Cotati City Council
Agenda Staff Report
Item type: REGULAR AGENDA (ACTION)
To: City Council
Subject: RANCHO ADOBE FIRE DISTRICT LEASE EXTENSION -
COTATI FIRE STATION
Date: January 27, 2026
Written by: Damien O'Bid, City Manager
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the Second Amended Lease Agreement between the City and the Rancho Adobe Fire District (RAFD) Background
The City of Cotati and RAFD are parties to an existing Lease Agreement governing the use of City-owned property at 1 East Cotati Avenue. The basic structure of the lease is that the City leases the underlying land to RAFD, who in turn owns, operates and maintains the fire station until the end of the lease term, at which time the fire station reverts to City ownership. The original lease was executed in 1965, with a term of 50 years (expiring in 2015). The lease agreement was subsequently amended in 1989, primarily to address planned improvements to the fire station structure, as well as extending the lease for an additional 50 years (expiring in 2039).
The proposed Second Amended Lease consolidates prior amendments, largely eliminates unnecessary requirements regarding internal improvements and incorporates additional negotiated revisions. Approval of the Second Amended Lease will supersede previous versions of the Lease and provide a single, restated document reflecting the current terms agreed upon by both parties.
Analysis/Discussion
The Second Amended Lease maintains the fundamental structure and intent of the existing agreement while incorporating clarifications and updates intended to improve clarity, align the Lease with current City practices, and reduce the potential for future interpretation disputes.
Summary of Significant Edits from the 1989 License Agreement • Clarifies provisions related to the lease term (extends by 50 years) and administrative timelines to ensure consistency and avoid conflicting interpretations. • Minor revisions clarify rent payment timing, invoicing, and administrative procedures, without materially changing the financial terms of the Lease. • Language was refined to more clearly allocate maintenance and repair responsibilities between the City and the Tenant, and to clarify standards for improvements and alterations.
• Insurance and indemnification provisions were updated to align with current City risk management standards and to clearly define coverage and compliance obligations. • Edits were made to permitted use and operational sections to improve clarity, remove duplicative language, and better reflect existing use of the property. The notable additions include providing exclusive use of 6 off-street parking spaces, and delineation on landscape maintenance responsibilities. However, the City, at its sole discretion, may revoke RAFD’s exclusive right to use the Parking Area upon thirty (30) days written notice to RAFD. The City will engage in good faith discussions with RAFD to identify a different mutually agreeable location for designated parking spaces. All landscape areas on or adjacent to the premises served by the building water meter shall be irrigated and maintained by RAFD. All landscape areas on or adjacent to the premises served by the park water meter(s) shall be irrigated and maintained by the City. • Additional changes include formatting updates, correction of cross-references, definedterm consistency, and removal of outdated or redundant provisions.
At the RAFD Board meeting on January 21, 2026, the RAFD Board approved the proposed lease, in the form attached, and authorized the Fire Chief to execute the agreement on behalf of the RAFD.
Financial Considerations
Approval of the Second Amended Lease is not expected to result in a material fiscal impact beyond what has already been contemplated under the existing Lease. The City will continue to lease the property to RAFD for $1 per year as a public benefit. All financial obligations and cost responsibilities remain consistent with current budget assumptions, and no additional appropriations are anticipated.
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.