City Council:
Jack Ding, Mayor
Kelso Barnett, Vice Mayor
Madolyn Agrimonti
Robert Felder
Sandra Lowe
This meeting will be conducted pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 54953 (as amended by AB 361) which authorizes teleconferenced meetings under the Brown Act during certain proclaimed States of Emergency. The Governor of California proclaimed a State of Emergency related to COVID-19 on March 4, 2020. This teleconferenced meeting is necessary so that the City can conduct essential business and is permitted under GC 54953 in order to protect public health and safety of attendees.
Consistent with GC Section 54953, this City Council Meeting will be held via teleconference only and will not be physically open to the public. City Council members and staff will teleconference into the meeting by audio and/or video. The meeting will be conducted via Zoom Webinar.
The meetings will continue to be live streamed on the City's CivicWeb Portal (sonomacity.civicweb.net) and YouTube Channel. Those members of the public wishing to participate must do so remotely via Zoom. Please see the agenda below for information on public participation.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE SONOMA CITY COUNCIL
City Council Chambers, 177 First Street West
Wednesday, February 2, 2022
https://zoom.us/j/94943925973
6:00 p.m. Regular Meeting
****
AGENDA
Be Courteous - TURN OFF your cell phones and pagers while the meeting is in session.
The City Council may discuss and/or take action on any or all of the items listed on the agenda irrespective of how the items are described.
No new items will begin after 9:00pm unless a majority of the members present vote to allow the items to be heard.
Page
6:00 P.M. – REGULAR MEETING
CONVENE, CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL (Barnett, Felder, Lowe, Agrimonti, Ding)
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION USING ZOOM
Public Comment Process for ZOOM Attendance at Meetings
REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
1. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
At this time, members of the public may comment on any item not appearing on the agenda. It is recommended that you keep your comments to three minutes or less. Under State Law, unless otherwise permitted under the Ralph M. Brown Act, the merits of the matters presented under this item cannot be discussed or acted upon by the City Council at this time. For items appearing on the agenda, the public will be invited to make comments at the time the item comes up for Council consideration. Upon being acknowledged by the Mayor, please step to the podium and speak into the microphone. Begin by stating and spelling your name.
2. MEETING DEDICATIONS
3. PRESENTATIONS
4. CONSENT CALENDAR – CITY COUNCIL
All items listed on the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be acted upon by a single motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless members of the Council or staff request specific items to be removed for separate action.
4.1: Waive further reading and Authorize Introduction and/or Adoption of Ordinances by Title Only. (Standard procedural action - no backup information provided)
4.2: Adopt a Resolution Approving a $15,000 Contribution to Food for All/Comida para Todos to Continue its Stay Home Box Program Which Provides Food and Essential Items to Households who Have Tested Positive for the COVID-19 Virus (City Manager)
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution.
Agenda Report - Funding Request - Food for All/Comida para Todos - Pdf ADDITIONAL ATTACHMENT - Resolution - Food For All
4 - 9
4.3: Adopt a Resolution Extending the Authorization of Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and All City Commissions and Committees Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e) (City Manager) RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution.
Agenda Report - Extension - AB 361 Findings - Pdf
10 - 13
5. PUBLIC HEARING
6. REGULAR CALENDAR – CITY COUNCIL
(Matters requiring discussion and/or action by the City Council)
6.1: Discuss/Consider Directing Staff to Work with the Council’s Ad-Hoc Development Code Revision Subcommittee or Other Ad-Hoc Subcommittee to Develop Recommendations for Council Consideration Regarding the Continuation of the Al Fresco Sonoma Program (e.g., Parklets) Beyond October 31, 2021, Including, But Not Limited to, Parklet Design Standards, Use of Public Spaces (e.g., Sidewalks, Parking Spaces) and Private Outdoor Spaces, Possible Annual Encroachment Fees, Parking Impacts, Possible Improvements to Public Spaces, Permitting Process, and Locations; and Provide General Direction to Staff, as Appropriate (City Manager) RECOMMENDATION: Discussion and direction.
Agenda Report - Parklets - Pdf
14 - 17
6.2: Receive Report from Sonoma Overnight Support (SOS) on the Status of Finding a Temporary or Permanent New Location for the Safe Parking Program and Provide Direction to Staff, as Appropriate (City Manager) RECOMMENDATION: Discussion and direction.
Agenda Report - SOS - New Location - Pdf
18 - 34
6.3: Discussion, Consideration, and Possible Action to Adopt a Resolution ReAdopting Rosenberg's Rules of Order for Official, Noticed, Public Meetings of the City Council and Selecting Rule on How to Count Abstentions (City Manager)
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt resolution and provide direction on which voting rule to apply.
Agenda Report - Rosenberg's Rules - Pdf
35 - 48
7. COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS AND COMMENTS
8. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
8.1: Future Agenda Items
9. CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS
10. ADJOURNMENT
I do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on the City Bulletin Board on January 28, 2022.
Rebekah Barr, MMC, City Clerk/Executive Assistant.
*********************************************************************************************************************************** Copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to any item of business referred to on the agenda are normally available for public inspection the Wednesday before each regularly scheduled meeting at City Hall, located at No. 1 The Plaza, Sonoma CA. Any documents subject to disclosure that are provided to all, or a majority of all, of the members of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda after the agenda has been distributed will be made available for inspection at the City Clerk’s office, No. 1 The Plaza, Sonoma CA during regular business hours.
If you challenge the action of the City Council in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described on the agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, at or prior to the public hearing.
The City Council may discuss and/or take action on any or all of the items listed on the agenda irrespective of how the items are described.
APPOINTMENTS TO COMMITTEES: The Council may establish and make appointments to a Council committee (made up of two Council Members) with respect to any item appearing on this agenda.
CLOSED SESSION: If action is taken during a Closed Session meeting which is required to be reported out at this meeting, the Council will return to Open Session and report out immediately. However, if the Council is unable to do so due to time constraints, it will report out at the immediately following Regular Council Meeting under "REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION".
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION: A Council Member voting with the majority on any item appearing on this agenda may move for reconsideration of that vote provided the motion is in conformance with the rules adopted by the Council governing such motions.
In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk (707) 933-2216. Notification 48-hours before the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
City of Sonoma
Agenda Item Summary
Meeting: City Council - 02 Feb 2022
Department
Administration
Staff Contact
Garrett Toy, City Manager
Agenda Item Title
Adopt a Resolution Approving a $15,000 Contribution to Food for All/Comida para Todos to Continue its Stay Home Box Program Which Provides Food and Essential Items to Households who Have Tested Positive for the COVID-19 Virus Summary
At its January 19th meeting, the Council received a request from Food for All/Comida para Todos (Food for All) for City support of its Stay Home Box Program during public comments on items not on the agenda. The Council requested that the Food For All proposal be agendized for consideration at this meeting.
Attached is a letter from Food for All requesting $15,000 from the City of Sonoma to continue the Stay Home Box Program at Food for All/Comida para Todos. These funds will be used to continue to provide food and essential items to households who have tested positive for the COVID-19 virus. The cost for each Stay Home box averages $80 each depending on the unique needs of that household (e.g., diapers, care items).
The $15,000 would cover the costs of 187.5 Stay Home Boxes (@$80/box) which would be distributed to households who live or work in the City of Sonoma. Food for All estimates that 60% of the 230 households to date that have received Stay Home boxes are households with people who live and/or work in the City of Sonoma.
Staff supports a one-time $15,000 contribution to Food for All for its Stay Home Box program.
It is important that households that test positive for COVID-19 do not feel the need to leave their home to shop for food and other essential items. However, any future support for this program should be evaluated during the budget approval process when the Council discusses funding for various community activities using the City’s Community Fund (see Financial Impact Section below).
Recommended Council Action
Adopt a resolution approving a $15,000 contribution to Food for All/Comida para Todos to continue its Stay Home Box Program which provides food and essential items to households who have tested positive for the COVID-19 virus.
Alternative Actions
Council discretion.
Financial Impact
Agenda Item #4.2:
The City’s Community Fund Program has approximately $18,000 available in discretionary funds. The Community Fund supports such programs as the Boys and Girls Club, Vintage House, and Community Center.
Environmental Review Status
Environmental Impact Report
Negative Declaration
Exempt
Not Applicable
Approved/Certified
No Action Required
Action Requested
Attachments
Stay Home Box Program Request - Food for All
Alignment with Council Goals:
Not Applicable
Compliance with Climate Action 2020 Target Goals:
CC:
n/a
Agenda Item #4.2:
Stay Home Box Program - Food For All Comida Para Todos Request Thank you for the opportunity to request funding for Food for All/Comida para Todos. We recognize what an amazing opportunity we have to serve our community and your support will allow us to continue these efforts. The rise in numbers associated with the Omicron variant has proven to be another challenging winter for the nation and our valley. We are requesting $15,000 from the City of Sonoma to continue the Stay Home Box Program at Food for All/Comida para Todos. These funds will be used to continue to provide food and essential items to households who have tested positive for the COVID-19 virus. The cost for each Stay Home box averages $80 each depending on the unique needs of that household (diapers, care items, etc.). Our food costs have dramatically increased as well.
What we were able to supply in the past for $50.00-$60.00 is now closer to $80.00 per family.
Two years ago, at the onset of this pandemic, the FFA/CPT team did not imagine we would find ourselves continuing to serve our community with basic food and hygiene products two years later. The new variant is ravaging our community once again. FFA continues to drink from a fire hose as we work to meet the demand of basic needs in our community. None of us imagined we would be here again, gearing up for another long hard winter. This variant is highly contagious, and we are seeing 500,000 cases a day nationwide. Locally, we are seeing a surge in cases that is reflective of the rise across the nation and is greater than the numbers reported as many people who test positive with rapid tests are not reporting those test results to the county. However, we see those cases in real life in the form of Stay Home Box requests in our valley.
The FFA team is committed to continuing to serve our community through this next difficult period. Our focus remains, at this time, on feeding people, testing, and educating families about isolation and quarantine and assisting in keeping people who are COVID positive in isolation at home with the food and essential items they need to recover from COVID while staying home and preventing the further spread of COVID-19 in our valley.
Since the official start of our Stay Home Box program at the end of 2020, we have delivered to over 230 households, some with as many as 12 people in them. Many households are multi- family and/or multi-generational families with a variety of needs such as elderly people who are in need of adult Agenda Item #4.2:
incontinence items, infants, and toddlers in need of diapers, school age children in need of rapid tests and mask to return safely to school, pets who need food and litter and then there are the needs specific to having symptoms from COVID like a digital thermometer, fluids, and other care items to assist in recovery.
Often the most critical work we find ourselves doing is being the connection to the outside world for a person who is in isolation due to COVID. We provide them education and the necessary items like N95 masks to prevent the spread of COVID. Often these individuals and families will continue to reach out to us for specific needs or because they are quite frankly afraid and need reassurance and to know that someone cares and is there for them during a really difficult and scary time. Sometimes they also reach out because they are worried about losing their jobs, homes and we are able to refer them to other programs they can apply for assistance.
The Stay Home Box program is not just about a box of food - it is a Public Health program that does the boots on the groundwork directly serving our neighbors and community in Sonoma Valley, this includes the City of Sonoma. We deliver valley wide and each week there are deliveries to homes in the City of Sonoma. Additionally, many of the households we deliver to outside of the city limits have COVID positive family members who work in the City of Sonoma. Approximately 60% of the household we deliver to work or live in the city of Sonoma - typically in agriculture, hospitality, grocery stores and those who provide care to the disabled and elderly in their homes or in assisted living facilities. All industries with a high risk for contracting COVID, especially the highly contagious Omicron variant.
Food For All - Comida Para Todos is a community organization under the umbrella of North Bay Organizing Project who are a 501c3 nonprofit and act as our fiscal agent. NBOP only maintains a fiscal management cost for FFA/CPT of $100 a month for accounting labor.
The funding we are requesting is specifically to support the Stay Home Box program that aims to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This program is separate from our regular Essential Items delivery program that happens twice a month to any Sonoma Valley household impacted by loss of income since the onset of the COVID-19 viral pandemic.
Food for All by the Number:
● We have provided:
o Approximately 4000 (duplicated) families with deliveries over the course of 40 bi-weekly deliveries. This is our regular Essential Items delivery program. o This is approximately 10,000 unique individuals and 20,000 total individuals ● 4,800 boxes in total, equaling $250,000 in goods including donated items. (pet food, menstrual kits, facial coverings, some food items)
o Each box costs approximately $80 per family. Families of 5 or more receive double food items.
● We have provided and delivered over 230 Stay Home Box deliveries. ● We received 301,000 in donations and grants beginning in March 2020. ● Since April 2020, there have been 6,000 volunteer hours provided by over 60 volunteers.
We also provide services for the following over the last 18 months:
Agenda Item #4.2:
● Information pamphlets to community Covid Resources, Rental Assistance, and Immigration support.
● Support for Covid positive families, such as, links to medical support, rental assistance, school supplies and medication pick up.
● Forums on the following topics: vaccination, rental assistance, education, mental health, know your rights and covid testing.
● Two rental Clinics for community members to access Sonoma County Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) funds from North Bay Organizing Project (NBOP). ● On Christmas Eve one of our team members ran a Covid testing site in his driveway for 80 people and since then multiple team members have been rapid testing community members during a shortage of rapid tests and access to free rapid tests during the variant surge. ● Dr. Panna Lossey Facebook live on the efficacy of rapid testing and the new variant These events are offered as we see the need within our community. The educational and informational offerings will be an ongoing essential component of our work in the community.
Thank you for your time and consideration and for recognizing the importance of working together as a community to ensure that none of our neighbors fall through the cracks during this incredibly difficult time. Should the City management or any council members have any questions we are happy to make ourselves available.
Sincerely,
Celeste Winders
Maite Iturri
Food For All - Comida Para Todos
Agenda Item #4.2:
City of Sonoma
RESOLUTION # - 2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SONOMA APPROVING A $15,000
CONTRIBUTION TO FOOD FOR ALL/COMIDA PARA TODOS TO CONTINUE ITS STAY HOME
BOX PROGRAM WHICH PROVIDES FOOD AND ESSENTIAL ITEMS TO HOUSEHOLDS WHO HAVE TESTED POSITIVE FOR THE COVID-19 VIRUS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Sonoma received a request from Food for All/Comida para Todos (Food for All) for City support of its Stay Home Box Program and requested that the Food For All proposal be agendized for consideration at this meeting; and WHEREAS, Food for All/Comida para Todos is a community organization under the umbrella of North Bay Organizing Project and for the past two years have ran a Stay Home Box Program which provides food and essential items to households who have tested positive for the Covid-19 Virus; and
WHEREAS, Food for All estimates that 60% of the 230 households to date that have received Stay Home boxes are households with people who live and/or work in the City of Sonoma; and WHEREAS, the cost for each Stay Home box averages $80 depending on the unique needs of that household (e.g., diapers, care items); and
WHEREAS, $15,000 would cover the costs of 187.5 Stay Home Boxes (@$80/box) which would be distributed to households who live or work in the City of Sonoma; and WHEREAS, Staff supports a one-time $15,000 contribution to Food for All for its Stay Home Box from the City’s Community Fund Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Sonoma approves a $15,000 contribution to Food for All/Comida para Todos to continue its Stay Home Box Program.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council directs those funds in the Community Fund Program be utilized for this contribution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of February 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Jack Ding, Mayor
Rebekah Barr, MMC, City Clerk
Agenda Item #4.2:
City of Sonoma
Agenda Item Summary
Meeting: City Council - 02 Feb 2022
Department
Administration
Staff Contact
Garrett Toy, City Manager
Agenda Item Title
Adopt a Resolution Extending the Authorization of Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and All City Commissions and Committees Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e)
Summary
On January 6, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution 01-2022 authorizing remote teleconference meetings of the City Council and all City Commissions and Committees pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e). The findings made in this resolution, and listed below, must be reconsidered every 30 days to continue meeting remotely. Staff is recommending the Council make the findings necessary to continue meeting remotely for the remainder of February. WhileCOVID-19 case rates have decreased slightly and hospitalization rates appear to have stabilized in Sonoma County and that this trend will continue, we believe it is prudent to continue meeting remotely and re-evaluate meeting remotely at the February 16th Council meeting.
BACKGROUND
The City Council and all City Commissions and Committees had been holding their meetings in-person while simultaneously using ZOOM for remote public participation since June 7, 2021.
On November 10, 2021, the Governor issued Executive Order N-21-21, which extended the State of Emergency and the timeframes set forth in Executive Orders N-12-21 and N-17-21 until at least March 31, 2022. The Governor's action was primarily in response to a plateau in California's recent record of week- over- week declines in COVID- 19 cases and hospitalizations, which indicates the potential beginning of a new surge in COVID- 19 cases, and the need to protect capacity in and prevent staffing shortages at health care facilities with the onset of the flu season. As a result, the Governor' s proclaimed State of Emergency remains in effect, and State and local officials, including the Sonoma County Health Officer, the California Department of Public Health, and the Department of Industrial Relations, have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
Due to the imminent surge in the COVID-19 Omicron Variant, and in an abundance of caution, Staff requests the City Council consider returning to the all virtual meeting format, which had been in place under the Governor's Executive Orders N29-20 and N-08-21.
On September 16, 2021, Governor Newsome signed Assembly Bill (AB) 361 into law, effective October 1, 2021, to allow agencies to use teleconferencing for public meetings during proclaimed state of emergencies without requiring the teleconference locations to be accessible to the public or a quorum of the members of the legislative body of the agency to participate from locations within the boundaries of the agency’ s
jurisdiction. AB 361 will sunset on January 31, 2024.
Agenda Item #4.3:
As discussed above, state and local officials continue to recommend social distancing.
Government Code section 54953(e), as amended by Assembly Bill No. 361, allows legislative bodies to hold open meetings by teleconference without reference to otherwise applicable requirements in Government Code section 54953(b)(3), so long as the legislative body complies with certain requirements, there exists a declared state of emergency, and one of the following circumstances is met:
• State or local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, or
• The legislative body is holding the meeting for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees, or
• The legislative body finds that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
To return to a virtual meeting format under AB 361, the City Council now needs to find and declare the circumstances of the state of emergency and either:
1. the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person, or
2. State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
These finding are required to be reconsidered every 30 days.
Recommended Council Action
Adopt the resolution.
Alternative Actions
Council discretion.
Financial Impact
N/A
Environmental Review Status
Environmental Impact Report
Negative Declaration
Exempt
Not Applicable
Approved/Certified
No Action Required
Action Requested
Attachments
AB 361 Extending Resolution
Agenda Item #4.3:
City of Sonoma
RESOLUTION # ______-2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SONOMA AUTHORIZING
CONTINUED REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND ALL
CITY COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953(e)
WHEREAS, Government Code section 54953(e), as amended by Assembly Bill No. 361, allows legislative bodies to hold open meetings by teleconference without reference to otherwise applicable requirements in Government Code section 54953(b)(3), so long as the legislative body complies with certain requirements, there exists a declared state of emergency, and one of the following circumstances is met:
1. State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
2. The legislative body is holding the meeting for the purpose of determining whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
3. The legislative body has determined that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted Resolution #01-2022 finding that the requisite conditions exist for the City Council and all City Commissions and Committees to conduct teleconference meetings under California Government Code section 54953(e); and WHEREAS, Government Code section 54953(e)(3) requires the legislative body adopt certain findings by majority vote within 30 days of holding a meeting by teleconference under Government Code section 54953(e), and then adopt such findings every 30 days thereafter; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to continue holding its public meetings by teleconference consistent with Government Code section 54953(e).
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SONOMA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.
Section 2. Conditions are Met. The City Council] hereby finds and declares the following, as required by Government Code section 54953(e)(3):
1. The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency declared by the Governor pursuant to his or her authority under Government Code section 8625;
2. The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of members of the City Council to meet safely in person; and
Agenda Item #4.3:
3. State and local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Sonoma, this 2nd day of February, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_____________________________________
Jack Ding, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Rebekah Barr, MMC, City Cerk
Agenda Item #4.3:
City of Sonoma
Agenda Item Summary
Meeting: City Council - 02 Feb 2022
Department
Administration
Staff Contact
Garrett Toy, City Manager
Agenda Item Title
Discuss/Consider Directing Staff to Work with the Council’s Ad-Hoc Development Code Revision Subcommittee or Other Ad-Hoc Subcommittee to Develop Recommendations for Council Consideration Regarding the Continuation of the Al Fresco Sonoma Program (e.g., Parklets) Beyond October 31, 2021, Including, But Not Limited to, Parklet Design Standards, Use of Public Spaces (e.g., Sidewalks, Parking Spaces) and Private Outdoor Spaces, Possible Annual Encroachment Fees, Parking Impacts, Possible Improvements to Public Spaces, Permitting Process, and Locations; and Provide General Direction to Staff, as Appropriate.
Summary
One of the Council goals for FY21-22 is to” Create design standards and long-term plan for “parklets.” The City’s Al Fresco Program is slated to expired October 31, 2022. The Council requested this matter be agendized for this meeting.
BACKGROUND
On May 18, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution 26-2020 (see link in attachment section below for staff report) which authorized the City staff, working with the Chamber of Commerce, the Visitors Bureau, and others to take series of steps relating to helping businesses survive during the COVID-19 Pandemic.
These included:
• The issuance of temporary use permits, encroachment permits, and/or licensing procedures to allow the city’s businesses to expand their operating space into publicly owned spaces;
• Additional drop-off and delivery parking spaces, along with a clear licensing program for the use of parking spaces for business expansion and to reduce private parking requirements on a temporary basis;
• The above two items later became “Al Fresco Sonoma” – a way to use outdoor public spaces as "parklets" for dining and other activities during the extended times when retailers’ and restauranteurs’ indoor spaces were closed or restricted; and • Fee waivers where appropriate; and
• Expedited review of these ideas and others via an Ad Hoc Council Committee on Business
On April 19, 2021, the Council discussed the extension of the Al Fresco Sonoma program and its policy implications (see link in attachment section for staff report). The April 19th staff report provided a very comprehensive assessment of the City’s efforts and economic support to business during the pandemic including the Al Fresco Sonoma program. The April 2021 report indicates that approximately 25 businesses received encroachment permit fees for Agenda Item #6.1:
parklets and/or sidewalk extensions. Currently, there are eleven (11) parklets in and around the downtown area.
The Sonoma parklets were originally set to expire October 13, 2021, but later the expiration date became November 1, 2021, with the understanding that it was possible to extend the expiration date further.
The Council agreed to extend the Al Fresco Sonoma program thru October 2022.
DISCUSSION
Below are the policy issues (slightly revised) raised in April 2021 because they continue to be applicable to any long-term plan for parklets. The extension/use of sidewalks is a component of the parklet discussion.
Why extend the parklets’ expiration date further?
• It allows more time for the restaurants and other hospitality ventures to recoup not only the cost of the parklets but the thousands if not tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars that some ventures lost during the pandemic. Their success is also the City’s success, given our reliance on sales taxes from food and beverages. • Even with relaxed pandemic rules, it’s still likely that some customers will feel safer outdoors than in, until the spread of COVID-19 is eliminated. • Some residents and visitors enjoy the experience of eating or drinking outdoors, and the weather in Sonoma is often fully conducive to that experience. • Others note a vibrancy and community spirit that the parklets provide, as spaces formerly used for parked cars turn to spaces for gathering and interaction. • They may be especially necessary given the possibility of more COVID-19 surges with the pandemic.
Why not extend the parklets’ expiration date further?
• Some have argued that the parklets were intended to be short-term, pandemic-only related opportunity for some businesses (not all) to survive. The same businesses should be able to also survive now as they did in 2019. • The aesthetics of some of the parklets (such as the ones with orange barriers) doesn’t really mesh with Sonoma’s aesthetic.
• The parklets take away store-adjacent parking, and some believe that limits convenience, and, thus, hinders customers.
• Not all businesses feel like they benefit from the parklets. • The parklets may not all be set up for proper drainage and maintenance. • This is a private use of public property that possibly should be subject to some rentbased program if allowed in the long-term.
Two Initial Policy Determinations
The staff recommendation to work with a Council Ad-Hoc Subcommittee to develop a longrange plan is based on the Council’s willingness to consider a temporary or permanent extension of components of the Al Fresco Sonoma program. However, staff is not recommending the continuing closure of 1st Street East. In consultation with the Fire and Police Chief, staff agrees the street should be reopened when the current program expires on October 31, 2022. Staff will work with the affected businesses, Maya and Pangloss Cellars, Agenda Item #6.1:
to ensure a relatively smooth transition to reopen the street. Police and Fire indicated that since the street has been closed for quite some time they will wait until November 1st for the reopening. Should Maya and/or Pangloss Cellars request the ability to use the street parking spaces for parklets that process would be addressed in the long-range plan for the Al Fresco Sonoma program. Should the Council want to consider the extension of the street closure, it could direct staff to consider this option as a component of the long-range plan.
Recommendation
Staff is recommending we work with the Council’s Ad-Hoc Development Code Revision Subcommittee because of the planning and design issues associated with the Al Fresco Program. We anticipate the Ad-Hoc Subcommittee inviting resources, as needed, from the community to assist in the process such as the Sonoma Valley Chamber of Commerce CEO and the Sonoma Valley Visitors Bureau Executive Director. We also envision that staff and budgetary resources may be needed to explore and collect data such as updating portions of the 2016 Sonoma Parking Study to better evaluate long-range plans.
It should be noted that to keep all options open to the Council, some tasks may take place concurrently with the development of the long-range plan. For example, the Planning Commission will need to consider design standards for Parklets while the long-range plan is being developed so the design standards are available when the long-range is considered by the Council.
Recommended Council Action
Discuss/consider directing staff to work with the Council’s Ad-Hoc Development Code Revision Subcommittee to develop recommendations for Council consideration regarding the continuation of the Al Fresco Sonoma program (e.g., parklets) beyond October 31, 2021, including, but not limited to, parklet design standards, use of public spaces (e.g., sidewalks, parking spaces) and private outdoor spaces, possible annual encroachment fees, parking impacts, possible improvements to public spaces, permitting process, and locations; and provide general direction to staff, as appropriate.
Alternative Actions
Council discretion.
Financial Impact
To be determined.
Environmental Review Status
Environmental Impact Report
Negative Declaration
Exempt
X Not Applicable
Approved/Certified
No Action Required
Action Requested
Agenda Item #6.1:
Attachments:
May 18, 2020, staff report link:
https://sonomacity.civicweb.net/document/35519/Discussion,%20Consideration,%20and%20Possible% 20Action%20.pdf?handle=315BF5B6E3294DEFA47B1194EEAC8198 April 19, 2021, staff report link:
https://sonomacity.civicweb.net/document/44216/Discussion%20and%20Direction%20on%20Economic %20Developmen.pdf?handle=BFB2A85EC7844622AD988EE5035BDC83 Agenda Item #6.1:
City of Sonoma
Agenda Item Summary
Meeting: City Council - 02 Feb 2022
Department
Administration
Staff Contact
Garrett Toy, City Manager
Agenda Item Title
Receive Report from Sonoma Overnight Support (SOS) on the Status of Finding a Temporary or Permanent New Location for the Safe Parking Program and Provide Direction to Staff, as Appropriate
Summary
In November 2019, the City approved a new MOU with SOS to operate an updated version of the Safe Parking Program (Program) in the Police Department parking lot at 175 First Street West. The Program would include up to 10 total parking spaces that would be available on a permit basis between the hours of 10:00 PM to 9:00 AM. SOS would require participants to adhere to a set of Rules and Guidelines. Participants who violate the Rules and Guidelines could be permanently exited from the Program and risk losing access to the day services provided at The Haven. SOS would hire a security service to patrol the Safe Parking lot overnight with three to four drive through visits per night in addition to some monitoring by Police. SOS has recently modified the security service to have a person on-site during the evening hours. The MOU was slated to expire December 1, 2021.
On December 1, 2021, the Council extended the MOU with SOS until April 1, 2022. At the meeting, the Council had a lengthy discussion regarding the compatibility of the Safe Parking Program with the uses of the Field of Dreams. SOS reported it was trying to find a new location for SOS services including the Haven and Safe Parking Program, but was unsuccessful in finding a location due to a variety of reasons. As a part of its approval, the Council requested a status update on SOS and City efforts to find alternative locations for the Safe Parking Program as well as an update on the progress of HAS (Homeless Action Sonoma) regarding its winter shelter efforts. Attached is report from SOS summarizing its efforts to date to find a permanent new location.
SOS and/or City staff have reached out to all its community partners including churches regarding an interim location for the Safe Parking Program. Staff also reached out to the County of Sonoma regarding the use of the Veteran’s Building parking lot. The County Department of General Services indicates the program would conflict with the Veteran Building uses and regulations. In general, the non-profits including churches indicate that the Safe Parking Program is generally incompatible with their daily operations, would affect the parking needs of its operations, and/or they don’t have the facilities to meet the program’s needs.
The Safe Parking Program requires at a minimum restroom facilities/water, security, and an intake system and access to the operator’s services. The parking lot by the police station provides that plus access to the Haven which has SOS support staff on-site, showers, and laundry facilities during the day. SOS’s food service is located at the Sonoma Springs Community Hall. SOS believes if we relocate to less a desirable location that is significantly further away from the Haven and the Springs, people will be less likely to participant in the Safe Parking Program and will begin to park anywhere including in the parking lot near the Haven. The Safe Parking Program in its current location allows the City to limit participants and better control the area.
Agenda Item #6.2:
Staff has evaluated existing City facilities such as parks and the City’s corporation yard. All the City parks are in residential neighborhoods, and, thus, the Safe Parking Program would face the same incompatible use issues as cited for the Field of Dreams. The City’s corporation yard is located outside of the City limits on Eighth Street East and would be too far from any SOS services. SOS states it would not operate a Safe Parking Program at that location. It should be noted that Fire also does not have any surplus facilities available for use. The difficulty is that for a interim/temporary location to work for the Safe Parking Program it needs to have similar services that SOS provides on-site at the Haven.
Staff also spoke to HAS regarding the concept of locating the Safe Parking Program on their site.
Unfortunately, HAS indicated there is no room on their site for the Safe Parking Program. HAS did provide that they are in the process of applying for building permits from the County. When the permits are issued, HAS is are prepared to get the QuickHaven shelters and other temporary services onto the property for a winter shelter in short order.
Another option explored by staff was the concept of paying for hotel vouchers in-lieu of a Safe Parking Program. Assuming the current Hotel operator would agree to the same rate and room availability they current offer SOS, it would cost the City approximately $36,000/month (10 rooms x 30 nights x $119/night). The County currently funds, via SOS, 10 hotel rooms through February.
As directed by Council at the December 1st meeting, we will continue to work with SOS to find an alternate location and will provide an oral and/or written status update at each upcoming Council meeting.
For reference, below are links to the December 1, 2021 staff report:
https://sonomacity.civicweb.net/document/50351/Adopt%20a%20Resolution%20Authorizing%20T he%20City%20Manager.pdf?handle=EB474D780A584CA0920E04CC2ECD673F and the staff report from the November 18, 2019 Council meeting. https://sonomacity.civicweb.net/document/27850/Consideration,%20Discussion,%20and%20Possi ble%20Action%20.pdf?handle=D4C310DA6D12465FA499A50493CC541D Recommended Council Action
Receive status report and provide direction to staff, as appropriate.
Alternative Actions
Council discretion.
Financial Impact
N/A
Environmental Review Status
Environmental Impact Report
Negative Declaration
Exempt
Approved/Certified
No Action Required
Action Requested
Agenda Item #6.2:
Not Applicable
Attachments
Potential Properties 2022
Alignment with Council Goals:
Not Applicable
Compliance with Climate Action 2020 Target Goals:
CC:
n/a
Agenda Item #6.2:
1.26.2022
Safe Parking Update
SOS current safe parking uses and needs
Agenda Item #6.2:
37 People living in their cars*
7 People in Safe Parking
*Who have used our services in the past 3 months
Safe Parking
Agenda Item #6.2:
Haven Services
SOS Services
SOS in Numbers
2179
Delivered Meals
21 Volunteers
771
People Served
485
Additional
Household
Members
749
Showers
202
Jackets
328
Vaccinations & Tests
1,500
Socks
Shir Shalom
Agenda Item #6.2:
Milestones
50,000 meals
Agenda Item #6.2:
January March May July SeptemberNovember January March May July SeptemberNovember 5,021
4,6894,689 4,5404,6054,603 4,603
4,122
4,435
5,306
4,212
3,818
4,647
4,246 4,268 4,345
3,310
2,499
1,542 1,653
2,350 2,534
3,028
3,284
All Meals
Meals Served
#total meals 2020-2021 per month
Number of Meals
54,940 meals in 2021
Agenda Item #6.2:
Current Usage
SOS Current services
771 Unique Individuals in 2021
54,940 Meals in 2021
250 meals per day
200 individuals per month
10 Safe Parking Spots
749 Showers
227 Laundry
The total square footage of the
Grange is 5200 ft²
The total front of house which
includes two bathrooms storage
area the pick up area food
plating area in one office is
3440 ft²
The total back of the house
which includes the pantry in
the kitchen is 1760 ft²
Services: Food Space Usage
Agenda Item #6.2:
SOS needs
What we need in a future property with Wraparound Services • Commercial Kitchen
• 10+ Parking Spaces
• Access to public transport
• Office x2 - Case Manager &
Day Services manager
• Services
• Bathroom
• Showers
• Laundry
• Case Management
• Storage for equipment,
hygiene items, clothing
Agenda Item #6.2:
10 People currently in wintertime hotel program
18 On the waitlist
In LG Village
13 Current Shelter Placements
193
Homeless Individuals*
*Self-declared at Springs Hall
Agenda Item #6.2:
Safe Parking End Date:
Wintertime Hotel Stay End:
Upcoming Dates
SOS contract deadlines
March 31st
February 28th
Agenda Item #6.2:
Possible Properties
Agenda Item #6.2:
18625 Sonoma Hwy
• $??
• ~7,000 ft2
• Unknown owner
• Adjacent to Springs Hall
• local realtor on SOS board
is pursuing – property
owner would like not to
divulge information at
this time
Grange Adjacent
Hwy 12
Agenda Item #6.2:
19357 Sonoma Hwy
• $3.4m
• 5.43 acres
• 3+ houses on lot
• 10 bedrooms
• 10 parking spaces
• 2,167 ft2
All-In-One
W Napa St Hwy 12 Southbound
Agenda Item #6.2:
20540 Broadway
• $3.5m
• 5 Acres
• Residential Lot
• Electrical hookup available
Large Lot
Broadway
Agenda Item #6.2:
1120 Napa Rd (8th St. East)
• $1.7m
• 8.16 acres
• Electricity available
• Septic
Empty Lot
Napa Rd
Agenda Item #6.2:
City of Sonoma
Agenda Item Summary
Meeting: City Council - 02 Feb 2022
Department
Administration
Staff Contact
Garrett Toy, City Manager
Agenda Item Title
Discussion, Consideration, and Possible Action to Adopt a Resolution Re-Adopting Rosenberg's Rules of Order for Official, Noticed, Public Meetings of the City Council and Selecting Rule on How to Count Abstentions
Summary
On July 6, 2011, the Council passed Resolution # 23-2011 which adopted an abbreviated version of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order. An issue came to light on January 12, 2022, when the Council voted 3-1-1 to adopt a Resolution to Suspend the Rule to Reconsider a Matter Only at the Meeting Where the Item was First Voted Upon or at the Very Next Meeting of the Council. Under the City’s abbreviated version of Rosenberg’s rule of order there was no guidance regarding abstentions. The City Attorney opined, at that time, the motion failed because it did not meet the 2/3rds rule to suspend the “reconsider rule.” However, at a subsequent special January 14, 2022 Council meeting, the City Attorney stated the motion actually passed because the full version of the 2011 Rosenberg’s Rule of Orders provided clarification on how to count abstentions and it would be reasonable for the Council to follow the full version of Rosenberg’s Rule of Order. As the Council did not previously adopt a rule on how to count abstentions, a vote of three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain” results in passage of the motion because the abstention is counted only for the purpose of determining quorum, but on the actual vote on the motion, it is as if the abstention vote never existed — so an effective 3-1 vote is a two-thirds majority vote.
The Council has expressed its preference to adopt the full version of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order 2011 to provide clarity on the process. The proposed resolution rescinds the adopted 2011 resolution and adopts the Rosenberg Rules of Orders 2011 as amended from time to time.
The Council has not formally adopted rules that count votes of “those present”. As a result, the general rule of thumb (and default rule) is that you count all votes that are “present and voting.” Accordingly, under the “present and voting” system, you would NOT count abstention votes on the motion. Members who abstain are counted for purposes of determining quorum (they are “present”), but you treat the abstention votes on the motion as if they did not exist (they are not “voting”). On the other hand, if the rules of the body specifically say that you count votes of those “present” then you DO count abstention votes both in establishing the quorum and on the motion. In this event, the abstention votes act just like “no” votes. As mentioned above, the Council has not specifically adopted such an abstention-counting rule How does this work in practice? Here are a few examples.
Assume that a five-member city council is voting on a motion that requires a simple majority vote to pass, and assume further that the body has no specific rule on counting votes, as is Agenda Item #6.3:
the case in Sonoma. Accordingly, the default rule kicks in and we count all votes of members that are “present and voting.” If the vote on the motion is 3-2, the motion passes. If the motion is 2-2 with one abstention, the motion fails.
Assume a five-member city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, and further assume that the body has no specific rule on counting votes. Again, the default rule applies. If the vote is 3-2, the motion fails for lack of a two-thirds majority. If the vote is 4-1, the motion passes with a clear two-thirds majority. A vote of three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain” also results in passage of the motion. Once again, the abstention is counted only for the purpose of determining quorum, but on the actual vote on the motion, it is as if the abstention vote never existed — so an effective 3-1 vote is clearly a two-thirds majority vote.
Now, change the scenario slightly. Assume the same five-member city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, but now assume that the body DOES have a specific rule requiring a two-thirds vote of members “present.” Under this specific rule, we must count the members present not only for quorum but also for the motion. In this scenario, any abstention has the same force and effect as if it were a “no” vote. Accordingly, if the votes were three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain,” then the motion fails. The abstention in this case is treated like a “no” vote and effective vote of 3-2 is not enough to pass twothirds majority muster Now, exactly how does a member cast an “abstention” vote? Any time a member votes “abstain” or says, “I abstain,” that is an abstention. However, if a member votes “present” that is also treated as an abstention (the member is essentially saying, “Count me for purposes of a quorum, but my vote on the issue is abstain.”) The City Council needs to consider whether they wish to formally adopt rules on how abstentions are counted. The resolution that is before you this evening, has been drafted in a manner so that is will accommodate either practice - “those present” or “those present and voting”. The Council should also consider giving direction to Staff regarding whether they would like all Commissions and Committees be under these same rules. If so, then Staff would bring back a resolution memorializing that direction.
Recommended Council Action
Adopt resolution and provide direction on which voting rule to apply.
Alternative Actions
Do not adopt the Resolution, and leave the rules as they are.
Council discretion
Financial Impact
None.
Environmental Review Status
Environmental Impact Report
Negative Declaration
Exempt
Not Applicable
Approved/Certified
No Action Required
Action Requested
Agenda Item #6.3:
Attachments
Resolution Adopting Rosenbergs Rules of Order
Rosenberg's-Rules-of-Order-Simple-Parliamentary-Procedures-for-the-21st-Century Alignment with Council Goals:
Not Applicable
Compliance with Climate Action 2020 Target Goals:
CC:
n/a
Agenda Item #6.3:
City of Sonoma
RESOLUTION # - 2022
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SONOMA RE-ADOPTING ROSENBERG'S
RULES OF ORDER FOR OFFICIAL, NOTICED, PUBLIC MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND
SELECTING RULE ON HOW TO COUNT ABSTENTIONS
WHEREAS, at its meetings the City Council of the City of Sonoma must consider many public matters which vitally affect the interests of the citizens of Sonoma, and it is both necessary and desirable that these meetings be regulated in order to permit the Council to give agenda matters due consideration and provide an opportunity for public discussion; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to conduct meetings in an orderly fashion with rules that establish order, are easy to understand and enforce the will of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority; and WHEREAS, it is the purpose of this resolution to provide for the orderly and expeditious conduct of Council meetings in a manner which will give adequate consideration and afford a reasonable opportunity for Council and public discussion; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 36813 and 54954.3(b) provide the City Council with the authority to adopt reasonable regulations concerning the proceedings and order of business of City Council meetings; and
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2011, the Council passed Resolution No. 23-2011 which adopted an abbreviated version of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, which said version the Council no longer desires to use in governing its proceedings, and, thus, the Council desires to repeal said Resolution; and WHEREAS, with respect to counting votes and abstentions, the complete Rosenberg’s Rules of Order, dated 2011, is the preferred set of rules which the Council desires to govern its proceedings and in that set, Rosenberg’s Rules of Order distinguish counting votes of “those present” from counting votes of those “present and voting.” Said Rules also provide that if the Council does not choose between these two different voting rules, then the default vote-counting rule requires application of the “present and voting” rule; and WHEREAS, the Council does not wish its rules of order to be established by default, and, therefore, it wishes to count votes of [“those present”] [“those present and voting”].
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Sonoma approves and adopts the version of Rosenberg's Rules of Order dated 2011 and attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by this reference incorporates said Rules herein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council Resolution No. 23-2011 be and the same is hereby repealed.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council adopts the vote-counting rule which counts votes of those [“present and voting”] [“present”] as this term is defined and explained in the attached version of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of February 2022, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Jack Ding, Mayor
Rebekah Barr, MMC, City Clerk
Agenda Item #6.3:
Rosenberg’s Rules of Order
REVISED 2011
Simple Rules of Parliamentary Procedure for the 21st Century By Judge Dave Rosenberg
Agenda Item #6.3:
ii
MISSION and CORE BELIEFS
To expand and protect local control for cities through education and advocacy to enhance the quality of life for all Californians.
VISION
To be recognized and respected as the leading advocate for the common interests of California’s cities.
About the League of California Cities
Established in 1898, the League of California Cities is a member organization that represents California’s incorporated cities.
The League strives to protect the local authority and automony of city government and help California’s cities effectively serve their residents. In addition to advocating on cities’ behalf at the state capitol, the League provides its members with professional development programs and information resources, conducts education conferences and research, and publishes Western City magazine.
© 2011 League of California Cities. All rights reserved.
About the Author
Dave Rosenberg is a Superior Court Judge in Yolo County. He has served as presiding judge of his court, and as presiding judge of the Superior Court Appellate Division. He also has served as chair of the Trial Court Presiding Judges Advisory Committee (the committee composed of all 58 California presiding judges) and as an advisory member of the California Judicial Council. Prior to his appointment to the bench, Rosenberg was member of the Yolo County Board of Supervisors, where he served two terms as chair. Rosenberg also served on the Davis City Council, including two terms as mayor. He has served on the senior staff of two governors, and worked for 19 years in private law practice. Rosenberg has served as a member and chair of numerous state, regional and local boards. Rosenberg chaired the California State Lottery Commission, the California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board, the Yolo-Solano Air Quality Management District, the Yolo County Economic Development Commission, and the Yolo County Criminal Justice Cabinet. For many years, he has taught classes on parliamentary procedure and has served as parliamentarian for large and small bodies.
Agenda Item #6.3:
1 Table of Contents
About the Author............................................................................................................ii Introduction....................................................................................................................2 Establishing a Quorum...................................................................................................2 The Role of the Chair......................................................................................................2 The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion........................................................2 Motions in General.........................................................................................................3 The Three Basic Motions................................................................................................3 Multiple Motions Before the Body.................................................................................4 To Debate or Not to Debate............................................................................................4 Majority and Super-Majority Votes ...............................................................................5 Counting Votes................................................................................................................5 The Motion to Reconsider..............................................................................................6 Courtesy and Decorum ..................................................................................................7 Special Notes About Public Input..................................................................................7 Agenda Item #6.3:
2 Establishing a Quorum
The starting point for a meeting is the establishment of a quorum.
A quorum is defined as the minimum number of members of the body who must be present at a meeting for business to be legally transacted. The default rule is that a quorum is one more than half the body. For example, in a five-member body a quorum is three.
When the body has three members present, it can legally transact business. If the body has less than a quorum of members present, it cannot legally transact business. And even if the body has a quorum to begin the meeting, the body can lose the quorum during the meeting when a member departs (or even when a member leaves the dais). When that occurs the body loses its ability to transact business until and unless a quorum is reestablished.
The default rule, identified above, however, gives way to a specific rule of the body that establishes a quorum. For example, the rules of a particular five-member body may indicate that a quorum is four members for that particular body. The body must follow the rules it has established for its quorum. In the absence of such a specific rule, the quorum is one more than half the members of the body.
The Role of the Chair
While all members of the body should know and understand the rules of parliamentary procedure, it is the chair of the body who is charged with applying the rules of conduct of the meeting. The chair should be well versed in those rules. For all intents and purposes, the chair makes the final ruling on the rules every time the chair states an action. In fact, all decisions by the chair are final unless overruled by the body itself.
Since the chair runs the conduct of the meeting, it is usual courtesy for the chair to play a less active role in the debate and discussion than other members of the body. This does not mean that the chair should not participate in the debate or discussion. To the contrary, as a member of the body, the chair has the full right to participate in the debate, discussion and decision-making of the body. What the chair should do, however, is strive to be the last to speak at the discussion and debate stage. The chair should not make or second a motion unless the chair is convinced that no other member of the body will do so at that point in time.
The Basic Format for an Agenda Item Discussion
Formal meetings normally have a written, often published agenda.
Informal meetings may have only an oral or understood agenda. In either case, the meeting is governed by the agenda and the agenda constitutes the body’s agreed-upon roadmap for the meeting. Each agenda item can be handled by the chair in the following basic format:
Introduction
The rules of procedure at meetings should be simple enough for most people to understand. Unfortunately, that has not always been the case. Virtually all clubs, associations, boards, councils and bodies follow a set of rules — Robert’s Rules of Order — which are embodied in a small, but complex, book. Virtually no one I know has actually read this book cover to cover. Worse yet, the book was written for another time and for another purpose. If one is chairing or running a parliament, then Robert’s Rules of Order is a dandy and quite useful handbook for procedure in that complex setting. On the other hand, if one is running a meeting of say, a five-member body with a few members of the public in attendance, a simplified version of the rules of parliamentary procedure is in order.
Hence, the birth of Rosenberg’s Rules of Order.
What follows is my version of the rules of parliamentary procedure, based on my decades of experience chairing meetings in state and local government. These rules have been simplified for the smaller bodies we chair or in which we participate, slimmed down for the 21st Century, yet retaining the basic tenets of order to which we have grown accustomed. Interestingly enough, Rosenberg’s Rules has found a welcoming audience. Hundreds of cities, counties, special districts, committees, boards, commissions, neighborhood associations and private corporations and companies have adopted Rosenberg’s Rules in lieu of Robert’s Rules because they have found them practical, logical, simple, easy to learn and user friendly.
This treatise on modern parliamentary procedure is built on a foundation supported by the following four pillars:
1. Rules should establish order. The first purpose of rules of parliamentary procedure is to establish a framework for the orderly conduct of meetings.
2. Rules should be clear. Simple rules lead to wider understanding and participation. Complex rules create two classes: those who understand and participate; and those who do not fully understand and do not fully participate.
3. Rules should be user friendly. That is, the rules must be simple enough that the public is invited into the body and feels that it has participated in the process.
4. Rules should enforce the will of the majority while protecting the rights of the minority. The ultimate purpose of rules of procedure is to encourage discussion and to facilitate decision making by the body. In a democracy, majority rules. The rules must enable the majority to express itself and fashion a result, while permitting the minority to also express itself, but not dominate, while fully participating in the process.
Agenda Item #6.3:
3 Ninth, the chair takes a vote. Simply asking for the “ayes” and then asking for the “nays” normally does this. If members of the body do not vote, then they “abstain.” Unless the rules of the body provide otherwise (or unless a super majority is required as delineated later in these rules), then a simple majority (as defined in law or the rules of the body as delineated later in these rules) determines whether the motion passes or is defeated.
Tenth, the chair should announce the result of the vote and what action (if any) the body has taken. In announcing the result, the chair should indicate the names of the members of the body, if any, who voted in the minority on the motion. This announcement might take the following form: “The motion passes by a vote of 3-2, with Smith and Jones dissenting. We have passed the motion requiring a 10-day notice for all future meetings of this body.”
Motions in General
Motions are the vehicles for decision making by a body. It is usually best to have a motion before the body prior to commencing discussion of an agenda item. This helps the body focus.
Motions are made in a simple two-step process. First, the chair should recognize the member of the body. Second, the member of the body makes a motion by preceding the member’s desired approach with the words “I move … ”
A typical motion might be: “I move that we give a 10-day notice in the future for all our meetings.”
The chair usually initiates the motion in one of three ways:
1. Inviting the members of the body to make a motion, for example, “A motion at this time would be in order.”
2. Suggesting a motion to the members of the body, “A motion would be in order that we give a 10-day notice in the future for all our meetings.”
3. Making the motion. As noted, the chair has every right as a member of the body to make a motion, but should normally do so only if the chair wishes to make a motion on an item but is convinced that no other member of the body is willing to step forward to do so at a particular time.
The Three Basic Motions
There are three motions that are the most common and recur often at meetings:
The basic motion. The basic motion is the one that puts forward a decision for the body’s consideration. A basic motion might be: “I move that we create a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.”
First, the chair should clearly announce the agenda item number and should clearly state what the agenda item subject is. The chair should then announce the format (which follows) that will be followed in considering the agenda item.
Second, following that agenda format, the chair should invite the appropriate person or persons to report on the item, including any recommendation that they might have. The appropriate person or persons may be the chair, a member of the body, a staff person, or a committee chair charged with providing input on the agenda item.
Third, the chair should ask members of the body if they have any technical questions of clarification. At this point, members of the body may ask clarifying questions to the person or persons who reported on the item, and that person or persons should be given time to respond.
Fourth, the chair should invite public comments, or if appropriate at a formal meeting, should open the public meeting for public input.
If numerous members of the public indicate a desire to speak to the subject, the chair may limit the time of public speakers. At the conclusion of the public comments, the chair should announce that public input has concluded (or the public hearing, as the case may be, is closed).
Fifth, the chair should invite a motion. The chair should announce the name of the member of the body who makes the motion.
Sixth, the chair should determine if any member of the body wishes to second the motion. The chair should announce the name of the member of the body who seconds the motion. It is normally good practice for a motion to require a second before proceeding to ensure that it is not just one member of the body who is interested in a particular approach. However, a second is not an absolute requirement, and the chair can proceed with consideration and vote on a motion even when there is no second. This is a matter left to the discretion of the chair.
Seventh, if the motion is made and seconded, the chair should make sure everyone understands the motion.
This is done in one of three ways:
1. The chair can ask the maker of the motion to repeat it;
2. The chair can repeat the motion; or
3. The chair can ask the secretary or the clerk of the body to repeat the motion.
Eighth, the chair should now invite discussion of the motion by the body. If there is no desired discussion, or after the discussion has ended, the chair should announce that the body will vote on the motion. If there has been no discussion or very brief discussion, then the vote on the motion should proceed immediately and there is no need to repeat the motion. If there has been substantial discussion, then it is normally best to make sure everyone understands the motion by repeating it.
Agenda Item #6.3:
4 First, the chair would deal with the third (the last) motion on the floor, the substitute motion. After discussion and debate, a vote would be taken first on the third motion. If the substitute motion passed, it would be a substitute for the basic motion and would eliminate it. The first motion would be moot, as would the second motion (which sought to amend the first motion), and the action on the agenda item would be completed on the passage by the body of the third motion (the substitute motion). No vote would be taken on the first or second motions.
Second, if the substitute motion failed, the chair would then deal with the second (now the last) motion on the floor, the motion to amend. The discussion and debate would focus strictly on the amendment (should the committee be five or 10 members). If the motion to amend passed, the chair would then move to consider the main motion (the first motion) as amended. If the motion to amend failed, the chair would then move to consider the main motion (the first motion) in its original format, not amended.
Third, the chair would now deal with the first motion that was placed on the floor. The original motion would either be in its original format (five-member committee), or if amended, would be in its amended format (10-member committee). The question on the floor for discussion and decision would be whether a committee should plan and put on the annual fundraiser.
To Debate or Not to Debate
The basic rule of motions is that they are subject to discussion and debate. Accordingly, basic motions, motions to amend, and substitute motions are all eligible, each in their turn, for full discussion before and by the body. The debate can continue as long as members of the body wish to discuss an item, subject to the decision of the chair that it is time to move on and take action.
There are exceptions to the general rule of free and open debate on motions. The exceptions all apply when there is a desire of the body to move on. The following motions are not debatable (that is, when the following motions are made and seconded, the chair must immediately call for a vote of the body without debate on the motion):
Motion to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the body to immediately adjourn to its next regularly scheduled meeting. It requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to recess. This motion, if passed, requires the body to immediately take a recess. Normally, the chair determines the length of the recess which may be a few minutes or an hour. It requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to fix the time to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the body to adjourn the meeting at the specific time set in the motion. For example, the motion might be: “I move we adjourn this meeting at midnight.” It requires a simple majority vote.
The motion to amend. If a member wants to change a basic motion that is before the body, they would move to amend it. A motion to amend might be: “I move that we amend the motion to have a 10-member committee.” A motion to amend takes the basic motion that is before the body and seeks to change it in some way.
The substitute motion. If a member wants to completely do away with the basic motion that is before the body, and put a new motion before the body, they would move a substitute motion. A substitute motion might be: “I move a substitute motion that we cancel the annual fundraiser this year.”
“Motions to amend” and “substitute motions” are often confused, but they are quite different, and their effect (if passed) is quite different.
A motion to amend seeks to retain the basic motion on the floor, but modify it in some way. A substitute motion seeks to throw out the basic motion on the floor, and substitute a new and different motion for it. The decision as to whether a motion is really a “motion to amend” or a “substitute motion” is left to the chair. So if a member makes what that member calls a “motion to amend,” but the chair determines that it is really a “substitute motion,” then the chair’s designation governs.
A “friendly amendment” is a practical parliamentary tool that is simple, informal, saves time and avoids bogging a meeting down with numerous formal motions. It works in the following way: In the discussion on a pending motion, it may appear that a change to the motion is desirable or may win support for the motion from some members. When that happens, a member who has the floor may simply say, “I want to suggest a friendly amendment to the motion.” The member suggests the friendly amendment, and if the maker and the person who seconded the motion pending on the floor accepts the friendly amendment, that now becomes the pending motion on the floor. If either the maker or the person who seconded rejects the proposed friendly amendment, then the proposer can formally move to amend.
Multiple Motions Before the Body
There can be up to three motions on the floor at the same time.
The chair can reject a fourth motion until the chair has dealt with the three that are on the floor and has resolved them. This rule has practical value. More than three motions on the floor at any given time is confusing and unwieldy for almost everyone, including the chair.
When there are two or three motions on the floor (after motions and seconds) at the same time, the vote should proceed first on the last motion that is made. For example, assume the first motion is a basic “motion to have a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.” During the discussion of this motion, a member might make a second motion to “amend the main motion to have a 10-member committee, not a five-member committee to plan and put on our annual fundraiser.” And perhaps, during that discussion, a member makes yet a third motion as a “substitute motion that we not have an annual fundraiser this year.” The proper procedure would be as follows:
Agenda Item #6.3:
5 Motion to close nominations. When choosing officers of the body (such as the chair), nominations are in order either from a nominating committee or from the floor of the body. A motion to close nominations effectively cuts off the right of the minority to nominate officers and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to object to the consideration of a question. Normally, such a motion is unnecessary since the objectionable item can be tabled or defeated straight up. However, when members of a body do not even want an item on the agenda to be considered, then such a motion is in order. It is not debatable, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Motion to suspend the rules. This motion is debatable, but requires a two-thirds vote to pass. If the body has its own rules of order, conduct or procedure, this motion allows the body to suspend the rules for a particular purpose. For example, the body (a private club) might have a rule prohibiting the attendance at meetings by non-club members. A motion to suspend the rules would be in order to allow a non-club member to attend a meeting of the club on a particular date or on a particular agenda item.
Counting Votes
The matter of counting votes starts simple, but can become complicated.
Usually, it’s pretty easy to determine whether a particular motion passed or whether it was defeated. If a simple majority vote is needed to pass a motion, then one vote more than 50 percent of the body is required. For example, in a five-member body, if the vote is three in favor and two opposed, the motion passes. If it is two in favor and three opposed, the motion is defeated.
If a two-thirds majority vote is needed to pass a motion, then how many affirmative votes are required? The simple rule of thumb is to count the “no” votes and double that count to determine how many “yes” votes are needed to pass a particular motion. For example, in a seven-member body, if two members vote “no” then the “yes” vote of at least four members is required to achieve a two-thirds majority vote to pass the motion.
What about tie votes? In the event of a tie, the motion always fails since an affirmative vote is required to pass any motion. For example, in a five-member body, if the vote is two in favor and two opposed, with one member absent, the motion is defeated.
Vote counting starts to become complicated when members vote “abstain” or in the case of a written ballot, cast a blank (or unreadable) ballot. Do these votes count, and if so, how does one count them? The starting point is always to check the statutes.
In California, for example, for an action of a board of supervisors to be valid and binding, the action must be approved by a majority of the board. (California Government Code Section 25005.) Typically, this means three of the five members of the board must vote affirmatively in favor of the action. A vote of 2-1 would not be sufficient. A vote of 3-0 with two abstentions would be sufficient. In general law cities in Motion to table. This motion, if passed, requires discussion of the agenda item to be halted and the agenda item to be placed on “hold.” The motion can contain a specific time in which the item can come back to the body. “I move we table this item until our regular meeting in October.” Or the motion can contain no specific time for the return of the item, in which case a motion to take the item off the table and bring it back to the body will have to be taken at a future meeting. A motion to table an item (or to bring it back to the body) requires a simple majority vote.
Motion to limit debate. The most common form of this motion is to say, “I move the previous question” or “I move the question” or “I call the question” or sometimes someone simply shouts out “question.” As a practical matter, when a member calls out one of these phrases, the chair can expedite matters by treating it as a “request” rather than as a formal motion. The chair can simply inquire of the body, “any further discussion?” If no one wishes to have further discussion, then the chair can go right to the pending motion that is on the floor.
However, if even one person wishes to discuss the pending motion further, then at that point, the chair should treat the call for the “question” as a formal motion, and proceed to it.
When a member of the body makes such a motion (“I move the previous question”), the member is really saying: “I’ve had enough debate. Let’s get on with the vote.” When such a motion is made, the chair should ask for a second, stop debate, and vote on the motion to limit debate. The motion to limit debate requires a two-thirds vote of the body.
Note: A motion to limit debate could include a time limit. For example: “I move we limit debate on this agenda item to 15 minutes.” Even in this format, the motion to limit debate requires a twothirds vote of the body. A similar motion is a motion to object to consideration of an item. This motion is not debatable, and if passed, precludes the body from even considering an item on the agenda. It also requires a two-thirds vote.
Majority and Super Majority Votes
In a democracy, a simple majority vote determines a question. A tie vote means the motion fails. So in a seven-member body, a vote of 4-3 passes the motion. A vote of 3-3 with one abstention means the motion fails. If one member is absent and the vote is 3-3, the motion still fails.
All motions require a simple majority, but there are a few exceptions.
The exceptions come up when the body is taking an action which effectively cuts off the ability of a minority of the body to take an action or discuss an item. These extraordinary motions require a two-thirds majority (a super majority) to pass:
Motion to limit debate. Whether a member says, “I move the previous question,” or “I move the question,” or “I call the question,” or “I move to limit debate,” it all amounts to an attempt to cut off the ability of the minority to discuss an item, and it requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
Agenda Item #6.3:
6 Now, exactly how does a member cast an “abstention” vote? Any time a member votes “abstain” or says, “I abstain,” that is an abstention. However, if a member votes “present” that is also treated as an abstention (the member is essentially saying, “Count me for purposes of a quorum, but my vote on the issue is abstain.”) In fact, any manifestation of intention not to vote either “yes” or “no” on the pending motion may be treated by the chair as an abstention. If written ballots are cast, a blank or unreadable ballot is counted as an abstention as well.
Can a member vote “absent” or “count me as absent?” Interesting question. The ruling on this is up to the chair. The better approach is for the chair to count this as if the member had left his/her chair and is actually “absent.” That, of course, affects the quorum. However, the chair may also treat this as a vote to abstain, particularly if the person does not actually leave the dais.
The Motion to Reconsider
There is a special and unique motion that requires a bit of explanation all by itself; the motion to reconsider. A tenet of parliamentary procedure is finality. After vigorous discussion, debate and a vote, there must be some closure to the issue. And so, after a vote is taken, the matter is deemed closed, subject only to reopening if a proper motion to consider is made and passed.
A motion to reconsider requires a majority vote to pass like other garden-variety motions, but there are two special rules that apply only to the motion to reconsider.
First, is the matter of timing. A motion to reconsider must be made at the meeting where the item was first voted upon. A motion to reconsider made at a later time is untimely. (The body, however, can always vote to suspend the rules and, by a two-thirds majority, allow a motion to reconsider to be made at another time.)
Second, a motion to reconsider may be made only by certain members of the body. Accordingly, a motion to reconsider may be made only by a member who voted in the majority on the original motion. If such a member has a change of heart, he or she may make the motion to reconsider (any other member of the body — including a member who voted in the minority on the original motion — may second the motion). If a member who voted in the minority seeks to make the motion to reconsider, it must be ruled out of order. The purpose of this rule is finality. If a member of minority could make a motion to reconsider, then the item could be brought back to the body again and again, which would defeat the purpose of finality.
If the motion to reconsider passes, then the original matter is back before the body, and a new original motion is in order. The matter may be discussed and debated as if it were on the floor for the first time.
California, as another example, resolutions or orders for the payment of money and all ordinances require a recorded vote of the total members of the city council. (California Government Code Section 36936.) Cities with charters may prescribe their own vote requirements. Local elected officials are always well-advised to consult with their local agency counsel on how state law may affect the vote count.
After consulting state statutes, step number two is to check the rules of the body. If the rules of the body say that you count votes of “those present” then you treat abstentions one way. However, if the rules of the body say that you count the votes of those “present and voting,” then you treat abstentions a different way. And if the rules of the body are silent on the subject, then the general rule of thumb (and default rule) is that you count all votes that are “present and voting.” Accordingly, under the “present and voting” system, you would NOT count abstention votes on the motion. Members who abstain are counted for purposes of determining quorum (they are “present”), but you treat the abstention votes on the motion as if they did not exist (they are not “voting”). On the other hand, if the rules of the body specifically say that you count votes of those “present” then you DO count abstention votes both in establishing the quorum and on the motion. In this event, the abstention votes act just like “no” votes.
How does this work in practice?
Here are a few examples.
Assume that a five-member city council is voting on a motion that requires a simple majority vote to pass, and assume further that the body has no specific rule on counting votes. Accordingly, the default rule kicks in and we count all votes of members that are “present and voting.” If the vote on the motion is 3-2, the motion passes. If the motion is 2-2 with one abstention, the motion fails.
Assume a five-member city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, and further assume that the body has no specific rule on counting votes. Again, the default rule applies.
If the vote is 3-2, the motion fails for lack of a two-thirds majority. If the vote is 4-1, the motion passes with a clear two-thirds majority. A vote of three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain” also results in passage of the motion. Once again, the abstention is counted only for the purpose of determining quorum, but on the actual vote on the motion, it is as if the abstention vote never existed — so an effective 3-1 vote is clearly a two-thirds majority vote.
Now, change the scenario slightly. Assume the same five-member city council voting on a motion that requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, but now assume that the body DOES have a specific rule requiring a two-thirds vote of members “present.” Under this specific rule, we must count the members present not only for quorum but also for the motion. In this scenario, any abstention has the same force and effect as if it were a “no” vote. Accordingly, if the votes were three “yes,” one “no” and one “abstain,” then the motion fails. The abstention in this case is treated like a “no” vote and effective vote of 3-2 is not enough to pass two-thirds majority muster.
Agenda Item #6.3:
7 Appeal. If the chair makes a ruling that a member of the body disagrees with, that member may appeal the ruling of the chair. If the motion is seconded, and after debate, if it passes by a simple majority vote, then the ruling of the chair is deemed reversed.
Call for orders of the day. This is simply another way of saying, “return to the agenda.” If a member believes that the body has drifted from the agreed-upon agenda, such a call may be made. It does not require a vote, and when the chair discovers that the agenda has not been followed, the chair simply reminds the body to return to the agenda item properly before them. If the chair fails to do so, the chair’s determination may be appealed.
Withdraw a motion. During debate and discussion of a motion, the maker of the motion on the floor, at any time, may interrupt a speaker to withdraw his or her motion from the floor. The motion is immediately deemed withdrawn, although the chair may ask the person who seconded the motion if he or she wishes to make the motion, and any other member may make the motion if properly recognized.
Special Notes About Public Input
The rules outlined above will help make meetings very publicfriendly. But in addition, and particularly for the chair, it is wise to remember three special rules that apply to each agenda item:
Rule One: Tell the public what the body will be doing.
Rule Two: Keep the public informed while the body is doing it.
Rule Three: When the body has acted, tell the public what the body did.
Courtesy and Decorum
The rules of order are meant to create an atmosphere where the members of the body and the members of the public can attend to business efficiently, fairly and with full participation. At the same time, it is up to the chair and the members of the body to maintain common courtesy and decorum. Unless the setting is very informal, it is always best for only one person at a time to have the floor, and it is always best for every speaker to be first recognized by the chair before proceeding to speak.
The chair should always ensure that debate and discussion of an agenda item focuses on the item and the policy in question, not the personalities of the members of the body. Debate on policy is healthy, debate on personalities is not. The chair has the right to cut off discussion that is too personal, is too loud, or is too crude.
Debate and discussion should be focused, but free and open. In the interest of time, the chair may, however, limit the time allotted to speakers, including members of the body.
Can a member of the body interrupt the speaker? The general rule is “no.” There are, however, exceptions. A speaker may be interrupted for the following reasons:
Privilege. The proper interruption would be, “point of privilege.” The chair would then ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate points of privilege relate to anything that would interfere with the normal comfort of the meeting. For example, the room may be too hot or too cold, or a blowing fan might interfere with a person’s ability to hear.
Order. The proper interruption would be, “point of order.” Again, the chair would ask the interrupter to “state your point.” Appropriate points of order relate to anything that would not be considered appropriate conduct of the meeting. For example, if the chair moved on to a vote on a motion that permits debate without allowing that discussion or debate.
Agenda Item #6.3:
1400 K Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 658-8200 | Fax (916) 658-8240
www.cacities.org
To order additional copies of this publication, call (916) 658-8200. $10
© 2011 League of California Cities. All rights reserved.
Printed on recycled paper.
Agenda Item #6.3: