| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:11.66 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:12.18 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:00:13.92 | Mayor Theodorus | Welcome to the regular meeting of the Sausalito City Council for Tuesday, September 1st, 2015. Lily, would you take the roll, please? |
| 00:00:21.70 | City Clerk | Councilmember Weiner. Thank you. |
| 00:00:22.81 | Mayor Theodorus | President. |
| 00:00:23.20 | City Clerk | Thank you. Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Councilmember Withey? Here. Vice Mayor Hoffman? |
| 00:00:26.56 | Mayor Theodorus | Take care. |
| 00:00:28.85 | City Clerk | President? Mayor Theodora. |
| 00:00:30.22 | Mayor Theodorus | present we we will uh shortly adjourn uh to close session to discuss items d1 through d3 of the agenda would anyone in the public like to comment on those closed session items at this point please |
| 00:00:55.31 | Unknown | Members of the City Council, thank you very much for hearing me speak. I'm here to address an item on the closed session agenda, which is the pending negotiation, the pending culmination of the contract and salary establishment for city employees, both police and fire and other city employees. I don't have, I'll leave to others information on the data about whether the salary is, too high or too low. I'm deeply troubled by the process. The process is, well, corrupt would be too dramatic a word, but it's words with that level of distaste when All of us have a non-civic life and non-public life where we buy and sell things, we negotiate for things, we sell things on eBay, we rent our house, we buy our house, we hire employees, we hire domestic help. When we do that, we are dealing in our own money, and we hopefully are prudent We try to get the best deal we can. And it's not because we're mean-spirited, it's because we try to do the best that we can. and the party with whom we're negotiating, does the same thing. And. that negotiation. between consenting adults, both trying to do the best they can the seller trying to get the highest possible price the buyer trying to pay as little as possible produces a generally irrefutable market price and we know Generally in a market environment, we know we're getting, both sides are getting a good deal. Compare that with the process by which we decide how much to pay our workers. We have the city has a city employee negotiating on behalf of myself, on behalf of you, on behalf of all the citizens. He has the great pleasure of negotiating. AND with somebody else's money. not his own money. It's not your own money, it's our money. But it's a great luxury when you get to spend somebody else's money all the time. It's pretty heady stuff. the. the city, the employees negotiating on behalf of the city are generally negotiating not against their friends, but with their friends. They know each other. It's all very convivial, cordial. The negotiations end, and they sit down. They both sides of the table. we'll spend the rest of the workday working together. hardly an adversarial relationship, hardly one designed to produce the best the best deal. I defy any of you. to look at me. look at your citizens, look at yourselves in the mirror, and say to yourselves, the contract you are voting on is a good deal negotiated at arm's length. It's a giveaway and that the process has been corrupted and there has not been the adversarial nature designed to produce a good result. any employee in the city. could be replaced by somebody who would do the same job for less, and we don't even know that. We are just giving away the money, and that's shameful. Thank you so much. |
| 00:04:19.37 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. Please state your name. |
| 00:04:27.58 | Wendy Richards | Wendy Richards. So I have a goal. My goal is that the people that work for me, the people that I pay, have their interests aligned with mine. that they have their risks aligned with mine, And I do not see either of those happening in this agreement. I also have a goal when I manage people that people have incentives that incentivize them to do the best work. This agreement doesn't do that either. Let me cover a few other points. In case you missed it. The markets fell. In case you missed it, oil was near $40. In case you missed it, the chinese markets dropped in case you missed it Macy's blamed the lack of Chinese buyers for their falling revenues. The city depends on tourism, tourists are slowing down, Macy's can't make their numbers. China cut its rates, they are going to be exporting deflation. There is no inflation right now. The economy is barely growing 2.2%. I just got my health insurance for next year from Kaiser. Health insurance, right? You think it's going to go up 5%, 10%, 20%? Including the fact that I'm a year older, so I'm in a new category. two percent. And that's for a new category. There's no inflation. Let me cover another point. What the rest of us live in the market, the new normal. uncertain work. This just came from my recycling. I didn't have to look far. I took a taxi from the airport in LA to a meeting. Oh, sorry, I tried to Uber for the first time. Do you know what it cost? $8 and some change. $8 for two of us from the airport. On the way back, it was busy hour. $12.63. Do you think those people driving are making any money at all? None zero zip. If you put through this contract, we will have three, five people on our staff making more than our Congress members make. Our city manager will be close to our Supreme Court. The numbers are staggering. It's wrong. We need to tear it up and start wrong. over I looked at this thing called steps. If you add up the proposed increases with the things called steps, it's a 50% increase at the end of the last step. 50% that in just those few five jobs is nearly $150,000. Who is going to pay this? You promised us long term, long range planning. Where are our revenues going to be in five years? Where is the homework on this thing? What's the real impact? They've only given you one year of numbers. I sat at home and added them up. It's staggering. Please don't waste another minute on this agreement. Tear it up. Start over. Thank you. |
| 00:07:49.14 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? |
| 00:07:51.94 | Wendy Richards | We can do better, really. |
| 00:07:55.38 | Mayor Theodorus | Anyone else like this? Public comment on the closed session items? |
| 00:08:03.53 | Mayor Theodorus | Oh, not consent. That's after 7 o'clock. This is on anything D1 through D3. Okay. See no further public comment. We'll adjourn to closed session. |
| 00:08:32.02 | Mayor Theodorus | Welcome everyone to the regular meeting of the Sausalito City Council for Tuesday, September 1st, 2015. Lily, would you like to take the roll, please? |
| 00:08:40.00 | City Clerk | Councilmember Weiner. |
| 00:08:41.47 | Unknown | President. |
| 00:08:42.26 | City Clerk | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Councilmember Withey? Thank you. |
| 00:08:45.15 | Mayor Theodorus | here. |
| 00:08:45.20 | City Clerk | THE END OF THE END OF THE Vice Mayor Hoffman. |
| 00:08:48.25 | Jill Hoffman | President. |
| 00:08:49.10 | City Clerk | Thank you. |
| 00:08:49.13 | Mayor Theodorus | Mayor Theodorus. Can we have Pat Guasco lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, please? |
| 00:08:57.10 | Unknown | He's usually underground. I know, we got him. He's dressed today. |
| 00:08:58.21 | Mayor Theodorus | The President. |
| 00:09:02.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:09:02.85 | Unknown | allegiance to the flag of the |
| 00:09:02.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:09:02.90 | Unknown | to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God. |
| 00:09:03.96 | Unknown | Amen. |
| 00:09:05.03 | Councilmember Weiner | of the United States of America. and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. |
| 00:09:18.59 | Mayor Theodorus | were in closed session but we do not have any announcements coming out of closed session um do we have any public comment on our closed session items items d1 through d3 Seeing no public comment, we'll move on to item E, approval of agenda. Would someone like to make a motion to approve the agenda? So moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. That passes five zero. |
| 00:09:42.34 | Unknown | I'm not sure. All right. |
| 00:09:49.56 | Mayor Theodorus | Um, So the first thing on our agenda is the introduction of the Sausalito graduates from the 2015 Southern Marin Management Academy. And the presenter will be Human Resources Manager Susan Patterson. |
| 00:10:05.98 | Susan Patterson | you |
| 00:10:11.51 | Susan Patterson | Good evening, Mayor Theodorus, council members. For the record, I'm Susan Patterson, the HR manager with the city of Sausalio. And I am here to say thank you so much for the Southern Marin Management Academy. This is our third academy. And, of course, as with all things, practice makes perfect, and I think it's the best academy that we've had yet. So those of you who are not familiar with it, it's a management academy that lasts for eight months, one session every month for a full day. And the academy graduates go over things such as leadership and vision, financial management, strategic management, and strategic planning. conflict resolution, risk management, communications, and more. This year, it has been an excellent academy. The class has really bonded together, works well together, and is in a formal negotiation for networking with all the cities. This year we had the city of Sausalito, the city of Mill Valley, the town of Tiburon, the city of Belvedere, and the Southern Marin Fire Protection District with the expansion of Central Marin Police Authority and the city of Larkspur. Unfortunately, Marin City was not able to join us this year because of new employees. But with that, I proudly would like to announce our Southern Marin Management Academy graduates with the city of Sausalito. Augie Webb, librarian two. |
| 00:11:46.13 | Susan Patterson | Rhett Rettlings, our IT manager. |
| 00:11:51.57 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:11:53.98 | Susan Patterson | Mark Carey, our fleet maintenance coordinator. |
| 00:12:00.17 | Susan Patterson | Pat Glosco, our sewer maintenance coordinator. Sergeant Bill Frost wanted to be here this evening, but he is on vacation. But Kenneth Henry is here, who is our building inspector. And he would like to say a few words on behalf of the class. |
| 00:12:22.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:12:23.38 | Kenneth Henry | Council, thank you very much for your vision in allowing this type of thing to be given to the opportunity to staff to become more familiar with the overall big picture of what goes on in our cities. I'm sorry. quite often. us at staff level, we don't have the understanding, the broad view of what goes on at the administration level, the department head level, and what this class did is this brought the information to the staff members we did have a great opportunity to network amongst different communities different ways of the the cities and counties doing their job one of the things that we practiced was role playing throughout the the course of the 10 months and we found that the interaction with the actual this is the scenario, play it out. We got a good understanding of what it is they're, um, the overall picture. And. It comes directly from Adam down to our level, which is you need to be informed, and these are the things that you're responsible for. We learned about risk management, conflict resolution. One of the things that was unique to me is the generational diversity on the four different generations that are currently in our workforce. Um, Risk management, Ms. Wagner gave a fantastic presentation as to what it is we're really out there and responsible for and the best way to practice risk management as the priority assessment and the best way to practice. Mr. Pulitzer. had really had the vision for the Academy group, and Ms. Patterson carried out the execution of it, and I'm part of the third... of the alumni of the the Southern Marine Management Academy, and I'm very blessed to have had that opportunity, and I want to thank everyone for that opportunity. Adam, Ms. Wagner, Ms. Patterson? The council, thank you. |
| 00:14:36.50 | Susan Patterson | On a final note, I just want to share that in the last three years, we have had 20 city employees graduate with the Southern Marin Management Academy. And some of those employees are here, and I want to acknowledge Lily Shinsing. We have Peggy Gill. Lily Whalen. Pardon me, Lily. Habit. Jeff Dibdahl is here. Peggy Gill is here. And for that, and myself. So I've had a great time being the coordinator, and thank you. |
| 00:15:11.77 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you all for participating. We're all proud of you doing that. And I think it really adds to both your professional development and your involvement in the community. So it's a wonderful thing. And thank you all. Any other comments? Okay, thank you. Moving on to next item is communications. I'm not sure. This is the time for the city council to hear from citizens. regarding matters that are not on the agenda, except in very limited situations, state law precludes the council from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. However, the council may refer matters not on the agenda to city staff. Would anyone from the public here today like to speak on anything that is not on tonight's agenda? you If anyone. Okay. Seeing none, we'll move on to item three, action minutes of previous meetings. We have minutes for regular council meetings of July 21. I think some of these are special meetings of August 4th and August 25. Do we have a motion to approve those minutes? Anyone have any comments before that? |
| 00:16:23.95 | Councilmember Weiner | I move to approve the action minutes of City Council meetings of July 21st, August 4th, and August 25th, 2015. |
| 00:16:35.79 | Unknown | second. |
| 00:16:37.29 | Mayor Theodorus | All in favor? Aye. Passes 5-0. Moving on to item 4, consent calendar. |
| 00:16:38.63 | Councilmember Weiner | . |
| 00:16:43.59 | Mayor Theodorus | Matters listed under the consent calendar are considered routine and non-controversial. require no discussion or expense are expected to have unanimous Council support and may be enacted by the Council in one motion in the form listed in the agenda. There will be no separate discussion of Consent calendar items. However before the council votes on a motion to adopt the consent calendar items council members city staff or members of the public may request that specific items be removed from the consent calendar for separate action. So we'll bring it up here first. Anyone have any comments or issues on the consent calendar. |
| 00:17:19.77 | Unknown | I do. Go ahead, Councilwoman Pfeiffer. |
| 00:17:23.02 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I was going to request pulling A and B and F or having a roll call on B and F? And I just have some questions around A. |
| 00:17:40.88 | Mayor Theodorus | B. Thank you. |
| 00:17:42.75 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Okay, A is... Yeah, I get that. Okay, and B and F is the mooring field. |
| 00:17:42.79 | Mayor Theodorus | Okay, A is? Yeah, I get that. Okay, and B? Before we take that, anyone else have any comments or requests regarding it? Then we can put them together anyway. |
| 00:17:49.65 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I just... |
| 00:17:56.39 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I would suggest that we take B off and pull it for discussion, because I have a couple questions about that as well, about the resolution urging the state legislature to create. I have a question about some of the language in the resolution. |
| 00:18:05.82 | Mayor Theodorus | Okay. Okay, so we'll pull item B, and we want to move that to the very end of the calendar. Sure. Okay. And we'll put that after as item 6C. And okay, so that's... Any, and I'm sorry, so we had A question on item A. Council member Pfeiffer, do you want to have that question? |
| 00:18:33.98 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yeah, I just, and perhaps we need to pull this, I don't know. I received an email from a former Historic Landmarks Board member, two former members, who commented that this is regarding the historic preservation work on the elephants and the fountain. And I'm so impressed with the person we've lined up to do this restoration, but I wanted to share this information, which is the elephants have a very thin mortar veneer over brick interiors. |
| 00:19:08.14 | Mayor Theodorus | Can we make sure that's entered, that you'll give a copy of this to the clerks that we have this? We should have anything presented. |
| 00:19:14.10 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Perhaps we could discuss A, B then, because I'm not prepared to approve A knowing that it could go forward without, you know, a discussion of the council and perhaps direction. |
| 00:19:24.64 | Mayor Theodorus | Before, what's the issue though, what's the concern? |
| 00:19:27.44 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Well, I'm concerned that it could hurt the elephant statues, the proposed mode of restoration, as well as the water pressure and the sealants, according to what they've said. |
| 00:19:43.14 | Mayor Theodorus | you |
| 00:19:43.32 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:19:43.37 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. All right, I guess anyone else have any comment on that? I mean, I thought we had somebody, I thought you just started your comment that you said they respected the person. |
| 00:19:52.08 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I do respect his background and expertise. However, every historic landmark is unique. And we have two HLB members who have decades of knowledge around these elephants that gave me cause for concern that perhaps information he needed to hear. |
| 00:19:53.95 | Mayor Theodorus | BEFORE. |
| 00:20:17.07 | Mayor Theodorus | For the city manager my understanding that I have to look at this is mainly for retaining retaining them is this specifying we getting that level of detail in this contract? |
| 00:20:20.55 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Sure. |
| 00:20:20.99 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:20:23.81 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:20:23.82 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:20:23.97 | Adam Politzer | That's it. |
| 00:20:24.18 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:20:28.78 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 00:20:28.80 | Adam Politzer | I don't believe it goes into that level of detail, but our public works director is here. If you want to ask him any specific questions or give him direction before. commencing any work. |
| 00:20:40.29 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | We could agendize it and I could ask just a few questions. |
| 00:20:43.16 | Mayor Theodorus | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:20:43.90 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:20:43.92 | Mayor Theodorus | Let's move that down to item 60 then. Thank you. Yeah, let's see what he said. Well, we can do it all at one time, so. |
| 00:20:51.03 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So. |
| 00:20:52.43 | Mayor Theodorus | What? Oh, he wouldn't say, well, if you think we can do this, then we can say Jonathan. Two quick questions. Sure. All right, Jonathan, let's, all right, I'm overruled here. I'm fine. And, uh. |
| 00:20:56.05 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Two quick questions. |
| 00:20:57.98 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 00:20:59.99 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I'm fine. |
| 00:21:01.54 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 00:21:01.59 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I'm sorry. |
| 00:21:01.62 | Mayor Theodorus | We're gonna have you come back and you get to walk back and forth a little bit. |
| 00:21:01.74 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | you I just didn't want to derail us. |
| 00:21:04.91 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. You really? |
| 00:21:05.93 | Jonathon Goldman | It's good for me. |
| 00:21:06.11 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 00:21:08.64 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Okay, so really quickly, I guess the contract here mentions water pressure, and according to the email I have, the elephants have a very thin mortar veneer over brick interiors and cannot take pressure washing, which can lift the veneer. So can you comment on that? |
| 00:21:28.81 | Jonathon Goldman | I appreciate having that information. I wasn't aware of that. I, too, fundamentally trust the expert that we're recommending that the council authorize being retained. But if the council would like to have that consultant come and discuss their approach and conceivably even meet with the folks that you're referring to in advance so that whatever assurances are warranted can be produced. I'm happy to arrange that. If that's the case, I would suggest this be continued to a future meeting. |
| 00:22:12.89 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | The other part of it is that the, I guess the HLB worked closely with the company that did the last restoration of the cleaning of the fountain and elephants and recommended not to add a sealant to the old works because they needed to breathe and the sealant would need to be repeated every several years. So that was the other half of it. So perhaps we could continue this and perhaps explore the methodology, because it could also impact the price. Because right now it's $35,000, and if it can't be water pressured, if it has to be more minutely cleaned, it might increase, it might decrease the price, I don't know. |
| 00:22:53.62 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:22:54.65 | Mayor Theodorus | Can you forward the comments to Jonathan? And then possibly you could look into them |
| 00:22:56.44 | Unknown | that we're going to have |
| 00:22:57.40 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:23:00.64 | Mayor Theodorus | And the next time it comes through, you can address them. Hopefully we can do it on consent rather than have someone come down and add the expense and time. |
| 00:23:07.44 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yeah, and I just got this before the council session, or I would have, you know, forwarded it earlier. |
| 00:23:12.56 | Jonathon Goldman | Absolutely. |
| 00:23:12.99 | Mayor Theodorus | we're gonna pull that for now with instructions that you afford the information and Jonathan and then they'll work on addressing those concerns. Okay. |
| 00:23:15.05 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. Yes. Thank you. Just didn't want to hurt the elephants. |
| 00:23:21.38 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. Thank you. All right, now we're on item 6F. Do you have questions on 6F? I'm sorry, 4F. |
| 00:23:34.53 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I have issues with 4F because I've made no secret that I have several questions and concerns around the mooring fields and don't support them. And that we're contributing 3,000 for a forum on this. I have an issue with that. |
| 00:23:56.60 | Mayor Theodorus | Well, do you realize, just so you understand, this is so that we can educate our residents and have more public input on this issue. So that, I mean, it's exclusive. And maybe I'll defer to. |
| 00:24:05.36 | David Sudo | Yeah. |
| 00:24:05.38 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I mean, |
| 00:24:05.69 | David Sudo | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 00:24:08.97 | Mayor Theodorus | committee members here, but that, I mean, we're not taking a position on this here. It's merely, uh, to make sure that the residents have a forum so that they can have as much information and input as possible. |
| 00:24:20.24 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So, like I said, I think this is a really... bad idea personally but if RBRA wants to hold a workshop my experience with some of their past workshops and others are they're more we're going to do this in the here all the reasons why if they want to do a workshop to to to extol the benefits of a mooring field then I think it should be on their dime not ours |
| 00:24:46.79 | Unknown | She's right. |
| 00:24:47.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:24:47.83 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | because I think it encourages the increased population of anchor outs we already have. |
| 00:24:52.69 | Unknown | To my knowledge, most of the cost is going to go out to a mailer, if anything. to the residents so they can be able to participate in the future of what goes on. |
| 00:25:05.16 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Wow, that's a lot more than we did for some of the housing element policies that some people were advocating. |
| 00:25:08.02 | Unknown | The policies. People were advocating. We don't have the. |
| 00:25:11.95 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:25:12.81 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:25:12.91 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yeah, I just don't support this. That's all. I don't support it. |
| 00:25:13.03 | Unknown | . Thank you. I don't support this, that's all. |
| 00:25:16.03 | Jill Hoffman | support it look if I could if I can interject so um herbs are are representative to the RBRA which is the Richardson Bay Regional Authority and so that's the five entities that have a jurisdiction over Richardson Bay so that board um is is was put together to help manage Richardson Bay and so they had a workshop last spring in March a full day workshop There were conclusions from that workshop and an after report. And Ben Berto came in from the county to give us a recap of what the workshop, what happened. And then we decided instead of, and then RBRA voted to go have these big, you know, very involved sort of public outreach. And we said, well, let's start with one. |
| 00:25:56.43 | David Sudo | the |
| 00:26:01.76 | Jill Hoffman | and we're gonna do it at Spinnaker hopefully in November. It's going to be basically Ben Berto telling again the results of what the workshop, the conclusions were, much like he did when he came to city council. We pared it down from a $40,000 cost to a $3,000 cost, and most of that cost is informing the citizens through the mailer and every other means possible. Yeah, to come down and become informed about just sort of what the scope of possibilities are from RBRA. And so, and part of that also, by the way, is public comment. And so it's not a workshop, it's merely a recitation of what occurred at the workshop that was held in March. Hopefully... People will come down. We're shooting for the second week in November. |
| 00:26:47.48 | Unknown | November 12. |
| 00:26:49.18 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:26:49.20 | Unknown | Yeah. LEADER. |
| 00:26:49.97 | Jill Hoffman | That's the thought of this. |
| 00:26:53.89 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I understand the thought of that. And again, if it's going to be a rehash of his presentation that RBR made to us, I found it lacking in complete data in terms issues around the current population of the anchor outs in terms of what they were proposing to do, which is basically um, make it permanent out there, the population increase. So there were things that came out of that presentation because I was able to interject and ask questions throughout. I did not see that presentation, I saw it as a sales job, a pitch for mooring fields. I did not see it as we've got an anchor out population increase out there and how can we reduce that and what are the grants we could pursue or what have you, you know, like what the other anchorages have done. Well, other anchorages have closed down because of the environmental issues and the criminal element. So anyway, I'm just saying, I see this as a big PR push. It's going to be like his presentation. It's just going to be the same. This is why we need to do this. I would have to be there and be interjecting to get my viewpoints across. |
| 00:28:12.54 | Adam Politzer | Mr. Mayor, if I can just interject here, because you're going on a little bit on this item, either pull it and put it at the end or take a separate vote, which is what I thought I heard. No, I think we're ready to vote on this one. |
| 00:28:20.22 | Mayor Theodorus | No, I think I think we're ready to vote on this one. I think I think we understand Councilmember Pfeiffer's position. Now before I do that, so what I think we're going to recommend, we'll take a vote on that. We'll vote on the other consent items. But we do need to open it up to any public comment and any items on the consent calendar. Do we have any public comment? Okay. Seeing none, I think we'll move to this item, item 4F, and we'll take an individual roll call on that. Okay. You want to do that? |
| 00:28:50.02 | City Clerk | Councilmember Weiner. Thank you. |
| 00:28:51.05 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 00:28:51.07 | Unknown | I guess. |
| 00:28:51.81 | City Clerk | Councilmember Pfeiffer? No. Councilmember Withey? Yes. Vice Mayor Hoffman? |
| 00:28:54.66 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 00:28:54.70 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 00:28:54.97 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 00:28:54.98 | Unknown | . |
| 00:28:56.94 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, and to be clear, I'm not voting for the plan. I'm just voting to have the form. |
| 00:29:00.77 | Mayor Theodorus | Yes, and that's, we all are if we read this. Okay, and I vote yes as well. of people. |
| 00:29:07.30 | City Clerk | 4-1. |
| 00:29:08.13 | Mayor Theodorus | 401. Okay. Pass forward. Now we have the rest of the consent calendar. I think we may be in agreement. So would someone like to make a motion? |
| 00:29:15.79 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:29:15.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:29:16.40 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I just want to clarify we're continuing A, and we're moving B to the end of the agenda. |
| 00:29:21.24 | Councilmember Weiner | Yeah. So with that, I'll move to, |
| 00:29:21.68 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:29:27.79 | Councilmember Weiner | Adopt consent calendar items 4C, D, and E. We're moving item 4B to be a new item 6C. And we are continuing item 4A to a date uncertain. |
| 00:29:50.45 | Mayor Theodorus | Second. |
| 00:29:51.68 | Councilmember Weiner | will do |
| 00:29:52.12 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. All in favor? |
| 00:29:53.51 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:29:53.52 | Mayor Theodorus | Aye. Aye. |
| 00:29:53.84 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:29:54.94 | Mayor Theodorus | That's 5-0. Moving on to item five, public hearings. Introduction and first reading, uh, reading by title only, uh, an ordinance of the city council of the city of Sausalito to add chapter 10.7. Oh, to the sauce of the municipal code to provide an expedited streamline permitting process for small residential rooftop solar energy systems. And that's the presenter will be community development director, Danny Castro. |
| 00:30:27.47 | Jonathon Goldman | Let me get the right slide. |
| 00:30:40.64 | Kenneth Henry | Oh, there it is. |
| 00:30:52.65 | Jonathon Goldman | Good evening, Mayor Theodoris, members of the council. Welcome back. Thank you. The item before you is a request to conduct a public hearing on the proposed zoning ordinance amendment to create an expedited process for permit applications for small residential rooftop solar energy systems by September 30th, 2015. to introduce and read by title only an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito amending Title 10 of the Sausalito Municipal Code to add a new section 10.70 to comply with state law AB 2188. |
| 00:31:43.45 | Jonathon Goldman | State law currently encourages the use of solar power by limiting a municipality's ability to regulate solar energy systems. To further this objective, the California legislature recently adopted Assembly Bill 2188, which requires that every city and county must adopt an ordinance that creates an expedited process for permitting applications for small residential rooftop solar energy systems by September 30th, 2015. |
| 00:32:16.57 | Jonathon Goldman | A small residential rooftop solar energy system is defined as a solar energy system that is no larger than 10 kilowatts, alternating current nameplate rating, or 30 kilowatts thermal. A solar energy system that conforms to all state fire, structural, electrical, and other building codes is adopted or amended by the city, and all state and county of Marin health and safety standards, a solar energy system that is installed on a single or duplex family dwelling, and a solar panel or module array that does not exceed the maximum legal building height as defined by the city. Here is a chart. In the last two years and a half, there were 19 small residential rooftop solar systems permitted in Sausalito. There were five issued in 2013, 10 issued in 2014, and four permits issued this year to date. Here's an example. This is a roof plan. And just to give you an example, this is a 6-kilowatt project that was permitted in 2014. And it's an example of a larger rooftop solar system installation. They range from about 2 to 7 kilowatts, the ones we received in the last 2 1⁄2 years. That's very typical. Most residential systems range from 3 to 9 kilowatts. Here's just an elevation. It shows a residence with the solar module arrays on the rooftop. |
| 00:34:00.96 | Jonathon Goldman | The requirements, the proposed ordinance satisfies the requirements of AB 2188. The proposed ordinance provides that the city must accept and approve applications for small rooftop solar energy systems electronically via email And also directs the city's building official to develop a standard plan and checklist for expediting review eligibility. the checklist must substantially conform to the California solar permitting guidebook adopted by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research. An application or the ordinance provides that an application complies with this checklist. If it's found to comply, then approval must be administrative and non-discretionary. Permit applications that utilize this checklist and satisfy the checklist may be approved over the counter or if submitted via email within one to three business days. |
| 00:34:59.16 | Jonathon Goldman | the Did I skip something? I think I skipped one. The general plan, in terms of its consistency with the general plan, staff has reviewed the objectives and policies of the general plan and determined that the amendment is consistent with the environmental quality element to build upon current city policy and continue to protect the city's natural resources. The project is consistent with policy EQ3.13, which encourages the application of energy efficient design and energy saving devices in new and existing buildings. The Planning Commission, at their July 19, 2015 meeting last month, or actually two months ago, held a notice public hearing on the proposed amendment and adopted Resolution 2015-19, recommending City Council adopt the amendment. And this is a unanimous vote. So the recommendation this evening is to conduct the public hearing and introduce and read by title only the ordinance. And to continue the second reading to September 15, 2015. And that concludes my report and I'm available to answer any questions. |
| 00:36:14.98 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you, Danny. Bring it up here. Any city council questions? Oh, sure. |
| 00:36:22.29 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you, Danny. Could you, other than the... speed the application email the checklist other than those things could you help us understand what our current ordinance is, how a solar project is currently handled under our ordinance. Do, under normal circumstances, currently, does it receive anything other than a simple zoning permit, or does it need to go through a discretionary review process? And so what is the fundamental change that this is bringing about in terms of our actual operation, other than these checklists and email submission and things like that? |
| 00:37:13.81 | Jonathon Goldman | Sure. Our current process is it does require a building permit. This is the same as this process, but it does require a building permit. We do a plan check review that can take. A few years ago, we did adopt what we consider was an expedited process, about five days within a week to review, approve, and to issue a building permit. The fees are waived, and that was something that was adopted a few years back. and I'm saying the building permit fees. That's really the fundamental difference. What the state has done under this legislation has sort of put the fire behind that and says, you know, do it even quicker. And if you qualify and you provide a checklist, make the process even more expeditious. |
| 00:38:10.49 | Councilmember Weiner | So just to be clear, we currently do not require an administrative design review permit or a design review permit. And this, so there's no change there. We do not. Thank you. |
| 00:38:21.56 | Jonathon Goldman | We do not. |
| 00:38:25.88 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So I know that in the past we have had issues where solar panels have gone up, and with the sunlight and the angles and the fact that people have lots of big windows in their living areas, that the panel has reflected and caused an impact to their view or to their quality of living because of the reflection. So my only concern about this, and I'm wondering if you could respond, is how If I can get something approved by email, then that means that something could conceivably go up next door or, you know, in my home without any of my neighbors being aware ahead of time. Is that correct or no? |
| 00:39:18.94 | Mary Wagner | That is correct. That's correct. That is correct. I'm sorry to interrupt, but that could happen without this ordinance in place also. |
| 00:39:19.70 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | That's correct. That is correct. And Council Member |
| 00:39:26.21 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yeah, I understand, and I guess it's an opportunity for us to potentially, I mean, to me, Just because it can happen right now doesn't mean that it's okay, that it could, because this is expediting it even easier in terms of doing it via email. So let's say someone has their neighbor next door, puts up this, and it's reflecting into their living area, and it's very blinding. What is their recourse? What do they do? |
| 00:40:05.66 | Jonathon Goldman | There is no recourse in terms of the fact that it is permitted and allowed. Again, those considerations were taken into this legislation that preempts discretion. |
| 00:40:24.77 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Okay, so, okay, so... Those are my questions and I'll withhold my comment for the comment period. |
| 00:40:33.89 | Mayor Theodorus | just to be clear we're required to do this by state statute correct it is a state mandate the state mandate so this is and has the city staff or Plain Department added anything that's not in the state mandate no and is there any thing that we could do to not comply with the state mandate I mean other than no flaunting it I just want to be clear why this is on the agenda |
| 00:40:37.95 | Jonathon Goldman | It is. We have. Thank you. |
| 00:40:46.64 | Jonathon Goldman | No. |
| 00:40:52.54 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | No. THE END OF |
| 00:40:54.47 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:40:54.52 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:40:54.62 | Unknown | you |
| 00:40:55.75 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I'm sorry. |
| 00:40:55.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:40:55.82 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:40:55.85 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 00:40:57.30 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I have a follow-up question to the state mandate. So does the state mandate say that we can't include a path for recourse and review if there is a complaint? |
| 00:40:58.68 | Mayor Theodorus | THE FAMILY IS THE FAMILY |
| 00:41:13.20 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, I'm happy to take that one, Mr. Mayor, if I may. To reiterate, this Solar Rights Act was originally put into place in the 70s, the late 70s. And it's evolved over time and the legislature's been very clear that it's a statewide mandate. And it's not a matter of municipal concern, which means the city does not have discretion to alter what the state is requiring the city to adopt. That's exactly why they add that language, because they are, trying to encourage the development of solar applications. There are very limited circumstances in which the building official could Indicate that a permit would not be issued and it's a very high bar that's built into the statute and that would be analyzed on a case-by-case basis but the answer to councilmember Pfeiffer's question about whether the city could adopt a different policy or a different procedure than is laid out in the state law which is for very specific findings to be made by the building official which would then allow for a use permit hearing to be conducted and then denial of a use permit is also a very high standard of specific health safety concerns that would have to be documented there would have to be no conditions that could be imposed to obviate those concerns or to remediate those concerns in order for the permit to be denied. And then there would be appeals to the Planning Commission and from the Planning Commission to the City Council. |
| 00:42:57.28 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So we could have a path for recourse, we could include that, is what you're saying? |
| 00:43:05.64 | Mary Wagner | It's in the statute, so it's not a path that needs to be included in the ordinance. |
| 00:43:08.79 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | needs to be included in the ordinance. Okay, I guess it would have been helpful. I don't see the statute. |
| 00:43:17.72 | Mary Wagner | And one other quick point, Mr. Mayor, this ordinance is actually modeled after the League of California Cities Model Ordinance. It's a model that was also adopted by many other jurisdictions. And it's kind of the state of the art or the industry standard, if you will, on what other jurisdictions are doing. And our timing is that we're going to need to bring this back to you for second reading in order to get it adopted to meet the statutory deadline. |
| 00:43:48.68 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Okay. I have lots of questions but I need to read the statute. It's not in my staff report. |
| 00:43:55.11 | Mayor Theodorus | All right. So can we, any other consequence? Okay. Can we open this up to public comment? and from the public like to comment. Okay. Seeing none, we'll bring you back here for council coming. Who would like to start? |
| 00:44:10.00 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Well, I certainly support solar panels, and I support, you know, anything we can do to, you know, enhance energy conservation. I do think that it's important to consider impact and to give our residents a path for recourse. And it would have been helpful, I think, to have the Solar Rights Act, you know, included. so perhaps this is going to be coming back to us and I can ask more questions. It would have been helpful, I think, to have the Solar Rights Act included. So perhaps this is going to be coming back to us, and I can ask more questions at that point. I'm not prepared to approve this right now. |
| 00:44:50.04 | Councilmember Weiner | there's really nothing to discuss. You know, this is a mandate from the state of California. um, It's sort of not much different than what we're doing anyway, I gather, other than some procedural issues. Thank you. I have nothing else. |
| 00:45:09.70 | Unknown | Other than the fact that, as Mary Wagner said, that this was started in the 70s, And it's besides a mandate, it's the right thing to do. We should be going towards a more solar... solar energy. And you're going to get one or two people that are going to complain. about an angle of the light wait until we start hearing about on a full moon. how it is at night. So on a reflection. So you're going to have all these things. It brings out the quirkiness in Sausalito. |
| 00:45:50.13 | Mayor Theodorus | I certainly support solar, and I think we have to approve this statute. We're going against the legislative mandate. I do have to say, just comment, this comes down from the state, and it's another example of things being thrust on us by the state that we may not want. I mean, solar is fine. I think having permits issued where we have no ability to really review them is something that I'm not sure I support. but in this case there's a PERMITS ISSUED WHERE WE HAVE NO ABILITY TO REALLY REVIEW THEM IS SOMETHING THAT I'M NOT SURE I SUPPORT. BUT IN THIS CASE, THERE'S A STATE STATUTE. WE HAVE TO DO IT. AND SO I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS. |
| 00:46:25.45 | Councilmember Weiner | I move to introduce and read by title only an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito, amend in Title 10 of the Sausalito Municipal Code to add a new Section 10.70 to provide an expedited streamlined permitting process for small residential rooftop solar systems in compliance with State Law AB 2180. |
| 00:46:51.17 | Mayor Theodorus | Second. Okay, Lily, would you take the roll on this? |
| 00:46:57.11 | City Clerk | Councilmember Weiner? Yes. |
| 00:46:58.00 | Mayor Theodorus | Yes. |
| 00:46:58.44 | City Clerk | Thank you. Councilmember Pfeiffer? No. Councilmember Withey? Yes. Vice Mayor Hoffman? Yes. |
| 00:47:01.48 | Mayor Theodorus | Yes. |
| 00:47:03.98 | City Clerk | Mayor Theodorus. |
| 00:47:04.79 | Mayor Theodorus | Yes, passes four to one. Okay, moving on to item 6A, response to grand jury report. Uh... the need for labor negotiation transparency. Charles Sakai is our presenter. |
| 00:47:20.20 | Charles Sakai | Now let me try to find the right slides here. |
| 00:47:26.98 | Unknown | you or just a little glasses. |
| 00:47:42.86 | Charles Sakai | I think it's coming. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, Madam Vice Mayor, members of the City Council, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Charles Sakai. I am outside counsel and a labor negotiator who assists the city in some instances in labor negotiations and advice. I'm here to present the response to the Marin County Grand Jury, Civil Grand Jury Report on the need for labor negotiation transparency. As you know, the grand jury completed its deliberations in June and made a number of recommendations, including this one. Tonight we'll be walking through a summary of the grand jury findings and recommendations and a recommended response. I think attached to the staff report is the recommended response that's been drafted, and this PowerPoint is just a brief walkthrough of those things. |
| 00:48:30.60 | Charles Sakai | The grand jury made three findings. The first was that residents of Marin County pay taxes to support decisions made by the board of directors of special districts and city councils. However, these residents have minimal opportunity to provide input into labor negotiations. I'll walk through the three findings, the two recommendations of the grand jury, and then our recommended responses to all these things. Finding number two is that the COIN process, which is a civic openness and negotiations process, can be implemented without affecting the manner in which tentative agreements are reached, so agreements with labor unions are reached, but would ensure public awareness of the terms and costs of the agreements in advance that are being adopted. Finding three is that the COIN process mandates transparency in government decision-making, again allowing residents to have more information and participate in public discussion. There are two recommendations. The first is that the County Board of Supervisors and each city council and town council in Marin adopt and implement a COIN ordinance prior to June 1 of 2016, the end of this fiscal year, or sorry, June of this year, or provide the next round of negotiations, prior to the next round of negotiations, whichever comes sooner. Recommendation number two is similar to that. It's more detailed. It recommends that the board and each city council adopt and implement a coin ordinance with a number of different aspects. One, hiring an independent experience lead negotiator. Two, hiring an independent auditor to determine the fiscal impact of each provision in the current contract and make the analysis available for public review. Three, to make public each proposal that is made between the parties, and to publicly verify the costs of those proposals by an independent auditor. And then number four, make public seven days prior to a board or council meeting that negotiate a tentative agreement and the fiscal analysis of that, which is, again, independently verified. And then to have two readings of the tentative agreement, one just for discussion of the tentative agreement, second meeting for a vote to approve or disapprove the tentative agreement. So as I said, we have a proposed response after the staff report. With regard to these, we have required responses. So with findings, you either agree or disagree wholly or partially with the finding and explain which part you dispute or which part you don't dispute. With recommendations, there are four options. I'm sorry, five options. Four options. One is the recommendation has already been implemented. Two, the recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in the future. Thank you. I'm sorry, five options, four options. One is the recommendation has already been implemented. Two, the recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in the future. Three is the recommendation requires further analysis. And four, the recommendation will not be implemented at this time. So walking through the findings, again, finding number one is that the residents pay taxes but have minimal opportunity to provide input in labor negotiations. The recommendation, our recommendation is that you disagree with that. There is information provided through staff reports and third party audits during the negotiations process. You've also held public meetings to discuss the process of negotiations even before negotiations started. Back in February I came and made a presentation about the process and negotiations prior to you're actually entering into the negotiations process. And members of the public, as I understand it, already continue to provide input on issues of employee compensation benefits, either during public meetings or even directly to council members and city officials. Finding number two, the coin process can be implemented without affecting the manner in which tentative agreements are negotiated, but increases public discourse. Again, there's disagreement here. Coin utilizes an informal, I'm sorry, city utilizes an informal negotiation process. Coin requires a much more robust process, one that has much more public discussion prior to putting any proposals on the table. So far, the informal negotiation process here has been a much simpler process secondly the coin process is relatively new and there are not very many cities that have adopted it yet so it's hard to say what the impact is outside of Orange County finally the per chief ALJ so the chief ALJ of the Public Employment Relations Board, which oversees labor relations, has found that the coin process, elements of the coin process, must be negotiated prior to entering into negotiations. So you'd enter into negotiations over the coin process before you would begin negotiations over the substance of wages, hours, and working conditions. We believe that would add time to the process. Again, this is a recommended decision from a PIRB ALJ. This has been appealed to the full PIRB board, so it's pending there, but at this time, the Chief ALJ has reached this conclusion. Thank you. Finding number three is that the COIN process mandates transparency in government decision-making, allowing residents to be informed and participate. With this finding, there is agreement, and it's, we think, consistent with the city's labor relations philosophy, which embraces the spirit and intention of the COIN ordinance to provide information to the public and to increase public discourse prior to the adoption of any changes to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment. With regard to the two recommendations, the first recommendation, again, is to implement a COIN ordinance prior to June 1, 2016 or prior to the next round of negotiations, whichever comes sooner. The recommended response is that this requires further analysis. And I would say this requires further analysis, but that the timeframe for any analysis is sort of uncertain because we're waiting for a number of things to happen, which are in someone else's hands. So the further analysis, would you review the experience of agencies which have adopted COIN? Again, there are not very many that have, and many who have started with COIN have not gotten through a full negotiations process, so I'd like to see what works, what does not work with COIN. Wait for resolution of the current legal challenges to various aspects of the existing COIN ordinance prior to committing to a COIN process. This one is one that could take quite a long time. PERB has no specific timeline for rendering a decision, and once the Public Employment Relations Board rules, that decision may be appealed to the Court of Appeals. So this could be a lengthy period of time before we know what the legal ramifications of COIN are. Certainly it's going to be a few months before per rules. And then lastly, there is pending legislation at the state level that would apply only to agencies which have adopted a COIN ordinance. It's the Civic Reporting Openness and Negotiations Efficiency Act, the CRONY Act, which went through its second reading in the Assembly yesterday and is set for a third reading. This would require only agencies which have adopted COIN to apply similar kinds of openness to contracts valued at $250,000 or more for goods or services. But again, it's limited only to those agencies that adopted coin. Not certain it's passed the Senate. It's headed for a third rating in the Assembly. I think it's likely to pass there. Not certain what the governor will do with it. So again, something that may or may not affect you if you adopt a coin ordinance. Recommendation number two, again, has the five points, independent negotiator, independent auditor, public proposals and costing, and then the sunshine on the TA process. This one, again, requires further analysis. It's very similar to recommendation number one, and the purpose would be to see where things go with COIN before you jump into a COIN. I think even advocates of a COIN ordinance recognize one size doesn't fit all, and it probably does require some time to figure out what are the appropriate elements of COIN to adopt for an agency. |
| 00:56:20.51 | Charles Sakai | The city currently uses an outside labor negotiator and attorney to advise. I think these are things that we believe already are aspects of the openness of the city. You make public audits of your financial liabilities, especially pension and retirement medical benefits, up on your website. Provide detailed analysis and form staff reports prior to the adoption of any new MOU with a labor union. And staff reports are posted generally five to six days prior to council consideration. You also have a pretty robust 10-year plan, which includes a number of elements of labor negotiations in it. |
| 00:56:57.72 | Charles Sakai | So we thought it would be helpful to walk through a little bit what some of the other agencies are doing with the recommendations. The county of Marin found that recommendation number one required further analysis. Fairfax will not implement the coin ordinance. Larkville will not implement at this time. Mill Valley has a detailed response, which we'll list in response number two. San Anselmo found, again, this requires further analysis. Tiburon will not implement a coin ordinance at this time. With regard to recommendation number two, San Anselmo found again this requires further analysis, Tiburon will not implement a coin ordinance at this time. With regard to recommendation number two, since it has multiple elements, the county said it requires further analysis, Fairfax split, bifurcated its response saying it will not implement items 2.1 to 2.4 but will implement the two readings of the tentative agreement. Larkspur will not implement this time. San Anselmo again requires further analysis. Tiburon will not implement. Mill Valley notes that it has already implemented a labor negotiator but will not implement elements 2.2 to 2.5. So that's a little bit from what the other agencies have been asked to respond to this, what their responses have been. And those are the ones we have at this time. They're all in your packet as well. With that, I will open it to questions. |
| 00:58:13.16 | Mayor Theodorus | Before we go open to the council questions, Mr. Sky, would you mind introducing yourself as to your relationship, who you are and your relationship to the city in this matter? |
| 00:58:22.34 | Charles Sakai | Oh, I'm sorry. I did that a little bit, but I can be more complete. So, again, my name is Charles Sakai. I'm an attorney who provides labor negotiations advice to the city at various times. I've presented to the council previously in February on subjects of labor negotiations. I represent many cities and counties in labor negotiations and advise many others in labor negotiations and speak on it fairly frequently. I've got a presentation on labor negotiations for policymakers coming up at the League of Council. labor negotiations and speak on it fairly frequently. I've got a presentation on labor negotiations for policymakers coming up at the League of California Cities. I hope to see you there. |
| 00:58:55.18 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. So bring it up here for questions. Who would like to start? Member Pfeiffer. |
| 00:59:02.89 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Okay. Thank you very much for that presentation. So I have a question about the transparency for the public during these negotiations. You mentioned that the city of Sausalito had engaged the public. I recall you delivered a presentation back in February. Yes. But isn't it the case that tonight is the first time that we are having a public meeting on the terms of all of the contracts? |
| 00:59:36.26 | Charles Sakai | I believe tonight is the first night for you to review the contracts in public. |
| 00:59:40.26 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:59:41.16 | Charles Sakai | the |
| 00:59:41.33 | Mayor Theodorus | We're talking about COIN now and our grand jury response to COIN. |
| 00:59:44.52 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Correct, and our response regarding in public engagement I think it directly correlates to that issue. Is that this, if I look at the process we have used in terms of educating the public and engaging the public during this negotiation process, my point, the point to my question is that this is the first night that we have, we have actually held a meeting which discloses the terms of what we have done. |
| 01:00:18.00 | Charles Sakai | The staff report was posted previously but tonight is the first night that it's been publicly discussed in this forum. |
| 01:00:24.07 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Great, thank you. And do you think that that is enough for the public in terms of transparency to see this after the fact for the first time in one meeting? |
| 01:00:40.19 | Charles Sakai | Well, it's fairly traditional that a tentative agreement is brought before the council for one reading. And the state law requires that even if you do two readings, you have to do those within 30 days of each other. You have to adopt within 30 days after the first reading of the tentative agreement. So, and in many places, even though there's simply one reading, there's a fair amount of public engagement and public comment on those terms if they are things of controversy. |
| 01:01:08.94 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | And just to be clear, are we doing one reading or two prior to voting? |
| 01:01:14.09 | Charles Sakai | My understanding is tonight you have it on your agenda for the first analysis, yes. The first. |
| 01:01:20.03 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So we're only doing one. Thank you. |
| 01:01:22.76 | Charles Sakai | That's correct. |
| 01:01:22.78 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | That's correct. Thank you. So this is the first, just so to confirm, this is the first time that we are having a meeting on the terms of this new MOU. And we're also voting on it tonight. |
| 01:01:36.30 | Charles Sakai | Right, that's correct. And that was my point, is that's a fairly standard way to approach this, yeah. |
| 01:01:36.68 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Okay, thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:01:41.83 | Mayor Theodorus | Just to be clear, though, I think we've had three closed session items, so council's been involved as the first with the public. |
| 01:01:47.70 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I'm talking about the public because the coin is about transparency for the public. |
| 01:01:48.19 | Mayor Theodorus | Yeah. Yeah. |
| 01:01:51.13 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. During negotiations, not after the fact. |
| 01:01:55.47 | Mayor Theodorus | Any other comments on Coyne? We're on questions. |
| 01:01:58.89 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:01:58.93 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. |
| 01:01:59.26 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:02:00.04 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. Charlie, what's the What's the importance of an independent lead negotiator? They see the grand jury spend a lot of time on that, and so Some of the cities have it looked like independent negotiators, some don't. What's the advantage of having an independent negotiator? |
| 01:02:19.92 | Charles Sakai | Well, larger cities tend to have independent negotiators if they have maybe more money at stake or a larger group to negotiate with. I think there are advantages and disadvantages depending on the process. One of the things independent negotiators provide is sort of a flack catcher, somebody who's on the outside of the process who comes in and makes a deal but doesn't have to be the person. You can say no more easily in some cases because you're not going to be working with people day to day having said that a lot of cities even when they use it outside negotiator will begin with an informal process to see if they can negotiate a deal that works within their budget parameters and utilize that as an internal process and if it doesn't work then go to an outside negotiator |
| 01:03:03.27 | Jill Hoffman | And what was your role in the process that the city just went through in the agreement that we're going to be talking about later? You were involved in the process, but you were not the lead negotiator? |
| 01:03:14.29 | Charles Sakai | I made a presentation to counsel. I've been to a couple of closed sessions, but I haven't been at the bargaining table. |
| 01:03:20.47 | Jill Hoffman | And the bargaining table for us was Charlie Francis and Adam Thank you. |
| 01:03:25.83 | Charles Sakai | That's my understanding. |
| 01:03:30.02 | Mayor Theodorus | back to Coyne. We, to your knowledge, and you know, we looked at, read all the responses from the various other cities in Marin County, and they had similar reactions to ours, but one of them was this case, this is, we're, what we're doing tonight is responding to the grand jury. We're not necessarily taking any action other than a response to the grand jury, and, and the grand jury, I don't recall, are being asked, but did they poll anyone else, interview anyone else from any of the other cities? Because one of the problems here is there's some disconnect to the way things are done in Marin County. So I was just wondering if you had any information on that. |
| 01:04:09.44 | Charles Sakai | There's an indication that they had discussions. It's not clear who they talked to. And I think several of the letters, kind of responses complained that the agencies were not contacted or were not, there was no discussion with them about how negotiations worked and whether a coin process would work for their agency. |
| 01:04:30.40 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So, Coyne, getting back to the independent negotiator and the issues that Coyne, the grand jury raised about city employees negotiating for city employees. salaries and MOUs. In the case here, would you describe a city manager and a finance director leading negotiations as independent? |
| 01:04:56.55 | Charles Sakai | Well, I think the way that the coin defines independent is someone from the outside, so no. |
| 01:05:01.38 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:05:01.77 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:05:06.46 | Jill Hoffman | Charlie, I have a question. I'm just going down through the recommendations from the grand jury. And their last, recommendation number five, well, four is that the tentative agreement be published seven days prior to the Board of Council. And that's pretty obvious. It's so that people have time to look through it and give it a thought. But number five is that there's two meetings, that the first one's two consecutive public meeting agendas. The first is for discussion, and the second is for a vote. |
| 01:05:09.26 | David Sudo | Thank you. |
| 01:05:36.14 | Jill Hoffman | And I see that as a benefit. and, Can you speak to that or what the grand jury was thinking when they made that recommendation? |
| 01:05:44.22 | Charles Sakai | Well, it's similar to the adoption of an ordinance where you would bring it up, allow some public comment, and then have a second meeting. COIN has adopted that for labor negotiations. That is, I would say, it's not the norm still, but it is something Costa Mesa and some other agencies have done just to create an additional opportunity for people to make public comment if they wish to. |
| 01:05:48.29 | Jill Hoffman | allow. |
| 01:06:07.90 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:06:07.92 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:06:08.02 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:06:08.91 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thanks. |
| 01:06:15.11 | Mayor Theodorus | Any other questions? |
| 01:06:18.35 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, I did have one. What's the, Mary, we have a deadline for providing comments on this to the grand jury? |
| 01:06:18.36 | Mayor Theodorus | Sorry. |
| 01:06:26.75 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. We do. |
| 01:06:26.90 | Mary Wagner | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:06:27.44 | Jill Hoffman | And what's the deadline today? |
| 01:06:29.20 | Mary Wagner | It's the 18th, September 18th. Okay, great. And that was an extension that we received from the grand jury from the original response. |
| 01:06:31.98 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, great. jury from the original response. And we have another city council meeting on the 15th. |
| 01:06:40.81 | Mary Wagner | You do. Okay, do you have any questions? |
| 01:06:44.30 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:06:44.32 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Do you have any questions? I have one follow up question. So regarding the ordinance for coin, we don't, a city doesn't have to necessarily pass an ordinance for coin to implement some of the coin recommendations. I mean, that fall under there. |
| 01:06:45.48 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:06:45.51 | Mary Wagner | you |
| 01:06:45.58 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:06:45.60 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:06:45.73 | Mayor Theodorus | Bye. |
| 01:06:45.75 | Mary Wagner | Follow-up question. |
| 01:06:46.51 | Mayor Theodorus | And then, |
| 01:06:59.84 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Correct? |
| 01:07:00.47 | Charles Sakai | Well, you can do certain things by policy, that's correct. I think none of the Marin County agencies have a COIN ordinance, but several of them have an outside negotiator. And you have independent audits of a number of your different benefits which are posted on your website. So you're already doing some of the things in COIN without having an ordinance, that's correct. |
| 01:07:21.04 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:07:23.64 | Mayor Theodorus | Okay, now I'd like to open up for public comment. Would anyone from the public like to comment on this issue? Okay, David. |
| 01:07:37.78 | David Sudo | David Sudo, I just thought I'd make a comment, a couple comments. One is there doesn't seem to be a lot of outrage about not having COIN, because obviously I think there were a couple of e-mails sent, but I don't see a lot of people here like other hot topics in town. So, you know, a little public notice, better public notice might be nice, but I think that our city staff is doing a really good job in negotiating the contracts right now and I don't think that we need to fundamentally change the process thank you |
| 01:08:12.20 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing no other public comment will close public comment bring it back up here for comment council come who would like to start |
| 01:08:24.08 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I can start. You know, I appreciate our city staff. I know we have a great staff and they work very hard. And I also appreciate the promises that we make when we look at enter the negotiation process and the importance of those promises that they be kept. I think that COIN is critical to transparency, to due diligence, and to ensuring that we are not overstepping our bounds and overpromising something that potentially we may have problems delivering in the future. I think that a COIN ordinance is appropriate. I think that city employees should not be negotiating city employee salaries i believe that we should have an independent negotiator leading those negotiations i require in fact i i would have very much liked to see that here i have been an advocate of coin pretty much from the get-go when I saw this. And I also believe that we need more than one hearing for the public. This is the first time that we are sharing this MOU. And per COIN's recommendation, I think having a second hearing makes a lot of sense. So I concur with the recommendations of the grand jury regarding their report. I support COIN, and I would have liked to see us implement COIN, frankly, in these negotiations. In terms of the comment earlier about, well, first we want to sit back and let someone else adopt coin and see how it goes you know i've sat up here for the past seven years and heard um about how how wonderful sauce ludo is ahead of the pack in you know tiers or various you know pension issues and yet here we have an opportunity to really take a systemic change and to be a leader, a true leader in this. And we missed our opportunity. I hope it comes again soon. And I certainly would not shirk from the opportunity to take a leadership role in this. Ultimately, I believe it benefits our employees, it benefits the residents, and it benefits everyone involved. |
| 01:10:59.64 | Mayor Theodorus | Who else would like to go? Right? |
| 01:11:07.67 | Councilmember Weiner | I think that the coin discussion is worthwhile. I think the grand jury did some good work in part. I think they were looking in the rear view mirror a little bit too much. But with that said, I think, as you'll see with the other jurisdictions, COIN is currently a work in progress, and I think a little too premature to adopt an ordinance. I think the general principles nobody's going to disagree with. I think the major thing, though, is that with many things like this, and actually a lot of other things that are done sometimes, we create a lot of busy work. That creates a whole lot of nothing. And I think we've got to be careful of that. So I'm going to sit back. I'm going to watch this process evolve and see if the Korean process can be molded into something this practical pragmatic works for everybody and doesn't start and presuppose that you must enter an adversarial relationship Those who are advocating this ordinance, and I don't mean anybody up here, I mean where it originated from in Southern California, is primarily driven by folks who believe that the only way to achieve anything is to fight and argue, not form collaborative relationship with your labor force and your unions, but instead assume that they are the enemy and the only way to proceed forward is in that manner. And I do not believe that is the best way to proceed. And so I would certainly hope that coin and the good things that are in coin evolve so that they actually get to a real pragmatic way in which labor negotiations and relationship with labor unions should evolve. |
| 01:13:27.14 | Unknown | Well, I also agree that there are some issues that Cohen brought up, like the seven day notice. There are a few things that really are benefit As far as having an independent from outside, come in. These are... We live in a small city. I don't want it to be treated like we were 50,000 people up in San Rafael. 50,000 people in Nevada. They don't even know each other. It was a small town. I don't want someone coming in who really doesn't even know the people or how hard they work. just what they can, as a It was just mentioned. looking to bargain to see how much they can beat beat you down. That isn't the way. I don't know. And in the business world, we prize our employees. And so we should prize our employees in the government world also and not have outsiders just coming in that don't know. They know the workings, but they don't really know the inner workings. So I think that it might be great for a city of more than 25, 30,000 people. But smaller cities, I see it as a negative. So. As I said, the seven day notice making people more aware. of what is going on. But also at the same time, I don't like the idea of if we're in negotiations that we give out our cards. Everybody already knows what the other person is doing to the public as far as the negotiations go. And you know that's going to be all misconstrued the wrong way, in a negative way. So I'm happy with the process we have. When I ran my businesses, when I gave raises or whatever compensations I gave, it was done on the work that they did, but I knew what they were doing. not an outsider. |
| 01:15:40.22 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I'm just... I find a lot of merit in coin, and so I'm just going to go down and read the grand jury findings. The residents of Marin County pay tax, this is their first finding. The residents of Marin County pay taxes for decisions made by the Board of Supervisors and the City and city and town councils. However, these residents have minimal opportunity to provide input into labor negotiations. I would agree with that finding. Our draft response agrees in part and disagrees in in part. in these labor negotiations that we're talking about tonight specifically, the public has had almost no impact and no ability to have input. So I don't know how we can say we agree and disagree in part, I think that's just a yes. in our, when we're drafting our response to the grand jury. The second finding, the coin process can be implemented without affecting the manner in which tentative agreements are negotiated But which nevertheless will ensure public awareness of the terms and cost of those agreements in advance of their being adopted. Yes, why would we not want that? I think that's fine. I would agree with that. Grand jury number, finding number three, the coin process mandates transparency and government decision making allowing residents to be informed and to participate in the public discussion of how their tax dollars are spent. Yes, that's a good goal. I see no problem with that. Grand jury recommendation number one, That recommendation is that the town adopt a coin residence prior to June 1, 2016. I do have a problem with that because I have a problem with some of the further recommendations, which I'm going to talk about right now. So their second recommendation lists five recommendations. The first one is to hire an independent experience lead negotiator to negotiate all labor agreements. I agree with that and I see the issues that we have here with our small town. I know that we have a good relationship with our workforce. However, I feel that someone that's negotiating their own pay raise has an inherent conflict, and that's just an ethical issue. That's just a bedrock fundamental issue that I have. And so if you want to have the, If you want to have the the credibility with the electorate, the people who are paying your taxes and whose money you're spending, I think you should do whatever you need to encourage that. And I think that's just a fundamental issue. we would hire the lead negotiator. I mean, keep in mind that it would be Adam who would hire the lead negotiator and we would sign off on that and that lead negotiator would do what we told him to do. But I think that's very important. That would be a very important change going forward. Hire an independent auditor to determine the fiscal impact. I believe that we do that now, so I'm fine with that recommendation as well. Make public each proposal after it's accepted. I'm not sure each proposal, and that's the problem that I have about adopting the ordinance as is now. I think each proposal is a little for us especially a little too much but certainly the tentative agreement should be made public maybe even more than seven days prior to the board council. And then the real work begins. Then the real work begins with the public. You publish it to the public. You set your meeting. People come in. They look at it. They have plenty of time to go to their own whatever. experts and then we really sit down and talk about it as a council. Then you get seven days, it goes on the First reading, everybody talks about it. Anybody that wants to come in, we talk about it. Um, And then the next meeting, you set it for the vote. So I think there's work to be done. I like the coin. I like the transparency. And those are the edits that I would recommend for the response. |
| 01:18:55.44 | Mayor Theodorus | I appreciate everyone's comments, and I certainly respect the intent of COIN. I think I agree with a lot of the, if you go through the exhibits and the comments by the other cities, while, again, they respect it, I think it's not necessarily tailored to each of the jurisdictions. I think there's a lot of issues that need to be worked out. In our case, we're at the end of one negotiations, and it will apply to the next negotiation, which will be a few years away. I think I'm perfectly happy with our response because essentially it says that while we respect it, it just doesn't work for us. At this time, we want to find out. We have to do further analysis. There's a case, I think it's called from the PIRB. I'm not sure. The statute is something to be concerned about because if the statute passes, it can cost the city quite a bit of money just to have a coin statute on its books and could cost a lot so again this is merely to the grand jury's response this is not exactly what we're doing but I would so I would support that we endorse the response as drafted on COIN. What I would follow on, which I think would be a separate thing, I think that when we go into our next labor negotiation, I would, direct staff that they need to go to the city council and i would put a time limit of I'll throw off 45 days. PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY NEGOTIATION TO GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND I IMAGINE THERE WOULD BE BOTH CLOSED AND OPEN SESSIONS FOR WHAT THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS WILL BE WHETHER WE WILL INCORPORATE ANY ELEMENTS OF A COIN AND SPECIFICALLY WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO HAVE AN INDEPENDENT NEGOTIATOR. I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO DO BEFORE WE START ANY OF labor negotiations. And so I would have that as a direction from council tonight for the for the next one but i think right now i think it's premature to adopt any of these other elements of coin at this point |
| 01:20:50.06 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Mr. Mayor, I have a response. me? So just for the record, I too wanted to weigh in. The grand jury finding one, residents have minimal opportunity to provide input into labor negotiations. I agree that that's the case. Finding two, we need to ensure public awareness of the terms and costs. Yes, I concur. Finding three, the process for COIN would mandate transparency and keep residents informed. I completely agree with that. Recommendation number one, the coin ordinance prior to June 1st, 2016. I concur with that. I would like to see a coin ordinance because I believe also that there is something to Well, I agree with all the points. The recommendation to the COIN ordinance includes the hire an independent lead negotiator. Absolutely. I mean, in the current situation, when a city manager is participating in negotiations for salary increases that will result in his or her own salary increase, there is an inherent conflict. Number two, the independent auditor, the public proposal, the seven days notice, and the public seven days. I completely agree with all of that. So I commend the grand jury on some excellent work, and I would also support posting the earlier agreements just because I think that there is value in getting public input along the way. Thank you. THE END OF THE END OF THE Thank you. |
| 01:22:19.14 | Jill Hoffman | I have, sorry, one fall. So Mary, in the draft response, um, |
| 01:22:20.93 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. Thank you. . |
| 01:22:25.86 | Jill Hoffman | There were a couple of edits that needed to be done in the copy that I had, and specifically that the negotiators wouldn't benefit from the pay increase. I mean, I think that we talked about that, that that sentence needs to be deleted. or address? There's a draft. Yeah. Oh, I have a new draft, okay. |
| 01:22:47.85 | Mayor Theodorus | Yeah. Oh, I have a new director, okay. |
| 01:22:51.09 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and so can we then also, in our response to the grand jury, note that Councilwoman Pfeiffer and I agreed with the findings and the recommendations as I stated. I think there was one recommendation that I didn't agree with. We could do it by an asterisk or a footnote or a. |
| 01:23:07.67 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | We can also make a separate motion to agree with the grand jury findings. |
| 01:23:15.11 | Charles Sakai | I'm not sure I've seen a dissenting opinion in a response to a grand jury. |
| 01:23:22.20 | Jill Hoffman | Well, it seems that if you say the city council voted, the way the letter's written, it seems like it's a unanimous vote. So it's just a footnote. I mean, it's like a one. Did you say three to two? |
| 01:23:32.99 | Mary Wagner | And if I may, Mr. Mayor, I mean, there's in any council... |
| 01:23:33.54 | Unknown | I may, Mr. Mayor, |
| 01:23:37.66 | Mary Wagner | decision it's a majority of the council that directs the action so it's not it's not assuming that it's a 5-0 it's the action that was directed by the city council is reflected in the letter that's that's drafted it would be unusual and I haven't seen it either for a dissenting opinion if you will I'm just trying to answer your question vice mayor Hoffman to have to put that forth in a response to the grand jury I haven't seen us do that in the past but just wanted to add that So |
| 01:24:04.71 | Jill Hoffman | There's nothing preventing it, right? |
| 01:24:06.16 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I've been in it. So I could move to that. to reject the current city submission of the grand jury response and to agree with the grand jury findings and recommendations. |
| 01:24:27.22 | Unknown | for a second. |
| 01:24:27.78 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:24:27.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:24:31.78 | Jill Hoffman | I can't second it because I don't, I would make another motion, a counter motion. Sure, a substitute motion. A substitute motion. |
| 01:24:37.48 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | A substitute motion. |
| 01:24:42.32 | Jill Hoffman | that our letter agrees with all the findings of the grand jury and recommendations. |
| 01:24:43.24 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | THE CITY IS A |
| 01:24:43.59 | David Sudo | THE END OF |
| 01:24:48.94 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 01:24:49.53 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | You said you agree with recommendation two, and then I think with recommendation number one, you said you, what was this, what were the categories? |
| 01:24:49.55 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 01:25:04.35 | Charles Sakai | I believe it was recommendation one and then recommendation two points one, two, four, and five, but not number three, which was to make public each proposal. |
| 01:25:14.96 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yeah, I guess my question was what were the three categories that a city can You had agree, needs further analysis. What were those categories? |
| 01:25:23.15 | Charles Sakai | Oh. Let me go back to the... So with regard to recommendations, you have four. |
| 01:25:30.89 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:25:30.91 | Jill Hoffman | You have four recommendations, you have four options. |
| 01:25:45.03 | Jill Hoffman | That's not it. That's not it. There were the... Where's my... Do you have the draft? Does someone have a draft? I take notes and let you know. Oh, okay, there you go. Yeah, so my recommendation, or my motion would be that we adopt recommendations. One, two. three, sorry, one, two, four, and five, and not recommendation three. |
| 01:26:16.12 | Mayor Theodorus | We have a second to that motion. |
| 01:26:17.45 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Second. |
| 01:26:19.41 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:26:19.42 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:26:19.49 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:26:19.52 | Mayor Theodorus | Yeah, but... |
| 01:26:19.54 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I think the minutes will reflect my first motion too, right, Lily? Yeah, okay. |
| 01:26:24.54 | Mayor Theodorus | We have. |
| 01:26:25.11 | Councilmember Weiner | I have an alternative motion. |
| 01:26:28.23 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | It's getting interesting up here. |
| 01:26:29.67 | Councilmember Weiner | Which is to accept the letter as drafted and to, with the correction that was made and previously given to us, we move forward and authorize the mayor to submit the letter as drafted. |
| 01:26:46.10 | Mayor Theodorus | Do we have a second to that? I'll second it. |
| 01:26:49.18 | Councilmember Weiner | I believe my motion takes precedence. |
| 01:26:52.09 | Mayor Theodorus | We pull on that. |
| 01:26:58.37 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I have a substitute motion. Can you pass me the materials? |
| 01:27:01.39 | Mary Wagner | Mr. Mayor, I believe you can only have three motions on the floor at any one time. You had a motion that was made and failed for lack of a second. Can I have an agenda? A motion that was made by Vice Mayor Hoffman. And then you have the third motion, which is the substitute motion that was just made by Council Member Withey. |
| 01:27:08.99 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:27:09.04 | Unknown | I have an agenda. A motion that was America. |
| 01:27:17.71 | Mayor Theodorus | We have to vote on this. |
| 01:27:18.69 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, I understand. |
| 01:27:24.88 | City Clerk | Councilmember Weiner. |
| 01:27:26.40 | Unknown | No. Wait, wait, wait. You seconded the motion. |
| 01:27:27.89 | Mayor Theodorus | Wait, you seconded the motion. You're voting on his. |
| 01:27:31.28 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, you're voting. Yeah. Just to be clear, Mr. Mayor, you're voting on the motion that was made by Councilmember Withey, the last motion on the floor. |
| 01:27:39.12 | Unknown | on the floor. Yes. |
| 01:27:42.03 | City Clerk | Councilmember Pfeiffer? No. Councilmember Withey? |
| 01:27:44.83 | Mary Wagner | you |
| 01:27:44.91 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 01:27:45.77 | City Clerk | Vice Mayor Hoffman. No. Mayor Theodorus. |
| 01:27:48.93 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 01:27:50.41 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I'd like to make another motion. I mean, we don't vote on the other motions, right? Love it. Because we're done. Well, I can make another motion now. |
| 01:27:56.08 | Mary Wagner | because we're done. I can make another motion now. Mr. Mayor, when a substitute motion obviates the other motions, you don't vote on those other motions. Yes, I understand. |
| 01:28:04.28 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I have a new motion. |
| 01:28:08.50 | Mayor Theodorus | So I guess if it depends on whether it it's different with the other if it's different. Okay. It's different. Okay. |
| 01:28:08.64 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So, I moved. It's different. different okay and if you'd like to make a substitute to my motion you can so I move to to could I have I moved to agree with, can I see the one, two, three, one, two, three? The agree, disagree, or? Yeah, the, the, the, the, the, okay. Because these are our responses, right, as a city, we pick one of these. Okay, so for finding, so I move for finding number one, and I think, |
| 01:28:35.34 | Unknown | the agreed, disagree or? |
| 01:28:41.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:28:41.23 | Unknown | I think that's a good question. |
| 01:28:41.51 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:28:45.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:28:51.57 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | we would respond with but you know |
| 01:28:53.31 | Mayor Theodorus | But this is the same motion we just voted on. |
| 01:28:56.55 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | No, my first motion was that I agreed. |
| 01:28:59.47 | Mayor Theodorus | No, he's not. |
| 01:29:00.02 | Unknown | The Pressure is to approve it. |
| 01:29:03.50 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yeah, I'm I'm making a new motion. I'm making a new motion. |
| 01:29:09.59 | Councilmember Weiner | Mr. Mayor, as far as I'm concerned, this item's finished, and I think we should call a five-minute break. |
| 01:29:09.79 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yeah. |
| 01:29:09.93 | Mayor Theodorus | I'm just going to get it. |
| 01:29:10.18 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:29:10.20 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:29:10.23 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:29:10.27 | Mayor Theodorus | Yeah. |
| 01:29:10.28 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | as far as... |
| 01:29:11.03 | Mayor Theodorus | I'm concerned this item's finished and I think we should call a five minute break. If you're on what our response let me see if I'm clear we'll go to the city attorney on this. If this relates to our response to the grand jury which was the subject of Councilmember with these motion, then we are we passed that motion there there's no other motion to be entertained on that particular issue |
| 01:29:32.37 | Unknown | that people. |
| 01:29:36.27 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, the majority of the council has approved the response to the grand jury. So if there are, the only motion would be a motion to reconsider. That could be considered on that item. |
| 01:29:51.17 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:29:51.24 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:29:51.27 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. So then you're making a motion to reconsider the motion. Well, |
| 01:29:51.43 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Okay. I make. Well, I actually, I have a new motion that I move- |
| 01:29:59.17 | Mary Wagner | Mr. Mayor, to make the motion to reconsider, you had to be in the majority on the action. Yeah, that's right. We had to be in the majority. So you can't be in the minority. |
| 01:30:03.52 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yeah, that's right. We had to be in the majority, so I can't do it. So I have a new motion. My motion is that the council move forward on a policy, a new policy, to continue to hold at least two sessions for public review of employee contracts to and to hire independent lead negotiators independent auditor and |
| 01:30:44.41 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | THE END OF THE END OF THE for employee negotiations. |
| 01:30:47.38 | Mary Wagner | of Mr. Mayor, just to be clear, that isn't on your agenda. And that's not this agenda item. It's related to coin. If the council wanted to direct... |
| 01:30:48.83 | Jill Hoffman | I'm just going to make it. |
| 01:30:49.22 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:30:49.27 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 01:30:49.58 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 01:30:53.41 | Mayor Theodorus | It's... |
| 01:30:53.44 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | to tell you. |
| 01:30:53.80 | Mayor Theodorus | Yeah. |
| 01:30:53.81 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:30:53.86 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:30:53.88 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yeah. |
| 01:30:53.91 | Mayor Theodorus | Yeah. |
| 01:30:53.93 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Bye. |
| 01:30:53.95 | Mayor Theodorus | It's related to coin. They're points of coin. It's not on the agenda because this is a fault. But whatever, let's vote. |
| 01:31:01.35 | Mary Wagner | If the council wanted to direct us to bring something back to you at a future agenda, you could certainly do that. Right. |
| 01:31:08.32 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Okay, so I moved to direct staff to... Well, no, that won't work. you |
| 01:31:21.99 | Mayor Theodorus | Okay, so we're gonna move on unless we have a motion here. |
| 01:31:23.81 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. No, I'll make a motion. I make a motion that we direct staff to address the issue of the council adopting a policy going forward, implementing some of the provisions in coin that we've discussed tonight. One being an independent negotiator, second being Um, transparency and publication of proposed labor agreements consistent with the coin recommendations. And that's it. |
| 01:31:54.83 | City Clerk | Thank you. |
| 01:31:55.96 | Mayor Theodorus | Let's take the roll now. |
| 01:32:01.07 | City Clerk | Councilmember Weiner. |
| 01:32:02.00 | Unknown | I will say no. |
| 01:32:03.71 | City Clerk | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Yes. Councilmember Withey? |
| 01:32:06.98 | Councilmember Weiner | I'm sorry, I need that motion repeated. I don't know what I'm voting on. |
| 01:32:19.74 | Jill Hoffman | Did you want me to look at it? I'm waiting for the court reporter. |
| 01:32:23.16 | City Clerk | I got part of it, I was gonna go back and listen to the tape for the entire motion, if you have it in front of you. |
| 01:32:28.51 | Jill Hoffman | No, I just did not. So the motion was to direct city staff to Address? |
| 01:32:38.34 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | work on a policy in which a independent negotiator would be used for future negotiations and then an independent auditor would be engaged for future negotiations and that |
| 01:32:59.41 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. publication of the labor agreements at least seven days prior to any. |
| 01:33:03.51 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | at least seven days prior to any And I have a substitute, I mean an addendum which is two hearings. |
| 01:33:11.49 | Jill Hoffman | right? Thank you. |
| 01:33:11.61 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | to apply to the current agreement. |
| 01:33:17.89 | Jill Hoffman | To be clear, this is directing staff to come back with a policy recommendation on this that we would address at a future meeting. When would that be? |
| 01:33:25.75 | Mayor Theodorus | When would that be? Because I was saying be prior to, okay. |
| 01:33:28.81 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:33:28.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:33:29.42 | Jill Hoffman | Uh, |
| 01:33:29.48 | Mayor Theodorus | Um, Because I mean, a friendly amendment, I think, as I mentioned earlier, |
| 01:33:31.91 | Jill Hoffman | because |
| 01:33:36.47 | Mayor Theodorus | I think there's we need a lot of time to understand how point plays out. I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF GOOD ELEMENTS IN IT. SO MY PROPOSAL WOULD BE THAT I'M GOING TO PUT A TIME, IT'S ARBITRARY, 45 DAYS PRIOR TO ANY for future labor negotiations that staff comes back to the city council for approval of the method of negotiations, including whether it should adopt all or any of the elements of coin as specified in the grand jury and specifically relating to an independent negotiator. |
| 01:34:08.40 | Jill Hoffman | Um, I agree. Would do. A further amendment in that because we're looking at a five-year agreement tonight, you're talking about five years out, so I would like to address this within the next 60 days. I would request that it come back so that when the next labor negotiations begin, we've already talked about it, we've already implemented a policy. |
| 01:34:30.28 | Mayor Theodorus | many years. I mean, the problem with it, and I appreciate it, is that |
| 01:34:31.23 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 01:34:34.20 | Mayor Theodorus | The whole point of our response to the grand jury is that we don't know what's going to work out with coin with other jurisdictions, with some of these cases, and with the statute. And there's no point doing it early when we can have the wisdom and we're not going to have a labor negotiation. And the problem with coming back is that we'd have to come back again. So I don't agree with that friendly, what I take as a friendly amendment. So I would say prior to that, |
| 01:35:00.81 | Councilmember Weiner | The thing is, I know we're supposed to be in the middle of voting, but the thing is, You're trying to lock down an agreement that this will be based on coin now, before staff has analyzed the policy bringing it back. like the mayor's formulation of the motion because it's actually saying before the next Labour negotiation comes back, You have to come to counsel and go through the methodology, go through, you know, and it may very well incorporate, coin may be forgotten by that time. Coin may be irrelevant at that time. We may already have state law that mandates certain provisions at that time. So what's really important is that the state I think the Mayor's motion is not to go, not to, staff has to come and we get pre-approval from the whole council as to what the game plan is for the negotiation. Is that basically, Mr. Mayor, what you were? |
| 01:36:05.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:36:05.14 | Mayor Theodorus | Right. Because of the heightened awareness of independent negotiating, including whether we have an independent negotiator. I don't want that spelled out. |
| 01:36:11.62 | Councilmember Weiner | And I can be on board with that motion. |
| 01:36:13.00 | Mayor Theodorus | And frankly, I'd even specify and consider the grand jury's recommendation at that time. It's just so that as we're going forward, we know. But essentially, you stated what was my intention. |
| 01:36:25.40 | Jill Hoffman | But here's my problem with that, is that no one's going to remember that, like as Council Member Withey said, in four and a half and five years. What I'd like to have, what I would recommend, and I also actually... take the mayor's comments. that we want to see how it sort of plays out in the legislature and some other areas before we adopt. So perhaps if we just set it a year out from today. I mean, I just don't want us to forget about it so that it be part of the policy and that we have a full discussion before we start the next labor negotiations. That's my concern. |
| 01:36:56.32 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. Well, I think we're ready to vote on that. And I think what are we, are we now, where are we on the motions? |
| 01:37:02.99 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I believe we have an addendum to your motion, which is within 60 days, correct? |
| 01:37:08.56 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, but let me amend that addendum. I would say a year from today. |
| 01:37:12.72 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:37:12.74 | Mayor Theodorus | well it's a friendly amendment i i don't agree to that so i mean because i just think that's |
| 01:37:12.86 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Well, I- |
| 01:37:13.60 | Jill Hoffman | you. |
| 01:37:13.65 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:37:13.70 | Jill Hoffman | It's a friend. |
| 01:37:16.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:37:16.93 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:37:16.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:37:16.99 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:37:17.13 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:37:18.19 | Mayor Theodorus | Okay, particularly waste of time because then we're going to do it three times versus two. I mean, I think prior to is when you really have to. So I guess we have to get clear. So where do we maybe maybe we can get some help about where we are with the motions and then we'll move forward. |
| 01:37:18.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:37:25.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:37:25.95 | Mary Wagner | Maybe we can Yeah. So Mr. Mayor, if your suggestion was a motion, I just need clarification if there was a second on that motion? |
| 01:37:37.48 | Mayor Theodorus | Second. |
| 01:37:38.15 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. Okay, so and if the city clerk understands- |
| 01:37:41.09 | Mayor Theodorus | My time period was within 45 days prior, 45 days prior to opening further negotiation, labor negotiations. |
| 01:37:49.76 | Mary Wagner | And I want to make sure that your city clerk understands where we are in the motion process. Yeah. So you were mid voting on Vice Mayor Hoffman's motion. You had Council Member Pfeiffer. |
| 01:38:05.31 | Unknown | I'm voting yes and no on things. Councilmember Weiner had voted. |
| 01:38:06.91 | Mary Wagner | Councilmember Weiner. |
| 01:38:09.44 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:38:09.47 | Mary Wagner | You voted. |
| 01:38:10.08 | Unknown | again. |
| 01:38:11.99 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I did not, yeah, I have a substitute motion. My substitute motion. |
| 01:38:16.66 | Mary Wagner | My substitute motion. One second, Mr. Mayor, I apologize, but there's a motion that you're in the middle of voting on. Then there's another motion that was made and seconded. If you want to put a third motion on the table. I do, I have a substitute motion. I'm looking to the mayor as the running of the meeting to make sure we all understand procedurally where you are. |
| 01:38:28.39 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I do. I have a substitute motion. |
| 01:38:37.01 | Mayor Theodorus | You can do this if you like. Let me just recommend that we vote on these individually. They're going to come out in the same place, and otherwise we're going to spend half the night trying to sort out what we're doing. So you can do this, but it will really complicate things unnecessarily because we all have an idea where we're going to go with it. So do what you like. |
| 01:38:53.82 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So do what you like. I have a substitute motion. My substitute motion is that we direct city staff to explore the COIN ordinance within the next year. |
| 01:38:55.17 | Mayor Theodorus | Okay. Thank you. |
| 01:39:11.81 | Mayor Theodorus | So let's, we work backwards and... |
| 01:39:15.59 | Jill Hoffman | Would it be helpful if I just withdrew my motion? |
| 01:39:18.51 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 01:39:18.76 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yes. |
| 01:39:19.18 | Jill Hoffman | I'm sorry. |
| 01:39:19.23 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:39:19.25 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yes, it would be. The rest would be very... Hang on, hang on. If we've got three motions on the table, don't we vote on the last one and the rest are canceled? |
| 01:39:19.27 | Mayor Theodorus | Yeah. |
| 01:39:19.34 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:39:19.35 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:39:19.51 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:39:19.66 | Jill Hoffman | BE. |
| 01:39:19.98 | Unknown | I would tell him I'm like, |
| 01:39:21.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:39:27.94 | Mary Wagner | You vote on the last one if it replaces and answers the previous ones. And frankly, I'm not sure at this point. We had a motion from Vice Mayor Hoffman that I believe was staff bring back those items that you wanted to – a discussion of elements of COIN, which included independent negotiator posting seven days in advance, two readings, I believe, and I think that was it. |
| 01:39:36.43 | David Sudo | We had a motion. |
| 01:39:57.41 | Mayor Theodorus | But I believe she wants to withdraw that motion. |
| 01:39:57.46 | Mary Wagner | But I... I believe she's just. Just to be clear, Mr. Mayor, it would help us if we have, because Lily's going to have to reiterate in the minutes these motions, and I apologize for belaboring it. So there was that motion and a second. She then amended her motion to add a 60-day return time period. Mr. Mayor, you then said, I move, and it was seconded by Council Member Withey. Why don't we do that but do it 45 days before we start the next negotiating period? And that's my understanding of where you are in your motion process. |
| 01:40:04.17 | Mayor Theodorus | Okay. in the middle. |
| 01:40:05.34 | David Sudo | and, you know, |
| 01:40:32.96 | Mayor Theodorus | Vice mayor, would you like to withdraw your motion? |
| 01:40:34.77 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Well, I guess I'm still confused. Are we going to vote on every motion now, or are we voting on mine? Because mine was basically Tom's with the year time frame. |
| 01:40:46.02 | Jill Hoffman | the differences |
| 01:40:47.88 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | The time frame. |
| 01:40:48.15 | Mayor Theodorus | NO WE CAN WORK BACK LET'S IF SHE HAS HERS LET'S AND IT'S ONLY IF IT'S SUBSTANCE SO LET'S START WITH COUNCIL MEMBER PFEIFERS LET'S VOTE ON THAT MOTION WELL WAIT A MINUTE |
| 01:40:54.78 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Well, wait a minute. No, I mean, Are we voting on all three or does my motion? You don't get to the- Councilor. |
| 01:41:00.37 | Unknown | My motion. If your motion loses, you don't get to obviate my motion. Yeah, sorry, Mr. Mayor. |
| 01:41:02.85 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:41:02.95 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | loses you don't |
| 01:41:03.71 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:41:03.73 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:41:03.74 | Mayor Theodorus | to the |
| 01:41:03.98 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:41:04.05 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:41:04.06 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I just wanted to clarify the process because I'm willing to withdraw my motion. if you want to stand on yours. Because I would prefer 60 days. So if we're going to vote on every one, I will withdraw my motion. And I would rather vote on Jill's motion, actually. |
| 01:41:24.95 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, that's fine. Yeah, that's fine. |
| 01:41:26.10 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yeah. THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:41:27.23 | Mayor Theodorus | we vote on the election. of the |
| 01:41:28.02 | Adam Politzer | I wish. |
| 01:41:28.24 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:41:28.26 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:41:28.28 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Thank you. |
| 01:41:29.71 | Unknown | And we want an index. |
| 01:41:30.79 | Adam Politzer | That's not how it works. |
| 01:41:32.35 | Unknown | No. |
| 01:41:32.87 | Adam Politzer | . So if. You stay with your motion and they vote on it. and it passes, it's done. If they vote on your motion and it doesn't pass, then they go to TOMS. If they go to Tom's and it passes, it's done. We don't go to Jill's. So the only way you get to Jill's is if Tom's doesn't pass. Let's. |
| 01:41:46.94 | Mayor Theodorus | So the only way you get to it is Tom doesn't pass. |
| 01:41:51.75 | Adam Politzer | Let's go. |
| 01:41:51.84 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Let's let's go. We don't know. Wait, I'm sorry. Now that I know this process, what I want to do is amend my my motion to be 45 days and not a year. |
| 01:41:52.61 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:41:52.68 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:41:52.70 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:41:52.81 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:41:52.83 | Mayor Theodorus | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:41:52.91 | Adam Politzer | We don't want to. |
| 01:41:53.25 | Mayor Theodorus | THE FAMILY IS |
| 01:42:03.85 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Okay. |
| 01:42:04.86 | Mayor Theodorus | Let's take the role. Let's just vote on these motions. |
| 01:42:05.64 | Mary Wagner | Let's just vote on these motions. Who seconded Councilmember Pfeiffer's motion? I'll second. |
| 01:42:09.74 | Mayor Theodorus | all right okay i just want to let's just proceed with a vote on these because we can go round and round let's let's take a vote on councilmember pfeiffer's motion |
| 01:42:17.00 | City Clerk | Thank you. So this is Councilmember Pfeiffer's motion for the 45 days. Yes. |
| 01:42:20.98 | Mayor Theodorus | Yes, 45 days. From today. From today. That's my understanding. |
| 01:42:23.98 | City Clerk | From today. From today. That's my understanding. Councilmember Weiner. Councilmember Pfeiffer? Yes. Councilmember Withey? No. Vice Mayor Hoffman? Yes. |
| 01:42:33.85 | Mayor Theodorus | No. |
| 01:42:36.81 | City Clerk | Mayor Theodore. No. |
| 01:42:37.53 | Mayor Theodorus | No. Now we move on to my motion. OK, can we take a roll on that? |
| 01:42:44.86 | City Clerk | Councilmember Weiner. Yes. |
| 01:42:45.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:42:46.66 | City Clerk | Councilmember Pfeiffer. Yes. Councilmember Withy. Thank you. |
| 01:42:51.83 | Councilmember Weiner | Yes. |
| 01:42:52.23 | City Clerk | Vice Mayor Hoffman. Yes. Mayor Theodores. |
| 01:42:55.25 | Mayor Theodorus | Yes, so that obviates any other. So we're done. We made it through. Thank God. Okay, so we'll take a break right now. I don't think there's anything further than this. Thank you, Mr. Sakai. And we'll see you in, we'll take a five-minute break. |
| 01:43:23.97 | Unknown | Thank you. . |
| 01:43:27.06 | Unknown | . |
| 01:43:28.51 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:43:49.23 | Unknown | Bye. Thank you. Bye. |
| 01:44:03.32 | Mayor Theodorus | Welcome back everyone. We move on to item 6B, approval of memorandums of understanding, resolutions establishing compensation and employee benefits. And our administrative services advisor this time, Charlie Francis will present. |
| 01:44:19.74 | Charlie Francis | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of the council. Yes, this is the proposed 2015-16 through 2019-20 memorandums of understandings with the labor groups. As within all of our labor negotiations, the past seven years were back to the basics, and building on the basics has been our theme. It's very important that the city align the cost of labor with with its revenues and that's the basic theme of our negotiations and we did that by establishing certain criteria up front we the criteria being simply to realize the city's strategic plan goals and objectives every year the city has a strategic plan there's goals and objectives and I just want to go through these real quick. Strategic plan goal one has three components. It has a fiscal stabilization objective, which is predictable costs over the long term. It has a sustainability objective, where cost inflation from the city's largest expenditure category is constrained to less than anticipated revenue inflation, in other words, structural balance. We want to align the cost of living allowances with projected expenses in the city's long-term financial plan and eliminate administrative time burdens and future year direct and indirect costs from more frequent labor negotiations. And those take the form of formal annual compensation and classification studies. There's expenses for calculating costs of future negotiation proposals. There's expenses for labor attorney and negotiation assistance. And under fiscal sustainability, we also want to freeze the current market and internal alignment, both horizontal and vertical, that exists in the workforce. And then finally, the ultimate objective of fiscal strategic plan goals is the fiscal resiliency, where we reduce our employer pension costs and effectively implement the PEPRA cost-sharing targets. And as the tenured employees churn, Tier 2 and Tier PEPRA future employees create further decreases in annual employee compensation costs you recall that one of the major factors of our 2010 through 2012 to 2015 labor agreements were that for every employee that tenured employee that leaves the city not that we encourage them to do but when they do we have we realize the $50,000 cost savings when the new tiered employee comes in, and we've been reaping the benefit of that policy reflected in our structural balance and our positive revenue surpluses in the general fund There's also a strategic plan goal three. Strategic plan goal three is the efficient and effective providing services that align. Those two have to go together. One of the jobs of a chief financial officer for a city is the stewardship capability, in other words, the fiscal stabilization, resiliency, and sustainability, but balanced with the value that the organization provides the community, effective, efficient levels of service that are aligned with the priorities that the organization provides the community effective efficient levels of service that are aligned with the priorities of the community and the City Council and while also retaining our market competitiveness and by market competitiveness I mean our labor market competitiveness in order to continue to have the kinds of employees that deliver the quality service that you the City Council asked for and our citizens deserve so when we looked at these criteria of employees that deliver the quality service that you the City Council asked for and our citizens deserve so when we looked at these criteria to realize the city's strategic plan goals we then sat down and said what strategies can we put in place we looked at five-year contracts cost of living allowances that are consisted with projective consumer price index increases, and then to implement the CalPERS cost 50% cost-sharing agreement. So let's just look at some of this. The city's 10-year long-term financial plan, which was presented to the city council, I believe, last February, basically laid out our labor negotiation strategy for the council and for the public. This was our labor negotiation strategy. It wasn't stated as such, but it's implicit in this long-term financial plan where revenues were projected along with, based on very, very rigid analysis, which was presented to the city council, and conservative projections of sales tax, property tax, and TOT tax and parking revenues. Then we looked at our cost of labor and we projected our cost of labor out at CPI. projected our pension costs out at a very, very a steep curve effectively traveling our pension costs over those 10 years and then made our other services in alignment with CPI and we came up with a financial plan that is structurally balanced as we go out in the future. So with that as our guidelines, negotiations the five year contract made sense because what it did is It effectuated the five-year plan. And so, But because there's always uncertainty in long-term financial plan, we wanted to mitigate the risks. And there was two risks that we wanted to mitigate. One was the pension rate stability, rate fluctuation. And so at one of your last council meetings in June, you authorized establishing a pension rate stabilization fund where monies are put in to accumulate to stabilize the general fund's contribution for pension costs and thereby kind of ameliorating that 10 percent increase that's built into this plan. And then the second thing we did is put into place a reserve policy that allows for fluctuations in the economy because economies do roll up and down within a bandwidth within the city and so our reserve policy states that when you know the economy is in a slight recession we didn't realize all our revenue goals we would use those reserves and then when revenues are exceeding our estimates that monies would be replenished or go back into reserves to continue that reserve stabilization fund so both we've kind of mitigated the risk of revenue fluctuation and the pension cost mitigation and so a five-year plan made much sense for the city second thing, well, what is the CPI forecast? And we have forecasts going back to the, I mean, we go back to the 70s. It's all on the Bureau of Labor statistics. And no matter which smoothing formula we would use, running average, exponential smoothing, rolling averages 10, 15, and 20 years, We came up with scenarios that projected in the future about 2.61% cost of living increase could be projected for the future, and that's what we used in the long-term financial plan. So see, those were the first two. And then the third one was the 50% cost sharing. So I'm going to walk through the terms of the MOU and then look at how the 50% cost sharing works. First, for SEIU, the annual cost of living increase would be 2.75% per year. But the employees would embark on a 50% cost sharing program where over the five years they would be contributing back through payroll deductions 0.14% per year for a total of 0.7% over the life of the contract. And which gives them a net COLA increase of 2.61%. For police, the cost of living allowance is 3% per year, but they would be contributing up to their max that the city could unilaterally impose of 0.6% per year over the five years as be 3%. And so the net increase for them was 2.4% for the COLA portion. Police also asked for increases in longevity, shift differential, and some special pays for motorcycle and hostage and SWAT team response teams. So that was the overall package deal. And then, of course, the policy of the city council for employees that are unrepresented as expressed in resolutions that have been passed since the mid 2000s is that the confidential and management group receive the same compensation as SEIU. So that package costs out like this. The you The first part of it is, let's see. is this is the total compensation as we ended fiscal year 15. You know, as you recall, the city adopts a two-year budget, and in the original second year of the two-year budget, which was the beginning of the negotiation year, this was what we had budgeted for a 2.5% increase was what was in the budget, the original second-year budget. So the compensation at 2.61% is $9,980,000, or it's only $34,000 over this original second-year of the two-year budget. However, the total increase over the current contribution is 213,000. So that's if they would have received no COLA. And when we cost this out, going out over five years, the total five years of total compensation would be this $1,266,935, which results in an average annual cost increase of $253,000 or a 2.6% increase consistent with our long-term financial plan. |
| 01:54:40.88 | Charlie Francis | Now how the cost sharing works is currently employees in the police department are, that's kind of funny, |
| 01:54:52.30 | Charlie Francis | It's not current, it's current. I apologize for the spelling error right there. The librarians should have caught that. The tier one police employees, their employee contribution required by the PERS contract and as negotiated in PERS agreements is 9%. As a result of the 2012 labor negotiations police agreed to pay the equivalent of the final average compensation one year formula of 9.896. So they're currently paying 9.896%. This is for tier one employees. Now each year they would be paying an additional 0.6% so on July 1st of 2015 Retrospectively if you pass this tonight They'll be paying 10.496 and then and year two would be 11% and then in year three it's going to be 12 and then and year four and The year that we could unilaterally impose a 3% increase will have exceeded the amount that we could unilaterally impose. So the police agreed to that. And so the total cumulative at the end of the three years would be 12.896. For Tier 2, it would be 12, the amount that we can unilaterally impose. And for Tier PEPRA employees, their amount would be 15%. So blended, we're exceeding the 50% cost target set by Kale-PERS. And this is consistent with the recommendations that were made by John Bartell when he reviewed the actuarial analysis of the pension plans in February. Similar calculation for the miscellaneous employees. Currently they pay 8%, they agreed to pay.604 to the final annual compensation back in 2012. They would continue paying that and then each year be added another.4% for a total at the end of 9.304%. Again, being a... Let's see, the max that we can impose on them is 8%, which is where they're at, so we're far above the max that we can impose on them. Is that right, Charles? Is the max at 8%? So we're far and excited of what we can unilaterally impose. So we get pension reform out of this deal, the employee paying the employer's share. I know it's common for cities to compare themselves with other cities. Most cities in California, and I think all in Marin, have not gotten to where the employee is paying the employee's share of pension costs. So we've been paying, our employees have been paying the employee's share since 2006, and they're going beyond that. They're going way beyond it. They're going beyond the amount that we can unilaterally impose. And it's a credit to the negotiating team that they saw the value in cost sharing and staying in line with the city's long-term financial plan. |
| 01:58:10.84 | Charlie Francis | The general fund expenditures, and earlier I said that it's very important that we align with revenues. It's also very important that we align our expenditures with expenditures. And so you can notice here our salaries are 40% of the total general fund expenditures and our benefits another 21%. I'm sure you'll recall in 2012, our salaries were running close to 70% our salaries and benefits. So we've been able to keep our salaries and benefit costs within a sustainable and almost a resiliency range. The other part I like to look at is that what happened over time, what's happening over time here, go back to 2003 and 2004, salaries were about at 40% of total revenues and now salaries are down to 30% of total revenues. So we're... doing pretty good there. So I was asked to include in here a little discussion about GASB 68. Now as you know that the city produces annual financial statements and GASB 68 will be implemented on the city's financial statements for this year. The first thing to notice about GASB 68 is GASB 68 has no impact on employer contributions. What Gatsby 68 is saying, is that for financial statement presentation purposes and only on the statement of net position and statement of activities, which is the top level of the financial statements, you have to calculate a pension expense, which is different than your real pension expense, the amount that you paid. You know, it's sort of like an actuarial accounting methodology imposed upon general accepted accounting principles, but that was GASB 68. And then the next day, that's immediately taken off the books because it's only a financial statement presentation as of a certain date. So it only impacts the liability and the expense on the statement in that position. It doesn affect the city's ability to finance services it doesn't affect the city's future contributions all it is is a statement of actuarially calculated liability as promulgated by accountants so it's it's a little bit of a weird animal |
| 02:00:39.39 | Charlie Francis | So the recommendation tonight is for you to approve the MOU with SEIU, approve the MOU with the Police Officer Association, and approve the resolution, again spelled wrong, for unrepresented employees. And I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. |
| 02:00:56.43 | Mayor Theodorus | Okay, thanks Charlie. So we'll bring it up here and who would like to start? Vice Mayor. |
| 02:01:03.05 | Jill Hoffman | Sure, I have some questions. So Charlie, let's go back to GASB 68. So you talked about, you know, Can you explain just a little bit what that is and then also the difference that we're going to see in the financial report this year as opposed to last report, the most significant difference? |
| 02:01:19.70 | Charlie Francis | The GASB 68, GASB first of all stands for Governmental Accounting Standards Board. They're the agency that promulgates accounting standards for governments very much like FASB, the Financial Accounting Standard Board promulgates accounting standards for the private sector. So GASB frequently issues these promulgations to make sure that financial statements present fairly the financial condition of the city so we've had a number of these that we've implemented over the years gasby 34 which talked about our fixed assets gasby 45 which talked about how we present opeb liabilities on our balance sheet gasby 54 i think which said how you designate reserves and now GASB 68, which says we have to report the unfunded liability portion of the city's pension expense on the balance sheet, calculated under a certain methodology. So, you know, I believe our fiscal year 15 GASB liability was estimated by John Bartel when he was here in February at being at $12 million. That will be offset by the amount that we put into the irrevocable trust fund. So I think we're down to under about $11 million, and it's half of what it was in 2012. |
| 02:02:41.95 | Jill Hoffman | But that for the first time this year is going to show up on our financial report as a debt, the $11 million, where before the $12 million wasn't accounted for. GREAT. |
| 02:02:49.82 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 02:02:49.90 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay. So that's why in November when the financial statement for the city comes out, we're going to have an $11 million debt on there that we haven't seen before. |
| 02:02:59.28 | Charlie Francis | Correct. |
| 02:02:59.32 | Jill Hoffman | Great. as It's a, |
| 02:03:01.24 | Charlie Francis | It's a debt that's different than other debts. |
| 02:03:03.53 | Jill Hoffman | No, I understand. |
| 02:03:04.30 | Charlie Francis | It's a debt that isn't callable. |
| 02:03:07.75 | Jill Hoffman | But you got to pay. right? Yes, we have a third, we have |
| 02:03:09.98 | Charlie Francis | Yes we have a 30 year plan to pay it it's an actuarial plan over 30 years that we are on board to pay and we're now in the second year of it |
| 02:03:22.82 | Jill Hoffman | I had some specific questions from some citizens, so I'm just going to ask you. Okay. Can you explain how the STEP increases work? Because if you look at our report, like page 2 through the MOU, page 2 through the MOU, |
| 02:03:29.20 | Mary Wagner | Okay. |
| 02:03:43.33 | Jill Hoffman | goes through page 39 or 40, it goes through all the step increases. So can you explain what those are and how they work? |
| 02:03:50.30 | Charlie Francis | So we have a seven-step program. Prior to 2012, we only had a five-step program. Typically, an employee comes in at step one. After one year, if they meet all the minimum requirements of the job and they exceed their performance expectations, they go to step two, which is typically a 4.5% to 5% differential between the two steps. And they continue up that, provided that they're in good standing and they are exceeding their service expectations till they finally get to the top step and at the top step they that's the furthest they can go the reasoning behind the government step program is that you come in at year one you're at step one as a beginning employee you're inexperienced you don't have sector year two now you've been with the organization for a year that hasn't has value to the organization and you're growing and learning in the job by the time you reach the top step assumed you're either going to be promoted and go to a different job classification or you've maxed out the the equation of experience versus education that are the requirements for the job. In other words, another year of experience doesn't bring more value to the city, and that's the reasoning for a top step. So a person doesn't automatically move through it, and they don't move through it within a one-year time frame. They move through it year by year, provided they're exceeding levels of service. Mr. Mack. |
| 02:05:15.97 | Adam Politzer | Mr. Mayor, can I just add to that? Traditionally, it's a range. And so, as Charlie pointed out, we may hire people at step one, but in general, in in, in the industry. You're hiring based on experience. So if someone, so Charlie's example was if someone comes in with no experience, They start at step one. But it's arranged so if someone comes in with a lot of experience they could come in at step seven. That's not Sausalito's practice. But it is the practice in the industry that they look at the range and look at your level of experience, and then they hire you at the appropriate level of step one through five, which is the tradition we've added to on the other side. |
| 02:06:03.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks, thanks. So any employee that hasn't made it all the way through the step programs, the pay increase we're talking about now is in addition to the step increases that they would receive each year. |
| 02:06:14.31 | Charlie Francis | What this increase that's in MOUs is a cost of living increase that elevates the range based on the cost of living. So the answer is yes. |
| 02:06:25.24 | Jill Hoffman | So the answer is yes? Yes. Okay. Okay. And we also were provided a comparison that was relied upon by the negotiators between salaries in the area. Can you talk a little bit about the – I don't know if we have the slides. I don't have a slide. |
| 02:06:41.34 | Charlie Francis | YOU CAN SEE THAT. |
| 02:06:44.82 | Charlie Francis | I don't have a slide on it. At the very beginning of the fact-finding for the negotiations, we asked the same agency that we used in 2012 to do an update of the compensation study that they had performed back in 2012. And that was provided to the council in closed sessions. |
| 02:06:46.42 | Jill Hoffman | There's so much time. |
| 02:07:09.44 | Charlie Francis | And I guess it's now on the website. |
| 02:07:10.96 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, it's now on the website. I've got the summary page here with me right now, and I'm looking at the SEIU summary page. And I'm showing a median. immediate a percentage above the median of 5.2%. and a percentage above the average of 5.2%. for the SEIU, for the police. I'm looking at the summary page that was provided, and I see 1.3%. above the median. And I see in the manager summary page, the meeting is a little bit below. right below like 0.4%, 0.6% below the median. And so is that your recollection of what you're doing? And then the confidential employees about two point 2% below the median. and 5.4% below the immunity. |
| 02:08:05.82 | Charlie Francis | I'm sure your eyesight's better than my recollection. |
| 02:08:07.93 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. But that's consistent with what year? Yeah. OK. |
| 02:08:11.25 | Charlie Francis | Yeah. |
| 02:08:18.93 | Jill Hoffman | Can you, do you have any numbers on, so I understand that there's the three tiers for pension calculations. I looked at a report that was done several years ago, and it looked like most of the employees at that time, as of 2013, 49 to 51, were in the top tier. in the highest cost here. Do you have any breakout or did you guys do any breakout Of course, the city has. |
| 02:08:46.37 | Charlie Francis | Of course, the city has that. I don't have it right in front of me now, but yes, we have that breakout. |
| 02:08:47.77 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 02:08:51.73 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Um, |
| 02:08:57.51 | Jill Hoffman | I also saw in the MOU that there's a final year comparison. Can you explain what that means, the final year comparison, when you're talking about pensions? |
| 02:09:07.60 | Charlie Francis | In the MOU itself? |
| 02:09:10.04 | Jill Hoffman | thought I saw it in there. It's part of the agreement, right, with regard to pension and and what the pension calculation is for. |
| 02:09:16.07 | Charlie Francis | it is for. |
| 02:09:17.64 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, I did not. |
| 02:09:19.81 | Charlie Francis | Pardon? |
| 02:09:20.34 | Jill Hoffman | Nothing. That's a question I had, whether or not the final year comparison with regard to pension calculation Which means that your pension is based on your final year of salary. Oh, I'm sorry. |
| 02:09:32.10 | Charlie Francis | Oh, I'm sorry. |
| 02:09:33.87 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry. |
| 02:09:34.72 | Charlie Francis | The city has a contract with CalPERS for pensions and the city's contract with CalPERS for tier one employees is that the pension that an employee gets when they retire is based on their final |
| 02:09:35.19 | Jill Hoffman | The city. |
| 02:09:52.94 | Charlie Francis | highest year compensation, one year. |
| 02:09:54.37 | Jill Hoffman | you And is that only for the Tier 1 employees? Yes. Okay. And is that something new this year, or is that something that we've had |
| 02:09:56.99 | Charlie Francis | Yes. |
| 02:10:01.14 | Charlie Francis | We've had it ever since I think since the 90s but what's new in 2012 is that the city employees agreed to pay that premium for that it costs this employer for that final annual compensation of one year |
| 02:10:21.00 | Adam Politzer | you And just for clarification, that benefit is not exclusive to the city of Sausalito. No. |
| 02:10:27.11 | Charlie Francis | Thank you. |
| 02:10:28.97 | Jill Hoffman | Is that part of the, is that? |
| 02:10:30.10 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:10:30.13 | Charlie Francis | It says, |
| 02:10:30.40 | Adam Politzer | . |
| 02:10:30.42 | Charlie Francis | It's something you contract for and so some cities have contracted and it was the common practice of the 90s and 2000 that that was the benefit that employees got. |
| 02:10:41.99 | Unknown | you |
| 02:10:48.09 | Jill Hoffman | No, I have more, but I'm happy to yield it. |
| 02:10:50.82 | Kenneth Henry | We'll go ahead and do another one then. |
| 02:10:53.30 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 02:10:53.88 | Kenneth Henry | Good. |
| 02:10:55.09 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. Okay, and so as part of, also part of our discussion of salaries, we talked about the salaries in the last... several years so in the in 2008 the, uh, employees received a 5% increase, is that right? |
| 02:11:18.65 | Charlie Francis | 2009. |
| 02:11:19.76 | Jill Hoffman | 2009 was a 5%. And then 2010. |
| 02:11:19.83 | Charlie Francis | Thank you. Yeah. 2010 and 2011, 0%. |
| 02:11:23.26 | Jill Hoffman | 2010. |
| 02:11:30.58 | Jill Hoffman | And then after that it was 1% up to now? |
| 02:11:32.79 | Charlie Francis | Another. |
| 02:11:38.81 | Jill Hoffman | That's all for now. |
| 02:11:39.15 | Mayor Theodorus | open out. |
| 02:11:42.81 | Jill Hoffman | I'll yield. |
| 02:11:45.82 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yes, and thank you. I'd like to follow up on some clarification regarding the STEP. I know that the concept of STEPs are kind of foreign to the private sector, but of course in the public sector they're throughout. And so just to clarify again, the STEPs mean that Here's a, like I'm a police sergeant, let's say, for example, and here's my salary, and there are seven steps, and each year, and each step represents a salary amount, and each year, If I meet, it's an M, isn't it? Satisfactory performance. I go to the next step. And the next step represents a 5% increase in my salary. Did I get that right? |
| 02:12:37.66 | Charlie Francis | Yeah. Well, I don't think you got the fact right about this being foreign to the private sector. I believe that there are step programs in both the private sector and the public sector. Oh, okay. All right. But the movement through the steps is based on performance that meets and exceeds expectations. |
| 02:12:45.62 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Unbelievable. |
| 02:12:49.15 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Oh, okay, all right. |
| 02:12:57.33 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Well, you say meets and exceeds, but I read it was an M. Where did you read that? I read it somewhere in the MOU, I thought, that it was meets, an M, and I presume M stands for meets. Is that correct? |
| 02:13:01.81 | Charlie Francis | Where did you read that? |
| 02:13:13.04 | David Sudo | Yes. |
| 02:13:13.06 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Yes. Okay. So if I'm, and I'm just arbitrarily picking, you know, a police sergeant here because it's right in front of me, and I guess step one, 85,909, the next year I'm making 90,204, and that's a 5% increase if I hit that M, correct? And that's not counting the 2.75 percent okay so just one to clarify that and and that's not counting the 2.75 pay increase we're talking about right now my next question has to do with |
| 02:13:57.64 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | the inflation piece. Actually, before I go there, You've got a slide. that it shows how you came up with the CPI of 2.6, and then you started off, it was the prior one, it started off on 2.75, and then you reduced. This is, you went, it's next, there. Okay. So I saw this, and I thought this was interesting, and I was wondering if you could explain this a little bit more, because in at least my experience in Silicon Valley was We received. We received a raise, like you get a 2% raise, for example, and I mean, maybe they stopped contributing to the 401k plan because the economy went down. Maybe you had to pay more for your medical insurance because you just had to. with no explanation, maybe they dropped your vision because they just could. But when we got the pay raise, there was no kind of, well, because you've lost this and this and this, your actual pay raise is lower. And so when I looked at this, I'm seeing that we're actually giving them a 2.75, and then you reduced it by.14 for their employee share cost of the pension expense, and then you're saying that the actual net increase is 2.61. I look at that, Charlie, and I'm seeing a pay raise of 2.75 with my background. And I was wondering if you could explain this a little bit more. |
| 02:15:45.22 | Charlie Francis | absolutely right there's 2.75 minus 0.14 equals 2.61 net |
| 02:15:55.77 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Oh, I'm sorry. When I asked you to explain it, I didn't mean explain the math. Because we can do the math. I guess, is it common to take |
| 02:16:01.17 | David Sudo | We should do the math. |
| 02:16:02.03 | Unknown | What's left to explain? |
| 02:16:07.18 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | to look at the salary proposed increase and deduct it by the employees paying into their pension, because that's a benefit that they're going to get, a defined benefit that they will be getting that is quite generous in and of itself. |
| 02:16:16.39 | David Sudo | Yeah. |
| 02:16:16.41 | Charlie Francis | their pension because that's |
| 02:16:25.35 | Charlie Francis | Well, let's look at your example. You got, your example was a 2% increase, And if I was management explaining this to my board, I said, but I'm not gonna make a contribution to Linda's 401 program this year, That was worth 1%. So the net cost to the organization is 1%. And that's the exact same way I would do it in the private sector as I would do it in the public sector. |
| 02:16:51.68 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | My next question is the CPI you have proposed, which is the 2.6. And I understand that I looked at some rates in Marin County. The average over the next five years is estimated at roughly 2.6. The national inflation rate, as you know, is quite a different story. It's projected for 2015 at 0.2 percent. Last year it was 0.8 percent. 2013 was 1.5 percent. I guess, Can you explain a little bit more about the rationale of using that local inflation rate? If we lived in Boise, Idaho, I would be using that. |
| 02:17:39.36 | Charlie Francis | So, If we lived in Boise, Idaho, I would be using a lower inflation rate. But we don't live in Boise. We live in the San Francisco Bay Area, and this is the inflation rate calculated by the U.S. government for this area. |
| 02:17:53.47 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So we have federal employees who live in the Bay Area, and they had a 1% pay raise this year. |
| 02:18:01.49 | Charlie Francis | this year. They didn't do a very good job negotiating and we don't hire federal employees. We hire state and local government employees that are exceeding the level of service that this city council is asking to provide to our citizens. |
| 02:18:10.36 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I don't have anything to say to that. |
| 02:18:28.56 | Mayor Theodorus | At this point, we'll open it up to public comment. So who would like to speak on this issue? Wendy? |
| 02:18:41.11 | Mayor Theodorus | Please. |
| 02:18:41.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:18:53.95 | Wendy Richards | Wendy Richards. Thank you. I'm just staggering to me. I honestly, feel like I've walked into a parallel universe. You guys are all nodding your heads. You represent us. The taxpayers, for God's sakes, this is the richest pay package on the planet. There's no inflation. I spoke earlier tonight. Oil is down. The stock market dropped 469 points today. Did anyone here know that? No, because we've set it up so they don't have to. We do. Charlie took retirement at the end of July. Guess what? It's probably a $5 million nut that it takes at CalPERS to pay his retirement and health care and all that stuff, right? Guess what? With the Dow and the markets down 10%, We just lost $500,000 just for one employee's retirement plan. Guess who's going to pay? I'm gonna pay that. And every employee in this town who doesn't have any of these kinds of high quality benefits. Do you know the minimum? I looked in the time between your 6 o'clock meeting and now, I read the rest of this thing. Do you know that we give the minimum vacation of more than three weeks? Nobody does that. I mean, I'll go down the list if you would please give me a few more than three minutes to speak on behalf of the other 6,999 people who live in this town. It's unsustainable. And it's time that we all tell the truth. These are good people, they're hard working people. Look how brilliant they are. This is brilliant. I want that working on my side, not just on their side. They're smart. It's just incredible. There's no risk sharing. Charlie talks about risk. What about that $500,000 and the market's just dropped? What about the Chinese tourists are going to stop coming? What about the real estate market? One of the biggest buildings in San Francisco that went up, 25% of the units were sold to a Chinese developer a year ago. That money's gone. This is a bubble. It's going to pop just like every other bubble did. But we're the taxpayers and we're left holding the bag. And I have a, look, I have a target on my back. Look who's here. The people who are gonna stop me for running a stop sign, the people who I have to go to to fix my house. If I wanna fix my house, do you think these people share the risk and the cost? No, we've set it up so that their incentive is to make it to follow the rules, like it's some police building. They don't have any way to know... Can I afford to even fix it? You see, and I just, I'm just incredulous. I didn't elect any of the five of you for five years. How can you even dream of a five-year contract? You don't have the right to speak for me for five years. I didn't elect you for five years and some of you are almost done with your terms. I just... I would love to see all of us get together and use the smarts of these folks and use it together. I added up all the days off. Do you know how many days off are in this contract? |
| 02:22:38.31 | Wendy Richards | Look. 20%. They're off 20% of the time. If you had a vacation, holiday, sick pay that they can carry over, blah, blah, blah. That's a 20% cost. I'm paying. So I'm only getting 80% of the work days for paying 100 because that's the benefits. We pay cars. We pay longevity. Why do we pay longevity? Who would leave? This is a great job. These jobs are not out there. I can't run my business with that. |
| 02:23:03.62 | Mayor Theodorus | can you please wrap it up? I mean, we limited three minutes. I appreciate your comments, but |
| 02:23:08.78 | Wendy Richards | I'm sorry that I am so emotional. Excuse me. And I'm sorry that I'm the only one here. I said earlier in my earlier comments that what I would like to see in my town are. Risk sharing. management policies, positive incentives, and an alignment of interest with the good people that work for us so they can be in alignment with the universe out there of hardworking people who are working hard in jobs that don't look like this. Thank you. |
| 02:23:44.15 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else from the public like to speak on this? |
| 02:23:44.17 | Wendy Richards | Thank you. |
| 02:23:58.14 | Dawn Barber | everybody city council members and staff I would like to make an exception as far as I've seen everybody in this town I'm blessed I work here and I live here and I pay taxes here my name is Dawn Barber |
| 02:24:10.21 | Mayor Theodorus | Your name for. Thank you for our minutes. |
| 02:24:14.61 | Dawn Barber | So I am blessed in a great way, but I see all these people that I work with throughout the city working their tails off. I resent this person's feelings that, oh boy, we are so lucky. We do a lot of work here and we, We care about our community. I pay taxes too. And I just feel that, you know, unlike this person who obviously maybe has never been in danger. I think public works risks their lives when they go out in storms and help us. I know the officers do. People are getting more and more brazen. Their officers are being killed on the streets constantly. There's no respect, and I just feel that... We do deserve, we work hard for our money. We don't, I don't think most of these people make five figures, three figures. I don't, but I work hard for this place because I love my community, and I don't know what she's referring to, but she does not represent me. And I don't believe she represents a lot of my community where I live on the streets that I live. So I would just appreciate your consideration. We've worked hard. We haven't taken raises in the past few years, you know, and cost of living did go up. And people can't live here. They commute. I'm blessed. I get to live here because my landlord rents to me very cheaply. But I do feel that the people in this town work hard, and they deserve what they've tried to find and get from our community and I don't resent paying those taxes. Thank you. |
| 02:25:56.06 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. Anyone else from the public? In case seeing none, we'll close public comment, move it back up here for council comment. Who would like to start? |
| 02:26:06.10 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I I'd like to start this is just an unsustainable contract both of them from what I can see I am very concerned that the public is seeing this for the first time tonight at this meeting in terms of being able to comment publicly on it we need to continue this I don't believe the process was transparent. I appreciate our staff. I appreciate our hard working city employees. I... When I look at this, however, and I see the uncertain economy, I cannot support a proposal that when you consider the step increases that automatically occur every year at 5%, so that's 5% of your salary every year goes up, and that's not considered the raise. That's just considered if you meet that bar. And on top of that, for the police, 3%, so that's 8% a year increase in salary. And that means that over the course of this five-year contract, you're looking at a 44% increase cumulative but you are well look at the numbers it's 5% between step 1 and step 2 another 5% between 2 and 3 another 5% between 3 and 4 and 4 and 5 and then on top of that the 3% so it does I mean you would be going in the one thing I'm looking at Uh... You start at 89, seven, seven and wind up at 116, 321. um that's a 37 percent uh salary increase right there in five years so don't tell me it's not true it is true i'm looking at the numbers are right in front of me this this look I know that other cities have had to do layoffs when they had, the city of Mendocino County had to reduce staff by 33% and cut salaries by 10%. We don't know what is going to be happening in this rocky economy in the next year or two years. And I don't want to see our employees hit. And I don't want to see us promising more than we really should be promising. Five years is just unprecedented in Sausalito. It's unprecedented five years. Five years, I mean, a council member could be elected and never participate in a city negotiation. That is, I can't even fathom that. We heard the comment that we're elected for four years to represent the citizens for four years. So this five years, you know, it's unprecedented, and I have alarm bells going off for that and the rate of the increases as well. I can't support this. I'm sorry. I really can't. And I really appreciate our employees. But I think this is doing a disservice. |
| 02:29:41.06 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:29:46.39 | Unknown | our employees are a very, very valuable resource. I was in the business where I was totally dependent on labor. and how you treat them. You know, a lot of people. Besides, I love it. Some of the people that get up and talk, What's your house worth today as opposed to when you bought it? My house is worth five times what it was when I bought it. All right. So don't talk about labor. that's just getting by. |
| 02:30:25.57 | Wendy Richards | nothing. |
| 02:30:27.45 | Unknown | Thank you. OK. |
| 02:30:34.85 | Unknown | I'll speak to her later. Believe me, I will. |
| 02:30:38.45 | Unknown | No, no, go ahead on. Go ahead on. This is going to be met head on. Go ahead. |
| 02:30:51.34 | Jill Hoffman | You know, I hate that this is being couched as people that support labor and that don't support labor. And I agree with my friend here, Council Member Weiner, that we value the employees here. in Sausalito. You guys do a great job. This is a great place to work. And everybody works hard to make sure that we use the resources that we have. And the driving factor for me in reviewing this this agreement is when I look at the comparables amongst other states and what's the best allocation of assets for Sausalito combined with the recent the recent effort we've spent as a city council on trying to get our parks redone. And when we're talking about MLK and taking out financing against MLK because the city doesn't have money to fix the parks, we're at $7 million. And now, on the other hand, we're talking on the other side of our face and saying, well, now we can afford $1.2 million over five years. for an increase for our workers When I look at the comparable rate about what's a fair wage, and I see that we're 2% to 5% above the median amongst much larger cities. And so when I look at what's fair, I see that we have seven-year step increases, and I'm just randomly pulling from, the attachment, anybody can go look at it, to the agenda. This is item 6B1 attachment. You know, I'm looking right now at page 23. I'm not going to name the worker. But in 2017, they're going to go from an annual salary at $52,000 to $70,000 over five years. So sorry, seven years, so they're gonna end up at 70,000. You know, I look at another one, a maintenance worker. Sorry, I'm going to talk about another one because I don't want to talk about specific salaries. But so here's another one, another worker who's going to start at you know, 78,000 and ends up at 105,000. By the time they get done with their step increases. And we're talking about 2.3. 7% or 6%, however you want to slice it with the pension, but on top of that. And so I don't see that that's warranted. I don't see that that's sustainable. And when you also step back and look at the 5% increase that the workers received in 2009, when we were in the depths of a recession, People were getting laid off. Their salaries were getting sliced. They were going on furloughs. And we gave a 5% increase. And my suspicion is that's why our salaries are still well above the median. And so I, you know, I. i was presented with this plan i've voiced my concern about it at the when we were presented with it, there was no further concessions, there was no further talk. You know, I'm not saying I'm not in favor of some sort of pay increase. I'm saying I am absolutely fundamentally opposed to this deal, and I do not believe that this serves the city in the best way that we should be serving them. And as an aside, one of the, Just quickly, another fundamental problem I have with the five-year plan is that I was elected by some people for pension reform, because I was concerned about the pension, because I was concerned about our budget. This completely takes that away from me and the people that supported me in my election to do my duty. for what they elected me for, for looking at the pensions because it takes this issue completely out of my term that I was elected for for four years. So for those reasons, I don't feel like this is the best plan for the city. |
| 02:34:32.44 | Councilmember Weiner | Um, Yeah, I think everybody agrees apparently our employees are most valuable. I think they're our most valuable asset in the city. And I think it's worthwhile stepping back and asking, why do we even have a compensation philosophy? What's the purpose of actually rewarding people, paying them, and trying to estimate what the market is and pay at a certain level of the market? You know, our... Compensation philosophy should be to retain and motivate the highest quality people that we can, so that the city can deliver the services that our residents demand. That's bottom line what the purpose of a compensation philosophy is. I think we've made in the past significant strides to, but with that said, we've got to keep an eye to labor costs. And in the past, we've made great strides at reforming our labor costs. at making serious modifications to our pensions, such that It is just factually incorrect for anybody up here to say that what is being proposed is unsustainable. That's just not true. If you look at the long range financial forecast, you can't just throw out the word unsustainable when the numbers, the way you measure sustainability does not say that. Now the other thing is, We also need to be fair. And so the question is, is it fair that right now in this current environment that we offer a cost of living increase that is in line with long-term historical trends and inflation? Of course it's fair. I'm actually fully supportive of this. I think this is absolutely in the best interests of the city. If you adopt a philosophy where all you're trying to do is continually nickel and diming labor costs, you will end up sending people elsewhere and you will be hiring from the bottom of the barrel. because we're in a marketplace. We're in a marketplace where we're competing for employees. And we seem to forget that. I just, yeah, we are living in different worlds. We're living in very different worlds. Um, I don't think pretty much those worlds are ever going to meet because it's a matter of philosophy, and it's a matter of fairness, and it's a matter of why you have employees. |
| 02:37:55.92 | Mayor Theodorus | Well, I support it. I mean, as we... Look at this. This is a cost of living increase. This is not raises in general. I think Charlie, when we look at it in the Bay Area, when you look at The statistics were right at what the cost of living would be. Otherwise, all our employees would be going backwards. Charlie went through, I mean, having the privilege of being on the finance committee, we go through it in great detail, but Charlie walked us through how this absolutely fits into our five and 10-year plans. We have the revenues plan for where this comes from, how it fits in, and it's very important. I do want to take a little bit of a side on these steps because these steps are for our benefit. If one thinks about it, if you only got a cost of living increase and you came and worked for the city and you were there for 30 years, you never get a raise even though you were that much more of a valuable employee we would be forced to spend more money to hire people at higher wages and and and pay them at the top salaries because we know we'd lose them now we're able to bring them in at lower salaries and move them up so it's it GET EXPERIENCE AS OPPOSED TO JUST RANDOM RAISES. I AGREE WITH COUNCIL MEMBER WITH THE I MEAN WE WHEN WE DO THIS WE HAVE TO BE FAIR WITH OUR EMPLOYEES. AND WHEN WE WALK AWAY I THINK WE'RE GOING TO KNOW THAT, YEAH, WE'RE PAYING IT'S NOT A PERFECT DEAL. IT'S NOT AS WE MAYBE LIKE TO SPEND LESS MONEY. THE EMPLOYEES WOULD LIKE TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY. TH's not as we maybe like to spend a little less money. The employees would like to get a little bit more money. These are not, but you have to be fair with them because it's a value proposition. We have valuable employees. I can nickel and dime them a little less on inflation does not get us the best employees. We have very dedicated employees. And when we go out and when we lose them, we need to be able to replace them with good employees, both on the salary and because they know that we're a fair city to work with. So I support this. I do think I would recommend that we move it from five years to four years. I think I would think I actually think it's a great deal on the five years, but I think because of the. the cycles and for the comfort, I think we should move it to a four year cycle. |
| 02:40:08.27 | Unknown | that's right point of order you Mr. Mayor. |
| 02:40:11.20 | Mayor Theodorus | Sir, public comments over, please. Thank you. |
| 02:40:14.60 | Unknown | Can I make one comment, a point of order? |
| 02:40:15.07 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. Thank you. We're an important part of this. |
| 02:40:18.48 | Unknown | I just struggled for 15 minutes out of a sick bed watching this on television because I had to come over here to say something. No, no. Will you allow me? |
| 02:40:24.11 | Mayor Theodorus | to say something. No, no. Will you allow me? No, please sit. We're at a critical point of finishing our debates here. Please, sir. It's closed. I appreciate it. |
| 02:40:39.20 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. No, we're at a very, we can't. |
| 02:40:39.40 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:40:39.44 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 02:40:39.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:40:41.97 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:40:41.98 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Three minutes. |
| 02:40:42.90 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think it's worth saying something about the length of the contract because I By the way, I can agree, I have no, I'm not wedded five years. But I think you have to look at it from an economic standpoint, from a finance standpoint. It's actually in the city's interest for it to be long. Um, But with that said, I'm not wedded to five years. I just think the city management went into the process thinking it was in the city's best interest to have a longer thing. And I don't know whether, Charles, you'd like to comment on that at all. |
| 02:41:29.10 | Charles Sakai | I just wanted to say that you're considering a tentative agreement now. If you modify those terms, you're basically directing the negotiators back to the bargaining table. So that's, I think, the only thing that I wanted to clarify. |
| 02:41:47.21 | Mayor Theodorus | And is there any, they can go back to the bargaining table |
| 02:41:52.37 | Charles Sakai | Thank you. |
| 02:41:52.89 | Mayor Theodorus | What's the ramifications of that? Why don't you explain that in |
| 02:41:55.44 | Charles Sakai | Well, you're sending them back to the table with new authority to bargain with the various unions, and that means that the process sort of restarts. So it'll depend on whether the unions are amenable to the change. |
| 02:42:11.22 | Mayor Theodorus | Yeah. |
| 02:42:12.35 | Charles Sakai | at this point. |
| 02:42:12.77 | Mayor Theodorus | Our understanding is that this was really for the city's benefit and that they would be. Do we need to come back to council again? |
| 02:42:19.17 | Adam Politzer | That's my understanding is you would have to come back to council. Unless the attorneys can tell us a way that you can craft a language that if agreed upon by the bargaining units, it doesn't come back to council. But I'd look to Charles and Mary on. |
| 02:42:32.85 | Charles Sakai | I suppose you could direct the manager to reach an agreement under these terms on a four-year deal. And if that was the only change, then that could be effective. But if there's any other changes from the negotiation, then it would have to come back here. |
| 02:42:55.74 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I move to not approve the employee MOUs and to direct Well, to go back to negotiations with an independent negotiator, and move forward. Thank you. with a two to three year contract and enter negotiations with that shorter timeframe and just, |
| 02:43:39.12 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | to quote a few residents, start over. |
| 02:43:46.80 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:43:46.82 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 02:43:46.92 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:43:46.93 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | . |
| 02:43:46.97 | Jill Hoffman | I second that. |
| 02:43:49.87 | Mayor Theodorus | What I recognize, |
| 02:43:51.29 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not. Thank you. |
| 02:43:51.68 | Mayor Theodorus | and maybe take one motion at a time. |
| 02:43:54.44 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:43:54.48 | City Clerk | Okay? |
| 02:43:54.76 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:43:54.78 | City Clerk | Thank you. |
| 02:43:54.80 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:43:56.69 | Mayor Theodorus | Let's call the roll on that motion. |
| 02:43:58.85 | City Clerk | Councilmember Weiner? No. |
| 02:43:59.76 | Mayor Theodorus | No. |
| 02:44:00.10 | City Clerk | Councilmember Pfeiffer. Yes. Councilmember Withey? |
| 02:44:03.66 | Mayor Theodorus | No. |
| 02:44:04.74 | City Clerk | Vice Mayor Hoffman? Thank you. |
| 02:44:06.17 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 02:44:06.49 | City Clerk | you |
| 02:44:06.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:44:06.93 | City Clerk | Mayor Theodorus. |
| 02:44:07.66 | Mayor Theodorus | No. Do we have another motion? |
| 02:44:13.41 | Councilmember Weiner | Okay, I move. to, I don't know what the council's doing, approving the, is there a draft resolution up there? |
| 02:44:32.26 | Councilmember Weiner | Sorry, I should have been prepared for this. |
| 02:44:35.08 | Mayor Theodorus | Are we voting separately on each of the police and SEIU? Why don't we take separate votes on them? |
| 02:44:38.98 | Councilmember Weiner | Yeah. |
| 02:44:43.75 | Mary Wagner | THANK YOU. Thank you. You can do them separately or together if it's... Let's do them separately. Or if we've done it all as... |
| 02:44:47.48 | Mayor Theodorus | do them separately. |
| 02:44:49.24 | Charlie Francis | Thank you. |
| 02:44:49.30 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 02:44:49.34 | Charlie Francis | Historically we've done it all as one, just a motion vote to approve the two MOUs and then a second one to approve the resolution for the representative. |
| 02:44:49.39 | Mary Wagner | Yeah. |
| 02:45:01.57 | Councilmember Weiner | Okay, so to adopt a resolution of the City Council, the City of Sausalito approving the memorandum of understandings between the City of Sausalito and one, the SEIU, two, POA, and also to approve the resolution for unrepresented employees. And the only question I have, I'm sorry, I'm sort of like polls. polls then the question I have is do we want to move this from five years to four years and ask the city manager to press to proceed with that with no other change and Hopefully, the City Manager can, through this resolution, be authorized to complete the deal, assuming that the only change is five years to four years. |
| 02:45:58.04 | Mayor Theodorus | A CITY ATTORNEY IS THAT WOULD THAT BE SUFFICIENT THAT WE WOULD GET THAT THE COUNCIL WOULD GIVE SUFFICIENT AUTHORITY TO GO THROUGH WITH THAT AND THAT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY NECESSITATE COMING BACK SORRY |
| 02:46:12.25 | Mary Wagner | Okay, if there were no other changes, that's sufficient. |
| 02:46:12.70 | Councilmember Weiner | Yeah. |
| 02:46:14.30 | Mayor Theodorus | That's sufficient. Right. |
| 02:46:16.85 | Councilmember Weiner | So that's my motion. Yeah, we see. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:46:24.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:46:26.91 | Councilmember Weiner | We just said all three. |
| 02:46:29.46 | Adam Politzer | you |
| 02:46:29.69 | Councilmember Weiner | you |
| 02:46:29.74 | Adam Politzer | British. |
| 02:46:31.25 | Councilmember Weiner | Would you prefer? |
| 02:46:32.23 | Dawn Barber | Yeah. |
| 02:46:33.46 | Councilmember Weiner | Let's go. |
| 02:46:33.68 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:46:33.79 | Councilmember Weiner | Let's roll down them one at a time. Is there anybody going to second my motion? |
| 02:46:38.37 | Unknown | Yes, I'll second it. Thank you. |
| 02:46:39.90 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Starting with the police. I have an amendment, and the amendment is to continue this item to the next council agenda to give the public more time to review. |
| 02:46:39.92 | Councilmember Weiner | Starting with the bill. Yeah. |
| 02:46:41.39 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:46:54.92 | Mayor Theodorus | And that's up to you. No, I guess there's no. Okay, so we move on with, now we're starting with- |
| 02:47:01.45 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So I'm sorry, so Ray, you do not accept that addendum? |
| 02:47:05.32 | Mayor Theodorus | So we move on with Council member with these motion, but we're going to do them for all three, correct? Thank you. |
| 02:47:12.64 | City Clerk | Thank you. |
| 02:47:12.77 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. Okay? |
| 02:47:13.65 | City Clerk | So the first is SEIU. |
| 02:47:15.85 | Mayor Theodorus | Okay. What? Yeah, separately. Okay. |
| 02:47:18.06 | David Sudo | Yeah. |
| 02:47:20.42 | City Clerk | Councilmember Weiner? Yes. Councilmember Pfeiffer? Yes. |
| 02:47:20.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:47:22.14 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:47:22.17 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:47:22.60 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:47:24.22 | City Clerk | No. Councilmember Withey? Yes. Vice Mayor Hoffman? No. |
| 02:47:26.14 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:47:29.67 | City Clerk | Mayor Theodore. |
| 02:47:30.34 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:47:32.40 | City Clerk | That's it. 3, 2. the Police Association, Councilmember Weiner. |
| 02:47:40.16 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:47:40.47 | City Clerk | Thank you. Councilmember Pfeiffer? No. Councilmember Withey? Yes. Vice Mayor Hoffman? |
| 02:47:43.99 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:47:44.21 | Unknown | So, |
| 02:47:44.30 | Unknown | you |
| 02:47:46.69 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, and let me just, I forgot to say during my comments that my comments were directed toward the SEIU and the other unrepresented. When I look at the comparisons for the police, they're at 1% and 1.3% within the median. So I think that that's reasonable. So yes, on the police. |
| 02:48:03.11 | Unknown | Yes. Oh, sorry. Yes. |
| 02:48:05.98 | City Clerk | 401. |
| 02:48:06.54 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:48:08.04 | Unknown | and representative. |
| 02:48:08.85 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:48:09.02 | City Clerk | And then unrepresented, Councilmember Weiner. |
| 02:48:11.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:48:11.97 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:48:12.67 | City Clerk | Councilmember Pfeiffer? No. Councilmember Withey? Yes. Vice Mayor Hoffman? No. Mayor Theodoris? |
| 02:48:13.12 | Unknown | Right. |
| 02:48:13.34 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:48:15.43 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:48:18.66 | Mayor Theodorus | yes Thank you. |
| 02:48:19.60 | City Clerk | Thank you. |
| 02:48:19.63 | Mayor Theodorus | So they're done with that. That's it. They're passed. And the city manager will report out to us as to further OK moving on to will now move on to. item 6C, which was previously four. B on the consent calendar, the adoption of the resolution urging the state legislature to create additional transportation funding. And thank you all. Thank you for coming tonight. Uh, |
| 02:48:58.70 | Jill Hoffman | We thank you for your service, Mayor and Council Members. |
| 02:49:01.75 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:49:01.92 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 02:49:02.87 | Mayor Theodorus | Um, Who is, do we, Adam, do we have anyone that could present on this? |
| 02:49:22.92 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of council, staff, and folks who were in the audience and are leaving and the people who are still in the audience at home. Jonathan Goldman, your public works director. presentation or a lengthy discussion on this item. It's an item that the League of California Cities asked the city to bring to your attention and... While council was supposed to be dark in August, we drafted a letter for the mayor's signature, which is in your packet, letting our representatives know that that we had heard the league's interest in this issue, and that staff would bring an item to council for consideration. And that's really all there is to it. The fact is that, as indicated in the staff report, the governor in responding to the agenda, Issues brought to his attention from cities and counties in the state, as well as his own staff in the State Department of Transportation, recognizing that because of changes in the economy, because of changes in the way, transportation is being used, the model that was originally created, which largely relies on gas taxes and things like that, isn't necessarily a viable way to continue to fund maintenance and improvements of transportation infrastructure. And so I think the idea is that the league is encouraging cities and counties in California to let the legislature know and the governor know that there's interest in doing what's been recommended to look at that process, those mechanisms for funding, and to the extent that they can be improved in a way that results in increased revenues to local jurisdictions, increased revenues to the city of Sausalito, to allow us to make bigger investments in maintenance or repair of that kind of infrastructure. I think the league would like your support in doing that. |
| 02:52:01.91 | Adam Politzer | Can I just add to that, Jonathan? What it also says in the letter and the discussion that we had from Nancy Hall Bennett, who's our league representative here in the North Bay, was that the governor was basically proposing 50-50 split originally of $3 billion of new revenue. And we all supported that. The city supported that concept. 50% would go to the state and 50% would go to the counties and cities to split up and down the state of California. That money would go back into local roads for repair. All great. But as the governor started thinking about all of his infrastructure and road improvements, he needed to actually complete 50% wasn't enough for him and so there started to be talks that the cities and counties would only get 20%. of that revenue. which is still a significant amount of money, but not anything close to 50%. So we feel strongly up and down the state of cities and counties that we need to reach out to our representatives, make our statements clear that we support the 50%. I think in the staff report they may have come to a 44% maybe where this all settled because that's what I see in front of me. But 44% split where the county gets 56% of the money. the state gets 56% of the money the state gets 56% of the money in the county and cities share 44% so that's the intent of the letter this is pretty much a standard letter that boilerplate that all cities and counties are using they're tweaking it a little bit to meet its own personality but for the most part it's a boilerplate letter that we're asking the council to support |
| 02:53:43.67 | Jill Hoffman | So Do you want me to start? Sure. I'm the one that asked to move it off. So I'll just launch in. So my concern, you know, I'm all about I'm fine with getting, you know, whatever, 300 and whatever from the state. My sticking point is reasonable increases in gasoline and diesel excise taxes and reasonable increases in vehicle registration and vehicle license fees. |
| 02:53:45.62 | David Sudo | . TODAY. |
| 02:54:04.64 | Jill Hoffman | I wouldn't endorse anything unless I know exactly what they're talking about. So reasonable to me is different probably than reasonable to somebody else. Sorry. So that's on page 2 of 4. Yeah, 2 of 4, and then it's on paragraph or the resolution. It's in paragraph 4. So the resolution to me is fine except for paragraph 4. And I would prefer just a strike. Just strike it out. Thank you. Yeah, yeah, page three or four of the resolution. and it's paragraph four, and it just talks. I wouldn't ever, I don't think, I don't want to say ever, but I wouldn't support it unless I know exactly what, somebody's proposing. And they talk about a broad range of options, including fuel taxes, license fees, registration fees, rather than just one source. So I'd want to know exactly what those were and how much they were proposing. And then any package should move California toward an all-users-pay structure in which everyone who benefits from the system contributes to maintaining it. from traditional gasoline-fueled vehicles to new hybrids or electric vehicles to commercial vehicles. So I can think of some other probably definitions that need to be in that sentence as well. So I would just strike paragraph four. and then I would vote for it. |
| 02:55:29.96 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Um, |
| 02:55:31.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:55:31.26 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:55:31.31 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 02:55:31.40 | Adam Politzer | . |
| 02:55:31.47 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:55:31.48 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I have a question and I would also concur and I also pulled this item. I agreed with that for discussion. |
| 02:55:31.50 | Unknown | I know. Thank you. |
| 02:55:41.27 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. i also have an issue with the raised revenues i know they they mention reasonable increases in gasoline diesel excise taxes vehicle registration vehicle license fees etc and uh... My question was, it's my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, because I could be, but it's my understanding that One of the reasons we're getting squeezed is Plan Bay Area redirected a lot of transportation funds that were allocated for roads, etc., to transit-oriented development projects. And that is one of the reasons this funding for just our basic roads are being squeezed. Do you have a comment on that? |
| 02:56:41.68 | Jonathon Goldman | No. I don't know that transit funds have necessarily been redirected. |
| 02:56:46.56 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 02:56:46.58 | Unknown | And... |
| 02:56:55.82 | Jonathon Goldman | So I don't know. I don't have a comment on that. |
| 02:56:59.30 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Can you tell me, there is an insert in here. It's called Fix Our Roads. It's on page one of three attachment two for item 4B. It looks like an informational selling for among other things, the tax increases. Who is behind this? Is it the League of California Cities? |
| 02:57:30.13 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 02:57:30.20 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:30.28 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | My recommendation. |
| 02:57:30.32 | Jonathon Goldman | My recollection is that that information came from the League of California Cities. |
| 02:57:33.94 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Did they create this? |
| 02:57:35.65 | Jonathon Goldman | I don't know. Thank you. |
| 02:57:38.15 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:57:38.18 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 02:57:39.68 | Adam Politzer | All the material came from the League of California Cities. |
| 02:57:42.74 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | So, They also make a comment and I had it here. I'm still trying to. Sorry, I had it. I lost it. According to the league, research by the California Alliance for Transportation California shows voters strongly support increased funding. Voters appear to be much more open to a package that spreads potential tax or fee increases, including fuel taxes, license fees, registration fees. You know, is that the sole source of this funding is, are the taxes and the fees? |
| 02:58:30.14 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm sorry, which funding? |
| 02:58:32.99 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | that to raise the funds for for this |
| 02:58:37.34 | Jonathon Goldman | I don't necessarily think, and this goes to Vice Mayor Hoffman's question, I don't know that the plan for increasing funding is fully baked yet. I think that the league's objective is to try to encourage our state representatives to work with the governor and find ways to increase the amount of funding that's available to our jurisdiction. I don't know that they're necessarily that they have |
| 02:58:43.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:59:17.73 | Jonathon Goldman | all the details worked out or everything in mind at this point. |
| 02:59:22.58 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I have one follow up question on point five. It uses the term goods movement. And I was wondering if you could explain what that means. It says invest a portion of diesel tax and or cap and trade revenue, in other words, diesel taxes, to high priority goods movement projects. |
| 02:59:54.06 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Upgrade the goods movement infrastructure. when establishing a framework to make appropriate investments in major goods movements Are we talking about a trolley here? I guess, when I see these new words, phrases, I'm not sure what that means. |
| 03:00:16.18 | Unknown | you |
| 03:00:16.25 | Councilmember Weiner | You know, phrases. I'm not sure what that is. |
| 03:00:20.65 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I am done. |
| 03:00:21.51 | Councilmember Weiner | I was just going to comment the goods movement is a standard economic term to actually talk about the transportation of economic goods. I mean, that's what it is. |
| 03:00:32.35 | Jonathon Goldman | And again, if I may, just to help with the context here, I don't think that the League and certainly staff is not advocating that council communicate with its elected representatives and... And with the expectation that, for example, lo and behold, a trolley will appear here, the objective is to increase the revenues that are available to the city for the purposes that the city council chooses to put them to. |
| 03:01:08.26 | Mayor Theodorus | I THINK THAT'S THE GENERAL INTENTION OF THIS IS THAT THIS LEGISLATURE IS ESSENTIALLY TAKING OUR LOCAL FUNDS AND PUTTING THE GENERAL FUNDS. THAT'S THE INTENTION OF THIS LETTER. I THINK THEY'VE THROWN IN A LOT OF OTHER THINGS THAT ARE throwing us off. So what I'd recommend is that maybe we tailor our letter and take out things that aren't really relevant to it and say, you know, it's important for us that these particular transportation taxes that are already, we're not advocating more, that are already being imposed, that we get our fair share of it. and maybe strike out other parts. Then we can eliminate this discussion. Because I don't think we're here, I don't think any of us are prepared or interested in discussing what the legislature is going to impose in the future. We want our fair share of what they're imposing now. |
| 03:01:40.93 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Okay, I guess- |
| 03:01:49.40 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 03:01:52.03 | Mayor Theodorus | And can we... Can we go back to staff? |
| 03:01:54.58 | Adam Politzer | Your other action is to take no action and just not send the letter Yeah okay We're one of 400 plus cities that are sending basically this carbon letter and may or may not be putting more things the whole point of the letter is to say |
| 03:01:58.48 | Mayor Theodorus | Yeah. Okay. Yeah, that's true. |
| 03:02:06.48 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 03:02:06.49 | Unknown | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 03:02:09.75 | Adam Politzer | If there is additional revenues, which is the governor's |
| 03:02:09.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:02:09.78 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:02:13.07 | Adam Politzer | position. I think that's a good question. then we want 50% of those areas for local use. if you you know, if it's if there's concern about some of the language, that is an option. And I don't think Sausalito's missing letter is going to go notice. And it is worth pointing out that this letter was actually due back in |
| 03:02:29.69 | Unknown | IT'S A GOOD IDEA. |
| 03:02:29.97 | David Sudo | Thank you. |
| 03:02:34.40 | Adam Politzer | August so we sent a a very informal letter to our senator and Mark Levine with our support of the 50-50 split. and said that we would take this to the council September 1st. Thank you. I think they go to recess here in a couple of weeks. And this item, our letter is not all that powerful. |
| 03:02:54.30 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I guess the reason I raised the issue about the goods movement, and it says we'll improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. So when I see that, I'm thinking transit-oriented development, I'm thinking major arteries and that whole thing. That's, I've learned to look and read between the lines. |
| 03:03:10.18 | David Sudo | Thank you. |
| 03:03:10.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:03:10.33 | David Sudo | Thank you. |
| 03:03:10.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:03:10.42 | David Sudo | Thank you. |
| 03:03:14.16 | Mayor Theodorus | But again, the attention was very basic, and I think at this stage, You know, we I agree with city manager. We may just let it go. It's not going to make any difference in terms of unless we want to make a very short one, say, you guys better make sure we get the 50 percent. |
| 03:03:24.64 | Unknown | Unless we want to. |
| 03:03:28.28 | Unknown | Well, it's gone from 425 down to almost $2 a gallon. There's a tremendous amount of money that the state has lost. As far as the improvement in the air quality, especially with trucks. is these new diesels now that are coming out. a very clean burning. but yet 75% of the trucks that are out there in California don't have that new system. They're on the old system. And You know, that's how we move goods in this state is by truck. All right, so they're not getting the revenues and they're stretching every way because it just fits. If you use your automobile and you buy gasoline and you get licenses and things, that money there goes to improve the condition of the transportation roads. And it's not coming in, and it hasn't been coming in for the last two years, and they're just looking in every which way they can do to get something to offset it, and yet it fits, because the gasoline tax should be, the payment for improvement on roads. |
| 03:04:38.22 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:04:38.82 | Mayor Theodorus | Is the consensus that would take no action that we will not pass this resolution? We have a consensus on it, so we- Well, it's not my consensus, no. |
| 03:04:44.90 | Councilmember Weiner | Well, it's not my consensus, no. I'm sorry. No, it's not at all. I think it's outrageous that the city of Sol Soledo is unable to pass a simple resolution to approve a form letter that every other downtown in the whole of Marin County and probably most of the state is going to sign to ask to ensure more revenue comes into the local jurisdictions. Quite frankly, I think this is ridiculous. |
| 03:05:11.24 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Well, if everyone else is doing it, then we should definitely just rubber stamp this. |
| 03:05:15.98 | Councilmember Weiner | It's not what I said. It's not what I said. And move on. Do you want to make... |
| 03:05:16.01 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I'm sorry. |
| 03:05:20.52 | Mayor Theodorus | You want to make... Okay. Then there's... |
| 03:05:28.98 | Mayor Theodorus | you you Okay? Does that work? Now, can we move on to item 7A, city manager information for councils? Welcome. |
| 03:05:42.04 | Adam Politzer | back to the very abbreviated and interrupted break that we all shared but we are back and we'll have a very busy fall season as we look forward there's significant items in our future agenda and Lily and I will work on forecasting out to the end of the year I think that there are some big items there that will take up a significant amount of time of discussion and some of those items will find their way onto some of the other boards and commissions and council committees. uh, Make sure you eat your Wheaties and come prepared to take on some big issues. We are certainly not afraid to take on big issues. with this City Council and our staff and so I appreciate everyone's effort going forward. A handful of quick items. We've launched the new Sausalito Current. You've seen the new format. Lilly and Abbott have taken the reins and have worked with staff to pull forward future stories, putting forward relevant information, and they'll continue to work on this going into the year and so if you have recommendations that you want to pass on to staff feel free to do that directly to Lily. And then we'll incorporate it. The mayor had asked that at a future agenda that we bring it forward and just kind of walk through the changes that we've made and the intent behind those changes. So through the agenda setting committee, as we find a moment in time to do that, we'll put that on the agenda. We're very proud of it. We've gotten a lot of very positive comments back from the community. I think the staff has really enjoyed that we're not just throwing the kitchen sink out in the currents, we're actually thinking about what we want to put out there and then rotating departments and boards and commissions through the process to update the community on what's going on. So a big thanks to Abbott and to Lily for their hard work on that. There's others involved, including Debbie and a few other people that have been working to help these two, but they're the ones really driving this, so big thanks to them. You will be getting a A report in the future from the Ped and Bike Committee as we come to the end of our season. We have seen a noticeable drop off just starting the month of September, the last week of August. And we think that within the next two weeks, we'll be down to a pretty small number of bikes that are coming to town in comparison. to the number of bikes that came in during the summer. I think our small number of bikes is still significantly higher than any other city in the county of Marin. But in comparison to what we see in the summer, it's a very low number. But they'll come with a report. We'll be working with staff and with the members of the various groups to look at what went well. what we want to enhance, things that were challenges and things that we want to change. and then come and give just kind of a summary report in October and then between October and January work on looking at proposed changes for the next year and the bike and pet committee will be taking the lead on a lot of that discussion and then staff will be engaged all the way through. You saw in the currents that Jennifer Tejada and you also received an announcement that They took a job with the city of Emeryville. And we wish her well. I know that she will Be very successful there. And then we also introduced in the currents that Scott Pollan, our retired police chief, who had been the chief here for about five and a half years and had about a five-month interim job city manager gig here for us while he was the chief he's returned and he started today and he told me this afternoon that he'll come back tomorrow so that was that was good news that we didn't scare him off on his first day back but we're very fortunate to have scott come back because he's able to hit the ground running. The community knows him, respects him, and so the opportunity for him to reconnect with the community immediately. Obviously, most of the staff with the police department worked under his leadership. He hired John Robacher, so they already have a very positive relationship. So there's not going to be a very difficult transition period between the two of them so welcome back Scott during this interim time Scott will be with us into February of next year, all depending on the recruitment of the chief. So we'll take the next six to eight weeks evaluating the needs of the department, then go through a recruiter and search for our next chief. For those that don't remember that when we recruited Jennifer DeHatta, we had 114 applicants for that position, and Jennifer obviously came out number one in that recruitment. So I am hopeful that we are still a desirable place to work as a chief and look forward to a successful recruitment going into the winter as this progresses. We are underway with the recruitment of the administrative services Director, Charlie's position that Brian Mora, who would have been here tonight, but has the flu, and so we told him not to come. But we were wanting to at least make sure that you folks all met him and gave the public a snapshot of who Brian is. Lillian Abbott put that in the current, a brief introduction of Brian to you. Strongly recommend that you stop by and say hello, and also members of the public to come and stop by and introduce yourself to Brian. And if you, just like with Charlie, if you have any questions of our budget or our operating system, you know, Brian will be a great person to start with to have any conversations about our budget he's got over 35 years of experience and just a very very knowledgeable and experienced interim finance director that position Bay Area wide is probably the single most difficult position to hire and many cities here in Marin County and nearby have gone out for recent recruitments and have had only six people apply and of the six people applied maybe three of them are actually qualified so this one this from talking to three different recruiting firms have all told me that this is going to be a significant challenge for a small city that's at the end of a peninsula. You're not. going to potentially attract a lot of people from down in the peninsula or out in the East Bay. So you're looking at someone like Danny Castro that moves from another location to be here and then finds a place within the market that they can afford and continue to have high quality of life. So this one is underway. It closes soon. If we don't have a strong enough pool of candidates, we'll reopen it. We won't just interview six people and be hopeful that we get a good candidate. that we will reopen it we won't just interview six people and and be hopeful that we get a good candidate we will we will work until we find someone that is able to continue to lead us forward in a positive way just as Charlie did for the past seven years The fun stuff, hopefully it's still fun to you, but MCCMC in Cora Madera is on the 16th, and it will be in the community center. And I think Lily sent out a request for RSVP, so if you haven't done so, can you please make sure she knows who is attending? The chili cook-off is on the 26th and that is a lot of fun And we changed the chili cook off back in 2001. It went from probably 18 years of being in Numphy Park and being a real community grassroots event. becoming a street fair. on Caledonia Street, and then we turned, we We evolved the street fair into a traditional street fair. and then put the chili cook off back to Dunphy Park. And since that time, It's actually been very well attended, a lot of Chile teams, a lot of fun. And so we expect the same. you know, this year. So again, hopefully you get the time to, to relax and not necessarily talk about politics but also just enjoy being a part of your community and having some good chili and some interesting chili. while you're out there. Also, this weekend, as you all are aware, and it's been probably the smoothest of my eight years as city manager and smoothest as my 15 years with the city in terms of the Saucyut Art Festival, pre-meeting, pre- event. activity you know from parking to signs to ADA compliance to fire extinguishers being placed in the right place, all the things that Kenneth Henry, Mike Langford, Jonathan and his team and the fire department have to do. to go out and do the inspections. But it takes several months in advance to plan all this, and then you actually unroll it as they're doing now. Have some corrections that take place in the next 48 hours. But we're set to have a fantastic art festival Obviously, the organizers of the event deserve all the credit. They work hard. and it's just a fantastic event, and as we know, a lot of our residents volunteer at the event and have a great time. there. So looking forward to a great festival. The gala normally sells out I think it's sold out But I'm not sure if it has But on Saturday night, Jefferson Starship. which my mom always wants to call airplane. will be playing so for some of you that will be the highlight On Monday night, I think it's the... Bunyibrand, five. which is a 80s, our 70s disco cover band. with some 80 stuff we'll be there. If you don't watch out, you'll see me on the dance floor because I think they're great. Anyway, it should be a fun time for all, and hopefully everyone gets a chance to enjoy that event. Worth reporting, two more items here. Lice, the Licee Francais and the Willow Creek Academy had very successful opening days of school. I'm assuming no one's phone was ringing off the hook on traffic congestion or crazy parents driving too fast but a lot of credit to the police department and Public Works and to Leslie Johnson who is out there today at the Lise's opening day of school and I know that Lauren I know and a few other tenants there said this was a great start to the school year well organized and both at the beginning of the day and everyone enjoyed themselves on the playground at the end of the day. So a good start to the school day. And again, a big thanks to Leslie. For her coordination specifically out at MLK, she puts out her own newsletter. Make sure you guys are on that if you're not already on it. It's kind of a fun newsletter. in Leslie's style. And so we'll add you to that list if you're not already receiving it. And then the last was a very successful birthday party for Robin Sweeney, her 90th birthday, and I want to give a big thanks to Mike Langford And Debbie Pagliaro, who worked with Sarah Sweeney, her daughter, to really put on a beautiful event that was low stress, low cost, low maintenance, and enjoyed by everyone that attended the event. So a big thanks to Mike, Debbie, and Sarah, and a big happy birthday to Robin. That concludes my report. Happy to comment on any questions you may have of me. Questions or comments for the city manager? |
| 03:18:17.18 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 03:18:17.80 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I have just a couple comments. So Adam, I looked at the new format for the Saucydo Currents. I like it very much. It kind of reminds me of my newsletter format. I really, really think it's very user-friendly, and I just wanted to say I think it's great. And I also wanted to say happy birthday, Robin Sweeney. I hear it was a big success. And I unfortunately was in Southern California that weekend, so I could not go. But happy birthday, Robin, if you're out there. And third of all, I just wanted to comment on Chief Tejada. She leaves an amazing legacy. I wanted to take just a couple seconds to acknowledge her amazing contributions. she'll be sorely missed I sure wish we we could have kept her she was the first female chief police chief in Marin County she excelled in community outreach and public trust she built the public trust and consummate professional she achieved several groundbreaking programs here in Sausalito she set a very high bar for our next police chief and I think it'll be very hard to fill her shoes so thank you chief Tejada if you're out there and listening and again I just really admire your contributions and just really good job and you will certainly certainly be missed |
| 03:19:49.85 | Mayor Theodorus | Other comments or questions? The city manager's department. |
| 03:19:52.18 | Jill Hoffman | I do, and it's related to Ashley, the Chief Tejada. So I know, at least I don't, but I, It seems that the last time we hired a police chief, did we have a committee? Did we have a search committee amongst the city? Or how will that process work this time? And the same question with our finance manager. just you. |
| 03:20:12.87 | Adam Politzer | At the end of the day, it is just me, but my practice and several practices of other communities for department heads in particular, they'll have panels. And so that's what we did for the police chief, that's what we did with the public works director, that's what we did with Danny, that's what we did with Mike. the position there could be two or three panels and so the police chief we had a community panel we had a professional panel of other chiefs and then we had a peer panel that group reviews a pool of candidates normally between 10 and six depending on how deep the pool is and how rich the pool is. and of that they will recommend two or three of the top candidates to the city manager and then the city manager at that point will recognize that the the the, um, recommending panels have said, we're comfortable with any three of these, if they pass four or three. We can see any one of these three being the chief, and each of them have different strengths, different weaknesses, but then it becomes a fit with me as the manager, managing the employee, Thank you. going into a lot more detail in terms of you know, an hour interview that they might have with the panel. might turn into three hours with me and there might be several iterations of that so I might go from three to two and and then continue to scrutinize that down but at the end of the day The city manager hires the department heads. But I do utilize for all the department heads in the past the community's feedback. And I'll do that with the Administrative Services Director as well, assuming we have a pool of candidates for them to interview. Sometimes it's intimidating when I have three or four people on the panel. And only a couple candidates to put in front of him. And that was the case when Jonathan was hired. Small pool of about six. but the pool was rich and Chuck Donald was on that committee with me. uh, um, Norm Wolfshauger was on that committee. uh... you know and then we had several public works directors in the county in that case we only had two panels a professional panel and a community |
| 03:22:39.31 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 03:22:39.33 | Mayor Theodorus | Any other comments? Any comments from the public? I see no public or? Jonathan, okay. No comments, so we'll move on. to Item 7B, council member committee reports. |
| 03:22:53.05 | Kenneth Henry | I don't have any council members. |
| 03:22:53.98 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 03:22:53.99 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, we did have a Marin Telecommunications Agency meeting in August, and one of the topics was the withdrawal of Larkspur from the agency. So it's down to the cities without Larkspur and sort of the reallocation of funds from that. It's not a significant amount. You know, the cities are spreading out amongst themselves but we are going to have they are going to trying to schedule a workshop it will probably be in January about how to sort of reconfigure the board and the allocation now that large person no longer on the on the agency |
| 03:22:54.01 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 03:22:54.06 | Kenneth Henry | Thank you. |
| 03:23:32.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:23:32.32 | Jill Hoffman | Go. you And then Herb, do you wanna talk about the RBRA subcommittee? We talked a little bit about that earlier, the RBRA subcommittee met with, Thank you. the RBRA representatives, not the representatives, but the, yeah, Ben Berto and Bill Price, yeah, and Leslie Eldon, yeah, Leslie Eldon and Adam, and we talked about how to go forward and the forums, and that was what, that became the item on the agenda, on the consent calendar the forum that we would have what the forum would look like when it would happen and what the cost would be. And so we significantly reduced the cost from the proposed cost. So. |
| 03:24:22.81 | Unknown | and to make sure that we get a good representation of citizens. |
| 03:24:27.62 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, yeah, yeah, our focus was to maximize the number of citizens of Sausalito to attend and be informed about what the |
| 03:24:27.72 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:24:34.85 | Jill Hoffman | proposal was from RBRA, not that we endorsed it, Certainly, but that just the maximum number of citizens would come and that there would be a time for public comment. |
| 03:24:46.16 | Unknown | And the spinnaker was chosen because that seems to draw, I get the draw that we want from here, not the water. |
| 03:24:55.97 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Are they going to present the cons of the mooring fields? Are they going to present, you know, the... |
| 03:25:05.47 | Jill Hoffman | Is it going to be a balance? |
| 03:25:05.89 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Is it going to be balanced? Because the presentation I saw was a hard sell. |
| 03:25:10.19 | Jill Hoffman | This is the, it was perceived to be, let's get the proposal from, yeah, the proposal from the RBRA to as many people as possible. This isn't seen as the last step. This is just sort of seen as the next step. Yeah, the communication step. |
| 03:25:26.14 | Unknown | It's the sales pitch. |
| 03:25:26.73 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. Yeah, well, that's not to say there's not going to be the next meeting or a follow-up meeting. It's just that's just the next one in the process. |
| 03:25:32.67 | David Sudo | You know. |
| 03:25:34.71 | Unknown | Just the next one in the process. |
| 03:25:36.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:25:36.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:25:44.85 | Adam Politzer | But we received about a 50 minute presentation from Ben Berto. And what we talked about at the committee level was Yeah, this was roughly about a two and a half hour So the intent is to drill down a little bit. into the various off ramps that were presented during that 45, 50 minute. presentation that we received. But as Vice Mayor Hoffman is suggesting, this isn't the end. This is to at least at a minimum, get the people off the hill to come and participate and hear what's being proposed. And then based on that feedback that the council will receive at a future meeting, and we'll know if there needs to be additional drilling down or additional but at this point, drill down on the information that we received. sure that the public is understanding what at a very minimum URBRA. is actually recommending as the preferred. PLAN. And if our community agrees to that, well, then the council will take appropriate action. If the community doesn't agree with that, the council will Either ask for additional information or go a different direction. |
| 03:26:55.44 | Mayor Theodorus | I do have two reports. One is on the ferry landing. There's really nothing to report since the last time. I think the summer recess has made a lot of people unavailable. So I think Kate Sears staff, that's right, is trying to get enough people together for it. I think we're looking at now early October, early to mid October on that date. So again, as I reported before, it's going to be a follow on with essentially the same group. probably the same places and the same time. TO FOLLOW ON THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WERE HAD, a couple of months ago now, and awaiting some responses from the Golden Gate Ferry District on request and technical information that was submitted by our our group. So that's on that. Secondly is on I just I do want to report In our August meeting, I was called in from Sakai to Japan on our sister cities. I'm not sure. We had a sister city's delegation go to our sister city in Japan, Sokaide. It's a fabulous event. I have to say it was one of the most interesting and fulfilling events trips and adventures of my lifetime, I have to say, and far beyond my expectations. Hard to put into words. We have had several of our council members, Pfeiffer and Weiner, have been there. And it was, as I like to say, like going to a family reunion for a family you didn't know you had. And so it was a great, so I just give a pitch for anyone that wants to be involved in our sister cities, and we have three of them, but certainly it's a wonderful experience, especially for anyone who has interest in, in that case, Japan, but we have Chile and Portugal. I think it's a great thing, and it's a wonderful thing for our children, because we had children from ages from 15 to 17. That's it for me. |
| 03:28:52.57 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I just want to quickly echo it having been to Portugal there are kashkash sister city as well as Sakaita just truly an amazing experience as a councilmember just really just just really it's just a memorable experience so glad I went I have a quick report at the sustainability committee. So driver's market came and they were proposing a parklet to take two to three, I guess, parking spaces for an extension of seating or something on, and I think... you know I didn't make a comment you know on this I'm waiting for for for it to come through the proper channels and everything and the sustainability committee did not you know either I think it will be interesting moving forward this in terms of controversy going into the public right of way for removing parking spaces for seating. So I have many, many questions about that. And that was the only thing. |
| 03:30:05.20 | Mayor Theodorus | you for agenda items before we move. |
| 03:30:08.61 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | I do have one. |
| 03:30:09.92 | Mayor Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 03:30:10.13 | Councilmember Pfeiffer | Thank you. Drones. There was a posting on On Next Door, about a drone on Bridgeway south of the Trident today at 8 a.m. flown at window height of homes, invasion of privacy. operated by three men in two different cars. Police said it was not illegal to look in windows of private homes with a drone or something not. This was next door. We don't know if this happened or not. But I do think the issue of drones are becoming a big issue, and I think we need to look at a policy regarding drones. and so i'd like to put that on a future agenda |
| 03:30:47.20 | Mayor Theodorus | Well, we can look at it and we will have to take a look at we'll work with the city attorney. It may be covered by state law or other laws. We'll see if it's something we should do at our level or if there'll be laws. at the state level, but we'll take a look at it. We'll discuss it agenda setting. Any other reports of significance? Are we ready to adjourn? I think this is I believe this is Lilly's first regular City Council meeting as clerk. So you've done a great job. We're happy to have you. So congratulations. You made it through. And look, you got us out on time. Great job. Okay, are we adjourned? Okay. |
Wendy Richards — Against: Argued the proposed contract misaligns employee interests with citizens, lacks incentives for performance, and grants excessive raises (up to 50%) amid economic deflation and slow tourism, urging the council to reject it. ▶ 📄