| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:12.40 | Alessandro Gallo | Ready. |
| 00:00:24.45 | Lily | Councilmember Theodorus. Present. |
| 00:00:26.22 | Ray Withy | President. Thank you. |
| 00:00:26.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:26.80 | Lily | Councilmember Weiner? Present. Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Vice Mayor Withey? |
| 00:00:27.84 | Ray Withy | President. |
| 00:00:31.76 | Ray Withy | here. you |
| 00:00:32.53 | Lily | And... Mayor Hoffman. |
| 00:00:33.83 | Jill Hoffman | Present. I will now announce that item D1 will be discussed in closed session. Do we have any public comment on closed session items? Seeing no one approaching the podium, I will now close the session for closed session. |
| 00:00:54.67 | Unknown | All right. All right. |
| 00:01:03.09 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Good evening and welcome to the January 26, 2016 City Council meeting, Sausalito City Council meeting. Lily, would you call the roll please? |
| 00:01:16.91 | Lily | Councilmember Theodorus? Present. Councilmember Weiner? Present. |
| 00:01:19.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:01:19.66 | Unknown | President. |
| 00:01:20.27 | Lily | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Vice Mayor Withey? Here. Mayor Hoffman? |
| 00:01:23.26 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:01:23.41 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:01:23.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:01:24.84 | Jill Hoffman | Present. Tammy Blanchard would you please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance |
| 00:01:37.64 | Tammy Blanchard | to the flag. of the United States of America. and to the Republic. which it stands. my nation. Amen. indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. |
| 00:01:57.43 | Jill Hoffman | I have no announcements on our closed session items. Do we have any public comment on closed session items? I see no one approaching the podium. Thank you. Would anybody like to move for approval of the agenda? |
| 00:02:17.41 | Unknown | So moved. Second. Second. |
| 00:02:21.73 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? Aye. |
| 00:02:23.42 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:02:25.36 | Jill Hoffman | um, Thank you. Special, next we have. Item one, special presentations. And we have an introduction of our administrative services director, Melanie Purcell. and Administrative Aid by Heather by Adams. |
| 00:02:53.17 | Adam Politzer | Melanie, have you come join me and then Lily's actually going to introduce Heather to you, but I'm going to introduce our new Administrative Services Director Melanie Purcell, I think hopefully everyone has signed up for the Sausalito Currents and saw the announcement that we've hired Melanie. Melanie went through an interview process that utilized, the city utilized Avery & Associates, a recruitment firm that's used here in the Bay Area in the state of California and is one of the top three firms here in California and then also obviously recruits out of state for these types of positions we had over 35 qualified applicants submit applications Averine Associates interviewed all of those folks and then narrowed down the field to the top six then we had a panel Two different panels interview the top six, and the panels narrowed it down to the top two. And then I interviewed the top two and made the decision to hire Melanie. And we're very excited to have Melanie on the team. Melanie comes to the city with over 22 years of experience. She's a certified public finance officer. She will be in charge of our administrative services department which includes not just finance which is what I think everyone goes to right away but also human resources. our IT division with information technology, and our property management, which also includes MLK and Old City Hall downtown. And, um, and any of the other issues that come up related to our to our property. Melanie holds a degree in economics from San Francisco State where she grew up here in the Bay Area and then got her master's in public policy from University of Michigan. She and her husband have three children. And we look forward to having them at our various events this coming summer and throughout the new year. So I'd like to introduce Melanie Purcell. Please, if you will. |
| 00:05:16.82 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you very much. It's an honor. It's a privilege, and I'm very excited. It's been a wild three weeks already, but a wonderful time and an amazing crew to work with. So thank you very much. I'm looking forward to it. Welcome to Sausalito. Thank you. |
| 00:05:28.37 | Alessandro Gallo | Welcome. |
| 00:05:33.16 | Jill Hoffman | And Adam, do you have another introduction? Oh, oh, Lily, sorry. |
| 00:05:42.32 | Lily | Good evening. I'd like to introduce Heather Laporte. Heather is our administration department's new administrative aide. Heather assists the public at the administration counter, the public counter, and she also assists the offices of the city clerk the Finance Department and the Human Resources Department. Heather comes to us from a Marin based nonprofit where she worked as an office manager. Heather holds a degree in psychology from the University of Exeter in England. Heather was born and raised in the United Kingdom, and she moved to the United States with her husband and her family in 2007. Heather has been extensively involved as a volunteer in education, serving as a finance director for a primary school. and as an admissions volunteer for a charter high school. In her spare time, she likes to cook, play tennis, hike in the hills, and attend her children's musical and sporting events. She also reads widely and especially enjoys contemporary literature. So please join me in welcoming Heather. |
| 00:06:47.19 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you very much. Very excited. |
| 00:06:48.56 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. Yeah, thank you everyone. |
| 00:06:49.84 | Jill Hoffman | Welcome to Sausalito. |
| 00:07:02.73 | Jill Hoffman | Next on our agenda, we're up to 1B. We're cooking along. Very good on our schedule. A very exciting presentation by our police chief. Chief, would you like? |
| 00:07:25.13 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 00:07:25.21 | Jill Hoffman | person. Wow, we're very organized tonight. |
| 00:07:31.13 | John Rohrabacher | A little bit of staging here. Come up here. |
| 00:07:39.91 | John Rohrabacher | And then if anybody wants to take pictures, you guys have to come up and do that. Like over here someplace would be fine. |
| 00:07:48.80 | John Rohrabacher | Good evening, Mayor, members of the council. My name is John Rohrabacher. I'm your police captain, at least for the next few days. And Chief Pollen wasn't able to make it tonight, home nursing and injury. So I have the privilege of giving out this award. And I want to set the stage before Lieutenant Frost actually reads the citation. Because we don't give out many lifesaving awards. And we have that in our field. capacity to do and from our Policy says the life-saving medal be awarded to anyone who performs an exceptional act of under emergency and or extraordinary conditions and the furtherance of human life. And to set the stage for the story, which you hear a little bit more about in the citation that Bill will read, It's a year ago, it's February of 2015, AND We receive a call for service, but we're not the only ones who receive that call for service. So there's multiple law enforcement or public safety vessels on the water at the time. So the Southern Marin Fireboat Liberty is in service. The Marin County Sheriff's Rescue One, vessel's in service. and Sausalito Police, Marine One's in service. and we get a report of a man who has jumped off the balcony of the barrel house into the water with the intent to kill himself. and swam out and drown himself. And the initial reaction of other people to try and save him, he's actually you know, actively pushing them away and continue to try and drown himself. As the vessels arrived to do their THE END OF THE END OF THE assessment of the situation. TAKE A LOOK. take action. the sky is swimming further and further away. and the reports even in our in our community. in our dispatch log say the guy's swimming towards Alcatraz, a little far, but that's kind of the direction he was going. and and there was a person in a kayak who was trying to at first, get near him and throw him a personal flotation device And as I understand it, like, and threw it away from himself and threw him away from the yelling to the kayaker, to stay away from this guy because maybe he was going to place him in danger as well. So the kayaker stayed in the area and then people were calling in and so now we have public safety vessels, citizens with a kayaker trying to help this guy and the guys continuing to try and and drown himself. which is not terribly easy, I imagine, but he was working at it pretty hard. And So, as the vessels coming away and to try and develop a plan. It ends up that on the sheriff's boat, pardon me, was already a member of the Coast Guard because part of our Richardson Bay Regional Agencies, you know, as public safety plan, we work on each other's boats. And in this case, there was a Coast Guard on the Sheriff's boat. And. The fire boat with Captain Bouchard was there and our vessel with two people on it. but they needed to get on one boat, so these boats are underway out in the water. It's not tied up dockside making the crew changes, so they're doing it at great peril to themselves to try and get to the point where they could get alongside this guy and try and get him on board, which he was having none of. And so it was continuing to get worse and worse, except for the actions of the sheriff's deputy and the Coast Guard person and Captain Bouchard and one of our officers Sergeant Steve Evereau. So we gave Sergeant Evereau his award at our annual awards event a couple weeks ago. And tomorrow morning, Lieutenant Frost and I are going to the Coast Guard station to give the award to the Coast Guard Petty Officer. And the deputy sheriff, he beat us and he went to work for Springfield, Missouri Police Department. So I don't think we're going to get a field trip out of that, so we're going to nail him his. So I'm going to invite Lieutenant Frost to read the citation. |
| 00:11:48.53 | Lieutenant Frost | Take off my glasses so I can actually see the citation. |
| 00:11:52.46 | Unknown | . |
| 00:11:53.15 | Lieutenant Frost | on February 15th. 2015 the Southern Marin Fire Protection District responded to assist the Sausalito Police Department report of a suicidal subject attempting to drown himself in the bay near downtown Sausalito. Captain Bouchard responded as a member of the crew of Southern Marin Fires vessel Fireboat Liberty. The suicidal subject was actively attempting to drown himself and had thrown away a life jacket a kayaker had provided him. Upon arriving on scene, Fireboat Liberty attempted to rescue the subject using safety equipment. The subject continuously pushed the rescue equipment away and swam from them. Saucy Little Police, Marine One, and the Marin Sheriff's Rescue One arrived on scene at the same time. quickly coordinated a rescue plan with the Southern Marin Fire Protection District Captain Matt Bruchard, and Sausalito Police Sergeant Steven Vivereau, boarded Rescue 1, And along with U.S. Coast Guard Petty Officer Matt Whitlow, who was serving aboard Rescue One, attempted to pull the suicidal subject out of the water. The subject physically resisted the public safety officer's numerous attempts to rescue him and started to swim away once again. at this time. It was decided to take more dramatic measures to conduct the rescue. The operator of Rescue One, Deputy David Stiers swiftly and safely backed Rescue One towards the subject, causing large amounts of weight. to strike. into days the subjects. With the subject dazed, Captain Bouchard, Sergeant Vivereau, and Petty Officer Whitlow, able to immediately grab the subject and pull him aboard rescue one. After getting the subject aboard, he became combative and had to be physically restrained in order to prevent him from escaping in attempting to harm himself. Captain Bouchard's actions in this incident were in keeping with the finest traditions of public safety and played a direct role in preserving the subject's life. And it's with great pride the Sausselo Police Department awards Captain Matt Burchard with our life saving medal. |
| 00:14:33.51 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 00:14:44.74 | Jill Hoffman | Well done, Captain Burchard. That's as exciting as it's going to get tonight, folks. Sorry. That's the high point. Right? Okay. On to item... 1B on the, oh, sorry, 2 on the agenda, communications. 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 city council from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. However, the council may refer to matters not on the agenda to city staff. or direct, the subject be agendized for a future meeting. Please make sure that you have completed a speaker's card and turn in the city clerk if you would like to speak during this time. And I have a card from Jason McCormick. Thank you for filling out a card. Yes. |
| 00:15:37.44 | Jason McCormick | I'm Jason McCormick. I'm a resident of Salisbury at 248 Varta Laning Road. First of all, I want to say thank you for your service very much. I have a lot of confidence in our leadership here. Just a couple of things that I kind of want to address and throw on the record here. I have returned from Santa Rosa this afternoon concerning a matter related to the coincidentally, Barrel House Tavern. And some of you may be aware, may not be aware, that Mr. Chris Henry, who owns Barrel House Tavern, has been accused of being a slumlord in Fresno County. And I just wanted to raise some awareness to some of the concerns that are going on downtown at that facility. I think one of them was actually just addressed. Again, thank you for your public service. That's all I have to say. And then lastly, I have sent over an email a little late regarding a recent settlement with Barrel House Tavern. Thank you very much. |
| 00:16:35.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Mr. McCormick. Any other comments not on the agenda? Yes. you |
| 00:16:41.85 | Ron Albert | Thank you, Your Honor, and I apologize I didn't fill out a speaker's card in advance. I'm Ron Albert, resident of Sausalito, former member of the council. I don't get down here very often, so I'd like to thank you all for your service and continuing tradition of service. I especially came down here to hear the presentation on Matt Bouchard. I didn't know the story, but I'd just like to add that Matt and many other members of the fire department also volunteered many hours, assisted both on the Measure S campaign to build the two public safety buildings and the Measure D campaign to consolidate with Southern Marin. So you put in a lot of volunteer hours on that. I've known Matt a long time and was very happy to see tonight's presentation. |
| 00:16:41.87 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:17:29.93 | Ron Albert | Exactly. |
| 00:17:29.99 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Anybody else for matters not on the agenda? Seeing no one approaching, what? No? Is that a later item? Okay. Alrighty. |
| 00:17:48.86 | Jill Hoffman | So we have no action minutes from a previous meeting. And so we're now moving on to the consent calendar. Matters listed under the consent calendar are considered routine and non-controversial, require no discussion, are expected to have unanimous council support and may be enacted by the council in one motion in the form listed below. There may 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 actions. In order to request an item be pulled, you must have completed a speaker's card and turned it in to the city clerk. Items will only be removed from the consent calendar by a vote of the council. Items removed from the consent calendar will be discussed later on the agenda and When public comment will be heard on any item that was pulled from the consent calendar. Do we have any public comments? on request to remove items from the consent calendar. Yes, Mr. Van Meter, I see your hand up. |
| 00:18:57.96 | Peter Van Meter | I request that item, 6C, be removed. I am here to, when you bring that back later on the agenda, to advocate not purchasing that parking equipment. |
| 00:19:10.89 | Jill Hoffman | So you're talking about item 4C then? |
| 00:19:13.61 | Peter Van Meter | Forrest, yeah, I'm sorry. |
| 00:19:13.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. you OK, thank you. Any other public comment for items on the consent calendar? Or to request to remove items from the consent calendar, sorry. Okay. Any discussion from Council regarding the consent calendar? |
| 00:19:30.89 | Heather Laporte | Thank you, Mayor Hoffman. I, too, would like to pull item 6C, approval of the parking equipment. And so I would second that regarding some potential use issues with the current system. And then I just had a quick question on item 4E regarding the finance meeting minute notes. It makes a reference to Bay City Refuse, a 10-year renewal, and I just wanted to make sure that that comes to the council, correct? That will be coming to council. Maybe it's a question for Adam. |
| 00:20:17.56 | Adam Politzer | I believe so but I don't know specifically but before any action is taken we'll report back to the council. |
| 00:20:23.65 | Heather Laporte | Okay, let me just clarify then. I am approving this, but for future agenda items, I'm going to request that that come as a future agenda item. I don't think that should be approved. I mean, before vetting in the public. The other thing is I just got some resident inquiries regarding item 4D, the expenditures for the replacement patrol vehicle. I think these questions could be addressed easily, maybe offline, and I'm wondering if it would be a big problem to just continue that item to the next consent calendar and let me ask some of these questions offline. Conversely, we could put it later on the agenda and I could ask the questions then or I could ask the questions now. |
| 00:21:10.94 | Adam Politzer | Madam Mayor, if I may, for both the items 4C and then 4D, as Councilmember Pfeiffer asked, with the chief here and Lieutenant Gregory, you may just want to take a few minutes of time now to see if there's anything that can be clarified, and then direct staff to work with any member of the public, including Mr. Van Meter, offline, but maybe have Stacey and John respond to any direct questions before we we move it because I don't think we'll be able to move it to the end of this agenda because we have a full plate so we'd be pumping this to the February 9th meeting. |
| 00:21:55.23 | Heather Laporte | clarification, I'm wondering if we shouldn't move it to the 19th then, because we have a lot of people in the audience and I think they're here for, you know, two of the comments. I'm concerned that the questions could be a bit longer than you might be anticipating. |
| 00:22:09.16 | Jill Hoffman | That's fine. Okay. Let's, do we have a motion then to remove those items from the consent calendar and continue them to February 9th, I think is our next or future agenda. |
| 00:22:09.80 | Heather Laporte | Okay. |
| 00:22:16.58 | Heather Laporte | I move to remove agenda items 4C and 4D and put them on the agenda for the 19th. What's that? |
| 00:22:26.39 | Jill Hoffman | you It's the 9th and the... I'm sorry. The 9th and the... |
| 00:22:30.03 | Heather Laporte | The ninth to the next agenda. |
| 00:22:32.95 | Adam Politzer | The 23rd is booked because that's |
| 00:22:33.68 | Heather Laporte | Yeah. |
| 00:22:36.87 | Adam Politzer | the mid-year budget so there's not any room on there. The ninth is already pretty crowded. I would suggest maybe moving 4D to the ninth because it does sound like Council Member Pfeiffer has some questions that I think time spent with staff would be helpful. But again, I would recommend with 4C, because I think some of that was based on an email that we received from Mr. Werner that may be able to be resolved with some responses from staff tonight so we don't punt too many items downstream. |
| 00:23:13.48 | Heather Laporte | Well, I'm fine with moving 4D to the 9th and moving 4C to the end of this council session. I don't think we should do it with all these people here. |
| 00:23:28.79 | Jill Hoffman | That's fine. Does anybody have any objection to that? I... That's fine. Okay. We'll do that. So 4C and then 4E, what did we do? 4D goes to the... |
| 00:23:42.31 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 00:23:42.34 | Jill Hoffman | 4D to go tonight but you had a question about |
| 00:23:44.63 | Heather Laporte | The C goes to the end of the council session tonight. |
| 00:23:47.40 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Okay? Okay, that's fine. We'll move into the end of the council session, but if it's going to be more involved than just a couple of questions, then we'll. move it to the next city council meeting. Okay. So with regard to, is there a motion then for 4A, B, and F? I move that we... |
| 00:24:06.96 | Unknown | I move that we move that we approve items for a for B for E and for F that we approve those items. |
| 00:24:10.62 | Jill Hoffman | Right. |
| 00:24:18.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:24:18.94 | Unknown | That was second. |
| 00:24:18.96 | Jill Hoffman | No, second. Thank you. All in favor? Aye. |
| 00:24:24.21 | Heather Laporte | Hi. Thank you. |
| 00:24:25.09 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, public hearings, none. Business items, so our first, Business item is our ferry landing update. |
| 00:24:44.88 | Jill Hoffman | we have a ferry landing update Thank you. |
| 00:24:51.73 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:24:52.20 | Lily | Madam Mayor. Yes. I'm going to give the presentation. Oh, we do have a free landing. |
| 00:24:53.20 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. Oh, we do have a free lane. |
| 00:24:56.27 | Lily | here. Good evening, thank you. So this evening we will be discussing the process for the review of the revised plans for the ferry landing downtown. As you are aware, the city's lease with the ferry district requires that the city give prior written consent to any major alterations for the ferry landing. This consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed. The district is required to present the proposed major alterations in a written form with detailed plans, and the city then has 45 days to act on the district's request. In terms of background, in February of last year, the council approved a public review process for the review of the new ferry landing plans. From March through May, the Planning Commission and the Historic Landmarks Board held joint meetings to provide a recommendation on the plans to the city council. On May 5th of last year, the council denied consent to the alterations which were proposed by the Ferry District. Then from June through November, Supervisor Sears held several stakeholder meetings. The conclusion of these meetings resulted in modifications to the plans and a vote from the stakeholders who participated in that process about for or against moving forward with the revised plans. And nine voted in favor, three voted no, and two did not vote. The district has indicated that they are now ready to resubmit revised plans for the council's consent. |
| 00:26:39.06 | Lily | In order to determine whether or not to grant consent to the revised project, staff is recommending that the council direct the Planning Commission and the Historic Landmarks Board to conduct one all-day Saturday workshop. The workshop would be held as a notice public meeting, and the purpose of the workshop would be to receive a presentation from the district regarding their revised plans, a presentation also on how the district has modified their project to respond to the extensive public input that was gathered during the process last year. and also to receive public input on the revised process. Additionally, staff is recommending that the council direct the Planning Commission and the Historic Landmarks Board to provide the council with the recommendation on five of the seven bullets given by the council in your resolution of denial. as the primary rationale for denying consent. These five bullets that we've pulled out are all within the purview of the Planning Commission and the Historic Landmarks Board. We think it's appropriate for them to provide a recommendation to you on those five issues. The recommendation would then come back to the council and the council would determine whether or not to grant consent for the project. |
| 00:28:00.68 | Lily | The lease that the city has with the ferry district requires that the district submit detailed plans in order to start their review process. Following that submittal, the city then has 45 days to review the plans to determine whether or not to grant consent. Staff believes that the clearest way for the city's decision makers to evaluate the current project and the changes which are proposed by the district is for the district to submit the following things as detailed plans required under the lease. So that would be an illustrative comparison of the project highlighting the changes, and that would be through site plans and renderings. So that would show the existing conditions today. The March 2015 proposal that the Planning Commission and the Historic Landmarks Board first looked at the May 2015 proposal that the City Council looked at, and then also the current proposal. We also suggest that they provide a detailed written response regarding how the district has addressed the concerns raised in 2015, including response to the council's prior determination and why, from the district's perspective, the council may now grant consent to the alterations. |
| 00:29:17.51 | Lily | staff therefore is recommending the council a first request that the district provide an evolution of the project's changes and a detailed written response letter as outlined in your staff report also to direct the planning commission in the historic landmarks board to conduct that all day saturday workshop to review the revised projects and then provide a recommendation to the city council on five of those bullets from your resolution from May. And then following the workshop, the project would be reviewed at a city council meeting in order to determine if consent can be granted for the project. That concludes my presentation. We're available for any questions. |
| 00:30:02.47 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Lily. Does the city council have any questions for staff on this project? Or sorry, on this proposal? |
| 00:30:12.74 | Heather Laporte | I have some questions. I'll start with two questions, and then I'll so I don't. You can circle back to me. So my first question is the Planning Commission and the Historic Landmarks Board weighed in on seven bullet points. And it's unclear to me why two have been removed for this review. And I was wondering if staff could comment on that. |
| 00:30:40.97 | Lily | The Planning Commission and the Historic Landmarks Board reviewed all the findings that are required for a design review permit. So there were a number of findings that they reviewed that are listed in their resolution that was provided in the staff report. These bullets here are the bullets that were placed in the city council's denial of consent for the project. So these are the city council's reasons for denying the project in May of 2015. We think that bullets two, three, four, five, and seven are under the purview and what typically the Planning Commission and the Historic Landmarks Board look at when they evaluate projects. Bullets one and six are typically outside the Planning Commission and Historic Landmarks Board review, and therefore, we've teased those out. |
| 00:31:36.60 | Heather Laporte | Okay, I'll hold my comment on that for comment time. And my other question is, I see the term workshop, and I guess I just want to clarify that, as you know, I was not fond of Supervisor Kate Sears' approach to this with no public input, no public participation. And from what I have seen, I'm not clear as to the Brown Act By workshop are we talking about will they will the Planning Commission and HLB go through the same process of review with public input time? You know public participation as they did when this ferry landing was first reviewed and |
| 00:32:21.74 | Lily | Yes, the intent would be a notice public hearing. And also the intent is that it's an all-day workshop to give that time to the Planning Commission and the Historical Landmarks Board and the public for that comment at the meeting. |
| 00:32:33.63 | Heather Laporte | So when you use the term workshop, we're talking about people being able to come up to the microphone and have their three minutes comments. Correct. And the Q&A and that whole process. Perfect. And you're just making it all day, because before we had a series of meetings in the evening. So this consolidates it all at once. OK, thank you. Those are my two starters. |
| 00:32:46.61 | Ron Albert | Correct. |
| 00:32:54.14 | Unknown | Correct. |
| 00:32:59.87 | Unknown | I have a question on the CEQA part of it. I agree with all this and actually I think we should consider whether we want to include one in six because these are the standards they can look at. I'm a little more troubled about the item regarding the CEQA requirements because It seems to make legal conclusions. And I think the planning commission and HLB can make factual or, you know, is it too large that the project should be reduced, but applying these things to the to seek what I think is is a legal analysis. There are certain things within them that may we may want to pull out and say they should make a determination on it. I'm kind of concerned that when I'm looking forward, whether they're gonna have some problems of saying, because the first sentence is the city cannot determine whether the program project has adequately analyzed been analyzed pursuant to CEQA's requirements. So again, I think we should be giving them a clear mandate about what this project that's being presented you know, and then we can get the recommendations. tripped up with making some legal conclusions on the CEQA issue. |
| 00:34:04.96 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:34:06.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. The question is, would it be an out- Isn't that right? |
| 00:34:08.96 | Unknown | you |
| 00:34:09.62 | Mary Wagner | But, CEQA is something that particularly the Planning Commission deals with all the time. in any of you know any situation even where the city councils analyzing a project that's been reviewed by the planning commission they would make a recommendation to the council on sequa so it'd be a similar discussion i think the issues would be more framed than just this bullet point that came out of the city council's resolution you know what the specific environmental issues may be you know whether aesthetics and land use and all those things were adequately addressed in the prior mitigated negative declaration that the district prepared those would be the kind of things that we would be looking to the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council on |
| 00:35:03.23 | Ray Withy | When is it anticipated that the district will actually submit their plans? |
| 00:35:13.39 | Adam Politzer | that's you know we're looking for direction tonight so that we can finalize the date where this Saturday with the meeting would be held so we're working backwards from when we could have a quorum of both HLB and the, uh, Planning Commission together and then working with their staff to submit those documents prior to those meetings. And I think from the various conversations that staff has had to date, The sooner the better. The more time that it's available, something that we can put out in the currents and so that people have time to look at it, I think the better. So we've encouraged them to start preparing this information now. |
| 00:36:02.31 | Ray Withy | Okay. Madam Mayor, just as a follow-up to that, when exactly does the 45-day clock start |
| 00:36:13.84 | Mary Wagner | When we get the submittal of the detailed plans and the requests from the district for the city's consent. |
| 00:36:19.22 | Ray Withy | So is my understanding correct, therefore, that we've got to get through this workshop, plus have this come to City Council within that, for a final decision within those 45 days? Correct. Thank you. |
| 00:36:31.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:36:31.06 | Mary Wagner | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:36:32.08 | Ray Withy | Thank you. you |
| 00:36:32.16 | Unknown | you |
| 00:36:46.78 | Mary Wagner | Yes, because it's a contractual term. So if both parties agree to an extension of time, that would be adequate. The concern would be to make sure that it was in writing and consented to by the appropriate decision makers, because if you don't act within that time, it's deemed consent under the lease. |
| 00:37:06.03 | Jill Hoffman | This is kind of a small item, maybe just semantics, but should we call it something other than a workshop? I mean, a workshop sort of, gives the connotation that we're starting from zero and we're all working together to create something new. Should we just call it a joint meeting? Yeah. |
| 00:37:22.92 | Mary Wagner | Sure. |
| 00:37:23.51 | Jill Hoffman | Let's just, I think that might be. |
| 00:37:24.20 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 00:37:24.24 | Mary Wagner | or public. |
| 00:37:24.96 | Heather Laporte | you |
| 00:37:25.03 | Mary Wagner | review. |
| 00:37:25.76 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 00:37:26.13 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, joint public review or something. |
| 00:37:28.30 | Mary Wagner | I think it's just a noticed public meeting of the planning commission and the historic landmarks board. |
| 00:37:32.02 | Jill Hoffman | works board. I think that's fine. Okay. That's the only question I have. Go ahead, Linda. |
| 00:37:35.34 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:37:35.36 | Heather Laporte | So, yeah, so it's my understanding that CEQA includes, like, view corridors for the public view. Is that correct, Mary? |
| 00:37:35.56 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:37:46.16 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, CEQA includes a number of things, and views are one of the aesthetic considerations under CEQA. |
| 00:37:49.33 | Heather Laporte | . |
| 00:37:53.26 | Heather Laporte | Yeah. Okay. So yeah, I think that bullet should stay, but I'll save my comments for, for the comment period. |
| 00:38:02.63 | Jill Hoffman | any other questions from City Council |
| 00:38:04.91 | Heather Laporte | I have a couple, just another follow-up question. I wasn't at the, this, this, I don't know what it was that Sears did, a working group, something like that. But what's interesting, it says, it talks about this vote for, quote, moving forward with the new ferry landing. And I've had some participants of that that working group or whatever it was, say that when they made that vote, moving forward to them was not approving the project. It was just moving forward, you know, with continued revisions. And I was wondering if staff could comment on that because the way it's phrased in the staff report, you know, for against moving forward with the new ferry landing, it implies approval. And I've just heard from a number of the people who participated that that was not their intent. |
| 00:39:06.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:39:07.14 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 00:39:07.16 | Lily | The notes that we received from that meeting included the language that's in the staff report. So that's the information that we received. |
| 00:39:13.42 | Heather Laporte | So it was phrased that way, and I guess it was just then open to different interpretations. Okay, thank you. It's on page two of four. It's on the staff report. It's on the first bullet at the conclusion of the stakeholders meeting. And people, when the motion was made, people were looking at moving forward as just, you know, continuing with revisions, continuing the public outreach process, going through vettings, not as just approval. So the question was asked about the 45 day time clock beginning and so I heard it, the answer was when a certain point milestone in the process was. What's the framework in terms of the day and will council be specifically told this is when the 45 day begins? |
| 00:39:20.24 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 00:40:07.52 | Heather Laporte | I wasn't clear on that. And at what stage does that kick in? |
| 00:40:13.27 | Mary Wagner | Thank you, Councilmember Pfeiffer. This is a provision in the lease that says that that the city has 45 days to act, and it's 45 days within the date of the tenant, the district's request. Yeah, I'm familiar with the- |
| 00:40:28.53 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, I'm familiar with the passage. My question is, last time, I was really clear in wanting to know when that 45-day began. Because remember, the district said that it began sooner because they claim to have given us design documents. And we came to an agreement with them that it was actually later. So I just want to clarify when that 45-day begins. When are we going to get their final design documents? |
| 00:40:56.66 | Mary Wagner | I don't have a date for you, Councilmember Pfeiffer. We'll work with the district as the city manager indicated when we know what the date of the workshop is, which is what we did. last January when that process began. We worked closely with district staff to |
| 00:41:06.89 | Ron Albert | Okay. |
| 00:41:10.97 | Mary Wagner | to get the information to understand when that clock would start and to understand when that clock would end. And if the council would like us to notify you via email when we get that information in from the district, we'd be happy to do so. |
| 00:41:25.80 | Heather Laporte | Okay, I'll save my comments for when we're discussing that. Yeah. |
| 00:41:33.99 | Jill Hoffman | I have a comment about the task force and the vote that we went forward. Should I, in response to a comment that Councilwoman Pfeiffer made? Should I say that now or during our discussion? Great. I'll, that'll be fine. Okay. Any other questions for staff from the City Council? I mean, yes. |
| 00:41:41.07 | Kate Storr | Thank you. |
| 00:41:41.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:41:41.31 | Kate Storr | Thank you. |
| 00:41:53.26 | Adam Politzer | I think it's important to clarify, because I don't want either the public or the council to wonder why there's a mystery on this 45 days or the date of when this forum's happening. So Danny Castro, our Community Development Director, has been polling the HLB members and the Planning Commission members On their availability. uh... we've gone through the month of february where they're not available that we have members missing and we think it's very important that we have a hundred percent attendance of both hlb and the planning commission uh... we're now i think uh... through March 19th where we don't have 100% So we're trying to get all 10 members, five from HLB and five from the Planning Commission, to be able to make a Saturday workshop. So, we're now into the middle of March in terms of when that date may happen, so that's why we haven't been able to say, The 45 day clock will run when their application submitted based on the public hearing that we're going to hold at some point in March or later based on getting 100% attendance from both HLB members and planning commission. So I didn't want there to be some concern that come February, Yes, the first February and Saturday we're all of a sudden going to have this public hearing without a whole lot of time to talk about it. So we hope when we come back at the February 9th City Council meeting that that information will be worked out and we'll have a date certain. And again, we'll publicize that in the in the current. and all the other... means that we have to get that information out. But I thought it was important that the public knows that we're working actually to get 100% attendance of both Planning Commission and HLB members, and that's why the date is being pushed out. |
| 00:43:36.45 | Jill Hoffman | And Mary, do I have it right that usually, or the way it's worked in the past with the Ferry District is we sort of agree with them, our 45-day clock starts on whatever date it is. |
| 00:43:47.13 | Mary Wagner | That's the way it worked last year, yes. |
| 00:43:49.43 | Jill Hoffman | And that's what we would be working toward this year. And if there's some anomaly in that, we will address it to make sure that we don't run afoul of the 45-day calendar. |
| 00:43:58.15 | Heather Laporte | Yes. I just have a follow-up quick clarification. If they give, if the district gives complete design drawings per the lease requirement at the start of the workshop, but then I would assume that, you know, if there are any changes after that, and if it takes them time to implement those changes, that the 45-day clock would then start, you know, later at the point when we got those new diagrams? Yes. It's a hypothetical question. Not necessarily. |
| 00:44:29.00 | Mary Wagner | Not necessarily. No? |
| 00:44:30.45 | Heather Laporte | No? No. |
| 00:44:31.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:44:31.60 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:44:31.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:44:32.00 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:44:32.02 | Unknown | you |
| 00:44:32.15 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. Okay, thank you. It could, and it's something we could discuss with them, again, because it's a contractual provision. But the lease is not that detailed about what detailed plans are, which is part of why we're making the suggestion tonight about what that means in terms of this submittal. |
| 00:44:49.48 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Any other questions? All right, so at this point, we will take public comment on this item, item 6A, and I have one card. Peter Van Meter. |
| 00:45:09.03 | Peter Van Meter | Thank you. As a member of the Kate Sears meeting group, I would like to compliment her on pulling this group of diverse people together. For the most part, they were in a harmonious way of working with the bridge district to come up with some alternative ideas. In my opinion, there was no confusion out of the working group that move ahead meant go into the review process Did not have anything to do with approving a particular design that was presented to us that evening Now as regarding your points on the agenda here I think staff is absolutely right and not considering the land side improvements at the coincidence with this project the fact of the matter is that while meaningful landside improvements for the benefit of Sausalito can be made within the 5% variation rule within the infamous Ordinance 1128, there will be likely, in my opinion, folks in town who will dispute that point. So there's a possibility as soon as you get in any consideration of land site improvements, that there would be some contentious issues raised in that regard. Notwithstanding 1128 issues, the sensitivity of the downtown area is of critical concern to all residents of Sausalito. That will, regardless of that potential concern with 1128 be potentially a long and contentious process. Tying those projects together will then, in effect, in my opinion, delay the ferry terminal rehab indefinitely. Maybe that's a goal of some. This is not a problem for the project moving ahead because there is a clear demarcation in the physical world between the ferry landing structure and the land side improvements. If you walk down there, in fact, you can see a little crack in the concrete right where that point of differentiation occurs. So in effect, no matter what you do in decision making on the land side will not affect what is happening on the ferry landing side they are clearly separate projects and in fact in a way you're going to be better off dealing with the land side when it comes up going to that detailed process when you've made your final decisions on the ferry landing so I highly support staff's recommendation here on separating these issues |
| 00:47:38.42 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:47:38.86 | Peter Van Meter | Thank you. |
| 00:47:41.17 | Jill Hoffman | I don't have any other speaker cards for the ferry. And are we having a problem with our clock? Okay. |
| 00:47:49.59 | Mary Wagner | THE FAMILY IS |
| 00:47:49.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:47:49.88 | Mary Wagner | Mayor Hoffman, when that clock isn't working, we are keeping track over here. It's just much more difficult to hear. But I think I fixed it. |
| 00:47:49.91 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor Hoffman, when the... Okay. |
| 00:47:57.51 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:47:59.31 | Tammy Blanchard | you |
| 00:48:00.88 | Jill Hoffman | Are you Clayton Smith? Okay, gotcha. It was the agenda item was not. Please, sir. |
| 00:48:14.14 | Jill Hoffman | It was, this is item 6A. |
| 00:48:17.43 | Clayton Smith | Six A, I'm sorry, I just put down A. |
| 00:48:18.41 | Jill Hoffman | That's fine. You have immunity on that issue. You may go forward. |
| 00:48:22.72 | Clayton Smith | All right. you I went to numerous of these meetings concerning the ferry earlier, and I voiced one particular complaint. Thank you. at every single one of them, and I'm going to be back here to voice it again and an additional complaint, too. That is that this project is going to have a permanent mark, leave a permanent mark on downtown Sausalito. We're talking about a very large, major architectural statement. I think it is inexcusable, given the amount of money that is being spent on these plans and ultimately is going to be spent on this terminal, that a three-dimensional model is not a mandatory part of this presentation by the bridge district. And I think if you fail to do that, your staff, I think they're derelict in their responsibilities to getting something of complete nature to the people of this town. And I'm going to complain about that until it happens. That's for one thing. Having one Saturday meeting, I believe, is problematic. I mean, this is something where I think the town, from what I saw the last time around there were hundreds of people that wanted to be involved in this because of the importance this is going to have for what they see as a town in the future and confining it to one Saturday is I don't think very nice treatment nice treatment of the general public. We don't know what prior commitments many people have. And I'm tempted to think that from my experience of much of what goes on in the bureaucracy that I've seen in Marin, and the bridge district will do its best to find a day that is most convenient for it and least convenient for everyone else, probably try to schedule it someplace in the middle of August where everyone's off on vacation. And so I would hope that we would have some discipline over their choice of dates and that we have at least two dates. Thank you. |
| 00:50:56.40 | Jill Hoffman | Anybody else on item 6A, the ferry? see no one approaching the podium. This is a ferry landing. This is a ferry landing? Yes, would you like to? Yes. You may approach? Thank you. |
| 00:51:07.45 | Unknown | Thank you. THE END OF THE END OF THE Would you like to? |
| 00:51:16.73 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 00:51:16.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:51:16.85 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 00:51:18.40 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:51:18.77 | Unknown | you |
| 00:51:19.03 | Jill Hoffman | That's fine. |
| 00:51:19.41 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:51:24.58 | Jeffrey Chase | Thank you mayor and city council and city employees and citizens of Sausalito as well and as an anchor out I do have an address and I vote so And I voted for almost all of you. |
| 00:51:42.20 | Jill Hoffman | That's all right. |
| 00:51:43.68 | Jeffrey Chase | I'm going to read a portion of Torah. I don't know where to fit this in. And I'd be happy if anybody from any denomination would come here and also share. whether it's the Gospels or the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita. I don't want to be the only person here doing this, but I'm going to do it. This is this week. The portion is... called Yitro, which is the name of Jethro. He's the person who says this. Moses' father-in-law saw that what Moses was doing to his people... sitting in judgment all day and all night. What is this thing that you are doing? Why do you sit by yourself while all the people stand before you morning until evening? The last city council meeting was six hours. It was admirable that you are able to do all of this, Now, Jethro comes up with the rules. for the people who will sit. that will help him. He says we want them to be masters over thousands, over hundreds, over fifties, and over tens. He says... You shall choose out of the entire nation men of substance, you like that one, and women, I, God fears, people of truth, who hate monetary gain. So I'll bring this to the fairyland, and if it's going to be on Saturday, that is the holy day of... the Israelite people from Friday night to Saturday night. So it would be great if this wasn't about money. I'm going to have a suggestion, which is the people on the anchorage as well as the people at marinas, that's 4,000 boats can go back and forth to San Francisco or Berkeley or wherever. I have not used money for four years now. I'd like to compromise now and bring Bay Barter bucks so we don't even have to do this for money, that anybody that wants to do it is able to do this, that we have public access at every place, every dock and every government land that is sitting there on the waterfront to come in, to pick up and drop off passengers. So thank you for listening to this proposal. And I also hope that some of the public comments are listed as well in the minutes of the meetings. So thank you, everybody. Shalom, shalom, peace. |
| 00:54:11.17 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Any other public comments on item 6A? Seeing none, I'll bring it back up here for city council discussion. Anybody want to start? |
| 00:54:26.14 | Heather Laporte | So I guess I'll start. I want to thank everyone who came here who's interested in this. As you know, we're just talking about process tonight, but process is really important because it lays the foundation for your participation and the town's advocacy for our waterfront. I would agree that we need a three-dimensional model. I think that is so important. I'm really, I've said this consistently, I'm so shocked we haven't had that before then. This is our waterfront What they're proposing is massive Of course, I haven't seen the new design yet So I'm I'm waiting to see what that looks like But I know the the older design was quite large and we had no three-dimensional model I think when we're talking about our waterfront we need that I would also concur with what we heard regarding having two meetings and not just one. I agree that when we look at the past participation and interest in Sausalito's waterfront in our historic downtown, everyone has something to share, and I think that enriches the process and it results in a better product, frankly. And so I do would support and request that we have two meetings and not just one. It's very important that we include all seven points here. CEQA, public views, very important. I know that I guess there is some debate regarding uh private views but i think we should include uh private views even though i guess that's i don't know if it's mandatory in sequa but it's i think it's something that the council can add as something that's important because of course we're looking at the yacht club being severely impacted by this and then of course publicly public view the view from the shore in terms of the the the way the the landing would look so I would include definitely seven on sequel I would include six the improvements regarding the leased area our Planning Commissioners Commissioners are very versed in um in leases and the lease of of all of these items number one the planning for waterside and landside that's a no-brainer i mean we we've got to have We need to have our planning commissioners weigh in on number one. I remember the Ferry District having a slide that featured a reconfiguration of one of our parking lots. I mean, they're already thinking clearly about landside. I think we need to give our planning commissioners free reign to weigh both of this. So I think we're moving the goalposts. If we remove items one and six, I think we need to give one through seven to our planning commission and our HLB. And I think not to do so would cast serious doubt on the process from the get go. Thank you. |
| 00:57:31.12 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. Anybody else? you |
| 00:57:34.72 | Unknown | Well, I support the process. I think we're moving forward. I think we've made a lot of progress since they first submitted their first plan, including the Joint Planning Commission and HLB meetings we had long though they were and and our working group led by Kate Sears. I think it's been productive. We still have a long way to go. I would say I agree with this process. I think we should have items one and six included because we have to keep in mind the Planning Commission and the HLB are giving our recommendations to the council. The council, because of the resolution that we passed back in 5512 are gonna have to make those findings As long as the planning commission and the HLB are looking at this, I think they should make their recommendations. We're going to ultimately be the fact finder I will go along with the unseek what my only concern was there there seemed to be a mixture of legal conclusions as well as findings that they would make but I will go along with that so I would recommend that we do one through six I tend to agree on the 3d model it's something that I've pushed on I don't know we've they the ferry district has resisted and and certainly I have no objections to having a council resolution that again request that they provide us with a 3D model. And finally, normally I'm not as picky on staff reports, but I think in this particular case, that item, and I think Mayor Hoffman's going to if you have some language, but I think we need to clarify that because I don't think it captures the spirit. I certainly don't want anything in the record. that shows that by any stretch of the imagination that that working group approved the submission. So I think it can easily be done by language. I might say that we agreed to go forward with the process. We can add a disclaimer saying nothing herein shows that the group approved the thing. But some language, I think in this case, we should make a simple correction to that. |
| 00:59:27.24 | Ron Albert | Thank you. |
| 00:59:38.09 | Tammy Blanchard | It's the issue. |
| 00:59:42.19 | Ray Withy | Thank you to those folks who have come out tonight to listen to this topic. So let's remind ourselves of a couple of things. We previously asked our planning commission and HLB to review their proposal, the ferry district's proposal, so that as if using the design review findings that we would normally use, not because they have the authority to issue a design review permit for this project, they do not, but simply to use that as a tool to advise us who have to make the determination whether we approve the design under the lease so the process that is being recommended here is consistent with that again we're asking our HLB and our Planning Commission to review we've either these seven or five depending upon where we we end up, points, again, so that they can make a recommendation to us so that we can make a decision as to whether the new plans that we will see in the future we can approve under our auspices as landlord under the lease. Now whether it's one to seven or we don't do one and we leave out six, I really don't think it behooves us to waste time talking about it to be honest because you know if the Planning Commission wants to determine whether the project's in or out of the lease area, they're probably going to listen to staff, and it's going to be either in or out. And they're going to tell us whether it's in or out, and come here, and we will determine yes, it's in, or yes, it's out. So, you know, let's not waste time worrying about that. You know, you might as well include it. With regards to the land side improvements, it's the decision of this council as to whether we are going to approve any land side improvements. We don't even have a conceptual plan. It is absolutely impossible for us to abide by the terms of the lease and actually go through a process of approving landside improvements which haven't even been thought about, let alone designed, within 45 days to again uphold our obligations as landlords. But again, if the Planning Commission and the HRB want to make a recommendation to us, I'm not going to get in the way. Let's not, again, waste time talking about it here. And then finally, in my last three seconds, I would agree with everybody on the model. There is absolutely no excuse in today's world for a proper, accurate, three-dimensional model of this project to be constructed. It is not hard and there's no excuse that it's not been done. you |
| 01:03:02.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:03:02.14 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:03:03.07 | Unknown | Well, I agree with Councilmember Ray Withey on especially the 3D model. We should have that. It'll show us a lot clearer what it looks like. As far as the items one to seven, I think that will be determined by the Planning Commission, so I'm not really worried about that. As far as the meetings go, I really think that we should, when you're attempting to get a date in March, I think also include another date that they could possibly meet on a second meeting, just as a backup. But I think maybe one will not be enough. |
| 01:03:54.01 | Jill Hoffman | Well, let me just first say, again, revisit the issue about what the item on page two of four of the staff report, the bullet that talked about the vote. And I have no doubt that those were the notes that the staff was looking at. Keep in mind the staff was not there. These were notes that were provided to them. So it may read in a different way, but I would concur that it was an endorsement. The yes was to move forward with the review process. It wasn't an endorsement of the plans. At that point also, my recollection was that The ferry district had indicated that the plan that they presented was the plan. They were not going to do any further revisions. So there was no point, you know, for further meetings of that task force. So that that was the import of that. I guess we could amend the staff report for something that says, yes, move forward with the review process. I mean, I think that would accurately reflect what happened. I agree. Let's just have the Planning Commission and the HLB look at items 1 through 7 as a whole. Okay. And I agree on the 3D model that should be conveyed to the the ferry district that they should do a 3D model and put it in a public location that has equal access to everybody, perhaps the library or something. And so now the real question I think that we're looking at right now, everybody, I would request further input on whether or not we want to agree or try to go forward with two meetings as opposed to one. I think we were looking at one meeting because we thought if we had the miracle of getting all five board members together on one date and to just go with that date because the difficulty in trying to get everybody together would be a problem. But I also see the value in having two separate meetings. So does anybody want to have further comment or discussion on that issue? |
| 01:06:02.21 | Unknown | I think, well, I THINK WE SHOULD GO WITH ONE MEETING. IT COULD ALWAYS BE DELAYED AND POSTFULLY, JUST AS WE DO WITH CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. WE DON'T SAY WE'LL HAVE TWO OF THEM. WE HAVE ONE, AND SOMETIMES THEY COULD BE DEFERRED. I THINK AT THIS STAGE, I THINK WE SHOULD TRY TO GET EVERYONE AT ONE TIME. IT'S AS THE CITY MANAGER KNOWS, IT'S BEEN DIFFICULT. IT'S GOING TO BE DIFFICULT ENOUGH TO GET EVERYONE TOGETHER. I THINK WE'D GO FOR IT. If it doesn't get done, The planning commission, HLB and staff will tell us and we'll We'll just continue the meeting. |
| 01:06:35.05 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, and I hear what you're saying about getting everybody together, but, you know, this is part of the job, you know, when you get an appointment. And this is our waterfront, and this is the heart of our downtown. And I think it really is doing a disservice to the public and the review process if we just try to do it all at once. And I think it should be hard scheduled as two not a continuance maybe sort of because then people could feel rushed i think it should be two and um regarding this and i I want to make a comment about the 3D model, but I'll hold off. I think it should be two meetings. Okay. |
| 01:07:17.41 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:07:17.43 | Heather Laporte | How about |
| 01:07:17.90 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:07:17.91 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:07:17.93 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:07:17.97 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:07:18.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:07:18.07 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:07:18.18 | Unknown | I'd say one more thing on this. I mean, the reason we came with a |
| 01:07:19.77 | Heather Laporte | ME. |
| 01:07:21.78 | Unknown | one full day model because it's essentially two to three meetings that would be held in the evening. So I think they're all arbitrary, you know, I mean, we had four before too, but essentially the all day meeting was in lieu of probably three other meetings. So I just, we should all bear that in mind. |
| 01:07:41.52 | Jill Hoffman | Let me ask one question. So we ended up at the combined meetings the thought was we were going to have one and we ended up with three over the span of a month two months something that i can't remember what the exact So how about this? Can we agree that we're going to go forward with a joint? meeting and then have maybe at the next city council meeting staff report back on the timing. I mean, if we did two meetings, what would that look like? And what confirmed dates do we have from the all 10 members, assuming we want to have all 10 members available. So I mean, if we're looking at something like March 19th and April, 30th or the only two dates that we can get all members together, then I think we want to revisit the one or the two meetings. But if we can get them in. close proximity, perhaps, then that might be a different question. How do you guys feel about that? |
| 01:08:33.70 | Ray Withy | I think we need as many as it's going to take to get the job done within 45 days. And that's the 45 days that is the issue. |
| 01:08:40.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:08:40.85 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 01:08:44.77 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, because we've got the issue, too, is that it has to come back to city council, and we have to take action within the 45 days. So we'd have to have the two joint meetings and then back to us. So anyway, Councilwoman. |
| 01:08:55.74 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, I think we can do two, and I think we'll get good attendance. I know one, I think it was the chair of the HLB, could not attend one, if not two, meetings, and we went forward. I think that the benefits of having two opportunities for the public is outweighed, you know, is more critical. |
| 01:09:24.06 | Ray Withy | I'm, Well, I mean, again, it's about timing. You know, we're thinking, I gather, I've not been involved in this, of course, but I gather that you're thinking of having this at an off-site location. |
| 01:09:27.28 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:09:27.31 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:09:41.15 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, I think we're thinking back at the iDesk Hall. |
| 01:09:43.48 | Ray Withy | Okay, so maybe we have an all-day meeting on a Saturday at the IDIS Hall. |
| 01:09:50.14 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, hold on. Spinnaker. |
| 01:09:51.80 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Sorry, or wherever we're. Thank you. |
| 01:09:54.48 | Jill Hoffman | Whatever. |
| 01:09:54.85 | Ray Withy | But it's not here. That's the point. That's right. But maybe the second meeting, rather than have that held here. |
| 01:09:56.35 | Jill Hoffman | That's right. |
| 01:09:56.83 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 01:09:56.86 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:10:05.20 | Jill Hoffman | I think, yeah, the second meeting is going to be a decision meeting, though. So that's got to be at a big place. So let me, you know, so let me... Let's do this. How about let's do this since we're getting late. Why don't we, I think we can all agree that this is a process that we want to move on. How about at the next city council meeting? You can report back to us on the timing issue, challenges. If we can do two meetings, fine. But if it's just not going to work and we just can't get the members, then I think we go forward with one. Is that acceptable to everybody? Yeah. Okay. All right. |
| 01:10:32.64 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:10:40.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:10:41.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:10:41.14 | Adam Politzer | And Just I'm fine with that direction. I just wanna get some latitude that Maybe the first meeting's on a Saturday or the second meeting's on a Saturday, but maybe we open up a Thursday night or some other week night so that we get a little more. Because the challenge is that all of our commissioners also have clients. |
| 01:10:54.22 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, that's fine. so that we give a little |
| 01:10:59.80 | Heather Laporte | And the one other comment I would make is I don't think the Spinnaker is going to be large enough. I think the IDSST haul last time worked very well and had ample room for everyone. Is there a price point problem with IDSST? Well, it's both price. |
| 01:11:13.51 | Adam Politzer | Well, it's both price and availability. So we're just trying to open up every, we opened up every Saturday, looked at the Bay Model, IDES Hall, and Spinnaker, and obviously whatever's available with the largest availability for people to participate will go with. But there is a cost, as we experienced last time, roughly between $5,000 and $7,000 per meeting because we're bringing this to a place that doesn't have it. |
| 01:11:45.30 | Heather Laporte | So and also the Bay model would be might be cheaper. Yeah. |
| 01:11:45.42 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. |
| 01:11:49.30 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Thank you, Adam. Okay. |
| 01:11:53.47 | Heather Laporte | So Mayor Hoffman, can I make a motion? about the 3D model. And I think that we may Before I make the motion, I'd like to make a comment. I think we may have to get ahead of that process with the 3D model. I've been pushing for this for a long time. doubt I'm not sure the district's going to do that for us and it might be that this council might take a leadership role there and say we're going to perhaps you know direct city staff to come back to us with an estimate on how much it would cost to create a 3d model we need a 3d model you know perhaps as the district knows that you know we're we're going to move forward on it that you know they will realize this needs to happen either that or we we link the review process to mandating having that 3d model before it starts and I also from the district and I also think that or perhaps perhaps we include the 3d model since we're in we're defining what detailed plans mean in in the staff report perhaps we add a third bullet that says a 3d model since we're in we're defining what detailed plans mean in this staff report perhaps we add a third bullet that says a 3d model and the other thing is that that 3d model should be available two weeks before the workshop or the public hearing and it should like you said in a public place so everyone can come and have the time to vet it and look at it and everything |
| 01:13:22.43 | Ray Withy | Madam Mayor, I just want to make sure we're clear here. We're talking about an electronic three-dimensional model. We're not talking about a piece of cardboard model. |
| 01:13:32.27 | Heather Laporte | Well, no, I thought we were talking about an actual model that people could come and look at. |
| 01:13:36.94 | Ray Withy | No, that's impossible to get done in the time frame. Absolutely impossible. We're talking about an electronic three-dimensional model, surely. Is that what we're talking about? Because I can't support it. |
| 01:13:47.46 | Heather Laporte | I can't support it. |
| 01:13:52.70 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, how about if we inquire of the bridge district that we are going to require a 3E model and see what they come back with? Either electronic or if they can do a hard one. |
| 01:14:06.85 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:14:06.86 | Ray Withy | I mean, But what you want to model out, what's the purpose of the model? The purpose of the model is to |
| 01:14:12.43 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:14:12.47 | Heather Laporte | The purpose of the model is to show scale. You want to show scale, right? It's our waterfront. It's to show scale. |
| 01:14:14.29 | Ray Withy | You want to know. It is to show scale. |
| 01:14:17.78 | Jason McCormick | Yeah. |
| 01:14:17.92 | Heather Laporte | Yes, Mary. |
| 01:14:18.05 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF Thank you. Oh, sorry. All right, well, let's, how about at the next meeting? Can you report on the 3D model issue? Like, let's present that to the Bridge District and say that's going to be a requirement for the review process going forward, and then see what type of 3D model they can come back with, either actual or 3D, and then we can address it then. How about that? |
| 01:14:45.32 | Heather Laporte | Yes. So does that take a motion? I move that we direct city staff to talk to the district about creating a proposal for a 3D model and bringing that proposal back to council by next, by February, sometime in February. |
| 01:15:11.81 | Jill Hoffman | Do we need a motion? We directed them to do it. |
| 01:15:18.14 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. I thought we needed a motion for direction. |
| 01:15:20.81 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 01:15:21.10 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:15:21.25 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:15:21.28 | Heather Laporte | So. |
| 01:15:21.59 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:15:21.86 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:15:22.06 | Jill Hoffman | Can I be honored you? |
| 01:15:23.12 | Heather Laporte | And I think that's a good thing. OK. |
| 01:15:24.77 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, now moving on. |
| 01:15:26.65 | Heather Laporte | I just want to clarify that we all agreed that we are going to look at a two-day workshop that with the second or the first possibly being in the evening and staff is going to come back to us with that recommendation based on availability. |
| 01:15:42.01 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:15:42.27 | Heather Laporte | Okay. |
| 01:15:45.21 | Unknown | Yes? They were like a two day, did we agree on a two day? |
| 01:15:49.11 | Jill Hoffman | We're going to shoot for it today. Yeah. If it's feasible. |
| 01:15:51.76 | Unknown | Yeah. Thank you. Yeah, if it's feasible. Thank you. |
| 01:15:53.87 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right. Yes. And the third thing I think |
| 01:16:01.36 | Unknown | guys before we do that can we make we need a motion or can staff make that clarification on page two of the staff report relating to the vote that it was relating to the process, can we make sure that's done? I actually would like to see the |
| 01:16:14.94 | Lily | And I, I, I, |
| 01:16:16.85 | Unknown | you |
| 01:16:16.94 | Lily | Thank you. I can include that in the minutes that you had that conversation. |
| 01:16:19.92 | Unknown | Yeah, and I'd like to have that amended because I wouldn't want this floating. Yeah, can we? |
| 01:16:24.31 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. Can we edit the staff report to say that? Is that possible? No? |
| 01:16:31.84 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:16:31.87 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:16:31.90 | Mary Wagner | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:16:31.95 | Heather Laporte | I'm sorry. |
| 01:16:32.21 | Unknown | Okay, got it. We put it in the minutes that we want to make that edit. |
| 01:16:32.49 | Heather Laporte | So then we put it in. |
| 01:16:33.73 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:16:33.74 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:16:33.78 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:16:33.95 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:16:33.98 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 01:16:36.41 | Heather Laporte | And then I would also move that the Planning Commission and HLB review all seven points from Council Resolution number 5512. |
| 01:16:52.56 | Heather Laporte | seven points from the waterside land side down to sequa |
| 01:16:53.47 | Unknown | Oh, yeah. We can handle that when we make the motion because you'll notice in point B, you can change the language. |
| 01:17:01.25 | Heather Laporte | And one more point, I heard if feasible at the end of the two-day if feasible. And I mean, it's feasible. We say we want two days and we figure out which two are the most, two meetings, and we figure out which two work the best in terms of their schedule. So I feel uncomfortable with the if feasible tag. |
| 01:17:25.75 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so the issue with that is, you We can do it if we don't want to shoot for 100% with HLB, the combined. So that's why I think we want to have the report back from city staff on what that configuration is going to look like, because that might change our opinion about whether or not we go with two-day or one-day. And I understand your point, too. |
| 01:17:51.32 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, I just can't imagine a situation where I would go with just a one day review. That's what I'm grappling with. |
| 01:17:56.31 | Jill Hoffman | That's what I'm grappling with. That's fair. Okay, so would you like for me to read the recommendation up there? Or would somebody like to make a motion? Thank you. |
| 01:18:07.77 | Ray Withy | Thank you. I'd just like to make a point of clarification. My earlier comment, which said that it's a no-brainer, there should be a 3D model prepared, was presuming that I was talking about an electronic model. I'm not about to ask the Bridge District to actually build a model of Richardson Bay. Which is what would be needed. |
| 01:18:32.46 | Heather Laporte | And I'm just clarifying, we're not, I mean, the ferry building at one time I know had a model on display. We're not talking about Richardson Bay. We're talking about our little downtown waterfront to view the scale. You know, you can use a 3D printer. There are cost-effective ways. I mean, I don't know. I don't know how they would do it, but I know that we deserve a model. We need to see what the scale is and the impact is to our waterfront. |
| 01:19:02.19 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Thank you. |
| 01:19:03.05 | Mary Wagner | All right, so... |
| 01:19:05.36 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, Mary. |
| 01:19:06.02 | Mary Wagner | So, Madam Mayor, if you were so inclined, you could move staff's recommendation with the additions of exploring the 3D model with the district, reporting back to the city council on the availability for the one and two days of the planning commission and the HLB. |
| 01:19:25.13 | Heather Laporte | Mary, as a point of clarification, I would like to add the 3D model, Under as a bullet on page three of four Where it says you said that it was kind of Unclear in the lease regarding what detailed plans meant and what I'm suggesting to counsel is that we add a bullet here? Because what staff is trying to do is they're trying to define what detail means and to me detail means a 3d model |
| 01:19:56.61 | Heather Laporte | And I'm talking about a tangible model that people can look at. |
| 01:20:05.20 | Heather Laporte | So I move to add a 3D model as a bullet for defining what a detailed plan under the lease requires. OK. |
| 01:20:21.19 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, so. Thank you. We... I would like to move that we accept the staff recommendation that the city council the three bullets up here. Can I just do that? Or any? May I? Yeah, we have a question though. Okay. |
| 01:20:36.57 | Unknown | May I, I do have a question though. I'm saying my apologies. The Number one, in a detailed written response letter as outlined in the staff report, Can you point that out? not 100% clear on that. |
| 01:20:56.03 | Lily | So that's the second bullet on page three or four. |
| 01:21:02.70 | Lily | A detailed written response regarding how the district has addressed the concerns raised in 2015, including a response to the council's prior determination and why, from the district's perspective, the council may now consent to the alterations. |
| 01:21:17.26 | Unknown | on page two, okay. Oh, the detailed plans. I'm sorry, again. |
| 01:21:22.96 | Lily | Thank you. |
| 01:21:23.00 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:21:23.02 | Lily | the |
| 01:21:25.44 | Unknown | were on page three or four of the three |
| 01:21:26.80 | Lily | Three or four, the second bullet towards the bottom of the page. |
| 01:21:29.73 | Unknown | that. |
| 01:21:30.10 | Lily | So the detailed plans would mean... Okay, I got it. |
| 01:21:33.41 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 01:21:33.75 | Lily | Thank you. |
| 01:21:37.06 | Heather Laporte | Does the wording on that regarding the council may now consent to the alterations or reject the proposal? I mean, is it understood that this is coming from the district's perspective? That this is their argument as to why we should accept it? Yes. Okay. |
| 01:22:05.10 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, I... |
| 01:22:14.57 | Heather Laporte | Do we say here, I mean, are we getting dimensions? I don't see dimensions in here. I just see a detailed written response. |
| 01:22:26.72 | Heather Laporte | Having sat through numerous presentations from the district that did not mention dimensions, I think that's something we need to ask them to include. |
| 01:22:36.15 | Unknown | You may want to say there's something missing here is the submission of the detailed plan. And maybe you can say along with the submission of the detailed plan's request that they provided by me. |
| 01:22:51.46 | Mary Wagner | If I may, Madam Mayor, I think staff's suggestion here in this report was we have detailed plans. We're now asking them that were submitted before and they were rejected. We still have those plans. We're asking them to explain the revisions to those plans. |
| 01:22:53.45 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 01:23:12.35 | Heather Laporte | Okay, now, in other words, we would not get a second set of detailed plans with the revisions they have made? I disagree with that. I don't think it's enough for them to say, this is what we proposed before, and then here's a bullet list of how we're changing this. I want detailed plans. I want the plans of what they're proposing now. |
| 01:23:36.48 | Adam Politzer | So, Madam Mayor, I think what may be missing, and Councilmember Theodorus mentioned this earlier, or Mayor Hoffman mentioned it earlier, at the conclusion of the working group, The district said. These are the revisions. The city received those revisions and we posted them on our website. And I checked with Lily here and we will. send those out in the current based on the direction that Council gives tonight in terms of the process. We'll add that. So, The plans are available to the public and have been available to the public since once the working group sent those plans to us. So I don't think that it's going to be. |
| 01:24:15.55 | Unknown | Ooh. |
| 01:24:24.13 | Adam Politzer | a bullet point of here's what we've done to change it, it will be a visual that we already have received So we want them to explain. and demonstrate at the public meeting, at the hearing, how they evolved this project from what was rejected. to what the working group said move forward with. not approve, but move forward with, to this HLV planning commission. meeting. So it's on them. The onus is on them. to both. visually show us the changes. And then also tell us. specifically how those changes address the written concerns that are in the resolution. from the City Council rejection. |
| 01:25:04.01 | Heather Laporte | And that includes dimensions. |
| 01:25:05.78 | Adam Politzer | Yes. |
| 01:25:10.51 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, do we have a motion? |
| 01:25:13.88 | Adam Politzer | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:25:14.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:25:14.10 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:25:16.02 | Jill Hoffman | from me. Okay, do it. Second. |
| 01:25:18.13 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 01:25:18.15 | Unknown | Second. |
| 01:25:21.83 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? |
| 01:25:23.40 | Heather Laporte | I want to clarify, we are voting on these three bullets. |
| 01:25:29.64 | Jill Hoffman | We're voting on these three bullets with the addition of... |
| 01:25:30.77 | Heather Laporte | Or the first one. |
| 01:25:34.98 | Jill Hoffman | illustrative evolution of the project changes in a detailed written response letter where do we want to put the 3d model in there |
| 01:25:41.71 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:25:41.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:25:41.98 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:25:42.03 | Lily | Thank you. |
| 01:25:42.70 | Heather Laporte | Yeah. |
| 01:25:43.02 | Lily | because |
| 01:25:43.46 | Heather Laporte | you |
| 01:25:43.53 | Lily | I'm adding that to this motion. |
| 01:25:45.40 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:25:45.44 | Heather Laporte | THE END OF THE END OF THE So I move to add the 3D model and I also move an item to to change five of the seven bullet points to seven bullet points. over here from We already did that. Okay. Just want to make sure. |
| 01:25:57.89 | Jill Hoffman | We already did. |
| 01:26:00.61 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:26:00.64 | Jill Hoffman | All right. All in favor? |
| 01:26:03.51 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:26:05.00 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:26:05.35 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:26:05.37 | Heather Laporte | Hi. |
| 01:26:05.50 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:26:05.55 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:26:05.76 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. |
| 01:26:05.81 | Heather Laporte | I... Thank you. Motion carries. Uh... Did we include the two meetings? We did. |
| 01:26:14.60 | Jill Hoffman | All right. Should we take a five-minute break? OK, we're all right. But Miss Whalen may be excused to take a public comfort, a comfort break if she needs to. All right, onward we march to, and we're very close to being on schedule, item 6B, Airbnb. |
| 01:26:21.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:26:28.03 | Unknown | I'm not going to be able to |
| 01:26:48.89 | Jill Hoffman | Is it hot up here? |
| 01:26:49.12 | Ray Withy | I'm sorry. So what do we want to see? What models? What's on the shoreline? |
| 01:26:55.64 | Jill Hoffman | for me. |
| 01:26:55.67 | Ray Withy | Thank you, Herbie. |
| 01:26:57.16 | Jill Hoffman | I want my house in there. |
| 01:26:58.73 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 01:26:58.88 | Jill Hoffman | more. |
| 01:26:59.22 | Ray Withy | Thank you. THANK YOU. |
| 01:27:15.11 | Danny Castro | Ready for me? you you Thank you. |
| 01:27:18.64 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I didn't have my, Mr. Castro, the floor's yours. |
| 01:27:23.01 | Danny Castro | Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Hoffman, members of the council. The issue before the council this evening is an update on short-term vacation rentals and the update on the code enforcement program relating to that. The city council's had two prior discussions in March of last year and in June of last year regarding short-term vacation rentals. In March, there was an introduction to short-term rentals and its impacts to Sausalito. Also at that meeting, there was a presentation from California State Senator Mike McGuire, who introduced a pending Senate Bill 593 that hasn't come to full fruition and likely to be visited and considered in 2017. So it was just a pending bill. In June of last year, there was direction from the City Council to implement the code enforcement program. |
| 01:28:24.08 | Danny Castro | To step back a bit, Sausalito does not permit short-term rentals. The section of the Municipal Code 10.22030 and referenced in Table 10.22-1 does not indicate short-term rentals as a permissible use in all residential zoning districts. There is a reference for accessory uses, residential accessory uses, but that's clearly indicated in a... zoning districts. There is a reference for accessory uses, residential accessory uses, but that's clearly indicated in 10.44, a different section, that states that residential accessory uses are for 30 days or longer, 30 days or more. So in effect, short-term rentals then are not permitted. It's not a listed use. The short-term rental code enforcement program that was implemented and given direction by the city council was intended to be a trial period to test the enforcement capability, test the cost recovery regarding by way of remittance to TOT, and that is to be clear back TOT and not for continue to T test the success rate of seizing the operation of short term rental uses focus on the bad apples the ones that have had continued neighbor complaints over the last couple years or within the last year. And return to the city council to report on the program and review options and that's what we're here tonight for. In terms of the report on the code enforcement activity, We, I should state that the code enforcement officer that was hired is Lamont Mack. He is from CSG, who is the company who currently provides our plan check and building services to community development, and we hired him on a part-term basis to enact this enforcement activity. Mr. Mack investigated approximately 15 cases, and these were residences advertised as short-term rentals verified by online photos, descriptions, and subsequent field inspections. There was also and these were residences advertised as short-term rentals verified by online photos, descriptions, and subsequent field inspections. There was also internet search that found 50 or more short-term rentals in Sausalito. These properties were found on popular websites including Airbnb, VRBO, Flipkey, HomeAway, and Craigslist. The code enforcement officer drove by these 15 properties to document the fluctuating vehicles and foot traffic conditions. Courtesy notices were mailed, including a compliance deadline date. There was electronic notification on many of these online websites. You're able to respond to these and they were flagged and notified in that fashion. There are also email responses from about 12 of the hosts, mostly agreeing to adjusting their account settings to clearly discourage short-term bookings. Many of the availability settings have been changed to require 30-day minimum accommodations, as was recommended by our code enforcement officers. And In terms of next steps, is to reexamine those website listings to ensure that they have adjusted the language and look at actual booking dates from these websites, reviewer comments, which would indicate whether they are staying at short-term at these places, and take the next steps, which is administrative citations to again achieve compliance. And further steps would be to demand for retroactive TOT. |
| 01:32:29.65 | Danny Castro | The focus of the code enforcement really was to focus on the problematic cases. And we did focus on mainly three cases. Case number one, where we did provide notice, written notice to the property owners. And in terms of case number one, legal counsel responded denying short-term rental activity and the presence of website listings and stated that the rental use has seized. And there were no further complaints from case number one. In terms of case number two, neighbors confirmed that continued short-term rental activity and that the code enforcement officer observed the website listings, the turnover and rental cars at the site. A compliance order was sent and a notice of violation was issued. There has been no response from that property owner, and code enforcement officer recommends that we begin with administrative citations. On the third case there was a complaints date back to 2013 And there has been new complaints based on continued activity and the previous code enforcement action resulted in administrative citation that was then contested and then upheld. The property owner states that, in our recent conversations with this property owner, that the renter sign a lease for 30 days or more stay, but if the renter leaves before 30 days, he has no control over that. Um, As such, there are no outward signs of vacation rental activity, and there hasn't been any recent complaints on case number three. So we're continuing to monitor that one. In terms of positive outcomes for the code enforcement, we have through our discussions and with a group of folks that I'll describe a bit later, a Sausalito host group, that it appears that some hosts have seized their operations since we began this code enforcement effort. Hosts also responded that they will modify the language so that their website listings are clear that they will rent for 30 days or more. And the host group says that the number of hosts have lessened. I think I mentioned that since enforcement began. The challenges that we've faced. While language in the listings are modified, there is concern that in reality, renters are allowing visitors to stay for shorter periods. It's been difficult to prove that rentals are being conducted on a short-term basis. For example, actual documentation of receipts or rental documentation without cooperation from these property owners, it's really difficult to prove. It's difficult to collect the back TOT to help recover costs. Often, the response we get from property owners are that, okay, we will see as we get it. But... leave me alone, basically I'm done. But that would be a next step should we request that if there's continued problems. Many cities are experiencing these same challenges. Code enforcement is time intensive. It can be cost intensive and costly, based on whether there are appeals of our enforcement. And we've had one example in 2014. Another challenge that we find in my experience in reading about this more and more is that a ban on short-term rentals could push the rental economy underground, |
| 01:36:19.72 | Danny Castro | I'm not going to go through each of these, but I did provide in your staff report an update on adjacent cities and other cities throughout the Bay Area that have been dealing with short-term rentals. Some ban them. Some allow them with certain regulations. Some have a registration program. So it's... It varies. I did mention a Sausalito host group. Since the City Council met in March of 2015 and introduced this issue, the host group has formed. And I have been meeting with members to keep them apprised of the code enforcement activity and also to hear their recommendations. They are, Melanie Meher-Shan is a host group member that would like to make a presentation to the council following my presentation. And these are the three items that have been attached to your staff report. In terms of the fiscal impact, the cost to contract a part-time code enforcement officer was approved by the council in this year's fiscal budget for $50,000. $15,000 has been spent and approximately $35,000 remain in the balance. As I mentioned back, TOT has not been collected to date, but it could be the next steps in code enforcement. So the city council has a number of options, and I'll read them. Number one is to direct staff to continue code enforcement. program. Two, to appoint a task force or working group to develop policies, a draft ordinance to allow and regulate short-term rentals. Number three, appointed task force, I should say three Three and five are actually new. They're not in your report. So number three, appoint a task force working group to conduct a forum to begin a community dialogue and input on this issue and then take the next steps following that. Number four, discontinue the code enforcement program. Number five, any one or more of the above options? And six, lastly, any other direction that the city council wishes to provide. That concludes my report, and I can answer any questions you might have. |
| 01:38:34.84 | Jill Hoffman | I don't have any questions. Do we want to have the presentation by the host group and then have questions by the council? Let's have that. And we gave them five minutes? Yeah. Oh, no. you There's going to be others speaking. It's just a short five-minute presentation. Thank you. Thank you. . That's fine. |
| 01:39:00.76 | Jill Hoffman | although irregular. Yeah, I know. |
| 01:39:04.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:39:06.97 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. Awesome, thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:39:10.32 | Unknown | Mayor, council members, staff, Mr. Castro, I'm honored to speak tonight, thank you. I'm a Sausalito resident and mom with a fifth grader at Willow Creek and a sophomore at TAM. we share at our second home I'm representing the Sausalito host group. And our long-term goal is to see smart, sensible regulation in Sausalito. Our hope tonight is that council will make a motion to enact a committee to start a discussion about home sharing here. Okay, so who we are. This conversation we're having in this room is happening in every city across California, the US, and the world. It's the sharing economy. Hosts get something out of it. Usually it's on the scale of supplemental income. We've done a survey of our host group here to share some information about who we are. The headline is that this is a middle class phenomenon. As a city, we've taken a lot of pride in Willow Creek bringing families back to Sausalito. Almost half of the home sharing households here are families many with kids at Willow Creek. We're trying to make ends meet. Just about everybody shares because of a discreet financial need. Most are not investors. This is for offsetting the cost of financing the home, allowing a mom or dad to stay home with the kids, saving for college, earning retirement income, or helping to pay for expenses while traveling, for example, for work. So they would face real economic impacts if they were to have to not have this avenue available for them. So... There's a lot of controversy over how short term renting compares to long term renting. I won't go into detail here, It's not always as easy as what it seems to be. There's a lot more hands-on, a lot more consumables involved in short-term renting. Long-term renting turns out to be a better passive investment for people. So why do people home share? It appeals to the middle class because they might have a spare room in their house. They might have time when they're not at home, but they don't have a long-term place that they can rent on a regular basis. In terms of our guests, they are also middle class. Many are former residents, Sorry. keep going down. Many are vacationers, but families. Some are here for a celebration. Many are Sausalito residents who are renovating their house or people who are looking to house hunt here. They would not be staying in a hotel, so we're not taking money or business away from hotels. And this tax revenue that could come from regulating home sharing would be additive to hotels because we wouldn't be taking away business from hotels. The economic value of these visitors is also really important. They outspend what they spend on lodging a great deal and they spend in our restaurants, in our grocery stores, they buy from our They are the high quality visitors that we're looking to attract to Sausalito. In terms of the code, as Mr. Castro was saying, And certainly there are different opinions on the legalities of it. but it's worth noting that the code sections that we're talking about, they date back to the 50s and earlier before home sharing as we know it today. The code refers to transient occupancy. That means that according to our interpretation, there are other activities that would be prohibited. I'm not sure. an eight-year-old birthday party if it's not a 30-day sleepover. not okay. um, grandma coming to visit. It's not for a month. Not okay. If you have a house sitter or a dog sitter coming to stay for less than a month, also not okay. So We would really like to talk about a way forward. We would love to have a two-way dialogue about this. |
| 01:43:25.88 | Unknown | We would like this to have a community basis. We would like to have community oriented boundaries on the activity, boundaries that we can enforce more effectively. Thank you. We are in favor of preserving the residential housing stock, and there are some really good code precedents out there. Mill Valley, for instance, that we can turn to for that. Many other cities, in fact. I have something from the city of Truckee up here. They just sent me an update yesterday. At the bottom, the blue line is hotel tax revenue, TOT. It's remained consistent as the green And the red ones, that's all renting of individual homes by homeowners themselves directly and property managers, has increased. It's additive revenue. They're doing really well. We're building an indoor pool in Truckee. It's great. THE END OF THE END OF THE If you go on to, this is the city of Pacific Grove, it looks a lot more like Sausalito but you know, well-known. Um, They're on track for a million dollars in TOT this year. So I'll just wrap up by saying that Sausalito finds itself in the same situation as many of our hosts. Somewhat stressed financially, we could use an extra source of revenue. This could be it and what our group would like to ask for is an open discussion. and a task force or a work force. working group to talk about what this could mean in our community thank you so much thank you |
| 01:45:00.65 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 01:45:04.90 | Jill Hoffman | All right, thank you. And now we have questions from city council of staff on this issue. Are there any questions? None? |
| 01:45:15.50 | Unknown | So we were noted that, you know, we have a social social hosting group. So I assume there and we have we look at the Airbnb and such. We have 80 to 100 listings at any one point in time. So this is going on. And they talk about the TOT, how much TOT have we collected from Sausalito hosting people so far? None. So, so we have this going on, but we're not collecting any TOT. Okay. That's correct. |
| 01:45:45.45 | Jill Hoffman | . Danny, yeah, I have a follow-up with that. But if we had, if we had an ordinance and we allowed it in some form and some permitted form, Airbnb now makes agreements with cities that they're automatically paying the cities. Do I have that right? And Mill Valley, I think that's how they've done it in Pacific Grove. Let's let Mr. Castor... |
| 01:46:08.98 | Danny Castro | I found that Airbnb has agreed in some instances and in some cities. I'm not sure about Mill Valley. |
| 01:46:19.42 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, my apologies. |
| 01:46:20.48 | Unknown | Can I clarify this? Sure. But they don't go nearly as far as SB 593. They will confirm what others have said. |
| 01:46:20.98 | Danny Castro | Yeah. |
| 01:46:21.55 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. |
| 01:46:25.73 | Jill Hoffman | they will. |
| 01:46:28.96 | Unknown | tell you data about people who are not reporting so they they fall pretty far short and SB 593 would take us as far as we need to go |
| 01:46:38.00 | Jill Hoffman | And as part of any sort of working group and ordinance, as part of the permitting process, and Mary, you might be able to hear I'm throwing you a curve, we could require as part of the permitting process that the person requesting the permit sign a document that would release the records from Airbnb. in some form I may not be saying that right but |
| 01:47:03.64 | Mary Wagner | So if the individual host were to authorize the city to receive that information? |
| 01:47:08.95 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, and consent to the release of that information from whatever hosting website they're using. We'd have to look into that for you. I would. Okay. Thanks. |
| 01:47:14.72 | Mary Wagner | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:47:14.76 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:47:14.79 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:47:14.94 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:47:19.14 | Heather Laporte | So I have a different question. So I have a duplex, and I pay a business license every year for my duplex because the city charges me. And anyone who's got a duplex or a triplex or whatever, we pay a business license fee. And so I guess my question is, are the policies such? Are these then, I mean, is the TOT tax and a business license, is it the policies such are these then I mean is the TOT tax and a business license is it the same how is it different from a hotel I'm just curious about that |
| 01:47:57.13 | Danny Castro | It could be both. That would be if the city were to permit a short-term rental within a property, like Mill Valley, they require both a tax certificate to collect TOT as well as a business license to conduct that use. |
| 01:48:20.20 | Heather Laporte | Okay, so if it's a triplex and you're already paying a business license fee just to have a triplex, then if you had an Airbnb unit, you would pay an additional business license for the Airbnb plus the TOT tax? |
| 01:48:41.12 | Danny Castro | I'm not certain whether that would be duplicative, in other words, having another business license. We'd have to check whether the business license would capture that because you're doing rental, whether it's short term or long term. |
| 01:48:52.68 | Heather Laporte | Okay. Okay. |
| 01:48:54.60 | Danny Castro | Okay. Thank you. |
| 01:48:55.67 | Heather Laporte | So I have a follow-up question on that. I have heard from both sides of this issue, and I have friends and supporters on both sides. And one of the major concerns that I have is that there's has been like the party houses and the disruption and the trashing of neighborhoods by some Airbnb hosts that are not as responsible as others. And unfortunately, the approach has been to just use the current ordinances in place to address the sound and the noise issues, but that is... It's just a living hell, frankly, for the neighbors. And I was wondering, is there a city that you know that has created separate enforcement legislation specifically around nuisance neighbors, nuisance short-term rentals in their policy? |
| 01:50:06.54 | Danny Castro | I'm not aware of any specific separate or additive enforcement. I do know that the penalties can be amended or the type of code enforcement and the process can be amended to address any number of code enforcement, not just short-term rental but any other issues. |
| 01:50:29.59 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. And I've also had a couple folks tell me that people have lost units, rental units, to Airbnbers. And I was wondering, has staff gotten any feedback along those lines? Because we hear, in theory, that it could happen. And I've been told, in one case, it did happen. Does staff have any insight into whether or not this is a hit to our affordable housing stock? |
| 01:50:59.97 | Danny Castro | No, we haven't made that kind of analysis. I hear the same just in general, that it could take the rental market away, that short-term uses in rentals like Airbnb have an effect on the rental market. |
| 01:51:16.29 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:51:19.73 | Ray Withy | Yeah, I would just like to... you confirm Danny that you The topic tonight was enforcement. What is it you're specifically asking of us on that issue tonight? |
| 01:51:35.20 | Danny Castro | Sure. The direction the City Council had in June was to implement the code enforcement program and come back to provide an update and provide you with the update of code enforcement. And also to review any options that you may want to consider this evening. That is a purpose. |
| 01:51:58.19 | Jill Hoffman | I believe there's a slide of the five or six options that you're. Thank you. |
| 01:52:02.49 | Tammy Blanchard | Yeah, that's right. |
| 01:52:05.01 | Ray Withy | Sorry, if you could put that slide up, Danny, that would be helpful. |
| 01:52:11.64 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Sure. While you're doing that, Councilman. Yeah. |
| 01:52:14.96 | Unknown | While you're doing that, Councilman. Danny, are there any cities that require that the, even Airbnb, that the occupancy of the home is only to the owner of the house? No. |
| 01:52:31.75 | Danny Castro | Airbnb, my understanding, does not make that requirement. There are cities who have developed policies that require that the owner reside in the home, or that's their primary residence. Mm-hmm. as a qualifier to apply for a short-term rental use. |
| 01:52:50.13 | Adam Politzer | Okay. |
| 01:52:54.16 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:52:54.20 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:52:54.38 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:52:54.52 | Heather Laporte | you So, Danny, I have heard of some abuses about this, not only with nuisance neighbors and loud noises and parties and parking messes, but also I've heard about people who actually are buying homes and using them as a business model. And that is of great concern to me, to be using Sausalito, you know, as just an investment for Airbnb-ers, you know, in terms of the hit to our neighborhoods and our community. Did you find any of that, any evidence of that? I know of at least one. |
| 01:53:37.56 | Danny Castro | I have not. Or in the enforcement process. |
| 01:53:39.17 | Heather Laporte | Or in the enforcement process, did they uncover any? |
| 01:53:43.39 | Danny Castro | Not that from my reports from Lamont that I haven't heard of that particularly. I'm not privy to the sales of projects. Often it's when there's work being done and I hear it secondarily, but not specifically for purchase for Airbnb type use. |
| 01:54:05.46 | Adam Politzer | And Councilmember Pfeiffer, just to clarify, and Danny correct us if this is not correct, That wasn't the intent of the $50,000 approval that the council was really looking for enforcement in terms of some of these high profile homes. |
| 01:54:21.29 | Ron Albert | Thank you. |
| 01:54:21.39 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:54:21.47 | Ron Albert | I'm not sure. |
| 01:54:23.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:54:23.08 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:54:23.21 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:54:25.30 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. I have a follow-up question. Okay, so I want to thank the Saucido host group for putting together this proposal and for presenting it to us. And I was just curious, is there also another group in town that represents kind of the other view? Because clearly the host group, which disclosure, they called me and I talked to them a little bit about their proposal. Okay. We've given them presentation time, their proposals included in our packet. Is there another group in town or advocates that have concerns that we could perhaps invite to the table on this or make a presentation as well? |
| 01:55:14.95 | Danny Castro | I'm not aware of any group that has come to me |
| 01:55:19.40 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. Right? |
| 01:55:21.95 | Ray Withy | Yeah. Is it staff's recommendation that in fact we do continue the code enforcement program? I'm not saying to the exclusion of anything else on that list. Just focusing on number one. Is it staff's recommendation to continue with the enforcement program? |
| 01:55:39.47 | Danny Castro | It's one of your options. |
| 01:55:41.56 | Adam Politzer | But it is our recommendation that we continue. I think where Danny is pausing is that the direction of council |
| 01:55:42.85 | Danny Castro | It is good. |
| 01:55:52.09 | Adam Politzer | with staff's original recommendation was to authorize $50,000 to go through an enforcement, process. to one, answer the question, can we actually enforce the activity. related to single-family dwellings not not the shared models but these homes that are be rented out exclusively for for short-term rentals the entire complex entire home so our recommendation is to continue through that process because we don't yet have a conclusion if we have an enforcement program that would be sustainable going in which would also I think give council some information as they make the broader discussion decisions |
| 01:56:39.09 | Jill Hoffman | Danny, since you guys have started the enforcement, I know that there were problem houses in the past that actually prompted the enforcement program. Have we seen that those problem houses have ceased operation or at least ceased their annoying behavior? |
| 01:56:55.91 | Danny Castro | The problem houses or the problem properties are the three cases that I went through. And so in some cases they've been continued. We'd have to continue enforcement. In one case there was no report of activity and they appeared to seize the operation. And the other one where we're still monitoring. So, you know, it's a, you know, we would have to continue to monitor to ensure that those problem cases don't come up again. |
| 01:56:59.74 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 01:57:23.88 | Jill Hoffman | So have the complaints been generally with regard to those three houses, though? I mean, have there been other complaints for other properties that we suspect are Airbnb, or is it mainly these three? |
| 01:57:37.56 | Danny Castro | There are other properties where we're getting complaints. |
| 01:57:39.82 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 01:57:40.80 | Heather Laporte | All right. |
| 01:57:42.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:57:43.01 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:57:43.15 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:57:43.18 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 01:57:43.35 | Unknown | you |
| 01:57:44.02 | Heather Laporte | What fines have been levied on the three kind of egregious cases that have floated to the top? Thank you. |
| 01:57:51.79 | Danny Castro | That is actually the next step. So, we have not imposed administrative citations to date, but that would be the next step if show that they are continuing to do short term rental use. |
| 01:58:08.34 | Heather Laporte | And what do those fines look like? |
| 01:58:10.45 | Danny Castro | The first is $100. The second would be $200. And then the third is $500. Those are cumulative. And then after the $500, we have the ability to fine them every day for the violation, if the violation continues. So that is a compounded amount. |
| 01:58:35.15 | Heather Laporte | Do those fine levels represent the effort that staff puts in to enforce this? |
| 01:58:46.36 | Danny Castro | No, I don't think so. |
| 01:58:48.45 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, I think that's part of what we want to bring back to the council at the conclusion of the program is the cost to investigate and to actually have code enforcement. go through the entire process and the cost associated with that compared to the amount of money that we collect in terms of fines to get compliance. |
| 01:59:12.97 | Jill Hoffman | Any other questions? Seeing none, we're going to move into the public I would just comment that The our limit is three minutes, but I have about 15 cards here. And if everybody takes their full three minutes, we're talking about almost an hour of public comment, which is fine. But if you can be succinct, I think that would be appreciated so that we can move on to the action portion of this item. So the first, I'm just going to read off the names that I have three at a time, and if you guys could line up, that would help us go faster as well. I have Bob and Linda Bruce, but read by Helen Godfrey. The next one I have is Melanie Newsharland. and Diane Braca, |
| 02:00:07.21 | Jill Hoffman | Bob and Linda. |
| 02:00:09.13 | Helen Godfrey | Yes, go ahead. |
| 02:00:10.21 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:00:11.58 | Helen Godfrey | Thank you for letting me read this letter. Bob and Linda are my neighbors and they're out of town, so I've volunteered to read it for them. So the letter says, since we were out of town on a long planned vacation, our neighbor and friend has kindly agreed to read our comments regarding how we are impacted by and view the Sausalito short-term rental issues. We retired to Sausalito September 2012 to live near our children, their families, and our grandchildren. We only want to rent occasionally so as not to disrupt either our lives or our homes. We insist on being home and present whenever we have guests staying because meeting and getting to know our guests is half the reason we do this. We have the world coming to us now. The world shows up on our doorstep. It brings great joy to our lives and those who visit us are equally charmed by the exchange. This is a very expensive area and quite frankly, we could not afford to stay here. to our children and grandchildren if we are not allowed short-term rentals. It also helps us enjoy an occasional night out. A good one half of our guests are here visiting family and businesses in Sausalito or Miranda. They tell us they are delighted in their accommodations because they need an affordable place to stay. Hotels in and near Sausalito are incredibly expensive for the average person. Parking is not a problem in our area, so all I can say about that is Many of our foreign guests use Uber or taxis to get to our home. They walk to eat in local restaurants, see a movie, grab a coffee, and shop in Sausalito stores. We would do this even if we didn't get paid because meeting and getting to know our guests is so rewarding. I can't think of a better way to get to know so many different types of people. It's such a gift. Renting out a room for more than 30 days is out of the question as this feels too invasive. We wouldn't have room for our own family and friends to stay. We like the occasional visitor and meeting a new friend. Please know that we pay income taxes on rents we receive when we tried to determine how to pay TOT We were told there was no way to register to remit the TOT taxes. This seems very strange to us. If the city had a policy where we could contribute TOT tax, that would be a win-win for all. The hosts, the guests, the city, and the businesses all could profit from this endeavor. Thank you for the opportunity to present our thoughts and opinions. |
| 02:02:24.60 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:02:30.81 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, we like passionate debate in Sausalito, but let's let everybody talk and move quickly through the speakers. Melanie? Melanie Marsh. |
| 02:02:40.69 | Unknown | That's me, I spoke. |
| 02:02:42.04 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, you did? Oh, okay. Okay. Sure. Diane. Diane. Hi, I'll tell you. |
| 02:02:47.59 | Diane Braca | Thank you. |
| 02:02:47.60 | Jill Hoffman | and it was a great time. |
| 02:02:47.79 | Diane Braca | this succinct good evening council. I'm in favor of forming a working group or a task force for this issue. I'm not a homeowner, nor do I have a short-term rental, but I am a traveler and have been a tourist in European countries. In France, there is the concept of the chambre d'hote. Maybe many people here have experienced that. Where you stay for a night or two in someone's house as you travel through. At the time, about 10 years ago, doing this, I marveled at how easy and affordable this way of travel was. |
| 02:02:50.63 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Good evening. |
| 02:03:26.62 | Diane Braca | especially enjoyable. to meet the people of France as they lived in their homes and experience their hospitality in that way. Here in the States at the time, 10 years ago, there was this, or was or is this concept of bed and breakfast, which wasn't quite the same as the French chambre d'hôte. B&Bs were certainly more expensive and there were fewer of them, harder to get reservations. than all the many, many Chambordotes in people's homes in France. Well, years later, Chambrodots have arrived in the U.S. via Airbnb and other places. So as a tourist, what I remember about these experiences, I do remember the places like the Pyrenees and the Alps and various places in France, but what I really remember were the people I met in their homes and the conversations we had, often in French, my very bad French. And I just want to, I'd like to see people have that same experience with Sausalito. Maybe they won't remember the waterfront ten years later, but they'll remember the conversations and the homes they stayed in in Sausalito. Thank you. |
| 02:04:50.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:04:53.44 | Jill Hoffman | Michael Michael Reichling. Let me just, Michael Raglin, Yasmeen McGrane, and Sam Penrose. Your next three up. Go ahead. |
| 02:05:07.47 | Michael Reichling | Thank you for the opportunity to speak. It may sound like I'm not in favor of Airbnb, but actually I am with qualification. I'll tell my story as briefly as I can. I'm a tenant in a nine-unit building in Hurricane Gulch. One of the units, at least one, perhaps two, has been turned into an Airbnb building. apartment. The turnover is every one to three nights. The owner lives in the East Bay. He's not there. the impact has been tremendous. It's an older building, there are hardwood floors, there's little sound isolation, it's a constant source of noise and aggravation, because there is no regulation. There's no room for conversation about it. They're not interested in hearing about the impact, evidently. Nothing has been done. I'm And it's reached the point where I have to move out because I need to sleep. Friday night, there was a party with 12 college-age students. There are people that come at any hour. The parking is tight. so that there's always chaos in the garage. uh, It's... And unfortunately, Um, Of course, I've lived beneath the unit that has the most activity. Um, I think that there needs to be guidelines. and I think primarily the hosts have to be present. and you can't turn it into essentially a hotel room and not be And And I think another thing that is important to consider With the rental market as it is in Sausalito and the Bay People are afraid to speak up because they don't want to lose their home. and I'm speaking up because I'm leaving, but I think for those For those that are left behind, there has to be some consideration given to them. Thank you. |
| 02:07:18.97 | Heather Laporte | Can I ask just a clarification, sir? Yes. Sir? Did you at any point feel comfortable about, like, alerting the city about? |
| 02:07:21.67 | Michael Reichling | Yes. |
| 02:07:26.57 | Michael Reichling | it. I spoke to Danny Castro today, actually. Okay. And, you know, I've been trying to go about this through discussion. Discussion with City Hall or discussion with the owner? No, no, no, with the property owner. Mm-hmm. And it doesn't seem to be going anywhere. And, you know, I feel like there are no teeth in... |
| 02:07:31.46 | Heather Laporte | Okay? |
| 02:07:37.28 | Heather Laporte | Discussion with City Hall or discussion with the owner? Mm-hmm. Thank you. |
| 02:07:41.72 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:07:41.74 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 02:07:47.80 | Michael Reichling | the restrictions or rather the lack of accommodation for this. And so I don't want to put the energy into making the case with my owner, I'm just going to move on. But I think it's important to recognize that not all the occupancies are the same, not all the circumstances are the same, and they can't be treated with the same set of rules. |
| 02:07:53.48 | Ron Albert | this. |
| 02:08:13.09 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:08:13.53 | Yasmeen McGrane | Thank you. |
| 02:08:13.60 | Heather Laporte | Okay. |
| 02:08:14.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:08:14.05 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 02:08:14.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:08:14.09 | Michael Reichling | Thank you. |
| 02:08:14.88 | Jill Hoffman | Yasmin? |
| 02:08:19.28 | Yasmeen McGrane | Hi, my name is Yasmine and I live in Sausalito and I'm a mother of two children that attend Willow Creek. I'm here to really focus on one component of this, which I think is one of the very important components. It's the flexible economy. |
| 02:08:33.36 | Yasmeen McGrane | Um, And we hear a lot about it these days, and I know I've asked myself, what exactly does that mean? And what it really means is that most people no longer will have nine-to-five jobs with benefits packages at the same company and the same industry over their lifetime. They will have to find new employment every two to three years with two or more career changes over their lifetime. As President Obama said in the State of the Union address the other week, it is not too far of a stretch to say that some of the only people in America who are going to work the same job in the same place with health and retirement package for 30 years are sitting in this chamber. for everyone else, especially folks in their 40s and 50s, saving for retirement or bouncing back from job loss has gotten a lot tougher. Our economy is becoming more flexible, whether we like it or not. People, businesses, and towns that see this as an opportunity and innovate will be the ones that thrive. Reality is we are all going to be having more project-based work, living for several weeks throughout the year in multiple cities, and needing supplemental income to make ends meet. This is especially true for people living in expensive areas like Sausalito. Home sharing is one of the many solutions that is organically grown out of market demand to meet this flexible economy. So what do people that rent their homes look like? One group are professionals on work assignments in another city for a few weeks throughout the year. They still want to keep their homes and live here. Renting out their place while they are away makes this possible for them. As we heard tonight, they're also retirees. Many of you may know a neighbor that is a senior citizen on fixed income who now needs to earn supplemental income. Hosting people in their homes may not only make ends meet, but actually be a new lease on life for our seniors. They are also artists relying on renting a room part-time to live in town. They are mothers just like myself that would like to stay at home and raise young children in return having the flexibility to volunteer at their school and in their community. Short-term rental income is necessary to contribute to the family mortgage and be a means to save for rising college tuition. All these people are the many faces of our hosts. Since they live here, they are amazing ambassadors of our town. They promote the beauty and diversity, often offering their short-term rental places to neighbors for their family members to stay over the holidays. Now let's look at guests who rent these places. They're the same category of people I described, working professionals here on assignment. They want to feel at home in a comfortable environment rather than spend weeks at a hotel. And so I'll wrap it up that those are also, they're also vacationers that want to come to Sausalito like we heard of and actually go to local places, to Chibo, to drivers and experience it. There's a lot of surveys that have been done of these home shares. And we can send you that link and it shows how much that they spend in town. So in summary, home sharing enables our town to retain our diversity of citizens, which in turn supports our schools and businesses and is one of the many. spend in town so in summary home sharing enables our town to retain our diversity of citizens which in turn supports our schools and businesses and is one of the many ways that supports the world's new flexible economy so thank you very much |
| 02:12:01.51 | Sam Penrose | Hi, Sam Penrose, neighbor of a very active Airbnb renter. Two brief things. There are people with genuine interests on both sides of this issue, on more than one side, and it feels like for whatever reason, we as a community have been able to discuss pretty well. Yay, us. It isn't always so amicable or civil, and I'm very pleased. The other is I support the working group solution because it feels like there are many cases to think through many different situations and the community needs to decide where lines are drawn. So I support a group of people who go into it in some detail. |
| 02:12:42.58 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. The next one, Kate Storr, Adrian Marchand, I think, and Clayton Smith are the next three. |
| 02:12:52.91 | Kate Storr | Hi there. Good evening. I'm Kate Storr and I'm the co-chair of the Sausalito Host Group. And I want to thank you, Madam Mayor and City Council, for... allowing us to come and present tonight. Um, I'm in the very surprising situation many of you have heard me speak here before of asking you please to ask for a working group to regulate short-term rentals. It's very clear to me after spending nearly a year working on this issue and talking to my fellow citizens that whether you are supportive of short-term rentals or you are against short-term rentals, We are all four. clear regulation around it. And to me, the way forward would be to support a working group that would allow that to happen. |
| 02:13:41.85 | Kate Storr | In addition to that, I am also in the surprising position of being a citizen asking you please to tax me As a host, I feel like I'm happy to contribute to EOT. I think it's the right thing to do. It's the fair thing to do, and it's good for the city. And there's an opportunity here. Many other cities are already taking advantage of it. Mill Valley, our next-door neighbor, is already taking advantage of it. getting revenues that should be coming to Sasauito. And we have an opportunity to do that. We also have the opportunity to collaborate with the platforms. and require them and work with them and partner with them to remit the TOT so it doesn't become a burden on that. And that TOT money, importantly, could be used to aid in the enforcement process. And I think that's important, especially to give some recourse and relief to neighbors who are dealing with this issue. So, TOT is not just about tax. It's also about providing the resources we need to regulate this and do this correctly. Finally, We talked a little bit tonight about the enforcement, co-enforcement program. I want to call your attention to a letter that was sent to the city by Christine Gregerak, who's an attorney here in town, a land use attorney. As the host group, we did ask her to review the current ordinances as well as the current code enforcement program. That letter was sent to the city. I ask that you all review it. She found a number of legal failings in the way that we're currently approaching code enforcement. And as a citizen, I feel a lot of compassion for neighbors who feel that their rights have been trespassed and that they have had their privacy violated without due process. That's obviously something that's not in the best interest of this community. It also opens us up to liability, and it makes it even harder still to enforce the code and gives neighbors even less recourse, which is not what we want. We want neighbors to find a balance. So finally, I want to leave you with this last idea. We have successfully had task force in the past, worked through very complex issues. I feel that this is an issue that we could, again, reach out to neighbors who've posted on Nextdoor or neighbors who've appeared here who have had complaints and worked with them along with other members of the host group to come forward with regulations that would bring balance and help move this issue forward. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. |
| 02:16:21.13 | Jill Hoffman | Adrian? |
| 02:16:22.45 | Adrian Maharshan | Hi, my name is Adrian Maharshan. Full disclosure, my daughter Melanie has presented to you earlier today. But I'm not a member of the host group. I'm an observer, and I'm a resident of Sausalito. I have a home here, and I have a home business on which we pay taxes. So I won't use the full three minutes in the interest of time, but I do want to say what I've heard here is an opportunity for a balanced approach. As a resident, I would expect my council to be looking for a balanced approach, and I'm sure that's the case. There's an opportunity on the business side for the individuals and families involved in rental, but there's an opportunity on the city side for capturing some revenue around the administration and licensing of that, and that's clear. People have made the case. I want to make sure that my understanding is correct. I'll say it out loud here. I've never heard anyone who's proposing the short-term rental solution empathize with the bad apples. No one's asking for a free pass for bad apples, so the opportunity for enforcement is there, but it does require some dialogue between those who know the most about the rental end and those who know the most about the administrative end, |
| 02:16:23.36 | Jill Hoffman | Harsha. Okay. |
| 02:17:34.37 | Adrian Maharshan | So I'm going to speak in favor of the task force or the working group that will enable that dialogue to continue with the idea of the outcome being a balanced approach between enforcement of people who abuse the privilege and allowing those who do have the needs that were expressed here earlier to fulfill their opportunity to meet their needs. I personally am not engaged in Airbnb or that type of rental, but as someone close to retirement, it's an option for me that I would like to see remain on the table as I go through the process of making my decisions. So thanks for the time. Appreciate it. |
| 02:18:10.60 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Clayton Smith. . |
| 02:18:16.52 | Clayton Smith | I want to go back to the issue of the bad apple. And I think if you're particularly, and this is very true here in San Salido, that if you've had that second glass of wine down here at Salido's to wash down your tasty steak, you're taking a risk at a $10,000 to $15,000 consequence driving down Bridgeway. And I'm sure that you people are very familiar with how many people's lives have been turned upside down, some actually ruined by these fines. So when I'm looking at bad apple, when you're talking about your working group, These minuscule dust-off fines of $100 or $200 are meaningless. You hear the stuff about the party houses. And the reason why you must deal with this with the most severe way is because otherwise you're not going to be able to provide the opportunity for what the people in this room want as a benefit. And they've outlined all the benefits, and I could talk my own experiences in other towns, the wonderful benefit of not having to stay in a hotel. So you, I think, need to think about if your police department is required to come out and service a citation for disturbing the peace. That should be treated, I think, to the landlord with the same severity as the guy with the second glass of wine. I think it's not unreasonable that if someone is actually abusing this privilege, $10,000, $20,000 fines, liens against their property, should be put upon them. And I think it will provide a very clear message that the greater benefit that could be enjoyed by these people will not be disturbed by crappy landlords. And I will say there are a lot of crappy landlords in this world. I think a lot of people here know that. Somebody have their radio on out there? Thanks. The other thing I wanted to say is that in Mill Valley what we've done is we have dealt with the issue of the absentee landlord. And when you have a congested, principally residential neighborhood where you have houses all packed together, you might consider as part of this working group proposal to make it so that you actually have a person who is a responsible party in residence at the location while people are coming and going. Thank you. |
| 02:20:13.53 | Ron Albert | . |
| 02:21:07.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Alessandro Gallo in... Jeff Chase, yeah, and Jesus. And then we'll finish up with Wes. |
| 02:21:24.97 | Alessandro Gallo | Hi, I'm a member of the Sassalito Host Group, but I also set up a larger group of hosts in Marin Sonoma Napa. We talk to each other, exchange... and we want to set up a common, sensible code of conduct. So I wanted to briefly say that we support the community a creation of a working group And I wanted to address some of the issues that you talked about in, for example, the noise management. Thank you. Noise is one of them. these issues are talked about in every city. And It is true that there are horror stories, but I don't think that we should take those horror stories and deny other people who are behaving correctly, and that's the great majority of hosts and guests. We should not deny them the opportunity to continue with short term rentals and the the The collection of TOT could also be a revenue for enforcing those cases, for which there are already laws in place, and residents have to abide those laws. I actually happened to live next door to a house with parties, but they are residents, and so why should it be different for short-term rentals than it is. The same laws should apply. So that's really my main point. So to do with traffic, with noise, with garbage or other concerns. Thank you. Thank you. Justin? Thank you. |
| 02:23:16.04 | Jeffrey Chase | Jeff? |
| 02:23:20.24 | Jeffrey Chase | Hi, thank you again. And Jeff Jacob Chase is my name, my dad's name Chase. He was a city councilman in Southfield, Michigan. So I feel an attachment for doing this. I'll go full jubilee for a moment. So the solution is, this is in, this will be in a few months, Leviticus 25, 10, which is everybody gets an equal amount, an equal portion throughout the land, and it has different rules for cities, different rules for suburbs, Linda, and different rules for the country. I suggest everybody read this, maybe this issue will be finished by the time we get to that. Now, |
| 02:24:02.70 | Jeffrey Chase | I host quite a few people on my boat and I was doing it with a group called Couchsurfers, so that way I wouldn't have to deal with money. And I'm trying to renounce renouncing at the moment, I don't feel like I need to continue doing this. But Couchsurfers is a free site. and it's not like Airbnb, we do it, I'm doing it on the water, and now I've been trying to do something called, it's called Workaway, And work away is when somebody comes and works. and you give them food and you give them shelter or sailing lessons. Right? I'm not sure. I want to say that I've researched the number of people who are living in the houses in Sausalito and the number of people is going down as the square footage of the houses goes up. And there's many elderly people, elders, let's call them elders, out there who would like not to live alone. Wouldn't it be nice if they had someone to share their place with. I lived in the Philippines and when somebody got rich, he had 12 people living in his house. Here in America, we have all of our labor-saving devices, so we have one person in a big house and maybe not even there all the time. So, One last thing, I'll bring this back to a person named Abraham, who's the father not only of the Israelites, of all the Christians and the Muslims as well. And I'm not saying that he's not attached to Brahmin too. That he let. People come in from the north and the south and the west and the east because one might be an angel in disguise. So I'm encouraging people to share. If anybody wants to help me renounce renouncing, we've got some really good apples there. I'll take barter bucks. If somebody wants to leave cash on the table, that's OK too. All right? Shalom, shalom. |
| 02:25:57.60 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right. Yes. |
| 02:26:03.40 | Jesus | Hi, Jesus. I feel it goes all the way back to God's second commandment of loving thy neighbor as thyself. If you've got a beautiful home that you're, that you, that has God blessed you with, and you... feel like you want to share your love with another traveler. Like, it's just like, when you share your love with them, they give that love back and you're both opening each other's hearts to love more and to be that reflection of love to another, to your neighbors, They like. They're not. They need to open up and learn to love and open their homes and share that love with people. And like, Me. I live on a boat. And when travelers come through, I see them with backpacks, and I offer them a place to stay. I like to get to know them and share my love with them, find out where they've been. Basically, there's a bunch of boats out there that people live on, and we're a part of the community as well. and like it's I feel it's a big part of love for money uh that is going on when you guys are wanting to tax the community as well and like it's i feel it's a big part of love for money uh that is going on when you guys are wanting to tax and take people's money for them loving another brother or sister that's traveling through town like i've got a botel of love for love |
| 02:27:44.81 | Jesus | And it's open for anybody. And I know several people out there that have got a bowtel for love just as well as I do. Thank you. |
| 02:27:56.74 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. We've learned a new word. Yes, Wes. Learned something new at city council. Yes. |
| 02:28:05.82 | Wesley Renzes | My name is Wesley Renzes and I've lived here in Sausalito in this community since 1976. It's a few years. And I'm totally for the working group that we've been talking about all evening. And I am so big in this new economy, such as what Uber has done to the economy, namely as to get a ride rather than have a couple of drinks and drive. Anyway, as far as Uber and short-term rentals, one aspect we haven't talked about was the retailers in our community, such as the various places I've spoken to, which is the people at High Five Nail Salon, the people at Fen Yang, the people at Louie's Deli, the people at Chibo, the people at F3, the people at Seafood Peddler, the people at Sauce Lator Market, the people at Dario's. All these retailers are all appreciative of the extra business that comes in via Airbnb. Thank you. |
| 02:28:27.64 | Ron Albert | and she was like, |
| 02:28:55.75 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right. Thank you. I have no more speaker cards. Was any? Looks like someone was yes or? This will be our last speaker, unless there's... |
| 02:29:11.04 | Marvin Hovatter | give you the answer. |
| 02:29:11.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:29:11.88 | Marvin Hovatter | you |
| 02:29:11.93 | Jill Hoffman | You're the only one. |
| 02:29:12.05 | Marvin Hovatter | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:29:12.30 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:29:12.39 | Marvin Hovatter | Hi, I'm Marvin Hovatter, 25-year resident here. I own a vacation home up in Lake Tahoe, and we see this, |
| 02:29:12.40 | Jill Hoffman | I don't know. |
| 02:29:21.97 | Marvin Hovatter | All these issues going on, and I would encourage the city council to take a look at what's going on up there. It's interesting because there's a California side and there's a Nevada side. I'm on the Nevada side. Just a couple of points, I'm not going pro and con here really, We are licensed, we are registered with the county, We pay... The occupancy tax? It is a volunteer thing. I just did it today. I keep very meticulous records. But I could just easily write that check half of what I paid. So enforcement of the actual amount of money that you're going to pay is going to be completely voluntary. I just want to make a bet before somebody says we're going to have a lot of money coming in, you're going to have voluntary coming in. One more point, we are responsible for the noises. The first time the sheriff comes out, it's a warning. The second time the sheriff comes out, I, as the renter, get billed $500. And there's no way to pass that back. So I would encourage you, just throw that out there. Again, if you might look at the two, areas up there, South Lake Tahoe, and then go over to Zebra Cove around the Hill area. And you can learn a lot about their experience with vacation rentals, both pro and con, mostly con. It really is. Thank you. |
| 02:30:37.96 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, at this point, since we have no further public comment, I'll bring it back up here for city council discussion on this issue. I guess we have two issues to talk about. The first one is whether or not we want to direct staff to continue the code enforcement program, at least to the current budgeted amount, which was $50,000. And then the second one is whether or not we want to form a working group. Does anybody want to start? I'll start, and then I might bring it back to me at the end if I have additional comments. I would suggest that we direct staff to continue the code enforcement program to the current budgeted amount of $50,000. The second thing, you know, I would suggest is that we form a task group, a task force subject to the Brown Act, subject to notice requirements that to look at this issue. And that's not to say that we would implement a program for short term rentals. It would be to look at the issue and come back to the city council. with a proposal on a working ordinance. And I would expect that all of the issues that we've talked about tonight would be included as subjects for the working group. that they would look at impacts to neighborhood, that they would work to lessen the impacts on certain ways to lessen the impact on certain neighborhoods, that they would come with a plan of the ease of collection of TOT, whether that's working agreements with the platforms that people are renting through for automatic payment of TOT to the city, Um, that, the enforcement aspect of it would be addressed and that substantial fines would be issued and permits would be revoked. for problem houses and people that aren't complying with the ordinance that we come up with. That it only be a pilot program. And That would be my recommendation. Anybody else? |
| 02:32:46.67 | Jill Hoffman | Go ahead, yeah. |
| 02:32:49.69 | Ray Withy | And I think Sam Penrose put this very well, which is the, there's genuine interest on each side here. And so, I pretty much agree with everything the mayor said there. In particular, let's deal with number one, enforcement. So I think there's probably agreement up here to continue enforcement. So then we're looking for you guys to come back when this enforcement program is finished or this, to really make some concrete suggestions around enforcement, including the size of the penalties so that we're not running enforcement at a loss. When it comes to, you know, right now we have I think our ordinance is very, very clear. Short-term rentals is not allowed in Sausalito. I remember, though I wasn't up on city council at the time, but I just happened to be in the audience there when the Um. the city council was debating relaxing its rules during the America's Cup. And other than the few people who were really on the America's Cup committee that this council, before my time, had set up, every comment from the audience was not to let it happen. So here we are today where, for now, two separate agenda items, which is about enforcement of an existing ordinance Um... We've had members of the audience and the group that you have formed hear dominating the discussion and indicating that the this would be good for a social leader. And I get it. I get the share of an economy. I get all the good reasons why it's occurring. Thank you. But I can assure you, if we sent out a flyer to the community right now that actually said the city council is – moving ahead, start a workshop to actually legalize short-term rentals. My gut says that you would be substantially outnumbered by a very vast number of people coming to say no. Now, I may be wrong. Because here, what the wishes of the overall community is probably the most important thing, including yourselves. So I support, and I want to be very clear, I support item number three. which is to appoint a task force working group to conduct a forum where we can listen for where we can listen... from a wide a group of our residents as possible. And I'm very worried about going in with the presumption that we are going to legalize this instead of going in to seek the input from yourselves and from a wide group of people. Because if there's, in general, a balance that a majority of the folks in town want to do this, I'm supportive of it. But right now, my radar says that is absolutely not the case. But I'm willing to be corrected. I may be wrong. |
| 02:36:52.94 | Unknown | you Well, I'll go ahead and tell you. Sure. |
| 02:36:55.74 | Unknown | I want to thank everyone for both the civil and articulate discussion, uh, articulation of your views on this. Um, I tend to agree with, um, representative with the, and we see it on issues. We get one group and then we have 200 waiting in home in the next session we have, we'll get the rest of them. Uh, and to remind everybody, not only has this, uh, the short term rental. been the law for years, but we had the discussions around America's Cup. and clearly, It was very difficult to have it suspended for a few weeks, much less time. So people need to be aware of that. I think, and I do appreciate the idea of the shared economy that you all have, lifestyles where you'd like to rent out your home and fly and be in other places. But a lot of what we see and a lot of the residents are more interested in community than in shared economy. We're not so much interested in the money, they're interested in how it is to know their neighbors, who's going to live there I think that's the higher priority. Um, The TOT is important. By the way, I think we do have a mechanism for collecting it. And I'm sure if you stop by and talk to Danny, he will help you do that even though you haven't registered. So we can't collect it. the TOT, if you're interested. But I think the important part is that we're mostly interested in the community. The part that really affects me is we're 50% renters here. We had, I think our second speaker talked about how that particular house was changed. I think our renters are very susceptible. We have no rent control, they have no rights. When- As landlords decide that they can rent this, and of course we know this is about money. You can already rent it to roommates, but you can make four or five times the amount by renting it on Airbnb. I think owners, have that and I'm very concerned about that we're gonna lose our housing stock We also have our housing element. And as we lose our housing stock, we'll be, no one wants to build more, but we don't want to give it away. We want it for our teachers, police, or whatever it might be. I have no problem, again, with the task force. I think you guys talk about working group. I tend to, with three, I think we need to flesh out. I think people need to be aware at home that there's a growing movement on this. Take a look at it. and if anything were to be done, we have to look at it. I would really, in showing good faith, We realize and I think everyone realizes both sides how difficult the enforcement is and and If we, and it would be a show of good faith on the hosting group, if we could get support on Senator McGuire's SB 593, that would really allow reporting that would really obviate any of these needs for enforcement that would get all the data that would really be not. I think it would be twofold. I think it would represent to the council in the community that, the hosting group is really, to address the issues and it would take out a big enforcement part. So I encourage the hosting group to consider that. Thank you. Okay. |
| 02:40:02.73 | Heather Laporte | Yeah. |
| 02:40:05.06 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 02:40:05.09 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 02:40:05.21 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 02:40:05.26 | Unknown | Go ahead. |
| 02:40:05.69 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 02:40:06.58 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, so when I look at this, I think of the golden rule. And I... I like going next door and I know my neighbor's name. And if I need help, they're there for me. If they need help, I'm there for them. It's a sense of community. I think that one of the things that concerns me is when I hear stories like we heard tonight where we have a renter who's renting. He's basically said, I'm moving out. And the owner lives in the East Bay. I'm out because the unit above me is is is an Airbnb and I can't sleep and it's a nuisance neighbor and you know the the it's it's really I think folly to think that we can rely on our current ordinances and basically deplete our police resources to enforce someone else's profit model you know I if with regards to if we go with number three to form this task force we we must put teeth in Enforcement, I mean trust me if you if you want anything like this to to To move forward we must have enforcement. We must have enforcement that is not just dependent on a TOT fund. It's got to be really hitting the owner. I think off the top of my head, I can't imagine moving forward with something that wouldn't be owner-occupied. So I also heard comments about a shadow that we're pushing them in a shadow situation right now without regulation. But I think even with regulation, we are going to have some shadows. We're going to have people who try to dodge the TOT piece. So we're going to have to take a look at that. I support continuing the enforcement to the 50 grand. I think that makes a lot of sense. Regarding the task force, I guess one of the concerns I had tonight, and I talked with the host group, and I really appreciate their work, and I appreciate them reaching out to me. But nonetheless, we entered this discussion with a packet in our task force that was making an advocacy for Airbnb. And I think that it would have been more balanced to reach out to some of those folks who have suffered from this with regards to nuisance neighbors or losing rentals and gotten some more balanced perspective and presentation. Had known you know I would have perhaps given some names but I get back to balance we need to find a balance we need to find a way to help those on a restricted income who want to rent out a room in their house to be able to do that but at the same time we need to protect our renters we need to protect our communities and our neighborhoods that are suffering with this nuisance noise parking losing our rentals our affordable housing stock i think in closing the task force really needs to be we need to have that representative of the community not not biased it's very important that this is going to be well we I'd like to see some folks there who it reflects the spectrum and finally I think with regards to HCD and our housing element because I don't want to fall out of compliance. I think we should also contact HCD, maybe have staff contact HCD with respect to weighing in on Airbnb as well. |
| 02:43:45.97 | Unknown | Thank you. Well, |
| 02:43:48.17 | Jill Hoffman | Line two and three. Councilman Malani. you |
| 02:43:53.72 | Unknown | Well, first of all, Sausalito, 50% are rentals. And by the way, our population now is less now than it was 10 years ago. So it isn't a matter of us growing. And yet, if you look at it, about 23% of the population is over 65. It's one of the oldest in percentage-wise. And we're living longer. So the desire as we get older to have someone in the house, not only as a supplement but also as an aid, is a benefit. I think we should continue the code enforcement, the money that we put aside for that. But I still. really believe that The only way it's gonna work here in Sausalito is if the person that's living in the house It has to be in that house when you're renting these out. Uh... You could take Mill Valley, Tiburon, Belvedere, Sausalito for a renter is the most desirable place. Much different. Can hop on a ferry and get into the city. All of these things that really point to Sausalito being the best location for this. As far as events, San Francisco is a very cosmopolitan city. It's going to never mind the Super Bowl. In the future, it will always have big events. that will bring a lot of people into our area. So I really think. that we should. not even hesitate. and just make sure that it's occupied by the owner So at least they have an investment in it. They're going to make sure that it isn't gutted. It isn't a lot of noise. Uh, And for that reason, I think that's very important. A task force. It's okay, you can do it. I think you're going to come down with the same results that I just said. And in general, if I was collecting TLT, It's not an easy thing, especially in a society where now it seems that greed is very well accepted. So if they can get away with it, they will. So I think it's time for us to shape up our community and how we handle people that are coming in. Not to enjoy our community, not to abuse our community. Thank you. |
| 02:46:42.55 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thanks. All right, so I think, Yeah, sure, yeah, especially the enforcement part. |
| 02:46:50.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:46:50.11 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Yeah. So let me have a crack at crafted emotion because I would argue that if you're going to discuss, you know, and get a white community group together to discuss the issue, you're going to be discussing whether, you know, you want to change our ordinance or you don't. And if you're going to change it, under what circumstances? So some sort of merger of two and three, I think, can be accomplished, Madam Mayor. So why don't I move then to direct staff to continue the code enforcement program through the term of the currently financed amount, and to report back on ways to enforce cost-effectively, including but not limited to considering a change of the penalties. That's number one. And two, to appoint a task force working group of a diverse membership of the community to conduct a forum or forums for a community dialogue about this issue to ask the question whether we should change our ordinance to allow short-term rentals, and if in fact we did, and if so, what would be the restrictions and the policies to regulate those? And I think that hopefully encompasses pretty much everything. |
| 02:48:46.58 | Heather Laporte | I have a clarification on that because that was kind of long. I just want to clarify. So you're not appointing a task force. You're appointing a task force to do a public forum regarding whether to legalize short-term rentals. |
| 02:49:06.60 | Ray Withy | And if so, what would be the terms? Okay. And the reason is let's hear from the community. Yeah. Okay. A wide range. |
| 02:49:07.85 | Heather Laporte | Okay. Okay. Yeah, okay. |
| 02:49:13.04 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:49:13.28 | Heather Laporte | Okay, and I guess I would, I don't know if I need to do this regarding number three, but if we could include a, for the forum, for forum input, to include some form, some requirement of resident, whether they state their address or state whether they're a resident and state their address. Just because I don't want people coming in from San Francisco or from all over coming to a forum and swinging things one way or the other. and we can do it just by speaker cards I mean you know as people give input they can just include their address |
| 02:50:01.96 | Jill Hoffman | I think there's a constitutional issue on that. But we can certainly, the members of the task force, |
| 02:50:11.30 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 02:50:11.31 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:50:11.33 | Heather Laporte | Well, not for addresses, is there? |
| 02:50:11.35 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I think so, yeah. |
| 02:50:14.92 | Mary Wagner | You can't require that someone lists their address as being able to speak or being able to participate in the meeting. |
| 02:50:21.74 | Heather Laporte | Okay. in the meeting. Okay. Oh, we can request it. We can volunteer it. Perfect. We can request it. |
| 02:50:24.68 | Mary Wagner | Oh. Oh, we can request it. We can volunteer it. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:50:27.53 | Ray Withy | Thank you. With that very long motion that I made, I mean, basically, does staff know what that was? Yeah. Okay. Okay. |
| 02:50:36.83 | Heather Laporte | So would this task force work, I mean, a task force is how many people, obviously, I mean, will there be council liaisons on this? And we're looking at one, oh, I can't go with that. That's awful loosey goosey. Well, let's wait until final round. |
| 02:50:57.82 | Unknown | Well, on that subject, I don't think it needs to be part of it, but I would recommend that the agenda set a group go back and come to it with a proposal to Council and that we approve it, but that they can put it together. We don't need to deal with that tonight. |
| 02:51:01.19 | Heather Laporte | Yeah. |
| 02:51:11.98 | Heather Laporte | Well, then I have an amendment to the motion that we direct staff to come back to the council with a recommendation on what the task force would look like and the forum requirements that they would hold. |
| 02:51:37.93 | Ray Withy | So I can accept that amendment. |
| 02:51:41.09 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 02:51:41.17 | Heather Laporte | Okay. |
| 02:51:41.26 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:51:41.92 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 02:51:41.97 | Jill Hoffman | With that. |
| 02:51:42.35 | Unknown | that I'll second the motion. |
| 02:51:42.77 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 02:51:44.40 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All in favor? Aye. |
| 02:51:46.57 | Unknown | Aye. |
| 02:51:48.14 | Jill Hoffman | Motion carries. All right, on to, oh, yeah, we're going to take a break. Taking a five-minute break. |
| 02:51:53.41 | Unknown | Bye. Thank you. Okay. |
| 02:51:54.22 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 02:51:54.25 | Unknown | . |
| 02:51:54.30 | Tammy Blanchard | Well, we're going to be |
| 02:51:54.67 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:52:02.27 | Jill Hoffman | All right, I call us back to order. My first announcement is that because of the late hour, we are moving item, what was item four to the meeting. C which was the on the consent calendar that became six E. The pay station equipment issue, we are moving that to the February 9th consent calendar. I encourage anybody that has questions about this to talk to the relevant staff members or police about this prior to the February 9th. |
| 02:52:37.43 | Unknown | Don't we get to make that decision or we don't vote on a change in the agenda? Nope. Okay. |
| 02:52:38.02 | Jill Hoffman | you get to know. |
| 02:52:42.29 | Jill Hoffman | Nope. Okay. Thank you for your interest, Councilmember Theodore. |
| 02:52:44.54 | Unknown | Your interest, councilman. |
| 02:52:45.97 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 02:52:50.38 | Heather Laporte | I'm fine with that. |
| 02:52:51.46 | Jill Hoffman | I'm fine with that. Thank you. |
| 02:52:53.57 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 02:52:55.78 | Jill Hoffman | And our next... You don't like it? |
| 02:52:55.98 | Heather Laporte | next you don't like it you can pull it off the agenda |
| 02:52:57.23 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:53:00.55 | Jill Hoffman | And moving on to our next presentation. is an update on the Richardson Bay vessel anchoring and public safety report from Captain Robacher. |
| 02:53:13.36 | Ron Albert | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:53:25.36 | John Rohrabacher | Well, good evening again, Mayor and members of the council. Actually, Lieutenant Frost is going to deliver the report, but I wanted to introduce him first, because for the last several years, you've known him as Sergeant Bill Frost, and so recently promoted to lieutenant and well-deserved promotion. Bill's got an extensive... background of course leading the disaster preparedness and emergency operations center for the city but also in our Marine Patrol program. And Bill has been in charge of that for about the last seven years or so and has probably more time on the water. AND I THINK IT'S A a better knowledge of what's happening in Richardson Bay than anybody else in the department. So I'm going to step aside and let Bill make the presentation, but I'll be standing by in case you have any questions of me. |
| 02:54:16.35 | Lieutenant Frost | Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the council, and distinguished city staff. I'll be presenting today about a report on Richardson Bay anchoring regarding Sausalito waters the Anchorage as well as a public safety report and the aspects of what we are dealing with. Little bit of history is Sausalito first started seeing waterfront community in an anchor out population back in the 1840s when the gold rush happened and the prospectors were coming from across the country. And they first found And they first found a welcoming place along our shorelines. Little by little, The waterfront population and the Ankara population remain somewhat stable and somewhat present for the next 80 or somewhat years with very few people actually on the waterfront but always present. That started changing about 1960s when a more free spirited or bohemian type of lifestyle was popular in the United States and across and they kind of came to the waterfront of Sausalito. Population pretty much stayed stable. until 1986 when they saw approximately 70 to 90 vessels in. Richardson Bay, the vast majority were in the Anchorage. Very few boats were in actually the city waters of the Sausalito. 2008 rolls around, we had approximately 98 vessels. Not a major change, still, the vast majority were in. county waters within the anchorage with very few vessels in Sausalito. 2015 rolls around. We have seen a dramatic increase, not only vessels in the anchorage of Richardson Bay, but within Sausalito waters. approximate count within the last year we've had 211 to 240 vessels at different times within Richardson Bay totally varying from 65 to over 80 vessels within Sausalito waters. So here's a view of 2010, a grand view of Richardson Bay. See the line right through the middle where there's no vessels, that is the channel. Anything closer to the shore, those are Sausalito waters. Anything further out? towards the bay is Anchorage and County water. So it gives you an idea what we are dealing with. So this is 2010. We want to give you a perspective of what it looks like today, and we asked our friends at the California Highway Patrol to fly over and provide us with this perspective. |
| 02:56:57.24 | Marvin Hovatter | that was set up correctly a second ago. |
| 02:57:07.75 | Jesus | And here we go. |
| 02:57:09.98 | Lieutenant Frost | CHP being CHP, the gave us about a 20 minute video. I'm only gonna show a few minutes of it, but just to give you perspective, The lines have not changed. the number of individuals on the waterfront and in Sausalito waters have changed. And as you can see, the channel is still clearly marked, but if you start looking in our waters, The Sausalito waters have seen more vessels showing up and in spots and places they were never in beforehand. |
| 02:57:42.99 | Lieutenant Frost | This was also taken at a very slow time of year in 2015. This is in December. We had many more boats in Richardson Bay and in Sausalito waters during the summer months. And this is working from the far north of our city, towards the south. |
| 02:58:11.78 | Lieutenant Frost | In such little waters, you're going to start seeing as we go south. the boats that are beginning to occur. 10. 15 years ago These vessels were not anchored in this area in our waters. This is a relatively new phenomenon. that has been occurring just in recent years. |
| 02:58:38.64 | Lieutenant Frost | CHP is going to do a little pattern and they're going to show a complete perspective of the anchorage and all the boats and of Richardson Bay and the Anchor Out community. |
| 02:59:13.73 | Lieutenant Frost | That is still the channel right down the middle. |
| 02:59:15.63 | Heather Laporte | It's so interesting that there's nothing on the other side. |
| 02:59:15.65 | Lieutenant Frost | Thanks. |
| 02:59:22.18 | Lieutenant Frost | It's depending on what areas you're in, the water could be very shallow, but it's also, I don't know. You have vessel on the other side of the anchorage. It's shallow, but also you don't have as many aspects services, it's not as easy to make sure. And you also don't have other people in the community of Anchor to live in a kind of a grouping. |
| 02:59:49.97 | Lieutenant Frost | Why do we have this increase? Well, one thing is in 2010, a lot of different anchorages throughout the Bay Area started closing down for environmental reasons, and they started coming to Richardson Bay because there's a belief in the waterfront community that you could go into Richardson Bay and there's no rules apply. You could put your boat in there, and you could stay there for as long as you want. That is throughout the maritime environment, We have heard that people have told individuals in the Sacramento Delta area hey, if you're being kicked out of this anchorage, go to Richardson Bay. You could stay there. Also, there's been several other boat yards and storage yards that specialized in storing vessels that have closed down. And people have bought boats for cheap. brought them to Sausalito and then deposited them in our waters. not only have they placed them in the water but i could count probably approximately ten to fifteen boats that have been intercepted upon our shoreline on trailers in parked in our city parks that we have towed away before they could actually get into our waterways. Those vessels, the worst registration on one of those vessels I saw was in about 1978. Thank you. The locations, the vast majority of the vessels that are in Richardson Bay are anchored in the anchorage which falls under the county of Murray. However, in the last few years, larger numbers, as we talked about, have come into the Sausalito waters. Areas such as the Turney Basin and the waters off of Dunphy Park were once virtually free of any vessels. When I first started here in 1996, you did not see any Boats. our waterways in those locations. We now have seen numerous vessels come in. Case in point. Photograph of the Tourney Basin in 1995. Not the best photo, but you can see there's one catamaran sailing out. Nobody else anchored in that area other than in the marinas. 2010, same thing, Tourney Basin, you have two boats that are tied up. Fast forward to 2015, you have over 25 boats. This, and once again, December 2015, a slow part of the year. If we actually went into June, you would probably see another 10 to 15 boats that were out there. different areas closer to shore tied together. as well as wooden structures that we're holding two boats at a time, serving as basically a portable pier, And also, what in storage devices that people put out there that were holding three, four, or five kayaks that were out there. People were using it for boat storage. What regulations do we have and what can we do prevent this from happening there's two current regulations that are on the books One is 3.04.04. one zero of Richardson Bay that means 72 a Mariner could moored in Richardson Bay waters for 72 hours without the harbor master's permission In addition, we have 16.04.020 of the Municipal Code. which says in Sausalito waters, you could only moor for 10 hours without the written permission from the chief of police. Well, People are thinking, well, if we have these codes, why do we have these issues? Well, there's a couple reasons why we have these issues. Number one, in the past, it's been a case-by-case situation why these things have been enforced. And the reasons why is insufficient staffing. RBRA is basically a one and a half person organization. and they don't have enforcement powers. law enforcement. Sausal PD does not have enough staff to be manning a full-time maritime patrol, so we are only able to address issues when we can, And the sheriff's office has not always had their Marine Patrol unit as a full time unit in Richardson Bay they're responsible for all county waters and at one They weren't a full-time unit. They were patrolling as needed. There was also a strong belief that the community the waterfront community and the Sausalito community do not view the anchored vessels as a problem. And there was a concern that if any enforcement were to occur, there would be negative public opinions That would be put against The city. politicians. as well as law enforcement. And in certain cases, some citations that were issued were dismissed because of a lack of proper documentation efforts. Well, as we've seen more and more boats come into our waterways, we've seen more public safety concerns. And we've seen increases in such things as violent crime. |
| 03:04:21.76 | Ron Albert | and |
| 03:04:25.56 | Lieutenant Frost | quality of life. theft crimes. environmental concerns and navigational hazards. We're gonna start out with violent crimes, just a very small, sample we had a subject discharge a shotgun in our waters towards a kayaker We had an individual who was attacked and stabbed at a dinghy dock as he was attempting to return to his dinghy to go to his vessel that was anchored in our waters. We've had incidences of domestic violence And we've had other Batteries, assaults, and crimes against people. Many of these do not get reported, but we do learn of them third hand, fourth hand. And we've seen more and more when more vessels are in our water. So we're dealing with this more. It's taken more of our resources. quality of life, narcotics usage. There is not well not. The rumors of meth labs on every single boat in the anchorage is not true. Narcotics are out on the waterfront just like they are anywhere. and on numerous vessel searches and boardings, we do find narcotics paraphernalia. we have a issue regarding alcohol abuse and narcotics abuse in society and that's seen on the water, which has resulted in instances of people that are too intoxicated to be operating vessels or to be even out on their own without proper care and guidance on the water. One situation right there is the individual who is being contacted and put through field sobriety tests right there. He had a long history of alcohol related crimes and operating under the influence. Four months after he was arrested for voting under the influence, we recovered him. He had drowned because he was once again operating under the influence and he fell. The number of deaths we have seen along our waterfront and in our waters and even in the anchorage we have seen an increase from suspicious deaths to individuals on the waterfront who have had too much to drink and fall in. die to individuals who have died of numerous natural causes or long term diseases on boats and are not discovered right away. to drownings. A few years ago, Richardson Bay had more deaths on the waterfront in the Port of Los Angeles. deaths. For every one report that we take, there's probably about 10 reports that people Don't report to us, but thefts have occurred. And what do we see? We see vessel thefts. We're not talking about just rowboats and dinghies. We've had sailboats taken. We have kayaks taken. every kind of vessel in the world take it. thefts from the marinas and the waterfronts. They're not just stealing from boats. from the marinas boats and from the anchored out boats. They're stealing from things that are on them and stealing from the grounds and the properties of our marinas. and along the waterfront. and the thefts from vessels. Individuals have boarded vessels that are moored and are docked in our harbors. and have taken personal items such as laptops, computers, electronics, and numerous other things. As more boats are on our waterways, the more crimes we see upon our waterfront. Environmental issues, these are all photographs we have taken. We have seen unsecured, unsafe debris on deck, as two of these vessels have shown. These during storms, during bad weather, or as people moving about, these items fall off into the waterways and pollute our waterways, causing a sick environment furthermore. wildlife as well as for the people that are using for recreational purposes. And one photo sees a suitcase full of garbage that we found submerged. in the waterway that we had to recover after it had burst open and polluted the entire bay. While during our enforcement efforts, we have routinely found buckets of human waste on the decks of vessels out there. Coast Guard officers have worked with us, have declared some of the vessels they've boarded here worse than the boats they've boarded. when they were, contacting individuals that were trying to come into the United States from Haiti or Cuba while they were stationed We've also seen vessels that are being used as garbage bins. These are vessels that are stacked to the gills with every kind of piece of debris and garbage And we have photographs that the Coast Guard provided I couldn't find of a vessel, two vessels tied together And the only thing on those vessels' decks were bags of garbage, and they were piled about three feet high. In addition, All that stuff, as I talked about, finds a way into the bay. Navigational hazards, these are a few things that we've taken just from our waters, we've dealt Boats that have sank. capsized boats Vessels that have run aground is the one behind Barbacci. that was just barely able Uh, standing up with one bad line and a hope and a prayer. Vessels that are blocking the boat ramps. We've had numerous complaints of people wanting to launch their vessels from the tourney boat ramp that can't. because there are too many boats in our waters in that area as well as too many boats that are tied up to either the dinghy dock or the condemned docks. That photo of me looking at that sail That was submerged in our waters. While we were on patrol, that hit our patrol boat's props, and it was like hitting a rocket about 20 miles per hour. THE END OF THE END OF THE If we were in a different type of vessel and if people were not in proper safety gear or not doing the proper safety devices, if that was a recreational boater, somebody could have could have fouled an engine and caused other injuries to property. or to individuals. We're seeing vessels that aren't properly anchored during bad weather. are beginning to drag anchor. They find themselves on the Belvedere Cove Belvedere shoreline on our shorelines are bumping and crashing into other vessels. Lasso? individuals have created unmarked mooring balls and underwater hazards. you'll be going down and you'll see a life jacket in the middle of the water. So you'll start searching for a person who's possibly in the water and you just find out that's how somebody marks the hit a mooring ball. And underneath that life jacket is a chain. vessels could easily Foul their crops in that chain. and now we have a disabled vessel. So how are we going to combat this? We've thought and we've come up with a future plan in which we implement a program that would gain community compliance with our municipal code in order to address the growing number of anchored vessels within our Sausalito waters and the associated public concerns that are related to them. What our goal is, our goal is not to move the anchor out population from our waters to another jurisdictions waters. that is not our goal at all our goal is to gain the anchor out's willing cooperation to that adherence to the municipal code to increase our public safety and the quality of life for everybody in the Sausalito community, especially on the waterfront. How are we gonna meet this goal? There's no one way to meet this goal. We have to have a well-rounded approach. And part of this is we're gonna do outreach to community leaders, advise them of what we wanna do and why we wanna do it. We're gonna hold community meetings, get a group of individuals together and explain the purposes and the reasons why We want to do this and what benefits it is to the community and for them. We're going to distribute information regarding the municipal code. We can't hold people accountable for rule. or for laws if they are not aware of it. So we're going to make people aware of it through education. We're gonna go through and in the vessels in our water, we're gonna post compliance notices on vessels. The Marine Patrol unit will document where vessels are provide them with information about if they are in violation or not, and about information regarding the rules. And afterwards, WE'RE GOING TO ENTRY THE We're gonna do compliance efforts through warnings as well as citations. But that is the last aspect of it. All those tools. methods are going to be used to accomplish this goal. What's our focus and who we're gonna partner with? Where number one, our focus is gonna be, first of all, vessels that are being stored or being used as trashed, debris. our property storage in our Sausalito waters. Those are our first vessels we're gonna look at. After we address that issue, we're going to move to those vessels that are inhabited and people are living on. And who's we're going to partner with? Well, we're going to partner with our maritime Law enforcement. partners such as the Richardson Bay Regional Agency who have stated that they are interested in this program and want to partner with us in this program. We're gonna work with the Marin County Sheriff's Office as well as the US Coast Guard. We're in the process of arranging a meeting with these organizations to see what each agency could bring to the table to solve this issue. Because if it's not a well-rounded effort, it's going to be playing like ping pong. votes gonna go from one side of the channel to the other side of the channel we're gonna address it as one whole group to find a lasting solution So at this time, I welcome any questions from the council. |
| 03:13:42.40 | Unknown | Thank you. Congratulations on your well-deserved promotion. Thank you. |
| 03:13:45.93 | Lieutenant Frost | Thank you. |
| 03:13:46.97 | Unknown | Lieutenant. I in this particular plan in your presentations a little news to me why are we doing this separately from our BRA it seems like that's an additional cost to Sausalito that my understanding is we contribute to our BRA and enforcement can and should be done through them and why are we doing this separately |
| 03:14:11.42 | Lieutenant Frost | The RBRA is a governing agency. They have no enforcement powers of their own. They rely on their partner agencies to assist them in that matter. For the Anchorage area, that is what the Sheriff's Department assists them. In our waters, it would be us to assist them. |
| 03:14:28.05 | Unknown | Okay, and so in this particular effort, you've already gained the cooperation of the others and you're sharing this particular enforcement program, is that correct? |
| 03:14:38.04 | Lieutenant Frost | We have talked to the fellow law enforcement agencies. We have made them aware of what our plans are and why we are gonna be doing this. What they may do in their jurisdiction is 100% entirely up to them, but we're sharing the information. RBRA is aware of this and they want to partner with us and they're interested in the program and are going to do what they can because we want a well-rounded approach. But there's no hidden agendas here. We have spoken to these agencies and said these are the reasons why we're doing it. because we're having these issues and we must address these issues because it's not only impacting our waterfront, But with the more vessels that are out in our waters, we have more people coming into and we have to address all these issues and this is one aspect of doing |
| 03:15:22.25 | Heather Laporte | Um. Yeah. So could I see, and congratulations, Lieutenant, for your permission, and can I see the goals slide, please? So this is what threw me. I was very impressed with the data in the staff report, by the way. The detail, the codes. I've never, I mean, I've been here a long time. I've been complaining about this problem from an environmental standpoint. It's the first time that I've seen, you know, this laid out, and it's very helpful. Your statement that there are more deaths in Richardson Bay one year than the Port of Los Angeles was just a very sad statement on the conditions. So the program goals. I guess I'm I look at the Audubon's letter. I don't know if you've had a chance to take a look at that. So I'm just going to read a passage. It says, the use of public trust waters for private use, such as residential use, is contrary to the public trust. As responsibility for the public trust, it's been delegated to the city of Sausalito. It's incumbent upon the city to take affirmative action to end this residential use. And I concur with that. I think that we've got an environmental problem out there right now. And so when I'm looking at the goal of the city, |
| 03:16:15.00 | Ron Albert | Yes, I did. |
| 03:16:53.65 | Heather Laporte | I'm curious as to why our goal here is not to move the Anchor Yaut population from Sausalito's waters. We have ordinances in place. It seems to me that we would want to implement those ordinances. I was wondering if you can comment on that. |
| 03:17:15.11 | Lieutenant Frost | Well part of gaining their compliance in this is with the would be following the laws and moving their vessels and removing themselves from our waterway. However, just like in like any population center. We have to be, sensitive to the community that's out there. There are individuals that are living Jeffrey, you could answer that in a second, but please let me have a comment. Thank you. But what's going to happen is We have to be sensitive to their needs. And we can't. it makes no sense to kick everybody out at all once and not give them any resources. We have to educate them, provide them with information, And then. provide a way for them to gain compliance and for them to want to move on their own. Part of that will be us conducting enforcement efforts But, One of my mentors who's police chief of New York has once said, you cannot cite and you cannot arrest yourself out of a quality of life issue. You have to be completely well-rounded in your efforts, and you have to look at the community as a whole. So as we're going to address in creating helping the environment and clearing our waterways for public safety We're going to do it in a way that's going to be least intrusive. and most impactful while keeping the spirit of the law and the letter of the law in harmony. |
| 03:18:32.74 | Adam Politzer | Mayor Hoffman, if I can just also step in here, and I appreciate Lieutenant Frost's optimism in terms of the program's goals and your response to Councilmember Pfeiffer. But I think it's important to note really the first focus. And the first focus is consistent with RBRA's attempts or their goals two or three years ago, which is let's focus on the boats that are not occupied by people, either with debris or... or have been abandoned or have been illegally pulled into our waters to be destroyed. So let's focus there, as we all know, because we held a public forum back in November, and RBRA has been having public meetings. on their management plan which the city of Sausalito has said We're not yet in agreement with you in the management plan and we want to focus on enforcement. So we think that the first step, which we think is non-controversial, We think it's non-controversial with the five agencies that make up RBRA. We think it's non-controversial in relationship with the law enforcement agencies that will rely on to help us execute this plan and we think it's non-controversial with the people that live on the water and it moves us in the right direction to at least deal with the boats that we know are causing navigational hazards that are causing environmental concerns. and are a nuisance of a variety of sorts. I think the bigger discussion on where does the community that live on the water Do they continue to live on the water? We heard at the forum that there was folks that believed that the anchorage should be closed. That's one voice from community members. There's another voice that it should continue to be in the spirit of the Bohemians. lifestyle is to allow that. I think that discussion is going to continue And that debate and Sausalito's position and role in that, we'll hear from our community at large, but we want RBRA to actually stay in the lead in that bigger discussion and for Sassler's voice to be a little bit more. Thank you. You're more vocal. |
| 03:20:56.65 | Heather Laporte | Thank you, Adam. So how much environmental devastation have we sustained in terms of eelgrass, in terms of herring row population salmon population while we've allowed the population to to explode from 90 to over 200 |
| 03:21:14.63 | Adam Politzer | I think that the five jurisdictions have allowed that activity to happen. |
| 03:21:20.98 | Heather Laporte | I'm looking at Sausalito Waters, and the agenda item is Sausalito Adams. So I've asked a question. |
| 03:21:27.17 | Adam Politzer | We don't have the answer for that. |
| 03:21:29.47 | Heather Laporte | That is, to me, that's the primary question, is the type of environmental devastation that is incurring right now on Sausalito waters. So that, to me, is the number one question. We have laws on the books. They have not been enforced. They need to be enforced. I don't know why they have not been enforced. And we also are having a complete devastation of our environment. So I'm very concerned about this. Well, I think before it gets too easy, |
| 03:21:56.89 | Unknown | Well, I think before it gets too heated, but I think there's an assumption that there's environmental devastation. If those have been in RBRA meetings, there's been evidence that it's not any different than the rest of the Bay, and so we have to be a little careful about making assumptions about the extent of environmental damage. |
| 03:22:14.86 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, if I could get us to focus up here for a second. So the issue today, whether or not there's environmental impact and the level of it, I mean, I think we all agree there's environmental impact. The level is a discussion for another time. Um, And so the issue here today, this is just a report from Lieutenant Frost on the anchorage and the efforts. Correct. Or we asked for any action today, Adam. |
| 03:22:38.49 | Adam Politzer | There's no action, we're looking for a nod from the council to move forward with these objectives. And again, the focus on the vessels that are not occupied, and again with the emphasis of working with our partners, none of this is cost zero. So we have to come back with a proposed budget, again, working with the partners. budget that RBRA presented to the council back in May. that the council did not support. and the initial funding request was in the neighborhood of $30,000. so you know we need to continue assuming that the council gives us a nod to move forward with at least The original, the first focus there, and we'll come back. after we've talked to our partners and propose a budget to move forward to at least deal with the boats that are unoccupied. |
| 03:23:38.90 | Heather Laporte | So I have a follow-up question on that. So Lieutenant, would it be possible to create a proposal on what would be needed to enforce the ordinances in Sausalito waters? |
| 03:23:57.63 | Adam Politzer | And I'll let Bill give you the fuller picture of the response. But I think Bill's comments earlier in the presentation, that if we don't work collaboratively with the whole Bay, we'll play ping pong. We'll push people out, and then people will sneak back in or push back in, and then we'll push them out. So we need to look this collectively, but go ahead. |
| 03:24:20.24 | Heather Laporte | So I'll buy that, Adam, and as a follow-up question, how about getting a joint, you know, a proposal on how much it would cost to clean up the whole bay? |
| 03:24:34.67 | Adam Politzer | I think that's the intent. |
| 03:24:36.36 | Heather Laporte | Pardon? |
| 03:24:37.50 | Adam Politzer | I think that's the intent working with the department. |
| 03:24:39.41 | Heather Laporte | But what I'm not seeing that, though, I'm seeing goals of not to move out the anchor out population. I'm seeing a goal of, you know, just, you know, community outreach and focusing on. on removing uninhabited vessels as a primary goal. I'm not seeing anything up there to quote the Audubon letter. You know, we have The anchor outs, that use for permanent residency on public open waters is illegal. We're talking about the public trust. And we've got two ordinances on the books. And I would like to see a proposal that enforces that. How many would would Lieutenant Frass need to enforce this? How how many and in that collaboration with our BRA in the county? What would they need? What is the holistic approach to that? That's for |
| 03:25:41.65 | Adam Politzer | We would look for direction from council, but I think where staff is starting from is where RBRA has left off. So there is an RBRA workshop at the Bay Model that was held in the early spring. that was well attended, standing room only, And the consensus from that, group, was not to close the anchorage or clean it up to the degree that you may be citing from the Audubon Society's letter. It was attended by anchor outs. Let me finish. Then there have been several RBRA meetings from that workshop |
| 03:26:06.18 | Heather Laporte | It was attended by Anchor House. |
| 03:26:14.01 | Adam Politzer | Okay. Concluding with a presentation in May to the City Council, Saying here's our plan, go forward. we said we don't agree with it, or we don't think our community has yet heard of these ideas. Adam, I didn't agree with it |
| 03:26:26.62 | Heather Laporte | Adam, I didn't agree with it because they were not proposing what I'm proposing, which is cleaning up the bay. They were proposing the status quo. |
| 03:26:29.76 | Adam Politzer | So. CLEANING UP THE BAY. So we held another community forum in November, and again, we heard of diverse views from a variety of, again, probably over 250 people standing room. at the Spinnaker that night. So we're trying to move forward on at least one component that we believe at this moment in time, regardless to what position you have, is there's agreement to at least have the vessels that are unoccupied Remove. and try to prohibit any more vessels coming into the Anchorage. that can continue to impact you know this effort if the council Working with RBRA, not alone, working with RBRA wants to look at a more comprehensive program Which RBRA if they were here would argue that they have done. then we can give direction to our representative on our BRA to say that our vote is to close the Anchorage. but that's not the direction that the council has given. nor has the council been in a position to give that direction. And so this is the step to move the ball forward. which is better than what we've been watching over the last 10 years. of the population growing and becoming unsafe for the people that live there today, let alone the people that are trying to navigate through the channel. |
| 03:27:52.55 | Heather Laporte | I'm just saying we should enforce the law. That's all, Adam. |
| 03:27:55.50 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 03:27:56.87 | Ray Withy | Madam Mayor, I have a simple question of the lieutenant. Thanks Bill. What's, you, great staff report by the way. You say you've got 210 to 240 vessels overall there. 65 are in our waters currently, approximately. Of that 65, how many do you think are occupied, and how many are the storage, the debris, the, you know, what's the, do you have a sense? |
| 03:28:28.25 | Lieutenant Frost | It's hard to give specifics because it's a very transitory population. I would say approximately It is a 40-60 at 10. this time where 40 are occupied. and 60 are being utilized as storage. |
| 03:28:45.42 | Ray Withy | So you would view, therefore, a success of this program is to at least try and have the number of boats in our waters as a kickoff? |
| 03:28:56.55 | Lieutenant Frost | By removing the boats that are being there for storage, we would see a dramatic reduced amount of boats on the water. |
| 03:28:58.41 | Ray Withy | Yeah. |
| 03:29:03.32 | Lieutenant Frost | And also we must realize those boats that are being stored on the water are magnets for other individuals to come towards. So by removing those from our waterways, we'll see increased quality of life. |
| 03:29:13.28 | Ray Withy | So good start. Yes. Thank you. |
| 03:29:14.49 | Lieutenant Frost | Yeah. |
| 03:29:17.31 | Unknown | My understanding was that so many boats being in Sausalito is a recent phenomenon. And several years ago there were none. Is that pretty close to accurate? |
| 03:29:26.86 | Lieutenant Frost | There were fewer. The boats in our waters a little bit closer to the north in the area of Clipper Yacht Harbor. There's always been some vessels anchored there. However, as we move further south towards the area of Schoonmacher, |
| 03:29:28.45 | Unknown | you. |
| 03:29:41.88 | Lieutenant Frost | Dunphy Park and especially the tourney basin That area has dramatically grown in size. And that's where we have seen a lot of the storage boats or the debris boats that have been placed. |
| 03:29:54.22 | Unknown | And can you explain, do you have a theory of why it's expanded there? Because that's a significant portion of the overall growth coming into that part of Sausalito. |
| 03:30:03.29 | Lieutenant Frost | Well, the simplest issue was it was open water and people saw a place they could put their boat Other areas, we've had vessels that have been removed from. marinas and had just been placed there. Other people have come from different areas. Other anchorages have shut down. People have come into our bay. And you've gone, you know, this is a place for me drop my anchor. And then as vessels have entered the waters via our roadways being trailered in, It was an area where they could open spot where they |
| 03:30:32.66 | Adam Politzer | One addition to that, and we're also looking into this, is that the access to land has seemed to disappear from some of the other marinas so the only access now is at turning street so that's that becomes an attractive area. |
| 03:30:49.85 | Heather Laporte | And I have a follow-up about the debris boats. My concern is that unless we come with a comprehensive, you know, goal to enforce the ordinance and to, you know, remove the boats, the anchorage, and by the way, enforcing the, is it correct that enforcing the law is not getting rid of the anchorage? Enforcing the law. is actually installing an anchorage as opposed to an anchor out. In other words, the anchorage, you're allowing people to dock for 72 hours and then they move, correct? |
| 03:31:25.00 | Lieutenant Frost | Well, the Anchorage itself is an area that as Sausal Police, we don't have jurisdictional enforcement ability because that's for the county of Marin. What we're looking at is if we enforce our 10 hour regulation is they're going to be having to move where they're anchored in our waters every 10 hours. As we're looking at the situation that we're For the debris vessels, we've been dealing with the debris vessels in many different forms. However, we don't have the authority by law, statute or anything to be able to tow these vessels We have done enforcement, we've done public warning, We've contacted the Coast Guard environmental officers and they've gone with us to review the area. So we've done a comprehensive project, but Yeah. We just cannot tow a boat out of our waters. That's unlawful. Or we've issued citations. Yes, we've issued citations and given warnings. |
| 03:32:18.67 | Heather Laporte | We've issued citations, yes. We've issued citations and given warnings. Thank you, Lieutenant. Is that RBRA's responsibility? Is that their charter that they're responsible to tow that? |
| 03:32:29.25 | Lieutenant Frost | Well, The RBRA, they have to follow the same laws as we do regarding the towing of vessels. There has to be a lawful reason to tow a vessel. and justice. a violation of one of these codes is not the legal justification for towing a vessel. There's no law available for us to tow them because of these codes. |
| 03:32:49.53 | Heather Laporte | So it's my understanding, though, that the RBRA was founded to manage the Anchorage and to manage this issue. Is that your understanding? The origin? |
| 03:33:00.08 | Lieutenant Frost | The origins of the RBRA. The RBRA was founded in 1984, I believe, for the goal of coordinating the five agencies that have jurisdiction on the waters. And based on that, It was. they wanted to manage it with the philosophies of those five organizations. In order to conduct any enforcement, or to be doing towing, any of the enforcement or the safety aspect they have to work with their partner agencies and on the water That would be the sheriff's office or ourselves is we're the only maritime law enforcement on the local level |
| 03:33:37.32 | Heather Laporte | And regarding the debris boats, my concern is that if we remove those, and we're using now our police resources, our tax dollars to go in and do that, more debris boats will just take their place is my concern. And I guess, so one question is, what is your response to that? And the other question I have is, is there any way, from your slideshow, it looked like some of the debris boats were still being used as garbage bins and people were using this. Is there some degree of accountability where we can hold those accountable for setting these boats up, the debris boats? |
| 03:34:18.12 | Lieutenant Frost | Yes, there is. We do regularly enforce Richardson Bay regional agencies' debris violation, which the registered owner for that vessel has a citation issued to them. and Since we have started enforcing that approximately four years ago, we have seen a dramatic decrease in the amount of debris boats, the debris boats are still there. What happens usually is, We contact them. We, depending on the circumstance and the violation we see, they may get a warning until cleanup and one day we'll be back. or they get a citation. Usually after that first initial contact, they start cleaning up. However, if we're able to do a more holistic in which we are utilizing other laws as well as the laws we're doing now, That's going to send a message that I saw so the waters are no longer free and anybody could come in here that there are being regulated and we're not gonna see the amount of boats in our waters. |
| 03:35:12.49 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I think we're ready to take public comment now. Okay, public comment. I have no speaker cards, but I'm guessing that there are members of the public that would like to comment. So if you could approach the podium and line up, that would be much appreciated. |
| 03:35:30.72 | Yasmeen McGrane | Thank you. |
| 03:35:30.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:35:30.99 | Jeffrey Chase | Thank you. |
| 03:35:32.51 | Tammy Blanchard | Hello, City Council. |
| 03:35:32.73 | Jeffrey Chase | Yes. City Council and. Linda Pfeiffer you were talking about environmental devastation when we had the meeting over At Spinnaker's there were 29 people who spoke against the mooring plan which was proposed. to make it into a grid and take away the free anchorage There was one person from the Audubon Society at the end who, spoke against the Anchorage. So it seems like a lot of the public... is for a diversity in this community. Sausalito is a place I love, which is why I'm up here, really. Um. And thank you, Officer Farras. I loved what he said. He said we can't cite and arrest ourselves out of a quality of life issue. Um... I think what's going to have to happen is that we have to organize the Anchorage. That right now I'm dealing on a really personal level with the thefts and with domestic violence as well, and even with the deaths. I know the people who have died. And it's a It's a novel, it's not a short story, going to be possible to explain this in three minutes. butt. the way to deal with it is maybe to say that the focus, and it seemed like the focus was gonna be on the debris boats first, and I am all for that. I mean, but of course, we would, you would think it would be common sense. that we would have a chandlery or a place where people could get boat parts. There is one that opened up in Sausalito recently called Duke's. So people would be able to use parts. It's the same thing in a rural area, why there would be cars up on blocks. because those people need parts for their one car that does run. But I'm all for getting rid of the debris boats. I'm a sailor. My boat now is anchored off of Dunphy Park. It was on its side at about 7 o'clock. because it was a very low tide, I had a person that came in there and helped me with the anchors. I'm a sailor. I like to go to different places. and anchor there. The only reason why we can even Have this conversation as... that these are fiberglass boats mainly. Thank you. And they might even have pumps on them. In the marinas, they probably do. So even during the rain, every boat's going to take on some water, but it will be automatically pumped out. When... It was only wood boats, which was up until 1958, whatever, 1960, a person had to live on the boat during the wintertime or it would sink. That's just. That's just kind of the law of the sea. So I'm I'm glad that all of this is being spoken about and that the next issue is I read that Dunphy Park is being proposed to be closed. from July 5th for one year. This is, as Lieutenant knows and the other officers, this is the place where the anchor outs congregate. It is our only source of water. It's our only source of porta potties and our only source of trash disposal as well. I'll talk about that when that comes up. Thank you. Thank you. And so the officer, his father was chief of police here, like my father was in the city council. So we're a legacy and a lineage too. |
| 03:38:59.43 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Anybody else? Public comment? Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead. Thank you. |
| 03:39:08.76 | Clayton Smith | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. This is The shades of the past coming here back when the squatters at Cappas Marina basically stole a man's property by occupying it. The sheriffs, because of public opinion, I guess they were afraid they would lose some part of their budget. They gave up on abating the people. I think you probably remember the wars down there at the gates. And you can take a look at what has happened there. I left my houseboat there because of the community that was over there, the squatter community. Bought a boat that had a view and then had the view basically taken away by all their trash dwellings. Had these lawless people rowing right up to the window of my boat to harass me, just as kind of they're joking about. And what I'm seeing here is a failure in government. This is a tremendous failure in government, the inability to embrace controversy. My father was an officer during World War II, fought through the Follies Gap,, Hurtigan Forest, the Bulge, where he was surrounded by a Panzer Army, and endured the Rhine Crossing. And he taught me one thing. Leadership is about embracing controversy and making hard choices when they need to be made. And what you have here is lawless behavior, and you're caving into it. And it's a kind of government anarchy. You're elected to enforce the laws. You have laws that are unenforced. And the consequence of this is either you take the law off the book and admit that it's not a law in fact, or you enforce it. |
| 03:39:54.86 | Ron Albert | Um, |
| 03:41:18.85 | Clayton Smith | Thank you. And that's really the choice. And to go about having laws that are unenforced breeds that incredible disrespect for social order. And we're seeing this now in this country, which is being overrun. You're seeing it in Europe. You're seeing it globally. |
| 03:41:31.94 | Ron Albert | Thank you. |
| 03:41:41.23 | Clayton Smith | and unless some people actually rise to the challenge of leadership, and take responsibility for making controversial decisions, our society is not probably much longer to last. And you may have that look on your face over there, but you're probably the only person in the room, besides the men in blue, who actually have a retirement plan. So I'm thinking I just want to, I'll bring it back to you. I'm sorry. I do think you, I agree with you, Linda. It's time to abate this problem. Thanks. Thank you. |
| 03:42:20.46 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 03:42:27.14 | Vicki Nichols | Maybe he has more to say about Mill Valley where he lives. My name is Vicki Nichols. I wasn't going to talk about this, but just to let's really get to the issue. And the issue here is enforcement is going to cost an awful lot of money, money and political capital. No politician since the Houseboat Wars has wanted to take this on again. and if you look closely at Barbara Salzman's letter, I know her quite well and work on a subcommittee with her. Her issue is public trust, which is the Petrus McIntyre Act, which states that no one has a right to be out in that anchorage. It's public trust. It's all of our waters. To really enforce that, it means that you're kicking everyone out unless you're enforcing that they're staying there only 72 hours. So we need to be clear about what we're talking about if we're expecting the city of Sausalito to enforce this. They don't have the jurisdiction, and this would cost thousands of dollars. So if the council wants to appoint appoint some money i don't think it's even something that you're not needing to do just for clayton's benefit he won't hear this but that lawless community down at the gates has now been legalized in a 30-year process and if you look down there, it is pretty orderly. They've got their own docks down there. They'll shortly be putting in a park with the county. I really am going to support the methodology and the goals that are set out here because it's a very emotional issue for a lot of people, but I think you start with what you can get first My understanding is is Sausalito has not contributed the portion that's been asked of the RBRA because you want more time to think about this So we're not even really putting money into the agency that has the authority to remove these boats. So let's start with the ones, the derelict boats or the uninhabited that you can get. I think it's a good plan. And I think the incorporation of outreach to the community to help both sides of the issue understand why this is being done will go a long way to just some inflammatory quotes. Thank you. |
| 03:44:59.96 | Jesus | Oh, uh, this is Jesus, uh. I do agree about the junk boats. Well, first off, let me start. God is life, as in he's us. We are life, and that is a lifestyle that we are allowed to live, and we are free to be to live, just as a pelican is free to dive into the bay, as a fish is to swim around. Yes, and as human beings, we should be responsible for our possessions, our own actions. And there's a situation on the beach the other day where a friend of mine that lives on shore, that's a part of the community, came down and burnt a bunch of documents on the beach and spread the paperwork everywhere, half-burnt documents all over the mud flats. And... I put on my boots, and I went out and I picked it all up out of the mud. It took me a few hours to pick all this up. And... I talked to the cops about it and they said, well, why didn't you call it in? And it's not up to me to call and send a chief in to take away anybody's freedom, because we were free to be. He had the freedom of choice to burn that there. But me, being part of the community, I took, it's my responsibility of being part of this community If somebody's arrogant and doesn't take responsibility for their own actions and clean up their mess, me being part of that community, is. to pick up that mess. I'm sorry, but as a community, we're here to help pick up after one another if people are not able to do so, like, don't love the environment or themselves or another. as we should be doing so, But I love the environment. I love them. I love the fact that everybody can come down and see a clean park, like Dumpy Park. This is all right out in front of Dumpy Park. I pick up after my community. And as a community, we should go around and help people clean up the junk boats. Yes, I agree if nobody's living on it like it's it comes down to material control like like us we come into this world with without possessions and we leave this world without possessions and it comes down to like The government is... tending to THE FAMILY IS A anything that we have possession of as a form of control to take away our freedom. And it's not right. We are free to live life. Thank you. |
| 03:48:04.56 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, any other public comment? I see no one approaching the podium, so we'll move on to... City Council comments? Who would like to start? |
| 03:48:15.58 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, I'll jump in. I'll start with a motion right off the bat, which is I move to direct staff to come back with a proposal and cost estimate to enforce the anchor out regulation laws designed to remove residential use on the anchorage and to enforce code 3.04.010, Richardson code and 16.04.020 Sosmo municipal code code working in conjunction with RBRA and the county. |
| 03:48:57.43 | Jill Hoffman | I second. So vote. |
| 03:49:03.44 | Heather Laporte | And if we can have a discussion before the vote, and I'll explain why I made that motion. |
| 03:49:05.73 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. |
| 03:49:10.47 | Heather Laporte | I think we need to empower our police to to have a vision, a shared vision of our waterfront. A waterfront that respects the environment, that respects the public trust, and the eelgrass, and the habitat that is fragile out there. And I think to empower our police, we need to let them know that that is our shared vision of pristine waters in Sausalito and enforcement of these codes. |
| 03:50:05.25 | Unknown | Sorry, you can tell me, Herb. RBRA just doesn't sit there. Most of the budget from RBRA is going for cleaning an average of 50 to 60 vessels a year. It may be about a cost of about $1,000 a foot. to dispose of it. So that's where, right now, those monies, and this has been probably for the last three, four years, 50 or 60. So the problem was as they closed down the others, like the Oakland Estuary and the Redwood City, they came up here. And I'm fully in agreement of getting rid of the abandoned or the storage boats. but even RBRA Can't keep up with that. because as you get boats that sink and boats that crash against Tiburon or Belvedere, That comes out to about 50 about 50 to 60 boats a year. And that's where your budget from the RBRA is going. So this here to manage all the other things, never mind the abandoned or empty boats out there in the bay, that's besides this. You're looking at millions of dollars, millions. If you have millions of dollars, go find it. |
| 03:51:35.31 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:51:35.97 | Unknown | the staff report staff is only is not asking for any action I take it and THE FAMILY. on Councilmember Pfeiffer's motion. I'm going to I'm going to vote against it at this point because one is we haven't been briefed or had it considered by staff. It's past 11 o'clock tonight. And I think I think we should start with enforcement taking the salvage boats I think there's more work to be done with our bra and I think it's a first step at some point I'd consider it but I don't think it we have time to fully explore tonight |
| 03:52:08.79 | Heather Laporte | So just to clarify my motion, it was to direct staff to come back to us with the details of this, because right now they're going to come back to us with the details of a program anyway. I'm just shifting the focus of that program. |
| 03:52:21.82 | Ray Withy | it. |
| 03:52:22.14 | Unknown | Thank you for that. Can you read the motion? |
| 03:52:24.18 | Ray Withy | Could I, yeah, I'd like some clarification as well. Council Member Pfeiffer, was your motion regarding the whole of Richardson Bay or Sausalito Waters? |
| 03:52:36.33 | Heather Laporte | My motion was actually all of Richardson Bay to collaborate with the RBRA and county to come back with a proposal of what it would cost to enforce the regulations that RBRA, it's my understanding, RBRA and And all the vessels in Richardson Bay fall under. And I think that this needs to happen, and we need to have that shared vision of what the outcome will be. And the outcome will be that we are you know, not establishing residential living on our waters, but rather we are enforcing our codes. And one more thing. The reason why, you know, you don't think the other anchorages had these issues? They had these issues. They had anchor outs in their estuaries. They had the same cost considerations. The difference is BCDC worked with and collaborated with them to get grants to get to get the cleanup going. They had abandoned debris vessels. They had all of the problems. And I know this for a fact. And that was like, |
| 03:53:55.44 | Unknown | That was the California lands commission, not BC. |
| 03:53:56.77 | Heather Laporte | They had leadership. Now we've got Supervisor Kate Sears on the BCDC board and one of the questions I had when our BRA and on RBRA, and one of the questions I had for the RBRA rep was, why aren't we getting that kind of collaboration on getting grants to clean up our waters? And that is the question. That was California lands. I would like to get all of us on the same page in terms of what the vision is. And the starting point there is that having our Bay used as a continuous residential |
| 03:54:19.35 | Unknown | That was California land. |
| 03:54:20.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:54:21.16 | Unknown | I would. |
| 03:54:22.37 | Ron Albert | Thank you. |
| 03:54:22.39 | Unknown | All of us on Thank you. |
| 03:54:24.55 | Ron Albert | AND, AND, Thank you. |
| 03:54:25.56 | Unknown | The vision. That's right. |
| 03:54:26.66 | Ron Albert | Yeah. |
| 03:54:39.47 | Heather Laporte | site going from 90 to over 200 votes with crime rates that rival the Port of Los Angeles is not our vision. |
| 03:54:49.71 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:54:49.88 | Heather Laporte | I'm sorry. |
| 03:54:49.96 | Unknown | Okay. All right, well, let's get back to what we're there's a there's a motion. |
| 03:54:51.58 | Heather Laporte | I'm not sure. |
| 03:54:51.60 | Jill Hoffman | I'm sorry. |
| 03:54:51.62 | Heather Laporte | Let's give back to you. |
| 03:54:52.56 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Oh. |
| 03:54:55.09 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, I'll, okay, go ahead, Lily. Whatever. |
| 03:55:00.68 | Lily | I was relying on the tape for most of the motion. So if you could read it back, Councilmember Pfeiffer, thank you. |
| 03:55:05.67 | Heather Laporte | Okay. So let me see if I remember everything I said. I moved to direct staff to come back with a proposal and cost estimate to enforce anchor out regulation laws designed to remove residential anchoring on the Bay collaborating with RBRA and Marin County as needed. |
| 03:55:32.76 | Jill Hoffman | So as I understand the motion, we're just trying to get – you just want a cost estimate. It's not – we're not going forward. |
| 03:55:39.00 | Unknown | She said the proposal and across the state. |
| 03:55:42.33 | Ray Withy | I mean, I got some of that. Can I comment? |
| 03:55:42.41 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:55:43.24 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:55:43.73 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:55:43.75 | Jill Hoffman | All right, well, some of that. |
| 03:55:48.59 | Ray Withy | Thank you, Madam Mayor. We are, I think this is way too premature. are in ongoing discussions with RBRA and the other jurisdictions that make up RBRA about how to begin to tackle this problem. To burden staff with actually to go and put a proposal together with all of these agencies when we're, we've got a long way to go. All right. I will actually make a counter motion. which is to authorize staff to proceed with enforcement actions in Sausalito Waters, initially focusing on removing boats, unoccupied boats, as has been presented by the lieutenant here today. |
| 03:56:46.86 | Unknown | I'll second that motion. |
| 03:56:48.11 | Ray Withy | Okay, thank you. And I believe by protocol that motion has to be voted on first. |
| 03:56:48.16 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:56:52.88 | Ray Withy | We got to go. |
| 03:56:53.30 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, and just to clarify, so you're not, you're focusing on just the removing the abandoned vessels right now. |
| 03:57:03.55 | Ray Withy | I'm focusing on something that can actually be done now. |
| 03:57:08.47 | Jill Hoffman | let me say I believe that the Thank you. and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was a two-step process that Lieutenant Frost was talking about, and the focus is first on the abandoned vessels, and then The next is on the... the vessels that are inhabited. So it's not... We're not excluding that second process, it's just |
| 03:57:30.33 | Heather Laporte | I think my challenge was that the goal was not to remove the anchor outs. Nowhere in the Audubon letter says this, nowhere does it say that anchor outs are illegal. And, you know, Ray, in your motion, you do not clarify that either. You're focusing on. you know. I guess I just want clarity that we all agree that using the bay as a residence is not what we want to see it used for. |
| 03:57:57.01 | Ray Withy | I don't believe in making motions to set goals that cannot be executed. I can say that. At this moment. |
| 03:58:03.05 | Jill Hoffman | I can say this. At this moment. |
| 03:58:04.23 | Heather Laporte | That's why we need. |
| 03:58:04.89 | Jill Hoffman | a proposal. So let me weigh in here. I think that we can all say that there is no provision currently in the law for people to anchor indefinitely in the Bay. And so until that law changes, we as a city will enforce the law as it exists now. |
| 03:58:04.97 | Ray Withy | . |
| 03:58:05.04 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 03:58:05.07 | Ray Withy | proposal. |
| 03:58:05.78 | Heather Laporte | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:58:18.69 | Jill Hoffman | And so that two-step process that we're talking about now, which I believe Lieutenant Frost was talking about, is that the first step and of course enforcing the current codes under the law is to remove uninhabited vessels. The second step, which she acknowledges is more complicated, is how do you address the inhabited vessels in a thoughtful manner and encourage them to comply with the law. That's my understanding of what we're talking about today. We're not making any policy decisions beyond that. So. |
| 03:58:52.52 | Ray Withy | So I will amend my motion specifically to what you've just addressed. which is to execute on the lieutenant's plan in a two-step process. in Sausalito waters. |
| 03:59:08.39 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 03:59:08.51 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:59:08.52 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. And I would move to and make an addendum, which is to... to work with the county and RBRA to create a joint proposal to stop illegal activities in Richardson Bay and bring everything into compliance. |
| 03:59:35.74 | Unknown | Here you go. Sorry, I'm... |
| 03:59:36.59 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 03:59:36.69 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF |
| 03:59:36.74 | Heather Laporte | I'm going back to the vision. |
| 03:59:37.99 | Unknown | Yeah, I know your vision is nothing out there but |
| 03:59:39.74 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 03:59:39.88 | Heather Laporte | Yeah. |
| 03:59:39.94 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. |
| 03:59:40.08 | Heather Laporte | . |
| 03:59:40.15 | Jill Hoffman | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:59:40.38 | Heather Laporte | We need collaboration. |
| 03:59:41.60 | Jill Hoffman | All right, so I see nothing objectionable in that agenda. In my motion? |
| 03:59:48.57 | Ray Withy | In my motion, I think the Council Member Theodore is – didn't you second my motion? |
| 03:59:53.23 | Unknown | you |
| 03:59:53.27 | Jill Hoffman | SEC. |
| 03:59:53.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:59:53.85 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:59:53.95 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:59:54.03 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 03:59:54.17 | Unknown | Yep. |
| 03:59:55.33 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 03:59:55.40 | Ray Withy | And I'd like with my so I'd like my motion voted. |
| 03:59:55.47 | Jill Hoffman | And I'd like with your... |
| 04:00:01.75 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I think if council member. Thank you. |
| 04:00:05.31 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:00:06.47 | Jill Hoffman | But we have some questions on the table as well. |
| 04:00:07.70 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:00:07.72 | Heather Laporte | I just made an amendment, a motion, a proposed amendment. |
| 04:00:18.82 | Adam Politzer | Ray would have to accept the amendment. |
| 04:00:19.87 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:00:19.99 | Heather Laporte | I need a... |
| 04:00:22.03 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, you would have to. |
| 04:00:22.74 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:00:22.89 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. THE END OF |
| 04:00:23.03 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:00:23.08 | Heather Laporte | to the next day. |
| 04:00:23.26 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:00:24.21 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 04:00:24.22 | Ray Withy | which I don't. |
| 04:00:25.15 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 04:00:25.19 | Jill Hoffman | well. All right. So we're going to vote on, we're voting on my, my, |
| 04:00:26.81 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:00:26.89 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 04:00:26.94 | Ray Withy | So, |
| 04:00:27.01 | Heather Laporte | WE'RE GOING TO GET A LITTLE |
| 04:00:27.28 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:00:27.33 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 04:00:27.36 | Ray Withy | THE END OF |
| 04:00:28.56 | Heather Laporte | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:00:31.48 | Ray Withy | No. My motion to go. |
| 04:00:34.11 | Heather Laporte | Which is basically the staff report. And we have to then ask the city attorney whether my motion invalidates it. |
| 04:00:34.69 | Ray Withy | And we have to then ask the city attorney whether my motion invalidates the first motion. If not, then we'll have to vote on the second motion. |
| 04:00:44.00 | Heather Laporte | And just for the record, my concern with Ray's motion is that it does not... It does not state that we are removing, the goal is that we are removing anchor outs and enforcing these two codes. I don't know what's funny, was that an anchor out who left? |
| 04:01:09.03 | Unknown | It's not, there's no dialogue. |
| 04:01:10.36 | Heather Laporte | Yeah, so we need to enforce these two codes. |
| 04:01:10.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:01:10.41 | Tammy Blanchard | Yeah. |
| 04:01:12.71 | Unknown | you |
| 04:01:12.76 | Tammy Blanchard | We need to inform you. |
| 04:01:25.53 | Mary Wagner | So the last made by Vice Mayor with the seconded by Councilmember Theodorus and then to move with the program. Lieutenant Frost outlined. |
| 04:01:25.61 | Unknown | motion that was |
| 04:01:30.59 | Unknown | And then- |
| 04:01:35.15 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:01:35.27 | Unknown | THE CITY IS A |
| 04:01:35.67 | Ray Withy | Thank you. in Solskjaer, Walter. |
| 04:01:37.51 | Mary Wagner | as well. |
| 04:01:37.85 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:01:37.85 | Heather Laporte | So I'm, I'm, can I move? I move for a substitute motion, a substitute motion. |
| 04:01:37.97 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 04:01:38.15 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 04:01:38.19 | Mary Wagner | THE END OF THE END OF THE Thank you. |
| 04:01:40.55 | Ray Withy | Substitute motion. |
| 04:01:43.96 | Heather Laporte | To enforce the codes 304010, 1604, 020 in collaboration with RVRA and the county. and to come back to the council with a proposal that would enforce those codes. A proposal with cost estimate. |
| 04:02:10.13 | Heather Laporte | Let me see if the wording was that, exactly that way. |
| 04:02:27.36 | Heather Laporte | No, because my first motion ended with removing residential anchor outs on the bay. And that was my first motion. My substitute motion did not say that. |
| 04:02:53.21 | Lily | Is there a second? |
| 04:02:53.48 | Jill Hoffman | Second. Thank you. |
| 04:02:53.85 | Lily | Thank you. |
| 04:02:53.87 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:03:06.86 | Lily | Thank you. So this is on Vice Mayor Withy's motion? Yes. Council Member Theodorus? |
| 04:03:13.58 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 04:03:13.94 | Lily | Thank you. Councilmember Weiner. |
| 04:03:15.42 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 04:03:16.91 | Lily | Councilmember Pfeiffer? No. Base mirror with you. |
| 04:03:21.63 | Ray Withy | Yes. |
| 04:03:22.63 | Lily | Mayer Hoffman. That carries for one. |
| 04:03:53.95 | Melanie Purcell | Okay, in your staff report before you, there's an explanation and a proposal to establish the Citizens Oversight Committee in support of the 2016 certificates of participation. It's a council directed at the last meeting. you wanted to pursue the idea of looking at an oversight committee, so we modeled the 2006 bond, oversight committee. So we brought forward that language and then also added the provision as as you suggested that would allow the council to direct this group to look at items that come back to the council. So if you wanted, additional overlay or review. of the information. that are issues that come before you, you could ask this group to look at those closely. Traditionally, oversight committees related to this type of debt issues are provided for ensuring that the funds spent are as provided by the debt issues. So that's kind of where we took that model because that is the typical practice for using an oversight committee in a bond issue. |
| 04:05:08.13 | Melanie Purcell | I'm going for a record here. It's all about efficiency and finance. |
| 04:05:12.43 | Unknown | It's all about efficiency and finance. Bye. That's just four steps. Okay. |
| 04:05:17.06 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 04:05:17.07 | Heather Laporte | Okay. |
| 04:05:17.46 | Melanie Purcell | Bye. |
| 04:05:17.65 | Heather Laporte | so so i guess my question is when we did the police building you know it was we had an oversight committee and i sat in on that and it was very clean and very it was well thought out um and with respect to there were clear bids we knew how much everything was going to cost we asked for amount of money with the voting that we knew would cover it. And now we're in a... We knew how much everything was going to cost. We asked for an amount of money with the voting that we knew would cover it. And now we're in a situation that, in my opinion, is completely cattywampus. And so to say that the Citizens' Oversight Committee is going to include items within the project not funded by the COPs, I'm a little bit fuzzy on that. What do you mean by that? |
| 04:06:06.89 | Melanie Purcell | The intent is that the committee is going to look and ensure that the invoices being paid by COP funds are eligible under the COP because within these projects, there are activities that are bid through the same construction project that are not funded through the COP. So we want to ensure similar to, you know, there were instances under the public safety bond, building bond, in which things were not eligible. So the committee reviewed that and came back and said, no, this would not be included. |
| 04:06:38.06 | Adam Politzer | Mayor Hoffman, I gotta step in here because what Councilmember Pfeiffer just talked about, I think she may be blending |
| 04:06:38.21 | Tammy Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 04:06:38.41 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 04:06:46.81 | Adam Politzer | what happened to pre bid to what happened when the contract was awarded so that The official oversight committee, the council appointed, which had four members, there was five initially appointed, but four, was strictly looking at the invoices as our administrative services director, Melanie Purcell, has shared. There was a working group. And there was a variety of working groups leading up to the award of contract. that did some of the activities that Councilmember Pfeiffer was citing. So I want to distinguish that there was a working group and then there was an oversight |
| 04:07:30.47 | Heather Laporte | So, okay, so this oversight committee, so what you're saying is that they would confirm that the COP expenditures are being tracked and there's that accountability. And then there are going to be these other items, these surprise items in the areas of influence that we were suddenly told about |
| 04:07:59.34 | Melanie Purcell | Everything comes in front of the council for review and approval. This committee is designed to look at those items that are eligible to be covered or paid for from the COP period. |
| 04:08:13.99 | Heather Laporte | Okay. Yeah. I guess one clarification is, I mean, if there's an ADA, you know, aspect, you know, to a playground, that is COP as well. I mean, if there's... Well, yeah, I mean, that is inclusive to the project. You're not going to put something in without, you know, and violate ADA. Right. |
| 04:08:39.91 | Melanie Purcell | This project, in particular, the first of the three projects, the committee would cover all the projects, and actually there's four sites involved. This project, and I would anticipate as we look at any project, you're going to have multiple funding sources. The focus of this committee will be on the certificates of participation. |
| 04:09:01.12 | Heather Laporte | Okay, I guess I'm just a little bit confused here because I mean this was never presented as something that was going to be dipping into the general fund, you know, as well for other funding for the projects. So, you know, I mean if we're creating an oversight committee for the COP funds, good, you know, but, |
| 04:09:01.14 | Melanie Purcell | Okay. All things are system contracts. |
| 04:09:25.05 | Heather Laporte | You know, I'm hoping that they will be, you know, keeping things within budget and recognizing that ADA is part of that COP budget. I |
| 04:09:35.19 | Ray Withy | Councilmember Pfeiffer is incorrect in that the |
| 04:09:35.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:09:35.77 | Heather Laporte | out. |
| 04:09:41.42 | Ray Withy | We are not dipping into the general fund at all. We have a very large capital improvement fund. which contains many line items, including ADA. We've also settled a lawsuit on ADA, and that has to still get programmed into our budget, and that's going to occur, I believe, on February 23rd. I'm here trying to just clarify something, and please, if I'm wrong here, correct me. Some of the ADA projects are part of the settlement. have nothing to do with the COPs. The COP money dedicated $1.2 million towards the Robin Sweeney core playground project. There's a whole bunch of other stuff at City Hall that needs to get done, and that's going to draw on different line items in the budget. is my understanding, this oversight committee, which initially I wasn't sure about, but the mayor in December convinced me it was a good idea, that... I know Councilmember Pfeiffer, I don't know how to tap dance. |
| 04:11:05.12 | Heather Laporte | Really, because you're doing a good job of it right now. |
| 04:11:05.59 | Ray Withy | Because you're... Not at all. I'm just stating the facts. Yeah, just wait. The facts. Which you need to get. Now it's. All right. Wait, wait, wait. Which you need to get. Wait, wait, wait. Jill. Jill. |
| 04:11:10.33 | Heather Laporte | The fact, now it's, wait, wait, wait, Jill, Jill, you're shutting me down, but you didn't shut him down. So I need to say something. Ray, you said, you were saying, Ray, that you were, Ray, you were saying that the 1.2 million was just for the, quote, the core playground project. Whereas you know that that 1.2 million was for the drainage it was for the whole project and and not just the playground yeah and and not only that but if there were all of these other things ancillary that kicked in as added costs to 1.2 million that the 1.2 million upgrade couldn't be done without all these other areas of influence being done why wasn't that disclosed to voters |
| 04:11:23.67 | Yasmeen McGrane | Ray. |
| 04:11:41.17 | Ron Albert | Thank you. |
| 04:11:58.53 | Ray Withy | It's in the budget. |
| 04:12:00.30 | Heather Laporte | It's, We just pulled $400,000 out of the air redirecting Dunphy Park project funds to this project. No, we are. |
| 04:12:08.62 | Ron Albert | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:12:08.67 | Jill Hoffman | Adam and Eric. |
| 04:12:09.51 | Ron Albert | Prime. |
| 04:12:09.87 | Jill Hoffman | to this project. No, we are. Well, this is why we're appointing the committee for the oversight of the certificates of participation, to provide clarity and clarity. |
| 04:12:19.05 | Ron Albert | Thank you. |
| 04:12:24.91 | Jill Hoffman | openness and transparency for about why things are being spent and that they're keeping within the scope of the COPs. |
| 04:12:30.56 | Ron Albert | Thank you. |
| 04:12:30.58 | Mary Wagner | He's a good guy. |
| 04:12:30.66 | Ron Albert | keep it. |
| 04:12:32.58 | Jill Hoffman | and to provide that explanation to the public and the voters as we go forward. And so what we're talking about today the focus of today's meeting is to pass the resolution to Ashley be able to form the citizens of the certificate of participation citizens oversight committee. And so we are I think we're all in agreement. It's a good idea. Let's talk about the actual resolution. I don't see any issues of concern in the draft resolution. Do we have any comment or questions about that? |
| 04:13:06.81 | Heather Laporte | I have a comment. When will we be submitting recommendations for members of this committee? And I would, I mean, can we do that now? |
| 04:13:17.99 | Jill Hoffman | The process I would like to follow is that we pass a resolution to form the committee today. We open it up for people to. Yeah, apply or indicate that they would like to participate. |
| 04:13:29.75 | Ron Albert | or |
| 04:13:33.33 | Jill Hoffman | And then as we do with all of our other commissions, we vote on that as a council, hopefully at the next city council meeting. Madam Mayor, will we be. |
| 04:13:41.48 | Ray Withy | Madam Mayor, will we be interviewing the candidates? |
| 04:13:45.15 | Jill Hoffman | you . Yeah, I would say that we would be open for interviews, but an interview I don't think would exclude anybody. If somebody wants to throw their hat in the ring by February 9th, then we would consider that. We all know people in our community who are very talented in these areas. I wouldn't expect that everybody would have to come in and interview, but I would expect that we would have to have the applications by February 9th. I want to move with all haste to form this committee. Yes, Mary, you look like I've said something wrong. You're on the committee. No, no. Oh, okay. Just trying to wait for the- I thought that was your warning face. No, but Madame, |
| 04:14:20.99 | Unknown | you No. |
| 04:14:21.31 | Mary Wagner | No, no. Oh, OK. |
| 04:14:22.90 | Unknown | Wait, wait for the... I thought that was your warning face. |
| 04:14:24.80 | Mary Wagner | no but but madam mayor yes you're the municipal code provisions that are included in your staff report and they're referenced in there do call for applicants to be interviewed by the council okay that's fine that's fine |
| 04:14:27.01 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 04:14:36.17 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, that's fine. That's fine. Thank you. Okay, thank you. So, yes, then we would do interviews, and I would expect to do those on February 9th. Thank you. THE END OF THE |
| 04:14:45.62 | Heather Laporte | Okay, that's good. |
| 04:14:48.55 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:14:48.56 | Heather Laporte | So, oh, go ahead. Well, I just have one. Well, no, I'll wait till the end of the council session. Never mind. Okay. |
| 04:14:48.58 | Jill Hoffman | So- |
| 04:14:54.49 | Jill Hoffman | Never mind. Bye. |
| 04:14:55.90 | Heather Laporte | Bye. |
| 04:14:55.97 | Jill Hoffman | Do we have no other comment then on the draft resolution in Exhibit A? Do I have a motion? I take public comment. Public comment. Oh, public comment. Sorry. |
| 04:15:02.52 | Unknown | I take public comment. Public comment. Oh, public comment. |
| 04:15:07.66 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:15:07.70 | Unknown | It's getting late. Come on. On oversight. |
| 04:15:07.72 | Unknown | He's getting late. |
| 04:15:08.61 | Jeffrey Chase | Come on. This is one line on the plan for the park. |
| 04:15:12.25 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 04:15:15.78 | Jeffrey Chase | It says, this is a... It says anticipate closing Dunphy Park on July 5th, spend a year construction reopening on July 4th in 2017. Dunphy Park. is part of... Thank you. is in fact the only ground base for the anchorage, as in the only place where there are porta-potties, the only place where there is public water, and the only place where there is garbage disposal. |
| 04:15:34.17 | Ron Albert | Facts. |
| 04:15:49.02 | Jeffrey Chase | So I heard that there were going to be meetings on Dunphy Park, on the rehab of it this week. I'll attend those and say my piece there too. OK? I just read this. This is part of the Finance Committee report. Thank you. |
| 04:16:04.97 | Jill Hoffman | Any other public comment? Seeing none. All right, is there a motion that we adopt the resolution in Exhibit A? |
| 04:16:14.88 | Unknown | So moved. Second. |
| 04:16:16.09 | Jill Hoffman | Second. |
| 04:16:16.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:16:16.92 | Jill Hoffman | Vote. All in favor? Aye. Motion passes. |
| 04:16:18.69 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 04:16:22.77 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, okay, all right, so we are now moving on to, we've not finished with our business items. We are now moving into item seven, city manager reports, council member reports, city council appointments, and other official. |
| 04:16:39.23 | Adam Politzer | I will make mine very brief, Mayor Hoffman. I just, a handful of quick things here. We are planning the volunteer recognition event, which is one of our big events to thank our volunteers. And the date that we have focused on is April 12th. And I know that I've reached out to the mayor because the mayor usually plays a big role in terms of welcoming and thanking each of the groups. but I would like each of you to put that date on there and assuming that the mayor is able to get back to me in the next 70 years the groups and so but I would like each of you to put that date on there and assuming that the mayor is able to get back to me in the next 72 hours or less or we'll tow your car or your boat we'll you will try to narrow down that date quickly so that we can get the invitations out and all the planning work into that in addition we had our first construction team meeting with the architect contractor and project manager for robin sweeney park an interesting fact for everyone is that the contractor that was a low bid was actually the contractor that worked and constructed robin Tweeney Park, however many years ago that was a low bid, was actually the contractor that worked and constructed Robin Sweeney Park, however many years ago that was, 30-plus years ago, and worked with Jock Ullman and Paul Leffingwell when that project was going. So we feel good that we have someone that actually knows what the conditions are when it was originally reconstructed out there but we are planning a groundbreaking ceremony for the ninth Tuesday the ninth of February so that's in less than two weeks So next week we'll be doing all of the pre- construction requirements in terms of noticing. and demo plans and what have you. and we'll put something out in the currents on Friday, but we'll do a groundbreaking and we'll give you the time Um, Groundbreaking is pretty ceremonial. but uneventful it's the ribbon cutting when you actually cut the ribbon and all the kids and families and adults go in and actually celebrate the park so we're not looking for a hundred percent participation from the council or the community and we hope that you can all attend but we want to kick this off and get building so the ninth will be the date that we then we do it we don't know yet we'll narrow that down I just wanted to get that date out and I know that the mayor can be there and so that's where we started I know that the vice mayor will be out of the country we're not going to wait for you to come back I apologize in advance so those are the two big items February 9th oh you are back it's council meeting yes good then I expect you to be there |
| 04:19:23.32 | Unknown | What is it, Adam? |
| 04:19:25.41 | Ray Withy | Amen. Oh, I'm back on the night. Council meeting. Council meeting. That's good. Don't want to miss that for the world, do you? |
| 04:19:33.11 | Adam Politzer | THE WORLD. Um, The mayor can share this but on city clerk and assistant city manager's behalf, both the mayor and Lily attended the mayor's academy. And I was very pleased that they both were able to attend. |
| 04:19:52.99 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and are we moving on to council member committee reports? And shall I read my tourism impact plan statement at this point? So during the last meeting, we indicated that we would address the tourism impact plan tonight, but I have a written statement. Under the California Elections Code, in order for the tourism impact plan initiative to qualify for an election, The proponents of the initiative needed to collect 483 valid signatures. We received notice from the county registrar voters last week that they did not get the minimum number of signatures, so we did not include it on the agenda this evening. If they had gotten all the signatures they needed, the elections code would have required that we have it on our agenda tonight. But since it did not qualify, it isn't on our agenda. for discussion this evening. So I also have some other announcements. I'm making some adjustments in our various committees and representations, and so I'm just going to go through those quickly. I'm swapping myself and Mayor Theodorus on a couple of committees. Sorry, former Mayor Theodorus. Council Member Theodorus is now going to be the representative on the Marin Telecommunications Agency. |
| 04:21:03.69 | Unknown | or Mary. |
| 04:21:10.59 | Jill Hoffman | I'm putting myself on the finance committee in place of Councilmember Theodorus. I'm making myself the alternate RBRA alternate again swapping out Councilmember Theodorus and Mayor Theodore suggested that I become the legislative alternate for the MCC-MC body. And I think... That's it for today. Um, |
| 04:21:41.36 | Unknown | Can we, may I recommend that you also be the alternate for the Marin Telecommunications, since you're already sworn in? |
| 04:21:46.03 | Jill Hoffman | since you're already sworn in. Okay. Okay, and that's... Those are all the reports I think I have. Yes. So I have... Sorry, anybody else have committee reports? |
| 04:21:59.51 | Heather Laporte | And I'll see you next time. So I have a committee report with the Sustainability Commission. I just wanted you to know that they hosted a little... community outreach on sustainability and encouraging residents of Sausalito to take a i guess it's the green challenge basically you and You show up, and they're having a meeting on, I think it's February 2nd. It's next, I guess, yeah, next Tuesday. And basically, they're going to meet at Driver's Market, and they're going to share ways to reduce your carbon footprint. And so you can attend and brainstorm and create action plans on reducing your carbon footprint. And so they're just doing this. So it's something that you're all invited to if you want to. It's February 2nd at 7 o'clock at Driver's Market. And I will be there. I'm going to take the challenge. |
| 04:23:05.68 | Jill Hoffman | I get that. |
| 04:23:06.31 | Heather Laporte | Excellent. |
| 04:23:07.25 | Jill Hoffman | Any other committee reports? Wait, no, future agenda items. Anybody have future agenda items? |
| 04:23:14.46 | Heather Laporte | So I have a future agenda item. I would request measure O is supposed to the sales tax was supposed to have an oversight committee. It's a year later. We don't have one. We need one and it should be separate from the measure of oversight committee with different people. Secondly, |
| 04:23:34.91 | Unknown | That is absolutely untrue. |
| 04:23:41.42 | Unknown | Thank you. We have. Thank you. |
| 04:23:43.28 | Heather Laporte | Well, no, we do need to be clear, and it was my understanding that we promised an oversight committee for the sales tax. |
| 04:23:49.29 | Ray Withy | Well, your understanding is wrong. That was never promised. |
| 04:23:51.21 | Heather Laporte | That was never promised. Oh, really? Wow. Well, we can see just how upset you get when I mention the word oversight. Now, I guess the second request I'd have would be Bay City's Refuse, the 10-year lease. I just want to make sure that that's a discussion that we have here at Council. Okay. And let's see if I have anything else. Yeah. |
| 04:24:20.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:24:21.99 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 04:24:22.01 | Jill Hoffman | I think that's it. Okay. We, for future agenda items, I have a couple of mine. One is the emergency shelters ordinance. We need to agendize that and bring that back. Also, and I saw this in the finance committee meeting notes too, but the process of forgiving the MLK interfund debt that we talked about, that needs to be agendized. Also, the machine shop in the Marin Chef, the status, I believe they were going to come back. And so those are my notes on the future agenda items. Any other? |
| 04:24:59.08 | Heather Laporte | Just to comment, I really second the emergency shelter thing and the forgiving the MLK debt. That's really high priority, so I really look forward to getting those two. All right. Any questions? |
| 04:25:09.61 | Jill Hoffman | And it, Go ahead. Thank you. |
| 04:25:11.64 | Heather Laporte | Any other? |
| 04:25:11.98 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:25:12.02 | Heather Laporte | future agenda items. |
| 04:25:12.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:25:13.04 | Heather Laporte | Thank you. |
| 04:25:13.10 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:25:13.44 | Heather Laporte | I guess code enforcement as just a general topic. I've heard from residents regarding codes, regarding sleeping on the street, idle laws, decibel levels, and of course the code enforcement with Bridgeway Marine, perhaps a status update on that. Okay. |
| 04:25:37.96 | Jill Hoffman | Any other future dinner items? Any other reports of significance? Seeing none, we are adjourned. |
Ron Albert — In Favor: Expressed gratitude for council service and specifically attended to honor Captain Bouchard, praising his volunteer efforts on Measure S and Measure D campaigns. ▶ 📄