project. He said a public hearing was scheduled on tonight's agenda following a presentation by representatives of the Santa Rosa Subregional System to explain the anticipated bond sale as part of the long term wastewater project. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (17) March 24, 1992 Director of Public Works /City Engineer Brust introduced Dan Carlson, Capital Project Coordinator, City of Santa Rosa. Mr. Carlson proceeded with the above- referenced presentation and said Santa Rosa is currently in the process of selling the first bond issue at 21% share. The estimated $35 million is actually approximately $32.5 million. The proposed date of sale is April 2nd, 1992 in New York. The intent of the bond purchase was to raise $30 million. $2.5 million is the issuance cost of those bonds. A substantial portion is earmarked for right of way reservoir site, reuse options are recognized, and $2.5 million is for design improvements included in the project. The first of those project is the Wastewater Treatment Plant expansion work regarding future capacity to treat wastewater and is already submitted to consultants for proposals due back on August 16 with hopes to proceed early in May to expand the 18 million gallon facility to a 22 million gallon facility. This expansion will also increase Rohnert Park's ability to dispose of water at the treatment plant. This project will also assure an irrproved liability of extension requirement justified by the Regional Board through 1995 until there is a long range project in effect. Miles Ferris, Director of Utilities, City of Santa Rosa, responded to Council inquiry that the long range portion of this first bond for the design fees, which includes consideration of consultant fees, amounts to $2.5 million or about 20% of the cost. Santa Rosa does budget conservatively with the 20% for design and construction improvement. W. Ferris reported on procedures for selling bonds and how financial consultants are picked, timing of the bonds and credit ratings, etc. Mr. Ferris responded to various Council questions confirming that standards are going up; Healdsburg and Petaluma do not have to meet the same standards that we do since we are in the North Coast Regional Quality Control Board area and they are in other areas; in response to what percentage of the cost does the increased standards represent, it hits you two ways with O & M wherein the range is 35% to 40% in terms of operating costs and the capital costs are somewhat higher because you go to tertiary water which is very expensive; Petaluma and Sonoma do not have to meet the same requirements we do because they have conditions from the Bay Board, however, State regs will probably force them into similar requirements. W. Ferris said the percentage ratio of capacity preservation maintenance is 60% to 40% for capital expansion service. He also said the disposal part of the system is the most costly. Public Hearing - Mayor Spiro opened the public hearing at approximately 9:32 p.m. Keith Hallock - Keith Hallock, 1500 Baumgardner Lane, said he was the person with a program in effect for an affordable housing project. He asked of Santa Rosa's capacity right now, what percentage of that housing is allotted to affordable housing. Miles Ferris responded that currently there is no sewer capacity allocation to any particular housing, however, in the General Plan there is specification that first priority goes to affordable housing. There is basically enough capacity to carry the plan out to the year 1995. Discussion followed. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (18) March 24, 1992 Jake Mackenzie - Jake Mackenzie, 1536 Gladstone Way, said the residents in G section of Rohnert Park are pleased to see the Annual Mitigation Nbnitor Report for the General Plan in front of Council. He has been following additions to it and also looks forward to the EIR in the northwest portion of our City. In listening to both issues tonight, it seems there will be up to a 70% increase in rates that are going to be asked of us. What proportion of these expansions deal with increased capacity and which deal with standards of the treatment. Mr. Mackenzie noted figures in the report on the two phases regarding capacity of 18.22 million gallons per clay with projection of 22 to 25 million gallons per day, and asked if it was correct that this would take us past the year 2010, rather than the 2005 mentioned. Miles Ferris responded that 2010 was correct and said it was the intention in the City of Santa Rosa that they were going to clearly define existing users, that new capacity will be paid with connecting fees, and the City of Rohnert Park will have to figure out who is going to be paying for what. W. Mackenzie asked if he was correct in assuming that the south is dead. W. Ferris responded there could be possible fallback but the cost of $3.5 million per year is significant and must also be considered. Increase in capacity seems to be somewhat greater than when we went through the General Plan documents. There are some significant impacts. Mr. Mackenzie said, by his calculations, the City of Rohnert Park could be retrofitted for 1/2 million gallons and could actually provide 1500 units, which represented figures on a mandatory basis, and since any retrofitting would be on a voluntary basis, the City would not be doing that. So, there are actually 200 units of capacity. As of February 1992 we were using up to 3.12 million gallons per day which would take us to 1995. According to the General Plan document, the City would end up with an additional 430,000 gallons per day or 1800 units up to the year 2025, which would end up with a possible population of around 38,000 for the additional units. The conclusion, in fact is, if you look at the possible annexation along the east side of about 500 units, and if you agreed with the calculations, there is a remarkable consistency that starts to emerge. Mr. Mackenzie said he would like to suggest, as part of the General Plan update, that City Engineer Brust be asked to prepare a report for the proposed retrofitting program. W. Mackenzie said that in looking at the possible expansion of the wastewater treatment plant, at least so all of us in the community can know what we are going to be buying int.n under the enfnrrarmnt pf tha North Coast Regional Quality Control Board and, if we are looking at a possible annexation, we need to have the most accurate expansion figures in front of us. He said he would like to add, since Mr. Codding's proposal for affordable housing in on tonight's agenda, which is commendable, that other eastern boundary proposals would need further consideration. W. Mackenzie said it was very hard to follow from the totals presented. Councilman Hollingsworth said the accurate figures are important if the City goes ahead and does expand and invites future expansion, but agreed that the capacity expansion cost ought to go on to sewer connection fees and not to existing users. Therefore, in this case, only 60% should be charged to the rate payers and the 40% to developers through sewer connection fees. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (19) March 24, 1992 Councilman Hopkins said that if this proposal, through a voluntary retrofit program, does not provide additional capacity, then no permits will be issued. Discussion followed. Dawna Gallagher - Dawna Gallagher, 7342 Rasmussen Way, said she was speaking on sewer capacity directly as a citizen of Rohnert Park. She said the low income housing Senate Bill 1019 calls for the remaining amount of sewer capacity to be built for low income housing. It also calls for not discriminating against housing incomes. Ms. Gallagher recommended that the City's highest priority for use of remaining sewage capacity be for low income housing. Dave Mochel - Dave Mochel, 4405 Hollingsworth Circle, said he listened the discussion on sewer rate increases and capacity appropriations, and his perception of the problem is that these rate increases will be handed across to all the citizens of Rohnert Park. A great deal of the reason is growth and expansion of sewage capacity. Mr. Moche1 referred to Councilman Hollingsworth's previous comments that in the future, sewer connection fees would take care of the costs. Mr. Wchel said on the growth issue and the need for affordable housing, about the only time he hears affordable brought up is when a builder wants to put in a subdivision on that basis. He said he does not agree that growth helps affordability. Growth does not make the houses more affordable. 'There is a need to go one step further to see why people are being driven out of our City and County. It is important to look at both sides of affordability. Look at people being driven out of homes because of costs, as well as looking at young families that need homes. George Horwedel - George Horwedel, 7669 Camino Colegio, referred to the sentiment of Dawna Gallagher's comments regarding the remaining 200 sewer permits being used for low income housing. W. Horwedel said he thought the City should allocate them wisely. There being no one further desiring to speak, Mayor Spiro closed the public hearing at approximately 9:59 p.m. Discussion followed regarding the remaining sewer allocations and the issue of vested rights of property owners, if sewer allocations were transferred to affordable housing units. A motion was made by Councilman Hopkins to continue this meeting to 5:00 p.m. tomorrow night. Said motion died for lack of a second. Discussion followed during which City Manager Netter pointed out the need to revise proposed rate increase due to decreased total cost figure from $35 million to $32.5 million, as well as scheduling another public hearing at the next Council meeting regarding same. Council comments included request for figure comparisons to reflect usage, not expansion; review of conservation reduction for the same Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (20) March 24, 1992 capacity; review comparison of 60/40 percentage ratio whereby, if 60% represents operating costs, what needs to be done to recoup the 40% for improved standards; and review options regarding possibility of loans for people who might opt to retrofit if installment financing was available. A motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilman Eck, and unanimously approved, to continue this item when staff has accurate information from the City of Santa Rosa and computes a rate taking into consideration the 60% of costs for capacity preservation. Councilman Hollingsworth Leaves Discussion continued during which Councilman Hollingsworth left the & Chamber at approximately 10:10 p.m. and returned to the Chamber at Returns approximately 10:14 p.m. A motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilman Eck, to continue the meeting after the scheduled 10:00 p.m. adjourn- ment time to review only the next two items listed on the agenda with the remaining items to be deferred to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting, and approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: (4) Councilman Eck, Hollingsworth, Reilly and Mayor Spiro NOES: (1) Councilman. Hopkins ABSENT: (0) None Codding City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council, as reviewed Enterprises in the Council Meeting Memo, of letter dated March 10, 1992 from Proposal Codding Enterprises regarding :request for sewer capacity to build affordable housing units on west side of U. S. 101 on 7 1/2 acres south of Price Club. Hugh Codding expressed appreciation to Council for holding the meeting over for this item and introduced his wife, Connie, his son, David and Planning Consultant Charles Evans. He distributed copies to Council of memorandum with attachments regarding Expressway Apartments proposal for affordable housing (copy attached to original set of these minutes). He reminded Council that Codding Enterprises has been in the City for 25 years, built the existing sewer mains, as well as the road that is ready to go for this project. This proposal is strictly for affordable housing as stipulated in SB1019 effective January 1992. W. Codding acknowledged the shortage of sewer capacity. He said this proposal was being presented for Council's consideration when, and if affordable housing units can be built, as he did not want to lose by default when permits are approved. Discussion followed during which Mayor Spiro requested City Attorney to review more fully the details of SB1019 requiring sewer districts to give priority to projects that contribute to the supply of affordable housing. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (21) March 24, 1992 Keith Hallock - City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council, as Proposal reviewed in Council Meeting Memo, of letter dated March 16, 1992 requesting sewer capacity from Santa Rosa for proposed affordable housing project. Keith Hallock, 1500 Baumgardner Lane, distributed to Council copies of affordable housing plans proposed for an additional 40 acres to his previous proposal of 6.89 acres on Snyder Lane (copy attached to original set of these minutes). He said he had been trying to digest a lot of the comments made tonight, but what the General Plan dictates is the need for affordable housing. He reviewed comments made earlier tonight by City of Santa Rosa representative Miles Ferris regarding sewer capacity and said he would again like to ask that a letter be sent to Santa Rosa requesting the additional sewer capacity for affordable housing in Rohnert Park. Discussion followed during which Council directed City Attorney to research the provision of SB 1019 and report back when conglete. Councilman Hollingsworth- Councilman Hollingsworth left the Chamber at approximately 10:29 p.m. leaves City Manager Netter referenced letter from Sonoma County Association for Youth Development (SCAYD) requesting City's support for its submittal for 2nd year grant funding for the State. A motion was made by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Eck, and unanimously approved, to authorize a letter of support over the Mayor's signature for SCAYD 2nd year grant funding. Adjournment Mayor Spiro adjourned the meeting at approximately 10:35 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., March 31st, 1992 at Confucius Restaurant for joint meeting with School District and then to 6:30 p.m., April 6th, 1992 for joint meeting with Parks and Recreation Commission. De Ciy,C f erk Mayor 2 MOW WSW I _781_t C Se F- C eA L 1,Y of ir rE & A EA - jo/ Al C 27h E"' ofresAt., f Cdr ig Z A r_ / o (e b- a /9914 fl4,lW LO R* t, *,r-A4_C- V -r- T a Li ,�IF4MW NEW CA Ad MUNUM /C /T_ IVO W11E �inU.SA SM \ALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS 2929 Tapo Canyon Road, Simi Valley, California 93063 (805) 583 -6700 NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL BY -LAWS Axt i cee 1. Cheat i.o n There is hereby created a Neighborhood Council for each of certain designated areas, the number and area of which shall be provided by resolution of the City Council. (Sec. 2- 3.301.) An t icee 11. Putpoa e Section 1. A. The purpose of the Neighborhood Councils shall be to advise the City Council on: 1) matters affecting their neighborhood initiated by the Executive Board or requested by non - Executive Board members; and 2) issues on which the City Council has specifically requested their advice. All Neighborhood Councils, regardless of boundary lines will be required to review major development proposals of community -wide significance and advise the City Council of their findings. Neighborhood Councils shall provide for public participation and involvement in City affairs, and provide a mechanism for communication between the City Council and the public. The residents of the City shall have an opportunity to have interested, concerned, and knowledgeable individuals to represent them on a neighborhood level at official City meetings, thus building a sense of community interest and self -pride for each neighborhood so, represented. (Sec. 2- 3.302.) B. Each Neighborhood Council shall be advisory to the City Council and Planning Commission, and to other City Council advisory bodies as may be requested by the City Council and may contribute information, opinions, advice, suggestions, and recommendations to the City Council on all governmental affairs and services having an effect on the area the Neighborhood Council represents, including, but not limited to, public works, public safety, planning and zoning, and public health and sanitation. (Sec. 2- 3.302.) Section 2. Goa z The goat,6 oS Ai4 non -pro6 t, non- PaAtiaan ongan.c'zati,on are: A. To provide an ongoing opp"twlity Son citizen .input in .the deci.4.ion- mak,c;ng pnoce64 os xlievc government in a po4.ctive and productive manner. B. To ptov.ide a mechan.i4m which Sac t tatea communication between City government and the citizen4. C. To encourage eitizen4 to develop an unde"tandi.ng o6 the needs and expeeta tion4 o6 the entiAe community and an undeu tanding o6 City government and the c ti,zena. �. To encourage c t zen4 to identisy ne- ighborhood and to a44.c.6.t in the deveZopment and .imptementa ionto 4 and needs, which re4pond to .these ptobtem4 and needs. 6 pnogram4 E. To encourage citizen4 to undeh/a.ke action prms which improve the ph y4 iea� and 4oeeaZ env ueonment os theuc ogra neighborhoo4. F. To encourage a 4p A t o6 coopeeAation and r among goo residenta 0 each neighbohood. i A&t cte III. Membership Section 1. Each Neighborhood Council shall consist of residents eighteen (18) years of age or older residing within the defined boundaries of a Council area. Those individuals not residing within the City limits but living within the City's area of interest may participate as members of the Neighborhood Council. (Sec. 2- 3.303.) Att rea.edente o6 a Neighborhood Counci,e area, 18 years o6 age or otder, are automati,ca,toey members o6 the Couneit. Section 2. No resident shall be a member of more than one Neighborhood Council in the City. declaration member may v;,te at a Neighborhood Council meeting, s /he shall file a declaration with the secretary declaring his /her address and that s /he is not a member of any other Neighborhood Council in the City. (Sec. 2- 3.303.) Section 3. No rez iden t wit be P%ohib,i ted Srom membership on the Neighborhood Counci,Z on Neighborhood Council Executive Board 4.tni,ct4 on the bas.ce os maAitat 4tatu4, or beeau4e they ree.i,de within the flame tuidence. An tic ee IV. On ganizat i.o n Section 1. A Neighborhood Council shall be comprised of the general membership, an Executive Board, standing committees as designated in this article and ad hoc committees as may be formed by the Neighborhood Council. (Sec. 2- 3.304.) Section 2. GENERAL MEMBERSHIP The genvcaE membwh,i,p w,iU be comprised o6`a Z the %aident6 o6 a des.ined Ne.ighbon.hood Council area. Section 3. EXECUTIVE WARD i A. Membena A minimum of seven (7) members, with a maximum of thirteen (13) members, shall be appointed by the Mayor upon the approval of the City Council to serve as the Executive Board for each Neighborhood K; Council. Only City residents may be considered for appointment to the Executive Board, and no person may be appointed to the Executive Board if the appointment to the Executive Board would constitute an incompatible holding of office prohibited by Section 1126 of the California Government Code. No person who is appointed to the Executive Board may participate in the making of any decision if the person may have a conflict of interest under 1090 et seq. of the California Government Code, 87100 et seq. of the California Government Code, or Simi Valley City Council Resolution No. 85 -150. Before a resident can be appointed, s /he must attend one of the mandatory Neighborhood Council Orientation sessions held for that appointment cycle. Members of the Executive Board shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council and may be removed from office by a majority of the five (5) members of the City Council. (Sec. 2- 3.305.a.) + B. Rupond.ib.c,e i tieb o6 the Executive Board Membw, . a. The %e6pon6ibi,R,Wes o6 Executive Board membeu aha t be: 1. To attend and ac Lively pan ti,cipate in a t neguean, generae and apec,i.aZ meeti.nga of the Neighborhood Councite. 2. To aenve on, at teat, one 6tanding on ad hoc committee. 3. To participate in Neiighbonhood Counc U acti.viti.eb and pnognamd . 4. To attend or.ientatti.on /fiAa fining pn.ograw. . S. To conad.6.tentty communicate au th the Cha ,% and Cooncii.naton on att matten6 os .i,nteAut to Ne ighborhood Cou.n" . 6. To insonm the Chain. and Coordinator at the ea&P, ut po64.ibte time o6 att agenda -c tem6 Son d.i,acuba.ion on action. 7. To week neti,abte complete .cnsonmati,on on aU 6ubject6. 8. To cooperate with othe -Executive. Board membeu by aha4.i,ng insormation; con6.idering other opinion6, u iti,ze each memben.'a tate.nx6 and background. 9. To act a6 a %ep,%uentati,ve o6 Neighborhood Counc,it4 .throughout, the community. 10. To be aware o6 and a66-c,4t with member6h.i,p and committee %ec4uibnent. # 11. To act a6 a hobt/ho4tu4 at geneAae and 6peccae. meetinga. 12. To patti,c.ipate in the recruitment o6 new Executive Board member6. C. Tmw a. Terms of Office All Executive Board member terms shall be for twenty -four (24) months upon appointment. One -third (1/3) of the seats on each Executive Board shall expire, and new appointments shall be made to replace such expired terms, every eight (8) months, commencing on January 31, 1983, referred to in this section as "regular appointment times." An Executive Board member whose tern is expiring or who has vacated a seat is not eligible for reappointment to a consecutive term. An individual who resigned or whose term of office expired may not be reappointed to a new term or a vacated seat until twelve (12) mnn ±hes h;ye @lapscU. (sec. 2- 3.3^a.a.) b. Vacated Seats If a seat on an Executive Board is vacated after an appointment period, an applicant may be appointed to fill such seat for a new twenty -four (24) month term at the next regular appointment time, or, if five (5) or more vacancies or applications for appointment collectively exist on the Executive Boards of the Neighborhood Councils, an interim appointment time may be scheduled by the City Council at the request of the Community Services Director. If an applicant is appointed to fill a previously vacated. term at an interim . V. E. appointment time, the twenty -four (24) month appointment shall be considered to have commenced as of the nearest prior regular appointment time and shall thereafter be considered to have been appointed to a full Executive Board term, notwithstanding that the individual may serve less than twenty -four (24) months. Members of Executive Boards whose terms have expired within the past sixteen (16) months, or who have resigned from office within the past twenty -four (24) months, may not be appointed to serve in other vacated seats. If a seat on the Executive Board is vacated after an appointment period, an applicant may be appointed to fill such seat for a new twenty -four (24) month term at the next regular appointment time, or, if five (5) or more vacancies or applications for appointment . collectively exist on the Executive Boards of the Neighborhood Councils, an interim appointment time may be scheduled by the City Council at the request of the Director of Community Services. If an applicant is appointed to fill a previously vacated term at an interim appointment time, the twenty -four (24) month appointment shall be considered to have commenced as of the nearest prior regular appointment time and shall thereafter be considered to have been appointed to a full Executive Board term, notwithstanding that the individual may serve less than twenty -four (24) months. (Sec. 2- 3.305.e.) Communi.cati,ona Members of the Neighborhood coordinate and channel all Council /Planning Commission Boards and the Neighborhood (Sec. 2- 3.305.f.) 06jici.at Repuzentati,vee Council Executive Boards shall official communications to the City through their respective Executive Council Coordinator for the City. The chairperson, or in his /her absence, the vice - chairperson or other duly appointed representative, shall be the official representative of his /her Neighborhood Council to the City Council or Planning Commission and shall represent official positions taken by his /her Neighborhood Council, provided that such representative has received the prior approval for such representation by the Neighborhood Council Chair or by a consensus of the Neighborhood Council members present at a Neighborhood Council meeting during which the item was discussed. (Sec. 2- 3.305.g.) F. Mee ing.a: Time E Ptace Each Executive Board shall establish and announce a particular time and place for its regular meetings. Special meetings as well as regular meetings shall be noticed, and agendas prepared and posted therefor, at least 72 hours in advance. (Sec. 2- 3,305.i.) J- G. 2uonum A quorum for Executive Board meetings shall consist of a majority of the membership of the Executive Board. (Sec. 2- 3.305.c.) N. Meetinga: Abaencea If a member of an Executive Board shall miss three (3) or more consecutive meetings, or 50% or more of meetings in any eight (8) month period, without a valid excuse or the approval of the other Executive Board members, the seat of such member shall be deemed immediately vacated. (Sec. 2- 3.305.j.) I. Candidates jot pub. i,c oiLice If any member of an Executive Board shall file as a candidate for election to a public office, the holding of which would be incompatible with Executive Board membership under the provisions of California Government Code Section 1126, s /he shall take a leave of absence from the Executive Board. If any member of an Executive Board shall be elected or appointed to any such foregoing described public office, his /her seat as a member of the Executive Board shall become vacant upon the assumption of the other public office. (Sec. 2- 3.305.k.) Section 4. EXECUTIVE BOARD OFFICERS A. Chair and vice - chairperson Each Executive Board shall select a chairperson and a vice - chairperson. (Sec. 2- 3.305.b.) The aetecti.on ahaZZ be made by a majority o6 the Executive Board at the second meeting Jottowing the end o$ each ataggened team. The new o66iceu 6hatt .take o66ice at the end o6 the 6etection meeting. a. The dutiea o6 the Chavcpenaon shah be: 1. To pnea.ide oven a t negu zt and a pec.iaZ mee ti.nga o6 the Executive Board and genenaZ membership. 2. To appoint aZt committeea with the apptovaZ o6 a ma9on,i ty o6 the Executive Board. 3. To develop the agenda Jon aZZ meetings in conjunction with the Ne.ighbonhood Council Coordinator. 4. To p%ov.i,de jot %epoAt6 to the appnopn late bodies o6 a2Z v.iewpo.inta expneaaed by membeA6 o6 the Ne.ighbonh.00d Council, .cnctu.ding the number o6 votes bon a t po,6itione, and any �indi.nga and /on tecommendatcon6. 5. To ptov.ide jot the comptet.ion o6- atte' pro fec to undertaken by the Ne.ighbonhood Councit. me 6. To ptov.i,de Son the writing o6 aeZ tetteAa nece66any Son Neighborhood Counc it bua.inea6 in conjunction with the Ne.ighbonhood Council CooAd i.natOA. 7. To attend Joint Cha u meeti.ng6 on behat6 o6 the Executive Board. 8. To meet montht y oA a6 necea6axy with the aa6.igned t is i aon City Counc it Member to %epoAt on and di,6cu46 Ne.ighboxhood Council acti.viti.ea at the %equeat o6 the City Counci.tZ Member. b. The duties o6 the Vice- ChaiApe Loon 6haet be: 1. To peASaAm the dut e,6 o6 the Chai& in h.i,a on heA aW ence. 2. To develop a pZan and conduct ongoing membeuh.ip AecAuitment. B. SECRETARV Each Executive Board shall appoint a secretary to keep an accurate record of all official actions of the Neighborhood Council and Executive Board and an accurate record of the number of people in attendance. (Sec. 2- 3.305.h.) a. The duti,e6 os the aecAetany 6hatt be: 1. To pAov.ide m.inu te,6 Jot a t Executive Board and Genewt meeti.ng6 . 2. To keep an accurate permanent Aott cat o6 Executive Board membeAa, genenaZ membeu, gue6t6 and 6ta6i at aZ.Z regutan. and 6pec i,aZ Executive Board and genvwl meeti.ng6. 3. To document in the' o s6.ic i.ae m.inu tea that a quoAum =4 pAeaent. „r 4. To ptovi.de noti6i.cati.on os %egulaA and 6pecia.Z Executive Board and geneAaZ meeting6 to each Executive Board membeA. Section 5. COMMITTEES A. Standing Committtee6 Each Neighborhood Council Executive Board shall appoint not less than three (3) members of the Neighborhood Council for each standing committee. An Environmental Planning Committee and a Public Safety Committee shall be standing committees for each Neighborhood Council. (Sec. 2- 3.306.) Section 3. All meetings of Neighborhood Councils and Executive Boards shall be duly noticed and open to the public. (Sec. 2- 3.307.c.) Section 4. Neighborhood Councils may act or conduct official business only at duly- called meetings operating under established procedures as set forth in this article and under the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act. (Sec. 2- 3.307.d.) Section S. Neighborhood Council recommendations to the City Council may be by written resolutions or motions adopted.by the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the Neighborhood Council voting on the issue. All communications from Neighborhood Councils to the City Council shall show the number of members supporting, opposing, and abstaining from voting upon each such resolution or motion. (Sec. 2- 3.307.e.) Section 6. All communications from Neighborhood Councils shall be approved by their respective Executive Boards. The Executive Boards shall direct communications at the request of any resident, to the City staff or City Council on behalf of such resident. No Neighborhood Council Executive Board member may use the title of Neighborhood Council Executive Board member on any form of communication unless authorized by the entire Executive Board and channeled through the Neighborhood Council Coordinator.(Sec. 2- 3.307.f.) Section 7. The Executive Board shall establish the agenda for Neighborhood Council meetings. However, at any regular meeting of a Neighborhood Council, any member may request the inclusion of any specific agenda item for specific future meetings, and upon concurrence of a majority vote of the members of the Executive Board, such item will be placed on the agenda as requested. (Sec. 2- 3.307.g.) Section 8. All meetings and activities of each Neighborhood Council shall operate under such further rules, not inconsistent with the provisions of this article, as may be established and adopted by its respective Executive Board. (Sec. 2- 3.307.h.) Anticte VI. Reta tionbhip with City Councit Section 3. Members of the City Council shall be encouraged to be present at Neighborhood Council meetings. (Sec. 2- 3.307.1.) Antiae VII. City Suppoxt Section 1. The City may provide the following services to Neighborhood Councils: A. Neighborhood Council Coordinators and other reasonable staff support as necessary to render assistance to the Neighborhood Councils and respective Executive Boards. Requests for additional staff support shall be made to the City Manager; and B. The City Manager and City Attorney, or their designees, shall be available for Neighborhood Council meetings at the request of the Executive Boards except that such requests shall reasonably relate in need and necessity to matters formally scheduled for agenda consideration. (Sec. 2- 3.307.j.) Section 2. City depaAtmentaZ 6tajj dhaU pnov.i.de, to the extent po.6.6 i.bZe, .technica.0 .injonmati,on and xepox.ta to the Neighborhood Council Executive Boated membexa and eommitteea. Such inboxmation and xeponta ahatl be concuxxentty ptov.ided to the Neighborhood Counca Cooxd,i.natox. Section 3. City 6ta6j ahatt make pxeaentationa and act as a %eaou ce at Neighborhood Councie meeti.ngz, as neeebaany. Section 4. A 6peciat ejsoxt uii.0 be made to .cnvo.tve each Neighborhood Counc i e in the eatty det berati.on ob any matter a66ecting .cta area bo that deeia.conz uZtimatety reached may u6tect the needs and expectations of the a66ected ne.cghboxhooda to the gxeateat extent pobb.ibte. Section 5. Neighborhood Councit Coordinator The Neiighboxhood Council Cooxdinatox auppoxt box Neighborhood Councitz dhatt .include the pxov.i,a.ion oS: A. Aes.iatanee with the pxepaAction and di.6tAibution o6 agendas, m.inutea, : ettexa, %epoxtz, 6tyexa, poate.na. B. L i,a,ibon with goveAnmentat agene ieb, devetopeu, .cn.div.iduata, and ongan.izati,ona engaged in bua.ineba with the City o6 Simi VaUey. C. Cooxdinati.on o6 the acti,vitie.b o6 the Council-6. D. Ruouxeea and aba.i,a#a.nee in the planning of Neighborhood Council pxograma , pno J ecta , and acti,v.c t ie,6 . � 0 Anticte V11. Cyy Suppor t Section 1. The City may provide the following services to Neighborhood Councils: A. Neighborhood Council Coordinators and other reasonable staff support as necessary to render assistance to the Neighborhood Councils and respective Executive Boards. Requests for additional staff support shall be made to the City Manager; and B. The City Manager and City Attorney, or their designees, shall be available for Neighborhood Council meetings at the request of the Executive Boards except that such requests shall reasonably relate in need and necessity to matters formally scheduled for agenda consideration. (Sec. 2- 3.307.j.) Section 2. City depattmental 6taJ6 6halZ pAov.i.de, to the extznt po66.ibte, -techni.ca.Z .in6onmation and nepoh t,6 to the Ne.ighbonhood CounciZ Executive Board membena and comm.i tteea . Such .i.n6okma ti,on and %epon t6 6hatt be concuAAentZy p cov.ided to the Neighborhood CounciZ Cooad inaton. Section 3. City a.taj j shalt maize ptu entationa and act as a %u ounce at Ne ighborhoo d i CouncZ meeting-6, a6 necessary, Section 4. A 6peciaZ e66okt wW be made to invo.tve each Neighborhood Councit in the early det i.bera ti.on o5 any matter a66ecting .c 6 area 6o that deci,a.conb utt matety peached may u6tect the needy and expectation6 o6 the a66ected ne.cghbonhood6 to the gneateat extent poaa.ibte. Section 5. Neighborhood Council Coond.inaton The Ne.ighbonhood Councit Coondinaton 6upport bon Ne.iJghbonhood Councils 6ha t .include the pnovis ion oP A. Aaa.i.6 a.nce with the pnepanation and diathibuti.on o6 agenda6, minutes, tetter6, nepon ts, 6t yens, po6ten6 . B. L' iaizon with govennmentat agenciea, devetopera, .cndividuat6, and organ,ization6 engaged in bu6.in26a with the City o6 Simi, Valley. C. Coordination o6 the acti.vitie6 o6 the Councit6. D. Reaouncea and a66"tance in the piann.ing o6 Ne-ighbonhood Councit programs, pn.o j ec t6, and acti vit iea . B. Attendance and resource at Neighborhood CounciZ meetingz, as needed. P. Otientation /training 6or Neighborhood Council Executive Board members. G. Liaison and coordination with City CounciZ, Manning CommL64 ion, City ataJ6, as needed. H. Education. and .c.n6ormafiion matekia .6 ob beneJ t to Neighborhood Councit6 . I. Recognition jot the votu.nteer 4erv.icee of Neighborhood Councit members. J. PerbonneZ records 6o4 duty appointed Nei,ghbo rAood Council Executive Board and committee members u6tecting the -type and extent o6 the votu.nteer 6eAv.ice. K. Records and 6ita o6 aU Neighborhood Council activit i,eb, meetings, membeuhip, and the pertinent data. L. Procedures and contacts jot the conduct ob Neighborhood CounciZ bus.ineee . M. Other ase.i,b.tanee as needed.to achieve the goat4 o6 Neighborhood Councit-6. Artiete VIII. Standing Rut a Section 1. AU meetinge, minutes, and records of each Neighborhood Councit aha.0 be open to the public. Section 2. Citizen .input will be recognized at each meeting on a t agenda .stems as weft " other injormati.on that may be brought before the Executive Board or genena,Z membeuhip. Section 3. No member o6 the Executive Board or any Neighborhood Council committee ahaU ube the poziti.on or the name o6 Neighborhood Council to endorse or .i,mpty endorsement for any enterpA"e, except as authorized by the Neighborhood CounciZ Executive Board. Section 4. No Neighborhood Councit meeting on activity aha,tt be used a6 a iotum got pe UOnat gain, Pakti6an of non -pcv titan po,Q.i tc;c.6 of to citcueaA ize the membet6 o6 the Neighborhood Councit6 Got anything other than Neighborhood Councit pto j ect6, un.te66 ouch meeting of activity " 6 per-i6 icat ty de6igned Got such a pwcpo6e. Section 5. potma.t contact6, war -itten of ora.t, on behat6 .o6 Neighborhood Coun" to devetopet6, ind.ivi of o4ganization6 engated .in. City bec6.ine66 with the City 06 Simi Vattey, 6hatt be made by of t'htough the Neighborhood Councit Cootd,inatot, of by the Neighborhood Councit Cootd,inaton, of by the Neighborhood Council chai4peuon, of hi6 dezignee, with the prior knowtedge of the Ne.ighbothood Councit Cootdcnatot. Section 6. Nei.ghbothood Councit but nezz with other gove%nmentat ageneie6 shah be conducted by of in conjunction with the Neighborhood Council Cootdtnatot. Section 7. The tutu 06 paxtimenta&y pnocedute eodi's.ied in Robe4t6 Ru.te.6 o6 Otdet 6hat,t govern the conduct o6 a.tt meeting6 not otheAutize gOveAned by thue y- ,taws. Section 8. Neighborhood Councit6 6haet not pte6ent of purport to p%uent po4i i.on6, pot i.cie6 on di,%ection Jot the City o6 S.cmi, Vattey of it6 City Councit without the pn iot apptovaZ o6 the City Councit. Atticte X. GA ievaneea Any grievances made by any individual Neighborhood Council member or members concerning a Neighborhood Council Executive Board action may be made to the general membership of the Neighborhood Council thirty (30) days after filing such grievance with their Executive Board. If such individual or individual members are not satisfied with the results from the appeal to the general membership, they may brin the matter directly before the members of the City Council within thirty (30� days after consideration by the general membership. Any action by the City Council shall be final in regard to such grievance by any individual or individual Neighborhood Council members who pursue the procedures set forth in this section for filing grievances. (Sec. 2- 3.309.) I -)-, EXHIBIT A CODE OF CONDUCT FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL EXECUTIVE BOARD MEMBERS 1. Executive Board Members must abide by all Neighborhood Council By -Laws. 2. Executive Board Members shall participate in at least one of the Bi- Annual Clean Up Campaigns. 3. Executive Board Members shall treat anyone appearing before Neighborhood Council courteously and fairly and shall allow presentations without undue interruptions. 4. Executive Board Members shall refrain from unduly influencing the Neighborhood Council membership. 5. Executive Board Members shall be facilitators of discussion, and rhay express or expound a particular point of view, but shall not coercively champion a particular point of view. 6. Executive Board Members shall, to the best of their knowledge, accurately represent City policy to the residents and shall accurately represent recommendations from their Neighborhood Council to the City Council and Planning Commission. 7. Executive Board Members will not attend other Neighborhood Council meetings for the purpose of influencing such Neighborhood Councils unless they clearly state for the record that they are not representing their Neighborhood Council Board, or their Neighborhood Council as a whole, but are attending as an individual, or unless it is an advertised Joint meeting, and shall not attempt by any other means to unduly or through misrepresentation to influence action by members of another Executive Board. 8. Executive Board Members shall refrain from personal character attacks upon members of the community or City officials. 9. Failure to abide by these rules will be cause for removal from the Executive Board. 13 r' ORDINANCE NO. 118 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SIMI VALLEY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AMENDING DIVISION 1 OF THE SIMI VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO ARTICLE 1 OF CHAPTER 3 RELATING TO THE ESTAB- LISHMENT Of' THE NEIGHBOR COUNCILS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SIMI VALLEY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Division 1 of the Simi Valley Municipal Code is 6reby amended by adding thereto Article 1 of Chapter 3 relating to the establishment and creation of Neighborhood Councils to read as follows: "CHAPTER 3 NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS Sec. 1300: CREATION There is hereby created a Neighborhood Council for each of certain designated areas, the number and area of which shall be provided by City Council resolution. Sec. 1301: PURPOSE A Neighborhood Council is a recognized component of the City government structure with its purpose and function to operate independently and apart from the influence of the City Council nembers or City officers while advising the City Council of the various problems of its neighborhoods and making reoommendations for improvements of City government services. The purpose of Neighborhood Councils is to provide for citizen participation and an involvement in their own affairs as well as providing a mechanism for communication between the City Council and its citiaens. The residents of the City of Simi -1- 0 Valley shall have an opportunity to have interested, concerned and knowledgeable individuals to represent them on a neighborhood level at all official City meetings, thus building a sense of community interest and self -pride for each neighborhood so represented. Neighborhood Councils can provide large reservoirs of talent which may assist in performing needed City functions. 1301.1 Each Neighborhood Council shall be advisory to the City Council and to other City Council advisory bodies and may contribute informa- tion, opinions, advice, suggestions and recommen- dations to the City Council on all governmental , affairs and services having an affect on the area the Neighborhood Council represents, including, but i �. not limited to, public works, public safety, planning i and zoning and public health and sanitation. Sec. 1302: MEMBERSHIP Each Neighborhood. Council shall consist of residents eighteen years of age or older residing within the defined boundaries of a Council area. 1302.1: No resident shall be a member of more than one Neighborhood Council in the City of Simi Valley. Before a member may vote at a Neighborhood Council meeting, he or she must file a declaration with the secretary declaring his or her address; that he or she is of the age of eighteen years or older and he or she is not a member of any other Neighborhood Council in the City of Simi Valley. Sec. 1303. ORGANIZATION A Neighborhood Council shall be comprised of the General Membership, an Executive Board, standing -2- committees as designated in this Chapter and ad hoc committees as may be formed by the Neighborhood Council. Sec. 1304% EXECUTIVE BOARD Five members and two alternates shall be appointed by the City Council to serve as the Executive Board for each Neighborhood Council. Prior to any appoint- ment, the respective Neighborhood Council shall provide a list of at least three nominees for each vacancy; to the City Council for appointment to the Executive Board. The five members and two alternates shall represent as broad a spectrum of interest as possible, and a geographical distribution throughout the Neighbor- hood, whenever feasible. Any Board member may be removed from their respective office for cause by theiCity Council. f 1304.1: Each Neighborhood Council Executive Board shall select a Chairman and a Vice - Chairman. 1304.2: A quorum of the Executive Board meeting of the Neighborhood Council shall consist of three members. 1304.3: Two of the Executive Board members of each Neighborhood Council shall be appointed for a term of nine months commencing on June 15, 1972. The three remaining Executive Board members of each Neighborhood and the two alternates shall be appointed for a period of eighteen months, commencing June 15, 1972. Thereafter, all terms shall be for eighteen months. 1304.4: Executive Board members may not serve two consecutive terms. At least 9 months must elapse before they are eligible for reappointment to the Executive Board. -3- 1304.5: The Neighborhood Council shall coordinate and channel all communications to the City Council through their Executive Board. 1304.6: The Chairman, or in his absence, the Vice- Chairman or other duly appointed representative, shall be the official representative of the Neighbor - hood Council to the City Council and shall represent official positions taken by his Neighborhood.Council. 1304.7: Each Neighborhood Council Board shall appoint a secretary to keep an accurate record of all official actions of the Neighborhood Council and the Executive Board and shall keep an accurate record of the number of people in attendance. 1304.8: Each Neighborhood Council Executive Board shall establish a particular time and place for their regular meeting. The meeting shall be announced at least three days in advance to the Neighborhood Council membership. 1304.9: If a Neighborhood Council Executive Board member shall miss three consecutive meetings, whether Executive Board or Interim General Membership, without first securing the permission of the other Executive Board members, said member will automatically termin- ate his office if his absence was due to reasons other than personal illness. 1304.10: If any Neighborhood Council Executive Board member filos ft: any elactive office or is elected or appointed to any other public office, his office as said Executive Board member shall become vacant upon filing for or assumption of the other public office. -4- P i !A' r� Sec. 1305: COMMITTEES 1305.1: The Neighborhood Council shall appoint not less than three of its members for each stand- ing committee. An environmental planning committee and a membership committee shall be standing committees for each Neighborhood Council. 1305.2: Each Neighborhood Council may appoint ad hoc committees as required. 1305.3: Each committee shall communicate all reports to the City Council through their Executive �- Board members. Sec. 1306: CONDUCT OF GENERAL MEETINGS The Chairman, or Vice- Chairman in his absence, shall preside over all Neighborhood Council meetings., 1306.1: Each Neighborhood Council shall meet at least once a month at a designated time and place regularly scheduled. 1306.2: All' meetings of each Neighhorhood Council shall be open to the public. 1306.3: A quorum of the Neighborhood Council General Membership shall consist of three members of the Executive Board and at least twenty -five other members V present. 1306.4: A Neighborhood Council may act or conduct official business only at a duly - called meeting operating under established procedure as set forth in this Chapter. 1306.5: A Neighborhood Council recommendation to the City Council shall be by written resolution. The resolution shall be introduced at a regular -5- meeting and adopted at a subsequent meeting no sooner than five days. As an alternative method, a motion may be directed to the City Council when time does not permit a resolution to be formally adopted and presented to the City Council, or when the communication relates to an emergency condition. 1306.6: All communications from the Neighborhood Council must either be approved or reviewed by the Executive Board of the respective Neighborhood Council. 1306.7: The Executive Board shall set the agenda for the Neighborhood Council meetings. However, at any regular mating of the Neighborhood Council, `. any member may order the inclusion of any specific �± agenda item for any specific further meetings: if such specific agenda item as requested are challenged by other members present at the meeting, they should be included only on a majority vote of those present. 1306.8: All meetings and activities of the Neighbor- hood Council shall operate under such further rules as may be established and adopted by the general membership of the Neighborhood Council. 1306.9: At least once a year the Chairman of all Neighborhood Councils shall meet as a group with the City Council. The City shall also meet annually With tha Executive : Board members of eaCh Neighbor - hood Council. At the latter meeting an annual report describing the activities of each Neighbor - hood Council shall be presented to the City Council members. -6- 1306.10: Each Neighborhood Council shall submit to the City Council within thirty (30) days after the end of each fiscal year an annual report sum- marizing expenditures of the ,preceding year. 1306.11: A duly appointed member of the Executive Board of each Neighborhood Council shall normally be present at all City Council meetings, absent , emergency circumstances. 1306.12: City Council members are encouraged to be present at Neighborhood Council meetings. ?' 1306.13: The City shall provide the following services to the Neighborhood Councils: (a) At least two Neighborhood Coordinators to render necessary assistance to the Neighborhood Councils and respective Executive Boards. (b) The City Manager and City Attorney or their designees shall be available for Neighborhood Council meetings at the request of the Executive Hoard of said Council except that such request must reasonably relate in need and necessity to a matter or matters formally scheduled for agenda consideration. Sec. 1307: MANAGEMENT OF FUNDS 1307.1: Tofia:U -11 its responsibilities, Neighborhood Councils shall be supplied a minimum budget as co- ordinated through the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. All disbursements shall be approved by the respective Neighborhood Council t -7- a> >e processed through the City Ma.. 4eros office and municipal warrant process as required by law. 1307.2: Neighborhood Councils may raise funds to pay expenses which are not paid by the City pro- ` viding that it has prior City Council approval. A treasurer shall be appointed by -the Executive Board who shall be one of its members and who shall make collections and make disbursements for said fund for its Neighborhood Council activities. Any disburse=ents that shall be made by the treasurer, however, shall be approved by the membership present at a regular Neighborhood Council maeting.o SECTION 2, SEPARABILITY If any section, subseotion, sentence, clause, phrase, or Portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such' portion shall be deered a separate, distinct and an independent provision and such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. The City Council hereby declares, that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases hereof be declared invalid or unconsistutional. SECTION 3. The Mayor shall, sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall attest thereto and shall cause the same to be published once in the Simi Valley Enterprise Sun acid News, the newspaper published and circulated in said City of Simi Valley; and thereupon and thereafter this Ordinance shall take effect and be is force according to law. ADOPTED on this 28 day of February 1972. y O THE CITY SIMI ALLEY, CALIFORNIA -8- �. r�. APPROVED BY: CIRNEY ` ATTEST: DEPUTY tI'i' Y CL I, Deputy City Clark of the City of Simi Valley, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of Simi Valley, California, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 28 day of February , 1972, by the following vote of the City Councilo AYES: Councilmen Ostler, Smith,, Sigmon, Marohn and Mayor Cleveland NOES: None ABSENT: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Simi Valley, California, this 29 day of February , 1972. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE., BEING ORDINANCE N0. //,p , IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL AND HAS BEEN PUBLISHED, PURSUANT TO LAW, IN THE SIMI VALLEY ENTERPRISE SUN AND NEWS, THE NEWS- PAPER CIRCULATED IN SAID CITY. DATED THIS DAY OF BC- z�.t.t� , (9 7X BY V 61 DEPUTY CITY CLERK Ir. NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL CALENDAR March it, 199'1 sr,,w11r EVERYONE IS A MEMBER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS! NKDGHBORHOOD ---, COUNCILS SIMI VALLEY n-. 4 INFORMEDI ATTEND A NEIGH - RHOOD COUNCIL MEETING. :. PROVIDES A FORUM FOR 'IZENS' INVOLVEMENT IN CAL GOVERNMENT AND IGHBORHOOD AFFAIRS. FOR =ORMATION OR TO FIND OUT IICH COUNCIL YOU ARE IN, NTACT THE DEPARTMENT OF VIRONMENTAL SERVICES AT 3 -6756. �_w 0 0 Timothy Shannor C. #4 UGLICSEAVICESCENTEA = 00 W.11 L01 A.p.IH A�.n,,. j 010.11-10 P.01a WO,., i w . •::.•, , M.mun.nMl/tdb.fl O.anm.m or � •p 1 �JII E--m. S..r, , POLICE STATION r CIVIC CENTER T..nnl Owr.l,onn 3200 CaOwm Srwl I SANITATION PLANT •DoioA Oprrn,mnl j Goo W..1 La Arq jI A— 0.0..1 -1 or P-1-1 Ww.r "This map designates City Department locations & N Neighborhood Council boundaries. C. #1 cutive Board /General Meeting: Thursday, April 9, 1992 7:30 p.m.,'City Hall Community Room, 2929 Tapo Canyon Road :NBA ITEMS: Continued Discussion of the April 18 Neighborhood Council Spring Clean -up; �cussion of ADJ -S -501, Proposed Installation of a Screen Wall in Front of an Existing Vons •ket, Located a'. the Southwest Corner of Fifth Street and Los Angeles Avenue. Iirperson: James Cooksey 583 -2627 ?cutive Board /General Meeting: City Council Liaison: Tuesday, April 14, 1992 Sandi Webb, 583 -6701, 526 -3864 7:30 p.m., City Hall Community Room, 2929 Tapo Canyon Road ENDA ITEMS: Continued Discussion of the April 18 Neighborhood Council Spring Clean -up. airoerson: Stephen Frank 584 -3733 City Council Liaison: Judy Mikels, 583 -6701, 583 -4759 C. #3 ecutive Board /General Meeting: ENDA ITEMS: Continued Discussip, airaerson: Timothy Shannor C. #4 ecutive Board /Genera; Ao N { ENDA ITEMS: J V air erso Thursday, April 16, 1992 7:30 p.m., City Hall Community Room, 2929 Tapo Canyon Road ate= L- } O C c o Un -0 = cn U N O O CO C () O L C O U o, o � C VU L O O E O = Q N -C CO = 5 ZU3 } N = Cj(7) Let Your Voice Be Heard .. . Join Neighborhood Council and Become a Voice for Your Community SIMI VALLEY 0 o 3 i�,�s�,. .�E °° 1 - '..° 02 e_ ... ............ Si - — J_ M WsSERVICES CENTER o ° / - i00 West Los Angees Avenue j o nvE <_ Depmmmt of Public Works i rcenn N D. 'art— (Maim-Ublitiesl - r i ' DepartmeZt of E n Dorn tat S- (Transit Open0-0 POLICE STATKM CIVIC CENTER /CITY HALL 3200 Cochran suesI SANITATION PLANT um I Deparbnont F 600 West Los Angeles Avrnue Department of Public Works This map designates City Office locations & IWartewater T,ratment) Neighborhood Council boundaries. On November 23,1970 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 70-118 which established the Simi Valley Neighborhood Council Program. Most Simi Valley residentsbre not aware that they belong to such an organization. Every City resident 18 years and older Is a member of a Neighborhood Council. Neighborhood Council's promote citizen awareness of, and participation in, local government. They communicate citizen concerns to City policy - makers and professional staff. Some special con- cerns addressed by Neighborhood Councils in- clude: 'Land Development *Traffic 'Public Safety Neighborhood Councils also sponsor community programs, such as the BI-Annual Neighborhood Clean -up Campaigns. Clean -ups are conducted each Spring and Fall to enable residents to dispose of refuse free of charge and promote the beautifi- cation of Simi Valley. The Neighborhood Councils operate within four (4) geographic areas of the City (refer to the Neighbor- hood Council map shown to locate your Neighbor- hood Council). Neighborhood Council #1 meets the first Thursday of the month; Neighborhood Council 12 the second Tuesday; Neighborhood Council #3 the second Thursday, and, Neighbor- hood Council #4 the third Tuesday. A volunteer Executive Board, appointed by the City Council, Is responsible for overseeing the activities of each Neighborhood Council. Volunteers who wish to donate one or more evenings a month on behalf of their community are encouraged to apply for an Executive Board position. Formal recruitments for Executive Board members are conducted every (8) months; however, supplemental recruitments do occur periodically. Applications for the Executive Board may be obtained by: "Returning the card in this brochure, *Calling the Neighborhood Council Coordinator at 583 -6756, or .g R t 11 'Visiting the Environmental Services Counter E In the Development Services Building, o 3855 -A Alamo Street. Z The Neighborhood Councils aim at promoting direct citizen involvement in local government by: (1) provid- ing an effective avenue of communication; (2) providing a means of participation for interested residents; (3) an advisory role into the decision - making process of the City; and, (4) establishing a forum for the discussion and resolution of Neighborhood Issues. The Neighborhood Councils have the potential of bringing about beneficial changes for the entire community. If you are concerned about issues which affectyour community, participate in Neighborhood Council and let your voice be heard. H U `m m m Q N U Q1 X W C C E O U N ..Q C O� E N N N � C O _ m 0 S �!3_ L SZ0 t O O .0 O Z O C O C O +_ a O C _O O N O i O Q U C O LN u O O L O O1 Z O C O C O 6 O C Q. O C E O �U L U :3 C: O O 3U C C U N O � O '� O E C E ONOMA COUNTY SSOuATES FOIZ ouTH EVELOPNIENT Counseling and Prevention Services B March 18, 1992 AY pz> { K Mayor Spiro & OP 1. Rohnert Park City Council Rohnert Park City Hall 6750 Commerce Blvd. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Dear Mayor Spiro & members of the Rohnert Park City Council, Although I am unable to attend the 3/24 City Council Meeting, I am writing to express my support for the passage of the proposed tobacco ordinances pertaining to youth. In short, the ordinances propose to: 1) Ban vending machines where youth can go 2) Post signs stating that only those 18 and over may purchase tobacco 3) Require clerks to check the I.D. of, those youth purchasing tobacco who appear to be under 18 4) Remove self. -serve tobacco & put tobacco behind the counter These ordinances will reflect the city's commitment to making Rohnert Park a "Healthy City,, for all youth. encourage you to support the proposals. Sincerely, Cecelia Belle Executive Director Sonoma County Associates for Youth Development cc: Judy Erickson, Northbay Health Resources Center 5550 State Farm Drive, Suite E Rohnert Park, California 94928 (707) 586 -3414 PROPOSAL 3/19/92 CREATION OF A NON - PROFIT CORPORATION 501(c)(3) TO HELP FUND THE ROHNERT PARK SYMPHONY Proposed Board Members • Suzanne Anderson, Volunteer Fundraiser • Mary K. Grubb, CPA, Pisenti & Brinker • an attorney to be named later * others Ac 9 ci 0 �9k The purpose of the non - profit corporation would be to raise money for the City of Rohnert Park. This money would be earmarked to supplement the city funds for the Rohnert Park Symphony payroll. This money would not be used to reduce the current appropriation. The volunteer board members would operate the non -profit corporation. Expenses for operating the board are expected to be low since board members are volunteer. Expenses will be covered by donations. If we are unable to find a volunteer attorney, it may be necessary to pay for some attorney fees from donations. The Performing Arts Center needs to supply the non - profit corporation with: * Number of tickets sold for all performances number of individual tickets number of Rohnert Park Symphony subscriber tickets number of tickets sold as part of a package deal * Names and addresses of buyers of Rohnert Park Symphony subscriber tickets tickets sold as part of a package deal * Acknowledgements for non - profit corporation supporters in the program The City of Rohnert Park would provide legal services for the benefit of the non - profit corporation to assist in filing for non - profit 501(c)(3) status. The city would also provide annual auditing services for the non - profit corporation. council correspondence Copy to ea. CouncUman ':Clpy to to rr. Comments from the Rohnert Park Symphony on "CREATION OF A NON - PROFIT CORPORATION 501(c) (3) RECEIVED TO HELP FUND THE ROHNERT PARK SYMPHONY" °�� CITY OF RONNGRT PARK If the proposal, "CREATION OF A NON - PROFIT CORPORATION 501(c)(3) TO HELP FUND THE ROHNERT PARK SYMPHONY ", is accepted as is stands, and the appropriation for the Rohnert Park Symphony remains at least at last year's level of $41,520.00, the Rohnert Park Symphony orchestra members will agree to commit to one or more seasons of five (5) sets of two (2) concerts each, as the Rohnert Park Symphony, under the direction of J. Karla Lemon. The Rohnert Park Symphony orchestra members will accept this proposal with the further understanding that this will serve as a short term measure, but that structural changes in orchestra administration should be under continuing discussion. Members of the Rohnert Park Symphony March 22, 1992 � o aLO MEMORANDUM March 24, 1992 TO: Councilman Hollingsworth RE: General Plan update Councilman Hollingsworth has asked me, based on my knowledge of the General Plan process, whether the city has done anything illegal or whether I am aware of anything it proposes to do that is illegal in the upcoming General Plan update. Answer The answer to both questions is that I am not aware of any proposal that violates state law. Discussion On or about December 6, 1991, I issued a brief memorandum of opinion regarding the relationship between the General Principle set forth at page 1.3 of the 1990 Rohnert Park General Plan and the issue of a. General Plan update. As I tried to explain in the memorandum of December 6, 1991, I felt that the city was obligated to conduct a General Plan review under the statement set forth in the General Principle. A photocopy of that memorandum is attached. I also am of the opinion that the degree of the General Plan update is dependant on what is proposed. For example, a proposal to study the effect of an 80 -acre expansion upon the General Plan is different from a proposal to consider the whole planning area surrounding the City of Rohnert Park and how it relates to the General Plan. Another example is that the proposed annexation of 80 acres may not have any impact or result in any changes in the noise element of the General Plan, whereas a study of land -use patterns and the General Plan on all of the area surrounding the city might require a greater analysis for General Plan environmental impact report purposes. As I have indicated, the approach should be to review the impact of the proposed annexation and the General Plan amendment on each General Plan element. It should also be noted that the City Council has been advised that it, not the proponents of the annexation, has control over the preparation of the environmental impact report. So far as I am aware, the city is taking steps to insure that it and not third -party developers has control over the environmental review process and that the process follows the legal requirements. It is lawful for the city to consider the project and the proposed General Plan amendment. City staff has been and will be advised to follow the process as required by law. The ultimate decision is a matter for the City Council after public comment and discussion. Respectfully submitted, L `JOHN D. FLITNER Ci y Attorney MEMORANDUM TO: City Manager RE: General Plan DATE: December 6, 1991 FROM: John D. Flitner This will respond to your request as to the meaning and scope of the General Principle statement set forth at page 1.3 of Volume I of the 1990 Rohnert Park General Plan. Paraphrased the statement provides that before the City annexes property other than that addressed in the 1990 General Plan, it "...shall do another thorough General Plan review and update focusing on the entire planning area and including required environmental documentation." The General Principle proceeds to define what is meant by a "thorough General Plan review." You asked me two questions. 1. What is the legal impact of the General Principle? 2. Can the City delete the General Principle? In my opinion the General Principle is probably enforceable. There is no doubt that law that applies to public agencies as well as the general public is enforceable against a public agency. Specifically, laws regarding discrimination, safety, employment rights are enforceable against public employees as well as employers in the private sector. The question is a little less clear when the issue involves policy or procedure. However, in an employer - employee situation the court had no trouble enforcing the provisions of a police department manual with regard to notice and hearing of a pretermination hearing of an at will employee. General Plans are firmly engrained in the legislative and judicial fabric. In my opinion, if the city proceeded with an annexation contrary to the General Principle the issue would be litigated. In my opinion the city would lose. 2. With regard to the second question, if the city elects to delete the General Principle on page 1.3. I believe that it would be necessary to hold public hearings and hear the public on the question. If the city elects to delete the provision without public discussion and debate, in my opinion it would be forced into litigating the matter. The law provides that the General Plan is a public document in which public participation is to be solicited and encouraged. Public Resource Code § §21000, 21001, 21001.1, 21002, 21002.1, 21003.1, 21004, 21005, et seq. The legislature in stating this policy of the law and the courts in interpreting the law regarding the environment have been protective of policies and procedures that assure that public participation is protected. Respectfully submitted: John D. Flitner City Attorney TO: Members of the Public and the City Council RE: General Plan Update INTER - OFFICE MEMO FROM: Linda Spiro, Mayor DATE: March 24, 1992 Many citizens at the Town Meeting suggested that the General Plan process should be immediately stopped. They contend that there should not be General Plan debates until around 1995. Effective community planning must be a dynamic, continuing process. Public debate frames a democracy and local government should provide frequent opportunities for such debate, not just every five years. Citizens have stated that the City promised not to revise the General Plan until 1995. The charge has been repeated in the press. Such a promise does not appear in the General Plan. The General Plan states that there would be a thorough General Plan review and update if and before land is annexed. There exist reasons for reviewing the General Plan other than to consider an annexation proposal such as: 1) In accord with an action item in the General Plan, the City Council formed an Interim Housing Task Force. This Task Force has prepared proposals that would require amendment of the General Plan. 2) The State legislature approved SB 1019 which requires amendments to the Housing Element. 3) Objective 4 in the Housing Element states that by 1995, the City would identify and evaluate building sites for up to 1,300 residential units. Actions 3, 4, and 5 state that this would be done in conjunction with a thorough General Plan review and update. 4) Among the open space proposals in the General Plan is: "By 1995, establish a plan for acquisition of large parcels of land and /or development rights beyond the City limits so as to create a permanent open space border around the City." The General Plan also states that all elements shall be reviewed at the time of each proposed amendment (General Policy 2). It is my view that, in undertaking a General Plan review and update, the City complies with not only adopted City policy but also the most fundamental precepts of democracy and public planning. MEMORANDUM (' TO: Hugh Codding ?ROM: Charles Evans RE: Expressway Apts. SEWER ISSUES: SB1019 effective January 1992, requires that sewer districts give priority to projects that contributes to the supply of lower income housing. Rohnert Park has unallocated capacity to serve approximately 250 units, (possibly more units if they are studios and one bedroom units). JOBS /HOUSING BALANCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING: SB1019 also requires the identification of sites to accomodate housing for all income levels. The Expressway Mall EIR describes the following impacts and mitigation: 1. Jobs /housing Balance The addition of new jobs in conjunction with affordable housing would help improve the present jobs /housing balance. However, given the low salaries the project will generate and the trend toward higher housing costs, it will be difficult to provide housing within Rohnert Park that most project employees will be able to afford. The lack of affordable housing near the project will likely encourge employees to seek housing in other parts of Sonoma County. This trend will contribute to increased commuting and more traffic on Highway 101. (3 -64) 2. Affordable Housing In order to mitigate increased traffic congestion due to commuting between homes and jobs and to maintain a desirable jobs /housing ratio, The City should provide additional housing appropriate to the income of levels of the emplovees expected tofill the new jobs created by the proposed project. Typically, the retail jobs created by projects such as that proposed tend to be low paying. (3 -64) MITIGATION MEASURES: To the extent possible. the City should provide adequate levels of housing affordable to the income levels of employees expected to work in the new jobs generated by the proposed project. The developer can contribute to this effort by constricting new affordable housing within the City. (3 -65) GENERAL PLAN ISSUES: The 1991 Sonoma County Grand Jury Report, in it's discussion of affordable housing production in redevelopment areas, states "Housing does not have to be built on vacant residential land. It can be built on any unused commercial or residential property." (Page 34) The Rohnert Park Land Use Graphic, when scaled, shows the proposed site to be within the Commercial and the Intermediate Housing designation. HCD Answers Housing Element Questions by Sande George George R. Steffes, Inc. CCAPA Legislative Advocates Yes, there was another bill signed into law this year which will require changes in the housing element. SB 1019 makes a number of changes to the housing element law designed to increase the zoning and supply of affordable multifamily housing. The most controversial portion of the bill would require that if the inventory of sites does not identify adequate housing sites to accommodate the needs of all household income levels, the locality must provide sites with multifamily residential use "by right" for very low and low income households. At the CCAPA Legislative Work- shops held in December 1991, a number of people had questions about the interpretation of the "by right" concept and other sections of the bill. CCAPA asked the author's office and the Department of Housing and Com- munity Development (BCD) to offi- cially clarify how to implement SB 1019. HCD's response to CCAPA's questions appears below. As noted in the HCD letter, HCD will be preparing a technical assistance paper on SB 1019 which will be ready early in 1992. In addition, they plan to meet with their legal department to further clarify when localities will have to amend their housing elements to comply with the requirements of SB 1019 (see number four below). 1) If a locality decides to plan for less than its fair share number, does the inventory of sites have to include sites that they plan for in their quan- tified objectives or the original fair share ntnnber? Housing element law has always required that the land inventory identify sites sufficient to accommo- date a locality's regional share alloca- tion for all income groups. While an element may include quantified objec- tives which are less than the regional share, a locality must always identify sufficient sites to accommodate its regional share allocation by income level or include programs to identify the needed sites. SB 1019 did not alter this require- ment. In fact, if anything SB 1019 strengthened this requirement by adding the following language to the adequate sites program requirement: "Where the inventory of sites, pur- suant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for groups of all household income levels pursuant to Section 65584, the program shall provide for sufficient sites.." Section 65584 describes the regional share allocation requirements, clearly linking the inventory with the regional share allocation. 2) If the locality cannot or does not have an adequate site inventor}; what does 'provide for sufficient sites" with zoning that permits owner - occupied and rental multifamily residential use by right for lou, in- come families mean? Must a locality zone for their fair share number for loin income housing? Yes. If a locality's land inventory does not identify adequate sites to accommodate their share of the regional housing need for very low and low income levels, then the ele- ment must include a program to pro- vide the sites with zoning that permits owner- occupied and rental multifamily residential use by right. The program should identify enough sites to accom- modate the remaining need so that together with the inventory, the ele- ment identifies adequate sites equal to or greater than the total regional share allocation. The amendment clearly indicates that the program must pro- vide sites with zoning that permits owner- occupied and rental multifamily residential use by right, including den- sity and development standards that could accommodate and facilitate the feasibility of housing for very low and low income housing. As noted above, the locality is responsible for identifying sites to accommodate their entire regional share allocation even if the quantified objectives are lower. Who decides what is "sufficient' or "adequate -? It is the local govern- ment's responsibility to demonstrate that the sites identified can facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of housing types to accom- modate the regional share allocation. If the element does not clearly demon- strate how the sites can accommodate lower income housing development, HCD's review would indicate that ade- quate sites had not been identified. 3) How Is the phrase "use by right" interpreted? For the purposes of SB 1019, we interpret use by right to mean that a locality must provide some sites which would not require conditional use permits for multifamily housing projects. This does not mean, how- ever, that a locality would be pro- hibited from imposing appropriate density and development standards that "could accommodate and facili- tate the feasibility of housing for very low and low income households" Localities would still be able to require design review and impose specified development standards as long as those requirements did not render the site infeasible for the development of lower income housing. Local governments will be required to demonstrate that the sites identi- fied in their adequate sites program could facilitate the development of lower income housing commensurate with their remaining regional share need. In addition, local governments are required to analyze their land use and processing requirements as potential governmental constraints. Any requirements imposed in a multi- family "use by right" zone will have to be analyzed as a potential constraint to development. If either the locality or HCD in its review of the element finds that the requirements unreason- ably constrain the development of lower income housing, mitigation programs will be required. 4) When must a locality comply with the new requirements as a result of SB 1019? It is our interpretation that locali- ties must comply with the require- ments (adequate sites, quantified objectives and notifications to special districts) at the next amendment or periodic review of their element, whichever comes first. Therefore, any amendment submitted after CALIFORNIA PLkNNER — i — iANVARY/FEBM ARY 1992 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REMAINING WASTEWATER CAPACITY AS OF FEBRUARY 25, 1992 BASED ON 1991 AVERAGE DRY WEATHER FLOW (SEPTEMBER, 1991) Million Gallons Per Day (mgd) 1991 Average Dry Weather Flow (September, 1991) 3.71 Less: Cotati 0.584 Sonoma State University 0.113 Subtotal 0.697 0.697 Rohnert Park Existing Flow as of September 30, 1991 3.013 Plus Committed Flow from Units with Permits Issued or Finaled and Not Occupied as of September 30, 1991 Single Family 120 @ 298 gpd/Unit 0.036 Multiple Family 80 @ 213 gpd/Unit 0.017 Commercial /Industrial 14 @ 75 gpd 0.001 Subtotal 0.054 0.054 Total Rohnert Park Existing and Committed Flow through February 25, 1992 3.067 Capacity Service Rohnert Park Area 3.84 Less: Cotati 0.62 Sonoma State University 0.10 0.72 0.7 Rohnert Park Capacity Service 3.12 3.12 ROHNERT PARK REMAINING CAPACITY AS OF FEBRUARY 25, 1992 0.053 a� mission — would be established if Rebecca Morgan's SB797 were passed. So far, Governor Wilson has neither endorsed nor rejected regional plans such as SB797. And until the vote on these bills occurs, the fate of California's physical form will remain unclear. But with new -found consensus on such ideas as preferred growth areas, compact development patterns, and higher densities to alleviate housing, traf- fic, and land use worries, the future has at least begun to take shape. New Housing Bills Take Effect Two bills approved by Governor Wilson last October went into effectJanuary 1 of this year. Both underwent significant re- vision since originally proposed but in fi- nal form are important additions to the state's housing policy. The new housing element legisla- tion, SB1019, has four major provisions, the strongest of which requires local gov- ernments to designate sufficient sites for multifamily housing, along with coincid- ing density and development standards that preclude conditional use permits. Another major component of SB1019 re- quires that special water and /or sewer districts give priority to projects in their service areas that contribute to the region's supply of lower- income housing. Better coordination between housing de- velopment and utilities capacity is the in- tended result. Local governments will also be required to submit to HCD an- nual progress reports on meeting their shares of regional housing needs. A.B315 closes loopholes that have al- lowed local governments to avoid setting aside the full 20 percent of redevelop- ment tax increments for low- and moder- ate- income housing (see HDR, July'91). The full impact of these bills will not be immediate. Redevelopment agencies may continue to use the strongest exemp- tion until January 1, 1993. Some provi- sions of SB1019 will not go into effect un- til a community prepares its next housing element. And whether projects already in the pipeline will be subject to the new provisions has not yet been determined. A 160 -unit, multifamily rental project in Half Moon Bay is currently caught in such a debate: the developer, Mid- Penin- sula Housing Coalition, contends that it should be approved under SB1019; the city disagrees. The state will be left to re- solve this and similar questions as imple- mentation of the new bills proceeds. 1991 Sonoma County Grand Jury Report * Redevelopment agencies have always been charged with the respon- sibility of providing low and moderate income housing. It is a task more often ignored than fulfilled. Housing has never been the agencies' prime mission. Instead, auto malls, auto mall signs, shopping centers, luxury hotels, office build- ings, industrial warehousing and commercial development have been their priori- ty, rather than building economically and politically less- desirable low and moderate income housing. * Housing does not have to be built on vacant residential land. It can be built on any unused commercial or residential property. There is a difference between extolling affordable housing and actually affecting the redevelopment agencies' policies. * Redevelopment agencies are accumulating large balances in their LMI housing equity funds, but are dragging their feet when it comes to spending it on low and moderate income housing. * Redevelopment agencies could potentially be the largest source of public money for low and moderate income housing needs in Sonoma County. While many such agencies have had the resources in the past, some have not been willing to use their LMI housing funds as mandated by law. * There is very little case law that governs or controls redevelopment agencies' activities regarding LMI housing fund expenditures. Besides the Health and Safety Code, this effort is left to housing advocate groups or other interest- ed parties. RECOMMENDATIONS: LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING FUND 1. All Sonoma County Redevelopment Agencies must comply with all the Health and Safety Code Sections that are pertinent to low and moderate income 34 x x x x x w a. .. ., w •. .�•• I L �wr I IT 58 ol ol •,: /. W 0 i WIN�v�r�� l:e:e - . , ,. III�IIIIIIIIIIIIu loo ��IN!Ill�lNot Proposed Affordable Single Family Houses ------------ RETAIL SHOPS 40 acres 'Ag tACk MiVie-I'Cil e-,_ C--sfcife-s Affordablc Townhouses 6.89 acres -- m -------------------------------------- SNYDERLANE -----------------------------------------