You are currently browsing the category archive for the 'Uncategorized' category.
YOLO SUN NEWS REPORT :
Updated in large part as a result of the death of a Woodland bicyclist — riding upon the existing — on-street, Class II type of bikeway route previously adopted — the “Final” version of a 2001-originated Davis-Woodland Bikeway Feasibility Study (DWBFS) has now recommended a preferred (6.5 mile) intercity route and accomplished related feasibility analyses for potential implementation of a dedicated, Class I type of bikeway.
Class I bikeways are physically separated from motorized vehicular traffic, by either open space or a barrier.
According to an associated staff report: “The final piece of the on-street [Class II] type of bikeway is currently under construction with [imminent completion, along expanded CR-99D, CR-29 and CR-99]” — while, the near-decade old, DWBFS also: “included pursuing a dedicated bikeway after completion of the County road improvements.”
However, several pivotal problems are looming and — “any one of these issues could kill the project” — according to Woodland City staff members briefing Council members Bill Marble and Martie Dote during a recent meeting of its Infrastructure Subcommittee.
Uncertainty surrounds potential agreement by Woodland, Davis and Yolo County about joint action on an application for regional and federal funds to accomplish another phase of this project — within “the next application window in October 2009.”
This “Final” DWBFS Update is currently being circulated throughout appropriate community venues within all three jurisdictions and is intended to be available for action during late October — by both city and county panels of elected officials.
___ Reasons / Outcomes of DWBFS Update ___
Reasons other than this (early 2008) bicyclist fatality — for this DWBFS Update begun by multi-jurisdictional action during mid-2008 — are three, identified as: evolving “State and Federal government mandates [and] funding opportunities for projects that promote alternative forms of transportation, [i]nterest in evaluating new options to accommodate the growth in southeast Woodland and surrounding areas,” and interest about inclusion of a Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) component within what was deemed an: “alternative transportation corridor.”
Key facets of the program of feasibility analyses addressed within the updated DWBFS are interwoven and overlaid, including policy predication for selection of its preferred route for a dedicated (Class I) bikeway.
“Connection Travel Times” analyzed for three alternative routes, demonstrate (not surprisingly) that the optimum route orientation involves a diagonal, SE / NW path — “as a bird flies” — between J Street & Covell Boulevard on the Davis end and County Road 24A & Sixth Street at the Woodland terminus.
Coincidentally, this basic route is already the track of the California Northern Railroad, and the recommended bikeway route parallels this track for much of its own course (please see related details, below).
One proposed alternative route would enter Woodland at its SE corner, greatly extending “travel times,” toward the predominance of the City — while, the other alternative route would closely parallel Highway 113 — failing to optimize “travel times” upon entering Davis.
The alternative route paralleling Highway 113 would impact 33 parcels of land, but the preferred route would impact only 18 parcels.
In addition, concerns and resistance from adjacent landowners was much greater along this Highway 113 corridor, according to Woodland City staff.
By vivid comparison — 2.7 miles of the 6.5 mile recommended route — has already been positively received by adjacent landowners: North Davis Land Company and Lewis Planned Communities — which have “sent letters stating their interest in working with the jurisdictions in the future,” regarding this project.
Another key item that is proceeding smoothly is passage of this recommended bikeway route under Highway 113 (at its railroad overpass). “Caltrans has provided positive feedback to construct” the bikeway within its [right-of way], indicates a staff report.
DWBFS intentions regarding: “evaluating new options to accommodate the growth in southeast Woodland [principally, the Spring Lake Community area]” — was noted by inclusion of a — potential phase — that may in the future be added as a branch of the preferred route.
___ NEVs to be Nixed ___
Quite significantly — both staff and elected officials of Woodland and Yolo County favor eliminating the NEV component from the project, based on several considerations.
“Let’s get rid of the NEVs — now!” exclaimed Woodland City Manager Mark Deven, during the recent meeting of its Infrastructure Subcommittee — while, another staff member indicated that: “the county is strongly with removing [NEVs]” from this proposed bikeway plan.
One reason for not accommodating an NEV lane is its expense. A regular pedestrian – bikeway is estimated to cost about $9.5 million — with NEV capability adding $3.8 million to that price-tag.
In contrast — a regular bikeway-branch of this proposed facility — that might eventually better serve SE Woodland — is estimated to cost only an added $2 million.
Maintenance costs for this facility are estimated to be $76,000 annually (shared among three jurisdictions).
Money for designing and constructing this bikeway, however, is intended to be entirely derived from: “regional and federal transportation funds generated by competitive grant applications or federal appropriations” — not from the local purse — emphasizes Woodland City staff.
___ NEVs Lack Political / Marketing Traction ___
Justifications for including an NEV component within this local project appear tenuous, at best. Concerns and cautions are plainly outweighing perceived benefits of this aspect of the project, and its direct feasibility appears vague and unproven.
Apparently, this nature of motor vehicle exists within an already slim and swiftly narrowing niche.
NEVs — with a top speed of around 25 mph and a range of less than 30 miles — are mainly intended for intracity (“neighborhood”) travel and are unlawful to operate on roads posted for speeds above 35 mph (except on specialized lanes, analogous / coincident with bike lanes).
Also, the price differential between NEVs and regular electric-powered motor-vehicles — capable of conventional speeds and versatility — is rapidly closing.
NEVs may eventually become obsolete antiques rather than viable alternative transportation, implies this DWBFS assessment.
A key fact worth added note – is that electric-powered motor vehicles, while creating no emissions — themselves — are inevitably powered by various sources of electricity which may significantly add to climate change.
Bicycles — however – are guaranteed to be totally free of environmentally deleterious emmisions in operation.
Woodland City staff recently expressed to its Traffic Safety Commission that — because of a variety of factors — local NEV use is expected to remain flat or perhaps decline during the foreseeable future.
Interestingly, Joshua Cunningham of UCD’s — Institute for Transportation Studies — presented a September 2008 analysis entitled: “Research Insights for NEVs on a Davis-Woodland low speed corridor,” which highlights the limitations and diminishment of the NEV niche within evolving transportation circuitry.
___ DWBFS Survey and NEVs ___
This evolving profile of NEV use is clearly reflected in a DWBFS survey of approximately 300 local residents, the majority of whom live / work in Davis (where there exists a higher level of NEV interest).
Survey results indicate that: while more than 87% of respondents would be more likely to increase their — bicycle use — as a result of having access to a (Class I) Davis-Woodland Bikeway, almost 60% of respondents said that such an NEV access route was — “not likely” — to increase their NEV use — with most (67 of 79) of the other — likely users — presently lacking an NEV.
More than 66% of survey respondents, most of whom don’t presently own an NEV, stated that they would “rarely or never” use it on this proposed facility, while less than 18% said they would use it at least once per week.
“NEVs are not a good match with bikers,” recently observed a city staff member.
Support for this observation / conclusion appears in the DWBFS survey, wherein more than 90% of bikers are “comfortable sharing the facility” with pedestrians — but that comfort level starkly drops to the 65% range for “motorized vehicles traveling less than 25 mph.”
In other words — about a quarter of potential users of such a bikeway are “[un]comfortable” about inclusion of motorized vehicles — regardless of their intended speed of operation.
Several elaborated comments within this survey offered specific criticisms of NEV inclusion upon such a bikeway — desiring a focused emphasis on bicycling.
Only 40% of survey respondents were “comfortable sharing the facility” with equestrians. Such incompatibility may have been one reason for the elimination earlier this year of this particular mode of transportation from the proposed bikeway.
Woodland staff suggested and reiterated at the Infrastructure Subcommittee meeting — that some reasonable opportunity should be available for Davis to politically digest this — NEV-nixing by Woodland and Yolo County — among Davisites — prior to publicly announcing it — since: “we don’t want it to kill the project, [or] to cram it down [Davis’] throat.”
___ Four Other Critical Issues ___
During the recent Woodland City Infrastructure Subcommittee meeting, staff members outlined a series of five major issues requiring resolution prior to further progress, one of them being whether the DWBFS should recommend inclusion of an NEV component.
Remaining critical issues are: (1) Acquisition of Right of Way (ROW), (2) Maintenance of the Bikeway, (3) Potential Conflicts with Agricultural Uses, (4) Funding for Local Match of Environmental – ROW – Design Phase.
In addition, renewed joint decisions by city councils in Woodland and Davis, as well as by the county board of supervisors — “would be required to move the project forward” — relates the staff report.
ROW acquisition could potentially involve public eminent-domain proceedings, wherein owners of what is almost entirely farmland (on the recommended route) would receive monetary compensation for property taken for public use.
___ Woodland Council Opposed to Essential Eminent Domain? ___
However, the sheer prospect of having to condemn any private property for purposes of constructing this bikeway aroused immediate and profound antagonism from Councilmember Marble — who indicated his belief that other Woodland City Council members would share his policy position of extreme reluctance regarding any use of such a process.
Councilmember Dote didn’t disagree with Marble’s political assessment.
Marble expressed that he considered the scope of public value / importance attaching to this proposed bikeway to be significantly less than that of a public road or highway — with City Manager Deven agreeing.
Thus, it seems that any single, relevant landowner / farmer along this proposed bikeway route could extinguish the project by simply refusing cooperation.
Eminent domain proceedings would — however — only affect a tiny sliver of land amidst relatively vast agricultural fields and across Willow Slough.
Staff members and council members at the Infrastructure Subcommittee meeting suggested that the Yolo County might take the lead role within such a ROW process.
___ Agricultural / Environmental Impacts ___
Major problems of bikeway – agricultural compatibility will certainly arise with occasional episodes of agricultural (aerial, and perhaps ground-based) spraying — which would arguably pose a health hazard / nuisance for bicyclists — as well as with required alterations of field-tillage practices — which would have to conform to inhibitions of a transecting bikeway.
Yolo County Farm Bureau has “recommended a 500 foot buffer [on either side of this facility] along this corridor, possibly via purchase of the property or purchase of an easement with restrictions.” it also “recommended incentive programs for impacted landowners to offset impacts and to offset increased exposure to liability [and environmental concerns].
“Spraying of any given crop usually occurs a couple of times a year per parcel, and it mostly occurs during the morning hours,” according to the feasibility study. “The duration of spraying is typically an hour.” Aerial spraying is forbidden within a 500 foot buffer zone around city limits.
“The corridor may need to be closed during spraying times which will require close coordination with growers to determine their spraying schedule.”
Various approaches to such temporary bikeway closures are being considered.
Accomplishment of detailed analyses of environmental (flora & fauna, etc.)conditions and impacts of this project are likely to become its next developmental phase. Several state and federal permits will be required for its eventual approval.
___ Maintenance and Funding ___
Much discussion occurred during the recent Woodland Infrastructure Subcommittee meeting about the nature of — three-way funding split — that would operate for future phases and long term operation of this project.
Currently, there is a 40% / 40% / 20% cost sharing arrangement, with the county in the lesser category of expense.
City staff expressed their belief is that the county is actually looking for a — bi-city — 50-50% split — with it being written out of the funding formula.
“That doesn’t seem fair,” responded Marble. Dote echoed his position by noting that city residents also pay into county coffers and are residents of both jurisdictions. Plus, various county residents may also use / benefit from such a facility.
City staff strongly related a basic preference for one (single) entity (perhaps in multi-year rotations) being in charge of facility maintenance (from potholes and lighting to broken-glass and rubbish) — whatever the eventual decision(s) about jurisdictional cost-sharing.
That single entity will likely be Woodland or Davis, rather than Yolo County.
Councilmember Marble thought aloud that: “perhaps PG&E might put solar panels [on a shade structure installed along the bikeway],” in order to help fund this project.
On the topic of creating a local match for needed proportions of available federal funding — city staff say that certain state-provided money can be used for such a local funding match — minimizing allocation of (severely strained and hyper-prioritized) local revenues for this project.
In order to move this project into the next phase, however, some joint-council resolutions / joint-funding mechanism(s) / relevant memorandum(s) of understanding(s) must be renewed.
Such resolutions would commit these jurisdictions to a local-funding match (intended to eventually be obtained from state-level resources), in order to submit a timely application for various federal allocations.
As noted above, the next application period for relevant federal support is during October 2009.
___ Railroad ROW (Bonus) Wild Card ___
The recommended route of the “Final” DWBFS runs predominantly alongside a Union Pacific Railroad track used by the California Northern Railroad (CNRR).
City staff has revealed that there is a — fair chance — that the change in local railroad practices which has been quite eagerly anticipated within Woodland — for a quarter-century — may finally be on track and approaching the station (so to speak).
“[R]ecent discussions with [ ] railroad representatives revealed plans to abandon the railroad tracks five to ten years into the future,” indicates the DWBFS. However, “[p]urchasing right of way or obtaining an easement from the railroad is a lengthy process and is not recommended if the jurisdictions want to explore starting the next phase of this project soon.”
Apparently — federal money is coming for replacement / restoration of the CNRR’s ancient, wooden trestle spanning the Yolo Bypass — but CNRR is contemplating using these significant funds — instead — for completing a re-orientation of their entire — local tracking format – including abandonment of the railroad track that runs alongside the proposed (recommended) bikeway route – as well as the portion of track that runs North & South along East Street in Woodland.
This new CNRR track orientation would send its rail traffic through West Sacramento and Davis, proximate to I-80 — then north to NE Woodland along a separate, more easterly track (west of Conaway Ranch).
If CNRR abandons the portion of its track alongside the proposed bikeway route, this situation would present a classic — “Rail – to – Trail” — scenario, a planning template commonly followed throughout the state and nation.
City staff perceives no conflict with pursuing the current bikeway project in the midst of this potential / impending CNRR, “Rail – to – Trail” prospect, because a significant amount of environmental and design analyses would remain useful within any developmental scenario.
Of course — if this CNRR prospect arrives at the political station along a fortuitous manner / schedule — most ROW matters will thereby become instantly resolved.
___ Fascinating DWBFS Statistics ___
Official statistics relate that there currently occur daily about 21,000 one-way trips between Woodland and Davis, with about half of these trips starting in one city and ending in the other.
By 2035, 28,000 such daily trips are currently predicted to occur.
Approximately 10% (2,100) of these 21,000 daily intercity trips are made by UC Davis bound Woodland residents.
An estimated 1,500 Woodland residents are students, faculty or staff, regularly commuting to UC Davis.
“[T]he most commonly cited reason to [general] travel from one jurisdiction to the other was for shopping [~70%], followed by recreation / leisure [~40%] and work [~30%], specified survey results.
Multiple answers were permitted” for this DWBFS survey.
Relatively more respondents use bicycles for recreation / leisure (~94%), than shopping / errands (~70%) or work purposes (~60%).
Only about 145 electric-types of vehicles are presently registered in Yolo County, with most of these presumed to be NEVs.
This contrasts with the City of Lincoln (a nearby hotbed of NEV culture) — with 600 registered NEVs and another 800 street-legal golf carts.
It’s worth noting that Lincoln’s system, apparently based mainly upon on-street (expanded, Class II-type) lanes for both NEVs and bikes within that community — doesn’t have such a facility as proposed here: traversing a many-miles round trip between it and other communities — excluding whatever in-city miles are relevant.
Current estimates of 100 to 200 such bicycle trips per day between Davis and Woodland may increase as a result of the proposed bikeway — to perhaps 1400 per day — according to city staff recently speaking before the Woodland Planning Commission.
4% of Davis residents commuting to Woodland use a bicycle, while only 1% of Woodland residents do so when commuting to Davis.
The DWBFS survey indicates that there are a — wide variety — of regular commute-cycles between Davis and Woodland.
Non-commuters (rarely if ever traveling between these communities) comprise 6.5% of survey respondents, while 13.3% commute about once a month.
22.2% of survey respondents accomplish a relevant commute about twice per month, while 20.1% commute on a weekly basis; 15.4% commute several times per week — with the largest proportion: 22.5% — commuting daily.
Thus, about 80% of respondents (- 2/3 live in Davis, 3/4 work in Davis -) presently commute between Woodland and Davis — at least twice per month.
87% of survey respondents currently ride a bicycle.
More than 80% of respondents said they used a bicycle on a daily basis or several times per week. Less than 15% said that they would rarely if ever use such a proposed bikeway — yet more than 25% indicated they would use such a (Davis – Woodland) bikeway daily or several times per week.
___ YOLO SUN NEWS REPORT & OPINION ___
YOLO SUN NEWS REPORT :
A unanimous Woodland City Council vote on September 1, 2009, adopted an: Urgency Ordinance Establishing Moratorium on the Establishment and Operation of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries and Other Illegal Uses.
Bobby Harris, local medicinal cannabis advocate, helped the city council to crucially improve its “outdated and unworkable” definition of the intended target of this moratorium — “dispensaries” — while also observing that this urgency moratorium “is antagonistic to the purposes of Proposition 215,” with “several other very serious problems” — and requesting the council to not adopt it.
Now — Harris has suddenly produced suggested text for what he describes as, “a properly constructive implementation ordinance” (a copy of which is found just below — after this news report & opinion column).
Harris also indicates that this proposed ordinance text — “is currently the optimum model for Proposition 215 implementation, and the city council and relevant staff are noticed regarding this language.
“There’s no good reason why the city council shouldn’t replace the new urgency moratorium ordinance with this model implementation approach — at the first opportunity (its October 6 regular meeting),” indicates Harris.
Harris should know — as he has been widely recognized as conceptual originator and legal architect (1997-98) of the — rather novel legal theory — of local governmental action in California (independent of the State Legislature) regarding this 1996 voter-initiative statute.
This is the second urgency moratorium ordinance passed by the council (the first one was in effect during 2004 – 2006), since statewide law on Proposition 215 was adopted in the midst of the 2003 Recall Election against former Governor Gray Davis.
___ State Law and Dispensaries ___
State law has been widely interpreted to permit establishment and operation of such “dispensaries,” unless local governmental action disallows them, despite the fact that this term appears nowhere within state law.
This 2003 state law (SB420) simply identifies “collective” or “cooperative” associations of legally qualified persons, related to relaxing state Health and Safety Code sections pertaining to distribution of medicinal cannabis.
According to the city staff report: “Adoption of a temporary moratorium regarding the establishment and operation of medical marijuana dispensaries. cooperatives and collectives, and other businesses and land uses that violate state or federal law will give the City time to study how best to regulate dispensaries and other land uses that are illegal under state or federal law.”
The staff report continues: “Since the City’s previous interim ordinance regulating medical marijuana dispensaries expired in 2006, the Woodland Municipal Code has not contained any provisions that specifically address [them]. Since dispensaries (which are sometimes called “collectives or “cooperatives”) do not fit into any of the City’s existing land use categories, they are currently prohibited, but the lack of an explicit prohibition has caused some confusion in the community, and the City has received one application for a business registration to open a dispensary.”
The staff report concludes by: observing that “more than 100 cities and several counties have adopted permanent bans on dispensaries [while only about 30 allow them],” citing reports by various law enforcement agencies purporting to raise serious issues of public safety relating to such “dispensaries,” and emphasizing that the City of Anaheim’s permanent ban is presently being challenged in state appellate court, with a ruling due by year’s end.
Moratorium ordinance language is: a recitation of “whereas” clauses, followed by a brief statement of purpose, definition of relevant terms (such as “dispensary”), findings and determinations, and a concise directive to city staff to — “consider and study” — this subject.
The initial phase of this moratorium lasts 45 days, whereupon it may be extended two times, first for 10 months and 15 days (adding up to the first year), and then for a subsequent year, for a total of two years.
This initial moratorium phase of 45 days is due to expire on October 16, with the agenda for the October 6 regular council meeting likely to include a relevant action item.
YOLO SUN OPINION :
Examination of Woodland’s urgency moratorium ordinance reveals several serious problems — a key one being whether it withstands scrutiny under state Government Code section 65858(f), which “permits the City of Woodland following termination of a previous interim urgency ordinance, to adopt another interim urgency ordinance to protect the public safety, health, and welfare from an event, occurrence or set of circumstances different from the event, occurrence or set of circumstances that led to the adoption of the prior interim urgency ordinance,” on this same topic, according to one of the legal clauses attached to the new ordinance.
Subsequent recitations of facts by this urgency moratorium ordinance — purportedly supporting a belief in the existence of meaningfully “different” events, occurrences or circumstances, from those in effect during the time of Woodland’s prior interim urgency ordinance — are thin and fragile, as well as prominently misconceived.
In addition — although Bobby Harris persuaded the city attorney to recognize and fix the key element of the city’s definition of “dispensary” that is “outdated and unworkable” — because of yet insufficient municipal attention to the (wrongheaded) basic approach of this urgency ordinance — it remains the case that this same definition is plainly vulnerable to legal assault on state constitutional grounds (article 2, section 10), for intruding into the lawful ambit of protected conduct under Proposition 215, through its vague and overbroad description and prohibition of “dispensary.”
___ First Claim of Compliance with Government Code ___
“[T]here continues to be uncertainty regarding the relationship between federal laws and California laws regarding medical marijuana dispensaries,” exclaims this urgency ordinance — while, President Obama campaigned upon and has since implemented federal law enforcement policy (through his new Attorney General, Eric Holder, etc.) that respects state law in those states which have adopted medicinal cannabis reforms.
Violations of state law must accompany any potential application of federal law — since the Obama Administration phased such policy into place earlier this year.
Infirmities within state law regarding Proposition 215 are now the only genuine issue.
Addressing one of these infirmities — the California Supreme Court will soon strike down as unconstitutional (under article 2, section 10) all present state and local quantitative limitations upon medicinal cannabis possession / cultivation by qualified persons.
The legal case at the forefront of this pivotal state-policy shift, fully briefed and awaiting a schedule for oral argument, is: People v Kelly (S164830). Bobby Harris has been filed in this case (Jan. 9) as the only amicus curiae (friend of the court) participant, with an oversized (15,000 word) brief.
The reason for — absolute certainty — about the Supreme Court’s eventual opinion in Kelly, is that the state Attorney General’s office — has now flatly conceded — that any and all such quantitative limitations put into state law are transparently unconstitutional.
There exists no “legal uncertainty” about: “the relationship between federal laws and California laws,” contrary to such a claim by the urgency ordinance. Previous “legal uncertainty” regarding federal law has now become meaningfully resolved.
This (supportive) claim is thus: wholly fallacious, offending essential protections of the Government Code, which prohibit local governments from engaging in bad-faith, serial applications of — ultimately similar — urgency moratoriums.
Woodland failed to adopt pertinent municipal law, during the two-year period of its previous urgency moratorium ordinance — allowing that “consider[ation] and study” process to lapse — but then, simply pulled it up again upon the slim trigger of another (meaningfully similar) application.
This is precisely what the Government Code intends to prevent, by its demand of a demonstration of a relevantly changed (“different”) situation.
___ Relevant Relationship of State and Federal Law ___
This urgency ordinance greatly confuses the relatively separate, state and federal legal systems, by addressing / identifying “dispensaries” within its title as being: “land uses which are illegal under state or federal law.”
Its summaries contain a similar slant, incorporating its unconstitutionally vague and overbroad definition of “dispensary” (see further below) as being something: “that cannot be or is not carried on without violating applicable state or federal laws.”
This talk is utter nonsense.
Clearly — “dispensaries” are lawful under state authority — which is exactly why Woodland seeks to enact local authority to prevent their operation within its jurisdiction.
And obviously — since practical federal law enforcement policy is now aligned with state law on this topic, “dispensaries” are only tacitly unlawful under federal law; so long as state law is obeyed (e.g., no diversion to nonmedical purposes), federal law is no longer an obstacle for activities of “dispensaries.”
This grand dimension of logical and factual lapse — within the very title and summaries of this urgency ordinance — calls into serious question the city’s competence on this topic.
Also, this entire approach of (purported) legal reasoning is bogus — fatally flawed.
The California Constitution (article 3, section 3.5(c)) forbids state officials from choosing to not enforce state law because of any perceived conflict between state and federal law — unless an appellate court has so ruled.
Contrary to that occurring — a state appellate court in Southern California recently agreed with its trial court that Proposition 215 — “has no direct conflict” with federal law. This legal ruling is grounded on the fact that California’s criminal statutes regarding cannabis are not a matter of federal law, nor do they actually provide cannabis. Proposition 215 simply sets state public health and safety policy on this particular subject — that contrasts with federal law.
Both legal systems coexist (with contrast and comity) within such circumstances.
State officials possess absolutely no legal authority to follow federal law against viable state law (most especially, a voter-initiative statute, such as Prop. 215), despite much loose and irrelevant talk about federal law (on some purported, supremacy clause argument) somehow trumping state law.
Prominent Yolo County officials, such as the District Attorney and Sheriff, have in the past been quoted in the press — before the Board of Supervisors — committing precisely such a large legal (and eventually: political) blunder.
Legal attempts during the previous dozen years — to void Proposition 215 because of purported conflicts with federal law — have been unsuccessful.
The notion that Woodland’s officials can select to abide federal law over and against Proposition 215 — is totally absurd.
___ Second Claim of Compliance with Government Code ___
Another legally defensive claim advanced by this new urgency ordinance is that litigation regarding City of Anaheim’s dispensary ban is a relevantly “different” circumstance.
Anaheim is apparently being sued by medicinal cannabis proponents because of the perception that due and proper implementation of Proposition 215 is thereby being frustrated and repressed.
Since there is no overt legal duty of local governments to permit such — retail-storefront type of “dispensaries” — to operate as a land use — a zoning category — this case against Anaheim is relatively weak. losing in trial court, but taken on a precarious appeal.
It’s mainly — being sued at all — that Woodland wants to avoid — by sheltering under an urgency moratorium — while awaiting establishment of some future legal precedent in this Anaheim case.
The salient policy feature in this circumstance, however, is that if Anaheim would have adopted a constructive policy toward implementation (such as suggested ordinance text, by Bobby Harris; see this text below) — it would never have been sued — or if so, its legal defense would become truly invincible.
Regarding compliance with the Government Code, Woodland’s notion that there exists a “different” situation because of this specific case of litigation — appears quite flimsy — since a variety of relevant litigation can — often if not always — significantly redefine or reorient fundamental affairs.
___ Woodland’s New Ordinance is Vulnerable to Legal Challenge ___
In fact — to illustrate just such a concrete point, it may easily be observed that — Woodland’s interim urgency ordinance obviously contains a legally overbroad and vague definition of “dispensary,” being: “any [ ] location” where medicinal cannabis is “ma[de] available [ ] or provide[d] to two or more [qualified persons].”
In other words — at no place in Woodland can medicinal cannabis be made available to qualified persons — which is preposterous, ridiculous — as well as unlawful policy.
This urgency ordinance (on its face) prohibits three or more qualified patients from collectively exchanging / using medicinal cannabis, at “any [ ] location” within Woodland.
This unlawfully vague and overbroad prohibition clearly obstructs and oppresses state law rights of qualified persons, with respect to Proposition 215.
If Woodland is sued over these specific matters, it will lose — badly.
Nothing about the eventual outcome of this Anaheim case will rescue Woodland from stumbling headlong into such hugely adverse litigation.
Thus, Woodland’s present moratorium strategy may catalyze extended, divergent litigation, its own precedential case — larger than that against Anaheim — aside from any anticipated (speculative and superfluous) interpretive guidance obtained from a single, future appellate opinion.
___ Compound Basis for Legal Challenges ___
Awaiting a legal precedent in this Anaheim case — with intended, subsequent enactment of a similar ban on “dispensaries” — may thus well provoke increasing precision and aggressiveness of legal challenges, with respect to whether an interim ordinance is constitutionally infirm due to flawed and inadequately tailored provisions, displaying substantive (generally, law enforcement motivated) antagonism toward legally protected rights under Proposition 215.
Unless proper implementation occurs: successful bases for litigation.(as above) will exist. The key to avoiding litigation is adoption of constructive implementation policy.
There is no conveniently arising, prophylactic, legal panacea for failures of implementation policy, inherent within this Anaheim case.
Plus, the prevailing legal perspective has always been that local governments cannot be forced to abide “dispensaries” (properly defined).
That, of course, was the basic legal premise for adoption of Woodland’s previous urgency moratorium.
Nothing of legal or practical substance is altered — the legal status quo remains unaffected — by the eventual outcome of this Anaheim case. Any case can be appealed — and the idea that an appellate court will order Anaheim to permit retail-storefront “dispensaries” to operate — when there is no explicit basis in law on this topic — is a magnificent order of speculative phantasm.
The accompanying staff report indicates that “more than 100 cities and several counties have adopted permanent bans on dispensaries,” and that more than 30 local governments have enacted moratoriums.
The pivotal legal scenario here is, however — for purposes of Woodland’s compliance or non-compliance with the Government Code — how many local governments — in addition to Woodland — have enacted such — multiple / serial — urgency moratoriums, legally demonstrating some “different” situation to justify such a remarkable maneuver?
What (good cause) prevented Woodland from adopting a permanent ban, back in 2006, lawfully obviating any validity of the recent “dispensary” application — which is clearly the “differen[ce]” that triggered this renewed moratorium?
It seems that this, indeed, was truly the — “different” — set of circumstances: a more recent application for the same form of municipal registration.
Of course, such municipal conduct is exactly what the Government Code intends to prohibit.
Thus, it appears that Woodland may be in violation of Government Code protections against relevant abuse of local discretion, by enacting with specious justification its new urgency ordinance, as well as, through means of such violation be also offending legal rights guaranteed by Proposition 215 — creating for itself a compound legal predicament.
Sued on these plural legal grounds (both constitutional and statutory violations), the potential significance of Woodland’s liability situation would appear to well eclipse Anaheim’s.
Woodland would certainly lose in a constitutional affair, and may well lose in the statutory contest.
___ Third Claim of Compliance with Government Code ___
The third excuse presented by this new ordinance, for engaging in multiple moratoriums, is that: “the City’s previous interim urgency ordinance was adopted at a time when there was considerable uncertainty regarding cities’ authority to regulate [ ] and cities had very little experience [so] regulating [ ] and observing the effects of the operation of dispensaries on neighborhoods and communities[.]
“Whereas, California cities and counties have subsequently gained considerable experience with regulating [ ] and observing the effects [ ], and legal developments since the passage of Prop. 215 have helped clarify the scope of cities’ regulatory authority [ ] and dealing in general with marijuana used for medical purposes,” relevant circumstances are “different” — between 2006 and 2009.
The actual thrust of this claim is that a crucially “different” situation emerged during this three year period of time (2006-09) — not: “since the passage of Prop. 215” (1996), as implied.
Woodland is here arguing (confessing) that it allowed its previous (‘04 – ‘06) urgency moratorium to expire without enactment of any permanent ban — because it (must have) inadequately perceived the (alleged) very serious, impending danger (“posing a current and immediate threat to public safety, health and welfare”) — which very reason, of course, duly impelled its adoption of the previous moratorium in the first place.
In other words, this (“dispensary”) danger was supposedly serious enough to warrant installation of — a two-year long moratorium — but not really serious enough to legally follow through with enactment of a permanent ban.
Yet, solely the receipt of another application of this identical nature — suddenly (like a knee-jerk) — is deemed to “immediate[ly]” restore seriously dangerous conditions, based on sheer evidence of some purported, conveniently revived, retroactive attention to something “different” occurring during only the past three years.
Again, this quite tortured, circular sort of reasoning runs directly afoul of the Government Code.
___ Fourth Claim of Compliance with Government Code ___
The next claim by the city is that some version of ‘crime-wave’ is being associated with (“immediately surrounding”) such “dispensaries.”
If 30 or more cities and counties allow such “dispensaries” to operate — swimming against some supposedly rising tide of ‘crime-wave’ — such alleged “current and immediate” danger certainly isn’t pervasively perceived.
Reasonable, responsible and compassionate local governments have made well-founded, political decisions to permit “dispensaries” to operate — directly in the face of such alleged, public safety concerns.
The question of whether or not to allow “dispensaries” to operate is purely a political matter.
Their absense, to the extent of diminishing lawful recourse to cannabis access for qualified persons — starkly fuels the black-market, driving seriously ill patients into its unsafe and unaffordable grasp.
Thus — one could easliy and validly argue that banning “dispensaries” causes a very significant increase in — and support for — crime and criminals.
No doubt, similar arguments are raised in the lawsuit against Anaheim.
What likely won’t be raised in this litigation is the real crime with regard to retail-storefront type of “dispensaries:” their cost of medicinal cannabis — regularly $300 – $600 and more per ounce.
Reasonable remuneration for access to medicinal cannabis, authorized by Proposition 215, should rather in the “affordable” range: $200 per ounce or less.
Such retail-storefront “dispensaries” often insert their margin in costs, placing an extraneous siphon between the cannabis farmer and qualified patients — within the pockets of qualified patients.
Since above noted relaxation of federal prohibition against state sanctioned medicinal cannabis programs, retail-storefront “dispensaries” have rapidly proliferated.
This condition might potentially have constituted “different” circumstances under the Government Code, but ironically – it wasn’t raised.
While not diminishing legitimate concerns about public safety in this regard — historically, the (very powerful and deep) law enforcement lobby has always cast unreasonable and hyperbolic antagonism against Proposition 215.
Aspects of this continuing political campaign are “studies and reports” by politically resistent localities and obstinate police associations, purporting to inherently and broadly link crime to medicinal cannabis — by that means repressing its legitimate access to qualified persons.
A great example of this law-enforcement lobby tactic, is the related municipal claim within this urgency ordinance, that: “the United States Department of Justice’s California Medical Marijuana Information report has advised that large-scale drug traffickers have been posing as ‘caregivers’ to obtain and sell marijuana[.]”
The clear inference of this item is that — because some criminals are somewhere active — qualified persons should be denied (through a municipal process of as much as — four years — of serial moratoriums) reasonable access to medicinal cannabis.
Combined with its constitutional infirmities, such an incompetently and fradulently engineered moratorium policy is an outrageous affront to Proposition 215.
And of course, such a strained and flawed predication for disallowing or stalling city adoption of properly constructive municipal implementation policy is unjusitifiable and unlawful.
___ Fifth Claim of Compliance with Government Code ___
The next defense of the city, to an ever stronger and clearly convincing belief that it has indeed violated the Governemnt Code, is supposed relevance attaching to the event of a U. S. Supreme Court opinion of this topic — from May, 2001.
This case is totally irrelevant as any support for the city’s effort in this cause. It’s beyond doubt that this opinion was ice cold (concrete), long before the city warmed up to begin its consideration of these matters.
Frankly, a further and quite vivid demonstration of municipal incompetence is revealed by this claim and the sixth one, so we may duly collapse them into a single claim.
The city seems to think (as noted above) that merely the sheer and passing mention of federal law somehow anneals legal justification to its infirm policy.
Thus, it cites a more recent case wherein the U. S. Supreme Court ruled (without essential focus — by the way) that the federal Commerce Clause still exists as a basis of federal jurisdiction over medicinal cannabis.
As noted above, relevance of federal law to this topic is — since early in 2009 — governed by the Obama Administration’s highly reported pull-out of federal law enforcement from California — except to go after those: “large-scale drug traffickers [that violate state law by] posing as ‘caregivers’ to obtain and sell marijuana[.]”
Federal law itself is no longer obstructing medicinal cannabis access to qualified persons — but Woodland is.
___ Conclusion ___
Woodland’s statutory justifications for enacting its second, urgency moratorium ordinance are entirely without merit. Also, this ordinance blatantly violates legal rights guaranteed to qualified persons, pursuant to Proposition 215 and various provisions of the California Constitution.
Woodland’s relevant officials should immediately and very carefully consider and fully explore with him, municipal adoption of the model version of implementation ordinance language proposed by Bobby Harris.
TEXT OF MODEL PROPOSITION 215 IMPLEMENTATION ORDINANCE — Proposed by Bobby Harris :
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND TO IMPLEMENT THE COMPASSIONATE USE ACT OF 1996, CODIFIED AS SECTION 11362.5 OF THE STATE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
SECTION 1. The City Council finds and declares as follows:
(a) On November 5, 1996, the voters of the State of California adopted by initiative the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, codified as Section 11362.5 of the Health and Safety Code, pertaining to medicinal use of cannabis. As stated therein, purposes of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 include to “ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the person’s health would benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief” and “to ensure that patients and their primary caregivers who obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes upon the recommendation of a physician are not subject to criminal prosecution or sanction.” The City Council supports the use of medicinal cannabis, also referred to as medical marijuana, in accordance with the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.
(b) Section (b)(1)(C) of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 encourages governments “to implement a plan for the safe and affordable distribution of” medicinal cannabis to all legally qualified persons.
(c) The Compassionate Use Act of 1996 establishes a legally distinct and specifiable class of persons with medical authorization status pursuant to Section 11362.5 of the Health and Safety Code, who are lawfully involved in activities related to the intrastate, noncommercial cultivation, possession, distribution and use of cannabis, for personal medical purposes, which is not intended for the stream of intrastate or interstate commerce, and which is separate from the illegal market in trafficking, sales, or distribution of controlled substances.
(d) It is the intent of the City Council in enacting this ordinance to recognize and protect the right to cannabis access among qualified patients and primary caregivers in accordance with the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 and to promote the safe use of, and safe and affordable distribution of, medicinal cannabis as permitted pursuant to the Act.
(1) The City Council recognizes that activities of medicinal cannabis associations / collectives promote safe, timely, consistent and affordable distribution of medicinal cannabis, as authorized by the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.
(2) The City Council intends that only lawful, affordable remuneration for medicinal cannabis access, consistent with the act and implemented by this measure, occur among persons with medical authorization status through Section 11362.5.
(3) The City Council intends to facilitate preservation of the right to lawful medicinal cannabis access, through establishment of protective policy to guide law enforcement conduct related to Section 11362.5.
SECTION 2. For purposes of this ordinance, the following definitions shall apply:
(a) “Qualified person” means a person with medical authorization status as a patient or primary caregiver under Section 11362.5.
(b) “Medicinal cannabis association / collective” means an affiliation or association of qualified persons whose collective intent and activities provide relevant educational, referral, and network services, and assist in the lawful acquisition and distribution of medicinal cannabis in a safe and affordable manner, in accordance with the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.
(c) “Affordable remuneration” means that remunerative compensation for lawfully provided cannabis, between qualified persons, shall be at a rate not in excess of two hundred dollars ($200) per ounce for any quantity.
(d) “Outreach and delivery model” means a program of lawful access to medicinal cannabis conducted by qualified persons based upon: public informational outreach, legal status verification of qualified persons, provision of relevant educational, referral and network assistance, and arranged delivery.
SECTION 3. Medicinal Cannabis Access Plan
(a) The City of Woodland implements the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 by recognizing and facilitating operation by qualified persons or medicinal cannabis associations / collectives of an outreach and delivery model of distribution of medicinal cannabis at affordable remuneration to all qualified persons. Access to medicinal cannabis is reasonably assured within its jurisdiction based upon this program of: public outreach, verification of qualified status, provision of relevant educational, referral, and network services, and arranged delivery.
(b) Compensation provided in exchange for access to medicinal cannabis between qualified persons or between qualified persons and medicinal cannabis associations / collectives shall be at a rate of affordable remuneration.
(c) Neither a qualified person, nor an association / collective of qualified persons, shall dispense medicinal cannabis from a retail-storefront location.
(d) Physician approvals or recommendations in relation to Section 11362.5 shall be presumed valid by a law enforcement official, absent good-faith probable cause of fraudulence or invalidity.
(e) All reasonable efforts shall be made by a law enforcement official to investigate and determine medical authorization status of any person claiming qualified status, prior to any arrest or seizure. These efforts shall include relevant training, supervision and development of law enforcement field procedures requiring clear consideration and reasonable use of evidentiary alternatives to any interference with cannabis cultivation or possession until all noticeably related claims with respect to status as a qualified person under Section 11362.5 are fully resolved.
(f) A law enforcement official shall not arrest a qualified person, or seize any property, cannabis, or cannabis products used in relation to conduct in compliance with Section 11362.5 and this ordinance, without averring good-faith probable cause of unlawful “diversion” of cannabis to a “nonmedical purpose,” pursuant to subdivision (b)(2).
SECTION 4. Severability
The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If any provision of this ordinance or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
######
YOLO SUN OPINION :
Public interest sometimes becomes a remarkable phenomenon when subverted and sabotaged, especially if there remains in prominent public midst an obvious, enduring tomb memorializing such civic treason.
Indeed, the sheer prospect of such a malevolent monument may generate public disdain, abhorrence and foreboding.
Woodland’s much heralded, historic downtown is on the cruel cusp of such catastrophe, as its — “primary gateway” (according to its Downtown Specific Plan: DSP) — is swiftly approaching the strip-mall factory of Paul Petrovich.
___ Gateway Strip-Mall Design ___
That’s what happened out at Gateway Center, which is simply a — gigantic strip-mall design — a strip-mall on steroids — alongside an ocean of asphalt so vast that persons are inclined to operate their motor vehicles between its destinations.
It’s a sort of perpetual-drive-through brand of retail mall, arguably outdated on conceptual grounds prior to becoming occupied.
It’s the County Fair Mall of today; but — what about tomorrow?
An improved design concept might well have consolidated a multi-story retail center, with a focused theme and peripheral parking, and perhaps even mixed-use components — instead of a sprawling peninsular strip-mall jutting out into a titanic sea of asphalt.
Marvelous new conceptual designs exist for such retail complexes, and are commonly insisted upon by municipalities, but Petrovich wasn’t suitably (proactively) encouraged to pursue such improved options; so, relying on his own initiative, such ideas of course never materialized.
Connected with one of his current development projects in Sacramento, Petrovich has recently pleaded that he’s: “not evil.”
It just seems that way.
Delusional, arrogant developers running amuck present profound challenges to the genuine public interest — often not well protected and advantaged against them in relatively un-illuminated local political systems, susceptible to purchase and stealthy inside influences.
___ Rite Aid Takes a Long Time Coming to Wrong Spot ___
City Manager Mark Deven indicates that Petrovich’s installation of a cookie-cutter Rite Aid store upon the downtown’s — “primary gateway” — remains right on track, just delayed due to the sorts of funding bottlenecks to be expected in the current economic climate.
Around downtown and city hall a person often hears rumors that Rite Aid is going bankrupt, these thoughts seemingly serving as a desperate wish for relief from an impending Rite Aid – ruination of the “primary gateway.”
Apparently, about $5 billion in credit from banking giant CitiGroup has at least temporarily reeled-in Rite Aid from hurtling toward widely predicted bankruptcy cataclysm; however, a financial freeze-up remains for Woodland’s second Rite Aid on Main Street.
Petrovich is actually in no hurry at all, however.
Woodland City Council gave him a — stupendously lavish — six and a half years — from the date Costco opened at Gateway Center, until he must have made $3 million of (vague, unfocused, un-tethered) improvements to downtown property stock — or else forfeit $1 million in mitigation for impacts of retail sprawl arising from his Gateway Center.
So, Woodland may be suffering the behemoth blight of an immense vacant parcel upon its “primary gateway” — the incipient Rite Aid lot — for another five long years — only to have it then transformed into an even more macabre form of — civic blight — in severe aesthetic disharmony and upheaval with the Wiseman Building across Main Street: — the Stupidman Building.
Now — even more spectacularly obtuse — it suddenly appears that the new Yolo County Courthouse will become located on the block bounded by Main, Lincoln, Fifth and Sixth Streets.
Yet another massive, four-story edifice on the southern side of Main Street still further demands ( . . . frantically screams out for . . . ) architectural balance upon Main Street’s northern aspect.
Freeman Park, finally owned by the city after Petrovich pointed out that the school district has long owned this land (a fact he discovered while trolling for development gambits), isn’t capable of harmonious composure with the towering architecture blooming directly across Main Street.
Woodland’s downtown faces an aesthetic emergency.
___ City’s Consultants Exclaim Gravity of Downtown Gateway ___
Woodland’s Redevelopment Agency recently presented an outreach workshop (with the Woodland Historic Downtown Association) related to its planned application for a 80%+ federal funding match to move forward streetscape and traffic improvements to the eastern section of downtown Main Street (the western section, Elm to Third Streets, was essentially accomplished about twenty years ago).
Consultants (from Sacramento) presenting the new streetscape renovation program to this group — loudly, floridly and persistently — emphasized the overwhelming importance and gravity of: “downtown’s gateway.”
They weren’t aware that the Woodland City Council has already failed to protect downtown’s — “primary gateway” — by permitting Petrovich to Rite Aid it, tacitly undermining these consultants’ glowing admonitions concerning its huge (potential) value.
___ Community Legacy ___
Legacy is a central matter. A community permitting developers to disable its fundamental civic goals and dislodge its basic interests, to advance their projects of whatever nature, is a community which has confused its moral compass and imperiled its vision of identity.
Woodland’s identity is one of historically strong, architectural and agricultural integrity — superbly clashing with a conventional Rite Aid store squatting like a troll, a disagreeable dwarf upon the — “primary gateway” — of its historically and culturally valuable downtown.
Is this dreadful monstrosity of disequilibrium what Woodland wants to display at its downtown doorway — at its (very) welcome sign — all throughout the coming decades?
Will it become a constant symbol of something undeniably wrong, a piercing anomaly, an incisive injury, a forever glaring monument to selling-out / neglecting / abandoning a pivotal feature of downtown’s complexion?
Is it possible to tame Petrovich toward recognizing and becoming responsible for his moral obligations to civic interest?
Petrovich’s own interests (both financial and political) clearly would benefit from his re-conceiving these crucial affairs, and conforming to the publicly inspired vision of the DSP.
Does Rite Aid really desire to follow Petrovich down this particular trail, its new retail location tarred by meaningful civic transgression?
Will history recall as legacy that this became Woodland’s downtown gateway that got away?
___ DSP Vision Starkly Conflicts With Cookie-Cutter Rite Aid ___
An entirely superior alternative has always existed, against this absurd travesty of civic values.
The DSP repeatedly depicts an extension of the historically relevant and architecturally distinct, agricultural theme of the multi-story (mixed-use) Rice Mill complex — just across North Street from the site of the proposed Rite Aid — in order to serve as the northern base of this — “primary gateway” — already absent any components on its eastern side.
Extension of the Rice Mill’s architectural style and scale, plus its modern, mixed-use format, is obviously the vision and anticipation of the “primary gateway” — outlined within the very — Vision Statement — of the DSP.
Petrovich pranced through a (could fairly easily have been closed) loophole in the DSP, however, taking advantage of the city’s overlooking placement of this parcel within a zone and land-use matrix designation — requiring a conditional use permit — obviously essential to achieve this specific goal of the DSP.
Petrovich used this municipal neglect / oversight (or was it an intentionally produced loophole?) plus adverse influence within city hall to perform his end-run around the DSP.
___ What Woodlanders Can Do About It ___
At this late stage of circumstances (Petrovich already has municipal entitlements to build this Rite Aid) — there are only two ways to preserve Woodland’s historical integrity and civic interests toward realizing the DSP’s public pledge of a — “primary gateway” — that would properly reflect and dramatize the City’s heritage.
Residents must contact Rite Aid (at its regional and national headquarters) and vigorously complain about this situation, pointing out that Rite Aid itself is not the problem and that a Rite Aid may well be a component of a project on this site — of proper nature and dimension.
Residents must contact their city councilmembers and demand that enough (legal) — political heat / persuasion — be immediately applied to Petrovich, for him to reconsider his present plans, and rather to construct on this — “primary gateway” — site the land uses and architectural theme contemplated and announced by the DSP.
That healthy prospect would be worth waiting a few years to achieve.
Otherwise, Woodland will inherit an injurious legacy with various adverse consequences, from a truly regrettable failure of key civic leadership.
YOLO SUN NEWS REPORT :
Its budget reduced by 18.5% and short-staffed by 33%, Woodland Public Library is grappling with surging community patronage and remarkably, squeezing some improvements from imposed budgetary downsizing.
Library visits during last April set a new record: 26, 850. Circulation set a new record in July (2008): 32,617. Annual circulation records indicate a fifth consecutive year of growth — with almost 350,000 checkouts / renewals.
Only five years ago — less than 150,000 items were circulated. Public demand for all library programs is dramatically increasing; while, its abilities to deliver those services is seriously constrained by pervasive municipal budgetary crises.
New records for public usage will be difficult to set, however, since library hours have (on July 1) been chopped from 54 per week, down to just 40.
A deep cut in computer access time several months ago already demonstrates that public use directly reflects library access (4,458 users in April, dropping to 2,803 in June). Circulation figures for July-Sept. may be expected to reflect further aspects of public impacts of reduced library access.
An automated telephone attendant was recently activated, advising callers (in English and Spanish) of current — library open hours — before directing them to circulation, reference or children’s services.
___ Initial Budget Proposals Slashed Hours to 20 per Week ___
An astonished panel of library trustees was greeted during March, with a city budget proposal wherein — all three presented options — assumed a drastic reduction of library hours — from 54 to 20.
“Primary research revealed that the minimum number of hours for a main public library [in this region of California], regardless of budget, was 35,” expresses Woodland Public Library Services Director, Sandra Briggs, in her quarterly report to Library Board of Trustees.
Briggs’ report summarizes a community-wide political advocacy effort waged on behalf of the library, which resulted in city council adoption of a budget in excess of earlier proposals: at $1.13 million (18.5% cut), making possible through work by Briggs and related staff, library trustees’ adoption of a 40 hour per week schedule,
From the time when library budget reductions were proposed to be limited to 18.5% (May 26) and the time when the contingency of relevant concessions from labor associations was resolved and announced (June 22) — the library’s fate remained: “precariously poised between [40 and 20 hour weeks], rendering concrete planning useless.”
“As a result of the impact of [ ] dramatic staff reductions [beginning in May], the Board engaged in the difficult process of evaluating services against the core mission of the library, and weighing community input, authorized reductions in services which included the elimination of non-core services (closing Leake Center and eliminating test proctoring and obituary look ups) and reduced core services including children’s and adult programming, summer reading, public computer access,” describes Briggs’ report.
“Consistency combined with balancing all interests and elements within the community,” should predicate the nature of library schedule adopted by the trustees for a 40 hour per week format, suggested Briggs to trustees during their consideration of various approaches.
Trustees selected a schedule of open hours that offers two evenings per week (Tuesday and Thursday, noon to 8:00 pm) and two Saturdays per month (second and fourth, 9:00 am to 5:00 pm). In order to offer these open Saturdays, two Mondays (usually: first and third) will be slashed from the schedule.
Wednesdays and (usually second and fourth) Mondays now have library hours of 10:00 to 6:00 pm, and Fridays offer library hours of 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
___ Innovating Advantages From Downsizing ___
Creatively adjusting to altered circumstances, Briggs and library trustees are discovering and evolving approaches that are actually improving patron services in some ways, while being forced to reduce them in others.
For one item, “[t]he library will [now] be operated with one shift with an anticipated ease in communication,” explains Briggs’ quarterly report.
Other strategic advantages (already) being developed by the library to variously improve public services include an enhanced self-check-out system for materials and the implementation of a new-materials pre-processing program — with both improvements making professional library staff more available to the public.
“With the exception of the media desk, the majority of public service will be handled by permanent staff,” states the report. “Despite the reduction in open hours, this would not be possible without the increases in self-check and the implementation of pre-processing [of newly acquired materials].”
During the previous year, self-check-out of materials increased from 17% to 29%, overall — with the average during the previous six months rising to about 40%.
“[A]s a result of the current downsizing,” outlines an attachment to Briggs’ report, “[t]he existing upstairs work area, including staff work stations, delivery and check-in of materials will be relocated to the ground floor in an effort to provide more public service space without increasing staff.”
This high-ceilinged and wide-windowed, well-lighted room of about 500 square feet, “is located precisely above the library’s mechanical room which houses the computer server and routers.”
Beneficial for several key reasons — including returning the portion of library lobby which overlooks its interior plaza to conventional use — the library will soon consolidate its public access computers within this former staff workroom — forging a newly designed: “computer laboratory, [ ] a concept that is prominent in public library settings.”
___ New Computer Lab ___
The library will soon shift its 22 public access computers, along with a relevant staff desk, into this new computer lab space.
“The room is located directly adjacent to the circulation desk where a 4’ by 8’ interior window on the south side of the room provides excellent visual supervision for circulation staff. A similarly sized interior safety window is proposed to be installed by volunteers on the west side for both staff and public observation,” indicates Briggs.
“The result would be a dramatic decrease in noise and congestion[,] with increased staff supervision and oversight.”
Segregating computers within this enclosed precinct of the library will obviously improve its major-lobby ambience, as well as establishing a more coherent strategy for best accommodating various computer users.
With computers presently being strewn all throughout a major library lobby area, and slapped up against the long bank of large windows opening upon the library’s central plaza (much better suited to public seating, reading, gazing, etc.) — a significant deterioration of public library space has occurred.
A clear impression of the library not having a deliberately focused and facilitated computer area — will now be dispelled by this new computer lab — with a key gain of important public (lobby) space — alongside improved use of existing (ground-floor) work facilities for staff.
This is a distinctively winning convergence of strategies creating value for all library interests, well fashioned in the midst of deep service constraints.
___ Library Left Behind in Recent Municipal Growth ___
The library has not been suitably supported by the city, in order to best accommodate the tsunami of community patronage which has swept through it during the previous five years.
This adverse municipal trend is starkly revealed by examining the levels of its various employees during this period of time (budget years 2002-03, 2007-08, 2008-09), within each city department, of which there are eight.
Three departments had the same number of employees — in both 2003 and 2009: City Manager, Parks and Recreation and the Library — while Woodland’s population has jumped over 11%, from about 50,000 to around 56,000.
Police (2003 to 2009) saw a 9% increase in staffing and the Fire Department staff increased by 10: 22%, while Public Works gained 15 new full-time employees, for an 18% increase.
The Finance Department received 3.5 new full time workers (up 21%), but by far the largest staff increase occurred in the Community Development Department: with 19.9 new employees (13 to 32.9) — escalating 153%.
Overall, Woodland’s municipal staff increased 19% — 2003 to 2009 — by 56.4 full time employees (302 to 358.4).
However, neither the Parks and Recreation Department — nor the Library — has ended up with any of them.
Another signal of historical municipal inattention to the library is the fact that there are at least 2000 square feet of prime library space (ground-floor, southwestern corner, adjacent to the Leake Room) left entirely unfinished since the library’s renovation — twenty years ago.
___ Volunteer Activity Rising ___
4300 hours of library volunteer efforts, equivalent to more than two full time employees, occurred during the previous year, according to Briggs.
In addition to those hours, it is estimated that between the Friends of the Library, the Library Rose Club and its Board of Trustees, about 2300 hours of volunteer time benefits the library.
One project which the library is very interested in attracting volunteers to accomplish is a (delayed) full inventory of its materials. Briggs emphasizes that this inventory program is very flexible, with volunteers easily able to schedule time on a convenient basis.
“The Spine Tinglers [volunteer book repair] are being resurrected, and a customer service volunteer opportunity is being explored,” relates her report.
In other volunteer action, the Friends of Woodland Public Library has purchased two wall-mounted magazine racks for the Teen area (the most underserved population sector), and relevant magazines will be relocated there, while general magazines are being reorganized.
Three additional periodicals have been ordered to supplement the Teen magazine selection: two skateboarding magazines and a popular teen “people” magazine.
Also, for the second year, Lydia and Judy Swenson held a Girl Scout event in the Leake Room and collected money to buy books for the children’s room, collecting $380.49 on an Earth Day theme, then choosing to add more books on polar bears, pandas, gorillas and elephants.
___ Programming Proceeds, A Lot at Half-Staff / Half-Time ___
Briggs’ quarterly report outlines an impressive flow of library programming, although some is now functioning at half of the previous staffing levels (usually one staff person, where previously there were two) and/or at half of the previous timing.
“Despite the reductions, enthusiastic audiences attended the less frequent story times for toddlers and pre-schoolers as well as two age level book clubs,” describes the report. “School tours increased substantially as the end of the school year approached, Eleven class tours were provided [for] grades K – 3, and two English as Second Language tours were conducted.”
“Four poetry workshops were conducted for three school age groups during National Poetry Month; while, two Sacramento-area poets entertained adults in the rotunda. Renowned storyteller Kirk Waller performed for a small audience for National Library Week.”
“With modifications and reductions, summer reading was launched without a kick-off event, on June 9th. Over 600 young readers were registered by the end of June, and approximately 375 people were in attendance at the first two programs (music and puppets),” states Briggs’ report.
“The Friends of the Library generously fund the performers, incentives, and refreshments fro program events. In addition, teen volunteers were instrumental in the preparation and facilitation of activities. The Teen Advisory Group held a “Green Day @ the Library” in conjunction with downtown businesses and several City Departments, approximately 50 people attending.”
Adult (summer) reading and regular “Brown Bag Book Club” continue at half-staff levels.
Although the Teen Advisory Group and Teen Book Club have been suspended, library staff hope to bring both back upon an internet format.
“Outreach efforts with schools continued to be a high priority. [Staff] alternated appearances at seven public school assemblies to promote summer reading. Flyers were distributed to every elementary student,” indicates the report.
Briggs also notes that significant improvements to the — “collections” — aspect of library affairs have been very well managed by its employees, under conditions of intense uncertainty. “Staff is to be commended for the attention to collection development in a challenging time period.”
All of the permanent staff append an impressive list of their work items (to this quarterly report), which are too extensive for reproduction in this article, but quite enlightening about the intricately detailed nature of library affairs.
___ Literacy Services ___
The official name of the local literacy organization has been changed from Yolo Literacy Council to Woodland Literacy Council, and the group has a new mission statement and a prioritization of goals and activities, according to Briggs’ report.
A procedure manual was created for the Woodland Literacy Program, and the Literacy Coordinator has conducted three tutor training sessions, resulting in eleven new tutors. Six additional inmates at the county jail graduated with their GED (bringing total graduates to 141 — 45 from juvenile hall). Two additional notepad computers were purchased with grant monies for the Wayfarer Center in order to facilitate computer as well as basic literacy.
The Woodland Literacy Council received two grants during the quarter, $3,500 from United Way and $5,867 from a Woodland Community Development Block Grant. Applications have been submitted for a number of future / pending grants.
YOLO SUN NEWS REPORT :
At the outset of its regular meeting of August 6, 2009, the Board of Trustees of Woodland Public Library discussed fundamentally altering the Library’s organizational structure with Elizabeth Kemper, executive staff for the Local Agency Formation Commission of Yolo County (LAFCO, the operative means by which municipal incorporations, annexations, special districts, etc., are originated).
Turbulence arising from recently escalating, municipal budgetary crises has instilled a firm desire to best ensure the library’s future fiscal strength and program stability (as well as: enhancement), among its trustees.
LAFCO is comprised of four elected officials, two county supervisors and two city councilmembers serving on a rotating basis and agreeing upon a fifth (public-sector) member.
At the present time, supervisors Matt Rexroad and Helen Thomson, plus councilmembers from Winters and Davis, serve upon the Yolo LAFCO panel.
Kemper provided the library trustees with a: “Summary of Organization Options,” outlining various transformational avenues for consideration, including annexation of the library into the Yolo County Library District.
However – its trustees were intently focused upon the process by which the Woodland Public Library might itself become a special district.
___ Special District Status ___
Kemper’s Summary explains that, “the formula used for specific allocation of property tax to a new district is a positive fiscal aspect of formation.”
Special district status would establish funding for the library through allocation of a specific portion of Woodland’s annual property tax revenue, based on a detailed — non-negotiable — formula (similar to municipal incorporation), according to Kemper, who added that:
Being a special district, the library would also be capable of issuing bonds and receiving grants, assessments and development fees, as well as properly retaining and accessing its equity position within the existing Measure E (local capital improvements by sales tax ballot initiative) funding stream.
Kemper advised trustees that the Woodland Public Library’s share of Measure E money — “should be (properly) described” — within the relevant paperwork for this special district formation application process, eventually (if successful) filed through LAFCO with the county clerk.
Basic changes in library operations — as a special district — would be: eventual ballot election of its trustees; virtual independence / insulation from city budgetary affairs due to its assigned, property-tax increment funding stream (as well as, existing and potential supplemental funds); and obtaining legal status for initiating ballot measures on its own behalf.
___ Process for Becoming a Special District ___
Two application paths lead to triggering LAFCO’s relevant process: a petition by 5% of relevantly registered voters within the previous gubernatorial election — or — a city council resolution.
“After receipt by the Yolo LAFCO the application is processed and analysis is prepared for the Commission,” read Kemper’s Summary. “At a noticed public hearing the Commission receives public input and determines the approval, denial or modification of the proposal. If approved the Commission adopts terms and conditions and sets a conducting authority public hearing to receive written protest [if any].”
At the time of this latter hearing, if between 25% and 50% of relevant landowners or registered voters file written protest, an election will be called by LAFCO. However, if a less than 25% written protest is received — the special district will be lawfully formed without an election.
From the time LAFCO’s process is triggered, it takes about ten months to a year to complete a transition to special district status, related Kemper.
___ Specific Aspects of Fiscal Allocation ___
Kemper’s Summary provided to the library trustees identifies that:
“As set in Government Code section 56810(a)(2) the Yolo LAFCO will determine the amount of property tax to be exchanged by the affected agency [City of Woodland] to the [proposed] new [library] district. The determination is made by formula outlined in [this section] and calculated by the county auditor. In this process there is no negotiation of property tax shares[.] In addition, the Commission must determine a provisional appropriations limit as required by section 7902.7 and Article XIIIB of the California Constitution.”
___ Special District is Separate Entity ___
Kemper emphasized to the trustees that as a special district, the library “would be a separate entity,” responsible for various elements of its operative affairs that are presently handled through its being a department within the city.
“You’d need your own reserve and contingency funds,” for example, she explained, “and you’d have your own budget, funding sources,” and other fiscal elements.
Becoming a special district, “eliminates the reliance on the City general fund revenues. On the other hand, the library would then be responsible solely for its own functions without the support of the city,” relates the Summary, which also explains that:
“At the time any election is held for [special district] formation, the question of additional revenue, either through bonds, assessments or other revenue could be included on the ballot.”
Options exist for employee status, described Kemper to the trustees, indicating that library employees could actually remain personnel of the city — through negotiated arrangements. The city remains involved as — technical governing body — for such a library district, temporarily filling trustee vacancies and potentially providing background frameworks / logistics for personnel relations and other relevant matters.
Replying to a question, Kemper stated that the state Public Employees Retirement System (CAL PERS) will fully function in a regular manner within any library personnel format, whether or not affiliated with the city.
Library districts appear to be in an extraordinary class, as there was some uncertainty about origination / selection of district trustees, on the part of Kemper. After momentary review by the trustees president, of pertinent state Education Code provisions, a single reference to both appointment and election was discovered.
Interviewed subsequent to this meeting, the trustees president agreed that the likely process involved — is for the city council to initially appoint the existing board of trustees, within terms of staggered length, having these (newly) elective special district positions included on primary election ballots until all five trustees are duly elected, and making temporary appointments in case of vacancies.
___ Next Step: Lobbying City Council ___
Trustees were inclined to immediately begin approaching and persuading members of the Woodland City Council regarding its potential adoption of a resolution which would initiate the LAFCO process of special district formation for Woodland Public Library.
This lobbying effort may occur in some sessions of two councilmembers in discussion with two library trustees, suggested Library Services Director, Sandra Briggs.
The library is due to present its annual report to city council at the next council meeting, on September 1.
YOLO SUN NEWS REPORT :
About twenty years ago, Woodland’s downtown Main Street partially received a pedestrian-friendly make-over — a new streetscape with improved, decorative sidewalks and streetlights, tree plantings, and a little later on, benches, bike racks and other improvements — between Elm and Third Streets.
Today, another phase of this pedestrian-use & beautification program is being pursued by means of federal money, with a relatively modest municipal funding match.
The city’s Redevelopment Agency is presently preparing to submit a Community Design Grant application for federal funding through the Sacramento Area Council Of Governments (SACOG), a regional (six county) regulatory / planning authority — for the purpose of continuing this multi-phased project by extending such streetscape improvements from Third Street to East Street.
The grant application is due on September 4, with a prior, informational workshop scheduled for an August 13 meeting of the Historic Woodland Downtown Association “in order to receive community input on the design process.” A preliminary design is being produced by a relevant consultant.
The Woodland City Council adopted a required resolution supporting this grant application on July 21. The City has twice previously received funding from this SACOG administered program ($494,000 for improvements to East Street proximate to the Casa del Sol project in 2004, and $100,000 for the Lemen Street alignment project in 2008).
___ Planning Commission Presentation & Memorandum ___
In a July 16 Memorandum to the Woodland Planning Commission, Redevelopment Manager, Cynthia Shallit, explains that: “City and Agency staff believe that streetscape improvements along Main Street will promote development that leads to fewer vehicle miles traveled and more walking, biking, and transit use.”
The Main Street Pedestrian and Streetscape Improvement project: “involves installing new [antique] streetlights, bike paths, bus stops, bicycle [racks and bikeway signage], landscaping, [decorative] sidewalks, landscaped medians, bulb outs, a new traffic light, [enhanced] crosswalks, [banner hangers, refuse receptacles] and other improvements designed to support an accessible mixed-use district linked to new infill developments along the Main Street corridor.”
The July 16 Memorandum relates that; “City Staff believe that [this multi-phased project] would be a good candidate [ - ] the City’s most competitive proposal [ - ] for these [federal] funds and promotes the SACOG Blueprint Principles of providing a safe and aesthetically pleasing pedestrian environment while supporting development of the properties bordering this section of Main Street.”
Woodland Senior Planner (within the Redevelopment Agency), Dan Sokolow appeared on behalf of Shallit during the Planning Commission meeting of July 16, presenting relevant material about this grant application and taking questions, as an informational item on the panel’s regular agenda.
___ Current Project Phase Excludes Sections of Main Street ___
The current project phase excludes new curb, gutter and sidewalk from the north side of Main Street between Third Street and where Fifth Street intersects with Main Street, as well as the south side of Main Street east of Fifth Street.
The northwest corner of Main and Fourth Streets is excluded from that intersection’s bulb outs.
Tree plantings are planned for installation: between Third and Fourth Streets, at the northeast corner of Main and Fourth Streets, at the southwest corner of the intersection of Main and Fifth Streets, and on the north side on Main Street between Freeman Park and Sixth Street.
___ Federal Grant Requires Matching Municipal Funds ___
The overall cost of this proposed project phase is about $1.1 million.
$150,000 of Redevelopment Agency bond funds — plus about $44,000 from existing Agency budget allocations for streetscape improvements within the Capital Improvement Plan — combine at around $194,000 to comprise a — 17.74 % match — with federal dollars — of the total (estimated) cost of the project phase.
At least a 11.47% funding match is required by the SACOG Community Design Grant process.
Starting date for construction is planned for Spring of 2010, with completion by Winter of the same year.
___ Qualifications of Project ___
Sokolow provided the city planning panel with a Pre-Submittal Letter and Information Summary — on a format provided by SACOG — which justifies the project and lists the various costs associated with each component.
This Summary describes that this project qualifies under SACOG’s “Blueprint [planning principles:] by increasing the use of Main Street for pedestrians and bicyclists; focusing streetscape improvements in an urban, infill area to support and attract new development on vacant and underutilized properties that are near or border Main Street from Third to East Streets; creating a ‘green’ space by providing landscaping and eventually a shade tree canopy that will lessen the heat island effects of concrete and asphalt concrete surfaces; and using streetscape design elements to establish an aesthetically pleasing landscaped corridor on Main Street[.] While not directly related to the Blueprint principles, the median islands on Main Street will narrow the roadway and are intended to support a “traffic calming effect” in combination with other improvements planned for Main Street.”
___ Associated Private / Public Development ___
This project phase is described in the SACOG Informational Summary as being — “associated” — with four potential development projects along Main Street, from Third to East Streets.
They are: the potential (and priority budgeted) new Yolo County Courthouse — perhaps combined with a parking structure; plus, two projects sites of Paul Petrovich, the already entitled Rite Aid store on the northwest corner of East and Main Streets, and the block bounded by Main, Third, Fourth and Court Streets (focused on the old Electric Garage building, now Hoblit auto dealership), where the current Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) indicates an opportunity for a multiplex theater.
In a relevantly comprehensive paragraph, this Summary expresses that:
“Woodland’s [DSP] identifies an opportunity for the construction of a parking structure in the downtown in an area that is near or adjacent to the [ ] site [of] the Main Street Pedestrian and Streetscape Improvement project. The parking structure is expected to serve users of the new courthouse, the future multiplex movie theater, and other visitors to Woodland’s downtown.”
___ Major Cost Items in Current Project Phase ___
Several interesting (even curious) cost items are contained in this SACOG Informational Summary.
A new traffic signal — cost: more than $320,000 — is planned for Main and Fifth Streets.
Pedestrian “actuation” (activation) of this new traffic signal will cost an added $60,000, for a total of — over $380,000 — to signalize this single intersection.
About $340,000 is budgeted for three items: 1,135 feet of new sidewalk and exposed aggregate strip, 1,135 feet of electrical line for lighting in tree wells, and 1,135 feet of drip irrigation hose for tree wells and bulb outs.
The interesting aspect of these three budget items — is that they all estimated to cost the same amount: $113,500.
Related budget figures indicate that laying enhanced sidewalk, installing electrical line and running drip irrigation hose — (somehow) all cost $100 per linear foot — to incorporate within this phase of the project.
Apparently (yet perhaps unbelievably), identical lengths of: special sidewalk, electrical cable and irrigation line are extremely similar with regard to their cost within project construction.
Eleven tree wells are priced at $8,800, and seven bulb outs are $84,000.
Various crosswalk (stripping) treatments and (parking, bikeway) signage totals about $50,000.
___ Added Project Items — Outside Scope of Current Phase ___
Stamped concrete, median islands (5,000 sq. ft.) will cost an estimated $625,000, at $125 per square foot; however, this element of the project is proposed for an “add[ed]” phase, apparently outside the specific scope of this SACOG grant application.
$43,000 for street furniture (seven garbage cans at $1,200 apiece, ten benches at $2,000 each, twenty banner-hangers at $500 apiece, ten planters at $1,500 each, and five bike racks costing a total of $3,000) is also listed within the preliminary project budget description as an “add [-on].”
Perhaps, “add[itional]” funding may become available to bring these future options within even the current phase of this project; with that being the reason for including them on the periphery of this application.
“Antique street lights will be installed on Main Street in the stretch from Third to East Streets,” relates the Informational Summary. “Funding for this [portion] of the project will be provided through [a federal] Community Development Block Grant and SACOG Federal Stimulus funds.”
Yolo Bus will be installing a nine-foot, lighted bus shelter with garbage can — at Freeman Park — (an improvement already planned and funded by Yolo Bus).
YOLO SUN OPINION :
Like many other towns within California’s Central Valley, a state highway served as a primary element of Woodland’s historical character and development. Some of these cities continue to host a major highway running through their core downtowns.
Woodland is no longer one of them — but anachronistic inertia and misplaced nostalgia attached to such a thoroughfare have so far stymied basic evolution of its core downtown beyond that obsolete planning paradigm.
___ Commercial Drift Caused Downtown Descent ___
Downtown Woodland gradually declined in commercial stature as the City’s retail center, eclipsed by an ever-widening, peripheral spiral of new commercial hubs sprawling around it.
Specialty retail, entertainment and office uses – as well as chronic, glaring vacancies — have eventually come to dominate downtown’s identity.
A redevelopment authority was created in 1987-88 to assist emergent municipal intentions for revitalizing downtown Woodland — after a few vanguard efforts toward architectural restoration by devoted individuals, and prior to completion of renovation of the City’s Opera House in 1990.
Slow progress is being made during the intervening twenty years.
A Downtown Specific Plan was adopted in 1993, to provide a uniquely focused planning framework for the city’s core.
Various historic buildings, such as the Woodland Hotel and Capital Hotel & Saloon — as well as an increasing number of redesigned retail spaces — have been refurbished and in some cases extended into mini-plazas linked by paseos (pedestrian corridors) to Main Street, or suitably expanded to augment existing uses.
Diverse restaurants and cafes appear relatively successful. Taverns of yesteryear have disappeared, remodeled in style with current policies.
Genuine gravity and public magnetism, hoped to be generated within this exercise of incremental, civic rejuvenation — however — remains a deeply elusive goal.
___ Once Major Highway — Now: “Minor Arterial” ___
The old State Highway 16 running through its downtown was an essential component of Woodland’s identity during most of its development.
Downtown Main Street was for over a century the principal channel of local commerce.
Increasing vehicle volumes necessitated signal lights be installed at some point, when Main Street was the ultimate traffic course through town, developing its character into that of a vigorous city thoroughfare.
While Main Street was once such a crucial conduit of vehicular dynamics — it is by today’s traffic-engineering parlance festooned with the label: “minor arterial” — with respect to its “functional classification.”
Downtown Main Street still carries a substantial amount of traffic, but is now dwarfed by vehicle numbers on East Main Street — around the freeway interchanges.
2002 PM Peak Roadway Volumes, according to the recently released, ten-year update of Woodland’s Street Master Plan, indicate 1,370 vehicle trips in the core downtown, compared with 2,430 trips at the center of freeway connections on East Main Street.
Even Gibson Road (from College St. to Matmor Rd.) has peak traffic flows far exceeding downtown Main Street, peaking at around 2,000 trips at East Street.
By 2020, peak traffic flows along downtown Main Street are projected to slightly lessen (~1,200) — while the middle zone of freeway interchanges skyrockets to 3,370 and Gibson Road proximate to East Street approaches 3,000.
For the first time — vehicle trips on Kentucky Avenue, averaging more than 1,500 from East to West Streets, will surpass those through the downtown. Plans exist to widen Kentucky Avenue to four lanes, increasing peak traffic flows to over 2,000.
County Road 102 must be widened to four lanes in several sections.
Peak traffic is predicted to roughly double along County Road 98 by 2020, with 1,500 vehicles traveling on the portion south of West Main Street.
In due perspective of changing times, therefore — it becomes quite plausible that Main Street (west of East St.) — as well as Court Street — have now been designated: “minor arterial.”
___ Level of Service Standards in General Plan Appear Unsustainable ___
Relevant language of Woodland’s General Plan establishes that:
“The City shall develop and manage its roadway system to maintain LOS ‘C’ of better on all roadways, except within one-half mile of state or federal highways and within the Downtown Core. In these areas, the City shall strive to maintain LOS ‘D’ or better. Exceptions to these level of service standards may be allowed in infill areas where the City finds that the improvements or other measures required to achieve the LOS Standards are unacceptable because of the right-of-way needs, physical impacts on surrounding properties, and/or the visual aesthetics of the required improvement and its impact on community character.”
The 2009 Street Master Plan — however — announces that: “An evaluation of the projected [traffic] volumes indicate that the following roadway sections will [during traffic peaks] operate at service level D conditions by 2020[:]
* County Road 98, from West Main Street to Gibson Road;
* Cottonwood Street, from Cross Street to Gibson Road;
* West Street, from West Main Street to Gibson Road;
* Pioneer Avenue, from Gum Avenue to East Gibson Road;
* Gibson Road, from County Road 98 to Cottonwood Street;
* Gibson Road, from West to East Streets.
None of these roadways are capable of being widened to preclude LOS D conditions or avert further deterioration of LOS Standards.
In 1995, “total daily vehicle trips generated in Woodland or traveling through [it] was approximately 342,000. [ ] By 2020, this number is expected to increase to about 621,000, which represents an 82 percent increase,” relates the updated Street Master Plan.
Coping with ever increasing volumes of traffic, where road widening is not feasible, is planned by means of installing added:
“traffic signals[;]
pedestrian and bicycle facilities[;]
left turn pockets[;]
Intelligent Transportation Systems improvements[;]
[and targeted] Traffic Calming measures.”
“The use of more general traffic calming measures may be justified to mitigate citywide congestion levels. The applicability and definition of these measures will be the subject of future studies,” describes the new Street Master Plan.
Woodland’s General Plan (as noted above) already recognizes that regular LOS Standards are unrealistic within its downtown zone and freeway linkages.
___ Minor Arterial, Major Civic Center ___
While downtown Main Street’s historical status as prime conveyor of vehicle traffic has significantly waned — its preeminent station as principal conveyor of local culture has become vastly magnified by the escalating dimensions and diversity of Woodland’s population.
Unfortunately, the style and volume — the freeway-feeling — of motor vehicle traffic remaining on this “minor arterial” — downtown Main Street — is distinctly inconsistent with the nature of genuinely pedestrian-friendly conditions required to successfully engage an authentic renewal of Woodland’s core district.
Evolution of the key civic institution of Woodland’s downtown area is imperative for fulfillment and satisfaction of historic public values.
A new policy balance must emerge between pedestrians and motor vehicle traffic along the historical section of Main Street, in order to predicate true renaissance within downtown Woodland.
___ Back to the Future ___
Returning the — initial model — of downtown traffic flow is now the proper path toward restoring real pedestrian values alongside the downtown itself; otherwise, revitalization will be unreasonably impeded.
A durable downtown ambience must display, that draws the public in a magnetic manner because of attracted interest, comfort and convenience.
Original equipment along downtown Main Street was, of course: stop signs and diagonal parking.
By definition — stop signs put pedestrians in the driving seat.
They may leap into the roadway without concern at any intersection, perhaps even at mid-block cross-walks — as vehicles must yield and creep along, reasonably calmed (like dogs on a leash).
Diagonal parking combined with stop signs clearly signal to vehicles that safe progress must be relatively slow and cautious (thus usually: quieter) further elevating pedestrian values.
___ Options and Benefits of New Street Master Plan ___
Companion roadways to Main Street, Court Street and Lincoln Avenue (the latter is now designated as a collector street, but could easily become an arterial, with a one block jump to Main Street at Fifth / Sixth Streets) are not being called upon to provide a significant enough contribution toward motor vehicle movement through the city.
A wide and signalized roadway, Court Street accounts for barely 1,000 peak trips at the present time, with future projections well under that volume (~850).
Lincoln Avenue (generally un-signalized) has recently been revamped adjacent to downtown, but is projected to carry only about 600 peak trips (College to West Sts., and less toward either direction).
These parallel roadways are reasonably available for participation within a redesigned functional balance of motor vehicular movement for the downtown area.
___ Mitigations Rise Over Improvements for Traffic Strategies ___
Detailed above, municipal directions on the subject of traffic standards are now being driven toward: “mitigations” rather than “improvements” — by basic, irresistible dynamics of its population expanding against limitations of civic infrastructure.
One of the — “traffic calming measures [ ] to mitigate citywide congestion levels” — should be this hugely valuable, proposed adjustment of the traffic format of downtown Main Street.
Eliminating extraneous traffic from downtown Main Street, and advancing use of Court Street and Lincoln Avenue to assist that goal, are indispensible for achievement of prominent civic purposes associated with downtown renewal.
Diversion of extraneous vehicles from the historical section of Main Street will tend to deflect them (especially, when traveling easterly from outside city limits to the freeways) — away from Woodland’s single most serious zone of traffic congestion: the freeway interchanges on East Main Street — toward alternative freeway access.
Freeway signage noticing vehicle drivers of a sharply — “reduced-speed zone” — along the historical portion of Main Street will also motivate potential routing options, further relieving peak traffic congestion on East Main Street.
Plus, some of these folks may thus become interested to visit Woodland’s downtown and discover precisely what fashions of civic importance have elevated local cultural values above crass convenience of motor vehicles.
Along the lines of related policy (above) within its General Plan:
Woodland should “find[ ] that [ ] measures required to achieve the LOS Standards [within its core downtown area, such as signalized intersections and parallel parking on Main Street] are unacceptable because of [ ] physical impacts on surrounding properties, and/or the [various] aesthetics of [such measures] and impact[s] on community character.”
YOLO SUN NEWS REPORT :
By 2013, Yolo County should have a huge new, multi-story, 16 courtroom, comprehensively facilitated courthouse; but left unresolved — its specific location within the eastern side of downtown Woodland.
Prior plans to use as a part of it: the block bounded by Court, North, Third and Fourth Streets — the old county jail — now the Public Defenders Office and courtroom space, with facilities for detention of inmates during court appearances across Third Street at the courthouse — plus key parking (~150 spaces) for the existing courthouse — have apparently been axed, because of inabilities to resolve relocation of those uses during construction of the new courthouse and its analogous facilities.
City staff has been swiftly scouring the eastern portion of downtown — alongside closed-session negotiation meetings with city council — cataloguing and coalescing available parcels, attempting to identify a feasible footprint for the new 160,000 square foot courthouse facility — plus enough space to park nearly 500 vehicles.
If this parking was installed within conventional, surface lots: five acres — two full city blocks within Woodland’s downtown area — adjacent to the new courthouse facilities would become engulfed in asphalt.
___ Redevelopment Agency Partnership Essential ___
Woodland Redevelopment Agency (WRDA) Manager, Cynthia Shallit, indicates that — “the state budget allocated funds for parking, but its allocation is based on what they think it would cost to provide sufficient surface parking for the courts.
“The City would not want such a large area of space in the heart of downtown just paved over; we would prefer to have that land used for higher density development.”
The pivotal reason that WRDA must now become involved is that apparently, the state doesn’t specifically recognize potential contingencies for parking garages within its process of project and budgetary purview — only “surface parking.”
Either that, or Yolo County got an incomplete package of plans, during legislative consideration of what is deemed a “priority project” — “one of the top four” — such projects for the state (because current courthouse conditions are near the — bottom — of overall quality – statewide).
Shallit also identifies — another major hurdle — in that: “it is also unlikely that much land could be found downtown, so the courts facility would have to locate on the outskirts of town or in another community.”
Thus, it appears impossible for the state to operate in a way which preserves the county courthouse within downtown Woodland (the county seat) — without basic help from WRDA.
___ Parking Garage Structure Appears Inevitable ___
That’s where, having long been a general goal, in previous downtown planning attached to development of a multiplex cinema — the concept of creating Woodland’s initial, multi-level parking garage suddenly gains ineluctable traction and inertia.
The logic is: (a) the new courthouse must be located in downtown Woodland, (b) Woodland will avoid losing the courthouse or winning an asphalt sea for its downtown area — by partnering with the state in construction of a multi-level parking garage with a minimal footprint and perhaps beneficial orientation toward joint (public-private) uses within downtown redevelopment.
It’s truly a case of transforming a potentially devastating feasibility dilemma into a classic redevelopment opportunity.
Such convergence of uses is a basic policy goal of Woodland’s Downtown Specific Plan (DSP): “The City shall pursue development of a multi-story parking structure that supports parking for Downtown employment and shopping during the day and entertainment uses at night. The City shall encourage retail frontages on the ground floor of new parking structures.” (DSP, Policies and Standards.)
The DSP specifically includes such a project: “Cinema Square Parking Structure,” offering “parking for [a] new cinema complex as well as neighboring businesses / offices, [plus] first floor [ ] commercial space.”
This potential project is timed for completion by 2012, and is located on the southern side of Court Street, between Third and Fifth Streets (closing Fourth Street), adjacent to a proposed cinema complex on the Main Street side of these blocks.
Paul Petrovich owns the old Electric Garage site, now the Hoblit automobile dealership, and has a contract with a cinema developer for purposes of constructing such a project. (Please see further details, below.)
Recent municipal documents indicate accommodation of 30,000 sq. ft. of retail space around the periphery of the ground floor of the proposed parking garage.
___ Role of WRDA ___
Shallit describes that, “the role of the Redevelopment Agency in the courts project is: to acquire land, find other financing and oversee the construction of the [potential parking] garage.”
Of course, courthouse facilities and related parking are a snug package; so in essence, despite documentary statements regarding an independent state process for selecting the actual courthouse site, WRDA is likely to be closely cooperating with the state in assembling parcels of land that are reasonably optimum for this entire project.
WRDA’s related Parking Needs Study (please see details, below) is an essential policymaking hinge on which this proposed parking garage swings, and will preface its reception by the city council (WRDA board).
“Because Woodland is willing to help find a site and build a parking structure, parking will consume less land and the new courts facility can be located in our downtown core,” explains Shallit, adding that, “it is quite an accomplishment for Woodland to be able to attract the new court building here.”
Woodland City Manager Mark Deven explains that: “the City Council / Redevelopment Agency Board is 100% supportive of this project since it will stimulate redevelopment, economic development and reinvestment in downtown Woodland.
“This project has been in process for over nine years and downtown business / property owners are supportive.”
Indeed, it’s inherent to vitality and growth within the downtown / redevelopment area — more than any other single factor. According to official statistics more than 380,000 persons visited local courthouse facilities during 2008 – perhaps the largest generator of public activity within Woodland’s downtown.
___ Reimbursement of WRDA Funding Appears Likely ___
“The amount [of money] the state has set aside for (surface) parking acquisition is about $8 million, which they can use to reimburse us for acquisition and construction,” Shallit continues.
$5 million of redevelopment funds (most of the agency’s recent $6 million bond) have been budgeted in 2010, for land acquisition, contract services and other costs related to this project.
“It may be that [WRDA] will get a significant portion of its money back, once it receives the [$8 million] state allocation for parking acquisition,” says Shallit.
“[WRDA] recently received $125,000 in supportive, preliminary funding for this project from the federal Economic Development Administration,” adds Shallit — who also intends to pursue a $3 – $5 million construction grant from this agency and will be attempting to secure an additional loan / bond from the state Infrastructure Bank, “to pay for the rest of it.”
Reimbursement thus seems especially likely — because the proposed parking garage will cost only about $7 million ($20,000 per space in a 350 space garage).
Even factoring in the land cost (uncertain at this time), it seems there is ample funding available for this project – from state and federal sources – inclining matters toward substantial WRDA reimbursement.
Shallit indicates that no General Fund money is being used for this project.
The state may actually save a lot of money — with WRDA arranging its courthouse parking component — while the reimbursed city preserves this fundamental facility in its downtown area and greatly benefits from consequential dynamics of huge new development.
An initial timeline of WRDA “milestones” for this process has already been established (please see details, below).
___ Parking Garage Project Obtains WRDA Goals ___
Shallit emphasizes that: “one of the primary goals of the Redevelopment Agency is to encourage development in the Redevelopment Area, which is primarily the downtown. It can do this by providing parking that can be used by other businesses that wish to locate downtown.”
Plus, if sufficient parking for courthouse facilities undergoes an easterly shift, onto presently under-used land, this movement would tend to enhance parking availability within the downtown core, where overflow courthouse use now ties up some parking.
“Also, by encouraging this kind of new development, especially right on Main Street, it brings new vitality and energy to downtown and attracts further investment. We need new development of all types in downtown Woodland.”
“It is very common,” describes Shallit, “for redevelopment agencies to join with many types of public as well as private entities to complete projects. These partnerships help leverage funds and can make projects happen that normally would not be feasible.”
“In this case,” relates Shallit, “the courts project will bring $160 million dollars to Woodland. It will stimulate job creation, new business development and re-energize downtown.
“At a time when Woodland’s Redevelopment Area is suffering from disinvestment and neglect, bringing in this large project is a major success.
“In general, the purpose of redevelopment is to remove blight by stimulating development,” Shallit indicates, “which naturally means that redevelopment funds are meant to be used on construction projects, whether that means public infrastructure improvements or private development, where development does not happen with the private sector alone.”
Or — in this case — with the state acting alone.
___ New Parking Needs Study Now Underway ___
WRDA, in order to best integrate this huge project within overall plans for downtown redevelopment — has requested proposals from firms qualified to prepare parking needs studies, and recently hired a consultant (Fehr & Peers of Sacramento, for $20,000) to accomplish a comprehensive analysis of existing and future parking supply and demand along the Main Street corridor, within the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP).
“Key assignments for the consultant,” announces the formal Request for Proposals of WRDA, “include: preparing an inventory of existing parking resources (on-street parking and off-street parking lots); putting together parking demand analyses for the Woodland Courthouse Project and a multiplex theater, as well as [ ] evaluation of “trigger points” for the need to construct new parking facilities including one or more parking structures; provide[ ] recommendations on general locations for future parking facilities within the [DSP]”
A related aspect of these analyses will be the factor of Woodland’s adoption in 2008 of a resolution establishing an in-lieu parking fee and a parking district boundary.
According to Shallit, this Parking Needs Study is presently underway and should be completed during August.
A public meeting / workshop was recently held, combined with a meeting of the Woodland Downtowners, to elicit comments from interested parties on this project — which will thereafter be incorporated into a final report.
The consultant (Fehr & Peers) will present this final report to the Woodland Planning Commission and City Council / Redevelopment Board and respond to questions in September.
___ Major Projects for Parking Study Include Multiplex Theater(s) ___
Major future projects to be analyzed in terms of their parking impacts are: the new courthouse, the City Center Lofts project and a multiplex theater with 10 to 14 movie screens (1,200 seats).
The only multiplex cinema proposals which are currently budgeted by WRDA are those located within the eastern part of downtown (the old Electric Garage on the northern side of Main between Third and Fourth Streets, now the Hoblit auto dealership, which property is owned by Paul Petrovich — and a recent proposal on the southern side of Main between Fifth and Sixth Streets, beside its other building, by Wiseman & Assoc.).
The 2009-10 WRDA budget projects annual receipt of property tax increment beginning in 2011 ($48,000, gradually increasing to about $56,000 in 2019), related to a – ”multi-plex theater” — indicating basic agency planning for completion of such a project within the next 18 months.
A goal of land use and development in the DSP is : “multi-screen cinema and plaza at site of existing auto dealer on Main Street,” directly alongside the goal of: “a multi-story parking structure with ground floor retail / food court use.”
How this goal converges with, or separates from, the imperative for best serving the site location of the new courthouse — is an open question.
Shallit has explicitly denied any reliance upon a cinema proposal by this project; while, retaining the courthouse is its “driving force,” according to related city staff.
___ Petrovich Challenged by Historical-Preservation Advocate ___
Quite interestingly — the (private contract) agreement that Paul Petrovich has had with a regional cinema developer — CinemaWest, which owns and operates a large string of multiplex theaters throughout Northern California, some involving restorations and renovations of historic, art-deco movie-houses, such as Woodland’s State Theater (vintage: 1937) on Main near Walnut Street — will expire in September.
Noted Woodland historical-preservation advocate and author, David Wilkinson, is presently engaged in a campaign to persuade CinemaWest — to not renew its agreement about the Hoblit site with Paul Petrovich — and rather to approach Richard Mann, owner of the State Theater, about prospects for immediately redeveloping this historical Woodland landmark.
Wilkinson indicates that CinemaWest — “approached Mann several years ago about purchasing the State Theater — before the Petrovich deal — but was discouraged by city parking requirements.”
“CinemaWest has a good track record of restoring historic theaters, similar to the State (in Fortuna and Willits, for example) — and adding screens to create a hybrid multiplex involving new and old buildings,” describes Wilkinson, “which I think is exactly what needs to be done with the State.”
“There is vacant land on either side of the State to allow for expansion and parking,” observes Wilkinson. “The [WRDA] could assist in negotiating the purchase of these parcels. Synergy with the City Lofts project across the street would be tremendous. The State Theater would further enhance Woodland as the “Valley Jewel” with top-notch historic venues that are unique to Woodland
“It’s too bad the multiplex idea got linked to the courthouse expansion, since it has resulted in sweeping the State Theater restoration under the rug — which is puzzling and unfair for a city like Woodland that has historic resources second to none.
“I think it is shortsighted. Unfortunately, the city is reactionary when it comes to redevelopment. They need to proactively go out and recruit a developer (like CinemaWest) for a State Theater – multiplex combo and offer incentives to make the deal happen and be creative with parking requirements. They haven’t even attempted to do this.”
Wilkinson is thus determined to challenge Petrovich’s ability to retain CinemaWest; and rather — to swing this prestigious multiplex developer toward advancing restoration and expansion of the State Theater, located at the western “primary gateway” (DSP) to Woodland’s downtown area.
This challenge, if successful, would have an impact of uncertain dimensions — including upon the incipient Parking Needs Study — by forcing Petrovich to find another multiplex developer — or perhaps even to abandon this (Hoblit sited) multiplex project — because of such arising competition from CinemaWest at the State Theater site.
Would a cinema complex proposed by Wiseman and Assoc., along the southern side of Main Street, across from Freeman Park, survive a decision by CinemaWest to wrap a new multiplex around a fully restored State Theater?
Will Woodland’s long-anticipated cinema renaissance suddenly shift from east-downtown to west-downtown?
David Wilkinson is now working on it.
___ Uncertain Cinema Scenario Affects Parking Analyses ___
As well as potentially altering considerations of specific convergences of use — between the cinema complex and new courthouse — renewal of CinemaWest’s original interest in purchasing, restoring and expanding the State Theater would significantly affect the comprehensive assessment of downtown parking demand.
During the recent public gathering noted above, to elicit comments on this subject, consultant Fehr & Peers principal, Bob Grandy, emphasized that the desired result is a project that “has parking for shared use, a good mix of uses — an efficient parking facility.”
Grandy described that the study “will look at [cinema complex proposals], as affecting parking in the downtown,” as it is a “major project.”
“Different demand areas” exist, however — he indicates — between east and west downtown. Thus, a shift of focus for this multiplex cinema to the State Theater, across Main Street from the new City Center Lofts project — which is intended to have “a strong retail component” — would have a salient impact on eventual, overall parking demand.
As presently designed, the City Center Lofts project fails to fully achieve city parking requirements — and would be subject to some in-lieu fees for final approval.
Another aspect of existing (approved) planning process for this project is financial support for renovation of the State Theater — creating the prospect of a beneficial convergence of support between them regarding parking requirements.
Interviewed about this unsettled “major-project” element of the ongoing Parking Needs Study, subsequent to the recent public gathering, Grandy indicated that this somewhat fluid — east / west — cinema-complex situation would receive due consideration as an option / factor, being “incorporated” within the final edition of the Study.
___ Petrovich Has Already Undermined Key Feature of DSP ___
Petrovich has so far had an objectively deleterious influence on implementation of Woodland’s DSP, by seemingly attempting to satisfy his mitigation obligations related to peripheral retail development within his Gateway project, through sitting a conventional (one-story, cookie-cutter) Rite Aid store at the northwestern corner of East and Main Streets.
DSP policy that: “the CIty shall continue to support mixed-use developments [ ] with a similar style and scale of the historic rice mill building,” at the northwestern corner of East and Main Streets — was (officially) ignored by the City — in relation to Petrovich’s plans for a Rite Aid store.
Public speculation exists about the ability of Woodland’s City Council to successfully manage Petrovich’s development projects.
According to a long-time observer of city hall: Petrovich was the pivotal influence in the 2004-election replacement of (now) Woodland Vice-mayor Art Pimentel, for (now returned) Councilmember Martie Dote — who tended to (too) carefully scrutinize Petrovich’s various development plans.
Rumors are circulating about Petrovich selling the un-built Rite Aid site on Main and East Streets to Wiseman and Associates, who own the multi-story building directly across Main Street.
City Manager Deven has recently stated, however, that as far as he knows, the project remains on track — just delayed.
This intersection is the eastern “primary gateway” to the downtown area, intended in conjunction with the western “primary gateway” at Main and Walnut Streets, “to reinforce a strong community identity for the Downtown,” exclaims the DSP.
“[T]he City shall develop enhanced entrances (gateways) on both ends of Downtown Main Street,” according to the DSP.
Because of abridgement of the DSP, a regular Rite Aid store is still scheduled — despite rumors of a change of ownership / inability of Petrovich to obtain funding to build this second Rite Aid store in town — to become one pillar of “community identity” for downtown Woodland’s eastern ‘primary gateway.”
Another such pillar of — “community identity” — is the State Theater.
Yolo Sun will soon present a detailed news report on the topic of David Wilkinson’s campaign to transfer the interest and participation of CinemaWest toward the purpose of well-fulfilling the municipal promise of gateways creating — as expressed by the DSP: “a strong community identity for the Downtown.”
___ Timeline of Courthouse Parking Garage Project ___
An initial timeline for WRDA’s courthouse parking garage project has been set:
Identification of preferred sites by Redevelopment Agency – July 16. 2009
Review by State Public Works Board – August 16, 2009
Environmental Review – March 2010
Acquisition of Sites – March 2010
Completion of Design and Engineering Plans – April 2010
Completion of Parking Garage Construction – April 2011
Completion of Courthouse Construction — August 2013
YOLO SUN NEWS REPORT :
Woodland’s annual municipal-liability, insurance premium rose from $418,000 to $640,000 for the upcoming fiscal year — a $222,000 increase — due a single incident involving 44 year-old Ricardo Abrahams – whose welfare was allegedly of concern to four Woodland police officers involved in his death.
This basic proportion of premium increase for the city will remain in effect for three years — adding a total of about $666,000 in red ink — to Woodland’s several years of budget deficits.
Two years ago, Woodland’s annual liability-insurance premium was only about $300,000.
___ Abrahams Died From Physical Compression & Suffocation ___
Abrahams died of — “positional asphyxia” — in the opinion of the Yolo County Coroner, while under physical restraint by these four police officers — although there was apparently no legal basis for his detention or arrest.
Wrongful-death litigation against the City of Woodland and these four individual police officers was initiated on February 11, 2009, by Sacramento-based attorney Johnny Griffin, on behalf of Abrahams’ parents, Rosemary and Cecil Abrahams of Davis.
Abrahams reportedly was a law student and an intern in the office of Yolo County District Attorney, Jeff Reisig.
___ Abrahams Not Accused of Criminal Behavior ___
Abrahams was a client of Safe Harbor Crisis House, a mental health provider, located in the 500 block of Kentucky Avenue. During or soon after his visit to this facility on May 28, 2008, someone notified police about their — apparently: non-criminal — concerns regarding Abrahams.
Yolo Sun’s request for comments by the (at least in this instance — ironically named) Safe Harbor Crisis House have so far been declined, although this facility doesn’t appear to be a target of litigation by Abrahams’ parents.
No allegation of unlawful conduct by Abrahams has been made during the course of local police investigation, as well as an investigation by the state Attorney General — which also found that no criminal violations occurred — on the part of these four officers.
These four police, dispatched for such a — “welfare check” — type of situation encountered Abrahams nearby this facility.
When Abrahams (armed only with a pencil, according to some accounts of this incident) displayed behavior which might reasonably be expected of persons with mental instability / illness — and failed to obey some police instructions — he was shot with four separate taser weapons, ultimately being physically subdued and restrained by these four police officers — who suffocated him in the process.
___ JPA Insurer for Local Governmental Entities ___
Yolo County’s various jurisdictional entities (cities and special districts, etc., as well as the County) aggregate their resources for insurance — liability protection — within a separate legal entity, generically known as a Joint Powers Authority: Yolo County Public Agency Risk Management Insurance Authority (YCPARMIA).
YCPARMIA is a component of a broader network and program of self-insurance for public entities, with seventy to eighty members throughout Northern California (California Joint Powers Risk Management Authority), for use on occasions of legal judgments exceeding $500,000 for a single event.
Woodland’s liability coverage under this expanded, excess-risk umbrella system of liability management, is $40 million for any single event.
___ Claims History Component in Insurance Premium Formula ___
Jeff Tonks, CEO of YCPARMIA, describes that — “there’s an element of experience” — within the formula for determining premium amounts within the various jurisdictions participating in this self-insurance system. “Too adverse a [litigation] history, has an adverse affect on [that member’s] premium.”
Tonks expressed that the incident involving the death of Abrahams was the factor responsible for the huge jump in Woodland’s liability premium.
“A three-year experience modifier” exists within this allocation formula for setting members’ premiums, relates Tonks. Just as a person’s driving history (accidents, citations, various factors influencing liability exposure, etc.) is a determinative factor in rating their automobile insurance — a city’s — “adverse litigation and claims component” — will for this period of time elevate its proportion of fiscal burden within this self-insurance system.
“Good risk practices by member agencies, good claims practices by [YCMARMIA], and [fostering] safety” in all facets of agency exposure to liability are the keys to success for such multi-jurisdictional systems, indicates Tonks.
“One or two bad claims can greatly skew an entity’s relative position [within YCPARMIA].”
___ Death Cases Cause Sharp Rises in Insurance Premiums ___
“Where you have a death case, [ ] the fluctuating dynamic of this history element becomes very negative,” Tonks emphasizes.
Tonks predicts that the recent death of Luis Gutierrez during a mid-day encounter with four members of the Gang Suppression Unit of the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office will cause a similar — very significant elevation — of the County’s share of next year’s premium allocation.
Yolo County’s current (annual) liability premium through YCPARMIA is $949,404, so the incipient lawsuit in the Gutierrez matter will surely boost the County’s annual insurance bill — to way over a million dollars.
If it rises roughly in proportion to Woodland’s recent increase, the County’s share would exceed $1.5 million for fiscal year 2010-11.
Such an increase would stay in place for three years (until 2014), connected to the adverse-history, modifier component of YCPARMIA’s risk management formula.
Woodland’s elevated proportion of this JPA premium-pool will likewise be maintained for three years — resulting in a total loss to the City of about $666,000. Also, this year’s premium was diminished by $60,000 because of an expenditure of reserves by YCPARMIA.
More or less, the city is paying-off more than the — full amount — of the local liability cap ($500,000) — with its increased premiums over three years — simply based on such a significant damage claim being litigated.
Unless, of course, a successful damage claim exceeds $40 million — these elevated premiums are the extent of the city’s basic loss. While, various other expenses related to such extraordinary circumstances surely expand to some extent the overall cost.
However — a multi-million dollar legal judgment against Woodland — for the wrongful death of Ricardo Abrahams — would likely have various political and financial consequences.
___ Comparisons With Other YCPARMIA Jurisdictions ___
For comparison, Tonks mentioned that the City of Davis has a less adverse, recent “history element,” which is directly reflected in its — much lower — $336,061 liability premium for the current fiscal year.
A few years ago (as noted), Woodland’s annual premium was in this range.
West Sacramento’s present share of the YCPARMIA premium-pool for liability coverage is $561,545. As noted, the county’s share is now $949,404.
YCPARMIA also covers workers compensation claims on behalf of its members. Woodland’s premium for this insurance coverage also went up for fiscal year 2009-10, from $471,334 to $544,000.
___ YCPARMIA Reserves Lower Woodland’s Premium ___
Some liability claims will be lost, while some will be won. Overall, YCPARMIA is in pretty good (stable) shape.
In fact, YCPARMIA just expended some “excess, surplus” reserve funds, “credited against [current and] future premiums of the member agencies,” says Tonks, who added that such help was fairly “common” within the authority’s operations — whenever reserves are sufficient and the members could use a fiscal hand — as in the current economic conditions / budget crises.
This YCPARMIA (reserve) supplement for 2009-10 meant about $60,000 to Woodland, reducing its premium from a projected (and budgeted) $700,000 — down to $640,000.
Tonks reports that the total amount of premiums paid by members of YCPARMIA is presently at the same level that it was in 1995 – indicating a well-managed operation.
“How would you feel if your overall debts were the same as [fifteen years ago]?,” he proudly expressed.
___ Budget Savings From YCPARMIA Help Already Soaked Up ___
Inquiry to the City Manager regarding budgetary savings created by the difference between projected and actual expenses for liability and workers compensation insurance — roughly $216,000 — resulted in Mark Deven’s (regularly) timely response:
“Any savings realized due to premiums being lower than originally estimated could be used to offset the [anticipated] deficit in the benefits internal service fund — which receives its funding based on a flat-rate allocation to departments per employee. We were concerned that [this] would be under-budgeted,” because of the number of voluntary early retirements provoked in an effort to navigate the city’s budget.
Deven also indicated that it would be prudent to also begin to build a small amount of reserves in the city’s (related) liability account — that was totally flattened as an early remedy to fiscal woes.
Thus, whatever savings accrued from YCPARMIA’s limited help lowering Woodland’s sky-rocketing liability premium was instantly soaked-up by the City’s (ongoing) budget crisis.
YOLO SUN NEWS REPORT :
The Woodland City Council voted in July, 2008, to join the California Climate Action Registry, a non-profit organization created by the State of California as a voluntary greenhouse-gas emissions registry — which “provides leadership on climate change by developing and promoting credible and consistent greenhouse-gas reporting standards and tools for organizations to measure, monitor, obtain third party verification, and reduce their [ ] emissions consistently across industry sectors and geographical borders,” according to an associated staff report.
“Environmental Services staff compiled and submitted [plus verified] a baseline inventory of greenhouse gas emissions attributable to all 2007 municipal operations,” indicated City of Woodland Conservation Coordinator, Marshall Echols.
___ Woodland One of Only Eight ‘Climate Action Leader’ Cities ___
This subject was again on the City Council’s agenda for June 2, because the initial phase involved with Woodland’s membership has been completed, making it — one of only eight cities in California — to be designated: “Climate Action Leader.”
Echols presented this agenda item, within which the City Council received a formal certificate recognizing its status as an early “Leader” for the state in addressing global warming.
Any public or private entity in the state can join the Registry, and about 300 have done so — including Yolo County and the University of California, Davis.
The City of Davis hasn’t accomplished a 2007 baseline analysis, and is reportedly engaged in an effort to establish a — community-wide inventory — which involves attempting to obtain exhaustive, annual estimates of total community emissions (electricity, natural gas, propane and motor vehicle usage, industrial emissions, etc. — for all public and private activities within a jurisdiction).
City of Woodland Environmental Analyst, Roberta Childers, in an interview forecast that — “the state will want communities to” — eventually conduct such a comprehensive examination — but that presently such an intensive study inevitably involves a lot of various estimates and speculation.
While, Woodland’s municipal emissions (at least) are now understood with certainty, allowing specific strategies for their reduction to be currently employed with a known (quantifiable) result.
___ State Law Requires Emissions Reductions ___
California’s Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32) requires statewide reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.
“Next steps for the City of Woodland include formulating an energy conservation strategy and climate action plan [ ] through [ ] efforts of the City Council Energy Committee [CCEC]. The City will continue to calculate and report its emissions inventory on an annual basis. Each inventory will be compared with the baseline (2007) inventory to determine the effectiveness of City actions in reducing energy use and helping to meet the state’s reduction goal,” explains Echols in a staff report.
Childers indicated that there is a preliminary, “draft list of measures [ ] and criteria to rank measures [within relevant] categories,” that will soon begin to be considered by the CCEC (which meets monthly at city hall) related to establishing this municipal greenhouse-gas reduction strategy / plan.
___ Inventory Reveals Biggest Greenhouse-Gas Sources ___
The 2007 baseline inventory of municipal emissions indicates that by far the largest portion of greenhouse-gas emissions is related to enormous amounts of electricity used for pumping from the underground aquifer to provide the City’s water supply — at 39% — of all municipal electricity use — amounting to about 7.4 million kwh with a $950,000 bill from PG&E.
The other large consumer of electricity within city operations is the Wastewater Treatment Plant, at 28% (5.3 million kwh, $660,000). City Hall uses 8%, the Police Station uses 5% and the Community-Senior Center uses 4%, with other facilities using less, such as the Library at 1%.
Electricity and natural gas usage is considered to be: “Indirect Emissions,” meaning that they are not locally produced, but are caused elsewhere by local energy use. Generating electricity results in emissions occurring somewhere.
“Direct Emissions” by the municipality are almost exclusively created from its gasoline and diesel use (22% of total greenhouse-gas emissions).
About half of such fuel is used by the Public Works Department, with the remainder split between the Police Department (53% of gasoline use) and Fire Department (42% of diesel use).
___ Basic Greenhouse-Gas Emissions Factor: Water ___
Water is — for a third time — at the center of creating “indirect” municipal emissions.
Pumping Woodland’s water supply from underground (39%) — then treating municipal outflow (28%) — far surpasses other municipal consumers of electricity.
Natural gas use in municipal operations is dominated by that used to fuel boilers heating the two municipal swimming pools — at 54% (44,400 therms) — dwarfing all other consumers.
The Police and Fire Departments — combined — represent only 26% of city natural gas consumption, with the Community-Senior Center next in use, at 9%.
Closure of Hiddelson Pool (for budgetary reasons) will significantly affect “indirect” emission figures for 2009 — perhaps reducing by a quarter municipal use of natural gas.
___ Electricity Use Largest Element of Municipal Emissions ___
Green-house gas emissions (almost exclusively carbon dioxide: CO2) for which Woodland’s municipal operations are responsible, are predominantly — “indirect” sources — related to electricity consumption: 67% of total emissions are so attributable.
“Direct” sources of emissions — namely gasoline and diesel-fuel use — are the next largest portion of municipal energy consumption, at 22%.
Natural gas use, an “indirect” source, is in third place with 8%.
Municipal emissions for 2007 — overall — were 1,665 metric tons of CO2 in “direct” emissions and 3,976 metric tons of CO2 in “indirect” emissions, for a total of 5,643 metric tons.
According to city staff, unincorporated Yolo County (with a population of 29,000, compared to its four cities: Woodland, Davis, West Sacramento and Winters, with combined population of 180,000) — is responsible for 3,752 metric tons of CO2 in “direct” emissions and 2,128 metric tons of CO2 in “indirect” emissions.
Apparently — the county uses much more gasoline / diesel / propane than Woodland, causing “direct” greenhouse-gas emissions that are more than twice Woodland’s level (3752 mt – 1665 mt), although the county has roughly half the population of the municipality.
This emissions differential is perhaps related to expanded travel distances within the county, compared to the city — since direct emissions are primarily created from gasoline and diesel use.
Population figures above are derived from current (2010) estimates by the regional planning authority: Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG).
___ Stimulus Funds to Upgrade Police Station, City Hall & Streetlights ___
Federal economic-stimulus money – $508,700 in a “block grant” — is headed for Woodland to achieve progress on key municipal energy efficiency and conservation projects, as a result of its upcoming (June 25) application with the U. S. Department of Energy.
These funds are intended to accomplish “ — within 18 months — certain kinds of ‘shovel-ready’ projects,” describes Environmental Analyst Childers, who also indicated that potential energy conservation projects included consideration of those projects inclined “to benefit [Woodland’s] General Fund,” which remains affected by an adverse economic climate.
Childers mentioned three high-priority projects that qualify for using these federal funds.
“Putting solar panels on the Police Department Headquarters building, which is already equipped” for such installation, is one noted project.
“Upgrading the [heating, air-conditioning and ventilation] system within the City Hall building, and replacing conventional (sodium) lamps in Woodland’s streetlights — with LED technology — are also top priorities for use of this $508,700 in one-time, economic-stimulus funding.
