| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:05.36 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Good evening, everybody. Welcome to the regular city council meeting for Tuesday, June 12, 2018. I will call the meeting to order and ask Lily to take roll. |
| 00:00:18.53 | Unknown | Councilmember Withey. Here. Councilmember Hoffman? Present. Councilmember Cleveland Knowles? Here. Vice Mayor Burns? Here. Mayor Cox? |
| 00:00:24.41 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THE FAMILY. I'm not sure. here. Jim Meyer, will you lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance? |
| 00:00:33.70 | Unknown | you |
| 00:00:33.73 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, |
| 00:00:33.92 | Unknown | I'm going to leave. Thank you. I'm glad. the United States of America. to the republic for which it stands, Thank you. |
| 00:00:40.55 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. |
| 00:00:40.58 | Unknown | one nation, Under God. |
| 00:00:42.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:42.98 | Unknown | to do this. |
| 00:00:44.77 | Unknown | Bye. Thank you. |
| 00:00:45.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:45.09 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:00:49.24 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm going to ask that we amend the agenda to move comment on closed session and other comment until after the special announcements. Second. All in favor? Aye. |
| 00:01:02.37 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:01:03.80 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Ooh. Okay, with that we'll move on to special announcements. |
| 00:01:07.97 | Unknown | you |
| 00:01:08.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm going to go. |
| 00:01:08.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:01:08.64 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | and special presentations. The first, Yes. special presentation is a proclamation of the mayor of Sausalito thanking the city of Qashqai for a gift of calzada stones and artisans to install the stones and proclaiming June 13, 2018 as Praka de Qashqai Day. Whereas, during an official visit in May 2013, representatives from the cities of Sausalito and Cascais, Portugal, signed a twinning agreement to form a sister cities relationship in which to share their cultural ties. And, whereas, since that time, representatives from Sausalito have visited Cascais, and representatives from Cascais have visited Sausalito to share educational and cultural experiences in their respective cities. And whereas on this 12th day of June 2018, the city of Sausalito welcomes dignitaries from our sister city in Qashqai, Portugal. And whereas in the true spirit of international cultural exchange, the city of Qashqai has so generously gifted the city of Sausalito precious calçada stones to be placed in a calçada pavement mosaic at the new Praça de Cascarice in downtown Sausalito. And whereas, the city of Cascarice also shared a gift of tradition and skill by providing the city of Sausalito with calçada artisans from Portugal, known as calçateros in Portuguese, who began work on May 15, 2018 to create the mosaic from 15 tons of stone in a traditional compass rose calcada design. And whereas on June 13, 2018 there will be a dedication ceremony at the new Praga de Cascais at which the city of Sausalito will be honored by the presence of the Prime Minister of Portugal, his esteemed delegation, and city of Cascades dignitaries. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that the city council, along with the residents of the city of Sausalito, wholeheartedly thank the city of Cascades for their overwhelming generosity in gifting the city of Sausalito with the means to create a calzada public art installation in a prominent downtown plaza. And be it further proclaimed that in recognition of the sister city spirit of cultural and educational exchange, along with Sausalito's Portuguese heritage that spans more than 100 years, I, the mayor of the city of Sausalito, declare June 13, 2018 as Procaday Qashqash Day in honor of the new plaza and the city of Qashqash's important contributions to the plaza project. |
| 00:03:52.77 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Are you trying to take a picture? |
| 00:03:54.10 | Jill Hoffman | I was trying. I looked like a photo. You did? Yeah, I know. Now it's not even on my birthday, too. |
| 00:03:57.16 | Unknown | Yeah. Thank you. I just feel like we can make It's my honor to present this proclamation to the Vice Mayor of Cascades, Portugal. |
| 00:04:03.66 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not. |
| 00:04:09.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:04:30.12 | Unknown | . |
| 00:04:34.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Does anyone say anything? |
| 00:04:35.67 | Unknown | . |
| 00:04:35.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | . |
| 00:04:36.38 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 00:04:36.65 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Cheryl, did anyone want to say anything? |
| 00:04:38.49 | Jill Hoffman | Is that? Thank you. |
| 00:04:38.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:04:39.43 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:04:39.56 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:04:39.97 | Jill Hoffman | Female Speaker 1st of the House The Pressure |
| 00:04:44.07 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And Cheryl, do you mind introducing people so that people who are here know who you have with you? Introduce the delegation. |
| 00:04:53.50 | Unknown | Thank you. you OK. |
| 00:05:03.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:05:03.97 | Unknown | Yes, thank you. |
| 00:05:04.03 | Unknown | Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. is the tourism director |
| 00:05:23.91 | Unknown | not on, the Luso American I won't start over. It's okay. Luso American Development Foundation who've generously granted us a very generous grant for this project and of course the city of Cascosh gave us the stones and the as the proclamation noted. So we're very grateful that they're here to join the Prime Minister and his entourage. We're very honored and excited about our event tomorrow. So we hope you can all join us. Thank you. |
| 00:06:07.99 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Next, under special presentations and mayor's announcements, we have the award of life-saving medals to Corporal Mather and Officer Padilla. And we'll call up our Chief John Rohrabacher. |
| 00:06:38.25 | John Rohrabacher | Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of City Council. Being able to honor the exemplary work of members of our staff is one of the true honors and privileges of being the Chief of Police. And we don't get to do many, and in some regard, that's probably a great thing that we don't have to do a lot of lifesaving awards, but we have the occasion tonight to honor two of our members of the Police Department, Corporal Brian Mather and Officer Edgar Padilla. Joining me is Lieutenant Frost, who has the medals and the ribbons to present and so anybody that wants to move around to take pictures please do that. I just stuck them over there even though they're not in camera view for the public but I think it offers the best chance for everybody to see them and I know that they're at least Brian his wife and children are here and I'd like them to be able to see their dad be able to you know, received this award. So bear with me for a moment, I'm going to read the citation and then we'll hand them off. So this is actually the life-saving medal awarded to both Corporal Brian Mather and Officer Edgar Padilla. on February 9th, 2018, the Saucyuta Police Department responded to a report of an unconscious male lying on the ground in front of Wells Fargo Bank. Corporal Mather arrived on scene one minute after dispatch and located a male in full cardiac arrest with no pulse and suffering from agonal breathing. C.P. Mather immediately started CPR in attempt to resuscitate the subject. Upon arrival of the Southern Marine Fire Protection District, Corporal Mather paused momentarily and retrieved the subject's wallet in order to identify him while file personnel provided treatment. After identifying the male, Corporal Mather resumed CPR. Officer Padilla arrived on scene three minutes after dispatch and began assisting Corporal Mather in performing CPR. Corporal Mather and Officer Padilla perform CPR on the subject for approximately 15 to 20 minutes. before the ambulance arrived and transported him to the hospital. The subject survived his heart attack, actually his third, And after a hospitalization of over a week, he was released from the hospital. Corporal Mather and Officer Padilla's actions in this incident were in keeping with the finest traditions of the Sausalito Police Department, and without a doubt, played a direct role in preserving this man's life. And for that, we're very grateful. |
| 00:09:44.08 | John Rohrabacher | And thank you very much for the opportunity to be able to do this. |
| 00:10:01.61 | John Rohrabacher | If they're all excused and we'll take our usual seats in the back row. |
| 00:10:05.00 | Unknown | you . |
| 00:10:05.34 | John Rohrabacher | Thank you. |
| 00:10:05.35 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:10:05.37 | John Rohrabacher | Thank you, Chief. |
| 00:10:05.46 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. THE FAMILY. |
| 00:10:06.15 | John Rohrabacher | I think that's something. |
| 00:10:26.75 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, and the third special presentation is a status update on Coastal Conservancy Buck Family Fund of Marin Community Foundation grant application for nature-based wave attenuation project at Dunphy Park. |
| 00:10:41.03 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you, Mayor Cox, members of the council, staff, and members of the community. It's a pleasure for me to have an opportunity to introduce Terri from Conservation Corps North Bay. She's going to deliver a presentation, and the conclusion of her presentation leads very well into Heather Richards' presentation for South Slater Community Boating Center. So with no further ado, I'm going to turn it over to Terri. |
| 00:11:11.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:11:14.63 | Terri | Well, it's a pleasure to be here. Thank you for this opportunity to tell you about the Dunphy Park Wave Attenuator Through Nature-Based Adaptations Project. This project, it kind of came into being naturally, and it has a lot of partners. So Conservation Corps North Bay, I'm the director of natural resources for that group, and I've been working with Jonathan, who's been helping me direct this project so that it meets what the city of Sausalito would have in mind. The funding is from the Buck Fund at the Marin Community Foundation, and it'll be administered through the Coastal Conservancy, California State Coastal Conservancy. And then we have scientific partners. And the Estuary and Oceanary Science, which used to be the Romberg Tiburon Center, The Smithsonian. Institute, which is here is the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center. California Audubon, but that's through the Richardson Bay. and Sanctuary Center. and then the Sausalito Community Boating Center. So with all of those together, we're approaching the following goal. The goal is to explore ecologically friendly ways to reduce erosion and the impacts of sea level rise on the Dunphy Park shoreline. So... Let's see, where do I point this? There? There? Where do I? Oh, this is this. OK, I point this to this. There we go. So people have been thinking about how the waves are affecting the area of Dunphy Park for quite some time. Can you guys, you guys can hear me okay, right? I'll get a little closer to this. Galilee Harbor at once identified a possible need for a wave attenuator right there or a wave damper. And then Sausalito, excuse the quality of this slide, but it's a good orientation. hired Claussen Engineering to develop a concept plan for a wave attenuator, which is a sheet metal piling wave attenuator at that place. This slide shows the oyster beds that are native Olympia oysters that you have at Dunphy Park. The eelgrass beds, which are our native seagrass community, and seagrass has been known as the third highest value habitat in the world. And then right here, There is a big mound that was created when Cass dredged for the Cass marina, but it's clean fill and might be able to be used for this project. And then the final thing I want to show is the channels. All right, so I'm going to show you a couple other photos of this just to kind of so you can make sure that you're oriented right. This one's a little bit prettier. All right. And it shows again, this is how big that mound is. This is where the oyster beds are. The eelgrass is in here, and then the next one shows the channel. So of course, this is the channel. And again, here's where Schoonermacher is. and the oyster beds and the eelgrass. There's no eelgrass in the channel because of the depth of the channel, but you can see on the other side there is eelgrass. And the way you can tell that is you can actually see the circles that the anchors make when they churn up the bottom of the eelgrass. I don't know if this is dark. Can we make this a little darker? Um, |
| 00:14:36.38 | Unknown | It's the Thank you. |
| 00:14:40.21 | Terri | It's a little darker, so skylights. But you can see a little bit about how it goes. Yeah, it's probably those. But this project is gonna have the following process for the wave attenuation. We're going to compile all the information from the site. This came out kind of funny. And evaluate opportunities constraints. And then develop a broad array of perspective strategies with a lot of examples and use a lot of examples. So I thought you might like a couple of pictures about what the examples for nature-based wave attenuators are and how you can protect erosion from the shore. So shoreline plantings, this was done at Giant Marsh in Richmond, and of course that can protect the shoreline. There is oyster reefs. which are made out of oyster shells and bay mud. And it's too bad you can't see it, but there's also some, oops, there's also some eelgrass in that picture. AND THIS IS A at Candlestick? There's, they've done it with an island, which that mound might be able to help with some sort of island. There's these Floating islands that can still allow water to come in and out of Dunphy Park waters, but still protect some from waves. And there's another possibility, this is kind of a similar living shoreline possibility. We aren't gonna do anything, this is just exploring the different ideas and what might fit exactly here. The biggest project that's been done so far in Marin County is in San Rafael. They created this living shoreline in 2012, which provided both oyster and eelgrass and also kept waves. from eroding the shoreline. And this, they came in with oyster shells and just dumped them off the ship and also created a constructed oyster shell Kind of a reef. 4 million oysters have attached to that structure since it was built in 2012. So between 2012 and 2016. They've been, that one was pretty successful, although it did decrease a little after that. So just a little bit about the oysters. The oysters, CLEAN WATER. They're filter feeders and they clean water. There's over 100 species of animals that live on oyster reefs. They get shelter, they're spawning habitat, they provide food. And because of all this, the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration has identified this a high habitat for protection and conservation in California. and all over the nation actually. We're lucky enough to have Chayla Zobin of the Smithsonian Institute, who's an oyster expert, and she's going to be teaching our Corps members and doing the monitoring of the site for the oysters. The other value, the eelgrass, this is Dr. Kathy Boyer, who's out of the Estuary and Oceanographic Sciences, which used to be Romburg-Tiburon, and she is going to be teaching our Corps members and doing the monitoring of your eelgrass. And eelgrass has actually been, that particular type of habitat has now been designated, make sure I get the designation right, a special aquatic site by both NOAA and National Marine Fisheries Service because of its values. Not only does it provide habitat for macroinvertebrates and fish and crustaceans, but also everything up and down the food chain with birds. There's a Ygritte. feeding on eelgrass communities. And also it holds the soil, it creates a structure. It's valuable for a lot of structural identities as well. And it sequesters carbon. So the results of all these values in this area and around Richardson Bay are things like the herring runs that come in. And have you guys all seen the herring runs? Has everybody seen the herring runs? It's pretty spectacular in January and February when the herring comes in and all the birds, thousands of birds come in and the marine mammals come in. So it becomes an aesthetic pleasure. It becomes a recreational pleasure. And it's a really great thing to do. So then, of course, the other part of my side of the project is that from this, We'll be providing, it's all gonna be done in the spirit of education. And in that spirit of education, Conservation Corps North Bay, which was founded in 1982. And since then, over 12,000 young adults, young men and women have broken the cycle of poverty. And it's been through education and job skills. So what we're trying to do is to create a new corps, a new crew for the corps that's based on climate change jobs. So we're developing, we're actually recruiting for this core. And the crew that's going to be working on this is part of that recruitment. There'll be some college grads, some high school grads. And together, they'll be learning a lot of different projects regarding climate change, and I put some flyers back here if you want to pick it up and see how different it is from necessarily all our other Corps members, but it will still be the typical Job Corps that you know the Conservation Corps to be. The part of this project that this vision, this new forward-thinking vision for a new type of crew, they will be creating interpretive panels on herring, on nature-based adaptations, on sea level rise, and on oysters. And those will be on mobile platforms that you can use throughout, like, Dunphy Park or other marsh restorations. And then their home will be the Sausalito Community Boating Center, which is also a partner in this project. And part of their mission is educating about Richardson Bay. And so these will be part of their ability to continue to educate youth and the public throughout for a long time into the future. So with that, I will turn it over to Heather Richard of the Sausalito Community Boating Center. |
| 00:21:41.23 | Heather Richard | Great. So you all know about the Sausalito Community Boating Center, formerly known as Cass Marina. And we're just going to run through really quickly our mission, for those that are new that might not know this project, is threefold. So we want to provide affordable access to the water for people who cannot necessarily afford to own their own boat. And we want to preserve the maritime history and heritage of Sausalito, making sure that all of the boat building skills, the maritime skills, the sailing, the rowing, the things that residents of this town know how to do well are preserved and carried on to the next generations. And we want to make sure that our environment of Richardson Bay is also preserved in a way that allows us to continue to use the water for recreation and for teaching and for food source. So these are slides that you can find online on our new website. We're based off of ideas that have been done really successfully across the country at other community boating centers. So there's a lot of places around the country that have this kind of center, and Sausalito currently does not. Right now, the project status may appear to be not moving forward, but there's a ton of work that has gone on behind the scenes. And we were kind of running the numbers earlier today with Jill just to make sure we have it right, but at this point, we are well over $100,000 in just simply the development of the plans and applying for the permits and the permitting fees and the environmental work that has been done in order to get construction started. A lot, a lot, a lot of hours have gone into this project pro bono by Michael Rex and many others to kind of just pitch in and say, let's make this happen. Let's get it going. WE HAVE We're very close to having the permits in hand from Army Corps, Fish and Wildlife, BCDC, and all the other agencies that are under the JARPA jurisdiction. We've heard back from everybody, which is great. We may still be required to do one further eelgrass study. We've done one already. But we are super close to being able to actually hand those over to the city and finish the permitting to be able to start construction this summer. So we're just waiting. We're just waiting very patiently. This has been a super long process, but it will be worth it, I promise. So we've got, I'm going to just flip forward here. So this was our hopeful year projection for 2018. We're now into summer, and we still haven't started the construction of the abutment yet because we are still waiting for these permits. But they're very close to being in hand. And we've been working with Jonathan, we've been working with Terry, we've been working with a lot of different partners. And we've really seen the opportunity in all of this environmental work that we, instead of it just being a drag that we have to go through all of these environmental regulations, it's really become an opportunity to figure out how can we build this with the least impact on the environment as possible. And so we've done a lot of changes to make that happen, and we've really come up with something that I think is definitely going to have the least amount of impact on the environment as we go forward with this center. So things like allowing light to pass through using different building materials than the traditional ones, to allow that eelgrass that Terry was talking about to actually grow under the docks and continue to flourish, and making sure that all of our best practices are going to be in place so that we don't disturb any species during the construction process. So that's what's taken so, so long. But it's a good story. It's a good environmental story. So I want to also touch on a couple of things. This is our best case scenario as far as being able to be up and running by next spring. And we are a little behind on the timing, but we still have some room to catch up this year. We do need to raise quite a lot more money. but we also have found that without the permitting in place it's but we still have some room to catch up this year. We do need to raise quite a lot more money. But we also have found that without the permitting in place, it's very difficult to go and get grants, to go and get programs up and running. We don't have use of the facilities until it's all permitted and going in the direction that the environmental regulations require us to go in. But once we do get construction finished for phase one, which includes a new abutment, a new ramp, which will be very wide, so it will be very handicap accessible, wheelchair accessible, new, safe, stable floating docks, once that's in place, we have a number of different programs that are ready to roll. High school sailing is bursting at the seams right now. They're turning kids away from high school sailing because there's no capacity to grow. And so as soon as this ramp and dock is built, we'll be able to provide them a place to expand and to get twice as many, three times as many kids out on the water. So that's a really positive thing. We also have the opportunity to continue to work with Conservation Corps for job training. And there'll be a lot of interpretive materials that they're going to develop as far as signage and things that will teach people about what they're seeing on the waterfront. And we'll be able to do some immediate environmental programs right away because we'll have some materials there to teach people from, as well as also having a safe dock for people to come down and observe the little wilderness in front of Dunphy Park there. And then the other thing that I just want to also put out is that there's still opportunity as well for Bay Water Trail money. We thought that that might dry up by the time we were finished with all of our permitting, and it's not, thank goodness. So there's opportunity to do an application there. As soon as we have our ramp in place, our gangway, and our docks finished, we can go to them for additional funding that will help improve Dunphy Park. We can apply to them for things like bathrooms. all kinds of extra signage and further ADA handicap accessibility as well, because that's a big part of their mission. So some good things. We're right at a tipping point, pretty critical tipping point. As soon as the permits are in hand, that's when things just can start to roll forward. I want to make a pitch tonight, though. We are, with all of the planning and designing phase starting to come, to an end and moving into construction and then and project management of the construction and then moving into the final phase of program development, hiring staff, and opening our doors, it's really important that we start to create a much bigger team now. It's been a small group of very, very dedicated people putting a ton of time in, and we're ready to have a much bigger team. So we've been actively recruiting, and I'm just going to put it out there to you all and to the public as well, that we are ready for more fundraisers, more people to pitch in with the Herring Festival, more people with finance experience as we sort of start this new business and open the doors and get things going. We've got a lot of volunteer gaps of places where we can fill in people. So if you have any time and interest in joining us, now's a great time to step forward. We have a bunch of people here tonight that came to support us that are new members of our team that I'm really proud to have on board. I won't name everyone, but it's a really nice growing group at this moment. And we also, I just want to also say that we do still need some funds. We need actually a lot of funds still. It's an expensive project. The grand total of improvement to public land is well over $300,000. That's a lot of money that volunteer time is putting in to improve city property. And it would be great at this point if there was any potential for matching funds coming from the city, especially for this ramp, which is kind of a big ticket item. It's the next thing that we need to fund. It's been designed. We need to have it fabricated. It's a one-of-a-kind custom thing. And that's kind of what comes next. After we build the abutment, we need a ramp to connect from the docks to the land. And that's the one big piece of the puzzle So I'm open for questions if you want to do that now or also via email if you want to keep the meeting shorter. |
| 00:31:48.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:31:50.50 | Heather Richard | Thank you. |
| 00:31:50.52 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:31:50.53 | Heather Richard | Okay. |
| 00:31:50.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, thank you so much. you |
| 00:31:52.56 | Heather Richard | you |
| 00:31:52.61 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:31:52.66 | Heather Richard | Thank you. |
| 00:31:52.81 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. Any questions? All right, I'm going to open it up for public comment. |
| 00:32:02.53 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Seeing none, thank you both so much for your presentations. |
| 00:32:11.41 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And thank you for your commitment to our waterfront. |
| 00:32:20.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Any other comments? Okay. All right. We're going to go back to the items that we postponed. The first is closed session announcements. There are no closed session announcements. Is there any public comment on our closed session? All right, seeing none, we'll move on to communications. This is the time for the City Council to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda. Except in very limited situations, state law precludes the council from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items of business that are not on the agenda. Would anyone here this evening like to comment on an item not on our agenda? Okay. |
| 00:33:11.47 | Jerry Taylor | Good evening. Good evening, Jerry. I am Jerry, that's right. I am Jerry Taylor, and I want to talk about briefly my favorite day of the year, the 4th of July. This will be the 25th year that the Cal band has come to Sausalito and performed with us and had fun. Through the years, we've had a lot of support to make this happen, not just from me personally, but from the city of Sausalito, the park and rec department with Mike, the wreckers, We've teamed with the Lions Club. The Rotary Club's been feeding us for years. We've teamed up for performances with the Saucer Women's Club. The Little League, Christ Episcopal Church, we've even performed an enlightened boat parade a couple times, and a couple times we got stormed out. but I wanted to acknowledge all those things. As I say, it takes a village. It takes all of you to make this work in Sausalito. |
| 00:34:07.88 | Jerry Taylor | and Couple of things to show you. Last year is celebrating Marin Ship 75. The Lions Club and the band alumni bought uniforms for everybody. I won't take off my shirt tonight because I'm on television, but I've got one of these Marin Ship shirts. I wanted to give this to you to take a look at. And then we got a nice snapshot of last year's mayor on the 4th of July also. Now, I also want to call your attention briefly to the fact that this is the 25th year of the Cal Band in Sausalito. You all know this is 125th year of Sausawood's incorporation. But in fact, the University of California, Cal, was created in 1868. which makes this the 150th anniversary. That's what this pin says, and you'll get a chance to see this a little later, perhaps. But I ask you, 25 125 150. Is that just a coincidence? Perhaps that's a cosmic confluence beyond our comprehension. Stay tuned, we'll find out on the 4th of July. THANK YOU. |
| 00:35:18.97 | Jerry Taylor | Thank you. Thank you. And I'll do that. |
| 00:35:52.98 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Next on our agenda is action minutes of the prior meeting. And I personally did not have any action minutes in my packet, and there aren't any online. So I'm going to recommend that we simply continue this matter to our next meeting. |
| 00:36:13.18 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So we'll do that by acclamation? Great. Okay, next is our consent calendar. Would anyone like to remove any items from our consent calendar? |
| 00:36:26.02 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. I would like to remove item 4C, which is the CAFR report and address that in item. |
| 00:36:38.57 | Jill Hoffman | 5C, which is the strategic resources allocation plan. |
| 00:36:50.52 | Jill Hoffman | Item 4C is the comprehensive annual financial report. |
| 00:37:12.19 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | You know what, Ray, I think it's fine. Okay, anything, any other questions or any other removals? Okay, I'm going to open it up to public comment on our consent calendar. Yes, please step forward. |
| 00:37:32.42 | Bill Monnet | Good evening, Bill Monnet. I'm so sweet. Oh, thank you. I actually a council member Hoffman has preempted me, but I I saw on the agenda tonight that you did have a consent calendar the comprehensive annual financial report. This is a matter I know a little bit about. I happen to believe these financial statements are very important and can be very helpful. So I also wanted to ask that you remove it from the consent calendar and try to find some time where you could review it more thoughtfully. The, Um, I know that you guys do a good job, you're very busy, there's a lot of demands on your time, and nobody except me is asking you to spend more time on accounting. But I do think the city is facing some medium-term and long-term fiscal risks, and a review of your financials could be very helpful. You spend a lot of time in the budget process, but the budget is necessarily short-term, and the risks, I think, are medium and longer-term. I have reviewed the financials. A couple of things stand out. in my mind, The first is to the net position, I mean the management discussion correctly identifies net position as a key indicator over time of whether your financial position is getting better or worse. I think that's right. It's like the stock price of the city should focus on that. Secondly, the pension debt. The seriousness of the pension debt I would not underestimate. I know also in the management discussion there's a comment that the pension debt is not a legal obligation. Well, the lawyers at CalPERS would probably disagree. I know following the Stockton and San Bernardino bankruptcies, the CalPERS lawyers argued forcefully that the pension debt was a legal debt obligation, in fact, protected by the California state constitution. The thirdly, Pension risk, I would not underestimate that either. It's hard to get good historical information on Sausalito's pension debt and liabilities, but we do know from prior financials that in 2005 the pension debt was $5 million. And we know from the current financials that it's but $25 million in 2016. So $5 million in 2005. 25 million in 2016. $20 million increase over 11 years, and you're paying an interest rate on that in excess of 7%. So it is serious. And finally, I would say, when reviewing these, if you review them, don't be complacent. If you look at the statement of activities for last year, the results were actually very good, very good. You had an excess of revenues over expending of $2 million, which is a great result. And, but $2 million can go away very quickly. We also know from the Bartell review of a couple of months ago that they're telling us that based on optimistic investment assumptions that in a couple of years' time, our employer pension contribution is going to double or increase by $2 million per year. And we know that in 2025, our legal authority to collect the measure of sales tax goes away. That's another million dollars a year. So. It's worth looking at. |
| 00:40:35.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, may I ask you a couple of questions, Bill? |
| 00:40:38.74 | Bill Monnet | Sure. |
| 00:40:41.18 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Well, he's talking about the CAFR. Are you going to stick around for our budget discussion, or are you going to leave after this? |
| 00:40:46.33 | Bill Monnet | How long do you need me to stick around? |
| 00:40:47.82 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, so I'm asking you these questions now, although I could ask them to you as part of the budget. But you mentioned that our pension debt should not be underestimated. It was $5 million in 2005. Now it's $25 million. We've been told by other financial experts that what we have to focus on is cash flow, because we don't have any control over CalPERS unless we mount some sort of legislative attack in banding together with other cities and so what we've done in our budget process if we is we have mapped out our cash flow through 2038 to ensure that we can smooth the adverse impact of the rising pension debt cash obligation each year. And so I don't like the fact that the pension obligation is doubling and quadrupling in such short order, but I don't think we have a lot of control over that. Do you believe that managing the cash flow is the next best alternative to that? |
| 00:41:57.97 | Bill Monnet | I do. I think it's absolutely critical. You go bankrupt and you run out of cash. You need to focus on cash, and that's why your budgeting process is so vitally important. Right. However, I do think there are things that can be done over the long term. As I'm sure some of your colleagues will tell you, that a lot of this pension debt is a historical obligation. We have a moral, ethical, and legal obligation to pay it. But it could get a lot worse. You know, Bart, CalPERS' investment performance has been deteriorating for years, and the $25 million estimate for the pension debt could be too low, could be a lot too low. So as bad as it is, it could be worse. Also, in addition to cash flow, I believe you need to be thinking about what could be done to... reduce the accrual of future pension liabilities or find ways to pay for them. If the good folks at Sausalito want to pay for it, fine. But somehow you need to match the possible expenses with the ability to pay for them. And there are things that other cities are doing. |
| 00:42:55.29 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And are you aware of something that other cities are doing that Sausalito is not? Because I believe we've done a tremendous amount to reduce our prospective pension liability. And we'll hear more about that from our administrative services director. |
| 00:43:10.31 | Bill Monnet | I'm sure he knows more about it than I do, but some of the things I see in other cities, for example, reliance upon technology. City of Fremont, for example, I think the police department has made good use of technology to try to reduce their headcount. THEIR OWNERS. There are outsourcing opportunities, especially in Europe. Places are, countries are outsourcing in imaginative ways which we haven't considered here. consolidation is another one the fire consolidation we did back in 2012 is an example of of this central marine police authorities another example there are and frankly I you know I I don't want to be impolite, the I think you need to create the right incentives. that whenever your city manager's contract comes up for review, you need to think about what are the incentives of her or him or whoever's going to fill this job next, and should that person participate in the pension program, which creates a conflict of interest. which I'm not implying anything, it's just that incentives matter. |
| 00:44:16.86 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, is there, other than the three points that you made about pension risk, our commendable results from last year, the seriousness of pension debt and the fact that net position is a key indicator of whether the financial position is getting better or worse. Is there something else you think we should be focusing on in the CAFR? I mean, we all had it in our packet. I'm sure we all read it, even though it was on the consent calendar. Is there something you think we should be focusing on? |
| 00:44:49.05 | Bill Monnet | No, those are the highlights as far as I'm concerned. It's a complex subject, it's a difficult subject. It's hard to understand, and I just thought that I think you know, I just ask you to focus on it. That's all, Jill. I mean, too. |
| 00:45:03.07 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, any other questions of Bill? |
| 00:45:08.54 | Jill Hoffman | Bill, sure, not the word. If we're going to be in question and answer. |
| 00:45:10.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:45:10.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:45:13.61 | Jill Hoffman | So why is it so important then for this not to be on the consent calendar? Why is it so important for us to have a full presentation of the city's financial report, including the unrestricted net position, which is at negative 18 million, and how that impacts our decision-making process going forward. |
| 00:45:34.34 | Bill Monnet | Well, actually, how you review it is up to you guys, and you would understand better than I do. Ordinarily, my understanding is things on the consent calendar don't receive a lot of attention. And so, have you been able to do that? I just think that this particular report does deserve attention. What is today's date? It's June 12th. |
| 00:45:52.51 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:45:52.53 | Unknown | Well. |
| 00:45:53.61 | Bill Monnet | This is for the fiscal year. This is a report for the fiscal year ended 347 days ago. So we're leaving it late. and when I saw that it's coming up on the agenda so late and it's on the consent calendar, I had to ask myself whether it has received the attention it deserves. I don't know, but I'm asking the question. |
| 00:46:18.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:46:18.85 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:46:20.46 | Unknown | Anything else, Jill? |
| 00:46:22.18 | Jill Hoffman | No, I mean that's why I'm requesting that it be taken off consent and added into our pension or not a pension but our our budget discussion later OK and next week if we have so I |
| 00:46:29.77 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. So I'll be sure to ask that question of our administrative services director when we hear this matter as part of item Anyone have any objections to moving item 4C to item 5C? Okay, great. Thanks so much for coming, Bill. Thank you. And please stick around for the pension if you have the time. I'll stick around for that. For the finance, for the budget. |
| 00:46:46.33 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 00:46:46.34 | Terri | Thank you. |
| 00:46:52.87 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, aside from... Any other public comment on our consent calendar? all right seeing none um aside from item 4c may I have a motion on our consent calendar SECOND. All in favor? Aye. |
| 00:47:11.96 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:47:11.98 | Unknown | Hi. |
| 00:47:12.95 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you Motion to approve the consent calendar carries 5-0. All right, we're gonna move on to business items. The first business item is our 2018 community survey results. And I think we have Lucia Del Pupo. |
| 00:47:31.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:47:36.04 | Lucia Del Pupo | Hello, good evening. |
| 00:47:43.79 | Unknown | Perfect. |
| 00:47:45.69 | Lucia Del Pupo | It's a pleasure to be back here. And I'm Lucia Del Pupo with FM3 Research. And I'm going to be walking through the results of the community survey that we worked on here in Sausalito. We conducted the interviews in the month of May. I presented a subset of these results to the finance committee, but this is a more involved, longer presentation. I'm going to move through these pretty quickly because we have a lot of material and it was a very dense and positive survey. But please feel free to stop me along the way if you have any questions or if you'd like to save them for the end, that's also fine. So a quick refresher and summary of our survey methodology. So we spoke to, we ended up being able to reach over 400 Sausalito voters. We did it in an online and telephone approach, giving people both options of participating. And the margin of error on the data is about 5%, so keeping that in mind when we're walking through it. So first section is about general attitudes towards life in Sausalito. And so first thing is we asked voters whether they felt that the city was on the right direction or the wrong track. What we saw was that a plurality, basically two to one, they felt positively about the direction of the city. And that things were just headed in a good direction. And about another quarter were undecided. We also asked voters about a series of different aspects or statements about life in Sausalito and whether they agreed or disagreed with these. And what we saw was very high ratings for Sausalito as a place to visit and as a place to live. So 9 and 10 saying it's a good place to visit or a good place to live. A majority saying it's a great place to raise a family. And then some division and a little bit more uncertainty. Also more people saying they didn't know about the quality or feeling of the choices for schools. We also gave voters an opportunity to tell us what they felt the two biggest problems facing the city were, and in their own words. And what we saw was that bikes, buses, taxis, and traffic were the ones that kind of came up the most often, both as first choice as a problem or second choice. And actually what compounds that is we also asked this question in terms of a list of choices, and we saw a similar dynamic there was that this external issue of traffic was affecting quality of life. And so what we saw here is this is a list of potential problems facing the city that we asked. And we asked similar versions of those lists in a lot of cities where we do community surveys. And we asked voters to tell us how serious of an issue these were in Sausalito. So first of all, I do have to say that there's very few cities that I've done work in where most problems are not seen as a very serious problem by a majority of voters. You all only have one problem that's seen as a very serious problem by a majority of your voters. And that's the cost of housing, 64% say that's an extremely or very serious problem. |
| 00:50:39.57 | Mary Wagner | AS A VERY |
| 00:50:51.91 | Lucia Del Pupo | That said, that's an issue regionally. That same question in San Francisco, 91% of voters are saying it's a very serious problem. So just to kind of couch that perception, that's a problem in the whole Bay Area, as most of us are aware. So that's the biggest issue, according to voters from this list. But also traffic congestion was one that popped up and kind of goes hand in hand with that previous item of the problems that they were volunteering of issues affecting their quality of life. And this is a continuation of the same list, and what you see there is that crime and emergency response times, availability of public transit, all of those are not seen as serious problems at all. We also asked voters and residents about their commuting habits. And what we saw was that they actually kind of split down the middle about who drives alone to work and those who do not drive alone to work. Those who commute and use public transit tend to use the ferry, bus, bike, carpooling. But really it's the ferry and the bus are the biggest public transit or non-car commuting mechanisms. We also asked voters about some different types of traffic and we asked them whether they felt like these were acceptable or unacceptable amounts of these types of traffic. And what we saw is that people felt that the traffic in their neighborhoods, the traffic during their commute was actually okay. Majority is saying that that was acceptable. What they were having a little bit less, they're a little bit more likely to say that traffic on the freeways and expressways during their commute was more unacceptable than acceptable. And then tourists riding bikes also was seen as unacceptable by more voters than acceptable. We also asked a series of questions about perspectives on public safety. So first of all, your voters or your residents give a really high rating of the sense of safety they have in the city. 95% agreed that they felt personally safe living in Sausalito. We also asked about perceptions of whether crime had increased, and we asked about some different types of crime. And what we saw is the majority felt that car break-ins had increased, and crime in general. Amount of home burglaries, a third, or a little bit over a third, said they felt that those had increased. Again, those would be interesting. I don't have access to this information, but it would be interesting to look at that against actually the data of what is happening, because sometimes perception of what's happening doesn't always line up with what's actually happening. And we also looked at it by the amount of time someone had lived in Sausalito. And it looked like longer-term residents, so those who had lived here more than 21 years, were more likely to feel that car break-ins had increased. We also asked about the license plate readers in the city. And we asked whether the voters felt they had had a positive or negative or no impact on the city's safety. And we saw that they were divided between feeling that they had had a positive impact or no impact. Or sorry, not no impact, not knowing. So it tended to be that if people were aware, they felt they were positive. We also asked a series of questions about city government and So first of all, a majority felt that they had a favorable view of the city council. That's not always the case, so congratulations. But yeah, again, this is a positive rating. And two to one feeling it's favorable against unfavorable for the city council. Thank you. And we asked about individual city departments as well. And what we saw was that individual departments were very well liked, the library, fire, police, and that's not uncommon, especially for fire and police to be so popular. Other organizations that we asked about were less well known. So the favorability ratings are lower overall. But the general ratio of favorable to unfavorable is positive for these organizations that we asked about. And we also asked voters how closely they followed the business of various city commissions or boards. And what we saw is that majorities really didn't follow any of them very closely. The planning commission, the pedestrian and bicycle advisory committee had a little bit more of a following than the others, but generally kind of not a lot of attention happening, which I'm sure is not a huge surprise, but it's good to get a pulse check about how close citizens are following these things. And they gave a very strong approval rating for the city's job performance. So we asked them how they felt, whether they approved or disapproved of the job being done by the city and providing services and taking care of Sausalito residents and 70% approved of the job the city is doing. And we also asked about a series of different aspects about things that the city does. And again, using that format of whether they agreed or disagreed. 87% said the city had an adequate number of special events. They felt that parks were well maintained. They felt that the city does a good job of communicating with residents. A majority felt that the city's doing a good job adopting technology, but that's where you start to see that gray bar get a little bit bigger, where about a third of voters really didn't. I have a strong opinion on that one or really no, but generally positive feelings about these different aspects of city government's role. So then we walked through each voter in a random order, a long series of specific city services. And we asked them to tell us which of these they were satisfied with. And what we saw was that maintenance of public facilities, maintaining garbage recycling, composting, library recreation programs, adequate fire services, all rose to the top. So very positive feelings about safety and maintenance of public facilities. They also were highly satisfied with the city's beautification projects. Again, public parks, technology for communications, just communications in general. Very positive attitudes about an array of these services. And then we start to get into some lower sense of satisfaction. Again, I want to draw your attention to the gray bar. On most of these, the lower sense of satisfaction is really driven by that lack of familiarity or that the people we put into that category are those who tell us they don't know and they can't give an opinion. The only one of these that I wanted to draw your attention to is again coming back to that traffic congestion and improvements. That's an item that people were able to broadly express opinions on and tended to be dissatisfied by. Again, drawing back to that question I showed earlier, it does seem like some of that traffic that people are concerned about is a little bit more out of the city's control in some respects, because it does seem like it's that expressway, freeway traffic that obviously isn't Sausalito alone. But there is also some attribution to tourism there. So then we walked voters through that same list again, but this time we asked them to tell us how important each of these services were. So first they tell us how satisfied they were, then how important these services are, because you can be very satisfied with a very unimportant thing. And what we saw is some of those items that they perceived as most satisfied with or satisfactory were also those that were most important. So fire services, garbage recycling, maintaining streets and roads, communicating with residents, all at the very top of that importance list. And also preparing for natural disasters, maintaining public facilities and parks. Very important to majorities of voters. And then, Again, voters kind of labeled everything very important or majorities did. The only item that really didn't resonate or wasn't seen as very important by a majority was the providing building code enforcement. which I can understand. I don't, it's important to some people, but I'm sure some people, again, don't really understand it. And so then what we did was we mapped this, and I think that this is a great graph for staff to sit and study and use it, and I'm sure they have, and they've used it to inform some of their recommendations for the budget tonight. But I just want to put it up here to show you briefly why a general trend about this graph, which is so basically we map those items by how satisfied someone is against how important that item is to voters that city service and um What you want to see is this upward trend line that you do have. You want to see the items clustering up towards we're satisfied and it's important, things that are unimportant. You don't want people to not be satisfied with, but obviously it's less So kind of you do want to see this clustering or this movement up here. That traffic item tends to be one that's more important and a little bit lower on the satisfaction line. But a lot of the other important things, such as neighborhood fire services all the way up at the top, is very far to the right. So people are very satisfied with that. So again, just a useful illustration of kind of where you're at visually with city services. And we also gave voters the opportunity to tell us in their own words what they thought were the most important improvements. And really, they kind of said a lot of just generic, improve city services, improve different services. But also, they wanted more enforcement of cycling laws and bicycle traffic safety and balancing tourism and residents. and again, public safety, improving traffic, all kind of came up as the most important items that they felt the city needed to address. And here are some of those comments. I kind of pulled these out from the data, ones that I thought were... interesting or representative of what was in there. So just providing low rent housing and bicycle safety, take care of our schools, increase public transportation, Again, just a lot of different kind of comments that came up. We also asked voters if they felt like the city was doing a good job of balancing resident services and tourist services. And they were actually divided. 43% said that there was a good balance and 42% said that the city was addressing too much to tourists. Only 3% said there was too much to residents. And looking at that demographically, what was interesting is it kind of actually split by a lot of the demographics. They were kind of split down the middle. It was hard to find what, sometimes you can pinpoint a different demographic profile of people who feel that way. Instead, it really was pretty split among most demographics. The biggest one we found actually was gender, where men tended to feel like there was a good balance, and women were a little bit more feeling like there was too much going to tourists. We then asked a series of questions about voters' experience with city services and really just customer service working with the city. And so 71% told us that in the last two years they had worked with the city department or agency or called for a reason or interacted with them. Of that 71%, we then asked them, okay, if you have interacted with the city, or were you satisfied with the service you received? And what we saw was that 83% said they were satisfied, 49% very satisfied. So general high satisfaction, good customer service or resident service coming from the city. And in terms of which departments they were interacting with, obviously they were able to tell us multiple of these responses, so it doesn't add up to 100. But it was the police, library, planning, parks and rec, kind of up at the top. But really police and the library were most commonly ones that they had used or interacted with. And we then asked them about a series of different elements of customer service or resident service, professionalism, courtesy, willingness to help. And we ask them to tell us whether these were excellent or good, fair or poor. And here they're grouped by the blue bars are excellent or good, orange is fair or poor. Again, very high ratings on a number of these attributes. |
| 01:03:44.70 | Lucia Del Pupo | And we also asked voters if they were aware of the general plan update. And what we saw is that only a third said that they were familiar and only 5% were very familiar. So generally lack of awareness and Sometimes those people who tell us they're somewhat familiar don't want to tell us they don't know something. So just keep in mind that 32% is a little bit soft because there's a social desirability bias in these types of questions a little bit to say that you know something. But what we did see, so we did take a look at who those who said they were familiar were, and they tended to be those people who were riding some kind of public transit or non- private mode, so ferry, bus, and then also homeowners. So maybe those people are people who are a little bit more in tune because they're not driving every day or I don't know if there's some kind of relationship between that. And then we asked that again that 32% who had heard of the general plan update, whether they felt like it reflected the interest of the community. And they were kind of divided, 30% said it did, 40% said it didn't, and 30% had no strong opinion. And then to the right there, kind of that profile of the voters who said that it did reflect their interest or does not reflect their interest. But again, remembering that this is a pretty small slice of the community. |
| 01:05:07.74 | Lucia Del Pupo | So we also asked a series of questions about city finances, perceptions of the city's finances, and funding of city services. So again, we asked voters how closely they follow city government and city budget. Remember we asked that question about individual boards and commissions, but we also asked it broadly, just in general, the city budget. And what we saw is that only 39% said they followed the city government closely, 58% said they didn't follow it closely. Which explains why we have such a big gray bar on the question of how they feel about the city's finances. A third were unable to express an opinion about how the city's doing managing its tax dollars. Of those who were able to express an opinion, a majority said that they approved of the job the city was doing. We also asked a question that we often ask in a lot of cities about perceptions of need for funding for city services. This is often a good barometer of voters willingness to support any type of future finance measure or just general perception of need in the city. And we saw that voters were pretty divided, only 41% said there was at least some need. 42% said there was little or no need. I was curious to look at this by party, even though I realize your city is predominantly a Democratic city or Democratic residence. So There is a little bit of a trend line, but Democrats a little bit more likely to say there's a need, and independents and Republicans a little bit more likely to say there isn't one that you would expect, but not huge, stark differences there. And again, very few Republicans, so... We also asked about a series of potential finance mechanisms. Again, for the idea that suppose the city needed to do something for additional funding, what are things that they would be comfortable with, that they would be willing to support or that they would oppose. And we saw that really the things that voters were more likely to support were things that affected people who were from out of the town or out of the city, which is not too surprising, I think we see that in a lot of places. But establishing fees on short term rentals, increasing fees for hotel and bed and breakfast guests were the only mechanisms that really got more than 50% of voters saying they would support that. at this point in time. Right below it is that increasing fees for delivery of marijuana. I do want to caution that, as I mentioned earlier, that perception of need is related to this. I think that in a community where people feel positively about their city, which is Sausalito, If there were perception of need, we would see more support potentially for different finance mechanisms, but people don't seem to really see a need. And again, I wanted to look at this by party just because, for the reason I mentioned, sometimes we do see some differences there that are interesting. But generally, the city is so much Democrats and independents. And as you see, the attitudes there are pretty consistent by party. The only thing is that actually, again, Republicans and independents were actually a little bit more comfortable increasing fees on marijuana than were Democrats. And then we asked a series of questions about Richardson's Bay. And what we saw was that three quarters of voters had heard about boats in Richardson's Bay. And 41% said they had heard a great deal about this issue. And of those 71%, 72% said they were concerned about the live aboards in Richardson's Bay, or at least somewhat concerned. So 21% were extremely concerned. Overall, out of the whole population of voters, that's 54% of voters saying they're at least somewhat concerned. Oops, sorry, I jumped ahead. So we also asked them, what are your concerns? After they told us they were concerned. And what we saw was that it was really environment and then concerns for kind of public health slash safety. Those things were often coupled. I went through and looked at the individual comments. And what was interesting, I would say about, Between 10 and 20% were concerned for live aborts, was concerned that was motivated as in, and I'll show you some of the comments, like I'm concerned that we're pushing out a part of the community. I'd like to find a middle ground. But a lot of the other comments were kind of very like, there's drugs and pollution and I'm concerned. So it kind of split that way with between 10 and 20% saying that they had these more concern for feelings versus just concerned about. So, in conclusion, my main takeaway is as I really take a step back and had a moment to digest this data was really that voters in your city or residents in your city feel very positively about the city. They feel safe, they think it's a great place to live, they recommend it as a place to visit. Majorities feel like it's a great place to raise their family and they feel positively about city government and city services. Some of the issues that really seem to crop up are regional issues. Castle housing obviously is one, and traffic is one that we're feeling regionally. But it does seem like there's a little bit of tension around the tourism issue and that also interacts with that traffic concern and in general. Coming back to that idea of eventually if the city ever needed to seek out a finance measure, there was more appetite for mechanisms that affected tourists than people who live here. And also just a general sense or lack of awareness that there would be a need. So that would be something that would need to be communicated to voters basically. So I'm happy to take any questions. |
| 01:10:55.48 | Unknown | I know that was a lot. Any questions of Lucia? Okay, Susan. |
| 01:11:01.83 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, do you have a kind of a breakdown of the demographic data? I mean, you showed... some of the ways the answers broke down, but how many women, how many Democrats, how many? |
| 01:11:15.36 | Lucia Del Pupo | Yeah, and so... |
| 01:11:16.98 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Is that somewhere in the packet? |
| 01:11:18.28 | Lucia Del Pupo | It's in the top line, but I'm happy to talk about it briefly. It's on the back couple pages, pages 15, 16, and 17 of the top line. So that's survey document, not the PowerPoint. The demographics are representative of voters in the city, so it's a representative sample, random sample that we pull and we It's statistically stratified, so it really is THE SAME match up to the city of the different demographic groups. But I can run through some of the major ones, just to give you a sense. For example, it was 48% male to 52% female. There's a little bit more female voters than male voters, believe it or not. highly educated, so 83% with some kind of college degree or and over half homeowners. So you can, I mean, I'm happy to walk through these in detail, but it is there on 15, 16, and 17. And the items on 17 are items that we pull from the voter file. So 54% Democrat, 14% Republican, and 27% Independent. |
| 01:12:33.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, thanks. And so on the revenue slide, you showed that TOT for short-term rental Thank you. was high on list of potential revenue and delivery of marijuana was a little bit lower. Did you ask about how people feel about either of those issues? |
| 01:12:56.44 | Lucia Del Pupo | No, we didn't get into the specifics beyond that question. |
| 01:13:02.27 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. |
| 01:13:02.82 | Lucia Del Pupo | So, |
| 01:13:03.67 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 01:13:06.82 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And what prompted the question about Richardson Bay? |
| 01:13:10.87 | Lucia Del Pupo | I think there was just some interest in knowing what voters thought if there was any concern or not. |
| 01:13:16.80 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, I guess what struck me, you know, I thought the survey results were really interesting. What struck me was that we have a lot of controversy. You know, there's a lot of issues that are under debate right now. You know, we had a big debate about marijuana, delivery, both recreational and medical, about whether there would be storefront operations, whether we would allow warehousing and sale, development of housing, short-term rentals, whether there should even be any. And of all these issues, and Richardson Bay is also an issue. But the only question that we really delved into was that one. And I'm just wondering how that rose to the top and why we didn't ask about some of these other issues that we're kind of struggling with. |
| 01:14:06.76 | Adam Politzer | Yes, Council Member Cleveland-Knowles, I'm happy to respond. I think, you know, as we had the discussion when this item was first brought to the Council for approval to go forward, you know, there was discussion about what questions we would ask, and I took the direction from the Council to leave that in staff's hands, and so we looked back, Lily, Waylon, Abbott-Chambers, myself, looked back at some of the issues that we've been working through and the items that raised to the top. And we thought it was an opportunity to introduce the subject and then give enough information for the council to give us direction to do additional studies or work to flush it out. With Richardson Bay and our relationship with RBRA, we've spent a number of years now on that item, and we thought that it was not just important to find out if they were aware of it, but what were the concerns that the residents had. And so although it looks like we spent a lot of time in terms of the information that we gathered, it's two or three questions at most. Same with the general plan. Again, we didn't go into a lot of detail. We were in the beginning stages of the general plan, but we thought it would be helpful just to get a moment in time of how many people are participating or aware of it so that we could do a better effort on our outreach as we now go into the visioning. And what proved was that we do need to do a little bit more work, and I think that the GPAC is working hard to reach as many residents as possible. And so several of those top line items was really just to give us some information. So the short-term rentals, another one that we thought that it was worth asking the question. We had discussion about the marijuana delivery. And again, just trying to get some brief responses back so that the council can give direction if they want to explore any of those further as we go forward. Yeah, as the council noted, when we brought this forward, there's an opportunity to do a lot more. And we thought that this would be a good way to start that next year or in six months or whenever the council would like to pursue anything further, an opportunity to do so. |
| 01:16:40.14 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, thanks. Thank you. |
| 01:16:42.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 01:16:44.98 | Unknown | Joe Gill. Joe. |
| 01:16:47.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Joe. |
| 01:16:48.12 | Unknown | Joe. |
| 01:16:48.51 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Burns, Vice Mayor. Coming up. |
| 01:16:50.52 | Jill Hoffman | Coming up. Insidious. Let me go get them. I'M GOING TO BE ABLE thank you for the presentation i think we saw that the level of service which was really kind of what we started off with on this was you know what's the level of service we're providing and i think that turned out really good i would like to see maybe at some point the comparison to the last where we might be hedging up or down but Staff is doing great, and that's what we saw in this. One of the things that was confusing to me, maybe from what I do for a living, but housing stood out as being kind of inconsistent. And it comes down, I think, to this one question, but in this one area, it was 4%. |
| 01:17:28.55 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:17:35.74 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 01:17:36.13 | Jill Hoffman | On one slide, on the graph, it was very low as far as importance. But then in one sample B, it showed as the cost of housing being high. What was the difference with sample B in that question that skewed differently than the other questions? |
| 01:17:39.93 | Unknown | as far as what's going on. |
| 01:17:50.27 | Lucia Del Pupo | Yeah, I don't think it's the sample, per se. That skews differently. I think it's the way the question is asked. I think, so in one of those questions, we offered it as an option. versus another one in the one where it's 4%, we ask people to volunteer the things that are affecting their quality of life. And I think what ended up happening is, realistically, Sausalito is an affluent community. And so maybe people are not feeling, if they're thinking of what is affecting their day to day life, they say, oh, traffic. But then when you say cost of housing, you're like, oh, yeah, that's a problem. But it's not something that they necessarily feeling in the same way as traffic. I know that that seems kind of counterintuitive, but I think there is a difference when you offer something as an option for someone to say whether it's a problem or not versus ask them to volunteer it. The housing aspect, especially when you volunteer, is augmented by the fact that there is this regional discourse about cost of housing. |
| 01:18:47.34 | Jill Hoffman | I think that's, and I agree with you on that, I think it is about the regional discourse, as well as maybe the difference between the cost of housing and the value of housing, and that's something that we... |
| 01:18:56.22 | Lucia Del Pupo | Right. |
| 01:18:56.24 | Jill Hoffman | identify a lot with. |
| 01:18:57.99 | Lucia Del Pupo | And I'm sorry, I flipped through it pretty quickly because I know there was so much material. But there was an item about low-income housing, and there was a sense that that was an issue a little bit in the city services. So again, obviously a different aspect of it, but I do think that it is a coherent story. |
| 01:19:15.12 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, the rest are comments. Thanks. |
| 01:19:19.74 | Lucia Del Pupo | Thank you. |
| 01:19:19.84 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:19:21.38 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Oh. Thank you. Thanks. OK. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you all. I'm going to open it up for public comment. |
| 01:19:24.37 | Unknown | Yeah, great. |
| 01:19:29.33 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yes, David. |
| 01:19:37.65 | David Sudo | So since we had so many, there's a lot of bike-related content in that, I thought I'd point out one factoid and then make a couple of comments. I noticed that if you parse out that data, that it shows that 8% of our population is commuting by bike, which I think is great. If you look at the other data point that I know of is the 2000 census said that only 1.2% of our population was commuting by bike in 2000. So in 18 years, we've gone a long way into mode shift. That's a lot of people. That's a couple hundred people probably, our residents, that are biking. So when you see those bikes in the morning, a lot of those are people that live in town or biking to the ferry or biking into the city or biking to Mill Valley or biking to work inside the town, which I think is great. I noticed that pedestrian bicycle committees seem to have high interest in town, and people are paying attention to us. But I'm not quite sure how that translates, because we have very low participation. I don't, maybe people are watching online or they're just talking to their neighbors somehow. Thank you. But we're having trouble translating that interest into participation, and I would hope that maybe we can figure out a way to transfer that there. And the final thing is there seems to be a lot of concerns about bicycles in general, and with our general plan update, one thing I would hope we would do is look at bicycle facilities and what we can do to those facilities to reduce the conflict between bicycles and pedestrians and vehicles. Thank you. |
| 01:21:31.54 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. Any other public comment? All right, I'll close it. Close public comment, bring it back up here for discussion and comment. Anybody have comments? |
| 01:21:43.03 | Jill Hoffman | comment. |
| 01:21:43.52 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, go ahead. |
| 01:21:43.60 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Mine is quick. Since we should look at some results, we spent money and we should try to come to some conclusion. I'm kind of piggybacking on what David Sudo brought up with the how people see some of our commissions and Mike Langford back there with the Parks and Rec Commission getting such a high score, yet No one ever comes to those meetings. At least they didn't when I was there. There probably are now. And it's not videoed. And I would put that on our list as something to start getting on either YouTube, our actual video programming, or even a Facebook Live. But that commission is so connected to the community. Sorry, Mike. You're going to have to dress up for this and everything. But that commission is so vital to so many things that are going on in our community, especially now as we look at vision, you know, with the arts and recreation and all the community events that go through that department and that commission. I would like to see a little more exposure, and I think the community... Said that as well. |
| 01:22:48.64 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, I'd echo that comment and that was definitely one of the things that I noticed that the boards and commissions and the general plan update are very low on people's radar screens. you know, that we definitely can do more in terms of outreach. I think, you know, the And Abbott Chambers has done a great job getting notices about those meetings out weekly, but I think that people are still just not that engaged. And, you know, even when they're concerned about an issue. So that's definitely something I think we should think about. I was really gratified, as David Sudo said, to see the numbers on the bike commuting but also the ferry and bus numbers 56% of people say they commute regularly by bus or ferry that's just amazing and I think says a lot about the sustainability of our community. I am a little frustrated just to go back to my earlier question that we have two potential revenue sources on the revenue questions that show that people are interested in the revenue from marijuana delivery and from short-term rentals. But the question wasn't really asked, do they want to see those things in this community? And we had some good survey data. on marijuana delivery when we made our early decision to do our interim ordinance, but we still have an interim ordinance, and I would really like to see more data on how people feel about that issue. And then, you know, on the short-term rentals, too, it's just a very, I know people have very strong feelings about that. We had a task force organized around that but we've never done a survey about how people really feel and so I was disappointed to see just the revenue question on the survey so hopefully moving forward we can try to find out more information |
| 01:24:52.01 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thanks. |
| 01:24:52.47 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you Thank you. |
| 01:24:52.77 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Any other comments? All right. Thank you so much. |
| 01:25:04.85 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I know, I took mine off. All right, with that, we will move on to item... 5B, Authorize Professional Consulting Services Contract for Project Management Planning and Design Services for Sausalito Ferry Landside Improvements Project. Jonathan Goldman. |
| 01:25:23.53 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you very much, Madam Mayor, members of council, staff and members of the community. I decided that my best bet was to load an image of the staff report, which isn't happening nearly as quickly as I would like, so forgive me for that. There's not. whole bunch to show here but and I'm not going to read it although there's a lot of incredibly valuable persuasive powerful information in it and I encourage any of you who haven't read it to to take advantage of the opportunity to do so the short version of this as council is aware is that we are the beneficiary of a pass-through agreement from Federal Transit Administration through the Golden Gate Ferry District to Oh. essentially perform a visioning exercise and then develop plans and construct improvements to the ferry land side, the city side of the Sausalito ferry landing. That project or that money and this effort has been delayed for some time for a variety of reasons, but with some prodding from the Federal Transit Administration, the city staff was able to have the city council reiterate its commitment to the pass-through agreement and adopt a resolution earlier this year committing to a process of identifying and engaging a consultant team to help us through that process. Our initial conversations internally between the city manager and I were with Bill Werner, who I think is familiar to all of you. As a result of those conversations, the realization on my part was that we really needed to take advantage of his expertise and his skills, but also to try to develop a team that would help us very quickly build momentum towards community consensus on what we would like to see as an initial phase of ferry landside improvements, try to make sure that we have kind of in an overarching way identified programmatic kind of objectives, but then try and get some construction to happen as quickly as possible. Do that in a manner that's integrated with the Ferry District's project on the water side for a variety of reasons. Certainly, we want to minimize the disruption to the community that constructing two projects would create. And as Council and especially the Finance Committee is well aware, we derive significant revenues from our municipal parking operations in Muni Lot 1, and we certainly want to be as intelligent and informed as we can about trying not to have any adverse impacts on those revenues from either project. So in that context, and taking the procurement regulations that apply through the district and federal transit administration, Council saw a draft request for proposals that I had prepared several meetings ago. We initiated a conversation with a team that includes Bill Werner and also local architect Robert Hayes, both of whom are here in the audience and are available to answer questions. I want to acknowledge them and appreciate their presence. Bob and Bill have put together a team that, in my judgment, really represents the only viable local team that could do what I think we at staff and the community need to do, which is to develop that momentum and take us on a fast track towards community consensus on an initial phase of the project. That momentum will help us in working with the Ferry District, ideally to develop additional funding resources through FTA and potentially other granting agencies. And so given that council appropriated the funds from the city's share of this project several meetings ago, given that we have what I think is a very good team that satisfies the disadvantaged business enterprise goals and satisfies our objectives in terms of local knowledge and skills and experience. My recommendation is that council authorize the city manager to enter into execute a professional services agreement with the project team led by Mr. Hayes and including Bill Warner and several other firms with a lot of local project experience. And I'm happy to answer questions and happy to entertain questions or have you ask questions of our team representatives. The resolution that's in your packet includes their proposal as well as a draft standard form of contract. So their budget breakdown, their hourly rates, their team members are all there. But rather than go through that in great detail, I'll just invite questions at this point. |
| 01:30:51.80 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Any questions of Jonathan? |
| 01:30:55.63 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, I was just wondering, can you talk a little bit about the schedule that's on page 12 of 12? So it looks like this would be wrapping up in 2019 March, if I'm reading it correctly. |
| 01:31:11.24 | Jonathon Goldman | I'll just bring that up to try to bring that quickly for everybody else's information while I try and talk about it. the intent with Thank you. I mean, we have a couple of, here it is, sorry. I sometimes pretend I can multitask and I really can't. |
| 01:31:40.98 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you |
| 01:31:41.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | last page. Yeah, it's not going to be very helpful on the screen. |
| 01:31:43.83 | Jonathon Goldman | on this is the last page. |
| 01:31:45.45 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | It's the last page. |
| 01:31:46.48 | Jonathon Goldman | Yes. Very difficult. We all have it in our pocket. Very difficult to read. And again, it is in the packet. It's the last page of the attachment to the staff report, which is the last page of the draft resolution. |
| 01:31:47.51 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | We all have it in our pockets. |
| 01:31:59.76 | Jonathon Goldman | This schedule was developed by the project team based on the grant fund drawdown schedule that we provided to the Ferry District and then they provided to Federal Transit Administration. Obviously, those are two different kinds of approaches to how we will deliver the project, but this is what Mr. Hayes and Mr. Warner and their team have identified as an appropriate schedule for them to do what they're recommending to us as this visioning phase. The first part of which involves them developing a set of alternatives. And for example, for NEPA and CEQA reasons, we want to make sure we at least have a no action kind of placeholder, because the absence of that then penalizes us later on in the process. So they've developed a schedule in very short order based on that scope of services. I would argue that there's some flexibility in it, but the objective, as indicated in the proposal, and interrupt me if I'm in place. moving away from answering your question. But the objective in the schedule is to get a set of alternatives developed that we can very quickly get public participation involved in with the objective of getting a preferred project to the Planning Commission. |
| 01:33:21.91 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So I think the question was simply, are they going to finish in March of 2019? |
| 01:33:25.47 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Well, and then I guess the second part of my question is, does that align with the ferry landing improvement project? |
| 01:33:32.37 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm |
| 01:33:32.86 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | and the Golden Gate Bridge District schedule. |
| 01:33:36.08 | Jonathon Goldman | Right. I'm sure that there's some alignment, and the fact is that the bridge district still doesn't have their project out to bid. . |
| 01:33:45.43 | Unknown | MMM. |
| 01:33:45.55 | Jonathon Goldman | So there is going to have to be a lot of iterative adjustment throughout the process. But again, that to me, and I'm not, again, not trying to not answer your question, that's why there's a strong incentive for us to start building momentum, to have a team working for us right away and coordinating with the Ferry District. We had a meeting with their senior staff earlier this week. I forget which day. It must have been yesterday because it's only Tuesday. And then had one scheduled with their pass-through agreement subgrantee group this coming Thursday. That has been postponed. I've reached out to their engineering staff at Dennis Mulligan's suggestion on our meeting yesterday. We wanna start a routine schedule of coordination meetings with them, and obviously if council |
| 01:33:46.24 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:34:38.45 | Jonathon Goldman | agrees to do what staff is recommending tonight, we would want to integrate our project team in that. And then I think we would be pretty regularly updating you on what our schedule is and being able to give you a kind of a coordinated update on what the ferry district schedule is. |
| 01:34:54.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, thank you. Any other questions of Jonathan? Okay, go ahead, Rick. |
| 01:35:01.49 | Ray Withey | Thank you, Jonathan. The, um... You can't help but note that we do have a general plan advisory committee and a general plan process, and about over half of that committee seems to think they're going to be redesigning a plaza in front of the ferry. and changing and possibly optimizing or having suggestions for a complete redo of the circulation system in the downtown. With that in mind, how do these two efforts talk to each other? |
| 01:35:43.49 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Well, if you look at the timeline there is a community workshop included in the program plan. |
| 01:35:51.27 | Ray Withey | I agree, and so my question still stands. How do these two efforts talk to each other? |
| 01:35:56.33 | Jonathon Goldman | It's certainly staff's intention, my intention, that that coordination has to happen as part of our management of the project. At the same time, we're advocating for retaining a team that is focused on developing a set of alternatives and building community consensus on those alternatives. I'm perhaps delusionally optimistic regularly, but I believe that that consensus can be developed in conjunction with the general plan process. And to the extent that there are conflicts, obviously our job, staff's job, and our visioning team's job is to reconcile those conflicts. There's no benefit to having conflicting visions of what happens with the project. |
| 01:36:48.27 | Ray Withey | What I'm trying to get to is the actual dialogue and the integration of those efforts needs to be an inherent part of the project plan. |
| 01:37:10.04 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm sorry, suggesting that we need to amend this exhibit that's on page 12 to have a work plan that includes meetings with the general plan committee or is that just a comment to staff for direction. |
| 01:37:10.21 | Jill Hoffman | I'd like to... |
| 01:37:10.97 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:37:16.06 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:37:16.16 | Ray Withey | So, yeah. |
| 01:37:16.37 | Jill Hoffman | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:37:22.29 | Ray Withey | I think it's, I'm quite happy to Um, to enable staff to be able to work that out. I'm just making sure that it happens and that we're not going to try and do a silo thing where we have one group trying to design one thing and another group thinking they're having a say in the downtown organization and the two silos not talking to each other. It's ridiculous. So whether it's in the exhibit or whatever, We need to figure out how that coordination is going to happen and make it an integral part of the program plan. If it means we have to modify an exhibit, well, so be it. I'm not focusing on the details. I'm just trying to make a specific point that there needs to be a relationship between the two. That's all. Okay, I agree. It's just that the |
| 01:38:09.20 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, I agree, it's just that the program has a specific number of meetings with the planning commission, with the HLB, so. |
| 01:38:17.32 | Ray Withey | Well, I mean, if something got to the Planning Commission and We have a general plan advisory committee doing the same thing. And they're out of, I mean, it makes no sense. So how are we gonna do it? That's all I'm asking, how are we gonna do it? |
| 01:38:33.84 | Jill Hoffman | I agree it sounds like that's a good discussion for the general plan update committee more so than this. This to me takes a forward seat. |
| 01:38:36.95 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm not sure. |
| 01:38:40.47 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. Well, and that's the other thing, as someone just said. Both efforts are constrained by budgetary issues. So that's... |
| 01:38:57.80 | Ray Withey | Well, the alternative is, you know, someone tells the General Crown Advisory Committee to butt out of this. I mean, that's the alternative. I just don't want to see parallel efforts with a lot of people getting very frustrated because they think they're doing one thing and participating. And in fact, there's another group that's actually superseding them. they need to have a dialogue about it. |
| 01:39:23.20 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Well, so... |
| 01:39:23.32 | Ray Withey | . |
| 01:39:24.18 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So the good thing, Ray, is that both the general plan advisory committee and this group, |
| 01:39:24.23 | Ray Withey | So- |
| 01:39:33.38 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | ultimately report to the City Council and so at a minimum we are the final arbiter of conflicting feedback. |
| 01:39:45.69 | Jill Hoffman | I have a follow-up question based on conversation we just had. So my understanding was that the This that we're talking about today in this you know consulting services contract is mainly to address paths of travel in what the current parking lot one from this ferry the new ferry landing and to have a corresponding update on that. with regard to the new fair landing project, not a complete redesign of that area around parking lot one and the Vina Del Mar Do I have that right? |
| 01:40:25.49 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Do I have that right? I don't think so. I mean, Jill, this is the Ferry Landside Improvements Project. That's the consulting agreement. And the Ferry Landside Improvements Project includes parking lot one. |
| 01:40:29.87 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:40:37.77 | Jill Hoffman | So we are talking about a complete redo. If I'm not mistaken, that's subject to a measure. And that's the whole point. |
| 01:40:39.54 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I know. Thank you. |
| 01:40:40.79 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah. |
| 01:40:40.84 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 01:40:42.23 | Jonathon Goldman | And that's the whole point. That's the whole point. If I may. |
| 01:40:44.30 | Jill Hoffman | Right? |
| 01:40:44.72 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 01:40:46.58 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 01:40:46.61 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah. The grant that has been passed through is intended to address all the facilities that ferry patrons use in getting onto or getting off of Golden Gate Ferry. $2.5 million is not enough money to do everything that even staff can conceive of that needs to be done there. So part of our challenge is, again, to build that momentum, to build community consensus. And just for the record, Plaza Viña del Mar isn't in the equation because ferry patrons don't use Plaza Viña del Mar to get to the ferry landing or to get off the ferry in general. The principal emphasis in the short term is going to be in Lot 1. And that includes looking at the way Lot 1 currently circulates for all of the modes that use it, which includes cars, it includes public transportation to some extent, it includes delivery vehicles, it includes bicycles, and it includes pedestrians. And then to the extent that, again, in a more programmatic umbrella sense, we can identify conceptual paths of travel that connect lot three, which is where our commuter parking is, with the ferry landing. We want to make sure that we've at least laid some of the groundwork there so that we don't have to redo environmental compliance. But the project team is challenged with optimizing those efforts, and we have to optimize them in conjunction with what the Ferry District is doing on the water, because we aren't really in a position to take lot one out of use for any longer than absolutely necessary. So... From my perspective, the short-term objectives are, let's develop community consensus on a project, and it may be as simple as, renovating the lot, repaving it, restriping it, and making pedestrian and lighting improvements that comply with the building code for accessibility, for example, and at the same time, developing alternatives sufficiently enough so that while those improvements are being constructed, we can work with the ferry district and FTA or even other granting agencies to get additional funds to do a lot more work that really needs to be done downtown. |
| 01:43:28.33 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | DOES THAT ENTERTAINMENT? |
| 01:43:28.70 | Jill Hoffman | to your question. No. And so Mary, what's the ordinance that if you do anything, I know we addressed this in the past and now I can't remember what it is. |
| 01:43:38.32 | Mary Wagner | 1128. |
| 01:43:38.96 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so anytime we talk about parking lot one or anything, I think that 1128, that needs to be somewhere in the staff report. this plan is governed by Ordinance 1128. Any changes to it substantially must go through the voters and subject to a vote. So, I mean, anytime you talk about what's going on in parking lot one or any of the other of those properties that are governed by 1128, that's got to be part of the conversation. So, if we're talking about more than just you know, talking about paths of travel and we're talking about substantial change in that parking lot, then IT'S A NONSTARTER. |
| 01:44:14.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | half of the change results in fewer parking spaces. So it's not no change. It's simply a greater than 10% reduction in number of parking spaces. |
| 01:44:20.30 | Jill Hoffman | Right. |
| 01:44:25.16 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, but if we're going from a parking lot to a plaza, That's subject to vote in my opinion. |
| 01:44:29.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. Yeah, and that's something the General Plan Advisory Committee has already identified as a constraint. |
| 01:44:36.64 | Jill Hoffman | Anytime, but we have a staff report. I think that needs to be in the staff report. |
| 01:44:39.77 | Jill Hoffman | Well, you could also say it's a budget item, too, to take away our parking for a plaza at this point. So I don't think anybody's proposing that. Anyway, we don't need to discuss. |
| 01:44:46.73 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Anyway, we don't need to discuss the merits of what this, we're looking tonight to approve a contract for some, resident experts to start this visioning process for us. |
| 01:45:02.99 | Jill Hoffman | So any other questions on that? I wasn't commenting on the merits. I was just commenting that that needs to be part of the conversation. |
| 01:45:12.18 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | All right, seeing no other questions, I'll open up for public comment. Seeing none, I'm going to close it, bring it back up here. Any further comment or may I have a motion? |
| 01:45:29.02 | Jill Hoffman | I move that we adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute a professional consulting service contract with Robert Hayes and Associates for project management planning and design services for the Sausalito ferry land side improvement project. |
| 01:45:42.77 | Jill Hoffman | So I can. |
| 01:45:43.06 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:45:43.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:45:43.29 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | clearly recall the roll. |
| 01:45:48.07 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 01:45:48.09 | Unknown | Councilmember Withey? Yes. Councilmember Hoffman? |
| 01:45:49.00 | Mary Wagner | Yeah. |
| 01:45:49.06 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. |
| 01:45:49.10 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:45:49.11 | Mary Wagner | Yes. |
| 01:45:51.71 | Unknown | Council member Cleveland Noles? Yes. Vice Mayor Burns? Yes. Mayor Cox? Yes. That carries 5-0. |
| 01:45:54.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:45:54.46 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yes. Yes. That carries five zeros. Great. Good evening. |
| 01:45:58.97 | John Rohrabacher | you |
| 01:46:01.43 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thanks to both of you for being here tonight. |
| 01:46:03.86 | John Rohrabacher | The Press. |
| 01:46:06.48 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Of course. |
| 01:46:07.27 | John Rohrabacher | Thank you. To the next one. |
| 01:46:09.97 | Mike Langford | All right. Thank you for stepping up. |
| 01:46:11.22 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | All right, thank you for stepping up. |
| 01:46:12.71 | Mike Langford | Thank you. |
| 01:46:12.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:46:13.03 | Mike Langford | Thank you. |
| 01:46:15.96 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | OK, we're going to take a five minute break and let Melanie get set up. And we're going to get ready to focus on our budget. |
| 01:46:26.43 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE |
| 01:46:28.69 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:46:29.02 | Unknown | It exists. |
| 01:46:29.63 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I'm not. |
| 01:46:31.27 | Unknown | I'm going to announce it. |
| 01:46:32.92 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:46:33.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, everybody, welcome back, and we're ready for the highlight of the evening, what we've all been waiting for. Item 5C introduce the fiscal year 2018 to 20 strategic resources allocation plan and budget. Thank you very much. |
| 01:46:47.82 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you very much. Melanie Purcell, Administrative Services Director for the City of Sausalito. And it is my pleasure to bring together all the hard work from the Finance Committee and staff over the last. |
| 01:46:59.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Five months. And Melanie, we would like you not only in your presentation to address the strategic resources allocation plan and budget, but also the CAFR at item 4C. |
| 01:47:12.32 | Melanie Purcell | And what I'd like to do is kind of interweave the two, if that's all right, because most of the numbers that are stated in here, particularly in our conversation about fund balance and available balances, are taken directly from the CAFR. And I do want to apologize to the council because it is late, and it is unacceptably late. But I did want to make sure that it was on your agenda and in front of you, because it is critical that the council does see the comprehensive annual financial report. The city has done very well in terms of meeting the standards by the Government Finance Officers Association and from the state of California. But it is imperative that the numbers become much more timely. Thank you. |
| 01:47:53.70 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And so, Melanie, I saw that the report from the consultant came in in May, but why is it so late? That was a question posed by a member of the public. |
| 01:48:03.47 | Melanie Purcell | Yes, and it's a very good question. Several things happened this year that really derailed the process. One in particular, we did have a change in standards with GASB and had a rather robust discussion between our auditor and Bickmore, who is our actuary, regarding the implementation of the OPEB valuations. And so we were required. under those change in standards to go out and have a subsequent valuation done of our OPEB liability. And so that bumped us back at least a month. Internally, we had a very significant issue with the data breach in January, and that set me back horribly. And there's, again, no excuses. But the good news is we do have a new audit partner with MACE and Associates, and we have already had our interim meeting with them and are started with the audit process in advance. We will have our meeting, they will be onsite in November with the expectation that the report be to Council at the first meeting in January. Okay, thank you. Absolutely. |
| 01:49:06.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Can I just ask a question preliminary? So I got the packet that was in our you know that we could pick up last week but then on the dais there's another Packet. So is there an updated one or? They sent an email today telling you |
| 01:49:21.74 | Melanie Purcell | So... |
| 01:49:26.24 | Melanie Purcell | There was an email late this afternoon in which the presentation material for the capital improvement program and the resources allocation plan includes slides for the departments. that were added this afternoon. None of the financial information has changed, but we wanted to provide the departments an opportunity to present to the council directly. Because at this point they've only presented to the finance committee. |
| 01:49:49.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 01:49:49.16 | Melanie Purcell | So that's why this slide's doubled. |
| 01:49:49.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:49:49.23 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 01:49:49.28 | Unknown | . |
| 01:49:49.33 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So, And again, Melanie, why did we not get those until 5 o'clock today? |
| 01:49:55.00 | Melanie Purcell | Those were compiled late with department directors this afternoon. |
| 01:50:01.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 01:50:01.04 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:50:01.41 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | and |
| 01:50:01.82 | Melanie Purcell | It's the same material as before, but... |
| 01:50:01.84 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | It's the same material as before. But some of us to not have to meet next week, we don't get to cancel that meeting next week because we get too much stuff at the last minute. So we need to do a better job of getting stuff more in advance. |
| 01:50:15.99 | Adam Politzer | Madam Mayor, if I can just interject what I think that Melanie said that may not have been I'm not. heard is that this is the same information that was presented to the finance committee early in the process. So the material has been available. We just felt that for tonight to give the council members an opportunity to ask questions of staff, they've provided some brief highlights and information for tonight. But the rest of the information has all been rolled up into what Melanie is presenting this evening but we wanted to give uh and information for your for tonight but the rest of the information has all been rolled up into what melanie is presenting this evening but we wanted to give the council because in previous updates to the council on the budget the council has not had an opportunity to either hear from or ask specific questions of any of the departments so that was the late addition |
| 01:51:04.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:51:05.15 | Adam Politzer | It's not new information, it's information to just provide council an opportunity to ask direct questions of staff. |
| 01:51:05.18 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | It's not. |
| 01:51:11.26 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. So perhaps it's an organizational thing because Susan is pointing to a one-inch thick packet that is on the dais. So if there's just a few pages that are new, perhaps you just provide the few pages that are new. Because we have no ability at this point to go through and compare what is on the dais, what was in our packet, and still pay attention to you. So maybe that's a better approach to providing incremental |
| 01:51:37.72 | Melanie Purcell | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:51:39.42 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | information. |
| 01:51:42.14 | Melanie Purcell | Well, we'll dive in, and then I'll highlight. Can I? some of where we're at. |
| 01:51:44.28 | Jill Hoffman | some of them. |
| 01:51:44.69 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:51:44.84 | Melanie Purcell | Can I just say? |
| 01:51:44.96 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 01:51:44.98 | Jill Hoffman | Can I just before, because I know you're going to try to weave some of these things, but I think it might be helpful if I call out things that I'm particularly interested in and hope that you can comment on as you go through. and really, with regard to the cap for I'm specifically looking at page 18 and 19 when you're talking about the statement of net position and then unrestricted net position have a negative 18 million which is really our balance sheet if you're talking about normal accounting terms. And then statement of activities which is a corollary to an income statement. which is greater than income by 11 million. you know when you're framing our conversation about our budget and and going what we've done in the past and going forward I'm interested in that I'm also interested in um the change in the net position and the unrestricted net position over time. And so even though that's called out on page six, that's an important thing that we need to have in the second, I think, or third paragraph. Okay. That's an important thing to know when you're evaluating the success of your budget or the financial health. But then we're not given that later in the CAFR, which is, I think, a bit odd. But assuming that we meet next week, I would like to have some of that information. However far back we can go for 10 years or whatever's not burdensome for you to find out how that negative unrestricted position is falling over time. The other thing that we got this week, which I'm really happy about, is the executive summary from Bartell. I think it's really nicely put together, and I wish we had had it earlier. So I'm interested in that. And I did send you an email earlier. It's a little bit confusing when they put the numbers in there, but then they deduct a bunch of zeros. And then to figure out, okay, what does this really mean? It looks like it's 27,000, but no, you have to remember to go back and add the zeros in. It's really 27 million. And so... you know, if you can remember to add those numbers in as you go, especially when we're talking about we get to the pension trust. And when we're talking about page five of the Bartell report, which puts the numbers to the range of what our liability is going to be going out to the year 28-29. And the fluctuation there is essentially $2.9 million at the low end. The median is $4.2 million and then $5.7 million. At the upper limit of what we know now, of course, that can fluctuate depending on the things. So Jill, this is not |
| 01:54:18.52 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So Jill, this is not sounding like questions. Thank you. |
| 01:54:21.90 | Jill Hoffman | No. |
| 01:54:22.27 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Sure. |
| 01:54:22.28 | Jill Hoffman | No, this was not a question. This was I'm calling out to her. She goes through her report, the things that I'm interested in. So that's what I'm interested in hearing comments. We may not get to it tonight, and I may follow up, and that might be a subject for next week, but I wanted to let her know those are the things I'm interested in. |
| 01:54:40.78 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | OK, and I think it's important to discuss the difference between the total net position and the negative net position that Jill is making reference to. |
| 01:54:55.31 | Melanie Purcell | Yeah. So, To actually make this easier, so to speak, let's go ahead and go to The page eight, you can look at net position. There's a table there and unfortunately I do not, I'll try to put it up. |
| 01:55:11.37 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | This is page eight of the Kaffir. Age eight of the Kaffir. Which is item 4C. |
| 01:55:13.77 | Melanie Purcell | which is item attachment one in our package. So actually of the book itself. So I'm going to go ahead and flip it up onto the screen. |
| 01:55:17.92 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So, I'm going to go |
| 01:55:29.24 | Unknown | Once I get there. |
| 01:55:31.00 | Melanie Purcell | This is part of what's called the management discussion and analysis, where we provide some summary information. And a couple of things I want to make note. In particular, in 2000 and. 15. We actually started the implementation of the net position changes and the reporting of that. And what that means is the Government Accounting Standards Board, GASB, requires that those be on the position and the unfunded liability, the total liability associated with OPEB and with pensions, And right now it's pension, and then OPEB is a secondary statement from GASB. The pension liability is now reported on the face of the financial statements as part of the net position. Prior to that time, that was not reported that way. It was reported in the financial statements, but it was reported in either Note 8 or Note 9 to the financial statements, which is about 15 pages back. But the information has always been there. The difference is now you see a negative. net position. And if you'll notice that toward the very bottom, it says, oops, unrestricted, Thank you. |
| 01:56:44.45 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:56:44.52 | Melanie Purcell | That is referring to the liability. Pension liability. Specifically pension and OPEB. So that is unfunded liability. And that significantly alters our position because we are required to report that. Some of you may be familiar with in the early 90s, mid 90s, the Financial Accounting Standards Board known as FASB, which governs private sector accounting, required a similar declaration from the auto industry and other manufacturers. So the auto industry, several of them required bailouts and had to re-declare their financial position. In their instance, they are not supported by any taxation capacity. So for a lot of them, it caused significant retrenchment to account for that. In the government sector, it's been 20 years later because of the fact that it is a completely different industry. |
| 01:57:36.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So, and Melanie, on the next page of the report, it does note that it should be recognized the negative unrestricted net position likely did not result from short-term actions of the city. It's the implementation of GASB statement number 68 that moved the unfunded pension obligations from supplementary information to the face of the financial statements. That's it. |
| 01:57:59.53 | Melanie Purcell | So I just want to make sure that's clear. So what it does, it does get a little bit. |
| 01:58:01.76 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you. |
| 01:58:01.78 | Jill Hoffman | It does get a little bit. Is there something that you think I misunderstood? And I understand that there wasn't all of a sudden this big debt that came up in 2015. It was always there. It was just in a different... part of the report. |
| 01:58:13.76 | Melanie Purcell | Absolutely, I just want to make sure that's clear for folks who aren't familiar. |
| 01:58:14.70 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE But the net that I was talking about, the 18 million, isn't isn't directly related to the unrestricted net the unrestricted net position of negative 18 million isn't just the pension, it's the overall budget. And I'm talking about page 18. if you look at the bottom it says unrestricted it takes into account the earlier up in there. the $24 million that is Pension. |
| 01:58:46.51 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | No, the total net position is 22 million. The unrestricted negative is 19. What page are you on? On the same page, eight, in the table. I know, I flipped over to page 18. |
| 01:58:55.14 | Jill Hoffman | No. Thank you. |
| 01:58:58.19 | Unknown | 15. That 22. 22. |
| 01:59:00.37 | Jill Hoffman | I'm talking about this unrestricted Yeah, right there. That's the pension. The unrestricted is the pension and new layup. That's not. Okay, well, maybe I should address this with her offline. This 17 million of unrestricted net position isn't just pension. |
| 01:59:07.77 | Terri | Thank you. |
| 01:59:07.79 | Unknown | Pension anyway. |
| 01:59:08.85 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:59:18.27 | Melanie Purcell | No, it actually reflects liquid assets as well. So it's less than the pension obligation. Right. Because we have positive net assets as well, liquid assets. So it is the combination of the two. Yep. And that's what's declared in the system. Right. |
| 01:59:26.37 | Jill Hoffman | Liquid. Right. But overall. |
| 01:59:30.39 | Mary Wagner | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:59:33.31 | Melanie Purcell | As you'll know, we'll have 9.1 $5 million, I believe, in general fund fund balance. And the majority of that is liquid assets. And so we'll go into that in a little more detail as we go into the budget This is a long term post. accounting of activities and the budget is a forward looking estimate. And so we try to find the merge there and really the place where they meet is that fund balance. And so we plan how we're going to use fund balance or not use it or reserve it and we have several recommendations for that including increasing it so that this number stays at a higher level. Thank you. rather than be subject to use. But the idea being that we are doing more of a five-year cycle and look forward as opposed to one year. And the city made great strides, I'm going to say, six years ago. Four years ago, I'm sorry. I'm looking at Ray because I know he was here for it. We started doing two-year budgets and starting to do that. But there was always a six-year forecasting window at least. And so we built that in and made it, I think, a bit stronger this year to incorporate this information, the trust information, and the actual budget operations. So this, I just want to make sure that we are clear. One of the things that GASB 34 did was roll this together. And so we have two different types of accounting that are merged. into a single format and then reconciled. I don't want to go into gory details, you'll all start snoring. But it's recognizing that we do report the entire system wide under the accrual or proprietary system, and that includes sewer, and it also accounts for our actual assets in a way that we don't normally do when we talk about general fund-fund balance. That makes sense. So we actually talk about the value of the sewer pipes when we do a full roll-up of this nature. |
| 02:01:39.45 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And then, Melanie, on page 5 of the report, it says that our total net position is $29,882,934, and that amount increased by $1.9 million from the prior fiscal year. Correct. |
| 02:01:52.10 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 02:01:52.44 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:01:52.63 | Melanie Purcell | So we retained better earnings. Thank you. And I'd be happy to, certainly, as I mentioned, we do have a new audit partner, and I'm very excited about that prospect. Within the report that I provided to you, the staff report, it was very brief, but I did mention that the staff is committed to ensuring that an RFP goes out in August. That would be the optimal time while the audit is underway, but we can then plan for the next audit to solicit proposals for a new audit firm. It's best practice to do that every five years, the city is behind. But that would allow us to also emphasize the need for the an audit firm to come and present as is traditional in a lot of communities. And this coming year I've spoken with Ms. Yeun and she is very willing and happy to do so, if the council would prefer. So it is a tradition in some communities to have the audit presented by the audit firm and to tell you what they see going on, not just from staff. |
| 02:02:59.10 | Jill Hoffman | and when you're... When you say that you're talking about the person that or the company that prepares the CAFR to have them come and do a presentation. |
| 02:03:04.30 | Melanie Purcell | to have them come in. Bye. |
| 02:03:06.15 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 02:03:06.19 | Melanie Purcell | . |
| 02:03:06.22 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:03:06.32 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 02:03:06.35 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I think that's a good idea. |
| 02:03:08.94 | Melanie Purcell | So we can either have them come back and review this one or just go forward looking from here that we can talk about that. But so given that this one is a little later, you might want to just hold on till January. So diving into the budget side of the house. First of all, we're going to talk about the capital improvement program. We have the funding proposal included in your packet was also the detail with the by priority and by category. We'll talk about the general fund operating resources allocation plan, and I do have some summations of the entire citywide budget as well. Adjustments to the base that I presented to you earlier this spring, and then the discussion items that the Finance Committee is referring back to the Council. Excuse me. And the Finance Committee had quite a bit of discussion, not just about the operating and the capital, but also in talking about how the pension trust is set up, both to be funded and to be used, and how that plays into the long-term cash flow and budget health of the city. So first things first, we've been working on the CIP planning for nine months. And we are very pleased at the imminent delivery of the budget plan and the capital improvement program. It is a six year program and includes one year adopted and five years of planning. And then goes forward, it is primarily focused on the use of the debt proceeds that the city has issued. So it would allow us to complete a lot of the major projects that are currently underway or in planning. The resources being proposed include measure of sales tax and as noted 2425 measure of the sunset. These are pass through funds, they come into the general fund and they are immediately allocated and transferred to the capital improvement. So they are not in any way used for operating dollars. The certificates of participation have included in here the $2.2 million associated with Dunphy and Southview Park. This is the remaining funds. The restricted streets funding is SB1, gas tax, and minimal amounts that we also get from the county. Okay. The use of fund balance, we're going to go into in a little more detail, but it's looking at the surplus balances. These are balances above and beyond both council established and staff recommended reserves for future operations and for stability. The dedicated grants, as Jonathan went into some detail about the ferry landing, this represents the pass through funding. with a small amount from the city, the majority coming from the feds. The other dedicated grants are funds that we are either in the process of applying for and hoping to hear back or we are in the process of identifying. But these are projects that are dependent on grant funding from outside sources. The general fund transfer. Is to continue the general plan update. That is not in our determination an eligible expense for Measure O, so it would need to come from general fund operations. Private party contributions are the match for the slide repairs that are taking place and the Gala Lee contribution for the Dunphy Park parking. And then the carry forward of prior year funding is actually measure of funding that is related to ADA work that we are specifically holding to use at Dunphy Park. because the elements at Dunphy Park for ADA were actually identified in the litigation and specifically need to be done, so we'd like to do that all together. You can see the similar flow. The anticipation is the certificates of participation would be either used up or fully appropriated, though the construction may fall over into the following year. We account for it in its first year of the budget. Okay. So the projects are categorized by accessibility, being ADA-specific projects, and enabling us to track projects directly related to litigation. Buildings and facilities, that includes MLK and some of our other facilities, this building as well. Information technology is maintaining the infrastructure that keeps us all moving. That is an area the city is It has invested quite a bit of energy and effort in its strategic plan that was adopted in November of 2015. We've gone through phase one and phase two, and we want to ensure that it does not fall off before phase three continues. The parks and open space, Dunphy Park and Southview Park are the majority of that. Right of way continues our streets projects, sidewalks, street lights, the stoplight improvements. Storm water, again recognizing we need to complete the plan and begin work in the storm water areas. The studies, that is the general plan update, and then the waterfront continues work there. |
| 02:08:32.99 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So Melanie, referring to the stormwater, one of the criticisms in the CAFR was our failure to address the stormwater system, and they said that we don't have the funds to do that. So how does this measure up against the overall issue? How do these expenditures measure up against the overall issue, and why did the CAFR report have that finding, given our investment in our stormwater system? |
| 02:08:59.01 | Melanie Purcell | This represents a significant increase in stormwater dedication, It is also premised on the completion of the stormwater master plan. And the CAFR is based on the 2017 dollars in which there was not a lot expended and had not historically been based on starting. Actually, we started the master plan in 1718 or excuse me, 1617 with its completion expected soon. This represents quite a significant increase. It is important to note that that is an area that we bring up later on in the presentation as well about revenue options and needing to evaluate I believe it's SB 231 and any other options for dedicated funding for storm water. Because otherwise it will have to come from the general fund. And at this point, it's insufficient. There's not sufficient dedicated sources for that. |
| 02:09:53.06 | Melanie Purcell | So we also wanted to acknowledge our unfunded. So information technology, this actually represents something that we've addressed a little bit later. This was the license plate readers, and we've actually I've proposed a way to address that. |
| 02:10:10.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And you see in the out. In other words, you're going to move it from unfunded to funded. Yes, ma'am. Okay, so that was based on feedback from the Finance Committee. Correct. |
| 02:10:11.20 | Melanie Purcell | any outlets. Yeah. |
| 02:10:17.97 | Melanie Purcell | you Mm-hmm. The majority of this does come into the right-of-way work in the out years based on needing to get grant funding for improvements on the south end of town. So as you notice, there's a huge, huge investment and a lot of commitment from the city to ensure that the capital improvement program continues at least through the life of Measure O. Again, we've shown it by priority. You see very few things falling off in priority one and priority two throughout the entire plan. So that's a nice feeling to be able to say that. |
| 02:10:57.99 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Can I ask a question? Yes. So are the SB1 funds, the gas tax and vehicle license fees that were passed by the legislature last year, do those fund capital improvements in the SB1? |
| 02:11:09.60 | Melanie Purcell | Yes, they can only be used for capital on streets. |
| 02:11:11.95 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. Does our budget currently assume continuation of SB1 funding or... So it's up for repeal. on the November ballot. And so what are our assumptions? |
| 02:11:22.38 | Melanie Purcell | on the November. |
| 02:11:26.04 | Melanie Purcell | in our capital budget. We assume that whatever the level of expenditure is is based on the actual receipts. So we actually tie the expenditure level for streets right-of-way up here in the ROW line. That's premised on whatever is received. So we have not gone out to bid. And if SB1, right now at this point SB1 is about $40,000 anticipated. We have not worked with the assumptions that a number of agencies have. in very high level. of funding, so we're working from an incredibly conservative viewpoint. Jonathan will vouch that I get very snarky about, don't you even think that money's in there, until I have the check in my hand. So while it is budgeted, it's not released. I don't actually input it into the system until the checks are received. |
| 02:12:18.94 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So that's for this year, 18, 19? |
| 02:12:22.13 | Melanie Purcell | That's for any year at this point, given that it's still up for referendum. |
| 02:12:27.21 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, so these numbers assume that we will get the funds. About 40,000. How much? 40,000 a year for Sausalito? |
| 02:12:30.77 | Melanie Purcell | About 40,000. Right. Okay. |
| 02:12:36.15 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | it. |
| 02:12:36.63 | Melanie Purcell | now the the initial projections went much higher than that but we we have a tacit agreement one might say that we won't |
| 02:12:36.66 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | No. |
| 02:12:44.66 | Melanie Purcell | won't count on it. If it comes, then we'll come to council and ask for that to be appropriated and a contract awarded, but the contracts currently aren't with that number. |
| 02:12:51.75 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | COMPANY. Thank you. |
| 02:13:00.22 | Melanie Purcell | Okay, so I just wanted to highlight what is proposed within the next two years, 1819 and 1920. And the budget itself, you'll notice that I always refer to 1819 as the proposed, 1920, and outlying years as planned. Because the legal binding conversation really revolves around the 18-19 proposed budget. So we're talking about the ADA work. Thank you. The street repair program, Dunphy Park, Southview Park, parking lot two, and the ferry landing, and obviously there's a lot of coordination work to be had in all of these because we don't want to disrupt our parking revenue stream either. a Napa Street storm drain, is recognizing a recurring flooding issue that has resulted in claims to the city. the general plan update. Gate six road improvements has been grant funded to date and we would be relying on grant funding to continue work there. The Teco Mesh and Soil nail is a fancy description for slide replayers. That is a joint project with the homeowners group and part of a settlement. So that $200,000 is actually split between the city and private contribution. The IT strategic plan implementation continues. That, as I mentioned, Gordon Street storm drain, specific project storm drain master plan completion. The bridgeway medians, we would be looking for grant work to improve drainage and work potentially with the water district for some exhibit type work. The wave attenuator you heard earlier about, the traffic signal upgrades, is part of another conversation with TAM. |
| 02:14:48.19 | Melanie Purcell | Or federal highways, so we would be looking to either county, state, or feds for that. And then the Civic Center landscape beautification is currently underway, and so we would be proposing to carry forward some of the funds that were in the current year budget to continue some of that work and to see how much could also be done by city staff. And then falling into the next year, you can see projects being added on as others drop off. I won't read all of them. You can read. you Yeah, face down. Mercy code. Unless you have any specific questions about those projects. Okay. The balance this conversation really ties back to between the CAFR and the budget. So the balance as of June 30 of last year, so coming from the CAFR was 9.578 in the general fund. And I want to focus on the general fund first, and then we'll get into the other funds. But the general fund itself, we're proposing to just go through the year, we had budgeted no contribution, no usage. And then we set aside the non spendable. and the required reserves. Those are either actual payables that somebody owes us, the MLK loan, for example, and the trust is in the required reserves. So we calculate and account for the pension trust within the general fund balance so that it is counted as an asset against the liabilities. GASB has not caught up with much clamoring from the government finance world. And their decision to not allow separate trusts to be counted. They allow it for OPEB, but not for pensions. So for the purposes of the city's CAFR, we do treat it as part of the general fund balance. It is a legally binding 115 trust. We simply report it. under the general fund. The city has long had a 5% budget stabilization policy and these are based on 5% of expenditures. 10% shortfall reserve policy, and then staff is recommending that we actually double that, and that we provide an additional $1.6 million, or 10% of expenditures, in order to provide for future pressures and provide the city some additional flexibility, recognizing that we are anticipating sales tax to remain stagnant, unless something changes drastically, and nobody is proving to be particularly good at forecasting our economic conditions right now. We do also recognize that while CalPERS has given us what they think is the projection for now, and they are doing quite well this year and did well last year, That's never guaranteed and so we want to provide additional buffer. for the city. continue services. The reimbursement for mudslides clean up would be to actually reimburse the city itself, the general fund back and draw down some of the disaster relief. So the Disaster Assistance Fund was also established many years ago as a flat amount that has just grown interest over the years. So it started, I believe, at about 780,000. something like that so it's it's done quite well we're proposing to use a trifle of that and to also retain a high level So right now, the city has approximately 34.9%. general fund fund balance according to the CAFR and to the auditors and we would expect it to remain that way if not be better. So going into MLK, The balance says negative and that's because it owes the general fund. And we hold that as that 1-9-5-6-2-49 as their negative. They owe that obligation back to the city long term. So that is taken back against it, which means that their actual cash reserves then are about $700,000. And we're recommending they're required to keep $506,000 in order to meet the covenants of the certificates of participation. You must keep 1.25 or 125% of your annual debt service payment in reserves in order to meet the covenants. So that they're guaranteed that you can make your payments if something catastrophic should happen. We're also recommending $125,000 to be kept in additional reserve because that represents the majority of the payments that MLK makes back to the general fund on an operating basis. So between that and its debt service payment to the general fund, we'd like to ensure that we are guaranteed some level should something. horrible happen. Then comfortably saying that we have about $100,000 remaining that could be used for projects at MLK. The parking fund is healthy and has retained a high level of balance, has no issues in it. We do keep a high level of reserve in there because the city general fund is highly dependent on the parking fund and receives just under $2 million a year from the parking fund. In past, the parking fund has had a high level of balances in order to keep, in anticipation of needing to do major repairs at parking lot one and parking lot two. So being able to fund those comfortably and still retain a high balance means that we've achieved exactly what the city council in prior years had set out to do. In the Tidelines Fund, we have unusual, I call it an unusual situation, but it is what we call unearned revenue. In effect, the city took out a loan and rather than make out payments to a bank or to the person that lent us the money for the bulkhead project, we give them credit against the rent. So we have to still record that as a negative. So when we back that out, we end up with a fairly significant balance of $900,000, almost $1 million. We're recommending retaining a half a million dollars. given that there is some volatility in the tidelands activities. lots of conversations with lots of outside agencies that involve Consultants. And so we want to ensure that there's a level of coverage for that. So that still relieves us about $400,000 that we would find comfortable for use in capital projects. Please recognize that when we talk about cash available, we're talking about money that is available for one-time use, not for a recurring operational activity. So the sewer fund as well is in healthy shape. We have a very high level of required reserves because we do have both capital proceeds, the debt bond proceeds in that fund. And then we also have the bond covenants as well. So we keep those in reserve. And we recommend, again, the 125% of the bond covenant as well. So the recreation grant fund has been building up over the years, and this is county money that came through Measure A for recreation activities, and that is required to be spent on capital projects for parks and recreation. So that tells us where we're at. |
| 02:22:14.19 | Melanie Purcell | What we're proposing to actually use is taking the bottom numbers from the prior slide and moving them forward here to the available as of July 1st of 18, we're recommending the use of general fund dollars for the Napa Street Storm Drain project, for the match for the techo mesh. soil nail or this slide, mud slide project. And then $650,000 to be transferred to the pension trust. It's a one-time boost to that. The MLK funds recognizing use of that strictly for MLK to enhance the COP funds for the fields and the courts. using parking funds for the Dunphy Park parking lot and for parking lot 2. Tidal ends for waterfront work at Dunphy Park. We do have some work that is required regardless, and this would help us complete that while doing it as part of the Dunphy Park project. And then the sewer fund would also be contributing to Dunphy Park because it has actual work that coincides as well with that project. The recreation fund, we're recommending that we use that balance to supplement Southview Park. and bring us better able to use the COP funds for the park enhancement as opposed to structural repairs. |
| 02:23:42.68 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Can I ask a question there? Can you go back? So that $650,000 to the pension trust, I mean, there are obviously other capital needs that we have, and that's a huge chunk of money. Can somebody from the finance committee or Melanie just walk me? |
| 02:24:01.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | that Every council member had been briefed on this, but later in our packet are various options for how we can smooth our ability to meet our cash obligations. |
| 02:24:16.52 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, I saw that, but right. So the original, the original recommendation was 400 and now it's 650. |
| 02:24:22.75 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Correct. So at the last, and again, I had thought that council members were going to be briefed on this at the last finance committee. |
| 02:24:23.39 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So, |
| 02:24:28.72 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | last finance committee. I was asking what the theory of putting it all in that bucket |
| 02:24:36.43 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So in the packet, you have some options, and the option that keeps our general fund in the black from now through 2038 and also meets all of our pension obligations from now through 2038 entails increasing the |
| 02:24:36.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | It is. |
| 02:24:57.17 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | the contribution this year from $400 to $650. So what we did was several weeks ago you saw a chart in which you saw a curvature in which our expenditures, largely due to pension obligations, exceeded our revenues. And that will start if we do nothing this year. It will start later if we do a little bit of something. And so the demand that the Finance Committee made to staff was to figure out how we can, as a city, maintain our current level of service, maintain the capital improvement projects that we've already committed to, and meet our pension obligations at the time when those obligations meet their zenith, starting in six years and then extending for 10 years after that. And so what we did was figure out what we need to invest now in order to not go in the red in the general fund for that 10-year period of time when our cash obligations are at their worst. And the finance committee was presented with a half a dozen different options by... Um, staff and the option that enabled us to do that predictably was to invest A larger amount of our cash now um, in order to be growing and thereby smoothing the pension obligations down the road. And that's why your packets include those capital projects that would be unfunded, those things in the next several years that would be unfunded that are considered to be priorities, in order to use our surplus to invest in that manner. |
| 02:27:02.48 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, so just looking at the original slide that I got when it was called 1C, that seemed to smooth out with a $400,000 |
| 02:27:11.48 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:27:11.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you Thank you. |
| 02:27:12.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | contribution. And so that slide doesn't have numbers. There are other slides in another presentation that have the bottom line, yeah, that have the bottom line numbers. And if you look, |
| 02:27:22.51 | Unknown | And if you look. Once he did smooth. Is what Susan is saying. |
| 02:27:27.22 | Melanie Purcell | Yeah. |
| 02:27:27.42 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:27:27.88 | Melanie Purcell | What is most significant in the difference between the $400,000 and the $650,000 is the time that you can extend the trust out. So taking it out a little larger actually allows you to buy several more years of stability. |
| 02:27:44.18 | Jill Hoffman | with greater margins of error the further you get out. So we're talking about we know what's going to happen year 2, 3, fuzzy on 4, more fuzzy on 5, 7 through 15. It's a crap. Can we say crap? It's a bad, it's a guess, really. Yeah. |
| 02:27:59.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Swag. |
| 02:28:01.26 | Jill Hoffman | I appreciate the formula that we're using, and that's what we're basing it off of, but I'd hate to tell the public that we are going to be smoothing out a black number in any of this? |
| 02:28:10.86 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | any of this. Well, I think investing this amount now gives greater assurance that we are |
| 02:28:14.52 | Unknown | greater assurance that With some number. |
| 02:28:17.98 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | that we will be able to who successfully meet some of those uncertainties. |
| 02:28:24.97 | Melanie Purcell | It is intended, and the finance committee was very thorough in the discussion of trying to build as much flexibility in for the city in the next five to ten years, recognizing that's really the critical time frame as so many other things will start to shake out by the end of that. |
| 02:28:25.63 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. |
| 02:28:25.96 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:28:43.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And I also want to point out that this $650,000 investment now does not contemplate, in making these assumptions, we are not counting as revenues that will come in for certain anything from our insurance archaeology claims, which will very likely exceed $1 million. That's not counted. It does not count revenues if we decide to allow distribution of marijuana here in Sausalito. Those are not included. It does not include potential TOT revenues from short-term rentals. So these assumptions upon which we've balanced the budget does not include many fairly certain sources of revenue that we will likely undertake. And so when and if those revenue sources are realized, that's when we will be able to better address some of our other capital needs. |
| 02:29:42.34 | Jill Hoffman | I have a follow-up question based on this back and forth. What assumptions did you make with regard to the pension pension payments, were you taking the 50% line, the green line in the Bartell report on page five, or were you taking the top line or the bottom line? |
| 02:29:59.84 | Melanie Purcell | No, actually. I took the direct payments from CalPERS and the direct payments required from the Bartell presentation. So I can show you in detail attachment four. It shows the exact payments that are required based on both CalPERS' projections. They gave us five years of projections. Bartell gave us another 20 years of projections, and then I added five, based on an extrapolation. So I did not use the 50% methodology. |
| 02:30:05.34 | Mary Wagner | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:30:05.58 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:30:05.59 | Mary Wagner | Yeah. |
| 02:30:33.34 | Jill Hoffman | So, okay, then, can you tell me, is there a slide that, can you tell me what slide that is? It's toward the very end, actually. Okay. Oh, then. |
| 02:30:44.46 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 02:30:44.51 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 02:30:44.59 | Melanie Purcell | you |
| 02:30:44.64 | Jill Hoffman | Are we going to |
| 02:30:45.30 | Melanie Purcell | We're getting there. Oh, then there's a- Yes, we are definitely getting there. |
| 02:30:45.32 | Jill Hoffman | We're getting there. Yeah, that's fine because that affects if you're talking about smoothing and whether or not this is sufficient, you know, what you're projected what your assumption on the payment is going to be out in your 567. Yes. |
| 02:31:01.32 | Ray Withey | I think. Melanie before we move on. Now this is very slightly different than the last time I saw this at the Finance Committee. In that, In that... |
| 02:31:18.27 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:31:18.41 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 02:31:18.44 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:31:18.48 | Mary Wagner | and then, |
| 02:31:20.89 | Ray Withey | What was being proposed was $400,000 into the trust. And then a $250,000 carry forward into the following year. Which was then going to be a source of revenue which was going to deliver sort of a 200 plus, 1,000 plus profit at the end of the next year. which was going to go into the trust. And I said, wait a minute, that is going to look really bad because you're carrying forward fund balance you're going to use for operations. Why don't you, if you're going to make an extra 250 this year, why don't you put it all into the trust? And that's how we came with 650. But that wasn't 650 out of fund balance. |
| 02:32:09.17 | Melanie Purcell | Now, what's not in show here is |
| 02:32:10.22 | Ray Withey | So you're going to have to go through the P&L for me to understand how this has now been done before I can get comfortable with this. |
| 02:32:19.80 | Melanie Purcell | And there is an element here that is exactly what you're referring to. And I left this for purposes of simplicity, to be honest, in this format, and then so we can talk through the operating side. |
| 02:32:33.30 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:32:34.36 | Jill Hoffman | Good night. Sorry, can I interject one more thing? I'm not sure. AND THIS IS JUST A COMMENT ON TIME. We're on page, we're on slide 11 of 82. and it's 10 o'clock and we still have like five things on the agenda. So I'm wondering if we're thinking we're gonna go next Tuesday anyway, should we let Melanie go through the slides and then prepare our follow-up statements for next Tuesday? Is that a good use of our time, do you think? I think it's important. |
| 02:33:00.99 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I think it's important that she go through the slides because obviously there's not full comprehension of what is in the slides. So I think it's important she go through the slides and then... |
| 02:33:09.09 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:33:13.46 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | We can email questions and |
| 02:33:15.94 | Jill Hoffman | I think that might be a way to do it, and I think I started all this, actually. Well, I have some questions. |
| 02:33:19.49 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Well, I have some questions I'd like to bring up tonight. But the issue is that it's hard to, like when I see things, I think of a question at that point. It's hard for me to remember the context |
| 02:33:20.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:20.18 | Jill Hoffman | the |
| 02:33:20.43 | Unknown | No. |
| 02:33:20.45 | Jill Hoffman | I'll bring up tonight. Okay, but go ahead. |
| 02:33:30.84 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:33:30.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:31.25 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | tomorrow of what the questions are. Okay. |
| 02:33:35.11 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:35.15 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 02:33:35.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:33:38.15 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. Any other questions on capital? Fairly good? Okay. So it'll all come together, I promise. Finance committee obviously has been working very hard. This is just an overview of the process and some of the conversations that have been taking place. It is a very high-level summary because there have been many, many hours put in by the finance committee to really get through the weeds on this one. So our general fund revenue forecast, you'll notice we do take it out for six years. We are including in this some assumptions that are itemized on slide 16. I just wanna give you the overview first, it's all color coded and then we can explain why it matters. So they're italicized as to when they're gonna hit and they're color coded. You'll note that we have very conservative estimates going on. And these are specific to THE Making sure that we don't ever have to apologize for being short and that our revenues assumptions are reasonable but also conservative. So property taxes are running about 4.5%. Sales tax is about 1.7 to 1.8. Measure O is a pass-through, as I noted earlier. So I show it on here as a revenue and then I show it as an expense on the next slide. TOT runs at about 2%. The transfers, again, about 2% because our parking is the majority of that and it tends to behave very similarly to sales tax and TOT. Business licenses, this does assume that we have a significant increase in our business license taxes. The fees and permits also increasing our fees for that and I just drew a blank, I'm sorry. I'll show you the purple right here. Okay. |
| 02:35:36.29 | Melanie Purcell | increasing the TOT and increasing the business license taxes. I apologize, both of those are in there. um, We're also increasing some of our fees for other act demand parking and other activities. So it is a very moderate increase. It is a reasonable increase in talking with my peers in the county, as well as state agencies. This is about where everybody is looking. In terms of property taxes, we're probably stronger than most. In terms of sales and TOT, we're right on par. You'll see the transfers are suspending for two years, transfers to the Vehicle Replacement Fund. That is an area that we have, as shown in the CAFR, a very healthy balance. We've also just recently replaced the majority of vehicles in the police department, so we have reason to expect some relief in the demand for new vehicles. We're also recommending some changes in professional services and in operations. And we are requesting that the larger operating departments reduce operations on a staggering scale for the next five years. So these are the adjustments that were proposed. The Friends of the Library have contributed very well, very faithfully, I should say, and very strongly for many years to the city operations at the library, particularly for the children's program and hours of service. They're agreeing to increase their contribution. I mentioned suspending the transfers and the department savings increasing fees for demand parking And we will be bringing forward a resolution to council to implement that in which we would be charging higher fees. on weekends and on weekends. peak months of the year during the high season. We would be proposing a business license tax increase as well as increasing TOT. And there's in your packet some additional information on comparable communities and what their TOT areas are. I did return some funding that we originally had talked about reducing based on conversations with the finance committee for the historical society and keeping the Icehouse Docents program going, the hospitality business development group and by representation of the chamber, reduced the request. from prior years. recommending that those be funded. The chamber kiosk funding would go from $11,000 to 5,000? And the... Business Development Group would go from 30,000 to 11,000 for the coming year. And then we did include in here the funding for the license plate readers. you And what you'll notice is the funding for the license period reader shows up in 17-18. And that is a reflection of that balance. As Council Member Withey mentioned, we were originally talking about having an additional balance at the end of this fiscal year of nearly $250,000. What you see here is $150,000 falling to fund balance. With the license plate readers being funded from current year balance or surplus, and then the remainder falling to fund balance. So the ending balance in the general fund would actually go up by $150,000. Okay. Yes, sir. |
| 02:39:11.05 | Jill Hoffman | I now have a question on the, license plate readers. Because they were originally left off by staff and then came back on in the finance committee just added it to the budget. I was hoping to have some discussion. on that item and I'm glad that the chief and lieutenant are here Obviously, the license plate readers are working fabulously. they seem to be working so well for not only us but the entire region that they seem to be a high opportunity for some type of grant in the future. If I was proposing any grants, that would be the number one thing to catch criminals, apparently, especially when you have a captive audience like Sausalito's geography that they come through our community for some reason. So before just funding this, I wanted to hear from the police, is there any opportunity for regional funds, grant funds, special crime fighting funds, anything like that to pay for something like this that's proven to be so successful, not just for our department, but in crime. tasking throughout the region. |
| 02:40:22.75 | Melanie Purcell | The chief will be up here in just a couple of minutes and I'm sure he will take note to answer that. |
| 02:40:26.85 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:40:27.57 | Melanie Purcell | Okay. So I don't want to go through the assumptions. I've kind of highlighted them for you. But I did detail them here so that you could see. In particular, one of the things that we did discuss at the finance committee was the impact of work comp increases. And so that has been broken out separate from other benefits. Contrary to some of the other presentations you've seen, I've lumped them together. But you can see that there are some pretty hefty increases. The CalPERS UAAL actually dropped this year, but then spikes back up. the workers' compensation is spiked and will be, in effect, sustained with 5% growth ongoing. That is an area that we do recommend part of the influence in recommending the additional balance in the general fund. So. We had earlier a series of discussion items. And I think in the interest of, unless you would prefer me going through all the ones that were included, I think that it's important to note these were conversations from 2016. They were implemented for the majority of them. And so we're recommending their continuation. But rather than go through them again, I'm going to skim right through. Okay. So just to note, the sister city's government expense is specifically when the city holds an event related to the sister cities. It is not to provide travel, and it does not provide support for the sister cities organization. Just a real quick note on that. The upgrade and the administrative aid is an addition. in that we have historically had an administrative aid position in the Public Works Department, and due to the complexity of both the grant monies, the capital projects, and the activities in that department, we're recommending that that position be upgraded to a technician to provide a higher level of expertise and to help them facilitate moving along their permits. faster. The COP logic is a standing project that we're carrying forward and refunding. I'm sorry, I want to make sure I don't lose anything. The contract negotiator. is included and that is related to earlier conversations in which the council committed to revisit the recommendation to have an outside negotiator. And so we put that in there based on that conversation, and then you will have that conversation later on. this fall, most likely. And then the other addition was for communication services. Given the emphasis and efforts that the city has made to enhance its communications with residents, this would include contract services, $3,100. So the items that we moved from unfunded are not included to now included. are as I mentioned the Business Hospitality Committee, the Chamber Kiosk, and the Historical Society's Visitor Center Docent Program. And the Licensed Play Readers. So, and I do wanna note that Jerry Taylor from the Historical Society is here if there's any questions regarding their efforts as well. So the not included items, part time sworn patrol, which was an expansion of seasonal services. The position is currently not filled, but had been used to expand activities during high tourism season. Business development activities. Bye. $10,000 that was not designated to a specific committee or plan but was put aside for activities to be brought forward in front of council. We had quite a discussion over the historical preservation consulting. CDD community development had requested a total of $50,000 and we recommended a total of $15,000. This does not give them the capacity to do the historical inventory that is in the strategic plan, but rather puts it off post-general plan and other activities that are on their plate right now. And Danny can speak to that. And then Abbott can also explain the city librarian hours, that has been made whole by the friends of the library. The contract building inspector position and code enforcement, we're recommending reducing that to $20,000. It was originally at 85,000 and it would become 20,000 and that would be for code enforcement specifically. And then we also recommended a reduction. of $50,000 in the contract services for landscape. So we're retaining portions of both of these initiatives, but not retaining them at the level they were originally proposed. And then there were a couple of capital projects that are not listed on the capital fund because they come through the departments. The body cameras for the police departments. The EOC technology upgrade and that is something that we're actually discussing as well with the fire department and IT, but that is an area that we We'll continue to look for opportunities to fund from other sources as well. And then the downtown surveillance cameras that were brought up in earlier conversations. OK, so before I bring the chief up, I would like to apologize first because I left Parks and Recreation out of the slides. So I'm going to put Mike Linkford on the spot and let him go first. |
| 02:45:58.81 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So wait, Melanie, our PowerPoint presentation is 41 slides that's in our packet. Packet. And so... Can we finish that and then hear from the departments? If that's right, sure. Does that make sense? |
| 02:46:17.21 | Unknown | It's in order. Thank you. |
| 02:46:20.80 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | What do you mean it's in order? Where do you... |
| 02:46:22.98 | Unknown | Bobby, she's going into that next slide, sorry. |
| 02:46:26.23 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, so I'm looking at the packet that was given to us. This is what must be where you added the slides, I guess. |
| 02:46:32.58 | Melanie Purcell | That is, I stuck the department's right smack in the middle before I headed into Thank you. |
| 02:46:36.41 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | It makes sense to do that now. Revenue. |
| 02:46:37.73 | Melanie Purcell | Revenue options. |
| 02:46:39.85 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, so I'm hearing from my fellow council members. It makes sense to do that now. |
| 02:46:44.80 | Ray Withey | I have a question about what's been presented though. |
| 02:46:44.90 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Bye. THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:46:48.20 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:46:48.86 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:46:48.88 | Ray Withey | So, |
| 02:46:48.97 | Unknown | So. |
| 02:46:50.16 | Ray Withey | and I mean, we got a lot to talk about, so I'm not quite sure why we're going through the departments, to be honest. |
| 02:46:56.27 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:46:56.31 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Right. |
| 02:46:56.66 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:46:57.44 | Ray Withey | you know, um, |
| 02:46:58.28 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, I actually think |
| 02:47:00.44 | Ray Withey | So can I just because this is going to get, and I apologize for this is going to get some of the juice perhaps. |
| 02:47:02.11 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yes, please, go ahead, Greg. |
| 02:47:03.41 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:47:03.44 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:47:09.91 | Ray Withey | Thank you. Okay, at the last Finance Committee meeting, we left it so that after having listened to a number of the outside groups that came and listened and so on, we... |
| 02:47:25.35 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:47:25.63 | Ray Withey | where staff said they would look at the budget and see if it could be incorporated. Now, I'm not necessarily dinging this, because I actually think I could support it. under the right. structure, but we didn't agree to license plate readers. That's something you guys have added since Finance Committee, right? |
| 02:47:49.53 | Adam Politzer | Right? Yes, right, but we heard from the mayor who asked us to look at that and so we have. Okay. |
| 02:47:58.74 | Ray Withey | Fair enough. Yeah. |
| 02:47:59.40 | Adam Politzer | No. |
| 02:47:59.75 | Ray Withey | THE FAMILY. |
| 02:47:59.96 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:47:59.98 | Ray Withey | I just want to make sure we understand. |
| 02:48:00.13 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:48:00.16 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | make sure. I actually did say that during the Finance Committee meeting. Whatever. Yeah. |
| 02:48:03.42 | Ray Withey | Whatever. Whatever. But... The reason I'm going to focus on this is because we've actually used $100,000 more fund balance in what you're presenting here than what Finance Committee approved. |
| 02:48:17.17 | Unknown | know. Thank you. |
| 02:48:20.87 | Ray Withey | Isn't that right? |
| 02:48:24.73 | Melanie Purcell | We actually took $250,000 out of the original recommendation to be used for legal services to go back into fund balance and then use this. So, yes, $150,000. But the whole concept. |
| 02:48:35.92 | Ray Withey | Right. But the whole concept of where the 250 came from was it was consistent with the scenario that was being presented, which was any excess. |
| 02:48:44.47 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:48:51.71 | Ray Withey | of net in the year would be put into the fund. And there was going to be 250 estimated net for this year, which could additionally be put in the fund. But now you're using $100,000. of operating that brings the net down to 150,000, at least as the old numbers were. |
| 02:49:13.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | But yet your PowerPoint did say $650, not $550, that would go into pensions. Thank you. |
| 02:49:18.38 | Ray Withey | Do you see what I'm saying? So where's the extra 100 coming from? Well, it's coming from fund balance. |
| 02:49:18.76 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Do you see what I'm saying? |
| 02:49:23.07 | Ray Withey | This is nowhere else it can come from. Unless we now have a net of 350, which would be great, but. |
| 02:49:28.85 | Melanie Purcell | Yeah, I love it. |
| 02:49:31.08 | Ray Withey | I mean, am I right or am I missing something here? |
| 02:49:31.32 | Melanie Purcell | Oh my God. THEIR OWNERS. No, you're right, except, which is always the case, right, we had the million dollars that we're divvying up under the fund balance, and that's where the $650,000 is coming from that we originally said would be $400,000. So we added $250,000 here. That was $250,000 that we had talked about using. for legal. And we said no. |
| 02:50:01.00 | Ray Withey | Right, because it was a net you were going to carry forward. But now you don't have that net to carry forward. |
| 02:50:01.41 | Melanie Purcell | Because it was a... |
| 02:50:06.86 | Melanie Purcell | It does reduce the net surplus by $100,000 that we would have had. |
| 02:50:14.84 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:50:15.33 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, but Melanie, I agree with Ray. So you're showing here a surplus of 52. Where's the 100 coming from? Thank you. |
| 02:50:23.40 | Melanie Purcell | Earlier, that number was higher. It was over $100,000 last time. OK, but the hundred... |
| 02:50:28.39 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | when we first talked. |
| 02:50:30.92 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 02:50:31.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | It's the net of the two transactions. I see, so even with the 250, we still were left with over 100,000 as net surplus. So you've reduced that net surplus now down to 52. Correct. |
| 02:50:41.05 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:50:41.08 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF |
| 02:50:41.11 | Melanie Purcell | Yes, ma'am. |
| 02:50:44.03 | Jill Hoffman | But what about the 400 that was additional contribution? |
| 02:50:47.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | That's still in that. |
| 02:50:47.97 | Melanie Purcell | It's 50. |
| 02:50:48.20 | Jill Hoffman | So really, so that comes back now to the fund balance. |
| 02:50:54.06 | Melanie Purcell | Instead of $400,000 to the pension trust, $650,000 would go to the trust. We would potentially- |
| 02:51:01.01 | Jill Hoffman | But the budget has 400 missing from it. THE BUDGET STILL HAS 400 |
| 02:51:06.00 | Melanie Purcell | No. |
| 02:51:06.34 | Jill Hoffman | It doesn't? Thank you. |
| 02:51:07.10 | Melanie Purcell | Mm-hmm. So let's back up for a sec. If we take $650,000 out of the existing fund balance, because you'll notice I did not include the change in FY17-18 in here. And we have not historically in any of these conversations. So the $250,000 that we talked about, net to this year, was an add-on when we got into operating. Was not calculated in this. So when I backed it back out, |
| 02:51:33.93 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 02:51:38.89 | Melanie Purcell | I just took it all from here, reducing the net surplus. When we talked at the finance committee meeting, that number in net in the first column of digits, the 2017-18 was 247,000. That would have fallen to fund balance. Instead, 147 falls and 52,000 falls from the other. And so the decision is whether we want another $250,000 to go to the trust or $147,000 to go to the trust. |
| 02:52:09.40 | Jill Hoffman | You were in the first column, the 2017-18 estimate. |
| 02:52:13.18 | Melanie Purcell | Yes, sir. Thank you. |
| 02:52:15.11 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | That's where we are now. |
| 02:52:16.88 | Melanie Purcell | So yes, the grand total. Still, if we spend $100,000 on license plate readers, that is $100,000 we do not transfer to the trust based on the conversations of finance committee. |
| 02:52:28.69 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:52:28.76 | Ray Withey | All right. |
| 02:52:28.78 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:52:29.87 | Ray Withey | But now we are. So you're... |
| 02:52:29.91 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you |
| 02:52:29.92 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 02:52:29.94 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | But- |
| 02:52:30.02 | Melanie Purcell | . |
| 02:52:30.08 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:52:30.13 | Melanie Purcell | Absolutely. |
| 02:52:30.58 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Bye. This is your... It shows 400 additional contribution to the trust. |
| 02:52:35.53 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 02:52:35.56 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yes. |
| 02:52:35.59 | Melanie Purcell | Yeah. And that would change. This was before we made any of the scenarios. |
| 02:52:44.57 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:52:44.74 | Unknown | you |
| 02:52:44.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:52:45.04 | Melanie Purcell | This is how I got so confused at Finance Committee. |
| 02:52:46.04 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Fused up finance committee. Okay. So these are inconsistent with the prior slide. |
| 02:52:52.11 | Melanie Purcell | It is a pass through at the operating level. |
| 02:52:56.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:52:56.28 | Melanie Purcell | When you have the income at the top of this, it says $400,000, you put it down here as $400,000. It is a wash. I can change that number to 650 on both sides of the equation the end balance net will still be 147,225. |
| 02:53:13.36 | Jill Hoffman | And I still want to vet the $100,000 a little bit more. Not that I'm against it. But we had staffs give presentations. They didn't include it. We just added it in. We haven't talked about it. |
| 02:53:23.52 | Ray Withey | What's it, Joe? |
| 02:53:24.50 | Jill Hoffman | The 100,000 license plate readers. We've just never talked about what is that? That's just a round number that we put aside and now all of a sudden it's in, but we didn't talk about what we're getting for that. What? No, I understand that part. |
| 02:53:25.73 | Ray Withey | the 100,000 license clearance. |
| 02:53:35.25 | Ray Withey | No. |
| 02:53:35.28 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I understand. |
| 02:53:36.36 | Ray Withey | Yeah. |
| 02:53:36.77 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:53:36.78 | Ray Withey | Yeah. |
| 02:53:38.88 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | They made a presentation about where those would go, I thought. |
| 02:53:43.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:53:46.13 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | what areas of Sausalito that are not now covered that would become covered through that funding. |
| 02:53:51.53 | Ray Withey | Yeah. Okay. Based on what you're saying, I then just got to say I don't agree in putting 650 into the trust. Not if, because there's 100,000 being used that wasn't discussed. The only reason we came up with 250 extra to go in the trust is that was the net profit this year. That's the only reason. |
| 02:54:02.36 | Unknown | I'm not. Okay. |
| 02:54:16.19 | Ray Withey | It wasn't some magic number. |
| 02:54:17.82 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | What she's saying is that after 650 goes into the trust and after 100 goes into license plate readers, there's still 47,000 left. And the last budget, |
| 02:54:26.24 | Ray Withey | And the last budget I sold, there was 150,000 left. |
| 02:54:30.70 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And you want that, why do you want 150 left? |
| 02:54:35.19 | Ray Withey | because it's fun balance. |
| 02:54:37.62 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Why so? |
| 02:54:39.39 | Ray Withey | Why don't we spend everything? Why don't we spend every balance? |
| 02:54:39.84 | Melanie Purcell | which is the first time. |
| 02:54:40.72 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:54:40.77 | Melanie Purcell | You spend like a year. |
| 02:54:42.46 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | . |
| 02:54:42.49 | Melanie Purcell | I've spent... Your decision, one of your discussion items is, do you want to spend, because you'll have a grand total of $800,000 will go to the trust based on policy at the second. The discussion then becomes, do you want that to be $900,000? as opposed to $800,000 as a grand total. between the two. |
| 02:55:04.82 | Jill Hoffman | Did we have 800? Break that down. |
| 02:55:07.00 | Melanie Purcell | Okay, $650,000 from surplus balance. |
| 02:55:07.23 | Jill Hoffman | WE HAVE 700. How much? |
| 02:55:11.59 | Melanie Purcell | $650,000. |
| 02:55:13.51 | Jill Hoffman | Let me ask Kerr the question. |
| 02:55:14.57 | Melanie Purcell | $150,000 here. If you do not do the license plate readers, that would give you the 900,000. |
| 02:55:24.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:55:26.79 | Melanie Purcell | So that's one of your discussion items that the council will need to give direction back. |
| 02:55:31.50 | Adam Politzer | Melanie, can you go to the slide that shows the balances on the reserves, on the various reserves? The 10%, the 5%, the slide that has the... |
| 02:55:43.41 | Jill Hoffman | Go ahead. |
| 02:55:44.36 | Adam Politzer | Go ahead. Sorry. Yes, that's it. Thank you. |
| 02:55:46.40 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Stop. |
| 02:55:47.02 | Melanie Purcell | I don't think which slide we're talking about. |
| 02:55:47.70 | Adam Politzer | Why I think this discussion is important because |
| 02:55:47.85 | Jill Hoffman | It's a great time. |
| 02:55:48.10 | Melanie Purcell | THANK YOU. |
| 02:55:50.69 | Adam Politzer | to the finance committee's credit, we spent a lot of time looking at this slide and talking about a variety of different uses of the balances that were available. And one of the things I think is getting lost in this discussion, which was mentioned by Melanie earlier, is that we are recommending doubling the shortfall reserve policy from 10%, adding another $1.6 million, so we now will have a 20. So we're increasing the general fund and our reserves by an additional 10%, and still left with over a million dollars of cash available, which staff was originally recommending, based on former discussions at council meetings years in the past that our job is not to hoard away the money our job is to use the money to provide services and our recommendation is towards capital with a variety of other recommendations that came to look at how we fund the pension and create some stability out into the future. So I recognize the value of the 147,000 that would be left as the net, but we, and I think the police department, to Council Member Burns' comment, |
| 02:56:21.84 | Mary Wagner | Yes, sir. |
| 02:57:09.98 | Adam Politzer | It's not that they weren't wanting to have license plate readers. They're doing their job as part of the team in terms of how do we balance our budget, how do we move forward where everyone gets a piece of the pie. But we all know, just as you said, and we'll hear from the lieutenant and the chief potentially on the grant opportunities, but we are having success, and that success is saving us hundreds of thousands of dollars of investigation putting people in harm both our residents, our public, and our officers when we have to respond to a crime versus catching them unexpectedly because they hit the license plate reader and we go and catch them before they even know they're in trouble. So I think that that's why staff agreed to and just You know, there was discussion. We had a presentation at the Finance Committee. There was discussion. I agree with Council Member Withee. We didn't agree to fund it, but staff looked at this as a positive and we're recommending approval. If Council chooses to do differently, we respect that and happily make a change. And we can review this at mid-year to see if there's an opportunity downstream. |
| 02:58:17.95 | Ray Withey | You know, don't get me wrong. I actually agree with the license plate readers. I'm going to vote for it. That's not the point. The point is, where is the money coming from? You know, and it's just been automatically, I think, without discussion, taken out of fund balance. Whether you like it or not, whatever you're doing, you're taking it out of fun balance. And okay, that's... Fair enough, but recognise that was not where we were at. It is a shame. |
| 02:58:49.63 | Melanie Purcell | It is a shift, and it is absolutely a use of surplus. |
| 02:58:50.08 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE Right. And I, too, support the license plate readers. I just thought we would have a discussion, a little broader discussion, because it just went in and out so quickly, or out and in so quickly, that, hey, let's talk about what, I don't know the net return on two more on small streets. |
| 02:58:59.15 | Melanie Purcell | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:58:59.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:59.57 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 02:59:08.36 | Jill Hoffman | I have not seen any. Maybe there was a presentation to that detail. I didn't see it. But I'm very interested to know if there is opportunities. This seems like a boondoggle or a boom fall for us to have this type of product. I think it's an opportunity that I want to look into, not just throw 100,000 at it and close the door. So I just wanted more discussion. without offending anybody that I don't like license plate readers. |
| 02:59:26.58 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm not. |
| 02:59:29.47 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:59:29.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So I just want to point out, this is the initial presentation. We are scheduled for another full meeting today. |
| 02:59:29.71 | Jill Hoffman | I don't know. Thank you. |
| 02:59:35.88 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | one week from now in which we are |
| 02:59:36.02 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 02:59:36.03 | Jill Hoffman | We know. |
| 02:59:36.32 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 02:59:38.94 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | we're told we were going to roll up our sleeves and get down into the nitty gritty details. So this is just staff's initial presentation. This is not a fait accompli. This is what we're being given to consider. |
| 02:59:50.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:59:51.04 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:59:51.05 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, cool. |
| 02:59:51.39 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So I want to make sure everybody knows there's an opportunity to discuss everything that's in here. |
| 02:59:57.25 | Jill Hoffman | We'll do that. |
| 02:59:59.31 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Well, you said that you were worried you weren't going to be able to. about the license plate readers. That's what next week is for. |
| 03:00:08.59 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:00:08.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | in two weeks. No, we're meeting one week from tonight, a special meeting on June 19th. to do nothing but the budget. |
| 03:00:18.09 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, I thought we hadn't decided if we were doing that yet. |
| 03:00:20.21 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Well, after the way this evening is going, it's pretty obvious we're going to need that meeting. |
| 03:00:25.28 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | program. So I just have a policy question about the license plate readers. Again, I'm also supportive of those, but there's also another item on the items not included in the budget for the part-time sworn patrol, which if I understand that correctly, would help with downtown congestion, which as we just saw, you know, from our resident survey, that is really one of the highest priorities and kind of basic safety is not. So... I mean, just in terms of where we spend extra money, if we are going to go into fund balance further, I'd just be interested in why the license plate reader is over this. |
| 03:01:11.43 | Melanie Purcell | From a financial management perspective, and I'll let the chief talk about the operating side. From a financial management perspective, because it is an operating expense, we would not recommend use fund balance. Now, that being said, if there's things that are included that you think are not as high a priority as something that is not included, then that's a choice of counsel just to tell us. Similarly with capital projects. |
| 03:01:11.45 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | from |
| 03:01:17.33 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm a financial management. |
| 03:01:18.31 | Mary Wagner | I'm sorry. |
| 03:01:20.44 | Unknown | expensive. |
| 03:01:20.88 | Mary Wagner | We would not recommend you. |
| 03:01:35.76 | Melanie Purcell | The idea is that we present a balanced recommendation and then you tell us what you want. |
| 03:01:41.23 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:01:42.61 | Jill Hoffman | I also think we should say as many items tonight so we have the next week to think about them or ask questions. So I'll throw two more out there. One being replace the city library and ours run reference desk for 11,000. I don't know if some of that was offset or if that's the new number. |
| 03:01:49.23 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 03:01:49.25 | Melanie Purcell | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:01:57.28 | Melanie Purcell | That is completely offset by the friends of the library. |
| 03:01:57.99 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. So we're done with that. |
| 03:02:00.45 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:02:00.47 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | We're done with that. |
| 03:02:01.02 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, good. |
| 03:02:02.42 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So why does it still show up on discussion items not included in the budget? because I didn't get it moved to the now end. |
| 03:02:09.53 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:02:09.67 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. Okay, so I just want to make sure that that's great. Then the other item that I wanted to bring out is a little more philosophy. I'm sorry, this gum. on investment in the future. And I've kind of talked about this a little bit with some other people, and it's kind of hard to get out. So I'm going to have to take a whole 30 seconds longer. On the hospitality, I know you've put some money back in. I think that's great. I was kind of looking prior to this recent change, of looking at some number level that goes straight to an investment in hospitality. It could actually be a fund balance number, not an operation number that gets considered for year after year. But almost a one time expense that says let's see if we can't increase our TOT, |
| 03:02:43.65 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 03:02:43.79 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:02:54.23 | Jill Hoffman | by a certain exponential based on an investment one-time investment through metrics. I've talked to both the hospitality, Jeff and Yoshi about this. What metrics can we look at that that 50,000, and I'm proposing 50, because I also had 600 on my number last week as a 1C. But 50 of that being more of an investment in something other than the trust. So diversifying our investment. And I think revenue enhancement is a great diversity of our investment. How do we maybe make $100,000 over two years on a $50,000 investment that perpetuates? I would want to somewhere in this, whether it be trust balance, because now it seems convoluted, whether it be trust balance or through the operation, but the general fund, that we earmark 50% but they come back to us with a metric-based plan for investment in ROI. |
| 03:03:47.73 | Melanie Purcell | I think part of what is, and I'll defer to Adam if I'm getting too far off course, There's a conversation kind of brewing between the GPAC and the council and these kind of comments about economic development itself within the community. And at some point, then that's a decision of the city council in particular as to what role the city will play. in that economic development function. Thank you. And at that point, you're talking about Whether that's an operation. or whether that's a capital investment. The city has focused on capital because that's been its primary |
| 03:04:21.05 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:04:26.13 | Melanie Purcell | a resource of which it has control and which it has the ability to really add value and left the function to others. And that's very much a philosophical conversation and a policy conversation that I have to be brutally honest, far exceeds the budget conversation. |
| 03:04:46.21 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I know other than, to me it primes the water for that discussion. It's only 50,000. I can see that number ultimately being 200,000, but for right now it's a small number to prime it to see can we get traction in that hospitality development industry |
| 03:04:59.70 | Melanie Purcell | I think that you probably are at a point where rather than put the, you might want to put the money aside. an ear market, but start the conversation about the plan of what that means. Because at this moment you have a group of three or five volunteers who are running very intensive businesses thinking about it. You have interested parties thinking about it. But throwing money at that is not, you know, the hospitality committee has done an amazing job this year. But they haven't spent the $30,000. |
| 03:05:33.48 | Jill Hoffman | I know. |
| 03:05:33.97 | Melanie Purcell | Their capacity, it's very similar to the conversations that we have internally as the city organization. How much can we actually deliver? We have $15 million in capital projects over a three year period. Realistically, it takes more than three years to deliver $15 million with a concrete. So I think that if you wish to put aside funds, that's a signal of the investment. But realistically, the structure, I think, is the crux of the conversation that's needed right now. |
| 03:06:06.88 | Jill Hoffman | I completely agree. And I know we've tried this before to an extent. I think I have a little different plan for that structure. I think we needed some funds for it. I think we, you know, let alone the investment discussion we're gonna have when we get more TOT tax that I think the community's gonna wanna have. This is totally separate of that. This is a, set-aside program. Can we develop funds that I think are out there? I think we're revenue-shy in some areas. And... a $50,000 investment would go a long way if done right. |
| 03:06:42.35 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'll just say, the hospitality and |
| 03:06:42.67 | Jill Hoffman | I'LL JUST. |
| 03:06:46.26 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | BAC made presentations and didn't ask for that money. We gave them in this proposed budget exactly what they asked for. Yes. |
| 03:06:57.30 | Unknown | You know, I think there's something new |
| 03:07:00.73 | Melanie Purcell | Okay, so any further questions on the discussion items? Would you prefer to jump into the revenue options or would you prefer to hear from the departments? |
| 03:07:10.39 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm looking at my fellow council members. I've heard both. |
| 03:07:12.77 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:07:12.79 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:07:12.81 | Unknown | The President. |
| 03:07:13.15 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:07:15.76 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I don't care. Revenue options. No. |
| 03:07:16.10 | Melanie Purcell | Foxtrot. |
| 03:07:16.42 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:07:16.54 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:07:17.01 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:07:17.11 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:07:17.13 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:07:18.26 | Melanie Purcell | Okay. |
| 03:07:18.55 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:07:18.66 | Melanie Purcell | So we're just going to skip ahead for a minute. |
| 03:07:21.51 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So but can we do a time check and talk about whether we're going to hear from the departments because all the department heads are sitting there waiting. So are we going to want to hear from the department heads tonight? Are we going to meet in a week and want to hear from them then? |
| 03:07:33.61 | Adam Politzer | I would like to influence you on that. Traditionally, We've always heard from the department heads. Almost every city has ever heard. |
| 03:07:41.31 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'M JUST SAYING WHEN, |
| 03:07:42.81 | Adam Politzer | I'm saying when. No, no, no, but at the beginning of the process. And I think that, you know, they've been instructed to get very brief. presentation very brief but really be available if you have questions and we know that councilmember Burns has questions related to the license plate readers but it may stimulate other questions I think that it's important that we hear from our department heads and as they've been instructed to keep it brief |
| 03:08:11.38 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So do you guys want to hear from them tonight? |
| 03:08:12.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | or |
| 03:08:13.47 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | in a |
| 03:08:13.96 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | . |
| 03:08:14.17 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:08:15.67 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm just trying to see how involved the presentations are because it's usually so much more helpful to hear the presentation once we've looked at the. |
| 03:08:24.37 | Jill Hoffman | I weigh in and yes, I want to hear from the department. |
| 03:08:26.20 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yes, I want to hear from the department. |
| 03:08:28.31 | Jill Hoffman | I've got like three or four questions for each of the departments that they're not going to be able to answer tonight. So what I'm going to want to know is how many employees do they have in their department, how many contract people do they use, and I want to hear from each of them where they think there are areas for consolidation and cost savings and streamlining. And I can email each of those, but they're going to have to come back, and they're going to have to anyway, so they might as well just come back. Thank you. |
| 03:08:54.55 | Melanie Purcell | Have you talked to them about that? |
| 03:08:54.56 | Jill Hoffman | Have you talked? Nope. |
| 03:08:57.38 | Melanie Purcell | I would ask that you email me and I'll hunt them down. |
| 03:08:59.78 | Jill Hoffman | That's fine. Yeah, whatever, however. But I think that's got to be part of our conversation about moving forward and policy-wise, how we move forward not just with this budget but in the next 15 years when we're looking back. And that's why I wanted a deeper discussion of the CAFR. You know, what did our budget look like in the CAFR? You know, we had $1.9 million surplus last year, but that's going to be eaten up by our pension debt as we go forward. And so that's why that context is important. That's why the context of the departments is important in how they're run and how we move forward as a city council. |
| 03:09:38.12 | Jill Hoffman | My next appointment's not till midnight, so however long we go. |
| 03:09:40.82 | Unknown | Hehehehe. |
| 03:09:47.91 | Melanie Purcell | How about I go through the revenue options very quickly and then we can have the departments chime in if there's anything that you have. And then we can jump into the pension because that might be more brainwashed. |
| 03:09:55.89 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | that might be. So let me see how much time we put on the agenda for this, Melanie, because we still have five public hearings. Yes. |
| 03:09:57.64 | Melanie Purcell | Let me see. FIVE. |
| 03:10:03.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:10:03.36 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Hi. |
| 03:10:10.20 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So you put 45 minutes on the agenda for this whole discussion this evening. We've spent over an hour so far. |
| 03:10:17.49 | Melanie Purcell | I would propose that the pension conversation then go to next week, the pension trust, because that is a much more intensive dialogue. |
| 03:10:34.41 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Is everybody in agreement with that? |
| 03:10:37.65 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, because I think actually they can iron out some numbers too. |
| 03:10:44.28 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, what was the suggestion was to do the pension next? |
| 03:10:47.44 | Melanie Purcell | The pension trust completely next to it. |
| 03:10:47.47 | Jill Hoffman | Exactly. Sure, that's fine. Okay. |
| 03:10:50.48 | Melanie Purcell | Yeah, that's fine. I'd rather you be able to feel comfortable asking as many questions as you would. |
| 03:10:54.21 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, now, CAFR. So we're being asked to approve the CAFR. Do you have questions about the accuracy of the CAFR? |
| 03:11:01.28 | Jill Hoffman | No, we're being asked to accept the CAFR. |
| 03:11:03.35 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Just to receive it. Yeah, to receive it. |
| 03:11:04.48 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, to receive it. |
| 03:11:05.56 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. See you next time. you |
| 03:11:06.34 | Jill Hoffman | That's fine. |
| 03:11:06.61 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | That's fine. you prepared to do that this evening? |
| 03:11:09.09 | Jill Hoffman | Um, |
| 03:11:13.01 | Jill Hoffman | That's a good question. I don't want to receive it in this manner. I want to receive it as a presentation. It may be like 10 minutes. It may be a ten minute presentation of This is, you know, these were our, you know, I think that's the, as I said, the unrestricted net position, the income statement or the statement of activities, you know, it's hard for us to evaluate how our budget works if we don't have a comprehensive, or at least some sort of presentation, that not just us, the city council, but residents can understand. I mean, you can't understand how our budget works if you don't understand the CAFR and what's happened in the past on an annual basis. And so that's why I pulled a lot of the consent calendar. That's why I wanted to talk about it in the context of the budget. Yeah. I don't think it's a good idea for us to just accept it and then move on. I think we need to have it in the context of our budget conversation. I don't think we've had that tonight, and I don't think it needs to be a long or intensive conversation. But it does need to be set out for the context of our budget. This is how it worked in the past. This is what happened. This is what we can expect in the future. This is what we're dealing with today. as part of the second part of a two year budget, Part of our budget is we're I'm not sure if you're that are gonna happen in the future with regard to the pension, I'm sorry, with the pension trust, right? So you have to understand how our expenses and our our revenue is going to get eclipsed when you're talking about the conversation we've had tonight. Well, do we want to spend $50,000 on the trust? Do we need more in the trust? You know, how do we evaluate that? That's my answer with regard to the cafe. |
| 03:13:03.01 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So is everyone okay with postponing this so we can have a quick presentation? Okay, so yes, you're okay with that? Okay, so Melanie, next week, let's plan on starting with a brief presentation about the historical trends reflected in the CAFR, the change in the GASB, how that affects, and the projections regarding the pension obligations. |
| 03:13:26.20 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Perfect. |
| 03:13:26.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:13:26.52 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:13:26.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:13:26.67 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. |
| 03:13:27.77 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And just on that, I do think having the auditor in the future provide that presentation is more you |
| 03:13:34.20 | Melanie Purcell | I can request them for next week if you wish, or I can just prepare. |
| 03:13:34.39 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I can request them for next week if you wish, or I can just prepare. I'm not going to push that issue this year, but I just do think that that's more. |
| 03:13:37.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:13:41.32 | Unknown | Absolutely. |
| 03:13:41.69 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | standards. |
| 03:13:43.30 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:13:43.31 | Unknown | . Thank you. |
| 03:13:47.29 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, so in deference to the city manager, I'm willing to hear briefly from the department heads tonight with the understanding they're going to have to come back in a week to answer other questions. Is that okay with everybody? |
| 03:14:02.19 | Ray Withey | Yeah, I have one question about the revenue options that went up there. Just a quick clarity. |
| 03:14:06.21 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:14:09.99 | Ray Withey | The T, the, you've got short term rental TOT, 243,000 estimated revenue. Is that the revenue stream that you put in the budget? |
| 03:14:24.62 | Melanie Purcell | No. No, sir. |
| 03:14:26.16 | Ray Withey | Okay. |
| 03:14:27.02 | Melanie Purcell | So what is in bold is what is in the budget. That is the demand parking. That is a business license tax increase, which will require an election. And it is an increase in the TOT base rate from 12% to 14%. So an extra 2%, and that also requires an election. |
| 03:14:48.31 | Ray Withey | Right. And so is the increase The short-term rental TOT, does that assume that the 2% increase has taken place? |
| 03:15:02.42 | Melanie Purcell | Right. That does not. It is not calculated in any way in the budget. The short term rental is not included. I don't know. |
| 03:15:10.77 | Ray Withey | No, I understand. But the number that you have. The $243,000, is that based on the current TOT rate or the project? Yes, sir. It's current rate. All right, thanks. |
| 03:15:11.97 | Melanie Purcell | But the number that you have. I'm... Yes, sir. OK. |
| 03:15:23.40 | Melanie Purcell | So that's where, I mean, and so you know, the three that we've discussed that are included are in bold. The rest of them are not included. You'll see a lot of TAB determines and some rough test of the TBTs. some things that we're kind of ironing out just so we have more information to present to you. And then the marijuana I believe is coming at another meeting in more detail as we kind of explore what the nuances of the state law are for this. Thank you. |
| 03:15:51.11 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And can I ask just on the business license tax, going back to the other side and the TOT increase, what kind of community outreach has happened on those? Not very much. |
| 03:16:03.95 | Adam Politzer | Not very much. And not until we get direction from the council that you want to pursue that. |
| 03:16:04.93 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So, Yeah, so and it involves an election, so it would go on the ballot. |
| 03:16:13.42 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Right, but our budget assumes them. So it's just kind of a... |
| 03:16:17.35 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:16:17.38 | Melanie Purcell | for a couple of days. |
| 03:16:17.87 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | YEARS. |
| 03:16:17.94 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm going to go. |
| 03:16:19.14 | Melanie Purcell | This would assume that we would go out for an election this fall and that it would not be implemented until the six months later, three to six months later. So it doesn't assume any revenue until 2019-20. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:16:31.01 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Right. |
| 03:16:31.27 | Melanie Purcell | But it does, we have had very brief introductory conversations with some members of the business community that have been very positive. Actually several of them brought forward the suggestion. |
| 03:16:31.44 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | But- |
| 03:16:43.05 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | On both of those or just on the left? |
| 03:16:44.72 | Melanie Purcell | On the business license tax. |
| 03:16:44.75 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So it's a business source. |
| 03:16:47.32 | Melanie Purcell | And we're doing the research right now on what our comparables are with everybody else and making sure that what we're finding is an incredible variety of methodologies. So as we iron that out, we'll bring that to us. Or on the TOT? No, the TOT is pretty straightforward. |
| 03:16:58.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Turn that out. No. |
| 03:17:03.13 | Melanie Purcell | And we're right in the middle of the pack in terms of similar communities. Healdsburg is at 16%. That's the one that's off the top of my head. Is that info in our packet, Millen? It's in your packet, I believe. It's a comparison of TOT elsewhere. Yeah. |
| 03:17:15.26 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | It's in your own. Yeah, I read that. |
| 03:17:20.75 | Melanie Purcell | So those are in there. We have not gone out on any significant activity yet. We're just trying to prepare it. And frankly, it is a pretty massive undertaking once we start that, if that's the direction of council. |
| 03:17:36.51 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, so can I just ask a procedural question? So if we vote in two weeks to adopt the budget with those items in the long-term projected budget, are we committed? to that course of action or are we going to have further discussion We would be bringing to you a road trip. |
| 03:17:56.44 | Melanie Purcell | We would be bringing to you a resolution directing us to pursue them. |
| 03:18:00.94 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So they would be on the November ballot if we vote to do that in two weeks? We'd have to in order to make the ballot. With no community outreach. |
| 03:18:01.16 | Melanie Purcell | I would be honest. |
| 03:18:06.68 | Melanie Purcell | WITH NO COMMUNITY. Thank you. |
| 03:18:08.91 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:18:09.02 | Melanie Purcell | have to start right then. That would be the draw. |
| 03:18:11.76 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:18:11.78 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:18:11.79 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I mean, |
| 03:18:12.22 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:18:12.23 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:18:12.28 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. Thank you. It's a very tight window. |
| 03:18:17.82 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, I just, it seems a little bit of the cart before the horse, but anyway. Okay. |
| 03:18:18.36 | Melanie Purcell | I think that's a good thing. just. |
| 03:18:22.59 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:18:22.64 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:18:22.68 | Melanie Purcell | of the |
| 03:18:22.73 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. |
| 03:18:25.82 | Melanie Purcell | Okay, so unless there's other questions specific to these, these are ones that we have brought forward before. I'll bring up the Parks and Rec director. |
| 03:18:46.01 | Unknown | you |
| 03:18:47.53 | Mike Langford | Good evening, City Council, Madam Mayor. Mike Langford, your Parks and Recreation Director. First off, I do want to, I'm going to be very brief here, as you've asked, but I do want to focus on, we did have some very excellent survey results, as did the library. You heard Jerry Taylor talk about what we do with the 4th of July. We've made great strides to the parks and the landscaping this past year. Part of that is because we are now finally, finally up to full force in both the parks and recreation sides. However, we are losing Brian Valle later on this year. very shortly here um i'm positive that we can keep the forward trend of the moving forward however i caution you about adding any extra facilities responsibilities with the current funding and staffing levels but with the budget that is proposed again i'm very confident that we can keep our service levels where they are and even do some improvements to some of the facilities and course, we're always working on improving our programs and events. But I am here if you have any questions about the Parks and Recreation budget. |
| 03:19:56.92 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So Mike, I understand you're looking at other grant opportunities. |
| 03:20:00.89 | Mike Langford | Yes, we are always looking for various grant opportunities. With the passage of Proposition 68, there will be some grant opportunities. I was on a webinar conference call yesterday about that. They won't be for quite a while, because even though it passed and all this, they still have to write all the legislation around it. There will be some per capita funding coming, approximately $200,000. But even that could take at least a year to get to us. |
| 03:20:30.27 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And then there's a proposal that the surplus in the recreation fund be spent at Southview Park. Are you endorsing that allocation? |
| 03:20:41.25 | Mike Langford | THE FEDERAL. Thank you. I'm going to endorse what the city council wishes. |
| 03:20:45.37 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. All right, thank you. |
| 03:20:47.65 | Mike Langford | Those funds have to be used for parks, and any use at any parks is going to be a positive. and we need to finish some of these projects. |
| 03:20:56.63 | Jill Hoffman | How much is that? |
| 03:20:57.42 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:20:58.38 | Mike Langford | As Melanie said, there's 300 and... |
| 03:20:58.81 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 03:20:58.82 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I don't know. 58. |
| 03:21:01.99 | Mike Langford | Thank you. |
| 03:21:02.89 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | 3, 18 or 3, 58 something. Okay. Thank you. Thanks. Any questions of Mike? Thank you, Mike. Thank you. |
| 03:21:10.25 | Mike Langford | Thank you. |
| 03:21:24.18 | John Rohrabacher | Hi, good evening again. John Rohrabacher, your Chief of Police. So I have just a handful of slides and I can cover them pretty quickly, but I want to leave time for if you have any questions for me or for later. but I understand I feel like from Council Member Hoffman The questions you had, I know I could answer them now if you needed to. I know we don't have time, and I know there's not. So our budget is largely driven by the budget the strategic plan objectives. And unlike a lot of the other departments, most of ours are contained in objective five and then some of the subcategories. We don't have a lot of things, if any, in one through four. And so what we have done, and there's two slides like this, we don't spend a lot of time on them, but just in the general flavor of this is, we are always looking at |
| 03:22:12.65 | Mary Wagner | Yeah. |
| 03:22:15.50 | John Rohrabacher | What can we add or ask for that would provide a service but not necessarily have to bring anybody else on? or full-time employees knowing that that's costly. And we maintaining our current staffing of 20 officers, four parking officers and two professional staff, that's still four full-time officers less than we had. I think it's a good question. eight or ten years ago when we had 24. So we're doing fine with that, but we're looking for options, options that make sense and technology drives some of that. this slide covers. I'm not going to do any more detail on that right this second. Same here. when we were looking at what could we do with part-time people, which are less costly because they're hourly and there's no benefits and we can adjust their work schedules during the time of the year that we need them. And again, working smart is what we are trying to do with the money that we have and that the council, this council and previous councils have agreed to fund. We're gonna move in rather quickly here. So there's a couple things I redlined out that even Melanie doesn't know about because the COP logic program is the online report writing. We went live with that now. So I fully expect that COP logic is gonna send me a bill to pay right now this budget year, which I have the money for. So it doesn't need to carry over. There's a small service fee every year. It's maybe three or $4,000 to maintain the system, but the initial startup money will be due now, but we would not pay them before until they delivered the product. So that was pretty simple. The red line through the Mera radio, we initially had put that in at about a $45,000 cost. We needed radios for the unmarked cars. We would have purchased them when we bought the unmarked cars, but the radios were not available yet because Mera is changing from generation one to generation two or what they're calling next gen. So it seemed prudent at the time not to buy old radios that were not gonna be any good, so we let that go. But the price from the vendor for Mera, the Motorola radio company, gave all the agencies in Mera a good price to buy new products now. And so we were able to buy what we needed for $22,000 using vehicle replacement money, which is where it would have come from in the first place if we had bought them, we bought the cars. So that's out. We don't need it anymore for the coming year to buy those. So I'll mark those out. So, |
| 03:24:49.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So, I'm sorry. |
| 03:24:49.70 | John Rohrabacher | Sorry. |
| 03:24:50.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm a little bit confused how this matches up with our budget and the things that are in or out. |
| 03:24:52.94 | John Rohrabacher | Sorry, going too fast. |
| 03:25:02.41 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:25:02.43 | John Rohrabacher | Yeah, and I don't know that it will or won't. These are what we prepared for the Finance Committee presentation three or four weeks ago. |
| 03:25:03.07 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And I don't know that it was. |
| 03:25:10.66 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | This is a change from what? |
| 03:25:10.68 | John Rohrabacher | but this is a change from what? THE FEDERAL CITY IS |
| 03:25:14.26 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So this is actually on Melanie's summary. She shows cop logic as something she's not funding. He's now removing it from the ask basket. |
| 03:25:21.60 | John Rohrabacher | front. Yeah. |
| 03:25:24.42 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | She, she, she. |
| 03:25:24.91 | John Rohrabacher | I'm sorry, I'm going pretty quick here, not getting into that. |
| 03:25:27.86 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | She doesn't show the Mira radio system. She simply says, don't have the cars. We're not going to buy more cars this year. |
| 03:25:28.13 | John Rohrabacher | It doesn't show |
| 03:25:36.43 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So, but she does have the cameras. The hundred, so bullet two here is $100,000 for, is this for the license plate readers, the cameras? |
| 03:25:47.10 | John Rohrabacher | Are you actually asking me a question about them? Okay. |
| 03:25:50.14 | Unknown | COPLogic is in the budget though isn't it? |
| 03:25:52.72 | John Rohrabacher | Copologic is the online police reports where people can fill out their own report online. So we're taking that out because it's already there. So the reason it's crossed out. |
| 03:25:58.39 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So we're taking that out because it's already. The reason it's crossed out is because it's now in the budget? Because he's already spent it this year. If I may, Councilmember. |
| 03:26:04.11 | John Rohrabacher | AND I THINK IT'S A If I may, Councilmember, Cleveland Knowles, we had actually put that in almost two years ago at the beginning of this two-year cycle, but the vendor was slow to deliver, and so we didn't pay them any money, and the money's been sitting there in our allocation. |
| 03:26:06.64 | Unknown | THE END OF I'm not. THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:26:18.77 | John Rohrabacher | And of course it just turns out that they deliver now in June the 24th month of a 24 month cycle. So I already have the money to pay them. So I'm not asking for that same $15,000 in the upcoming budget year. |
| 03:26:35.23 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:26:35.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:26:37.50 | John Rohrabacher | It's good news. |
| 03:26:40.17 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | It's just we're having a hard time reconciling this slide with the PowerPoint that we got tonight from Melanie. So why don't we just listen to what you have to say, and we'll sort it out later. |
| 03:26:49.08 | Danny Castro | Just listen to what you want. |
| 03:26:51.07 | John Rohrabacher | it out. Sure. |
| 03:26:52.28 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:26:53.38 | John Rohrabacher | AND THE SAME THING WITH THE We were always going to buy them using vehicle replacement fund to outfit the cars. But now that we're able to get them and get them at a significant savings, we've already done that. So we're not going forward with what was a $45,000 request. We're able to spend $22,000 now out of the vehicle replacement fund. Done with that. |
| 03:27:15.88 | Unknown | Great. |
| 03:27:16.05 | John Rohrabacher | So that's why I just felt it was good to mark them that way. And that would look a little different than the Finance Committee presentation three, four weeks ago. So in addition to what we call proposals, and again, these are technology issues that would be of value-safe staffing and provide the service to the community that we strive for. and so we proposed to complete the with two more installations. I'm going to go by that for a moment. We recognize that a joint project for the EOC between fire and IT and police is to get that room squared away. It's okay in its current state, but it could be better. And I'm feeling the need to bring that up because of what happened with the Tubbs Fire and the other fires in Sonoma County and Napa County and the after-action reports are coming out from those counties and They're frankly getting some pretty harsh criticism for what they did or didn't do, and I think that we're really good on our staffing part, but if we wanted to improve... our connectivity with the county and the state, we have a little work to do. But that's just on the list. And then- |
| 03:28:37.79 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So I don't even see this on the funded or not funded list, Melanie. Is this on the, is the OEC? |
| 03:28:44.03 | John Rohrabacher | We did not, it's not funded at the moment, we're just a proposal and it was a roughly $30,000 and again that was just a number that we were using as a combined thing that it would be a combination of fire, police, and IT. |
| 03:28:53.53 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | COMBINED. |
| 03:28:57.25 | Adam Politzer | technology upgrades. |
| 03:28:57.89 | John Rohrabacher | We've done no work on this at all. We're just putting it out as food for thought. |
| 03:28:59.94 | Adam Politzer | PUTTING IT OUT AS FOOD FOR THOUGHT. |
| 03:29:03.08 | John Rohrabacher | Yeah. because this is our opportunity to propose things, talk about what we look at as the future, as things that we need. |
| 03:29:16.48 | John Rohrabacher | Should I go on? Please. Okay, so body worn cameras is another one of those wish list type items. It was just in the paper again the other day because the grand jury has released their report. |
| 03:29:17.43 | Unknown | TODAY. |
| 03:29:30.39 | John Rohrabacher | They contacted me a couple months ago. I gave them a statement at that time that it's on the wish list, but it's very expensive and it remains that way. I'll be preparing a report for your consideration in July because we have an obligation to respond to the grand jury. So you'll be hearing lots more about that later. And I just did this about the radio. So that's the cost that we did already pay. And this slide just has the general cost about the license plate reader system. And I just want to add again, we, I don't want to make up numbers because it's really not fair, but in some cases like to complete the LPR project until we actually have some indication that it could get funded. We would then go forward with seeking firm costs on what it would take to provide the poles and the utilities to make the cameras work. This number was an estimate from the initial part of the project. When we completed the project as we have it now, with the three main locations on Spencer and each end of town south and north, we're very lucky to have places where we could put those and not have to add utilities. And so it also turned out to be our major entry and exit points of town. The two remaining locations, Montymar and Rodeo, We don't know what we're missing. We do know that sometimes based on the things that are happening, we did not catch a car and we suspect it came from those locations. And to answer Vice Mayor Burns' question about grants, we've explored this like crazy. And there are 330 police chiefs in California, With one inquiry, I can get them all. And I'm sure everybody else has listservs like this. And we are always looking at who's got something like this and how are they paying for it. And unfortunately, license plate reader camera does not have any kind of grant process out there in any other jurisdiction as well. The only other thing that we do take advantage of with the other agencies is if we do have one, and we join with them on our records then we have access to more data than our own, because then the other law enforcement agencies, nobody else, can see our records and we can see there. that we have an LPR system. but we can then catch a, a car coming in that another agency put in, not just our own. And that's some of the ones that you see or read about in the paper are entries made by other law enforcement agencies put into the general system. And that's how we get those hits. So there's a lot of cooperation going on. and it's very helpful. But again, I don't know that $100,000 is, it could be too much money. It's not likely short. It's probably that or less. But that's based on the homework we did initially when we were designing the system. Thank you. |
| 03:32:24.81 | Jill Hoffman | Can I ask you then on the body cameras, was the grand jury report on sharing the, not sharing, but |
| 03:32:25.80 | John Rohrabacher | Sure. |
| 03:32:32.65 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, sharing the cost of the data, everybody going on the same data purchase. Is that what that report was? |
| 03:32:38.46 | John Rohrabacher | That's a component of that. I haven't written the report yet. It just came in and I'm formulating my response on behalf of the city and on behalf of the police department about body-worn cameras. |
| 03:32:42.53 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 03:32:50.37 | Jill Hoffman | you ultimately lowering the data cost can change that number drastically right That 88. |
| 03:32:55.43 | John Rohrabacher | There's a lot of options involved. That's our best option at the moment, and that's because several of the agencies in Marin County are using the same vendor. But in terms of us having a shared database, it's probably a train wreck. In terms of trying to protect our own and who releases them and the public records act request or the district attorney request. data, we can't have another agency release that for us. were able to save a lot of money based on the acquisition of the equipment itself. because the common vendor that most agencies are using now. And let's see, so that's kind of those. I know I'm going really fast. I just put that up there. We were having great luck as you know. As with the recent case this weekend, that's 16 stolen cars, 23 people arrested for a lot of crimes and not just stolen car crimes. It's sort of an astounding number, isn't it, over 9 million plate scanned. And the one difference I want to just point out, one really quick technical thing about this, which is different than the body cams or even city surveillance type cameras is that this is just photos. And so the storage of this is way cheaper. and way less intensive to store 9 million records frankly cost next to nothing compared to storing Video. |
| 03:34:24.25 | Mary Wagner | Yeah. |
| 03:34:26.10 | John Rohrabacher | It's just one of the differences in technology. So body cameras would be great, but... And again, I have to write the report for you for your consideration, but again, as we've said before, I'd love to really have them for what they provide in terms of law enforcement, evidence of crimes and that type of thing. We are... SO FORTUNATE TO you know, hire selective, trained, really good quality people, our complaint rate is almost non-existent. I think I've had one, I don't know if I had one this year yet or not, I had one last year. I mean, and it's so small. that that alone is not a reason to have them. However, it's like anything else. If something happens, you're going to wish you had them. and because they provide great evidence. at the moment, not the first thing on my list. And then, again, I talked about the You'll see room. So that's really fast and probably way over my three minutes, but I'm happy to take questions or come back next week again and answer more questions. |
| 03:35:27.21 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Any questions? |
| 03:35:29.13 | John Rohrabacher | Okay. |
| 03:35:29.20 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. Thanks, Chief. |
| 03:35:30.06 | John Rohrabacher | Sure. |
| 03:35:40.71 | Abbott Chambers | Well, Abbott Chambers, your city librarian and director of communications. I'm also going to try to keep this very brief and just focus on the discussion items that you have in your packets. As Melanie mentioned, an item that was unfunded coming out of the finance committee was a proposal, a recommendation that I made to add $11,000 to the library's budget to free up some of my time. I currently, since I started here in Sausalito six years ago, I've been spending 12 hours a week working on the reference desk. With my added communication responsibilities, I'm finding that I'm very crunched with my time. My fear in having to try to free up more time was that I was going to end up cutting back on the adult programs that we do in the community, and I think that's a big reason why the library is so well regarded in the community, or some of these extras we're doing. So I'm happy to announce tonight that the Friends of the Library have agreed to fund $6,500 or $660 of that. So not quite the full amount that Melanie mentioned, but to Council Member Hoffman's question, I'm going to find the other savings through some creative staffing with the library in the evening. So we're going to do a beta project on Thursday nights where we're going to have two library assistants working instead of a reference librarian, a library assistant, and a page. So we'll see how that works out and potentially be able to scale it to other weeknights when the library is open until 9. I wanted just to mention, in addition to that $6,500 that the Friends are granting, that they drew a tremendous amount for our community. This is just a portion of the annual grant that we get from the Friends of the Library. And just for staffing related to children's programs and adult programs, we'll be getting about $21,500 from the Friends. The total amount of the checks that they write to the city for or that we'll be writing for 2018-19 will be about $26,000. And the total amount that they bring to the city is in excess of $30,000 when other gifts that they're making to the community are taken into account. And then just wrapping up with the communications request, this was funded coming out of the Finance Committee, and this was a request for $3,100. That covers the cost of currents, the platform we use to send out currents. And currently there is no communications budget whatsoever, and it would be helpful to have some money if we need to pay for some design services. If we want to do some marketing. So for example, Facebook or Nextdoor campaigns to build up the number of subscribers that we have for Currents. Um. That's all I have to say, and I'd be glad to answer any questions. |
| 03:38:35.40 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:38:35.43 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:38:35.47 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | ANYTHING? |
| 03:38:35.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THE END OF |
| 03:38:36.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | ABBOTT? |
| 03:38:36.44 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. No, I don't have any questions, but just thank you. And I do think building followers and supporters on Facebook and Nextdoor would be great and kind of advancing that I think people who are on it are really much more aware than other people in the community about what's going on. And it's a, a great means of communication. at some point when we can fund it, dollars in that direction would be a good idea. |
| 03:39:03.97 | Unknown | Agreed. And goes. |
| 03:39:04.29 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And goes to our earlier, the survey that we got about people kind of being uninformed about some of our commissions and other projects I think that would circle back. |
| 03:39:14.62 | Abbott Chambers | Yeah, I agree. And in July, I'll be putting together an annual communications report that will kind of take a look at where we are right now and where we may be able to get to with some added initiatives. |
| 03:39:26.29 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:39:27.61 | Abbott Chambers | Any other questions? |
| 03:39:29.09 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, thanks Abbott. |
| 03:39:37.21 | Danny Castro | Good evening, Mayor and members of the Council. Danny Castro, I'm your Community Development Director. And the Community Development Department budget is largely aligned with the strategic plan. So I'm going to really go into there and go pretty quickly. As you all are well aware, we have started the general plan update. We are actually in year two of three of the general plan update, well underway, and have completed a number of the milestones. And this just indicates the number of the other milestones that works within the work plan. And we are on schedule at this time. And these are just the remaining items that completes a general plan in EIR that we intend to complete in 2020. Uh, Along with the general plan update is to assess the marinship specific plan. That's part of the general plan update and would be covered within that. One of the objectives is protection of historic resources in our strategic plan. That's to enhance and strengthen Sausalito's historic preservation program and protect historic resources. A number of objectives came from that. One was we completed the machine shop designation. Another is that the historic preservation regulations right now is actually undergoing planning commission review. It's gone through the HLB and it'll come to the council very soon. There's actually a public hearing coming next week on that from the planning commission and hopefully they will approve that and then come to you. The MarinShip Historic Properties are a couple items regarding nominating the two shipways office buildings and also to come up with design guidelines for the marine rails and that's something that could be done within this or or, deferred to a later time, perhaps following the completion of the general plan. A number of other objectives under historic preservation includes evaluating the Mills Act program and considering establishing a program. Also, conducting a citywide historic resources inventory that would align with our new historic preservation regulations. And thirdly, looking at an overlay zoning district for the downtown, making it a national register. Again, these are objectives that were aligned with the strategic plan, but can also, if desired by the city council, moved and deferred until after the completion of the general plan. Another objective is our online application, our TrackIt, permit tracking software, I'm really pleased to say that it's completed. It has been implemented. We are, it being a new program, we are... always looking at ways to improve it and to continue to enhance and improve our efficiencies and our turnaround times. |
| 03:42:41.93 | Danny Castro | So in terms of notable changes, we were looking at increasing the professional services to retain a qualified historic preservation consultant to do the number of objectives that I just stated, and also to increase, a small increase, to our training and workshop budget for Planning Committed Historic Landmarks Board and to staff just to continue with training, continued education, and best practices for our boards and commissions. |
| 03:43:15.39 | Danny Castro | And that completes my report, if you have any questions. And I can be prepared for the next meeting for any additional information as well. |
| 03:43:24.30 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:43:24.32 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Any questions of Danny? I don't know if this is the right time, but going back to the revenue questions, I know you were managing the short-term rental program. So in the recommendation, it was at 60 days for the revenue projection. A program that would allow residents to rent their homes for 60 days per year is now changed to 90 days per year in the revenue projection. And I was just wondering why that changed and what the thinking was there. |
| 03:44:01.96 | Danny Castro | I'd have to look at the recommendations of the task force if it wasn't, if you recall it being 60 days that we predicted. |
| 03:44:07.25 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | No, I remember that we passed on a recommendation to the city council that said a limited number of days per year, and I think it said 60 to 180. We had a range. We didn't pick. But I was just wondering for the revenue projection If that was a strong feeling that you had or if that was- |
| 03:44:27.51 | Danny Castro | If that were to be a good one. Not necessarily. I mean, I think that's something that's still a policy decision. Should we have regulations in place? I think 90 was chosen to look at what that projection could be. given, you know, the the estimated amount of short-term rentals that we would be able to capture in TOT. |
| 03:44:48.42 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And does the projection on the revenue, I think it was $243,000, does that assume that someone who signs up for a short-term rental would rent $2,000? for the full 90 days, do you remember? Okay, so every person who registered their unit as a short-term rental would rent for the full amount of time? For the full amount of time. For 90 days, okay. |
| 03:45:00.82 | Mary Wagner | Yes. you |
| 03:45:02.24 | Unknown | I'm going to go. |
| 03:45:02.41 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:45:09.40 | Danny Castro | Thank you. |
| 03:45:09.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:45:09.53 | Danny Castro | FULL OF THEM. |
| 03:45:09.82 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | for 90 days. |
| 03:45:10.61 | Danny Castro | Thank you. |
| 03:45:10.73 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Correct. All right, thank you. Any other questions of Danny? Thanks, Danny. Thank you. Jonathan |
| 03:45:20.99 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. Again, Jonathan Goldman, your Public Works Director, City Engineer, and ADA Coordinator. The last time I gave this presentation, I think it was 34 minutes long, which I'm sure is why my department suffered in the community survey. So I'm going to try to be more brief than that and certainly open to questions. Just want to highlight a couple of things. our organization. Just to remind the council and the community, one of the things that we did with your approval last year that Mike Langford mentioned is we, I think, very successfully transferred landscape maintenance and custodial to the Parks and Recreation Department. And to be honest with you, after watching the community survey, I think that probably contributed to some of our low marks as well because I think that Mike and his team have done a very good job of making that transition. Another element of transition that we undertook last year was to try and increase our in-house construction management services. That is still ongoing, I think is still a work in progress, and is something that I think with our emphasis on capital projects continuing in my entire tenure here is very important to our success. I think we've been successful in delivering capital projects, and we intend to continue to do so and to try to do so without having to outsource as much of some of those services as we have in the past. I also want to shout out to our Sanitary Sewer Maintenance Division. Pat Guasco is the supervisor of that group. We have excellent staff working with him. I think if you look at our sanitary sewer overflow reports and our statistics as well as the feedback that we get from the community, and I know the city manager gets some of this as well, despite a very heavy workload, especially with Pat because he's also acting as a regulator, we have an excellent sewer maintenance division. We also have a very good streets and facilities maintenance division, and Lorne Umbertus has done a good job of taking responsibility for managing those folks, prioritizing their work, and continuing to address issues, prioritize and triage issues and go from there. Our engineering staff, Andy Davidson, senior civil engineer, has been here a long time, very stable, very reliable, very diligent and detail-oriented engineer, which is a good compliment to me because I'm sometimes unstable. I'm certainly diligent, but a very good compliment. Bryant Ho is our assistant. He recently passed the professional engineering exam which I think is a compliment to him and his abilities because he's really in the deep end with the workload that we have and despite that he's still advancing his career and successfully passed that exam. Our administrative aide, for whatever peculiar reason, a Sausalito resident decided that she needed to go back to Texas. So, as was mentioned earlier, and reflecting on the demands of our office here in City Hall, our private development demands, our capital project demands, our regulatory requirements, our contractual requirements and things like that. We have requested that council upgrade that position so that we can hire a higher skill level and hopefully reduce some of our backlog in that department. Am I at 30 minutes yet? Just wanted to do a couple of things, restate our mission. I'm not going to read this, but this is something that's always been very important to me, you know, trying to be able to elucidate what our mission is, share that with you, with members of the community and the people who we work with so that we're kind of all on the same page with that. I'm not going to go through the whole list of priority projects and things like that because that's what got me in trouble last time but a couple of slides you know photographs just highlighting some of the kinds of things we do and one of the projects I do want to to mention specifically and Danny just talked about it a little bit the implementation of our new permit tracking software the the track it system has really been a multi-departmental effort and I want to give credit to Melanie Purcell and Heather Laporte, who really were the program managers for that implementation. It's still underway, and we've got staff and community development, both planning, building, and in public works contributing to it. We continue to have the support from finance, from administrative services, and from IT in helping make that happen. But just wanted to make sure they got some recognition for that as well. question. |
| 03:50:33.02 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:50:34.48 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Any questions of Jonathan? |
| 03:50:36.00 | Jill Hoffman | If you're concerned about your community image, I can propose we videotape your staff meetings. Thank you. Having been in those, I don't suggest it. Thank you. |
| 03:50:49.12 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 03:50:50.15 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So yeah, I just wanted to note, I know we've talked about this, but the SB 231 stormwater utility on the revenue. |
| 03:50:50.27 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:50:50.31 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 03:50:55.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:50:55.27 | Jonathon Goldman | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:50:55.98 | Unknown | to the next episode. |
| 03:50:56.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:50:59.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | proposal and you know it doesn't look like we've got it looks like a multi-year process to even get there but you know I am supportive of looking at that seriously. So I just wanted to mention that I don't know if you have anything else to say about it but or have talked to any of your colleagues and Marin about other jurisdictions. |
| 03:51:19.77 | Jonathon Goldman | other jurisdictions. I appreciate that. The short answer is that I don't, although again, the League of California Cities is following it very closely and I think advocating very strongly for it. We are in a good position in terms of timing to once again engage a consultant to look at both our sanitary sewer rates and these issues with respect to the possibility of a dedicated revenue stream for stormwater. And we have the funds appropriated or in the budget available to bring that consultant on. So you'll hear more from us about that in the future. But I absolutely agree with you. It's something we um and i may have told this story about high school across country um it's certainly something that we don't want to be at the front of the pack on necessarily but we don't want to be last either we want to make sure that we're uh that we're in the hunt and then to the extent that we can start generating any dedicated revenue stream or even restructure to prepare for that revenue stream i would strongly advocate for that |
| 03:52:30.58 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Great, and you mentioned sanitary, having the study look at our sanitary rates too, so maybe that should be on our revenue options if we think that study might... support some potential increases. |
| 03:52:46.10 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm happy to work with the finance director and city manager on that. In the short term, it, to my mind, isn't something we necessarily need to project a revenue increase on, but it's certainly something we should look at, and that's the purpose of the rate study. |
| 03:53:03.79 | Unknown | Thanks. Other questions of Jonathan? Right? |
| 03:53:09.84 | Ray Withey | Yeah, can I just clarify on that last point that, remember, the sewer, any sewer revenue is not coming through the general fund. Correct. So it wouldn't be revenue to the general fund. It would be revenue to the sewer fund, which is for the capital maintenance and capital expenditure, does cover a little bit of our expenses for the head count that we use for the sewer fund. But it's not a revenue source of the general fund. |
| 03:53:32.36 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah. |
| 03:53:36.62 | Ray Withey | Correct. |
| 03:53:36.96 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:53:37.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, yeah, still in revenue. Thank you. |
| 03:53:39.04 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. All right. Thank you. |
| 03:53:47.34 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you to the team. They scrambled on this and jumped in to help very nicely. Admin and finance, you know us, you see us frequently. We've done a lot of reorganization and managed to save quite a bit in reorganizing positions. We are seeing increased costs due to audit and other activities. The labor negotiations is actually a non-departmental, so I just wanted to clarify that. And there was an increase, a fairly significant increase in information technology. And, again, that is the upgrades and keeping all of our lovely technology running, because these all come with subscription services and other maintenance programs. Just wanted to highlight the economic development strategy within the general fund that is still on our plate and definitely a strong commitment THEIR CITY IS GOING TO BE looking at the storm water financing as you mentioned. looking at best practices, Just a note. We've had tremendous asset in our administrative analyst, Heather Laporte, and she's now transitioning from having helped implement track it, spearheading that to really helping in many of these areas in terms of updating policies, procedures, and really enhancing internal controls. So we are trying to develop a very strategic infrastructure for financial management that will support the long-term forecast and the long-term goals of the city. So questions for admin. Any questions of Melanie on that admin department. |
| 03:55:20.31 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:55:20.34 | Melanie Purcell | Okay. I get the record. So the revenue options are here, and we... Within all this are the numbers, and I will probably tweak them just a little bit. Obviously, I have a couple of corrections to make or modifications, and we will talk next week on the pension and turning. I do need a confirmation from the council as to time and that we are, in fact, meeting next week. |
| 03:55:46.04 | Adam Politzer | Mayor we had proposed 630 start time of 630. And going for 3 to 4 hours. |
| 03:55:54.92 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Is that going to be enough? |
| 03:55:58.88 | Melanie Purcell | SHOULD BE. I would definitely encourage you to call me, email me, text. Yeah, I want to encourage you. |
| 03:56:06.31 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, I want to encourage my fellow council members to send questions to you in advance of the meeting so that you can come to the meeting prepared. With everything you need. |
| 03:56:10.78 | Melanie Purcell | THE END OF THE END OF THE Thank you. |
| 03:56:13.46 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | WITH EVERYONE. |
| 03:56:13.73 | Melanie Purcell | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:56:13.92 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm sorry. |
| 03:56:13.93 | Melanie Purcell | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:56:13.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | COMMUNITY. |
| 03:56:14.27 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:56:14.29 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yes. |
| 03:56:17.33 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So just on a scheduling issue, I may, I have another hearing that day in the afternoon. So I will try, I will likely be here at 630, but it may be 7. |
| 03:56:31.35 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Well, then we should just schedule it at 7. So. Yeah, let's just schedule it at 7. The two finance committee members have been through all of this. It's the other council members who haven't. So I think that's the priority. And so let's schedule it for 7. |
| 03:56:48.59 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So is the focus of next week's meeting on the these pensions scenarios. |
| 03:56:53.29 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | It's on the pension, but also on working through the various elements of the budget presented tonight that the city staff and the Finance Committee are recommending we adopt. |
| 03:57:07.04 | Adam Politzer | And specifically the discussion items, the funded items that we're recommending, and we heard some comments on that, and the items that we're not recommending. And clear direction on what you want us to bring back on the 26th so that we can adopt the budget. |
| 03:57:26.23 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, so I just personally I have very few remaining questions. Jill has a lot, it sounds like. |
| 03:57:33.97 | Melanie Purcell | I'm not sure. Okay. So 7 o'clock next Tuesday evening? Yep. All right, we will be prepared. Thank you very much for your time tonight. Thank you. |
| 03:57:43.54 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:57:46.46 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:57:46.48 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Motherfucker. THE END OF THE END OF THE Is there any public comment on the budget? Okay, Keith, come on up. |
| 03:58:00.43 | Jill Hoffman | Did you fill out your card completely? |
| 03:58:02.46 | Keith | Yes, I did. Madam Mayor, fellow council members, I, or not fellow to me, but council members, I want to first go back to the survey. I think you should all be very happy about the public feeling about the city council and city management But unfortunately, I think our times have just changed and we are going to have to raise revenue And cut expenses. We can't get there. There's not enough place to raise revenue and You saw the citizens are going to need a lot of communication before that's going to happen. So one of the things I'd like to encourage you to think about is how to use Abbott and the other communication tools because I think you're going to be going to the public for increases in revenue that are not going to be particularly well accepted. And I would also tell you just on my talking with various voters, they don't realize that this financial crisis is here. And that is What major problem when you start asking for revenue? increases. The second thing... that didn't get discussed tonight but was added on at the end. was the Bartell report. And, There's a very scary part of that at the very beginning where he talks about the fact that the state will probably lower the THEIR FUNDS AND THEIR FUNDS which will change our unfunded liability from 20 something to maybe 38 million dollars. And none of the budgets you've seen tonight have used that number at all. And that, CHANGE. I would guess is fairly likely to come. Most companies that I follow and many of the unions have already switched to that number on their pension fund. So CalPERS is once again, I think, being very unrealistic. And one thing I think it was a little unfair |
| 04:00:20.53 | Unknown | And |
| 04:00:24.93 | Keith | in the audit report to refer to your unfunded liabilities in 2005 to today because Cowpers lost 5% of their revenue THE END OF THE END OF THE But, um... THEIR OWNERS. in 2008 and followed that up by losing 24% in 2009. So I think the city has done perhaps a lot better job than perhaps was represented by Bill earlier. Thank you. |
| 04:00:59.26 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. Question for staff, Melanie. |
| 04:01:07.04 | Jerry Taylor | With all these levels of discussions, I'm embarrassed to say anything about the middle, little $15,000, but please understand, it's also historical society, that's a big deal. Our operating budgets are around 50,000 a year. We spend about $20,000 on the salary for the staffing, of which this covers 15 of it. If you didn't put in this 15, we'd just have to close the ice house and have it open for special events. Most of the people that come in are asking for restaurants, stores. When I drop in, and I try to drop in about every week or so and see a different... and docent down there. very few people, much to my dismay, actually go in and enjoy what I consider to be a great little museum. Many, many more people are in there for to find out where to go and get recommendations from us. Where do you get the bus to Muir Woods? Well, it's right next door. But we are a very legitimate use of the TOT money. We used to get TOT money. Perhaps in the future we can maneuver back into something like that, because that seems to be an area of great growth. And I'd love to be able to figure out how to spend more money, of the Historical Society's money, on our residents and on education and working with the school kids and less money supporting businesses unless the businesses are supporting us but believe me I'm very very grateful for what you do with that project with the ice house but also we have this wonderful space upstairs we don't have to pay rent down at Marin ship We live because you guys are supporting us. Let me know what we can do to do a better job of that. Thank you very much for your time and for your service. Staff also, all my friends. Thank you. |
| 04:02:55.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thanks Jerry. Okay Melanie. Keith just said that many firms are relying on an assumption that the unfunded liability is going to increase from $28 million to $38 million. So at your report next week, I'd like to know what statistics you're relying on and why you're not relying on that projection, if indeed you're not. |
| 04:03:28.55 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And just following up on Jerry's comment, that $15,000 is now in the budget after the finance committee. Is that correct? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Yeah, we put it. |
| 04:03:35.35 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yes ma'am. |
| 04:03:36.89 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:03:36.94 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:03:36.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:03:36.99 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. Yep, I'm just confirming, Jenny. No, I'm looking to him to make sure he, I'm saying to him, we put it back in. You do know we put it back in. |
| 04:03:42.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:03:42.03 | Unknown | to him we put it back in you do know we put it back in |
| 04:03:46.37 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. Okay. |
| 04:03:46.56 | Unknown | OKAY. Thank you. . I'm sorry. |
| 04:03:47.48 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. It's a good thing. Okay. |
| 04:03:54.55 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, seeing no other public comment, I'm going to close public comment on this item. Is there anything else anyone else wants to say on this item tonight? |
| 04:04:07.77 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | All right, seeing none, we're going to move on to our public hearings. |
| 04:04:12.68 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Actually, there is something I would like. If we are going to have a hearing, since we are going to have a hearing next week, I do think it would be helpful if staff could have some preliminary conversation and see if we can get folks who would be interested in commenting on the business registration fee and the TOT. I mean, it just makes me very nervous to go out and put something. I'm very supportive of those ideas in concept and would like to see them advanced. But I also think that if we're going to be irrevocably committed to something on the November ballot, then I'd like to have affected community consulted at least at a high level and the opportunity for them to come next week or on the next week to comment. We'll be sure to invite them. That's possible. |
| 04:05:03.00 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | That's possible. Thank you. |
| 04:05:04.35 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:05:04.38 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. Okay, item 6A on our agenda is review and approve response to grand jury report, sexual assault in Marin, evidence collection, processing, and backlog. And the chief... |
| 04:05:24.40 | John Rohrabacher | Good evening Mayor and Vice Mayor, Council Members. John Robacher, Chief of Police. My case, sorry, go on. |
| 04:05:53.67 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | We don't need a. |
| 04:06:00.32 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I don't think we did, but it's right there, yeah. |
| 04:06:04.09 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So, Go ahead. I mean, I would just say for myself, I've reviewed the chief's staff report and the slideshow pretty thoroughly. |
| 04:06:11.92 | John Rohrabacher | support. |
| 04:06:17.33 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you know, I don't know how |
| 04:06:18.83 | John Rohrabacher | Yeah, my actual presentation is very brief because this was actually a... very, pardon me, very comprehensive report by the Marin County Grand Jury. Their findings and recommendations really are not in dispute. And just, Thanks. They did a lot of work. They asked a lot of questions. Great questions and great sources of information for those questions listed right there. I'm And of course the California Penal Code requires that we have this public hearing to create a reply or response to the grand jury and the presiding judge. And so there was four recommendations actually I'm recommending that the city agree to the four of them. I myself as the chief of police, separately agreeing to the four of them. We already have comprehensive policies that cover evidence collection and and what to do with sexual assault investigations. They're very thorough. You probably saw it's a very actually pretty thick package in your overall agenda package for tonight. That's really it. So if you approve that. But I want to point out one thing too. We were good on this in 2011 when the district attorney spearheaded such a review back then. We were doing a... review of our property evidence room when I change the command between the two lieutenants. The change of command over the property evidence room in my mind requires an audit of the property evidence room so that the handoff is clean. It turns out this comes on the heels of that. We have no untested kits then or a couple of months later after so we're still clean on that. And so we're in great shape. This is one of the easiest Grand Jury response I've ever had to work on. |
| 04:08:20.84 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:08:22.06 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. Any questions? |
| 04:08:23.41 | Jill Hoffman | I just had a quick question. Sure. We had four in the 2011 to 17, we had four. rapes? Yes. And eight SARTs. Why did our SARTs |
| 04:08:35.62 | John Rohrabacher | Because not all investigations that go to SART are rape cases. They could be a different type of sexual assault. |
| 04:08:46.61 | Jill Hoffman | I know it's just a grand total of the crime, |
| 04:08:47.89 | John Rohrabacher | It's just a penal classification of the crime, but not all sexual assaults are rape cases. |
| 04:08:54.81 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Other questions of the chief? Any public comment? Bring it back up here. Does anyone want to move to approve the staff recommended responses to the grand jury? |
| 04:09:05.83 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'd move to approve, and I just think it's great that the grand jury was looking at this and that Sausalito has got such good policies already in place and that we don't need to make changes. But this is a really serious issue, and I'm glad that we're responding. So I move approval. |
| 04:09:21.31 | Unknown | Second. |
| 04:09:22.62 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:09:22.76 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | All in favor? Aye. That motion carries 5-0. |
| 04:09:23.57 | Unknown | Aye. THE FAMILY. |
| 04:09:27.14 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you, Chief. |
| 04:09:27.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:09:29.22 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | We'll move on to item 6B, consideration of amendment of an ordinance amending chapter 6.04 of the Sausalito Municipal Code relating to animal control. |
| 04:09:42.04 | Unknown | Thank you, Madam Mayor. And I have prepared a PowerPoint for each of my ordinance amendments this evening. I'm happy to give just a brief summary if you prefer. So the animal ordinance change that Marin County is responsible for administering animal control services within for all jurisdictions in Marin County. City of Sausalito is under a joint powers agreement to adopt animal control ordinance that mirrors the Marin County ordinance. Marin County has recently made some |
| 04:09:50.11 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:09:50.13 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:09:50.26 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:10:15.32 | Unknown | small changes to the animal control ordinance and is asking all jurisdictions to make those same changes and details are in your staff report. I also prepared a red line of the ordinance. Any questions of staff? |
| 04:10:30.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. Any public comment? I'll close public comment, bring it up here for discussion or a motion. |
| 04:10:39.08 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I make a motion to approve the ordinance related to the animal. care and control. |
| 04:10:44.62 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I actually think I'm going to go ahead and if I may. I move we waive first reading, read by title only, and introduce an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito amending Chapter 6.04 of the Sausalito Municipal Code relating to animal control. |
| 04:10:59.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:11:01.71 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | All in favor? Aye. Aye. That motion carries 5-0. |
| 04:11:02.67 | Unknown | All right? |
| 04:11:07.31 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. Sorry. Okay, item 6C, consideration of an ordinance allowing use of online or electronic filing of campaign statements. |
| 04:11:19.70 | Unknown | So again, very briefly, I won't pull up the PowerPoint, but the Political Reform Act and our municipal code contains certain requirements that elected officials and those running for office file campaign disclosure forms with the city. Thank you. In 2014, Saucyut began using an electronic filing system, and we use that for our Form 700 right now. We have the option in our contract with Netfile, who's our provider, to also file those campaign statements electronically, in order to do that the council must adopt this ordinance to allow filers to file those campaign statements other cities have issued this as a mandate going forward for campaigns to file electronically i proposed kind of a more moderate approach that includes an opt-in system so campaigns can choose to get trained on the system and then once they have a successful filing, then they would be required to file electronically from that point forward. But they could also choose to continue to file on paper. And so the request is to adopt, to waive first reading and I don't know. and continue the hearing for a second read at your next council meeting. |
| 04:12:39.45 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Any questions of staff? Any public comment? |
| 04:12:43.30 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, go ahead. I actually do have a question. |
| 04:12:43.42 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:12:43.70 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Absolutely. |
| 04:12:43.96 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:12:47.42 | Jill Hoffman | So I like the opt-in, the number two, because it has a little bit of a transition period, especially for people that aren't particularly proficient. I think and I like the fact that that you know and call out in there that you the staff would assist them anybody that has an issue with that or that and also help them file in the library. under computers if someone doesn't particularly have a computer. The other thing is I just wanted to be sure that even if we start filing online, we'll still continue to maintain a hard copy file. I think we have a hard copy file now at the desk or some place in the office here where people can go in and look at the binder almost immediately, right? |
| 04:13:30.99 | Unknown | We do have a file right now because we only take paper and then we upload that paper to the online system. So the beauty of the online system is anyone can go immediately once someone has filed and look online at those statements. So they don't even need to come into the office. |
| 04:13:45.06 | Jill Hoffman | They don't. There are some people that are in that habit and they may not be proficient on the computer and they still, part of our population. So I was just going to suggest that we continue to keep the hard file for a certain number of years. I don't know what that would be, but like in this transition period. Does anybody have a thought on that? you |
| 04:14:10.66 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I think it's a bigger administrative burden. I think if someone wants the file, they can come in to ask assistance for accessing it or printing it out, or they could submit a Public Records Act request, I suppose. But I don't think there's a need for us to continue to shoulder that burden. |
| 04:14:30.22 | Adam Politzer | I think if I can just interject, I think what Councilmember Hoffman is saying is what we would, was what the mayor is suggesting. If someone came to the counter and asked to see what exists today, the binder, we would just pull that up online and print it for them. We don't need to create a separate. |
| 04:14:47.90 | Jill Hoffman | So then you would provide that. Okay, I got it. So then you would provide a hard copy to them anyway. Yeah, I think that's fine. I think that's fine. |
| 04:14:49.27 | Adam Politzer | Perfect. |
| 04:14:54.30 | Jill Hoffman | people that aren't computer proficient have the ability to |
| 04:14:58.79 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So, Lily, your staff recommendation is to waive first reading, but it's not clear to me from reviewing the draft ordinance which option you've embodied in the draft ordinance. |
| 04:15:09.03 | Unknown | It's the opt-in approach without the sunset. So there's an option in your staff report that you could have a hard stop date. And from that point forward, all filers would be required to file electronically. That's not the option that's in the ordinance as proposed. |
| 04:15:14.11 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THEIR SIDE. |
| 04:15:28.20 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Any other questions of staff? Any public comment on this? A CLOSED PUBLIC COMMENT. BRING IT BACK UP HERE. IS EVERYONE OKAY WITH THE OPT-IN OPTION WITH NO SUNSET? Mm-hmm. Yes? Okay. Then I will move. We waive first reading, read by title only, and introduce an ordinance allowing use of online or electronic filing of campaign statements. Second. All in favor? Aye. That motion carries 5-0. |
| 04:15:52.64 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 04:15:52.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | . |
| 04:15:53.12 | Mary Wagner | . |
| 04:15:56.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Item 6D, consideration of ordinance amending section 4.04.040 of the Saucedo Municipal Code to increase the limitations on campaign contributions. |
| 04:16:08.84 | Unknown | So also in a similar chapter in the municipal code, It contains campaign contribution limits relating to municipal elections in the city. And currently it limits the total amount of monetary contributions made by a person to $250 and by a political committee to $500. That ordinance was adopted in 1999 and hasn't been amended since. The mayor and the vice mayor recently reviewed Bay Area cities' campaign contribution limits, and it revealed that other cities in the Bay Area have higher and in some cases much higher contribution limits and therefore the mayor the vice mayor recommended that we draft this ordinance to increase the campaign contribution limits from $250 to $500 so increase double it essentially. And so that's what the proposed ordinance amendment does. Any questions? |
| 04:17:07.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | have. Any public comment? Close public comment. Bring it up here for discussion. |
| 04:17:16.34 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So I'm actually not really in favor of this. I don't. I feel like we're a very small town that we should keep our... that we're going to have a I don't really see a need to increase it. I think there are some other cities. I think even Berkeley has $250 limit and San Francisco isn't much higher. It's either 250 or five. So anyway, I just didn't see the need for this. Was there some... trying public need for more yard signs or |
| 04:17:52.26 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:17:52.28 | Bill Monnet | you |
| 04:17:52.57 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:17:53.19 | Bill Monnet | Nope. |
| 04:17:53.76 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I mean, |
| 04:17:55.28 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Nope, it was just something No, there was not a burning need. This was something that came up. It hasn't been amended in 20 years. um, and obviously expenses have increased significantly in 20 years. So it was something we wanted to bring to the Council for consideration. |
| 04:18:14.45 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, Ann, yeah, I think we should increase it. Because, I mean, when the, you know, The ordinance is so old, and when you're talking about fundraising for a campaign, the amount of people that you have to touch increases dramatically with the fairly low limit, which I think... you know, it's really low. And so, you know, people don't have to donate $500. They can donate whatever they want to. But it gives them the option for the higher amount. And I think $500 is still pretty low compared to other campaign limits. You know, there are inequities when you're talking about people of different income levels running because people can finance their own campaigns. And so when you cap it at a lower level, that decreases the ability of someone from a lower income level to be as effective as someone from a higher income level or net worth level, I guess you could say, during a campaign. So, you know, I thought it was reasonable I mean you're going from 250 to 500 that doesn't seem to me to be a big change so. I'm in favor of it. |
| 04:19:27.27 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Do we have the legal ability to limit the amount that someone can contribute to their own campaign? |
| 04:19:35.15 | Mary Wagner | I'd have to look into that for you further. |
| 04:19:37.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:19:37.04 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | We did, in looking at the survey, we did see some municipalities that do limit the amount that someone can contribute to their own campaign. I don't know whether that's legal or not, but we did see some of those limitations. Thank you. |
| 04:19:50.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I think, you know, I think Councilmember Huffman makes a good point. |
| 04:19:50.07 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Exactly. |
| 04:19:53.66 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I still just don't really feel like you need a lot of money to run a good campaign at all. But I do agree with the inequity issue and if it was possible to limit the personal contribution, then that would be compelling. Thank you. Bye. I don't know if I'm not sure anyone else is interested in that approach. |
| 04:20:20.00 | Jill Hoffman | We could also consider a different number, 500, 400. We kind of had a placeholder there of 500, but if we want to go four or... |
| 04:20:29.44 | Jill Hoffman | Was there a reason you went with 500? |
| 04:20:31.31 | Jill Hoffman | Which of the others were doing? |
| 04:20:31.58 | Jill Hoffman | What's the way the others were doing? If you look at the survey, |
| 04:20:33.15 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. That's the most frequent. |
| 04:20:34.97 | Jill Hoffman | I'll just make a motion. You want me to just make a motion? |
| 04:20:35.06 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. |
| 04:20:35.53 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:20:35.55 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Amen. |
| 04:20:35.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:20:35.78 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm sorry. |
| 04:20:35.83 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 04:20:35.88 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. |
| 04:20:35.90 | Jill Hoffman | . |
| 04:20:35.93 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Bye. |
| 04:20:35.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:20:35.98 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THE CITY IS A Thank you. |
| 04:20:38.63 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:20:38.68 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. |
| 04:20:38.78 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:20:40.20 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:20:40.22 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:20:40.32 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:20:40.35 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:20:40.37 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. |
| 04:20:40.56 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:20:40.57 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you |
| 04:20:40.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, I'm not going to say it right. Is it written down somewhere? It's on the first line of your staff report. recommended motion right at the top from the staff. |
| 04:20:47.36 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THEIR OWNERS. Hold on. |
| 04:20:50.97 | Jill Hoffman | There we go. I make motion that we wave you the first reading and read by title only and introduce an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito, amending section 4.04.04, the Sausalito Municipal Code, to increase the limitations on county I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M contributions. |
| 04:21:10.16 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Do I need to say the amount? It's already written at $500, with no change to the amount, the $500 limitation on in-kind contributions by political committees. Okay. |
| 04:21:13.08 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 04:21:21.24 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | in kind and by political committees. |
| 04:21:27.33 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I second. Lily, will you call the roll? |
| 04:21:33.43 | Unknown | Councilmember Withey. |
| 04:21:34.54 | Ray Withey | Yes. |
| 04:21:35.15 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:21:35.69 | Unknown | Council member Hoffman? Yes. Council member Cleveland Knowles? Yes. Vice Mayor Burns? |
| 04:21:41.05 | Jill Hoffman | No. |
| 04:21:41.93 | Unknown | Mayor Cox. |
| 04:21:42.59 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yes. |
| 04:21:42.76 | Unknown | Thanks. That carries 4-1. Thank you. |
| 04:21:46.34 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, item 6E, consideration of an ordinance amendment to Saucydean Municipal Code Chapter... What? |
| 04:21:52.99 | Ray Withey | Thank you. Sorry. Sorry, I was trying to figure out exactly. |
| 04:21:59.43 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Exactly. I'm going to do the same thing. It's too late for me to try to figure it out. |
| 04:22:00.29 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 04:22:05.18 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | consideration of an ordinance. |
| 04:22:07.65 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:22:07.77 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Amendment to Saucydeo Municipal Code Chapter 15.13, entitled Bicycle Parking, to include powered scooters. |
| 04:22:16.76 | Mary Wagner | Thank you, Madam Mayor, members of the City Council, follow the lead of your assistant city manager, city clerk. And I'll give you a brief presentation. We do have slides available if we need to refer to them. in accordance with this ordinance. I will note that I think this is the record number of ordinances I've seen the council consider and take action on in my tenure as city attorney. As you are all aware, we have regulations that govern the parking of bicycles in the downtown area. That's a defined area, literally, in the downtown of Sausalito. We've recently noticed scooters, powered scooters, coming across and being on our sidewalks in Sausalito. And the proposed ordinance would amend our existing regulations to add a definition of powered scooters to our definition of bicycles. So all the same regulations that currently apply to parking bicycles in the downtown area would apply to powered scooters. We utilize the definition from the vehicle code to add to your ordinance, and we can pull that up if you'd like to look at it. I would note it's also the definition that the city and county of San Francisco recently utilized in connection with their regulation of powered scooters, and particularly when we have an expert here who can provide more information if we need it. But their issue was a little different in that they had a proliferation of the actual locations where you could acquire the powered scooters and ride them around town. We just seem to have scooters appearing even though it's illegal for them to cross the bridge. So again, the proposed ordinance adds a definition of powered scooters to the definition of bicycles. And that's the definition from the vehicle code. It's interesting to note that the vehicle code does have a number of regulations regarding motorized scooters, including that you have to wear a helmet, you have to have a driver's license or a permit, valid permit, and you're currently already not allowed to ride a motorized scooter on sidewalks. We did meet with the legislative committee, along with the police police chief to discuss the proposed regulations. And one of the questions to the chief was, do you feel that those existing regulations in the vehicle code are adequate or do they need to be enhanced? And I believe it was his opinion at the time that those existing regulations in the vehicle code are adequate and provide them with the enforcement tools they need for those types of things, like riding on a sidewalk, but that it would be useful to add powered scooters to our regulations of parking in the downtown area to avoid cluttering our sidewalks. We did reach out to the Sausalito Bike Return Program. It's your current vendor operating bicycle parking in the downtown area. They indicated they do have capacity to include powered scooters and would be happy to add them to their program. We would just follow up with a brief letter agreement, memorializing that understanding in the event that these regulations are approved by the council. That concludes my report, unless you have any questions, with one minor addition that all the penalty provisions, including impoundment and impoundment in place, and the fees that are attached to that would also apply to this program. So with that, we are recommending that you introduce and read by title only the proposed ordinance. We'll put that up there on the screen for you. With one additional correction, there's a typo in Section 15.13.060, which pre-existed. I don't think we added it when we put this in front of you. But in the second line of that section, the word pairing, P-A-R-I-N-G, should be parking. I think it's just a typo, but we wanted to bring it to your attention while we had this ordinance in front of you. |
| 04:25:55.44 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And then Mary, in our staff report, it says the recommended motion is introduce, give first reading. We usually say introduce, waive first reading and read by title only. I like that second better. Okay, yes. Okay, any questions of staff? Any public comment? |
| 04:26:20.64 | David Sudo | So I don't disagree with the intent of this thing, but I'm a little bit confused because I pulled up our current code and it already mentions motorized scooters. And also, I pulled up the text for the California vehicle code and it doesn't say powered scooters, it says motorized scooters. So I'm a little confused about what we're actually doing here and whether we're doing the right thing and whether we're already covered under our current rules. |
| 04:26:51.71 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I can answer half of that question, but I don't know if we already include motorized. Have you seen the staff report, David? |
| 04:26:54.93 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Have you seen the staff report, David? That shows what the revision to the ordinance is? |
| 04:26:56.97 | David Sudo | I don't know. |
| 04:26:57.29 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:26:57.34 | David Sudo | to the next one. Yes. Yeah, but I pulled up our current, Thank you. code and it says, unless someone inadvertently already edited it and it says motorized scooters. We're changing. |
| 04:27:09.90 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | We're changing. We're changing any motorized elect, we're changing the title to include |
| 04:27:15.80 | David Sudo | Right. |
| 04:27:18.71 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | a motorized electrical bicycle, or a powered scooter. |
| 04:27:24.24 | David Sudo | Well, maybe there's an error, but the published code already includes those provisions. |
| 04:27:29.89 | Mary Wagner | And if I may, Madam Mayor, and I appreciate the eye to detail in the question, because I think you're correct that the definition of bicycle in a previous code section does include this. This is meant to provide even more clarity and to ensure that this new type of, you know, motorized device that's showing up in Sausalito was covered very specifically. So while I concur with you that it's listed there, I think it was important to provide more clarity on what exactly it is that we were governing. |
| 04:28:03.98 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So I can just maybe add some context. So San Francisco changed from motorized to powered because there's a state law pending that takes away electric stand-up scooters from the definition of motorized scooter. So that is being... proposed by the current scooter companies as a method of creating a new category of stand-up electric scooter that would be exempt from the current rules around motorized scooter so the idea of creating A new definition that is actually mirrors the language of the current vehicle code is to keep stand-up electric scooters regulated in the same manner. |
| 04:28:50.98 | David Sudo | Are we including the old motorized term also as well as the powered? |
| 04:28:55.26 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | We did in San Francisco. |
| 04:28:59.01 | David Sudo | Yeah. |
| 04:29:00.80 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And then I would just add for Staff, I do think if we haven't put the helmet not riding on the sidewalk... and driver's license requirements in our local ordinance, then we do need to monitor the state law because those requirements would be taken away from a motorized, a stand-up electric scooter if the law that's in place now passes. So. Thank you. um i mean i think that's something that could be monitored but that was the reason that the definition changed and i think it's just more protective |
| 04:29:41.69 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, seeing no further public comment, I'm gonna close it and bring it up here for discussion. Is there any discussion? |
| 04:29:50.18 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | No, I've seen a bunch of scooters parked downtown in a way that I feel impedes pedestrian access, accessibility. You know, I just think they shouldn't be parked on the sidewalk. I think they can be a great form of transportation, but we shouldn't have them cluttering up our already very narrow sidewalks. So I'm in favor. Thank you. |
| 04:30:11.37 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, I move we introduce wave first reading and read by title only and ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito amending Title 15, Chapter 15.13 of the Sausalito Municipal Code to regulate the parking of powered scooters. |
| 04:30:27.25 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Second. |
| 04:30:27.99 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | All in favor? Aye. Aye. That motion carries 5-0. And Mary, may we please include direction to staff to monitor the state regulations and to bring back to us further amendments to our ordinance if rendered necessary by modifications to the state ordinance. Absolutely. |
| 04:30:29.24 | Lucia Del Pupo | I'm going to go. |
| 04:30:29.26 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I, |
| 04:30:29.53 | Lucia Del Pupo | I know. |
| 04:30:48.12 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, I'm going to move on to item 7, City Manager reports, Council Member reports, City Council appointments, other Council business. |
| 04:30:58.64 | Adam Politzer | Madam Mayor, I'll just make one announcement. I attended the |
| 04:31:07.48 | Adam Politzer | Thank you the port authority commission meeting in the city this afternoon. And they heard an item. Related to the. ferry service for alcatraz related to fort baker ferry service the item had lots of public comment and ended with the four commissioners on a 4-0 vote. Um, Voting that this item needed to be continued to know earlier than the first meeting in July. but potentially more time was needed for additional information and discussion between the various stakeholders and parties. So I'm happy to report that our continued dialogue with the National Park Service and with the Port Authority will continue. That ends my report. Happy to answer. Any questions from the council on other related items? |
| 04:32:11.52 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. Any questions of the city manager? I realize I skipped 7A, which is public comment on items 7B to 7F. Is there any public comment on items 7B to 7F? Seeing none, I'll move on to 7C. Council member committee reports. |
| 04:32:31.00 | Jill Hoffman | I'll report from the school district liaison, though this isn't related to the school directly, but a few citizens have filed a civil suit against the district asking for judicial clarity as far as the recusal of two of our residents who were voted in and haven't voted by the public to sit on the school board but haven't got to vote on many of the budgetary items. So that's progressing in a fashion that I think we've kind of supported for a while. |
| 04:33:04.44 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Any other council member reports? |
| 04:33:08.15 | Ray Withey | Yeah, the only thing I have to report is I attended the TAM Innovation Workshop last week. I was, uh... Uh... David Sudo was also there, so we listened to the same thing. Basically, the take home message was the whole of- |
| 04:33:33.15 | Unknown | No, you don't. |
| 04:33:34.21 | Ray Withey | the transportation infrastructure and structure is changing, and that I think it would be very important for our general plan advisory committee to start really hearing some of this stuff. It appears that planners, transportation authorities, et cetera, are taking far more seriously of autonomous vehicles than I think most cities are doing. And most cities are going to find themselves shocked as to how this technology is moving and is going to penetrate their cities. So I think it's something. Actually, if you don't, David was there. Can I ask David to make a comment? I know we've... he understands this stuff pretty well, and he listened, as I did, to these experts, and I don't know So... |
| 04:34:33.61 | David Sudo | Yeah, I thought some of the initial speakers gave a really good talk. I think they're going to be at some time on Marin TV available, and I would recommend that anybody who's interested in transportation listen to them. I think the most shocking statistic that I heard is that they believe 70% to 90% of parking may evaporate in the next 25 years or so just because that they're looking at the economics and private vehicles once to go to autonomous vehicles it don't make any sense at all from a from you know economic model sense so there'll be a rapid adoption of kind of non-private autonomous vehicles. Thank you. I think that's about, yeah. |
| 04:35:30.16 | Ray Withey | Yeah, thanks, David. That was my take home as well. And, you know, I think it's important. People need to start paying attention. |
| 04:35:40.13 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Any other council member reports? THE END OF Okay, next is appointments to boards and commissions. I'm going to take this opportunity to appoint Vice Mayor Joe Burns to the Hospitality slash Business Development Commission. committee and also effective July 1. I am removing Council Member Withey from the Finance Committee, and I'm adding Vice Mayor Joe Burns to the Finance Committee. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:36:14.84 | Unknown | I don't know if I want it. |
| 04:36:16.85 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THE END OF THE END OF THE I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO Thank you. |
| 04:36:20.29 | Unknown | Bye. Thank you. I'd be broken. Yeah, come on, try a little harder than I know. |
| 04:36:26.64 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Wait till we go through the next two meetings, Ray. Okay, item 17, future agenda items. Any comments on our matrix? Okay, item 7F, other reports of significance. Any other reports of significance? The League of... We actually are setting a record this year. Every council member is interested in attending the League of... California City's annual conference, which is amazing. So congratulations to everybody for your commitment to our town. Okay, if there's no further business, I'm going to adjourn at 11.55 p.m. |