Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016/03/08 City Council Agenda Packet,qj)yiNRRT PAR �Y , CALI FORM/ Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow. " City of Rohnert Park ♦ 130 Avram Avenue ♦ Rohnert Park, California 94928 PHONE: (707) 588-2227+ FAX: (707) 794-9248 ♦ WEB: www.mcity.org ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL Rohnert Park Financing Authority (RPFA) Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission (CDC) JOINT REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, March 8, 2016 Open Session: 5:00 p.m. MEETING LOCATION: CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBER 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California The Rohnert Park City Council welcomes your attendance, interest and participation at its regular city meetings scheduled on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. City Council/RPFA agendas and minutes may be viewed at the City's website: www.rpcity.org. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Council/RPFA may discuss and/or take action on any or all of the items listed on this agenda. If you challenge decisions of the City Council or the Rohnert Park Financing Authority of the City of Rohnert Park in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Rohnert Park at, or prior to the public hearing(s). RIGHT TO APPEAL: Judicial review of any city administrative decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5 may be had only if a petition is filed with the court no later than the deadlines specified in Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits the time within which the decision may be challenged to the 90th day following the date that the decision becomes final. SIMULTANEOUS MEETING COMPENSATION DISCLOSURE (Government Code § 54952.3): Members of the City Council receive no additional compensation as a result of convening this joint meeting of the City Council and the Rohnert Park Financing Authority. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Provides an opportunity for public comment on items not listed on the agenda, or on agenda items if unable to comment at the scheduled time (limited to three minutes per appearance and a 30 minute total time limit, or allocation of time determined by Presiding Officer based on number of speaker cards submitted). PLEASE FILL OUT A SPEAKER CARD PRIOR TO SPEAKING ANNOUNCEMENT: Please turn off all pagers, cellular telephones and all other communication devices upon entering the Council Chamber. Use of these devices causes electrical interference with the sound recording and TV broadcast systems. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Agenda March 8, 2016 for City Council/RPFA/CDC Successor Agency Page 2 of 5 1. CITY COUNCIL/RPFA/SUCCESSOR AGENCY JOINT REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL (Ahanotu _ Callinan_ Stafford _ Mackenzie _ Belforte —) 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. PRESENTATIONS A. Mayor's Proclamation: Honoring Rancho Cotate High School Teacher Bill Hartman and his Wood Shop Students for their Community Building Efforts in Support of Social Advocates for Youth's New Dream Center 4. SSU STUDENT REPORT By Shannon Garcia, Legislative Representative, Sonoma State University Associated Students, Inc. (SSU ASI) 5. DEPARTMENT HEAD BRIEFING 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS Persons wishing to address the Council on any Consent Calendar item or on City business not listed on the Agenda may do so at this time. Each speaker will be allotted three minutes. Those wishing to address the Council on any report item listed on the Agenda should submit a "Speaker Card" to the City Clerk before announcement of that agenda item. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR All items on the Consent Calendar will be considered together by one or more action(s) of the City Council and/or the Rohnert Park Financing Authority and Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission, whichever is applicable, unless any Council Member or anyone else interested in a consent calendar item has a question about the item. A. Approval of Minutes for: 1. City Council/RPFA/Successor Agency Joint Regular Meeting, February 9, 2016 2. City Council/RPFA/Successor Agency Joint Regular Meeting, February 23, 2016 B. Acceptance of Reports for: 1. City Bills/Demands for Payment dated March 8, 2016 C. City Council Resolutions for Adoption: 1. 2016-19 Approving the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges Revised February 24, 2016 2. 2016-20 Amending Resolution 2011-40 Regarding the Disbursement of Funds from California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust (CERBT) Services 2016-21 Authorizing the Purchase of Sixty (60) VieVu Body Worn Cameras (BWC) Including Software, Related Equipment and an Internal Storage Solution for the Department of Public Safety Not to Exceed $100,000 City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Agenda March 8, 2016 for City Council/RPFA/CDC Successor Agency Page 3 of 5 D. Accept Resignation from Senior Citizens Advisory Commission Member Dolores Barron and Direct Staff to Send Letter of Appreciation Council Motion/Vote 8. CLOSED SESSION A. Recess to Closed Session in Conference Room 2A to Consider: 1. Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code §54956.8) Property: 435 Southwest Boulevard (APN: 143-370-010) City Negotiator: Darrin Jenkins, City Manager Negotiating Parties: Andre Shashaty and Craig Burnett Under Negotiation: Price and Terms 2. Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code §54956.8) Property: 6750 Commerce Blvd. (APN: 143-380-015); 100 Avram Avenue (APNs: 143-380-022 through 029); and 120 Avram Avenue (APN: 143-061- 052) City Negotiator: Darrin Jenkins, City Manager Negotiating Parties: PMB Development Company, Barney Aldridge Under Negotiation: Price and Terms B. Reconvene Joint Regular Meeting Open Session in Council Chamber C. Report On Closed Session (Government Code § 54957.1) 9. Consideration of Letter Opposing Sonoma County Agricultural and Open Space Preservation District's Young-Armos Incubator Farm A. Staff Report B. Public Comment C. Council discussion/action 10. Consideration of City Video Surveillance Cameras and Policy A. Staff Report B. Public Comment C. Council discussion/direction 11. Acceptance of Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year 2014-15, and Proposition 4 Article XIII -B (GANN) Limit Agreed -Upon Procedures Report for Fiscal Year 2015-16 A. Presentation of Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended 2014- 15, and Proposition 4 Article XIII -B (GANN) Limit Agreed -Upon Procedures Report for Year Ending June 30, 2016 B. Public Comment C. Council discussion/receive reports 12. Graton Mitigation Program Budget 2014-15 Year -End Update A. Staff Report B. Public Comment C. Council discussion/direction City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Agenda March 8, 2016 for City Council/RPFAICDC Successor Agency Page 4 of 5 13. PUBLIC HEARING (NO EARLIER THAN 6PM) Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area Plan and Related Final Environmental Impact Report, Amendments to the General Plan, and Amendments to the Zoning Map and Ordinance A. Staff Report B. Open Public Hearing C. Move to Continue Public Hearing to March 22, 2016 14. COMMITTEE / LIAISON / OTHER REPORTS This time is set aside to allow Council members serving on Council committees or on regional boards, commissions or committees to present a verbal report on the activities of the respective boards, commissions or committees on which they serve. No action may be taken. A. Standing Committee Reports B. Liaison Reports 1. Health Action Council (3/4) 2. Russian River Watershed Association (2/25) C. Other Reports 15. COMMUNICATIONS Copies of communications have been provided to Council for review prior to this meeting. Council Members desiring to read or discuss any communication may do so at this time. No action may be taken except to place a particular item on a future agenda for Council consideration. 16. MATTERS FROM/FOR COUNCIL Prior to agenda publication, any Councilmember may place an item on this portion of the agenda. Upon the concurrence of two Councilmembers, the item may be added to a subsequent agenda for deliberation and action. In accordance with the Brown Act, at the City Council meeting, Councilmembers may not add items hereunder, except for brief reports on his or her own activities or brief announcements regarding an event of community interest. 17. PUBLIC COMMENTS Persons wishing to address the Council on City business not listed on the Agenda may do so at this time. Each speaker will be allotted three minutes. Those wishing to address the Council on any report item listed on the Agenda should submit a "Speaker Card" to the City Clerk before announcement of that agenda item. 18. ADJOURNMENT City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Agenda March 8, 2016 for City Council/RPFA/CDC Successor Agency Page 5 of 5 NOTE: Time shown for any particular matter on the agenda is an estimate only. Matters may be considered earlier or later than the time indicated depending on the pace at which the meeting proceeds. If you wish to speak on an item under discussion by the Council which appears on this agenda, after receiving recognition from the Mayor, please walk to the rostrum and state your name and address for the record. Any item raised by a member of the public which is not on the agenda and may require Council action shall be automatically referred to staff for investigation and disposition which may include placing on a future agenda. If the item is deemed to be an emergency or the need to take action arose after posting of the agenda within the meaning of Government Code Section 54954.2(b), Council is entitled to discuss the matter to determine if it is an emergency item under said Government Code and may take action thereon. DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: If you have a disability which requires an interpreter or other person to assist you while attending this City Council meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at (707) 588-2227 at least 72 hours prior to the meeting to ensure arrangements for accommodation by the City. Please notify the City Clerk's Office as soon as possible if you have a visual impairment requiring meeting materials to be produced in another format (Braille, audio -tape, etc.) AGENDA REPORTS & DOCUMENTS: Copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to each item of business referred to on the agenda are available for public inspection at City Hall located at 130 Avram Avenue, during regular business hours, Monday through Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. Any writings or documents subject to disclosure that are provided to all, or a majority of all, of the members of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda after the agenda has been distributed will also be made available for inspection at City Hall during regular business hours. CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA I, Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk for the City of Rohnert Park, declare that the foregoing agenda for the March 8, 2016, Joint Regular Meeting of the Rohnert Park City Council/RPFA was posted and available for review on March 3, 2016, at Rohnert Park City Hall, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 94928. The agenda is also available on the City web site at www.rpcity.org, Executed this 3`d day of March, 2016, at Rohnert Park, California. Caitlin Saldanha, Deputy City Clerk CtVtt,Ftf16q44gg+& of �ecogttitfon 0ortorino RANCHO COTATE HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER BILL HARTMAN AND HIS WOOD SHOP STUDENTS for their Community Building Efforts in Support of Social Advocates 60r Youth's Nein Dream Center As Mayor, and on behalf of the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park, I do hereby recognize and honor Rancho Cotate High School teacher Bill Hartman and his woodshop students for their community building efforts in support of Social Advocate for Youth's new Dream Center, a new housing facility for at -risk young adults. Last year, Bill's students had a dream; a dream to be of service that would send a strong message to the youth staying at the Dream Center ... a message that they are cared for by other teens andpeers their age. This year, through innovation, dedication, skill and compassion, the students constructed numerous wardrobes for the new Dream Center and also successfully raised money to help pay for some of the shop supplies. We are deeply honored to recognize this inspiring group for their amazing show of compassion and dedication towards serving youth in need in our community. By: Signed this e day of March, 2016 Oina e-Iforte, fRapor SAY F1 .0, The 41 11 ow WZ&L/h�44 f �w t y p IF l- 1 4 r i a � �i U r u � o W t —{ er PL - im 4 rte.+ r •, 1 r AM hp t Is pw lil rsm; - Nbe. F ±� G,lime w i r Y � r This .Armoire lVas Buf0t rBy The 1/I 1 / StudentsAt 4 Rancho Cotate Hit"fgh School Rohnert Park January 2oi6 Go Confit"dentcy In The Direction Of Your Dreams. Live I'he Life you Have Imagined -Henry Thoreau CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date:.3 ek, Agenda Item #:_ ' Name: 1 4tS, Address: TOPIC: �('� •:� . Brief Summary of Comments: !> See Reverse —> CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CAIN] Date: Agenda Item #:11 V �� Name: 47 Address:'C.f Phone: TOPIC:/�� See Reverse —� MINUTES OF THE JOINT REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK City Council Rohnert Park Financing Authority Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission Tuesday, February 9, 2016 Rohnert Park City Hall, Council Chamber 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 1. CITY COUNCIL/RPFA/SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE CDC JOINT REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Mayor Belforte called the joint regular meeting to order at 5:00 pm, the notice for which being legally noticed on February 4, 2016. Present: Gina Belforte, Mayor Jake Mackenzie, Vice Mayor (arrived 5:01) Amy O. Ahanotu, Councilmember Joseph T. Callinan, Councilmember 40L Pam Stafford, Councilmember Absent: None Staff present: City Manager Jenkins, Assistant City Manager Schwartz, City Attorney Marchetta-Kenyon, City Clerk Buergler, Senior Analyst Atkins, Finance Director Howze, Development Services Director Pawson, Director of Public Works and Community Services McArthur, Director of Public Safety Masterson, Human Resources Director Perrault, and Planning Manager Beiswenger. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Lisa Bauman, Technology Middle School teacher. 3. PRESENTATIONS A. Mayor's Certificate of Recognition: Honoring Technology Middle School Teachers for Hosting the `Hour of Code' Benefitting Rohnert Park Students Mayor Belforte read and presented the Certificate to Lisa Bauman, teacher at Technology Middle School. 4. SSU STUDENT REPORT Shannon Garcia, Legislative Representative, Sonoma State University Associated Students, Inc. (SSU ASI) reported Judy Sakaki is the new university president. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes February 09, 2016 for City Council/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 2 of 5 5. DEPARTMENT HEAD BRIEFING None. 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS Tina Torres proposed amending code section 8.32.040- Prohibition on smoking in enclosed areas to include inside residence and 8.32.050- Prohibition on smoking in unenclosed areas to include front and rear patios. Carol Sherman expressed concern for seniors' housing rights and protection. Tornio Endo, Farmster member, announced the launch of Sonoma Mountain Community Farm, a new non-profit project, located at Sonoma Mountain Village. He is seeking communication with the City in an effort to receive community input and to find out if their farm can serve any City initiatives currently in place. February 19, Farmster is holding a kickoff event at Sally Tomatoes. 7. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of Minutes for: 1. None. B. Acceptance of Reports for: 1. City Bills/Demands for Payment dated February 9, 2016 C. City Council Resolutions for Adoption: 1. 2016-012 Authorizing the Purchase of One Patrol Car Vehicle Not to Exceed $45,000 and 12 Security Cameras and Authorizing the Finance Director to Increase Appropriations by $57,000 to the State Asset Forfeiture Fund 2. 2016-013 Amending Resolution 84-88 To Establish a Five (5) Member Sister Cities Relations Committee D. Approve 2016 Update to the City's Strategic Plan E. Approve ove Elimi ,.,tion of Economie Development, Write and n o,,yeling City Couneil Standing Committees (PULLED by Stafford) ACTION: Moved/seconded (Callinan/Stafford) to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by the following unanimous 5-0 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. E. Approve Elimination of Economic Development, Waste and Recycling, and Education City Council Standing Committees ACTION: Moved/seconded (Mackenzie/Ahanotu) to table the item. Motion carried by the following unanimous 5-0 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes February 09, 2016 for City Council/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 3 of 5 8. CLOSED SESSION A. Mayor Belforte made the closed session announcement pursuant to Government Code §54957.7 and Council recessed to Closed Session at 5:23 pm in Conference Room 2A to Consider: 1. Conference with Real Property Negotiators (Government Code §54956.8) Property: 6750 Commerce Blvd. (APN: 143-380-015); 100 Avram Avenue (APNs: 143-380-022 through 029); and 120 Avram Avenue (APN: 143-061-052) City Negotiator: Darrin Jenkins, City Manager Negotiating Parties: Barney Aldridge Under Negotiation: Price and Terms 2. Conference with Legal Counsel — Anticipated Litigation - Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code §54956.9(d)(2): (One Case) B. Reconvened Joint Regular Meeting Open Session in Council Chamber at 5:44 pm C. Report on Closed Session (Government Code § 54957.1) Mayor Belforte reported: no reportable action. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Mackenzie/Stafford) to reorder the agenda, moving Item 12 before Item 9. Motion carried by the following 5-0 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. 12. Adoption of an Ordinance to Prohibit Marijuana Activities in the City, with an Exception to Allow for a Limited Amount of Indoor Personal Cultivation of Medical Marijuana Amending Chapters 17.02 (General Provisions), 17.04 (Definitions) and 17.06 (Land Use Regulations) of the Zoning Ordinance, and Adoption of a New Chapter 8.30 (Marijuana Cultivation, Processing, Delivery, and Dispensaries) of the Municipal Code and Finding the Action Exempt Under CEQA Planning Manager Beiswenger presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Adopt Ordinance 896. Public Comment in Opposition: Brian Dombrowski is in support of allowing a highly regulated system in Rohnert Park. Curtis Craft supports outdoor growing. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Stafford/Ahanotu) to adopt Ordinance 896 An Ordinance of the City of Rohnert Park, Amending Chapters 17.02 (General Provisions), 17.04 (Definitions), and 17.06 (Land Use Regulations) of the Zoning Ordinance, and Adoption of a New Chapter 8.30 (Marijuana Cultivation, Processing, Delivery, and Dispensaries) of the Municipal Code. Title read by Mayor Belforte. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes February 09, 2016 for City Council/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 4 of 5 Motion carried by the following 3-2-0 roll call vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Stafford, and Belforte, NOS: Mackenzie and Callinan, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. 9. Discussion and Direction on Amending the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws of the City of Rohnert Park Foundation Senior Analyst Atkins presented the item. Recommended Action(s): provide direction on amending the Articles of Incorporation and the bylaws of the City of Rohnert Park Foundation. Public Comment: None ACTION: By Consensus (none opposed), City Council supported the amendments staff presented. 10. General Fund 10 -Year Financial Forecast Update City Manager Jenkins presented the item. Recommended Action(s): receive and discuss a report of the City's projected financial condition as staff prepares the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2016-17. Public Comment: None Recessed 6:30 pm Reconvened 6:35 pm ACTION: By Consensus (none opposed), City Council received report. 11. Consideration of Authorizing Contributions of $6,633,323 Toward Unfunded Post - employment Benefit Liabilities and Increasing Appropriations by $1,333,323 City Manager Jenkins presented the item. Recommended Action(s): authorize transferring $3,333,323 into the City's Pension Trust Fund and transferring $3,300,000 into the City's Other Post -Employment Benefits Trust Fund in Fiscal Year 2015-16. Public Comment: None. Vice Mayor Mackenzie stated for the record he supports the course of action and reflects what we need to continue to do. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Stafford/Callinan) to adopt Resolution 2016-014 Authorizing Contributions of $6,633,323 Toward Unfunded Post - employment Benefits Liabilities and Increasing Appropriations by $1,333,323. Motion carried by the following unanimous 5-0 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, Mackenzie, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: None. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes February 09, 2016 for City Council/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 5 of 5 13. COMMITTEE / LIAISON/ OTHER REPORTS A. Standing Committee Reports None. B. Liaison Reports Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) (2/8) Vice Mayor Mackenzie reported SCTA received a letter of congratulations from the President regarding Sonoma County's efforts on climate change. 2. Water Advisory Committee (WAC) (2/1) Vice Mayor Mackenzie reported Mike Healy has been named Chair and Laurie Gallian Vice Chair. The Russian River Watershed is in good condition related to the drought. C. Other Reports Chamber of Commerce Women in Business (2/9) City Manager Jenkins reported the Lions Club wants to establish a club in Rohnert Park and are meeting at noon on Friday at the Cotati Lions Club for anyone interest in participating. Sonoma Countv Agricultural Preservation and OUen Snace District Mayor Belforte reported the City Manager, Vice Mayor, and she attended the February 8, 2016 community meeting regarding an incubator farm being proposed on 40 acres owned by Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District. Most of the attendees were against the project. The District will be making a presentation to City Council in the future. Vice Mayor Mackenzie said another community meeting will be held Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 6:00 pm at Laurence Jones Middle School. 14. COMMUNICATIONS None. 15. MATTERS FROM/FOR COUNCIL None. 16. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. 17. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Belforte adjourned the joint regular meeting at 7:10 pm. JoAnne M. Buergler, City Clerk City of Rohnert Park Gina Belforte, Mayor City of Rohnert Park MINUTES OF THE JOINT REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK City Council Rohnert Park Financing Authority Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission Tuesday, February 23, 2016 Rohnert Park City Hall, Council Chamber 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 1. CITY COUNCIL/RPFA/SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE CDC JOINT REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Mayor Belforte called the joint regular meeting to order at 5:00 pm, the notice for which being legally noticed on February 18, 2016. Present: Gina Belforte, Mayor Amy O. Ahanotu, Councilmember Joseph T. Callinan, Councilmember Jake Mackenzie, Vice Mayor (arrived 5:51 pm) Pam Stafford, Councilmember (absent after 5:49 pm) Absent: See above. Staff present: City Manager Jenkins, Assistant City Manager Schwartz, Deputy City Attorney Herrington, City Clerk Buergler, Senior Analyst Atkins, Finance Director Howze, Development Services Director Pawson, Director of Public Works and Community Services McArthur, Director of Public Safety Masterson, Commander Strouse, Crime Analyst Jill Kempf, Commander Taylor, Planning Manager Beiswenger, Theater Manager Abravaya, and Public Safety Officer Smith. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Led by Public Safety Officer Smith. 3. PRESENTATIONS A. Mayor's Certificate of Recognition: Honoring Public Safety Officer Debbie Smith for Providing Exemplary Service in the Community Mayor Belforte read and presented the Certificate to Public Safety Officer Smith. 4. DEPARTMENT HEAD BRIEFING A. Public Safety: Announcement on Citizens Academy and Annual Crime Report City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes February 23, 2016 for City Council/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 2 of 4 Director of Public Safety Masterson and Crime Analyst Kempf provided the Annual Crime Report. B. Community Services: Billy Joel Tribute Fundraiser at Spreckles Performing Arts Center Theater Manager Abravaya announced the tribute will be March 19, 2016; "Wait Until Dark" will run March 11 to April 3, 216; and the "Little Mermaid" will run April 29 to May 22, 2016. 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of Minutes for: 1. City Council/RPFA/Successor Agency Joint Regular Meeting, January 26, 2016 B. Acceptance of Reports for: 1. City Bills/Demands for Payment dated February 23, 2016 2. Successor Agency to the CDC Bills/Demands for Payment dated February 23, 2016 3. RPFA- Cash Report for Month Ending January 2016 4. Housing Successor Agency- Cash Report for Month Ending January 2016 5. Successor Agency- Cash Report for Month Ending January 2016 C. City Council Resolutions for Adoption: 1.201 6 015 Authorizing the Addition of a Fell Time C,,,....,.,.mnit y Sen4ees Officci Position i the Public Safety Depa,-*ment (PULLED by Callinan) 2. 2016-016 Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Master Service Agreements with Brelje & Race, W -Trans, Green Valley Consulting Engineers, Cinquim & Passarino, Inc., and Moe Engineering 3. 2016-017 Approving the Position Title, Salary Range and Associated Job Description for Planner I/II in the Development Services Department 4. 2016-018 Approving Task Order 2016-01 with W -Trans for a Regional Traffic Fee Study (City Project 2016-04) and Authorizing the Finance Director to Take Related Actions ACTION: Moved/seconded (Stafford/Ahanotu) to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried by the following unanimous 4-0-1 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: Mackenzie. C. City Council Resolutions for Adoption: 1. 2016-015 Authorizing the Addition of a Full Time Community Services Officer Position in the Public Safety Department ACTION: Moved/seconded (Callinan/Stafford) to approve Resolution 2016-015. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes February 23, 2016 for City Council/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 3 of 4 Motion carried by the following unanimous 4-0-1 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Stafford, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: Mackenzie. 7. Consideration of Body Worn Cameras for Public Safety Officers Director of Public Safety Masterson and Commander Strouse presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Proceed with Body Worn Cameras to promote improved practices in Public Safety, including the associated policies on use of cameras, retention of videos, and access to videos. Public Comment: None Councilmember Stafford left the meeting at 5:49 pm. Vice Mayor Mackenzie arrived 5:51 pm. ACTION: By Consensus (none opposed, Stafford absent), City Council directed staff to move forward with the recommended actions and bring the item back for approval. Staff will provide an update after a year of use. 8. Accept the July 1, 2015 Other Post -Employment Benefits (OPEB) Actuarial Valuation and Authorize a Funding Plan Consultant Marilyn Oliver, Bartel Associates LLC, presented the item. Recommended Action(s): Accept the Actuarial Valuation as of July 1, 2015 for Fiscal Years 2015/16 and 2016/17, and authorize a funding plan. Public Comment: None. ACTION: Moved/seconded (Mackenzie/Ahanotu) to approve the recommended actions. Motion carried by the following unanimous 4-0-1 vote: AYES: Ahanotu, Callinan, Mackenzie, and Belforte, NOS: None, ABSTAINS: None, ABSENT: Stafford. 9. COMMITTEE / LIAISON/ OTHER REPORTS A. Standing Committee Reports None. B. Liaison Reports 1. Chamber of Commerce (Board of Directors) (2/16) No report. 2. Library Advisory Board (2/16) Councilmember Ahanotu reported the Board continues to recruit board members and applications are available at the local branch and the library's website. City of Rohnert Park Joint Regular Meeting Minutes February 23, 2016 for City Council/Rohnert Park Financing Authority/Successor Agency Page 4 of 4 3. Mavors & Councilmembers Board Meeting and General Meeting (2/11) Mayor Belforte reported Town of Windsor Mayor Millan was appointed to serve as the League of California Cities North Bay Division, Executive Board Alternate. Housing and transportation funding were the Countywide topics selected for the 2016 General Membership Meetings. C. Other Reports Metropolitan Transportation Commission Vice Mayor Mackenzie reported on "Calling the Bay Area Home: Tackling the Affordable Housing and Displacement Challenge" workshop held February 20, 2016. He will arrange for the materials to be distributed to the Mayors & Councilmembers Association. Legislative Committee Mayor Belforte reported on two legislative items coming forward. The Marijuana Value Tax Act, introduced by Senator McGuire, would place a 15 percent tax at the point of sale on medical marijuana. The second pertains to Ca1PERS and requiring them to invest in California projects. Metropolitan Transportation Commission Vice Mayor Mackenzie reported he was in Sacramento today meeting with elected representatives regarding transportation funding. COMMUNICATIONS None. MATTERS FROM/FOR 1 None. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Belforte adjourned the joint regular meeting at 6:25 pm. JoAnne M. Buergler, City Clerk City of Rohnert Park Gina Belforte, Mayor City of Rohnert Park CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BILLS FOR ACCEPTANCE March 8, 2016 Check Numbers: 230172-230512 $2,093,902.44 Dated: February 17 - March 1, 2016 TOTAL $2,093,902.44 Accounts Payable NE K7 Checks for Approval (0" User: gburke Printed: 3/1/2016 - 2:16 PM Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 230172 02/18/2016 General Fund P E R S Payable CALPERS 230172 02/18/2016 General Fund Pers -Survivorship CALPERS 230172 02/18/2016 General Fund P E R S Payable CALPERS 230172 02/18/2016 General Fund Pers -Survivorship CALPERS 230172 02/18/2016 General Fund P E R S Payable CALPERS 230172 02/18/2016 General Fund Pers -Survivorship CALPERS Check Total: 230173 02/18/2016 General Fund Def Comp Payable-Gw Nationwide Retirement Solutions 230173 02/18/2016 General Fund Def Comp Payable-Gw Nationwide Retirement Solutions Check Total: 230174 02/19/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT&T Check Total 230175 02/19/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT&T Check Total: 230176 02/19/2016 General Fund H Pool /Telephone AT&T Check Total: 230177 02/19/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Telephone AT&T Check Total: 230178 02/19/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Telephone AT&T Check Total: 230179 02/19/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool /Telephone AT&T Check Total: 230180 02/19/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Telephone AT&T Page 1 of 43 Void Amount 12,755.35 20.00 12,755.35 20.00 12,667.76 20.00 38,238 46 200.00 400.00 600.00 121.37 121.37 75.75 75.75 17.98 17.98 37.24 37.24 37.71 37.71 17.98 17.98 17.97 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 1797 230181 02/19/2016 General Fund City Hall /Telephone AT&T 73.55 Check Total: 73.55 230182 02/19/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Telephone AT&T 73.55 Check Total. 73.55 230183 02/19/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT&T 36.94 Check Total: 36.94 230184 02/19/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Telephone AT&T 37.71 Check Total: 37.71 230185 02/19/2016 General Fund City Hall /Telephone AT&T 73.55 Check Total: 73.55 230186 02/19/2016 General Fund City Hall /Telephone AT&T 109.37 Check Total: 109.37 230187 02/19/2016 ISF - Information Techno Telephone - IT AT&T 55.61 Check Total: 55.61 230188 02/19/2016 General Fund City Hall /Telephone AT&T 185.77 Check Total: 185.77 230189 02/19/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Telephone AT&T 36.59 Check Total: 36.59 230190 02/19/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT&T 729.44 Check Total: 729.44 230191 02/19/2016 General Fund City Hall /Telephone AT&T 1,564.63 Check Total: 1,564.63 230192 02/19/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone AT&T 281.09 Check Total 281.09 230193 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Telephone AT&T 173.52 Check Total: 173.52 230194 02/19/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Telephone AT&T 37.21 Page 2 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name 230195 02/19/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Telephone 230196 02/19/2016 General Fund Sports Center/Telephone 230197 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Telephone 230198 02/19/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Telephone 230199 02/19/2016 ISF - Information Techno Telephone - IT 230200 02/19/2016 General Fund Medications - AS 230201 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. Bldg/Facilty 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions 230201 02/19/2916 General Fund Pac /Concessions 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions 230201 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies -Senior Cntr 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions 230201 02/19/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire 230202 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike 230202 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike 230202 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable 230203 02/19/2016 General Fund Productions/Marketing Page 3 of 43 Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 37.21 AT&T 37.85 Check Total: 37.85 AT&T 73.76 Check Total: 73.76 AT&T 19.82 Check Total: 19.82 AT&T 20.94 Check Total: 20.94 AT&T 37.77 Check Total: 3777 Bayer HealthCare, LLC 365.07 Check Total: 365.07 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 429.34 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 233.53 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 21.57 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 24.77 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 48.75 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 231.07 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 20.97 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 120.92 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 174.82 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 60.88 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 151.23 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 30.27 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 108.73 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 193 50 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL 46.34 Check Total: 1,896.69 City Electric Supply 1,927.93 City Electric Supply 8.91 City Electric Supply -8.91 Check Total: 1,927.93 Clone Digital Print & Copy 625.58 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name 230204 02/19/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Contractual Services 230205 02/19/2016 ISF - Information Techno Equip less than 5K 230206 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Theatre 230206 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Production 230206 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Theatre 230206 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable 230207 02/19/2016 General Fund Fire /Small Tools 230208 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Contractual S 230209 02/19/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S 230210 02/19/2016 General Fund Productions/Marketing 230210 02/19/2016 General Fund Productions/Marketing 230211 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint 230211 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint 230211 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Telephone 230211 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint 230212 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr 230212 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr 230212 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Page 4 of 43 Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 625.58 Code Source 3,438.22 Check Total: 3,438.22 Comcast 47.74 Check Total; 47.74 DTC Grip & Electric 849.54 DTC Grip & Electric 226.10 DTC Grip & Electric 4.73 DTC Grip & Electric -4.73 Check Total: 1,075.64 John Deere Financial 194.84 Check Total: 194.84 Language Line Services 8729 Check Total: 87.29 MGT of America Inc 6,000.00 Check Total: 6,000.00 North Bay Bohemian 270.00 North Bay Bohemian 270.00 Check Total 540.00 Platinum Chevrolet 4,839.38 Platinum Chevrolet 83.92 Platinum Chevrolet 52.12 Platinum Chevrolet 7.37 Check Total: 4,982.79 Platt 49.31 Platt 166.94 Ply 97.90 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 230212 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Platt 230212 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Platt 230212 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Platt 230213 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Power Industries 230213 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Power Industries 230213 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Bldg/Facilty Power Industries 230213 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Supplies - Fleet Power Industries 230213 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Power Industries 230213 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. Bldg/Facilty Power Industries 230213 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr- /Spec Dept Equ Power Industries 230213 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. 93ldg/Facilty Power Industries 230213 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Power Industries 230213 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Power Industries 230213 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint Power Industries 230214 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Contractual S Red Cloud, Inc. 230215 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W 230216 02/19/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station Bldg/Facilty 230216 02/19/2016 General Fund BeneciaPool /Bldg/Facilty 230216 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike 230216 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Small Tools 230216 02/19/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station Bldg/Facilty 230216 02/19/2016 General Fund Ladybug Rec Bld Bldg/Facilty 230216 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint 230217 02/19/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North Bldg/Facilty 230218 02/19/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Contractual Services 230218 02/19/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits 230218 02/19/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits 230218 02/19/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS 230218 02/19/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Page 5 of 43 Red Wing Shoes Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Redwood Lock & Key Redwood Lock & Key Redwood Lock & Key Redwood Lock & Key Redwood Lock & Key Redwood Lock & Key Redwood Lock & Key Check Total: Refrigeration Supplies Distributor Check Total: Regional Government Services Regional Government Services Regional Government Services Regional Government Services Regional Government Services Void Amount 130.53 70.39 280.19 795.26 843.96 -40589 24088 13.23 218.41 1,141.48 128.16 540.39 45.72 128 83 131.02 3,026.19 2,670.00 2,670.00 210.42 210.42 138.47 105.00 84.83 15.99 48.77 113.70 38.88 545.64 17.14 17.14 3,136.00 256.00 320.00 -256.00 256.00 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230218 02/19/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Regional Government Services -320.00 230218 02/19/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Regional Government Services 320.00 Check Total: 3,712.00 230219 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools Reliable Hardware & Steel Co. 52.13 230219 02/19/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Reliable Hardware & Steel Co. 173.33 230219 02/19/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Reliable Hardware & Steel Co. 16.75 Check Total: 242.21 230220 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Haz Mat Disposal Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc. 331.69 230220 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc. 50.00 230220 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc. 165.30 Check Total: 546.99 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet FleeWehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts -275.13 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 224.98 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 458.14 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 321.27 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair &-Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 637.79 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 1.64 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 23.15 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 36.32 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet FleeWehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 7.82 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 14.59 230221 02/19/2016 IST - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 14.59 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts -189.54 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 73.57 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 15.83 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 10.47 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet FleeWehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 72824 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 164.71 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts -110.93 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 138.54 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 392.00 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 265.35 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 23.90 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 19.72 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 14.39 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 19.72 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 2826 Page 6 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230221 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts -114.19 Check Total: 2,945.20 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 59.76 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 461.75 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 806.98 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 6.00 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 306.35 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 122.62 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police/Armory - Police Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 293.57 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 91.02 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 691.11 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 395.52 230222 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 119.52 Check Total 3,35420 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials 133.29 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials -061 230223 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials 0.61 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials 98.33 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials -0.45 230223 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials 0.45 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials 98.33 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials -0,45 230223 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials 0.45 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials 117.44 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials -0.53 230223 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials 0.53 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials 98.33 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials -0.45 230223 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials 0.45 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials 122.36 230223 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials -0.56 230223 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Shamrock Materials 0.56 Check Total. 668.08 230224 02/19/2016 ISF - Information Techno Equip less than 5K SIR International Corp 9,541.00 Check Total: 9,541.00 230225 02/19/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty SIERRA CHEMICAL CO 797.70 230225 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable SIERRA CHEMICAL CO -056 Page 7 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230225 02/19/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty SIERRA CHEMICAL CO 0.56 230225 02/19/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool /Bldg/Facilty SIERRA CHEMICAL CO 1,966.24 230225 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable SIERRA CHEMICAL CO -8.91 230225 02/19/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty SIERRA CHEMICAL CO 8.91 230225 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - M Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO 651.30 230225 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - M Pool SIERRA CHEMICAL CO 223 230225 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable SIERRA CHEMICAL CO -223 Check Total: 3,415.24 230226 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Smothers 255.02 230226 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Smothers 0.59 230226 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Smothers -0.59 Check Total 255.02 230227 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Small Tools SNAP-ON TOOLS 83.73 Check Total: 83.73 230228 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Stroupe Petroleum 125.63 Check Total: 125.63 230229 02/19/2016 General Fund Productions/Marketing Ad Vantage Marketing 582.60 230229 02/19/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping -Production Ad Vantage Marketing 1,282.20 Check Total: 1,864.80 230230 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Facility Repa City Electric Supply 268.61 Check Total: 268.61 230231 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Consolidated Electrical Distributors, Inc. 583.34 Check Total: 583.34 230232 02/19/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S County of Sonoma 202.91 230232 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs County of Sonoma 2,383.84 230232 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs County of Sonoma 1,283.60 230232 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs County of Sonoma 2,156.49 230232 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr/Contractual Svs County of Sonoma 1,161.19 Check Total: 7,188.03 230233 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - B Pool Eureka Oxygen Co 136.62 230233 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - H Pool Eureka Oxygen Co. 136.62 230233 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - M Pool Eureka Oxygen Co. 136.62 Page 8 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 230234 02/19/2016 General Fund 230235 230235 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230236 230237 230238 230239 230240 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Account Name Supplies - Streets & Bike Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - Fire 02/19/2016 Water. Utility Fund Office Supplies - WTR Entr 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Office Supplies - SWR Entr 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - City Hall 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - HR 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - FIN 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS 02/19/2016 General Fund Box Office - Theatre 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Office Supplies - SWR Entr 02/19/2016 General Fund Box Office - Theatre 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - City Hall 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - City Hall 02/19/2016 General Fund 02/19/2016 General Fund 02/19/2016 General Fund 02/19/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po Park Maint /Heat/Light/Po Streets & Bike /Heat/Light/Po SC/ Concession Purchases 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Page 9 of 43 Vendor Name Grainger, Inc. Mr. Sparkle Mr. Sparkle Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Office Depot Void Check Total: Check Total. Check Total: Check Total: Pacific Gas & Electric Check Total: Pacific Gas & Electric Check Total Pacific Gas & Electric Check Total: Pepsi-Cola Check Total: Santa Rosa Auto Parts Santa Rosa Auto Parts Santa Rosa Auto Parts Amount 409.86 137 57 137.57 58.50 144.00 202.50 58.70 156.04 100.00 954.70 239.36 66.97 468.00 66.97 120.89 87.22 33.36 31.55 270.41 76.77 184.71 302.62 10.86 3,229.13 106.91 106.91 7266 72.66 58.80 58.80 292.77 292.77 740.38 22.80 15.20 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 15.20 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 249.41 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 24.40 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 929.49 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts -32.60 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 160.69 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 14.39 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 177.37 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 66-89 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 26.10 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 2.71 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 59.56 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 103.20 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 585.23 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 251.84 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 103.49 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 63.84 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 125.05 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 71-73 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 97.86 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 491.03 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 47.89 230241 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Santa Rosa Auto Parts 19.72 Check Total: 4,432.87 230242 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery 188.36 230242 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery 0-87 230242 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery -0.87 230242 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery 238.15 230242 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery 1.10 230242 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Sweet Lane Wholesale Nursery -1.10 Check Total: 426.51 230243 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Syar Industries, Inc. 241.07 230243 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Syar Industries, Inc. 1.12 230243 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Syar Industries, Inc. -1.12 230243 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Syar Industries, Inc. 375.41 230243 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Syar Industries, Inc. 1.74 230243 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Syar Industries, Inc. -1.74 230243 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Syar Industries, Inc. 479.39 230243 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Syar Industries, Inc. 2.21 230243 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Syar Industries, Inc. -2.21 Page 10 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 1,095.87 230244 02/19/2016 General Fund Software maintenance - CH Syserco, Inc 1,059.50 Check Total: 1,05950 230245 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Terex Services Inc 64.05 Check Total: 64.05 230246 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Tifco Industries 145.00 230246 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Tifco Industries 0.61 230246 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Tifco Industries -0.61 Check Total: 145.00 230247 02/19/2016 General Fund Storm Drains /Contractual S Titus Trucking 610.00 230247 02/19/2016 General Fund Storm Drains /Contractual S Titus Trucking 53.38 230247 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable Titus Trucking -53.38 Check Total: 610.00 230248 02/19/2016 General Fund Equip. less than $5k Traffic Logix Corporation 6,667.34 Check Total: 6,667.34 230249 02/19/2016 General Fund City Hall /Bldg/Facilty Trope Group 130.00 Check Total: 130.00 230250 02/19/2016 General Fund Park Maint /Contractual S UCPNB 2,303.34 230250 02/19/2016 General Fund City Hall/ Contractual Service UCPNB 216.66 230250 02/19/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S UCPNB 540.15 230250 02/19/2016 General Fund Streets & Bike /Contractual S UCPNB 324.09 230250 02/19/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr /Contractual S UCPNB 324.09 Check Total: 3,708.33 230251 02/19/2016 Capital Projects Fund Sports Ctr Locker -room Rehab United Site Services 5,376.93 Check Total: 5,376.93 230252 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Facility Repa Universal Building Services 2,164.00 230252 02/19/2016 General Fund R P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Universal Building Services 805.00 230252 02/19/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Ree Cr /Bldg/Facilty Universal Building Services 345.00 230252 02/19/2016 General Fund R P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Universal Building Services 115.00 Check Total: 3,429.00 230253 02/19/2016 General Fund Productions/Production WEAPONS OF CHOICE 38.00 Check Total 3800 230254 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 848.25 Page 11 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name 230254 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr 230254 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr 230254 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr 230254 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint 230254 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Vendor Name Wheeler Zamaroni Wheeler Zamaroni Wheeler Zamaroni Wheeler Zamaroni Wheeler Zamaroni Check Total: 230255 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Work World Inc 230255 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Work World Inc 230255 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Work World Inc Check Total: 230256 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Wyatt Irrigation Co. 230256 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Wyatt Irrigation Co. Check Total: 230257 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police Yarbrough Bros. Towing, Inc. Check Total: 230258 02/19/2016 General Fund Books/Pamphlets - PDA Your Other Office, Inc. 230258 02/19/2016 Capital Projects Fund OF -55 PS Main HVAC Replcmnt Your Other Office, Inc. Check Total: 230259 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Alhambra & Sierra Springs Check Total_ 230260 02/19/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Attune Landscape Co. Check Total: 230261 02/19/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Bettin Investigations Check Total: 230262 02/19/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen CA Department of Justice 230262 02/19/2016 General Fund RP Comm Ctr/ Recruitment CA Department of Justice 230262 02/19/2016 Capital Projects Fund OF -55 PS Main HVAC Replcmnt CA Department of Justice 230262 02/19/2016 General Fund Animal Services/Recruitment/Hi CA Department of Justice 230262 02/19/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen CA Department of Justice 230262 02/19/2016 General Fund Finance/Recruitment CA Department of Justice 230262 02/19/2016 General Fund Theatre/Recruitment CA Department of Justice Check Total: Page 12 of 43 Void Amount 440.44 570-94 755.81 476.30 440.44 3,532.18 97.84 70.67 141.36 309.87 62.72 46.44 109.16 100.00 100.00 4,997.06 90.25 5,087.31 57.00 57.00 350.00 350.00 1,72452 1,724.52 115.00 128.00 288.00 32.00 390.00 64.00 64.00 1,081.00 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230263 02/19/2016 General Fund Police/Armory - Police City of Fairfield 550.00 Check Total: 550.00 230264 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Laguna Plant/ City of Santa Rosa 762,817.64 Check Total: 762,817.64 230265 02/19/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Mark Clementi 625.00 230265 02/19/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Mark Clementi 1,250.00 Check Total: 1,875.00 230266 02/19/2016 General Fund Fire /Contractual S Co of Sonoma Fire and Emergency Servi 2,000.00 Check Total. 2,000.00 230267 02/19/2016 ISF - Information Techno Equip less than 5K COMPUCOM SYSTEMS 41.918 01 Check Total: 41,918.01 230268 02/19/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 96.30 230268 02/19/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. 59.91 Check Total: 15621 230269 02/19/2016 General Fund Fire /Contractual S FRANK HIGDON 500.00 Check Total: 500.00 230270 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Innovative Screen Printing 293.63 230270 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Innovative Screen Printing 150.00 Check Total: 443.63 230271 02/19/2016 General Fund Animal Control /Contractual S Barbara Leach, D.V.M. 1,730.00 Check Total: 1,730.00 230272 02/19/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Bldg/Facilty M Leo's Roofing, Inc. 345.00 230272 02/19/2016 General Fund City Hall /Bldg/Facilty Leo's Roofing, Inc. 620.00 Check Total: 965.00 230273 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - DS National Document Solutions, LLC 35.54 230273 02/19/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - DS National Document Solutions, LLC 35.54 230273 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint National Document Solutions, LLC 40.42 230273 02/19/2016 General Fund Fire /Uniforms National Document Solutions, LLC 556.65 Check Total: 668.15 230274 02/19/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Occupational Health Centers of Californ 81.50 230274 02/19/2016 General Fund Theatre/Recruitment Occupational Health Centers of Califom 81.50 Page 13 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230274 02/19/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Occupational Health Centers of Califom 95.00 230274 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Workers Comp - SWR Entr Occupational Health Centers of Californ 81.50 230274 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Workers Comp - SWR Entr Occupational Health Centers of Californ 81.50 230274 02/19/2016 General Fund Finance/Recruitment Occupational Health Centers of Califom 81.50 230274 02/19/2016 General Fund Animal Services/Recruitment/Hi Occupational Health Centers of Californ 81.50 Check Total: 584.00 230275 02/19/2016 Casino Public Service RPSC/ Contracted Services George Osner, AICP 2,010.00 Check Total: 2,010.00 230276 02/19/2016 SECA - State Seized Ass(State Seizure Pending-Payable Sonoma County Office of the District At 32,350.00 230276 02/19/2016 SECA - State Seized Ass(Interest Inc State Seized Asse Sonoma County Office of the District At 106.22 Check Total: 32,456.22 230277 02/19/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan The Community Voice 228.00 230277 02/19/2016 General Fund Other Services The Community Voice 264.00 230277 02/19/2016 General Fund Other Services The Community Voice 1,584.00 230277 02/19/2016 General Fund PDA/Advertising The Community Voice 384.00 Check Total: 2,460.00 230278 02/19/2016 Capital Projects Fund Sports Ctr Locker-room Rehab United Site Services 5,376.93 Check Total: 5,37693 230279 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 44044 230279 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 848.25 230279 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund - System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 755.81 230279 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 125.84 230279 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 348.00 230279 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Wheeler Zamaroni 440.44 Check Total: 2,958.78 230280 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Haz Mat Disposal Aramark Uniform Services 133.16 230280 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 18.79 230280 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 27.64 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-PW Aramark Uniform Services 30.28 230280 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Aramark Uniform Services 30.68 230280 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Aramark Uniform Services 34.28 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Aramark Uniform Services 12.86 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Aramark Uniform Services 5.50 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Aramark Uniform Services 25.68 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M Aramark Uniform Services 95.40 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Aramark Uniform Services 50.88 Page 14 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr Bldg/Facilty Aramark Uniform Services 50.67 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Facility Repa Aramark Uniform Services 19.08 230280 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 18.79 230280 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 27.64 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-PW Aramark Uniform Services 3028 230280 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Aramark Uniform Services 30.68 230280 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Aramark Uniform Services 34.28 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Aramark Uniform Services 12.86 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Aramark Uniform Services 5.50 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Aramark Uniform Services 25.68 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund City Hall Bldg/Facilty Aramark Uniform Services 178.00 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Aramark Uniform Services 167.64 230280 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 18.79 230280 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 30.88 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-PW Aramark Uniform Services 30.28 230280 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Aramark Uniform Services 30.68 230280 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Aramark Uniform Services 34.28 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Aramark Uniform Services 12.86 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Aramark Uniform Services 5.50 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Aramark Uniform Services 25.68 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter Bldg/Facilty M Aramark Uniform Services 95.40 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance Aramark Uniform Services 50.88 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr Bldg/Facilty Aramark Uniform Services 50.67 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Facility Repa Aramark Uniform Services 19.08 230280 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fle Aramark Uniform Services 18.79 230280 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry Service-Fie Aramark Uniform Services 30.88 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-PW Aramark Uniform Services 30.28 230280 02/19/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Aramark Uniform Services 30.68 230280 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Aramark Uniform Services 34.28 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms & Laundry Serv-Street Aramark Uniform Services 12.86 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Contractual Services Aramark Uniform Services 5.50 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund Uniforms Laundry Ser - Parks Aramark Uniform Services 25.68 230280 02/19/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Aramark Uniform Services 167.64 Check Total: 1,827.82 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint The Barricade Company 28.04 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint The Barricade Company 0.13 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.13 230281 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund Equipment Rental - W The Barricade Company 281.87 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 114.96 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike The Barricade Company 0.53 Page 15 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.53 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - JEPA Mtn The Barricade Company 151.39 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - JEPA Mtn The Barricade Company 0.70 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.70 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint The Barricade Company 443.50 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint The Barricade Company 2.05 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -2.05 230281 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr The Barricade Company 76.64 230281 02/19/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr The Barricade Company 0.36 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -036 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint The Barricade Company 23.92 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint The Barricade Company 0.11 230281 02/19/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company -0.11 Check Total 1,120.32 230282 02/19/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Fac Maintenanc Comcast 63.10 230282 02/19/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty Comcast 63.11 Check Total: 126.21 230283 02/19/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bidg/Facilty Comcast 65.48 230283 02/19/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty Comcast 65.48 Check Total: 130.96 230284 02/19/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr /Bldg/Facilty Comcast 51.09 Check Total: 51.09 230285 02/19/2016 General Fund Marjorie Dennett 425.60 Check Total: 425.60 230286 02/19/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions Department of Alcoholic Beverage Conti 350.00 Check Total: 350.00 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Fire /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 514.16 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 463.89 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 772.51 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 765.10 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 611.81 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 763.99 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Diesel Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 589.31 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 737.55 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 837.04 Page 16 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Fire /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Fire /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016, General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Supplies - Fleet Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Diesel Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 General Fund Unleaded Fuel Inventory Flyers Energy 230287 02/19/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet(Vehicle Repair & Maint Flyers Energy Check Total: 230288 02/19/2016 General Fund Productions/Production DIEGO GARCIA Check Total: 230289 02/19/2016 General Fund Theodore Giesige Check Total: 230290 02/19/2016 General Fund Carl Leivo Check Total: 230291 02/19/2016 General Fund Del Patton Check Total: 230292 02/19/2016 General Fund Paul Skanchy Check Total: 230293 02/19/2016 General Fund Walter Taddeucci Check Total: 230294 02/19/2016 General Fund Production/Theatre Admissions Theater At Large Check Total! 230295 02/19/2016 General Fund John Thompson Page 17 of 43 Void Amount 734.40 560.83 44.60- 510.42 677.54 304.60 702.85 507.96 948.45 463.12 419 13 668.59 678.84 515.72 613.18 531.57 248.46 15,185.62 860.00 860.00 418.23 418.23 186.34 186.34 384.74 384.74 71.36 71.36 713.73 713.73 9,619.00 9,619.00 354.30 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Check Total: 230296 02/19/2016 General Fund Aflac Payable AFLAC Check Total: 230297 02/19/2016 General Fund EDD - DS CA EDD Dept 230297 02/19/2016 General Fund EDD - RP Comm Cntr CA EDD Dept 230297 02/19/2016 General Fund EDD - Parks Maint CA EDD Dept Check Total: 230298 02/19/2016 General Fund Court Order Payable CA FRANCHISE TAX BOARD Check Total: 230299 02/19/2016 General Fund HSABank Payable HSA Bank Check Total:. 230300 02/19/2016 General Fund Kaiser Hlth Ins - Retiree Med KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC 230300 02/19/2016 General Fund Kaiser W/H Payable KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC 230300 02/19/2016 General Fund Kaiser W/H Payable KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC 230300 02/19/2016 General Fund Kaiser Hlth Ins - Retiree Med KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC 230300 02/19/2016 General Fund Kaiser Hlth Ins - Retiree Med KAISER HEALTH PLAN INC Check Total: 230301 02/19/2016 General Fund Prepaid Legal Services Legal Shield Check Total: 230302 02/19/2016 General Fund Def Comp Payable-Gw Nationwide Retirement Solutions Check Total 230303 02/19/2016 General Fund Def Comp Payable-Gw Nationwide Retirement Solutions 230303 02/19/2016 General Fund Def Comp Payable-Gw Nationwide Retirement Solutions Check Total: 230304 02/19/2016 General Fund Scope Dues Payable SEIU Local 1021 Check Total: 230305 02/19/2016 General Fund United Way Payable United Way Check Total. 230306 02/19/2016 General Fund Eye Care/VSP/Payables Vision Service Plan - (CA) 230306 02/19/2016 General Fund Eye Care - Ret Med Vision Service Plan - (CA) 230306 02/19/2016 General Fund Eye Care - Ret Med Vision Service Plan - (CA) Page 18 of 43 Void Amount 354.30 1.175.16 1,175.16 4,950.00 798.00 196.00 5,944.00 484.02 484.02 1,720.00 1,720.00 14,369.80 13,915.58 23,427.13 1,400.66 14,369.80 67,482.97 67.75 67.75 1,703.37 1,703.37 2,829.84 1,575.00 4,404.84 1,152.81 1,152.81 93.26 93.26 2,456.15 1,799.91 465.50 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 4,721.56 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund City Council /Liability/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 512.76 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund City Manager /Liability/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 2,692.87 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Finance/Liability/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 2,930.46 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Dev Svs/Liab & Property Ins Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 6,819.05 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund HR /Liability/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 1,797.14 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund City Hall/ Liab & Property Ins Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 15,531.70 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Police /Liability/Property Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 93,234.85 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Animal Services /Liability/Pro Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 4,831.14 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund PS Main Station /Liability/Pro Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 18,660.73 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Liability/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 1,527.64 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Liability/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 2,221.25 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Liability/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 4,131.15 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Streets/Liab/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 28,231.52 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Storm Drains/Liab/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 600.70 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Parks/Liab/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 14,331.01 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Library/ Liability Property Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 6,438.92 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Gold Ridge/Liab & Prop Ins Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 2,933.29 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Liability & Property Ins - SrC Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 4,224.76 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Alicia Pool /Liability/Proper Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 643.25 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool /Liability/Prope Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 1,492.18 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Ladybug Pool /Liability/Prope Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 679.42 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund H Pool /Liability/Property Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 2,485.78 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Liab & Prop Ins Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 1,904.23 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Liability/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 10,426.10 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm Ctr /Liability/Pro Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 7,555.21 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Burt Ave Rec/Liability/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 2,104.94 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Pac/Liability/Property Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 14,367.88 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund Casino SEA/Liab/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 3,136.13 230307 02/22/2016 General Fund JEPA Mtn/Liab/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 1,933.31 230307 02/22/2016 Casino Public Service RPSC/ Insurance Liab & Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 8,667.96 230307 02/22/2016 Rent Appeals Board RAB/Liability Ins/Property his Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 187.94 230307 02/22/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Liability/Propert Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 15,328.86 230307 02/22/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Liability/Prop Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 52,121.26 230307 02/22/2016 ISF - Information Techno Liabilty/Property Insurance Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 4,558.09 230307 02/22/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Liabilty & Prop Ins Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 2,881.52 Check Total: 342,125.00 230308 02/22/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Lorreen Abbott 65.00 Check Total: 65.00 230309 02/22/2016 General Fund Sports Center/Telephone AT&T 25.46 Page 19 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total 25.46 230310 02/22/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -South /Telephone AT&T 48.65 Check Total: 48.65 230311 02/22/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S Pete Breeland 55.82 230311 02/22/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S Pete Breeland 26.00 Check Total: 81.82 230312 02/22/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police Brenden Tatum 150.00 Check Total: 150.00 230313 02/22/2016 General Fund Police /Gas & Oil Chevron and Texaco Business Card Sery 335.60 Check Total 335.60 230314 02/22/2016 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Desarea Cuevas 350.00 Check Total: 350.00 230315 02/22/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire Brandon Davidge 90.00 Check Total: 90.00 230316 02/22/2016 General Fund Lucas Dotta 65.00 Check Total: 65.00 230317 02/22/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Casino SEA Doubletree Hotel 273.60 Check Total: 273.60 230318 02/22/2016 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing Guadalupe Garcia 100.00 Check Total: 100.00 230319 02/22/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police Brittany Hawks 90.00 Check Total: 90.00 230320 02/22/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police Joe Huffaker 150.00 Check Total: 150.00 230321 02/22/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Casino SEA Jill Kempf 139.00 Check Total, 139.00 230322 02/22/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police Nick La Velle 90.00 Check Total: 90.00 Page 20 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230323 02/22/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police DEBORAH LAMAISON 295.00 Check Total: 295.00 230324 02/22/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S MARTIAL ARTS ACADEMY BUJUTS 364.00 Check Total: 364.00 230325 02/22/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire ERIC MATZEN 295.00 Check Total: 295.00 230326 02/22/2016 Sewer Captial Project Fui WW-24 Sewer Pipe Lining Projct Miksis Service Inc 109,964.20 230326 02/22/2016 Capital Projects Fund Retention Payable - CIP Miksis Service Inc -5,498.21 Check Total: 104,465.99 230327 02/22/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping - CH Pitney Bowes 4,000.00 Check Total: 4,000.00 230328 02/22/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Michael J Rinaldini 273.00 Check Total: 273.00 230329 02/22/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Kathleen Robinson 468.00 Check Total: 46800 230330 02/22/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire Anthony Savas 36.00 230330 02/22/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire Anthony Savas 72.00 Check Total: 108.00 230331 02/22/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Lucas Sherman 50.00 Check Total: 50.00 230332 02/22/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police MATTHEW SNODGRASS 150.00 Check Total: 150.00 230333 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Yolanda Basquez 9.09 230333 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Yolanda Basquez 11.09 Check Total: 20.18 230334 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Laura Dahlen 56.60 Check Total: 56.60 230335 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Dryco Construction Inc 409.94 230335 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Dryco Construction Inc 2,042.03 Page 21 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 2,451.97 230336 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Melinda Furtado 17.94 230336 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Melinda Furtado 17.18 Check Total: 35.12 230337 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Blanca Gallegos 20.94 230337 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Blanca Gallegos 2128 Check Total: 42.22 230338 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Harjeet Giri 6.08 230338 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Harjeet Giri 732 Check Total: 13.40 230339 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Gracie Barra Rohnert Park 11.07 230339 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Gracie Barra Rohnert Park 9.47 230339 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Gracie Barra Rohnert Park 17.22 Check Total: 37.76 230340 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Dakotah Highfill 4.64 230340 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Dakotah Highfill 6.03 Check Total: 10.67 230341 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya In The Now 45.98 230341 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable In The Now 25.36 Check Total: 71.34 230342 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Margaret Johnston 42.60 230342 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Margaret Johnston 22.23 Check Total: 64.83 230343 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund water Entr. /Accounts Paya Jill Knowlton 46.47 230343 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Jill Knowlton 23.65 Check Total: 70.12 230344 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Cindy Kowell 29.74 230344 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Cindy Kowell 14.26 Check Total: 44.00 230345 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Richard Liddell 38.74 230345 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Richard Liddell 19.18 Page 22 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 57.92 230346 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Michael Marshall 5.02 230346 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Michael Marshall 5.62 Check Total: 1064 230347 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Betty Mc Kinnie 14.67 230347 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Betty Mc Kinnie 14.14 Check Total 28.81 230348 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya. Richard Murchie 1699 230348 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Richard Murchie 26.01 Check Total: 43.00 230349 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Giovanni Napoli 3.60 230349 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Giovanni Napoli 4.60 Check Total: 8.20 230350 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Nicholas Pastor 25.22 230350 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Nicholas Pastor 24.27 Check Total: 49.49 230351 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Steve Read 50.01 230351 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Steve Read 26.75 Check Total 76.76 230352 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Yvette Ruan 53.51 230352 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Yvette Ruan 46.49 Check Total: 100.00 230353 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Mete Senocak 23.43 230353 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Mete Senocak 21.55 Check Total: 44.98 230354 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya. Bradley Welch 38.78 230354 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Bradley Welch 19.38 Check Total: 58.16 230355 02/23/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Accounts Paya Tracy Williams 52.74 230355 02/23/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Accounts Payable Tracy Williams 30.55 Check Total 83.29 Page 23 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 230356 02/29/2016 General Fund 230356 02/29/2016 General Fund 230357 230358 230359 230360 230361 230362 230363 230364 230365 230366 230367 230368 230369 02/25/2016 General Fund Account Name Vendor Name Void Def Comp Payable-Gw Nationwide Retirement Solutions Def Comp Payable-Gw Nationwide Retirement Solutions Check Total: POST Training & Travel -Police BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS TRAINING 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production JEREMY BERRICK Check Total: 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Laurie Bilbro Check Total: 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Jacob Bronson Check Total 02/25/2016 Rent Appeals Board Rancho Verde Cap Imp Applicati Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Check Total: 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Telephone - IT California Department of Technology Check Total: 02/25/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S CN EXPERIENCE LLC Check Total: 02/25/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen Bldg/Facilty Comcast Check Total: 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire COURTYARD SACRAMENTO CAL E Check Total: 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production EMILY DOYLE Check Total: 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Lisa Doyle Check Total: 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Harry Duke Check Total: 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production SHAWNA EIERMANN Page 24 of 43 Amount 200.00 400.00 600.00 481.00 300.00 300.00 800.00 800.00 750.00 750.00 1,066.00 1,066.00 2,300.00 2,300.00 327.60 327.60 26.90 26.90 642.15 642.15 800.00 800.00 800.00 800.00 400.00 400.00 250.00 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 230370 02/25/2016 General Fund 230371 02/25/2016 General Fund 230372 02/25/2016 General Fund 230373 02/25/2016 General Fund 230374 02/25/2016 General Fund 230375 02/25/2016 General Fund 230376 02/25/2016 General Fund 230377 02/25/2016 General Fund 230378 02/25/2016 General Fund 230379 02/25/2016 General Fund 230380 02/25/2016 General Fund 230381 02/25/2016 General Fund 230382 02/25/2016 General Fund 230383 02/25/2016 General Fund Account Name Productions/Production Productions/Production Productions/Production Unleaded Fuel Inventory Productions/Production Training & Travel - PS Productions/Production Supplies - Park Maint Training & Travel - PS Training & Travel - PS Training & Travel - PS Productions/Production R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty Page 25 of 43 Vendor Name Check Total: Claire Engan Check Total: Pam Enz Check Total: MARLENE EYRE Check Total: Flyers Energy Check Total: DIEGO GARCIA, Check Total. Joe Huffaker Check Total: KELLEY HUNT Check Total: John Deere Financial Check Total: LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE Check Total: LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE Check Total: Nicholas Miller Check Total: CARMEN MITCHELL Check Total: Petaluma School of Ballet, LLC Check Total: Refrigeration Supplies Distributor Void Amount 250.00 800.00 800.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 800.00 800.00 923.13 923.13 1,100.00 1,100.00 283.00 283.00 800.00 800.00 417.44 417.44 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 283.00 283.00 500.00 500.00 624.00 624.00 134.83 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Check Total: 230384 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Marc Rudlin Check Total: 230385 02/25/2016 General Fund Rec Ref Clearing WILLIAM RUEHMANN Check Total 230386 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Jennifer Ruygt Check Total: 230387 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production STEVE SANCHEZ Check Total: 230388 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Tim Setzer Check Total 230389 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Lucas Sherman Check Total: 230390 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Michelle Snider Check Total: 230391 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS MATTHEW SNODGRASS Check Total: 230392 02/25/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police CHRIS SNYDER Check Total: 230393 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Dwayne Stincelli Check Total: 230394 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS BRENDEN TATUM Check Total: 230395 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production CAROL VINES Check Total: 230396 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Benjamin Acedo Page 26 of 43 Void Amount 134.83 800.00 800.00 40000 400.00 800.00 800.00 950.00 950.00 80000 800.00 1,500.00 1,500.00 1,250.00 1,250.00 283.00 283.00 90.00 90.00 300.00 300.00 283.00 283.00 800.00 800.00 200.00 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name 230397 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production 230398 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Telephone - IT 230399 02/25/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Telephone 230400 02/25/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Telephone 230401 02/25/2016 General Fund PIS Bldg -North /Telephone 230402 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production 230403 02/25/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees 230404 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production 230405 02/25/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Heat/Light/Po 230406 02/25/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Heat/Light/Po 230407 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Equip less than 5K 230408 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production 230409 02/25/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Travel & Meals 230410 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Page 27 of 43 Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 200.00 Lorenzo Alviso 200.00 Check Total: 200.00 AT&T 2,703.00 Check Total: 2,703.00 AT&T 17.99 Check Total: 17.99 AT&T 37.81 Check Total: 37.81 AT&T 99.57 Check Total: 99.57 Hannah Barton 200.00 Check Total: 200.00 Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 3,240.94 Check Total 3,240.94 Anya Cherniss 200.00 Check Total: 200.00 Comcast 19.54 Check Total; 1954 Comcast 19.54 Check Total: 19.54 Comcast 47.74 Check Total: 47.74 Jorge Covarrubias 200.00 Check Total: 200.00 Sonia Espino 592.37 Check Total: 592.37 Shary Fugitt 200.00 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount Check Total: 200.00 230411 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Contractual Services Granicus Inc 700.00 230411 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Contractual Services Granicus Inc 100.00 Check Total: 800.00 230412 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs H & R Plumbing & Drain Cleaning Inc. 31,500.00 230412 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Retention Payable - Sewer H & R Plumbing & Drain Cleaning Inc. -1,575.00 Check Total 29,925.00 230413 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Roy Kitaoka 20000 Check Total 200.00 230414 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Contractual S Kone Inc 106.71 Check Total: 106.71 230415 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Aislynn Malilay 200.00 Check Total: 200.00 230416 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Sophia Markoff 200.00 Check Total: 200.00 230417 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production OLIVIA RENEE MARTIN 200.00 Check Total: 200.00 230418 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS McDonald's Corporation -4,132.16 230418 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses McDonald's Corporation 4,132.16 230418 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits McDonald's Corporation 4,132.16 Check Total: 4,132.16 230419 02/25/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S Diane Micheli 79.20 230419 02/25/2016 General Fund Sports Center /Contractual S Diane Micheli 79.20 Check Total: 158.40 230420 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Nafe Nafe 200.00 Check Total: 200.00 230421 02/25/2016 General Fund Outside Event Ticket Sales North Bay Performing Arts Association 2,225.00 230421 02/25/2016 PAC Facility Capital Res. PAC Capital Facility Fee Reven North Bay Performing Arts Association -794.00 Check Total: 1,431 00 230422 02/25/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS Office Depot 114.96 230422 02/25/2016 General Fund Office Supplies - PS Office Depot 47.87 Page 28 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Check Total: 230423 02/25/2016 Casino Public Service RPSC/ Contracted Services George Osner, AICP Check Total: 230424 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Aimee Ouellette Check Total: 230425 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Hardware Maintenance Aaron Owen Check Total 230426 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Arturo Pena Check Total 230427 02/25/2016 General Fund SC/ Concession Purchases Pepsi-Cola Check Total: 230428 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Red Wing Shoes 230428 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Red Wing Shoes 230428 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr Red Wing Shoes 230428 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Red Wing Shoes 230428 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Red Wing Shoes 230428 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W Red Wing Shoes Check Total: 230429 02/25/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Contractual Services Regional Government Services 230429 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Southeast Dist. Specific Plan Regional Government Services 230429 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Regional Government Services 230429 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Regional Government Services 230429 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Regional Government Services Check Total: 230430 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Casey Rusher Check Total 230431 02/25/2016 General Fund License Permit & Fees - CM Caitlin Saldanha 230431 02/25/2016 General Fund License Permit & Fees - CM Caitlin Saldanha Check Total: 230432 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund System Repair - WTR Entr Shamrock Materials Check Total: Page 29 of 43 Void Amount 162.83 861.72 861.72 200.00 200.00 85000 850.00 200.00 200.00 195.18 195.18 200.63 89.58 300.00 166.38 249.57 99.37 1,105.53 3,648.00 128.00 192.00 320.00 352.00 4,640.00 200.00 200.00 4000 5.43 45.43 63.58 63.58 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name 230433 02/25/2016 General Fund Pac /Concessions 230433 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production 230433 02/25/2016 General Fund Pac /Front House/P 230434 02/25/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Contractual Services 230435 02/25/2016 General Fund PDA/Advertising 230435 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits 230435 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS 230435 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses 230436 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr 230436 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr 230436 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint 230436 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike 230437 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Professional 230438 02/25/2016 General Fund Ps Main Station /Bldg/Facilty 230438 02/25/2016 General Fund Publ Works Gen /Bldg/Facilty 230438 02/25/2016 General Fund Animal Shelter /Bldg/Facilty M 230438 02/25/2016 General Fund City Hall /Bldg/Facilty 230438 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr/Contractual Svs 230438 02/25/2016 General Fund Gold Ridge/Bldg/Facility 230439 02/25/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping -Production 230439 02/25/2016 General Fund Prod uctions/Marketing 230440 02/25/2016 General Fund Medications - AS 230441 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Contractual S 230442 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Dues & Subscr Page 30 of 43 Vendor Name Gail Shelton Gail Shelton Gail Shelton Check Total Shums Coda Associates Inc Check Total The Community Voice The Community Voice The Community Voice The Community Voice Check Total West Coast Graphics West Coast Graphics West Coast Graphics West Coast Graphics Check Total AAA Backflow Prevention, Inc. Check Total ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA ABM Janitorial North Calif -LA Check Total: Ad Vantage Marketing Ad Vantage Marketing Check Total Amatheon, Inc. Check Total: American Medical Response, Inc Check Total: B.W.S. Distributors, Inc Void Amount 123.52 39.18 32.61 195.31 9,120.00 9,120.00 240.00 168.00 -168.00 16800 408.00 482.27 482.27 482.27 482.30 1,929.11 1.45000 1,450.00 1,767.00 26300 561.00 803.00 133.37 1,084.32 4,611.69 1,184.63 679.12 1,863.75 215.14 215.14 600.00 600.00 44.10 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 230442 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Uniforms & Laundry. Service -Fie B.W.S. Distributors, Inc 230442 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr B.W.S. Distributors, Inc 230442 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Service-Swr B.W.S. Distributors, Inc 230442 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Uniforms & Laundry Sery - W B.W,S. Distributors, Inc 230442 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Fire B.W.S. Distributors, Inc Check Total: 230443 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Equipment Rental - W The Barricade Company 230443 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Equipment Rental - W The Barricade Company 230443 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable The Barricade Company Check Total 230444 02/25/2016 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ BAUER COMPRESSORS Check Total: 230445 02/25/2016 General Fund Animal Control /Contractual S Bay Area Sound & Security Inc. Check Total: 230446 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint Big O Tires Check Total: 230447 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Professional Brelje & Race Laboratories Inc Check Total: 230448 02/25/2016 General Fund City Hall /Bldg/Facilty Buchanan Food Service Check Total: 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 Casino Public Service RPSC Legal Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 Rent Appeals Board Rancho Verde Cap Imp Applicati Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 Rent Appeals Board System Repair - RAB Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 Rent Appeals Board Petition Revenue Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Sonoma Mtn Village Project Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist, Specific Plan Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 Recycled Water Utility FiLegal fees - RW Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Professional Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Page 31 of 43 Void Amount 115.22 104.40 100.87 56.37 2,299.80 2,720.76 435.68 0.95 -0.95 435.68 1,130.95 1,130.95 149.85 149.85 79.99 79.99 34.00 34.00 98.75 98.75 18,816.61 148.20 488.28 2,683.72 2,177.24 3,183.96 3,183.96 -3,183.96 499.20 15,956.81 4,718.48 130.10 533.42 521 58 -521.58 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 521.58 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 725.40 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP -725.40 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 725.40 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 312.00 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP -312.00 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 31200 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,081.60 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP -1,081 60 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,081.60 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 3,564.60 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP -3,564.60 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 3,564.60 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,808.04 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 15,372.72 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP -15,372.72 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 15,372.72 230449 02/25/2016 Sewer Captial Project Fut WW -23 Adrian Swr Syst Rehab Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,307.22 230449 02/25/2016 Water Capital Project Fur WA -36 Adrain Dr Watr Sys Repl Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 1,027.10 230449 02/25/2016 General Fund Legal Dept / Legal Fees Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 245.44 230449 02/25/2016 Successor Agency Housir Legal Services - Housing Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP 538.72 Check Total: 75,840.44 230450 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ CDW Government 237.84 230450 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - DS CDW Government 140.99 230450 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - DS CDW Government 4.00 230450 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Supplies - IT CDW Government 59 81 230450 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - DS CDW Government 153.41 Check Total: 596.05 230451 02/25/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr /Bidg/Facilty Comcast 55.84 Check Total: 55.84 230452 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Dowdell Ave Construction Dudek 110.00 230452 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Dudek 990.00 230452 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Dudek -990.00 230452 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Dudek 990.00 230452 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Southeast Dist. Specific Plan Dudek 450.00 230452 02/25/2016 General Fund Developer Refundable Deposits Dudek 12,480.00 230452 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Revenue - DS Dudek -12,480.00 230452 02/25/2016 General Fund 2297 Expenses Dudek 12,480.00 230452 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund University Dist. Specific Plan Dudek 5,820.00 Page 32 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 230452 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Sonoma Mtn Village Project Dudek 230452 02/25/2016 General Fund Dev Svs /Contractual Services Dudek Check Total: 230453 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production Denise Elia-Yen Check Total: 230454 02/25/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping - FIN FedEx Check Total: 230455 02/25/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Gary Zane Friedman 230455 02/25/2016 General Fund R.P. Comm. Cntr /Contractual S Gary Zane Friedman Check Total: 230456 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Sports Ctr Locker -room Rehab GHD Check Total. 230457 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Sports Ctr Locker -room Rehab Glass Architects 230457 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Sports Ctr Locker -room Rehab Glass Architects 230457 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Sports Ctr Locker -room Rehab Glass Architects 230457 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Sports Ctr Locker -room Rehab Glass Architects Check Total 230458 02/25/2016 General Fund Senior Ctr /Bldg/Facilty Grainger, Inc. Check Total 230459 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS Grand Sierra Resort Check Total: 230460 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS Grand Sierra Resort Check Total: 230461 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS Grand Sierra Resort Check Total: 230462 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund PR -82 H Pool Heater/Filter/Cir Gregory Equipment Inc 230462 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Retention Payable - CIP Gregoly Equipment Inc Check Total: 230463 02/25/2016 General Fund Dev Svs / Recruitment Occu-Med LTD 230463 02/25/2016 General Fund Park Maint/Recruitment Occu-Med LTD 230463 02/25/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Occu-Med LTD Page 33 of 43 Void Amount 450.00 1,800.00 22,100.00 3,000.00 3,000.00 27.41 27.41 1,066.00 19.50 1,085.50 8,199.00 8,199.00 1,195.92 652.50 1,357.50 2,614.39 5,820.31 65.02 65.02 597.60 597.60 597.60 597.60 597.60 597.60 4,496.77 -224.84 4,271.93 223.50 313.50 540.00 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void 230463 02/25/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Occu-Med LTD Check Total: 230464 02/25/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen Occupational Health Centers of Califom Check Total: 230465 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - PW Office Depot Check Total 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund PDA/Advertising OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund City Manager /Contractual Se OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM 230466 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Contractual S OFFICE TEAM Check Total: 230467 02/25/2016 General Fund License Permit & Fees - CM Caitlin Saldanha 230467 02/25/2016 General Fund License Permit & Fees - CM Caitlin Saldanha Check Total: 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel Page 34 of 43 Amount 540.00 1,617.00 38.50 38.50 391.49 391.49 348.73 904.32 1,01736 1,130.40 986.84 226.08 452.16 904.32 226.08 113.04 687.85 904.32 7,901.50 30.00 13.00 43 00 551.85 220.60 68.46 256.38 181.23 207.55 418.36 130.45 18.00 529.18 16.35 86.35 1,17994 1,179.94 1.179.94 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 7281 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 140 18 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 21.75 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 206.46 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 712.22 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 43.49 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 43.45 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 76.07 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 48938 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 489.38 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 489.38 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 1,179.94 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 1,179.94 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 130.50 230468 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Uniforms Santa Rosa Uniform & Career Apparel 45.68 Check Total: 11,545.21 230469 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Purchase of Water So Co Water Agency 143,321.24 Check Total 143,321.24 230470 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. Bldg/Facilty Sonoma County Carpet and Blinds 949.00 230470 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. Bldg/Facilty Sonoma County Carpet and Blinds 1,765.00 230470 02/25/2016 Capital Projects Fund Retention Payable - CIP Sonoma County Carpet and Blinds -135.70 Check Total: 2,578.30 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 63.60 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 194.35 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 13.59 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 26068 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Prod uctions/Production US Bank 260.68 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 260.68 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 19.95 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank -260.68 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank -260.68 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 21 74 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 249.00 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 5436 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 2281 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -22.81 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 1.75 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -1.75 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 5.57 Page 35 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 230471 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230472 02/25/2016 General Fund Publicity - SpC US Bank 230472 02/25/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance US Bank 230472 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - H Pool US Bank 230472 02/25/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance US Bank 230472 02/25/2016 General Fund Publicity - SpC US Bank 230472 02/25/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance US Bank 230472 02/25/2016 General Fund SC/ Repairs & Maintenance US Bank 230472 02/25/2016 General Fund SC/ Concession Purchases US Bank 230472 02/25/2016 General Fund Publicity - SpC US Bank 230472 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230473 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230473 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230473 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230473 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230473 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230473 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230473 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230473 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 230474 02/25/2016 General Fund Econ Dev/Paper Supplie US Bank 230475 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police US Bank 230475 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 230475 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police US Bank 230475 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank 230476 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank 230476 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank 230476 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank 230476 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank Page 36 of 43 Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Void Amount -5 57 87727 63.47 924.36 21000 924.36 150.00 40.53 -924.36 184.91 5.55 -5.55 1,573.27 2.34 -2.34 0.53 -0.53 20.32 6.47 6.00 1,400.00 1,432.79 999 9.99 1089 490.00 0.87 -0.87 500.89 0.06 -0.06 0.33 -0.33 0.04 -0.04 -0,26 0.26 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank 5.42 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank 11.69 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank 71.34 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank 8.88 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank 58.12 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank -14.88 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Fleet/Vehicle Repair & Maint US Bank 16.00 230476 02/25/2016 ISF - Fleet Postage & Shipping - Fleet US Bank 2.74 Check Total. 159.31 230477 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 10.05 230477 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 10.33 230477 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 20.33 230477 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 2089 230477 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 0 88 230477 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -0 88 230477 02/25/2016 General Fund Productions/Production US Bank 0.88 230477 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -0.88 Check Total: 61.60 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 22.08 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -2208 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 25231 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Casino SEA US Bank 1,070.00 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 62000 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 161 96 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 161.96 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 161.96 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 57.76 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 57.76 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund POST Training & Travel -Police US Bank 850.00 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 10.00 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank -85.00 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Fire US Bank 395.00 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 725 230478 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 7.25 Check Total: 3,728.21 230479 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - City Mgr US Bank 175.00 230479 02/25/2016 General Fund License Permit & Fees - CM US Bank 95.00 Check Total: Page 37 of 43 270.00 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name Void Amount 230480 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. Bldg/Facilty US Bank 9938 230480 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. Bldg/Facilty US Bank 6438 Check Total 163.76 230481 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 16493 230481 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 31.50 230481 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel -OTS PT -1608 US Bank 35000 230481 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel -OTS PT -1608 US Bank 350.00 230481 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 0.69 230481 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable. US Bank -0.69 Check Total, 896.43 230482 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint US Bank 239.09 Check Total 239.09 230483 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - Casino SEA US Bank 1,605 00 230483 02/25/2016 General Fund Books/Pamphlets - Police US Bank 70.62 230483 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Dues & Subscr US Bank 100.00 230483 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police US Bank 76.11 230483 02/25/2016 General Fund Police /Dues & Subscr US Bank 150.00 Check Total: 2,001.73 230484 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr US Bank 21.99 230484 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Supplies - WTR Entr US Bank 21.99 Check Total: 43.98 230485 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Training & Travel - ISF IT US Bank 298.00 230485 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 249.57 230485 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Supplies - IT US Bank 13.94 230485 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - DS US Bank 268.98 230485 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Supplies - IT US Bank 41.97 230485 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Telephone - IT US Bank 16.79 230485 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Telephone - IT US Bank 81.00 230485 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Supplies - IT US Bank 1.22 230485 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -1.22 230485 02/25/2016 ISF - Information Techno Telephone - IT US Bank 7.09 230485 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank -7.09 Check Total. 970.25 230486 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint US Bank 57,07 Check Total. 57.07 Page 38 of 43 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 230487 02/25/2016 General Fund Bldg Facility costs - PS South US Bank 230487 02/25/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping - ABSO US Bank 230487 02/25/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230487 02/25/2016 General Fund Faclty Non-Routin Main -PS Main US Bank 230488 02/25/2016 General Fund Training & Travel - PS US Bank 230489 02/25/2016 General Fund Postage & Shipping -Animal Svc US Bank 230489 02/25/2016 General Fund Office Supplies -Animal Control US Bank 230490 02/25/2016 General Fund City Council/ Exp Stafford US Bank 230490 02/25/2016 General Fund Finance /Travel & Meetings US Bank 230490 02/25/2016 General Fund City Council/Exp Callinan US Bank 230490 02/25/2016 General Fund City Council/ Exp - Mackenzie US Bank 230490 02/25/2016 General Fund Econ Dev/fravels & Mee US Bank 230490 02/25/2016 General Fund City Council/Exp Ahanotu US Bank 230490 02/25/2016 General Fund City Council/Exp Callinan US Bank 230491 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint US Bank 230491 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike US Bank 230491 02/25/2016 General Fund Pub] Works Gen /Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230491 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint US Bank 230492 02/25/2016 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230492 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230492 02/25/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230492 02/25/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North /Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230492 02/25/2016 General Fund Fire /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230492 02/25/2016 General Fund P/S Bldg -North Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230493 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint US Bank 230493 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint US Bank 230493 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint US Bank 230493 02/25/2016 General Fund Parks - IT Services US Bank Page 39 of 43 Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Void Amount 21.49 19.51 62.75 83.62 187.37 150.00 150.00 65.25 6.50 71.75 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 70.00 70.00 70.00 310.00 190.24 58,22 207.55 77.06 533.07 3.64 -3.64 28.21 6.49 44.61 117.33 196.64 141.54 108.00 29.93 8.42 287.89 Check Number Check Date 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 230494 02/25/2016 Fund Name General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund Account Name Supplies - Production Supplies - Production Supplies - Production Supplies - Production Supplies - Production Supplies - Production Supplies - Production Supplies - Production Supplies - Production Sales Tax Payable Supplies - Production Sales Tax Payable Supplies - Production Sales Tax Payable 230495 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike 230495 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike 230495 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike 230496 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water/Cell Phone 230497 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ 230497 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr /Spec Dept Equ 230497 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ Page 40 of 43 Vendor Name US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Void Amount 58.73 155.66 3.80 250.06 267.51 58.79 101.01 175.68 4.28 -4.28 20 11 -20.11 3.93 -3 93 1,071.24 58.71 72.83 134.74 266.28 43.46 43.46 262.89 102.42 1.14 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 230497 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230498 02/25/2016 General Fund Publicity - SpC US Bank 230498 02/25/2016 General Fund Publicity - RP Comm Cntr US Bank 230498 02/25/2016 General Fund Publicity - SpC US Bank 230498 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Community Event US Bank 230498 02/25/2016 General Fund Travel & Meals - SrC US Bank 230499 02/25/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool /Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230499 02/25/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230500 02/25/2016 General Fund Fire /Gas & Oil US Bank 230501 02/25/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230501 02/25/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230501 02/25/2016 General Fund Burt/Ave Rec Cr Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230501 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr Bldg/Facilty US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund System Repair - SWR Entr US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230502 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Streets & Bike US Bank Page 41 of 43 Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Check Total: Void Amount -1 14 36531 55 00 55 00 1900 53.68 238.20 420.88 16.74 42.41 59.15 27.19 27.19 132.00 2.11 11.55 -11.55 134 11 246.97 4339 87.40 80.53 258.51 303.75 296.90 100.00 81.00 -81.00 479.59 430.36 2468 -24.68 35.39 -35.39 2023. -20.23 0.31 Check Number Check Date Fund Name 230502 02/25/2016 General Fund 230503 02/25/2016 General Fund Account Name Sales Tax Payable R.P. Comm. Cntr Bldg/Facilty 230504 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint 230504 02/25/2016 General Fund Supplies - Park Maint 230505 02/25/2016 General Fund Animal Services/Recruitment/Hi 230505 02/25/2016 General Fund Police/Recruitment/Hiring Gen 230505 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund PW/Recruitment 230505 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund PW/Recruitment 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund H Pool /Bldg/Facilty 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool /Bldg/Facilty 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Fac Maintenanc 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund H Pool Bldg/Facilty 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Fac Maintenanc 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund Magnolia Pool /Fac Maintenanc 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund H Pool Bldg/Facilty 230506 02/25/2016 General Fund Benecia Pool Bldg/Facilty 230507 02/25/2016 General Fund Econ Dev/Travels & Mee 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Supplies - SWR Entr 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools Page 42 of 43 Vendor Name Void US Bank Check Total US Bank Check Total US Bank US Bank Check Total: US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank US Bank Check Total Check Total.- Check otal: Check Total: Amount -0.31 2,327.40 2277 22.77 13 01 3795 50.96 75.00 75.00 37.50 37.50 225.00 44.58 21.66 -76.61 -7661 -7661 13999 13999 14000 11 52 -34 56 11.52 11.52 256.39 15 10 15.10 110.73 83.23 12.54 35.50 3440 87.76 39.20 57.34 195.56 Check Number Check Date Fund Name Account Name Vendor Name 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools US Bank 230508 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230508 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank 230508 02/25/2016 Sewer Utility Fund Sewer Entr. /Small Tools US Bank 230508 02/25/2016 General Fund Sales Tax Payable US Bank Check Total. 230509 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ US Bank 230509 02/25/2016 Water Utility Fund Water Entr. /Spec Dept Equ US Bank Check Total: 230510 02/26/2016 General Fund Aflac Payable AFLAC Check Total: 230511 02/26/2016 General Fund REMIF Health Ins Payable Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F 230511 02/26/2016 General Fund REMIF Health Ins - Ret Med Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance F Check Total: 230512 03/01/2016 General Fund Supplies - Police Wedgewood Banquet Center Check Total: Report Total; Page 43 of 43 Void Amount 9.18 -9.18 1.63 -1.63 0.40 -0.40 656.26 44.87 22.74 67.61 1,476.40 1,476.40 34,347.00 50,523.00 84,870.00 3,309.46 3,309.46 2,093,902.44 01;N T Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." Catr�vnr�t" CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: March 8, 2016 Department: Human Resources Submitted By: Victoria Perrault, Human Resources Director Prepared By: Tracy Rankin, Human Resources Analyst ITEM NO. 7C 1 Agenda Title: Consideration and Adoption of Resolution Approving the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised February 24, 2016 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt the attached resolution approving the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised February 24, 2016. BACKGROUND: Council approved the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges document dated January 11, 2016 on January 26, 2016, pursuant to Resolution No. 2016-003. Since that date, the following position and salary changes have been approved and/or require updating: Description Action Approval Planner I/II — Level I New position; add to pay Resolution No. 2016-017 (PLNR1) rates and ranges dated 02/23/16 RPEA Unit Existing Range 81 $4,897 - $5,952 Monthly Planner I/II — Level 11 New position; add to pay Resolution No. 2016-017 (PLNR2) rates and ranges dated 02/23/16 RPEA Unit Existing Range 87 $5,669 - $6,890 Monthly Planner III Position eliminated; Resolution No. 2016-017 remove from pay rates and dated 02/23/16 ranges PT Public Safety Records Clerk New temporary, part-time Assistant City Manager (PTPSRC) hourly job classification; 02/10/16 add to pay rates and ranges Miscellaneous — Public Safety New Range $15.00 - $20.00 Hourly ITEM NO. 7C 1 Description Action Approval PT Aquatics Office Assistant New temporary, part-time Assistant City Manager (PTAOA) hourly job classification; 01/26/16 add to pay rates and ranges Miscellaneous - Community Services Existing Range 45 $11.58 - $14.08 Hourly PT Lifeguar&C.� Existing job classification; Assistant City Manager revision to job title 01/26/16 PT Swim Instructor�T Existing job classification; Assistant City Manager revision to job title 01/26/16 ANALYSIS: California Public Employees' Retirement Law at Section 570.5 of the California Code of Regulations Title 2 requires the City Pay Rates and Ranges document published on the City's internet site to be approved, in its entirety, by the City Council each time a modification is made. Attached as Exhibit A to this staff report is the updated City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised February 24, 2016 that incorporates the changes listed above. Staff recommends that the Council adopt the updated Pay Rates and Ranges by resolution. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This is not applicable. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: This is not applicable. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: There is no fiscal impact. Department Head Approval Date: N/A Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 02/29/16 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Resolution Approving the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised February 24, 2016 2. Exhibit "A" City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised February 24, 2016 W RESOLUTION NO. 2016-19 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK APPROVING THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CURRENT PAY RATES AND RANGES REVISED FEBRUARY 24, 2016 WHEREAS, the California Public Employees' Retirement Law, at Section 570.5 of the California Code of Regulations Title 2, requires the City of Rohnert Park to publish the City's Current Pay Rates and Ranges on the City's internet site and the City Council to approve the Pay Rates and Ranges in its entirety each time a modification is made; and WHEREAS, the City Council previously approved the City Pay Rates and Ranges document dated January 11, 2016 on January 26, 2016 pursuant to Resolution No. 2016-003 and several positions have been subsequently approved and/or require updating; and WHEREAS, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the updated City Pay Rates and Ranges document revised February 24, 2016 attached hereto as Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby approve the City of Rohnert Park Current Pay Rates and Ranges revised February 24, 2016 attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated by this reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby directed to execute documents pertaining to same for and on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 8th day of March, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: JoAnne M. Buergler, City Clerk Attachment: Exhibit "A" AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES: ( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT:( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) Exhibit A oERT L I F 0 R N 1 62, CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CURRENT PAY RATES & RANGES Revised February 24, 2016 (� CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Management Unit (Unrepresented) N/R CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually City Council (COUN) N/A $98,280 2 $189.77 $411.16 $8,599 N/R CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually City Manager (CMGR) N/A $9,480 $113,760 5 $15,750 $189,000 (By Employment Contract) $119,448 RANGE 105 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Director of Public Safety (SDIR) N/A $13,864 $166,366 (By Employment Contract) RANGE 103 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Assistant City Manager (ACM) M 1 $61.48 $4,918.62 $10,657 $127,884 (By Employment Contract) 2 $64.56 $5,164.62 $11,190 $134,280 3 $67.79 $5,423.08 $11,750 $141,000 4 $71.18 $5,694.00 $12,337 $148,044 5 $74.73 $5,978.77 $12,954 $155,448 RANGE 100 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Director of Development Services (DODS) M 1 $53.94 $4,315.38 $9,350 $112,200 Director of Public Works and Community 2 $56.64 $4,530.92 $9,817 $117,804 Services (PWCS) 3 $59.47 $4,757.54 $10,308 $123,696 4 $62.44 $4,995.23 $10,823 $129,876 5 $65.56 $5,244.92 $11,364 $136,368 RANGE 98 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually City Engineer (CENG) M 1 $51.96 $4,157.08 $9,007 $108,084 Finance Director/City Treasurer (FDIR) 2 $54.56 $4,364.77 $9,457 $113,484 Human Resources Director (HRDIR) 3 $57.29 $4,583.08 $9,930 $119,160 4 $60.16 $4,812.46 $10,427 $125,124 5 $63.16 $5,052.92 $10,948 $131,376 RANGE 94 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually City Clerk (CCLERK) M 1 $42.85 $3,427.85 $7,427 $89,124 Deputy City Engineer (DCENG) 2 $44.99 $3,599.08 $7,798 $93,576 Planning Manager (PLMG) 3 $47.24 $3,779.08 $8,188 $98,256 4 $49.60 $3,967.85 $8,597 $103,164 5 $52.08 $4,166.31 $9,027 $108,324 Rohnert Park Public Safety Managers' Association (RPPSMA) RANGE 95 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually P.S. Commander (PSCMDR) P 1 $47.25 $3,780.00 $8,190 $98,280 2 $49.61 $3,968.77 $8,599 $103,188 3 $52.09 $4,167.23 $9,029 $108,348 4 $54.69 $4,375.38 $9,480 $113,760 5 $57.43 $4,594.15 $9,954 $119,448 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Confidential Unit (Unrepresented) RANGE 70 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Human Resources Technician Trainee (HRTT) X 1 $17.35 $1,387.85 $3,007 $36,084 2 $18.21 $1,457.08 $3,157 $37,884 3 $19.13 $1,530.00 $3,315 $39,780 4 $20.08 $1,606.62 $3,481 $41,772 5 $21.09 $1,686.92 $3,655 $43,860 RANGE 72 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Human Resources Technician (HRT) X 1 $22.68 $1,814.77 $3,932 $47,184 2 $23.82 $1,905.69 $4,129 $49,548 3 $25.01 $2,000.77 $4,335 $52,020 4 $26.26 $2,100.92 $4,552 $54,624 5 $27.58 $2,206.15 $4,780 $57,360 RANGE 74 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Administrative Assistant - Confidential (AACU) X 1 $23.74 $1,899.23 $4,115 $49,380 2 $24.93 $1,994.31 $4,321 $51,852 3 $26.18 $2,094.00 $4,537 $54,444 4 $27.48 $2,198.77 $4,764 $57,168 5 $28.86 $2,308.62 $5,002 $60,024 RANGE 76 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Payroll/Fiscal Specialist (PFS) X 1 $25.02 $2,001.23 $4,336 $52,032 2 $26.27 $2,101.38 $4,553 $54,636 3 $27.58 $2,206.62 $4,781 $57,372 4 $28.96 $2,316.92 $5,020 $60,240 5 $30.41 $2,432.77 $5,271 $63,252 RANGE 78 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Senior Payroll/Fiscal Specialist (SPFS) X 1 $26.26 $2,100.92 $4,552 $54,624 2 $27.58 $2,206.15 $4,780 $57,360 3 $28.96 $2,316.46 $5,019 $60,228 4 $30.40 $2,432.31 $5,270 $63,240 5 $31.93 $2,554.15 $5,534 $66,408 RANGE 80 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Executive Assistant to the City Manager X 1 $28.26 $2,261.08 $4,899 $58,788 (EACM) 2 $29.68 $2,374.15 $5,144 $61,728 3 $31.16 $2,492.77 $5,401 $64,812 4 $32.72 $2,617.38 $5,671 $68,052 5 $34.36 $2,748.46 $5,955 $71,460 RANGE 84 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Human Resources Analyst (HRA) X 1 $31.16 $2,492.77 $5,401 $64,812 2 $32.72 $2,617.38 $5,671 $68,052 3 $34.36 $2,748.46 $5,955 $71,460 4 $36.08 $2,886.00 $6,253 $75,036 5 $37.88 $3,030.46 $6,566 $78,792 RANGE 88 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Accounting Services Supervisor (ASSP) X 1 $34.34 $2,747.08 $5,952 $71,424 2 $36.06 $2,884.62 $6,250 $75,000 3 $37.86 $3,028.62 $6,562 $78,744 4 $39.75 $3,180.00 $6,890 $82,680 5 $41.73 $3,338.77 $7,234 $86,808 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Confidential Unit (Unrepresented) RANGE 92 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Supervising Accountant (SUPAC) X 1 $36.03 $2,882.77 $6,246 $74,952 2 $37.83 $3,026.77 $6,558 $78,696 3 $39.73 $3,178.15 $6,886 $82,632 4 $41.71 $3,336.92 $7,230 $86,760 5 $43.80 $3,504.00 $7,592 $91,104 RANGE 94 -CF CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Senior Analyst (SRAN) X 1 $38.41 $3,072.46 $6,657 $79,884 2 $40.33 $3,226.15 $6,990 $83,880 3 $42.35 $3,387.69 $7,340 $88,080 4 $44.46 $3,557.08 $7,707 $92,484 5 $46.69 $3,735.23 $8,093 $97,116 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) RANGE 61 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Office Assistant I (OA1) X 1 $17.35 $1,387.85 $3,007 $36,084 2 $18.21 $1,457.08 $3,157 $37,884 3 $19.13 $1,530.00 $3,315 $39,780 4 $20.08 $1,606.62 $3,481 $41,772 5 $21.09 $1,686.92 $3,655 $43,860 RANGE 63 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Animal Health Technician (AHT) X 1 $18.21 $1,457.08 $3,157 $37,884 2 $19.13 $1,530.00 $3,315 $39,780 3 $20.08 $1,606.62 $3,481 $41,772 4 $21.09 $1,686.92 $3,655 $43,860 5 $22.14 $1,771.38 $3,838 $46,056 RANGE 64 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Community Services Program Coordinator (CSPC) X 1 $18.60 $1,488.00 $3,224 $38,688 Public Safety Records Clerk (PSRC) 2 $19.53 $1,562.31 $3,385 $40,620 3 $20.50 $1,640.31 $3,554 $42,648 4 $21.53 $1,722.46 $3,732 $44,784 5 $22.61 $1,808.77 $3,919 $47,028 RANGE 66 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Accounting Specialist 1/11- Level I (ASP1) X 1 $19.53 $1,562.31 $3,385 $40,620 2 $20.50 $1,640.31 $3,554 $42,648 3 $21.53 $1,722.46 $3,732 $44,784 4 $22.61 $1,808.77 $3,919 $47,028 5 $23.74 $1,899.23 $4,115 $49,380 RANGE 68 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Secretary I (SEC1) X 1 $20.50 $1,640.31 $3,554 $42,648 2 $21.53 $1,722.46 $3,732 $44,784 3 $22.61 $1,808.77 $3,919 $47,028 4 $23.74 $1,899.23 $4,115 $49,380 5 $24.93 $1,994.31 $4,321 $51,852 RANGE 70 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Accounting Specialist 1/11- Level II (ASP2) X 1 $21.53 $1,722.46 $3,732 $44,784 Technical Director (TECH) 2 $22.61 $1,808.77 $3,919 $47,028 3 $23.74 $1,899.23 $4,115 $49,380 4 $24.93 $1,994.31 $4,321 $51,852 5 $26.18 $2,094.00 $4,537 $54,444 RANGE 74 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Administrative Assistant (AABS) X 1 $23.74 $1,899.23 $4,115 $49,380 Community Development Assistant (SEC5) 2 $24.93 $1,994.31 $4,321 $51,852 Community Services Specialist (CSSP) 3 $26.18 $2,094.00 $4,537 $54,444 Information Systems Technician I (IST1) 4 $27.48 $2,198.77 $4,764 $57,168 5 $28.86 $2,308.62 $5,002 $60,024 RANGE 76 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Property Technician (PRPT) X 1 $25.02 $2,001.23 $4,336 $52,032 2 $26.27 $2,101.38 $4,553 $54,636 3 $27.58 $2,206.62 $4,781 $57,372 4 $28.96 $2,316.92 $5,020 $60,240 5 $30.41 $2,432.77 $5,271 $63,252 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) RANGE 78 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Information Systems Technician II (IST2) X 1 $26.18 $2,094.00 $4,537 $54,444 $5,141 2 $27.49 $2,198.92 $4,764 $57,172 $2,491.38 3 $28.86 $2,308.77 $5,002 $60,028 $32.70 4 $30.30 $2,424.00 $5,252 $63,024 4 5 $31.82 $2,545.38 $5,515 $66,180 RANGE 81 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Animal Shelter Supervisor (ALSS) X 1 $28.25 $2,260.15 $4,897 $58,764 Code Compliance Officer (CCO) 2 $29.67 $2,373.23 $5,142 $61,704 Community Services Supervisor (CSSV) 3 $31.15 $2,491.85 $5,399 $64,788 Crime Analyst (CRA) 4 $32.71 $2,616.46 $5,669 $68,028 PT Fire Inspector (PTFI) 5 $34.34 $2,747.08 $5,952 $71,424 Purchasing Agent (PAGT) Records Supervisor (RCSU) Theatre Manager (THMG) Planner 1/11 - Level I (PLNR1) RANGE 83 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Public Works Inspector (PWIN) X 1 $29.66 $2,372.77 $5,141 $61,692 Senior Engineering Technician (SRET) 2 $31.14 $2,491.38 $5,398 $64,776 3 $32.70 $2,616.00 $5,668 $68,016 4 $34.33 $2,746.62 $5,951 $71,412 5 $36.05 $2,884.15 $6,249 $74,988 RANGE 85 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Environmental Coordinator (EVC) X 1 $31.15 $2,491.85 $5,399 $64,788 Project Coordinator (PJC) 2 $32.71 $2,616.46 $5,669 $68,028 3 $34.34 $2,747.08 $5,952 $71,424 4 $36.06 $2,884.62 $6,250 $75,000 5 $37.86 $3,028.62 $6,562 $78,744 RANGE 87 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Accountant (ACCT) X 1 $32.71 $2,616.46 $5,669 $68,028 Management Analyst (MANA) 2 $34.34 $2,747.08 $5,952 $71,424 Planner 1/11 - Level II (PLNR2) 3 $36.06 $2,884.62 $6,250 $75,000 4 $37.86 $3,028.62 $6,562 $78,744 5 $39.75 $3,180.00 $6,890 $82,680 RANGE 89 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Information Systems Operations Manager (ISOM) X 1 $34.34 $2,747.08 $5,952 $71,424 2 $36.06 $2,884.62 $6,250 $75,000 3 $37.86 $3,028.62 $6,562 $78,744 4 $39.75 $3,180.00 $6,890 $82,680 5 $41.73 $3,338.77 $7,234 $86,808 RANGE 92 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Community Services Manager (CSMG) X 1 $36.03 $2,882.77 $6,246 $74,952 PlanneF III /DI NR -34 2 $37.83 $3,026.77 $6,558 $78,696 3 $39.73 $3,178.15 $6,886 $82,632 4 $41.71 $3,336.92 $7,230 $86,760 5 $43.80 $3,504.00 $7,592 $91,104 RANGE 94 Building Official (BDBO) CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) CLASS STEP Hourly X 1 $38.76 2 $40.70 3 $42.74 4 $44.87 5 $47.12 Biweekly Monthly Annually $3,101.08 $6,719 $80,628 $3,256.15 $7,055 $84,660 $3,419.08 $7,408 $88,896 $3,589.85 $7,778 $93,336 $3,769.38 $8,167 $98,004 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Service Employees' International Union (SEIU - Local 1021) - Maintenance Workers RANGE 52W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Maintenance Worker Trainee (MWT) 1 $14.60 $1,167.69 $2,530 $30,360 2 $15.33 $1,226.31 $2,657 $31,884 3 $16.10 $1,287.69 $2,790 $33,480 4 $16.90 $1,352.31 $2,930 $35,160 5 $17.75 $1,420.15 $3,077 $36,924 RANGE 60W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Landscape Maintenance Worker (LMW) 1 $17.35 $1,387.85 $3,007 $36,084 2 $18.21 $1,457.08 $3,157 $37,884 3 $19.13 $1,530.00 $3,315 $39,780 4 $20.08 $1,606.62 $3,481 $41,772 5 $21.09 $1,686.92 $3,655 $43,860 RANGE 64W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Meter Technician (PWMT) 1 $19.00 $1,520.31 $3,294 $39,528 2 $19.96 $1,596.46 $3,459 $41,508 3 $20.95 $1,676.31 $3,632 $43,584 4 $22.00 $1,760.31 $3,814 $45,768 5 $23.11 $1,848.46 $4,005 $48,060 RANGE 70W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Maintenance Worker I (MW1) 1 $23.25 $1,860.00 $4,030 $48,360 2 $24.42 $1,953.23 $4,232 $50,784 3 $25.64 $2,051.08 $4,444 $53,328 4 $26.92 $2,153.54 $4,666 $55,992 5 $28.26 $2,261.08 $4,899 $58,788 RANGE 74W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Fleet Mechanic (FMEC) 1 $25.66 $2,052.92 $4,448 $53,376 Maintenance Worker 11 (MW2) 2 $26.94 $2,155.38 $4,670 $56,040 3 $28.29 $2,262.92 $4,903 $58,836 4 $29.70 $2,376.00 $5,148 $61,776 5 $31.18 $2,494.62 $5,405 $64,860 *6 $32.73 $2,618.38 $5,673 $68,078 RANGE 78W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Electrician (ELEC) 1 $28.21 $2,256.46 $4,889 $58,668 2 $29.61 $2,369.08 $5,133 $61,596 3 $31.10 $2,487.69 $5,390 $64,680 4 $32.65 $2,611.85 $5,659 $67,908 5 $34.28 $2,742.46 $5,942 $71,304 RANGE 79W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Arborist (ARB) 1 $28.92 $2,313.69 $5,013 $60,156 Fleet Services Supervisor (FSS) 2 $30.37 $2,429.54 $5,264 $63,168 Supervising Maintenance Worker (SMW) 3 $31.89 $2,550.92 $5,527 $66,324 4 $33.48 $2,678.31 $5,803 $69,636 5 $35.15 $2,812.15 $6,093 $73,116 RANGE 83W STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually General Services Supervisor (GSSR) 1 $31.88 $2,550.00 $5,525 $66,300 Utilities Services Supervisor (PWUSS) 2 $33.47 $2,677.38 $5,801 $69,612 3 $35.14 $2,811.23 $6,091 $73,092 4 $36.90 $2,952.00 $6,396 $76,752 5 $38.75 $3,099.69 $6,716 $80,592 *Inactive salary step; acting pay previously incorporated into base salary CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers' Association (RPPSOA) RANGE 68 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Public Safety Dispatcher (PSD) XD 1 $24.43 $1,954.62 $4,235 $50,820 2 $25.65 $2,052.00 $4,446 $53,352 3 $26.92 $2,153.54 $4,666 $55,992 4 $28.25 $2,260.15 $4,897 $58,764 5 $29.65 $2,372.31 $5,140 $61,680 PT Public Safety Dispatcher (PTD) - Hourly 1 $23.21 2 $24.37 3 $25.57 4 $26.84 5 $28.17 *6 $29.58 RANGE 69 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Community Services Officer (CSO) S -CSO 1 $22.40 $1,791.69 $3,882 $46,584 2 $23.52 $1,881.23 $4,076 $48,912 3 $24.68 $1,974.46 $4,278 $51,336 4 $25.90 $2,072.31 $4,490 $53,880 5 $27.19 $2,175.15 $4,713 $56,554 RANGE 81 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Public Safety Officer Trainee (PSOT) S 1 $24.72 $1,977.23 $4,284 $51,408 RANGE 83 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Public Safety Communications Supervisor XD 1 $32.42 $2,593.38 $5,619 $67,428 (PSCS) 2 $34.03 $2,722.62 $5,899 $70,788 3 $35.72 $2,857.85 $6,192 $74,304 4 $37.49 $2,999.08 $6,498 $77,976 5 $39.35 $3,148.15 $6,821 $81,852 RANGE 83.5 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually New -hire Public Safety Officer (NEWB) S 1 $28.52 $2,281.38 $4,943 $59,316 2 $29.93 $2,394.46 $5,188 $62,256 RANGE 83.75 CLASS STEP **Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually New -hire Fire Public Safety Officer S 1 $19.75 $2,096.42 $4,542 $54,507 (NEWF) 2 $20.73 $2,200.31 $4,767 $57,208 RANGE 84 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Public Safety Officer (PSO) S 1 $31.42 $2,513.54 $5,446 $65,352 2 $32.98 $2,638.62 $5,717 $68,604 3 $34.62 $2,769.23 $6,000 $72,000 4 $36.33 $2,906.31 $6,297 $75,564 5 $38.13 $3,050.31 $6,609 $79,308 RANGE 86 CLASS STEP **Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Fire Assignment Public Safety Officer S 1 $21.76 $2,309.81 $5,005 $60,055 (FPSO) 2 $22.84 $2,424.69 $5,254 $63,042 3 $23.97 $2,544.69 $5,514 $66,162 4 $25.16 $2,670.65 $5,786 $69,437 5 $26.41 $2,803.00 $6,073 $72,878 `Inactive salary step; only applies to existing employees affected by prior pay reduction/restoration *`Hourly rate based on 2,760 hours annually CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers' Association (RPPSOA) RANGE 89 CLASS STEP Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Fire Marshal (PSFM) 5 1 $36.68 $2,934.00 $6,357 $76,284 Public Safety Sergeant (PSGT) 2 $38.49 $3,079.38 $6,672 $80,064 3 $40.40 $3,232.15 $7,003 $84,036 4 $42.41 $3,392.77 $7,351 $88,212 5 $44.50 $3,560.31 $7,714 $92,568 RANGE 91 CLASS STEP "Hourly Biweekly Monthly Annually Fire Assignment Sergeant (FSGT) S 1 $25.40 $2,696.12 $5,842 $70,099 2 $26.66 $2,829.69 $6,131 $73,572 3 $27.98 $2,970.08 $6,435 $77,222 4 $29.37 $3,117.69 $6,755 $81,060 5 $30.82 $3,271.65 $7,089 $85,063 `Inactive salary step; only applies to existing employees affected by prior pay reduction/restoration *`Hourly rate based on 2,760 hours annually CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Miscellaneous Part -Time (MISPT2) - Community Services Department RANGE 38 STEP Hourly PT Community Services Leader (PTCSL) 1 $10.00 PT Facility Attendant (PTFA) 2 $10.26 PT LifeguardF (PTLC) 3 $10.77 PT Pool Cashier (PTPC) 4 $11.31 5 $11.88 RANGE 41 STEP Hourly PT Swim Instructor/Lifeguard (PTIL) 1 $10.44 2 $10.96 3 $11.51 4 $12.08 5 $12.69 RANGE 43 STEP Hourly PT Senior Community Services Leader (PTSCSL) 1 $10.76 2 $11.30 3 $11.87 4 $12.46 5 $13.08 RANGE 45 STEP Hourly PT Senior Lifeguard (PTSRL) 1 $11.58 PT Sports Center Coordinator (PTSC) 2 $12.16 PT Aquatics Office Assistant (PTAOA) 3 $12.77 4 $13.41 5 $14.08 RANGE 53 STEP Hourly PT Pool Manager (PTPMGR) 1 $12.46 2 $13.08 3 $13.73 4 $14.42 5 $15.14 RANGE 59 STEP Hourly PT Community Services Coordinator (PTCSC) 1 $13.73 2 $14.42 3 $15.14 4 $15.90 5 $16.70 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Miscellaneous Part -Time Hourly Positions Administrative/Office Hourly PT Administrative Assistant (PTAA) $10.50 - $28.50 PT Office Assistant (PT01) $10.00 - $19.00 PT Information Systems Assistant (PTIS) $20.00 - $25.00 PT Technical Advisor (PTTA) $14.25 - $47.50 Temporary Management Analyst (TMAN) $25.00 - $40.00 PT Administrative Intern (PTAI) $10.00 - $19.00 Community Services Hourly PT Custodian (PTC) $11.40 - $14.00 Performing Arts Center Hourly PT Box Office Assistant (PTBA) $10.45 - $11.40 PT Assistant Box Office Manager (PTHBM) $10.00 - $12.00 PT Arts Center House Manager (PTHM) $10.00 - $12.00 PT Theater Technician (PTTT) $10.00 - $13.30 Public Safety Hourly PT Animal Shelter Assistant (ASA) $11.40 - $14.25 PT Community Services Leader (PTCSL) $10.00 - $11.88 PT Public Safety Records Clerk (PTPSRC) $15.00 - $20.00 Public Works Hourly Seasonal Maintenance Assistant (SMA) $11.40 - $14.00 Stipends by Unit Public Safety Amount/Percentage Euthanasia Certification 7% CITY OF ROHNERT PARK - PAY RATES AND RANGES Pensionable Stipends by Unit All Units Amount/Percentage Acting Pay 5%-10% *Longevity 2%-10% By Employment Contract Amount/Percentage POST Certification Pay (Director of Public Safety) - Executive 10% Confidential Amount/Percentage Bilingual $100/month Educational Incentive - BA/BS, MA/MS $50/month Rohnert Park Employees' Association (RPEA) Amount/Percentage Bilingual $100/month Educational Incentive - MA/MS $50/month Rohnert Park Public Safety Managers' Association (RPPSMA) Amount/Percentage POST Certification Pay (Commanders) - Supervisory 7.0% POST Certification Pay (Commanders) - Management 8.5% Rohnert Park Public Safety Officers' Association (RPPSOA) Amount/Percentage Acting Supervisor/Watch Commander 5%-10% Acting Lieutenant 10%-15% Bilingual 2.5% Canine Handler 3.0% Detective 5.0% Educational - AA/AS (Sergeant, PSO, CSO) 1.8% Educational - AA/AS (Dispatcher, Comm Sup) 2.4% Educational - BA/BS (Sergeant, PSO, CSO) 2.8% Educational - BA/BS (Dispatcher, Comm Sup) 3.6% EMT 2.0% Field Training Officer 5.0% Non -Sworn Training Officer 5.0% Fire Specialty 2.0% Fire Engineer 2.5% Fire Captain 4.0% *Fire Marshal 15.0% PSO Captain 3.0% Master Officer 5.0% Motorcycle Duty 3.0% **Intermediate POST Certification 4.5% **Advanced POST Certification 7.0% **POST Supervisory Certification (Sergeant) 9.0% POST Field Evidence Tech Certification (CSO) 2.5% Property Technician (CSO) 5.0% Shift Differential 5.0% Special/Extra Assignments 5.0% ***Uniform Allowance $240/year Service Employees' International Union (SEIU) Amount/Percentage Certification and License Program - Level 1 2.6% Certification and License Program - Level II 4.5% Certification and License Program - Level 111 6.0% Educational Incentive Pay - Level I $75/month Educational Incentive Pay - Level 11 $100/month Educational Incentive Pay - Level III $135/month *Inactive stipend; closed to new hires **Only one POST stipend paid per employee ***Only pensionable for classic PERS members ,�_pHNERT PgRK CA L1 Fo RN lP ITEM NO. 7C2 Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: March 8, 2016 Department: Finance Submitted By: Betsy Howze, Finance Director Prepared By: Betsy Howze, Finance Director Agenda Title: Authorize an Amendment to Resolution 2011-40 Regarding the Disbursement of Funds with the California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust (CERBT) RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the attached Resolution amending Resolution 2011-40 regarding the disbursement of funds with the California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust (CERBT) services. BACKGROUND: The City offers Other Post -Employment Benefits (OPEB). These benefits consist of health care, dental, vision, and life insurance benefits provided to retired former employees and their dependents. On May 24, 2011 by Resolution 2011-40 the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park authorized the "CERBT Agreement and Election of the City of Rohnert Park to prefund Other Post -Employment Benefits through CalPERS." The resolution designated the City Manager as Plan Administrator and authorized the Plan Administrator to execute all documents to facilitate the funding, investment management and administration of OPEB. It also delegated to the incumbent in the position of City Manager authority to request on behalf of the Employer disbursements from the OPEB Prefunding Plan, and to certify as to the purpose for which the disbursed funds will be used. ANAT,VCTC- CERBT staff recently reviewed the Rohnert Park CERBT Plan documents, and noticed that Resolution 2011-40 which authorized only the City Manager to make disbursement from the trust to the City for retiree medical costs limited the disbursements to $10,000. CERBT requires a resolution authorizing two signatures in order to make disbursements in excess of $10,000. The current CERBT funding plan recently adopted by the Council estimates to begin using CERBT funds to reduce the City's retiree medical costs in FY 2022, with the first disbursement estimated at $26,000. Disbursements continue each year thru 2045 when the actuarially determined obligations are relieved. All disbursements to the City are expected to exceed $10,000. We recommend amending the authorizing resolution for disbursements to include the Assistant City Manager and the Finance Director. This change will ensure that at least two staff would be available to request disbursements. 1 ITEM NO. 7C2 STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: Goal B of our strategic plan calls for us to Achieve and Maintain Financial Stability. By adding authorization for additional signers to the CERBT disbursement agreement, it allows the City to better manage the retiree medical funding. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: Option 1 — Recommended. Authorize the amendment to Resolution 2011-40 which will increase the number of authorized signers to disburse funds from the CERBT from one to two. This will increase the allowable disbursement of funds to the City in excess of $10,000. Option 2 — Not recommended. Without the amendment to Resolution 2011-40 the City will not be able to disburse funds in excess of $10,000, which would limit the ability to recoup funds per the adopted plan, and inhibit the use of CERBT funds for City retiree medical costs during an economic downturn. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to authorizing the change in signature authority, except as it limits the ability to recoup CERBT funds in excess of $10,000. Department Head Approval Date: 02/24/16 Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: 02/29/16 City Manager Approval Date: 02/29/16 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Resolution 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-20 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AMENDING RESOLUTION 2011-40 REGARDING THE DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS FROM CALIFORNIA EMPLOYERS' RETIREE BENEFIT TRUST (CERBT) SERVICES WHEREAS, on May 24, 2011 by Resolution 2011-40 the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park authorized the "CERBT Agreement and Election of the City of Rohnert Park To Prefund Other Post -Employment Benefits through Ca1PERS;" WHEREAS, also by Resolution 2011-40 the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park delegated to the incumbent in the position of City Manager authority to request on behalf of the Employer disbursements from the OPEB Prefunding Plan, and to certify as to the purpose for which the disbursed funds will be used; WHEREAS, CERBT has requested the City Council adopt a new resolution requiring two signatures to request on behalf of the Employer disbursements from the OPEB Prefunding Plan, and to certify as to the purpose for which the disbursed funds will be used to disburse funds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park hereby amends Resolution 2011-40 to require two signatures to request disbursements from the OPEB Prefunding Plan and delegates to the incumbents in the position of City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and Finance Director the authority to make such a request on behalf of the Employer and to certify as to the purpose for which the disbursed funds will be used. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that except as otherwise provided for in this Resolution, Resolution No. 2011-40 remains in full force and effect. DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 81h day of March, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: JoAnne M. Buergler, City Clerk AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES:( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT:( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) 01;N T Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." Catr�vnr�t" CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: March 8, 2016 Department: Public Safety Submitted By: Brian Masterson, Director of Public Safety Prepared By: Patrick Strouse, Commander ITEM NO. 7C3 Agenda Title: Consideration of the Purchase of Sixty (60) VieVu Body Worn Cameras (BWC) for the Department of Public Safety RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt a Resolution authorizing the Purchase of Sixty (60) VieVu Body Worn Cameras (BWC) including Software, Related Equipment and an Internal Storage Solution for the Department of Public Safety not to exceed $100,000; Authorizing the City Manager to execute purchase documentation; and Authorizing the Finance Director to Increase Appropriations. BACKGROUND: Body -worn camera (BWC) devices are a small, pager size, camera that attaches to an officer's uniform and records video and audio of law enforcement interactions with the public. The use of body worn cameras is becoming increasingly prevalent in law enforcement, given their effectiveness in resolving issues regarding officer conduct. In a 2002 study by the International Association of Police Chiefs for the US Department of Justice, use of in -car cameras resulted in only 5% of complaints against officers being sustained when video recording of the encounter was captured. The video also helps improve prosecutors' ability to successfully prosecute cases, according to the study. By reducing the time in complaint investigations and in court testimony, officers have more time to provide patrol and public safety services to the community. The Cambridge Police Foundation, with the cooperation of the Rialto, California Police Department, conducted a year-long study on the effects of BWC's on the behaviors of both the public and the police officers. The study, which concluded in 2013, showed that the number of complaints against officers declined 88% and the number of use of force incidents declined 60%. Overall the behavior of both citizens and officers improved significantly with the knowledge they were being recorded. This change resulted in fewer injuries to officers and citizens, fewer complaints, better evidence for court, and a greater level of transparency. The United States Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, the Police Executive Research Forum, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the American Civil Liberties Union and a number of police risk management organizations all endorse the utilization of BWC's as a best practice in policing. ITEM NO. 7C3 ANALYSIS The Public Safety Department is proposing a comprehensive body worn camera (BWC) program that entails the purchase of cameras, software and an in-house data storage system. The initial costs are estimated at $96,611, and on-going costs on the high end at $30,000/year. The use of Body -Worn Cameras raises a variety of important policy issues. These are discussed in detail in the attached draft City policy. Some of the key issues include: Use and Activation of Cameras: In general, officers will be required to carry a BWC while on duty and use it in the following circumstances: a) All enforcement and investigative contacts including stops and field interview (FI) situations b) Traffic stops including, but not limited to, traffic violations, stranded motorist assistance and all crime interdiction stops c) Self -initiated activity in which a member would normally notify the Communications Center d) Any other contact that becomes adversarial after the initial contact in a situation that would not otherwise require recording Retention of Records: Staff proposes that the City follow state law in retaining video recordings. This generally requires retaining video that could be used as evidence for a minimum of two years, and other videos for 60 days. Evidentiary: Pursuant to Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5)(B), evidentiary data including video and audio recorded by a body -worn camera under this section should be retained for a minimum of two years under any of the following circumstances: a) The recording is of an incident involving the use of force by a peace officer or an officer -involved shooting. b) The recording is of an incident that leads to the detention or arrest of an individual. c) The recording is relevant to a formal or informal complaint against a law enforcement officer or a law enforcement agency. Pursuant to Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5), "evidentiary data" refers to data of an incident or encounter that could prove useful for investigative purposes, including, but not limited to, a crime, an arrest or citation, a search, a use of force incident, or a confrontational encounter with a member of the public. Videos labeled with one of the following categories in the recording software shall be considered evidentiary data and retained for a minimum of two years: Category 1: Arrest, Cite Arrest, Use of Force, or Relevant to Criminal Case [Evidentiary Data]; Category 2: Hostile Contact [Evidentiary Data]; or Category 3: Traffic Collisions [Evidentiary Data]. Non -evidentiary: Pursuant to Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5)(A), unless Sections 451.7.2.1 or 451.7.2.2 apply, non -evidentiary data including video and audio recorded by a body -worn camera should be retained for a minimum of 60 days, after which it may be erased, destroyed, or W ITEM NO. 7C3 recycled. An agency may keep data for more than 60 days to have it available in case of a citizen complaint and to preserve transparency. Pursuant to Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5), "non -evidentiary data" refers to data that does not necessarily have value to aid in an investigation or prosecution, such as data of an incident or encounter that does not lead to an arrest or citation, or data of general activities the officer might perform while on duty. Videos labeled with one of the following categories in the recording software shall be considered non -evidentiary data and kept for a minimum of 60 days: Category 4: Investigative Contact or Detention [Non -Evidentiary Data]; or Category 5: Traffic Stops [Non -Evidentiary Data]; Category 6: Training [Non -Evidentiary Data]; or Category 7: Uncategorized [Non -Evidentiary Data]. Officer and Supervisor Access to Video: Officers will be able to review recordings to help prepare written reports, courtroom testimony or administrative interview incidents. When preparing written reports, officers should review their recordings as a resource. However, officers shall not retain personal copies of recordings. Officers should not use the fact that a recording was made as a reason to write a less detailed report. Supervisors are authorized to review relevant recordings any time they are investigating alleged misconduct or reports of meritorious conduct. Supervisors can periodically review a sample of recordings to evaluate compliance with this policy. The primary intent however, is not to engage in unnecessary "fishing' expeditions to uncover malfeasance. In the event an officer is to be interviewed for an administrative purpose, the officer may review the officer's related video recordings in preparation for the interview. This will include the administrative review of officer -involved shootings or critical incidents. If the officer is a witness or subject of a criminal investigation, the decision on reviewing any related videos will be determined by the investigating agency. Public access to video: Public access will primarily be determined by current state law as is the case with all Department records. When requests for access are not subject to state law, the City Manager has final authority to determine public access. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This recommendation is in alignment with Goal C: Ensure the effective delivery of public services by integrating technology into operations. OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1. Recommended Option: Staff recommends proceeding with the purchase of Body -Worn Cameras to promote improved practices in Public Safety, including the associated policies on use of cameras, retention of videos, and access to videos. 2. Alternative: The City could not proceed with Body -Worn Cameras, which would require continuing existing practices in Public Safety. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: Should the Council approve the purchase, funding for the BWC's, incorporated software and internal storage solution will be from Asset Seizure Funds. This is a special fund comprised of seized assets from crimes that can be used for specified purposes, including BWC's. ITEM NO. 70 The one-time costs are estimated at $96,612. This includes $69,655 for 60 cameras (at $749 each), charging stations, and a three-year warranty. This also includes $26,956 to purchase servers to store two years of video recordings. On-going costs are projected to be $30,000/year on the high end toward replacement of cameras and other equipment funded from the Asset Forfeiture Fund. Department Head Approval Date: 1-25-16 Finance Director Approval Date: 3-1-16 City Attorney Approval Date: 2-11-16 City Manager Approval Date: 2/29/16 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Resolution 2016-21 2. Lexipol Policy 451 Body Worn Video System 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF SIXTY (60) VIEVU BODY WORN CAMERAS (BWC) INCLUDING SOFTWARE, RELATED EQUIPMENT AND AN INTERNAL STORAGE SOLUTION FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY NOT TO EXCEED $100,000; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE PURCHASE DOCUMENTATION; AND AUTHORIZING THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS WHEREAS; the Department of Public Safety desires to implement a Body Worn Camera (BWC) program to enhance the effective delivery of public service by integrating technology into our operations; and WHEREAS, after analyzing applicable studies, conducting field surveys, and undertaking a pilot program with respect to BWCs, staff recommends the VieVu LE4 camera and incorporated video management software with an internal storage solution; and WHEREAS, consistent with the Cooperative Purchasing Agreement provisions, Section 3.6.6(c) of the Rohnert Park Purchasing Policy, the City has piggybacked off of Riverside County's competitive bids for BWCs and secured an agreement on the same terms and conditions; and WHEREAS, staff recommends authorizing an expenditure not to exceed $100,000 for the initial purchase of 60 Cameras, software & equipment, as well as internal storage on 3 year contract with locked -in pricing for additional cameras; and WHEREAS, staff recommends utilizing the Asset Forfeiture Special Revenue Fund for the purchase of all equipment, a designated fund for law enforcement expenditures. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rohnert Park that it does hereby authorize and approve the initial purchase of sixty (60) VieVu BWC's, associated equipment and storage solution and subsequent purchase of additional BWC's and equipment/storage for a total not to exceed amount of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to execute documents pertaining to same for and on behalf of the City of Rohnert Park. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Finance Director is hereby authorized to increase appropriations in the State Asset Forfeiture Special Revenue Fund number 106 in the amount of $100,000 for the aforementioned purchase. [THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY.] 1 2016-21 DULY AND REGULARLY ADOPTED this 8th day of March, 2016. CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Gina Belforte, Mayor ATTEST: JoAnne M. Buergler, City Clerk AHANOTU: CALLINAN: STAFFORD: MACKENZIE: BELFORTE: AYES:( ) NOES: ( ) ABSENT: ( ) ABSTAIN: ( ) 2 2016-21 Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety Policy Manual Body Worn Video Systems 451.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This policy provides guidelines for the use of Body Worn Video (BWV) recording devices by members of this department while in the performance of their duties. This policy does not apply to lawful surreptitious audio/video recording or interception of communications for authorized investigative purposes. 451.2 POLICY The Rohnert Park DPS may provide members with access to BWV systems for use during the performance of their duties. The use of BWV recorders is intended to enhance the mission of the Department by accurately capturing contacts between members of the Department and the public. Penal Code Section 832.18 — Body Worn Cameras Best Practices are incorporated into this policy. 451.3 MEMBER PRIVACY EXPECTATION All recordings made by members acting in their official capacity shall remain the property of the Department regardless of whether those recordings were made with department -issued or personally owned recorders. Members shall have no expectation of privacy or ownership interest in the content of these recordings. 451.4 MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES Prior to going into service, each uniformed member assigned a BWV recorder will be responsible for making sure that he/she is equipped with a BWV recorder issued by the Department, and that the recorder is in good working order. If the recorder is not in working order or malfunctions at any time, the member shall promptly report the failure to his/her supervisor and obtain a functioning device as soon as practicable. Any member assigned to a non -uniformed position may carry an approved BWV recorder at any time the member believes that such a device may be useful. Unless conducting a lawful recording in an authorized undercover capacity, members shall wear their BWV recorder mounted on their uniform shirt or on their external ballistic vest carrier generally about their chest in a forward -facing manner. Members should document the existence of a recording in any report or other official record of the contact, including any instance where the recorder malfunctioned or the member deactivated the recording. Members should include the reason for deactivation. Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety Policy Manual Body Worn Video Systems This section is not intended to require a report be prepared solely for the purpose of documenting the existence of a body worn video. A primary investigating officer should document the existence of any recordings in the report narrative. If a participating officer writes a supplemental report as to his/her involvement in a case, the existence of their recording should also be documented in the supplemental report. 451.5 ACTIVATION OF THE BWV RECORDER This policy is not intended to describe every possible situation in which the BWV recorder should be used, although there are many situations where its use is appropriate. Members should activate the recorder any time the member believes it would be appropriate or valuable to record an incident. The BWV recorder shall be activated in any of the following situations: (a) All enforcement and investigative contacts including stops and field interview (FI) situations (b) Traffic stops including, but not limited to, traffic violations, stranded motorist assistance and all crime interdiction stops (c) Self -initiated activity in which a member would normally notify the Communications Center (d) Any other contact that becomes adversarial after the initial contact in a situation that would not otherwise require recording Members should remain sensitive to the dignity of all individuals being recorded and exercise sound discretion to respect privacy by discontinuing recording whenever it reasonably appears to the member that such privacy may outweigh any legitimate law enforcement interest in recording. Requests by members of the public to stop recording should be considered using this same criterion. Recording shall resume when privacy is no longer at issue unless the circumstances no longer fit the criteria for recording. Members shall cease recording if any of the criteria set forth in Section 451.6 that prohibit the use of BMV recorders arise. At no time is a member expected to jeopardize his/her safety in order to activate a BWV recorder or change the recording media. However, the recorder shall be activated in situations described above as soon as practicable. 451.5.1 SURREPTITIOUS USE OF THE BWV RECORDER Members of the Department may surreptitiously record any conversation during the course of a criminal investigation in which the member reasonably believes that such a recording will be lawful and beneficial to the investigation (Penal Code § 633). Members shall not surreptitiously record another department member without a court order unless lawfully authorized by the Chief of Police or the authorized designee. Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety Policy Manual Body Worn Video Systems 451.5.2 CESSATION OF RECORDING Once activated, the portable recorder should remain on continuously until the member's direct participation in the incident is complete or the situation no longer fits the criteria for activation. Recording may be stopped during significant periods of inactivity such as report writing, booking or transporting prisoners, while holding static or perimeter positions on field events, or other breaks from direct participation in the incident. 451.5.3 EXPLOSIVE DEVICE Many BWV recorders emit radio waves that could trigger an explosive device. Therefore, these devices should not be used where an explosive device may be present. 451.6 PROHIBITED USE OF BWV RECORDERS Members are prohibited from using department -issued BWV recorders and recording media for personal use and are prohibited from making personal copies of recordings created while on- duty or while acting in their official capacity. Members are also prohibited from retaining recordings of activities or information obtained while on - duty, whether the recording was created with department -issued or personally owned recorders. Members shall not duplicate or distribute such recordings, except for authorized legitimate department business purposes. All such recordings shall be retained at the Department. Members are prohibited from using personally owned recording devices while on -duty without the express consent of the Chief of Police or designee. Any member who uses a personally owned recorder for department -related activities shall comply with the provisions of this policy, including retention and release requirements. Recordings shall not be used by any member for the purpose of embarrassment, intimidation or ridicule. Officers should be aware of privacy issues relating to a person's place of residence and/or other areas where there could be an expectation of privacy. If a private person objects to the use of the recording inside a private residence, the officer may turn off the device in accordance with this policy. Recordings should specifically not be made in the following instances: - When not in service or during breaks - During encounters with undercover officers or confidential informants - To record non work-related activity, or in areas where a reasonable expectation of privacy exists such as in locker rooms, dressing rooms or restrooms - Where a person's private health information is being discussed, such as ambulance responses to accidents or illnesses where victims are not believed to be involved in any criminal activity - When the recording creates an officer safety issue - When discussing administrative, tactical or law enforcement sensitive information away from the public Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety Policy Manual Body Worn Video Systems 451.7 RETENTION OF RECORDINGS All BWV recordings should be downloaded no later than the end of each shift into the designated server or storage platform utilized by the agency. Under extenuating circumstances a supervisor may authorize a short delay in the downloading of the data into the server, but it should be completed as soon as practical. Any time a member records any portion of a contact that the member reasonably believes constitutes evidence in a criminal case, the member shall record the related case number and transfer the file in accordance with current procedure for storing digital files and document the existence of the recording in the related case report. Transfers should occur no later than the end of the member's shift, or any time the storage capacity is nearing its limit. Any time a member reasonably believes a recorded contact constitutes evidentiary data, within the meaning of Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5), that is not evidence in a criminal case, the member should promptly notify a supervisor of the existence of the recording. 451.7.1 CLASSIFICATIONS Employees using the BWV shall identify each video by category. In the event a video is taken that does not fall into a listed category, the officer may leave the video as uncategorized. P u rs u a n t to P e n a I C o d e § 8 3 2.18 (b) (4) , t he following categories have been established in the recording software: Category 1: Arrest, Cite Arrest, Use of Force, or Relevant to Criminal Case [Evidentiary Data] Category 2: Hostile Contact [Evidentiary Data] Category 3: Traffic Collisions [Evidentiary Data] Category 4: Investigative Contact or Detention [Non -Evidentiary Data] Category 5: Traffic Stops [Non -Evidentiary Data] Category 6: Training [Non -Evidentiary Data] Category 7: Uncategorized [Non -Evidentiary Data] When a video is taken by an assisting officer, or when conducting follow-up on an event, the video should be retained under the original category for the event. In the "Case Number" field, officers should enter the corresponding case or citation number. Entering event numbers is optional. Officers should use the following formats when making these entries: Case Number: 15-0015 (4 -digits) Event Number: RP140421001 Citation Number: 0123456 Entries in the "Comments" field are optional but may be used when a member wants a comment preserved in the audit trail for the video file. Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety Policy Manual Body Worn Video Systems 451.7.2 RETENTION REQUIREMENTS All recordings shall be retained minimally for a period consistent with the requirements of Penal Code Section 832.18, and State Evidentiary Laws. 451.7.2.1 EVIDENTIARY DATA Pursuant to Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5)(B), evidentiary data including video and audio recorded by a body -worn camera under this section should be retained for a minimum of two years under any of the following circumstances: (i) The recording is of an incident involving the use of force by a peace officer or an officer -involved shooting. (ii) The recording is of an incident that leads to the detention or arrest of an individual. (iii) The recording is relevant to a formal or informal complaint against a law enforcement officer or a law enforcement agency. Pursuant to Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5), "evidentiary data" refers to data of an incident or encounter that could prove useful for investigative purposes, including, but not limited to, a crime, an arrest or citation, a search, a use of force incident, or a confrontational encounter with a member of the public. Videos labeled with one of the following categories in the recording software shall be considered evidentiary data and retained for a minimum of two years: Category 1: Arrest, Cite Arrest, Use of Force, or Relevant to Criminal Case [Evidentiary Data]; Category 2: Hostile Contact [Evidentiary Data]; or Category 3: Traffic Collisions [Evidentiary Data]. 451.7.2.2 ANY EVIDENCE RELEVANT TO A CRIMINAL PROSECUTION Pursuant to Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5)(C), if evidence that may be relevant to a criminal prosecution is obtained from a recording made by a BWV, the recording shall be retained for any time in addition to that specified in Sections 451.7.2.1 and 451.7.2.3, and in the same manner as is required by law for other evidence that may be relevant to a criminal prosecution. 451.7.2.3 NON -EVIDENTIARY DATA Pursuant to Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5)(A), unless Sections 451.7.2.1 or 451.7.2.2 apply, non - evidentiary data including video and audio recorded by a body -worn camera should be retained for a minimum of 60 days, after which it may be erased, destroyed, or recycled. An agency may keep data for more than 60 days to have it available in case of a citizen complaint and to preserve transparency. Pursuant to Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5), "non -evidentiary data" refers to data that does not necessarily have value to aid in an investigation or prosecution, such as data of an incident or encounter that does not lead to an arrest or citation, or data of general activities the officer might perform while on duty. Videos labeled with one of the following categories in the recording software shall be considered non -evidentiary data and kept for a minimum of 60 days: Category 4: Investigative Contact or Detention [Non -Evidentiary Data]; or Category 5: Traffic Stops [Non -Evidentiary Data]; Category 6: Training [Non -Evidentiary Data]; or Category 7: Uncategorized [Non -Evidentiary Data]. Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety Policy Manual Body Worn Video Systems 451.7.2.4 ACCESS OR DELETION LOGS Pursuant to Penal Code § 832.18(b)(5)(E), records or logs of access and deletion of data from body - worn cameras should be retained permanently. 451.7.3 DATA STORAGE LOCATION: An internal dedicated department server will be utilized to store BWV and be maintained by the Information Technology Department of the City. 451.8 REVIEW OF RECORDINGS When preparing written reports, members should review their recordings as a resource. However, members shall not retain personal copies of recordings. Members should not use the fact that a recording was made as a reason to write a less detailed report. Supervisors are authorized to review relevant recordings any time they are investigating alleged misconduct or reports of meritorious conduct. Supervisors can periodically review a sample of recordings to evaluate compliance with this policy. The primary intent however, is not to engage in unnecessary "fishing' expeditions to uncover malfeasance. In the event a member is to be interviewed for an administrative purpose, the member may review the member's related video recordings in preparation for the interview. This will include the administrative review of officer -involved shootings or critical incidents. If the member is a witness or subject of a criminal investigation, the decision on reviewing any related videos will be determined by the investigating agency. Video files may be utilized as a training tool. A recommendation to utilize a file for such a purpose may come from any source. A person recommending utilization of a file for training purposes shall submit the recommendation to their supervisor. If an involved officer objects to the showing of a recording, a Commander shall determine if the employee's objection outweighs the training value. Recorded files may also be reviewed: (a) Upon approval by a supervisor, by any member of the Department who is participating in an official investigation, such as a personnel complaint, administrative investigation or criminal investigation. (b) Pursuant to lawful process or by court personnel who are otherwise authorized to review evidence in a related case. (c) By media personnel with permission of the Chief of Police or the authorized designee. (d) In compliance with a public records request, if permitted, and in accordance with the Records Release and Security Policy. The Chief of Police or authorized designee with review by the City Manager has the final authority of releasing any audio or video to the media or the public. All recordings should be reviewed by the Custodian of Records prior to public release (see the Records Release and Security Policy). Should the decision be made to release any video to the public, the Chief of Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety Policy Manual Body Worn Video Systems Police or designee will make a best effort to notify any involved member prior to release of the information. Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety Policy Manual Body Worn Video Systems ,�_pHNERT PgRK CA L1 Fo RN lP Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: March 8, 2016 Department: Administration Submitted By: JoAnne Buergler, City Clerk Prepared By: Caitlin Saldanha, Administrative Assistant Agenda Title: Accept Resignation from Senior Citizens Advisory Commission Member Dolores Barron and Direct Staff to Send Letter of Appreciation Item No. 7D RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept the resignation of Senior Citizens Advisory Commission Member Dolores Barron and direct staff to send letter of appreciation. BACKGROUND: On January 19, 2016 the City Clerk's Office received notification of Dolores Barron's decision to resign from the Senior Citizens Advisory Commission, effective immediately. Ms. Barron was nominated for appointment to the Committee by Mayor Gina Belforte and initially took office in April of 2015. The vacated position's two-year term will expire on December 31, 2016, and in order to solicit interest from the community for a replacement, the City Clerk's office prepared and posted a Notice of Special Vacancy at various City facilities and on the City's website advertising this vacancy. All applications of interest received from community members following the posting were submitted to Mayor Gina Belforte for consideration. Department Head Approval Date: 3/1/2016 City Manager Approval Date: 3/2/2016 City Attorney Approval Date: N/A Attachments: 1. Letter of Resignation — Dolores Barron 2. Special Vacancy Notice 3. Draft Letter of Appreciation January 12, 2016 Rohnert Park, California To: City Clerk From: Dolores Barron Member Senior Citizens Advisory Committee RpHNERT PARK JAN 19 ZO CITY CLERK I recently moved out of the City of Rohnert Park and wish to advise you that I am resigning from the position as member of the Senior Citizens Advisory Committee. Thank you very much for allowing to be part of your wonderful community. My move to Lake County makes it difficult to continue to serve in the committee. Sincerely, Dolores Barron CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 130 AVRAM AVENUE, ROHNERT PARK, CA 94928 PHONE: (707) 588-2227 1 FAX: (707) 794-9248 1 WEB: www.rpcity.org OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK SPECIAL VACANCY NOTICE Rohnert Park City Council is Seeking Applicants for the City's SENIOR CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMISSION The Council of the City of Rohnert Park is seeking applications from Rohnert Park residents 60 years of age or older to nominate for a special vacancy on the City's Senior Citizens Advisory Commission for the remainder of a two-year term which expires on December 31, 2016. The appointment will be made by Mayor Gina Belforte. The Senior Citizens Advisory Commission currently meets the third Thursday of January, May, and September at 1:00 p.m. at the Senior Center, 6800 Hunter Drive, Suite A, Rohnert Park, CA. Preference in the selection of applicants shall be given to citizens indicating an interest in identifying the needs of the elderly of the community and creating citizen awareness of these needs. Interested Rohnert Park residents may obtain a fact sheet application at the City Clerk's Office located at 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 94928, online at rpcity.org or by calling (707) 588-2227. Completed applications can be submitted in person at City Hall, via mail, or fax (707) 794-9248. The Rohnert Park City Council will be notified when the vacancy is filled. Dated: January 19, 2016 JoAnne Buergler, City Clerk In Accordance with Maddy Act Provisions (G.C. 54970 et. al.) POST: (1) City Hall (2) Public Safety (3) Community Center (4) Performing Arts Center (5) Library (6) City of Rohnert Park Website (www.rpcity.org) (7) Chamber of Commerce: (info@rohnertparkchamber.org) CC: City Council Members Darrin Jenkins, City Manager Michelle Marchetta Kenyon, City Attorney Alexandra Barnhill, Assistant City Attorney Mitch Austin (for Senior Citizens Advisory Commission) Jennifer Davis (for POSTING at Public Safety) Chris Morgan (for POSTING at Community Center) Gene Abravaya, Theatre Manager (for POSTING at PAC) Nancy Kleban (for POSTING at Library) m:\commission-committee-board appointments\00 commissions-committees-boards\senior citizens advisory commission\special vacancy notice december 2016.docx City Council Gina Belforte Mayor Jake Mackenzie Vice Mayor Amy 0. Ahanotu Joseph T. Callinan Pam Stafford Councilmembers Darrin Jenkins City Manager Don Schwartz Assistant City Manager Michelle Marchetta Kenyon City Attorney Alexandra M. Barnhill Assistant City Attorney JoAnne Buergler City Clerk Betsy Howze Finance Director Brian Masterson Director of Public Safety John McArthur Director of Public Works and Community Services Mary Grace Pawson Director of Development Services Victoria Perrault Human Resources Director March 8, 2016 Dolores Barron Re: Senior Citizens Advisory Commission Dear Ms. Barron, On behalf of the City of Rohnert Park, I would like to extend our appreciation for your services and commitment to the community as a member of the Senior Citizens Advisory Commission since April 2015. We wish to acknowledge your investment of time and energy in serving the citizens of the City of Rohnert Park as a member of the Senior Citizens Advisory Commission and thank you for your service to the community. Sincerely, Gina Belforte, Mayor cc: City Council Members Mitch Austin, Community Services Manager File — Senior Citizens Advisory Commission 130 Avram Avenue ♦ Rohnert Park CA ♦ 94928 ♦ (707) 588-2226 ♦ Fax (707) 794-9248 www.rpcity.org Meeting Date: Department: Submitted By: Prepared By: Agenda Title: ITEM NO. 9 Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT March 8, 2016 Administration Don Schwartz, Assistant City Manager Don Schwartz, Assistant City Manager Consideration of Letter Opposing Sonoma County Agricultural and Open Space Preservation District's Young-Armos Incubator Farm RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve attached letter to the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Agricultural and Open Space Preservation District's opposing the Young-Armos Incubator Farm Concept. BACKGROUND: The Sonoma County Agricultural and Open Space Preservation District has proposed establishing an Incubator Farm on the Young-Armos property immediately north of the City boundary. The purposes of the project include establishing an incubator for aspiring farmers, and for the District to divest ownership of the property. Attached is a proposed site map for the project. At two community meetings held in February, many Rohnert Park residents strongly opposed the project. Also, many residents have signed the attached petition opposing the project. Staff has met with the District and believes that the goals of supporting aspiring farmers and divesting ownership of the property can be met without this project. ANALYSIS: Because the District's goals can be met through other means and because of substantial opposition from Rohnert Park residents, staff believes that this project is inappropriate. Additionally, the District has noted that community support is essential to move this project forward; there is no evidence that such support exists in the most affected community. The City has a history of expressing interest in acquiring this property and allowing passive recreational use (see attached letters). ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLAN: Opposition to this project is consistent with the Strategic Plan goal to demonstrate participative leadership as it aligns the City's position with residents' interests. ITEM NO. 9 OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1. Recommended Option: Staff recommends sending the attached letter because it reflects the desires of our community and because the projects goals can be met in other ways. 2. The Council may edit the letter. 3. The Council may take no position. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: None Department Head Approval Date: N/A Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: March 2, 2016 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Draft letter of opposition 2. Site map 3. Petition from residents and homeowners 4. Prior City letters regarding the Young-Armos property 2 March 8, 2016 Sonoma County Board of Supervisors 575 Administration Drive, Room 100A Santa Rosa, CA 95403 City Council Gina Belforte Subject: Young-Armos Incubator Farm Concept Mayor Dear Friends and Colleagues: Jake Mackenzie Vice Mayor I am writing today on behalf of the Rohnert Park City Council and the residents of Amy 0. Ahanotu Joseph T. Callinan Rohnert Park. Simply stated, our Ci Council is opposed to the Agricultural p y City pp g Pam Stafford Preservation and Open Space District's (District) proposal to establish an Councilmembers incubator farm on 48 acres of open space adjacent to Rohnert Park's northern border. Darrin Jenkins City Manager Community opposition to this proposed project is strong. In facta a proposal to farm this property came to light a decade ago, and it was decided that creating a Don Schwartz Assistant CittyyManager an farm on the iistent with i interests. Nothing has 1�rohe�' was inconsistent community eresg changed; it is still inconsistent. Furthermore, the FAQ's distributed by the District Michelle Marchetti Kenyon City Attorney for public consumption states on page 4 that: `It is essential to have community support in order to move forward. " Characterizing the overwhelming community Alexandra M. Barnhill opposition to the proposal as the thoughts of one person is a mistake. At the Assistant City Attorney District's February 8th meeting there were forty residents, nearly every one of JoAnne Buergler them spoke and every single one of them was opposed to the farm at the proposed City Clerk location. The Rohnert Park community does not support this project. Betsy Howze Finance Director Your staff and UC Extension staff state they have received a "positive reaction from County, State, Federal agencies." Conspicuously absent from that list is the Briasterson Direector,ofPublicSafety adjacent city and the area most affected, Rohnert Park. The County's own study, Final Report on County Lands, states the property should be left as grazing land; John McArthur Director of Public Works and we agree. Community Services The property is not a farm as that term is used in the proposal, although it was Mary Grace Pawson used for non -irrigated hay production in the past. The UC Extension staff stated Director ofa Development Services as a result of ha fanning, the soil is depleted and needs to be rebuilt using y g� p g fertilizers and other amendments. It is not a farm being "preserved." The Victoria Perrault Human Resources Director proposal is to change an open space area into a commercial farming operation with up to twelve buildings, unsightly hoop houses, parking lots, fences, and other elements inconsistent with open space preservation. The sign posted by the District on the property says "Protected Forever. " Please honor that commitment. The land was purchased nearly 20 years ago with open space district funds to preserve a community separator between Rohnert Park and Santa Rosa. Constructing buildings—up to 12 shown in the plan—is inconsistent with 130 Avram Avenue ♦ Rohnert Park CA ♦ 94928 ♦ (707) 588-2226 ♦ Fax (707) 794-9248 www.rpcity.org the District's primary mission which is to preserve the intent, spirit, and aesthetic of community separators and green belts. In addition to the concerns noted above, there exist numerous environmental issues requiring further consideration by the District: Your staff says this is a "really important area for tiger salamanders. " In addition the property is part of an important continuous wildlife corridor extending from the Laguna de Santa Rosa to Sonoma Mountain. Developing the property could disrupt wildlife migration and movement. The League of Women Voters of the Bay Area recently discussed this issue in their Bay Area Monitor. They said, "critical corridors need to be kept between fragments of open space. " Wild animals are affected by human activities. Currently the site is without human disruption and wildlife is not affected. The Monitor went on to say, "When animals make lifestyle adjustments to avoid people, it can interfere with their ability to find food, a place to rest, or mates. " 2. Growing food is inconsistent with the current wildlife using the site. Deer and other animals will consume the plants unless they are trapped, poisoned, or fenced out. Fencing—of the type necessary to keep deer out—will further disrupt and injure wildlife. 3. This site is not appropriate for farming because of its adjacency to an existing creek. The County itself has pursued policies to restrict development within 300 feet from waterways, yet now produces a plan showing development and disturbance of soil with just a few fee of the creek. Soil amendments such as manure, phosphorous, and nitrogen will all runoff the site and contaminate Wilfred Creek leading to eutrophication and increased Ludwigia growth all along the Laguna de Santa Rosa. Even increased use as grazing will result in negative impacts on the creek. 4. The site location is poor from a water supply standpoint. The existing well cannot supply the irrigation needs of the proposed farm. Importing water will create road impacts. Drilling wells will be expensive, adversely affect neighboring property owners, and likely not yield sufficient flows. Due to its geographic location and hydrogeology, the specific area has not been a productive part of the Santa Rosa Plain Aquifer. The project proposal seems to be a solution without a problem. Here's why ... Farmster is a new incubator farm in Sonoma County with the same primary goal to support aspiring farmers. It is located a mere four miles away from the District's proposed project site. Installation of an additional farm in such close proximity would merely be a duplication of an existing amenity already enjoyed by community residents. There is no need to duplicate and compete with this grass roots incubator farm. In addition to Farmster's thriving incubator farm, adding an additional government-sponsored farm site will only hurt our existing family farms that rely on income to sustain their businesses, feed their families and provide for the Rohnert Park community. Adversely affected farms would include: • Darling Farms (Petaluma Hill Road at Roberts Road) • Coyote Family Farms (Lichau Road) • Valley End Farms (Petaluma Hill Road ) • Senk Farms (Keiser Avenue) • Eastside Seasonal Farm (Petaluma Hill Road) These farms are all located within 4 miles of the District's proposed incubator farm site. As you can clearly see, there is no need for additional small family farmers in this area. Please don't put these hardworking people out of business by subsidizing their competition on open space land. While this is not a comprehensive list, we thought it important to share with you some of the residents' verbatim comments and questions from the district's February 8 community meeting in Rohnert Park: 1. No information from the very beginning. This is our first meeting. People probably got the post card but many might of thrown it away. I'm only here because a neighbor told me about it. 2. Will push rodents and snakes into our yards. 3. I cannot even have one chicken in my backyard but 50 yards away a commercial farmer can have them. Don't want any livestock. Odor, noise. What type of livestock? 4. What will be start time and close time? 5. There is another farm nearby and they are in there at 5:30 am and don't leave till after dark. 6. In the past the hay bales were left for three years and had to call city and county to get them to clean it up. Rat infestation in our neighborhood. Bad. 7. We're not excited about farming back there if not regulated, heavily regulated. We were part of group that set rules and regulations last time, who to contact, etc. Went to at least a dozen meetings ten years ago to figure out how it would affect us. If there was music blaring first thing in the morning. We had contact people to call. 8. Flip the map to have activity at the north and wetlands at the south. 9. Who has ultimate control of this property? Who ultimately decides? Concerned about the business part. Why can have business in open space area? 10. Taking open space and selling off a chunk to university extension to make money Not appropriate for open space. 11. If non-profit manages the farm, then we are just more steps away from responsiveness. 12. Maybe we need more residents on the technical advisory committee. 13. FAQ says district wants to sell property and keep easement. 14. You have easements on 10% of land in county—use one of those for the farm. 15. Could you farm water from here and use it elsewhere? 16. Can you farm marijuana? It smells. 17. Going before board of supervisors in the spring, are you going to answer our residents' questions first? 18. You are measuring the water now and measuring after El Nino in January yet consumption will be happening in August. Measure it when you are using it. 19. How are you going to help the road impacts on Rohnert Park? 20. I've attended meetings 10 years ago. I came last year. Some of these questions are going unanswered. Measure is for protection of small farms, not creation of farms. Buy a farm somewhere else. Been there 25 years. Young family sold to Open Space to be preserved. Falls under measure A and C from 1990. That is the legal question. 21. Great idea, but feels like open space is being taken away from us. Location is a poor choice for me. I state this with sadness, because I love this idea. Only organic, no GMOs. This is a corridor for animals. 22. Don't impact our property. Safety. Who do we call. Which police respond. Walking path will be impacted. 23. What is and is not permitted on property owned in fee? 24. Some clarity on the soil type on the property. Basically clear lake clays that are virtually impermeable. 25. Clarity on what type of crop production is anticipated - California organic or otherwise. If organic then use of synthetic agricultural chemicals are not permitted. 26. Ten years ago there was one grower looking at farming it. That fell apart. 27. Clarity on the water issue. Aquifer is not in overdraft. Still in drought statewide, but not in Sonoma County. Look at lake levels. 28. What noticing was done for this meeting/project? It should be everyone within 300 feet. Proposed project FAQ's (page 3) states that an incubator farm is the best option for the property in part because it is close to neighborhoods; ironically these targeted neighborhoods don't want the farm. FAQ's suggest there are other use options appropriate for this County -owned land and that this site could be a model for many more sites with the caveat... "if there is enough community support for projects such as this one. " To reiterate, the Rohnert Park community enthusiastically opposes the installation of this, or any other proposed incubator farm. We understand the County placed a community separator ballot measure on an upcoming election. Pursuing this proposal to develop in the community separator seems a risky approach while the measure isendin . p g OW8888809 If the County insists on ignoring the overwhelming outcry from our community and proceeds ahead with the proposal, we ask that at a minimum the following be considered: 1. Conduct an EIR; it hasn't been done (Bill Keene stated the design is too preliminary to even do environmental review at this point; and he went on to say an EIR will be done before anything happens). 2. Eliminate any meeting or viewing area near the south end of the property. 3. Eliminate consideration of any raised area or a tower for viewing. 4. Minimize the number, height and size of buildings. (the UC Cooperative Extension Director indicated at the February 11, 2016 public meeting that a storage shed was the only building needed for a viable incubator farm). 5. Locate the entrance, buildings, hoop houses, parking area on Hunter Lane—not Snyder Lane—on the northwest corner of the site away from Rohnert Park residents and nearer to existing structures. 6. Require organic farming practices with no application of pesticides or herbicides. 7. Avoid, minimize, or treat runoff into the creek. 8. Permit only dry farming or irrigation using water captured on site. We recognize this may impact the range and timing of possible crops. If you chose to continue pursuing this project, please ensure your staff adequately addresses the questions and comments from our residents. However, we entreat you not to pursue the project further and encourage you to explore private agricultural land available elsewhere in abundance for this purpose. In addition, we acknowledge the County's primary goal of supporting aspiring agricultural farming endeavors while protecting community separators and the District's intent to divert the property it owns in an effort to reduce its associated long-term costs. Both are noble goals: neither require this project. Sincerely, Gina Belforte Mayor , k °.. Y I. it i c •�>w Y' ■ Q 0 (' \\ ' •. ! c ,�-. ,. 7 � � ° i , n f aR Y k R / e I „ — lit IR�A . w u ✓ u ' n, _ Y _ip - _ i , _ .:.1 Q - is � , Y.•I ,. � - �, Q ° ,: o, - _ ,� ___ R . p� R ; P r O e _ EXAMPLE W CROP LAYOUT WITH 1/2 ACRE AND 1 4 . - _ az - :�3 ,� � � �• ° .� N ACRE PLOTS — _: „ e,. - - ° _ - ,fir• �".-.: - � - , .. •_ .- :D _ � ,:.. .. , w .. z. ,: n a ,..• - _ P d r , EXAMPLE 100'X 100 CORRAL SHOWN o u o Y (� o � Q s o ,�- OSI > HO . N @ 2,Od0' F; e. e . O: p __ `. gyp, - 4 _ • ._ '' J .. I p » o� him EXAMPLE 360' SF TOOL SHED/BARN Q V d • GE BARN OFFIa � sem.• __oo-- o SHOWN al e�-, o- .v 1 EXA EQUIPMENT AND UPPL BARD (2, 0 $ WN)D y , GRAZED PASTURE 26 AC. �, a k � J� §: POSS LE NEW PASTURE ACCESS e 1 -r-. R .111 - / ` EXAMPLE FUTUR ,! _ 00 SF 946WN a h • -. ° > 25 STREAM G DING SETBACK BLEE 1///IIIP POSSIPOT FARM ROA RIDGE OR CULVERT � i:.. � 5 - 10' X 2( r .� Y .� -I 1 , - o _ v ENTIAL D {TREAM ER SSING' J O .16 . .., i .•;" „�=.i, n Q „-- -EXISTING PASTURE L PERENNIAL D/ _A3DEN UNOa SWALE WID NG WITH SES iVE y f„ j v ,.PINCH POINT 'T READ OUJPEcl" ,��� CTS POND 2 FLOWS FOR FLOO EAK R UC ION -"' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A ---------------- - - - -- ----- --1 _ - e o 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ." ■' 1 1 1 199200 S F � - - - �,;, a 'r 1 1 1 • G o 1 1 1 it o Q k 1 1 1 1 1 ! EXAMPLE 25 x25 HOLDING CORRAL' k I,_ Inl O i ALTERNATE S A • ----- -- � 1 1 1 1 1---------- ----� I � Y I CORRAL F 4 CTS POND , 1 ,I - � k�o GATE � — -------------- — — — — — — — — — — C � Q e • �1I _ r , 50 GRADING SETBACK 1 1 1� M 1 ' - . - - - - . >• - " i � �\ � - ^. - .-+T¢{.rte -_'may ,'�',-�_-'�:,,•°""--' - � R : . .. � ;BRIDGE OR CULVERT -: —`'k 1 U, L . D a 1 I Y . 1 .� �� 1.4 ACRE FARM PLO STREAM CRO SJNG f-60' AG BUILDING SETBAC �.., - r, 8 1 ' 1 p ��� R . E STOCK 2 1 1 n.1 a _ / -,a,.:, _ �/ DING PEN - ��,�.. PUBLIC VIEWING AREA WITH `�� z- 'ACRE PLOT 1 1 _ o !Y �� EDUCATIONAL SIGNAGE Y - 1 1 1 7 T SHOWN I Y : r ' -f—CTS POND 3 - 1 - �SI:� LE RAINWATER 40 STORAGE TANK, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - � j/ AMETER SHOWN W:AGRICULTURAL BUILDING SETBACK FROM SNYDER LN. , 19 - 10'x20' PUBLIC IPPARKING SPACE PERENNIAL BED INSECTARY 2 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE SHADE TREES & WALKWAY 7 ' I 1� i i 1 1 " . >_ p � 1 D 1 1 s GRAZED PASTURE 3.4 AC. MIN 20 T UR UND AND ACC - - - - - -1 C7 1 1 10 1; POTENTIAL SHORT TERM STORMWATE e i - _ . G DETENTION SWALE W/ CTS WETLAND ' 1 , 1 IT1 1 1 — — OSSIBL ^ COMBINATION (F ASIBLE LOCATIONS) a Z IDE WALK' I o °1 1 r 1 1 EXTENSION POSSIBLE VEGETATED MOUND W/ LOOP ' ' - - 1 I - 1 1 - 1 m9 - , V ' r I1 _ TRAIL USING POND EXCAVATED Suj OIL v,1 1 1 1 1 Q 1 1 1 AY � �, ° 1 • •' • 1 � s Qn �%` VEGETATIO 1- ---�-- -- -- ----1-------1 -------------1 SCREENING - 50' SETBACK FROM TOP OF BANK _ :. ^ NORTH R HNERT ARK TRAIL --, , L - - <11 t57 e LEGEND Pam a- _ O I • e - 0 it ■ Q ' gum rl F F IN . S. F=UTURE 6TRUOTURE6 (�,ARN6, HOOP HOIJ6E6, TOOL 6HER F=ARM 6 PRELIMINARY d y U F=UTURE TRAIL 6ETfMCK i C R STUEXY PURPOSFS C)ULY i ! 1 ' ■ VERIFY SCALES i I� DATE Jan 28 2076 - ONE INCH SCALE: 1 =80' L 03 u � wa PETITION OF HOMEOWNERS AND RESIDENTS February 10, 2016 PETITION RECOMMENDING THE SONOMA COUNTY AGRICULTRUAL PRESERVATION AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT (SCAPOSD) RECONSIDER ALTERNATE SITES WITH LESS NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL, ECONOMICAL, AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS/ISSUES FOR THE INCUBATOR FARM PROJECT AND RELOCATE THE CONCEPT OFF THE YOUNG/ARMOS PROPERTY BASED ON THE INPUT/CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO AND IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE YOUNG/ARMOS PARCEL. THIS RECOMMENTATION IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SALIENT POINTS AND NEGATIVE I M PACTS: • Potential legal issues of commercialization (including farm stands, parking lots, building structures, farm roads, green houses, plastic row crop coverings, portable toilets, etc. in a Community Separator/Open Space -Greenbelt designated area purchased in simple fee title by the SCAPOSD under the provisions of Sonoma County Measure A&C approved in 1990, and its then existing expenditure plan and purpose of the purchase from the Young/Armos family, protection of open space and preservation of agricultural lands (not the creation of small commercial farms); and the potential misuse of public funds to advance this commercial venture. • Water Quantity and Water Quality issues including lack of a permanent water source, depletion of existing ground water (if a new well is drilled) that may affect neighboring wells off of Snyder Lane and Mountain View Avenue adjacent to the parcel including the water drawn from the wells within the City of Rohnert Park's well water system. The volume of water necessary to support row crop farming and other water infrastructure needs. • Major environmental disruptions of the Federal and California State endangered species of the California Tiger Salamander (CTS) regulated by the Federal and California Endangered Species Act and monitored by the California Department of Fish and Game; including the disruption of habitat areas by the cultivation of row crops and the detrimental effects on the CTS by the use of pesticides as reported by the Center for Biological Diversity. • Major environmental disruption of the wetland areas by cultivation of row crops. SCAPOSD presented wetlands map is not all inclusive and areas planned for row crops disrupt existing seasonal wetlands. • Major environmental disruption of existing fauna and flora including hawks, coyotes, foxes, jack rabbits, deer, egrets, birds of all types and various natural and wild plants by development and farming activities. • Existing site land and soil composition is not conducive to row crops as reported in "Final Report Sonoma County Lands for Food Production Phase 2," dated March 10, 2015 and the recommendation as reported on Page 20 is to leave the Young/Armos lands in grazing. Soil amendments and chemicals would be necessary that would percolate into the ground water basin. • No real benefit to the masses of food production as the site and plots are too small for any real food production impacts. • Disruption of the natural beauty and visual pleasures of the existing open space lands between the North City Limit borders of the City of Rohnert Park and the rural homes at the Southern edge of the City of Santa Rosa. • Potential of "Pot" growers with policing issues, criminal activity, smell & odor issues, regulations and control issues, etc. (see recent article in Press democrat dated August 7, 2015) • Other impacts to the neighborhood include: o Traffic issues on Snyder Lane and people traffic on site and adjacent creek trail o Safety and Security Issues for the neighborhood o Noise and Odor impacts from farm equipment and use of fertilizers and pesticides o Visual impacts from the building of barns, greenhouse, parking lots and farm roads o Policing issues including increased foot traffic on the creek trail south of the parcel and north of the homes in Park Estates subdivision and homes bordering the creek to the west City of ROHNERT P A R K November 14, 2000 Ms. Andrea Mackenzie Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation Open Space District 747 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 100 Santa Rosa, CA 95401-4850 City Council Vicki Vidak-Martinez RE: Young/Armos & Oken, In -Fee Property Mayor Off of Snyder Lane, Rohnert Park Jake Mackenzie Vice Mayor Dear Ms. Mackenzie: Armando F. Flores James J. Reilly, Jr. Vice -Mayor Jake Mackenzie, who represents the City of Rohnert Park on the Linda Spiro Open Space Advisory Committee, has informed me that the Sonoma County Councilmembers Agricultural Preservation Open Space District is considering the surplus of various District owned properties in Sonoma County. Two of the properties that are of great interest to the City of Rohnert Park include the Young/Armos Joseph D. Netter property and the Oken property just north of the current City limits of Rohnert City Manager Park, adjacent to Snyder Lane. The Young/Armos property is approximately 45 acres and the Oken property is approximately 76 acres. The City of Rohnert Park is very interested in both of these properties and would like to submit a proposal for acquisition prior to each of these properties being offered to an open public bid process. Over the past several years, the City Council has discussed the possibility of passive recreational use on the Young/Armos and Oken properties. We have also discussed habitat restoration or the creation of a natural arboretum. This would enhance the greenbelt around our City. This concept was discussed with your predecessor David Hanson in June of 1998 when Mr. Hanson informed us that the Open Space District was considering the sale of surplus property. He said that the parameters for potential uses and conditions of transfer were not set and were still in the development stages. He indicated that by the Fall of 1998, this process would be completed. Unfortunately, because of staff turnover and other priorities, this process was never completed. I am delighted that this issue is now being considered at this time. Please provide us with the criteria and policies for public acquisition along with the rules and parameters for passive recreational uses on open space lands. We know it has been a goal of the District to release lands for agricultural or other natural uses. It is hoped that public use of lands is a primary focus. I r Viould appreciate receiving the above listed information as soon as possible so at the City of Rohnert Park can consider purchase of this property prior to the pen Space District deciding to offer this property to open public bid. 6750 Commerce Boulevard • Rohnert Park, CA 94928-2486 • (707) 588-2226 • Fax (707) 588-2274 November 14, 2000 Page 2 I appreciate your attention to this request and look forward to meeting you in person. Very truly yours, Cl OF ROHNERT PARK J epP Netter City Manager JDN:tcd Enclosures cc: City Council Joe Gaffney, City Engineer Nancy Kaufman, Planning Director C 9 C 6, 1 Linda Spiro Mayor June 16, 1998 Mr. David Hansen, General Manager Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District 747 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 100 Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Vicki Vidak-Martinez RE: Young/Armos in Fee Property off Snyder Lane Vice Mayor Armando F. Flores Dear David: Council Member Jake Mackenzie The City Council, at it's meeting of June 9, 1998 discussed the possibility of Council Member passive recreational use on the Young/Armos in fee title property held by the James J. Reilly, Jr. Open Space District north of the city limits off of Snyder Lane. We have Council Member previously discussed this site for passive recreational uses. The City Council has asked me to have the open space district provide its' policies, rules, and conditions for potential passive recreational use on this site. The City Council is very interested in submitting a proposal once this information is received. As I understand from our previous discussion, the open space district is interested in soliciting proposals on use of said site by an open bidding Joseph D. Netter process to the public. I would appreciate receiving the information as soon City Manager as possible so that the City of Rohnert Park can possibly execute an agreement for purchase of this property prior to the Open Space District deciding to offer this property to open public bid. Your immediate attention to this request is sincerely appreciated. I look forward to hearing from you. Very truly yours, CITY OF ROHNERT PARK VV�- - J eph Netter, City Manager JDN: km c: City Councilmembers Joe Gaffney, City Engineer Wendie Schulenburg, Director, Planning and Community 6750 Commerce Blvd. �on4' Rohnert Park, CA 94928-2486 DATE " Phone: 707/793-7226 FAX: 707/793-7274 '`I ! Iv IA a A _ .r .APINM 41 - _ 3PL. OKI* - 4 - Existing Site -l- LL low •r __ r - I Ll AWL � . �= f , � f - ` [ . -fir• f - .-r**M-Lf W r be' aamtam..... vL .. T *-,.n�'MI WFIApFflfr Glxr PAS 4J- �6 i , hs r .. - .............. ... Y � .. . 1 .• . IJ1 4 �v 5_ddC.LSinl t ... . --Wmqdimlkm" FAMIRM �i Nearby Farm (to illustrate county's proposal) Does this look "preserved?" Does this look like "open space?" e , A�T {' F _ hY +�.� �Y,.•I� � �, �-4e- �. � - -saws - . � i i '•r _ - � n. � � •� fit• 9 � 1 - �� " � , , I � r 1 � �' � e Or IL i Al 77 Jv 07 -� -�''„t� V � •R f f r:. �l '� , ` � �7. a• it '.-rr� _. V. . 1 7 ?r & '/� C =� .�V• JIB Y�j Y Existing I`r'e► Y SiteZ. :Az .0t r _-aa+--aeras•• T- 1� Y•..Y'-4 4 , 4� a� a r. �nvc]Pr 1-anP r;. IL- a m IMF CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: b1b L N Agenda Item #:—,I— Name: :1 Name: 10MO trldC] Address: TOPIC: Brief Summary of Comments: 15'aknk- Dl- 3u t'� i} IAer-� �t`� +tri• d+ Can�rnr,�; S�+de w%lne - See Reverse —> Date: Agenda Item #:� game: Address: Phone Topic: zfi LA y � 7 /�y, Brief Summary of Comments: �l °+ 14 w '7 U CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date:� �ti Agenda Item #: Name: _J+�.]►1'� iU ►V Address: ! TOPIC: r �...,,t'C,..,,.r.o,■, of Cnmmvntc- Date: Agenda Item #:,_ See Reverse —> Topic: a Brief Summary of Comments: CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: ,J/ jr Agenda Item #• _ Name:. Address: Phone: ' Date: ?J Name: — Address: Phone: TOPIC: Z�1 r 454X. -O -0-c- TOPIC: 4X.-O-0-c- TOPIc: 4-.e4- 9 r4 --r -1-4W' i i►�� CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CA" /d&JI, Agenda Item #: / SO/fce I 6suwuu• Brief Summary of Comments: B 'ef Summary of Comments r1 G�.0 5 See Reverse -> end&) ClAeAA014 AS Pte, M See Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: Agenda Item #:--� Address: '� Toric: Ly I501 --l-0 Brief Summary of Comments: I hi L`+: C- 7u lr SONOMA COUNI Y AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT March 7, 2016 Ms. Gina Belforte, Mayor City of Rohnert Park 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Dear Mayor Belforte: The Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District is proud to enjoy positive and collaborative relationships with all of our City and Town partners, and have completed numerous projects in and around Rohnert Park to benefit your community, the most recent example being Taylor Mountain Regional Park and Open Space Preserve. In this vein, our project, the Young Armos Incubator Farm and Habitat Restoration project, is being proposed in this same spirit of community benefit. At a recent meeting to discuss this project concept, City Manager Darren Jenkins suggested that it would be helpful for myself and Stephanie Larson of the University of California Cooperative Extension (UCCE) to present the concept to your City Council. The presentation is currently scheduled for the March 22 meeting. We would anticipate presenting the concept to your Council and answering and addressing questions that your Council might have. We understand and believe that it is essential to have an open and constant dialogue with your City as we move forward in developing this project concept. We also understand that your Council has a very full calendar on March 22, and we would be more than happy to appear before your Council at a later date that is convenient to you. Let me stress that this project concept is not fully developed, and there is no rush or urgency at this point in time for the City to formally weigh in on this project. Over the past week, it has become clear that there is considerable misinformation out there about this project concept. In summary, the project concept is to create an incubator farm at the property, to provide a place for beginning farmers and ranchers (under guidance from mentor farmers) to hone their skills before launching their full-scale operations elsewhere, and to enhance habitat for species including the endangered California tiger salamander. The property is currently zoned for diverse agriculture (10 -acre minimum), and is located in the greenbelt area between Rohnert Park and Santa Rosa. At the time of purchase in 1997, the 747 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 100 • Santa Rosa, California 95401-4850 707.565.7360 • Fax 707.565.7359 • www.sonomaopenspace.org District's intent for the property was in fact to resell it for agricultural or passive recreational use, and to retain a permanent, protective conservation easement over the land. We are also interested in exploring the potential to restore some portions of the property as habitat for California tiger salamander, and work with resource agencies on a model for agricultural best practices that would be consistent with habitat restoration, and that could potentially be implemented elsewhere in the County. There is a recommendation in the County Lands for Food Production Report, considered by the County Board of Supervisors in March of 2015, to look at the Young Armos property as a potential site for an incubator farm. The District and UCCE held a public meeting at the Crane Melon Barn in January of 2015, and heard mostly support for the proposal from the farming community, with some neighborhood opposition to the idea. The District completed a feasibility study (focused more on the habitat restoration portion) and developed a concept plan to bring to the public for input. Given the range of input received at each public meeting held to date, the District and UCCE have been working to refine the project concept plan, and will be able to share these ideas with your Council. It has come to my attention that your City Council will discuss a draft letter regarding the Young Armos property at their March 8 meeting. It is unfortunate that the Council is being asked to approve this letter without having the benefit of the informational presentation by the District and UCCE, and without an accurate portrait of the work completed to date. I would submit to you that the consideration of a letter opposing the project concept is premature at this point. More specifically, upon reviewing the draft letter, District staff have discerned a large number of inaccuracies, and we also have a few additional comments. Allow me to briefly outline a few of these for your consideration: • Paragraph 1: The Young Armos property is 45 acres in size, not 48 acres as stated. • Paragraph 2: "Characterizing the overwhelming community opposition to the proposal as the thoughts of one person is a mistake." Please clarify this statement, as the District has not, to its knowledge, made this characterization. • Paragraph 2: "At the District's February 8th meeting there were forty residents, nearly every one of them spoke and every single one of them was opposed to the farm at the proposed location." This is not accurate, as there was support expressed for the project concept at this meeting. We agree that the meeting was well -attended, as was the meeting on February 11th (50 attendees) and the meeting held in January of 2015 (80 attendees). Paragraph 3: The District has received general support of the project concept from various agencies, potential partners, and several members of the public. At the recent public meetings, we also heard concerns from many of the neighbors that live adjacent to the property in Rohnert Park. We have not yet had the opportunity to present the project concept to the City of Rohnert Park City Council, and look forward to doing so on March 22. • Paragraph 3: The County Lands report indicates that the Young Armos property is suitable for grazing. The report also recommends that the property be considered for siting an Incubator Farm for young farmers and ranchers. • Paragraph 4: The property has been farmed for hay for many years until very recently. • Paragraph 4: The project concept does not involve a commercial farm operation. • Paragraph 4: The concept plan shows a variety of potential project elements, but no decision has been made as to which elements would be included in a final version of the plan. The District scheduled the two public meetings in February to gather input on the potential project elements and overall concept, and is in the process of refining the project concept based on that input. We appreciate you providing your notes from the February 8 meeting, as we will add them to our own. • Paragraph 4: The District's Expenditure Plan states that the District will "preserve agricultural land use and open space" which would be supported by the potential project elements. • Paragraph 4: Any property that the District has purchased with sales tax funds will be protected forever, through recording of a conservation easement at either the time of an easement acquisition, or transfer or sale of the underlying fee title interest. District - held easements are stewarded (monitored and enforced) in perpetuity. The easement, once recorded, runs with the land, providing permanent protection. • Paragraph 5: The elements included in the concept plan would be consistent with activities allowed in community separators and greenbelts as defined by the county General Plan and the District's 2006 Acquisition Plan. • Paragraph 5: The District's mission is to "permanently protect the diverse agricultural, natural resource, and scenic open space lands of Sonoma County for future generations" and is not focused solely on greenbelts, as is stated in the draft letter. • Paragraphs 6-10: Environmental issues. o Wildlife corridors and habitat, and the compatibility of growing food with current wildlife, including California tiger salamander: The District and UCCE have talked with both state and federal fish and wildlife agencies to find out if they would consider a proposal to have habitat restoration and an incubator farm at this location. They are both interested in looking at regulatory mechanisms that would support both the recovery of California tiger salamander and also allow for agricultural use, if best management practices were followed. We haven't studied the wildlife present on the property in detail, but we don't expect that it would change with a portion of the property used for row crops. One farmer present at the February 11th meeting said that she sees an increase in wildlife use of the property at her farm. We would look at this issue in more detail during the California Environmental Quality Act review process, once we had Board authorization to move forward with a detailed design and environmental review. However, right now we are still at the concept stage. o Adjacency to Wilfred Creek: Current storm water regulations require that the quality and quantity of storm water runoff leaving a subject property remain the same as pre -project conditions. The project would be designed to be in compliance with this and all other environmental regulations. o Water supply: This is something that we would need to study further once there is a more refined concept plan, but preliminary conversations with Sonoma County Water Agency indicate that there would be no negative impact on the groundwater in the area. • Paragraphs 11 and 12: "proposal seems to be a solution without a problem." The District and UCCE continue to hear from those trying to learn farming and ranching skills that there is a problem, that there is a need for additional support, or else local food producers will not be able to persist in this county. o Farmster's Sonoma Mountain Community Farm is indeed a very exciting project that will contribute towards supporting the continuation of the agricultural way of life in Sonoma County. The concept of an incubator farm on the Young Armos property is intended to complement such effort. o Regarding the suggestion that District look to currently -held easements that allow agricultural use: Staff have been looking at this possibility, and have found that most of the land with District easements that allows for agricultural uses is currently in agricultural use. One example is Valley End Farm, listed in the draft letter as a local farm with the potential to be 'put out of business.' The District holds a conservation easement over this property. o It is not clear to the District and UCCE how the training of beginning farmers and ranchers will adversely affect these local farms. Our two organizations believe that providing more beginning farmers and ranchers with the opportunity to hone their skills and learn best practices from mentor farmers, that there will ultimately be more successful farms and ranches in the county, which will in turn help preserve the agricultural way of life in our region, and provide more locally - produced food for our community. We appreciate the list of items at the end of the City's draft letter for our consideration. These would be conveyed to our Board at such time as this project concept is put before our Board. To address the input received to date, please note that: • Environmental review and compliance pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act and all other relevant environmental regulations would be completed for this project, including compliance with storm water runoff regulations. • District and UCCE are already working to minimize number and height of structures for the project concept, and are evaluating potential for providing main ingress to property at Hunter Lane. The viewing area has already been removed from consideration. • District and UCCE would design the project for minimal use of water for irrigation purposes, to demonstrate best practices in water conservation, and all farming practices would be organic. • District staff have offered to meet with the nearby affected community including Joe Netter to further the dialogue initiated at the recent public meetings to further address neighbor issues. I want to thank the Council for the opportunity to provide comments on your March 8 item, and would like to reiterate my request to have you postpone any letter weighing in on this project concept until such time as District and UCCE staff have the opportunity to formally engage with your Council. If your Council does authorize a letter be sent to the District, we ask that you remove the inaccuracies contained therein and specifically identified in this letter. We also would suggest that City staff be directed to work with District and UCCE staff, and agricultural interests and the affected neighborhood to find a solution that works for all. Feel free to contact me at any time with questions about this project, as we want to be sure that your Council has the most accurate information regarding this project concept. Sincerel William J. Keene General Manager Copy to: Jake Mackenzie, Vice Mayor Amy O. Ahanotu, Councilmember Joseph T. Callinan, Councilmember Pam Stafford, Councilmember Darren Jenkins, City Manager Stephanie Larsen, UCCE Sonoma County Director Sonoma County Supervisor Shirlee Zane, Third District Attachments: Young Armos Property Acquisition Board Resolution (1997) AGENDA ITEM TRANSMITTAL REPORT DEPARTMENT: SC AGRICULTURAL SUBMITTED BY: DAVID WM. HANSEN PRESERVATION & OPEN SPACE DISTRICT GENERAL MANAGER FOR BOARD ACTION ON: 04/15/97 AS: ( CONSENT XXX REGULAR THIS ITEM: (Check appropriate boxes) ( ) 4/5 Vote ( ) Hearing ( ) Appropriation Transfer date time ( ) Requests Gold Resolution ( ) Position Alloc List Change(s) ( ) Public Appearance Anticipated By.(XX) Date County Counsel Approval AGENDA SHORT TITLE: ACQUISITION OF FEE TITLE TO THE YOUNG/ARMOS ET AL PROPERTIES Requested Board Action: Resolution authorizing and directing the President to accept Grant Deeds and execute Certificates of Acceptance for the purchase of the fee title to property located at 4314 Hunter Lane and 4315 Snyder Lane and'directing the preparation of escrow instructions a 4gnlat�ure of Department Head Special Instructions to Clerk of the Board: Recordation will be completed by the Title Company following close of escrow FOR AGENDA COMMITTEE USE County Administrator's Office Recommendation: () Approval O Not Recommended () Submitted with Comment () Policy Determination by Board Analyst Comment: SIg nature of County Administrator Agenda Committee Action: () Consent Calendar () Regular Calendar Date Scheduled: 1 f Time Scheduled: County of Sonoma f Agenda Item ;krk s51 --WFd Ure On(y -, At�#JrV :[3aR0 Fleid.11nil! SummaryReport x a Department: SC AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION () 4/5 Vote Required & OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Contact: Phone: Board Date: Deadline for Board Action: David Wm. 524-7360 04/15/97 Hansen AGENDA SHORT TITLE: ACQUISITION OF FEE TITLE TO THE YOUNG/ARMOS ET AL PROPERTIES Requested Board Action Resolution authorizing and directing the President to accept Grant Deeds and execute Certificates of Acceptance for the purchase of the fee title to property located at 4314 Hunter Lane and 4315 Snyder Lane and directing the preparation of escrow instructions, EXPENDITURES Estimated Cost Amount Budgeted Other Avail. Approp. (Explain below) Additional Requested: Explanation Of required): Prior Board Action(s) CURRENT YEAR FINANCIAL IMPACT SOURCE OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS RE99ESTER $ Contingencies $ 000,00 (Fund Name: ) $ 0 Unanticipated Revenue $ 00.0.00 (Sources: ) Other Transfer(s) $ 000.00 0.00 Total Source of Funds: $ 0.00 $ All funding will be processed through the Open Space Authority Alternatives - Results of Non -Approval: Do not adopt resolution. Property will not be acquired by the District, Background: HistoW. The Young/Armos property encompass approximately 45 acres between Snyder and Hunter Lane on the northern boundary of Rohnert Park, east of Highway 101. The property is designated as Category One in the District's Acquisition Plan. The land lies entirely within the Santa Rosa/Rohnert Park Community Separator, representing the width of the separator from north to south. The District is presently involved in negotiations for the acquisition of conservation easements to the east and west Of the property.(refer to attached map). The Sonoma County Water Agency channel is adjacent to the southern property boundary, contiguous to the Rohnert Park city limits. This publicly owned channel is used informally as a hiking/bicycling trail. DeiglIg of Me Trs ction: The owners were not willing to sell a conservation easement over the property, and therefore, the District has negotiated the purchase of fee title to the property. The Santa Rosa/Rohnert Park Community Separator Preservation Study suggests fee acquisition in this area when a below market sale is offered to the District. The proposed transaction would further the District's preservation goals by providing an open space buffer between Santa Rosa and Rohner[ Park urban areas; protecting a scenic vista along a well - traveled corridor at the Rohnert Park entrance; and protecting an agricultural property from subdivision and development. Potential disposition of the property could include sale for agricultural uses or public acquisition for recreation or other `open space purposes, with the District retaining a perpetual conservation easement. On a short term basis, the District will enter into a license agreement with the adjoining landowner for limited grazing use, Restoration of Valley Oaks could potentially occur on the site to help lessen the visual impacts of adjacent development. D-Isfrict"s 'ren Alan: Category One Acreage: 45.31 acres Existing Use The site is characterized by gently sloping and open grassland, and a large Valley Oak. It has traditionally been used as a hay field, but is currently not leased out. Sonoma Cgmag genera! Plan: Land Use: Diverse Agriculture, 10 acre density Open Space: Santa Rosa/Rohnert Park Community Separator Attachments: 1. Site Map 2. Resolution On File With Clerk: 1. Certificates of Acceptance 2. Grant Deeds J. Appraisal ::CLERK OF THE BOARD USE ONLY Board Action JIE other than 'Requested') I Vote: Background (continued): Open ace Advisory Committee_ The Advisory Committee reviewed and approved proceeding with the project as submitted to the members on April 18, 1996. GeneLal 1a Consistency: The Open Space Authority Board of Directors found this property to be consistent with the 1989 Sonoma County General Plan on January 9, 1997, by Resolution No. 97-006 . Exe p -ndityLg Plan Consistency: The Open Space Authority Board of Directors unanimously approved consistency of the project with its Expenditure Plan on March 27, 1997, by Resolution No. 97-012. Anvraisal: A full narrative appraisal was completed by Campbell & Rhodes on October 25, 1996.This appraisal was reviewed by District staff who agreed that the valuation methodology utilized by the appraisers was accurate and complete. The appraiser determined the fee simple value to be $443,000. District staff has negotiated a recommended purchase price of $370,000, which is a bargain sale discount of 16.5% or $73,000. EnvironmentalCondition: A limited Phase I Environmental Site Assessment of the property and letter of Findings was completed January 24, 1997 by BACE Environmental. The study concluded that no hazardous material concerns existed on the site. CEQA: This purchase of the property is Categorically Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15317, and alternatively, is exempt by virtue of Sections 15325 (a) and (b). J ,��� /■� I 'r V:hlty: r,_ kI,A ,^•. C r'1_ I ���yllr; <;:;i :r,t �' a i `, J •`�'. rl'l ./fhr wl,.,J `k rlrl.'«��r+a f9�x, r^:t �1• . I 1 (� .ii`{•xis+, �1i,1� raxi�.:1-' w,A J 4tr i t 11 p I Iryr {� r t•f /1'..I�^7�!r `;r-• rw Z Ql`y }/tf Itirr 11I , + 1 t rt1•T1 ry `,1I Y Ir6 1/l..� I I'txe r, r. rJt t rill yll dxN X 1 � % r � r li+� tr Q` LL y rl� d, .tdl.1 x1A It1/t FIS Rti 7mpdti 4 xl r^ irI y Ad I,• x kJ1 li t �+6. 'la Rt,rr_•y r a !ti. r tlr 5 Y rl --d 1 1 IJ !t/ Ir rr til x Irlr I ly" if: 1 y ir+ I It 9 r�9 r,/} iw � r ♦+t �r I J Y. '�1_'/Yr x^ x t Jt tl... sir � I�t /.�l , �1-max! Y "rx^ � � 9. �f t ,t r'1 fR�ti Jyryl. } rim �'/^Y a.F ♦ y x,{ 4dl f 41 f t { , r 1Iy r xR ^ rl 1r ;^rr 1 IR }w Id 1}..I r t - �1 rr dr" -,x P Ily 4r5 j1wf' {'1 O • Jir`/51 t75 rfY rl t ri{ ;/ori xSli IrlrrlYl }/Y7�xi �!I 1`1r 1.1 Citi ri�l. / e, : •!rl yr I� fl I' l � �Jr V r�rfA_ISJ lyd«R♦ w�^Iw7v+l/ frl4ti='�_ +titis`� Ir ^ti^..1r:.1x Y+ YSr�tf,I;�rirrrx.4 1 � (r /+ l� 1 `f Yrw x5iil�dY rx1}rltr.-.k�^ x'YI%t'tti i J\ }fi y, 1 5r�r rIi-'! 41 ti r `! 41 7 Q r(..f 1�fx r ♦ #^rte: �,,�• ti; 7.r.Y� exlJ�.r Y M �� I�trrtl" i� i^ Ird "�4�t :1'` rrw tFr. ,?trdx'Lr+rC!,I•irr�1r^r�N 5� wl+y.l/��`l5! tl�. 1-j}I 14, X. /1_a51Y `YyS +t/tl r. Jllf^y1 w. }..S xl f JxrdtfC 1+ � = r I. _' t� ijsi a � ♦''r-fy 1."I 1.'w F. rrp fr9. It1 -rr , i`r 5- rAlr r 9y' w r /x ,.c ,rt xp 1 s x+r-r rw.^r i1 I 1 d i p fY l x - • r+�y y .y / +� y}-� t,� `�y �r5 `41�trY +rw�'-+i^yl1'rl�rtlyJ��l �5�+1 ryl�lyy'; tl r.. ♦ x, 'I+S r .• �+ - O 4-1 �f lsl� r 4r r /e• J !'J. jl mfr l+Y y'rr x l rly c 7 f�1 e t r.tl I ! Cl) w v_J at r�1}.^ ±Yi 1!,� 5- x!•IirY" * r] tt J i t tJr^ t 1 r;lr d. �x y LL rr j .r 1., r � 1 irx 4 / rr J •-'•rxl 1� 1 t'+ �+.^" Fyr V.Y rf� r�tl 4RA`y 1 rr r5'^+1.4 Vit. yrir^1+`„ tl;,..l` Iy.��ry7 yt fxy yl �le�'xr �!/ '1. ,."°•r -ti! r/11 +7 �� � N �' '� II rrtiJ S.V Iw lrr:r Irw1 1 fyxY,{}:lia �Ir {Y IY _} r i I!N 11A Iwf �1 +aYrx I IYr ,4#fR ,+It tx{r rlr x Ifr{1 yR.} x 1°Y 1 A+�IxYp r t r _ w� ♦ r / Y fy _ 41 5'• a 1 4�/1 {Jw w7r 5 1 - � � }j45}�1 r - r l.. 1 r rr'x }~. z 1 5_t t+, ! 1�/ Y,• 1 Yri It l.i"+t 1 1 Y f +1 ` ft,. r 5P� 5 ry + �•.s. Jn -, �I j7fA']�i3�N1 rj 5'Y JI�R�.1 {tt litfl Ir yyi it to �Id lxrlr. + , _ � w _ _ jj Fyl 11 l� ♦rxr9Y tIr' f y -r' + r 1 r r..l ! Yrx^ j' .li\� ,Y1i 1� f 'tet 5.r A< 5,'/,.+ %tl, 4M ! y,i , i" f- _.I_L- }r ''��. � i?� r •. t •4:: I`1„r.x r�Yd_p 1 e 9 �e�f rl. Slr�,`r r�{r. � �r r � �•s , F�'y'JfX LU J •�A`rt.r r 1 rtti /M 15 d � � J �% �+; ,Ir� IJ J$11. //7 V/ ala`!^r ♦ x i t Y Y �p �,I�"!�l � 3 F y nii � � v�• d`y�. k � r � * ,* � i''pr!itld � + _1 1 _ I }I I •lY -+-a �;r`�qr' 1^i f^,*,:i. � � �, 1 { �� ;�y Y �l.1r—._-__. {1.1 _ � 7q S•yY"q;S.{. N 2 '6}- rf� t1 r, r�Lp r1 }I r lx l�� tlrxlrer 1*I rxFl r 5 {` }r�lY ti ♦rt tt I Ir r Y-1 �1 I Ir Jar II,1. I r4l 1 11'I r, r�Lp r1 }I r lx l�� tlrxlrer 1*I rxFl r 5 {` }r�lY ti ♦rt tt I Ir r Y-1 �1 I ' .:IYIN INSTRUMEN( A S�C3 ..Al3C`i' C'.opy OF THE C}Rt "NAL ti VC, i. L 4'� 3, Cowl y clerk & e -ol ]CIO Cini�t a1 r.'. u: ul Diznclaru allho Sonoma Comp AUkuf rrrl Vresorvakn end upon Spaca Diaid _ 7/J fi 9- ay' x p,rly ;k #32 Resolution No. 97-0467 Dated: April 15, 1997 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE SONOMA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL PRESERVATION AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT, COUNTY OF SONOMA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE PRESIDENT TO ACCEPT GRANT DEEDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 4314 HUNTER LANE AND 4315 SNYDER LANE; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF CERTIFICATES OF ACCEPTANCE, DIRECTING THE PREPARATION OF ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS, AND THE DRAWING OF NECESSARY WARRANTS; AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING DISTRICT STAFF TO FIND A FEE BUYER AND TO ASSURE THAT INTERESTED PARTIES ARE NOTIFIED AND OFFERED AN OPPORTUNITY TO PURCHASE. WHEREAS, the General Manager has negotiated and is now recommending the purchase of fee title to approximately 45 acres located at 4314 Hunter Lane and 4315 Snyder Lane, Sonoma County; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board of Directors hereby finds, determines, declares and orders as follows: 1. Truth of Recitals. That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 2. General Plan Consistency. That by its Resolution No. 97-006, dated January 9, 1997, the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Open Space Authority determined that the acquisition was consistent with the 1989 Sonoma County General Plan. 3. Expenditure Plan Consistency. That by its Resolution No. 97-012, dated March 27, 1997, the Board of Directors of the Sonoma County Open Space Authority determined that the acquisition was consistent with the Authority's Expenditure Plan. 4. Authority to -Execute Certificates of Acceptance. That the President is authorized and directed to accept, on behalf of the District, grant deeds conveying fee title through the execution of certificates of acceptance required by Government Code 27281. 5. Escrow Instructions. That the District's Counsel is directed to prepare and deliver appropriate escrow instructions and other necessary documents to North American Title Company and the General Manager is authorized to sign all closing documents and to make any technical, non -substantive changes in them with the prior approval of the District's Counsel. 1 of 2 6. Payment of Purchase Price and Costs of Escrow. That the Sonoma County Open Space Authority has directed the Auditor to draw warrants and in such other amounts necessary against the funds of the Authority for the District's purchase of fee title in the amounts of $212,140 for 4314 Hunter Lane and $157,860 for 4315 Snyder Lane and the close of escrows as approved and requested by the General Manager. 7. Environmental Exemption. That the acquisition authorized by this resolution is excluded from the requirements of the Californla Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 and following) because the acquisition is not a project as that word is defined in Section 15378 of Title 14 of the California Administrative Code and, alternatively, is exempt pursuant to Section 15317 of Title 14 of the California Administrative Code because the purpose of the acquisition is to maintain the open space character of the area; and alternatively Is'exempt pursuant to Section 15325 (a) and (b) of Title 14 of the California Administrative Code because the purpose cif the acquisition is to preserve the existing natural conditions and to allow continued agricultural use of the area. 8. Notice. That, immediately upon the adoption of this resolution, the General Manager is directed to post and to maintain the posting of a notice of exemption pursuant to Public Resources Code 21108(b) and 21167(d). 9. Sale of Fee. That following the acquisition of the 4314 Hunter Lane and 4315 Snyder Lane properties, and under the adopted Procedures Outlining Disposition of Lands Acquired in Fee, the General Manager is directed to find a fee buyer and to assure that all interested parties are notified and offered an opportunity to purchase. Concurrent with the sale of fee the General Manager is further directed to retain a conservation easement over the properties to be dedicated for open space, recreational or agricultural purposes in perpetuity. DIRECTORS: CALE: _. REILLY: SMITH: AYES: 5 - NOES: KELLEY: HARBERSON: ABSENT: SO ORDERED. 2 of 2 ABSTAIN: yngermos.Wd Saldanha, Caitlin From: Buergler, JoAnne Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 9:05 AM To: Saldanha, Caitlin Subject: FW: Young Armos draft concept plan and draft working drawing Attachments: Young-Armos-Draft-Concept-Site-Plan.pdf; 20160301135653039.pdf From: Mariah Robson [t-nailto;Mariah.Robson@sonoma-county.orrc ] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 8:50 AM To: Belforte, Gina Cc: 'blumacjazz@aol.com'; Ahanotu, Amy; Callinan, Joseph; Stafford, Pam; Jenkins, Darrin; Stephanie Larson; Shirlee Zane; Michelle Whitman; Sheri Emerson; Buergler, JoAnne Subject: Young Armos draft concept plan and draft working drawing Mayor Belforte, As a follow up to my recent letter to you regarding the Young Armos Incubator Farm and Habitat Restoration Project, I wanted to share with you some ideas that staff are currently exploring for the site concept plan. Staff met onsite last week to discuss ideas for re -arranging the project components on the property, given the feedback we've received at the recent public meetings. The second pdf attachment is a markup of those ideas, incorporating a hedgerow through the property, clustering the row crop activity in the northwestern area of the property, as well as any barn or greenhouse structures, and then including orchards along the north/eastern portion of the property. The remainder of the property would be restored to support California tiger salamander, and would be grazed. Keep in mind that we are still at the concept stage, and so these drawings are of course subject to change. But I thought it might be helpful for you to see that we have been considering how to incorporate input from the community. We remain committed to working with the City, the adjacent neighbors, the agricultural community, and other interested parties on a solution that works well for all involved. Best Regards, Bill Keene Mariah Robson sent on the Behalf of Bill Keene Executive Secretary to BVI Keene Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District 747 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 100 Santa Rosa, CA 95401 ph: 707-565-7363 fax: 707-565-7359 4vr"v.soil om ao penspace.o rg A 4 rl Supplemental Item 2 ITEM NO. 9 City Council Meeting 3/8/2016 PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE (Submitted before 3:30 p.m. on March 8, 2016) Buergler, JoAnne From: galen palmer < Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 8:31 AM To: blumacjazz@aol.com; Ahanotu, Amy; Callinan, Joseph; Stafford, Pam; Buergler, JoAnne; Belforte, Gina Subject: Young-Armos Incubator Farm on tonight's agenda Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged March 8, 2016 Honorable Mayor Gina Belforte, Vice Mayor Jake Mackenzie, Councilmember Amy Ahanotu, Councilmember Joe Callinan, Councilmember Pam Stafford, and City Clerk, I was a student in the University of California Cooperative Extension's Agropreneurs program at SRJC Shone Farm in 2013. That program gave me valuable experience and knowledge for pursuing my goal of growing food sustainably for my community. The six-month program was great, but learning to become an independent farmer generally requires about 5 years of experience. The incubator farm being proposed (see agenda item 9 on your March 8 agenda), would be of immense help to myself and others gaining the skills and support to achieve the goal of growing food locally for our community. I understand that there is concern among neighbors of the effects that an incubator farm could have on their experience at their homes. I would encourage a continuation of the dialogue to find a resolution that would benefit everyone. I would suggest a vantage point that takes in the broad view and includes food security in a time of climate change, peak oil, etc.... Thank you for your consideration, Galen Palmer 3/7/2016 Dear Rohnert Park City Council, We urge your support of the Young-Armos Incubator Farm being discussed under Agenda Item 9 of the March 8, 2016 Rohnert Park City Council Meeting. The Incubator Farm would provide crucial support to beginning farmers in our County, expand the supply of fresh, local, and healthy food in our community, and contribute to a more sustainable local food system. The Incubator Farm is a key component of the Sonoma County Food Action Plan (Goal 3.2 and 9.3), Sonoma County's roadmap to a more healthy and sustainable local food system. With thoughtful planning, this project will be a great asset to our community. In fact, research shows that urban farming provides positive social impacts including creating safe places, providing community development, building social capital, and creating cross - generational and cross-cultural opportunities. It provides positive health impacts including increased food access and food security, increased fruit and vegetable consumption, greater food and health literacy, and general well-being. It supports positive economic impacts including job creation, training and business incubation, market expansion for farmers, and increased home values for near -by residents ("Research: Social, Health, and Economic Impacts of Urban Agriculture," UC Agriculture and Natural Resources, ucanr.edu/sites/UrbanAg/Research). Sincerely, Erin Axelrod, local economy advocate & member of the Sonoma Food System Alliance Angie Corwin, Community Alliance with Family Farmers & member of the Sonoma Food System Alliance Wendy Krupnick, Community Alliance with Family Farmers North Coast Chapter & member of the Sonoma Food System Alliance Shan Magnuson, local health advocate & member of the Sonoma Food System Alliance Julia Van Soelen Kim, North Bay Food Systems Advisor, UC Cooperative Extension & member of the Sonoma Food System Alliance Evan Wiig, Executive Director, Farmers Guild, & member of the Sonoma Food System Alliance Josephine Borgeson (The Rev.), member of the Sonoma County Food System Alliance. Carmen Snyder, Executive Director, Sonoma County Farm Trails, & member of the Sonoma Food System Alliance Terry Garrett, Sonoma County GO LOCAL, Publisher of Made Local Magazine & member of the Sonoma Food System Alliance Buergler, JoAnne From: Paula Downing < Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 7:41 PM To: gbelfort@rpcity.org; blumajazz@aol.com; Ahanotu, Amy; Callinan, Joseph; Stafford, Pam; Buergler, JoAnne Subject: Incubator Farm Ladies and Gentlemen: I represent the Sebastopol Farmers Market. We wish to speak on behalf of the proposed Incubator Farm - and as potential administrators of the farm. I have managed the Sebastopol Farmers Market for 23 years. I also managed the Santa Rosa Original Farmers Market for 10 years. During those years I have worked with dozens of farmers of all ages. Based on my experience I can testify unconditionally to the substantial and honorable character of farmers - including the young farmers who hope to develop their trade at the Incubator Farm. Indeed I would bet that you all share my experience with farmers. Has anyone known a farmer ever who isn't of stellar character? None that I know of. They are hard working, honest, diligent. They love growing food for people. The young people who will occupy the Incubator Farm are the best and the brightest. Most of them have college degrees. Most of them are farmers because they are idealists - because they believe in people and community and growing good food - an alternative to the sterile corporate culture that controls so much of our lives. These are our younger generation. They need to be supported not feared. Most of them have enough education that they could move to Silicon Valley and make a pile of money. Instead they are putting their vast creative energy and love into growing food. What is there not to support about that endeavor? Sonoma County has been a farming community for decades. Most of the big box stores are built on what was once farmland. Here is your opportunity to connect with those roots - to bring them new life. No one knows better than you, the City Council, that your home town is known for big box, intense housing development, traffic, the Casino. The Incubator Farm would be a counterpoint to all that. Just look at the function that farmers market fulfill, including your own - they act as a community center, a place of respite for friends and neighbors to meet, a place where old and young can connect with each other. They fulfill basic human needs. That is why there are so many thriving farmers markets. The Incubator Farm would, without question, enhance all those positive attributes - give people a place to be part of nature, a place for solace and escape from the rat race we all engage in every single day - a solid and much needed community center for people who have no green grass, who live in small apartments, who have no space to get off the treadmill and breathe deeply. We would hope that you as leaders see this Incubator Farm as a positive piece of the City's fabric; that you take a strong role in assuaging the fears of the neighbors by offering them the opportunity to engage in making this a community center that they own and oversee. Form committees to be part of the development from day one. Include a children's playground, a children's garden, a community apple press, a place for seniors to sit and enjoy - create a beautiful vision for people to embrace. This is your chance to do something strong and positive and good for your people. What an opportunity! Have you been to Bayer Farm in Santa Rosa? It's a community garden and not an Incubator Farm but they are companion plants. Bayer Farm is truly a beautiful model. It is located in the heart of Roseland, the lowest income neighborhood in Santa Rosa, a place where all the downsides of crowded city living might thrive. Instead Bayer Farm is a village where families gather. Indeed, Bayer Farm is an alternative to the things your neighbors fear - homeless encampment, crime, drugs - exactly because it is a place where families of the community gather, a place they own, that it is theirs to nurture and enjoy. The City of Santa Rosa fully and unconditionally supports Bayer Farm. Over time it has grown from a small community garden into a thriving community center where dozens of people spend time, growing food, playing soccer, feeding the chickens, gathering for Friday night potlucks - all supported by the City of Santa Rosa. It is managed by Land Paths, a nonprofit entity. The Incubator Farm will be managed by a non profit entity to be determined. Bayer Farm proves that the model works. You are the leaders of Rohnert Park. If I might be so bold as to tell you how to do your job I would say it is your responsibility to help your community embrace this beautiful model rather than succumb to their fears. You could lead by empowering the neighbors to involve in the project - by creating a strong community oversight committee. If the citizens of Rohnert Park see you as leaders who believe that this Incubator Farm is a good thing for the community, they will follow. Overtime they will learn that your vision was honorable -they will be grateful for your leadership. I would hope that you know this to be true in your heart of hearts. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely Paula Downing Administrator Sebastopol Farmers Market Cflff COMMUNITY ALLIANCE WITH FAMILY FARMERS North Coast Chapter To: City of Rohnert Park City Council Subject: Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District Proposed Young- Armos Incubator Farm For communities and farms to interact in supportive ways with as little conflict as possible is a prime goal of the North Coast Chapter of Community Alliance with Family Farmers. We support the letter from members of the Sonoma County Food Systems Alliance but would like to call your attention to some additional points. There is a growing recognition that farming when done organically using such inputs as compost instead cif chemical fertilizers is of major importance in lowering Green House Gas, GHG, emissions. Simply put, it takes carbon out of the air and puts it back into the ground where it came from. Replacement of chemical fertilizers which can emit nitrous oxide, a much more potent GHG than carbon dioxide, further helps reduce climate change. We need to train young farmers in these farming and ranching techniques as quickly as possib[e. Our members whose farms are in Sonoma County's AR, Agricultural -Residential Zone, a combination of farms, ranches and rural residences, report a minimunn of conflict when the two uses are adjoining. Some of the fears expressed by Rohnert Park residents in living next to a farm refer to disruptive activities that are more common in parks and recreational areas than they are on a farnn or ranch. Contrary to concerns about possible decliningproperty values, this link is to an article about farms in Davis, CA where neighoring home values increased when next to a farm: htti)://livecannerydavis.com news davis-enter rise-reco nizes- canne_rv-welcome-a igr hood. CAF F is running both a Harvest of the Month program brinin a particular food from a particular farm to class rooms all over the county an a Farm to school pro ram matching farmers to school lunch pro ams. These programs are -Linable to find. enough Sonoma County grown Eocod to satisfy the demand, contrary to the suggestion that the incubator farm will hurt .neighboring farms. The changes that have been made in the design of the proposed farm such as lowering its profile should alleviate some additional objections. We urge you to reconsider your opposition to the proposed incubator farm. Terry Harrison For NC CAFF Policy Committee Buergler, JoAnne From: Charlie the Llama < Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 4:42 PM To: Belforte, Gina; blumacjazz@aol.com; Ahanotu, Amy; Stafford, Pam; Callinan, Joseph; Buergler, JoAnne Subject: Singing Frogs Farm advocating for Young-Armos Incubator Farm Regarding Agenda Item 9 on March 8th Agenda Dear Rohnert Park City Council, We at Singing Frogs Farm urge you to support the Young-Armos Incubator Farm in Rohnert Park because we need more support for beginning farmers in this county. Getting technical training/experience as well as access to land are the number one barriers for young farmers. At Singing Frogs Farm we have a multitude of young farmers come to us to learn our innovative farming practices but we are not able to reach enough young farmers or to help them sufficiently. What they truly need is an incubator farm where they can learn the skills needed to farm in an ecologically and economically viable way in Sonoma County (where land prices are astronomical and we have exceptional natural beauty which we all wish to maintain)! We need incubator farms like The Young-Armos Incubator Farm to truly get new farmers up and running successfully and to become vital producers of food for our local communities. As you know this project is a key component of the Sonoma County Food Action Plan, Sonoma County's roadmap to a more healthy and sustainable local food system. We need more local food, more local farmers and therefore a thoughtful and well designed incubator farm. We were just talking with the owners of Amy's Kitchen at their drive thru two weeks ago and they were telling us of their deep desire to buy produce from local farms but the inability to get the quantity needed from local farmers. I'm sure you're getting plenty of other emails on this topic but I thought I would share that a farm does NOT have to be an eyesore. It hurts me so much to hear that the neighbors are against shutting down this project on their perception that it might be an eyesore. I believe, and am repeatedly told, that our faun, like many others, is beautiful. Small farms and those with a lot of energy and love can be exceptionally beautiful. Here are some photos of our 8 acre organic vegetable farm in Sebastopol to show you what I mean. These are the views that our neighbors have. Regards, Farmers Elizabeth and Paul Kaiser Singing Frogs Farm ( www.sing ingfrogsfa rm.com Buergler, JoAnne From: Louis Brouillet < Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 1:15 PM To: Belforte, Gina; blumacjazz@aol.com; Ahanotu, Amy; Callinan, Joseph; Stafford, Pam; Buergler, JoAnne Subject: Farm incubator Dear Rohnert Park City Council, We urge your support of the Young-Armos Incubator Farm because it would provide crucial support to beginning farmers in our County, expand the supply of fresh, local, and healthy food in our community, and contribute to a more sustainable local food system. The Incubator Farm is a key component of the Sonoma County Food Action Plan, Sonoma County's roadmap to a more healthy and sustainable local food system. With thoughtful planning and partnership with the neighborhood, this project will be a great asset to our community. In fact, research shows that urban farming provides positive social impacts including creating safe places, providing community development, building social capital, and creating cross -generational and cross-cultural opportunities. It provides positive health impacts including increased food access and food security, increased fruit and vegetable consumption, greater food and health literacy, and general well-being. It supports positive economic impacts including job creation, training and business incubation, market expansion for farmers, and increased home values for near -by residents ("Research: Social, Health, and Economic Impacts of Urban Agriculture," UC Agriculture and Natural Resources, ucanr.edu/sites/Url)anAg/Research). With hope for the future of local food and farms, Louis Brouillet I LOKL I loklxoni 1 Buergler, JoAnne From: Rick Williams < Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 11:34 AM To: Belforte, Gina; blumacjazz@aol.com; Ahanotu, Amy; Callinan, Joseph; Stafford, Pam; Buergler, JoAnne Subject: March 8, 2016 Agenda Item 9; Young-Arnos Incubator Farm Dear Rohnert Park City Council, As a staunch supporter of Agriculture in Sonoma County (Farm Trails Board President, Farm Bureau Member, School Garden Network contributor, SRJC Sustainable Ag Advisory Counsel Member), I urge your support of the Young-Armos Incubator Farm because it would provide crucial support to beginning farmers in our County, expand the supply of fresh, local, and healthy food in our community, and contribute to a more sustainable local food system. The Incubator Farm is a key component of the Sonoma County Food Action Plan, Sonoma County's roadmap to a more healthy and sustainable local food system. With thoughtful planning and partnership with the neighborhood, this project will be a great asset to our community. In fact, research shows that urban farming provides positive social impacts including creating safe places, providing community development, building social capital, and creating cross -generational and cross- cultural opportunities. It provides positive health impacts including increased food access and food security, increased fruit and vegetable consumption, greater food and health literacy, and general well-being. It supports positive economic impacts including job creation, training and business incubation, market expansion for farmers, and increased home values for near -by residents ("Research: Social, Health, and Economic Impacts of Urban Agriculture," UC Agriculture and Natural Resources, ucarnr,edulsitesfC]rbaiiA Rcsc3rch). Rick Williams General Manager Harmony Farm Supply & Nursery Buergler, JoAnne From: Rose DeNicola < Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 12:13 PM To: Belforte, Gina; blumacjazz@aol.com; Ahanotu, Amy; Callinan, Joseph; Stafford, Pam; Buergler, JoAnne Subject: Incubator Farm (Agenda Item 9 on March 8) Dear Rohnert Park City Council, We urge your support of the Young-Armos Incubator Farm because it would provide crucial support to beginning farmers in our County, expand the supply of fresh, local, and healthy food in our community, and contribute to a more sustainable local food system. The Incubator Farm is a key component of the Sonoma County Food Action Plan, Sonoma County's roadmap to a more healthy and sustainable local food system. With thoughtful planning and partnership with the neighborhood, this project will be a great asset to our community. In fact, research shows that urban farming provides positive social impacts including creating safe places, providing community development, building social capital, and creating cross - generational and cross-cultural opportunities. It provides positive health impacts including increased food access and food security, increased fruit and vegetable consumption, greater food and health literacy, and general well-being. It supports positive economic impacts including job creation, training and business incubation, market expansion for farmers, and increased home values for near -by residents This farm is a beacon of hope for much of our community and young farmers who are facing severe problems finding land for farming. With much concern, Rose DeNicola BS Conservation and Resource Studies, UC Berkeley Buergler, JoAnne From: Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 12:10 PM To: Belforte, Gina; blumacjazz@aol.com; Ahanotu, Amy; Callinan, Joseph; Stafford, Pam; Buergler, JoAnne Subject: Young-Armos Incubator Farm Dear Rohnert Park City Council, We urge your support of the Young-Armos Incubator Farm because it would provide crucial support to beginning farmers in our County, expand the supply of fresh, local, and healthy food in our community, and contribute to a more sustainable local food system. The Incubator Farm is a key component of the Sonoma County Food Action Plan, Sonoma County's roadmap to a more healthy and sustainable local food system. With thoughtful planning and partnership with the neighborhood, this project will be a great asset to our community. In fact, research shows that urban farming provides positive social impacts including creating safe places, providing community development, building social capital, and creating cross -generational and cross-cultural opportunities. It provides positive health impacts including increased food access and food security, increased fruit and vegetable consumption, greater food and health literacy, and general well-being. It supports positive economic impacts including job creation, training and business incubation, market expansion for farmers, and increased home values for near -by residents ("Research: Social, Health, and Economic Impacts of Urban Agriculture," UC Agriculture and Natural Resources, ucanr.edu/sites/UrbanAg/Research). With hope for the future of local food and farms, Suzette Stephens Rohnert Park resident and parent Buergler, JoAnne From: Terry Church < Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 11:51 AM To: Belforte, Gina; blumacjazz@aol.com; Ahanotu, Amy; Callinan, Joseph; Stafford, Pam; Buergler, JoAnne Subject: Preservation District's Young Armos project Dear Mayor Belforte, Vice -Mayor MacKenzie, and Rohnert Park City Councilmembers, As a long-time resident of Sonoma County (currently Petaluma), I strongly urge your support of the Young-Armos Incubator Farm. This kind of visionary venture is an essential component to creating a community that is resilient and that benefits its members for the following reasons: It would provide crucial support to beginning farmers in our County, expand the supply of fresh, local, and healthy food in our community, and contribute to a more sustainable local food system. The Incubator Farm is a key component of the Sonoma County Food Action Plan, Sonoma County's roadmap to a more healthy and sustainable local food system. With thoughtful planning and partnership with surrounding neighborhoods, urban farming provides positive social impacts by creating food security, safe spaces for children and community members, community development, and cross -generational and cross-cultural engagement. It provides positive health impacts by increased access to healthy food, increased fruit and vegetable consumption, greater food and health literacy, and a much higher quality of life for local residents. In addition, it supports positive economic impacts including job creation, training and business incubation, market expansion for farmers, and increased home values for near -by residents. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Terry Church Buergler, JoAnne From: Connie Madden < Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 11:44 AM To: Belforte, Gina; blumacjazz@aol.com; Ahanotu, Amy; Callinan, Joseph; Stafford, Pam; Buergler, JoAnne Subject: Please support the Young-Armos Incubator Farm To: Honorable officials of the City of Rohnert Park: Mayor Gina Belforte Vice Mayor Jake Mackenzie Councilmember Amy Ahanotu Councilmember Joe Callinan Councilmember Pam Stafford City Clerk Dear Rohnert Park City Council, As a small farm owner (Oasis Farm outside Petaluma), a member of both Petaluma Grange and the Farmers Guild, I urge you to support the Young-Armos Incubator Farm realizing our county provides ideal conditions for farming fresh, local, and healthy food. There has never been a time when the ability to grow locally is more important for our own wellbeing and economic health. This Incubator Farm is a key component of the Sonoma County Food Action Plan, Sonoma County's roadmap to a more healthy, sustainable and economically viable local food system. Working in partnership with the neighborhood, this project will be a great asset to our city as urban farming provides community development, builds social capital, and creates cross -generational and cross-cultural opportunities. Positive health impacts include increased food access, food security, increased fruit and vegetable consumption, greater food and health literacy, and general wellbeing. This Incubator will create jobs, provide training and business incubation, offer market expansion for farmers, and increased home values for near -by residents. We live in a beautiful region, made more secure and stable with support for real food, free of questionable chemical "additives" shown to be damaging. - Yours, Connie Madden Oasis Community Farm, Petaluma (paraphrased from letter provided by Evan Wiig, The Farmers Guild) "Research: Social, Health, and Economic Impacts of Urban Agriculture," UC Agriculture and Natural Resources,ucanr.edu/sites/UrbanAg/Research). Buergler, JoAnne From: Karen M < Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 9:27 AM To: Buergler, JoAnne Subject: please support the proposed Incubator Farm Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear City Clerk, I am writing in reference to planned Agenda Item 9 for tonight's meeting - discussion of the Young-Armos Incubator Farm. Please support the proposed Incubator farm. I am an aspiring/slowly beginning farmer and mother of a three year-old child. I earned my A.S. in Sustainable Agriculture at SRJC in 2012 and have been slowly getting our garden going since our child was born and we moved to Mountain View Ave in 2013. I was excited to hear that an Incubator Farm might be coming to Snyder Lane, and disappointed to hear that neighbors of the property are opposed to it. Our county needs farmland. A drive down Petaluma Hill Road in either direction reveals development pressure. This means that empty lots, which many see as potential agricultural land, are disappearing forever. Beginning farmers face high real estate values that mean that they can't afford to buy or even rent land when they are just starting out. SRJC's farm is in a remote location, permaculture classes in Sebastopol are expensive, and other learning opportunities are limited. The proposed incubator farm would provide an important space for new farmers to practice their craft. The Incubator Farm would be educational for everyone who drives by or goes to a workshop on the site. Farms can be beautiful, with flowers, healthy plants, animals, and people. Children and adults alike would be inspired to grow their own food, or at least to support farmers such as the ones who use the site. (In fact, in some places, fanning is part of education: littp://www citylab coin/navigator/2016103/could-urban-farms-b.c-the-preschools-of=the-future/4 72 )49/ ) In a period of climate instability and as Americans face mounting health problems, local farms and opportunities to buy healthy and locally -grown food become more and more important. On the subject, I went to the RP farmers' market over the winter and was disappointed by the lack of produce available for sale. Without a doubt, food produced on this site would help to feed local residents. Farmland is not an eyesore (especially if people are farming in a sustainable manner). I love the idea of gardens and/or farm animals blocking the view of the poultry factories that one can see as one drives past the lot. I have no sympathy for neighbors who have a problem with the proposed use of the lot - 1. they have fences as it is, so clearly they already didn't want to be too "close" to it, 2. judging by the size of their homes, they can afford to move somewhere else, and 3. our food has to be grown somewhere- why not close to home? Perhaps if the neighbors move, the OSD can buy those houses and rent them to beginning farmers so they can be close to their work. More likely, people who want to live near a farm would purchase those homes, whose values would increase due to the view of a farm! I drive past the lot every day as I bring my child to preschool and would love to see a farm on that site. I will be unable to attend tonight's meeting due to family and, weather permitting, gardening commitments. Please support the Farm as it will be a wonderful addition to our community. Sincerely, Karen Martin SONOMA COUNTY FARM BUREAU Affiliated with California Fann Bureau Federation and American Farm Bureau Federation i Councilmembers City of Rohnert Park ATTN: Young-Armos Incubator Farm Project Proposal 130 Avram Ave, Rohnert Park, CA 94928 September 25, 2015 Dear Councilmember, Sonoma County Farm Bureau, an organization representing nearly 3,000 family farmers, ranchers, rural landowners and agricultural businesses in Sonoma County, appreciates the opportunity to share the organization's thoughts on the Young-Annos Incubator Farm Project Proposal. As staunch supporters of Agriculture in Sonoma County, we encourage you to support of the Young-Annos Incubator Faun as it would provide crucial support to beginning farmers in our county, expand the supply of fresh, local, and healthy food in our community, and contribute to a more sustainable local food system. The Incubator Farm is a key component of the Sonoma County Food Action Plan, Sonoma County's roadmap to a healthier and more sustainable local food system. With thoughtful planning and partnership with the neighborhood, this project will be a great asset to our community. Research shows that urban farming provides positive social impacts - creating safe places, providing community development, building social capital, and creating cross -generational and cross-cultural opportunities. It provides positive health impacts including increased food access and food security, increased fruit and vegetable consumption, greater food and health literacy, and general well-being. It supports positive economic impacts including job creation, training and business incubation, and market expansion for farmers. Thank you for the opportunity to voice our support for this much-needed project. Sincerely, John Azevedo, president Sonoma County Farm Bureau cc: Gina Belforte, Mayor, City of Rohnert Park Jake Mackenzie, Vice Mayor, City of Rohnert Park Amy Ahanotu, Councilmember, City of Rohnert Park Joe Callinan, Councilmember, City of Rohnert Park Pam Stafford, Councilmember, City of Rohnert Park City Clerk, City of Rohnert Park Sonoma County Board of Supervisors Sonoma County Farm Bureau, Board of Directors Dr. Stephanie Larson, County Director and Livestock Range Management Advisor Bill Keene, General Manager, Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District 970 Piner Road, Santa Rosa, CA 95403 • Phone (707) 544-5575 • Fax (707) 544-7452 • Website: www.sonomafb.org Supplemental Items for City Council Meeting: Buerg ler, JoAnne 51$ ) Zo I u Bopp 'J]eM * 3 From: Anya S < Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2016 4:30 PM To: Belforte, Gina; blumacjazz@aol.com; Ahanotu, Amy; Callinan, Joseph; Stafford, Pam; Buergler, JoAnne Subject: Comment on Agenda Item #9 for 3/8 City Council Meeting Dear Rolmert Park City Council, I am unable to attend the meeting being held later tonight to discuss the potential Young-Armos Incubator Farm project and recent opposition expressed by neighboring landowners. Given that I will be absent, I wanted to send a note to voice my enthusiasm and support for this initiative and to urge the City Council to keep supporting this project and allowing it to move forward. As an individual that hopes to transition into agriculture in the foreseeable future, I see land access and opportunities to learn hands-on commercial farming and business skills as some of the key limitations for making this career shift. An Incubator Farm would provide a local opportunity to learn and develop my skills as a vegetable farmer or livestock manager on a commercial scale, which is vital to ensuring my future business success. An Incubator Farm also affords an opportunity for someone like me to try farming commercially before making a massive commitment to purchasing land, equipment, and other infrastructure that'd be needed to create a functional ag operation on my own. Incubator farms have been successful in other parts of our country and there is no reason why one cannot succeed in Rohnert Park. I believe it also aligns well with Sonoma County's efforts towards a more healthy and sustainable local food system. If you love farmers markets, farm -to -table restaurants, and having access to local, fresh, delicious produce, an incubator farm is vital in training a new generation of farmers as our existing farmers rapidly approach retirement age. I believe that everyone involved is motivated to engage the local community and neighbors to make this project a success. There are my factors that can be agreed upon to minimize concerns over chemicals, livestock waste management, and to maintain a natural landscape while still allowing the proposed project to proceed. I am hopeful that those voicing opposition will come to the table to discuss their concerns and find a middle ground with project proponents where their concerns can be addressed without halting the progress. I hope you will keep these thoughts in mind and will find value in continuing to support the Young-Armos Incubator Farm for the sake of the future farmer generation. Thank you for your time and attention. Anya Starovoytov Sonoma County Resident and Aspiring Farmer PETITION OF HOMEOWNERS AND RESIDENTS February 10, 2016 PETITION RECOMMENDING THE SONOMA COUNTY AGRICULTRUAL PRESERVATION AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT (SCAPOSD) RECONSIDER ALTERNATE SITES WITH LESS NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL, ECONOMICAL, AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS/ISSUES FOR THE INCUBATOR FARM PROJECT AND RELOCATE THE CONCEPT OFF THE YOUNG/ARMOS PROPERTY BASED ON THE INPUT/CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO AND IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE YOUNG/ARMOS PARCEL. THIS RECOMMENTATION IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING SALIENT POINTS AND NEGATIVE IMPACTS: • Potential legal issues of commercialization (including farm stands, parking lots, building structures, farm roads, green houses, plastic row crop coverings, portable toilets, etc. in a Community Separator/Open Space -Greenbelt designated area purchased in simple fee title by the SCAPOSD under the provisions of Sonoma County Measure A&C approved in 1990, and its then existing expenditure plan and purpose of the purchase from the Young/Armos family, protection of open space and preservation of agricultural lands (not the creation of small commercial farms); and the potential misuse of public funds to advance this commercial venture. • Water Quantity and Water Quality issues including lack of a permanent water source, depletion of existing ground water (if a new well is drilled) that may affect neighboring wells off of Snyder Lane and Mountain View Avenue adjacent to the parcel including the water drawn from the wells within the City of Rohnert Park's well water system. The volume of water necessary to support row crop farming and other water infrastructure needs. • Major environmental disruptions of the Federal and California State endangered species of the California Tiger Salamander (CTS) regulated by the Federal and California Endangered Species Act and monitored by the California Department of Fish and Game; including the disruption of habitat areas by the cultivation of row crops and the detrimental effects on the CTS by the use of pesticides as reported by the Center for Biological Diversity. • Major environmental disruption of the wetland areas by cultivation of row crops. SCAPOSD presented wetlands map is not all inclusive and areas planned for row crops disrupt existing seasonal wetlands. • Major environmental disruption of existing fauna and flora including hawks, coyotes, foxes, jack rabbits, deer, egrets, birds of all types and various natural and wild plants by development and farming activities. • Existing site land and soil composition is not conducive to row crops as reported in "Final Report Sonoma County Lands for Food Production Phase 2," dated March 10, 2015 and the recommendation as reported on Page 20 is to leave the Young/Armos lands in grazing, Soil amendments and chemicals would be necessary that would percolate into the ground water basin. • No real benefit to the masses of food production as the site and plots are too small for any real food production impacts. • Disruption of the natural beauty and visual pleasures of the existing open space lands between the North City Limit borders of the City of Rohnert Park and the rural homes at the Southern edge of the City of Santa Rosa. • Potential of "Pot" growers with policing issues, criminal activity, smell & odor issues, regulations and control issues, etc. (see recent article in Press democrat dated August 7, 2015) • Other impacts to the neighborhood include: o Traffic issues on Snyder Lane and people traffic on site and adjacent creek trail o Safety and Security Issues for the neighborhood o Noise and Odor impacts from farm equipment and use of fertilizers and pesticides o Visual impacts from the building of barns, greenhouse, parking lots and farm roads o Policing issues including increased foot traffic on the creek trail south of the parcel and north of the homes in Park Estates subdivision and homes bordering the creek to the west A�#m r:, -- lireI P -e Vel i �_I-�--�ci.�1.�� I a v-' 1 SlerJ r L 0"4 4t -j oby-IX) L (9-M /I �JAJPILLh A�" e I,wwrc�. ��cww��wv p2,'TN. M -e r uVA tf N'Uhv� Gran fir-, W U 1 G,gRy 7;i7rmokj �Cq V, s t"C41tvc/-�> elf' t 42 div v�� •'��� L,ri64 mosfu(zQiu4; n j�,�7,33'iJ l I'7���vr - �GIc�Y'G5�7 IJ rL or > C; �i ev) --t filre.— - Al,�'M,e, 611 not fLlre-- 4,1, k -e bJ Wig-- /k loW Q� Its5i co, R-dsop, k0l, OL� t 9-A/Ai Dtb(� Fro 4L.41K e-�_ , Ohl POn4 ,�_pHNERT PgRK «► Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." C/LIFD RN IP CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: March 8, 2016 Department: Public Safety, Administration, Public Works and Community Services Submitted By: Don Schwartz, Assistant City Manager Prepared By: Daniel Adam, Fire Marshal and Don Schwartz, Assistant City Manager Agenda Title: City Video Surveillance Cameras and Policy ITEM NO. 10 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide direction on the use of video surveillance cameras, including proposed City policy. BACKGROUND: For over twenty years the City has used video surveillance to prevent and deter crime, protect City assets, and record criminal activity. This includes 28 cameras at City facilities and two at the intersection of Rohnert Park Expressway and the train tracks. The Public Safety Department also uses covert cameras in targeted criminal investigations. Also, hundreds of private businesses and homes have installed video surveillance systems throughout our City. Our police and fire investigators have used video from these systems to investigate and solve crimes, including obtaining convictions in homicides. Using funding from a Homeland Security grant, the City has established the foundation for robust video surveillance at any City location with electricity, including buildings, traffic signals, street lights, and well sites. We have an expandable network that can accommodate both direct and wireless connections. On February 9, 2016 the Council approved replacing 12 video security cameras at the Public Safety Main station at a cost not to exceed $12,000. ANALYSIS: During the past two years staff have been evaluating the expansion of video surveillance. With technology advancements, the quality of video has increased and the costs have decreased. Modern cameras provide high definition resolution, allowing us to obtain very good quality video at reasonable costs for data storage. Staff have completed their initial evaluation and recommend adding video surveillance at several new locations: Exterior of restroom facilities in City parks as they are re -opened: As noted last year when the Council approved remodeling and opening three park restrooms (A, B, and C parks), staff have developed plans to reduce and mitigate the vandalism that led to closing the restrooms. These plans include several `layers' of protection including building with vandal -resistant materials, ensuring easy line of sight viewing from streets to the restroom buildings, lighting, and automatic locks after dark. Staff noted that video ITEM NO. 10 surveillance of the exterior of the restrooms was an important layer in the security plan. Costs for this expansion are projected at $16,500 for one-time costs and $4,800 annually. 2. Sewer pump station: The sewer pump station has been vandalized several times in recent years. The presence of video surveillance may deter this vandalism and assist in apprehending vandals should problems continue. Costs for this expansion are projected at $10,000 for one-time costs and $1,470 annually. 3. Four additional intersections: Public Safety recommends adding cameras at high -traffic intersections and railroad crossings, including Rohnert Park Expressway and Commerce Boulevard, Golf Course Drive and Commerce Boulevard, Redwood Drive at Commerce Boulevard, and Southwest Boulevard and the train tracks. Cameras at intersections have helped in monitoring congestion, reviewing collisions, and training officers. Costs for this expansion are projected at $6,000 for one-time costs and $1,490 annually. Attachment 1 includes a Draft Proposed Policy for Video Surveillance. It will guide the City's use of videos. Some of the key points in the Draft Policy include: Storage and Retention: State law generally requires that video surveillance data be retained for one year. This requires significantly expanding the City's storage capacity at existing sites. The costs of this expansion are projected at $5,000 in one-time costs and $1,130 annually. Complying with state law will also require updating the City's records retention policy. The City Clerk will bring a proposed amendment to the Council soon. Monitoring Video Cameras: Staff will usually not actively monitor the images from video cameras. Public Safety Dispatch will have the ability to view images in real time at those facilities with alarms if the alarm alerts them to potential problems at a site (such as an attempted break-in at a park restroom after hours). Also, staff may occasionally monitor images during particular law enforcement events such as DUI checks or officer training. Privacy: Staff recognize the need to ensure that video surveillance does not interfere with the public's rights and expectations regarding privacy. Thus, the policy includes provisions to achieve a balance between legitimate safety and security monitoring and privacy concerns. In general, staff members will not have access to the video images except in response to an incident or as part of an investigation. Public Access to Video Images: The policy requires that video images be released consistent with the legal requirements of the Public Records Act (PRA), which are still developing with new case law. In response to a PRA request, the City may be required to release any video data that is not part of a Public Safety Department investigation. When there are no legal restrictions on disclosure, the policy delegates authority for decisions on releasing video to the public to the City Manager. Signs/Public Notification: Staff will place signs notifying the public of video surveillance at all City buildings where public access is permitted such as parking lots, doorways, and hallways. ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLAN: This recommendation is an alignment with Goal C of the Strategic Plan, which is to ensure the effective delivery of public services. It particularly ties to the strategy of integrating technology into operations. ITEM NO. 10 OPTIONS CONSIDERED: Recommended option: Staff recommends that Council provide direction to staff to proceed with a video surveillance program and policies because they provide a cost- effective way for the City to expand our use of video technology to improve services. The direction would include the following uses of video surveillance and future expansion consistent with the attached policy: a. Approve the use of video cameras at the exterior of park restrooms as they are remodeled, including most immediately B pool, Alicia Park, and Collegio Vista Park. b. Approve the use of video cameras at the sewer pump station. c. Approve the expanded use of video cameras at intersections and railroad crossings. d. Approve expansion of the storage capacity of existing video systems to comply with state law. e. Adopt the attached "Video Surveillance Policy." 2. Alternative: Staff also considered a greater expansion of video surveillance at City facilities, including well sites and additional intersections. Staff are not recommending these options until the City gains greater experience with video surveillance at existing sites and those recommended for the next phase of expansion, but plans to add cameras at these sites over time. 3. Alternative: The City could forego adding video surveillance capacity. This is not recommended because the City would lose the benefits of video surveillance in protecting its assets and addressing crime. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: The total one-time costs of the recommended action are projected at $37,500. Estimated on-going costs are $8,890 per year. While staff have a high level of confidence in these cost estimates, they could vary as we gain experience, particularly with new approaches to video storage. Locations One-time Costs On-going Costs Funding Source Park Restrooms $16,500** $4,800** CDBG and Bonds for one-time; GF on- going Sewer Pump Station $10,000 $1,470 Sewer Fund Additional Intersections $6,000 $1,490 Asset Forfeiture Expanded Storage at existing sites $5,000 $1,130 Asset Forfeiture TOTAL $37,500 $8,890 * * Budgeted in FY 16-17 ITEM NO. 10 Department Head Approval Date: February 23, 2016 Finance Director Approval Date: February 19, 2016 City Attorney Approval Date: February 25, 2016 City Manager Approval Date: February 29, 2016 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Draft Policy on Video Surveillance at City Facilities and Intersections 2 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL POLICY SUBJECT/TITLE: POLICY NO: APPROVED BY: APPROVAL DATE: VIDEO SURVEILLANCE ❑ RESO NO: ❑ MINUTE ORDER TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................ 1. PURPOSE.................................................................. 2. SCOPE / BACKGROUND ............................................ 3. DEFINITIONS............................................................. 4. GENERAL PRINCIPLES ............................................... 5. LOCATION AND DIRECTION OF VIDEO EQUIPMENT 6. OPERATION PROCEDURES ....................................... 7. RETENTION, EXTRACTION AND STORAGE ................ 8. PRIVACY.................................................................... 9. PUBLIC ACCESS TO VIDEO IMAGES .......................... 10. STAFF/ PUBLIC NOTIFICATION ................................. 11. EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES ....................................... 12. EXCLUSIONS............................................................. 13. APPENDIX................................................................. MM11 I IS ' II.p ..........................................................................1 ..........................................................................1 ..........................................................................1 ..........................................................................1 .......................................................................... 2 .......................................................................... 2 .......................................................................... 2 .......................................................................... 3 .......................................................................... 3 .......................................................................... 4 .......................................................................... 4 .......................................................................... 4 .......................................................................... 4 .......................................................................... 4 The purpose of this policy is to govern the use of the City's video surveillance cameras and overt electronic recording. This policy applies to all use of the City's video surveillance monitoring and/or recording of City facilities, infrastructure, and intersections. This policy is established to set parameters restricting the non -court ordered use of video surveillance in public places and to enhance public safety and security in a manner consistent with accepted rights of privacy. 2. SCOPE / BACKGROUND The City of Rohnert Park recognizes that improvements and changes in technology can greatly enhance public safety and law enforcement efforts. The City is implementing this method of crime deterrence by strategic placement of video surveillance cameras in the City of Rohnert Park. This policy applies to systems that enable continuous or periodic routine video monitoring on a sustained basis. The videos obtained from this routine video monitoring are investigatory or security files compiled by the City and the Department of Public Safety for correctional or law enforcement purposes. Legitimate uses of this technology are covered by this policy and applicable state and federal law. 3. DEFINITIONS A. "Extracting" means copying images from the hard drive or Internet site to some other media (CD ROM, video tape, etc.). B. "Monitoring" means real-time viewing or viewing footage stored on a hard drive. Page 1 of 5 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL POLICY SUBJECT/TITLE: POLICY NO: APPROVED BY: APPROVAL DATE: VIDEO SURVEILLANCE ❑ RESO NO: ❑ MINUTE ORDER C. "Personnel" means authorized city staff. D. "Recording" means capturing images on a computer disk or drive or Internet storage site. 4. GENERAL PRINCIPLES The City is committed to enhancing the quality of life in Rohnert Park by integrating professional police practices with available technology. A critical component of security and safety through technology is video surveillance in public areas. The principle objectives of video surveillance monitoring and/or recording in public areas include: A. Promote a safe environment by preventing/deterring acts of theft, vandalism, harassment, assault and/or other criminal activity. B. Assist in identification of individuals involved in criminal activity on city streets and city owned or managed properties. C. Assist in the safe daily operation of City facilities. D. Assist Public Safety enforcement agencies in investigating criminal activity. 5. LOCATION AND DIRECTION OF VIDEO EQUIPMENT The cameras will be installed in public places, such as intersections, public parks and open spaces, and the exterior of public buildings. Placement of cameras will take into consideration physical limitations such as availability of power, data reception and reasonable mounting facilities. Video surveillance cameras shall be used to observe locations that are in public view and where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. Any view provided by a video surveillance camera shall be no greater than what is available from the public vantage point. Traffic flow / intersection cameras may be placed at an elevated location to view a specific area if needed. Cameras may need to be placed in locations on buildings or poles with elevated observation points to cover a larger area. Cameras located inside City facilities shall not be directed to look through windows to areas outside the building, unless necessary to achieve the principal objectives described above. 6. OPERATION PROCEDURES The video surveillance cameras may be monitored by public safety department or other authorized City personnel. The Director of Public Safety will assign a designee to periodically review video systems to ensure they are functioning properly and recording correctly using the proper date/time stamp. Page 2 of 5 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL POLICY SUBJECT/TITLE: POLICY NO: APPROVED BY: APPROVAL DATE: VIDEO SURVEILLANCE ❑ RESO NO: ❑ MINUTE ORDER The Director of Public Safety will ensure that appropriate permissions are in place on the network software protocols. Department Heads have the authority to have a new video camera installed. 7. RETENTION, EXTRACTION AND STORAGE The City shall comply with all local, federal and state case law applicable to the use of surveillance cameras in public spaces and all legal requirements for the storage and release of video recordings. Pursuant to Government Code section 34090.6, all images of routine video monitoring must be retained for a minimum of one year. Any images that are known to have evidentiary value in a criminal investigation, civil lawsuit, or Government Claim investigation shall be stored in a separate fashion and shall be retained until the final resolution of the criminal or civil matter. Video surveillance recorded images shall be stored in a secure location with access by authorized personnel only. Only trained personnel shall be authorized to extract video from City recordings. Any video footage extracted for investigation purposes shall be stored in a manner that will exclude access by unauthorized personnel. Video footage kept as evidence will be stored in the evidence room with access by authorized personnel only. Records will be securely and permanently disposed of in a manner appropriate to their storage media, in compliance with all federal and state laws related to the disposal of records and the City's Records Retention Policy. 8. PRIVACY In general, staff members will not have access to video images except in response to an incident or as part of an investigation. If a staff member needs access to video images, they shall request authorization from their department manager via the chain of command. Video surveillance monitoring and/or recording shall be conducted in a professional, ethical, and legal manner. Violations of this policy and procedures may result in disciplinary action and may subject those involved to criminal and/or civil liability under applicable state and federal law. Page 3 of 5 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL POLICY SUBJECT/TITLE: POLICY NO: APPROVED BY: APPROVAL DATE: VIDEO SURVEILLANCE ❑ RESO NO: ❑ MINUTE ORDER 9. PUBLIC ACCESS TO VIDEO IMAGES The policy requires that video images be released consistent with the legal requirements of the Public Records Act. In response to a PRA request, the City may be required to release any video data that is not part of a Public Safety Department investigation. When there are no legal restrictions on disclosure, this policy delegates authority for decisions on releasing video to the public to the City Manager. 10. STAFF/ PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Clearly written signs shall be prominently displayed at the perimeter of video monitoring areas, except for public intersections, advising the public that video monitoring is occurring. The City will post signage at appropriate locations. Signage will state: AREA SUBJECT TO VIDEO MONITORING BY THE CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Public intersections that are subject to routine video monitoring do not require any signage. 11. EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES Nothing in this policy is intended to limit the reasonable and legal use of the video surveillance cameras during exigent circumstances involving matters of public and/or officer safety. 12. EXCLUSIONS This policy does not apply to the use of surveillance, or to the conduct of surveillance monitoring or recording by a law enforcement agency engaged in a legitimate criminal investigation. This policy does not apply to the use of hand-held video cameras or body -worn cameras. 13. APPENDIX REVISION HISTORY: Page 4 of 5 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL POLICY SUBJECT/TITLE: POLICY NO: APPROVED BY: APPROVAL DATE: VIDEO SURVEILLANCE ❑ RESO NO: ❑ MINUTE ORDER Page 5 of 5 Surveillance Vide Discussion and Direction March $, 2016 Why Video? Deter Criminal Activity Record Criminal Activity Protect City Assets Proposed Expansion Exterior of Park Restrooms Initially: Alicia; B Pool; Collegio Vista Sewer Pump Station Four New Intersections Increase Storage at Existing Sites Additional Sites Later Well sites All parks restrooms when re -opened Other, TBD Policy Issues Storage & Retention: One Year, or longer for criminal cases Monitoring: Only if activated by alarms Staff Access to Recordings: No active monitoring unless alarm sounds After incidents and during investigations Occassionally, such as DUI checks and officer training Policy Issues Public Access to Recordings: To be consistent with legal requirements, which are developing Probably protected in investigations When flexible, authority delegated to City Manager Privacy: Only public areas as much as possible Will provide signs Fiscal Impact Park Restrooms 16,500 4,800 CDBG/Bonds Sewer Pump 10,000 1 ,470 Sewer Fund Station Intersections 6,000 1 ,490 Asset Forfeiture Expanded 5,000 1 ,1 30 Asset Forfeiture Storage TOTAL 37,500 8, 890 Requested Action Provide direction on use of video surveillance Provide feedback on key policy issues ,�_pHNERT PgRK ITEM NO. 11 «► Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." C/LIFD RN IP CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: March 8, 2016 Department: Finance Submitted By: Betsy Howze, Finance Director Prepared By: Betsy Howze, Finance Director Agenda Title: Accept the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year 2014-15, and Proposition 4 Article XIII -B (GANN) Limit Agreed - Upon Procedures Report for Fiscal Year 2015-16 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for FY 2014-15 and Proposition 4 Article XIII -B (GANN) Limit Agreed -Upon Procedures Report for FY 2015-16. CAFR BACKGROUND: The financial records of the City of Rohnert Park are subject to an annual independent audit, which is currently performed by Macias Gini & O'Connell LLC. The audit is required to be performed in conformance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States (GAAP), by an independent certified public accounting (CPA) firm. The audit includes a comprehensive review of the financial records and the internal control procedures in place which safeguard the City's assets. The Finance Department facilitated the annual audit, and requests the City Council's acceptance of the CAFR. The CAFR includes the financial statements for the City, and the Rohnert Park Financing Authority, a legally separate component unit for which the City Council maintains fiscal accountability. ANALYSIS: The Independent Auditor's Report contained in the CAFR (page F-1) indicates that the financial statements present fairly in all material respects the financial position of the City as of June 30, 2015. This opinion is considered "clean" or "unmodified," which means that the financial records reflect appropriately the financial activity of FY 2014-15. The auditor provided a management letter and no new recommendations were noted; however, the auditors noted in Item 2015-001 a significant deficiency over internal controls that is a carryover finding from 2014. The auditor continues to note the following internal control deficiencies: Accounting Policies and Procedures — The City has not adequately developed and/or documented critical policies and procedures for its operations. Without a comprehensive set of policies and procedures, staff does not have specific guidance to follow when executing their daily duties. Furthermore, once long time staff members leave, the City is at risk that ITEM NO. 11 the institutional knowledge and ability to perform daily functions will not be adequately captured to train replacements. • Payroll — The City overaccrued an individual's annual leave hours due to the misapplication of leave accrual rate in accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement. The City's internal control procedures did not prevent or detect the overaccrual. • Capital Assets Accounting —The City does not have a formal capital asset capitalization policy. Management concurs with the audit recommendations. Finance is in the process of developing written processes and procedures. Several are in various stages of development, including the Capital Asset Policy specifically noted by the auditor. In addition, to strengthen our internal controls over payroll, we have recently completed a training with our software vendor that included several levels of Finance staff. The next step will be to apply the new knowledge of the payroll module to review payroll records to ensure that all calculations are in accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement, and expand the documentation of the payroll processes. The auditor also noted that several recommendations from the prior year have been corrected by the City. These items include: • Adequate Review over the utility billing cycle. • Segregation of duties between recording, processing, and mailing payments to vendors; and the required purchase order documents for various purchases made during the year. • Changes in the purchasing function for the City in which the processes were performed at the department level with minimal or no involvement of the Finance Department. • Adequate controls over expenditure. Upon the initial set up of the City's budget in the general ledger, actual costs can exceed budgeted amounts per expense line item category. • Effective controls over the financial reporting process. Specifically, the City lacked a sufficient complement of personnel with an appropriate level of accounting knowledge, experience and training in the application of GAAP commensurate with the City's financial reporting requirements to meet the objectives that should be expected of those roles. These control deficiencies could result in a misstatement of account balances that would result in a material misstatement to annual financial statements that would not be prevented or detected. During the audit, we identified significant errors in the City's beginning balances as of July 1, 2013 and balances for the year ended June 30, 2014. The auditor also noted several recommendations from the prior year regarding our Information Technology environment that are currently in progress. In response to this comment, the City Council established an Ad Hoc Information Technology Committee, which is comprised of senior City management and the IT Operations Manager. The City continues to work to strengthen its IT general controls. The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) is the widely -recognized "best practice" body for governmental accounting, auditing and financial reporting. Each year the CAFR is 2 ITEM NO. 11 submitted to the GFOA award program for review in order to potentially receive a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the prior year's financial report. The City of Rohnert Park has received this award for the last 33 years, and we anticipate the City will be successful in attaining the award for FY 2014-15. The Introductory Section of the CAFR, while not audited, relays general information on the City's structure and personnel as well as information useful in assessing the City's financial condition. This is accomplished through the "Letter of Transmittal" and other documents such as Principal Officers, Boards and Commissions and an organizational chart of the City. The Financial Section of the CAFR begins with the auditor's report and opinion on the financial statements of the City. This is followed by the "Management Discussion and Analysis" where management introduces the basic financial statements and provides an analytical overview of the City's financial activity. The basic financial statements include the financial schedules and notes, where descriptions of the accounting and finance -related policies, and underlying amounts presented in the basic financial statements are found. This section concludes with other required and supplementary information as necessary. The Statistical Section of the CAFR, while not audited, provides financial trends, revenue and debt capacity information, and other economic and operating information useful for determining the overall financial health of the City. Significant and successful efforts were made by Finance Department staff to close the books, provide information to the auditors, update statistical information, and facilitate the peer review work of the GFOA. The City of Rohnert Park CAFR is available for review under the Finance Department on the City's website at: hqp://www.rpcity.org/index.aspx?page=119 PROPOSITION 4 ARTICLE XIII -B APPROPRIATION (GANN) LIMITS AGREED- UPON PROCEEDURES: On June 9, 2015, Council by Resolution 2015-107 adopted the City's Proposition 4, Article XIII B calculation for the FY 2015-16 Budget. In general, the article limits annual appropriations of the City to the level of appropriations for the FY 1978-79 base year, adjusted for changes in the cost of living, population, and other specified factors. The GANN budget appropriations for FY 2015-16 are limited to $46,985,153 based on Finance's calculations using the Proposition's parameters. The budgeted appropriations subject to the limit are $20,276,800, well within the allowable limits. Macias Gini & O'Connell LLC, reviewed the City's calculation using Agreed -Upon Procedures, and found no exceptions. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: Goal B of our strategic plan calls for us to Achieve and Maintain Financial Stability. The annual audit is an integral part of this goal. It ensures that the City's financial position is presented fairly and accurately. 3 ITEM NO. 11 OPTIONS CONSIDERED FISCAL IMPACT N/A Department Head Approval Date: 02/22/16 Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 02/29/16 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. FY 2014-15 CAFR 2. FY 2015-16 Proposition 4 Article XIII -B (GANN) Limit Agreed -Upon Procedures Report 2 City of Rohnert Park, CaCifornia t IF Comprehensive Annual Financial Report For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2015 "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow" a 19 g0VANERT PA1 62 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK, CALIFORNIA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2015 Prepared by Finance Department CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 2015 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT Table of Contents INTRODUCTORY SECTION Letterof Transmittal...................................................................................................................................I-1 GFOA Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting................................................I-6 Listof City Officials...................................................................................................................................I-7 OrganizationalChart...................................................................................................................................I-8 FINANCIAL SECTION IndependentAuditor's Report ....................................................................................................................F-1 Management's Discussion and Analysis (Required Supplementary Information) (unaudited).................F-3 Basic Financial Statements: Government -wide Financial Statements: Statement of Net Position........................................................................................................... F-17 Statement of Activities................................................................................................................F-18 Fund Financial Statements: Governmental Funds: BalanceSheet.......................................................................................................................F-20 Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the Government - wide Statement of Net Position — Governmental Activities..........................................F-23 Statement of the Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances .........................F-24 Reconciliation of the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds to the Government -wide Statement of Activities — Governmental Activities.............................................................................F-26 Proprietary Funds: Statement of Fund Net Position............................................................................................F-27 Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Fund Net Position................................F-28 Statementof Cash Flows......................................................................................................F-29 Fiduciary Funds: Statement of Fiduciary Net Position.....................................................................................F-30 Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position..................................................................F-31 Notes to the Basic Financial Statements...........................................................................................F-32 Required Supplementary Information (unaudited): Schedule of Changes in Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios...................................................F-76 Schedule of the Cost Sharing Plans' Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability ...................F-77 Schedule of Plan Contributions - Pension.........................................................................................F-78 Notes to the Schedule of Plan Contributions - Pension.....................................................................F-79 Schedules of Funding Progress - Post Employment Health Care Benefits.......................................F-80 Budgetary Comparison Schedules: GeneralFund...............................................................................................................................F-81 Housing Projects Special Revenue Fund....................................................................................F-84 Public Facilities Finance Fee Special Revenue Fund.................................................................F-85 Graton Mitigation Supplemental Special Revenue Fund............................................................F-86 Note to Required Supplementary Information..................................................................................F-87 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 2015 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT Table of Contents Supplementary Information: Combining and Individual Fund Statements and Schedules: Nonmajor Governmental Funds: Description of Nonmajor Governmental Funds...................................................................F-91 Combining Balance Sheet....................................................................................................F-94 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances ............F-95 Nonmajor Special Revenue Funds: CombiningBalance Sheet....................................................................................................F-96 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances ..........F-102 Budgetary Comparison Schedules: Alcohol Beverage Sales Ordinance (ABSO) Special Revenue Fund ..........................F-108 Vehicle Abatement Special Revenue Fund..................................................................F-109 Traffic Safety Special Revenue Fund..........................................................................F-110 General Plan Maintenance Special Revenue Fund......................................................F-111 Spay and Neuter Special Revenue Fund......................................................................F-112 Refuse Road Impact Fee Special Revenue Fund.........................................................F-113 State Gasoline Tax Special Revenue Fund..................................................................F-114 Measure M Traffic Special Revenue Fund..................................................................F-115 Traffic Signals Fee Special Revenue Fund..................................................................F-116 Capital Outlay Fee Special Revenue Fund..................................................................F-117 Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Special Revenue Fund ..............................F-118 DIVCA PEG Fee (AB2987) Special Revenue Fund...................................................F-119 Traffic Congestion Relief (AB2928) Special Revenue Fund ...................................... F-120 Graton Mitigation Development Fee Special Revenue Fund ...................................... F-121 Graton Mitigation Law Enforcement Special Revenue Fund......................................F-122 Graton Mitigation Problem Gambling Special Revenue Fund .................................... F-123 Graton Mitigation Waterway Special Revenue Fund..................................................F-124 Graton Mitigation Public Services Special Revenue Fund..........................................F-125 Graton Mitigation Wilfred Maintenance Special Revenue Fund.................................F-126 Measure M Benefit Assessment Special Revenue Fund .............................................. F-127 Mobile Home Rent Appeals Board Special Revenue Fund.........................................F-128 Copeland Creek Drainage Facility Special Revenue Fund .......................................... F-129 Assets Forfeiture Special Revenue Fund.....................................................................F-130 Performing Art Center Facility Capital Reserve Special Revenue Fund.....................F-131 Sports Center Facility Capital Reserve Special Revenue Fund...................................F-132 Explorer Special Revenue Fund...................................................................................F-133 California Disability Access Fee Special Revenue Fund.............................................F-134 Nonmajor Enterprise Funds: Description of Nonmajor Enterprise Funds........................................................................F-135 Combining Statement of Net Position................................................................................F-136 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position...............................................................................................F-137 Combining Statement of Cash Flows.................................................................................F-138 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK 2015 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT Table of Contents Internal Service Funds: Description of Internal Service Funds................................................................................F-139 Combining Statement of Net Position................................................................................F-140 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position...............................................................................................F-141 Combining Statement of Cash Flows.................................................................................F-142 Fiduciary Funds: Description of Fiduciary Funds..........................................................................................F-143 Combining Statement of Fiduciary Net Position................................................................F-144 Combining Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position.............................................F-145 STATISTICAL SECTION (UNAUDITED) Index to Statistical Section.........................................................................................................................S-2 Net Position by Component — Last Ten Fiscal Years................................................................................ S-3 Changes in Net Position — Last Ten Fiscal Years...................................................................................... S-4 Program Revenues by Function/Program — Last Ten Fiscal Years........................................................... S-6 Fund Balances of Governmental Funds — Last Ten Fiscal Years.............................................................. S-7 Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds — Last Ten Fiscal Years ........................................... S-8 Tax Revenues by Source of Governmental Funds — Last Ten Fiscal Years ............................................ S-10 Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property — LastTen Fiscal Years........................................................................................................................ S-11 Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rates — Last Ten Fiscal Years ..................................................... S-12 Property Tax Levies and Collections — Last Ten Fiscal Years................................................................ S-13 Taxable Sales by Category — Last Ten Fiscal Years................................................................................ S-14 Top Ten Principal Property Tax Payers — Current and Eight Years Ago ................................................ S-15 Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type — Last Ten Fiscal Years.................................................................S-16 Direct and Overlapping Governmental Activities Debt — As of June 30, 2015 ....................................... S-17 Legal Debt Margin Information — Last Ten Fiscal Years........................................................................ S-18 Pledged Revenue Coverage — Last Ten Fiscal Years............................................................................... S-19 Demographic and Economic Statistics — Last Ten Calendar Years......................................................... S-20 Principal Employers — Current Year and Nine Years Ago...................................................................... S-21 Full -Time -Equivalent City Government Employees by Function/Program............................................ S-22 Operating Indicators by Function/Program — Last Ten Fiscal Years.......................................................S-23 Capital Asset Statistics by Function/Program — Last Ten Fiscal Years...................................................S-24 This page is left intentionally blank. City Council City Council Gina Belforte Mayor Jake Mackenzie Vice Mayor Amy 0. Ahanotu Joseph T. Callinan Pam Stafford Councilmembers Darrin Jenkins City Manager Don Schwartz Assistant City Manager Michelle Marchetta Kenyon City Attorney Alexandra M. Barnhill Assistant City Attorney JoAnneBuergler City Clerk Betsy Howze Finance Director Brian Masterson Director of Public Safety John McArthur Director of Public Works and Community Services Mary Grace Pawson Director of Development Services Victoria Perrault Human Resources Director January 19, 2016 Members of the City Council, and Citizens of the City of Rohnert Park: The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) of the City of Rohnert Park for the fiscal year 2014-15 is hereby submitted. This report was prepared by the Finance Department, which is responsible for both the accuracy of the presented data and the completeness and fairness of the presentation, including all disclosures. To the best of our knowledge and belief the data, as presented, is accurate in all material aspects and presented in a manner designed to fairly set forth the financial position and changes in financial position of the City as measured by the financial activity of its various funds, and that all disclosures necessary to enable the reader to gain the maximum understanding of the City's financial affairs have been included. The City has prepared the CAFR using the financial reporting requirements as prescribed by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 34, Basic Financial Statements — Management's Discussion and Analysis — for State and Local Governments. This GASB Statement requires that management provide a narrative introduction, overview and analysis to accompany the basic financial statements in the form of a Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A). This letter of transmittal is designed to complement the MD&A and should be read in conjunction with it. The MD&A can be found immediately following the report of the independent auditors. THE REPORTING ENTITY The CAFR includes the funds and account groups of the primary government, which includes several enterprise activities, as well as all of its component units. Component units include legally separate entities for which the primary government is financially accountable and that have substantially the same board as the City or provide services entirely to the City. Accordingly, the Rohnert Park Financing Authority's financial information is blended with the City's information in this report. The City was incorporated in August 1962. The City has a council-manager form of government. Five persons are elected by popular vote to serve four-year terms on the City Council. Elections are held every two years. The Mayor is separately elected to a one-year term by members of the City Council from among the City Council members. The Mayor acts as the presiding officer of the City Council. Policies established by the City Council are implemented through the office of the City Manager. Economic Condition and Outlook The City is located in beautiful Sonoma County, approximately forty-five miles north of San Francisco on US Highway 101. It is home to approximately 41,000 people, Sonoma State University, the Green Music Center and the award winning Foxtail Golf Course. A neighboring government, the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria (Tribe) opened a newly constructed casino in November 2013. As one of the first planned communities, Rohnert Park enjoys the benefits of a coordinated 130 Avram Avenue ♦ Rohnert Park CA ♦ 94928 ♦ (707) 588-2226 ♦ Fax (707) 794-9248 www.rpcity.org I-1 system of bike trails and paths, schools and parks in every neighborhood. More than 50 restaurants including all the best national chains offer diners the flavors they crave. Residents enjoy sweeping views of Sonoma and Taylor Mountains, preserved from development forever. Rohnert Park is just minutes from popular tourism venues including hundreds of local wineries, the Pacific Ocean, and giant redwoods. Sonoma County is an attractive international destination and outdoor recreational mecca, with wine related products, specialty foods, wellness programs and spa experiences. The close proximity to major Bay Area attractions will continue to support tourist traffic. Sonoma County's economy is recovering. All of the primary sectors are expected to experience modest growth. The unemployment rate fell to 3.8 percent; sales tax revenues are up; hotel occupancy and room rates have increased; and property tax revenue continues to grow. Future growth will be attributable to Sonoma County being an attractive international destination, with close proximity to major Bay Area attractions that are a draw for many tourists. MAJOR INITIATIVES For the Current Year In response to the current economic conditions, the City has taken a more proactive approach and has developed a Strategic Plan for the City of Rohnert Park for 2015-2019. The strategic plan provides a comprehensive framework which includes vision, mission, values, accomplishments, best practices and a detailed Action Plan. For the second consecutive year the City adopted a balanced budget where total sources exceeded total uses without spending down General Fund balance. This continues the City's journey toward improved financial sustainability. Labor contracts were modified and the City agreed to fund Retiree Health Savings Accounts for some employees in exchange for them agreeing to a reduced future benefit. These changes reduced unfunded retiree medical liabilities and will reduce future pay -go for retiree medical premiums. The Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety serves the citizens of Rohnert Park by performing both Police and Fire functions. The Officers are trained as both police officers and firefighters as an effective way to provide a quick response to either structure fires or a crime event. The City upgraded the computer aided dispatch and record system in FY 14-15. The Public Works and Community Services Department is a full-service department that is responsible for the construction, operation, maintenance, and repair of most of the City's infrastructure, facilities and community programs. In addition to performing regularly assigned duties, staff responds to over 5,000 citizen requests each year and responds to a variety of system problems and emergencies 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. The Department is organized by function into three distinct divisions: Utilities, General Services, and Community Services. The Utilities Division consists of potable water, sewer, recycled water, and drainage systems. Most utility system functions are heavily regulated where many day-to-day functions are mandated. This division is staffed at a minimum of five days a week but is also monitored 24-7 through the City's computer -controlled wireless network. The General Services Division consists of streets, buildings, fleet, and parks maintenance. This division is also responsible for the implementation of components of the City's Greenhouse Gas Action Plan and the administration of the Foxtail Golf Course lease agreement. I-2 The Community Services Division operates several major City facilities including: Callinan Sports & Fitness Center, four community centers, Senior Center, pottery studio as well as several parks, community gardens, dog parks, athletic fields, tennis courts, and three swimming pools. Community Services staff also either run or oversee several youth and adult programs, sports leagues, classes, and community events. In addition, the staff at the Spreckels Performing Arts Center is taking innovative steps toward making the City owned and operated facility not only a valuable community asset but a financial asset as well. The new theater performances have been well received by the community and have also recovered all production costs. The Development Services Department manages land and building development from concept to completion; maintains and implements the City's General Plan and Zoning Code; plans and builds Rohnert Park's infrastructure; plans for Rohnert Park's physical and resource needs by working with local, regional and state agencies to ensure that there is enough water supply and sewer treatment for Rohnert Park citizens and businesses now and in the fixture; and ensures safe structures and physically attractive neighborhoods by enforcing the California Building Standards Code. The Department has worked diligently to process land use entitlements and permits for significant land developments this year (University District Specific Plan), and as a result of this work construction is underway at this time. For the Future Rohnert Park is home to some of the region's most affordable, high-quality commercial space. The downsizing of the telecommunication industry in the early 2000's has left Rohnert Park with a surplus of commercial units. Economic development efforts are focused on stimulating interest in locating to Rohnert Park. Recently, several companies have moved to the former Agilent site, now known as Sonoma Mountain Village. Tourism is a key industry in Rohnert Park, contributing significantly to the tax base. The City partners with the Chamber of Commerce and the Sonoma County Tourism Bureau to promote Rohnert Park as a destination. Rohnert Park has seven hotels/motels which provide almost 1,000 rooms, and plans to attract more hotels in the near future. The largest property is the Doubletree Hotel, which offers convention and meeting facilities. The Hampton Inn captures a previously un -met segment of the tourism market. Oxford Inn & Suites broke ground this year and will be complete in 2016 adding additional mid -scale rooms to Rohnert Park's hotel inventory. Rohnert Park offers a number of amenities for the traveler, including two 18 -hole golf courses, a Performing Arts Center, and a strong base of dining experiences. The Green Music Center at Sonoma State University includes a world-class concert hall to showcase music and provides education programs year-round. The music center attracts visitors from within the region and nationwide, due to the quality of the concert experience. The City is committed to realizing new development anticipated in its General Plan (GP). The GP articulates a vision for the City that includes an urban growth boundary correlated with a growth management program. It describes a framework of targeted growth areas, including the creation of a City Center area, the development of a mixed-use area north of the Sonoma State University to integrate with the Green Music Center, the development of balanced neighborhoods with a variety of housing types, the expansion of commercial uses to the northwest, and the continued expansion of the City's network of parks and open space. The GP provides for an average growth rate of 1% with an ultimate build -out of approximately 20,000 housing units, 405 acres of commercial, office and industrial uses, 60 acres of mixed use, and 190 acres of open space over the next twenty years. Construction is underway on the University District Specific Plan at this time. I-3 FINANCIAL INFORMATION Management of the City is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls designed to ensure that the assets of the City are protected from loss, theft, or misuse and to ensure that adequate accounting data are compiled timely and accurately to allow for the preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The City's internal controls are designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that these objectives are met. The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that: (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the benefits likely to be derived and (2) the valuation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judgments by management. Budgetary Controls. The objective of budgetary controls is to assure compliance with legal provisions embodied in the annual appropriated budget approved by the City Council. Activities of the General Fund, Special Revenue and Proprietary Funds are included in the annual appropriated budget. The level of budgetary control (that is, the level at which expenditures cannot exceed the appropriated amount) is established at the fund level. The City also maintains an encumbrance accounting system as one technique of accomplishing budgetary control. Except as separately authorized by the Council, all unencumbered appropriations lapse at the end of the fiscal year. As demonstrated by the statements and schedules included in the financial section of this report, the City continues to meet its responsibility for sound financial management. Cash Management. The City's goals for cash investing are prioritized to protect the principal invested, make cash available as needed for operations, and earn a return on investment; in that order. Cash is held primarily by the State and County Investment pools, with some operating cash kept in local banking institutions that provide efficient operating opportunities at very -low risk. The following table illustrates the cash and investments of the City as of June 30, 2015: Cash and Investments - June 30, 2015 Sonoma County Investment Pool Money Market Mutual Funds U.S. Government Agencies Securities State Treasurer LAIF Cash and deposits Total Cash & Investments 32,023,566 19,001,567 3,500,000 7,322,935 17,349,399 $ 79,197,467 Cash temporarily idle during the year was invested in the Sonoma County Investment Pool, State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), and money market mutual funds. These investments are allowed under an investment policy adopted by the City Council. All cash and deposits are FDIC secured and the City works with two brokerage firms to find attractive investment opportunities. Risk Management. The City is a member of Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF), a joint powers authority composed of cities located in Northern California. The City maintains coverage for property, liability and workers' compensation through REMIF. REMIF currently contracts with Anthem Blue Cross for some active employees and retirees under the age of 65 and with Hartford Insurance for retirees over 65. The City contracts directly with Kaiser for other employees and retirees. The City presently contracts with Delta Dental for dental benefits and V.S.P. for vision benefits. I-4 OTHER INFORMATION Independent Audit. Management considers an annual audit by independent certified public accountants a sound and prudent business practice. The accounting firm of Macias Gini & O'Connell, LLP performed the annual audit for the City for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015. The independent auditor's report on the basic financial statements and combining and individual fund statements and schedules is included in the financial section of this report. Awards. The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City for its comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014. This was the thirty-third consecutive year that the City has achieved this prestigious award. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, a government must publish an easily readable and efficiently organized comprehensive annual financial report. This report must satisfy both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements. A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only. We believe that our current comprehensive annual financial report continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement Program's requirements and we are submitting it to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate. Acknowledgments. The preparation of the comprehensive annual financial report was made possible by the dedicated service of the entire staff of the Finance Department. Most notably, Elizabeth Smith, Supervising Accountant, and accountant Lori Newzell worked diligently to prepare reports, reconciliations and supporting schedules to facilitate audit completion. Each member of the department has our sincere appreciation for the contributions made in the preparation of this report. Respectfully submitted, Darrin Jenkins City Manager I-5 r ((,V6 pt. Betsy Howze Finance Director Covern went Finance- Officers Association certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Pre8e,nted to CRY of Rohnert Pa For its Comprehensive Annual Financial Rcp rt For the Fiscal Yeah Ended June 30, 2014 */Ojr do-pAot.., Executive Director/CEO I-6 CITY OFFICIALS City Council: Amy O. Ahanotu, Mayor Gina Belforte, Vice Mayor Joseph T. Callinan, Councilmember Jake Mackenzie, Councilmember Pam Stafford, Councilmember City Staff: City Manager----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Darrin Jenkins Assistant City Manager-----------------------------------------------------------------Don Schwartz City Attorney------------------------------------------------------------Michelle Marchetta Kenyon Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP City Clerk------------------------------------------------------------------------------------JoAnne Buergler Finance Director------------------------------------------------------------------------------.Betsy Howze Director of Public Safety...........................................................Brian Masterson Director of Public Works & Community Services ------------------- John McArthur Director of Human Resources Victoria Perrault -------------------------------------------------- Acting Director of Development Services .......................Mary Grace Pawson City Council Advisory Commissions, Committees, and Boards: Bicycle Advisory Committee Cultural Arts Commission Mobile Home Parks Rent Appeals Board Parks & Recreation Commission Planning Commission Senior Citizens Advisory Commission Sister City(s) Relations Committee I-7 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART Citizens of Rohnert Park Rohnert Park City Council City City Assistant City Attorney Manager Manager Administration Human Resources Economic Information Development Technology Development Public Works/ Services Finance11 11 Public Safety Community Services Planning Revenue/ Police Parks Building/ Utility Billing Fleet Building Budget Fire Performing Streets Arts Center Animal Community Engineering Accounting Water Services Services Code Recycled Sewer Enforcement Water I-8 PurtiL� �Sacraments Public Aw cmuntents walnut creek Gakland Las Angeles Century City Newpsrt Beach Independent Auditor's Report San Diego Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rohnert Park, California Report on the Financial Statements We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business -type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Rohnert Park, California (City), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2015, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents. Management's Responsibility for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. Auditor's Responsibility Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor's judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity's preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity's internal control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions. Opinions In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business -type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City as of June 30, 2015, and the respective changes in financial position and, where applicable, cash flows thereof for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Nadas Gln, & CrCarmall LLP 2121 N. GBfarnla Bled., Sults 750 walnut creak c,L "596 F-1 www.mgocpa.com Emphasis of Matter Change in Accounting Principles As discussed in Note 1(R) to the basic financial statements, effective July 1, 2014, the City adopted the provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions — an amendment to GASB No. 27, and GASB Statement No. 71, Pension Transition for Contributions Made Subsequent to the Measurement Date — an amendment of GASB Statement No. 68. Our opinion is not modified with respect to this matter. Other Matters Required Supplementary Information Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management's discussion and analysis, the budgetary comparison schedules, and the schedules related to the pension and post employment health care benefits, as listed in the table of contents be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the GASB who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management's responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. Other Information Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise the City's basic financial statements. The introductory section, combining and individual fund statements and schedules, and statistical section are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. The combining and individual fund statements and schedules are the responsibility of management and were derived from and relate directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. In our opinion, the combining and individual fund statements and schedules are fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole. The introductory and statistical sections have not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements, and accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on them. Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated January 19, 2016 on our consideration of the City's internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the City's internal control over financial reporting and compliance. Hotc;VLS (D)C40Jtd/ / /�;) Walnut Creek, California January 19, 2016 F-2 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) As management of the City of Rohnert Park (City) we offer readers of the City's financial statements this narrative overview and analysis of the City's financial activities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015. We encourage readers to consider the information presented here in conjunction with additional information that we have furnished in the City's basic financial statements, which immediately follow this section. FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS New Significant Accounting Standards Implemented In fiscal year 2014-15, the City adopted two new statements of financial accounting standards issued by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) that relate to pension activity: Statement No. 68, "Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions - an amendment of GASB Statement No. 27." • Statement No. 71, "Pension Transition for Contributions Made Subsequent to the Measurement Date - an amendment of GASB Statement No. 68." Statement No. 68 establishes standards of accounting and financial reporting, but not funding or budgetary standards, for the City's single -employer defined benefit pension plans. This Statement replaces the requirements of prior GASB statements impacting accounting and disclosure of pensions. The most significant impact to the City by implementing Statement No. 68 is the reporting of the City's unfunded pension liability on the City's full accrual government -wide financial statements. New note disclosures and supplementary schedules are also required by the Statement. The measurement date for the pension liabilities is as of June 30, 2014. This date reflects a one year lag and was used so that these financial statements could be issued in an expedient manner. Activity (i.e., contributions made by the City) occurring during the FY 2014-15 are reported as deferred outflows of resources in accordance with Statement No. 71. In order to implement Statement Nos. 68 and 71, a prior period adjustment was made to the City's July 1, 2014 net position. This prior period adjustment decreased the City's net position by $51.9 million from $148.9 million to $97.0 million and reflects the reporting of the net pension liabilities of $55.9 million net of $4.0 million of deferred outflows of resources. Please refer to Note 8 for more information regarding the City's pension plans. The adoption of Statement No. 68 has no impact on the County's governmental fund financial statements, which continue to report expenditures equal to the amount of the City's actuarially determined contribution (formerly referred to as the "annual required contribution or "ARC"). The calculation of pension contributions is also unaffected by this Statement. Deferred Outflows of Resources Deferred outflows of resources are new to the City's Statement of Net Position for this fiscal year. This classification balance, although similar to "assets," is set apart because these items do not meet the technical definition of being a City asset on the date of these financial statements. In other words, these amounts are not available to pay liabilities in the way assets are available. When all the recognition criteria are met, the deferred outflow of resources will become an expense. F-3 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) The deferred outflows of resources reported is related to the implementation of Statement Nos. 68 and 71 for pension liability reporting. Statement No. 71 requires that contributions made during the fiscal year to the retirement system be reported as deferred outflows of resources. Consequently, the majority of the deferred outflows of resources reported are comprised of current year contributions to the retirement system. At June 30, 2015, the City reported pension items including pension contributions subsequent to measurement date and differences between the employer's actual and proportionate share of contribution as deferred outflows of resources. Deferred Inflows of Resources Deferred inflows of resources are the counterpart to deferred outflows of resources on the Statement of Net Position. Deferred inflows of resources are not technically liabilities of the City as of the date of the financial statement. When all the recognition criteria are met, the deferred inflows of resources will become revenue or an increase to net position. At June 30, 2015, the City reported unavailable revenues on the governmental funds financial statements and pension items including change in employer's proportion and net difference between projected and actual earnings on plan investments on the governmental -wide and proprietary funds financial statements as deferred inflows of resources. Government -wide Financial Highlights The assets and deferred outflows of resources of the City exceeded its liabilities and deferred inflows of resources by $114.7 million (net position) at June 30, 2015. Of this amount, $107.8 million represents the City's investment in capital assets, less (1) accumulated depreciation, and (2) related outstanding debt and deferred outflows and inflows of resources used to acquire those assets; $40.0 million is available for the City's ongoing obligations related to programs with external restrictions (restricted); and ($33.1) million (unrestricted) is primarily the result of the City's unfunded pension. The City's total net position decreased by $34.3 million over the prior year: • The $11.7 million increase in net investment in capital assets represents the change in capital assets net of FY 14-15 retirement of related long-term debt. • The $7.6 million increase in restricted net position represents the change in resources that are subject to external restriction on their use. The $53.6 million decrease in unrestricted net position is the change in resources available to fund City programs and debt obligations. The decrease was mainly related to the implementation of Statement No. 68 and 71 and at June 30, 2015, the City reported net pension liability, deferred inflows of resources for pension items, and deferred outflows of resources for pension items of $47.3 million, $9.0 million, and $4.8 million, respectively. Governmental Funds Highlights The City's Governmental Funds combined ending fund balance of $48.0 million was an increase of $5.9 million from the prior year ending balance of $42.1 million. Amounts available for spending are categorized into Restricted, Assigned, and Unassigned Fund Balances. These categories total $45.6 million, or 94.9% of ending fund balance. Of this amount: • $38.4 million is restricted by law or externally imposed requirements (e.g., for capital projects, housing projects, and debt service). F-4 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) • $14.4 million is assigned by the City Council, City Manager or Finance Director in accordance with policy and/or budgetary directives (e.g., operating reserve and contingency reserve). • ($7.2) million is Unassigned Fund Balance, which represents the residual of total fund balance less the aforementioned categories. • The General Fund reported total fund balance of $14.2 million of which $12.2 million is spendable: $0.2 million is restricted, $12.0 million is assigned, and $0.03 million is unassigned. The balance of $2.0 million is nonspendable. Although net position declined by $34.3 million due to the implementation of Statement No. 68, the overall increase in fund balance of $5.9 million indicates relative financial success for the year. OVERVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Management's Discussion and Analysis introduces the City's Basic Financial Statements. The City's Basic Financial Statements include three components: • Government -wide Financial Statements • Fund Financial Statements • Notes to the Financial Statements This report also contains required and other supplementary information in addition to the basic financial statements themselves. Government -wide Financial Statements The Government -wide Financial Statements are designed to provide readers with a broad overview of the City's finances, in a manner similar to a private -sector business. These financial statements provide both long- term and short-term information about the City's overall financial status. The Statement of Net Position presents information on all of the City's Assets and Deferred Outflows of Resources, and Liabilities and Deferred Inflows of Resources with the difference reported as Net Position. Net Position = (Assets + Deferred Outflows of Resources) - (Liabilities + Deferred Inflows of Resources) Over time, increases or decreases in net position are a useful indicator of an improving or deteriorating City financial condition. The Statement ofActivities presents the most recent fiscal year changes in the City's net position. All changes in net position are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. The statement reports items resulting in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., uncollected taxes, and earned but unused vacation leave) as revenues and expenses. The Government -wide Financial Statements distinguish functions of the City principally supported by taxes and intergovernmental revenues (governmental activities) from other functions intended to recover all or a significant portion of their costs through user fees and charges (business -type activities). The governmental activities of the City grouped by function include General Government, Public Safety, Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Cultural Arts Center and Interest on Long -Term Debt. The business -type activities of the City include Water, Sewer, and Refuse Collection. F-5 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) Component units are included in Government -wide Financial Statements and are legally separate entities for which the City is financially accountable. Component units have substantially the same governing board as the City, or provide services entirely to the City. The Rohnert Park Financing Authority is included as the only component unit of the City. Fund Financial Statements A fund is a grouping of related accounts used to maintain control over resources segregated for specific activities or objectives. The City, like other state and local governments, uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance -related legal requirements. The City's funds are divided into three types: Governmental funds, Proprietary funds, and Fiduciary funds. Governmental funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported as governmental activities in the Government -wide Financial Statements. However, unlike the Government -wide Financial Statements, governmental funds financial statements focus on near-term inflows and outflows of spendable resources, as well as on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal year. (Modified Accrual Basis of Accounting) Such information may be useful in evaluating the City's near-term financing requirements. Because the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the Government -wide Financial Statements, it is useful to compare the information presented for governmental funds with similar information presented for governmental activities. Both the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet and the Governmental Funds Statement of Revenue, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental funds and governmental activities. The City maintains individual governmental funds organized according to their type (special revenue, debt service, capital projects and permanent funds). Information is presented separately in the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet and in the Governmental Funds Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances for the General Fund; Housing Projects Special Revenue Fund; Financing Authority Debt Service Fund; City Capital Projects Fund; Public Facility Finance Fee Special Revenue Fund; and Graton Mitigation Supplemental Special Revenue Fund, all of which are considered to be major funds. Data from the remaining governmental funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation entitled "Other Governmental Funds." Individual and combining fund data for each of these non -major governmental funds is provided as supplementary information in this report. The City adopts an annually appropriated budget for all of its operating funds. The budget to actual comparison schedules are provided for the General Fund and Special Revenue Funds to demonstrate performance against this budget. Proprietary funds are generally used to account for services for which the City charges external, or internal customers with the intent to recover all or a significant portion of their costs through user fees and charges. The City maintains the following two types of proprietary funds: • Enterprise Funds report the same functions presented as business -type activities in the Government -wide Financial Statements. The City uses enterprise funds to account for Water, Sewer, Recycled Water, and Refuse Collection. • Internal Service Funds are an accounting device used to accumulate and allocate costs internally among the City's various functions. The City's internal service funds account for Information Technology services, Vehicle Replacement and Fleet Management services. Since these services predominantly benefit governmental rather than business -type functions, they are consolidated within governmental activities in the Government -wide Financial Statements. F-6 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) Proprietary funds provide the same type of information as the Government -wide Financial Statements, only in more detail. The proprietary funds financial statements provide separate information for the Water, Sewer, Recycled Water and Refuse Collection activities. The three internal service funds are combined into a single, aggregated presentation in the proprietary funds financial statements. Fiduciary funds account for resources held for the benefit of parties outside the City. Fiduciary funds are not reflected in the Government -wide Financial Statements because the resources of those funds are not available to support the City's own programs. Fiduciary fund accounting is similar to proprietary fund accounting. Fiduciary funds report the external portions of the private purpose trust funds. Notes to the Financial Statements provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the government -wide and fund financial statements. Other Required Supplementary Information (RSI) is presented in addition to the basic financial statements and accompanying notes. This required information includes the Schedule of Changes in Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios, Schedule of the Cost Sharing Plans' Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability, Schedule of Plan Contributions for Pension, Schedule of Funding Progress for Post Employment Health Care Benefits, and Budgetary Comparison Schedules for General Fund and major Special Revenue Funds. GOVERNMENT -WIDE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS As noted earlier, net position may serve as a useful indicator of a government's financial position. In the case of the City, assets and deferred outflows of resources exceeded liabilities and deferred inflows of resources by $114.7 million at the close of the current fiscal year. The following table is a condensed comparative analysis of the net position of governmental and business -type activities as of June 30, 2015 and June 30, 2014: Summary of Net Position As of June 30, 2015 and 2014 F-7 Governmental Activities Business -type Activities Total 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 Assets: Current and other assets $ 68,142,829 $ 59,405,500 $ 21,855,885 $ 25,220,303 $ 89,998,714 $ 84,625,803 Capital assets, net 74,208,781 70,356,289 49,544,009 45,439,641 123,752,790 115,795,930 Total assets 142,351,610 129,761,789 71,399,894 70,659,944 213,751,504 200,421,733 Deferred outflows of resources: Pension items 4,295,181 - 508,951 - 4,804,132 - Liabilities: Current and other liabilities 18,282,310 15,952,114 2,401,273 3,908,975 20,683,583 19,861,089 Long-term liabilities 54,300,318 15,684,475 19,889,012 15,929,922 74,189,330 31,614,397 Total liabilities 72,582,628 31,636,589 22,290,285 19,838,897 94,872,913 51,475,486 Deferedinflows of resources: Pension items 7,973,896 - 1,032,882 - 9,006,778 - Net position: Net investment in capital assets 73,541,499 66,373,255 34,323,645 29,762,623 107,865,144 96,135,878 Restricted net position 39,964,837 32,362,423 - - 39,964,837 32,362,423 Unrestricted net position (47,416,069) (610,478) 14,262,033 21,058,424 (33,154,036) 20,447,946 Total net position $ 66,090,267 $ 98,125,200 $ 48,585,678 $ 50,821,047 $ 114,675,945 $ 148,946,247 F-7 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) Analysis of Statement of Net Position The City's total net position (government and business -type activities) decreased by $34.3 million, or 23.0% during the fiscal year. As described below, the City experienced a net decrease mainly due to changes in unrestricted net position resulting from a change in pension reporting. Net investment in Capital Assets is the largest portion of the City's net position. It is comprised of capital assets (i.e. land, building, roads, machinery and equipment) less the related outstanding long-term debt used to acquire those assets. The City uses these capital assets to provide services to citizens; as such, these assets are not available for future spending. Although the City's investment in its capital asset is reported net of related debt, the resources needed to repay this debt must be provided from other sources, since the capital assets themselves cannot be used to liquidate these liabilities. • The $11.7 million, or 12.2% increase in net investment in capital assets was due to the increase in capital assets by $8.0 million and the decrease of related long-term debt by $3.7 million. Restricted Net Position of $39.9 million represents resources that are subject to external restrictions on their use, or by enabling legislation. Due to the unique nature of funding sources, the City has significantly more restricted net position dollars than unrestricted net position dollars. Restricted net position is mainly comprised of amount restricted for housing development ($25.1 million or 63.6%), capital and street projects ($6.2 million or 15.6%), and redevelopment capital projects ($5.1 million or $13.0%) Restricted net position increased $7.6 million, or 23.5%. The increases were mainly due to the following: • Amount restricted for redevelopment capital projects increased by $5.2 million due to the receipt of funds from the Successor Agency to the City in accordance with the Excess Bond Proceeds Agreement. The funds are restricted for infrastructure projects within the Redevelopment Project Area, consistent with the bonds covenants. • Amount restricted for housing development increased by $1.6 million primarily due to the sale of housing successor agency properties. Unrestricted Net Position in the amount of ($33.2) million represents net position of the City that is not restricted for any project or purpose. The decrease of $53.5 million, or 262.1% was mainly related to the implementation of Statement No. 68 and 71 and at June 30, 2015, the City reported net pension liability, deferred inflows of resources for pension items, and deferred outflows of resources for pension items of $47.3 million, $9.0 million, and $4.8 million, respectively. Current Assets increased by $5.4 million, or 6.3% were mainly due to the receipt of $5.7 million from the Successor Agency in accordance with the Excess Bond Proceeds Agreement. Current and Other Liabilities increased by $0.8 million or 4.1 % were mainly due to the timing difference of payments on accounts payable. Long -Term Liabilities increased by $42.6 million or 134.7% were mainly due to the recording of net pension liability of $47.3 million offset by the decrease in net OPEB obligation of $0.8 million and retirement of long- term obligations during the year. Deferred Inflows of Resources and Deferred Outflows of Resources increases were due to the implementation of Statement Nos. 68 and 71. F-8 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) Analysis of Changes in Net Position The following table is a condensed comparative analysis of the changes in net position of governmental and business -type activities for fiscal years ended June 30, 2015 and 2014: Revenues: Program revenues: Charges for services Operating grants and contributions Capital grants and contributions Changes in Net Position For the Fiscal Years EadedJune 30, 2015 and2014 Governmental Activities Business -type Activities Total 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 $ 7,499,533 $ 5,472,817 $ 19,524,173 $ 20,437,744 $ 27,023,706 $ 25,910,561 General revenues: Property taxes Sales taxes Franchise taxes Othertaxes Grants/contributions not restricted to specific programs: 10,148,400 5,784,503 - - 10,148,400 5,784,503 13,065,771 13,745,990 - 270,063 13,065,771 14,016,053 3,564,329 3,875,521 - - 3,564,329 3,875,521 10,493,451 10,541,059 - - 10,493,451 10,541,059 2,068,761 1,981,803 - - 2,068,761 1,981,803 3,109,123 2,945,367 - - 3,109,123 2,945,367 Motor vehicle license fees 2,948,341 2,747,818 - - 2,948,341 2,747,818 Investment income 300,328 246,098 75,585 52,305 375,913 298,403 Other 133,236 1,296,275 - - 133,236 1,296,275 Total revenues 53,331,273 48,637,251 19,599,758 20,760,112 72,931,031 69,397,363 Expenses: General government Public safety Public works Parks and recreation Cultural arts center Interest on long-term debt Water Sewer Refuse collection Total expenses Increase in net position before transfers Transfers Change in net position Net position, beginning 10,648,148 9,202,607 - - 10,648,148 9,202,607 15,711,045 14,888,571 - - 15,711,045 14,888,571 4,115,427 2,840,825 - - 4,115,427 2,840,825 2,940,882 3,342,205 - - 2,940,882 3,342,205 774,542 648,630 - - 774,542 648,630 194,621 153,921 - - 194,621 153,921 - - 7,875,791 6,036,836 7,875,791 6,036,836 - - 13,037,337 11,963,155 13,037,337 11,963,155 - - 3,530 4,828 3,530 4,828 34,384,665 31,076,759 20,916,658 18,004,819 55,301,323 49,081,578 18,946,608 17,560,492 (1,316,900) 2,755,293 17,629,708 20,315,785 (4,275,417) (7,909,865) 4,275,417 7,909,865 - - 14,671,191 9,650,627 2,958,517 10,665,158 17,629,708 20,315,785 as previously reported 98,125,200 88,474,573 50,821,047 40,155,889 148,946,247 128,630,462 Restatements (46,706,124) - (5,193,886) - (51,900,010) - Net position, beginning of year, as restated 51,419,076 88,474,573 45,627,161 40,155,889 97,046,237 128,630,462 Net position, end of year $ 66,090,267 $ 98,125,200 $ 48,585,678 $ 50,821,047 $ 114,675,945 $ 148,946,247 F-9 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) Analysis of Governmental Activities Governmental Activities decreased the City's net position by $32.0 million to $66.1 million for the year ended June 30, 2015, accounting for 93.5% of the City's total decrease in net position. Governmental Activities operating revenues exceeded operating expenses plus transfers out by $14.7 million. The Governmental Activities' prior period adjustment of ($46.7) million, is primarily the result of the unfunded pension obligations. Revenues Total revenues for the City's Governmental Activities had an overall increase from the prior year of $4.7 million, or 9.7%, to $53.3 million. Revenues are divided into two categories: Program Revenues which derive from the program itself such as fees and charges or from outside the City's tax base, and General Revenues that are not program related such as taxes. Program Revenues had an overall increase of $5.7 million, or 22.8%, to $30.7 million from the prior year. • Charges for services increased $2.0 million, or 37.0%, to $7.5 million primarily due to an increase in developer reimbursements to the City of $0.7 million; and implementation of the cost allocation plan which reimburses the General Fund for services provided to proprietary funds of $0.9 million. • Operating grants and contributions increased $4.4 million, or 75.4%, to $10.1 million primarily due to a $4.5 million contribution made by the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (Tribe) in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City. • Capital grants and contributions decreased $0.7 million, or 4.9% primarily due to the completion of the Wilfred widening road project funded by the Tribe in the previous year offset by the receipt of donated capital assets of $2.4 million. General Revenues had an overall decrease of $1.0 million, or 4.3%, to $22.6 million. These revenues include general taxes which provided the City Council with the most discretionary spending ability. The decrease in general revenues were due primarily to the decrease of other revenues of $1.2 million. Expenses Expenses had an overall increase for Governmental Activities of $3.3 million, or 10.6%, to $34.4 million. As a service delivery entity, the City's' major cost component is salaries and benefits, amounting to 79% of the total City expenses. The increase in expenses is generally attributable to the following: • General Government increased by $1.4 million, or 15.7%, to $10.6 million primarily due to the Retiree Medical buyout of $2.3 million. Public Works increased by $1.3 million, or 44.9%, to $4.1 million primarily due to the loss of $1 million incurred for the disposal of capital assets during the year. F-10 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) Analysis of Business -Type Activities The net position of business -type activities decreased by $2.2 million, or 4.4%, to $48.6 million. • Continued water conservation measures reduced Operating Revenue by $0.9 million, or 4.5%, to $19.5 million. • Salaries and Benefits increased $0.6 million, or 23.5%, to $3.4 million mainly due to the Retiree Medical buyout of $0.5 million. • Other expenses increased $0.8 million to $0.8 million due to the implementation of the cost allocation plan which reimburses the General Fund for services provided. • Non-operating expenses increased by $1.0 million, primarily due to management's decision to write off $1.3 million of capital assets not meeting the City's capitalization policy. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE CITY'S FUND BALANCES As noted earlier, the City uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate compliance with finance -related legal requirements. Governmental Funds. The focus of the City's governmental funds is to provide information on near-term inflows, outflows and balances of spendable resources (modified accrual basis of accounting). Such information is useful in assessing the City's financing requirements. In particular, total fund balance less the nonspendable portion is a useful measure of a government's net resources available for spending at the end of the fiscal year. At June 30, 2015, the City's Governmental Funds reported total fund balances of $48.0 million, an increase of $5.9 million, or 14.2%, in comparison with the prior year's total ending fund balances. The components of total fund balance are as follows: • Nonspendable Fund Balance, $2.5 million, are amounts that are not spendable in form, or are legally or contractually required to be maintained intact, and are made up of prepaid items, advances to the successor agency trust fund; and certain assets held in the Performing Arts Endowment Permanent Fund. • Restricted Fund Balance, $38.5 million consists of amounts with constraints put on their use by creditors, grantors, contributors, laws, regulations, or enabling legislation. Examples of restrictions on funds are those for (1) purpose of fund (e.g., Sports Center Capital Facility Fund) or legislated amounts (e.g., State Gasoline Tax). • Assigned Fund Balance, $14.4 million is assigned in accordance with policy and budgetary directives. • Unassigned Fund Balance, ($7.2) million, represents the residual classification for the City's General Fund and the negative fund balances for other governmental funds. Approximately 94.9%, or $45.6 million of the total fund balances is spendable, which means it is available to meet the City's current and future needs. City Council or City management can earmark a portion of fund balance to a particular function, project or activity, and can also earmark it for purposes beyond the current year, within the constraints applied to the various categories of fund balance.. With the exception of the nonspendable portion, fund balances are available for appropriation at any time. F-11 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) General Fund The General Fund is the main operating fund of the City. The General Fund's total fund balance increased by $1.6 million, or 12.7%, to $14.2 million at June 30, 2015. The spendable portion of fund balance increased by $2.1 million to $12.2 million, of which $0.5 million is due to unanticipated revenues. The nonspendable portion of fund balance decreased $0.5 million, to $2.0 million, due to a $0.5 million repayment on the advance to the Successor Agency. As a measure of the General Fund's liquidity, it is useful to compare both total fund balance and spendable fund balance to total fund expenditures. Total fund balance equates to 45.9% of total General Fund expenditures while spendable fund balance equates to 39.5% of total General Fund expenditures. Of the General Fund spendable fund balance, $0.2 million, or 1.4%, is restricted; $12.0 million, or 98.3% is assigned; and $0.03 million, or $0.3%, is unassigned. Other Major Governmental Funds The total fund balances of the other Major Governmental Funds increased by $4.9 million, or 25.9%, to $23.8 million with the following significant changes: • The Housing Projects Special Revenue Fund increased fund balance in the amount of $1.5 million, to $24.0 million, primarily due to the sale of four (4) residential real estate parcels and receipt of proceeds of $1.4 million. • The Financing Authority Debt Service Fund decreased fund balance in the amount of $0.4 million, to $0.04 million, due to the timing of debt service payments. • The City Capital Projects Fund increased fund balance by $6.1 million, to $5.8 million, primarily due to the transfer in of $5.7 million of 2007R Redevelopment capital projects bond proceeds from the Successor Agency. • The Public Facility Finance Fee Special Revenue Fund decreased fund balance by $2.5 million, to ($7.3) million, as capital projects funding in the amount of $5.9 million were transferred out. • The Graton Mitigation Supplemental Special Revenue Fund increased fund balance by $0.07 million, to $1.3 million, mainly due to the timing of planned transfers out to other funds. Nonmajor Governmental Funds The total fund balances of Nonmajor Governmental Funds decreased by $0.5 million to $10.0 million. The significant changes occurred in the following funds: • The State Gasoline Tax Special Revenue Fund decreased by $0.5 million to $1.7 million due to timing difference between revenues and funding of capital projects. • The Graton Mitigation Development Fee Fund decreased by $1.2 million due to the reimbursement to the General Fund to mitigate impacts of the casino. F-12 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) Proprietary Funds The City's proprietary funds provide the same type of information found in the Government -wide Financial Statements, but in more detail. Total Enterprise Fund net position, which at year-end was comprised of the Water Fund, the Sewer Fund, the Recycled Water Fund and the Refuse Collection Fund, decreased by $2.2 million, or 4.4% from the prior year. This decrease in net position is the result of the prior period adjustment for pension of $5.2 million offset by the increase from operations of $3.0 million due to water conservation measures, salary and benefit and other non-operating expense changes that are more fully described previously, in the Government -wide Analysis. • Total Internal Service Fund net position decreased by $0.3 million, or 105.6%, to $0.02 million. This decrease in net position is the result of the prior period adjustment for pension of $0.6 million offset by the increase from operations of $0.3 million. Fiduciary funds The City's fiduciary funds net positions decreased by $4.1 million, or 16.1%, to ($30.0) million. • The Assets Seizure Fund decreased by $0.1 million to $0.01 million due to requests for funds by the Sonoma County District Attorney's Office. • The Redevelopment Successor Agency decreased by $4.0 million to ($30.0) million. This decrease was primarily due to the intergovernmental transfer of $5.7 million of 2007R Redevelopment capital projects bond proceeds to the City Capital Project Fund. The negative net position is due to long- term bonds debt. GENERAL FUND BUDGETARY HIGHLIGHTS The City's final budget appropriations for expenditures for the General Fund differ from the original budget by $5.4 million or 17.6%. The major changes in appropriations are as follows: • Nondepartmental employee benefits appropriations increased $3.4 million primarily due to the retiree medical buyout and the increase in Other Post -Employment Benefit (OPEB) contributions. • General government nondepartmental appropriations increased by $1.0 million to early retirement of the 1999 Certificates of Participation. • Development Services appropriations increased by $0.9 million due to an increase in reimbursable developer activities. Revenues: General Fund revenues were $1.6 million more than Final Budget revenue estimates. The main reasons are as follows: Transient Occupancy Tax outperformed revenue estimates by $0.4 million or 14.6% due to an increase in tourism. • Property and Franchise Tax outperformed revenue estimates by $0.2 or 5.3% due to an increase in property values. F-13 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) • Implementation of a Cost Allocation Plan (CAP) which reimburses the General Fund for services provided to proprietary funds increased unanticipated revenues by $0.9 million. Expenditures: The variance between the final budget and actual expenditures resulted in $4.7 million of unspent appropriations. Key variances are due to unfilled and vacant positions, and tight controls on materials, supplies and equipment spending. Capital Assets CAPITAL ASSETS AND DEBT Governmental activities Business -type activities 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 Land $ 7,029,287 $ 6,906,156 $ - $ - Construction in progress 4,384,494 4,480,480 4,405,679 12,996,488 Infrastructure, structures and improvements 128,573,366 125,049,591 64,546,795 52,668,346 Equipment 11,585,093 14,079,946 4,014,480 3,668,701 Accumulated depreciation (77,363,459) (80,159,884) (23,422,945) (23,839,894) Total Percent of 2014 Change $ 7,029,287 $ 6,906,156 1.8% 8,790,173 17,476,968 -49.7% 193,120,161 177,717,937 8.7% 15,599,573 17,748,647 -12.1% (100,786,404) (103,999,778) -3.1% Total $ 74,208,781 $ 70,356,289 $ 49,544,009 $ 45,493,641 $ 123,752,790 $115,849,930 6.8% During the fiscal year, the City's investment in capital assets increased by approximately $7.9 million, or 6.8%, to $123.8 million (net of accumulated depreciation). This investment is in a broad range of capital assets including land, and improvements, structures and improvements, equipment, vehicles and infrastructure. The City both purchases and constructs capital assets throughout the year. When a capital project will be completed in a subsequent fiscal year, related expenditures are recorded as Construction in Progress (CIP). In the year of completion, CIP is reclassified to the appropriate capital asset classification(s). In the current fiscal year, CIP decreased by $0.1 million for governmental activities and decreased $8.7 million for business -type activities. During the year, the City completed and capitalized projects costing approximately $18.0 million, of which $8.8 million was already in CIP at June 30, 2014. Some of the major projects completed were as follows: • General government — Wilfred Widening ($1.2 million); Public Safety Roof Replacement ($1.1 million) 0 Water Fund —Adrian Drive Water Rehab Project ($2.2 million) • Sewer Fund - Eastside Truck Sewer Project Phase II ($9.5 million); Adrian Sewer Rehab ($2.7 million) During the year, the City capitalized $0.8 million in new equipment purchases, and retired $2.9 million in equipment (and related accumulated depreciation) that did not meet the City's capitalization policy. Additional information about the City's capital assets can be found in Note 6 to the financial statements.. F-14 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) Debt Administration Long -Term Liabilities As of June 30, 2015 and 2014 Governmental activities Business -type activities Total Percent of 2015 2014 2015 2014 2015 2014 Change Certificates of participation $ - $ 2,895,000 $ 10,610,000 $ 10,915,000 $ 10,610,000 $ 13,810,000 -23.2% Lease revenue refunding bonds 417,500 446,500 - - 417,500 446,500 -6.5% Water revenue bonds - - 4,625,000 4,890,000 4,625,000 4,890,000 -5.4% Bond premium/discount - - - 124,922 - 124,922 -100.0% Capital leases - 514,494 - - 514,494 -100.0% Loan payable 249,782 127,040 - - 249,782 127,040 96.6% Total $ 667,282 $ 3,983,034 $ 15,235,000 $ 15,929,922 $ 15,902,282 $ 19,912,956 -20.1% At June 30, 2015, the City's governmental activities had total outstanding long-term debt of $0.7 million. The balance was comprised of $0.4 million of lease revenue refunding bonds issued by the Rohnert Park Financing Authority (the Authority), and secured by the base rental payments to be made by the City under the lease between the City and the Authority; and $0.3 million of loans payable. Governmental activities long-term debt decreased by $3.3 million during the year as $2.9 million of certificates of participation, $0.5 million of capital leases, and $0.1 million of loans payable were fully repaid, offset by an additional loan of $0.2 million incurred during the year. At June 30, 2015, the City's business -type activities had total outstanding long term debt of $15.2 million, comprised of $10.6 million of sewer system revenue certificates of participation issued by the Authority and secured by an irrevocable pledge of sewer net revenues; and $4.6 million of water revenue bonds secured by an irrevocable pledge of water net revenues. The City's Ordinance imposes a limit on the amount of general obligation bonds the City can have outstanding at any given time. As of June 30, 2015, the City's debt limit (15.0% of assessed valuation) was $604.2 million. At June 30, 2015, the City did not have any debt applicable to the limit outstanding. Additional information about the City's long-term obligations can be found in Note 7 to the financial statements. ECONOMIC FACTORS AND NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET ANALYSIS The following factors were considered in preparing the City's operating budget for FY 2015-16: • In general, property taxes were projected to increase between 0.3% - 2.2%, however due to the uncertainty surrounding the Redevelopment property tax residual distributions, the FY 15-16 Budget projection was estimated at 8.0% lower than the FY 14-15 estimated collections at the time the budget was prepared. • Transient Occupancy taxes were projected to increase 11.5% compared to the FY 14-15 Budget to align budget projections to actual collections. F-15 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Unaudited) • Retail Sales tax was projected to increase 3.0% based on economic forecasts by our Sales Tax consultant. Total Governmental Fund budgeted revenues showed an increase of 17.0%, or $8.6 million comparing FY 15- 16 budget to FY 14-15 actual revenues. This budgeted increase is primarily due to a $6.1 million increase in revenue from planned new development activity; the first year of the two-year, non-recurring, Casino Public Safety Building funding of $1.9 million, and the increase in the Casino Recurring Public Service contribution of $0.6 million. The budget appropriations for total Governmental Fund expenditures for FY 15-16 increased by $12.5 million, or 30.0% when compared to FY 14-15 actuals. The FY 15-16 budget includes: • The addition of a Public Safety Community Oriented Policing (COPS) unit dedicated to fighting crime and consisting of three (3) officers and one (1) crime analyst. This new unit will target drugs, gangs, prostitution, transient issues, and parolee/probation issue related to the State's release of many prisoners. The funding source of this unit is casino mitigation. • The addition of one (1) accountant position in finance, funded from the special revenue funds and cost allocation plan revenue. • The conversion of nine (9) part-time positions to five (5) full time positions in various departments. • The addition of one (1) full time Environmental Compliance Specialist position in Public Works. • The addition of one (1) Community Services Coordinator at the Senior Center. • The addition of one (1) part time position in Development Services, and one (1) part time position in Economic Development. • The addition of one (1) full time position in the Cultural Arts Center. • A moderate increase for salary COLA's and employee benefits. • A $4.4 million, or 230.0%, increase in public facility construction projects funded by the anticipated increase in Public Facility Financing Plan Fee revenues. For the second consecutive year, the City adopted a balanced budget, however unfunded liabilities continue to present significant challenges to long-term financial solvency and service level solvency. The City's FY 15-16 budget which includes the Five Year Capital Improvement Program budget can be found at http://www.ci.rohnert-park.ca.us/index.aspx?page=118. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION This financial report is designed to provide a general overview of the City's finances for all interested parties. Questions concerning any of the information provided in this report or requests for additional information should be addressed to the City of Rohnert Park Finance Director, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA 94928. The City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report can also be found on the City's website at http://www.ci.rohnert-park.ca.us/index.aspx?page=119. F-16 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Program Revenues FUNCTION/PROGRAM ACTIVITIES: Primary government: Governmental activities: General government Public safety Public works Parks and recreation Cultural arts center Interest on long-term debt Total governmental activities Business -type activities: Water Sewer Refuse Collection Total business -type activities Total primary govennneni Expenses Operating Capital Charges for Grants and Grants and Services Contributions Contributions $ 10,648,148 $ 2,740,546 $ 6,594,289 $ 1,510,040 15,711,045 1,102,207 1,310,847 - 4,115,427 2,015,070 2,243,264 11,555,731 2,940,882 1,297,774 - - 774,542 343,936 194,621 - - - 34,384,665 7,499,533 10,148,400 13,065,771 7,875,791 6,307,513 - - 13,037,337 13,216,660 3,530 20,916,658 19,524,173 - $ 55,301,323 $ 27,023,706 $ 10,148,400 $ 13,065,771 General revenues: Property taxes Intergovernmental - Sales taxes Franchise taxes Transient occupancy taxes Real property transfer taxes Grants/contributions not restricted to specific programs: Motor vehicle license fees Investment income Other Transfers Total general revenues and transfers Change in net position NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, AS PREVIOUSLY REPORTED CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, AS RESTATED NET POSITION, END OF YEAR See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-18 Net (Expense) Revenue and Changes in Net Position Primary Government Business - Governmental type Activities Activities Total $ 196,727 $ $ 196,727 (13,297,991) (13,297,991) 11,698,638 11,698,638 (1,643,108) (1,643,108) (430,606) (430,606) (194,621) (194,621) (3,670,961) (3,670,961) FUNCTION/PROGRAM ACTIVITIES: Primary government: Governmental activities: General government Public safety Public works Parks and recreation Cultural arts center Interest on long-term debt Total governmental activities Business -type activities: Water Sewer Refuse Collection Total business -type activities Total primary govennnem General revenues: Property taxes Intergovernmental - Sales taxes Franchise taxes Transient occupancy taxes Real property transfer taxes Grants/contributions not restricted to specific programs: Motor vehicle license fees Investment income Other Transfers Total general revenues and transfers Change in net position NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, AS PREVIOUSLY REPORTED CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, AS RESTATED NET POSITION, END OF YEAR See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-19 (1,568,278) (1,568,278) 179,323 179,323 (3,530) (3,530) (1,392,485) (1,392,485) (3,670,961) (1,392,485) (5,063,446) 3,564,329 3,564,329 10,493,451 10,493,451 2,068,761 2,068,761 2,980,129 2,980,129 128,994 128,994 2,948,341 - 2,948,341 300,328 75,585 375,913 133,236 - 133,236 (4,275,417) 4,275,417 - 18,342,152 4,351,002 22,693,154 14,671,191 2,958,517 17,629,708 98,125,200 50,821,047 148,946,247 (46,706,124) (5,193,886) (51,900,010) 51,419,076 45,627,161 97,046,237 $ 66,090,267 $ 48,585,678 $ 114,675,945 FUNCTION/PROGRAM ACTIVITIES: Primary government: Governmental activities: General government Public safety Public works Parks and recreation Cultural arts center Interest on long-term debt Total governmental activities Business -type activities: Water Sewer Refuse Collection Total business -type activities Total primary govennnem General revenues: Property taxes Intergovernmental - Sales taxes Franchise taxes Transient occupancy taxes Real property transfer taxes Grants/contributions not restricted to specific programs: Motor vehicle license fees Investment income Other Transfers Total general revenues and transfers Change in net position NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, AS PREVIOUSLY REPORTED CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, AS RESTATED NET POSITION, END OF YEAR See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-19 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BALANCESHEET GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS JUNE 30, 2015 ASSETS Cash and investments Receivables: Taxes Accounts Accrued interest Intergovernmental Due from other funds Prepaid items and other assets Restricted cash and investments Loans and notes receivable, net of allowance Advances to the successor agency trust fund Total assets LIABILITIES Accounts payable Accrued liabilities Due to other funds Deposits Unearned revenue Advances from the successor agency trust fund Total liabilities DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unavailable revenues FUND BALANCES (DEFICITS) Nonspendable Restricted Assigned Unassigned Total fund balances (deficits) Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resouces and fund balances (deficits) $ 1,302,940 $ 1,961,994 738,670 225,111 288,500 4,517,215 24,951 $ $ 2,479,342 46,596 24,951 2,525,938 189,428 1,007,527 1,970,598 - - - 172,998 23,994,290 40,099 5,759,439 12,042,682 - - - 33,588 14,219,866 Housing Financing City $ 18,926,509 $ Projects Authority Capital General Special Revenue Debt Service Projects $ 13,958,899 $ 1,652,427 $ $ 3,044,353 2,050,656 - - 703,525 - 14,947 550 2,761 25,944 - 74,581 167,960 - 171,028 - - - 13,758,942 40,099 5,163,682 33,980 9,614,849 - - 1,799,570 - - - $ 18,926,509 $ 25,026,768 $ 40,099 $ 8,285,377 $ 1,302,940 $ 1,961,994 738,670 225,111 288,500 4,517,215 24,951 $ $ 2,479,342 46,596 24,951 2,525,938 189,428 1,007,527 1,970,598 - - - 172,998 23,994,290 40,099 5,759,439 12,042,682 - - - 33,588 14,219,866 23,994,290 40,099 5,759,439 $ 18,926,509 $ 25,026,768 $ 40,099 $ 8,285,377 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-20 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-21 Public Graton Facility Mitigation Other Finance Fee Supplemental Governmental Special Revenue Special Revenue Funds Total ASSETS $ 4,989,647 $ 1,316,423 $ 9,708,593 $ 34,670,342 Cash and investments Receivables: - - 16,022 2,066,678 Taxes - - 198,043 901,568 Accounts 4,194 1,967 9,463 33,882 Accrued interest - - 145,929 246,454 Intergovernmental - - 17,338 185,298 Due from other funds - - - 171,028 Prepaid items and other assets - - - 18,962,723 Restricted cash and investments - - 9,648,829 Loans and notes receivable, net of allowance - - - 1,799,570 Advances to the successor agency trust fund $ 4,993,841 $ 1,318,390 $ 10,095,388 $ 68,686,372 Total assets LIABILITIES $ 973,619 $ $ 89,536 $ 4,870,388 Accounts payable - - 1,961,994 Accrued liabilities 1,222,382 18,228 1,240,610 Due to other funds - - - 785,266 Deposits - 225,111 Unearned revenue 10,055,725 - 10,344,225 Advances from the successor agency trust fund 12,251,726 107,764 19,427,594 Total liabilities DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES - - 1,196,955 Unavailable revenues FUND BALANCES (DEFICITS) - - 500,000 2,470,598 Nonspendable 8,500,642 38,467,468 Restricted 1,318,390 1,004,320 14,365,392 Assigned (7,257,885) - (17,338) (7,241,635) Unassigned (7,257,885) 1,318,390 9,987,624 48,061,823 Total fund balances (deficits) Total liabilities, deferred inflows of resouces $ 4,993,841 $ 1,318,390 $ 10,095,388 $ 68,686,372 and fund balances (deficits) See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-21 This page is left intentionally blank. F-22 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK RECONCILIATION OF THE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS BALANCE SHEET TO THE GOVERNMENT WIDE STATEMENT OF NET POSITION - GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES JUNE 30, 2015 Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of net position are different because: Fund balances - total governmental funds Capital assets net of depreciation, used in governmental activities are not financial resources and, therefore, are not reported in the funds. Internal service funds are used to charge the costs of management of centralized data processing services, vehicle replacement, and fleet management and related billings to other City departments and individual funds. The assets and liabilities are included in governmental activities in the statement of net position. Long-term receivables and interest on loans are not available to pay for current period expenditures and, therefore, are considered unavailable on the modified accrual basis of accounting. Interest payable on long -tern debt does not require the use of current financial resources and, therefore, interest payable is not accrued as a liability in the balance sheet of governmental funds. Deferred outflows and inflows of resources for pension items in governmental activities are not financial resources and, therefore, are not reported in the governmental funds. Deferred outflows of resources Deferred inflows of resources Long-term liabilities, including bonds payable, are not due and payable in the current period and therefore are not reported in the governmental funds. Net OPEB obligation Net pension liability Lease revenue refunding bonds Loans payable Compensated absences Net position of governmental activities $ 48,061,823 74,208,781 (15,565) 1,196,955 (10,158) 4,232,041 (7,845,757) $ (9,501,000) (42,213, 820) (417,500) (249,782) (1,355,751) (53,737,853) See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-23 $ 66,090,267 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30.2015 REVENUES Taxes Intergovernmental - Sales taxes Intergovernmental Intergovernmental transfer from successor agency trust fund Interest and rentals Charges for current services Licenses, permits and fees Fines, forfeitures and penalties Donations and miscellaneous Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: General government Public safety Public works Parks and recreation Cultural arts center Capital outlay Debt service: Principal Interest and fiscal charges Total expenditures EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER(UNDER)EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Proceeds from the sale of capital assets Issuance of loans Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES FUND BALANCES (DEFICITS), BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCES (DEFICITS), END OF YEAR Housing Projects General Special Revenue $ 8,742,213 $ 10,493,451 3,580,789 800,259 36,558 3,894,746 - 1,509,781 42,173 - 20,112 127,596 29,083,524 164,154 10,019,250 212,675 14,941,875 - 1,273,308 2,660,915 770,138 645,132 Financing City Authority Capital Debt Service Projects 194,393 - 5,695,287 3 9,414 1,315,647 3 7,214,741 5,690,424 641,534 2,924,000 40,875 222,431 - 30,993,027 212,675 3,146,431 5,690,424 (1,909,503) (48,521) (3,146,428) 1,524,317 - 1,442,823 249,782 - - - 8,224,465 59,701 2,870,403 4,606,274 (4,967,112) - (14,909) 1,597,632 1,454,003 (276,025) 6,115,682 12,622,234 22,540,287 316,124 (356,243) $ 14,219,866 $ 23,994,290 $ 40,099 $ 5,759,439 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-24 Public Graton Facility Mitigation Other Finance Fee Supplemental Governmental Special Revenue Special Revenue Funds Total REVENUES $ $ $ 563,029 $ 9,305,242 Taxes - 10,493,451 Intergovernmental - Sales taxes - 2,011,581 5,786,763 Intergovernmental - 5,695,287 Intergovernmental transfer from successor agency trust fund 19,789 9,647 47,647 923,317 Interest and rentals - - 182,018 4,076,764 Charges for current services 3,401,650 828,532 5,739,963 Licenses, permits and fees - - 134,317 176,490 Fines, forfeitures and penalties 1,288 4,545,204 2,638,017 8,647,864 Donations and miscellaneous 3,422,727 4,554,851 6,405,141 50,845,141 Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: - - 570,537 10,802,462 General government - 700,888 15,642,763 Public safety 7,605 633,912 1,914,825 Public works - - 2,660,915 Parks and recreation 17,030 787,168 Cultural arts center - 6,335,556 Capital outlay Debt service: - 3,565,534 Principal 3,280 - 266,586 Interest and fiscal charges 10,885 - 1,922,367 41,975,809 Total expenditures EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES 3,411,842 4,554,851 4,482,774 8,869,332 OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) - - - 1,442,823 Proceeds from the sale of capital assets - 249,782 Issuance of loans 14,909 15,775,752 Transfers in (5,865,867) (4,486,749) (5,014,712) (20,349,349) Transfers out (5,865,867) (4,486,749) (4,999,803) (2,880,992) Total other financing sources (uses) (2,454,025) 68,102 (517,029) 5,988,340 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES FUND BALANCES (DEFICITS), (4,803,860) 1,250,288 10,504,653 42,073,483 BEGINNING OF YEAR $ (7,257,885) $ 1,318,390 $ 9,987,624 $ 48,061,823 FUND BALANCES (DEFICITS), END OF YEAR See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-25 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK RECONCILIATION OF THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES OF GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS TO THE GOVERNMENT -WIDE STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES - GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Amounts reported for governmental activities in the statement of activities are different because: Net change in fund balances - total governmental funds $ 5,988,340 Governmental funds report capital outlay as expenditures. However, in the statement of activities, the cost of those assets is allocated over their estimated useful lives and reported as depreciation expense. Capital assets additions $ 5,213,013 Donated assets received 2,420,598 Capital assets retirements (2,529,755) Depreciation (1,251,364) 3,852,492 Revenues recognized in the governmental funds that were earned and recognize 29,000 in previous years are reported as beginning net position in the statement of 514,494 activities. Revenues earned in the current year that did not meet the revenue 127,040 3,565,534 recognition criteria for governmental funds are reported as revenues in the statement of activities. 11,933 Pension contribution made subsequent to the measurement date is an expenditure in the governmental funds, but reported as a deferred outflows of resources in the government -wide financial statements. 3,879,343 Pension expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of current financial resources and, therefore, are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds. (3,645,105) The issuance of long-term debt provides current financial resources to governmental funds, while the repayment of the principal of long-term debt consumes the current financial resources of governmental funds. Neither transaction, however, has any effect on net position. Issuance of loans (249,782) Principal repayments: Certificates of participation $ 2,895,000 Lease revenue refunding bonds 29,000 Capital leases 514,494 Loan payable 127,040 3,565,534 Some expenses reported in the statement of activities do not require the use of current financial resources and therefore are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds. Change in net OPEB obligation $ 795,000 Change in accrued interest payable 71,965 Change in compensated absences 49,690 916,655 Internal service funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain activities to individual funds. The net revenue of the internal service funds is reported with governmental activities. 351,781 Change in net position of governmental activities $ 14,671,191 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-26 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK STATEMENT OF FUND NET POSITION PROPRIETARY FUNDS JUNE 30, 2015 See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-27 Governmental Business -type Activities - Enterprise Funds Activities Major Other Enterprise Internal Water Sewer Funds Total Service ASSETS Current assets: Cash and investments $ 5,568,027 $ 11,412,336 $ 709,440 $ 17,689,803 $ 704,407 Receivables: Accounts 963,389 1,969,813 5,097 2,938,299 15,253 Accrued interest 5,057 9,041 613 14,711 367 Due from other funds - 1,222,382 - 1,222,382 - Restricted cash and investments 134,800 - - 134,800 - Total current assets 6,671,273 14,613,572 715,150 21,999,995 720,027 Noncurrent assets: Capital assets: Nondepreciable assets 2,565,373 1,811,167 29,139 4,405,679 - Depreciable assets, net 8,800,653 36,337,677 - 45,138,330 Total noncurrent assets 11,366,026 38,148,844 29,139 49,544,009 - Total assets 18,037,299 52,762,416 744,289 71,544,004 720,027 DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES Pension items 295,001 213,950 - 508,951 63,140 LIABILITIES Current liabilities: Accounts payable 937,958 469,588 23,885 1,431,431 85,168 Accrued liabilities 10,406 2,816 - 13,222 - Interest payable 50,092 41,679 91,771 - Due to other funds 84,736 59,374 144,110 22,960 Deposits 281,658 583,191 864,849 - Bonds payable 272,146 322,612 - 594,758 - Total current liabilities 1,636,996 1,479,260 23,885 3,140,141 108,128 Noncurrent liabilities: Net pension liability 2,627,933 1,905,915 - 4,533,848 562,465 Bonds payable 4,313,806 10,446,600 - 14,760,406 - Total liabilities 8,578,735 13,831,775 23,885 22,434,395 670,593 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Pension items 598,684 434,198 - 1,032,882 128,139 NET POSITION Net investment in capital assets 6,914,874 27,379,632 29,139 34,323,645 - Unrestricted 2,240,007 11,330,761 691,265 14,262,033 (15,565) Total net position $ 9,154,881 $ 38,710,393 $ 720,404 $ 48,585,678 $ (15,565) See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-27 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN NET POSITION PROPRIETARY FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Governmental Business -type Activities - Enterprise Funds Activity Major Other Enterprise Internal OPERATING REVENUES: 11,692,274 38,436,897 691,876 50,821,047 277,004 CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES Utility service charges $ 6,045,328 $ 13,193,635 $ - $ 19,238,963 $ Charges for services - - AS RESTATED - 1,245,212 Penalties and other 262,185 23,025 $ 9,154,881 285,210 36,834 Total operating revenues 6,307,513 13,216,660 19,524,173 1,282,046 OPERATING EXPENSES: Purchase of water 2,198,233 - 2,198,233 Wastewater treatment - 8,824,722 8,824,722 - Contractual services 291,835 223,318 - 515,153 63,416 Rent and leases 5,758 3,409 9,167 62,781 Payroll and related costs 1,989,567 1,447,883 3,437,450 480,027 Heat, light and power 273,456 70,852 - 344,308 - Other 230,561 584,486 3,530 818,577 114,705 Repairs, operations and maintenance 359,747 231,928 - 591,675 492,973 Professional services 262,183 12,090 274,273 - Supplies 138,380 61,290 199,670 16,121 Depreciation 799,648 1,072,608 - 1,872,256 - Total operating expenses 6,549,368 12,532,586 3,530 19,085,484 1,230,023 OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) (241,855) 684,074 (3,530) 438,689 52,023 NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES) Investment income 24,686 47,980 2,919 75,585 1,578 Interest expense (205,628) (502,958) - (708,586) - Loss on retirement of capital assets (1,120,795) (1,793) - (1,122,588) Total nonoperating revenues (expenses) (1,301,737) (456,771) 2,919 (1,755,589) 1,578 INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE TRANSFERS (1,543,592) 227,303 (611) (1,316,900) 53,601 Transfers in 3,592,410 3,920,315 29,139 7,541,864 309,180 Transfers out (1,575,704) (1,690,743) - (3,266,447) (11,000) CHANGE IN NET POSITION 473,114 2,456,875 28,528 2,958,517 351,781 NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, AS PREVIOUSLY REPORTED 11,692,274 38,436,897 691,876 50,821,047 277,004 CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES (3,010,507) (2,183,379) - (5,193,886) (644,350) NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, AS RESTATED 8,681,767 36,253,518 691,876 45,627,161 (367,346) NET POSITION, END OF YEAR $ 9,154,881 $ 38,710,393 $ 720,404 $ 48,585,678 $ (15,565) See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-28 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS PROPRIETARY FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Cash receipts from customers Cash receipts from interfund services provided Cash paid to suppliers for goods and services Cash paid to employees for services Net cash provided by operating activities CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Transfers in Transfers out Received from other funds Net cash provided by noncapital financing activities CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Payment on capital debt Interest paid on capital debt Acquisition of capital assets Net cash used in capital and related financing activities CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Interest received NET CHANGE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF YEAR CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF YEAR CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS: Cash and investments Restricted cash and investments Governmental Business -type Activities - Enterprise Funds Activity Major Other Enterprise Internal Water Sewer Funds Total Service $ 6,399,547 $ 13,024,625 $ 3,699 $ 19,427,871 $ - - - - 1,266,793 (3,460,334) (11,439,076) (3,530) (14,902,940) (736,867) (2,133,671) (1,552,436) - (3,686,107) (496,913) 805,542 33,113 169 838,824 33,013 3,592,410 2,664,225 53,024 6,309,659 309,180 (319,614) (1,690,743) - (2,010,357) (11,000) 20,607 120,223 140,830 22,960 3,293,403 1,093,705 53,024 4,440,132 321,140 (265,000) (305,000) (570,000) (205,179) (511,517) (716,696) (4,658,085) (2,357,988) (29,139) (7,045,212) - (5,128,264) (3,174,505) (29,139) (8,331,908) - 22,652 43,956 2,654 69,262 1,389 (1,006,667) (2,003,731) 26,708 (2,983,690) 355,542 6,709,494 13,416,067 682,732 20,808,293 348,865 $ 5,702,827 $ 11,412,336 $ 709,440 $ 17,824,603 $ 704,407 $ 5,568,027 $ 11,412,336 $ 709,440 $ 17,689,803 $ 704,407 134,800 - - 134,800 - $ 5,702,827 $ 11,412,336 $ 709,440 $ 17,824,603 $ 704,407 RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) TO NET CASH PROVIDED BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES Operating income (loss) $ (241,855) $ 684,074 $ (3,530) $ 438,689 $ 52,023 Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities: Depreciation 799,648 1,072,608 - 1,872,256 - Changes in assets and liabilities: Decrease in accounts receivable 77,012 108,129 3,699 188,840 Dcrease in prepaid expenses 1,352 2,029 - 3,381 - Increase (decrease)in accounts payable 298,467 (1,429,010) (1,130,543) 15,853 Decrease in accrued liabilities (65,213) (47,337) (112,550) (17,977) Increase (decrease) in deposits 15,022 (300,164) (285,142) Decrease (increase) in deferred outflows of resources - pension (54,528) (39,547) (94,075) (11,672) Increase (decrease) in deferred inflows of resources - pension items 598,684 434,198 1,032,882 128,139 Increase (decrease) in net pension liability (623,047) (451,867) - (1,074,914) (133,353) Net cash provided by operating activities $ 805,542 $ 33,113 $ 169 $ 838,824 $ 33,013 SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF NONCASH CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Transfer of capital assets between enterprise funds $ (1,256,090) $ 1,256,090 $ - $ - $ - See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-29 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK STATEMENT OF FIDUCIARY NET POSITION FIDUCIARY FUNDS JUNE 30, 2015 NET POSITION Restricted $ (30,030,532) See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-30 Total Private Purpose Trust Funds ASSETS Cash and investments $ 3,403,368 Receivables - accrued interest 1,414 Restricted cash & investments 3,632,024 Advances to other City funds 10,344,225 Capital assets: Nondepreciable assets 4,934,146 Depreciable assets, net 13,264,868 Total assets 35,580,045 DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unamortized loss on refunding 21,298 LIABILITIES Accounts payable 924,650 Interest payable 864,834 Advances from other City funds 1,799,570 Long-term debt: Due in one year 2,525,311 Due in more than one year 59,517,510 Total liabilities 65,631,875 NET POSITION Restricted $ (30,030,532) See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-30 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FIDUCIARY NET POSITION FIDUCIARY FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 CHANGE IN NET POSITION (4,159,273) NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR (25,871,259) NET POSITION, END OF YEAR $ (30,030,532) See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-31 Total Private Purpose Trust Funds ADDITIONS Taxes $ 5,146,489 Interest and rentals 4,167 Donations 5,555 Total additions 5,156,211 DEDUCTIONS Current: Redevelopment expenses 309,182 Intergovernmental transfer of bond proceeds to the City's Capital Project Fund 5,695,287 Law enforcement costs 135,162 Depreciation 286,437 Interest and fiscal charges 2,889,416 Total deductions 9,315,484 CHANGE IN NET POSITION (4,159,273) NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR (25,871,259) NET POSITION, END OF YEAR $ (30,030,532) See accompanying notes to the basic financial statements. F-31 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES The basic financial statements of the City of Rohnert Park, California (City) have been prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) as applied to governmental entities. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is the accepted standard setting body for establishing governmental accounting and financial reporting principles. The more significant of the City's accounting policies are described below. A. Reporting Entity The City was incorporated on August 28, 1962. The City has a council-manager form of government and provides a wide range of municipal services. Component units are legally separate organizations for which the City is financially accountable or other organizations whose nature and significant relationship with the City are such that exclusion would cause the City's financial statements to be misleading or incomplete. As required by GAAP, these basic financial statements present the City and its component units. The City's component units, which are described below, are either blended or fiduciary in nature. Rohnert Park Financing Authority (Financing Authority) - The Financing Authority is a joint powers authority, organized pursuant to a joint exercise of powers agreement dated January 1, 1999 between the City and the Former Community Development Commission of the City of Rohnert Park (Commission). The Financing Authority was formed for the public purpose of assisting in financing activities for the benefit of the City and the Commission. The Financing Authority's governing board is the same as the City Council and a financial burden relationship exist between the City and the Financing Authority as long-term liabilities outstanding are expected to be repaid with resources of the City. The Authority's transactions are blended into the City's basic financial statements. Successor Agency to the Community Development Commission of the City of Rohnert Park (Successor Agency) — A separate governmental entity established on February 1, 2012 for the purpose of serving as a custodian of the assets of the Commission and winding down the Commission's activities subject to the direction of a seven - member Oversight Board. Based upon the nature of the City's custodial role for the Successor Agency, the Successor Agency is reported as a private purpose trust fund of the City. Separate financial statements are not issued for the Successor Agency. Information of the Successor Agency can be found in the fiduciary fund financial statements. B. Basis of Presentation Government -wide Financial Statements The statement of net position and statement of activities display information about the primary government and its component unit. These statements include the financial activities of the overall government, except for fiduciary activities. Eliminations have been made to minimize the double counting of internal activities. These statements distinguish between the governmental and business -type activities of the City. Governmental activities, which normally are supported by taxes and inter -governmental revenues, are reported separately from business - type activities, which rely to a significant extent on fees charged to external parties. The statement of activities presents a comparison between direct expenses and program revenues for each segment of the business -type activities of the City and for each function of the City's governmental activities. Direct expenses are those that are specifically associated with a program or function and therefore, are clearly identifiable to a particular function. Program revenues include 1) charges paid by the recipients of goods or services offered by the programs and 2) grants and contributions that are restricted to meeting the operational or capital requirements of a particular program. Revenues that are not classified as program revenues, including all taxes, are presented instead as general revenues. F-32 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Fund Financial Statements The fund financial statements provide information about the City's funds, including blended component units and fiduciary funds. Separate statements for each fund category, including governmental, proprietary and fiduciary, are presented. The operations of each fund are accounted for with a separate set of self -balancing accounts that comprise its assets, liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, deferred outflows of resources, fund equity, revenues, and expenditures or expenses, as appropriate. Government resources are allocated to and accounted for in individual funds based upon the purposes for which they are to be spent and the means by which spending activities are controlled. The emphasis of fund financial statements is on major governmental and enterprise funds, each displayed in a separate column. All remaining governmental and enterprise funds are separately aggregated and reported as nonmajor funds. The City reports the following major governmental funds: • General Fund is the City's primary operating fund. It accounts for all financial resources of the general government, except those required to be accounted for in any other funds. • Housing Projects Special Revenue Fund accounts for the housing assets and functions related to the Low and Moderate Income Housing Program retained by the City following the dissolution of the Commission effective February 1, 2012. It is used to account for the restricted revenue and expenditures of the City's low and moderate income housing activities. • Financing Authority Debt Service Fund accounts for accumulation and disbursement of financial resources that are used to make principal and interest payments on long-term debt of the City. • City Capital Projects Fund accounts for resources used for the acquisition and construction of capital facilities except for those facilities financed by enterprise funds. • Public Facility Finance Fee Special Revenue Fund accounts for the revenues and expenditures of the public facility finance fee imposed per City's Resolution 2008-126 related to the approved Public Facilities Finance Plan (Facilities Plan). The Facilities Plan's purpose is to manage the costs of capital facilities, maintenance, and services that are impacted by the City's new development. • Graton Mitigation Supplemental Special Revenue Fund accounts for supplemental contributions and related activities or mitigation of potential impacts pursuant to Section 3.4.1 of the MOU between the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (Tribe) and the City. The City reports the following major enterprise funds: Water Fund accounts for water services provided to the residents of the City. The activities necessary to provide such service are accounted for in the fund, including, but not limited to, water purchase, water operations, maintenance, financing and related debt service, and billing and collection. • Sewer Fund accounts for sewage disposal services provided to the residents of the City. The activities necessary to provide such service are accounted for in the fund, including, but not limited to, sewer operations, maintenance, financing and related debt service, and billing and collection. F-33 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 The City reports the following additional fund types: Internal Service Funds account for the services provided to the other city departments, on a cost reimbursement basis, in the following area: centralized data processing services (information technology), vehicle replacement, and fleet management. Private Purpose Trust Funds are a fiduciary fund type used to account for resources held and administrated under trust or similar arrangement for the benefits of individuals, private organizations, or other governments. The City reports the following private purpose trust funds: - Assets Seizure Fund accounts for Federal and State seized assets held by the City in a trustee capacity until the County of Sonoma District Attorney's Office requests for remittance of the assets. Redevelopment Successor Agency Fund was created to serve as a custodian for the assets and to wind down the affairs of the Commission. This fund accounts for the receipt of property tax revenues pursuant to the Redevelopment Dissolution Act and the assets transferred from the Commission. The Successor Agency's assets can only be used to pay enforceable obligations in existence at the date of dissolution pursuant to the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedules approved by the California Department of Finance (DOF) under the Redevelopment Dissolution Act. During the year, the City has activity between funds for various purposes. Any residual balances outstanding at year-end are reported as due from/to other funds and advances to/from other funds. While these balances are reported in the fund financial statements, certain eliminations are made in the preparation of the government -wide financial statements. Balances between funds included in governmental activities (i.e., the governmental and internal services funds) are eliminated so that only the net amount is included as internal balances in the governmental activities column. Similarly, balances between the funds included in the business -type activities (i.e., the enterprise funds) are eliminated so that the net amount is included as internal balances in the business - type activities column. Similarly, activities involving the transfers of resources between funds are reported as transfers in/out. Interfund activities, with the exceptions of activities between the governmental and business -type activities, are eliminated in the government -wide financial statements. Transfers between funds are eliminated so that only the net amount is included as transfers in the governmental and business -type activities columns. C. Measurement Focus and Basis of Accounting The government -wide financial statements are presented on an economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Property taxes are recognized as revenues in the year for which they are levied. Grants and similar items are recognized as revenue as soon as all eligibility requirements have been met. The governmental funds financial statements are presented on a current financial resources measurement focus and the modified accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both measurable and available. Revenues are considered to be available when they are collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to pay liabilities of the current period. Property tax revenues are recognized in the current year if they are collected within 60 days of year-end. All other revenues are recorded when received in cash, except that revenues subject to accrual (generally received within 60 days after year-end) are recognized when due. The primary revenue sources that have been treated as susceptible to accrual by the City are taxes, licenses, intergovernmental, interest and rental, donations, and certain charges for services. All other revenues are not susceptible to accrual because they are usually not measurable until received in cash. Expenditures are recorded F-34 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 when the related fund liability is incurred, except for principal and interest on long-term debt, certain compensated absences and claims and judgements are recognized when payments are due. Proprietary funds and private purpose trust funds are presented on an economic resources measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recorded when a liability is incurred, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Proprietary funds distinguish operating revenues and expenses from nonoperating items. Operating revenues and expenses generally result from providing services in connection with the proprietary fund's principal ongoing operations. The principal operating revenues of the City's enterprise funds are charges for customer services for water, sewer, recycled water, and refuse collection. The principal operating revenues of the City's internal service funds are charges to other funds for the information technology, vehicle replacement and fleet management support services. Operating expenses for enterprise funds and internal service funds include the cost of sales of services, administrative expenses, and depreciation on capital assets. All revenues and expenses not meeting this definition are reported as nonoperating revenues and expenses. D. Cash, Cash Equivalents, and Investments The City pools cash resources from all funds in order to facilitate and maximize the management of cash. The balance in the pooled cash account is available to meet current operating requirements. Cash in excess of current requirements is invested in various interest-bearing accounts and other fixed income investments with varying terms. Interest earned on investments is allocated to all funds based on average cash and investment balances. For purposes of the statement of cash flows, the City considers all highly liquid investments with maturity of three months or less when purchased to be cash equivalents. The proprietary funds' "deposits" in the City cash and investments pool are, in substance, demand deposits and are therefore considered cash equivalents. Investments are presented at fair value except as noted below. Fair value is the amount at which a financial instrument could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale. Money market investments (such as short—term, highly liquid debt instruments including bankers' acceptances) and securities (notes, bills, and obligations of the U.S. government and its agencies), and participating interest-earning investment contracts (such as negotiable certificates of deposit and repurchase agreements) that have a remaining maturity at the time of purchase of one year or less, are reported at amortized cost, which approximates fair value. Certain restricted cash and investments are held by a fiscal agent or the City for the redemption of bonded debt and for acquisition and construction of certain capital projects. E. Prepaid Items Certain payments to vendors reflect costs applicable to future accounting periods and are recorded as prepaid items in both the government -wide and fund financial statements. F. Capital Assets Capital assets are stated at historical cost or estimated historical cost if actual cost is not available. Donated assets are recorded at their estimated fair value on the date donated. The City defines capital assets as assets with an estimated useful life in excess of one year and an individual cost of $5,000 or more. Capital assets are depreciated or amortized (assets under capital leases) using the straight-line method over the lesser of their estimated useful lives or the capital lease period in the government -wide and proprietary fund financial statements. The City changed the estimated useful lives for capital assets during the fiscal year and recalculated the accumulated depreciation retroactively in which the impact is reflected in the current year's depreciation expenses. F-35 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 The estimated useful lives are as follows: Infrastructure and buildings 30 years Equipment purchased with FEMA funds 10 years Furniture & fixtures 7 years Vehicles 7 years Equipment 5 years Communication equipment 3 years G. Claims Payable The City records a liability to reflect an actuarial estimate of ultimate uninsured losses for both general liability claims and workers' compensation claims. The estimated liability for general liability claims and workers' compensation claims includes incurred but not reported (IBNR) claims and related loss adjustment expenses. H. Compensated Absences In accordance with negotiated labor agreements, employees accumulate earned but unused paid time off (PTO) and other compensated leave. There is no liability for unpaid accumulated sick leave because the City does not pay any amounts when employees separate from service with the City. All PTO and other compensated leave is accrued when incurred in the government -wide and proprietary fund financial statements. A liability for these amounts is reported in governmental funds when due and payable only if it is expected to be settled with current financial resources. I. Long -Term Debt and Other Long -Term Obligations In the government -wide, proprietary fund, and fiduciary fund financial statements, long-term debt and other long- term obligations are reported as liabilities. Bond premiums and discounts are amortized over the life of the bonds. Bonds payable are reported net of the applicable bond premium or discount. Deferred amounts on refunding are reported as deferred inflows/outflows of resources and amortized over the life of the bonds. In the governmental fund financial statements, bond premiums, discounts and costs of issuance are recognized during the period the bonds are issued. The par value of debt issued is reported as other financing sources. Premiums received on debt issuance are reported as other financing sources, while discounts on debt issuance are reported as other financing uses. Issuance costs, whether or not withheld from the actual debt proceeds received, are reported as debt service expenditures. J. Unearned Revenue Unearned revenues arise when the City receives resources before it has a legal claim to them, as when grant monies are received prior to incurring qualifying expenditures or when monies are received before the related services are performed. In subsequent periods, when both revenue recognition criteria are met or when the City has a legal claim to the resources, the liability for unearned revenue is removed from the balance sheet and revenue is recognized. K. Deferred Outflows and Inflows of Resources In addition to assets, the statement of net position will sometimes report a separate section for deferred outflows of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred outflows of resources, represents a consumption of net position that applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an outflow of resources (expense) until the future period. At June 30, 2015, the City reported pension items including pension contributions subsequent to measurement date and differences between the employer's actual and proportionate share of contributions as deferred outflows of resources. F-36 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 In addition to liabilities, the statement of financial position will sometimes report a separate section for deferred inflows of resources. This separate financial statement element, deferred inflows of resources, represents an acquisition of net position that applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an inflow of resources (revenue) until the future period. At June 30, 2015, the City reported unavailable revenues on the governmental funds financial statements and pension items including change in employer's proportion and net difference between projected and actual earnings on plan investments on the governmental -wide and proprietary funds financial statements as deferred inflows of resources. L. Net Position and Fund Balance Net Position Classifications In the government -wide financial statements, net position is classified in three categories: Net Investment in Capital Assets — This category groups all capital assets, including infrastructure, into one component of net position. Accumulated depreciation, outstanding balances of debt and any debt -related deferred outflows and inflows of resources that are attributable to the acquisition, construction, or improvement of these assets reduce the balance of this category. Restricted Net Position — This category consists of restricted assets reduced by liabilities and deferred inflows of resources related to those assets. Enabling legislation authorizes the City to assess, levy, charge, or otherwise mandate payment of resources and includes a legally enforceable requirement that those resources be used only for the specific purposes stipulated in the legislation. The City's restricted net position for the Performing Arts Center Endowment is nonexpendable, and the remaining restricted net positon is expendable. Unrestricted Net Position — The category represents net position of the City that is not restricted for any project or purpose. Fund Balances Classifications Governmental funds report fund balance in classifications based primarily on the extent to which the City is bound to honor constraints on how specific amounts in the funds can be spent. Fund balance is classified in five categories: Nonspendable Fund Balance — amounts that cannot be spent because they are either (a) not in spendable form; or (b) legally or contractually required to be maintained intact. Restricted Fund Balance — amounts with constraints placed on their use that are either (a) externally imposed by creditors, grantors, contributors, or laws or regulations of other governments; or (b) imposed by law through constitutional provisions or enabling legislation. Restrictions may effectively be changed or lifted only with the consent of resource providers. Committed Fund Balance —amounts that can only be used for the specific purposes determined by a formal action of the City's highest level of decision-making authority. The City Council is the highest level of decision-making authority for the City that can, by adoption of an ordinance, commit fund balances. Commitments may be changed or lifted only by the City Council taking the same formal actions that imposed the original constraint occur no later than the close of the reporting period. Assigned Fund Balance — amounts intended to be used by the City for specific purposes through budgetary actions or delegation of authority by the City Council. Intent is expressed by the City Council or an official to whom the City Council has delegated the authority (generally, the City Manager) to assign amounts to be used for specific purposes. This is also the classification for residual funds in the City's special revenue funds. Unassigned Fund Balance — the residual classification for the General Fund that includes amounts not contained F-37 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 in the other classifications. The amount also includes negative fund balances for other governmental funds. M. Use of Restricted/Unrestricted Net Position and Fund Balances When an expense is incurred for purposes for which both restricted and unrestricted net position are available, the City's policy is to apply restricted net position first. With respect to fund balance, the City considers restricted amounts to have been spent first when an expenditure is incurred for purposes for which both restricted and unrestricted fund balance are available. Additionally, the City considers committed amounts to have been spent first, assigned amounts to have been spent second, and unassigned amounts to have been spent last when an expenditure is incurred for purposes for which committed, assigned, and unassigned fund balance is available. N. Program Revenues The types of transactions reported as program revenues for the City are reported in three categories: (1) charges for services, (2) operating grants and contributions, and (3) capital grants and contributions. All taxes, including those dedicated for specific purposes, and other internally dedicated resources are reported as general revenues rather than as program revenues. O. Interfund Transactions During the normal course of operations, the City has numerous transactions among funds. The significant interfund transactions that occurred during the year can be classified into two types: • Transfers — Transactions to allocate resources or the occurrence of specific capital or debt service expenditures to the receiving fund. These transactions are recorded as transfers in and out in the year in which they are approved. • Loans Between Funds — Transactions to loan resources from one fund to another. Short-term loans are recorded as "due from other funds" in the disbursing fund and "due to other funds" in the receiving fund. Long-term loans are recorded as "advance to other funds" in the disbursing fund and "advance from other funds" in the receiving fund. P. Property Tax Under California law, property taxes are assessed and collected by the counties at a rate of up to 1% of assessed value, plus other increases approved by the voters. Property taxes go into a pool and are then allocated to cities based on complex formulas. Property taxes are collected by the Auditor -Controller -Treasurer -Tax Collector of the County of Sonoma (County) and are remitted upon collection to the various taxing entities, including the City. Accordingly, the City accrues only those taxes that are received from the County within sixty days after year-end. For assessment and collection purposes, property is classified as either "secured" or "unsecured" and is listed accordingly on separate parts of the assessment roll. The "secured roll" is that part of the assessment roll containing State -assessed property and real property having a tax lien that is sufficient, in the opinion of the County Assessor, to secure payment of the taxes. Unsecured property comprises all taxable property not attached to land, such as personal property or business property. Every tax levied by a county that becomes a lien on secured property has priority over all present and future private liens arising pursuant to State law on the secured property, regardless of the time of the creation of the other liens. A tax levied on unsecured property does not become a lien against the taxed unsecured property, but may become a lien on other property owned by the taxpayer. F-38 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Valuation of secured property and establishment of a statutory tax lien occur as of January 1 prior to the tax year (the tax year is the July 1— June 30 fiscal year of the State) of the related tax levy, and the secured and unsecured tax rolls are certified on or before July 31 of the tax year by the County Assessor. The County assesses property values, levies bills, and collects taxes as follows: The City does not have the ability to control the levy rate or the amount of property taxes remitted by the County because these are governed by State law. Q. Pension Plans For purposes of measuring the net pension liability and deferred outflows/inflows of resources related to pensions, and pension expense, information about the fiduciary net position of the California Public Employees' Retirement System (Ca1PERS) plans and additions to/deductions from the plans' fiduciary net positions have been determined on the same basis as they are reported by the plans. For this purpose, benefit payments (including refunds of employee contributions) are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Plan member contributions are recognized in the period in which the contributions are due. Investments are reported at fair value. R. Effects of New Pronouncements The City implemented the following GASB Statements during the year: In June 2012, the GASB Statement No. 68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions - An Amendment of GASB Statement No. 27, to improve the guidance for accounting and reporting on the pensions that governments provide to their employees. Key changes include the following: • Separating the determination of accounting and financial reporting from how pensions are funded. • Employers with defined benefit pension plans will recognize a net pension liability, as defined by the standard, in their government -wide, proprietary and fiduciary fund financial statements. • Incorporating ad hoc cost -of -living adjustments and other ad hoc postemployment benefit changes into projections of benefit payments, if an employer's past practice and future expectations of granting them indicate they are essentially automatic. • Using a discount rate that applies (a) the expected long-term rate of return on pension plan investments for which plan assets are expected to be available to make projected benefit payments, and (b) the yield or index rate on tax-exempt 20 -year general obligation municipal bonds with an average rating of AA/Aa or higher to projected benefit payments for which plan assets are not expected to be available for long- term investment in a qualified trust. • Adopting a single actuarial cost allocation method — entry age normal — rather than the current choice among six actuarial cost methods. • Requiring more extensive note disclosures and required supplementary information. F-39 Secured Unsecured Lien Dates January 1 January 1 Levy Dates January 1 January 1 Due Dates 50% on November 1 July 1 50% on February 1 Delinquent after December 10 (for November) August 31 April 10 (for February) The City does not have the ability to control the levy rate or the amount of property taxes remitted by the County because these are governed by State law. Q. Pension Plans For purposes of measuring the net pension liability and deferred outflows/inflows of resources related to pensions, and pension expense, information about the fiduciary net position of the California Public Employees' Retirement System (Ca1PERS) plans and additions to/deductions from the plans' fiduciary net positions have been determined on the same basis as they are reported by the plans. For this purpose, benefit payments (including refunds of employee contributions) are recognized when due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Plan member contributions are recognized in the period in which the contributions are due. Investments are reported at fair value. R. Effects of New Pronouncements The City implemented the following GASB Statements during the year: In June 2012, the GASB Statement No. 68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions - An Amendment of GASB Statement No. 27, to improve the guidance for accounting and reporting on the pensions that governments provide to their employees. Key changes include the following: • Separating the determination of accounting and financial reporting from how pensions are funded. • Employers with defined benefit pension plans will recognize a net pension liability, as defined by the standard, in their government -wide, proprietary and fiduciary fund financial statements. • Incorporating ad hoc cost -of -living adjustments and other ad hoc postemployment benefit changes into projections of benefit payments, if an employer's past practice and future expectations of granting them indicate they are essentially automatic. • Using a discount rate that applies (a) the expected long-term rate of return on pension plan investments for which plan assets are expected to be available to make projected benefit payments, and (b) the yield or index rate on tax-exempt 20 -year general obligation municipal bonds with an average rating of AA/Aa or higher to projected benefit payments for which plan assets are not expected to be available for long- term investment in a qualified trust. • Adopting a single actuarial cost allocation method — entry age normal — rather than the current choice among six actuarial cost methods. • Requiring more extensive note disclosures and required supplementary information. F-39 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 The statement relates to accounting and financial reporting and does not apply to a government's approach to the funding of its pension plan. At present, there generally is a close connection between the ways many governments fund pensions and how they account for and report information about them in financial statements. In November 2013, the GASB issued Statement No. 71, Pension Transition for Contributions Made Subsequent to the Measurement Date — an amendment of GASB Statement No. 68. This statement is intended to address an issue regarding application of the transition provisions of Statement No. 68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions. The issues related to amounts associated with contributions, if any, made by a state of local government employer or nonemployer contributing entity to a defined benefit pension plan after the measurement date of the government's beginning net pension liability. As of July 1, 2014, the City restated its net position to record beginning net pension liability and beginning deferred outflows of resources related to pensions as follows: In January 2013, GASB issued Statement No. 69, Government Combinations and Disposals of Government Operations. The statement establishes accounting and financial reporting standards for governments that combine or dispose of their operations. The new standard is effective for periods beginning after December 15, 2013. Implementation of this statement did not have a significant impact on the City for the year ended June 30, 2015. The City is currently analyzing its accounting practices to determine the potential impact on the financial statements for the following GASB Statements: In February 2015, GASB issued Statement No. 72, Fair Value Measurement and Application. This statement addresses accounting and financial reporting issues related to fair value measurements. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2016. In June 2015, GASB issued Statement No. 73, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions and Related Assets ThatAre Not within the Scope of GASB Statement No. 68, andAmendments to Certain Provisions of GASB Statements No. 67 and No. 68. This statement establishes requirements for those pensions and pension plans that are not administrated through a trust meeting specified criteria and thus are not covered by Statements Nos. 67 and 68. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2016. In June 2015, GASB issued Statement No. 74, Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefit Plans Other Than Pension Plans. This statement addresses reporting by OPEB plans that administer benefits on behalf of governments. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2017. F-40 Net Position, at Beginning of Year As Previously Statement Reported Nos. 68 and 71 As Restated Primary Government: Govermental Activities $ 98,125,200 $ (46,706,124) $ 51,419,076 Business -type Activities 50,821,047 (5,193,886) 45,627,161 Total Primary Government $ 148,946247 $ (51,900,010) $ 97,046,237 Water Enterprise Fund $ 11,692,274 $ (3,010,507) $ 8,681,767 Sewer Enterprise Fund $ 38,436,897 $ (2,183,379) $ 36,253,518 Internal Service Funds $ 277,004 $ (644,350) $ (367,346) In January 2013, GASB issued Statement No. 69, Government Combinations and Disposals of Government Operations. The statement establishes accounting and financial reporting standards for governments that combine or dispose of their operations. The new standard is effective for periods beginning after December 15, 2013. Implementation of this statement did not have a significant impact on the City for the year ended June 30, 2015. The City is currently analyzing its accounting practices to determine the potential impact on the financial statements for the following GASB Statements: In February 2015, GASB issued Statement No. 72, Fair Value Measurement and Application. This statement addresses accounting and financial reporting issues related to fair value measurements. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2016. In June 2015, GASB issued Statement No. 73, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions and Related Assets ThatAre Not within the Scope of GASB Statement No. 68, andAmendments to Certain Provisions of GASB Statements No. 67 and No. 68. This statement establishes requirements for those pensions and pension plans that are not administrated through a trust meeting specified criteria and thus are not covered by Statements Nos. 67 and 68. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2016. In June 2015, GASB issued Statement No. 74, Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefit Plans Other Than Pension Plans. This statement addresses reporting by OPEB plans that administer benefits on behalf of governments. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2017. F-40 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 In June 2015, GASB issued Statement No. 75, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Postemployment Benefits Other Than Pensions. This statement addresses reporting by governments that provide OPEB to their employees and for governments that finance OPEB for employees of other governments. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2018. In June 2015, GASB issued Statement No. 76, The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles for State and Local Governments. This statement reduces the hierarchy of generally accepted accounting principles to two categories of authoritative GAAP and addresses the use of authoritative and nonauthoritative literature in the event that the account treatment for a transaction or other event is not specific with a source of authoritative GAAP. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2016. In August 2015, GASB issued Statement No. 77, Tax Abatement Disclosures. This statement requires governments that enter into tax abatement agreements to disclose certain information about the agreements. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2017. In December 2015, the GASB issued Statement No. 78, Pensions Provided through Certain Multiple -Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plans. The objective of this statement is to address a practice issue regarding the scope and applicability of Statement No. 68 associated with pensions provided through certain cost-sharing multiple - employer defined benefit pension plans and to state or local governmental employers whose employees are provided with such pensions. Such plans are not considered a state or local government pension plan and are used to provide benefits to both employees of state and local governments and employees of employers that are not state or local governments. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2017. In December 2015, the GASB issued Statement No. 79, Certain External Investment Pools and Pool Participants. This statement establishes criteria for an external investment pool to qualify for making the election to measure all investments at amortized cost for financial reporting purposes. Pool participants should also measure their investments at amortized cost if the external pool meets these criteria. If an external investment pool does not meet the criteria, then the pool should apply the provisions in paragraph 16 of Statement No. 31, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Certain Investments and for External Investment Pools. Pool participants should measure their investments in that pool at fair value in accordance with paragraph 11 of Statement No. 31. This statement establishes additional note disclosure requirements for qualifying external investment pools that measure all of their investments at amortized cost and for governments that participate in those pools. The requirements of this statement are effective for the City's fiscal year ending June 30, 2017. S. Use of Estimates The preparation of the basic financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions. These estimates and assumptions affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. In addition, estimates affect the reported amount of revenues and expenses. Actual results could differ from these estimates and assumptions. 2. STEWARDSHIP, COMPLIANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY Deficit Fund Balances and Net Position At June 30, 2015, the following City funds had deficit fund balances: The Public Facility Finance Fee Special Revenue Fund had a deficit fund balance of $7,257,885. The deficit is due to the timing difference of receipt of revenues to fund its capital expenditures related to the Facilities Plan. The deficit is expected to be funded by future public facility finance fee. F-41 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 The Graton Mitigation Public Safety Building nonmajor special revenue fund had a deficit fund balance of $17,338. The deficit is due to the timing of receipt of revenues to fund its expenditures related to the public safety building preconstruction costs. The deficit is expected to be funded by future contributions for public safety buildings. At June 30, 2015, the following City funds had deficit net position: The Information Technology and Fleet Management internal services funds had deficit net position of $338,574 and $200,106, respectively. The deficit is due to the recording of pension items upon the implementation of GASB Statement Nos. 68 and 71. The deficit is expected to be funded by future internal service charges to other City funds. The Redevelopment Successor Agency private purpose trust fund had a deficit net position of $30,042,064. The deficit is due to the nature of the redevelopment financing in which long-term debt were incurred for redevelopment activities. The deficit is expected to be eliminated with future redevelopment property tax revenues distributed from the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund (RPTTF) administered by the County. Excess Expenditures Over Appropriations For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the following funds had excess expenditures over appropriations, which are expected to be covered with existing fund balance: Fund Name Amount Major Fund: Housing Projects Special Revenue $ 92,675 Nonmajor Special Revenue Fund: Alcohol Beverage Sales Ordinance (ABSO) 47,273 Vehicle Abatement 74,488 Spay and Neuter 11,022 Refuse Road Impact Fee 66,333 State Gasoline Tax 404,220 Supplemental Law Enforcement Services 100,000 Graton Mitigation Law Enforcement 431,212 Mobile Home Rent Appeals Board 69,954 F-42 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 3. CASH AND INVESTMENTS A. Authorized Investments Under the provisions of the City's investment policy, the City may invest in the following types of investments: • State of California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF); • Sonoma County Investment Pool; • Securities of the United States Government or its agencies; • Certificates of deposits with commercial banks, savings & loan companies or credit unions; • Negotiable certificates of deposits; • Bankers' acceptances; and • Money market mutual funds invested in United States government securities. In accordance with Section 53651 of the California Government Code, the City cannot invest in inverse floaters, range notes, or interest -only strips that are derived from a pool of mortgages, or in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity. The limitation does not apply to investments in shares of beneficial interest issued under the Investment Company Act of 1940 that are authorized investments under Section 53601 of the California Government Code. A five-year maximum maturity for each investment is allowed unless approved by the City Council. The provisions of the bond indentures shall govern investments of restricted cash and investment held in the bond fiscal accounts. B. Summary of Cash and Investments The following is a summary of cash and investments at June 30, 2015: Cash and investments Restricted cash and investments Total cash and investments Less: cash and deposits not meeting the definition of investments Governmental Business -Type Activities Activities 35,374,749 $ 17,689,803 Fiduciary Funds 3,403,368 18,962,723 134,800 3,632,024 54,337,472 17,824,603 7,035,392 Totals $ 56,467,920 22,729,547 79,197,467 (17,349,399) Total investments $ 61,848,068 C. Risk Disclosures Custodial Credit Risk - Deposits The custodial credit risk for deposits is the risk that, in the event of the failure of a depository financial institution, the City will not be able to recover deposits or will not be able to recover the deposits that are in the possession of an outside parry. At June 30, 2015, the carrying and bank amounts of the City's cash and deposits were $17,413,650 and $17,541,244, respectively. The City is not exposed to such risks as all deposits are insured or collateralized. The California Government Code and the City's investment policy do not contain legal or policy requirements that would limit the exposure to custodial credit risk for deposits, other than the following provision. The California Government Code requires that a financial institution secure deposits made by state or local governmental units by pledging securities in an undivided collateral pool held by a depository regulated under state law (unless so waived by the governmental unit). The market value of the pledged securities in the collateral pool must equal at least 110% of the total amount deposited by the public agencies. California law also allows financial institutions to secure City's deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the secured public deposits. F-43 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Custodial Credit Risk - Investments The custodial credit risk for investments is the risk that, in the event of the failure of the counterparty to a transaction, the City will not be able to recover the value of the investments or collateral securities that are in the possession of an outside party. To mitigate this risk, all of the City's investments in securities are held in the name of the City. Credit risk - Investments Credit risk is the risk that a security or a portfolio will lose some or all of its value due to a real or perceived change in the ability of the issuer to repay its debt. The City's investment policy is to apply the prudent -person rule: Investments are made as a prudent person would be expected to act, with discretion and intelligence, to seek reasonable income, preserve capital, and in general avoid speculative investments. The City's investment policy is to follow the investments permitted by Section 53651 of the California Government Code. Concentration of Credit Risk - Investments Concentration of credit risk is the risk of loss attributed to the magnitude of an investor's holdings in a single issuer. The City's investment policy is to follow the investments permitted by Section 53651 of the California Government Code. At June 30, 2015, the City's investment in Federal Farm Credit Bank Bonds represented 5.7% of the City's total pooled investment portfolio. Interest rate risk - Investments Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in market interest rates will adversely affect the fair value of an investment. The City has an investment policy of lengthening its maturities when rates are falling and shortening its maturities when rates are rising as a means of managing its exposure to fair value losses and to take advantage of advantageous interest rates. As of June 30, 2015, the City's investments consisted of the following: Pooled Investments: Federal Farm Credit Bank Bonds Federal Home Loan Bank Bonds Money Market Mutual Funds Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) Sonoma County Investment Pool Total Pooled Investments Maturities (in years) 1 year or less 1 to 3 years Totals S&P Credit Ratings $ - $ 2,500,000 $ 2,500,000 AAA - 1,000,000 1,000,000 AAA 1,010,588 - 1,010,588 AAAm 7,322,935 - 7,322,935 Not Rated - 32,023,566 32,023,566 Not Rated 8,333,523 35,523,566 43,857,089 Investments Held with Fiscal Agents: Money Market Mutual Funds 17,990,979 17,990,979 AAAm Total Investments $ 26,324,502 $ 35,523,566 $ 61,848,068 D. External Investment Pools As of June 30, 2015, the City's investment in the California Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), a State of California external investment pool has a weighted average maturity of 239 days and is not rated. LAIF determines fair value on its investment portfolio based on market quotations for those securities where market quotations are readily available, and on amortized cost or best estimate for those securities where market value is not readily available. At June 30, 2015, the total amount reported by all public agencies in LAIF was approximately $21.5 billion. F-44 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 LAIF is part of the Pooled Money Investment Account (PMIA). PMIA oversight is provided by the Pooled Money Investment Board (PMIB) and an in-house Investment Committee. PMIB members are the State Treasurer, State Director of Finance, and State Controller. The Local Investment Advisory Board (LIAB) provides oversight for LAIF. The Board consists of five members as designated by statute. The Chairman is the State Treasurer or his designated representative. Two members are qualified by training and experience in the field of investment or finance, and the State Treasurer appoints two members who are treasurers, finance or fiscal officers, or business managers employed by any county, city or local district or municipal corporation of this state. At June 30, 2015, PMIA had a total portfolio of approximately $69.6 billion and of that amount, 97.92% was invested in non- derivative financial products and 2.08% was invested in structured notes and asset-backed securities. As of June 30, 2015, the City's investment in the Sonoma County Investment Pool (County Pool), an external investment pool has a weighted average maturity of 600 days and is not rated. The County's Pool is subject to regulatory oversight by the County's Treasury Oversight Committee. The County determines fair value on its investment portfolio based on market quotations for those securities where market quotations are readily available, and on amortized cost or best estimate for those securities where market value is not readily available. The value of the pool shares in the Sonoma County Investment Pool that may be withdrawn is determined on an amortized cost basis, which is different from the fair value of the City's position in the pool. At June 30, 2015, the total amount invested by all public agencies in the County Pool was approximately $1.8 billion. 4. LOANS AND NOTES RECEIVABLE The following is a summary of loans and notes receivable at June 30, 2015: Gross Allowance Net Fund Name Amount Amount Amount Governmental Activities General Fund Housing Projects Special Revenue Fund Total governmental activities Fiduciary Fund Redevelopment Successor Agency Fund $ 33,980 $ - $ 33,980 11,501,838 (1,886,989) 9,614,849 $ 11,535,818 $ (1,886,989) $ 9,648,829 $ 500,000 $ (500,000) $ - General Fund In August 2003, the City entered into an amendment to a ground lease dated May 29, 2001 with Rohnert Park Golf, L.P. (Tenant), whereby the tenant leases certain property and improvements from the City. The City made a one-time advance totaling $355,000 to the Tenant for the purpose of making improvements to the golf course, and on-going capital contributions to the Tenant as defined in the agreement. At June 30, 2015, the outstanding balance owed to the City was $33,980, and principal payments of the advance are paid in equal monthly installments over 10 years. Interest is earned by the City on the unpaid principal portion at a rate of 5% per annum. Housing Projects Special Revenue Fund The Commission extended various developer loans, first-time homebuyer loans, and rehabilitation loans to property owners for the rehabilitation and improvements of commercial buildings and residential homes, and other loans for families and individuals of low/moderate income. The following loans and notes receivable were transferred from the Commission to the City's Housing Projects Special Revenue Fund on February 1, 2012, when all redevelopment agencies in California ceased to exist: F-45 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 On August 23, 1991, the Commission entered into a non-recourse promissory note in the amount of $390,000 with Burbank Housing Development Corp. for the construction of 50 low income rental housing units at 781 East Cotati Avenue. The note bears interest at 8% simple interest per annum and is due on or before August 23, 2021. During the term of this note, Burbank Housing Development may request and the Commission, at its option, may cancel or extend the terms of the note. At June 30, 2015, principal and accrued interest related to this loan totaled to $1,118,345 and an allowance of $728,345 was recorded against the accrued interest portion of the loan. On July 1, 1995, the Commission and Burbank Housing Development Corp. executed a loan agreement in the amount of $260,000. The loan was for pre -development costs for the property at 120 Santa Alicia Drive for residential low income housing. The note accrues 3% per annum simple interest and is to be paid concurrently with principal on or before September 1, 2023. During the term of this loan, Burbank Housing Development may request and the Commission, at its option, may cancel or extend the terms of the note. At June 30, 2015, principal and accrued interest related to this loan totaled to $430,300 and an allowance of $170,300 was recorded against the accrued interest portion of the loan. On January 27, 1998, the Commission entered into a note agreement with Muirfield Apartments for supportive housing for persons with disabilities and low income persons. The note represents an advance of funds by the Commission to Muirfield Apartments for the pre -development and development expenses in the amount of $611,000 accruing 6% per annum, simple interest. Interest shall accrue and be paid concurrently with principal on or before June 30, 2039. During the term of this note, Muirfield Apartments may request and the Commission, at its option, to cancel or extend the terms of the note. At June 30, 2015, principal and accrued interest related to this note totaled to $1,234,221 and an allowance of $623,221 was recorded against the accrued interest portion of the note. On September 13, 2005, the Commission entered into an Affordable Housing and Loan Agreement with Burbank Housing to develop a 56 -unit affordable housing project on a City -owned City Hall Drive site. The term of the loan agreement is a non-recourse loan in the amount of $4,015,000, which accrues interest at the rate of 2% per annum and is deferred for 55 years. At June 30, 2015, principal and accrued interest related to this loan totaled to $4,792,735, of which the City determined the accrued interest of $777,735 to be unavailable. On May 23, 2006, the Commission entered into an Affordable Housing and Loan Agreement with Vida Nueva Partners for the development of the Vida Nueva Affordable Housing Project, which includes twenty-four (24) very -low income permanent supportive housing units (carrying 55 -year affordability restrictions), a community building, laundry facilities, a management office and activity and counseling rooms. The loan agreement provided for the Commission to loan $1,675,000 to Vida Nueva Partners at an accrued interest rate of 1% per annum, with the principal and accrued interest deferred for 55 years. At June 30, 2015, principal and accrued interest related to this loan totaled to $1,814,184, of which the City determined the accrued interest of $139,184 to be unavailable. In April 2007, the Commission was awarded $600,000 of grant funding for an owner occupied rehabilitation loan program through the CalHome program administered by California Department of Housing and Community Development. The Sonoma County Community Development Commission ("SCCDC") is responsible to administer the CalHome program on behalf of the City. These rehabilitation loans are deferred payment loans that have a 30 year term with 3% simple interest. At June 30, 2015, principal and accrued interest related to this loan totaled to $456,322. F-46 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 On December 12, 2007, the Commission executed a loan agreement to Rainbow -Copeland Creek LLC for improvements to Copeland Creek Apartments (an all senior affordable housing complex) for $1,200,000. The funds were primarily used for energy efficient improvements at the complex. The loan accrues interest at a rate of 1% per annum, with the principal and accrued interest deferred for 55 years, as defined in the loan agreement. At June 30, 2015, principal and accrued interest related to this loan totaled to $1,290,608, of which the City determined the accrued interest of $90,608 to be unavailable. At June 30, 2015, the Housing Projects Special Revenue Fund reported Sonoma County rehabilitation loans of $365,123, in which the City has recorded an allowance of $365,123 against the full amount of the loans. Successor A eg_ncy The following loan was transferred from the Commission to the Successor Agency on February 1, 2012, when all redevelopment agencies in California ceased to exist: In December 2007, the Commission loaned $500,000, with interest accruing at 3% simple interest per annum, to the Sonoma Mountain Business Cluster (Incubator) to pay a portion of the cost for tenant improvements at the former Agilent site. The loan terms called for continued operation of the incubator, increased occupancy and eventually job creation. The loan provides that as long as the improvements are made as specified in the agreement and continues to operate the Incubator, and is not in default of any terms of the loan, the loan and accrued interest will be forgiven ten years from the date business incubator is open for business. As of June 30, 2015, the Incubator was not in default of any terms of the loan. At June 30, 2015, the outstanding loan balance was $500,000 in which the City has recorded an allowance of $500,000 against the full amount of the loan. 5. INTERFUND BALANCES Due To/From Other Funds The composition of due to/from other funds at June 30, 2015 is as follows: Receivable Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund General Fund Sewer Enterprise Fund Nonmajor Governmental Funds Payable Fund Amount Water Enterprise Fund $ 84,736 Sewer Enterprise Fund 59,374 Nonmajor Governmental Funds 890 Internal Services Fund 22,960 Public Facility Finance Fee Special Revenue Fund 1,222,382 Nonmajor Governmental Funds 17,338 $ 1,407,680 The balances between the Public Facility Finance Fee Special Revenue Fund and the Sewer Enterprise Fund represents the cumulative borrowing for the debt service payments of the 2005 Sewer System Revenue Certificates of Participation as of June 30, 2015 and is expected to be repaid during fiscal year ended June 30, 2016. The other balances are due to 1) cash flow needs to cover negative cash position at year-end or 2) timing difference between the dates that interfund goods and services are provided and the payments between funds are made. F-47 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Advances To/From Other Funds and Successor Agency The composition of advances to/from other funds and the Successor Agency at June 30, 2015 is as follows: Receivable Fund General Fund Redevelopment Successor Agency Fund Redevelopment Successor Agency Fund Payable Fund Amount Redevelopment Successor Agency Fund $ 1,799,570 General Fund 288,500 Public Facility Finance Fee Special Revenue Fund 10,055,725 $ 12,143,795 The City's General Fund advanced funds to the Commission in order to construct a performing arts center. The loan is being repaid annually through installment payments of principal plus interest from property tax increment. As of June 30, 2011, the advance balance was $2,075,000 and no interest was accrued to the balance since June 30, 2011. The advance was transferred from the Commission to the Successor Agency on February 1, 2012, when all redevelopment agencies in California ceased to exist. On September 16, 2013, the Oversight Board to the Successor Agency determined that the loan was for a legitimate redevelopment purpose and adopted Resolution No. OSB 2013-05 to support the loan repayment. The City recalculated the accrued interest for the period from July 1, 2011 to September 30, 2013 based on LAIF monthly interest rate for March, June, September, and December during the period. For the period from October 1, 2013 to June 30, 2015, interest accrued based on LAIF monthly interest rate for September 2013. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, interest of $2,693 was accrued and the Successor Agency repaid $298,505. At June 30, 2015, the advance balance was $1,799,570. On February 1, 2012, the Successor Agency purchased the Hazel Wetland Preserve for $288,500, which is to be repaid by the General Fund upon the sale of the stadium lands. No interest is accrued for the outstanding advance balance. At June 30, 2015, the advance balance was $288,500. On May 22, 2007, the Commission entered into a reimbursement agreement (as amended on August 26, 2008) with the City whereby the Commission would fund 88% of the project cost of the Eastside Sewer Main Phase 1 Improvement, which is the portion of the project that lies within the project area, in advance of the City receiving the money through public facilities finance fees recorded in the Public Facility Finance Fee Special Revenue Fund. The project funded by this advance is recorded in the Sewer Enterprise Fund. The Commission funded this project from the 2007R Tax Allocation Bond proceeds. The advance was transferred from the Commission to the Successor Agency on February 1, 2012, when all redevelopment agencies in California ceased to exist. No interest is accrued for the outstanding advance balance. At June 30, 2015, the advance balance was $10,055,725. The City also advanced $124,675 to the Successor Agency for other expenses and the City expected to be repaid by the Successor Agency from the County's RPTTF. No interest is accrued for the outstanding advance balance. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the Successor Agency paid off the outstanding advance balance. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2013-066 to authorize the Traffic Signal nonmajor special revenue fund to loan the General Fund an amount not to exceed $1,300,000 to provide funds to pay for the Public Safety Building Roof Replacement and Exterior Improvements Project 2012- 12. The loan accrues interest daily at the LAIF per annum interest rate on the unpaid principal balance of the loan. Repayment will commence on July 1, 2015 in annual installments. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, interest of $2,331 was accrued and the General Fund paid off the outstanding advance balance. F-48 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Interfund Transfers The composition of interfund transfers during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 was as follows: Internal Services Funds General Fund 129,238 Reimbursement of various operating activities Water Enterprise Fund 87,614 Reimbursement of various operating activities Sewer Enterprise Fund 71,284 Reimbursement ofvarious operating activities Nonmajor Governmental Funds 21,044 Reimbursement of various operating activities 309,180 Total Interfund Transfers $ 23,626,796 F-49 Amount Funds Receiving Transfers Funds Making Transfers Transferred Funding Purpose General Fund Graton Mitigation Supplemental Special $ 4,486,749 Reimbursement of casino mitigation revenue Revenue Fund Water Enterprise Fund 232,000 Employee other postemployment benefit payments Sewer Enterprise Fund 139,000 Employee other postemployment benefit payments Nonmajor Governmental Funds 3,355,716 Reimbursement of various operating activities Internal Services Funds 11,000 Reimbursement of various operating activities 8,224,465 Housing Projects Special Revenue General Fund 59,701 Reimbursement of housing activities Fund Financing Authority Debt Service General Fund 2,870,403 Debt service payments Fund City Capital Projects Fund General Fund 1,692,770 Capital projects costs Public Facility Financing Fee Special 1,330,552 Capital projects costs Revenue Fund Nonmajor Governmental Funds 1,582,952 Capital projects costs 4,606,274 Water Enterprise Fund Public Facility Financing Fee Special 2,056,951 Capital projects costs Revenue Fund Sewer Enterprise Fund 1,480,459 Capital projects costs Nonmajor Governmental Funds 55,000 Capital projects costs 3,592,410 Sewer Enterprise Fund General Fund 215,000 Capital projects costs Public Facility Financing Fee Special 2,449,225 Debt service payments Revenue Fund Water Enterprise Fund 1,256,090 Transfer of capital assets funded by Sewer Enterprise Fund 3,920,315 Nonmajor Governmental Funds City Capital Projects Fund 14,909 Return of overfunding of capital projects costs Nonmajor Enterprise Funds Public Facility Financing Fee Special 29,139 Reimbursement of various operating activities Revenue Fund Internal Services Funds General Fund 129,238 Reimbursement of various operating activities Water Enterprise Fund 87,614 Reimbursement of various operating activities Sewer Enterprise Fund 71,284 Reimbursement ofvarious operating activities Nonmajor Governmental Funds 21,044 Reimbursement of various operating activities 309,180 Total Interfund Transfers $ 23,626,796 F-49 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Intergovernmental Transfers Upon the City Council's adoption of Resolution No. 2014-109 on September 9, 2014 and the Successor Agency Oversight Board's adoption of Resolution No. OSB 2014-09, the City and the Successor Agency entered into an Agreement Regarding Expenditure of Excess Bond Proceeds (Excess Bond Proceeds Agreement). Subject to DOF's approval of the inclusion of the Excess Bond Proceeds Agreement on the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) 14-15B, the Successor Agency shall transfer the remaining excess bond proceeds of the Rohnert Park Redevelopment Project Tax Allocation Bonds, Series 2007R to the City and the City agrees to use the excess bond proceeds for infrastructure projects consistent with the bonds covenants. On November 13, 2014, DOF approved the submitted ROPS 14-15B which included the Excess Bond Proceeds Agreement. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the Successor Agency transferred $5,695,287 to the City Capital Project major governmental fund in accordance with the Excess Bond Proceeds Agreement. 6. CAPITAL ASSETS Capital asset activities for governmental activities for fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 were as follows: Balance Balance 7/1/2014 Additions Retirements Transfers 6/30/2015 Nondepreciable assets: Land $ 6,906,156 $ 123,381 $ (250) $ - $ 7,029,287 Construction in progress 4,480,480 4,644,478 (1,926,075) (2,814,389) 4,384,494 Total nondepreciable assets 11,386,636 4,767,859 (1,926,325) (2,814,389) 11,413,781 Depreciable assets Infrastructure, structures and improvements 125,049,591 2,499,021 (1,233,348) 2,258,102 128,573,366 Equipment 14,079,946 366,731 (3,417,871) 556,287 11,585,093 Total depreciable assets 139,129,537 2,865,752 (4,651,219) 2,814,389 140,158,459 Accumulated depreciation: Infrastructure, structures and improvements (67,419,740) (716,653) 684,973 - (67,451,420) Equipment (12,740,144) (534,711) 3,362,816 - (9,912,039) Total accumulated depreciation (80,159,884) (1,251,364) 4,047,789 - (77,363,459) Total depreciable assets, net 58,969,653 1,614,388 (603,430) 2,814,389 62,795,000 Total capital assets, net $ 70,356,289 $ 6,382,247 $ (2,529,755) $ - $ 74,208,781 F-50 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Construction in progress for governmental activities at June 30, 2015 is comprised of the following: Expended to Project Name June 30, 2015 Snyder Lane Widening $ 2,446,252 Specific Plan Developments 559,570 B -Pool Renovation 506,297 RPX Rehabilitation 238,188 Sidewalk Ramps ADA Upgrades 194,906 Community Center Parking Lot Overlay 129,500 Sports Center Locker Room Rehabilitation 84,018 Public Safety Main Station HVAC Replacemen 36,454 Senior Center Roof Replacement 26,218 Various Other Projects 163,091 Total construction in progress $ 4,384,494 During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the City completed governmental activities projects totaling $2,814,389 which were transferred from construction in progress to depreciable capital assets. The City also sold capital assets during the year and received proceeds totaled to $1,442,823. Capital asset activities for business -type activities for fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 were as follows: F-51 Balance Balance June 30, 2014 Additions Retirements Transfers June 30,2015 Nondepreciable assets: Construction in progress $ 12,996,488 $ 6,575,503 $ - $ (15,166,312) $ 4,405,679 Depreciable assets Infrastructure, structures and improvements 52,668,346 - (3,277,893) 15,156,342 64,546,795 Equipment 3,668,701 469,709 (1335900) 9,970 4,014,480 Total depreciable assets 56,337,047 469,709 (3,411,793) 15,166,312 68,561,275 Accumulated depreciation: Infrastructure, structures and improvements (21,471,188) (1,183,519) 2,163,178 - (20,491,529) Equipment (2,368,706) (688,737) 126,027 - (2,931,416) Total accumulated depreciation (23,839,894) (1,872,256) 2,289,205 - (23,422,945) Total depreciable assets, net 32,497,153 (1,402,547) (1,122,588) 15,166,312 45,138,330 Total capital assets, net $ 45,493,641 $ 5,172,956 $ (1,122,588) $ - $ 49,544,009 F-51 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Construction in progress for business -type activities at June 30, 2015 is comprised of the following: Expended to Project Name June 30, 2015 Water System Distribution Improvement $ 2,363,934 Sewer Interceptor Phase 11 Eastside Trunk Sewer Phase III Sewer Pipe Lining Project Well/Tank Site Upgrade Water Meter Installation Sewer Clausin @ 101 Rehabilitation Water Tank 8 Project Well Rehabilitation Program Recycled Water System Expansion Total construction in progress 953,575 714,941 103,506 70,236 60,096 39,145 38,890 32,217 29,139 $ 4,405,679 During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the City completed business -type activities projects totaling $15,166,312 that were transferred from construction in progress to infrastructure, structures and improvements. The City also transferred capital assets totaling $1,256,090 from the Water Enterprise Fund to Sewer Enterprise Fund during the year. Depreciation expenses for governmental activities and business -type activities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 were charged to the following functions: Governmental Activities: General government $ 809,630 Public safety 38,386 Public works 61,860 Parks and recreation 341,488 Total governmental activities $ 1,251,364 Business -Type Activities: Water $ 799,648 Sewer 1,072,608 Total business -type activities $ 1,872,256 F-52 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Capital asset activities for the Successor Agency for fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 were as follows: Nondepreciable assets: Land Depreciable assets Infrastructure, structures and improvements Equipment Total depreciable assets Accumulated depreciation: Infrastructure, structures and improvements Equipment Total accumulated depreciation Total depreciable assets, net Total capital assets, net 7. LONG-TERM LIABILITIES Balance 4.00% - 4.75% $274,500 - $423,000 Balance June 30, 2014 Additions Retirements June 30, 2015 11,936,651 17,079,826 2021 4.50% -5.25% $ 4,934,146 $ - $ - $ 4,934,146 4.00% -5.00% $20,000 - $1,385,000 26,760,000 15,525,000 29,702,695 - (10,403) 29,692,292 805,264 - (113,103) 692,161 30,507,959 - (123,506) 30,384,453 (16,146,945) (286,437) 5,958 (16,427,424) (805,264) - 113,103 (692,161) (16,952,209) (286,437) 119,061 (17,119,585) 13,555,750 (286,437) (4,445) 13,264,868 $ 18,489,896 $ (286,437) $ (4,445) $ 18,199,014 The City's long-term debt payable for the governmental activities, business -type activities, and Successor Agency at June 30, 2015 are as follows: Governmental Activities 2003 Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds Loan Payable Total Governmental Activities Business -Type Activities 2002 Water Revenue Bonds 2005 Water Revenue Bonds 2005 Sewer Revenue Certificates of Participation Total Business -Type Activities Successor Agency 2003 Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds 1999 TaxAllocation Bonds, including accreted interest 2001 TaxAllocation Bonds 2007H Housing TaxAllocation Bonds 2007R Redevelopment TaxAllocation Bonds Total Successor Agency Final Interest Maturity Rate Annual Principal Installments 2026 4.00% - 4.75% $30,500 - $47,000 2022 0.00% $7,034 - $31,662 Original Issue Outstanding at Amounts June 30, 2015 $ 695,000 $ 417,500 249,782 249,782 $ 944,782 $ 667,282 2023 4.00% - 4.50% $111,000 - $145,000 $ 2,090,000 $ 1,005,000 2031 3.80% - 4.50% $165,000 - $305,000 5,000,000 3,620,000 2036 3.70% - 5.00% $315,000 - $775,000 13,000,000 10,610,000 $ 20,090,000 $ 15,235,000 2026 4.00% - 4.75% $274,500 - $423,000 $ 6,255,000 $ 3,757,500 2036 5.00% - 5.30% $395,000 - $1,755,000 11,936,651 17,079,826 2021 4.50% -5.25% $740,000- $810,000 8,200,000 4,550,000 2038 4.00% -5.00% $20,000 - $1,385,000 26,760,000 15,525,000 2038 4.00% -5.00% $550,000 - $2,455,000 34,680,000 20,395,000 $ 87,831,651 $ 61,307,326 F-53 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 The following is a summary of changes to long -liabilities for the governmental activities, business -type activities, and Successor Agency for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015: Governmental activities Certificates ofparticipation Lease revenue refunding bonds Capital leases Loan payable Subtotal long-term obligations Compensated absences Total governmental activities Business -type activities Water revenue bonds Sewer revenue certificates of participation Original issue premium Original issue discount Total business -type activities Successor Agency Lease revenue refunding bonds Tax allocation bonds Accreted interest on capital appreciation bonds Original issue premium Original issue discount Total Successor Agency Balance July 1, 2014 Additions Retirements $ 2,895,000 $ - $ (2,895,000) 446,500 - (29,000) 514,494 - (514,494) 127,040 249,782 (127,040) 3,983,034 249,782 (3,565,534) Amount due Balance Within One June 30, 2015 Year 417,500 30,500 249,782 31,662 667,282 62,162 1,405,441 1,187,459 (1,237,149) 1,355,751 1,237,149 $ 5,388,475 $ 1,437,241 $ (4,802,683) $ 2,023,033 $ 1,299,311 9,102,532 860,756 (211,056) 9,752,232 $ 4,890,000 $ - $ (265,000) $ 4,625,000 $ 275,000 10,915,000 - (305,000) 10,610,000 315,000 166,824 - (7,612) 159,212 7,612 (41,902) - 2,854 (39,048) (2,854) $ 15,929,922 $ - $ (574,758) $ 15,355,164 $ 594,758 Amount due Balance Balance Within One July 1, 2014 Additions Retirements June 30, 2015 Year $ 4,018,500 $ $ (261,000) $ 3,757,500 $ 274,500 48,871,539 (1,073,944) 47,797,595 1,988,682 9,102,532 860,756 (211,056) 9,752,232 221,318 1,092,713 - (54,568) 1,038,145 54,568 (316,408) - 13,757 (302,651) (13,757) $ 62,768,876 $ 860,756 $ (1,586,811) $ 62,042,821 $ 2,525,311 Governmental Activities 1999 Certificates of Participation On January 15, 1999, the Financing Authority issued the 1999 Certificates of Participation (1999 COPS) in the amount of $5,055,000. The 1999 COPS were issued to provide funding for the acquisition by the Financing Authority of the site and improvements for the community center complex. The General Fund provides for the repayment of the 1999 COPS, per the agreement between the Financing Authority and the City. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the City paid off the outstanding balance of the 1999 COPS. 2003 Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds On July 1, 2003, the Financing Authority issued the Rohnert Park Financing Authority Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2003 (2003 LRBs) to refinance the outstanding Rohnert Park Public Safety Facility Project -the Series 1994 Certificates of Participation (1994 COPS) of $5,780,000 and the outstanding Master Equipment Lease Program Series 1999 Certificates of Participation (1999 COPs) of $785,000, and to provide for deposit of a surety bond in a reserve fund and to pay certain costs of issuance. The 2003 LRBs are payable from and secured by base rental payments to be made by the City under the lease between the City and the Financing Authority for the lease of the Department of Public Safety Main Station, which houses the City's Department of Safety which provides police and fire services in the City. The General Fund provides 10% of the 2003 LRBs repayments, per the agreement between the Financing Authority and the City. The remaining 90% of the repayment is made by the F-54 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Successor Agency. These revenues have been pledged until the fiscal year ended June 30, 2026, the final maturity of the 2003 LRBs. The total principal and interest remaining for the 10% governmental activities' share of the 2003 LRBs COPs is $534,351. The revenue pledged during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 was $48,753 which equaled to the total debt service payment by the governmental activities. Capital Leases On June 22, 2005, the City has entered into a long-term capital lease agreement with a financing agency to lease public safety patrol and fire protection vehicles and other equipment. Payment for the capital lease obligations are made from various revenue sources recorded in the General Fund. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the City paid off the outstanding balance of the capital leases. Loans Payable On August 1, 2013, the City entered into a loan agreement with Exchange Bank in the amount of $150,000. Proceeds of the loan were used to purchase various new cardio exercise equipment for the Sports Center, including 10 treadmills, 2 stair steps, 4 reclining bikes, 4 regular bikes and 2 crossover machines. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the City paid off the outstanding balance of this loans payable. On June 18, 2015, the City entered into a loan agreement with Pacific Gas and Electric Company in the amount of $249,682. Proceeds of the loan were used to replace LED Street Light. The loan is payable over 5 years from the City's General Fund, bears no interest, and has a final maturity of August 15, 2021. Other Long Term Liabilities — Compensated Absences Compensated absences are generally liquidated by the General Fund. Business -Type Activities 2002 and 2005 California Statewide Communities Development Authority Water Revenue Bonds In October 2002, the City became a program participant in the California Statewide Communities Development Authority Water and Wastewater Pooled Financing Program (Program). As a participant in the Program, the City was able to issue California Statewide Communities Development Authority (CSCDA) Water Revenue Bonds. During October 2002, the CSCDA issued the 2002 CSCDA Water Revenue Bonds (2002 Water Revenue Bonds) on behalf of the City in the amount of $2,090,000. The proceeds are to be used for water improvement projects. System net revenues, as defined in the agreement, and all amounts on deposit in the System Revenue Fund, are irrevocably pledged to the payment of the Installment Payments and the System Net Revenues will not be used for any other purpose while any of the Installment Payments remain unpaid. On May 1, 2005, the CSCDA issued the 2005A CSCDA Water Revenue Bonds (2005A Water Revenue Bonds) on behalf of the City in the amount of $5,000,000 under the Program. Proceeds of the Bonds were used to finance the acquisition and construction of water public capital improvements System Net Revenues, as defined in the agreement, and all amounts on deposit in the System Revenue Fund, are irrevocably pledged to the payment of the Installment Payments and the System Net Revenues will not be used for any other purpose while any of the Installment Payments remain unpaid. System Net Revenues have been pledged until the fiscal year ended June 30, 2031, the final maturity of the 2005 Water Revenue Bonds. The total principal and interest remaining on the 2002 and 2005A Water Revenue Bonds is $6,236,636. The System Net Revenues for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 was $557,793 while the total debt service payment was $470,179. F-55 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 2005 Sewer System Revenue Certificates of Participation On May 27, 2005, the City entered into an installment sale agreement with the Financing Authority for the issuances of Sewer System Revenue Certificates of Participation, Series 2005 (2005 Sewer COPS) in the amount of $13,000,000. Proceeds of the 2005 Sewer COPS are being used for: a) financing certain improvements, betterments, renovations and expansions of facilities within the Sewer System of the City; b) paying capitalized interest with respect to the 2005 Sewer COPs to June 1, 2006; c) providing for the deposit of a reserve fund surety bond and; d) paying costs of delivery of the 2005 Sewer COPS. Pursuant to the Installment Purchase Agreement, all Net Revenues and all amounts on deposit in the Revenue Fund (other than amounts on deposit therein required to pay Operations and Maintenance Costs) are irrevocably pledged to the payment of the Installment Payments as provided therein and the Sewer Net Revenues shall not be used for any other purpose while any of the Installment Payments remain unpaid; provided, that out of the Sewer Net Revenues there may be apportioned such sums for such purposes as are expressly permitted by the Installment Purchase Agreement. In addition, the Public Facilities Finance Fee Special Revenue Fund is required to repay its portion of the Installment Payments that represent improvements constructed with these bond proceeds that were used to expand facility capacity. Sewer Net Revenues have been pledged until the fiscal year ended June 30, 2036, the final maturity of the 2005 Sewer COPS. The total principal and interest remaining on the 2005 Sewer COPS is $17,108,432. The Sewer Net Revenues for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 was $1,756,682 and total public facilities finance fee was $3,401,650 while the total debt service payment was $816,518. Successor Agency The following long term obligations were transferred from the Commission to the Successor Agency on February 1, 2012, when all redevelopment agencies in California ceased to exist: 1999 Tax Allocation Bonds On January 15, 1999, the Commission issued Capital Appreciation Tax Allocation Bonds, Series 1999 (1999 TABS) in the amount of $11,936,651. The 1999 TABS were issued for the purpose of funding certain capital improvements, to fund a reserve fund and to pay the costs of issuing the Series 1999 Bonds. The 1999 TABS will mature during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2036, are limited obligations of the Successor Agency payable and secured by tax revenues to be derived from the project area. 2001 Tax Allocation Bonds On September 25, 2001, the Commission issued the Rohnert Park Redevelopment Project Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds, Series 2001 (2001 TABs) for the purpose of refunding a portion of the Commission's outstanding Series 1991 Bonds, funding certain capital improvements, funding a reserve fund and paying the issuance costs. The 2001 TABs will mature during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021, are limited obligations of the Successor Agency payable and secured by tax revenues to be derived from the project area. 2007R and 2007H Tax Allocation Bonds On March 28, 2007 the Commission issued the Rohnert Park Redevelopment Project Tax Allocation Bonds, Series 2007R (2007R TABs) in the amount of $34,680,000, and the Rohnert Park Redevelopment Project Housing Tax Allocation Bonds (2007H TABs) in the amount of $26,760,000, for the purpose of financing certain public improvements, including certain housing projects, purchasing municipal bond debt service reserve fund policies in order to satisfy the reserve requirements for the respective reserve accounts, and paying the costs of issuing the bonds. The 2007R and 2007H TABs, which will mature during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2038, are limited obligations of the Successor Agency payable and secured by tax revenues to be derived from the project area. F-56 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 With the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency, tax increment is no longer distributed, and instead the Successor Agency receives payments from the RPTTF that are to be used to fund the debt service on the bonds. The total principal and interest remaining on the 1999, 2001, 2007R and 2007H TABS is $91,913,720 and total debt service payment for the year ended June 30, 2015 was $3,177,712. 2003 Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds As discussed in the governmental activities section, 2003 LRBs were issued to refinance the 1994 COPs and 1999 COPS. The General Fund provides 10% of the 2003 LRBs repayments, per the agreement between the Financing Authority and the City. The remaining 90% of the repayment is made by the Successor Agency. The 2003 LRBs will mature during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2026. With the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency, tax increment is no longer distributed, and instead the Successor Agency receives payments from the RPTTF that are to be used to fund 90% of the debt service on the 2003 LRBs. As of June 30, 2015, the total principal and interest remaining for the 90% Successor Agency's share of the 2003 LRBs is $4,809,159 and total debt service payment for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 was $438,780. Future debt service requirements (principal and interest) for governmental activities are as follows: Future debt service requirements (principal and interest) for business -type activities are as follows: Lease Revenue Bonds Bonds Fiscal year (10% City portion) Loan Payable Fiscal Year Principal Interest Ending June 30: Principal Interest Principal Interest 2016 $ 30,500 $ 18,582 $ 31,662 $ - 2017 31,500 17,326 42,217 - 2018 33,000 15,999 42,217 - 2019 34,000 14,511 42,217 - 2020 36,000 12,849 42,217 - 2021-2025 205,500 36,468 49,252 - 2026 47,000 1,116 - - 2036 $ 417,500 $ 116,851 $ 249,782 $ - Future debt service requirements (principal and interest) for business -type activities are as follows: F-57 Sewer Revenue Certificates of Participation Princin al $ 315,000 325,000 340,000 355,000 370,000 2,105,000 2,655,000 3,370,000 775,000 $ 10,610,000 Interest $ 500,143 487,888 475,138 461,463 447,175 1,975,300 1,414,250 699,200 37.975 6,496,432 Water Revenue Bonds Fiscal year Ending June 30: Principal Interest 2016 $ 275,000 $ 195,034 2017 285,000 183,999 2018 290,000 172,499 2019 305,000 160,183 2020 315,000 146,865 2021-2025 1,505,000 520,784 2026-2030 1,345,000 225,409 2031-2035 305,000 6,863 2036 - - $ 4,625,000 $ 1,611,636 F-57 Sewer Revenue Certificates of Participation Princin al $ 315,000 325,000 340,000 355,000 370,000 2,105,000 2,655,000 3,370,000 775,000 $ 10,610,000 Interest $ 500,143 487,888 475,138 461,463 447,175 1,975,300 1,414,250 699,200 37.975 6,496,432 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Future debt service requirements (principal, interest, and accreted interest) for the Successor Agency are as follows: Principal $ 1,988,682 2,163,830 2,439,386 2,330,467 2,396,384 10,845,356 11,656,546 7,706,555 6,270,389 $ 47,797,595 TaxAllocation Bonds Interest Accretion $ 1,831,150 1,747,225 1,650,325 1,548,306 1,455,225 6,105,203 4,139,394 2,149,439 517,454 $ 21,143,721 221,318 231,169 240,614 584,533 603,616 5,594,644 6,763,454 7,238,445 1,494,611 $ 22,972,404 Legal Debt Limit As of June 30, 2015, the City's legal debt limit (15% of valuation subject to taxation) was $604,150,000 and the City has no debt subject to the legal debt limit. Arbitrage Liability The Tax Reform Act of 1986 instituted certain arbitrage restrictions with respect to the issuance of tax-exempt bonds after August 31, 1986. Arbitrage regulations deal with the investment of all tax-exempt bond proceeds at an interest yield greater than the interest yield paid to bondholders. Generally, all interest paid to bondholders can be retroactively rendered taxable if applicable rebates are not reported and paid to the Internal Revenue Service at least every five years. At June 30, 2015, the City has no arbitrage liability. 8. EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT PLAN Plan Description All qualified permanent and probationary employees are eligible to participate in the City's CalPERS plans. The City participates in five plans with CalPERS as follows: CalPERS Plan Lease Revenue Bonds Fiscal Year (90% Successor Agency Portion) Ending June 30: Principal Interest 2016 $ 274,500 $ 167,234 2017 283,500 155,932 2018 297,000 143,994 2019 306,000 130,601 2020 324,000 115,639 2021-2025 1,849,500 328,213 2026-2030 423,000 10,046 2031-2035 - - 2036-2038 - - $ 3,757,500 $ 1,051,659 Principal $ 1,988,682 2,163,830 2,439,386 2,330,467 2,396,384 10,845,356 11,656,546 7,706,555 6,270,389 $ 47,797,595 TaxAllocation Bonds Interest Accretion $ 1,831,150 1,747,225 1,650,325 1,548,306 1,455,225 6,105,203 4,139,394 2,149,439 517,454 $ 21,143,721 221,318 231,169 240,614 584,533 603,616 5,594,644 6,763,454 7,238,445 1,494,611 $ 22,972,404 Legal Debt Limit As of June 30, 2015, the City's legal debt limit (15% of valuation subject to taxation) was $604,150,000 and the City has no debt subject to the legal debt limit. Arbitrage Liability The Tax Reform Act of 1986 instituted certain arbitrage restrictions with respect to the issuance of tax-exempt bonds after August 31, 1986. Arbitrage regulations deal with the investment of all tax-exempt bond proceeds at an interest yield greater than the interest yield paid to bondholders. Generally, all interest paid to bondholders can be retroactively rendered taxable if applicable rebates are not reported and paid to the Internal Revenue Service at least every five years. At June 30, 2015, the City has no arbitrage liability. 8. EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT PLAN Plan Description All qualified permanent and probationary employees are eligible to participate in the City's CalPERS plans. The City participates in five plans with CalPERS as follows: CalPERS Plan Type of Plan Participants Miscellaneous Plan Agent multi-employer plan City non -safety members Safety members hired or join CalPERS Safety Tier 1 Plan Cost sharing plan before 7/1/2008 Safety members hired or join CalPERS Safety Tier 2 Plan Cost sharing plan from 7/1/2008 to 6/17/2012 Safety members hired or join CalPERS Safety Tier 3 Plan Cost sharing plan from 6/18/2012 and 12/31/2012 Safety members hired or join CalPERS Safety PEPRA Plan Cost sharing plan since 1/1/2013 F-58 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Ca1PERS acts as a common investment and administrative agent for various local and state governmental agencies within the State of California. Benefit provisions and other requirements are established by State statute, employer contract with Ca1PERS and by City resolution. Ca1PERS issues publicly available reports that include a full description of the pension plans regarding benefit provisions, assumptions and membership information that can be found on the Ca1PERS website at www.calpers.ca.gov. Benefits Provided Ca1PERS provides service retirement and disability benefits, annual cost of living adjustments and death benefits to plan members, who must be public employees and beneficiaries. Benefits are based on a final average compensation period of 12 months or 36 months. The cost of living adjustments for the Ca1PERS plans are applied as specified by the Public Employees' Retirement Law. The California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act (PEPRA), which took effect in January 2013, changes the way Ca1PERS retirement and health benefits are applied, and places compensation limits on members. As such members who established Ca1PERS membership on or after January 1, 2013 are known as "PEPRA" members. The Ca1PERS' provisions and benefits in effect at June 30, 2015, are summarized as follows: Hire date Benefit formula Benefit vesting schedule Benefit payments Retirement age Monthly benefits, as a % of eligible compensation Required employee contribution rates Required employer contribution rates Safety Plans Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 PERPA Prior to From July 1, 2008 From June 18, 2012 On or after July 1, 2008 to June 17, 2012 to December 31, 2012 January 1, 2013 3.01/o @ 50 with 5.0% 3.0% @ 50 with 2.0% 3.0% @ 55 with 2.0% 2.7% @ 57 with 2.0% COLA COLA COLA COLA 5 years of service Monthly for life 50 3.0% 9.000% 51.317% 5 years of service Monthly for life 50 3.0% 9.000% 27.849% 5years of service Monthly for life 55 3.0% 9.000% 21.367% 5 years of service Monthly for life 57 2.7% 11.500% 11.500% Employees Covered At June 30, 2014, the most recent information available, the following employees were covered by the benefit terms for the City's Miscellaneous Plan: Inactive employees or beneficiaries currently receiving benefits 114 Inactive employees entitled to but net yet receiving benefits 124 Active employees 116 Total 354 F-59 Mseellaneous Plan Prior to From July 1, 2008 From July 1, 2011 On or after Hire date July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2011 to December 31, 2012 January 1, 2013 Benefit formula 2.7% @ 55 with 5.0% 2.7% @ 55 with 2.0% 2.0% @ 55 with 2.0% 2.0% @ 62 with 2.0% COLA COLA COLA COLA Benefit vesting schedule 5 years of service 5 years of service 5 years of service 5 years of service Benefit payments Monthly for life Monthly for life Monthly for life Monthly for life Retirement age 55 55 55 62 Monthly benefits, as a % of eligible 2.7% 2.7% 2.0% 2.0% compensation Required employee contribution rates 8.00% 8.000/0 7.00% 6.25% Required employer contribution rates 25.550% 25.550% 25.550% 25.550% Hire date Benefit formula Benefit vesting schedule Benefit payments Retirement age Monthly benefits, as a % of eligible compensation Required employee contribution rates Required employer contribution rates Safety Plans Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 PERPA Prior to From July 1, 2008 From June 18, 2012 On or after July 1, 2008 to June 17, 2012 to December 31, 2012 January 1, 2013 3.01/o @ 50 with 5.0% 3.0% @ 50 with 2.0% 3.0% @ 55 with 2.0% 2.7% @ 57 with 2.0% COLA COLA COLA COLA 5 years of service Monthly for life 50 3.0% 9.000% 51.317% 5 years of service Monthly for life 50 3.0% 9.000% 27.849% 5years of service Monthly for life 55 3.0% 9.000% 21.367% 5 years of service Monthly for life 57 2.7% 11.500% 11.500% Employees Covered At June 30, 2014, the most recent information available, the following employees were covered by the benefit terms for the City's Miscellaneous Plan: Inactive employees or beneficiaries currently receiving benefits 114 Inactive employees entitled to but net yet receiving benefits 124 Active employees 116 Total 354 F-59 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Contribution Requirements For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the City's actuarially determined contributions were as follows: Miscellaneous Plan Safety Tier 1 Plan Safety Tier 2 Plan Safety Tier 3 Plan Safety PEPRA Plan Total $ 2,034,136 2,196,939 93,660 102,046 24,652 $ 4,451,433 Section 20814(c) of the California Public Employees' Retirement Law requires that the employer contribution rates for all public employers be determined on an annual basis by the actuary and shall be effective on the July 1 following notice of a change in the rate. Funding contributions for the City's plans is determined annually on an actuarial basis as of June 30 by CAPERS. The actuarially determined rate is the estimated amount necessary to finance the costs of benefits earned by public employees during the year, with an additional amount to finance any unfunded accrued liability. Net Pension Liability The following is a summary of net pension liability at June 30, 2015: Governmental activities $ 42,776,285 Business -type activities 4,533,848 Total net pension liability $ 47,310,133 As of June 30, 2015, the City's net pension liability is comprised of the following: The City's net pension liability for each Safety Plan is measured as a proportionate share of the plan's net pension liability. The City's net pension liability of each of its plans is measured as of June 30, 2014, and the total pension liability for each of its plans used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of June 30, 2013, rolled forward to June 30, 2014, using standard update procedures. The City's proportions of the net pension liability for the Ca1PERS plans were actuarially determined as of the valuation date. F-60 Share of Net Proportionate Pension Share Liability Miscellaneous Plan n/a $ 18,120,529 Safety Tier 1 Plan 0.46803% 29,122,874 Safety Tier 1 Plan 0.00099% 61,841 Safety Tier 1 Plan 0.00005% 3,017 Safety PEPRA Plan 0.00003% 1,872 Total $ 47,310,133 The City's net pension liability for each Safety Plan is measured as a proportionate share of the plan's net pension liability. The City's net pension liability of each of its plans is measured as of June 30, 2014, and the total pension liability for each of its plans used to calculate the net pension liability was determined by an actuarial valuation as of June 30, 2013, rolled forward to June 30, 2014, using standard update procedures. The City's proportions of the net pension liability for the Ca1PERS plans were actuarially determined as of the valuation date. F-60 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 The following table shows the proportionate share of the net pension liability of the City's Safety Plans over the measurement period. Balance at June 30, 2013 (VD) Change in year: Service cost Interest on the total pension liability Contributions fromthe employer Contributions from employees Net investment income (1) Benefit payments, including refunds of employee contributions Net changes during measurement period Balance at June 30, 2014 (MD) G)Net of administrative expenses. $ 74,859,488 $ 52,442,826 $ 22,416,662 1,392,611 - 1,392,611 5,526,199 - 5,526,199 - 1,658,144 (1,658,144) 535,499 (535,499) - 9,021,300 (9,021,300) (3,746,291) (3,746,291) - 3,172,519 7,468,652 (4,296,133) $ 78,032,007 $ 59,911,478 $ 18,120,529 F-61 Safety Tier 1 Plan Safety Tier 2 Plan Increase (Decrease) Increase (Decrease) Total Plan Net Pension Total Plan Net Pension Pension Fiduciary Liability Pension Fiduciary Liability Liability Net Position (Asset) Liability Net Position (Asset) Balance at June 30, 2013 (VD) $ 91,629,878 $ 58,194,309 $ 33,435,569 $ 317,412 $ 235,525 $ 81,887 Net changes during measurement period 4,445,367 8,758,062 (4,312,695) 15,399 35,445 (20,046) Balance at June 30, 2014 (MD) $ 96,075,245 $ 66,952,371 $ 29,122,874 $ 332,811 $ 270,970 $ 61,841 Safety Tier 3 Plan SafetyPEPRA Plan Increase (Decrease) Increase (Decrease) Total Plan Net Pension Total Plan Net Pens ion Pension Fiduciary Liability Pension Fiduciary Liability Liability Net Position (Asset) Liability Net Position (Asset) Balance at June 30, 2013 (VD) $ 15,490 $ 11,494 $ 3,996 $ 9,609 $ 7,130 $ 2,479 Net changes during measurement period 751 1,730 (979) 466 1,073 (607) Balance at June 30, 2014 (MD) $ 16,241 $ 13,224 $ 3,017 $ 10,075 $ 8,203 $ 1,872 The net pension liability for the City's Miscellaneous Plan is measured as the total pension liability less the fiduciary net position. The change in the net pension liability for the City's Miscellaneous Plan is as follows: Increase (Decrease) Total Plan Pension Fiduciary Net Pension Liability Net Position Liability Balance at June 30, 2013 (VD) Change in year: Service cost Interest on the total pension liability Contributions fromthe employer Contributions from employees Net investment income (1) Benefit payments, including refunds of employee contributions Net changes during measurement period Balance at June 30, 2014 (MD) G)Net of administrative expenses. $ 74,859,488 $ 52,442,826 $ 22,416,662 1,392,611 - 1,392,611 5,526,199 - 5,526,199 - 1,658,144 (1,658,144) 535,499 (535,499) - 9,021,300 (9,021,300) (3,746,291) (3,746,291) - 3,172,519 7,468,652 (4,296,133) $ 78,032,007 $ 59,911,478 $ 18,120,529 F-61 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Pension Expense and Pension Related Deferred Outflows and Inflows of Resources For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the City recognized pension expense as follows: Governmental activities $ 3,691,358 Business -type activities 372,844 Total pension expense $ 4,064,202 Pension expense represents the change in the net pension liability during the measurement period, adjusted for actual contributions and the deferred recognition of changes in proportionate share, difference between actual and proportionate share of contributions, actual investment gain/loss, actuarial gain/loss, actuarial assumptions or method, and plan benefits. At June 30, 2015, the City reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pension from the following sources: Mscellaneous Plan Deferred Deferred Outflows of Inflows of Resources Resources Pension contributions subsequent to measurement date $ 2,034,137 $ Change in employer's proportion - Differences between the employer's actual and proportionate share of contribution Net differences between projected and actual earnings on plan investments Total Safetv Plans Deferred Deferred Outflows of Inflows of Resources Resources $ 2,417,296 $ - - (244,992) 352,699 - Total Deferred Deferred Outflows of Inflows of Resources Resources $ 4,451,433 $ - - (244,992) 352,699 - (4,128,142) - (4,633,644) - (8,761,786) $ 2,034,137 $ (4,128,142) $ 2,769,995 $ (4,878,636) $ 4,804,132 $ (9,006,778) Deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources above represent the unamortized portion of changes to net pension liability to be recognized in future periods in a systematic manner. At June 30, 2015, the City reported $4,451,433 as deferred outflows of resources related to contributions subsequent to the measurement date, which will be recognized as a reduction to net pension liability in the year ending June 30, 2016. Other amounts reported as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized as pension expense as follows: Year Ending June 30 2016 $ (2,185,127) 2017 (2,185,127) 2018 (2,167,628) 2019 (2,116,197) Total $ (8,654,079) F-62 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Actuarial Assumptions A summary of the actuarial assumptions and methods used to calculate the total pension liability as of June 30, 2014 is provided below, including any assumptions that differ from those used in the June 30, 2013 actuarial valuation. Valuation date June 30, 2013 updated to June 30, 2014 Measurement date June 30, 2014 Actuarial cost method Entry -age normal cost method Investment rate of return 7.50%, net of pension plan investment expense, including inflation Inflation 2.75% Projected salary increases 3.30% to 14.20% depending on age, service, and type of employment 7.50% as of June 30, 2013 Net of pension plan, investment and administrative, expenses, including inflation Basic COLA Contract COLA up to 2.75% until purchasing power allowance floor on purchasing power applies, 2.75% thereafter The underlying mortality assumptions and all other actuarial assumptions used in the June 30, 2013 valuation were based on the results of a January 2014 actuarial experience study for the period 1997 to 2011. Further details of the Experience Study can found on the CalPERS website. Discount Rate The discount rate used to measure the total pension liability was 7.50 percent. To determine whether the municipal bond rate should be used in the calculation of a discount rate for each plan, Ca1PERS stress tested plans that would most likely result in a discount rate that would be different from the actuarially assumed discount rate. Based on the testing, none of the tested plans run out of assets. Therefore, the current 7.50 percent discount rate is adequate and the use of the municipal bond rate calculation is not necessary. The long-term expected discount rate of 7.50 percent is applied to all plans in the Public Employees Retirement Fund. The stress test results are presented in a detailed report called "GASB Crossover Testing Report" that can be obtained at CalPERS' website under the GASB Statement No. 68 section. According to GASB Statement No. 68, the long-term discount rate should be determined without reduction for pension plan administrative expense. The 7.50 percent investment return assumption used in this accounting valuation is net of administrative expenses. Administrative expenses are assumed to be 15 basis points. An investment return excluding administrative expenses would have been 7.65 percent. Using this lower discount rate has resulted in a slightly higher total pension liability and net pension liability. This difference was deemed immaterial by the City. CalPERS is scheduled to review all actuarial assumptions as part of its regular Asset Liability Management review cycle that is scheduled to be completed in February 2018. Any changes to the discount rate will require Board action and proper stakeholder outreach. For these reasons, CalPERS expects to continue using a discount rate net of administrative expenses for GASB Statement Nos. 67 and 68 calculations through at least the 2017-18 fiscal years. The long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was determined using a building-block method in which best -estimate ranges of expected future real rates of return (expected returns, net of pension plan investment expense and inflation) are developed for each major asset class. In determining the long-term expected rate of return, CalPERS took into account both short-term and long-term market return expectations as well as the F-63 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 expected pension fund cash flows. Such cash flows were developed assuming that both members and employers will make their required contributions on time and as scheduled in all future years. Using historical returns of all the funds' asset classes, expected compound (geometric) returns were calculated over the short-term (first 10 years) and the long-term (11-60 years) using a building-block approach. Using the expected nominal returns for both short-term and long-term, the present value of benefits was calculated for each fund. The expected rate of return was set by calculating the single equivalent expected return that arrived at the same present value of benefits for cash flows as the one calculated using both short-term and long-term returns. The expected rate of return was then set equivalent to the single equivalent rate calculated above and rounded down to the nearest one quarter of one percent. The table below reflects long-term expected real rate of return by asset class. The rate of return was calculated using the capital market assumptions applied to determine the discount rate and asset allocation. These geometric rates of return are net of administrative expenses. Asset Class Global Equity Global Fixed Income Inflation Sensitive Private Equity Real Estate Infrastructure and Forestland Liquidity New Strategic Real Return Real Return Allocation Years 1 - 10 (1) Years 11+ (2) 47.0% 5.25% 5.71% 19.0 0.99 2.43 6.0 0.45 3.36 12.0 6.83 6.95 11.0 4.50 5.13 3.0 4.50 5.09 2.0 (0.55) (1.05) (1) An expected inflation of 2.5 percent used for this period. (2) An expected inflation of 3.0 percent used for this period. Sensitivity of the Net Pension Liability to Changes in Discount Rate The following presents the net pension liability of the City's Miscellaneous plan and proportionate share of the net pension liability of the City's Safety Plans as of the measurement date, calculated using the discount rate of 7.50 percent, as well as what the net pension liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is 1 percentage -point lower (6.50 percent) or 1 percentage -point higher (8.50 percent) than the current rate: Miscellaneous Plan Safety Tier 1 Plan Safety Tier 2 Plan Safety Tier 3 Plan Safety PEPRA Plan Total Discount Rate -1%(6.50%) $ 28,040,052 41,991,915 106,420 5,193 3,222 $ 70,146,802 F-64 Current Discount Rate (7.50%) $ 18,120,529 29,122,874 61,841 3,017 1,872 $ 47,310,133 Discount Rate +1%(8.50%) $ 9,867,911 18,519,340 25,110 1,225 760 $ 28,414,346 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Position Detailed information about each of the pension plans' fiduciary net position is available in the separately issued CalPERS financial reports. Each plan's fiduciary net position disclosed per the GASB Statement No. 68 accounting valuation report may differ from the plan assets reported in the funding actuarial valuation report due to several reasons. For the accounting valuations, CalPERS must keep items such as deficiency reserves, fiduciary self-insurance and OPEB expense included as assets. These amounts are excluded for rate setting purposes in the City's funding actuarial valuation. In addition, differences may result from early financial statement closing and final reconciled reserves. 9. POST EMPLOYMENT HEALTH CARE BENEFITS Plan Description The City sponsors a single -employer defined benefit plan providing other postemployment benefits (OPEB) including medical, dental and vision to eligible retirees and their dependents in accordance with various labor agreements. Employees are eligible for OPEB if they were hired before July 1, 2007, work continuously for the City for 10 or 15 years dependent on hire date (unless disabled), and are eligible for the CalPERS pension plan. Employees hired on or after July 1, 2007 participate in a defined contribution plan that is funded monthly and are not eligible for the defined benefit OPEB plan and thus benefits provided are not included in the OPEB actuarial valuation. The City participates in the California Employers' Retiree Benefit Trust (CERBT) Fund. CERBT is administered by CalPERS and is an agent multiple -employer trust. CalPERS issues a separate comprehensive annual financial report. Copies of the CalPERS annual financial report may be obtained from the CalPERS Executive Offices, Lincoln Plaza East, 400 Q Street, Sacramento, California 95814. The City reached new agreement with its bargaining groups during June 2014. Effective July 1, 2014, the City's OPEB for employees hired prior to July 1, 2007 were eliminated in exchange for the following benefit: 1) Eligible employees agreed to accept $2,000 (non -sworn) and $2,500 (sworn) for each year of continuous service as a regular, benefited employee calculated through January 1, 2015. This lump sum amount is to be deposited prior to January 15, 2015 into a Retirement Health Savings Account (RHSA) established in each individual's name; and 2) Eligible employees will receive $500 per month from the month following retirement until the age of Medicare eligibility or death, whichever occurs first. This $500 amount can either be applied as a credit toward health insurance premiums if the retiree elects to stay on the City's health plans or credited monthly to a RHSA in the retiree's name. Eligible employees were given the option of retiring prior to January 1, 2015 under the original OPEB plan or electing the buyout option. All eligible employees employed as of January 1, 2015 will participate in the buyout option. The City performed an actuarial valuation as of July 1, 2015 factoring in the impact of the buyout option. During the year ended June 30, 2015, the City paid lump sum amount of $2,854,614 for the eligible employees that participate in the buyout option. Funding Policy During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011, the City Council adopted a 20 -year phase-in plan to set aside monies in the General Fund for contributions to the OPEB plan. The City started contributing to the CERBT during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2011 and continues to fund more than the pay-as-you-go amount annually. F-65 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Annual Other Postemployment Benefit Cost and Net Obligation The City's annual OPEB cost is calculated based on the annual required contribution (ARC) of the employer, an amount actuarially determined in accordance with the parameters of GASB Statement No. 45. The ARC represents a level of funding that, if paid on an ongoing basis, is projected to cover normal cost each year and amortize any unfunded actuarial accrued liabilities (URAL) over a period not to exceed thirty years. Annual OPEB Cost (AOC) equals the plan's ARC, adjusted for historical differences between the ARC and amounts actually contributed. Based on the July 1, 2015 actuarial valuation, the City's annual required contribution for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 is the sum of (a) normal cost of $232,000, and (b) level dollar amortization of the UAAL of $2,111,000. The City's contribution amount for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 included (a) deposits into the CERBT of $1,111,000, (b) implicit subsidy of $120,000, and (c) benefit payments for retirees of $1,556,000. The following table shows the components of the City's annual OPEB cost for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, and the changes in the net OPEB obligation: Annual required contribution Interest on OPEB obligation Adjustment to annual required contribution Annual OPEB cost (expense) Contributions made Decrease in net OPEB obligation Net OPEB obligation, beginning of year Net OPEB obligation, end of year $ 2,343,000 432,000 (783,000) 1,992,000 (2,787,000) (795,000) 10,296,000 $ 9,501,000 Three-year historical trend information for the annual OPEB cost, percentage of annual OPEB cost contributed to the plan, and the net OPEB obligation were as follows (in thousands): F-66 Annual Percentage Fiscal Year OPEB Cost of AOC Net OPEB Ended (AOC) Contributed Obligation 6/30/2013 $ 3,433 44.7% $ 10,144 6/30/2014 3,360 95.5% 10,296 6/30/2015 1,992 139.9% 9,501 F-66 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Actuarial Methods and Assumptions The actuarial methods and significant assumptions used in the July 1, 2015 actuarial valuation for the City's annual required contributions for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015 is as follows: Valuation Date July 1, 2015 Actuarial Cost Method Entry age normal cost Amortization Method Level percent of payroll UAALRemaining Closed 23 years as of the valuation date Amortization Period Asset Valuation Method Market value 6.5% with prefunding, 4.0% without prefunding, Discount Rate grading from 4.0% to 6.5% over 20 years for phase-in prefunding Project Salary Increases 3.25% Inflation 3.00% Medical Cost 5.25% for Medicare Part B premium, 5.25% for dental costs, 3.25% for vision costs, and other medical premiums grading from Trend Growth 7.5% to an ultimate rate of 5.25% by 2021 Funded Status and Funding Progress The funded status and funding progress were determined as part of the July 1, 2015 actuarial valuation (the most recent valuation available). The schedule of funding progress for the OPEB plan below shows the actuarial assets value, actuarial accrued liability, their relationship, and the relationship of the unfunded actuarial accrued liability to payroll. Actuarial Unfunded UAAL as Actuarial Accrued Actuarial Actuarial Annual Percentage Valuation Liability - Assets Accrued Funded Covered of Covered Date Entry Age Value Liability (URAL) Ratio Payroll Payroll 7/1/2015 $ 29,770,000 $ 5,008,000 $ 24,762,000 16.8% $ 12,262,602 201.9% Actuarial valuations of an ongoing plan involve estimates of the value of reported amounts and assumptions about the probability of events far into the future. Examples include assumptions about future employment, mortality, and the healthcare cost trend. Amounts determined regarding the funded status of the plan and the annual required contributions of the employer are subject to continual revision as actual results are compared with past expectations and new estimates are made about the future. Projections of benefits are based on the types of benefits provided under the substantive plan at the time of each valuation and on the pattern of sharing of benefit costs between the employer and plan members to that point, and, if applicable, the disclosure that the projections of benefits for financial reporting purposes do not explicitly incorporate the potential effects of legal or contractual funding limitations on the pattern of cost sharing between the employer and plan members in the future. The schedule of funding progress, presented as required supplementary information (RSI) following the notes to the financial statements, presents multi-year trend information about whether the actuarial value of plan assets is increasing or decreasing over time relative to the actuarial accrued liability for benefits. F-67 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 10. FUND BALANCE / NET POSITION Portions of unassigned fund balance may be assigned to indicate tentative plans for financial resource utilization in a future period, such as for special purpose or capital projects. Such plans or intent are subject to change, have not been legally authorized and may not result in expenditures. As of June 30, 2015, the City's governmental fund balances were classified as follows: Restricted for: Public Graton Special revenue programs - 979,119 979,119 Senior Center donations 92,802 Facilities Mitigation 92,802 Total 1,205,373 Housing Projects Financing City Capital Finance Fee Supplemental Other Governmental Capital and street projects 639,599 General Special Revenue Authority Projects Special Revenue Special Revenue Governmental Funds No nsp end ab le: Housing projects 80,196 23,994,290 - - 24,074,486 Performing Arts Center - - - Prepaid and other assets $ 171,028 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 171,028 Advance to other funds 1,799,570 38,467,468 1,333,323 1,799,570 Performing Arts Center - 400,000 500,000 500,000 Total nonspendable 1,970,598 - - - - - - 500,000 2,470,598 Restricted for: Special revenue programs - 979,119 979,119 Senior Center donations 92,802 - 92,802 Public safetyprograms -police - 1,205,373 1,205,373 Public safetyprograms - fire - 114,014 114,014 Capital and street projects 639,599 5,514,374 6,153,973 Redevelopment capitalprojects - - 5,119,840 - 5,119,840 Housing projects 80,196 23,994,290 - - 24,074,486 Performing Arts Center - - - 687,762 687,762 Debt service - - 40,099 - - 40,099 Total restricted for 172,998 23,994,290 40,099 5,759,439 8,500,642 38,467,468 Assigned to: Public safetyprograms -police 87,124 87,124 Capital and street projects - 50,818 50,818 Graton Mitigation - 1,318,390 866,378 2,184,768 Operating reserve 3,828,518 - - 3,828,518 Contingency reserve 2,754,259 2,754,259 Infrastructure reserve 1,616,000 - - - - - - 1,616,000 Self-insured losses reserve 998,268 - - - - - - 998,268 Retirement reserve 1,333,323 - - - - - - 1,333,323 Vehicle replacement 400,000 400,000 Info rmat io n Tee hno In g y 180,000 - - - - - - 180.,000 Retiree health savings 6,895 6,895 Encumbrances 925,419 - - 925,419 Total assigned to 12,042,682 - 1,318,390 1,004,320 14,365,392 Unassigned 33,588 - - - (7,257,885) - (17,338) (7,241,635) Total fund balance $14,219,866 $ 23,994,290 $ 40,099 $ 5,759,439 $ (7,257,885) $ 1,318,390 $ 9,987,624 $ 48,061,824 F-68 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 City's Reserve Policy The City adopted budget and fiscal policies to maintain various reserve balances as follows: • Operating Reserve — The City shall maintain a reserve balance of 10% of total operating expenditures. The purpose of this reserve is to adequately provide for: 1) economic uncertainties and financial hardships or downturns in the local or national economy; 2) cash flow requirements; 3) future debt or capital obligations, and 4) legal requirements. • Contingency Reserve — The City shall maintain a reserve of 5% of total operating expenditures to provide adequate capital in the event of a local disaster or unanticipated fiscal crisis. • Infrastructure Reserve — The City shall maintain a reserve with a target balance equivalent to the annual depreciation of the existing infrastructure and a minimum balance of 100% of the first year Capital Improvement Plan funding requirements. • Self -Insured Losses Reserve — The City shall maintain a reserve equal to 50% of the annual premium plus the average deductible. All insurance refunds will be transferred back to this reserve. • Retirement Reserve — The City shall maintain a reserve equal to 25% of the annual pension costs to offset fluctuations in pension contribution rates. The City intends to use the reserve for the specific purpose as stated in the budget and fiscal policies. At June 30, 2015, the City reported these reserve balances as part of the General Fund's assigned fund balance. 11. RISK MANAGEMENT The City is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts; theft of, damage to, and destruction of assets; errors and omissions; injuries to employees; and natural disasters. The City reports all of its risk management activities in its General Fund. The City participates in the Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF), a joint powers agency established in May 1976 to provide an independently managed risk sharing self-insurance program for member cities. The purpose of REMIF is to spread the adverse effect of losses among the member agencies and to purchase excess insurance as a group, thereby reducing its costs. As of June 30, 2015, the City's deductibles and maximum coverage through its participation in REMIF is as follows: Coverage: Deductible REMIF Coverage Excess Coverage General liability $ 5,000 $ 500,000 $ 39,500,000 Workers' compensation 5,000 1,000,000 Statutory Property damage 5,000 25,000 290,000,000 Automobile liability 5,000 10,000 9,990,000 Earthquake 5% of actual value of unit subject to $100,000 minimum 100,000 19,900,000 Fidelity 1 5,000 1 25,000 1 11990,000 Boiler and Machinery 1 5,000 1 51000 1 21,245,000 F-69 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 A summary of audited financial information of REMIF as of and for year ended June 30, 2014, the most current available audited financial information, is as follows (amounts in thousands). Total assets $ 18,192 Total liabilities 15,648 Net position $ 2,544 Total revenues $ 8,798 Total expenses 9,481 Change in net position $ (683) The City contributes its pro -rata share of anticipated losses to a pool administered by REMIF. Should actual losses among participants be greater than the anticipated losses, the City will be assessed its pro -rata share of the deficit. Conversely, if the actual losses are less than anticipated, the City will be refunded its pro -rata share of the excess. The City paid insurance premiums and deductibles of $1,217,944 during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015. Settled claims have not exceeded commercial excess liability coverage in any of the past three fiscal years. Claims expenditures and liabilities are reported for self-insured deductibles when it is probable that a loss has occurred and the amount of that loss can be reasonably estimated. These losses include an estimate of claims that have been incurred but not reported (IBNR). At June 30, 2015 the amount of these IBNR liabilities was $38,222. This liability is the City's best estimate based on available information. Changes in the claims liability (reported in accrued liabilities of General Fund) during the past two fiscal years ended June 30, 2015 and 2014, are as follows: Year Ended June 30 2015 2014 Claims liability, beginning of year $ 126,500 $ 117,642 Current year claim deductibles and changes in estimates Net payments Claims liability, end of year 120,486 110,029 (27,657) (101,171) $ 219,329 $ 126,500 At June 30, 2015, the City assigned $998,268 of General Fund's fund balance for future claims liabilities. 12. JOINT VENTURES Sonoma County Waste Management ABX The City participates in the Sonoma County Waste Management Agency (SCWMA), a joint power authority of nine incorporated cities and the County formed in April 1992. Each member of the joint venture has a representative on the Board of Directors of SCWMA. The SCWMA Board of Directors is responsible for governing the joint power authority as a separate entity. The SCWMA Board of Directors, or a designee, is responsible for the preparation of an annual budget, assessing fees, and entering into contracts and is authorized to sue and become obligated when sued. The purpose of SCWMA is to conduct a yard waste composting, wood waste recovery system, household hazardous material recovery program, and a public education program in the County. F-70 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 The expenditures of SCWMA are primarily funded by dumping fees collected when reusable resources are disposed of at the County landfill site. Funding for SCWMA also comes from the sale of composted and recycled products. No direct funding is required from the participants to the joint power authority. A summary of audited financial information of SCWMA as of and for fiscal year ended June 30, 2014, the most current available audited financial information, is as follows (amounts in thousands). Total assets $ 10,257 Total liabilities 1,006 Net position 9,251 Total revenues $ 5,988 Total expenses 5,479 Change in net position $ 509 Complete financial statements for SCWMA can be obtained from SCWMA office at 2300 County Center Drive, Suite B 100, Santa Rosa, CA 95403. Sonoma County Public Safety Consortium The Sonoma County Public Safety Consortium (SCPSC) was formed by a joint powers agreement on July 1, 2008 to efficiently and effectively operate, maintain and improve a public safety communication and data management system in the County. SCPSC members are the City, the cities of Cotati, Petaluma, Santa Rosa, Sonoma, Town of Windsor, Redwood Empire Dispatch Communications Authority, the Santa Rosa Junior College, and the County. In addition to the SCPSC members, other public safety entities have limited access to system as non- affiliated agencies. As a member, the City pays its proportionate share percentage of the total costs incurred by the SCPSC. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the City paid $245,829 to the SCPSC. A summary of audited financial information of SCPSC as of and for fiscal year ended June 30, 2014, the most current available audited financial information, is as follows (amounts in thousands). Total assets $ 4,842 Total liabilities 581 Net position 4,261 Total revenues $ 2,159 Total expenses 2,158 Change in net position $ Complete financial statements for SCPSC can be obtained from SCPSC office at 585 Fiscal Drive, Suite 100, Santa Rosa, CA 95403. F-71 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 13. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Claims and Litigations , The City is directly and indirectly involved in various suits relating principally to claims arising from construction contracts, personal injury, and property damage. In the opinion of the City Attorney and City's management, potential claims against the City resulting from such litigation, not covered by insurance, would not materially affect the basic financial statements of the City. As a result, no liability has been accrued by the City relating to these matters as of June 30, 2015. Long Range Property Management Plan On April 26, 2013, the DOF granted a Finding of Completion for the Successor Agency. On September 23, 2013, the Successor Agency submitted a Long Range Property Management Plan (LRPMP) addressing the disposition and use of real properties held by the Successor Agency to the DOF for approval. The Successor Agency submitted a revised LRPMP to DOF on April 10, 2014. The DOF approved the LRPMP on June 19, 2014. As of June 30, 2015, the City has not transferred or disposed any of the Successor Agency's capital assets. 14. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH FEDERATED INDIANS OF GRATON RANCHERIA During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013, the City entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (Tribe) relating to their establishment and operation of a casino just outside the City limits boundary. The MOU provides for contributions from the Tribe to the City to fund mitigation efforts to lessen the impact of the casino on the community. The MOU provided for initial, one-time contributions to cover mitigation costs before the opening of the casino, and then ongoing, quarterly contribution distributions through the State of California's Graton Mitigation Fund. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015, the City received $6,870,626 of recurring contributions for five contribution areas as described in the MOU. Contribution amounts are adjusted each year to reflect increases in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers in the San Francisco Bay Area, per Section 5.5 of the MOU. The MOU sections, descriptions, and amounts received are as follows: MOU Section Description Amount Notation 3.1 Law Enforcement Recurring Contribution $ 381,968 A 3.2 Problem Gambling Recurring Contribution 95,492 B 3.3 Waterway Recurring Contribution 38,196 C 3.4.1 Supplemental Recurring Contribution 4,545,204 D 3.4.2 Recurring Public Services Contribution 1,809,766 E A. In accordance with MOU Section 3. 1, Law Enforcement Recurring Contribution - Following the Opening Date, the Tribe shall make a recurring cash contribution to the City of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) per annum for Special Enforcement Activities to mitigate the ongoing impacts of the Project on public safety in the City. The above -referenced contribution shall be made by the Tribe in four (4) successive, equal, quarterly installments commencing on the first business day of the third (3rd) Quarter after the Opening Date and on the first business day of every Quarter thereafter. The City received payments totaling $381,968 during fiscal year ended June 30, 2015. F-72 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 B. In accordance with MOU Section 3.2, Problem Gambling Recurring Contribution - Following the Opening Date, the Tribe shall make a recurring cash contribution to the City of one hundred twenty five thousand dollars ($125,000) per annum to mitigate the social impacts of the Project on the City. The City shall grant such payment to an organization dedicated to the treatment and prevention of problem gambling or pathological gambling disorders. The recipient organization shall be determined by the City, with approval by the Tribe, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. The above -referenced contribution shall be made by the Tribe in four (4) successive, equal, quarterly installments commencing on the first business day of the third (3rd) Quarter after the Opening Date and on the first business day of every Quarter thereafter. The City received payments totaling $95,492 during fiscal year ended June 30, 2015. C. In accordance with MOU Section 3.3, Waterway Recurring Contribution - Following the Opening Date, the Tribe shall make a recurring cash contribution to the City of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) per annum to be used solely to address storm water drainage matters to mitigate potential impacts of the Project on storm water drainage. The above referenced contribution shall be made by the Tribe in four (4) successive, equal, quarterly installments commencing on the first business day of the third (3rd) Quarter after the Opening Date and on the first business day of every Quarter thereafter. The City received payments totaling $38,196 during fiscal year ended June 30, 2015. D. In accordance with MOU Section 3.4.1, Supplemental Recurring Contribution - Following the Opening Date, the Tribe shall make a recurring cash contribution to the City of five million dollars ($5,000,000) per annum to mitigate potential impacts of the Project on the City. The above -referenced contribution shall be made by the Tribe in four (4) successive, equal, quarterly installments commencing on the first business day of the third (3rd) Quarter after the Opening Date and on the first business day of every Quarter thereafter. These payments shall be paid from the Graton Mitigation Fund which is expected to include deposits made by the Tribe within thirty (30) days of the close of the prior calendar quarter. The City received payments totaling $4,545,204 during fiscal year ended June 30, 2015. E. In accordance with MOU Section 3.4.2, Recurring Public Services Contribution - Following the Opening Date, the Tribe shall make a recurring cash contribution to the City of two million three hundred sixty nine thousand dollars ($2,369,000) per annum to mitigate potential impacts of the Project on City services. It is the intent of the City to use these funds in part to provide for additional staffing levels to mitigate the potential impacts on public safety and/or other City services. The above - referenced contribution shall be made by the Tribe in four (4) successive, equal, quarterly installments commencing on the first business day of the third (3rd) Quarter after the Opening Date and on the first business day of every Quarter thereafter. These payments shall be paid from the Graton Mitigation Fund which is expected to include deposits made by the Tribe within thirty (30) days of the close of the prior calendar quarter. The City received payments totaling $1,809,766 during fiscal year ended June 30, 2015. F-73 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 15. OPERATING LEASES The City has entered into an operating lease contract whereby the City leases golf courses to a third party. The lease commenced July 1, 2012. The term of the lease is for twenty years, with an optional extension of ten additional years. The future minimum rentals to be received from the aforementioned operating lease as of June 30, 2015 are as follows: Fiscal Year Ending 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2025 2026-2030 2031-2032 Amount $ 82,746 84,649 87,325 90,776 93,577 512,204 592,544 261,642 $ 1,805,463 During the year ended June 30, 2015, the City received operating lease revenue of $78,428. 16 SUBSEQUENT EVENT Passage of Senate Bill 107 (the Bill) In September 2015, the State passed the Bill which contains additional provisions and provides specificity to existing law governing the dissolution of redevelopment agencies and the wind -down of their existing activities and obligations. The Bill required that remaining principal amount of any of the advances between the Successor Agency and the City that were previously unpaid after September 2015 be recalculated from the date of original of the loan on the basis at a simple interest rate of 3%. F-74 REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION F-75 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION (Unaudited) SCHEDULE OF CHANGES IN NET PENSION LIABILITY AND RELATED RATIOS (Dollar amount in thousands) Miscellaneous Plan Fiscal year 2014-15 Measurement period (2) 2013-14 Total pension liability 9,021 Service cost $ 1,393 Interest 5,526 Benefit payments, including refunds of 7,468 employee contributions (3,746) Net change in total pension liability 3,173 Total pension liability, beginning 74,859 Total pension liability, ending $ 78,032 Plan fiduciary net position Contributions, employer 1,658 Contributions, employee 535 Net investment income (1) 9,021 Benefit payments, including refunds of employee contributions (3,746) Net change in plan fiduciary net position 7,468 Plan fiduciary net position, beginning 52,443 Plan fiduciary net position, ending $ 59,911 Plan net pension liability $ 18,121 Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage of the total pension liability 76.78% Covered -employee payroll $ 6,788 Plan ne t pe ns ion liability as a pe rce ntage of covered -employee payroll 266.96% Note to schedule: (1) Net of administrative expenses. (2) Historical information is required only for measurementperiods for which GASB Statement No. 68 is applicable. Benefit Changes - The figures above do not include any liability impact that may have resulted from plan changes which occurred after June 30, 2013. This applies for voluntary benefit changes as well as any offers of Two Years Additional Service Credit (a.k.a. Golden Handshakes). Changes ofAssumptions - There are no changes in assumptions. F-76 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION (Unaudited) SCHEDULE OF THE COST SHARING PLANS' PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THE NET PENSION LIABILITY (Dollar amount in thousands) Note to schedule: (1) Historical information is required only formeasurementperiods for which GASB Statement No. 68 is applicable. Benefit Changes - The figures above do not include any liability impact that may have resulted from plan changes which occurred after June 30, 2013. This applies for voluntary benefit changes as well as any offers of Two Years Additional Service Credit (a.k a. Golden Handshakes). Changes of Assumptions - There are no changes in assumptions. F-77 Safety Safety Safety Safety Tier 1 Plan Tier 2 Plan Tier 3 Plan PEPRA Plan Fiscal year 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 Measurement period (1) 2013-14 2013-14 2013-14 2013-14 City's proportion of the net pension liability (NPL) 0.46803% 0.00099% 0.00005% 0.00002% City's proportion share of the NPL $ 29,123 $ 62 $ 3 $ 2 City's covered -employee payroll $ 5,079 $ 325 $ 135 $ 125 City's proportionate share of the NPL as a percentage of its covered -employee payroll 573.38% 19.04% 2.24% 1.50% Plan's fiduciary net position as a percentage of the Plan's total pension liability 80.43% 80.43% 80.43% 80.43% Note to schedule: (1) Historical information is required only formeasurementperiods for which GASB Statement No. 68 is applicable. Benefit Changes - The figures above do not include any liability impact that may have resulted from plan changes which occurred after June 30, 2013. This applies for voluntary benefit changes as well as any offers of Two Years Additional Service Credit (a.k a. Golden Handshakes). Changes of Assumptions - There are no changes in assumptions. F-77 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION (Unaudited) SCHEDULE OF PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS - PENSION (Dollar amount in thousands) Fiscal Year Ended June 30 Actuarially determined contributions (ADC) Contributions in relation to the ADC Contribution deficiency (excess) Covered -employee payroll Contributions as a percentage of covered -employee payroll Fiscal Year Ended June 30 Contractually required contributions (actuarially determined) (CRC) Contributions in relation to the CRC Contribution deficiency (excess) Covered -employee payroll Contributions as a percentage of covered -employee payroll Fiscal Year Ended Contractually required contributions (actuarially determined) (CRC) Contributions in relation to the CRC Contribution deficiency (excess) Covered -employee payroll Contributions as a percentage of covered -employee payroll Miscellaneous Plan 2015 2014 $ 2,034 $ 1,658 (2,034) (1,658) $ 6,953 $ 6,788 29.25% 24.43% Safety Tier 1 Plan Safety Tier 2 Plan 2015 2014 2015 2014 $ 2,197 $ 2,228 $ 93 $ 82 (2,197) (2,228) (93) (82) $ 4,282 $ 5,079 $ 336 $ 325 51.31% 43.87% 27.68% 25.23% Safety Tier 3 Plan Safety PEPRA Plan 2015 2014 2015 2014 $ 102 $ 59 $ 25 $ 13 (102) (59) (25) (13) $ 478 $ 135 $ 214 $ 125 F-78 21.34% 43.70% 11.68% 10.40% CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION (Unaudited) NOTES TO THE SCHEDULE OF PLAN CONTRIBUTIONS - PENSION (Dollar amount in thousands) The actuarial methods and assumptions used to set the actuarially determined contributions were as follows: Actuarial valuation date June 30, 2012 June 30, 2011 Actuarial cost method Entry age normal Entry age normal Asset valuation method Actuarial value of assets Actuarial value of assets Inflation 2.75% 2.75% Salary increases Varies by entry age and service Varies by entry age and service Payroll growth 3.00% 3.00% Investment rate of return 7.50%, net of pension plan 7.50%, net of pension plan investment and administrative investment and administrative expenses, includes inflation expenses, includes inflation Retirement age The probabilities of retirement The probabilities of retirement are based on the 2010 Ca1PERS are based on the 2010 Ca1PERS Experience Study for the period Experience Study for the period 1997 to 2007. 1997 to 2007. Mortality The probabilities of mortality The probabilities of mortality are based on the 2010 Ca1PERS are based on the 2010 Ca1PERS Experience Study for the period Experience Study for the period from 1997 to 2007. Pre- from 1997 to 2007. Pre- retirement and Post-retirement retirement and Post-retirement mortality rates include 5 years mortality rates include 5 years of projected mortality of projected mortality improvement using Scale AA improvement using Scale AA published by the Society of published by the Society of Actuaries. Actuaries. F-79 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION (Unaudited) SCHEDULE OF FUNDING PROGRESS - POST EMPLOYMENT HEALTH CARE BENEFITS (Dollar amount in thousands) See Note 9 to the basic financial statements for actuarial assumptions and other information related to the schedule of funding progress. F-80 Actuarial accrued UAAL Actuarial liability Unfunded as a% Actuarial value of (AAL) AAL Funded Covered of covered valuation assets entry age (UAAL) ratio payroll payroll date (a) (b) (b -a) (a/b) (c) ((b-a)/c) 7/1/2012 $ 1,654 $ 41,857 $ 40,203 4.0% $ 14,299 281.2% 7/1/2013 2,487 49,130 46,643 5.1% 14,498 321.7% 7/1/2015 5,008 29,770 24,762 16.8% 12,263 201.9% See Note 9 to the basic financial statements for actuarial assumptions and other information related to the schedule of funding progress. F-80 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GENERAL FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES 495,000 495,000 498,577 3,577 Taxes: 45,000 45,000 63,102 18,102 Property $ 3,384,879 $ 3,384,879 $ 3,564,329 $ 179,450 Real property transfer 100,000 100,000 128,994 28,994 Transient occupancy 2,600,000 2,600,000 2,980,129 380,129 Franchises 1,957,000 1,957,000 2,068,761 111,761 Subtotal 8.041.879 8.041.879 8.742.213 700.334 Licenses, permits and fees Business licenses 495,000 495,000 498,577 3,577 Animal licenses 45,000 45,000 63,102 18,102 Building permits 235,000 242,572 404,048 161,476 Plan check 355,000 409,600 544,054 134,454 Subtotal 1,130,000 1,192,172 1,509,781 317,609 Fines, forfeitures and penalties: Vehicle code 100,000 100,000 - (100,000) Parking fines 50,000 50,000 40,168 (9,832) Impound fees 12,000 12,000 - (12,000) Other court 4,500 4,500 2,005 (2,495) Subtotal 166,500 166,500 42,173 (124,327) Interest and rentals: 14,085,723 14,427,860 14,074,240 (353,620) Investment earnings 5,000 5,000 65,294 60,294 Rent - golf courses 69,992 69,992 69,100 (892) Rent - other 649,312 649,312 665,865 16,553 Subtotal 724,304 724,304 800,259 75,955 Intergovernmental Sales and use 10,694,000 10,694,000 10,493,451 (200,549) State motor vehicle in -lieu tax 2,757,000 2,757,000 2,948,341 191,341 Public Safety Augmentation Fund 220,000 220,000 248,197 28,197 Grants 364,723 706,860 157,719 (549,141) Reimbursements 50,000 50,000 226,532 176,532 Subtotal 14,085,723 14,427,860 14,074,240 (353,620) Charges for current services Zoning and subdivision fees 157,200 157,200 162,166 4,966 General plan maintenance fee 14,000 14,000 19,634 5,634 Sales of maps and lists 200 200 109 (91) Special public safety services 25,000 25,000 59,405 34,405 Animal shelter fees 70,000 70,000 99,373 29,373 Engineering fees 110,000 110,000 156,717 46,717 Library ground maintenance 8,370 8,370 8,370 - Developer engineering building fee - 726,471 726,471 - Administrative fees 283,263 283,263 Finance charges 9,563 9,563 Cost allocation charges 865,391 865,391 (continued) See note to required supplementary information. F-81 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GENERAL FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Public safety Personnel 12,338,230 12,409,960 12,002,634 Variance with Police protection 1,953,969 1,921,149 1,776,197 Final Budget Fire protection Original Final Actual Positive Animal control Budget Budget Amount (Negative) (Continued) 46,130 46,130 38,566 7,564 REVENUES (Continued) 225,549 229,985 202,532 27,453 Recreation: 22,870 22,870 26,614 (3,744) Recreation centers S 1,112,200 $ 1,112,200 $ 1,010,876 $ (101,324) Swimming pools 198,100 198,100 145,272 (52,828) Contract classes and other 37,000 37,000 37,435 435 Performing Arts Center admissions 389,940 389,940 310,701 (79,239) Subtotal 2,122,010 2,848,481 3,894,746 1,046,265 Donations and miscellaneous 90,000 121,357 20,112 (101,245) Total revenues 26,360,416 27,522,553 29,083,524 1,560,971 EXPENDITURES 1,040,239 1,068,382 721,313 347,069 Current: 151,717 153,739 150,063 3,676 General government: 139,079 102,959 102,082 877 City Council 130,016 131,516 126,792 4,724 City Manager 884,850 897,185 743,346 153,839 Economic Development 111,150 111,150 14,851 96,299 Finance and accounting 587,830 647,017 647,017 - Legal services 425,150 425,150 316,193 108,957 Development services 1,098,175 1,971,182 1,988,692 (17,510) Development services programs 374,063 723,291 251,555 471,736 Human Resources 405,877 414,104 419,674 (5,570) City office building 226,229 219,678 178,627 41,051 City office annex 21,500 34,145 28,464 5,681 Casino mitigation activity 2,865,484 788,203 1,148 787,055 General government-nondepartmental 161,055 1,118,733 254,132 864,601 Nondepartmental-employee benefits 1,794,000 5,197,590 5,048,759 148,831 Subtotal 9,085,379 12,678,944 10,019,250 2,659,694 Public safety Personnel 12,338,230 12,409,960 12,002,634 407,326 Police protection 1,953,969 1,921,149 1,776,197 144,952 Fire protection 463,400 358,305 266,321 91,984 Animal control 445,753 450,215 439,568 10,647 Animal shelter 46,130 46,130 38,566 7,564 Main station 225,549 229,985 202,532 27,453 North station 22,870 22,870 26,614 (3,744) South station 18,646 18,646 48,384 (29,738) Civil defense 3,000 3,000 1,609 1,391 Special enforcement activity - 503,182 28,078 475,104 Public safety programs 154,168 234,568 111,372 123,196 Subtotal 15,671,715 16,198,010 14,941,875 1,256,135 Public works: General 272,905 276,417 299,850 (23,433) Maintenance of streetsibikepaths 1,040,239 1,068,382 721,313 347,069 Storm drains and drainage 151,717 153,739 150,063 3,676 Wilfred maintenance 139,079 102,959 102,082 877 Subtotal 1,603,940 1,601,497 1,273,308 328,189 (continued) See note to required supplementary information. F-82 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GENERAL FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 (Continued) EXPENDITURES (Continued) Parks and recreation: Parks maintenance -general Recreation centers Swimming pools Recreation administration and programs Golf courses Library Subtotal Cultural Arts Center: Performing Arts Center Performing Arts Center productions Subtotal Capital outlay Debt service Principal Interest and fiscal charges Subtotal expenditures DEFICIENCY OF REVENUES UNDER EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Issuance of loans Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR Original Final Actual Budget Budget Amount Variance with Final Budget Positive (Negative) $ 756,180 $ 764,744 $ 753,567 $ 11,177 1,305,450 1,296,519 1,326,271 (29,752) 421,865 424,114 411,697 12,417 212,606 214,983 143;567 71,416 17,013 17,398 17,319 79 13,489 24,417 8,494 15,923 2,726,603 2,742,175 2,660,915 81,260 441,118 473,252 515,904 (42,652) 272,250 272,250 254,234 18,016 713,368 745,502 770,138 (24,636) 581,200 1,092,755 645,132 447,623 - 641,534 641,534 - - 40,167 40,875 (708) 30,382,205 35,740,584 30,993,027 4,747,557 (4,021,789) (8,218,031) (1,909,503) 6,308,528 - - 249,782 249,782 5,097,167 9,565,153 8,224,465 (1,340,688) (765,042) (5,369,073) (4,967,112) 401,961 4,332,125 4,196,080 3,507,135 (688,945) $ 310,336 $ (4,021,951) 1,597,632 $ 5,619,583 See note to required supplementary information. F-83 12,622,234 $ 14,219,866 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE HOUSING PROJECTS SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 REVENUES Interest and rentals Donations and miscellaneous Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: General government DEFICIENCY OF REVENUES UNDER EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Proceeds from sale of capital assets Transfers in Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR See note to required supplementary information. F-84 � LS,yy4,LyU Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) $ 1,800 $ 1,800 $ 36,558 $ 34,758 1,500 1,500 127,596 126,096 3,300 3,300 164,154 160,854 120,000 120,000 212,675 (92,675) (116,700) (116,700) (48,521) 68,179 - - 1,442,823 1,442,823 - - 59,701 59,701 - - 1,502,524 1,502,524 $ (116,700) $ (116,700) 1,454,003 $ 1,570,703 See note to required supplementary information. F-84 � LS,yy4,LyU CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE PUBLIC FACILITY FINANCE FEE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 See note to required supplementary information. F-85 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 19,789 $ 14,789 Licenses, permits and fees 1,610,000 1,610,000 3,401,650 1,791,650 Donations and miscellaneious - - 1,288 1,288 Total revenues 1,615,000 1,615,000 3,422,727 1,807,727 EXPENDITURES Current: Public works - 7,605 7,605 - Debt service: Interest and fiscal charges - - 3,280 (3,280) Total expenditures - 7,605 10,885 (3,280) EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES 1,615,000 1,607,395 3,411,842 1,804,447 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out (12,918,547) (12,910,942) (5,865,867) 7,045,075 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE $ (11,303,547) $ (11,303,547) (2,454,025) $ 8,849,522 FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR, (4,803,860) FUND BALANCE (DEFICIT), END OF YEAR $ (7,257,885) See note to required supplementary information. F-85 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GRATON MITIGATION SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 REVENUES Interest and rentals Donations and miscellaneous Total revenues OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR Original Final Budget Budget Variance with Final Budget Actual Positive Amount (Negative) $ 9,647 $ 9,647 4,554,851 4,554,851 (4,687,187) (4,486,749) 200,438 $ - $ (4,687,187) 68,102 $ 4,755,289 1,250,288 $ 1,318,390 See note to required supplementary information. F-86 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK NOTE TO REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Budgets and Budgetary Accounting The City operates under the general laws of the State of California and annually adopts a budget for its General Fund to be effective July 1 for the ensuing fiscal year. From the effective date of the budget, which is adopted and controlled at the department level, the amounts stated therein as proposed expenditures become appropriations to the various City departments. The City Council may amend the budget by resolution during the fiscal year. The legal level of budgetary control is the fund level. The City Manager may authorize transfers from one account to another within the same department. All unencumbered appropriations lapse at year-end. Annual budgets for all of the City's major funds and nonmajor special revenue funds are adopted on a basis consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, with the exception of proceeds from the sale of capital assets, which are treated as revenues on the budgetary basis. The City prefers to leave its original budget unaltered during the year, unless there are substantial changes to budget forecasts, so that the effectiveness of individual departments in meeting budget objectives can be evaluated and the adequacy of the budget itself can be judged. Expenditures in excess of budgeted amounts are allowed by law but must be approved individually by the City Manager and are required to be disclosed per GAAP. Encumbrance accounting, under which purchase orders, contracts, and other commitments of expenditures are recorded in order to reserve that portion of the applicable appropriation, is employed as an extension of the budgetary process. At June 30, 2015, encumbrances of $925,419 were outstanding for the General Fund. F-87 This page is left intentionally blank. F-88 OTHER SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION F-89 This page is left intentionally blank. F-90 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Special Revenue Funds are used to account for and report the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are restricted or committed to expenditure for specified purposes other than debt service or capital projects. The following summarizes the City's Special Revenue Funds: Alcoholic Beverage Service Ordinance (ABSO) Fund - Annual permit fee that is received from all businesses that sell alcohol in the City pursuant to City's Ordinance No. 780. The permit from the ordinance requires the business owner to comply with operational standards and training requirements and creates conditions and requirements upon the local alcohol sales licenses for the purpose of law enforcement compliance checks, police services necessary to monitor and enforce operational stands established with the license. Vehicle Abatement Fund - Revenues received from the Sonoma County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement Program, pursuant to the terms of an agreement with the Service Authority authorized by City Council Resolution No. 95-16, providing for the abatement of abandoned vehicles in the City. Traffic Safety Fund - Revenues received pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 42200 for the purpose of maintenance of traffic control devices and traffic law enforcement and traffic accident prevention. General Plan Maintenance Fund - Revenues received from a surcharge pursuant to City's Resolution No. 2008-03 on certain building permits and based on a percentage of project valuation, for the purpose of updating and maintaining the Rohnert Park General Plan. Spay and Neuter Fund — Revenues received from $2 of each animal license, pursuant to City's Resolution 2008-03, for the purpose of supplementing the costs of spay and neuter activities. Refuse Road Impact Fee Fund - Revenues received from Rohnert Park Disposal pursuant to the Second Amended and Restated Agreement between the City and Rohnert Park Disposal, Inc. for expenses incurred by the City for repairing and maintaining the City's public streets cause by normal and ongoing use of Rohnert Park Disposal's collection vehicles. State Gasoline Tax Fund - Revenues received pursuant to Street and Highway Code Sections 2105, 2106, 2107, and 2107.5 and other funds for the purpose of maintenance and construction of the City streets. Measure M Traffic Fund - Revenues received from County of Sonoma on one quarter cent sales tax for street improvements. Proposition 1B Fund - Revenues received from the States issued general obligation bond proceeds to City for maintenance and improvements of local transportation facilities. Traffic Signals Fee Fund - Revenues received from fees imposed on developers for the purpose of constructing traffic signals. Capital Outlay Fee Fund - Revenues received from fees imposed on developers for the purpose of park development, open space, and community facilities such as fire stations, libraries, auditoriums, stadiums, etc. Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund - Revenues received from the State of California pursuant to AB 3229 for the purpose of ensuring public safety. DIVCA PEG Fee (AB 2987) Fund — Revenues received pursuant to Assembly Bill 2987 for activities related to public, educational and governmental access channels. Traffic Congestion Relief (AB 2928) Fund - Revenues received pursuant to Assembly Bill 2928 for the purpose of maintenance and reconstruction of streets and roads. F-91 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Graton Mitigation Development Fee Fund — Accounts for nonrecurring development fee contributions and related activities pursuant to Section 2.1 of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria (Tribe) and the City. Graton Mitigation Law Enforcement Fund - Accounts for contributions and related activities for special law enforcement pursuant to Section 2.2 and Section 3.1 of the MOU between the Tribe and the City. Graton Mitigation Public Safety Building Fund - Accounts for contributions and related activities for the construction of a new public safety building and purchase of public safety equipment and vehicles pursuant to Section 2.3 of the MOU between the Tribe and the City. Graton Mitigation Problem Gambling Fund - Accounts for contributions and related activities for mitigation of social impacts pursuant to Section 3.2 of the MOU between the Tribe and the City. The City shall grant such payment to an organization dedicated to the treatment and prevention of problem gambling or pathological gambling disorders. Graton Mitigation Waterway Fund - Accounts for contributions and related activities for storm water drainage pursuant to Section 3.3 of the MOU between the Tribe and the City.. Graton Mitigation Public Services Fund - Accounts for contributions and related activities for public services pursuant to Section 3.4.2 of the MOU between the Tribe and the City. Graton Mitigation Wilfred Maintenance Fund - Accounts for contributions and related activities for the maintenance of the Wilfred Avenue pursuant to Section 6.6 of the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for implementation of mitigation measure for widening Wilfred Avenue between the Tribe and the City. Measure M Fire Benefit Assessment Fund - Revenues received pursuant to the voter approved fire benefit assessment district. Purpose is to finance enhancements of fire suppression activities. Mobile Home Rent Appeals Board Fund - Revenues received pursuant to City of Rohnert Park Ordinance 494 authorizing the collection of registration fees from mobile home parks. Purpose is to fund the Mobile Home Rent Appeals Board. Copeland Creek Drainage Facility Fund - Revenues received from fees imposed on developers in a specific area serviced by the Copeland Creek drainage improvements. Purpose is to repay the costs of the Copeland Creek drainage improvements. Asset Forfeiture Fund — Revenues from assets seizures returned after Federal and State seized asset court cases have been adjudicated and finalized. Performing Arts Center Facility Capital Reserve Fund — Revenues received from two dollars per ticket fees which is set aside for improvements at the Preforming Arts Center. Sports Center Facility Capital Reserve Fund — Revenues received from two dollars per sports center memberships which is set aside for improvements at the Sports Center. Explorer Fund— Revenues received from Public Safety Explorer Scouts fundraising activities that can only be used for Explorer Scouts goods and services. California Disability Access Fee Fund — Revenues received on each business licenses pursuant to SB 1186 for costs associated with hiring a Certified Access Specialists and other related costs. F-92 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 PERMANENT FUND Permanent Funds are used to account for resources that are legally restricted to the extent that only earnings, and not principal, may be used for purposes that support the City's programs. The following summarizes the City's Permanent Fund: Performing Arts Center Endowment Permanent Fund - Capital donated for the City's Dorothy Rohnert Sprekels Performing Arts Center. The interest generated from the donations is used for operating costs of the Performing Arts Center. F-93 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS JUNE 30, 2015 ASSETS Cash and investments Receivables, net: Taxes Accounts Accrued interest Intergovernmental Due from other funds Total assets LIABILITIES Accounts payable Due to other funds Total liabilities FUND BALANCES Nonspendable Restricted Assigned Unassigned Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances Performing F-94 Nonmajor Arts Center Special Endowment Revenue Permanent Funds Fund Total $ 8,521,656 $ 1,186,937 $ 9,708,593 16,022 - 16,022 198,043 - 198,043 8,638 825 9,463 145,929 - 145,929 17,338 - 17,338 $ 8,907,626 $ 1,187,762 $ 10,095,388 89,536 $ - $ 89,536 18,228 - 18,228 107,764 - 107,764 - 500,000 500,000 7,812,880 687,762 8,500,642 1,004,320 - 1,004,320 (17,338) - (17,338) 8,799,862 1,187,762 9,987,624 $ 8,907,626 $ 1,187,762 $ 10,095,388 F-94 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 REVENUES Taxes Intergovernmental Interest and rentals Charges for current services Licenses, permits and fees Fines, forfeitures and penalties Donations and miscellaneous Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: General government Public safety Public works Cultural arts center Total expenditures EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES FUND BALANCES, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCES, END OF YEAR F-95 Performing Nonmajor Arts Center Special Endowment Revenue Permanent Funds Fund Total $ 563,029 $ - $ 563,029 2,011,581 - 2,011,581 41,243 6,404 47,647 182,018 - 182,018 828,532 - 828,532 134,317 - 134,317 2,638,017 - 2,638,017 6,398,737 6,404 6,405,141 570,537 - 570,537 700,888 - 700,888 633,912 - 633,912 - 17,030 17,030 1,905,337 17,030 1,922,367 4,493,400 (10,626) 4,482,774 14,909 - 14,909 (5,014,712) - (5,014,712) (4,999,803) - (4,999,803) (506,403) (10,626) (517,029) 9,306,265 1,198,388 10,504,653 $ 8,799,862 $ 1,187,762 $ 9,987,624 F-95 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS JUNE 30, 2015 F-96 Alcohol Beverage Vehicle General Sales Ordinance Abatement Traffic Plan Spay and (ABSO) Fund Safety Maintenance Neuter ASSETS Cash and investments $ 72,001 $ 324,539 $ 213,459 $ 430,248 $ 44,338 Receivables, net: Taxes - - - - - Accounts - - - - 3,583 Accrued interest 89 307 253 344 83 Intergovernmental - 19,323 15,968 - - Due from other funds - - - - - Total assets $ 72,090 $ 344,169 $ 229,680 $ 430,592 $ 48,004 LIABILITIES Accounts payable $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Due to other funds - - Total liabilities - - - - - FUND BALANCES Restricted 72,090 344,169 229,680 430,592 48,004 Assigned - - - - - Unassigned - - - - - Total fund balances 72,090 344,169 229,680 430,592 48,004 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 72,090 $ 344,169 $ 229,680 $ 430,592 $ 48,004 F-96 F-97 State Traffic Refuse Road Gasoline Measure M Propostion Signals Impact Fee Tax Traffic 1B Fee ASSETS $ 628,777 $ 1,670,776 $ 563,978 $ 42 $ 1,506,686 Cash and investments Receivables, net: - - - - - Taxes 112,448 - - - Accounts 475 2,169 400 596 Accrued interest - 25,584 62,087 - Intergovernmental - - - - - Due from other funds S 741,700 $ 1,698,529 $ 626,465 $ 42 $ 1,507,282 Total assets LIABILITIES $ 61,001 $ - $ - $ - $ - Accounts payable - Due to other funds 61,001 Total liabilities FUND BALANCES 680,699 1,698,529 626,465 42 1,507,282 Restricted - - - - - Assigned - - - - - Unassigned 680,699 1,698,529 626,465 42 1,507,282 Total fund balances Total liabilities and $ 741,700 $ 1,698,529 $ 626,465 $ 42 $ 1,507,282 fund balances (continued) F-97 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS JUNE 30, 2015 Due from other funds - - - - - Total assets $ 205,122 $ 176,336 $ 380,329 $ 216,835 $ 4,019 LIABILITIES Accounts payable $ $ $ Due to other funds - Total liabilities FUND BALANCES Restricted 205,122 176,336 Assigned - - Unassigned - - Total fiord balances 205,122 176,336 Total liabilities and 380,329 216,835 - - - 4,019 380,329 216,835 4,019 fund balances $ 205,122 $ 176,336 $ 380,329 $ 216,835 $ 4,019 F-98 Supplemental DIVCA Traffic Graton Capital Law PEG Congestion Mitigation Outlay Enforcement Fee Relief Development Fee Services (AB2987) (AB2928) Fee ASSETS Cash and investments $ 204,934 $ 153,217 $ 349,221 $ 216,642 $ 3,221 Receivables, net: Taxes - - - - - Accounts - - 30,834 - - Accrued interest 188 152 274 193 798 Intergovernmental - 22,967 - - - Due from other funds - - - - - Total assets $ 205,122 $ 176,336 $ 380,329 $ 216,835 $ 4,019 LIABILITIES Accounts payable $ $ $ Due to other funds - Total liabilities FUND BALANCES Restricted 205,122 176,336 Assigned - - Unassigned - - Total fiord balances 205,122 176,336 Total liabilities and 380,329 216,835 - - - 4,019 380,329 216,835 4,019 fund balances $ 205,122 $ 176,336 $ 380,329 $ 216,835 $ 4,019 F-98 Graton Graton Graton Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Graton Graton Law Public Safety Problem Mitigation Mitigation Enforcement Building Gambling Waterway Public Services $ 69,491 $ $ 126,974 $ 50,789 $ 734,234 295 73 29 1,078 17,338 - - - $ 87,124 $ $ 127,047 $ 50,818 $ 735,312 17,338 17,338 87,124 127,047 50,818 735,312 - (17,338) - - - 87,124 (17,338) 127,047 50,818 735,312 $ 87,124 $ - $ 127,047 $ 50,818 $ 735,312 F-99 ASSETS Cash and investments Receivables, net: Taxes Accounts Accrued interest Intergovernmental Due from other funds Total assets LIABILITIES Accounts payable Due to other funds Total liabilities FUND BALANCES Restricted Assigned Unassigned Total fund balances Total liabilities and fund balances (continued) CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING BALANCE SHEET NONMAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS JUNE 30, 2015 Mobile Maintenance Graton Measure M Home Copeland Mitigation Fire Rent Creek Wilfred Benefit Appeals Drainage Asset F-100 Maintenance Assessment Board Facility Forfeiture ASSETS Cash and investments $ 456,932 $ 97,748 $ 117,974 $ 53,802 $ 349,679 Receivables, net: Taxes - 16,022 - - - Accounts - - 51,178 - - Accrued interest 270 244 103 48 169 Intergovernmental - - - - - Due from other funds - - - - - Total assets $ 457,202 $ 114,014 $ 169,255 $ 53,850 $ 349,848 LIABILITIES Accounts payable $ - $ - $ 5,235 $ - $ 23,300 Due to other funds - - 890 - - Total liabilities - - 61125 - 23,300 FUND BALANCES Restricted 457,202 114,014 163,130 53,850 326,548 Assigned - - - - - Unassigned - - - - - Total fiord balances 457,202 114,014 163,130 53,850 326,548 Total liabilities and fund balances $ 457,202 $ 114,014 $ 169,255 $ 53,850 $ 349,848 F-100 Performing Sports Art Center Center Facility Facility California Capital Capital Disability Reserve Reserve Explorer Access Fee Total ASSETS $ 33,244 $ 35,096 $ 8,546 $ 5,068 $ 8,521,656 Cash and investments Receivables, net: - - - - 16,022 Taxes - - - 198,043 Accounts 5 3 - - 8,638 Accrued interest - - - - 145,929 Intergovernmental - - - 17,338 Due from other funds $ 33,249 $ 35,099 $ 8,546 $ 5,068 $ 8,907,626 Total assets LIABILITIES $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 89,536 Accounts payable - - - - 18,228 Due to other funds - - - - 107,764 Total liabilities FUND BALANCES 33,249 35,099 8,546 5,068 7,812,880 Restricted - - - - 1,004,320 Assigned - - - - (17,338) Unassigned 33,249 35,099 8,546 5,068 8,799,862 Total fund balances Total liabilities and $ 33,249 $ 35,099 $ 8,546 $ 5,068 $ 8,907,626 fund balances F-101 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES NONMAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 F-102 Alcohol Beverage Vehicle General Sales Ordinance Abatement Traffic Plan Spay and (ABSO) Fund Safety Maintenance Neuter REVENUES Taxes $ $ $ $ $ Intergovernmental - Interestandrentals 417 1,591 1,181 1,617 401 Charges for current services 28,588 93,180 - 60,250 - Licenses, permits and fees - - - - 10,494 Fines, forfeitures and penalties 134,317 - Donations and miscellaneous - - - - - Total revenues 29,005 94,771 135,498 61,867 10,895 EXPENDITURES Current: General government - - - - - Public safety 47,273 74,488 - 11,022 Public works - - - - Total expenditures 47,273 74,488 - - 11,022 EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES (18,268) 20,283 135,498 61,867 (127) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in - - - - Transfers out (150,035) (45,723) Total other financing sources (uses) - (150,035) - (45,723) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES (18,268) 20,283 (14,537) 61,867 (45,850) FUND BALANCES, BEGINNING OF YEAR 90,358 323,886 244,217 368,725 93,854 FUND BALANCES, END OF YEAR $ 72,090 $ 344,169 $ 229,680 $ 430,592 $ 48,004 F-102 (continued) F-103 State Traffic Refuse Road Gasoline Measure M Propostion Signals Impact Fee Tax Traffic 1B Fee REVENUES $ $ $ $ $ Taxes - 1,230,543 258,075 - Intergovernmental 2,199 10,238 1,834 4,816 Interest and rentals - - - - Charges for current services 450,597 Licenses, permits and fees - Fines, forfeitures and penalties - - - Donations and miscellaneous 452,796 1,240,781 259,909 4,816 Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: - - - - General government - - Public safety 66,333 567,579 Public works 66,333 567,579 Total expenditures EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES 386,463 673,202 259,909 4,816 OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) - 14,909 - - Transfers in (336,766) (1,204,090) (89,684) Transfers out (336,766) (1,189,181) (89,684) - - Total other financing sources (uses) 49,697 (515,979) 170,225 - 4,816 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES FUND BALANCES, 631,002 2,214,508 456,240 42 1,502,466 BEGINNING OF YEAR $ 680,699 $ 1,698,529 $ 626,465 $ 42 $ 1,507,282 FUND BALANCES, END OF YEAR (continued) F-103 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES NONMAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 REVENUES Taxes Intergovernmental Interest and rentals Charges for current services Licenses, permits and fees Fines, forfeitures and penalties Donations and miscellaneous Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: General government Public safety Public works Total expenditures EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES FUND BALANCES, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCES, END OF YEAR Supplemental DIVCA Traffic Graton Capital Law PEG Congestion Mitigation Outlay Enforcement Fee Relief Development Fee Services (AB2987) (AB2928) Fee - 160,269 - - - 899 691 1,276 921 2,739 118,637 899 160,960 119,913 921 2,739 - - 150 - - 100,000 - 100,000 150 899 60,960 119,763 921 2,739 (6,656) (21,044) (1,212,813) (6,656) - (21,044) (1,212,813) (5,757) 60,960 98,719 921 (1,210,074) 210,879 115,376 281,610 215,914 1,214,093 $ 205,122 $ 176,336 $ 380,329 $ 216,835 $ 4,019 F-104 Graton Graton Graton Mitigation Mitigation Mitigation Graton Graton Law Public Safety Problem Mitigation Mitigation Enforcement Building Gambling Waterway Public Services REVENUES $ $ $ $ $ Taxes - - Intergovernmental 1,287 298 119 4,912 Interest and rentals - - - - Charges for current services - Licenses, permits and fees Fines, forfeitures and penalties 381,968 95,492 38,196 1,809,766 Donations and miscellaneous 383,255 95,790 38,315 1;814,678 Total revenues 431,212 431,212 (47,957) EXPENDITURES Current: 463,071 General government - Public safety - Public works - - 463,071 Total expenditures EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES 95,790 38,315 1,351,607 OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in (32,078) (1,208,681) Transfers out (32,078) - (1,208,681) Total other financing sources (uses) (80,035) 95,790 38,315 142,926 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES FUND BALANCES, 167,159 (17,338) 31,257 12,503 592,386 BEGINNING OF YEAR $ 87,124 $ (17,338) $ 127,047 $ 50,818 $ 735,312 FUND BALANCES, END OF YEAR (continued) F-105 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES NONMAJOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 REVENUES Taxes Intergovernmental Interest and rentals Charges for current services Licenses, permits and fees Fines, forfeitures and penalties Donations and miscellaneous Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: General government Public safety Public works Total expenditures EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES FUND BALANCES, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCES, END OF YEAR $ $ 563,029 $ $ - $ - - 362,694 1,259 1,062 486 231 747 175,410 304,049 - - - - 305,308 564,091 175,896 231 363,441 Mobile Graton Measure M Home Copeland Mitigation Fire Rent Creek Wilfred Benefit Appeals Drainage Asset Maintenance Assessment Board Facility Forfeiture REVENUES Taxes Intergovernmental Interest and rentals Charges for current services Licenses, permits and fees Fines, forfeitures and penalties Donations and miscellaneous Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: General government Public safety Public works Total expenditures EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES FUND BALANCES, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCES, END OF YEAR $ $ 563,029 $ $ - $ - - 362,694 1,259 1,062 486 231 747 175,410 304,049 - - - - 305,308 564,091 175,896 231 363,441 F-106 107,316 - - 36,893 - - 107,316 - 36,893 305,308 564,091 68,580 231 326,548 (136,386) (570,000) - (756) (136,386) (570,000) - (756) - 168,922 (5,909) 68,580 (525) 326,548 288,280 119,923 94,550 54,375 - $ 457,202 $ 114,014 $ 163,130 $ 53,850 $ 326,548 F-106 Performing Sports Art Center Center Facility Facility California Capital Capital Disability Reserve Reserve Explorer Access Fee Total REVENUES $ $ $ $ $ 563,029 Taxes 2,011,581 Intergovernmental 14 8 41,243 Interest and rentals - - 182,018 Charges for current services 33,235 35,091 5,068 828,532 Licenses, permits and fees - - - 134,317 Fines, forfeitures and penalties - - 8,546 - 2,638,017 Donations and miscellaneous 33,249 35,099 8,546 5,068 6,398,737 Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: 570,537 General government 700,888 Public safety 633,912 Public works - - - - 1,905,337 Total expenditures EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES 33,249 35,099 8,546 5,068 4,493,400 OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) 14,909 Transfers in (5,014,712) Transfers out (4,999,803) Total other financing sources (uses) 33,249 35,099 8,546 5,068 (506,403) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES FUND BALANCES, - - - - 9,306,265 BEGINNING OF YEAR $ 33,249 $ 35,099 $ 8,546 $ 5,068 $ 8,799,862 FUND BALANCES, END OF YEAR F-107 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE ALCOHOL BEVERAGE SALES ORDINANCE (ABSO) SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 EXPENDITURES Current: Public safety EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 31,050 31,050 $ 63,505 $ 63,505 F-108 47,273 (47,273) (18,268) (49,318) - (32,455) (18,268) $ (81,773) 90,358 $ 72,090 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ - $ - $ 417 $ 417 Charges for current services 31,050 31,050 28,588 (2,462) Total revenues 31,050 31,050 29,005 (2,045) EXPENDITURES Current: Public safety EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 31,050 31,050 $ 63,505 $ 63,505 F-108 47,273 (47,273) (18,268) (49,318) - (32,455) (18,268) $ (81,773) 90,358 $ 72,090 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE VEHICLE ABATEMENT SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 EXPENDITURES Current: Public safety EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 121,000 121,000 $ 230,000 $ 230,000 F-109 74,488 (74,488) 20,283 (100,717) - (109,000) 20,283 $ (209,717) 323,886 $ 344,169 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ 1,000 $ 1,000 $ 1,591 $ 591 Charges for current services 120,000 120,000 93,180 (26,820) Total revenues 121,000 121,000 94,771 (26,229) EXPENDITURES Current: Public safety EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 121,000 121,000 $ 230,000 $ 230,000 F-109 74,488 (74,488) 20,283 (100,717) - (109,000) 20,283 $ (209,717) 323,886 $ 344,169 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE TRAFFIC SAFETY SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 310,000 $ 197,000 $ 507,000 F-110 (150,035) (460,035) (14,537) $ (521,537) 244,217 $ 229,680 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ - $ - $ 1,181 $ 1,181 Fines, forfeitures and penalties 197,000 197,000 134,317 (62,683) Total revenues 197,000 197,000 135,498 (61,502) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 310,000 $ 197,000 $ 507,000 F-110 (150,035) (460,035) (14,537) $ (521,537) 244,217 $ 229,680 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 EXPENDITURES Current: General government EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 20,000 175,700 155,700 127,017 127,017 S 302,717 $ 282,717 F-111 20,000 61,867 (93,833) - (127,017) 61,867 $ (220,850) 368,725 $ 430,592 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ 700 $ 700 $ 1,617 $ 917 Charges for current services 175,000 175,000 60,250 (114,750) Total revenues 175,700 175,700 61,867 (113,833) EXPENDITURES Current: General government EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 20,000 175,700 155,700 127,017 127,017 S 302,717 $ 282,717 F-111 20,000 61,867 (93,833) - (127,017) 61,867 $ (220,850) 368,725 $ 430,592 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE SPAY AND NEUTER SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 EXPENDITURES Current: Public safety EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 19,140 19,140 $ 80,140 $ 80,140 F-112 11,022 (11,022) (127) (19,267) (45,723) (106,723) (45,850) $ (125,990) 93,854 $ 48,004 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals S - $ - $ 401 $ 401 Licenses, permits and fees 19,140 19,140 10,494 (8,646) Total revenues 19,140 19,140 10,895 (8,245) EXPENDITURES Current: Public safety EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 19,140 19,140 $ 80,140 $ 80,140 F-112 11,022 (11,022) (127) (19,267) (45,723) (106,723) (45,850) $ (125,990) 93,854 $ 48,004 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE REFUSE ROAD IMPACT FEE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 EXPENDITURES Current: Public works EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 379,786 379,786 $ 779,786 $ 779,786 F-113 66,333 (66,333) 386,463 6,677 (336,766) (736,766) 49,697 $ (730,089) 631,002 $ 680,699 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ 500 $ 500 $ 2,199 $ 1,699 Licenses, permits and fees 379,286 379,286 450,597 71,311 Total revenues 379,786 379,786 452,796 73,010 EXPENDITURES Current: Public works EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 379,786 379,786 $ 779,786 $ 779,786 F-113 66,333 (66,333) 386,463 6,677 (336,766) (736,766) 49,697 $ (730,089) 631,002 $ 680,699 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE STATE GASOLINE TAX SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 EXPENDITURES Current: Public works EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 46,000 163,359 567,579 (404,220) 1,050,390 933,031 673,202 (259,829) - - 14,909 14,909 (1,778,212) (1,778,212) (1,204,090) 574,122 (1,778,212) (1,778,212) (1,189,181) 589,031 $ (727,822) $ (845,181) (515,979) $ 329,202 2,214,508 $ 1,698,529 F-114 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Intergovernmental $ 1,091,390 $ 1,091,390 $ 1,230,543 $ 139,153 Interest and rentals 5,000 5,000 10,238 5,238 Total revenues 1,096,390 1,096,390 1,240,781 144,391 EXPENDITURES Current: Public works EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 46,000 163,359 567,579 (404,220) 1,050,390 933,031 673,202 (259,829) - - 14,909 14,909 (1,778,212) (1,778,212) (1,204,090) 574,122 (1,778,212) (1,778,212) (1,189,181) 589,031 $ (727,822) $ (845,181) (515,979) $ 329,202 2,214,508 $ 1,698,529 F-114 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE MEASURE M TRAFFIC SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 F-115 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Intergovernmental $ 260,429 $ 260,429 $ 258,075 $ (2,354) Interest and rentals 2,000 2,000 1,834 (166) Total revenues 262,429 262,429 259,909 (2,520) OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out (310,735) (310,735) (89,684) 221,051 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE $ (48,306) $ (48,306) 170,225 $ 218,531 FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR 456,240 FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR $ 626,465 F-115 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE TRAFFIC SIGNALS FEE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 F-116 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Intergovernmental $ - $ 1,006,388 $ - $ (1,006,388) Interest and rentals 5,000 5,000 4,816 (184) Total revenues 5,000 1,011,388 4,816 (1,006,572) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE $ 5,000 $ 1,011,388 4,816 $ (1,006,572) FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR 1,502,466 FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR $ 1,507,282 F-116 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE CAPITAL OUTLAY FEE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ 1,050 $ 1,050 $ 899 $ (151) OTHER FINANCING USES Transfers in Transfers out Total other financing sources (uses) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 33,517 33,517 (33,517) (219,000) (219,000) (6,656) 212,344 (185,483) (185,483) (6,656) 178,827 $ (184,433) $ (184,433) (5,757) $ 178,676 210,879 $ 205,122 F-117 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Intergovernmental $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 160,269 $ 60,269 Interest and rentals Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: Public safety EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 100,000 100,000 160,960 60,960 100,000 100,000 (100,000) (100,000) F-118 100,000 (100,000) 60,960 (39,040) - 100,000 60,960 $ 60,960 115,376 $ 176,336 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE DIVCA PEG FEE (AB2987) SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 EXPENDITURES Current: General government EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING USES Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 133,435 133,435 150 (150) 119,763 (13,672) (115,000) (115,000) (21,044) $ 18,435 $ 18,435 98,719 281,610 $ 380,329 F-119 S 80,284 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ 598 $ 598 $ 1,276 $ 678 Licenses, permits and fees 132,837 132,837 118,637 (14,200) Total revenues 133,435 133,435 119,913 (13,522) EXPENDITURES Current: General government EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING USES Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 133,435 133,435 150 (150) 119,763 (13,672) (115,000) (115,000) (21,044) $ 18,435 $ 18,435 98,719 281,610 $ 380,329 F-119 S 80,284 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF (AB2928) SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ - $ - $ 921 $ 921 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR (35,568) (35,568) $ (35,568) $ (35,568) F-120 921 215,914 $ 216,835 35,568 $ 36,489 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GRATON MITIGATION DEVELOPMENT FEE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 F-121 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 2,739 $ (2,261) Donations and miscellaneous 7,544,000 7,544,000 - (7,544,000) Total revenues 7,549,000 7,549,000 2,739 (7,546,261) OTHER FINANCING USES Transfers out (2,863,619) (1,212,813) (1,212,813) NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE $ 4,685,381 $ 6,336,187 (1,210,074) $ (7,546,261) FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR 1,214,093 FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR $ 4,019 F-121 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GRATON MITIGATION LAW ENFORCEMENT SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 EXPENDITURES Current: Public safety EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR - 431,212 (431,212) 500,000 500,000 (47,957) (547,957) (500,000) (500,000) (32,078) 467,922 $ - $ - (80,035) $ (80,035) 167,159 $ 87,124 F-122 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals - - 1,287 1,287 Donations and miscellaneous 500,000 500,000 381,968 (118,032) Total revenues 500,000 500,000 383,255 (116,745) EXPENDITURES Current: Public safety EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR - 431,212 (431,212) 500,000 500,000 (47,957) (547,957) (500,000) (500,000) (32,078) 467,922 $ - $ - (80,035) $ (80,035) 167,159 $ 87,124 F-122 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GRATON MITIGATION PROBLEM GAMBLING SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals S $ - $ 298 $ 298 Donations and miscellaneous - 95,492 95,492 Total revenues - 95,790 95,790 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE S $ - 95,790 $ 95,790 FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR 31,257 FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR $ 127,047 F-123 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GRATON MITIGATION WATERWAY SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ $ - $ 119 $ 119 Donations and miscellaneous - 38,196 38,196 Total revenues - 38,315 38,315 EXPENDITURES Current: Public works NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 50,000 50,000 $ $ (50,000) F-124 38,315 $ 88,315 $ 50,818 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GRATON MITIGATION PUBLIC SERVICES SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ $ - $ 4,912 $ 4,912 Donations and miscellaneous - 1,809,766 1,809,766 Total revenues - 1,814,678 1,814,678 EXPENDITURES Current: General government EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENDITURES OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 1,838,619 463,071 1,375,548 (1,838,619) 1,351,607 $ - S (1,838,619) F-125 3,190,226 (1,208,681) (1,208,681) 142,926 $ 1,981,545 592,386 $ 735,312 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE GRATON MITIGATION WILFRED MAINTENANCE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR (139,079) (139,079) (136,386) 2,693 $ 157,111 $ 157,111 168,922 $ 11,811 288,280 $ 457,202 F-126 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ 500 $ 500 $ 1,259 $ 759 Donations and miscellaneous 295,690 295,690 304,049 8,359 Total revenues 296,190 296,190 305,308 9,118 OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES) Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR (139,079) (139,079) (136,386) 2,693 $ 157,111 $ 157,111 168,922 $ 11,811 288,280 $ 457,202 F-126 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE MEASURE M BENEFIT ASSESSMENT SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 F-127 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Taxes $ 550,087 $ 550,087 $ 563,029 $ 12,942 Interest and rentals - - 1,062 1,062 Total revenues 550,087 550,087 564,091 14,004 OTHER FINANCING USES Transfers out (570,000) (570,000) (570,000) - Total other financing sources (uses) (570,000) (570,000) (570,000) - NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE $ (19,913) $ (19,913) (5,909) $ 14,004 FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR 119,923 FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR $ 114,014 F-127 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE MOBILE HOME RENT APPEALS BOARD SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 EXPENDITURES Current: General government NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 36,683 37,362 $ 52,317 $ 51,638 F-128 107,316 (69,954) 68,580 $ 16,942 $ 163,130 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ - $ - $ 486 $ 486 Licenses, permits and fees 89,000 89,000 175,410 86,410 Total revenues 89,000 89,000 175,896 86,896 EXPENDITURES Current: General government NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 36,683 37,362 $ 52,317 $ 51,638 F-128 107,316 (69,954) 68,580 $ 16,942 $ 163,130 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE COPELAND CREEK DRAINAGE FACILITY SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals $ - $ - $ 231 $ 231 OTHER FINANCING USES Transfers out NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR F-129 (756) (756) (525) $ (525) 54,375 $ 53,850 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE ASSETS FORFEITURE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Intergovernmental $ $ $ 362,694 $ 362,694 Interest and rentals - 747 747 Total revenues EXPENDITURES Current: Public safety NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR 363,441 363,441 42,000 36,893 5,107 $ - $ (42,000) 326,548 $ 368,548 F-130 $ 326,548 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE PERFORMING ART CENTER FACILITY CAPITAL RESERVE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals S $ - $ 14 $ 14 Licenses, permits and fees - 33,235 33,235 Total revenues - 33,249 33,249 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE S $ - 33,249 $ 33,249 FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR - FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR $ 33,249 F-131 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE SPORTS CENTER FACILITY CAPITAL RESERVE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Interest and rentals S $ - $ 8 $ 8 Licenses, permits and fees - 35,091 35,091 Total revenues - 35,099 35,099 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE S $ - 35,099 $ 35,099 FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR - FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR $ 35,099 F-132 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE EXPLORER SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Donations and miscellaneous $ $ - $ 8,546 $ 8,546 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE $ $ - 8,546 $ 8,546 FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR F-133 $ 8,546 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE CALIFORNIA DISABILITY ACCESS FEE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Variance with Final Budget Original Final Actual Positive Budget Budget Amount (Negative) REVENUES Licenses, permits and fees $ $ - $ 5,068 $ 5,068 NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE $ $ - 5,068 $ 5,068 FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR F-134 $ 5,068 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF NONMAJOR ENTERPRISE FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Enterprise Funds account for operations that operate in a manner similar to private business enterprises where the intent of the governing body is that the costs of providing goods and services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed primarily through user charges. The following summarizes the City's nonmajor Enterprise Funds: Refuse Collection Fund — Accounts for the remaining assets held in the Refuse Collection Fund. Ordinance No. 851 adopted by the City Council on November 27, 2012 transferred refuse billing and rate setting responsibilities from the City to an independent contractor in accordance with the Second Amended and Restated Agreement. Recycled Water Fund — Accounts for the activities of recycled water operations provided to recycled water customers based on user agreement. The activities include but not limited to, recycled water operations, maintenance, billing and collection. F-135 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF FUND NET POSITION NONMAJOR ENTERPRISE FUNDS JUNE 30, 2015 ASSETS Current assets: Cash and investments Receivables: Accounts Accrued interest Total current assets Noncurrent assets: Capital assets: Nondepreciable assets Total assets LIABILITIES Current liabilities: Accounts payable NET POSITION Net investment in capital assets Unrestricted Total net position F-136 Recycled Refuse Water Collection Total $ 23,888 $ 685,552 $ 709,440 - 5,097 5,097 2 611 613 23,890 691,260 715,150 29,139 - 29,139 53,029 691,260 744,289 23,885 - 23,885 29,139 - 29,139 5 691,260 691,265 $ 29,144 $ 691,260 $ 720,404 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN NET POSITION NONMAJOR ENTERPRISE FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 OPERATING EXPENSES: Other OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) NONOPERATING REVENUES Investment income INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE TRANSFERS Transfers in CHANGE IN NET POSITION NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, NET POSITION, END OF YEAR Recycled Refuse Water Collection Total $ - $ 3,530 $ 3,530 - (3,530) (3,530) 5 2,914 2,919 5 (616) (611) 29,139 - 29,139 29,144 (616) 28,528 - 691,876 691,876 $ 29,144 $ 691,260 $ 720,404 F-137 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS NONMAJOR ENTERPRISE FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Cash receipts from customers Cash paid to suppliers for goods and services Net cash provided by operating activities CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Transfers in CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Acquisition of capital assets CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Interest received NET INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF YEAR CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF YEAR RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING LOSS TO NET CASH PROVIDED BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES Operating loss Adjustments to reconcile operating loss to net cash provided by operating activities: Decrease in accounts receivable Net cash provided by operating activities F-138 Recycled Refuse Water Collection Total $ - $ 3,699 $ 3,699 (3,530) (3,530) 169 169 53,024 - 53,024 (29,139) - (29,139) 3 2,651 2,654 23,888 2,820 26,708 - 682,732 682,732 $ 23,888 $ 685,552 $ 709,440 $ - $ (3,530) $ (3,530) 3,699 3,699 $ - $ 169 $ 169 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Internal Service Funds are used to account for the accumulation of resources and the allocation and reimbursement of costs for service provided between City departments and functions. The following summarizes the City's Internal Service Funds: Information Technology Fund - Accounts for the cost of providing information technology services to City departments including: purchasing, operating and maintaining the City's voice, data, computer systems and its infrastructure. Vehicle Replacement Fund - Accounts for the accumulation of resources, and related expenses incurred for future replacement of major equipment and vehicles in the City. Fleet Management Fund — Accounts for the cost of providing fleet management services to City departments with services including: vehicle repairs, preventative maintenance and quality control inspections. F-139 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF NET POSITION INTERNAL SERVICES FUNDS JUNE 30, 2015 F-140 Information Vehicle Fleet Technology Replacement Management Total ASSETS Current assets: Cash and investments $ 86,394 $ 507,589 $ 110,424 $ 704,407 Receivables: Accounts - 15,253 - 15,253 Accrued interest 42 273 52 367 Total assets 86,436 523,115 110,476 720,027 DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES Pension items 37,721 - 25,419 63,140 LIABILITIES Current liabilities: Accounts payable 36,281 - 48,887 85,168 Due to other funds 13,873 - 9,087 22,960 Total current liabilities 50,154 - 57,974 108,128 Noncurrent liabilities: Net pension liability 336,025 - 226,440 562,465 Total liabilities 386,179 - 284,414 670,593 DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES Pension items 76,552 - 51,587 128,139 NET POSITION Unrestricted $ (338,574) $ 523,115 $ (200,106) $ (15,565) F-140 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN NET POSITION INTERNAL SERVICES FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 OPERATING REVENUES: Charges for services Penalties and other Total operating revenues OPERATING EXPENSES: Contractual services Rent and leases Payroll and related costs Other Repairs, operations and maintenance Supplies Total operating expenses OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) NONOPERATING REVENUES Investment income INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE TRANSFERS Transfers in Transfers out CHANGE IN NET POSITION NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, ASREPORTED CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR, AS RESTATED NET POSITION, END OF YEAR Information Vehicle Fleet Technology Replacement Management Total $ 783,002 $ - $ 462,210 $ 1,245,212 - 35,039 1,795 36,834 783,002 35,039 464,005 1,282,046 46,193 - 17,223 63,416 62,781 - - 62,781 292,313 - 187,714 480,027 108,530 - 6,175 114,705 285,730 - 207,243 492,973 15,849 - 272 16,121 811,396 - 418,627 1,230,023 (28,394) 35,039 45,378 52,023 194 1,137 247 1,578 (28,200) 36,176 45,625 53,601 21,044 288,136 - 309,180 (11,000) - - (11,000) (18,156) 324,312 45,625 351,781 64,526 198,803 13,675 277,004 (384,944) - (259,406) (644,350) (320,418) 198,803 (245,731) (367,346) $ (338,574) $ 523,115 $ (200,106) $ (15,565) F-141 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS INTERNAL SERVICES FUNDS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: Cash receipts from interfund services provided Cash paid to suppliers for goods and services Cash paid to employees for services Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL FINANCING ACTIVITIES: Transfers in Transfers out Interfund borrowing received from other funds Net cash provided by noncapital financing activities CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: Interest received NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF YEAR CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF YEAR RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME (LOSS) TO NET CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES Operating income (loss) Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities: Changes in liabilities: Increase (decrease)in accounts payable Decrease in accrued liabilities Decrease (increase) in deferred outflows of resources - pension Increase (decrease) in deferred inflows of resources - pension Increase in net pension liability Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities Information Vehicle Fleet Technology Replacement Management Total $ 783,002 $ 19,786 $ 464,005 $ 1,266,793 (543,692) - (193,175) (736,867) (302,401) - (194,512) (496,913) (63,091) 19,786 76,318 33,013 21,044 288,136 309,180 (11,000) - - (11,000) 13,873 - 9,087 22,960 23,917 288,136 9,087 321,140 216 965 208 1,389 (38,958) 308,887 85,613 355,542 125,352 198,702 24,811 348,865 $ 86,394 $ 507,589 $ 110,424 $ 704,407 $ (28,394) $ 35,039 $ 45,378 $ 52,023 (12,796) (15,253) 43,902 15,853 (11,813) (6,164) (17,977) (6,973) (4,699) (11,672) 76,552 51,587 128,139 (79,667) - (53,686) (133,353) $ (63,091) $ 19,786 $ 76,318 $ 33,013 F-142 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION DESCRIPTION OF FIDUCIARY FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 Fiduciary funds are used to account for resources held for the benefit of parties outside the City. The City's private -purpose trust funds are reported as fiduciary funds to account for resources held and administrated under trust or similar arrangement for the benefits of individuals, private organizations, or other governments. The City reports the following private purpose trust funds: Assets Seizure Fund - Accounts for Federal and State seized assets held by the City in a trustee capacity until the County of Sonoma District Attorney's Office requests for remittance. Redevelopment Successor Agency Fund — Accounts for the assets and activities to wind down the affairs of the former Community Development Commission. This fund accounts for the receipt of property tax revenues pursuant to the Redevelopment Dissolution Act and the assets transferred from the Commission. The Successor Agency's assets can only be used to pay enforceable obligations in existence at the date of dissolution pursuant to the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedules approved by the California Department of Finance (DOF) under the Redevelopment Dissolution Act. F-143 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF FIDUCIARY NET POSITION PRIVATE PURPOSE TRUST FUND JUNE 30, 2015 DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unamortized loss on refunding LIABILITIES Accounts payable Interest payable Advances from other City funds Long-term debt: Due in one year Due in more than one year Total liabilities NET POSITION Restricted - 21,298 21,298 924,650 - 924,650 Redevelopment Total - 1,799,570 Assets Successor Private Purpose - 59,517,510 Seizure Agency Trust Funds ASSETS Cash and investments $ 935,536 $ 2,467,832 $ 3,403,368 Receivables - Accrued interest 646 768 1,414 Prepaid expenses - - - Restricted cash & investments - 3,632,024 3,632,024 Advances to other City funds - 10,344,225 10,344,225 Capital assets: Nondepreciable assets - 4,934,146 4,934,146 Depreciable assets, net - 13,264,868 13,264,868 Total assets 936,182 34,643,863 35,580,045 DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES Unamortized loss on refunding LIABILITIES Accounts payable Interest payable Advances from other City funds Long-term debt: Due in one year Due in more than one year Total liabilities NET POSITION Restricted - 21,298 21,298 924,650 - 924,650 - 864,834 864,834 - 1,799,570 1,799,570 - 2,525,311 2,525,311 - 59,517,510 59,517,510 924,650 64,707,225 65,631,875 11,532 $ (30,042,064) $ (30,030,532) CITY OF ROHNERT PARK COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FIDUCIARY NET POSITION PRIVATE PURPOSE TRUST FUND FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2015 ADDITIONS Taxes Interest and rentals Other Total additions DEDUCTIONS Redevelopment expenses Intergovernmental transfer of bond proceeds to the City's Capital Project Fund Law enforcement costs Depreciation Interest expenses Total deductions CHANGE IN NET POSITION NET POSITION, BEGINNING OF YEAR NET POSITION, END OF YEAR F-145 Redevelopment Total Assets Successor Private Purpose Seizure Agency Trust Funds $ - $ 5,146,489 $ 5,146,489 - 4,167 4,167 - 5,555 5,555 - 51156,211 5,156,211 - 309,182 309,182 5,695,287 5,695,287 135,162 - 135,162 - 286,437 286,437 - 2,889,416 2,889,416 135,162 9,180,322 9,315,484 (135,162) (4,024,111) (4,159,273) 146,694 (26,017,953) (25,871,259) $ 11,532 $ (30,042,064) $ (30,030,532) This page is left intentionally blank. F-146 STATISTICAL SECTION S-1 City of Rohnert Park Statistical Section This part of the City's comprehensive annual financial report presents detailed information as a context for understanding what the information in the financial statements, note disclosures, and required supplementary information says about the City's overall financial health. Contents Financial Trends These schedules contain trend information to help the reader understand how the city's financial performance and well-being have changed over time. Revenue Capacity These schedules contain information to help the reader assess the factors affecting the City's ability to generate its property and sales taxes. Debt Capacity These schedules present information to help the reader assess the affordability of the City's current levels of outstanding debt and the City's ability to issue additional debt in the future. Demographic and Economic Information These schedules offer demographic and economic indicators to help the reader understand the environment within which the City's financial activities take place and to help make comparisons over time and with other governments. Operating Information These schedules contain information about the city's operations and resources to help the reader understand how the City's financial information relates to the services the City provides and the activities it performs. M Page S-3 S-6 5-16 5-20 5-22 City of Rohnert Park Net Position by Component (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (accrual basis of accounting) Governmental activities Net investment in capital assets Restricted Unrestricted Total governmental activities net position Business -type activities Net investment in capital assets Unrestricted Total business -type activities net position Primary government Net investment in capital assets Restricted Unrestricted Total primary government net position Source: City Finance Department Fiscal Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 $ 73,541,499 $ 66,373,255 $ 49,803,902 $ 52,293,588 $ 25,958,726 $ 45,009,673 $ 46,572,533 $ 56,608,019 $ 36,112,457 $ 28,259,799 39,964,837 32,362,423 33,166,020 27,482,966 17,346,572 2,418,812 13,873,842 5,730,424 11,318,076 5,955,759 (47,416,069) (610,478) 17,562,930 5,287,237 16,293,462 16,995,866 13,927,933 17,318,920 19,471,114 29,407,530 $ 66,090,267 $ 98,125,200 $ 100,532,852 $ 85,063,791 $59,598,760 $ 64,424,351 $ 74,374,308 $ 79,657,363 $66,901,647 $ 63,623,088 $ 34,323,645 $ 29,762,623 $ 23,820,293 $ 25,277,232 $ 25,501,383 $ 27,364,564 $ 17,081,819 $ 25,538,667 $ 17,709,497 $ 14,867,127 14,262,033 21,058,424 5,662,653 1,287,885 1,062,428 2,435,608 14,654,310 6,682,325 11,737,893 11,641,400 $ 48,585,678 $ 50,821,047 $ 29,482,946 $ 26,565,117 $26,563,811 $ 29,800,172 $ 31,736,129 $ 32,220,992 $29,447,390 $ 26,508,527 $ 107,865,144 $ 96,135,878 $ 73,624,195 $ 77,570,820 $51,460,109 $ 72,374,237 $ 63,654,352 $ 82,146,686 $53,821,954 39,964,837 32,362,423 33,166,020 27,482,966 17,346,572 2,418,812 13,873,842 5,730,424 11,318,076 (33,154,036) 20,447,946 23,225,583 6,575,122 17,355,890 19,431,474 28,582,243 24,001,245 31,209,007 $ 114,675,945 $ 148,946,247 $ 130,015,798 $ 111,628,908 $ 86,162,571 $ 94,224,523 $ 106,110,437 $ 111,878,355 $ 96,349,037 S-3 $ 43,126,926 5,955,759 A i nn 4 ozn City of Rohnert Park Changes in Net Position (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (accrual basis ofaccounting) MAI Fiscal Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Expenses Governmental activities: General government $10,648,148 $ 9,202,607 $10,772,401 $14,359,626 $16,306,249 $18,388,212 $16,036,110 $12,955,293 $12,926,332 $11,455,704 Public Safety 15,711,045 14,888,571 14,347,850 14,403,785 15,455,097 16,930,100 19,823,047 20,758,556 17,349,211 16,703,386 Public Works 4,115,427 2,840,825 2,840,555 3,530,589 3,416,002 4,228,872 4,050,312 4,421,182 4,522,563 4,220,758 Parks and recreation 2,940,882 3,342,205 3,085,681 3,266,821 3,659,993 3,650,692 4,687,184 4,979,212 4,198,572 4,167,196 Other 774,542 648,630 704,021 587,931 417,011 646,355 841,126 902,319 889,073 1,504,207 Interest on long-term debt 194,621 153,921 499,028 1,920,730 3,856,319 5,939,204 4,586,047 4,629,601 2,690,598 2,038,944 Total governmental activities expenses 34,384,665 31,076,759 32,249,536 38,069,482 43,110,671 49,783,435 50,023,826 48,646,163 42,576,349 40,090,195 Business -type activities: Water 7,875,791 6,036,836 5,929,852 7,095,841 6,791,475 5,702,115 6,306,127 7,122,292 6,690,385 6,454,568 Sewer 13,037,337 11,963,155 11,768,056 10,659,707 12,071,585 11,252,707 11,318,825 9,830,647 10,085,147 9,697,231 Refuse Collection 3,530 4,828 3,039,046 5,534,555 5,330,582 5,547,595 5,390,186 5,344,215 5,181,643 4,548,674 Total business -type activities expenses 20,916,658 18,004,819 20,736,954 23,290,103 24,193,642 22,502,417 23,015,138 22,297,154 21,957,175 20,700,473 Total primary government expenses $ 55,301,323 $ 49,081,578 $ 52,986,490 $ 61,359,585 $ 67,304,314 $ 72,285,852 $ 73,038,964 $ 70,943,317 $64,533,524 $60,790,668 Program Revenues Governmental activities: Charges for services: General government $ 2,740,546 $ 1,423,854 $ 855,997 $ 1,339,978 $ 1,076,171 $ 1,076,152 $ 1,137,111 $ 978,440 $ 1,221,652 $ 1,476,260 Public safety 1,102,207 1,196,933 661,454 407,871 592,952 621,490 623,483 592,567 517,742 450,057 Public works 2,015,070 1,114,354 879,340 703,948 474,124 388,237 859,348 1,697,041 2,836,987 2,542,293 Parks and recreation 1,297,774 1,406,770 1,192,894 1,337,034 1,319,042 1,187,022 1,156,550 1,791„969 1,618,401 1,640,881 Other 343,936 330,906 403,728 398,004 301,631 386,317 448,970 - - 1,429 Operating grants and contributions 10,148,400 5,784,503 15,128,681 2,125,258 2,441,258 2,796,402 3,366,714 2,572,995 2,344,534 2,719,200 Capital grants and contributions 13,065,771 13,745,990 4,323,246 651,077 1,492,542 2,257,720 1,480,622 1,991,493 1,492,565 546,563 Total governmental activities program revenues 30,713,704 25,003,310 23,445,340 6,963,170 7,697,720 8,713,340 9,072,798 9,624,505 10,031,881 9,376,683 Business -type activities: Charges for services: Water 6,307,513 7,020,887 7,421,931 6,631,136 6,466,678 6,384,464 6,630,287 6,341,560 6,433,014 6,406,197 Sewer 13,216,660 13,416,857 12,522,826 10,934,425 8,407,237 8,117,101 10,304,507 12,370,603 12,007,771 9,955,355 Refuse Collection - - 2,697,879 5,442,977 5,526,939 5,635,222 5,554,993 5,454,193 5,240,389 4,723,623 Capital grants and contributions - 270,063 769,406 268,029 192,260 235,742 214,617 566,411 1,829,074 1,186,735 Total business -type activities program revenues 19,524,173 20,707,807 23,412,042 23,276,567 20,593,114 20,372,529 22,704,404 24,732,767 25,510,248 22,271,910 Total primary government program revenues $ 50,237,877 $ 45,711,117 $ 46,857,382 $ 30,239,737 $ 28,290,834 $ 29,085,869 $ 31,777,202 $ 34,357,272 $ 35,542,129 $ 31,648,593 MAI City of Rohnert Park Changes in Net Position (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (Continued) (accrual basis ofaccountiny) Source: City Finance Department S-5 Fiscal Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Net (Expense)/Revenue Governmental activities $ (3,670,961) $ (6,073,449) $ (8,804,196) $ (31,106,312) $ (35,412,951) $ (41,070,095) $ (40,951,028) $ (39,021,658) $ (32,544,468) $ (30,713,512) Business -type activities (1,392,485) 2,702,988 2,675,088 (13,536) (3,600,528) (2,129,888) (310,734) 2,435,613 3,553,073 1,571,437 Total primary government net expense $ (5,063,446) $ (3,370,461) $ (6,129,108) $ (31,119,848) $ (39,013,479) $ (43,199,983) $ (41,261,762) $ (36,586,045) $ (28,991,395) $ (29,142,075) General Revenues and Other Changes in Net Position Governmental activities: Taxes Property taxes $ 3,564,329 $ 3,875,521 $ 3,517,309 $ 16,106,337 $ 15,595,902 $ 16,632,581 $ 16,989,860 $ 17,054,597 $ 16,928,529 $ 15,504,905 Sales taxes 10,493,451 10,541,059 9,555,854 9,062,981 8,237,144 5,735,600 6,172,593 7,236,048 7,707,375 7,386,925 Franchise taxes 2,068,761 1,981,803 1,682,427 1,695,706 1,.500,461 1,700,371 1,411,622 1,440,749 1,428,827 1,308,839 Motor vehicle license fees 2,948,341 2,747,818 2,630,122 2,722,876 2,908,809 2,947,584 3,042,186 3,142,034 3,074,869 2,572,107 Othertaxes 3,109,123 2,945,367 2,329,689 2,054,212 1,816,893 1,574,857 1,812,696 2,016,907 1,606,108 1,855,821 Rental Income - - - - - - 31,823 - - - Investment earnings 300,328 246,098 38,876 962,474 1,605,298 2,538,119 3,726,188 4,792,727 3,155,613 1,964,903 Gain (Loss) on sale of capital assets - 4,000 - - - (159,537) 997,720 4,778,278 - 1,109,814 Gain (Loss) on retirement of bonds - - - - - - 759,614 - - - Other 133,236 1,292,275 4,348,120 181,941 415,518 176,370 197,023 311,425 217,520 Transfers (4,275,417) (7,909,865) (171,499) 65,415 (255,089) (25,807) 526,648 573,812 294,438 - Extraordinary item - dissolution of RDA - - 23,719,400 - - - - 277,474 Total governmental activities 18,342,152 15,724,076 23,930,898 56,571,343 31,824,937 31,120,138 35,667,973 41,346,577 34,413,279 31,980,788 Business -type activities: Investment earnings 75,585 52,305 71,242 80,257 109,076 168,124 352,519 458,866 426,769 586,583 Transfers 4,275,417 7,909,865 171,499 (65,415) 255,089 25,807 (526,648) (518,348) (294,438) (277,474) Total business -type activities 4,351,002 7,962,170 242,741 14,842 364,165 193,931 (174,129) (59,482) 132,331 309,109 Total primary government $ 22,693,154 $ 23,686,246 $ 24,173,639 $ 56,586,185 $ 32,189,102 $ 31,314,069 $ 35,493,844 $ 41,287,095 $ 34,545,610 $ 32,289,897 Change in Net Position Governmental activities $ 14,671,191 $ 9,650,627 $ 15,126,702 $ 25,465,031 $ (3,588,014) $ (9,949,957) $ (5,283,055) $ 2,324,919 $ 1,868,811 $ 1,267,276 Business -type activities 2,958,517 10,665,158 2,917,829 1,306 (3,236,363) (1,935,957) (484,863) 2,376,131 3,685,404 1,880,546 Total primary government $ 17,629,708 $ 20,315,785 $ 18,044,531 $ 25,466,337 $ (6,824,377) $ (11,885,914) $ (5,767,918) $ 4,701,050 $ 5,554,215 $ 3,147,822 Source: City Finance Department S-5 City of Rohnert Park Program Revenues by Function/Program (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (accrual basis of accounting) Function/Program Governmental activities: General government Public safety Public works Parks and recreation Other Subtotal governmental activities Business -type activities: Water Wastewater Refuse Subtotal business -type activities Total primary government Fiscal Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 $10,844,875 $15,333,596 $14,143,255 $ 1,636,799 $ 1,147,579 $ 1,230,469 $ 1,842,155 $ 3,416,683 $ 4,104,573 $ 2,683,313 2,413,054 2,603,116 1,257,721 1,008,050 910,988 1,626,916 1,477,094 858,919 748,521 729,783 15,814,065 (2) 5,328,922 6,447,742 2,583,283 4,018,480 1,519,461 4,081,609 2,887,783 3,117,622 3,412,799 1,297,774 1,406,770 1,192,894 1,337,034 1,319,042 1,691,952 1,156,550 1,791,969 1,618,401 1,655,338 343,936 330,906 403,728 398,004 301,631 386,822 515,390 669,151 442,764 895,450 30,713,704 25,003,310 23,445,340 6,963,170 7,697,720 6,455,620 9,072,798 9,624,505 10,031,881 9,376,683 6,307,513 7,020,887 7,432,612 6,775,045 6,466,678 6,384,464 6,794,666 6,388,188 6,330,481 6,530,394 13,216,660 13,686,920 13,281,551 11,058,545 8,599,497 8,352,843 10,354,745 12,890,386 13,590,308 11,017,893 - - 2,697,879 5,442,977 5,526,939 5,635,222 5,554,993 5,454,193 5,240,389 4,723,623 19,524,173 20,707,807 23,412,042 23,276,567 20,593,114 20,372,529 22,704,404 24,732,767 25,161,178 22,271,910 $50,237,877 $45,711,117 $46,857,382 $30,239,737 $28,290,834 $26,828,149 $31,777,202 $34,357,272 $35,193,059 $31,648,593 Notes: (1) The increases in general government program revenues for fiscal years 2013 and 2014 when compared to prior years were mainly due to the receipt of non-recurring fees and contributions from the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria for the Eastside Sewer Trunk Project and the Golf Course Drive / Wilfred Avenue improvements projects during fiscal year 2013 and 2014, respectively. (2) General government program revenues for fiscal year 2015 included one-time intergovernmental transfer received from successor agency trust fund of $5.7 million. City of Rohnert Park Fund Balances of Governmental Funds (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (modified accrual basis of accounting) General Fund (i) Nonspendable (i) Restricted (i) Committed Assigned c j Unassigned Reserved Unreserved Total general fund All Other Governmental Funds (i) Nonspendable (i) Restricted (i) Committed Assigned c j Unassigned Reserved Unreserved, reported in: Special revenue funds Capital projects funds Total all other governmental funds Fiscal Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 $ 1,970,598 $ 2,441,659 $ 2,719,913 $ 2,360,946 $ 2,382,742 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 172,998 186,413 2,041,125 2,429,224 927,747 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A - - - - 3,592,593 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 12,042,682 9,786,317 2,391,104 3,553,613 1,567,135 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 33,588 207,845 4,100,959 1,208,071 - N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A - - - - $ 2,466,224 $ 2,578,952 $ 3,233,155 $ 3,904,011 $ 2,805,375 - - - - 6,871,421 9,589,701 13,186,254 13,083,633 15,225,455 $ 14,219,866 $ 12,622,234 $ 11,253,101 $ 9,551,854 $ 8,470,217 $ 9,337,645 $ 12,168,653 $ 16,419,409 7 16,987,644 $ 18,030,830 $ 500,000 $ 2,212,970 $ 10,613,660 $ 10,519,393 $ 20,231,490 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 38,294,470 29,149,054 29,433,741 16,816,229 26,492,563 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A - - 2,604,735 2,710,553 2,895,378 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2,322,710 3,267,686 - - - N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (7,275,223) (5,178,461) (465,303) (473,022) (311,900) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A - - $ 62,746,031 $ 56,532,084 $ 68,299,779 $ 73,308,593 $ 13,321,727 - - 3,237,597 3,249,461 2,910,150 4,520,308 3,730,841 - - (600,372) 5,013,206 6,034,588 8,154,368 6,653,690 $ 33,841,957 $ 29,451,249 $ 42,186,833 $ 29,573,153 $ 49,307,531 $ 65,383,256 $ 64,794,751 $ 77,244,517 T85,983,269 $ 23,706,258 Source: City Finance Department (1) New Fund Balance Classification based on GASB Statement No. 54 S-7 City of Rohnert Park Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (modified accrual basis of accounting) Revenues Taxes Intergovernmental Intergovernmental transfer from successor agency trust fund Interest and rentals Charges for services Licenses; permits and fees Special assessment collection Fines, forfeitures and penalties Donations and miscellaneous Total revenues Expenditures General government Public safety Public works Parks and recreation Other Capital outlay Debt service Cost of issuance Principal Interest and fiscal charges Total expenditures Excess (deficiency) of revenues over (under) expenditures Fiscal Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 $ 19,798,693 $ 19,931,274 $ 17,085,279 $ 28,919,237 $ 27,150,400 $ 25,643,409 $ 26,386,771 $ 27,748,301 $ 28,010,839 $26,055,840 5,786,763 5,068,049 5,913,576 5,506,724 6,114,398 5,607,308 7,251,897 6,789,040 6,470,275 4,385,363 5,695,287 - - - - - - - - - 923,317 679,090 373,516 1,462,569 2,146,774 3,045,486 4,208,902 4,669,700 3,434,813 2,214,033 4,076,764 2,357,628 1,769,053 1,649,569 1,952,202 1,823,791 1,812,427 2,531,523 2,312,537 2,461,399 5,739,963 3,855,530 14,407,014 1,129,495 888,402 870,585 837,678 1,816,859 2,550,850 1,796,443 - - - - - - - - 210,435 306,495 176,490 174,637 200,266 184,386 146,940 193,392 212,849 159,701 197,134 216,368 8,647,864 16,206,168 7,581,291 876,716 518,210 1,148,005 1,512,347 1,780,818 1,241,335 1,656,272 50,845,141 48,272,376 47,329,995 39,728,697 38,917,327 38,331,976 42,222,871 45,495,942 44,428,218 39,092,213 10,802,462 8,099,455 6,909,977 12,969,980 13,914,331 15,592,370 12,731,601 12,694,183 12,654,518 11,184,075 15,642,763 14,724,998 13,884,510 13,788,261 14,687,084 16,117,857 18,978,007 19,414,226 16,126,814 15,442,477 1,914,825 1,353,085 1,242,943 726,480 656,651 1,643,398 1,715,606 2,255,776 2,085,443 1,841,831 2,660,915 2,598,935 2,300,901 2,312,924 2,270,907 2,266,260 3,062,625 3,248,052 2,983,531 2,875,257 787,168 643,463 704,021 587,931 417,011 646,355 841,126 902,319 889,073 1,187,748 6,335,556 13,623,069 7,165,820 1,748,317 174,963 3,523,917 11,268,721 13,940,133 7,324,188 5,065,505 - - - - - - - - 1,316,741 - 3,565,534 325,314 460,000 1,188,430 1,604,925 16,043,885 11,682,136 3,734,038 2,039,651 1,896,222 266,586 200,938 420,257 2,463,746 3,028,229 3,254,018 3,924,833 3,345,671 1,188,507 1,196,955 41,975,809 41,569,257 33,088,429 35,786,069 36,754,101 59,088,060 64,204,655 59,534,398 46,608,466 40,690,070 8,869,332 6,703,119 14,241,566 3,942,628 2,163,226 (20,756,084) (21,981,784) (14,038,456) (2,180,248) (1,597,857) Mi City of Rohnert Park Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (Continued) (modified accrual basis of accounting Fiscal Year Source: City Finance Department S-9 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Other Financing Sources (Uses) Issuance of debt and loans $ 249,782 $ 150,000 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 61,440,000 $ Discount on debt - - (391,516) Premium on debt 1,344,163 Refunding bonds issued - - - 759,614 - - - Proceeds from the sale of capital assets 1,442,823 4,000 1,255,263 3,995,000 5,201,717 1,956,704 Lease proceeds - - - - - - 818,624 Transfers in 15,775,752 10,242,332 5,005,015 30,274,573 10,206,357 24,626,604 24,118,981 21,953,933 12,377,738 9,245,675 Transfers out (20,349,349) (18,266,807) (5,274,014) (30,309,158) (10,461,446) (24,652,411) (23,592,333) (21,380,121) (12,083,300) (8,968,201) Total other financing sources (uses) (2,880,992) (7,870,475) (268,999) (34,585) (255,089) 1,229,456 5,281,262 5,775,529 62,687,085 3,052,802 Net change in fund balances $ 5,988,340 $ (1,167,356) $ 13,972,567 $ 3,908,042 $ 1,908,137 $ (19,526,628) $ (16,700,522) $ (8,262,927) $ 60,506,837 $ 1,454,945 Debt service as a percentage of noncapital expenditures 10.4% 1.9% 3.4% 10.7% 12.7% 34.7% 29.5% 15.5% 11.6% 8.7% Source: City Finance Department S-9 City of Rohnert Park Tax Revenues by Source of Governmental Funds (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year Property (a) Sales & Use (b) Franchise Transient Occupancy Real Property Transfer Total 2006 $ 3,127,448 $ 7,386,925 $ 1,308,839 $ 1,601,587 $ 253,584 $ 13,678,383 2007 3,167,241 7,707,375 1,428,827 1,771,527 174,581 14,249,551 2008 3,199,831 7,236,048 1,440,749 1,899,362 117,545 13,893,535 2009 3,029,029 6,172,593 1,411,622 1,722,049 90,647 12,425,940 2010 2,845,643 5,735,600 1,700,371 1,574,857 84,087 11,940,558 2011 2,679,110 8,237,144 1,500,461 1,747,659 69,234 14,233,608 2012 3,252,056 9,062,981 1,695,706 1,940,536 113,677 16,064,956 2013 3,517,309 9,555,854 1,682,427 2,202,885 126,804 17,085,279 2014 3,875,521 10,541,059 1,981,803 2,814,059 131,308 19,343,750 2015 3,564,329 10,493,451 2,068,761 2,980,129 128,994 19,235,664 Change 2006-2015 14.0% 42.1% 58.1% 86.1% -49.1% 40.6% Notes: (a) The City direct tax rate of 0.50% (Rohnert Park Essential City Services Temporary Funding Measure E) was approved by Rohnert Park citizens on June 8, 2010 and went into effect on October 1, 2010. This tax rate expires on Sept 30, 2015. It has been extended by Measure A (Rohnert Park Continuation of Essential City Services Funding Measure) which was approved by the voters on November 5, 2013. Measure A shall not expire, unless terminated by a unanimous vote of the City Council. (b) In FY 2010 the City received a donation for franchise fees. S-10 City of Rohnert Park Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (in thousands of dollars) Notes: (a) The State of California Constitution Article XIII A provides that the combined maximum property tax rate on any given property may not exceed one percent of its assessed value unless an additional amount for general obligation debt has been approved by voters. Assessed value is calculated at 100 percent of market value as defined by Article XIII A and may be adjusted no more than two percent per year unless the property is improved, sold or transferred. Because of this method of assessment, the City does not have a reasonable basis for estimating the actual value of taxable property and this information is not presented above. (b) The State Legislature has determined the method of distribution of receipts from a one percent tax levy among the counties, cities, school districts and other districts. Source: Sonoma County Auditor -Controller Treasurer -Tax Collector S-11 Real Property Personal Property Total Percentage of Basic Fiscal Assessed/Market Assessed/Market Assessed/Market Change in Direct Year Value Value Value Market Value Rate 2006 $ 3,496,707 $ 153,029 $ 3,649,736 7.69% 1.00% 2007 3,685,609 187,036 3,872,645 6.11% 1.00% 2008 3,957,436 121,053 4,078,489 5.32% 1.00% 2009 3,921,550 116,899 4,038,449 -0.98% 1.00% 2010 3,782,228 118,715 3,900,943 -3.40% 1.00% 2011 3,605,471 114,596 3,720,067 -4.64% 1.00% 2012 3,611,567 107,759 3,719,326 -0.02% 1.00% 2013 3,509,762 103,730 3,613,492 -2.85% 1.00% 2014 3,633,619 114,420 3,748,039 3.72% 1.00% 2015 3,907,910 119,759 4,027,669 7.46% 1.00% Notes: (a) The State of California Constitution Article XIII A provides that the combined maximum property tax rate on any given property may not exceed one percent of its assessed value unless an additional amount for general obligation debt has been approved by voters. Assessed value is calculated at 100 percent of market value as defined by Article XIII A and may be adjusted no more than two percent per year unless the property is improved, sold or transferred. Because of this method of assessment, the City does not have a reasonable basis for estimating the actual value of taxable property and this information is not presented above. (b) The State Legislature has determined the method of distribution of receipts from a one percent tax levy among the counties, cities, school districts and other districts. Source: Sonoma County Auditor -Controller Treasurer -Tax Collector S-11 City of Rohnert Park Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rates (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (rate per $1, 000 of assessed value) Basic Fiscal Direct Year Rate (b) Overlapping Rates (a) Rohnert Park Santa Santa Cotati Warm Rosa Rosa Bellevue School Springs Junior High School District Dam College School District Total Total Tax Rate (c) 2006 1.00 0.11 0.007 0.025 0.054 0.025 0.2212 1.2212 2007 1.00 0.11 0.007 0.025 0.054 0.250 0.4462 1.4462 2008 1.00 0.11 0.007 0.025 0.053 0.240 0.4350 1.4350 2009 1.00 0.11 0.007 0.025 0.049 0.024 0.2150 1.2150 2010 1.00 0.11 0.007 0.025 0.049 0.030 0.2211 1.2211 2011 1.00 0.11 0.007 0.025 0.049 0.054 0.2450 1.2450 2012 1.00 0.11 0.007 0.025 0.058 0.068 0.2679 1.2679 2013 1.00 0.10 0.007 0.021 0.058 0.071 0.2564 1.2564 2014 1.00 0.11 0.007 0.019 0.055 0.074 0.2650 1.2650 2015 1.00 0.12 0.007 0.018 0.052 0.088 0.2850 1.2850 Notes: (a) Overlapping rates are those of local and county governments that apply to property owners within the City of Rohnert Park. Not all overlapping rates apply to all Rohnert Park property owners; for example, school districts' rates apply only to property owners within those districts' geographic boundaries. (b) In 1978, California voters passed Proposition 13, which set the property tax rate at a 1% fixed amount. This 1% is shared by all taxing agencies for which the subject property resides within. In addition to the 1% fixed amount, property owners are charged taxes as a percentage of assessed property values for the payment of any voter approved bonds. (c) Rates for Sonoma County Tax Rate Areas 007-000 through 007-019 are represented in this table. Source: Sonoma County Auditor -Controller Treasurer -Tax Collector S-12 City of Rohnert Park Property Tax Levies and Collections (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Collected within the Year Taxes Levied Fiscal Year of the Levy Collections Total Collections to Date Ended for the Percentage in Subsequent Percentage June 30, Fiscal Year Amount of Levy Years Amount of Levy 2006 $ 2,909,684 $ 2,909,684 100.00 - $ 3,113,048 106.99 2007 2,959,694 2,959,694 100.00 - 2,959,694 100.00 2008 3,003,697 3,003,697 100.00 - 3,003,697 100.00 2009 2,820,894 2,820,894 100.00 - 2,820,894 100.00 2010 2,641,026 2,641,026 100.00 - 2,641,026 100.00 2011 2,489,903 2,489,903 100.00 - 2,489,903 100.00 2012 2,539,634 2,539,634 100.00 - 2,539,634 100.00 2013 2,440,436 2,440,436 100.00 - 2,440,436 100.00 2014 2,651,430 2,651,430 100.00 - 2,651,430 100.00 2015 2,870,668 2,870,668 100.00 - 2,870,668 100.00 Note: The City participates in the County Teeter Plan whereby all taxes are remitted to the City each year. Amounts reported are for secured property taxes only. Source: Sonoma County Auditor -Controller Treasurer -Tax Collector S-13 City of Rohnert Park Taxable Sales by Category (Unaudited) Last Ten Years (in thousands of dollars) Fiscal Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 All other outlets $ 2,288 $ 2,233 $ 2,424 $ 2,370 $ 2,097 $ 2,282 $ 2,302 $ 2,645 $ 1,847 $ 1,862 Apparel stores 15,045 12,902 14,621 13,808 14,246 13,862 14,123 14,430 14,599 14,213 Auto dealers and supplies 23,225 21,223 20,733 19,169 19,432 22,019 22,787 29,550 32,154 31,698 Building materials and farm tools 98,521 99,472 92,139 79,426 75,866 77,547 94,237 103,245 126,919 145,867 Eating and drinking establishments 103,267 96,427 75,454 70,882 68,767 69,713 74,122 77,691 78,202 76,079 Food stores 34,957 34,972 35,416 38,032 36,031 35,005 36,776 37,620 39,287 40,239 General merchandise 244,789 243,471 252,386 239,845 234,926 234,059 239,889 267,954 266,732 257,949 Home furnishings and appliances 31,495 29,076 29,099 24,899 24,676 25,173 22,351 30,997 33,880 31,975 Other retail stores 37,550 34,261 34,733 41,245 57,868 45,584 41,326 48,679 61,156 61,121 Service stations 47,065 53,506 47,070 38,765 35,138 32,355 34,879 43,328 38,967 36,393 Packaged Liquor and Drug Stores 7,463 8,434 7,376 6,917 6,768 6,799 8,051 7,864 7,542 7,383 Total $ 645,665 $ 635,977 $ 611,451 $ 575,358 $ 575,815 $ 564,398 $ 590,843 $ 664,003 $ 701,285 $ 704,779 City direct sales tax rate 0.50% 0.50% 0.50% 0.50% 0.50% 0.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Source: Muni Services Sales Tax & Economic Review for the City of Rohnert Park 5-14 City of Rohnert Park Top Ten Principal Property Tax Payers (Unaudited) Current and Eight Years Ago (in thousands of dollars) Notes: * The 2006 information is not available. The oldest information available is 2007. Source: County of Sonoma Auditor -Controller Treasurer -Tax Collector 5-15 2015 2007* Percentage of Percentage of Taxable Assessed Total City Taxable Taxable Assessed Total City Taxable Value Rank Assessed Value Value Rank Assessed Value Scarpa Steve J $ 47,306 1 1.262% - - Sonoma Mountain Village LLC et al 46,567 2 1.242% - - - Columbia Redwood Creek LLC 41,275 3 1.101% $ 37,032 3 0.956% Kother Ernest M et al 39,879 4 1.064% - - - CLPF - Oak View at Sonoma Hills LP 37,606 5 1.003% - - - Crossbrook Apartments LP et al 32,685 6 0.872% 29,289 6 0.756% Codding Enterprises 31,041 7 0.828% 29,464 5 0.761% Redwood Equities Investments LLC et al 29,200 8 0.779% - - - Knickerbocker Properties Inc XXXVIII 28,348 9 0.756% 25,476 7 0.658% 4855 Snyder Lane LLC 27,714 10 0.739% - - - Rohnert Park Ridge LLC Et Al - - - 43,836 1 1.132% Sonoma Green LLC Et Al - 37,616 2 0.971% KLS Rohnert Park LP - 31,970 4 0.826% Santa Rosa Press Democrat - 25,190 8 0.650% Healthcare REIT Inc - 24,861 9 0.642% State Farm Mutual Automobile - 22,005 10 0.568% Total $ 361,621 9.648% $ 306,739 7.921% Notes: * The 2006 information is not available. The oldest information available is 2007. Source: County of Sonoma Auditor -Controller Treasurer -Tax Collector 5-15 City of Rohnert Park Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (dollars in thousands, except per capita) Government -type Activities (b) (a) Certificates Lease Special Fiscal Redevelopment of Revenue Assessment Loan Capital Year Bonds Participation Bonds Bonds Payable Leases 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 23,082 84,351 82,253 72,120 59,513 51,553 $ 4,265 4,115 3,960 3,800 3,635 3,460 3,280 3,090 2,895 6,485 6,255 6,020 5,780 5,535 5,280 465 473 447 418 $ 620 190 - 127 - 250 $ 2,027 1,778 1,539 1,212 982 846 705 594 515 Business -type Activities (c) (c) Water Sewer Revenue Certificates of Bonds Participation $ 6,725 $ 13,000 6,515 12,770 6,305 12,530 6,085 12,285 5,860 12,030 5,630 11,765 5,390 11,624 5,145 11,340 4,848 11,082 4,586 10,769 Total Primary Government $ 56,204 115,974 112,607 101,282 87,555 78,534 21,464 20,642 19,914 16,023 (d) Percentage of Personal Income 4.97 9.32 9.20 8.47 7.86 6.87 1.94 1.88 1.81 1.39 (d) Per Capita 1,308 2,693 2,618 2,334 2,137 1,917 523 501 489 390 Notes: Details regarding the City's outstanding debt can be found in the notes to the financial statements. (a) Due to the FY 2011-12 dissolution of the RDA, the bond liability was transferred to the Successor Agency. (b) Due to FY 2011-12 dissolution of the RDA, 90% of the LRRB bond liability was transferred to the Successor Agency. (c) In FY 2004-05, the City issued $13 million of sewer certificates of participation and $5 million of water revenue bonds. (d) See Schedule S-21 for personal income and population data. These ratios are calculated using personal income and population for the prior calendar year. 5-16 City of Rohnert Park Direct and Overlapping Governmental Activities Debt (Unaudited) As of June 30, 2015 (dollars in thousands) Governmental Unit Debt repaid with property taxes Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified School District #15R #16 #17R #18R 2014A 2014B Sonoma County Junior College District Debt Outstanding 735 555 11,170 2,495 25,915 30,695 Estimated Percentage Applicable 79.134% 79.134% 79.134% 79.134% 79.134% 79.134% Estimated Share of Direct and Overlapping Debt 582 439 8,839 1,974 20,508 24,290 #2 23,510 5.655% 1,330 #3 3,615 5.655% 204 #4 13,210 5.655% 747 #2R 129,435 5.655% 7,320 Warm Springs Dam 91,597 5.634% 5,161 Subtotal, overlapping debt City direct debt Total direct and overlapping debt 71,394 $ 72,062 Notes: For debt repaid with property taxes, the percentage of overlapping debt applicable is estimated using taxable assessed property values. Applicable percentages were estimated by determining the portion of another governmental unit's taxable assessed value that is within the city's boundaries and dividing it by each unit's total taxable assessed value. Overlapping governments are those that coincide, at least in part, with the geographic boundaries of the City. This schedule estimates the portion of the outstanding debt of those overlapping governments that is borne by the residents and businesses of the City. Source: Sonoma County Auditor -Controller Treasurer -Tax Collector S-17 City of Rohnert Park Legal Debt Margin Information (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (dollars in thousands) Legal Debt Margin Calculation for Fiscal Year 2015 Assessed value $ 4,027,669 Debt limit (15% of assessed value) 604,150 Debt applicable to limit: General obligation bonds - Legal debt margin $ 604,150 6 Fiscal Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Debt limit $ 604,150 $ 562,206 $ 542,024 $ 564,587 $ 564,732 $ 591,965 $ 612,688 $ 611,773 $ 580,879 $ 534,506 Total net debt applicable to limit - - - - - - - - - - Legal debt margin $ 604,150 $ 562,206 $ 542,024 $ 564,587 $ 564,732 $ 591,965 $ 612,688 $ 611,773 $ 580,879 $ 534,506 Total net debt applicable to the limit as a percentage of debt limit 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 6 City of Rohnert Park Pledged -Revenue Coverage (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years (dollars in thousands) Notes: (a) The Sewer Revenue Certificates of Participation were issued by the Rohnert Park Financing Authority pursuant to an Installment Purchase Agreement with the City of Rohnert Park. All Net Revenues and amounts on deposit in the Revenue Fund (other than amounts on deposit therein required to pay Operation and Maintenance Costs) are irrevocably pledged to the payment of the Installment Payments and the Net Revenues shall not be used for any other purpose while any of the installment payments remain unpaid. Details regarding the city's outstanding debt can be found in the notes to the financial statements. Operating expenses do not include interest, depreciation or amortization expenses. S-19 Water Revenue Bonds Sewer Revenue Certificate of Participation (a) Special Assessment Bonds Utility Less: Net Utility Less: Net Special Fiscal Service Operating Available Debt Service Service Operating Available Debt Service Assessment Debt Service Year Charges Expenses Revenue Principal Interest Coverage Charges Expenses Revenue Principal Interest Coverage Collections Principal Interest Coverage 2006 $ 6,406 $ 5,480 $ 926 $ 205 $ 237 2.10 $ 9,955 $ 9,112 $ 843 $ - $ 572 n/a $ 319 $ 290 $ 37 0.98 2007 6,084 5,700 384 210 262 0.81 12,008 9,501 2,507 230 583 n/a 456 430 21 1.01 2008 6,342 6,851 (509) 215 257 (1.08) 12,371 9,244 3,127 240 575 n/a - - - - 2009 6,630 5,715 915 220 251 1.94 10,304 10,740 (436) 245 568 n/a - - - 2010 6,384 5,445 939 225 245 2.00 8,117 10,682 (2,565) 255 560 n/a - - 2011 6,360 6,542 (182) 230 238 (0.39) 8,180 11,510 (3,330) 265 552 n/a - - - 2012 6,631 6,273 358 240 231 0.76 10,934 8,984 1,950 275 542 n/a - - - - 2013 7,422 5,091 2,331 245 223 4.98 12,523 10,168 2,355 280 532 n/a - - - - 2014 7,021 5,150 1,871 255 215 3.98 13,417 10,383 3,034 295 522 n/a - - - - 2015 6,308 5,750 558 265 206 1.19 13,217 11,460 1,757 305 512 n/a - - - - Notes: (a) The Sewer Revenue Certificates of Participation were issued by the Rohnert Park Financing Authority pursuant to an Installment Purchase Agreement with the City of Rohnert Park. All Net Revenues and amounts on deposit in the Revenue Fund (other than amounts on deposit therein required to pay Operation and Maintenance Costs) are irrevocably pledged to the payment of the Installment Payments and the Net Revenues shall not be used for any other purpose while any of the installment payments remain unpaid. Details regarding the city's outstanding debt can be found in the notes to the financial statements. Operating expenses do not include interest, depreciation or amortization expenses. S-19 City of Rohnert Park Demographic and Economic Statistics (Unaudited) Last Ten Calendar Years Notes: (a) Calendar year. (b) Average unemployment rate through June 2015. $ Personal Income City City (dollars in Year (a) Population thousands) 2006 43,027 $ 1,863,844 2007 42,959 1,129,736 2008 43,062 1,243,889 2009 43,020 1,224,435 2010 43,398 1,196,136 2011 40,971 1,113,510 2012 41,034 1,143,864 2013 41,184 1,107,355 2014 40,722 1,098,965 2015 41,077 1,151,553 Notes: (a) Calendar year. (b) Average unemployment rate through June 2015. $ County City Per Capita School Unemployment Unemployment Income (a) Enrollment Rate (b) Rate (b) 43,318 7,023 4.5% 3.9% 26,298 6,847 4.3% 3.9% 28,886 6,655 5.5% 6.4% 28,462 6,429 10.1% 10% 27,562 6,206 10.6% 10.2% 27,178 6,003 10.1% 10.1% 27,876 5,946 9.0% 8.1% 26,888 5,770 7.1% 6.6% 26,987 5,788 6.0% 5.9% 28,034 5,765 5.2% 5.2% Source: Population, Per Capita Income: Sonoma County Economic Development Board from the ESRI Business Analyst Report. Personal Income is a calculated amount: Population x Per Capital Income. School Enrollment: Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified School District. Unemployment Rates: California Employment Development Board Labor Force Statistics. S-20 City of Rohnert Park Principal Employers (Unaudited) Current Year and Nine Years Ago Employer Sonoma State University Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified School District City of Rohnert Park Wal-Mart Store #1755 Comcast Cable Holdings, LLC Costco Wholesale #659 Home Depot #641 Marmot Mountain The Press Democrat Pacific Bell State Farm Insurance Cross Check Target 852 Parker Hannifin Corporation Alvarado Street Bakery Total Total City Employment 2015 2006 Notes: Sonoma State University is not within the Rohnert Park City limits, but has been included in the schedule because it is a significant contributor to the City's economy. Source: 2006 City of Rohnert Park CAFR 2015 City of Rohnert Park Business Licensing; http://www.sonoma.edu; http://www.crpusd.org 2015 Total City Employment from www.labonnarketinfo.edd.ca.gov S-1 Percentage Percentage of Total City of Total City Employees Rank Employment Employees Rank Employment 1,184 1 5.36% 1,532 1 14.25% 560 2 2.54% - - 238 3 1.08% 182 7 1.69% 220 4 1.00% 600 3 5.58% 210 5 0.95% - - 184 6 0.83% 190 6 1.77% 133 7 0.60% 160 8 1.49% 133 8 0.60% - - 124 9 0.56% - - 123 10 0.56% - - - - 625 2 5.81% - - 285 4 2.65% - - 210 5 1.95% - - 137 9 1.27% - - 116 10 1.08% 3,109 14.08% 4,037 37.55% 22,087 10,752 Notes: Sonoma State University is not within the Rohnert Park City limits, but has been included in the schedule because it is a significant contributor to the City's economy. Source: 2006 City of Rohnert Park CAFR 2015 City of Rohnert Park Business Licensing; http://www.sonoma.edu; http://www.crpusd.org 2015 Total City Employment from www.labonnarketinfo.edd.ca.gov S-1 City of Rohnert Park Full -time -Equivalent City Government Employees by Function/Program (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Year 5-22 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Function/Program General government City Manager's Office 6.59 6.50 6.40 6.00 5.85 6.70 7.00 7.00 7.00 5.00 Finance 9.70 10.50 10.50 10.00 9.75 11.00 11.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 Information Systems 2.75 2.75 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Planning (a) - - - - - 1.70 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Development Services (a) 12.33 11.78 11.08 11.00 11.00 - - - - - Human Resource 3.24 3.24 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 Other - - - - - - - - - 2.00 Public Safety 90.39 88.76 81.25 80.75 83.75 90.75 110.00 110.00 109.00 107.00 Building Inspection (a) - - - - - 2.30 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Public Works Engineering (a) - - - - - 8.00 8.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 Public Works 43.45 38.47 34.72 34.65 30.30 27.40 29.00 29.00 29.00 25.00 Park Maintenance (b) - - - - - 6.60 5.00 5.00 4.00 5.00 Parks and Recreation (b) - - - - 2.00 6.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 Community Services (b) 20.28 9.06 8.51 5.30 5.10 - - - - - Performing Arts Center 5.68 3.50 3.65 2.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Total 194.41 174.56 160.36 153.95 152.00 163.70 191.00 190.00 188.00 182.00 Notes: (a) FY 10-11 New Department combining Planning, Building Inspection and Engineering (b) FY 10-11 New Department combining Park Maintenance and Parks and Recreation 5-22 City of Rohnert Park Operating Indicators by Function/Program (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years Function/Prouam General government Building permits issued Building inspections conducted Department of Public Safety - Police Physical arrests Parking violations Traffic violations Department of Public Safety - Fire Emergency responses Inspections Refuse collection Refuse collected (average tons per day) Recyclables collected (average tons per day) Parks and recreation Sports & Fitness Center Attendance Community Center Attendance Library Volumes in collection Water Water main breaks Average daily consumption (millions of gallons) Peak daily consumption (millions of gallons) Wastewater Average daily sewage treatment (millions of gallons) Fiscal Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 1,306 1,068 722 658 622 575 515 650 663 574 3,343 1,452 946 902 1,168 815 1,664 1,393 1,560 1,875 2,014 2,075 2,015 1,819 2,214 2,323 3,156 3,076 2,474 2,485 1,710 1,753 2,136 2,106 2,034 2,419 3,248 2,448 2,554 3,794 1,218 1,559 1,539 1,248 1,232 1,438 1,452 1,695 1,402 264 3,948 3,560 3,189 3,325 3,156 3,263 3,262 3,007 3,164 134 1,690 1,441 1,268 1,427 2,031 1,555 1,966 1,869 1,713 not available 46.93 47.28 51.37 54.35 49.00 53.39 58.41 59.70 68.20 64.30 14.37 19.41 23.45 22.64 19.00 18.39 28.91 28.89 31.40 30.90 116,700 113,540 114,138 110,710 112,330 125,321 101,253 124,261 111,655 119,803 58,400 52,000 54,819 44,912 36,170 43,253 48,682 42,240 46,495 42,019 108,744 100,979 100,000 97,382 90,538 90,478 90,478 84,381 84,369 75,718 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 - 2 3.89 4.57 4.43 3.94 3.90 3.90 4.38 4.40 4.90 5.00 5.50 5.48 6.03 5.60 5.40 5.70 6.40 6.70 7.15 7.86 3.1 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.5 3.3 3.1 3.4 3.2 3.9 Source: Various City Departments; Sonoma County Library S-23 City of Rohnert Park Capital Asset Statistics by Function/Program (Unaudited) Last Ten Fiscal Years 2015 Function/Program Department of Public Safety Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Public Safety Stations -Police & Fire combined 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 Public Safety Officers -Police & Fire combined 62 61 59 60 63 70 80 79 77 77 Refuse Collection Collection trucks 8 8 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 Street Sweepers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Other public works Streets (miles) 101.47 90.24 90.24 86.17 86.17 86.17 85.12 85.12 85.12 85.12 Streetlights 2,941 2,941 2,837 2,817 2,817 2,817 2,794 2,794 2,794 2,794 Parks and recreation Acreage 116 107 107 105 105 105 105 102 102 102 Playgrounds 20 24 24 24 24 25 25 30 30 30 Baseball/softball diamonds 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 14 14 14 Soccer/football fields 12 12 12 11 11 11 11 9 9 9 Tennis courts 23 25 25 25 25 26 26 25 25 25 Water Water mains (miles) 116.2 116.2 116.2 115.7 115.7 115.7 115.7 115.7 115.7 115.7 Fire hydrants 1,470 1,470 1,470 1,462 1,462 1,462 1,462 1,458 1,458 1,450 Storage capacity (thousands of gallons) 4,375 4,375 4,375 4,375 4,375 4,375 4,375 4,375 4,375 4,375 Wastewater Sanitary sewers (miles) 84.5 84.5 84.5 83.0 83.0 83.0 83.0 77.0 77.0 80.0 Storm sewers (miles) 32.5 32.5 32.5 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 32.0 Treatment capacity (thousands of gallons) 4.40 4.40 4.45 4.46 3.28 3.28 3.13 3.83 3.13 5.41 Source: Various City Departments. 5-24 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Independent Accountant's Report on Applying Agreed -Upon Procedures Related to the Article XIII -B Appropriations Limit For the Year Ending June 30, 2016 Certified Public Accountants Certified Public O Sacramento Accountants Walnut Creek Oakland Los Angeles Century City Newport Beach San Diego Independent Accountant's Report on Applying Agreed -Upon Procedures Related to the Article XIII -B Appropriations Limit The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Rohnert Park, California We have performed the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet of the City of Rohnert Park, California (City), for the year ending June 30, 2016. These procedures, which were agreed to by the City and the League of California Cities (as presented in the publication entitled Agreed -Upon Procedures Applied to the Appropriations Limitation Prescribed by Article XIII -B of the California Constitution), were performed solely to assist the City in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIII -B of the California Constitution. The City's management is responsible for the Appropriations Limit Worksheet. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of the City's management. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. The procedures performed and our findings were as follows: We obtained the completed worksheets setting forth the calculations necessary to establish the City's appropriations limit and compared the limit and annual adjustment factors included in those worksheets to the limit and annual adjustment factors that were adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also compared the population and inflation options included in the aforementioned worksheets to those that were selected by a recorded vote of the City Council. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. 2. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet, we added the prior year appropriation limit to the total adjustment and compared the resulting amount to the current year appropriations limit. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet to the appropriate supporting worksheets described in No. 1 above. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. Macias Gini & O'Connell LLP 2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 750 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 , www.mgocpa.com 4. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying Appropriations Limit Worksheet to the prior year appropriations limit adopted by the City Council. Finding: No exceptions were noted as a result of our procedures. We were not engaged to, and did not, conduct an examination, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the Appropriations Limit Worksheet. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you. No procedures have been performed with respect to the determination of the appropriations limit for the base year, as defined by Article XIII -B of the California Constitution. This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Mayor, City Council, and City's management and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Walnut Creek, California January 13, 2016 2 CITY OF ROHNERT PARK Appropriations Limit Worksheet For the Year Ending June 30, 2016 2014-2015 appropriations limit, as adopted Adjustment factors: Population (1) Inflation (2) Total adjustment factors (3) Total adjustments 2015-2016 appropriations limit $ 44,879,373 1.0084 x 1.0382 1.0469 2,105,780 $ 46,985,153 The population factor may be based on the change in population of 1) the City or 2) the County of Sonoma, as provided by the State of California's Department of Finance. The population factor adopted by the City for the current year appropriation limit represents the change in population of the County of Sonoma. (2) The inflation factor may be based on 1) the change in per capita personal income for the State of California, as provided by the State of California's Department of Finance; or 2) the change in the assessed valuation due to new non-residential construction within the City. The inflation factor adopted by the City for the current year appropriation limit represents the change in per capita personal income. (3) The total adjustment factor is calculated by multiplying the population factor by the inflation factor. City of Rohnert Park 19 P- QQ,}4NERT Pjk LI F0 W4 2 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report - (CAFR) and Financial Highlights Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2015 FY 2014-15 Audit Results The FY 2014/15 City's financial statements have been audited by Macias Gini & O'Connell LLP (MGO), a licensed Certified Public Accounting firm. The auditor has issued an unqualified "clean" opinion that the City's financial statements are fairly presented in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). z FY 2014-15 Audit Results Cont. The City has received the Award for Excellence in Financial Reporting from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) for 33 consecutive years and has submitted the FY 2014/15 CAM for consideration. Proposition 4 Article XIII -B (GANN) Limit Agreed - Upon Procedures Report. No Exceptions. 3 GENERAL FUND The General Fund is the main operating fund of the City used to account for and report all financial resources not accounted for and reported in another fund. C,jeneral General Fund Revenues June 30, 2015 ($ in Millions) Total General Fund Revenues 29.1 Property Tax $3.7 Franchise Fees $2.1 Intergovernmental $3.6 Sales Tax & Other $10.5 License & Permits $1.5 m Donations & Misc $<0.1 ■ Transient Occupancy Tax $3.0 • Interest & Rents $0.8 Charges for Services $3.9 P- Forfeitures & Fines $<0.1 6 General Fund Revenues June 30, 2015 & 2014 ($ in Millions) <0.1 Counted as 0.0 or 0.1 for Rounding Purposes. 7 FY 2014/15 FY 2013/14 Increase/ (Decrease) Amount % of Total Amount % of Total Amount Property Taxes $3.7 12.7% $4.0 14.2% ($0.3) Sales and Other Taxes 10.5 36.0% 10.5 37.4% 0.0 Transient Occupancy Tax 3.0 10.2% 2.8 10.0% 0.2 Franchise Fees 2.1 7.2% 2.0 7.1% 0.1 Intergovernmental 3.6 12.3% 3.4 12.1% 0.2 Interest and Rents 0.8 2.7% 0.6 2.1% 0.2 Charges for Services 3.9 13.4% 2.0 7.1% 1.9 Licenses & Permits 1.5 5.2% 1.3 4.6% 0.2 Fines & Forfeitures <0.1 <0.1% <0.1 <0.1% 0.0 Donations and Misc <0.1 0.2% 1.5 5.3% (1.5) TOTAL $29.11 100.0%1 $28.11 100.00% $1.0 <0.1 Counted as 0.0 or 0.1 for Rounding Purposes. 7 General Fund Revenues Five Year Comparison ($ in Millions) $30.0 $25.0 $20.0 15,.0 $10.0 X5.0 0.0 FY 10-11 FY 11-12 FY 1-13 FY 13-14 FY 14-15 12.7% 7.2% 5.5% 12.4% 3.6% general Fund Expenditures 9 General Fund Expenditures by Function Jute 30, 2015 ($ in Millions) Total General Fu Expenditures $31.OM Public Safety $14.9 Parks & Recreation $2.7 ■ Debt Service P & 1 $0.7 General Gov't $10.0 Cultural Arts $0.8 Public Works $1.3 Capital Outlay $0.6 General Gov't Includes: City Council, City Manager, Finance, Legal, Development Services, Human Resources, and Other Non -Departmental Costs. 10 General Fund Expenditures by Function June 30, 2015 8c X014 ($ in Millions) FY 2014/15 FY 2013/14 Increase/ (Decrease) Amount % of Total Amount % of Total Amount General Gov't $10.0 32.3% $ 8.0 28.3% $ 2.0 Public Safety 14.9 48.2% 14.7 51.9% 0.2 Public Works 1.3 4.1% 1.4 4.9% (0.1) Parks & Rec 2.7 8.6% 2.6 9.2% 0.1 Cultural Arts Center 0.8 2.5% 0.6 2.1% 0.2 Capital Outlay 0.6 2.1% 0.9 3.2% (0.3) Debt Service 0.7 2.2% 0.1 0.4% 0.6 Total $31.0 100.0% $28.3 100.0% $ 2.7 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 [flue Five Years of Expenditures By Function ($ In Millions) FY 10-11 0 Public Safety 0 Cultural Arts 0.4 0.7 2.3 4.8 14.7 0.1 0.6 0.7 2.3 5.0 13.8 0.4 0.7 1.2 2.3 5.6 3.9 0.1 0.9 0.6 1.4 2.F 4.7 0.7 0.6 0.8 1.3 2.7 m 14.9 FY 11-12 FY 12-13 FY 13-14 FY 14-15 ■ General Government ® Parks & Recreation N Public Works ■ Capital Outlay 0 Debt Service 12 FY 2b14/15 General Fund Balance Revenues Exceeded Expenditures by $1.6M Revenues $ 29.1 M Expenditures (31.0) M Net Other Financing Sources/Uses 3.5 M Net Increase Fund Balance $ 1.6 M $3.5M is the net of transfers in/transfers, out and loan proceeds that are not considered general revenues. 13 General Fund Budget to Actual Comparison ($ in millions) Complete GF Budget to Actual Schedule can be found on pages F-81 to F-83. 14 Original Budget Final Budget Actual Amounts Variance To Final Revenues 26.4 27.5 29.1 1.6 Expenditures (30.4) (35.7) (31.0) 4.7 Other Sources/Uses 4.3 4.2 3.5 (0.7) Net Change in Fund Balance 0.3 (4.0) 1.6 5.6 Complete GF Budget to Actual Schedule can be found on pages F-81 to F-83. 14 General Fuad Balance ($ in Thousands) Non -Spendable (inventory; advances; prepaid) 1 $ 17971 Assigned for Operating Reserve 1 31829 15 General Fund Balance Cont, ($ in Thousands) Assigned for Infrastructure ($616k in budget) 11616 Assigned Assigned for Self -Insured Losses (policy) for Retirement Reserve (Sent to PARS) 998 1,333 Assigned Assigned for Vehicle Replacement Reserve for Information Technology Reserve 180 Assigned for Health Savings Reserve (benefit) 7 Assigned for Carryover Encumbrances 925 UnassignedFund Balance 34 CAFR Fund Balance (pg F-207 F-68 details) $14,220 16 Discussion Direction on Assignments Assigned for Infrastructure (less $616k) 1 170007000 LAssigned for Information Technology Reserve 1807000 Recommend following transfers at Mid Year: $1.OM to the Infrastructure Reserve. $400k to the Vehicle Replacement Reserve. $180,000 to the IT Reserve for Infrastructure Upgrades and Replacements. Recommend Non -GF Departments make similar pro -rata contribution. 17 Impacts To Net Position lu GASB 68/71 Impacts to Net Position In FY 2014/15 implemented G68/71. Required reporting full value of pension liability. Measurement date of 6/30/14 was used as most recent information provided by CaIPERS. Required a restatement of FY 13-14 Governmental Activities Net Position to $51.4M a reduction of $46.7M. Required a restatement of FY 13-14 City's Net Position to $97M a reduction of $51.9M. 19 GASB 68 Changes to FY X014-15 Statement of Net Position ($ in millions) Govt. Act. Deferred Inflows (Pension Related) • New components found on Statement of Net Position on page F17. • See chart on page F-62 for more details on the Deferred Inflows and Outflows. city Wide 9.0 20 ,uestions? 21 Meeting Date: Department: Submitted By: Prepared By: Agenda Title: ITEM NO. 12 Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT March 8, 2016 Administration Darrin Jenkins, City Manager Bryce Atkins, Senior Analyst Graton Mitigation Program Budget 2014-2015 Year -End Update RECOMMENDED ACTION: This is an informational item. BACKGROUND: A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria (Tribe) and the City of Rohnert Park (City) was created and entered into to provide funds to mitigate the impacts of the casino on our community. The City's Graton Mitigation Program Budget was based on receiving the guaranteed recurring contributions for the fiscal year. ANALYSIS: Contributions The City received $6,886,888 from the State of California and the Tribe, as called for in the MOU, and in the adopted program budget. The budget projected receiving revenue in the amount of $8,044,000. The amount of contributions collected within the fiscal year was 85.6% of the budgeted amount. The lower amount received is a product of the timing of guaranteed payment due dates spanning fiscal years in June and July. Although the amount collected in the year was lower than budgeted, the payments were all received in keeping with the terms and conditions of the MOU and the balance was received in early Fiscal Year 2015-2016. There was sufficient fund balance from prior years to cover the costs incurred within the year. There will likely be a similar condition in approximately 6 years when more of the guaranteed contributions will be distributed by the State, as opposed to the guaranteed payments made by the Tribe, which is the split between receiving the quarterly contribution in June or July. Expenditures The amended budget totaled $8,363,619 for this year. The actual expenditures for Fiscal Year 2014-2015 were $7,834,605. Actual expenditures were 93.7% of planned expenditures. ITEM NO. 12 The main expenditure areas are as follows: • $5 million in lost revenue repayment to the City's General Fund for losses incurred in not being able to develop the Northwest Specific Plan • $1.2 million for improving Rohnert Park Expressway • $633,297 in salaries and benefits, and workers' compensation for dedicated personnel, as well as non -dedicated staff time • $500,000 for improving Snyder Lane • $207,095 in initial funding for the beginning work of other public projects • $210,499 for contractual and legal services • $28,335 for purchase of a Public Safety motorcycle • $7,560 for reimbursement of an unused portion of the Sonoma County Fire Services Agreement advance payment made during the opening week of the Casino • $8,597 for supplies • $4,000 transferred for future vehicle replacement These account for the vast majority of the annual expenditures, along with other smaller costs as detailed in the attached year-end report. Productivity Below is a listing of what has been achieved with the funds expended. • Continued employment of 3 dedicated staff members (1 Public Safety Sergeant, Public Safety Traffic Officer, and 1 Senior Analyst) • Non -dedicated staff time spent on the projects and work outlined below • Contribution towards improving Rohnert Park Expressway • Contribution towards improving Snyder Lane • Contribution towards multiple other projects • Legal review and completion of objectionable business moratoria and municipal code revisions • Purchase of a Public Safety motorcycle and equipment Conclusion Overall, the City received approximately 86% of budgeted contributions and used 94% of the budgeted annual expenditures. There remained $2.58 million in reserve at the completion of the fiscal year. Committed Funds At the February 23rd, 2016 Council meeting, Council requested updates with future actions about the amount of committed funds, and the fiscal impact that the action may create as far as W ITEM NO. 12 committed funds. Staff has identified personnel as ongoing commitments, as other contract services may be modified or cancelled. With the inclusion of the adopted Community Service Officer approved at the above referenced meeting, $1.6 million (19.7%) of the $8.3 million this year is committed to ongoing personnel costs and the remaining $6.7 million this fiscal year is not committed to ongoing costs. Below is a graphical representation of the commitment level of casino mitigation recurring contributions. Commitment Level of Recurring Mitigation Contributions (in millions) Ln $i.6 $6.7 3 ■ Committed U Y CO ■ Uncommitted U 0% 20% 40% 609% 80% 100% OPTIONS CONSIDERED: Not applicable. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report meets the following values of the City's 2016-2018 Strategic Plan: Values: o Fiscal Responsibility: Transparent in disclosing financial transactions and their implications o Communication: Open, honest, clear, and respectful communication with the public and within the City organization FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: Not applicable. Department Head Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 2/29/2016 City Attorney Approval Date: N/A Finance Director Approval Date: 2/22/2016 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Casino Mitigation Program Budget — Year -End Update. 3 Casino Mitigation Program Budget 2014-15 Year -End Update ADOPTED AMENDED 2014-2015 2014-2015 BUDGET BUDGET YEAR-END YEAR-END FUNDING SOURCES 2014-15 2014-15 ACTUALS % RECEIVED Existing Fund Balance $ 3,531,009 $ 3,531,009 $ 3,531,009 FIGR Casino Mitigation MOU $ 8,044,000 $ 8,044,000 $ 6,886,888 85.6% TOTAL REVENUE $ 8,044,000 $ 8,044,000 $ 6,886,888 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 2014-15 ADOPTED AMENDED YEAR-END YEAR-END EXPENSE BUDGET BUDGET ACTUALS % USED Compensation Salary and Benefits $ 585,574 $ 585,574 $ 617,287 105.4% Training 5,500 5,500 30 0.5% Insurance Workers' Compensation 15,946 15,946 16,010 100.4% Liability/Property 17,087 17,087 11,758 68.8% Services Fees 17,103 17,103 17,103 100.0% Supplies Office Supplies 5,150 5,150 180 3.5% Special Departmental 22,500 22,500 8,417 37.4% Contingency 130,509 130,509 7,560 5.8% Contractual/Professional Legal Services 85,000 85,000 122,262 143.8% Other Outside Experts 220,000 220,000 88,237 40.1% Travel & Meetings 2,750 2,750 206 7.5% Other Expense 21,500 21,500 6,125 28.5% Capital Outlay 35,000 35,000 28,335 81.0% Transfer -Out 2,200,000 7,200,000 6,911,095 96.00 TOTAL EXPENSE $ 3,363,619 $ 8,363,619 $ 7,834,605 93.7% $ 4,680,381 $ (319,619) $ (947,717) NET RESULT REMAINING FUND BALANCE $ 8,211,390 $ 3,211,390 $ 2,583,292 i mot 1 ///, AA& ;-v Beginning Fund Balance MOU Contributions Expenditures Net Result Ending Fund Balance INERT ]? $3,531,009 $8,044,000 $3,531,009 D 5 85.6% N $8,363,619 $7,834,605 93.7% $(319,619) $3,211,390 $(947,,717) $2,583,292 N%v*44 CA L I F 0 R NIP f 1y1 ALM i i rmdroi � "Vs%le " a mv W , PI'S Ilk aw• • ��rl►��1Mlv,fli ./ .i1' .■/� F,L.jlj m m.-�ftm ANMWm= • F� V of Co m mitmen# Level of Recurring Mitigation tion n ri u i n (in millions) 7 6-3 C�`1LIFORN-.gag IA COMrFAted ,�_pHNERT PgRK «► Mission Statement "We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." C/LIFD RN IP CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: March 8, 2016 Department: Development Services Submitted By: Jeffrey S. Beiswenger, AICP, Planning Manager Prepared By: Jeffrey S. Beiswenger, AICP, Planning Manager Agenda Title: Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area Plan and Related Final Environmental Impact Report, Amendments to the General Plan, and Amendments to the Zoning Map and Ordinance RECOMMENDED ACTION: ITEM NO. 13 Open the public hearing on the Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area plan and related environmental impact report, general plan updates and zoning ordinance amendments, take public comments and continue the public hearing to March 22, 2016. Due to complexity of this topic and the expectation of extensive public comment, staff recommends that the Council open the public hearing to allow public comment but that the City Council not deliberate on this item until the March 22 meeting. Continuing the public hearing to March 22 will assure that full public involvement and comment is heard before City Council deliberations so that those deliberations can be fully informed by public input. While we do not recommend Council deliberation, if there are questions of staff, we will be prepared to answer at this March 8 meeting. DOWNTOWN FORMATION Downtown formation is a central component of the Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area plan (PDA plan). Since the inception of project in 2013, we have heard from city residents, the business community and other community stakeholders that a downtown Rohnert Park is needed. A summary of the public workshops and meetings with the project's Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) are attached to this report. The PDA planning effort has featured extensive urban design research into the critical components of successful downtowns. Staff has also collected economic data that asserts that the city can absorb a significant amount of downtown commercial development. The following is a summary of a few of our conclusions related to downtown formation: • A downtown should incorporate the SMART train platform as a focal point. Transit is a typical component of many successful downtown areas. The area adjacent to the SMART train platform (the former State Farm campus) is a natural location for a future downtown. • The City Center area (north of RPX) should be included in any future downtown efforts. This area already has a "downtown street" (City Center Drive) and public amenities (library, plaza, farmer's market, etc.). ITEM NO. 13 • State Farm Drive should be used as a "downtown street" with retail buildings fronting on it from both sides. This would include the Raleys Town Center's frontage and the frontage of the (former) State Farm campus south of RPX. • Any new streets created should be two-sided downtown streets. This means that both sides of the street should have street -facing commercial building entries, downtown street furniture (lighting, landscaping, benches, outdoor seating areas, etc.), and on -street parking with any parking lots or parking structures located behind retail storefronts. • A minimum amount of commercial, specifically active retail and service businesses, is needed to create a downtown streetscape environment. Staff has recommended a minimum of 275,000 square feet of active retail and service uses. Other supportive uses such as office and residential would be encouraged, in addition to, but not in place of ground floor retail and service uses. • Economic data from the Concord Group (Market Opportunity and Feasibility Analysis for a Mixed Use Site in Rohnert Park, California, September 29, 2015) asserts that Rohnert Park's Retail Trade Area will be undersupplied by a cumulative of 291,929 square feet of retail by 2019. It is expected that demand will continue to increase after 2019 increasing this undersupply every year unless additional retail opportunity is created. A downtown creates a unique setting for retail and service businesses not currently available in Rohnert Park and it is reasonable to assume that 275,000 square feet of commercial could be easily absorbed within the near future. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 25, and recommended approval of: • The Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area Plan, Environmental Impact Report (Planning Commission Resolution 2016-04). • The Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area Plan (Planning Commission Resolution 2016-05). • General Plan amendments to implement the PDA plan (Planning Commission Resolution 2016-06). • Zoning Ordinance Amendments to implement the PDA plan (Planning Commission Resolution 2016-07). The Planning Commission recommended approval to the City Council of the PDA Plan with a few significant deviations from staff recommendations. Staff recommended changes to Chapter 4 (Land Use of the PDA document) which would establish minimum commercial square footage requirements for projects within the Downtown District Amenity Zone (DDAZ). These amendments are attached with an excerpt included as Figure 4. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2016-05 (Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area) and Resolution 2016-07 (Zoning Ordinance Amendments) with the deletion of the Chapter 4 revisions proposed by staff and the deletion of the zoning ordinance amendments that would have imposed the minimum commercial square footage requirements. Staff respectfully disagrees with the Planning Commission recommendation to eliminate the minimum commercial square footage requirements. Without a significant amount of new 2 ITEM NO. 13 downtown oriented development — especially active retail and service businesses — the area will lack the necessary energy or critical mass to create a dynamic downtown streetscape environment. The DDAZ is intended to create a destination downtown environment for the city and based on our analysis a minimum amount of active retail and service uses are necessary to create this environment. Staff suggested an amendment to Chapter 4 (see Figure 4) that would require a minimum of 275,000 square feet of active retail and service uses in the DDAZ. This would be implemented by the zoning ordinance by requiring 150,000 square feet in the Station Center subarea; 100,000 square feet in the City Center subarea and 25,000 square feet in the Central Commercial subarea (along the State Farm frontage of the Raley's shopping center). Figure 1 Changes to Chapter 4 (Land Use) of PDA Plan Centra I Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan 4.3,6 Downtown District Amenity Zane The DDAZ is to be implemented as a new overlay zone, designed to help focus investment within the Downtown District and facilitate the development of a compact, walkable commercial district that is unique to Rohnert Park. The DDAZ encompasses the SMART rail station and the existing or planned commercial areas irnmediately surrounding this. It will build from and extend the urban streetscape environment already estabilshed in the City Center south across RPX to include the downtown commercial area envisioned in the Station Center subarea: and west to encompass the portions of the Central Commercial subarea fronting State Farm Drive and RPX (Figure 4.4). The DDAZ is proposed to include land use and development standards that support the creation of a walkable dining, entertainment, retail, and civic district within a unique, urban, mixed-use environment. Minimum development within the DDAZ of the PDA will be required to create the tXK of active retail environment desired blr the city. The rgluirement for each subarea: • Station anter, 150,O00 square feet lirl 1y1 ,Y s rr 1_! T,. rCOTITIercial. 25.DOO■ falping State Farrin4 . DFa t December 2015 A minimum amount of retail and service uses are required within the DDAZ to create the active commercial environment desired by the city. Based on research of downtowns in surrounding_ communities a minimum of 275.000 sf of active retail and services uses in the DDAZ would the minimum amounted needed. The PDA as a whole could su000rt LID to 430.000 sf of new retail or �1�'L`aC.I.I lli� Illl>t C.] ■ r�.rlrl [-al7Y� Il�C�lit�tq l int of new dev w deVeldniner wni De require❑ to naverr` r�aLX entrances racing the public sidewalk to create an active streetscape. Building heights of two stories or taller- are desired to help frame the sidewalk and create a minimum level of development intensity Chapter 4: Land Use ITEM NO. 13 The Planning Commission voted to exclude the minimum square footage requirement from the PDA document and the related zoning ordinance amendment. These minimum square footage thresholds were strongly opposed by Suncal, the current owner of the former State Farm campus. The Suncal representative testified in support of the remainder of the PDA proposal. Active retail and service uses are critical to the success of a future downtown district. With the help of urban design consultants, staff completed research into the fundamental components of a successful downtown environment by looking at examples from around the region and the nation. The critical components of a downtown can be thought of a quantity + quality. Downtowns need to be designed correctly with: building entrances at the back of public sidewalks; buildings tall enough to help "frame" the street; and a public sidewalk/street environment that is inviting to pedestrians. The quantity of commercial square footage is just as important. In order to create a downtown environment, buildings need to be occupied by many active retail and service uses to create a multitude of destinations for folks visiting downtown to enjoy. Without this quantity component a desolate streetscape will be created. Staff has provided a list of a few successful California downtowns (and mixed use developments) of various sizes that work well from a quality and quantity perspective. Approximate square footages were calculated from aerial photo analysis. Only small downtown areas were selected for comparison purposes to Rohnert Park. These are summarized in Table 1 below. La Quinta, the Barlow and Windsor Town Green all have square footage of 200,000 or less for one portion of the downtown, but all have surrounding areas that are supportive of the downtown environment and contribute addition commercial buildings. The Windsor Town Green is an example of this. The original (Town Green) development has approximately 200,000 sf of commercial square footage and new development has recently added more — further enhancing the area. Table 1 — Comparison of Select Downtown Areas Downtown Area Approximate Size Description Healdsburg 400,000 sf Only the area proximate to the central square was included in the calculation Windsor Town Green 200,000 to 300,000 sf The original town green development is 200,000 sf but with the addition of the Oliver's shopping center, the square footage is closer to 300,000 sf The Barlow 220,000 sf The Barlow is adjacent to downtown Sebastopol which is not included in this total La Quinta (Old Town) 175,000 to 300,000 sf The Old Town development is a small walkable area, but the surrounding area has a supportive downtown street grid and additional development j9 ITEM NO. 13 PUBLIC COMMENTS SUPPORT DOWNTOWN FORMATION The PDA planning process has included extensive public input (see Table 2). The first opportunity for public input was a focus group meeting held on October 1, 2013. Participants in that first meeting called for the creation of a downtown and for unique shops and services that are not currently available in the city. Similar comments were heard at subsequent public workshops and at meeting held by the project's Citizen Advisory Committee. Summaries of the meetings are attached to this report. The following downtown related themes have emerged from public input: • The city needs a walkable shopping area with buildings facing the public sidewalk and street. • Rohnert Park could support locally owned shops and restaurants. Folks would not have to leave town as much to Healdsburg, Windsor, Petaluma, Santa Rosa, Sebastopol, etc. • SMART train area needs to be a focal point of activity (not just a platform and a parking lot). • The city needs to challenge the assumption that people in Rohnert Park can't afford certain types of goods and services. • A cohesive, dynamic downtown will help small businesses survive. • Downtown needs to be a mixed-use area with retail, office and residential uses, but with a strong retail core. PROJECT BACKGROUND: Development Services staff along with a consultant team has developed the Central Rohnert PDA, funded through a regional FOCUS planning grant. The $450,000 grant requires the City to adopt the PDA by March 31, 2016 or forfeit the funds. Given the condition of state transportation funding—where we read about projects losing funding on a regular basis—staff is concerned that missing the March 31, 2016 deadline will mean the loss of $450,000 to the City' General Fund. PDAs are local, infill development areas near transit facilities. The anticipated arrival of the SMART commuter train station adjacent to the former State Farm campus is a major impetus for the PDA plan and the plan will help the City foster development throughout the PDA area, build on investments occurring in the City Center area and utilize the former State Farm campus as a key catalyst site to revitalize the area. As part of the PDA plan adoption and implementation process, an environmental impact report (EIR), general plan and zoning ordinance amendments have been prepared. The PDA is a 330 acre triangular shaped area (see Figure 2), formed by the boundaries of U.S. Highway 101 to the west, the railroad tracks (and SMART line) to the east, and Avram Avenue/Santa Alicia Drive to the south. The location of the City Center and former State Farm campus are indicated with a blue star on Figure 2. Special attention will be paid to this area since it is viewed as a key catalyst site for downtown formation. 5 ITEM NO. 13 Figure 2 Location of Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area The PDA planning process has relied heavily on public input from the community in determining the priorities and vision for the future of the PDA. A variety of strategies were utilized to engage and solicit input from residents and community stakeholders. A Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) were formed from the onset to advise and provide input on the PDA plan at key points of its development. Stakeholder interviews and public outreach workshops were conducted. As the project has progressed additional forms of project input have been used, as summarized in Table 2. � wlrrreQckanner _ 1 Hot Ave r. . %.... �. �. �. �.. r.w. �. CoknraeGnk ; 1 f Faraway Dr 1 ........... i i 1 _ 1 r Goii Course Dr 1 n Priority S f • ` Development a r F Area Z ° Location of City Center area, former State Farm ♦ ,kneneughc.e.k office building and SMART LhnertParkExpy NERTPARK train platform 4 t . EnterpnueDr Rohnert Park Expy I �. Cop CIO ndCreek s; A-- rT� �o9w Santa Aii[i3DrAve C f Alien Dr x„�. 1 50 NOMA o tiro j STATE UNIVER5ITY ro r f � 1. �. � E Cotati Ave r./ r P r ? 3 j , tt� COTATIPriority as f y Rohnert Park DevelopmentCentral r Priority Development Area Location w M city L;rnds r r,a.r SMART Railway Station Locations E Railroad Ave The PDA planning process has relied heavily on public input from the community in determining the priorities and vision for the future of the PDA. A variety of strategies were utilized to engage and solicit input from residents and community stakeholders. A Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) were formed from the onset to advise and provide input on the PDA plan at key points of its development. Stakeholder interviews and public outreach workshops were conducted. As the project has progressed additional forms of project input have been used, as summarized in Table 2. ITEM NO. 13 2013 Focus Group Held October 1, 2013 Issue identification Chamber of Commerce October 2, 2013 Project overview, issue Presentation September, 2015 identification Public Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 Project overview, issue Burden) September 8, 2015 identification, visioning CAC/TAC Meeting #1 November 19, Project overview, issue City Town Hall Meeting 2013 identification, visioning 2014 CAC/TAC Meeting #2 March 4, 2014 Site concepts, identify Discussion opportunity sites and locations Public Draft PDA available September, 2015 for transportation enhancements Walkability Workshop (Dan May 7, 2014 Workshop and walking tour of Burden) September 8, 2015 PDA area CAC/TAC Meeting #3 July 10, 2014 Development scenarios, City Town Hall Meeting October 15, 2015 circulation enhancements City Council Workshop August 12, 2014 Development scenarios, PDA EIR Scoping Meeting November 18, circulation enhancements Public Workshop #2 October 21, 2014 Development scenarios, PDA, EIR Comment Period and December — circulation enhancements 2015 Planning Commission July 23, 2015 Update on project to PC Discussion Public Draft PDA available September, 2015 Draft plan available to public for comment Joint City Council / Planning September 8, 2015 Discussion of draft plan Commission Workshop City Town Hall Meeting October 15, 2015 Among other topics downtown formation was discussed PDA EIR Scoping Meeting November 18, A scoping meeting was held as 2015 required by CEQA PDA, EIR Comment Period and December — An EIR was prepared for PDA Final EIR Preparation February, 2016 and a comment period was required 2016 — PDA Adoption PDA & EIR — Planning February 11, 2016 Review PDA and Final EIR Commission PDA — GP & Zoning February 25, 2016 Consider adoption of GP and Amendments zoning amendments PDA, EIR, GP & Zoning — City March 8, 2016 Study session on Central 7 ITEM NO. 13 Task Date Topics Council Rohnert Park PDA and related approval documents PDA, EIR, GP & Zoning — City March 22, 2016 Consider adoption of PDA, Council (tentative) EIR, GP and Zoning Amendments PROPOSED PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS As part of the approval process and to fully implement the PDA plan, the city would need to do the following: 1. Adopt the PDA plan. This document will serve as the "master plan" for the entire 330 acre PDA area and is intended to supplement general plan goals, policies and programs within this area. General plan amendments are proposed to create links between the two documents. 2. Adopt the PDA plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The City Council was provided with a copy of the draft EIR document In January for review and a Final EIR document attached to this staff report. 3. General plan amendments. Updates to the general plan have been prepared to implement the PDA plan. 4. Zoning amendments. Certain targeted amendments to the zoning ordinance have been prepared to implement portions of the PDA plan. PDA PLAN The purpose of the PDA plan is to establish the vision and policy for the plan area for land use, transportation and infrastructure. The plan also contains design guidelines that would apply to public sector and private sector development when it occurs within the plan area. The general plan and zoning ordinance would be amended to implement the PDA document. A theme that has emerged during the public workshops is that Rohnert Park needs a town center (or downtown). Downtown formation strategies have been incorporated into the PDA document, to accomplish the following: • Create a policy and land use framework to support a downtown with unique shops and restaurants that are well connected with a network of roads and sidewalks — more "places to go" and "ways to get around" • The PDA plan allows for the creation of a unique destination to complement other parts of the City with localized retail, gathering places including restaurants, small parks and plazas, and a welcoming entry for SMART riders to attract more of these venues. • The PDA plan has a good mix of land uses and is balanced in terms of residential housing and commercial development with an emphasis on active retail and service uses within a downtown area. ITEM NO. 13 • State Farm site has been identified as a catalyst site. The site should be carefully developed to maximize its impact on the PDA area. • The PDA plan calls for more connectivity. Walking and riding a bicycle are currently a challenge in central Rohnert Park. Streets are difficult to cross and many commercial properties lack internal pedestrian facilities. Existing development is designed more for vehicles than for pedestrians or bicyclists with missing sidewalks and lack of trail connections. • Several methods of crossing Rohnert Park Expressway (RPX) are proposed in the PDA. When the new SMART platform begins operation on the south side of RPX, more pedestrians are expected in the vicinity of the railroad tracks and safer crossing solutions are needed. PDA Subareas and Development Concepts The PDA has been divided into various subareas since future development within the PDA will vary based on location and the anticipated land use character and the development concepts vary based on the subarea. A few of the subareas are highlighted below. Downtown District Amenity Zone The PDA identifies a Downtown District Amenity Zone (DDAZ) with the goal of focusing investment within the Downtown District and facilitating the development of a compact, walkable commercial district that is unique to Rohnert Park. The DDAZ encompasses the SMART rail station, the adjacent State Farm site and the City Center area. A zoning overlay will be added to the zoning ordinance which will include land use and development standards to support the creation of a walkable dining, entertainment, retail, and civic district within a unique, urban, mixed-use environment. City Center Area The Rohnert Park, City Center Concept Plan was adopted in 2002 and has helped guide development in the 32 -acres north of Rohnert Park Expressway (RPX) and west of the railroad tracks. The PDA plan identifies where additional infill development could occur within the City Center Area, strategies to strengthen east -west connectivity and ways to provide safe crossings of RPX. A concept plan was included in the PDA plan that identifies the following strategies: • Infill of new buildings to create a more urban setting. • A new parking structure (or structures) will be needed if a significant amount of new development occurs. A possible location is depicted adjacent to RPX. • The plaza that currently hosts the farmer's market will remain to will continue to support public events in the City Center area. • East -west connectivity will be enhanced as development occurs with a connection out to Commerce Drive. • Front buildings onto RPX, State Farm Drive and City Center Drive to create a pleasant environment for bicycling and walking. 0 Figure 3 Location of Downtown District Amenity Zone 74inebaugh Creek corridor o PADRE CENTER CITY CENTER �_rtri fir. r ROHNERT PARK I -••� --.. •...�,,�... •u1 ` 4f' , a 14 4K .too Co PCiR.Tp.L Station Center Site (former State Farm campus) ITEM NO. 13 RACQUET CLUB Downtown District Amenity Zone ROHNEIRT PARK ' a _SMART WALNUT Station VUAi f4L; C-AR.Lt"iA CAN This 32 -acre site of the former State Farm campus is immediately adjacent to the SMART rail platform. The PDA plan proposes conceptual reuse plans for this site that create an interface and connect with the SMART station site and multi -use path. The plan identifies an appropriate land use mix for the site's reuse. The intent is to convey critical concepts that may be important to the community, including the following: • Provide a grid network of streets. Pedestrian sidewalks should be built throughout to encourage walking. Development that creates indirect walking routes for pedestrians and discourages pedestrian activity should be avoided. Direct paths of travel should be provided — particularly to the SMART platform. • Create a plaza adjacent to the SMART platform. A transit drop-off could occur at this location. This would be a critical focal point in the project. • Linking the existing multi -use trail along RPX into the bicycle and pedestrian network of the project. • Incorporating the crossings of RPX into the site. A mid -block pedestrian crossing could be used close to the railroad tracks or an overcrossing could be considered in the future. • Relocating the City's corporation yard to create a larger development site. 10 ITEM NO. 13 • Locating a new Village Green along RPX where the large open space area is currently located. This could be designed as an exceptional community gathering place for the community. • Designing retail buildings to face or "front" onto the local streets and/or the Village Green with parking internalized. This will create a pleasant pedestrian environment. Triangle Business Subarea The PDA includes a large area currently zoned primarily for industrial and office uses bounded by Hinebaugh Creek to the south, the railroad tracks (and future multi -use path) to the east and Highway 101 to the west (forming a triangle) (see Figure 2). The PDA plan explores how strategic sites within this area could be reused and how more connectivity could be created for all forms of transportation. The PDA plan determines the appropriate land use mix for this area. To help the City and developers envision the reuse of certain parcels within the Industrial Triangle, a conceptual lay -out of the "Yardbirds" site and adjacent parcels was completed. Figure 4 Development Concepts in Business Triangle Subarea Transition industrial uses ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ...... Mwn. ux N* In compliance with CEQA, the environmental review for the Project has included: • Notice of Preparation (NOP): o Described the proposed Project and issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). o Distributed to responsible agencies and other interested parties for a 30 -day public review period beginning October 18, 2015. o The NOP and the comment letters received in response to the NOP are included in the Draft EIR. 11 ITEM NO. 13 o Scoping Meeting: Held on November 18, 2015 in the Council Chamber of the City of Rohnert Park to allow interested parties to provide comments regarding potential environmental issues to be considered in the EIR. • Draft EIR: o Prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the PDA Plan. o Provides a programmatic level analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the PDA plan o Circulated for a 45 -day public review period beginning December 18, 2015 and ending February 1, 2016. • Final EIR o Prepared to respond to comments received on the Draft EIR. o Two comment letters we received on the EIR from Sonoma County and Caltrans. The full letters and responses to those letters are included in the Final EIR, • Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP): o Prepared to reduce the impacts of plan (and any future development within the plan area) to a less than significant level. o The MMRP identifies the required mitigation measures, responsibility for ensuring compliance and the timing of the measure implementation. ANALYSIS: The following is an analysis of key topics that required consideration leading up to staff's recommendations to the City Council on this Project. Downtown The Plan establishes a vision for a new downtown area proximate to the SMART platform. To implement this vision, the PDA identifies a Downtown District Amenity Zone (DDAZ) with the goal of focusing investment within the Downtown District and facilitating the development of a compact, walkable commercial district that is unique to Rohnert Park. Numerous general plan and zoning ordinance amendments are proposed to implement the downtown vision (described in more detail in the following sections). The PDA plan includes design guidelines and development standards to require that new development within the identified DDAZ will lead to the implementation of a downtown. As projects are proposed they would be required to address these design guidelines and development standards. The requirements would include: the placement of the buildings (and building entries) at the back of the sidewalk; fagade treatments along the public sidewalk to contribute to the downtown streetscape; minimum heights of buildings to create a "street wall" and "frame" the downtown street; appropriate urban landscaping (e.g. street trees); and other design components typically found in a downtown area. Staff has also proposed minimum building square footage requirements for active retail and services uses in the DDAZ. As new projects come in ground floor uses would be required to be active retail and service uses until the minimum requirement 12 ITEM NO. 13 was met. This would ensure that the appropriate balance of active retail and service uses, office uses and residential uses are provided within the DDAZ and surrounding areas. Too much residential and office will not create the commercial shopping experience nor the active sidewalk environment desired by the community. Staff has determined that a minimum of 275,000 square feet of active retail and service uses is needed throughout the DDAZ and this requirement has been included in the recommended zoning ordinance amendments. The zoning ordinance amendments assign 150,000 square feet to the Station Center subarea, 100,000 square feet to the City Center subarea and 25,000 square feet to the Central Commercial subarea (specifically the State Farm frontage). General Plan Consistency The PDA plan adheres to numerous existing general plan goals and policies for housing diversity, infrastructure, transportation improvement, funding of infrastructure and services, open space, walkable site planning with bicycle and pedestrian trails, and accessibility to parks. Additional general plan amendments are proposed to enhance the policy framework for the PDA area, as follows: • The general plan map (Figure 2.2-1, "General Plan Diagram") would be updated: o Replace the "Office" designation for the former State Farm campus property and the "Public/Institutional" designation for the City's Corporation Yard with a "Mixed -Use" designation. o Change the roadway designation of State Farm Drive to a minor collector. State Farm Drive is currently considered a major collector, but minor collector is more appropriate given the traffic volumes analyzed as part of the PDA Plan's traffic impact study. This also allows for a State Farm to be redesigned as a "downtown street." • Add a new section for the Central Rohnert Park PDA (Chapter 2 of the General Plan). This new section of the document would include the following information: o Land use policies. All the land use policies related to the PDA would be added to this section. o A description of the Station Center Planned Development. As part of the section on the PDA, a subsection on the Station Center subarea would be added. o A description of the regional commercial overlay. This overlay would allow more commercial (retail and services) uses within the industrial classification. o A description of the downtown amenity zone. A more complete description of the downtown area would be included in Chapter 3, "Community Design." • A section entitled "Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan" would be added to Chapter 3 of the General Plan to incorporate the goals and policies from the Community Design Guidelines chapter of the PDA, including an illustrative diagram of the PDA area. • A new section entitled "Downtown District" would be added to the General Plan with the current General Plan section entitled "Commercial Centers" (Section 3.3). This section 13 ITEM NO. 13 would be amended to include graphics and descriptions from the PDA Plan for the downtown district. • The master street plan would be amended (Chapter 4, "Transportation") to change State Farm Drive from a major collector to a minor collector. The minor collector would allow State Farm to be transformed into a downtown street. This change is supported by information in the PDA's traffic impact study, provided in Appendix E of the Draft EIR. • Parking restrictions would be amended to allow for on -street parking (important for a downtown street). • Circulation and connectivity goals and policies would be added to Chapter 4, "Transportation," of the General Plan. A new section entitled "Central Rohnert Park" would be added and the relevant goals and policies from the PDA Plan would be incorporated. • The General Plan has a chapter entitled "Open Space, Parks, and Public Facilities" (Chapter 5). A section entitled "Central Rohnert Park" would be added to this chapter and would include the relevant goals and policies from the PDA Plan. Zoning Ordinance Amendments As described above, the PDA plan is consistent with the planned uses for the plan area in the General Plan, as amended, and is compatible with adjacent uses. The PDA plan proposed the following specific rezoning actions: • Station Center Property. Two key properties in the plan area are the former State Farm office campus, which is currently zoned Office Commercial (C -O), and the adjacent City Corporation Yard, which is zoned Public Institutional (P -I)). Both of these zoning designations would be replaced with a Station Center Planned Development (SC -PD) designation. The rezoning will be necessary to implement to "downtown district" in this area. A minimum amount of commercial development would be required as part of this district, to ensure that enough active retail and service uses are built to achieve the type of downtown desired by the city. • Regional Commercial Overlay. The zoning map would be amended to add a Regional Commercial Overlay Zone (I -L/C) to the industrial properties located at the north end of the plan area. The PDA Plan envisions this area as an emerging commercial area because of the visibility and access afforded to it by U.S. 101 and Commerce Boulevard. • Downtown District Amenity Zone (DDAZ). The zoning map would include this overlay designation, which would modify the development standards to require that new buildings are placed at the back of the sidewalk to create active, downtown streets. • Downtown High Density Residential (DTR -H). The Downtown High Density Residential (DTR -H) zones in the plan area would be replaced by the DTR -H designation and would include modified development standards, including densities of up to 30 units per acre. • Downtown Mixed -Use (DTM-U). The Downtown Mixed -Use (DTM-U) zones in the plan area would be replaced by the DTM-U designation and would include modified development standards to require a minimum amount of commercial development and allow for densities of up to 45 units per acre. Residential development would only be permitted as part of mixed-use projects. 14 ITEM NO. 13 STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: Goal D: Continue to develop a vibrant community. Policies: • Improve transportation and infrastructure; and • Integrate State Farm/SMART train/City Center plans in a Priority Development Area. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: The project is primarily funded with a regional FOCUS planning grant through the Association of Bay Area Governments and Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Department Head Approval Date: 3/2/2016 Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: 3/2/2016 City Manager Approval Date: 3/2/2016 Attachments (list in packet assembly order): 1. Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area Plan, Final EIR 2. Staff proposed changes to Chapter 4 (Land Use) of PDA document. 3. Zoning Map Changes 4. Changes to Chapter 17.06 (Land Use Regulations) 5. Changes to Chapter 17.07 (Footnotes/Special Provisions) 6. Summary of Public Workshop and Citizen Advisory Committee Meetings 7. Letter from Lois Fisher 15 entral ohnert ark Priority Development Area Plan City of Rohnert Park CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN Final Environmental Impact Report Response to Comments SCH # 2015102081 Prepared for: City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department Planning Division Prepared by: AECOM February 2016 THERE IS A TRAIN COMING TO TOWN z - CONSTRUCTION BY SC7AOIFT ftQCV and entral ohnert ark Priority Development Area plan City of Rohnert Park CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN Final Environmental Impact Report Response to Comments SC H # 2015102081 Prepared for: City of Rohn ert Park Development Services Department Planning Division Prepared by: A;COM February 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Se ction 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Use of the Final EIR..................................................................................................... 1-2 2 COMMENTS AND REPONSES TO COMMENTS............................................................................. 2-1 2.1 List of Commenters on the Draft EIR.............................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Comments and Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR.................................................. 2-1 2.2.1 Comments and Responses to Comments.............................................................. 2-1 3 REVISIONS TO THE DRAFT El ............................................................................................... 3-1 Appendices A Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Figures No table of contents entries found. Table s Table 2-1: Written Comments Received on the Draft EIR.............................................................. 2-1 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area. Plan Final EK Response to Comments i ACRONYMS AND OTHER ABBREVIATIONS AFY Acre-feet per year Caltrans California Department of Transportation CEQA California Environmental Quality Act City City of Rohnert Park HAWK high-intensity activated crosswalk beacon MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission MUP multi -use path NOP Notice of Preparation PDA Priority Development Area PDA Plan Priority Development Area Plan Proposed Plan Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan RRFB rectangular rapid flashing beacon SCTM/10 Sonoma County Travel Model SMART Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit TDM transportation demand management U.S. 101 U.S. Highway 101 UWMP Urban Water Management Plan VMT vehicular miles traveled WSA Water Supply Assessment CentralRohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan ii Final EIR, Responseto Comments 1.0 INTRODUCTION The City of Rohnert Park (City) has directed the preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR) to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan (proposed plan) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.). In accordance with Section 15088 of the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the City of Rohnert Park, as the lead agency, has reviewed the comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) for the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan and has prepared written responses to the comments received. The City asked for input from federal, State, and local agencies; organizations; and members of the public regarding the issues that should be evaluated in the EIR. Specifically, the City issued a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the EIR on October 28, 2015 and conducted a scoping meeting on November 18, 2015. The Draft EIR (State Clearinghouse Number 201510208 1) was received on December 18th, 2015 by the State Clearinghouse, and circulated to the public for review and comment. The City conducted a 45 -day public review period for the Draft EIR that concluded on February 1, 2016. The City has now prepared this Final EIR document, which includes: • The Draft EIR, with minor revisions detailed in Chapter 3 of this Final EIR • Public comments received on the Draft EIR • Responses to written comments • The list of organizations that provided comments on the Draft EIR Chapter 2 of this Final EIR includes the written comments received on the Draft EIR and responses to environmental topics raised in these comments (as required by the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15132) and to non -environmental topics included in these comments. The responses to comments respond to the comments received on the Draft EIR. To assist the reader, each response to a comment is also preluded by a brief summary of the comment. In some instances, responses to comments may warrant modification of the text of the Draft EIR. In those cases, the changes compiled in Chapter 3, "Revisions to the Draft EIR," amend the text of the Draft EIR. The text deletions are shown in strikeout (stfikeeirt) and additions are shown in underline (underline). The minor revisions summarized in Chapter 3 of this EIR do not change the findings presented in the Draft EIR. The aforementioned responses to comments document and the Draft EIR together constitute the Final EIR that is being considered by the City of Rohnert Park. Central Rohnett Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR Response to Comments 1-1 1.1 USE OF THE FINAL EIR The Final EIR includes revisions to the Draft EIR and the Responses to Comments. The Final EIR serves as the environmental document to inform the Planning Commission and City Council's consideration of the proposed plan, either in whole or in part, or one of the alternatives to the project discussed in the Draft EIR. As required by Section 15090(a)(1)-(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Lead Agency, in certifying a Final EIR, must make the following three determinations: 1. The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA. 2. The Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the Lead Agency, and the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to approving the project. 3. The Final EIR reflects the Lead Agency's independent judgment and analysis. As required by Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified that identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings (Findings of Fact) for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding supported by substantial evidence in the record. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Speck economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Central Rohnert ParkPriority Development Area Plan 1-2 Final EIR Response to Comments 2.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS This section of the Final EIR contains comment letters received during the public review period for the Draft EIR, which concluded on February 1, 2016. The EIR is an informational document intended to disclose to the City and the public the environmental consequences of approving and implementing the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan (proposed plan) or one of the alternatives to the plan described in the Draft EIR. In conformance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088(a), the City has prepared written responses to all comments received during the public comment period that address environmental issues related to the proposed plan. The focus of the responses to comments is on the disposition of significant environmental issues that are raised in the comments, as specified by Section 15088(c) of the CEQA Guidelines. 2.1 LIST OF COMMENTERS ON THE DRAFT EIR Comments on the Draft EIR were received as written comments submitted to the City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department during and shortly following the public review comment period. Table 2-1, below, indicates the numeric designation for each comment letter received, the author of the comment letter, and the date received. Table 2-1: Written Comments Received on the Draft EIR Letter I Commenter I Date 1 I County of Sonoma Permit and Resource Management Department 01/26/2016 2 1 California Department ofTransportation(Caltrans) 02/01/2016 2.2 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR The written comments received on the Draft EIR and the responses to those comments are provided in this section. Each comment letter is reproduced in its entirety and is followed by the response(s) to the letter. Where a commenter has provided multiple comments, each comment is indicated by a line bracket and an identifying number in the margin of the comment letter. 2.2.1 Comments and Responses to Comments COMMENT LETTER 1 —COUNTY OF SONOMA PERMIT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-1 COUNTY OF SONOMA Lettex � PERMIT AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT 2550 Ventura Avenue, Santa Rosa, CA 95403-2829 (707) 585-1900 FAX (707) 555-1103 January 26, 2016 Jeffrey S. 8eiswenger, Planning Manager City of Rohnert Park Development Services Department 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park CA 94928 Ibeiswengeri7racity.orq Re: Draft FIR for Central Rohnert Park PDA Area Plan The County of Sonoma appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the draft EI R. for the Central Rohnert Park PDA Area Plan. The County strongly supports city -centered growth, enhanced pedestrian and bicycle path connectivity, and the transit opportunities featured by the Area Plan. In fact, many of the goals and objectives of the County's General Plan are in line with those of the draft Area Plan. With respect to the Draft EIR, the County submits the following comments for the City's consideration: Transportation and Traffic The proposed plan provides for the construction of approximately 835 new residential units and 823,000 square feet of additional commercial, office and light industrial uses, yet the Draft EIR finds no significant cumulative impacts to the greater regional transportation system, other than to Highway 101. The traffic impacts resulting from the residential and commercial development envisioned by the plan would not be confined to the City limits. There would be increased demands on the County circulation system as well. The interconnectivity of traffic between the City and the adjoining County areas requires interagency coordination and cooperation in order to adequately address the effects of growth on both the local and regional circulation system. Cumulative traffic impacts cannot be mitigated without meaningful consideration of the roadways beyond the City limits. The costs of improvements to the County circulation network should be equitably distributed among those who cumulatively contribute to the need for such improvements. Accordingly, the County encourages the adoption of policies which would provide for the equitable distribution of costs through fair share funding by future development within the project area. 1-2 A more thorough explanation of the cumulative impact analysis with respect to the regional transportation system is also warranted_ The Draft EIR should also describe the threshold of 1-3 significance used in the analysis and indicate whether the density of the project area is comparable to the density assumed by the Sonoma County Travel Model (SCTM110). Central Rohnert ParkPriority Development Area Plan 2-2 Final EIR, Responseto Comments Central Rohnert Park PDA Area Plan Draft EIR - Comments January 26, 2016 Page 2 of 2 Hydrology The Draft EIR indicates that groundwater levels around the City's well field appear to be stable, however, the Draft EIR does not specifically analyze the project's impact on groundwater supply or the potential reduction in groundwater discharge to streams as a result of increased pumping. The Simulation of Groundwater and Surface -water Resources of the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed, prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2011, 1-4 indicates that there was a cumulative groundwater -storage reduction between 1976 and 2010 as well as a reduction in groundwater discharge to streams in the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed. A thorough analysis of these water resources are necessary to determine the potential for impacts and the appropriate mitigation if warranted. Thank you for the opportunity to express our concerns. We appreciate the hard work and dedication required to create the Area Plan and commend your service to the community of Rohnert Park. I may be reached by phone at (707) 565-7387 or by email atyolanda.solanopasonoma- county.org should you have any questions. Since da G. Solano er III s:lcomplpprslresponses - by year12016116-15-01 draft eir central rp priority development Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-3 RESPONSE TO COMMENT 1-1 The commenter thanks the City for the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR and expresses the County's support for many of the goals and policies of the proposed plan, highlighting the plan area 's focus on city - centered growth, enhanced pedestrian and bicycle path connectivity, and transit opportunities. The goals and objectives of the County's General Plan are in line with those of the proposed plan. The City acknowledges the comment. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 1-2 The commenter summarizes the project and comments that the resulting development would not be confined to the City's limits, but would also create increased demands on the County circulation system. The commenter questions why there are no other significant cumulative impacts to the regional transportation system, other than Highway 101. The Draft EIR transportation chapter (Chapter 3.9) addresses impacts to regional roadways, given that it represents a programmatic EIR analysis for a master plan (the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan or proposed plan). As such, the evaluation of potential impacts focuses on those areas most likely to be impacted, which are largely comprised of existing developed areas in the City of Rohnert Park within and near the plan area. Areas outside of the City limits are generally less developed and, therefore, less likely to attract traffic generated by development within the plan area. While development within the plan area can be expected to contribute some share of additional traffic to roadways serving these areas, the majority of traffic generated by development within the PDA would be expected to use U.S. 101 for regional access and a combination of major arterials (e.g., Rohnert Park Expressway and Golf Course Drive) and connecting streets for local access. In particular, the existing development pattern within Sonoma and Marin Counties is characterized by a mix of developed (urban and suburban) and undeveloped (rural) areas, with developed areas largely concentrated along the north—south U.S. 101 corridor. U.S. 101 also serves as the primary regional link between Sonoma County and the rest of the Bay Area, providing access to State Route 37, Interstate 580, and other major highways and thoroughfares. Thus, given the proposed plan's location adjacent to U.S. 101, it is reasonable to expect that the majority of the regional traffic generated by development within the plan area would utilize U.S. 101, either to access developed areas of Sonoma County along U.S. 101 (e.g., Santa Rosa or Petaluma) or to reach otherparts of the Bay Area. By analyzing potential impacts to U.S. 101 (Draft EIR Section 3.9.3, pp. 3.9-19 and 3.9-20), the Draft EIR analyzed the regional roadway facilities expected to be most impacted by development within the plan area. Recognizing that development within the plan area would add some traffic to these other roadway facilities, the City is committed to working in cooperation with the County to address the proposed plan's contribution to traffic growth and impacts to both local and regional roadways, including those outside of the City of Rohnert Park. This would also be consistent with Policy TR -21 of the City of Rohnert Park General Plan that calls for establishment of a regional mitigation plan for transportation improvements, thereby creating a mechanism for development projects within the City of Rohnert Park to contribute impact fees toward roadway improvements in Sonoma County. The City has recently agreed to take the lead in preparing this study to establish a regional mitigation plan, with preparation of this study anticipated to commence in the spring of 2016. Once the regional impact fee is Central Rohnert Park Priority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-4 Final EIR, Responseto Comments adopted, future development within the plan area will be subject to payment, thereby contributing a fair share towards the funding of regional roadway improvements. Specific County roadways where future development under the proposed plan may add traffic, and where the Sonoma County General Plan 2020 (SCGP) has identified future improvements that payment of the regional impact fee could contribute funding toward implementation, include the following. • Petaluma Hill Road — consider improvements, such as intersection improvements, turn lanes, and signals to reduce congestion (SCGP Policy CT-6aaa, Figure CT- lg) • Community of Penngrove —identify and implement a combination of local and regional roadway improvements to reduce congestion in Penngrove (SCGP Policies CT -6v, CT -6w, CT -6x, and CT -6y) • Stony Point Road— consider additional turn lanes at RPX intersection to reduce congestion (SCGP Policy CT-6bbb); widen corridor to four lanes (SCGP Figure CT- 1g) RESPONSE TO COMMENT 1-3 The commenter suggests a more thorough explanation of cumulative impact analysis to the regional transportation system and that the Draft EIR describes the threshold of significance used in the analysis and indicate whether the density of theproject area is comparable to the density assumed by the Sonoma County Travel Model (SCTM/10). As discussed in Response to Comment 1-2, potential impacts to the regional transportation system are discussed in Draft EIR Section 3.9.3, pp. 3.9-19 and 3.9-20, in the context of impacts to U.S. 101. The Sonoma County Travel Demand Model (SCTM\10) was utilized in the assessment of cumulative traffic impacts. The model's future year scenario of 2040 reflects buildout of current general plans throughout Sonoma County, including build -out within the County and incorporated municipalities in the County (the cities of Rohnert Park, Cotati, Healdsburg, Santa Rosa, Petaluma, Cloverdale, Sebastopol, and Sonoma and the Town of Windsor). For the model's traffic analysis zones JAZ) encompassing the plan area, the added development potential for buildout under the current Rohnert Park General Plan (i. e., without adoption of the proposed plan) includes 269 residential units and 628,897 square feet of non-residential uses. In comparison, as shown in Draft EIR Table 2-3 (pp. 2-15 and 2-16), the proposed plan estimates an added development potential of 835 residential units and 822,324 square feet of non-residential uses. The proposed plan, therefore, would allow for a higher density of development than the City's General Plan and the assumptions used in the County's traffic model. The traffic volumes and traffic operations calculations presented in the "Future plus Project" scenario of the proposed plan's traffic impact study (contained in Draft EIR Appendix E) reflect the effects of this additional increment of cumulative growth beyond what is assumed in the SCTM\10 model. While the proposed plan would allow for more units and more non-residential square footage than assumed in the current SCTM\10 model, it is critical to discern the differences in automobile traffic generation and travelpatterns that would result from implementation of the proposed plan versus the more suburban type of development pattern currently evident in the vicinity. On a per-unit or per -square foot basis, the PDA is anticipated to generate fewer automobile trips than conventional development. A greater share of trips is projected to be made by walking, bicycling, and transit. Development in the plan area (both existing and future) would be increasingly transit -focused, both in its proximity to existing local and regional bus routes as well as its proximity to the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-5 SMART commuter rail line. Implementation of the proposed plan would also result in a more balanced jobs - housing ratio within Central Rohnert Park, meaning that the potential for existing and future residents to live closer to their workplace also increases (thereby, resulting in a potential shift away from auto trips as well as towards shorter driving distances). Finally, the types of non-residential uses envisioned by the proposed plan are oriented to local users. The proposed plan places a focus on local -serving and downtown retail versus big -box or auto -oriented retail. This type of land use not only tends to draw fewer auto trips than big -box shopping center type uses, but associated auto trips also tend to be shorter in length and oriented to/from more proximate areas. The combined effects of this type of development pattern lead to fewer trips extending beyond the City and onto the County/regional roadway network, substantially limiting the potential traffic impacts that implementation of the proposed plan may create on these roadways. As indicated in the Draft EIR transportation chapter and traffic impact study and considered in the Draft EIR alternatives chapter (Chapter 6), the proposed plan would increase automobile traffic levels, but the amount to which the proposed plan would affect regional facilities under future cumulative conditions is expected to be similar or only slightly greater than would otherwise occur assuming build -out of the plan area under existing zoning utilizing more suburban and automobile -oriented development patterns. As discussed in Section 6.3 of the DEIR, although the proposed plan would add traffic to several local intersections, it also includes traffic signal and lane geometry improvements that would improve these intersection operations to acceptable conditions and mitigate the effects of the additional traffic. Without the proposed plan, these improvements would not be in place and development in the plan area under existing zoning would be expected to cause four intersections to degrade to unacceptable conditions, as addressed in Section 6.3.4 of the DEIR. Existing zoning and development patterns also would not feature the land use and transportation improvements under the proposed plan that would support reductions in automobile parking and promote alternative modes, such as transit, biking, and walking, both of which are critical to reducing vehicle -miles travelled (VMT) and its associated effects on both the local and regional roadway network. Furthermore, as noted in Response to Comment 1-2 above, the City will be preparing a study to establish a regional mitigation plan for transportation improvements that, once adopted, will require future development in the plan area to contribute fair -share funding of regional roadway improvements. Regarding thresholds of significance, the Draft EIR describes the thresholds of significance applied for intersection and freeway operations in the beginning of Section 3.9.3 (pp. 3.9-16). RESPONSE TO COMMENT 1-4 The commenter suggests the Draft EIR does not specifically analyze the project's impact on groundwater supply or the potential groundwater discharge to streams as a result of increased pumping and that a thorough analysis of these water resources are necessary to determine the potential for impacts and the appropriate mitigation, if warranted. Implementing the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan does not require, nor is the City proposing, an increase in groundwater pumping. Therefore, there is no anticipated impact to groundwater supply, groundwater levels, or a reduction in groundwater discharge to streams in the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed as a result of the proposed plan. As described in Draft EIR Section 5.8.2, pp. 5-15, the City manages its groundwater supply in accordance with its 2004 Water Policy Resolution, which limits groundwater pumping to 2,577 AFY. CentralRohnert Park Priority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-6 Final EIR, Responseto Comments The City will maintain this maximum pumping limit and groundwater pumping will not increase as a result of the PDA Plan. The 2004 City-wide Water Supply Assessment, which is a reference for the EIR, provides the technical support for this maximum pumping rate. The City continues to monitor and document its groundwater use through its required Urban Water Management Plans and through cooperative participation in the regional groundwater management work occurring in the Santa Rosa Plain basin. Draft EIR Section 5.8.2, "Water Supply," pp. 5-15 provides a discussion of potential impacts of the proposed plan on water supply. This includes a discussion of potential impacts to groundwater levels from operation of the plan. Draft EIR Section 5.8.2, "Water Supply," pp. 5-15 also provides a summary of the water supply assessment (WSA) that was prepared by the City for the proposed plan as required by State law. The WSA is included as Draft EIR Appendix F. The WSA describes the water demand associated with build -out of the plan area as well as the three water sources used by the City, which includes groundwater pumping from the Santa Rosa Plain Subbasin of the Santa Rosa Valley Groundwater Basin. The City is aware of the results of the Simulation of Groundwater and Surface -water Resources of the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed, having participated as a cooperative funder of this study. The study documents the rising groundwater levels in the southeast portion of the Santa Rosa Plain groundwater basin as a result of the groundwater management policy included in the City's 2004 Water Policy Resolution. In addition to providing data and funding for the Simulation of Groundwater and Surface -water Resources of the Santa Rosa Plain Watershed, the City provided data and funding for Groundwater Management Plan for the Santa Rosa Plain basin and is contributing to the implementation of this plan as well as the development of the Groundwater Sustainability Plan, required by the Groundwater Sustainability Act of 2014. This extensive body of technical and policy work documents that sustainable groundwater use is achieved through cooperative efforts throughout the basin and are not isolated studies associated with individual project(s) or plans. In addition to implementing its Water Policy Resolution, the City will continue to participate in the implementation of regional groundwater management activities to support sustainable use of groundwater in the basin. Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-7 COMMENT LETTER 2 — CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION b'MG+EralMIANAlMlkw."RIWWW"1 )0 IFAVI Al1*1117,11M.0MA.rA]"J+TA4a[+!� DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 4 P.O. BOX 23660 OAKLAND, CA 94523-0650 PHONE (5 10) 296-5528 FAX (510) 286-5554 TFC£ 711 www.dCt,c&g0V February 1, 2016 Mr. Jeffrey Beiswenger City of Rohnert Park Planning Department 130 Avram Avenue Rohnert Park, CA 94428 Letter 2 %V .Serino.¢ Drnug& Hely saw'. warm! SON 1011921 SON -101 -VAR SCH # 2015102081 Central Rohnert .Park Priority Development Area Plan -- Draft Environmental Impact Report Dear Mr. Beiswenger: Thank you for including, the California Deparlment of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan. Caltrans' new mission, vision, and goals signal a modernization of our approach to California's transportation system, in which we seek to reduce statewide vehicle -miles -traveled 2-1 (VMT) and increase non -auto modes of active transportation. Our comments seek to promote the State's smart mobility goals and are based on the Draft Environmental Impact Report. Additional comments may he forthcoming pending final review. Project Understanding The proposed project is a programmatic land use master plan that is intended to support transit - oriented and infill development nearby the Rohnert Park City Center and. planned Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) commuter rail station. The proposed developments would cover a 330 -acre area centered on the Rohnert Park Expressway/State. Farm Drive intersection., which would allow the construction of 835 multi -family residential units and 823,000 square feet (sf) of retail/commercial, office, light industrial, and publichnstitutional use. Additionally, the project would construct new roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements in order to provide non -vehicular community access to the planned SMART station. The proposed project would add 27,777 new daily trips of which 1,352 trips would occur during the AM peak hour and 1,973 trips during the PM pear hour, The western edge of the PDA is bound by U.S. 101, which would provide regional access to the PDA. Lead Ageney As the lead agency, the City of Rohnert Park is responsible for all project mitigation, including T 2-3 "Provide a mfi, ,mvtainahk, integrated and efcientOanspnrfaflon xysretn io enhance C aliforrda °.r errmorny and livability" CentralRohnert Park Priority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-8 Final E1R, Responseto Comments Mr. Jeffrey Beiswenger, City of Rohnert Park February 1, 2016 Page 2 any needed improvements to State highways. The project's fair share contribution, financing, scheduling, implementation responsibilities and lead agency monitoring should be fully discussed cont for all proposed mitigation measures. Additionally, please provide Caltrans with all future project- 2-3 specific documents and analysis that may derive from the proposed land use master plan. Regional Impact Fees U.S. 101 is critical to regional and interregional traffic in the San Francisco Bay region. It is vital to commuting, freight, and recreational traffic and is one of the most congested regional freeway facilities. Given the scale of the proposed project, the traffic generated will have significant regional impact to the already congested U.S. 101. The Department encourages the City to develop a regional transportation fee program to mitigate and plan for the impact of future growth on the regional transportation system. The fees would be used to help fund regional transportation programs that add capacity increasing improvements to the transportation system 2-4 to lessen future traffic congestion. Reducing delays on State facilities will not only benefit the region, but also reduce any queuing on local roadways caused by highway congestion. The purpose of regional impact fee program would improve mobility by reducing time delays and maintaining reliability on major roadways throughout the San Francisco Bay Area. Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements • We recommend that the City consider the use of on -street parking to create a parking - protected Class IV separated bikeway. Guidance on these facilities may be gained via Caltrans Class JV Bikeway Guidance (Separated Bikeways/Cycle Tracks), which can be 2-5 found at the following link: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/oppd/dib/dib89.pdf. Where protected bike lanes are referenced, please also include the Class IV designation; • Please clarify the meaning of `enhanced bike lanes' when referenced in the Bike and T Pedestrian Improvements section (p. 2-22) of the environmental document (e.g. Class Il ll 2-6 buffered bike lanes with green pavement markings at conflict zones); • Where midblock pedestrian crossings are proposed, also consider rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) in addition to standard signals or High -Intensity Activated 2-7 Crosswalk beacons (HAWK), which Caltrans refers to as pedestrian hybrid beacons (PI -IB); and • On page 2-22, please correct all references to Professional Drive to Professional Center Drive and Lynne Conde Drive. to Lynne Conde Way. 2 $ Vehicle Trip Reduction The project should adopt a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program in order to encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use while reducing traffic impacts on State highways. The region should be supported by a framework of transportation alternatives by increasing transit, 2-9 pedestrian, and bicycle systems in order to maximize access and mobility throughout the region while reducing dependence upon the automobile. In an effort to accomplish such, the project "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-9 Mr, Jeffrey Beiswenger, City of Rolinert Park February 1, 2016 Page 3 should consider the various TDM measures listed below. The TDM program should document vehicle trip reduction, including annual monitoring reports to demonstrate the ongoing reduction of vehicle trips while continuing to survey the travel patterns of residents and employees within the project area. • Project design to encourage walling, bicycling, and convenient transit access; Parking cash out/parking pricing; cont. 2-9 • Formation of a Transportation Management Association (TMA) in partnership with other developments in the area; • Adoption of an aggressive trip reduction target with Lead Agency monitoring and enforcement; and • Transit fare incentives such as such as subsidized transit passes on a continuing basis. Implementing various TDM measures will help the project become more consistent with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's (MTC) Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategy goals. Please also refer to "Reforming Parking Policies to Support Smart 2-10 Growth," a MTC study funded by Caltrans, for sample parking ratios and strategies that support compact growth. Reducing parking supply can encourage alternate forms of transportation, reduce regional vehicle miles traveled, and lessen future impacts. Encroachment Permit Please be advised that any work or traffic control that encroaches onto the State ROW requires an encroachment permit that is issued by Caltrans. To apply, a completed encroachment permit application, environmental documentation, and five (5) sets of plans clearly indicating State ROW must be submitted to the following address: David Salladay, District Office Chief, Office of 2-11 Permits, California Department of Transportation, District 4, P.O. Box 23660, Oakland, CA 94623-0660. Traffic -related mitigation measures should be incorporated into the construction plans prior to the encroachment permit process. See the website linked below for more information: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/developsery/permits. "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" CentralRohnert Park Priority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-10 Final EIR, Responseto Comments Mr. Jeffrey Beiswenger, City of Rohnert Park February 1, 2016 Page 4 Should you have any questions regarding this letter or require additional information, please contact Cole Iwamasa at (510) 286-5534 or cole.iwamasa@dot.ca.gov. Sincerely, PATRICIA MAURICE District Branch Chief Local Development - Intergovernmental Review Cc: State Clearinghouse "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EK Response to Comments 2-11 RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-1 The commenter thanks the City for being included in the environmental review process for the PDA Plan and expresses that the comments in the letter seek to promote the State's new mission, vision, and smart mobility goals. The City acknowledges Caltrans' mission to reduce statewide vehicle miles traveled and increase non -vehicular modes of active transportation and has similar goals and policies in its planning documents. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-2 The commenter summarizes the proposed plan including associated trip generation characteristics. The Draft EIR provides a comprehensive description of the proposed plan in Chapter 2 of the DEIR. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-3 The commenter states that the project's fair share contribution, financing, scheduling, implementation responsibilities should be discussed in all proposed mitigation measures and that all future project specific documents and analysis, derived from the proposed plan, should be provided to Caltrans for review. As shown in Draft EIR Section 3.9.3, pp. 3.9-16 through 3.9-22, the Draft EIR concludes that the proposed plan would result in less -than -significant transportation and traffic impacts, with the exception of significant impacts to three segments of U.S. 101 However, the Draft EIR does not identify any feasible mitigation measures for these three segments, as widening the freeway to accommodate additional lanes would result in substantial environmental, social, and financial impacts. As discussed in Response to Comment 1-2, the City of Rohnert Park recognizes that development within the plan area may contribute to these impacts to the regional transportation system, and the City has agreed to take the lead on preparing a study to establish a regional mitigation plan and impact fee structure that will require all future development in Sonoma County, including future development within the plan area, to make a fair -share contribution toward funding regional roadway improvements. The City will provide notification of future actions related to the proposed plan to Caltrans and will circulate these responses to comments to each organization and individual that commented on the Draft EIR. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-4 The commenter encourages the City to develop a transportation feeprogram to mitigate andplan for the impact of future growth on the regional transportation system. As described in Response to Comment 1-2, the City has agreed to take the lead, in 2016, on preparing a study to establish a regional mitigation plan for transportation improvements that, once adopted, will require future development in the plan area to contribute towards funding regional roadway improvements. CentralRohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan 2-12 Final EIR, Responseto Comments RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-5 The commenter recommends the City consider use of on -street parking to create a parking protected Class IV separated parkway. Parking -protected bike lanes are encouraged within the proposed plan and are suggested specifically along portions of various local roadways such as State Farm Drive, as reflected in the street section concepts provided in Chapter 5 of the proposed plan. Additional street segments, with on -street bike lanes, could also be considered as a "parking -protected" solution at a later time, once proposed roadway improvements enter the detailed design phase. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-6 The commenter asks for clarification on the meaning of "enhanced bike lanes" referenced in the project description. References to enhanced bike lanes on Draft EIR pp. 2-22 of the project description are intended to support a variety of bike lane treatments, including green -striping or high-contrast bike lanes, separated bike lanes (through various methods), or other bike lane improvements that enhance driver awareness and increase the safety of bicycling. Since this is a programmatic -level EIR, more specific details regarding the type of enhancement or improvements will be determined as future projects within the plan area are designed and implemented. A definition for enhanced bike lanes, as described above, has been added as a footnote to Chapter 3, Revisions to Draft EIR, to update Section 2.3.4, `Bike and Pedestrian Improvements." RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-7 The commenter suggests that where midblock pedestrian crossings are proposed, rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) be considered, in addition to standard signal or High -Intensity Activated Crosswalk (HAWK) beacons. The City acknowledges this comment. Where references are made to HAWK signals in the Project Description of the Draft EIR, rectangular rapid flashing beacons will also be provided as a potential alternative solution to ensure the safety of midblock pedestrian crossings. The description of mid -block pedestrian crossings along Rohnert Park Expressway in the Draft EIR, pp. 2-22, bullet point b7 in Section 2.3, `Bike and Pedestrian Improvements," has been updated by Chapter 3 of the Final EIR to not only include pedestrian refuges and the option for high-intensity activated crosswalk beacons, but also rectangular rapid flashing beacons or other potential signalized crossing solutions. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-8 The commenter identifies that references to Professional Drive be updated to Professional Center Drive and Lynne Conde Drive to Lynne Conde Way. Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-13 References to Professional Center Drive and Lynne Conde Way have been updated throughout the EIR and proposed plan. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-9 The commenter encourages the Plan to adopt a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program that supports transportation alternatives that increase transit, pedestrian, and bicycle systems to maximize mobility and access in the region while reducing the dependence upon the automobile. City General Plan Goals TR -I, TR -K, TR -L, and TR -R and Policies TR -24 -TR -34, TR -41, and TR-42support reducing traffic congestion by encouraging transportation demand management (TDM) programs for businesses and workplaces and parking standards that help reduce automobile trips, and promote alternative transportation modes. These goals and policies are also identified as one of the objectives of the proposed plan. As a priority development area located adjacent to the future SMART commuter rail line and multi -use path, the proposed plan incorporates measures to reduce VMT and support transportation alternatives, including transit, bicycle, and pedestrian systems that maximize mobility within the plan area and connections to local and planned regional bike and transit systems. City General Plan goals and policies as well as proposed plan circulation goals and policies (provided in Chapter 5.2 of the proposed plan) support the goals and strategies of, and function fundamentally similar to, the TDM program suggested by the comment. Rohnert Park General Plan Policy TR -22 encourages the adoption of a non -mandatory employer -based TDM program for Rohnert Park businesses. The City also has a trip reduction ordinance requirement, Code Section 10.80.040, that applies to employers with more than 100 employees. Development within the plan area would be subject to these various goals, policies, and requirements, as well as the goals and policies explicitly identified in the proposed plan. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-10 The commenter provides additional examples of TDM measures to help the project be consistent with MTC's Regional Transportation Plan /Sustainable Community Strategy goals and makes reference to the "Reforming Parking Policies to Support Smart Growth, " study, prepared by MTC, for parking ratios and strategies that support compact growth. The proposed plan incorporates input from a shared parking analysis study, prepared for the plan area in the Parking Policy and Management Strategy Memo (available upon request), focused on the Station Center and City Center subareas, where the potential for shared parking lots and future parking structures are envisioned, in close proximity to the SMART rail station. The results of the shared parking analysis are described in the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Section 5.7.2, "Parking Analysis." In addition to other parking reductions permitted by Chapter 17.16.040 of the City's Zoning Code, input from findings in this analysis have been accounted for in the parking ratios for the proposed plan, which propose parking reductions for multifamily residential development and retail, office, and public uses in the Station Center and City Center subareas. The proposed plan allows these parking reductions, encourages projects in the plan area to adopt a "park once" strategy (PDA Plan Policy C-5.5), where applicable, and builds in flexibility for development to meet City parking demands through various parking strategies, including shared parking, development of parking districts (in the Downtown); off-site parking; and CentralRohnert Park Priority DevelopmentArea Plan 2-14 Final EIR, Responseto Comments unbundled and paid parking, as future long-term strategies when parking demand warrants. Car share and bike share programs in the plan area are also encouraged. To provide additional clarification within the Project Description, Draft EIR Section 2.3.5, "Parking" has been revised as part of the Final EIR (see Final EIR Chapter 3) to provide additional information and reference to the assumptions behind the parking standards, including parking reductions considered and currently permitted by the City's Zoning Code that are also applicable to the plan area. This clarification does not change impact analyses or conclusions. RESPONSE TO COMMENT 2-11 The commenter advises any work or traffic control that encroaches into the State right-of-way requires an encroachmentpermit, issued by Caltrans, andprovides instructions forsubmitting an encroachmentpermit application. The City acknowledges this comment and will coordinate with Caltrans on any requests for encroachment permits into any State right-of-way. Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 2-15 TABLE OF CONTENTS ---For document production use only --- Section Page 2.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO COMMENTS...................................................................... 2-1 2.1 List of Commenters on the Draft EIR.................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Comments and Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR...................................................... 2-1 2.2.1 Comments and Responses to Comments.................................................................... 2-1 Exhibits/Figures No table of contents entries found. Tables Table 2-1: Written Comments Received on the Draft EIR...................................................................... 2-1 Central Rohn ert Park Priority Development Area Plan 2-16 Final EIR, Responseto Comments 3.0 REVISIONS TO THE DRAFT EIR This chapter presents minor text additions and revisions to the Draft EIR that do not constitute significant new information or changes to significance findings. Thus, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, there is no need to recirculate portions or all of the Draft EIR. The changes are presented in the order in which they appear in the Draft EIR and are identified by page number. Text deletions are shown in strikeout (fit) and additions are shown in underline (underline . Global Changes References to "Professional Drive" have been changed to "Professional Center Drive" and references to "Lynne Conde Drive" have been changed to "Lynne Conde Way" throughout the EIR and proposed plan. Chapter 2.0, "Project Description" Page 2-22, Section 2.3.4, Bike and Pedestrian Improvement Bullet Point b7). The description of midblock pedestrian crossings along Rohnert Park Expressway has been updated, as provided below, so that it not only includes pedestrian refuges and the option for high- intensity activated crosswalk beacons, but also rectangular rapid flashing beacons. • b7) Upgrading RPX to incorporate high-contrast bike lanes; widening the existing meandering sidewalks on both sides of the street, to support development of a Class I MUP; and supporting intersection and mid -block pedestrian crossings, with pedestrian refuges and high-intensity activated crosswalk signals, rectangular rapid flashing beacons, or other potential signalized crossing solutions at Lynne Conde lie -Way and along the SMART MUP. Footnote 1. Footnote 1 has been added, as provided below to clarify the definition of an enhanced bike lane, as used in the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan and DEIR. Enhanced bike lanes, as referenced in the proposed plan and this Final EIR, encompass a variety of bike lane treatments, including green striping or high-contrast bike lanes, separated or protected bike lanes (e.g., parking -protected bike lanes), or other bike lane improvements that enhance driver awareness and increase the safety and comfort of bicycling. Page 2-23, Section 2.3.5, Parking. Additional clarification provided on assumptions to and proposed parking standards. The proposed plan identifies the appropriate number of off-street parking spaces for new residential, mixed-use, light industrial, retail/service, and office uses, as shown by the parking ratios in Table 2-4. These standards reflect parking analysis findings conducted for the proposed plan, including a shared parking analysis and parking reductions in the City Center and Station Center subareas, as described in Section 5.7.2 of the PDA Plan. For nonresidential uses, on -street parking spaces would be permitted to meet the requirement for off-street parking spaces. Chapter 17.16.040 of the City Zoning Code also allows parking reductions, including: 1) up to 25 percent for shared parking, where a combination of uses can demonstrate and make the finding that the uses share a common parking area and demand for parking Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Final EIR, Response to Comments 3-1 occurs over different time periods, making the full parking requirement unnecessary; 2) up to 10 percent for providing a rideshare, transit incentive, or other transportation system management program; and 3) permits meeting parking demand off-site for off-site uses within 300 feet of the use(s) they are intended to serve. Central Rohnert ParkPriority Development Area Plan 3-2 Final EK Response to Comments CHAPTER 4 1 LAND USE 4.1 CHAPTER OVERVIEW This chapter describes the land use framework for the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA)—specifically, the land use designations, associated development standards, and development potential to support the preferred plan concepts introduced in Chapter 3. This chapter should be referenced in coordination with the circulation concepts described in Chapter 5 and the design guidelines addressed in Chapter 6. 4.1.1 Downtown Creation A central theme organizing the land use and design features of the PDA Plan is the desire to create a downtown for Rohnert Park. The plan concepts, provided in Appendix A, tested the development potential of the City Center and Station Center subareas to create a downtown adjacent to the SMART station based on the community's vision and typical features of most downtowns in suburban communities. These typical features include: A distinct character, as described in Chapter 5, inspired by the valley setting in Rohnert Park and surrounded by hills and agricultural land that allows downtown to take advantage of natural views in the community; support a mix of architectural styles, consistent with the region's vernacular character; and incorporate sustainable design elements. ■ A pedestrian scale at the block, site, and building levels, as in other traditional downtowns that emphasizes walkable blocks, a compact form, and pedestrian -oriented architectural features. ■ A mix of uses that support downtown development and transit use, with dining and entertainment, lifestyle and specialty retail, office, civic, and public uses, and housing . ■ Densities/intensities that support a vibrant downtown commercial area and transit ridership—typically multi -story buildings, some with street -facing retail and/or C* entral Rohnert Hark _ Priority Development Area Plan commercial uses and two or more levels of housing above. ■ Buildings designed to address the street, with pedestrian -oriented sidewalk features and buildings placed at the back of the sidewalk. • Slower speeds and enhanced crossings on downtown area streets, including on -street parking along less busy collector streets (such as, State Farm Drive). ■ Quality landscape and building design, accented with distinct gateways, signage, and public amenities that improve the pedestrian experience of downtown. ■ Areas adjacent to downtown that contribute to downtown enhancements with safe vehicular, bike, and pedestrian connections, streetscape and landscape improvements, and public amenities leading into the downtown. Creation and expansion of a downtown environment will occur as properties develop and public- and private -sector investment occurs. Although not large enough to be considered a "downtown," the City Center subarea already has many components of a typical downtown (e.g. public buildings, mixed-use buildings, urban plazas and sidewalks, etc.) and establishes a good starting point for a future downtown environment. To facilitate the creation of a downtown for the city, a Downtown District Amenity Zone (DDAZ) is proposed adjacent to the SMART rail station. The DDAZ is the proposed location to focus public and private investments, such as the features noted above. This proposed land use overlay zone is further described later in this chapter. 4.1.2 Planning Subareas and Districts The PDA has been organized into five distinct planning subareas and a Downtown District (Figure 4. 1), which serve as the basis for evaluating characteristic uses in the community. Page 4-1 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Figure 4.1: Priority Development Area Subareas and Distric 8 0 ❑ 5 MADRIGAL PARK Lityt=r 1 1 t Central JS on Station ��r Laca++tion iornmercial 1 q: Center;„ 1 y � ENTERPRISE Creekside Neighborhood 1 - _���1 f --� Copeland neekway S01 r I is Draft December 2015 \ r LEGEND L s : t Priority Development Area 101 City Limits ,yamv' SMART Rail Line and Station ^^^^ ^ SMART Multi -Use Path Triangle Business Subarea N City Center Subarea � ^m 1 1, Creekside Neighborhood Subarea + r Downtown District I r I ! n i r + + a i GOLF COURSE ! I � I f I I j USCADF 8 0 ❑ 5 MADRIGAL PARK Lityt=r 1 1 t Central JS on Station ��r Laca++tion iornmercial 1 q: Center;„ 1 y � ENTERPRISE Creekside Neighborhood 1 - _���1 f --� Copeland neekway S01 r I is Draft December 2015 \ r LEGEND L s : t Priority Development Area City Limits ��■ SMART Rail Line and Station ^^^^ ^ SMART Multi -Use Path Triangle Business Subarea City Center Subarea Central Commercial Subarea Station Center Subarea Creekside Neighborhood Subarea + r Downtown District 0 900 GCu IZD0 f LET Source: AECOM, 2015 Page 42 A Hi -bough Creek It Chapter 4: Land Use The Triangle Business subarea is a mixed-use employment center with freeway presence near the SMART rail line. r The Downtown District is to be a central retail and entertainment core for the PDA that is envisioned as pictured. The City Center subarea is emerging as a civic center hub and walkable neighborhood. The former State Farm campus in the Station Center subarea is an opportunity site for a new town center in the city. The Central Commercial subarea is a cluster of centers providing retail and services to the community. ■ Triangle Business subarea, a business subarea transitioning from industrial uses, with frontage along U.S. 101 and the SMART rail line. ■ City Center subarea, a current civic center and neighborhood -oriented mixed-use area, with potential for infill growth that complements the existing land use and circulation framework in the area. ■ Station Center subarea, a new mixed-use, transit -oriented community adjacent to the SMART rail station, with a town center, housing, parks, plazas and open space. ■ Central Commercial subarea, the City's primary retail and service shopping area, including grocery stores, a post office, banks, and restaurants. ■ Creekside Neighborhood subarea, an established multifamily residential neighborhood area, centered along Copeland Creek. ®Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Pian The Creekside subarea is a multifamily residential area centered on Copeland Creek. Subareas are intended primarily to help divide the PDA Plan into meaningful study areas, but are not intended to establish regulatory controls. Established General Plan designations and zoning districts, with some modifications, will help implement the PDA subarea concepts. Planned new land uses build off the existing assets and character of each subarea to enhance their roles in the broader PDA. A DDAZ that ties together the subareas in terms of walkability is intended to help focus investments into downtown, including amenities (e.g., benches, plazas, signage, and lighting). The subareas and DDAZ for the PDA support the community's needs for diverse retail experiences, jobs, services, housing, and attractive places to live, work, and play. Figure 4.2 illustrates the composition and mix of land uses, envisioned in each subarea and in the DDAZ. Page 4-3 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Draft December 2015 Figure 4.2: Land Use Concept Diagram a(�A 5 S 101 k. HEP ENL r � I A7Rl^JqT' l_ i WILFRLD co fretal \h service? r-LOFAL le: vu LF t,OUR.S_ .. flexO` a (industrial, 7 ELEANOR I retail/service, 1 office) 7j v. i I CASCADE .� 7 j I , Greenway, typical 1 °o C?ry "its --------- -_-_-_-_-_ 13USINESS PARhI ELLABETH PAHK w industrial ����� c� v 7 R6GER5 ECUT]VE ; a 4`��jE�' Bikeway, typical =LtFN iangleBusiness CARLSON NA o 1 ',,•flexUndustriaL �`� nIARTSN "iA,TFN 1 mixed-use office) '% � stall/servlcG.: 9 0 . 4111LU PAcpUEI" cua_, 1 City Center SANTA CRUZ > le P ROHn;rr;i : PARK i II i mix a u61ic � e a e i al) sgNr �. RONNE ARK ROHNERT PARK S41V ZANC�,`SCo _ eFN u' _SMART VVAINLFF �O hero i z, cornmerual � e u Station Central Commercial �:. tad/service) f Station Center �c (aciNc ..�! ``� y cFryTeT multifamily reside' OWX Creekside °� rsTUEi _ residential Neighborhood z c = j ..T ..,..CIO'fZRPR15E'.. .T...."•..;. S RUSTIC maRifamily residential z •� �j WALNUT ------- : e -- l City Limits CAHLI IA r,^,. O CORONAD( Poernl AAROrJ 1-u y�^ sL,�r LEGEND Subareas and Districts Recommended Land Use Priority Development Area _.._a Triangle Business subarea L , Commercial (Retail/Service 'Mix) ® High Density Residential CtyLimits ........... a City Center subarea jam_ ] Industrial Public luuw SMART Rail Line and Multi -Use Path F-11, Station Center subarea Industrial, Office Mix Park/Open Space Multi -Use Trails Central Commercial subarea I Industrial, Retail/Service Mix ' i Downtown District Amenity Zone FEET F.,,,,_,,j Creekside Neighborhood _Mixed -Use n 300 eoo i.zoo I Downtown District Source: AECOM, 2015 Page 4-4 4.2 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND POLICIES In addition to the goal, policies, and standards of the General Plan and Zoning Code, the PDA shall be subject to the goals and policies listed below. See Chapter 5 for related circulation goals and policies and Chapter 6 for community design goals and policies. General Land Use and Development Goal L-1: Establish Central Rohnert Park as a complete community, with distinctive mixed-use areas and places. Policy L-1.1: Take advantage of the relatively close proximity and mixed-use character of each of the PDA subareas to support a one-stop destination for the community's shopping, employment, living, and recreational needs. Policy L-1.2: Support new art and entertainment venues in the PDA. Policy L-1.3: Implement a Regional Commercial Overlay zone to support opportunities for a variety of regional commercial uses in the Triangle Business subarea, particularly within vacant and underused portions of the Triangle Business subarea, fronting U.S. 101 (as identified in Figure 4.2). Policy L- IA: Implement a Downtown District on both sides of Rohnert Park Expressway and State Farm Drive and encompassing the SMART rail station. Goal L-2: Promote high-quality, compact infill growth in the PDA that enhances the character of existing neighborhoods, complements the identity of subareas, and improves the bike, pedestrian, and transit orientation in the PDA. Policy L-2.1: Design new development to reinforce and enhance the unique qualities of each subarea. Policy L-2.2: Support creation of a pedestrian - oriented downtown, adjacent to the SMART rail station. Policy L-2.3: Build on development in the City Center as a civic and cultural destination, with smaller shops and services, mixed-use lofts, and neighborhood -oriented uses. - entral Rohnert Park Priority Develop Area Pian Chapter 4: Land Use Policy L-2.4: Promote infill development to activate State Farm Drive, a key roadway connecting all subareas in the PDA. Policy L-6.1: Support and market available employment parcels within walking distance of the SMART rail line or local transit stop. Connect these centers with bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Policy L-2.5: Provide transitions to established neighborhood areas by ensuring appropriate setback standards and stepbacks for upper -story levels of multi -story structures, adjacent to residential uses. Housing and Anti -displacement Goal L-4: Encourage variety in new housing development to serve the diverse segments of the community, including students, working professionals, families, and senior citizens. Policy L-4.1: Provide a variety of housing types and densities. Policy L-4.2: Focus the development of new housing in the City Center and Station Center subareas, at densities sufficient to support transit use and with access to employment and community services in the region. Policy L-4.3: Increase minimum density limits for higher density housing near transit (particularly within one-half mile of the SMART rail station). Goal L-5: Ensure an adequate supply of affordable fordable rents and home ownership opportunities, avoiding indirect displacement of existing residents. Policy L-5.1: Support and encourage the provision of housing to a broad range of income levels, including market -rate and affordable housing. Policy L-5.2: New development shall be required to comply with the City's inclusionary housing ordinance. Policy L-5.3: Affordable housing should be encouraged, based on implementation of City programs and policies, identified in the City's Housing Element Update and as recommended for the PDA, as summarized in Section 4.2.3. Page 4-5 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Economic Growth Goal L-6: Support the PDA as a thriving business and employment district. Policy L-6.1: Implement corridor landscape improvements that beautify and improve vehicular, transit, bike, and pedestrian access to businesses within the PDA. Policy L-6.2: Support and market infill development opportunities on vacant and underused sites that can attract small and large tenants and a variety of users. Policy L-6.3: As new development occurs, provide incentives and assistance to existing small businesses for property improvements that support their vibrancy and viability. Policy L-6.4: Encourage existing property owners in the suburban commercial and business centers in the Central Commercial and Triangle Business subareas to upgrade their properties to support new public places and improve the pedestrian orientation and character along the street or retail frontages. Environmental Conservation and Sustainability Goal L-7: Preserve, protect, and restore sensitive natural resources in the PDA. Policy L-7.1: In new development, use site preparation, grading, and construction techniques that prevent contamination and sedimentation of creeks and streams. Policy L-7.2: Avoid adverse impacts on ecologically sensitive habitat and wildlife in planning, construction, and maintenance of creek corridor paths. Policy L-7.3: Protect native and heritage trees that meet the definition of a "protected tree" under the City's Zoning Ordinance. Policy L-7.4: Plant native vegetation in parks, public areas, and creek open space corridors. Goal L-8: Encourage new development to incorporate sustainable building principles. Policy L-8.1: Promote site and building design that improves energy efficiency by designing for natural cooling and passive solar heating. This can be achieved through the addition of building and site development features such as extended eaves, Page 4-6 Draft December 2015 window overhangs, and awnings; tree placement for natural cooling; and orientation of buildings and windows to take advantage of passive solar heating. Policy L-8.2: Support the use of green or sustainable building materials, including recycled - content materials that are consistent with the style and character of buildings. Policy L-8.3: New project development will be required to comply with applicable greenhouse gas reduction strategies in the Sonoma County Climate Action Plan and the Rohnert Park Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reduction Plan. Policy L-8.4: Prior to obtaining building permits, projects within the PDA will need to be evaluated against the Bay Area Air Quality Management district's thresholds of significance for project -level impacts and comply with applicable control measures in the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air Plan. Potentially significant GHG impacts will need to be mitigated to a less -than -significant level through alteration of project details or construction methods. 4.3 SUBAREA LAND USE AND IMPROVEMENT CONCEPTS The land use and development concepts described in the following sections serve as the basis for the land use and development standards described in the latter parts of this chapter. 4.3.1 Triangle Business Subarea Based on the vision and development concepts tested for opportunity sites in the Triangle Business subarea, provided under separate attachment, the following changes are recommended in this subarea: ■ Roadway and streetscape improvements that enhance the subarea's aesthetics and identity. Adjacent private -ownership parcels are encouraged to share driveways and internal connections should be made to reduce street curb cuts and allow more continuous sidewalks. • Accompanying private -property improvements to fa4ades and landscaping of front yards. Additional new landscaping with opportunities to incorporate low -impact development features such as infiltration planters, bioswales, and curb extensions that reduce impervious surface area, manage stormwater flows, and "green" the streets, parking lots, and other landscaped areas. Open space features, such as common space, greens, pedestrian walkways, or paseos. These features are encouraged and should be added as sites redevelop, to improve bike and pedestrian connectivity. ■ Multimodal circulation and streetscape improvements, as described and illustrated in the street sections in Chapter S. To support a greater mix of uses in the Triangle Business subarea than currently allowed by existing zoning, a Regional Commercial Overlay zone is proposed (Figure 4.3). This overlay zone is proposed on the existing properties zoned Industrial (I -L), fronted or served by Commerce Boulevard, Cascade Court, and State Farm Drive, from one parcel deep north of Utility Court to several parcels deep south of State Farm Drive. Figure 4.3: Proposed Regional Commercial Overlay Zone Boundary _IC entral RQhnert Park _ Priority Development Area Pian Chapter 4: Land Use The proposed Regional Commercial Overlay zone would attract and support a variety of new businesses and enhance the area's interface with passing traffic on U.S. 101. Methods to improve traffic flow and access to U.S. 101 may need to be considered to accommodate additional commercial activity in this area. The southwest corner of the Triangle Business subarea includes a Mixed -Use (M -U) zoning designation that could accommodate 100-150 additional residential units. Applying the Regional Commercial Overlay zone would still permit the uses allowed by the Industrial zone, such as manufacturing, warehousing, research and development, and auto repair, to remain (per Section 17.06.100 of the City's Zoning Ordinance). However, the overlay zone would also allow a variety of retail, hotel, and service uses, as permitted in the Regional Commercial (C-R) zone designation (per Section 17.06.060 of the City's Zoning Ordinance). Based on maximum average feasible floor area ratio (FAR) assumptions for the zoning district, up to 166,800 square feet of retail and service commercial, 153,000 square feet of office, and 182,000 square feet of industrial uses are proposed in the Triangle Business subarea to support new infill and redevelopment. About 1.5 acres of open space are proposed to support a central pedestrian paseo for the PDA. Page 4-7 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan 4.3.2 City Center Subarea Infill growth is proposed in the City Center subarea to implement the framework established in the City Center Concept Plan (2002), but this PDA Plan updates the vision in the concept plan to reflect changes that have occurred in the area and potential development opportunities that may result from the arrival of the Rohnert Park SMART rail station. The City Center subarea will continue to grow and evolve as a mixed-use civic and neighborhood commercial center, supporting commercial retail and service and office development in the Padre Shopping Center, west of State Farm Drive. This subarea will support additional residential mixed- use infill (such as residential lofts above ground - floor commercial uses), civic uses, and neighborhood commercial uses on the underused parking parcels adjacent to the new civic center area, west of State Farm Drive. Projections indicate that this subarea will support an additional 1 15 residential units and up to approximately 103,500 square feet of residential mixed-use area, 56,500 square feet of retail or service development, 32,500 square feet of office uses, and 50,000 square feet of public -institutional or civic development. Siting and planning of parking structures in the City Center subarea is also encouraged, to accommodate future growth in the PDA. Such structures should be constructed as feasible, based on parking demand. Existing zoning in this subarea has been updated to support mixed-use opportunities in the City Center subarea that implement the City Center Concept Plan. Thus, zoning in this subarea is proposed to remain unchanged, except to promote and encourage high-density housing in a compact fashion near the SMART rail station. An increase in the allowable residential density in the existing Mixed -Use zone designation to 45 dwelling units per acre is proposed. Page 4-8 Draft December 2015 4.3.3 Station Center Subarea Land use concepts for the Station Center subarea involve relocating the City corporation yard and redeveloping the State Farm campus as a pedestrian- and transit -oriented community, with a town center shopping and entertainment center; a community park along Rohnert Park Expressway (RPX); a transit plaza adjacent to the SMART rail station; and a mix of new residential, residential mixed-use, civic, and neighborhood commercial and office uses. A continuous street, landscape, and park and open space framework provides unity and identity to the subarea. Proponents of future development projects in the Station Center subarea should submit a Planned Development application to allow the subarea to define its own unique set of land use and zoning standards, consistent with the vision of this PDA Plan. Development projections for the Station Center subarea, described in Section 4.4, envision up to 415 residential units, including about 122,000 square feet of residential mixed-use area; 171,600 square feet of retail or service development; 65,300 square feet of civic uses; and up to 6 acres of open space. A parking benefit district that serves the Station Center and City Center subareas and the adjacent commercial centers is recommended as a long-term community improvement to efficiently serve future parking demand, as this demand increases over time, with new development. 4.3.4 Central Commercial Subarea The Central Commercial subarea, containing the major shopping and grocery stores in the city, is developed primarily with shops and is operating successfully. Improvements recommended for this subarea include new infill uses to break up large surface parking areas at the commercial shopping centers and tenant fagade and streetscape improvements to enhance vehicular and pedestrian safety. New infill commercial opportunities are encouraged to hold street edges and activate and improve the area's interface with the Station Center and City Center subareas along State Farm Drive. The following connectivity improvements supporting pedestrian and vehicular safety are encouraged: detached single-family and multifamily housing, at densities ranging from 12.1 to 30 units per gross acre. To support the transformation and greater range of uses in the Triangle Business subarea, a Regional Commercial Overlay zone is proposed in the area zoned I -L. This will allow uses and development standards applying to light industrial uses to remain the same, but also permit greater flexibility in the types of commercial uses allowed, similar to uses permitted in the C-R zone. ■ north -south and east -west pedestrian connections within and between centers and subareas; walkway and landscape improvements within commercial centers to connect commercial shops and services internally and provide external connections to the surrounding community, transit stops, and public sidewalks; ■ driveway and streetscape improvements to ensure safe vehicular access and bike and pedestrian crossings; and mid -block and intersection crossing improvements, as addressed in Chapter 5, to support safe pedestrian access between subareas and from transit stops in the Central Commercial subarea to the planned SMART rail station, particularly in the initial phases of the rail line's operation. - entral RQhnert Park Priority ©evelopment Area Pian Chapter 4: Land Use As a centrally located shopping and convenience center, this subarea is envisioned to continue its function as a major community shopping destination. Infill projections indicate that the Central Commercial subarea will support an additional 74,000 square feet of retail or service development and approximately 12,500 square feet of public -institutional uses. Existing zoning designations in this subarea include Regional Commercial, Public/Institutional, and High Density Residential. No changes to existing zoning are proposed because development standards in place already support the envisioned infill development potential in the subarea. 4.3.5 Creekside Neighborhood Subarea The Creekside Neighborhood subarea is an existing, largely built -out multifamily residential area. This subarea contains the highest density of housing development in the city. Some infill growth may occur in this subarea, permitting a maximum development potential of 30 dwelling units per acre in the R -H zone. However, this subarea is otherwise not anticipated to see much land use change. Projections for the Creekside Neighborhood permit the potential infill development of an additional 155 residential units and up to 17,500 square feet of commercial retail or service uses. No zoning changes are identified for this subarea; however, improvements to bike and pedestrian trail connections in the subarea are highly desired. The Copeland Creek greenway and connecting area trails are envisioned to be improved and enhanced to support safe access and connections from the community to the future SMART rail station and multi -use path and to the commercial and mixed-use areas to the north. The Copeland Creek corridor and north -south greenways in the subarea should be enhanced through regular maintenance to ensure the safety and visibility of trails. Lighting and interpretive and wayfinding signage should be incorporated to direct people to community destinations and streets and support interpretation of natural features along the creek trail, such as native or riparian trees and other habitats. Page 4-9 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan 4.3.6 Downtown District Amenity Zone The DDAZ is to be implemented as a new overlay zone, designed to help focus investment within the Downtown District and facilitate the development of a compact, walkable commercial district that is unique to Rohnert Park. The DDAZ encompasses the SMART rail station and the existing or planned commercial areas immediately surrounding this. It will build from and extend the urban streetscape environment already established in the City Center south across RPX to include the downtown commercial area envisioned in the Station Center subarea; and west to encompass the portions of the Central Commercial subarea fronting State Farm Drive and RPX (Figure 4.4). The DDAZ is proposed to include land use and development standards that support the creation of a walkable dining, entertainment, retail, and civic district within a unique, urban, mixed-use environment. Draft December 2015 A minimum amount of retail and service uses are required within the DDAZ to create the active commercial environment desired by the city. Based on research of downtowns in surrounding communities a minimum of 275.000 sf of active retail and services uses in the DDAZ would the minimum amounted needed. The PDA as a whole could support up to 430.000 sf of new retail or service commercial (see Table 4.2(PDA Site Development) for requirements for each subarea. In addition to the amount of new development the character of the new development is particularly important to create a downtown environment. A critical factor is the placement of new buildings. New buildings built in the DDAZ will be required to have primary entrances facing the public sidewalk to create an active streetscape. Building heights of two stories or taller are desired to help frame the sidewalk and create a minimum level of development intensity. Figure 4.4: Proposed Downtown District Amenity Zone Overlay Boundary .w 00 �d U •� �� � '• �-I Ar rid di 0 Hine4aagh creek corridor 1 I I,! PADkE 1=l NfrER-1 CITY CENTER �� RA( I.TT CL 1,11 �1 r,NTA J. '�rDowntown District ke, CRUZ 'go* *A Amenity Zone 1 "�. c 1 ROHPJLRT PARK 1 .-•�- M.�.�.�,,...... � O�� rdL+': i I',4dthi Ary�E 1 Ed's s �e U + ,k '' SMART WALNUT l 1 Elf..'�, z : F , . i► s Station O Q11 . ENTERPR t'4"iq� RUSTIC pf, WALNUT c <_ . tom.».,.-. mss_;► -c. �_AN_��► .� CARLITA '! CAMINC J w�� l is i Cr(riAl 101 I Ld o s Source: AECOM, 2015 Page 4-10 4.4 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL 4.4.1 Zoning and Land Use Designations This section describes the zoning and land use designations that will govern development in the PDA. Figure 4.4 shows the proposed zoning diagram for the PDA. Established areas in the PDA are expected to see some incremental infill growth, but implementing the vision for these subareas is not expected to require major land use changes. Thus, the PDA shall continue to be governed by the City's existing zoning designations, as shown in Figure 4.5, with the following exceptions: A new Regional Commercial Overlay zone is proposed over the base Industrial zone in the Triangle Business subarea to help facilitate redevelopment of several vacant and underused sites, as represented by the orange dashed boundary in Figure 4.5. The Station Center subarea is proposed for rezoning to a Planned Development designation. This new designation will allow establishment of unique land use and development standards for the area shown in Figure 4.5 that could support higher density/intensity transit -oriented land uses than currently permitted by existing zoning standards. ■ The DDAZ is proposed to facilitate the creation of a downtown for Rohnert Park by focusing public improvements and amenities in a walkable, commercial, mixed-use district. The following existing zoning designations shall continue to govern in the PDA. Table 4.1 summarizes zoning designations and development standards applicable to the PDA. ■ Regional Commercial (C-R) zone, located in the Triangle Business, Creekside Neighborhood, and Central Commercial subareas. This zone permits shopping centers and other retail uses that attract customers from outside the city. This zone permits a - entral Rohnert Park Priority ©evelopment Area Pian Chapter 4: Land Use maximum FAR of 0.4, with a maximum FAR of 1.5 for hotel and motel uses (Table 4. 1). Industrial (I -L) zone, found in the Triangle Business subarea, allows for campus environments for corporate headquarters, research and development facilities, offices, light manufacturing, assembly, industrial processes, warehousing, storage, distribution, service commercial, and ancillary retail uses. This zone allows a maximum FAR of 0.5, but an FAR of up to 1.0 may be permitted and approved by the Planning Commission. ■ Industrial with Office Overlay (I -L/0) zone, also located primarily in the Triangle Business subarea. This zone permits the same uses as the I -L zone, but also allows administrative, financial, business, professional, medical, public office, and supporting commercial uses (as permitted in the Office Commercial [C -O] district). Development is subject to the same standards as the I -L zone. ■ Mixed -Use (M -U) zone, located in the City Center and Triangle Business subareas. This zone accommodates compatible businesses, retail stores, service and institutional organizations, and residences. Up to a 1.5 FAR is permitted for nonresidential uses, while a 2.0 FAR is allowed for residential - commercial mixed uses. Maximum density will increase to 45 units per acre in keeping with the vision for this zone. ■ Public/Institutional (P-1) zone, which applies in the City Center and Central Commercial subareas. This zone allows for schools, government offices, transit sites, religious facilities, and other facilities with a public character. This district permits a maximum FAR of 0.5. High Density Residential (R -H) zone, in the Creekside subarea, permits a wide range of detached single-family and multifamily housing, at densities ranging from 12.1 to 24 units per gross acre. Open Space—Environmental Conservation (OS/EC) zone includes sites with environmental and/or safety constraints, such as riparian corridors, sensitive habitats, and wetlands. Page 4- H Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Figure 4.5: PToposed-Zoning Diagram Draft December 2015 '\ LEGEND Priority Development Area I L__ -I City Limits �a I �siusu SMART Railway �d Station Location 1 � Zoning Designations j R -H: High Density Residential P -I: Public Institutional jC-R: Regional Commercial OS -EC: Open Space - 1 I -L: Industrial Environmental Conservation I 1 PD: Planned Development 1 I-L/O: Industrial/Office Overlay 1 5 _ New I-L/CR: Industrial/ 1 M -U: Mixed Use Regional Commercial Overlay 1 1 I rte. �__�� Downtown District Amenity Zone � -i i STI" v, 1 I-uC-R 28.7 acres W W 1 G 1 G 1 k 1 d I -L i c 22.9 acres 1 1 EXEO.JTIVE T- 4 I -U4 rt 73.0 acres � IrI^xar11:� �i!iaet�i: � ! V --------- .� . Hinebaegh 1 1 1 � W W7.7acre 1 W 1 ROHNERT PARK 1 ■ FEET 0 300 5D6 1,200 c z U 0 m D EI2ZABETH DONNE L -R Refer to Figure 4.6 for Station Center Land Uses 1 � a� • t•iilJr��� Station 1 ` — W— Location W .1 acres ; -. ♦. 1 7A -r i P -I R H_�s W — kW 8 acres 6.9 acres W —G 1 R -R � 1al. f�.!- 36 acn 1 ��OS-EC: 111 acres -------------------- IQI ---/ i Source: AECOM, 2015 Page 4-12 Copeland Creek Chapter 4: Land Use Zoning/ Residential Assumed Allowed Assumed MaximumZoned Building Land Use Density Residential Maximum Intensity Coverage Area Designations Range Density[4] Intensity (FAR) (%)/Building (gross (units/acre) (units/acre) (FAR) Height (feet) acres) Existing Zoning Districts within the PDA Plan Area, with Modifications Regional Commercial 0.4 [ 1 ] 0.325 60%/65 60.2 (C-R) Industrial (I -L) 0.5 [2] 0.30 605' /45 23.4 Industrial/Office 0.5 [2] 0.325 605' /45 72.3 Overlay (I -L/0) Open Space - Environmental [3] [3] 18.3 Conservation (OS -EC) Public/ 0.5 0.35 50%/45 11.2 Institutional (P-1) Proposed New Zoning Designations Downtown 0.45 (City Mixed -Use 12.1-45 35 1.5 (CMU) Center) 80% 26 (DTM-U) 2.0 (RMU) 0.3 (Triangle) Downtown High Density Residential 12.1 to 30 30 40% 60.3 (DTR -H) Industrial/Regional Commercial 0.5 [2] 0.325 60%/45 28.4 Overlay (1-UCR) Downtown District Amenity N/A (overlaps with other zones) Zone Overlay (DDAZ) Station Center District Planned Development (PD) 32.4 Commercial 1.5 0.60 80%/65 Mixed -Use Residential 15-35 35 2.0 1.00 80%/65 Mixed -Use High Density 12-75 35 60%/65 Residential Office or Civic 1.0 0.60 70%/65 Parks/Open [3] [3] Space Percentage of the PDA (%) 5.5% 11.2% 7.8% 18.1% 8.5% 9.7% Total 332.5 100.0% Notes: CMU = Commercial Mixed -Use; FAR = floor area ratio; PDA = Priority Development Area; RMU = Residential Mixed -Use [ I ] An FAR of 1.5 is allowed for hotel and motel uses in the C-R district. [2] An FAR of 1.0 is allowed for industrial projects, approved by the Planning Commission and meeting criteria set forth in City of Rohnert Park -approved design guidelines. [3] A density of I unit per acre is allowed in the developable portion of any property within the OS -EC district. Source: AECOM, 2015 ®Central Rohnert Par= Priority Developmc Area Pian Page 4-13 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan To support the transformation and greater range of uses in the Triangle Business subarea, a Regional Commercial Overlay zone is proposed in the area zoned I -L. This will allow uses and development standards applying to light industrial uses to remain the same, but also permit greater flexibility in the types of commercial uses permitted, as allowed by the C-R zone. The proposed DDAZ supports creation of a walkable downtown environment through urban design standards and guidelines that allow buildings to be built to the edge of the sidewalk; supports wide sidewalks and pedestrian amenities along commercial streets; promotes compact, multi -story development, on -street parking, and transit use; and may incentivize features desired in a downtown setting through parking reductions, density bonuses, or project streamlining. The Station Center subarea is recommended to be developed as a Planned Development zoning district. In keeping with the vision for this subarea, a unique set of land use and development standards is proposed (Table 4.1 and Figure 4.5). Planned new land uses in this subarea include: Station Center—Residential Mixed -Use, which permits residences, organized in a pedestrian -oriented environment in a horizontal or vertical mixed-use configuration, with residential densities of 15- 45 dwelling units per acre and maximum 2.0 FAR. Compatible businesses and retail and services are proposed to be permitted, preferably at ground level. Open space or community amenities for the public and residents are encouraged in this subarea. ■ Station Center—Commercial Mixed -Use supports a variety of service, retail, and civic uses organized in a pedestrian -oriented environment, in a horizontal or vertical mixed-use configuration, and encourages new civic and open space uses. This district permits a maximum 1.5 FAR. Station Center—Office allows for all types of administrative, financial, business, professional, medical, public office, and/or public institutional uses, such as government or nonprofit offices. This district permits a maximum 1.0 FAR. Page 4-14 Draft December 2015 Station Center—High Density Residential permits a wide range of single- family to multifamily housing, at densities ranging from 12 to 45 units per acre, with an assumed density of 30 units per acre. Station Center—Parks/Open Space is subject to the same uses as the existing OS -EC district, except that it permits a maximum development potential of one percent of the total land use area to provide opportunities for small retail pavilions and other neighborhood or transit services. 4.4.2 Site Development Potential and Requirements By testing opportunity sites for subareas (included in Appendix A) and considering reasonable market opportunities, a maximum average development cap was established for each subarea. Table 4.2 summarizes the existing and added development potential, establishing the parameters for future land use intensification at build -out in the PDA. Additional development potential is expressed as a development cap, under the assumed densities and intensities identified in Table 4.1. Based on average densities and intensities, this PDA Plan assumes and analyzes an added development potential in the PDA of: ■ 835 dwelling units; ■ 429,936 square feet retail or service commercial uses; ■ 205,232 square feet of office uses; ■ 62,807 square feet of public/institutional uses; and ■ 129,315 square feet of industrial uses. Chapter 4: Land Use Minimum development within the DDAZ of the PDA will be required to create the type of active retail environment desired by the city. The requirement for each subarea: Station Center, 150,000 square feet City Center, 100,00 square feet (50, 000 sf feet additional) Central Commercial, 25,000 square feet (along State Farm frontage) �C entral RQhnert Park Priority Development Area Pian Page 415 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Figure 4.6: Station Center Subarea Land Use Designations Draft October 2015 Source: AECOM, 2015 Page 4- 16 Although individual projects can achieve the maximum densities and intensities permitted for each zoning district (Table 4. 1), the total overall development cap for each category of land use Chapter 4: Land Use (Table 4.2) cannot be exceeded in the PDA without triggering the requirement for additional environmental analysis. Notes: [I] Existing development is based on assessor's parcel data, verified through aerial maps, and adjusted where needed. [2] See Table 4-1 for land use assumptions used in determining the PDA's additional development potential. [3] Total development potential is the sum of existing development plus the assumed additional development potential. [4] Existing uses in the Station Center subarea are proposed for removal and redeveloped with new uses. [5] Identifies dedicated public park/open space, based on proposed land use concepts studied for the PDA. Additional open space to be provided for new development, as required by the Zoning Code, is not reflected in the project area totals. [6] Non-residential project area totals also support the addition of up to 500 hotel rooms. f71 50.000 square feet of active retail or services uses are required within the DDAZ portion of this subarea. [8] 150,000 square feet of active retail or services uses are required within the DDAZ portion of this subarea. [9] 25,000 square feet of active retail or services uses are required within the DDAZ portion of this subarea. Source: Assessor's Parcel Data, modified by AECOM in 2015 _C entral Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Page 4- 17 Land Uses Building Area (net square feet) Subarea Open Space p Residential Retail or (acres) Units Service Office Public- Industrial Total Non - Commercial Institutional residential Existing Development [ I ] Triangle Business 2.9 0 76,882 742,540 251 768,429 1,588,102 City Center 2.6 143 units 50,500 0 135,005 0 185,505 Station Center 0 0 0 283,230 7,168 0 290,398 Central Commercial 0 240 units 544,1 1 1 44,410 14,528 0 603,049 Creekside 1 1.2 1007 units 29,235 11,600 11,600 0 50,360 Neighborhood Total 16.7 1,390 units 700,728 1,081,780 166,477 768,429 2,717,414 Additional Development Potential [2] and Requirements Triangle Business 2.5 150 units 120,881 91,415 0 129,315 341,611 City Center 0 115 units 56,581U7 32,560 50,362 0 139,503 Station Center 6.0 415 units 171,62681 65,340 0 0 236,966 Central Commercial 0 0 74,264-91 0 12,445 0 86,709 Creekside 0 155 units 17,534 0 0 0 17,534 Neighborhood Total 8.5 [5] 835units 429,926 205,232 62,807 129,315 822,324 Total Development Potential [3] Triangle Business 5.4 150 units 197,763 833,955 251 897,744 1,929,713 City Center 2.6 258 units 107,081 32,560 185,367 0 325,008 Station Center 6.0 415 units 171,626 65,340 [4] 0 [4] 0 236,966 Central Commercial 0 240 units 618,375 44,410 26,973 0 689,758 Creekside 11.2 1,162 units 46,769 11,600 9,525 0 67,894 Neighborhood Total 25.2 2,225 units 1,141,614 987,865 222,116 897,744 3,249,337 [6] Notes: [I] Existing development is based on assessor's parcel data, verified through aerial maps, and adjusted where needed. [2] See Table 4-1 for land use assumptions used in determining the PDA's additional development potential. [3] Total development potential is the sum of existing development plus the assumed additional development potential. [4] Existing uses in the Station Center subarea are proposed for removal and redeveloped with new uses. [5] Identifies dedicated public park/open space, based on proposed land use concepts studied for the PDA. Additional open space to be provided for new development, as required by the Zoning Code, is not reflected in the project area totals. [6] Non-residential project area totals also support the addition of up to 500 hotel rooms. f71 50.000 square feet of active retail or services uses are required within the DDAZ portion of this subarea. [8] 150,000 square feet of active retail or services uses are required within the DDAZ portion of this subarea. [9] 25,000 square feet of active retail or services uses are required within the DDAZ portion of this subarea. Source: Assessor's Parcel Data, modified by AECOM in 2015 _C entral Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Page 4- 17 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan 4.5 AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND ANTI -DISPLACEMENT This section summarizes the analysis of the Affordable Housing and Anti -displacement Strategy Memo, prepared by Bay Area Economic, to plan for the PDA's affordable -housing needs. 4.5.1 Housing Affordability Housing affordability is typically measured by the percentage of household income that is spent on housing costs. Housing is typically considered affordable to a given household when total housing costs equal 30 percent of gross household income or less. As analyzed in the PDA Profile for Rohnert Park in 2013, PDA households had a median income of approximately $31,600, compared to a median income of $57,000 in Rohnert Park overall. The PDA has very few households compared to the rest of the community, mostly in apartment complexes concentrated in the Creekside Neighborhood subarea. The City Center has some more recent residential development, constructed after 2000. As envisioned by this PDA Plan, additional residential development could occur in the Station Center, City Center, Triangle Business, and Creekside Neighborhood subareas. The City's Housing Element provides information about the affordability of for -sale and rental housing in Rohnert Park, demonstrating that the housing in the city is generally unaffordable to lower income households with incomes equal to the PDA's median income. For -Sale Homes Data and analysis on home sales prices presented in the Rohnert Park Housing Element indicate that home sale prices for two- and three- bedroom housing units are generally unaffordable for very -low-income households and some low- income households. As indicated in Table 4.3, households earning the PDA's median annual income (approximately $31,600 in 2013) would be unable to afford the median sales price for a home in Rohnert Park. Page 4-18 Draft December 2015 Rental Affordability Like for -sale prices, average rental rates in Rohnert Park are unaffordable to lower-income households. Table 4.4 shows the maximum affordable rent for households at various income levels and sizes compared to the average market - rate rent in Rohnert Park, based on data and calculations presented in the City's 2015-2023 Housing Element. As shown, market -rate rents exceed the affordability threshold for very -low- income households and for two-, three-, and four -person low-income households. Based on the PDA's median income of $31,600 per year in 2013, the average market -rate rent in Rohnert Park exceeds the affordability threshold for PDA households by more than $600 per month. The current cost of market -rate housing in Rohnert Park suggests that market -rate rents for units in new development will exceed the affordability thresholds for lower income households. Although some existing for -sale units are affordable to households earning 70 percent of the area's median income and some rental units are affordable to households earning less than 100 percent of the area's median income, new -construction units built at current market prices are expected to generate higher rents and sale prices than the existing units in the city. The City has begun to address this need in the Housing Element by identifying sites for new affordable units in the PDA and other places in the city. Chapter 4: Land Use Table 4.3: Affordability of Market -Rate For -Sale Housing, Rohnert Park, 2013 Notes: (a) Median sale price from www.trulia.com, Rohnert Park Trends, February 2014, as reported in Table 9-23 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. 2 -bedroom unit size used for households with one to three persons because prices are not available for smaller home sizes, likely due to a shortage of available homes for sale in this size range. (b) Household income per City of Rohnert Park, <http://www.ci.rohnert-park.ca.us/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=797>, accessedon December 27, 2013, as reported in Table 9-22 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. (c) Assumes that 30 percent of income (or 35 percent for moderate -income) is available for or mortgage payment, taxes, mortgage insurance, and homeowners insurance. Also assumes 95 percent loan at 5 percent annual interest rate and 30 -year term; assumes taxes, mortgage insurance, and homeowners insurance account for 21 percent of total monthly payments. Figures reported are as shown in the Table 9-22 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. Sources: Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014, as cited in notes above; BAE, 2015. _Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Page 4- 19 Household (Unit) Size 1 Person 2 Person 3 Person 4 Person (2 Bedrooms) (2 Bedrooms) (2 Bedrooms) (3 Bedrooms) 2013 Median Sale Price (a) $165,500 $165,500 $165,500 $277,500 Maximum Affordable Monthly Rent Extremely Low Income (30% AMI) Household Income (b) $17,400 $19,850 $22,350 $24,800 Max. Affordable Sale Price (c) $71,393 $81,445 $91,703 $101,755 Amount Above (Below) Median Sale Price ($94,107) ($84,055) ($73,797) ($175,745) Very Low Income (50% AMI) Household Income (b) $28,950 $33,050 $37,200 $41,300 Max. Affordable Sale Price (c) $118,783 $135,605 $152,633 $169,455 Amount Above (Below) Median Sale Price ($46,717) ($29,895) ($12,867) ($108,045) Low Income (70% AMI) Household Income (b) $40,450 $46,250 $52,050 $57,800 Max. Affordable Sale Price (c) $165,968 $189,765 $213,563 $237,155 Amount Above (Below) Median Sale Price $468 $24,265 $48,063 ($40,345) Median Income (100% AMI) Household Income (b) $57,800 $66,100 $74,350 $82,600 Max. Affordable Sale Price (c) $237,155 $271,211 $305,061 $338,911 Amount Above (Below) Median Sale Price $71,655 $105,711 $139,561 $61,411 Moderate Income (110% AMI) Household Income (b) $63,600 $72,700 $81,750 $90,850 Max. Affordable Sale Price (c) $304,445 $348,006 $391,327 $434,887 Amount Above (Below) Median Sale Price $138,945 $182,506 $225,827 $157,387 Notes: (a) Median sale price from www.trulia.com, Rohnert Park Trends, February 2014, as reported in Table 9-23 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. 2 -bedroom unit size used for households with one to three persons because prices are not available for smaller home sizes, likely due to a shortage of available homes for sale in this size range. (b) Household income per City of Rohnert Park, <http://www.ci.rohnert-park.ca.us/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=797>, accessedon December 27, 2013, as reported in Table 9-22 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. (c) Assumes that 30 percent of income (or 35 percent for moderate -income) is available for or mortgage payment, taxes, mortgage insurance, and homeowners insurance. Also assumes 95 percent loan at 5 percent annual interest rate and 30 -year term; assumes taxes, mortgage insurance, and homeowners insurance account for 21 percent of total monthly payments. Figures reported are as shown in the Table 9-22 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. Sources: Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014, as cited in notes above; BAE, 2015. _Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Page 4- 19 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Draft December 2015 Table 4.4: Affordability of Market -Rate Rental Housing, Rohnert Park, 2013 Notes: (a) Average market -rate monthly rent per RealFacts Annual Trend obtained December 2013, as reported in Table 9-25 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. (b) Household income per City of Rohnert Park, <http://www.ci.rohnert-park.ca.us/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=797>, accessedon December 27, 2013, as reported in Table 9-22 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. (c) Assumes that 30 percent of income (or 35 percent for moderate -income) is available for monthly rent, including utilities. Figures reported are as shown in the Table 9-22 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. Sources: Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014, as cited in notes above; BAE, 2015. Page 4-20 Household (Unit) Size 1 Person 2 Person 3 Person 4 Person (Studio) (1 Bedroom) (2 Bedrooms) (3 Bedrooms) Average Market -Rate Monthly Rent (a) $775 $1,109 $1,446 $1,757 Maximum Affordable Monthly Rent Extremely Low Income (30% AMI) Household Income (b) $17,400 $19,850 $22,350 $24,800 Max. Affordable Monthly Rent (c) $435 $496 $559 $620 Amount Above (Below) Market Rate Rent ($340) ($613) ($887) ($1,137) Very Low Income (50% AMI) Household Income (b) $28,950 $33,050 $37,200 $41,300 Max. Affordable Monthly Rent (c) $435 $496 $559 $620 Amount Above (Below) Market Rate Rent ($340) ($613) ($887) ($1,137) Low Income (60% AMI) Household Income (b) $34,700 $39,650 $44,600 $49,550 Max. Affordable Monthly Rent (c) $868 $991 $1,115 $1,239 Amount Above (Below) Market Rate Rent $93 ($118) ($331) ($518) Median Income (100% AMI) Household Income (b) $57,800 $66,100 $74,350 $82,600 Max. Affordable Monthly Rent (c) $1,445 $1,653 $1,859 $2,065 Amount Above (Below) Market Rate Rent $670 $544 $413 $308 Moderate Income (110% AMI) Household Income (b) $63,600 $72,700 $81,750 $90,850 Max. Affordable Monthly Rent (c) $1,855 $2,120 $2,384 $2,650 Amount Above (Below) Market Rate Rent $1,080 $1,011 $938 $893 Notes: (a) Average market -rate monthly rent per RealFacts Annual Trend obtained December 2013, as reported in Table 9-25 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. (b) Household income per City of Rohnert Park, <http://www.ci.rohnert-park.ca.us/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=797>, accessedon December 27, 2013, as reported in Table 9-22 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. (c) Assumes that 30 percent of income (or 35 percent for moderate -income) is available for monthly rent, including utilities. Figures reported are as shown in the Table 9-22 of the Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014. Sources: Draft Rohnert Park 2015-2023 Housing Element, September 2014, as cited in notes above; BAE, 2015. Page 4-20 Affordable -Housing Needs The Housing Element is the primary tool used to plan for and address affordable -housing needs in California. This projected need is determined through the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process, which distributes project regional housing needs to individual cities and counties by income level. The RHNA allocation for Rohnert Park during the current planning period, between 2015 and 2023, identifies a need for 899 units in the city; 46 percent should be affordable to households earning 120 percent of the average area median income (AMI) or less, as shown in Table 4.5. Table 4.5: Citywide Regional Housing Needs Allocation, 2015-2023 Planning RHNA Income Category Number Percent Very Low (<50°% of AMI) 181 20.1% Low (50-80°% of AMI) 107 11.9% Moderate (81-120% of AMI) 127 14.1% Above Moderate (>120°% of AMI) 484 53.8% Total 899 100.0% Sources: ABAG Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation, 2013, as cited in the Draft 2015-2023 Rohnert Park Housing Element, September 2014; BAE, 2015. Recent changes in state law require local jurisdictions in California to plan to accommodate larger shares of their project housing need in areas accessible to transit, beginning in the current planning period. To meet these goals, the region's Job -Housing Connection Strategy, adopted in May 2012, anticipate that new housing development is emphasized in PDAs, thus making PDAs important locations to plan for housing affordable to households of all income levels. Based on the estimated affordable -housing needs citywide and income distribution for Rohnert Park during the current 2015-2023 planning cycle, 835 new residential units is the projected affordable housing need in the PDA Plan, distributed among income categories (Table 4.6). This analysis suggests a project need for approximately 168 units affordable to very -low- income households, 99 units affordable to low- income households, and 118 units affordable to moderate -income households. _IIF gntral Rchnett Park �/„ Priority Development Area Plan Chapter 4: Land Use Table 4.6: Affordable -Housing Needs in the PDA, 2015-2040 Sources: ABAG Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation, 2013, as cited in the Draft 2015-2023 Rohnert Park Housing Element, September 2014; AECOM, 2015; BAE, 2015. These calculations provide an estimate of housing needs for the current planning cycle and a general guideline for affordable -housing needs in the PDA to ensure the planned SMART rail station and PDA amenities are available to all segments of Rohnert Park's current and future populations. Changes to the future RHNA requirements, the rate of affordable -housing production, and the actual rate of development in the PDA will result in different incomes. Housing price data indicate that although some existing rental and for -sale housing in the PDA is affordable to low-income households, new market -rate construction in the PDA is likely to be more expensive and unaffordable to low- income households, requiring public funding sources and strategies to facilitate production of new affordable housing to meet the participated housing needs. Based on input of staff from Burbank Housing, a developer of affordable housing active in Sonoma County, affordable -housing projects typically require between $100,000 and $140,000 per unit in local funding to make projects feasible. This presents a challenge for local governments. Additional new funding sources are anticipated to be needed to continue to fund affordable -housing programs. Chapter 8 of this PDA Plan describes potential additional sources of funding to support the development of affordable housing in the PDA. Page 4-21 Percent of Total New Income Category New Units Units Very Low (<50% of AMI) 20.1% 168 Low (50-80% of AMI) 11.9% 99 Moderate (81-120% of AMI) 14.1% 118 Above Moderate (>120% of AMI) 53.8% 450 Total 100.0% 835 Sources: ABAG Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation, 2013, as cited in the Draft 2015-2023 Rohnert Park Housing Element, September 2014; AECOM, 2015; BAE, 2015. These calculations provide an estimate of housing needs for the current planning cycle and a general guideline for affordable -housing needs in the PDA to ensure the planned SMART rail station and PDA amenities are available to all segments of Rohnert Park's current and future populations. Changes to the future RHNA requirements, the rate of affordable -housing production, and the actual rate of development in the PDA will result in different incomes. Housing price data indicate that although some existing rental and for -sale housing in the PDA is affordable to low-income households, new market -rate construction in the PDA is likely to be more expensive and unaffordable to low- income households, requiring public funding sources and strategies to facilitate production of new affordable housing to meet the participated housing needs. Based on input of staff from Burbank Housing, a developer of affordable housing active in Sonoma County, affordable -housing projects typically require between $100,000 and $140,000 per unit in local funding to make projects feasible. This presents a challenge for local governments. Additional new funding sources are anticipated to be needed to continue to fund affordable -housing programs. Chapter 8 of this PDA Plan describes potential additional sources of funding to support the development of affordable housing in the PDA. Page 4-21 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan 4.5.2 Anti -displacement Enhanced transit accessibility and public and private investments in the PDA may increase the demand for housing, which can result in both direct and indirect displacement of existing residents. Direct displacement can occur as rents and sale prices in the area increase, potentially allowing property owners to gain more value from properties through redevelopment and causing owners of some older residential properties to demolish existing buildings to rebuild larger and newer projects that can achieve higher current market rental rates. Because development in the PDA is anticipated to occur incrementally over time through infill growth and does not propose changes that would result in demolition of existing residential units, direct displacement of existing residents in not expected. Indirect displacement may result as the area's housing prices increase, causing increasing rents for existing units, which can make these units unaffordable for existing households. The higher cost of land acquisition in areas with high property values can present a barrier to the construction of affordable new units by increasing the costs of housing production, resulting in an overall shortage of housing proximate to the transit station for new or existing households with low or moderate incomes. In part, displacement can be prevented by producing new units in the PDA that are affordable to low- or moderate -income households. Other actions that can be used to address displacement are summarized in the tables in Section 4.5.3. 4.5.3 Affordable Housing and Anti - displacement Programs and Strategies The 2015-2023 Housing Element includes a set of policies and programs that the City will implement during the 2015-2023 Housing Element cycle. Among the policies and programs detailed in the Housing Element are: • identification of opportunity sites for residential development, including sites in the PDA; Page 4-22 Draft December 2015 ■ ensuring an adequate supply of land zoned for residential uses at sufficient densities to accommodate existing and future housing needs; • requiring residential ownership projects to include affordable units in accordance with the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance; ■ working with nonprofit and other affordable housing developers to facilitate the production of affordable housing; ■ minimizing governmental constraints to the provision of affordable housing; ■ participation in the Mortgage Credit Certificate Program for first-time homebuyers; ■ planned adoption of a residential in -lieu fee subject to a future fee study; ■ providing incentives such as expedited application processing, fee deferrals, modifications to development standards, or financial assistance to developers that provide affordable units; ■ pursuing state and federal funding for affordable housing and supporting partner applications for state and federal funding for affordable housing; ■ monitoring affordable units at risk of conversion to market rate, working with owners of properties at risk of conversion to examine strategies to preserve or replace the units, and assisting tenants displaced by conversions in finding affordable housing; ■ partnering with the Sonoma County Community Development Commission on housing rehabilitation programs for low- and moderate -income households; and continued implementation of the City's Density Bonus Ordinance. In addition to these policies and programs, complementary actions that can be implemented to facilitate the production of new affordable housing and prevent displacement of existing residents in the PDA are summarized in Tables 4.7 and 4.8. Chapter 4: Land Use Program Type Program Strategy A housing impact fee could be adopted and charged to developers of market -rate rental residential projects to generate revenue for affordable housing. This fee would be similar to the in -lieu fee that the City plans to adopt for ownership units, but would allow the City to collect revenue from developers of market -rate rental units. To adopt a housing impact fee, the City would first need to prepare a nexus study to determine the maximum fee rate. However, the City could choose to adopt a fee that is lower than the Housing Impact Fees maximum established by the nexus study to account for development feasibility or other considerations. The fee could be waived for developers that provide affordable units according to City policy, making the impact fee program similar to an inclusionary housing ordinance with an in -lieu fee alternative. Because housing impact fees would be collected from all development in the city, funds generated from projects outside the PDA may be available to support development of affordable housing in the PDA. The allocation of these funds to specific affordable -housing developments will be based on future City decisions in response to specific requests by affordable -housing developers. New development in the PDA will increase property values in the area and generate Dedication of New General additional property tax revenues to the City. Rohnert Park could adopt a policy to Fund Revenues dedicate a portion of its increase in General Fund revenues to production of affordable housing, essentially a set-aside fund giving the City discretion, while relying on state law. In general, a community benefits plan would require that developers of new projects provide a community benefit in exchange for an increase in density for the project, and could be implemented as a modification to the City's existing density bonus ordinance. This approach would need to be studied to determine the benefits to be provided and the Community Benefits Plan density increases to be permitted for the PDA. Potential community benefits could include affordable housing, public open space, or community -serving uses such as child care, senior centers, or community centers, which would help to create a neighbor -hood that serves the needs of a variety of households at all income levels. Benefits could be provided directly or through financial contributions that support the provision of community benefits. Rohnert Park has a density bonus ordinance and offers various incentives to developers that provide affordable units. The City could adopt additional incentives tied to the Affordable -Housing provision of affordable housing. Incentives could be offered citywide or in an affordable - Incentives housing overlay area defined by the City. The incentives offered, the number of affordable units required, and the required affordability levels would be determined based on further study. A policy could be adopted to direct a portion of the City's affordable -housing Small and Scattered Site resources to acquisition of small and scattered sites and land banking efforts in the Acquisition and Land PDA. Land banking could be furthered by requiring or encouraging developers of Banking market -rate units to dedicate land to the City for future affordable -housing projects. The land acquired through these efforts could be provided to affordable -housing developers to build new affordable units in the PDA. Rohnert Park has a history of working with nonprofit housing developers to encourage Community Land Trust and the development of affordable housing in the city. To diversify affordable housing Cooperative Ownership options and create additional opportunities for affordable housing production, the City Models could adopt a policy to work with nonprofits to establish community land trusts and limited -equity cooperative housing developments in the PDA. Notes: City = City of Rohnert Park; PDA = Priority Development Area. Source: BAE, 2015 _C entral Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Page 4-23 Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Draft December 2015 First -Time Homebuyer Some funds could be targeted as available to provide first-time homebuyer assistance Program to lower income PDA renter households, potentially allowing these residents to purchase homes and remain in the area. A rent control ordinance could be adopted to limit allowable residential rent increases. The rent control ordinance would be subject to a number of state laws, which would Rent Stabilization allow for decontrol of rents at termination of tenancy and apply rent control only to units constructed before 1995, and would likely apply citywide rather than in the PDA only. Rent control would help to stabilize rents for existing tenants, thereby helping to avoid displacement. Condominium Conversion A condominium conversion ordinance could be adopted to regulate the conversion of Control rental units to condominiums and reduce the potential impacts on the City's rental housing inventory. Developers could be required to provide relocation assistance to lower income residents displaced by the redevelopment of residential properties. Although this PDA Relocation Assistance Plan does not anticipate demolition and redevelopment of existing residential properties in the PDA, requirements for relocation assistance would mitigate the impacts of displacement if future market conditions enhance the redevelopment potential of existing properties and lead to demolition of existing units. An ordinance could be adopted that requires developers of projects that will displace existing lower income residents to offer new units to these residents at the same Right of First Return rental rate that the residents are charged in the property to be demolished. (These rents would be below market for new units but may be above affordable rents calculated based on household Income figures.) One -to -One Replacement One-to-one replacement of demolished residential units could be required. Source: BAE, 2015 Page 4-24 Attachment 3 Amendments to Zoning Map W cq,_cade Cl ILIC; Ind Commel Downtown District Amenity Zane (DDAZ). ;n kAS # FFG -, 1-1- Attachment 4 Chapter 17.06 - LAND USE REGULATIONS Article I. - Residential Zoning Districts 17.06.010 - Purpose. The residential districts are intended to achieve the following purposes: A. Reserve residential areas for a broad range of dwelling types and densities, which meet the diverse economic and social needs of the residents consistent with sound standards of public health and safety. B. Ensure the provision of light, air, privacy, and open space. C. Protect residential neighborhoods from excessive noise, illumination, unsightliness, odors, dust, dirt, smoke, vibration, heat, glare, and other objectionable influences. D. Minimize congestion and avoid the overloading of public services and utilities. (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) (Ord. No. 854, § 2(Exh. A), 7-9-2013) 17.06.020 - Districts. A. R -R: Rural Residential. This district is intended for very low-density residential development on large lots of typically forty thousand sq. ft. or more that convey a "rural" or agricultural character. These districts are located at the perimeter of the city and provide a transition from the more urban development to the open space/agricultural areas outside of the city. This district is consistent with the "Estate Residential" general plan designation. B. R -E: Estate Residential. This district is intended for very low-density residential development on large estate size lots of typically seventeen thousand sq. ft. or more. This district also is located at the perimeter of the city to provide a transition from the more urban development to the open space/agricultural areas outside the city. This district is consistent with the "Estate Residential" general plan designation. C. R -L: Residential -Low Density. This district is comprised of four sub -districts: R -L-5,000, R -L-6,000, R- L -8,000, and R -L-10,000 (Note: numbers represent minimum lot size). These sub -districts are intended to promote the development of single-family detached dwellings in a suburban setting with a variety of minimum lot sizes. This district is consistent with the "Low Density" general plan designation. The floor area ratio for this district is 0.40. D. R -M: Residential -Medium Density. This district is intended for attached and detached single-family housing and duplexes as part of a planned residential development with a minimum lot size of three thousand seven hundred sq. ft. Multi -family housing is not permitted. Side-by-side duplexes not separated by a property line or without individual heating systems are permitted. This district is consistent with the "Medium Density" general plan designation. The floor area ratio for this district is 0.55. E. R -H: Residential -High Density. This district is comprised of two sub -districts: R -H-2,000 and R -H- 1,800 (Note: numbers represent minimum lot area per unit). These subdistricts are intended to permit a wide range of housing types, ranging from single-family attached to multi -family, and are intended for specific areas where higher densities may be appropriate. This district is consistent Page 1 Attachment 4 with the "High Density" general plan designation. The floor area ratio for this district is 1.15. (Ord. 695 §3,2003) F. DTR -H: Downtown Residential -High Density. This district is located within the Central Rohnert Park PDA planning area as identified in the general plan and is intended to allow for residential development proximate to the downtown area. This district is consistent with the "High Density" general plan designation. (Ord. No. 854, § 2(Exh. A), 7-9-2013) 17.06.030 - Permitted uses. The following is a list of land uses and the residential districts within which they are permitted as follows: P = permitted C = conditionally -permitted by planning commission A = administrative permit Z = certificate of zoning compliance T = temporary conditional permit I = uses allowed as incidental to a primary use Land uses that are not specifically listed are not permitted unless determined, by the planning and community development director, to be substantially similar to a listed use. If the listed land use is followed by a number or a section reference in parenthesis, that number or reference directs the reader to the corresponding land use footnote or special provision which follow this chapter. Land Use Category Affordable Housing Density Bonu! Agricultural Uses • Pasturing and Grazing (small si • Other Bed & Breakfast Inn (D) Community Center Communication Facilities (F) (H) R-R/R-E A R -L R -M V A A F_ R -H DTR -H A A :ale) P C C C C C C C C C C/A C/A C/A C/A Page 2 Attachment 4 Day Care Center Day Care Home, Famil • Small (8 or fewer chi • Large (9 or more chi Equestrian Uses • Stables, Privat( • Stables, Commer Family Care Home/Comms • Small (6 or less per. • Large (7 or more pe Farmworker Housir Homeless Shelters (I • Small (6 or less per. • Large (7 or more pe Kennel (Commercial and Nonco Manufactured Housin; Mobile Home Park or Sub (see Section 17.06.1, Multi -Family Housir • duplexes -single si Page 3 C C C C C ✓(G) Idren) P P P P P dren) C C C C C P Jal C nity Care >ons) P P P P P 'sons) C C 9 P P P vi) >ons) P P P P P 'sons) mmercial) (0) C P P ;(Q) _T Z Z Z Z Z division ?0) C C C Ig ory P P Page 3 Attachment 4 • other Private/Public Utility Facilit, • Minor • Major Private Schools mentary and Second • High School .�cational/Trade Scho I Public Facility -Non -city owned or (see also Public Utility) Public Facility -City owned or propos to Planning Commission review c from City Council) Rooming or Boarding Hou Single Room Occupancy Living I (Z) 1— • Fraternity/Sorority P Recovery Facility • Small (6 or less persor • Large (7 or more perso Religious Assembly Residential Care Facility (Cong Page 4 P P �(F) Z/C Z/C Z/C Z/C Z/C C C C C C ary C C C C C C C C C C DIS C C proposed C C C C ;ed (subject n referral P P P P P se )nit Facility A A C S) P P P P P is) C C C C C C C regate Page 4 Attachment 4 Care/Assi • Small (6 c • Large (7 o Second Residential Ur Single Farr • Accessory • Antenna, Verti • Accessory Structur( and 1i • Home Temporary Use/Ev • Arts & Craft • Outd • Religio • Seasonal Lots/A trees, F • Recre Small (e.g., one or two remote con L< sted Living) it less persons) P P P P P more persons) iit (e.g., in-law units) (X) C C C C C Z Z Z Z Z ily Dwellings P P P C Uses/Structures cal/Satellite Dish (F) P/C (see Sections 17.10.020 P .10.060) ccupation (L) Z ent (EE, see also DD) s Shows/Outdoor T aor Exhibit T us Assembly C ;tivity (e.g., Christmas T umpkins) ation Event day skateboard demo or T trol car races) rge T P/C P/C P/C P C P P P P Z Z Z Z T T T T T T T T C C C C T T T T T T T T T T T T (Ord. 739 § 2 (part), 2005; Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) Page 5 Attachment 4 (Ord. No. 844, § 2(Exh. A), 3-13-2012; Ord. No. 854, § 2(Exh. A), 7-9-2013) Article II. - Commercial Zoning Districts [No proposed changes to sections 17.06.040 through 17.06.070] Article III. - Industrial Zoning Districts [No proposed changes to sections 17.06.080 through 17.06.100] Article IV. - Mixed -Use Zoning Districts 17.06.110 - Purpose. The Mixed Use District and the Downtown Mixed Use District encourages the siting of compatible businesses, stores, institutions, service organizations, and residences in close proximity to one another so as to create self-sufficient neighborhoods within the city. The district promotes such neighborhood development in order to minimize reliance on the automobile, resulting in a reduction in vehicle miles traveled and traffic congestion. These districts Miwe' Use District 'ss are intended to create pedestrian - oriented environments that provide access to residents' basic everyday requirements, foster an active street life, enhance the vitality of local businesses, and provide employment opportunities close to home for residents of the city. The preferred pattern of development will be ground floor commercial uses, with residential and/or office uses located on the upper floor(s). Special urban design amenities (pedestrian facilities, landscaping, public spaces, etc.) would be included in the district to create recognizable, pedestrian friendly activity centers. On-site parking would be provided for residential uses and parking for businesses would generally be on -street and in parking garages or off-site parking lots. Convenient vehicular and pedestrian/bicycle access from surrounding neighborhoods and transit service would also be components of this district. (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) (Ord. No. 854, § 2(Exh. A), 7-9-2013) 17.06.120 — District Descriptions. M -U: Mixed Use District. This district allows for the development of integrated centers that combine a supportive mix of land uses, either within the same building or in clusters of buildings. This district is consistent with the "Mixed Use" general plan designation. The floor area ratio for this district is 1.5 for non-residential projects, and 2.0 for mixed residential/neo-residential projects. (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) DTM-U: Downtown Mixed Use District. This district allows for the development of integrated centers that combine a supportive mix of land uses, either within the same building or in clusters of buildings. This district is consistent with the "Downtown Mixed Use" general plan designation. The floor area ratio for this district is 1.5 for non-residential protects, and 2.0 for mixed residential/residential projects. Non-residential development is required within this designation and residential development is only permitted as part of a mixed use project. (Ord. No. 854, § 2(Exh. A), 7-9-2013) 17.06.130 - Permitted uses. Page 6 Attachment 4 The following is a list of land uses and the Mixed Use District within which they are permitted as follows: P = permitted C = conditionally -permitted by planning commission A = administrative permit Z = certificate of zoning compliance T = temporary conditional permit I = uses allowed as incidental to a primary use Uses involving chemicals may also be subject to requirements regarding hazardous materials (footnote 11), in which case more restrictive requirements shall apply. Land uses that are not specifically listed are not permitted unless determined, by the planning and community development director, to be substantially similar to a listed use. If the listed land use is followed by a number or a section reference in parenthesis, that number or reference directs the reader to the corresponding land use footnote or special provision which follow this chapter. Land Use Category Amusement Center (e.g. video games, other indoor amusement Animal Hospital/Veterinary Clinic Antique Store Bakery (Retail Sales) Bank/Savings & Loan/Credit Union (drive-through windows not permitted) Bar/Nightclub (R) Barber/Beauty Shop Bath House/Spa Bed & Breakfast Inns (D) Billiards Parlor (R) Clubs & Lodges M -U District �) C A P P P P DTM-U District F_ C A P P P P P P C C A A C C C C Page 7 Attachment 4 Communication Facility (F) Cultural Institutions (e.g. museums) Day Care Center (Non -Residential) Dry Cleaning Outlet Florist Food Store * Under 15,000 square feet * Between 15,000 sq. ft. and 40,000 sq. ft. Hardware Store Health Club Hotel (100 Feems e4e&s (No food preparation unless ap and approved as part of project approval or separatE Interior Decorator Laboratory * In conjunction with a medical, dental or optical USE Laundromat Liquor Store (Off -Sale) (R) Live Entertainment (R) Massage Therapy (see Chapter 9.80) Medical Clinic Page 8 C/A C A A C C P P P P P P C C P P P P )lied forC ly.) C P P only P(I) P(l) P N C C C C P P A A Page 8 Attachment 4 Microbrewery (with restaurant) Office * Professional and Administrative * Medical and Dental Parking Lot (Commercial) Pharmacy (drive-through windows not permitted) (Does no a Medical Marijuana Dispensary, which is a prohibited use the City.) Photography Studio Printing * Small Copy Center Public Assembly Public Facility (e.g. police and fire stations, community ce government offices) Religious Assembly * Homeless shelter (6 or less persons) Residential Facility * Congregate Care/Assisted Living * Convalescent Hospital * Single Room Occupancy Living Unit Facility (Z) * Single Room Occupancy Residential Hotel (Z) Page 9 Attachment 4 * Senior Housing (Independent Living) Residential Use * Live/Work (P36) * Multi -Family * Townhouse Restaurant * General r & Sidewalk Cafe (544) * Take Out/Delivery (drive-through windows not permitted) * With Bar & Live Entertainment (Rig) Retail, General and Specialty School * Elementary or Secondary * High School * Trade School * College Studio (e.g. Dance, Martial Arts) Tailor Tattoo/Piercing Studio Temporary Use/Event (EE31�) G G G I G C C JJ P C JJ C JJ Page 10 Attachment 4 * Arts & Crafts Show * Circus/Carnival * Flea Market/Swap Meet * Live Entertainment * Outdoor Exhibit * Recreational Event * Religious Assembly * Retail Sales * Seasonal Lot/Activity (e.g. Christmas trees, pumpk * Trade Fair Theater (under 500 seats) Transit Facility (e.g. bus or train station) Visitor Center (Ord. 781 § 6, 2007; Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) (Ord. No. 844, § 2(Exh. A), 3-13-2012; Ord. No. 854, § 2(Exh. A), 7-9-2013) Article V. - Public/Institutional Zoning Districts [No proposed changes to section 17.06.140 through 17.06.160] Article VI. - Open Space and Recreational Zoning Districts [No proposed changes to section 17.06.170 through 17.06.190] Article VII. - Planned Development Zoning District 17.06.200 - Purpose. Page 11 T T T T T T T T T T T T C C T T ins) T T T T C C C C P P (Ord. No. 844, § 2(Exh. A), 3-13-2012; Ord. No. 854, § 2(Exh. A), 7-9-2013) Article V. - Public/Institutional Zoning Districts [No proposed changes to section 17.06.140 through 17.06.160] Article VI. - Open Space and Recreational Zoning Districts [No proposed changes to section 17.06.170 through 17.06.190] Article VII. - Planned Development Zoning District 17.06.200 - Purpose. Page 11 Attachment 4 The Planned Development Zoning District is intended to accommodate a wide range of residential, commercial and industrial land uses, which are mutually -supportive and compatible with existing and proposed development on surrounding properties. P -D zoning districts shall encourage the use of flexible development standards designed to appropriately integrate a project into its natural and/or man-made setting and shall typically be intended for projects that provide for a mix of land uses to serve identified community needs. Furthermore, the P -D zoning process may be used to implement the various specific plans adopted by the city. Once established, the P -D zoning district becomes, in effect the zoning for the area within its respective boundaries. (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) 17.06.210 - General provisions. A. P -D zoning districts with commercial and/or industrial components may be established on a parcel or parcels of land having a contiguous area of at least three acres or, if in a M -U District, at least one and one-half acres. P -D zoning districts for residential developments may be established on a parcel or parcels of land having a contiguous area of at least one acre. Within a specific plan area, a P -D zoning district may be designated for properties totaling less than three acres in size, provided the district is consistent with the specific plan. B. Each P -D zoning district shall include specific development standards designed for that particular district, including minimum lot sizes, setbacks and open space requirements, architectural and landscaping guidelines, and maximum building heights and lot coverage. In establishing these standards, the requirements for existing zoning and P -D zoning districts may be reviewed and modifications to these standards may be made as appropriate. Varying residential densities may be established for specific areas within each district. Once approved, as part of a final development plan (see Section 17.06.250), all standards, densities, and other requirements shall remain tied to that plan and to the property designated by that district, unless formally amended by city council action (see Section 17.06.280.) If no specific standards are proposed for any or all portions of a P -D district, the applicable general standards of the zoning ordinance shall apply. C. A P -D zoning district may include a combination of residential, industrial, and commercial uses within either the same or adjacent buildings within the district, so long as such mixed uses are consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan. Industrial, commercial and residential components within the same P -D districts shall share a similar or compatible architectural theme and maximize pedestrian access between the two. D. In situations where a subdivision of land (e.g. a tentative map) is undertaken in conjunction with the establishment or implementation of a P -D zoning district, such subdivisions shall be processed concurrently. (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) 17.06.220 - Uses permitted. Any and all uses otherwise permitted in the city of Rohnert Park may be included in a P -D zoning district, provided such uses are permitted or conditionally -permitted by the zoning ordinance and are shown on the approved final development plan for that district. Page 12 Attachment 4 (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) 17.06.230 - Relationship to existing general and specific plans. All standards, requirements, densities, land use designations and other contents of an approved final development plan shall be consistent with the city's general plan and any applicable specific plan. (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) 17.06.240 - Application. Application for a P -D zoning district shall be made by a person, or the authorized agent of a person, having a legal or equitable interest in the affected property. In addition to the required application submittal forms available from the planning department and specified supporting materials including the fee pre scribed by the city council, the following shall also be required for all requests to establish a P -D zoning district and shall be submitted at the preliminary development plan and final development plan stages, as outlined in Section 17.06.250: A. A listing of the development standards proposed for the P -D zoning district (e.g., setbacks, lot sizes, building heights); B. A listing of the uses that will be permitted and/or conditionally -permitted in the P -D zoning district; C. A phasing plan indicating the approximate date when construction of the first development phase of the P -D zoning district is scheduled to begin and tentative completion dates for the remaining phases. (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) 17.06.250 - Procedure. A. Preliminary Development Plan. In establishing a P -D district, a preliminary development plan shall be prepared for the proposed P -D zoning district. 1. Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendation. The preliminary development plan shall be submitted to the parks and recreation commission for a recommendation with regards to any proposed parkland dedication. The recommendation of the parks and recreation commission to the planning commission shall be based upon the criteria listed in Section 16.14.020(K)(1)(a) of this code. 2. Planning Commission Approval. The planning commission will hold a public hearing to consider the preliminary development plan, the recommendation of the parks and recreation commission with regard to any dedicated parkland, and whether the land uses proposed and their interrelationships are generally acceptable and consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan. The commission shall indicate conceptual approval or disapproval of the preliminary development plan. Such conceptual approval shall not bind the planning commission to approval of the final development plan, which shall be subject to environmental analysis and public hearings. Page 13 Attachment 4 B. Final Development Plan. Once a preliminary development plan has been approved by the planning commission, a final development plan to rezone the property to P -D district may be submitted to the city. If subdivision within the district is necessary, then a tentative map may also be applied for at this time. 1. Parks and Recreation Commission Review. If any changes to dedicated parkland have been proposed since preliminary development plan approval, staff will schedule a public hearing before the parks and recreation commission after receipt of a complete application. The recommendation of the parks and recreation commission to the planning commission shall be based upon the criteria listed in Section 16.14.020(K)(1)(a) of this code. 2. Planning Commission Approval. Following appropriate environmental review of the plan, the planning commission shall consider the application for a final development plan at a public hearing. After the hearing, the planning commission shall forward any new recommendation of the parks and recreation commission with regard to any dedicated parkland. The planning commission will also make a recommendation to the city council based on a review of the environmental impacts of the plan, the appropriateness and interrelationships of the proposed uses, any effects on traffic circulation due to development of the plan, the quality of the suggested site plan design, consistency with the general plan and any applicable specific plan, and other details of the proposed district. A favorable recommendation must include the findings listed in this title for a final development plan (see Section 17.06.260). 3. City Council Approval. At the city council's public hearing, it may approve or deny the final development plan or return the matter to the planning commission for further evaluation. If the application for a final development plan is approved, the property shall be rezoned as a P- D zoning district and so indicated on the zoning map for the city. C. A use permit shall be required prior to the construction of any phase of an approved P -D zoning district. A use permit for any or all phases of the development may be processed concurrently with the final development plan. It is the intent of the use permit to further clarify the details of the development phase being considered and to ensure that each component complies with the established provisions of the district. The use permit is intended to refine the final development plan and implement the conditions of approval attached to the final development plan. Use permit approval shall be required prior to final map recordation for all projects within a P -D zoning district. The planning commission may grant a use permit, provided that the proposed development phase is in substantial conformance with any approved final development plan for that property and the conditions thereof. In approving a use permit for a phase of the P -D zoning district the planning commission may add conditions of approval, which are consistent with the intent and provisions of an approved P -D zoning district and help to implement that district. For P -D zoning districts containing commercial and/or industrial components, a Master Use Permit may be approved which will generally or specifically describe those tenants that may utilize those components. (Ord. 787 § 4, 2007; Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) 17.06.260 - Findings. The planning commission shall recommend approval of a final development plan to the city council, provided the planning commission finds the following: Page 14 Attachment 4 A. Each individual component of the development can exist as an independent unit capable of creating an environment of sustained desirability and stability, and the uses proposed will not be detrimental to present and potential surrounding uses but instead will have a beneficial effect which could not be achieved under another zoning district; B. The streets and thoroughfares proposed meet the standards of the city and adequate infrastructure can be supplied to all phases of the development; C. Any commercial component complements other uses in the development; D. Any residential component will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and community and will result in densities within the P -D district that are no higher than that permitted by the general plan; E. Any industrial component conforms to applicable desirable standards and will constitute an efficient, well -organized development with adequate provisions for railroad and/or truck access and necessary storage and will not adversely affect adjacent or surrounding development; F. Any deviation from the standard zoning requirements is warranted by the design and additional amenities incorporated in the final development plan, which offer certain unusual redeeming features to compensate for any deviations that may be permitted; G. The P -D zoning district is consistent with the general plan of the city and any applicable specific plan. (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) 17.06.270 - Lapse of approval extension and renewal. A. A final development plan shall expire two years after date of approval or at an alternate time specified as a condition of approval, unless there has been any activity in that P -D zoning district (e.g. a use permit has been approved or a building permit issued for any development phase of the P -D zoning district) or an extension has been granted. Preliminary development plans shall expire one year after date of approval unless application for final development plan approval is submitted. If a final development plan expires and is not extended, the property shall revert to its prior zoning. B. A final development plan approval may be extended by the planning commission for a two-year period at a noticed planning commission public hearing, if the findings required remain valid and application is made at least thirty days prior to expiration. The planning commission may modify the final development plan and/or add conditions of approval at this time based on this review. (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) 17.06.280 - Changed plans and new applications. A. A request for modifications to the conditions of approval for an approved final development plan shall be treated as a new application, unless the planning and community development director finds that the changes proposed do not involve substantial alterations or additions to the plan, and are consistent with the original approval and the general plan and any applicable specific plan. Page 15 Attachment 4 B. If an application for a final development plan is denied, no new application for the same, or substantially the same, final development plan shall be filed within one year of the date of last denial, unless the denial was made without prejudice. (Ord. 695 § 3, 2003) Article VIII. - Specific Plan Zoning District [no proposed changes to sections 17.06.290 through 17.06.450] Article IX. - Mobile Home Park Overlay District [no proposed changes to sections 17.06.460 through 17.06.510] Article X. - Office Overlay District [no proposed changes to sections 17.06.520 through 17.06.550] Article XI. — Commercial Overlav District 17.06.620 - Purpose. The Commercial Overlay District is intended to permit additional commercial development with existing industrial areas which are proximate to Highway 101, such as the Commerce Boulevard. The district would ensure that there are locations for new commercial users within such areas and would allow for their timely approval as principally -permitted uses, while continuing to allow for uses that are more industrial in nature. 17.06.630 - Overlay districts A Commercial Overlay District may be combined with an Industrial Zoning District by a change of district to include the overlay in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 17.25.070 of this title. A Commercial Overlay District shall be designated by the letter "C" following the industrial district designation. 17.06.640 - Permitted uses. In addition to the uses allowed in the underlying zoning district, the following is a list of permitted land uses within the commercial overlay designation. Permitted as follows: P = permitted C = conditionally -permitted by planning commission A = administrative permit Z = certificate of zonine compliance T = temporary conditional permit I = uses allowed as incidental to a primary use Uses involving chemicals may also be subject to requirements regarding hazardous materials (footnote 11), in which case more restrictive requirements shall apply. Land uses that are not specifically listed are not permitted unless determined. by the planning and communitv development director, to be Page 16 Attachment 4 substantially similar to a listed use. If the listed land use is followed by a number or a section reference in parenthesis, that number or reference directs the reader to the corresponding land use footnote or special provision which follow this chapter. Additional Uses Permit Land Use Category 11 11 Amusement Center — Small (e.g. indoors; commercial shopping center) Antique Store Arcade Games/Cybercafes (B) Bakery (Retail Sales) Bank/Savings and Loan/Credit Union (see Drive -Through Windows) (1) Bar/Nightclub (R) Barber/Beauty Shop/Tanning Salon Bath House/Spa Billiards Parlor (R) Check Cashing Store Day Care Center (Nonresidential) Drive -Through Window (any use) (1) Dry Cleaning Outlet Florist Food Store - Convenience Store Food Store - Supermarket Furniture Store - Small/Custom Order in C Overlay A P P P C P C C P C C P P Page 17 Attachment 4 Furniture Store - Large Health Club Home Improvement Store Hotel/Motel (No in -room food preparation unless applied for and approved as part of protect approval or separately.) Interior Decorator Liauor Store (Off -Sale) (R Live Entertainment Massage Therapy (see Chapter 8.36) Microbrewery with restaurant Paint Store Pharmacy (see Drive -Through Window) (1) (Does not include a Medical Marijuana Dispensary, which is a prohibited use within the City) Photography Studio Restaurant Restaurant - General Restaurant - Fast Food (see also Drive-Throueh Window) (1) � L Restaurant - Outdoor and Sidewalk Cafe Q M M Page 18 Attachment 4 Restaurant - Take Out/Delivery Q Restaurant - With Bar and Live Entertainment (R) I C Retail, General and Specialty A Retail, Department or Big Box I P Tailor A Tattoo/Piercing Studio A Article XII Station Center Planned Development District Zoning District 17.06.700 - General provisions. A. Authority. The adoption of the Station Center Planned Development District is authorized under the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Rohnert Park (Rohnert Park Municipal Code Title 17, the "Zoning Ordinance"). Specifically, Chapter 17.06, Article VII. B. Purpose. The district is intended to create a well-designed, pedestrian -oriented commercial focused downtown environment. C. Procedure. Prior to any development within the Planned Development the procedures within Article VII, sections 17.06.200 through 17.06.280, shall be followed to establish the required Final Development Plan and Development Area Plan(s). D. Applicability. All property within the boundaries of the Station Center Planned Development as designated on the City of Rohnert Park, zoning map, shall be subject to the provisions contained within this Article and anv subseauent Final Development Plan and Development Area Plan approvals. 17.06.710 Consistency with Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan. A. All development within the Station Center PD shall be consistent with the Central Rohnert Park, Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan. Any subsequent approvals including the Final Development Plan and Development Area Plan(s) shall be consistent with the PDA, specifically all entitlements and related development shall be: 1. Supportive of the Downtown District Amenity Zone (Section 4.3.6 of PDA). 2. Consistent with Section 4.4 (Land Use and Development Potential and requirements) of PDA, specifically the requirement to provide a minimum of 150,000 square feet of active commercial retail or service uses within the Station Center PD area. Page 19 Attachment 4 3. Consistent with Table 4.1 (PDA Zoning Designations and Development Standards) of P DA. 4. Consistent with Figure 4.6 (Station Center Subarea Land Use Designations). Modifications to street layout, block layout and size, acreage of each land use are permitted subject to the review and approval of a Final Development Plan. 5. Implementation of relevant street designs in Chapter 5 (Circulation and Connectivity) in the PDA, specifically State Farm Drive (Figure 5.7). 6. Implementation of the Community Design guidelines (Chapter 6) in the PDA, with particular attention to: a. Urban Streetscape Condition (Table 6.1 and Figure 6.3 in the PDA). b. Street Furnishings and Lighting c. Building Setbacks and Building Orientation (Section 6.2.3 (Building Setbacks), Section 6.2.4 (Building Orientation), Figure 6.4 (Building Setback Diagram) and Figure 6.5 (Streetwall Diagram) in the PDA plan). d. Mixed -Use Guidelines for the Downtown District (Section 6.3.2 in PDA plan). Other requirements from the PDA plan or from PDA plan implementation that may apply. Article XIII Downtown District Amenity Zone (DDAZ) A. Purpose. The DDAZ is intended to guide downtown -style within a portion of Central Rohnert Park. Development in the DDAZ should be well-designed and supportive of an active, Dedestrian-oriented. commerciallv focused downtown streetscaae environment. B. Applicability. All development within the designation DDAZ boundary as indicated on the City of Rohnert Park, zoning map. C. Consistency with PDA Plan. All development within the DDAZ shall comply with relevant rovisions within the Central Rohnert Park. Prioritv Develooment Area Plan (PDA). saecifically: 1. Downtown District Amenity Zone (Section 4.3.6 of PDA). 2. Section 4.4 (Land Use and DevelODment Potential and reauirements) of PDA. sDecificall the requirement to provide a minimum of 150,000 square feet of active commercial retail or service uses within the Station Center PD area. 3. Table 4.1 (PDA Zoning Designations and Development Standards) of PDA. 4. Figure 4.6 (Station Center Subarea Land Use Designations). Modifications to street layout, block layout and size, acreage of each land use are permitted subject to the review and approval of a Final Development Plan. S. The relevant street designs in Chapter 5 (Circulation and Connectivity) in the PDA, specifically State Farm Drive (Figure 5.7). 6. Community Design guidelines (Chapter 6) in the PDA, with particular attention to: a. Urban Streetscape Condition (Table 6.1 and Figure 6.3 in the PDA). b. Street Furnishings and Lighting c. Building Setbacks and Building Orientation (Section 6.2.3 (Building Setbacks), Section 6.2.4 (Building Orientation), Figure 6.4 (Building Setback Diagram) and Figure 6.5 (Streetwall Diagram) in the PDA plan). d. Mixed -Use Guidelines for the Downtown District (Section 6.3.2 in PDA plan). Page 20 Attachment 4 7. Other requirements from the PDA plan or from PDA plan implementation that ma apply. C. Limitations on Residential Development. All residential development and mixed-use development within the DDAZ shall comply with the relevant provisions of Chapter 17.07 (Land Use Footnotes/Special Provisions), Footnote JJ (Residential Development in Downtown District Amenity Zone (DDAZ). Article XV — Form -Based Codes for Special Areas [no changes to sections 17.06.800 through 17.06.870] Page 21 Attachment 5 Chapter 17.07 - LAND USE FOOTNOTES/SPECIAL PROVISIONS 17.07.010 - Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standards for the approval, conditional approval or disapproval of particular uses that typically have unusual site development features or operating characteristics requiring the establishment of standards to ensure that the use is designed, located, and operated compatibly with uses on adjoining properties and in the surrounding area. 17.07.020 - Footnotes. The following standards apply to the land use indicated by corresponding number in the zoning district use charts: Footnote A (ADULT ENTERTAINMENT) through HH (CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS) are unchanged. JJ. Residential Development in Downtown District Amenity Zone (DDAZ) A. Purpose. The purpose of the restrictions is to ensure that a minimum amount of active commercial or service uses are building within the DDAZ. This is intended to create a vibrant environment with restaurants, shops, services and other active uses that create downtown foot -traffic and activity. To accomplish the type of environment desired it is necessary to limit the amount and configuration of residential development. B. Standards. Residential development shall only be permitted within the Downtown District Mixed - Use desianation as follows: 1.. A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the total building square footage shall be used for non- residential purposes, unless at least seventy-five (75%) of the ground floor building square footage is utilized for active retail or service uses, then the percentage of building square footage used for residential purposes may increase. 2. Parking structures do not qualify as building square footage for the purposes of the 50% calculation. 3. The number of residential units shall not exceed the maximum permitted within the zoning district prior to the application of any density bonus provision. Page 1 -* entral ohnert ark MEETING SUMMARY Over 20 people were in attendance at the first open house and community workshop for the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan, the first of three community workshops that will be held in support of the planning process to consider the future of the Central Rohnert Park project area, a triangular site area bound by Highway 101, the planned SMART train line right-of-way, and Avram Avenue / Santa Alecia Drive. The purpose of the first community workshop was to gather public input on the issues, priorities, vision, and opportunities for the Central Rohnert Park PDA. The community workshop consisted of an open house; presentation introducing the project and summary of information and observations collected on the PDA; and small group, interactive table exercises. A community open house was held during the first hour of the workshop to provide the public an opportunity to learn more about the project area and browse boards addressing the area's existing conditions, existing land uses and community amenities; circulation and travel patterns; built form; and potential area opportunities and constraints. Following the open house period, Marilyn Ponton, Development Services Director for the City of Rohnert Park, gathered the public's attention, thanked workshop participants in attendance, and described the role of the City's Development Service Department as reviewing, approving and implementing projects. She introduced Jeffrey Beiswenger as the planner and City contact for information on the project and for future community meetings and workshops. Ms. Ponton then introduced the planning and design consultants representing the Planning Team: Jeffrey Goldman from AECOM and John Nicolaus from Mogavero Notestine Associates to give a short project presentation (refer to the slide presentation). In addition to the team present at the workshop, the project consulting team also includes economists, traffic and transportation planners and engineers, and infrastructure engineers. Jeff Goldman described the agenda to be covered for the remainder of the evening and instructed the public to feel free to ask questions during the presentation. The reason for this work Jeff described is to continue the work in the City Center that's been started and take advantage of the coming SMART train station (currently under construction) to create a walkable center for the community, with an unique activities, uses, and character not found elsewhere in Rohnert Park. The project is focused on how to build a more complete City Center, with shopping and entertainment uses, and a new transit gateway into the PDA; creating a Downtown center around the State Farm campus; strengthening businesses in the area; and opportunities to attract other entertainment own enter Pnonty CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK Development Area Plan -'_ PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN f. OPEN HOUSE / COMMUNITY WORKSHOP # 1 OCTOBER 16, 201354:00-7:00 PM MEETING SUMMARY Over 20 people were in attendance at the first open house and community workshop for the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan, the first of three community workshops that will be held in support of the planning process to consider the future of the Central Rohnert Park project area, a triangular site area bound by Highway 101, the planned SMART train line right-of-way, and Avram Avenue / Santa Alecia Drive. The purpose of the first community workshop was to gather public input on the issues, priorities, vision, and opportunities for the Central Rohnert Park PDA. The community workshop consisted of an open house; presentation introducing the project and summary of information and observations collected on the PDA; and small group, interactive table exercises. A community open house was held during the first hour of the workshop to provide the public an opportunity to learn more about the project area and browse boards addressing the area's existing conditions, existing land uses and community amenities; circulation and travel patterns; built form; and potential area opportunities and constraints. Following the open house period, Marilyn Ponton, Development Services Director for the City of Rohnert Park, gathered the public's attention, thanked workshop participants in attendance, and described the role of the City's Development Service Department as reviewing, approving and implementing projects. She introduced Jeffrey Beiswenger as the planner and City contact for information on the project and for future community meetings and workshops. Ms. Ponton then introduced the planning and design consultants representing the Planning Team: Jeffrey Goldman from AECOM and John Nicolaus from Mogavero Notestine Associates to give a short project presentation (refer to the slide presentation). In addition to the team present at the workshop, the project consulting team also includes economists, traffic and transportation planners and engineers, and infrastructure engineers. Jeff Goldman described the agenda to be covered for the remainder of the evening and instructed the public to feel free to ask questions during the presentation. The reason for this work Jeff described is to continue the work in the City Center that's been started and take advantage of the coming SMART train station (currently under construction) to create a walkable center for the community, with an unique activities, uses, and character not found elsewhere in Rohnert Park. The project is focused on how to build a more complete City Center, with shopping and entertainment uses, and a new transit gateway into the PDA; creating a Downtown center around the State Farm campus; strengthening businesses in the area; and opportunities to attract other entertainment Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 and recreational uses. It will also consider potential for infill opportunities and improvements within the Regional Commercial areas south of the City Center and the future of the office and light industrial uses north of the City Center. The project planning process is anticipated to occur over a 20-22 month period. We are in the fourth month of the project. Focus group interviews were conducted earlier this month, and the planning team is in the process of preparing a profile for the PDA. This community workshop will be followed by a visioning and alternatives process, working in collaboration with a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) group and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) group of regional agencies, City departments, and local professionals. The CAC/TAC will work with the planning team through visioning and alternatives process, development of strategy memos on the topic areas shown, and development of the Administrative Draft Master Pian and environmental document. Opportunities for broader community input will also be provided throughout the course of the planning process. The next community workshop, planned in February 2014, will focus on the vision and alternatives for the PDA. The third community workshop will consider and address the elements that should be included in a Preferred Plan for the area. A Public Draft Master Plan and environmental document will fold in the information, input, and recommendations developed in earlier phases of the project and serve as another opportunity for public comments. The presentation then turned to a summary of some of the key project issues and opportunities that have been observed and identified in the PDA, including information collected on the project area's demographics; market trends and potential; land use and transportation patterns; and conditions and opportunities within the various districts or subareas of the PDA. Discussion during the presentation turned to concerns regarding the high unemployment rates, beyond what is often reported, and the need for the growth of incomes and jobs in the area to rise to a level that will allow for discretionary spending and investment. Potential opportunities to attract the business of visitors, commuters, and students arriving by the SMART train were also recommended. John Nicolaus described his experiences as a pedestrian in the project area, noting the fast moving traffic on Rohnert Park Expressway, Commerce Boulevard, and State Farm Drive, the parking lots in the Safeway and Raleys plazas that are used as defacto streets and lack of dedicated and pedestrian walkways. Hence, the needs and opportunities to formalize safer intersection and street crossings and provide cross parcel connections that prioritize pedestrians and pedestrian ways through shopping centers and developments in the PDA. He noted the trails along the creek corridors are a great asset in the community, but could benefit from more lighting and regular maintenance. Land uses in the PDA are chopped up and separated, with the need for USPS to be woven together and opportunities for more multi -story housing; lofts, and uses that promote sidewalk activity. The public commented on the need for safe bike and pedestrian crossing opportunities to connect the east and west sides of Highway 101. Parks and golf courses are important existing features, contributing to the landscape character of the City. There is Page 2 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 also the need for a community destination where people do not have to get into their cars. The SMART train and related multi -use path provides opportunities for people to get to work without their cars and for others outside the area to move to the City (on a train or a bicycle). It can also be an economic engine for Sonoma County, attracting more visitors that will come more immediately to the casino. The SMART train service should be coordinated with the frequency of local transit routes, shuttle services to and from the Casino, and potentially, shuttles from the Sonoma County Airport. Bus routes need to be expanded to serve all neighborhoods. The State Farm property can serve as a great transit hub. This process will help the City steer developers on how the site should be planned, as envisioned. Development of the property should consider preserving the landscaping around the State Farm site and the residents adjacent to the State Farm property, who currently enjoy the quietness of the area and nearby creek paths, but are, however, concerned with issues of safety and the homeless along the creek paths. John closed the project presentation with four discussion questions to get input from workshop participants on what is perceived as the assets, opportunities, and constraints in the PDA; the types of uses needed in the community; issues and priorities; and the vision and opportunities for the future of Central Rohnert Park. Facilitators and recorders assisted workshop participants seated at each table understand the intent of the questions, ensure everyone had an opportunity to be heard, and record comments from the group. The questions and comments heard from table discussions at the workshop are summarized in the "Key Themes Summary" that follows. The complete list of comments recorded during the workshop is summarized in the "Table Discussion Comments and Notes" that follows. KEY THEMES SUMMARY Assets, Opportunities, and Constraints See list in the table discussion comments and notes Vision and Land Uses • Transit Hub. Create a transit hub near the SMART station. • City Center. Make it special, walkable, capitalize on existing assets and unique features already present in the City, such as the history of the region. • Roadways. Improve roadway connections, slow traffic, and address safe crossings. Bike and Pedestrian Connections. Place priority on internal bike and pedestrian connections in the PDA and to residences and centers in the community, including Sonoma State University, jobs, community amenities, and regional parks and trails. • Diverse Population. Create a community place and uses to serve diverse segments of the community- youth, working professionals, students, and seniors. Page 3 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 Mixed -Use. Allow diverse uses and consider zoning overlays to attract desired land uses in the community. Jobs and Economic Viability. Provide more diverse and higher paying jobs and a variety of small and large businesses. Family Friendly. Expand family -friendly uses, not suitable anywhere else in the community. Arts. Encourage and expand the arts. Desired Uses • Food and entertainment uses (a Mirrn F%rn Yei y, more r esta l.3rants, bars, etc.) o Nighttime activities o Tourism, i.e. a welcome center o Specialty or green grocer o Diverse housing (more student housing, senior housing, lofts, and urban style housing) o Extension campus facilities for Sonoma State University o Year-round farmer's market that also serve SMART passengers o Sidewalk and creek facing commercial uses and activities o Parks, plaza spaces, landscaping, and open space Issues and/or Priorities + Pedestrian -Friendly. Create a center that is walkable, pedestrian -scaled, and accessible for all populations. Consider subdividing State Farm into blocks that are more permeable and scaled to adjacent blocks. + Bike and Pedestrian Connections. Complete gaps in existing bike paths and improve the safety of parking lots, creek corridor ways, and street crossings. Safety and Security. Ensure the safety and security of local residents in the PDA. + Affordability. Ensure housing and commercial rents are affordable to avoid displacement of residents or businesses in the area. + Local Businesses. Support locally owned "mom and pop" businesses; don't affect existing businesses. Parking. Review parking standards and consider creative parking arrangements and parking districts. Keep it Green. Preserve existing greenways, landscaping, open space areas, and redwood trees characteristic in the area for the visual / aesthetic relief they provide. + Gateways. Make gateways in the project area more attractive and visible. Page 4 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 TABLE DISCUSSION COMMENTS AND NOTES Mapping Exercise: Where are Assets, Opportunities, and Constraints? Assets: • Hinebaugh Creek - good walk and bicycle path • Copeland Creek - accessible pedestrian crossing over train tracks • City services including Library and Spreckels Performing Arts Center • Greenbelt between State Farm and RP Expressway - keep as a buffer between busy street and private uses • Quiet area • Proximity of Raley's and Safeway • Services in the North Triangle area • Multi -family residential units south of the State Farm property • Easy access to the Kaiser Clinic • Farmer's market • Retail/Services • Discount stores • Senior Center • Sonoma State University Foxtail Golf Course- reasonably priced and close to the Downtown • Park and Ride Center at Rohnert Park Expressway • Walkable / crossable section of Enterprise, near Hunter Drive Opportunities: • State Farm Site ■ Maintain greenbelt between State Farm and RP Expressway keep as buffer along this busy street • Copeland Creek, including existing crossing along the SMART train line • Improvements to regional commercial shopping centers ■ More infill development • Internal streets connecting parking areas and share parking • Future SMART stop Page 5 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 • Expand Rohnert Park Expressway Park and Ride to serve SMART train station or create a link between the two transit amenities o Work with businesses for time of use, time of delivery, and time of cleaning ® Opportunity to beautify and develop more senior housing on the vacant property on Avram Avenue • Underground or structured parking • Relocate city corporation yard adjacent to State Farm • Multifamily housing opportunity at the State Farm site, adjacent to existing multi- family housing • Consider moving City Hall to the City Center or State Farm Undercrossing near Hinebaugh Creek and the SMART line • Light Industrial uses south of State Farm Drive and north of Executive • Large vacant buildings along State Farm Drive to be repurposed Constraints: • Crossings at major intersections including: • State Farm Drive and Rohnert Park Expressway • State Farm Drive and Enterprise Drive (no traffic signal) • Limited north -south access and spacing of crosswalks • Lack of safe and connected bike paths; many missing gaps • Parking areas in the regional commercial shopping centers and City Center • Bike crossing of Hinebaugh Creek and the SMART station line • Lack of accessible curb cuts in the community • Vacant properties in regional commercial centers affect public improvements (such as, benches and sidewalks) • Overgrown brush along Hinebaugh Creek • Issues of safety along the creek (due to homeless population, trash, and dog waste) • Overcrossing of Highway 101 for bicyclists and pedestrians near the Park and Ride is not safe • City gateway at the northern tip of the PDA, near Golf Course Drive Page 6 Table Inputs on Mapping Exercise: Mapping Exercise Assets Opportunities • Constraints '1 O _.a l 0 i r ., ip ` v Table 4 Input 1 �k 1 S 1 Y- � ! • i4ln - R Rsl.-r.WOW I r.M„I;,„la• 3fcdt6t.5,�--[e A, Table 3 Input ,dF Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 1 ! qiy Center I xt ! 1 City Canter 4 " tit 5�.:.Y �N•dh �_ _ 1 Yrrbn � �=� u � *GMilai SJI 1 tt,�ur ! ulrtr� KAI h't;{sehalsf.0 I 1 1 Table 2 RsrNAIUM , � ! • i4ln - R Rsl.-r.WOW I r.M„I;,„la• 3fcdt6t.5,�--[e A, Table 3 Input ,dF Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 1 ! qiy Center I xt ! 1 City Canter 4 R y Raley, s .. $taw, rh Stattotl _ 1 4�lHrr 1 R.y e [+e,lav u � *GMilai SJI 1 tt,�ur ! ulrtr� KAI h't;{sehalsf.0 I 1 1 Table 2 Input { John Reed .A!itxl ElemeRlary Table 1 Input Presentation of Table Input Page 7 qiy Center 1 -��PAtlle llYxn Center Lob.. R y Raley, s .. $taw, rh Stattotl 1 ( r Location u s�n,c f s rF. Jf4cr 1 1 �S ctt � ENIERMer .. Pft ISE 1 KAI Table 2 Input Presentation of Table Input Page 7 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 What does the future vision for Downtown Central Rohnert Park look like? What activities and land uses are needed and where? Table 1 (Purple Pen) • Pleasant walking paths, like Copeland Creek • Lighting along the creekways • Maintain the greenery around the State Farm campus • Art and garden center A green grocer • Standing, year round farmer's market with a deli to serve SMART train passengers Table 2 (Green Pen) • Housing and retail uses and community place for students • Need for a microbrewery in the community • Yard Birds could be an opportunity site for a brewery • Extension classes for Sonoma State University • Entertainment (food) within walking distance of apartments • More locally owned "mom and pop" businesses, like at Windsor Town Green • Plaza spaces, open space, places to read, and maintenance of the natural beauty of the area • Development that attracts specialty grocers, like a Whole Foods or Trader Joes • Encourage and expand the arts • Lots of banks already • Some discount stores ■ Dog park Table 3 (Brown Pen) • Transit hub at the SMART stop with cafes and street facing businesses • More pedestrian -friendly streets and opportunities for road diets • More senior housing choices • Review amount of parking (not very attractive) near SMART station Review current office space; could this be transformed to something else • Summer Market Page 8 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 Potential zoning overlay to allow other uses at State Farm and the Triangle light industrial area a Sidewalk and creek -facing commercial and restaurant uses (i.e. along Hinebaugh Creek) Table 4 (Black Pen Walkable ® Diversity; inclusive and friendly to all elements of the community Economic viability (variety of large and small businesses) • Capitalize on the City's existing assets ® Family -friendly and fun; family events not suitable elsewhere ® Interconnected, multimodal transit center 0 Connect City Center to regional parks and trails What issues and priorities should the Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Address? Table 1 (Purple Pon) • Affordability is key ■ Casino is already raising rents s Accessible and affordable senior housing Don't affect existing businesses Route of casino traffic is improperly mapped; route should come off Wilfred Avenue and not Enterprise Drive Make the area pedestrian -friendly ■ Ensure safety and security Make it a special place • Keep the streets in the City clean ® Keep the redwood trees and mature trees in the area • Provide parks • Maintain the greenbelt in the PDA • Avoid the need to walk through parking lots ® Ensure safety a Make it family -friendly Page 9 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 • Encouraae the arts ■ Respect and draw on the history of the region • Encourage energy -efficiency, like the development in the City Center Table 2 Green Pen • Bike and pedestrian access over Rohnert Park Expressway • Continue bike system on existing creek trails underneath Highway 101 • Attract and get students to campus 4 Noise from �:tatea rarm Campus ■ Greenbelt around the State Farm campus is calming; if it were built -out it could affect the feel of the existing community • Bicycle and pedestrian access from the University • Improve safety of routes and paths • How can development in the City Center bring in new businesses to vacant commercial parcels in the north? • Need to find ways to improve local income and support mom and pop businesses Table 3 (Brown Pend • Human scale, green and active frontage on streets and connections to the transit hub • Bike paths require continuity • Transform existing vacant buildings • Relocate existing City Corporation yard next to State Farm; use the area for parking • Subdivide State Farm blocks scale them to be more permeable and scaled to adjacent blocks • Increase mixed-use in the commercial/industrial triangle • Work on gateways; make them more attractive and visible • Address what's already there and use the City Center as a magnet to lure a welcome center and more diverse uses Table 4 (Black Pen ■ Lack of stream mainteriance • Maintenance of bikeways/walkway Page 10 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #1 October 16, 2013 Homeless along the creekways More "fine dining" opportunities Focus on opportunities for youngsters and teens (e.g., Chop in Santa Rosa) Landscaping- more trees Ease of access between east and west sides Page 11 CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN OPEN HOUSE / COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 OCTOBER 21, 2014, 4:00-7:00 PM MEETING SUMMARY Over 40 people were in attendance at the second open house and community workshop for the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) Plan to consider future development opportunities in the Central Rohnert Park project area, a triangular site area bound by Highway 101, the planned SMART train line right-of-way, and Avram Avenue / Santa Alicia Drive. The community workshop was held to review work progress and gather public input on preferred site concepts that have been prepared for the Central Rohnert Park PDA. Ms. Jody Hayes The community workshop consisted of an open house, slide presentation, and small group discussions. The community open house, held during the first half hour of the workshop, provided the public an opportunity to ask questions, learn more about the project, and browse site concepts under development. Following the open house period, Marilyn Ponton, Development Services Director for the City of Rohnert Park, opened the public presentation with introductions of the project team in attendance, including from the City: Jeffrey Beiswenger, the project manager and city contact on the project, Darrin Jenkins, the City Manager; and the project consulting team, led by Jeff Goldman and Anh Thai, with AECOM and John Nicolaus, with the Office of John Nicolaus. The floor was then .turned over to Jeff Goldman and John Nicolaus to conduct the slide presentation. Later in the workshop small group discussion were conducted to gather public input on features of the plan they preferred and any additional project recommendations or priorities. Mr. Goldman described the outline for the evening's presentation, consisting of: an overview of the Priority Development Area grant program and objectives; the priorities and steps that have been taken in Central Rohnert Park, including consideration of the community's priorities of what makes a Downtown; concepts for subareas and opportunity sites in the PDA; and circulation and open space concepts to better connect the PDA to the neighborhood areas and destinations, east and west of it. Mr. Goldman explained the FOCUS planning grant is made available to support infill growth around transit stations, within the nine counties in the Bay Area. The PDA plan, in progress, is a long range vision for Central Rohnert Park, planning for the next 20 years or more. The reality today may not be the same for the future and the plan needs to be forward looking. The project is guided by Plan Bay Area, the region's transportation plan. Transportation plans in the State are required to have a Sustainable Community Strategy element that integrates land use and transportation planning to help achieve State mandated greenhouse gas emission targets. Plan Bay Area addresses how transportation is delivered in communities and seeks to incentivize development around transit. Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #2 October 21, 2014 The FOCUS planning grant supports sustainable infill, which addresses approaches to: O reduce our carbon footprint; ID provide choices for housing, work, and transportation choices; grow while consuming less open space; plan for equitable growth (housing, jobs, and transit access for the community); and support local economic development and placemaking (placemaking addresses how people use spaces to support environments, with a unini1P. identity), Station areas are guided by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Station Area Pianning Manual, which classifies the PDA as a "Transit Town Center." The Manual includes recommended targets to support transit ridership, as shown in the slide, but cities have the right to determine what will work for them. The project schedule is anticipated to take place over a 30 month period. The team has been collecting information and has been meeting with various stakeholders and groups to understand issues and priorities of the PDA. A PDA Profile has been prepared to evaluate and analyze existing conditions and project opportunities. The team is now working on the development of a set of preferred alternatives, based on input we've heard to date and the input we will be receiving today. We also recently met with the Plannina Commission and Citv Council to share the work in nrngress on the Cite development concepts. The following was their additional input: The project should provide a mix of uses, with a preference that the area around the station be commercial and mixed-use in character; • The PDA isn't the right location for single family housing but could include some higher density residential housing near the station; ■ Open space and connectivity concepts presented were supported, but participants thought there was a need to incorporate civic or public space throughout the plan and a center piece near the station; ly Participants suggested that enhanced street crossings continue to be explored and the possibility for a pedestrian overcrossing of RPX, between the City Center and Station Center be considered. Mr. Goldman highlighted a few of the priorities and Downtown placemaking values that have emerged from discussions with the community. These priorities include creating a Downtown for Rohnert Park, planning roadway improvements that can help create the "place" or places desired in Central Rohnert Park; planning for distinct districts, and opportunities to connect these areas with open space and bike and pedestrian facilities. Values emphasized for a "Downtown" in Central Rohnert Park include ensuring: Page 2 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #2 October 21, 2014 It has a distinct character that integrates and enhances the existing features of the community (trails, creek paths, tree -lined streets, and recreational amenities); Compact and walkable areas that are safe; ® Downtown uses (retail, entertainment, and urban style housing) that take advantage of the proximity to the SMART station; and Public spaces (for example, the Windsor Town green) that provide places of activity for the community. Mr. Nicolaus provided a highlight of some of the key concepts that have been developed for the PDA. Site concepts focus on the subareas or districts in the PDA and how we can link these districts to each other and to the rest of the City. The subarea concepts that were presented are representative examples used to study the potential land uses on the site and not proposed development projects. The concepts also address approaches to accommodating parking so that it does not disrupt the pedestrian experience. Starting with Yardbirds, this is a vacant opportunity site located in the Triangle Business subarea. It is envisioned for commercial uses that could include retail or office uses and the potential for a hotel use, as a second site option. This option proposes a bike/pedestrian paseo to connect along private property lines of businesses to provide an alternative means of circulation for bikes / pedestrians off-street. Both options also propose opportunities to employ low impact development techniques in the parking areas and green spaces. A second site option is similar to the first, but proposes a hotel/motel use fronting Highway 101. A Regional Commercial overlay is proposed for the Triangle Business Area that would allow for a set of new commercial uses on top of the currently permitted industrial uses permitted in the subarea The City Center subarea concept builds off previous plans and considers trail connection opportunities for north -south trail connections from the City Center area to existing east -west bike and pedestrian creek trails and sidewalks along Rohnert Park Expressway (RPX). Protected bike lanes, separated from vehicular traffic with curbs, bollards, or striping, is proposed on State Farm Drive The concept also looks at improving streets to make them more pedestrian -friendly, particularly widening and formalizing Padre Center Drive as a commercial street and improving it to the same standard as City Center Drive, with wider sidewalks and accommodating safer vehicular and pedestrian access. Development with new infill commercial, residential mixed-use and civic uses is proposed in City Center, with opportunities for more public plaza spaces and housing. The eastern half of the City Center is proposed to have more of a civic and residential character, while the area around Padre Center is proposed to continue with more of a commercial mix of uses. The Station Center site on the former State Farm property is the largest opportunity site in the PDA. The site is privately owned and plans for this area are in progress and running parallel to the PDA planning process. The concepts for the Station Center include preserving the existing redwood trees and open space along RPX as a park and Page 3 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #2 October 21, 2014 open space area, connecting to the SMART station and coordinating with connections with the regional retail center west of State Farm Drive. A roundabout is proposed at the northerly entry into the Station Center. As shown, in the land use concept, the site is planned for a mix of commercial and residential uses, with a commercial shopping district planned in the center of the site and housing planned to the south. We heard from the community there is no "there, there" in Rohnert Park. This means that no single central gathering place exists that can be identified as the "center of Rohnert Park." There is a need for a commercial destination in the City for dining and evening activities. Character examples of shopping streets and districts from other paces were shown • i the presentation. PUiIIC areas varied from vUluu' 'to gg feet in sOiii2 of these places; spaces don't need to be ver;, wide to accommodate site furnishings and pedestrian spaces and activity. Residential neighborhood uses, with a variety of different housing types, are proposed that may consist of more updated residential housing unit types, including townhomes, apartments, and tuck under housing units. Units are connected through a system of green spaces and shared open space. The Plan considers opportunities for roadway improvements and other forms of connections such as, bike and pedestrian connections, paseos, and protected bike lanes to connect the PDA north -south and east -west. Roadway improvements concepts for Rohnert Park Expressway (RPX) and State Farm Drive were also presented. RPX is a two lane road, with median and turning lanes and meandering sidewalks. Existing sidewalks on RPX are proposed to be widened to accommodate bikes and pedestrians. A r..1..__ I-:[__ i__ �L__:_J__ i ri r -Z r._._ i.___i M IULUfe LJIKe/jJeUeslfldll L)HUYU IS prUpUSCU dUlUSS Mr -A. I WU SUeUL CrUSS-SUCtIUf15 were shown for State Farm Drive; one street cross-section illustrated the roundabout and the second cross-section illustrated a typical condition along State Farm Drive. These cross-sections illustrate how State Farm Drive can be reconfigured by narrowing existing vehicular lanes to accommodate high contrast bike lanes on both sides of the street. A pedestrian refuge would be added in the median to accommodate safe pedestrian crossings. Proposed street crossing concepts were illustrated with an enlarged diagram of the PDA to shows where the roundabout is proposed at the entry point to the Station Center and the Regional Commercial subareas. Roundabouts allow for the smooth, continuous flow of traffic which will be important in this area due to the close proximity of the State Farm and RPX intersection. Planned locations for improved crossings, with HAWK signals were depicted in green on the diagram. A member of the audience asked what "HAWK" stands for and the response was "High- intensity Activated crosswalk." These are pedestrian activated traffic signals that stop vehicular traffic to allow pedestrians to cross safely. An enlarged view of RPX was displayed to illustrate how street crossings can be improved. A midblock "Z" -crossing, with HAWK signal, is proposed at Lynne Conde Drive (the roadway in front of the library). This type of crossing allows pedestrians to cross RPX one leg of at a time. The angled "Z" in the median turns the pedestrian to better see on -coming traffic. The bike/pedestrian bridge across RPX is also proposed. Nage 4 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #2 October 21, 2014 The concept shows a type of crossing with circular ramps to reduce the space required to get up to the overcrossing over RPX and to meet ADA requirements. A height of approximately 18 feet from the bottom level of the bridge structure to the ground will be needed. A suggestion was also provided from the public to consider lowering RPX. The option had not previously been considered due to its expense, potential to interrupt traffic, and the desire to preserve redwood trees along RPX. Mr. Nicolaus described potential future pedestrian improvements in the Raley's/Safeway shopping center, by adding formal walkways and landscaping to enhance pedestrian safety and access from the nearby community, particularly from the senior center and adjacent Altamont senior housing development. In addition to proposed pedestrian improvements, additional transit stops and route extensions, in coordination with Sonoma County Transit and Golden Gate Transit, will be planned to serve and improve transit connections to the SMART station and other sites within the PDA. Improvements to creek corridors to enhance visibility to the trails by trimming back brush; adding signage and lighting to enhance their natural surveillance and safety; and improving access/connections to these assets is another priority of the Plan. The project presentation ended with a list of discussion questions to get input from workshop participants on what features they liked or did not like about the PDA subarea and circulation concepts. Mr. Nicolaus reviewed these with the audience: • For the Station Center, what would make a "there" there. What type of housing or public spaces should be programmed? • What type of uses should be provided in the City Center? • Should a Regional Commercial overlay be considered in the Triangle Business subarea? • What about circulation concepts? Should a bike, pedestrian overcrossing be considered? Each table group was asked to appoint a recorder and presenter to summarize the comments at their table. The comments received on the PDA subarea and circulation concepts, from each of the three tables, are summarized in the "Public Comments Summary," that follows. PUBLIC COMMENTS SUMMARY The following is a compilation of comments from the individual table exercises. Please note that while these comments may be an indicator of some common themes, they do not reflect a consensus of the group. Station Center Page 5 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #2 October 21, 2014 ■ Mix of apartments and townhomes; with shops below. Existing examples don't seem to work well in Rohnert Park. • Don't want another subdivision, want a Downtown. • Maybe senior housing; something like the Altamont • Need to address land use conflicts • Need more cost effective housing options (townhomes, apartments) • !-lousing for students? Would they live Downtown? • is PDA large enough to create an urban lifestyle (example of businesses moving to Petaluma)? • Would like to see the City acquire the green north of the State Farm building (for a park) • Emphasize housing for seniors and students since they are most likely to support nearby commercial uses • Need housing to support the mixed-use concept • Avoid building types that may be susceptible to seismic and/or fire damage (e.g. tuck -under garages) • Need higher end, sit down, restaurants (too much fast food already) • Need professional and health care office space (e.g. dental, doctors) • Parking is a concern — want to avoid paid parking (like in downtown Santa Rosa) • Establish a character that is pleasant and quaint (e.g. hanging flower baskets, decorative street lighting, clocks) in Downtown • Consider the larger area; the Downtown area needs to include transformation of the Raley's shopping center. • Need more reasonably priced housing options, including housing for students and seniors • Like idea of townhomes and other housing types with exterior doors to the street • Prefer a green space / plaza in the center of the Station; in addition to a greenbelt or buffer along RPX, with commercial on the edges • Ensure central park/plaza is large enough for community events (i.e., farmer's market, amphitheater, benches, picnic tables) • Water use is a concern with many more additional high density housing development • Consider the use of permeable paving 0 Consider Wi-Fi access in the park, now being provided in some parks Page 6 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #2 October 21, 2014 • No single family homes; provide mix of medium and high density housing and affordable housing • Public spaces for high density housing is needed • Consider xeriscaping, ground water recharge, and rain catchment systems for development • Need places that serve and attract students that are low cost and provide places to meet or walk around City Center Subarea • Elevate area of buildings overlooking a main street (RPX) • Reduce amount of asphalt • Current civic center is not yet completed • North -south trail connections are needed. Tie into existing east -west trails (along creeks) m m 0 More higher end restaurants and activity is needed in the City Center Live -work did not work; spaces are too small and most of the retail space is vacant Instead of live -work, ground floor retail should be separated from residential units and spaces should be larger Need more activities for seniors • More well defined streets; current pattern of internal "driveways" is confusing and not cohesive ® Public spaces need to be designed for conversation/games (e.g. benches, bocce ball) • Consider a City Hall annex in this location Triangle Business Subarea • Need a higher end hotel • Area is easily walkable and bikeable from City Center • Restaurants and other smaller retail uses should be concentrated in City Center/Station Center and not this far north • Heavier and larger commercial uses are ok in this area • Great location for breweries / brew -pubs • Avoid a large Regional Commercial overlay. Scale it down to have commercial businesses only on the side facing Highway 101 Page 7 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #2 October 21, 2014 Uses like Lagunitas, but with a streetfront • Take advantage of existing railroad spur in the area to support industrial uses to Look to the Barlow Center in Sebastapol, combining crafts, food, and services as an example of what should be encouraged in the area • Support the paseo concept Circulation • Consider a roundabout for RPX Consider a roundabout for the transit station (for buses) Better east -west bus connections needed (similar to other SMART Stations) • More connections needed to the multi -use path • Elevated crosswalks • What about street cars? System would connect Central Rohnert Park with other destinations (start with a jitney) • Lower the road (RPX) to allow pedestrian to crossover Need more green bicycle lanes; those work great • Need better street (and directional) signs — on city streets in addition to the creek paths • Creek paths need to have more directional signage • Creek paths need to be cleared out; with more visibility • Overcrossing over RPX is a great idea • Like pedestrian bridge; make it perpendicular to RPX to save cost • Improve creek paths; provide trash cans, benches, and monitor spaces; less undergrowth to allow for better natural surveillance • Along creek paths, label California natives • Improve backyards along bike paths to be safer, more community -oriented, and cleaner Other • A market study is needed for the PDA • Consider a student survey at Sonoma State University to determine what would work for retail/services. Page 8 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan Community Workshop #2 October 21, 2014 NEXT STEPS Before the workshop was concluded, Ms. Ponton asked the audience how they had learned about the workshop. It appears that most in attendance received the flyer in the utility bill, had read an article about the workshop in the Community Voice or were on the project's e-mail distribution list. Mr. Goldman explained that the information learned at this workshop would be considered as the PDA plan is developed. Comments from earlier workshops and comments submitted via other means (e-mail, letters, etc.) are also being considered as part of the process. Mr. Beiswenger was identified as the contact for the project and can best be reached via e-mail at ibeiswengergrpcity.orcl or phone at (707) 588-2253. Project information is on the web site at www.rpcity.org. Page 9 07141 i'I+1•.'r CENTRAL ROHNERT PARK ; PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING #1 NOVEMBER 19, 2013, 5:30-7:00 PM MEETING SUMMARY A Community Advisory Committee (CAC) has been assembled to provide input on the Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area (PDA) project. The first CAC meeting on November 19, included an overview of the PDA project, update of the project planning process, and a presentation of the information and data collected and analyzed for the PDA Profile and existing conditions report. The consultant team delivered a presentation to share the results of studies and preliminary recommendations developed in an existing conditions report for the PDA and input from earlier community outreach, including information on local demographics and market characteristics, physical land use and site development characteristics, circulation and infrastructure conditions; and the associated project findings, issues, and opportunities. Discussion was encouraged throughout the presentation. The agenda was then open to discussion for CAC members to share their observations and additional thoughts regarding the information in the slide presentation and project area conditions. The CAC shared additional ideas for the PDA, information about the project area, applicable for consideration in the PDA. The notes that follow are a summary of the key points shared during the presentation and the input received from CAC members at the meeting and not a direct transcript. The accompanying slide presentation from the meeting is provided in a separate link. PROJECT PRESENTATION Proiect Overview Why We Are Here: • Provide input on the Master Plan and environmental document that are the outcomes of planning process • The SMART train stop in Rohnert Park and State Farm site are opportunities to expand and support the growth of the City Center Plan / Grant Objectives: • To focus infill where there is already existing concentration of jobs and housing and be business -friendly • Lots of assets in the City; build on the character in the City • Look at different modes of transportation, including development of more complete streets • Preserve affordability Project Schedule: 0 Focus group interviews and the first public workshop were held last month (October) Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan CAC Meeting #1 November 19, 2013 • Team is completing work on existing conditions, PDA Profile and beginning meetings with the CAC and also will be working with a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which met earlier today • Visioning and alternatives development will take place and preliminary alternatives shared with the CAC in February • Development of the preferred alternative will follow that process and shared with the CAC in April • Strategy memos, based on the preferred alternative plan, will then prepared and serve as ilii. basis for the development of the Iviaster Plan Project Context PDA Site: • Existing uses and context in the PDA have been mapped and include: o Civic Center, mixed use development, including a library, public safety building, multifamily housing, urban plaza and room for future development o Commercial areas on Commerce Boulevard Rohnert Park Expressway (RPX) , including age -restricted and senior housing on Enterprise Drive o Former State Farm campus and SMART stop and line o Multifamily development along Copeland Creek o Also. a business and industrial area to the north (referred to as s the_ "Tris_ nale_ District" in the presentation materials) Zoning: • Uses in the PDA are separated; reflect a 1960s -80s development pattern o Mixed-use areas in the City Center are assets o Industrial uses, followed by regional commercial uses currently occupy the biggest area in the PDA, but this will change over time • Lots of positive things happening in the City, outside of the PDA o Sonoma State University (SSU), the newly opened Graton Rancheria casino, and Roberts Lake o Also the cultural venues including Spreckles Center and the Green Music Center at SSU PDA Profile Demographic Comparisons: • Approximately 3,000 residents in the PDA in 2012 o Lower median household income in the PDA than in the City and County u Households are slightly smaller in size, both fur owner-uccupied and renter occupied households, compared to the City and County Page 2 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan CAC Meeting #1 November 19, 2013 Housing Characteristics: • Residents within the PDA are housing in multifamily dwellings which are predominately located at the southern end of the PDA area • The City is showing signs of rebounding from the recession, but has a long ways to go before rebounding back to pre -recession levels • Housing trends show there is more demand for affordable multifamily housing o The PDA should take advantage of Sonoma County's HOME program; this will be looked into as part of the Affordable Housing and Anti -Displacement strategy memos Jobs: • Job loss in the City is due to the recession and loss of two large major employers, including State Farm and Agilent Technologies • There are lot of opportunities to attract new businesses on vacant and for -lease sites and opportunity sites o Rents are affordable in the Triangle District and need to be maintained to attract all types of new businesses and employers • Positive influences of SMART, the casino, and SSU, including the Green Music Center, known for its acoustics should be leveraged as magnets for the PDA o Most residents for SSU are provided on campus or near Cotati; may be a smaller opportunity for housing serving students in the PDA • More jobs are needed in all industries, particularly professional service jobs and other types of retail and entertainment opportunities not currently provided in the City Proiect Issues/Opportunities • Existing urban form is suburban with cul-de-sac access o Opportunities to be more transit -supportive and walkable o Need for block sizes that make distances shorter and safer for pedestrians o Should keep in mind we are creating an urban setting within a suburban context and won't support the same types of densities as in a truly urban context Vehicular and Transit Circulation: • Challenge is to create a walkable environment that spans both sides of Rohnert Park Expressway • Need for smaller block sizes on the State Farm site • Crossing opportunities of Rohnert Park Expressway o Via a pedestrian signal or o At grade undercrossing or overcrossing Page 3 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan CAC Meeting #1 November 19, 2013 Developing Professional and State Farm Drives as complete streets that accommodate all modes of travel and also provide bioswales and other landscape treatments systems that clean stormwater run-off before it is channeled to the city's drainage system Changing Padre Center Drive to a public street, with formal pedestrian sidewalks, bike lanes, and shading • Work with Sonoma County on timed bus transfers and location / configuration of multi -modal connection opportunities, coordinated with SMART service Pike and Pedestrian Connections: Only safe crossing are provided at signalized intersections RP^ is and expressway carrying high traffic volumes o Need to retool how we think about it to ensure north -south connections across the expressway are safe Bike paths are a hidden jewel o Improve bike access on State Farm and the businesses along State Farm Drive o Also, issue brought up in the TAC that crossing the golf course is not safe and needs to be avoided Land Use: Focus on placemaking that attracts and serves a variety of people o Night time activities though need to address residents that currently live around the area o Restaurants and Farmer's market o One potential opportunity could be to introduce more business and entertainment uses in the Triangle industrial area; in Santa Rosa they converted an old warehouse to a restaurant o Urban style housing is for young professionals, empty nesters, and seniors o Urban style living in Rohnert Park or Santa Rosa will not be to the same density and scale as it would in San Francisco o Need for successful businesses within proximity to the surrounding area o Currently the summertime Farmer's Market and "Party on the Plaza" goes from 5-8 and attracts families and visitors Planning Districts: State Farm and City Center Districts • In the near term, opportunities to relocate the City Corporation yard and protection of the redwood trees as a prior icy • Provide higher densities and mixed-use to support future transit use on the State Farm site Balance parking with other placemaking objectives Triangle District Page 4 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan CAC Meeting #1 November 19, 2013 • Mostly office • Area is currently characterized by disconnected parcels, cul-de-sac access, and too much parking • Opportunities to allow shared parking Consider repurposing some buildings as a center for the homeless and providing social services, such as Santa Rosa mission to provide a place for transients, instead of Copeland Creek o There is a shadow population of homeless living along the creeks o State law allow half -houses to be located in residential districts Regional Commercial and Multifamily Districts • Has an unofficial circulation system accessed through driveways o Need to develop safer connections for pedestrians • Odd configuration of buildings with shared loading are between the Safeway and the Raleys o There is a proposal to provide patio seating where the loading are currently occurs Opportunity Sites • Map identifies vacant and underutilized parcels, based on accessor's parcel data comparing improved values to land values; additional visible opportunity site were identified through a combination of a field visit and Google Earth • Southeast site of Commerce Boulevard and State Farm Drive are recently repurchased office o Need to get bigger space. users interested o Excess land on the parcel even with parking, with potential to add another 20k -30k sf footprint on the site Need to refine opportunity site map Other Potential Opportunities • Density bonus suggestion, though intent is good, seems too premature; depends on what density will be permitted o Currently the State Farm site is zoned office and doesn't allow any residential uses • In addition to ideas discussed earlier, the plan will consider the location of potential gateways o Improve the sign coming into Rohnert Park from Cotati DISCUSSION What have we missed? • We should have a representative from the University to serve on the TAC and contact to share information about attracting the college segment Page 5 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan CAC Meeting #1 November 19, 2013 o There is someone that has been identified on the TAC but could not make the first meeting; hope to engage with the University in the future • Will there be a new section name? o Traditionally, each residential section has a school and park and a alphabetical section name; the City Council would like to continuo this tradition particularly for new residential areas o Sometimes neighborhood areas are identified by the section names in newsletters; residents know where the sections are by the section name Address concerns of senior population, a growing segment ent of the City, Including issues shared at the Public Workshop. o Over 20% of the population are seniors o Need to consider existing neighbors in the PDA (noise, accessibility, walkability, and safety) o Beauty and art; more cultural centers o Draw inspiration from the history of Sonoma County • Norm would like to contribute to the topic of affordable housing • Transit -orientation in the PDA is a unique opportunity o This is the largest PDA o No historic downtown in Rohnert Park o Opportunity to tie new elements to the City Center NEXT STEPS ■ Project moves into the visioning and alternatives development; next CAC meeting is planned for February o Prior to next CAC meeting, concept alternatives will be shared in advance 4 The notes and presentation from this meeting will be posted on the City's website for reference Page 6 entral ohnert ark own enter Pf�prll•; CENTRAL ROHNERT PARKvt `sM, A,rdv LVa —M -` PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PLAN , y CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING #2 MARCH 4,2014,5:30-7:00 PM MEETING SUMMARY The purpose of the second CAC meeting is to discuss and review preliminary site options in progress for various opportunity sites in the PDA. A presentation from the consulting team was given to the CAC consisting of: background on the goals of the planning process and station area guidance for PDAs; a summary of the recommendations provided in the PDA Profile / existing conditions report for Central Rohnert Park; and initial conceptual site options for opportunity sites and subareas within the PDA. Questions and comments were encouraged during the presentation and following the review of the conceptual subarea site options that have been developed for the PDA, thusfar. SunCal, the new property owners for the State Farm property, also gave a brief presentation to update the CAC on the progress of their plans prepared to date and also welcomed any questions and comments from the CAC. The key points shared during the presentation and input received from CAC members are summarized in the notes that follow. The meeting presentation is available as a separate link on the City's website: http://www.Epcity.org/index.aspx?page=865. PROJECT PRESENTATION Presentation Overview: • Project is to develop a station area plan for Central Rohnert Park (CRP) • This work is supported by a grant from ABAG and MTC • Today, we'll be presenting site concepts for the PDA for consideration: o For several subareas defined for the PDA, including Station Center, City Center, Triangle Business, Regional Commercial, and the Multifamily Residential subareas and o Address circulation and connectivity enhancements. PDA Goals: ■ Leverage the fact that there will be a commuter rail station in CRP as a catalyst for development of a town center in CRP • Project will work from guidelines from ABAG and MTC that support higher density development, transit use, and a mix of uses • Station area guidelines from MTC has defined several types of centers o Rohnert Park is defined as a Transit Town Center; similar to Windsor o Residential targets for Transit Town Centers are 3,000 — 7,000 units Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan CAC Meeting #2 March 4, 2014 o Suggests a 2.0 FAR for employment uses; however, this project is not conceived as an employment center as MTC conceives of this use around transit v MTC has guidance for different types of housing, including small lot housing, townhomes, and a mix of multifamily housing types SiteOptions: Existing conditions of the PDA are shown and include the new mixed-use development and plaza area in the City Center, existing commercial uses, the State Farm opportunity site, and multifamily housing development in the southern part of the PDA; these conditions set the stage/framework for the^ development of the PDA Transit supportive uses, as shown, include a broad range, as heard through past meetings and teased from the work on existing conditions analysis • Circulation. Many good roadways serving the PDA, the project will look at: o an area of focus within the one-half mile of the transit stop where we want to see improvement; o how to connect sites with bike and pedestrian access; o what types of uses are appropriate in the PDA; and o advocate non -vehicular connections through the site • Site concepts suggest higher density examples than currently exist in the City or in earlier planning reports Site concepts that have been studied and presented in the following slides include the Station Center or former State Farm campus, the City Center, and Yardbirds opportunity site in the Triangle Business Subarea. Potential circulation and connectivity improvements to cross RPX will also be shared. • Station area examples looked at for the Central Rohnert Park PDA include: o Beaverton, a suburb in Oregon, which supports a mix of uses around the station, including multifamily and commercial uses, centered on a transit -supportive plaza; and close to shared parking located adjacent to or behind the buildings o Orenco station, with a variety of housing centered on a transit center, town center, and other commercial uses o Pleasant Hill and Glenwood Park, shown in the slide, are representative of the kinds of densities, desired near the station area Station Center, UDtion 1 -- Residential I-ocus • All site options for the station center suggest the following: o Preserving the village green and perimeter redwood trees on the site; o Connections to existing streets; and o Consideration of drop-off for buses and bike and pedestrian connections • A boulevard street terminating at the transit plaza • Current plan for SMART includes parking, accessed from Seed Farm Drive Page 2 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan CAC Meeting #2 March 4, 2014 C Need to consider how to connect bikes from the MUP to the PDA ■ Option 1 proposes wide sidewalk, park and open space areas, and a variety of housing Station Center, Option 2 — Commerical Focus • Commercial frontage on RPX for visibility • Connectivity with adjacent shopping centers and commercial uses • A mixed-use shopping or promenade street, with ground level retail and residential above • This option considers relocating the corporation yard • Images reflect various opportunities for creating a pedestrian -friendly shopping and mixed- use environment Station Center Option 3 — Live -Work Mix • Commercial frontage on RPX for visibility • Bus drop off adjacent to transit stop High density residential near station • Concepts will depend on market • Commercial fronting State Farm and some in RPX • Connection to RPX Discussion of State Farm Site Options • Consider the opportunity for more mixed-use, particularly next to the station • At Safeway and Raleys, driveways act as streets through parking lot; many accidents occur there; o Suggestions will be provided to look at options to smooth and provide safe pedestrian movement through that lot as a site option for that area • How would parking be addressed in Site Option 2? o Concepts shown are at high level; land use colors don't correspond to building footprints but general site uses; parking would be provided as tuck under spaces behind units, on surface lots, and in parking structures, wrapped with other ground floor uses o Multi -story residential uses may also have the potential for some podium level parking in the future o Many places in East Bay purposefully don't provide enough parking to encourage transit use o A park and ride area needs to be considered next to the transit stop City Center Site • Opportunities within the site for buildings to be reused and for infill development • At Padre Drive, City Center Drive becomes a driveway rather than street and narrows Page 3 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan CAC Meeting #2 March 4, 2014 • East of State Farm Drive, could be opportunities for live -work residential infill and a parking structure to support surrounding site uses • Connections from site to Hinebaugh Creek and MUP • Opportunities for infill west of State Farm Drive to provide another activity point and allow opportandities far `shaTBd�rk ny • Along Commerce Blvd., Discussion of City Center Site Option • How are the new businesses around the City Center doing? o Mixed-use businesses in the City Center appear to be viable; uses there include a homework club; insurance; mortgage; and other small business; one of these businesses is expanding to three spaces o Many of those businesses don't need a lot of foot traffic to be viable Yardbirds Opportunity Site • Site is freeway facing • The option looked at how to better connect the site o Proposes connections to the MUP from Cascade Court o As a redevelopment opportunity to encourage internal site connections, particularly bike and pedestrian connections with adjacent sites north and south • Boxes indicate approximate building square footage. • Opportunities for sustainable site planning such as, bioswales • Opportunities to preserve existing trees, as a buffer from SMART train Discussion of Yardbirds Site ■ Parking is becoming more of an issue • Potential site use opportunities could include commercial, gym, and light industrial uses • Traffic on Commerce turning left is difficult o Consider more north -south connectivity options as an alternative to travel on Commerce o What about a through way from Cascade Court? Commercial District • Improve visibility of trail connections to the creeks • Improve pedestrian connectivity through commercial and multifamily sites Connectivity Concept • Suggests potential for pedestrian activated signal at the SMART MUP and perhaps between State Farm and Commerce? Page 4 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan CAC Meeting #2 March 4, 2014 • Even with marked crosswalks, there will be a need to have a pedestrian refuge for pedestrians to safely stop and crossing, allowing them to navigate the street and watch for oncoming traffic from one direction at a time • We need to connect both sides of RPX; how do we make a full town center on both sides of RPX? o Where could we provide an undercrossing or overcrossing of RPX? • There is also a need for feasible short-term solutions Connectivity Comments/Discussion • The Town and Country resort in San Diego in Mission Valley has a bridge from the hotel to the mall; area has been evolving into more residential area • Santa Rosa is having difficulty finding funding for overcrossing or undercrossing • Include bulb -outs and raised or table crosswalks in the near-term Focus on near-term, at grade solutions • Many seniors are considering scooters; a pedestrian rest spot would be helpful Rohnert Crossings Presentation • Original plan was 100% residential, consisting of townhomes, condominiums, and small lot housing • Attended presentations for the PDA and understand the goal of the project is to leverage the SMART stop to create a pedestrian -friendly town center for the City • The applicant will work with team to ensure the project is viable and site is put to good use • Project, however, proposes densities around 20 units/acre • As precedent for the project, research was conducted in nearby cities for Downtown Concepts, including Petaluma, Healdsburg, and Windsor o Block lengths were measured to be 350 to 550 feet o Town squares were approximately 1.5 acres • Project revised to propose: o Commercial uses opening up to town square o A variety of housing products, with densities of 11, 18, and 22 dwelling units per acre o Preservation of trees on the perimeter o A town Square that is 2.5-2.75 acres. o New main street with 30k to 40k square foot of commercial and 400 to 450 feet block lengths o Bike and pedestrian ways that connect to networks within the City • Windsor was suggested as an example and was visited by the team o Project includes diagonal parking around park to address parking needs and shared parking Page 5 Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan CAC Meeting #2 March 4, 2014 ■ SunCal is working on parking study; engineering and street configurations are also being refined The plan is still evolving 0 The project would like to break ground in 18 months General Discussion and Other Questions for the PDA What policies would be provided to preserve existing businesses? CJ rVIIL.ICJ LV CIIIVVv businesses to VC expanded UI fepUrpUseU ('With nr-.'Vy sKIII of maintain existing shell and renovate the interior) U Pi uvi Uf.J�.iVi iUf iltil;)J iU i lUl �i;i cd�.J� fi le grollfld i;l�dI o Incentivizing renovation and reuse; providing flexibility to make it easier for applicants to make changes o With implementation of industrial -office overlay; buildings have been converting to office uses o In Midtown Sacramento, many building have been gutted and converted to retail - restaurant, microbrewery, art studios; and with that, relaxation of parking standards ■ Will there be new parking standards as part of the plan? o Parking and zoning standards will be a recommendation of the PDA Page 6 FISVI i lk `i OWN DESIGN Uw, I'huuilng • H-Ithy Communities • SmanCbd. February 17, 2016 Jeffrey S. Beiswenger, AICP Planning Manager City of Rohnert Park 130 Avram Ave. Rohnert Park, CA 94928 Subject: Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area Plan Dear Jeffrey, Thank you so much for the opportunity to provide Rohnert Park with a 'Third Party' critique of the Priority Development Area Plan. As you may know, we have been involved with the creation of a new downtown from scratch in Windsor. In addition, in downtown Petaluma, Lois calibrated the SmartCode - a form -based code, which has resulted in the Theatre District. We both have a keen sense for the type of information that is needed in a code or plan to create a walkable place instead of the much more common 'car -oriented' experience. Deb's experience is as an Environmental Planner and a LEED AP professional. She was the Mayor of Windsor during the design of the downtown there. Lois is a long-term Planning Commissioner in Windsor, a professional urban designer and LEED ND. There are two major types of plans in use today: o Land Use Plans that focus almost exclusively on regulating the private realm and private property. Land uses are separated. o Form -Based Codes that focus on creating a beautiful public realm. This planning tool is the only one that has lots of historical success in creating a downtown type environment with the elements that you envision: shops, plaza, train station and walkable mixed use buildings. In our opinion, you have a land use plan for your draft Central Rohnert Park Priority Development Area. It is not likely that a successful and lively downtown as in Petaluma or Windsor will be created with this plan. The elements that created the Town Green in Windsor are not in place. Unfortunately, this plan cannot be tweaked - a new approach is needed. Here are the elements which we used to create Windsor's downtown, which you can use to create a successful new downtown for Rohnert Park: A public multi -day charrette to design the downtown area should be held in an easily accessible place. This will create excitement and the broad political consensus that will be needed to keep up the momentum over time. This consensus will provide the political will to reject inappropriate development proposals that do not follow the eventual code & plan. Start with the plaza. Find a highly visible place for it that will work for the shops that will eventually surround it. Land for that plaza should be located appropriately and then ideally purchased by Rohnert Park. This critical piece should not be left as a requirement or suggestion for a developer to include in their project with no clear location for it in your plans. Windsor did this. The Open Space District provided partial funding to both the Windsor Town Green and the Roseland Plaza. Create standards to regulate key development parameters such as building form and location. Do not use 'Design Guidelines' as they are not regulatory and easily ignored. Include a Site Plan that includes the location of all required streets, including local streets and their cross sections, including alleys if desired, in addition to parks, plazas and appropriate areas for outdoor restaurant seating. The design principles for this Regulating Plan and Code would be: o 'Like faces like' in terms of buildings across streets. Zones are never changed in the center of the street as the result is a disjointed public realm. o Building heights are regulated, including minimum and maximum number of stories. o Allowed building frontages are clearly defined. These include shopfronts and awnings, stoops, etc. o A maximum block perimeter regulates the size of blocks for walkability. For example, in the Theatre District in Petaluma, the maximum block perimeter is 1700'. We would like Rohnert Park to have a vibrant plaza area like Windsor, Healdsburg and Sonoma, and lively downtown like Petaluma and we know how to do it. We would be happy to give you a presentation on the alternate path that we have outlined here -one that resulted in the creation of the Windsor Town Green and Theatre Square in downtown Petaluma. Warmly, Lois Fisher, CNU, LEED ND President of Fisher Town Design Windsor Planning Commissioner UZLX_Y1k (_(A_� Deb Fudge, LEED AP Vice -Mayor of Windsor t ► t 19 noNFtzT Pam Priority Development Area (PDA) City Council Public Hearing March 8, 20 16 w THERE IS A TRAIN COMING TO TOWN scra eorsraucrro ar ftany oad MMG UINI ,: L/ALtr4tZ'�4J erltra) ohnert Priority Gz Development Area Plan e ark I 4 Presentation Outline PDA PlanVision and Overview Review Final EIR Components of a Downtown Questions of Staff Public Comments 6. Continue to March 22, 2016 for consideration/adoption Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan ;.z10 i 2 M ti E 4 U Fairway Dr Coif Course - Priority Development Area Hlnebaugh Creek RL MAL F,�Ik M ROHNERT PARK ViA 0-- d �&W& �♦s 10 _ _ _ ' Avrarn Ave Santa Alicia Dr i r f VP "Poll Arlen Dr VP. Copeland Creek 330 ac. planning area Funded by regional FOCUS PDA grant to support infill growth near transit D 0 0 PROJECT FOCUS COMMUNI 7MAY BILI INITIATION GROUP WORKSHOPSHOP INTERVIEWS #1 June 2013 OCT. 201 OCT. 201 2014 PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE& AREA PROFILE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE VISION AND ALTERNATIVES • Alternatives Development • Preferred Alternative OMKLANNING CITY MISSION COUNCIL WORKSHOP . , WORKSHOP ::OMMUN WORKSH #2 OCT 201 STRATEGY MEMOS \ • Land Use & Zoning • Urban Design • Circulation & Station Connectivity • Parking Policy & Management • Infrastructure & Community Services • Real Estate Market Considerations • Affordable Housing • Implementation and Financing 0 Is JOINT PC&CC SESSION SEPT 2015 ,N A ------------ UBLIC DRAFT REFINE 1 PLAN & EIR ADMIN. DRAFT PLAN &EIR PLAN/EIR 111 ADOPTION MASTER PLAN &MND REVIEW ;' Feb -March December 2015 ------ 2016 WhatWe Heard from the Community Creation of a Downtown for RP Distinct community and subareas Community Connections Link to SMART station Complete bike / pedestrian networks Wayfinding elements 4o Community Greening Add to / enhance public open space Promote environmental stewardship Fully utilize, improve existing creek paths Final EIR EIR addresses adverse impacts Increased traffic on Highway 101 Required to consider alternative that may reduce impacts No project / no development No commercial overlay Station Center office and residential focus None of the alternative deliver a "downtown" • Final EIR o Incorporates draft EIR by reference Two comments submitted from agencies County of Sonoma, Permit and Resource Management Department WO CalTrans EIR — Response to Comments Sonoma County Comment — impacts on county roads Addressed by EIR Regional impact fee under development Comment — concern over increased groundwater pumping Not proposed A water supply assessment has been completed EIR — Response to Comments CalTrans Comment —consider regional road impacts Response: EIR addresses impacts / regional impact fee Comment —create protected bike lane w/parking Response: Protected bike lanes are included as part of PDA, city will consider this specific design solution when designed Comment —use rectangular, rapid flashing beacons for pedestrian crossing Response: Considered when ped. crossings are installed Comment —Transportation Demand Management (TDM) / compact growth Response: PDA includes TDM strategies as well as other strategies related to compact growth (e.g. transit, bicycle and pedestrian enhancements, shared parking, etc.) Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan 7rip City of Santa Rosa , Access i I I unurr I Rohnert Park Expressway Access central ; Commerc i:, I � I �- i/flYJf [::; Priority Development Area City Limits ••�•�SMART Rail Line and Station ............ SMART Mul,-Use Path Triangle Business Subarea City Center Subarea Central Commercial Subarea Station Center Subarea Creekside Neighborhood Subarea IDowntown District Amenity Zone suo Tzuo FEET T a Sou 3 � Hinebaugh Creek corridor ... i ............ m rc n - n - � ` Himebpugh Geek Downtown District Amenity Zone Copelapd Creek I ENTEPPF'I E I corridor I Creekside Neighborhood Station Location laoa'ni I -- %-f----------9lICl'R1SLiCiA------' lal W • Plan organized as five subareas, plus • A new Downtown District Amenity zone New mix of retail, jobs, and housing Downtown next to the SMART station Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan uowntown iuristrieX Arnernty mon Hinebaugh Creek corridor 1 PADRE CENTER CITY CENTEf 1 ROHNERT PARK `��!-��+ N�.�NN•l..�►.., ♦ �' '�' uj Lu ♦! 1 p ±i'ld 40 . Ab w r " Copeland Creek corridor f • 1 �' .J 1 .z �� +I PORT AS 101 N,*is�s�_ —Lw RACQUET CLUB SANTA GRID Downtown District Amenity Zone S�JvF� ROHNL SMART WALNUT Station CARLITA C4 -11C c, 3 M D a 0 M CAMINO COF v � � I d U _ SANTA GRID Downtown District Amenity Zone S�JvF� ROHNL SMART WALNUT Station CARLITA C4 -11C c, 3 M D a 0 M CAMINO COF I� Downtown District Amenity Zone Active streetscape + amenities Creating the downtown sidewalk environment Minimum amount of active retail / service 5 Downtown residential Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan i= r Commercial (Retail/Service Mix) Industrial l Industrial, Office Mix .vl IFReCI Industrial, Retail/Service Mix r. e Mixed -Use Q High Density Residential Public Park/Open Space e Downtown District Amenity Zone Rex' e Unduorial.- F,'� reraRlservice, othce) r 4 � CASCADE 1 Y ---------- industrial Greenway, typical Tiiangle Business ! 1 ,flex (industrial, Office) a GmtralComrnerri;of ettiArl Land Use Features Plan assumes high development potential, based on vision for Downtown r. • Mixed-use subareas • More compact Slkeway,typical development focused Downtown 1. r SMART Station Station Censer CreeksWe sr ,. & Neighborhood h .r i rnurr!(amttyresrdernral z,..' :AAI. ITA Recommended Land Use Commercial (Retail/Service Mix) Industrial Industrial, Office Mix r�, I Industrial, Retail/Service Mix Mixed -Use Q High Density Residential Public Park/Open Space —r Downtown District Amenity Zone Triangle Business District #- Better connect to mixed use area to the south Commercial Overlay — increase diversity of uses Opportunity sites m � 1 . t i CASC:0.pECOURT r r� co ! Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan x 1 � r ! r t I ' u LTT'Y ' a 1 +� ' F -We C"'course 1 ° I t Trian0e 1 Business I 1 City �enter I = •, , . ♦ . i___; ` *' e : riStatiprE.Cl'IiY ICmekside NeiKhbnrhnocl copeivnd cr"* Py Ae. m Jahn Reed Hemenrpry •o•• SMART Rail Line and Station SMART Multi -Use Path ............ Proposed Vehicular Connections --- Existing/Proposed Class I Bike Trails — Existing/Proposed Class II Bike Lanes ------- Proposed Pedestrian Connections •• Proposed New Bus Stops, Transit Route Extension to Station Center 0 3W 1. 1.2111 FFE- Circulation Features • New bus stops + SMART Multimodal streets • Downtown street grid • Continuous bike -ped. Qpa* System + regional trails • Safe bike and pedestrian crossings v -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - — -!r,n17,-77 -► -------------------------- % -------------------------� \ Z 1 � Station Location Circulation and Parking Parking strategies On -street parking (downtown) Shared parking provisions Parking structures (future) Circulation enhancements State Farm redesign Roundabouts Protected bicycle lanes Pedestrian crossings z Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan ' I: �'� Paseo or Multi -Use Trail ; o UTILITY`'� ,�""n�nt"� SMARM' Multi -Use Path Existing Parks I Existing Open Space 13 13 a� GalfCourse 13 CASCADE „ -c Proposed Park or Civic Space (conceptual locations) Proposed Plaza or Commons (conceptual locations) 4ECLMVf Domeed Ic 12 Triangle `- Business] �........, ry.. ................... hnebaugM creekwaY .t�...,........."...........,""..,,...."",""".".�..'�.,..,H� Y; ..".,.,"......... ",.+".. .."..�..". i. -i CENTER ...��+► T I _ >@dccente?3 City Center to:o e.0W' EPT441 K'i.....""....... ....... .... .................." ..... ...."y, ��. ......".....� : w .......................""........"". P ....-..................,. , ROHNERT PARK %�� ........... o�t: I SMART Central j Central Commercial , Station ° Station Center ------------------_--- e -------------- �--...... �� � 2Creelcside Neighborhood:c e (residentloi commons/greens) a+ .............0.....�...,.....,.,.",.."...."...". "s"......."..".capelvnd �ereekway" c.Y."..,..."...".....,.......".. .�.�s .".,"..,,..d.""...".."",""...","""""".........."."................."...".."..,..""..".."..,.".""....."..""� 1 In Hr ReoA 1 11 Park + Open Space Features Parks, plazas strategically located • Continuous bike/ped. trail connections • Continuous landscaped roadway corridors Recommended tree list / street furniture What Makes a Downtown? Unique Character Distinct architectural and landscape design Inspired by landscape, e.g. local materials Encourage mix of styles, consistent with regional vernacular Modern but drawing from traditional Downtowns Sustainable vision City Center Plan (2002) 9 -11A I rj, What Makes a Downtown? Pedestrian Scale Walkable blocks Compact form Pedestrian -oriented features La Quinta, CA VT may" `f _ s . , •,. 117 . � I -,n Jff- itown Windsor, CA Downtown eta uma, CA What Makes a Downtown? Downtown Streets I '7 4C �s g Buildings placed at back of sidewalk and Oriented to the street - r Active sidewalk areas y~• h '., . Safe pedestrian crossing f Implementing the Downtown Street Grid OP 1119 � U - m' d -use ixe P commercial retaillservice) park L -f, a 4. - U U b 171 ?; ""C Multifamily residentiai A public sm sta 6 res idehtia� mix \VOA I What Makes a Downtown? Cuitituiercial Intensity & S II � Y r �Z a �w e■ - Downtown Healdsburg = 400k sf The Barlow, Sebastopol = 220k+ sf trategic &.ucation La Quinta, CA = 17 f ("Old Town") } vl_ M Mixed-use lofts, Downtown Merced, CA Minimum amount of new buildings need to create "Sense of enclosure" f retoif II !e.x�r— 1 mixech d AA 1 IF �1 commercial��'re[nil'Iservice) park pub c SMr.r mere VS to What Makes a Downtown? Mix of Uses Downtown and transit supportive uses: Dining, entertainment I Lifestyle and specialty retail Professional jobs Urban style living options Civic and public uses FJ ITz IJIJ ill JO. o, A What Makes a Downtown? Public Spaces and Amenities a place for the community ,,77 L r_I I to relax to play smaller parks and plazas = to gather Case Studies of Public Space Healdsburg — classic town square • La Quinta — new "Old Town" development * Petaluma Theater District — new 9F development in an old downtown t The Barlow — small public spaces arranged along a linear street Healdsburg Downtown Square Tcad'Uollo' Vinc'.,,-lFdS Walk A Realds ED Willi 'srafcod 7 & , Ta >:Inra Raw Bi�'O' f,lue 'A"llery RGOO-, IL Foss Creek Parkway. VIN Akk NbUrg Torn Square MFRS' � :a, C' (Old To Av a Tampico � .,, .®� � To Washington SO -I ` - town w ire JciTwnr ', 04d Tom a Eiatdc ;�,-rn. C i Aly to Chmm CNOIF- t i O 7 _ 5t Pallor Malt! Street r � ir6eae F� bk drad Ln Rue C,�'f14ir � A6 ,tuft Pwz� Iw y f4lan�+rr Aveela HK Ldno CA Qtu nf4$ Re a! Fstale Sak2n L Parking 0 � xx�f e ��'��` � l _ §Li�37iLP 4 Nrstrcf QU DU ARE L Tm;bh U — C�5ti9ifl@6 lane i P�rlciurg Bout' - on Monte 1 Petaluma Theater District Apple Box 5 $ 1. r.7gC y �GfabtitiJ A_ at'Mdll p.,p le Nee on taffing rJ, .4 7 Flex Ace FfardwarevW� Bank of thepest Pant d Parts Buss SID, coffee f, ��,, �,• �q � �F . - US Post Office %7p t .07 I The Barlow (Sebastopol) r 6BO Smokeliou ' _ 6isrra & C.tering � } Zero Cream V9g�urt l W T�nfrin SCIS r g xzeria s a� u r the F I I k HYI. rys.,,Ilttle#aur Ilan 11 1� Imetric so vk '�� v. �' asPhail�a`ti��?• & 'tr:dlr�LV� -.� uin a Baria bastapo� ti... enr�af P' k ��e= C UrlityrMarke Trsn t1 io + Animal KIS tlom _ Veterinary Hospital i tIi e r u yaki Yerha Mste BaF~' ff"M $mum z- Conclusions A variety of ways to create quality public spaces Spaces need to be framed by buildings * Need a certain minimum development intensity and/or building height to frame public spaces • Need activity in public spaces to create interest and enhance safety Planning Commission Hearing Public Hearing on February 25, 2016 Recommended Approval of.- Final f: Final EIR Central Rohnert Park PDA Plan General Plan Amendments 0 * Zoning Ordinance Amendments Amended Staff Recommendation: Staff recommended: 150,000 in Station Center Subarea 100,000 in City Center Subarea 25,000 (additional) in Central Commercial along State Farm (Raley'sTown Center frontage) Planning Commission deleted these requirements from recommendation 0 0 PRl7JECT !7�^CU MUNIT'� CROUP RFCSHOP INITIATION INTERVIEWS, #I June 2,013 OCT. 21] 1 ' (O f. 2f) I. PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREA PROFILE D 4WKAB I L 'W O RIGS H MAyY201 :1 DTARIN CITIZENS ADVIISORY COMMITTEE & TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS VISION AND ALTERNATIVES Alternatives Development Preferred Alternative /PLANNING/ CITY � COMMISSION COUNCIL WORKSHOP WORKSHOP JLi1LY2014 ° \AUG201 COMMUNIT'4 WORKSHOP t:, OCT 201 4 STRATEGY MEMOS Land Use&Zoning ' Urban Design Circulation & Station Connectivity Parking Policy& Management Infrastructure & Conriun ity Se rvi ces Real E stere Market Considerations AffordahIeHousin g Implernoijit2lionand Finmidrtg AD M I N. D RAFT MASTER PLAN & MND j1O SUC DP kFT� REFINE t PLAN & EIR PLAN € EIR PLANIEIR ADOPTION December REVIEW WINTER Implementation !! IL 4A Station Find Center Implement "downtown" PD DDAZ businesses Continue to work with property owners Pursue Grant Funds Roadway & Crossing Improvements Next Steps City Council hearings March 8 March 22 � Council Actions Certify EIR Adopt PDA Plan, General Plan and Zoning Amendments Direction on implementation Close-out PDA grant by the end of March Second reading (ordinance in April) Follow-up Implementation (on-going) CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date:J),6- 6- Agenda Item #: Name"t, ` 4 Address: = � Phone: °' TOPIC: +[°SPA Brief Summary of Comments: CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD See Reverse —> Date: �Lf� aI6 Agenda Item #: t -� Name, WVLFF 726f"0c,--b Address: Topic: '' 0L -V T-0WlJ rl rt --o PO 5 A)— Brief Summary of Comments: Brief Summary of Comments:- te C�- See Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER LAIRD late: AgendaIters #: CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Agenda Item # Name: Address: Phone: Topic:; Brief Summary of Comrqents: --l., I --7 0,r) CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Date: Agenda Item Name:_ Address: e-7 J C-fr,<j A.) 'e 't' 11--"-? L - Phone. Topic: Brief Summary of Comments:- te C�- See Reverse CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER LAIRD late: AgendaIters #: CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER CARD Agenda Item # Name: Address: Phone: Topic:; Brief Summary of Comrqents: --l., I --7 0,r)