| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:03.19 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. I don't need to speak right. |
| 00:00:06.21 | Jill Hoffman | I mean a micro. Okay. Good evening. This is Jill Hoffman, Vice Mayor of Sausalito, calling to order the special City Council meeting of the City of Sausalito for Tuesday, August 4th. Our Mayor, Tom Theodorus, will be joining us by phone from our sister city, Sakai-de, Japan. So I will be running the meeting this evening. Lily, will you take the roll, please? |
| 00:00:30.52 | Lily (City Clerk) | Council Member Weiner. |
| 00:00:32.04 | Councilmember Weiner | President. |
| 00:00:32.77 | Lily (City Clerk) | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Councilmember Withey? Here. Here. |
| 00:00:35.57 | Councilmember Weiner | here. |
| 00:00:36.63 | Lily (City Clerk) | of Vice Mayor Hoffman. THE PRESIDENT. |
| 00:00:38.59 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:00:39.67 | Lily (City Clerk) | And I just want to note for the record that the mayor will be on the telephone in your closed session meeting. |
| 00:00:47.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks, and he'll be joining us by phone in open session as well. |
| 00:00:49.98 | Lily (City Clerk) | Correct. |
| 00:00:51.20 | Jill Hoffman | We will be going into closed session to discuss items D1 and D2 on our agenda, which both involve threatened litigation. the financing approved by the City Council on June 30th 2015 for improvements to Robin Sweeney Park, Dunphy Park, Southview Park, and the Martin Luther King Campus. Any public comment on closed session items? seeing no one moving to the mic. We will now adjourn to closed session and we'll be back at 7 o'clock. |
| 00:01:25.49 | Jill Hoffman | Good evening. This is |
| 00:01:31.27 | Jill Hoffman | Good evening. This is Vice Mayor Jill Hoffman welcoming you to a special meeting of the City Council. I will now call the meeting to order. Um... I will note that I'm acting or leading the meeting tonight. Although our mayor is with us, he's with us virtually on the phone because he's in Japan. Um, That's why I'm leading the meeting tonight. Lily, would you please call the roll? |
| 00:01:58.85 | Lily (City Clerk) | Councilmember Weiner. Thank you. |
| 00:01:59.94 | Councilmember Weiner | President. |
| 00:02:00.55 | Lily (City Clerk) | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Councilmember Withey? Here. |
| 00:02:03.50 | Councilmember Weiner | here. . |
| 00:02:04.31 | Lily (City Clerk) | Vice Mayor Hoffman. Present. Mayor Theodorus. |
| 00:02:08.85 | Mayor Theodorus | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:02:12.08 | Jill Hoffman | And at this point, I'd like to take the Pledge of Allegiance. And since John Flavin got his card in first to be a speaker, I'd like to invite him to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. |
| 00:02:35.72 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:02:43.58 | Jill Hoffman | We did just come back from closed session and we addressed some of the matters that are going to be before us this evening regarding potential litigation with regard to COPs. I don't have any other announcements with regard to closed session. Do any of the council members have announcements with regard to closed sessions? |
| 00:03:02.40 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | No. |
| 00:03:03.24 | Jill Hoffman | Do we have any public comment on the closed session item? Seeing no one moving toward the podium, I'm thinking no. The closed session we discussed, as I said just now. |
| 00:03:22.31 | Mayor Theodorus | No. |
| 00:03:23.51 | Jill Hoffman | We discussed potential litigation in the past, regarding the certificates of participation for the MLK property. Thank you. and which is also the subject of our of our meeting tonight. So we're moving into the public comment on that. Would anybody like to make a public comment on the closed session. If you would like to approach the podium, you're welcome to make a public comment. |
| 00:03:55.20 | Lance Alameda | Lance Alameda, I'd like to make a comment only that. Is this comment the only comment, or is the business item the other spot, because we have no idea it was discussed behind closed doors. |
| 00:04:06.54 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. Right, the business item is the potential litigation and the city's action for the COPs and MLK, the litigation. |
| 00:04:15.05 | Lance Alameda | Okay, well I would like to make a comment on that, but I don't have to make it now as long as I can make it |
| 00:04:19.70 | Jill Hoffman | That will be later. Yeah. I'll call public comment on that later. Fantastic. OK. Anybody else? |
| 00:04:25.00 | Mayor Theodorus | Anybody else? Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:04:29.56 | Jill Hoffman | All right, I see no one else approaching the podium. Obviously, as we move through the meeting, we'll have public comment on this issue after we have the presentations from the staff. Can I have a motion for approval of the agenda? |
| 00:04:44.27 | Councilmember Withey | So moved. seconds. |
| 00:04:48.19 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? |
| 00:04:48.95 | Councilmember Withey | Bye. |
| 00:04:49.45 | Councilmember Withey | you |
| 00:04:49.50 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. Bye. |
| 00:04:51.01 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:04:52.12 | Mary Wagner | All right. Vice Mayor Hoffman, I apologize for interrupting. Because we have the mayor on the phone under the Brown Act, every vote that you take tonight has to be by a roll call, even the approval of the agenda. |
| 00:05:04.00 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, I forgot that. All right, can we have the roll? |
| 00:05:07.11 | Lily (City Clerk) | Councilmember Weiner? Yes. Councilmember Pfeiffer? Yes. Councilmember Withey? Yes. Vice Mayor Hoffman? Yes. Mayor Theodoros? |
| 00:05:08.22 | Mayor Theodorus | Yes. |
| 00:05:11.95 | Mayor Theodorus | Yes. |
| 00:05:16.30 | Mayor Theodorus | Yes. |
| 00:05:18.70 | Jill Hoffman | All right, thank you. Now we move into the business item, the only business item on our agenda this evening. Charlie, I'm guessing you're going to make the presentation on that? |
| 00:05:27.85 | Charlie Francis | Yes, ma'am. |
| 00:05:28.38 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. The business item is to discuss options related to placing a park improvement and safety measure on the November 3rd, 2015 ballot to fund necessary park improvements through a lease of the MLK school site. to the Sausalito Finance Authority and the use of revenues from the MLK school site to pay off their certificates of participation utilized to address park projects. And so, Charlie, could you please start the presentation? Thank you. |
| 00:05:54.56 | Charlie Francis | Great. Thank you Vice Mayor, members of the council. Start with some background. The Robin Sweeney, Southview, and Dunphy Parks, and the MLK site need significant repairs and safety upgrades. Just as more of a background, it's been in your priority calendar for this year that we've come up with a long-term MLK plan. And so, accordingly, in last year's budget, we included a comprehensive MLK facility after it being the scope of services being vetted by the Finance Committee on February 10th we the City Council approved a professional services contract with faithful and gold for to do that assessment they started their field work in February completed their report in March and and gave the initial review of their findings to the Finance Committee on April 15th after the Finance Committee reviewed that proposal came to the City Council on April 28th where they delivered the executive summary and you received the findings and staff told that the findings from that report that we would work those numbers into the budget. We didn't have a recommended financing plan at that time, but we would include it in the budget. So that all occurred on May 12th, where we introduced those findings. On May 19th, we had a study session regarding the whole budget process, where again, the MLK repairs and facility assessment came up and at that time we introduced the the possibility of using the mlk finance the mlk enterprise fund as a mechanism to improve the parks that we also knew were in their needed repairs and safety upgrades following that workshop there are that budget process that meeting the study session there was a meeting the same evening here in the City Council on June 2nd you considered a draft of the budget where these proposals were all considered and then on June 16th you adopted the budget with the financing mechanism being in place to directing staff to move forward with a certificates of participation to generate the resources to provide the significant repairs and safety upgrades at all the parks as well as the MLK facility. So with that approval of the financing, staff moved forward with working with a financing team consisting of Craig Hill from North Cross and Brian Quint. We put what solicited for an underwriter, and as we moved through that financing team, we were working to bring the certificates of participation to market, we're anticipating pricing this week. But on July 29th, we received notice of a lawsuit and we halted the financing plan and But we also had strongly heard from residents throughout that process, starting last May all the way through June 30, that our deteriorating parks is a top community priority. So tonight we want to bring options to the city council. on how to move forward now that we received this notice halting the financing plan. So the option to proceed is a ballot measure. |
| 00:09:14.41 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:09:17.35 | Charlie Francis | The The park improvements are a top priority. At the June 30 meeting, we had 26 speakers, 25 speaking for it and one against. And so placing a measure on the November ballot to approve the financing plan is the prudent and expedient and efficient way to move forward. It improves and upgrades our deteriorating parks now before they become more expensive in the future. It improvements a reality and again it's the most transparent way possible the democratic process letting the voters decide it's fiscally prudent for making these park upgrades without raising taxes and it allows the city to utilize a low-risk common financing mechanism used by many many cities and other public agencies throughout California So with that, in your staff report, we had a draft ballot measure question as we move forward until tonight, there were some changes. This slide highlights the potential ballot measure question. The yellow is where we made the changes. So the ballot measure question would read City of Sausalito, no tax increase, park improvement safety measure. to bring Robin Sweeney Park, Southview Park, Dunphy Park, and the MLK site to current health safety standards repair unsafe children's playground equipment, upgrade safety lighting pathways and play courts add needed restrooms wetlands natural areas Shall the city of Sausalito enter an agreement with the Sausalito financing authority and permit revenue from the MLK site to be used as revenue Financing with no increase in taxes. So that would be the ballot measure question that staff is asking City Council to approve tonight to put on to the the November 3rd election so the key milestones that we have to reach in order to bring that ballot measure forward was tonight adopt a resolution calling for election and placing the measure on the ballot the deadline for doing that is Friday August 7th so if you pass that tonight the city clerk would get everything ready and and have it presented and accepted and recorded by the Marin County Board of Supervisors and the Registrar voters. Following that, there's submission of ballot arguments, ballot arguments for, ballot arguments against, and the deadline for doing that is August 17th. This date is different than the date that was in your staff report the deadline dates per Marin County is due to will be published with official dates in the newspaper on the city's website does that mean they could change still |
| 00:11:50.84 | Mary Wagner | No, just making sure we get the word out. |
| 00:11:51.16 | Charlie Francis | you Just. Oh okay so and then the then of course you know as with any ballot issue there's arguments for and then there's an against and then there's rebuttals to the for and the against arguments if people choose to make them and the August 24th is the deadline at 5 p.m. for those arguments to be submitted to the Sausalito City Clerk following that the election would be November 3rd 2015 Now, the fiscal impact of doing this, the cost to run an odd-year election is $1.75 to $3 per registered voters. The cost is shared amongst all the other public agencies that put ballot measures on the ballot. And so when they determine what those costs are, they prorate it, and that's why there's a range of $1.75 to $3. And based on the number of registered voters in Sausalito, we're estimating that at the outside, it'd be approximately $15,300 to run the election. So staff recommends that the city council adopt a resolution of the city council of the city of Sausalito calling for an election to be held on November 3rd, 2015, submitting to the voters a measure to approve the lease of the MLK school site to the Sausalito financing authority and the use of revenues from the MLK school site to be used as revenue financing to address park projects. Thank you. desperately needed park projects. And that concludes staff's presentation and available to answer questions that you might have. We also have with us Craig with our financing team, |
| 00:13:23.50 | Jill Hoffman | Do I have questions from the council? |
| 00:13:28.83 | Jill Hoffman | Councilman Pryor? Thank you. I do have a question. So Charlie, as I understand it, going forward with the decision that the city council made, on June 30th to go forward with the certificates of participation is not an option at this point because of the threatened lawsuit and the way that affects the ability to secure financing. |
| 00:13:49.86 | Charlie Francis | I'm sorry, to do what is not an option? |
| 00:13:52.37 | Jill Hoffman | To go forward as was voted by the city council on June 30th. |
| 00:13:55.12 | Charlie Francis | Oh. Well, it's not an option the investors, well, we can move forward. |
| 00:14:05.49 | Charlie Francis | Mary, help me out there. Yeah, if I may. I'm just trying to get some context. |
| 00:14:06.26 | Mary Wagner | If I may, Vice Mayor Hoffman, we were informed by the underwriters that they would not take this issuance to market with the letter that we received indicating that we were going to be sued. |
| 00:14:22.87 | Jill Hoffman | okay great and so then that's what prompted this this meeting tonight and The proposal to take it to the voters. |
| 00:14:31.03 | Mary Wagner | Correct. And we were working to bring the council options to consider, and that was the need for the special meeting and the action you have in front of you tonight. |
| 00:14:40.62 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and if we didn't go forward with the vote, let's, for instance, we waited to see someone file the lawsuit and then we just, the lawsuit went forward The timing on that would take, Mary, this might be a question for you, approximately six months. we look at the total resolution The final lawsuit, our response to the lawsuit, other people giving opinions on the lawsuit. |
| 00:15:03.01 | Mary Wagner | Yes, and I think there's actually two parts to that question. The assumption or question that was embedded in your question about how long would a validation action take, is the timing to bring a validation action? |
| 00:15:12.39 | Mayor Theodorus | take. |
| 00:15:17.81 | Mary Wagner | timing to bring a measure to the voters which we would need to get to the county by Friday. The deadline to submit a validation action to the court from the June 30th action of the city council is August 28th. It's 60 days from the date of the action. We believe that it would take approximately six months for that case to reach resolution at the trial court level. There are, of course, always appeal options to the parties involved in the litigation. And six months is an estimate. We don't know how quickly the Marin County courts are moving right now and how quickly they would move this item, but we believe that that's a good ballpark. |
| 00:15:59.46 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks, I think that's all the questions I had. |
| 00:16:04.67 | Jill Hoffman | Any questions in light of mind? Mayor Theodorus, any questions on the phone? |
| 00:16:09.08 | Mayor Theodorus | No questions, thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:16:10.41 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Um, All right, this is the time for public comment. And so I'm gonna read off of several names and you guys can line up. John Flavin is up first. Oh yeah, Terry Lang and Sila Seleski. Those are the first three. If you would like to make a comment, there are comment cards over at the side table. Thank you. |
| 00:16:38.78 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 00:16:39.79 | John Flavin | My name is John Flevin, I submitted an email earlier today with many of my opinions. The thing that I see lacking this evening is any reference to initiative ordinance 1128. you all are proceeding now pursuant to that ordinance. And that's what we ask of you on the night of June 30th. So you're making it sound like this person brought this suit to block the financing. They did not, my understanding, that they did not bring this suit to block this financing, but rather to have the majority who voted in favor of the financing comply with section, I mean with ordinance 1128. And I think that should be part of this voter initiative is that this is pursuant to Ordinance 1128, we are proceeding on this basis. Thank you. |
| 00:17:44.66 | Terry Lang | Thank you. |
| 00:17:44.94 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 00:17:46.26 | Terry Lang | Hi, my name is Terry Lang. I live at 119 West Street here in Sausalito. I've been a resident for 10 years. I have two children who attend school here in Sausalito. One goes to Sparrow Creek, Nursery school and the other goes to Willow Creek. They will both attend Willow Creek in the fall. I'm a proud resident of Sausalito and I think that If you look at the room around you, you'll see that there are other parents who are also proud residents of Sausalito, and that's why they're here. I'm incredibly disappointed. by the fact that one person can derail the momentum of what has taken Sausalito countless years to already get through. It's practically been a joke that the parks will not see the light of day until my children are in high school. I was hopeful, but now I'm not, because you can see that one person makes a difference. It's a $15,000 difference. How possible that in a let we have to have an election because one person says they disagree with ordinance 1128 or 9 or whatever it is and since then other people have come in and become tenants of that property it just doesn't make sense it's. And I would propose that perhaps the person that brought forward the lawsuit be countersued for the money that it costs to incur an election, or something along those lines. So today I was over at Sweeney Park. The park has been closed and will remain so, I think, for the next seven or so days. But you know what? It was full of children. There were approximately 50 children and 50 parents standing around the park because of the work that the friends of the library have done. And I wanted to bring some pictures because I think this is very important. This is not just today. This is every day and this is the way that it's been. for the last five plus years. So I think that it's imperative that we move forward as swiftly as possible. And going through with an election and a litigation is stopping this train. So thank you very much. I'm gonna pass out these images and I would hope that |
| 00:20:02.04 | Unknown | And, |
| 00:20:03.45 | Terry Lang | you take them into consideration. Thank you. |
| 00:20:20.63 | Jill Hoffman | Cecilia Seleski. |
| 00:20:21.97 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:20:22.09 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:20:22.12 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council members. I'm Celia Sileska, a long-term Sausalito resident, and I'm a member of the Park and Rec Commission. In light of the recent developments, I strongly urge you to adopt a resolution calling for an election in November asking voters to approve funding to address the major safety issues, upgrades, and improvements to these parks. We need to address our parks now. Thank you. |
| 00:20:53.08 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:20:56.75 | Jill Hoffman | Lisa Fredericks. Next year, Lisa Fredericks, David Sudo, and Jan Johnson. Thank you. |
| 00:21:04.09 | Lisa Fredericks | Hi, my name is Lisa Fredericks. You know, I can't say that I'm as up-to-date as everyone else on this subject, but it's been something I've been incredibly passionate about for quite some time. My husband's lived here for 20 years, I've lived here for 10. We have a two-and-a-half-year-old, a 16-year-old, and a 13-year-old. Um, For the longest time, I've been considering trying to create my own nonprofit. like Kiddo in Mill Valley and like several other communities to address the park issue. People who say, why do you live in Sausalito? all the time. And I have to say, all I see is tourists and bikes and it seems like the most unfriendly kid spot ever. And I steadfastly say it's a great community. There's diversity. There's so much to offer here. but I am heartbroken every time I go to a playground Or I say, hey, let's go to the playground, and my friend says, let's go to Tiburon. Let's go to Cordo Madera. Let's go to San Francisco. Let's go anywhere but here. And I was doubly astounded when I went to Marin City the other day and saw their lovely new park. It was just like. Really? So, You know, I am saddened because there seems to be, and I don't know if this is the case, my impression, some type of issue with old Sausalito and new Sausalito. Young families moving in here, people coming in and wanting to establish here. We have a great school now. It's really changed the tide of who lives here and why. And I see an older Sausalito, no change, don't do anything, no, no, no, fight, fight, fight. And it makes me just feel really sad because I feel like we can't progress. And it's kind of a smaller reflection of our entire country. You know, someone's going to fight, someone's going to fight, and nothing gets done. And so I would just urge you to do what you think is best to get this done as soon as possible, because I just think it's... terribly upsetting and I agree. It's like, are our children going to be in high school? by the time they have a decent park to play and we don't have to drive to another town in our county for them to play. Thank you very much. |
| 00:23:23.20 | David Sudo | Hi, David Sudo, 411 Locust. You know, I'm angry that we have to be here today. You know, it's clear from the ordinance that we could probably fight this lawsuit and win. Frankly, I think we should do both. We should fight this lawsuit, and we should pass this voter initiative. And if we prevail in the lawsuit, we should go after all our fees from the plaintiffs. Yes. Here, here, here. This is ridiculous that one person can hold us hostage or a small group of people can hold us hostage. Frankly, the same group of people that's holding us hostage here complain about how they're paying too much taxes and don't want to pay any more taxes. And for us to have to spend our time and spend our money to get things done that need to get done in town is ridiculous. Thank you. |
| 00:24:13.34 | Jill Hoffman | Could we please hold our applause to the end? I know it's nice to applaud, but let's be respectful of everybody that's coming here to talk tonight. |
| 00:24:23.04 | John Farrell | John Farrell on Johnson Street. Sorry to say, but I think a lot of people here are missing the point. Whether when the election comes it's a yay vote or a nay vote, that's in the future. This is not about that. This is about whether an election should be approved. and 1128 the city's ordinance says that in order for the MLK property to be leased, among other things, it has to require a public vote. People back in 1997, when that thing was passed, felt very strongly about that. It passed and 1128, which is one of the city ordinances, requires a public vote. You tried to to, run financing. without and do leasing without that, you got called out on it. and you've had to back down. I may say, I'm not sure. But my question is, what made you think that you could ignore 1128 in the first place. That's the key issue. Whether the thing is approved, I mean, who doesn't like parks, fine, a dandy, but that's an election issue which really people, I think, are misunderstanding. This isn't about that election issue. That's going to be, you know, subject to pro and con and so forth. The item here is 1128, and how is it that you thought that you could squeeze that by when it seems to me at least that language is pretty clear. And for the finance director to say, oh, well, you know, a democratic process will open it, well, that's rich. That's very rich, I must say. So it's a good thing that you finally saw the light, our council finally saw the light, I must say, and back down and have the election. When there's a public controversy like this and you've got an ordinance that says it has to go to the public, take it to the public. |
| 00:26:38.09 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Jan. |
| 00:26:40.94 | Jan Johnson | Jan Johnson, I've been here 22 years, I intend to die here. I want to say first to all the pro park people, I have nothing against kids playing in parks. I've devoted my professional life to the medical care of children. However, the population of Sausalito, based on the census in 2013, is about 7,099 people, of which there are 618 kids less than 18, which includes 355 kids less than five. If you average that out at $8.5 million, that's $13,754 per child. $2,162. Please let me speak. Yeah. Please let's be respectful. $162 per household. |
| 00:27:30.81 | Jill Hoffman | Please let's be respectful. |
| 00:27:37.11 | Jan Johnson | So I think that in this day and age of we don't know where we're going to pay for our pensions, we can't pay for our sewers, we need to carefully consider what we're going to do with aid on. million at $500 of debt. If MOK produces enough money to pay for that debt, then I would suggest we save that money on a yearly basis and turn that profit into park creation. The legal interpretation that allowed you to take your vote was quite creative. In my mind, it's clearly illegal. contradiction to the ordinance 1128 that the previous city council passed. And in the depth of that, they talk about maintaining the solvency of the MLK property. I personally think that there was some creative financial analysis going on here. And I have no faith that MLK property is going to pay off this huge mortgage without putting the very ownership of that property at risk and therefore negate the very purpose of having the park. If you can have an independent financial analysis that says this can actually be done, someone other than Charlie Francis, who keeps assuring us that we're in great fiscal solvency, but yet when we need the money, there's nothing there, then show it to us. How much interest money is this gonna cost us and when that interest money not be better spent on absolute needs in the community that can't take care of its basic infrastructure. So my opinion is you have to pass this to have a vote because it's in your very own ordinance. And I'm sorry someone had to sue you to get you to take the correct vote, but your previous vote was illegal. according to ordinance 1128. And if the parents want to have this go forward, then have an election and vote for it. And by all means, feel free to find a nonprofit and help pay for some of it. There's great parks at North street and third and fourth street. My nephew's play there. There's a great park across in the Star of the Sea, and there's the Licee Francaise school grounds that are perfectly adequate. |
| 00:29:57.15 | Jan Johnson | Thank you. |
| 00:29:58.54 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, next up is Lance Kameda. I think that's a good thing. Anyway, I can't read Doreen. Anyway, Doreen, we know who you are, and Natasha. And let me say again, everybody gets their minutes, okay? So let's not interrupt, and let's try not to have negative comments when someone's up here, because we try to be respectful of everybody who comes up here to speak at the podium. Thank you. |
| 00:30:19.22 | Lance Alameda | Good evening, my name is Lance Alameda. |
| 00:30:19.24 | Jill Hoffman | Good evening. |
| 00:30:23.68 | Lance Alameda | also known as the Walking Dad. You may remember me as the 1983 winner of the TV20 Dance Party Talent Competition Yes, that happened. Anyway. Okay, I'm not going to say I'm disappointed. I'm not going to say I'm upset. You can all tell by my face how I feel about this. And I've had so many differing opinions coming at me regarding 1128 public swimming pools You know, whether this was legal People took the time to figure out how to do what's right for the children of this city, because no one has been doing that for 30 years. 30 years. I've lived here almost 30 years. I've lived here almost 30 years. |
| 00:31:11.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:31:11.55 | Mayor Theodorus | I've lived here almost 30 years. I applaud you. |
| 00:31:18.37 | Lance Alameda | And nothing has changed. And every time something starts to change, somebody steps in. and says, I'm suing, I'm doing this, I'm doing that. And we just grind to a halt every damn time. And it's driving me batty. I'm on the point. of saying, you know what, my tax dollars should go to some other city. will go. |
| 00:31:51.56 | Lance Alameda | But on the other hand, I've never given up a fight. And as far as I'm concerned, from what I know, Correct me if I'm wrong. Can 1128 even go forward while there were current leases, people paying their leases? That's 17 years. No development can happen there for almost two decades. So are we going to be obstructed by people with nuisance lawsuits until my children are in grad school? Is this park going to deteriorate? And the star of the Southview, is that going to crumble into dust? because we have to have a public vote because somebody says it's illegal. Because 1128 said we had to vote. Well, you know what? If we've got to have, you know, what drives me crazy more than anything else is I walk the streets every day with my girls. And if I had known this was going to happen, I would have had a damn clipboard with me. and I would have gotten every single signature I could have gotten. because my girls deserve. A new park. Tired of it. And I'm tired of people thinking, You know, some woman came up here the other day and said she needed a community pool. Well, you know how much a community pool would cost? Over $100,000 a year just to put water in the damn pool. And what are we supposed to do? Everybody pay $3,000 for a membership? This is crazy. Why is this happening? And the saddest part is, It's going to set everything back at least eight months. Groundbreaking was supposed to happen in September. Now it may not happen until afterwards. And you know people are going to pass this. You know people are going to pass this. |
| 00:33:36.32 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:33:37.05 | Lance Alameda | Go Giants! |
| 00:33:39.24 | Jill Hoffman | I, I feel like maybe we need to take a cleansing breath. We all need to take a cleansing breath. Everybody gets to speak. Doreen, you have the podium. |
| 00:33:49.74 | Doreen Gunnar | Hello I'm Doreen Gunnar I am a resident of Saucido now for 21 years and I am the Park and Rec Commission chair. This is another setback for us who want parks. We understand that. And we also know that anything that's worth anything is often with a fight. So we're going to have to roll up our sleeves, everybody, and get to work because we're going to pass this ordinance. We're going to pass this, whatever we want to call this, referendum or whatever it is in November. We're going to do this. And more importantly, I think it's going to help the city understand who it is right now. And that's what we have to do. We just gotta put our energy there because we know this lawsuit can go on forever and ever and ever and we cannot let that stop us. That's just what we gotta do. So we're gonna roll up our sleeves and we all gonna get busy. I'll see y'all later. |
| 00:34:52.87 | Jill Hoffman | All right, okay, okay. Now you've all been warned. All right, Susan, the next three are Susan Cleveland Knowles, Jeff Knowles, and Alice Merrill. |
| 00:35:07.77 | Unknown | Hi, good evening. I'm Susan Cleveland Knowles. I'm a parent and a resident of Sausalito. And similar to other speakers, I'm sad and not a little angry to be here. I think that the lawsuit that is being threatened is irresponsible. I have read the letters, I've read the ordinance 1128. I think the legal arguments are completely unsupported. I think it thwarts a sound and thorough public process that we have all spent a lot of our time and a lot of our energy going through. A lawsuit is also expensive, time-consuming, and wasteful. As I've spoken about at earlier meetings, we need the park improvements. I cannot disagree enough with the prior speaker who said that our parks are adequate. They are deteriorating. They are unsafe. You have heard public comment at other meetings that children are being injured. and they don't comply with the ADA. This is not a situation that a town like Sausalito and the heart of Marin County should be facing. We have a civic duty to fund our parks and our other infrastructure. And you, the city council, voted to do that. And you voted legally to do that. You voted with the support of your attorney, and I think that the ordinance does not have Ordinance 1128. does not hold a legal argument. against your decision. The specific improvements to Rob and Sweeney are ready to go. They should go forward. and there is no reason that they shouldn't However, you're faced with a difficult decision. because there has been a lawsuit and the COP cannot be funded with that hanging over our heads. Given the unlikely event that the people that filed the lawsuit would be willing to withdraw it, which would be the right decision, I think you're either faced with litigating, which is time consuming, wasteful, and expensive, or going to the ballot, which is also time consuming, wasteful, and expensive. So I don't envy you your decision. Um, But I do think that the advantage to going to the ballot is that we will win. And... that, there will be an absolute decision after November. There are no appeals, there's no You're not subject to a trial court judge or the calendar of the Marin Superior Court. I think you have two bad choices, but I hope that you'll move to go to the ballot, not because you have to, but because you're being bullied into doing it. Given the two bad choices, I would go with that one. Thank you. |
| 00:38:13.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Jeff Knowles. |
| 00:38:19.27 | Jeff Knowles | Good evening, City Council. I'm Jeff Knowles. I've lived in Sausalito for 20 years. Together with Susan, we're raising our two children here, a rising third grader and a rising fifth grader at Willow Creek Academy, where I've been on the board for the last five years. I'm proud to be in this community. I'm proud to make it better. During my day job for nearly 30 years now, I'm a complex commercial litigator. I have reviewed The letters from Shoup Mahali, a law firm I know well, They're a good firm. I've litigated against them. They make the best arguments they can make. The arguments are meritless. I've reviewed Section 1128, Ordinance 1128. I've looked at the funding mechanism. That lawsuit should fail. But having litigated my whole career, I know how costly it is. I know how distracting it is. I understand that even if the investors hadn't been scared off by this lawyer letter, which is not surprising, it probably wouldn't make sense to fight that lawsuit. Meritless lawsuits also cost money. And so this move of going to the ballot is probably the best of a bad situation. My hope is that if there's a silver lining here at all, It's that this kind of thing, this obstruction of what is clearly a sound decision by the city council, clearly a legal decision by the city council. will cause a number of people in Sausalito, many people, who don't usually participate in the public process to come out and participate Vote in favor of this ballot measure And hopefully, maybe we get the momentum to actually take control of the political process maybe even someday repeal or amend ordinance 1128 so that it can't be used as an obstruction again. Thank you. |
| 00:40:08.48 | Jill Hoffman | THANK YOU. Oh, my God. |
| 00:40:12.65 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 00:40:12.68 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:40:12.78 | Alice Merrill | All right. Hello, Alice Merrill. Let's see, I live at 200 Johnson Street and I've actually lived here a really long time, but missing a few years. But I remember Sausalito a long time ago in the old days. And there were some parks around. They weren't fancy. They were adequate for 50s kids. But right now, this is going to be clearly the right thing to do. And what bothers me more than anything is if I'm... Correct, which I think I am, about the... group of people that really don't want this and have started this is is that it's the same group of people who didn't want us to go with the southern marin fire department and that was all voted on really quite fine and they sued so it had to go to a ballot so it won handily It smoothed right in, everything was fine. And that's what bothers me is that this is not the first time that this has happened. And, I don't... I don't know why this is happening and I just wish that it weren't but I'm clearly the ballot is the only solution at this point because of being bullied. So that's all I have to say thank you. |
| 00:41:47.55 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. The next three speakers that I have and the last three speakers I have are David Holub, Sybil Boutillier, and Camilla Brown. |
| 00:41:55.03 | Jan Johnson | you. |
| 00:42:01.21 | David Holub | Well, thanks for a moment to speak here. You know, I've stood up here before and talked about obstructionism, and I think it's really a problem, and it's something that we have to stop rewarding. in Sausalito. I mean, As other people have pointed out, There seem to be a handful of residents with You know, really an outsized influence over AND, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT over infrastructure and they've sort of appointed themselves as the gatekeepers of Sausalito's public infrastructure. and you know the city council represents all the residents of Sausalito There are 7,100 residents of Sausalito and the five or six people that fund a handful of political campaigns that fund these lawsuits. that have sort of appointed themselves as the gatekeepers for all of the rest of our infrastructure, I think is really inappropriate. And at a certain point the community needs to stand up and say, no, our interests are important. We do need a new ferry landing terminal. My daughter, she's outside now, is at the Sausalito Yacht Club right now. And the last two weeks, every single day, I've picked her up and dropped her off to the Sausage Hill Yacht Club. To quote Elizabeth Warren last night, you'd need to have fallen down and hit your head real hard to walk past that ferry landing terminal, see all of those bikes queued up, and not, just get that we need a bigger ferry landing station. It's just amazing to me. And yet, here we are again in another process of obstructionism obfuscation and throwing monkey wrenches in the legal system that prevent our community from getting the infrastructure it needs. I mean, it's a safety problem. These kids get break arms and legs and get hurt in these parks. You know, we don't have a good emergency plan for our community because there isn't going to be another way to get in and out of the community if and when something happens at the bridge. I've said this before, but you know, there's exactly a hundred percent chance we're going to have a 7.0 or greater earthquake in the next 20 years. And we don't have a plan. And we let a handful of people really hurt our safety, our quality of life, And at some point, you've got to stand up and act in the interests of everybody else. |
| 00:44:30.13 | Jill Hoffman | Um... Sybil? |
| 00:44:35.87 | Sybil Boutillier | Sybil Bertelier, resident of Sausalito, and I represent you on the Commission on Aging. I first would just mention, I have a 10-year-old and a 5-year-old in my life, Willow Creek students, and I had dinner with one of them tonight, the 10-year-old who said, Oh, I hope they fix the parks. We're really looking forward to it. But that's not why I'm here, actually. Obviously, that's going to be going forward. But the parks are not just for the kids. I'm a senior, and every day I take a walk in MLK Park, and I see 15, 20, 30 other seniors out there also. I spend a lot of time at Dunphy Park and we have a lot of seniors using the parks. I think it's very important to recognize that with 20 and more percent of South Slido being older people as well, that the parks are a very valuable resource for folks to get out, take the walks that they need to take, have places to rest, and have places to play games, which we do in the parks. I play every Tuesday with a group of seniors in Dunphy Park. I think these things are really important to realize that I just wanted to make this comment, especially because people need to understand this isn't just for the children. It is for the children, but it's also for all the rest of the residents. And so I'm glad you're taking these steps to keep things moving forward. I regret that we have to take extra steps, but I'm looking forward to it going forward. Thank you very much. |
| 00:46:25.27 | Camilla Brown | Thank you. |
| 00:46:25.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:46:25.45 | Camilla Brown | Thank you. Camilla? Hi. Gosh, it's been a while since I was on the mic. I've got to say I'm a little bit nervous. But I felt like I had to come tonight to speak up for my son and for so many other people's kids that are here tonight. We need the park. We need the park to get you know, a place where we can all hang out. And you're right, it's for the parents, it's for the children, Um, They thrive there. I have had a hard time explaining to my son for the past couple of weeks I've gone by you know, the wooden beams being in there, why we can't go to the park, but I'm comforting him saying it's going to be a better park. It's going to open soon again. And this was basically a kick in the butt. I don't know where it came from. I haven't met the lady. Is she here tonight? Is she here tonight? No, I wish he was. |
| 00:47:19.67 | Mayor Theodorus | No. |
| 00:47:21.97 | Camilla Brown | Yeah, sure. I guess I'm just confused in how one person with an opinion, whether it's legal or not, what she's telling you guys, then if she's legally correct, the law then has it changed? I feel like this should be the prime example. this to change. welcoming more children. I know I've lived in Sausalito for not that many years, four or five years, and I've seen it change on the streets. There are so many children, I mean, parents walking down with baby strollers. There are so many kids. They're multiplying by the day. and I agree with you too. We want the kids to play in a safe park. We want them to thrive. And again, me too. I went over to Marin City the other day, Boy, they got it going on over there. They got a barbecue section. They got a football field. They got... Otis couldn't believe it when he saw it. We pulled out. He said, Mom, you see that tree house? And I said, Otis, that's where we're going. He couldn't believe it. He was like, So I think we can do it. I know we can do it. Doreen, yes, we're pulling up our sleeves. But you shouldn't even have to go that far. I think... This is what we need. |
| 00:48:39.52 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:48:39.54 | Camilla Brown | So. Go get him. |
| 00:48:43.05 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I don't have any other speaker cards. State your name. |
| 00:48:51.29 | Natasha Damner | Hello, my name is Natasha Damner and I'm a Sausalito resident as well as a parent to a four and six year old. I'm really sad to be here again tonight taking time away from my children as I'm a working mother. to be here to fight again on something that I thought we has made a decision on. And now there's one person. who's not even here. who's hiding behind their attorney, that doesn't want it to be. any progress of the city. Everything the city has tried to do, this person has fought against. Southern Marin Fire Department, the ferry landing, This. And obviously this person has a lot of money. And I say, we have a leg to stand on, and we call her bluff. Let Pat Sue us. Spend all the money that she doesn't want to spend saying that this is going to cost the taxpayers. Now we have Rob and Sweeney Park that all of the kids have been so excited, they've been looking at these polls that they haven't been able to play in all summer, And now is it just going to sit like this until November when we put it on a ballot? I'm very confident that the parents of the city will pass this. But then what happens? Is Pat going to appeal it? What's going to be the next step? I don't understand. I feel that there's something shady going on and I don't know what the agenda is. Unfortunately, there was one person on the council that didn't vote for the parks to proceed. And the person that is putting the lawsuit forth is the biggest backer of this council member. So I think that's something we should also think about. And this is for the children and future generations of this city. And the fact that one person can bully us, hey, I'm gonna sue. is a game changer and it's just so depressing. I mean, I thought, God, I'm just a mom and I made a difference. And now stuff like this just continues to happen. I mean, where do they want to live? I don't understand their agenda. and I mean, I'm here for future generations of Sausalito and the type of people we should be bringing into this city and the type of people we want to continue this city to grow and flourish and thrive. Thank you. |
| 00:51:12.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:51:13.12 | Natasha Damner | Thank you. |
| 00:51:13.96 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, yes, I, yeah, one. Put in a card. |
| 00:51:21.68 | Janet Dean | Hi, it's clear that there's a feeling that I'm sorry. Can you state your name please? Janet Dean, I live on Casino Avenue, I've been here since the 60s. |
| 00:51:30.25 | Jill Hoffman | Can you say Janet Dean. |
| 00:51:36.46 | Janet Dean | And I am one of the original signatories of the initiative, which became 1128. And it's clear to me that um, this wrapping that ordinance around parks issue. has made it really emotional. for our parents and our citizens here. And so I want you to know that when that initiative happened. There were plans to turn Martin Luther King's school into a private health plan, I mean a private health club. I believe it was the Bay Club at the time. There were plans to turn our downtown parking lot into a two-story shopping center. that would, it was called a plaza, but there were two-story buildings that would have blocked the open water view. When I spoke to one of the architects about the wall that was in front of the water, It had a window in it, and his explanation was, we have to frame the view. So I think what's happening here is We just want to make sure that the people of Sausalito have a chance to vote for what they want. But the issue here, is, putting Martin Luther King's school again, at risk. of being lost through this very creative financing process. So while I taught nursery school, while we all love children and we all want our parks to be upgraded and we want Sausalito to be great for the young and the old and everybody, there's a false argument that you're being given right now that it's between parents and children and obstructionism. But Martin Luther King needs not to be risked. It needs to be here for generations to come. That's the issue. Thank you. |
| 00:53:36.22 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. you OK, no further, anybody else for public comment? All right, I don't see anybody. I have no further speaker cards. All right, so I'm going to bring it up here for council discussion. Anybody want to start off with council discussion? No one? I'll start off. You know, my feelings on this, I voted for the certificates of participation. I looked at the ordinance 1128, and I get 1128, I understand what it was for. The great irony is 1128 is to protect a public asset. So that's the protections in 1120. If you read through it, that's what it's for, is to protect MLK as a public asset of the people of the city of Sausalito. and to protect it from the danger of it falling out of the hands of the people of Sausalito. And so I'm cognizant of that and I respect that. And I respect the efforts of people who passed the ordinance 20, 30 years ago and their activism today to continue that protection of MLK. But on the other hand, I saw in the 1128 the room to go forward with the COPs. And so that's why I voted for it, especially given the protections that we had in the financing documents that the the, um, It would only run for a certain period of time concurrent with the current leases. that the money would be going to certain funds, and that those protections were being placed to ensure that the money that's raised by the MLK school would actually be used for the parks. And only a certain amount of money used for each park so that one park wouldn't suck up all the money that was raised amongst all of them. So that's why mainly I was for it. However... You know, the point now is, but there was a legitimate dispute about what the language of 1128 was. you know, said and what we had to do. Did it have to go to a vote or did it not? And so, you know, I give everybody's view respect in this town. And if you come to me and say, I have a legitimate legal concern about what can be done under this ordinance, then I'm going to listen to you. And at this point, if we had the time and we had the luxury of going to a judge, And having that heard before a judge, the two different the two different sides, then it would be of great value to have a judgment from that legal officer to tell us can this be done or can't be done that would be helpful going forward as well if we want to do other things, you know, sometime in the future with MLK, then we could always go back to that judgment and say, well, the judge ruled this way and this is what we think we can do. This is the interpretation. of the ordinance. You know, pragmatically, I don't think we have time for that. And I wouldn't want to waste the time to do that in this case. We have, you know, because the because the city hustled in the last few days, we're ready to put it to a vote. And I think that's a fair resolution rather than spending the time and money to take this to a judicial, to do the lawsuit. So, you know. Would we win or not win with a lawsuit? I don't know. You can never tell. I'm an attorney. Who knows? You know, you get up there, and who knows what the judge is going to do. I think we would have a good chance. I think the other side has a very legitimate argument as well. And so, you know, if we can move forward, the most expeditious way, I think, moving forward is to put it to a vote and let the people decide. |
| 00:57:09.40 | Jill Hoffman | Any other discussion? Go ahead. |
| 00:57:12.09 | Councilmember Weiner | Well, |
| 00:57:15.88 | Councilmember Weiner | First of all, 1128, we'll work on that after the next election. in November to overturn or move forward with this. I really recommend in the following election in November when we have the regular election that we put 28 on the ballot. to get rid of it. To me, it represents just like the Confederate flag. All right, it doesn't belong here. It's outdated. Just so you know, when they planned these things so far ahead, and by the way, most of these decisions were made out of fear. They were so afraid that there were going to be so many automobiles coming into Sausalito. We have less automobiles coming into Sausalito now than we did ten years ago. They voted, three, I can't say for all of them, but I know for a fact at least three or four of these people that are against this. They voted against the fire consolidation. Just so you know, we save over $300,000 a year just on overtime that we were paying, never mind the other features that we save on it. Same small little group. feeding off of fear. Okay? You have a very old population here also, about 24, 25%. And that's what they are driven by. They don't want to make any changes. and they don't really want to even see children. All right? |
| 00:58:54.47 | David Holub | more points. |
| 00:58:55.66 | Councilmember Weiner | Or, yeah, well, just for your information, when we get to a ferry terminal, 10 years ago there were 450,000 people came by Golden Gate Ferry. There are now 900,000 people coming by. And yet we're gonna still, with this small group, Stay many-minded. I think that we, it's a shame that we have to go in this direction. but I guarantee you that I work not only to make sure that you get your PACs done, But also that we get rid of 1128 where it belongs. Thank you. |
| 00:59:36.49 | Jill Hoffman | Any other discussions? |
| 00:59:39.27 | Councilmember (Unknown) | Yes, I have a comment. So I just want to say that I was one of the, well, I was the only council member who voted against this from the very beginning. I said that this proposal needed to go to a ballot vote because of ordinance 1128. I think that there is some perhaps misunderstanding regarding what 1128 is. If you Gabrielson Park 1128 protects Gabrielson Park you know Gabrielson Park is where we have jazz by the Bay if you like Vena Del Mar Park where the fountain is 1128 protects Vena Del Mar I heard about old Sausalito versus new Sausalito if you've ever ever used the soccer field, for your children have ever played baseball or little league there, or soccer, if you've ever used the tennis courts at MLK, the basketball courts, the dog park, all of those things were from parents just like you from decades past who fought for that. I know that in just five years ago, I was fighting to preserve open space in Sausalito that was threatened with potentially high density accommodation. It is a constant vigilance here in Sausalito to preserve the small town character that we love. It's not anti-Park to support a citizen's initiative. 1128 clearly says that this should go to a vote. And no, my only supporter is not the person who happens to agree with me that this should go to a ballot vote. I have many supporters in town because of where the values that I stand for and the integrity I have to stay the course in that. What's anti-park is not making parks a regular annual priority in our budget every year. This should not be a fire drill running around, oh, now we just passed a sales measure, measure O. bringing in a million dollars in new revenue, which was supposed to include parks. And yet here we are challenging 1128 without a ballot vote going in after for $8.5 million. So it needs to go to a ballot vote. What is before us today is a big loan. It's secured by an important piece of property with an initiative that requires a democratic vote. It was initiative by the people, by the people of Sausalito. From the beginning I have said and I will continue to say that I will stand by the people of Sausalito. This is not being derailed by one person. is this is being honored for the spirit forance 11-26-28 is all about, which is the democratic process. Thank you. |
| 01:02:49.86 | Councilmember Withey | I have been thinking what words come to mind. disappointment. Puzzm-on Resolve. I'm disappointed like all of you. I'm saddened that we're here. Not because I'm having to spend my Tuesday night. It's a pleasure to dedicate the service. No, that's not it. I'm saddened and disappointed because we're here because we've been bullied. And many of you said that. We're here because We've been advised, we've heard some of you who are experts. I've looked at being no expert myself. 1128, Ordinance 1128 does not require us. By my reading and by all the expert advice I've been given, does not require us to go to a vote of the people in order to do this financing. I have no doubt, and let me just say this, I have no doubt that Pat Zook, who initiated this lawsuit, is doing so with honorable intentions. I have no doubt about that. She truly believes, fervently believes, in 1128 and its goals. But this is an example of Ordinance 1128 being used as a weapon. being used as a club to actually stop us doing what we think the majority of residents want. Now, I'm puzzled because the grounds for suing us is the nature of the transaction that involves the lease and the leaseback. And yet in 1999, after Ordinance 1128 was signed, we did the same thing. Nobody objected. Nobody sued us. Not till today. What's different? What's different? Well, I have my ideas as to what's different, but that's not the purpose for now. The purpose for now is to keep our eyes on the ball |
| 01:05:10.86 | Unknown | . |
| 01:05:11.03 | David Holub | What's the objection? |
| 01:05:23.42 | Councilmember Withey | to figure out how to win this in November and get our parks done. That's what we must do. That's what we must focus on. And that's what we must dedicate and have resolve to do and finish, because that's what I believe our majority of our residents want. And yes, next year we may want to actually ask the question, should we have an ordinance in our books that can be used as a weapon? That's for the community to cite. That's for you to cite. Right now, it's about our parks. |
| 01:05:58.86 | Councilmember Withey | Uh... Oh, yes. |
| 01:06:02.94 | Mayor Theodorus | Yes. Can you hear me? Okay. My apologies for having to participate on the phone. I know it's difficult to, follow, so I'll keep it short. Firstly, I'd just like to say I fully support the COP to fund our parks. It's one of the most exciting and positive things we've done in years. So we have to keep it. Keep. eye on that. That's very important. When we pass the COP, and the resolution we were on solid legal ground that we could authorize the COP. We had legal opinions on that and there's no question we're on legal, we're on solid legal ground. However, in light of this threatened lawsuit, and the time and cost that would entail the, go through it. The most expeditious thing is to bring it to a vote in November. Let's just do it. Let's authorize that tonight. We can deal with clarifying or eliminating 1128 in the future, we shouldn't have to go through this again to really, take action that is positive for the cities. So I, um, totally support uh, putting the ballot measure, uh, on this November, and I would vote to do so. Thank you. |
| 01:07:16.92 | Councilmember (Unknown) | I do have a comment because I wasn't going to mention this, but 1999 was raised. And I went back and I looked at 1999 and read the minutes from 1999. And I think it's important to clarify that in 1999, 100 percent, you read the minutes. I encourage you all to do that. It's online. 100% of the borrowings were represented in all the hearings as 100% for MLK property maintenance and improvements it was also a bank loan wasn't a certificate of participation and finally at the last meeting back in on September 28th 1999 when they did add a couple more projects to that list, it was for tax reasons. They said it was to preserve tax exemption, but the entire intent was to spend it only on MLK maintenance. Furthermore, one of the names that was raised by city staff as supporting it back in 1999, That very individual wrote a letter to counsel stating his belief that this needed to go to a ballot vote not not saying whether he supported it maybe he would vote and foot in favor of it but he said regardless of whether he favored it that he felt it needed to go to a vote because the terms are very, very different. I think it's very misleading for people to keep telling residents that what is being proposed today is exactly the same as 1999. Please read the data, read the history. I think you'll find a very different story. |
| 01:08:57.34 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. All right, any other rebuttals or comments? |
| 01:09:02.84 | Councilmember Weiner | Just one, our job up here, you know, what did you elect us for? Every time an issue comes up, it's got to go to a vote to the public. You don't need us. Okay. It's so out of touch, all right, and to just keep in mind that |
| 01:09:11.50 | David Sudo | The President. Thank you. |
| 01:09:25.25 | Councilmember Weiner | You have a certain element in it. Look, I've been in this town 39 years. I had my shell station for 33 years. I've been on this council for nine years. And I've been bucking the same group that always thinks that they want to preserve the town the way it never was. |
| 01:09:44.17 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. Thank you Councilman Weiner. And anybody else? you Okay. So, |
| 01:09:51.27 | Councilmember Withey | Madam Vice Mayor. |
| 01:09:52.51 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 01:09:52.76 | Councilmember Withey | I would like to make a motion. So, um... we need to get this right. Thank you. Ahem. So do we need to read out the words of the measure? Mary, could you help us out here a little bit as to what we actually need to, what the motion needs, how it needs to be crafted? |
| 01:10:17.72 | Mary Wagner | Thank you, Councilmember Withey. If the city council agrees with the modifications to the ballot language that are on the screen in front of you and that I believe are placed on the dais, you would simply need to make a motion to approve the resolution in your staff report, incorporating the revisions to the ballot language that you've received this evening. |
| 01:10:39.57 | Councilmember Withey | So I make a motion to approve the resolution in our staff report. Can it be that simple? With the changes that are tracked up on the screen here and that we have in writing before us of this particular ballot measure question. |
| 01:10:59.28 | Councilmember Weiner | Second. |
| 01:11:00.87 | Jill Hoffman | That's sufficient. |
| 01:11:01.41 | Councilmember (Unknown) | Thank you. |
| 01:11:02.71 | Councilmember Withey | Thank you. |
| 01:11:02.72 | Councilmember (Unknown) | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:11:02.91 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:11:02.96 | Councilmember (Unknown) | Thank you. Thank you. And just for the record, I just want to clarify that later, it's my understanding, there will be discussions to firm up the wording with respect to making the vote bindings. |
| 01:11:21.54 | Mary Wagner | Staff will continue to have discussions with the lawyers who have been engaged to bring the validation action, and we'll bring that back to you for further consideration if we can agree upon language, which clarifies in their letters, which are part of your packet tonight. They've asked a very specific question, and then upon further conversation, we want to work with them on what it is they're actually asking for. And yes, when her attorney returns from vacation, we will continue to work on that issue. potentially be bringing back a resolution for your consideration before the end of the month. at another special city council meeting. |
| 01:11:58.49 | Councilmember (Unknown) | Thank you. |
| 01:11:59.00 | Mary Wagner | That would not alter the course that the city council is taking this evening. It simply would clarify what happens if the voters say no. |
| 01:12:10.27 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I think we're ready to take a roll vote, Lily. |
| 01:12:16.11 | Lily (City Clerk) | Councilmember Weiner. |
| 01:12:17.16 | Councilmember Weiner | Yes. |
| 01:12:18.20 | Lily (City Clerk) | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Yes. Councilmember Withey? Yes. Vice Mayor Hoffman? |
| 01:12:21.18 | Councilmember Weiner | Yes. |
| 01:12:23.82 | Lily (City Clerk) | Mayor Theodorus. |
| 01:12:27.93 | Lily (City Clerk) | That passes 5-0. |
| 01:12:30.22 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and I think since that's the only thing on our agenda this evening, are we adjourned? We are adjourned. |
| 01:12:35.37 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:12:35.79 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:12:35.82 | Mary Wagner | you |
| 01:12:35.99 | Jill Hoffman | Motion and a second. Motion. Motion. Do we have a motion to adjourn? So moved. Yes. Second. Third. Aye. Thank you. |
| 01:12:38.42 | Mary Wagner | The most important. |
| 01:12:39.57 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:12:39.59 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |