| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00.03 | Unknown | on what's happening at the hospital. As you will recall on June 30th, 2010, there was a transfer of operational responsibility from the prior operator to the owner of the district. And so the district had in the preceding months assembled an executive team to assume operational control of the hospital at that time. And so that's what happened. And since that time, I'm pleased to report that Uh, from a quality standpoint, from a financial standpoint, a volume standpoint, a physician, Um, recruitment standpoint, the hospital is healthy and doing well. And I'll give you a couple of specific examples I'll point to. We've established the Prima Medical Foundation, have about 60 physicians that have joined that. Uh, five, six now, 1206 B clinics, and that's basically a medical clinic with doctors that's owned by the district as well. We've also created very close alignment with the oncologists in the community at the Marin Cancer Institute, which is the cancer program at Marin General. We passed a new charity care policy. the Marin General Hospital Foundation, which for a number of years leading up to the transfer not been raising the type of funds that it had in its heyday. In the first 18 months after transfer, we raised $9 million at the foundation, which represented a significant, very significant increase over really the prior five years. And we've obtained a PET CT, and we've created alliances both with Sonoma Valley Hospital and Palm Drive Hospital in Sevastopol. We've won a number of awards for a variety of our clinical programs, in particular heart and cancer care. And we're very proud of those also. Our stroke program, has won awards as well. And so that was my brief update on what's happening at the hospital. And I'm going to pause and just ask if you have any questions about anything happening at the hospital, having nothing to do with the new building project. |
| 00:02:22.22 | Unknown | What's going on with the lawsuit between Sutter and |
| 00:02:26.52 | Unknown | So that suit went before an arbitrator and we anticipate that We don't know exactly when we'll get the results, but we anticipate it will be in the June timeframe. And we're looking forward to having what I refer to as our unresolved issues with the prior operator resolved and behind us finally. and looking forward to having that resolved probably in the June timeframe. So jumping into the project, I'll just explain a little bit of background. I happened to be in Los Angeles the morning of the Northridge earthquake. And in that earthquake there were three hospitals in the San Fernando Valley that sustained that they had to be immediately evacuated and closed, meaning that all the patients that were in the hospital had to be moved into the parking lots. and the people in the neighborhoods who were injured to their local community hospital that the hospitals were closed. And the earthquake that had damaged the hospitals had likewise damaged the transportation system, so there was no way to get the injured. from the side of town where the hospitals were closed to the hospitals that were still open, the legislature said, hey, this is not a good thing. We need hospitals that can remain fully operational in the immediate aftermath of a major earthquake and the late Senator Al Alquist from San Jose authored SB 1953, that dramatically raise the seismic standards for hospitals in California. At that time, they had until, hospitals had until 2008 to comply. And being California, it's what we call an unfunded state mandate. It was estimated at that time it cost about $12 billion for the industry to comply. and it's now estimated to be somewhere between 10 and 20 times that number. So the deadline has been extended a number of times. It was extended again most recently this last year in 2011. and we now have, we think, the final extension to 2020 to comply with this new seismic standard. Thank you. And just to give you a sense of what the standard means in practical terms, I was at El Camino Hospital where we built a new El Camino Hospital that complies with the seismic standard right next to the old El Camino Hospital. The two hospitals are almost the exact same height. The old El Camino Hospital is held up by five-inch steel beams that are connected to cement footers that just sit on top of the ground that are two feet by two feet by two feet. The new El Camino Hospital is held up by 17-inch steel beams with 5-inch flanges or edges. connected to cement footers that are 8 feet by 9 feet by 13 feet, and then all of the cement footers are connected by 3 more feet of concrete and rebar. So there's a huge difference in the amount of steel and concrete, and also there's a difference in design. So the new hospitals that are being built are built to, as I say, remain fully operational in the immediate aftermath of a major earthquake. In the case of Marin General, that's especially important because Marin General is the only facility in Marin County that provides basic acute care services that you think of when you think of a hospital like cardiac surgery. neurosurgery, labor and delivery, and a whole host, you know, vascular surgery, a whole host of other of the most serious services that an acute care hospital and the county's trauma center has. There's another reason why we need to build a Numer and General Hospital, and that's because hospitals have a useful life typically of about 50 years, meaning that the way medicine is practiced changes so much in five decades that the old building design really isn't well suited to continue to provide state-of-the-art care for the next 50 years. So even if the state didn't impose this mandate on us, we'd still be coming up with a plan to build Enumer in general. And I'll give you one specific example to illustrate that point. Again, going back to El Camino, at the new El Camino Hospital, the operating room The smallest operating room in the new El Camino is literally twice the size of the largest operating room in the old El Camino. Why would that be? because in the 40s and 50s when these hospitals were designed and built, when a patient presented with, say, congestive heart failure, they died. Now we send you to the OR, you've got literally a dozen people operating technology and the people and the technology take up space, and you have this incredible open heart procedure and A couple weeks later you go home and you live another 10 or 20 or 30 years, and that was something that was unimaginable then. So in order to be able to provide state-of-the-art care in Marin for the next 50 years, it requires a new Marin General Hospital as well. So I've touched on most of these. Let me go to the next slide. I just wanted to give you an orientation, and I'm sorry that you all can't see this, but if you go to our website, you'll be able to spend time looking at these pictures. This is just an overview to orient you South Alisio in Greenbrae. This slide is to illustrate that even though we have 20 acres, the amount of buildable land is just this shaded area, because the rest of it is either already built on or it's hillside. So in this slide, it gives an artist's rendering of, really it's intended to show you the location of the new hospital rather than the final exterior design, but just to orient you, This building here in the middle is what we call the Central Wing. This is the building that was opened in 1952. And then on this side, it all looks like the same building, but there was an addition built a few years later that's called the East Wing. And it's the inpatient beds in the Central and East Wings here that have to be replaced according to the state seismic standards. This rectangular-shaped building, also exists on the campus. This is called the West Wing, having nothing to do with President Bartlett. And this opened in 1989 and does comply with the seismic standards. So these inpatient beds in this building will remain. These two squares here are the proposed new inpatient buildings. So it's two wings connected by elevator towers and a foyer here, an entrance here. And then they also will connect to the west wing so that the three wings that will comprise all of the new inpatient beds will be connected to each other. This building here does not currently exist, and this is a proposed outpatient facility More and more and more procedures are done on an outpatient basis, and every hospital that can has an outpatient building that relates directly to the inpatient facility. This building here does exist. This is our, what we call, behavioral health building. And then anyone who's been to the campus in the last 20 years knows that there's an parking shortage at their acute care hospital. And so this is a proposed parking structure for patients and visitors, and this is a proposed parking structure up on the hill for employees and physicians. And so that's really the site plan for complying with SB1953. I've got another view of this almost exact same thing. Again, this is the east wing and central wing. These are the beds that have to be replaced. This is the new inpatient bed proposal, the existing west wing, the outpatient facility here, and the two parking structures. This rendering shows the hillside parking structure in a lower place, but it's probably going to be where I showed you earlier in the previous slide. And then again, the behavioral health building. So the new hospital will not only meet the seismic standards, but we'll have a number of other enhancements that will represent a significant improvement over the existing hospital. I mentioned the OR size. The patient rooms themselves will all be private rooms and much larger. It's not because, hey, it's Marin, we all have to have our own room. All hospitals now are being built this way. It's because our sensibilities in the last 50 years about things like patient privacy, we have this law called HIPAA, infectious disease has changed and also the way that we think of how families support patients has changed. So if you want to be able to spend a lot of time supporting their loved one in the hospital, you need to make space for them. Likewise, there are changes in the way care is given. It used to be that to the greatest extent possible, if a patient, let's say a patient needed respiratory therapy. In the old days, what would happen is an orderly would come by and drag you onto a gurney, wheel you down the hallway into the elevator, to the floor where respiratory therapy is, and they'd wheel you down the hall and they'd park you outside respiratory therapy while you waited your turn, and you'd count the holes in the tile in the ceiling, and then you'd go have your respiratory therapy and then somebody would come and take you back. The tech comes to your room with their equipment to provide you with the therapy in your room. Well, if you're going to have techs and equipment and nurses and family and doctors and patients all in one room, you need a lot more space. So the new Marine General will facilitate that new way of providing care. And we believe that it'll be more efficient. We'll be able to significantly expand our emergency department and our ICU, which will dramatically reduce the wait times for patients coming to the emergency department. Anybody who's been there in the last several years knows that we have significant wait times. We're currently doing an expansion of the emergency department now because we can't wait six or seven or eight years to reduce the wait times. We're seeing about 35,000, 36,000 patients a year visiting our emergency department, and we just need more space. So we have sort of a midterm expansion underway that will hold us until the new hospital opens. |
| 00:12:18.89 | Vicki Nichols | THE FAMILY IS |
| 00:12:18.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:13:09.54 | Unknown | I have a couple slides on our sustainability. The project is registered as a LEED project. Each of the senior members of the design team are LEED certified. And without going into a lot of detail, the board is committed to building a hospital that meets LEED standards and is a sustainable building as far as hospitals go. There's some other slides related to that, but I think I should pause or stop because I'm almost out of time and I want to give time for questions and as I say, be respectful of your time. |
| 00:13:48.44 | Unknown | Rick. Are there any questions? |
| 00:13:53.10 | Unknown | I thought just a couple would come to mind here in your presentation. I won't ask you to comment on the... what happened in Washington today, whether healthcare is pushes costs on people who have it if you don't have it, but that's a different discussion. Obviously, the emergency room is the most costly thing to operate and what operators are trying to move away from, you know, like Sutter, obviously. The big issue for Marin general is how do you remain competitive? Other more private or non-private organizationally driven entities have tried to poach certain things like the outpatient care that are much more profitable away from hospitals. |
| 00:14:33.57 | Unknown | There might be. |
| 00:14:36.37 | Unknown | in general, what's the current philosophy and how's that changed from the past and the fallout of that is how are we going to pay for this much shorter, shorter, shorter, shorter, |
| 00:14:47.98 | Unknown | So in terms of strategy going forward, we view Marin General as a full service community hospital. |
| 00:14:48.01 | Unknown | Newfoundland. |
| 00:14:58.36 | Unknown | and that includes services that lose money, whether it's behavioral health or the trauma center or the emergency department. Labor and delivery loses money. In fact, I don't think there are any hospitals in California that generate net revenue from their inpatient business at all. to the extent there are hospitals generating that revenue, and that's about half the hospitals in the state are able to. It's as a result of their outpatient services. And I don't think Marin General is going to be any different. I think that Marin General is... In a very different situation than a place like El Camino, which had seven full-service hospitals in a 10-mile radius, Marin General is the only full-service hospital in Marin County. And so I think that that positions us to, as long as we keep faith with the community and provide high-quality services, including those that lose money, that will enjoy community support. And I think that given the payer mix in Marin County, if the hospital's well managed and there aren't dramatic intervening factors, which there could be, you mentioned what's happening in Washington, we should be able to operate the hospital in a fiscally responsible manner. In terms of how we pay for the project, We haven't done a plan of finance. We haven't sent it out to bid, but in ballpark terms, we anticipate this project costing approximately $500 million. And I believe the plan of finance will include going to the voters for a general obligation bond probably in the November 2013 timeframe, an order of magnitude probably somewhere between $300-$350 million for the And then there will be a fundraising component and the rest will be revenue bonds that the hospital will pay for from future operating revenue. Thank you. And in terms of the GEO bond, if it's between $300 and $350 million, how much does that translate into for individuals? As you know, general obligation bonds are not like parcel taxes. It's based on an assessed value of the property. So it may be somewhere between $20 and $30 per assessed value of $100,000. If the average single-family home in the district is at $600,000. average Again, the assessment, not the fair market value. and the average homeowner is going to pay somewhere between $120 and $180 a year for somewhere between 30 or 40 years to pay for the general obligation bond portion of the plan of finance. |
| 00:17:41.70 | Unknown | Great. Any other questions? Thank you very much. |
| 00:17:46.04 | Unknown | Well, thank you so much for your time. And again, if you want me to come back to talk about the impact of health care reform or give you an update on the project or anything else related to MIR in general, I'm more than happy to. Thank you. |
| 00:17:51.27 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:17:51.29 | Unknown | or give you a note. project. |
| 00:17:55.88 | Unknown | Thank you. All right, moving right along, this is the time for public communications for members of the public to speak to issues that are not on the agenda. Thank you. |
| 00:18:08.96 | Adam Politzer | You have one more special presentation. |
| 00:18:09.28 | Unknown | more special presentation. Oh, do I? Oh, wait a minute. I do, don't I? It's because my computer just went to sleep. Hang on. I'm doing it from memory. |
| 00:18:12.82 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:18:17.18 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:18:17.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:18:18.02 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:18:18.05 | Unknown | I'm good, I'm good. |
| 00:18:18.20 | Unknown | We... |
| 00:18:18.78 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 00:18:19.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:18:19.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:18:19.27 | Unknown | I'm good. I'm good. |
| 00:18:20.18 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. THE FAMILY IS |
| 00:18:21.11 | Unknown | Oh, yes. It's Jonathan. Jonathan Goldberg. Yeah. With gold. The gold, I think. |
| 00:18:21.12 | Unknown | Oh, yeah. |
| 00:18:28.48 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. I'll be brief. I did put together a brief PowerPoint on this. Not that it's lengthy, but it's there if we want to go to it. I issued a press release earlier today that members of the council have already received. I have copies here if anybody is interested. But one of the things we wanted to do tonight was take advantage of the opportunity to announce that |
| 00:18:40.70 | Unknown | There. |
| 00:18:59.84 | Jonathon Goldman | you our public safety facilities Our architect was notified on the 14th were awarded gold certification in the LEED process. |
| 00:19:09.08 | Unknown | application. |
| 00:19:12.12 | Jonathon Goldman | Our public safety facilities, the fire station number one at 333 Johnson. and the police station at 29 Caledonia. were certified at the gold level by the Washington, DC-based US Green Building Council. for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, which is what LEAD stands for. Eric Glass, the project architect, was informed of the award March 14th and congratulated the city and the project delivery team. Mr. Glass expressed his pride at being a part of this important civic project and he was proud to have helped the city achieve this recognition. City manager, in replying to to Eric's email thanked him for his diligence in following through in the certification process which was actually initiated by the city in 2007 after glass architects joined the project team. Adams quote, notice of the gold level achievement was excellent news for the supporters of Yes on S and the taxpayers of Sausalito. In doing a little research for this press release, because in my mind this is a significant achievement, I went back through council minutes trying to figure out how the decision was made and when the decision was made to pursue LEED certification in general. And it was actually then-Mayor Kelly, with backing from former Vice Mayor Amy Belzer, whose celebration of her life was held yesterday, to fund the design and documentation efforts necessary to achieve LEED Silver certification beginning in February of 2007. At that time, the council unanimously supported the design of the project with that objective and subsequently the project was designed, approved by Um, all of the necessary discretionary approval agencies here and as far as I can tell everywhere else in Marin County. permitted and constructed by Alton Construction with the city's project management team, again including Mayor Kelly, City Manager Adam Pulitzer, and yours truly to some extent for the relatively short time I was here after that project started, but also bolstered by construction management services of Swinnerton Management and Consulting in one part in the person of Lauren Umbertis who has since joined us as a city employee. Both buildings opened and entered service following a well-attended public ceremony held September 11, 2010. That was hosted by a local resident, Dana King, who is a recently recognized news anchor for San Francisco CBS affiliate, KPIX Channel 5. The project, which was funded by general obligation bonds approved by the people of Sausalito in 2006, was successfully delivered with a surplus of more than $2 million. surplus funds were returned to the voters at the direction of City Council in September 2011 by lowering Sausalito property taxes. I wasn't able to get the plaques and certificates together in time to unveil those this evening. I wanted to make the announcement, but we will be organizing some kind of ceremony for unveiling of the plaques as soon as we can put that together. |
| 00:23:02.11 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:23:02.14 | Unknown | Thank you, Jonathan. |
| 00:23:04.22 | Jonathon Goldman | You're welcome. Thank you. |
| 00:23:04.86 | Unknown | Does anybody on the council have any questions? |
| 00:23:09.03 | Unknown | I've got a comment. So, correct the record. because Once a blue moon, I'm going to pat myself on the back. |
| 00:23:16.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:23:17.43 | Unknown | This was on the board of E, one of the things we might cut when we went through our whatever that process was. Value engineering. Value engineering. |
| 00:23:22.56 | Unknown | Value engineering. |
| 00:23:24.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:23:24.25 | Unknown | and I'm sorry. |
| 00:23:24.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:23:25.14 | Unknown | And I made my promise that it wouldn't get cut. |
| 00:23:26.83 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 00:23:28.15 | Unknown | you So certainly, Amy certainly and Mike pushed it through the council, but This is one thing I'm glad we didn't reassess. We certainly reassessed the cost of it, because it was unknown at that time how much it was going to cost to be. And we weren't even shooting for this level. We were just shooting to be certified LEED, which is green, versus silver or gold. And Lauren certainly helped us get to that gold level through his diligence and suggestions and creativity. And that's what he gets a pat on the back as well. |
| 00:23:44.86 | Unknown | Mr. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:24:00.57 | Unknown | As does Alton and Jonathan and everybody who daily found ways to make it lead gold. |
| 00:24:04.75 | Unknown | and all the beauty. |
| 00:24:08.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:24:08.21 | Unknown | it. |
| 00:24:08.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:24:08.35 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:24:08.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:24:08.63 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:24:08.66 | Unknown | That was great. It's a good thing for our community. |
| 00:24:10.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:24:12.04 | Unknown | It's a good thing for the community to do this, and it sets the standard for Sausalito, and I'm glad we did this without blowing the budget. |
| 00:24:19.79 | Unknown | Yep. Yep. Great. Thank you, Jonathan. |
| 00:24:23.68 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you, Jonathan. You're welcome. Thank you. |
| 00:24:25.76 | Unknown | Okay. All right. Now we are going to move to public comment. And this is the time for members of the public to address the Council on matters that are not on the agenda. And I have a card for Andy Rowling. |
| 00:24:48.51 | Unknown | I'm just here to talk about Phil's coffee for a brief moment. I'm not against coffee. In fact, I love coffee. and I like fills. Um. But in that area of Sausalito, I'm under the impression that there can't be standardized businesses. There can't be franchises. Phil's is that. Phil's claims are going to change the sign, they're going to do this and that, but Phil will still offer an array of standardized services. This somehow happened and it's an oversight for that area. And now I think it's set a presence. Um, little worried that someone might decide to bring, you know, Hooters to Sausalito and change the name to Knockers. |
| 00:25:35.32 | Mike Langford | And James the name, do not. |
| 00:25:37.97 | Unknown | Yeah. And, um, Why am I worried about this? Well, I'm working on a project here in Sausalito that I would like to start. I've been spending a while on it, about 18 months. And I think I'm getting close. In its current state, it's a blight on the city. Um, It needs to be purchased by someone that would work with the city and clean this area up. My real concern is that in doing my diligence for 18 months, and this is not a cheap project. budgeting $10 to $12 million to fix this area. Um... Unfortunately, I see the community development department sometimes as a moving target. And it's a concern. And this is a prime example. business and this project should have gone to the planning commission. The Planning Commission would have identified. a lot of areas here that are a mistake. You can't have the, here's Phil's website. They have all their Phil's and they say, coming soon, Sausalito Phil's. So what's done is done, so it's done. But I would like the city to look a little more closely at how the zoning codes are interpreted. Honestly, the project I want to do, my biggest fear is the community development department. I think that the way it swings, it will cost my project a million dollars of unnecessary waste. And I have done my diligence for 18 months, and I believe what I've found. So this is just, I'm just bringing you a perfect example of how this slipped through the cracks. It should have gone to the planning commission. And I believe that the decisions that were made even circumvented the authority of the City Council. And I think that's unacceptable. |
| 00:27:18.83 | Unknown | this is a great thing. |
| 00:27:32.95 | Unknown | Thank you, Andy. The matters that are on the public communication, we cannot comment on them because they're not on the agenda, but we hear what you say. Thank you. |
| 00:27:44.82 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:27:45.73 | Unknown | that though could we ask the city manager to come back at some point with some commentary on that particular project responding to those comments. |
| 00:27:45.78 | Unknown | No. |
| 00:27:53.66 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, the community development. |
| 00:27:54.62 | Unknown | I'll do it right now, but it would be great to come back and inform us. I understand. |
| 00:27:57.64 | Adam Politzer | I understand, but the Community Development Director has sent out a correspondence to the Council on this particular item, and we'd be happy to share that information at a later date. Public. Thank you. |
| 00:28:13.45 | Unknown | All right. Thank you. Anyone else from the public care to comment on any items that are not on the agenda? All right, seeing none, we'll move on. And we had... We don't have any action minutes from the previous meeting. Okay, so now we're at the consent calendar. There are two items on the consent calendar this evening. Consent calendar is items that are thought to be routine and not necessary to bring fully before the council. Does anyone care to make a motion on the consent calendar? |
| 00:28:50.26 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor, I would like to pull an item regarding the Senate Bill 973 exemption from CEQA. |
| 00:28:50.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:29:04.25 | Unknown | for discussion. |
| 00:29:06.46 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:29:07.52 | Unknown | Specifically, or perhaps continue to another staff, I mean, another council session. Specifically, I would have liked to see both sides of the argument regarding SB 973. |
| 00:29:26.35 | Unknown | Okay, why don't we move it to, for tonight, to decide what to do with it, we'll move it to... I guess it's a public hearing. |
| 00:29:35.97 | Adam Politzer | of this. I'll just go ahead and move it to the next meeting of April 3rd. |
| 00:29:41.96 | Unknown | Excellent. We'll move it to April 3rd. All right. So that leaves one item on there. Do we have a motion? I'm... |
| 00:29:49.42 | Unknown | I move. Go ahead. I move we accept item 4A, the public consent calendar approve it. |
| 00:29:54.30 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:29:58.86 | Unknown | Um, |
| 00:30:02.52 | Unknown | I'm seconded. |
| 00:30:03.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:30:04.51 | Unknown | All right, move and seconded. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? None. |
| 00:30:06.94 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:30:09.98 | Unknown | All right, there are no public hearings this evening, so we'll move now to item 6, which is business items, and 6A is receive update on the status of Harrison Park. Parks and Rec Director Mike Langford. |
| 00:30:28.91 | Mike Langford | Well, good evening, Council. Mr. Mayor, it's nice to be up here again. I wanted to give you a little bit of an update on Harrison Park and also primarily focus on the potential funding to get this project moving. Brief history, in 1963, the land was donated to the city to be used as a park. In the early 1970s, a playground was actually developed on the park with various play equipment including a Seesaw, a rocking horse, a slide, some swings, all kinds of different equipment. I've heard different stories, but there was a lot of stuff packed into that little park. In the 1980s, the equipment was removed because it was worn out, it was no longer safe, it didn't even meet the codes at that time. Since that time, the park has basically sat as a vacant lot. It's been used as a dog park. It's been used, people hang out there from the, after they go to church across the street, but really it's not being utilized as a park at all. In 2002, Then Parks and Recreation Director Adam Pulitzer approached the Lions Club and said, Your plaque is on this park, what are you going to do about it? So since that time, the Lions Club along with architect Don Olson have been working on various plans for the park. They've been to the Planning Commission multiple times. You know, City Engineer Taj Dechout came to the Planning Commission at one time. And finally, In 2010, the plans were approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission And then on December 15, 2010, final plans were approved by the Planning Commission. you should have a copy of those plans in your packet there. The total estimates, again, this is a rough estimate, not having gone through everything, but working with Lauren Umbertas from the Department of Public Works, we estimate, and also working with architect Don Olson, who's still working with the program, we estimate that the total project will cost $128,225. So now's the fun part. How do we get that money in today's economy? Well, We're very fortunate that the city council and Fiscal year 2010-2011 put $15,000 aside for the park project. In addition, in the 2011-2012 budget, the Council put aside $25,000. In addition to those funds, way back in 2009-2010, the Council appropriated $76,400 for parks capital planning. I want to make sure to note that all these funds have carried over from year to year so they are still available, still for the budget. In addition to that, the council committed $15,000 in grant funds. These grants were actually set to expire in June 2011, but the state extended the deadline to 2015. |
| 00:33:30.96 | Mike Langford | As far as the grant funds go, the city currently has $19,970 in unallocated Roberti Zeberg Harris grants. In addition, we have $28,317,000 in the 2002 per capita grants. I'm proposing that those funds, which again are unappropriated so far, be committed to Harrison Park. In addition, working with Alliance Club, We... have estimated that we can raise a minimum of $20,000. So again, In addition to, yes, so we've got the $15,000 from 2011, the $25 from 2012. I'd like to put the $19,970 from Robert Z. Burke Harris. as the 28317 from the per capita, and then we expect donations of a minimum of $20,000. What that does is that leaves us with an approximately $20,000 funding gap, and what I'm proposing to do is take that from the 2009-2010 Parks Capital Planning. So that would still leave us $56,400 in parks capital planning. Now if bids come in under or we get additional funds in donations, then we would not utilize all of that $20,000 Parks Capital planning. So what I'm asking the council for, this evening is to use those funds as stated in the staff report and as I just explained there to allocate those funds towards the park and as well as empower the city manager his designee to execute in the name of the city of Sausalito all necessary contracts and agreements and amendments to implement and carry out the improvements to Harrison Park. Basically I want to break ground this spring and get this thing done. |
| 00:35:26.52 | Unknown | Thank you. Yes, yes. All right, any questions? Mike? |
| 00:35:34.80 | Unknown | Just one. Mike, are we still planning to rename that park to Mary Ann Sears Park or after her? |
| 00:35:43.22 | Mike Langford | That will be something that comes back to you for formal approval, but my plan was to bring that to you as we get ready to open the new park. I don't think it's very appropriate to call it Mary Ann Sears Park in its present condition. |
| 00:35:53.32 | Unknown | THANK YOU. |
| 00:35:56.77 | Unknown | No, it looks terrible. I agree. Okay, thank you. |
| 00:36:01.04 | Unknown | Any other questions? Yeah, I have a question for Mike or Charlie. So when you look through the CIP numbers in the different years, they are all over the place for this particular park. So which is the actual correct one? Because if you look at the... As far as the carry forwards, Charlie, which one is correct of the different versions of the CIP? Because one has 55,000 being carried forward, one has 95,000, and one has 15. |
| 00:36:30.51 | Mike Langford | which year you're looking at? |
| 00:36:32.51 | Unknown | I am looking at, if you look at the attachments that we have, there's a difference between A2, A3, A4, they're showing all different numbers as far as the CIP. So A3 shows Harrison Park, if you carry it over to the five-year budget for carry forward at the 2010-11, then at 11-12 in the CIP, it has $95,000 carry forward. If you look at the 2011 one, it has $1,000, $55,000, which 40 of that is contributions. And then the other one has a detachment, four has just the $15,000. So between three... |
| 00:37:30.03 | Jonathon Goldman | I have a detailed accounting, Councilmember Leon, from each year and how it rolled forward and I can email that to the Council following this meeting unless you would need me to go |
| 00:37:42.92 | Unknown | Yeah, I mean, my concern about taking, and this isn't, I want this project to go through, about taking money out of the planning carry forward is that we don't have to take the money out of the planning carry forward and use it for the other parks that we're doing planning for. Then that would be preferable than if we already have it in the coffee jar somewhere. |
| 00:38:02.93 | Jonathon Goldman | In order to balance the project, part of it has to come from the planning project. |
| 00:38:09.61 | Unknown | Well, that's my point. So we need to know what's sitting in the carry forward to know how much we need to borrow out of that other fund. So if you look at these three different attachments, and I'm sorry I didn't call you earlier, but I just noticed this in scanning through them. |
| 00:38:10.69 | Jonathon Goldman | So, |
| 00:38:26.52 | Unknown | It's somewhat unclear. So it's not, I think it's just different versions of the same document in different years, and I'm not sure which one is the |
| 00:38:34.72 | Jonathon Goldman | If the council would like to put this on hold until after the next agenda item, I can go to my office, do that accounting, and then come back. |
| 00:38:41.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:38:41.39 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:38:41.41 | Unknown | Yes, sure. You can just do that. |
| 00:38:43.72 | Jonathon Goldman | THE END OF |
| 00:38:43.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:38:43.82 | Unknown | Well, yeah, I mean, I just looked. In 2012, it was $25,000. 2011 was $15,000. 2010 had two columns, and it's 15 plus 15. And then you've got the $19,900 from the Roberti-Zyberg-Harris grant. |
| 00:38:43.90 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 00:38:43.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:38:43.97 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 00:38:44.11 | Unknown | the |
| 00:39:04.98 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:39:05.12 | Jonathon Goldman | I'll do a real brief presentation. I'll put it up on the slide and I'll have it ready in about five minutes. Yeah, it's just those three attachments have different figures. |
| 00:39:06.08 | Unknown | A real brief presentation I'll put Yeah, it's just those three. |
| 00:39:12.03 | Unknown | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 00:39:13.33 | Unknown | Great. |
| 00:39:13.96 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 00:39:13.97 | Unknown | I think it's all. |
| 00:39:14.48 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. Thank you. So if you just want to continue this until at the end of the pension presentation, I'll come back. Let's go ahead. |
| 00:39:20.99 | Unknown | Let's go ahead and take public comment and get it all wrapped up so you can come back with the numbers and then we can. Thank you. |
| 00:39:26.41 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm going to do that now. Yeah, go ahead. |
| 00:39:26.95 | Unknown | Yeah, go ahead. Yeah. or if you're not. Because he's next. Yeah, he has to be here for a next time. So, real quick. All right. Any other questions? Yeah, quick questions. |
| 00:39:30.11 | Jonathon Goldman | He's next. Yeah, he has to be here for the next day. So, come on. |
| 00:39:37.21 | Unknown | Mike, quick question. As far as the, are we close, you know, we have Don Olsen's plan, but as far as construction documents and things like that, is that part of the, $128,000 |
| 00:39:50.22 | Mike Langford | Yes. |
| 00:39:51.30 | Unknown | but he hasn't done those already. |
| 00:39:52.82 | Mike Langford | He's working on them right now. |
| 00:39:54.43 | Unknown | OK. He's working on them? Yes. |
| 00:39:57.87 | Mike Langford | Yeah, we haven't... We haven't stopped working. We keep going on this. I've had multiple meetings with Don Olson, as well as Steve Buckley from the Lions Club to just keep this project moving forward and doing what we can and then coming to you as we need to for these next steps. |
| 00:40:16.09 | Unknown | Okay. Great. And there's no all the public out, all that stuff's done. We don't have any neighbor next door who- We did extensive hours. |
| 00:40:24.02 | Mike Langford | The neighbor next door. We did extensive outreach, had multiple meetings with the neighbor. He's done. He's excited to get this thing done. He wants to get it done. |
| 00:40:27.70 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:40:29.07 | Unknown | that we have. |
| 00:40:29.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:40:32.31 | Mike Langford | Thank you. |
| 00:40:32.36 | Unknown | Good. |
| 00:40:32.41 | Mike Langford | Good. |
| 00:40:33.07 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:40:33.27 | Unknown | Excellent. Any other questions? |
| 00:40:35.63 | Unknown | Oh, one. How do you plan to raise funds, get more donations? |
| 00:40:44.80 | Mike Langford | Well, we actually already have some commitments from local residents. The Sears family has made a very generous commitment already. And again, working with the Lions Club, they are going to be the lead fundraisers in the project. The guys from the Lions Club know people in the community and they have identified some community residents that they feel that they can ask for donations and they will be able |
| 00:41:12.35 | Unknown | Great, thank you. |
| 00:41:13.70 | Mike Langford | So like I said, 20,000 I feel is a conservative figure, but I'd rather err on the conservative than thinking that we're going to get all kinds of donations rolling in. |
| 00:41:22.93 | Adam Politzer | is rolling in. Thank you. Sure. If I can add, because Mike and I have had some conversations on this. I think the other thing that the City and the Lions Club are planning is you can buy the swing, you can buy the teeter-totter, you can buy the bench, you know, so also the opportunity for people to go in there and |
| 00:41:35.56 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:41:43.98 | Adam Politzer | and make a donation towards one of the amenities at the park. So I think one part of it is just the door-to-door requests for donations, but then also the ability to do somewhat of an open house and say, this is what the park is going to look like, and with your help, you can make this happen. |
| 00:42:07.53 | Unknown | or, I'm sorry. Sure. Are any of these donations contingent on renaming the park |
| 00:42:14.08 | Mike Langford | No. |
| 00:42:14.96 | Unknown | because I would hate to see that. I don't even know if I want to rename the park or if it's appropriate, but that would not be buying a park is not the way to go. |
| 00:42:25.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:42:25.20 | Unknown | Okay, any other questions? Seeing none, I'll open the public comment. Does anybody from the public care to comment on this matter? See? Terrence, you have to come up to the microphone. |
| 00:42:39.16 | Unknown | You have to come up. microphone. |
| 00:42:47.46 | Terran Sprela | My name is Terran Sprela. I would like to make a pledge of $10,000 towards the park. |
| 00:42:52.51 | Unknown | Wow, all right. |
| 00:42:53.55 | Terran Sprela | Right. |
| 00:42:54.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:42:54.97 | Terran Sprela | Thank you. |
| 00:42:55.12 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Wow. |
| 00:42:56.78 | Unknown | That's wonderful. |
| 00:43:01.79 | Unknown | Would you like to make another comment? |
| 00:43:03.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:43:03.20 | Unknown | Thank you. Bye. |
| 00:43:03.39 | Unknown | What other projects do we have? Thank you, Terrence, very much. |
| 00:43:03.59 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:43:06.12 | Unknown | Thank you, Terrence, very much. I need some work on my garden now. |
| 00:43:08.67 | Unknown | Thank you. . That's terrific. That's terrific. All right. Seeing none, then we'll put this on Oh, here we go. Yeah. |
| 00:43:26.70 | Unknown | I was just thinking about this park a number of years ago. I wrote a history of all the parks in town and did a monograph on it, and I planned to publish a book. I interviewed him along with it. And it never got published, but I have in my head I remember studying Harrison Park. And I remember meeting the man who donated the land. and was his name John? you John Davis Is he still around? If he is, I would think it would be appropriate and proper to discuss with him the naming of the park. He was a beautiful man. Thank you. |
| 00:44:14.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:44:14.94 | Unknown | Yes. you |
| 00:44:18.26 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:44:19.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:44:21.02 | Unknown | Thank you. All right, any other comments? All right, we'll bring it back up here. Hmm. Let's see, we have... |
| 00:44:33.01 | Unknown | We had to wait for your... |
| 00:44:34.20 | Unknown | We had to wait for Charlie, yeah. As well. |
| 00:44:35.82 | Unknown | Thank you. before we continue this. |
| 00:44:37.59 | Unknown | Okay, we can continue this, but I think Charlie's on the next one, isn't he? So we're kind of in a double body. Why don't we take a five-minute recess until Charlie gets back. |
| 00:44:42.35 | Unknown | Why don't we take a five minute |
| 00:44:49.16 | Unknown | I'll take a five minute break. |
| 00:44:54.36 | Unknown | You want to go in prime time to the city manager report? |
| 00:44:54.75 | Unknown | prime time to the city manager report there's the arts commission discussion yeah there's no staff |
| 00:44:58.34 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:45:03.12 | Unknown | See you again. |
| 00:45:03.64 | Unknown | Check it in. |
| 00:45:04.10 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:45:04.62 | Unknown | Amen. |
| 00:45:04.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:45:05.13 | Unknown | Is there any manager report? Okay, let's go ahead. Yeah, we can take it out of order. |
| 00:45:05.30 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:45:09.24 | Unknown | Here we go. |
| 00:45:14.19 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 00:45:14.22 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:45:14.31 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 00:45:14.70 | Unknown | Amen. |
| 00:45:15.03 | Adam Politzer | Yes. |
| 00:45:15.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:45:16.23 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. Thank you. you |
| 00:45:17.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:45:17.33 | Adam Politzer | I'm sure there's something about that. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and council members. Just say, you know, we do have a brief city manager's report, but an important one. The, yesterday at the Bay Model, we held the celebration of Amy Belzer's life. Very well attended event. I know that we had roughly 270 chairs laid out and, again, we had standing room only. |
| 00:45:17.38 | Unknown | I'm sure there's something about that. Thank you, Mr. Mayor and council members. |
| 00:45:46.07 | Adam Politzer | and 19 different folks scheduled to speak at the event, from Jared Huffman's office, Lynn Woosley's office, all the way down to members of our Women's Club and Sister City program and a variety of people in between. One of the things that I heard over and over during the reception afterwards, people saying, I didn't know that she was involved in that. I didn't know that she was a member of that. Or I couldn't, I can't believe how much time she spent on things that were not exclusively related to Sausalito or exclusively related to the county. or exclusively to the state because when she participated, I would say that she was all in. at whatever level it was. So it was nice. to see so many different folks from Marin County and some folks from further places. coming and listening and participating in the celebration and I think for many it brought real closure. Working with the Belser family that were all in Michigan or mostly in Michigan and other parts of that neck of the woods, we had to delay the celebration for them to make arrangements and then come back because they obviously were out here when Amy actually passed and then went back home. So working with them over the phone and on emails, I think that Tom actually pulled, gave us the opportunity to pull a really nice event together and I know the family was very, very appreciative as were, I think, the members of our community. I do want to give some recognition to a few folks that helped behind the scenes. And Debbie Pegliero obviously did a lot of work in terms of making sure that things were set up, working with Chris Gallagher at the Bay Model, putting the program together, and the list is endless with the flowers to the caterers and what have you. Mike Langford, who stepped out of the room, was another person that, gave up a lot of his personal time to help make arrangements to pick things up from the spinnaker. to work with staff. to get pictures and put the photo Thank you. display together. Demir, who has done this for us from the Park and Rec Department, does this for us for our employee celebration. The photo slideshow worked with Mike and others to put the slideshow in memory of Amy, and I think that it was very well done. We had a terrific singer from the Performing Stars who was an alumni 10 years with the Performing Stars that I think just gave a very beautiful tribute to Amy and just a very incredible, powerful voice. And it was nice to have that from someone that was locally homegrown in a program that was so important to Amy be celebrated at the event. Chris Gallher, by giving us the facility on a day that it's traditionally closed and making all of her tables and chairs available to us, Jeff Shirash and Yoshitome had donated the wine, and we thought it was important that everyone have a glass of Chardonnay because that was Amy's drink and we thought that that was important in terms of a toast at the end. Kent Basso and the Public Works Department again coming there early in the day setting up and then returning again this morning to have the Bay Model return back to its normal position of serving as the model. So, you know, very terrific team effort and then all 19 folks that participated and kept their comments precise and effective and inclusive of the impact that Amy made on Sausalito and the county and the state. |
| 00:49:26.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:50:09.70 | Adam Politzer | They all did a very nice job of keeping our celebration to roughly about an hour and 25 minutes of material. So I am happy that that has been executed and celebrated and I think that we all can feel good about it. recognizing the effects that Amy has had on our community. Similar to when other folks have passed away, it does give us a moment to think about the contribution that Amy has given to our community, 17 years on the city council, many years on the planning commission, trees and views committee, and the parks and recreation commission. So, you know, several decades of time volunteering for our community and so there there is some thought of what could be named in her honor or in her memory so you know there's a handful of ideas that have already circulated around but just give the council some pause to think about that and if you have any |
| 00:51:01.04 | Unknown | Uh, |
| 00:51:25.39 | Adam Politzer | suggestions or recommendations and we'll let that come from the community, but we look forward to recognizing Amy and her commitment to our community in the near future. Moving on to tomorrow night, there is a MCCMC dinner in Rill Valley. They are having the discussion of ABAG and representatives there to present to the county and its mayors and council members. And they received, if you would have all received in today's email, the questions that were posed from council members, some of those may have been from you. They didn't identify who the questions came from, but it's a very long a very long list. I don't think it's going to be possible that all those questions are answered tomorrow night. but I think that the presenter will have a good idea and be able to probably combine some of those and be able to respond. So, you know, this obviously is getting a lot of press in the paper. A lot of cities are working on their housing element and reacting to the new numbers. So tomorrow will be a good opportunity to hear and discuss and hopefully walk away with some information that's useful. as we go forward in this discussion. Jeremy Graves, I think, has put out an email to the council saying that we'll be coming back to the council with an update and a presentation in response to our new numbers and try to give some... background on why and then what our options are And we'll probably ask the Metropolitan Group, the M Group, and help with that presentation so that you have people with experience here that can also help facilitate those questions. So we hope to have... that come to a meeting in the very near future once we can secure the report and the information. |
| 00:53:34.95 | Unknown | Mayor Kelly. May I ask the city manager a question? related to the ABEC comment. Is it true that the new RENA number has been, is as high as 600 for Sausalito? |
| 00:53:49.91 | Adam Politzer | The number has been all over the place in the report that was in the email that came out today. There is a number and I forget the language that they use, but preferred maybe, and that has a 600 number, the number that has been um, some combination of four strategies is a number of 250 I believe is the number that is in that column but my understanding is that number is less but I think there's a lot of speculation around that right now and I think again that's why The community development director has reached out to the state and working with the M group to bring back a report and an update to the council. |
| 00:54:32.89 | Unknown | And as a follow-up, Mr. Mayor, I have a follow-up question, Adam. So do we have someone at the table at the ABAG right now? |
| 00:54:35.15 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:54:44.18 | Unknown | Does the city... |
| 00:54:46.51 | Adam Politzer | The city has a member of, I can't tell you who it is, but the council has a voice at the table, and the council has that representative. As you are aware, Susan Adams is our county representative that also represents our interests. |
| 00:54:53.98 | Unknown | I thought it was. |
| 00:54:54.82 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:54:54.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:54:54.98 | Unknown | the council. |
| 00:55:08.19 | Unknown | All right. Sausalito specifically though, I thought the council had an ABAG liaison. I thought it was Mayor Kelly. Is that true? No? No? Okay. So do we have any other representation from Sausalito? |
| 00:55:19.85 | Adam Politzer | Okay. |
| 00:55:25.03 | Adam Politzer | I'm not aware, but I can have Jeremy Graves when we come back with our update. |
| 00:55:25.99 | Unknown | Okay, thank you. OK, thanks. |
| 00:55:30.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:55:30.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:55:30.70 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:55:30.72 | Unknown | date. |
| 00:55:31.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:55:31.17 | Unknown | Okay, just curious. |
| 00:55:31.44 | Unknown | Okay, just curious. |
| 00:55:32.17 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:55:32.25 | Unknown | I do have representatives at ABAE. I could be wrong. |
| 00:55:36.22 | Unknown | It was just a question. Thanks. |
| 00:55:39.00 | Adam Politzer | So tomorrow night I think it's valuable and as I mentioned before and I think it's highlighted In Amy's celebration yesterday, Participation at the county level is very important and then also in the north Bay Division of the League of California Cities, which were a member of the North Bay Division, and so it's important for us to attend those meetings as well when possible. So as we go forward here in the calendar year, we'll be looking at the priority calendar coming up here in the end of April. and that process will also be tied into the budget and our strategic goals as we look forward. And so that will be really important that we recognize what was reported to us from our administrative services director that mid-year budget review that showed that we were at a negative $65,000 to end this year's budget. So as we go forward, we're not starting the year off with a surplus like we have done in the past. And so some of these projects that can be considered discretionary, we're going to have to think hard and long about how we fund them and then prioritize them in that fashion. As you all are aware, some of these projects are not our mandated projects, things that we cannot not do, but they don't come with the funding associated with it. So it draws on your own resources to do just that. So the department heads have been meeting with the various boards and commissions and asking them for their priorities and so I know that HLB in the Planning Commission, in the VAC, and the Park and Rec Commission and the Sustainability Commission have all been asked, and some of them have already provided their priority list, so those will be attached to the staff report. Some of those will be included, and some of those will just be for your information, and if you so choose, you'll be able to put them onto the calendar, or they'll just be as information, and it doesn't mean that they won't ever be worked on. The committees can choose to continue to work on some of those items without staff support and let them mature. The food scraps program is a good example of that where it worked its way up. through the process and then eventually got to the staff level and eventually got to the council and the council supported it at its last meeting as you may recall. So some heavy lifting coming over the next three or four months and I look forward to working with the council and the community in the budgeting process. That concludes my report. Happy to answer any specific questions that you may have. |
| 00:58:37.03 | Unknown | Any questions? All right, any public comment on the city manager report? Seeing none, we'll go back to Item 6A. |
| 00:58:57.62 | Unknown | He wants a real paper agenda. Thank you. |
| 00:59:05.65 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:59:11.02 | Unknown | I don't know if there's no mistake. |
| 00:59:13.77 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you for giving me time to go back to my office and prepare this. grant. So in fiscal year 11, 15,000 was budgeted from the CIP fund, 15,000 from the grant fund, and 40,000 expected in donations for a total project cost of $70,000. Then in fiscal year 12, another 25,000 was appropriated from the CIP fund, zero from grants, and then in order to bring the project in, $40,000 was expected more from donations. So the total project then, $40,000 from the CIP fund, $15,000 from grant fund, and $80,000 from donations. So in order to balance the project, it was recommended that we take $20,000 from the park's planning appropriation of $76,400, which would still leave $56,400 carried forward in that capital project. And there was comment about getting more from grants. |
| 01:00:17.39 | Unknown | Well, there's $28,000 or something, or $19,000 from one grant, which has a name attached to it, right? |
| 01:00:26.64 | Mike Langford | What I'm proposing is basically taking the $40,000 from CIP that has currently been budgeted and instead of $15,000 from grants, having the two grants come together, basically all the funds that we have, you currently remaining in our grant what we're eligible for. So $19,900 from Roberti Zeberg-Harris, $28,317 from the 2002 Parks Capita. So using all of our grant funds, expending them, we do have a deadline of 2015 that we need to use those for. And then using up to $20,000 of the Parks Planning Grant excuse me, of the funds that are dedicated and then collecting $20,000 in the parks planning grant, excuse me, of the funds that are dedicated and then collecting $20,000 in donations. But as we've seen already today, I think we're going to be able to go over that in donations so we won't have to use as much of the park planning funds as we initially thought. Some of the numbers that you may have been looking at, I was confused as well looking at this, and it has to do with when we do the budget, we put what the city is going to expend out of the CIP, what we're going to expend out of grant funds, so it gives you what are we going to expect back from the grant funds, and then what do we expect the donations to be. So when you're looking at the FY2011, that totals up to $70,000. When you look at the FY 2012 budget, it says carry over $70,000. You can see where the $70,000 came from. |
| 01:02:00.09 | Unknown | Where is the 70? |
| 01:02:03.01 | Mike Langford | 15 from the CIP, 15 from a grant, and 40,000 from donations. Totals of 70 that was carried over. |
| 01:02:10.66 | Unknown | And is the grant the Lions Club grant money or it's a separate grant? |
| 01:02:13.95 | Mike Langford | No, the $15,000 back in the... |
| 01:02:16.41 | Unknown | Back in the 40s. |
| 01:02:17.45 | Mike Langford | who No, the 15,000 of the grant was a state grant, so what I'm proposing to do is utilize the and not 15,000 but use the 19,900 from Robert E. Z. Rick Harris as well as the 28,300 from the 2000 Park Capital. Basically, expending the remaining of our grant funds. |
| 01:02:32.32 | Unknown | Right. Thank you. So sitting in the proverbial coffee can, as Charlie likes to call it, is 40 of previously allocated CIP funds. Yes. $15,000 of the, hold on, of a grant, whatever grant that was. $15,000 commitment from the Lions Club previously, right? Because they said they were going to give you that a long time. |
| 01:02:56.15 | Mike Langford | There was no, there was, they had talked about that, but none of those, the numbers from the Lions Club are included in these figures. Those would be considered donations. Some of the figures. |
| 01:02:57.65 | Unknown | I mean, |
| 01:03:04.15 | Unknown | But I mean, those, those, But they've committed to give $15,000 in donations at some point, or they have not committed to that? |
| 01:03:12.11 | Mike Langford | At this point, they have not committed to $15,000. |
| 01:03:15.99 | Unknown | So every time they'd come in here and say, we've already committed money to build this park, that was just |
| 01:03:20.09 | Mike Langford | They did commit money, unfortunately in the period of time that the project has taken the money has gone elsewhere. They have made the strong commitment to assist in raising funds for the park and they've also told me that the Lions Club themselves would donate to the park but I don't have a solid number from them. |
| 01:03:38.08 | Unknown | Okay, so let's not count on that. So we've got 40 in the CIP funds. We have how much of grants that we could use outside of the planning stuff. |
| 01:03:46.39 | Mike Langford | Let's see, 48, just over 48,000. |
| 01:03:50.03 | Unknown | We have 90 towards the 130-ish number. |
| 01:03:52.56 | Mike Langford | Yeah. |
| 01:03:57.24 | Adam Politzer | just quickly here. So I don't want to underplay the Lions Club's involvement here. And because Mike and I share some history here, Hayes, obviously, where we are today, and I was, as Park and Rec Director, where we were yesterday. They have taken a considerable amount of leadership from the earlier time, and then Mike has now re-engaged them. Because the project stalled out, they basically said that they have to move forward. They didn't come to a council meeting to make that statement, but they shared that with both Mike and I over the last four years. But again, we're not paying, we weren't paying for Don Olson's time I don't know about the construction drawings. I imagine that we're probably paying something for those. But all that work and all the meetings that he attended, the Park and Rec Commission meetings, Planning Commission meetings, we weren't paying for that. |
| 01:04:58.17 | Unknown | I'm not criticizing the alliance, I just want to know what is firm and what's not. |
| 01:05:00.65 | Adam Politzer | But it's also important to understand the rest of the council and the public too as There was also a time where because of the type of members and resources that they had at the club, they were going to try to do a lot of the work themselves. And that was taken away. We don't do that anymore and for a lot of reasons. So again, other than demolition and some landscaping, It really, you know, some of their in-kind contributions which made these numbers more realistic no longer exist. I just thought that it was important that the council and the community understand that things changed over that 12 year period. |
| 01:05:37.27 | Unknown | Yeah, no, I appreciate the work that Don's done for pro bono, as they say, and certainly the commitment of the Lions Club to help improve this park. So that's not my point of question. It's good to know what you have in the coffers and what you don't. So then the 50-40 is what we have, so $90,000 towards $130,000 more or less is kind of what we have. So you need, the 80 would be actually more than you would need to raise to get to, maybe great to raise as much and use the money for other things. |
| 01:06:13.69 | Mike Langford | Oh, the 80 in donations? I'm not counting on that. I'm counting on 20, but again, as we see today, I think we'll be able to exceed that. |
| 01:06:17.84 | Unknown | as well. |
| 01:06:22.60 | Mike Langford | My, you know, ultimate goal would not be to dip into the park planning line item at all. but I want to be able to have that contingency so that we don't continue this process on for another 12 years. |
| 01:06:36.49 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:06:36.67 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:38.78 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:06:39.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:39.96 | Unknown | All right. Thank you. So do I have a motion? |
| 01:06:40.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:43.91 | Unknown | Please do take a little time. |
| 01:06:45.80 | Unknown | Oh. |
| 01:06:45.84 | Unknown | Oh, with you. |
| 01:06:46.17 | Unknown | I thought we already did. We did earlier. |
| 01:06:48.67 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:48.72 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:48.74 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 01:06:50.27 | Unknown | Before there's a motion, I just want to, one thing, just to clarify, Mike, so you're asking the city now to |
| 01:07:01.80 | Unknown | to maybe it's not this. There's no commitment here for the 2011-12 budget. in terms of new additional funds from the city? |
| 01:07:11.16 | Mike Langford | No. I'm not asking for any more funds from the city, simply using what is currently in the piggy bank. |
| 01:07:19.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:07:20.02 | Unknown | except for the 20. And taking it out of the planning fund? Yeah. Yeah. |
| 01:07:24.90 | Unknown | Yeah, but that's in the piggy bank. That's really... Thank you. |
| 01:07:28.97 | Unknown | Okay. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:07:29.47 | Unknown | So there's 20, it's 20 shy basically. |
| 01:07:29.51 | Unknown | to. Yeah, so I'll make a motion here that the Staff recommends, let me read this the right way, that the city manager fund the plan improvements to Harrison Park using $15,000 previously appropriated in the 2011 budget that carried forward. So should we say $40,000 that have been appropriated in previous CIP budgets carried forward? Now, see, this is where I asked you the question, $25,000 additional appropriated in the 2012 budget. So that's what I just, that was the question. Because you the question. $25,000 additional appropriated in the 2012 budget. So that's what I just, that was the question. Because you're asking, that's, so there is an appropriation in the 2012 budget for additional $25,000. |
| 01:08:14.18 | Mike Langford | Yes, that is in the budget. |
| 01:08:17.10 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. It's the 76,000 that's in the park planning, which would carry over to the 2,000. |
| 01:08:21.60 | Jonathon Goldman | Here we go. It's this number right here. It's already appropriated. If I can. It's just the way it's phrased here. It's phrased a little. Well, what I will do if council approves this is I'm going to move 20,000 from this project and put it into this project. They're both in the same coffee can. I'm going to increase this grant from 15,000 to 28,000, whatever it is. Or 48, and then we'll reduce the donations. |
| 01:08:26.24 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 01:08:26.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:08:26.48 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 01:08:39.59 | Mike Langford | All right, so. |
| 01:08:45.38 | Unknown | All right. |
| 01:08:49.85 | Unknown | So here I'll try again at it. So I move that the staff and city proceed with this project, utilizing the previously appropriated $40,000 in CIP funds, the appropriate grant funds that are already received and reserved, Um, and donations from the community and try to minimize the amounts being taken out of the CIP park planning budget. to a minimum. but proceed with the design and construction of Harrison Park per plans. Thank you. |
| 01:09:26.45 | Unknown | I'll say it. |
| 01:09:27.84 | Unknown | All right. All in favor? Aye. Anybody opposed? |
| 01:09:29.78 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:09:32.22 | Unknown | Hearing none, motion passed. All right. |
| 01:09:40.44 | Unknown | Now we are at item 6B, which is discussion on pension issues, Governor Brown's 12-point plan, GASB exposure draft, CalPERS discount rate. and our Administrative Services Director, Charlie Francis. |
| 01:09:57.60 | Jonathon Goldman | Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. So in readiness for our labor negotiations and our 2012-2014 budget preparation, there's been some recent pension issues that we probably need to understand and discuss. There's three that I have brought forward for the city council this evening, and I'll pause in between each one so that we can preserve the continuity and ask questions on each one of the topics. The three topics are Governor Brown's pension reform proposals, the GASB exposure drafts, and finally the recent, very recent, CalPERS change and the discount rates. So we'll start first with Pension Governor Brown's toe point proposal. The essence of Governor Brown's proposal was that he put a hybrid plan in place for all new government employees. And that hybrid plan would provide a pension benefit for a model employee that would be equivalent to 75% of their salary when they do retire after a full career of government service. And to achieve that 75% of salary goal, he proposed a three-prong approach where one-third would come from defined benefit. And for the community's sake, I would like just to define benefit. And defined benefit is basically a pension plan where the employer promises a specified monthly benefit on retirement that's predetermined by a formula. And that formula is based on employees' earnings, on their tenure and their age, rather than depending on investment returns. So just for a real quick example, if a formula was 2% at 55, which is a way of describing a defined benefit plan, that would equate to 2% for every year of service of the employee's final salary. So if an employee was making $80,000 and he had worked 15 years, that would be 2% times 15 is 30% times the $80,000 would be a pension of $24,000. |
| 01:11:45.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:12:23.28 | Jonathon Goldman | Now, if there was no social security, and the city of Sausalito is not a social security city, then the governor proposed that two-thirds of the employee's pension a pension benefit that's 75% of their final salary would come from the defined benefit plan. And then the second item in his three prong approach was one third come from a defined contribution. Now a defined contribution is, uh, an amount that the employer sets aside is specified. Individual accounts are set up. Those, I'm going to go. Oh. Accounts can have investment earnings. himself can put money into that account, but only the employer contributions are defined and guaranteed, not the future benefits. So that's a definition of a defined contribution plan. And finally, his proposal proposed that one-third come from Social Security. And then in summary, he also proposed for a normal retirement age to be increased 267 for general employees and 257 for public safety employees. Just for comparison purposes, the city of Sausalito is in a CalPERS miscellaneous pool where we're together with a number of other PERS agencies because we're less than 100 employees. And the average pension of a miscellaneous employee in the California CalPERS pool is $15,551. And if you took that as a percentage of the average compensation of employees in that same employer pool, that would come to 24 percent, which is less than the one-third from the defined benefit plan. And it's interesting to note, it's less than if you're not in Social Security, which the city of Sausalito is not in Social Security. Now a safety employee, our safety employees are also in a CalPERS pool and that CalPERS pool's average pension for safety employees, this is both fire and police, is $30,093. And the percentage of compensation to all employees in that pool is at 34%, which is the, within the target of the one-third if we were not in Social Security. But we're not in Social Security, so it would fall pretty short of the governor's proposal. |
| 01:14:57.47 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:14:58.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:14:58.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:14:58.64 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:14:59.26 | Jonathon Goldman | This is not necessary. I might cover your question, so why don't we, if you could write it down though. All the questions are important. Recently, PERS came up with an actuarial cost analysis. This is a 37-page and a lot of appendices analysis. And what they did is they analyzed the governor's proposal. Now, the governor's original proposal wasn't specific on some items, so the CalPERS worked very closely with the legislative staff of the governor's office and the legislature to come up with a model that they think the plan represented. And they, after a lot of negotiations, they agreed on the numbers. And it's interesting that what this cost analysis did not analyze was the additional administrative costs to administer a defined contribution plan and the additional cost that would come with the defined benefit plan. And real briefly. was the additional administrative costs to administer a defined contribution plan and the additional cost that would come with the defined benefit plan. And real briefly, the summary, after they went through all the calculations, and I'd be happy to distribute this to the public and the city council, is that a 2.5% of 55 safety employee would end up, or general employee, they have less than a 1% savings from the system as it exists right now. So there wasn't a lot of benefit to state employees, benefit to the state from the reform to state employees. Safety employees, they actually went through the calculations and found that it would cost the state 2.1% more than it's currently costing them to reach those targets as we defined earlier. For the California Highway Patrol, it increased cost a half of 1%. But for 3% of 55 safety employees, there was another less than 1% savings. Now, CalPERS didn't opine on how much additional administrative costs would eat up those small savings, but obviously they wouldn't. They did go on to say, though, that local agency employers, which we are They're all over and they couldn't compare to local agencies, said in general, local agency employees would see a larger savings than the state. So if 3% of 55, which is what the city of Sausalito is for their safety employees, we would probably see about a 1% savings by implementing a program. identical to the governor's proposal. and our 2.5 at, and we have 2.5 at 55 for our general employees, so we might see 1% or greater savings from there. Now, the other interesting recent event is that the governor, when he wrote his proposal, it was written in the form of a bill. but the bill didn't have a backer. In fact, these kinds of things are called an unbacked bill. Uh, Just recently, the Republicans took the governor's bill put a bill number on it and submitted it to the legislature so now the governor's proposal is now a Republican bill. working its way through the legislature. So it'll be interesting to see how that falls out. One thing that most of the pundits say about the bill is that it will not emerge the way it went in. So we don't know what kind of, how it's gonna emerge. Thank you. But let's look at the bill. It has 12 points. And I've listed the 12 points here so that we have them in one place, but I'm not going to read them all to you. I'm going to discuss them one by one. The first point requires new and incurred employees to pay 50% of the normal pension costs. 50% of the normal pension cost. So when I look at our plan, our plan, our normal cost is 8% and our employees are already paying They're paying almost 100% of the normal cost of the pension plan. So we far exceed the governor's proposal for our miscellaneous employees. For our police safety employees, our normal cost is 15.73% and our employee contribution is 9. So they've exceeded the 50% goal for.1 there. Now our fire safety employees have zero employee contributions, so they would not fall in line with the governor's proposal. But as of now, the moving to the Southern Marin Fire Protection District is still being considered, and so I didn't put the calculation in there. |
| 01:19:47.54 | Jonathon Goldman | Point number two is to have a mandatory defined benefit defined contribution hybrid for new employees combined with Social Security. Well, we can't combine with Social Security. I've called CalPERS and I've checked with attorneys and other experts that said, can a city of Sausalito be a non-Social Security city for its existing tier and a Social Security city for the new tier? And the answer was absolutely not. So combining with Social Security is not an option for us. But... As we've been working our way through the labor negotiation, developing the strategy, and you've seen all the different elements that we've been bringing together since the first of the fiscal year, management is contemplating recommending to the city council a two-tier system that would include a defined benefit, defined contribution plan. And so I'm saying that we're not aligned with the governor's proposal, but the strategy that probably we're going to be recommending will be in alignment on point two. |
| 01:20:55.10 | Jonathon Goldman | Point number three, the governor's proposal says increase the retirement age for new employees. As you saw at the beginning of the presentation, he increased it to 67 and 57. And when we consider our two tier system, as I said, the recommendation most likely coming from management to the city council on the 2012-14 labor strategy will include a two tier system that has an increased retirement age for new employees. And finally on point four, the governor's proposal says that instead of using the single highest for your final compensation to use the three year final compensation for new employees and and calculating what the retirement benefit would be. Real quickly for everyone's benefit, if an employee retires at $80,000, that being his last year and his highest year of compensation, his retirement benefits are based on that. Under the three-year formula, perhaps during the three years, it was $70,000, $75,000, and $80,000 for each of those three years before retirement. So in that case you'd use the three year average of those in order to calculate your retirement benefit. And again that is more than likely going to be the recommendation from management to the city council in adopting a 2012-2014 labor strategy for your second tier. |
| 01:22:05.73 | Mike Langford | Yeah. |
| 01:22:20.96 | Jonathon Goldman | Now, point number five was that the final compensation definition eliminates special bonuses, unplanned overtime payouts for unused vacation or sick leave and other benefits. City of Sausalito is already aligned with that, and I don't think management would ever recommend not doing that. So I'd say that we're in alignment with that. Oh, not only do I cannot see the management not recommending it, I don't see the City Council adopting it either. Point number six is limit work as a retiree to the current 960 hour employment limit utilized by PERS. That's a state requirement. We have to comply with it. We are in alignment with it. Point number seven is the felony forfeiture. We have no control over who gets the pension checks. Only PRRS controls who gets them and if the state law changes and it says felonies can't get it, then they won't get it and we're aligned. because we comply with the current and future state laws. Point number eight. is the prohibit retroactive pension increases. And for this point I would say that our current financial policy and our proposed financial policy going forward is to prohibit retroactive pension increases. And I think that we can include that in the labor strategy that we're going to be recommending. On point number nine, prohibit pension holidays. You know, so. Will we ever see superfunded days again? I suppose that we might. Will PERS ever allow Asian public agencies to not set aside their superfunded status? I doubt it. But even if they did, the city of Sausalito should have a financial policy in place that says that we would set aside future superfunded surpluses in order to pay future contributions. Ban the purchase of service credit for airtime. Whatever CalPERS says is the law, current law and future law, we would comply with. It's a complicated way of being able to buy years of service. For example, if I was here and I had nine years of service and I wanted to buy one more year of service in order to get a higher pension, well then they calculate how much that would cost. And there's a... of what they call airtime where the employer bears some of the burden for the employee buying that excess year. And they want to eliminate that so the employer isn't on the hook for it. I probably simplified that a little bit. That's basically what they're eliminating, the employer cost of buying service credit. Of course, we don't have any control over restructuring the PERS board. We would align with that naturally. And finally, reduce the state contribution for retiree health care. As we look at our own retiree health care, the recommendation in our 2012-14 labor strategy to the City Council will include a strategy for lowering the cost of our other post-employment benefits in our retiree health care. I think that concludes the governor's 12 point plan and I'd be happy to answer any questions about the governor's plan before we move on to the next topic. |
| 01:25:43.82 | Unknown | Any questions? |
| 01:25:44.98 | Unknown | Yes, I have a few. |
| 01:25:47.55 | Unknown | Thank you. I have a couple questions. Of course, we know CalPERS isn't neutral on some of the studies they do. Were there any other studies that looked at the percentages to be saved? And over what time were they looking at these savings from, or not savings as they put forth from Governor Brown's proposal? |
| 01:26:13.72 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:26:13.74 | Jonathon Goldman | or- |
| 01:26:19.29 | Jonathon Goldman | I don't know of any other studies being conducted outside of the CalPERS study. And I'd have to refer back to the details of this 35 plan so I don't know all the specifics of it. Okay. I would just... |
| 01:26:30.49 | Unknown | I have 35 plans, so I don't know. I would just really question that. And what is our average pension for, say, our firemen? I don't have a detail. |
| 01:26:44.05 | Jonathon Goldman | I don't have a detailed census of how much each one of our retirees receive as pension. I just know from our annual actuarial reports what the pool's retiree is. Thank you. |
| 01:26:58.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:26:58.14 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:26:58.24 | Unknown | Peace. |
| 01:26:58.57 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:26:58.59 | Unknown | Thank you. Okay. For Social Security, |
| 01:27:08.90 | Unknown | That would require, are you saying we can't do it because we're not doing it now? Could that be done with a law change? If the law changes as they're looking at, you know, making the changes and to, and Governor Brown is suggesting that we bring in Social Security, then we could in fact include that, right? You're not saying that we're not going to look at that, are you, in your presentation? |
| 01:27:26.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:27:27.02 | Jonathon Goldman | you |
| 01:27:27.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:27:35.90 | Jonathon Goldman | Well, no, I'm not saying that we're not going to look at it. We can't look at it. But if the law changes, I would certainly look at it because I think it would be a wonderful strategy for pension reform for the city of South Seattle. |
| 01:27:49.60 | Unknown | Yeah, okay, good. Because I think that's one of the things that I would include, that we would be aligned with that if the law changes. Okay, and the one year versus three year for the final average pay, did you inquire if that could be done now for our current employees? |
| 01:27:58.45 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:27:58.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:27:58.63 | Jonathon Goldman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:28:16.20 | Jonathon Goldman | Well, it categorically cannot. I think that when we had our Charles Sakai here for our pension attorney, he addressed what can be done to current employees. |
| 01:28:25.16 | Unknown | And that cannot be done? |
| 01:28:26.95 | Jonathon Goldman | That's correct. |
| 01:28:27.45 | Unknown | Thank you. Okay, thanks. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:28:31.71 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:28:31.96 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:28:31.99 | Unknown | Thank you. Charlie, just to go back to the And this is obviously on the state analysis because it didn't get out of the local level. So there's a potential for some of these proposals to actually increase the |
| 01:28:38.42 | Unknown | See you on this. |
| 01:28:47.40 | Unknown | you know, in aggregate, the cost for certain employee classes or types. MR PRICE, I'm sorry. |
| 01:28:52.46 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:28:52.53 | Unknown | The potential is there. Mostly in the safety personnel, is that correct? in the state level? |
| 01:28:58.07 | Jonathon Goldman | the state level. Yeah. I think what happened in here is in order to reach these targets of one-third, one-third, one-third, you'd have to contribute so much to a defined contribution program. And in designing our own hybrid plan. |
| 01:29:08.11 | Unknown | Right, you'd have to, you'd have to, next slide. |
| 01:29:14.16 | Unknown | Right. |
| 01:29:20.10 | Jonathon Goldman | perhaps we just go to a lower defined benefit and not do a defined contribution, But the employee could. So you can structure it. Right now we have the flexibility to structure it more conservatively than the proposed governor's plan. |
| 01:29:29.03 | Unknown | you |
| 01:29:45.62 | Unknown | Thank you. So Charlie, as you know, we received, the Council received this presentation at 1 o'clock today. And I was wondering, is it possible in the future when we're dealing with pension reform issues and actuarial analysis that we receive these, you know, at the same time we get our packets? At least a five-day. Yeah, I totally apologize to you. |
| 01:30:07.46 | Jonathon Goldman | I totally apologize. The presentation was ready last Thursday. I didn't get it to the city clerk in time. In fact, I even mentioned it in my staff report that it was going to be included. And I didn't notice it until I got to work Monday. So I apologize for not getting it to you sooner. |
| 01:30:18.90 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:30:24.33 | Unknown | Thank you. And the other question is in the future if you're Referring to an analysis like the CalPERS study, if you could include a hyperlink for us so that we could go immediately to that. And to echo what Council Member Ford said with respect to the biasness of the CalPERS study, if there is a counter analysis or thought that might be of interest to see that. |
| 01:30:36.21 | Unknown | That we're not. |
| 01:30:57.39 | Jonathon Goldman | But I will email the Council tomorrow the link to the study. |
| 01:31:02.13 | Unknown | Thank you, Charlie. And a follow-up question, Mr. Mayor? So if I look at... I just want to clarify something. where you refer to, I think it's point, Point seven, point ten, and point eleven you refer to complies with current and future state laws. By that, can I interpret that what you're saying is that the governor's proposal would change the law, and we can't go ahead and change that until the law changes. |
| 01:31:45.41 | Jonathon Goldman | Right. So we don't distribute the pension checks. Yeah. CalPERS does. And so if the state law changes and says felons cannot receive a pension, then CalPERS would administer it. If we told CalPERS we did not want our checks to go to felons now, they wouldn't listen. Because they only can do what the state law allows them to do. |
| 01:31:48.57 | Unknown | Yeah. Uh-huh. |
| 01:32:02.95 | Unknown | Thank you. Gotcha. Thank you, Charlie. So in this context, then aligned means you're aligning with current state law. Correct. Not that you're aligned with the governor's proposal. Because, I mean, we're going with current or future state law. |
| 01:32:14.73 | Unknown | correct. |
| 01:32:15.05 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:32:21.80 | Jonathon Goldman | current or future state law. We'd be aligned with whatever governor's proposal is enacted. |
| 01:32:26.73 | Unknown | Yeah. OK, thanks. |
| 01:32:27.11 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah. |
| 01:32:29.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:32:29.14 | Unknown | I'll just to put that on points 10. |
| 01:32:29.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:32:29.36 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:32:32.97 | Unknown | 11 |
| 01:32:34.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:32:35.36 | Unknown | restructuring the PERS board and the purchase of airtime, which I still quite don't get, but I don't need to have it explained to me, is given that I don't think we do this, but I don't know, is there a state law that, is it state law that authorizes the airtime thing and is it state law that governs the CalPERS board, obviously? So whatever the state law is, we have to comply with that. |
| 01:32:57.15 | Unknown | Right. |
| 01:32:59.78 | Unknown | Correct. And the same thing is true with the felony for it. So in a sense, if something comes out of his proposals, we would be aligned with him because by default. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:33:09.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:33:09.57 | Unknown | Right. Because it's state law. |
| 01:33:11.77 | Unknown | Sorry. As long as we're at this point, is there any more questions up here? |
| 01:33:16.24 | Unknown | Yes, I'm sorry. One more question. Charlie, on your slide several back, that talks about what the employees pay, It says require new and current employees to pay 50% of normal pension costs. What do you mean by, could you define normal pension costs? Is that what their portion of it that you're talking about, or are we talking about? 50% of the entire city employee, pension costs, all of it. |
| 01:33:56.25 | Jonathon Goldman | THE BEST. I don't have Mr. Bartell's presentation here, but when he walked through all the components of what an employer pays, one of those components is the normal cost. So as you get to the total percentage that the city pays, you have a normal cost, a pool cost, an amortization cost, and a side fund cost. You have costs for the one-year highest year highest compensation and you have a cost for the survivor benefit. So all those are represented as percentage of payroll. The governor's proposal said that the line that's called normal pension costs, that's the percentage that the employer pays in order for that employee to be able to have enough funds on that, for the city to have enough funds on hand to pay that employee's retirement in the future. That's the normal cost. And what the governor's proposal said is that the employee should contribute at least 50% of whatever that normal cost is. |
| 01:34:51.83 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:34:52.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:34:52.17 | Unknown | And so, that's a good one. |
| 01:34:53.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:34:53.08 | Unknown | the Senate. |
| 01:35:02.30 | Unknown | Okay, good. All right. Thanks. |
| 01:35:04.47 | Unknown | Thanks. Thank you. |
| 01:35:04.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:35:04.96 | Unknown | parents. |
| 01:35:05.60 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:35:06.24 | Jonathon Goldman | Yes. And that's because many, many public agencies, many state agencies are paying the employee share. And so that was his way of getting it at least to 50%. We're at 100% for our miscellaneous employees. |
| 01:35:07.02 | Unknown | And that's |
| 01:35:21.95 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:35:22.34 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:35:23.00 | Unknown | Thank you. Mr. Mayor? Another question? So Charlie, so if we look at this slide, we go down to the fire safety employees. If we're taking a snapshot of what is today, what you mentioned is that currently our firefighters are paying zero. Thank you. |
| 01:35:40.20 | Unknown | Right. |
| 01:35:40.40 | Unknown | 0%. Thank you. just for the record, it would be Um, 0% under the employee share. |
| 01:35:50.46 | Jonathon Goldman | Crypt. And I don't have with me what the normal cost for a fire safety employee would be. I imagine that would be close to the 15.73, but I'd have to go look. |
| 01:36:02.73 | Unknown | Any more questions? All right. I want to take public comment on this so we can be done with it because it's going to get confusing to go all the way back. Anybody from the public care to comment on anything on the pension side of this? All right. We'll move on to the next. |
| 01:36:18.82 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. The next agenda item is the GASB exposure draft. Now for everyone's benefit, GASB stands for Governmental Accounting Standards Board. The GASB, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, is the public sector equivalent of FASB, which is the Financial Accounting Standards Board. And if we read the Wall Street Journal, we know that FASB sets accounting standards for the private sector. GASB sets accounting standards for the private sector, GASB sets accounting standards for the government sector. When we're audited, we're audited to see if we're in compliance with governmental accounting standards and as promulgated by GASB. I have to point out that right now these are exposure drafts. The exposure drafts are not promulgated yet. The main provisions of GASB say that we should recognize the net pension liability of the city on the city's financial statement. Currently we recognize the pension liability of the city as stated in the CalPERS pool in the notes to the financial statement. How that's different is one goes on a balance sheet and one goes on the notes. But in either case, we're currently disclosing what we're required to under the current GASB standards. Under the future ones, we'd be required to report this on the balance sheet. The measurement is at fiscal year end. And why that's important is that it's calculated as of the end of the year, because as you know, the liability changes from day to day. Stock market goes up, the stock market goes down, funded ratios change as people come in, people come out. So they have to do an actuarial analysis of who your census of employees is as of a certain date, what the market condition is, and they defined the net pension liability, total pension liability, and all these things, so you could be precise. And the effective date, if and when this is promulgated, would be years 2013, 2014, and beyond. So it won't be for our current financial statement and won't be for our fiscal year ending 2013 financial statement. If it is promulgated, it will be effective for our financial statement in the year 2014. Now, what the GASB does not require, is faster funding of any unfunded liabilities. In fact, GASB's new shorter amortization rules only apply to pension expense and not to funding. What this means is that at the end of the year, The city would go through a calculation of saying, Here's how much expense occurred from the last year. And to this year end, and then they would record that expense against the liability that's being reported. That, which goes to the third point, it has no impact at all on funding the Funding is an actuarial calculation. This is an accounting calculation. And so GASB does not have an impact on the city's budget. What? What that would look like for the city, the biggest impact that the city has on and from its liability comes from the side fund. The blue bars on each one of these graphs is the side fund and the orange bar is the unfunded liability that has existed in the city pool. So in the miscellaneous employees, and the fire employees and the police employees, you'll notice the blue bars get a little bit less every year. And you can see when we aggregate them for the total city, you can see that a little bit more demonstrably. They get less every year because we're paying them off over a fixed period of time. Each side fund has a different period of time, but they're all being paid off at a rate of 7.75% interest rate. The orange bars are the amount of unfunded liability that occurs as a result of market fluctuations. |
| 01:40:29.42 | Unknown | Charlie, just for the record, you want to define what side funds, how they came to being. I know we've heard this before, but just for folks. |
| 01:40:32.56 | Jonathon Goldman | how they came to being. just again. So the CalPERS side fund is the, at one point the city had its own pension plan with CalPERS. And legislation changed, I think it was in 2005, that said that the city, if you had less than 100 employees, could not have their own pool maintained because it wasn't, it was costing CalPERS a lot of money. And they put everyone into a pool, all the employers with less than 100 employees. employees. In order to make their own pool maintained because it was costing CalPERS a lot of money. And they put everyone into a pool, all the employers with less than 100 employees. In order to make the pool whole going forward, they said whatever unfunded liability existed in that pool as of the date that we were required to come out of our own plan into there, we had to fund it. And each agency that entered it, the pool, funded whatever unfunded liability they had and that comprised the side fund. |
| 01:41:27.86 | Unknown | It affected a lot of things. |
| 01:41:29.44 | Jonathon Goldman | Right. So it was our loans. We could, of course, if the financial conditions in the bond market were correctable and if we had assets that could be leveraged, we could borrow at 5% and pay off the 7 and 3 quarter percent. There's risks to that. Those would be taxable bonds. And so we do study that every year. We look for opportunities, but up until this point, we haven't been able to do it. the But you can see we get the biggest impact on our liability if we could pay off our side funds whereas this fluctuates. And as it did spike here in 2009 and 2010 because of the market losses, because of the smoothing formula that's going into place and with continuation of CalPERS, for example, in 2011 exceeded their investment returns, this unfunded liability would shrink. And with smoothing and continued meeting, in the future, it will get smaller and smaller. But let's just look at it for today. And I'm using, right now this is our fiscal year 2010 statement of net assets. The reason I'm using the fiscal year 2010 statement of net assets instead of the fiscal year 2011 is because I only have actuarial report for 2010 from CalPERS. And I want to demonstrate what the impact of recording the unfunded liability would be on the city. So this is extracted directly from our audited financial statements and you see here on the bottom that we have forty million dollars of net would be on the city. So this is extracted directly from our audited financial statements. And you see here on the bottom that we have $40 million of net assets. What that says is we have total assets, we have total liabilities in governmental funds, and giving us a net of $40 million, which is a very healthy position of net assets to be in. Under the restatement, we would add in these pension liabilities. These pension liabilities are the ones that you saw on the previous graph. Side funds of almost $5 million and unfunded actuarial liability of $4.5 million. And they would be inserted here in the financial statements, which would increase our liabilities and reduce our net assets. But take a look, our net assets will still be $31 million, which is a substantial amount of net assets left over to carry all that unfunded liability. So in summary, Gatsby... Exposure draft impact on the city is that it's an accounting entry, it's not an actuarial entry. It shifts the disclosure of the unfunded liability from the notes to the financial statement to the balance sheet. And it's not a new number. It's not a new number that we didn't know before. And most importantly, it does not have an impact on budget contributions to our pension plans. So. |
| 01:44:33.48 | Unknown | not on the reporting itself but just on the city's net pension liability. It shows that we have less than 10 million, and I'm trying to rectify that with the 40 million that we were told when we wanted to, when we were looking at getting out of CalPERS. What's the deal? |
| 01:44:59.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:45:00.02 | Jonathon Goldman | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:45:03.82 | Jonathon Goldman | Pardon? |
| 01:45:04.46 | Unknown | What's the deal? |
| 01:45:06.45 | Jonathon Goldman | Oh, so what's the difference? So that's a great question. Let's go back to that. |
| 01:45:08.61 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:45:14.44 | Jonathon Goldman | So, CalPERS, if we wanted to terminate our plan, changes the assumptions and goes from a discount rate of 7.75% down to a much lower discount rate. Right. To a normal one. Yeah. And then that would increase our payment to get out to the 40 million estimate that I |
| 01:45:29.15 | Unknown | to a normal one. |
| 01:45:31.24 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:45:31.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:45:31.50 | Unknown | And then |
| 01:45:33.03 | Unknown | That would... Oh, okay. Okay. |
| 01:45:39.38 | Jonathon Goldman | I'll calculate it back then. |
| 01:45:40.98 | Unknown | Thanks. CalPERS has it always, don't they? Thank you. |
| 01:45:44.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:45:44.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:45:44.27 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:45:44.36 | Unknown | Thank you. you you |
| 01:45:44.76 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:45:44.91 | Unknown | I'm sorry. Any more questions? |
| 01:45:48.96 | Unknown | I'm gasping. Okay, moving on. Any questions from the public on gas? |
| 01:45:52.27 | Unknown | So... |
| 01:45:52.91 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:45:52.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:45:55.78 | Unknown | Thank you. All right. |
| 01:45:58.24 | Jonathon Goldman | So and then to follow up on Councilmember Ford's comment, and they have it always, so let's look at what did happen here in the CalPERS change. Recently the CalPORS board reviewed three rates. The first, they reviewed the real discount rate, the price inflation rate, the real wage inflation rate. And just allow me to just do this real quick. The current Oh. Thank you. Anyone see the... Oh, there it is. You take this 4.75% and the 3% That together adds the 7.75% discount rate. |
| 01:46:42.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:46:42.76 | Jonathon Goldman | That's how they calculate it. They say, what's our real discount rate? And what's the real price inflation rate? So. This became a pretty interesting conversation. The first thing that they considered in their deliberation was price inflation. And they looked at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland that reported in November 2011 that it expects inflation over the next 10 years to be 1.4%. Um, But actuaries don't use 10 years, they use 30 years. And so they looked at the bond market and the bond market, which goes out 20 years, looked at a 2.62%. So after a lot of discussion back and forth, CalPERS decided to go with the 2.75% price inflation rate. Now you notice 4.75, let's see, where's my little marker? So now we take it to this figure, and that would give us a 7 1⁄2. discount rate. Thank you. which is the 4.75 and the 2.75. The next thing they looked at was wage inflation. Now, wage inflation does not impact the discount rate, but what it does impact is the actuarial calculations. And an increase in the real wage inflation rate would have a negative effect on employer contributions. And when they looked at the wage inflation, they finally concluded that it's probably going to be pretty suppressed in the near term because of the economy. And even though that wage inflation has outpaced price inflation substantially from years 2000, 2010, rather than look at historical, they looked prospectively and they decided to punt and not make any change in the real wage inflation. Thank you. went along with that decision. So that didn't have any impact on our future contribution rates. Then the last thing they looked at then was the, oh, here we go, was the, the recommendation to lower the real discount rate from 4.7 to 4.5. Now if they would have lowered it to 4.5, we can do the math. 4.5 plus 2.75 would have brought the total discount rate to 7.25. Does that make sense? Do you see that? the Okay. How do you calculate the discount rate? Is you take the real discount rate plus the price inflation and it gives you the current The 4.7 plus the decision to move to here would a 7.5. If they would have gone with the recommendation, the proposed 4.5, the 4.5 plus the 2.5 would have been 7.25. When they looked at it, they said, if we go to a 7.5, the actuaries calculated that, they would have a 50% expectation that they would be able to meet their investment returns in the future. 50% of the time they'd be right. 50% of the time they went wrong. If they went to 7.25%, they said we'd be right 54% of the time that we would make our investment. And for that small difference of 4%, they decided not to decrease the real discount rate any lower than the 7.5 that was recommended. What that does tell us though is that it was a modest decrease now and we could see more decreases in the future depending on future investment returns. So that impact on the city is a 1 to 2% of payroll for miscellaneous plans and a... 2 to 3% for our safety plans. They said that they would Um, do a two year phase in in the plan. But if they phased it all in in one year, 2% increase up to a 2% would be a 78,940 negative impact on our budget. And a full 3% increase to payroll on our safety plans would give us another $110,000 impact for a total of $192,000 impact on our total budget. For budgeting purposes right now, I'm calculating that half of this increase would come in the year 2013-14, and the other half would come in 2014-15, consistent with their two-year phasing plan. plan and I'm estimating the full 2% and the full 3% over that two-year period for conservative budgeting purposes. And that's a summary of the recent CalPERS decision. |
| 01:51:48.10 | Unknown | All right, any questions? |
| 01:51:52.52 | Unknown | Questions? Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:51:53.07 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 01:51:53.29 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:51:55.67 | Unknown | No work to a question period. |
| 01:51:57.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:51:57.40 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:51:58.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:51:58.96 | Unknown | Any questions from the public? Anybody want to make a statement about any of this? Okay, seeing none, now we'll bring it back for comment. |
| 01:52:06.44 | Unknown | It's the next. |
| 01:52:09.09 | Unknown | So... |
| 01:52:09.86 | Unknown | Okay. Um, |
| 01:52:11.42 | Unknown | There's no accident required. This is information only right here. |
| 01:52:14.30 | Unknown | Oops. |
| 01:52:14.74 | Unknown | Charlie's information only, no action required. |
| 01:52:15.43 | Unknown | Thank you. I'm sure. Thank you. Amen. |
| 01:52:16.13 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:52:16.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:52:16.40 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:52:17.75 | Jonathon Goldman | that. |
| 01:52:17.80 | Unknown | That's what I'm saying. |
| 01:52:17.88 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:52:17.90 | Unknown | That's correct. |
| 01:52:18.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:52:18.42 | Unknown | Yeah, we had talked earlier about supporting the 12-point plan of Governor Brown, and I think that's a good idea because it, |
| 01:52:18.45 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:52:30.99 | Unknown | It shows that we're serious about pension reform and sustainable pensions. I don't for a minute believe that CalPERS is giving us all the information or an analysis that neutral so I really think that we should join the county and join Governor Brown give him the support that he needs to move forward to give our to get a pension plan that is sustainable over the years one that is fair to our employees and is secure but is sustainable. So I move that we support Governor Brown's 12-year, 12-year, 12-point plan by sending a letter to the state and the county and any other people we want to CC on it. Thank you. |
| 01:53:41.38 | Unknown | and I suck up. |
| 01:53:42.02 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:53:43.81 | Unknown | Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any comments? |
| 01:53:46.29 | Unknown | Yeah, I'd say, well, two things. First, Charlie's pretty much shown that we're on board in both in our current labor strategy as well as with just state law in general that we are somewhat in agreement where at the end goals of what the governor hopefully is trying to achieve. I think the last thing any entity wants to do is to hitch itself to the state of California's policies on financial guidance. That would be, I think, a flawed strategy to begin with, given the politics in Sacramento and |
| 01:54:16.70 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:54:26.89 | Unknown | and the effectiveness they've shown over the last 20 years in this particular subject. The second thing is, The second thing is I think we're better off acting on a localized basis and doing what fits our budget, our employees' base, and making our employees as well compensated for the job that, on a performance-based level, what they're achieving as we can afford. And to get good people, you have to pay them well. And to keep them, you have to pay them well. And I think we're better off doing that on our own strategy The third thing I wouldn't propose following the 999 plan or the 654 plan or whatever plan just because it has a catchy name. Who was the guy with the 999 plan? cane, right? So I think that's just politics. That's not practical action. That's just politics and being able to put a catchphrase out there for people to latch on to. So I think here we're much more productive at going forward with our own labor strategy, to get the maximum amount of cost effectiveness for the taxpayers in this municipality than to hitch a ride with anybody in Sacramento. |
| 01:55:47.84 | Unknown | Thank you. Any other comments? |
| 01:55:52.41 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor, I do. Thank you. So I support this. I seconded this motion. I feel very strongly about this. I think that endorsing Governor Brown's 12-point plan does not negate our ability to pursue localized pension reform in Sausalito as well. I think that Governor Brown needs our support right now. I think it's actually very important. And I look to Charlie's analysis of our alignment with Governor Brown's proposal. And with respect to, for example, fire annexation, We definitely could make substantial gains here if we had our firefighters contribute to their to their plans per Governor Brown's strategies. I'm really concerned when I look at these numbers, and I'm sure that my concerns are shared. I would hope they are. We just heard that the CalPERS Board accepted a 7.5% discount rate, which has a 50% chance of being achieved. 50%. And we're on the hook for this, our budget is. This is very serious. And when you look at the slide, Let's see. In Charlie's presentation, |
| 01:57:31.20 | Unknown | when, let's see, it's here, he's talking about Now I can't find it. the cost to the pension issues Let's see, sorry. Just got this at 1 o'clock today, and that's one of the challenges we have. Oh, thank you. So talking about the exposure draft main misconceptions regarding GASB's new shorter amortization rules apply only to pension expense, et cetera. Well, we know that currently CalPERS is using a 15-year smoothing for gains and losses, but what if that changes to five years? We know they're using a 30 years amortization on the unfunded liability. What if that changes to 15 years? And frankly, you look at the accounting practices of the private sector and basically they would be far more conservative in these projections. So I think at a minimum, I urge my fellow council members to support Governor Brown's 12-point plan. It's very important we take a leadership role in this, as well as pursue localized strategies Thank you. |
| 01:58:58.68 | Unknown | Thank you. Um, You know, since I got on the council in 2004, we have been working diligently to change as best we can under the existing law Sausalito's position on pensions relative to our own liability and so on. And we've accomplished about 90% of that, actually a little less than that, probably 60% or 70% of it. If annexation is approved by the voters, we would accomplish the balance of it by having the firefighters under the new annexation pay 50% of their share of the pension. So as I see it, we have, and we are aligned, I think as Charlie has pointed out, with all of the governor's proposals, assuming that he can get that bill through with the Republican backing and his Democrats. not supporting him. So I promised when I got on the council that I would stick to Sausalito issues. In fact, I was promised by someone who lectured me that we should never endorse national issues, state issues, stay with local issues, and please don't write letters accordingly. So I'm not against anything that the governor has proposed. I think it doesn't actually go far enough, and I suspect it will be whittled away in some fashion. But we have little influence how that occurs except through our local Jared Huffman, I'd be more inclined to write a letter to Jared Huffman and say I'm in support of this than I would be to write a letter to the Governor, which I think is lost on you on the legislature. So that's, I think, my position. |
| 02:01:06.69 | Unknown | Mr. Mayer. |
| 02:01:07.45 | Unknown | Kim. |
| 02:01:07.77 | Unknown | Thank you. Well, then I would suggest that we write a letter to Jared Huffman. I think that's a good idea. I completely agree with you that the city shouldn't go off telling the national government or the state government what to do unless it affects them directly. And this affects Sausalito directly. Whatever the state does affects us. And more and more we see that, that the state's actions affect us. So I really think that this is, it shows, if we support it, it shows that we as a city want to see Governor Brown take or if the Republican Party does it, great, whoever, but take a look at this and make it our pensions and make them sustainable. Because otherwise we're simply sticking our heads in the sand like ostriches and ignoring The issue. We need to... We need to move forward with our own strategy, and I think I see that we can do many things, one of which is to limit our contracts to one year so that we can incorporate any changes that the governor might propose. But I would certainly support you on the Jared Huffman letter. |
| 02:02:36.35 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:02:46.10 | Unknown | Right. |
| 02:02:48.75 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor, may I comment? Actually, it's more of a question to Councilmember Ford. Your motion was to write a letter supporting Governor Brown's 12-point plan, but I think you were pretty, you know, flexible with respect to where that letter was sent. That's true. |
| 02:02:51.76 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:03:06.91 | Unknown | Amen. |
| 02:03:06.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:03:06.98 | Unknown | I think. |
| 02:03:07.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:03:07.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:03:07.57 | Unknown | you |
| 02:03:08.29 | Unknown | I mean, Debbie, could you refresh our memory on the... Carol? Well, I will say... |
| 02:03:13.52 | Unknown | Well, I will say that I'm happy to send the letter to whoever the council would agree to send it to. I just think we need to go on record as supporting pension reform. And I do know that three of us on this council have signed an oath with the local county group that is for sustainable pension planning. So I think this falls right in line with where we should be. So I would support a letter to supporting this plan to whoever we might decide it should go to. |
| 02:03:57.43 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:03:57.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:03:57.97 | Unknown | I would second that. I think it's the same issue. |
| 02:04:00.64 | Unknown | Yes, I would say, again, I would stay away from any illabeled plan and just say, this is what we're trying to accomplish on a localized level. If you can affect state legislation that accomplishes these things, great. But I don't want to, I think it's useless to say, I support your 12-point plan. It's more important what the results are and what you're trying to achieve than whatever 12 or 10 or 14 points a politician puts forward. So what we're trying to achieve are, some reforms in state law that require certain things. The governor isn't going to come in here and negotiate with our employee base. That's up to us to do. And so writing a letter accomplishes none of that. What we need to accomplish is some of these reforms in the state law about pensions that hammer you into certain categories you can't change. And that's what I think we need state reform on, not negotiating for increased retirement age for new employees. That's what we negotiate with our employees directly on. Or three-year final compensation, more of us, again, averaging or smoothing, that's what we negotiate with. |
| 02:05:02.99 | Unknown | but in case of Winnie Would you... Is that you? Yeah, that's your one minute. That's our one minute. |
| 02:05:07.89 | Unknown | Yeah, that's still one minute ago. |
| 02:05:10.00 | Unknown | that's all right you move away it seems a |
| 02:05:10.49 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 02:05:10.98 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 02:05:11.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:11.52 | Unknown | . |
| 02:05:11.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:12.02 | Unknown | I'm sorry, you move away. Signify in one minute. To summarize, it'd be better to just, I say this is what we want to accomplish. Forget referencing the 12 point plan, just say this is what we want to do. |
| 02:05:13.46 | Unknown | One minute. |
| 02:05:13.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:14.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:14.20 | Unknown | that. |
| 02:05:14.38 | Unknown | Oh. |
| 02:05:14.70 | Unknown | Right. |
| 02:05:14.79 | Unknown | as well. |
| 02:05:14.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:14.89 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:05:14.91 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:18.01 | Unknown | Don't forget referencing the 12-point plan. Could you support writing that letter to Huffman? |
| 02:05:24.04 | Unknown | if it doesn't say I'm Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:05:25.94 | Unknown | Yeah, we just mentioned what we want to do. Right. Okay. So let's see if we can do it. Rather than make it the governor's plan, let's make it our plan and write it to Hufflin and say, well, these are the things we want you to work on in the legislature. And there may be some of the governor's things. There may be more. |
| 02:05:27.06 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:43.46 | Unknown | I think we can. my thought on that is that we don't know yet what we want to do and the governor's plan is broad enough that um we can work within it i don't see anything there maybe uh other council members do that i would that i would object to taking a look at the only |
| 02:06:08.59 | Unknown | I would bring up is that the governor's plan couldn't find a carrier from the Democrats. |
| 02:06:13.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:13.50 | Unknown | Right. |
| 02:06:13.97 | Unknown | So, sending it to a to our democratic Democrat. Assemblyman, as the governor's plan, is going to hit the trash can. I'd rather have him see the 12 points spread out related to Sausalito. |
| 02:06:28.01 | Unknown | Lega de Saucerito. Thank you. |
| 02:06:29.65 | Unknown | So there's no interpretation of this being the governor's plan. It's our plan that we want him to work on. |
| 02:06:33.31 | Unknown | the students. Mr. Mayor, I disagree with that actually. I think that that's how we put pressure on our local people to support these items. The Republicans shouldn't be carrying this through, or Democrats should be carrying it through. and I'm sorry to see that, and you know, the talk is that it's because the unions have so much power. They're buying our... our legislators so I think we need to as a city as residents and make it take a stand. And I think that's the only way we're going to see change. And I think it should come from the Democrats as well as the Republicans. There shouldn't be a partisan Um, position on this. We're not, the pensions are simply unsustainable. And unless someone takes action, we're going to be, you know, there's bankruptcies in our future. So we need to take action. No. |
| 02:07:39.59 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:07:39.90 | Unknown | and the other side. |
| 02:07:39.97 | Unknown | Do you have anything to say anymore? |
| 02:07:42.46 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:07:42.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:07:43.07 | Unknown | I'd like to make a comment, Mr. Mayor. Thank you. Yeah, I would just say that I see this as bipartisan then because it was crafted by Governor Brown. He's working very hard lobbying this. It has been praised in the media. and it is an important, very important first step. And he needs our support. Governor Brown needs our support. Governor Brown needs to hear that local voice. We can make a difference here. I think it's an important historic step. It doesn't preclude our ability to do another letter supporting additional local steps. I think we do need to take in addition to Governor Brown. But specifically, the motion on the floor is first of all regarding supporting and endorsing Governor Brown's 12-point now. And I'd like to move forward on that. |
| 02:07:43.39 | Unknown | I'd like to make a |
| 02:08:51.82 | Unknown | All right, we call the motion. |
| 02:08:52.63 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:52.97 | Unknown | So let me put a counter motion on the floor. That motion would be. |
| 02:08:53.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:56.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:56.61 | Unknown | that. |
| 02:08:56.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:56.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:56.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:56.91 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:08:56.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:57.03 | Unknown | would be |
| 02:08:57.74 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:58.13 | Unknown | Thank you. And again, this is the use of staff time, yada yada, which we don't have to throw around. to put it on... because you're going to have to take something off the list if you want them to work on this, right? So in terms of writing a letter, drafting it, coming back to the city council, being on the agenda. So you have to keep that in mind. But with that in mind, so I would say we... as the city attorney or Charlie, whoever the right person would be, under Adams, whoever Adams chooses, to write a letter that says, here's what we're trying to achieve on the local level in terms of pension reform. Some of these are... We would like your support at the state level, Assemblyman Huffman, to enact reforms that would enable us to do this. |
| 02:09:48.47 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor. |
| 02:09:49.07 | Unknown | Wait a minute, do we have a second? I'll second. |
| 02:09:54.05 | Unknown | The problem with us writing a letter at this point saying what we want to do is that we have made no policy decisions. So I don't think that's on the table yet. I do think that we can do that in the future. But what's on the table right now is the motion to send a letter supporting the 12 points and i i call for the vote |
| 02:10:26.08 | Unknown | Well, there's an ultimate motion that vote would come first. Yeah. Mr. Mayor. |
| 02:10:29.52 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:10:29.56 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor, I'd like to make a substitute motion. And that motion would be to... |
| 02:10:39.99 | Unknown | You want to amend the motion. |
| 02:10:43.68 | Unknown | Well, I think it's a completely different motion. I'm not amending his. OK, we can have three motions on the table. |
| 02:10:48.22 | Unknown | I'm not amending his... Okay, we can have three motions on the table at any given time, so make the motions. |
| 02:10:52.44 | Unknown | Yes, and this is the third one. |
| 02:10:54.20 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:10:54.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:10:55.46 | Unknown | So I move a substitute motion to endorse Governor Brown's 12-point plan for pension reform in a letter that is sent to the other city of Pennsylvania. other city councils with an invitation to kind of join us in this support. I second. |
| 02:11:26.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:11:26.56 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:11:26.58 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:11:26.61 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:11:26.90 | Unknown | . Thank you. |
| 02:11:27.02 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:11:27.20 | Unknown | Anybody call the question? |
| 02:11:28.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:11:32.59 | Unknown | Which motion are we voting on it? |
| 02:11:33.45 | Unknown | Oh, and I hadn't... And send it to... Send our original letter to... |
| 02:11:35.12 | Unknown | you |
| 02:11:35.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:11:35.42 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:11:35.44 | Unknown | . |
| 02:11:35.47 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:11:35.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:11:35.61 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 02:11:35.68 | Unknown | Just it. |
| 02:11:36.53 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:11:36.60 | Unknown | And... |
| 02:11:36.76 | Unknown | And... |
| 02:11:43.30 | Unknown | to |
| 02:11:44.20 | Unknown | Thank you. No, no, no. I did want to add this point to it. I didn't get a chance to because I was formulating it in my head. But it's to send our letter of endorsement to the other cities in Marin to get their endorsement, but to also send that letter onward to Governor Brown's office. So in other words, I don't want our letter to be held up if the other cities don't endorse. So, in other words, I don't want our letter to be held up by, you know, if the other cities don't endorse. So, in nice language, that was the spirit, that's the spirit of my motion. Carolyn, does your second still answer? Oh, yes. Okay, thank you. |
| 02:12:18.67 | Unknown | Oh, yes. Thank you. Okay, thanks. |
| 02:12:20.17 | Unknown | YOU'RE SORRY. |
| 02:12:23.77 | Unknown | Okay, Debbie, would you call the roll? |
| 02:12:26.42 | Unknown | That's number five for |
| 02:12:27.48 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:12:27.99 | Unknown | you |
| 02:12:28.95 | Unknown | Council member four. |
| 02:12:31.60 | Unknown | Yes, and I hope that Councilmember Weiner will join us on this since he supports Citizens for Sustainable Pension Plans. |
| 02:12:33.52 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:33.64 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:33.69 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:33.74 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:12:33.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:34.11 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:34.15 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:12:34.27 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:12:34.31 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:34.35 | Unknown | to the point. |
| 02:12:34.65 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:12:34.69 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:34.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:34.96 | Unknown | you |
| 02:12:35.02 | Unknown | It's just a little bit. |
| 02:12:43.14 | Unknown | Well, okay, well, I wish you all were up there Saturday when you had a chance to speak to Governor Brown. |
| 02:12:44.41 | Unknown | So, Thank you. I'm not sure. |
| 02:12:47.39 | Unknown | Here we go. |
| 02:12:53.10 | Unknown | My voters, no. |
| 02:12:55.02 | Unknown | Council member Wider. |
| 02:12:56.52 | Unknown | No. |
| 02:12:59.39 | Unknown | Vice mayor, Leon. |
| 02:13:01.53 | Unknown | So, |
| 02:13:03.85 | Unknown | you |
| 02:13:03.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:13:03.91 | Unknown | Mayor Kelly. |
| 02:13:04.67 | Unknown | Thank you. No. So now we vote on the second motion. The second motion was... |
| 02:13:10.77 | Unknown | Yeah, sure, I'll rephrase it or re-repeat it. The second motion is to draft a letter addressed to our state assembly men, person and senate, remember, saying Sausalito is trying to achieve in our labor negotiations and in our pension review of our pension obligations, these changes. And we encourage you to enact legislation that would enable us to affect these changes where they're restricted by state law. |
| 02:13:45.61 | Unknown | We had a motion and a second, so Debbie, would you call the roll? |
| 02:13:48.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:13:49.06 | Unknown | May I have a comment? No. |
| 02:13:51.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:13:51.57 | Unknown | Bye. HIM. |
| 02:13:52.07 | Unknown | Yes, we can, because this is a second motion. I would just say we don't have that policy yet. When are you planning, when could we send this? |
| 02:13:52.09 | Unknown | There's a motion. |
| 02:13:52.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:13:54.52 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:14:02.94 | Unknown | We do not, we have not agreed as to how we are moving forward. We simply had a presentation and we haven't considered all the options. |
| 02:14:14.22 | Unknown | So are you against any of these 12 points that are raised here that Charlie has commented on? |
| 02:14:20.07 | Unknown | Those are not all the points. I, for instance, mentioned making our contracts. Those are the points that I'm suggesting to comment on. No, no. Those are not all the points that should be considered when we look at our policy. So then when you support the 12-point plan, you want that to amend it to include 15 other points? Wait, wait, wait. It's just on your office. Mr. Mayor, I think I had the floor, and then I started receiving questions from Councilmember Leon so if I may just finish my thought it is that we do not have a policy in place we have we have staffs recommendations. We have not crafted a policy, the council has not yet crafted a policy |
| 02:14:24.95 | Unknown | That's the point. |
| 02:14:26.03 | Unknown | That's right. I'm suggesting to comment on. |
| 02:14:28.29 | Unknown | No. |
| 02:14:34.47 | Unknown | So then when you support the 12-point plan, you want that to amend it to include any other points? Wait, wait, wait. That's just on your office. |
| 02:15:10.97 | Unknown | and consider all options. For instance, and I mentioned this one earlier, I believe all our labor contracts should expire after one year, or should have a provision after one year, so that, I still have a minute if I may, so that... |
| 02:15:31.93 | Unknown | Somebody time. |
| 02:15:33.43 | Unknown | so that we can pick up any changes in the law that the state may make, you know, on this program that the Republicans are putting through or whoever. |
| 02:15:47.13 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:15:47.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:15:47.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:15:47.59 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:15:47.62 | Unknown | Oh, yeah. |
| 02:15:47.70 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:15:47.89 | Unknown | Mayor Kenry. Excuse me. The motion that's on the table at the moment is a motion to write a letter based on the discussions that occurred tonight. So if you're against that, you can vote no. We're not making any policy. We're writing a letter based on the information that was delivered to us, and that letter would then be |
| 02:15:48.16 | Unknown | Mayor Kennedy. |
| 02:15:49.52 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:16:03.82 | Unknown | you know. |
| 02:16:12.29 | Unknown | We can delegate that to me or we can delegate it to anybody else here to work with the city, the appropriate city person to make that letter available. And then your position, if you voted no, would be you don't support that letter. So we're not making policy. |
| 02:16:23.04 | Vicki Nichols | me. |
| 02:16:30.46 | Unknown | Mayor Kelly, I'd like to amend the motion, if I may. Amend the motion to be subject to council review and approval. Because when Charlie presented the elements you referred to tonight, he also mentioned things like, He projected that staff would recommend that Saucet will pursue a second tier with DB and DC, and he recommended a second tier system with increased retirement age for new employees. And, you know, so he weaved some things in. And so what I'd like to do is, my amendment is just to... to make it subject to council review. |
| 02:17:14.24 | Unknown | Thank you. To that. I recall the Rosenberg, if you make an amendment to the motion, the person that made the motion can accept or reject the amendment. |
| 02:17:24.31 | Unknown | So just to understand, what are you asking for? Thank you. |
| 02:17:28.72 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:17:28.73 | Unknown | I'm asking that when we vote on accepting this letter, that we are making some assumptions about what the content of that letter will be. And so to kind of make a contingency of this vote, that we would review the letter and could make changes or comments to it, in discussion and by follow-up motion. if need be. |
| 02:18:02.79 | Unknown | I don't care if it comes back here. You're just going to churn it for a number of meetings. So if that's what you want to do, that's fine. So I'll restate my motion then. I'll say that... The motion would be to draft a letter covering the subject matter that we have discussed here tonight in terms of pension reform and changes that Sausley was pursuing. It's both, and they're currently in this discussion, there were a limited number of points, so I would confine it to the discussion this evening, and to draft what we are trying to pursue on the local level and what items we need support at the state level to put into effect. And that that let her come back to the city council for to be on the agenda for review. |
| 02:19:02.10 | Unknown | Thank you, Council Member Leon and Mayor Kelly. I do have an amendment to that motion, which is because Charlie presented in those points. He mentioned right now that fire safety employees, he said moving to SMFD, and my point was that they would start to make contributions, you know, because that hasn't happened yet. |
| 02:19:25.34 | Unknown | No, we're not going to negotiate labor agreements in a letter. Okay. It doesn't make any sense. |
| 02:19:28.70 | Unknown | Okay, alright, alright. It doesn't make any sense. But we embrace full employee participation and contributions for DB. |
| 02:19:32.19 | Unknown | That's- |
| 02:19:38.28 | Unknown | per the points. |
| 02:19:40.83 | Unknown | Just let some things go for a moment. My God, and you'll have a chance to review it again. |
| 02:19:43.04 | Unknown | you |
| 02:19:43.09 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 02:19:43.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:43.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:43.28 | Unknown | you |
| 02:19:44.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:44.49 | Unknown | you'll see. |
| 02:19:44.58 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:19:44.63 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 02:19:44.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:44.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:44.86 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:19:44.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:44.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:45.03 | Unknown | as to |
| 02:19:45.44 | Unknown | I'll review it again. |
| 02:19:46.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:46.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:46.48 | Unknown | I can make the observation that if we can't agree five to zero as a council, that we shouldn't be sending letters to anybody. So if we're split on how we should do it, maybe the best course of action is just each of us write an individual letter supporting anything we want to support and call ourselves the mayor, council members, vice mayor, or whatever our title is, and you get the same, you actually probably get five times the drag you would get by just sending one letter. But I think it's absurd to try to craft a letter that we don't agree on and send it out of here on a three to two vote. It doesn't make sense to me. But there's a motion on the table, and the motion has been amended. Do we have a second on the amendment? |
| 02:20:31.22 | Unknown | I'll say him it. |
| 02:20:32.00 | Unknown | Okay, Debbie called. |
| 02:20:34.49 | Unknown | Just for, I apologize Mr. Mayor for clarification. So it's Councilmember Leon's original motion with the amendment that the Draft letter be brought back to Council for approval. The second suggested amendment by Council Member Pfeiffer was rejected by the maker of the motion so it's not included. |
| 02:20:44.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:20:44.67 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:20:44.69 | Unknown | Right. |
| 02:20:44.92 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 02:20:44.96 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:20:49.38 | Unknown | It's not included. |
| 02:20:50.17 | Unknown | I restrain. |
| 02:20:50.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:20:50.93 | Unknown | She withdrew it too. |
| 02:20:50.98 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:20:51.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:20:51.08 | Unknown | Thank you. Oh, thank you. |
| 02:20:53.46 | Unknown | Well, I... |
| 02:20:54.25 | Unknown | Oh, she didn't actually. |
| 02:20:54.71 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:20:54.91 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:20:54.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:20:54.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:20:55.01 | Unknown | I wasn't, yeah, I didn't say it and I wasn't going to, but he reworded his motion as opposed to accepting my amendment. |
| 02:20:55.15 | Unknown | for the rest of the day. |
| 02:20:55.32 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 02:20:55.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:20:56.70 | Unknown | say it. |
| 02:21:01.31 | Unknown | So the motion before us is that we draft the letter based on the conversations that took place this evening and bring that back to this council for review and approval. Thank you. And we have a motion and a second, so call |
| 02:21:16.12 | Unknown | That's not a reply for. |
| 02:21:16.23 | Unknown | It's not for Piper. Yes. |
| 02:21:18.74 | Unknown | That's number four. |
| 02:21:19.57 | Unknown | Yes. Thank you. |
| 02:21:20.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:20.16 | Unknown | Thank you. That's number one. |
| 02:21:21.86 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:21:23.60 | Unknown | Vice Mayor Leone. |
| 02:21:25.17 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:21:27.01 | Unknown | Thank you. There you go. |
| 02:21:27.62 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:27.68 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:21:29.79 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:21:29.86 | Unknown | That's torturous. |
| 02:21:31.41 | Unknown | Porteous. |
| 02:21:32.97 | Unknown | So all you guys had to do was be up there Saturday. Jeremy Brown was there. Mr. Mayor, I requested |
| 02:21:33.76 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:21:34.03 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:21:34.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:34.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:34.43 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:21:34.47 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:34.67 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:21:34.70 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:21:34.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:37.32 | Unknown | Yeah. Okay. Mr. Mayor, I request a three minute break. |
| 02:21:39.80 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:21:41.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:42.01 | Unknown | Uh, |
| 02:21:42.04 | Unknown | No. |
| 02:21:42.08 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 02:21:42.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:42.20 | Unknown | Let's get on. Or I'll just step out. |
| 02:21:44.52 | Unknown | or I'll just step out. |
| 02:21:46.35 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:21:46.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:46.52 | Unknown | But wait, so one second. So you've got two items left. You've got our commission and the one we can, there's one we pulled. Oh, you continue to do that. |
| 02:21:49.35 | Unknown | All right. |
| 02:21:50.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:50.06 | Unknown | Commission and the |
| 02:21:55.09 | Unknown | Yeah, we changed that one. So we're at 6C. Council's Discussion on the Arts Commission. |
| 02:22:00.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:04.00 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:22:05.70 | Unknown | Let's just take a couple minutes. I mean, it doesn't matter if we get ready. All right. |
| 02:22:07.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:07.59 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:07.73 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:07.76 | Unknown | I'm trying to make it ready. |
| 02:22:08.66 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:08.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:08.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:09.01 | Unknown | All right, we'll take two. |
| 02:22:10.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:10.46 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:10.50 | Unknown | Three minutes. Three minutes. Because Councilmember Pfeiffer is involved in the Clark. |
| 02:22:10.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:10.55 | Unknown | The President's office is a very good question. |
| 02:22:18.33 | Unknown | Okay, three-minute break. Please come back in three minutes. |
| 02:22:20.96 | Unknown | Oh, more involved, maybe. She was on the commission for some time. |
| 02:22:20.99 | Unknown | . |
| 02:22:27.12 | Unknown | There's no presentation here, so this is really a discussion of what the art commission is and whether or not we should have one, and if so, how would it be constituted? So I'll start off by just pointing us to the resolution which set the thing up, and let's talk about the resolution for a moment. And the resolution is, let me just get it up here. |
| 02:22:58.07 | Unknown | 5198, or the original is. |
| 02:23:00.40 | Unknown | Yeah, it's item 6C attachment one. |
| 02:23:03.72 | Unknown | All right, just... |
| 02:23:04.72 | Unknown | All right. Just... I don't want to read the whole thing, but basically the Art Commission shall be responsible for the following things. Number three, inventory and cataloging of the current art collection. I assume that's the city's art collection. Recommending to the city on the display and care are the same. Review of art and cultural activities in the city. That's pretty vague. Assessment of and reports on the needs of artists currently living and or working in Sausalito. And those are the four |
| 02:23:29.94 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:23:31.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:23:31.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:23:31.51 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:23:39.92 | Unknown | charges that this commission has. And then it breaks into Suggested programs and recommendations, which then are where we get into trouble. Displaying art in the council chambers on a revolving basis. Who's going to make that decision? Is it a board? Is it the whole bunch? Is it one person? Making recommendations to city council of any opportunity to display local artwork in other public locations. |
| 02:23:55.04 | Unknown | playing art. |
| 02:23:55.73 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:24:10.27 | Unknown | Making recommendations on the City Council on acceptance of gifted artwork. Making recommendations to the Council on the appropriate disposal, sale, or transfer of city-owned artwork. work in concert with the Sausage Hill Foundation when changes in the permit displays may be required. Artists assist in representing the city of Sausage Hill and art-related organizations and government efforts in Marin County. The Art Commission shall promote the arts in Sausage Hill by being a liaison between the city council and the local artist community, community at large, and so on. And it goes on. And then the last but not least, it will tell us what it did at the end of the year in February following. It seems to me that four is where the problems start. Before that, it's probably not But I think we've tried this ever since I've been on the Council. The Art Commission has been a problem. way out over his tennis shoes with Wednesday nights. I think it was Wednesday nights or Friday nights, something where it was Thank you. And then complaints started and people started, you know, being unhappy with each other. And so it's been reformed two or three times over my eight years here. And then it completely dissolved two years ago or more. |
| 02:25:21.72 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:25:37.01 | Unknown | Most of the people who have applied for this commission, their resumes date back a couple of years with the exception of one. I think the 4B, 4, with its ABC, A through H is... so vague as to give rise to a a problem of governance. So that's my thoughts. So anybody else want to weigh in? |
| 02:26:15.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:26:15.30 | Unknown | Yes, Jim. |
| 02:26:15.99 | Unknown | So go ahead. |
| 02:26:16.72 | Unknown | Okay. One of the things that I see on one commission consists of five members who are currently in show be residents of the city. You know, we, if you really look down on the ACB and all of that general area, You know, these are people that have had their studios and things for years and years here, but yet they do not live in Sausalito. And I think that is one of the... mistakes that we're making that if we do have this commission that We do have, or we'll say if someone all of a sudden moves next door to Mill Valley from Sausalito, now they can't be on the board, and yet they're a very strong, contributed to this commission, I think we should have that open to at least two. |
| 02:27:04.88 | Unknown | It does call for two non-voting members that are not residents. |
| 02:27:07.80 | Unknown | We're not residents. We may not be residents. But I think they should be voting. And that's my opinion. |
| 02:27:15.04 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor, I'd like to comment. So I voted, you'll recall I voted against this resolution |
| 02:27:15.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:27:22.51 | Unknown | and with skitters. |
| 02:27:24.69 | Unknown | This was unanimous? |
| 02:27:26.09 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:27:27.44 | Unknown | Was it unanimous? Let me see. Oh, okay. Well, I guess I swung back and approved it, but I expressed verbally a lot of reservations over it. When I was on the Arts Commission, I served two terms, and we had a great group, very successful. We didn't have any of these parameters. We had a mission statement, which was to promote local Sausalito artists, and we would create project proposals. I designed a project proposal template. The Arts Commission would brainstorm projects and budgets. We would present the proposal to the council with a funding request. The council, or no, or no funding. Many of our projects were just volunteer. We set up the website with our local artist portfolios. We had binders of artwork in all of the main hotels that we updated regularly so visitors could come in and go through the binder and review the local art. And some people sold art through that process. We had the art, the ICB artists loved us. We had quarterly, no, we had an annual and sometimes a biannual showing in here. And we always had a saucusalito theme like house books or Fort Baker or something historic, you know, around about Sausalito. And Every project was something that was, you know, it followed this project proposal. No one was an artist. If you were an artist, you couldn't show your work, you couldn't participate with your work in any of our projects. You couldn't promote your own artwork. And the only time that, to my recollection, that that happened was we had an art showing with a theme and one member submitted some, and it was always juried, and we had residents, we picked residents outside in the community to come in and jury. and then we participated in the jurying too. But it was blind when we had one member who did participate. She didn't tell, you know, and it was completely blind. recused herself. So when we were juring all the paintings, no one knew who had done what. And it was very fair. It was very successful. We had a monthly column in the Marinscope about the art scene. Now your comment earlier, the comment I heard earlier about, I think it |
| 02:30:19.38 | Unknown | Let me ask a question. The original, this resolution reads that the council... |
| 02:30:30.97 | Unknown | that in the afternoon. Thank you. |
| 02:30:32.16 | Unknown | The, the, um... The Council disbanded the Art Commission by resolution in 2009. What went wrong in 2009? |
| 02:30:41.96 | Unknown | I resigned early on. I wasn't part of that group. I was like four years before that. If I may, I served two terms. I was six years on the Arts Commission, I believe. And what happened, my personal opinion is that I was in the arts commission, I believe. Well, no. I'm not going to second guess. I do not know what happened. I do know that the processes and guidelines and templates and rules that we put in place, we had leading artists from Sonoma, you know, museum artists. |
| 02:31:11.34 | Unknown | I'm sure. |
| 02:31:25.82 | Unknown | As part of our art advisory board, we also had like Heather Wilcoxon was part of our art advisory board whenever we created a public arts donation policy. We, you know, I don't know what happened. I know that we were very busy, you know, as we left. New members came on and from what I saw, the old guidelines and things that we had put in place, I had one member who was still on the board contact me and say that perhaps things, and it was no ill will or anything like that. It was just that they were getting away. I mean, they were just going in a different direction. |
| 02:32:06.76 | Unknown | It was a very good thing. |
| 02:32:11.55 | Unknown | Let me ask a question. May I? Just let me ask one more question and then just a quick answer if we could. What happened to it? We passed this ordinance on the 7th day of December 2010. What happened to the Arc Commission after that? Did it just not get formed? Dissolved. I don't have a recollection. |
| 02:32:13.14 | Unknown | man. |
| 02:32:27.85 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:32:27.97 | Unknown | Right. |
| 02:32:28.49 | Unknown | have a |
| 02:32:29.07 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:32:29.08 | Unknown | It was bizarre. |
| 02:32:30.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:32:30.50 | Unknown | It was. |
| 02:32:30.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:32:31.70 | Unknown | We disbanded it in 2009 because of the conflict on the art commission at that time. And the reason we disbanded it, Adam came to speak to this, is because we had people who wouldn't come because some people would come and some people wouldn't resign. So then they couldn't have any meetings. So we had to disband it. |
| 02:32:35.31 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:32:45.57 | Unknown | Right. Right. |
| 02:32:47.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:32:51.39 | Unknown | That was the only way to get everyone off the board and start over again. We haven't started over again. because I think part of it we waited, some of it we drafted this in 2010 to reform the duties of the commission so that it can incorporate some feedback from people outside of the Sausalito who don't live or in Sausalito in terms of the non-voting members and to give it some direction which it obviously got a little bit lost along the way since |
| 02:33:12.67 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:12.69 | Unknown | IT IS. |
| 02:33:12.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:20.03 | Unknown | But did it get reformed with this? No. No, it doesn't. |
| 02:33:22.52 | Unknown | No, this is just the, we never appointed anyone. We never appointed anybody. So it's just been a city that's for two years. It was reformed, but it was never appointed. I, if I may. Largically, we didn't get any applications to the audit. |
| 02:33:25.24 | Unknown | We never appointed anybody. So it's just been seven years for two years. but it was never appointed. |
| 02:33:30.31 | Unknown | . |
| 02:33:30.35 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:30.71 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 02:33:30.74 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:33:30.76 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:31.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:31.96 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:33:35.59 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor, may I comment? |
| 02:33:38.44 | Unknown | Yes, sir. |
| 02:33:38.64 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:38.81 | Unknown | Maybe let somebody else, and then you come back. |
| 02:33:38.93 | Unknown | Go ahead. |
| 02:33:41.98 | Unknown | What happened was real simple. You had, at that time, you had a chairperson that really didn't delegate anything, was running the whole show by themselves. Everybody else felt like they couldn't even say anything. The votes didn't matter. The chairperson did whatever they wanted to do, and everybody started going after each other, and that's real simple what happened. |
| 02:34:16.31 | Unknown | Thank you. Mr. Mayor? Sure. I think it's important, just listening to what's been said here, that we have people on the Arts Commission who are actually appreciative of art and managers. We need people, I have heard, and I can't substantiate this, that there was a group of artists and they were all vying for their own artwork and that sort of thing. But we don't need to fill the art commission with artists. We need to fill it with people who appreciate art and who have experience in managing Um... museums and that sort of thing and in fact the council interviewed a person for the Cladding Commission shortly after I got on the Council and she was more interested in the Arts Commission. So we said, well, we'll come back to you whenever we decide to reconstitute the Arts Commission and she had experience on the East Coast in running a museum, an art museum. So I think it's that kind of person we want to... to recruit to this and I do think considering our history, Sausalito's had artists for a long time, that it would be really well for us to bring bring the Arts Commission back because this town has had, has artists and has had over the years. And we need to appreciate them and help them as we can, in my view. |
| 02:36:11.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:36:12.07 | Unknown | Okay, Mr. Mayor. So, yeah, my recollection, and I was part member of the Arts Commission long before any of the, I guess, I mean, there were probably two or three cycles, you know, before it got into trouble. But... We ran a tight ship. We had templates, we had processes in place. We had very strict conflict of interest guidelines. Very strict. And the, by the way, I heard a comment about, I think it was the Art Walk. The Art Walk was very interesting. It was not an arts commission, uh, project initially. It was something that a member of the Arts Commission joined forces with the man who was the Chamber of Commerce president at the time. and it was 50% the chamber and 50% this member They didn't, this member didn't, they didn't go through the initial like project proposal template kind of process. It was something that was positioned as being outside the Arts Commission, and then what happened later was it was thrown into the Arts Commission, like, you guys do this. |
| 02:37:26.86 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:37:27.03 | Unknown | Thank you. Can I just... So I agree we should have some sort of art commission. It's more of the issue is what does it do? And in my read of both what is important in speaking to local artists or artists that have studios here, A, the biggest problem is affording to live or work, have a studio space in Saucyut. That's the biggest problem, if you want a thriving art community. The second is, where can I have a show? Because I want to show my work and sell it if I do want to sell it. So the issue is do you want to participate in those two categories, in my mind, those two issues? I think that's why I put it in here, and the 3D didn't exist in the prior definition of what the Arts Commission would do, is report on issues that the needs of artists currently living and are working in Sausalito. It was about putting on shows. |
| 02:38:08.96 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 02:38:23.15 | Unknown | And to me, that's where it goes awry and gets into trouble is, even though you may have done a very good job of it, all these commissions and boards turn over, council members change, and all these things, each incarnation of these boards and commission is free to do whatever essentially what it wants. You can't strap them in and make them follow the rules before because those people aren't there anymore. |
| 02:38:39.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:38:44.55 | Unknown | So my point of view is, What you can do to really help the artists who live or work have space here is to facilitate them doing so. And the second is if you make available the space the city controls, to have their own shows. |
| 02:39:00.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:39:02.20 | Unknown | And don't get involved in the jurying and worrying about what the format or the theme or whatever. That's all great. It's a lot of work. It's a lot of effort. It's a lot of agita. And let, you know, I've had a lot of artists approach me, hey, I want to have a show, but I want to pay $300 to rent the city room for a day. You know, I don't even know if I'll make that much selling my art. That to me I think would be much more advantageous to an artist to have their quote unquote opening kind of thing and then getting involved in kind of like what's on display in the council chamber. I mean that's just, in my opinion that's not going to put you over the top as an artist, but having, being able to afford a rent space here and this is where you get back to kind of enacting legislation, that's much more important. to do and what we've tried to do at MLK is make sure you can afford a rent space there if you're an artist. Or make sure you can get the rooms here for free as long as you put a deposit down so there's no damage and you cover it. Rather than get involved in the curation of events, I think the events is where it becomes costly, it gets contentious, and you get personalities involved. I think it's much better off to kind of represent the artists, what we can control from a legislative point of view, to help them live and work and show their work. |
| 02:40:20.59 | Unknown | I kind of agree with you on that because, first of all, the Atwa collapsed because Two things. ABC rules all of a sudden came in because everybody was drinking on the streets in Caledonia Street. And then they wanted to put music in there, and we had to go through a permitting process and everything else, and there was a charge, and that's kind of where that went. And yes, they are very, very difficult to run these things, and it is not easy. Believe me, it isn't. Thank you. |
| 02:40:56.18 | Unknown | Mayor Kelly. So, yeah, well, regarding the Art Walk, I was tertiary, you know, I stepped up and, you know, volunteered to help out. With regards to the BCDC issue, I drove up |
| 02:40:57.71 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:41:10.25 | Unknown | with, well I'm sorry, not BCDC. Sorry, I'm getting my, what time is it? I'm getting my acronyms mixed up. |
| 02:41:16.68 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:41:16.78 | Unknown | acronym. |
| 02:41:18.30 | Unknown | But I went up there with the police. Yeah, police captain. I can't remember who it was. But we went up together to Sacramento, not Sacramento, Roseville, I think it was. Santa Rosa. And we talked to them and actually worked with them |
| 02:41:19.89 | Unknown | The police Yeah. |
| 02:41:37.99 | Unknown | to work out a compromise for Sausalito, and it was actually a very big deal. to be able to have liquor in and kind of work out a compromise in that. But the Art Walk was something that it really was never an Arts Commission. I mean, it wasn't an Arts Commission issue. And the reason I have concerns about what's being proposed here is what really killed us was when we were the arts commissioners were suddenly asked to handle all the logistics. Oh, now we want to have these shows. We want to do it once a month, which is tremendously hard to do. And we want you to do all the logistics and all the, set it all up for us and make it all happen. And yet there was no authority to work with the restaurants one on one to say, you need to recirculate the art. So I have concerns about that. I really do have concerns. I don't think we should hold. I'm sorry I'm going over time, but can I just wrap it up? I don't personally think we should tie the hands of the Arts Commission. I think we should give them a mission statement, provide them strong guidelines, and give them a project template, and let them come back to us with, this is what we'd like to do. |
| 02:42:54.62 | Unknown | Okay. I, yeah, we should probably have a, anybody in the public want to comment on this? Yes, thank you. Okay. No contribution. Can't hardly work. Can't hardly work. Thank you. |
| 02:43:02.57 | Terran Sprela | . |
| 02:43:02.59 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:43:02.62 | Terran Sprela | Thank you. |
| 02:43:02.77 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 02:43:02.82 | Terran Sprela | Ha ha ha. |
| 02:43:03.48 | Unknown | . |
| 02:43:04.10 | Terran Sprela | Thank you. |
| 02:43:04.14 | Unknown | No, no. |
| 02:43:05.74 | Terran Sprela | Yeah. |
| 02:43:06.53 | Unknown | and, |
| 02:43:06.74 | Unknown | you |
| 02:43:07.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:43:08.92 | Terran Sprela | You know, I've lived here on and off for 14 years, and one thing continues to puzzle me. If there's going to be an arts commission, it should have something to do with that event that happens over Labor Day. It's completely bizarre that that, It's like a little gypsy circus setting up their own tent over there. It's a Sausalito. You should take the name away. You should allow them to use the name if the city has nothing to do with it. That's bizarre. It's more important than an art walk. When I was on the art commission, we were on the art walk. It was no big deal getting it done. But, That's all I've got to say. That's bizarre. |
| 02:43:42.46 | Unknown | Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else? Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:43:49.45 | Unknown | you |
| 02:43:51.05 | Unknown | You want to make a movie? |
| 02:43:53.50 | Vicki Nichols | Vicki Nichols, I was listening to all of your |
| 02:43:53.51 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:43:58.76 | Vicki Nichols | description of your ordinance and all the duties and everything. One of the things that came up was the sort of oversight or the review of public works of art. And if the art, Commission is not together to do that. That's part of the HLB's charge somewhat. I think that is an important function. It's written in the ordinance for the HLB. So someone needs to do that and it needs to be pointed out somewhere because I think you're going to be having something that's, I think the historical site is doing something that the public's going to want to comment about public art. |
| 02:44:35.11 | Unknown | I certainly will. Thanks. All right. Thank you, Vicka. Yes. Mike, you want to say anything? Jennifer, you want to say anything? All right. All right. Public comments closed. Go ahead. Thank you. |
| 02:44:47.53 | Adam Politzer | I just wanted to add a little bit here that might be helpful. You know, this is not a unique... discussion exclusive to Sausalito. There are many, many communities that pride themselves on public art and in having an arts commission or a community but they have changed over time, just like everything. And the Park and Rec Commission has, in some cities, have expanded to have art members, similar to what Carolyn Ford, Council Member Ford, had suggested, that it's not just artists, but it's people that know how to run events, how to maximize their public spaces, recruit volunteers to help them with the operation. But the biggest challenge, regardless if it's an arts commission, a sustainability commission, park and rec commission, is that you really can't give them their parameters and confine them to that versus letting them come together, giving them some guidance, but then letting them come back to you and say, this is what we want to work on. And you folks giving some direction. A couple of alarms went off in my head by giving people free space, especially in today's economic times. We can't afford to give away free space because we don't have a lot ourselves that we're not maximizing. So if the council, just like we did with the MLK, chose to subsidize the space, well then we have to take that pressure off of Park and Rec to generate that revenue for having a dance class in there or renting it out for a birthday party. So that's another piece of it. Special events, as Councilmember Pfeiffer talked about, if they're done on a quarterly basis or... Yeah, from small to large, you can do maybe some smaller things a little bit more often that don't take a lot of time. Um, But once you say everyone can be in, That doesn't work because again, you're limited in space and we saw During the art festival, there was a grassroots effort led by Morrow over at the Seahorse to have an art show. And that, you know, that conflicted because it challenged, they didn't have parking for it. They didn't really do the special event permit properly. They worked with our police chief, who was really exceptional in accommodating. allowing the event to occur and worked with Mike Langford with that as well but They had a really funky, Now, some people would say that was the true Sausalito artist. but others would say that was Beau and some other folks like that. So the quality of your show has to have some parameters. Otherwise, it's a first come, first serve or a free for all, and that also doesn't work all that well, too. So your arts commission, you know, we had two commissions in my short time as a city manager. one had a mutiny and then the other one just exploded or imploded as I heard earlier. And so the nature of it makes it challenging because you're bringing creative minds together that don't always agree. So there has to be some guidance, but it's got to be loose. So if you've got to be a lot of people who are if you move forward with an arts commission, selection process of who's on the committee. and how they work together becomes really important and I'll just share my philosophy with the management team. We don't have the best athletes. It's Miracle on Ice, anyone that saw the movie about the 1980 Olympic team. Miracle on Ice is... |
| 02:48:39.77 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:48:39.97 | Unknown | Mary, we don't have the best athletes. You two in the back. |
| 02:48:43.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:48:43.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:48:44.42 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. Thank you. But the miracle in ice, they chose the best teammates, not the best hockey players to be on that team. And they won the gold medal against all odds against the folks that they went up against in that challenge. |
| 02:48:45.62 | Unknown | . |
| 02:49:00.08 | Adam Politzer | And I think that our management team is the best team. because of our ability to work well together not just with ourselves but also with the council the boards and commissions in the community. And so when you bring this Arts Commission, do go forward on looking at bringing the Arts Commission together. There's got to be a real effort in looking at what the roles of each of these folks the Bicycle and Ped Committee. You really gave it some thought. How many bicyclists, how many pedestrians, how many professionals from the county? and you looked at those nine seats and really gave careful thought of who goes into those seats. So again, the Arts Commission, you may want to table tonight's discussion, and I don't know which staff person could work on this to bring some recommendations forward, but it may be as we're going to start the priority calendar process later next month in April that this becomes an item because I think it really needs the careful thought. And if it gets populated in July with the new fiscal year and money is designated, given to this arts commission because in the past they had a small budget to do printing and some other minor things, that would also be needed to be given some consideration. Because you give a committee the task to put on events with no seed money to do it. is also a bit of a disaster until they actually have been formed. And as Council Member Pfeiffer said, she joined the commission. |
| 02:50:25.59 | Unknown | God. |
| 02:50:35.92 | Adam Politzer | that also had some history of success. So they had some programs and then they were able to build on that and I think take it to another level when she was on the Arts Commission, but you're now starting from scratch, and I think you've got a different situation. I'll conclude my thoughts there. |
| 02:50:50.82 | Unknown | Okay, we could probably talk about this until 1 o'clock in the morning if we're not careful. |
| 02:50:54.75 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. I'm not sure. |
| 02:50:56.37 | Unknown | So let me propose the following. I can live within our Commission. I think this thing has got to be reworked to both limit and broaden. Instead of articulate in seven or eight bullet points all the things that could be done, we could probably do number three and just add a couple of words to this, and it would work. |
| 02:51:21.73 | Unknown | Just to clarify, all this stuff was in the previous, we actually took a few out when we redid this, but all this other stuff in four was already in the previous version of what the art commission was. |
| 02:51:24.87 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:51:25.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:51:25.39 | Unknown | So, |
| 02:51:25.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:51:31.66 | Unknown | version. But at the end of the day, a person is going to have to make this happen. So I would maybe I'd challenge you. Yes. I was just going to say. I challenge you to rewrite this resolution and to come back with a recommendation of the council about how you would establish this organization. And then we can have another discussion about it, but it will be around a document that is not crafted like this one is. So I would – we don't have to make a motion. We just – if you accept it, you'll do it. |
| 02:51:38.76 | Unknown | So, |
| 02:51:43.97 | Unknown | Yes, that's what I was just going to say. |
| 02:52:02.23 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:52:08.54 | Unknown | Yeah. Yeah, I'd like to comment. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think that's an excellent idea. I would be thrilled to do that. And I will say that when I was on the Arts Commission, I was so impressed with the people who were on it with me. They were fantastic. And we, I mean, the artists to this day, they know me by name. I mean, I walk through the ICB. They remember the value add. We did so much, and yet we followed strict guidelines when we did that. |
| 02:52:40.88 | Unknown | we did that. Maybe in addition to putting out to the public because they want to serve. You could also come up with a couple of folks that you would like to serve with who would be your But seed capital. Oh yeah, no, definitely. |
| 02:52:52.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:52:53.03 | Unknown | Oh yeah, no, definitely. |
| 02:52:53.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:52:54.04 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 02:52:54.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:52:54.38 | Unknown | But, and I don't know how to say this politely, as politely as possible, but I just don't want to see this become this thing that goes off on a tangent and it becomes just your ideas and then it gets so far over in left field that we have the same problem. I just don't want to go that way. I... |
| 02:53:12.77 | Unknown | Do you know what I'm saying? Yeah. Can I respond to that? Yeah. Yeah. I really want to stress that things did not go astray when I was on the Arts Commission. It was like seven years before these two other Arts Commissions. |
| 02:53:13.33 | Unknown | Do you know what I'm saying? Thank you. |
| 02:53:28.28 | Unknown | I'm just saying looking at the housing element and other things, if we could make this a consensus driven thing where it's not becoming a political football or a off way on left field, otherwise it's going to turn, I don't want to go through another fiasco like that. |
| 02:53:47.11 | Unknown | Okay, the housing element was not a fiasco. It was an incredible success of what I'm extremely proud of, Council Member Leon. Not on the agenda. Very, very proud of that with the wonderful team. |
| 02:53:49.78 | Unknown | is incredible success. |
| 02:53:50.98 | Unknown | . |
| 02:53:51.02 | Unknown | of which I'm extremely proud of. |
| 02:53:54.60 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:53:57.45 | Unknown | Thank you. So with |
| 02:54:01.98 | Unknown | That was it. |
| 02:54:02.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:54:02.62 | Unknown | you |
| 02:54:02.69 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:54:02.72 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:54:02.97 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:54:03.04 | Unknown | Thank you. when I was young. |
| 02:54:03.85 | Unknown | Will you reject it for two years of nonsense? |
| 02:54:04.61 | Unknown | I'm just... What? |
| 02:54:06.43 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:54:06.48 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:54:06.72 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 02:54:06.79 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:54:06.85 | Unknown | Come on, come on. It's not on the, I'm trying. Of which Councilmember Leon resigned because he didn't attend any of the meetings. |
| 02:54:06.94 | Unknown | you Thank you. of which Councilmember Leon resigned because he didn't attend any of the |
| 02:54:14.03 | Unknown | No. Because it was nonsense. |
| 02:54:17.23 | Unknown | Stop. It was nonsense. Okay. Now, Linda, would you take the charge to do what we just talked about with this? Thank you. And come back to the council with recommendations, a new resolution, and some ideas about how it would be formed. |
| 02:54:23.81 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:54:29.15 | Unknown | Thank you. And I just want to say thank you to my fellow council members for empowering me to do this. I'm looking forward to it. Moving on. |
| 02:54:37.43 | Unknown | All right. |
| 02:54:41.40 | Unknown | So future agenda items. Anybody got one that's burning that has to be on here? |
| 02:54:43.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:54:43.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:54:43.32 | Unknown | you |
| 02:54:52.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:54:52.97 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:54:56.16 | Unknown | I think all of us, I know all of us, received an email regarding the traffic issues, bicycle traffic issues. And I'd like to compliment Councilmember Weiner on his work that he's done downtown and suggest that we need to take a look at, again, the south end of town and actually from the south end to the Ferry Building. because we need to do something not only about the tourists to come over, but also about the people in spandex who, you know, I hear complaints about this all the time, but who are speeding and scaring the residents, and then also shouting civil... Can you put that into a... |
| 02:55:49.15 | Unknown | shouting, civil, Thank you. |
| 02:55:50.97 | Unknown | an agenda. |
| 02:55:51.97 | Unknown | I hear you. |
| 02:55:53.69 | Unknown | Okay, yes, yes, yes. I was just excited. |
| 02:55:54.43 | Unknown | Yes, yes, yes. But I would also should. I would also suggest that that is a huge item, and it ought to be on the priority calendar, because it's going to take a lot of time, and we need to all come to agreement that that's where we want it to be, and that it would be, you know, get the proper... |
| 02:56:13.08 | Unknown | Okay, well, in line with that, we need to constitute a bicycle and pedestrian committee to look at these things. That's, that should be done. |
| 02:56:21.42 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:56:21.74 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:56:21.75 | Unknown | that she... We put that on the priority calendar. |
| 02:56:26.50 | Unknown | I guess so. |
| 02:56:27.59 | Unknown | I think it's a better place for it because we've got to decide what we can and can't do. Can't do, yeah. And I'm not against it. I mean, I think it's a problem. But we need to put it in the context of all the other problems and see where it rises to its level. |
| 02:56:32.92 | Unknown | Can't do. Thank you. and you can put it in the store. |
| 02:56:41.60 | Unknown | Okay. I know it would rise very high if the residents were asked about it. Yes. Okay. And then my second thing is that I would like to see really soon that we discuss what our, that we give specific guidelines to the negotiator for our union labor negotiation. |
| 02:57:04.09 | Unknown | That will come up in closed session. Yes. Yes. So that will rise automatically in closed session. |
| 02:57:07.20 | Unknown | Yes. Thank you. Okay, I'd just like to get it up there soon, like next month if we can. It'll be there. |
| 02:57:16.16 | Unknown | It'll be there. It'll be there. It arrives at the proper moment. |
| 02:57:19.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:19.47 | Unknown | next time. |
| 02:57:19.85 | Unknown | to run. |
| 02:57:20.02 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:21.42 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:21.46 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:21.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:22.40 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:22.45 | Unknown | Mr. Mayor, I have a future agenda item. So Council Decorum, basically what just happened about five, ten minutes ago where I was personally attacked, I think that we need to kind of, we had, as you know, an independent group talk to all of us and receive all of our input. And I think one of their recommendations was to have a parliamentarian present to, you know, to listen and to weigh in. And I'd like us to start moving forward on that recommendation. |
| 02:57:54.87 | Unknown | That wasn't their recommendation. |
| 02:57:56.44 | Unknown | Oh, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. That duly heard. The agenda study committee will consider it. Okay? All right. Any other future agenda items? Hearing none, any council member committee reports? |
| 02:57:56.45 | Unknown | So, |
| 02:58:13.36 | Unknown | Hearing none. Any appointments to the landmarks board? Three seats. Tonight we interviewed seven people. Six. Six? We have six people. So do you have any? |
| 02:58:34.78 | Unknown | but one has to be filled with the English. |
| 02:58:38.76 | Unknown | I would We need one right away. |
| 02:58:41.27 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:42.52 | Unknown | At least one. |
| 02:58:44.25 | Unknown | Sorry about it. |
| 02:58:46.62 | Unknown | Right, right. So, |
| 02:58:55.28 | Unknown | I would nominate John McCoy. |
| 02:59:03.67 | Unknown | I'll second. |
| 02:59:05.25 | Unknown | No need for seconds, Mr. Mayor, just nominations. Just nominations. And then we'll poll you and vote. |
| 02:59:05.27 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:59:05.29 | Unknown | No need for a second, Mr. Mayor. |
| 02:59:07.08 | Unknown | Nominations. Nominations. |
| 02:59:08.88 | Unknown | I'm going to go. |
| 02:59:11.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:59:12.21 | Unknown | nominations. |
| 02:59:13.46 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:59:13.96 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:59:15.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:59:15.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:59:15.11 | Unknown | Is your desire to make the appointments over multiple meetings? |
| 02:59:18.62 | Unknown | Yes. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:59:22.01 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:59:22.08 | Unknown | So just one tonight? That's my recommendation. |
| 02:59:25.05 | Unknown | So, Mr. Mayor, when would we be appointing the other two? |
| 02:59:26.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:59:29.93 | Unknown | over subsequent meetings. |
| 02:59:31.66 | Unknown | over subsequent meetings. So is there a specific timeline, like the next month, two months? The following meeting. Okay, all right. Okay, good. Good, good. Okay. Okay, that's good. |
| 02:59:37.33 | Unknown | Next meeting, following me. |
| 02:59:39.04 | Unknown | All right, okay, good. So, because... Good, good, okay. Deliberate the vote. Okay. |
| 02:59:46.80 | Unknown | Is there any cause that we can't nominate three people tonight? and vote on all three. |
| 02:59:54.50 | Unknown | you're welcome to nominate if you want to. but. |
| 03:00:00.11 | Unknown | I'm seeing reticent looks from my fellow council members, so I guess I'll step back and go with the one. No. |
| 03:00:15.05 | Unknown | So if we can... |
| 03:00:15.49 | Unknown | I don't want to wander out this land. It's up to you guys. |
| 03:00:15.98 | Unknown | out this alone. It's up to you guys. I mean, we just need to know how many you're voting on so we can track it. |
| 03:00:20.92 | Unknown | Right now we've got one nomination on the table. |
| 03:00:22.10 | Unknown | Yeah. And you're filling one position currently? One position, correct. |
| 03:00:26.49 | Unknown | position. |
| 03:00:28.19 | Unknown | Okay, so we're filling one position tonight. |
| 03:00:32.16 | Unknown | All right, by acclamation. Thank you. |
| 03:00:35.13 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:00:35.54 | Unknown | All right. Oh, public comment. |
| 03:00:43.96 | Unknown | Well, come up and talk. We could undo it. That's the beauty of it. |
| 03:00:51.82 | Vicki Nichols | I'm sorry I wasn't able to join you for the interviews tonight, but I just wanted to say, and I'm sure that you're all aware of this, Number one, I want to say how much I appreciated the six years that I served a little over. It was a really great experience. We got a lot of things done. And because of that, of the different people that have come on the committee, I've learned that it's really important that you have a group that can work together. They cannot say they're going to do the work or, and I think from some of your résumés, some statements were made about what was done, which really wasn't done. But it's important that people understand that this is a pretty big time commitment, so I don't know what you're saying when you question people. It's also important that you have some, people on there that have some understanding of Sausalito history, so when you run across a name from a building, it isn't that you just, oh, it's just a Perry or it's Earl Dunphy, et cetera, et cetera, so that helps. But mostly I'd say that this isn't a committee that you If you put down planning commission and everything else, I think this is the committee that really has to have someone that's demonstrated an interest in some history or some uh, experience in it. So I don't know how your interviews came tonight. I did look at the applications. I'd met Mr. Singer before and I noticed that he had some experience architecturally and also I believe with the Crissy Field Museum over there, which strongly got involved with the Secretary of the Interior Standards But I also can say that Mr. McCoy came to us recently and he had an application where we got into one where we really had to go at it with Secretary of Interior Standards on our mid-century architecture And we were, I think, impressed about his research and all that, so his recommendation, I think, would be fine, too. But, um... I think that in filling your other seats, please just take in mind that we need people that are going to, we've lost people over the years because they think, oh great, a history committee. It's one of our reports takes three or four hours to write at the minimum when we do research and all that. And we get, you know, get them all the time. And, um, you gotta do a good job now, we're a certified local government, we worked really hard, no one wants to lose that. So thank you for being thoughtful about your nomination. |
| 03:03:12.10 | Unknown | Yeah, let me comment on how the process worked. Carolyn Kurnott was in the room and had a list of questions, and she asked pretty much every candidate the same questions in one form or another. And one of the most important questions was, how much time do you have to dedicate to this? And the other question was, how will you work with the group, a group? And they were different. Everybody said, of course, well, but there are different, differing, you know, ways they said it and so on. So I think our point here is not to rule anybody in or out except Mr. McCoy for tonight and then continue the deliberative process until we get to a conclusion that we fill all the chairs there. |
| 03:03:39.95 | Unknown | you know, Thank you. |
| 03:03:52.47 | Unknown | I... |
| 03:03:55.45 | Unknown | Okay. All right. Great. Thank you. All right. That brings us to other reports of significance, of which I see no one ready to speak, which is unusual for us. And now we have adjournment. I move we adjourn. Thank you. |
| 03:03:55.49 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:04:05.80 | Unknown | Thank you. which is unusual. And, |