COUNCIL WATCH
A Report on Council

Notes and commentary on the 05/04/09 Petaluma Council Meeting presented by the Council Watch Team of Petaluma Tomorrow

Agenda Item: PUBLIC HEARING

Item 6A. Public Hearing and Discussion of Dear Creek Village Fiscal and Economic Impact Assessment - Pursuant to City Council Resolution "Establishing a Policy and Procedure for the Preparation, Review and Use of Fiscal and Economic Impact Assessments for Specified Development Projects in the City of Petaluma," adopted October 6, 2008. (Moore/Lewitter)

What’s at Stake:
The intent of the FEIA is to give the Council the ability to determine the impacts of large development projects on the city so that it can make informed decisions about approving, altering, or rejecting such projects. Areas that are supposed to be examined by the FEIA include short-term job creation; part-time and full-time jobs created; pay scales; sales and property taxes generated; whether sales taxes are new or taken from existing businesses; and the impacts and costs to existing city services (sewer, water, fire protection, police etc.). Will the project bring a net gain to the city, or will it bring an immediate or eventual loss? Will the demands and burdens cost more than the taxes it brings in? This is what the Council has to try to figure out from the FEIA.

Deer Creek Village is the former DSL site on McDowell Blvd. and Rainier Ave. across from the hospital. The project currently is proposing over 300,000 square feet of big-box retail (Lowe’s home improvement and other unspecified tenants), some offices, restaurants, medical offices, a large health club, and smaller shops.

Bay Area Economic, the City’s contracted FEIA economic consultant, estimated that this project will bring in ~$34.2 million dollars from a certain trade area that did not take in to account all trade areas. Of the $32 million, the FEIA claims $28 million will be captured from “retail leakage,” or money spent by Petalumans outside of town. Yet this FEIA does NOT include any impacts from the proposed East Washington Place development (also done by Bay Area Economic). If this project is approved as proposed, with or without the East Washington project, it will have a negative impact on an undetermined number of local businesses, including their likely demise. It can lead to more large and small commercial spaces going vacant. It would drain local monies out of the community, adding to the burden on our streets, water supply, and public safety services.

Public Comment:
Mid-State Construction was well represented, as were other speakers in the construction industry. The Living Wage Coalition was also present, with an alternative FEIA analysis questioning the validity of Bay Area Economics’ FEIA report.

A point was brought up that nationally, every year, 1% of small business’ monies get captured by publicly held corporations (shareholders and stock market).
It is valid for Petalumans to question differing methodologies and theories regarding ‘free-market’ capitalism and other economic models that are more socially and environmentally oriented.

Council Comments:
This item is a discussion only item, and no formal action is required or taken.

Dave Glass: Wants best development for Petaluma. This site was low on the list of best development sites for Petaluma retail. Glass would like to see Petaluma maximize its revenue for a net positive gain, but not at the expense of our existing businesses. He suggested Freidman’s for this site.

Mike Harris:
Thinks the City should say “yes” to development more often.

Mike Healy: The FEIA is in its “beta-version’. Public may not understand the
“constraint” on Council to adhere to the General Plan’s (GP) zoning/land-use regarding application of FEIA and GP Chapter 9 (Economic Health & Sustainability). He asks City Atty. Eric Danley for his opinion re: projects’ consistency with GP and the Council’s ability to weigh in on a project- to deny or approve it based on consistency with the GP.
He agrees with Glass on Freidman’s.

Eric Danly: He states the FEIA alone does not create “discretionary decision-making” for the Council. “Land-use legislation [....] creates entitlements for conforming projects.” This seems to satisfy Healy.


Tiffany Renee: Questioned the use and ability of the GP if the above opinion is valid and decision-making bodies don’t need or can’t use it to set policies as set forth in the GP’s Chapter 9. In the Staff report on Item 6A, it states that the FEIA information can be used by the Council to make decisions on project entitlements, as it provides direction to decision-making bodies.

Mayor Torliatt agrees with Renee’s question and agrees that this issue definitely needs to be addressed, but dissuades further discussion, as this discussion is not in the purview of the item as it published on the Agenda.

Dave Rabbitt: Accepts FEIA as is. Net positive is fine. FEIA is showing weaknesses. BAE’s report complies with FEIA resolution, and has a valid margin of error. He does not need or want to know all data regarding the effect of large developments on existing stores.

Teresa Barrett: Barrett would give BAE’s report an “F” grade. BAE data needs to be backed up by reliable facts, not conjecture. Some phrases and sentences are insufficient and confusing, leading to half-truths. As presented, the BAE report “obfuscates points”. The report “needs hard data” on the impacts on existing businesses, as well as on public services without clear concise data and information, it is impossible to analyze the data as presented. This FEIA seems to be waste of time and money spent.

The FEIA report process needs to be clarified, reminding applicants and citizens that acceptance of the FEIA as received is not to be construed as acceptance of the FEIA. Also perhaps the FEIA needs to go out to bid, creating a more competitive process, not a single-source bid. Barrett also likes the idea of Freidman’s occupying the site.

Mayor Pam Torliatt: Mayor Torliatt gave a rundown on the history of the current FEIA resolution- how in the beginning the Community Impact Report had much better defined criteria for creating policies, how this CIR was brought before the prior Council that voted it down on a 5-2 vote. The CIR was then sent back out into the community for more review, and was heavy influenced by the development community and their Council supporters. This version then passed on a 6 to 1 vote. What we have now is a watered down, highly developer-influenced version.

Regarding BAE’s FEIA, Torliatt critiqued the numbers as presented in Tables 32, 19, 10, & 13. Of the proposed long-term $34m in Sales Tax Revenue Petaluma is to potentially receive, Petaluma already receives up to perhaps 41% ($14m) of this $34m. BAE was unable to explain away this information as analyzed by Torliatt and conceded her point.

Three major ‘missing’ retail categories in Petaluma seem to be electronics, lumber/hardware, and general merchandise, and 695,000 sq. ft. (E. Washington Place plus Deer Creek) seems extreme to accommodate these. The issue is not whether Petaluma needs retail and the associated sales tax revenues, but at what rate does development occur, and where within the city will it best benefit the city as a whole. Large developments such as these two will most likely exacerbate existing vacancies.

Sales tax revenues promised in either of these developments will not solve Petaluma’s budget problems. Developer fees will not balance Petaluma’s budget, as it is illegal to use these fees to balance budgets.

As for job creation, there are already projects coming through that will create construction jobs. Some of these projects are: Logan Place, Pittler property (transit mall/Weller St.), North River Landing (these will bring downtown property taxes), and two interchanges at East Washington and Old Redwood Hwy.
The question then becomes where will jobs be focused, and which locations are the best investments for Petaluma and at the best benefit for all of Petaluma.


Analysis:
The FEIA process is meant to review and critique some of the presented methodologies and theories used to develop land, make profits, offer living wage or low-paying jobs, and the socioeconomic impacts of such. The process is still being worked out. Because the original Community Impact Report was dismissed by the former unquestioning and developer friendly Council, Petaluma has the watered-down version called the FEIA. As each large development seeks coveted “entitlements,” the FEIA process represents a minor hurdle to project proponents but is inadequate for making informed decisions by the Council. Even if the FEIA finds huge negative impacts it cannot be used to reject a project.

One point brought up was that City Staff as well as other Council-appointed bodies currently deem this project “Incomplete” and it is questionable as to why the FEIA is being discussed at this stage. Also, no tenants have signed leases. Completed shortly after the East Washington Place’s (EWP) FEIA, the numbers cited in the Deer Creek FEIA do not take into account the build out of EWP, nor were issues brought up at the EWP FEIA considered.

The hiring of an FEIA consultant needs to be more competitive, and the contract needs to be more specific. If an FEIA is not responsive, a consultant should not be paid. It is important that newer economic theories be represented so that Petalumans can more clearly understand and assess the long and short-term impacts that large retail developments have not only on consumption habits, but also on traffic, public services, revenue to pay for those public services, smaller stores’ vacancy rates, the need for affordable and low-income housing, as well as on local providers of jobs. In fact, Petaluma needs the Community Impact Report first proposed by Petaluma Citizens.
evolved intelligence

[QUOTE]Originally posted by PetalumaTomorrow:
COUNCIL WATCH
A Report on Council

Dave Rabbitt: Accepts FEIA as is. Net positive is fine. FEIA is showing weaknesses. BAE’s report complies with FEIA resolution, and has a valid margin of error. He does not need or want to know all data regarding the effect of large developments on existing stores.

Your note taking was a little slack- of course I would want to know and desire to know the net imapct of new development on each and every store in Petaluma but the fact is that data is not available and in fact, most likely unattainable. That was my comment....

petaluma tomorrow has an agenda, they push it....even if it means being a bit dishonest...leaving out little facts here and there and embellishing a bit. their integrity is questionable at best and they are no where near genuine in what they promote. very disappointing.

Saul Alinsky would be proud of Communists for Tomorrow....

My guess is these very bias petalumaformytommorrows are written by someone named marty from another town (sonoma).

As the coucilmembers read martys prepared comments, our city furthers into bankruptcy.

Thank you Petaluma Tomorrow for setting the record straight on how things are going on the council. Thanks for the intelligent reporting that is more fact based than the Argus. Thanks for the integrity and for not succumbing to the reactionary forces of ignorance that seems to have become prolific on these opinion pages. Do these people even live in Petaluma? Oh yea, some say they work here. Or used to work here. So, who is paying them? The "TO Tell The Truth group"? The goofy Recall Plot, who pays them? Could they be paddling their canoes more upstream? Keep paddling Dudes. The tide of accountability of loyal Petaluma citizens is headed your way. LOL!

ptlmafrnd, I'd happily read other summaries of city council meetings from different perspectives.

Perhaps you'd like to write them.

if i wasn't busy running my own business, spending time with my wife and kids maybe i would take proper notes. i simply find it unfortunate that these notes are presented in a slanted manner. can't notes just be presented w/o the slant, as they were stated? why the slant? i agree with a great deal of what pet tom is about but it is very unfortunate how this group goes about pushing its agenda.

I know exactly my position on the Deer Creek FEIA as well as the East Washington FEIA thank you very much. The FEIA's were written in accordance with the resolution which dictated the scope of services provided by Bay Area Economics. I said as much in the meeting(s). Would I like to see a detailed analysis of each and every store and the impact thereof? Sure- but it is neither required by the resolution or is the data even available to analyzed and as you say... 'nuff said.

quote:

Originally posted by Dan Lyke:
ptlmafrnd, I'd happily read other summaries of city council meetings from different perspectives.

Perhaps you'd like to write them.

The fact is these notes should not have perspectives. They should just be accurate accounts of what was said at the council meetings, that's what they look like they're suppose to be from the outside. But as you read you can see a bias. Instead of trying to make these notes look like a court reporters account of the meetings there should be a disclaimer saying these are someones views and not factual accounts of what was said at the coucil meetings. When I first started reading pet. tommorrows blog I thought it was the city providing us w/ the notes from the meetings, than I noticed some very bias comments. That said I think there should be a disclaimer so others don't get confused also.

agreed king, well stated.

king01 said "The fact is these notes should not have perspectives."

That's a rather entitled attitude. "should"? ptlmafrnd has admitted that going to the city council meetings, or even watching them on video, and writing summaries is an undertaking that requires time and energy. Furthermore, any attempt at summary, any reporting, contains the bias of the process that created it.

And you two are sitting here on the sidelines saying what PetalumaTomorrow "should" do? What sort of self-entitled commie whiners are you people?

I may not agree with the particular slant of these notes or the reporting of the Argus Courier or what have you, but as a new resident I'm make an effort to go to advisory council meetings that address issues that I have an interest in, and educate myself about the economics of local circumstance, and learn about the various factions, and what I hear from one side is this tremendous sense of all of the things that "should" be done by other people, because after all you have busy lives and can't be bothered to get involved in the towns and communities in which you live.

"should" indeed.

Dan, i never once said what pet tom "should" do, never! read my initial post here, i was simply pointing out my view of these notes. not once did i say what they "should" do. they can do whatever they want to do. it is just disappointing to me that they promote themselves on "open government" and post these notes as reporting from a meeting and that is not what it is. and the open government, they folks they support are as guilty as anyone of back door politics but pet tomorrow doesn't "report" on that. again, they can do what they want, i just was posting my opinion on them. "should" i not have done that?

quote:

Originally posted by Dan Lyke:
king01 said "The fact is these notes should not have perspectives."

That's a rather entitled attitude. "should"? ptlmafrnd has admitted that going to the city council meetings, or even watching them on video, and writing summaries is an undertaking that requires time and energy. Furthermore, any attempt at summary, any reporting, contains the bias of the process that created it.

And you two are sitting here on the sidelines saying what PetalumaTomorrow "should" do? What sort of self-entitled commie whiners are you people?

I may not agree with the particular slant of these notes or the reporting of the Argus Courier or what have you, but as a new resident I'm make an effort to go to advisory council meetings that address issues that I have an interest in, and educate myself about the economics of local circumstance, and learn about the various factions, and what I hear from one side is this tremendous sense of all of the things that "should" be done by other people, because after all you have busy lives and can't be bothered to get involved in the towns and communities in which you live.

"should" indeed.

What I meant was the notes should be accurate, then others can comment on their perspective after reading what was really said at the meetings. Petaluma Tommorrow intentionally skews the facts and leaves comments out to reflect their motives.