LIVE City Council: Planning for the Future

Good afternoon, Davis, and welcome once again to the Davis Voice LIVE City Council Coverage! I am your host, Will Arnold.

Tonight’s meeting will begin at (no earlier than) 6:30pm following a closed session of the Council.

Prior to the meeting, feel free to check out tonight’s agenda and associated staff reports for each item:

Agenda Tuesday May 24, 2011

• 02 Proclamation-Preservation Month.pdf 
• 03B Long Range Calendar.pdf 
• 05A Yolo Adult Health Day Center Resolution of Support.pdf 
• 05B Huynh Winners 2011.pdf 
• 05C-1 HRC MIN 04-28-11.pdf 
• 05C-2 PC MIN 10-27-10.pdf 
• 05C-3 City-UCD SLC MIN 04-13-11.pdf 
• 06-CC & 03-RDA Pedestrian-Bike At Grade Crossing.pdf 
• 07 Prop 218 Notice of Utility Rates.pdf 
• 08-CC & 04-RDA Affordable Housing Workshop Follow-up & Plan.pdf 
• 09 Housing Needs and Housing Types.pdf 

6:37pm- The Council is just entering the chamber now. Closed session is over and the regular meeting should begin within minutes.

6:44pm- And we’re off! The meeting is called to order.

The Mayor expresses an interest in “being a little bit shorter” with regard to meeting length this evening. Councilwoman Greenwald, toward that end, proposes tabling items 8 and 9 (Affordable Housing and Housing Needs) to a future meeting. She moves the agenda without those items, approved unanimously. We have an agenda!

6:50pm- We move to item 2, a ceremonial presentation recognizing National Preservation Month. Read the proclamation here: 02 Proclamation-Preservation Month.pdf 

6:53pm- We move to Staff/Council brief communications. Mayor Pro Tem Swanson reports on her visit to the state legislative conference. Councilmember Greenwald commends the Davis Chamber of Commerce on the recent Celebrate Davis! event. Councilmember Wolk reports on his and the Mayor’s visit to the United Methodist Church in Davis in celebration of its 50th anniversary. Finally, the Mayor reports on the second-annual Loopalooza, which celebrates the Davis bike loop.

7:03pm- On to Public Comment. Roger O’Keefe wants to speak about the railroad crossing but is asked to wait until the item comes up on the agenda. He obliges.

The Mayor and the City Attorney discuss the nature of Public Comment during a “special meeting”. Comments are meant to be limited to items on the agenda in a special meeting. The Mayor expresses his belief that there is a potential for confusion when the agenda includes a public comment portion.

7:07pm- On to the Consent Calendar. The Mayor Pro Tem moves its approval, and it is approved unanimously.

7:08pm- On to item 6, the Proposed Pedestrian/Bike At-Grade Crossing at the Train Depot (06-CC & 03-RDA Pedestrian-Bike At Grade Crossing.pdf ). The Mayor Pro Tem excuses herself from this item because of a business interest she has within 500 feet of the proposed crossing.

Staff is asking Council to concur with the proposed locations and type of crossings, to direct staff to return on June 7 for a public hearing, and Redevelopment Agency Board approve the attached Budget Adjustment for $50,000 to provide sufficient funds to prepare the necessary documents for the CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) process.

Public comment is open on this item. Roger O’Keefe speaks first. He talks about the safety issues regarding such crossings. He says that such crossings are common and “99.9%” safe.

Mike Bartolic speaks next. He is here to get as much information as he can. “Clearly the residents deserve a safe crossing.” He also asks the council to consider a “non-at-grade” crossing (over- or under-pass).

Public comment is now closed.

We move to Council questions and comments. Councilmember Souza begins by echoing the question of the last public commenter, that the City look into a non-at-grade crossing.

Councilmember Wolk speaks next. He expresses that he shares the goal of having a safe crossing available for the residents of Olive Drive. But he is curious about the viability of this proposal in the face of staunch opposition of Union Pacific Railroad and the CPUC. Staff indicates that such projects have gone forward in other jurisdictions in the face of similar two-party opposition. He also asks about the potential cost for such a project. Staff indicates that, while hard numbers are difficult to estimate, the cost could be in the neighborhood of $1 million.

Councilmember Greenwald speaks next. She expresses a desire to explore the potential of Union Pacific paying some of the cost of the crossing because of the “unique situation” created by the fence. The Olive Drive residents, she says, are “trapped” as a result of the fence in a potential emergency situation. The City Attorney indicates that there is little precedent and regulation that would imply responsibility for UP to provide funding. Councilmember Greenwald concludes by indicating that she voted against the Lexington/Cesar Chavez project. Those projects, she says, include about half of the residents impacted by the fence and potential at-grade crossing, and that it should be a lesson regarding residential planning.

The Mayor speaks next. He has a comment regarding at-grade versus off-grade crossings. It is his understanding that people often avoid off-grade crossings (for various reasons) and that an at-grade crossing is ultimately safer. Combined with the high cost of an off-grade crossing (nearly six-times that of at-grade), he is “pleased” by the potential of an at-grade crossing project.

Councilmember Souza moves staff recommendations 1 and 2 (as the City Council) and recommendation 3 (as the Redevelopment Agency). Both pass unanimously (with the Mayor Pro Tem absent).

7:50pm- We are on a 5 minute break.

8:05pm- And we’re back! On to our final agenda item of the evening, Review and Approval of Proposition 218 Notice for Utility Rate Adjustments (07 Prop 218 Notice of Utility Rates.pdf). Staff is recommending that Council review and approve the City’s attached Proposition 218 Notice which includes proposed fiveyear utility rates for water and sanitary sewer, and one-year rates for sanitation to be effective on the December 2011 utility bill.

City Public Works Director Bob Clarke indicates that this item is a result of Council direction to consider multi-year rate increases, as opposed to an increase in a single year. In March, the Council reviewed a draft notice presenting one year utility rate changes. Direction was given to return to Council in May with multi-year utility rates.

We move to public comment on this issue. David Greenwald speak. He indicates his belief that the Prop 218 notice is “inadequate” in properly informing the public of the coming rate increase. He urges “full transparency” beyond that which is statutorily required. Specifically, he believes the Mayor should approach the Davis Enterprise regarding a front-page story to inform the public. “The more information and the less shock you give people, the more likely you are to get things passed.”

Public comment is closed.

The City Manager indicates his agreement that a notice, which may meet the legal requirement, may also be inadequate in properly informing the public. Staff also hilights outreach efforts that continue, including neighborhood meetings and Farmer’s Market tabling.

8:40pm- On to Council questions and comments. Councilmember Greenwald begins. She expresses her unhappiness with the document in its current form. She asks staff whether she is correct in inferring that the average single-family will be paying $2000/year in utilities. Staff confirms that number. The Councilmember also asks where money would come from for a low-income exemption from the rate increase. Staff indicates that such an exemption cannot be worked into the rate structure. The Councilmember replies that it is, therefore, disingenuous to mention such an exemption in the notice if the money is not secured to fund it. Finally, the Councilwoman has many concerns regarding the language of the proposed notice documents. Staff indicates that linguistic changes can be presented to staff and brought back to Council.

Councilmember Souza speaks next. He indicates that he is satisfied with the information he has been given by staff and that he will save his comments for a full hearing.

Councilmember Wolk speaks next. He expresses his concern for the impact of such rate increases on low-income families, and his disappointment in being presented with proposed rate increases without a firm plan for addressing low-income families. He also says he appreciates the comments of David Greenwald earlier, and the op-ed by Councilmember Souza and Mayor Krovoza, in helping inform the public. Staff indicates that a first step would be to identify what income levels would qualify for rate subsidies and what type of subsidy might be available. Councilmember Souza responds by indicating his belief that such a discussion is appropriate after the Council has approved a budget and knows how much money the City will have at its disposal.

Mayor Pro Tem Swanson speaks next. She concurs with Councilmember Wolk that an analysis be done to identify those who may qualify for rate subsidies, and that PG&E might have pertinent information regarding its own rate subsidies.

The Mayor speaks last. He points out that, on June 9, there will be a public outreach meeting. He also endorses the outreach discussed by staff, with special emphasis on the neighborhood meetings. He views such meetings as “the most important piece” of public outreach. He also echoes Councilmember Wolk’s point that low-income consumers be considered as the project goes forward. Finally, he indicates his desire that the City have a “water master-plan” that connects all aspect of water use.

9:25pm- The Mayor now entertains a motion. Councilmember Souza moves staff recommendation, seconded by Mayor Krovoza. The Council discusses the potential of including a plan for incorporating a low-income subsidy. Councilmember Souza amends his motion to include direction for staff to bring recommendations for a sibsity program at the June 7 meeting. The motion passes unanimously.

9:36pm- Council is adjourned. See you all next week!