Live Life Lincoln Live Life Lincoln. Live Life Lincoln Live Life. Lincoln Live Life Lincoln  MINUTES  CITY OF LINCOLN CITY COUNCIL & LINCOLN REDEVELOPMENT SUCCESSOR AGENCY SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES Council Work Session April 4, 2017  4:00PM - 6:00PM -First Floor Conference Room Mayor Pro Tem Nader called the meeting to order at 4:05PM.  1. ROLL CALL  Councilmen present: Mayor Pro Tem: Mayor: Staff members present:  Gabriel Hydrick Dan Karleskint Paul Joiner Stan Nader  Peter Gilbert (delayed arrived at 4:10PM) Matt Brower, City Manager Leslie Walker, City Attorney Steve Ambrose, Support Services Director Jennifer Hanson, Public Services Director Ray Leftwich, City Engineer Gwen Scanlon, City Clerk Matt Wheeler, Community Development Director  Various City employees, consultants and members of the public were also present.  2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE led by Mayor Pro Tem Nader.  Mayor Pro Tem Nader stated Items 4B, Solar Array, and 4C, Sustainable Groundwater Management 4.B.Information Item on Placement of Solar Array at Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Jennifer Hanson, Public Services Director, gave a brief staff report and detailed two site options of solar array at the' Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation Facility (WWTRF) and stated staffi is recommending Site B at the current NorCal Crushing Plant. An extensive Council discussion ensued which included cost of Solar Array at' WWTRF project and whether cost would impact wastewater operations, funding mechanisms such as State Revolving Fund loan, acreage needed for the project, cost savings for current rate payers, when the other 50 citywide solar array project would move forward and location options with related environmental impacts with City Consultant Russel Driver from ARC giving information on environmental impacts and needed input from PG&E on capacity of system. Councilman Joiner stated he heard Council consensus on moving forward with Site B with a report back in with funding options and decision points will be acted on at that point. Jennifer Hanson agreed that staff has a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) to solicit bids for a Design/Build of the Array which could include options for funding such as municipal financing and power purchase agreement and staff could bring back those responses as well as additional SRF funding information and CPUC information to Council for action at a future date. Mayor Gilbert opened the discussion to the public with no  Act Update, would be heard first. 4. STAFF REPORT Facility.  comments.  4.C.Sustainable Groundwater Management Act(SGMA) Update  Jennifer Hanson, Public Services Director, gave a powerpoint presentation and stated this item has been before Council a number of times and two members of previous Council had also attended an elected officials meeting and consensus of all of these meetings was to pursue the option of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between partners oft the proposed Groundwater Sustainability Agencies: City of Roseville, City of Lincoln, Placer County, Nevada Irrigation District and  600 Sisth Strect Lincoln, CA 95648 "www.s.lncoln.ca.ux 916-434-2400    Live - Life . Lincoln - Live . Life - Lincoln. Live Life Lincoln . Live Life - Lincoln Live Life Lipcoln  Page 2of3 April 4, 2017 Work Session  City Council & Lincoln Redevelopment Successor Agency  Placer County Water Agency. A lengthy discussion ensued regarding issue of a private company suche as California American Water Company being a signatory on the MOA therefore they would be part of the GSA as a sub-agreement; differences between MOA and Joint Powers Agreement (JPA); future actions needed for adoption; annual $50,000 payment that Lincoln has made for past 10 years and the concern that new parties were. joining the agreement that had not made that investment; concern that Placer County would be oversight administrator of the agreement and that Council would not be able to oversee the budget associated; and whether actions required unanimous approval under the agreement. Leslie Walker, City Attorney, stated any expenses beyond $50,000 and therefore beyond the authority of the City Manager would need to be brought forward for Council action and additional language could be added to define the agreement provisions. Jennifer Hanson stated as the Groundwater Sustainability Plan is developed a lot of these issues will be ironed out and that she would bring the MOA forward to an upcoming regular Council meeting for action. Mayor Gilbert opened the 4.A.Timing of Sewer Connection Fees Payment - Staff requests that the City Council hear a presentation on the proposed funding/financing alternatives available for the upcoming sewer treatment facility expansion project; then host a workshop discussion with staff, developers, and community stakeholders on Policy options for requiring payment of sewer connection (impact) fees by development. Staff is seeking Policy direction to inform development agreements and conditions of approval for upcoming development projects.  discussion to the public with no comment.  Matt Wheeler, Community Development Director, gave a powerpoint presentation with four options for financing the sewer treatment facility expansion project: Option A (not likely): Development Pre-Fund (Build) WWTRF Expansion - No Debt Incurred by City; Option B: Pre-Payment of Sewer (Treatment Component) PFE Connection Fees at Final Map; Option C: Establish Sewer (Treatment Component) PFE Connection Fees as Critical Element; and Option D: Current Practice - Sewer PFE Connection Fees due at Time of Building Permit (all non-critical). Al brief Council discussion ensued on State Revolving Fund (SRF) and who made policy decision to include pre-payment of fees in conditions brought forward to Planning Commission. Mayor Gilbert opened the discussion to the public at 5:45PM pre-payment of sewer fees the risks are understated and rewards are overstated and there are no jurisdictions in California that are currently requiring pre-payment of fees as the current market won't bear that. He continued iti is a self-defeating policy as small projects would be unable to build because the up-front costs are sO high and encouraged Council to choose option D, current practice.  with the following comments:  a)  Marcus Lo Duca, a Roseville Attorney representing Lincoln developers, stated option B  b)  Price Walker, of Elliot Homes a Lincoln developer, agreed with Mr. Lo Duca and stated  that when their project Turkey Creek Estates went before Planning Commission for approval there was discussion that if their project pre-paid they would get reimbursed if another source came up. He stated he wasn't aware that pre-payment wasn'ta Council policy and that his Development Agreement would be coming up soon sO he requests their condition of pre-payment be changed as that is the reason his  project has not begun as the infrastructure costs are sO high.  c)  Phil Rodriguez, of Lewis Communities a Lincoln developer, stated he is excited about  the Village 7 project with 2,200 units but cost of Phase 1 of that project with 540 units is approximately $21million and to have to pre-pay fees adds insults to injury. He continued they had received notice of this proposed policy a few weeks ago in relation to their Independence Development in Lincoln which required them to review the project for its feasibility. Mr. Rodriguez requested Council direct staff to  work with the industry. d) industry.  Katie Donahue, North State Builders Industry Association (BIA), stated she had  sent a letter with the BIA's concerns to Council and also requested Council direct staff to work with the  600 Sixth Street Lincoln, CA 95648 "www.di-lincohn.caux . 916-434-2400    Live Life . Lincoln Live Life Lincoln. Live Lifes Lincoln Live. Life Lincoin - Live Life Lipcoln  Page 3of3 April 4, 2017 Work Session  City Council & Lincoln Redevelopment Successor. Agency  e)  Tony Frayji, of Frayji Design Group representing Village 1 and other Lincoln  developers, stated he echoes previous statements and pre-payment ofi fees overburdens projects. Mayor Gilbert ended the public discussion at 6:00PM and a lengthy discussion ensued regarding any policy direction given to Staff at Strategic Retreat with Council consensus directing staff to meet with 4.D.Village 1 Specific Plan Amendment Timing The Village 1 Stakeholders would like feedback from the City Council on the ability to process and adopt an Amendment to the Village 1 Specific Plan prior to a (typically required) 2-year waiting period after annexation. Protests by some property owners within the Village 1 Specific Plan Area (in particular the Allen property) for inclusion in the Specific Plan and Annexation require a revision to the planned alignment of Oak Tree Lane at the southeast edge of the plan. This re-alignment of Oak Tree Lane is necessary to facilitate development and entitlement processing for properties south of HWY 193 int the plan area. Staff and the Village 1 Stakeholders believe this condition justifies consideration of a Specific Plan Amendment prior to the normal 2-year waiting period. Matt Wheeler, Community Services Director, gave a powerpoint presentation and stated re-alignment of Oak Tree Lane is necessary to facilitate development and entitlement processing for properties south of HWY 193 in the Village 1 plan area. However, the ability to process and adopt an Amendment to the Village 1 Specific Plan prior to a (typically required) 2-year waiting period after annexation requires a Council finding of overriding consideration. Mayor Gilbert opened the discussion to the public at  BIA and developers to try to identify a solution that won't strangle development.  6:20PM with the following comment:  a)  Tony Frayji, of Frayji Design Group representing Village 1 developers, stated traffic  analysis was done for this alignment which will work but in order to move the Ewing annexation forward a Council finding of overriding consideration is needed and requested the Council make that finding. A brief discussion on realignment and its impact on Highway 193 and Sierra College Boulevard occurred. Council consensus was to allow the specific plan amendment which would be brought back  for action at a future date.  4.E.California Main Street Program Review  Councilman Nader stated he had attended the California Main Street Alliance Conference in late February along with Joann Hilton and Wayne Sisneroz. Councilman Nader distributed his notes from the conference, made a part of these minutes by mention thereof. Joann Hilton, gave a brief report and distributed a flyer 'California Main Streets at Work', made a part of these minutes by mention thereof. Councilman Hydrick expressed his concern with the program as centralized planning doesn'twork and  stated he would meet offline with Joann Hilton to discuss his concerns.  5. COUNCIL INITIATED BUSINESS - NONE 3. PUBLIC COMMENT - NONE  Gwen Scanlon, City Clerk, stated Item 3, Public Comment, had been skipped and Mayor Gilbert  opened the discussion to the public and heard none. 6. ADJOURNED by Mayor Gilbert at 6:45PM. Bwer Scarlo Submitted by Gwen Scanlon, City Clerk  600 Sixth Street Lincoln, CA es-sssalinaacant -916-434-2400    CALIFORNIA MAIN STREET ALLIANCE CONFERENCE  RETAIL TRENDS  Consumers are looking for AN EXPERIENCE and will  pay more to get it!  Food and Entertainment are the new shopping center  anchors  People are eating out more  Retail opportunities must provide multiple channels  to purchase goods and services  Market Halls - Grocurants - Urgent Care Centers  Changing demographics of communities    Important to know who you are as a community and  what your customers are looking for  Building elationships/rrust  Differentiate from competition  Internet resistant ousinessesiPeoples daily needs  Small Business Development Centers/Banking  partners  Things cities can do to improve business climate Provide ertainty/Regulatory streamlining  Ability to react to change  PARKING  The action to address parking issues is to monetize  parking (meters)    Monies collected generally are used to build parking  garages.  Parking Compliance through education  BUSINESS ATTRACTION STRATEGIES  Start with good retention program  Are you ready to do it!  Develop an approach that works  Make sure there is sufficient market demand for the  business you are attempting to attract  Image is everything!  Well managed, clean, safe, common store hours,  parking, lighting, signage    Know your inventory of available sites  Place making/Diversity  Create balance mix of businesses  Internet resistant Authentic Experiencal Personal  Messagingwil potential businesses find the  community inviting  signage/Customer orientation Community Engagement  Learn what the community wants  CAN SMALL TOWNS BE COOL  Size does not matter/lt is a matter of scale    What is Cool?  Innovative = Diversity = Relevance = Energy  Be across all generations Bring education into the program  Partner with colleges  Mixed Use residential developments  Lifestyle shops (yoga, childcare) Seniors work in  childcare businesses  Seasonal Ambassador Program  Volunteers  Provide information about the community  Community Improvement Districts (BID)  It's all about the events to bring residents downtown  LEARNING FROM AN EXPERIENCED MAIN STREET  PROGRAM    Collaboration/Coalition Building  Establish a Vision  Social Interaction  People want to be around other people  Questions to ask as you develop strategies 1. Does your community desire change?  2. Is there a threat to your community? (Homeless)  3. Has new funding become available 4. Hold to your vision without saying no to  developers  Find your why  Define your brand culture Define your business district Know what your values are  Relationship building with businesses and  stakeholders    Activate your marketing activities  Everything is done with a focused approach leading  directly to results  NEW WAYS TO HELP BUSINESSES RAISE CAPITAL  Crowd sourcing  Building citizen ownership in their city  Matching funds Indego.com Gofundme.com Kickstarter.com crowdrise.com Razoo.com Kibazip.com  Investor must share the value of the project  Direct public offerings  Marketcreek Plaza in San Diego    State of California Department of Business Oversight  Provide loans  Cutting Edge Capital, John Katovich, 510)919-8510    What is the California Main. Street. Alliance?  california main street A LEANCE psle depieig, plapes California Main Streets At Work Califomia Main Street Alliance's expertise helps communities set forth a vision of their revitalization efforts with support from local government, property and business owners, and Community staff and volunteers implement projects and activities within the four program areas that comprise the Main Street Four-Point Approach", developed by thei National Trust for Historic Preservation's National Main Street Center. These four points and their corresponding committees are: Organization Builds an effective volunteer-driven management organization guided by professional staff with broad-based public and private support. Activities mayi include community visioning, work plan development, volunteer recruitment and fundraising. Economic Restructuring Identifies your downtown's unique economic niche. Activities may include market analysis, building rehabilitation, business retention," recruitment and education, parking andi transportationi improvements, and new development. Promotion Creates a unified, quality image and develops promotional strategies that capitalize on your downtown's or districi's unique assets. Activities may include retail aavertising, community vents,magecampagns.sodaimedia and heritagetours. Design Enhances your area's unique design andappearance. Activtuesmaylnclude cleaning and maintenance, design guidelines, facade improvements, historic preservation, streetscape improvements, signage and window  The Califomia Main Street Alliance (CAMSA), anon-profit organization, has kept the Main Street Program active in California by providing technical assistance,communication,andh training programs for Califomial Main Street Organized in 2002, CAMSA partners with the Califomia Main Street Program (established in 1985 and currently housedi int the Califomia Office of Historic Preservation) to provide its members with valuable resource information for revitalization, including one-on-one technical assistance by phone or email. CAMSA also conducts on-site trainings, workshops, conferences, and otherfeef for serviceprograms. What are the benefits ofmembership in CAMSA? Membershipi in CAMSAI includes member-only  communities.  citizens.  updatesi including the latest  newsi inr revitalization, grant opportunities," reduced feesi for conferences and trainings, a members-onlyl listserve, one-on-one technical assistance, membership listings with links from our website, and our quarterly  e-newsletter.  Who can join CAMSA? districts inCaliforia.  Membership is open to any person, business, organization or publice entity thati is interested in the revitalization of downtowns and commercial Whyshouldmycommunio/plowteMalnstreetapproache? After the elimination ofr redevelopment. agencies in Califomia, downtown associations and commercial districts are looking many for cities, altematives to start or continue revitalization efforts. The Main Street Approacheis at tried and true revitalization strategy that educates business: andp property owners aswell as communityleaders, engages non-profit organizations and volunteers to work together for the benefit of Since 1980, the cumulative success of the Main Street Approach"and local Main Street programs has earned this strategy a reputation as one of the most powerful economic development tools in the nation. The National Trust Main Street Center collects statistical information annually on economic activity in local Main Street programs throughout the country. Thet following estimates arel based on cumulative statistics gathered from 1980tol December 31, 20121 fora all designated Main Streete communities Totall reinvestmenti in physicali improvements from publica and private  and  the entire community.  nationwide.  sources- -$53.6 Billion Net gaini in businesses - 104,961 Net gain inj jobs = 448,835 Number of building rehabilitations - 229,164  20121 Nationall Main Street Program Reinvestment: Ratio: $18:$1* 2012CalformiallainseremtProgramReinvestmentRatio: $22.20:$1** What is a Designated California Main Street Progrem? As ofNovember: 2013, there are: 27 Main Street programs in Califoria that have met the criteria and operational standards of performance as set by the National Main Street Center and the Califomia Main Street Program between 1986 and 2013, and are considered Designated Califomia Main Street Communities. Twenty-two of these programs are: accredited with the National Main Street Center for 2013, meeting annual requirements that include standards of performance and reporting of statistics. "The Reinvestment: Ratio measurest thes amount ofnewi investment that occurs, ona average, fore every dollara participating community: spendstos supportt the operation ofits! Main Streetp program, based on medial annual program costsr reportedt tot the National Trust Main Street Center byi its coordinating programs. This number is not cumulative andr ropresents investment: and organization! budgetsf from. January 1,2011 to December: 31, 2012. "The 2012 Califomia Reinvestment Ratiol is based onr medial annuaip program costs reportedt tot the California Main Street Alliance by2 24ofi its Designated Califomia Main Streetp programs. This numberi is noto cumulative and representsi investment: and organization! budgets from. January 1,2012t to December 31,2012.  displays.