| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:15.81 | Jill Hoffman | I will now call the. March 8th, 2016, City Council meeting to order. Lily, can you call the roll, please? |
| 00:00:23.55 | Unknown | Councilmember Theodorus? Present. Councilmember Weiner? Present. Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Vice Mayor Whitley? Here. Mayor Hoffman? |
| 00:00:26.69 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:26.74 | Ray | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:00:30.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:30.10 | Unknown | I'll see you there. |
| 00:00:32.03 | Jill Hoffman | THE FAMILY. Very good. We'll now do the Pledge of Allegiance. And in honor of International Women's Day, I would like Catherine Streetman to lead us. |
| 00:00:42.57 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:42.61 | Ray | THAT IS. |
| 00:00:42.69 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:00:42.71 | Unknown | THAT IS. |
| 00:00:43.03 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. you |
| 00:00:45.22 | Ray | Yeah, well you can now. |
| 00:00:46.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:46.13 | Jill Hoffman | out. |
| 00:00:47.94 | Ray | allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. |
| 00:00:48.51 | Unknown | Allegiance to the flag. |
| 00:00:50.57 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 00:00:50.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:51.03 | Unknown | of the United States. you |
| 00:00:52.88 | Ray | Thank you. |
| 00:00:53.39 | Unknown | And to the Uwe Valerie. for which you |
| 00:00:55.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:55.60 | Unknown | Amen. |
| 00:00:55.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:56.56 | Unknown | One nation. |
| 00:00:56.75 | Unknown | you Thank you. |
| 00:00:57.81 | Unknown | Amen. In the best world. with liberty and justice for all. |
| 00:01:07.31 | Jill Hoffman | We did not have closed session today, so we have no closed session announcements. Since we have any closed session, we will not have public comment on closed session items. Uh, Before we approve the agenda, I would... I think the method to do this, I would make a motion to move the. Um, |
| 00:01:37.31 | Jill Hoffman | the vote on the citizens oversight committee up from Item 7C. that is on the agenda for 11 o'clock tonight up to our first item, which would be Would that be item? Would that be under... Special presentations or would that be 6A, Mary? |
| 00:02:08.67 | Jill Hoffman | OK, so yeah, so I would move that up to item 6A. Anybody want to second that? |
| 00:02:15.66 | Unknown | I'll second that and I'll move to approve the agenda with that one amendment. |
| 00:02:20.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Second? All in favor? |
| 00:02:24.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:02:24.62 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:02:29.27 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, communications, we are now moving on to Special presentations and mayor announcements. I don't think I have anything other than wishing everybody a happy International Women's Day. Moving on to item two, communications. This is a time for City Council to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda. Except in very limited situations, state law precludes the council from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda, However, the council may refer matters not on the agenda to city staff or direct that the subject be agendized for a future meeting. Would anybody like to make any communications on items not on the agenda and if you do please complete a speaker's card and turn it into the city clerk Anyone for items not on the agenda? Seeing no one approaching the podium, we will now move on to Um, action minutes of the previous meeting. Would anybody like to move to approve the action minutes from the February 23rd, 2016 meeting. |
| 00:03:45.08 | Unknown | So moved. |
| 00:03:47.96 | Jill Hoffman | Is there a second? |
| 00:03:48.69 | Unknown | second. |
| 00:03:50.02 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? Aye. And I'm abstaining. |
| 00:03:52.89 | Unknown | I... |
| 00:03:57.87 | Jill Hoffman | All right, we're moving on now to item four. you 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 will be no separate discussion of consent calendar items. However, before the council votes, On a motion to adopt the consent calendar items, council members, city staff, or members of the public, may request it. specific items be removed from the consent calendar were separate actions. In order to request an item be pulled, you must have completed a speaker's card and turn it in to the city clerk. The 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 when public comment will be heard on any item that was removed from the consent calendar. Is there any public comment regarding the consent calendar. See no one. Is there a motion to approve the consent calendar? |
| 00:05:02.63 | Unknown | So moved. Second. |
| 00:05:04.34 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All in favor? Aye. |
| 00:05:06.46 | Unknown | Hi. |
| 00:05:08.37 | Jill Hoffman | All right, the consent calendar is approved. Moving on to business items. So our first business item is going to be a vote on the Citizens Oversight Committee. My understanding is that I will, as mayor, will list five candidates. Then we will take additional nominations, and then we'll go down for the vote. |
| 00:05:30.53 | Unknown | Mayor Hoffman, just a point of clarification. Could we get a reminder as to the list of applicants? Again, is that on the- |
| 00:05:41.55 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, I can read it. Would you like me to read them off? Yes, please. Okay, my list that I have, and Lily, if you can follow along, that'd be great. I have John Flavin, Burton Drobnis, Christine Scarpino, Bob Zadig, Robert Gould, Mike Kelly, David Holub, John Lerner, and Richard Yang. |
| 00:05:44.16 | Unknown | Yes, please. |
| 00:06:03.26 | Unknown | Is that a total of nine? |
| 00:06:05.64 | Jill Hoffman | So. of it. |
| 00:06:08.97 | Unknown | you |
| 00:06:09.04 | Jill Hoffman | Anyone else? |
| 00:06:09.96 | Unknown | you |
| 00:06:10.03 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 00:06:10.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:06:11.03 | Jill Hoffman | We can appoint, is it five? Yes. All right, so my my nominations are John Flavin Christine Scappino Bob Zadig John Lerner and Richard Yang Do we have any other nominations? |
| 00:06:27.70 | Unknown | I nominate Bert Drobness. |
| 00:06:30.84 | Unknown | I'm gonna write this down so I can track this up. The mayors is John Flavin, Christine Scarpino, Bob Zedek? |
| 00:06:39.33 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, John Learn. |
| 00:06:40.36 | Unknown | you |
| 00:06:40.54 | Unknown | John Lerner and |
| 00:06:41.66 | Unknown | Richard Yang, and then Council Member Pfeiffer? I'm sorry. I'll list five to be specific. I would nominate John Flavin, Bert Drobness, Bob Zadig, John Lerner, and Richard Yang. |
| 00:06:42.55 | Unknown | And then Councilmember Pfeiffer? |
| 00:07:00.76 | Jill Hoffman | Any other nominations? Yeah, I do. Other than those? |
| 00:07:01.05 | Unknown | Other nominations for other. I do, I'm gonna add to. Sure. |
| 00:07:06.26 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. Go ahead. |
| 00:07:07.15 | Unknown | Mike Kelly and Bob Gould. |
| 00:07:14.97 | Jill Hoffman | Any other nominations? Are there any other candidates? Any other nominations other than those? Okay, so we're going to start, my understanding is we start of the ones I listed and we vote yes or no? |
| 00:07:31.20 | Unknown | It's the entire pool that has |
| 00:07:33.07 | Jill Hoffman | been announced. |
| 00:07:33.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:07:33.95 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Could we do one name at a time? Right, so let's just start at the top. |
| 00:07:40.62 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:07:40.89 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, okay, got it. |
| 00:07:45.41 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so I listed my five, so my five votes are done. Great. Okay, so then we just go down the line. |
| 00:07:50.45 | Unknown | What's going on? |
| 00:07:52.63 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 00:07:56.58 | Jill Hoffman | Mm-hmm. Right? |
| 00:08:01.80 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so I say just in one shot, these are my five votes. Got it. Okay, my five votes are John Flavin, Christine Scopino, Bob Zadig, John Lerner, Richard Yang. |
| 00:08:17.35 | Unknown | So my five vote. |
| 00:08:18.38 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:08:20.11 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:20.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:20.15 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 00:08:22.47 | Unknown | Council member, would you, I mean, Madam Mayor, would you like me to do a roll call vote? Sure. |
| 00:08:30.52 | Unknown | Mine and my next update. |
| 00:08:31.43 | Unknown | Councilmember Theodore. |
| 00:08:32.27 | Unknown | you Mike Kelly, Bob Zadig, Bob Gould, John Lerner, and Christine Scarpino. |
| 00:08:40.89 | Unknown | Councilmember Weiner? |
| 00:08:42.28 | Ray | Yeah, mine are Christine Scopino, Bob Zadek, Bob Gould, Mike Kelly, and John Lerner. |
| 00:08:54.58 | Unknown | Councilmember Pfeiffer. My votes are John Flavin, Bert Drobness, Bob Zadek, John Lerner, and Richard Yang. Vice Mayor Withey. |
| 00:09:12.45 | Unknown | Christine Scarpino, Bob Zadig, Bob Gould. Mike Kelly. And John Lerner. |
| 00:09:32.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:09:36.18 | Unknown | Give me one second. |
| 00:09:46.52 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:09:46.54 | Unknown | So Lily, could you list off |
| 00:09:46.62 | Jill Hoffman | So, Lily, could you list off the... |
| 00:09:47.84 | Unknown | So the candidates that received three votes or more were Christine Scarpino, Bob Zadig, Bob Gould, Mike Kelly, and John Lerner. |
| 00:10:00.09 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, and I want to thank all of the candidates who submitted applications for this process. It was a fantastic pool, and thank you to everybody who threw their hat in the ring. |
| 00:10:12.37 | Unknown | here here. |
| 00:10:15.06 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 00:10:20.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:10:21.13 | Jill Hoffman | you So now are these all, I assume these are all now Thank you. So this is item, W6A is now 6B mid-year budget. And let me just go down there. So 6A is now 6B mid-year budget. What was the key is now CCC, which is the doctor's schematic may have both done the count. Thanks. be. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:11:19.38 | Melanie Purcell | Good evening. My name is Melanie Purcell, I'm Administrative Services Director and City Treasurer. I want to present for you this evening the mid-year budget amendment for the current fiscal year, FY 2015-16. Included within this staff item, staff report, are actually four major elements. So we'll go over those in various fashions. First and foremost is the receipt of the 2014-15 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, which is before you on your desk, as well as a short summary in the staff report. We're also requesting the establishment of a sewer construction capital fund for the purposes of tracking projects within the sewer system, initially with the use of the 2015 sewer bonds, the appropriation of those funds as well. The mid-year budget amendment itself that includes all actions to date by the City Council, as well as what staff is recommending through the end of this fiscal year to tie up 2015-16. Finally, there is also a second resolution to authorize the City Manager to execute contracts remaining for the accessibility activities, the bid alternates, as they're known for at Robin Sweeney Park Campus. First of all, our FY 2014-15 status, I wanna congratulate the city, and certainly the finance department, staff and administration, and the council as well. We have a clean opinion from Mays and Associates. It seems kind of ordinary, but that's always very good news. Thank you. especially coming in, I have to compliment you on that because it's wonderful to see. Fund balance is increasing. in the general funds. A total of $10,426,298. The unassigned portion, and this is as defined by GASB, The Government Accounting Standards Board is $3,332,106. That is an increase of our prior year by $601,231. The non-spendable general fund balance, which is the difference between that unassigned and the general fund balance, includes $6.3 million. That is the internal loan, so it is a non-spendable, obviously it's not been received, loan to MLK for past activities. The total net position. is $25.9 million. That is a minor reduction from prior year for the calculations in GASB. As mentioned before, Government Accounting Standards Board defines how our finances are reported in every way, shape, or form. We... Do as they say. The business type activities also are very positive with an increase in that position of $961,754. the majority of that is in parking, so a very successful year. Our approach heading into the mid-year amendment for 2015-16 And just to reiterate, the fiscal year, for those that may not be familiar, does start on July 1st and end on June 30th. So when we refer to the midyear, that's basically taking the pulse of things after about half of the year has passed. We're looking to incorporate the changes already approved by the City Council. It was brought to my attention and requested by the Finance Committee that we very carefully show the differences between what was adopted as of July 1st, what has been changed over time and then what we're recommending right now. So all of that is incorporated, so the vast majority of what is in the third element of the evening. amendment itself includes all of the actions taken by the council prior to now We want to reflect the most current information in revenues, department operations, and projects, including the shifts from earlier estimates. We want to address the funding as requested for identified projects and needs. and begin reviewing and discussions, kind of laying the groundwork and foundation for the FY16-18 budget process, which is right on the heels of this, coming very quickly. We want to start with several items, what we call special items, that were part of the staff report and the council actions on June 16, 2015. These are items that were specifically called out and they represent the first set of tables in the staff report. These are items that were specifically mentioned as being funded, and there are a number that were also mentioned that were not funded. We wanted to give you an update as to where they stand. The Measure O, half-cent sales tax, was implemented April 1st. This is when revenue started to come in, so we had no basis upon which to do a true, specific estimate. The estimate that went into the budget was $1 million. We're increasing that based on actual receipts by $100,000. The OPEB funding was extra payment made to the irrevocable trust. for what's called Thank you. annual required contribution, what used to be known as. Basically, it's the unfunded liability previously incurred. payment of $263,000 was made in July 2015. Pension pre-funding. was made $1,056,044, was also made in July 2015. That resulted in discounts... throughout the year and how much had to be contributed to CalPERS. So that was a good way of reducing... total cost to the city. finance senior business analyst position was upgraded to finance manager that has been posted we have four applications came in. We are currently in the process of scheduling interviews, hopefully by the end of the month. Information technology, The planning and permitting software for community development, we are in the process of drafting the RFP, confirming what technical components need to be included. We are proposing to move all of this, the infrastructure master plan, into the Capital Improvement Fund so that it can be capitalized and tracked more cleanly as a separate project. We are postponing any purchase of permitting software until we go through the RFP process, recognizing that that will not be complete before June 30th. Council approved $93,000 in expenditures at the last meeting for emergency purchases in IT infrastructure. We're recommending a total of $100,000. and five thousand in the capital improvement plan to finalize the to finish out this phase That's actually the second piece as well. A police officer that's partially funded through federal funding was filled. The individual did resign, so that is vacant at this moment. But we have been in communications with the federal government and So that is what's considered in good standing. |
| 00:18:30.19 | Melanie Purcell | We're nearing the completion of draft regulations without extensive use of consultants. There's been no expenditure of those particular funds. That's reflected later on. and the amendment has some significant savings in community development. Um, Similarly, we are working on the formula retail. They've done some research, and there will be recommendations for next year for funding to pay for additional consulting assistance. The report by Danny Castro, I believe two meetings back for City Council provided you an update on the vacation rental code enforcement. There has been no revenue received. $20,000 was expended through January, the total program was $50,000. So there's $30,000 that remaining for the rest of the fiscal year. The Planning Commissioner's Academy training is scheduled for this spring. I believe that they have already placed the registrations, so that is underway. The CARS grant, this $15,000 grant, has already been expended, and there's $9,000 of city funds available to be spent within that project. The enhanced book budget was $2,500 and is in the process of being expended. Homeless civic funding. The amendment itself includes the $12,000. and this is my way to finalize and make sure that I know exactly where everything is placed. The transfer out to the CIP includes $743,000. That includes the $105,000 of the IT strategic master plan and $100,000 of Measure O. So the increase in general fund support for capital projects is $638,000. That's not correct. That's 538,000. I apologize. Capital Projects Fund. The certificates of participation closed in January of 2016. Those funds are being recorded, however, in the Martin Luther King, Jr. MLK Fund. The contract was awarded for Robin Sweeney Park. It's estimated to be completed July 4th. Design is underway, obviously, on Dunphy Park with construction coming. Southview Park is pending. Marin Ship Marine Rails, $50,000 was budgeted for historic consultant work. Related to that, including $20,000 for Marine Rails, specifically $10,000 has been expended through January, and the work is ongoing. The general plan can circulation element. is again, the committee is meeting. There are work to be done on the RFP. We're actually recommending that for this fiscal year those funds be reallocated. and the actual plan as a whole be brought forward as part of the 16-18 plan. budget process. Mijerot, the enhanced Street construction, concrete street funding, traffic transportation repairs compliant with ADA, requirements, these are all items that were included. as being for the purpose of Measure O. The amended budget includes $1.1 million, an increase of $100,000. Total projects related or eligible are just under $2.4 million. The amended budget for the downtown and Bridgeway tree and median includes $60,378. It's over $47,000 has already been expended. Enhanced landscape, $15,000 dedicated to landscape maintenance. Water conservation, $15,000 was included. Over $12,000 has been expended. The flashing crosswalk indicators are budgeted at $30,000. Installation is pending location study for traffic management. Dunphy Park Modular Restroom was deferred for the comprehensive plan of Dunphy Park Renovation. The City Hall beautification, the amendment The original budget was $145,000. That included painting, As well as a component of the City Hall beautification, this amendment recommends retaining $65,000 for work through June 30th and then additional funding being considered as part of the FY16-18 budget process, specifically for the beautification, not for the painting. So we're kind of separating those now. In the parking fund, originally the kiosk funding was to be part of the Chamber of Commerce request that was actually made through the general fund as an operating expense. you um, The sewer fund, obviously, the bicycle parking congestion management plan is for this evening's agenda. No changes are recommended in that funding. City and District Consolidation Study. It is budgeted at $25,000 for a 50% share in conjunction with Southern Marin. MLK fund. Again, the COPs were closed in January netting $7.2 million. RFP is being drafted for the MLK renovation specifically estimated at $3 million. Robin Sweeney and Dunphy Park and Southview are being funded through the General Capital Projects Fund. So that is a transfer of $4.2 million. Significant items for this amendment include a significant increase, pardon the pun, significant. The Accessibility and Compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, including projects specifically mentioned in the settlement agreement, of $431,000. That is bid packages 7 through 9 in the Caledonia Street improvements. The Robin Sweeney Park alternate items, I have separated those between the bid alternate specific to compliance with ADA and compliance with the settlement agreement. Those are included in the $431,000. It is actually 216 of the fourth component of this item. The authorization for the city manager to execute the contract is $216,000. That $216,000 is part of the 431. Those are items that are not... So they have to go forward as part of the ADA compliance anyway. $34,000, however, is recommended to be set aside as contingency should anything in the next three and a half months come up for Robin Sweeney. The Chamber of Commerce kiosk, as I mentioned, was funded out of general fund rather than the parking fund. The police dispatch contract at the time the budget was adopted was still in discussion, so that is an additional $70,000 that was... Um, it was inadvertently dropped down. pending additional discussions and then it came back at the original price, which was $70,000 more. Replacement benefit fund is a requirement by CalPERS that is for someone who has already retired, so the $8,113 is required to be funded and will be in future budgets. It's a recurring expense. Streets program, $100,000. That was brought up two council meetings ago in that the original amount had intended for certain streets to be included. For those streets to actually be completed, we would need to set aside an additional $100,000. Thank you. Also, moving the IT master plan to the Capital Improvement Fund. |
| 00:25:57.39 | Melanie Purcell | The FY16 general fund highlights, great news. And I have to say congratulations, it's been a while and I love being in a position to say almost $600,000 in additional revenue. That is a sign of good, strong, conservative budgeting, and wonderful economic activity in the community. Sales tax transient occupant tax estimates, an additional $315,000. Planning, building, engineering, those are all the development fees, just shy of $142,000. Other revenues, including parks, police, basically everything else, is $127,000. You can see the breakdown. The increase of Measure O is $100,000. Increased estimates of public safety sales tax is 15. Transient Occupancy Tax, TOT, is $200,000. Development fees, $141,000. Increase in recreation revenues transferred from MLK for additional general fund services and miscellaneous other activities is $127,000. |
| 00:27:06.58 | Melanie Purcell | Okay, other general fund highlights include that transfer $743,000 including, as a component, $105,000 for the IT master plan. That is not new money. that is simply shifting it from the general fund to the capital improvement fund for better tracking and frankly for the ease of accounting Police operating costs with at least four positions vacant and some underfunding previously in the year, they have a savings of $223,759. Public Works has seen an increase in operating costs predominantly from Um, somewhat from professional services and also an offset. Some of the savings that we see in community development is, in fact, a transfer between the two for the purposes of PERS reporting. When the budget is initially established, we estimate where the PERS costs, retirement costs, are calculated throughout the entire budget. What we're doing now is catching those up and adjusting them to where they actually are. It is not an increase in costs. It is a movement from one department to another department. Other operating costs include additional activities. Those are actually itemized a little further in your staff report as well as here. Administration, you'll see the movement, again, movement between departments and accounts to address CalPERS, moving IT strategic master plan. reduction for community development and professional services, Other services to reflect current workload and wages for past vacancies, again, movement between departments. Police, savings from vacancy, partially offset by full funding for dispatch, and movement between departments. Additional professional services and infrastructure repairs reflect the level of activity in the Department of Public Works. Obviously, we are doing a phenomenal amount of capital projects and anticipate doing so for the next two to three years. This will be a topic of conversation as we go into FY16-18. Recreation and library, again, just minor changes. And non-departmental reflects increased support for litigation and activities, legal activities. Non-departmental, the second non-departmental is, again, the transfer to the capital improvement fund. |
| 00:29:29.44 | Melanie Purcell | The impact to the general fund, this is something that was presented to you with the adoption of the budget, and I wanted to come back and kind of show what the impact of this amendment does to the bottom line. because it's always good to know what the comprehensive impact is. In effect, we are increasing. the impact on the fund balance. by adding an additional $27,000. We are also showing here the increase between the adopted and the current budget of what shows up in the CAFR, the additional $600,000 that came in fund balance available. So the very, very bottom line there, it says percent of liquid revenues of annual expenses. This is a traditional, typical measure of financial health, and you can see that the city is in exceptional, in good shape, and continues to move forward that passion. Thank you. The second item we were, or excuse me, flipping back to the second item we were requesting your action for is to establish a separate sewer construction capital fund. This is considered a best practice simply to establish an easier way to be transparent in how the bonds, in this particular case, the bonds are being spent. projects are clearly identified rather than being part of operating activities. What happens is the sewer bonds have already been received by the city. We would appropriate those into this. sewer construction capital funds and expend them from there over the next couple of years. Future sewer construction, major sewer construction capital projects will then be budgeted in this fund and funded as deemed appropriate by council. These were the projects identified with the issuance of the bond. I'm not going to go through all of them, but you can see the distribution over the three-year period We have a lot coming up in the next two years. a grand total of just under $6.1 million. |
| 00:31:37.64 | Melanie Purcell | summarized in your staff report is the impact to each of the other funds. But real quickly, I want to just review them. The construction impact fee, We are recognizing additional revenue as well as additional expenditures. The expenditures are transfers to the Capital Improvement Fund. Net impact is a negative $25,000. Thank you. There is proposed for the police grant simply the recognition of $60,000. It has zero impact on the fund balance, financial position. General Capital Projects Fund, which we will go into detail later on. includes an additional $80,000 returning to fund balance. This reflects some of those projects that are being deferred. for the $1.4 million is actually... It was originally budgeted at 1375. Projects were added for the ADA transition plan and other activities. And then we're recommending to continue using a substantive portion of the capital projects fund, and that is typical. build up the cash, you carry it forward, build up the cash, carry it forward as projects come available. Sewer construction funds, $6.1 million, obviously no impact to fund balance. What we will do is whatever is not spent in the current year, which will be material, we will then drop to fund balance and reappropriate next year. But it will remain within that fund. MLK. What you see here is an increase in revenues. Those revenues are associated with utility costs. So those are also reflected in the expenditures. It is a pass-through. The primary additional expenditures are related to debt service and issuing fees. What was determined was that we could save one year of debt service, as well as an additional $80,000 per year by making one new payment at the end of this fiscal year. So we're pulling the funds into out of fund balance, in fact, to make that payment so that we would see savings going forward. The parking fund, I am recommending that we adjust revenues down, $25,000. This is simply just to reflect my own uncertainty with what activities will be coming forward. The parking fund is in very healthy conditions, so this will allow us to just go forward without any concerns of coming up short. |
| 00:34:02.24 | Melanie Purcell | General Liability Fund, this is simply to recognize expenditures and that is an area for an internal service fund. Those are funds set aside throughout the year and prior years for the purposes of paying claims. |
| 00:34:17.95 | Melanie Purcell | Okay, general capital projects fund. There's a lot of movement going on here, but hopefully we can make this very clear. The City Hall meeting room. was partially defunded and this removes the remainder of it. It isn't a signed stage, it is not ready to be complete prior to the end of the year, so the intent is to push that activity off. It's under process, we cannot get the process contracted and expended prior to June 30th. Mary Sears Park as well. some of that will actually get rolled into future ADA compliance because that's what's remaining on that park. Storm vane replacement process. again, a $95,000 reduction. Street repair, as mentioned at the previous council meeting, $100,000 additional to complete all of the streets that were originally proposed. Robin Sweeney Park, this reflects the $483,728, reflects the $450,000 already adopted by city council, so it's the $33,728 in contingency that I'm recommending for this evening. Parks-related projects, this is basically everything else that is not tied up in specific projects. So these are items that were partially defunded at that previous council meeting to fund the Robin Sweeney adjustments. |
| 00:35:48.72 | Melanie Purcell | Storm drain master plan. This is under process, but it is an extensive project that will take multiple years. Similarly, the general plan update. Accessibility projects. This is reflecting where we are to date, 431,262. These are all of the projects outstanding. We're currently under ready for bid, under bid, and not awarded. brings it up to $1.2 million. This also reflects bringing us very close to the end of the settlement agreement. The settlement agreement, excuse me, this portion, phase one of the settlement agreement, which takes us through January 17th. City Hall beautification, as mentioned before, it was originally defunded at $145,000 So this is actually a combination of two actions that have taken place. The end result would be $65,000 set aside. IT strategic master plan, as mentioned before, and then other projects. These are just small things, such as the kitchen and a number of other little carpet in here, other items. To bring up to date on the accessibility lawsuit, the settlement was approved in the fall of 2015. It included priority one improvements that must be complete by January 2017, and then priority two and three. Basically, another about $3 million to be completed before the end of that time. Total estimated projects was $3.9 million. We've spent just under $600,000 as of January 2016. The legal costs are actually reflected predominantly in prior years, and this is outlined in your staff report as well, showing a timeline. It looks kind of like this. Shows prior year and then each portion of time coming up to a grand total of 4.5. |
| 00:37:55.37 | Melanie Purcell | What's being proposed of the $431,000 as I mentioned was the 216, but within that is $86,000. It is considered lower priority than the initial priority one within the settlement, but because it is within the Robin Sweeney Park project, area. it is more cost-effective to do at this time, and that's why that is being recommended. |
| 00:38:20.28 | Melanie Purcell | Jumping to Robin Sweeney then. we have $1.6 million was awarded in January. That included the 1,050,000 Um, $1,150,000, my apologies, from the certificates of participation. the remaining funding had to come from somewhere else. So that was from incomplete, deferred, or unneeded projects that were going to be handled in another fashion than their original intent. The proposed contract um, includes bid alternates 1, 2A, 2B, and 2C. 1 and 2A are ADA compliance items that were not included on the original priority one list. But because of the mobilization costs and the opportunity to gain additional compliance within the ADA while we're under construction, we're recommending those. 2B and 2C are included in the accessibility settlement as priority items. So those are items that would need to be done regardless of the disposition of the park or even the issuance of the COPs. The 33728 is mentioned as for contingency. Going forward, Finance Committee did meet last month and began an overview of the process and at that time, decided that it would be a good idea to be coming back to Council at each regular meeting beginning with the second meeting in April through the month of June. So rather than have the Finance Committee do all its heavy lifting and then come back once, I'll be providing updates each council meeting beginning April 26 on what the finance committee is reviewing and seeing. We will be starting with revenues. having an in-depth, detailed conversation about capital as well as meeting with each department. Any questions? |
| 00:40:12.28 | Melanie Purcell | Questions? And |
| 00:40:17.53 | Unknown | Thank you, Melanie, for a good presentation and covering a lot of ground in that. I appreciate it. So my first question actually is not specifically about the budget, but it is related to finance. Every year, usually in fall, we receive a financial audit, you know, the financial report for the fiscal year. And I don't recall getting that this year. |
| 00:40:52.17 | Melanie Purcell | The audit that you received is actually was only just received by the city in the month of February. So it's not atypical. Most every state requires within six months. Six months from June, so December. From the end of June, and actually California, I believe, is eight or nine months. So this would be right on time. |
| 00:40:52.96 | Unknown | The audit, yes. |
| 00:41:05.16 | Unknown | Six months from June, so December. From the end. |
| 00:41:14.93 | Unknown | Okay, so I know usually we get that because it's helpful. It gives us perspective. For example, if you could go to your slide where you are referring to the net position. |
| 00:41:25.14 | Unknown | where you can see the |
| 00:41:30.85 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 00:41:31.81 | Unknown | Um, I, uh, fiscal year 2014 status, I think it's slide two. |
| 00:41:37.89 | Unknown | Oops, there we go. |
| 00:41:40.47 | Unknown | Yeah, so your one, two, three, four bullet down, total net position is $25.9 million, but I believe last year's financial audit was about $44 million. Is that correct? I can't speak to that. I have it, so. So perhaps, I guess, and as well, the next bullet down, per GASB 68, the last bullet, you mentioned that we have an increase in our net position of $961,000. But it's my understanding, if we look at the unrestricted cash, we're going to see a negative of several million because of our pension liability being factored in. |
| 00:41:56.14 | Melanie Purcell | I can't speak to lecture. |
| 00:42:01.43 | Melanie Purcell | THE END OF |
| 00:42:28.97 | Melanie Purcell | So when we were, there's something to keep in mind. GASB actually changed the rules, let me say seven, eight years ago, in terms of how you report. You have to report at several different levels. They also changed last year. the reporting on pension liabilities. It does not change the reality that the city's financial position is quite secure and is in exceptionally good shape. It simply means that we have to report those items differently. |
| 00:42:54.92 | Unknown | Well, it shows the public what the true debt is long term. THE FAMILY IS Anyway, so I guess my question is, can we have that financial audit at the next presentation so that we can weigh those numbers against the decision making we're making in the short term versus the debt in the long term? |
| 00:43:16.89 | Melanie Purcell | the audit is in front of you. |
| 00:43:18.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:43:18.83 | Melanie Purcell | right now. |
| 00:43:19.34 | Unknown | I'm sorry? |
| 00:43:20.23 | Melanie Purcell | That is the audit. |
| 00:43:21.43 | Unknown | Where is, I'm sorry, where is the audit? |
| 00:43:24.72 | Melanie Purcell | Oh, under here. Mm-hmm. We did not place it on the city website until the council has received it. |
| 00:43:28.97 | Unknown | So- Okay, I did not get this. I mean, this was just- You got it tonight, yes. Just walking in here tonight, okay. It was under my stuff, so. |
| 00:43:35.23 | Melanie Purcell | He's just... |
| 00:43:40.60 | Unknown | Well, obviously, I haven't had a chance to look at it. I just discovered it was here. So, great. |
| 00:43:51.65 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, of course. Thank you. Oh, yeah. |
| 00:43:53.58 | Unknown | did want to just jump in or okay On slide, it's on page six of your slide, significant items. |
| 00:44:04.61 | Unknown | And I did wonder why you labeled it significant items, because there are a few that are 8,000. That was one. So let's start with that, and I have another question. I'm not sure what that meant, because they were kind of an unusual assortment, and some were big numbers and small numbers. |
| 00:44:12.95 | Melanie Purcell | I'm not sure what that means. |
| 00:44:14.15 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:44:20.17 | Melanie Purcell | Frankly, because they actually stood out to me. significant being that they are not something that I would Normally, the $8,000 is in there because that is a new charge that you will see going forward that has not been seen in the past. |
| 00:44:35.53 | Unknown | And then the other question is, I mean, I think it'd be good to explain to everyone. The big number is the 431 in ADA. And can you explain why we're spending the additional 431? this year. |
| 00:44:49.75 | Melanie Purcell | The 431 is specifically related to items within the settlement agreement, as well as the $86,000 associated with Caledonia and Robin Sweeney Park influence. that are within the what I would call priority two, but basically the non-first segment, but within the expectations of that settlement. So we have a certain amount that must be done by January 17th, and then we have everything else that has to get done in a hurry, but within 15 years. So we can then pick and choose how we do that. because this project is open We're recommending the $85,000, almost 86, to be done now because it would be cheaper than putting it off. prudent use of funds. The 431 is including items that are all related to priority one. Thank you. Yes. |
| 00:45:40.70 | Unknown | Thank you. I have a follow-up question to that and Priority 201 because we recently learned from Public Works that California Code, Building Code 11B-206 requires all routes be ADA accessible when a project has one or more routes for pedestrians. And evidently, Robin Sweeney falls under that. So irrespective of priority one or priority two, these kick in according to California requirements. Correct. |
| 00:46:14.62 | Melanie Purcell | Correct, and that's the portion that I've called you. |
| 00:46:16.71 | Unknown | Right, right. And so I guess the controversy, well, I'll hold my comments regarding the overrun for comments. Thank you. |
| 00:46:25.67 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:46:25.69 | Jill Hoffman | right? Thank you. |
| 00:46:27.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:46:27.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:46:27.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:46:27.28 | Jill Hoffman | you Thank you. Bye. Don't have any questions. All right. So we'll start with public comment. I have Shelby Van Meter. And I have Jeff and Jesus, Scott and Nova. And then the last card I have is David Holu. Yes, Shelby. |
| 00:46:53.99 | Shelby Van Meter | Good evening. Nice to see you, Mayor Hoffman and City Council. I represent South Little Beautiful. As many of you may know, I'm president of South Little Beautiful. We started the beautification initiative, as you all know, in 2013. So tonight we're here to bring up the subject of the $145,000 that was budgeted for or allocated for and approved by the City Council in June of 2015. At that time, it was really clear to us that this was for the first phase of landscape improvement at the Civic Center. And we see in the budget, major budget this evening, that the description included painting and landscaping and that it has been largely defunded, I guess for the purposes of elevator repair, we understand. and some painting or repairs on the exterior of the building. So we're very curious about that and wonder what the city's point of view is on this project. and how you see it moving forward. We've spent a lot of time advocating this. It's on our website, and we've talked about it in our newsletters, and we've all been very excited, as the public has, and as you at the City Council were, about this moving forward. So it's been a long time, and We really would like to understand the city's point of view or commitment to this project and how you see it unfolding in the future because we're gonna need some words pretty soon to explain to our public whatever happened to the Civic Center Landscape Improvement Project. So I guess that's the form of a question and that's what we're here to ask. |
| 00:48:37.79 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Um, Next speaker. Next speaker. We can't answer in the public. Oh, you can't respond. Oh, all right. |
| 00:48:42.85 | Shelby Van Meter | We can't answer in the public. Oh, all right. Well, I'll just leave that as a question then. Thank you for your comments. And if you can help us when you have a chance to let us know, we'd very much appreciate it. Thank you. |
| 00:48:47.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:48:47.20 | Jill Hoffman | as a question then and if you can help us. |
| 00:48:54.02 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay. you I did take notes, though, Shelby. Yes, Jeff. You're up. |
| 00:49:06.57 | Jeffrey Chase | Thank you, Ms. Mayor and City Council and citizens of Sausalito. Uh, I'd like to read... a little Torah portion here. I've invited people of various faiths or no-faiths, agnostics, atheists, Buddhists, or Hindus, to also come and do this. I don't feel like this should be sectarian. Only for... an Israelite to be talking about this. in the US Constitution, It says, there shall be no established church. It does not say there is a separation between synagogue and church. and stay. state. without religion. is power without ethics. and religion without state, is weak. So... I'd like to read a little bit. This is from Vayachel. the Torah portion for last week. And Vayechel means the whole community. It says Moses called the whole community of the children of Israel to assemble. And he said to them, These are the things that the Lord commanded to make. Take from yourselves an offering for the Lord. Every generous-hearted person shall bring it, namely the Lord's offering, gold, and silver and copper. And silver is a word that in Hebrew, kesev, that's the same as money. Then it says this, and this is about a worker's who are building the Mishkan, which is the tent of meeting. It says, Moses called Bezalel and Holiab and every wise-hearted man into whose heart the Lord had given wisdom. Everyone whose heart lifted him up to approach the work to do it. And The... Let me find this. This is... This is the Haftor. This is after the Mishkan is built. It says this. It says, All the people of the land rejoiced. And the city quieted down. Now, Amhaaret means the people of the land, and often it's used as a bit of a curse word in Hebrew to say people who are in a rural area, they're hicks, they wear overalls, they got a little piece of hay in their teeth. But here it's saying that they rejoiced, and I feel a sense of rejoicing today because me and a few pals from the Anchorage went up to Southview Park This is between 3rd and 4th Street on north. And Nancy Wagner, the city attorney, and Jonathan Goldman, the Department of Public Works director had told us that we could use the unused part of this for a community garden. So I just want to say thank you to them. Thank you to the City Council. and the mayor. As well. So if anybody else, I brought about seven people up there, and they're the ones who are going to talk next. |
| 00:52:15.93 | Jill Hoffman | and Okay, now let me just focus us for here a second. Now, this is public comment on the finance. The President. |
| 00:52:24.47 | Jeffrey Chase | What I'd like to say is the Torah portion had directly to do with finance. This community garden will cost nothing for the city. |
| 00:52:25.63 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:52:35.03 | Jeffrey Chase | It's not going to be a... a debt. And it's not going to be, it will be an asset, of course. Okay, so I think that, when I'm talking about the Torah, we're talking about something that's freely given. So it very much has to do with finance to you. |
| 00:52:54.08 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Okay. So we're moving on to the next speakers on my list. Yes. |
| 00:52:54.61 | Jeffrey Chase | Okay. Thank you. |
| 00:52:57.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:52:57.19 | Jeffrey Chase | Yeah. |
| 00:52:57.85 | Jill Hoffman | which, again, I hope they'll be speaking to the finance report that was just given. Jesus, Scott, and Nova are the next. You're up. No? All right. Scott? |
| 00:53:14.81 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. And Nova? Okay. All righty. Moving on then. David Holup to talk about the budget. Yes. Thank you. |
| 00:53:26.77 | David Holu | Thanks, Mayor. I'm just commenting about a very specific line item in the budget. On the IT portion of it, I noticed that you were deferring roughly $125,000, which is a lot of money for this, for software development and the planning and building departments. And I just want to say that I think deferring this is not necessarily a great idea. I think it's something that really does deserve the city's attention. I think that there is a lot of benefit both internally for the city to develop better program management and planning tools for the various capital projects that are being discussed here. As well as the community aspects of it, in which I think we've all heard, and I'm personally experiencing some frustrations around the building and planning department And investing in that type of software infrastructure is really critical to both saving money for the city and dealing with those kinds of planning issues. And I would really ask the city council not to defer that investment, but to make that investment sooner rather than later. Now, of course, the devil's in the details inside these types of IT projects. You know, the budget doesn't reveal those details. but I would just add that. It also takes commitment both in terms of personnel, having the right operators for these types of software projects to get them to produce the kind of results, and the commitment of the city operationally and organizationally to get everything inside that environment and operate in a disciplined way inside of a software environment like that. And I think you would find a lot less frustration from the community on their building and planning projects and I think you'd find a lot of savings for the city in identifying opportunities to plan better and more effectively and the last thing I would say is that these tools have gotten very very good but to also in that RFP look for solutions that are non-vendor specific so that you can identify software solutions that can be developed by more than one operator and you don't get pegged into a specific vendor. So that was my comment, it's just specific about that item. |
| 00:55:47.53 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. Next is David Sudo. Sorry, David Sudo. And then the last card I have is Meg Fawcett. |
| 00:55:57.26 | David Sudo | So I was looking at the budget, and one thing that stood out to me is, for some reason we have a 45% increase in parking revenues this year. And I was just unclear about whether that was a distortion from the purchase of the metering system or if we were really having that much increased tourism or perhaps we had an enhanced revenue program with the parking enforcement. It really stood out to me that we had a 45% increase over basically last, which was much larger than the last two or three years, or even maybe four. And I was just wondering where that came from. Thank you. |
| 00:56:38.07 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. Thank you. Meg Fawcett? |
| 00:56:42.40 | Meg Fawcett | Good evening. I'm Meg Fawcett. And it's my understanding from the presentation from Melanie that there's approximately $600,000 that is now unallocated or unassigned And I'm hopeful that you will put back into the budget for the Civic Center City Hall beautification the full $145,000. The plan is already set forth by SWA It's beautiful. It's easy to implement it, we know how. And I think it would be a shame if that money wasn't put back. Thank you. |
| 00:57:16.57 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. This is for the... |
| 00:57:18.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:57:21.23 | Jill Hoffman | I have – we'll just hand another card for Peter Van Meter and Una Kavanaugh. Is this for the budget, I'm guessing, Peter? Yes? All right. |
| 00:57:22.03 | Meg Fawcett | We're just talking about it. |
| 00:57:33.74 | Peter Van Meter | I think that Una's on her way. So I'm sort of standing until she gets here. I'm looking over my shoulder. You got three minutes. |
| 00:57:40.16 | Jill Hoffman | You got three minutes. |
| 00:57:41.58 | Peter Van Meter | you I wasn't clear if the $11,000 for the kiosk was drawn in a special items as something to be continued. or something to be proposed to be eliminated. It would be a clarification on that point, because I'm sure that the, as a member of the board of directors of the chamber, that the chamber would be interested in that, having that continue so we can maintain that public service to the visitors to Sausalito. But I wasn't clear when it was listed if that's a yes or no on being on that list. |
| 00:58:12.04 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you for your comments. Next. Yes. |
| 00:58:19.40 | Jesus | Jesus. See as a community like Jeff was saying in the Torah like people coming together and actually coming and speaking as a community to where we speak back and forth and share share our thoughts, like, would be a beautiful thing. Like, if we all meet together and actually |
| 00:58:38.72 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:58:41.22 | Jesus | share love with one another and talk about what we want to do with our city and uh bring the money and actually work together and do it together instead of like having such a love for money to like, to pay people to go do this to where they have to do that. And it's like, it's a form of slavery. Like, I'm tired of like people, being enslaved over money. And it's just, it's ridiculous. Like, why are, as a people, do we bowed down to money. And come. And instead of love and love for one another, Why? Why can't we come together and just plant food and make a nice park? If I had money and if our community was getting together, I would give my every last dollar to... to help the community and just to, to share the love and get to know the community and build our community together instead of taking money from everybody and enslaving our people to make them work for a living instead of coming in, like helping each other supply our and grow our food and, and supply each other supply and grow our food and supply each other with love, which everybody's all craving. Everybody's craving love. There's no love in slavery. Loving money is not the answer. It's loving each other because God, he's us. |
| 01:00:30.84 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. Okay, those are all the speaker cards I have for public comment on the budget. And so I'm going to bring it back here for council comments. May I? Sorry. Forget something? |
| 01:00:43.02 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:00:43.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:00:43.06 | Unknown | Amen. |
| 01:00:43.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:00:45.76 | Unknown | Well, I was going to – I actually have some questions, I think, that need answering. Yeah, sorry. |
| 01:00:51.11 | Unknown | I'm sorry. Yeah, sorry, we're back in the, fine. And can I make a comment? Yeah, no, thank you. It's a little procedural. We had, we know this is mid-year budget adjustments. It's very technical and accounting wise. |
| 01:00:52.52 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:00:52.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:00:52.56 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yeah, no. |
| 01:00:55.22 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:01:02.73 | Unknown | And and I know it can be very confusing to look at this. And I know that there were five questions Saucelito Beautiful, the IT question, parking, make faucets and on the kiosk. And I think it would be worthwhile to take those questions at some point and have staff answer them. So I don't know, maybe we might have council questions first, but I would recommend that. |
| 01:01:23.35 | Unknown | I would recommend that. Actually, my questions were going to be those questions. Oh, okay. So that actually people's questions were not answered. |
| 01:01:26.21 | Unknown | Oh, okay. |
| 01:01:27.12 | Jill Hoffman | the, the, |
| 01:01:27.29 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. PEOPLE. |
| 01:01:28.03 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, Adam has his hand up. |
| 01:01:29.77 | Adam Politzer | So let me try to respond to the six questions that I |
| 01:01:29.80 | Jill Hoffman | So. |
| 01:01:34.24 | Adam Politzer | note it down and then Melanie. |
| 01:01:34.32 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:01:35.99 | Adam Politzer | Can fill in the blanks if I if I'm wrong which is not unusual, or if there's more information, So for Shelby Van Meter's question and question related to Sassu de Beautiful and phase one here at City Hall. During the original budget process, the discussion at the council meetings were about the beautification here at City Hall. Somewhere through the translation between public works and finance at the time that turned into the city hall painting both the interior and exterior of the project. Some of that confusion may have happened based on, at the same time, The COP coming forward and the landscape improvements that were going to be the front of City Hall were probably incorporated in that discussion so that painting and the landscape improvements related to the Robin Sweeney Park project, you probably ended up throwing that communication off kilter. At the finance committee, Shelby and members of Saucyuta Beautiful were there. We brought this to the council's attention. There was obviously some concerns related to this. And when we defunded the painting of the interior and exterior of City Hall, to fund the elevator project as an urgent project that ended up creating the recognition that that defunding had occurred of the landscape improvements. So what Melanie has shown in the budget recap here is that in addition to what the Robin Sweeney Park project is already encompassing in terms of the improvements in the landscape on the front of the building, we have put in the budget $60,000 between the council adopting this tonight. June 30th and which I think is what the Public Works Department said even if you gave us a hundred and forty five thousand dollars to do any of the phases of City Hall we wouldn't be able to spend a hundred and forty five thousand dollars between now and June 30th but we do believe that sixty thousand dollars for beautification. unrelated to painting. could be spent between now and June 30th. the intention of the $60,000 that's in this budget for beautification for Saucyutu Beautiful. For Jeff, Jeff, your memory of the community garden is excellent, but this is Mary, not Nancy. And the community garden discussion was part of a much larger discussion that the community was having about building a community garden out at MLK. And that discussion ended up not moving forward because of a lot of concerns that were that were brought forward to the council and through the community. And the discussion that then materialized was looking at having community gardens throughout the city and not just one location because if it's here at Dunphy Park or here at at MLK. The people that are walking from their neighborhoods would have a long journey to get to those. So there was discussions of looking at Southview Park as one component of it. Those discussions never materialized. They never moved forward. They never even came before. the city council, so there is no traction what's the future of community gardens it doesn't mean that that communication cannot start again but we would recommend that it that it restart at the Park and Rec Commission meetings and as discussions on any of our parks or community garden any location throughout town starts at the park and rec commission and make its way back to the city council. With David's question about the IT software, I think he's left, but for the public. And if he's watching at home, Um, We as staff and as the city council 100% agree we want that software. It's actually quite expensive and to build it to the point that is a good starting place for us. We're looking at the dollar amount that staff has recommended. But again, similar to Sassaduro Beautiful. to get through the RFP process and to get a bid. and be back in front of the council and then get the product online wouldn't happen before June 30th. So we are deferring the actual purchase of the software, but we are working very hard and diligently with the staff to actually identify what we need. We've had several discussions with the Finance Committee in the past in a very good presentation to the council in December or in January. I don't know when we actually did that, but spelling that out. So it is our intent. We absolutely believe that that will be a benefit both to our customers, but also a benefit internally to the staff that will be utilizing that to be more effective and efficient in terms of going through that process. David Sudo's question about the parking revenue it's a combination of the new equipment the new meter heads the call by phone and then also bike parking bike parking was collected through that and that was a new program last last summer and the big dollars came in in July and August of last year, and that also had a spike in that revenue that you see in the budget there. But we believe, as you heard from Julie Dixon, who's our parking consultant, working with Lieutenant Stacey Gregory, when we shared the information, we had already seen a spike in the revenues in the parking from the year before based on the new equipment. And I would say that those new meter heads will contribute significantly as we go forward in parking. Meg had asked about Saucer de Beautiful. I've addressed that. And Peter, the $11,000 is available and is proposed to remain in the budget for the kiosk. And Jesus, I believe and love too. And hopefully there's a lot of love in the room tonight. So thank you. |
| 01:07:53.32 | Jill Hoffman | All right. Thank you, Adam. Any other follow-up on any of those issues from? |
| 01:07:59.38 | Unknown | All right. Comment. I have some questions just because we walked in tonight and this was sitting on the dais and I just flipped it open and looked at it. So I just am referring to the financial audit and I wanted to confirm my interpretation of this. I'm looking on page 9, City of Sausalito's net position. And can you define for the public what unrestricted means, unrestricted cash or assets? |
| 01:08:00.57 | Jill Hoffman | COMMENT. |
| 01:08:36.77 | Melanie Purcell | I will do my best. I have to be perfectly honest. When I start speaking GASB and accountees, I have to stop and think left, right, debits, credits. So full disclosure. When we talk about restricted versus unrestricted, restricted funds are things that you cannot spend. Assets that are fixed, as in buildings, roads, things like that. They're also debts owed to the city or non-liquid. So at no point in the immediate future, even, really the foreseeable future, could the city actually dispose of them to garner cash? that's that's the general description unrestricted may include some items that the city has said yeah we think we're going to use for these items but has not moved into restricted because you can also take cash instruments or in effect budget authority and say it is restricted for these things. For example, at the end of the year, if you have encumbered items, you have entered into a contract and you have said we're going to pay $25,000 for this, but you've only received invoices for $5,000. That becomes a restricted asset because you cannot without, you've already obligated the funds, you've already entered into the contract. Yes, in theory, you can go back and cancel it and go through that, but it's not immediately available. There are some fine distinctions that are not reflected in the higher categories. |
| 01:10:04.96 | Unknown | So unrestricted then, could you also describe unrestricted as money that is not restricted for spending? |
| 01:10:15.05 | Melanie Purcell | Please repeat that. |
| 01:10:16.18 | Unknown | Oh, could you also define unrestricted as money that is not confined for specific spending? It does include that. Okay, thank you. So when I look at page nine, our unrestricted, that is cash that was not earmarked for specific projects, unrestricted, we had a surplus of $918,489. Unrestricted. |
| 01:10:23.84 | Melanie Purcell | It does include that. |
| 01:10:44.89 | Unknown | This year, we have a negative 17,209,146. |
| 01:10:58.05 | Melanie Purcell | Yes. |
| 01:10:58.71 | Unknown | It's my understanding we have that debt because of GASB 68, which is designed to educate the public as to the financial status long term of the city at this time. |
| 01:11:18.35 | Melanie Purcell | What they're specifically referring to is that it does not, and this is directly from page nine, does not represent a liability due and payable immediately. It does not represent a legal debt obligation. a cumulative financial liability. It has always been reported It has just not been reported on the face of the financial statements, but rather as a note. What you will note though, or you may note, is that it does change all the time. There are several elements to GASB 68, including a mandate on when... the market value of your assets and the market value of your obligations, and they were designed to be ultra-conservative. So you do not get any advantage of the smoothing and the long-term picture when you are looking at your assets, which you did in the past. So while you would expect to not be paying that over 30 years because the person is going to live 30 years, you now have to take a snapshot at any given moment. So it does distort what was previously reported as a long-term asset and a long-term liability to now a short-term picture of the asset and a long-term picture of the. |
| 01:12:27.93 | Unknown | And. And with respect to that short-term snapshot, it works both ways, doesn't it? Because it's my understanding that CalPERS in June of 2015, that their target was 7.5% return, but they only got 2.5%. you and that this year they did worse. It hasn't been published yet. We're not going to know that yet for, you know, several months. But I guess my point is, isn't it true that that can go against taxpayers? And but either way, we're on the hook. Taxpayers are on the hook for that because it's pension liability. |
| 01:13:12.31 | Melanie Purcell | And if the person collects, then the pension must be paid. What I'm referring to is that they take the snapshot at a different timeline than the audit in terms of your market value. That could be at a good point or a bad point, but it will almost always be less than the timeline upon which your liability. Your liability is booked as if it exists and everybody gets to retire. there's no discounting for that. Whereas your asset is taken at the moment in the time that its value is. Right. Right. So it will always be less. Right. And, and, |
| 01:13:36.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:13:36.67 | Unknown | Oh. |
| 01:13:36.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:13:38.60 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 01:13:43.34 | Unknown | Right, right. So it will always be less. Right. And it was done that way to educate the public as to the risk with respect to the pensions. Thank you. |
| 01:13:52.72 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:13:58.68 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right. So let's now. Ready for council comments? Yep. Okay. Who wants to kick us off? Anybody? Thank you. |
| 01:14:08.05 | David Holu | Thank you. |
| 01:14:08.20 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:14:08.23 | David Holu | Thank you. |
| 01:14:08.35 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 01:14:09.21 | Unknown | I think, again, you know, note to the public, I mean, this is the accounting. I mean, this is a budgeting process, and we're estimating, and a lot of this are estimating, we're re-estimating before the end of the year, so it doesn't necessarily mean we've spent or haven't spent. The good news is that our revenues are up $583,000, over $583,000 from what we had originally budgeted. So that's really good news. We're transferring into our... Capital Improvement Project 743,000. So there's a plus in in the budget as well. So we're doing well We talked about the ADA because we've had to do that. We've settled a lawsuit now at least we know what our Liabilities are what we need to do to do it to handle those so moving along I guess this is just merely the wrap-up this year's budget which ends in three months I guess we have three more months and then of course we're going to start big-ticket item and we'll see a lot of Shelby I'm sure when we talk about the two-year budget that comes up and a lot of the stuff that as Adam pointed out to you so so I had to say thanks |
| 01:15:15.98 | Jill Hoffman | Councilman Fyre. |
| 01:15:18.19 | Unknown | Thank you, and thanks again to Melanie and other city staff members who responded to my questions before this council session. So first of all, I also want to thank Melanie for providing us when we walked in with this booklet. I encourage the public to take a look at this booklet. This booklet is the financial audit of the city. The difference between the budget and the financial audit is that the budget is just about money in, money out. Money in, money out. If you have a credit card and you charge you know, $10,000 on it but you only pay $100 a month, minimum payment that's the budget. It says, oh, well you're only paying $100 a month. But the financial audit says you owe $10K. So the financial audit really provides a lot more insight, I think into the financial audit says you owe 10K. So the financial audit really provides a lot more insight, I think, into the financial risks and kind of what we're looking at moving forward. I know that they say this stuff is complicated. You know what? It's kind of common. To me, it's common sense. when you look at this, last year our unrestricted, you know, cash was, it was listed at 918,000. This year unrestricted column is negative 17 million and that was done by legislation. Legislation in Sacramento, legislators said, you know what, the The American public needs to know the facts They need to know the unfunded pension liability the pension liability that cities are facing. So take a look at this It's an eye-opener. I will have more to say about it at the next meeting in terms of the elements of this budget, I remain so disappointed with respect to the overrun. It is an overrun on Robin Sweeney Park. The public was clearly told for Measure F that that budget was $1.150, you know, 1.15 million. At one point they said 1.2 million, but that was the most fluctuation we saw during the campaign. Now suddenly we're seeing, you know, well last time it was a $400,000 overrun they're claiming it's for ADA it is for ADA but we now know that before that that vote that there was a California building cold 11b-206 that was you know in place in 2013 so that they knew that these requirements for ADA with or without a lawsuit would be triggered with this project. Those should have been included with the budget. If they're mandated by law they're part of that budget when you're redoing that park. In fact in a prior staff presentation there there was a line item of $250,000 for ADA and I intend to do research on that I'm out of time I have a lot more to say but bottom line is I have more questions about this budget than anything else |
| 01:18:35.51 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Councilman Whitehead. That's what we're doing. |
| 01:18:41.96 | Unknown | Well, we've talked about a number of things up here. First of all, the financial statement and the audit for the previous year, which we've just received. GASB 68 was actually put in place by the Government Accounting Standards Board. That's what GASB stands for. That's the entity that regulates accounting for government agencies. GASB 68 has been talked about for about four years. We've been anticipating it. It's old news. And as our financial services director said, our net position is very strong. Reason is, is that in our long range forecast, we actually have, by law, a plan to actually pay all that down. That's part of our budget. So let's actually move on to the real topic of the conversation here, which is the budget. One of the things that folks need to understand is that when this budget was put together, we had not settled this ADA lawsuit. And in fact fact this ADA lawsuit has been hanging over the city for quite a number of years we deliberately as we've done every year we're very conservative on the budget budgeting very conservatively for revenues being as realistic as we could on expenses. And recognize that this time, this year, right now, we would have to incorporate the results of that settlement. Settlement occurred in July, August of last year. And now we're incorporating it. It is, in my view, a great credit to the financial management of this city that we are actually able to incorporate into our budget in a positive way so that we actually do not end up with deficits a major litigation settlement over one of the most important topics that we have, which is ADA work. So this is a very significant thing. You should be very pleased with the financial management of the city accordingly. And the take home message is we actually have an extra 500, over half a million dollars that we've been able to move into the capital fund to fund ADA improvements. That's a significant achievement. |
| 01:21:35.03 | Jill Hoffman | Well, The major concern that I have with this budget, and this is not a secret to anybody who ever listens to anything that I say, is that the overruns in Robin Sweeney Park, and I shared this during the Finance Committee as well. So it's troubling to me, as Councilman Pfeiffer alluded to, that we started out at $1,050,000, and now we're up to $1.6 million. And that's the driving reason why we needed a Citizens Oversight Committee, and I'm very pleased that we have one, and we have one appointed tonight. What I would like to do is to And if we want to separate this out, that's fine. If I have any support for that, we would do that, or we might delay. the vote on this budget for two weeks so that our citizens oversight committee can have their first meeting and specifically look at the budget as it is for Robyn Sweeney Park and MLK. Because it's not just Robin Sweeney, it's MLK, it's Dumpy Park, it's Southie Park. And so that's why I suggested that we have a Citizens Oversight Committee in December. That's why I suggested in February that we have one, and I'm certainly happy that we have one now. I'm also very pleased that we have... that we have the audit, I'm very pleased that now The pension liability is clearly reflected in the audit. It gives us a much better picture of where we stand financially. It would have been very helpful to have this when we were a five year that became a four year contract with our city employees to be able to assess the pension the added pension burden against what we see now. So I'm glad that that's part of the budget. I think that's the right move with regard to transparency and our financial standings. Um, I... I would like to see if any of my fellow council members want to comment on with regard to whether or not we want to vote tonight. given that the Citizens Oversight Committee has just been formed or whether or not they want to carve out the COP portion. or whether or not the majority wants to go ahead and vote. So I invite any comment on Thank you. |
| 01:23:44.63 | Unknown | Well, this is a budget thing, and the oversight committee is not looking at a budget. They're looking at what the actuals are and whether they've been funded. But also, and I think we need Melanie to address this, we have already accounted for the increase in Robin Sweeney in this budget. It's been handled. We voted on it as a council. We voted the additional amount. |
| 01:23:44.65 | Jill Hoffman | Why? |
| 01:24:04.20 | Unknown | some meetings ago. So there's nothing more to do on that. And what the citizens oversight committee do and I'm certainly happy to have it is they're going to look at what's been spent and is it come from the measure of funds so we'll have nothing to do with the budget. I mean, it has nothing at all to do with the budget. So that's my only, you know, and I don't see why we would hold this up for that because they would add nothing to the budget. And would would also we're, we're moving along and I but you know, to organize this and get them together and such and again, I don't see any way that they possibly could add any any information is because we've voted on it. It's in the budget other than I think 34,000 contingency. So can you want to comment on that Melanie or Adam? |
| 01:24:54.00 | Melanie Purcell | The council has adopted amendments to $1.6 million. So what exists as of today, both in the financial accounting system, on the books for the council record, is $1.6 million. The 33,000. change. 784, I think. is in fact contingency. you can choose to adopt or not. The 450,000 has already been adopted. What I have done in this amendment is incorporate everything that you have done since July 1st and reflecting it so that because this was actually a request and expressed also at the Finance Committee that there was concern we were not seeing the whole picture. So I wanted to ensure that everything was incorporated from original to amended to adopted, is what I'm saying, and then amended the amendment today. |
| 01:25:43.31 | Unknown | Melanie, I have a follow-up question on that. It was my recollection when we were first looking at the COPs, I looked at the line items for the tenants at MLK and came up with something like over $200,000 in funds, repair costs that the tenants should incur. And I said, why are we borrowing it against money that is the tenant's responsibility? The answer I was given was, oh, well, that's actually the contingency cost. That's a buffer we've built in like 10% or something in case things go over. So I'm just curious, is it that that 200 K was a buffer for just MLK and that now we have this 33 I'm just curious as to why |
| 01:26:14.97 | Unknown | you |
| 01:26:14.99 | Caroline | Thank you. Well, we. |
| 01:26:39.96 | Unknown | There was a buffer for MLK, but it was not considered for Robin Sweeney, and now it is. |
| 01:26:46.88 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, thank you, Council Member Pfeiffer. I'll answer that question. That question was asked twice. You brought it up when Leslie Johnson actually gave the presentation with the consultant and asked. You pointed out that discrepancy. Staff said they would look into it. Then Charlie Francis responded to it. The next time that item came up and said that money will not be spent if it's for tenant improvements. The tenants will be responsible for their improvements. I'm not aware of staff. or any member of the council saying that that money would be contingency money at the end of the day it will be unspent money. unless the council makes a decision to spend it on something that they so choose. But at this point, I don't have any memory of it being ever discussed as some contingency. |
| 01:27:34.13 | Unknown | Well, I was told because I said, why on earth are we borrowing and now paying interest against $200,000 that we don't need to borrow? Why would we borrow more money and pay interest on that sitting at a bank when we don't need to? And and I I believe if it didn't come up here and I'll go back and look at the tapes Then it may have come up in the MLK subcommittee when we were Talking about the dip which wasn't on you know, what wasn't on tape, but I do remember I do remember I And I know you know what it was in here. It was Charlie Francis. He gave this presentation and he assured me goes Oh, well, we've put 10% in for contingency costs because that's standard for project management Well, I've done, you know, what? Few decades in project management. I was at HP for 16 years five years at their project management initiative I I know about project management. Okay For you to say now that actually that's money that we just borrowed but that the Tenants are going to be responsible for and we're just going to be paying interest on it And there's just no earmark for it. I don't know how to respond to that |
| 01:28:51.27 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not sure. I recall us talking with Charlie Francis about the 300,000 for MLK very clearly, that that was not allocated for any specific fund, that that was a buffer that was built in there. So why are we- In December, on the December. |
| 01:28:58.27 | Unknown | that. |
| 01:29:03.04 | Unknown | So why are we- |
| 01:29:06.10 | Unknown | Madam Mayor, of course, that's the very thing that your oversight committee will be looking at. |
| 01:29:06.27 | Jill Hoffman | I don't know. |
| 01:29:06.47 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:29:06.55 | Jill Hoffman | And I'll see you next time. All right. |
| 01:29:11.95 | Jill Hoffman | That's why I would like to have them look at this before we vote on it. |
| 01:29:12.63 | Unknown | I would like to. |
| 01:29:15.94 | Unknown | and maybe... saying the contingency, the 34,000 we could wait for that, I think. But what we voted on and approved is already in the budget. |
| 01:29:24.43 | Unknown | No, we're mixing apples and oranges here. We're talking about something that's in the $3 million line item for MLK. We haven't even got the process rolling on MLK yet in terms of sending this out for a bid. So what's the Oversight Committee going to do? Thank you. |
| 01:29:47.00 | Jill Hoffman | I think that was a good question. |
| 01:29:47.02 | Unknown | For the MLK money. |
| 01:29:49.23 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, I think that was an example of why we need to have the oversight committee look at this. |
| 01:29:49.40 | Unknown | I think that was the next. |
| 01:29:55.24 | Unknown | Fine, that's nothing to do with the budget. |
| 01:29:56.03 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 01:29:57.62 | Unknown | Oh, well, hang on a minute. I will be happy, Ray, to bring it back to the budget. This all started with my question regarding the $33,728 that has been set aside for contingency for Rob and Sweeney Park, which I see as yet another overrun element. And my question came back to my recollection when we were talking about the budgeting with Measure F and I had a lot of questions with a lot of inconsistencies that I was seeing in the numbers, that one of them had MLK and there you know, there were things that were the tenant's responsibility and it totaled over 200,000. Jill says 300,000, I believe it. It was high. And the response I got from the Thank you. at the next meeting by the finance director was, oh, that's a contingency for the MLK. Well, if we were building that in for MLK, I mean, surely we would have built it in for the other projects, too, because he said it was, quote, I believe, project management 101. And I went, oh, okay, 10% overrun. But now we're seeing another 33,000. So, yeah, I think that this is intricately linked with the oversight committee, at least my vision of what the oversight committee should be looking at. I guess if what I'm seeing before me here falls into place, it looks like projects are being pulled out of Robin Sweeney Park that are actually part of Robin Sweeney Park and being told they're not part of Robin Sweeney Park so that they don't go look like an overrun. But that's exactly what they are. Thank you. |
| 01:31:55.47 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:31:55.52 | Unknown | you |
| 01:31:55.61 | Jill Hoffman | So I'm looking at – oh, go ahead. Go ahead. |
| 01:31:56.20 | Unknown | you |
| 01:31:56.23 | Unknown | Look at it. No, I think my recommendation is that we move ahead and approve this budget. |
| 01:32:03.30 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, let me just say. Amendment 4, attachment 4, part of the resolution clearly says Robin Sweeney Playground. 1.634. So that's part of the resolution that we're voting on tonight. |
| 01:32:17.02 | Unknown | We've already voted on that. It's already done. That's a done deal. |
| 01:32:17.48 | Jill Hoffman | Voted on that. It's already done. That's a done deal. Then why is it part of the resolution? |
| 01:32:21.07 | Unknown | because we are just bringing formally the budget up to date. |
| 01:32:25.53 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I would say that I would like to then delete those sections from the resolution tonight or delay the vote by two weeks. |
| 01:32:32.70 | Unknown | You can't undo a vote you've already done to appropriate money that's already started being spent. |
| 01:32:37.46 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:32:37.74 | Jill Hoffman | Well, |
| 01:32:38.12 | Unknown | Well, I voted against it. No, I mean just to be clear. So I can vote against it again. |
| 01:32:38.79 | Unknown | Thank you. . |
| 01:32:39.30 | Ray | Yeah. |
| 01:32:39.41 | Unknown | I'm sorry. Thank you. |
| 01:32:39.64 | Ray | So I can vote against it again. You vote against everything. No, I do not. |
| 01:32:41.71 | Unknown | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 01:32:45.34 | Unknown | No, I do not, Herb. No, I do not. Okay, we're getting. I do not, Herb. We're devolving down. You attack me all the time, but I do not vote against everything all the time. Like Measure O? And I, no, I supported Measure O. I made. |
| 01:32:46.40 | Ray | . Okay, we're getting... I do not, Herb. We're devolving down. You would. I would say. that I do. |
| 01:32:54.59 | Jill Hoffman | everything all the time. Like measuring? Okay. I made Okay, we need to Okay Okay, I'm guessing that someone wants to make a motion. |
| 01:33:07.63 | Unknown | Actually, I have another comment. I think 30 seconds rebuttal. So, you know, I heard, you know, the comment that we have a long-range forecast to pay down that pension liability. Long-range, you know, I know that CalPERS looks in excess of 30 years. There's something called generational equity in terms of should future generations be paying for the services that we're enjoying today. The unsustainable pension costs we're looking at is what we're dealing with. And I also feel that when you look at the risk involved in this long-range forecast to pay that down, there are assumptions we're making. The assumption is that the cumulative interest rate of return, the discount discount rate will be 7.5 percent per CalPERS well CalPERS did get 18 percent return in 2014 that's pretty cool but last year it was 2.5 percent and this year it some people are predicting it's going to be 0 percent now this is not the type of thing where you can have 18% one year and 2.5 and it all evens out. It doesn't work that way because CalPERS requires compounding to make everything even out. So to say to the public that we've got this all figured out, to me, is misleading. It's misleading misleading this is a powder keg this is a heavy debt and the fact that we just got this finance audit tonight is a key reason to wait on this budget and I will quote from the first financial audit which says |
| 01:33:09.72 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 01:34:47.95 | Unknown | Over time, increases or decreases in net position may serve as a useful indicator of whether the finance position of the city is improving or deteriorating. We just got this tonight. How can we make decisions regarding cash allocations and what we can and cannot spend without taking a closer look at this very big document that we just literally got walking in, sitting on the dais tonight. If nothing else, I think it's, I mean, for me to do my fiduciary duty, I'm not voting, I cannot support this budget. So not until I review this and not until I Get clarity on the Robin Sweeney overruns |
| 01:35:26.56 | Jill Hoffman | Not until I review this. |
| 01:35:27.90 | Unknown | you |
| 01:35:33.55 | Unknown | Council Member Pfeiffer, you haven't voted in favorable budget since I've been on this |
| 01:35:36.22 | Unknown | Okay. All right. I have made motions supporting budgets that you voted against. |
| 01:35:42.37 | Jill Hoffman | We're not getting to that. Okay. Does someone want to make a motion? |
| 01:35:42.91 | Unknown | So, Madam Mayor, I move to approve the amended budget for the 2015-16 fiscal year, including the establishment of a sewer construction capital fund and receiving the fiscal year 2014-15 comprehensive annual financial report. I'll second it. |
| 01:35:59.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:36:01.06 | Jill Hoffman | Do you want to do a roll? |
| 01:36:01.26 | Unknown | Thank you. Are we going to, what I would suggest, just so we're clear on this, is that those not voting against it would say in which on what items you're voting, not voting against, if you would, so we'll have some clarity on this budget. |
| 01:36:17.56 | Unknown | Can I see the motion? I mean, I assume you just read what was in the staff report. |
| 01:36:20.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:36:20.60 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:36:20.61 | Unknown | What was it? |
| 01:36:20.97 | Unknown | And then the staff report? Page one of the staff report. |
| 01:36:23.78 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:36:24.26 | Unknown | Before before we go on, I want to be clear. I want to be clear on something is Mayor Hoffman is your main concern on this is the Robin Sweeney. And so we can go to the oversight committee. |
| 01:36:36.61 | Jill Hoffman | I think I've clearly stated my position on both. Oh, I'm just asking. So I don't understand why. I mean, my position is what I've stated. I have concerns about the budget. I think it should wait. I have concerns about, as Councilwoman Pfeiffer said, about the audit that we've got. I think it's too early. I think it's too soon to vote on this budget. I think we need to digest. When are we? We need to move forward. So I don't let we have a motion on the floor. I just want to. |
| 01:36:38.96 | Unknown | Oh, I'm just asking you. |
| 01:36:51.26 | David Holu | What? |
| 01:36:51.53 | Adam Kravatsky | Thank you. |
| 01:36:55.14 | David Holu | Thank you. |
| 01:36:55.17 | Unknown | When are... |
| 01:36:56.84 | David Holu | Thank you. |
| 01:37:00.13 | Unknown | Thank you. I just want to make sure you understand this is middle of March. The budget started July 1st of last year. |
| 01:37:06.72 | Unknown | I think. |
| 01:37:09.95 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, it would have been great if we had had a citizen's oversight committee starting in December. |
| 01:37:14.11 | Unknown | It also would have been nice to have the financial audit in November like we had it last year. That's right. It would have been great. But we didn't. |
| 01:37:17.99 | Jill Hoffman | That's right. It would have been great, but we didn't. So here we are in March. I agree. It is not ideal. |
| 01:37:20.18 | Unknown | So- |
| 01:37:20.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:37:20.52 | Unknown | Here we are in March. |
| 01:37:21.31 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 01:37:23.02 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:37:23.03 | Unknown | Council member, may I, I mean, we can, I do think, |
| 01:37:23.78 | Jill Hoffman | So- |
| 01:37:28.64 | Unknown | It doesn't make sense because we've approved spending the one point six and to put it in the budget. But just just to avoid confusion, I would be certainly happy to have a budget that we approve without Robin Sweeney at this point, and we bring it back in two weeks. This way we'll know, we'll focus on. In terms of the pension, I'm just making a suggestion. In terms of the pension, we periodically, the pensions and accounting for the pensions are extremely, complicated we go through that together to take one footnote at this or to take one item right now in the middle of budget process We need a whole exploration of it and and and finally I do agree that If we don't do this budget now, we're going to start the two year budget. We're almost through this budget. |
| 01:38:15.30 | Unknown | So what I need to understand though is if you want to remove Robin Sweeney Park, how can you remove it when you've already appropriated the money and started spending it? |
| 01:38:15.48 | Unknown | So... |
| 01:38:26.48 | Unknown | I mean, how exactly are we going to remove it from the budget when we've already done it? Yeah, I agree. |
| 01:38:29.17 | Jill Hoffman | budget I agree I completely agree it is difficult at this point it should not have been approved without the citizens oversight committee so now we're trying to unravel things maybe I mean, maybe. It depends on what our Citizens Oversight Committee comes back to us with. That's my concern on this budget. The fact that we've, you know, yeah, it's problematic. |
| 01:38:48.79 | Unknown | I, We have a right. |
| 01:38:50.35 | Jill Hoffman | I'm, I'm, Thank you. Hello. |
| 01:38:52.98 | Unknown | things get done is that the City Council approves a project. We approve Robbins-Winney Park. Then you get the bids and then the oversight committee starts reviewing it. We could not WE COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE HAD, EVEN IF WE HAD AN OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, LOOK AT THIS BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT ENGAGED UNTIL WE APPROVE THE PROJECT. WE HAVE APPROVED THE PROJECT AND ACTUALLY IN ORDER OF |
| 01:39:09.92 | Unknown | They're not. |
| 01:39:10.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:39:16.70 | Unknown | The normal order is that you budget it, then you approve it, and then you have an oversight. down the road with that. Thank you. I mean, I'm certainly willing to |
| 01:39:23.17 | Unknown | I mean, I'm- |
| 01:39:25.28 | Unknown | to prove everything else to give two weeks to dwell on, but I don't see how else you can do this. |
| 01:39:29.26 | Unknown | I think it's my turn now. I got this five days ago. This. Five days ago. I have been crunching, studying it, got this just walking in the door I'm inundated with with this and the things and the numbers I'm seeing I've got like I said I have many questions I In the past, when I've asked questions, and I've vetted things, I think we wind up with a better product. I still, Wind up with concerns, but I do think we get a better product and I think the public is more educated about Why we are able to fund some things to a certain degree and why we are Hesitant about other other funding strategies But I I I just need I need more more time I am not happy with the way the Robin Sweeney Park is presented in this budget I have questions about the measure O allocations I have questions about I guess the general plan circulation element, I did not see, I guess this is a question for Melanie. Melanie, do we have money? |
| 01:40:47.54 | Adam Politzer | That's deferred. It is deferred. Yes, you shared that that was deferred. |
| 01:40:49.31 | Unknown | It is deferred? Yeah, she shared it. Okay, I was trying to listen and follow everything, but I missed that part. Okay, so that's good. And you know, but I think, to me, the ability to digest this financial audit to me is paramount i i really To do my job for the taxpayers of this town, I need time to review this. |
| 01:41:17.06 | Jill Hoffman | I don't see any downside to waiting two weeks and letting our citizens oversight committee form. have their first meeting, hopefully be able to take a look where we are right now and give us a recommendation. whether or not it's a move forward or whether or not they have concerns and you know, whatever other questions we have about this very complicated, budget with regard to the audit. I don't see any downside to that. I say we wait two weeks. The city's gonna continue to operate. |
| 01:41:47.06 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:41:47.11 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:41:47.43 | Unknown | All right. |
| 01:41:53.71 | Unknown | Yeah, and believe me, I've been up here for a while. It won't be the first time that we continue discussion on a budget. And with the Robin Sweeney Park project, I mean, I'm looking at last time it was $400,000. Now I'm looking at this slide. It says it's $550,000 funded from deferred or unneeded general capital projects. I wanna know what those projects were that were deferred. I want a line item. I know we had a line item for the 400K. I wanna understand the difference between this. I just, I just, and then the contingency of 33,000 when we've got 200,000 set aside, yeah. you |
| 01:42:34.97 | Jill Hoffman | So our next city council meeting is March 22. |
| 01:42:38.31 | Adam Politzer | Yeah I need to weigh in if you don't mind. |
| 01:42:40.05 | Jill Hoffman | And then, yeah, let me just say one more thing. So, and then we have a finance committee I believe on March 21st on the Monday prior, right? That would be a good time to address some of these issues on March 21st so that we're ready to come back on March 22nd. But yes, Adam. |
| 01:42:56.30 | Adam Politzer | Just for clarification purposes, if we were able to schedule a meeting of the newly formed oversight committee, I'm not. Their very first meeting is to make sure that they understand $7.2 million and how that $7.2 million is allocated But even if they got into the weeds, See you. The COP money is the 1.2 or the 1.05. There's no increase to the We're not taking money from Southview Park or Dumpy Park or from MLK. We're not taking any of the COP money from any of those other products. So there's no increase. requests of COP funds to fund the completion of Robin Sweeney Park but even if the oversight committee had the ability to meet you know, next week and assuming that we post it 72 hours or 72 hours in advance and the materials for that meeting that haven't been prepared that would all have to go into the council's packet a week from this Thursday you folks to be able to review the information. And then I'd want to be clear, we'd want clear direction from the council. What is it that you want the oversight? committee to actually review if there are still questions while you have your Public Works Director and your Administrative Services Director here, Let's bring back up the slide and go through what is already part of the settlement agreement, a hundred and something thousand dollars, which has already been agreed to be paid for out of the ADA settlement agreement so I want to make sure that if there's something specific that you want the oversight committee to look at, I think at this point, you are delaying the project being approved potentially with an impact on the project being constructed. as they're going through so as we look at the bigger picture the three million dollars for MLK where we're at the beginning of that process the 2.8 million dollars for the 1.8 million dollars for a dumpy park that were at the beginning of that process. And the $1.2 million for Southview Park, we're at the beginning of that process, we look over the long run here, That's where the oversight committee will be very effective because they're at the beginning for those three additional projects. I just wanted to clarify that any direction that the council came tonight to come back in two weeks. The oversight committee would have had to be posted. meet and give their recommendation. by next Thursday for it to be in the Council |
| 01:45:32.10 | Unknown | So just to follow up on that, if I may. Sure. Yeah. I understand what you're saying. You've got notices, and they've got to define the scope and meet and everything. Still, it adds a degree of transparency, a degree of review for the public that I think has been lacking from the get-go on this. And from my perspective, I have several questions that I need to follow up with staff. I sent staff several questions before this meeting, and I got timely answers, and I thank them for that. Those answers have led to additional questions, and I need to do a deep dive on this to understand exactly a little bit more about these overruns and the discrepancies that we discussed earlier about the you know the tenant costs at MLK that are that are you know contention up here regarding with if they were contingencies or they're just sitting in a bank account and we're all paying interest on it so I So I have many questions. I'm not prepared to approve this budget. And yes, I have many questions. I'm not prepared to approve this budget. And yes, I haven't approved a budget in the last four years because these guys basically just push it through, and I don't get my questions answered. And I'm not going to vote on something that I don't get answers to. |
| 01:46:55.31 | Jill Hoffman | So in my in my view, we'd be in no more soft position if we waited. The purpose of the citizens oversight committee is a check and balance and to give the public confidence in what we're doing with this with the |
| 01:46:55.33 | Unknown | So, |
| 01:47:08.09 | Jill Hoffman | the measure measure F money. And so I think it's very important that they meet. that the overruns, well, that the increase in the budget for Robin Sweeney Park is looked at by third parties that are impartial, perhaps. I would hope that they're impartial and that they look at it and they give us their opinion about how we're doing and going forward and then way forward. especially on Robin Sweeney Park, because they haven't been able to take a look at it up until this point. So yeah, it's gonna be a fast track. They volunteered They got voted in, and they're all extremely competent. Um, So I would guess that they're going to be able to quickly digest. the budgets and what's going on. So I for that reason, I would suggest that we delay the vote on the budget until March 22nd and give them the chance to meet. |
| 01:47:59.81 | Adam Politzer | We're still not clear though on what specifically that you want them to do because They're not increasing the amount of budget That's the 1.2. |
| 01:48:10.66 | Jill Hoffman | What I would have said. |
| 01:48:10.81 | Adam Politzer | The council. has already approved up to 1.6 which is above the 1.2. And then the additional funds are related to the ADA projects partly of the settlement agreement. I'm not sure what the. responsibility that the oversight committee has here. versus what the Finance Committee has responsibility for, or ultimately what the City Council has the responsibility for. |
| 01:48:35.38 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I would hope that the oversight committee gives the public confidence in what we're doing here in the city. We have a lot of money with the measure F. We're already $500,000 over budget. And I know that, you know, I've been the reasons for that have been explained to me. Some of those have been explained here, but the purpose of the oversight committee is an important check and balance on the public use of these funds. That's what I would expect them to do. That's the value in having the Citizens Oversight Committee. There's some reason. Well, I would hope that we would all be welcoming of someone looking at this and giving credibility to what we've done so far. And that's what I would look for from this perspective. SHORTEN. you know, schedule for the Oversight Committee. I understand that that we're just voting them in tonight. Would have been that we voted in before we Got a shovel in the ground, but that didn't happen. So here we are tonight on March 8th. Thank you. |
| 01:49:39.59 | Unknown | That's fine. I'll support the two weeks if for no other reason. I still have this question about the oversight, but we'll get them involved. But also, I would encourage all council members, because most of us spend time, as I did with both the city manager and several hours with the finance director, answering the questions. So What I would like to see is in those two weeks is to make sure that. All council members questions are answered. If there's any specific issue, I would like to see an up or down vote on this without someone saying it's being pushed through. So I'm happy to do that. |
| 01:50:13.78 | Unknown | Should I ask the city manager the implications of delaying this approval of this budget amendment by two weeks? |
| 01:50:14.59 | Unknown | So, |
| 01:50:14.81 | Unknown | That's nice. |
| 01:50:15.44 | Unknown | Take care. |
| 01:50:24.60 | Adam Politzer | I think the implications, you know, I think you're putting staff in a very difficult position as the over and also the oversight committee because for us to have a meeting early next week. prior to the Thursday deadline. We have to develop the materials for the oversight committee to actually review. And then we need to generate a report based on the oversight committee's recommendations. Thank you. And based on the oversight committee's responsibilities are primarily focused, if not exclusively focused, on the COP dollars being spent, there is no real discussion about the general fund dollars that are being spent. It's important to clarify that it's not a cost overrun. We don't have any cost overruns right now. We had an estimate. and a bit. And the bid came in over the estimate. It's not a cost overrun. cost overrun is when we come to you and say we're in the middle of the project and that we hit four gas tanks underneath the fire building and it's now going to cost us more money to run do the project as we're in the middle of the project or when we hit the sunken sail ships at the Madden Harbor, and had diesel fuel to clean up from the ships that got sunk way back in the 50s or earlier than that. So there's no cost overrun. a cost estimate that came in higher And the council addressed that. and approved the budget of 1.6. And that's what's being worked on. So the fear is that we go to the oversight committee, they don't have enough information or they need more time And we're now in April. And we're missing opportunities. As you look at what's out there today, We've benefited from the good weather so far. We've been able to do most of the demolition out there. And where you see the areas that have not been demolished, The ADA projects associated with the Litho Street Bridgeway or Litho Street, Caledonia B Street, Caledonia, the stairs at the basketball court, and then the steps. all the way across Caledonia Street from Litho to B. Those are the areas that we're talking about. Many of those were part of the settlement agreement. So... I'm not quite sure what we're asking them to do and the ability to lose two weeks' worth of work. then come back to council, assuming that all of this goes smoothly on March 22nd, and the council then gives direction, then you potentially have another lost week work that could be done now so there's a potential of three three weeks at a minimum being lost in terms of what can be being done right now in demo Because that's the stage we're in. knock out all that concrete while we have the equipment mobilized to knock out all that concrete. That's what they're working on as we speak. So I think that three-week loss is significant. |
| 01:53:25.36 | Jill Hoffman | Adam, are you saying that nothing's going to get done? in the next two weeks. I mean, the work is, scheduled, the work is going to get done. that the oversight committee is gonna go forward at the same time. I would guess Most of this information is already Written. I would guess that there should be some merge documents that can be done And the information can be pulled together pretty quickly for the committee. It's Tuesday. I would expect the committee could meet perhaps on Thursday or Friday. I know that's quickly. |
| 01:53:53.55 | Adam Politzer | quickly you can't meet Thursday Friday is it got to be posted |
| 01:53:59.35 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 01:53:59.72 | Unknown | Friday. Fine. |
| 01:54:00.13 | Jill Hoffman | Fine. Thank you. |
| 01:54:00.56 | Unknown | Saturday. I mean, I can't believe we're just. Or Monday, but I don't know. |
| 01:54:03.35 | Jill Hoffman | Or Monday, but I don't know why we're talking about this now. It's I say, do we need a motion? Do I need to make a motion? It's nine o'clock. |
| 01:54:05.78 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:54:11.38 | Jill Hoffman | I think we're three of us in our agreement that we should. |
| 01:54:14.03 | Unknown | delay. You have to. But we have to get clarification, though, about what we are. But what I Adam, what I'm thinking we're saying, we're not saying postpone any work. I mean, this project's been approved. It's I know this is fiction. We have to get our minds around it, but we've delayed to this point on budget. We're going to decide what we do on the budget. The project's approved. We're going forward on the project. |
| 01:54:14.06 | Jill Hoffman | Delay? |
| 01:54:34.74 | Unknown | I certainly sympathize with you on this notice thing with them. I don't know how they're going to get it, but do your best, and we'll move along and bring it. And if we can't, we'll have to discuss it at our next meeting. |
| 01:54:46.15 | Adam Politzer | I just want to clarify because the question that the mayor asked and you're asking the same question, It's not that work won't continue. If you guys vote no, say that was the outcome tonight, vote no, then those alternates would not be of this project. We would still have the responsibility as part of the settlement agreement between now and and January 17th to do those improvements along B Street in Caledonia and Litho in Caledonia and then the whole bench in front of it. We're required to do that because we've already agreed in the settlement agreement to do that, Where it gets delayed and it gets difficult is that we are mobilized right now for demolition. And you're having the jackhammers that everyone in the neighborhood is enjoying, including patrons listening to the Jack Emmer's crush concrete, and cement. And the work that needs to be demoed is the parts on the sidewalk that would be demoed just as we had to do all the way up and down Caledonia Street this past fall. So, The delay means that they would need to remobilize to come back and do that work. So the sequence of work would be thrown off, the schedule would be thrown off, and the cost may go up because it's not part of the timing that we said to the council. Approve the project. You approve the project at 1.6. We'll come back at mid-year. after we valued engineered some of the cost downs, which we did, and that's in the staff report, and then pull the settlement agreement information forward. So you can see what we've already agreed to do per the settlement. And then the balance is, as Melanie said in her staff report, makes sense because you're mobilized and you have a firm bid, and it won't get less expensive. That delay could cause that sequence to be thrown out of sorts, which could either be a delay or a cost or both. |
| 01:56:37.86 | Unknown | So Adam, what you're saying is if this council does not approve this budget tonight, there will be a delay in the Robin Sweeney project. |
| 01:56:50.53 | Adam Politzer | there could be if you come back and approve these components of the projects later so if you say We don't wanna do these things and we'll deal with the settlement at some other point. then the park will move forward and it will be opened on July 4th. We're telling you if you do that, it'll be more expensive. If you choose in two weeks or in four weeks to approve the add alternates to the project, then the project will be out of sync and that could cause the delay because they gotta come back and do the work that they would be doing |
| 01:57:17.01 | Unknown | WE HAVE TO GO. |
| 01:57:19.96 | Adam Politzer | you approve it tonight they're able to once they can get back out there assuming the rain settles in the next few days. |
| 01:57:24.31 | Unknown | That'll say. |
| 01:57:25.92 | Adam Politzer | then they'll be back out there jackhammering away and they'll take care of these at that same time. |
| 01:57:28.62 | Unknown | Okay. Well, if so much of a dependency was writing on this timeframe, it would have been good to communicate that to me. Because I would have changed the agenda scheduling so that I got this earlier than just five days ago. I would have gotten this earlier than tonight. I would have gotten, you know, clarity on things that I have been asking about and being concerned about for many for many months and then I get this and I and I have a whole new set of questions with the debt that I'm seeing so I guess I feel like it's a... I mean, I've already shared where I stand on this. I have too many questions to move forward on this, and I have too many real concerns on this to move forward on this, especially hearing about the contingency buffer, different interpretations out there alone, even setting aside the oversight committee. I have questions about the fact the last time we looked at the Robin Sweeney project, it was a 400K overrun, and now it's over a half a million dollar overrun. And I understand you don't see it as an overrun. You see it as a cost estimate that's out of date. That it was 2011 and it's 2015, and gee, what a surprise it's higher. I look at this as it's a cost overrun because there were ADA requirements mandated by California law that was passed in 2013 that were known at the time of the vote for Measure F that was never communicated to the public so that that overrun was clear that the allocation from Measure F was not going to cover the cost of redoing the part. To me that's you know selling a bill of goods that isn't straightforward and not transparent so to me it's an overrun okay so |
| 01:59:32.85 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, may I? I mean, I do need to respond, and I'll just say shortly that- Yeah, okay, heard. |
| 01:59:33.59 | Ray | THE FAMILY IS |
| 01:59:33.85 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:59:33.97 | Ray | I do need a response. |
| 01:59:34.98 | Ray | I'll just say shortly that. Yeah, okay, go ahead. You're right. You know what's gonna happen, folks? You're gonna come back here in two weeks if this happens, and you're gonna hear the same exact things. Nothing will change as far as their opinion goes of the measure F that we passed and what we're doing. What you're hearing now tonight, you'll hear the same exact thing, even after they've read everything, Two weeks from now. Because this is a stopgap. |
| 02:00:08.22 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 02:00:08.32 | Ray | Not a procedure. |
| 02:00:09.45 | Jill Hoffman | That's fine. Let me respond. just, So, Adam, you're talking about if the oversight committee comes back and says – because we haven't planned for the contingencies right now, right? They're not part of the, project. |
| 02:00:22.95 | Adam Politzer | be clear there was contingencies in the original budget When Jonathan came forward and gave the path forward to move forward, We removed the contingencies. So we put a small contingency back in now that we valued engineered the project and moved forward. |
| 02:00:32.32 | Unknown | Thank you. you |
| 02:00:37.87 | Adam Politzer | The MLK fund has its own contingency unrelated to the $200,000 or $300,000 that we're talking about Every project has its own contingency. We have several projects that went through the exact same platform, just the B of A restroom and Vina del Mar Park and Yitachi Park and the path to travel, that had a budget of $750,000 for all four. We spent close to a million dollars on the B of A restroom by itself. And no one said boo. That's the, we had a solid, Estimate. from a very reputable architect that said it's going to cost $470,000 to build the restroom. The bid came in at $723. We moved forward and we built it because The community And the council... agreed that that restroom was something that was essential and what was there wasn't satisfactory. So I just want to be clear that there were some statements that were made that did not come from me. and that there isn't any the wool over the community. I think we've been incredibly transparent, and today's mid-year budget. It's just that. The big fight. the big wrestling match is coming over the next three months because we're going to be talking about the next two-year budget cycle. And the. the annual report. is a is a preview to the next two years budget cycle where the money that hasn't been pledged or spent Um, or estimated. for the most part, will show up in this next two year cycle. So I want to be careful here that the argument that we're making at mid-year is not the same argument that we should be making you know, for the two-year budget. You know, so Again, I don't recommend the delay because we are mobilized right now to do all the demolition so we can move forward to actually constructing the surfaces, the drainage, the irrigation, all of that that runs all the way down to the street. And regardless if you think that it's an overrun or the estimate was changed, it is what it is, and that's where we are. just like the B of A restroom. We were where we were and we made the decision to find those funds and to build it. And everyone is now enjoying it and believes it was a successful project, as I do. |
| 02:02:50.66 | Unknown | So Adam. |
| 02:02:51.44 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 02:02:51.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:02:52.01 | Jill Hoffman | Can I just respond about the bathroom? Just let me just drill down here on that. Because with regard to the sequencing. So the sequencing, you know, the... The project is scheduled as a project is scheduled. People are ready to do demo. I expect the citizens oversight committee to come in and look at what's been done so far, look at the reasons why the budget is what it is. I, I doubt. And the reason that you're talking about whether or not it might be off sequence is if they want to add something in. from the contingency list. The ADA requirement is an ADA requirement, that's gonna go forward regardless Well, our approval tonight if we don't approve it tonight you're saying all construction stops you're saying if we if we delay this tonight you're saying all construction stops on robin sweeney because i don't think that's what you're saying |
| 02:03:39.88 | Adam Politzer | I know I'm answering your question. |
| 02:03:40.48 | Jill Hoffman | I think that that's what you're trying to make people think but I don't think that's what's gonna happen |
| 02:03:41.72 | Adam Politzer | Councilman. |
| 02:03:42.10 | Ray | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:03:42.15 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:03:42.18 | Ray | All right. |
| 02:03:42.25 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:03:42.26 | Ray | you |
| 02:03:42.28 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. not. |
| 02:03:43.49 | Ray | Bye. |
| 02:03:43.51 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 02:03:43.53 | Ray | . |
| 02:03:43.56 | Adam Politzer | . |
| 02:03:45.39 | Ray | No, the ADA requirements. |
| 02:03:45.44 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:03:45.47 | Jill Hoffman | THE EASY. |
| 02:03:45.86 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:03:45.88 | Jill Hoffman | I don't know. |
| 02:03:47.41 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:03:47.49 | Ray | up and down are gonna stop. |
| 02:03:47.66 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 02:03:47.71 | Adam Politzer | I'm down. that's common sense I'm not saying that your comment was the ADA work is going to go forward regardless that's what that's what you said and I'm saying that part of that ADA settlement |
| 02:03:49.74 | Ray | Okay. |
| 02:04:01.84 | Adam Politzer | is in the information that's in front of the council tonight to approve. So if you don't approve it tonight, then that ADA work is not going to go forward until the council approves it. |
| 02:04:14.55 | Ray | common sense. |
| 02:04:16.84 | Jeffrey Chase | I'm thinking. |
| 02:04:17.70 | Unknown | What I'm hearing is... |
| 02:04:18.66 | Jeffrey Chase | I can do that. |
| 02:04:19.17 | Unknown | you're concerned about the oversight committee and questions about the budget, but I understand you don't want to hold up progress and cost us money. So is there a way that we could just approve the ADA portion of this so we don't hold anything up |
| 02:04:26.95 | David Holu | THE FAMILY. |
| 02:04:35.17 | Unknown | We set it up for two weeks. We have all council questions answered so that anyone comes in will have specific issues that they speak to. Can we do that? And which item would we need to approve? Yes. |
| 02:04:46.42 | Unknown | Yes. This is motion number two, which I was going to make after we voted on the last one, so let me make it now. Authorizing the city manager to execute a contract amendment with Bowman Landscape and Construction, Inc. of San Francisco for construction of alternate items 1, 2A, 2B, and 2C for the Robin Sweeney Park Improvement Project. Second. |
| 02:05:13.35 | Unknown | Yeah, and I just want to comment, of course, Adam, as you know, the downtown bathroom did not borrow money against MLK and trigger 1128. It did not borrow against future income of funds that flowed into the general fund. The downtown bathroom was a very different animal and very different structure of financing. |
| 02:05:38.82 | Unknown | Before we... |
| 02:05:39.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:39.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:39.68 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:39.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:05:41.23 | Unknown | Does this handle your concerns, Adam, that we would go forward and do you have any issue? Okay. So, okay. |
| 02:05:47.12 | Jill Hoffman | We can. We take the roll. |
| 02:05:48.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:48.96 | Unknown | And just to clarify my stand on this, some of the questions I have are related still to the ADA and the way it is structured with budgeting around the Robin Sweeney Park. I still see this as an overrun. So, you know, I am going to, you know, |
| 02:05:48.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:48.99 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 02:05:49.03 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:05:49.05 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 02:05:49.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:07.52 | Unknown | Vote no. As always, because you guys are pushing it through. |
| 02:06:10.26 | Unknown | All right. |
| 02:06:12.11 | Jill Hoffman | You're pushing it through. All right, let's do the vote. We're already 40 minutes behind schedule. So let's vote on the second motion, which is. |
| 02:06:21.01 | Unknown | Council members last with these last motion. |
| 02:06:22.04 | Unknown | Okay. Thank you. So I have two motions on the table. Second one, Vice Mayor, with these for the recommended motion number two. I'm withdrawing the first motion. Okay. Thank you. |
| 02:06:28.18 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:28.21 | Unknown | about the project so I recommend the first motion okay second motion is the only one that we're gonna vote on time so |
| 02:06:32.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:32.73 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:32.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:32.90 | Ray | Thank you. |
| 02:06:32.94 | Unknown | you |
| 02:06:32.99 | Ray | of the |
| 02:06:36.18 | Unknown | So, |
| 02:06:36.50 | Ray | Thank you. |
| 02:06:36.53 | Unknown | I did second that. |
| 02:06:37.32 | Unknown | you So actually, so we're voting on the second motion? The ADA. Okay. You know what? I'm going to abstain from that vote because I may, you know, if I'd had my questions answered, maybe I could support it. |
| 02:06:48.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:48.31 | Jill Hoffman | I had my questions answered, maybe I could support it. That's fine. Let's vote. We have a second. |
| 02:06:51.21 | Unknown | Thank you. We haven't seen it. Exactly. |
| 02:06:55.28 | Unknown | Second. |
| 02:06:55.55 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:06:55.70 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:55.73 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor or do we want to? |
| 02:06:57.27 | Unknown | No, I think we better go through the roll. Let's take a roll. |
| 02:06:57.90 | Jill Hoffman | We better go through the roll. |
| 02:06:58.91 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:58.93 | Jill Hoffman | We'll be right back. |
| 02:06:58.98 | Unknown | You're right. Councilmember Theodorus. |
| 02:07:00.81 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:07:02.54 | Unknown | Transit member Weiner. |
| 02:07:03.36 | Ray | Yes. |
| 02:07:03.84 | Unknown | Thank you. Council Member Pfeiffer. Abstain. Vice Mayor with me. |
| 02:07:08.97 | Ray | you |
| 02:07:08.98 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:07:10.21 | Unknown | Mayor Hoffman. |
| 02:07:14.28 | Adam Politzer | So, Mayor Hoffman, what direction do you want to – the council want to give the staff on the first recommendation that's on your – before you, which is the overall budget, not just the ADA projects? So we are looking for a motion. |
| 02:07:29.72 | Jill Hoffman | So we- |
| 02:07:32.32 | Adam Politzer | on improving the amended budget now that we've addressed the ADA discussion. |
| 02:07:37.18 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I believe the motion was withdrawn. So the direction for the staff is to bring it back in two weeks and respond to whatever council questions. Yeah, whatever council. Should we vote on that? I would guess it would come up. Yeah, do we need to bring it back in two weeks? |
| 02:07:48.39 | Unknown | Thank you. vote on that? I would guess it would I mean, I guess I'll ask staff. Is it better to vote on it, or are we just going to give you direction from there? |
| 02:07:53.06 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 02:07:56.76 | Adam Politzer | We need you to vote on it, but we need you to vote on the direction that you're, you know, we're not clear on what it is that you now want us to bring back other than that have a oversight committee meeting and we're what we will. |
| 02:08:05.82 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:08:07.59 | Adam Politzer | do our darndest to pull all that together, and I agree with you Madam Mayor on all the things that you started listing. I'm sure that we will work hard to make that happen. I'm trying to understand because the. |
| 02:08:17.88 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:08:18.17 | Adam Politzer | The overall budget is a lot more than Robin Sweeney Park. It's all of the other activities. |
| 02:08:23.03 | Jill Hoffman | Right. I would say, unless someone has a better idea, the direction to staff would be to this is – you know, in two weeks we're going to come back, bring the same, you know, unless it needs to be amended or there's staff recommendation for changes. And I would expect that the staff report might incorporate any conclusions or recommendations from the oversight committee as well, if they have any. And I don't know if we want to invite the oversight committee to come back. for March 22nd and give a report on their first meeting. That might be a good idea. We might want to add that to our March 22nd meeting. So. |
| 02:08:59.66 | Adam Politzer | Can I, I'm sorry, we're all kind of thinking out loud here and I apologize for joining in that fun. |
| 02:09:00.64 | Jill Hoffman | . YES. |
| 02:09:06.10 | Adam Politzer | As you pointed out, Madam Mayor, there's a finance committee meeting. Maybe we direct this discussion back to the finance committee meeting. not absent the oversight committee having their own meeting and then |
| 02:09:17.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:09:17.70 | Unknown | I'm going to go. |
| 02:09:19.19 | Adam Politzer | giving direction to staff on what you C. uh... changing if anything in terms of the discussion that comes back to the council do we have time out |
| 02:09:26.95 | Jill Hoffman | Do we have time though if we if we. do that for the March 21st you |
| 02:09:31.73 | Adam Politzer | Other than the direction that we just heard and the conversation that was with perceived this we will take that into consideration and Melanie and I will work to incorporate any of the things that were recommended bring that back but in the meantime bring it to the Finance Committee for at least a run-through which will happen the day before the council meeting. |
| 02:09:31.74 | Jill Hoffman | That will be. Yeah. |
| 02:09:55.18 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:09:55.22 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:09:55.40 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. unless the Finance Committee can meet next week |
| 02:09:59.22 | Jill Hoffman | Will that be enough time though for a staff report for the March 22nd? |
| 02:10:02.26 | Adam Politzer | 20 second different than the oversight committee it's the same pressure to have a meeting and to have this discussion |
| 02:10:05.38 | Jill Hoffman | OK. Okay, that's fine. |
| 02:10:09.36 | Unknown | I do say I'd like to make a commitment from staff and from a council that we'll be essentially bringing back what we have tonight. And I really ask that staff be available and council have all their questions fully answered so that we can go and vote on each item. And if someone votes no, that they would have a specific reason. Because there are a lot of disparate items on here. So we have to have all questions answered and be able to vote on this because we have to move forward. And this will help us in the process of our two year budget. You know, some of these things are to come up again. |
| 02:10:41.74 | Unknown | And I would ask, and I did send several questions to staff, and they did respond in a very expedient way, and I appreciate that very much. It's hard, though, when I walk in and I see this sitting here. So I would ask that next time, next year, that the council next year would benefit if they received this earlier. Thank you. |
| 02:11:02.43 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 02:11:02.63 | Unknown | Thank you. All right. |
| 02:11:03.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:11:04.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:11:04.96 | Jill Hoffman | That is it for item 6B moving on. Should we take a break? Yes. Oh. |
| 02:11:14.12 | Unknown | No. |
| 02:11:15.20 | Jill Hoffman | Well, wait, yeah, we need a break. It's been two hours and 25 minutes, so sorry. My apologies. We're going to take a 10-minute break. That's it. Ten minutes, Tom. Five. Thank you. Here we go. Okay. All right. All right. Do we need to take a cleansing breath, everybody? Okay. We got one. Calling us back to order. Uh... We're moving smartly along through our agenda. We are up to item 6C. Adoption of this schematic master plan developed by friends of Dunphy Park and recommended by the Parks and Rec. And I see Mike Langford at the podium. Mike, are you ready? |
| 02:11:56.57 | Jonathon Goldman | I am. Thank you very much, Mayor Hoffman and City Council. |
| 02:11:58.25 | Jill Hoffman | The floor's yours. |
| 02:12:00.77 | Jonathon Goldman | As you said, today we're here to talk about the adoption of the schematic master plan developed by the Friends of Dunphy Park and recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission with staff suggestions and direction to staff to solicit for design services. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to give you a real brief history how we got to this point. Schock's going to go over his and do his PowerPoint, which is the actual schematic master plan. I'll kind of wrap things up and then we'll open it up for questions here. |
| 02:12:30.72 | Jonathon Goldman | First off, the schematic master plan, or designing the schematic master plan, was ranked fifth on the priority calendar for fiscal year 2014. You can see right there, it's right up on the top. On November 16, 2013, with the assistance of a professional facilitator, the friends had a public forum. There were roughly 90 people in attendance. It was held at the Bay Model. Lots of great information came out of that, lots of good questions. In addition to the forum, people could write in questions. They had a comment card. And as we'll talk about later, there was a place that they could send in comments over the Internet. From that, the Friends of Dunphy Park. As we said here, it's a website. www.dunphypark.org. and there's a screenshot from it. We built this website right after the forum, and it has been kept up regularly as new information has become available. Then at the March 18th, City Council meeting, the Friends of Dunphy Park presented the preliminary results from the forum. So again, with the help of our professional facilitator, we took everything that was said and kind of condensed it into different areas of focus for the park and what the public would like to see there. Then on June 17th, 2014, the Friends came back, showed the City Council some preliminary results. sketches and views and designs of the park but primarily they were here to ask for direction on parking as well as get some assistance from staff as far as soil samples etc. Then on November 10th, 2015, coming to basically present day, the Friends presented the plan to the City Council. Council at that meeting directed that. Parks and Recreation hold two well-publicized medians facilitated by a paid facilitator where the friends could present the plan to the public and gather further input. The friends talk with the cruising club, and to collaborate with the North Strait North-South Greenway plans. Council also recommended that the plans be adjusted accordingly based on community input and that the final plans be brought back to council for approval. We are here today. As part of the well-publicized forum, press releases were sent to the Marin IJ and Scope Meetings were listed in the Currents multiple times, and postcards were sent to every address at 94965 and 94966. Prior to the public forum, the friends met with city staff to gather information on the north-south greenway, Representatives from the Bocce League where they discussed the number of courts that the Bocce League wanted as well as the location of the courts. The cruising club to talk about parking and the orientation of the club. And Galilee Harbor to talk about a variety of issues, including parking, where the activities were going to be done, as well as other things. The first forum was held on January 19th. There were approximately 70 in attendance. You can see that's a photo from it. We had a packed house. What you don't see is there are plenty of people that were just kind of standing out in the hall, listening in and coming in when they wanted to speak. We had a second forum January 27th with about 50 people in attendance. and then on February 8th the Parks and Recreation Commission held a meeting approximately 40 people were in attendance and at that meeting the Parks and Recreation Commission recommended that These are additions to the plan that they saw from the friends. A vehicle turnaround at the northeast portion of the parking lot be considered. Loading zones for deliveries as well as park users be considered. There'll be more detail on the north-south greenway and how it can be incorporated into the plan. and there'll be further analysis of the large trees to see if any can be saved. The commission also recommended that the city Work with Galilee Harbor to develop a parking enforcement plan to enforce parking regulations on their private property. Also review the number of parking spaces in regards to the cruising club, Cass Gidley, and Galilee Harbor's lease, and propose parking plan see if they can come up with a new parking plan while not increasing the amount of paved area proposed in the schematic master plan this is seeing is there anything we can do with this to put even more cars in there and make sure everybody's taken care of. And then they recommended considering adding parking along the south end of the park in the future. In addition, the Parks and Recreation Commission recommended that the council or the Parks and Recreation Commission have additional public meetings where they get more information on these topics before making any decisions. that those topics included designating the water area as a preserve and restricting boat orientation of the and the orientation of the the cruising club. Now staff agrees with most of these recommendations But we do think that the following be addressed in the future and not part of the design process. The north south greenway can be discussed in detail when the project comes before council. The proposed plan allows for flexibility if and when the greenway is done. Staff also believes that there is ample parking for all activities at the park and that additional parking does not need to be considered at this time. As the park and surrounding areas become more active with community programs, the Parks and Recreation Commission can reevaluate the programming should any parking issues arise. Parks and Rec, excuse me, staff also thinks that the idea of designating the water areas to preserve and restricting boat traffic can be addressed when the leases for Galilee Harbor and the Cruising Club come up. Excuse me. Thank you very much for correcting me. Cruising Club and Cass Gidley come up. Again, going back with the Park and Rec Commission's recommendation that there be some additional study on that. Also, the orientation of the cruising club can be addressed when the lease for the cruising club comes before the city council for consideration. The park plan is not dependent on the cruising club being either direction. It's pretty much a non-issue as far as the park plan goes. What I'd like to do now is bring up Jacques Ullman, and he can give you his PowerPoint, which is the schematic master plan as proposed by the Friends of Dunphy Parks. |
| 02:19:08.33 | Jacques Ullman | which is a pretty good thing. |
| 02:19:12.68 | Jacques Ullman | Good evening, Jacques Coleman, friends of Dunphy Park. I'm just going to quickly go through another PowerPoint before the plan because as a result of all the reviews we had, there seemed to be some need for clarification on certain points because of the comments that were made. So this first slide is simply to have us look again at Dumpy Park as it relates to the entire community, because this is one of the things that really came out in the discussions, is that we are a whole community, a town of 7,500 plus people, and this is a park for the whole community. And so that was one of the tasks for us, is to design something that would relate not to just one group, but all kinds of diverse groups. And as you can see, as you look along the waterfront, we do have a nice open water along Bridgeway with the stone riprap that we all enjoy. But then you have boats, boats, boats, boats. And from this side, you have boats, boats, boats, boats. And from this side you have boats, boats, boats, boats. And you have Dunphy Park in the middle, which is really one of the last undeveloped little pieces of waterfront. And so we are a water-oriented and boat-oriented community, although some of us don't know much about boats, but we like to look at it. That's one of the reasons that we're going to do it. We are a water-oriented and boat-oriented community, although some of us don't know much about boats, but we like to look at it. That's one of the reasons that we're here. |
| 02:19:15.42 | Unknown | you |
| 02:19:15.47 | Adam Kravatsky | you |
| 02:19:15.60 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:19:15.62 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:19:18.47 | Adam Kravatsky | Thank you. |
| 02:20:44.60 | Jacques Ullman | But this, so it's natural that everyone wanted the park to relate to boats, but really it's one of the few places where there's also space for something else. But there is a component in our plan that involves boats, but I wanted to emphasize again this idea of the community and then the local neighborhood. And I think it's important to note that if you draw a circle with its center in Dunphy Park, and it includes the marinas, the live-aboard marinas in the area. It also includes many single-family houses, city hall, a number of apartment buildings, a Caledonia Street, and all its commercial activities. So the local neighborhood is very diverse, and it has to serve this diverse community. And actually, the people living in single-family houses within this neighborhood have to go down a street and then cross a busy Caledonia street and cross a busy Bridgeway street to have access to the park. So other people who are on the other side of Bridgeway are concerned that the plan may involve they're going past a parking lot to get to the park. Well, they actually have an easier path than the majority of the people in the neighborhood. So I just wanted to emphasize the sense that we're trying to do a park that relates to a neighborhood that's very diverse with different kinds of people. Now, it's important to look at the park the way it is now. And so you'll see that we have quite a bit of undeveloped Waterfront here then we have a club here that takes It has dancing and music and people getting together and so on, which is fine. And then we have a marina here that there's a group that's trying very hard to reactivate, and I suggest that everyone who's interested in any boating activity here really support this effort. And then we have a parking lot here that is not formally built, but it has been used, and it has access off of Napa Street so that it doesn't interfere with the bridgeway traffic, and it will have no interference, added interference with the eventual north-south greenway. so those are the basic the basic situation that we're looking at when we try the eventual North-South Greenway. So those are the basic situation that we're looking at when we try to develop this plan. Now, if you have a program that's so varied that it says you want shoreline habitat restoration maintenance, you want passive area for picnics, reading, nature, viewing, you want demonstration garden for native and low-water plants, you want parking and toilet facilities, you want active group sports such as bachi and volleyball, you want to preserve and enhance open grass bowl area for community and individual multi-use, you want beach rehabilitation and maintenance, you want preservation of eelgrass, you want small non-motorized boat facilities, you want a shoreline path, you want greater visual access to bay views, and you want to enhance the connection of the park to the neighborhood. That's a lot of things that you're trying to do. And you look at what I showed you before, and you ask yourself, where are you going to place all those things? That has nothing to do with Thank you. who's living where, and so on. It has to do with the park that you're dealing with, and where is it appropriate to put those functions. Where would you put shoreline habitat restoration? You're not gonna put it where you already have a barge and already have a shoreline that's already been sort of accounted for, you're going to put it where you have an undeveloped shoreline. And if you put your shoreline habitat and restoration there, then it seems natural to put your passive facilities near that. Now, if you need restrooms and parking, you've already got parking in that area, and it's logical to have the restrooms near the parking. So that's why it's put there, and you maintain the parking lot with its entry not on Bridgeway, but where it is now on Napa Street so that it doesn't interrupt the traffic. Well, then everything else sort of falls into place. If you're going to have some non-motorized boat facilities, you're going to develop it where that's always happened. The beach improvement is obviously going to be where the beach is. I think for most people, Dunphy Park represents that big open bowl where we have all of our big activities. You're going to maintain that and enhance it. And the group sports are going to be near where the parking and the restrooms are. Makes sense. So that's how that came together. It wasn't because of some ulterior motive to maintain someone's view or any prejudice toward any group. It was the land and the situation that dictated where things were put. And, of course, you're going to extend the park to Bridgeway, visually connected to the neighborhood. That was part of the program. So then that's how we came up with what we came up with. Now, this is what you're going to be approving or not approving, is to move the schematic master plan to working during construction document phase. So you will be reviewing the design for the park. You're not going to be approving any further design, as it were, but to move on to the construction document phase now during a construction document phase there's always some design adjustments made but so uh so there there are certain items want to make clear are not included in what you would be approving for construction documents because these are items which clearly need more discussion and it needs to be a discussion between people who know what they're talking about, people who know about boats, people who know about habitat restoration, people who know about eelgrass, and so on. So the small, non-motorized boat facilities, concentrated, Cass, Gidley, and the cruising club. That needs to be a further dialogue. Now, secondary parking and toilet at the southern border of the park. That we don't want to include, we did not include in this plan because one of the best places to put it might be on Humboldt Street, and that is part of a negotiation that's going on with the Bridgeway Marina people, and we don't want to interfere with that. So we're suggesting that that be thought about in the future, but it is not part of this plan. And the same thing with the Yieldgrass Preserve. There's people who have arguments for and against and so on, and we're not in a position to deal with that now. So that is to be done in the future. There are some items that you could, and it would be appropriate for you to recommend, be considered during the working drawing phase, and that's the turn around and drop off at the eastern end of the parking lot, and the north-south greenway. We have to assure, I mean, that's a difficult issue because we don't know when that's going to be done. And also, I know that you council people are very concerned about budget. We have a budget for this project. We don't want to be spending any money on the north-south greenway as part of this budget, obviously. We don't want to redo the sidewalks at this point. We want to do a minimum amount of work outside of the park. Okay. But we have to have a dialogue with the people who were involved with the North-South Greenway to make sure that nothing that we do is going to be in conflict should that ever happen. And we also, and I'll talk about this later, we want to ensure that the schematic master plan will work with any orientation of the cruising club because that is an issue which there's a lot of discussion and we don't want anything to be delayed because of that. So now I'm going to go quickly because you've seen most of this before. So here's the plan. I do want to point out here that we've added, since you've seen this before, these black areas, those represent the areas that were purchased with coastal conservancy money. And so there's certain restrictions that came with that purchase, which was, there's a lot of documentation on it, but enhanced public access to the bay and enhanced open space are sort of key to why the Coastal Conservancy gave us the money to purchase this property. So we have to be careful when we use this property that we're consistent with those covenants and restrictions. The schematic master plan is a guideline to assure that future incremental improvement plans are compatible with the city's long range view for park development. Desired improvements, activities, and priorities will be defined along with preferred locations, technical requirements, and governmental limitations. The program for Dunphy Park schematic master plan is based on public input from outreach program that included a city website survey, a questionnaire, and a professionally facilitated public forum. A summary of public comments from these three sources was presented to the city council at a public hearing. Now, since you last saw it, we did, in response to the Bocce League's requests, we moved them from, we flipped and moved them closer to the water. We added one more Bocce court, and I'll talk more about this later. Input from public outreach clearly indicated that the plan would have to respond to a very broad spectrum of activities ranging from bocce ball tournaments to quiet habitat for World life. The plan includes six zones that blend with minimum conflict. Parking toilets and active uses are placed together at the north end, multi-use in the grass bowl in the middle, and passive habitat rehab and preservation to the south. And you've seen, everyone's seen this many times. So now, with parking, I want to, well, all right, there's 70 parking spaces, including two ADA van and three ADA auto spaces. Parking at the north end of park with toilets and active uses such as bocce and volleyball near parking. No parking along the waterfront, and minimum parking on the railroad right of way, no toilets at pedestrian entrances. you You'll notice that we did put parking on the railroad right-of-way on property that was purchased from Coastal Conservancy. But we felt that this amount of parking is justifiable because it's a little more than the current parking. and it's parking that's basically serving the park, the main day-to-day activities of the park, which is giving people access to the bay. We did not show any more parking than that. There has been surge parking along here, but we're not showing that because that kind of parking is for activities like the league bocce or large events at the cruising club. And so in those circumstances, we don't feel that that would be in conformance with the Coastal Conservancy because that's not really for access to the bay or for open space. So we are showing about one-third of that road right away taken up by parking, but we don't feel that we could justify more than that. |
| 02:33:29.23 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 02:33:51.01 | Jacques Ullman | So the active uses, as I said, are placed near the parking. And I want to point out that a bocce court, of course, is flat. And so if you have three bocce courts, you have quite a large flat area. And the bocce court ends are about three feet high. They're lower on the sides. If you're trying to have a park that has its major part feel natural and give people access to the bay, visually seem like a park that you're going to that's by the water, then you want to be careful where you place a large element that is flat, that doesn't allow you to contour the area, and it really shouldn't have grass going up to it because it's a high traffic area. So there were some people suggesting that bocce be put in all sorts of places, but you have to realize that that physically is an element, you have to think in three dimensions. It's an element that's visually intrusive and that is not allowing you to have the natural landscaping that we're trying to be the predominant element of the park. So it seemed very appropriate to put it where we did. |
| 02:34:49.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:35:18.78 | Jacques Ullman | You can actually see, whoops. how both the volleyball and the bocce have a very flat area. Now, it's nice where the bocce is. They're near the water and near the shoreline path. It all works where it is now. So the multi-use area has always been the heart of the park. And it's a fluid, contoured, bermed area that is where we try to keep the natural feeling. So it's an open grass bowl contoured to be visually connected to bridgeway and water, eliminate parking on railroad right-of-way between B and Litho streets and blend this area into the park, thus integrating the park. connected to bridgeway and water, eliminate parking on railroad right-of-way between B and Litho streets, and blend this area into the park, thus integrating the park into the neighborhood. and we have all of our wonderful community events that we love there. Now, the beach, we consulted with the public works director, and he recommended that for weather change sea levels, that we should count on elevation 10, with whatever reference was used, as the level at which the water wouldn't come. So we're suggesting that we consider raising the level of the gazebo by a foot. And we raised this area by a foot. It created some stairs going down to the beach and then a handicapped rank. We actually thought that was an improvement, that it actually sort of defines the beach, creates a nice steps for kids to step on. It just makes it a more interesting area. The shoreline path, we know that there was a lot of concern that that shoreline path not be open to bicycles. There was also some concern expressed that it not be a concrete surface, that it be a friendly surface. That was always our intent, but we didn't state it strongly enough. So here we are saying that it should be a pavement that is as natural as possible, but it will still meet the AD requirements. And we should emphatically state that there should be bollards and signage at all, and bicycle racks at all the access points so that we assure that there will not be any bicycles on the shoreline path. |
| 02:38:04.61 | Jacques Ullman | Now, the North-South Greenway issue, again, this schematic master plan is the PowerPoint. So every one of these slides is part of the plan that you would be approving. So I will be talking in the next slide about the North-South Greenway so we talk about north-south greenway it is part of the plan and it is recognized but we first have to address what we have now and make sure we make that work because we may be living with that for three four five six seven we don't know so that's why we're first making a plan that works with what we have and that doesn't require us to spend our precious budget on too much that's outside of the park. But we say very strongly here that the study is for a very extensive and costly project that involves total replacement of sidewalks, curbs, and street planting over a long distance that may not be realized for some time. Thus, the current Dunphy Park schematic master plan has to work with the existing joint path and street bicycle lane. During the working drawing phase of the master plan, attention will be paid to avoid any conflicts with a future North-South Greenway. So we're recognizing the North-South Greenway. We're saying in this next note that The three groups that are involved in this north-south plan should be consulted before working drawings are commenced to make sure that there aren't any conflicts. And we are pointing out that there is an issue at Napa and Bridgeway at that entrance. And as much as some people think it's determined, it isn't. I mean, there does need to be a dialogue between the city and the people planning the North-South Greenway to make sure that that part is resolved. But that does not need to delay your approval to go on to working drawings because we're saying very emphatically that during the working drawing phase, people have to get together and figure this out. But there's a lot of expense involved in that. There's a power pole that's in the way and so on. Maybe one can work around it. I don't know. But it has to be looked at by the people who are responsible for this and the people who will be doing the working drawings. We do show the section of what's anticipated and we believe that the parking lot as it's placed leaves enough room for that width but any adjustments that need to be made on that corner will have to be discussed. But as a working drawing thing because there isn't even an adequate survey of that area. I mean you have to deal with it now in technical terms to make it work. |
| 02:40:50.94 | Unknown | THE VIRGINIA. |
| 02:41:15.78 | Jacques Ullman | So I'm not gonna go too much into the eelgrass and so on thing because as we've said, this is to be dealt with as a separate issue. but we need to be aware of the studies that are being made and all the issues that are involved. So as I said, it is recommended that expert advice on both habitat preservation and small boat activity be obtained to determine the most appropriate interface of these two subjects of concern. Same thing with water traffic, shall be limited to small boats without keels. Facilities for boats shall be provided at Casa Marina and Cruising Club and shall not extend south of the Cruising Club. The schematic master plan does not detail this area. The city shall determine who will be served by these facilities. So this is, again, for a future dialogue. Now, this is important. we want to show that the orientation of the cruising club is not critical to how this plan functions. It will function however the cruising club is oriented. And so during the working drawing stage and when the turnaround that's been suggested is studied, all of that area at the end of the parking lot will be adjusted to make sure that it could work for either orientation or with a minimal amount of change. Because that is an issue that everybody involved with that in the immediate neighborhood deserves that to be dealt with more seriously. |
| 02:42:59.65 | Jacques Ullman | Now, as far as the waterfront community is concerned, there's been a lot of talk about dinghy docks and moorings and laundry machines and showers and so on, and all that's important. And if the city wishes to address the issue of liveaboards or anchor outs and what should or shouldn't be provided, that's fine. But Duffy Park Master Plan is not really the way to look for that solution. It's a different dialogue. Well, that's fine. I guess you'll have your say, and you should have your say. But I'm just saying, you know, I'm suggesting, I am sympathizing with it as a serious problem and I do seriously think that if one looks toward the schematic master plan as the way to solve the problem it's not going to get solved |
| 02:43:32.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:43:54.88 | Jacques Ullman | So again, I want to emphasize that at the entrances to the park, there should be bollards and signs that say that bicycles are not permitted in the park, and there should be adequate places for the bicycles to be parked. |
| 02:44:14.14 | Jacques Ullman | Now, the grading is an important issue in the sense that it really also is related to the trees and the plant material. Because you can't really regrade the park and save all the trees. And I want to say that there actually have been, we had studies made, we met, and in the references page, we have reference to the three reports and studies that were done. And it's a difficult thing to face, but, I mean, we have to give credit to the people who created this park, the Waddell brothers and Barry Hibben and people that I knew who created the park. And now we have the park because of their work. But unfortunately, it was done, you know, the place they dumped a lot of stuff in there. They didn't necessarily choose the right plant material. And so now we're at a stage where we have to build on what they started, but we have to make it better. And it's always difficult at this point to have to maybe, what appears to be moving backwards, to remove some of the plant material. But you can't amend the soil. You can't improve the drainage. You can't do the proper thing with the grating and then keep the trees. And in any case, the trees, if we don't do something about them, nature is slowly doing something about them for us. And so we're never going to have what we want if we don't face the music and do what we have to do with the existing trees. There are a few that can be saved. But at some point we're going to have to Thank you. what we have to do with the existing trees. There are a few that can be saved, but at some point we're going to have to face the issue that they were just the wrong choice and they're diseased and they're falling apart and so on. So we want to create this rolling contoured berms, creating the central open grass bowl while maintaining the visual connection to the water from bridgeway sidewalk berms will also provide a certain amount of wind protection and they will also allow us to bring in more good soil and plant on the berms so it gives us an to, because we can't remove all that horrible junk that was put there, but we can try to add to it. This will allow us for better vegetation. So that's really got into the plant material on that subject, and I'm not going to take your time. If anyone really is interested in the plant material, you can read it more carefully. habitat. So the passive area, again, it's the same slide you've seen before, and we have had some assistance from Marin Audubon to get a conceptual plan, but this will require more work and more dialogue, and your approval of this plan tonight will not be approving in detail what happens here is just the concept of doing and your approval of this plan tonight will not be approving in detail what happens here. It's just the concept of doing it. So as I said, the last three items in the references there are the ones that have to do with the soil conditions and the plant material. So I hope that the city isn't going to be spending a whole lot more money for more studies for what we already really kind of know. If you look and see how the exposed roots of all those trees and the way they've been falling down and so on, we kind of see the handwriting on the wall and we have to do the right thing. |
| 02:48:10.37 | Jacques Ullman | So I can... I can answer questions. |
| 02:48:15.25 | Jonathon Goldman | Actually, before, excuse me. Before we go into questions, I just want to put up a couple more things from another |
| 02:48:29.12 | Adam Politzer | I'm sorry. |
| 02:48:30.91 | Jonathon Goldman | I took my clicker. All right. Well, first off, thank you very much, Jacques, and Paul, and all the friends for all the hard work they've done. This would have cost the city, I'm just going to pull a number out, at least $100,000 for all the work that they've done. And they've done it for us for free. So I really want to thank them for that. And they worked really hard at it. So staff is recommending that the following be considered. So now that you've seen the plan, now we can see what the staff is recommending in regards to the plan. And this is still going to go to the planning commission and go through other design orientations. So there'll be time for more tweaking it here and there. But the basic plan. I'm not sure. Let's see. First off, the number of parking spaces in regards to the Cruising Club, Cass Gidley, and Galilee Harbor Leets and proposed parking plan with the goal of, This didn't come out right. What I'm saying here is that the Munro parking spaces in regards to the cruising club, Cass Gidley. and Galilee Harbor, All of those, be considered and see how can we maximize parking while not increasing the amount of paved area proposed in the schematic master plan. I understand that Galilee Harbor has come up with a different plan to add additional parking spaces to the property that they own adjacent to the park. The city and any engineer would be more than willing to look at that, and hopefully that will work out so we can really maximize parking in that area but not turn the park into a parking lot. While we're on that note, I wanted to make a small correction in the amount of parking spaces that we said. In my staff report, I said 72 were proposed. It's really 70. I was off there. But also in some of the counts that I've done, the existing parking there's 66 spaces total 10 of those belong to Galilee and 56 of those belong to the city if we take that number 70 which includes the parking in front of Galilee as well as the city we've increased that by four in addition to increasing that by four we've added the correct amount and the legal amount of ADA parking spaces including van spaces which take up basically over a a space and a half. We've also included the proper paths of travel for the ADA. ADA parking spaces including van spaces which take up basically over a space and a half. We've also included the proper paths of travel for the ADA. And that's something that we don't have now. So, that would bring it to whatever Galilee can put in their space, which I was counting. on, uh, Let's see. Ten. We've added that there, so we'd have an increase, net increase in the entire lot of four spaces. But we're willing to look at other ideas and see how we can get more in there and make it more efficient. The city staff work with Galilee Harbor to develop a parking enforcement plan to enforce parking regulations on private property. This is very common here in Sausalito. with the right signage all the property owner has to do is call the police and they will come out and ticket the cars that are parked illegally on private property Once a couple people get tickets, word travels fast, and you don't have that problem as much anymore. Great example is downtown. You've got Madden's lot. You've got this big open parking lot. And somehow everybody says, it's crowded downtown, but people know not to park there because the proper signage is there. And even the locals that say, I'll just park here for a little while, they learn eventually they'll get a ticket. We're also recommending, as everybody else was, that a vehicle turnaround be put at the northeast portion of the parking lot. Loading zones be added for deliveries as well as park users. Somebody pulls up, they can unload their picnic gear, unload their kayak, the cruising club, whatever deliveries they get. There will be a space for that. There'll be further analysis of the large trees to see if any can be saved. As Jacques said, you know, in order to do these things right, You have to look and some trees are gonna have to go. Just the other day, we lost a large tree right by the bocce courts. It basically just fell down in slow motion. Didn't really break, the roots just pulled out. Since the time I've been here, probably lost at least 10 trees in the parking lot. Last winter, we lost one and it fell on top of a car and the city was... have to take care of that staff is recommending that the process that the following be addressed in the future and not part of this design process. that's the north-south greenway that Jacques was talking about. The proposed plan allows for flexibility if and when the greenway is done. And staff believes that there's enough ample parking for all activities at the park and that additional parking does not need to be considered at this time. Now, as the park and surrounding areas become more active with community programs, parks and recreation Commission along with the parks and recreation department can reevaluate the programming should any parking issues arrive what I'm saying is that I'm not going to book multiple activities in there what's going to happen there going to have to be appropriately sized for the park. As well as the parking, if somebody wants to have an event there, that will exceed the parking, then they're going to need to come up with a parking plan, just like other events in town do when they're going to have more people than there is parking for. |
| 02:53:50.01 | Jonathon Goldman | And again, the idea of designating the water areas a preserve, restricting boat traffic, that can be addressed later once we get more information on it and we go through the leases with the Cruising Club and Cass Gidley. And as Jacques said, the Cruising Club can be addressed at a different time. The orientation of it has no bearing on the park plans. So we're recommending First off, recognize and thank the Friends of Dunphy Park for all the work with special thanks to Paul Leffinois and Jacques Ullman for the countless hours, expertise that they have generously donated to the schematic master plan development process. Adopt a resolution adopting the updated schematic master plan developed by the Friends of Dunphy Park as presented this evening. accept the recommendations of the Parks and Recreation Commission with changes recommended by staff, And finally, direct staff to solicit proposals for design services to prepare more detailed plans for submittal to the Planning Commission and other agencies for entitlements and permits. So with that, I'm done, and we'll open it up to you. And Jacques and I are both here to answer questions. |
| 02:54:55.49 | Jill Hoffman | ever. Thanks Mike Councilman Pfeiffer. |
| 02:55:00.53 | Unknown | Thank you. And thanks very much, Jacques, for that hard work, your hard work, and Paul Leffingwell, too, for your efforts on this. It truly is so wonderful. I think it's an example of the amazing talent we have in town. Thank you. And thank you to Mike for your presentation. Very good. So my first question is, just as council was beginning, we received an email from a lawyer representing Galilee Park. I wasn't familiar with the controversy with regards to I guess this parking lot is it includes their parking lot too I mean I was not at the the Dunphy Park forums public forum so this this my first inclination that there was an issue was when I got the Galilee Harbor letter and then I got this and then so my first question is you said that current parking is 66 total 10 belonging to Galilee and 56 belonging to the city I saw in mr. Hurd's letter that he mentions eight spots public parking spaces for Galilee Harbor Are included in the park. Can you explain that to me? Is that are those eight? Part are those eight parking spaces publicly for Galilee currently part of their ten that they're allocated or are they different? Because I'm sorry, one more thing. I know Galilee also has its own separate parking lot, I believe. I could be wrong about that on the side. |
| 02:56:44.74 | Jonathon Goldman | Because I... |
| 02:56:52.42 | Jonathon Goldman | OK, so you are correct, and folks from Galilee, Deli Harbor does have parking on the the north side of Napa Street, or if you're looking at the map would be over here. |
| 02:57:06.18 | Unknown | It's a parking lot. |
| 02:57:07.16 | Jonathon Goldman | Yep, there's a parking lot. And that is theirs, exclusively theirs on their property. |
| 02:57:08.55 | Unknown | . |
| 02:57:11.42 | Jill Hoffman | Okay? |
| 02:57:12.12 | Jonathon Goldman | This area here, if you see this line right there, |
| 02:57:13.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:13.36 | Jill Hoffman | Yep. |
| 02:57:13.63 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:57:15.48 | Jonathon Goldman | flowing there. To then there. Thank you. |
| 02:57:18.05 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:57:18.07 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. That is Galilee Harbor property. And they can park cars or park. do with as they please, the city does have a 25-foot easement that travels through that area there. |
| 02:57:31.02 | Unknown | Ah, okay. And what about this eight public parking spaces that BCDC- |
| 02:57:36.02 | Jonathon Goldman | Through Galilee Harbor's agreement with BCDC, they're required to have a total of 62 parking spaces. Of those 62, eight of them are to be left open during daylight hours. In other words, Galilee Harbor, tenants, people working there and such can't use them because they are to remain open for public access. And that's public access to the water, whether it's walking out on Galilee Harbor's pier using the dinghy dock they have there or going over to Dunphy Park. It's water access, public access. |
| 02:58:09.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:09.33 | Unknown | you |
| 02:58:14.55 | Unknown | So the dinghy dock at Galilee Harbor is for public access. |
| 02:58:14.58 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 02:58:19.20 | Jonathon Goldman | I will not comment on that because it is Galilee Harbors, and they control that. But it is my understanding. If I'm wrong, I'm sure I'll be corrected later today. Thank you. |
| 02:58:31.71 | Unknown | And the eight public spaces, did BCDC dictate where those eight should be? Do they need to be in Galilee Harbor's separate parking lot? Or are they part of this little slice here that is included in the Sweeney? |
| 02:58:47.40 | Jonathon Goldman | In my research, I did not see anything that said that they had to be in a certain location, except that they have to be on Galilee Harbor property. |
| 02:58:56.26 | Unknown | Okay, good. And to your knowledge, do those, do you know where those, so you don't know where those eight public spaces currently are? |
| 02:59:05.68 | Jonathon Goldman | What I've been told currently, they are the spaces that are in front of the office here. Those are the ones that they have designated. There's actually some signage out there that says that. |
| 02:59:11.08 | Unknown | that doesn't work. |
| 02:59:15.48 | Unknown | And did you say there were 10 there or 8? |
| 02:59:18.45 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. Well, in this, in this, going out there and just doing some unofficial counting, but basically going out there when the parking lot is full. I could see seven spaces here. And then over on this side of the driveway, I counted four spaces. Three of those are Galilee's. One is city. |
| 02:59:41.42 | Unknown | When you say, again, I guess what I'm trying to understand is I didn't know that this parking... proposal included, you know, paving, you know, basically setting up the infrastructure for Galilee's private property. And it makes sense if it is parking spaces that are used for the public and for the parks. |
| 03:00:05.19 | Jonathon Goldman | Well, it is Galilee Harbor's property. In conversations that I've had, Galilee Harbor, and again, I'm sure someone will correct me when I'm wrong, they've had plans to pave this as part of their agreement with BCDC for quite some time. they had started the stop started stopped but when measure F passed and it was discovered that we were going to be doing improvements for the park in my conversations with Galilee folks, it was, hey, let's work on this together so that we can maximize parking as well as maximize the efficiency of getting the work done. Mike, can I correct? Working on it together means |
| 03:00:39.70 | Unknown | My way to work on a together means we're paying for it right Galilee it's not a accurate. |
| 03:00:42.20 | Adam Politzer | We're paying. |
| 03:00:42.81 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 03:00:42.91 | Adam Politzer | Right, yeah, it's not an accurate statement if I'm not accurate What Mike does it go back to the slide that shows the what's there today and that might be helpful as a visual Keep keep going. Do you have the maybe it's the bigger where he shows the neighborhood chose galley harbor and their parking lot might be that that might be too small, but |
| 03:00:46.52 | Unknown | That's not accurate? |
| 03:01:07.43 | Adam Politzer | Let's start there. Let's start there. So you can see Galley's parking lot to the left there. And then you can see Napa Street, which has this circle. Now, this was constructed many years ago, several years ago, with the understanding that we were working together on what's going to happen in the parking lot. So then go to the bigger slide of what's there today. So you can see there the Galley Harbor office, the building, and then the kind of cutout parking spaces that are there. Since the late 90s, early 2000s, there's been an understanding and a working relationship with Galley Harbor and the city at that time. April Phillips and Gordon Sweeney, Gordon Sweeney was the city engineer. April Phillips was also donating her time in working with us. With the understanding that we were going to maximize the number of parking spaces. in that location. To clarify, Mike is talking about 60-something parking spaces. that are unofficial parking spaces. There's not a single you know, line in there that actually shows where you're supposed to park. And if someone parks sideways or funky or in the middle of it, You know, there's really nothing to show where people are going to park. And during special events, people are jammed in there in any way they can. And again, no path of travel, no ADA compliance. which both the Gale area and the city are both required as we, when we moved to paving the lot, We're both required to address the ADA concerns. So the agreement from the early 2000s to now, And prior to Measure F, because Galilei was actually working with Jonathan Goldman and Jock. and Michael Rex on how to maximize that parking area prior to Measure F, even prior to the COPs, even being discussed. because phase one was, well, how do we move forward with the parking and Gali in fact had money both for design and wanted to move forward on constructing the parking lot and how could they work with the city to do that so I want to be clear that um, In all of our presentations, you know, we have we have shown the Galilee cutout because it's in the go to the slide you were just at Mike. You know, it's it's shown there with a galley office and then that rectangle there of spaces and how do we maximize, you know, using their space and ours without losing city. |
| 03:03:36.23 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:03:38.76 | Adam Politzer | Parking. And without losing Galilee's partner. |
| 03:03:41.68 | Unknown | Yeah, Adam, my question was pretty Let me restate my question. When I look at this, I know Galilee Harbor has its own separate parking lot across the street. I thought that was Galilee's parking lot. Now I'm hearing that that is part of their property too. And we are using Measure F funds to pave that. And irrespective of whether they've been working with city staff on this, I did not know that. And so my question is, now we have questions that are bubbling up with Galilee about usage and allocation of the parking lot. And i can see where they would have questions because it's their their property so my question here setting aside the fact that we're we're using measure f funds to to um to to pave a and set up infrastructure for a private property is that those parking spaces there for Galilee, you know, it sounds like to me there's a... is that those parking spaces there for Galilee, it sounds like to me there's a controversy right now as to what percentage of those will be for the public benefit. Did I get that wrong? So tell me then how many spaces there are going to be available for the park? |
| 03:05:02.70 | Adam Politzer | Well, what we're proposing, and I don't think that there's a controversy with Galilee or the city, what we're proposing is that all of the 70 parking spaces that are proposed there will be used for the park. There will be a designated number of parking spaces, which I think what Mike is saying is eight, that are used in the evening for Galilee when the park is actually closed. And during the daytime, those eight spaces would be used for the community. |
| 03:05:31.52 | Unknown | Thank you, Adam. And when you say those eight used there, you're talking about used on the slice of land that belongs to Galilee. Correct? Okay. So just to paraphrase, my understanding of the answer to my question is that the proposal as it stands is that that strip that belongs to Galilee is going to be paved using Measure F funds, and eight spaces there are going to be allocated for public use during the day, not Galilee use, and that at night, Galilee residents will be able to, at night, presumably, when the sun goes down, because with daylight savings time, that could be 9 o'clock, that Galilee residents can then park there. Did I get that right? |
| 03:05:41.70 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 03:05:42.07 | Shelby Van Meter | Bye. |
| 03:05:42.09 | Unknown | . |
| 03:05:57.17 | Unknown | And... |
| 03:05:57.38 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:05:57.39 | Unknown | And, you know, the |
| 03:06:20.98 | Unknown | I'm hearing some members of Galilee in the audience saying no. |
| 03:06:23.99 | Adam Politzer | Well, I think where you may be hearing comments, and Galilea will certainly speak tonight, I think the THE one of the main points of the letter that we received from the attorney. was that that property is Galilee's and that they want to have assurances tonight that the city is going to continue to work with them to maximize the number of parking spaces so that they, you know, so their uses are protected. You know, their needs are protected and that there's a parking plan that doesn't require them to police their own parking lot. The Measure F funds, we are absolutely recommending that what you see and what has been presented by Jacques that the Measure F funds encompass what's in the conceptual plan, including the parking spots on Galilee, because ultimately we believe that during the daytime hours when the park is open, that all 70 spaces will be available to the public. |
| 03:07:25.02 | Unknown | So in other words, we're using Measure F funds to provide parking, basically build the parking lot for Galilee for eight spaces that will be used for the public during the day. And are there any private spaces for Galilee on that strip? No? Okay, so eight spaces there that would be used for the park during the day, and then at sunset, when the park is closed and it's dark, Galilee residents would then be able to use those eight spaces. I mean, it's a pretty good deal for Galilee, if I'm interpreting this correctly, because they're getting their entire parking lot set up. Thank you. I have more questions, but I'm going to leave it at that right now. Any other questions? |
| 03:08:18.25 | Jill Hoffman | from the council? |
| 03:08:20.61 | Ray | What's this? |
| 03:08:20.75 | Unknown | Thank you. I noticed in the parking rep rec recommendations and in your presentation, you talked about resolving these parking issues and I was just wondering, since you want us to approve this master plan at this point and go forward, when and how and who are going to resolve these parking issues? |
| 03:08:38.03 | Jonathon Goldman | General. will be resolved, of course, by Galilee and the city. and then it goes to the Planning Commission. And that will be the next kind of stop measure where people can report. |
| 03:08:50.68 | Adam Politzer | Sorry, Mike, let me jump in again and just say that the action tonight is to actually direct staff to come to solicit. qualifications, and proposals to hire a design team that will turn this into working drawing. and work with Galilee. in terms of looking at the footprint of this parking Um, Um... parking design and maximize those number of spaces within that footprint working with the co-owner of that section of space. So the design team, the professional design team and staff We'll work with Gali to come up with a finalized plan if it changes significantly comes back to Council. If it doesn't change significantly, it goes on to the Planning Commission. one |
| 03:09:41.00 | Unknown | question is do we do we have a budget for the design architect or the professional that we would be authorizing tonight is there |
| 03:09:48.90 | Jonathon Goldman | We do not, as we have not gone out to bid yet on that. |
| 03:09:52.66 | Adam Politzer | Again, you'll be authorizing that because that's over the $25,000 that I'm authorized. So when we go out to solicit a design team, we'll come back just like we've done in the past and we'll tell you who we are recommending. the cost associated with that and you will approve it. And if there's additional instructions and direction you want to give to that design professional and the team that will make up that group, you'll be able to do that again. |
| 03:10:18.06 | Unknown | So all you're asking us tonight is to authorize you to solicit bids that you would get and come back to Council. Is that correct? Thanks. |
| 03:10:27.92 | Ray | Mike, can we go back to the Bridgeway, I want to see a live picture of Bridgeway. |
| 03:10:47.19 | Unknown | So |
| 03:10:47.78 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah, that's it. That's okay. Would you like to see this or the North-South Greenway? Yeah. |
| 03:10:54.16 | Jill Hoffman | this one. |
| 03:10:55.52 | Jonathon Goldman | That's all. |
| 03:10:55.81 | Jill Hoffman | You're saying the case is correct. |
| 03:10:56.13 | Ray | Thank you. |
| 03:10:56.17 | Jonathon Goldman | I, I, I. |
| 03:10:56.84 | Ray | Thank you. I can work with that. Opposite the bike shop, there are parking spaces. |
| 03:11:04.58 | Unknown | you |
| 03:11:08.80 | Ray | Thank you. I would say. So right there? Right there. Okay? And then you have the bike path that goes along. Is that right? |
| 03:11:22.03 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah, there's the bike lane that goes along the roadway. And then there's also a sidewalk, wide sidewalk area. |
| 03:11:31.48 | Ray | Now, right in between, between litho and B. on Bridgeway, It is a median, five feet. Is that right? Yeah, there is. I'll take your word for it. Okay, I'm thinking that if, I don't know how we do it, but, If you put automobile, continue the packing up until, Lift out. If you continued automobile parking, along Bridgeway, almost up the B. could you utilize that five foot median in the middle. And move that way you could park maybe nine to ten automobiles along bridgeway and still be able to have the bike path and the ten foot roadway that you need on bridgeway. |
| 03:12:29.03 | Jonathon Goldman | but that's out of my lane. |
| 03:12:30.70 | Jill Hoffman | Uh... Thank you. |
| 03:12:33.15 | Jonathon Goldman | Okay. |
| 03:12:36.96 | Adam Politzer | I think the answer to that question is that's what you would ask the design team to consider when we have the professional design team, if in fact the council wanted us to look at that. |
| 03:12:45.28 | Ray | because I just started to bring it up. And basically when you talked about the trees inside Don Free Park, What's it go down? Three, four feet before it hits water, salt water, Jacques? |
| 03:13:04.58 | Ray | Yeah, I'm assuming that if it's anything like down at parking lot one, it doesn't, it's not too far, three feet, four feet. And that's what... |
| 03:13:14.64 | Unknown | You have to go that |
| 03:13:15.92 | Ray | Yeah, and because it's salt water, that's why your roots are going to go horizontal and not vertically. But anyways. |
| 03:13:25.09 | Unknown | Okay. Madam Mayor, I'd just like to ask a clarifying question about, before we hear public comment, about exactly what it is you're asking, what is the nature of the approval that you're asking for tonight? And so, for example, you're asking us to approve the schematic plan, right? So let's look at pieces of it. So and then so that you can hire a design professional, produce work and drawings, and then go in front of the planning commission for their approval of this project. Let's say the planning commission having hearing public testimony from neighbors and the like say we don't think I'm picking on one thing just for no reason other than it's something to pick on pick on either the volleyball or the bocce or something like that one of the active areas and says no as a planning commission We don't think it should be there. We should think it'd be somewhere else now are we saying that by? I Approving this tonight, we're saying Planning Commission, we as landlord are saying those activities are there and you can't move them. Or if you are going to move them, it's gotta come back to us to start the process all over again. So I wanna just be clear what it is you're actually asking us to do tonight. And I use that as an example of things that the Planning Commission might decide to change upon hearing testimony that, so what's the city's expectations here? |
| 03:15:16.87 | Adam Politzer | So let's say it's volleyball. Let's remove the volleyball, say, in court. based on the discussion that that happens at the Planning Commission. hearing. and the public participation at that meeting, if there is no strong advocacy for the volleyball courts staff may make the recommendation contingent on the council not having any concern about that. you know, that approval would go forward. We you know this has been one of those areas where there hasn't been a strong group of volleyball people coming to the meetings meeting. We want more than one volleyball court or we need it. You know X location. But with bocce ball we think that that is very sensitive and that if they decided that three is too many or three is not enough. or the location's not appropriate, then we would bring that back to the council as the property owner and ask the council to weigh back in. to say, look, there's been a recommendation of a change from the Planning Commission before we accept that change, we want the property owner as the representative to actually say that they're okay with that or not. And if they're not okay with that, then they would give direction back to the planning commission to reconsider. something of significance would come back to the council things that that we felt that we feel are programmatic would go back to the Park and Rec Commission because it may have an impact on what programs that we we offer there so you know I think it's hard for us to answer that question other than to say We're asking you to give us direction on the master plan, the schematic plan. with consideration of what the Park and Rec Commission has asked, consideration of what you may hear from the public this evening, And then give us the opportunity to move forward with the design team. to get into the working drawings And even in that, that level if significant issues come up where we can't come to agreement then we would bring that back to Council before we go to the Planning Commission. There's no purpose to go to the Planning Commission if we're at odds. But if we can reach agreement on the direction that's given tonight, and move forward with the interested parties, then we would go on to the Planning Commission, and as issues come up there, you'll come back to the Council if necessary. I hope that answers your question. |
| 03:17:50.65 | Jill Hoffman | Any other questions from council? |
| 03:17:52.62 | Unknown | I may have some after public comment. I'd like to take public comment and leave the opportunity for that. |
| 03:17:57.68 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not. |
| 03:17:59.17 | Unknown | Okay, fine, thank you. I have a couple quick questions. Sure. So I looked at the lawyer's letter again, and his comment is that the eight public parking spaces on the strip of Galilee property are for the public accessing the short line from Galilee. So perhaps that echoes back. At least this is what their lawyers said. I don't know if this is true or not Not the park and I was wondering if city staff had a comment on that And it sounds like then perhaps it's related to that dinghy access that you weren't sure about. I don't know I Yeah. |
| 03:18:38.93 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, I don't think that we have a comment on that. We received a letter just prior to the council meeting. City attorneys had an opportunity. I think what is in all of our interests is to sit down with Galilee and, make sure that we're back on the same page and maybe we'll hear some of that tonight. But again, it's maximizing the use of those spaces And if there are designations that need to be designated, then to work that through, But again, that will be addressed at the Planning Commission. That level of detail will actually be worked out at the Planning Commission. So give us the opportunity to talk with their attorney and with Galley Harbor and see if we can work towards a solution. if we have a difference of a legal opinion, then we either bring it back to Council for consideration or we'll let the Planning Commission try to sort it out before we bring it back to Council for the for their consideration I have confidence that we'll work it out before we get to the Planning Commission because I again for you know for almost a 16 years, we've been working together towards this effort. And for whatever reason, we're at a, you know, we have drawn some lines in the sand and I believe unnecessarily, but we'll hear from Galilee tonight. I'm sorry. |
| 03:19:54.59 | Unknown | Well, I've got to say, I've been here for eight of those 16 years, or 13 years, and this is the first I've heard, you know, with this conflict. So when I got Galilei's letter, and then I got his email here. So the next question I have is the north-south greenway. You might recall, Jacques and Mike, the reason I could not support this initial plan was I looked at that shoreline pathway and said, I don't care how many signs you do. You know, I live on the south side of town. The cyclists ignore the signs and they just ride on the sidewalks. There's a shoreline path. The bikes, the rental bikes are going to go there. And that's frankly the reason why I was pushing for moving forward on the North-South Greenway. Number one, the Marin Bicycle Coalition really wanted it very badly. I understand that it's a long-range vision, but, I mean, if we don't build that in right now just to that strip, in that strip, off-road, the bikes are naturally going to go there. I mean, they avoid the intersection there. They can go. I mean, they're going to be riding over pedestrians. I'll give you a warning. I know. |
| 03:21:08.34 | Jacques Ullman | I'll give you a warning. I know that you're very, very concerned about cost overruns and about costs that are a result of adding scope to a project. And you're adding scope to a project, and that's a guaranteed cost overrun. So we have to find other funds to do that. We could do that strip of the North-South Greenway, but it's a significant addition to scope. |
| 03:21:28.47 | Unknown | we could do. |
| 03:21:35.10 | Unknown | Jacques. So let me just follow up with a question and a comment on it very quickly, is that I have been consistent since 2011, since I first saw this. I said, please build this into your scope. That's number one. Number two, you don't have to build the North South Greenway. I'm just asking you to allow that space. You've put a parking lot in there. |
| 03:21:56.99 | Jacques Ullman | in there. I guarantee you that we're doing that. I, |
| 03:22:02.02 | Unknown | I'm seeing a parking lot. I don't understand that. |
| 03:22:04.99 | Jacques Ullman | No, no, let's see. I need to get to the other slide, but it's not. So Jacques. Okay, next one. |
| 03:22:08.55 | Jill Hoffman | So, Yeah. |
| 03:22:12.53 | Jacques Ullman | Yeah, that one. Again, You have to understand this is a schematic plan, and we do not actually have a survey of this area. I had to go to the Google Maps to figure out exactly where the curb was. So just because I think I can satisfy your concern. When we go into working drawings, then you have a survey, and then you know precisely where things are. Now, there's a section here of what they want to do. Very precise about their dimensions. So when this is laid out then when the curbs are put in for the parking lot it needs to be positioned such that this can be put in without interference. |
| 03:22:29.98 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 03:22:30.03 | Unknown | . |
| 03:22:30.35 | Unknown | I'm sorry. Thank you. |
| 03:22:30.64 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:22:30.72 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:22:30.81 | Unknown | inside us |
| 03:22:57.71 | Jacques Ullman | And that's why this is here, and this is part of the plan. So if it's not done, someone has failed their job. |
| 03:23:01.03 | Unknown | Okay. And my next question is, have you talked to the Marin Bicycle Coalition about coordinating this, about do they have funding? I'm just concerned about bikes going on that pedestrian path. |
| 03:23:13.55 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:23:13.57 | Jacques Ullman | concerned about you know here's why we say that these people have to be consulted they're that these are the my understanding and there's someone here from from that group I'm sorry there is someone here that can maybe answer you but we're saying they have to be consulted those three entities that are |
| 03:23:27.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:23:27.37 | Unknown | There is someone. |
| 03:23:35.34 | Unknown | Let's go. |
| 03:23:36.97 | Jill Hoffman | Public comment, yeah. Okay. Let's move on to public comment, and then maybe we'll revisit some of this after public comment. I'm just going to name off the names I have here, the first three. Christine Scarpino. I have a card that just says Caroline on it. There's no last name. And Nina LeBaron are the first three up. |
| 03:23:37.68 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:24:03.89 | Christine Scarpino | Hi, good evening. My name is Christine Scarpino, I'm a long time resident of Sausalito, and I'm here to speak on behalf of Galley Harbor Community Association. to address the nature of our letter and the letter of our attorney. I'm saying this in the spirit of collaboration and maybe a little frustration. while I am all in for the parks. as evidenced by my services treasurer on measure F, And my desire, I guess I became a member of the oversight committee tonight. I'm just a little befuddled over the Dunphy Park schematic plan approval process. First of all, we have Galley Harbor come to the table on this issue since June of 2014. And yes, this is old news parking for many of us. I feel like a broken record, but quite frankly, after reading the staff report and related resolutions for tonight's meeting, Galley Harbor feels it's imperative to receive an official understanding. on record regarding our concerns. so to back into the parking. and Adam has echoed this, so I don't need to echo it again. We do have an understanding verbally. what we would desire is to have this on record that we are going to be collaboratively working together. Linda to take your point there are 18 spaces in front of our tin shed that actually need to be constructed. 10 of which are for the rest of our residential CUP. And the remaining eight is from a BCDC requirement. It's a public shoreline access. Now, does that include the park? or is it just for shoreline access for BCDC? That's a question for the attorney. THEIR OWNERS. Are we receiving Measure F funds? Absolutely not. That's our property. If just say for example, know during the construction maybe Some drainage has to go through our property based on, you know, from the city's perspective. something like that. Obviously. But no, that's our property. We pay for it. That's our parking lot. Want me to continue? And again, we can talk to the attorney more about that. But I'm part of the oversight committee, I don't think I could actually say that we're taking measure F funds. the cruising club turning to just go back away from the parking Galley Harbor feels pretty strongly about this. The staff report requests that this issue be decided in the future. while having no impact to the proposed Dunphy plan design. I have a difficult time understanding this. If it's drawn, if it's going to be redrawn, the cruising club turning, why is the bocce court being moved up so that they're going to have a view of the gangway and the back deck of the cruising club. So that's my question on that. Um, I just want to say Galley Harbor, we're talking. We're in collaborative mode. We've attended all of the meetings. Okay, the only thing is I ask that you either delay approval tonight Or please adjust the record to exclude those residential spaces on our property. agree to have us at the design table with a new architect thank you |
| 03:27:22.66 | Unknown | Could I ask a couple questions of Christine real quick for point of clarification? We've done it before. It's just point of clarification. Okay. |
| 03:27:27.81 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not sure. |
| 03:27:28.18 | Christine Scarpino | Thank you. |
| 03:27:28.19 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:27:32.60 | Jill Hoffman | Do you want to put? |
| 03:27:33.95 | Unknown | Because I just I heard one thing and I just wanted to clarify this. What you're saying is, hey, we're not taking measure of funds. We're paying for the paving ourselves. |
| 03:27:43.18 | Christine Scarpino | Yes. |
| 03:27:43.81 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. It's our lot. It's on our private property. |
| 03:27:45.09 | Christine Scarpino | It's our lot, it's on our private property. There's 18 spaces that we actually need to do. It's gonna be tight and that's why we're working with Adam, collaboratively. And the city and Jonathan, it's just we've been waiting for the funding for the park in order to collaboratively do it together, not necessarily be paid by the city to do it. So it makes more sense to do it together. We've been waiting for many years to do it. It's been unpaid for a long time. |
| 03:27:53.44 | Unknown | Collaborate. |
| 03:27:53.83 | Unknown | in the city. |
| 03:27:55.16 | Unknown | And just- |
| 03:28:03.46 | Unknown | by the city to do it. Uh-huh. It's been unpaved for a long time. So you're paying for the paving of that parking lot, and there are 18, not 10 spaces being. |
| 03:28:15.56 | Christine Scarpino | There's 18 spaces left in our requirement, 10 of which are for residential 100% of the time, and then 8 of which are for public access for the BCDC. |
| 03:28:18.31 | Unknown | I don't know. 100%. |
| 03:28:28.54 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, thanks. Thanks, and Caroline? Is there anybody? |
| 03:28:42.17 | Caroline | I work with plants. This is where we live on Earth. I heal plants. Now I believe plants heal us. So does water, air, the elements, and so do we, the people. I'm Caroline. My friends. A friend of Dunphy Park, a friend of land, a friend of yours, the people. My friends need showers, water, and dinghy docks. A nice way to make the water community be easy on the eyes is on giving respect, therefore receiving it back equally. I feel that voting is separating us. Groups are separating us. We all have our opinions. We all are equal. |
| 03:29:03.32 | Unknown | life. |
| 03:29:21.44 | Caroline | We are all one. Please focus on coming together, making everyone happy. As a family, we can all learn from one another equally by listening with patience and respect. I believe we all have the right to express our opinions. It has been expressed that some people would appreciate very much so. I do believe. But putting their time and efforts and love into the community themselves in a community garden available to the public. How beautiful. We are all love. Everything is living. Imagine if perhaps the community was gifted even Robin Sweeney as a community garden. It's already dug up. No, this is just a dream. Dunphy Park, those who love the earth, the flowers, plants, they make us happy. make us appreciate where we come from. The people who love doing so can come together and create a lovely space we all can share for free. I believe everyone would appreciate more nature, especially the local animals that we all love. Dunphy Park has a bodge court and volleyball court already. What it doesn't have is a flower, vegetable, garden and only a few trees. We as humans need to preserve and flourish plants on land that we breathe. Something with the plant, same thing with the plants under water and our people's needs. Me and my Dunphy Park friends, |
| 03:31:03.18 | Caroline | want to help for free because we'd love to. This is important spiritual land that deserves respect and love. Coming back together. back to where we come from, respecting Mother Earth. Beautiful. And we, as people, are spirits who deserve respect, healing, and love. Let's give back to the land we live on. We have to do the right thing and help the trees survive, not die. I, for one, was very upset to see the tree in Dunphy Park cut down, not preserved. I'm sure that there are many others in Sausalito that would love to come together, meditate with love, growing love in Sausalito that everyone can enjoy, making Sausalito more happy, more lovely, and can you imagine, even more beautiful. |
| 03:31:56.49 | Caroline | Thank you. I for one would love and enjoy to be allowed to |
| 03:31:56.90 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:32:03.22 | Caroline | be more a part of preserving of land and helping the plants. The plants cannot speak. and I am here to speak for them. Money needs to be quiet. My opinion is that we should keep the park more for the love of nature, being right next to the water, being so spiritually for everyone free, including all of my friends. I think the bocce and volleyball courts should be more moved somewhere else, and they should be replaced with community gardens, and Dumpy should be planted more trees, plants, and flowers freely. I believe this would be a lot more fair for everyone and beneficial. The trees deserve respect for our lives. This being said, our history also needs respect. We the people, one with the elements. |
| 03:32:47.35 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Caroline. |
| 03:32:51.28 | Jill Hoffman | Very good, very nicely said. Nina LeBaron. |
| 03:33:00.97 | Nina LeBaron | Thank you. |
| 03:33:01.80 | Jill Hoffman | Oh. Yes, you may. |
| 03:33:08.23 | Jill Hoffman | That's fine. You're welcome. Yeah, line up together. if you would. |
| 03:33:17.14 | John Donovan | Ms. Mayor, Council, staff, thank you. I'm John Donovan, I'm the Rear Commodore of the Cruising Club. |
| 03:33:18.13 | Jill Hoffman | Council. |
| 03:33:23.55 | John Donovan | Thank you. Jock, thank you as well for recognizing the redesign needs of the turnaround at the cruising club and in accommodating the needs of the cruising club in the redesign when this goes to actual planning drawings. I'd like to introduce the cruising club, kind of reintroduce the cruising club to you guys and what we're doing now. So I'm going to go into that a little bit with a story here that I've written. The cruising club is a historic entity first established in 1949 to provide cruising sailors with an affordable home port yacht club affiliation to use as they visited other yacht clubs and ports around the world. Many renowned sailors, including Sterling Hayden, have sailed under the... under the Sausalito Cruising Club Bergy. Today, the Sausalito Cruising Club remains one of the most affordable PICYA-affiliated yacht clubs on the bay and boasts a very diverse roster of over 450 members ranging in age from under 18 to over 80. Over 100 of these members are young families new to the Sausalito Cruising Club as of the last two years, and most have kids in the Willow Creek School. We offer to the community water access through kayaking, stand-up and prone paddle boarding, and sailing. Our sailing fleet includes both dinghies and small keelboats, and we offer instruction as well as equipment usage in any of these venues for free. Our outreach includes four to five kids' days a year where we rig our whole fleet and provide boat rides as well as food and teach kids and parents alike how to safely operate the equipment in our fleet. We have five or six cruise outs a year where we take people out on bigger boats and cater to our young at heart. who might not be spry enough to enjoy kayaking or dinghy sailing, but still like to feel the wind and learn about the bay. THE FAMILY IS We sponsor a yearly Dolphin Club Bay Swim and an annual Crayfish Boil that last year raised over $4,000 for the Willow Creek School. This year we're hoping to double that. That's going to be on April 2nd. We hope you guys can make it to that. We are. hosting the year-end celebration for the Willow Creek School teachers and staff. This winter, our dynamic third grade teacher, Ann Siskin, and our awesome music teacher have joined the club, and this summer we'll be expanding our outreach by offering kids camps, where we will be exploring kayaking, paddling, nature, and music at the cruising club. Our dynamic yet down-to-earth approach to water access has attracted the attention of the Sausalito Community Boating Center at Cascadley Marina. We accepted them with open arms and are in talks and planning right now about how the Cruising Club can help kickstart their water activities and how the two entities will work together in the future. Our rustic and beautifully funky historic restaurant bar not only provides a wonderful evening on the Sausalito waterfront after an active day on the water, but also a revenue stream that lets us provide these services and outreach for under cost and in most cases for free. Let the sauce lead. Two more sentences. |
| 03:36:21.53 | Jill Hoffman | Two more sentences. Fine. |
| 03:36:22.61 | John Donovan | At the Sausalito Cruising Club, we do not have an ideal about helping and teaching our community and kids about the amazing gem that is our waterfront. We are already in the trenches. We are doing it right now. What we're asking for you is to look out for us, be a part of this greatness, and understand where we are going. This is not the same cruising club that it was three years ago even. Thank you. Thank you, John. |
| 03:36:41.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, John. Thank you, that was a nice combination of no periods. Yes, next for the cruising club. |
| 03:36:51.80 | Terry Tucker | Hello, my name is Terry Tucker. I am the current Commodore of the South Salud Cruising Club. I have also been a professional marine surveyor since 1984. I would like to address the possibility of rotating the cruising club and hopefully put that to bed once and for all. The original club barge is wood. At some point, I assume in the 70s, a concrete barge was designed and built to house the old wooden barge that was no longer built. seaworthy and that barge was designed to sit in the exact location that it is today |
| 03:37:32.39 | Terry Tucker | The barge only floats a few hours a day. It's basically beached. At high tide, it comes off the beach. foot or two and then settles right back down into the mud again as part of this process. Um, any beach goes from zero to depth, so there's an angle. So the barge actually sits at an angle when it's sitting into the mud. Um, any boat has a thing called freeboard. You've got your water line, you've got the distance between the water line and the top of the hull. which would allow water to cascade in. The barge is over 100 feet long and about 30 feet wide. In the short distance, the barge leaning four or five degrees, that one foot of freeboard is enough to keep the water from being able to cascade over. If you turn that barge 90 degrees, all of a sudden you've got 100 feet of barge leaning that three or four or five degrees. Now that one foot is no longer capable of keeping the water from cascading in. That's a that's a primary reason why we can't turn it. Another one if that would require to keep that from happening, extensive dredging. and extensive continuous dredging to keep that from happening. but also the bars are subject to surging from the water. coming in from the wave action again in the in the the narrow attitude of the vessel, rotating back and forth, the one foot is sufficient to keep it from being able to sing. in the long axis. the longitudinal axis, if it starts going up and down. that one foot of freeboard is not going to be enough to maintain viability of the vessel. And those are just a couple of points. It's just not designed to be in open water. It's designed to be exactly where it's at in a mud berth. So I'd like to ask that the future drawing show the barge in its current location so we can start planning on the details to integrate with the park in any way we can. I'd like to further talk. Dunphy Park has one of the very, very few public direct access to the water locations in Sausalito and the only one that's within a park. Schoonmacher has a nice beach, but that's within a commercial marina. The talk of... restricting the water area to me is counterproductive. Thank you. |
| 03:40:02.52 | Jill Hoffman | THANK YOU. |
| 03:40:06.56 | Nina LeBaron | Hi, I'm Nina LeBaron. I'm an architect with Island Architecture here in Sausalito. And I'm registered in the state of California. I listened to the testimony of concerned citizens to come up with an alternative design that I presented at the last two meetings to no avail. This plan was also emailed to the council with a preliminary budget indicating that the Friends of the Dunphy Park design was already over budget as shown. The Friends of Dunphy Park did not initially consult with the cruising club when they came up with their proposal to turn the club. and remove all of the parking in front of the club, including the dock for the sailing program. I can only assume that the intention of the friends is to get rid of the cruising Is that the intention of the council I ask? The club is under new leadership and is trying to improve their relationship with the community. through family sailing and kids sailing events. Removing parking in front of the club will be detrimental to the club's operation. The only part of my alternate proposal that was considered was a turn around. Now that it has been asked to be included in the design without the front parking for the club, it further reduces the parking for the cruising club. This is the exact opposite intention that I had. My suggestion is that the council does not approve but only approve that an RFP request for proposals. go out to design firms with the following requirements. One, that an adjacent user's committee be appointed to work with the design firm selected that represents all of the constituents of the park. that a parking study be done. with all of those constituents in mind. and the results be incorporated for future users as well. Three, that the design be bid out with contractors to prove that it is within the allocated budget before it goes to a vote. to the council. a design that is over budget cannot be allowed to come to a vote. Please do not approve the current design that is already over budget. My fear is that if the design that stands is approved, that it will send a message to the selected design team that they have to use that design. Once you approve that design, it will be very hard to let an impartial design team do their Please leave the design of the park to train professionals to come up with the right solution for the budget and hand. The park can be so much more. So railroad the current design through is just not appropriate. We thank the friends for all their hard work, but the design needs to be pitched forward now. to go out to bid for an RFP to refine the design by impartial design professionals. This design is not ready for construction documents. There is still a huge list of issues that are not resolved with parking and access for the cruising club if it is to be remain operable with the proposed parking restrictions. Thank you. |
| 03:43:01.20 | Jill Hoffman | THANK YOU. Yes. |
| 03:43:04.45 | Frank Leidman | Good evening. My name is Frank Leidman. I'm also a member of the Board of Directors of the Sausalito Cruising Club. We have approximately 450 members, the bulk of whom are Sausalito residents, and I speak for them. I'm the 2016 Secretary of the club, and I can tell you about how the Cruising Club is dedicated to those 450 members and how they are dedicated and committed to the survival of the Cruising Club, and it is the survival of the Cruising Club that I'm here to discuss. I've read with some distress the staff report suggesting that the City Council adopt the Friends of Dunphy Park schematic master plan. I'm here to urge the City Council postpone such action. I believe it would be imprudent to rush into adopting that plan without first considering alternative plans and without fully considering other issues which I'm going to address. One such alternative plan you just heard was offered by Nino LeBaron but it has been dismissed. We've heard from Terry Tucker about the orientation of the barge. and the fact that it must be where it is. Finally, you've heard from John Donovan, our rear commodore, and the man in charge of the club's nautical committee. You've heard about our kids. I'd add as well that we've been hosting the U.S. Coast Guard seamanship course recently, and we're doing sale outs and doing everything we can to reach out to the community now. Yet reading the staff report is hard to see the cruising club surviving as it is. the limited ingress and egress from the cruising club, the absence of a covered trash area in the park near the cruising club, The absence of adequate parking, the reorientation of the barge we've just discussed, all are inadequately considered. We believe that these concerns are being Uh, trample or basically trampling the cruising club's interest as an adjacent user and would require much more consideration as an adjacent user under the law. I said I would illustrate concerns that I have, and let me do that. The schematic plan on page four at the bottom of that page says the idea of designate quote, the idea of designating the water area as preserved and restricting boat traffic can be addressed when the leases of the cruising club and Cascadley come before the city council for consideration, end quote. We- disagree we oppose the effort to kick the can down the road so I tell you now that the cruising club is prepared to enter into lease negotiations now not later. and believe that such lease negotiations should be part of the design process now. Second, also at the bottom of page for the report, the issue of the turning of the barge. I think that has been definitively addressed by Terry Tucker as a marine surveyor. Third, the parking issue. This is a design process, and the issue needs to be considered at this time, not later. In sum, just one bit. Um. The plan does everything to threaten the cruising club and nothing to integrate the cruising club into the design of a refurbished Dunphy Park. We'd like to bring together all of these right now. If leasing should be part of this process, the design should be part of this process, we believe that there shouldn't be an approval until those things occur. |
| 03:46:33.47 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:46:33.57 | Frank Leidman | I'm not sure. |
| 03:46:35.02 | Jill Hoffman | So I'm going to nail off the next three that I have here on my stack. Jacob and Adam Kravatsky and Michael Rex. |
| 03:46:51.05 | Jeffrey Chase | Hello again, City Council. and mayor. This is really difficult for me. I came in here very happy after I had looked at Southview Park. I had talked to two people that worked for the city. And they had suggested that. as a venue for a community garden. Now I find out, that they would like another meeting. instead of a garden. We've had quite a few meetings and We don't have a community garden. I don't think another meeting is really going to help. Either people are going to do it, and accept it. Or they're not. I'm, I'm looking at this description here. that the jock put up on the screen And it says... that dinghy docks moorings are necessary but there are other locations available. Are there other locations available in the area? Sausalito for public showers, laundry machines, dinghy docks. moorings and et cetera for the anchorage. I don't think so. Dunphy Park is now the spot where the Anchorage gathers for good? purposes, sometimes for slightly unwise purposes and The people who are living on the boats, we try and do what we can to keep that place available for everybody to keep the atmosphere there a good one. It's now proposed that this Dunphy Park be closed for one year. that the only water available for the anchorage be cut off. that the only toilets be cut off, that the only trash services be cut off for the Anchorage for a year. We've now entered a civil rights issue. in Sausalito. There's a proposal in Marin to remove the Ritter Center and St. Vincent's. Sausalito is receiving thousands of dollars for homeless services as far as I know. None of that is being spent. on the Anchorage, aside from a Christmas giveaway of life preservers and whistles. There's one more point, which is it says here the city is researching park hours and is making a suggestion to the council to close the park after dusk. I'm asking why we have a government if they come up with such a wrong headed proposal to take the cruising club and rotate it on an axis to obviously make it much more vulnerable to storms, to cut it off from the anchor outs to Stop bicycles from entering. and to build another bocce ball court. I'm shocked. And thank you. |
| 03:49:56.88 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. Adam Kravatsky. Adam, yeah. And then Michael, you're next. And Patrick Seidler, I have last. |
| 03:50:12.49 | Adam Kravatsky | Good evening, Adam Krivacci, 840 Ulema Street. I am here only to thank the council and the staff for the two additional public hearings in January and to reflect the public comments on this plan that came from that meeting, those two meetings, and I wanted to thank staff for reflecting in the staff report results of those comments. Thank you very much. |
| 03:50:48.31 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:50:53.39 | Michael Rex | Hello, I'm Michael Rex, architect. I'd like to speak in support and the plan and encourage it moving forward. I want to encourage the friends and the citizens in the city to improve Dumpy Park. It's seriously needed. I want to commend the friends for their... diligent effort to address recent public input, because I think they have. addressed well. Um, I have a few comments and questions. I think when you add the turnaround and loading area which I think is necessary where the parking ends at the Bay. you'll see a real change in the parking lot layout because the turnaround and loading area take a lot of room. I also question the process a little bit. Thank you. I hear that this should move to working drawings. It doesn't make sense to me. This is a schematic plan. A professional needs to be retained to develop the schematic plan into a preliminary plan. in more detail. And then that plan should go to the Planning Commission for recommendations and back to you before any plan is adopted. It's premature to adopt a plan tonight. Because of that, what I ask you to do instead is accept the plan and direct staff to, in fact, send out the RFP to bring on a professional team to turn the schematic plan into a preliminary. I, I also question if the north terminus of Humboldt Street is part of the park. I see it's included in the park and I don't think it is. I request two requests that you remove as the friends were directed by staff to do any improvements on private land. There's a that natural preserve or habitat preserve is going across, as shown on this plan, going across the Bridgeway Marina parcel. And it should not, and it should be removed because no improvements in this plan should be shown on private land. I also ask that the dotted channel be removed that limits boat access to the beach. And I think that all water uses off the, boating uses off the park be a subject to further study as is recommended tonight before we talk about prohibiting watercraft from our park shore line or channelizing access. I do want to support strongly the recommendations from the Park and Rec Commission and those recommendations from the Park and Rec Department I think they're good and thoughtful and I do want to point out that I think the greenways good and I'm wrapping it up but that intersection down there at Napa and and Bridgeway is needs further study and that's recommended that the design team do that because that components not included so I ask that you take action tonight you accept not approve the plan and direct staff to send out the RFP thank you |
| 03:54:18.54 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Michael. Patrick Seidler. |
| 03:54:34.17 | Patrick Seidler | Good evening. My name is Patrick Seidler. My Aunt Bea Seidler lived in Sausalito for over 60 years. She passed away a couple years ago. But I grew up in Larkspur and got to spend a lot of time down in Sausalito and have had the opportunity to get to know the city quite well. I'm honored to be here tonight. |
| 03:54:34.46 | Unknown | the |
| 03:54:56.33 | Patrick Seidler | I'm here tonight as a representative for Transportation Alternatives for Marin. We're a 501c3 nonprofit that promotes sustainable mobility including bicycle and pedestrian transportation, as well as integration with transit. I also sit on the Marin County Bicycle Coalition's Board of Advisors. We work very closely with the MCBC. They don't have any representatives here tonight just because of scheduling. I really wanted to thank Jacques and all the friends of Dunphy Park, the Parks and Recreation Commission, Thank you. the city for the great work that they've done, the Department of Public Works, because I know they're involved what's going on here and also just like to really compliment The citizens of Sausalito who are extremely articulate group of people. We get around the county to see a lot of folks talk And it's great to hear democracy and process. You guys have quite a group here and it's exciting to see. So congratulations for that. I'd like to direct you to the document I just handed you, which is called Include the North-South Greenway at Dunphy Park. that really coincides with all the recommendations that have been made. The first one just shows you where the area of the North-South Greenway is, located next to Dunphy Park. On the second tab, It has a 1974 Marin County bicycle plan. That was done right after the 1973 Arab oil embargo. That's when bicycling became pretty big in the United States. And they came out with a bicycle plan that identified north-south right of way for bicycles, that ran from the border in Sausalito to Novato. was called the Redwood Route. was the first time the North-South Greenway showed up. The next tab, if you turn to page three, third tab, is the North-South Bikeway Feasibility Study. That was done in 1993 and 1994, and we've given you the correct or the specific references to the North-South Greenway, and that shows the alignment for the first time in this exact area right here in 1993-1994, and that study has been adopted by the county and its alignment as being of regional significance. The next tab, number four, is your 2008 study of Sausalito Bicycle Plan. which also shows the north-south greenway going through your city. including this right-of-way here. And we applaud you for doing that. Behind that is the counties 2008 pedestrian bicycle plan. And it includes the North-South Greenway in its plan as well. One thing we should note is a 2008 study that was done, Transportation Alternatives for Marin was integral in getting the funding for that. And in closing, what we'd like to say is we really think Now, you should do what the staff says. include the spatial planning in the schematic plan and in the design. And we urge you to make this a regional plan. And the bigger you make it in bringing the Bay Trail in and bringing the Transportation Authority Marin We will work to get the funding for the North-South Greenway and Sausalito, if we get your support to make it a regional plan at the county level, we'd like to work with you to do that. Thank you very much. |
| 03:58:12.80 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right, I've got one last card for Jesus. |
| 03:58:26.03 | Jesus | All right. |
| 03:58:30.52 | Jesus | Well. See you. I do agree with that. You guys have put in a lot of time and effort, and I thank you guys for... thinking of other people like Gali and well, I do live on a boat. I'm not necessarily, I don't classify myself as an anchor out, but I am out there. Thank you. What? Loving another person and people in your community, like, is giving them the opportunity to take care of themselves, which would be showers. And I mean, you guys are working with a lot of money that's going into this, a budget that's going into fixing this. And if you're not living with the love of money, if you're loving the people, Why don't you use that little extra bit of money and help out with a shower and Help out with things that. can help better the people and make them feel better about themselves. Thank you. people want to be clean. People want to live and be a part of this community and not be walking around stinking and, like, it's not just about showers, the beach, like, People love to bring their kayaks and their stuff and go out. I like to kayak and go over to the beach and dock over and just come to shore and just be a part of life and not have to worry about. like, not my freedom. Like, in turn, like, why... why take our freedom away for... Money. Money. Like, it's, I feel like that's a form of like, like the form of the way the government is trying to enslave people. And it's just... Like, we can use the money for the love of the people instead of for the love of the money. And we can better all of our lives by loving each other and using what we have to better each other's lives instead of bettering each other's wallets. And it's, like, Life is beautiful. There's so much to it. Thank you. |
| 04:01:32.69 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right, I have no other speaker cards. So do we have additional council questions based on what we've heard from the community or? Thank you. in general. Oh, yeah, closed public comment. |
| 04:01:52.14 | Unknown | I do have a couple questions for clarification. And Mike, maybe you can help me out, because when I was asking questions about the Galilee parking, I was hearing that Measure F funds were going to be used to create that infrastructure. And then I heard from Galilee, and I heard, no, Measure F funds are not going to be used to build their parking lot, that they are funding it themselves. so I guess my first question is why is there a disconnect and my second question is if you look at the Galilee parking property. is, I mean, the parking lot part. And I'm not talking about the parking lot across the street. I'm talking about the part that is under controversy tonight. Is their private property, is it from their office there all the way to Bridgeway? Or is it, and then we have an easement to cut across, is that it? |
| 04:03:05.48 | Jonathon Goldman | So to address the funding, I have not had any talks with Gallilee regarding funding. We're quite a ways away from that because we're still working on what we're going to build. |
| 04:03:13.53 | Unknown | We're still working on what we're going to build. Did the budget for this, did the cost estimate for Robin Sweeney Park assume that those funds would be used to pave the private property or no? because I'm hearing no. |
| 04:03:33.66 | Adam Politzer | Well, I think what you heard from Gali was that they will pay for their share of the parking. What has not been worked out, and it's also evident tonight, that we don't have full agreement on what the parking configuration will be. but there will be costs associated with path of travel that will need to be shared, costs, and that would also pertain to the cruising club. That would also pertain to Cass Gidley. You know, so all those elements would need to be worked out. But the parking. whatever is constructed, which we're recommending stays within the 70, spaces in this footprint. whatever is constructed, then how we portion off who pays for what will come when those discussions move forward. |
| 04:04:24.35 | Unknown | Well, thank you, Adam. I guess I'm just confused because I, if that's private property there and it belongs to Galilee, why is the city even getting involved there? |
| 04:04:35.65 | Adam Politzer | because way back in the nineties, um, There was a understanding between the two parties that we both win. if we maximize the number of parking spaces. For Galilee to put, Mike can you close that and open that back up please. if for Galilee to put 18 parking spaces in that little spot There's no way to do that without impacting the city's parking lot. And for the city to maximize our parking, there's no way to do it without impacting theirs. So that's why this collaborative approach, which you heard tonight, is we're on the same page. to work together. So we have to use their space to maximize the parking, and they have to use our space to maximize their parking. So that's why we're tagged and tied together in trying to accomplish what is before us. |
| 04:05:27.25 | Unknown | Okay, thank you. |
| 04:05:29.56 | Jonathon Goldman | You had a question in regards to the area. I'm trying to find a good map that shows that. |
| 04:05:35.87 | Unknown | And so what I just heard the city manager say is that there is collaboration. I didn't get clarity on whether Measure F funding, you know, was the estimate was included for Dunphy Park. You don't know? Okay. Well, all right. |
| 04:06:01.03 | Jonathon Goldman | their area of property is this right here. And then just past the, Entry into the park right now, you see this line that's right here. |
| 04:06:09.88 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:06:10.62 | Jonathon Goldman | That's their property from this point on. is, So basically it's a railroad right of way plus approximately a car width. |
| 04:06:17.82 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 04:06:20.05 | Jonathon Goldman | you |
| 04:06:20.10 | Unknown | Oh, okay. |
| 04:06:20.12 | Jonathon Goldman | Oh, okay. It's Sausalito property. The rest is Galilee Harbor. |
| 04:06:23.44 | Unknown | Okay. Okay. Good. |
| 04:06:27.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:06:27.12 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 04:06:27.26 | Unknown | you Questions? So I don't know if this is for Mike or Adam. . Questions about the cruising club, let me just understand nature and scope of their lease. So right now, the, Cruising Club is in He's on their property, he's on city property. number one, and number two, presumably, I think it's on city property, in which case there must be a lease. What's the nature of the lease? When's it up for renewal? Because a gentleman mentioned tonight that they'd be ready to negotiate with the city. So I just want to understand what the status of that lease is. And does the lease involve any parking because in this plan I mean people park on our property in front of the cruising club does a cruising club is part of their lease parking requirement. So could you just help fill me in on what actually is the status right now? |
| 04:07:43.08 | Adam Politzer | I'll do my best at 1125 with one more big item to come. The leased, the cruising club is on city land. They leased the land. The boat is theirs as was described. They are month to month. So back again in the early 2000s, roughly 2002, the city council was actually in negotiation with the cruising club and had made the decision to evict, or not evict, to end the lease, to not renew the lease with the cruising club and asked them to vacate. the council chambers filled up with 80 people or so and the council changed its position and asked the cruising club to work with at the time vice mayor Keller and Michael Rex who was representing the cruising club and myself as a park and rec director to look at reorienting the cruising club back in the early 2000s so Michael Rex and Bill Keller and I had a variety of meetings having that discussion. There has been no other direction from the council to change that direction. And so but the cruising club has had turnover of the leadership several times. We've we've had meetings with the cruising club. For the eight years I've been city manager and six years as the park and rec director with a variety of Commodores. who's represented the cruising club helping to you'll look at the terms of the agreement over that, course of time so and then we just recently met with the cruising club to look at how we can move forward on the lease agreement and then as you heard Mike say that Jacques and others met with the cruising club representatives to you know to listen to their interests and then as you heard from the cruising club which is great satisfaction to all of us is they're working with Cass Gidley to collaborate so those are all very good pieces of information and But there is no application before us. We've asked the cruising club to actually bring forward The technical information that was shared tonight that would prohibit it. prohibit the cruising club actually from turning what And even what was described tonight, wouldn't keep it from being turned other than really money you know at the end of the day you could turn it it would just cost a lot more money to do that and that may be by itself what what the city would recognize as something that we would don't want to do and and support you know their recommendation of not reorienting but we've asked for them to actually provide details in terms of what it would take and cost to reorient the cruising club and if in fact the club itself, the boat itself, the vessel itself would survive the reorientation. So that's where we last had discussions with the Cruising Club. So we're waiting to hear back from them and to continue those discussions and then look at what was directed by the council back in the early 2000s that said we want more community uses specifically the park and rec department to have use of that facility during some negotiated amount of time. And so those discussions have been ongoing again with the various Commodores and representatives of the cruising club but for the last couple of years, You know have have you know kind of come to a halt until you know the last you know seven or eight months so We will we we are happy to sit back down with a cruising club We hope that the cruising club has information to share with us in terms of what they're proposing And they do pay rent monthly to the city, but the lease is month to month |
| 04:11:35.71 | Unknown | And parking? |
| 04:11:36.76 | Adam Politzer | And I think there is no formal agreement on the use of parking, and that would need to be addressed. And the same with Cass Gidley would be under the exact same circumstances. |
| 04:11:50.67 | Unknown | So in our schematic plan, the idea is that the parking, the 70 whatever it is, spaces, are presumed to fill that need, those needs. |
| 04:12:07.59 | Adam Politzer | That is correct. Based, and as you heard from John Donovan, nice to see him tonight, that they have a lot of activities going on now. And they've had a lot of activities in the past, and we've not had with the funky parking layout unofficial parking layout. that may be able to accommodate 60 cars. We haven't had a parking issue out there Um, in the relatively near past or any time in the past 15 years that I'm aware of. |
| 04:12:40.97 | Jill Hoffman | Mike. The, and just so I have my notes right. The parking plan as it's presented is 10 more spots than that are there now. Is the parking plan is for 70 spaces and right now there's about 60 or did I get that wrong? Thank you. |
| 04:12:58.89 | Jonathon Goldman | So the parking plan that the friends are proposing is 70 spaces. That's an increase of four from the 66 spaces that are there now. I did a parking count a while ago, again, going out there just counting, and I thought that there could be. |
| 04:13:05.35 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 04:13:17.03 | Jonathon Goldman | up to 17 spaces currently along the waterfront. |
| 04:13:20.68 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 04:13:20.69 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. Thank you. I've been out there a few times and they've managed to get 19 cars in there. So I've changed my increased the amount of parking that is currently there. But it's still, the new plan provides an increase of four spaces. And that does include the spaces at Galilee, and if they have a plan to get more cars in there, that increases the amount of parking for them. |
| 04:13:43.93 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thanks. And let me just say, too, with regard to the Galilee Harbor parking lot, you know, the inverse, and Councilwoman Pfeiffer brings up some good points about that, But the inverse would be true that we get the benefit of using parking spots that we're not paying for. I mean, it's we're not paying for that land. It's like we're not buying the land. We're. we're yeah we're using it together so i mean i kind of see that collaborative effort um and as as you know a benefit to the city as well um as well as galley harbor so um And I think those are all the questions I have, yes. |
| 04:14:22.74 | Unknown | So, yeah, I get the upside for collaboration, but I also have a lot of questions around that, which is I heard from Galilee, not eight, but 18. So they have 10 residential parking spaces and then eight public spaces. So what I'm hearing is that parking space that we're looking at would have 18 spaces, of which 10 would be residential for Galilee all day. |
| 04:14:58.47 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm open to seeing how we can get 18 spaces in there and... |
| 04:14:58.69 | Unknown | All night. |
| 04:15:03.19 | Jonathon Goldman | not significantly impact the city lot. |
| 04:15:08.31 | Unknown | I'm sorry? |
| 04:15:08.95 | Jonathon Goldman | And not significantly impact the city lot for access. |
| 04:15:11.56 | Unknown | So how many slots are in there right now? |
| 04:15:14.77 | Jonathon Goldman | Right now, I believe there's 10. |
| 04:15:18.63 | Unknown | Ah, so, okay. So this is interesting. Now I see where the confusion is. I mean, I don't see how you can do collaboration without using Measure F money in that area, you know, with that private property. If you're looking at maximizing the parking spaces for Galilee, Well, okay, I'm hearing the audience of Galilee reps say that's not true, so I'm flexible. |
| 04:15:45.89 | Jill Hoffman | All right. All right. Well, let's focus here on what we're doing here tonight. Okay. If we could. |
| 04:15:50.24 | Unknown | Okay, so in the cruising club, I don't understand. I personally support it staying the way it is. And so I'm wondering what is preventing us from, and Adam, just to confirm that you said that we can move forward with negotiating their next lease. That's what I heard. Is that correct? |
| 04:16:14.52 | Adam Politzer | That's correct. |
| 04:16:15.11 | Unknown | Okay, great. |
| 04:16:16.77 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, any other questions based on comments? No, none from Council. Very good. So we'll move in then to sorry, Council comments. Anybody want to kick us off with comments? I'll kick us off then. Okay, so... You know what? Darn it. I do have a question, I'm sorry, based on the comments that Michael Rex made. Michael said to accept the plan and then put an RP out for a preliminary plan. Is that inconsistent with what you guys have recommended, or are we just using different words for the same process? |
| 04:17:08.35 | Adam Politzer | I think it's inconsistent. I personally don't have an issue with it, but I think if I understand what Michael is suggesting, that that preliminary plan would then come back to the council before we go to the planning commission. So it would bring a step back saying that this design team has come together, met with all the interested parties that need to be heard and work with us. And then whatever comes out of that would then come back to council for your blessing, and then we would go take it to the next level to take it to the planning commission. |
| 04:17:46.42 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thanks, that's very good clarification. Okay, so, First of all, let me thank Paul and Jacques again for a spectacularly hard work and a great job in getting the concept together and bringing it to us in the current form that it's in. I like the plan. I think it's great. You guys worked very, very hard to put all of the input from the community and all the community serving spaces in there. So I like the plan. With regard to the questions about the parking with Galley Harbor and you know, with the orientation of the cruising club I think we can I think we can agree that the plan as it is should go forward for professional you know whatever it's called, an RFP for a preliminary plan, I think is a good idea. I think, you know, whether or not the cruising club, you know, it stays where it is or it reorients. You know, I don't think that's, It has to have too much bearing on moving forward at this point with the plan. It seems like the cruising club wants to stay where they are. You know, we want to renegotiate their lease or whatever it is we need to do. That's fine. I think the parking as it is, obviously, in the plan, was meant to serve the cruising club, was meant to serve the Cascadly because, you know, there's four more spaces than there are now. So, you know, the number of spaces are the same. So I wouldn't think that it would negatively impact the operation of any of the functions of the park. And those are my comments at this point. I might have one. |
| 04:19:42.42 | Unknown | Um, I agree. I thank everyone, Jacques and Paul and all the friends and, and I think it's an excellent plan and a lot of hard work and a lot of public input into it. I think I agree with the mayor Hoffman, I think in with Michael records is recommendation of accepting the plan going from schematic preliminary and the key for me is this parking. I think staff has to come and work with, with, uh, um, Galilee and the cruising club or and make its recommendations and we should know exactly what we're going to do on parking and what our positions are, and if anyone disputes it, what our legal positions are, we should know exactly what we're going to do before we send it to plan. I think it has to come back because the reason is it all unravels if any of this doesn't work. But I think if we get the parking exactly right and have everyone agreed, I think We're basically there. That's what I would do. I would accept the plan. Um, I would send it back. I would go out for RFP, based on this plan, but I would certainly have staff simultaneously look at this parking and we'd have to come back and we have to know this exactly how it would work and what spaces it go where and, and either. the interested parties either agree or disagree, and we would know on what basis we make a decision. |
| 04:21:05.40 | Unknown | Yeah, I generally agree with that. You know, I was – one thing I was really worried about is – We've been talking about reorienting the cruising club for a while, and it's been very clear that the cruising club doesn't want it. Galilee doesn't want it. I don't think anybody up here particularly wants it. So why is it still on the drawings? I realize we don't have time. We don't have money to now spend on re-tinkering with these drawings because a lot of it was done with good hard work from volunteers. So we do now need to get and spend some money to get a design professional. So that's why I think rushing to work in drawings before we've had a chance to look at it one more time in the context of a preliminary drawing, preliminary set of drawings, the sort of thing that you would normally put in front of a planning commission. You wouldn't put working drawings in front of a planning commission. So I think that's good. I'd also like to see drawings where the properties are clearly delineated. We can't tell from any of these drawings that in actual fact, what we think is park parking is actually on Galilee property. Well, we need to have the property lines clearly delineated and know what we're doing. So I'm sort of in agreement with, you know, generally with the mayor and council member Theodorus' view on this. |
| 04:22:53.77 | Ray | Yeah, I, after hearing this, I definitely agree that we should just accept this and Move it towards a preliminary. plans. As far as the cruising club goes, I don't think either side has the money for the dredging and everything else that it would take. You're stuck there. Literally. But you come out smelling like a rose, so it's not so bad. Thank you. Well, you'd call it a mug hat. Okay. Okay, anyway. Thank you. I'll leave it on. |
| 04:23:29.75 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Okay. Thank you. |
| 04:23:30.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:23:32.31 | Jill Hoffman | Who does? |
| 04:23:32.82 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 04:23:33.05 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 04:23:34.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:23:34.28 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:23:34.37 | Unknown | Yeah, so I think that going forward, you know, I could see, you know, going out and and getting, I guess, is the RFP the next step to get clarity on the design. But only if this council provided strong guidance and leadership with respect to the vision. |
| 04:23:34.39 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 04:23:58.08 | Unknown | of the controversial issues that we're hearing I agree that we need to keep the cruising club in the same place I think that that would really talk about overruns we will we will incur a lot if that topic starts popping up again and Frankly, they should go into negotiations knowing that the community and the council want them in that place, too. And the eelgrass, I'm concerned. I think we need to also send direction to check with the coastal conservancy regarding the railroad right-of-way, that that's a proper use, that part of it is parking. And also strong direction to protect the eelgrass. It's so important there. Parking, what a mess. I have heard different interpretations of what's going on with Galilee's private property. So I personally would like to, I echo what I heard up here, delineate it, let them work out what they want to do on their property, and just hands off. That personal opinion and in terms of the anchor outs no showers we've heard loud and clear from the community on this I was shocked to hear the anchor outs are using trash services at Dumfee and water at Dumf um you know that there are entitlements there this is this is a public park um so and uh clearly um you know that needs to be i think that direction needs to be loud and clear too |
| 04:25:43.28 | Unknown | Amen. Amen. |
| 04:25:44.92 | Unknown | And oh, I'm sorry, one more thing is the North South Greenway that we've already heard that they are going to set aside space and that the Marin Bicycle Coalition will pursue funding for that. Because otherwise, we're going to have bikes going on the waterfront path and it's going to be a mess. |
| 04:26:03.93 | Ray | regarding the parking. Thank you. |
| 04:26:05.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:26:06.08 | Ray | Thank you. |
| 04:26:06.11 | Unknown | you |
| 04:26:06.18 | Ray | Thank you. first of all, |
| 04:26:07.78 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 04:26:08.15 | Ray | It's important to work together with Galilee. for them just to put up their parking lot then don't have any use for the public. you lose those eight spaces. I think that is definitely not the way to go. And I think once that, Once you put an asphalt on that, if you really look down there the way everybody parks, it's angles and everything else that, with parking spaces set up, I think you'll find out there is an order there. |
| 04:26:38.58 | Unknown | Okay. I want to respond, but Tom was first. |
| 04:26:39.73 | Unknown | I want to. but Tom was first. Yeah, I do want to. Add to this. |
| 04:26:50.80 | Unknown | that are used, that it's explained why, because the mayor mentioned it, there could be a trade off and we may wanna do it. We just have to know if our funds are expended anything on private property, and if it is, what we get in return. Thank you. you |
| 04:27:06.77 | Unknown | Yeah. And just to follow up on the comment I heard over here about the eight spaces. Yeah, BC DC allocated eight spaces for public use, public use. So that those eight spaces are for use from the public. So that is something that's already baked into this. |
| 04:27:11.20 | Unknown | I'm going to have another comment. |
| 04:27:12.97 | Ray | Yeah, BCD. |
| 04:27:14.30 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:27:26.27 | Ray | You don't want any, you don't collaborate with anybody anyway. |
| 04:27:29.76 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:27:29.78 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, all right, okay. Of course I do. All right, let's wrap it up. I think we can wrap it up. Okay, so can I – we all agree, the five of us, I think, cruising club stays oriented where it is, right, all five of us? |
| 04:27:30.70 | Ray | Thank you. |
| 04:27:30.81 | Unknown | TODAY. |
| 04:27:30.96 | Ray | Bye. |
| 04:27:30.97 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 04:27:31.18 | Ray | Yes, I do. All right, let's wrap it up. |
| 04:27:42.01 | Unknown | Are we going to make that decision? |
| 04:27:44.27 | Jill Hoffman | Or do we get? |
| 04:27:45.74 | Unknown | I don't really get your recommendation. |
| 04:27:46.89 | Jill Hoffman | Well, or |
| 04:27:48.02 | Unknown | No, I'm just asking. I'm okay with it. |
| 04:27:48.32 | Jill Hoffman | No, I'm just asking. I'm okay with it. I think I think we're not interested in reorienting the cruising club, even if it could be reoriented. Okay, and then we all five agree we need to, in the plan that comes back, the parking needs to be clearly delineated with the divide between public and private use of land there contiguous to the park and funding. And funding. Also, Council Member We weiner you didn't mention this but also can we explore additional parking along bridgeway where we have the median that's built in there in between litho and b i think would be helpful if we can squeeze out some parking in |
| 04:28:01.84 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 04:28:33.75 | Jill Hoffman | And it looks like the north-south Greenway area is in the plan, and that's good, and I think we all agree that that's, you know. Okay, so how do we want to do this? Okay. |
| 04:28:45.58 | Unknown | No showers. was another one. |
| 04:28:47.99 | Jill Hoffman | That's another one. Well, there aren't, I don't think we need to say that. We don't need to say that. There aren't any in there. Okay. |
| 04:28:49.44 | Unknown | There aren't, well I don't think we need |
| 04:28:50.83 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:28:50.89 | Unknown | We don't need to. |
| 04:28:51.35 | Unknown | to say that. |
| 04:28:51.91 | Unknown | There aren't any in there. |
| 04:28:53.04 | Unknown | All right. |
| 04:28:53.05 | Unknown | Okay, and then a coastal conservancy and eelgrass. |
| 04:28:58.42 | Unknown | the Principal Conservancy. |
| 04:28:59.48 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. conservancy about the the right of way yeah the the railway right away and whether or not parking lot that you know that's amenable and then the eel grass I think that's in the plan too I mean that's in Falls okay all right so we want to make a motion to accept the plan and put it out for an RFP for preliminary plan is that the right wording am I wearing that right |
| 04:29:02.93 | Unknown | Yeah. with the parking lot. |
| 04:29:08.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:29:24.26 | Unknown | Mayor Hoffman. preliminary design I would make the motion if I could make an addendum except the plan with the direction those points that you just mentioned Can we do that? |
| 04:29:42.02 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 04:29:42.26 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:29:45.23 | Jill Hoffman | the point was taken notes the point the point I just made about the cruising Club the parking North South Greenway coastal concern conservancy and eelgrass |
| 04:29:46.01 | Unknown | with the point. |
| 04:29:47.02 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:29:53.13 | Unknown | Okay, sir. Thank you. |
| 04:29:55.95 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:29:55.96 | Unknown | Clarification on the eelgrass, I didn't get the |
| 04:29:56.18 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:29:59.36 | Unknown | Oh, well, maybe we don't need to say it because, Jacques, it's my understanding that right now the eelgrass is protected because they're suggesting non-motorized vehicles. Is that right? |
| 04:30:12.94 | Adam Politzer | We're suggesting that further study |
| 04:30:16.40 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:30:16.42 | Jill Hoffman | Right. |
| 04:30:16.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:30:18.58 | Jacques Ullman | I think our attempt is to not delay the progress of the land side improvements because we recognize that there needs to be a dialogue about this. I mean, I could give you my personal conviction about it, but I don't think that's appropriate. I think at this point there are some people who feel that certain kinds of boating will not hurt eelgrass and some people have a different opinion about it. I think that the subject deserves a dialogue between people who know more about this than we do so that when we finally make a decision, it won't be contentious. |
| 04:30:44.46 | Adam Politzer | I think. |
| 04:30:54.91 | Unknown | Okay, so I would like some degree of research to be done on that topic as part of this direction. |
| 04:31:03.63 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, I. Yeah. Included in part of the report. Yeah, that's fine. Okay, do we, do you need me to state that any more or we got it? Okay, motions on the table. Is there a second? |
| 04:31:18.55 | Unknown | Second. |
| 04:31:19.78 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor. Bye. |
| 04:31:20.68 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 04:31:22.01 | Jill Hoffman | Very good, thank you very much. |
| 04:31:31.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:31:44.40 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, here we go. No back, that's fine. On the home stretch. We are now moving on to item 6D. |
| 04:31:45.87 | Caroline | No back, man. |
| 04:31:46.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:31:47.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:31:51.91 | Jill Hoffman | bicycle congestion management plan yes chief you have the floor |
| 04:31:52.11 | John Robacco | Bicep |
| 04:31:59.66 | John Robacco | Thank you. Council member Weiner pointed out maybe I should say good morning rather than good evening. I'm not so sure. So I got a couple minutes of evening left. |
| 04:32:04.13 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:32:04.15 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:32:04.20 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 04:32:04.50 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 04:32:04.74 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:32:04.81 | Unknown | So I got a couple minutes. |
| 04:32:08.55 | John Robacco | So this is probably not going to show up very well. |
| 04:32:19.23 | John Robacco | Maybe that's not going to work. All right, forget that one. |
| 04:32:43.53 | John Robacco | All right, good evening, I'm John Robacco, Chief of Police, Dr. Ed Fotch and I each have a few-minute presentation tonight to talk about the 2016 Bicycle Congestion Management Plan. The first slide I was going to show actually isn't part of the PowerPoint slide. It was actually just a copy of the 10-point action plan that the Pedestrian Bicycle Advisory Committee had presented to council last November. and we, the police department, had configured it just a little bit differently and presented it as part of our staff report. That was what I was going to show as a sign of the roadmap that we've been using for the off-season action that we've been working on. So it was really the first three items of that plan that we've been using to decide how to spend our time in the off season and get to a couple of points on that plan based on the council's direction back in November. So just saying that, the |
| 04:33:52.16 | John Robacco | starting sort of backwards with a summary. What we're looking for here tonight is the authorization from council to conduct our seasonal closure of Tracy Way to do the seasonal modification of El Portal, changing it from A a one-way street to a two-way street. And then as needed, the use of the property in front of the Bank of America for overflow parking. and then the use of Saucydo Plus for bicycle parking and ambassador services. And I'll get to the details of that as we go along. So a little tiny bit of background here just to bring us up to speed. is I was able to find staff reports going back to 2009 with 2008 data talking about how to work on congestion management. and bicycle racks and parking And And then when I started here in 2009, I remember some of that work being done. Fast forward to 2013, the city council established the Pedestrian Bicycle Advisory Committee to provide you with advice on safety issues related to bicycles and pedestrians. In 2014, the Saw Street Ambassador Program was created the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee and then, all the way to last year now, the city council authorized using the Saucyuta Plus in 2015 for bike parking under a pilot program. So that just gets us back from 2009 till now, sort of at a fast speed. So I want to acknowledge all the participants and a little bit about who's been doing what. with this in no particular order. but. The Pedestrian Bicycle Advisory Committee has been hard at work since 2013. I've had the honor of serving as one of the two staff liaisons of that committee. They're a really hardworking group, and it put a lot of effort into making things better for the bicyclists and pedestrians. And sort of the capstone for that was the 10-point action plan with goals and tasks, and I'm pretty sure Dr. Fogg will talk about that in a few minutes a little bit more. Sausalito Plus was our vendor, so to speak, to actually provide the Ambassador and Bicycle pilot program services last year. and in my opinion they did a really superb job And I'm I measure that in a lot of different ways, but one of them was that based on their effort, it required almost no law enforcement effort. last year, contrary to what happened in 2014 when without the Saucedo Plus Ambassadors, we had law enforcement people on Tracy Way and El Portal every day, several of them. And I wish that I had known then what I know now, and I would have actually tallied up those hours by who worked there. And it's in the tens of thousands of dollars of time from the police department that we did not have to spend in 2015 because of Saucyutu Plus and their efforts. Another partner, or a pair of partners, are the two ferry companies, Golden Gate Ferry and Blue and Gold Ferry. They actually are responsible for the year round management of the queuing of their patrons. And there's a lot that goes into that. They not only contribute some, the Blue and Gold contributes cash for the queuing services And the Golden Gate Ferry, of course, puts people there and has been responsible for providing bike racks and a lot of other work, including printing all the material for the bike companies to give out with the rental maps. with all the schedules for the ferries. And the Saucyedo Chamber of Commerce for the last two years has assisted by being the hiring and pass-through agency for the queuing workers. taking the money that was contributed by Blue and Gold and then also by the bicycle rental companies. And this year, Sausageo Chamber of Commerce would like to not have to be involved in doing that anymore. And that goes back to Saucyuta Plus having offered to do both parts of not only the parking but the queuing, so they would be serving the city of Sausalito as our parking Um, valet service provider and the ambassador service, and then separately they would be providing the queuing services for the ferries. The bicycle rental companies, along with Blue and Gold, are important partners because they have contributed funding for the workers in the queuing lines. They've also provided bicycle racks and personnel at the foot of El Portal and Tracy Way helping people when they come into town. Other participants of course deserve mention is the Department of Public Works because they do the street closure and reopening. They're responsible for helping with all the proper signage because without proper signage we can't do enforcement. And of course, the Public Works folks put up the free parking bicycle racks in those areas. And for us, the police department, we're the lead agency on congestion management. And our mantra is safety. Safety and even more safety. And so that's what we're about. So what we're looking for here is, I back up a little tiny bit, but this is the recommended motion that we're asking from council. But just to hear a little bit about the plan is, Maybe to restate some of what I already said. is that all those people that were working together last year all want to work together again this year. And everybody wants to help. make the environment safe for our visitors, whether they're pedestrians, whether they're bicyclists. They want to help with congestion management. They want to continue to contribute. in no way, shape or form come to the finish line on the plan. The plan tonight is just what you're hearing. There's so much more to go, but we need the Council's authorization to start moving forward. Part of that is the Second Amendment with Saucyotl Plus that has a financial cost to it. We're asking for $100,000 or no more than that to get started and take us through probably the middle of June. But by April, we'll be able to come back probably with an actual definitive budget about what the season would look like. But I'm saying that we need to get started now. I can't wait until the middle of April, May, or June to get started. And we need to start now. And so we need that startup money to start paying any expenses at this point. So... That's kind of where we're at. Maybe that's a bit of a fast faster than I thought I would do because I know it's late. So if you have more questions and I left something out, please ask, but maybe you'd like to hear from Dr. Fotch first and then we could both answer your questions. |
| 04:41:17.07 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I think that's a good idea. Let's hear from Dr. Fotch and then we'll just power through. |
| 04:41:24.77 | Ray | Good morning, Ed. |
| 04:41:31.04 | Ed Fotch | Well, morning, Mayor, members of the council. |
| 04:41:32.77 | Unknown | Interesting. |
| 04:41:33.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:41:35.16 | Ed Fotch | First, apologies. getting over a cold. Felt pretty good about 1030. |
| 04:41:47.95 | Ed Fotch | Let's see, here we go. |
| 04:42:01.94 | Ed Fotch | Thank you. Thank you. Oh, close enough. Um, I want to acknowledge my fellow committee members. They work very hard. Also, Adam, the chief, and Jonathan really appreciate There, Halper, I wanted to start by briefly mentioning that we recently voted these 2016 goals. They're not wholly different than last year's goals. Part of it is to suggest that the ambassador program be established year round. It looks as though it could be a break even program year round and it would avoid the startup costs that the city experiences. and then briefly take you through the 10-point plan The first was to reinstall some bike loops, and I believe that's going to Historic Landmarks Board. The second is to revise the current bike parking ordinance and specifically to make it easier for locals to park during off-season hours. You may not recall that, but I believe that there's a first reading of that that's coming up. There are people who actually like going downtown, tying up to a parking meter in front of Starbucks and being able to go in and if it's a Tuesday morning in the middle of November, it's just no harm, no foul. On the third is enforcement of the bike parking ordinance I'm not sure. Several of us have been here now. I'm actually winding up my term on the committee. And I remember right at the beginning, there was a discussion about we need to enforce our bike parking ordinance and we're still working on that excuse me But it's absolutely essential. I'll touch on that at the end. And I brought this as a gift to the council. I think we have to use very The goal is not to impound bikes. The goal is to have bikes parked legally and they simply won't do that unless we enforce our laws, excuse me, our ordinances. The third is to improve signage and I understand from Jonathan and Public Works that that's the case. We may be coming back to you looking for more free bike parking further north in town. But right now we need to tell people who don't want to use the valet parking services that there is free bike parking north in town while we simultaneously enforce our parking ordinances. The consolidation of the Ambassador Program with the bike ferry queuing, I will say that there's been good efforts over the years to deal with the bike queuing and with the bike congestion. Hopefully every year is a building year. I think there's some efficiencies to consolidating but I would say that there's, a real challenge and I'll get to my requests of counsel There's a real challenge with the ferry queuing and it boils down to the fact that The queuing for the ferry occurs on city property. There's no doubt about that. It's cruise on city property. the ferry does not lease from the city. and yet it's clearly fairy patrons that are lining up. And unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be clear agreement as to whose responsibility those folks are. They're on city property, no doubt about it, They're lining up for a ferry, no doubt about it. and somewhere in the middle, I think we've had more finger pointing than we've had resolution. And we really need to grind that to to a resolution so that we can do a better job of managing the queues. Reducing bike congestion by using our T2 machines and I think this is a work in progress, I've spoken with Chief John about that and I think that there's that's more of a tactical thing Our strong recommendation was to institute a $2 peak like, queuing fee. So last year We actually used city resources, city real estate and technology to provide queuing numbers for folks so that instead of waiting in line for hours in the hot sun and queuing all the way up to Spinnaker, they could go and join themselves and use technology to see when their time to join the bike queue occurred. We didn't charge for it last year. It was probably the appropriate thing to do. There's no doubt that it's a valuable service. If we don't do that this year, there would be half-mile long lines with 400 or 500 people in it, So I think it's valuable and I think that that should be pursued. And that remains a work in progress in terms of the city plans, at least as I understand it. very importantly is immediately in this case we were talking about engaging the PUC, it's actually engaging the ferry service. The truth is, as I've mentioned before, and I've posted videos to this effect, not because I'm telling secrets, because I'm telling the obvious. The ferries are leaving half full. There's 12 or so ferries during the peak time. 75 people get on, the capacity is 150, essentially stranding a thousand bikers and those bikers are on our streets on our sidewalks and in our parks They're in the queue, they need a place to park. So we really need to engage the ferry service proactively, and I think we need to do it at a leadership level. and bring this to their attention because I don't think they are naturally going to improve their services at this point. direct the ambassadors to Improved daily information, there's a lot of information we don't know about bikes. Actually, the fact that the ferries are leaving half full is because the ambassadors literally spent time counting them last year and we got data on that. in the last is to engage the park service regarding opening a Vista point trail been talking about that for a few years when and if that opens we have some additional options in terms of queuing. I'm. THE COUNTRY IS The good news, let me see if we can make the, well, it doesn't make it happen. It was a weather forecast. It's raining. So one option is we create a prayer group. and just hope that it rains until October, but if it doesn't, this is reality. This is what we will be facing quite soon. And so I'd like to widen the lens for a minute here and say this is what we hear at the committee, why are there so many bikes? What can we legally do? to reduce their impact on our streets and sidewalk. Whose fault is it? or how do you fix it? And what I would say is that over my last three years, I've seen a lot of complaints and a lot of blame, and I know it's frustrating. They're out, you know, I choose when I leave my house based on the time of day on Saturdays and Sundays because there's so many bikes coming in, All the complaints and all the blame really doesn't get us anywhere. and frankly, hope. is not a plan. I'm not sure. the bike vendors and the ferry companies aren't on their own going to solve our problems. Not because they're bad people. If I was running a bike rental shop, I would want to rent bikes. I wouldn't want to solve Saucelito's problems. I don't live here. It isn't my problem, except to the extent Saucelito makes it their problem. Ditto with the ferry companies. It is very easy for them, especially as a union shop, to say those queues in Saucelito are simply not our problem. We run a union shop. We cannot afford to hire more union people to deal with that And so, It's sort of over there and I'll get a report on Monday morning and if there's complaints, So what can we do? You can focus on the things that are 100% under our control. And that boils down to biking, including the fees and the valet parking and enforcement of our laws And also, we can control our streets and sidewalks. That's in fact how we control cars in this town. We said there's only so much parking. And then we charge for the parking. And unfortunately, bicycles under the California vehicle code are in fact vehicles and so they're public streets we can't stop them from coming but we can control parking we can control our sidewalks and I think that really needs to be the focus including the associated fees. This is our trip. as the committee we started not knowing and then we were afraid and now we're real excited to move forward. So these are our immediate asks of counsel. First of all we have to agree that we have a complex problem and it's political. It simply is political. And the reason I mention that is I think it's unfair and unsatisfactory to hand this stuff to the staff because there's so many politics involved, because the ferry company's involved, and we're negotiating on other issues with the ferry company. that we need leadership from you folks And it can't just be a hey, the staff's going to handle it. THE FAMILY IS So proactive leadership and we have to require, we have to This is a man-made problem. I think you've heard me compare our streets to Squaw Valley Ski Resort. If you go there at 6 o'clock in the morning, it's a ghost town. But at two o'clock in the afternoon, it's jammed, and it would be insane if it wasn't for ticket takers and lift line operators and ski patrol and all that. That's the role envisioned by our committee of the ambassadors And yet, our focus from the beginning has been no net tax dollars used to solve this. And we'll have, I think, 500,000 bicyclists coming to town this year. I spent a lot of time down there. They're here to spend money. They are absolutely here to spend money. Last year I had several people say, oh, they'll never spend $3 for valet parking. And $160,000 or $170,000 later, I don't hear that anymore. If we provide a decent service that manages the bikes, manages the queuing, manages the parking, people will pay a reasonable amount of money for those services, and that was the 10-point plan. And I really think that the details of that plan were well thought out, and hopefully we will pursue those but in the near term, I think we need very proactive engagement from the Council or a representative from the Council, including weekly detailed meeting or meetings Direct engagement with the ferry service. Again, so many of our problems are because we trap bicyclists in this town, and the only way you can get out is spending $20 or gouge more pricing because of higher volumes And lastly, I would assume that we're going to need some time allotted on council agendas going forward, hopefully at an earlier hour and hopefully less time and very focused. But the plan is moving, but we aren't there yet, in my opinion, and there's some more pieces of this that need to be put in place so that it's not only a good season, but it's a season in which we're not reaching into our limited tax coffers to fund people who are here to spend money. Thank you. |
| 04:52:49.96 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right, do we have questions from Council for Ed or Chief? Abaker. |
| 04:52:56.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:52:56.12 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 04:52:56.36 | Unknown | Thank you. Do you want to go first? Yeah, so thank you, Ed. Thanks for that presentation. Appreciate it, and appreciate your work and the hard work of Sauce Little Plus and the Bike Committee. My question is with regards to the... the peak hours and the charging. A while back, I had suggested that we implement a permit process for residents, and then we put color coding on racks so that we preserve a certain amount of racks for residents. And instead of putting cozies on the loops, that perhaps we designate the loops as resident you know serving bicycle loops and I was wondering and and the other thought was that if they show their driver's license that they don't they don't have to pay for parking bike parking so I was wondering if you could comment on those two things. And the last thing was, I'm personally concerned about charging residents for bike parking and also having residents get involved in the peak parking aspect. So those three. Thank you. |
| 04:54:23.33 | Ed Fotch | So, excuse me, taking those in no particular order. Currently the residents don't pay for bike parking in the valet parking area. |
| 04:54:33.37 | Unknown | Okay. Okay. |
| 04:54:36.17 | Ed Fotch | And honestly, I love that. |
| 04:54:38.96 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:54:39.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:54:39.48 | Ed Fotch | I use that all the time. I think it's an underused thing, but it's really cool to be able to go down. |
| 04:54:40.86 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:54:40.88 | Unknown | the end. |
| 04:54:45.33 | Ed Fotch | You not only have parking in a convenient spot, you have somebody watching your bike. And having had five of my bike stolen so far, |
| 04:54:48.34 | Unknown | and have a great day. |
| 04:54:51.36 | Ed Fotch | in the last 10 years, it's pretty handy. The the allowing residents to park and putting in more bike loops. We're actually in favor of that. The challenge that we have and that we've looked at from a committee standpoint is that educating bike visitors is extremely difficult. When they see a bike loop, they park on it. And in parallel with that, It has not become apparent yet that we have insufficient parking for residents of bike parking for residents in this town. We may, if we encourage it more, which is the reason that we suggested loosening up the ordinance for bike parking. I mean, the truth is most of the time in Sausalito is not peak season. We have warm weather months and during those warm weather months, essentially from noon until about six o'clock is the peak time. |
| 04:55:54.86 | Unknown | is the |
| 04:55:57.14 | Ed Fotch | So, We're trying to take a stepwise approach to this and sort of say, you as a resident, not only can park on these new cozy-less bike loops, but go ahead and park to a parking meter. as long as you don't block the streets and start using the downtown. So we're trying to encourage the use of the downtown. And then I think if we see, oh wow, there's so many bikes down here, we really need more, you know, separate residents only bike parking areas, you know, I think the committee or the council could address that, but so far we haven't really seen the demand there. |
| 04:56:33.88 | Unknown | So have you looked into doing a resident permitting aspect where you could designate, you know, like the loops or what have you for, you know, resident only or certain racks for residents only, but color coding? We would have to do enforcement, of course, but because it seems like it would be feasible. |
| 04:56:56.23 | Ed Fotch | Yeah, we actually, at your request, specifically had a conversation about that, noticed it did all the right things. I would say where we ended up is, well, number one, we're not sure how much demand there is for that. We were very concerned about who was going to do the enforcement And number three, Frankly, we to date to my knowledge, have never enforced our bike laws and then putting more bike parking in places where we don't want visitors to park seem to be moving the ball backwards. So I certainly wouldn't rule it out. We haven't identified the demand to, you know, sort of put the infrastructure in place and deal with the enforcement. and we see this proposed change to the bike parking |
| 04:57:37.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:57:39.42 | Ed Fotch | ordinance as a first step down that path. And hey, if in midsummer, it looks like we've got a or whenever there's a lot of residents that are saying, hey, I can't park conveniently. we could take a next step. But you're right, there's infrastructure that would need to go into place and there's enforcement And we haven't enforced anything. |
| 04:57:57.96 | Unknown | I just want to clarify, I was not suggesting you add new bike racks or new loops. I was suggesting you reserve the current loops that are generally located where residents frequent and then require and color code those or designate those as permitted and keep all the rental bikes downtown on Tracy Way or wherever they park en masse. so if you're a rental bike it's pretty straight and and and keep all the rental bikes downtown on tracy way or wherever you know they they park in mass so if you're a rental bike it's it's pretty straightforward you go through town and you park there so that's what i'm suggesting well you |
| 04:58:33.99 | Ed Fotch | Well, you and I are in violent agreement that they should do that. the challenge we have is, with limited English speaking being about one in five, Again, I'm not suggesting that can't be done, but we're sort of focused on what are the tactical, practical things, and I would really like to see enforcement occur while at the same time we loosen up this ordinance and let people in town, kind of park wherever they want to park, as long as they're not blocking the sidewalks. We have almost no loops in the downtown anymore, frankly, anyway. And that's because we suggested getting rid of the. |
| 04:59:11.54 | Unknown | I thought you were going to replace, I thought part of your prior proposal was to reinstate those loops. |
| 04:59:17.68 | Ed Fotch | But that is our recommendation. I don't know if that's going to occur, but that is our recommendation. I thought that we were moving. |
| 04:59:17.70 | Unknown | That is our recommendation. Oh, I thought that was good. But we were moving forward on that. |
| 04:59:24.35 | Ed Fotch | I would have no aversion at all. I'm sure the committee would have no aversion to writing on their residence only. I just wouldn't hold my breath that that would keep visitors from parking there. In fact, that's why we sort of said just cover them up during the peak time. Have the ambassadors cover them and take them off because we're just encouraging the use of the sidewalks for the bikes. And that is the best of our bad ideas. |
| 04:59:51.41 | Unknown | With the proposed ordinance, I'm not seeing, am I missing it? Is there a special, there must be a special, you know, caveat or something for resident cyclists in here. |
| 05:00:07.53 | Ed Fotch | Actually, we were just focusing on the hours because they're just, it's so, the bike traffic is so predictable. that if you just say whatever it is. Well, it says bicep. |
| 05:00:21.15 | Unknown | Well, it says bicyclists required to park bicycles in designated downtown places. areas So you're just treating all the cyclists the same? |
| 05:00:35.37 | Ed Fotch | Yes. And frankly, we're doing that because the visitors all come during a predictable time, and so rather than trying to put the infrastructure in to have a residence sticker or whatever, I'm not ruling it out, I'm saying, We're just really trying to make 2016 better than 2015. |
| 05:00:54.83 | Adam Politzer | Dr. Fatton, can I just clarify, if we have the loops put back in. The recommendation is that during the. early part of the morning. residents could park on those hoops. loops. And then as the ambassadors start work that day, they would cover those hoops up. That's the recommendation. |
| 05:01:21.02 | Jill Hoffman | And part of that too, Ed, is that the loops do take up sidewalk space and the peak hours anticipate that the sidewalks are going to be very crowded and you're still trying to maintain an open space as much as possible on the sidewalks. |
| 05:01:34.55 | Ed Fotch | Yes, and the other reality that hasn't necessarily jumped to mind but is very much the case is Locals tend to ride alone or with one other person. visitors tend to ride in groups of four on average. And so when you put up a bike loop, if it's visitors, you can assume you're going to get four or six bikes tied to it, whereas it's locals, it tends to be onesies or twosies. |
| 05:01:50.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:01:53.88 | Jill Hoffman | I'm just kidding. Thank you. |
| 05:01:54.74 | Ed Fotch | Thank you. |
| 05:01:54.77 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:01:54.79 | Ed Fotch | I mean, that's just how it sort of |
| 05:01:54.94 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:01:57.44 | Ed Fotch | sorts out. |
| 05:01:59.61 | Jill Hoffman | And again, with regard to the ordinance, we're just talking about a very limited area in the downtown, which is... 539 Bridgeway to 833 Bridgeway. So that's like five blocks or something like that. |
| 05:02:14.94 | Ed Fotch | I believe that's where the original bike parking ordinance applied. |
| 05:02:20.88 | Jill Hoffman | And if you're out of that area, you can park wherever. Well, not however, but you know what I mean. OK. And I apologize, because I didn't |
| 05:02:28.64 | Ed Fotch | And I apologize, because I think the bike parking ordinance is actually the next agenda item, but anyway, sort of commingling. |
| 05:02:33.58 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. That's true. Okay, all right, so with regard to any more questions of Ed and the Chief about the bike plan. Do we have any more questions about that? |
| 05:02:47.98 | Unknown | Bye. I had a question. |
| 05:02:53.75 | Unknown | Well, I just want to make one that's obvious. I mean, we're asking to allocate $100,000 till June 30th. But of course, |
| 05:02:57.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:03:03.01 | Unknown | We expect that to be upset by revenues and as the projection that we would, |
| 05:03:05.44 | Unknown | by, Thank you. |
| 05:03:08.97 | Unknown | more than offset it or less than offset it or break even? Have we done that kind of analysis? Thank you. |
| 05:03:15.16 | Ed Fotch | So, |
| 05:03:15.92 | Unknown | you |
| 05:03:15.99 | Ed Fotch | THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE The 10-point plan that we recommended, based on the numbers from last year, using some increased expenses that Sauce Lido Plus would need to take on, particularly to take on the queuing, just a back of the napkin, which is what we did at the committee, would have shown a surplus. |
| 05:03:34.97 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 05:03:36.80 | Ed Fotch | to the city. but it includes moving forward with all aspects of the 10-point plan. And some of those aspects are detailed and political, and they really need to be kind of nudged forward. But our goal, and I think what we delivered to the city, was a plan that would have a surplus. Now, I have started and finished five businesses. Projecting revenue and generating revenue are two different things. And so you, of course, always want to have surpluses projected, because you know the expenses will come. AND I THINK IT'S A But I think our experience last year and I would tie this into the priority by queuing fees and some of the, you know, some subtle things that can be moved around in that. is that people very much appreciate the services that are provided. They appreciate the valet parking. They appreciate the concierge services they're getting. They appreciate. all this stuff and I think that they're happy to spend money on services that not only is a better experience for them, but frankly is a better experience for us. The citizens don't like the sidewalks tied up with people in the queue and the people in the queue standing in the queue on the sidewalk don't want to be there. those kinds of things in the valet parking is kind of a win-win. But to specifically answer your question, The 10-point plan, the goal of the 10-point plan, was to have this be a surplus so that we're not using taxpayer dollars, I would still advocate for that plan. but because there's some I think there's some areas where council leadership would be helpful on the ground. |
| 05:05:13.44 | Unknown | you |
| 05:05:13.51 | Unknown | else. |
| 05:05:17.56 | Ed Fotch | in working through the details of that plan. |
| 05:05:21.61 | Unknown | And as staff looked, I mean, on this $100,000, and we appreciate it, but we have to do our due diligence at this end is, and as staff looked at it, I mean, are they looking at historical, we at least have one year's data on this. And for this period of time, does it look like we're going to be able to more than break even? And secondly, and I assume that's without this extra $2 queuing fee. So I guess that's part of the question. so I so to be able to more than break even. And secondly, and I assume that's without this extra $2 queueing fee. So I guess that's part of the question. So I, so someone taking a look at this to see that. Yeah, I mean, we're. |
| 05:05:51.07 | Adam Politzer | Has someone taken a Oh yeah, I mean we're spending a lot of hours looking at this and as the chief commented earlier there's a lot of different moving parts and players. But in terms of what you saw last year that was presented at at various points of the program and then, at the very end. We know that the expenses outpace the revenues at the beginning of the season. you know, the, the startup costs, the training, the hiring. gearing up of closing Tracy Way and all the activity that's involved during the months of March, April and May. you know, will potentially outpace it. What's being introduced and was introduced back in November as part of the 10-point plan is this peak queuing fee. with that peak queuing fee, um, between now and June 30th, if in fact that goes into place and has success in the months of the later part of of May and all of June. then there should be money that puts us in the black between now and June 30th. But what the chief shared is that this is a placeholder with I think the understanding You know, we will track expenses and revenues so that they are on course. to keep us in the black. you know, in the first three months here. But if we come back in April with the recognition the budget will be further developed the negotiations with the district and the bike companies and everyone else that is collaborating and in the spirit of collaborating, everyone is saying that they want to work together. Then we should have a more comprehensive budget that demonstrates this. But the one fundamental question, it was proposed in November, Dr. Fotch is proposing it again. And I'll just say it more clearly, the program this year, the revenue needed to close all the gaps and ensure that it's in the black is this peak boarding fee, the $2 additional fee. And if you agree with that approach, then you're assured that we will collect more revenue than we did last year, just by the obvious. Even if we only did that during the peak times in July and August, just on the weekends, that's more revenue than we collected last year. But if we do it seven days a week during the peak times, then obviously that's a considerable amount more money. We'll bring that detail to you as we continue to work. with Deb Fotch and Ed. and the chief as we keep grinding away at the budget and the projections both on expenses and on revenue. |
| 05:08:53.61 | Unknown | Yeah, so I have a follow-up question. I'm a little bit confused about the $100,000 because it was my understanding that this was supposed to be self-sustaining by the second year. You wouldn't need anything from the city that the parking fees and everything would fund this. Last year, the city was, was I guess in the red 25,000 we were told that that was because a certain amount of you know investment was made by the city to to help sauce a little plus get started my personal preference because sauce little plus uses city assets owned by the public that you know the road to do the parking and make the money that there should be a competitive RFP because they're providing a city service after the fact when I heard we were in the red I requested you know just a clarification into you know the list of into, you know, the list of, you know, the ambassadors and the payments. And, yeah. So my quest, and I didn't get that. And my question is that I'm wondering why we need to give you $100,000 loan for What is it? Three months then? I guess you're going to pay us back on June 30th? I guess is that, is that what I'm seeing is one question. And, uh, the other question I have is, um, for that 100 K, uh, are, are anything that exceeds that then, is that going to be given to the city as you know, infrastructure to be spent for capital improvements or what have you so. |
| 05:10:53.25 | Ed Fotch | So a few comments. I agree that the city should, assuming someone has time and expertise, should generate an RFP. I would recommend that for my remaining time on the pedestrian bike committee. Last year there was really no time to do it. there wasn't anyone who was stepping up. You may recall that we offered this opportunity. you to start the Ambassador Program to the Chamber. We also offered it to the City Council, or to the City Public Works, sorry, Park and Rec. Standing up a new business, if you haven't done it before, it's sort of an act of faith and a hell of a lot of work. So just to be clear, all the dollars that came in last year went to the city. I had the opportunity last year to write checks for $50,000 to front end the cost. of Saucelito Plus. and I'm not going to do that this year. So if the city wants a program, then they should put up the money for it. If it was me sitting in one of those chairs, I would insist on a budget neutral or budget surplus plan. sooner rather than later. for the 2016 season. But the I can guarantee you, I'm not asking for $100,000. our recommendation you just saw. if there's a different recommendation, You should follow it. That's the plan of our committee. the city then has to take the plan and execute. If the city can do that, hire and train 50 people. Put in the workman's comp. do the training, the SOPs, and run the whole thing They should do that. If the city can write an RFP and have someone do it, they should do it. I'm not in any way auditioning for this opportunity. It sort of was our family's opportunity to step into the breach last year, which we did. I'm stepping back now. And as of the end of my term, it will be someone else's responsibility to bring forward programs like this. And if you have a better option than Salcido Plus, I strongly suggest that you take it. |
| 05:13:19.24 | Unknown | I guess what I'm saying, though, is it sounds like you agree with me that we should we should float out an RFP and just. Yeah. Well, then we're in agreement. |
| 05:13:25.87 | Unknown | own. |
| 05:13:30.80 | Unknown | the Thank you. Could you talk a little bit more about the peak boarding fee? I've got to be honest, I am a sort of, for some reason I feel queasy about that part of it, and I don't know why necessarily. You see, part of what seems to me here is that the parking has gone a long way to ... provide a platform for us to manage the congestion. But you've alluded to the fact that the congestion is my words, in large measure. The congestion is in part due to the boarding process. The queuing process. So they come out of the parking lot or from wherever they decide they're going to, you know, suddenly appear from. Sorry. And then they start queuing. And that's where we get, you know, a lot of the potential hazard safety issues in the queuing. So is the peak boarding fee going to help manage and reduce the congestion of queueing by creating some order or what's it or is it simply revenue generating? That's what I'm trying to get to. Is it got a tactical operational congestion management role or is it purely revenue generating? |
| 05:14:47.90 | Unknown | it. |
| 05:15:10.60 | Ed Fotch | No, it's absolutely a tactical, organizational, crowd control congestion measure. And so I can make it easiest by saying that you and I are bringing our families here. We hit Saus Lito at about 1 o'clock. The line's already formed. It's backed up. We haven't solved the ferry. And we have two choices. There's no priority queuing system, which we piloted last year, albeit we didn't charge for it. and you have your only way to get on a ferry is to stand in line. and you may be standing in line for a few hours your time is probably worth two bucks to not have to stand in that line. So by being given a priority queuing number. which you can. scan using your smartphone. You can go enjoy Sausalito and get in line only when your number is called. You don't have to do that, but then you'll wait for everyone else who does acquire such a number, which is exactly what we did last year. We just didn't charge for it. It had costs associated with it. Wi-Fi cameras, you had to have people managing this. It wasn't perfect, but it was reasonably well done. So first and foremost, it is a congestion management, but it's also a valuable service, not unlike the valet service, that I think has a reasonable fee associated with. Now, if someone said, oh, it's only worth a dollar, then charge a dollar. Just make sure the budget works. And back to the budget, you know, you can always cut back on the number of ambassadors. but the experience last year to the extent I volunteered as an ambassador, and I try to let Tom Riley, who's the chair, and Deb, who runs the thing, do it without my heavy footprint, which they claim I put all the time, but I can tell you last year, there is always something else for the ambassadors to do. Oh, the ambassadors should be over there. Well, they need to be over here, and they need to help with the queuing So it seems like it's this expanding role for the ambassadors And I think from a – once you take a high-level 10-point plan and say operationalize it, you have to make your outlays match your income And that's why I think you need to move briskly toward a more detailed plan. And for example, either say we're gonna do the $2 priority boarding. project the revenues. infrastructure is largely, I think, in place. or you're not. And if you're not, you're gonna have to dial the ambassador program work. Use city funds you know, something has to give But from a committee standpoint, we looked at it as an extremely valuable service that cut down the lines last year and gave people two hours of their vacation time back. And they liked it. Some people just wanted to get the heck on the ferry, but given the choice of waiting in the hot sun in a long line versus wandering around Sausalito and taking the views They like the system. |
| 05:18:21.84 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks, Ed. And with regard to the $100,000, really, it seems to me that it's a front load to get the program started, that it will come back to the city at the end of the year when the revenues come in. Have I got that right? |
| 05:18:35.69 | Ed Fotch | Well, that's certainly the plan that we proposed. And what I'm suggesting, and the reason I think this really could use one or more council members is because some of these issues come up and we're there. I mean, this isn't November, December. I mean, it's we're like, it's on us. And so I think, I mean, for my position, when I sit there on our committee, there should be a surplus. |
| 05:18:38.65 | Jill Hoffman | The projection, yeah. |
| 05:18:45.01 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 05:19:01.88 | Ed Fotch | and the plan we delivered is a surplus. I'm not executing on that plan. I'll probably volunteer some more time this year. And if you want a surplus and you want to plan that as a surplus, I think you should be very crisp on that. and the last thing just as long as I'm asking I think you've got to square up the ferry companies and say exactly, specifically, what is the plan to take 150 bikes out per ferry? Not sort of conceptually. I'm not saying these are bad people. I'm saying it's time. And it's not gonna happen from staff, We don't even have a budget on our little committee, so it's not going to happen because Ed Fotch says this. I mean, it really has to happen from you folks. We need you guys. |
| 05:19:44.69 | Jill Hoffman | Why don't, let's have last question and then we still have public comment. |
| 05:19:47.63 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE Yeah, just wanted to clarify that any money that comes in over the 100K goes to the city? |
| 05:19:55.07 | Ed Fotch | all the revenue that comes in associated with valet parking and any revenue that would come in before the priority boarding all goes to the city. It all went to the city last year. Because it all comes in through machines and the city owns and controls the machines. |
| 05:20:09.97 | Unknown | But I guess, but I know that you paid $80,000 to your ambassadors, and you paid, you know, you had payments for your, for Soft Cetal Plus. |
| 05:20:20.25 | Ed Fotch | Yes, the city reimbursed Saucyotl Plus in arrears. Yeah. Because I fronted the money, and that's not an option this year. |
| 05:20:23.36 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 05:20:28.92 | Unknown | Yeah, no, I guess what I'm saying is there's a cost, you know, I mean, you're making money from the parking fees to pay the ambassadors. And, you know, the fact that money goes here and then it comes back is, you know, in the end, that's what's going on, right? Right. And you're asking for $100,000 to cover those costs, and then anything over that will be, the city will keep. You're projecting your costs will be $100,000. |
| 05:20:49.58 | Unknown | And you're, you're. |
| 05:20:59.67 | Ed Fotch | You're projecting your costs will be $100,000. I'm not exactly, frankly, sure where the $100,000 came from. I tend to stay away from Sausalito Plus and their budgets, as you know, because you've communicated with them. Tom Riley chairs that. My lovely wife puts hours in on that. So I don't know the specifics of the $100,000. To me, that's less an issue, although it's, you know, last year was my money, so it wasn't The thing that would concern me if I was in one of those chairs is, where's the budget for the year? Where's the plan for the year? Where's the plan that says at the end of the year all the money comes back? And how do we get there? And what doors do we need to kick down to get between here and there? |
| 05:21:41.52 | Unknown | And what you just said is you don't know how they came up with, who came up with 100,000, was it? |
| 05:21:46.21 | Ed Fotch | I assume Tom Riley, Deb, and the Chief, and Adam. |
| 05:21:51.66 | Unknown | Do we have a breakdown on why 100,000? |
| 05:21:57.37 | Ed Fotch | you |
| 05:21:57.42 | Unknown | Yeah, and at the same time, can you tell us what the next step is in the budget process? |
| 05:21:57.62 | Ed Fotch | Thank you. |
| 05:21:57.74 | Unknown | and it's, you know, |
| 05:21:57.81 | Ed Fotch | Yeah. |
| 05:22:02.82 | Unknown | when it's like, when it's likely to come to Council so you can do that um because this is the first step and we agree we're going to end up with a budget for the year that's going to be in the black and it'll be projected and negotiated but this is to get us started so that we can start next week correct Thank you. |
| 05:22:21.41 | Adam Politzer | Correct. So as the chief said earlier the I the idea is to come back in April based on direction from the council tonight on the you know several of the components That have been have been shared the hundred thousand you know looks at the expenses Based on starting on March 18th versus last year where we started the parking program June middle of June so starting the program earlier looking at the expenses related to paying for the ambassadors to run the bike parking and provide some level of supervision in you know smaller amount of supervision during the earlier months and obviously off the weekends well we'll need more staffing on the weekends and we'll do on the weekdays projected out to June 30th and ramping up the staffing as we get into the warmer months and busier months such as May. But to deal with spring break and any of the holidays, Easter and what happens between now and then and opening day on the Bay, we're looking to be staffed up and trained and ready to go come March 18th so that hundred thousand will be offset by some volume of revenue And if the council is supportive, in concept. with the boarding fee, the peak boarding fee, then it's based on the information that we've reviewed so far that would put us in the black, prior to June 30th, making the assumption that we have good weather and that we actually have crowds so that we have a peak queuing period. There's no peak queuing period, then there won't be a peak queuing fee. But then again, the costs to manage it would go down because you wouldn't need as many staff people working out there. So at this point, there are continued discussions with Sausalito Plus and combing through their budget both on expenses and expenditures. their assumptions and then there's discussion that we're having with the bike rental companies in terms of trying to manage where the customers park their bikes when they come into town and if we offer a discount or not And and then you know that and then there's still discussions going on with the district on who's managing the queue. and we believe it's going to be South Salido Plus, but that hasn't been. all ironed out and then as Dr. Fogg State it we are asking the district to tell us precisely how they're going to manage when people actually get onto their portion of the gangway And on to the boat, how they're being managed so that they take 150 people per boat. But we believe that the $100,000 will be offset if we initiate the queuing fee this spring. And if the council isn't comfortable making that decision today, they'll have an opportunity in April when we come back. with additional information. And with the support of the Bicycle Coalition and the support of the district ideally. We have all of those people together with us as we bring forward a comprehensive plan. |
| 05:25:57.38 | Unknown | So would there be another infusion of cash or is it just a hundred thousand and that's it for this year fiscal year? |
| 05:26:04.70 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, I mean it's Dr. Fuss is not really an infusion of cash it's a loan or it's not a loan either It's as their expenses come in we pay them and as the revenues okay That we collect it will offset that and we're on that's a huge lie in August There'll be more revenues coming in that expense |
| 05:26:07.81 | Unknown | Alone or. Yeah. |
| 05:26:13.48 | Christine Scarpino | Okay. |
| 05:26:13.97 | Unknown | Thank you. to get to the next level. |
| 05:26:14.53 | Unknown | WE CAN. |
| 05:26:14.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:26:14.88 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, okay, well... |
| 05:26:15.42 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:26:15.52 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. |
| 05:26:15.64 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:26:16.75 | Jill Hoffman | As we get to July and August. |
| 05:26:18.44 | Unknown | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 05:26:21.22 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks. Let's move on to public comment. OK, I can wait. |
| 05:26:23.60 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 05:26:23.97 | Adam Politzer | I can wait. |
| 05:26:24.65 | Ed Fotch | If I could just add one thing, because I apologize. I should have thought of this. I don't know if you're going to make a decision or even discuss this priority bike boarding queue. I've already made the point that I think it's an incredibly valuable service. |
| 05:26:25.00 | Adam Politzer | If I could just |
| 05:26:25.38 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:26:25.48 | Adam Politzer | Sure. |
| 05:26:38.77 | Ed Fotch | city resources. But the other thing that's really important is I spent quite a number of hours last year, as did other members of the committee, working through the details of that 10-point plan, including the $2 priority bike boarding fee with Alicia Uh, Anyway, from the Marin Bike Coalition, who is a non-voting member of our committee. And they were supportive of it as a package. of a package, and the package included more parking for locals that council member Pfeiffer folks' son. more signage for free parking. organizing the bike queuing. when they looked at it as a package, they were quite supportive of the entire plan, including the $2 priority. bike boarding. And they're not always supportive of fees associated with ferries But in this case, because it's really not about paying to be on the ferry, it's about paying to not have to stand in line for two hours, they were supportive. And so from a political standpoint, I think it's important to note that the bike coalition was supportive of the plan. |
| 05:27:40.06 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks Ed. Is there any public comment on, yes. You got just two of you just line up. You don't have to fill out a card. David Sudo. |
| 05:27:50.78 | David Sudo | David Sudo. I just thought I'd be a little more forthright than maybe Ed is about. You know, it would be helpful, I think, to pass this today because we have an opportunity to have a lot of leverage with the Golden Gate Bridge District in the next month. And having a clear plan of what we want to negotiate with them would probably be helpful. And, you know, we're probably in the best position in the next month to get them to agree to things that they might not necessarily want to do. So something to consider. Thank you. |
| 05:28:25.88 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yes, Una Kavanagh. |
| 05:28:32.80 | Jill Hoffman | Happy. Good morning. |
| 05:28:33.08 | Unknown | Thank you. Good morning. Yes, happy St. Patrick's Day. Fortunately, I'm still a bit jet lagged, so I'm wide awake at this point. Anyway, I just wanted to clarify a few things. Firstly, the Saucelida Chamber has been working on the bike issue. for more like four or five years. and pretty actively involved. I've personally attended hundreds of meetings to discuss the whole issue working with the police department with the bike rental companies and with the Golden gate and the ferry companies. So over the last two years we've been managing the bike queuing or bike reservation as we called it. So last year The Ambassador Bike and Ped Committee were actively involved and I thought it was great we've made some more improvements. We're not saying we don't want to have anything to do with it. We're merely saying that rather than having a set of staff working as ambassadors, and then another set of staff working as queuing or reservation people, we believe that it would be way more effective to coordinate the programs. But I also wanted to point out, when we were managing the queuing system, the bike rental companies financed that. that was literally going through us. They put the money in. It was between 50 and 55,000 over the last two years, and we paid out the money. and kept a P&L of it. It was straightforward. Where I'm a little puzzled, and I know this is only the beginning stages, a couple of things. Firstly, You know, we need to iron out who's responsible for what. Will we have one set of staff? doing the parking. and another set of staff doing the queuing. And if so, who's going to manage that? And secondly, where do the bike rentals go? companies come in. they were happy to contribute. once they understood what they were contributing. They trusted me at the Chamber to manage that. I had the respect and I proved to them I could effectively run the program. but we need to make sure that they keep that level of trust. And I really want to be actively involved as we go through this, and I've told this to Deb and Ed and Chief Roebacher. We're not... I want to be actively involved because I do have the trust of the Golden Gate and the ferry people. and I do have the trust of the bicrential companies and the respect. So I think we have an important role to play So I just have a few questions about it, but I'm meeting with Chief Robacher and with Dev Votch, so I'm hoping we can iron it out, but there's still a lot of questions to be answered, just like you feel. I feel the same. Thank you. |
| 05:31:58.08 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. Any other speaker cards? Adam Carbacci. |
| 05:32:13.17 | Adam Kravatsky | Adam Krivach, 840 Olima Street, my admiration for your tenacity and working toward a purpose. Two points I'd like to make here. One I already talked about. We are talking about crowd management. We are trying to reduce the crowds. The crowd. it becomes a crowd. When it's a crowd, it's unpleasant. Nobody likes to be in a crowd unless he's on a football game rooting for a company or a team. And... people should not feel crowded when they are coming to Sausalito. And there is a way of solving that problem During the peak periods, they need an outlet. They have two hours here. They should know What? they want to do while they have Two hours. And their bike is parked in a parking lot. So we can inform people in advance, Amen. give literature to the bike companies so that people can read that before they come here or When they get here, they see a few signs that a cafe is that way, two minutes from here, something else is five minutes from there. In essence, I would like to recommend that you hire an urban designer who figures out how to disperse the crowd. This is not crowd management. This is elimination of crowds. And you do that through design, good design, and by making people's time much more pleasant while they're in town, they will remember Sausalito as a great place where they had a good time and not where they had to stand in line. That's one point a second. We are talking about $100,000, it's a big, big amount. And I have only probably 20 seconds. to say this you should ask your finance director to tell you How much money week. generate through sales taxes if there is such a large number of people here and if each of them spends $15, $30, whatever they spend, And think about it as an income stream that you finance in advance. And you benefit from the income stream and your business community benefits from that. Thank you. |
| 05:35:17.90 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Adam. All right, I don't see any other, no other public comment. Okay, I'm gonna bring it close public comment and I bring it back up here for comments or further questions based on the comments. |
| 05:35:31.26 | Unknown | I guess my comment is that before voting on this, I'd like to get clarity on the breakdown on the $100,000 a little bit more than just the high level that we received. And I'd also like clarity on the chamber's role. It sounds like there are some things to be ironed out there in terms of staffing for parking versus queuing, with the bike companies etc I just it just feels like there are still you know a few moving parts that need need to be what's clarified the other thing is that it would be we all received one email from a resident who said that she wanted to make sure that her her daughter her her young daughter could ride through town it wasn't clear to some of the residents that the bike the peak how the peak bike period could negatively impact residents so I don't know if there's something we can do with the ordinance to highlight that this is, the special conditions for residents that might make that a little stronger. I know we're going to talk about the ordinance next, but I just. kept the flow and went into that. So anyway, those are my comments. |
| 05:36:57.94 | Unknown | Well, there are a lot of moving parts, but I think, first of all, what really is is great I that from our police department our staff bike and pet committee Sausalito Plus Chamber all of us are working together to on this and and are marching along and we had some success last year I thought it was successful we're moving along this year I think the plan um that we we have we need to have these guys back in next meeting and following meeting, we have to go over the full year's budget. But I think we're on the right step to to we we need to have these guys back and next meeting and following meeting. We have to go over the full year's budget, but I think we're on the right step step to to and this thing with 100,000, we're just putting it up to make sure we do it. We're going to be gaining, gaining it back and there'll be rentals and all the way through. It's not that we're expending it. So I would go along with making the second amendment to the Oscillator Plus. closing Tracy way and And then authorizing the chief, as it says here, to change the plan in the next couple of weeks to see. It's a moving thing, but I think we're on the right path. I think we should start early, and I go with the staff's recommendation on this. |
| 05:38:08.57 | Ray | Yeah, let me, it is late and I want to go home. But let me throw some things out at you real quickly, because as you know I've been involved in this. And I thank the chief for doing a great job and Ed. And I was able to sit in at one of the meetings last week, first of all. |
| 05:38:31.57 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:38:33.13 | Ray | I met with the ferry people. There is a way that we could expedite them getting on the ferry much quicker. And they agreed to attempt to do that. |
| 05:38:45.60 | Unknown | that. |
| 05:38:46.27 | Ray | And one of those things would be is that between the gate And where the tickets are sold, you can put in 75 bikes. 15 minutes before the ferry pulls in, all those bikes should be accounted for and all paid. So when that ferry comes in, they don't have to get their tickets out. They don't have to put their kickstands up. They put them on very, very quickly. |
| 05:39:09.97 | Unknown | you |
| 05:39:14.23 | Ray | Normally before it took seven minutes. With this method, I feel they could do it in three minutes. That's one thing and they're willing to do that. And maybe to extend it out even further to collect And by the way, they now can do that, whether you have a ticket, whether you have the clipper, they have a portable device rather than |
| 05:39:38.69 | Unknown | you |
| 05:39:39.02 | Ray | So they agreed that would possibly make it much, much quicker. The addition of using the Bank of America, which they didn't do last year, I think that could be a very good asset. Um, We also met with the bike companies, the major ones. And just so you know, by the way, They're... 64 bike rental companies in San Francisco. And they have it, and it's count when you say Blazing Saddles, Bike and Roll, and Bay Cities. That makes it a total of 77 locations for bike rentals in San Francisco. This year here they agreed tentatively that if you give them a coupon, when they come over. Instead of the $3, it would be two. If they came over and they didn't have this coupon, it would cost them three. The idea of that would be is now you're explaining to the bike rental customer. only parked in a designated bike. And when they have that coupon, they will use it. Um, |
| 05:40:56.58 | Ray | I think the idea, the 100,000, that's started. That doesn't mean they're going to eat it all up by June 15th. In fact, there is an option that we could do. One of them is March is not that busy, especially with the weather the way it is, or April. Your main concentration is on the weekends. So until that period of time that you really wanted get ready for that season, you could only have, I'd go free parking on Tracy Way and have maybe two people that are just keeping everything in order. And that would cost you approximately $2,000 a month. to do that. That's an option. Or if it starts really getting busy then you could kick in the program. I really think with the tickets, Thank you. Now in the customer's hand, And they're told, look, the valet, I think it's, I'm not in favor of the word valet. I think what we should attempt to incorporate in there is, it's called a downtown bike parking zone. And that's what we've called it. But if you've got different names, one's a valet, one's a downtown parking zone, I think if we can get across to the bike companies and everybody else that we have a downtown bike parking zone, and you can only park in designated bike rack. And that's it. And the customer will be educated hopefully, by the bike companies to do this. Um, The boarding number, that's not going to go away. I know you want to get out of here. The boarding number, whether it's a boarding time or a boarding number, By the way, the ferry people do not like the idea of the $2 charge. that whether they change your mind or not, I don't know. Up to the $100,000, that's seed money. It doesn't mean you're going to use it all, but you have to give them the flexibility that if we do have to kick in, and you do go with the ambassadors, you've got to have that money in hand. All right. So, and that's enough. I want to go home. And the other thing that goes with valet is it almost sounds like you have to tip them. I don't want to get people into the idea of tipping. So I'm tipped as it is. |
| 05:43:12.46 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 05:43:25.62 | Nina LeBaron | All right. |
| 05:43:28.94 | Unknown | Well, it's getting late, so I'll keep my remarks very short. I want to at some point pick up a conversation that the goal of this whole exercise should be to actually reduce congestion downtown. And that's period what the primary goal should be. And we do that by management of our bicycle visitors. and eventually figure out how to reduce their number. because the only way to reduce congestion downtown is to reduce the number of people in it downtown, in my view. But we can certainly help the congestion by a very efficient parking of bikes and very efficient queuing and loading of the ferries. And so I think this has been a good collaborative effort. Sausalito Plus did a great job last year. I'm a little bit dubious about the peak boarding fee, but if you really think that this is a way to actually further manage congestion, you guys are the experts, not me. So I'll go with that. The $100,000, I don't know where the number comes from. Basically what we're doing is... is we're authorizing the staff to cover the social legal plus expenses for the next number of months until we see a budget. And I agree with Ed. We need to see a budget before we can take this much further. Because I don't know if we're making money or losing money. I don't know. Yeah. But I think we should move ahead as planned, but have this quickly come back with a budget and a plan. And I'll just note my reservations again. you |
| 05:45:11.14 | Ray | Thank you. |
| 05:45:11.17 | Unknown | life. |
| 05:45:11.51 | Ray | You can try to make a reservation for your bike. |
| 05:45:13.59 | Unknown | Shit. |
| 05:45:15.12 | Jill Hoffman | Well, thanks to Ed and her healing effort from last year to get this program off the ground it was just You know, it's a phenomenal effort of them and the way they reacted quickly last year and turned it around into a profit-making Enterprise was pretty amazing. the um I think they were so successful, and because the ambassadors are in demand to do other things is because they are so competent. And it's such a well-run, well-organized, positive enterprise. I didn't hear any negative comments all summer about the ambassadors. I heard only positive comments about them from visitors, and from residents and from the police. So kudos to everybody involved in that. I think the ambassadors, Sorry, Saucel Plus should come back on either April 5th or the 19th. Those are our two April meetings. The earlier the better with the budget. And I agree that it should be. I'm not sure. I think it should be aimed at budget surplus. not budget neutral. If we aim for a surplus and come late July, we got a big surplus and we're cruising in through August we decided we want to dial back on the amount of money we're making. I think that's great. That's a really great position to be into. but I think we should start out as budget surplus I think we should do the boarding fee. Let's see how it goes. Sauce Wheel Plus is agile. They've been able to... change course very quickly So let's see if it works. If it's a disaster, then we'll, you know, we'll admit it and we'll, we'll do something else. But, um, I think that we should include that in there. I agree with Ray, I think that it's a balance between managing the bikes or and trying to start dialing back on the numbers of bikes coming into town. And that's been my position all along that we've got too many – bikes trying to come down into Sausalito. So I think. though, you know, the Bavista trail that goes off the Golden Gate Bridge is a big piece of that, and it's not going to be fixed for a couple of years. So I think that we're kind of stuck with these numbers, at least for the next couple of years, when that trail is completed, that people can go underneath the Golden Gate Bridge and down into Fort Baker, maybe to the Exploratorium. whether or not they want to come back over the hill to Sausalito. maybe for the more experienced riders, and I don't think that's such a bad thing. I think we'll see that in the future. But for right now, for this year and perhaps next year, what we're talking about is managing congestion still and how to do that in a way that doesn't cost the city any money. So that's why we have revenue generating as part of this plan. So that's what I'd like to see. I agree. All the recommendations are fine, whether or not 100,000 is necessary or needed. We'll see. I would like the Sossville Plus to come back on a monthly basis and give us a status report, kind of like what they did a few times last year where you know, 10 minutes at the top of the hour at seven o'clock. just to let us know and how we need to adjust going forward. So that's how I'd like to go. Thank you. |
| 05:48:19.75 | Unknown | So I want to thank again, Ed, the committee, Saucetal Plus for your hard work and everything. And I appreciate what you do. I don't feel comfortable personally voting on this tonight because I'd rather see a budget in front of me. I understand the $100K would be, you know, reimbursed and it's just, you know, I guess a guesstimate. But I'd like to see a I guess a guesstimate but I'd like to see a little bit more structure and again I'd like to see a little bit more clarity with the chamber role before before moving forward I also am disappointed frankly that we didn't get an RFP this year for services we talked about about it. I asked for it last year. It was the reason I didn't support this last year. And so I just hope we don't go another year, you guys, without getting your RFP. So anyway, that's my thought. Thank you. |
| 05:49:21.89 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 05:49:22.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:49:22.48 | Jill Hoffman | If there's no other comment, I'll make a motion. I make a motion to approve the proposed 2016 bicycle congestion management plan, including, do you want me to go ahead and read all the, including the second... Oh, you already did? Oh, sorry. My apologies. I forgot. Okay. Well, I was just going to read right here this first paragraph. Okay. So, Madam Mayor. |
| 05:49:40.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:49:41.04 | Unknown | Sorry, my apologies, I forgot. Okay. |
| 05:49:51.87 | Unknown | You can just move staff's recommendations. |
| 05:49:54.51 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I move that we accept staff recommendation for the 2016 bicycle congestion plan. Any second. |
| 05:50:00.75 | Unknown | Second. Second. |
| 05:50:02.27 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? |
| 05:50:03.16 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 05:50:03.87 | Jill Hoffman | I suppose. No. All right, moving on. Wait. |
| 05:50:10.30 | Ray | Thank you. You have a little bit more. |
| 05:50:12.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:50:13.03 | Ray | All right. |
| 05:50:13.40 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 05:50:14.49 | Jill Hoffman | Off you go. There's the ordinance. You want to do the ordinance? You want to do the ordinance or? We'll go fast. |
| 05:50:16.39 | Ray | You want to do the order? Yes. Thank you. It goes by age priority, half book, 115, the oldest person in here. Thank you. |
| 05:50:25.45 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, yeah, yeah. |
| 05:50:27.43 | Ray | THE FAMILY IS you |
| 05:50:27.82 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:50:27.83 | Ray | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:50:28.00 | Unknown | I simply Thank you. |
| 05:50:29.74 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, we're on to items. |
| 05:50:39.41 | Jill Hoffman | It says item five, but I think these items got mixed up. |
| 05:50:44.88 | Unknown | and they were just, |
| 05:50:46.40 | Jill Hoffman | Mary, what item number is public hearing? |
| 05:50:49.23 | Mary Wagner | It is five. It's just out of your typical sequence. Typically, you do public hearings before business. |
| 05:50:54.29 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, yeah, okay. Sorry, go ahead. Go. Go. |
| 05:50:57.28 | Mary Wagner | So as you're aware, the kind of companion piece to the report you just received is a proposed amendment to the bicycle parking regulations that were adopted by the City Council in July of 2014. The main point is that bicycles are required to park in designated downtown areas. No person shall park or allow to be parked their bike in the downtown area of Sausalito, unless it's within a designated bicycle parking zone or other fixed items specifically intended for bicycle parking. So that's your current regulation. a parked bicycle in violation of the section is defined as any unintended bicycle lock to or leaning against a pole tree or any other object not commonly used for bike parking. You've already discussed what the downtown area is defined to include. It's those areas of public property within 539 Bridgeway and 833 Bridgeway. So it's really a very distinct area. And we had a little map for you that kind of highlights it in purple. right there. there it is again the current penalty provision is that bikes that are found in violation of the section are subject to being seized and stored until the owner or operator pays an administrative bicycle release fee which currently is a 25 fee in addition to a five dollar per calendar day storage fee and the current regulations indicate that bicycles that aren't claimed can be auctioned off in compliance with the California Civil Code regulations. Tonight, we're proposing a modification to add an additional enforcement, which is basically somewhat of a tweak of the existing enforcement of bikes being impounded. We're recommending that you approve the changes to the ordinance that allow impoundment in place and I think that dr. Fotch held up the orange cable which he would be suggesting that would be utilized the concept is that illegally parked bikes can be secured in place some form of a sticker or other notification would be affixed to the bike so that they know what number to call to have the bike released a release fee would be paid the bike would be released but bicycles which are a hazard or which are left for a period of time can still be removed and impounded so we're not suggesting that you eliminate that remedy but that you add this additional remedy there are are also proposed modifications to the fee structure. A bicycle release fee for impoundment in place would be $25. Bicycles that are actually seized, we're recommending that that be increased from $25 to $100 and that the bicycle storage fee be increased from $5 to $25 per calendar day to actually reflect the costs that are involved in having staff actually go out, remove a bicycle, and then ensure that it's safely stored. |
| 05:54:12.58 | Mary Wagner | All of this only applies in the downtown zone, correct? There's no proposed modifications to the area in which it applies. And if I can just clarify that we added the definition of bicycle to clarify that it was always supposed to have the same meaning as set forth in the existing section 1512.0.10, which I've put the definition up there for you. It also currently includes motorized electrical bicycles or motorized scooters, and then the the addition of the definition of a peak bike period, which is from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m., which is the only time that these bicycle parking regulations would be applicable. So with all of that, staff is recommending that you introduce and read by title only an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito, amending Title 15, Chapter 15.13 of the Sausalito Municipal Code. I am happy to answer any questions. |
| 05:55:16.88 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 05:55:16.90 | Unknown | My only question is if a resident bike is impounded, you know, or something, I mean, I'm wondering if we should cut the residents some slack. you know? |
| 05:55:31.25 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, the only response that I would add in addition to the information that you're already provided and kind of this resident versus other non resident bike is your recall, we did have some discussion of identification. features being added to bicycles, which met with great resistance. So the ability to, I understand that you're just saying there's some kind of sticker or color coding on a bike. |
| 05:55:54.04 | Unknown | I'm not talking about adding like their name I think we had initially. Yeah, and that met with great resistance. That didn't go over well at all. I can see why. |
| 05:55:59.11 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, and that met with great resistance. |
| 05:56:05.08 | Mary Wagner | Yep. So somehow you'd have to clearly differentiate between bikes and why a rental bike parked, um, illegally is different than a resident bike parked illegally. It has the same impact to your city streets. We could potentially do more outreach to the residents to make sure that they understand what the regulations are so that they don't find themselves running a foul of, um, this, um, |
| 05:56:33.99 | Jill Hoffman | I would suggest that we do the reading of this ordinance as is, and if it becomes necessary that that we could perhaps do an amendment or another ordinance later if we need to address resident issues with regard to this program. |
| 05:56:52.04 | Mary Wagner | Sure, if you want to go ahead and introduce it tonight and get it in place. So if you introduce it tonight, the next step would be to come back to you for second reading on March 22nd. We go into effect April 22nd, which is 30 days thereafter. That would give you an opportunity and staff an opportunity to work with the regulations for a little period of time and come back to you if there's changes that are necessary. I. |
| 05:57:12.56 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, I think that's sufficient. |
| 05:57:15.55 | Unknown | Yeah, and of course, if a resident were to get their bike impounded for some reason, I'm sure that there would be judgment calls in place about just whether to charge them. Okay. |
| 05:57:35.82 | Jesus | I'd just like to say I have the liberty to live my life as a free human being anywhere I am. in the pursuit of my happiness. And I can. park bike. Anywhere I choose to. if, It's going to make me happy to go into a store and drink a cup of coffee or to go eat something somewhere like the liberty to live my life free. in the pursuit of my happiness. |
| 05:58:06.01 | John Robacco | Yeah. Pursuit of my. I guess. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:58:08.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:58:08.13 | John Robacco | Thank you. |
| 05:58:08.17 | Jesus | Thank you. |
| 05:58:08.47 | John Robacco | Mm-hmm. |
| 05:58:08.91 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 05:58:08.96 | John Robacco | Okay. |
| 05:58:09.30 | Jesus | Thank you. |
| 05:58:09.33 | John Robacco | you |
| 05:58:09.53 | Jesus | Thank you. |
| 05:58:12.99 | David Holu | Thank you. |
| 05:58:13.01 | Unknown | you |
| 05:58:20.40 | Jeffrey Chase | Well, I've been shut out today, so... Maybe if I said that the bikes that are Park downtown should be blown up or thrown into the water. that might help, kind of, you know, |
| 05:58:49.26 | Jeffrey Chase | I heard from an officer outside that there's going to be an issue with the Anchorage this year. And now you're talking about bicycles which can mitigate climate change, which use no fossil fuel. I don't hear anything about... cars or automobiles, anything, any enforcement on their driving privileges. But this is specifically targeted towards Bicycles. The idea that somebody would come on a bicycle here and lock their bicycle to the downtown coming from France or Germany or Belgium, and they would have to pay $100 to get their bicycle released. I don't think that's going to leave a really good taste in their mouths about Sausalito, So what I'm going to say to I don't know if it's going to be to you because I don't think it's going to have any effect. Nothing I've set up here for years has. I'll say to the people that are watching on television, that We might not be ready for civil disobedience. That takes a lot of discipline. among the people that do that. that if we are going to resist any of these extremely unjust laws, every single one I've heard today has been. I don't think the citizens of Sausalito know. exactly what's going on here. I think that the people that are here are involved with these issues monetarily, I, This will be a revenue stream for the city, $100. I find it really hard to believe that you would actually do this. But A guy named Gandhi called civil disobedience in. India. I'm not sure. And he said that he did it prematurely. and people were killed. So I'm not gonna call for that today. I'm gonna say that the people that are watching on television, the council and the mayor and the city managers, This... is also for you because we're trying to appeal to your best side, the side that knows that there's a reason that people ride bicycles instead of cars. It helps the environment. It helps them. It keeps them slim. It's a much better way to get around than an automobile, and I'm from Detroit. I know this. personally. Please come and help us here in Sausalito. We need your help. Anybody that's at home watching, please help us. Thank you. |
| 06:01:27.60 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yes. I'm fine. |
| 06:01:31.65 | Ed Fotch | Just very briefly, two related things. One is that as it relates to enforcement of the bike... ordinance, I mean that's one where the outreach to the bike companies is really key. They need to know that you can't just drop your four bikes in the middle of the sidewalk. And the second thing, just to let you know, I did suggest to the head of the ambassador program that the ambassadors take two bikes every day of two ambassador bikes, lock this around them in a prominent place. because the point is not to impound bikes. The point is to have people park their bikes in legal places and not block the sidewalks. And so if you just took a couple bikes and locked it around it so you could see the sign, I think it would send a message to people coming into town that, hey, that's not a particularly good idea. Thanks. |
| 06:02:22.44 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, now. Closing public comment. And so do we need to do a motion, Mary, for the, okay. |
| 06:02:34.18 | Unknown | I move to introduce and read by title only an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito amend in Title 15, Chapter 15.13 of the Sausalito Municipal Code. |
| 06:02:47.19 | Unknown | And just a comment that if I made an amendment to exclude residents from this, resident cyclists, |
| 06:03:00.29 | Unknown | Okay, all right, it's late. |
| 06:03:02.21 | Unknown | Second, second, Council Member Withey's motion. |
| 06:03:02.30 | Jill Hoffman | So, |
| 06:03:02.45 | Unknown | Second. |
| 06:03:02.74 | Jill Hoffman | . So. All right, all in favor? Aye. |
| 06:03:07.53 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 06:03:09.33 | Jill Hoffman | Opposed? No. None. |
| 06:03:20.93 | Jill Hoffman | we have many exciting things left we have the city manager reports goes more reports appointments nothing Adam you got nothing okay we're done |
| 06:03:31.56 | Unknown | I move we adjourn, Madam Mayor. |
| 06:03:32.60 | Jill Hoffman | Adjourned. I second. Done. |
Jeffrey Chase — Neutral: Spoke about community gardens and Torah portions, relating to community collaboration and cost-free projects, specifically mentioning Southview Park garden plans. ▶ 📄
David Holu — Against: Opposed deferring $125,000 for IT software development in planning/building departments, arguing it's critical for efficiency and community satisfaction and should be invested in sooner. ▶ 📄
David Sudo — Neutral: Asked for clarification on a 45% increase in parking revenues, questioning whether it was due to new meters, increased tourism, or enhanced enforcement. ▶ 📄
Meg Fawcett — In Favor: Urged the council to restore the full $145,000 for Civic Center City Hall beautification, referencing the existing SWA plan and its readiness for implementation. ▶ 📄
Peter Van Meter — Neutral: Sought clarification on whether the $11,000 for the Chamber of Commerce kiosk was being continued or eliminated in the budget. ▶ 📄
Jesus — Neutral: Spoke about community love and collaboration over money, criticizing enslavement to money and advocating for community-driven projects like gardens. ▶ 📄