From: Anne Mirante
To: [email protected]; Peggy Flynn; -- City Clerk; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Beautiful Petaluma Riverfront Promenade - IT"S TIME TO TRESTLE! Date: Friday, May 2, 2025 6:53:59 PM
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] ---Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR EMAIL SYSTEM.---
I support that the City of Petaluma and SMART commit staff and funds NOW to rehabilitate the dilapidated Petaluma Riverfront Trestle into a beautiful riverfront promenade.
Please share this email with the Petaluma City Council members and the SMART Board Members.
It's Time To Trestle!
Thank you.
Anne Mirante
From: Bonnie Black
To: [email protected]; Peggy Flynn; -- City Clerk; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Beautiful Petaluma Riverfront Promenade - IT"S TIME TO TRESTLE! Date: Friday, May 2, 2025 3:09:47 PM
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] ---Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR EMAIL SYSTEM.---
I support that the City of Petaluma and SMART commit staff and funds NOW to rehabilitate the dilapidated Petaluma Riverfront Trestle into a beautiful riverfront promenade.
Please share this email with the Petaluma City Council members and the SMART Board Members.
It's Time To Trestle!
Thank you.
Sent from my iPhone
From: Constance
To: -- City Clerk; -- City Council
Subject: Decorum at City Council meetings
Date: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 7:44:04 PM
---Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR EMAIL SYSTEM.---
Greetings City Council Members,
Please help me to understand what happened at the last city council meeting. It was extremely frustrating to watch the unprofessional, extremely inappropriate tirade from Janice Cader Thompson!
Not only did she attack a fellow Council Member but also the Petaluma Historical advocate group. It’s one thing to have a member of the audience shout out, but when an elected city council member behaves In such a horrific manner and our city mayor does nothing to cut her off, it is hard to understand and extremely disturbing! There is no excuse for a council member to lash out in this manner and the mayor or other city council members to
sit there and allow this to happen. Perhaps the behavior was so shocking no one was able to respond quickly except a member in the audience?
How do you feel about this incident? What is the city council planning to do now to prevent this from happening again? How can the public trust that City Council members will even be able to work together on the many issues facing our town.
Best regards,
Constance Bay
From: Darren @ Petaluma
To: -- City Council; Drew Halter; -- City Clerk
Subject: Tree Advisory Committee Policy Idea: "Keys for Trees" Date: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 7:21:06 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
---Warning: Use caution before clicking any attachments. THIS EMAIL IS FROM OUTSIDE OUR EMAIL SYSTEM.---
Councilmembers and Mayor,
As Chair of the Petaluma Tree Advisory Committee, I am writing to urge the City Council to investigate and consider implementing a tree-funding campaign modeled after San Luis Obispo’s innovative “Keys for Trees” program. Our city faces a dire street tree and sidewalk situation, with aging trees, inadequate canopy cover, and crumbling infrastructure posing safety and aesthetic challenges. A program like Keys for Trees could provide a sustainable funding mechanism to address these issues, enhance our urban forest, and align with Petaluma’s commitment to environmental stewardship and community well-being. Below, I provide an overview of the Keys for Trees program, its benefits, and an estimate of potential revenue for Petaluma based on a similar funding model.
Overview of San Luis Obispo’s Keys for Trees Program
Launched in November 2021, Keys for Trees is a pioneering urban reforestation initiative in San Luis Obispo, California, designed to plant 10,000 trees by 2035 as part of the city’s Climate Action Plan to achieve carbon neutrality. The program is funded through a 1% allocation of the San Luis Obispo Tourism Business Improvement District’s (TBID) annual revenue, derived from a 2% assessment on hotel stays (e.g., $2 on a $100 hotel stay). In its pilot year (2021-22), this generated $15,000, with potential for continuation based on success.
The program involves all 41 lodging properties in the city, including hotels, motels, bed-and- breakfasts, hostels, inns, and owner-occupied homestays.
Keys for Trees is a partnership with the Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo (ECOSLO), a nonprofit that coordinates tree plantings. Visitors contribute automatically through their hotel stays, requiring no extra action, and can volunteer to plant trees via ECOSLO’s Urban Tree Planting program. The initiative is supported by Kind Traveler’s Every Stay Gives Back program, which provides third-party validation, live impact reporting, and educational tools (e.g., QR-coded plaques in hotels) to enhance transparency and visitor engagement. San Luis Obispo is the first U.S. city to fund urban reforestation through hotel assessments, setting a model for sustainable tourism.
"Keys for Trees:" A Wide Breadth of Benefits:
Adopting a Keys for Trees model in Petaluma would yield multifaceted benefits, addressing environmental, economic, and social priorities:
Environmental Impact: Trees reduce carbon emissions, improve air quality, and mitigate urban heat. San Luis Obispo estimates 10,000 trees will offset the annual emissions of 40 cars. In Petaluma, expanded canopy cover could combat climate change and enhance biodiversity.
https://matadornetwork.com/read/san-luis-obispo-launches-tree-planting- initiative-funded-local-hotels/
Infrastructure Improvement: Healthy street trees stabilize sidewalks, reducing maintenance costs and trip hazards. This directly addresses Petaluma’s crumbling sidewalk issues.
Tourism Sentiment & Economic Boost: The program promotes “green” tourism, attracting eco-conscious visitors. San Luis Obispo notes growing demand for sustainable travel, enhancing hotel appeal. Petaluma’s tourism sector could similarly benefit, supporting local businesses.
https://www.ksby.com/news/local-news/new-keys-for-trees-program-aims-to- offset-climate-change
Community Engagement: Visitors and residents can volunteer to plant trees, fostering civic pride and environmental awareness. Transparent impact reporting (via Kind Traveler’s model) builds trust and participation.
https://kirstenalana.com/lifestyle-beauty-fashion-design/california/slo-keys-for- trees/
https://www.kindtraveler.com/content/visit-san-luis-obispo-every-stay-give-back Public Health and Aesthetics: Trees provide shade, reduce energy use, and enhance mental well-being. A greener Petaluma would improve livability and property values.
https://www.slocity.org/living/natural-resources/trees-and-urban-forestry Alignment with Goals: Petaluma’s Climate Action Plan and sustainability objectives align with this initiative, reinforcing our commitment to a resilient future.
Estimated Revenue for Petaluma
Petaluma has approximately 500 hotel rooms across its lodging establishments. Assuming a $5 per room per stay fee (higher than San Luis Obispo’s $2 average to account for inflation and local costs), revenue depends on occupancy rates and average stays. Using conservative estimates:
Occupancy Rate: Assume 70% annual occupancy, typical for mid-sized California cities (500 rooms × 0.7 = 350 rooms occupied nightly).
Nights per Year: 365 days × 350 rooms = 127,750 room-nights annually.
Revenue Calculation: 127,750 room-nights × $5 fee = $638,750 per year.
Note:
Hotel room count (500) is an estimate based on Petaluma’s tourism profile; actual numbers should be verified with Visit Petaluma or hotel inventories.
The $5 fee and 70% occupancy are conservative estimates; a detailed study could refine these figures.
This estimate assumes no seasonal fluctuations or additional homestays (e.g., Airbnbs), which could increase revenue. Even at 50% occupancy, the program would generate ~$456,250 annually. For comparison, San Luis Obispo’s $15,000 pilot funded initial plantings; Petaluma’s higher revenue could support a robust program, covering tree planting, maintenance, and sidewalk repairs. Costs for trees vary ($50-$200 per tree, plus labor), but $638,750 could plant 3,000-6,000 trees annually, transforming our urban forest over a decade.
(https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article256589521.html) Recommendations
The Tree Advisory Committee strongly recommends that the City Council:
1. Investigate Keys for Trees: Form a task force to study San Luis Obispo’s program, engaging with their TBID, ECOSLO, and Kind Traveler for insights.
2. Assess Feasibility: Analyze Petaluma’s hotel industry (e.g., 500 rooms, occupancy trends) and legal framework for a TBID or similar assessment.
3. Engage Stakeholders: Consult hoteliers, Visit Petaluma, and local nonprofits (e.g., ReLeaf Petaluma) to design a program tailored to our needs.
4. Pilot a Program: Propose a 1-2 year pilot, allocating a hotel fee (e.g., $5 per stay) to fund street tree planting and sidewalk repairs, with clear metrics for success.
The Tree Advisory Committee's involvement with the community has made it clear to us a sustainable long-term solution is needed for Petaluma’s street tree and sidewalk challenges.
We need creative solutions. Keys for Trees offers a proven, scalable model that leverages tourism to fund environmental progress. By adopting this initiative, Petaluma can enhance its urban forest, improve infrastructure, and position itself as a leader in sustainable tourism. We urge the Council to act swiftly to explore this opportunity.
Thank you for your consideration. I am available to discuss this proposal further.
Sincerely,
Darren Racusen
Chair, Tree Advisory Committee
PE
TITION FOR ABANDONMENT OF TRAIL EASEMENT AND REMOV AL OF DEED
RESTRICTIONS
Submitted by: Ashley Bruce & Brian Klotz, Owners – Lot 10, Oak Knoll Court City Council Meeting – May 5, 2025
Cov
er Letter – Petition to Abandon Trail Easement and Remove Deed Restrictions May 5, 2025
To:
City Clerk, Planning Department, and Public Works
City of Petaluma
11 English Street
Petaluma, CA 94952
RE: Petition to Abandon Trail Easement and Remove Deed Restrictions – Lots 10–13, Sunnyslope II Subdivision (Oak Knoll Court)
Dear City Officials,
Enclosed please find a petition signed by 23 residents, representing a clear majority of Oak Knoll Court hou
seholds. We respectfully request that the City of Petaluma initiate formal proceedings to vacate the unb
uilt public trail easement and remove the associated “Private Open Space” deed restrictions affecting Lots 10 through 13 in the Sunnyslope II subdivision.
This request is submitted pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code §§ 8300–8363 and Gov
ernment Code § 37359, and is based on the following:
· A 15-ye
ar lapse since original approvals with no trail constructed · Fire sa
fety risks, including two unmapped concrete cisterns and a high vegetation load · Ero
sion, slope instability, and landslide hazards in the trail corridor · No
parking, signage, or ADA access to support public use
· Uniform
and documented opposition from affected property owners Devel
oper Obligations Ignored
Und
er Resolution 2010-230 N.C.S., the developer was required to construct the Urban Separator Trail, fund trail improvements, and comply with Fire Marshal standards for vegetation management. However:
· No
trail was ever constructed or maintained
· No
signage or public access exists
· The
trail was never integrated into a larger open-space system · The
City informed the developer in 2018 of the process to abandon the trail, but the developer did not act and no notice of this option or decision point was provided to the affected residents of Oak
Knoll Court.
¹ Stree
ts and Highways Code §§ 8300–8363: Governs abandonment of public easements. ² Government Code § 37359: Authorizes cities to vacate or convey property interests no longer required for public use. ³ Government Code § 7922.535 (formerly § 6253): Requires agencies to respond to public record requests within 10 calendar days.
PE
TITION FOR ABANDONMENT OF TRAIL EASEMENT AND REMOV AL OF DEED
RESTRICTIONS
Submitted by: Ashley Bruce & Brian Klotz, Owners – Lot 10, Oak Knoll Court City Council Meeting – May 5, 2025
¹ Stree
ts and Highways Code §§ 8300–8363: Governs abandonment of public easements. ² Government Code § 37359: Authorizes cities to vacate or convey property interests no longer required for public use. ³ Government Code § 7922.535 (formerly § 6253): Requires agencies to respond to public record requests within 10 calendar days.
To d
ate, no records have been produced showing any completed trail funding, construction drawings, or compliance with the improvement conditions.
Fire
Safety & Hazardous Terrain
The
area is designated by the State Fire Marshal as a Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Trail access would:
· Invite
public use into a wildland interface hillside with no hydrants · Intr
oducing risks of bonfires, trespassing, or blocked emergency access · Confli
ct with the Fire Marshal’s original conditions requiring fire-safe landscaping Your records show the trail area was intended to remain low-impact and natural, but due to the buried agricultural structures and steep terrain, it cannot safely support public access without grading—which itself is restricted by the recorded deed language.
Due
Process Concerns
Affecte
d property owners were not given timely notice or an opportunity to respond before the 2017 recordation of the trail easement and deed restrictions. These burdens now impact homeowner property rights and safety, with no active public use or corresponding benefit.
Pro
posed Alternative Use of Funds
Whil
e the primary request is to abandon the trail easement, we understand the City may still have public safety goals. If any developer funds remain from the original trail obligation, we respectfully suggest redirecting them toward wildfire mitigation, such as installing a gated fire access point or similar improvements to support emergency response access. This would protect public safety without burdening private properties or creating liability.
Prio
r Communications & Legal Authority
We have
submitted two formal written requests (April 24 and April 29, 2025), seeking:
PE
TITION FOR ABANDONMENT OF TRAIL EASEMENT AND REMOV AL OF DEED
RESTRICTIONS
Submitted by: Ashley Bruce & Brian Klotz, Owners – Lot 10, Oak Knoll Court City Council Meeting – May 5, 2025
¹ Stree
ts and Highways Code §§ 8300–8363: Governs abandonment of public easements. ² Government Code § 37359: Authorizes cities to vacate or convey property interests no longer required for public use. ³ Government Code § 7922.535 (formerly § 6253): Requires agencies to respond to public record requests within 10 calendar days. · Doc
umentation of trail funding, construction plans, and compliance with Resolution 2010-230 N.C.S.
· Confirmatio
n of whether the City intends to pursue or abandon trail development Pursuant to California Government Code § 7922.535 (formerly cited as § 6253), we respectfully request:
1. A written response by May 9, 2025, confirming whether the City intends to initiate abandonment proceedings; and
2. Placement of this item on the next available Planning Commission agenda, followed by City Council determination, as required under:
o Str
eets & Highways Code §§ 8300–8363 (easement abandonment), and o Governm
ent Code § 37359 (public property no longer required for City use) If the City declines, we request written justification and production of all relevant records, funding, engineering, and trail compliance documents.
Timel
ine of Trail Easement Proposal and Community Comments
Trai
l Easement Timeline
· 20
10 – City of Petaluma approves Sunnyslope II subdivision (Res. 2010-230 N.C.S.) with req
uired trail easement
· 20
15 – Final trail improvement plans approved (stairs, benches, grading) · July 20,
2017 – Final Map recorded with Sonoma County, imposing deed restrictions on Lots 10–13
· April
2018 – City outlines removal process to developer; no action taken · 20
18–2025 – No trail constructed; site remains unmaintained and unsafe · April
21, 2025 –City Council Meeting - Public Comments
o Kathy
Abrams (18 Oak Knoll Ct): Opposes trail and public signage due to fire hazard and lack of i
nfrastructure
o Sha
ron Miller (11 Oak Knoll Ct): Echoes fire concerns and warns of misuse, bonfires, and parking hazards
o Brian Klo
tz (Lot 10): Submitted photo evidence of underground cistern in trail corridor, highlighting collapse and liability risks
· April
24 & 29, 2025 – Formal abandonment requests submitted under Sts. & Hy. Code §§ 8300– 8363 and Government Code § 7922.535
· May
5, 2025 – Petition submitted with 23 signatures and supporting documentation
Exhibit A -
Non-Development Open Space Markup
Map Markup and Observations
Th
e map below indicates the approximate location of observed hazardous buried structures within the designated non-development open space area behind Lot 10. The structures are highlighted to assist with the City's evaluation of site safety, stability, and public access feasibility.
Exhibit A -
Non-Development Open Space Markup
Photo Evidence - Buried Concrete Structures
Photo
1: Buried concrete structures located within the non-development open space area, posing potential safety hazards for any proposed public trail development.