Loading...
1992/05/12 City Council MinutesRohnert Park City Council Minutes May 12, 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. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Spiro called the regular session to order at approximately 6:34 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 real estate matters. She said no action was taken and there was nothing to report at this time. ROLL CALL Present: (5) Councilmembers Eck, Hollingsworth, Hopkins, Reilly, and Mayor Spiro Absent: (0) None Staff present for all or part of the meting: City Manager Netter, City Attorney Flitner, Assistant to the City Manager Leivo, Director of Public Works /City Engineer Brust, and Performing Arts Director Grice. Approval of Minutes Upon motion by Councilmember Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilmmber Hopkins, the minutes of April 28, 1992 were unanimously approved as submitted. Approval of Bills Upon motion by Councilmember Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilmember Hopkins, and unanimously approved, the bills presented per the attached list in the amount of $1,368,347.47 were approved. Non - agendaed Mayor Spiro queried if any Councilmember had any non- agendaed Matters items to add to the agenda. Councilman Reilly said he had one item to add. Councilman Eck said he had one miscellaneous item to add. City Manager Netter said he had three items to add under City Manager's report. 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) May 12, 1992 Sam Diamond Sam Diamond, 1412 Roman Drive, said she was one of the people recently polled by the Press Democrat on annexation and wanted it known that she voiced her objections to the questions which only offered three multiple choice answers. She said her response to the poll taker was that she had definite opinions regarding the matter that could not be expressed within the choices and felt the poll was very slanted and provided misinformation from the responses that could be given. Ms. Diamond referenced the results printed in the Press Democrat regarding the statement that the percentages added up to 1000 and asked where was her percentage of opposition as expressed. She reviewed some of the questions like "do you favor keeping the City population around 40,000 or larger ? ". Time question had a statement that said a poll was taken a couple of years ago specifying that the majority of Rohnert Park citizens said they did not want the population to exceed 40,000, when she recalled the referenced poll stated between 40,000 and 50,000, therefore the Press Democrat poll statement was inaccurate. Referencing the Press Democrat poll question, "do you favor a change in the proposed General Plan update to allow more annexation now?" adding the comment "when they say City Council reneged on its promise of no annexation until 1995 ", Ms. Diamond responded that was not her understanding of the matter. In researching the issue from materials she had accumulated from participation in the previous General Plan update, she located the City's publication responding to citizen inquiry about a promise not to annex, that such a promise does not appear in the General Plan. The publication listed four other exanples regarding reasons why it was necessary to update the General Plan. Ms. Diamond said if she had not been involved in attending informative meetings and workshops for the previous General Plan update, she would have been led to believe from this recent Press Democrat poll that the referenced cones ents were fact. Another question she felt was really unfair, was prefaced by the commwent that other developers are not given equal opportunity as a certain one has been given, but did not provide Council's information that the referenced proposal was the only one on the table for consideration and, if presented, others would have been equally considered. Ms. Diamond expressed concern regarding heaving the background information as compared to others in the community who have convened on receiving their information from the Press Democrat. It is already confusing enough to decipher facts from folly, and concerns regarding the power of the nvedia are eery great because of how that power has been abused. It was especially disturbing that the article questioned whether or not we would vote for a councilmember who voted for annexation, as this comment is completely unfair and inappropriate. She and her husband were concerned when they read the article because a lot of people they know did not participate in the previous General Plan update and do not have the background information to sort out the facts. Whitey Stratton - Whitey Stratton, 875 Holly Avenue, asked the Mayor about her involvement with the new Wine Center as he had heard from several sources that she was to be the director. Mayor Spiro responded that this information was not accurate, and that her name had probably been confused with that of Linda Johnson. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (3) May 12, 1992 Mr. Stratton referenced the Mayor's conflict of interest with the tobacco issues, and asked if the same should not apply to the Wine Center. mayor Spiro responded that, when she does not vote on tobacco matters, it is because she has money to be made on that issue. She said this was not the case regarding the Wine Center issue which she did not vote against, that the City Attorney had previously reviewed and explained issues regarding conflict of interest, and that reasons are clear to the Fair Political Practices. Imo'. Stratton directed an inquiry to Councilman Hollingsworth asking if his daughter is an insurance agent transacting business from an office at the Red Lion Plaza, to which Councilman Hollingsworth responded that his daughter is not an insurance agent. George Horwedel - George Horwedel, 7669 Camino Colegio, referenced the General Plan Citizens Committee meeting last night wherein the question was raised regarding the printed form for the Citizen's Survey asking why retrofitting was not included on the survey. Mr. Horwedel said he understood a member of the General Plan Council Committee had taken it off. He also said it would seem an extra week of time should have been given to the matter to allow the Citizens Committee time to review the final draft of something this important. Discussion followed with the Council Committee explaining the reasons for changes in the survey. Council Comnittee Members further explained the role of the :Citizens Committee, that it is the responsibility of the Council Committee to make decisions, and that the Citizens Committee is to gather and present information and recommendations as requested by the Council Committee. 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 Memo. Acknowledging the City Manager /Clerk's report on the posting of the agenda. Resolution A RESOLUTION _OF .THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK No.92 -76 CONGRATULATING SILVIO C. CINCERA ON THE OCCASION OF HIS RETIREMENT AND` NAMING HIM AN "HONORARY CITIZEN" OF ROHNERT PARK Resolution RESOLUTION AMENDING CERTAIN PLANNING AND ZONING, SUBDIVISION AND No.92 -77 RELATED FEES Resolution A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REAFFIRMING No.92 -78 THE CITY'S COMAETNEnTT TO EQUAL ENPLOYNENT OPPORTtNITY Resolution A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK No.92 -79 ESTABLISHING A POLICY AGAINST DISCRIMINATION OF QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS WITH A DISABILITY AND ESTABLISHING A COMPLAINT PROCEDURE Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (4) May 12, 1992 Resolution A RESOLUTION OF THE COLUCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK DESIGNATING A No.92 -80 COMPLIANCE OFFICER AS REQUIRED BY THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990 Upon motion by Councilmember Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilmember Hopkins, the Consent Calendar as outlined on the meeting's agenda was unanimously approved. Resolution A RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT (MISCELLANEOUS FURNISHINGS FOR THE NEW No.92 -81 PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING) City Manager Netter explained the resolution as reviewed in staff report dated May 12, 1992. He said one complaint had been received from JAX International, the first four alternate items listed on the Bid Comparison sheet attached to the staff report. Mr. Netter said he met with the owner of JAX in fairness to the company and reviewed the items of concern revealing the conclusion that he was still higher. Based on the figures in the staff report and further consultation with the City Engineer and Purchasing Agent, it continues to be staff's recomriendation to honor the bid of B. B. & T. in the bid amount of $162,116.82. City Manager Netter and City Engineer Brust responded to various Council questions confirming that the entire project has change orders of about 1 %, which is very low for the size of project. Upon motion by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Hollingsworth, and unanimously approved, reading of Resolution No. 92- 81 was waived and said resolution was adopted. Ordinance AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AMMING THE ROHNERT PARK No. 559 MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 15, BUILDING AND CONSTRUC'T'ION, TO ADOPT THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, 1991 EDITION; THE UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, 1991 EDITION; THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, 1990 EDITION; THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, 1991 EDITION; THE UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, 1991 EDITION; THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, 1991 EDITION; THE UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, 1991 EDITION; AND THE UNIFORM SWIMMING POOL, SPA, AND HOT TUB CODE, 1991 EDITION; AS AMENDED, AND ADOPTING OTHER REQUIREMIIVTS City Manager Netter explained the ordinance which was inn- rcduced at the Council meeting of April 28th, 1992. Upon motion by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, reading of Ordinance No. 559 was waived and said ordinance was adopted. Scheduled Public Appearances: 1) Joe Nation - Joe Nation, Democratic Congressional candidate, P. O. Box 9374, San Rafael, Ca., 94912 introduced himself to City Council and expressed appreciation for allowing time on tonight's agenda for this opportunity to get acquainted. He distributed flyers to Council pertaining to his canpaign information and extended an invitation to attend an event this Saturday, May 16th, in Petaluma expressing Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (5) May 12, 1992 concern regarding a democracy that is being run by special interests and his desire to change that by putting an end to big money politics. Further information regarding the event, as well as confirming interest to attend, can be obtained by calling 1- 800 -67- NATION. 2) Kim Bricker - Kim Bricker, representative of Rancho Cotate High School , referenced copies provided to Council of flyers regarding the First Annual Cotati - Rohnert Park 24 Hour Relay Challenge and shared contents of an additional flyer (copy attached to original set of these minutes) distributed at the meeting containing =re details pertaining to 24 hours of comnitment, conn=ity involvement and drug, alcohol and tobacco -free fun. Miss Bricker responded to various Council questions regarding the event and invited participation in same, especially requesting opening comments by the.Mayor at 10:30 a.m. on Saturday, May 30th, 1992 at the Rancho Cotate High School track, followed by starting the first mile of the relay. Mayor Spiro consented to participate as requested. Councilmembers Hollingsworth and Eck, after jokingly presenting and accepting a two to one challenge between each other, also confirmed intent to participate in the relay. Miss Sonoma City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council of letter County dated April 30, 1992 from Reba Roberts, Publicist for Miss Sonoma Pageant County Pageant and reviewed contents therein requesting contribution for a set of luggage for Rohnert Park resident Miss Jennifer Esperante, winner of this year's Miss Sonoma County Pageant, to help toward competition expenses at the Miss California Scholarship Pageant in San Diego in early June. The gift could be presented to Miss Esperante at the next Council meeting, prior to her departure for this pageant on June 5th. Upon motion by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Eck, a contribution of $200 for luggage as requested for Miss Sonoma County Pageant winner Jennifer Esperante, was unanimously approved. Nbsquito City Manager Netter explained that Council may want to consider the Abatement appointment to the Mosquito Abatement Board which is now vacant Appointment because of the loss of Millie Hamill. The current term expires December 31st, 1994 and meetings are usually held on the second (2nd) Wednesday monthly at 7:00 p.m. at the District Office in Petaluma. A motion was made by Councilman Eck for a notice be published regarding the vacancy. Said motion died for lack of a second. Councilman Hopkins expressed his interest to be on the Mosquito Abatement Board. Upon motion by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilman Eck, appointment of Councilman Hopkins to the Nbsquito Abatement Board was unanimously approved. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (6) May 12, 1992 Mayor Spiro Mayor Spiro left the Council Chamber at approximately 7:10 p.m., due leaves to a conflict of interest in the next agenda item, with Vice Mayor Hollingsworth presiding over this portion of the Council meeting. Tobacco matters: City Manager Netter explained the Tobacco Ordinance No. 555, as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo, which regulates the sale and distribution of tobacco products to protect the health of minors. He said this ordinance was introduced at the Council meeting of March 24, 1992 wherein the public hearing was continued for 30 days in order to allow time for the City Attorney to further research concerns regarding this matter. Mr. Netter referenced copies provided to Council of letters pertaining to this matter as follows: 1) letter dated May 4, 1992 from Roger Wilco Market supporting newly proposed revisions; 2) letter dated May 4, 1992 from Pat and Gayle Berry opposing ban on self - service tobacco displays; 3) letter dated May 8, 1992 from Rohnert Park Chamber of Commerce rescinding support of the pending tobacco ordinance; and 4) letter dated May 6, 1992 from North Bay Health Resources Center with attached revised version of the tobacco ordinance dated April 30, 1992 with recommendations to accommodate merchant concerns expressed at the March 24 public hearing. City Manager referenced copies distributed to Council of the revised tobacco ordinance as reviewed and prepared by City Attorney, and said the public hearing regarding this matter had been properly noticed and scheduled to continue at this time. City Attorney Flitner explained the revisions of the proposed tobacco ordinance, responded to various Council questions regarding same, and said the issue of concern locally was basically surveillance. He reviewed his recent research of pending litigation of the City of Rancho Mirage regarding vending machines for tobacco, and said he felt the proposed ordinance presented for Council's consideration tonight was constitutional, if it elects to adopt the ordinance, and that the only change would be if the referenced litigation turns out disadvantageous to the City of Rancho Mirage. Public Vice Mayor Hollingsworth opened the public hearing at approximately Hearing 7:13 p.m. Frank Moffett. - Frank Moffett, President of the Northern California Grocers Association, said he expressed concerns regarding the proposed tobacco ordinance at the previous public hearing for this item. He said the issue is the same as for alcoholic products and agreed with concerns expressed by Roger Wilco Market representatives Bill Jonas and Larry Katen in that there is a State law dealing with this issue and the proposed ordinance is not necessary since it is a duplication of State law. However, if Council feels this is important, the new draft ordinance is workable and he could go along with the revisions as presented in the above- referenced letter from Rick Kropp, Executive Director of North Bay Resources Center for STAMP. Mr. Moffett said he would also like to restate that any adult who purchases such products for minors should also be penalized, and not the minors only. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (7) May 12, 1992 Scott Hopkins - Scott Hopkins, Manager of local Food 4 Less, said they believe in education and no prosecution to minors pertaining to the referenced tobacco issue. Food 4 Less stores do have vending machines which requires an I.D. check as well as obtaining a card from the manager to obtain such products from the vending machines. However, if the cigarette vending machines were not placed there, and it was not so easy to get the cigarettes, Mr. Hopkins said he would not have smoked for the four years that he did. Mr. Hopkins thanked Council for this opportunity to speak regarding this matter. Jack Hammond - Jack Hammond, Business Manager of Mblsberry Markets, Inc., said he also shared his concerns regarding the proposed tobacco ordinance at the previous hearing. Primarily, the referenced revisions to the ordinance make it workable, but it is very hard to write an ordinance that would fit every type of operation. Mir. Hammond said he thought this ordinance is going to be somewhat difficult, if not impossible, to enforce. If there is a reason that Council feels it necessary to enact an additional layer of law to the existing State law regarding restriction of tobacco sales to minors, the revisions could make it acceptable to merchants, even though this is basically a duplication of law that already exists. Rick Kropp Rick Kropp, Executive Director of North Bay Health Resources Center for STAMP, confirmed that if this tobacco ordinance is enacted, his organization will engage in a very comprehensive effort to assist with compliance checks through 1994 including provision of surveys, as well as following up on any technical information merchants may need, such as employee clerk training, etc., through the end of this year. He expressed appreciation to Council for considering this issue. There being no one further desiring to speak, Vice Mayor Hollingsworth closed the public hearing at approximately 7:20 p.m. A motion was made by Councilman Reilly to adopt Tobacco Ordinance No. 555, seconded by Councilman Eck in order to proceed with further discussion of the matter. Discussion followed during which Councilman Hopkins asked if there could be an inclusion of penalties in this ordinance for adults attempting to buy tobacco products for those under age, as well as penalties for the minors purchasing same. He said he could vote in favor of the ordinance, if this were the case, since he did not think it was fair to put the whole responsibility on the merchants. City Attorney Flitner confirmed such an amendment could be done. Councilman Hopkins made a motion to amend the ordinance to include above - described penalties to tobacco purchasers for minors and include said amendment in Councilman Reilly's motion for adoption. Further discussion followed regarding educational benefits of the ordinance as a policy statement regardless of enforcement feasibility; comparisons with duplication of State law with confirmation by Mr. Kropp for STAMP that none of the four provisions specified at the end of Section 2 are included in State law referring to adequate Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (8) May 12, 1992 surveillance of self- service displays, posting of age -of -sale warning signs, display of proper I.D. to purchase tobacco products, and restriction of vending machine cigarette sales; Mr. Jonas of Roger Wilco Market responded to Council inquiry that the revised ordinance basically has no impact on them other than what they already do and the rest is already covered in the State law. Council comments included concerns of previous experience of ordinances that require the City to prosecute with the expensive result of costing the City, as well as examples of promoting illegal sales of cigarettes such as is being experienced in New York, and comparisons with complications of former days regarding prohibition. Concluding comments established that the only remaining inconvenience to the merchants would be if certain vending machines would have to be placed where not accessible to minors, Mich would include surveillance provision, and that any barrier that might help stop a person from going through the devastation of results like cancer is worth the effort. A motion was made by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Hollingsworth, to call for the question, and unanimously approved by roll call vote. Councilman Hollingsworth said he could vote in favor of the motion to adopt the ordinance, if the penalties referenced within the ordinance were removed and the effort established as a pilot program for the period of one year and make a policy statement. This would basically put everyone involved in the issue on their honor for the period, and provide a way to make the statement that we are against smoking and the hazards caused by smoking. Ordinance AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REGULATING THE SALE AND No. 555 DISTRIBUTION OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS To PROTECT MINORS Upon above motion by Councilman Reilly with amendment to remove penalties section of the ordinance and proceed for a period of one (1) year as a pilot program to make a policy statement, seconded by Councilman Eck, and unanimously approved, reading of Ordinance No. 555 was waived and said ordinance was adopted. City Attorney Flitner confirmed removing penalties would include any violations of the code for a misdemeanor. Council agreed that the motion meant the removal of all penalties connected with the tobacco ordinance and directed City Attorney to make the language clear within the context of Ordinance No. 555. RECESS Vice Mayor Hollingsworth declared a recess at approximately 7:37 p.m. RECONVENE NL3y01' Spiro returned to the Chamber to preside over the remainder of Nbyor Spiro the meeting and reconvened the Council meeting at approximately returns 7:42 p.m. with all Councilmembers present. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (9) May 12, 1992 1) Resol.No. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RATES FOR TICKETS AND SUBSCRIPTIONS CHARGED 92 -82 AT THE DOROTHY ROHNERT SPRECKELS PERFORMING ARTS CENTER FOR THE 1992 -93 SEASON City Manager Netter explained the resolution as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo. He and Performing Arts Director Grice responded to various Council questions regarding same. Council Committee Member Eck said the Council Committee agrees with the report, and there are further suggestions in the works. He referenced performances that might not be sold out at certain times, as well as the advantage of a fuller house to enhance quality performance, and reviewed previous suggestion of enacting some type of program, not now but possibly for consideration in the near future, of providing tickets at reduced or no cost to certain related groups, such as the High School Drama Club. Upon motion by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, reading of Resolution No. 92 -82 was waived and said resolution was adopted. 2) Resol.No. A RESOLUTION APPROVING RENTAL RATES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1992 -93 FOR THE 92 -83 DOROTHY ROHNERT SPRECKELS PERFORMING ARTS CENTER AND APPROVING ADDITIONAL RENTAL POLICY TERM City Manager Netter explained the resolution as reviewed in the Council Nbeting Memo. He and Performing Arts Director Grice responded to various Council questions regarding same. Upon motion by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Eck, and unanimously approved, reading of Resolution No. 92 -83 was waived and said resolution was adopted. 3) Independent Evaluation Proposal: City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council of letter dated April 27, 1992 from AM Planning & Research Corp. and shared contents therein as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo regarding proposal for independent evaluation of Performing Arts Center operations. A motion was made by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Eck, and unanimously approved, to consider AM proposal during the upcoming budget review sessions. 4) Rohnert Park Symphony mater: City Manager Netter acknowledged Suzanne Anderson, who was present at tonight's meeting, and said it is very exciting to know that things are moving in a positive direction regarding contract negotiations on behalf of the Rohnert Park Symphony in establishing "a Symphony League ". Nis. Anderson confirmed that she and her husband, Tom, would be signing the agreement shortly with the Sonoma County Community Foundation. City Manager Netter expressed appreciation to Ms. Anderson for the efficient efforts involved toward this venture. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (10) May 12, 1992 Wine Center City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council of separate staff report dated May 7, 1992 regarding the Wine and Visitors Center Agreement and shared contents therein. He pointed out the specific changes within the context of the agreement and explained that the resolution for Council's consideration at this time was for the approval of the Wine Center Agreement as reviewed. Discussion followed during which Council Committee Members Mayor Spiro and Councilman Hollingsworth and City Manager Netter responded to various Council questions pertaining to the Wine Center Agreement. Discussion followed. Particular concerns were expressed regarding the need for additional language in the agreement clarifying the need for compatible use of the location, in the event that the Wine Center does not succeed, because of the option of consideration to other uses. Resolution A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK No. 92-84 AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING AGREEMr'TTT AND GROUND LEASE FOR WINE AND VISITORS CENTER Upon motion by Councilman Hopkins, seconded by Councilman Hollingsworth, subject to City's review and approval of alternate uses language amendment by City Attorney, reading of Resolution No. 92 -84 was waived and said resolution was adopted by the following vote: AYES: (4) Councilmen Eck, Hollingsworth, Hopkins, and Mayor Spiro NOES: (1) Councilman Reilly ABSENT: (0) None Planning and Zoning matters: File No. 1462 - Mayor Spiro said a public hearing was scheduled at this time regarding File No. 1462 - abandonment of a portion of Willis Avenue (Bloom Avenue) being a public road right of way 40 ft. wide by 465 ft. ± in length. Because it was necessary for the Planning Commission to continue this matter, this Council agenda item will be continued to the next Council meeting. Public Hearing - Mayor Spiro opened the public hearing at approximately 8:11 p.m. There being no ore desiring to speak, Mayor Spiro closed the public hearing, subject to re- opening at the next Council meeting. Cultural Arts Commission restructure: City Manager Netter said this item regarding the Cultural Arts Commission restructure was carried over from the previous Council meeting of April 28, 1992. He said staff met again yesterday with members of the Cultural Arts Commission regarding the proposed restructure and referenced copies provided to Council of draft document dated May 7, 1992 regarding Cultural Arts Commission revisions that would change Chapter 2.24 of the Rohnert Park Municipal Code. Mr. Netter explained that the Commission Members are considering putting the Cultural Arts Corporation into inactive status for now, since continuing the corporation would not be a necessity if Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (11) May 12, 1992 the Cultural Arts Commission becomes more solidified and formal. The Commission needs to review the changes further to see if it is going to agree with staff's recommendation of this approach so they can break themselves away from the corporation. The thrust is now toward establishing new guidelines to use the Commission for purposes for which it was designed, such as fund raising, etc. This approach would allow the Commission to become a single unit under one of the City Departments so when Council annually authorizes budget funding, it would be a budget item handled by the specified City Department. This matter will be brought back to Council for further review following Commission's acceptance and recommendation to Council of the referenced amendment to the Rohnert Park Municipal Code. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE: 1) Proposed City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council of staff Specific report explaining proposed Specific Plan ordinance and resolution Plan setting specific plan fees and shared contents therein as reviewed in Ordinance the Council Meeting Memo. He said the matter has been scheduled for public hearing before the Planning Commission on May 14th, 1992, afterwhich Planning Commission recommendations regarding same will be presented to City Council for consideration. W. Netter referenced the proposed specific plan area map on display and reviewed the eight (8) specific plan areas which break up the east area. Discussion followed during which Assistant to the City Manager Leivo responded to various Council questions regarding this matter pointing out that the referenced specific plan budget was generic and based on a typical cost of doing a specific plan. 2) Citizen's Survey: Assistant to the City Manager Leivo referenced copies provided to Council of the Rohnert Park Citizen's Survey prepared for distribution throughout the community. He responded to various Council questions regarding same and said the wording was generated from Council Subcommittee, General Plan Citizen's Committee, suggestions from citizens and staff. This survey will be mailed to every address in Rohnert Park. OPEN SPACE AND CONM&JITY SEPARAI ORS : 1) LAFCO Councilman Hopkins referenced copies provided to Council of letter dated May 4, 1992 from County Counsel regarding Commission Policy on community Separators and letter dated April 29, 1992 from Sonoma LAFCO regarding direction to County Counsel to prepare a draft policy for the preservation of community separator lands. Councilman Hopkins reported on results of LAFCO meting of May 7th, 1992 regarding this matter, and expressed concerns as reviewed in tonight's Council Meeting Memo. He said LAFCO adopted the policy that community separators will not be considered for annexation, which he argued and voted against, because there may be times when cities my want to do something other than that with the specified areas. He suspected that the County, from time to time, would decide to expand the community Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (12) May 12, 1992 separators. Under LAFCO policy, LAFCO would automatically refuse to consider annexation. This could be bad, but what could be worse, and could happen, is that the County could decide to put an entire area into comumity separator. He reference maps on display and pointed out specific areas as an example of this possibility. Councilman Hopkins said his experience has been that once these kinds of things get on the books and become policy, it puts the County in the driver's seat. This was the very reason LAFCO was generated in the first place. Mr. Hopkins said he did not think it was in the best interest to this City or any other city, and did not think others realized the full ramifications of the situation, but it is now LAFCO policy. 2) City's Sphere of Influence - West of U.S. 101: City Manager Netter referenced plans on display relating to the City's sphere of influence west of U. S. 101 regarding approximately 22 acres in the specified area and shared comments as reviewed in the Council Meeting Memo related to the adoption of LAFCO policy as reviewed above by Councilman Hopkins. Mr. Netter reviewed the matter in detail and said it is staff's recommndation that the City submit for a County General Plan Amendment to remove the 22 acres currently in the City's sphere of influence that is designated as Comnuzity Separator by the County's General Plan in order to be able to annex this area. City Manager Netter and Councilman Hopkins responded further to various Council questions regarding this matter. Discussion followed. A motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilman Hopkins, and unanimously approved, directing staff to proceed on the removal of the above- referenced 22 acres from the comnMity separator via Sonoma County General Plan Amendment, or other procedures as required by LAFCO. City Manager Netter referenced maps on display regarding Santa Rosa's urban boundaries in relation to open space. Discussion followed during which various concerns were reviewed regarding the referenced areas, development difficulty due to vernal pools in certain areas, forthcoming acquisition plan from the Open Space District with public hearings scheduled for the near future. Further discussion followed. Economic Developrrwnt Corporation: City Manager Netter said this item regarding the Economic Development Corporation was continued from the previous Council meeting summarized contents of report from Economic Development Board provided to Council for its information. Mr. Netter compared similarities of what happened to Cal -Wood Door, referred to cost and clean up of the property and the possibility of obtaining the land at under market price. Owners of the property feel they have a very worthy site and attenpts are being made for a lessee in that site. Mr. Netter said this information was provided as previously requested by Council. Discussion followed expressing concern regarding businesses that are moving out of the area, followed by review of funding possibilities to be reviewed at budget time. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (13) May 12, 1992 Communications- Communications per the attached outline were brought to the attention of the City Council. No action was taken unless specifically noted in these minutes. 1. Joe Faye letter - Councilman Eck referenced letter from Joe Faye raising an interesting question on lighting and asked if staff has looked into the matter. City Engineer Brust confirmed the letter had been forwarded to his attention and the issue is with staff in the budget process. Staff is making every effort to reduce lighting where possible to save on costs. Mr. Brust said he did not think the referenced area is a particular problem area. 2. Calaveras County Fair & Jumping Frog Jubilee - Mayor Spiro referenced the Mayor's Frog Jump scheduled on Sunday, May 17th during the 64th Annual Jubilee at the Calaveras County Fair from May 14 -17, 1992, and said she would not be in the area at that time because of her scheduled trip to Japan and, therefore, would not be able to participate in this year's frog jump. 3 through 5. City Manager Netter referenced three items on tonight's comn,inications list for Council's information and attention as follows: Item #5 - Sonoma County Tennis Association regarding recommendation for a tennis complex as part of proposed sports complex; Item #6 - University Athletic Assn. regarding funding request for 1992 -93 budget session; Item #9 - M. P. Rosen Inc. regarding California Young Woman of the Year Program, " Rohnert Park Night ", Wednesday, August 12, 1992. City Manager's Report: 1) Proposed 1992 -93 Budget - City Manager Netter said the proposed budget is completed and will be distributed to Council for review at the next Council meeting. 2) Sign language interpreter at Council meetings - City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council of staff reports dated April 22, 1992 and March 20, 1992 regarding sign language interpreter at Council meetings. He reviewed the matter and advised that the "Disabled Accommodation" statement was printed on the front of tonight's Council meeting agenda in order to comply with the American's with Disability Act (ADA) requirement. 3) California Department of Finance /Population estimates - City Manager Netter referenced copies provided to Council of the new population estimates from the California Department of Finance as of January 1, 1992 (copy attached to original set of these minutes). He shared comments reviewing percentage comparisons throughout the area and said the numbers wi l l be certified in the next week or so. 4) REMIF meeting in Anaheim, Ca., May 18 -22, 1992 - City Manager Netter said, for Council's information, he would be attending this REMIF meeting as previously scheduled. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (14) May 12, 1992 5) Hugh Codding project - City Manager Netter referred to initial stages of a Hugh Codding project for the furniture type store called Home Express to be located next to the new Wal-Mart. This item is scheduled for review at the next Planning Commission meeting this Thursday, and Mr. Codding has asked staff if he can start on the initial stages of grading and laying out the foundation. Council agreed it is an owner's option to do such work to his land as long as there is no development above ground. Councilman Eck said he would be expressing concerns he had about not liking the parking lot out front, when the time comes for Council to review this item. Councilman Reilly leaves - Councilman Reilly left the Chamber at approximately 9:07 p.m. 6) Garden site - City Manager Netter referenced recent efforts to identify a new garden site and advised that the hospital has agreed to use of the location proposed, therefore the garden would be raved to the new site in the near future. Councilman Eck compeeted that gardeners should be responsible for moving the garden dirt, if consideration is being given to moving their particular composted garden dirt, since the City should not be responsible for that kind of additional cost. 7) Guanella Bros. /Softball National Championships, Friday, May 22, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. - City Manager Netter reviewed upgrading work that has been done by the Guanella Bros. along with the Public Works Department, such as putting in new floors, repairing refrigerator, flooring, etc. at the City facility. Some bills will be paid to Guanella Bros. for the work they completed. Mr. Netter said he was sure the Mayor would need to be present to pass out the awards. Mayor Spiro responded that she may not be back from her Councilman trip to Japan by then, and may need a stand in for the occasion. Reilly returns - Councilman Reilly returned to the Chamber at approximately 9:10 p.m. City Attorney's Report: 1) Williamson Act Provisions - City Attorney Flitner referenced copies Provided to Council of his memo dated May 7, 1992 regarding Sierra Club v. City of Hayward (1981) "Williamson Act Case" (copy attached to -origirxal set of these minutes) and shared contents therein. He said this report was prepared in response to inquiry from Ms. Dawns Gallagher at the April 14, 1992 City Council meeting wherein she questioned Council's ability to annex real property subject to the Williamson Act and approve it for development when it was still encumbered with an Agricultural Preserve Contract, under Government Code Section 51200, et seq. Mr. Flitner said there would be public hearings held for this Hayward case and Council should be aware of the possibility of facing that type of action, but the referenced annexation should not be given up merely because the case exists. At the same time, Council should take a look at the case before Proceeding forward. In response to Council inquiry regarding the possibility that the developer may have to wait, City Attorney Flitner said this issue does not require signing, but just to wait out the terms. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (15) May 12, 1992 Discussion followed during which Councilman Hopkins said he did not recall Council reviewing this particular Williamson Act Case and that Council should always participate in opposing such cases for its own protection. 2) Rent Control litigation - City Attorney Flitner said out of the Rent Control litigation, there were several accounts filed against the City. He was happy to announce that out of six of those accounts filed, only two remain since three are falling away. With regard to Las Casitas, the Court had a problem regarding the amount of rents. He reviewed amounts left in by the Judge which Mr. Flitner said did not seem fair because they should recover the costs, as the ruling seemed to provide double recovery. City Attorney commented on the fees pertaining to the rent control trail that were reduced from about $384,000 to $323,000, of which $215,000 were the City's costs. As far as City staff is concerned, except for part of entering the record, all is on track. Matters from Council: 1) Rent Control /re- establish Council Committee - Following a brief discussion, Council concurred to appoint Councilman Eck and Councilman Reilly to re- establish the Nbbile Home Rent Control Council Committee. 2) City's Sphere of Influence (Spiro) - Council proceeded with discussion expressing continued concerns related to the City's Sphere of Influence including not changing the way Council handles the General Plan amendment; expectations of the property owner being much higher and more of a commitment than under the old requirements; concerns that the law has been tied up; the idea that the County can go ahead with another Canon Manor type of operation; and reference to the Press Democrat article in this morning's newspaper mentioned earlier during tonight's Council meeting regarding results of Press Democrat's annexation survey. Mayor Spiro requested City Attorney to report back at the next Council meeting regarding these Council concerns expressed tonight. 3) City Manager Netter said, for Council's information, the Redwood Empire Division /League of California Cities Quarterly Division meeting is scheduled in Willits, Calif., on Saturday, May 16, 1992. 4) Councilman Reilly referenced copy of complaint received regarding a crosswalk at La Fiesta School whereby trucks are parking on both sides and creating a visual hazard. City Engineer Brust explained the current approach taken, for notes to be placed on various vehicles, requesting the drivers not to park at this particular location on Lyman Way, since painting red curbs would inconvenience residents living on the other side of the street and already struggle with limited parking. Without stop signs, crosswalks tend to create more danger, since pedestrians are seldom noticed by motorists, if there are no stop signs. The roll out stop sign previously used by the school has been stolen, and Mr. Brust has been told the school cannot afford another one at this time. Rohnert Park City Council Minutes (16) May 12, 1992 Unscheduled Public Mayor Spiro asked if anyone in the audience wished to make an Appearances appearance at this time. Keith Hallock - Keith Hallock, 1500 Baumgardner Lane, said he would like an update on the retrofit program he understands the City plans to do. City Manager Netter responded the matter is in staff discussion only at this point and has not yet been presented to Council for review. The matter will be presented to Council for consideration at a later date. Mr. Hallock asked for clarification regarding Council's earlier direction to City Attorney regarding Williamson Act Provisions. Councilman Hollingsworth responded there would have to be over - riding considerations. City Attorney will make recommendations and Council Mold then make determination regarding the matter. Peter Sterba - Peter Sterba, 544 Santa Alicia, expressed concern regarding traffic signal sensor sensitivity for about 1/2 to 2/3 of Rohnert Park's traffic signals that fail to determine a waiting motorcyclist. City Engineer Brust responded that the complexity of signal installation would not allow adjustment for the referenced light weight motorcyclists and confirmed the need for such cyclists to use the walk buttons to activate changing the lights. Adjournment Mayor Spiro adjourned the meeting at approximately 9:35 p.m. De Ci C I erk Mayor r: t J � L E R COMMUNITY COMMITMEN 11 chalelenge , • to engage WHAT IS THE 24 HOUR RELAY CHALLENGE ? The Cotati - Rohnert Park 24 hour Relay Challenge is a non - competitive endurance experience, a celebration of community spirit and a giant campout all rolled into one incredible day. It takes place at Rancho Cotate High School and will involve up to 30 student and adult teams, (10 participants per team), and hundreds of community volunteers. All day and night, team members take turns walking or running a mile at a time, around the track while friends provide support and encouragement. Dawn brings euphoric exhaustion as team members, volunteers and friends complete their goal: 24 hours of commitment, community involvement and drug, alcohol and tobacco -free fun. HOW DOES THE EVENT WORW ? Funds are raised by the team registration fee and by obtaining sponsors. Each team member is respon- sible for raising $35 (student teams) or $50 (adult teams). Sponsors can be family members, relatives, friends, co- workers, businesses or the participant. Suggested minimum contribution is $5.00 per sponsor. All contributions from sponsors are collected up front and are required to be turned in to team captain by May 1 st, 1992. ALL CONTRIBUTIONS ARE TAX DEDUCTIBLE. HOW TO PARTICIPATE? Individuals interested in forming a team can pick up a team registration form at Rancho Cotate High School Administration Office or the Sonoma County Associates for Youth Development Offices, 5550 State Farm Drive, #E, or by calling (707) 586 -3414 for more information. 24 HOUR RELAY HELP AND INFORMATION LINE If you would like to participate and would like to be placed on a team or you would like to volunteer time or make a donation please contact: Cecelia Belle 556 -3414 Kim Bricker 792 -4750 Jay George 792-0726 hal e len e (chal enj )n. 2. The quality of requiring full use of one's abilities. JHO BENEFITS? All proceeds go to support the Cotati — Rohnert Park Unified School District HEALTHY KIDS PROGRAM ad SONOMA COUNTY ASSOCIATES FOR YOUTH DEVELOPMENT, our local non - profit who pro - ides prevention and counseling support to the HEALTHY KIDS PROGRAM. �G �G fG �s �J�GE 5� PFP \N S dwiduai /C V Saturday, May 30 5:00 pm to 8:00 pm 9:00 am to 10:30 am 6:00 am to 9:00 am Relay Dinner and Get Together. Registration & Check In. Pancake Breakfast. 10:30 am to 10:55 am Opening Ceremonies, Relay Instruc- tions. 11:00 am Start of Relay Snack Bar open, Entertainment, Activities, on -going throughout the day. 11:00 pm School grounds closed to non — participants. 10:45 am Team Reconition, Awards Presenta- tion, Closing Ceremony. 11:00 am Relay Ends. SPITALITY AWARDS Relay Participants Recieve Recognition Will Be Given For ® Pre Relay Dinner. ® Participant with the Highest Sponsorship. ® 24 Hour Relay T— Shirt. ® Team with the Highest Sponsorship. ® Refreshments. ® Most Inspirational Team. e Pancake Breakfast. ® Best Team Banner. ® Medical Assistance. ® Open Team with the most miles. ® Recognition & Awards. ® Walking Team with the most miles. RELAY RULES AND REGULATIONS There are two relay divisions — OPEN — all runners or combined teams of runners and walkers and WALKERS — walking only. Participants in the open division may walk, however walkers may not run. Each team must have a designated captain. Each student team must have an adult chaperone —21 or older present at all times. Each team must decide on the order its members will be running or walking, and this order must be maintained throughout the Relay. There are no subsitutes. If a team member drops out, the team must continue with the remaining team members. Each person must run or walk exactly one mile each time its their turn. Each person must carry a baton when on the track and it must be handed to the next runner /walker in the designated baton changing area. Batons are supplied by the Relay. Each person must check -in at the Scoring Table after completing each mile. No alcohol, tobacco or other drugs are allowed at the site. Saturday night at 11:00 p.m., school grounds will be closed to non - participants. No dogs please! Most important rule: To have fun! REGISTRATION INFORMATION A team consists of 10 members. Each student team member is responsible for a $35.00 minimum contribution. The registration fee per student team is $350.00. Each adult team member is responsible for a $50.00 minimum contribution. The registration fee per adult team is $500.00. Each team member must complete an individual sponsor sheet, clearly identifying the team name and the team captain. Sponsor sheet & donations must be turned in by May 1st to the team captain. Return all team members sponsor sheets and donations by May lst. Complete team registration form. Please make sure form includes chaperone's name for student teams. Attend mandatory team captains's meeting. Date and time to be announced. Turn in the completed team registration form as well as the order the team will be running /walking to Sonoma County Associates for Youth Development office or Rancho Cotate High School by May 1st. ! ft it, 41 v-. Qy (j --- �.�/4®2 -- s - s- 9 a p� r.� � el.I ENCLOSURE 11 ANNUAL PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN POPULATION MINUS EXCLUSIONS', JANUARY 1, 1991 DATE PRINTED TO JANUARY 1, 1992 AND TOTAL POPULATION JANUARY 1, 1992. 04/27/92 COUNTY CITY POPULATION MINUS EXCLUSIONS ANNUAL PERCENT CHANGE 1991 TO 1992 POPULATION 1 -1 -91 1 -1 -92 TOTAL POPULATION 1 -1 -92 SONOMA CLOVERDALE 4.20 5 :071 -. _.1.- 5,2$4 -- - -- 5,284 - COTATI 3.60 5,938 6,152 6,152 HEALDSSURG 0.75 9,599 9,671 9,671 PETALUMA --� ROHNERT PARK 2.72._ 3_.�$ 43,558 37,G4.2 44,742 38,22.0 44,742 38,2 .9 SANTA ROSA — 11"05, 120,181 120,181 3.52 SEBASTOPOL 0.86 7,215 7,277 7,277 SONOMA 1.89 8,254 8,410 8,410 UNINCORPORATED 1.63 162,063 164,707 167,250 SONOMA COUNTY 2.48 394,836 404,644 407,187 � EXCLUSIONS INCLUDE STATE MENTAL INSTITUTIONS, FEDERAL MILITARY GASES AKp SLATE AND FEDERAL PRISONS. PAGE 1 MEMORANDUM TO: City Council RE: Sierra Club v.___CitV of pia a d (1981) 28 Cal.3d 840 "Williamson Act Case" DATE: May 7, 1992 FROM: John D. Flitner At the April 14, 1992 City Council meeting, Ms. Dawna Gallagher appeared before the City Council and questioned its ability to annex real property subject to the Williamson Act and approve it for development when it was still encumbered with an Agricultural Preserve Contract, under Government Code §51200, at seq. As the Council knows, the Williamson Act.was enacted in 1965 by the California legislature before Proposition 13 was approved by the people. The legislative purpose was to preserve agricultural land and to slow the process whereby agricultural land was acquired for subdivision. Property that met the requirements placed in an agricultural preserve If either party wished to cancel t out of the agricultural preserve i receipt of notice of cancellation suppressed while the property was comparable "market" tax rates for For property within a mile of the withdrawn more quickly if the city the contract when it was proposed and standards of the Act was for a ten (10) year period. he contract the property came n 10 years from the date of and the property tax, in the contract, rose to comparable property. city limits of a city could be "Protested" the formation of and signed. The Act provides that property can be removed from the agricultural preserve and the contract can be canceled by a hearing process before the agency with jurisdiction provided the public agency can find 11(1) That the cancellation is consistent with the purposes of this chapter; or (2) That cancellation is in the public interest." Government Code §51282. If the council makes the first finding (cancellation is consistent with the purposes of the Williamson Act) then it must also be able to make all of the following findings: (1) Cancellation is for land on which a notice of nonrenewal was served under the Williamson Act. (2) Cancellation is not likely to remove other adjacent land from agricultural use. (3) Cancellation is for an alternate use which is consistent with the applicable provisions of the city or county genreal plan. (4) Cancellation will not result in discontiguous portions of development. (5) "There is no proximate noncontracted land which is both available and suitable for the ". . . proposed use or "that development of the contracted land would provide more contiguous practices of urban development than development of proximate noncontracted land." If the Council chooses to make the finding that cancellation of the contract is in the public interest then the Council or board must make the following finding: (1) that other public concerns substantially outweigh the objectives of this chapter; and (2) that there is no proximate noncontracted land which is both available and suitable for the use to which it is proposed the contracted land be put, or, that development of the contracted land would provide more contiguous patterns of urban development than development of proximate non- contracted land." In the Hayward_ case, the Sodas owned a 2300 -acre cattle ranch in the foothills east of Hayward. Until 1979, 600 -acres of the land was part of an agricultural preserve created by Hayward in 1969. The contract had been renewed annually. In 1978 Sodas petitioned the city for cancellation of the land preservation agreement as to a 93 -acre parcel. Ponderosa Homes filed a zone change application requesting a change from agricultural to planned development. The City Council considered the application for zone change and the cancellation request. The City Council held the hearings and canceled the contract. The council found that: 1. The cancellation was not inconsistent with the Act. 2. Removal of the small parcel would not jeopardize the use of the remaining land. 3. Development would benefit urban dwellers who needed homes. 2 4. A dedication of 30 -acres of land to the City of Hayward -or open space (presumably a requirement of an agreed consideration for the annexation) benefitted the city. The Sierra Club challenged the City Council determination and findings. The court sustained the Sierra Club and awarded the Sierra Club attorney's fees and costs. The court took note of the statement of purpose in the Williamson Act, i. e., preservation of agricultural land, the need to discourage and monitor premature development, the need for agricultural land in an urban society. The court felt that cancellation was appropriate only in "strictly emergency situations." The opinion also quoted from an Attorney General opinion holding the cancellation impermissible "except upon extreme stringent conditions." The court referred to alleged abuses of the Act and noted that ,1. . . In 1978 the legislature reaffirmed its resolve to make cancellations the exception to the general rule of termination by nonrenewal." The court stated: "In short, we harbor no doubt that the legislature intended cancellation tc be approved only in the most extraordinary circumstances." I will not quote further from the opinion and will only observe that the court, by a 4 (Chief Justice Bird, Judge Tobriner, Judge Newman with Justice Mosk writing the opinion) to 2 (Justices Clark and Richardson dissenting) held that Hayward had not justified its findings to terminate the contract. Since that time the court has changed and it is possible that findings could be made to support a public agency decision to terminate. I think the findings would have to be well founded and made as the solid majority of the court in a relatively recent case (1981) is a formidable obstacle. Respectfully submitted, John D. Flitner City Attorney 3