Cotati City Council
Agenda Staff Report
Item type: CONSENT CALENDAR (ACTION)
To: City Council
Subject: SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE
UPDATING THE RULES OF CONDUCT FOR PARKS AND
OTHER PUBLIC AREAS AND ADDING PERMIT
PROCEDURES BY AMENDING CHAPTERS 4.04 (FEES FOR
USE OF FACILITIES), 7.12 (LICENSING AND KEEPING OF
DOGS AND CATS), 7.24 (ANIMAL RESTRICTIONS), 7.28
(DOGS IN PARKS DURING FESTIVALS), 9.33 (PUBLIC
URINATION, DEFECATION AND EXPOSURE), 9.36
(CONDUCT IN PARKS, PLAZAS, STREETS AND SIDEWALKS
AND OTHER PLACES) AND 9.40 (OBSTRUCTING STREETS
AND SIDEWALKS) OF THE COTATI MUNICIPAL CODE
Date: October 28, 2025
Written by: Damien O'Bid, City Manager
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council conduct the second reading and adopt an ordinance adding permit procedures and updating the rules of conduct in the City parks and other public areas by amending Cotati Municipal Code (CMC) Chapters 4.04 (Fees for Use of Facilities),
7.12 (Licensing and Keeping of Dogs and Cats), 7.24 (Animal Restrictions), 7.28 (Dogs in Parks During Festivals), 9.33 (Public Urination, Defecation and Exposure), 9.36 (Conduct in Parks, Plazas, Streets and Sidewalks and Other Places) and 9.40 (Obstructing Streets and Sidewalks).
Background
Like all cities, the City of Cotati (City) has a variety of rules regarding conduct in public spaces, including parks. Generally, these are intended to reduce nuisances and disturbances in public areas, including in urban parks that are shared by the general public.
Today, many of the parks have inconsistent signage, sometimes with references to code sections that no longer exist. Therefore, the primary goal of this code update is to ensure that the rules are clear and enforceable and function for the benefit of all park users as well as the adjacent neighbors. This will then enable a new set of park signage, using the wayfinding sign standards.
At the regular City Council meeting on October 14, 2025, the City Council introduced the ordinance with some edits, including:
- Removing the waiver for the first dog license for people over 55 given the new significantly lower $6 fee for seniors, for consistency with Rohnert Park in DocuPet and to avoid the refund process currently necessary for the first license (Delete 9.12.120.C). - Clarifying miscellaneous unlawful acts and removing outdated language (9.36.030.D) - Editing to refer to other City Council adopted policies (e.g. Park Rules) to establish specific enforceable park open hours (9.36.060)
- Other miscellaneous spelling corrections.
Analysis/Discussion
Most City parks are currently signed with a park rules sign, typically at or near the primary entrance to the park. The park rules on these signs have been updated throughout the years and span a variety of City municipal code chapters. As a result, the park rules signs were only completely accurate at the time of installation. Today, many of these signs have outdated references to code sections and the listed rules are often inconsistent between parks. The net result of this is confusion of the public and the inability of the City to effectively enforce violations of the rules to reduce nuisance issues.
To understand the current state of the park signage, the staff audited all park signs throughout the City. This was then put into a matrix, which is attached to this staff report. Each listed park rule was added as a column and the name of the park on each row. Below the heading on each column is the listed municipal code section and a color code to indicate if the municipal code section still exists (green) or if it no longer exists or was replaced (red). The first column indicates if the park sign was fabricated in accordance with the new wayfinding signage standard (Yes - green) or not (No - red). The ”X” in the matrix indicates which rule was listed at which park.
Using the matrix as a guide, staff pulled all of the referenced municipal code sections to verify the language or propose edits, as needed. The proposed edits for each municipal code chapter are indicated in redline/strikeout and attached to this staff report. The following is a summary of the proposed edits, by Chapter:
Chapter 4.04 (Fees for Use of City Facilities)
The proposed changes in this chapter adds a definition of a City Facility, adds clarity on the process for events in the street and when an encroachment permit is needed and generally removes many details by pointing to the separately adopted Park Policy. This avoids the potential for conflicting requirements and puts most of the functional rules in the more easily updateable Park Policy. Finally, this adds the requirement for budgets for events that request fee elimination or waivers beyond what is allowed under the adopted policy. This adds to the existing requirement to require actuals of revenue and expenses within 15 days following an event with waived or reduced fees.
Chapter 7.12 (Licensing and Keeping of Dogs and Cats)
The proposed changes in this chapter move the leash restraint provisions to consolidate them with similar provisions in Chapter 7.24 (Animal Restrictions). There are also minor cleanup edits related to the recent switch to license dogs in DocuPet.
Chapter 7.16 (Sale of Animals)
No changes are proposed in this Chapter.
Chapter 7.24 (Animal Restrictions)
The proposed changes in this chapter clarity the leash law in all public spaces, including parks.
All dogs would be required to be on 6-foot leash in any public space, unless that space is specifically signed by the City to allow dogs off leash (i.e. dog parks). Additionally, the proposed edits include a prohibition of dogs in any ”special use sports facility”, such as basketball courts, tennis courts, volleyball courts, baseball fields, etc. that are posted as such by the City. This section also incorporates provisions from Chapter 7.12 regarding control of animals, eliminates the provision that prohibits animals in La Plaza Park and adds a general section for violations.
Chapter 7.28 (Dogs in Parks During Festivals)
The proposal is to eliminate this chapter completely. Dogs are generally at most festivals today, so the current ordinance is not enforceable. Removal of this chapter would allow rules related to dogs to revert to Chapter 7.24 that generally require leashing of dogs on a 6-foot leash, as well as control of the dog by the owner/handler.
Chapter 8.12 (Rubbish and Debris)
No changes are proposed in this Chapter.
Chapter 9.33 (Public Urination, Defecation and Exposure) Currently, this chapter only prohibits urination, defecation and public exposure for people over 10 years old. The proposed changes eliminate the age distinction and removes redundant language in the public exposure section.
Chapter 9.36 (Conduct in Parks, Plazas, Streets and Sidewalks and Other Places) The proposed changes in this chapter refers to other City Council policies to set park open hours.
For noise, it would eliminate the prohibition on drums during certain days and hours, clarify that any amplified sound is not permitted without a permit. The proposed changes also include the addition of a Section 9.36.130, which sets forth the procedures for obtaining such a permit.
Chapter 9.40 (Obstructing Streets and Sidewalks)
The proposed changes in this chapter simply clarify that there are instances, such as events or construction encroachments, when streets or sidewalks may be temporarily closed.
Chapter 9.41 (Curfew)
No changes are proposed in this Chapter.
Financial Considerations
If the recommended edits, or some variation, are adopted by the City Council, the next step will be to fabricate and install new signage at City parks. At this time, staff does not have a construction estimate for the cost of this work, but once the changes are finalized, staff will return to the City Council with an actual cost and installation plan. While there is not an estimate, it is expected to be no more than $50,000.
Environmental Issues
Where it can be determined with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA review.
This general rule can be applied to activities which could be subject to the CEQA process, but which logic dictates should not be subject to CEQA review. Therefore, based on the information provided above, the proposed resolution is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 14.03.021 of the CEQA Guidelines in that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant impact on the environment.