Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2006-02-01 Packet
CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 February 1, 2006 6:00 p.m. 1. ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. INTRODUCTIONS a. Introduction of New Employee - Kerry Randall, Ukiah Valley Conference Center Event Coordinator b. Introduction of New Employee - Maya Simerson, Community Services Supervisor c. Introduction of Tim Eriksen As Director of Public Works/City Engineer 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Regular Meeting Minutes of November 16, 2005 1 RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION Persons who are dissatisfied with a decision of the City Council may have the right to a review of that decision by a court. The City has adopted Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits to ninety days (90) the time within which the decision of the City Boards and Agencies may be judicially challenged. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the City Council. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Councilmember or a citizen in which event the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the City Council on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or Planning Commission recommendations. a. Rejection of Claims for Damages Received from Pacific Gas & Electric and Chuck Johnston, and Referral to Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund b. Approval of Resolution Extending the Existence of a Local Emergency for the City of Ukiah c. Report of Acquisition of Replacement Computer Equipment from Dell Marketing, L.P. d. Report of Bid Award to Williams USA in the Amount of $5,033.84 for the Purchase and Installation of One David Clark In-Cab Communication System e. Adoption of Resolution Amending Appendix to City Conflict of Interest Code f. Approval of Notice of Completion for the Roof Overlay for the Ukiah Valley Conference Center, Specification No. E25629 g. Adoption of Resolution Providing Conditional Consent to the Formation by the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors of a Countywide Lodging and Business Improvement District that Includes Lodging Businesses Located in the City Of Ukiah 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The City Council welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Council when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. 8. PUBLIC HEARING (6:15 P.M.) a. Introduction of Ordinance Revising Section 9254, Entitled "Marijuana Cultivation" to Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 19 of the Ukiah City Code b. Approval of Applications to Demolish Three Structures Over 50 Years Old Located at 763 and 765 Apple Avenue 9. UN a. FINISHED BUSINESS Authorization for City Manager to Negotiate and Enter into a Professional Consulting Services Agreement with Brown and Caldwell to Conduct a Groundwater Well Siting Study in an Amount not to Exceed $89,528 b. Discussion of Interim Urgency Ordinance Imposing Moratorium on Formula Businesses within the Downtown Business District and on Perkins and Gobbi Streets c. Discussion and Direction Concerning the Development of Form Based Zoning for the Perkins Street Gateway and Downtown Area d. Discussion of Possible June 2006 Ballot Measure Regarding the Mayor's Position Being Appointed Versus Elected 10. NEW BUSINESS a. Waive Bid Proposal Irregularity and Authorize City Manager to Execute A Contract With Miracle Construction Company, Inc. For The Purchase And Installation Of Playground Equipment At Todd Grove Park, Oak Manor Park, Vinewood Park And Orchard Park In The Amount of $299,995 b. Discussion Of Building Up Versus Building Out - Crane c. Discussion of City Council Meeting Decorum - Ashiku 11. COUNCIL REPORTS 12. CITY MANAGER/CITY CLERK REPORTS 13. CLOSED SESSION a. Conference with Labor Negotiator~ Government Code Section 54957.6 Employee Negotiations: Electrical Unit Negotiator: Candace Horsley 14. ADJOURNMENT I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda. Dated this 26th day of January~ 2006. Marie Ulvila, City Clerk The City of Ukiah complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. ITEM NO. 3.a DATE: February 1,2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE - KERRY RANDALL, UKIAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER EVENT COORDINATOR The Community Services Department is pleased to introduce to Council its newest employee, Ukiah Valley Conference Center Event Coordinator, Kerry Randall. Kerry started with us in December, just in time to coordinate the busiest months at the Conference Center! Kerry is replacing Maya Simerson who was recently appointed to Community Services Supervisor. Kerry brings to the position a wide variety of skills and an exceptional work ethic. His skills, work ethic and marketing talents will provide the Conference Center with the boost it needs to evolve into the next step on the horizon. Kerry has lived in the Ukiah area for fifteen years and maintains a home and farm in Potter Valley. On his own time, Kerry is an avid gardener, active equestrian and loves spending time with his family. The Community Services Department and the Ukiah Valley Conference Center is very fortunate to have Kerry among our ranks, and we are pleased to ask you to welcome Kerry to the City of Ukiah. RECOMMENDED ACTION' Welcome Kerry Randall, Ukiah Valley Conference Center Event Coordinator to the City of Ukiah. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised' Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager and Maya Simerson, Community Services Supervisor None APPROVED: Ca. dace Horsley, Cit~lanager ITEM NO. 3.b DATE: February 1,2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEE - MAYA SIMERSON, COMMUNITY SERVICES SUPERVISOR The Community Services Department is pleased to introduce to Council its newly promoted employee, Maya Simerson, into the position of Community Services Supervisor. Maya is replacing Gina Greco who recently parted company with the city to pursue a new business venture. Maya's three years of experience in the Community Service Department brings to the position a solid foundation of department knowledge and skills. In addition, Maya is a graduate of Cai Poly Pomona and has an extensive background in event and program management. Maya is married, and expecting her first child in April. She is a Ukiah native and is very involved in the community. On her own time, Maya rides her horse (Moose) and takes their boat out to the lake. The Community Services Department is happy to have Maya as part of our team, and we are pleased to ask you to now welcome Maya to her new position at the City of Ukiah. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Welcome Maya Simerson to the City of Ukiah in her role as Community Services Supervisor. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager None C--~ndace Horsley, City M'~ager AGENDA ITEM NO: 3, c MEETING DATE: January 18, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: INTRODUCTION OF TIM ERIKSEN AS DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER Tim Eriksen started his career with the City in 2001 as an Associate Civil Engineer and was then promoted to Senior Civil Engineer in ]uly of 2003. He has been involved with a wide range of City civil projects and worked with a large spectrum of customers in the Ukiah area. His past experience in the engineering field includes positions with Rau and Associates and engineering firms in San .lose, Santa Clara and Redwood City. His extensive work experience has provided him an opportunity to enhance both his technical skills as well as his knowledge of civil construction and requirements. Tim has deep roots in Ukiah, as he was raised in this area and is currently living in the City limits with his wife and two young children. Having the background, experience and associations in the Ukiah region that he has acquired over the many years, as well as his years of tenure with the City of Ukiah, Tim steps into this position prepared and well-versed in the on-going projects and issues that the department is facing. We are very pleased to have him join our management staff and feel very confident in his abilities to provide strong direction to the Department and move forward in the accomplishment of the City's goals. RECOMMENDED ACTION: ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Candace Horsley, City Manager Approved~ Candaco Horsiey, ~Manager CITY OF UKIAH CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Regular Meeting CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 November 16, 2005 1. ROLL CALL 6:05:45 PM Present: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, Staff Present: City Manager Horsley, Fire Chief Latipow, Fin; Rapport, Planning Director Stump, and City Clerk Ulvila. Ashiku. r McCann, City Attorney 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE- Councilmembe 3. INTRODUCTIONS6:06:39 PM Fire Chief Latipow explained that with the Department was able to unfreeze some firefighter pc brings the City's firefighting staff back to full strength. Firefighter, Kevin Zumstein, Probation~ Firefighter Pa Firefighter, Kevin Jennings, Chief, Secretary. the Ilegiance. ;d sales tax ba , the four new fi~ ~lhters, which uced Inger Mattern, Probationary ic, Kirk Thomsen, Probationary indy Stanford, Administrative 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES6:]$:2! PM a. Regular Meeting Mi M/RC McCowen presented; carried by1 and Mayor Ashiku. ~s of Septeml the reg[ call vote: None. ENT: meeting of September 21, 2005 as !S: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Baldwin, ;TAIN: Councilmember Rodin. 5. RIGHT TO Mayor Ashi icy. 6, c. d. eo g. h, IENT Al ~d Disburserr Rej6 ;laim for D~ Authori Rejected Authority, Received Notif Awarded to I ~t Calendar items "a" through "j" as follows: th of October 2005; .ges Received from Dan Sevier and Referred to Joint Powers ire Municipal Insurance Fund; es Received from Marc Tosca and Referred to Joint Powers Municipal Insurance Fund; ~ of a Vendor Name Change on a Previously Reported Purchase ~rise Software, Inc.; Received Notification of Bid to AIIstar Fire Equipment in the Amount of $5,016 Plus Tax and Shipping for the Purchase of 24 Lengths of Fire Hose; Approved Notice of Completion for Pavement Rehabilitation and Traffic Signal Loop Replacement, Specification No. 05-07; Adopted Ordinance No. 1073 of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Amending Section 3707.1 of the Ukiah City Code Requiring Sewer Services to be Charged to the Customer Receiving Water Service; Adopted Resolution 2005-21 Authorizing the Destruction of Certain Records (Public Utilities Department); Introduced Ordinance Authorizing the City Manager to Sign City of Ukiah Contracts and Other Documents; Adopted Resolution 2006-22 Adjusting Junior Fees for the Ukiah Municipal Golf Course. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS6:!7:]4 LaCretia Peoples, speaking on behalf of the Mendocino discussed the Freedom of Expression Project and events that w King Organization, on December 14th. al PUBLIC HEARING (6:15 P.M.)d:2]:43 PM Continuance of Minor Subdivision Map- Variance No. 05-19 Planning Director Stump advised that the app continued to the December 7, 2005 City Council ~n ts have~ uested the be 9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 9a. Consideration and Possible 'oval of Cc Ryder Homes Proiect to the Kiln/Ryder Homes Proiect6:22: Planning Director Stump explained that at discussed the land use and environmental is the discussion, the Council Staff to a subcommittee to prel .rate letter Council. The letters a~ to Coun County. He letter. the Ho on the HoD :, 2005 meeting, the Council project. At the conclusion of er. Council also decided to form and concerns raised by the City review before formal submittal to Mendocino Councilmember Baldwin hybrid alten manage is the managem says that the City favors involvement in a would be more growth than under the growth inion that the only plan that reduces growth under those levels In respor an inquiry proposed R Iomes Pro Mendocino ~yor Director Stump stated that it is his opinion that the be growth inducing. Director Stump will continue to work with ling the matter. It was the consen: changes, to the Mend~ Council to submit the subcommittee's letter, with recommended County Board of Supervisors. After reviewing Director Stump's letter to the County, the City Council provided recommended changes and by consensus, directed Director Stump to submit his letter to the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors. 9b. Discussion and Direction Regarding Hydrolo_~v Study of Hopkiln Housing Project Water Use6:33:32 PM City Manager Horsley advised that upon the request of the Council, she contacted the City's hydrology consultants, Wagner & Bonsignore, and proposed a work plan for studying the possible 2 effects of the Hopkiln Project and other hydrologic uses in the Ukiah area. The City's consultants suggest that the City conduct a "reconnaissance level" hydrologic investigation intended to identify the potential impacts to the City's water supply and water rights. A brief report would be prepared summarizing this information and setting forth a course of action for the City to pursue to protect its interests in the water resources for the area. This would also include identifying issues that Millview or other parties might need to address in its EI R for expansion of service to other areas or developments. Mr. Wagner estimates the budget for this effort at $15,000 or less. City Attorney Rapport noted that the impact of pumping water from the well could impact the City's water rights. This could involve surveying existing data and field investigation to determine the impact. It is unknown at this time if Millview will to undertake studying these matters or if they determine that there is no pressing nee~ studies at this time, but environmental review will be required. Mayor Ashiku stated that it is prudent to be careful rights. As long as it does not put the City in jeopardy, can provide further information. ;s and to may want to cons~ the City's water until staff Councilmember Baldwin stated that the community development and he recommended that the City be proa( water availability, and the interests of munity by cond~ Millview to take action. this potential protecting the City's water rights, its own research, and not wait for M/RC Baldwin/Rodin authorizing Staff to consultants, Wagner and Bonsignore, to con, a work plan with the City's use hydrologic investigation. Discussion followed · Having the co ~nts · Investi¢ proposed PrO · Know~ frar an outline ;ues for the and the study area, including the area to the west of the tdrologic investigation) study will aid the City in determining when it ~nding the ~ian River consultant,, imated cost ide ! an to include the area encompassing water users along the uses, permits, and water rights that are on record Council with proposal for the scope of work to include stimated timeline Motion failed b Councilmembers call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin and Baldwin. NOES: owen, and Mayor Ashiku. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. M/S McCowen g the City Manager to acquire additional information concerning the scope of work (separated by specific areas), cost, and how long it would take to complete the study to include the expanded area; and provide this information to Council for consideration at its next meeting, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 10. NEW BUSINESS a. Discussion and Possible Adoption of Resolution SuDDortin_c~ Marriaqe Ec~ualitv- Councilmembers McCowen and Rodin6:56:4! PM Members of the audience that spoke in support of the Resolution were: Jennifer Sookne, Delynn 3 Rogers, and James Sookne Mizell. M/RC McCowen/Baldwin adopting Resolution 2006-23 supporting marriage equality. Discussion followed with regard to the importance of the proposed Resolution and how, or if, it would make an effective statement. Equality rights issues and state legislature adopting same sex marriage measures were also discussed. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Counc Baldwin, and Mayor Ashiku. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ne McCowen, Rodin, 10b. Award of Contract for Alternate Route for 7:22:35 PM Planning Director Stump explained that the Environme~ Council to extend Orchard Avenue to Orr Creek, street further to Brush Street was challenged in co~ The route for Orchard Avenue as it approached and is for the Council to consider selecting a consultant comply with the settlement agreement and determine environmentally superior and feasible. ;nue Extension Report certified by the City ge over the and extend the agreed to con 'he purpose of enda item ~sis so t the City can ~er or not the alternative route is City Attorney Rapport noted that the c evaluated in the RFP. It was his opinion to the specifications contained in the RFP a~ were only to compare the routes ~roposal is more responsive Ied to do. It was Councilmember }nard s' proposal is the least biased. City Attorney contrary to the s matter to Closed Session. ,lained Leonard Ch; the City's R uggested another alternate route, which is ~d recommended the City Council table this It was of the Attorney. ~ncil to discuss this matter in Closed Session, upon the advice 10c. D don and Plar Planning Dir~ tump the timeframes construction compliment the effort= substitute building ' :ernin the Use of Structural En.qineerin~ Consultants to Building Permit ApplicationsT:4P:40 PM ~ed that there have been failures with the current contractor to meet g the first and second reviews, which have caused delays in uested that Council allow staff to explore utilizing a second firm to ;oastland Engineering to share the duties of structural engineering and ction services for the City. Council discussed the City's Building Permit structural engineering review program. A suggestion was made to build disincentives into the contract pertaining to when an engineering firm does not meet deadlines. It was the consensus of the City Council to direct Staff to submit a Request for Proposal (RFP) and bring the proposal and further information back to Council for consideration. Councilmember Crane inquired of City Attorney Rapport if he has a conflict of interest in this matter, and Mr. Rapport stated that he did not see a conflict of interest since the City isn't considering a specific firm at this time. Council directed staff to Email the proposed RFP to Councilmember Crane and Mayor Ashiku for review of the RFP and to make appropriate comments to Staff. 11. COUNCIL REPORTSg:00:43 PM Councilmember Baldwin reported that there is a significant Inland (IWPC) meeting scheduled for tomorrow involving a closed sess concerning the topic of a proposed compromise settlement with stated that soon he will ask the City Council to agendize the City of Ukiah elections. lnd Power Commission IWPC's attorney of the Eel River. He n contribution limits for Councilmember Rodin inquired as to the status of City concerning formula business and form based pc conflict of interest City Attorney Rapport explained that there is approximately 10 attorneys representing 15 cities that a~ with the League of California Cities sent an email Committee (FPPC) is now considering :ion of a small ci The FPPC is reconsidering a regulation f( :ities and it is year. group ema :onsisting of this staff attorney that the Fair Political Practices committee to take up this issue. take up the matter next Councilmember Rodin stated that she will the League and that a po,, :e in the Policy Committee. Services Policy Committee for fall within the purview of that 12. CITY City Manager Horsley a 3, 2005 and ~, Co K REPORTS .h Christmas party will be held on December City Gl Ulvila to attend a begin in th place on the g of 2006. r ~er 2006 ,llot. ~uld be out of the office during the week of December 6th Seminar. She reminded Council of the election and noted that preparation for that election would mended Council consider any ballot measure(s) they wish to Mayor Ashiku re Museum, Redwood Street in Willits, is sch Ihe third annual Memories in Motion from the Mendocino County History Project Wing and Engine House, located on Commercial ~led for December 3, 2005 through January 31,2006. Adjourned to sit as the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency: 8:07:47 PiV[ Reconvened: g:! 8:22 P1V[ City Attorney Rapport, upon consulting the Brown Act, advised that Council would be discussing another item in Closed Session under Government Code §54956.9a in the case of Sidnie Court/Ford Street Neighborhood v the City of Ukiah, filed in Mendocino County Superior Court. Adjourned to Closed Session: 8:18:22 PM 13. CLOSED SESSION a. Conference with Labor Ne.qotiator~ Government Code ~54957.6 Employee Negotiations: Electric, Miscellaneous, and Direct Units Negotiator: City Manager bm Conference with Real Property Ne.qotiator~ Government Property: 120-A Leslie Street City Negotiator: Candace Horsley Negotiating Parties: City of Ukiah/Vernon Watkins Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment .54956.8 Reconvened: 10:54 PM 10b. Award of Contract for Alternate Route An M/S McCowen/Crane awarding the contract to conform to the study outlines in the RFP; carried by th Councilmembers Crane, McCowen, Rodin, and Mayor ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 14. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the Marie Ulvila, City Clerk is for m~'' :10 Avenue ',n condition irm vote: ES: Councilmember Baldwin. M ITEM NO. 6.a MEETING DATE: February 1,2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: REJECTION OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES RECEIVED FROM PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC AND CHUCK JOHNSTON AND REFERRAL OF BOTH CLAIMS TO THE JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY, REDWOOD EMPIRE MUNICIPAL INSURANCE FUND A claim from Pacific Gas and Electric was received by the City of Ukiah on December 9, 2005 alleging damage to their gas main when City crews were working at the south west corner of Low Gap and South State Street assisting Granite Construction in the installation of a new water main. In addition, on January 4, 2006, a claim was received from Chuck Johnston alleging damage to his oven control panel due to a power failure on December 26 or December 27, 2005. Pursuant to City policy, it is recommended the City Council reject these claims as stated and refer them to the Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund (REMIF). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Reject claims for damages received from Pacific Gas and Electric and Chuck Johnston and refer both to the Joint Powers Authority, Redwood Empire Municipal Insurance Fund. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Alternative action not advised by the City's Risk Manager. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Yes Claimant Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager/Budget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Claim from Pacific Gas and Electric, pages 1-7.' 2. Claim from Chuck Johnston, pages 1 -5. APPROVED:~~~ Candace Horsley, City MaWr Pacific Gas and Electric Company December 5, 2005 CITY OF UKIAH-CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 300 SEMINARY AVE UKIAH, CA 95482 L~! Lit:6 9 2005 Ct~ OF UKIAH ' CiTY CL. FRK'S DEF:ARTMENT ATTACHMENT _ /,,, Credit and Records P. 0. Box 8329 Stockton, CA 95208 Gentlemen: This refers to an incident that occurred on October 18, 2005, when you damaged our underground gas facilities by cutting it with'a power saw by North State Street in Ukiah.. The conditions under which this damage occurred indicate you may be legally responsible for the damage and, in our opinion, we have the right to recover from you the cost of repairs. Enclosed is our invoice in the amount of $5,500.65. If you have insurance coverage, please provide the name, and address of your insurance carrier, as well as your policy number in the space provided below. We will then forward our bill for damages to them. Please call me at 1-800-945-5251, Extension 7478, if you have any questions. Sincerely, Connie Loo Claims Representative Enclosure File No.: E2005280800 ( ) Submit invoice directly to me for payment. · ( ) Submit invoice to insurance carrier. Insurance Company: Address: State: Contact Name: Insured's Name: _Zip:_ Agent: _City: Phone: _Claim/Policy No.: _File No.: E2005280800 File With: City Clerk's Office City of Uk|ah 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah, CA 95482 CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY OF UKIAH RESERVE FOR FILING STAMP i.;cC 9 2005 CiTY OF UKIAH · . A claim must be presented, as prescribed by the Government Cocle of the State of California, by the claimant or a person acting on his/her behalf and shall show the following: If additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets, identifying the paragraph(s) being answered. I. Name and address of the Claimant; Name of Claimant: PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC C0. Address: PO BOX 8329 STOCKTON, CA 95208 Address to which the person presenting the claim desires notices to be sent: Name of Addressee:pacific gas & electric co Telephone: 800-945-5251 x-7478 Address: PO BOX 8329 Stockton, CA 95208 The date. place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted. Date of Occurrence: 10/18/05 9 am · Time of Occurrence: Location: North State.St,, Ukiah Circumstances gi<dr~g rise to this claim: Granite Construction was dig.ging for City of Ukiah Water Main Replacement Job. They came upon an old 6" steel gas stub and 'thOught it. was dead. City water crew tr'ied to cut it out of way with a power saw. General description of the indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so fa~' as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim. , Damaged g'as main The name or names of the public employee or employees causing the injury, damage, or loss, if known. If amount claimed totals less than $10,000: The amount claimed, if it totals less then ten thousand dollars ($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage, or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation ol the amount claimed. Amount Claimed and basis for computation: $5, 500. 65 (see attached invoice & breakdown) If amount claimed exceeds $10,o00: If the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim would be a limited civil case. A limited civil case is one where the recovery sought, exclusive of attorney fees, interest and court costs does not exceed $25,000. An unlimited civil case is one in which the recovery sought is more than $25,000. (See CCP § 86.) E~ Limited Civil Case ~----] Unlimited Civil Case are required to provide the information requested above in order to comply with Government Codel Claimant(s) Social .Security Number(s): .(optional) N/a Claimant(s) Date(s) of Birth: N/A Name,. address and telephone number of any witnesses to the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted; 10. If the claim involves medical treatment for a claimed injury, please provide the name, address and telephone number of any doctors or hospitals providing treatment: N/A I1. If applicable, please attach any medical bills or reports or similar documents supporting your claim. If the claim relates to an automobile accident: Claimant(s) Auto Ins,.Co.: N/A Telephone: Address: ' Insurance Policy No.: Insurance Broker/Agen. t: Telephone: Address: Claimant's Veh. Lic. No.: Vehicle Make/Year: Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.: Expiration: If applica.ble, p/ease ~ach any repair bi//s, estimates or similar documents supporting your c/aim. __ Page 2 of 3 READ CAREFULLY' For ali accident claims, place on the following diagram the name City of Ukiah vehicle; location of City of Ukiah vehicle at time of of streets, including NoR. h, East, South, and West; indicate place of accident by mX" and by showing house numbers or distances to street comem. If City of UkJah vehicle was involved, designate by letter "A" location of City of Ukiah vehicle when you first saw it, and by ~B" location ol~ yourself or your vehicle when you first saw accident by "A-I" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the accident by "B-1" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. CURB 4~'-' SIDEWALK -- PARKWAY I SIDEWALK ..... _ I CURB o.¸ Warning: Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant to California Civil Prodecures §1038, the City/Agency may seek to recover all costs of defense in the event an action is filed which is later determined not to have been brought in good faith and with reasonable cause. · .. · Page 3 of 3 99950006626871500005500650000550065 0006626871 -5 11/30/2005 $ 5,500.65 I I CITY OF UKIAH PG&E WATER DEPARMENT Box99?300 Sacramento, CA 300 SEMINARY AVE 958~-73oo UKIAH CA 95482 Please return this Portion with your payment. Thank you. When Making Inquiries or Address Changes, Please Contact' Non-Energy Collection Unit P.O. Box 8329 Stockton CA 95208-8329 (800) 945-5251 555003 0006626871 -5 GPT LOW GAP RD & N STATE ST DIG-IN Reference Number: E2005280800 GAS LOST TO ATMOSPHERE (EXPENSE) 551 EA LABOR TO REPAIR GAS FACILITIES-EXPENSE ' 1 EA Line Item Subtotal 551.30 4,949.35 5,500.65 I AMOUNT NOW DUE $ NOTE' This invoice reflects current charges only. Any past due amounts will be billed separately. 5,500.651 ~ Recycled Paper ~ Standard Cost Worksheet Party: Our File No.: S & O No.: Date of Loss: City of Ukiah I Granite Construction Co. E2005280800 40443444 1011812005 Class Labor Hours Standard Rate Field Services 1.50 90.61 Engineering/Mapping 3.50 70.04 Construction Services 11.50 103.43 Construction Services 8.50 103.43 Construction Services 8.50 103.43 Gas Estimating 10.50 100.29 Subtotal Labor Charges 4381.90 Total Labor Charges Other Expenses Labor Expense Overheads Gas Lostto Atmosphere(Expense) Total OtherExpenses 567.45 551.30 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: Our costs are billed in accordance with the Uniform System of Accounts prescribed by the Federal Regulatory Commission. Our right to recovery for these costs are delineated in Public Utility Code 7952 enacted in 1951( Copy on Enclosed). $4,381.90 $ 1,118.75 $5,500.65 Labor Charge 135.92 245.14 1189.46 879.17 879.17 1053.04 UTILITY CORPORATIONS Z7952. Liability for injury to fixtures or equipment: Liability for injury to subaqueous cables.' Any person Who injures or destroys, through want of proper care, any necessary or useful facility or equipment of any telegraph, telephone, electrical, or gas corporation, is liable to the corporation for all damages m~stained thereby. The measure of d.am~ges to the facility or equipment injured or destroyed shall bo tho cost to repair or replace the property injured or destroyed including direct and alloc~tted costs for labor, mt,c~i.'?ls, supervision, suppff~, tools, taxes, mnsportatioa, i:let~~ by such tele~ph, tqephone,'elec~cal or'gas. '"" ...... ~~onsinconformi witha st¢ ..:.~..,~;,~,,> ~,,.~.:~.,..: .,. .... ty sy m of accounts .......... ' W~V'-~of such other 'damagc~ ~ioncd' thereby :~':~y'Bo ' , .... authorized bY law. · · .,. ..... ~>i~e, ssel. v hich, by dra -]ts anchor or ...: . .. <...:,,.~.:~;?,.:,?.,.,~:.<.~,-...,:....: ,.~ <,.~ .. gglng , .otherwi. ~, breaks '.," .' '..'..~ ~ '/.' · , -' - . /4.~;~i~g~PJ.i):!..~:,:."',.· :"i<' ::' : ': ,' ': ',".: ' · '.. ' · ',C. ;" ', .. ". ,' ' '~: .'.; )' . · · ,,..:: ,<.~. ,.,: ...:.. ,: .-..,. :..~,~J_, ~ ,,,~,.,..~,,,<..: ...,,, .... Y ~. y. ..Cablc ora telc .,. ::..,....~...::,.:: .... .:<~ ............ ~., ;~,~ ,.,:~ ,.~.:.,<,-,,...,. ~.. ....... ............. ._, ,-.,,.. ,....,......¥..>,.,.,.~ !) .... ~'?-' , "."":9".?:' "','.':"' ~'; ":':"'""',>.':~,i s , ' ..... ~ ..... ~ "', ' ' · ' '"' . ...... ' "'" · · ')' -' '. ' ,"'-'~ '-<..,.','i ' .. '..;,'-. .... :: ~;~' ,',. . ' , i"...~!:~','??::;~i::,. :, :: ,:',,>.i:.:~'~ .- ;: ::,'.':.:?'.;. i?; ~¢:.:~'! ~:-' :<.-~,':' ,-'~ ~":'::-5 ':.~ -i"~'"::.~ ~'~?~'~i~:).::'):c~'!":' '. :,i'"'::;',,:::' ' :-'";~ ~:~'¢,':.:"":.':,'".'::' ;' '"'.:'-'>~','-:".:',? ';. :~.- ':': <~'~,!:::~' ':;';:.. '. ~¢:2..!~ .... .... · ' :-";' ~.,7:';'iY;'.;~,',".",' ..... ~ ',:~V~:". ', .-:~' :' ':~:': · :.' · ~' ' · ' ." . ";,~ ?',.:'}'? :.:' .~ ,' .'' · :. '" '." ~ .:':::': ',7" ,:',':"- ..... .!.': ·· :'":'.,: ..,',:. ~:,~_.'~, OD · . - .... ...... ',.' · - · .', ,=-~'."::> ~.. · ' '.-..' : :.,:.. ?:.~,.~,,'<:'..' ':::."'ye:: :' ..' '- ' . . .... .:... . :' ' ,. ;.:".: ~.::':~. i' . ."".' ..:" .' ".:..'~: .-'/'-.;:;~?=:.o~:" ::.., :,,;.s,',d ' o'... i'' . ........ :{'":';;k"?'~) ' .:' - ............. .-: :.::::?;1,'~:'.~~:195i. g~ :on: (a) F~ CC':~37.: ~'~~a~; .................... ' ~ -,' ' .-;,'" ':. ' ' ,,: -'. ~'7a-"-?..::::,....~:?.~.'~.~.. · ': -' .. . ~d by 8tats 1905 Ch 385 ~, l FP 491q92,' amcildcd by 8tat~ 1929 p :t79, Stats 1931 Ch 795 )'. 1 p 1656. Co) 8tats 1862 Ch2621~ 8 p 290. (c} Stats 1857 Ch 147 l; p 171. (d} 8tats 1850 Ch 128 Y. 152 p 370. Amended by Stats 1969 Ch 709 g 1, (1) substituting"facility or _equipment:for 'T~xtum" in'tho fnzt sentenoo of the fu~t paragraph; (2) S,,u,~~g "electrical or" for" or electrical power corporation or the -lOt ~¢ stmaqueous in the second par~.h; (6) ~g ~ci~~ for "eleCh~'~"powc~ in the second'paragraph; and (7) del~ting "the" before ¢'piP~lin¢" in ibc second paragraph. Re '--~-'---~s OffiCe~ City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Ave THE CITY OF' UKIAH Ukiah, CA 95482 ATTACHMENT_ __. CLAIM FOR MONEY OR DAMAGES AGAINST RESERVE FOR FILING STAMP CLAIM NO. A claim must be presented, as prescribed by the Government Code of the State of Califorr~t¢7)l~! the claimant acting on his/her behalf and shall show the following: Il"/ i"/i If additional space is needed to provide your information, please attach sheets being answered. 1. Name and address of the Claimant: Name of Claimant: ~~~ ¢/~~~ Address: //~ ~. ~~ ) . Address to which the person presenting the claim desires notices to be sent: Name of Addressee: Address: Telephone: The date, place and other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted. Date of Occurrence: ,/,,~-- ,,~-~ -,¢~/,,/,¢~ -,¢,¢ ~'-<:¢~-*~"'Time of Occurrence: ,,,/,/,,/:2,~ _. ,~ Location: /__~~g"~,~-T' /'~_~/_,~y ~'"~'"" //<~)<:~ _~Z~~ Circumstances giving rise to this claim: o General ~description of the indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so far as it may 'be known at the time of the presentation of the claim. . The name or names of the public employee or employees causing the injury, damage, or loss, if known. Page 1 of 3 If amount 'claimed totals less than $10,000: The amount claimed, if it totals less than ten thousand dollars .($10,000) as of the date of presentation of the claim, including the estimated amount of any prospective injury, damage, or loss, insofar as it may be known at the time of the presentation of the claim, together with the basis of computation of the amount claimed. Amount Claimed and basis for computation: If amount claimed exceeds $10,000: if the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000), no dollar amount shall be included in the claim. However, it shall indicate whether the claim would be a limited civil case. A limited civil case is one where the recovery sought, exclusive of attorney fees, interest and court costs does not exceed $25,000. An unlimited' civil case is one in which the recovery sought is more than $25,000. (See CCP § 86.) ["~ Limited Civil Case Unlimited Civil-Case You are required to' provide the information requested above in order to comply with Government Codel i9.1o. ' I . Claimant(s) Social Security Number(s): (optional) · / / - Claimant(s) Date(s) of Birth: Name, address and telephone number of any witnesses to the occurrence or transaction which gave rise to the claim asserted' 10. If the claim involves medical treatment for a claimed injury, please provide the name, address and telephone number of any doctors or' hospitals providin/.q treatment': 11. If applicable, please attach any medical bills or repo'rts, or similar documents supporting your claim. If the claim relates to an automobile accident: Auto Ins. Co.: ,j~ ~/,~ Claimant(s) Address: Telephone: · Insurance Policy No.: Insurance Broker/Agent: Telephone: Address: Claimant's Veh. Lic. No.: Vehicle Make/Year: Claimant's Drivers Lic. No.: Expiration: If applicable, p/ease attach any repair bills, estimates or similar documents supporting your claim, Page 2 of 3 READ CAREFULLY :or all ~ccident claims,, place on the following diagram the name City of Ukiali vehicle; location of City of Ukiah vehicie at time of )f streets, including North,.East, South, and West; indicate place )f accident by "X" and by showing house numbers or distances to ;treet corners. If City of Ukiah vehicle was involved, designate )y letter "A" location of City of Ukiah vehicle when. you first saw it, ~nd by "B" location of yourself or your vehicle when you first saw accident by "A-I" and location of yourself or your vehicle at the time of the aCcident by "B-I" and the point of impact by "X." NOTE: If diagrams below do not fit the situation, attach hereto a proper diagram signed by claimant. SIDEWALK CURB ,1' PARKWAY SIDEWALK CURB -'-4, Warning: Presentation of a false claim is a felony (Penal Code §72). Pursuant to California Civil Prodecures §1038, the City/Agency may seek to recover all costs of defense in the event an action is filed which is later determined r~ot to have been brought in good faith and with reasonable cause. Page 3 of 3 SEARS HOME CENTRAL State Reg #: 1q28C NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 598! SUNRISE MALL CI~US HEIGHTS, CA 95611 (888') 4MY-HOME Sears #: 8888388 Dec 29, 2885 Technician ID~ 8881842 Service Order Number: 95632458 - HucK JOHNSTON 1188 W CLAY ST UKIAH, CA 95482 (787) 462-6588 MDSE: Range,lyr,O488/U688 Brand Name: KENMORE MOdel Number: 88575134388 Serial Number: RR821t258 Service Requested: NOTRUNNING Labor Performed - Collect: Elec Cunt, Repl $ 133.88 PM Add On, Tach (CC only) $ 94.95 Labor Sub-Total $ 167.95 Net Labor $ t67.95 Tax on Labor $ 8.88 Total Labor $ t87.95 Parts Required - Collect: i CNTRL-ELEC $ 388.78 Parts Sub-Total $ 386,78 Net Parts $ 386,76 Tax on Parts $ 28.84 Total Parts $ 414,88 Estimated Grand Total: $ 582.75 Estimated Customer Total: $ 582.75 Pre-Paid Amount: -$ 8.88 Customer Amount Due: $ 582.75 Customer Slgnature) STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY: An estimate as required (Section 9844 of the California Business and Professions Code) for repair shall be given to the customer by the service dealer in writing, and the service dealer mag not chorge for work done or parts supplied in excess of the estimate without prior consent of the customer. ~here provided In writing, the service dealer mag charge a reasonable fee for services provided in' determining the nature of the malfunction in preparation of a written estimate for repair. For information contact the Bureau of Electronic and ~pllance Repair, Department of Consumer Affairs, Sacramento 95814 Thank you for calling SEARS HOME CENTRAL. SEARS HOME CENTRAL State Rag #: 1428C · NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 5981 SUNRISE MALL CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA 95811 (888) 4MY-HOME Sears #: 8888368 Technician ID: 8881842 Service Order Number: CHUCK JOHNSTON 1188 g CLAY ST UKIAH, CA 95482 (78?) 462-6588 MDSE: Brand Name: Model Number: Serial Number: Service Requested: NOTRUNNING Dec 29, 2885 i I 95832458 Range, lyr,O488/U688 KENMORE 665?5134988 RR8211258 Labor Performed - Collect: Eiec CoGt, Repl $ 139.88 PM Add On, Tech (CC only) $ 34.95 Labor Sub-Total $ 167.95 Net Labor $ 167.95 Tax on Labor $ 8.88 Total Labor $ t67.95 Parts Required - Collect: I CNTRL-ELEC $ 388.?6 Parts Sub-Total $ 388.78 Net Parts $ 386.78 Tax on Parts $ 28.84 Total Parts $ 414.88 Estimated Grand Total: $ 582.75 Estimated Customer Total: $ 582.75 Pre-Paid Amount: -$ 8.88 Customer Amount Due: $ 582.75 Customer Signature: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY: An estimate as required (Section 9844 of the California Business and Professions Code) for repair shall be given to the customer by the service dealer in writing, and the service dealer mag not charge for work done or parts supplied In excess of the estimate without prior consent of the customer, ghere provided In writing, the service dealer may charge a reasonable fee for services provided in determining the nature of the malfunction In preparation of a written estimate for repair. For Information contact the Bureau .of Electronic and Appliance Repair, Department of Consumer AfFairs, Sacramento 958i4 Thank you for calling SEARS HOME CENTRAL pa~p,le ~*U~tl~ ~ OeSlO se OUlOPd sp~ ~ aulOtl Jno~ ~esI I1,~- snolPmlOSUOO · pue ' · mol ~Jl no al ~lUleJ1 ~ SlOOl ~,,~. SE~S HOME CENTRAL Store Reg #: 1428C NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 5981 SUNRISE MALL CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA 95811 (888) 4HY-HOME Seors #: 8888388 Technician ID: 8881842 Service Order Number: CHUCK JOHNSTON 1t86 g CLAY ST UKIAH, CA 95482 (787) 462-8588 Dec 29, 2885 95832458 MDSE,. Range,tyr,O488/U688 Broad Name~ KENMORE Model Number: 88575i34388 Serial Number~ RR82ii258 Technician Comments: Component Failure declined repair trying to get city of uklah to pay for repair . had power failer and control n at working Labor Performed - Collect: Elec Cunt, Repi $ t33.88 PM Add On, Tech (CC only) $ 34.95 Labor Sub-Total $ t87.95 CUSTOMER DECLINES ESTIMATE B~sic Home Call Charge $ 89.88 Net Labor $ 69.88 T~x on Labor $ 8.88 Total Lobar $ 69.88 Grand Total: $ 69.88 Cugtomer Total: $ 89.88 Pre-Paid Amount: -$ 8.88 Customer Amount Due: $ 89.88 CUSTOMER DECLINES ESTIMATE Total Amount Collected $ 89.88 Cash Payment S F/[ Returned checks are subject to n s~ce charge of $28 or the maximum alloued bg lac. Collection costs and ail penalties permitted by law will also be assessed. ge mag electronically collect returned checks, seruice charges, and other applicable charges. Customer Signatupe: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ONLY: An estimate as required (Section 9844 of the California Business and Professions Code) for repair shall be given to the customer by the service dealer in uritlng, nnd the geruice dea{er mny not chnrge for work done or part~ supplied in excess of the estimate without prior consent of the customer, ghere proulded In writing, the service dealer mag charge a reasonnble fee for services provided in determining the nature of the mn}function in preparation o~ a orltten estimate for repair. For information contact the Bureau of Electronic and Apr{lance Repair, Department of Consumer Affairs, Sacramento 958i4 Thank you for calling SEARS HOME CENTRAL : City of Ukiah RISK MANAGEMENT OFFICE Fax Transmittal TO: Jeff Davis REMIF (707) 938-0374 FAX TELEPHONE NUMBER DATE: 12/22/05 FROM' Sue Goodrick, Risk Manager NUMBER OF PAGES, INCLUDING COVER SHEET 6 Special Instructions/Notes: Hi Jeff - Attached is response provided by Utility Department on 12-26-05 power outage incident. Mr. Johnston has already called asking status. I'd like to move forward with denying this claim at our earliest opportunity - assuming you agree. Please advise. Thx Sue IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL PAGES, PLEASE CALL (707) 463-6287 Thank You AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 6.b DATE' February 1, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY FOR THE CITY OF UKIAH BACKGROUND: On December 30, 2005, the City Manager acting as the Director of Emergency Services prepared a proclamation declaring a local emergency due to excessive rain, flooding and storm conditions. The City Council ratified that action at a Special Meeting held on January 5, 2006. State law further requires the City Council to review the continuing existence of the emergency situation every twenty-one (21) days. On January 18, 2006, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2006-34 which extended the existence of a local emergency. Staff is recommending the approval of the attached resolution further extending the existence of a local emergency for the City of Ukiah for twenty-one additional days unless terminated sooner. RECOMMENDED ACTION: City Council approve resolution extending its declaration of the existence of a local emergency for the City of Ukiah with additional review to follow within the next 21 days as required by State law. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sue Goodrick, Risk ManagedBudget Officer Candace Horsley, City Manager 1 - Resolution Extending Existence of Local Emergency APPROVED:~~--~~"~ Candace Horsley, City M'h~nager RESOLUTION NO. 2006 - RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY WHEREAS, Section 8630, Article 14 of the California Emergency Services Act requires that the City Council for the City of Ukiah review, at least every 21 days until such local emergency is terminated, the need for continuing the local emergency; and WHEREAS, a period of local emergency presently exists in the City of Ukiah in accordance with the Proclamation issued by the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Ukiah and ratified by the City Council on the 5th day of January 2006, as a result of conditions of extreme peril to the safety of persons and property caused by excessive rain, flooding and storm conditions; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ukiah upon review determined the need to extend the existence of a local emergency on January 18, 2006; and WHEREAS, the City Council has again reviewed the need to continue the existence of a local emergency; and WHEREAS, the situation resulting from said conditions of extreme peril is still deemed beyond the control of normal protective services, personnel, equipment and facilities of the City of Ukiah; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council for the City of Ukiah, State of California does hereby proclaim the extension of the period of local emergency for twenty-one additional days unless sooner terminated. PASSED AND ADOPTED this call vote: day of February, 2006, by the following roll AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Mark Ashiku, Mayor AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 6.c DATE: February 1, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: REPORT OF ACQUISITION OF REPLACEMENT COMPUTER EQUIPMENT FROM DELL MARKETING, L.P. SUMMARY: Section 1522 of the Municipal Code requires a report be filed with the City Council regarding purchases between $5,000 and $10,000. In accordance with the above mentioned section this report is submitted to the City Council regarding the acquisition of replacement computer equipment for the following departments: Purchase to replace older computers that are not compatible with software that must be used by the Fire Department for standardized internet EMS reporting effective February 1, 2006. Information Technology department confirmed through testing that the existing computers were not capable of operating the software at an acceptable level. The Purchasing Department issued a Purchase Order for replacement computer equipment through Dell Marketing, L.P. - PO# 036505 for $6847.28. Funds are included in the FY05-06 budget for this purpose in account 100.2101.690.000 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding acquisition of replacement computer equipment from Dell Marketing, L.P. in the amount of $6847.28 ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/A Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: N/A Prepared by: Jeff King, PC Support Specialist Coordinated with: Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: None APPROVED ~ ~/~~ 'C~noace :~'~ley, City~vlanager AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT ITEM NO. 6.d DATE: February 1 2006 SUBJECT: REPORT OF BID AWARD TO WILLIAMS USA IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,033.84 FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF ONE DAVID CLARK IN CAB COMMUNICATION SYSTEM SUMMARY: Section 1522 of the Municipal Code requires a report be filed with the City Council regarding purchases between $5,000 and $10,000. In accordance with the above mentioned section, this report is submitted to the City Council regarding the bid award to Williams USA in the amount of $5,033.84, for the purchase and installation of an in cab communications system for the newly acquired 2001 American La France Fire Engine. An in cab communication system consists of headsets which are connected to the radio system for communication between the Captain, Engineer and Firefighter during a call or emergency. The system also reduces noise from the engine and siren when en route to a fire. This system is part of our OSHA Compliant Hearing Protection and Safety program and is compatible with our existing equipment. The American La France Fire Engine did not come with an in cab communications system. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive report regarding bid award to Williams USA in the amount of $5,033.84 from account 699.2101.800.002 for the purchase and installation of an in cab communications system. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: N/A Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A City Council Policy Kurt Latipow Fire Chief Candace Horsley, City Manager A P P ROVE D.'_ ~.,~c.~ ~..~'"~% Candace Horsley, City~nager ITEM NO. 6. e DATE: February 1,2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AMENDING APPENDIX TO CITY CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE It has come to the attention of the City Clerk's office that the City's Conflict of Interest Code as found in the Appendix to the Code should be amended to redefine certain position titles. The City Council is the code reviewing body for City agencies. These amendments are reflected in the Appendix as highlighted areas. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution Amending Appendix to Conflict of Interest Code. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Determine modifications must be made to the Appendix, identify changes, and adopt Resolution with revised Appendix. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ~~ Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Resolution Amending Appendix to Conflict of Interest Code APPROVEDi' ~~~ CanSace Horsley, City Manager ASR:Conflict2006 RESOLUTION NO. 2006- RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING APPENDIX TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE WHEREAS, 1. The Political Reform Act, Government Code § 81000, et seq., requires state and local government agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict of interest codes; and 2. The Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) has adopted a regulation (2 C.C.R. § 18730) containing the terms of a standard conflict of interest code, which can be incorporated by reference and may be amended by the FPPC after public notice and hearings to conform to amendments in the Act; and 3. On March 6, 1991, in Resolution No. 91-46, the City Council adopted the standard conflict of interest code by reference; and 4. Resolution No. 91-46 contained an Appendix which set forth the disclosure categories for the various positions in the City of Ukiah government who make decisions that could affect an economic interest; and 5. Various job titles and duties have changed since the Appendix was originally adopted and the Appendix requires amendment to reflect the currently effective job titles and duties within the City of Ukiah; and 6. Under Government Code § 87306.5 every other year beginning in 1992, the City Council must either amend its City Code or determine that no amendments are necessary. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Resolution supersedes all other resolutions establishing Appendix to Conflict of Interest Code in the City of Ukiah and the attached Appendix to Conflict of Interest Code (Exhibit A) is hereby adopted, effective February 1,2006, and shall remain in effect until further amended by resolution of the City Council. Resolution No. 2006- Page 1 of 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of February 2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN' ABSENT: ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Mark Ashiku, Mayor Resolution No. 2006- Page 2 of 3 EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 2006- APPENDIX TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES FOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE (Effective February 1, 2006) RANGE OF DUTIES POSITION REPORTABLE INTERESTS a. Employees whose duties are broad and indefinable Mayor*, Councilmembers*, City Manager*, Economic Development Coordinator/Assistant to the City Manager, City Attorney*, City Treasurer, Community Services Director, Finance Director*, Fire Chief Fire Battalion Chief, Planning Commissioners*, Planning Director, Police Chief, Police Captain, Public Utilities Director, Public Works Director/City Engineer, Risk Manager/ Budget Officer All sources of income, interests in real property and investments and business positions in business entities Employees whose duties involve contracting or purchasing for supplies: a: Entire City City Clerk, Deputy City Clerk Deputy Public Works Director, MIS Coordinator, Purchasing Agent, Information Technology (IT) Supervisor Investments and business positions in business entities, which provide services, supplies and materials, machinery or equipment of the type utilized by the entire City (excluding Schedules B & C1) b. A specific City Department Airport Manager, Recreation Supervisor, Community Services Supervisor, Museum Director, Electric Supervisor, Engineering Associate, Senior Civil Engineer, Electrical Distribution Engineer, Water Utilities Project Engineer Investments and business positions in business entities, and sources of income which provide services, supplies, materials, machinery, or equipment of the type utilized by the designated-employee's department (all schedules excluding schedules B & C1) Included solely for disqualification purposes. Disclosure requirements imposed by Government Code Section 87200. Solely required to complete Form 700 or any successor form. (See 2 C.C.R. {}18730, Section 3.) Note: If the City hires "consultants" as defined in 2 C.C.R. {}12700, the City Manager shall describe in writing the consultant's duties and, based upon that description, shall determine the scope, if any of his or her reporting obligations. The City Manager shall forward a copy of this determination to the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 6.f DATE:February 1, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE ROOF OVERLAY FOR THE UKIAH VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER, SPECIFICATION NO. E25629 SUMMARY: The City Council awarded the contract for the roof overlay for the Ukiah Valley Conference Center on October 19, 2005 to Hemminger Construction, Inc. (contractor) of Santa Rosa, California in the amount of $91,900. The Council budgeted an initial $75,000 in Fiscal Year 2004/2005 and approved an additional $16,900 plus a 10% contingency for Fiscal Year 2005/2006 for a total project cost of $101,090.00. Expenses for the project were charged to the 410.6190.800.000 Conference Center account. The work of the contract was completed by the contractor in substantial conformance with the approved plans and specifications on January 10, 2006. The final contract cost was $100,276.00 and was within the 10% contingency. Final payment of the 10 percent retention will be made to the contractor after 35 days from the date the Notice of Completion is filed with the County Recorder. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Accept the work as complete; 2. Direct the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion with the County Recorder for the Roof Overlay for the Ukiah Valley Conference Center, Specification No. E25629. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: None. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Notice of Completion Candace Horsley, ~~anager CC 6.f NOC Conference Center Overlay Project Please return to: CITY OF UKIAH 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, California 95482-5400 (707) 463-6200 Attachment: #1 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: . , That the real property described is owned by the following whose address is: City of Ukiah, a Municipal Corporation, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California 95482-5400 That the nature of the title to the Roof Overlay for the Ukiah Valley Conference Center. Specification No. E25629 of all said owners is that of fee simple. 3. That on the 10th day of January 2006, the Contract work for this project was actually completed. . That the name and address of the Contractor is Hemminger Construction, 3545 Oak Haven Court, Santa Rosa, California, 95404. . That the real property herein referred to is situated in the County of Mendocino, State of California, and is described as follows: City-owned property identified as the Ukiah Valley Conference Center, 200 South School Street within the City of Ukiah. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. City Council Approval CITY OF UKIAH, a Municipal Corporation By: Date Marie Ulvila, City Clerk Date STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MENDOClNO } The undersigned, being duly sworn says: That he/she/they is/are the person(s) signing the above document; that he/she/they has/have read the same, and know(s) the contents thereof, and that the acts stated therein are true. Marie Ulvila, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF MENDOCINO } Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this day of , 2005, by Marie Ulvila, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me. SEAL (Date) (Notary Signature) AGENDA ITEM NO: 6.a MEETING DATE: February 1, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION PROVIDING CONDITIONAL CONSENT TO THE FORMATION BY THE MENDOCINO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF A COUNTYVVIDE LODGING AND BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT THAT INCLUDES LODGING BUSINESSES LOCATED IN THE CITY OF UKIAH SUMMARY: At its ]anuary 18, 2006, meeting the City Council discussed the request from the Mendocino County Lodging Association for the City Council's consent to the formation of a countywide lodging and business improvement district that included lodging businesses in the City of Ukiah. The City Council indicated that it would be willing to grant that consent, if certain conditions to that approval were agreed to by the Board of Supervisors. Those conditions included: 1. For the purposes of complying with H&S Code Section 36525, regarding a majority protest, the Board shall separately determine whether written protests were received from the owners of affected lodging businesses in the City that will pay more than 50 percent of the assessments proposed to be levied on lodging businesses located in the City. If so, the Board will exclude the territory within the City limits from the boundaries of the District. 2. The Board shall not establish at any time an assessment on affected lodging businesses located within the City that exceeds 1% of the gross room revenue received RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt resolution providing conditional consent to formation of countywide lodging and business improvement district ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Revise resolution or deny consent Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: City Council David J. Rapport, City Attorney 1. Resolution Candace Horsley, Cityl~anager by a lodging business for transient occupancy without the prior written consent of the City Council. 3. If so requested in a petition signed by the owners of affected lodging businesses in the City that pay more than 50 percent of the assessments levied on such businesses located in the City, not more than one year from the receipt of such petition, the Board shall remove the territory located within the City limits from the District's boundaries under such procedures as are required by law, including H&S Code Section 36550, unless prior to the completion of such procedures a petition signed by the same owners withdraws the request. The attached resolution provides this conditional consent. The resolution incorporates suggested changes by Councilmember McCowen, Mike Gagna, Fort Bragg City Attorney, Penny Greenwood of the Mendocino County Lodging Association, and .leanine Nadel, Mendocino County Counsel. Nearly identical resolutions have been or will be adopted by Willits and Fort Bragg. The Council asked that this resolution be brought back for approval and that it be placed on consent calendar. ATTACHMENT .... / ,,, RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH PROVIDING CONDITIONAL CONSENT TO THE FORMATION BY THE MENDOCINO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF A BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT THAT INCLUDES LODGING BUSINESSES LOCATED IN THE CITY OF UKIAH WHEREAS, 1. The Board of Supervisors ("Board") of Mendocino County ("County") desires to begin the process to form the Mendocino County Lodging and Business Improvement District ("District") ") pursuant to the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 ("the BID law"; Cal. Streets and Highways ("S&H") Code, sections 36500-36551); and 2. Certain lodging business owners have requested that the Board create a countywide District; and 3. A portion of the territory proposed to be included in the countywide District lies within the boundaries of the City of Ukiah ("City"); and 4. In the opinion of the City Council, the area of the City which lies within the boundaries of the proposed District will be benefited by the improvements and activities of a countywide District, and the purpose sought to be accomplished by the work can best be accomplished by a single, comprehensive scheme of work; and 5. S&H Code § 36521.5 requires the consent of the City Council for the formation of the District described above within the city limits of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby resolves as follows: 1. Subject to the conditions set forth in paragraph 2 below and to the Board agreeing in writing to abide by said conditions, the City Council: a. consents to the County forming the District as described above that includes the territorial jurisdiction of the City of Ukiah; and b. grants the Board jurisdiction for all the purposes in connection with the creation and operation of the proposed District within the boundaries of the City as provided in the BID law. 2. The City Council's consent as set forth in paragraph 1 above is subject to the following conditions: a. For the purposes of complying with H&S Code Section 36525, regarding a majority protest, the Board shall separately determine whether written protests were received from the owners of affected lodging businesses in the City that will pay more than 50 percent of the assessments proposed to be levied on lodging businesses located in the City. If so, the Board will exclude the territory within the City limits from the boundaries of the District. b. The Board shall not establish at any time an assessment on affected lodging businesses located within the City that exceeds 1% of the gross room revenue received by a lodging business for transient occupancy without the prior written consent of the City Council. c. If so requested in a petition signed by the owners of affected lodging businesses in the City that pay more than 50 percent of the assessments levied on such businesses located in the City, not more than one year from the receipt of such petition, the Board shall remove the territory located within the City limits from the District's boundaries under such procedures as are required by law, including H&S Code Section 36550, unless prior to the completion of such procedures a petition signed by the same owners withdraws the request. 3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a certified copy of this Resolution to the Board and the City Clerk of Willits, Fort Bragg, and Point Arena forthwith. PASSED AND ADOPTED on February 1,2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO: 8.a DATE: February 1, 2005 REPORT SUB.1ECT: INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCE REVISING SECTION 9254, ENTITLED "MARI3UANA CULTIVATION" TO DIVISION 9, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 19 OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE SUMMARY: Last October, the City Council discussed possible revisions to the marijuana cultivation ordinance to simplify enforcement and make the ordinance more defensible against legal challenge. After discussing possible revisions, the Council referred the draft ordinance to the Planning Commission for a public hearing and recommendation. On December 14, 2005, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and discussed the proposed ordinance revisions with Staff, the City Attorney, and interested members of the public. After hearing from representatives from the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) and the Medical Marijuana Patients Union, the Planning Commission unanimously agreed to recommend that the City Council introduce and adopt the ordinance revising the marijuana cultivation regulations as proposed by the City Attorney and Staff. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Introduce the Ordinance revising Section 9254 entitled "Marijuana Cultivation" to Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 19 of the Ukiah City Code. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Do not introduce the Ordinance and provide direction to Staff. Citizens Advised: Interested groups, organizations, and members of the public Requested by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager and David Rapport, City Attorney Attachments: 1. Ordinance for Introduction 2. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated December 14, 2005 3. Planning Commission minutes, dated December 14, 2005 APPROVED: Candace Horsley, city Mana~r THE PROPOSED REVISI:ONS: This revised ordinance avoids several problems posed by the existing ordinance: 1. It eliminates the Use Permit requirement which is problematic for the following reasons: a. The public notice requirements of the ordinance publicizes where marijuana is being grown, which is contrary to one of the purposes of the ordinance; to avoid marijuana from being an attractive nuisance. b. The public notice, public hearing and public record features of the permit have been argued to violate the privacy rights of a marijuana patient. c. By issuing a permit, the City may, in fact, be authorizing an activity which is a violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act. d. Requiring an application for a permit has been argued to violate a marijuana grower's 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination by requiring him or her to admit in the application to a violation of federal law. e. The elimination of the permitting requirements will reduce administrative burdens on the City's planning department. Conversely, it will eliminate an argument that the permit is a de facto prohibition, because it is so burdensome. In fact, no one has yet filed for a Use Permit. 2. Eliminating the six plants per parcel limitation in residential zoning districts avoids the potential conflict with SB 420. Adding the language that allows for the abatement of a public nuisance caused by indoor or outdoor growing addresses the problem of someone growing so much marijuana on the property, even indoors, as to create public nuisance. :If that is happening at a particular address, a civil action can be filed to abate the specific nuisance impacts involved. 3. If all marijuana is required to be grown within a secure structure, there is less demonstrable need for banning cultivation within a stated distance of public facilities such as schools or parks. Moreover, eliminating this prohibition: a. Eliminates another argument that the ordinance violates SB 420; and b. Allows a patient who is using marijuana to grow small quantities indoors within 200 or 300 feet of a school, as long as that activity does not create a public nuisance. CONCLUSION: Staff and the Planning Commission are proposing to revise the marijuana cultivation regulations after four months of administering the ordinance. Based on enforcement experiences in response to complaints about marijuana cultivation, as well as legal issues identified by the City Attorney, the changes are suggested to simplify and reduce the burden of enforcement and make the ordinance more defensible against legal challenges. Staff and the Planning Commission also believe that a simple ban on outdoor cultivation will alleviate many of the complaints the City has received. Finally, the draft ordinance would authorize a civil injunctive action if specific public nuisance impacts of indoor cultivation exist in individual cases. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Introduce the Ordinance revising Section 9254 entitled "Marijuana Cultivation" to Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 19 of the Ukiah City Code. Attachment # / ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AMENDING SECTION 9254, ENTITLED: "MARIJUANA CULTIVATION," OF THE UKIAH CITY CODE The City Council of the City of Ukiah hereby ordains as follows: SECTION ONE The City Council hereby finds and declares as follows: 1. In November 1996, the voters of California approved Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, which enacted Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5. Under the Compassionate Use Act, Health and Safety Code Section 11357, making it a crime to possess marijuana, and Section 11358 making it a crime to cultivate marijuana, shall not apply to a patient, or to a patient's primary caregiver, who possesses or cultivates marijuana for the personal medical purposes of the patient upon the written or oral recommendation or approval of a physician. 2. Since the enactment of the Compassionate Use Act, 264 persons with residence addresses in the City of Ukiah have been issued medical marijuana identification cards by the Mendocino County Sheriff's Department. 3. The number of parcels in the City used to grow marijuana has increased substantially. The City Police Department estimates that up to 250 parcels are currently being used to grow marijuana throughout the City's residential neighborhoods. 4. Marijuana plants as they begin to flower and for a period of 2 months or more during the growing season (August - October) produce an extremely strong odor, offensive to many people, and detectable far beyond property boundaries. One popular strain of marijuana is called "Skunk" or "Super Skunk" and has a strong odor that resembles the smell of a skunk. 5. The strong smell of marijuana as well as its visibility from adjacent parcels or from areas accessible to the general public advertises its presence in the neighborhood and creates both an attractive nuisance and the risk of robbery and armed robbery. 6. Recently, the City planning and police departments have received numerous odor complaints related to the growing of marijuana in residential neighborhoods. The Mendocino County Air Quality Management District ("MCAQMD") reports an accelerating ORDINANCE NO. 1 increase in formal air quality complaints associated with the growing of marijuana in residential neighborhoods in the City of Ukiah. In 2002, the MCAQMD received two such complaints; in 2003, five complaints; and by October 31, 2004, it had received over 20 formal complaints for 2004. In addition, in 2004 MCAQMD received an additional two dozen informal calls complaining about marijuana odor in residential neighborhoods in the City. 7. Several highly publicized recent events have called attention to the impact on public safety caused by the growing of marijuana in residential neighborhoods of the City. In one recent incident a property owner was shot in the hand by an intruder caught stealing marijuana from the property owner's backyard. The intruder gained entrance through a neighboring property and passed the neighbor's bedroom window, carrying a loaded handgun. In 2004 the City police department reports numerous calls to the department to respond to incidents related to the growing of marijuana in residential neighborhoods. 8. At a City Council meeting on November 3, 2004, several members of the public testified to problems in their neighborhoods related to marijuana cultivation, including impacts associated with intense cultivation of mature plants, growing as tall as 14 feet, within a 100 square foot area. These impacts ranged from increased traffic to acts of violence and intimidation. 9. The Mendocino County District Attorney refuses to prosecute persons who grow marijuana as long as the person claims to be growing it pursuant to Proposition 215 and within a 100 square foot area on his or her property. As a result, City Police have been unable to take enforcement action, even where cultivation of marijuana for sale is suspected. 10. The City of Ukiah is a relatively small city with a population of approximately 15,000 people. It has three full-time planners in its Planning Department, one part-time code enforcement officer and one building inspector. It has limited resources available to engage in extensive regulation of marijuana cultivation. 11. Limiting the number of plants per parcel that medical marijuana patients may grow in residential neighborhoods and requiring that that they be grown indoors within a secure structure should alleviate a number of the above-described problems. These requirements should substantially reduce the public nuisance caused by the odor of mature plants, it should make marijuana cultivation less visible and less attractive to young people or potential thieves. It should prevent cultivation for sale and the associated public safety problems. 12. It is the City Council's intention that nothing in this Ordinance shall conflict with federal law as contained in the federal Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. Section 801 et seq., nor to otherwise permit any activity that is prohibited under that Act. It is further the City Council's intention that nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed to (1) allow persons to engage in conduct that endangers others or causes a public nuisance, (2) ORDINANCE NO. 2 allow the use of marijuana for non-medical purposes, or (3) allow any activity relating to the cultivation, distribution, or consumption of marijuana that is otherwise illegal. SECTION TWO Section 9254 is hereby added to Division 9, Chapter 2, Article 19 of the Ukiah City Code to read as follows. §9254: MARIJUANA CULTIVATION: Section 1. Definitions. As used herein the following definitions shall apply: 1. "Cultivation" means the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, or processing of marijuana plants or any part thereof. 2. "Fully enclosed and secure structure" means a space within a building, greenhouse or other structure which has a complete roof enclosure supported by connecting walls extending from the ground to the roof, which is secure against unauthorized entry, and which is accessible only through one or more Iockable doors. 3. "Immature marijuana plant" means a marijuana plant, whether male or female, that has not yet flowered and which does not yet have buds that are readily observed by unaided visual examination. 4. "Indoors" means within a fully enclosed and secure structure. 5. "Mature marijuana plant" means a marijuana plant, whether male or female, that has flowered and which has buds that are readily observed by unaided visual examination. 6. "Outdoor" means any location within the City of Ukiah that is not within a "fully enclosed and secure structure. 7. "Parcel" means property assigned a separate parcel number by the Mendocino County Assessor. 8. "Primary caregiver" means a "primary caregiver" as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7(d). 9. "Qualified patient" means a "qualified patient" as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7(0. ORDINANCE NO. 3 Section 2. Cultivation of Mariiuana. A. Outdoor cultivation: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any premises within any zoning district in the City of Ukiah to cause or allow such premises to be used for the outdoor cultivation of marijuana plants. B. Indoor cultivation in residential zoninq districts: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any Parcel within any residential zoning district (R-l, R-2, R-3 and CN districts) in the City of Ukiah to cause or allow such Parcel to be used for the cultivation of more than twelve mature and twenty-four immature marijuana plants within a fully enclosed and secure structure on the Parcel. C. Indoor cultivation of marijuana restricted to Qualified Patients and Primary Care Givers: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any Parcel within the City of Ukiah to cause or allow such premises to be used for the cultivation of marijuana, unless the person is a Qualified Patient or Primary Care Giver. D. Public nuisance prohibited: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any Parcel within the City of Ukiah to create a public nuisance in the course of cultivating marijuana plants or any part thereof in any location, indoor or outdoor. A public nuisance may be deemed to exist, if such activity produces (1) odors which are disturbing to people of normal sensitivity residing or present on adjacent or nearby property or areas open to the public, (2) repeated responses to the Parcel from law enforcement officers, (3) a repeated disruption to the free passage of persons or vehicles in the neighborhood, (4) excessive noise which is disturbing to people of normal sensitivity on adjacent or nearby property or areas open to the public, or (5) any other impacts on the neighborhood which are disruptive of normal activity in the area. Section 3. Enforcement. The violation of this ordinance is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and may be abated by the City Attorney by the prosecution of a civil action for injunctive relief. Cultivation of marijuana on parcels within the City that does not comply with this Section 9254 constitutes a violation of the zoning ordinance and is subject to the penalties and enforcement as provided in Article 22, commencing with § 9350. SECTION THREE 1. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA. The City Council finds that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment), 15061(b)(3) (there is no possibility the activity in ORDINANCE NO. 4 question may have a significant effect on the environment). In addition to the foregoing general exemptions the following categorical exemptions apply, Sections 15308 (actions taken as authorized by local ordinance to assure protection of the environment), and 15321 (action by agency for enforcement of a law, general rule, standard, or objective administered or adopted by the agency, including by direct referral to the City Attorney as appropriate for judicial enforcement). 2. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be published as required by law in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ukiah, and shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. Introduced by title only on ., 2006, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Adopted on ,2006 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Mark Ashiku, Mayor ATTEST: Marie Ulvila, City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 5 City o f Ukiah Staff Report to the Planning Commission PUBLZC HEARTNG Zoning Ordinance Amendment Marijuana Cultivation Regulations December :[4, 2005 Attachment # ~' Item No. 9A SUMMARY: Ukiah's marijuana cultivation ordinance became effective on September 2, 2005, as Ukiah City Code Section 9254. This project, which is being initiated by the City Attorney and Staff involves amending Section 9254 to simplify and reduce the burden of enforcement and make the ordinance more defensible against possible legal challenges. The City Council conducted a brief discussion of the revised ordinance, generally agreed with the modifications, and referred it to the Planning Commission for review and the formation of a recommendation. THE PROPOSED REVISIONS: This revised ordinance avoids several problems posed by the existing ordinance: 1. It eliminates the Use Permit requirement which is problematic for the following reasons: a. The public notice requirements of the ordinance publicizes where marijuana is being grown, which is contrary to one of the purposes of the ordinance; to avoid marijuan, a from being an attractive nuisance. b. The public notice, public hearing and public record features of the permit have been argued to violate the privacy rights of a marijuana patient. c. By issuing a permit, the City may, in fact, be authorizing an activity which is a violation of the federal Controlled Substances Act. d. Requiring an application for a permit has been argued to violate a marijuana grower's 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination by requiring him or her to admit in the application to a violation of federal law. e. The elimination of the permitting requirements will reduce administrative burdens on the City's planning department. Conversely, it will eliminate an argument that the permit is a de facto prohibition, because it is so burdensome. Tn fact, no one has yet filed for a Use Permit. 2. Eliminating the six plant per parcel limitation in residential zoning districts avoids the potential conflict with SB 420. Adding the language that allows for the abatement of a public nuisance caused by indoor or outdoor growing addresses the problem of someone growing so much marijuana on the property, even indoors, as to create public nuisance. ]:f that is happening at a particular address, a civil action can be filed to abate the specific nuisance impacts involved. Planning Commission Public Hearing Revisions to the Marijuana Cultivation Regulations December 14, 2005 3. Tf all marijuana is required to be grown within a secure structure, there is less demonstrable need for banning cultivation within a stated distance of public facilities such as schools or parks, rvloreover, eliminating this prohibition' a. Eliminates another argument that the ordinance violates SB 420; and b. Allows a patient who is using marijuana to grow small quantities indoors within 200 or 300 feet of a school, as long as that activity does not create a public nuisance. cI'r]:ZEN COt4MENT: Staff received email comments on the proposed revised regulations from Ms. Madelin Holtkamp (Attachment No. 3). Ms. Holtkamp expresses concerns about indoor only growing resulting in an increased risk of mistaken home invasions, deterioration of housing stock, and an increase in energy consumption. She suggests that there be a three plant per legal consumer regulation and that the plants must be cultivated outdoors behind a secure fence. ENV]:RONMENTAL REV]:EW: Staff has determined that the proposed revised ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA'~) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment), 15061(b)(3) (there is no possibility the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment). :In addition to the foregoing general exemptions the following categorical exemptions apply, Sections 15308 (actions taken as authorized by local ordinance to assure protection of the environment), and 15321 (action by agency for enforcement of a law, general rule, standard, or objective administered or adopted by the agency, including by direct referral to the City Attorney as appropriate for judicial enforcement). CONCLUSI:ON: Staff is proposing to revise the marijuana cultivation regulations after four months of administering the ordinance. Based on enforcement experiences in response to complaints about marijuana cultivation, as well as legal issues identified by the City Attorney, the changes are suggested to simplify and reduce the burden of enforcement and make the ordinance more defensible against legal challenges. Staff also believes that that a simple ban on outdoor cultivation will alleviate many of the complaints the City has received. Finally, the draft ordinance would authorize a civil injunctive action if specific public nuisance impacts of indoor cultivation exist in individual cases. RECOI~lt4ENDATI:ON: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Recommend adoption of the revised ordinance to the City Council. ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2. Draft Revised Ordinance Email correspondence received from IVladelin Holtkamp, dated November 30, 2005 Planning Commission Public Hearing Revisions to the Marijuana Cultivation Regulations December 14, 2005 Staff Report Prepared By: ,~ ~~n~ and Commun~evelopment Planning Commission Public Hearing Revisions to the Marijuana Cultivation Regulations December 14, 2005 Ch_alley Stump -- From: Sent: To: Subject: Madelin Holtkamp [MADELIN@mpic.org] Wednesday, November 30, 2005 4:34 PM charleys@cityofukiah.com Comment on marijuana ordinance Dear Charley, I am very concerned with the proposed revisions to the ordinance, especially the ban on outdoor growing. Here are my reasons: 1. Danger. I worry about the risk of mistaken home invasions. If the crop is not obvious, robbers may attempt to rob the wrong house. If it's outdoors, at least the only person at risk is the grower. 2. Deterioration of the housing stock. Indoor growing facilitates 2-3 crops per year under lights and high humidity which will cause rot and mold conditions. If the house rots, the grower will have plenty of money to move on, but Ukiah will ~ve blighted houses. I also suspect that it will not mitigate the smell problem as people vent their houses and open the doors when they leave the house. If it is argued thatindoor growing would mitigate smell, I'd like to see the documentation of that assertion. 3. Encourages high energy consumption. One has heard that they catch big gorwers by the spike in energy consumption. We have got to stop trying to solve every problem in the society by throwing more petroleum at it. And this in a Mediterranean climate! My suggestions: 3 plants per legal consumer per residence. They must be outdoors and concealed behind a conforming fence such as those used for swimming pools. Those growing for others are in business and should move their operations to ag land, a commercial designation. There they can provide security for the business at their own expense, and not the taxpayers' Thank you, Madelin Holtkamp 139 Gardens Ave. DRAFT MINUTES CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION December 14, 2005 Attachment MEMBERS PRESENT Ken Anderson Kevin Jennings James Mulheren, Chair Judy Pruden Mike Whetzel OTHERS PRESENT Listed below, Respectively STAFF PRESENT Charley Stump, Planning Director Sandra Liston, Associate Planner Dave Rapport, City Attorney Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary MEMBERS ABSENT None The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Mulheren at 6'30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Ukiah Civic Center, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken with the results listed above. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Charley Stump led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION Site visit for item 9A and 9B were verified. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - November 9, 2005 Recording Secretary Elawadly cited two errors, and stated the minutes have been corrected. ON A MOTION by Commissioner Jennings, seconded by Commissioner Whetzel, it was carried by an all AYE voice vote of the Commissioners present to approve the November 9, 2005 minutes, as amended. 6. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No one from the audience came forward. 7. APPEAL PROCESS Chair Mulheren read the appeal process. For matters heard at this meeting, the final date for appeal is December 27, 2005. 8. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE Zoning Ordinance Amendment 05-59 - Marijuana Cultivation and Major Use Permit No. 05-55 were legally noticed in accordance with the provisions of the Ukiah Municipal Code. PUBLIC HEARING 9A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 05-59 - Marijuana Cultivation, The proposed amended ordinance revises the six plants per parcel limit and deletes the permitting MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 1 December 14, 2005 provisions in the current ordinance. The revised ordinance prohibits outdoor (:rowing. Plants must be grown within a fully enclosed and secure structure. The ~'evised Ordinance also prohibits any public nuisance resulting from the cultivation of marijuana. Indoor cultivation is proposed to be limited to qualified patients and primary caregivers. The number of plants per parcel in residential zoning districts and the neighborhood Commercial zoning district is limited to the number allowed under state law for two qualified patients. Planning Director Stump addressed the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment 05-59 - Marijuana Cultivation (pages 1-5), as follows: · Ukiah's marijuana cultivation ordinance became effective on September 2, 2005. · The revised ordinance is being initiated by the City Attorney and involves amending Section 9254 to simplify/reduce the burden of enforcement, and make the ordinance more defensible against possible legal challenges. · Eliminates the Use Permit, and thereby avoids concerns which have been raised about the public notice given in connection with a use permit application and a legal argument that requiring the application violates the 5Ih Amendment by requiring the applicant to admit that he or she is violating the federal Controlled Substances Act. The City has received objections to the public notice both because it publicizes where marijuana is being grown and because it compromises the privacy of marijuana patients. Elimination of the Use Permit also would reduce administrative burdens on staff, as well as eliminate an argument that the permit is a de facto prohibition because it is onerous. · Revises the six plants per parcel limitation in residential zoning districts (R-l, R-2, R- 3 and CN districts) to avoid a legal argument that the ordinance conflicts with SB 420. The total number of plants would be limited to the cultivation of no more than 12 mature and 24 immature marijuana plants. · A qualified patient or primary caregiver is allowed to grow/cultivate marijuana indoors in a secure fully enclosed structure provided a public nuisance to the general public is not created. The ordinance has been revised to prohibit outdoor growing altogether. · Language was added that allows for the abatement of a public nuisance caused by indoor or outdoor growing as it addresses the problem of someone growing so much marijuana on the property that it creates a public nuisance. It also authorizes a civil injunctive action should a public nuisance be created. Commissioner Pruden referred to Section Two, Item B relevant to the regulation of 12 mature and 24 immature marijuana plants, and inquired what the larger numbers relate to the legal justification for doubling the number over SB 420. City Attorney Rapport stated the limit of 12 and 24 plants only applies to the residential zoning districts and not to the non-residential districts, whereas the SB 420 limit of 6 mature and 12 immature plants applies on a per patient basis. The Ukiah City Council requested the ordinance to limit indoor cultivation in residential zoning districts to the number of plants allowed for two qualified patients under SB 420, which are12 mature and 24 immature plants. The City Council wants to retain a per parcel limit in residential zoning districts to discourage commercial cultivation in those districts. Mr. Rapport further stated that the proposed limits would likely be a more defensible position for the City to take should it be challenged on the bases that the per parcel limit MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 2 December 14, 2005 violates SB 420. There is an argument to be made that the limit in SB 420 relates to criminal prosecution under the Health and Safety Code and does not really address limits that a local jurisdiction can impose under its zoning code authority. By increasing the limit to the amount allowed to two qualified patients under SB 420, the City reduces the possibility of a confii,:.., even if this argument is rejected. Moreover, since that number of plants should be sufficient for the medical needs in most circumstances, it is more defensible as a measure to avoid public nuisance impacts in residential areas. Commissioner Pruden requested clarification that it is Council's preference to implement the following language in Section 2B on a per parcel rather than on a per household basis: It is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance for any person owning, leasing, occupying, or having charge or possession of any parcel within any residential zoning district (R-l, R-2, R-3 and CN district) in the City of Ukiah to cause or allow such parcel to be used for the cultivation of more than 12 mature and 24 immature marijuana plants within a fully enclosed and secure structure on the Parcel. Attorney Rapport stated Council favors the concept of maintaining a "per parcel" limit in the residential zoning district and that allowing enough medical marijuana on a parcel for two patients should eliminate most problems. Commission Pruden inquired whether there is any change to the commercial section of the ordinance. Attorney Rapport stated SB 420 limits apply to the commercial section and there would be no per parcel limit. Commission Pruden stated the prior ordinance has a commercial and a residential component, while the proposed revised ordinance only appears to have a residential component. Attorney Rapport replied that the proposed ordinance only imposes a limit on the residential zoning district so that by not specifying a limit other than in a residential zone, it imposes no limit outside the residential zones. The reason the prior ordinance addressed commercial and residential limits is because there was a Use Permit requirement that allowed for different/separate criteria for commercial and residential zones. Because the Use Permit is being eliminated, there is no need to separately address commercial and residential districts other than in relation to the per parcel limit for the residential zone. Commissioner Anderson referred to Section One, Item 11, and stated one of the objections to the ordinance pertained to affordability for construction of a structure indoors or outdoors. He questioned whether this section addresses the issue of affordability. Attorney Rapport stated Section One consists of ordinance findings and item 11 does not address affordability. The issue of affordability is a policy decision and would not be addressed in the ordinance. Mr. Stump stated the Commission can recommend the City Council consider the affordability issue. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 December 14, 2005 Commissioner Anderson inquired if a court challenges the ordinance whether the findings would be presented as part of the documentation supporting the ordinance. Attorney Rapport replied affirmatively. Commissioner Anderson questioned whether the findings were comprehensive enough to effectively support the ordinance document should it be challenged in court. Attorney Rapport stated, in his opinion, the findings demonstrate sufficient evidence that an ordinance is warranted. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED: 6:47:16 Dane Wilkins of Northern California NORMAL stated his organization promotes working together for the reform of Marijuana laws, as "we are in the midst of the direct effects of Cannabis Prohibition." He recommended consideration of the following: · Development of a Cannabis Community Advisory Board. · Creation of a Ukiah Cannabis Collective. This would be designed and intended for the support of our local patients. There would be no charge to patients for medicine and would be designed as an educational, research and best practices center. This would be overseen by the Cannabis Community Advisory Board. Pebbles Triplett stated the Medical Marijuana Program Act was intended by the Legislature to enhance the access of patients and caregivers to medical marijuana through collective, cooperative cultivation projects. The intent of the State Legislature was to eliminate punitive and prohibitive approaches/measures that threatened property owners with fines and potential incarceration and is the reason establishing collective and cooperative methods/programs for growing marijuana for medical purposes is so important. The new law reflects a change in the prohibitions on the use, distribution, and cultivation of marijuana for persons who are qualified patients or primary caregivers. She referred to a court case that challenged the interpretation of this law and intent of Proposition 215 (Compassionate Use Act) relative to being able to effectively provide a safeguard for collective growing and distribution of marijuana by qualified patients and caregivers. She supports having an ordinance for the local jurisdiction that fairly/reasonably regulates and adequately protects qualified patients and caregivers growing and cultivating marijuana for medical purposes. She also supports approval of the guidelines proposed by Northern California NORMAL. Commissioner Pruden recommended that an education component that would address disputes and/or mediation program services be included in the ordinance document, and cited incidents where such a component would be helpful. She stated the ordinance is an acceptable document. She referred to correspondence from Madeline Holtcamp, and noted her ordinance comments demonstrate the confusion people have concerning indoor and outdoor growing. A greenhouse structure outside is considered an indoor 9rowing facility. Furthermore, she favors having a Good Neighbor Policy that would include provisions on how to address disputes and identify mediation services available in addition to educating the community about how to reduce growing/cultivation problems/issues that impact neighborhoods. The Ukiah Municipal Airport has a policy like this to encourage pilots to observe/maintain flight patterns and to use the communication equipment on-hand to assist/promote quiet flying and being a good neighbor to the community. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 December 14, 2005 Commissioner Anderson agreed that people are concerned about the criteria establishing the concept of indoor versus outdoor growing. He recommended encouraging a joint effort by the community to help construct indoor growing facilities and making the effort affordable for persons. Commissioners Pruden and Anderson agreed that City Council knows what provisions should be in the ordinance without regard to the Planning Commission's input and/or recommendations. Commissioner Pruden stated the reason she favors including an education component, and/or mediation/Good Neighbor Policy to the ordinance is to avoid reaching a point where codes are violated and enforcement is necessary and fines imposed. If the ordinance is not the appropriate document for such a component/policy, the City should Create a separate policy to address these principles/processes. Attorney Rapport stated the City legislates by ordinance when it becomes necessary to create an enforceable legal obligation with either a civil or criminal penalty, if violated. He does not recommend implementing an education component/Good Neighbor Policy in the ordinance. If the City desires to initiate a program that involved education and mediation, it can likely be done without it being part of an ordinance. Mr. Stump requested clarification regarding the details as to what a mediation policy would include. He commented on the City's current enforcement policy for the existing ordinance when a marijuana-related complaint is received. Commissioner Pruden suggested creating a one or two page policy that addresses the nuisance effects of odor and other associated complaint issues. Since the nuisance efforts are really a public health matter, the County Public Health Department should be involved. A determination must be made regarding the nature of the complaint in terms of which agency (City/County) should respond. There may be instances where the most effective approach would be mediation and corresponding mitigation measures should be implemented. Also, the policy could be provided to parties having a nuisance grievance to teach people how to be better neighbors. There may come a point when the growing and cultivation of marijuana would become intolerable in some neighborhoods. Mr. Stump stated the growing of any marijuana that creates a nuisance is a violation of the ordinance even if the growing takes place in a greenhouse or in another secure location. He acknowledged Commissioner Pruden's recommendation, and stated that once staff has made a determination and/or substantiated the complaint as to whether it violates the ordinance, providing people with a good neighbor policy may be an acceptable approach n some instances where mitigation measures can be implemented to alleviate the nuisance. Commissioner Whetzel stated the Good Neighbor Policy established for the Airport ~s similar to the good neighbor policy guidelines established by the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA). A Good Neighbor Policy is typical of most airports. Mr. Wilkins from Northern California NORMAL could create a good neighbor policy for the growing and cultivating of marijuana as opposed to staff. The City could adopt the policy and work with NORMAL to help emphasize the importance of people being good neighbors. Mr. Stump reiterated that the aforementioned recommendation is a good idea, since the purposes of NORMAL is education and to encourage growers to act responsibly. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 5 December 14, 2005 Commissioner Jennings inquired as to the length of time it takes staff to act on a complaint. Mr. Stump stated the complaint is evaluated the day it is received to determine whether a violation exists and the property owner is subsequently notified. It typically takes 10 days to correct the violation, and if the violation is not corrected within this timeframe, the matter is turned over to the City Attorney. City Attorney Rapport stated he writes another letter to the property owner advising of a potential enforcement action once he receives the referral from staff whereby the person has five to 10 days to respond and/or abate the situation. If a person does not respond or the matter is not abated to the satisfaction of staff, an enforcement action will be filed within the five to 10 day deadline. Commissioner Jennings stated the problem would likely eliminate itself within the timeframe of the above-referenced process. Mr. Stump stated had the ordinance been adopted in the spring rather than the fall, the enforcement may have been a lot easier. Attorney Rapport stated it is likely the proposed more simplified ordinance, if adopted, would speed up the process in the event of a court action. Commissioner Jennings favored the concept of having a Good Neighbor Policy, since the processing of complaints and related court proceedings were drawn out. Chair Mulheren stated the Good Neighbor Policy has really been made part of the process, since the ordinance was adopted even though it is not a formal document with regard to how complaints or potential violations have been addressed by staff, law enforcement, and concerned agencies. Commissioner Pruden stated it would be beneficial to have a written Good Neighbor Policy available to hand out. Commissioner Whetzel is not in favor of spending staff time to formulate such a document because the ordinance is essentially the policy. He favored that a good neighbor strategy be formulated by an organization such as Northern California NORMAL to educate people how to be responsible growers. The document would be recognized by the City. Commissioner Pruden stated the City Council should ask for a Good Neighbor Policy even if it comes from an another agency/organization. Chair Mulheren recommended the City Council consider the creation of a Good Neighbor Policy. Mr. Stump stated staff will inform Council of the Planning Commission's recommendation. Commissioner Whetzel expressed concern that growing indoors could create a potentially hazardous environment relative to fire safety, as well as require excessive use of electricity. He supported allowing for a minimum of two marijuana plants to be grown outdoors. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 December 14, 2005 Mr. Stump stated the Director of Public Utilities reviewed the potential for excessive use of electricity, and determined the energy usage would be insignificant. Attorney Rapport included a provision in the ordinance requiring the Fire Marshal to inspect indoor growing facilities. However, the Fire Marshal asked that the provision be eliminated because it would likely create more problems than it solves. Commissioner Anderson inquired whether there is any evidence that an indoor facility in the backyard would create a nuisance odor. Mr. Stump stated a venting system can be appropriately installed according to public testimony provided to the Council by people familiar with indoor growing techniques. A general discussion followed regarding techniques that can be used to reduce odor impacts to neighbors. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: ?'00:]2PM ON A MOTION by Commissioner Pruden, seconded by Commissioner Jennings, it was carried by the following roll call voice of the Commissioners present to recommend the City Council approve an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Amending Section 9254, Entitled: "Marijuana Cultivation," of the Ukiah City Code and that the City Council work with concerned citizen's groups to create a Good Neighbor Policy which promotes education on responsible growing, and possibly a mediation resolution process. AYES' NOES' Commissioners Jennings, Whetzel, Pruden and Chair Mulheren Commissioner Anderson. 9B. Major Use Permit No. 05-55, as submitted by Jason Wooldridge for Craig and Jane Rohrbough, to allow the conversion of an existing detached garage that is located 1'-2" from the south property line and zero feet from the east property line into a 297 square foot second dwelling unit. The subject property is located at 707 West Standley Street and is currently developed with a primary residential dwelling (APN 001-225-07); zoned R-1 (Single-Family Residential). Sandra Liston addressed the project as follows: · Approval of the project would allow the conversion of an existing nonconforming detached single-car garage, located 1'2" from the rear property line and zero feet from the east property line into a second dwelling unit. · A Use Permit is required because the garage is situated less than five feet from the side and rear yard property lines as required by the UMC. It is also located on a lot that is smaller than required for a second unit dwelling on a corner property. · A project description is specifically provided on pages 1 and 2 of the staff report. The property itself is nonconforming as to the minimum lot area for a corner lot, as it is 5,747 square feet versus the required 7,000 square feet. The garage is also nonconforming as to setbacks because there is a 1'2" setback to rear property line and a zero setback to the side property line where a five-foot setback is required for each. The applicant proposes to convert the garage into a second unit dwelling that MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 December 14, 2005 is less than 300 square feet of living area and set up as a "studio" style apaAment with Murphy beds. · The changes proposed for the conversion are listed on page 2 of the staff report. Of these changes, the applicant requests removal of the single-car garage from the west elevation and installation of a storage locker; However, staff is not recommending approval based on the impacts to parking. · The project is consistent with the land use and housing element of the Ukiah General Plan. · The project is consistent in all respects with the zoning standards for the R-1 Zoning District, in which second dwellings are allowed land uses except for the setbacks in the lot area whereby the applicant is seeking an exception. Aesthetic Impacts The garage structure already exists in its current location and utilizes a design, colors, and materials that closely resemble that used on the primary dwelling. There would be no changes to the west elevation. The garage is well-screened from general public viewing due to its location in the southeast corner of the subject property and behind the primary residence and the carport, which are substantially taller than the garage. Staff noted that there is an intense concentration of primary and accessory structures, many of which are nonconforming, in the immediate vicinity of the garage that not only helps to further screen the structure, but creates identity of the block, and, therefore, staff determined the aesthetic impacts would be minimal. Privacy Impact ~taff was concerned with this issue due to the location of the structure closer to the property lines than allowed and also that the structure is proposed on a lot smaller than allowed for a second unit dwelling would impact privacy. Privacy impacts are not anticipated due to the small size of the building, that it currently exists, and that there is no expansion of the building footprint. The applicant is eliminating a window from the east elevation of the garage to lessen the privacy impacts on the neighbor to the east and no openings are planned for any elevation other than one that faces inward on the property. Therefore, staff concluded that the privacy impact were negligible. On-Site Parkinq The UMC requires one on-site parking stall for each bedroom in the second dwelling unit. In this case, the proposed dwelling is designed as a studio and, therefore, only one on-site stall for the dwelling would be required. The parking requirement is in addition to the two on-site stalls that are required for the existing single-family residence on the site, unless the residence was legally constructed at a time when on-site parking was not required. Only one on-site stall for the secondary dwelling would be required. Staff verified the parking requirements by contacting the County Assessor's Office to determine the date that the primary dwelling was constructed. Based on construction in 1927, which predates the City's first zoning ordinance enacted in 1950, staff concluded that only one on-site stall for the secondary dwelling and no on-site stalls for the primary dwelling are required. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 December 14, 2005 AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 8.b DATE: February 1, 2006 REPORT SUB3ECT: APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS TO DEMOLISH THREE STRUCTURES OVER S0- YEARS OLD LOCATED AT 763 AND 76S APPLE AVENUE SUMMARY: The owner of the properties located at 763 and 765 Apple Avenue has applied for Demolition Permits to demolish three single-family residences on the two parcels. The homes were constructed in 1948, 1950, and 1951, and are in poor condition. The owner is planning on redeveloping the parcels with housing. The structures are over 50 years old, and therefore, according to the Ukiah City Code, the City Council must conduct a public hearing to review and consider the historical and architectural significance of the structures. On December 20, 2005, the City Demolition Permit Review Committee considered the application and I-//stor/ca/Profi/e prepared by Judy Pruden, unanimously found that none of the criteria in Ukiah City Code Section 3016(E) (attachment 4) applied, and therefore the structures are not historically or architecturally significant. Accordingly, Staff is recommending that the Demolition Permits be approved. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Demolition Permits for the three structures located at 763 and 765 Apple Avenue based on the finding that the structures do not have historical or architectural significance. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: Provide alternative direction to Staff. Citizens Advised: Property Owner and Agent Requested by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: . 2. 3. 4. 5. Demolition Permit Application and Location Map Historical Profile (Pruden) Demolition Permit Review Committee minutes, dated December 20, 2005 Ukiah Municipal Code Section 3016 CEQA Exemption APPROVED: Candace Horsley, City Manager ~k,, : '3AV AI::IVNI~3S '005 " 1104 NOIIVDIlddV DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION SURVEY (FOR STRUCTURES OVER 50 YEARS OLD) CITY OF UKIAH CODE SECTION 3016 ~roperty Owner: :roperty Address: '.oning: ~-~.. ~,ge of structure: Assessor's Parcel No.: Co;~--¢~-- ¢~-------~ General..Plan Designation: How was age determined? s property located in the City of Ukiah Architectural and HistOrical Resources Inventory? lyes, 1) Is It one of the 200 individually analyzed properties? 2) Is it included in a potential Historic District? Which one? 3) Is it one of the properties not considered worthy of specific analysis? )escribe structure's current condition: '~¢::o',,~'~ O~v'('_{ v-oCr '-~~_~_d~ )escribe purpose of demolition: )escribe all salvageable'archaic materials and any salvage plans: ;an the structure be moved? ~ Are there plans to move the structure? )escribe any moving plans (location, timing, etc.): ~bVL¢.~ ~eneral comments regarding historic, architectural, or cultural significance of building/properly: )escribe any unique features of building or property: [ecommendatlon for City Council action: 'escribe the Demolition Permit Review Committee's actions on thp. nnnlinn'H~n /,-,o,-,,-, ,')~ r~e~o nR~U~ ~ VU R~r. hqRl~lNti q L;VI~II:-~'--I~LI:R-~I: U:~I: BALL POINT DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION SURVEY (FOR STRUCTURES OVER 50 YEARS OLD) CITY OF UKIAH CODE SECTION 3016 perty Owner:_ ¢rv~v~io '¢2~ J-40~O Applicant: ~u_~ -t-- ~~'o..,,t--~, IY~(_.,. petty Address' lng: 1~- ~ ,of structure: Assessor's Parcel No.: General Plan Designation: t.tv~kkl ~tO~ How was age determined? roperty located in the City of Ukiah Architectural and Historical Resources Inventory? ;s, 1) Is it one of the 200 individually analyzed properties? 2) Is it included in a potential Historic District? 'Which one? · 3) Is it one of the properties not considered worthy of specific analysis? cribe structure's current condition:_ '"~:::)¢0~,. ~, ¥'-~ H'~~_~ cribe purpose of demolition: cribe all salvageable'archaic materials and any salvage plans: the structure be moved? ~ Are there plans to move the structure? cribe any moving plans (location, timing, etc.):_ Y')z)~ ' eral comments regarding histOric, architectural, or cultural significance of building/properly: tribe any unique features of building or property: ommendation for City Council action: ~ribe the Demolition Permit Review CommittP. P.'.~ ,.qntinn~ r~n tk,-, ~,~,,:^^,:~... , .... ,'~ .Liwaaa oNlall'n. ...... ,,,,',",'o '"""'"'~ BAV AblVNl~'qS OOC DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION SURVEY (FOR STRUCTURES OVER 50 YEARS OLD) CITY OF UKIAH CODE SECTION 3016 roperty Owner: roperty Address: oning: , ge of structure: Applicant: Assessor's Parcel No.: General Plan Designation: How was age determined? ~ property located in the City of Ukiah Architectural and Historical Resources Inventory? yes, 1) Is It one of the 200 individually analyzed properties? 2) Is it included in a potential Historic District?'Which one? ,. 3) Is it one of the properties not considered worthy of specific analysis? escribe structure's current condition: escribe purpose of demolition: escribe all salvageable'archaic materials and any salvage plans- .an the structure be moved? Are there plans to move the structure? ,escribe any moving plans (location, timing, etc.): ieneral comments regarding historic, architectural, or cultural significance of building/property: ,escribe any unique features of building or property: lecommendation for City Council action: MEMORANDUM TO: Demolition Permit Review Committee FROM: DATE: David Willoughby, Building Inspector November 21, 2005 SUBJECT: 760,763,765, and 767 Apple Ave. Review of the Demolition Permit applications and materials for the four lots listed below are as follows: · 763 Apple Ave.- The County Tax Assessors office shows'the building to have been built in 1951,705 sq. ft. and condition unknown. Field review of the SFD structure revealed it to be in "fair" condition and a possible candidate for rehabilitation, relocation, or salvage if it is deemed to be historically or architecturally significant. · 765 Apple Ave.- The County Tax Assessors office shows.the 2 buildings to have been built in 1948 and 1950. The first is 810 sq. Pt. and condition listed as average. The second is 572 sq. Pt. and condition listed as average. The field review of both SFD structures.is as noted above ATTACHMENTS: 1. Demolition Permit Application Materials. Attachment MEMORANDUM DATE' TO' FROM: RE: December 20, 2005 Charley Stump, Director of Planning Judy Pruden, Chair Demolition Permit Review Committee 763 and 765 Apple Avenue This area was part of the McCowen subdivision, originally filed with the County in the 1890's. There are and were several homes built over 100 years ago in the area. Interestingly, this area was annexed into the City in 1941, the first annexation since 1892. The southeastern and southwestern additions are the acreage south of Gobbi to Talmage. 763 and 765 Apple Avenue were part of a larger lot, which extended down Apple Avenue on the east side. After World War II, Ukiah went through a major building boom and many of the older larger lots were subdivided. Leslie and Dora Coffeen moved to Ukiah in 1948 or 1949. They purchased 765 Apple Avenue in 1949 or 1950 and lived there until 1974. Mr. Coffeen died in 1964 and Mrs. Coffeen in 1974. Their daughter, Marie Osbourne, owned the property for several years. It would be logical to assume that Leslie Coffeen built 763 Apple Avenue in 1951 because he was a professional carpenter. It is not known if the second unit on the Coffeen property was a rental or used for additional family members. An exterior visit showed that the original 1948 garage has been converted to a housing unit. All three structures on the lot are currently occupied as rentals. These buildings are very simple vernacular construction. They were constructed in an older style than was popular at the time. The Coffeen property is representative of a working class neighborhood that ~mple supply in Ukiah. There are no significant architectural and historic~ factors associated with these structures. Page 1 Death call Mrs. Coffeen A recitation of the rosary for Dor~ H. Coffee~, who died Tuesday in a Ukiah hospital, will take place Sunday evening at 7:30 at Zimmerman Mot-. tuary. A requiem mass will be celebrated Monday at tO a.m. at St. Mary of the Angels Catholic Church, Msgr. Andre Tourn~er officiating. Mrs. Colleen, a resident of Ukiah for the past 26 years, died at the age of 85. She was a native of Iowa. Survivors include a daughter, Marie Osbourn of Ukiah, a sister, Johannah Johnson'of Denver, Colo., three grand- children, Donald Osboum of L,ivermore, Patricia Reynolds of Chico and Dorothy Osbourn of Ukiah, and two great- grandchildren. Burial will be in Uhiah Cemetery. Leslie Colleen Taken :by Dear'h: , urd Rites · Leslie Concert, ?~'[ a res~clen of, Ukiah fcir the past t~._years, died yesterday in a Ukiah hos- pital. A native 'of Iowa, Mr. Coffeen was a retired carpenter. There will be the rosary;l~riday niilht at 8 in the chapel of Zimmerman Mor- tuary, A Solemn requiem mass wDl be recited Satul'day, 10 a.m. at St. Mary's or' the Angels Catholic Church with the Rev. Fr. Bertrlim Mulligan officiat- ing. Bu~'ial will ,be in Ukia~h Catholic Cemetery. Survivors include his wife, Dora Colleen of Uklah; a daugh- ter, Mrs. {Marlo Osbourn o! Ukt- ah; a .brOther, Cole Colleen o! Sprlngtiel~l, MO., a sister, Ber- 'tha Wood'o! Mc)dale, Iowa, and three grllndchlldren, ., DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING December 20, 2005 Attachment # MEMBERS PRESENT Judy Pruden, Chair Charley Stump Tim Eriksen, alt. for Diana Steele William French David Willoughby OTHERS PRESENT Terry Johnson MEMBERS ABSENT None STAFF PRESENT Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary The regular meeting of the City of Ukiah Demolition Review was called to order by Chair Pruden at 10:05 p.m. in the Conference Room 3, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken with the results listed above. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 22, 2005 ON A MOTION by Member Stump, seconded by Member Eriksen, it was carried by an all AYE voice vote of the members present to approve the September 22, 2005 minutes as submitted. ABSTAIN: William French 4. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS No one from the audience was present. 5. APPEAL PROCESS There is no formal appeal process of decisions made by the Committee. decisions are advisory to the City Council. All 6. DEMOLITION PERMIT REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS Al al Gl Demolition Permit application #A-6861, Assessor Parcel # 003-050-85 Building B Demolition Permit application #A-6862, Assessor Parcel # 003-050-86 Demolition Permit application #A-6863, Assessor Parcel # 003-050-85 Building A 765 Apple Avenue. 763 Apple Avenue. 765 Apple Avenue. Chair Pruden clarified inquiries made regarding the structures located at 760 and 767 Apple Avenue. Demolition Permit Review December 20, 2005 Page 1 Chair Pruden stated the structures slated for demolition review include two buildings, two of which are connected to one another at 765 Apple Avenue and one building at 763 Apple Avenue Chair Pruden referenced the first paragraph of her Memorandum dated December 20, 2005, that provides a brief history of the property, and clarified she did not check with the County Map Drawer when researching this project to confirm the date of the McCowen subdivision. She indicated that it is likely the McCowen subdivision was filed in 1890s, but the date could have been as early as the 1880s. County filing of subdivisions are sometimes difficult evaluate because this area was not annexed until 1941. She corrected a sentence in paragraph 5 to read, "The Coffeen property is representative of a working class neighborhood that is in ample supply in Ukiah." She indicated that these structures are representative of "working class" housing. The only anomaly is that the Coffeens did not have a telephone until 1962, even though they purchased the property in 1949 or 1950. Also, the County tax assessor's book is missing for 1949 to confirm the date of ownership. Member French addressed the proposed demolition of the three structures, and recommended they be demolished because there is no unique/special significant architectural and historical value associated with these structures. Conversely, similar structures to the south representative of the same period have been appropriately maintained and preserved. Chair Pruden was unable to determine any architectural/historical factors associated with the buildings. They are part of Ukiah history, but have no unique or special value. ON A MOTION by Member Stump, seconded by Member French, it was carried by the following roll call vote of the members present to recommend to the Ukiah City Council that the Committee does not find the criteria pursuant to Section 3016E, of the Ukiah Municipal Code to apply to the structures at 763 and 765 Apple Avenue, and that it has no architectural or historical significance, and, therefore, the Demolition Permit should be issued. AYES: NOES: Members Stump, Eriksen, David Willoughby, French, and Chair Pruden None A brief discussion followed regarding an update on a proposed preliminary draft ordinance that would require the recycling of demolition and construction debris, as mandated by the State. The ordinance emphasizes the salvaging of materials from structures having significant and historical value. Public workshops will be conducted for questions/comments regarding the preliminary draft. Demolition Permit Review December 20, 2005 Page 2 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m. Judy Pruden, Chair Cathy Elawadly, Recording Secretary Demolition Permit Review December 20, 2005 Page 3 Affachment # 3016: MODIFICATIONS TO THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE: Ao Bo Co D° mo The section of the Uniform Building Code, relating to applications for building permits is modified to require in an application to demolish a building, the date when the building was first constructed, if ld~own. The section of the Uniform Building Code, relating to permit issuance, is modified to require that, as to buildings constructed fifty (50) years or more prior to the date of application, the Director of Planning or his/her designee shall determine whether: 1. The building is an accessory building such as, but not limited to, a garage, storage shed, or carport, whether attached or detached to a main building; except that certain accessory buildings, such as carriage houses, which are presumed to have historic or architectural significance shall be subject to further review as provided in subsection D of this Section, unless the building is subject to demolition under subsection B2 of this Section. 2. Immediate demolition of the building is necessary to protect the public health or safety and the failure to immediately demolish the building would constitute a serious threat to the public health or safety. If subsection B 1 or B2 of this Section applies to the building, no further review shall be required under this Section and the permit shall be issued in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code. .. If the Planning Director finds that neither of the exceptions in subsection B 1 or B2 of this Section applies to the building, the demolition permit shall be subject to further review in accordance with this Section. The Planning Director shall transmit the proposal to the Demolition Permit Review Committee, or other official reviewing body established by the City Council, for review, comment, and a recommendation to the City Council. Once the Demolition Permit Review Committee formulates a recommendation concerning the disposition of the proposed demolition permit, the Planning Director shall schedule and duly notice the matter for a public hearing and decision by the City Council. The public noticing shall indicate the day, time, place, and purpose of the public heating, and how additional information about the subject matter can be obtained. The public noticing shall be accomplished in the following manner: 1. Publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing. 2. Mailing or delivery at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing to the owner(s) of the subject property, or his/her agent, and to the project applicant, if the applicant is not the owner. 3. First class mail notice to all owners (as shown on the latest available Mendocino County Tax Assessor's equalized assessment roll) of property within three hundred feet (300') of the subject property. In reviewing proposed demolition permits; and formulating recommendations to the City Fo Go Council, the Demolition Permit Review Committee shall consider any information provided during the meeting, and shall use the following criteria. The structure: 1. Has a special or'particular quality such as oldest, best example, largest, or last surviving example of its kind; or 2. Exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City's cultural, social, economic, political, aesthetic, or architectural history; or 3. Is strongly identified with persons or events significant in lOcal, State, or national history. If the Demolition Permit Review Committee finds that any of the criteria listed in subsection E of this Section apply to the building proposed for demolition, it shall recommend denial of the demolition permit to'the City. 1. The City Council shall conduct a public hearing pursuant to subsection D of this Section to consider the recommendation of the Demolition Permit Review Committee, and to determine if any of the criteria listed in subsection E of this Section apply to the building proposed for demolition. If the City Council determines that any one of the criteria apply, it shall makea corresponding finding to that effect. 2. At the hearing, the applicant shall have the opportunity to present evidence that a viable market does not exist for the building, taking into account the condition of the building, the probable cost to put the building into marketable condition, and the uses of the property allowed under existing or probable future zoning regulations. The City Council shall consider such evidence offered by the applicant and any other information presented at the meeting by any interested party or by staff, to determine whether or not a viable market exists. "Viable market" means that it is reasonably likely that the building could be sold within a commercially reasonable period of time for more than the seller would be required to invest in the purchase of the property and preparing the property for sale, or that the property could produce a reasonable return on the amount of money it would take to purchase the property and prepare the building for income producing purposes. "Reasonable return" means the average rate of return on real estate investments in the Ukiah Valley. 3. If the City Council determines that a viable market exists: a. It shall so notify the Building Official who shall not issue the demolition permit. The City Council shall determine whether a viable market exists based on substantial evidence presented at the hearing, or, it may assume thai a viable market exists, if the applicant fails to present substantial evidence that a viable market does not exist; b. Not more than once within any twelve (12) month period, the applicant may submit a new application for a demolition permit and the City Council may reconsider whether a viable market exists: (1) Upon a showing by the applicant that market conditions have changed; or (2) Based upon new information that in the exercise of reasonable diligence the applicant Could not have produced at the first heating. 4. If the City Council determines, based on substantial evidence, that a viable market does not exist, the issuance of the demolition permit shall be stayed for a period of ninety (90) days. a. During that ninety (90) day period, the City shall do the following: (1) Determine whether other alternatives to demolition exist, which are acceptable to the applicant, that would preserve the historic, architectural or cultural significance of the building; (2) Determine whether funds are available from any private source for the acquisition and preservation of the building through a negotiated purchase on terms acceptable to the applicant; or (3) If sufficient funds are available from any private source and a negotiated purchase is not possible, determine whether to acquire the building through eminent domain. b. If within the ninety.(90) days, the City does not reach agreement with the applicant or commence acquisition of the building, the Building Official may issue the permit in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code. c. If within the ninety (90) day period, the City either: 1) reaches agreement with the applicant or 2) commences acquisition of the building, the Building Official shall not issue the demolition permit. d. However, the Building Official shall continue to process the application for a demolition permit in accordance with the.Uniform Building Code, if the City and the applicant terminate their agreement or the City fails to diligently pursue or abandons acquisition of the building. e. The City Manager or his/her designee shall info .rm the Building Official whenever the City and the applicant terminate their agreement or the City fails to diligently pursue or abandons acquisition of the building. f. If the Building Official has issued a demolition permit under this subsection and the permittee applies to extend the permit an additional one hundred eighty (180) days in 'accordance with the applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code then in effect, the Building Official shall refer the application to the City Manager for an initial determination as to whether market conditions have changed. The City Manager shall make the determination within ten (10) days after the application is referred by the Building Official. If the City Manager determines that market conditions may have changed and that a viable market may exist for the property, he or she shall schedule the matter for a heating before the City CoUncil to be noticed and conducted in accordance with subsections D and G of this Section. However, at the heating the City shall have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that market conditions have changed and a viable market exists. If the City Manager determines that market H. conditions have not changed, he or she shall so notify the Building Official and the applicant. Upon such notification, the Building Official shall further process the application to extend the term of the demolition permit in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code then in effect. If the City Council conducts a hearing upon referral by the City Manager, the City Clerk shall provide written notification to the Building Official and the applicant of the City Council decision. If the City Council decides that a viable market exists, the Building Official shall not issue the permit, but the provisions of subsection G3b of this Section shall apply. If the City Council decides that a viable market does not exist, the Building Official immediately shall proceed to further process the application in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code then in effect. 5. "Diligently pursue acquisition" means taking all steps within the time required by law to acquire the building by eminent domain. 6. References to "applicant" herein shall include the building owner. The Planning Director shall provide a written notice of the City Council determination to the applicant. The written notification shall be mailed or hand delivered within five (5) days from the date of the City Council's decision. The notice shall include the finding(s) and decision made by the City Council and a copy of this Section. The applicant for a demolition permit for a building determined to have historic, architectural or cultural significance shall salvage the building materials for reuse to the maximum extent feasible, and shall ensure that upon completion of the demolition, the site is left in a safe, presentable, and clutter free condition. J. Reconsideration Of Decisions: 1. Grounds For Reconsideration: The City Council may reconsider a decision under this Section within sixty (60) calendar days from the date the decision was made, if information that may have materially affected the decision was: a) misrepresented by the applicant, or b) not disclosed by the applicant, if the applicant knew or should have known that the information may have affected the City Council decision. "Information" as used herein means matters of fact or law. A decision may not be reconsidered, if all three (3) of the following have occurred. The demolition permit: a) has been issued, b) did not at the time it was issued violate any provision of the Uniform Building Code, as adopted by the City, or any other City ordinance or State or Federal law, and c) the permittee has commenced demolition in good faith reliance on the permit. 2. Procedure On Reconsideration: Reconsideration of a decision under this Section may be placed on the agenda for a regular City Council meeting by any member of.the City Council who voted in favor of the original decision. Notice of any meeting where reconsideration is on the agenda shall be provided in accordance with subsection D of this Section. If already issued, the permit shall be suspended from the date that an eligible City Council member requests that the matter be placed on the agenda and until the City Council makes a final decision Upon reconsideration: The Building Official shall notify the applicant in writing of the permit suspension. At the meeting, the City Council shall determine, based on evidence provided to the City prior to or during the meeting, whether reconsideration is permitted under subsection'J1 of this Section. Any motion to reconsider the decision shall contain findings supPorted by substantial evidence. If upon reconsideration the City Council makes a different decision, the City Clerk shall provide notice of that decision to the Building Official and the applicant/permittee within five (5) working days after the deciSion is made. If, upon reconsideration, the City Council determines that a building has historic, architectural, or cultural significance, and the Building Official has issued a demolition permit based on the previous decision,' the Building Official shall revoke the permit. If the previously issued permit has expired, the Building Official shall deny an application for a new permit, unless the permit is issued in accordance with subsection G4 of this Section. (Ord. 838, §1, adopted 1984; Ord. 927, §1, adopted 1992; Ord. 1014, §1, adopted 1998) Attachment # TO: Office of Planning and Research 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 Sacramento, CA 95814 a~County Clerk County of Mendocino Courthouse Ukiah, CA 95482 PROJECT TITLE: Moreno/Ruff Demolition Permits FROM: City of Ukiah 300 Seminary Avenue Ukiah, CA 95482 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Demolition of three sinqle family residential structures on two individual parcels. The structures were constructed in 1948, 1950, and 1951. LOCATION: 763 and 765 Apple Avenue, Ukiah PUBLIC AGENCY APPROVING PROJECT: City of Ukiah NAME OF PROJECT APPLICANT: Moreno/Ruff CEQA EXEMPTION STATUS: Q Ministerial ~Categorical Exemption Section 15301, Class 1 (I) Q Statutory Exemption Section REASONS WHY PROJECT IS EXEMPT: The proiect involves the demolition and removal of three structures determined not to have historic or architectural significance. LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: Charley Stump TELEPHONE: (707) 46~ DATE:TITLE: ~//J~arF,,gebr~ 1, :006Direct°r/Environ~l Coordinator ITEM NO. 9.a DATE: February 1,2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION OF THE CITY MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BROWN AND CALDWELL TO CONDUCT A GROUNDWATER WELL SITING STUDY FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $89,528 SUMMARY: The City of Ukiah's current water distribution system relies on the Russian River to supply most of its water. This source of water is highly contested and subject to multiple demands including downstream water users and ever-changing environmental considerations. The current system has experienced costly and frustrating maintenance requirements related to the sedimentation of the Ranney collector and age-related problems with the groundwater wells, some of which are near the end of their useful life. (Continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and enter into a Professional Consulting Services Agreement with Brown and Caldwell to conduct a Well Siting Study for an amount not to exceed $89,528. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1) Determine a different firm is more qualified and select another consultant to perform the work. 2) Reject all proposals and provide direction to staff. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: Ann Burck, Project Engineer Prepared by: Ann Burck, Project Engineer Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1) RFP Distribution List 2) Table I - Professional Consultant Services to Conduct a Groundwater Well Siting Study Evaluation Candace Horsley, City M~nager Since 2003, the City has untaken an aggressive rehabilitation program of all existing wells. The capacity of the wells has increased as a result of the rehabilitation work. However, changes in the Russian River since the Ranney was built in 1966 and the age of the groundwater wells, has limited the capacity increase. The production capability as calculated by the Staff in their "City of Ukiah Water Facts - 2004" spreadsheet lists the total Sites Production as 7.440 million gallons per day (mgd). High demands are pushing the production facilities up to and beyond this capability. An earlier Water Workshop presentation by the Public Utilities Director showed the need for additional supply capacity. The Director stated the water production system is "working overtime with no room for error or downtime". To ensure the City has sufficient water source capacity to meet demand, new groundwater wells need to be found, prepared, and added to the municipal water system as soon as possible. A Request for Proposal (RFP) to conduct a Groundwater Well Siting Study was sent to 21 engineering consulting firms that provide hydrogeologic services for municipal water systems. The objective of the study is to identify, evaluate, and rank potential sites based non-hydrogeologic factors such as access to existing infrastructure, surrounding land use, and public concems. The most promising of these sites will then be evaluated further regarding their hydrogeologic characteristics and potential to provide high-quality drinking water in the volumes required. Test wells will be installed to verify water quality and water volumes. Seven proposals were received from the following firms: Todd Engineers, Richard C. Slade & Associates, Winzler & Kelly, Harris and Associates, Brown and Caldwell, SHN Consulting Engineers, and URS Corporation. The Department of Public Utilities staff and an outside civil engineering firm evaluated the proposals based on criteria specified in the RFP document. City Staff requested the civil engineering consulting firm of Wagner and Bonsignore to independently review the proposals and to offer their unbiased judgment in addition to City Staff's evaluation. The combined evaluation results for the seven proposals are shown in Table 1. Brown and Caldwell (B&C) received the highest evaluation score, 97 out of a possible 100 points. The strengths of B&C's proposal include: 1) an experienced and qualified team with 104 years of combined engineering experience, 2) design and development of more than 200 water production wells in Northern Califomia, 3) focused comprehensive site selection process, and 4) experience with design and construction of "casing path" wells capable of tapping all available water-bearing zones within an aquifer. B&C's proposal was the only one to propose constructing casing path wells. The proposal from Todd Engineers included a four-member team with a total of 52 years of combined engineering experience compared to 104 years for B&C. Two of the four team members with only one year of experience would be assigned 70% of the total project hours proposed. The least experienced member of B&C's team has seven years of experience. The remaining four team members with 97 years of combined engineering experience would be assigned 57% of the total project hours. The team proposed by Winzler & Kelly for the project had a total of 114 years of experience, but allowed for only 195 hours to complete the project. This was the least number of project hours of all the proposals received. B&C's proposal included 450 hours and Todd Engineers' proposal included 813 hours. Another factor considered in evaluating the proposals was the experience of the company and project team in siting and developing groundwater wells in northern California. B&C's proposal listed experience for their company and their project team with well siting and development for over 200 wells in Northern California. In their proposal, Todd Engineers listed experience for their company and their project team with well siting and development for 18 wells in Northern California. In their proposal, Winzler & Kelly listed experience for their company and their project team with well siting and development for 33 wells in Northern California. Staff, along with Wagner and Bonsignore believes Brown and Caldwell has the requisite experience and qualifications and offers the City the best value to provide the hydrogeologic services for the Groundwater Well Siting Study. The Brown and Caldwell hydrology staff is a separate group from the wastewater design engineering staff. Therefore, Staff is recommending the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate the final terms and enter into a contract with Brown and Caldwell for the services outlined in the Request for Proposals City of Ukiah Groundwater Well Siting Study. Copies of the recommended proposal from Brown and Caldwell are available for City Council review. Funds were budgeted and are available for this project in the FY '05-'06 budget, account # 820-3901-250- 000. A'i'I'ACHMENT~ Well Siting Study RFP Engineering Consultant Services Distribution List April 200,5 Geoconsultants, Inc. 1450 Koll Circle Suite 114 San Jose, California 95112 Joel B. ValBrown Boyle Engineering Corporation 1211 North Dutton Avenue, Suite C Santa Rosa, CA 95401 Hanover Environmental Services, Inc. 1072 Marauder Street, Suite 220 Chico, Ca. 95973 SHN Consulting Engineers 812 West Wabash Eureka, CA 95501 Todd Engineers 2200 Powell Street, Suite 225 Emeryville, California 94608-1809 URS Corporation 100 California Street, Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94111 Ulrick & Associates 1400 Grand View Drive Berkeley, California 94705 MWH Americus, Inc. 1340 Treat Boulevard, Suite 300 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Martin Steinpress, R.G.C.H.G. Brown and Caldwell 201 North Civic Drive Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Camp Dresser & McKee One Walnut Creek Center 100 Pringle Avenue, Suite 300 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Perry Petersen, P.E. HDR Engineering, Inc. 350 Frank H Ogawa Plaza, Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94612-2049 Greg Ow, P.E. Harris & Associates 120 Mason Circle Concord, CA 94520-1214 Ted Whiton, P.E. Winzler & Kelly 495 Tesconi Circle Santa Rosa, CA 95401-4696 Robert Gailey, R.G., C.H.G. The Source Group, Inc. 3451-C Vincent Road Pleasant Hill, California 94523 Geothermal Surveys, Inc. 520 Mission St. South Pasadena, CA 91030 Carrollo Engineers 2500 Venture Oaks Way, Suite 230 Sacramento, CA 95883 Brelje & Race Consulting Engineers 5570 Skylane Boulevard Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Quest GeoSystems Management 504 Limewood Drive Antioch, California 94509-5657 Black and Veatch 8950 Cai Center Drive, Suite 238 Sacramento, CA 95826 Mr. Mark Woyshner Balance Hydrologics 841 Folger Boulevard Berkeley, CA 94710 Richard C. Slade & Associates 6442 Coldwater Canyon Ave., Suite 214 North Hollywood, CA 91606 ATTACHMENT ITEM NO. 9.b DATE: February 1, 2006 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUB3ECT: DISCUSSION OF INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON FORMULA BUSINESSES WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS DISTRICT AND ON PERKINS AND GOBBI STREETS SUMMARY: The City Council has previously considered the adoption of a moratorium on formula businesses in the downtown business district and on Perkins and Gobbi Streets ("Gateway Streets"). I will refer to the downtown business district and the Gateway Streets collectively as "the downtown." Further discussion was postponed as a result of questions about potential conflicts of interest for Councilmembers who have ownership interests in property located within 500 feet of downtown. At the City Council meeting on .]anuary 18, 2006, three councilmembers were selected at random to participate in the decision along with Councilmember Baldwin who does not own property within 500 of downtown. I previously submitted an ASR discussing this issue. That discussion is set forth below. As set forth in more detail below, the City Council should consider, among others, the following questions: 1. Do so-called formula businesses pose unique problems for the downtown that warrant permanent zoning regulations? If the City does not intend to adopt permanent Continued on Page 2 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide direction to staff regarding urgency interim ordinance. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: N/a Citizen Advised: Requested by: City Council Prepared by: David .1. Rapport, City Attorney Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager, Charley Stump, Planning Director Attachments: I - Ukiah CibLCode, Sections 2605 and 2605.5 APPROVED: Candace Horsley, ~ity Manager Formula Business Moratorium Page 2 of 5 regulations with which a proposed use could conflict, it cannot adopt the urgency, interim ordinance,z 2. Will the establishment of one or more formula businesses in the downtown significantly interfere with the adoption of a permanent zoning ordinance prohibiting or regulating formula businesses in the downtown? 3. l~f a moratorium on formula businesses should be adopted, what businesses will be prohibited? 4. What findings of adverse health, safety or welfare impacts of formula businesses on the downtown should be included in an interim ordinance? As previously discussed in connection with marijuana cultivation and marijuana dispensaries, Government Code Section 65858 authorizes a City Council to adopt as an urgency ordinance, an interim zoning ordinance that imposes a moratorium on certain uses without going through the publicly noticed hearings before both the Planning Commission and City Council that are normally required for the adoption of zoning ordinances. Any such ordinance must be adopted by a 4/5 vote of the City Council. (Gov. Code §65858(a).) The urgency ordinance adopted without any public hearing is effective for 45 days, but may be extended by the City Council for an additional 10 months and 15 days, after conducting a noticed public hearing. ]:n order to adopt the ordinance, the City Council must make the following findings: . . . there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare, and that the approval of additional subdivisions, use permits, variances, building permits, or any other applicable entitlement for use which is required in order to comply with a zoning ordinance would result in that threat to public health, safety, or welfare. (_rd, subd. (c,).) As ]: also explained at the June 6 City Council meeting how the term "formula business" is defined could determine whether a moratorium on formula businesses discriminates against interstate commerce in violation of the United States Constitution. In determining whether a challenged law "discriminates" against interstate commerce, "'discrimination'... means differential treatment of in-state and out-of-state economic ~ Under Government Code Section 65858(a), the City may adopt an urgency, interim ordinance prohibiting particular land uses only if those uses" . . . may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the legislative body, planning commission or the planning department is considering_7 or studyinq or intends to study within a reasonable time." (Emphasis added.) Formula Business Moratorium Page 3 of 5 interests that benefits the former and burdens the latter." (Oregon Waste Systems, Inc. v. Department of Environmental (2ua/ity of Oregon (1994) 511 U.S. 93, 99.) Improper discrimination "may take any of three forms: first, the state statute may facially discriminate against interstate or foreign commerce; second, it may be facially neutral but have a discriminatory purpose; third, it may be facially neutral but have a discriminatory effect." (Pacific Merchant Shipping Assn. v. Voss (1995) 12 Ca/.4th 503; Waste Management of Alameda County v. Biagini Waste Reduction Systems, Inc. (1998) 63 CaI. App. 4th 1458, 149~; Smithfield Foods, Inc. v. Nil/er (S.D. Iowa 2003) 241 F. Supp. 2d 978, 986-987.) A neutral definition would focus on the attributes of the business that the City Council determines require special regulation to prevent adverse local effects. The definition should apply to local and in-state businesses as well as out-of-state businesses. The definition used by the City of Coronado which was upheld against a commerce clause challenge is as follows: "Formula Retail" means a type of retail sales activity or retail sales establishment (other than a 'formula fast food restaurant') which is required by contractual or other arrangement to maintain any of the following: standardized ('formula') array of services and/or merchandise, trademark, logo, service mark, symbol, decor, architecture, layout, uniform, or similar standardized feature. !n my opinion, the definition of "retail" should be refined. The dictionary definition of retail includes".., the sale of commodities or goods in small quantities to ultimate consumers; a/so: the industry of such selling." While many businesses, such as banks, hair stylists, and real estate and professional offices primarily provide services, some of these same businesses may also sell some goods. The City of Coronado ordinance excluded "formula fast food restaurants," because it had adopted a separate ordinance regulating those businesses. By excluding only fast food restaurants the "formula retail" definition probably included formula restaurants which are not "fast food" restaurants. ! would recommend a definition of retail along the lines of "a business predominantly engaged in the sale of goods and in which the provision of services is incidental to the sale of such goods." !f the City Council wants to include restaurants, ! recommend adding, "... including restaurants." ! would also include the statement: "'Retail business' does not include a business which predominantly provides a service and in which the sale of goods is only incidental to the provision of that service." !n my opinion, under this definition, an auto-parts or tire stores, for example, which also installs their products, would be classified as a retail business, because the installation service is incidental to the sale of goods. !n addition to being neutral on its face, the ordinance must also not have a discriminatory purpose or effect. To demonstrate that the purpose of the moratorium is Formula Business Moratorium Page 4 of 5 not to discriminate against out-of-state businesses, the City Council should make findings that identify the adverse effects of formula businesses, as defined, that require regulation. Similar findings are required, in any event, under Government Code Section 65858 that formula businesses are located on the gateway streets or in the downtown pose an immediate threat to the public health, safety or welfare. The City Council should express how allowing formula businesses in these locations will threaten public welfare. Clearly, the City Council has long pursued a policy of supporting the redevelopment and revitalization of the downtown and downtown businesses. There are many examples of programs the City has established to further that policy. The City has formally established boundaries for the downtown Parking and Business District and Benefit Zone. (See UCC §§2605 and 2605.5, copies attached as Attachment 1.) The City Council findings should explain how allowing formula businesses in the downtown or on the gateway streets would undermine that policy. There is no immediate threat of any formula business seeking to locate in the downtown. Since any moratorium would have to exclude the Walgreen Store, because that has already received City Council approval, there is no immediate threat of a formula business seeking to locate on a gateway street. As stated in $i/vera v South Lake Tahoe (1970)3 CA3d 554, 557, Government Code Section 65858 was adopted in recognition that the adoption of zoning regulations is a time-consuming process and that it is sometimes necessary to preserve the status quo, pending the adoption of zoning regulations: the formulation of a comprehensive zoning plan is a time consuming process and that while details are being studied and determined maintenance of the "status quo" should be permitted to the end that the public interests may be properly served. Accordingly, the City Council does not need to know that applicants are waiting in the wings to open formula businesses in the downtown, but it does need to explain in its adopted findings how the establishment of one or more formula businesses in the downtown or on the gateway streets will undermine the achievement of the goals sought to be achieved by the permanent regulation of formula businesses. The City Council should also adopt findings to demonstrate that the adoption of the ordinance will not have a discriminatory effect on out-of-state businesses. One suggestion at the June 6 meeting was to include a number of separate business premises in the definition of "formula business." For example: "Formula Retail" means a type of retail sales activity or retail sales establishment, maintainin9~ at least~ 12 separate business premises, which is required by contractual or other arrangement to maintain any of the Formula Business Moratorium Page 5 of 5 following in each separate business premise: standardized ('formula') array of services and/or merchandise, trademark, logo, service mark, symbol, decor, architecture, layout, uniform, or similar standardized feature. (Additional text highlighted.) Defining a formula business by reference to the number of separate business establishments raises, at least the possibility, of a discriminatory effect. For example, if it could be shown that the overwhelming majority of businesses or franchises consisting of twelve or more stores are out-of- state businesses, an argument might be made that the ordinance has a disparate impact on out-of-state businesses. Tf a number of stores is included in the definition, the City Council should seek some statistics to show that many such businesses are in-state as well as out-of-state. If the City Council decides to adopt an urgency ordinance imposing an interim moratorium on formula businesses in the downtown, the development of adequate findings will be important in making the ordinance defensible. ATTACHMENT_ I 2604: ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICT: There is hereby established a Parking and Business Improvement District and Benefit Zone pursuant to part 6, division 18 (section 36500 et seq.) of the Streets and Highway Code of the State. (Ord. 777, §1, adopted 1982) 2605: AREA OF DISTRICT: The district shall comprise the area described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the centerline of Oak Street with the centerline of Henry Street; thence easterly along the centerline of Henry Street to its intersection with the southerly extension of the west property line of parcel 002-184-18; thence northerly along the west property line of said property to its northwest comer; thence easterly along its north property line to the intersection with the west property line of parcel 002-184-26; thence northerly along the west property line of said property to its northwest comer; thence northerly and westerly along the west property line of parcel 002-184-11 to the northwest comer of said parcel; thence northerly along the west property line of parcel 002-184-31 to its northwest comer; thence easterly along the north property line of said parcel to its intersection with the west property line of parcel 002-184-02; thence northerly and westerly along the west property line of said parcel to its intersection with the centerline of Scott Street; thence easterly along the centerline of Scott Street to its intersection with the centerline of State Street; thence northerly along the centerline of State Street to its intersection with the centerline of Norton Street; thence easterly along the centerline of Norton Street to its intersection with the northerly extension of the east property line of parcel 002-153-28; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to the southeast comer of said parcel; thence easterly along the north property line of parcel 002-153-30 to the northeast comer of said property; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of parcel 002-153-34 to its southeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of parcel 002-150-33 to its southeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of parcel 002-153-29 to its southeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of parcel 002-153-27 to its intersection with the north property line of parcel 002-191-14; thence easterly along said north property line of said property to its northeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of said property to its southeast comer; thence westerly along the south property line of said parcel to its intersection with the east property line of parcel 002-191-08; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence a straight line southerly across Smith Street to the northeast comer of parcel 002-192-01; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of parcel 002-192-02 to its southeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of parcel 002-192-03 to its southeast comer; thence a straight line southerly across Standley Street to the northeast comer of parcel 002-192-18; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence a straight line southeasterly across Perkins Street to the northeast comer of parcel 002-231-01; thence southerly along the east property line of said property to its southeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of parcel 002-231-02 to its southeast comer intersecting the north property line of parcel 002-231-09; thence easterly along the north property line of said parcel to its northwest comer; thence southerly along the east property line of subject parcel to its southeasterly comer; thence westerly along the south property line of said parcel to its intersection with the east property line of parcel 002-231-27; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence westerly along the south property line of said parcel to its intersection with the east property line of parcel 002-231-25; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its intersection with the north property line of parcel 002-231-16; thence easterly along the north property line of said parcel to its northeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence a straight line southwesterly across Clay Street to the northeast comer of parcel 002-281-27; thence southerly and easterly along the north and east property lines of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence westerly and southerly to the southwest comer of said property intersecting the northwest comer of parcel 002-281-24; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of parcel 002-281-21; thence a straight line southwesterly across Cleveland Lane to the northeast comer of parcel 002-311-01; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of parcel 002-311-12 to its southeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of parcel 002-311-05 to its southeast comer; thence easterly along the north property line of parcel 002-311-06 to its northeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence easterly along the north property line of parcel 002-311-07 to its northeast comer; thence southerly along the east property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence westerly along the south property line of said parcel to its southwest comer; thence westerly along the south property line of parcel 002-302-36 to its intersection with the southeast comer of parcel 002-302-29; thence northerly along the east property line of said parcel to its northeast comer; thence westerly along the north property line of said parcel to its northwest comer; thence a straight line westerly across Main Street to the southeast comer of parcel 002-302-27; thence westerly along the south property line of said parcel to its southwest comer; thence westerly and northerly along the south property line of parcel 002-302-26 to its southwest comer; thence westerly along the south property line of parcel 002-302-17 to its southwest comer; thence a straight line southwesterly across South State Street to the southeast comer of parcel 002-301-03; thence westerly along the south property line of said parcel to its southwest comer; thence northerly along the west property line of said parcel to its intersection with the south property line of parcel 002-301-37; thence westerly along the south property line of said parcel to its southwest comer; thence in a straight line northwesterly across Oak Street to the southeasterly comer of parcel O01-304-03; thence westerly along the south property line of said parcel to its southwest comer; thence westerly along the south property line of parcel O01-304-02 to its southwest comer; thence northerly along a west property line of said parcel to its northwest comer; thence a straight line northerly across Mill Street to the southwest comer of property 001-294-26; thence northerly along the west property line of said parcel to its northwest comer; thence northerly along the west property line of parcel 001-294-27 to its northwest comer; thence easterly along the north property line of said parcel to its intersection with the west property line of parcel 001-294-11; thence a straight line northeasterly across Jones Street to the southwest comer of parcel 001-293-12; thence northerly along the west property line of said parcel to its northwest comer; thence northerly along the west property line of parcel 001-293-11 to its northwest comer; thence westerly along the north property line of parcel 001-293-10 to its northwest comer; thence westerly along the north property line of parcel 001-293-09 to its northwest comer; thence westerly along the north property line of parcel 001-293-08 to its northwest comer; thence westerly along the north property line of parcel 001-293-13 to its northwest comer; thence westerly along the north property line of parcel 001-293-06 to its northwest comer; thence westerly along the north property line of parcel 001-293-05 to its northwest comer; thence westerly along the north property line of parcel 001-293-04 to its northwest comer; thence westerly along the north property line of parcel 001-293-03 to its northwest comer; thence westerly along the north property line and property line extension of parcel 001-293-01 to its intersection with the centerline of Dora Street; thence northerly along said centerline of Dora Street to its intersection with the centerline of Clay Street; thence easterly along said centerline of Clay Street to its intersection with the centerline of Oak Street; thence northerly along the centerline of Oak Street to its intersection with the centerline of Henry Street and the point of the beginning. (Ord. 777, §1, adopted 1982; Ord. 883, §1, adopted 1989) 2605.5: ADDITION OF AREA TO DISTRICT: In addition to the area described in Section 2605 of this Chapter, the downtown parking and business improvement area shall include an area described as follows: Beginning at the south boundary line of the existing Downtown Parking and Improvement District at the intersection of the centerline of Oak Street and the westerly extension of the south property line of parcel 002-301-37; thence heading southerly along the centerline of Oak Street to its intersection with Gobbi Street; thence easterly along the centedine of Gobbi Street to its intersection with the southerly extension of the east property line of parcel 002-302-49; thence heading northerly along the east property line of said parcel to its intersection with the south property line of parcel 002-302-32; thence easterly along the south property line of said parcel to its southeast comer; thence northerly along the eastern property line of said parcel to its northeast comer; thence northerly along the eastern property line of parcel 002-302-25 to its northeast comer; thence westerly along the north property line of said parcel to the southeast comer of parcel 002-302-52; thence northerly along the east property line of said parcel to its northeast comer; thence a straight line northwesterly to the southeast comer or parcel 002-302-37; thence northerly along the east property line of said parcel to its northeast comer; thence easterly along the north property line of parcel 002-302-38 to a point approximately 121 feet east of the southeast comer of parcel 002-302-55, referred to as the southeast comer of parcel 002-302-29 in Municipal Code section 2605, the south boundary line of the existing Downtown Parking and Improvement District. The area added by this Section shall be assessed and shall benefit in the same manner and subject to the same conditions as the area described in Section 2605 of this Chapter. (Ord. 1021, {}2, adopted 1999) AGENDA l-I-EM NO: DATE: February 1, 2005 SUMMARY REPORT SUB.1ECT: DI'SCUSSI'ON AND DTRECTI'ON CONCERNI'NG THE DEVELOPMENT OF FORM BASED ZON]:NG FOR THE PERKI'NS STREET GATEWAY AND DOWNTOWN AREA SUMMARY: Last summer, Staff and the City Council began discussing the concept of preparing a Vision Plan and Form-Based Zoning for the Perkins Street "Gateway" and Downtown area. The discussion slowed because of potential conflict of interest issues, but those issues have now been resolved. This Agenda Ttem is intended to continue the discussion, and Staff is seeking Council approval to distribute a Request for Proposa/sto qualified consulting firms to assist with the project. Form-based zoning emphasizes the regulation of "design" of development rather than the more traditional approach of emphasizing the "use" of property. The "use" is still regulated, but the focus is placed on "design", which is intended to fulfill the community's vision for the affected areas. provides certainty to the community and to the developer, who will understand from the beginning what the Community's rules are for development. What is Form-Based Zoning?: Ukiah currently uses conventional zoning, which primarily concerns itself with controlling land uses and densities. For example, we have a number of residential and commercial zoning districts that allow and prohibit certain uses from occurring. There is very little emphasis on the way development must look when it is constructed. (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACT1:ON: 1) Discuss the Vision Plan and Form-Based Zoning Concept for the Perkins Street Gateway and Downtown area; and 2) Authorize Staff to distribute a Request for Proposa/s to qualified consulting firms. ALTERNATI'VE AGENCY POLZCY OPTZON: Provide alternative direction to Staff. Citizens Advised: N/A Requested by: Planning and Community Development Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. Redevelopment Agency Agenda Summary Report, dated October 5, 2005 2. Background Tnformation: Form-Based Zoning and Smart Codes APPROVED: Candac-~ Horsley, Executive D~c~or The emphasis with form based zoning is to control the design of development projects beyond the basic height and setbacks standards included in traditional approaches to zoning. Jt is meant to distinctly link a community's defined vision for an area with the actual outcome of development. However, form based zoning also controls the use of property and can assign land use densities. For example, the City of Petaluma's "Smart Code" for its central area includes "Building Function Standards," which identifies the land uses allowed in various designated areas. Tn one portion of their central area, gas stations, drive-through retail, and large (10,000 square feet or more) general retail are not allowed. The purpose of Petaluma's 'Smart Code" for their central area is to ensure that new buildings are harmonious with each other and within the character of the City, and to ensure that this part of their City evolves into new, mixed-use neighborhoods. They have carefully decided, based on constraints, design and form, where certain land uses are appropriate and inappropriate, and equally important what future buildings must look like. Defining a Vision: Before preparing a new approach to zoning along Perkins Street and in the downtown, Staff believes that a community visioning exercise should occur. With the assistance of experienced professional consultants, a series of public exercises can be conducted to determine what aspects of existing development we value in our community, and how we would like to see Perkins Street and the Downtown evolve. Tt could also include a streetscape vision for State Street, and would be coordinated with the Citywide traffic Study. These exercises would utilize the existing adopted urban design guidelines documents and General Plan, and could include participatory preference surveys, walking tours, and other techniques used to engage and empower interested citizens. Based on the outcome of these public exercises, the consultants would then prepare a Vision Plan that would guide the development of the form-based zoning document. FUNDIN~;: A specific funding source for this project has not been identified. Redevelopment funds may be a source, but the Redevelopment Agency has not discussed or taken action to allocate funds for this project. Once Request for Proposa/s are received, we will know how much funding will be needed. At that time, discussions can occur with the Council and Redevelopment Agency regarding the allocation of money to fund the project. CONCLUSTON: Staff believes that we are reaching a very important time in terms of urban design. The growth pressure anticipated in the 1990's is now upon us, and we can expect new development and redevelopment projects to be proposed along the Perkins Street corridor and in and around our downtown. Our vision for the downtown needs to be revisited, and a vision for Perkins Street and perhaps other important gateways needs to be developed to avoid difficult and uncomfortable development review processes. The current zoning tool used to respond to development has not maintained the crucial link between our vision for the City and what actually gets built. To better respond to development and redevelopment, Staff believes we should move in a new direction away from the traditional approach to zoning. By honing the vision and developing a form-based approach to zoning, we can provide certainty to the community about the outcome of development, as well as to developers, who will understand the City's vision and rules for development prior to submitting applications. RECOMMENDAT]:ON: 1) Discuss the Vision Plan and Form-Based Zoning Concept for the Perkins Street Gateway and Downtown area; and 2) Authorize Staff to distribute a Request for Proposa/sto qualified consulting firms. ATTACHMENT__ / ITEM NO: 5a DATE: October 5, 2005 UKZAH REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA SUPlPlARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND DIRECT[ON CONCERNING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A PLAN FOR THE PERI(ZNS STREET GATEWAY AND DOWNTOWN AREA SUMMARY: Staff and the City Council have recently discussed the concept of preparing a plan for the Perkins Street "Gateway" and revising the 1992 Downtown Revitalization Master Plan. The recent Walgreens project, the emerging skatepark, the planned restoration of the historic train depot building, and the recent discussions of "formula" businesses have prompted the discussions of a need for a vision, planning strategy, and regulatory tool to ensure that the Perkins Street corridor and the downtown are developed and redeveloped in a special and unique way. Staff has been exploring the concept of "form-based" zoning and believes that this regulatory tool may work well for the downtown and Perkins Street gateway. This Agenda item is intended to continue the discussion and develop an approach for this important planning project. BACKGROUND: Over the past nineteen years, the City has concerned itself with urban design. In 1986, the City prepared a H/stodca/ and Architec~ral Resources Inventory ReporL The follow~rig yearin 1987, the City commissioned a Redevelopment Plan Strategy Study to "preserve and build upon the City's unique historical resources, to retain the posiUve small town qualiUes, and to enhance the downtown area." (continued on page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTZON: 1) Direct Staff to refine the scope of a Perkins Street Gateway and Downtown Vision Plan and Form-Based Zoning project; 2) Prepare a draft request for Proposals; and 3) Return to the RDA for final review and approval. ALTERNA~VE AGENCY POL/CY OPTZON: Provide alternative direction to Staff. Citizens Advised: Persons expressing interest have been notified Requested by: Planning and Community Development Department Prepared by: Charley Stump, Director of Planning and Community Development Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: None. Previously distributed material on .luly 20, 2005 and September 21, 2005. Candace Horsley, 1 In 1988, the City adopted the Ukiah Streetscape Guidelines Study to further these goals. In 1992, the City Redevelopment Agency funded and adopted a Downtown Revitalization I~aster P/an, which was intended to be a "bold and realistic action plan for the social and economic revitalization of the downtown." That same year, it also adopted a Downtown Design Gu/de, which was intended to assist those involved in the development process in Ukiah's downtown. In 1995, the City Council adopted a revised General Plan which included a Community Design Element. This Element included goals and policies for preserving and enhancing both the downtown and the City's primary street "gateways." In 2001, the City Council adopted the Commercial Development Design Guidelines, which included the 1992 Downtown Design Guidelines and new Design Guidelines for commercials areas outside the Downtown area. D]:SCU$SI:ON: For the past eighteen years, the City has concerned itself with urban design. As indicated above, the City has adopted many guideline documents dealing with trees, streetscapes, building design, and historic preservation. For many reasons, what has not occurred has been the development of a complete "Code" that establishes the mandatory standards for implementing the guideline documents. While the Zoning Code has been revised in many ways to respond to the General Plan and guideline documents, it has never been revised to assure the community that new development will resemble its vision. Staff believes that the Perkins Street Gateway and Downtown planning effort can provide the starting point for embarking on a new approach to zoning in our community. Rather than developing a new IVlaster Plan for this area and then revising the zoning code to implement it, Staff suggests that because we have prepared a strong urban design foundation over the years, we should revisit and redefine our vision for the downtown and Perkins Street, and then prepare a form-based approach to zoning for this area. What is Form-Based Zoning?: Ukiah currently uses conventional zoning, which primarily concerns itself with controlling land uses and densities. For example, we have a number of residential and commercial zoning districts that allow and prohibit certain uses from occurring. There is very little emphasis on the way development must look when it is constructed. The emphasis with form based zoning is to control the design of development projects beyond the basic height and setbacks standards included in traditional approaches to zoning. It is meant to distinctly link a community's defined vision for an area with the actual outcome of development. However, form based zoning also controls the use of property and can assign land use densities. For example, the City of Petaluma's "Smart Code" for its central area includes "Building Function Standards," which identifies the land uses allowed in various designated areas. In one portion of their central area, gas stations, drive-through retail, and large (10,000 square feet or more) general retail are not allowed. The purpose of Petaluma's 'Smart Code" for their central area is to ensure that new buildings are harmonious with each other and within the character of the City, and to ensure that this part of their City evolves into new, mixed-use neighborhoods. They have carefully decided, based on constraints, design and form, where certain land uses are appropriate and inappropriate, and equally important what future buildings must look like. The Petaluma code includes a zoning map, building function standards, urban standards, thoroughfare standards, landscaping and utility standards, parking standards, and historic preservation standards. It also includes architectural guidelines (see September 21, 2005 Agenda Summary Report Attachment i - pages 1-56). 2 Defining a Vision: Before preparing a new approach to zoning along Perkins Street and in the downtown, Staff believes that a community visioning exercise should occur. With the assistance of experienced professional consultants, a series of public exercises can be conducted to determine what aspects of existing development we value in our community, and how we would like to see Perkins Street and the Downtown evolve. These exercises would utilize the existing adopted urban design guidelines documents and General Plan, and could include participatory preference surveys, walking tours, and other techniques used to engage and empower interested citizens. Based on the outcome of these public exercises, the consultants would then prepare a Vision Plan that would guide the development of the form-based zoning document. CONCLUSTON: Staff believes that we are reaching a very important time in terms of urban design. The growth pressure anticipated in the 1990's is now upon us, and we can expect new development and redevelopment projects to be proposed along the Perkins Street corridor and in and around our downtown. Our vision for the downtown needs to be revisited, and a vision for Perkins Street and perhaps other important gateways needs to be developed to avoid difficult and uncomfortable development review processes. The current zoning tool used to respond to development has not maintained the crucial link between our vision for the City and what actually gets built. To better respond to development and redevelopment, Staff believes we should move in a new direction away from the traditional approach to zoning. By honing the vision and developing a form-based approach to zoning, we can provide certainty to the community and developers, and avoid confrontational public hearings, and a lack of trust and respect between the community, decision-makers, and Staff. Most of all, we can ensure that future development along Perkins Street and in the downtown fulfills the community's expectations and vision for the future. RECOMMENDATI:ON: 1) Direct Staff to refine the scope of the Perkins Street Gateway and Downtown Vision Plan and Form-Based Zoning project; 2) Prepare a draft request for Proposals; and 3) Return to the RDA for final review and approval. First - The New Ui'banis: ahen~ative to convemional zoning http://rJ'Lgov/oep"resourcelibrarv;referencelibra-,/£/o^--.~ , ~, - ~.) ~, ~u~u~CC}2..OP, l~]oo/'.,. ' November 2004 Attachment Form First The New Urbanist alternative to conventional zoning. By Peter Katz ".lust throw your existing zoning in the garbage." That's what New Urbanist architect-planner Andres Duany exhorts audiences to do in his lectures about the decline of America's suburbs. When I first heard Duany express this view in the early 1990s, I was taken aback, as, I'm sure, most planners were. It seemed outrageous to suggest that zoning, the body of taw that controls development in 99 percent of America's communities, could be so easily dismissed. Since then, however, I've come to believe that Duany's prescription may not be so radical after all. His main point is that conventional zoning based on the segregation of land uses was never intended to deal with physical form, and that the "band-aid" measures (including' design guidelines) that planners cobble onto existing ordinances to address this deficiency just make matters worse. Something else is needed, and that something else is what New Urbanists call form-based coding. What is it? As its name suggests, form-based coding seeks to regulate the form of the built environment. In contrast, conventional zoning primarily Seeks to control land use and density, but is largely silent on matters of form beyond the most basic height, floor-area, and setback limits for individual buildings. The new approach builds on the idea that physical form is a community's most intrinsic and enduring characteristic. It seeks to codify that form in a straightforward way so that planners, citizens, developers, and other stakeholders can move easily from a shared physical vision of a place to its built reality. To understand the concept, think of the way neighborhoods change over time. In many cities, warehouse and industrial areas have morphed into trendy arts districts with galleries and restaurants at street level and loft housing above. The form of the buildings has remained fairly constant, while internal uses and activity patterns have been transformed. Under the current, use-based zoning system, such a change would be considered drastic. The land-use category has gone from industrial, at one end of the spectrum, to residential, at the other, although to the average onlooker, the place looks pretty much the same. In this example, a form-based code would regulate the part that had remained the same -- the form of the building and the configuration of the street and sidewalk. Use would be regulated, too, but at a secondary, rather than primary level of the code. In some cities, planners have found ways to bend land-use zoning to enable this kind of reuse to promote the revitalization of older neighborhoods, particularly those with good architectural "bones." But such modifications are typically made on a case-by-case basis or within narrowly defined special districts. Meanwhile, in new growth areas and in most existing neighborhoods, use-based zoning remains the law of the land. One result is the suburbanization of city neighborhoods by provisions such as setback rules that force houses far back on their lots and away from each other'. t First - The New t;t-banist alternative to conventional zoning Getting down to work ht¢://~, gov/oep/resourceli brai'y/re fe ren c e 1 ibr a rF,/f/fo rmba se dzo nih g/... Generally, the creation of a form-based code is interwoven with a community visioning process. The process typically includes a public design workshop, or charette, lasl:ing several days. The community's "consensus vision" is conveyed through a range of visuals, including perspective drawings, site analysis diagrams, and an illustrative plan. That plan, which resembles an aerial photo, includes proposed buildings (shown as rooftops), key natural features, and existing and planned public spaces. The first step in coding is to translate the illustrative plan into a more diagrammatic regulating plan, which indicates what goes where. This document, while similar in some ways to a zoning map, is far more detailed. It also omits any direct labeling of uses, a job that is handled in the building standards described below. In one kind of form-based code, the regulating plan assigns a building type or types to each available parcel of land. Other kinds of regulating plans indicate a range of building or frontage types that may be constructed in a certain area. Clearly, when it comes to detailing the urban environment, one size does not fit all, and the new approach to coding recognizes that. Coding by building type provides the freedom to create one set of rules for one building type and another set for a different type. For example, a townhouse may function best with its main floor lifted a half-level above grade for interior privacy, with a front stoop for access. Yet a shopfront in the same neighborhood may be more accessible to customers if it is set at grade. Although public buildings are very important to New Urbanist designers, they are typically not coded. Such buildings are usually indicated in the regulating plan by a conceptual footprint that serves as a ptaceholder until an actual design is formulated (often years in the future). Nuts and bolts The physical characteristics of each building type are summarized in the building standards -- a set of annotated building cross-sections and plan diagrams assembled on a single, letter-size sheet. In some cases, all the building types are combined into a matrix and formatted as a poster. Regardless of layout, building standards typically establish these parameters' - Building height is a key standard. A maximum number of floors (or dimension-to-the-eave) is set to ensure that a building does not overwhelm its neighbors. Unlike use-based zoning, form-based codes also speci'fy a minimum height in order to maintain a proper street wall. Siting standards control the placement of structures in relation to fronting streets and adjacent building lots. Dimensions to front, side, and rear building lines, as well as the location and configuration of entrances, parking, yards, and courtyards are specified. Key building elements -- i.e., windows, doors, and porches -- are also controlled by the standards. Uses are also part of the building envelope standards, but the approach here is quite different from conventional zoning. Permissible uses, stated in general terms (e.g., retail, residential), are identified for each 'building type and iabeted on the cross-section diagram. This approach makes it easy to assign different uses to each floor of a mixed-use development', and avoids the problem of trying to communicate the same information on a flat map. (The plethora of colors, stripes, and cross-hatch patterns on most zoning maps shows how confusing this can be.) Thoroughfare standards for a range of recommended street types may also be part of the code in places Fi~'s~.- T'he New Urbanist alte~'native to conventional zoning htTl-~:/.,nh.gov,'oep/resourcelibrary/referencelibrary/.fTtb,.Tnbasedzonmg/... wh ere streets are not individually designed. Such standards are indicated by section diagr.ams with dinnensions for travel and parking lanes, sidewalks, medians, and planting strips. Tree alignment and property lines are also shown. Fin ally, many codes include a set of landscape standards listing appropriate tree and groundcover spe~cies. Most codes also provide a glossary that defines terms that are used in a specific way in the document. These components constitute the basics of a form-based code. They control the urban design elements that New Urbanists are most concerned with. However, some communities -- master-planned developments, special retail districts, historic districts, among others -- may want to exercise a higher level of control over the appearance of individual buildings. For this reason, some form-based codes include architectural standards. This optional "dress code" controls exterior colors, materials, and construction techniques. Particular emphasis is given to cladding, doors, windows, stairs, and roofs. Style may also be included as part of the architectural standards, but not in every case. Many New Urbanists choose to avoid direct references to building style, fearing that too much specificity will lead to an overly homogeneous, "themed" look. A little history While the term form-based coding has only recently emerged, the technique has been used for over 20 years. Andres Duany's Miami firm, Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company, first applied the approach in its 1982 code for Seaside, the highly publicized coastal resort town on Florida's panhandle. The firm's principals, Duany and his wife, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, initially set out to design all the town's buildings themselves. But once the true scale of the project became evident, they realized that such a high level of design control would not be possible, or even desirable. :Instead, they handed off the design responsibility to the lot purchasers, or their architects. That decision led to a new challenge -- finding a way to impart a distinctive character to specific areas within the development. On study trips to historic Southern communities, the design team saw that certain building types tended to dominate in certain parts of a town: shopfronts on the main square, rowhouses on side streets, and mansions flanking Main Street just beyond the edges of the downtown. The team also noted that, while building types were fairly consistent in a given area, there was always enough variety within the design of each building to avoid a cookie-cutter look. The first Seasfde code established a hierarchy of seven (later expanded to eight) "classes" of buildings for use in l:he new .community. Each class was based on a traditional Southern vernacular building type. The code specified the rudimentary physical characteristics of each class, controlling siting on the lot, building, height, location of porches and outbuildings, and how parking should be handled. The code progressed through a number of iterations, achieving its near-final form during an on-site design charette in 1981. Shortly after that event, several architecture professors at Washington, D.C.'s Catholic University conducted a test of the code. They asked 140 students to design and bulld models of every building included in the 80-acre master plan according to the rules set forth in the code. The students then combined their individual creations into a 16-foot-long composite model of the community. ?- , Looking at the finished prodL~ct, one could ea~;ily envision the town's streets and public spaces. The model also assumed an important, diagnostic role. Recognizing the tendency of architecture students to push the design of each building to its limits, the code's creators were able to identify and fix a number of potential regulatory problems before the code was formally adopted. After the firm's experience at Seaside, Duany Plater-Zyberk adapted form-based codes to work within the legal framework of a planned-unit development. The Kentlands in Gaithersburg, Maryland, is one early example of that application. Since 1989, when its plan and code were created in a highly publicized charette, DPZ has crafted similar documents to regulate the buildout of over 200 new and existing Fix'st - ];he New Urbanist alternative to conventional zoning communities. http://nl~.gov/oep/resourcelibrary/reference!ibrary/f,.'£o~-mbasedzoning/.. BrOadening the circle Other urban designers have since used form-based codes in a wide variety of projects and locations. In 1999, Dover, Kohl & Partners of South Miami, working in collaboration with DPZ, prepared a master plan and form-based development ordinance for a new downtown for Kendall, an edge city just south of Miami. The 240-acre project site is adjacent to two commuter rail stations and a state highway. Since the adoption of the ordinance, an estimated $250 million in new construction permits have been issued. Some 3,400 new dwelling units, most in high-rise buildings (up to 25 stories), are now under construction in an area that previously had no residential population at all. While the recent wave of construction in Kendall was foreseen well before the code was adopted, many credit the regulations with helping the community to achieve a true downtown development pattern rather than the patchwork typical of booming suburban areas. On the East Coast, Dover Kohl and Ferrell Madden Associates of Washington, D.C., conducted an eight-day charette that resulted in the adoption in February 2003 of a plan and form-based code for the Columbia Pike Corridor in Arlington, Virginia. That work focused on the detailed design of four mixed-use centers along a 3.5-mile section of the historic corridor, which is minutes away from the Pentagon and downtown Washington. A year later, Arlington County planners approved Columbia Station, a mixed-use development consisting of 2S7 housing units above 42,000 square feet of street-fronting retail. Future plans call for the integration of bus rapid transit or light rail along the corridor. · Geoffrey Ferrell of Ferrell Madden was also responsible for the form-based coding of a $200 million, mixed-use development in Contra Costa County, California. For two decades, neighborhood opposition had stalled the proposed public-private venture on a 20-acre site adjacent to the Pleasant Hill station on the Bay Area Rapid Transit line. The plan for this project was developed by Lennertz Coyle & Associates of Portland, Oregon. The code, and the elaborate publi'c involvement that led up to it, created a level of trust that led to approval of the project in December 2001. The project is now moving forward under the direction of architect Dan Parolek, of Opticos Design in Berkeley, California. Stephen Lawton, the community development director of Hercules, another Contra Costa County community, credits the streamlined nature of form-based coding with helping the city to deal with a backlog of development proposals. Dover Kohl & Partners' Central Hercules plan is shaping several new mixed-use neighborhoods on a patchwork of brownfield sites. Says Lawton: "The clarity of the form-based code made it easy for citizens to understand the development proposals and to accept the intensity of growth needed to achieve financial stability. This was something we'd never have been able to achieve with conventional zoning." To date, most form-based codes have been crafted individually in response to the needs of a specific community or site. Now comes a new generation of standardized form-based codes, which 'are derived' from the SmartCode, a template developed by DPZ and licensed by the Municipal Code'~2orporation in Tallahassee, Florida. The SmartCode template defines a series of preconfigured (but customizable) zones based on the "transect" -- a framework for organizing a metropolitan area into a series of zones, ranging from most natural to most urban. One of the first communities to take this new approach is Petaluma, California, which adopted a variation of the SmartCode in July 2003. Laura Hall of Fisher & Hall Urban Design in Santa Rosa and Paul Crawford, FAICP, of Crawford Multari & Clark in San Luis Obispo tailored the document to the city's 'n Fi:;st -The Ne~,, Urbanist alternative ~o conventional zoning ]ittp://nh.gov/oepl;I'esourcelibrary/referencelibrary/f/formbasedzoning/... .2---5- needs; it focuses on a 400-acre portion of the downtown. According to Hall, Petaluma adopted the code in just nine months, after a seven-year effort to complete and adopt a more conventional, use-based downtown plan and zoning ordinance. Over SZ00 .million in development has been approved since the code's adoption, she says. California out front As more communities begin to incorporate New Urbanist and smart growth principles into their planning strategies, the practice of form-based coding is likely to spread. How much that will happen depends on several factors: the availability of qualified consultants (just a handful of firms practice true form-based coding); the dissemination of knowledge about the technique (little has been written on the subject, and there are few places to learn about it); and a continuing legal concern about overly prescriptive design guidelines that are often mistaken for form-based codes. The good news is that the state of California recently included an endorsement of form-based coding in its general plan guidelines. The document refers to the code as a "useful implementation measure for achieving certain general plan goals, such as walkable neighborhoods and mixed-use and transit-oriented development." And this summer, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill 1268, making California the first state to specifically enable the practice of form-based development regulation. The bill's language is brief and to the point: "The text and diagrams in the land use element [of the general plan] that address the location and extent of land uses, and the zoning ordinances that implement these provisions, may also express community intentions regarding urban form and design. These expressions may differentiate neighborhoods, districts, and corridors, provide for a mixture of land uses and housing types within each, and provide specific measures for regulating relationships between buildings and outdoor public areas, including streets." As states such as Florida and Arizona follow California's lead in mandating local planning through the use of a general plan, zoning consistent with the plan, and the use of specific plans, one can hope that the practice of form-based coding and the enabling laws that support it will not be far behind. Peter Katz is a consultant on New Urbanist implementation and development who is based in Alexandria, Virginia. He teaches planning at Virginia Tech's Alexandria campus and is the author of The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community, published by McGraw-Hill in 1993. FBCs: The Advantages Because they are prescriptive (they state what you want), rather than proscriptive (what you don't want), FBCs can achieve a more predictable physical result. The elements controlled by FBCs are those that are most important to shaping a high- quality built environment. FBCs encourage public participation because they allow citizens to see what will happen where ~ leading to a higher comfort level about greater density, for instance. Because they can regulate development at the scale of an individual building or lot, FBCs encourage independent development by multiple property owners. This eliminates the need for large land assemblies and the megaprojects that are frequently proposed for such parcels. The built results of FBCs often reflect a diversity of architecture, materials, uses, and ownership that can only come from the actions of many independent players operating within a communally agreed-upon vision and legal framework. First - The New U~'bamst a!temative to conventional zoning FBCs work well in established communities because they effectively define and codify a neighborhood's existing "DNA." Vernacular building types can be easily replicated, promoting infill that is compatible with surrounding structures. Nonprofessionals find FBCs easier to use than conventional zoning ordinances because they are much shorter, more concise, and organized for visual access and readability. This feature makes it easier for nonplanners to determine whether the codes have been complied with. ht'rp://l~, gov/o ep,,'re s o trrc eli bra 13,','r e fe~'e :ice lib r a fy/f/formb as e dz onir;.g/... ; FBCs obviate the need for design guidelines, which are difficult to apply consistently, offer too much room for subjective interpretation, and can be difficult to enforce. They also require less oversight by discretionary review bodies, leading to a less politicized planning process that can deliver huge savings in time and money and reduce the risk of takings challenges. The stated purpose of FBCs is the shaping of a high-quality public realm (a presumed public good) that, in turn, promotes healthy civic interaction. For that reason, the codes can be enforced not on the basis of aesthetics but because noncompliance would diminish the good that is sought. While enforceability of development regulations has not been a major problem in new growth areas where aesthetic concerns are usually addressed in private covenants, such matters have created problems for local governments in already-urbanized areas. Because they have the potential to level the regulatory playing field between city and suburb, form-based codes could play a major role in the recovery of vast areas of America's urban landscape. Resou roes Images: Top -- In Iowa City's Peninsula Neighborhood, the code requires sidewalks and minimum-width front porches in a effort to create a pedestrian-friendly community. Photo by Paul Warchol. Middle -- Townhouses in the Pleasant Hill development define the walls of a "public room" focused on Mount Diablo. Citizens supported the redevelopment plan in part becauseof the generous provisions of open space. Illustration by LCA Associates. Bottom -- The row of storefronts, with lofts above, seen in the computer simulation, shows the results of following an FBC's build-to line in a Chicago neighborhood. Illustration by Urban Advantage. For more information on form-based codes, go to www.formbasedcodes.org. This website has been created by FBCA, an alliance of form-based coding practitioners recently convened to set standards for and disseminate information about the technique. Examples of early form-based codes can be found in The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community by Peter Katz (McGraw-Hill !993) on pages 76-77, 94, 110-116, Attachment Central l eta[u ma SrnartCode® It took only 9 months for political adversaries in the City of Petaluma, California, with Fisher & Hall's assistance, to agree onand adopt an · easy-to-understand SmartCode~ for their downtown. But adoption of the 400-acre Central Petaluma SmartCodeu materialized only after hitting what seemed like an insurmountable impasse. The impasse was a conventional zoning code. The citizen's com- mittee working on the plan soundly rejected the thick text of legalese, incomprehensible floor area ratios and long charts of numbers. "How can we be sure that we'll begetting our vision, when we can't '' even understand the document that turns it into law?" one committee member asked. "What a great night in this community." MAYOR DAVID GLASS OF' PETALUMA SAID AFl'ER THE PLAN WAS APPROVED. about most - the building heights, the building fronts and the civic spaces. The committee was finally assured that new development would resemble their vision. PETALUMA'S WAREHOUSE DISTRICT BEFORE THE SMARTCODE© ~' · '~iP'~' ~J~,,~ '~ '. ~,~,~;,-'~ . :~.~;.--'. 'a'~ I ~',:-'-' , , ' - .,~,~'... ~::'~ ,ntt, ~;:a ~ :~'"J~'~""'~' ~4'~" ., · ..... PL='TALUMA'S VISION AFTER THE SN1ARTCODE© Then they tried the SmartCode,,, a "form-based" zoning code of ordinary language and simple graphics. It codes precisely those aspects of the built environment that the community cares Committee mem- bers weren't the only ones who supported the SmartCode~'. With clear rules for development, strong community buy-in, and predictability of process, devel- opers, who historica, lly shy away from new regulations, have also embraced it. Since its adoption, they have quickly begun their application process for new projects. 'A local, reporter told us that he couldn't tell if the SmartCode~ was a radical, green, [eft-wing document or a developer-friend[y, market-.based right-wing one. When that happens, we k_now we're on the right track!" LAUP, A HALL, P~INCiPAL, F'ISHER (~ HALL UI:IBAN OE$1GN The Central Petaluma SmartCode'~ is clearly a win-win solution for Petaluma and for other cities who want to encourage reinvestment and improve the quality of their public realm. Fisher &-Halt 707.544. 1910 vvww/.fishe:randhal[.com What is a $ a tCocle The SmartCode~ is a three-dimensional zoning code 'that everyone can understand. It provides a system that ensures that the design of the public realm and the design of priv;ate buildings are rigorously coordinated'and are focused on the pedestrian experience. At its core, the SmartCode~' definei an agreement between the community (the public) and property owners (the private). The community commits itself to building and maintaining high-quality, pedestrianl oriented streets, public parking facilities, and squares, plazas and other civic spaces. The property and business owners commit themselves to building high-quality CENTR.:tL PE l.~LU~/, ~,~ART COOE S£C110~ 7 '0 SMARTCODE© ZONING MAP -- USES AND DESIGN ARE SPECIFIED STREET-B¥-STREEW "This is the right plan in the right place at the right time," DAVIO KELLER, Co-CHAiR, C E Nt f~A!_ PEWALUMA SPECll~IC PLAN COI~MI~TEE buildings that face'the public realm with facades that are scaled to the pedestrian, and to put on-site parking and service functions to the backs of the buildings and the interiors of the blocks. Eye.one can understand the Tab[es. The SmartCodee defines what is essentially a "kit of parts," with instructions, for building a place that is based directly on the preferences of the community. It is intended to ensure that the new buildings are harmonious with each other and within the character of the place. This kit of parts includes: · Frontage Types - What the fronts of bu tidings will look like (see graphic below). Building Placement - Where the buildings are located on the lots. Building Function- Allowed uses. · Civic Spaces-Types of open spaces. · Thoroughfare Types - Street types for each block. F~o NTAO,=' TYP STOOP SHOPF~ONT WITH AWNINGS ES -- WHAT THE F~ONTS OF' BUILDINGS WILL LOOK. LIKE Each of these elements is Clearly described and .illustrated and then combined onto one easy-to-understand page called the Urban Standards (see graphic below). URBAN STANDARDS TABLE The rules are clear to everyone who has an interest in them- developers, planning staff, elected officials and the average citizen. ?by is ling codes already exist. But ~entional zoning codes don't necessarily It in walkable towns that everybody s. You can replace these outdated lng codes with community-supported ~rtCodes~. These precisely codify the gn of-buildings and streets to make n vital, walkable places. nartCodes~ create hole places. a SmartCode® so important? But all these places tend to remain unassembled. The SmartCode~ puts them all together. ike conventional zoning codes that ~s on the separation of uses and ;iplines, the SmartCode'= is an grated code. It allows the various 'essions that affect urbanism to act with y of purpose. Without integrated ts, each discipline tends to design in a mm. The civil engineer designs the :ts. The architects design the buildings. landscape architect designs the plazas. Investment is stimulated. A strong community vision attracts investors. Shopping centers and office parks use predictable rules that attract investment away from older cities and towns. SmartCodes° embed the same principles of predictability back into them, giving investors a stable investment environment. The SmartCode® is ecotogicatly based. The SmartCode'~ organizes development using what .ecologists call a transect. A natural transect (see graphic) is a slice through the landscape of'plant and animal life. Each plant community is whole, but it is also parr of a larger ecological community. The urban-rural transect of the SmartCode~ extends this principle to the "! ".":~."~-- ~'.~ i ..... ~.~..:, i ~' . '... ' ' ~'.:. ~ .... ~ ~ . ._~'~' '-~5..~&: : ?.~:':,', NATURAL TRANSECT Cities by nature tend towards socioeconomic monocultures. Healthy towns, like healthy ecosystems, thrive on diversity. SmartCodese have diversity embedded in them, using principles found in ecology to ensure a strong and sustainable mix of people, incomes and interests. · E~<AMPLE OF A STREET CROSS-SECTION i:',?i::i:i!:3:7:: il '::'- ", '- :'."i :' :;.~ ..~:i.:,'..~ :. !,.;,..-: · . .. ONE WANTS TO WALK HERE -- ~ICAL ZONING CODE RESULT. URBAN-RURAL TRANSECT human habitat, with diversity of uses increasing towards the center. It progresses from wild nature, agriculture, and houses · on large lots all the way to dense, mixed-use town centers. As in the natural transect, in the urban-rural transect each neighborhood is whole, but is also part of the larger city. "We would do more work in those towns ?. that hav~ SmartCode~o.'' VIN SM!TH, VICE PRESIDENT O~' TIlE PETALUMA-BASED DEVELOPE~, BASIN .~TREL-'-F PROPERTIES PEOPLE LOVE TO WALK HERE -- A SMARTCODEc VISION Rebuild your ci'ty. Do,a SmartCode Fisher & Hall ~. 707.544. ] 910 ~ www. fisherandhall..com CONVENTIONAL ZONINC, DELIVERS THIS SPF~WL. A SMARTCODE~ DELIVERS THIS VISION. Conventional zoning codes of the last 50 years have given us placeless, auto-oriented sprawl, threatening the vitality of our communities and the health of our environment. The SmartCode~ is different. When communities adopt a .SmartCode", they get a form-based plan that codes the place where all citizens meet - the public realm. SmartCodes° use sound ecological practices, walkable urban design principles and full community participation to ensure a plan that will produce sustainable communities that people care about. Adopt a' SmartCode©. Get the Best Community.. SmartCodes© streamline the coding process. Unlike other form-based codes, which require starting the coding process from scratch each time, the SmartCodeu is a template used as a fully realized starting point. The SmartCode'~ is customized for each municipality's locally-based cultural preferences such as block size, architecture, street width, and building heights. By using the SmartCode~, cities save time and money, and establish a new common zoning language that all citizens, builders and investors can understand. The clarity, simplicity and strong vision of the SmartCode~, improves the quality of design proposals that cities receive. It also speeds the design review process. With an adopted SmartCode~, cities enhance the value of the reinvestment in the public realm, and everyone benefits. Fisher O Hail Urban Design 707.544.1910 w~vvv, fisherand hail. corn Traditional Town Planning · SmartOodes° 618 Fourth Street, Suite 203 Santa Rosa, California 95404 AGENDA ITEM NO: 9. d MEETING DATE: February 1, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE JUNE 2006 BALLOT MEASURE REGARDING THE MAYOR'S POSITION BEING APPOINTED VERSUS ELECTED At the January 18, 2006 meeting the City Councilmembers determined that they would like to discuss the possibility of including a ballot measure regarding the Mayor position being appointed versus elected on the June 2006 election. Enclosed for Council's review are background materials and ballot measure language from previous discussions regarding this issue. Historically, there were two major discussions of this issue in the last seven years. The original measure to elect the Mayor was on the ballot in 1982: 1) April, March 2003 - In 2003, the Council considered the wording for a Measure eliminating the position of an elective Mayor. At the March 5, meeting there was extensive discussion between the Council and public members who were advocating for an appointed rotational Mayor (Attachment 2). The impetus for the discussion was the continuing pattern of appointments made by the Council due to the half term vacated seats of Councilmembers running for the two-year Mayoral position. The Council ultimately did not place this item on the ballot. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council discussion and direction regarding this matter. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: City Council Candace Horsley, City Manager Marie Ulvila, City Clerk 1. June 6, 2006 Election Schedule 2. Documents Related to the November 2003 Meeting 3. Documents Related to the 1998 Election 4. Documents Related to the 1982 Election Approved: "~.~ ~~~~-~ Candace HorSiey, (~ty Manager In 1998 a measure was placed on the November ballot to eliminate the elected Mayor for an appointed position. Attachment 3 includes staff reports, the ballot measure resolution and voting results of the failed measure at the polls. 3) In 1981, the City Council discussed the preparation of a resolution to place the matter of an elected Mayor before the voters in the 1982 election, which was ultimately passed. Previously, the Mayor was appointed through an annual rotation of the City Council members. The minutes of the discussion by the Council leading up to this decision are included as Attachment 4. Any measures that the Council deems to be appropriate for the .lune Election, must be submitted by February 22, 2006, to the County to be included on the March 7, 2006 Board of Supervisors agenda for approval by the Board. If the Councilmembers determine that they wish to go forward with this ballot measure for the June election, Staff will prepare the appropriate documents for approval at the February 15, 2006 meeting. A_TTAOHM~/,, .... -- General Law or Charter Cfi/es General Municipal Election (con$olidateci with County) June 6, 2006 Laws in effect in 2006 (Calendar laws updated 1 ~/4/2005) Date(s) I E minus l to E minusI December 16 -172 January 30 -127 January 30 to February 13 -127 -113 January 31 February 6 -120 February 13 to March 10 -113 -88 February 14 -112 February 15 -111 February 28 -98 March 10 -88 March 10 -88 March 10 -88 March 15 -83 March 15 -83 March 16 -82 March 22 -76 March 23 -75 April 10 to May 23 -57 -14 May 8 to May 30 -29 -7 May 16 -21 May 22 -15 May 23 -14 May 25 -12 May 30 -7 May 31 to June 6 -6 June 5 -1 June 6 0 No Later Than July 21 45 July 4 July 21 E+28+17+? 30 days after assuming office July 31 April 1,2007 Action Suggested Last Day to File Petitions Regarding Measure Suggested Last Day for Council to Adopt Resolutions Election Official to Publish Notice of Election - Candidates Last Day to File Campaign Expenditure Statements - Semi-Annual Statement Last Day to Adopt Regulations for Candidates Statements Filing Period for Nomination Papers and Candidate's Statements Suggested Last Day to Call Election For Ballot Measures Suggested Last Day to Post Notice of Deadline for Filing Arguments Suggested Last Day to File Arguments / Must Be 14 days after Council calls Election Suggested Last Day to File Rebuttal Arguments / 10 Days after Arguments Last Day to Call Election For Ballot Measures Last Day tO File Nomination Papers Last Day to File Nomination Papers - Extended Filing Period Last Day to Withdraw Measure(s) from Ballot Secretary of State to Determine Order of Names on Ballot Last Day to File Campaign Expenditure Statements - 1st Pre-election Statement Time to Cancel Election - Insufficient Candidates Filing Period for Write-in Candidate Voters May Request Absentee/Vote by Mail Ballots with Regular Applications Last Day to Mail Sample Ballots and Polling Place Notices Last Day to Register to Vote Last Day to File for Write-in Candidate Last Day to File Campaign Expenditure Statements - 2nd Pre-election Statement Last Day for Election Official to Publish' Notice of Nominees Emergency/Late Absent Voting Period Last Day for Council to Adopt Procedures to Resolve Tie Vote ELECTION DAY Last Day to Declare Results & Install Newly Elected Mayor, Councilmember(s), Etc. Reorganize Council and Choose Mayor and Mayor Pro'Tern Filing of Statement of. Economic Interests Last Day to File Campaign Expenditure Statements - Semi-Annual Statement Last Day to Submit Report on Measures to Secretary of State (R11/14/2005) Prepared by Martin + Chapman Co. www.martinchapman.com Attachment # ,.~. ITEM NO. DATE: April 2, 2003 ,AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Wording for measure eliminating position of elective mayOr and effect of conducting election in November 2003 or March 2004 SUMMARY: At its March 5, 2003, meeting, the City Council considered proposed wording for a ballot measure to eliminate the elective office of mayor and thereby reestablish the procedure of selecting the mayor by the city council. Specifically, John McGowan proposed the following language for the ballot measure: Shall all five City Council members be elected to four year terms and shall the office of mayor be appointed by the City Council from among the five elected City Council members? I have been asked whether the proposed language is permissible under the applicable law. The City Council also wanted to know whether the November 2004 election would be affected differently, if the ballot measure were presented during a November 2003 election or a March 2004 election. CONCLUSIONS In my opinion the wording for the measure is permissible, if modified to read as follows: Shall the elective office of mayor be eliminated and thereafter shall the office of mayor be appointed by the City Council from among the five elected City Council members, all of whom serve four year terms? The November 2004 election would not be affected differently, regardless of whether the ballot (Continued on page 2) ..RECOMMENDED ACTION. Approve modified wording for measure. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTION: not to pursue measure Provide direction for different wording or decide Citizen Advised: Mary Lindley, John McGowan Requested by: Candace Horsley, City Manager Prepared by: David J. Rapport, City Attorney Coordinated with: Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: None APPROVED: '~andace Horsley, City Manager [Continued from page 1] measure were placed on the ballot for the November 2003 or March 2004 election. In both caSes, the mayor would be selected by the City Council at the expiration of the incumbent=s term of office, if a majority of the votes were cast in favor of eliminating the position of an elected mayor. Conversely, the mayor could be elected during the November 2004 election, if a majority did not vote in favor of eliminating the elected mayor, regardless of whether that occurred at the November 2003 or March 2004 election. ANALYSIS Government Code Section 34902(b) provides as follows: After an office of elective mayor has been established, the city council may subsequently submit to the electors the question of whether or not to eliminate the elective office of mayor, pursuant to the procedures enumerated in this article, and thereby reestablish the procedure of selection of the mayor by the city council. If a majority of the votes cast on the proposition are in favor of the elimination of the office of elective mayor, the office shall be eliminated on the expiration date of the incumbent's term, and on that date the procedure of selection of the mayor by the city council shall be reestablished. As you can see, the voters must be asked whether they want to eliminate the elective office of mayor. If a majority of votes cast on the proposition are in favor of the elimination, the selection of mayor by the city council is restored on the expiration date of the incumbent--s term. In my opinion, therefore, the proposition must directly ask whether the voters want to eliminate the elective position of mayor. As worded by Mr. McGowan, that question is never asked and a majority vote in favor of the proposition would not clearly indicate that a majority voted in favor of eliminating the elective office of mayor. Until the elective office of mayor is eliminated, the selection of the mayor by the city council is not restored. Moreover, as. worded, the measure appears to ask the voters whether they want ali five members of the City Council elected for four year terms. The election of city council members for four year terms is required by Government Code Section 57377. That question cannot be presented to local voters. Government Code Section 36508 authorizes a city council to submit to the voters the question whether any of the elective offices, except city council, shall be appointed by the city council. As revised, the ballot measure asks the question required by statute and does not appear to ask voter approval for electing city council members to four year terms. The City Council has more discretion in its wording of a measure to eliminate the position of an elected mayor than it does in wording a measure to establish such position. See Government Code Section 34901 which requires the A... questions for establishing an elected mayor to be printed on the ballots in substantially the following form: AShall the electors elect a mayor and four city councilmembers?~ AShall the term of office of mayor be two years?~ AShall the term of office of mayor be four years?~ However, in my opinion, the elimination of the elective mayor position must be included in the proposition to comply with the requirements of Government Code Section 34902(b). Asyou can also see, if the ballot measure passed, the procedure for selecting the major by the city council is restore effective on the date the incumbent=s term expires. Hence, the next mayor would be appointed by the City Council. On the other hand, if the ballot measure fails, even if that were not determined until the March 2004 election, there would be plenty of time to conduct an election for the mayor=s position during the November 2004 election. MINUTES OF THE UKIAH CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING WEDNESDAY, MARCH 5, 2003 The Ukiah City Council met at a Regular Meeting on March 5, 2003, the notice for which had been legally noticed and posted, at 6:35 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California. Roll was taken and the following Councilmembers were present: Rodin, Andersen, Smith, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. Staff present: Public Utilities Director Barnes, Interim Fire Chief Cohn, Assistant City Manager Fierro, City Manager Horsley, Acting City Attorney Johnson, Distribution Engineer Sauers, Deputy Director of Public Works Seanor, Planning Director Stump, and City Clerk Ulvila. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Interim Fire Chief Cohn led the Pledge of Allegiance. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4a. Regular Meeting of February 19~ 2003 Councilmember Andersen recommended a correction to page 2, second to last paragraph, the first sentence should read, "Ricardo Negron discussed an incident whereby the vehicle he was driving was pulled over by the police and he felt it was a case of racial profiling." He also recommended a correction to page 4, first paragraph, that the last sentence should read, "If we believe that we should not preemptively go to war with Iraq and if we don't say anything then we're complicit, and that silence is complicity." He noted there are some spelling errors of speaker's names and he would provide the City Clerk with that information. City Clerk Ulvila recommended that speakers list their name on the sign in sheet so that their name could be listed correctly for the record. M/S Baldwin/Andersen approving the Regular Meeting Minutes of February 19, 2003, as amended; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin, Andersen, Smith, Baldwin and Mayor Larson. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 5. RIGHT TO APPEAL Mayor Larson read the appeal process. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR MfS Smith/Rodin approving items a through e of the Consent Calendar as follows: a. Adoption of Resolution 2003-28 Authorizing Fire Chief To Sign Agreement With California Department of Forestry Regarding Use of Federal Excess Property; b. Adoption of Resolution 2003-29 Restoring On-Street Parking at 953 and 955 North State Street; c. Approved Lease Renewal for Rusty Bowl BMX, Inc.; d. Approved Lease with North Ukiah Little League; e. Received Notification to the City Council Regarding the Purchase of Sodium Bisulfite From Basic Chemical Solutions For The Sum of $337.60 Per Dry Ton. Regular City Council Meeting March 5, 2003 Page I of 13 Approximately $5,332,424 covers costs for debt service, and the operations and maintenance of generation facilities to produce kilowatt-hours with NCPA. City Manager Horsley explaind{~l that the last electric rate increase was in 1995 and the City is attempting to hold the current rates until there is a reduction in the current debt. The Public Utilities Department~has done an excellent job with the electric rates. However, the state and ISO's char~Jes have increased. Director Barnes discussed the of renegotiating the contract with Western Area Power Authority (Western). He toted that it might be more beneficial to the City to not renew the contracts and to in its own generating capacity. He discussed geothermal plants as well as options The drilling programs for geothermal plants are very expensive and the co,, to operate and maintain the plant is also very expensive. Councilmember Andersen inquired ab ,ut the large electricity customers and advised that an alternative to building more c would be to initiate a more serious conservation program in the City that wou be geared toward large electrical users. He thought that there should be requirement.~ for new development of large scale, big box retailers. Since residential users are not ti biggest users of electricity, he felt that the City should partner with the larger out of to ~n businesses that have the resources and funds to provide an alternative energy sourc The City should investigate what type of incentives could be provided to them. He that proposals be brought back to Council this year with regard to finding ways ,'onserve energy. City Manager Horsley discussed the City's sol; energy program for residential users. She explained that the Public Utilities (PUC) charge for solar energy that is currently being considered will not apply to the of Ukiah because the City has an incentive solar energy program in place and the sc ~r energy leaving fee will not affect the City of Ukiah because we are not under the She noted that the City has received a lot of interest in the solar energy prog Lm and City's the conservation consultant could target the commercial buildings becau= of their high usage. Director Barnes responded to an inquiry by ,mber Rodin with regard to options available for new sources of power by stating th the NCPA Commission is evaluating projects and staff needs to consider what the rr needs to be. The long- term decision will need to be made very soon. It was the consensus of Council to receive the report. 10. NEW BUSINESS 10b. Consideration and Possible Action Regarding Ballot Measures For November Election City Manager Horsley advised that several agenda summary reports from previous Council considerations regarding ballot measures that included mayoral questions were included in the Staff Report. She discussed the attachments with the staff report. Mayor Larson declared this a "town hall meeting". Regular City Council Meeting March 5, 2003 Page 7 of 13 Mary Lindley, 700 E. Gobbi Street, read it into the record her letter to Council. "In past practice we elected five Councilmembers who would rotate for the Mayor's position. Now, we elect five Councilmembers, have one of them be "elected" Mayor, vacating two years of the term they were elected to, leaving the filling of that two year vacancy to whatever process is determined by three or four individuals. This can be done in a different manner every time. There is no consistency, no established procedure to address this situation. What I and many members of the community see is an open door to cronyism, corruption and most certainly the loss of the right to vote for each of the members of our local legislative body after having all members go through the process of filing all disclosures required by law and being scrutinized by the constituents. I personally do not believe the present process serves the constituents of the community in proper manner. Looking back to the time this change was first proposed; we all saw it as "out right to vote." In truth, it has taken away our right to vote for all members of this legislative body. In past elections the City has put this question to the voters, but the information was clouded and confusing. And, to put it bluntly, people were suspicious. '~Vhat is the City trying to take away from us?" I request that the question be put on the ballot for the next election in very simple terms that may be readily understood by the average layperson. "Shall all Councilmembers be elected by majority vote of the people in general election and shall those members then rotate to the position of Mayor?" Language addressing the process for rotation, (Seniority, continuation if a member chooses to pass on his/her rotation time) should be addressed by Counsel for the City along with the length of the term to serve as Mayor. I can't put it any simpler and that's the way l feel it should be on the ballot, in the simplest possible language. Thank you for your kind attention. As a footnote: This is not about me or about Mari Rodin. It is quite simply about the process which is flawed." She stated that she would not be in favor of a standard appointing the next runner up to fill the vacancy and is against the proposal of electing the Mayor to a four-year term. Councilmember Baldwin explained that he liked Ms. Lindley's proposed wording for the ballot measure with the exception of the word "majority" because to guarantee that a majority elects one Councilmember may demand a primary so that only two people would be running for office to guarantee a majority. He preferred the word "majority" be eliminated. Ms. Lindley voiced her agreement with Councilmember Baldwin's suggestion. Councilmember Rodin inquired if the ballot could say that we chose to elect all Councilmembers and the process of appointing the Mayor from the elected Councilmembers is a procedural matter that would be decided by the Councilmembers. City Clerk Ulvila explained to Council that during the last election the City Attorney advised that the wording of a ballot measure is defined by law and needs to be worded a certain way. The City Attorney will need to provide the argument in favor of the ballot measure and identify options to the voters. Discussion followed with regard to options for wording of a ballot measure for the Mayor's position. Regular City Council Meeting March 5, 2003 Page 8 of 13 John Mc Cowen, provided a history of how the current system came about. He proposed that the question to the voters be "Shall all five City Councilmembers be elected to four-year terms and shall the office of Mayor be appointed by the City Council from among the five elected City Councilmembers?" William French was supportive of the Mayor being elected by the voters and felt that if an incumbent runs for the Mayoral position, he/she should resign their seat as Councilmember. He felt there is a need to educate the public with regard to the duties of the City Council and the Mayor and the current issues involved with the Mayoral position. Dotty Coplen voiced her support of having five elected City Councilmembers and a one-year rotation of the Mayor's position from among those five. Upon an inquiry, City Clerk Ulvila explained that the November 2003 election will consist of Special Districts and it is unknown at this time how many would participate. Councilmember Andersen voiced his support for electing the Mayoral position. Discussion followed concerning whether to present a ballot measure to the voters during a primary election or during the November election. A two-year, as opposed to a four-year term limit for Mayor was discussed. Councilmember Baldwin discussed the option of changing the current electoral system so that a person would challenge another person who has a different vision. He was supportive of including a measure on the ballot in November 2004 to increase the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) to 10% if there is a consensus of how the TOT would be used. Mayor Larson summarized that there is a consensus to pursue a ballot measure to resolve the issue of whether the Mayor should be a separately elected office. He was in agreement that just that ballot measure should be presented to the voters and that the voters may become confused if anything further is added. He explained that in the November 2002 election, the voters had to consider three different questions. He briefly discussed the matter of instant run off balloting that is a different form of achieving majority votes. He was supportive of forming a Mayor's commission to research options. Mary Lindley expressed the need to begin publicizing the issue now so that the public will become more informed of the issues discussed at this meeting. NFS Baldwin/Smith providing direction to staff to obtain a legal opinion from the City Attorney with regard to the wording submitted by John McCowen, and to report back in a few months regarding the significance of the November 2003 election versus the March 2004 election in relation to whether or not it would apply to the November 2004 election; carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Rodin, Smith, Baldwin, and Mayor Larson. NOES: Councilmember Andersen. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. Regular City Council Meeting March 5, 2003 Page 9 of 13 Attachment # 9~ ITEM NO. DATE: MAY 6. ~ 998 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF BALLOT MEASURE TO ELIMINATE DIRECTLY ELECTED MAYOR At the March 4th meeting the City Council discussed the matter of elected versus appointed mayor and whether the elimination of the elected mayor should be placed on the next City election. The Council requested that costs, timeframes, and possible ballot wording be prepared by staff for consideration at a future Council meeting. Presented here is the applicable information. The County Clerk/Recorder estimates the cost for the addition of a ballot measure on the November 3rd election to be $1,000. The actual amount depends upon the number of pages of the ballot taken up a specific item. Since the election is consolidated, a measure regarding the elected mayor would be only one of several issues for voter consideration (the City will already have the election of Councilmembers and Mayor on the ballot). The Council must determine if the measure will be on the ballot by the June 3 meeting to insure timely transmittal to the County Clerk; wording of both the measure and any arguments must be finalized at the July 15 meeting. Ideas regarding possible ballot arguments include: *The City Council must appoint a new Councilmember if a vacancy is created when a current Councilmember is elected Mayor. This precludes the electorate from voting for all members of the City Council. * Because of the two year term, the Mayor must run for election twice as often to serve the same amount of time in office as a Councilmember. * Ukiah is a general law city and applicable State statutes do not require a Mayor to be elected; there are no specific duties or responsibilities for the Mayor which can not be completed by a Councilmember appointed to the position. * The City of Ukiah is the only governmental entity in Mendocino County in which the chairperson of the Council or Board is directly elected. For the Council's information, the wording of the the original 1982 ballot "Argument Against Measure D", which created the elected mayor is provided in attachment 1. Also included, as a draft of ideas for the Council's consideration, is a possible ballot argument in favor of eliminating the elected mayor position. An argument can not exceed 300 words. As the Council has directed, this matter should be discussed, a determination made whether the measure is to be placed before the voters on November 3rd, and direction provided to staff regarding the content of the argument if the ballot measure is pursued. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Discuss Matter of Ballot Measure to Eliminate Directly Elected Mayor and Provide Direction to Staff. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine discussion is not appropriate and do not consider this matter. Citizen Advised: N/A Requested by: City Council Prepared by: Michael F. Harris, Risk Manager/Budget Officer ~ Coordinated with: Colleen B. Henderson, City Clerk and Candace Horsley, City Manager Attachments: 1. 1982 Argument Against Ballot Measure and Possible Argument for November election, page 1. 2. Ex,pt of March 4 City Council meeting minutes,, pages 2-3. Candace Horsley, City Manager NOVEMBER 1982 BALLOT ARGUMENT AGAINST ELECTED MAYOR MEASURE Attachment 1 "Argument Against Measure D "The City of Ukiah does not need an elected mayor; we already elect five council members, each of whom serves one year as mayor. This gives equal representation to all taxpayers, and the taxpayer has equal access to all council members; no member is more or less important than the other. An elected mayor would only add an extra layer of bureaucracy and expense to the already burdened taxpayer in the form of an office, secretary, and all the trimmings. The function of the mayor remains the same whether elected or not elected; that is, to preside at all the meetings, sign documents after council approval, and to be the official city representative. An elected mayor would have no more authority than any other member of the council; goals would be no more important than any other elected members goals; and there would be no more continuity than we have now. The council-manager form of government was established in 1956 and have proven highly successful. We truly believe that a city with annual budget of approximately 13 million dollars needs a full-time professional and not a part-time amateur in management. We have this with the present council-manager form of government. In summary ejecting a mayor would create another layer of bureaucracy, add more expense to the taxpayer, divide the elected representatives, and be less efficient in running city business. For equal representation and less expense we are going to vote "no" on ballot measure "D". We hope you will join us. s/Hays Hickey s/Mary Snyder s/Charles Myers s/George Bartlett s/Marge Boynton" · · · · · I · · · · · · nl · · · · · · · · · · · nn · n nl · n · I · · · · · · · In · POSSIBLE ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE TO ELIMINATE ELECTED MAYOR - NOVEMBER 1998 Though the Mayor of the City of Ukiah is currently elected, he or she has no more representative authority than the ejected Councilmembers. The mayor and the four Councilmembers each have an equal vote on all matters before the council. The functions of the Mayor, i.e., presiding at all meetings, signing documents after council approval, and officially representing the city, remain the same whether the position is elected directly or is appointed by the Council as a whole. The fact is that in several cases, the elected mayor has created a vacancy on the council because an incumbent Councilmember was selected by the electorate. This created a situation in which the Council appointed the new Councilmember, precluding the citizens from electing each member of the Council. The two year term of the elected mayor requires an individual to run for office twice to serve the same amount of time as a Councilmember, with additional expense to the candidates. Eliminating the need to elect a Mayor will place the Council candidates before the electorate in the same election, allowing the citizens to select their representatives from a unified list. The City of Ukiah is the only governmental entity in Mendocino County which directly elects the chairperson of its respective council or board. An elected mayor is not necessary in the City of Ukiah. A "yes" vote on measure .. will eliminate the direct election of the mayor and allow the voters of Ukiah to select all of their council representatives equally. Please join us in voting "yes" on" " s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ mfh:asrccg8 0506MAYOR ,:[:e-¢ .'-(t by t'~.~. ",(; .r".t ci k.~i ncto(:;irlo i;s ¢,'~i ;I :t:i l!'~e Ci1:y' cf JkJah. M,~S ~lastirJAst~ ku I'~ intrc)CJce, by t:,i:le c,q:~, the Ordinance Amending Division 8, Chapter 1, Se,.,...,,q 7008 cf ~,h~. Ukiah City Code Regsrd;ng Holidays for Enforcement of Parking Regulations, cart;ed ~'' ,.,y a vo;ce vote of ALL AYE. Absent: None. City Clerk Henderson read by title only the Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Ukiah Amending Division 8, Chapter 1, Section 7008 of the Ukiah City Code Regarding Holidays for Enforcement of Parking Regulations. MIS Mastin/Ashiku to introduce the Ordinance Amending Division 8, Chapter 1, Section 7008 of the Ukiah City Code Regarding Holidays for Enforcement of Parking Regulations, carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. NOES: None. ABSTAIN' None. ABSENT: None. 7b. Discussion of Possible Ballot Measure to Eliminate Directly Elected Mayor Position [Councilmember Mastin) Councilmember Mastin asked the Council to consider a ballot measure which Would eliminate the position of directly-elected mayor and return the position to one which rotates in some manner among five elected Councilmembers. He noted the burden of the time commitment involved to whomever acts as mayor, with a two-year commitment being an unreasonably long time to serve. Councilmember Ashiku was supportive of the idea. Mayor Malone agreed the position takes a great deal of time, and it could be expensive to candidates to run every two years. Rotating the position of mayor among the Councilmembers would eliminate the need to fill a vacancy created by a Councilmember, if that Councilmember were elected Mayor mid-way through a four-year Council term. Councilmember Mastin asked City Clerk Henderson her opinion on the subject, since she, at one time, was a directly-elected Mayor. City Clerk Henderson replied it has been only about 15 years since the position of directly-elected mayor was approved by the people of Ukiah at the ballot box. She felt, in light of the defeat of several recent ballot measures to eliminate the elected City Clerk and City Treasurer positions, the public would not be receptive to this idea. She would prefer not to have the measure reconsidered at this time. Councilmember Kelly felt the public might be receptive to the. idea as the change would eliminate the need for the Council to appoint someone to fill out the term of any Councilmember who may be elected Mayor with two years of his/her Councilmember term remaining. City Manager Horsley offered the argument that other cities our size, as well as Mendocino County, do not directly elect the chairperson of their councils or boards. Councilmember Chavez noted she had the same concerns originally as City Clerk Henderson, but noted there are valid reasons for eliminating the direct election of the Mayor. Discussion ensued regarding the issue. Regular Meeting - March 4, 1998 Page 2 Lit was the general consensus of the Council to refer the matter to staff for preparation of possible ballot arguments, together with an estimate of the costs involved of putting the matter on the November ballot. 7c. Refinancinq of the Senior Center Lease Purchase Agreement City Manager Horsley noted this matter was brought before the Council as an urgency item: in order to respond to the Senior Center's immediate need to refinance its Lease-Purchase Agreement. The City acts as a conduit only for these funds, assuming no liability. MIS Kelly/Mastin to approve the refinancing was withdrawn by the maker and the second on advice of City Attorney Rapport. It was the consensus of the Council to refer the matter to staff, so required procedures, including a public hearing, may be followed in order to facilitate this request. The matter will be brought back before the Council at its March 18, 1998 meeting. 8. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Chavez thanked staff for continuing to work with the Main Street Committee to facilitate the Cinco de Mayo parade. The Main Street Program is hosting a volunteer appreciation evening. She encouraged the Council to support the American Cancer Society's Daffodil Days fundraiser. Councilmember Ashiku had nothing to report. ., Councilmember Kelly expressed her concern for the location of a new school in the Lover's Lane area. She noted a forthcoming informal meeting between County of Mendocino, City of Ukiah, and Ukiah Unified School District representatives regarding the location of the proposed new elementary school. She would like to see the documentation from the State which addresses the issue of locating the school near the Airport. She attended an Economic Development Financing Corporation meeting; all of its loan funds have been distributed. She attended a Mendocino Council of Governments meeting; it looks as if the Willits Bypass will be fully funded. She attended a County Board of Supervisors meeting to advocate for the selection of a contractor for the Air Quality Study. She shared a copy of the Skateboard Park Committee's spread sheet with the Council; the first- choice site location for the park is Low Gap Regional Park. She met with a group of people from the "Oleander Neighborhood"; she was very appreciative to staff for facilitating this positive meeting. She attended a meeting of the Transit Station Committee. Councilmember Mastin attended a Mendocino Solid Waste Management Authority (MSWMA) meeting at which the issue of illegal roadside dumping was addressed. He was pleased to have Ukiah Unified School Distdct cosponsor Recycling Day at Eagle Day School in Redwood Valley. He requested the matter of the future of the MSWMA North State Street Transfer Station property be agendized. He attended a meeting of the Mendocino'Transit Authority which dealt with budget matters. He noted Larry Sheehy will be sponsoring a workshop at which the idea of "local currency" (a barter system) will be explored. He asked the location of "River Street," the site of a proposed liquor license for use by The Pub. City Manager Horsley noted the license was most likely to serve a concession stand. River Street is probably a former name for Gobbi Street, east of Highway 101. Mayor Malone attended a Chamber of Commerce retreat in Samoa. He attended the scoping session for the Transit Station site. He distributed copies of AB96, dealing with the use of transportation dollars. He noted the upcoming Mendocino County Employers Council reception. 9. CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR REPORTS _ ~ _ ! 2 3 4 $ 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 RESOLUTION NO. 99-2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH CALLING FOR GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION, CONSOLIDATING GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION WITH STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION, PRESENTING BALLOT MEASURE TO MAKE MAYOR POSITION APPOINTIVE RATHER THAN ELECTIVE, TRANSMITTING MEASURE TO CITY ATTORNEY FOR IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS, AND AUTHORIZING ARGUMENTS' AND REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF MEASURE 27 28 WHEREAS, 1. The City Council of the City of Ukiah has determined pursuant to Elections Code Section 12112 to call a General Municipal Election for November 3, 1998, to consolidate the Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election and to contract with the County of Mendocino to conduct the election on the City's behalf; and 2. The City Council has determined to present one proposition, to make the Mayor position appointive rather than elective, at the General Municipal Election; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that; 1. A General Municipal Election in the City of Ukiah is called for November 3, 1998. 2. The General Municipal Election is consolidated with the Statewide General Election for 1998. 3. The following ballot proposition shall be presented to the voters at the general election: MEASURE .... Shall the office of Mayor be appointive? /__/Yes / / No 4. The City Clerk shall transmit a copy of the ballot measure set forth in paragraph 3 to the City Attorney for the preparation of an impartial analysis as required by Elections Code Section 9280. 5. The City Council shall file ballot arguments in favor of the ballot measure set forth in Paragraph 3 as contained in Exhibit A which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. If any argument is submitted in opposition to the measure, the Mayor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 is hereby authorized to file a rebuttal argument on behalf of the City Council as authorized by Elections Code Section 9285. PASSEl::} .&ND ADOPTED this 15th day of July, 1998, by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Chavez, Ashiku, Kelly, Mastin, and Mayor Malone. AYES: NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. ATTEST: Sheridan Malone, ~or Marie Ulvila, City Clerk 23 24 25 26 27 28 CERTIFICATE OF COUNTY CLERK TO RF~ULT OF THE CANVASS OF THE CONSOLIDATED GENERAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 3, 1998 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )SS COUNTY OF MENDOCINO ) I, MARSHA YOUNG WHARFF, County Clerk of said County, do hereby certify that I did canvass the returns of the votes cast in the Consolidated General Election held November 3, 1998, in the City of Ukiah, and that the Statement of the Votes Cast, to which this certificate is attached, shows the whole number of votes cast in each of the respective consolidated precincts therein, and that the totals of the respective columns and the totals as shown for each candidate and for and against each measure are full, true and correct. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL this 23rd day of November, 1998. (SEAL) County Clerk-l~ecorder ***~ OI~FI( 'STATEHEk'T OF VOTES CAST AT THE GENERAL EL' ~N~ NOVEMBER' 3, 1998 **** "' CITY OF UK~..., 14ayor CouncfLmember Measure Y Page #t~nber &5.807.001 R T T d , d E .... K B "O p S A -- E U U ! 0 R A R A H H P G R R M E ! T E k1 ! A P I N N C H N ! L L T S 0 0 14 D Y 0 E L D T U U A ! L A L B E T T S E A L A H R T T R [ d J L A E P I R S B 0 D Y ; D E N I 0 B L H W 0 R C N Y E N I R V C K V N 0 E A H 'B T N D A E E T I E R A T H S G I L E S Y E N :ONSOL. PREC. NO. ~00001 57~ 221 38.17 16E ....,~E "56 ='= 69 45 34 8E 6C L'ONSOL. PREC. NO. 200002 69~ 3.02 43.5~ 215 22 89 10~" 66 4~ 12c; 9C 182 CONSOL. PREC. .NO. 20000:3 68C 317 46-6~ 24~- 2~ 79 13S 8(~ 4; 137 8~ 20~ CONSOL. PREC. NO. 200004 828 36~ 44.2~ 261 42 105 15E 10( 3~: 151 110 220 - CONSOL. PREC. NO. 200005 866 47~; 55.3~ ~52 3~ 19~ '1~ 92 95 20.. 168 262 :ONSOL. PRE.~. NO. 20000~ 86; 411 47.6~ 294 2~ '1~C 15~' IOE 57 17S 15a ~2~4 -- :ONSOL. PREC. NO. 200007 807 41E 51.7~ 306 3S 163 127 64 89 210 136 24(] :ONSOL. PREC. .N.,O. 20000E 707 381 53.8~ 291 .... 3/, 132 144 6". 75 17'; 148 19~ :ONSOL. PREC. NO. 20000~; 85~ 352 41.0~ 252 31 135 111 6~ 34 169 118 19~ r. ONSOL.:,, PREC. NO. 20001C 76; 368 47.8~ 274 3~' -11; 147 6~ 4(: 184 '" 115 2'2C - ~BSENTEE GROUP 007 C 0 0 ' O~ C ...... 0 C C 0 C ~ C C 1 ~.BSE#TEE GROUP 008 C 1056 0.0~ 64! 73 321 41S 186 13; 365 26! CONSOL. PREC. NO. 999101 -~ C 0.01 C ..~, ., O_ C O ~: C C ( - .*** T 0 T A L S ~*** 7655 4652 60.~ 3.29S , , 37~ 1525 175C 937 67~ 198~ 1446 2679 , - , ..... ,., ,. ....... .... ,.. , . , , . ,, . ....... ~ttachmen'~ # 13 H/S~.$nyder/Pdley to add a new Policy No. 9 (~rlth the present Policy No. become8 Policy No. 10) that no smoking is allowed. · . \ ~o,ion ~rried by 4-1 (Hick,y) -sics Coaci~m~er Snyder made a motion that the S~ House gro~ds be kep: in the sa~_~ape ~d condition as when origin~lly purchase by ~he City as much as P°ssibl~ ~Y ~nader vas of ~he option this vas nsc a policy ,o,i~n ~,ed foXack of · second. Ori~ina~o~ion c~ried t.y ~he foll~s roll call ~e: A~S: _. ~CESS: . 8:20 P.H. City ~~ ~e ~equested tha~end~ It~ lOb. municipal ~entif~c~Cton H/S:~sch =o ~e Asenda~em 10h. ~icipal iden~ifica~ion Co~cil~~~~~ Asenda ~ 8b~ '10b ~d 10d be considered M/S: ~nsider A~a It~ 8b~ ~er of elected ~yor ~d ~ion carried by unanimous voice ~INISHED BUSINESS T ' TER 0F ~LE~ED mYOR ~ CITY A~O~E~ . H/S~ Fetbusch/Rlley ~o direct staff to prepare a resolution for ~ctl~s nex~ ~ee~in~ ~o submi~ the ~a~er of an elected ~ayor before the voters as a ballo~ ~easure to include the follo~ing: 1) shall the electorate ~ect a ~yor ~d four c~uncilmembers; 2) shall the te~ of office to be 2 years; 3) shall the . ~e~ ~ office ,o be ~ ,ears. Councilmember Feibusch felt the elec:lon of ~ mayor ~ould Eive ~ elected ~yor ~n opp~rtunity to have ~ platfo~, provide Continuity and the opport~lty to ~ve visions as to what will happen ~ ~he City. ~ electiou of five elected councilaeabers could lead to ~ J~ble of directions. Councilmember Riley felt con:inui~7 was an ~portant elint to the election a mayor. She ,lso ~lntet out the purpose of the ~tion was to put the ~a~:er on the ballot so the voters could decide whether or no~ a mayor should be elected. Councilmember Hickey is1: appoin~nt by co~ct!~bers of a ~yor sires ~embers o~ the council an oppor~i~y to se~e ~d ~et ~ be~r ~l~h~ into the opera~ion of City Co~cilmember Snyder *Ereed with Counci~ember ~ckey*s s=aC~nLs, felt presen= sys=em is a Eood one. and ~xpressed =he opinion tha= ~ elected be 8ood for large ct=les bu~ not ~ral Ukiah. Hayor l~yers felt that the office of mayor is very tl~e construing as well as demanding and to hold the office for 2 or 4 years could create & problem, i~e~.Mtg. 11/4/81 Page ~ . 'i · '.% ' .. · . · particularly for one who his a full time lob. He stated further that being elected mayor is an honor for each councilmember to enjoy. Motion failed by the following roll call vote: AYES': Feibusch, Riley NOES: Hickey, Snyder, Myers A~SE~T: None Councilmember Feibusch stated, because of the vote, he would take the matter to the electorate by circulation o! petitions. 10b. HATTER OF CHANGING G~NERAL MDf'ICI?AL ELECTIONS DATE ---- C~y Manager Payne referred to SB230 and sta~ed that Council may enact an ' ' ordnance requiring a general municipal election to be held om the same day as the ~a~Wide direct primary election, the day of the statewide general election o~ on%day of school dis,ric,,lections. M/S: Pe~usch/$nyder to direct s{aff to prepare an ordinlnce requiring the general mu~cipal election to be held on the same day as the atatewide direct It was pointed~out that the ordinance viii become operative upon approval by the Board of Supervisors. It was als~ p~tnteg out ~ha~ ~he current terms of councilnembers w~ld be extended from April to Motion carrie~ by,he following roll call vote: AYES: Hickey, Faibusch, ---\Snyder'.'P'tley'My'r~NOE$: ,one ABSDrf: ,one 10d. M~TTER OF KEHO~ OF DEPAKTMENT HEAD POSITIONS M/S: ~ley_/nS yder_ to dir~ staff to prepare a ballo~ maaure for removal of Motion carried by the follow~g roll call vote: ~ny~ei, Riley, Myers NOES: N~e ABSENT: None , ~a.~AUTHORIZ~ CITY MANACER TO sX~rI'E ApKEEMENT., , City Manager ~ay~e stated this matter a~ the following agenda item deal with ~eemen~s ~th_ Hea~dsburg _and NCPA for ~iden,ial conservation. ~ ~? a~thorize_CityManaker to enter into agreement with Healdsburg which establishes the formal process of performing the audits and the ~etmburseme, t _f~r s_ame~ _ _ Moti~lowing roll call vo~e:~Yg$: Htckey, ~eibusch, ~nyder, Riley, Myers NOES: None ABSENT: None ~ 9b~TYMA~^¢ERTO EXECUTE AC~EEME~T, M/S'~ity l~_~ger to enter ~o agreement with NCPA lOa. I~ESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL MAP~ PARK WEST CONDOMINIUM~ WEST END OF PARK BOULEVARD Reg.Mtg. 11/4/81 Page 22 . N.S.: Snyder/Hickey to introduce and adopt Ordinance No. ?74 changing ~he date of~e General Municipal Elactlon to the date of the Statewide direct 'pri. ary. __ The s~ing o~ ney co~cil~e~s coincidin~ vl~h review of the budge~ vas discuss~. It was pointed out that a budget should be adopted by the first of ~ul~ and ~counci~embers.ould have h.dle~ ,he bud,e, beforehand. _ ___________Snyder--~le"~er' NOES: None ~S~: None .. ~EPTAGE ~CSIVI~~TION, ' ' ~y A~om~y re.eyed ~r Co.oil th~ ordin~nce r{quir~en~s r~tardin~ ____ M/~~ick~roduce nd i~ Ordinance No.-77~ ~end~s Section ~ivlsion 4, Chapter 2, ~ ~be ~iah N~icip~ Code (Sepca~e ~nald Lucas~nk S~e, st~ed i~ ~s no~ ~o~ how ~uch ~~s I~a~ed ~he propose~ursency ordinate nov , ~ c~l v~ l~S: ~c~, ~tibusch, Councilmember Feibusch asked ii Council mus~ accep~ ~he repor~ before ~he auditor can be paid~ Finance Director sCa~ed ~he auditor co~d be paid before fo~al acceptance of the audi~ report. ~ion carried by unanimous unica vote. 9e. ~q~SI TO ~CONS~ER ~R OF ~ECTED ~YOR (~IBUSCH) ~uncilmember Feibusch asked that Council reconsider the ~tter of ~u tlect mayor. In his correspondence to the ~uneil~ he skated that little consideration had been given to the preference o[ ~he vo~ers. ~ls reason the fact tha~ subOeet mtter would be an ex;fa burden on the City Clerk were reasons reconsideration of the ~t~er vas requts;ed. If ~cil felt the way as indicated ~ their last nee;~g, he ~ould procisd by Counelimember Hickey stated 'Hr. ~yor~ uh, ~t our last ~eting, ~e didn't d~ vhac Counell~n FeibusCh w~ted so he did thrnat~ us t~; he~d go out and get petition signed and so, I say, let h~ go ~ead ~d get it signed. His conce~ about t~e City Clerk, from some of the things I~ve he~rd him say in ~he past abou~ the City Clerk, I.cnn~t see tha~ he would be too conceded about ~ouncilne~ber Feibusch sta~ed '~ Hr ~ or v , · Y , I ha · to take ~cepCion to this statement. I have never, ever made a derota~o~ re~rk a~a~s~ ~he City Cl~rk, and I would, I resent that. I really resent t~t." ' R~g ~age 4 · : 2 23 H/S: Feibusch/Rlley to direct City Attorney to dray up a resolution for submittal to the voters asking the ~uesti0n whether co have an elected or appointed mayor. Councilmember Riley vas of the opinion that it is important that the voters have an opportunity to make · choice. ~otlon failed by the following roll call vote: AYES: Feibuach, Ittley NOES: Htckey, Snyder, Hyers ABSENT: None It vas the consensus of the Council that Counci/member Hickey'a remarks be discussed in Personnel Session. NEW BUSINESS 10a.~..LOSS CONTROL LIABILITY EVALUATION P. EPORTl REHIF City H~ager referred to REHIFVs loss control liability evaluation report of August 2~ 1981 and the Finance Director's memorandum of November 13, state,.thC, staff, as indicated, has and rill take care of certain items, but council·crOn\ is needed on those m&tters tha~ are not routine. Discussion was~ad regarding second floor exits and options available to the Councilmembar Rile~was of the opinion that one of the implications of the Ftna~e'D~r~tor's ~aorandum is that a definite Schedule be established for the ne.w_ ?~_y Hal~ .~h~ ~t that the proposed civic center was a long range solution and felt therlkwere temporary or short term solutions available. Co~ncil. mimber Snyderfe~he matter must be addressed as the situation has existed for yea,s ,nd i, ~ reached , point,here it Is almost intoler.ble. It vas suggested that Co_uno, hold a workshop session to determine · civic center cons~ruction and [inan~ng schedule. City Manager stated the report_ on ~he c~vi_c center vill~e available next month and, at that time, a ti.e lra.e can be _la,d out. Cl~y ~7~ge~_as~ed that Council cons%r exterior exit doors for the City Hall. M/S'~der tha~he numberof p~ple within the City ~·lllbe limited to 49. . l'~vt ion Carried by the folloving roi1 cai Mo e: AYES: Rickey, Snyder, P. iley, Hyers NOES: Feibusch ABSENT: None \ lOb. _~__~ O~ t~,¥O~'S ~POZNTtiDrrs TO C~ ~ayor is ~o _appoint a~rd of appeal consisting of fiv~ peopl, vh~ ~ave so~e e~pertise or _knovledge o!'~.ub, ect matter. ~syor Hyers sta~ed ha v~s in the process of appointing member, s and vould report d be a ~ebefore for the project to proceed. He suggested that Council, as soon as possible, retain the services of a bond counsel to york vith council and staff in the final negotiations regarding the ps,er purchase a$ree~ent ·s this alree~ent is Reg.~tg. 11/18/81 Page 5 1 3 5 6 ? 8 9 lO 13 15 16 ~0 ~? ~8 RESOLUTION NO. 82-47 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UKIAH AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEM~ZT WITH TIlE COUNTY OF MENDOCINO FOR THE PROVISION OF ELECTION SERVICES AT THE CITY ELECTION TO BE CONSOLIDATED WITH THE REGULAR STATEWIDE DIRECT PRIMARY ELECTION. WHEREAS, the City of Okiah did, by Ordfnance No. 744, pursuant to the authority of Section 36503.5(a) of the G( Code, set the date for the general municipal election of the City of Ukiah to be h~ld on the same day as the statewide direct pri- mary election; and, WHEREAS, said Ordinance has been approved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Mendocino as required by law, by minute order of said Board of December 15, 1981; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ukiah has heretofore, by Resolution No. 82-38 (Resolutions of the City of Ukiah) requested that the following measure be placed on said bal.lot, to wit: "Shall the City of Ukiah be authorized to assist with other State and/or public bodies in the development, construction or acquisition of not more than 100 units of housing for the elderly, disabled, handicapped and for other iow income families, pursuant to Article XXXIV of the California State Constitution?" That, in addition thereto, City of Ukiah requires fur- ther measures to be placed on said ballot as set forth in Exhibit 'A" attached hereto which, toqether wfth"~.h~foregoing measure and an additional measure to be hereafter submitted, are to be placed on said ballot. · NOW, THEREFORE, BIT IT RESOLVED that the general City election shall be consolidated with the statewide direct primary election; that the measures hereinabove referred to shall be 1 4 5 0 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 ~0 ~2 ~4 ~7 28 placed on said ballot, together with the election candidates, an additional measure which shall be submitted, and any~ and all other required election matters, and that the County Clerk be authorized to provide the election services as set forth on the proposed agreement attached hereto and that said agreement be entered into by the Mayor of the City of l/kiah and the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of the County of. Mendocino. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of February . 1982, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Hickey, Feibusch, Snyder, Riley. ~ers NOES: None ABSENT: None Mayor ATTEST: City clerk 1 $ ? $ 9 10 11 19. 15 16 17 18 19 9.0 21 2'2 25 9.7 ~EASURE D Shmll the electors elect m Mayor and four City Councilmember$? Shall the term of office of such Mayor be two years? Shall the term of office of such Mayor be four years? Yes NO Yes flo Yes : .. ':: ?. · '., '2. · · · ...- · · · ,~ . , .. . · .. .. · . . .. °.. .. · · . ~.. . · · .. .. , . . · ., · . · : ~.'. ': .... :. "::i'~i.;.. .' .... · " '":.';i" :/ · , ..~ · -..',. · . ,:'~'. . ~ · · !.. .. .... · - .o · ....:. · ;....'~... · "~i '.~' ~ · . ~ . · · .'.-' ., · '.. ! :."..~. o.... [, .. · · · . .. · . . · ~'. AGENDA SUMMARY ITEM NO. 10.a DATE: February 1, 2006 REPORT SUBJECT: WAIVE THE BID PROPOSAL IRREGULARITY AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH MIRACLE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. FOR THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AT TODD GROVE PARK, OAK MANOR PARK, VINEWOOD PARK, AND ORCHARD PARK IN THE AMOUNT OF $299,995. In September of 2005, the City Council authorized the release of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the purchase and installation of playground equipment at Todd Grove, Oak - Manor, Vinewood and Orchard Parks. The current playground equipment throughout these parks is failing due primarily to age. Replacement components are no longer available and sections of the playgrounds have been dismantled due to structural failure. In addition, nearly all of the equipment and their associated fall zones do not meet current ADA and Playground Safety Guidelines. (Continued on Page 2) RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Waive the bid proposal irregularity and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Miracle Construction Company, Inc. for the purchase and installation of playground equipment at Todd Grove Park, Oak Manor Park, Vinewood Park, and Orchard Park in the amount of $299,995. ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: 1. Determine that the waiving of the bid irregularity and/or award of bid to Miracle Construction Company is inappropriate and remand to staff with directions on how to proceed. 2. Reject all bid proposals for playground equipment and remand to staff with directions on how to proceed. Citizen Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: N/A N/A Sage Sangiacomo, Community/General Services Director Candace Horsley, City Manager, Mary Horger, Purchasing Supervisor, and the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission Miracle Construction Company Proposal and Photos of the Submitted Display Boards Picturing the Playground Equipment. APP ROVED~~..-d~ce~ With the passage of the recent State Resource Bond Acts, the City of Ukiah is entitled to General Allocation Grant Funds which are dispersed statewide on a per-capita basis. The City of Ukiah will receive a minimum per capita allocation of approximately $96,000 under Proposition 12 and $220,000 under Proposition 40. The City Council has previously adopted the procedural resolutions necessary to encumber these funds with the State of California. The 2005/06 Fiscal Year Budget includes $310,000 of the per capita funds for playground improvements in the Park Development Fund (account number 140.6050.800.003). Per the City's purchasing policies, the RFP was sent out to all qualified vendors on file, and a notice was published twice in the Ukiah Daily Journal. In addition, the City conducted a bidder's conference and site tour on October 11,2005. Proposals were returned by seven vendors representing nearly all of the major playground manufacturers by the November 22, 2005 deadline, including California Parks and Recreation, Playgrounds by Design, Kompan, Ross Recreation Equipment, North State Playgrounds, Miracle Construction Company and Playground & Recreation Sales. Due to the enormous amount of information submitted and actual size of the graphic renderings, all proposals are currently available for review at the Civic Center Annex (411 West Clay Street). Upon initial review of the submittals, some members of the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission pointed out that while custom equipment like that offered by architectural firms is desirable, there is simply not enough time to coordinate a large volunteer workforce. The Commissioners reiterated the immediate need to replace the existing playground equipment which has deteriorated. Custom equipment would require the coordination of a large volunteer workforce to build and install the playground in order to be cost effective and would take approximately a year to plan. Commissioners did express the desire to explore future projects using the custom model and believe that such a project could complement one of the new playgrounds. A selection subcommittee of the Parks, Recreation, and Golf Commission was organized to evaluate the submitted proposals. Given the unique nature of playground equipment and the tremendous variety between manufacturers, proposals were evaluated based upon the following criteria: · Overall responsiveness to RFP · Overall strength of proposer's company · Experience and reputation of proposer's company · Compliance with all applicable safety standards · Pricing · Quality, Durability, and quantity of equipment offered · Innovation/creativity of site/equipment design · Variety of equipment · Ability of proposer to provide repair parts and service · Availability of equipment and lead time for delivery and installation · Warranty Furthermore, members of the subcommittee solicited advise from Park's Division maintenance staff, the Purchasing Supervisor, City Attorney, and a number of informal focus groups. After careful review, the selection subcommittee is recommending the proposal submitted by Miracle Construction Company in the amount of $299,995 and includes design, play equipment, fall zone material, containment boarder, demolition and removal of existing equipment, and installation of new equipment. The subcommittee felt that the proposal submitted by Miracle presented the best equipment in terms of variety, quality, and innovation. For example, the subcommittee specifically preferred the multilevel style play offered by the equipment proposed at Todd Grove Park, relating it to the type of play previously offered by the rocket ship. In addition, products offered by Miracle Construction Company are manufactured and distributed by Miracle Recreation Equipment who is one of the largest and oldest manufacturers of playground equipment in the United States. The full proposal from Miracle Construction Company is offered for review in Attachment #1. The subcommittee did identify an irregularity with the proposal regarding the omission of a performance bond. After discussion with the City Attorney and City Manager, it was deemed that the proposed payment term, which specifies the bulk of payment (80%) to be paid at the conclusion of the project, provided the necessary assurance that the project would be carried to successful completion and limit the City's fiscal liability. In addition, Miracle Construction Company provided clarification with regard to equipment and installation warranties and these are included in detail with Attachment #1. Warranties on equipment components vary from a minimum of a one year warranty on moving parts to 100 year warranty on deck posts. In addition, the installation warranty is five years from the date of completion and includes repairing or replacing any and all defects arising from non- compliance of the installation specifications. The subcommittee is recommending the use of a pat tte for the play equipment that will blend with the parks' natural environment such as green, sand, burgundy and brown. A representative from Miracle Construction Company will be available at the City Council Meeting to present the revised color renderings of the equipment presented in the proposal. The playground subcommittee and staff will complete a final review with the contractor to ensure the desired colors are incorporated and the orientation of the equipment within the parks is appropriate. At this time, staff is requesting the City Council waive the identified bid proposal irregularity and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Miracle Construction Company, Inc. for the purchase and installation of playground equipment at Todd Grove, Oak Manor, Vinewood, and Orchard Parks in the amount of $299,995. If approved, the Contractor has indicated that there will not be a problem with maintaining the proposed timeline and all four playgrounds will be completed by the May 31,2006 goal. Attachment MIRACLE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. PROJECT PROPOSAL CITY OF UKIAH, CA RFP # E26173 TODD GROVE PARK VINEWOOD PARK OAK MANOR PARK ORCHARD PARK PO BOX 263 ALAMO, CA 94507 8004)79-7730 · 51(~893~162 · FAX: 511~893~163 jharris53@msn.com CA Lic# 858908 MIRACLE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. EauiDment Frelaht Installation Surfacina T.a~.. TOTALS TODD GROVE PARK 5/12 Retail: $ 140,437 Discount: $ (46,344) Net Cost: $ 94,093 $ - $ 31,475 $ 5,950 $ 7,292 $ 138,810 TODD GROVE PARK 2/5 Retail: $ 48,937 Discount: $ (16,149) Net Cost: $ 32,788 $ - $ 8,250 $ 1,900 $ 2,541 $ 45,479 VINEWOOD PARK Retail: $ 44,735 Discount: $ (15,467) Net Cost: $ 29,268 $3,520 $ 7,980 $ 2,700 $ 2,268 $ 45,736 OAK MANOR PARK Retail: $ 39,995 Discount: $ (13,198) Net Cost: $ 26,797 $ - $ 7,675 $ 1,370 $ 2,077 $ 37,919 ORCHARD PARK Retail: $ 16,808 Discount: $ (6,139) Net Cost: $ 10,669 $1,795 $ 2,640 $ 2,280 $ 827 $ 18,211 PARK TOTALS $ 193,615 $5,315 $ 58,020 $ 14,200 $15,005 $ 286,155 Demolition, Removal, Disposal: Site Preparation: Containment Borders: Storage: Protective Fencing: Insurance/Bus. License 3,800 3,4O0 4,375 930 950 385 PROJECT GRAND TOTAL: $ 299,995 MIRACLE CONSTRUCTION INC JOHN HARRIS ASSOCIATES JOHN HARRIS LARRY CALHOUN KIT STEVEN LARRY WHITE STEVE HABERMACHER RICHARD COSBY JUDY HARRIS LESLIE VOSS TERRITORY Principal Construction Partner Sales/Installation General Manager Sales Foreman Installation Office Manager CAD Designer Northern California CATEGORIES REPRESENTED · Playground equipment · Water Parks · Skate Parks · Surface materials · Sporting equipment · Park shelters · Site amenities PRODUCT LINES · Miracle Recreation Equipment · HAGS Play USA · Vortex SplashPads · SpectraTurf Pour-in-Place · Litchfield Structures · Spohn Ranch Skate Parks P.O. box263 A~mo, CA 94507 o 800-879-7730 <> 510-893-2162 o FAX:510.893-2163 www~JohnHarri .sASs~ciates. ,c~..' iharris53L~msn.com John Harris Associates and Miracle Construction Company Inc are sister companies owned and operated by John Harris. The companies are engaged in the business of designing, selling and building Parks, Playgrounds, VVaterParks and SkateParks to schools, cities and developers throughout Northern California. Formerly known as Dale Green Associates, the companies have been in business since 1966 supplying products to virtually every city and school district in Northern California. Upon Dale Green's retirement in 2003, John Harris became the managing partner by purchasing Dale Green's interest in the business and changing the name. John Harris Associates has become known as a high quality supplier of uniquely designed play systems, water play areas and skate areas. VVe custom design every project from scratch utilizing sophisticated digital photography techniques incorporated into computer design software that yields the most play value for any given site, while automatically securing compliance with ADA (American Disability Act), CPSC [Consumer Product Safety Commission), ASTM (American Standards for Testing Methods) and IPEMA (International Playground Equipment Manufacturers' Association). Our philosophy is to provide the safest and greatest play experience for children and the lowest possible cost for the provider. Miracle Construction Company Inc is a California licensed General Contractor dedicated exclusively to the construction of parks, playgrounds, waterparks and skate parks. The operating partner has been in business since 1978. VVe are fully insured with Scottsdale Insurance Company for public liability, product liability, performance liability, auto liability and workers' compensation. VVe employ only our own documented employees and complete virtually all work entirely internally with no subcontractors. VVe warrant and guarantee all our work to the customer's satisfaction. p~omxmR TH~ CERI1F~ATE IS ~SUED AS A ~~ OF I~OR~ON Worldwide Business Insurance Semites ONLY ~D C~~ NO ~ ~N ~ CE~A~ ~~ ~S ~A~ ~ ~ ~END, ~~ OR CA License ~0C09678 ~ ~ ~~ ~~D ~ ~E ~UCI~ BELOW. 2238 E. Nyon Avenue co~~ ~o~ Anaheim CA 92806- '(714) 774-3010 (. ) .r a Scottsdale Insurance Co, any ~R~ Miracle Const~ction Co., Inc. .. 830 Longridge Rd. Oakland CA 94610- THIS IS TO CER~ ~T ~ ~~ ~ ~~E ~ ~ ~ ~EN ~U~ ~ ~ I~U~D ~AB~ ~R ~ ~ PER~D INO~D, NO~~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ON ~ ~ ~~T ~ O~ ~ME~ ~ ~ TO ~1~ TH~ CERT~ ~Y ~ ~ ~ ~y ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ BY ~ ~ D~BED ~N ~ ~~ TO ALL ~E ~ ~CL~ AND ~~ OF S~ ~~. U~ ~ ~Y ~ B~M ~~ ~ P~ ~. , , A ~~,~ ~~~ 1~2000000 ~~~~~ ~S1093743 02/11/05 02/11/06.~~-~~[s1000000 , ~s&~~s~ ' ~~ 'slO00000 ~ ~~E~, ~0000 . ~~~ sSO00 ~ILE ~ .-- ~v~ ,, H~D au~ ~Y ~ NON--ED ~ ~ ~ S ,,, .... ...... ,, ~C~S ~IU~ ~ ~~ ' , / / / / l0 day notice of cancellation is pr~ided for non-paint of pre~um Additional Insured ~dorsement attached ..~.iab~lity ~ductible: $1~0~,0.00 Bo~ly In~u~ & ProDerty Da~qe / Per Claim City of Ukiah 300 Semina~ Avenue ~ ~ ~'_~ ~~./"' ~'' ' ENDORSEMENT /L SCOTTSDA E COIVH ANY NO.i ATTACHED TO ~ , C~1093743 2/11/2008 Hiracle Const~ction ~y, Inc. -04040 THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POU~. PLEASE READ IT C,VIEFULLY. BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENT This endorsement modifies Insurance provided under lhe following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART WHO 18 AN INSURED (SECTION IQ is antended to in- clude as an insured mw, person or onganizafloo (cag~ additional insured) whom you am mqtdred to add as an b. executed l~ior to the "bodily injury, .... property dam- The insurance provided to Ibis additional Insu~ is limited as follows: only with respect to liability arising out of: agreement, permit or in the Decla~ for this policy, whichever are tess. These limits of insurance are inclu- shown in the Declarations. engbm~s or sunmy~s nmdmt~ or falure to render any drawings, opinlon~ reports, surveys, change orders, designs or specifications; and any other basis unless a contract specl~ requires that When INs insmance is excess, we will have no duly under Coverage A or B to deland the add~ional insured against dlUonal insured against that "suit." If no olher insurer tothe ~ insured's rights against a~ ~hose ~ insurers. MIRACLE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. TERMS, CONDITIONS, EXCEPTIONS 1. This quote is valid until P/PP/06. P. As per The C~'s Addendum #3, this quote does not include performance bonds. 3. This quote substitutes concrete borders with high-temper wear-resistant plastic borders. 4. All equipment complies with CPSC, ASTM, ADA and IPEMA. 5. Color selections must be made in advance of the order and may not be changed after the order is placed. 6. All shipments will be delivered directly to each individual park address by our company trucks, offloaded by our employees, and stored onsite un~il needed. 7. Due to the depth and scope of the discount structure of this proposal, it is turnkey and must be accepted as is or declined, it cannot be altered or revised. 8. City shall agree and make available the sites for construction to begin within 313 days of receipt of order. Completion of all sites shall be no later than 5/31/05 barring acts of nature, vandalism or other causes beyond the control of the contractor. 9. Payment terms are 20% of the Grand Total ($59.999.00) with order and full balance due ($239,996.00) upon completion of the fourth and final park. Completion shall be defined as that point in time when the City's representative shall inspect all sites and agree with the contractor that all work has been performed satisfactorily as stated. If the City cannot agree that all work has been satisfactorily performed, the City agrees to submit a "punch list" in writing to the Contractor within 24 hours of final inspection outlining any remaining items deemed to be incomplete. Contractor will evaluate the list and act upon any and all reasonable unresolved issues. The City of Ukiah should understand that Miracle Construction Co. Inc. will be responsible for the payment for equipment to the equipment suppliers, and the City agrees not to withhold payment unreasonably. MIRACLE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. PROJECT PROPOSAL TODO GROVE PARK 30HN HARR~ A~SOCZATES- HAGS PLAY USA P.O. Box 263 Alamo, CA 94507 510-893-2152 Fax) 510-893-2163 www.3ohnHarrisAssociates.c°m jharris53~msn.com Equipment Quotation Quote Number: 89050368 Quote Date: 11/20/2005 Customer Number 9450L05 Terms of Sale: Customer Class: i. Parks & Rec Shipping Method: Freight Terms: Approximate Ship Date: Cust PO Num: Prepared For: JOHN HARRIS ASSOCIATES P.O. BOX 263 ALAMO, CA 94507 Location: TODD GROVE HAGS -5/12 5/12 AREA Payment/ JOHN HARRIS (510) 893-2162 Accounting Co-_~_n:. FAX (510) 893-2163 Sbippi~/ SAGE SANGIACOMO Delivery Contact: Quantity Item Number I US564.00/.03 Description HAGS CUSTOM DESIGNED 5/12 MEGA TOWER W/SWINGS Price Each $140,437.00 Price Total $140,437.00 Color List: Equipment Total: Freight: Installation: Discount: Other Charge: SubTotal: Tax: Grand Total: $140,437.00 $0.00 $31,475.00 $46,344.00 $5,950.00 $131,518.00 $7,292.21 $138,810.21 Notes: **** OTHER CHARGE IS WOOD FIBER ***** Thank you for the opportunity to provide this quote! Your Exclusive Sales Representative Rep #: 89 Order #: 89050368 Page I of 2 HAGS , Inspiring a new generation Custom Proposal Project :TODD GROVE PARK 5/12 AREA UKL4H, CA 11/18/05 Weight HAGS EQUIPMENT: 13,112 lbs. Drawing no: US564.00-$64.03 134832 1 134832-1 3 134890 1 150051 1 177711 3 420094 45 420206 2 420207 20 420268 23 420269 28 420277r 16 420372 5 420382 5 420720 ! 42074514 l 42077130 1 42078020 1 420960 1 420994-L 2 420994-RT 2 426121 4 426152 6 426162 56 426236h 1 426239h 2 42650901 1 42651401 1 426544 9 426544C 3 426727 1 426785 1 426952 1 42775322 1 42775323 1 42832103 6 42870303 1 42871603 1 428977 1 44802003 2 44802303 4 44803003 2 44803303 3 44803603 5 44803903 1 44804303 4 44804603 2 44805303 2 44805603 3 UNIPLAY/USA TUBE 1.2M STRAIGHT UNIPLAY/USA TUBE ATTACHMENT KIT W/BAR CHAMELEON ATTACH. KIT MULTI-PONDO RED CITY-FORM BENCH .75M METAL GROUND FIXING 1M X 0.7M METAL SCREEN 1M X 0.9M METAL SCREEN 1.0X0.68M METAL MESH SCREEN 1.0X0.87M METAL MESH SCREEN STEEL WINDOW 1.0X0.36 M 1X0.22M DOUBLE PROTECTIVE PIPE 1.0M PROTECTIVE PIPE CPT. 1.SM ROPE LADDER UNIPLAY CLIMBING JUNGLE 2.0M SPIDERWALK JINK LINK STRAIGHT NOUGHTS & CROSSES GRIPBOW LEFT GRIPBOW RIGHT 1.0X1.0M FLOOR CPT. 1 .OX 1 .OX 1.42M FLOOR CPT. 1.0XI.0X1 .OM FLOOR CPT. 1.0X0.39M TIMBER SCREEN 1.0X0.92M TIMBER SCREEN UNIPLAY TOPROOF 2X2M UNIPLAY TOPROOF HEXAGON PLYWOODTRIANGLE FOR TUBESLIDE PLYWOOD TRIANGLE FOR TUBESLIDE IXIM TYRE-WELL CPT. UNIPLAY TORNADO 1.0M COUNTER UNIPLAY TRANSFERPOINT 1.20 M (US) UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY UNIPLAY TRANSFER POINT 1.50 M (US) ROUNDBEAM 1 .OM NB 1M FISHING NET CPT. NET TUNNEL 3.0M NB COOKER 1.0 M POLE . 197M W. ACC. POLE 2.30M W/ACC. POLE 2.97M W/ACC. POLE 3.30M W/ACC. POLE 3.63M W.ACC. POLE JOINT 3.95M POLE 4.30M W.ACC. POLE 4.63M W.ACC. POLE 5.30M W.ACC. POLE 5.63M W.ACC. 1999-04-01 2000-12-05 2000-11-30 1999-04-01 1999-04-01 1999-04-01 2004-11-16 2004-06-14 2004-06-14 2001-03-23 1999-04-01 1999-04-01 1999-04-01 1999-04-01 2001-07-06 011010 2004-11-26 2005-01-13 2004-05-11 2004-05-11 2004-05-11 2004-05-11 2004-05-11 2004-05-11 2004-05-11 2004-05-11 11/18/05 44806303 16 448078 l 593107 2 607-h3 I UNIPLAY POLE 6.30M W.ACC. 2.8M POLE C/W TOP PIROUETIE FOR CONCRETING/RED HAGS SAFETY PANEL 5-12 2004-05-11 2001-12-05 2003-08-27 MREC EQUIPMENT: 7147721 2 7148526S I BONGO PERCH (STATIONARY) 5" OD ARCH SWG FRAME W/6 S/P SEATS MC 30HN HARRZ$,,ASSOCZATES - HAGS PLAY USA P.O. Box 263 Alamo, CA 94507 510-893-2162 Fax) 510-893-2163 www.3ohnHarrisA$$o¢iates.com jharri$53@msn.¢om Equipment Quotation Quote Number: 89050369 Quote Date: 11/20/2005 Customer Number 9450L05 Terms of Sale: Customer Class: !. Parks & Rec Shipping Method: Freight Terms: Approximate Ship Date: Cust PO Num: Prepared For: JOHN HARRIS ASSOCIATES P.O. BOX 263 ALAMO, CA 94507 Location: TODD GROVE HAGS - 2/5 raymeau JOHN HARRIS (510) 893-2162 Accounting Contact:. FAX (510) 893-2163 Delivery Contact:. Quantity Item Number I US563 -.01 Description HAGS CUSTOM DESIGN 2/5 W/SWINGS Price Each $48,937.00 Price Total $48,937.00 Color List: Equipment Total: Freight: Installation: Discount: Other Charge: SubTotal: Tax: Grand Total: $48,937.00 $0.0o $8,250.00 $16,149.00 $1,900.00 $42,938.00 $2,541.07 $45,479.07 Thank you for the opportunity to provide this quote,v Your Exclusive Sales Representative Rep #: 89 Order #: 89050369 Page I of 2 HAGS Inspiring a new generation Custom Proposal 11/18/05 Weight HAGS EQUIPMENT: Project :TODD GROVE PARK 2-5 AREA UKIAH, CA 4,008 lbs. Drawing no: US565.00-565.01 134732grey 1 134733grey 1 134832 3 134890 1 150872 1 177711 2 420094 15 420182 1 420207 2 420268 2 420382 1 420960 1 420981 2 420994-L 1 420994-RT 1 426121 2 426162 6 42621304H 4 426236h 1 426470 1 42655605 1 426952 1 42775323 1 42870303 1 42871503 l 428949 1 428963 2 428977 1 44802303 6 44803003 2 44804003 7 607-hl 1 UNI/USA PLASTIC SL1DE 1.2M (GREY) UNI/USA PLASTIC SL1DE 1.5M (GREY) UNIPLAY/USA TUBE 1.2M STRAIGHT CHAMELEON ATI~ACH. KIT TURTLE H SPRING TOY CITY-FORM BENCH .75M METAL GROUND FIXING CONCAVE ARCH RAMP 1M X 0.9M METAL SCREEN 1.0X0.68M METAL MESH SCREEN 1.0M PROTECTIVE PIPE CPT. NOUGHTS & CROSSES 1 .OX 1.04M BALCONY CPT. GRIPBOW LEFT GRIPBOW RIGHT 1 .OX 1.0M FLOOR CPT. 1 .OX 1 .OX 1 .OM FLOOR CPT. UNIPLAY BOWSCREEN 1X0.73M RED 1.0X0.39M TIMBER SCREEN UNIPLAY PULP ROOF UNIPLAY HEXAGON TOPROOF 2M 1 .OM COUNTER UNIPLAY TRANSFER POINT 1.50 M (US) UNIPLAY lM FISHING NET CPT. UNIPLAY NET TUNNEL 2.0M NB UNIPLAY VAGABOND GREY 0.61M BENCH FOR HPL-SCREEN UNIPLAY COOKER 1.0 M UNIPLAY POLE 2.30M W/ACC. UNIPLAY POLE 2.97M W/ACC. UNIPLAY POLE 3.97M W.ACC. HAGS SAFETY PANEL 2-5 1999-04-01 2000-12-05 2002-07-05 2000-11-30 2001-03-23 2003-04-24 1999-04-01 1999-04-01 2004-11-26 2005-01-21 011010 2005-01-13 2005-01-28 2004-05-11 2004-05-11 2004-05-11 MREC EQUIPMENT: · l 7147356T I SINGLE SWG FRAME 5" OD W/6 360 O TOT SEATS i MIRACLE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. PROJECT PROPOSAL VI N EWOOD PAR K MIRACLE Sales Representative JOHN HARRIS ASSOCIATES www. JohnHarrisAssociates.com P.O. Box 263 ALAMO, CA 94507 Phone: (510) 893-2162 Fax: (510) 893-2163 Prepared JOHN HARRIS ASSOCIATES For: P.O. BOX 263 ALAMO, CA 94507 Payment/ JOHN HARRIS (510) 893-2162 Accounting Contact:. FAX (510) 893-2163 Location: Delivery Contact: Equipment Quotation Quote Number: 89050367 Quote Date: 11/21/2005 Customer Number 9450L05 Terms of Sale: Customer Class: 1. Parks & Rec Shipping Method: Miracle Freight Terms: Prepay & Add Approximate Ship Date: Cust PO Num: VINEWOOD PARK UKIAH, CA 95482 SAGE SANGIACOMO (707) 463-6221 Quantity Item Number ! 714851359 3 7145029 I 7145039 I 7145039 6 714552 4 714553 4 714572 6 714573 ! 714718 I 7147285 I 714734 I 71473846 I 71474969 I 714751 ! 7147555 I 714782 I 7148053 I 714808 I 7148153 I 7148155 2 714817B I 7148559 1 7148624 I 7148626 I 7149145 I 71495949 I 714968 Description SQUARE TRANSFER POINT W/OPEN HR (3' DECK) SQUARE DECK (ATTACHES TO 4 POSTS) MT II I/2 HEX FULL DECK (ATTACHES TO 4 POSTS) MT II 1/2 HEX FULL DECK (ATTACHES TO 4 POSTS) MT II 5" OD X 136" POST (3' TO 5' DECKS) 5" OD X 160" POST (5'6" TO 6'6" DECKS) 5" OD X 144" POST FOR ROOF (3' DECKS OR LESS) 5" OD X 168" POST FOR ROOF (3'6"-5' DECK) MAST LADDER W/RUNGS PVC (6'6" DECK) BUMP & GLIDE SLIDE, ONE PIECE (5' DECK) SAFETY PANEL AGES 5-12, FREE STANDING FOSSIL BLUFF CLIMBER (6'6" SQUARE DECK) 6'6" TYPHOON SLIDE 405 D (6' & 6'6" DK) MT II HANG-A-ROUND W/ARCH DK MNT (3' DK OR LESS) HONEYCOMB CLIMBER (5' DECK) CRUNCH STATION HULA CLIMBER GROUND TO 3' DECK CLIMBING POLE (3', 5' OR 6'6" DECK) VERTICAL LADDER CLIMBER (3' DECK) END LADDER FOR OVERHEAD CLIMBERS (ONLY) WALL ENCLOSURE W/SEAT (BELOW DECK) 8' SUSPENSION BRIDGE W/FULL BARRIER, MT II ROOF FOR SQUARE DECK, PERF STEEL ROOF FOR HEXAGON DECK, PERF STEEL HORIZONTAL "L" LADDER (ONLY) ADA STAIRS BETWEEN DECKS W/2' RISE 4' SPAN CURVED LOOP CLIMBER (3' DECK) Rep #: 89 Order #: 89050367 Page I of 2 f~uanfity Item Number 7149748 7149939 7148524S Description WIGGLY WORM CLIMBER (5', 6'6" OR 8' DECK) ADA STAIR BTWN DECKS W/I'6" RISE, MT II 5' OD ARCH SWG FRAME W/4 S/P SEATS MC Color List: System: KC System: SWG Item Number: 7148524S Quantity: 1 Notes: **** OTHER CHARGE IS WOOD FIBER **** Thank you for the opportunity to provide this quote,v Equipment Total: $44,735.00 Freight: $3,520.43 Installation: $7,980.00 Discount: $15,467.00 Other Charge: $2,700.00 SubTotal: $43,468.43 Tax: $2,268.27 Grand Total: $45,736.70 Your Exclusive Sales Representative i kereby autkorize Miracle Recreation Equipment Comlnmy to skip tke equipment listed above for wkick I agree to pay the total amount specifiet~ ! will be responsible for receiving all merckandisefrom tke Miracle trucl~ Payment terms are Net-30 days from invoice date witk approved credit. Non-taxable customers will provide proper tax exemption certificate to Miracle Recreation. Purckase orders and payments shouM be made payable to the order of Accepted By Printed Name Date Rep #: 89 Order #: 89050367 Page 2 of 2 MIRACLE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. vortex PROJECT PROPOSAL OAK MANOR PARK MI I CLP_. Sales Representative JOHN HARRIS ASSOCIATES www. JohnHarrisAssociates.com P.O. Box 263 ALAMO, CA 94507 Phone: (510) 893-2162 Fax: (510) 893-2163 Prepared JOHN HARRIS ASSOCIATES For: P.O. BOX 263 ALAMO, CA 94507 Location: Quote Number: 89050370 Quote Date: 1 !/21/2005 Customer Number 9450L05 Terms of Sale: Customer Class: i. Parks & Rec Shipping Method: Freight Terms: Approximate Ship Date: Cust PO Num: OAK MANOR PARK l'aymeatt JOHN HARRIS (510) 893-2162 Accounting Coatace. FAX (510) 893-2163 Shipping/ Contact: Quantity Item Number I US563.00/.01 Description HAGS CUSTOM DESIGN 5/12 Price Each Price Total $39,995.00 $39,995.00 Color List: Equipment Total: $39,995.00 Freight: $0.00 Installation: $7,675.00 Discount: $13,198.00 Other Charge: $1,370.00 SubTotal: $35,842.00 Tax: $2,076.77 Grand Total: $37,918.77 Notes: ***** OTHER CHARGE IS FOR WOOD FIBER ***** Thank you for the opportunity to provide this quote,v Your Exclusive Sales Representative i hereby authorize Miracle Recreation Equipment Company to ship the equipment listed above for which I agree to pay the total amount specifiet~ I will be responsible for receiving all merchandise from the Mirm~e truct. Payment terms are Net-30 days from invoice date with approved credit. Non-taxable customers wiH provide proper tax exemption certificate to Miracle Recreation. Purchase orders and payments sltould be made payable to the order of Accepted By Printed Name Date Rep #: 89 Order 0:89050370 Page I of 2 Weight HAGS EQUIPMENT: Inspiring a new generation Custom Proposal Project :OAK MANOR PARK UKIAH, CA 2,996 lbs. Drawing no: U$$63.00-565.01 134733GREY 1 134890 I 420094 19 420268 2 420269 1 420382 4 420705 2 42071914 1 42074514 l 42077011 I 42077130 1 420780 2 420937 1 420947 i 420960 ! 420970 l 420981 l 420991 2 420994-1 2 420994-n 1 426121 4 426152 2 42621304 2 42621404 2 426236 I 426470 I 42650201 2 42677250 1 426937 I 426952 l 42775323 1 42871503 I 428977 1 44801803 3 44802603 2 44803003 3 44803303 2 44803603 9 607-h3 ! UNI/USA PLASTIC SLIDE 1.5M (GREY) CHAMELEON ATrACI-L KIT .75M METAL GROUND FIXING 1.0X0.68M METAL MESH SCREEN 1.0X0.87M METAL MESH SCREEN 1.0M PROTECTIVE PIPE CPT. 1.4X 1.4 M NET UNIPLAY ROPE LADDER H=I.5M UNIPLAY CLIMBING JUNGLE 2.0M F1REMANS POLE I.SM O"qEW) SPIDERWALK POLE SUPPORT CPT. PERISCOPE cfr. PATIENCE GAME CPT. NOUGHTS & CROSSES PICTURE PUZZLE 1 .OX 1.04M BALCONY CPT. HANDRAIL STEEL CPT. GRIPBOW LEFT GRIPBOW RIGHT 1.0X1.0M FLOOR CPT. 1 .OX 1 .OX 1.42M FLOOR CPT. UNIPLAY BOWSCREEN 1X0.73M RED UNIPLAY BOWSCREEN I X0.93M RED 1.0X0.39M TIMBER SCREEN UNIPLAY PULP ROOF UNIPLAY TOPROOF 1.0M UNIPLAY CUBY DOUBLE 2X1 M 1.0X 1.28M PANEL WITH GRIPS 1.0M COUNTER UNIPLAY TRANSFER POINT 1.50 M (US) UNIPLAY NET ~tJNNEL 2.0M NB UNIPLAY COOKER 1.0 M UNIPLAY POLE 1.80M W.ACC. UNIPLAY POLE 2.63M W/ACC. UNIPLAY POLE 2.97M W/ACC. UNIPLAY POLE 3.30M W/ACC. UNIPLAY POLE 3.63M W.ACC. HAGS SAFETY PANEL 5-12 2000- I 1-30 011203 2005-01-21 2004-11-16 2004-06-14 2004-06-14 1999-04-01 1999-04-01 2001-03-23 2001-02-12 2001-06-27 1999-04-01 1999-04-01 2004-11-26 2004-1 !-26 1999-04-01 2005-01-21 2005-02-09 2003-04-23 011010 2005-01-13 2004-12-15 2004-05- ! I 2004-05-11 2004-05-11 2004-05-1 ! MREC EQUIPMENT: ]7147721 1 BONGO PERCH (STATIONARY) 10FI MIRACLE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. PROJECT PROPOSAL 0 RC HARD PAR K Sales Representative JOHN HARRIS ASSOCIATES www.JohnHarrisAssociatcs.com P.O. Box 263 ALAMO, CA 94507 Phone: (510) 893-2162 Fax: (510) 893-2163 Prepared JOHN HARRIS ASSOCIATES For: P.O. BOX 263 ALAMO, CA 94507 raymott JOHN HARRIS (510) 893-2162 Accounting Coatacv. FAX (510) 893-2163 Location: S~ipC~d Delivery Contact: Quote Number: 89050346 Quote Date: ! 1/21/2005 Customer Number 9450L05 Terms of Sale: Customer Class: 1. Parks & Rec Shipping Method: Miracle Freight Terms: Prepay & Add Approximate Ship Date: Cust PO Num: ORCHARD PARK UKIAH, CA 95482 SAGE SANGIACOMO (707) 463-6221 Quantity Item Number I 714734 3 7185029 8 718552 4 718553 I 7187264 I 71874969 I 7187716S I 7187786 I 718787 I 71881059 I 718816 I 71895959 I 718965359 I 718968 Description SAFETY PANEL AGES 5-12, FREE STANDING SQUARE DECK (ATTACHES TO 4 POSTS) MT II 3 1/2" OD X 130" POST (3' TO 5' DECKS) 3 1/2" OD X 148" POST (5'6" TO 6' 6" DECKS) MOGUL SLIDE-ONE PIECE (4' DECK) 6' TYPHOON SLIDE 405 DEG (6' DECK) MT II DUPLI-GATOR SLIDE (6' DECK) INCLINED SPIDER CLIMBER (5' & 6' DECKS) TOT ROCK CLIMBER (3' DECK) ADA STAIR BTWN DECKS W/I' RISE OPEN HR, MT Il WALL ENCLOSURE ADA STAIR BTWN DECKS W/2' RISE OPEN HR, MT II TRANSFER POINT OPEN HANDRAIL (3' DECK) MT II CURVED LOOP CLIMBER (3' OR 4' DECK) Color List: System: KC System: TC Equipment Total: Freight: Installation: Discount: Other Charge: SubTotal: Tax: Grand Total: $16,808.00 $1,794.63 $2,640.00 $6,139.00 $2,280.00 $17,383.63 $826.85 $18,210.48 Notes: **** OTHER CHARGE IS WOOD FIBER ***** Rep #: 89 Order #: 89050346 Page I of 2 · 5188932163 81-89-86 28'86 pg' ii ~IOHN HARRIS ASSOCIATES MIRACLE CONSTRUCTLON CO. Lic# 858908 ii P.O. Box 263 Alamo, CA 94507 (800) 879-7730 (51.0) 893-21.62 FAX # 510-893-2163 3 ha rris 53 @ m sn.com ii www.3oh n Ha rri~Associ,ate$.com To: MR. SAGE SANGIACOMO From: John Harris · ~ Oate: 1/9/2006 ', Re: Product/Installation Warranty · Curb_ip_g . (- - Sage, Please be advised of the following regarding the warranty of Miracle Recreation Equipment, HAGS USA Equipment, and installation by Miracle Construction Inc. The warranty for Miracle and HAGS equipment is as explained on the attached warranty statement, This statement is included on our invoice to the customer: "The installation warranty for Miracle Construction Inc. is Five Years from the date of completion of the installation. This warranty is inclusive of any and alt defects arising from the no~-comp~iance of the installation manua~ issued by Miracle Recreation and HAGS USA. If it is deemed the product is defective as a result of incorrect installation according to the factory supplied install manual, Miracle Construction Inc. will immediately repair or replace the affected product[s] at nc cost to the customer". Reqardin.q concrete curbs: We elected to substitute our Miracle high impact plastic "TIMBER~" in lieu of concrete curbs. We utilize these Timbers in virtually all of our playground installations as they are a high quality, durable substitute for concrete, and they cost substantially less. This allows for more money to be utilized on the park equipment itself. We have planned to excavate each site 12" from surface level, install the Timbers all the way around the inside perimeter of the sit~, and fill in with playground wood fiber. This will give the playground a nice level surface with the surrounding grassy area, and make it 100% ADA accessible from anywhere. Fax from : 5108932163 01-09-06 20:06 Pg: 2 Performance Bond: We elected to omit the costly performance bond in lieu of attractive payment terms that call for 80% of the cost of the entire project to be paid when and only when the City is 100% satisfied with the fulfillment of the quote. The City will be in possession of approximately $292,000 worth of new playground equipment that only $60,000 has been paid for, in the unlikely event full performance doe not occur, it was our hope and belief this type of security and terms package is actually more beneficial than a bond, in that the City is very well covered financially, and you get that much more in the way of value dollars toward the equipment. We would very much appreciate the opportunity to work with The City of Ukiah on this project, and we attempted to pack as much play value as possible into the proposal to illustrate our desire to win the project. I hope this helps explain our position, and of course would be happy to come to Ukiah to meet with you and your associates to further answer any questions. Thank you. John Harris Fax · 5188932163 81-89-86 28:86 Buyer agrees that products sold by Miracle® Recreation Equipment Company only carry the following warranty: 1. LIMITED ONE HUNDRED [100! YEAR WARRANTY on aluminum deck post.~, steel deck posts, the Versa]ok"' fastening sys-tem, and associated t~stening hardware against s~-uc-nura] failure caused by corrosion or deterioration from exposure to weather, or by defective materials or defective workmanshil~. 2. LIMITED FIFTEEN (151 YEAR WURANIY on steel support legs and Mira-Thcrm [I on TOTS' CHOICEx, KIDS' CHOICE', and CENIER STAGEx against structural failure caused by corrosion, defective materials, or defective we 'rkn~mship. 3. UII/~TED FIIq~EIM (IS) YEAR WARRJI~TY on playsystcm .~ccl components including railings, rungs, 'and rigid climbers against structural failure caused by defective mated'als or defective worlananship. 4, U~D FIFTEEN (15) YEAR W~O~I~IMqTY on Rockilc~ against structural thilure caused by defective materials or defective workmanship. 5. UI~[ED FIVE ES) y~l~ WARR~IMTY on KidroxTM Climbing Rocks and IL~INBOW BENDTM and enclosed watcrslidc fiberglass sections abminst structural failure caused by deti?ctivc materials or dcti:ctive workmanship. Limited one (1) 3'car wanmaty oa all walctslidc and pool slide support structures, staii-~'ays, landings, and railings against structural failure cau~d by defective materials or de feclivc workmanship. 6. I,I~I~D O~E [1) Y~lLq I/~$LIIRANTY on IODD/ERS' CHOICE~ main support materials and decks against .sm-ucmral failure caused by dc-fcc'live materials or detect/ye workmanship. 7. LIMII~D ONE (1) YEAR W,~R~O~ITY on bleachers ag'ainst structural thihtrc caused by detective nmtcrials or defective workq'nanship. 8. UMITED SIX (&} MONIH WSLIIR~ on sewn thbric components on Early Childhood products. 9. LIII~I'ED THR~ (3) YEAR WAR~Iib~'Y on $1ashproof Scats and 360~ Bucket To! Scats for Swings against structural failure caused by defective materials or defective workmanship. 10. LI/~TED ONE Il) yY, alffi WARR~I~' on all product~ not listed above including all moving partq and tlcxible climbers against stm~ural failure causcxl by defective materials or defective workmanship. 1 1. These limited warranties do not include thding of colors, damage due to excessive wear and tear, vandalism, or negligence. These warranties are valid only if products are installed according to manufimturer*s installation instructions. ! 2. All warranties begin on Thc dale of Miracle's invoice. Repaired or replacement partt s) arc only warranted for thc balance of the original limited warranty. BUYER'S REMEDY ifanyof the products prove Io he de fecln c or non con fon~ingunder normal operations within the above-prescwibed warranty period& Buyer must promptly notify Miracle in waiting at P.O. Box 420, Monett. MO 65708 USA. Mira -tlc u~4.1I within a reasonable time r~xai.r or replace ~uch dc£e~.nive or non coaOorming product by. providing Etec o f charge vzplacemen t peru[s) m the site. M ixac tc wiU not be.-esponsible for thc cost of labor for thc removal ofnor thc cost of tabor fox the installation of repaired or ri:placement part(sl. The~ limited warranties do not appb' to sn'uctares not erected in conferral .ty with Mkacle's installation instructions. sm~cturus not maintained or inspectc'd in conformity with Miracle's insm~ctions, ptu'Lq that I:LttY¢ ~ modified, aiterud or misused, parts t.hat ha,Ye not bcca~ used mq desi~ned or imtmded, stracmm-s that have laral parts 'addo3, or substitu'a~l, damage or rethtction in rahs: due to Yandalism. aimormal use, or abuse. Buyer, by acceptance and u~ of this warranty, ~.g tt~t il waives any ri~o-2x~ it may have to claim or assert that this limited a'.'wramy fails of' its essential purpose. [~uytyr aE~q'eeg venue for any action shall be in Barry or Greene Counties in the State of Missouri. D'/rl157 R~ L. Aurju~ 3, ~13~, 3,1,,>~! ,d' th,. research available today underlines how nnt~or- l itllI play is lbr a child's development. But there are some expc~qs x~'h¢~ bt, lieve that modem research h~ missed the p, fint by overemphasizing the formative function of play ami umterestimating its value aa fun and entertainment. (Thildi'en don't play to attain a pa~icular goal. On the con- trary, play seems to be the manifestation of a happy-go-luc~ attitude to life. ~ds play because they want to and yet play pro~ddes definite benefits necess~ for heMthy development. This is only one example of how fascinating the mysteries of play really are. ~d, if you ~k us, the best way we c~ learn more about our rem~kable human capacity for play is to combine theoretical insight with pracfieM e~e~ence. %at ~ what we have done at ~GS. O 1,4.R.. A~MI~I-F-! O N At tIAGS, we create stimulating, attractive ideas through theoretical insight into the nature of play. To put it simply, we take play seriously. So, let us welcome you to the world of HAGS, a member of the PlayPower family of companies, which also includes Miracle Recreation, Soft Play, Little Tikes Commercial Playgrounds by Playpower, and EZ Dock. Based in Sweden since 1948, HAGS has brought our reputation as one of Europe's leading suppliers of commercial play equipment to the U.S. Our products are now distributed to more than 40 countries all over the world. All the products featured in this catalog reflect the finn foundations on which our reputation is built: good design, safety, quality, and environmental responsibility. Play lays the foundations for the basic skills essential to explore the world around us. Good design means the kind of products that encourage children of all ages to play, training their bodies and developing their minds. To do this, we utilize the infinite variety of play opportunities found in nature, and complement these vdth HAGS products for a safe, sensible, stimulating, and complete play experience. :\t t tA(;S, our expertme and knowledge ()~t (tesignh~g safe areas is based on decades of practical experien{'e and cooperation with numerous organizations..~d our equil)n~('~tl is designed to meet the strictest industD' standards and guidelines, including ASTM, CPSC, ADA, and Er117t5. Our quality program has been accredited to ISO 9001 since February 3, 1993 a sure indication of our ability ~o consistently monitor and control quality issues. t5 NVIP-.DNMtSNT Our ISO 14001 environmental management accreditation from June 18, 1997 guarantees our continuing commitment to work to improve the environment. ~8 years of experience has given HAGS a wealth of knowl- edge which we are constantly translating into new opportu- nities for planning playgrounds and outdoor environments. We are laying the groundwork for tomorrow's citizens, the children of today. That's why quality is always at the top of our agenda, on the drawing board and in the finished product. From raw materials to assembly instructions, we have accord- ed the same stringent standards, because quality is in every- one's best interest. N~E~S 0,H-A:NG~ WtTH-A:G~ Children have different needs at different ages, and it's important to select age-appropriate play equipment. Each component listed in this catalog denotes the ages for which it is designed. For more information on age-appropriate play designs, ask your }tAGS Consultant, or visit www. HAGS.com. As shown in this catalog there are seemingly endless possibili- ties with HAGS. Our play equipment is developed to make play safer, more inspiring, and more fun than ever before, play equipment that is as versatile as a child's imagination. WeLc, om.e to the wowole~cbcL world o-~ I tA( iS si,tx.ia! {tot~idu-milli~g technique, this l~mgh, ]~:i!(]-xvt,;~ring [)~)al'(t ~nalerial ('m~ [)e given a s~noolh, safe [il/iM/lhld is ki~(t ~() young children's hands. Our timber is sloxx-gr{,xvmg, fine-ri~tged tdne from No~lhern S~veden. Wooden ('ompone]ds are t)laned mxt all lhe ends and edges are {'arefully rounded. UNIMINI system posts are made of hea~l-free (quatle~=sawn) pine. Other posts and poles are made oI' laminated timber. In addition, all 4.3-inch (110mm) posts have four grooves rnnning the entire length of the post to prese~xx~ lhe quality of lhe surface, and proxdde straight lines to simplify installation and ~sembly work. Sand boxes and safety cordons are made of oak. Pre-drilled holes are countersunk for bolt-heads ~d nuts, or fitted with ~GS covehng caps to protect fittings from vandalism. The Iligh-quality pl~ood used is specially developed for outdoor applications. Net components are made of hot-dipped galvanized chain covered with solid pol~rethane to ensure maximum durability, good el~ticity, ~d little sensiti~ty to temperature ch~ge. The stainless steel pattern-rolled plate used in slide chutes is protected against resting. Other steel and aluminum components are carefully selected and surface-treated according to the relevant requirements for durability. For safety's sake all bolt joints use hot-galvanized or electro-galvanized bolts, treated to resist corrosion; the nuts have special retainers. The nail plates are inse~ed hydraulically into the wooden w~ls, ~d ~e made of .06-inch (1.Sram) gauge sheet metal. Timber is specially treated to resist rot, in compliance with European Standard EN 351 Class P5 and the directives of the Nordic Wood Preservation Council. The need for chemical protection varies according to how great the risk is for timber-destroying organisms in the local environment. Class P5 protection is intended for above-ground timber and is applied after machining. The active ingredients in the oils used for this impregnation technique are biologically degradable and protect timber against moisture, drying out, and fiber-raising, thus helping to maintain the stability and shape of the wood. It is an environmentally safe treatment, and is in no way harmful to the wood. We use untreated oak for wooden components that come into direct contact with the ground, as in sand boxes, etc. .S IAI~.FAC. I~ T'I~ATM t~ NT Wood is treated with one coat of penetrating wood stain primer and one coat of film-forming wood stain finisher. This ensures the very best durability and resistance to wind and rain, at the same time it preserves and enhances the natural grain of the ~vood. Wooden components are flow-coated twice in our special process to saturate the fibers with pigment for the finest possible quality. Following manufacture, steel components are either hot-dip galvanized or powder-lacquered with polyester-t.vpe powder coatings. Prior to powder- lacquenng, the steel is electro-galvanized and primed, reinforc- ing the protection against rust and ensuring a longer lifespan than can be achieved by using traditional methods. ISO 9001 is the most comprehensive quality assurance system in the entire ISO program. }tAGS has been ISO 9001 accredited since February 1993. This means that every stage of the production chain, from idea to finished product, is subject 1o strict quality control. Precise quality requirements and specifications cover every aspect, from design through raw materials and production to warehousing and delivery. Everything is routinely checked by internal quality auditors, and external inspectors make regular assessments. Against the background of this strongly quality-oriented business philosophy, HAGS feels confident in offering the following comprehensive product quality warranties: · 10-year warranty on all HPL components. · 5-year warranty on all structural, load-bearing components. * 1-year warranty on all other components and materials. This warranty, which does not affect your statutory tights, extends to the free replacement and delivery of components that have manufacturing or material defects, or that have broken as a result of such. Damage due to vandalism or abnormal usage and the effects of normal wear and tear are not covered by the terms of the warranty. The warranty applies only where assembly, installation, and maintenance have been carried out in accordance with directives from HAGS. We reserve the right to amend dimensions and design specifications. If products are to function as intended over a long period of time, the initial assembly work must be carried out by people with the necessary skills. This cannot be done without detailed instructions. For that reason we have gone to great lengths to produce comprehensive, easy-to-follow assembly instructions. These are included with every product so that they can be studied and followed by those responsible for assembly work. Every play item must stand on an appropriate energy-absorbing surface in order to function safely and as intended. Statistics show that most playground injuries can be attributed to falls onto surfaces that are too hard. Ask your }lAGS Consultant or see the CPSC Handbook For Public Playground Safety for complete infornmtion about appropriate playground safety surfacing. All playground equipment needs checking and inspection at regular inten~als. Proper maintenance is essential to preserve the appearance and functional properties of all HAGS equipment. The time intervals and choice of maintenance methods depend to a great degree on the location of the equipment, play environment and the amount of use the equipment receives. MOYe I~,~orla~Olt~o~ Visit www. HAGS.eom or see the attached Price List for complete details on: Protective Area and Surfacing Requirements, Installation Detail, Inspection and Maintenance, Recycling Info and much more including a full listing of HAGS Play USA sales consultants. AGENDA ITEM NO: 10.b MEETING DATE: January 18, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUB.1ECT: DISCUSSION OF BUILDING UP VERSUS BUILDING OUT -- CRANE Councilmember Crane has asked to agendize a discussion of land use effects and the change of character of our community resulting from building up versus building out as it relates to the City of Ukiah and the County of Mendocino land use planning rules and guidelines in the Ukiah Valley. Attached for Council's review, is a letter from Councilmember Crane regarding this issue. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council discussion ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Councilmember Crane Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. Letter from Councilmember Crane Approved: ~e ~or's-ley, City ~anager February 1, 2006 City Council Meeting SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF LAND USE EFFECTS AND CHANGE OF CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY RESULTING FROM BUILDING UP VS. BUILDING OUT AS THEY RELATE TO THE CITY OF UKIAH AND COUNTY OF MENDOCINO LAND USE PLANNING RULES AND GUIDELINES IN AND ADJACENT TO UKIAH. What do we have now and how did it evolve? The City of Ukiah was founded in the days of walking people, horses, donkeys, mules, oxen, carts, wagons, buggies, wheelbarrows and bicycles. The downtown and early residential areas reflect that transportation set. Then came rail and the automobile. The portions of the community that were built after rail, but before trucks, reflected primary commodity and passenger transport to and from the community by rail with transport within the community by all of the afore mentioned methods. The portions of the community built in that era reflected those transportation methods. Rail gave way to automobiles, buses, trucks and airplanes and the land use patterns evolved in concert with the transport modes of the day. Land was initially readily available and limited in use only by the vision and resources of the land holder. As the human population grew and the beasts of burden population diminished, as home vegetable gardens, chicken coops, pig pens, rabbit hutches, food, and other aspects of local food production gave way to more economical commodities from more efficient markets, arriving by more efficient transport, conversion of lands and buildings followed those changing transportation modes and markets. More people arrived and stayed. With more people came more rules, services and costs. Infrastructure expanded substantially from nothing but dirt streets and roads to what we have today, most publicly owned and operated. Streets became paved. Individual wells gave way to private then public water systems. Outhouses were replaced with septic systems and then public sewer collection and finally treatment systems that also disposed of grey water. Lighting evolved from candles and oil lamps to gas lights and then electric lamps. Heating progressed from wood to coal, to city gas and oil, then electric resistance and heat pumps, natural gas and some solar. A few buildings of three or more stories have been constructed in an otherwise low rise community. We have progressed from hamlet to village to a small city and environs. The physical characteristics of our community are an amalgam of the past and current methods, materials, social mores, land use, and land use rules. These are all in response to the physical, social, economic, and regulatory environments of their respective times. Unless we erase what we have and start over, we will continue to repair, remodel, add to, replace and build new buildings and structures to accommodate changes in perceived needs, technologies, materials, environment, transportation, markets, demographics, etc. Our history is primarily low rise single use buildings and a small amount of mixed use with roots in store or shop in front, proprietor's dwelling in the rear or on top. Circulation/transportation within the community, with few exceptions, is now primarily automobiles on public streets, roads and highways with some areas more conducive to foot and bicycle travel than others. The automobile has provided a level of freedom of travel that is dear to the vast majority of our population and is a way of life that is being replicated across the world. Although the technology will continue to change, including power sources, it seems unlikely that people will willingly give up the auto and the freedom it provides. We have planning regulations that require substantial percentages of developed land use for parking and circulation. Unless we change the shape of development to more up and less out we build an environment that has a larger foot print and requires greater travel distances, uses more land, drives greater infrastructure and travel costs. The greater the distances the less likely we are to walk or bicycle. Some suggest that two and three story mixed use buildings in clusters with integrated enclosed parking is a useful tool to reduce the distance between buildings and provide a more pedestrian friendly environment through establishment of more densely populated "neighborhoods". Some suggest substantially taller buildings. So, what are some of the trade offs of more up and less out? The American housing mindset seems to be "to own my suburban free standing home on my own parcel of land". Variations on the home ownership theme, yielding higher density, have been multi-story row houses, duplexes and other multiplex condominiums. Rental housing is essentially the rest of the market. The cost of the single family owner occupied home has been increasing more rapidly than the incomes of a significant portion of the population, make ownership unaffordable for them. Those housing costs are driven by many factors including land prices, infrastructure costs and charges, school taxes, permits and related fees as well as the cost of building and marketing the improvements. By stacking dwellings on top of other uses and each other, density increase, so the cost of land and infrastructure per unit is reduced. The other costs remain, to be paid by the occupants or on the backs of others through subsidies of various types. More about the hollowing out the middle class through cost shifting on another day. If more multiplex dwelling units are produced as part of multiuse buildings as owner occupied condominiums then more home ownership is possible. For those at the front or the back of life, the lower cost "more affordable" housing can be helpful and desirable. Will sufficient private capitol enter into such ventures in our community? Will people adequately appreciate the more affordable but more densely populated mixed use stacked housing enough to adequately maintain property and subsequent property values? In this litigious society the builders of condominium dwelling units are a low hanging fruit being harvested by trial lawyers to the point for builders have little on no liability insurance markets. Will that reduce the availability of the building industry to deliver projects? I propose a discussion at the Council level to hopefully be followed by City Planning Commission discussion and review of the current City and County land use rules and guidelines that control or influence density and mixed use. Elements of the discussion could include: What defines our community's character? How do we want to evolve our environment? To what way point? How much area or population is appropriate for sustainable clusters or "neighborhoods"? How much area or population is excessive for a clusters or "neighborhoods" In what districts or areas is infill or replacement appropriate at higher density? What standards are appropriate for: Mix of uses Density Heights Parcel coverage Setbacks at grade and at various elevations above grade Enclosed concealed or semi concealed parking Additional parking for customers, clients and guests Private and public green areas Should mitigations such as green roof be encouraged? Are there areas that are not appropriate for increased density? Respectfully submitted, Douglas F. Crane AGENDA ITEM NO: 10. c MEETING DATE: January 18, 2006 SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECORUM -- ASHIKU Mayor Ashiku has requested a discussion regarding City Council meeting decorum. Attached for Council's information, is the City of Ukiah's Council Meeting and Decorum procedures as well as an article from the Press Democrat on a recent Santa Rosa City Council meeting discussion on maintaining decorum at their City Council meetings. Mayor Ashiku will lead the discussion on this topic. RECOMMENDED ACTION: COUNCIL DISCUSSION ALTERNATIVE COUNCIL POLICY OPTIONS: Citizens Advised: Requested by: Prepared by: Coordinated with: Attachments: Mayor Ashiku Candace Horsley, City Manager 1. City Council Meeting Procedures and Decorum 2. Press Democrat Article Approved: Candace Horsley, City Man Attachment # _,, j CITY OF UKIAH CTTY COUNCTL MEETING PROCEDURES CITY COUNCI'L DECORUM Revised 3uly 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS CITY COUNCIL MEETING PROCEDURES SECTION 1. CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ............................................................................... I Order of Agenda ............................................................................................................ 1 Special Meetings/Time and Place/Notices ..................................................................... 1 Open to the Public/Exception ......................................................................................... 1 Closed Sessions/Disclosure of Information .................................................................... 1 SECTION 2. AGENDA ............................................................................................................ 2 Preparation and Posting of Agendas ............................................................................. 2 Order of Business .......................................................................................................... 2 SECTION 3. COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE ....................................................................... 2 Availability to the Public ................................................................................................. 2 Authority of the City Manager ......................................................................................... 2 SECTION 4. PRESIDING OFFICER ............................ ' ............................... · ............................ 3 Powers and Duties ......................................................................................................... 3 A. Participation ........................................................................................................ 3 B. Signing of Documents ......................................................................................... 3 C. Sworn Testimony ................................................................................................. 3 D. Discussion of and Action on Agenda Items ......................................................... 3 SECTION 5. RULES OF ORDER ........................................................................................... 4 III. Rules Rules A. B. C. D. E. F. Rules A. B. C. D. E. F. G. of Order/Failure to Observe ................................................................................. 4 of Decorum .......................................................................................................... 4 Councilmembers ................................................................................................. 4 Employees .......................................................................................................... 5 Persons Addressing the Council ......................................................................... 5 Members of the Audience ................................................................................... 5 Dangerous Instruments ....................................................................................... 5 Rules of Decorum/Enforcement ............................................... .. .......................... 5 of Debate ............................................................................................................. 6 Getting the Floor .................................................................................................. 6 Questioning the Staff ........................................................... '. ............................... 6 Interruptions ........................................................................................................ 6 Points of Order .................................................................................................... 6 Points of Personal Privilege ................................................................................ 6 Privilege of Closing Debate ................................................................................. 6 Limitation of Debate ............................................................ '. ............................... 6 SECTION 6. MOTIONS ........................................................................................................... 6 I. After Motions are Made and Hearings are Closed ......................................................... 7 SECTION 7. VOTING PROCEDURE ...................................................................................... 7 II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. Seating Arrangement for Council ................................................................................... 7 Question to be Stated .................................................................................................... 7 Registration of Votes ...................................................................................................... 7 Voting Procedures/Disqualification ................................................................................ 7 Failure to Vote ................................................................................ : ............................... 7 Tie Votes ........................................................................................................................ 8 Changing Votes/Abstention ............................................................................................ 8 SECTION 8. RECONSIDERATION OF ACTIONS .................................................................. 8 SECTION 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS ........................................................................................... 8 III. IV. V. VI. Public Hearing Defined ................................ ' ............................. 8 Submission of Documents .............................................................................................. 9 A. Time and Submission .......................................................... · ................................ 9 B. Manner of Submission ......................................................................................... 9 Notice of Hearing ........................................................................................................... 9 Viewing the Site ............................................................................................................. 10 Making a Decision .......................................................................................................... 10 Conduct of Public Hearing ............................................................................................. 10 A. Order of Proof ..................................................................................................... 10 B. Time Limitations .................................................................................................. 11 C. Manner ................................................................................................................ 11 D. Spokesmen for Groups of Persons ..................................................................... 11 SECTION 10. ORDINANCES/RESOLUTIONS/CONTRACTS ................................................ 11 Motions .......................................................................................................................... 11 Resolutions .................................................................................................................... 11 Ordinances ................................................................................................. , ................... 11 A. Reading of Ordinances ........................................................................................ 12 SECTION 11. MINUTES/PREPARATION AND CHANGES ................................................... 12 Minutes/Reading .............................. · .................................................................. ' ...... 12 Minutes/Entry of Statements ..................... ' ...................................................... . ............ 12 Entry of Protests ............................................................................................................ 12 SECTION 12. SPECIAL COMMITTEES ................................................................................. 12 CITY COUNCIL DECORUM SECTION 1. OVERVIEW OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ........................................... 13 Mayor. .......................................................................................................................... 13 Vice Mayor .................................................................................................................... 13 All Councilmembers ....................................................................................................... 13 SECTION 2. COUNCIL CONDUCT WITH CITY STAFF .......................... '. ............................... 13 II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. Treat all staff as professionals ....................................................................................... 13 Limit contact to specific City staff .................................................................................... 14 Do not disrupt City staff from their jobs ................................................. ' ......................... 14 Never publicly criticize an individual employee .............................. · ................................ 14 Do not get involved in administrative functions .............................................................. 14 Check with City staff regarding correspondence before taking action ............................ 14 Do not attend unofficial meetings with staff unless required by staff or prearranged .......................................... , ...................................................................... 14 Limit requests for staff support ....................................................... *. ............................... 15 SECTION 3. COUNCIL CONDUCT WITH OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES ................................ 15 Be clear about representing the City or personal interests ............................................. 15 Correspondence should be equally clear regarding representation ............................... 15 SECTION 4. COUNCIL CONDUCT WITH THE PUBLIC ......................................................... 16 In unofficial settings: Make no promises on behalf of the Council ................................. 16 In public meetings: See Rules of Order, section 5.Il.D, below ...... -. ............................... 16 Revised 3uly 2005 CITY CO UNC.rL HEE T_rNG PROCEDURES · SECTION 1. CZTY COUNCZL MEETTNGS I. Order of Agenda The Ukiah City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday of each month at 6:00 p.m. The Council meetings are held at the Civic Center Council Chambers, located at 300 Seminary Avenue. Consolidated Resolution Nos. 76-45, 77-44, 87-36, 87-41, 87-45, 90-53, 97-57, and 00-46 setting forth procedural guidelines for the conduct of City Council meetings, are as follows: IZ. Special Meetings/Time and Place/Notices Special City Council meetings may be called at any time by the Mayor or by three (3) members of the Council by directing the City Clerk to deliver or mail a written notice to each Councilmember, to each local newspaper of general circulation, radio and television station requesting a notice in writing. Such notice shall be delivered personally or by mail at least twenty-four (24) hours before the time of such meeting, as set forth in the notice. The call and notice shall set forth the time and place of the special meeting, which may be at a time and place different from the regular meeting time or place, and the business to be transacted. A copy of the notice shall also be posted at or near the door to the City Hall Council Chambers. No other business shall be considered at such meetings. Such written notice may be dispensed with as to any Councilmember who, at or prior to the time the meeting convenes, files with the City Council a written waiver notice. Such waiver may be given by telegram. The written notice may also be dispensed with as to any Councilmember who is actually present at the meeting at the time it convenes. III. Open to the Public/Exception All regular and special meetings of the Council shall be public; provided, however, the Council may hold closed sessions during a regular or special meeting, from which the public may be excluded in accordance with applicable provisions of state law, including the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code Sections 54950 et seq.). IV. Closed Sessions/Disclosure of Information No member of the Council, employee of the City, or any other person present during a closed session of the Council, shall disclose to any person the content or substance of any discussion that took place during such closed session unless the Council shall, by majority vote, authorize the disclosure of such information. - 3. - SECTION 2. AGENDA T. Preparation and Posting of Agendas Except for documents or information prepared by City staff that is not available by 12:00 noon on Wednesday, but in the City Manager's judgment should be included with the agenda prior to its delivery to members of the City Council, all reports, communications, ordinances, resolutions, contract documents, or other matters to be submitted to the Council at a regular meeting, shall be delivered to the City Clerk no later than 12:00 noon on Wednesday, six (6) working days preceding the meeting. The City Clerk shall prepare the agenda of all such matters under the direction of the City Manager. The agenda and supporting documents shall be delivered to the members of the Council on the Friday preceding the Wednesday Council meeting to which the agenda pertains. The agenda itself shall be posted in a location freely accessible to the public at least 72 hours before each regular meeting or 24 hours before any special meeting of the City Council. The agenda must include a brief description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting, as well as the time and location of the meeting. The City Manager shall review the items to be placed on the agenda and place those items Which he or she believes to be of a routine non-controversial nature and are properly documented, on for adoption by a single motion. This item shall be the Consent Calendar, and it shall take the request of only one Councilmember to remove an item from the Consent Calendar. TT. Order of Business The business of the Council and the order of its agenda shall be in such form, as the Council may from time to time adopt by resolution. SECTION 3. COUNC:[L CORRESPONDENCE T. Availability to the Public Correspondence addressed to the Council and received by the City Clerk or any other officer or employee of the City, shall not become a public record until received and filed by the Council at a regular, special, or adjourned meeting of the Council. Correspondence shall not be read aloud at a Council meeting unless requested by a majority vote of the Council. TT. Authority of the City Manager The City Manager is hereby authorized to open and examine all mail or other written · communications addressed to the City and to give them immediate attention to the end, that all administrative business referred to in such communications, and 'not necessarily -2- requiring Council action, may by acted upon between Council meetings; provided, however, mail addressed to individual Councilmembers shall not be opened without the consent of the Councilmember. SECTZON 4. PRESTD'rNG OFFTCER The mayor shall be the presiding officer at all meetings of the Council. In the absence of the Mayor, the Vice Mayor shall preside. In the absence of both the Mayor and Vice Mayor, the City Clerk shall call the Council to order, whereupon a temporary presiding officer shall be elected by the Councilmembers present to serve until the arrival of the Mayor or Vice Mayor or until adjournment. Wherever in this article the term Mayor is used, it shall apply equally to the presiding officer as set forth in this section. Powers and Duties A. Participation: The presiding officer may move, second, debate, and vote from the Chair. BI Signing of Documents: The presiding officer shall sign all ordinances, resolutions, contracts, and other documents necessitating his signature which were adopted in his presence, unless he is unavailable, in which case the signature of an alternate presiding officer may be used. Gm Sworn Testimony: The presiding officer may require any person addressing the Council to be sworn as a witness and to testify under oath, and the presiding officer shall so require, if directed to do so, by a majority vote of the Council. Bi Discussion of and Action on Agenda Items: Under rules, as shall be determined from time to time by the Mayor, the public shall be offered an opportunity to address at the meeting, any item included on the agenda. The City Council shall not take action on any item not appearing on the posted agenda unless: 1) a Council majority determines that an "emergency situation", as defined herein, exists; 2) the Council determines by a two-thirds (2/3) vote or by a unanimous vote if less than two-thirds (2/3) of the City Council are present, that a need to take immediate action on the item arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda; or 3) the item was included in a properly posted agenda for a prior meeting occurring not more than five (5) days prior to the meeting at which the action is taken and was continued to the meeting at which the action is taken. As used in this section "emergency" means an event that will cause a work stoppage, severely impairing public health or safety, or a crippling disaster severely impairing public health or safety. -3- SECTZON 5. RULES OF ORDER In the event of questions as to procedure not set forth in this article for Council meetings, the Chair shall be guided by the rules of general parliamentary procedure. Rules of Order/Failure to Observe Rules adopted to expedite the transaction of the business of the Council in an orderly fashion shall be deemed to be procedural only, and the failure to strictly observe such rules shall not affect the jurisdiction of the Council or invalidate any action taken at a meeting, which is otherwise held in conformity with law. IZ. Rules of Decorum A1 Councilmembers: While the Council is in session, the members shall preserve order and decorum, and a member shall neither, by conversation or otherwise, delay or interrupt the proceedings or the peace of the Council,. nor disturb any member while speaking, nor refuse to obey the orders of the presiding officer. Members of the Council shall not leave their seats during a meeting without first obtaining the permission of the presiding officer. Use Formal Titles · The Council should refer to one another formally during public meetings as Mayor, Vice Mayor or Councilmember followed by the individual's last name. Practice civility and decorum in discussions and debate · Difficult questions, tough challenges to a particular point of view, and criticism of ideas and information are legitimate elements of a free democracy in action. This does not allow, however, Councilmembers to make belligerent, personal, impertinent, slanderous, threatening, abusive, or disparaging comments. No shouting or physical actions that could be construed as threatening will be toleral~ed. Honor the role of the Chair in maintaining order · It is the responsibility of the Chair to keep the comments of Councilmembers on track during public meetings. Councilmembers should honor efforts by the Chair to focus discussion on current agenda items. If there is disagreement about the agenda or the Chair's actions, those objections should be voiced politely and with reason, following procedures outlined in parliamentary procedure. Avoid personal comments that could offend other Councilmembers If a Councilmember is personally offended by the remarks of another Councilmember, the offended Councilmember should make notes of the actual words used and call for a "point of personal privilege" that challenges the other Councilmember to justify or apologize for the -4- language used. The Chair will maintain control of this discussion. Demonstrate effective problem-solving approaches · Councilmembers have a public stage to show how 'individuals with disparate points of view can find common ground and seek a compromise that benefits the community as a whole. Bm Employees: Members of the City staff and employees shall observe the same rules of order and decorum as are applicable to the Council. However, members of the City staff and employees may leave their seats during a meeting without first obtaining the permission of the presiding officer. Gl Persons Addressing the Council: Any person making impertinent, slanderous, or profane remarks, or who become boisterous while addressing the Council, shall be called to order by the presiding officer, and if such conduct continues, may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be ordered barred from further attendance before the Council during that meeting. D. Members of the Audience: Any person in the audience who engages in disorderly conduct, such as clapping of the hands, stamping of the feet, whistling, using profane language, yelling, or similar demonstrations, which disturbs the peace and good order of the meeting, or who refuses to comply with the lawful orders of the presiding officer, is guilty of a misdemeanor under the provisions of State law, and, upon instructions from the presiding officer, it shall be the duty of the sergeant at arms to remove such person from the Council Chamber and to place him under arrest. El Dangerous Instruments: No person may enter the chambers of a legislative body, as defined in Section 5~,852 of the Government Code of the State, or any place where such legislative body is in session, with any firearm, weapon, or explosive device of any nature. The provisions of this section shall not apply to authorized peace officers or to those persons authorized by the Penal Code of the State to carry such weapons. Fa Rules of Decorum/Enforcement: The Chief of Police, or such members of the Police Department as the Chief of Police may designate, shall .be sergeants at arms of the Council and shall carry out all orders given by the presiding officer for the purpose of maintaining order and decorum at Council meetings. Any Councilmember may move to require the presiding officer to enforce the rules, and the affirmative vote of a majority of the Council shall require him to do so. -5- III. Rules of Debate Al Getting the Floor: Every Councilmember desiring to speak at a Council meeting shall first address the Chair, gain recognition by the presiding officer, and confine himself to the question under debate, avoiding personalities and indecorous language. B. Questioning the Staff: Every Councilmember desiring to qUestion the City Staff shall, after recognition by the presiding officer, address his questions to City staff. C. Interruptions: A Councilmember, once recognized, shall not be interrupted when speaking unless called to order by the presiding officer, a point of order or personal privilege is raised by another Councilmember, or unless the speaker chooses to yield to a question by another Councilmember. If a Councilmember is called to order while speaking, he shall cease speaking until the question of order is determined to be in order, then he may proceed. Members of the City Staff, after recognition by the presiding officer, shall hold the floor until the completion of their remarks or until recognition is withdrawn by the presiding officer. D. Points of Order: The presiding officer shall determine all points of order, subject to the right of any Councilmember to appeal to the Council. If an appeal is taken, the question shall be, "Sha// the dec/s/on of the pres~al~rig officer be susta/ned"? A majority vote shall conclusively determine such question of order. El Points of. Personal Privilege: The right of a Councilmember to address the Council on a question of personal privilege shall be limited to cases in which his integrity, character, or motives are questioned or where the welfare of the Council is concerned. A Councilmember raising a point of personal privilege may interrupt another Councilmember who has the floor only if the presiding officer recognizes the privilege. F. Privilege of Closing Debate: The Councilmember moving the adoption of an ordinance, resolution, or motion shall have the privilege of closing debate. Gm Limitation of Debate: No Councilmember shall be permitted to speak more than once on any particular subject until every other Councilmember desiring to do so shall have spoken. SECTION 6. MOTIONS A motion by any member of the Council, including the presiding officer, may not be considered by the Council without receiving a second. -6- Z. After Motions Are Made and Hearings Are Closed After a motion has been made or a public hearing has been closed, no member of the public shall address the Council from the audience on the matter under consideration without first securing permission to do so by a majority vote of the Council. SECTION 7, VOTI'NG PROCEDURE T. Seating Arrangement for Council The Mayor shall sit in the center chair of the Council; the next senior Councilmember (and if there is more than one of the same seniority, then by highest vote count at that election) shall sit alternately on the left and right of the Mayor. Question to be Stated Upon moving the question, the presiding officer shall call for the vote which shall be taken first from the least senior member then moving by seniority rank to the most senior member, with Mayor voting last. III, Registration of Votes Any vote of the Council, including a roll call vote, may be registered by the members by answering "aye"for an affirmative vote or '~o"for a negative vote upon the name of the Councilmember. IV. Voting Procedure/Disqualification Any Councilmember who is disqualified from voting on a particular matter by reason of a conflict of interest, shall publicly state, or have the presiding officer state, the nature of such disqualification in open meeting. A Councilmember stating such disqualification shall not be counted as a part of a quorum, and shall be considered absent for the Purpose of determining the outcome of any vote on such 'matter. V. Failure to Vote Councilmembers present at a City Council meeting shall vote unless disqualified by reason of a conflict of interest or where the Councilmember in good faith believes that he or she should not vote on a measure for good cause, such as, but not limited to, not having attended a prior meeting essential to an informed vote on the measure. A failure to vote or an abstention shall not be counted. A measure shall pass only if it receives "aye"votes from a majority of the Councilmembers present at the meeting, provided a quorum is established. Councilmembers abstaining shall be counted in determining whether a quorum is present. -7- VI. Tie Votes Tie votes shall be lost motions and may be reconsidered. VII. Changing Votes/Abstention A Councilmember may change his vote. only if he makes a timely request to do so immediately following the announcement of the vote by the City Clerk and prior to the time the next item in the order of business is taken up. A Councilmember who publicly announces he is abstaining from voting on a particular matter shall not subsequently be allowed to withdraw his abstention. SECTION 8. RECONSIDERATION OF ACTIONS A motion to reconsider any action taken by the. Council may be made only on the day such action was taken. It may be made either immediately during the same session or at recessed or adjourned session thereof. Such motion may be made only by one of the Councilmembers who voted with the prevailing side. The provision of this section shall not be construed to prevent any Councilmember from making or remaking the same or any other motion at a subsequent meeting on the Council. SECTION 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS I. Public Hearing Defined A public hearing is any hearing that is publicly noticed by publication in a newspaper of general circulation, posting on affected property, or mailing to affected parties. Generally, public hearings can be classified as quasi-judicial or quasi-legislative. The following is a general summary description of quasi-judicial and legislative hearings. The discussion is not intended to change the general California law governing this subject. Generally, a quasi-judicial decision is any decision affecting one, or a limited number of individual applicants, in which the City Council is legally required to make its decision based on the evidence presented during the hearing. Examples of such hearings include appeals from land use decisions by the Planning Commission, such as those concerning use permits, variances, and site development permits. Generally, a quasi-legislative decision generally is a decision to make or amend rules affecting a whole class or large number of persons. The City Council is required to seriously consider evidence presented during quasi-legislative hearings, but it is not legally required to base its decision exclusively on the evidence presented. Examples of quasi-legislative decisions include the adoption or amendment of zoning ordinances, general plan amendments, and other ordinances. -8- I?. Submission of Documents In order to give adequate consideration to written documents, the following rules shall apply: Al Time and Submission: Any written document, whether containing factual information or legal or policy arguments exceeding 250 words, must be submitted to the City Clerk six (6) calendar days prior to the scheduled hearing date. Photographs or other graphi~ depictions may be filed at the hearing. If the submission deadline falls on a legal holiday or weekend, the document must be submitted the last working day prior to the submission deadline. . The City Council shall exclude from the record and not consider any document submitted after the submission deadline, unless uPon a motion by a Councilmember, a majority of the Councilmembers present at the hearing vote to consider the document. A decision to consider a document not timely filed shall be considered automatic grounds to continue the hearing, although a continuance shall require a specific motion adopted by a majority of the Councilmembers present at the meeting. Bm Nanner of Submission: All documents must be presented to the City Clerk for consideration at the hearing. No documents presented to the individual Councilmembers prior to the hearing shall be considered as part of the hearing record. 1. To be considered, an original and seven (7) copies must be filed with the City Clerk. 1 Upon receipt, the City Clerk shall date stamp as received the original and all copies. Upon request, the City Clerk will furnish the proponent of the document with a date stamped copy. The City Clerk shall immediately distribute copies of the submitted documents to the individual Councilmembers, the City Manager, and the City Attorney. The City Clerk shall retain the original and include it in the hearing record, which' the City Clerk shall compile and maintain. TTT. Notice of Hearing Any notice of a public hearing shall include a statement that anyone'wishing the City Council to consider a document exceeding 250 words must submit the original document and seven (7) legible copies to the City Clerk not less than six (6) calendar days prior to the scheduled meeting date. -9- IV. Viewing the Site ]:n Quasi-Judicial hearings involving specific property, it shall be the duty of all Councilmembers to view the site prior to the hearing. At the beginning of the hearing the Mayor shall poll the Councilmembers to establish, on the record, whether they have viewed the site. If any Councilmember indicates that he or she has not viewed the site, the hearing shall be continued to the next regular meeting date. Tn viewing the site, no Councilmember shall have any discussion with project proponents or opponents. Tn quasi-legislative public hearings involving specific property, any'Councilmember may, but are not required to, view the site. In such hearings, Councilmembers may, but are not required to, reveal on the record whether they have viewed the site. V. lVlaking a Decision In quasi-judicial hearings, the City Council shall base its decision exclusively on the record, including documents submitted in accordance with this rule and testimony and oral argument presented during the hearing. Any motion deciding the matter shall include sufficient findings of fact to inform the parties of the basis on which the City Council made its decisions, and to determine whether the decision is based on lawful principles. Where possible, the staff report to the City Council shall include proposed findings for the City Council consideration. In quasi-legislative hearings, the City Council shall seriously consider all documents submitted in compliance with this rule and testimony and oral argument presented during the hearing. The motion deciding the matter need not include specific findings of fact. The decision shall comply with any specific legal requirements applicable to the particular matter. VI. Conduct of Public Hearing As presiding officer, the Mayor shall conduct the hearing to promote an orderly presentation of the evidence by all parties. Subject to the following guidelines, the Mayor shall use his or her discretion in presiding over the hearing. A1 Order of Proof: Generally, all those supporting an application or measure shall present their evidence and argument first. Those opposing the application or measure shall present their evidence and argument second. Those supporting the measure shall be allowed some additional time for rebuttal. If, during the rebuttal, project proponents present new argument(s) or evidence, project opponents shall be allowed some additional time to rebut that new matter. -10- B. Time Limitations: The Mayor may impose time limitations on all those wishing to present evidence or argument. The Mayor may prevent the presentation of irrelevant, repetitive, or cumulative testimony or argument. C. Manner: Each person desiring to address the Council shall .step up to the microphone reserved for that purpose, state his name and address for the record, state the subject he wishes to discuss, state whom he is representing, if he represents an organization or other persons, and unless further time is granted by a majority vote of the Council, shall limit his remarks to five (5) minutes. All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a whole and not.to any member thereof. No question shall be directed to a Councilmember or a member of the City staff without the permission of the presiding officer. D.Spokesmen for Groups of Persons: In order to expedite matters and to avoid repetitious presentations, whenever any group of persons wishes to address the Council on the same subject matter, it shall be proper for the presiding officer to request that a spokesman be chosen by the group to address the Council, and in the event additional matters are to be presented by any other member of such group, to limit the number of such persons addressing the Council. SECTION 10. ORDINANCES/RESOLUTIONS/CONTRACTS Official actions of the Council shall be in the form of motions, resolutions, 'and ordinances. Z. Hotions Motions shall be used to express decisions of the Council on routine questions or matters of temporary importance, or to give instructions to the staff and shall be moved, seconded, and adopted by a voice vote, unless a roll call is requested by a Councilmember. Resolutions Resolutions shall be used to express decisions of the Council of a permanent or lasting nature and shall be introduced, seconded, and adopted by a roll call vote. Resolutions may be used to transfer appropriate funds within the budget or to appropriate funds. III. Ordinances Ordinances shall be used to adopt formal policy, in the exercise of the police power, and in other instances required by law. The manner of introduction and adoption shall be as provided, as stated in the Resolution section above. -11 - Am Reading of Ordinances: At the time of the second reading of an ordinance, it shall be read in full, unless after the reading of the title thereof, the further reading thereof is waived by the unanimous consent of all the Councilmembers present. The waiver of the reading of such ordinance shall be accomplished by regular motion adopted by a unanimous vote of the Councilmembers present. SECTZON 11. MI'NUTES/PREPARATZON AND CHANGES The City Clerk shall have the exclusive responsibility for the preparation of the minutes of Council meetings, and any directions for changes in the minutes shall be made only by a majority action of the Council. 'r. Minutes/Reading Unless the reading of the minutes of a Council meeting is ordered by a majority vote of the Council, such minutes may be approved without reading, if the City Clerk has previously furnished each Councilmember with a copy. 1"[. Minutes/Entry of Statements A Councilmember may request through the presiding officer of a Council meeting, the privilege of having an abstract of the statement of such Councilmember on any subject under consideration by the Council entered in the minutes. If the Council consents thereto, such statement shall be inserted in the minutes. Zll. Entry of Protests Any Councilmember shall have the right to have the reasons for his dissent from, or his protest against, any action of the Council entered in the minutes, and shall be made in the following manner: "~r would like the rn/nutes to show that ~r am opposed to th/s act/on for the fo#owing reasons..." SECTZON 12. SPECZAL COMMZTTEE$ All special Council committees shall be appointed by the presiding officer with a majority consent of the Council. Such committees shall be temporary in tenure and shall automatically be discharged upon the completion of their charge, or upon an order of the presiding officer or majority of the Council. -12- Mydocumentslwpdocs/procedures.body 7 12 05 -13- CITY COUNCIl DE¢ORUI I SECTZON 1. OVERVI'EW OF ROLES AND RESPONSI'BZLTrl'ES I. Mayor · Chairs City Council meetings · Maintains order, decorum, and the fair and equitable treatment of all speakers · Keeps discussion and questions focused on specific agenda item under Consideration · Selects substitute'for City representation when Mayor cannot attend · Determines appropriateness of proclamations, Special Orders of the Day, etc. · Leads the Council as an effective, cohesive working team · Recognized as spokesperson for the City · Acts as the official head of the City for ceremonial purposes · Signs documents on behalf of the City II. Vice Mayor · Performs the duties of the Mayor if the Mayor is absent or disabled · Chairs Council meetings at the request of the Mayor. · Represents the City at ceremonial functions at the request of the Mayor III. All Councilmembers All members of the City Council, including those serving as Mayor and 'Vice Mayor, have equal votes. No Councilmember has more power than any other Councilmember, and all should be treated with equal respect. SECTZON 2. COUNCZL CONDUCT WZTH C?TY STAFF Governance of a city relies on the cooperative efforts of elected officials, who set policy, and City staff, who implement and administer Council's policies. Therefore, every effort should be made to be cooperative and show mutual respect for the contributions made by each individual for the good of the community. I. Treat all staff as professionals Clear, honest communication that respects the abilities, experience, and dignity of each individual is expected. Poor behavior toward staff is not acceptable. II. Limit contact to specific City staff Questions of city staff and/or requests for information should be directed to the City Manager. If a request will require substantial time commitment of staff, the City Manager will first request Council's approval. 3.3 Requests for follow-up or directions to staff should be made only through the city Manager. When in doubt about what staff contact is appropriate, Councilmembers should ask the City Manager for direction. Materials supplied to a Councilmember in response to a request may be sent to all members of the Council so that all have equal access to information. III. Do not disrupt City staff from their jobs Councilmembers should not disrupt City staff while they are in meetings, on the phone, or involved in performing their job functions. An appointment can be made, if the staff cannot meet immediately. IV. Never publicly criticize an individual employee Council should refrain from publicly criticizing the performance of a City employee. Additionally, Councilmembers should avoid criticizing or challenging the employee directly. Comments about staff performance are to be made to the employee's Director or to the City. Manager.. Vm Do not get involved in administrative functions Councilmembers must not attempt to influence City staff regarding awarding contracts, selecting consultants, processing development applications, or granting City licenses and permits. VI. Check with City staff regarding correspondence before taking action Before sending correspondence, Councilmembers should check with the City Manager to see if an official City response has already been sent or assure an individual response does not contradict a City response. VII. DO not attend unofficial meetings with staff unless requested by staff or pre- arranged Councilmember presence at such meetings may imply support, show partiality, intimidate staff, and hamper staff's ability to do their job objectively. VIII. Limit requests for staff support Routine secretarial support will be provided to all Councilmembers. The City Clerk will copy the City Manager on C°uncil mail that requires action, and the City Manager's response will be copied to the Council. Requests for additional staff support, even in high priority or emergency situations, should be made to the City Manager, who is responsible for allocating City resources in order to maintain a professional, well-run City government. SECTZON 3. COUNCZL CONDUCT WZTH OTHER PUBLZC AGENCZES I. Be clear about representing the City or personal interests 14 If a Councilmember appears before another governmental agency or organization to give a statement on an issue, the Councilmember must clearly state: 1) if his or her statement reflects personal opinion or is the official stance of the City; and 2) whether this is the majority or minority opinion of the Council. If the Councilmember is representing the City, the Councilmember must support' and advocate the official City position on an issue, not a personal viewpoint. If the Councilmember is representing another organization whose position is different from the City, the Councilmember should withdraw from voting on the issue if it significantly impacts or is detrimental to the City's interest. Council-members should be clear about which'organization they represent and inform the Mayor and Council of their involvement. II. Correspondence should be equally clear regarding representation City letterhead may be used when the Councilmember is representing the City and the City's official position. A copy of official correspondence should be given to the City Clerk to be filed in the Council Office as part of the permanent public record. It is best that the City letterhead not be used for correspondence of Councilmembers representing a personal request by a public member, a personal point of view, or a dissenting point of view from an official Council position. However, should Councilmembers use City letterhead to express a personal opinion, the official City position must be stated clearly so the reader understands the difference between the official City position and the minor viewpoint of the Councilmember. SECTION 4. COUNCIL CONDUCT WITH THE PUBLIC I. In unpfficipl settinas: Make no promises on behalf of the Council Councilmembers will frequently be asked to explain a Council action or to express the City's intentions as they meet and talk with constituents in the community. It is appropriate to give a brief overview of City policy and to refer to City staff for further information. It is inappropriate to overtly or implicitly promise City action, or to promise City staff will take specific action (fix a pothole, provide labor for a project, plant new flowers in the median, etc.). I1. In oublic meetinos: See Rules of Order, Section 5.II.D, of"City Council Meeting Procedures" Revised 3uly 2005 15 Attachment # Keep a civil tongue before SR council Panel considers adopting Commitment to Civility to help maintain decorum at meetings By MIKE McCOY, THE PRESS DEMOCRAT Santa Rosa Mayor Jane Bender said you might have some nasty thoughts about her, but if you say them to her face at a City Council meeting you could be violating the Commitment to Civility the council is considering adopting. "It's like apple pie and motherhood," Bender said of the code of verbal decorum put together by Councilman Bob Blanchard and the city's legal staff. The council is scheduled to review the written rules of politeness at a 2:30 p.m. study session Tuesday at City Hall. If the council decides to move forward, it would be adopted at a subsequent council meeting. "It's a code, not a law. It's just a reminder for the council now and into the future to have civility and respect for the process," said Bender, who said audience members, city staff and other boards and commissions will be asked to abide by it as well. "It's really about etiquette," said City Attorney Brien Farrell. Provisions of the civility code include refraining from personal attacks at public meetings, listening "with an open mind" to all points of view and letting people "have their say without comment, including booing, whistling or clapping." Blanchard said name-calling, disruptive behavior and swearing occur only occasionally and usually begin and end at the public's side of the speaker's podium. But he's heard stories of other councils in California where "members not only swear at each other, drunken-Navy-style, but one mayor, I was told, got up and slapped a council member." "We have a really good council. We don't squabble, we don't have fistfights, but there have been past councils that have been less than civil," he said. Without naming names, Blanchard said some past council members weren't above sporadic displays of antagonistic behavior, name-calling and attempted character assassinations, although it was almost always directed at their fellow council members. "It would be inappropriate for council members to call people (representing the public) wingnuts," he said. How, and if, civility can be enforced remains in question. The code provides for no penalties should someone step over the civility threshold. "We are a pretty tolerant lot," Blanchard said of the council. The code, if adopted, will largely rely on good will. If a speaker is out of compliance, Blanchard said it would require the council to take the most uncivil action it has at hand to bring the behavior to an end. "The mayor will have to bang her gavel," he said. © The Press Democrat. For copyright information view our User Agreement