| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:40.97 | Unknown | Bye. . |
| 00:00:48.70 | Unknown | . . |
| 00:00:56.92 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. you . |
| 00:01:20.22 | Jill Hoffman | Good evening and welcome to the March 22nd, Sausalito City Council meeting. Debbie, would you call the roll please? |
| 00:01:29.11 | Debbie | Thank you. Council member Theodores? |
| 00:01:32.07 | Tom Theodorus | President. |
| 00:01:32.66 | Debbie | Councilmember Weiner president councilmember Pfeiffer here vice mayor withy |
| 00:01:33.91 | Ray Whitty | President. |
| 00:01:35.49 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:01:37.75 | Jill Hoffman | here. |
| 00:01:39.41 | Debbie | Mayor Hoffman. |
| 00:01:40.50 | Jill Hoffman | presence. |
| 00:01:46.36 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, and so could we have Chad lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, please? |
| 00:01:54.71 | Chad Carvey | Ready, salute, pledge. |
| 00:01:57.43 | Jeff Jacobs | Thank you. |
| 00:01:57.45 | Chad Carvey | Thank you. |
| 00:01:57.46 | Jeff Jacobs | Thank you. |
| 00:01:57.50 | Chad Carvey | Thank you. |
| 00:01:57.53 | Jeff Jacobs | Thank you. |
| 00:01:57.56 | Chad Carvey | Thank you. |
| 00:01:58.02 | Jeff Jacobs | to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands. |
| 00:01:58.59 | Chad Carvey | the flag of the United States. Thank you. |
| 00:02:04.92 | Jeff Jacobs | one nation under God. |
| 00:02:05.11 | Chad Carvey | Foundation. |
| 00:02:05.77 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 00:02:06.71 | Chad Carvey | Thank you. |
| 00:02:07.45 | Jeff Jacobs | Amen. with liberty and justice for all. |
| 00:02:14.73 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Oh boy. Okay. We had no closed session today, so we have no closed session announcements. And therefore, we will I will not invite public comment on closed session items because we had no closed session items. Would anybody like to? move to approve the agenda. |
| 00:02:37.02 | Unknown | So moved. Second. |
| 00:02:38.96 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? Aye. |
| 00:02:39.75 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:02:41.66 | Jill Hoffman | Um, Thank you. We're moving on now to section one, Mayor Announcements. Mayor, announcements. I have two announcements. One is an update of our movie theater blue ribbon committee. My understanding is that the property owners are accepting letters of intent from two separate groups this week, and they'll be evaluating those and whether or not to accept either one of those letters of intent for someone to take over the movie function of our movie theater. And the second one is an announcement on the COP Oversight Committee. The Oversight Committee had their first meeting on March 14th. And on Monday on Monday March 14th and their next meeting will be on April 11th and we have invited them to come and give a very short summary and presentation about the status on April 19th City Council meeting. you're going to be a little bit. |
| 00:03:41.74 | Linda Pfeiffer | time. |
| 00:03:41.95 | Jill Hoffman | When do they meet? 630. And where do they meet, Adam? In the conference room. And that is an open meeting. That is subject to the Brown Act. |
| 00:03:49.36 | Tom Theodorus | And it's noticed and will be in all the currents and such. |
| 00:03:54.88 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks. Moving on to Item number two, public communications. This is the time for the city council to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda. Except in very limited situations, state law precludes the council from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items of business. that are not on the agenda. However, the council may refer to matters not on the agenda to the city staff or direct that the subject be agendized for a future meeting. If you'd like to speak, please make sure you have completed a speaker's card and turn it in to the city clerk. Do we have anybody who would like to address matters that are not on the agenda this evening? Yes, sir. |
| 00:04:35.97 | Chad Carvey | My name is Chad Carvey and this would be my first announcement that is not purely Anchor Out related. First time. But I am going to start with one small Anchor Out related note. At our last RBRA meeting, us anchor out folks, we really pressed RBRA to admit the right of the anchor outs to live on the bay. That if a long list of problems that we have out there are fixed, that we have a basic right to live on our waters. And I would, there are going to be, there's going to be a bunch of us who are going to ask you the same thing, which is that the Sausalito City Council admit our right to live on our waters, that we have a community that is vibrant out there, and there are a list of problems that have to be fixed for that to happen, but that we do admit that these people have a right to live as part of our community on the water. So now on a personal note, so this is a very personal note, so two months ago, three months ago, my daughter moved here from New York. So excited, it took us a year to convince her and she moved here and enrolled my granddaughter in Willow Creek Academy. and two months ago she was driving into Willow Creek Academy And as she drove into the parking lot, a huge tree fell on her car and smashed it to pieces and barely missed taking the life of my two granddaughters and my daughter. We were so thankful. And the city workers arrived quickly, and the police was fantastic. And they said, oh, don't worry. The city will take care of it. And there is a law that says that a city does not have to pay for anything like this unless it's been proven that the tree, that they had noticed that the tree was a bad tree and that they should have fixed it. So my daughter, who had liability insurance only, has lost her vehicle, a $2,000 little SUV, no car, for a single mom and two children to have this ripped from her with absolutely zero accountability that the city has for taking care of that is so embarrassing to me that there's this law that protects a city from any liability in that case. And as a citizen, if a tree fell from a neighbor or my boat damaged someone, I would be perfectly responsible and liable, no chance. But a city gets to dodge that. This is all new to me. I found out. And because there was no proof that the tree was ailing or falling, they're not going to have to pay a penny. And I just cannot believe that the city could get away with that and have to be behind that law when such a tragedy has happened. It's just stunning to me. The amount is so small but so big for a young life like that. So just take it to heart and think about it. Thank you. |
| 00:07:15.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you, Chad. I have a card from Winnie. Conopath? |
| 00:07:26.41 | Winona Conopatha | Good evening. I'm Winona Conopatha, resident of Sausalito. I was encouraged by fellow Sausalito residents, Bill Patterson and Sonia Hansen, to come before you this evening after I asked them if they would be willing to add their names to a signature campaign for a homeless shelter in Marin County on behalf of the REST program. I am also a member of the United Methodist Church in Mount Tam, and our congregation participates in the REST program. REST stands for the Rotating Emergency Shelter Team. It was created nine years ago with support from the Marine Organizing Committee. The REST program operates during the winter months only. It is funded by the Marine Community Foundation in partnership with the County of Marin and by a joint fund derived from all Marin County cities and towns to help us. REST ran five months during the winter until last year when it expanded to six months. Every night dinner is provided for 40 men and 20 women by rotating congregations. Every night the shelters for the 40 men rotate around the circuit of local churches and other nonprofits. The 20 women are housed at the county wellness center. Last winter, approximately 400 men and women utilized arrest programs. Last year, no, not last year, 2014, the MOC was able to enlist cities and town councils to contribute to the REST fund that would augment county funds. The additional monies that were derived from that allow the REST program now to run for six months. So from five months, it's now going on a six-month rotation. The additional monies is for three years, with the understanding that within three years, a permanent site for the rest shelter will be found. a site for shelter, for the rest shelter, has still not been found. Last year, the Marin County Civil Grand Jury published a report based on six months investigation entitled Homelessness in Marin, a call for leadership. It calls for the County Board of Supervisors to take a strong, decisive leadership role I am asking your support in reminding our county officials of their commitment to rest and to finding and funding a site for an emergency shelter. Would each of you and the rest of you folks in this chamber be willing to Add your name to a signature card, reminding our County Board of Supervisors of their responsibility. There's no money involved. It's the act is, the plan is for the rest program to put these signed cards at the table of the County Board of Supervisors in their accountability session in a few months. Thank you. |
| 00:10:07.38 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:10:07.43 | Winona Conopatha | Thank you. |
| 00:10:07.73 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:10:07.84 | Winona Conopatha | Thank you. Um, |
| 00:10:09.20 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:10:09.74 | Winona Conopatha | it's, |
| 00:10:09.98 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yeah, yes, Adams. |
| 00:10:15.34 | Adam Politzer | Thank you very much for your comments. We have several council members, but in particular Tom Theodorus that actually sits on the countywide board or committee that discusses homelessness. Each council, as you stated, has pledged and committed funds. I think our pledge is in the $30,000 plus range per year for the next three years with the understanding that between when that pledge was made and the three-year period that the county and involved groups will continue to evaluate the need for a permanent shelter and locations for that permanent shelter. They had identified a location in San Rafael and about a year and a half, two years ago, there was discussion about all communities contributing towards a permanent shelter in San Rafael outside of the city limits in the county's jurisdiction. That was put on hold to see how this funding of the REST program, expanding the REST program, the months that you stayed it, how that works and what are the number of people that used the program. So we're expecting a report back from the county and county representatives to tell us how that's progressing and what the next steps are. So there will be an opportunity for the council probably over the next six months to hear from the from the county and hear from staff. And at the committee level where our council member sits on the committee to be able to report back. So I recommend that you talk with Councilmember Theodorus in the near future. And then if those meetings, and many of them are public meetings, make sure that you and other representatives are at that meeting to be able to influence the decisions that come back to each of the 11 communities that will be voting on this in the near future. |
| 00:12:02.75 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, thank you, Winnie. Yes, Jeff Jacobs. |
| 00:12:09.47 | Jeff Jacobs | Thank you, hello Mayor and City Council, City Officials and citizens of Sausalito and Winnie, thanks for mentioning that. The Ritter Center is being closed. in San Rafael, there's a plan to close it. St. Vincent's is under some pressure And the Helen Vine, which is the only detox center in Marin County as well, is being... closed in favor of a wild care bird center, and they have no place at the moment to put alcoholics except for jails and hospitals or the morgue. Also, this was in the last meeting, Homeless civic funding for the city of Sausalito, $12,000. So the city of Sausalito, not just the county, is getting money to deal with the homeless issue. And I'm going to be finding out exactly where that money is going. I hope to find that out. Thank you for giving us the space to talk with our elected officials. I was told by a friend that maybe I don't need to be so Israelites so Jewish that I can bring Buddhist or Hindu teachings, etc. I don't know those as well as I know the Israelite ones, so I don't think I'm the person to do that. So I'll say we have a prayer. Thank you. And I'll say it now for the Israelites that we repeat five times a day. It goes like this, it's Shema Yisrael, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai Echad. And it means, hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is unified. And of course, we also have that in our Constitution. And it says in order to create a more perfect union which grammatically, in a way doesn't make any sense. But in a deeper, sense after we get rid of the paradox, it makes a lot. |
| 00:14:12.52 | Jeff Jacobs | Four days ago, the Department of Justice, Vanita Gupta, the principal deputy, assistant attorney general, released from the Civil Rights Division. A note to the cities of America, not just Ferguson, Missouri. She said, recent years have seen increased attention on the illegal enforcement of fines and fees in certain jurisdictions across the country. often with respect to individuals accused of misdemeanors, quasi-criminal ordinance violations, or civil infractions. Here's what she says is illegal and unconstitutional to do. She says, courts must not condition access to a judicial hearing on the prepayment... of fines or fees. So tomorrow... I'm going to the court and I'm going to bring there's a few more here but I don't have time to go into all of it and I'll let you read this I'll leave a copy here is it? Is it okay if I get a job? |
| 00:15:13.91 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. times out. |
| 00:15:15.87 | Jeff Jacobs | Time's up. |
| 00:15:16.43 | Jill Hoffman | Time's up. Thank you. |
| 00:15:17.76 | Jeff Jacobs | Okay. |
| 00:15:18.37 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, is there anybody else who would like to address matters? Not on the agenda. |
| 00:15:19.08 | Jeff Jacobs | Thank you. |
| 00:15:19.13 | David Sudo | Thank you. |
| 00:15:23.94 | David Sudo | Um, David Sudo, since the REST program has been brought up, I had a conversation with a homeless lady in Sausalito who's been a long-time resident a couple months ago, and she brought up the fact that for women there's only this one place in San Rafael, and I believe it's in the Canal area, and she said she was very uncomfortable going there. She couldn't really use it because she felt unsafe there, and that she was really hoping that Sausalito would step up along with the other communities in Southern Marin and find a place that women could feel safe, a single woman could feel safe at. And, you know, being able to stay there maybe a couple days a week. She was really heartbroken about the fact that the rest places are only for men and that they won't take women. And she just was really despondent about it. And it was in the middle of winter and it was cold and rainy, and she just needed a place for a couple days to stay. And I just thought I'd relate that since it was brought up today. Thank you. |
| 00:16:31.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Anybody else for matters not on the agenda? Yes. |
| 00:16:39.98 | Unknown | by the administration. |
| 00:16:40.87 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:16:41.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:16:42.79 | Nova | Hi, my name is Nova, and I've been in Sausalito for... A couple weeks now and I've realized one thing, I was here last week for the meeting And I noticed that there was a homeless fund that wasn't being used. I know Jeff just brought that up whenever he was speaking. But, or I don't know if it wasn't being used, but I was just noticing it's a large number And there isn't anything really for homeless people here in Sausalito. And we have a place to stay. but it is nice whenever we first get into town because we traveled. and we wanted to come and see Sausalito. We heard a lot of good things about it. And, um, There was nowhere for us to go. There wasn't like a hostel. We could go to San Rafael, which is what we heard as well. We also heard that it's really crowded and We wanted to be in Sausalito. just to see the sights, you know, and not have like, we don't have a lot of money. And so that was what I wanted to bring up. I don't need the full three minutes, Just the homeless fund and what homeless people can do in Sausalito. |
| 00:17:37.54 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Anybody else for banners not on the agenda? see no one approaching the podium we'll move on to |
| 00:17:51.27 | Jill Hoffman | Action minutes, item number three on our agenda, action minutes of the previous meeting. Would anybody like to move or address the action? action minutes from the previous meeting. if they like moved to? |
| 00:18:03.54 | Tom Theodorus | I'll move that we approve the action minutes. If no one has any comments, I don't. I move to approve the action minutes for the meeting, our meeting of March 8, 2016. |
| 00:18:13.84 | Unknown | I'll second it. |
| 00:18:14.98 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? Aye. |
| 00:18:15.83 | Tom Theodorus | Hi. Hi. |
| 00:18:16.96 | Jill Hoffman | Anybody opposed? Okay. Now we're moving. We're moving on to item number four, 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 that specific items be removed from the consent calendar For separate action, in order to request an item be pulled, you must have completed a speaker's card and turned it in to the city clerk. Items will only be removed from the consent calendar by vote of the council. Items removed from the consent counter will be discussed later on the agenda when a public comment will be heard on any item that was removed from the consent calendar. Is there any public comment on whether to remove items from the consent calendar? seeing none do we have any comments from council about the consent calendar |
| 00:19:23.71 | Linda Pfeiffer | I actually have a couple of comments. One is item 4C regarding the second reading and read by title. It doesn't say that it says the number of the ordinance. It doesn't say what the ordinance is. This is on the bicycle parking, peak parking hours. And I had voted no about the peak parking, the bicycle piece. And so I'd like to call that out for a separate vote. Otherwise, I automatically approve it as part of consent calendar. That's fine. The other comment I have is on item 4B, the housing element progress report. I think there was some confusion in the city regarding this and the deadline for the emergency shelter program. and the edits and updates to that. So I guess I just have some questions around that. And if I don't pull this item, I'm not sure when I would get those questions answered in terms of the timeline for the emergency shelter. I think if you have |
| 00:20:33.31 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, okay. If you have just a few questions. |
| 00:20:38.67 | Linda Pfeiffer | you |
| 00:20:38.96 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:20:39.01 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:20:39.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:20:39.04 | Linda Pfeiffer | It's just the timeframe. I'd just like to know what the timeframe is for the city residents when they will see the changes that were proposed last year and that prompted then mayor Theodorus to create that working group. |
| 00:20:39.06 | Jill Hoffman | If you can ask them now, then that's fine, I think. |
| 00:21:03.19 | Linda Pfeiffer | Mayor, you want to respond to that? |
| 00:21:04.80 | Jill Hoffman | Danny, are you gonna respond to that? |
| 00:21:06.14 | Unknown | We'll respond to that. Awesome. Thank you. Good evening, council members. the um The item is coming before the Planning Commission at their March 30th meeting, and that would be the proposed amendments that were initially provided to the Planning Commission, but then since the working group has met, there are some additional possible amendments that will also be looked at by the Planning Commission on March 30th. following that meeting if the if the Planning Commission recommends for going to the City Council, then it'll come probably at your second meeting in April. |
| 00:21:42.22 | Linda Pfeiffer | So just a clarification. So the first amendments you refer to that were known to us last year from the state, those, of course, I had concerns about because they removed some safeguards we had with respect to management, you know, annual plans and stuff like this. The other amendments, though, were the things that the community was very concerned about with respect to the designation of the zones. So is that what you're referring to that on March 30th the Planning Commission will be presented with those new amendments yes not not the state amendments just not just the state amendments not just that would be an option too yes thank you and |
| 00:22:12.97 | Adam Politzer | Yes. |
| 00:22:16.57 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:22:16.58 | Unknown | Not just, so that would be an addition to, yes. |
| 00:22:18.64 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:22:19.97 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:22:19.97 | Jill Hoffman | Danny, that'll become available. The agenda for the planning commission will come out. |
| 00:22:24.19 | Unknown | At the end of this, for the Planning Commission, end of this week, the packet will go out, including the agenda for March 30th. |
| 00:22:26.99 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 00:22:29.58 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:22:29.61 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:22:31.19 | Linda Pfeiffer | and it will be posted online. Can we put it on the front of the website so it's easy for people to access? |
| 00:22:38.96 | Unknown | I believe so. I mean, it'll be included in the Planning Commission agendas. |
| 00:22:42.96 | Linda Pfeiffer | Right. But if you could put it as a hot topic, I think we need it as a hot topic on the on the website. So it's easy for people to access. |
| 00:22:48.64 | Jill Hoffman | easy for people to add. |
| 00:22:49.69 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:22:49.72 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:22:49.74 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:22:49.78 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 00:22:49.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:22:51.48 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yes. |
| 00:22:52.44 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:22:53.20 | Tom Theodorus | I do want to clarify something. The minutes reflect in my memory is that you know we voted on two bicycle things last time in the last one was about 115 first one was on the bicycle congestion plan which you voted no but the minutes reflect that you voted yes on the thing that we're voting on tonight which is the peak parking restriction. So be clear and you can thank you. |
| 00:23:11.63 | Linda Pfeiffer | So be clear. Thank you very much for clarifying that. And since then, I've done a little bit more research on the topic. And I'm concerned about peak hours, I think of in terms of like three to four hours, but this goes from 11 to seven o'clock at night. And it seems like not a peak hour, it seems like all day. So I bet thanks for that clarification. Yeah. |
| 00:23:34.97 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 00:23:35.20 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:23:35.25 | Jill Hoffman | We can do that by separate vote? Okay. Okay. So at this time, would anybody like to move to approve the consent calendar with regard to items 4A and 4B? |
| 00:23:50.15 | Unknown | So moved. |
| 00:23:51.69 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? |
| 00:23:52.50 | Unknown | Thank you. Bye. |
| 00:23:52.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right. And would anybody like to make a motion to approve the consent calendar item? C, which refers to the second read and reading and read by title only an ordinance of the city council of the city of Sausalito, emitting title 15, chapter 15.13 of the Sausalito Municipal Code. |
| 00:24:14.91 | Unknown | So moved. |
| 00:24:14.99 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All in favor? |
| 00:24:18.07 | Unknown | Bye-bye. |
| 00:24:18.52 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE TODAY. Oh, right. Yes. Council Member Pfeiffer would like to vote. Thank you. Yeah. |
| 00:24:21.52 | Unknown | you know, |
| 00:24:21.61 | Tom Theodorus | Councilmember Pfeiffer would like to vote. Thank you. What? |
| 00:24:26.74 | Jill Hoffman | Um, Okay, all in favor, aye. Aye. Yeah, and then opposed. |
| 00:24:28.04 | Tom Theodorus | OKAY. Aye. Yeah, and then opposed. Bye. |
| 00:24:33.23 | Jill Hoffman | No. Is that clear? Okay, I think we got it. Alrighty, moving right along. Um, moving on to item six on the agenda business items. This is an update from the National Park Service on the Presidio that Yacht Club Muir Woods shuttle reservation system. And I have on my agenda that Darren Brown and Steve Kazarski from National Park Service? Kazarski. Kazarski? That's correct. And you, sir, are? |
| 00:25:00.47 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:25:00.51 | Councilmember Weiner | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:25:00.67 | Steve Kozurski | Thank you. |
| 00:25:00.69 | Councilmember Weiner | Yes. |
| 00:25:00.91 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:25:04.78 | Steve Kozurski | I'm Steve Kozurski of the National Park Service and I'm joined by my colleague, Darren Brown. |
| 00:25:05.87 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:25:05.97 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:25:06.14 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:25:09.58 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you for coming. |
| 00:25:09.68 | Steve Kozurski | Thank you. coming you Thank you. And I'm a Berkeley resident, but we're both here as National Park Service staffers tonight. |
| 00:25:13.82 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. after. |
| 00:25:16.37 | Councilmember Weiner | Oh, very good. |
| 00:25:16.40 | Steve Kozurski | Thank you. That's pretty good. Mayor Hoffman, council members, city staff, and ladies and gentlemen, Uh, Darren and I are representing our National Park Service team here tonight. Particularly, we bring greetings from our Park Superintendent Christine Lennertz, Deputy Aaron Roth, Planning Chief Brian Aviles, Community Affairs Chief Howard Levitt, and many other team members, they are all attending a public meeting in San Mateo County tonight dealing with proposed rulemaking on dog walking. And I know Christine and others wish they could be here with you tonight, and I'm sure they'll be here in council chambers with you again in the future. But Darren and I are representing the park tonight. Among other things, we'll also be providing some brief written comments to you for the record that summarize the bullets that you hear tonight, and also provide answers to any questions that we can't answer tonight as well. So with that. |
| 00:26:15.80 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:26:16.09 | Steve Kozurski | Thank you. Darren and I have an update-style brief presentation for you that follows up our regular discussions with city staff and occasionally with council members as well. That occurs really on an annual basis. First, briefly on dog management and rulemaking. Neither Darren and I can speak specifically on that subject tonight, but you should know that Park already has two public discussions scheduled for taking place within city limits, and those include both meetings at the Bay Model coming up on March 23rd from 6 to 8 p.m., and then again on March 30th from 6 to 8 p.m. There's more specific information available on our Park website in addition to information you may have already received, which is www.nps.gov backslash goga. And so there's opportunities for public comment and learning about dog rulemaking that way. |
| 00:26:26.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:27:17.99 | Tom Theodorus | Is the place pay model? Yes. |
| 00:27:19.69 | Steve Kozurski | Yes. That would help. Yes. The location is bay model for both meetings. I believe the second meeting was recently updated for that location to be at the bay model. And those directions and times are also on the website. I think we can make sure that's double checked for council as well. On other matters, there are a few brief updates for you. First, on the Fort Baker waterfront, I've been working as a park staffer since 2000 at Fort Baker on the VISTA and the panels that are behind you. I know there's interest in a couple of subjects. I want to let you know that last October, October 2015, the park and representatives of Travis Air Force Base executed a park service permit that provided for the continued operation of the Travis Sailing Center and Marina through March of 2017, and that could be extended as well. That provides for continuous operation. We hadn't had an agreement with Travis for a while, and so we thought that was an important information update to share with you. Thank you. The marina is also known by the name Presidio Yacht Club, and there's also the Yacht Club organization beneath that. But our formal relationship is always with Travis Air Force Base, as it has been since 2002. We're also continuing to work through a number of internal park service issues about the long term uh, boat shop and marina options in terms of tenancies and partnerships. We're hoping to be able to finalize a request for qualifications, request for proposals type process that we've been thinking about for a while. We haven't finalized all of those plans. We've previously told council members and staff that we would make sure that the city, once that sequence was finalized, would be one of the first organizations and partners to know on how that process will work and want to reaffirm that pledge to you here tonight. we don't have our final sort of way forward on that subject completely figured out on the Park Service side, and so that's why I can't talk specifically anymore about that in terms of how that would work. On other waterfront issues, in December 2015, you may have noticed that we finished our major Satterley Road project in and around the waterfront. It's actually surrounding the marina area. We finished our trail connections and native plant installation for that project that took place more than a year. It's another milestone for us in that it involved our Parks Conservancy Conservation Corps North Bay and a number of partners. It also reflected the last special spending that we did as part of the base closure era. Some of you may recall that we received more than $26 million of special appropriations over 10 federal fiscal years from our fiscal year 2000 through 2010. We've now officially expended all of those monies on the infrastructure and site improvements that helped bring Fort Baker up to the modern era that you see now. And so that was an important milestone for us. So we finished that in December. Also on the utility side, we've started working with our colleagues in the Sausalito Marin City Sanitary District. You may know that the plant is located on Fort Baker Federal Enclave lands. It's been there since the Army era, beginning in the early 1950s. The existing Army era easement is expiring next year in 2017, and so we've started working with that district. on the successor agreement that will accommodate the rebuilding of the plant at that location for a long period of time, and also may pilot a simple operating partnership where skilled district staff can provide some assistance to the park service operations of our own sanitary sewer collection system at Fort Baker and the Marin Headlands. not too dissimilar to the relationship that you have developed over a long period of time with the district for certain city-owned sanitary sewer facilities. So we'll be working with the district staff and board to finalize those arrangements. Finally, representing some of our tenant and partnerships at Fort Baker specifically, you should know that both the Bay Area Discovery Museum and the Cavallo Point Lodge or Fort Baker Retreat Group have started to work with us on their next generation of facility rehabilitation and improvements that are part of their existing tenancy agreements for both the BADM campus and on the Lodge side of the street as well. So we've just started that with the representatives of those organizations as well. Now I invite my colleague Darren Brown to finish up with some brief remarks on transportation issues. |
| 00:32:31.22 | Darren Brown | Thank you very much, Madam Mayor, members of the council, Darren Brown. I'm a transportation planner with the National Park Service. Three updates for you, Muirwood shuttle and specifically some of the expansions that have gone on last year into Sausalito, an update on the Muirwood's reservation system. as well as an update on the Vista Point Trail over in Fort Baker. So on the Muirwood shuttle, just a little history for people on the Muirwood shuttle. The service started back in 2005. We just ended our 11th season in operation. It has a ridership. It's gone really, it's been one of the most successful, if not the successful system in the Marin transit portfolio, and it has gone exponentially up from about 10,000 riders per year in 2006 up to 110,000 trips last year. And what that equates to as far as traffic reduction is about 35,000 vehicles reduced per year out of Tam Junction going up to Muir Woods. And so it is really an amazing service as far as a partnership. We share that service financially with Marin Transit. Marin Transit is the operator of that. They're the agency that actually manages the service as well as approves any budget, schedule, operates it day-to-day. But we're a financial partner. We pay for half of the service. They pay for half of the service. And then we do planning together as well. In 2015, we did pilot a expansion of the service for about eight weeks in the summer, from late mid-June to mid-19th. August and the expansion comprised, was comprised of weekday service, the 66F that comes into Sausalito from Muir Woods. It has about 10 runs per day and so we expanded it through that summer period. What that allows Marin Transit to do is they usually have to lay off drivers during the time when the school bus service stops and when it restarts. This basically fills that gap for their school bus drivers. So it allows them to have a consistency in their staffing so it helps their service overall. And then it also fits in with our need of really having a very modest service during the summer weekdays. So I can answer any questions on that after I get done. Muirwood's system. We, as I'm sure all of you know, there was a very long, not a long debate, but an intense debate about Muir Woods reservation and visitation and other things around Muir Woods over the last year. We were very happy to have gotten to a consensus with the community, with a task force that Congressman Huffman convened. We were very thrilled that we got to a consensus within that ad hoc group, which had a number of members on it from the community. And we signed an MOU last year and then also completed the NEPA process for the reservation system. So that was 2015 in a nutshell. We kind of went from really kind of consternation to really an understanding with the community, we believe. With where we're going with that, we signed the MOU and then we completed the NEPA documents. In 2016, we intend to continue doing the planning for the reservation system, developing all the financial plans and releasing the requests for proposals later this year, and then we intend to have a contractor on board to operate that reservation system in mid to late 2017. So what that means is we have a period of time where we still have a significant amount of traffic out there, heavy demand, and we've employed a number of additional measures on top of what we already have. We've added some law enforcement, and we're going to also add some parking management folks to try to help with this period. We're in between now when we've reduced some of the parking along the road, which we just completed, and when the reservation system is complete. And then lastly, the Vista Point Trail. For those of you who don't know, the Vista Point Trail is the old historic road that goes from Caltrans' Vista Point off of the back there and then goes down into Marin or into the Fort Baker. The proposal of the project would be to upgrade that historic road to a multi-use path and would allow people who now currently have to go down Alexander Avenue, it would give them an option to go down into Fort Baker, enjoy Fort Baker, and also to get off Alexander Avenue off the bike lane there. The status of that, we've had a number of problems or we've run into a number of issues with lead contamination in the site because of its adjacency to the bridge. And we're currently testing and finding the extent of that contamination and developing a plan to clean up the lead as a part of the project. We think that we're getting a good handle on that and a good remediation strategy for that. Along with that, we will complete NEPA in the spring for that project and then go directly into the design phase for that project. The primary hurdle on actually getting to implementation, which we should be ready to get to in 2017, is funding. We have some monies set aside for the construction of it, but we're still about a million dollars short. It's a fairly expensive project. It's about $2 million capital cost. And right now we have not been able to identify beyond the money we've set aside, the additional capital money. And so we're working with, we'd like to work with, continue to work with the city, the state, and whoever else, San Francisco, there's a number of partners that we're going to be working with to try and raise this money through grants and other sources. So that's our little update, and we're available for any questions you might have. |
| 00:39:22.67 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:39:22.73 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yes, thank you and welcome. Thank you for the presentation. So I just have a couple questions about the Muir Woods shuttle. It's my understanding it began service in Sausalito in 2007. Can you confirm that? |
| 00:39:24.32 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. |
| 00:39:40.69 | Darren Brown | I have to get back to you. I know that the service started in 2005, but it might have, the first two years might have not come down. It was Marin City. It's entirely possible. |
| 00:39:44.81 | Linda Pfeiffer | you It was Marin City. It went to Marin City. It didn't come to Sausalito. Thank you. So it started in 2007. The decision to come to Sausalito, was that a decision that was shared with the council at the time? Was it discussed with city staff? I'm just curious as to what process was used, and I have a follow-up question. |
| 00:39:48.57 | Darren Brown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:40:08.72 | Darren Brown | Sure. My understanding, I discussed it with Marin Transit staff today. They have an annual process where they look at the year before, performance, schedules, budget, everything else, go through an evaluation, then make a decision on what they want to do for the following year. My understanding was before last year, I believe in late 2014, they came to City Sausalito staff and council. I'm going third hand, so I apologize if I'm butchering this. But my understanding is that they met to gauge support or problems with that with the city. Their understanding was that there was support for the city to do that expansion. and then the Marin Transit Board is actually the entity that actually approves that that change so just |
| 00:40:09.51 | Linda Pfeiffer | My understanding is that... |
| 00:40:58.89 | Linda Pfeiffer | So just to clarify, because my question started with the 2007, the start of the, you know, do you know, do you know, okay. I certainly would have been not supportive of expansion of the Muirwood shuttle. Sausalito residents are very concerned about becoming a transit hub and adding that congestion. Certainly expanding to, you know, running every day as opposed to, you know, would be problematic, certainly for me. So I would be interested if you could follow up with me, perhaps with an email with a little bit more detail, like who they met with, who they, you know, who they got support from. would appreciate that and my follow-up question is back in I think 2014 or before you decided to expand from weekday weekend to weekday service you also decided to expand from hourly to every 30 minutes on the weekend. Can you confirm that? And do you know what process, again, was used to inform the council? |
| 00:41:04.95 | Darren Brown | OH. Sorry. |
| 00:41:07.51 | Adam Politzer | . |
| 00:41:45.65 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 00:42:19.55 | Darren Brown | It is a going toward to increasing headways is an action of the Marin Transit Board. I will defer to them on what the process was of changing that. You're specifically speaking of going from hourly headways down to 30-minute headways is the 66, not the 66F, which is not to Sausalito. |
| 00:42:46.47 | Linda Pfeiffer | Right, right. |
| 00:42:50.92 | Darren Brown | Thank you. |
| 00:42:50.94 | Linda Pfeiffer | I looked at your annual report and I thought it was Sausalito because they were talking about how the writership from Sausalito had expanded so much it justified coming every 30 minutes during a certain period of time. |
| 00:43:07.91 | Darren Brown | I can confer with Marin Transit staff and I can provide a better information. Really, as they're the operators and the decision makers on the service, they kind of run that coordination with the city. |
| 00:43:18.63 | Linda Pfeiffer | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:43:18.71 | Adam Politzer | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:43:20.91 | Linda Pfeiffer | coordination with the city so it sounds like so I I'd look forward in my name is Linda Pfeiffer by the way I'd love to get that email with a little bit more detail as to who Who the National Park Service met with and on the council or staff and and how you got support for that Or we did not meet with Gotcha, okay, we're in transit and then I guess it would have been our, I know we have an MTC representative, I guess, from this council who might have reported that, which I don't recall ever happening. Thank you. |
| 00:43:38.91 | Darren Brown | We did not meet with the city. Not in transit. |
| 00:43:55.89 | Tom Theodorus | Yeah. This is for Steve. And back to the original. You said that you're renewing the lease with Travis Air Force Base. Are there any changes in the terms? I mean, are you doing anything differently there with them? Or are you just extending and making that legal in terms of the term? |
| 00:43:56.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:43:56.78 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:43:56.83 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:44:08.04 | Steve Kozurski | I mean, |
| 00:44:12.55 | Steve Kozurski | I would say it was largely an extension of the arrangement that existed. We did have clarification with them on the status of liveaboards, which was a vexing issue given the condition of the facility. But I believe as of today all of the facilities are not going to be able to do that. |
| 00:44:18.76 | Tom Theodorus | and we |
| 00:44:35.61 | Steve Kozurski | all liveaboards have actually left. Was that? Left, I believe so. Voluntarily? I believe so. Okay, that's interesting. But otherwise, the Air Force is still operating the facility as they have to. And the Presidio Yacht Club will, |
| 00:44:39.05 | Tom Theodorus | Was that right? Voluntarily? I believe so. Okay. But otherwise, And the Presidio yacht club will operate as it has been through through 2017. |
| 00:44:54.63 | Steve Kozurski | The Air Force provides a home, essentially a home for the Presidio Yacht Club as a separate organization to be part of that arrangement. |
| 00:44:57.50 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:45:04.25 | Steve Kozurski | Thank you. |
| 00:45:04.66 | Tom Theodorus | And then you mentioned some of the proposed changes with Cavallo Point and the lodge there and such. Are there any significant changes? You said if it's pursuant to their lease. |
| 00:45:14.41 | Steve Kozurski | What there are, on the Bay Area Discovery Museum side, in particular, there's an un-rehabilitated building right at the entry point that the Park Service and BADM shared in the past for storage. It actually was historically the telephone exchange for Fort Baker. So that is an opportunity to discuss. There are also some follow-up work on buildings that they occupy within the campus, and they're starting a as many institutions do over periods of time, rethinking how their program is organized within the campus. On the lodge side of the fence, there is an unrehabilitated building in the existing leasehold, the historic guardhouse that's right at the entry of the complex. And there are also two large historic buildings, the historic hospital at the top of the street and a brick barracks building, which you see as you go through the complex. They've been... painted and sort of stabilized as part of the original development back in 2006 to 2008, but they're not occupied in a conventional sense. So that square footage is represented in our agreements with the lodge, and it's something that they're starting to look at along with the Park Service. |
| 00:46:34.78 | Tom Theodorus | Will there be a public process associated with that, or are they allowed to do that pursuant to their lease? Because they're changing some of these buildings, historic buildings. |
| 00:46:41.96 | Steve Kozurski | buildings historic yes there there would we've already started some a public step on historic preservation that some that there were invitations extended I believe that there ex that going into those buildings is essentially accommodated under our existing arrangements with them for example in the basic environmental documents the EIS that we have in place for Fort Baker. We would confirm this as individual projects take shape, but it's generally in the context of our lease and development agreement with them. |
| 00:47:19.70 | Tom Theodorus | follow up one last with Steve and just and we'd like if there's any public notice, we'd like to be part of that. And we may include that with our Fort Baker task force next time we meet as task force, because that'd be something we'd want to take a keep keep an eye on. Yeah. |
| 00:47:22.20 | Steve Kozurski | Thank you. |
| 00:47:27.92 | Steve Kozurski | Yeah. |
| 00:47:31.40 | Steve Kozurski | Keep an eye on you. And I know at Cavallo Point, our Fort Baker Retreat Group LLC knows many of you and keeps you apprised as when things start getting specific, and it would be the same way with the Bay Area Discovery Museum as well. |
| 00:47:32.56 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 00:47:32.60 | Tom Theodorus | Yeah. |
| 00:47:48.21 | Tom Theodorus | And I know I won't get a direct answer on this because you can't, but I have to ask this question. On the Travis Air Force Base and the, you know, you had the request for expression of interest, et cetera, and you need at some point there will be an RF something or other. |
| 00:47:58.13 | Steve Kozurski | Correct. |
| 00:48:01.69 | Steve Kozurski | We anticipate it will be a request for qualifications, request proposals or something similar to |
| 00:48:07.38 | Tom Theodorus | Any idea of the timeline when we might expect that? |
| 00:48:10.67 | Steve Kozurski | It's hard for me to predict that. My previous personal thoughts of that have been wildly inaccurate in the past. We're still hoping to enter into this process this calendar year. |
| 00:48:23.02 | Unknown | Thank you. Question on the mule woods. That runs once an hour. Is that what it usually runs, I believe? |
| 00:48:33.13 | Darren Brown | to Sausalito? |
| 00:48:34.12 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:48:34.48 | Darren Brown | On the weekdays, I believe it is about once every 45 to 50 minutes. And then the weekends, it's a little bit more frequent than that. |
| 00:48:39.79 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:48:43.42 | Unknown | Yeah, well, don't forget, traffic's a lot heavier on that. And I believe the 66 bus was replaced by now the 17, is that correct? |
| 00:48:54.04 | Darren Brown | No, I don't believe so. No, the 66 is still, the 66 and 66F are still since just the Mural Shuttle. |
| 00:49:04.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:49:04.23 | Unknown | you're, Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:49:05.46 | Darren Brown | Thank you. |
| 00:49:05.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:49:05.55 | Darren Brown | Yeah. |
| 00:49:08.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:49:08.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:49:08.92 | Unknown | Yeah. Right. Love you. |
| 00:49:11.86 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I want to first thank you for coming tonight. You know, Fort Baker, in my opinion, looks great. I mean, there's been a lot of great improvements. You know, it's also has a long and very close relationship to what goes on at Fort Baker. And one of the things we're struggling with now, we've been struggling with for the past couple years, is the bicycle management and bicycle congestion management. One piece of the puzzle that we haven't root you know looped in I think to an effective degree is Fort Baker we had the bridge district we talked to them obviously because of the ferry but also because of the access across the bridge and the access point and so one of the things that I wish we could explore better part of it is the Bay Vista trail one of the key, is that that's a much safer route for people to come down from the bridge into Fort Baker and also into Sausalito. So anything, you know, that we can do, that we can coordinate with you to move that along to a faster resolution, and also alternatives for this season for routing people through signage or whatever method we can do it down into Fort Baker as opposed to coming down that hill into this town particularly for families and so I was wondering if there's a particular person or if there's anybody at the National Park Service with regard to Fort Baker this working on bicycle management that we could coordinate with specifically as it relates to that piece of the puzzle as people sort of route down into Sausalito from the bridge. And I apologize for bringing this on you right now, but you're here, so I thought I'd ask. |
| 00:50:49.65 | Darren Brown | I thought I'd ask. So let me try to get a, this season you were hoping to route them to go left on to, toward the tunnel, and then go route down. |
| 00:51:03.82 | Jill Hoffman | Or, yeah, or whatever method, you know, you guys think is feasible and safe for, particularly for families, for children that are trying to work their way down into, and a particular person that might be a point of contact that we could work with. Sure, go ahead. |
| 00:51:20.16 | Tom Theodorus | I'm the bicycle and pet committee works directly with Andrea Lucas, who's the planning on that particular part. And then at a higher level, she works for the planning director, Brian Aviles. And we try to touch base with him. So we we keep in contact. And then at the highest level with with their superintendent and stuff, we try to you know, we've gotten Senator McGuire and such, but we do have a point person on that. And they just had a report yesterday at the bike and pet committee. I'm just from our point. So we have contact that doesn't mean Senator McGuire and such but we do have a point person on that and they just had a report yesterday at the bike and pet committee and just from our point that we have contact that doesn't mean we can't do more but we would like to have more contact identified context within at different levels here. |
| 00:51:25.09 | Jill Hoffman | who's the plan? Okay. |
| 00:51:47.02 | Adam Politzer | you |
| 00:51:47.07 | Councilmember Weiner | from our point that we have. |
| 00:51:48.41 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:51:51.31 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:51:51.32 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:51:51.34 | Darren Brown | We would like to. |
| 00:51:51.85 | Jill Hoffman | And, |
| 00:51:52.07 | Darren Brown | Thank you. |
| 00:51:52.12 | Jill Hoffman | right? |
| 00:51:52.29 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:51:52.39 | Darren Brown | Thank you. |
| 00:51:52.52 | Jill Hoffman | I'm telling you. |
| 00:51:52.73 | Darren Brown | Thank you. |
| 00:51:52.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:51:56.05 | Darren Brown | I love it when a councilman knows our organization as well as we do. I was trying to think through whether Andrea, myself, or Steve, any of us three would actually be fine for that. But yeah, Andrea is already embedded in that. I think that she's a fantastic point of contact. And then if she needs to bring me or Steve in, she can do that. |
| 00:51:59.24 | Tom Theodorus | as we do. That was great. Yeah, I was trying to think. |
| 00:52:08.17 | Jill Hoffman | for that. |
| 00:52:09.04 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:52:09.06 | Steve Kozurski | Yeah. |
| 00:52:09.31 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not. |
| 00:52:17.70 | Steve Kozurski | Okay, great. In areas? |
| 00:52:18.90 | Darren Brown | Thank you. |
| 00:52:19.74 | Steve Kozurski | There is a continuous route. We call it Lower Consulman Road. The difficulty is that the starting point of that route is not the best capture point for bicycle traffic because you have to essentially start on the west side of the bridge, and it requires an awkward transition, in most cases carrying your bike down steps and up steps. So that's one of the big improvements of the project that's being talked about is the catchment area We'll be right back. most cases carrying your bike down steps and up steps. So that's one of the big improvements of the project that's being talked about is the catchment area will be on the Vista Point side. Right, yeah. And it will funnel traffic on this new route that then collects back into the existing Consulman Road route at the bottom where it enters Fort Baker. |
| 00:52:31.59 | Adam Politzer | have. |
| 00:52:36.45 | Adam Politzer | you |
| 00:52:36.50 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:52:36.97 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:52:51.74 | Jill Hoffman | Right, yeah. |
| 00:53:03.26 | Steve Kozurski | So unfortunately right now most bicyclists have to sort of run a gauntlet to get onto that pathway. Thank you. |
| 00:53:10.93 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:53:11.35 | Steve Kozurski | But there is an alternative that gets you into Fort Baker compared to driving down Alexander Avenue. It's just not a very friendly route. Thank you. |
| 00:53:21.67 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. Any other questions from Councilor? No? Public comment on this issue? Yes, Alice Merrill approaching the podium. |
| 00:53:35.14 | Alice Merrill | Hi. I'd just like to put my two cents worth into the boat yard down there. That it not be used for some commercial purposes like bicycle storage or whatever. That it really be kept used for boats, for boat building. Whether it's a learning center or there's so many boat builders around here that would love a shop. I'm hoping that it gets used for a continued use for real honest to goodness boats instead of being turned into a tourist kind of thing. Thank you. |
| 00:54:15.57 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yes, Winnie. |
| 00:54:19.76 | Winona Conopatha | I also volunteer at the Ice House, so I'm very familiar with the transit system to Muir Woods because majority of the time, the number one question asked by a tourist is, how can I get to Muir Woods? And during this time, actually, Councilman Herb Weiner is actually true. There is no 66 or 66F running. It is the stagecoach, and I've several times had to have people understand what is involved in having to go up to panoramic highway and then walk down do the hike and then try to catch it back up I just wanted to |
| 00:54:59.67 | Darren Brown | Thank you. Now I think I understand where the miscommunication there was. So as you guys probably know, the 66 and 66F, the Muirwood shuttle, actually doesn't run most of the year, which does create these operational hiccups in the service where people assume that such a busy destination would have 365-day-a-year public transit. We don't, and so you're right. The 17 is the way to get there when the Muirwood shuttle doesn't actually run and then people have to get off at Panoramic Highway and then hike down. |
| 00:55:33.43 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Any other questions for? Oh, sorry. Any other public comment? No. Yes. Yes, sir. Just under the wire. |
| 00:55:47.51 | Unknown | I believe the way I understand it is, if you get off the bridge on the weekend, Friday night, Saturday, Sunday, it's very easy to go down because you come off the left side on the bridge. |
| 00:55:58.53 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:55:58.54 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:55:58.56 | Linda Pfeiffer | Sir, up here. Thank you. All right. you Thank you. THE FAMILY. |
| 00:56:00.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:56:00.38 | Linda Pfeiffer | Could you speak into the microphone? |
| 00:56:00.42 | Unknown | Could you... Can I repeat the microphone? Sorry, okay, I'll repeat it. When you come off the bridge on a bicycle, Fridays, afternoon, Saturday, and Sunday, all the bicycle traffic is on the left side of the bridge. So when you come out, the easiest way is actually to take the road down into Fort Baker. not because you're not on the right hand side. I just want to clarify that. |
| 00:56:21.43 | Adam Politzer | because you're not. |
| 00:56:25.58 | Unknown | If the bridge were to be opened all the time for the bikes on the left, pedestrians on the right, the best way is what we have right now, what's in existence right now, |
| 00:56:37.17 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. Thank you, sir. That's good information. |
| 00:56:41.19 | Steve Kozurski | That's absolutely correct. And it's also subject to change and where people want to go, which is also typically on the Vista Point side for a little break, too. And so it's confusing for people depending on how the – the particular bikeways are managed on the bridge schedule versus a sort of a destination, overlook type approach. That's the source of confusion for everybody. |
| 00:57:11.06 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, any other public comment? Nope. Seeing none, any council discussion? |
| 00:57:18.87 | Linda Pfeiffer | I have a real quick question I forgot to ask. Okay. Sure. So this, I don't know who would answer this or respond, but I know that there were a couple veterans who were living on boats at Ayala Cove, Horseshoe Cove. Horseshoe Cove. And I know that there was hope given the historic roots of the Presidio Yacht Club and the historic roots with the military and Travis, that those vets would be allowed to continue living on their boats. And I was wondering if you could comment on that. |
| 00:57:35.61 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, yeah, like, THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:58:00.30 | Steve Kozurski | We in the Air Force did not move or require any of the liveaboards to relocate. I believe they left on their own volition this summer. And I don't believe today that there are any liveaboards left at Fort Baker. |
| 00:58:22.22 | Linda Pfeiffer | So you weren't quite into the microphone. So you said you thought that they left on their own volition. I heard that the slip fees were increased tremendously, and maybe that's not correct, to the point where they could not afford them anymore. And I was wondering if that was the case, and if so, could there be any adjustments for vets? I know BCDC allows 10% |
| 00:58:25.74 | Steve Kozurski | Oh, I'm sorry. . Thank you. |
| 00:58:27.97 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 00:58:51.21 | Steve Kozurski | Peace. ACDC allows. I'm not aware of what the Air Force slip fees were or are today. That's an Air Force management issue, and we actually didn't discuss that with them. And so I actually do not know if there was any relationship whatsoever in slip fees and their departures. |
| 00:59:13.18 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. I'll follow up, I guess, with Travis then on that one. Thank you. |
| 00:59:19.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:59:19.19 | Linda Pfeiffer | . |
| 00:59:19.26 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:59:19.46 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. you |
| 00:59:19.59 | Jill Hoffman | Any council discussion? |
| 00:59:23.22 | Unknown | No. Thank you. |
| 00:59:24.88 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah, I have a comment. So we've heard loud and clear from Sauce Little residents that they're very concerned about Sauce Little turning into a transit hub, particularly a tourist transit hub. They don't want that to happen. There's grave concern about the reservation system. My understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong there's no cap on that in terms of the number of people who can make reservations the fact that this Muirwood shuttle started in 2007 in Sausalito and I wasn't on council at that time but I was a resident and I and I know that I would have liked to have known about that. And the fact that it has expanded from hourly to every 30 minutes, just as recently as last year when I am on the council, and I had expressed earlier concern about that and wasn't informed. And the fact that it has now expanded from weekends to weekdays, multiple 10 runs per day between mid-June and August, and you know that's going to expand because they always do. It just feels like we are turning into a tourist transit hub, and this is of grave concern to me, and I want to know we need leadership from the council as to how we can stop this frankly and we also need clarity on how we can engage the public to prevent this trend from happening and as for me I would like very much to know who on the council knew about this who was our representative and who if any on city staff if at all knew about this to suggest support for this sort of thing because I think the the residents of Sausalito would like to know that information |
| 01:01:33.24 | Tom Theodorus | I want to thank you both for coming and actually going beyond and listing the whole list of issues because we have six or eight of them and I really appreciate you taking the time today and doing that. And, you know, we need to, I think you were here, it was last year, I believe, and to have you maybe a little bit more often because these are a lot of issues that we want to keep together going. So I just want to thank you both for taking the time tonight to come here and to all your colleagues who will help brief you I'm sure and they're out having fun with in San Mateo but we're glad you're here. |
| 01:02:06.74 | Unknown | Yeah, I also want to thank you. That's just one council person's opinion of the Mule Woods. I think it's a wonderful thing that you've done. Saves a lot of automobiles from going in there. |
| 01:02:12.68 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:02:22.97 | Unknown | And it's the right thing to do. |
| 01:02:29.03 | Ray Whitty | just to thank you for the update. |
| 01:02:31.70 | Jill Hoffman | Again, thank you for coming. As I said, there's a very close relationship, a longstanding relationship between Sausalito and Fort Baker. So we keep an understandably close eye on what goes on over there. And like I said, I think it's looking great. It looks like it's very well managed and, you know, it's moving along great. I will make comment, though, that we in Sausalito are very concerned about the increasing congestion in our town. And, you know, it's moving along great. Don't believe that the residents of Sausalito want our town Characterized as a transit hub or a tourist transit hub. We're concerned about the increasing congestion imposed on us by other entities can you know in Particular the Golden Gate Transit system trying to turn us into transit hub And other business entities including the bike companies imposing their business model on us and expecting the residents to Support that in an unsustainable manner manner so anytime you increase any kind of traffic buses or congestion in our town we keep a close eye on that we like things that reduce cars and reduce traffic but we don't like things that increase or encourage people to come to our town and park here and take a bus out to mere woods. There may be better alternatives for that and later stops along the way. Perhaps that could be explored, but but it in keeping with that, we're very happy that you came and thank you for working with us. And I do want to make |
| 01:03:54.81 | Tom Theodorus | I DO WANT TO REMIND, BECAUSE THIS IS A THING THAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, USE, ALTHOUGH WE ALSO WANT TO COOPERATE. BUT I DO WANT TO ADD A MAME, THIS COUNCIL IN THE LAST YEAR, A YEAR AND A HALF, SENT A LETTER TO THE PARK SERVICE ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT WE IN ANY PLANS, PARTICULARLY AROUND THE MIRE WOODS, THAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT ANY traffic congestion. We put it on the record that this is our concern. We've done this formally. We did that as a council. I want to remind. But I also, this has been going on since 2007. I've had zero complaints. This is something that the residents of Sausalito use. And one of the things that we have to bear in mind, this is operated by Marin Transit. Historically, we have concerns about tour buses and such, but we're we're very supportive of public transit. This is part of public transit. So while we have to watch it, we want you there. That's why we invited you tonight. We I just want to be clear that we have actually looked at this and taken action with in sending our letter. |
| 01:04:55.71 | Linda Pfeiffer | In a quick rebuttal, if I may, Mayor Hoffman, the letter that I recall, I don't recall anything from this council that expressed concern about the Muir Woods shuttle. And I know that we've expressed concern about congestion, but the Muir Woods shuttle, but Muir Woods, yes, but not the Muir, specifically this Muir Woods shuttle. The fact that it started in Sausalito just in 2007, it has expanded and continued to expand with no transparency and no visibility on this. shuttle the fact that it started in Sausalito just in 2007 it has expanded and continued to say to expand with no transparency and no visibility on this council certainly not with me certainly not with the public the fact that in the ice house downtown the number one question according to the resident who spoke is how do I get to Muir Woods that is I mean, I'm just shocked at that, that that is the number one question. It really, you know, makes me very concerned as to the direction that we're going in here. You know, clearly we don't want people, you know, driving here or what have you, dumping whatever and jumping on shuttles to go to go to Muir Woods and again with the reservation system having no cap is another concern so some concerns |
| 01:05:53.79 | Adam Politzer | here. |
| 01:06:13.22 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. But thank you for coming and thank you for answering all of our questions. Our last comment, because we're, |
| 01:06:13.28 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:06:13.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:16.30 | Jill Hoffman | Our last comment, because we are on schedule. |
| 01:06:21.06 | Unknown | No, I want to make a comment anyway. By the way, most of the, why they ask when they go to the ice house, is when they get off the ferry, the first place they ask is, where can I get the mulewoods settled? So we send them down to the ice house, which is where the bus stop is, and it's much easier to send them down to the ice house. So when they come in, that's why they ask, because that's where we send them down. All right. |
| 01:06:47.93 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. I do have a comment. So they're taking the ferry, and as a result, we're getting hit with these expanded, huge, massive ferry designs. Of course, I guess there have been changes, so I'm looking forward to seeing what those changes are in the presentation to get clarity on that. But, you know, to think that now we're getting people coming into the ferry not to see Sausalito, but to come and ask, how do I get to Muir Woods? That's called a tourist transit hub. That's a tourist transit hub. And that's not, I don't think that's not the vision or the direction we want to see in Sausalito. Okay, last comment. |
| 01:06:49.24 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:06:51.59 | Unknown | . |
| 01:06:51.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:06:51.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:53.50 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, they're taking it. |
| 01:07:30.49 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:07:30.50 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:07:31.09 | Linda Pfeiffer | Unless. |
| 01:07:32.17 | Unknown | They're coming in. They stay in Sausalito. They find out what time the schedules are. as long as they're not bringing automobiles, that's what we're supposed to be going in that direction. And just so you know, we have less automobiles coming into Sausalito now than we did 10 years ago. And that's one of the reasons. |
| 01:07:53.05 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah, I disagree with that statement completely. You disagree with everything. You disagree with everything. |
| 01:07:53.07 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:07:55.06 | Councilmember Weiner | you |
| 01:07:55.29 | Unknown | . |
| 01:07:55.34 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:07:55.36 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:07:56.32 | Unknown | I'm not sure. you Thank you. So we're just digressing now. you |
| 01:08:00.83 | Jill Hoffman | We finished this up. Thank you. |
| 01:08:08.52 | Steve Kozurski | you |
| 01:08:08.61 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:08:11.58 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. you |
| 01:08:14.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:08:16.99 | Jill Hoffman | which is very exciting. We're now into item 6B, the mid-year budget. And we have Melanie Purcell from our administrative services director to give us a presentation. |
| 01:08:30.16 | Melanie Purcell | Good evening. Just real quick, wanna give you an update. We met two weeks ago, I presented Fairly high level of detail. Regarding the mid-year amendment, there were a number of questions and I had the opportunity with several council members to answer questions. So I just wanted to give you a rundown of some additional information or perhaps some clarification for you. First of all, we are receiving, one of the requests that we're making of you is to receive. It is not an approve or take any other action other than to acknowledge the receipt of the CAFR, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report from Maize and Associates. That is a review of the 2014-15 financials. Good news, got a clean opinion. That's fabulous. Our fund balance, in fact, went up in the general fund. Just a note that that general fund fund balance, this is not the portion increasing, but the non-spendable includes a $6.3 million loan. Part of the other status, just the continued update of this, our net position is $25.9 million. It's a very good position to be in. It is a reduction. but that reduction is in fact, a calculation methodology change that is not a we incurred new costs and we incurred new liabilities. These are existing liabilities. It's simply a change in the reporting methodology. Specifically, the governmental activities net assets, that is for the general operations of the city, is $17.1 million. It shows a negative $13.3 million in unrestricted assets. That includes $17.7 in net pension liabilities. that is newly recorded on the face of the financials that is not new liability. It's not new debt. It's simply how the national reporting standards have changed. It reflects in all aspects of government finances. It is most notable in the governmental activities. We will see additional decreases to this particular liability in recognition of the irrevocable trust that the Council set up last year. A portion of that has been acknowledged, but there is still a remaining significant amount that will show up in future years. the council has taken many of the right steps to get us in managing this particular liability and in a much better position than many agencies across the country. Business activities increased the net position. The majority of that was highlighted in activities and parking. The second action that we're asking the council to take is to adopt the budget amendment. This will modify the FY 2015-16. This is our checkpoint, everybody calls it the mid-year budget amendment, it's chance to see where things stand in the existing budget. We have strong reserves, obviously noted in the FY14-15 CAFR. Major revenue sources are stable or increasing slightly, and these are reflected in the amendment, specifically sales tax, measure O sales tax, development fees, and TOT. Our operating costs are managed down. That means that we are seeing savings on the expenditure side. We're maintaining a double A bond rating, exceptional for the size community. And... very nice to have we have dedicated revenue sources the actions taken by the council and community and measure f measure 0 have allowed for significant accelerated capital investment This is all. Stuff you're very familiar with. The general fund summary, rather than go through all the lineups, I wanted to highlight real quickly the impact of what's being recommended. We're currently at the FY 14-15 balance you'll see the increase from 9.8 million to 10.4 This would increase the budgeted fund balance by $57,588. This brings us up to 32.93% liquid reserves of the annual budget. That is an exceptional place to be. So it is increasing the city's positive position, not decreasing. Fiscal impacts on other funds, in particular similar analysis, if we look at the proposed change and There are a lot of columns there, but I just wanted to be sure to be specific about where we started in July. What's happened in the current budget and then what we're actually asking you to amend. The amended budget change in that position you'll see then the ending net position is kind of where we're gonna end up. Everyone's in a positive position, I'm not sure. and are increasing or decreasing accordingly the general capital projects. That is the use of funds carried over from prior years for capital work. |
| 01:13:30.06 | Melanie Purcell | The third thing that we are asking you to do as part of the amendment is to create a sewer construction capital fund. This is important for tracking all capital expenditures specifically related to the sewer enterprise. This would be, right now, those funded by the 2015 sewer bond proceeds. It's just under $6.1 million and expected to be expended over the next two years. I should say two and a half years to take the last part of this fiscal year. But this would allow us to track it much more easily and to reflect it separate from the fund where the bond proceeds are held, or paid from, excuse me. This is the sewer construction plan as presented at the time that the bond issues was made. You'll see it totals $6,094,185, just under the 6.1. |
| 01:14:25.65 | Melanie Purcell | I wanted to highlight some of what's going on with all of the conversation about shifting money from this project to that project. It's important to note just how much activity is going on currently. And then we can get into, as we go into the 16-18 budget process, exactly how much capital project is planned. And the council will be asked to consider and prioritize those capital projects. But for now, it's important to note just how much activity is going on. Robin Sweeney Park, 1.6 million. The accessibility improvements already complete is just under 600,000. Accessibility improvements going forward is 600,000. Facilities improvements already done, and this includes activity being finalized in the building around the area is $119,000. Street repairs. already complete. 240,000. And that's not including the remainder of the street repairs proposed in the amendment. And storm drain repairs already complete, $128,000. I don't wanna go into too much detail, you have seen this, but this shows some of the movement between specific projects. and the major impacts would be the street repair, related projects for Throwdown, increasing the budgeted amount by $100,000, decreasing some of the other projects, just basically shifting funds around to fund priorities. |
| 01:16:00.43 | Melanie Purcell | Several of these items, such as the storm drain master plan mapping, will come back for reconsideration as those plans evolve and we're able to have more information. Accessibility projects is a large chunk of the movement. IT strategic master plan is not an increase. It is a movement from the general fund over to the general capital project fund is in fact a decrease with the postponement and reconsideration of the permitting system. We want to do a little more evaluation to have refined numbers for that. So you'll see that the net change is actually a $242,000 reduction. I wanted to, one of the biggest questions that I've been asked is what is going on with Measure O? And so this is a little different look at how We budget things. Please note that In the accounting system, we don't identify measure O projects specifically, and that's something that finance staff and I are working on, seeing if there's a way to tweak things. the accounts so that it'll be a little bit easier. One of the things that makes that a little bit challenging is because we list every single project individually for accounting purposes, and that we use multiple sources of funds. If you'll notice under the accessibility projects, that's just short of $1.2 million. 600,000, you could say, is coming from Measure O, 513 coming from general fund transfer and 55,000 from dedicated funds that would be eligible. Those dedicated funds are the transfers from county measure A, infrastructure. excuse me, the construction impact fund and the other dedicated sources, gas tax. Streets projects, similarly, you'll see that the total streets projects is a million dollars, a portion coming from Measure O, a portion coming from the general fund, and a portion coming from dedicated funds. Also storm drain projects. The amended budget would include $350,500. Majority of projects listed For Measure O, the famous red numbers in the FY 1416 biennial budget, biennial plan, far exceed the dollars available from Measure O. And so some of the first year dollars have been shifted to address accessibility. |
| 01:18:26.89 | Melanie Purcell | Looking forward, our FY16, 17, 17, 18 budget preparations are underway, beginning to meet with departments. Finance committee met yesterday. and has already scheduled their first three meetings for the first week of April to begin an in-depth dive into revenues, capital projects, fund balances, then beginning, then they will start meeting with departments. Updates are scheduled to be made to the city council at each regular meeting beginning in April. We're also recommending that the City Council begin scheduling some dedicated meetings for budget discussions. There's going to be a fair number of pretty meaty policy discussions that this council is going to need to have regarding How much do we want to dedicate to capital? How much do we want to dedicate to reducing pension liability. Are there any changes operationally in terms of service levels from our departments? Those kind of policy initiatives that really are the purview of the council. Finally, at the end of the process, or the beginning from an accounting perspective, the Council will hold the public hearings and adopt the budget in June. That is, they can adopt the 16-18 biennial plan and the 16-17 budget. I'm missing one. The recommendation from staff is to adopt the one resolution in front of you that accepts the FY 2014-15 comprehensive annual financial report, establishes the sewer construction capital fund, and approves the FY 2015-2016 amended budget that includes the funding of that sewer construction capital fund. So any questions? |
| 01:20:09.93 | Linda Pfeiffer | So thank you, Melanie, and also thank you for meeting with me last week. I really appreciate it. You put in a couple hours there. The sewer construction capital fund, I just wanted to confirm that the Sausaledans have had two sewer fee increases, one in, I think, 2009, and another one about five years after that. I think, I wanna say like 2012 or something like this, 2013. Those funds from those sewer fee increases went into, I'm assuming, the sewer construction capital fund, correct? That is that? |
| 01:20:56.32 | Melanie Purcell | The sewer construction capital fund does not exist at this time. Right. That's what I'm asking. |
| 01:21:00.15 | Linda Pfeiffer | Right, but if we create it tonight, is that meant to capture those funds and kind of keep them separate? |
| 01:21:05.82 | Melanie Purcell | No. Keep them separate? Oh, okay. It is intended to capture the bond proceeds. Oh, yeah. Okay. And then that way the actual revenues from rates are kept separate from the bond proceeds. Oh, okay. So it allows for that separation. |
| 01:21:09.72 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay. |
| 01:21:15.42 | Linda Pfeiffer | So it allows for. Okay. And then also there's nothing to prevent us from moving additional general fund dollars into the sewers. |
| 01:21:25.60 | Melanie Purcell | That would be an act of counsel. |
| 01:21:26.19 | Linda Pfeiffer | AN ACTIVITY. Thank you. |
| 01:21:27.32 | Melanie Purcell | . |
| 01:21:27.47 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 01:21:30.52 | Melanie Purcell | Other questions? |
| 01:21:31.49 | Tom Theodorus | No, we had the presentation at our last meeting. We've had all our questions, and then we thank you for meeting with me and other council members. And we've had some in writing, so we've, and for my, I just want to know that we've done this. We're pushing it over, and I think at this moment all my questions have been answered. Thank you. |
| 01:21:51.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:21:53.47 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah, and all my questions have been answered too, except for this one. And I believe when we met last week, you said it was a question for council. And I just wanted to confirm... that 125,000 had been identified as part of this general plan update, the circulation section or something like this. And of course, it's something that in light of all the infrastructure needs we now have, I'm glad it was defunded and I don't think we should be pursuing that. Is that 125,000? |
| 01:22:19.07 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:22:34.06 | Linda Pfeiffer | baked into this that we're voting on tonight, I mean, where did that money go? Or was it just rolled into allocation for the next budget? |
| 01:22:42.55 | Melanie Purcell | It actually rolls, the $125,000 is, as you said, removed from the general plan project account and then distributed into the other needs. So it is, as you say, baked into this amendment. The general plan conversation is part of those media discussions that we're proposing in May. |
| 01:23:01.06 | Linda Pfeiffer | So where did those funds go, $125,000? How were they dispersed? Because I don't remember having that conversation with council in terms of how we were going to redistribute those funds. |
| 01:23:13.38 | Melanie Purcell | This is actually, I'm gonna, for just a moment, kinda take you back to this for a moment. What happens is revenues come into one side of the bucket, and are expended out of the other side of the bucket. So we do not directly correlate necessarily we defunded this and added this, except on such instances where we're looking at a specific project. And those are the actions that have taken place up to this point. This being a comprehensive amendment, you'll see that the $125,000 on the second line of projects is being defunded. and you'll see that for example the accessibility projects city hall beautification are being increased. You're talking about. |
| 01:23:51.80 | Linda Pfeiffer | You're talking about the one that refers to Robin Sweeney Park mobilization. |
| 01:23:56.21 | Melanie Purcell | that includes that portion of that that is already in the current budget portion. Okay. |
| 01:24:04.00 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 01:24:04.09 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 01:24:04.10 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? No? Public comment on budget presentation? See, no, yes. Yes. |
| 01:24:23.17 | Alice Merrill | I have a question of Linda. So if you have met with her and feel comfortable about this, I got an email all about Measure O and how Robin Sweeney Park and Is that not, do you not feel the same way? Any more about that? Thank you. |
| 01:24:43.37 | Linda Pfeiffer | I'm sorry, Measure O, Alice, or Measure F? |
| 01:24:46.38 | Alice Merrill | Full of F. |
| 01:24:47.49 | Linda Pfeiffer | Measure F. |
| 01:24:48.25 | Alice Merrill | Yeah. That email that said that it was all overblown and blah, blah, blah, you know, do you still feel that way about that? |
| 01:24:56.03 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, I still feel very strongly that the project, that the specs for Robin Sweeney Park have been reengineered and ADA mobility projects pulled off and funded through the general fund. So I feel very strongly about that, and that's wrong. And that is the reason why I'm not going to support this. Understanding it and supporting it, Alice, are two different things. I think we misled the people of Sausalito. I think it was the wrong thing to do, and I feel very strongly about that. I think perhaps this will be in the comments section. |
| 01:25:12.77 | Unknown | But I feel very strong about that. And that's wrong. But... |
| 01:25:16.97 | Adam Politzer | And that is- |
| 01:25:26.84 | Councilmember Weiner | Please. |
| 01:25:26.91 | Alice Merrill | I think it was the wrong thing to do, and I feel very strongly about that. I think perhaps this will be in the comments section. I was just wondering if you understood now what the reasons were, but you're against it so fine. |
| 01:25:32.78 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:25:34.39 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:25:34.40 | Jill Hoffman | Definitely. |
| 01:25:39.19 | Jill Hoffman | I think she'll probably address that in the comment section. Thank you for your public comment. Any other public comment? See, none. None. so then I'll bring it back up here for council comments. Would you like to begin, Councilwoman Factor? |
| 01:25:55.51 | Linda Pfeiffer | I think I'll wait and hear what my peers have to say and then I'll weigh in. |
| 01:25:59.73 | Jill Hoffman | All right. Any other comment from council? Okay, well. |
| 01:26:07.26 | Linda Pfeiffer | Oh, I've got something to say thanks to Alice. |
| 01:26:08.03 | Jill Hoffman | Something to say thanks to Alice. |
| 01:26:10.97 | Linda Pfeiffer | Oh, yeah. I think that Measure F, the way it was presented to the people of Sausalito, was completely misrepresented. The project has been re-engineered with ADA access projects siphoned off and funded through the general fund when it was presented as the entire COPs funding this project. So I look at this budget, and I see a shell game. I see money moving from one place to the other. I don't think those funds and the movement of those funds are transparent aside from the questions that I ask and the research I had to do to prove my point. So no, I am not supporting this. I understand it very well, Alice. And if you want to understand it, in my view, I welcome coffee with you to lay it out. I don't see how anyone looking at the facts of this cannot understand exactly what happened here. |
| 01:26:11.04 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, yeah. |
| 01:27:11.62 | Linda Pfeiffer | Any other council comments? |
| 01:27:12.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:27:14.88 | Tom Theodorus | I'm just going to – I don't want to spend all until 1.30 at night, but – I can't I just want to convey to everyone here in TV how categorically I disagree with what Councilmember Pfeiffer says. It's been totally transparent. Measure F was voted on by number one with this council voted on by a vast majority of the of the citizens to fund our parks. We want to go ahead with our parks. Councilmember Pfeiffer with her own funds, almost single handedly opposed measure F with a variety of I'm not sure. misinformation and all types of things. This was counteracted during the whole entire election. We voted on it. We are now having someone who is trying to re Uh, Let's discuss. Well, I'm trying to stay away from personal. Wait a minute. I want to I want to be clear about this. Councilmember Pfeiffer made a lot of allegations to all of us. |
| 01:28:03.56 | Jill Hoffman | Let's try to stay away from personal attacks. |
| 01:28:09.26 | Jill Hoffman | to all of us. All right, we're not going to digress into personal attack. |
| 01:28:11.80 | Tom Theodorus | I'll just I just well I'll be happy to end with it. But if you want. Madam Mayor I'll be happy to stop right this second if we end this discussion with everybody. But I'm not going to allow. I'm going to respond to this. |
| 01:28:13.04 | Jill Hoffman | I'll be happy to end. And if you... Madam Mayor. |
| 01:28:22.95 | Linda Pfeiffer | No, I'm going to respond to this. |
| 01:28:25.14 | Tom Theodorus | I'm not a and we now have Councilmember with the I will stop but and I agree with that but we're not going to have somebody re Argue measure F which is a done deal and then I'll sit back and say nothing. We're not doing it |
| 01:28:38.10 | Jill Hoffman | I'm doing it. All right, well, you made your comments. Now, does anybody have any comments about the budget and not digress into personal attacks of other council members? No, she didn't. Her comments were about measure up. Now, Ray, you look like you have something you need to say. |
| 01:28:53.48 | Ray Whitty | Yes, I agree completely with Councilmember Theodorus, but I also move to adopt the following budget resolutions. Resolution to approve the amended budget for the 2015-16 fiscal year. Sorry, I'm reading a different thing than your slide, but I will achieve the same result. Including the establishment of a sewer construction capital or fund and for the council to receive the fiscal year 2014-15 comprehensive annual financial report |
| 01:28:57.14 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 01:29:26.74 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, now I had some comments, but I... I know. |
| 01:29:29.74 | Ray Whitty | We've got a motion on the table. |
| 01:29:30.77 | Jill Hoffman | Motion on the table. I'll second it and we still have comments correct that's fine second and councilmember why are you okay my comments are as follows as it's clear you know it's on the record that I had some concerns about the funding for in the the the cost for Robin Sweeney Park I'm glad that we have our citizens oversight committee in place I've |
| 01:29:34.06 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:29:34.09 | Ray Whitty | I'll second it and we can |
| 01:29:35.04 | Tom Theodorus | We still have comments, correct? |
| 01:29:38.35 | Unknown | I'll let you go. |
| 01:29:57.48 | Jill Hoffman | I'm on the Finance Committee and I you know we did it thorough review of the budget at the Finance Committee meeting. And so while I do have concerns about Robin Sweeney Park, I'm happy that we have our citizens oversight committee in place, and I have confidence in them, and I hope that they will provide what I expect to be a very good service to our city and our citizens with regard to the life of the Measure F funding, which will be the next 10 years at least. So all right, those are my comments. Any other comments? |
| 01:30:32.43 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yes, I have a comment. I was focusing on Measure F, and I didn't mention a council member, but Tom, you did. And so you also accused me of misinformation. So I would like to respond. The letter that I sent out to residents, I included an $8.5 million guesstimate. I said no bids were ever presented at council for any of the three parks. I said measure F. I said this is sloppy planning that could double the cost of these park projects. Pulling MLK's future revenues to finance this debt will be a hit to the general fund. What I said has come true. We are seeing projects that were initially part of the scope of Robin Sweeney Park pulled off and funded by other park projects that were defunct and are now being diverted and used and funded through the general fund. So what I said is true. It is not misinformation. It is fact. And I resent this misinformation that is coming up here on council. |
| 01:30:58.81 | Adam Politzer | All right. |
| 01:31:43.96 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. No. |
| 01:31:45.53 | Jill Hoffman | Herb, you haven't spoken yet. Did you have some comments? No, because you don't want to hear what I said. |
| 01:31:48.59 | Linda Pfeiffer | No. |
| 01:31:50.23 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I do want to hear. Oh, OK. There's a motion on the table. |
| 01:31:54.44 | Tom Theodorus | Well, and I just want, lastly, I just, I'm respecting the mayor's direction about discussing F. Thank you, Tom. And I will just say that I just categorically disagree with everything that's just been said and leave it at that. And I will, in deference to you, I will now, I'm happy to cut my comments. We have a motion? |
| 01:32:00.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:32:01.45 | Adam Politzer | you |
| 01:32:07.69 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:32:07.71 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:32:07.84 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:32:07.96 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. |
| 01:32:07.98 | Adam Politzer | I will. |
| 01:32:12.20 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. We have a motion? Could we have a vote, please? All those in favor? Yeah. Oh, sorry. Let's call the roll then. |
| 01:32:20.18 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:32:20.19 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:32:23.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:32:23.35 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah, I just want to say, you said categorically, and I want to just stress again, the voters were told that Robin Sweeney Park was going to cost 1.150, and we're seeing 1.6 up here. |
| 01:32:25.27 | Jill Hoffman | I like it. |
| 01:32:40.06 | Linda Pfeiffer | And the Delta is being funded through the general fund and other resources, and that's not right. |
| 01:32:40.34 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:32:40.38 | Councilmember Weiner | AND YOU CAN SEE THEM. |
| 01:32:40.56 | Tom Theodorus | . |
| 01:32:47.78 | Tom Theodorus | I do want to say something, this is globally, WE'VE GONE THROUGH THIS FOR THREE YEARS. WE CANNOT, WE HAVE ONE COUNCIL MEMBER THAT WILL INSIST ON THE LAST WORD EACH TIME. AND MADAM MAYOR, I WANT TO ASK YOU THAT YOU ROTATE THAT, AND I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT AT THAT. AND I HOPE THAT YOU'RE CUTTING OFF DISCUSSION. |
| 01:32:58.31 | Councilmember Weiner | Madam Mayor. |
| 01:32:59.02 | Jill Hoffman | I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK. |
| 01:32:59.26 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:32:59.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:33:02.31 | Jill Hoffman | that. And I think that's a great thing. That's... Yes, I think we're done with discussion. Yes, Debbie, quick. Thank you. |
| 01:33:08.37 | Debbie | Council member Theodorus. |
| 01:33:10.43 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 01:33:10.45 | Councilmember Weiner | Yeah. |
| 01:33:11.93 | Debbie | Councilmember Weiner? Yes. Councilmember Pfeiffer? No. Vice Mayor Whitty? |
| 01:33:13.15 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 01:33:13.65 | Ray Whitty | Thank you. |
| 01:33:15.58 | Jill Hoffman | No. |
| 01:33:17.82 | Ray Whitty | Thank you. |
| 01:33:17.84 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 01:33:17.87 | Ray Whitty | Yes. |
| 01:33:18.43 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 01:33:19.66 | Debbie | Mayor Hoffman. |
| 01:33:20.91 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 01:33:25.40 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, let's have a health and comfort break for five minutes. Thank you. |
| 01:33:36.57 | Unknown | My God, my God is born true. Blue rain. |
| 01:33:59.25 | Jill Hoffman | All right, here we go. All right, we're back on the record, and we are up to item. Hold on, my agenda says. next Friday. I don't think it's 5A. Is it 5A? Oh, 5A. Okay, it's out of... Sorry. 5A public hearings. Introduction of first reading by title-only ordinance of City Council of Sausalito to repeal existing municipal code 8.48 floodplain management and adopting a new chapter 8.48 floodplain management of Sausalito Municipal Code and continue the public hearing to April 19th for second reading. And adoption, and we have Jonathan Goldman. our public works director and city engineer, ADA coordinator, and floodplain manager? Is that your title, sir? |
| 01:34:47.72 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you, Madam Mayor. As you said, Jonathan Goldman, your Public Works Director. I appreciate the opportunity to bring this item before you this evening. It's kind of a hodgepodge of different information, but fundamentally, as the agenda title suggests, the recommendation is that the Council repeal the existing floodplain management ordinance and then enact a new ordinance which takes into account the existence of new flood insurance studies and flood insurance rate maps that FEMA has produced and that actually technically became effective in this jurisdiction on March 16th. But I did want to provide a little context for that and then, of course, give council and the community the opportunity to weigh in on actually any of the aspects that they're interested in doing. So this PowerPoint presentation is derived from one that was given at a workshop on March 14th that was attended by several powerful and incredibly intelligent people who I enjoyed spending that time with. |
| 01:34:48.20 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:36:12.73 | Jonathon Goldman | um, And so some of these slides don't make any sense in this evening's context, but I'm taking advantage of the fact that there's five hours left in the agenda for me to deliver this this evening and advertise in favor of people who might want to sign up for Current's email newsletter. Go to City of Sausage, the main page, and click Sign Up Now in the lower right-hand part. Also encourage people, since one of my titles is ADA coordinator, people who feel that somehow they don't have access to to this meeting or to other city programs and things like that. There are mechanisms by which we can accommodate them, and there are mechanisms by which they can let us know of the need for that. Let's see. So the organization of what I'm going to try and ramble on about is, again again derived from the workshop. I want to talk a little bit about the National Flood Insurance Program in general. Our existing ordinance, I already touched on the new ordinance. maps and flood insurance studies, provide some resources on sea level rise. I'm not gonna spend a lot of time on that this evening, but again, in terms of context, The way the staff report, the way the workshop was presented, and the way this item was actually previously brought to council in 2012, was to talk about a couple of alternatives for floodplain administration in Sausalito. The minimum requirement is really kind of the traditional measure. It's the minimum requirement for any community to be a member of the National Flood Insurance Program, which makes flood insurance available to property owners and even, I think, to renters and things like that. Basically, those minimums establish a regulatory flood plan that is identified by FEMA and has a 1% annual chance of being flooded to a depth of one foot or more in any given year. This is top secret shorthand that I'll reveal the secrets of this evening. Basically, it says that for a residential structure, the finished floor elevation can't be lower than the base flood elevation. It kind of makes sense. You don't want residential structures when there is a 100-year event, a foot or more of water, to have water come inside the habitable space. ways of more protectively or perhaps more proactively regulating to prevent flood the habitable space. More protect ways of more protectively or perhaps more proactively regulating to prevent flood damage include starting from that minimum level and then looking at other areas. Kind of by definition if the 100 year flood plain is 1% annual chance of one foot or more immediately adjacent to that 100-year floodplain is an area where, with 1% annual chance, there might be up to a foot of water. So FEMA actually identifies a 500-year area of moderate flooding hazard. Another area where a community can better protect against the possibility of both flood damage and then as we'll see by extension protect against susceptibility to sea level rise is to adopt freeboard standards. So for example instead of finished floor being not less than the base flood elevation we could establish or a community could establish any additional freeboard. For example, we might decide that we want two feet of free board. So the finished floor elevation of a residential structure would be not less than the base flood elevation plus two feet. And then the same kind of thing, we could adopt regulations that would establish finished floor elevation requirements for the 500 year flood plan. Just some background information as well as hyperlink to information on the National Flood Insurance Program. It's a national program, it's flood insurance. The flood insurance rate maps, that was another acronym that got discussed earlier, are the flood insurance rate maps or the official map of a community on which FEMA has delineated special hazard areas and the risk premium zones, those basically apply to For example, the 500-year flood plan where the program recognizes that there might be some risk of flooding and encourages people to get insurance against flooding in those areas but because the risk is lower the national flood insurance program doesn't charge as much for that insurance so those are called risk premium zones. Flood insurance studies are the technical information that FEMA develops in order to support the promulgation of the maps. Our existing ordinance, and again, I'm not going to read this or click on the links or anything, but for folks that are interested in it, and I'm sure there are literally hundreds of them, the kind of background information there in our ordinance, both the existing and the proposed, is kind of useful. The statutory authority, the findings of fact and statement of purpose. As I indicated, as of March 16th, we now have actually the whole county as a result of Um, pretty significant improvement in the quality of the science that, in my opinion, that FEMA has been using to establish flood insurance rate maps. We now have maps, map panels that cover Sausalito. The whole county has new map panels as well as flood insurance studies. And it's not totally clear from these hyperlinks, but all of this information is available on the city's website under Public Works. There's a sea level rise and FEMA flood zone maps page by itself. So all this information is available, as well as people are welcome to contact me, my office, and then we have hard copies of both the flood studies and the flood insurance rate maps at the counter we don't have them in the library yet but but we will alluded to the potential ordinance revisions as I'm sure you recall from your packet. We provided both a minimum recommended ordinance update, which is redlined with respect to the existing ordinance in the packet. I think that's attachment to and in addition drafted a conceptually more protective ordinance. That information is also available and has been available for some time. Here is a reasonably objective list of resources, hyperlinks to resources that are available regarding sea level rise. And again, I won't click through them or anything, but I do want to reiterate the fact that just on a statistical or a numbers basis, the 1% annual chance of flooding in an area of special flood hazard is statistically derived based on the past. In this particular case of our current flood insurance rate maps, it's based on a 30 year tide and wind and wave action study, statistical analysis. But by law, FEMA does not take the potential for future changes into account. |
| 01:44:33.80 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:44:35.47 | Jonathon Goldman | when we identify an area that's an area of special flood hazard now based on those statistics, we have to, I think, when we're making policy decisions or thinking as I would be, if I'm contemplating if I own property that is potentially exposed to flood hazard, or maybe even more importantly, I'm considering making a significant financial investment in that property, I want to take into account not only the past, but also think about how susceptible to possible futures that investment might be. So from my perspective as floodplain administrator, not as ADA coordinator, as floodplain administrator, I think there's a lot of value in taking those prospects into account. And again, in the situation that I mentioned a few minutes ago, while the regulations might allow me to have finished floor elevations that are at the base flood elevation. having eight inches of water above that level is not any significantly more appealing to me than having a foot or significantly different in terms of appeal. So taking susceptibility to sea level rise, taking sea level rise into account in making land use decisions and in making investment decisions, I personally think is good advice. Contact information for me and then just kind of process wise as indicated in the agenda title, this is a proposal to rescind the existing ordinance, to repeal the existing ordinance, to enact a new ordinance, and doing so this evening, there's a first reading and the introduction of the ordinance, and assuming that council takes the actions that it would this evening, there would be a second reading, which is currently scheduled for the April 19th meeting, as I recall. So my presentation is complete. I'm happy to answer council questions and then encourage you to take public comment and discussion, and I've got a motion for you if you're interested in it once we get to that. Thank you. |
| 01:47:04.85 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Jonathan. Do we have any questions from city councils? |
| 01:47:10.74 | Ray Whitty | Madam Mayor? Yes. Thank you, Jonathan. |
| 01:47:11.70 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 01:47:16.85 | Ray Whitty | You know, it's all a little abstract in the sense that I have no feel for how many properties, how much property in Sausalito is actually affected by this. And so, By choosing the, if you like, bare minimum ordinance versus some more stringent ordinance, |
| 01:47:38.85 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:47:48.29 | Ray Whitty | I want to get a feel for what does that really mean for property owners in the flood pay? And how many of those people are, of those properties exist here? |
| 01:48:03.22 | Jonathon Goldman | That's a good question, and I can address it both in general terms and then to some extent more specifically. The manner in which we identified property owners in Sausalito who received a postcard from me saying we're holding a workshop to discuss these issues. We used the geographic information system and information available to the public through MarinMap and identified every parcel in Sausalito where the land surface elevation was 15 feet above the 1988 North American vertical datum, which is the datum for flood insurance rate maps and below, on the order of 1,000 postcards went out. So that's one measure. There are other measures, and in fact, some of the links I provided as well as the links that are available on the city's website and through FEMA allow an individual to look up this kind of information on an address specific basis, a parcel specific basis and answer some of those questions themselves. But in a broader sense, because it is so abstract, and I think the people who came to the workshop and who discussed this matter, as well as some of the training and other discussions that happens countywide and even nationwide with respect to flood hazards and especially coastal hazards which aren't particularly they aren't necessarily as sophisticated as riverine flooding hazards are is that regulation isn't necessarily the best way to accomplish the public benefit, and it's in part because it's very difficult to quantify the costs and benefits. I kind of waved my hands over the freeboard, you know, plus two feet in the 100-year floodplain and plus one feet in the area of special flood hazard. We don't have any easy way to say the risk associated with flooding in those areas will cost X. And the cost to what's called increased cost of compliance, the cost to as properties are substantially remodeled or sold and reinvested, the cost to provide that additional freeboard isn't, that too is a very abstract figure. So the process, I guess, that I come down to is we have the opportunity to have this conversation about these issues in general, to bring our our ordinance up to the current minimum standard, which is a little bit different from what it was when it was last adopted. and My plan is, as is mentioned in the... in the staff report is to apply for membership in what's called the community rating system. And what that program does is the city, the local entity, agrees to provide more and higher quality information to people who ask questions. So instead of it being a regulatory posture, it's an educational and informational posture. And in exchange, the way the program works is that if just by joining at the lowest level of that program, class nine. every policyholder, I believe it would apply to every flood insurance policyholder in the city, would receive a 5% discount on their flood insurance premiums. That program extended to Class 1, and Roseville, California, is a Class 1 community rating system community. My understanding is the policyholders in Roseville save... more than $800,000 a year in insurance premiums because their community is that much more progressive, that much more involved in not just regulating, but in reducing flood losses in their community by a lot of different means and methods. So that's a long-winded answer to your question. It's still, there's still a lot of ambiguity and you lots more specific information that could be developed if the community wanted it to be developed and if we took the time and spent the money to gather that information. But I think as a matter of policy, Um, heading in that direction and not simply accepting the minimum is what I would recommend. |
| 01:53:27.14 | Ray Whitty | May I follow up with one sort of obvious follow on? |
| 01:53:29.23 | Councilmember Weiner | Sure. Mm-hmm. |
| 01:53:34.51 | Ray Whitty | Yeah, I understand that posture. But Is there much, if any... in savings in flood insurance between us adopting the minimum or the fact that there is a minimum and we adopt that and have a program versus the more stringent. If we adopted a two-foot whatever, right, does that actually mean our residents are going to save more money on their insurance? Yes. Because what it is going to do is for anybody who wants to remodel their home, it's going to add enormous cost, right? |
| 01:54:02.86 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 01:54:11.26 | Jonathon Goldman | Yes. |
| 01:54:15.18 | Jonathon Goldman | Yes. Well, the answer to the first part of the question is yes, it will save money on insurance premiums. A more stringent ordinance the insurance program recognizes as likely to reduce claims, to reduce flood damages, and therefore the community that adopts those more stringent regulations is compensated by a reduction in premiums. And I can't tell you at the moment, but it would be possible to calculate what those premiums are. I think in the case of a class one community rating system, it's 45%. It's a 45% reduction in premiums. I'm not sure I agree that the, for example, free board is a good example. I'm not sure that I agree that the cost to go from the minimum to a foot or to a free board is exorbitant. But it's gonna depend on the specifics. |
| 01:55:23.17 | Adam Politzer | I just want to also help bring some focus of the direction that we're recommending because Jonathan Goldman and I have had a fair amount of conversation on this. And I think why we're asking you to adopt or approve the minimum tonight is because there is a lot of discussion in education that we agree with. |
| 01:55:24.20 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 01:55:50.12 | Adam Politzer | still needs to continue. And we think that in the general, if we move forward on a general plan update, There'll be an opportunity for that discussion. If we have a discussion about the Marin ship, separately. |
| 01:56:00.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:56:00.85 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 01:56:00.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:56:01.96 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. or collectively there'll be an opportunity for that discussion. And as the county and the state are working on issues related to sea level rise. there'll be an opportunity again to come back. and make an amendment to the ordinance In fact, there needs to be changes. To take action tonight on the minimum is our recommendation. that there will be ample opportunities to revisit this discussion as we go forward. And I do want to give a real example, and Jonathan has a lot more detail than I do. When you look at San Anselmo and the creek, the floods that they have recently experienced and There's heavy rain. It's right there on the news and the cameras are there and they're watching the On their website, they got a live picture of the creek on an alarm system to tell everyone that it's the floods coming. that's a community that has create it. stringent, more stringent policy on the flood. because they've experienced it and they've seen real damage. occur on the properties locally. We're not asking that for tonight. But we are sensitive and aware, and I appreciate Jonathan's commitment to protecting residents because if in fact We... have it at the minimum and we keep it there forever and the 100 year flood comes in. and it floods the mountain. the damage that they have is going to be, it's much better to do things right the first time then repair them the second time but we don't want to you know we don't want to put something forward without actually having a much more detailed and and involved community discussion as we move forward |
| 01:57:38.76 | Linda Pfeiffer | So, um... My question is, I heard that this would result in reduced premiums. I mean, when I look at something like this, my question is, I'd like every resident to be able to look at this and say, how does this impact me personally? And so I heard two things, and I want to make sure I understood this correctly that on one hand it would reduce premiums On the other hand there might be a higher bar for compensation. Is that is that accurate? |
| 01:58:18.13 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah, no. And I apologize for that confusion. This is... I... on one hand could have brought the minimum ordinance update to council and just left it at that and left out the discussion about susceptibility to sea level rise and the community rating system. So I apologize for mixing those. I think they're not apples and oranges but they're different kinds of apples. If we're successful in being awarded class nine as a community rating system community, which in my judgment is readily achievable and will not result in any significant increase in level of effort on staff's part, that is worth a 5% reduction in insurance premiums I'm not positive that that applies to everybody who has flood insurance in Sausalito but you know it it will result in reduced flood insurance premiums for some if not all of our policyholders we don't have to do that at all that meaning because |
| 01:59:11.10 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. I'm not sure. |
| 01:59:36.28 | Linda Pfeiffer | That meaning be class nine. |
| 01:59:38.32 | Jonathon Goldman | We don't have to apply to join the community rating system. And enacting the minimum ordinance will not result in savings on flood insurance premiums. That is the minimum requirement for membership in the program at all. If we fall below the minimum standards, FEMA can deny Access to flood insurance for all of our property owners |
| 02:00:07.75 | Linda Pfeiffer | So just to drive that home, what you're telling us is that, hey, if we don't meet this minimum requirement, our residents stand to lose the opportunity for FEMA flood insurance. Is that correct? |
| 02:00:20.84 | Jonathon Goldman | In the extreme, yes. And I don't believe that the prospect of that happening is very high, even if we did not update our ordinance. The fact is that the flood insurance rate maps and flood insurance studies that became effective March 16th, I'm obligated to regulate to. but the recommendation is that we bring our ordinance into more specific compliance not only with those studies, but also with the California Department of Water Resources model ordinance for coastal communities that was also included in your package. |
| 02:00:59.00 | Linda Pfeiffer | What about the second part of my question about would there be a higher bar for residents to get compensation is does that. Did I hear that correctly? |
| 02:01:10.02 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm not sure whether you heard it correctly or not. It's probably a result of a poor presentation on my part. |
| 02:01:15.53 | Linda Pfeiffer | . |
| 02:01:15.57 | Councilmember Weiner | . |
| 02:01:15.64 | Linda Pfeiffer | THE FAMILY. No, I probably just misinterpreted. |
| 02:01:20.90 | Jonathon Goldman | and, So is the question compensation in the event that there's a flood? No. The bar is what it is. It's not necessarily a low bar. I assure you, having worked in one community that suffered fairly significant flood losses in 2005-2006, there is a lot of documentation necessary to prove a claim. |
| 02:01:29.80 | Adam Politzer | I'm sure. It's not. |
| 02:01:48.54 | Jonathon Goldman | Um, uh, under both the national flood insurance program as well as federal disaster relief. But it's not any higher or lower depending upon the stringency of our regulatory order. |
| 02:02:04.25 | Linda Pfeiffer | And my last question is, what about as a follow-up to the prior question asked from Council regarding the burden on folks who are now enhancing their homes? Would this apply to anyone anywhere in Sausalito doing major revisions to their homes? |
| 02:02:26.56 | Jonathon Goldman | So it applies to both residential and non-residential development improvements within the 100-year floodplain. And the current ordinance has the same effect that the proposed minimum ordinance would. So there's no change. There may be properties that are regulated differently. And I can give you a couple of good examples. The Valhalla, for example, where we recognized that the base flood elevations were going to change. So the flood insurance rate maps have changed, and the base flood elevation may have changed, but we haven't seen significant changes in the boundaries of the 100-year floodplain or things like that. |
| 02:02:45.78 | Councilmember Weiner | of the |
| 02:02:45.97 | Adam Politzer | Okay, thanks. |
| 02:03:20.34 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:03:21.85 | Jonathon Goldman | Amen. |
| 02:03:22.23 | Tom Theodorus | Sure. |
| 02:03:22.76 | Jonathon Goldman | you |
| 02:03:22.84 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. As a concrete example, the Valhalla, there'd be no change in its ability to complete its construction plans or anything because of the, for us taking the more stringent plan. Is that correct? |
| 02:03:35.24 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah. |
| 02:03:38.80 | Jonathon Goldman | Well, again, the minimum ordinance doesn't result in any change with respect to the Valhalla. What has changed are the base flood elevations. And the Valhalla had an application in for building permits before these flood insurance rate maps became effective. but we also have had in my judgment, a very constructive relationship with the owner and the designers and engineers associated with that project. Um, as you may recall, Council approved a variance from the elevation requirement under our floodplain ordinance for the Main Street boardwalk part of that project. But the protection that the public receives under the conditions under which that variance is granted provide protection against damage to that boardwalk and protection against pieces of that boardwalk, for example, being liberated and damaging other property in the event of a flood. So we've accomplished the same objective and would have without really a change in the ordinance. Now, if at some point in the future, |
| 02:04:51.59 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 02:04:58.82 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. or even now if the council chose to go in that direction, we wanted to adopt a more restrictive ordinance, then from the point that ordinance becomes effective, then a subsequent application, if someone else wanted to do something, then those more stringent standards would apply there. Now, you're going to be talking about |
| 02:05:20.54 | Tom Theodorus | Now, you're asking us to adopt the more stringent thing? Not this evening. Oh, that's good. |
| 02:05:24.24 | Jonathon Goldman | Not this evening, although you certainly have that discretion. |
| 02:05:28.52 | Tom Theodorus | You're asking us only for the minimum. |
| 02:05:30.40 | Jonathon Goldman | The recommendation is for the minimum this evening, but as the city manager said, I think that there's a strong case to be made for a community dialogue about um, susceptibility to sea level rise and potential flooding in the future. |
| 02:05:47.04 | Tom Theodorus | But you've had, was it March 14th, you had a workshop, three people attended, is that correct? Yeah. |
| 02:05:53.25 | Jonathon Goldman | And me, yes. |
| 02:05:54.12 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. three and there was no I take it no one's here. There was no issues with it. It was more informative or |
| 02:06:00.39 | Jonathon Goldman | No issues that I'm aware of now or was aware of then, no. |
| 02:06:06.19 | Tom Theodorus | And how did we, you know, you had notice in the currents, were there any other notice to people in the floodplain? Were you affected floodplain? |
| 02:06:12.59 | Jonathon Goldman | We direct mailed on the order of 1,000 postcards to property owners based on the tax assessor's property roles. Okay. |
| 02:06:14.73 | Tom Theodorus | every day. |
| 02:06:23.35 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:06:25.95 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Jonathan. And I understand. I did look on the website to some of the map attachments to the agenda. And to see, you know, to raise questions, to kind of look at the different areas of town that were affected by the floodplain. And none of it was a surprise. It was, you know, most of the low-lying areas. But as we move forward and certainly as we look to maybe a more stringent system we might want to we would probably benefit from the maps from being able to see the maps and what the properties are that are affected |
| 02:06:40.55 | Adam Politzer | THE FAMILY. |
| 02:06:59.97 | Jill Hoffman | I don't have any other questions. I don't think that was a question, sorry. Okay, public comment on the floodplain. Yes, Alice Merrill approaching. |
| 02:07:15.70 | Alice Merrill | I was at that meeting and I hope that you will approve the lowest denominator thing. I think it'll just help with the 5% and it won't change anything that's already happening. And then the people who have property, they'll be able to get that 5%. |
| 02:07:16.74 | Councilmember Weiner | I was at that meeting. |
| 02:07:18.03 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, very good. |
| 02:07:18.64 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:07:37.08 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. No other public comment? Council comments? Yes, yes, right? |
| 02:07:48.03 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:07:48.39 | Ray Whitty | Yeah, I would fully support adopting an ordinance with the minimum requirement at this point. You know, you have put out there two possible other options for making it more stringent and therein lies the problem. way of objectively choosing between two options. And so if I can't choose between two options, it suggests to me I can't choose between the minimum and any sort of more restricted ordinance until I can see what some analysis of what the economic impact is. Because yeah, we adopt a more restrictive ordinance, and those folks that are affected will be able to get even, you know, a further discount on their insurance premiums. But each one of those properties, if, for instance, it's got to have a new foundation, you know, and you've got to tear down walls and dig it up and put new foundations because half the damn properties in this town are still built on brick you know you try and do the you try and go to get from get a permit to put a new foundation in to increase your safety and all of a sudden, your floor level's gotta rise by two feet or three feet or four feet, which means the house has to rise by two, three, or, you know, because you've got different plate levels in the properties. So, you know, I think we need to understand that a little bit more before we rush into a more restrictive ordinance than the base, which we must put on. I mean, that would be silly not to do the minimum, you know. |
| 02:09:33.06 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:09:33.10 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 02:09:33.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:09:40.23 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:09:40.98 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:09:41.03 | Unknown | Anyone else? you Thank you. |
| 02:09:42.39 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:09:42.41 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah, I would agree with that because of course, if we're, we're, we're going to be requiring people to re rebuild foundations considerably higher, we're getting into potential, you know, view issues with the flats and you know, it, it, you know, if we can get to where we need to go legally with the minimal requirement and we're safe, then I would support that just the minimal requirement. |
| 02:10:07.87 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Tom? I agree with that as well. But I would also recommend that you also pursue the community rating system at the same time after we approve the minimum requirements. I think that would be a benefit. that would be a benefit to the city to have that designation under FEMA for further savings and also proactive management and protection for our citizens. So do we have a motion on the floor? |
| 02:10:36.98 | Unknown | make them. |
| 02:10:42.22 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:10:47.45 | Jonathon Goldman | Madam Mayor, just as a point of information, I failed to include certain language in the ordinance that I've added here in bold on the third bullet point here. It actually reduces the cost of publishing and noticing. So the recommended motion is there if it pleases the council. |
| 02:10:49.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:10:49.15 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 02:10:49.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:11:04.39 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:11:04.47 | Unknown | . |
| 02:11:04.66 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:11:15.85 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. Mary, is that sufficient? Yeah, okay. So then the motion is to, by Council Member Weiner, was to read by title only the ordinance repealing the existing municipal code and establishing a new Chapter 8.48 with the further additions or edits as set forth in bullet number 3. OK. Do we have a second? |
| 02:11:39.47 | Ray Whitty | Yeah, I'll second that. |
| 02:11:40.67 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. All in favor? Aye. |
| 02:11:42.74 | Ray Whitty | Bye. |
| 02:11:44.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right. |
| 02:11:46.93 | Tom Theodorus | Did we include what you had asked for? That's all inclusion? Okay. I'm sorry. Thank you. |
| 02:11:47.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:11:54.19 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:11:54.24 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah. |
| 02:11:54.59 | Tom Theodorus | Right? |
| 02:11:54.73 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 02:11:54.74 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, the CRS system. |
| 02:11:54.96 | Jonathon Goldman | The CRS system. |
| 02:11:55.74 | Tom Theodorus | Thank you. |
| 02:11:55.77 | Jonathon Goldman | A clear direction, yes. |
| 02:11:57.16 | Jill Hoffman | yeah thank you okay moving on to our next item on the next item on the agenda is item 7. City manager reports. |
| 02:12:09.36 | Adam Politzer | Well, since Jonathan left four hours, I will take those up. No, understanding that the mayor is under the weather, I will keep this very brief. Thank you. But I wanted to, again, remind the public and the council that on March 29th, we will have the second public meeting at IDES Hall to continue the hearing of the Planning Commission and the HLB and receive the report. |
| 02:12:18.37 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:12:36.15 | Adam Politzer | information from the Golden Gate Ferry District on the proposed ferry landing so that Meeting will be at the Eidos Hall on Tuesday the 29th at 6.30. PM. And it's my understanding that that will also be web streamed and available for the public to watch at home and potentially on TV. I haven't, I don't know for certain if it's going to be on Comcast again as it was last time, but we will put that out in the currents on Friday and confirm how people can watch that if they can't attend. And then a reminder that as that meeting comes to an end, we are scheduled to have that item come as a special council meeting, which will be our regular council meeting on April 5th. that to that meeting will be at the Ida's Hall that meeting will be televised and made available on April 5th and that too that meeting will be at the Ida's Hall and that meeting will be televised and made available on the city's website. And that meeting will, at this moment, take place at 7 o'clock in the evening at our normal regular scheduled conference. time and that will be the only item on the agenda for that evening so our next our next council meeting will then be on April 19th we'll pick back up our regular business of the city You heard Melanie Purcell, our Administrative Services Director, talk about the schedule in terms of Finance Committee meetings and bringing items back to the Council as we talked about at the last Council meeting two weeks ago and then a reminder. tonight that the council Finance Committee had recommended that rather than waiting until and June to bring the information to the council that we bring it back to you on a more regular basis and keep you folks in the loop and up to speed. We'll also use the website and information that the public can have access to as we go through the process to keep all the information that's available that we'll be presenting at Council also on the City's finance page so people can stay current on how that's progressing, including... Public Finance Committee meetings. and then the special council meetings. So I'll be working with the agenda setting committee to look at when we schedule these special meetings because, as we know, these are large discussions with a lot of moving parts and a lot of decisions and direction that staff will need as we build towards a June 30th approval. So to have appeals or other complicated items on the agenda that night, Thank you. need as we build towards a June 30th approval so we have appeals or other complicated items on the agenda that night would put us back to that 1.30 and we want to avoid that so we'll be asking the council for their flexibility and support to look at future Tuesday night meetings going into April and May for for our special meetings and probably more likely starting at the end of April and then rolling through the month of May in the beginning of June so we'll work with the agenda setting committee we'll get that information out to as soon as possible |
| 02:15:43.16 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:15:43.31 | Adam Politzer | Fun stuff, Easter parade this weekend. |
| 02:15:43.60 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:15:46.67 | Adam Politzer | And this Saturday at 10 o'clock, the parade, so I recommend everyone come out. There's supposed to be spectacular weather. It's always fun. The volunteer recognition event is on April 21st at the Spinnaker. All our volunteers are being invited. If they haven't already, the notices are, Um, are starting to go out. and so we will make sure that that's another fun event. And then lastly, which is important because it was all over the morning's news, obviously the terrorist threat or the terrorist act in Brussels early this morning, something that we always have to pay attention to here, being a tourist location, being our proximity to the Golden Gate Bridge and to San Francisco. I wanna assure the council and the public that our police chief and our fire chief have regular meetings and especially when things happen when the alert goes up to a higher status you know our police department is actively working with our partners here in the county our partners on the bridge and our partners in san francisco and bay area wide to stay abreast of what's going on so that our citizens are protected as the events unfold in europe and other alerts come forward, again through the agenda setting committee, if this is a topic that you would like to have, at a future council meeting as an opportunity to not just bring our chief back, but bring some of the regional folks to come and talk about how the Bay Area is being protected and what measures we take to pay attention to these threats. But when we have events like these that occur, it's really important that we recognize that at any given moment, any given day, this could happen here in Sausalito or in one of our neighboring communities. Thank you, City Council members. Any questions, I'm happy to answer them. |
| 02:17:44.29 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:17:48.56 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yes, Adam, I was just wondering about if you could comment on the bridgeway marina code enforcement thing that that popped up over the last week |
| 02:17:59.34 | Adam Politzer | Yes, as I shared with Councilmember Pfeiffer, we'll be sending a report out to the council on Friday. We did investigate the question if the houseboat that was for sale was actually properly registered. The police department worked over the weekend through DMV and confirmed that it has all of its registrations are current both as a vessel and there's some other requirements that they are required to have and they have all of they are they are a licensed registered vessel so and the council the police department did |
| 02:17:59.68 | Linda Pfeiffer | . |
| 02:18:40.28 | Adam Politzer | contact the owner They visited the site and did not experience any open house signs. post it. and nor did they notice any issues on the street. But we, as was stated on back to the council member through email, Jonathan Goldman and Danny Castro and our fire chief and police chief are again putting together a report. And again, I'm able to say to the council that Thank you. that the property owner is working with staff and continues to be responsive. city at this point time have no Thank you. concerns related to code violations out there that aren't being addressed. |
| 02:19:26.13 | Linda Pfeiffer | Adam, just a follow up question for clarification. I too talked to the owner. She's very nice, very amenable. The vessel has no engine. I presume that will be addressed. Also the slip proximity where it's boxed in and it can't get out in the sailboat behind it and the powerboat in front of it can't get out and I, you know, and that's not on the owner. It's the way that the marina owner has situated this. So that's part of code enforcement too, as well as the lack of an engine being problematic. They explained that they had taken down the registration number during painting. But the other part, I guess what I'm saying is that there are many questions I had with respect to that, so I look forward to that in the report as well. |
| 02:20:25.33 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Moving on to 7B, council member committee reports. Do we have any committee reports? Nope. Moving on. We have on here item 7C, appointments to sustainability commission. But I believe we are going to wait until the next city council meeting to vote on that. |
| 02:20:48.21 | Tom Theodorus | I do have one recommendation, though. May I add? We had four excellent candidates. And in speaking with the co-chairs of the Sustainability Commission, they said they often welcome an alternate. |
| 02:20:50.84 | Adam Politzer | Yeah. |
| 02:21:03.70 | Tom Theodorus | And I'd like us to consider whether we may want to point to and an alternate at our next, my next meeting. |
| 02:21:03.79 | Adam Politzer | the |
| 02:21:11.18 | Tom Theodorus | Okay. That's my suggestion. |
| 02:21:11.42 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, I think it's a good idea as well. Okay, then moving on to item 7D, future agenda items. |
| 02:21:25.08 | Councilmember Weiner | Thank you. |
| 02:21:25.12 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:21:25.20 | Linda Pfeiffer | I'm going to go back to code enforcement at Bridgeway Marina With respect to the way that the boat slips are being laid out and crammed up to prevent bay access another agenda item Well, I guess the I don't know honestly if this is an agenda item or just something we can take offline with staff But many residents have been asking me what's going on with the Valhalla in terms of, you know, the moving forward on the permits they secured and what steps can be taken to ensure the maintenance of the boardwalk, which many residents in Hurricane Gulch use. |
| 02:21:25.24 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 02:22:10.09 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay. including lighting. All right. |
| 02:22:13.55 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 02:22:13.62 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 02:22:13.74 | Tom Theodorus | And on our agenda, normally we have tentative agenda items for the next two meetings. And I take it April 5th is for the ferry, and that's why we don't have one. And we haven't decided on the 19th yet, is that basically |
| 02:22:29.95 | Adam Politzer | No, we haven't decided on the 19th, but the, uh, and, and we'll get this out to you in the next, uh, to all the council members in the next couple of days. Um, When I looked at it, it's so overloaded that we need some sorting out and rather than doing that on my own, I thought I would do that with the council. Um, agenda setting committee, but we we are, you know, one of the items that was supposed to be on this evening from you look at past ones was an update from the VA. We are pushing the VA hard to come and give us an update on what's going on with with that building We had on tonight's agenda, but Danny was pulled away, so we weren't able to have an update on the general plan, which is the committee working group has been working on recommendation to make to council. So that's an item that's coming forward. We have an appeal on the, we call it the FOTC DOC or FOTC peer. That appeal will be coming to the council at the next, at the meeting on the 19th. And then there's a handful of other significant items that we need to go through but if you look back at the last look back at the last council packet that had the future GIN items listed you'll see many items that were moved off that were scheduled for tonight and At this moment you can assume those who are all placed on the 19th and need to be sort of through, but by Friday, If not by the end of the day Thursday, we'll have a draft for your review. |
| 02:23:56.83 | Tom Theodorus | And may I could could you take just a minute on the tentative budget process for the two year budget and when when we would be voting on the final budget and just what you see as how many council meetings leading up to that? |
| 02:24:11.10 | Adam Politzer | Traditionally, over the last three, four, five years, we've had three meetings, three council meetings leading up to the adoption, and we need to adopt it by June 30th. One year we may have had a special meeting on June 29th Because we needed additional time but traditionally it's the first Thank you. the two meetings in May. and the first meeting in June. and or the last meeting in May and the two meetings in June. Um, That's our traditional process so we're now asking the council to consider holding probably two to three additional meetings starting at potentially starting at the end of April and then having four meetings in May, two of them being your regular council meetings and two of them being special budget meeting so every Tuesday night in May we're recommending Having a council meeting and it'll either be budget or regular business. The finance committee, the process for the finance committee I think there's roughly 14 meetings. Is that what Melanie told us that we had at yesterday's meeting? But traditionally there's 14 meetings. that the finance committee holds public meetings and we go through each department each each different um special fund and walk through both what is we know as our regular operating budget and then look at supplemental requests, hear from various public groups, age-friendly, Sausalito-Beautiful, to name a few that normally come and ask for additional consideration, and then bring that information back to the council so as we go through these 14 meetings assuming that number is correct we'll probably do three or four and then come to the council three or four then come to the council and so on and so forth so forth Thank you. So it has to be approved by the end of June. |
| 02:26:09.67 | Linda Pfeiffer | So that reminds me of another future agenda item under the topic of transparency, which is I know we tape, I believe, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee, but we don't tape the Finance Committee. And it seems like that would be a good thing to tape. The other one comment I have is to go back to Transcription for our council meetings. It's very very daunting for the public when they're doing research to go back and have to sift through videos and I know having just done hours of research on this and listening to hours of videos to get quotes and If we have it it transcribed, it's as simple as scanning a page to find out who said what and when. So I think those two items, perhaps under one future agenda topic of transparency, would make a lot of sense. Okay, thank you. |
| 02:27:11.61 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Sure. Okay, any other reports of significance? Item 7E. I see none. Okay. I think we're ready to adjourn. We adjourned. |
| 02:27:28.88 | Ray Whitty | you |
| 02:27:29.40 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:27:29.52 | Jill Hoffman | 742. |
| 02:27:29.53 | Unknown | December? |
Winona Conopatha — In Favor: Advocated for REST homeless shelter program; requested signatures to remind county officials of commitment to finding permanent shelter site. ▶ 📄
Jeff Jacobs — Neutral: Discussed homelessness funding and closure of shelters; raised legal issues about unconstitutional fines and fees. ▶ 📄
David Sudo — Neutral: Shared homeless woman's concern about lack of safe shelter options for women in Sausalito, particularly in REST program. ▶ 📄
Nova — Neutral: Commented on homeless fund and lack of affordable accommodations for visitors in Sausalito. ▶ 📄