COUNCIL WATCH…
A Report on Council

Notes and commentary on the 4/6/09 Petaluma Council Meeting presented by the Council Watch Team of Petaluma Tomorrow.

Agenda Item 5A, New Business: PCDC resolution approving the project budget and authorizing award of contract for the Washington Street and Sixth Street pavement rehabilitation project number C00500207 (Marengo/Zimmer)

What’s at Stake: Awarding the contract to re-pave portions of Sixth Street as well as Washington Street from Howard to Petaluma Boulevard North. This will begin June 1 with 70 working days and 15 working nights scheduled.

Public Comment: Comments from numerous residents of Petaluma Hotel as to how disruptive nighttime work will be. Since the hotel is a historic building and does not have air conditioning, residents must keep their windows open in the summer. The disruption to the residents will be as bad or worse as the street work done last year.

Council Comments and Votes: Many councilmembers are concerned with the disruption to the residents of the hotel. The city is saving significant money on this project due to the construction slowdown. Could some of this money be used to relocate the hotel residents during the 15 nights? The measure passed with a unanimous vote.


Agenda Item 4B: Public hearing and discussion of East Washington Place Fiscal and Economic Impact Assessment (FEIA) pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 2008-189 N.C.S., “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 first test of Petaluma’s FEIA will be the Regency Development at the former site of Kenilworth Junior High, a.k.a. East Washington Place. This document is for discussion and comment only. No action can be taken in regards to its content.

Bay Area Economics (BAE) prepared the FEIA. Target is the only identified tenant of the development. Rohnert Park and Novato have both Target and Costco Stores. Napa has Target but no Costco. 2007 economic data was used for the analysis, including retail sales information from (the now bankrupt and out of business) Circuit City. Studies show that 3.4% of all national retail sales are via the Internet.

A spokesperson for Regency stated that they would pay for all of the site improvements for relocating the sports fields to Petaluma Junior High.

Public Comment: Many people commented on whether they want the project or not, rather than directly addressing the FEIA.
“What we see before us is really a very inadequate effort to access the actual impact on our community”
“Bay Area Economics seemed to regard The Regency Corporation as their client, rather than the City of Petaluma.”
“This FEIA does not rise to the standards that are adequate to provide an accurate and comprehensive assessment of the fiscal and economic impact to the council.”
“With a (building) footprint this size, we will have no way of re-purposing that building if Target fails”.
“It (the FEIA) was lacking in financial and employment analysis.”
“It’s not just grandstanding to stop a project. It’s making sure we get the right project that suits our real (retail) leakage needs.”
“Very thoughtful, regulated development really does contribute towards the economic viability of our town”

Council Comments and Votes:

Councilmember Glass –
“It did not give me the true economic impact of having dollars wired, for instance, to (the) home office wherever that big-box corporation might be.”
“Maybe it’s semantics, but this is a community benefit analysis.”
“But I’m not sure that in my interpretation of it, that it’s a community impact analysis, and that’s what I was really looking forward to seeing as I read through it.”
(In regards to any future FEIA’s) “How do we get a report that is not a retail leakage analysis or rehash of that information but rather something that really tells us how does this proposed project impact or community for better or worse.”

Councilmember Renee –
(In regards to the FEIA’s analysis of Target only in this center and no other specific retail draw) “So the whole number then is fairly speculative in terms of the number that is supposed to come to Petaluma.”
“I think that we have to be really honest about what this project is providing. I don’t see us reaching our economic sustainability through this project.”
“I think David Glass hit it on the head when he said that this is a community benefit analysis not an impact analysis.”
“I can’t honestly say that those are going to be quality jobs (at Target).”
“I don’t see this as something that’s going to achieve the numbers that this report says that it will.”
“I think that there should be a more honest analysis of what those (predicted retail sales) numbers are.”

Councilmember Barrett –
“You didn’t break down the components of Target that would complete with existing businesses here in Petaluma.”
“I wanted to see this as a fiscal impact analysis on what’s existing here”
“The online (Internet) sales issue really needs to be a part of any kind of fiscal impact when we’re looking at retail in our city”
“I don’t think that it’s as responsive as Mr. Rabbit says it is”.
“We don’t just want the (wage and labor) numbers coming out of the EDD.”
(Referring to the lack of detail in the FEIA)“Nobody wants a product that doesn’t do what its supposed to do.”
“Something else that I didn’t think was very adequately addressed in the FEIA and I would like to see us go forward is the whole police and fire department needs.”
“I think that we don’t want to see a (new) shopping center come up that isn’t actually pre-leased.”
“We need to know what is going to populate this center.”

.Councilmember Harris –
“This (FEIA) would be for informational purposes only and I think that we have achieved that and we are not holding up the process.”
“We should just move forward and accept the comments.”
“There’s probably going to be a net positive impact. So I think that we should move this forward as quickly as possible.”

Councilmember Rabbit –
“I think the report does meet the intent of the resolution. It meets the content of the resolution.”
(In reference to details of the economic impacts) “I don’t think that we can ever get there.”

Councilmember Healy - “ I think that a lot of valid concerns have been raised on both sides. But I’m not sure that trying to study this further is going to really dissolve the issue because I’m sure that there will still be people who will be dissatisfied with whatever the answer was at that point.”

Mayor Torliatt –
Petaluma’s retail leakage is NOT about a lack of retail opportunities here.
We should be trying to fill our existing retail vacancies first.
Locating a local retailer such as Freidman Bros. on this site should have been looked at in the FEIA.

(Referring to (the FEIA) “It sounds like it’s from a retail sales standpoint, not necessarily the business standpoint of all of the businesses that might be affected.”
“The big elephant in the room, and this is what we were talking about with this (existing downtown) vacancy factor is most of the retail square footage other than Target (in this development) is not identified. And so we really have no idea how that’s going to impact us.”
“I also believe in this FEIA, that the liabilities weren’t really defined and quantified.”
“We got ABAG (population) numbers that have changed dramatically (from the numbers used in the FEIA) that have impacted us.”
“I think we’re just going to accept what we have, but we certainly don’t necessarily agree with the analysis or outcome and we’ve all stated our opinion on the report”


Analysis: No mention was made of Regency’s demand for $10 million in city redevelopment fees. This money would be paid back with the city’s share of sales and property tax money generated by the development.

Petaluma’s contract with BAE requires them to do in-person interviews with local merchants. This was not done. This is a benefit analysis for Regency, not an economic impact analysis for Petaluma. Real details of real community economic impacts were not addressed at all.

Councilmembers Harris, Rabbit and Healy found no problems with the FEIA. Councilmembers Barrett, Glass and Renee along with Mayor Torliatt had serious issues with the absence of detail and content in the FEIA and that it seemed to show Regency’s goals rather than assess the impacts to the City of Petaluma.