Dec 1 City Council

Concurrent Meetings Of

SONOMA CITY COUNCIL
(regular)

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(special) Community Meeting Room, 177 First Street West

December 1, 2010 5:30 p.m. - Closed Session 6:00 p.m. - Regular Session **** AGENDA

City Council Steve Barbose, Mayor August Sebastiani, Mayor Pro Tem Ken Brown Laurie Gallian Joanne Sanders

Be Courteous - TURN OFF your cell phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. 5:30 P.M. – CLOSED SESSION AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER The Mayor will open the meeting and take public testimony on closed session items only. The Council will then recess into closed session. CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION. Argonaut Investments, Inc. a Delaware Corporation and Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC, A California Limited Liability Company v City of Sonoma, a municipal corporation; Does 1 through 10, inclusive. Pursuant to Government Code 54956.9(a).

2. A:

6:00 P.M. – REGULAR SESSION AGENDA RECONVENE, CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL (Brown, Sanders, Sebastiani, Gallian, Barbose) REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION 1. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

At this time, members of the public may comment on any item not appearing on the agenda. It is recommended that you keep your comments to three minutes or less. Under State Law, matters presented under this item cannot be discussed or acted upon by the City Council at this time. For items appearing on the agenda, the public will be invited to make comments at the time the item comes up for Council consideration. At all times please use the microphone.

2. 3. 4.

COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS CITY MANAGER COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS PRESENTATIONS Proclamation Recognizing Francine Maffei World AIDS Awareness Day Proclamation Dean Biersch / Hop Monk Day Proclamation

Item 4A: Item 4B: Item 4C:

Page 1 of 4

5.

CONSENT CALENDAR/AGENDA ORDER

All items listed on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be acted upon by a single motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the Council, staff, or public request specific items to be removed for separate action. At this time Council may decide to change the order of the agenda.

Item 5A: Item 5B:

Waive Further reading and Authorize Introduction and/or Adoption of Ordinances by Title Only. (Standard procedural action - no backup information provided) Approval of the Minutes of the November 3 and November 8, 2010 City Council Meetings. Staff Recommendation: Approve the minutes. Consideration and Approval of Amendments to the Sonoma Conflict of Interest Code. Staff Recommendation: Approve the resolution amending the City’s Conflict of Interest Code. Approval and ratification of the reappointment of Charles Bouey to the Marin/Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District Board of Directors for a four-year term ending December 31, 2014. Staff Recommendation: Nomination by the Mayor, ratification by the City Council. Approval of Capital Improvement Project for cross-street signage in the amount of $9,000; and approval of Resolution of the Agency Board amending the FY 2010-2011 budget. Staff Recommendation: Approve a Capital Improvement Project for cross-street signage in the amount of $9,000 and approve resolution of the Agency Board of the Community Development Agency amending the FY 2010-2011 budget. Approval of Community Development Agency (CDA) redevelopment loan in the amount of $25,000 to Benz, Ebbesen, Anderson, LLC for improvements to the commercial property at 967 Broadway. Staff Recommendation: CDA Board approve the loan and authorize staff to execute loan agreement. Approval of a resolution declaring the results of the November 2, 2010 General Municipal Election. Staff Recommendation: Adopt the resolution. Approve the Notice of Completion for First Street West Inlet Improvements Project No. 0816 by Greener Excavators and Construction and Direct the City Clerk to File the Document. Staff Recommendation: Approve the Notice of Completion for the First Street West Inlet Improvements Project No. 0816 by Greener Excavators and Construction and Direct the City Clerk to File the Document. Adoption of a resolution establishing a process to track water demand and verify capacity to serve new development. Staff Recommendation: Adopt the resolution establishing a process to track water demand and verify capacity to serve new development.

Item 5C:

Item 5D:

Item 5E:

Item 5F:

Item 5G:

Item 5H:

Item 5I:

Page 2 of 4

5.

CONSENT CALENDAR/AGENDA ORDER, Continued Authorization to approve the purchase of wetland credits to mitigate the removal of wetlands in conjunction with the sale of properties owned by the Sonoma Community Development Agency (CDA) located at 19347 Fifth Street West and 726 West Spain Street. Staff Recommendation: Authorize the Community Development Agency Executive Director to execute the purchase of two wetlands credits from the Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank.

Item 5J:

6.

COUNCILMEMBER RECOGNITIONS Mayor Pro Tem Sebastiani will present the honorary Mayor’s gavel to Mayor Barbose Mayor Barbose will present a plaque and recognize outgoing Council member Aug Sebastiani Councilmember comments Comments by Aug Sebastiani

Item 6A: Item 6B: Item 6C: Item 6D: 7.

OATHS OF OFFICE City Clerk Johann will administer the Oath of Office and present a Certificate of Election to Steve Barbose, Ken Brown and Tom Rouse. Newly sworn in Council members are seated at the dais. Councilmember comments.

Item 7A: Item 7B: Item 7C: 8.

SELECTION OF MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEMPORE Mayor Barbose to open nominations for Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore. New Mayor to assume chair of the meeting and dais seating arrangement.

Item 8A: Item 8B: 9.

RECESS: The meeting will recess for a brief reception. Cake will be served.

10.

PUBLIC HEARINGS Review and Consideration of a Refuse Rate Adjustment and Certain Program Modifications for 2010-2011 with City Franchisee Sonoma Garbage Company, Inc. (Assistant City Manager) Staff Recommendation: Approval of all program components and rate increase proposed by Sonoma Garbage as follows: 1) Rate increase of 5.03% effective December 1, 2010; 2) Application of Extenuating Circumstances for Vehicle Replacement; 3) Allow hauler to perform a pilot project to study Commercial Food Waste Composting Service

Item 10A:

Page 3 of 4

11. REGULAR CALENDAR (Matters requiring discussion and/or action by the Council) Item 11A: Discussion, consideration and possible action approving a Water Service Consolidation Agreement with Rancho Sonoma Partners LLC, a Cost Recovery Agreement with Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC, and a Resolution adopting a finding of Categorical Exemption and Authorizing a Grant Application for Water System Improvements at the Rancho de Sonoma Mobile Home Park, all related to the City of Sonoma’s application for a State Revolving Fund Grant to connect Rancho de Sonoma Mobile Home Park to the City of Sonoma Public Water System. (City Manager/City Attorney/City Engineer) Staff Recommendation: Approve Water Service Consolidation Agreement with Rancho Sonoma Partners LLC; approve Cost Recovery Agreement with Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC; and adopt Resolution adopting a finding of Categorical Exemption and Authorizing a Grant Application for Water System Improvements.

12. 13.

COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS AND FINAL REMARKS Reports Regarding Committee Activities. Final Councilmembers’ Remarks.

Item 13A: Item 13B: 14.

ADJOURNMENT

I do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on the City Hall bulletin board on November 23, 2010. GAY JOHANN, CITY CLERK Copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to any item of business referred to on the agenda are available for public inspection the Monday before each regularly scheduled meeting at City Hall, located at No. 1 The Plaza, Sonoma CA. Any documents subject to disclosure that are provided to all, or a majority of all, of the members of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda after the agenda has been distributed will be made available for inspection at the City Clerk’s office, No. 1 The Plaza, Sonoma CA during regular business hours. If you challenge the action of the City Council in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described on the agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, at or prior to the public hearing. In accordance with the Americans With Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk (707) 933-2216. Notification 48-hours before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

Page 4 of 4

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF
SO
N O MA
CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

City of Sonoma City Council Agenda Item Summary

City Council Agenda Item: 4A Meeting Date: 12/01/2010

IFORN

IA

Department Administration Agenda Item Title Proclamation Recognizing Francine Maffei. Summary

Staff Contact Gay Johann, City Clerk

Mayor Pro Tem Sebastiani requested recognition of Francine Maffei for her many years of dedicated service to the students of St. Francis Solano Catholic Church. Recommended Council Action Mayor Pro Tem Sebastiani to present the Proclamation. Alternative Actions n/a. Financial Impact n/a Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: 1. Proclamation Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF
SO
N O MA
CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

City of Sonoma City Council Agenda Item Summary

City Council Agenda Item: 4B Meeting Date: 12/01/2010

IFORN

IA

Department Administration Agenda Item Title World AIDS Awareness Day Proclamation. Summary

Staff Contact Gay Johann, City Clerk

Sheana Davis requested a proclamation declaring December 1, 2010 as World AIDS Awareness Day. Representatives from Face to Face and the Sonoma County AIDS Network will be present to receive the proclamation and discuss their ongoing education and prevention activities. Recommended Council Action Mayor Barbose to present the proclamation. Alternative Actions n/a. Financial Impact n/a Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: 1. Proclamation Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF
SO
N O MA
CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

City of Sonoma City Council Agenda Item Summary

City Council Agenda Item: 4C Meeting Date: 12/01/2010

IFORN

IA

Department Administration Agenda Item Title Dean Biersch / HopMonk Day Proclamation Summary

Staff Contact Gay Johann, City Clerk

Councilmember Brown requested recognition of the opening of the new HopMonk Tavern located on Broadway. Recommended Council Action Mayor Barbose to present the Proclamation. Alternative Actions n/a. Financial Impact n/a Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: 1. Proclamation Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF

CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

City of Sonoma City Council/CDA Agenda Item Summary

City Council Agenda Item: 5B Meeting Date: 12/01/2010

IFORN

IA

Department Administration Agenda Item Title

Approval of the Minutes of the November 3 and November 8, 2010 City Council Meetings. Summary The minutes have been prepared for Council review and approval. Recommended Council Action Approve the minutes. Alternative Actions Correct or amend the minutes prior to approval. Financial Impact N/A Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: Minutes Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

SO

N O MA

Staff Contact Gay Johann, City Clerk

DRAFT MINUTES
Concurrent Meetings Of

SONOMA CITY COUNCIL
(regular)

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
(special) Community Meeting Room, 177 First Street West

November 3, 2010 5:00 p.m. - Closed Session 6:00 p.m. - Regular Session **** MINUTES
CLOSED SESSION AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER

City Council Steve Barbose, Mayor August Sebastiani, Mayor Pro Tem Ken Brown Laurie Gallian Joanne Sanders

Mayor Barbose called the meeting to order. No one from the public was present to provide public testimony on closed session items. The Council recessed into closed session with all members present. City Manager Kelly and Assistant City Manager Giovanatto were also present for Closed Session Item 2A. Negotiator Jack Hughes was present via telephone. City Manager Kelly, Planning Director Goodison and Assistant City Attorney Nebb were present for Closed Session Item 2B. Tim Mulrenan, Tierra West Consulting, was present via telephone. 2. CLOSED SESSION A: CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS, pursuant to Government Code §54957.6. Agency designated representatives: Jack Hughes, City Manager Kelly, and Assistant City Manager Giovanatto. Employee Organizations: Sonoma Professional Firefighters Association and City of Sonoma Employees’ Association (SEIU 1020). CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS. Property: 19340 Sonoma Highway; APN 127-202-006. Agency Negotiators: Linda Kelly, Executive Director, David Goodison, Planning Director and Tim Mulrenan, Tierra West Consulting. Negotiating Parties: Affordable Housing Associates. Under Negotiation: Price and terms of payment. Pursuant to Government Code §54956.8.

B:

REGULAR SESSION AGENDA The City Council reconvened in open session and Mayor Barbose called the meeting to order at 6:20 p.m. Planning Commissioner Bob Felder led the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT: ABSENT: Mayor Barbose and Councilmembers Brown, Gallian, Sanders, and Sebastiani. None.

ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Kelly, Assistant City Manager Giovanatto, Assistant City Attorney Nebb, City Clerk Rainsbarger, Development Services Director Wirick, Planning Director Goodison.

November 3, 2010, Page 1 of 9

DRAFT MINUTES

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION Mayor Barbose stated that the City Council had met in closed session to discuss the topics listed on the agenda and that no reportable action had been taken. 1. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

Tom Rouse, Councilmember Elect, thanked Councilmembers, City staff, and the public for supporting him in his bid for City Council. He stated that he would do the best job possible while in office. Candidate David Cook congratulated Barbose, Brown and Rouse for their success in the election. He said being a candidate for City Council had been a fun experience and announced he would run again in 2012. Candidate Mike Gillaspie stated that running for City Council had been a great experience. He said he met many great people and made a lot of friends. Nancy King, Pets Lifeline, announced they were looking for a location to hold their annual “Shelter on the Square” and asked that if anyone had a suggestion to please let her know. 2. COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

Clm. Sanders congratulated all the candidates and announced that the Laughing Queen retail store would be closing its doors on October 31. Clm. Brown stated that all candidates conducted themselves in an excellent manner during the campaign period. He reported that the father of long-time City Councilmember Larry Barnett had passed away and asked that the meeting be adjourned in honor of Norman Barnett. Mayor Barbose congratulated Tom Rouse and the other candidates for a race well run and reminded everyone that Readers Book Store was still offering a discount to anyone presenting a “I Have Voted” sticker or their ballot stub. 3. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

City Manager Kelly reported that she had received inquiries regarding recent activity at the old Ford Dealership and that it was her understanding that the space was being utilized as a temporary automobile display area. She announced the City Council would hold a special meeting on November 8 to conduct a water study session. Kelly also announced that PG&E would conduct open houses at the Community Center November 8 and at City Hall on November 9 and 10 to discuss the new Smartmeters with the public. 4. PRESENTATIONS Recognition of Career Milestones – Carol Giovanatto, Assistant City Manager and Gay Johann, City Clerk/Assistant to the City Manager

Item 4A:

November 3, 2010, Page 2 of 9

DRAFT MINUTES
City Manager Kelly reported that Carol Giovanatto, Assistant City Manager, recently received a 35-year career professional recognition award from the International City-County Management Association (ICMA). She stated that ICMA Service Awards recognize and celebrate ICMA members' dedication to public service and professional management at the local level and were presented every fall at the ICMA Annual Conference. Mayor Barbose presented the certificate to Ms. Giovanatto who thanked the City Manager and the City Council for the recognition and stated she would dedicate it to her father, Mr. Donald H. Ruppert, who had been her mentor. City Manager Kelly reported that Gay Johann, City Clerk/Assistant to the City Manager, recently achieved the International Institute of Municipal Clerks’ Master Municipal Clerk (MMC) designation. She said that MMC was the highest designation available to City Clerks and represented an advanced continuing education program that prepares participants to perform complex municipal duties. Kelly added that the program had an extensive and rigorous educational component and a professional and social contribution component. Mayor Barbose presented a plaque to City Clerk Johann. Item 4B: Veterans Day 2010 Proclamation

Mayor Barbose reported that former Mayor Jeanne Markson had contacted him with a suggestion that the City make special recognition of those returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said a proclamation was traditionally read and presented at the Veterans Day ceremony but he felt it was appropriate to also read the proclamation at a televised City Council meeting. Mayor Barbose announced that some local veterans were in the audience and he called them forward. Wesley Adams, John Mascarelli, John Smith, and Richard Schroeder; all serving in the U.S. Army, came forward. Mayor Barbose read aloud the Veterans Day proclamation with special emphasis on welcoming home those who are returning from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Gary Magnani, American Legion, accepted the proclamation and thanked the Mayor and the City Council for honoring all veterans. 5. CONSENT CALENDAR/AGENDA ORDER Waive Further reading and Authorize Introduction and/or Adoption of Ordinances by Title Only. Approval of the Minutes of the following City Council Meetings: 1) September 1, 2010; 2) October 20, 2010 (Regular Meeting); and 3) October 20, 2010 (Special Meeting). (Removed from consent, see below) Approval and Ratification of the Reappointment of Jeff Baptista and Yvonne Bowers to the Sonoma Valley Citizens Advisory Commission for Terms Continuing to November 19, 2012. Resolution Establishing an Appropriations Limit for FY 2010-11 Pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution as Amended by Proposition 111. Authorize the City of Sonoma to serve as lead agency and authorize the City Manager to execute purchase orders with AT&T to furnish and install new phone systems at Sonoma City Hall, the Carnegie Building, the Corporation Yard and Fire Stations #1, #2 and #3. (Removed from consent, see below) Adoption of an ordinance amending the Development Code with respect to Residential Care Homes.

Item 5A: Item 5B: Item 5C: Item 5D: Item 5E:

Item 5F:

November 3, 2010, Page 3 of 9

DRAFT MINUTES
Herb Golenpaul removed Item 5E from the Consent Calendar. Clm. Sanders removed item 5B. It was moved by Clm. Sanders, seconded by Clm. Gallian, to approve the items remaining on the Consent Calendar. The motion carried unanimously. Item 5B: Approval of the Minutes of the following City Council Meetings: 1) September 1, 2010; 2) October 20, 2010 (Regular Meeting); and 3) October 20, 2010 (Special Meeting).

Clm. Sanders requested rewording of a portion of her final remark in the September 1, 2010 minutes. It was moved by Clm. Sanders, seconded by Clm. Gallian, to approve the minutes as amended. The motion carried unanimously. Item 5E: Authorize the City of Sonoma to serve as lead agency and authorize the City Manager to execute purchase orders with AT&T to furnish and install new phone systems at Sonoma City Hall, the Carnegie Building, the Corporation Yard and Fire Stations #1, #2 and #3.

Herb Golenpaul commented about the purchase of a new phone system and suggested the Council hold off on the purchase until the City had a surplus of money. Development Services Director Wirick reported that utilizing the CALNET 2 State purchasing contract, the total project cost for the new system was approximately $70,000 and approximately $16,000 of the cost would be paid by Valley of the Moon Fire District. It was moved by Clm. Sanders, seconded by Clm. Brown, to authorize the City of Sonoma to serve as the lead agency for the purpose of acquiring the new AT&T Voice DNA phone systems and authorize the City Manager to execute purchase orders with AT&T under the CALNET 2 purchasing program to furnish and install new phone systems at Sonoma City Hall, the Carnegie Building, the Corporation Yard and Fire Stations #1, #2 and #3 at a total cost not to exceed $70,000; and to direct the City Manager to secure up to $16,000 in reimbursement from the Valley of the Moon Fire District for costs directly attributable to Fire Stations #2 and #3. The motion carried unanimously. CHANGE IN AGENDA ORDER Mayor Barbose noted that Susan Klassen, Executive Director of Sonoma County Waste Management, was present and asked if anyone objected to moving up item 7A on the agenda. There were no objections. Item 7A: Sonoma City/County Solid Waste Advisory Group (SWAG) Update, and discussion, consideration and possible adoption of resolution concurring with the SWAG’s priorities and objectives for developing a regional longterm solid waste option.

City Manager Kelly invited Ms. Klassen to speak regarding this agenda item. Ms. Klassen described how and why the Solid Waste Advisory Group (SWAG) was formed. She stated that each city in the County was being asked to weigh in, and hopefully support, the priorities and objectives that had been formulated by SWAG. Ms. Klassen presented the SWAG rules of governance and vision statement. She also explained that the Council was being asked to consider a resolution concurring with the priorities and objectives for development of a regional long-term solid waste option.

November 3, 2010, Page 4 of 9

DRAFT MINUTES
Clm. Sanders inquired if a commitment made now would tie the hands of the Council regarding future solid waste decisions. She pointed out that it may be less expensive to haul the City’s garbage to Napa than to the County landfill. Ms. Klassen stated that at some time in the future the City would be called upon to make some level of commitment. To be successful, the system would require a large regional investment. She said a future commitment would be necessary to support capital investment, maintenance issues and the closure of landfills. Ken Wells, representing Sonoma Garbage Collectors, reported that they had reviewed the report and were in favor of Council’s adoption of the resolution of support. Mayor Barbose invited comments from the public. Pamela Garant noted the adoption of the new construction codes and inquired about disposal of construction site waste. Mayor Barbose stated that every City in the County and the County of Sonoma were adopting the new codes. Ms. Klassen responded that construction demolition and debris disposal services were readily available in the County. City Manager Kelly added that staff had been in discussions with the Curattos of Sonoma Garbage Collectors and were working on how the new requirement would be rolled out in connection with the new codes. Clm. Sebastiani stated that if it would be cheaper to haul Sonoma’s waste to Napa, then the City should be looking that direction. Clm. Gallian stated that the plan had a long-term goal for the year 2050 and that every City needed to participate in order to deal with the issues on a regional basis. Mayor Barbose commented that the City would have to deal with its liability for cleanup separately if it does not participate in the group. He said that ultimately, money would have to be spent for a regional facility and it may be cheaper to do it now. It was moved by Clm. Gallian, seconded by Clm. Brown, to adopt the resolution entitled Resolution of the Council of the City of Sonoma Concurring with the Sonoma County/City Solid Waste Advisory Group’s Priorities and Objectives for Developing a Regional Long-Term Solid Waste Option. The motion carried unanimously. Clm. Sanders stated that Healdsburg held concerns similar to hers and noted they had not yet adopted the resolution of support. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearing and Adoption of Ordinance Repealing Chapter 14.10 of the Sonoma Municipal Code and Reenacting a New Chapter 14.10 Adopting and Amending New Construction Codes.

Item 6A:

Development Services Director/Building Official Wirick reported that at its meeting of October 6, 2010 the Council discussed and introduced the proposed ordinance adopting by reference and amending the new construction codes. He reported on the history of the State codes and provided a summary of the changes and explained the amendments recommended by staff. Wirick stated that the new codes would take effect January 1, 2011. Mayor Barbose opened the public hearing. Herb Golenpaul stated it would be okay to adopt the new codes as long as the fees did not go up.

November 3, 2010, Page 5 of 9

DRAFT MINUTES
Vic Conforti stated that it would take contractors and designers a while to get on board with the new Green Building Code. He noted that the new construction codes would require submittal of a construction waste management plan and there were many other changes coming forth. Robert Garant stated that implementation of the new codes would be expensive. He has identified a $10,000 to $20,000 increase for materials alone. Mr. Garant stated this could cause problems with development of affordable housing. Pamela Garant stated concern that the new code would require white or reflective roofs and asked if the City could make exceptions. Wirick responded that the Green Building Code provided a small amount of flexibility by the Building Official. Clm. Sanders stated she would not support adoption of the Tier 1 Green Building Code because it would increase costs and harm employment opportunities. Clm. Sebastiani agreed. Mayor Barbose stated that having continuity within the County would be good and he continued to support adoption of the codes. It was moved by Clm. Gallian, seconded by Clm. Brown, to adopt the ordinance entitled AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SONOMA REPEALING CHAPTER 14.10 OF THE SONOMA MUNICIPAL CODE AND REENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 14.10 ADOPTING A NEW ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE PARTS 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 AND 12 OF THE 2010 CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDS CODE AND AMENDMENTS THERETO AND THE 1997 UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS AS PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS AND AMENDMENTS THERETO. The motion carried three to two, Councilmembers Sanders and Sebastiani dissented. Item 6B: Public Hearing and Adoption of Ordinance Amending Chapter 14.24 (Review, Rehabilitation and Abatement of Existing Seismically Unsafe Buildings) of the Sonoma Municipal Code.

Development Services Director/Building Official Wirick reported that the purpose of the ordinance was to update the City’s existing code to be in conformance with the mandatory structural provisions of the 2010 California Existing Building Code. He said the ordinance also included editorial and administrative changes to provide consistency with State law. The public comment period was opened and closed with none received. It was moved by Clm. Gallian, seconded by Clm. Sanders, to adopt the ordinance entitled AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SONOMA REPEALING CHAPTER 14.22 (GREEN BUILDING) and CHAPTER 14.36 (VIOLATION — PENALTY) OF THE SONOMA MUNICIPAL CODE and to direct the City Clerk to carry out the publishing and posting procedures required by the Government Code. The motion carried unanimously. Item 6C: Public Hearing and Adoption of Ordinance Repealing Chapter 14.22 (Green Building) and Chapter 14.36 (Violation — Penalty) of the Sonoma Municipal Code.

Development Services Director/Building Official Wirick reported that the ordinance would repeal the 2009 ordinance implementing a local Green Building Code. The public comment period was opened and closed with none received.

November 3, 2010, Page 6 of 9

DRAFT MINUTES

It was moved by Clm. Sanders, seconded by Clm. Brown, to adopt the ordinance entitled AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SONOMA REPEALING CHAPTER 14.22 (GREEN BUILDING) and CHAPTER 14.36 (VIOLATION — PENALTY) OF THE SONOMA MUNICIPAL CODE and to direct the City Clerk to carry out the publishing and posting procedures required by the Government Code. The motion carried unanimously. Clm. Sanders noted that before the subcommittee was formed in 2008 to develop a local Green Building Code, Development Services Director Wirick had warned the Council that the State had something in the works. She said she regretted not listening to him, as it would have saved the subcommittee and staff six months of work that was now being tossed out. 7. REGULAR CALENDAR Sonoma City/County Solid Waste Advisory Group (SWAG) Update, and discussion, consideration and possible adoption of resolution concurring with the SWAG’s priorities and objectives for developing a regional longterm solid waste option.

Item 7A:

Discussed out of order, see above. Item 7B: Discussion, consideration and possible action authorizing the Mayor to sign a follow-up letter to Westamerica Bancorporation in support of keeping the Banco de Sonoma branch open in the Springs and the Glen Ellen branch of Sonoma Valley Bank open in Glen Ellen, requested by Mayor Barbose and Councilmember Brown.

City Manager Kelly reported that Councilmember Brown was asking the Council to consider sending a letter to Westamerica asking them to commit to keeping the bank branches in the Springs and Glen Ellen open. She reported that in a telephone conversation, Bank Vice President Christy Coulsen had stated that keeping the two branches open would be dependent upon their level of usage and the bank could not make any guarantees. Clm. Gallian commented that they had reduced the branch hours in the Springs and she expressed concern for the employees. Clm. Sanders questioned why it was not the County Supervisor being contacted about this matter. Clm. Sebastiani commented that if it worked out financially for the bank that was fine but he did not understand the City being involved. He noted the branches in question were not in the City limits. Clm. Sanders agreed and stated that it was a free market and the City should not get involved. Clm. Brown stated that the Banco de Sonoma was important to the City because they provide a service to the Latino community that work in Sonoma. Mayor Barbose stated the City should not be micromanaging their hours and he was not in favor of writing a letter. City Manager Kelly clarified that the City had not sent a previous letter on this issue.

November 3, 2010, Page 7 of 9

DRAFT MINUTES
Clm. Gallian, noting there was not majority support to send a letter, suggested the matter be referred to Supervisor Brown’s office. It was moved by Clm. Sebastiani, seconded by Clm. Sanders, to not send a letter to Westamerica. The motion carried four to one, Clm. Brown dissented. 8. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

Herb Golenpaul stated his unhappiness with the recent election. 9. COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS AND FINAL REMARKS Reports Regarding Committee Activities.

Item 9A:

Clm. Brown reported attending the Economic Development Advisory Committee meeting on behalf of Clm. Sebastiani and stated that they discussed the Shop Sonoma Day promotion and streamlining business signage regulations. He also reported that the Community Development Agency Loan Committee met with Mayor Barbose sitting in for Clm. Sanders who was prevented from participating due to a conflict of interest. They considered a loan to Tom Anderson to accommodate a new wine business on Broadway. Clm. Brown reported attending the Library Committee meeting in the place of Clm. Sanders and reported they were happily moving ahead with their remodel. Their big unanswered question was where to relocate the library during the renovation. Clm. Gallian reported the Transportation Authority just received $1.4 million in grant funds for expansion of the bus pass and ride-sharing programs. The Water Advisory Committee discussed liquidated damages and determined not to levy surcharges on City’s that went over their annual allotment because the overall usage was within its allotted amount. Mayor Barbose reported attendance at the Waste Management Authority and Waste Advisory Group meetings and that he attended an interesting tour of a green waste facility in San Jose. Item 9B: Final Councilmembers’ Remarks.

Clm. Brown reminded everyone of the November 11 Veteran’s Day activities. Clm. Sanders stated she would not mind serving on the Economic Development Advisory Committee in the future and she mentioned a recent newspaper article regarding Healdsburg’s economic development program. Clm. Gallian noted that Clm. Sanders would speak at the Chamber’s Women in Business Forum November 19. Clm. Sebastiani reported recently having breakfast in downtown Chicago with former Sonoma Mayor Stan Cohen. He also reported attendance at the World Series games and the Giant’s victory parade in San Francisco. Mayor Barbose announced that the recent passing of Proposition 22 would ensure that the State could no longer come in and steal the City’s money.

November 3, 2010, Page 8 of 9

DRAFT MINUTES

10.

ADJOURNMENT

Mayor Barbose adjourned the meeting at 8:33 p.m. in honor of Mr. Norman Barnett. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the Sonoma City Council on the day of 2010.

_____________________________ Gay Johann, MMC City Clerk

November 3, 2010, Page 9 of 9

DRAFT MINUTES

SONOMA CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting

Monday November 8, 2010 6:00 p.m. Community Meeting Room 177 First Street West **** MINUTES
OPENING

City Council Steve Barbose, Mayor Aug Sebastiani, Mayor Pro Tem Ken Brown Laurie Gallian Joanne Sanders

Mayor Barbose called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. David Cook led the Pledge of Allegiance. PRESENT: Gallian, Brown, Sanders, Sebastiani, Barbose ABSENT: None. ALSO PRESENT: City Manager Kelly, City Clerk Johann, City Engineer Bertolero, Public Works Director Bates, Planning Director Goodison, Assistant City Engineer Cargay, John Olaf Nelson, Water Resources Management. 1. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

The public comment session was opened and closed with none received. 2. WATER WORKSHOP

Continuation of Water Supply Plan and Water Rate and Connection Fee Study Session Public Works Director Bates stated that the study session would focus on the water rate and connection charge study prepared by John Olaf Nelson Water Resources Management. She reported that the study outlined strategies for meeting demand projections, recommended increases in use rates in the years 2013 - 2017 and connection charges for new development. Bates stated that the prospect of the City developing its own reservoir had been brought up at the last study session. She reported that Santa Rosa recently considered the same idea and estimated it would cost approximately $70,000 per acre foot to construct a reservoir. John Nelson, Water Resources Management, presented an in-depth analysis of the calculation of new capacity charges and conservation offset charges and reported his recommendations for rate and connection charges. He also presented a comparison of plans for financing the proposed capital improvements. Clm Sanders stated that Valley of the Moon Water (VOM) customers had lower rates that City customers. She asked if it would be cheaper to contract with VOM. Mr. Nelson stated it would not be less expensive and pointed out that VOM customers would not want to subsidize City residents, and that VOM would be implementing a rate increase soon.
November 8, 2010, Page 1 of 2

DRAFT MINUTES

Clm. Sebastiani expressed concerns about the City’s increasing its dependency upon groundwater and suggested that the City wells only be used during drought situations and water shortages. Mayor Barbose invited comments from the public. Planning Commissioner Robert Felder asked about a possible surcharge during drought years. Mr. Nelson stated that a surcharge would cover the City’s expenses if, for instance, it was tapping into a reservoir at the Developmental Center. He also noted that during a drought, the City’s administrative costs went up because of the need to emphasize conservation, etc. Planning Commissioner Michael George inquired about future new wells. Mr. Nelson responded that the Capital Improvement Plan included three new wells and the rehabilitation of some of the existing wells. Planning Commissioner Mark Heneveld asked about implementing a water-recharging program. Mr. Nelson stated he did not think it would ever be feasible. Clm. Gallian stated that her biggest concern was the City’s relationship with the Water Agency. Mr. Nelson stated the Agency would be approaching the City with a new contract and the fact that the City does not have a strong groundwater resource will hurt the City in its negotiations. He said the City would continue to be vulnerable to the Agency. Clm. Sanders expressed concern about the impact an increase of water fees would have on those on fixed incomes and suggested the City consider ways to offset the increase. Mr. Nelson mentioned a program called PAYS that would provide financing to homeowners for water conservation programs. Public Works Director Bates stated that staff would bring back the proposed rate increases at a future meeting for Council consideration and possible action. Mr. Nelson recommended adoption of the connection and conservation offset charges soon, so as not to let any new development escape without paying. Clm. Sebastiani stated the City should be looking at the bigger picture and should start talking about increasing its water storage capabilities. Clm. Sanders agreed. City Manager Kelly stated that the City was taking a good step towards development of a relationship with Sonoma Developmental Center. 3. ADJOURNMENT

Mayor Barbose adjourned the meeting at 7:21 p.m. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the Sonoma City Council on the day of 2010. _____________________________ Gay Johann, MMC City Clerk

November 8, 2010, Page 2 of 2

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF

City of Sonoma

CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

City Council

City Council Agenda Item: Meeting Date:

5C 12/01/2010

SO

N O MA

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

IFORN

IA

Agenda Item Summary
Staff Contact Gay Rainsbarger, City Clerk

Department Administration Agenda Item Title

Howard Stern, Walter & Pistole Consideration and Approval of Amendments to the Sonoma Conflict of Interest Code Summary The Political Reform Act requires every city to review its conflict of interest code every even numbered year to determine whether changes to the code are necessary. City council members, planning commissioners, the city manager, the city attorney and the city treasurer are required to file statements of economic interest pursuant to Government Code Section 87200. These positions, therefore, are not included in municipal conflict of interest codes. Municipal conflict of interest codes are instead concerned with those other employees, members, officers and consultants who hold positions that make or participate in the making of decisions on behalf of the municipality. According to Government Code Section 87302, a municipal conflict of interest code must designate those positions that make or participate in the making of government decisions. The conflict of interest code must also define the type of economic interests the holder of each designated position must report. The holder or each designated position must complete an annual financial disclosure statement that is maintained by the City Clerk. Pursuant to the Political Reform Act, the persons who hold these positions may be required to disqualify themselves from the making of government decisions if those decisions could materially affect those economic interests. On September 15, 2010, the City Clerk brought before the City Council a report indicating that amendments to the present Sonoma Conflict of Interest Code are required to update the list of designated positions that are required to disclose economic interests. The City Clerk also determined that revisions are required to the description of economic interests subject to disclosure. In conformance with Government Code Section 87311, a Notice of Intention to Amend the Conflict of Interest Code was posted at the locations at which council agendas are normally posted and interested members of the public were invited to attend this meeting and/or to present written comments regarding the proposed amendments. Notice was also provided to the City employees, members, officers and consultants subject to these amendments. Attached for Council consideration is the resolution amending the conflict of interest code. Exhibit A lists the designated positions subject to the code and the type of economic disclosures applicable to each designated position. The list of designated positions required to file disclosure statements has been expanded to include the Accountant, Administrative Services Manager, Associate Planner, Building Inspector, Deputy City Clerk, Fire Division Chief (City), Public Works Management Analyst, Parks Supervisor, Plans Examiner, Senior Planner, Streets Supervisor and Water Operations Supervisor. It is recommended that these positions be added to Exhibit A based on the determination that these positions also make or participate in the making of governmental decisions. Exhibit B amends the categories of economic interests that must be disclosed. The Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), the State agency that administers the Political Reform Act, has recommended that disclosure categories be amended to be “position” oriented rather than “property interest” oriented. Previously, the disclosure categories listed types of economic interests, such as real property interests, business position interests, etc. The conflict of interest code then designated the type of interests each designated position was required to report.

Agenda Item 5C

The FPPC now recommends that three broad categories be included in the conflict of interest code. Category A applies to those positions with generalized decision making authority. Category A includes the broad range of economic interests that must be reported to conform to the broad decision making authority exercised by that position. In the interest of assuring the complete disclosure of economic interests, most of the designated positions listed in Exhibit A are subject to disclosure category A. Category B is designed for those positions concerned primarily with purchasing. It should be noted that purchasing authority in Sonoma rests principally with the City department heads who are subject to disclosure category A. Therefore, since none of the designated positions are principally concerned with purchasing, there are no positions subject to disclosure category B. It was determined, however, to retain a disclosure Category B in the event such purchasing positions were added by the City in the future. Category C applies to those positions concerned primarily with real property related authority. According to the FPPC, this category is most applicable to municipal planning and building personnel.

Recommended Council Action Approve the resolution amending the City’s Conflict of Interest Code. Alternative Actions Council discretion. Financial Impact N/A Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

Agenda Item Summary for September 15, 2010 meeting concerning amendments to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code Notice of Intention to Amend A Conflict of Interest Code Resolution Amending the City’s Conflict of Interest Code cc:

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF

City of Sonoma

CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

City Council

City Council Agenda Item: Meeting Date:

5I 09/15/2010

SO

N O MA

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

IFORN

IA

Agenda Item Summary
Staff Contact Gay Rainsbarger, City Clerk

Department Administration Agenda Item Title

Approval of the 2010 Local Agency Biennial Notice indicating that amendments to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code are necessary. Summary The Political Reform Act requires every local agency to review its Conflict of Interest Code every other year (in even years) to determine if it is accurate or if the Code must be amended. Staff, with participation from the City Attorney’s office have reviewed the current Conflict of Interest Code and have identified several areas of potential change. The procedure to change an agency’s Conflict of Interest Code includes the following steps: 1. Approval of the Biennial Notice no later than October 1, 2010. 2. Providing notice via the posting of and dissemination to affected employees and officials of a “Notice of Intention to Adopt or Amend a Conflict of Interest Code”. Said notice will advise interested parties of the proposed amendments and establish a written comment period. 3. Presentation to the City Council of the proposed amendments to the Conflict of Interest Code for consideration and possible adoption. (Must be adopted within 90 days of approval of the Biennial Notice) Recommended Council Action Approve the 2010 Local Agency Biennial Notice indicating that amendments to the City’s Conflict of Interest Code are necessary. Alternative Actions Council discretion. Financial Impact N/A Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: 2010 Local Agency Biennial Notice Notice from the FPPC cc: Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

CITY OF SONOMA
NOTICE OF INTENTION TO AMEND A CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Sonoma intends to amend its conflict of interest code pursuant to Government Code Sections 87300, et seq. A conflict of interest code designates those city employees, members, officers and consultants who make or participate in the making of decisions. The code requires the persons who hold such positions to disclose, in financial disclosure statements maintained by the City Clerk, certain investments, income, interests in real property and business positions that could be effected by the decisions these persons make or participate in making. The persons who hold these positions may be required to disqualify themselves from the making of government decisions that affect those interests. Cities are required to review their conflict of interest codes every two years and determine whether amendments to the code are required. The proposed amendments to the Sonoma code amend the list of designated positions subject to the code and the description of the economic interests that must be disclosed. Copies of the amended conflict of interest code, and a written explanation of those amendments, may be obtained from the City Clerk for the City of Sonoma at 1 The Plaza, Sonoma CA 95476. The City Clerk’s telephone number is 707-933-2216. The City Clerk’s e-mail address is [email protected]. The amended conflict of interest code will be considered by the City Council of the City of Sonoma at their December 1, 2010 meeting which begins at 6:00 p.m. held in the Community Meeting Room located at 177 First Street West. Any interested person may be present at the meeting or may submit written comments concerning the proposed code. Written comments or other inquiries should be directed to the City Clerk at the address, telephone number or e-mail address specified above. Written comments should be submitted no later than the day before the council meeting. Date: October 25, 2010 _______________ Gay Johann City Clerk

CITY OF SONOMA
RESOLUTION NO. - 2010

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SONOMA ADOPTING A CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE AND RESCINDING PREVIOUS RESOLUTIONS WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act of 1974 (Government Code Section 81000, et. seq.) requires state and local government agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict of interest codes; and WHEREAS, the Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted a regulation (2 California Code of Regulations 18730) which contains the terms of a standard conflict of interest code and which may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission after public notice and hearings to conform to amendments to the Political Reform Act; and WHEREAS, designated officials and employees shall file their statements of economic interests with the City Clerk of the City of Sonoma and such statements shall be open for public inspection and reproduction pursuant to Government Code section 81008. Statements for all designated officials and employees will be retained by the City of Sonoma. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Sonoma as follows: SECTION 1. Incorporation of State Regulations by Reference With the additions noted below, the terms of Title 2 California Code of Regulations Section 18730 and any amendments to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission is hereby incorporated by reference and together with the List of Designated Positions and Disclosure Categories, as adopted by the City Council, shall constitute the Conflict of Interest Code of the City of Sonoma. SECTION 2. Designated Positions with Reporting Requirements Members of boards and commissions appointed by the City Council, consultants, and city employees holding designated positions as shown on Exhibit A shall be considered designated positions subject to reporting requirements under the Conflict of Interest Code, and shall disclose financial interests as set forth on Exhibit B which lists the individual disclosure categories. Said Exhibit A and Exhibit B are attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION 3. Filing of Statements Persons holding designated positions shall file Statements of Economic Interests with the City of Sonoma on Fair Political Practices Forms, in conformance with the individual disclosure categories and State guidelines.

SECTION 4. Late Filings and Failure to File Statements Any violation of any provision of this Code is subject to the administrative, criminal and civil sanctions provided in the Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 81000 et seq. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, all previous resolutions adopting and/or amending the City of Sonoma Conflict of Interest Code are hereby rescinded in their entirety. The foregoing Resolution was adopted this ______ day of ________ 2010, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ______________________________ Steve Barbose, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Gay Johann, City Clerk

EXHIBIT “A” LIST OF DESIGNATED POSITIONS AND DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES ***see note below POSITION Accountant Administrative Services Manager Assistant City Manager/Administrative Services Director Associate Planner Building Inspector Chief of Police City Clerk/Assistant to the City Manager City Prosecutor Contractual Consultants** Deputy City Attorney Deputy City Clerk Development Services Director/Building Official Fire Chief Fire Division Chief (City) Management Analyst, Public Works Parks Supervisor Planning & Community Services Director Plans Examiner Public Works Director Public Works Operations Manager Redevelopment Attorney Street Supervisor Water Operations Supervisor COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS Community Housing Corp. Board of Directors Community Services and Environment Commission Design Review Commission Mobilehome Park Rental Review Board Traffic Safety Committee DISCLOSURE CATEGORY A A A C C A A A A A A A A A A A A C A A A A A DISCLOSURE CATEGORY C A C C C

** Contractual Consultant means an individual who, pursuant to a contract with the City, makes or participates in making governmental decisions. The City Manager may determine in writing that a particular consultant is hired to perform a range of duties that are limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure requirements described in this section. Such written determination shall include a description of the consultant’s duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. The City Manager’s determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this conflict of interest code. *** City Council Members, Planning Commissioners, City Manager, City Attorney, and the City Treasurer are required to file statements of economic interests pursuant to Government Code Section 87200, and are therefore, not included in the list of Designated Positions required to file pursuant to the City’s conflict of interest code.

EXHIBIT “B” DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES CATEGORY A REPORTABLE INTERESTS Investments, business positions, income (including gifts, loans and travel payments) from sources located in or doing business in the City, interests in real property located in the City, including property located within a two-mile radius of any property owned or used by the City. Investments, business positions, and sources of income (including gifts, loans and travel payments) from or in any business entity that engages in the type of services, supplies, materials, machinery, or equipment that is purchased or acquired by the employee’s department. If the employee is involved in purchasing decisions that affect more than one department, then the employee shall disclose all income (including gifts, loans and travel payments) and investment interests and business positions in any business that engages in the type of services, supplies, materials, machinery or equipment that the City might reasonably be expected to purchase or acquire. Investments in real property or interests in business positions in any business entity which owns property within the City or within a two-mile radius of any property owned or used by the City.

B

C

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF
SO
N O MA
CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

City of Sonoma City Council Agenda Item Summary

City Council Agenda Item: 5D Meeting Date: 12/01/10

IFORN

IA

Department Administration Agenda Item Title

Staff Contact Gay Johann, City Clerk

Approval and ratification of the reappointment of Charles Bouey to the Marin/Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District Board of Directors for a four-year term ending December 31, 2014. Summary Mr. Bouey has represented the City on the Marin/Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District Board of Directors since 1985 and is eligible for reappointment. Correspondence from the District indicates that although there is no legal requirement for local representation on the Board, they continue to support such representation. Recommended Council Action Nomination by the Mayor, ratification by the City Council. Alternative Actions Council discretion. Financial Impact n/a Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: Letter from MSMVCD Charles Bouey 463 France Street Sonoma CA 95476 Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF

City of Sonoma

CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

City Council

City Council Agenda Item: Meeting Date:

5E 12/01/2010

SO

N O MA

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

IFORN

IA

Agenda Item Summary
Staff Contact

Department Administration Agenda Item Title

Linda Kelly, City Manager/Executive Director Laurie Decker, Economic Development Manager

Approval of Capital Improvement Project for cross-street signage in the amount of $9,000; and approval of Resolution of the Agency Board amending the FY 2010-2011 budget. Summary The Economic Development Partnership is taking a lead role in coordinating efforts to improve visitororiented signage in the Valley to support the local economy. While the major step will be a vehicular wayfinding signage project, an important intermediary step is to improve the cross-street signage at signalized intersections along Highway 12 throughout the Valley. Currently most signalized intersections include only a shield-shaped “Highway 12” marker, and the standard size pole-mounted City street name signs at the corner. With the exception of the intersections at Newcomb St. and at Agua Caliente Road, cross-street name signage on traffic signal arms along Highway 12 is non-existent in the Valley (although it does exist at some other signalized intersections, e.g. Napa Road/8th St. East and Leveroni Road/5th St. West.) In a recent survey of the largest businesses in the Valley, 58% identified the need for improved cross-street signage as being “critical” or “very important”. The Sonoma Valley Visitors Bureau also supports cross-street signage improvements. Caltrans has detailed requirements and specifications for street name signage on traffic signal arms, but it is Caltrans standard policy not to install street name signage unless done at the City’s direction and expense. However, based on information provided to the City’s traffic engineer at Winzler & Kelly by Caltrans, if the City provides the signage and the mounting hardware in accordance with their specifications, Caltrans will install the signage at no charge. Within the City, there are a total of five signalized intersections along Highway 12 where cross-street signage is recommended: MacArthur St.; Second St. West; Fifth Street West; Highway 12/West Napa St. (the “bend”); and West Spain Street. Excluded is the intersection at Leveroni/Napa Road, where signage will be included as part of upcoming signal improvements, and the signal at the entrance to Maxwell Village (no cross street). In addition to cross-street names, signage improvements to these five intersections would include the appropriate name signage for Highway 12 (e.g. Broadway, West Napa Street, or Sonoma Highway) where feasible. All five of these intersections are located within the CDA redevelopment project area, and the signage improvements are redevelopment-eligible expenditures. Winzler & Kelly has provided a proposal to inventory the existing intersections, develop the proposed signage, and to coordinate with the City and Caltrans on sign fabrication and installation. Total cost for the project (five intersections) is estimated at $9,000. The Winzler & Kelly tasks would be done under the existing Master Agreement with the City. This project is not currently included in the CIP, so a budget amendment would be required. The current five-year redevelopment Implementation Plan does include a total of $105,000 ($35,000 per year for 3 years) for visitor-oriented signage improvements. Recommended Council Action Approve a Capital Improvement Project for cross-street signage in the amount of $9,000 and approve resolution of the Agency Board of the Community Development Agency amending the FY 2010-2011 budget.

Agenda Item 5E

Alternative Actions Do not approve. Financial Impact Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: Resolution cc: Economic Development Advisory Committee members via email Wendy Peterson, Sonoma Valley Visitors Bureau Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

SONOMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
RESOLUTION ___-2010 A RESOLUTION OF THE AGENCY BOARD OF THE SONOMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AMENDING THE FY 2010-2011 BUDGET WHEREAS, the 2010/2011 Fiscal Year Budget was adopted on June 23, 2010, and WHEREAS, subsequent to its adoption the Agency Board approved an Capital Improvement project for cross-street signage in the amount of $9,000 and, WHEREAS, sufficient funds are available in the CDA/CIP fund for this budget amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by this Agency Board that the Budget for Fiscal Year 2011 is hereby amended as stated. The foregoing Resolution was duly adopted this 1st day of December 2010, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

________________________________ Steve Barbose, Chair ATTEST: ________________________________ Gay Johann, Secretary

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF

City of Sonoma

CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

City Council

City Council Agenda Item: Meeting Date:

5F 12/01/2010

SO

N O MA

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

IFORN

IA

Agenda Item Summary
Staff Contact

Department Administration Agenda Item Title

Linda Kelly, City Manager/Executive Director Laurie Decker, Economic Development Manager

Approval of Community Development Agency (CDA) redevelopment loan in the amount of $25,000 to Benz, Ebbesen, Anderson, LLC for improvements to the commercial property at 967 Broadway. Summary Property owners Benz, Ebbesen, Anderson, LLC, have applied for a redevelopment loan in the amount of $25,000 for interior improvements to the commercial property located at 967 Broadway. The property is located within the CDA Redevelopment Project Area. Thomas Anderson & Company, which previously occupied the property, has relocated to smaller offices at 822 Broadway. The owners plan to lease the property at 967 Broadway to Freixenet U.S.A., an international wine producer and owner of Gloria Ferrer Champagne Cellars. Freixenet will be relocating and expanding their Human Resources, International Marketing and Sales, and Executive Management offices from their current location at 23555 Highway 121 (at Gloria Ferrer Cellars). The initial term of the lease would be five years, with a five year renewal option. The applicants indicate that the Freixenet relocation would include approximately 20 – 30 middle and upper level positions, and the company will be employing up to 10 additional employees at the new location, for a total of up to 40 jobs located in downtown Sonoma. In addition to job creation, ancillary benefits are likely to include increased business-to-business spending within the Project Area. The offices would not be a retail sales location. The improvement project includes relocation of interior walls, doors, water heater, and closets; removal of a restroom; and addition of one exterior window, doors, and a skylight. Total project cost (excluding contingency for change orders) is estimated by Thomas Anderson & Co., which would serve as general contractor, at $33,950. Of this total, $25,844 is for subcontractor costs. The applicants have applied under the Redevelopment Business Loan Program, which provides loans of up to $25,000 (and in some cases, more) based on the benefits of the particular project. The CDA’s attorney has confirmed that improvements of the type included in the application, while not specifically identified in the program guidelines, are eligible for redevelopment assistance at the discretion of the Agency Board. The application was considered by the CDA Loan Committee (with CDA Board member Barbose serving as an alternate for Board member Sanders) on November 1, 2010. Based on the Committee’s review, a loan with the following terms is being recommended for Agency Board consideration: Low-interest (2%) loan for $25,000; Seven year term; interest accrues annually, but loan payments are deferred for the first four years; annual loan payments begin in year 5 and continue for three years; The loan is due in full if the property is sold during the term of the loan, or if the business ceases to occupy the property within the first five years.

Agenda Item 5F

Cost estimates for the project would be subject to review by the City’s Building Official prior to execution of the loan documents. The loan would be secured by the property. Prevailing wage requirements would apply to the project. Recommended Council Action CDA Board approve the loan and authorize staff to execute loan agreement. Alternative Actions Amend loan amount or terms, request more information, or deny the application at this time. Financial Impact The $25,000 is available in the CDA loan program budget. Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: cc: Tom Anderson, 822 Broadway Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF

CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

City of Sonoma City Council Agenda Item Summary

City Council Agenda Item: 5G Meeting Date: 12/01/10

IFORN

IA

Department Administration Agenda Item Title

Approval of a resolution declaring the results of the November 2, 2010 General Municipal Election. Summary A General Municipal election was conducted in the City of Sonoma on November 2, 2010 for the purpose of electing three (3) Members of the City Council. At the time of preparation of the agenda packet, the official statement of votes cast had not been received from the County Clerk; however staff has been assured it will be available prior to the December 1 City Council Meeting. The resolution will be completed and copies of the official statement of votes cast will be made available at, or prior to, the City Council meeting. Recommended Council Action Adopt the resolution. Alternative Actions n/a Financial Impact n/a Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: Resolution Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

SO

N O MA

Staff Contact Gay Johann, City Clerk

CITY OF SONOMA
RESOLUTION NO. - 2010

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SONOMA RECITING THE FACT OF THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON NOVEMBER 2, 2010, DECLARING THE RESULT AND SUCH OTHER MATTERS AS REQUIRED BY LAW WHEREAS, a General Municipal Election was held and conducted in the City of Sonoma, California, on Tuesday, November 2, 2010, as required by law; and WHEREAS, notice of the election was given in time, form and manner as provided by law; that voting precincts were properly established; that election officers were appointed and that in all respects the election was held and conducted and the votes were cast, received and canvassed and the returns made and declared in time, form and manner as required by the provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California for the holding of elections in general law cities; and WHEREAS, the County Election Department canvassed the returns of the election and has certified the results to this City Council, the results are received, attached and made a part hereof as “Exhibit A”. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SONOMA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the whole number of ballots cast in the precincts except absent voter ballots and provisional ballots was ____. That the whole number of vote by mail ballots cast in the City was ____, the whole number of provisional ballots cast in the City was ___, making a total of _____ ballots cast in the City. Section 2. That the names of persons voted for at the election for Member of the City Council are as follows: Tom Rouse, David Cook, Antoinette L. Castrone, Mike Gillaspie, Ken Brown, Steve Barbose, and Fred Martin. That the number of votes given at each precinct and the number of votes given in the City to each of the persons above named for the respective offices for which the persons were candidates were as listed in “Exhibit A” attached. The City Council does declare and determine that: 1) Steve Barbose, Ken Brown, and Tom Rouse were elected as Members of the City Council for the full term of four years. That the City Clerk shall enter on the records of the City Council of the City, a statement of the result of the election, showing: (1) The whole number of ballots cast in the City; (2) The names of the persons voted for; (3) For what office each person was voted for; (4) The number of votes given at each precinct to each person; and (5) The total number of votes given to each person.

Section 3.

Section 4. Section 5.

Section 6.

That the City Clerk shall immediately make and deliver to each of the persons so elected a Certificate of Election signed by the City Clerk and authenticated; that the City Clerk shall also administer to each person elected the Oath of Office prescribed in the Constitution of the State of California and shall have them subscribe to it and file it in the office of the City Clerk. Each and all of the persons so elected shall then be inducted into the respective office to which they have been elected. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED 1st day of December 2010, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ______________________________ Steve Barbose, Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________ Gay Johann, City Clerk

Section 7.

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF
SO
N O MA
CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

City of Sonoma City Council Agenda Item Summary

City Council Agenda Item 5H Meeting Date: 12/01/2010

IFORN

IA

Department Public Works Agenda Item Title

Staff Contact Toni Bertolero, City Engineer

Approve the Notice of Completion for First Street West Inlet Improvements Project No. 0816 by Greener Excavators and Construction and Direct the City Clerk to File the Document Summary The City Manager awarded the contract to Greener Excavators and Construction on June 17, 2010. The work generally consisted of storm drain inlet modifications, fabrication and installation of a galvanized structural steel trash rake assembly at the inlet and other related improvements. Final punch-list items have been completed and signed off by the Public Works Inspector. At this time, all work has been completed in accordance with the contract and it is recommended that the Notice of Completion (NOC) be approved and the City Clerk directed to file the NOC at the County Recorder’s Office. There were two (2) “no cost increase” contract change orders for this project. A summary of the final contract amount, including approved contract change orders (CCO) to date are shown on the table below. Contract Summary Table
General Description Approved Original Contract and Contract Pay Items CCO #1 CCO# 2 Additional Working Days Additional Working Days Final Contract Amount Amount $19,856.00 $0 $0 $19,856.00

Recommended Council Action It is recommended that Council approve the Notice of Completion for the First Street West Inlet Improvements Project No. 0816 by Greener Excavators and Construction and Direct the City Clerk to File the Document. Alternative Actions None. Financial Impact City Council approved a CIP budget of $150,000 for construction of this project as part of the FY2010 through 2014 Five Year Capital Improvement Program. Up to $145,000 is being reimbursed by Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) Zone 3A funds. Because this project is well under the Zone 3A maximum amount, the project will be fully funded by SCWA without a local match. Any unused funds will be returned to SCWA. Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: Notice of Completion Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

When recorded, return to: City Clerk City of Sonoma No. 1 The Plaza Sonoma, CA 95476
OFFICIAL BUSINESS: Exempt from Recording Fees Pursuant to California Government code §6103.

NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT: 1. That on the __16th___ day of __November_, 2010, the public project known as: FIRST STREET WEST INLET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT NO. 0816 was completed. 2. That the name and address of the party filing this Notice is: City of Sonoma, No. 1 The Plaza, Sonoma, CA 95476 That the name and address of the Contractor responsible for the construction of said public project is: Greener Excavations and Construction 57 Maple Ave Fairfax, CA 94930 That the name and address of said Contractor’’s insurance carriers is: North American Specialty Insurance Company 650 Elm Street, 6th Floor Manchester, NH 03101 2524 That the general description of the public project was: Ditch and inlet modifications, including cast-in-place concrete sill and apron, fabrication and installation of a galvanized structural steel trash rack rake assembly complete with Type II barricade, portable trash screen, concrete sidewalk demolition and sidewalk modification, including placing of concrete winch anchorage, rigging, linkage and below grade utility box and furnishing a portable generator and winch. That the original contract amount was: $_19,856.00__________

3.

4.

5.

6.

Recording of this document is requested for CITY OF SONOMA and on behalf of the City of Sonoma, a Municipal Corporation, under Section 6103 of the Government Code. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. ___________________________ Linda Kelly, City Manager ATTEST: __________________________ City Clerk Dated: _____________________, 2010

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF

City of Sonoma

CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

City Council/CDA

City Council Agenda Item: Meeting Date:

5I 12/01/10

SO

N O MA

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

IFORN

IA

Agenda Item Summary
Staff Contact

Department Planning and Community Services Agenda Item Title

David Goodison, Planning Director

Adoption of a resolution establishing a process to track water demand and verify capacity to serve new development. Summary In light of the decision of the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) to terminate its water transmission project, the City is updating its strategy for meeting its projected long-term water needs. (The City Council held a study session in this regard on September 8th.) In the interim, the City must carefully monitor its water use to ensure that there is sufficient capacity to address new development and redevelopment. Staff proposes to accomplish this through a monitoring program that includes the issuance of will-serve letters as a means of verifying capacity prior to the issuance of building permits for certain types of development. This concept was developed in consultation with the City Engineer and vetted by the Planning Commission earlier in the year. When the City Council reviewed this proposal in concept at its meeting of September 15, 2010, it directed staff to prepare an implementing resolution to implement such a program. Recommended Council Action Adopt the attached resolution establishing a process to track water demand and verify capacity to serve new development. Alternative Actions Council discretion. Financial Impact For certain types of development, as specified in the resolution, a water demand analysis would be required for review by the City Engineer. The preparation of this analysis is a cost that would be borne by applicants for new development. These reports would be reviewed by the City Engineer, which represents a cost to the City. However, this review would typically be undertaken in the course of reviewing improvement plans and other required project documentation and the time spent by the City Engineer is billed to the applicant, which offsets the cost to the City. That said, the review of a water demand analysis is not a lengthy process and staff does not expect that it would result in a significant cost to affected applicants. Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: 1. cc: Draft resolution. Matt Howarth, Planning Commission Chair (via email) Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

CITY OF SONOMA RESOLUTION NO. XX - 2010 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SONOMA ESTABLISHING A PROCESS TO TRACK WATER DEMAND AND VERIFY CAPACITY TO SERVE NEW DEVELOPMENT

WHEREAS, with the decision of the Sonoma County Water Agency (SCWA) in September 2009 to terminate the water transmission project, the Agency cannot commit to supplying water to its water contractors beyond its existing Russian River water diversion permit amount of 75,000 acre-feet per year; and WHEREAS, as a result of this change in direction on the part of the SCWA, the City of Sonoma is updating its strategy for meeting its projected long-term water needs; and WHEREAS, in the interim, the City of Sonoma, as the water utility for Sonoma, must carefully monitor water use to ensure that there is adequate water supply to address new development and redevelopment in order to avoid disruption to the development community and prevent environmental impacts that could occur as a result of insufficient supply. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Sonoma hereby finds and declares as follows: Section I A program for tracking water demand and verifying capacity to serve new development is hereby established as follows: A. Tracking Water Demand.

All new development and redevelopment having a projected demand of at least 0.5 Equivalent Single Family Dwellings (ESDs) shall be tracked and monitored in terms of water use. This tracking shall be performed by the Planning Department and the Building Department using forms developed by the Planning Department and shall be transmitted to the Public Works Department and the City Engineer on an on-going basis. B. Establishing Baseline Water Supply Capacity.

The City Engineer shall calculate the water supply available to serve new development, including projects that have been approved but not yet built, based on the City’s water supply from the Sonoma County Water Agency and local supply, and the City’s existing water demand associated with a normal hydrologic water year, and other such factors deemed relevant by the City Engineer. C. Requirement for Demand Analysis and Will-Serve Letter. 1. Applicability. Building permits associated with the following types of projects shall be issued only upon the issuance of a will-serve letter by the City Engineer, verifying that sufficient water supply exists to serve it: Residential developments of two or more units; new hotels; new

restaurants; new commercial development (including commercial additions and expansions) of 2,000 square feet or greater; and any use subject to discretionary planning approval with a water usage of 5 ESDs or greater. 2. Criteria. The City Engineer shall develop written criteria for evaluating will-serve requests, to include the scope and content of a required water demand analysis. 3. Timing of Request. To request a will-serve letter a development must have received all required discretionary approvals and any required public improvement plans must be complete. A letter of request must be submitted to the City Engineer along with a water demand analysis. 4. Determination by City Engineer. If the City Engineer determines that sufficient water capacity is available and that all other applicable requirements have been met, then a will-serve letter shall be issued. Alternatively, an applicant may qualify for a will-serve letter by demonstrating to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the project would have a zero net water demand as a result of the implementation of specific conservation measures. If the City Engineer determines that there is insufficient water capacity to serve a development for which a will serve-letter has been requested, that finding shall be communicated to the applicant in writing, along with recommendations for water use reduction measures, if available, that could be used to achieve compliance based on a revised submittal by the applicant. 5. Expiration. A will-serve letter shall be valid only so long as any applicable discretionary approvals are valid or for a period of two years in cases where there is no discretionary approval associated with the project. There is no automatic extension permitted for will-serve letters. Upon the expiration of will-serve letter, the applicant shall request another will-serve letter. 6. Right of Appeal. The denial of a request for a will-serve letter shall be appealable to the City Council, as provided for in Chapter 1.24 of the Sonoma Municipal Code. D. Reporting.

The Planning Department shall provide quarterly reports to the City Council and the Planning Commission summarizing the results of the tracking system in relation to the City’s available water supply. E. Expiration.

This program shall expire on January 1, 2013, unless specifically reauthorized by the City Council. Section II The tracking system for water demand established by this resolution represents an action taken in the regulatory capacity of the City of Sonoma as the operator of a water utility to protect the environment by assuring that an adequate water supply exists to serve new development with water and to provide the City Council, as the operator of the water utility, with timely information so that it can take steps to avoid environmental disruption that might otherwise occur due to a lack of sufficient water supply capacity. Based on these factors, the City Council finds that the adoption of the water tracking system provided for in this resolution would have no significant environmental impacts and therefore qualifies as categorically exempt under section 15308 of the California Environmental Quality Act.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___th day of December 2010 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

_____________________________ Steve Barbose, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Gay Johann, City Clerk

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF

City of Sonoma

CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

City Council/CDA

City Council Agenda Item: Meeting Date:

5J 12/01/10

SO

N O MA

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

IFORN

IA

Agenda Item Summary
Staff Contact

Department Planning and Community Services Agenda Item Title

David Goodison, Planning Director

Authorization to approve the purchase of wetland credits to mitigate the removal of wetlands in conjunction with the sale of properties owned by the Sonoma Community Development Agency (CDA) located at 19347 Fifth Street West and 726 West Spain Street. Summary In November of 2009, the CDA entered into a purchase agreement with Woven Shade/Peak Partners for the sale of five parcels located on Fifth Street West and West Spain Street. In the course of the initial due diligence period, a wetland was been found on the larger parcel. Beginning in March, the CDA and the Buyers agreed to a series of extensions of the escrow period in order to determine the scope and nature of the wetland and to proceed to obtain the permits needed to allow them to be filled. Since that time, number of actions have been taken: 1) a wetlands delineation has been completed and accepted by the Army Corps of Engineers; 2) the property has been surveyed for rare plants (none were found); 3) the Woven Shade project (including environmental review) was approved by the Planning Commission on October 14, 2010; 4) applications have been made to the Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water Board for permits allowing the wetland to be filled. As a condition of the permits allowing the wetlands to be filled, the purchase of mitigation credits is required at a 2:1 replacement ratio, which results in a purchase amount of 2/10ths of an acre. Credits acceptable to the permitting agencies may be purchased from the Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank at a cost of $68,830 per tenth of an acre. Note: the price of the credits is scheduled to increase by 10% after January 1, 2011. Recommended Council Action Authorize the Community Development Agency Executive Director to execute the purchase of two wetlands credits from the Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank. Alternative Actions N.A. Financial Impact Under the terms of the purchase agreement, the CDA is responsible for securing the permits needed to fill the wetland, including the purchase of wetlands credits. The purchase price of two credits amounts to $137,660. The parcels are being sold for $1,450,000, which more than offsets the cost of the credits. Because the subject properties were purchased with funds from the CDA’s LowModerate Income Housing Fund, proceeds from the sale of the properties will be deposited back into that fund as is required by the Community Redevelopment Law. Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: 1. Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank Transaction Documents

cc: Woven Shade/Inge Hudzell, Sotheby’s via email

Mr. Goodison, The following are the documents used for the purchase of mitigation credits: The Acknowledgement of Sale and the Notification of Sale are sent to the federal and state agencies by the Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank when mitigation credits are sold. The Bill of Sale will be given to the Sonoma Community Development Agency at the time of purchase. A W9 Form will be provided whenever requested. For the Acknowledgement of Sale there are three Endorsed Originals which contain: • • • • • A.C.O.E. File Number - 2010-00216N Name of Project Developer - Sonoma Community Development Agency Business Address - No.1 The Plaza, Sonoma, CA 95476 Name of Person Authorized to Sign for Purchasing Entity - Linda Kelly Title of Person Authorized to Sign for Purchasing Entity - Executive Director, Sonoma CDA

Note: The authorization letters to sell the mitigation credits will be attached to the Acknowledgment of Sale as Exhibits A and B. For the Notification of Sale there are two Endorsed Originals which contain: • • • • • • • Name of Project Developer - Sonoma Community Development Agency Purchasing Entity (if different than Project Developer) Contact Person - David Goodison Phone Number -707-938-3795 A.C.O.E. File Number - 2010-00216N Project Title -Woven Shade Residential Care Home Project Location - 19347 Fifth Street West, Sonoma, CA

Thank you, Anthony Georges

BURDELL RANCH WETLAND CONSERVATION BANK P.O. Box 2039 Mill Valley, California 94942

Tel. 415-602-4151

Acknowledgment of Sale of Mitigation Credits
Army Corps File No. 2010-00216N The undersigned Seller hereby acknowledges that it has sold and conveyed to the Sonoma Community Development Agency, No.1 The Plaza, Sonoma, CA 95476, two (2) Mitigation Credits from the Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank for the Woven Shade Residential Care Home. All terms of the conveyance shall be governed by the provisions of the Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) dated August 22, 2000 and the Agreement for Sale of Mitigation Credits, dated August 2, 2010, entered into between Seller and Department, which by their reference are incorporated herein. Seller represents that the MOA has been executed by all of the parties thereto, and a grant deed transferring fee title of the Conservation Bank has been executed by Seller to the California Department of Fish and Game, and accepted by the Department, and recorded on March 27, 2001, Marin County Records, #2001-0014535. Authorization to sell these mitigation credits is contained in the letters dated August 2, 2002, and October 15, 2003, from the Army Corps of Engineers, copies of which are attached. SELLER Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank By: ___________________________________ Anthony J. Georges Managing Tenant in Common BUYER Sonoma Community Development Agency By: ___________________________________ Linda Kelly Executive Director, Sonoma CDA
1

Date:

______________________

Date:

______________________

Cc: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service California Department of Fish and Game Burdell TIC James B. McKenney

2

Bill of Sale Sonoma Community Development Agency In consideration of $137,660.00, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, The Burdell Tenancy In Common hereby sells and conveys to Sonoma Community Development Agency, two (2) wetland mitigation credits for the Woven Shade Residential Care Home, from the Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank in Marin County, California. Burdell Tenancy In Common, Manager of the Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank

By:

___________________________________ Anthony J. Georges Managing Tenant in Common

Date:

______________________

BURDELL RANCH WETLAND CONSERVATION BANK P.O. Box 2039 Mill Valley, California 94942

Tel. 415-602-4151

November __, 2010

Notification of Sale of Mitigation Credits
Bryan Matsumoto U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory division 1455 Market Street, 16th Floor San Francisco, CA 94103 Dear Co-Chairs: Enclosed are: 1. Acknowledgment of the sale of two (2) Mitigation Credits, in accordance with the authorizations of credit availability from the Army Corps of Engineers (Army File No. 173370N) dated August 2, 2002 and (Army File No. 173371N) dated October 15, 2003. Project Developer Contact A.C.O.E. File Number Date of Purchase Project Title Project Location Type of Wetlands Credits Purchased Sonoma Community Development Agency David Goodison 707-938-3795 2010-00216N November __, 2010 Woven Shade Residential Care Home 19347 Fifth Street West, Sonoma, CA Seasonal 2 Scott Wilson Dept. of Fish and Game P. O. Box 47 Yountville, CA 94599

2. Check to the Department of Fish and Game (copy to A.C.O.E.) in the amount of $1,660 in accordance with the Declaration of Trust Agreement as provided in Section VI-C-3, which has been amended to change the endowment from $230 to $830 per credit. 1

If you have any questions or comments, please call Tony Georges at 415-602-4151. Your continuing assistance is appreciated. Sincerely, ___________________________________ Anthony J. Georges Managing Tenant in Common Burdell Ranch Wetland Conservation Bank Cc: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Sonoma Community Development Agency Burdell TIC James B. McKenney

2

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF

CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

City of Sonoma City Council Agenda Item Summary

City Council Agenda Item: 8A Meeting Date: 12/01/10

IFORN

IA

Department Administration Agenda Item Title Selection of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore Summary

Each year the City Council conducts a reorganization by selecting from among its members a Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore to serve for the upcoming year. The Mayor presides at City Council meetings and serves as the official head of the City for ceremonial purposes. The Mayor Pro Tempore performs the duties of the Mayor during the Mayor’s absence or disability. This reorganization usually takes place at the first regular meeting in December. The selection process proceeds as follows: Mayor Barbose will ask for nominations for the position of Mayor. To make a nomination, Council members need only state “I nominate ________”. Nominations do not require seconds; however, other members may express support of a nomination by making a seconding speech. When there are no more nominations, Mayor Barbose will declare nominations for the position of Mayor closed and will allow public comments, if any. A roll call vote will then be taken beginning with the first nominee. If that nominee receives a majority vote they are declared the winner and no additional votes are taken on the remaining nominees. If a majority vote is not achieved for any of the nominees, the nomination and voting process will be repeated, voting on the nominees in the order of their nomination, until a candidate has received a majority vote. The same process will be followed in selecting the Mayor Pro Tempore. Recommended Council Action Select a Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore Alternative Actions Council discretion. Financial Impact N/A Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: None cc: Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

SO

N O MA

Staff Contact Linda Kelly, City Manager

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF

City of Sonoma

CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

City Council

City Council Agenda Item: Meeting Date:

10A 12-01-10

SO

N O MA

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

IFORN

IA

Agenda Item Summary
Staff Contact

Department Administration Agenda Item Title

Assistant City Manager

Review and Consideration of a Refuse Rate Adjustment and Certain Program Modifications for 20102011 with City Franchisee Sonoma Garbage Company, Inc. Summary The City’s franchise Refuse Hauler, Sonoma Garbage Company, Inc [SGC] has submitted the proposed rate increase for the 2010-2011 annual period. The proposal includes three components for consideration. SGC’s updated program includes the need for additional capacity for replacing an aging refuse collection vehicle and the initiation of a pilot food waste collection for local commercial establishments. All proposals are geared towards bringing cost effective solutions to address the needs of the community. Discussion of all three components has taken place in a meeting with Sonoma Garbage. Participants in the meeting included Sonoma Garbage representatives John Curroto and Ken Wells and City representatives Mayor Barbose, City Manager Kelly and Assistant City Manager Giovanatto. Mayor Barbose participated in the discussion to provide insight and feedback as the City’s representative to the Solid Waste Advisory Group and the Sonoma County Waste Management Agency. Refuse Rate Increase for Refuse Collection In accordance with the Franchise agreement and based on the Refuse Rate Iindex calculation, SGC would be approved for a 5.03% rate increase effective December 1, 2010. The impact to the typical residential rate payer [32 gallon user] will be $.55 per month.
Recommended Council Action

Staff recommends Council approval of all program components and rate increase proposed by Sonoma Garbage as follows: 1. Rate increase of 5.03% effective December 1, 2010 2. Application of Extenuating Circumstances for Vehicle Replacement 3. Allow hauler to perform a pilot project to study Commercial Food Waste Composting Service
Alternative Actions

1) Defer action pending receipt of additional specified information
Financial Impact

The combined rate increase for the typical residential customer in Sonoma [32 gallon container] would be $0.55 per month. Franchise fee revenue is estimated to increase by approximately $6,000
Attachments

Supplemental Report Resolution
cc: Sonoma Garbage Collectors via email

SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT Review and Consideration of a Refuse Rate Adjustment & Certain Program Modifications for 2010-2011 with Sonoma Garbage Company, Inc. For City Council meeting of December 1, 2010 The City’s franchise Refuse Hauler, Sonoma Garbage Company, Inc [SGC] has submitted the proposed rate increase for the 2010-2011 annual period. The proposal includes three components for consideration as outlined in the document [attached]. SGC’s updated program includes the need for additional capacity for replacing an aging refuse collection vehicle and the initiation of a pilot food waste collection for local commercial establishments. All proposals are geared towards bringing cost effective solutions to address the needs of the community. Discussion of all three components has taken place in a meeting with Sonoma Garbage. Participants in the meeting included Sonoma Garbage representatives John Curroto and Ken Wells and City representatives Mayor Barbose, City Manager Kelly and Assistant City Manager Giovanatto. Mayor Barbose participated in the discussion to provide insight and feedback as the City’s representative to the Solid Waste Advisory Group and the Sonoma County Waste Management Agency. The three components are summarized as follows: 1. Proposed Increase in Refuse Collection Rates 2010-11

The franchise agreement with SGC requires an annual financial review of the franchisee and calculation of appropriate rate increase. In 2007, the City adopted the methodology formulated by Sonoma County Waste Management Agency based on a Refuse Rate Index [RRI]. The RRI is a price indexing method designed specifically for adjusting collection rates based on various published indices that are applicable to the actual costs incurred by a refuse hauler rather than an estimated percentage increase based on financial reports. The RRI methodology produces a more accurate rate adjustment since the RRI includes only those economic changes that directly affect solid waste and recycling collection costs. Using this method, the collection rates are based on changes in cost categories that are specific to the collection business. Annually the City will calculate the RRI rate percentage using a weighted percentage change to six specific cost categories of labor, fuel, vehicle replacement, vehicle maintenance, tipping fees and other. Refuse Rate Increase Based on the RRI calculation, SGC would be approved for a 5.03% rate increase effective December 1, 2010. The impact to the typical residential rate payer [32 gallon user] will be $.55 per month. 2. Provision for Extraordinary Circumstances The RRI methodology also includes a provision for the hauler to apply for a higher percentage based on “Extraordinary Circumstances.” These circumstances would include any additional unanticipated operational needs such as vehicle purchase or replacement.

Proposed Garbage Rate Adjustment December 1, 2010

SGC’s proposal includes a request under this provision for replenishment of vehicle replacement funds and purchase of garbage truck estimated at $360,000 [including finance charges]. This purchase is allowable under the Extraordinary Circumstances provision. The new truck will replace a 1989 truck, which is well beyond its expected life. In an effort to mitigate an impact on the monthly refuse rates, SGC has proposed that they be allowed to invoke a modified delivery location for 50% of the solid waste collected in Sonoma. By redirecting approximately half of the refuse material, the hauler would save significant tipping fee dollars which could then be directed towards this extraordinary circumstance. SGC further recognizes the need to compensate Sonoma County Waste Management Agency for the loss of revenue due to the redirected waste stream. The costs for this payment would be paid directly from SGC to the Sonoma County Waste Management Agency. 3. Perform Pilot Project to Study Commercial Food Waste Composting Service SGC has brought a new proposal to the table involving the collection of commercial food waste for composting. This service would be offered to business customers at no additional charge over their current collection service cost. Participation in this program would be voluntary for businesses that generate food waste such as restaurants, grocery stores, inns, etc. Initiating this type of program in Sonoma would be the first of its kind in Sonoma County.

Staff Recommendation Staff recommends Council approval of all program components and rate increase proposed by Sonoma Garbage as described above. In summary, this recommendation, which requires adoption of the attached resolution, is comprised of the following elements: 1. Rate increase of 5.03% effective December 1, 2010 2. Application of Extenuating Circumstances for Vehicle Replacement 3. Allow hauler to perform a pilot project to study Commercial Food Waste Composting Service Attachments 1. Sonoma Garbage Collectors proposal 2. RRI Calculation Worksheets 3. Resolution

Proposal for Sonoma Garbage Collectors Rate Setting for December 2010 –– November 2011
1) Apply the Refuse Rate Index and Franchise Fee to 2009 –– 2010 Rates As specified in the franchise agreement, application of the Refuse Rate Index results in a 5.03% increase to residential, commercial and debris box rates. 2) Apply the Extenuating Circumstances Clause in the Franchise Agreement Allow up to 50% of solid waste collected in Sonoma (not to exceed 3,000 tons) to be delivered to disposal facilities outside Sonoma County for at least two years and the resulting disposal savings would be used to replenish the vehicle replacement funds and purchase a new collection truck. 3) Direct Payment to SCWMA In order to continue to contribute the City of Sonoma’’s share of funding to SCWMA, a direct payment of $5.95/ton will be made to the SCWMA for each ton of waste delivered to disposal facilities outside Sonoma County. This rate will be adjusted to match the SCWMA surcharge if it changes. 4) Perform Pilot Project To Study Commercial Food Waste Composting Service Sonoma Garbage Collectors proposes to test the feasibility of commercial food waste composting by implementing a pilot project for Sonoma businesses that generate food waste such as restaurants, grocery stores, inns, etc. This service (64 gallon collection carts and twice weekly service) will be offered to business customers in the City of Sonoma at no additional charge over their current collection service cost. The pilot project will be used to gather critical information necessary to determine the level of business interest and cost of such a program. Following at least six months of the pilot project, Sonoma Garbage Collectors will return to the City with a report that includes: the level of interest of businesses to participate in the program, the quantity of food waste that can be collected, and the cost to implement a City wide commercial food waste composting service. If the program is economically viable, a commercial food waste composting collection rate will be proposed to the City to add this service to the solid waste collection rate sheet.

5) Rate Comparison of Current and Proposed Rates
Service Level Adopted Rates effective October 2009 November 2010 Proposed Rates (with 5.03% increase) effective December 2010 – November 2011 6.97 11.43 24.81 38.07 143.51 215.08 287.02 33.27 66.55 374.13 502.48

Rate for refuse collection once each week 20 gallon can 6.64 32 gallon can 10.88 64 gallon can 23.62 90 gallon can 36.25 2 cubic yard bin 136.64 3 cubic yard bin 204.78 4 cubic yard bin 273.27 Rate each pickup for refuse bins on a variable pickup schedule Each 2 cy bin 31.68 Each 4 cy bin 63.36 Debris Box Debris Box 20 yd 356.21 Debris Box 30 yd 478.42

6) Rate Comparison with Other Cities (weekly collection) Proposed 2011 Sonoma rates compared to 2010 rates in other cities.
City Sonoma Cloverdale Cotati Healdsburg Santa Rosa Sebastopol Windsor 32 gallon $11.43 $17.18 $10.20 $11.22 $11.28 $12.25 $13.38 2 cubic yard $143.51 $191.97 $173.57 $201.93 $222.30 $230.19 $230.84 4 cubic yard $287.02 $284.58 $258.59 $343.41 $336.05 $363.17 $368.30

Example of commercial rate comparison: A 2 cubic yard bin picked up weekly in Santa Rosa will cost $2,667.60 for one year. The same service in Sonoma will cost $1,722.12, a savings of $945.48 annually.

Effective December 1, 2010 Monthly Rates for Weekly Curbside Pick-up

Service Level

Adopted Rates effective December 2010 (5.03% increase) 6.97 11.43 24.81 38.07 143.51 215.08 287.02 33.27 49.91 66.55 374.13 502.48

Rate for refuse collection once each week 20 gallon can 32 gallon can 64 gallon can 90 gallon can 2 cubic yard bin 3 cubic yard bin 4 cubic yard bin Rate each pickup for refuse bins on a variable pickup schedule Each 2 cy bin Each 3 cy bin Each 4 cy bin Debris Box Debris Box 20 yd (includes 2 tons of waste) Debris Box 30 yd (includes 3 tons of waste) An additional charge of $10 per month for each bin will be applied to bin service.

Waste in debris boxes above the included quantity will be charged at the prevailing waste disposal rate.

TABLE 1 REFUSE RATE INDEX CALCULATION Weighted Percentage Change

Item #

Category

Data Source Series ID: CUURA422SA0 CPI-All Urban Consumers Series ID: WPU057303 Diesel Fuel Series ID: CUURA422SA0 CPI-All Urban Consumers Series ID: CUURA422SA0 CPI-All Urban Consumers Series ID: CUURA422SA0 CPI-All Urban Consumers Annual Tipping Fee Increase at the Sonoma County Central Landfill TOTAL RRI ADJUSTMENT

% Change

Item Weight

1

Labor

3.20%

39%

1%

2

Motor Fuel Vehicle Replacement Vehicle Maintenance

1.33%

4%

0.05%

3

3.20%

4%

0.13%

4

3.20%

4%

0.13%

5

CPI All Items

3.20%

9%

0.28%

6

Disposal

8.00%

40%

3.18% 5.03%

Total RRI Adjustment

OPERATING COST STATEMENT FOR REFUSE RATE INDEX Cost Category 1 2 Labor Motorfuel Equipment Replacement Vehicle Maintenance All Other Items Disposal Total Description Annual Cost 784,610 81,635 % of Total 39% 4%

3

80,962

4%

4 5 6

79,913 175,736 791,864 1,994,720

4% 9% 40% 100%

Annual Costs based on Annual Financial Statement Dated 12-31-09.

CITY OF SONOMA RESOLUTION NO. ___ - 2010 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SONOMA FIXING GARBAGE RATES (SONOMA GARBAGE COLLECTORS) WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 7.08.030A of the Sonoma Municipal Code, the City of Sonoma adopted Resolution Number 87-94 approving a contract with John D. Curotto, Margaret Curotto, and John D. Curotto, Jr. (Sonoma Garbage Collectors) for the exclusive right to collect and remove garbage and rubbish within the city; and WHEREAS, certain costs are a result of the collection and disposal process and are therefore eligible to be recovered through a fair rate of return, and WHEREAS, the City and Contractor agree to determine rate increase and fair rate of return using a modified Refuse Rate Index [RRI] methodology designed specifically for adjusting collection rates based on published indices that are applicable to the actual costs incurred by a refuse hauler, and WHEREAS, the maximum rates which Sonoma Garbage Collectors may charge for its services must be approved and established by resolution of the City Council of the City of Sonoma; and WHEREAS, the 2010-11 percentage determined by the RRI be borne by the ratepayers through an increase of 5.03% of the current rate schedule effective December 1, 2010 in order to effectuate a revenue neutral financial position, and WHEREAS, certain other modifications are included with the Refuse Rate increase include the deviation to delivery site of refuse material on a not to exceed limit of 50% to reduce tipping fee costs which shall be placed in reserve for vehicle replacement and the implementation of a pilot program for food waste collection for commercial establishments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Sonoma hereby fixes the maximum rates to be charged for the collection of garbage and rubbish as shown on Exhibit “A” attached hereto, incorporated herein by reference, and made a part hereof. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Contractor shall be allowed to redirect 50% of the waste stream to an alternative collection site and Contractor may initiate a pilot program for a one-year period for food waste collection from commercial establishments on a voluntary basis at no additional charge. The foregoing Resolution was duly adopted this 1st day of December 2010, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

STEVE BARBOSE, MAYOR ATTEST: GAY JOHANN, CITY CLERK

Exhibit “A”

Effective December 1, 2010 Monthly Rates for Weekly Curbside Pick-up

Service Level

Adopted Rates effective December 2010 (5.03% increase) 6.97 11.43 24.81 38.07 143.51 215.08 287.02 33.27 49.91 66.55 374.13 502.48

Rate for refuse collection once each week 20 gallon can 32 gallon can 64 gallon can 90 gallon can 2 cubic yard bin 3 cubic yard bin 4 cubic yard bin Rate each pickup for refuse bins on a variable pickup schedule Each 2 cy bin Each 3 cy bin Each 4 cy bin Debris Box Debris Box 20 yd (includes 2 tons of waste) Debris Box 30 yd (includes 3 tons of waste)

An additional charge of $10 per month for each bin will be applied to bin service. Waste in debris boxes above the included quantity will be charged at the prevailing waste disposal rate.

S E AL OF

TH

E C I T Y OF
SO
N O MA
CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC

City of Sonoma

City Council

City Council Agenda Item: Meeting Date:

11A 12/01/2010

C

FO

AL

UN

8 DED 1

23

IFORN

IA

Agenda Item Summary
Staff Contact Jeff Walter, City Attorney Toni Bertolero, City Engineer Linda Kelly, City Manager

Department Administration

Agenda Item Title Discussion, consideration and possible action approving a Water Service Consolidation Agreement with Rancho Sonoma Partners LLC, a Cost Recovery Agreement with Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC, and a Resolution adopting a finding of Categorical Exemption and Authorizing a Grant Application for Water System Improvements at the Rancho de Sonoma Mobile Home Park, all related to the City of Sonoma’s application for a State Revolving Fund Grant to connect Rancho de Sonoma Mobile Home Park to the City of Sonoma Public Water System Summary At the City Council meeting of July 21, 2010, the City Council directed staff to prepare an application to the State of California Department of Public Health in support of a Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) Grant to connect Rancho de Sonoma Mobile Home Park to the City’s public water system. The California Department of Public Health Services and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have determined that the well water that supplies the residences at Rancho de Sonoma failed and continues to fail to meet the Safe Drinking Water Act’s maximum contaminant levels for arsenic. Connecting the Park to City water would rectify this situation. The State has provided the City with the deadline of December 8, 2010 for submitting preliminary documents in support of the City’s application. The State has indicated that the first step in this process is to approve a Water Service Consolidation Agreement with the park owners. This Agreement is necessary to assure the State that if the grant is provided, the City will accept the obligation of installing the public improvement including an 8-inch water main (1,700 lineal feet) and related improvements (described more specifically on Exhibit “B” to the Water Service Consolidation Agreement), that the City will assume any loan obligation along with the grant, and that the City will agree to consolidate the new public improvement to be installed, with the City’s public water system. The Cost Recovery Agreement provides that the mobile home park owners, Rancho Sonoma Partners LLC, shall pay all costs incurred by the City in connection with the SRF funding application and/or agreement, as specified in the Cost Recovery Agreement. The Resolution provides for a categorical exemption of this proposed public project under the California Environmental Quality Act. Recommended Council Action Approve Water Service Consolidation Agreement with Rancho Sonoma Partners LLC; approve Cost Recovery Agreement with Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC; and adopt Resolution adopting a finding of Categorical Exemption and Authorizing a Grant Application for Water System Improvements. Alternative Actions Suggest amendments to the agreements, or decline to adopt the agreements, thus declining to apply for the State Revolving Fund grant. Financial Impact The estimated cost of the public improvements and water connection fees to be funded by the grant is approximately $1.1 million. The State has indicated that the State Revolving Fund program typically consists of an 80% grant and a 20% loan, although another funding combination could be

Agenda Item 11A

offered to the City. The Cost Recovery Agreement states that Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC, will assume responsibility for reimbursing the City for its repayment of the loan portion as well as reimbursing the City for all legal, engineering, administrative and other costs related to applying for, administering and reviewing the project. Environmental Review Environmental Impact Report Negative Declaration Exempt Not Applicable Attachments: Status Approved/Certified No Action Required Action Requested

Water Service Consolidation Agreement with Rancho Sonoma Partners LLC Cost Recovery Agreement with Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC Resolution adopting a finding of Categorical Exemption and Authorizing a Grant Application
cc: Preston Cook, Steve Jaeger, Sue Loftin via email Letters of notification regarding this agenda item were mailed to the Residents of Rancho de Sonoma Mobile Home Park

RECORDED AT REQUEST OF AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City Clerk CITY OF SONOMA No. 1 The Plaza Sonoma, CA 5476

Rancho De Sonoma Mobile Home Park APN: 127-141-012 Site Address: 19275 Sonoma Highway Sonoma, CA 95476

Space above this line for Recorder’s Use Only

EXEMPT FROM FEES (GC 6103)

CITY OF SONOMA WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

THIS WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is made and entered into on the _____ day of ___________, 2010, by and between the CITY OF SONOMA, a General Law city in the State of California, hereinafter referred to as CITY, and RANCHO SONOMA PARTNERS LLC, a California limited liability company (“RSP LLC” or “OWNER”). CITY and OWNER are hereinafter sometimes referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.” RECITALS A. RSP LLC is the owner of certain property commonly referred to as Rancho de Sonoma Mobile Home Park, consisting of approximately 15.23 acres of land, site address 19275 Sonoma Highway, Sonoma, California, Assessor’s Parcel Number 127-041-012 in the City of Sonoma, California as more particularly described and shown in Exhibit “A” hereto and incorporated herein (the “Property” or “Park”). The Property is operated by OWNER as a mobilehome park, on which are located ninety-nine (99) mobilehome spaces and one rental apartment unit attached to a laundry building. The Property also contains a swimming pool, clubhouse and an onsite office. On said Property, the OWNER operates a community water system (Public Water System Number 4900845) (“OWNER’s Current Water System”) within city limits and within the City’s water service area. The source of the system’s water is ground water from a single well; and B. The OWNER tests the Property’s well water on a quarterly basis. Based on those test results, in July 2008 the California Department of Health Services (CDPH) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determined that the well water failed and continues to fail to meet the Safe Drinking Water Act’s (“SDWA”) “maximum contaminant levels” for arsenic. The EPA issued its Order No. PWS-AO-2008-6014 (“EPA Order”) requiring OWNER
Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

Page: 2 of 13

to take those steps necessary to reduce the well water’s arsenic levels to below the maximum contaminant levels by June 20, 2010. On April 21, 2010, the EPA amended its EPA Order to extend OWNER’s compliance due date to December 31, 2011, but required OWNER to provide information to the EPA by December 31, 2010 indicating that approval, funding and permits are ready and available as of December 31, 2010, for physical connection to CITY’s public water system or arsenic treatment has been permitted, constructed and is in operation as of December 31, 2010 (“December 31, 2010 Obligations”). OWNER holds the CITY entirely blameless and harmless for any liability to satisfy the EPA’s December 31, 2010 Obligations. C. The OWNER seeks to satisfy the EPA Order by replacing the OWNER’s Current Water System with the Improvements (defined below) and connecting the Park’s new water system (“Park’s New Water System”) to the City’s public water system and abandon use of the well for purposes of providing water for human consumption at the Park; and D. CITY operates a public water system (Public Water System Number 4910012) (“CITY’s Water System”) to provide safe, potable water and is permitted to provide water services to customers within city limits and within the City’s water service area; and E. OWNER desires to hookup and connect the Property to the CITY’s Water System in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Sonoma Municipal Code and Sonoma Public Improvement Standards applicable to the Property; and F. CITY has adopted regulations which establish a program for Water Rates and Connection Fees and provide for the construction and financing of certain water service facilities necessitated by new development within the City, through the collection of Water Service Connection Fees and Charges (“Connection Fees”); and G. As a public agency, CITY is eligible to apply for a Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) grant and/or low-interest loan (“SRF Funding”) from the CDPH and OWNER has requested that CITY apply for the SRF Funding on OWNER’s behalf for the costs associated with the design, construction, inspection, and completion of the Improvements (defined below), the prosecution, implementation and consummation of the Project (defined below) and consolidating the Improvements into the CITY’s Water System; and H. Purely as an accommodation to OWNER, but primarily because the CITY desires to promote and protect the health and safety of the residents of the Park insofar as their water supply is concerned, the CITY has agreed to make application to the CDPH for the SRF Funding subject to the conditions set forth herein (“SRF Funding Application”). The Parties acknowledge and agree that by undertaking the tasks of researching, preparing, submitting, and administering the application for SRF Funding as contemplated herein, the CITY is assuming significant responsibilities and will incur costs and expenses for which the CITY would not otherwise be liable. OWNER especially appreciates the willingness of the CITY to undertake these responsibilities because should the SRF Funding Application be successful and, among other things, the OWNER and CITY agree to the terms imposed by the CDPH in providing such SRF Funding to the CITY, the OWNER shall avoid expending hundreds of thousands of dollars it would otherwise be required to spend in order to discharge its responsibilities under EPA Order; and

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

Page: 3 of 13

I. CDPH has required that a draft of this Agreement be submitted to CDPH by no later than December 8, 2010, in order to meet the funding deadlines for the State to obligate funds during Fiscal Year 2010-2011. At the time of said submittal date, CDPH will not be in a position to provide OWNER and the CITY information concerning (i) the amount of the SRF Funding that CDPH will provide to the CITY for the Project, (ii) what percentage of any SRF Funding the CDPH ultimately provides to the CITY will consist of a grant and what percentage will consist of a loan (“CDPH Loan”), (iii) the terms and conditions under which CDPH is agreeing to provide the CITY with SRF Funding, (iv) the CITY’s obligations as the fiscal agent responsible for the receipt, distribution, and accounting of whatever SRF Funding CDPH is willing to provide to the CITY, and (v) other matters which may materially affect the decision of the Parties as to whether the Parties or any Party may desire to ultimately accept the SRF Funding offered by CDPH. It is the Parties’ understanding that, among other things, all such terms, conditions and matters pertinent to the SRF Funding and the CDPH Loan will be set forth in a Funding Agreement between the CITY and CDPH the execution of which is envisioned to occur on or before June 2011 (“Funding Agreement”): AGREEMENT. NOW, THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is acknowledged, and based upon the promises and agreements set forth herein, OWNER and CITY agree as follows: 1. Incorporation of Recitals. Each of the above Recitals is incorporated herein and agreed upon by the Parties. 2. a. Description of the Improvements. The “Improvements” (sometimes referred to as “Public Improvements”) shall consist of those tasks, work, and things generally described in Exhibit “B” to this Agreement. The Parties agree that said description is based upon preliminary engineering plans. This description is intended to roughly outline the scope of the works and improvements to be installed and constructed in connection with this Agreement. The exact works and improvements comprising the Improvements shall be consistent with the CITY’s Standards and applicable laws, and shall be subject to CITY Engineer approval, and may change as a result of site requirements, changes in construction standards, geologic conditions, engineering constraints, the amount and nature of SRF Funding provided by CDPH, the bids received by contractors bidding on the Project or other factors deemed relevant by the CITY Engineer, in his or her absolute and sole discretion. b. Improvement Plans. The Improvement Plans, as approved and modified by the CITY Engineer, shall govern the composition of the Improvements and to the extent they conflict with the descriptions set forth in Exhibit “B” to this Agreement the Improvement Plans shall control. For purposes of this Agreement, “Improvement Plans” shall mean the final versions, as approved by the CITY Engineer, of each plan, legal description, plat, specification and cost estimate prepared as part of and/or for the Improvements which are the subject of this Agreement.

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

Page: 4 of 13

c. Project. The “Project” shall consist of all Improvements, steps, equipment, funding, security, and activities of any kind associated with the consolidation of the CITY’s Water System with the Property, including but not limited to, designing and constructing on-site and off-site water main and fire system distribution lines and related facilities to meet the fire and daily, potable water service demands of the Property. The components, tasks and activities that generally constitute the Project are described in Exhibit “B”. d. City’s Costs. “CITY’s Costs” shall include all of the fees, expenses and costs incurred by the CITY or assessed OWNER in connection with and/or arising out of the Project, including but not limited to those costs incurred in designing, contracting for, applying for SRF Funding for, constructing, inspecting and financing the Improvements. CITY’s Costs also include Connection Fees and costs and expenses incurred by the CITY for administration, legal and environmental review, plan check, SRF Funding administration and accounting, and any other activity, service, or document, deemed by the City to be reasonably necessary or convenient to the timely and successful consolidation of the City’s Water System with the Park’s New Water System. 3. OWNER’s Obligations.

a. OWNER shall, at OWNER’s sole cost and expense, be responsible for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and all other applicable state and federal environmental laws pertinent to the Improvements and facilities to be constructed hereunder and for compliance with all conditions and mitigation measures which must be satisfied in connection with the same. CITY shall act as lead agency. As part of its obligations to fund the CEQA process, OWNER shall prepare or cause to be prepared all instruments, documents, reports and other like or kind writings required to be prepared and/or filed under CEQA. b. OWNER shall, upon request by CITY, and at no cost to CITY, furnish CITY with such information as OWNER possesses or has available to it in any form from any consultants, engineers, contractors or other persons engaged by or under the control of OWNER relating to the environmental assessment relative to installation of the Improvements or consummation of the Project. In this regard, nothing herein contained shall be construed or interpreted to require CITY to take or participate in any legal action for the purpose of securing approval for any Improvements or the Project. c. Prior and as a condition precedent to the CITY’s and CDPH’s acceptance of the Public Improvements and the CITY’s consolidation of the Park’s New Water System into the CITY’s Water System, OWNER shall, at its sole cost, have already installed and constructed all of the improvements (“OWNER’s Private Improvements”) required in order to transport and provide potable water to each of the mobilehome spaces and other locations in the Park to which potable water is envisioned to be supplied from the Public Improvements. The design, installation and construction of the OWNER’s Private Improvements shall be subject to the approval of the CITY. Additionally, immediately upon the CITY’s and CDPH’s acceptance of the Improvements and at its sole cost, OWNER shall disconnect OWNER’s Current Water System to disallow use of that well water for human consumption and to allow its use only for non-potable

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

Page: 5 of 13

purposes. The disconnection shall be a condition precedent to CITY’s Water System being connected to the Property, but the CITY’s Water System shall be connected and activated with water service to the Park’s residents within twenty-four (24) hours of OWNER’s disconnection, to minimize disruption to the residents. 4. CITY’s Obligations.

a. CITY shall use its best efforts to apply to CDPH for SRF Funding. The CITY agrees that, to the extent permitted by the CDPH and DWSRF rules and regulations, in said application CITY will use its best efforts to seek SRF Funding to cover all of the CITY’s Costs. b. CITY shall use its best efforts to perform and facilitate performance of the Improvement work in sufficient time such that the consolidation of the Property’s water distribution system into the CITY’s Water System shall occur within two (2) years after the date that the Funding Agreement is fully executed by the CITY and CDPH, or as extended by CDPH. Under no circumstances will water service be provided by the CITY to the Property prior to the satisfactory completion and acceptance of the Public Improvements by CITY and CDPH or timely payment or reimbursement by OWNER to CITY or CDPH, as the case may be, pursuant hereto and/or pursuant to any other agreement pertinent to the Project entered between the Parties. The CITY will not approve or accept any on-site water Improvements until all related (off-site or otherwise) Improvements and the OWNER’s Private Improvements have been completed to the satisfaction of the CITY. c. Once (i) the Project is deemed complete and in compliance with all applicable CITY, state and federal laws, rules, standards and regulations by CDPH and the CITY, (ii) all conditions precedent to the CITY connecting the Park’s New Water System to the CITY’s Water System have been waived by the CITY or satisfied to the CITY’s satisfaction, and (iii) all SRF Funding funds that should have been disbursed have been properly disbursed, the CITY agrees to consolidate the Park’s New Water System into the CITY’s Water System. d. Upon completion of said consolidation, and subject to any other agreement pertinent to the Project entered by the Parties, CITY shall assume responsibility for making the payments under the CDPH Loan. 5. CITY. a. Except as is expressly set forth in subparagraph 5(d), below, this Agreement shall not become effective and shall not bind the Parties hereto unless and until the Funding Agreement is executed by CITY and CDPH. b. The agreements, tasks and/or decisions set forth in subparagraph 5(c) must be agreed to, undertaken, completed and/or made, as the case may be, by the Party or Parties set forth below, before and as a condition precedent to the CITY’s execution of the Funding Agreement. The Parties agree that they will undertake the obligations to reach the agreements Conditions that Must be Satisfied before Funding Agreement is Executed by

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

Page: 6 of 13

and perform the obligations imposed upon each Party under subparagraph 5(c) in good faith and with due dispatch, but the Parties acknowledge and agree that, they are under no obligation or duty to reach such agreements or perform said tasks, and, further that after exercising said good faith and due dispatch, if they are unable to timely reach the agreements or perform the tasks set forth in subparagraph 5(c), the Funding Agreement will not be executed by the CITY and any SRF Funding that might otherwise be available to the CITY (or to OWNER) to defray the costs of the Project and/or to pay for the Improvements will be unavailable, and OWNER understands and agrees that in such an event, though without any obligation to continue the Project and construct the Improvements, should OWNER in its sole and absolute discretion decide to continue with the Project and construction of the Improvements, it shall be solely responsible for the construction of the Improvements and for paying all costs associated therewith. And, further, in such an event, the CITY shall not permit the Property to connect to the CITY’s Water System until and unless all Connection Fees and other expenses incurred by the CITY that remain unpaid hereunder and/or under any other agreement entered between the Parties pertinent to the Improvements and/or are incurred by the City in reviewing, inspecting, monitoring, disapproving and/or approving OWNER’s installation of the Improvements and complying with all of the applicable City Regulations and Specification for Public Improvements are fully paid to the CITY. And, further, in such an event should the EPA and/or CDPH initiate enforcement proceedings or take any other adverse action against OWNER, the CITY shall not be in any way responsible for same and OWNERS shall indemnify, release and hold the CITY harmless from any and all penalties, fines, damages, delays, costs, loss of income, fees, claims, expense, injuries or liabilities of any sort whatsoever arising out of or in any way connected with (i) any reasonable delays caused or contributed to by CITY, (ii) the Funding Agreement not being executed by CITY because all of the conditions set forth in subparagraph 5(c) are not satisfied, (iii) OWNER’s failure to comply with the EPA Order, and/or (iv) the failure to obtain SRF Funding for the Project and/or Improvements, irrespective of the CITY’s negligence, be it active, passive or sole. c. The agreements, tasks and/or decisions set forth below must be agreed to, undertaken, completed and/or made, as the case may be, by the Party or Parties set forth below, before and as a condition precedent to the CITY’s execution of the Funding Agreement. 1) OWNER’s full payment of all amounts then owed to the CITY under this or any other agreement between the Parties pertinent to the Project and/or Improvements; 2) OWNER’s and CITY’s written approval of the amount, nature and terms of any grant and/or CDPH Loan proposed to be provided to the CITY by CDPH as part of the SRF Funding; 3) OWNER’s and CITY’s written approval of the final Improvement Plans and Specifications in their condition as near to the time when the Funding Agreement must be signed by the CITY; 4) OWNER’s and CITY’s written approval of the Funding Agreement;

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

Page: 7 of 13

5) OWNER’s delivery to the CITY of all real property licenses and easements necessary or convenient to the City to investigate, construct and subsequently own, operate and maintain the Improvements; 6) Costs; 7) If necessary, OWNER and CITY entering into an agreement providing for the CITY to exercise the power of eminent domain in order to obtain the real property interests necessary to consummate the Project; 8) OWNER entering a separate agreement with CITY obligating OWNER to pay the CDPH Loan and related costs. Said agreement shall be secured in a fashion acceptable to the CITY; 9) OWNER and CITY entering an additional and separate agreement settling the litigation entitled Argonaut Investments, Inc. et al. v. City of Sonoma, Sonoma County Case No. SCV 243323; 10) OWNER and CITY entering an agreement addressing whether and under what circumstances the costs OWNER incurs in paying the CITY’s Costs, consolidating the City’s Water System with the Park’s New Water System and/or bringing potable water to the Park’s residents shall not be passed on to the Park’s tenants/residents in the form of rent increases or other charges; 11) OWNER and CITY entering an agreement (“Water Service Connection Agreement”) setting forth the terms and conditions under which the Project shall be prosecuted, implemented and completed and the Improvements shall be designed, constructed, completed and consolidated with the CITY’s Water System; 12) OWNER and CITY agreeing to the appropriate parties who will be bound by the agreements referenced hereinabove, whether those parties shall be personally, jointly and severally liable for obligations under said agreements and the nature and amount of security that OWNER must provide to the CITY to guarantee performance by OWNER under said agreements; and 13) OWNER and CITY agreeing to the number of separate agreements required to address all of the issues identified hereinabove. d. In addition to the agreements set forth in subparagraph 5(b), upon the full execution of this Agreement, the following obligations and agreements set forth in this Agreement shall be binding on the Party whose obligation they are to perform and must be performed at the time and under the conditions specified herein, irrespective whether the Funding Agreement is executed: 1) OWNER’s obligations under paragraphs 3(a) and (b). OWNER’s agreement to pay and/or reimburse the CITY all of the CITY’s

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

Page: 8 of 13

2) OWNER and the CITY shall reasonably and timely cooperate in the submittal and review of the Improvement Plans, specifications, budgets, estimates and other documents that constitute the SRF Funding Application. Both Parties have the right to review the final SRF Funding Application before it is submitted to CDPH and shall have the right to withhold approval of same. If either Party fails to approve the final SRF Funding Application in writing, then this Agreement and the Cost Recovery Agreement executed by the Parties as of ___________2010, shall be terminated, and the Parties shall have no rights or obligations as against the other under this Agreement except that (aa) any CITY’s Costs incurred by the CITY prior to its receipt of OWNER’s notice of disapproval of the SRF Funding Application shall be paid by OWNER within thirty (30) days after receiving a demand from the CITY to pay same and (bb) all obligations on the part of OWNER to waive claims against the CITY, hold the CITY harmless and/or indemnify the CITY shall survive termination of this Agreement. Provided that (i) OWNER and CITY give their written approval of the SRF Funding Application, (ii) OWNER delivers to the CITY a copy of this Agreement, executed by OWNER, (iii) , OWNER has fully paid all amounts then owed to the CITY hereunder and under any other agreement obligating OWNER to reimburse the CITY for the latter’s costs incurred in connection with the SRF Funding Application, and (iv) December 8, 2010, has not passed, then the CITY shall submit the approved SRF Funding Application to CDPH. In the event the SRF Funding Application (i) is untimely or determined incomplete or otherwise unacceptable by CDPH or (ii) is rejected, conditioned, delayed, denied or acted upon by the CDPH, and, as a consequence, OWNER is unable to comply with the EPA Order and/or is damaged or injured, incurs expenses, fees, penalties or costs or suffers any adverse consequences (collectively referred to as “OWNER’s Injuries”), OWNER waives any claims it may have against CITY for OWNER’s Injuries and indemnifies and holds the CITY harmless from any and all claims, responsibilities, liabilities, expenses, fees, penalties, damages or costs arising from OWNER’s Injuries, irrespective of CITY’s negligence, acts or omissions, be they sole, passive, active or willful. 3) The obligations and agreements set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 6-28.

6. OWNER Not Agent of CITY. Neither OWNER nor any of OWNER’s agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of CITY in connection with the performance of OWNER’s obligations under this Agreement. 7. Other Agreements. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall preclude CITY from expending monies pursuant to Agreements concurrently or previously executed between the Parties, or from entering into other agreements with the OWNER. 8. Sale or Disposition of Property. Sale or other disposition of the Property will not relieve OWNER from the obligations set forth herein. 9. Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned by OWNER.

10. No Vesting of Rights. Performance by CITY of this Agreement shall not be construed to vest OWNER’s rights with respect to any change in any fee, regulation or ordinance of the CITY.

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

Page: 9 of 13

11. Water Service Connection Fee Credit/Reimbursement. OWNER shall not be eligible to receive any Connection Fee credit or reimbursement for activity it performs under this Agreement. 12. Notices. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person, sent by facsimile and email or sent by mail, postage prepaid and addressed as provided in this Section. Notice shall be effective on the date it is delivered in person, or, if mailed, two days after the date of deposit in the United States Mail. Notice sent by facsimile and email shall be effective on the date the notice is facsimiled and emailed, provided on the same day, the notice is deposited in the U.S. Mail, fully prepaid. Notices shall be addressed as follows unless a written change of address is filed with the CITY: Notice to CITY: City Manager City of Sonoma No. 1 The Plaza Sonoma, CA 95476 FAX: (707) 938-2559 Email: [email protected] Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC Attn: Stephen Jaeger 770 Tamalpais Drive, 401-B Corte Madera, CA 94925

Notice to OWNER:

13. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement shall be ruled invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the Parties shall: (i) promptly negotiate a substitute for the provision which shall, to the greatest extent legally permissible, effect the intent of the Parties in the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision, and (ii) negotiate such changes in, substitutions for or additions to the remaining provisions of this Agreement as may be necessary in addition to and in conjunction with subsection (i) above to give effect to the intent of the Parties without the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision. To the extent the Parties are unable to negotiate such changes, substitutions or additions as set forth in the preceding sentence, and the intent of the Parties with respect to the essential terms of the Agreement may be carried out without the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision, the balance of this Agreement shall not be affected, and this Agreement shall be construed and enforced as if the invalid, illegal unenforceable provision did not exist. 14. Captions. The captions of this Agreement are for convenience and reference only and shall not define, explain, modify, limit, exemplify, or aid in the interpretation, construction or meaning of any provisions of this Agreement. 15. Litigation. In the event that suit is brought to enforce the terms of this contract, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to litigation costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. 16. Entire Agreement. Except as to the other agreements expressly contemplated by or referred to in this Agreement, this Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the Parties

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

Page: 10 of 13

with respect to the subject matters described herein. All modifications, amendments, or waivers of the terms of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the appropriate representatives of the Parties. 17. Intentionally left blank.

18. Further Acts. Each party hereto agrees to execute and deliver such other documents and perform such other acts as may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Agreement. 19. Interpretation. This Agreement is entered into within the State of California, and all questions concerning the validity, interpretation and performance of any of its terms or provisions or any of the rights or obligations of the Parties hereto shall be governed by and resolved in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 20. Running with Land. The terms and provisions set forth in this Agreement shall be deemed provisions, terms and/or covenants running with the Property in accordance with applicable law, including, without limitation, Section 1468 of the California Civil Code and shall pass to and be binding upon the successor owners of the Property. As such, all successor owners of the Property will have any and all of the rights, responsibilities and liabilities of OWNER, as if such person or entity originally executed this Agreement in place and stead of OWNER. Each and every contract, deed or other portion thereof, shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to such terms and conditions regardless of whether such terms and conditions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument. 21. Fair Reading. The provisions of the Agreement shall be construed as their fair meaning, and not for or against any party based upon any attribution to such party as the source of language in question. 22. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement and each and every term and provision thereof. 23. Construction. This Agreement shall be construed as if prepared by all of the Parties hereto. Accordingly, any rule of law (including California Civil Code Section 1654) or legal decision that would require interpretation of any ambiguities in this Agreement against the party that has drafted it, is not applicable and is waived. 24. Delay no Waiver. No delay on the part of any party hereto in exercising any right, power or privilege hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any waiver on the part of any party hereto of any right, power or privilege hereunder operate as a waiver of any other right, power or privilege hereunder, preclude any other or further exercise of any other right, power or privilege hereunder. 25. Warranty of Authority. Each individual executing this Agreement hereby represents and warrants that he or she has the full power and authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the named Parties.

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT

Page: 11 of 13

26. Inspection Rights. OWNER shall maintain and make available for inspection by CITY during regular office hours, accurate records pertaining to the design, construction and installation of the improvements to be constructed by OWNER. 27. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute but one instrument. 28. Venue. The Parties agree that any action or proceeding to enforce or relating to this Agreement shall be brought exclusively in the State courts located in Sonoma County, California, and the Parties hereto consent to the exercise of personal jurisdiction over them by any such court for purposes of any such action or proceeding. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by the Parties hereto as of the date first written above. OWNER Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC, a California limited liability company By: Its Managing Member ATTEST: By:_________________________________ A Member City Clerk By:_________________________________ A Member APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY OF SONOMA By: Linda Kelly, City Manager

Michael Stump, Attorney for OWNER

Jeffrey A. Walter, City Attorney

[If corporation, corporate seal and signatures of two (2) officers is required.]

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT City of Sonoma/Rancho Sonoma Partners Page: 12 of 13

EXHIBIT “A”

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY AND THE PROJECT
APN: 127-141-012

Site Address: Rancho de Sonoma Mobile Home Park 19275 Sonoma Highway Sonoma, CA 95476 Project Exhibit:

Version: 11/23/10

WATER SERVICE CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT City of Sonoma/Rancho Sonoma Partners Page: 13 of 13

EXHIBIT “B” DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED BY CITY AND REQUIRED TO BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY Non-exclusive listing of Improvements generally consist of the following: 8-inch water main, 1,700 lineal feet 3-inch water meter and box, 1 each 1-inch water meter and box, 1 each Valve assemblies Backflow assemblies, 2 each Fire hydrants, 4 each Related improvements:
Miscellaneous Fittings, thrust blocks and pipe connections AC and concrete pavement replacement Curb and gutter replacement Traffic control Demolition and clearing/grubbing Mobilization Any other facility, structure, equipment, activity or improvement that the City, in its sole discretion, determines is necessary, convenient or prudent to use, install, manufacture, replace, repair, construct and/or perform in order to prosecute, complete and/or secure the timely construction and/or installation of the Improvements.

“Project” generally includes but is not limited to the following: Design of Improvements Preparation and Negotiation of easements and right of way documents Preparation of plans, specifications and bid documents Public bidding and advertisement Construction of Improvements Inspection and construction management Water connection fees and charges City permits Engineering plan check City Attorney review Working with State and other agencies Applying for SRF Funding and SRF Funding Application SRF Funding Oversight and administration City administration Dispute resolution and possible handling of claims and litigation Any other activity (on the part of any person selected by the City), performance (on the part of any person selected by the City), duty (to be discharged by any Party selected by the City) and/or document (to be prepared, executed and/or recorded by any Party selected by the City) that the City determines, in its sole discretion, is necessary, convenient and/or prudent in order to prosecute, complete and/or secure the timely construction and/or installation of the Improvements

Version: 11/23/10

COST RECOVERY AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered on _________________2010 by and between the City of Sonoma, a general law City (“City”), Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC, a California limited liability company (“RSP LLC”), Preston Cook, personally and individually, and Stephen Jaeger, personally and individually (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Owner”). City and Owner are hereinafter sometimes referred to as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties”. RECITALS A. RSP LLC is the Owner of certain property commonly referred to as Rancho de Sonoma Mobile Home Park, consisting of approximately 15.23 acres of land, site address 19275 Sonoma Highway, Sonoma, California, Assessor’s Parcel Number 127-041-012 in the City of Sonoma, California as more particularly described and shown in Exhibit “A” hereto and incorporated herein (the “Property” or “Park”). Preston Cook and Stephen Jaeger and/or family Trusts that they have established and of which they are trustees have been or are the members of RSP LLC. The Property is operated by OWNER as a mobilehome park, on which are located ninety-nine (99) mobilehome spaces and one rental apartment unit attached to a laundry building. The Property also contains a swimming pool, clubhouse and an onsite office. On said Property, the OWNER operates a community water system (Public Water System Number 4900845) (“Owner’s Current Water System”) within City limits and within the City’s water service area; and B. The Owner tests the Property’s well water on a quarterly basis. Based on those test results, in July 2008 the California Department of Health Services (“CDPH”) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) determined that the well water failed and continues to fail to meet the Safe Drinking Water Act’s (“SDWA”) “maximum contaminant levels” for arsenic. The EPA issued its Order No. PWS-AO-2008-6014 (“EPA Order”) requiring Owner to take those steps necessary to reduce the well water’s arsenic levels to below the maximum contaminant levels by June 20, 2010. On April 21, 2010, the EPA amended its EPA Order to extend Owner’s compliance due date to December 31, 2010, but required Owner to provide information to the EPA by December 31, 2010, indicating that approval, funding and permits are ready and available as of December 31, 2010, for physical connection to City’s public water system or arsenic treatment has been permitted, constructed and is in operation as of December 31, 2010 (“December 31, 2010 Obligations”). Owner holds City entirely blameless and harmless for any liability to satisfy the EPA’s December 31, 2010 Obligations; and C. The Owner seeks to satisfy the EPA Order by replacing the Owner’s Current Water System with the Improvements (defined below) and, once those Improvements have been satisfactorily completed, connecting the Park’s new water system (“Park’s New Water System”) to the City’s public water system and abandon use of the well for purposes of providing water for human consumption at the Park; and

Cost Recovery Agreement Final 11-23-10

1

D. City operates a public water system (Public Water System Number 4910012) (“City’s Water System”) to provide safe, potable water and is permitted to provide water services to customers within City limits and within the City’s water service area; and E. Owner desires to hookup and connect the Park’s New Water System to the City’s Water System in a manner consistent with the provisions of the Sonoma Municipal Code, Sonoma Public Improvement Standards and all other laws and regulations applicable to the Property; and F. As a public agency, City is eligible to apply for a Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (“DWSRF”) grant and/or low-interest loan (“SRF Funding”) from the CDPH and Owner has requested that City apply for the SRF Funding (“SRF Funding Application”) on Owner’s behalf to fund and/or pay for the costs involved in designing, constructing, processing, prosecuting, inspecting and completing the Improvements (defined below) necessary to replace the Owner’s Current Water System with the Park’s New Water System, and consolidate the Park’s New Water System into the City’s Water System (the “Project” – defined below); and G. The improvements, work and activities (“Improvements” or “Public Improvements”) which make up the Project and for which the City is agreeable to submit (under terms and conditions specified in the Water Service Consolidation Agreement (“Consolidation Agreement”) between the Parties and dated________________2010) the SRF Funding Application are generally described in Exhibit “B”, attached hereto and incorporated by reference. The components, tasks, documents and activities that generally constitute the Project are generally described in Exhibit “B”. Owner agrees that it shall pay for all costs incurred by any Party, including CITY, in connection with or in any way related to the SRF Funding Application and any other activities undertaken by the City in connection with CDPH’s response to the SRF Funding Application and negotiating, analyzing, preparing, drafting and consummating the agreements and documents described in paragraph 5(c) of said Consolidation Agreement; and H. CDPH has required that the SRF Funding Application be submitted to CDPH by no later than December 8, 2010, in order to meet the funding deadlines for the State to obligate funds during Fiscal Year 2010-2011. At the time of said submittal date, CDPH will not be in a position to provide Owner and the City information concerning (i) the amount of the SRF Funding that CDPH will provide to the City for the Project, (ii) what percentage of any SRF Funding the CDPH ultimately provides to the City will consist of a grant and what percentage will consist of a loan (“CDPH Loan”), (iii) the terms and conditions under which CDPH is agreeing to provide the City with SRF Funding, (iv) the City’s obligations as the fiscal agent responsible for the receipt, distribution, and accounting of whatever SRF Funding CDPH is willing to provide to the City, and (v) other matters which may materially affect the decision of the Parties as to whether the Parties or any Party may desire to ultimately accept the SRF Funding offered by CDPH. It is the Parties’ understanding that, among other things, all such terms, conditions and matters pertinent to the SRF Funding and the CDPH Loan will be set forth in a Funding Agreement between the City and CDPH the execution of which is envisioned to occur on or before June 2011 (“Funding Agreement”); and

Cost Recovery Agreement Final 11-23-10

2

I. Owner and City desire to enter into this Agreement, whereby Owner promises to fully reimburse City for any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the SRF Funding Application and all activities of the City related thereto including those activities which take place after the SRF Funding Application is submitted and continuing through the date that the Parties approve or disapprove the Funding Agreement. Now, therefore, for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and for the promises and agreements stated herein, the Parties agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. a. Owner shall pay the City all costs, including State-mandated costs and fees, incurred by the City in connection with or in any way related to the SRF Funding Application and/or the Funding Agreement, including but not limited to the costs described in Recital I, above, and any activities undertaken by the City in connection with CDPH’s response to the SRF Funding Application and negotiating, analyzing, preparing, drafting, checking, and consummating the agreements and documents described in paragraph 5(c) of the Consolidation Agreement (“City’s Processing and Review Costs”). Owner’s obligation to pay City’s Processing and Review Costs shall obtain irrespective whether (i) the City submits an SRF Funding Application to CDPH, (ii) CDPH awards any grant and/or loan to the City, (iii) the City and/or Owner determine that the terms and conditions of any said CDPH grant or loan are unacceptable and reject CDPH’s award, and/or (iv) the City enters into a Funding Agreement. Owner’s obligation to fully and timely pay the City’s costs described herein shall sometimes be referred to herein as “Owner’s Payment Obligation”. 2. Owner also agrees to pay all outstanding and unpaid City’s Processing and Review Costs, including legal fees, plan check fees and engineering costs to date applicable to the Project and the SRF Funding Application upon execution of this Agreement. The outstanding costs, as of __________________, 2010, are as follows: Outstanding plan check and engineering fees Legal fees Total $ $ $

3. The City’s Processing and Review Costs shall also include costs the City incurs in retaining and using consultants in connection with the activities described in paragraph 1, above. If the City anticipates that it will require the retention of consultants or other experts in addition to the current City Engineer and City Attorney to adequately perform the tasks associated with the SRF Funding Application and Funding Agreement, it will provide Owner advance notice of the decision to retain such consultants and an estimate of the costs retaining said consultant(s) will entail. Owner agrees that notwithstanding the fact that Owner is obligated to pay all consultant costs in connection with the SRF Funding Application and the Funding Agreement, Cost Recovery Agreement Final 11-23-10 3

the City, in its sole discretion, shall select all consultants for the SRF Funding Application and Funding Agreement and shall determine each consultant’s scope of work. Owner further agrees that all consultants selected by the City shall work exclusively for the City even though Owner bears the responsibility of paying the consultants’ costs. Except for documents protected from disclosure to the Owner by a confidentially privilege, Owner shall be provided copies of any reports, notes, memoranda, correspondence or any other form of communication between the City and the consultants retained by the City concerning the SRF Funding Application and/or Funding Agreement. The Owner understands that it will not be a third party beneficiary to City’s contracts with consultants, except as necessary to compel performance by the consultant, obtain an accounting and as to indemnify. 4. In addition to the amount specified in paragraph 2, above, upon execution of this Agreement, the Owner shall deposit with the City the amount of $15,000.00 (“Deposit”) against which the City’s Processing and Review Costs shall be charged on a monthly basis. The City shall deliver monthly statements to the Owner showing the City’s Processing and Review Costs incurred by the City along with reasonable public record documentation supporting such costs as determined in the discretion of the City. The Owner’s failure to object to an invoice, in writing, within 30 days of the date the invoice was postmarked by the City to Owner shall be deemed a conclusive waiver of such objection. Any amounts not paid by Owner within said 30 day period shall accrue interest at the rate of 10 percent per annum until fully paid. 5. In the event the Deposit falls or, within 30 days is anticipated to fall, below 25% of the amount of the Deposit specified above, the Owner shall replenish the Deposit to its original amount within 15 days after written notice from the City. Owner shall pay to the City any other amounts owed to the City within 30 days after written notice from the City. Any amounts not timely paid by Owner shall accrue interest at the rate of 10% per annum until fully paid. 6. Intentionally left blank. 7. The Owner acknowledges and agrees that notwithstanding the Owner’s timely and full payment of the City’s Costs, the City is not obligated to approve or accept the Project, the Improvements or any of the permits or approvals necessary for the Project. The Owner further understands that the City shall not be bound by any recommendations or conclusions of the consultants retained by the City and paid for by the Owner pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. The Owner understands that all decisions regarding the Project will be made only after compliance with the City’s statutory and legal obligations and after considering all appropriate information and evidence; and that such evidence may cause the City to disapprove any or all of the permits or approvals Owner seek in connection with the Project. 8. a. Prior to and as a condition precedent to the City submitting the SRF Funding Application with the CDPH and prior to and as a condition precedent to the City executing the Funding Agreement, Owner shall pay to the City all then outstanding and unpaid City’s Processing and Review Costs and replenish the Deposit, if necessary.

Cost Recovery Agreement Final 11-23-10

4

b. Owner agrees and acknowledges that nonpayment or untimely payment of any amounts owed by the Owner pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, including the failure to timely replenish the Deposit, shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement and may, in the sole and unfettered discretion of the City, result in the temporary or permanent cessation of (i) the processing of the SRF Funding Application and/or the Funding Agreement, (ii) City performance under the Consolidation Agreement and/or any of its Paragraph 5(c) Agreements, and/or (iii) any and all activity on the part of the City pertaining to the Project, SRF Funding, and/or the Improvements and, after notice, may result in the denial, repeal or revocation of any and all applications, requests, approvals and/or permits in connection with the Project. The City may, and is hereby authorized to, withhold approvals, the submittal of the SRF Funding Application, execution of the Funding Agreement, and issuance of further plan checks until all the City’s Processing and Review Costs have been paid in full by Owner. In the event the City invokes any of the remedies described above, then, with respect to any delay, penalties, injuries, expenses, losses, fees, expenses, claims, damages or liabilities of any sort (“Liabilities”) resulting therefrom, the Owner hereby waives any and all rights it may have to seek recovery against the City for such Liabilities or compel compliance by the City under the Permit Streamlining Act, CEQA, or any other law which imposes deadlines upon the processing of and acting upon the SRF Funding Application or the taking of any other action contemplated herein, the Consolidation Agreement and/or its Paragraph 5(c) Agreements. c. Both Parties have the right to review the final SRF Funding Application before it is submitted to CDPH and shall have the right to withhold approval of same. If either Party fails to approve the final SRF Funding Application in writing, then this Agreement and the Consolidation Agreement shall terminate, and the Parties shall have no rights or obligations as against the other under this Agreement except that (aa) any City’s Processing and Review Costs incurred by the City prior to its receipt of Owner’s notice of disapproval of the SRF Funding Application shall be paid by Owner within thirty (30) days after receiving a demand from the City to pay same and (bb) all obligations on the part of Owner to waive claims against the City, hold the City harmless and/or indemnify the City shall survive termination of this Agreement. Provided that (i) Owner and City give their written approval of the SRF Funding Application, (ii) Owner and City execute this Agreement, (iii) Owner has fully paid all amounts then owed to the City hereunder and under any other agreement obligating Owner to reimburse the City for the latter’s City’s Processing and Review Costs incurred in connection with the SRF Funding Application, and (iv) December 8, 2010, has not passed, then the City shall submit the approved SRF Funding Application to CDPH. In the event the SRF Funding Application (i) is untimely or determined incomplete or otherwise unacceptable by CDPH or (ii) is rejected, conditioned, delayed, denied or acted upon by the CDPH, and, as a consequence, Owner is unable to comply with the EPA Order and/or is damaged or injured, incurs expenses, fees, penalties or costs or suffers any adverse consequences (collectively referred to as “Owner’s Injuries”), Owner waives any claims it may have against City for Owner’s Injuries and indemnifies and holds the City harmless from any and all claims, responsibilities, liabilities, expenses, fees, penalties, damages or costs arising from Owner’s Injuries, irrespective of City’s negligence, acts or omissions, be they sole, passive, active or willful.

Cost Recovery Agreement Final 11-23-10

5

9. The Owner hereby represents that he/she is the Owner of the subject Property. RSP LLC, Preston Cook and Stephen Jaeger shall be severally and jointly liable for Owner’s Payment Obligations and Owner’s other obligations hereunder. 10. This Agreement may be modified only in writing and signed by the authorized representatives of both the City and the Owner. 11. The Recitals are incorporated by reference into this Agreement. 12. The Parties authorize the City to record this Agreement or a memorandum of same in a form mutually acceptable to the Parties. 13. All notices required or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person, sent by facsimile and email or sent by mail, postage prepaid and addressed as provided in this Section. Notice shall be effective on the date it is delivered in person, or, if mailed, two days after the date of deposit in the United States Mail. Notice sent by facsimile and email shall be effective on the date the notice is facsimiled and emailed, provided on the same day, the notice is deposited in the U.S. Mail, fully prepaid. Notices shall be addressed as follows unless a written change of address is filed with the City: Notice to City: City Manager City of Sonoma No. 1 The Plaza Sonoma, CA 95476 FAX: Email: Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC___________________________________ Attn: Stephen Jaeger 770 Tamalpais Drive, Suite 401-B Corte Madera, CA 94925______________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________

Notice to Owner:

14. If any provision of this Agreement shall be ruled invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the Parties shall: (i) promptly negotiate a substitute for the provision which shall, to the greatest extent legally permissible, effect the intent of the Parties in the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision, and (ii) negotiate such changes in, substitutions for or additions to the remaining provisions of this Agreement as may be necessary in addition to and in conjunction with subsection (i) above to give effect to the intent of the Parties without the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision. To the Cost Recovery Agreement Final 11-23-10 6

extent the Parties are unable to negotiate such changes, substitutions or additions as set forth in the preceding sentence, and the intent of the Parties with respect to the essential terms of the Agreement may be carried out without the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision, the balance of this Agreement shall not be affected, and this Agreement shall be construed and enforced as if the invalid, illegal unenforceable provision did not exist. 15. In the event that suit is brought to enforce the terms of this contract, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to litigation costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. 16. Except as to other agreements expressly contemplated by and/or referred to in this Agreement, this Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter. All modifications, amendments, or waivers of the terms of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the appropriate representatives of the Parties. 17. Each party hereto agrees to execute and deliver such other documents and perform such other acts as may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Agreement. 18. This Agreement is entered into within the State of California, and all questions concerning the validity, interpretation and performance of any of its terms or provisions or any of the rights or obligations of the Parties hereto shall be governed by and resolved in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 19. The terms and provisions set forth in this Agreement shall be deemed provisions, terms and/or covenants running with the Property in accordance with applicable law, including, without limitation, Section 1468 of the California Civil Code and shall pass to and be binding upon the successor owners of the Property. As such, all successor owners of the Property will have any and all of the rights, responsibilities and liabilities of Owner, as if such person or entity originally executed this Agreement in place and stead of Owner. Each and every contract, deed or other portion thereof shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to such terms and conditions regardless of whether such terms and conditions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument. 20. The provisions of the Agreement shall be construed as their fair meaning, and not for or against any Party based upon any attribution to such Party as the source of language in question. 21. thereof. Time is of the essence of this Agreement and each and every term and provision

22. This Agreement shall be construed as if prepared by all of the Parties hereto. Accordingly, any rule of law (including California Civil Code Section 1654) or legal decision that would require interpretation of any ambiguities in this Agreement against the party that has drafted it, is not applicable and is waived.

Cost Recovery Agreement Final 11-23-10

7

23. No delay on the part of any party hereto in exercising any right, power or privilege hereunder shall operate as a waiver thereof, nor shall any waiver on the part of any Party hereto of any right, power or privilege hereunder operate as a waiver of any other right, power or privilege hereunder, preclude any other or further exercise of any other right, power or privilege hereunder. 24. Each individual executing this Agreement hereby represents and warrants that he or she has the full power and authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the named Parties. 25. Owner shall maintain and make available for inspection by City during regular office hours, accurate records pertaining to the design, construction and installation of the improvements to be constructed by Owner. 26. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute but one instrument. 27. The Parties agree that any action or proceeding to enforce or relating to this Agreement shall be brought exclusively in the State courts located in Sonoma County, California, and the Parties hereto consent to the exercise of personal jurisdiction over them by any such court for purposes of any such action or proceeding. Exhibits to be attached: Exhibit A Property Description Exhibit B Description of Improvements and Project IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed by the Parties hereto as of the date first written above. OWNER Rancho Sonoma Partners, LLC, a California limited liability company By: Its Managing Member By: A member Preston Cook Stephen Jaeger ATTEST: CITY OF SONOMA By: Linda Kelly, City Manager

Cost Recovery Agreement Final 11-23-10

8

City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Michael Stump, Attorney for Owner and Preston Cook and Stephen Jaeger APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jeffrey A. Walter, City Attorney

Cost Recovery Agreement Final 11-23-10

9

CITY OF SONOMA RESOLUTION NO. XX - 2010 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SONOMA ADOPTING A FINDING OF CATAGORICAL EXEMPTION AND AUTHORIZING A GRANT APPLICATION FOR WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AT THE RANCHO DE SONOMA MOBILE HOME PARK INCLUDING THE EXECUTION OF A WATER CONSOLIDATION AGREEMENT AND COST RECOVERY AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the 99-space Rancho de Sonoma mobile home park is located within city limits at 19725 Sonoma Highway; and WHEREAS, the private water system that serves the Rancho de Sonoma mobile home park is deficient in that it fails to meet the maximum contaminant levels for arsenic specified in the Safe Drinking Water Act; and WHEREAS, The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued an order requiring the property owner to bring the water system into compliance with the standards of the Safe Drinking Water Act by December 31, 2011; and WHEREAS, by virtue of its location within city limits, the Rancho de Sonoma mobile home park is eligible to be connected to the City of Sonoma’s public water system; and WHEREAS, the owners of the Rancho de Sonoma mobile home park have identified a grant opportunity through the California Department of Public Health’s (CDPH) Drinking Water State Revolving Fund that would fund the design and construction of a connection to the City’s water system as well as the payment of applicable connection fees; and WHEREAS, as a public agency, the City of Sonoma is eligible to apply for this grant, while as a private property owner, the owners of the Rancho de Sonoma mobile home park are not; and WHEREAS, out of a desire to protect the health and safety of the residents of Rancho de Sonoma mobile home park, the City Council is desirous of making an application for the CDPH grant; and WHEREAS, an application by the City for CDPH grant funds would include a Water Service Consolidation Agreement (“Water Consolidation Agreement”) between the City and the owners of the Rancho de Sonoma mobile home park, a copy of which is attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the scope of work described in the application for CDPH grant funds generally consists of the design and construction of facilities to connect the Rancho de Sonoma mobile home park to the City of Sonoma’s public water system, including approximately 1,700 lineal feet of 8-inch water main, 1- and 3-inch water meters, valve assemblies, backflow prevention assemblies, four fire hydrants, and related work, as well as the payment of applicable connection fees and front-footage fees; and WHEREAS, the bulk of said work will be performed on the park’s property; and

WHEREAS, the conditional commitment to apply for CDPH grant funds, construct the improvements described above, and proceed with the connection of Rancho de Sonoma with the City of Sonoma’s water system memorialized in the “Water Consolidation Agreement” constitutes a “project” as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (sometimes “CEQA”); and WHEREAS, the City is requiring the park owners to reimburse the City all of the City’s costs incurred in processing, designing, constructing, administering, and completing this project pursuant to a Cost Recovery Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Sonoma hereby finds and declares as follows: Section A The water connection facilitated by the CDPH grant and the Water Consolidation Agreement represents a minor alteration in the City’s existing water supply system that has no likelihood of causing any significant environmental impact and therefore qualifies as categorically exempt from CEQA under section 15303 of the California Environmental Quality Act’s Guidelines (Class 3 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), based on the following factors: 1. The water connection will serve an existing development. 2. The water connection will not facilitate any new development. 3. The improvements associated with the water connection will be constructed within an existing street and on private property 4. There are no federally listed or candidate species, or suitable habitat, or Critical Habitat within the construction area. 5. Once completed, the project will allow the residents to discontinue the consumption of well water provided by the park that contains unacceptable levels of arsenic currently found in the park’s well water supply. Section B Provided that the grant application meets with the City Manager’s and City Engineer’s approval and is otherwise in conformance with the provisions of the Water Consolidation Agreement, the City Manager is hereby authorized to submit a grant application to the California Department of Public Health to fund the connection of the Rancho de Sonoma Mobile Home Park to the City of Sonoma Water system and to execute the Water Consolidation Agreement associated with said grant application. The City Manager is also authorized and directed to execute the Cost Recovery Agreement. The City Manager’s authority to execute said agreements is conditioned upon the park owners executing said agreements. Section C

The City Manager is hereby authorized to make non-material changes to the Water Consolidation and Cost Recovery Agreements, provided said changes are approved by the City Attorney, prior to its execution.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this ___th day of December 2010 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT:

_____________________________ Steve Barbose, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Gay Johann, City Clerk

City of Sonoma City Council Agenda Item Summary
Department Administration Agenda Item Title Council Members Report on Committee Activities. Summary Staff Contact

Agenda Item: Meeting Date:

13A 12/01/2010

Mayor and Council Members

Council members will report on activities, if any, of the various committees to which they are assigned. MAYOR BARBOSE City Facilities Committee Community Choice Aggregation Focus Grp North Bay Watershed Association Sonoma Community Center Subcommittee Sonoma County Mayors & Clm. Assoc. BOD Sonoma County Waste Management Agency Sonoma County/City Solid Waste Advisory Group (SWAG) Sonoma Disaster Council MPT SEBASTIANI ABAG Alternate City Audit Committee CLM. BROWN City Facilities Committee Community Dev. Agency Loan Subcommittee Sonoma Valley Citizens Advisory Comm. Alt. S.V. Economic Development Partnership Advisory Committee, Alt. SVFRA JPA Working Group Substance Abuse Prevention Coalition Swimming Pool Subcommittee S. V. Library Advisory Committee, Alternate Cittaslow Sonoma Valley Advisory Council, Alt. CLM. GALLIAN ABAG Delegate Budget Committee CLM. SANDERS Budget Committee Community Dev. Agency Loan Subcommittee LOCC North Bay Division Liaison, Alternate Sonoma County M & C Assoc. Legislative Committee S. V. Library Advisory Committee Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District

Community Dev. Agency Loan Subcommittee, Alt. N/B Watershed Association BOD, Alt. Sonoma County Mayors & Clm. Assoc. BOD, Alt. Sonoma County M&C Assoc. Leg. Comm., Alt. Sonoma County Transportation Authority, Alternate Sonoma Disaster Council, Alternate Sonoma Housing Corporation, Alt. S. V. Citizens Advisory Commission S.V.C. Sanitation District BOD, Alt. S.V.E.D. Partnership Advisory Committee VOM Water District Ad Hoc Committee

Cemetery Subcommittee City Audit Committee

LOCC North Bay Division Liaison Sonoma County Transportation Authority (SCTA) Regional Climate Protection Authority Sonoma County/City Solid Waste Advisory Group (SWAG), Alt. Water Advisory Committee Sonoma County Ag Preservation and Open Space District VOM Water District Ad Hoc Committee Water Advisory Committee Cittaslow Sonoma Valley Advisory Council

Sonoma Housing Corporation S.V.C. Sanitation District BOD SVFRA JPA Working Group Swimming Pool Subcommittee Water Advisory Committee, Alternate

Recommended Council Action – Receive Reports Attachments: None