| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:01.96 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:00:06.70 | Jill Hoffman | Good evening and welcome to the Tuesday, June 21st City Council meeting. |
| 00:00:17.06 | Jill Hoffman | I'm now calling the meeting to order. Items D1 through D3 on our agenda this evening will be discussed in closed session. Do we have any public comment on closed session items? |
| 00:00:30.04 | Lily | Sorry, roll call. |
| 00:00:30.71 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 00:00:31.50 | Lily | Councilmember Theodoris? |
| 00:00:33.66 | Linda Pfeiffer | Present. |
| 00:00:34.09 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:00:34.24 | Lily | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here, Councilmember Weiner. you |
| 00:00:37.53 | Ray Withy | PRESIDENT. |
| 00:00:37.98 | Lily | Thanks, Mayor Withy. |
| 00:00:39.08 | Ray Withy | here. |
| 00:00:39.11 | Lily | Mayor Hoffman? |
| 00:00:40.97 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 00:00:41.34 | Lily | Thank you. |
| 00:00:41.70 | Jill Hoffman | All right, now, is there any public comment on closed session items? See no one in our in our chambers other than us moving on I'm assuming that there is no public comment. I will now close the session for closed session. |
| 00:00:46.77 | Ray Withy | No one... |
| 00:00:58.84 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Where am I? |
| 00:01:07.11 | Jill Hoffman | OK. Welcome to the Tuesday, June 21, 2016 Sausalito City Council meeting. We are returning from closed session. Lily could you call the role please. Thank you. |
| 00:01:23.48 | Lily | Councilmember Weiner. |
| 00:01:24.76 | Ray Withy | THE CITY. |
| 00:01:25.54 | Lily | Councilmember Theodorus. |
| 00:01:26.50 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:01:26.52 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:01:26.53 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:01:26.67 | Linda Pfeiffer | doesn't. |
| 00:01:27.36 | Lily | Councilmember Pfeiffer? Here. Vice Mayor Withey. |
| 00:01:30.75 | Ray Withy | here. |
| 00:01:31.16 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 00:01:31.17 | Lily | Mayor Hoffman. Present. |
| 00:01:32.98 | Jill Hoffman | . For the Pledge of Allegiance, could we please have Ross Blanchard lead us? |
| 00:01:43.27 | Ross Blanchard | I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic |
| 00:01:53.94 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. with. |
| 00:01:54.58 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:01:54.78 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:01:55.03 | Lily | and justice for all. |
| 00:01:57.68 | Jill Hoffman | And yeah, and due to the warmth of our historic, beautiful building, the City Council will be removing our jackets at this time. |
| 00:02:06.10 | Ross Blanchard | Yeah. |
| 00:02:06.12 | Ray Withy | I'm not sure. |
| 00:02:06.19 | Ross Blanchard | I'm a server. |
| 00:02:06.69 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Ceremonially. Ceremonially, at the same time, there is no... |
| 00:02:07.30 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:02:07.40 | Ross Blanchard | Amen. |
| 00:02:07.84 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:02:07.86 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 00:02:07.89 | Ray Withy | Thank you. |
| 00:02:12.45 | Ray Withy | It's tradition that we do it the first day of summer. |
| 00:02:13.28 | Jill Hoffman | and that we do with the first day of summer. |
| 00:02:15.99 | Ray Withy | I'm not sure. |
| 00:02:16.40 | Jill Hoffman | conclusions drawn from this action? All right, closed session announcements. Yes, we did have closed session. I do have an announcement in accordance with California government code section 54957.1. The city council voted 5-0 to authorize Ben Stock, Burke Williams and Sorensen to act as special legal counsel in the case of Widman versus Sausalito. |
| 00:02:42.05 | Jill Hoffman | Do we have any public comment on closed session items? I see no one approaching. Moving on. Do we have a motion for approval of the agenda? |
| 00:02:53.98 | Linda Pfeiffer | So moved. Second. |
| 00:02:55.62 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? Aye. Very good. |
| 00:02:56.02 | Linda Pfeiffer | Aye. |
| 00:03:00.26 | Jill Hoffman | Special presentations and mayor's announcements. I don't have any announcements tonight, but I did take Councilmember Theodorus' question to heart last time about what's going on with the Sausalito movie theater, and my goal is between now and the next city council meeting to have a meeting of our Blue Ribbon Commission and try to find a time next week so that we can meet and have a status update. I was hoping that we were going to be further along than we are with the property manager. So hopeful. Fingers crossed that we are going to be moving forward on that. But that's my plan. Okay. Moving on to... |
| 00:03:44.06 | Ross Blanchard | you |
| 00:03:44.11 | Jill Hoffman | Item two on our agenda, communications. This is a time for City Council to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda. Except in very limited situations, state law precludes the Council from taking action or engaging in discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. However, the Council may refer matters not on the agenda to City staff or direct that the subject be agendized for future meetings. Do we have any questions? public any cards for public nod on the agenda? Yes, Chris. That's right, I waive the requirement for you. You may approach it. |
| 00:04:23.62 | Christopher | Thank you. But this is to Christopher Holbrook. to the movie theater? Yes, sir. Until something's done about that, what are the possibilities of painting the white |
| 00:04:30.05 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, sir. |
| 00:04:35.60 | Christopher | maybe gray and putting in two parking spots so that we can actually park on Caledonia. |
| 00:04:39.94 | Jill Hoffman | Excellent. I'm taking a note of that, and I will bring that up. Thank you. Excellent idea. Any other good ideas during public comment for matters not on the agenda? Nope. Nothing? See no one? Moving on. Item number three, action minutes from the previous meeting. Okay. Do we have any action minutes from P, none, very good. We have no consent calendar today. Excellent. Public hearing items, none. Excellent. We're rocketing through our agenda. We're now on to business items. What's business items? Agenda 6A, ferry landing update. Danny Castro, Community Development Director, you have the floor, sir. |
| 00:05:24.79 | Unknown | Thank you, Mayor Hoffman, members of the council. Good afternoon, evening. Um, The purpose of this report is to provide you an update to you, the City Council, and to the public on the ferry landing project, to recap the Planning Commission and HLB's review of the project back in March, and to let you know what are the next steps. A meeting was originally scheduled in April that was postponed, and a working group is working with the district, which I'll describe in the next few minutes of this presentation. At the joint public meeting on March 29th, the Planning Commission and Historic Landmarks Board provided their recommendations on whether the district revised plans to satisfactorily addressed the eight-point rationale for the City Council's denial of consent of the prior project in May of 2015. Here are the eight points I'm sure you're all familiar with. I will not read each one, but just it was these are the eight points in which were the Planning Commission and Historic Landworks Board reviewed. and This slide is a table at the March 29th meeting. Both the HLB and the PC Planning Commission voted separately as two bodies, and the Historic Landmarks Board voted first on each of the eight points, and here's the tally of the votes. And I should say that there was a memo following the March meeting to the city council members, and this reflects that memo and the tally. Here is also... the Planning Commission, which followed the Historic Landmarks Board in their vote, took separate motions for each of the eight points. And for purposes of clarifying the yes or no vote, they did tie to specific points. The Planning Commission, you'll see an italicized text that they rephrased each point in their motion. but this reflects their vote. And then another table here that, again, it may be small text, but this is the summary of both the Planning Commission and Historic Landmarks' votes. |
| 00:07:48.48 | Unknown | In terms of an update, as directed by the City Council Working Group, Mayor, comprised of Mayor Hoffman, Councilmember Theodores, and City staff has been working with consultants hired by the city to undertake, number one, an independent analysis of the engineering of the ferry landing to determine if the float and or other aspects of the structure could be smaller and still meet accessibility and operation requirements. And number two, a peer review of the photo simulations provided by the district. |
| 00:08:26.60 | Unknown | COWI, it's an acronym C-O-W-I. North America was selected to undertake a peer review analysis of the size of the ferry landing and advise the city if components of the structure, particularly the float, could be made smaller given the accessibility and operational requirements. Cowie is an internationally recognized engineering firm and has worked on projects such as the Port of San Francisco, PIE 27, CRUISE TERMINAL. Cowie also has experience working with the district's engineers from MoFat and Nickel. Cowie has analyzed the information provided by the district and has sent the district some follow-up questions. James Connolly of Cowie will be meeting with the district's engineer, Bo Jensen, from MoFat and Nickel, along with the city and district staff. I believe they have met prior to this meeting and on June 20th, prior to this meeting to go over these questions and District staff. I believe they have met prior to this meeting and on June 20th, prior to this meeting to go over these questions and further discuss the project. With regards to the photo simulations, Environmental Vision, a design firm conducted a peer review of four of the computer-generated renderings, photo simulations that were prepared by the district. Environmental vision determined that the district employed professionally and industry accepted standards in determining that the district employed, that the district, that producing the simulations were overall reasonably accurate. However, some discrepancies were identified, particularly the height of the guide piles and donut fenders, and the size of the structure is viewed from the yacht club. Environmental vision has indicated that these discrepancies may have to do with which iteration of the design was utilized to generate. the simulations. Environmental vision's initial findings have been sent to the district for their response, and we anticipate, depending on the district's response, that there will be additional or revised information provided by environmental vision. The initial report that's dated June 1st is provided in your packets. |
| 00:10:43.46 | Unknown | Also, design features that The city has requested the district incorporate design features to the ferry landing project that were in consensus by both the Planning Commission and the Historic Landmarks Board regarding color, lighting, and other physical design features. And here's just a listing specifically of what those design features are. |
| 00:11:18.71 | Unknown | In terms of next steps, the working group and city staff have met with the district to further clarify the questions regarding engineering of the project and the photo simulations. It was generally a positive meeting. The district will need about a week to two weeks to respond. and we should be receiving preliminary information by the week of July 11th. The working group will then convene to discuss the next steps. In your package, you receive correspondence from William McDevitt, and it's related to a contract, which you have a copy of. I believe it's on your dais as well, and there's also a copy of the contract that's on the desk behind me in a binder. There's no recommendations on this update? |
| 00:12:08.12 | Joe Burns | There's no recommendations on this? Danny, if I could just interrupt, I apologize. But I am not a member of that working group, so I think you have an error on that slide. I think it's Council Member Theodore is a member of the working group along with our member. |
| 00:12:19.24 | Ross Blanchard | on that slide. |
| 00:12:21.03 | Jill Hoffman | I think. |
| 00:12:21.30 | Ross Blanchard | is a good thing. |
| 00:12:24.20 | Linda Pfeiffer | along with our mayor. But I didn't meet with him last week. |
| 00:12:26.04 | Joe Burns | So, |
| 00:12:26.45 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 00:12:26.46 | Joe Burns | Yeah. |
| 00:12:26.46 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:12:26.66 | Linda Pfeiffer | I love it. |
| 00:12:28.91 | Jill Hoffman | I don't think we did. you |
| 00:12:30.29 | Adam Politzer | Nobody met with him last week. |
| 00:12:30.31 | Jill Hoffman | And I'll see you next time. Yeah. |
| 00:12:32.61 | Adam Politzer | Staff met with them last week. So Moffitt and Nickel and Cowley, the city engineer and myself, met with them last week. What we were scheduled to have was a meeting with the working group and the district tomorrow, but because they don't have any new information to share with us, nor does our engineer, Cowley, we postponed that meeting until the district has sent the responses to our engineer. Our engineers had time to incorporate, analyze, and review, and then we would meet with the working group once we have that information. And that's what's being |
| 00:12:35.30 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 00:13:06.98 | Adam Politzer | were anticipating July 11th as when the working group would re reassemble. sometime after that date. |
| 00:13:15.97 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 00:13:20.97 | Unknown | That concludes my report, and there are no recommendations at this point. |
| 00:13:25.59 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, questions from the council? |
| 00:13:26.96 | Linna Pfeiffer | I have some questions. Oh, sorry. So do we have a visual view three? I'm referring to the environmental vision report just for the benefit of the viewing public, specifically the discrepancies in terms of the size. |
| 00:13:45.18 | Unknown | I didn't include it in the slide presentation, |
| 00:13:48.14 | Linna Pfeiffer | Okay. |
| 00:13:48.51 | Unknown | I believe you were referring to what was included in the Environmental Vision's report regarding a percentage difference. |
| 00:13:55.11 | Linna Pfeiffer | So I'll just paraphrase and ask the question then. The environmental vision report discovered, looked at about a few of the visuals that the district had provided the city and found that one of the visuals was 25% smaller than it would be if built, found that the new piles would extend higher above the views of the horizon. This was for view number three. View number six, the district's, I guess the proposed new guide and fender piles at the far side of the float were lower than the correct elevation. view 7 the water level was 4 feet lower than the correct elevation. View 7, the water level was 4 feet lower than the other visuals. And View 8, the proposed new ramp and float was depicted at 20% smaller than what the district is proposing. So my question is, given these findings, I know that I asked and many residents asked for a physical model of what the district is proposing for a waterfront, a physical model with the surrounding structures for context. I know that the county of Marin offers something called LiIDAR data. It's elevation mark data paid for by the USGS. So it's just three years old, so it's new. It's free. It's downloadable. The district could download that and it shows the dimensions of neighboring structures. And so given that data for the dimensions would be free, then I'm just wondering if perhaps staff could go back to the district. And I personally think council should take a strong stand, in fact, especially in light of these findings that we would like to have. We need a physical model, a physical model. And I was wondering if that's something that could be pursued. |
| 00:16:08.28 | Adam Politzer | I think that I don't think that we disagree with your request. And to Tom Theodorus, our Council Member Theodorus comment earlier, we had a brief meeting with the mayor. Council Member Theodorus was not available. And the mayor brought this up in our discussion when we were reviewing the report that we received on the visuals and where we have placed it at this moment is waiting for our structural engineer, Cowie, to come back with either a recommendation that it can be smaller and the district agreeing with our engineer that it be smaller, and if that is the case, if that's the result that comes from it, whatever the new design is, hence it being smaller, then we would ask for the modeling to occur from that point. At this moment, to do any modeling on what is there, we're not, that's we think premature with the assumption that our engineers are going to be able to work with the district to refine the design. So, thank you. |
| 00:17:23.90 | Linna Pfeiffer | Thank you, Adam. That's where we are. So just to clarify, because when I asked this earlier, the answer was that that wasn't going to be provided. What I'm hearing now is that it will be provided, and you're just waiting to see the feedback from Cowie before you take it to that next step? |
| 00:17:24.78 | Adam Politzer | That's where we are. |
| 00:17:43.78 | Adam Politzer | What the staff, what Danny reported back several months ago was that the district refused to do the 3D modeling. What staff and the mayor are describing is that we are going to, as the city, request at the conclusion of the design that 3D modeling occur. So the district has not agreed to do that, nor have we asked them at this moment to do that because we don't have the conclusions of the engineering firm's work. |
| 00:18:19.93 | Linna Pfeiffer | So, Adam, as a follow-up question, you say you will request the district. The lease that the city has with the district states clearly that we need design documents from the district, etc., and there were some other criteria there that we actually were defining on this council. And it was during that discussion that I pushed the council include the requirement of a physical model. So... Wouldn't it be feasible for the council to revisit the lease with respect to the criteria for those designs and include the physical model as part of that criteria. |
| 00:19:14.94 | Adam Politzer | We will do what the council asked us to do last time. We can ask the district to do that. |
| 00:19:23.60 | Linna Pfeiffer | I've got more questions, but I'll let other folks jump in. |
| 00:19:29.21 | Joe Burns | Thank you, Danny. Of the, how many of the photo simulations that were initially provided by the district, did we end up actually sending out for validation by a third party? |
| 00:19:48.27 | Unknown | I believe there were four. |
| 00:19:50.22 | Joe Burns | Four out of how many? |
| 00:19:52.01 | Unknown | out of the seven Thank you. |
| 00:19:54.75 | Joe Burns | OK. |
| 00:19:57.24 | Unknown | I'm sorry, there are eight. |
| 00:20:05.56 | Jill Hoffman | Any other, Tom, any questions? |
| 00:20:06.64 | Linna Pfeiffer | Any questions? I... Thank you. So... |
| 00:20:08.80 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:20:12.58 | Linna Pfeiffer | So, Danny, I was just wondering if it would be possible, this isn't my question, but just as a side note, to get a hard copy of the Planning Commission HLB discussions from March 29th. I think we received an e-copy of that, but if we could get a hard copy of the transcription, I would love that. The reason I asked to is I was at that, um, the planning commission hearing and, um, At one point, I think it was Chair Werner mentioned that the pass-through grant for the $2 million that the City Council, I guess, is in line to receive should this move forward for the land side came with conditions. And I got a copy of these conditions. It's from a meeting of May 9, 2013. It's with the district, their finance auditing committee. And on page two, it's just a three-page document And on page two, it includes a bullet that says, quote, all improvements constructed are available for use by the district. This is the provisions for the pass-through agreement, that all improvements constructed are available for use by the district at no cost for its public transportation activities for the life of the improvements. so my for its public transportation activities for the life of the improvements. So I was surprised when I saw that and some of these others, like the district is not responsible for any cost overruns, et cetera. But especially that bullet that I read suggests that the district would have certain rights over that whole section of our land side with respect to public transportation activities for the life of the improvements. That, to me... First of all, that's new news for me because having been here in 2012, on November 27, 2012, I did not see those terms included in any of the documents that council received. But number two, wouldn't that trigger ordinance, I think it's 1128, with respect know a change of use and certainly giving that sort of Those rights to the district. This is our waterfront downtown landside waterfront And it's okay if you need to research that question. |
| 00:23:02.87 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, Danny's not the staff responsible for the pass through agreement. We're a public works director working with myself and the city attorney. We agree with... Planning Commissioner Chair Werner with his statements that he made at the joint meeting of the Planning Commission and HLB, we wouldn't agree to those terms either. And so at this point, the agreement hasn't moved off of the draft table, and it hasn't moved forward to the city council because our focus has been on the land side. I'm sorry, on the water side. But we wouldn't agree to those terms. And that's the contract and agreement that they took to their board for their approval. That has not made it off of the initial staff table in terms of discussions or even any meetings with the district to go over those terms. But we wouldn't agree with those terms. we're waiting for direction on council on when we'll start the discussion on the land side improvements based on how we how we move forward with with cowie and moffett and nickel on the water side engineering |
| 00:24:23.52 | Linna Pfeiffer | Well, that's reassuring, Adam. I'm wondering if we understand why Here's a 2013 condition agreement in the district's finance auditing committee, which basically gives them the rights to the waterfront for their activities. And here's a November 27, 2012 council agreement for the pass-through grant that doesn't mention that. So I'm puzzled about the... the differences because we did you know vote earlier on the pass through grant back in 2012 under the understanding there would be public hearings and transparency and we were not signing off on any plans and certainly this agreement here that we voted on had nothing like this in it. So, you know, unless there is legalese here that, you know, so. |
| 00:25:25.11 | Linda Pfeiffer | What are you reading from? Is that a contract that Sausalito entered into? No. No, it's not a contract so well. |
| 00:25:31.83 | Linna Pfeiffer | It's not a contract. It's an agreement. Adam referred to an agreement, and this was an agreement for the pass-through grant. Between the district and the city of Sausalén. |
| 00:25:38.66 | Linda Pfeiffer | between the thing that you read, the bullet point. |
| 00:25:40.97 | Jill Hoffman | on the city. THE END OF THE YEAR. |
| 00:25:42.36 | Linna Pfeiffer | Okay. |
| 00:25:42.62 | Jill Hoffman | How about this? How about this? Adam, the next time we talk about the land site improvements, can we have that part of the staff report, like the history of the |
| 00:25:43.13 | Linna Pfeiffer | I'm just trying to understand what we're talking about. |
| 00:25:55.03 | Jill Hoffman | conditions and whether or not they're applicable, then whatever. Thanks. |
| 00:25:58.67 | Linda Pfeiffer | And if Council Member Pfeiffer can give that, so that can be analyzed. Yeah, of course. So we understand it. Yep. |
| 00:26:00.43 | Jill Hoffman | So they can be analyzed. Yeah, of course. So we understand it. OK, sounds good. Thank you. |
| 00:26:05.07 | Linda Pfeiffer | I have a question. |
| 00:26:06.03 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, Tom. |
| 00:26:06.59 | Linda Pfeiffer | Danny, back to the photo simulations, and if you look at environmental vision, and I agree with our city manager that hopefully if we get them to shrink it, we'll be on to other photos and renderings and such. But I was a little puzzled because environmental vision says not you. Determine that the district employed professionally accepted standards in producing the simulations and that overall the simulations are reasonably accurate. say that but then for example one of them from the yacht club is 25 percent difference so i'm puzzled by that we may need to have them here but do you have can you shed any light on that because uh that doesn't seem reasonably accurate or one could argue that 25 percent is significant |
| 00:26:50.72 | Mary Wagner | And council member Theodorus, I'm happy to respond to that as well. I think that, We've sent the report over to the district for their response to that. In conversations with environmental vision, they didn't indicate that that was outside of alarming or outside of normal parameters. They felt that there could be some reasoning as to why that happened. So we're still in the discussion stages, so we don't have a definitive answer for you on that. But I think that once the district has responded and we engage environmental vision to work with whoever they had prepared, the renderings will be able to address that question. |
| 00:27:28.13 | Linna Pfeiffer | I have another question. Sure. So I think it was last week or the week before another lease surfaced that was new. And this was the lease that I guess the N above tides, McDevitt, according to the letter, McDevitt Enterprises has with the city. And I was wondering if you could comment on that. I know that just before this meeting at about 5 PM, council received a copy of a contract. It's not clear to me if this is the document or not. I was just wondering if you could comment on the status of that, because I would like to see that lease... |
| 00:28:17.03 | Mary Wagner | Council member Pfeiffer, I'd be happy to jump in there. Danny hasn't been directly involved in trying to locate the documents during those discussions. So the city clerk has looked in the city's files, did a pretty extensive search, and located the document that you have in front of you tonight. Lillie has worked with engineering to look at the map that's attached to the agreement to determine if this is in fact the same piece of property that the Inn Above Tide currently occupies. The city does receive $300 annually from the Inn Above Tide, and the lease amount in this document is $300, $25 a month, $300 annually. for a small rectangular or triangular piece of property that appears to be... and this document is $300, $25 a month, $300 annually. For a small rectangular or triangular piece of property that appears to be underneath some of the physical improvements for the N above tide. So we believe that we've located the appropriate document and that's what we've given you today. |
| 00:29:16.40 | Linna Pfeiffer | So to your understanding, this is the lease that we're looking for? you |
| 00:29:24.70 | Mary Wagner | We believe so. |
| 00:29:25.34 | Linna Pfeiffer | you Mm-hmm. Okay. |
| 00:29:28.21 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:29:31.77 | Jill Hoffman | Any other questions? No? Okay. Do we have any public comment on this item, which is item 6A on our agenda? I see no one approaching. No one? Yes? |
| 00:29:49.17 | Grover Deer | My name is Grover Deer. I just want to know the company environmental vision. How were they researched? What have they done? And what is their history? This may not, that's a lot of questions. I would like to know. I'm concerned with the issue. I want to determine the validity of that. Where did they come from? And what have they done? How were they selected? |
| 00:30:12.54 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. it yeah would anybody like to answer that I think sure so I could restate his question but |
| 00:30:19.54 | Mary Wagner | So I could really- Go ahead. City staff legal counsel met with various firms and do consulting work primarily for CEQA reasons. This firm was very well qualified and highly respected in their field and was selected on that basis to do the independent peer review of the photo simulations prepared by the district. |
| 00:30:45.04 | Jill Hoffman | And we looked at how many different firms before we settled on them. |
| 00:30:50.14 | Mary Wagner | I know we interviewed three different engineering firms. I'd have to go back to see how many different environmental visual photo simulation firms we looked at in that context. |
| 00:30:51.32 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:31:02.26 | Jill Hoffman | But it was more than one. |
| 00:31:03.35 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. I'm sure we thought about more than one. I don't believe we interviewed more than one. They came highly recommended. Okay. Thanks. |
| 00:31:04.31 | Jill Hoffman | I'M SURE WE CAN. |
| 00:31:06.59 | Grover Deer | Thank you. |
| 00:31:11.16 | Grover Deer | So their provincials would be online, |
| 00:31:15.05 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. Yeah, the reports have been attached to the, was it the staff report for last week? THE REPORTS FROM THE VISUAL Oh, to this one. So, yeah. So if you looked at the online to the staff report, they're attached to that. And then you can certainly look up their website and look at their credentials. Okay. Any other public comment? No? Okay, back to City Council for our discussion. Anybody have any comments? |
| 00:31:49.88 | Linna Pfeiffer | Yeah, I guess my comment is I'd like to see an earlier slide up here. It was the slide that referred to the Cowie group, what the Cowie group was looking at. Because... I guess my one, yeah, the earlier one, there. I guess my question here is, you know, one of the questions... that they're looking at if the structure, especially the float, could be made smaller given the accessibility and operational requirements. These are requirements that the district has established, and they're based on assumptions made regarding the current rental bike numbers we have. And my concern here is, do we want to have, like in May we had 32,000 rental bikes in the month of May alone, and that's off-season one Sunday in May. during the Memorial Day weekend, we had 4,000 rental bikes in one day. And it's not clear that that was all the bikes that came and counted. So I guess my concern here is, you know, are we accepting the accessibility and operational requirements that the district has told us we need when we have not yet really, I think, fully exploited strategies to reduce and manage and mitigate the rental bike numbers downtown, especially the increases every year. We have exponentially every year more and more rental bikes. I mean, we're just a small town. We can only take so many. So I guess that's one question that I have. My other comment would be we really need a physical model of this, what's being proposed, and we need it in respect to the other structures around it, the N Above Tide, the Yacht Club, Gabrielson Park. We need that scale to understand what our waterfront will look like if this is built. I'm concerned also about the discrepancies that Environmental Vision discovered, the fact that it's 25% smaller than it actually will be when it's built. Some elements of it, as well as the heights were incorrect in some places. So again, really important. And finally, the conditions. The conditions to the pass-through grant. Very concerned about that. Obviously, we don't want to lose control over our waterfront and cede that over to the district for their transportation activities. It's one step closer to turning Sausalito into a tourist transit hub. |
| 00:34:53.53 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Anybody next? Comments? Comments? No? No? |
| 00:35:00.14 | Linda Pfeiffer | I would just say that I think this is informational because we had scheduled a meeting for everyone in the public, and the public's been very involved in this, I think that right now it's premature to make any decisions. We have to look at the engineering analysis. I think the renderings, we will look at that. First of all, we need to have them here because they say they're fine and we see some discrepancies. But in the end, we think that we'll probably have to have totally new rendering. So what we really want to do is make sure that the public knows that we're still working on examining all the technical data that the Bridge District bases their plans on so that when we go to it, and we will have some discussions with them, and so that when we come to you that we will have a meeting of the public, and it's an investment of their time to come, that we will have investigated it all. Staff will be able to present it. We'll have the Bridge District there in public and also THEIR OWN have their questions relating to it. So we're trying to work on all these things so that we're not trying to speculate on what some of this is. And we're hoping to do that in the next couple of months. And we'll bring it here because when we have our meeting, I think the next meeting we're likely to have is going to be, we're going to decide whether we're going to say up or down. That has consequences to us because, you know, the bridge district seeks our written approval. We can't unreasonably withhold it. So we have to make sure that we make a reasoned decision on whatever we do. So we're hoping that when we do bring it to the public, we're going to have research to everything, and we're not going to go back to anything. We're going to make a decision. |
| 00:36:37.56 | Ross Blanchard | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:36:41.71 | Joe Burns | Yeah, I agree with that. I would just, you know, I'm not on the working group, so I really, this is some of the first time I've seen any of this. The report was... useful that we've received so far. The problem is that In the normal course of business, mistakes are going to be made. But with something as sensitive as a photo rendering, you Even if you've got one wrong, that's not good. It's just not good. Because, You make photos available, you put it up in the hallways of City Hall, you put it up in workshops, and people believe them. And even if there's no much material difference to the image, it's a credibility issue. So I think that we need to have every photo rendering redone. We need it verified by an independent party. And quite frankly, considering where we are right now, the bridge district should be paying for that independent assessment. because Even if it's just sloppiness, it's something you should not make a mistake on. It's just that simple. Thank you. |
| 00:37:59.99 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. No? Nothing? All right. Well, you know, the... The goal was to have the assumptions that were handed to us by the bridge district looked at by experts, independent experts, and some very reputable experts in the field of engineering and photo rendering. So I'm pleased where we're headed. I think I hope when we get to the point where we have a final design that that's the best design that we can get to for our city and also operationally for the ferry district. No one here, I don't think, has said we don't want a new ferry landing or we don't want the ferry here, but we also don't want to be inundated with congestion where we can't make it through our own streets. So that's our concern. And that's it for this item. Moving right along. We are now moving on to item 6B, the Caledonia Street Zoning Regulations and Allowed Uses. And again, it's a double header for Mr. Castro from our Community Development Director. |
| 00:39:25.20 | Unknown | Good evening again, Mayor Hoffman, members of the council. Uh, this is, uh, has brought to the attention of staff in the council to bring to you information regarding the land uses that are allowed in the CR, mixed commercial and residential zoning district, which includes properties along Caledonia Street and the surrounding area. Here's a map of, a zoning map of the city, and you'll see in the white dashed box is the area that I will be discussing, and it's the Caledonia and surrounding area. Here's a close-up of that area. You'll see Caledonia stretching along there and some side streets from Napa to, I think, Turney to the No, it's not turning. John said. Yeah, Johnson Street to the south. And then a portion of Bridgeway as it fronts along that portion of Caledonia. |
| 00:40:32.31 | Unknown | The Sausalito General Plan has policies and programs that relate to Caledonia Street. And let's see what that is. It promotes a mix of residential and commercial area by encouraging, I'm trying to get rid of this, encouraging local residents serving commercial uses and preservation of housing, the Street level uses, I'm just highlighting a few here. It calls to amend the zoning to require that commercial parcels locate local residents serving retail and service office outlets at the street level with preference given to retail. that to amend the zoning to require that commercial properties have residential uses on all levels above the street unless commercial uses are permitted by a CUP. and that to promote only those uses that will increase the diversity and economic vitality of local neighborhood commercial areas that serve the immediate neighborhoods. So now I'll turn to the zoning in which the general plan has indicated that it would like the zoning to do. And so the zoning in its preface of the commercial, residential, mixed commercial and residential zoning indicates that is to provide local serving retail and service businesses where mutually compatible, to provide for local serving commercial uses, to provide a pedestrian-oriented downtown experience for local residents, and to provide for accessory manufacturing uses incidental to primary commercial activity. So these next five slides are going to be all of the uses that are allowed or permitted in the CR zone, those uses that require a minor use permit, and those uses that require a conditional use permit. For the minor use permit, the MUP and the CUP, those are discretionary review requirements in order to, if a business were to come in, that land use, if it's subject to a minor use permit, is a discretionary review, requires notice to neighbors within a certain radius, it requires a public hearing, a zoning administrator hearing for the minor use permit, and for the conditional use permit, it requires a planning commission level review. |
| 00:43:12.42 | Unknown | I'm not going to go through each and name each of these uses. We can refer back to them if you'd like. But I want to get through this. But these are, again, a listing. This is slide two of five. because I am going to highlight a few of those uses. So you can see a mix of uses. Some are required a CUP and some are required a minor use permit. Some are just by right allowed. |
| 00:43:48.33 | Unknown | So here's a flow chart of the permit process for businesses. I'm not sure. When a new business comes into town, or if it's a relocation of existing business or an expansion of an existing business. they first need to obtain an occupational use permit. That is a simple form that's in the Community Development Department in which staff is able to review the list of uses that are in our municipal code to determine whether it's a permitted use, whether it requires a minor use permit, or whether it requires a conditional use permit. So that's the first sort of port of entry for someone to determine first if it's an allowed use in any of our commercial districts, including the CR zone. Once you go through any of those three, then you are able to obtain a business license and to operate. |
| 00:44:46.55 | Unknown | The minor use permit and conditional use permit are subject to a number of findings. Those are all listed there. I won't read each one, but pretty strict findings in terms of compatibility, in terms of harmonious, in terms of that it's a use that blends in with the other uses that are there. |
| 00:45:14.49 | Unknown | So offices, Offices are permitted only in the CR zone, only in the instance and two areas in which they're allowed. When they're associated with the construction of a new structure, or when it's replacing an existing office. So in the CR zone, those are the two instances when an office is allowed. Offices require a conditional use permit when it's construction of a new structure, |
| 00:45:48.16 | Unknown | And when it's a conversion of existing or previously existing retail trade, commercial service, drinking, eating, or residential use. |
| 00:46:03.40 | Unknown | There are additional conditional use permit findings for office conversions, and those are listed here. I'll read a few of them. Proposed use will promote diversity and variety to assure a balanced mix of commercial uses available to serve both resident and visitor populations. That there won't be an overconcentration of a specific use within a district. It will be mutually beneficial to and would enhance the economic health or surrounding uses in the district. that parking maintains an efficient use of available parking and will enhance that and not be a detriment to parking in the area. So what is office? In our municipal code, it doesn't have a paragraph describing what an office is. Instead, what it does, our zoning code definition for office lists a number of uses that we use as a guide to determine what an office is. And here's the list of them. And it's very interesting because you can tell This, in fact, was probably dated at the time it was done, but... That's what we look at as what offices are. Now, one particular type of use that I'm highlighting here is banks and financial services, which is retail, comma, retail. It's a permitted use. So that is defined as a financial institution providing service to the general public and maintaining hours of operation for at least five days per week for a minimum of eight hours a day. So banks, trust companies, lending and thrift institutions, credit agencies, brokers and dealers. I won't continue to list the definition, but IT'S NOT. It may appear as an office, but that's if you're receiving, I think the general intent is if you're receiving customers, Monday through Friday, you know, eight hours a day, that is considered a retail function of financial service. That is permitted. |
| 00:48:18.11 | Unknown | On. you Caledonia. Staff completed a preliminary inventory of businesses And this inventory does not include the side streets, which are Johnson, Pine, Turney, Locust, Lido, Bee, and Napa, and a portion of Bridgeway located in the CR Zone. There are no offices on this list. with the exception of L&L Property Management Office, which is a pre-existing use. Prior to that use, there was an office. There was a history of offices before it became L&L. And it can be considered that while it's an office, it's in terms of LML property, it's a local serving business. Lily Shahabi and Una Kavanaugh asked staff to investigate three other tenant spaces located within the CR zone that they believe may have been converted to office space without the required permits. The addresses are 501 Caledonia, 328 Pine Street, and 1621 Bridgeway. We are looking into those. We have sent notification and contacted the property owners that should they lease to an office use to be aware of the commercial residential zoning, that a conditional use permit is required, and you need to get an occupational use permit. So they've been all notified. there is Oh, let me just go back, sorry. Staff is currently Well, we met with Caledonia merchants last month on May 26th at the request of Lili Shahabi and Una Kavanaugh, Staff presented an overview of the CR zoning regulations related to the allowable uses, similar to what I've described to you, and the city's permit process for new businesses. There were about nine Caledonia merchants there, Um, How was that? There is a petition that is circulating ANSTAS, AND THERE'S A STATEMENT IN THERE THAT SAYS, IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS, MORE AND MORE RESIDENT SERVING RETAIL STORES ARE BEING FORCED OUT BY HIGHER RENT-PAYING OFFICES AND FINANCIAL SERVICES RETAIL. Some of these new offices don't even get legal permits before moving in. They just kick out the ground floor retail store, and then the landlord seeks forgiveness after the fact from the Sausalito Community Development Office. Staff finds this statement false. Staff is aware of only three tenant spaces that are currently being investigated. And the building owners have been made aware, as I mentioned, Staff is not aware of landlords seeking forgiveness, nor has a community development department granted permits without the required zoning process and further Along Caledonia, there are no new offices that have replaced retail. |
| 00:51:12.46 | Unknown | The petition indicates that the city council to consider a moratorium. Um, on allowing new office uses and financial services on Caledonia Street or the CR Zone. To give you background, a moratorium, the authority for a moratorium is under the California Government Code, Section 658. which authorizes the city to adopt an urgency measure an interim moratorium ordinance, prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with the contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the city is studying or intends to study within a reasonable time. The legislative findings required is that there is an established current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare, and that the approval of additional subdivisions, use permits, variances, building permits, or any other applicable entitlement for use which is required in order to comply with the zoning ordinance would result in that threat to public health, safety, or welfare. The time period for a moratorium is a two-year maximum. and there's extensions, but that's all within that two-year maximum time limit. And it requires for a fifth vote of the council. So the recommendation is any one or more of the following. Number one, to do nothing. receive and follow this report. Number two, direct staff to conduct a comprehensive inventory of the existing businesses in the CR zone, which includes those side streets, which I did not include. and return to the council for further review and discussion. Number three, direct staff to work with the planning commission. to study the CR zone and to consider zoning ordinance amendments to modify the allowable land uses. And number four, direct staff to return to the council with a process to initiate a moratorium on specified land uses in the CR zone. So with that, that concludes my report. |
| 00:53:24.19 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Do we have any council questions? |
| 00:53:28.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:53:28.36 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:53:28.39 | Linda Pfeiffer | uh, |
| 00:53:28.71 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:53:28.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:53:28.81 | Unknown | you |
| 00:53:28.96 | Unknown | Thank you. Tell me. |
| 00:53:30.82 | Linda Pfeiffer | Danny, on these three |
| 00:53:30.84 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 00:53:33.22 | Linda Pfeiffer | Um, conversions Thank you. |
| 00:53:36.56 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:53:36.76 | Linda Pfeiffer | believing whatever they are that Lillian Una asked you to look at, at 501 Caledonia, 328 Pine, and 1621 Bridgeway. I'm a little confused because, I mean, who was in there before, and are they offices now? I mean, didn't you knock on the door? I mean, are they offices? Do they have a sign on there? I'm a little confused. |
| 00:53:36.83 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:53:58.11 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah, what's going on with them? |
| 00:53:58.97 | Unknown | Well, that's cool. They're a little bit different. One's an active business where they expanded without getting an occupancy use permit. So they were existing and permitted, and then they expanded into an adjacent space. They broke a wall and expanded into it. That in itself is subject to at least getting an occupancy use permit, and then we let them know what the next process would be. |
| 00:54:21.63 | Linda Pfeiffer | But was that an office that they... That was an office. |
| 00:54:23.88 | Unknown | That was an office, yeah. Okay. However, I... |
| 00:54:24.70 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. Yeah. Okay. |
| 00:54:27.79 | Unknown | Well, it was an advertising agency on Pine. that that did expand and THE CITY. A few years ago, staff at that time had issued an occupancy use permit. I don't know if it was an error, but it was issued. And then it's since expanded. |
| 00:54:45.90 | Linda Pfeiffer | And what was it before this advertising agency expanded? Was it a retail? What was there before? No, I'm not. |
| 00:54:52.43 | Unknown | I'm not sure. I thought Pilates. That's what I was. |
| 00:54:54.79 | Linda Pfeiffer | I was. Okay. And then the other two? I mean, because again, it seems like we should at least have some general idea of what happened, what it was, and what it's likely to be known. |
| 00:55:01.19 | Unknown | that's likely to be known. The other two have history. 501 Caledonia, I think, originally was a clothing boutique. store and then it morphed into some type of design firm or office. It's now an office. I think it's vacant. There's a sign front, a little 8, 9, 11 sheet of paper looking for someone to lease. So it was obviously with Lily Shahabi's help and Una Kavanaugh, it was an opportune time to notify them and let them know that they need to get the right to consider what use would go in that site. |
| 00:55:34.85 | Linda Pfeiffer | And then the third one? |
| 00:55:35.32 | Unknown | And then the third one is on Bridgeway. at the south end North End. of Caledonia. That one was... It currently does not have |
| 00:55:47.09 | Ross Blanchard | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:55:47.90 | Unknown | a use. It appears there's no activity. There appears to be something stored there. There's no door that's open. Our records indicate that that business license expired, but I hear otherwise that perhaps there's still somebody leasing the site. but there's no activity. |
| 00:56:11.27 | Linda Pfeiffer | And community development, you're saying in none of these cases that you approve the uses that they currently are doing and they haven't come to the planning commission or anything they're just doing whatever they're doing and we don't know exactly in some cases okay |
| 00:56:18.17 | Unknown | No. |
| 00:56:27.35 | Linna Pfeiffer | Yeah, I have a follow-up question along the same line. So there's, of course, there's perception and there's reality. But, of course, perception is often based in elements of reality, and it kind of drives fear with existing merchants. And so what I heard about the advertising agency, which is an office, taking over the Pilates studio, which was clearly a resident-serving service. To go to them after the fact is... I guess my question is, it does sound like we are, you know, allowing, we're saying, oh, this is the process you need to go through to get, to become legal. But isn't it correct that... that the advertising agency would need to go before the planning commission in getting this occupancy use. And that there's a chance that they could be, and frankly, I would argue, based on what I'm looking at, would be perhaps questioned about this. I mean, I can't be biased one way or the other up here. But... Is there any kind of reinforcement we do? I mean, it does feel like they're just seeking forgiveness. We're not closing them down. We're not fining them. We're not doing anything punitive for them to knock down a wall and take over what was a resident-serving business. So can you respond to any punitive actions we take for these businesses that have broken our ordinance, our work? |
| 00:58:20.99 | Unknown | Since we've been made aware, we notified them via a correspondence. We contacted them and let them know that a conditional use permit, if it's shown that they are an office-type use, will require a conditional use permit. |
| 00:58:36.24 | Linna Pfeiffer | So that's telling them they have to go through a process. But is there anything that says you need to stop your business in this space right now? Or there will be fines? |
| 00:58:39.77 | Unknown | Right. |
| 00:58:48.34 | Unknown | We haven't chosen that route. There is an administrative penalties process that our code enforcement could undertake. At this point, we're beginning with a notification to let them know that they would need a conditional use permit. |
| 00:59:04.15 | Linna Pfeiffer | So there are administrative actions, punitive actions that could be pursued. And I have more questions, but I'll leave it to the council. I don't want to monopolize all the questions. Council Member Withey had some questions? Yes, Danny, could you? |
| 00:59:17.47 | Joe Burns | Yeah. Yeah, Danny, could you put up the language of the petition? Yeah, perfect. Okay. THE CITY IS A You guys basically... view the statements in there as factually incorrect. |
| 00:59:40.89 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 00:59:41.58 | Joe Burns | Okay, so let's go through it. Uh, How many... Retail stores have been forced out. and have been replaced by offices and financial services in the last two years on Caledonia Street, to your knowledge. |
| 01:00:04.09 | Unknown | I'm not aware of any except the three that's been brought to my attention. |
| 01:00:07.08 | Joe Burns | Okay. |
| 01:00:07.38 | Unknown | All right. and we're looking into the legitimacy of those three. |
| 01:00:12.14 | Joe Burns | Okay. And how many, to your knowledge, in the last couple of years, landlords have come in to seek forgiveness after the fact which you guys have then over-the-counter dealt with? None. Thank you. |
| 01:00:24.41 | Unknown | None. |
| 01:00:30.65 | Ross Blanchard | All right. |
| 01:00:31.36 | Linna Pfeiffer | Yeah, I have a follow-up question. Yeah. So right now the staff report has looked at Caledonia Street, but you haven't looked at kind of the other areas around Caledonia. |
| 01:00:33.61 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 01:00:47.06 | Unknown | around Caledonia. Between Caledonia and Bridgeway, you know, Pine, |
| 01:00:51.85 | Linna Pfeiffer | You didn't look at Pine. You didn't look at Tourney. It was a preliminary. |
| 01:00:53.81 | Unknown | It was a preliminary. Okay. Look at all the ground floor Caledonia Street businesses. |
| 01:00:55.11 | Linna Pfeiffer | Okay. |
| 01:00:59.32 | Linna Pfeiffer | Okay, okay, good. So this is to your knowledge based on what you've you've looked at in terms of Caledonia Street, and then what merchants have proactively come to you and said, hey, heads up, these three, you know, have done this. Is that accurate? |
| 01:01:19.03 | Unknown | one merchant has. |
| 01:01:20.72 | Linna Pfeiffer | One merchant has. Okay, good. So another question I have is the housing element passed something called a vertical mixed use, a VMU program, which encouraged housing on second floors, and I believe it also includes the Caledonia area. Do you know how the VMU, is that an overlay? Because I remember at the time there was discussion and fear about the offices on the second floor kind of getting squeezed out and then going to the retail ground level and perhaps squeezing out the stores. have if what is the impact of the VMU on the current ordinance in zoning in caledonia street regarding you know our our attempt to preserve you know that balance and that mix with retail serving on the ground floor |
| 01:02:20.86 | Unknown | Well, both the general plan and the zoning encourage that the retention of existing residential whether it's on the ground floor or on the second level or above the first level. So it encourages that because it's a stated objective of the general plan that this be a mixed commercial residential. Offices cannot, again, new offices cannot come in unless it undergoes a conditional use permit process. So that's the checkpoint in which one must undergo a public hearing and meet specific findings in order to come in. Okay. I think it really is a, you know, in terms of an impact, I think part of it is you mentioned the housing element, that it was a stated objective of the housing element to retain the existing residential as well as promote residential and retain existing and promote residential should it become available. |
| 01:03:23.94 | Ross Blanchard | Yes, Mr. Vice Mayor. |
| 01:03:24.38 | Joe Burns | Mr. Weissmere. Yeah, let's just to make sure we've got the record completely straight. The Caledonia Street is always had residential allowed on the upper floors. Correct. The revision of the housing element did not change that. |
| 01:03:38.22 | Unknown | All right. |
| 01:03:42.67 | Unknown | I- |
| 01:03:42.98 | Joe Burns | Thank you. |
| 01:03:43.03 | Unknown | That's correct. |
| 01:03:44.87 | Linna Pfeiffer | Yeah, and just to clarify that Caledonia has always allowed housing on the second floor. However, when you put the VMU on the Caledonia Street area, you create an environment and an overlay zone which encourages more housing in lieu of the offices. |
| 01:04:05.64 | Joe Burns | I'll reserve my comment. |
| 01:04:06.26 | Linna Pfeiffer | Well, I mean, that's why it was passed. I mean, I voted against it, but that's the reason it was passed. |
| 01:04:08.71 | Joe Burns | you |
| 01:04:08.78 | Linda Pfeiffer | I mean, I've been. |
| 01:04:09.59 | Joe Burns | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:04:10.75 | Linda Pfeiffer | That's the reason it was passed. How many on Caledonia Street, and it was legal before and after the housing element, so how many office units have been converted to residential housing in the last year? |
| 01:04:12.37 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 01:04:12.46 | Linna Pfeiffer | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:04:12.78 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 01:04:12.80 | Linna Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:04:24.54 | Unknown | Nothing has come before the Thanks. |
| 01:04:26.97 | Linda Pfeiffer | So basically it has had no effect on this office issue. |
| 01:04:31.12 | Linna Pfeiffer | So, well, so I guess a follow-up question then is, you know, I'm concerned about what I'm seeing in terms of, you know, the mix. And with these three businesses, if this is a trend, and the perception that exists with merchants. I know that a few have also talked to me beyond the ones that I see in this room expressing concerns regarding empty spaces above them and rumors of higher and higher rents for highest and best use. So certainly there is a perception out there, and I think that when we have three businesses that have successfully been able to do this without a CUP, it kind of bears, it supports the fear, I think, out there personally. Now, the VMU, though, if we are encouraging I don't know. housing with this VMU overlay on Caledonia Street, and if housing does move out the offices, or if we do protect, you know, kind of enforce the offices on the second floor that exist, and retail on the ground floor, Are we somehow putting a spotlight on the VMU for new housing in other locations in Sausalito? No. |
| 01:06:05.13 | Unknown | Well, first of all, offices are not allowed by right on the second level. The only instance it would be would be if they're existing and replaced by office. So just to be clear, that office is allowed if it replaces an existing office. But no new office can go in unless you require a CUP. There isn't an overlay of a VMU within Caledonia that has been established in our municipal code to allow for residential, whether it's on the ground floor or on the second floor as preservation of housing. And again, that's the mixed commercial and residential zoning districts. |
| 01:06:45.38 | Linna Pfeiffer | So I used the wrong term. It's not an overlay. There's no overlay. What is it, a program, an ordinance? What is it? What is the VMU program? |
| 01:06:48.53 | Unknown | But it's a. |
| 01:06:53.24 | Unknown | It's already just, no, there's just not a reference of the VMU or any of that in our municipal code, nor in our general plan. |
| 01:07:03.10 | Linna Pfeiffer | Well, it was included in the housing element, and Sacramento required it for certification according to what they claimed. |
| 01:07:12.14 | Mary Wagner | If I may, Danny, it's just part of your zoning code. It's been incorporated into the zoning code. |
| 01:07:15.53 | Linna Pfeiffer | Thank you. Okay. So it's in our zoning code. Thank you. Okay. |
| 01:07:20.31 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:07:20.33 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:07:20.34 | Jill Hoffman | Hey, can we? |
| 01:07:20.77 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 01:07:22.24 | Jill Hoffman | Do we have any more questions from the Council about the Caledonia street zoning requirements? |
| 01:07:26.81 | Linda Pfeiffer | Well, I do have one. I mean, a difference. Danny, when you take a look at this, and I'll have some in common about what we should be doing, but do you have any, I noticed that if there's new construction, an office can go as of right. And there are some offices that can go in there, like banks and that kind kind of thing that we haven't seen yet. So we're talking about a few things that may not be real, but there are some exposures here. So if we really want to keep this residence serving, in your general assessment of this, do we need to change the ordinance to make sure that some of these others don't come in? Other officers? |
| 01:08:10.51 | Unknown | I mean, it's a possible option to study to determine whether, you know, you want to look at amending the zoning to modify particular uses. |
| 01:08:10.55 | Linda Pfeiffer | and say, |
| 01:08:21.62 | Unknown | that are allowed in the CR zone, that certainly is an option. Um, |
| 01:08:27.32 | Joe Burns | Madam Mayor. Yes. Danny, could you put up the Options? No, the one describing what a bank is. Financial service, retail, what a retail service. Okay, now obviously this was written a little while ago. |
| 01:08:41.82 | Ross Blanchard | Yeah. |
| 01:08:48.62 | Joe Burns | Right? This doesn't really is sort of almost laughable in 2016. Okay. If a commodities broker, came to you at the counter and said, I am opening, an office, a retail space on the ground floor of Lily's space that's going to be a commodities brokerage firm that I intend to offer services for the public and I will have my doors open so that they can come in. Would you have to say that falls within the definition here even though it's ridiculous? Right, but would you have to say that that would fall in the definition here and therefore is that a definition that needs changing? |
| 01:09:47.70 | Unknown | Well, first of all, from your basic description of what you describe, I would say yes. But I would look further to be sure that they're not, that they're in fact taking, um, customers from the morning to the afternoon five days a week, and they're open eight to five, and their doors are open, and someone can walk in and receive service, customer service. That would be what I would determine to be fitting that definition. Do I find it outdated? Perhaps yes. |
| 01:10:22.06 | Jill Hoffman | No question? Yeah, go ahead. |
| 01:10:23.96 | Ray Withy | Um, Dan, uh, Danny, should we because it is Caledonia and important, very important to us, the locals. Should we have maybe a check every three, four months to see what stores are still vacant? For instance, I'll give you an example. right over here. It used to be a frame shop. |
| 01:10:49.04 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 01:10:49.34 | Ray Withy | Right. Now that's empty. Someone's going in. Yeah, but I'm saying as we see this store open, wouldn't it be wise to send the owner of the land |
| 01:10:54.02 | Ross Blanchard | Yeah, I know. |
| 01:11:02.67 | Ray Withy | THEIR OWNERS. |
| 01:11:06.03 | Unknown | until they move ahead? I mean, since after my discussions with some of the Caledonian merchants and with Una and both, and Lily, I thought perhaps that it was very helpful to have that, I would say, a workshop with these merchants, but to go as far as to perhaps providing a brochure that we can work with the chamber that indicates what the permit process is so that it's very clear to existing businesses as well as to new businesses that they're aware of the process and the rules for the different commercial zoning districts in the city. So... |
| 01:11:28.46 | Unknown | So that's... |
| 01:11:42.60 | Ray Withy | Can I ask what's going in over here? |
| 01:11:45.53 | Unknown | It's a photography studio slash gallery. it's going to require conditional use permit. |
| 01:11:51.24 | Ray Withy | Okay, thank you. |
| 01:11:52.42 | Unknown | They have their application in now. |
| 01:11:55.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Any more questions? No? Okay. Do we have any public comment on this item 6B, Caledonia Street Zoning Regulations and Allowed Uses? Yes, Christopher again? Have you failed to fill out a speaker card again, sir? I did. All right. |
| 01:12:14.29 | Christopher | Thank you. you |
| 01:12:14.44 | Jill Hoffman | Mark, go ahead. |
| 01:12:14.76 | Christopher | Go ahead. So could you please bring up the thing that was written about the slide about the public the comment. |
| 01:12:26.80 | Jill Hoffman | the petition. |
| 01:12:27.44 | Christopher | Oh. Which one is that? So, the first line, more and more residents serving retail stores are being forced out. You say this isn't true, but yet we just said that the three stores that Lily's, the one that the Pilates was kicked out of, And then there was a third one. We all agreed that there are three that are being or were kicked out. Yet you said that the staff, city staff doesn't see that this is a true statement. Well, if there are three that are, it's a true statement. Secondly, why would the landlord come and seek forgiveness if we're not going and doing anything to the landlords, if you're not fining them, if you're not doing anything to them, why would they come to the city and seek forgiveness? |
| 01:13:19.53 | Linna Pfeiffer | Oh, up here. Adjust test. |
| 01:13:20.98 | Christopher | I MEAN, IT'S A Why would they seek forgiveness if we're not doing anything about it? They don't need to seek forgiveness. There's no fine. There's nothing that they have to do, right? That's... This is the comment I have to make, that there are people there getting kicked out, and they don't need to seek forgiveness if we don't do anything about it. |
| 01:13:43.52 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Anybody? Yes? |
| 01:13:45.95 | Christopher | Thank you. What? |
| 01:13:46.44 | Unknown | . |
| 01:13:49.63 | Unknown | I'd like to know if you... Can you pull the microphone down here? If there is a fine for landlord... |
| 01:13:52.62 | Jill Hoffman | Can you pull the microphone down here? |
| 01:13:53.97 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. I think it's a good thing. |
| 01:13:57.97 | Unknown | and they pay for the fine. So what happened after that? constantly they can pay for the fine and stay there. And I don't think it's right for for us to leave and give it to hedge fund or some internet people or financing, whatever. |
| 01:14:20.60 | Ross Blanchard | MAKING A LITTLE BIT. |
| 01:14:21.01 | Unknown | So I'd like to know what we can do, what you can do. |
| 01:14:24.45 | Jill Hoffman | Mm-hmm. Okay, thank you. Anybody else? Any other public comment on this item? Seen no one? Oh, yes. Chill. |
| 01:14:36.43 | Unknown | I'm a 16-year resident, and I actually chose to live down the street from Caledonia for the reasons that it is our locals downtown, and it has all the restaurants and retail spaces, and I can walk there, and we all love it. I also chose to open my business on the street. I moved it from the city. I could have opened it anywhere. I chose that street because of the mix of retail and all the things that we come to love. I have to say that if it starts turning into a non-local serving street, I mean, my lease is up in several years and I have to evaluate, is there enough locals coming to the street? And are we just, |
| 01:14:51.16 | Ross Blanchard | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:15:21.67 | Unknown | turning it into office space because |
| 01:15:23.09 | Unknown | because |
| 01:15:24.57 | Unknown | I have to say the people that do work in the offices come to work and leave. They don't spend the dollars there and they you know they might order in or grab bite but they're not spending the time that the locals are so it does affect us so i do think we need to somehow protect it in some way |
| 01:15:44.89 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yes. |
| 01:15:46.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:15:54.15 | Unknown | Good evening. Regarding to those issues, a little bit off the subject, but talking about the Caledonia Street, the vibrancy of the business, my favorite subject is the parking. Obviously, Caledonia Street has more restaurants, more retail business open, and lately parking has been more difficult, more challenging. I am suggesting to maybe up to at least local street parking, two hours of parking extended to 8 p.m. Main reason why is a lot of the local retail restaurant stuff and they include Bridgeway's employees parking on Caradine Street. After six o'clock, nobody enforcing, which means you can park 401k. You're not going to get the ticket. In other words, the Caledonia Street park all night by the employees. Through Caledonia merchant meeting and the chamber, we try to restrain our own way to encourage them to not park in those areas. But everybody parking there right now. If you extend at 8 p.m., at least those business section 8 p.m., I think it will help. parking congestion. That's one. And two, where else is employees going? Previous ex-police station on the bridgeway, the front side, there's a vacant. Nobody uses it there. If we pave it and light it up, lit up, and the employee parking available, more space available. for employee staff parking somewhere else. So one side called enforcement, and the other side, if you can find a way to vibrancy of the Caledonia Street, is always challenging. Business people want to have more business to come. Residents want to have quite a lifestyle. It's always challenging to how we can meet for both sides. Thanks for all your consideration. |
| 01:17:52.19 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yes. |
| 01:18:01.75 | Judy Frazier | Hi. |
| 01:18:04.23 | Ross Blanchard | I don't know. |
| 01:18:05.27 | Judy Frazier | Pardon me? Oh, I'm Judy Frazier and... That's who I am. And we've lived here since 1966. But you have to remember the reason why Caledonia Street was made residential, commercial, or whatever you call it. We lost downtown. And we have kids, we've raised kids. Christopher's lived here all his life. And you want to have a place for, and frankly, a bank is a bank. we should try to get a local bank back where kids can go have a savings account. I'm sick and tired of losing everything. There may be a few dot com people, but I don't really care about them. They can go some they frankly can afford somewhere else. You really have to preserve our our street. I mean, it's really a dinosaur almost. And so we're going to lose the rest of the town. OK? Just remember why it was started. |
| 01:18:56.34 | Jill Hoffman | Mm-hmm. Thank you. Okay. Any other public comment? Seeing none, I'm going to bring it back up here for council discussion. Who would like to kick us off, Linna? |
| 01:19:07.46 | Linna Pfeiffer | Yeah, so I'm really glad that this was a request from me regarding an agenda item, so I'm really glad that this is on the agenda. I think we need to seriously consider a moratorium. I know other cities have taken urgent steps like Palo Alto, and I know Healdsburg has, I've been told, has an ordinance that provides for a mix, a nice balanced mix for residents serving in their downtown. The petition statements up here, they resonate with me. They strike me as they ring true based on what I'm seeing in the staff report. We've got three businesses. We know one basically expanded into the Pilates. The phrase seek forgiveness, I mean, obviously a merchant's not going to go knock, knock, knock, please forgive me. I think the spirit of what I'm reading up there is that seek forgiveness versus seeking permission is the spirit of that phrase and that petition. and without any punitive administrative actions to enforce our own codes, then obviously, you know, and without the tracking to know exactly what's happening, then we do threaten the mix of residents serving businesses on Caledonia Street. The fact that we have not yet looked at Johnson Street, Pine Street, Turney Street, Locust Street, Litho Street, B Street, and Napa Street, and the portion of Bridgeway that is located and considered resident serving as part of the Caledonia area, suggests that this staff report, these three, might be just the tip of the iceberg. So I really thank STD staff for coming forward and the research they did on this. I think that we need to look at a healthy mix on Caledonia Street. Maintain the resident serving balance of services and retail that Caledonia is known for. And I personally like, when I'm looking at page 7 of the staff report, I like number 2, direct staff to conduct a comprehensive inventory of the existing businesses. I like 3, as well, to work with the planning commission, in tandem while doing two to study the CR zone and frankly look at what other cities have done to protect that robust mix of resident serving services on Caledonia. And I also like four to explore the process of initiating a moratorium on specifiededonia. And I'd also like four to explore the process of initiating a moratorium on specified land uses if that's needed. Thank you. Sure. |
| 01:22:12.05 | Jill Hoffman | Anybody want to go next? Vice mayor? |
| 01:22:16.22 | Joe Burns | um, So I agree with Councilmember Pfeiffer on items two and three. We need to see if there's more of a problem than just the three businesses that have been identified. We just need to figure out what's going on. Um, Let me come to three in a moment. The issue here seems to me that some illegal conversions have taken place which have never been authorized by the city. That's what's going on here in a few businesses. That needs to be reversed. The issue here is not so much the businesses need to be basically... told they don't have an occupational use permit and they have to shut down. if they're actually in violation of never obtained one. I mean, it's kind of simple. So that's the first thing. The second thing is we need to make sure that the landlords know that they can't just do an office conversion. We have not done any office conversions. Our actual zoning ordinance is pretty robust. Our zoning ordinance is very clear. It's for residential retail use primarily. And I think that's what all the decisions of the Planning Commission and staff have been generally along those lines. We need to know sooner if there's somebody who's done something illegally so that we can act faster to shut it down. Kind of simple. Finally, with regards to item number three, I think there is a clear need to look at the financial services retail because of the language of that, that's one great big loophole. Any financial service firm could walk in there, try and make an argument, and if it came up with the CUP to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission would have to struggle because of outdated language. So that needs absolutely cleaning up. And I would recommend that we direct the staff to bring that particular definition to the Planning Commission for review. Obviously way back it was contemplated somebody wanted a local bank down there. That's what that like, but the language has been morphed into now anybody could walk in and abuse it, and abuse it basically. But other than that, my look at this, our ordinance is pretty robust, very clear in terms of the uses and the intention. And if anybody sees any misuse, they need to report it quickly so that we can act quickly to shut that business down. |
| 01:25:09.75 | Ray Withy | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:25:10.30 | Joe Burns | Yeah. |
| 01:25:10.64 | Ray Withy | Thank you. Well, I agree with Council Member Ray Withey on especially number two. I think a notice should be sent out to all of these businesses on Caledonia Street, Johnson, Pine, all of them. It should be sent out to all the landlords explaining to them once again what the rules are. and be able to track this, that if a property is sold on Caledonia Street, that the new landlord knows the rules very, very quickly. And I think it's very important that we maintain Caledonia and the side streets for local serving. We don't need to move downtown on Caledonia. So we have two separate areas, and I think Caledonia Street should remain as a resident service. |
| 01:26:05.57 | Linda Pfeiffer | . Yeah, I think we're all in agreement that Caledonia, we need to preserve Caledonia as residents serving. So this is a good opportunity for us to review these things. people are talking about perceptions of what's going on. I think that's why we're having this on the agenda. I think it's very important that we deal with and find out what the facts are, not deal in conjecture or speculation about it. I think we need, on the three that have been identified, we need to get exact information on it. Number one, were they kicked out or did they just leave? Number two is, what is the current use? And they have to conform to it. And as Council Member Withey said, and if they're not, we shut them down. It's that simple. We have the authority right now. If they haven't gotten the proper permits and they're in illegal use, we shut them down. It's that simple. I think we need to do a whole inventory again so we understand it. And it's a good thing as we go forward, especially as we get into the planning process and the general plan, we need the inventory. But we should do this to address this, to make sure that if there's anything we give them notices, if there are illegal uses, we shut it down. I think this highlights why we want to update our general plan. We have an excellent general plan that addressed issues about residents serving in Caledonia, but again, financial service is a big hole. And we're not even looking at that now. That's something that hasn't happened, but it's absolutely legal. And maybe if we tried to turn them down, we might be sued. So we have to close that loop. We actually have the same issue in our historic district about the formula retail. And so I would recommend when we go to the Planning Commission that they look at these services and financial services both in Caledonia and there. And so I agree on what we should do on three and we certainly need to do the inventory on number two. |
| 01:28:01.25 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, I don't disagree with anything that's been said, so I won't repeat it. So I think right now we're looking, what's our specific direction to staff? I think we're all agreeing on two and three. Danny, that we'd like the staff to conduct the comprehensive inventory that's mentioned in two, and then direct staff to work with the planning commission. How do you guys feel about number four, direct staff to return to the council with process to initiate a moratorium on specified land uses? I think Councilman Pfeiffer is in favor of that. Anybody against that? That kind of depends on two and three, right? |
| 01:28:33.88 | Linna Pfeiffer | Yeah, I guess perhaps I personally, perhaps if we can get a follow-up in a timely manner for two and to get clarity on just how rampant this problem is, that then we could take a look at number four, initiating a moratorium. Because the perception is, and based on just these three that actually were identified by another merchant, it gives me pause for concern. |
| 01:29:15.48 | Jill Hoffman | So I think number four is going to flow naturally from two and three. If we see that there's a problem, then we might want to do a moratorium on specified uses for a short period of time. So I think that's the way we'd like to proceed. Do you need a motion, or is that clear enough for staff? Okay. All right. That's it. So that's what we'll do. Excellent work coming up with a solution up here. And thank you to the Caledonia Street people that came and provided input. Merchants, thank you. Yeah, let's take a five-minute break. |
| 01:29:49.82 | Ray Withy | Is there something you can do to make it easier? |
| 01:29:53.43 | John Rohrabacher | right. |
| 01:29:59.44 | Jill Hoffman | Ready? |
| 01:30:05.57 | Jill Hoffman | I'm waiting for you, sir. Yes, sir. There you go. |
| 01:30:07.84 | Unknown | You gotta be human. |
| 01:30:10.04 | Jill Hoffman | All right, we're... back on the record. And we're moving on to item 6B, RBR update, State of Richardson Bay. And it's going to be given by our police chief, John Robacher, and Lieutenant Bill Frost. Is Lieutenant Frost here, or is it just you? |
| 01:30:28.13 | John Rohrabacher | Bill's on vacation. |
| 01:30:29.43 | Jill Hoffman | Very good. Then it's just you. |
| 01:30:30.62 | John Rohrabacher | I'll never forgive him for that. |
| 01:30:30.93 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I think. Who approved that? |
| 01:30:36.73 | John Rohrabacher | My name is John Rohrabacher. I'm your chief of police, and I have an update for you on Richardson's Bay anchoring. So what I would like to cover is a little bit of warm up before we get to the bulleted points items. but we were last before you in January and provided an update at that time. Since then, we've done public outreach, We've been doing an assessment of marine debris We've surveyed our anchorage waters of Sausalito, We've submitted a grant to the Division of Building and Waterways for vessel abatement. And then we've conducted quite a bit of partnership work with the other agencies in Richardson Bay. Thank you. So from there, So this map, using this little bit of a warm up This comes right off of RBRA's website, so you may already have seen it, but I want to point out, because there's some things we're gonna talk about related to this so that dark line here at the bottom is the county line so they just put that out of your mind for a sec the red line from THE BEST OF THE BEST OF THE point to Spinnaker is the line of the special anchorage. So from that point north, the federal anchorage. The city limits are outlined with the to the next episode. White, or the Richardson Bay, I'm sorry, the Richardson Bay Regional Agency borders are the white line as it goes across. So you can see it extends up into Mill Valley, and of course all of the Tiburon area up here And that constitutes the waters of Richardson Bay Regional Agency jurisdiction. THE yellow outline actually I think provides the most interesting view of just who has what piece of the water. Because really kind of hard to tell from another perspective. So Belvedere has actually quite a big chunk. And of course, so does Marin County. I'm not sure. Tiburon has a pretty big piece up to the north here, and then they have a little tiny piece over here where the ferry comes in. And Mill Valley's, of course, is fairly small up here, and ours really from I'm, part that matters the most I know our jurisdiction starts down here but again from Spinnaker Point You know, going north. So. This really defines for us whose water we're working in and however there's a lot of overlapping Richardson Bay Regional Agency ordinances that cover all of them combined. This is just another view, again, off of RBRA's website. And it's just a straight top-down view of Sausalito. And I only use it because it does point out the channel. and I'm not going to claim anything about whether it's to scale, but it's pretty much the location of the channel. And our waters are typically everything on this side of the channel and you'd see from the previous slide. This is primarily the channel right here at that border, and this is all that same water on this other map. So I just provide that for orientation. If you already knew all that, thank you for your patience. After the meeting in January, we set out to do some public outreach. And we had a meeting at the fire station public meeting room. We had about 60 people show up, all of them very interested in what our plans might be going forward. And in fact, we didn't have on purpose a firm plan going forward other than there would be some steps taken to work on clearing up the anchorage. And I asked the group to please share with us their concerns and comments so that as much as possible we could have a two-way conversation. And I was joined by Lieutenant Frost and Lieutenant Gregory, and it was fairly lively but respectful, and I appreciate that. And I also have to acknowledge that there was an awful lot of people in that room that have a lot of significant experience as mariners, and I have none. So I, you know, stand before them wanting to learn about the things that they know that will help us do our job. And it actually worked out pretty well. I have none. So I stand before them wanting to learn about the things that they know that will help us do our job, and it actually worked out pretty well. I told them that we would have another meeting. We haven't had one yet because it's so much to learn, and I don't have... I'm not ready yet to hold another one. |
| 01:35:30.60 | John Rohrabacher | One of the first things that we did then after that was go back and take a look at our city ordinances. And as you've heard before, the city of Sausalito, we have a 10 hour rule you can't you know anchor in our waters for longer than hours without permission of the chief I told that group that night I'm not issuing any of those permissions but the ordinance as it's written leaves a little bit of gap in it that makes me want to see it changed. And so we're already working with the city attorney and the community development director and public works to draft a revision of that rule. And it's a little complicated and I'm probably not the best person to try and summarize it. A few changes would go a long ways to help us with the ordinance and enforcing the 10 hours on anything of water in Sausalito rather than the lands below the water and it's sort of a little bit of a mix up in the way that's worded. Also too, and I don't know that we'll be able to fix it or even want to, but we don't have separate vessel removal authority in our municipal code. But the RBRA code does, and we have the authority to enforce that. So we don't necessarily have to make up a new rule where one already exists that will serve our purposes. And we'll talk more about that later. |
| 01:36:58.94 | John Rohrabacher | The County of Marin has also some of its own ordinances and they currently don't enforce any of them, but they have the 72 hour rule and a permit required for anchoring in Richardson Bay in their waters, and they also have no removal authority. However, the RBRA has, A 72 hour maximum. without a permit or a permit required for up to seven days, neither of which are being enforced. and liveaboards are entirely prohibited under RBRA ordinance, and RBRA does have removal authority. So there are some things there that we can work with because one of the revisions to the RBRA ordinances in 97 was allowing for all the law enforcement agencies that are members of the Richardson Bay Regional Agency to enforce Richardson Bay Regional Agency ordinances, whereas before that they were not. |
| 01:37:58.18 | John Rohrabacher | So the next thing we wanted to share was that after our January meeting, we were a little bit behind learning that in January was the new marine debris, law. And, uh, you know, there's the definition there and we're gonna skip by a little bit of that, It's actually a really great law that's on the books now to help jurisdictions clean up marine debris. There's another slide coming up with a definition of what marine debris is. And depending on whether the debris is identifiable or not how quickly it can be removed. So if it's something that is not identifiable, meaning we can't locate the owner, and we really do have to try, it can be immediately removed. But if we are able to identify the owner, than there's a 10-day period that we have to post the debris and then be able to remove the debris after that. |
| 01:39:00.42 | John Rohrabacher | So this is the definition of marine debris. We're looking forward to enforcing it and probably being a little bit of a test case sometimes because as anything new, depending what we take and how it fits somebody's definition, ours or the owner's or somebody else's, that may have to be settled later. But this allows quite a bit of room for removing marine debris. We put up a couple of pictures. This one's a little harder to see, because it almost looks like a whale that beached itself. But it's actually an upside-down boat. and since removed and another one that we believe qualified as marine debris. So one of the things that we did recently to bring a more current look for you to look at here as council members is we went out now twice on the water last week. On Monday, we went out with the chief of Belvedere, Patrice Seiler, and also the Tiburon town manager, Greg Chanis, and took some photographs and a couple of video clips I'm going to show. And then we went out again on Thursday and I had the privilege of taking out and believe me I'm not driving the boat. Our city manager went with me and Mike McKinley, who's here tonight, and is also one of our boat operators, and then also a man named Rod Gould. who coincidentally happened to be the city manager in San Rafael and appointed me chief of police there a bunch of years ago. And so it was like old home week, and we went out and had a chance to look at the anchorage. So this is just a picture that Chief Sider took of a potential example of either the marine debris law removal or one of the nuisance abatement examples. So I'm gonna see how this works here. So I have two short video clips |
| 01:41:03.71 | Ross Blanchard | you |
| 01:41:09.09 | John Rohrabacher | And I didn't turn the sound up, it was a really windy day. Little Whitecaps in Richardson Bay. and Trish was Chief Seiler, she was manning the camera, So she was just trying to capture A, example of boats. And there's lots of them, and you can see YOU KNOW, OFF IN THE DISTANCE, THE FURTHER OUT YOU LOOK, THE MORE BOATS THERE ARE, There's a lot of examples of boats that need our attention, and then there's several that probably don't need our attention at all right now because there's nothing wrong with them, other than maybe they shouldn't be there. But aside from the issue of being marine debris or a hazard, they are not because they're probably owned by a skilled mariner. uh, So there are plenty, though, that have challenges that we look forward to addressing. and So that's my little first one. And this is a second one. |
| 01:42:11.19 | John Rohrabacher | I just turned the sound off, because all you would hear is the wind. It was about 22 knots and pretty stiff. So this one, as we go by, whether the vessel itself or not is marine debris is maybe something still to be determined, but all that stuff on the deck actually qualifies as a violation of the RBRA nuisance law, because ideally those decks are all supposed to be clear. And you can see from those short clips that there are A lot of boats, the decks are clear and there's nothing in danger of falling overboard. But there's quite a few that have just about everything under the sun stashed on them and potentially could go overboard in a storm, wash up on other agencies' property like Belvedere or become hazardous to navigation. Okay. and those are covered by the nuisance RBRA law. So one of the things we wanted to do in addition to all this information gathering for ourselves since January is do our own survey. And I have other slides about some of the counts for the rest of the Anchorage, In mid-April, we determined that we had 63 vessels that were in our water. Now, you know, that could have changed the day after and gone down to or gone up to, but it was 63 on April 14th. And we... We're looking at a way to categorize them because it's gonna determine in which method or which order we try and get after some of those problems. But 49 of those appeared to be inhabited. And of those, you can see from the categories, I'm not gonna be able to read them sideways from here, You know, some are registered, some are not, and some had other issues. I'm not sure. Nine appeared to be uninhabited, and again, with the categories of the current state of those boats. And then five, I believe it is, is the people on the Marine Patrol boat weren't able to tell really whether it was uninhabited or not, but they looked like they had some registration issues or not. But of those, seven out of those 63, we believed were immediately meeting the definition of marine debris, and had we some money to spend, we would immediately remove them. |
| 01:44:34.14 | John Rohrabacher | So after we had some scope of what our work looked like going forward, we applied to the Division of Boating and Waterways for some money and a lot of money. $156,000. And, um... And that's just for one year. And we believe that. if that money's granted to us then we can really get after our problem make a pretty good dent in it. |
| 01:45:08.53 | John Rohrabacher | In between also all those other steps that we were taking, we've worked very hard at reaching out to everybody else that's one of the Richardson Bay Regional Agency partners. I've had meetings with the sheriff, and the sheriff's staff, We've had meetings with the Coast Guard and City Manager and I have been up to the Civic Center now at least three times meeting with once with the state senator Mike McGuire, mostly with our handout looking for some money, in addition to Boating Waterways money. That was a very productive meeting. But we've had follow-up meetings, too, since then. I have them on another slide, I think. Also in May, Lieutenant Frost and I were invited to speak at a Coast Guard meeting. meeting at the Bay Model. And that particular Coast Guard group was focusing on the environment. and they asked us to come forward and give our slide presentation and that's what we I have to say they enjoyed our presentation and have invited us to come back. And tomorrow morning, Lieutenant Frost and I are headed over to Hercules for another Coast Guard invitation meeting, but with a different group of people. And tomorrow's group is focused on abandoned vessels, and it's a work group just for that. And it'll be attended by people different than this. So we look forward to that because we believe that getting the word out about what we're trying to do is very helpful. In addition to the Coast Guard inviting us to come, also the person who's reviewing our grant, Susan Sykes from the Division of Boating and Waterways asked us to come. So sounds like that was a yes to me. |
| 01:47:11.26 | John Rohrabacher | I mentioned before that the Coast Guard has wanted to be involved in looking at this problem. And I think that ever since maybe late last year or after our presentation to the council in January the Coast Guard has been getting calls from people about the state of Richardson's Bay and so they invited us to participate in an operation they named it operation clean sweep that's their you know name for the operation and they organized it but invited us in the sheriff's office to participate and of course we said yes. They're port partners for many years and we're happy to do that. And I have a picture coming up, it's a little more clear but on this the boat here, it's kind of hard to tell, but there's a, it's a Coast Guard vessel, but there's a sheriff's deputy there. and there's somebody over here I think from County Probation Enforcement and then there's a Saucedo Officer on deck. So every boat that went out had a mixture of enforcement officers on it and the, um, the enforcement officers from the Coast Guard came from Ibubuena Island and not the surf rescue station at Golden Gate. So that was our write-up, and it got in the paper. And of course, we purposely did not put out any information in advance about it. One, it would spoil the operation, and two, it wasn't ours. And so we were an invited participant. And so we played it just like the Coast Guard would want. So in this particular photo here, just shows the officers getting together for their on-deck briefing before they headed out. That's Deputy Kate. forgot her last name already from the Sheriff's Office and one of our officers there Brian Mather and then a lot of Coast Guard people and they're getting ready to hit the hit the water and start making contacts Kate Dahlberg, Kate Dahlberg. Apologize to Kate. So in addition to those other meetings at the Civic Center, we've been having meetings with the Boating and Waterways staff. And again, we're trying to do everything as a group. It's not just me meeting with them. We wanted to be with people from the Sheriff's Marine Patrol, turned out to be Deputy Kate, and our Harbor Administrator Bill Price, and myself, and two people from the Boating Waterways, Susan Sykes being one of them, and Karina Duggar being the other. we wanted to present, this is after we submitted our grant application, we wanted, at their invitation, we wanted to back it up with you know, face to face time. And one of the things they asked for was an opportunity to go out on the water first. And so Bill Price and R. Mike McKinley and Kate all went on one boat and took them out for a tour. And, they were surprised, to say the least, at the congested state of the bay. and you'll see why when I have another slide coming about how much money's been spent already to have addressed that. So, We had, in addition to that, in mid to late May, discussions with the member agencies at the Civic Center. Adam and I went to all three of those meetings TO TALK ABOUT THE BUDGET AND TALK ABOUT MONEY. And I have some slides on that coming up. |
| 01:50:57.20 | John Rohrabacher | So one of the things that we did was we wanted to ask for records. what's been done, what type of record keeping's been done by Richardson Bay Harbor Administrator, and for instance, where are the boats being taken from, how many of them are coming out of Sausalito Water, how many are coming out from other jurisdictions, and pardon me, it's a process to get those records. But this was a good summary piece, because it illustrates that The harbor administrator has been pretty hard at work trying to remove vessels. 407 since 2011. And the money's come from several different sources. I actually had to write down THE what those stand for. So the AWF, which is an older grant fund, is the Abandoned Watercraft Abatement Fund from Boating and Waterways. The VTIP is the Vessel Turn-in Program. and the SAVE acronym is for Surrendered and Abandoned Vessels Exchange, which is the only grant now available, but it is the umbrella over some of those other programs so if we do get money it'll be a save grant but we would be required to address some of the other categories when that happens. And at this point, we will be very happy to do that. So this is an example of some activity that's been going on and rather significant. But one of the things that we have been keeping track of, us in Sausalito and also RBRA Harbor Administrator, is surveying how many boats are on the water. and When I was hired and started here in 2009, it was either that year or 2010, it was one of the first surveys I saw, and there was 139 boats on the water. And they put together a nice book of photograph, latitude, longitude, condition of the boat, registered owner information if it had it, and nicely done. However, in the most recent, there's over 250. votes in that survey. So it begs the question is if, and there are not a lot of answers right this second, If 407 boats were removed, yet the amount of boats in the anchorage has doubled, what's going on? You know, what's going on with that process? and some things start to become a little bit more clear and AND, YOU KNOW, in my way of thinking, it's about enforcement. And while this is all commendable work, because it's 407 boats that would probably still be here someplace. but they were all taken in a way that didn't require any enforcement. These are abatement tasks. And again, I'm not making light of the work because a lot of work goes into that. but there's no enforcement work being done. And even though the harbor administrator under the RBRA code is an enforcement officer, he is not a practicing enforcement officer. So our look at this is a team approach with the Sheriff's Office to do enforcement work. because we're prepared to write warnings and citations and act and do the, you know, impounding and towing and whatever is required of boats when the time comes. And, because otherwise this doesn't make a lot of sense. Ask yourself, how'd that happen? We don't know. but 407 vessels being removed, and we believe it's a true number, it's not any fiction here, It's that there's double the amount of boats now. So clearly the backfill of boats coming in is happening way quicker than boats leaving. So, It's a little small, I know you have this in your package, but this is a couple of sheets about the RBRA budget. If I could just say collectively the word we, we're a real big fan of this. And I know at the meeting, Councilmember Weiner expressed our group thinking about it, that We didn't vote for it, even though it's basically, and I say we, I know it was Council Member Weiner, you know, cast his vote. What's missing here is it's the same budget that they've had for several years. and there isn't really anything in here that captures any enforcement efforts. And so with that crucial piece missing, in my opinion, and certainly I think the city managers and So, It would be hard to say yes, even though it didn't necessarily represent hardly any increase in our 35% share of THE RICHARDSON BAY BUDGET, I don't know that we're getting 35% of the removal effort occurring in Salisbury water. And we really won't ever know that. until we get involved. And so our position is fairly strong on this, is that we want to get after the enforcement work. That's our job. and the Sheriff's Office is happy to join us. In fact, in a subsequent um, The budget piece, and we didn't act on this one, but it was with an effort for joint enforcement where we're on each other's boats so that we can do joint patrols and work in each other's waters. Because if we can, if we can do anything to help it, it would be really great to do these things together. as a law enforcement officer working with other agencies and sharing borders with things. It's very seldom a good idea to do something all by yourself because the problem just gets pushed around. And we can get a lot more accomplished in teamwork. show, um, The end of this story has not been written yet. We're at a point where It passed 4 to 1 so that the RBRA can continue to operate after July 1st. BUT. We're waiting to find out what happens with our grant request. So in the future, we still are able to do citation type enforcement work. And we can issue citations to vessels that are expired registration or have enough debris on the deck to constitute a nuisance under the RBRA code. And so there's some things like that that we can get after that don't cost any more money than we're already spending on Marine Patrol now. However, to really make a dent, we're gonna have to remove some of those boats at some point. And we won't know about the grant request awards until late in the summer, and typically they don't make the money available until October. So we're sitting here a little bit with our hands tied because even if we thought we were gonna get it, we are not allowed to spend the money in advance. So they don't want that and that's the rule. So we certainly aren't gonna get out and start encumbering some pretty significant bills with no way to pay them. And the same for RBRA is they also have to wait until the you know, awards are put forward. But you can see from that budget slide, if it's hard to read, I know it's small, But a significant piece of their operating budget right in here If I have that right, Even I can't read it on my own screen, There's the award. from boating and waterways in there that funds half of that. AND SO, The question then also arises if they don't have the money, what are they going to do for the next three months? It's a good question. And so I think it's a great time to prepare to get after a way that makes the you know, waterways safer and less congestion on the water, remove those things that are hazards to navigation, And it'll be a while. This didn't, you know, this... The RBRA created 1985, and so this is an ongoing problem. And it didn't just happen overnight. It's not going to get fixed overnight. But it does take effort. and that's what we're willing to do. So, I can take questions or I can go back to slides if you'd like. |
| 01:59:36.31 | Jill Hoffman | I have a few questions chief so what Thank you. What was the budget that we just voted on? for RBRA, what was the Sausalito portion of that budget? What was the total budget, and then what was the Sausalito portion of it? |
| 01:59:50.77 | John Rohrabacher | So, |
| 01:59:51.50 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, I know. |
| 01:59:52.09 | John Rohrabacher | I should have. It's kind of fuzzy. Our contribution at 35% has been about $94,000, $95,000. |
| 01:59:57.51 | Ross Blanchard | That's a good question. |
| 01:59:58.21 | John Rohrabacher | There you go, $94,000. That's basically the same. |
| 01:59:58.97 | Ross Blanchard | THE END OF THE END OF THE Thank you. |
| 02:00:02.30 | John Rohrabacher | Because it was a repeat the budget pretty much going forward, hopefully getting people to agree, which we did not, but everybody else did. And that's, as a total budget, |
| 02:00:02.33 | Ross Blanchard | OK. |
| 02:00:06.11 | Ross Blanchard | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:00:14.06 | John Rohrabacher | we're on the hook for 35%. |
| 02:00:17.52 | Ross Blanchard | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:00:17.69 | John Rohrabacher | Bye. And the sheriff's office, I think, is 42.5% for the county of Marin, sorry, not the sheriff's office. and then the other agencies portionally smaller pieces. |
| 02:00:27.78 | Jill Hoffman | So this may be a question for you or Adam. What was what about estimate that Sausalito has been contributing toward management of the waterfront in the past that you want to do the past year for our own efforts. |
| 02:00:45.35 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. Yeah, that number is a mix of public works, police, and library for the most part, a little bit of community development. And that's between $40,000 and $60,000, depending on the activity. Public works, it has dipped up and down depending on removal of hazardous material that's been dumped illegally or the use of... You know, clean up after various community events, unpermanent, unregistered events in some of our parks along the waterfront. And then the police department, you know, we fund 100% of the Marine Patrol that the police department has always gone out onto the water to help in our partnership. But that has not been a part of the calculation of expenses. And then what we've shared with our partners in Belvedere and Tiburon and Mill Valley and the county, but the other three agencies, is that probably 95% or more of the activity on the land happens in Sausalito and not in Belvedere or Tiburon or Mill Valley. And so all of the impacts on the land side are 100% Sausalito's costs. |
| 02:02:10.30 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 02:02:10.70 | Adam Politzer | But those are, at this point, those are very rough estimates, $40,000 to $60,000 a year. A big chunk of that is the police department. |
| 02:02:19.48 | John Rohrabacher | And there's one more piece, too. I bring this up in many conversations. It's about the RBRA workboat. And so that was our only police patrol boat until we had the memorandum of understanding with the Army Corps to use the larger boat, which is a really great thing. And The RBRA work boat is a boating waterways asset. I mean, it was funded by them and Richardson Bay to use that. That's the harbor administrator's primary work vessel. But at some point, right before I was hired here in 2009, that boat needed some attention, like two new engines and some other stuff. And so we, the city of Sausalito, contributed and bought one of those outboard engines and I don't know the cost but I know they're very expensive like $10,000 apiece or something like that. Crazy. But we paid for one and then ever since, we, out of the police department budget, we pay for half the slip fee of that boat and also half of the haul out maintenance. And it's about, Depending on the haul-out maintenance cost, that changes a little bit every year, but it's between $4,000 and $5,000 a year. And I only bring it up not because it's like money out of our pocket issue, but it's another way to demonstrate that we are trying to be teammates in this approach. We've been doing that since at least 2008 or 2009 with that, and we used that boat to do initially, before we had the bigger boat, we were using it for respond to calls for service and do safety patrols on the water and, And it's fine, but it's small and not very good for rough weather and such. So we have the best of both worlds because now we have access to both boats. I just don't like having to get lost when I had the meeting with the voting and water waste people. I wanted to make sure they knew that because it's not 100% funded by RBRA. 50% funded by RBRA, which Actually, part of that's our 35%. plus our 50% of ongoing bills. |
| 02:04:25.67 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 02:04:29.06 | John Rohrabacher | So it's just a measure of our effort to try and work together to, to, you know, make Richardson Bay what it's supposed to be. |
| 02:04:38.81 | Jill Hoffman | So it's fair to say that in addition to our 35% that we pay of the RBRA budget, we as a city are also contributing substantial assets to management of the bay. And specifically our waters. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Other questions from the council? |
| 02:04:50.81 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:04:59.48 | Linna Pfeiffer | I have some questions. Thank you. So thank you for that presentation, Chief. A couple questions. As you know, I didn't support, I supported a different motion, which was putting more of a focus on enforcing the inhabited boats in addition to removing the abandoned boats. My question is that... |
| 02:05:01.26 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:05:33.44 | Linna Pfeiffer | Other anchorages have closed in recent years in San Francisco Bay. I mean, they've closed down their anchorages, correct? That's what I understand. Yeah. For example, I believe in Oakland there was an anchorage they closed. On the peninsula there was one that closed. I think there were like four or five that closed. Something like that, like Redwood City. |
| 02:05:43.48 | John Rohrabacher | That's what I understand. |
| 02:05:57.41 | John Rohrabacher | Like Redwood City? |
| 02:05:58.72 | Linna Pfeiffer | Redwood City closed. And I guess some of the anchor outs came, at least that's what we were told when the RBRA presented. And I would presume that those anchorages, when they were enforcing their ordinances and closing down and removing not just the abandoned boats, but also the illegal... |
| 02:05:59.49 | John Rohrabacher | Thank you. Thank you. Yes. |
| 02:06:00.69 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 02:06:23.03 | Linna Pfeiffer | anchor outs that they face the exact same problems that we're facing here with our ever-crowded waters because the anchor out population has increased in recent years because these other anchorages have closed down. Have we reached out to those other anchorages to kind of get some best practices? I know one of them collaborated with BCDC to get a grant to clean their anchorage out. And they were successful. They cleaned it out. And so I'm just wondering, have we reached out to those anchorages to discuss best practices or anything like that? Or is that something we might do? |
| 02:07:07.72 | John Rohrabacher | Bye. or is that something we might do? For certain that I have not, but I know that Lieutenant Frost has. But how far he's gotten with that, I don't know. We've had a lot to do in the last four or five months. And so we are in that... stage where we are trying to gather as much information as we can. And so he's been a busy guy, which probably would drove him to take vacation. Okay. . We've been really, really concentrating on this because timing is everything, because if we missed our grant filing, application deadline, then we'd be out of luck for another year. |
| 02:07:40.49 | Linna Pfeiffer | Right. So the reason I'm going to send you this article, I was just looking at this. It's from the East Bay Express, referring to the estuary in Oakland that closed down. And it quotes a man named David McMasters who runs a small boat recovery service that pulls abandoned boats out of the water for a fraction of the cost of what marinas and law enforcement units would normally have to pay. So I'm just kind of glancing at this and thinking perhaps, now maybe not, but perhaps maybe there might be some opportunities there to perhaps Thank you. exchange some best practices. |
| 02:08:25.32 | John Rohrabacher | We are willing to learn from everybody. |
| 02:08:26.99 | Linna Pfeiffer | And another follow-up question is, thank you for those videos. That was so, I mean, talk about transparency. Those videos really showed the public what we're dealing with here. You know, with all those boats so crowded, I couldn't believe it. It was heartbreaking thinking about the environmental impact there. So I guess I'm glad that you're taking a multi-agency approach too. That's great. I was just wondering perhaps afterwards I'm interested in you said you're working with the Coast Guard at Yerba Buena. Yes. The San Francisco base there. Okay. So I might follow up with you a little bit about that just to get some more details. Yeah, and my last question is, I have been told earlier that some anchor outs bring the abandoned boats to dump garbage or they dump their trash in the abandoned boats. Can you comment on that? |
| 02:08:27.50 | John Rohrabacher | Bye. |
| 02:09:08.69 | Ross Blanchard | Yes. |
| 02:09:16.73 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 02:09:41.50 | John Rohrabacher | You know, I actually Mostly can't, because I don't know yet. And there's so much more to learn. So, you know, I've heard a lot of stories in the last five months, and especially starting with my community meeting in March. And so sifting through those for those little nuggets that are true and discarding those that aren't takes a little bit of time. |
| 02:10:07.42 | Linna Pfeiffer | One more quick question. So a few years ago, I want to say like three years ago, we used to have, there was a binder that had kind of like an inventory of everyone who was kind of illegally living on the bay. I mean, in our anchorage. Do we still have that binder? Is that still being kept current? |
| 02:10:29.03 | John Rohrabacher | It's actually the one I refer to is the survey done by RBRA and cooperating with the Sheriff's Office and Saucyuta Police to produce those because they're trying to do the count. That's the one I referred to that in 2000. |
| 02:10:31.82 | Linna Pfeiffer | It's the same. |
| 02:10:42.55 | John Rohrabacher | 9 or 10, the count was like in the low 130s. |
| 02:10:43.43 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:10:43.45 | Linna Pfeiffer | Yeah. |
| 02:10:46.13 | John Rohrabacher | And the most recent one was like $250. |
| 02:10:46.18 | Linna Pfeiffer | Good. Thank you. |
| 02:10:50.03 | Jill Hoffman | thing. Thank you. Any questions from Council. OK. I'm going to open it up for public comment. Would you please fill out a speaker card if you would like to speak during this portion of the City Council meeting. Do we have any |
| 02:11:24.34 | Ray Withy | While they're filling that out, the Oakland Estuary was closed down by the California Land commission. And what they did was they went in, deputized all of the sheriff's departments in the East Bay and went in there and removed them all in one suite. |
| 02:11:38.21 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 02:11:43.28 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 02:11:44.43 | Ray Withy | but it was the California Land Commission. |
| 02:11:46.59 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. Hello. |
| 02:11:48.40 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 02:11:54.03 | Jill Hoffman | OK. I have one speaker card so far away. Yes, it is one Jeff Jacob and I see some other ones working their way up that's fine. Just give them to the clerk. |
| 02:12:29.84 | Jeff Jacob | Ahoy, Ms. Mayor and City Council. I WANT TO THINK THE PEOPLE OF SOSOLITO AND THE POLICE CHIEF ESPECIALLY FOR SAYING THERE'S A talking about Richardson Bay Richardson Bay is not like the estuary or Redwood City or... Yerba Buena for one simple reason. There's hills that block the western prevailing wind and fog. So from the very beginning... Richardson Bay has been used by people who are just coming into Golden Gate. which I've done once or twice. So... It's different for a natural reason. And the heartbreak, I feel, does not need to be about cleanliness only. I have my own issues with that sometimes in my man cave. We all have different standards of that. I agree, trash does not need to be on the deck. People need to be mariners. The idea of closing off a federal anchorage that has been here, Since, did Drake stop here maybe? Well, Ayala, the Spanish, the English, the Chileans, the Japanese after World War II ended. And he told his father he was just going for a day cruise. And he took a 22-foot boat across into San Francisco Bay. And I'll bet you he stopped at Richardson Bay. And the people celebrated him. So, I want that bay to be for sailors too. I don't want it to be represented by trash or boats that are brought there as investments. There must certainly be a... a way that we sometimes mispronounce words. So I'll say, when Linda says illegal, I'm going to hear ill eagle, right, that we're all these triumphant, unique birds flying free out there on the anchorage, on a wing and a prayer and sometimes no money and sometimes no support for all sorts of different reasons. And sometimes the most support in the world, when I fell through the hatch last week, somebody from the hill rescued me for two and a half days. Thank you, Sausalito, for being here. Thank you for helping me when I make a mistake. I hope that we recognize that we're talking about people and not just their messes. We all make messes. There's a sewage system that pumps fresh water, two and a half gallons every time. one of you flushes. For us, we won't discuss it now. We're going to leave that for later. Bye, love you guys. |
| 02:15:34.24 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I have speaker cards for Kevin Kiefer, Alden Bevington, and Doug Storms. |
| 02:15:48.07 | Kevin Kiefer | Good evening. My name is Kevin Kiefer. I've been an anchor out for about going on eight years now. A couple quick answers to some questions. Yes, the government has a quota of boats, and I used to sell boats to Bill Price. And the more money Bill Price would spend on boats, the more money I would, or the more boats that I would go get. So up to a point, seven or eight is when the DMV starts to come down on you. So it's a hobby until then. So I used to be able to sell boats to Bill Price until I realized what a scoundrel he was. And the RBRI has been taking you, this entire council, and the rest of the membership for a boat ride. I hope you enjoyed it. This is what I'd like to say, and I probably won't get through all this. The Sausalito Police Department is an active member of the RBI Joint Task Force, an illegal confederation of law enforcement agencies that serve to foment the hyper-politicized agenda of multiple governmental agencies, this city being one of those. Part of an overlapping jurisdictional web in violation of federal and state doctrine, which will soon be held responsible for its actions, this council will be held responsible for its actions over the last few decades. All actions of the RBRA will be scrutinized by the highest court in this land, and no transgressions will escape discovery. This action will take place in direct response to the decades of fraud and corruption that the RBRA and this city has been doing its part that has been engaged in. The fraudulent taking of personal property, the irreverent patterns, practices, and protocol in violation of law enforcement standards and training, public harassment of a localized indigent population. The authorized collection of personal information expressly understood to be identity profiling of a localized indigent population. The dialogue surrounding the federal special anchorage has been severely restricted in its scope with terms like admiralty law, federal enclave, separation of powers being withheld from the dialogue. There are quite a few terms which will become commonplace in the future. They will become synonymous with Richardson Bay anchor out community. When the issues at hand before this council reach the national level, the decades of localized corruption will materialize. Misuse of the public trust revenues garnered from the lease of tidelands and submerged lands, the misallocation of these revenues for debt servicing, the public trust tidelands funds were never meant to be converted into public trust tidelands, a financial instrument. The various issues which I have personally uncovered are just the tips of this city's corruption icebergs, along with the misapplication of grant funding, the fresh and wastewater quality testing, the creation of an island within Richardson Bay, the Sausalito Police Department cover-up of an RBRA marine salvage chop-chop, this city's misinformation campaign being applied to the historical sovereignty of the Marin ship lands and the Richardson Bay Federal Special Anchorage. Sorry it has to go this way, but you guys pushed it. |
| 02:18:58.09 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Next up is Alden. |
| 02:19:08.25 | Alden Bevington | Hi, everyone. My name is Alden Bevington. That's a tough act to follow, so I'm just going to. Can you hear me? |
| 02:19:14.41 | Jill Hoffman | the |
| 02:19:14.56 | Alden Bevington | I can hear you now. Okay. Hi. So I am an anchor out. There are many very respectable people that consider that not a derogatory term. I just want to say I take exception to it being used in that way. So I'm not sure if you all are aware of the presentation that I gave to the RBRA about six months ago. I've been working. I've lived on the Anchorage for two years. I'm a professional, pretty competent. I choose to live there. I've lived in Marin for 10 years. I spend a lot of money in Sausalito. A lot of people out there do. But I have a professional background in what's called the stakeholder management of common pool resources. I made a big encyclopedia on different ways of managing this kind of problem, and I have done what I can to work with the community, a lot of folks that maybe are difficult for y'all to speak with, to try to induce some behavior and game rules to start resolving some of these issues on the side of the Anchorage. Everyone agrees there's a problem, and it's going to cost money to resolve it, but it's also going to take willingness of the people on the Anchorage. I take a lot of flack from a lot of sides, and it's very complicated, as you all know. The legal is very complicated. The cross-jurisdiction, there has been corruption, as far as I can tell. There's a lot of kind of double standards regarding the marinas are in the bay, and that's leased out. So... |
| 02:19:15.05 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 02:21:06.03 | Alden Bevington | I guess more than anything, I just want you all to know that I and some other individuals are available to really meet and be part of this process. We've been creating an organization, but I've been trying to do it in as collaborative a way as possible. But there also is a website that will be up soon at anchoredout.org, which is primarily informational for people on the Anchorage and on the Hill. So I guess at the bottom line, I think that it's really important to remember that on the other side of enforcement, there are people, and this is a social issue. And I believe that a well-managed Anchorage can continue to give Sausalito a very unique and rich cultural diversity, which just will go away if we take an approach of sterilizing. So I just want to let you all know that I'm working on the same thing. Cheers. Cheers. |
| 02:22:11.90 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. And the last speaker card I have is for Doug Storms. |
| 02:22:20.54 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 02:22:23.15 | Douglas Storms | Douglas Storms, 700 Waldo Point. I would like to thank... Jonathan Rohrabacher. for just his involvement. This is a difficult issue, and you have a couple people working for you. Jonathan Rohrabacher, and I believe Bill Frass and Adam Pulser have been very kind, very open with their time. They've been willing to meet with a group of mariners of Richardson Bay. That's a term that I use. I think we're going to be changing our name so that there's consistency. We've been meeting for the last six months, every month at the Saucelito Cruising Club. They've been very kind to let us use that facility. It's a great meeting location. We've also had numerous steering group meetings, countless, countless hours of discussions, trying to get a handle on it, trying to invite the Mariners, of Richardson Bay and anyone who lives and works in Richardson Bay, because it's just not liveaboards. It's anyone who cares about the bay, who lives, who works, who takes a kayak out, they're a stakeholder. They're a part of Richardson Bay. we're all a part of the problem, and we have to be a part of the solution. And so we've been really wrestling with it, and I'm... happy that you have people working for you that are willing to dialogue. And that makes all the difference in the world. Now, in a sandwich, you take the good with the bad. Communication, communication, communication. We need more of it. We weren't notified of this presentation. There's only four speakers, but normally we get 20 people at the at the Mariners of Richardson Bay meeting. When we know about things, there's a good presence of 20 to 30 people. So it's critical when you have meetings like this that the word gets out to the voting public because you guys need information, need feedback, and that's what we're trying to give. So my time is running out. Let me just say specifically, I won't argue with the stats that were presented. What I will do in the future, and what I've been asked to do, that the Mariners of Richardson Bay have been asked to do, is to provide reports to the RBRA on what is the status of the bay. So how many boats are registered? How many have proper ground tackle? How many are seaworthy? How many are getting pumped out? We have that information. It's tough, but we're working together. So do you take a top-down approach, or do you work with the community and come on up and let us help you? And there is process being made, and I see a change in attitude. I encourage your continued support, and it's going to be a tough road, but a noble one. Thank you. |
| 02:25:42.99 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right. I don't have any other speaker cards. Are there any other speak public speakers on this issue? Seeing no one approaching. Okay. I'm going to bring it back up here to. the council for comment and discussion. We don't have any action items. This is just an informational. Thank you. Okay, anybody want to jump off? Comment? |
| 02:26:09.24 | Linna Pfeiffer | Thank you. Yeah, and I want to thank Chief Rebacher for your hard work on this and also Officer Frass for his hard work. It's greatly appreciated, especially looking at the videos you've taken and going out on the water. We have a major problem, and the problem is a federal anchorage does not mean you can live on the water. A federal anchorage means we have ordinances. In Sausalito waters, it's 10 hours, and then you leave. In the county waters, it's 72 hours, and then you leave. It is illegal to live on the bay. If it was legal to live on the open bay, it's like building condos on the open bay. Those waters are open space. It's open space waters. To have a federal anchorage for people who are visiting, they drop anchor, they're here, they check in, they leave. The situation right now where we have illegal anchor outs living on the bay, it is bay fill. That is bay fill. It is illegal. It is hurting the environment. And even if you were to... set up strategies to regularly dispose of trash in environmentally friendly ways and sewage in that way, it's still bay fill. We're building on top of the bay. And that is illegal. That is the problem that I am having with this. I applaud our police department for pursuing the abandoned vessels. I fear it is a circular, never-ending sort of thing, because if we have anchor outs who are using those abandoned boats to dump trash or bringing in abandoned boats to perhaps, as I've heard some insiders tell me, rent out to new anchor outs, this is like this. So I am very concerned this problem is getting worse while other anchorages have successfully closed and enforced their ordinances. So I'm looking forward to continued progress, and I know that our police department is more than up to that task, and I am certainly looking forward to seeing that progress. We need to put the environment first. We need to take care of our bay. We need to save our bay. And when I see these videos of the kind of bay fill that I saw there, we are failing deplorably. And it's just very, very sobering for me. It's very, very sad. It's heartbreaking. Thank you. |
| 02:29:17.64 | Jill Hoffman | Tom? |
| 02:29:17.97 | Linna Pfeiffer | Thank you. Anybody? |
| 02:29:20.66 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you, Chief, for an excellent presentation and all the work you're doing. And actually, thank you to the entire police department and our city manager and our mayor and Councilmember Weiner. Sausalito's taking the leadership. I mean, we've been failing out there. Our BRA has been failing out there. And I appreciate the leadership role that we're taking. I think the emphasis has to be with enforcement to start with. And also the idea of working with other agencies. I appreciate hearing that the connections that we have with other agencies and with the Mariners, the kind of work we're doing, and we're trying to – we can't fault what was going on, but we certainly wasn't working, and we're taking the leadership on this, and I certainly appreciate it. I like the idea that you're looking for the money to help pay for it, and I just say, keep it up. There's a long way to go, but I think we're on the right track with what we're doing here. So thank you to everyone. |
| 02:30:14.23 | Jill Hoffman | THEIR OWNERS. . |
| 02:30:16.19 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 02:30:16.21 | Ray Withy | Yeah. Well, thank you. Thank you, Chief, for that presentation. I think it's important to know that, you know, Some of these boats have been there, or these anchor routes have been there before I came, and I came to Sausalito 40 years ago. I think it's got to be a balance, and we've got to attempt to work this out. I'm not in favor of every boat disappearing out there. I don't think it's the right thing to do, and I don't think we have to. But we do have to seek some balance. 250 boats is not tolerable. It's been mentioned before. My thinking is maybe 100. could be tolerable but uh let's see where we go with this but we cannot keep on going in a circle because we won't get anywhere and that's why sausalito has taken these uh steps to let our bra know that we're not happy with the way it's gone with them and you just can't keep on bringing in boats to replace the boats that are taken. That won't work. |
| 02:31:36.36 | Joe Burns | I will add very little to what's been said. This is a complex problem with lots of players. I... I think it's very important to recognize that our chief, as he is doing with other matters and issues, is recognizing that it needs teams and colleagues in other jurisdictions to solve a lot of these problems. And I think I would personally like to say that, you know, you're doing a great job on that, you and your team, because you're recognizing the power of collaboration with everybody else. I've seen it across the board. It's not only this, bicycles, whatever. That's really important, and you're doing a great job there. I remember almost four years ago now, when when I found myself a candidate for city council, we were at some debate up in San Rafael, just starting off the thing. And one of the questions was asked, you know, what about the anchor outs? What about the anchorage? And I was really trying to get my arms around the issue and understand it. And I know one of us who was up there said, well, the most important thing is that we have got to help RBI make sure that the problem doesn't get worse. And now, four years later, we're looking at RBRA, and guess what? The problems got a lot worse. And that's the bottom line, you know. And, you know, I think enforcement, therefore, is really the right way to go initially. And the RBRA's budget needs to be, in my mind, almost totally focused on that because that's what the job should be. So it's a difficult problem. I understand there are human beings on the other side of this problem. And it's a social issue that we, in collaboration with other agencies, can also deal with. So I applaud the good work. It's going to be a difficult effort because it's a difficult problem. But I think we're on the right track. |
| 02:34:10.75 | Jill Hoffman | I don't have a lot to add that's different. Excellent work, Chief, with you and your efforts at coordination. We were here a year ago in May in 2015 when RBRA came and gave us a presentation, and we told them at that time it's got to be enforcement first. It makes no sense to throw money at removal of boats when you don't have any handle on being able to enforce the laws as they exist currently in the bay. So I'm very pleased with the way this is going. I think it's been a successful effort so far. I think we just have to keep on this course. and then proceed as we can. So I think excellent work, and keep at it, Chief. Thank you. That's it for this. rocketing through our agenda. We're at our last business item. |
| 02:35:03.94 | Jill Hoffman | 5 minutes ahead of schedule. Oh no word had a schedule. |
| 02:35:07.56 | Ross Blanchard | No. Thank you. |
| 02:35:09.29 | Jill Hoffman | Wait a minute. Okay, we might be a little bit behind. Well, we were okay. All right, anyway. We were okay. We were good until. Okay, so we're at item 6D, award of contract for streets resurfacing project. |
| 02:35:15.05 | Ross Blanchard | We were. |
| 02:35:26.08 | Jill Hoffman | And that's going to be given by our illustrious Public Works Director, Jonathan Goldman, and Senior Civil Engineer, Andy Davidson. |
| 02:35:35.43 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you, Madam Mayor. Members of the council, staff, and everyone at home. Jonathan Goldman, your public works director and city engineer and ADA coordinator. I'll try to be brief. I actually have some really nice video as well, but I don't know if it'll be as exciting, and I'll save it in case I manage to get us back ahead of schedule, although I think my prospects are very slim. Just a reminder, this is just kind of an update or a year-end update. Council last heard from us on this general issue on February 9th, and then Council also awarded a contract on May 3rd for the Rodeo Avenue Rehabilitation Project. And what we're presenting tonight and asking you to do tonight is to award a contract to Gelati Brothers Incorporated of San Rafael, who was the only bidder on the final phase of this year's streets projects that we put out to bid. Some of this is just reiterated from February's presentation. The city, with council approval, hired BKF engineers to develop the program some time ago. The program was divided into a couple of separate projects, largely because they're separate areas of expertise. And in our judgment, dividing them gave the city the potential to minimize our expenditures. The Rodeo Avenue rehabilitation was separate. And then we looked at a number of different surface treatments including tracks crack sealing and then slurry sealing micro surfacing or cape sealing for other road segments this is the map that was presented it's kind of hard to see even on the screen here I did provide at council's request a |
| 02:35:39.36 | Ross Blanchard | I don't know. |
| 02:37:40.29 | Jonathon Goldman | copies of this map from the February presentation, as well as the list of streets or road segments and the treatments that were recommended for those segments at that time. I've got a few copies back here if anyone in the audience is interested. All this information is also available online, and if people have questions about what's happening where or was proposed to her, please don't hesitate to contact me. uh... in february we talked about how the payment condition uh... is measured how the payments uh... management system works uh... and i'm not gonna go into great detail again on that unless council has questions about it So I'll just skip some of these slides, give you all a second to read them and not read them out loud. Just wanted to share some of the before and after from Rodeo because this too, along with what we're asking you to award tonight, this was a very successful project in my judgment. You can see some of the before photographs from Rodeo Avenue, some of the issues, and the pointer is not visible to the people in back. I could point it at them, but they'd probably get upset. But you can see that there were some areas on Rodeo where we have pavement failures along the alignment of the roadway and in an environment there where Rodeo is on the hillside, the possibility that water infiltrates through those cracks has the potential for the base to eventually fail and move downhill. So this road segment was kind of a priority for us. The process that we employ once the contract had been awarded is to make sure that we're going to have the contractors responsible for, and we actually do this in the design process as well, notifying all the public utilities that may have underground facilities in the vicinity of our project. In this case, on the left-hand photograph, you can see blue pavement markings on the road surface. This is a Marine Municipal Water District 8-inch steel water line. You can also see a water valve identified there also in blue. And what we want to do in the initial stages of a pavement reconstruction and rehabilitation process is make sure that that water line is deep enough so that anything that we do won't damage the water line or cause other problems. The lower right-hand photograph, and I could go back to the other, but we did have an area, a couple of areas of storm drain and curb and gutter along Rodeo that had failed or needed repair. That work was done. And then in the upper right-hand photograph, it's kind of hard to tell from the photograph, but the way the rehabilitation of this particular road segment was performed is what's called mill and fill, where there's a pavement grinder that pulverizes and then windrows or loads a dump truck on the order of three or four inches. I mean, it's adjustable depending upon the machine, but removing the top level of the pavement section across the entire profile of the roadway, and then following that, installation of geotextile that helps ensure that any differential movement in the base underneath the pavement section doesn't result in cracking of the pavement section itself and then Let's see, I don't have, the video has the paving machine operating. It's kind of cute, and I'll be happy to share it separately. But following the completion of the project, the contractor then... performs, installs the pavement markings, the double yellow center line. And in this case, this is down at the intersection with Rodeo heading off towards the towers and Woodward in the right-hand direction, turned down the hill to Nevada. And for any of you who haven't had a chance to drive it since this work was done, I've actually done it a couple of times because I really enjoy it. In addition, sorry, I was hyper geeky, I know. |
| 02:42:09.38 | Ray Withy | It was that late at night. |
| 02:42:12.50 | Jonathon Goldman | In addition, because the bids that we received, the low bidder on the Rodeo Avenue reconstruction was sufficiently low, and because we had received a couple of reports of trip and fall incidents on the off-street path between Harbor and Coloma, we were able to negotiate a contract to get that path, again, with the same kind of pavement grinder, removing not only the failed asphalt there, but also the rotten tree stumps and things that were underground there, and then place, as I recall, we have four inches of asphalt there as well, well within the funds available. This particular project, I never changed those hash marks into arrows, sorry. This particular project, as I said, we issued invitations to bid. Those plans and specifications and the addenda that were issued are still available on the city's website, so if anyone wants to know details in that context, that information is still available. You've already seen the that map. This is just to show that it's not just a resurfacing project. As you may recall from February, we looked at a number of different surface treatments that could be employed. Some of the road segments are being crack-sealed. We elected to go with microsurfacing because we can afford to go with microsurfacing based on the bid, and because microsurfacing represents, I think, the best value for the funds available. That alteration of a roadway segment under a Department of Justice kind of policy establishes the requirement that any accessibility improvements at curb ramps or things like that in those road segments have to be brought up to code, have to be made at the same point in time. In addition, as Council may recall, we're continuing to make accessibility improvements or barrier removal projects in compliance with the settlement agreement that the city reached some time ago. So we have bundled some of that work into this same contract. And these photographs, these visuals, are just samples or examples of some of the sheets in the plan set, again, that's still available online. Before we get to the recommended action and if everyone's bored, the videos that I said I would share, I do want to acknowledge Andy Davidson, who's a civil engineer, is our senior civil engineer. Alex Chan, an engineer in training who was a wonderful addition here and contributed to this project and left us not too long ago and is now working for the city of Redwood City because I haven't been able to convince him to come back. Dane Johnson, our project manager with BKF Engineers. And I also want to acknowledge not that I'm not grateful for Gelati Brothers and for the bid that we're asking you to award for the contract tonight, but Majoran Gelati and specifically Scott Gelati, their vice president, worked very effectively with the city to get Rodeo done as absolutely quickly as possible, minimal disruption to traffic. I got zero complaints, just wonderful to work with. And again, because their bid was as low as it was, we were able to do more work than we thought we were going to. So your action item for tonight, after you ask questions and your public comment and anything else that you want to do, is our recommendation that you adopt a resolution of the City Council finding this resurfacing and accessibility project exempt from application of California Environmental Quality Act, finding an exempt from our design review procedure, authorizing the city manager to issue a notice of award and execute a contract with Gelati Brothers for construction of this project, and then also authorizing the city manager to execute a standard form professional services agreement with BKF so that they can continue in the same role they did on Rodeo in construction management and inspection services, and then also giving the city manager the maximum statutory authority to approve change orders. as allowed by Resolution 4979. So with that, I am going to end the presentation. Delighted to entertain questions, if there are any. |
| 02:47:02.01 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you for that excellent presentation. Do we have any questions from City Council? |
| 02:47:07.97 | Linda Pfeiffer | do um you the engineer's estimate is um was i guess if you take from the base bid 411 and joladi's bid was 464 i'm just wondering and and uh Could you explain the discrepancy? And also, I was just interested in the fact that we only had one bidder on this, and maybe you can comment on that. |
| 02:47:28.05 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah, I wouldn't necessarily describe it as a discrepancy. I would describe it as, in many respects, and you'll see with our next council meeting, we have a more significant issue with another project. When we advertised Rodeo, it was relatively earlier in the year when contractors are not traditionally as busy as they are at this point in the year. We're going to have a look at the next slide. It was relatively earlier in the year when contractors are not traditionally as busy as they are at this point in the year. We did our best to get this project out to bid as quickly as possible. And the fact that we only got one bidder tells us that we may be paying more for the project than it would have cost had we bidded earlier in the season or had multiple bidders. But because we're in a position to pay for this project with funds that are available and unencumbered in this year, our recommendation is that we award the contract. You know, the prices are... reasonably competitive. And the fact that we only got one bid, I think, is an indication that lots of contractors are very busy, and the one bidder probably knows that. And so that's why they submitted at the prices that they didn't. |
| 02:48:51.85 | Linna Pfeiffer | Any other questions? Yeah. So thank you for this, Jonathan. Just a quick question. These are just straight street repairs. In other words, we're not doing any reconfigurations on the streets or anything like that, correct? you |
| 02:49:12.05 | Jonathon Goldman | That's correct. |
| 02:49:12.67 | Linna Pfeiffer | Okay. |
| 02:49:14.82 | Jonathon Goldman | The only reconfigurations we're doing has to do with curb ramps or disabled parking |
| 02:49:14.93 | Linna Pfeiffer | Um, |
| 02:49:23.02 | Linna Pfeiffer | Or ADA. Okay. And my next question is regarding authorizing the city manager to approve change orders. I just want to confirm that the council will have visibility as to these change orders. Will they show up on consent calendar or just so we know what's going on or the history? |
| 02:49:44.48 | Jonathon Goldman | Well, the request is that the city manager be authorized to approve them. |
| 02:49:49.49 | Ross Blanchard | Yeah. |
| 02:49:49.58 | Jonathon Goldman | without coming back to city council. |
| 02:49:52.68 | Ross Blanchard | Yeah. |
| 02:49:53.14 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm delighted to bring back status updates on this project at any point in time. We're not asking your permission to come back to you and ask for subsequent. |
| 02:50:02.56 | Linna Pfeiffer | No, I understand that. I was just wondering, and no, I'm not asking you to come back and present. I was just wondering, just, you know, obviously just keeping us in the loop as to, like, if there are multiple change orders or, you know, start, it'd be something I'd be like to be in the loop on. |
| 02:50:22.94 | Jill Hoffman | to be in the loop one. Thank you. Any other questions from Council? No. I have two speaker cards. Thank you very much for filling out the speaker cards. Jeff Jacob and Kevin Kiefer. |
| 02:50:41.33 | Kevin Kiefer | Kevin Kiefer. I'm curious because I just started researching the geotextile and geofabrics not too long ago. And does... Does the removal of the application for the CEQ, does that, or the CEQA, Does that apply to adding something like a geofabric? Because the geofabrics can change the whole parameters of how a road breathes and how it drains. And it seems like maybe just avoiding the application of looking into that. But I have very little research time involved in those. But it's a very interesting topic. And especially the way you're able to use the spray irrigation to use the partially treated sewage water. So I just wondered how the geofabrics affect that. |
| 02:51:28.77 | Ross Blanchard | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:51:43.40 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. And Jeff Jacob. |
| 02:51:52.12 | Jeff Jacob | Well, I'm going to follow up on that one. Department of environmental quality, the Environmental Quality Act, Jonathan asks that it be waived. Ms. Pfeiffer, you were accusing the anchor out of being an environmental menace. that we are killing eelgrass or, throwing our trash and plastics into the bay. God knows what we do with our sewage. well. Kevin was talking about geofabrics and that having something to do with sewage. I know that I've come to the Bay and I've seen LOTS OF BIRDS. and animals belly up after a big storm that the sewage drains can't handle. Now we'll talk about a road that's being built for cars in a town that discourages bicycle travel, that takes the bicycle racks from in front of Schoonmacher's gives tickets to people when they put it on the fence at Schoonmachers, gave me a ticket for parking my bike downtown, which a tourist obviously couldn't know, just for... environmental qualities sake, that would seem that a person on a bike uses less hydrocarbons than a person in a car. Why don't we? Because once I... Why don't we measure all the cars that come into Sausalito and decide what environmental havoc they are creating for our atmosphere? It's eight degrees above normal. in almost every town in America. And Linda Pfeiffer is saying that the people who use paddles and oars and sale power are causing that. Well, I say it's this road and every road like it. And we cannot even vote. Mr. Goldman anymore. Two and a half million ballots were uncounted from the Democratic primary. It's now one and a half million that were provisional ballots. The vote was rigged. And this vote is gonna be rigged too, but I love you people. I know how hard it is to be in the seat that you're sitting in. My dad was a city councilman. I understand this. I get it. Okay, I get it. So I'm going to end this with thank you. And One more thing. Adol. The Levites are in, this is Numbers, Numbers chapter 8. This is about the Levites. It says, You shall bring the Levites in front of the tent of meeting, and you shall gather the entire congregation of the children of Israel. The Levites are the chosen among the chosen. They are one tribe that still exists to this day after thousands of years that are supposed to do the service in the temple. You shall set apart the Levites from the midst of the children of Israel, and the Levites shall become mine, says God. They are to exist without any portion and without any inheritance. They are God's people. And when we... When we give you the respect to say that even though my comments might be controversial, everywhere I go in Sausalito, not just here, people are watching Channel 26, that I know that there is some good faith that's why you entered and why you are sitting in these seats. So there's a person and there are people that you can model yourselves after. And to the extent that you do that, Todah Rabbah in Hebrew, that's thank you very much. |
| 02:55:40.17 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Any other public comment on this item? Seeing none and having no speaker cards, we're going to bring this back up to the council for close public comment and bring this up for council discussion. discussion |
| 02:55:59.39 | Linna Pfeiffer | I guess I would just, Jonathan, could you perhaps comment on the topic that was raised regarding, I'm probably mispronouncing this, the Geopyrix? |
| 02:56:13.47 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm happy to. The context in which a geotextile was raised was in the context of a project that has already been built. There are not geotextiles associated with the project we're asking you to award this evening. I would defer to the city attorney on the application of CEQA, but generally speaking, when we are repairing or maintaining an existing facility without making it bigger, without changing its use, there are categorical exemptions under the law, and we... CEQA doesn't apply. |
| 02:57:01.02 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Any other questions or follow-up from city council? No? Okay. Do I have a motion for... |
| 02:57:10.67 | Linna Pfeiffer | Sure, I move to award a contract for construction of the city of Sausalito 2016 street resurfacing project and award a professional services agreement for construction management inspection services for said project. Oh wait, was that? Okay, so recommended motion. Adopt a resolution of the City of Council of the City of Saucedo finding the project exempt from the application of CEQA, finding the project exempt from the Saucedo's ending ordinance design review procedure, authorizing the City Manager to issue a notice of award and execute a contract with gelati brothers incorporated for construction of the city of 2016 street resurfacing project authorizing the city manager to execute a standard form professional services agreement with via BKF engineers for construction management inspection services for said project and authorizing the city manager to approve change orders that may arise up to a total of 15,000 as allowed by resolution 4979 of October 21, 2008. Thank you. Second. Thank you. All in favor? Aye. I just want to say a quick comment that I want to thank Jonathan, Department of Public Works, for this. But also, I know this is such a high priority for residents to get these streets paved. So this is great. Great. Great job. |
| 02:58:20.06 | Jill Hoffman | Second. THE END OF THE |
| 02:58:22.63 | Ross Blanchard | Bye. |
| 02:58:22.75 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:58:22.81 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 02:58:22.85 | Jill Hoffman | I'm going to go. |
| 02:58:22.97 | Ross Blanchard | Yeah. |
| 02:58:38.03 | Jill Hoffman | All right, moving right along. |
| 02:58:43.94 | Jill Hoffman | We're up to item 7. 7A, City Manager Information for Council. Adam. What exciting information do you have for us this evening? |
| 02:58:59.20 | Adam Politzer | My mom told me I had to be on TV, so I'm putting the camera on over here. Not very many. Just a very quick reminder. Everyone knows that we, Sausalito, are hosting the MCC MC tomorrow night at Spinnaker. I wanted to thank Danny and the working group that's working with Danny on the short-term rental forum that they held on Saturday from 3 to 5 o'clock. About 30 people were there at the Bay Model. Really dynamic discussion. And then we had the planning director from Petaluma and the planning director from Tiburon And it was very interesting listening to Tiburon's comments about where they were, how they got to the issue bringing it forward to the council, split vote on the council. The second reading, the council said let's call a timeout and bring this back to the planning commission for further discussion, have their own set of forums that they held, and then back to council where they voted, I a three two vote to ban you know to continue to ban and actually create some regulations in terms of banning it that created stricter penalties on enforcement Petaluma had a very different experience in their presentation in terms of allowing it and, you know, the... Thank you. the reasons why but I think it was a good start and I want to emphasize that it really is just a start Lily and Danny are working on putting up an open town hall item on the website so the public can participate that weren't there so we can try to stimulate some discussion in the community and then there'll be a second forum at the bay model I think on the 29th around that date. It was in the, it's been publicized twice now in the current, and it'll continue to be in the current. But very well done. Danny is looking to bring different speakers to the next workshop, and then they did a survey of the folks that were there, and that survey will also be available online so that we can, again, try to get the public involved. But take time out of a very busy time to pull this together. I think that staff did a very good job as did the working group. But, again, it's the beginning of the process, and I want the council and the public to recognize that there's no decisions that came out of that meeting, and it may have been more pro people in the audience, but we're a long ways away from it being something that the council actually takes any action on. But a good start, and I want to thank Danny and his team for pulling that together. reminder we've done some great work the last few months including the finance committee and now the council on bringing forward a budget that I think we all should be proud of and please we'll have that final session on the 28th where Melanie will bring that to to a wrap with the council and hopefully you know we can take a little bit of time that evening to reflect on some of the accomplishments in this budget. Some really meaningful activity. And as Council Member Pfeiffer was recognizing Public Works, I think there's a lot of activity in the Public Works Department as we move forward. And that kind of leads me to thanking the Public public works department you know that the rodeo not only came in very timely they did a very good job of understanding what the problem was how to solve it identify any any exposed to liability that could have caused delays or change orders and we didn't we didn't didn those experiences. And, in fact, we came in under budget, which is always nice to be able to share with the council and the public. We, as you heard from our park and rec director, we are scheduling the grand opening of Robin Sweeney Park on Saturday, July 2nd at 11 o'clock, and so they will now start working hard to get the word out to the public to have that celebration. There was some interest of doing it on the 4th of July, but 4th of July is its own event. And we wanted the opening of one of our major parks, first park that we really have put a significant amount of time and money and effort and community involvement. We wanted that to stand on its own. So we'll have that event on Saturday, July 2nd. But if anyone that's around City Hall that comes and goes to City Hall or works here at City Hall, I mean, we're watching this kind of come up out of the ground. And as Lauren put in his article that was in this last Currents, I mean, it did look like they were just pushing dirt around there for a while. And I kept saying, what's going on? You're just pushing dirt around. When is this going to materialize? But there was a rhyme and reason for why they were pushing the dirt from the left to the right. And now we're watching it really come forward. One of the exciting things that I'm wanting to spoil the surprise, because I think it's worth spoiling, Many, many years ago, and I'll try not to get emotional about this, but many years ago, both Chuck Donald and Amy Belser kept talking about a flagpole here at City Hall. And both of them gave me flags at some point in their time involved with City Hall. We have a flagpole, as many may know, out there at the corner of Litho Street and the entrance of City Hall. But it's basically been gobbled up by the various trees. And it's old and rusty. It hasn't probably worked for 20 years. So we're very excited that as you look there today, there is a new flagpole right there in the middle of the park. on the lawn. And so we will be inviting Chuck Donald to help raise that flag on the opening day. And I think he should take a lot of pride. He's very persistent. And I would say that our former council member, Amy Belser, was equally persistent on that. They shared that goal. And I'm happy to say that that's something that we're going to be able to celebrate on the second Probably plenty of other things to talk about, but happy to answer any specific questions from the council. But that concludes my report. |
| 03:05:30.88 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. Moving on to Councilmember committee reports. Do we have any reports? Finance Committee meetings meeting tomorrow at 10 o'clock. That's an open meeting. Everyone's welcome. Future agenda items. |
| 03:05:48.33 | Linna Pfeiffer | Actually, if it's okay, I'd like to comment briefly on the agenda item during closed session tonight, the Butte parcel. Specifically, I recused myself. I meant to announce that at the beginning of the meeting. I recused myself from the closed session agenda item regarding the city's interest with the Butte Street parcel with respect to donating that to Open Space Sausalito because I'm secretary of Open Space Sausalito. And even though I... Thank you. will not receive financial gain, so technically it's not a conflict of interest. According to a conversation I had with the Fair Political Practices Commission, I thought it would be best for me to recuse myself from the closed session. So... |
| 03:06:32.31 | Jill Hoffman | OKAY. |
| 03:06:32.93 | Linna Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 03:06:33.03 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 03:06:33.05 | Linna Pfeiffer | Yeah. |
| 03:06:33.29 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:06:33.44 | Linna Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 03:06:33.45 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:06:33.56 | Linna Pfeiffer | should. |
| 03:06:33.86 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:06:33.89 | Linna Pfeiffer | . |
| 03:06:34.03 | Jill Hoffman | items anybody would like to discuss? Okay. This is not a time for public comment, but you can submit. |
| 03:06:44.71 | Ross Blanchard | for the |
| 03:06:45.22 | Jeff Jacob | . |
| 03:06:45.71 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 03:06:46.03 | Jeff Jacob | Yeah. |
| 03:06:47.02 | Jill Hoffman | Oh yeah, I'm sorry, you're right. Yes, you may. Sometimes that happens. You may, you're, please. |
| 03:06:50.14 | Jeff Jacob | . How does that happen? |
| 03:06:55.63 | Jill Hoffman | It just never happened before. Yes, sir. |
| 03:06:59.80 | Jeff Jacob | Well, I'm just trying to speak as directly as I can. without being too much of a Torahist here about the issues that are in front of me. And when Doug said that, Nobody's here except for me and Alden and Kevin. from the anchorage. Do you think it would have been more interesting, Linda, if there would have been 40 of us or maybe even 40 people from the Hill little tag team wrestling deal, maybe some cheerleaders from both sides, maybe a little bit of opening music or something, but a way for politics to become a little more Something we look forward to. I tried to avoid it last week because of what I said about Bernie Sanders' votes not being counted. that we could not even handle that part of of our elections. America has the lowest voter turnout rate of any industrialized country in the world, except for Switzerland, Japan, and Chile. Chile, it was required. Switzerland has something called direct democracy, so they vote all the time. And Japan, it's actually not true. They have a higher voter turnout rate when we include our off-year congressional elections. I checked that out. Why is that? Why do we discourage voting? Why do we discourage people participating? So Dunphy Park is going to be closed on July 4th. That is the place where much of the Anchorage gathers. That includes the only water and the only porta-potties Not trash, Linda Pfeiffer, for people to dump out. There are no legal trash cans in Sausalito for the Anchorage. Very silly tactic, I think, to get rid of illegal people. I'll say, no, you don't have to resign. You can re-sign. Okay, I mentioned that a few council meetings back. We can all change our minds. It's not that hard. So this is about Moses said to Jethro, the son of Ruel, the Midianite. Jethro comes up and he's the father-in-law of Moses. He tells Moses how to appoint judges, how to appoint policemen, how to appoint officials. We are traveling to a place which the Lord said, I will give it to you. Come with us and we will be good to you for the Lord has spoken of good fortune for Israel. He said to him, I won't go for I will go to my land and my birthplace. He said, which is Moses, please don't leave us because you are familiar with our encampments in the desert and you will be our guide. And if you go with us, then we will bestow unto you the good which God grants us. So Jethro was not an Israelite. I'm not ethnocentric about the people I was lucky enough, graced enough by God to be born into. Everybody's born into Israel. their way. Right? Now, I'm asking you to be the guide for what happens after Dunphy Park closes, after this uping of enforcement. Okay? Thanks. |
| 03:10:03.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, any other public comment on future agenda items? |
| 03:10:04.70 | Jeff Jacob | Thank you. |
| 03:10:09.71 | Jill Hoffman | And let's... |
| 03:10:09.74 | Linda Pfeiffer | And let's. It's about future agenda items. Yes. |
| 03:10:12.41 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:10:12.44 | Kevin Kiefer | Yes. |
| 03:10:13.24 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. you |
| 03:10:13.83 | Linda Pfeiffer | it. |
| 03:10:14.01 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:10:14.70 | Kevin Kiefer | Yeah. So I mentioned a few things in a comment earlier tonight. I'm really interested what will be the outcome of this council's decision. Herb spoke at the last RBI meeting and he read a prepared statement. I imagine it was from this council. in which Herb stated that he did not want to vote for the upcoming RBRA in favor of the upcoming RBRA budget. So I imagine that it's from the entire council. What would happen then if this council now decides to take that up to the next level and to defund its membership dues to the council? to the RBRA. |
| 03:11:01.60 | Ross Blanchard | MAKING A LITTLE BIT. |
| 03:11:01.95 | Kevin Kiefer | because if you're really interested in knowing about the RBRA, you'll ask more questions about the RBRA. But if you're not interested in knowing about the RBRA, you'll continue as this council and the other councils have been doing, and just shielding and covering up the corruption that has been the RBI. But if you really want to know, we have hard evidence that we'd be more than willing to share with you. if it would be leading toward that direction. |
| 03:11:30.30 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I move you with your... |
| 03:11:30.98 | Joe Burns | I move to adjourn. Madam Mayor. |
| 03:11:33.61 | Jill Hoffman | We do have one more. We have other reports. Madam Mayor. |
| 03:11:34.72 | Joe Burns | Madam Mayor, I think the city manager, for people who are listening, should actually correct the misinformation that Dunphy Park will not be closed on July 4th. |
| 03:11:37.37 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, Mr. Vice Mayor. |
| 03:11:43.45 | Ross Blanchard | Yes. |
| 03:11:51.65 | Jill Hoffman | So will Dumpy Park be closed on July 4th? I'll just pose a question. |
| 03:11:55.95 | Adam Politzer | Dunphy Park will not be closed on July 4th. The original schedule that the council heard when we were listening to the Friends of Dunphy Park's presentation of the conceptual plan had the proposed draft of a schedule that showed that Dunphy Park would be closed on July 5th. but because the council gave direction not to accept that design and asked us to actually go out and secure a design professional, and independent design professional to take a look at the conceptual design and confirm what is being proposed as something that we can actually build and that meets all of the codes and requirements, and then come back to council and have council review that information and then go on to the planning commission. So our schedule to be after the 4th of July celebration On 4th of July, that schedule has been postponed and we do not have a date certain, which I would imagine would be no sooner than uh... january of two thousand in seventeen |
| 03:13:14.27 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. All right, do we have any other reports of significance? No, then I am closing tonight's meeting in honor of my son, Robert Hoffman, whose birthday is today. Instead of being with him, I was here with all of you nice people. So there you have. |
| 03:13:29.64 | Ross Blanchard | people. Thank you. |
| 03:13:30.59 | Judy Frazier | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:13:31.33 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. We're done. |
| 03:13:32.46 | Judy Frazier | I can't believe you. Thank you. |
| 03:13:35.53 | Ross Blanchard | Thank you. |
| 03:13:36.61 | Judy Frazier | That's right. |
| 03:13:46.97 | Ross Blanchard | you |