2022 AIA Communities by Design Reimagining Petaluma SDAT - Report - Page 49
Petaluma DAT
Financing a Greener
Petaluma
A path to Implementing a
15-minute City
As a smaller city, Petaluma has enjoyed a range of
attributes lacking in many of its peer cities. Among
these are retaining and maintaining a vibrant historic
downtown; having a variety of industries, businesses and
entrepreneurs; a river flowing through the central city;
and access to mountains and world acclaimed vineyards
and wineries.
It also has challenges, including having such a high
cost of living that most of it employment base has
to commute in from elsewhere; a growing Latino
population that is more economically disadvantaged that
the larger majority population; infrastructure that isn’t
people friendly (such as wide streets that carry abundant
and rapid vehicle traffic); and insufficient shade from
increasingly hot sunny days.
Fortunately, city leadership, many community residents,
and businesses recognize that there’s a need to craft a
more sustainable, equitable, people-first city, one that
improves both the natural and physical environment in
addition to offering greater opportunities to house and
employ residents across the socio/economic spectrum.
As Dr. Martin Luther King observed, “The time is always
right to do the right thing”. For Petaluma, that time is
now.
The city is already making progress in doing the right
thing. It has prepared an abundant, robust data base
about current conditions with regards to the economy,
housing, and environment (as well as other factors.)
These documents, as well as various available white
papers, provide a reality check of where Petaluma is
today – which is well ahead of many cities, small and
large.
Doing the right thing by the environment (both natural
and built) and ensuring a more resilient economy for
current and future residents of all backgrounds involves:
• A City leadership committed to a long-term
improvement agenda (implementation of which is
phased);
• Community input into crafting a vision for the future
and maintaining support for the approved vision;
• Identifying and securing private, institutional,
and non-profit partners willing and able to
collaborate in both short and longer term built and
natural environment sustainable and equitable
improvements/opportunities;
• Having sufficient, capable public agency staff who
collaborate on agreed upon priorities and can
execute a variety of policies and programs;
• Identification of vacant and underutilized sites
(public and private) to accommodate desired
sustainable growth;
• Developing measurable, realistic markers for
achieving objectives, recognizing that unexpected
conditions (recessions, inflation, natural disasters)
are always possible and will require adjustments to
these markers;
• Embracing and being willing to use a robust
development funding tool kit and other creative land
use options to achieve envisioned outcomes.
Current progress & ingredients
for next steps
The city has already begun to position itself to achieve
a more sustainable and equitable future. A number of
46
environmental and economic justice/equity efforts have
been launched, as noted in the city’s draft general plan
and other documents. Leadership seems to be generally
on board to more aggressively pursue this type of
future with the community. Working toward a 15-minute
city is one of the tracks that leadership has expressed
interest in achieving. To advance this agenda, it will need
to better refine and prioritize its objectives and craft
policies as well as funded programs to help achieve this
desired future. Essential implementing partners in the
private, non-profit, other public agencies (county/state),
institutional sectors in addition to inclusive community
representation also need to be incorporated as key
actors as each of these sectors offer needed assets (e.g.,
land, funding, education).
Incrementally implementing a
15-minute city plan
The DAT team has produced a very ambitious set
of improvements and draft concepts that can help
guide Petaluma’s deliberations about solidifying clear
objectives and priorities to advance the realization o a
15-minute city.
Achieving a 15-minute city will also necessitate making
a range of significant public and private financial
investments in addition to regulatory changes along
with required community outreach (to assure that the
projects and programs being proposed are viable and
benefit the constituents they’re intended to serve).
This report section focuses largely on funding options
that Petaluma may not be currently employing, may not
be utilizing as extensively as it could, or that it may have
tried formerly without success. It also suggests exploring
alternative land use approaches and potential options
for denser multi-family affordable rentals and moderateincome home ownership, as well as start-up or micro
commercial spaces. The funding option list presented
is not exhaustive but offers a wide array of potential
resources.
In determining which if any of the alternative resources
could be useful in Petaluma’s pursuit of more
sustainable, equitable 15-minute city, it would helpful
to assess each option with a feasibility filter to assist in
determining whether it merits further pursuit. One such
filter is offered below. You may choose to use/modify
some of these elements or create a different set that
better meets the needs of leadership and the community.
Feasibility filter
• Legality. If the tool is currently prohibited by
state statute, then there is often a very large
administrative hurdle to be surmounted up front.
All the benefits of a funding mechanism are
negligible if the mechanism is not legal or cannot
become legal within a desired timeframe. Even for
mechanisms that are legal, the likelihood of legal
challenges adds to the cost of implementing them.
• Efficiency. The usefulness of a funding mechanism
is dependent on how much revenue it can generate
(capacity), when the revenue will be available for
use (timing), how easy it is to collect the revenue
(administrative ease), whether it will avoid large
fluctuations in collections (stability), and how many
types of projects can be funded by it (flexibility).
• Fairness. A simple definition of fairness in public
finance is that users should pay for benefits they
receive or costs they impose, unless they are in
groups that have been singled out for special
treatment (e.g., low income, elderly, physically and/
or socioeconomically disadvantaged). Fairness may
also be defined as requiring a nexus between fees
imposed on development and the expenditure of
those fees. Fairness is a judgement call.
• Political/Community Viability. The adoption of
funding tools requires an enactment by elected
officials, and the usage of a tool may require voter
approval for the tool and/or each project. Thus,
community input, public opinion and perception of
the funding mechanism matters for implementation.
Political viability is also a judgement call.
