| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:01:09.00 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | It's so good to see you. I know. I'm not sure. We're never going in there. |
| 00:01:14.97 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 00:01:15.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm sorry. |
| 00:01:15.44 | Debbie | Yeah. |
| 00:01:15.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:01:16.96 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 00:01:17.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | . |
| 00:01:17.54 | Debbie | I'm sorry. |
| 00:01:22.18 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Bye. |
| 00:01:31.90 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'm sorry, you just said I should have done something. The mic should have done this. Oh, that's better. Do I have allegiance? You got a good song. |
| 00:01:36.49 | Ray Withey | Oh, definitely. |
| 00:01:42.07 | Mary Wagner | Oh my gosh, you guys. |
| 00:01:56.38 | Jonathon Goldman | I'm really cold. |
| 00:03:05.96 | Joan Cox | Good evening everybody and welcome to the regular City Council meeting for Tuesday, July 17, 2018. Charlotte Mestrangelo, will you lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance? |
| 00:03:25.53 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic |
| 00:03:26.60 | Unknown | Thank you. to the flag. |
| 00:03:32.03 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:03:32.12 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:03:32.28 | Joan Cox | for which it stands. nation. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. liberty and justice for all. |
| 00:03:51.56 | Joan Cox | All right, we had no closed session this evening, so there are no closed session announcements. May I have a motion approving our agenda? |
| 00:04:06.15 | Joan Cox | So moved. |
| 00:04:06.86 | Vice Mayor Burns | Second. |
| 00:04:07.82 | Joan Cox | All in favor? Aye. Aye. That motion carries. |
| 00:04:08.95 | Vice Mayor Burns | Hi. |
| 00:04:11.62 | Joan Cox | Oh. |
| 00:04:12.14 | Vice Mayor Burns | and |
| 00:04:12.75 | Diane Steinhauser | Thank you. |
| 00:04:13.85 | Joan Cox | Yeah, actually we have one of our members participating via telephone conference this evening, so we will take a roll call vote for each of our votes this evening. So Debbie. Welcome back and will you please call the roll for our motion to approve the agenda. |
| 00:04:33.81 | Debbie | Councilmember Cleveland Knowles. Yeah. Councilmember Withey. Thank you. |
| 00:04:39.35 | Ray Withey | Yes. |
| 00:04:39.99 | Debbie | Councilmember Hoffman? Yes. Vice Mayor Burns? Yes. Mayor Cox? Yes. |
| 00:04:42.99 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:04:43.01 | Ray Withey | Yes. |
| 00:04:43.46 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:04:45.03 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:04:49.08 | Joan Cox | That motion carries 5-0. All right, next on our agenda is one of my favorite things to do, which is the presentation of a proclamation. And so with that, we'll move forward. This is a proclamation of the mayor of the city of Sausalito, honoring Weira Musaus and Charlotte Mastrangelo. Whereas, a rose is a rose is a rose. And, whereas, the Blanche Dunphy Rose Garden began to appear at the entrance to Gabrielson Park in 2006 with the help of two especially dedicated residents and our own Public Works Maintenance Division Manager. And, whereas, the Rose Garden continues to prosper because of these two exceptional residents with green thumbs, providing a bright spot in our community with the addition of unusually beautiful blooms and intoxicating fragrances for our visitors and residents to enjoy. And whereas these two residents have remained hidden within the toils of this garden, however, now is the time to peel back their petals of love and expose Weira Musaus and Charlotte Mestrangelo to those who ogle and awe at their incredible work. Whereas Weir and Charlotte may try to remain hidden should you find them in the garden, stop by and chat. They enjoy sharing stories and a little history about Sausalito, and most especially, what makes Sausalito such a special place. Whereas, it is not only the Rose Garden that Weira and Charlotte are so proud of, they are also responsible for the placement of the wreaths during the holiday season on the Viña del Mar elephant statues, along with the lights and trim on the fountain, as well as ensuring a wreath is placed at the War Memorial next to Viña del Mar Park every Memorial Day. And, Whereas, it is residents like these two incredible ladies that help to make our community proud and strong, and I commend them for their dedication. Now, therefore, and in witness thereof, I, Joan Cox, mayor of the city of Sausalito, of Huron, to set my hand upon this proclamation, thanking and recognizing Weira and Charlotte for their many, many hours of community service, and ask that the citizens of Sausalito also stop by the garden to offer their gratitude and thanks. |
| 00:07:42.22 | Unknown | I'd like to also thank the city people that help us so much. We have Mike and we have Oh. Jace, no, the Lauren. Lauren. Lauren. Lauren. I forget his name occasionally. Well, that's it. He's right there. And he sends some of their crew to help us. And we have Jason that's been with us for quite a while, and we have Martin. And we couldn't do it without all that extra help we have. So I hope you will recognize them, too, and thank them for all their support. |
| 00:07:57.22 | Calvin Chan | . I'm not sure. . |
| 00:07:59.96 | Joan Cox | Well, that's right there. |
| 00:08:03.74 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:08:22.54 | Unknown | help with us. |
| 00:08:23.48 | Debbie | And I agree with that. |
| 00:08:26.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:26.70 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 00:08:26.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:26.96 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 00:08:26.97 | Unknown | WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO BE ABLE TO |
| 00:08:27.04 | Joan Cox | WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO BE ABLE TO You guys come up so we can shake your hand. |
| 00:08:28.83 | Unknown | Yes, thank you. |
| 00:08:37.55 | Unknown | Thank you so much. Thank you. |
| 00:08:40.27 | Unknown | Thank you. We had to go ahead. . |
| 00:08:42.45 | Unknown | Please say about three, four days to be. |
| 00:08:42.62 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:46.51 | Unknown | you |
| 00:08:46.57 | Unknown | Ms. I'm very excited. |
| 00:08:47.14 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:08:50.31 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you very much. |
| 00:08:52.17 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Hi, sorry I can't shake your hand. |
| 00:08:56.37 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:08:59.81 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Hi. |
| 00:09:18.00 | Joan Cox | All right, that was the fun part. Next on our agenda is 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 like to comment on an item not on our agenda this evening? Seeing none. |
| 00:09:40.29 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 00:09:41.80 | Joan Cox | Okay, please step up. |
| 00:09:50.12 | Jeffrey Chase | Thank you, Madam Mayor and City Council. |
| 00:09:55.89 | Jeffrey Chase | I'd like to begin |
| 00:10:00.76 | Jeffrey Chase | when I come up here with, a little bit of Torah, and it's not because I think that the Jews are better than the Christians or the Muslims or vice versa. It's because it is a way to verify MY FEELINGS WITH some holy scripture. The story at this point is the beginning of Deuteronomy, where Moses is in the desert talking to his people directly, not repeating what God said. but repeating the story. of what they've gone through. In this story, the way it begins, is that Moses is complaining because everybody brings all of their problems, all of their quarrels to him. He's got an understanding father-in-law named Jethro. Beverly Hillbillies kind of guy. When he was living with the sheep. and his wife there in Midian. He was brought into this family. And Moses returns the favor. Jethro is brought into Moses's family. And he says, I have got the solution for you. This will wear you down if everybody comes and puts all the burden on your shoulders. You will have leaders of the tribe, of the thousands, of the 500s, of the hundreds, of the 50s. And of the tens. These aren't just from the tribe of Levi. They're not the priests. These are from all of the 12 tribes. They're people who are respected. People of substance, it says, so they're not so destitute. that they would want to take a bribe And it even says in this In this translation, it says they must hate money. And maybe that's the idea they hate unearned gain. THE FEDERAL is people working for their friends, and their closest family. because they're one of them. They're not sitting in a judgment seat judging another nation. They're judging their own brothers and sisters. And that way... The leader. isn't so burdened, he's able to share. the system does end up breaking down. |
| 00:12:51.27 | Joan Cox | Thank you Jeff. |
| 00:12:52.10 | Jeffrey Chase | We're here to build it back up. |
| 00:12:53.41 | Joan Cox | Would anyone else like to make public comment? |
| 00:12:59.39 | Sunny Yao | Hello, for the record, my name is Sunny Yao. I'm pleased to be a resident of California and of the United States of America. And I'm, for the most part, very happy with many of the progresses that humanity has made. THE FAMILY. There's some things that I think that could be addressed, and I think it's been a problem that's been weighing on many people's minds for a long time. And I would just like to state for the record that I have practical knowledge through experience and also kind of a divine intuitive gift that I have with dealing with some of these problems that I believe I could bring positive and inexpensive solutions. So if anybody would like to talk to me after the meeting, that would be my most important goal and I want to say. Thank you. |
| 00:13:49.54 | Unknown | My first experience coming into a community that commends some beautiful members with the hard work and sacrifices of their love of their life. That you tried to help me to remember what humanity is. Because I have been on the farthest reaches of this world, where there's no other people besides me. And... I'd like to say that. When it's one for the team, we can put down the book and think with our hearts. In our minds, we know what's right. And we all want to see a very beautiful sunny Sausalito. |
| 00:14:32.20 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comment on items not on our agenda this evening? |
| 00:14:41.70 | Joan Cox | If it's not on our agenda, please step up now. Oh, you have to step up to the microphone. |
| 00:14:48.58 | Mehdi Dallavarin | So there's some pictures here for your |
| 00:14:55.87 | Mehdi Dallavarin | My name is Mehdi Dallavarin, I live at 20 and 22 Edwards Avenue. I bombed my residence about two and a half years ago. The pictures that you're actually seeing right there are probably about two dozen pictures of Edwards Avenue as of maybe about 20 minutes ago. that street has become in disarray i have driven around sausalito and i have to say that's probably the worst street inside the city it's gotten to the point where the resident at 24 sausalito's car was actually hit because there was not not enough road to drive on the resident at 26 sausalito fell because there was gravel and Generally speaking, the cars that are actually driving through, the roads are becoming impassable. For two and a half years, five times I've actually contacted the city myself personally. I've asked if I could get a timeline on the possible repaving of Edwards Avenue. For two and a half years, I've not been able to get that timeline. I got the standard answer of we will do it as budget will come. Jonathan Goldman, who works for the city, actually wrote me a very gracious email telling me that this would be an option to come here to see if I can actually get that street prioritized. And that's the only reason why I'm here. |
| 00:16:08.07 | Joan Cox | Thank you for being here. Can you kindly forward these pictures to the city clerk, Debbie Pagliaro? Yeah, through email. And Debbie, will you please add this as an item for discussion on the future agenda items? And we'll refer it to the appropriate place. |
| 00:16:28.69 | Joan Cox | All right, any other comments on items not on our agenda this evening? Okay, seeing none, we'll move on to the action minutes of our previous meeting. First, well, I'm just going to take them together. So may I have a motion or any revisions to our minutes for the special meeting of June 19 or the regular meeting of June 26, 2018? |
| 00:16:53.41 | Ray Withey | I move to approve the minutes of the special meeting of June 19, 2018, and the minutes of the regular meeting of June 26, 2018, as submitted. |
| 00:17:07.06 | Vice Mayor Burns | Second. |
| 00:17:08.77 | Joan Cox | Debbie, will you please call roll. |
| 00:17:13.79 | Debbie | Councilmember Cleveland Knowles. |
| 00:17:16.22 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Bye. |
| 00:17:17.42 | Debbie | Councilmember Withey? Yes. Councilmember Hoffman? Yes. Vice Mayor Burns? |
| 00:17:18.97 | Ray Withey | Yes. |
| 00:17:19.33 | Vice Mayor Burns | Thank you. |
| 00:17:23.02 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:17:23.04 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 00:17:23.12 | Vice Mayor Burns | Yes. |
| 00:17:23.14 | Debbie | Thank you. Mayor |
| 00:17:24.04 | Joan Cox | Yes. |
| 00:17:24.83 | Debbie | . |
| 00:17:25.03 | Joan Cox | Thank you. That motion carries 5-0. Next on our agenda is the consent calendar. Matters listed under the consent calendar are considered routine and non-controversial, require no discussion, are expected to have unanimous Council support, and may be enacted by the Council in one motion in the form listed below. First, are there any questions about the items on our consent calendar? All right, does anyone wish to, oh, Oh, this is of council. So I'll invite public comment in just one second. Does any council member wish to remove any item from the consent calendar? Yes. All right. |
| 00:18:05.57 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I don't want to remove an item, but I'd like to make a couple comments on 4B. |
| 00:18:10.16 | Joan Cox | Okay, great. I'm going to invite public comment and then we'll take comments from the dais. All right. |
| 00:18:21.41 | Carolyn Revell | Good evening. I'm Carolyn Revell, a resident of 515 North Street and representing the Sausalito Beautiful Board. this evening regarding item 41 on the consent agenda of Southview Park. Does the project include any landscape elements? The staff report lists two attachments, but neither one of them are the engineering drawings from CSWSTZ or a planting plan of any sort. Is there a reason why the drawings aren't included that show the project scope? And has any landscape been designed for installation by city staff or volunteers? If not, will there be such designs presented to address this important issue? As you can imagine, Sausalito Beautiful feels essential that landscaping be installed with capital improvement projects as opposed to the site being left fallow after simple grading and engineering improvements. We believe it is important for the aesthetics of the neighborhood and the community that public parks are appropriately landscaped and there are many environmental benefits, as you well know, of landscaping. Thank you very much. Thank you. |
| 00:19:34.97 | Joan Cox | Thank you. So I'm going to go ahead and pull 4I from the consent calendar so that we can... find out why the plans and specs are not part of the bid approval. Yes, we have another member of the public that would like to comment. |
| 00:19:56.59 | Wendy Richards | Wendy Richards, did you say you're pulling the Southview Park RFP from the consent calendar? I am. Thank you. That's why I came. Okay. So if I may express my point of view on why. Yes, please. I believe it is irresponsible of us as a community. |
| 00:20:05.18 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:20:14.59 | Wendy Richards | to go forward with any RFP until we have identified the source of funds. It would be completely out of integrity to ask vendors to spend a lot of their time, energy, and money to design RFP responses when it's not clear where the funds are coming from. Furthermore, I think it is completely out of order that we would have on our consent calendar an item that is influenced by another item that takes place two hours later on the same agenda, the so-called revenue or new taxes. I am pleased that you'll be removing it from the consent calendar, and I will comment further on the other item later this evening. Thank you. |
| 00:21:03.97 | Joan Cox | we don't respond to comments, but I will say that the revenue discussion we're having later this evening does not concern this year's upcoming budget. It concerns revenue sources for the next fiscal year, not the current fiscal year. And we have identified the funds for Southview Park's renovations within this year's fiscal budget. But I am removing it from the consent calendar so that we can further discuss This is a very important part of the video. renovations within this year's fiscal budget. But I am removing it from the consent calendar so that we can further discuss this item. I'm going to place this on our agenda at item |
| 00:21:43.94 | Joan Cox | as business item 6. THEIR OWNERS. |
| 00:21:53.01 | Jill Hoffman | And where in the agenda? Thank you. |
| 00:21:55.81 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:21:55.83 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:21:55.86 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:21:55.88 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:21:55.88 | Vice Mayor Burns | 6D. |
| 00:21:55.91 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 00:21:57.39 | Joan Cox | But I mean it's all. |
| 00:21:58.95 | Vice Mayor Burns | Okay, so we're going to have to go. |
| 00:22:00.16 | Joan Cox | It's after the revenue options update. 60, okay, gotcha. All right, any other public comment on our consent calendar? |
| 00:22:12.63 | Jeffrey Chase | Yes. |
| 00:22:24.09 | Jeffrey Chase | the reason. THAT THIS BEAUTIFUL SYSTEM of designating leaders broke down was because the people. And their leaders lacked, they lacked |
| 00:22:40.58 | Joan Cox | Business comment. Jeff, excuse me, one second. This is comment on the consent calendar. Okay, I'm good. |
| 00:22:43.21 | Jeffrey Chase | Excuse me. |
| 00:22:48.05 | Jeffrey Chase | We're |
| 00:22:48.27 | Joan Cox | . |
| 00:22:48.31 | Jeffrey Chase | The item is 4B. Okay. This is on, I hope Susan Cleveland Knowles is, going to respond to this. Thank you. Uh, It looks like you've removed two items from the consent calendar. I'm hoping this is another one. |
| 00:23:09.86 | Jeffrey Chase | $20 million. $10 million from the county and the cities, and $10 million matching funds from the feds. is now being given and has been for the last two years to hire case managers for the 1173 counted houseless people in Sausalito. That works out to almost $20,000 Per person. |
| 00:23:46.56 | Jeffrey Chase | The grand jury which are composed of citizens that are NOT SALARIAED. they're doing this because they care about their county, have come up with a number of solutions to houselessness. |
| 00:24:06.45 | Jeffrey Chase | good ones. Sausalito. now wants to say that they are not willing to sign on to the fifth of the recommendations, B5. It says each city and town should actively seek developers to create housing for the homeless within their jurisdictions. The other four are about actually creating 400 units. That's the first one to help Mill Street, which is the only homeless shelter. They're now canceling something called the rest program, that 60 beds that will no longer be here in Marin County. Thank you. ALL THE SERVICES, except for very, very few exceptions in Sausalito, are in Accessed in Marin City. with much less population, But, A big sense of solidarity. They have a community health clinic, They have housing. They accept Section 8. Sausalito does none of these things. We can solve houselessness. We can do that now, and we do it on the Anchorage today. Thank you. |
| 00:25:24.60 | Joan Cox | Any other comments on our consent calendar? |
| 00:25:26.02 | Jeffrey Chase | Consentals. |
| 00:25:26.48 | Unknown | you |
| 00:25:27.02 | Wendy Richards | Thank you. |
| 00:25:28.59 | Joan Cox | Okay, I'm going to close public comment and bring it back up here for discussion. Susan, I'm going to let you lead off. |
| 00:25:36.08 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, so on 4B, the item on the grand jury report and homelessness, I thought the letter didn't reflect all of the things that Sassolito is doing and can be doing on this issue. So I would prefer to add fact that we have amended our local zoning ordinances to Bye. allow on our public zoning site for homeless shelters. I'd like to add that we have participated over the last three years in funding with other cities and cities for the rest program and now for the global shower program. I'd like to note that we are meeting our housing element low income goals. And I'd like to add that representatives of the city sit on two different county-wide homeless. committees. City Manager Pulitzer sits on a committee that he can provide the name of. And then he and I both sit on the MCCMC Homelessness Committee. And I think that those would both be good venues to discuss this recommendation with other cities and to see how they are responding to this issue. |
| 00:26:59.14 | Joan Cox | Susan, can you repeat what you said after the rest program and the mobile shower program? |
| 00:27:06.17 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yes. So I'd also like to note in our response that we are meeting our low income housing goals set forth in our housing elements. And those numbers are available in another staff report that was prepared for tonight. And then, The last thing I said is that I think it's also important to note in the response. |
| 00:27:32.85 | Joan Cox | No, I got the rest of it. you |
| 00:27:34.49 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | that |
| 00:27:34.51 | Joan Cox | that Thank you. |
| 00:27:36.65 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:27:36.68 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:27:36.72 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you Okay, are you having trouble hearing me? |
| 00:27:40.36 | Joan Cox | Yeah, I got the rest of it. So what I'd like to propose is that I will revise this letter that's coming from me to add these points to the letter, if everyone is agreeable with that, because we're up against our deadline to respond. |
| 00:28:01.74 | Unknown | . The Press. |
| 00:28:03.40 | Joan Cox | No, the letter is in the packet. I don't need to read it aloud. Nope. And please don't call out. Public comment is closed. |
| 00:28:05.96 | Unknown | Right. |
| 00:28:11.97 | Joan Cox | Okay, so is everyone agreeable to that? looking around OK. |
| 00:28:17.47 | Vice Mayor Burns | To change in the letter, and then I'll just go one further step on Susan's point that the CDB, the Community Development Block Grant is starting their application process right now as well for the next funding year, and this needs to stay in front of them as well. |
| 00:28:39.10 | Vice Mayor Burns | I'm sure it is. |
| 00:28:41.11 | Joan Cox | Okay and so with those revisions may I have a motion approving items 4A through 4H we have removed item 4I from the consent calendar. |
| 00:28:53.19 | Ray Withey | SO MOVED. |
| 00:28:53.70 | Vice Mayor Burns | Thank you. |
| 00:28:54.80 | Ray Withey | Second. |
| 00:28:57.94 | Joan Cox | Debbie, will you please call roll. |
| 00:29:04.69 | Joan Cox | Yes. |
| 00:29:06.02 | Debbie | Thank you. member. |
| 00:29:07.08 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 00:29:07.34 | Debbie | So Yes. |
| 00:29:09.06 | Joan Cox | Yes. |
| 00:29:09.50 | Debbie | by a spare bird. |
| 00:29:10.63 | Joan Cox | Yes. |
| 00:29:11.79 | Debbie | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:29:12.65 | Joan Cox | Yes. That motion carries 5-0. All right, we're going to move on to item 6A, an update on current housing legislation and proposed housing legislation. |
| 00:29:24.89 | Jeffrey Chase | Thank you for coming. |
| 00:29:30.54 | Lily Whalen | Good evening, Madam Mayor, Councilmembers. I am Lily Whalen, your Interim Community Development Director, and I'm pleased to introduce tonight Barbara Kautz for this item. Ms. Kautz is a partner in the firm Goldfarb & Lippmann, With an emphasis of practice and land use approvals, CEQA compliance inclusionary zoning, density bonus law, Housing elements and implementation of home ownership programs. Prior to joining the firm, Ms. Kautz was the community development director and Assistant City Manager for the city of San Mateo. She has also served as planning director for the town of Corte Madera. Ms. Katz is a frequent lecturer on state housing law, inclusionary housing affordable housing approvals, housing elements, home ownership programs, and density bonus law. She is here tonight to provide an update on current and proposed housing legislation. And with that, I'd like to welcome Ms. Kautz. |
| 00:30:31.90 | Joan Cox | Thank you, Lily, and welcome back, Barbara. So nice to see you again. |
| 00:30:38.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | . Just roll right here. Because it doesn't work for some reason. You can toggle here. So |
| 00:30:48.89 | Barbara Kautz | Well, Mayor Cox and Councilmembers, thank you very much for having me back. So I am going to make a presentation about some of the key aspects of the new housing laws that were passed. I'm happy to answer questions from the council as I go along, or if the council would prefer, we can save everything till the end. Thank you. |
| 00:31:14.45 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:31:14.47 | Barbara Kautz | Thank you. |
| 00:31:14.51 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:31:14.52 | Barbara Kautz | you. |
| 00:31:14.79 | Joan Cox | You all should feel free to call out as we |
| 00:31:16.82 | Barbara Kautz | So |
| 00:31:16.90 | Joan Cox | . |
| 00:31:17.09 | Barbara Kautz | if things aren't clear because these laws are relatively complicated. So last year was a bit of a housing legislation frenzy, as I'm sure many of you are aware. The governor signed 15 bills that were designed to mitigate the rather severe housing shortage and housing affordability problem in California. The legislature views that one of the core reasons for the lack of housing production in the state is the difficulty of obtaining local government approvals. And so I'm afraid that local government cities and counties were one of the targets of these sharks. So what I am going to discuss today are basically three key bills that I think affect how cities process housing legislation. Included in your packet is a much more comprehensive list of and discussion of all the bills that affect local government, but given time constraints and you know, what would be before the council, I want to discuss these three. these three bills. One is changes to the Housing Accountability Act. Second is SB 35, which probably of all the land use legislation, had the most publicity, but I think will have the least effect. And then a third bill, SB 166, which has to do with maintaining the capability of sites identified in the housing element. And then I'll also very briefly discuss the bills that remain in this legislation remaining that are related to housing, which have been somewhat reduced from the initial very large bill. |
| 00:33:04.23 | Barbara Kautz | So, This statement is taken from the, was added by the legislature in 2017 regarding the intent of the Housing Accountability Act. And basically it says that the legislature's intent was to curb the ability of local governments to deny or reduce the density or make infeasible housing development projects. The legislature felt that its intent to do this had not been fulfilled and so they modified the statute accordingly. And it really is the purpose of the amendments to the Housing Accountability Act to make it harder to deny or reduce the density of housing projects. And I think to some extent, as I'll explain, it does make it harder for cities to take either of those actions. And I think it helps in thinking about the bill to think about that it affects, in a market rate project, primarily decisions that would either deny the project or reduce the density. But it is silent for the most part about other conditions or findings that cities might make. So just as a brief comparison of the Housing Accountability Act and SB 35. So the Housing Accountability Act affects any residential project that includes two or more units of any type. But SP 35 provides much more, quote, streamlining, but only for some residential projects that need to meet a very strict set of standards. Both of these basically focus on objective standards and favor predictability over flexibility. So when Lily made the introduction, I worked as a planner or community development director for 30 years. And developers would always tell me that they wanted both predictability and flexibility. And those two things are very different, actually. And what the legislature seems to be coming down on the side of is predictability over flexibility. by emphasizing in both the Housing Accountability Act and SB 35 the use of objective standards. No. What's an objective standard? This rather complicated definition is included in SB 35, but is also limited to SB 35. But for the purposes of SB 35, it's a standard that involves no personal judgment by a public official, can be verifiable by reference to an external benchmark, and it can be known by both the developer and the city and by the public before a project's submitted. |
| 00:35:25.89 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 00:35:58.41 | Barbara Kautz | clear examples of standards that would fit this definition is things like, as I've listed here, height, setback, lot coverage, open space density, limits on impervious surface, requirements for runoff, street widths, design standards like every building has to have brown shingles or every roof has to have a slope of at least three to one or something like that. So it's possible to have standards that meet this definition. It's not entirely clear that this definition applies to the Housing Accountability Act. For instance, Black's Law Dictionary says objective is something based on externally verifiable phenomena. Um, There is a, oops, sorry. THEY'RE... There is a published case, this Honcho decision regarding which determined that a MAPEC finding, that the site is not physically suitable for the proposed development, is not an objective finding, but it doesn't really go on to define what an objective finding is. Listed above, there was a Superior Court case, so not published, which looked at findings that denied a 320 unit project in the town of Los Gatos. And the court determined that all of these findings that were listed here were not objective findings and directed the city to rehear the case rather than appealing the city did rehear the project and approved it. But things like producing high quality authentic design reflect the look and feel of the community. The Superior Court in that case found that none of these were objective findings. So what does the Housing Accountability Act apply to? It applies to all housing development projects and to emergency shelters. A change made is that it also applies to a mixed use project where at least two-thirds of the square footage is designated for residences. In the past, it's been thought that this law applies only to affordable projects, projects that have 20% low income, but that in fact has not been the case. In the Honchuru case I referenced earlier, specifically found it applied to a market – some of the provisions apply to a market rate project. There are additional findings that need to be made to deny a 20% low income project or an emergency shelter. But most projects are not 20% low income and so would generally be considered to be market rate. So another key change that the law that the that the legislation made. Barbara can I stop you here? Sure. Can you go back |
| 00:38:58.03 | Jill Hoffman | back to slide. |
| 00:38:59.21 | Barbara Kautz | Thank you. |
| 00:39:06.75 | Jill Hoffman | Are you going to go into specifically what this actually means? I see the bullets up there. What does that mean that it applies to all housing development projects and emergency shelters? So a housing development |
| 00:39:20.98 | Barbara Kautz | project is defined as something that consists of residences only. So we generally interpret that that must mean two or more residences. Transitional and supportive housing is defined in in the housing element law. Thank you. So cities are required to permit transitional and supportive housing in basically residential zones. Transitional housing is housing that has a minimum six month length of stay. that is intended to be transitional between perhaps homelessness and permanent shelter. Supportive housing has a very rather elaborate definition which is supposed to be housing for low income disabled people, I think that would be a definition of it. Um, And then a mixed use project, of course, is a project that could consist of both residences and commercial but where at least two thirds of square footage is residential. And I think... An emergency shelter is what most of us would term a homeless shelter. Thank you. |
| 00:40:25.91 | Jill Hoffman | And so does this mean that there's no local objective or set what the standard. |
| 00:40:32.53 | Barbara Kautz | Oh, okay, I'm going to Thank you. |
| 00:40:34.10 | Jill Hoffman | You are going to get |
| 00:40:34.70 | Barbara Kautz | Yeah, I'm going to go into what this means. Okay, thanks. Yeah, sorry. I jumped ahead, sorry. Yeah, sorry. |
| 00:40:34.72 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I'm going to go in. |
| 00:40:42.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Can I ask a follow-up question? |
| 00:40:43.87 | Barbara Kautz | Yeah. Sure. |
| 00:40:45.88 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So do you, Barbara, do you interpret this as meaning net new two units or any project involving two units, even if that's adding one unit to a single family home or renovating two units. |
| 00:41:02.92 | Barbara Kautz | I think you need to look at it specifically about the extent of the renovation of one of the homes. Generally, I would look at it as a net, you know, Like adding one ADU I don't think would be a project for residences. But adding, but somebody who's building a single family home plus an ADU, I think would be residences. Does that make sense? This particular issue is not very clear. |
| 00:41:28.43 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:41:34.36 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:41:35.27 | Barbara Kautz | Yeah. |
| 00:41:39.17 | Barbara Kautz | Oops, keeps doing this. Okay, so within 30 to 60 days of completeness, and 60 days only applies to a project with 150 units or more, so I think in Sausalito it'll be within 30 days after the application is complete. The city needs to. give an applicant a list of any inconsistencies with any you know, plan, program, policy, ordinance, any inconsistency with any guidelines that the city has, and explain why the project's inconsistent, or else the project is quote, deemed consistent, at least that's what the legislation says. |
| 00:42:25.52 | Barbara Kautz | And so, oh, just to go back here. So one issue has been, is a city restricted to talking about inconsistencies with objective standards or inconsistencies with any standard like compatibility with the community. And our view is that this letter can talk about any any inconsistencies that the city might perceive. So then, So then the Housing Accountability Act only applies to a market rate project here. if the city desires to either deny the project or to reduce the density of the project. And if the city desired to do that, it would need to identify an objective standard that the project doesn't comply with. or if the project applies with all objective standards, then it needs to make a finding that there's a specific adverse impact on public health or safety. And this is a difficult finding to make because the specific adverse impact has to be significant, quantifiable, direct, unavoidable, based on written health and safety standards that existed when the project was deemed complete, and there's no way to mitigate it. Now you'd think if you could make this finding that the project also would not be complying with some objective standard. So if the project complies with all objective standards to find a health and safety standard that the project also does not comply with, would seem somewhat difficult. This provision has actually been in the law for many years, and it has been applicable to market rate project, but for whatever reason, developers didn't start invoking it until recently. And this particular language has not really changed from the law that existed prior to 2018. THEIR OWNERS. Our view generally is that the Housing Accountability Act in relation to market rate projects is limited to the situation where the project's denied, or the density's reduced, or a condition's imposed that's so onerous that it has the effect of reducing the density. You know, you could imagine You have to have a 50-foot setback, and there's no way to get the density. proposed, and generally it doesn't apply to conditions that don't result in the loss of units or the effective denial of the project. Now, this particular view that we have has not been tested. but The Housing Accountability Act on its face applies to when either city denies the project or reduces the density. or adopts a condition that has the effect of reducing the density. |
| 00:45:21.19 | Ray Withey | THE CITY IS GOING TO BE Yeah, thanks. Are you going to comment on how density is to affect? |
| 00:45:31.45 | Barbara Kautz | Haha! YOU KNOW, THE USUAL Planners view density as units per acre, or the number of units that someone is proposing in the project. But in fact, there's no definition of density in the Housing Accountability Act, and there's very limited, and I really can't find definitions of density in planning while I did a, did a little search for it. So generally, The land use element law says cities have to adopt in residences standards of population Um, what is it, population intensity, I believe, population density or Building intensity, which is usually defined as floor area ratio. but it does not really define density. Again, we're talking about a law that hasn't been tested very much. Generally, I would view that as number of units, but it hasn't been tested. That's correct. |
| 00:46:34.95 | Barbara Kautz | I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE The legislature made several other changes that favor basically consistency with adopted standards. So a project is also deemed consistent if there's substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude a project's consistent. So let us say, for instance, that the city has some kind of outside architect perhaps looking at a project's conformance with the city's guidelines and says, yeah, I think it conforms. the council ultimately concludes it doesn't conform In that case, a court could decide that the architects letter provided some reasonable evidence of consistency. So it really flips the deference that was previously given to local government decisions, where your decision would be upheld if you had any substantial evidence in the record, to allow the court to find that, well, there was also substantial evidence on the other side. So I think the project's consistent. The city findings have to be based on preponderance of the evidence rather than substantial evidence, which Thank you. Again, substantial evidence is if the city has some evidence, the court would generally uphold it. Preponderance means the court will weigh the two sides and decide which side is stronger. Market rate projects that successfully challenge a decision are entitled to attorney's fees, previously were not, and if a court should order the city To rehear the project and the city refuses, the court is directed to apply a $10,000 per unit fine. |
| 00:48:29.72 | Barbara Kautz | One big control, though, in the Housing Accountability Act is that the California Environmental Equality Act still applies. This particular case says that CEQA has to be completed before a developer can invoke the Housing Accountability Act. This raises all kinds of issues in my mind about if the project changes between application and the completion of an EIR, but... In any case, it has to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act. So in terms of the Housing Accountability Act, oops, sorry. What have cities been doing I think much of the effort has been devoted into getting out this, into determining being able to tell applicants in a timely fashion whether their projects are consistent. So sometimes the first thing is just to get a complete list of all the city standards that apply to residences. And then a number of communities are trying to incorporate the consistency determination. into the completeness of the application, for instance, asking the applicant to demonstrate that they're consistent with the city's standards. There's some move to more objectives, quote, objective standards, but I'm not aware of very many communities that have actually done very much about that. And if the city is in a position where it desires to deny a project or reduce the density, I think the record has to be looked at very carefully, A, to see if it's supportable, and how the findings would be drafted. Yeah, Joe. |
| 00:50:15.12 | Vice Mayor Burns | So if a project is determined to complete and it can get to the Planning Commission within 30 days, what's left for public discussion in a Planning Commission style meeting? |
| 00:50:28.16 | Barbara Kautz | . |
| 00:50:31.66 | Barbara Kautz | Well, As I said, our view is that conditions can be applied to a project, so long as it doesn't have the effect of reducing the density. or denying the project. So I think there would be a role for the commission and for the council in terms of are there ways to make the project better. What cities want is for the applicant to modify the project to try to respond to community concerns. And I think you may be faced with situations where The applicant doesn't want to, and then the city may need to try to craft a condition. But again, all of this is somewhat untested. |
| 00:51:12.87 | Vice Mayor Burns | But kind of the big three of community characteristic, scale and mass and health and safety are pretty much determined prior to coming into the room. |
| 00:51:22.76 | Barbara Kautz | Well, I'm not sure that community character is. Health and safety, I think, usually there's some kind of standard for that. So, community character, and what was the second one? |
| 00:51:34.43 | Vice Mayor Burns | SCALING MASS. |
| 00:51:35.51 | Barbara Kautz | scale and mass. |
| 00:51:35.60 | Vice Mayor Burns | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:51:37.94 | Barbara Kautz | I mean, there's a big presumption that the height limits, the setbacks, the bulk standards, and so forth in the ordinance are the controllers of scale and mass. |
| 00:51:48.52 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:51:48.59 | Barbara Kautz | Thank you. But I do think there is room for some discretion in terms of modifying an application. but. None of us can give really definitive answers on a lot of this right now. |
| 00:52:07.37 | Barbara Kautz | So, SB 35 streamlining, which as I said, got the most attention in the last legislative session, was one of Senator Scott Wiener's bills. And a project could be eligible for streamlining, which I'll describe in a moment. If the jurisdiction is subject to SB 35, if the project is eligible for streamlining and then whether whether there's any exclusion that might exclude the project. Thank you. So in terms of whether the jurisdiction is subject to SB 35, HCD makes that determination based on annual reports published by cities, submitted by the cities, and then publishes its determinations. And that's where I looked up Sausalito to see how HCD viewed you. Um, The determinations are supposed to be made in four-year increments. They're good for four years. But because the ABAG communities are only three years into the housing element cycle, it started in 2014. So the annual reports have only been submitted in 2018 for three years. HCD looked at every community's three 8ths of your regional housing needs and determined if that many units had been built or approved. So, but at the end of 2018, When they look at the number of units constructed in 2018, that determination will be good until 2022. So. If a city hasn't approved enough units to meet the regional housing needs for above moderate income housing, A project that has more than 10 units has to provide hug. 10% low income housing, unless the city has a higher standard And interesting, Sausalito has not issued enough As of the end of 2017, Sausalito hadn't issued enough above-moderate income units. So the above mod goal is 23 and only five had been issued, which is not three-eighths of 23. And so a project that has 10 units or more would need to have 10% low income. Sausalito entirely met its low income need for the entire RHNA period, and also had met three eighths of its very low income need So, I mean, this is really ironic because most communities are in the opposite position where they've met above mod but have not met low. So basically, for the first three years, you were on track to meet your entire arena need for both very low and low-income housing. |
| 00:55:08.54 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 00:55:08.56 | Joan Cox | Well, and I think it bears mentioning that when we wrote the housing element, the RHNA numbers were to identify development potential. They were not at that time quotas. |
| 00:55:19.99 | Barbara Kautz | Yes. |
| 00:55:20.47 | Joan Cox | you |
| 00:55:20.56 | Barbara Kautz | I agree. This has been a big change, which I'll get to in the last bill. So just as an FYI, projects with nine units or less, though, are not subject to these. Don't have to provide any affordable units. So here's the big advantage of SP35. There's no SQL review. It is supposed to be a ministerial review only, treated like a building permit, based on objective standards, and the review can't last more than 90 days for a project with less than 150 units, fewer than 150 units. So those are big benefits to a developer. Now, in order to be eligible, the developer has to request SB 35 review. The developer can't, somebody can't come in with an application and then say, hey, I really was under SB 35. They have to request SB 35 review. They have to have two or more multi-family units on a site that's with 75% of the perimeter developed, and two-thirds of the square footage has to be residential, and it has to be zoned or shown in the general plan for residential use. It also has to be consistent with objective zoning and design review standards. Now, that definition of objective I showed in the earlier slide does apply specifically to SB 35, and there's some funny, some unusual provisions in SB 35, which are not generally the way that cities and planners think about consistency. Okay, consistent with objective design review standards, that sounds fine. But it's also consistent with the, it's consistent with the zoning, if it's consistent with the maximum density in the general plan. There's some communities that maybe have general plans with very wide ranges, might say eight to 20 units an acre, and then some sites are zoned to only permit 12, and others to permit 15. Under SB 35, every project in that 8 to 20 unit per acre category in the general plan is entitled to 20 units per acre. Any project that has a density bonus and any other modifications of development standards under density bonus laws considered consistent. And as I mentioned, the general plan standards trump everything. |
| 00:57:55.96 | Barbara Kautz | A project with 10 or more units has to pay prevailing wages. AND I THINK THAT'S A If the project has 75 units or more, it has to use a quote, skilled and trained workforce, which really means union labor or a project labor agreement. In any project with a subdivision, Any ownership project or any project that involves a subdivision in any way also has to use union labor. It's not eligible. And this is probably one of the reasons Thank you. that it has not been used very much. THE CITY. SB 35 excludes a lot of sites. I think the big one in Sausalito was, is that, The site cannot have contained any housing occupied by tenants in the last 10 years. So you're really talking about either a site that's been vacant for a long time. Guys, please don't call out. You're either talking about a site that's been vacant for a long time, or some kind of redeveloped commercial site, probably. There's also these exclusions. For instance, the site can't be in the coastal zone. If it's in certain other zones, like fire hazard areas, or flood plain has to meet certain standards. And I mentioned here, again, Any subdivision has to use skilled labor unless it's a low income housing project, in which case it could pay prevailing wages. I'm not sure. So within These larger numbers apply to a project of 150 units or more, so I'm going to assume all the small numbers apply to Sausalito. Within 60 days, a city has to provide a list of any inconsistencies, and these are within days of submittal. Regardless of whether the application is complete, these deadlines apply. And with 90 days of submittal, it has to basically make a decision. You can have some kind of a public hearing, but the public hearing. is prohibited from in any way inhibiting chilling or precluding the ministerial approval of a project, which makes you question the point of the public hearing. And as you can see, the review has to be objective and strictly focused on assessing compliance. So what have cities done in response to SB 35? I should first say I'm only aware of two SB 35 applications. One was in the city of Berkeley, and Berkeley found that it in this initial review that it wasn't consistent with objective standards. I saw an article citing the Plaintiff's attorney is saying she disagreed, but I don't know exactly where that is. The second project was a very large project in the city of Cupertino, where Cupertino completed the initial review and found it did comply with objective standards, although they haven't completed the second phase of the review, but both of those were very large projects that agreed to use union labor. and those are the only two I'm aware of. Some cities have developed an SB35 application form. I've listed some of them. Interestingly, because of where you were on your annual report, If by the end of 2018, the city has approved another three very low-income units and seven above-moderate-income units, you'd be exempt from SB 35 for the next four years. |
| 01:01:37.39 | Joan Cox | OK, well, our Interim Community Development Director is in the room. |
| 01:01:42.71 | Vice Mayor Burns | Yeah, let's make sure we get that word out. |
| 01:01:47.45 | Barbara Kautz | I mean, it could be accessory dwelling units that, or just rented at market rate, anyway. And then the last one I'm going to talk about is this no-let-loss-of-arena sites. So maybe I'm just going to skip ahead. So this was Sausalito's inventory of sites designated for housing in the city. And some of these, like... Accessory dwelling units didn't specify specific sites, but some of them like the R1 district capacity, R3 district capacity, there's a very detailed list of specific sites that were considered to be suitable. So, The city's obligation used to be simply to make sure that as many units were constructed on these sites as shown in the housing element. For instance, on a very low-income site, that at least 21 units, if a particular site was shown in the housing element and shown for 10 units, that if the city looked at a project on that site, that there were at least 10 units. The legislature changed that to say that not only does the city need to make sure that at least 10 units, but it has to make sure that their lower income, it combines very low and low. You know, and of course there aren't sufficient subsidies in the state to... you that we're going to have to subsidize all these units. Um, |
| 01:03:26.96 | Joan Cox | Thank you. But if, so most of our very low sites are indeed granny units or live aborts. And so there would be no density requirement. There is no potential to build more than one ADU on a site. Right. |
| 01:03:36.14 | Calvin Chan | Thank you. |
| 01:03:36.16 | Vicki Nichols | Right. |
| 01:03:39.16 | Calvin Chan | And so. |
| 01:03:48.28 | Barbara Kautz | Exactly, and I think you would only need to do this if one of the sites listed in the housing element, I think you would only need to pay attention for this if one of the specific, if a project is proposed on one of the specific sites listed in the housing element with a specific number of units. The other deal is that the city's total, very low and low number is 40 units, but the city actually identified sites for 114 units and has already approved Issued building permits for 27 of those units. So there's only a 13 unit requirement remaining. And so even if somebody came in on one of these sites, didn't propose lower income housing, you could almost certainly make the required findings that you had enough sites left. |
| 01:04:36.39 | Joan Cox | And, I mean, we as a city could... you know, adopt additional incentives for ADUs or consider mini-ADUs as a means to ensure that we meet this additional 13-unit requirement within our time frame. |
| 01:04:51.27 | Barbara Kautz | Right. I mean, the junior, kind of the junior ADUs. Yeah, the junior ADUs. Because I think most of those are actually low, very low. Right. Yeah. |
| 01:04:54.75 | Joan Cox | Yeah, the junior ADUs. |
| 01:05:03.10 | Barbara Kautz | So in looking at this, You know, with SP35, it says the project qualify for streamlining and somebody would need to come in |
| 01:05:15.15 | Vicki Nichols | you. |
| 01:05:16.11 | Barbara Kautz | qualify and if there was any kind of subdivision, would need to provide union labor. The Housing Accountability Act, I think any project that's two units or more, the city needs to pay attention to. And with no net loss, that issue would only apply if a project's proposed on a site specifically identified in the housing element. Just a little bit about proposed legislation. So some of what I provided you copies of the latest versions of the bills. The legislature is out of session, I think, till August 6, I believe. So then there'll be a whole flurry of different changes. Two bills here, these are competing bills to modify the regional housing needs assessment process. It won't affect ABAC communities until 2023, so you've got a bit of time. But the general goal is to increase the RHNA allocations overall, and particularly in job-rich cities and particularly in above-moderate-income cities. The last provision there is not in the current versions of the bill, but I've been told that Wiener was forced to take this out. but wants to put back into the legislation a requirement that every community zone to 125% of its actual arena. Probably more immediately significant, and I've heard with the likelihood of passing, is an additional bill about accessory dwelling units. There's a focus on limiting fees being charged for accessory dwelling units, although the current version of the legislation doesn't really do anything about it. One thing I've heard that the legislature is in favor of is that cities could not apply minimum lot size requirements, lot coverage, or FAR standards to accessory dwelling units. The time to process the applications has been in the proposed legislation is reduced from 120 to 60 days. And there's limitations on monitoring owner occupancy, which I have to say I don't really understand. And both an accessory dwelling unit and a junior accessory dwelling unit would be permitted on one site. I'm not sure if I'm And lastly, SB 765 is another Wiener bill. By the way, the Wiener bill that got all the publicity in opposition, SB 827, was defeated in committee. So I'm not talking about that. The current version of SB 765 I gave you doesn't have anything significant in it. Apparently he was required to take out what he wanted by committee, but he wants to get these provisions back in. We're a 50% He doesn't have anything significant in it. Apparently, he was required to take out what he wanted by committee, but he wants to get these provisions back in, where a 50% moderate income project would be eligible for SB 35 streamlining. Wants streamlining to be applied to commercial portions of mixed use projects, which I think is problematic, because you could get commercial without the residential. Then he talks about cleanup language, but we don't really know what that is. Thank you. |
| 01:08:24.96 | Joan Cox | So can I ask you an overview question? |
| 01:08:28.25 | Barbara Kautz | so |
| 01:08:29.21 | Joan Cox | You commented that, you know, unlike most of the other cities, Sausalito is ahead of the game with respect to its very low and low income and is not meeting the total number of units identified for above moderate. Right. And that is largely because Sausalito is unique in that it is somewhat fully built out. Yes. In order to even identify... |
| 01:08:56.35 | Calvin Chan | Thank you. |
| 01:08:56.36 | Unknown | Yes, yes. |
| 01:08:56.90 | Calvin Chan | Thank you. |
| 01:09:01.00 | Joan Cox | SITES FOR ADDITIONAL ABOVE-MODERATE INCOME construction, we had to use an infill strategy where we looked at our 20 units per acre density, looked at all the sites in Sausalito, and identified where another unit could go on those sites. And so there's not necessarily a plan to adopt that infill strategy throughout Sausalito. And so by Sausalito residents, we can't force residents to build on their own land if they don't want to. And we shouldn't be penalized for |
| 01:09:31.85 | Melanie Purcell | on their own. |
| 01:09:37.12 | Joan Cox | that failure. And so I want to talk to you about an alternative approach that some cities have adopted, and that is charter cities are subject to the home rule provision, which enables a charter city to maximize local control over its own municipal affairs. And courts have... enables charter city to maximize local control over its own municipal affairs. And courts have consistently classified as municipal affairs various things, including land use and zoning decisions. Thank you. |
| 01:10:17.73 | Barbara Kautz | Right. Well, the legislature has made all the legislation I've discussed today except the No Night Loss Bill, applicable to charter cities as well as to THE FAMILY. you know, as well as to general law cities. I understand that the legislation... |
| 01:10:31.93 | Joan Cox | I understand that the legislation says that, but the courts have consistently ruled that the charter trumps the legislation. |
| 01:10:34.73 | Barbara Kautz | Yeah. |
| 01:10:43.45 | Barbara Kautz | I mean, I think it would be a knock down, drag out. argument. Yeah. So I don't believe the courts have found that the |
| 01:10:50.78 | Calvin Chan | I don't know. |
| 01:10:54.57 | Barbara Kautz | I'm not aware of a case where the court has found that the charter trumps a land use law that the legislature has made specifically applicable to a charter city. There was... There was a recent case, Kennedy Commission, I think, versus the City of Huntington Beach. |
| 01:11:14.35 | Joan Cox | Commission versus the City of Huntington Beach. Yes. |
| 01:11:17.30 | Barbara Kautz | And right now, charter cities are not required to have general plans and zoning consistent. And the court decided that Huntington Beach had not explicitly adopted that requirement, so it was not required to have general plan and zoning consistent. So that is an area where charter cities are different from general law cities. button. But it didn't get into whether the law is applicable to charter cities. So barring that solution, |
| 01:11:46.97 | Joan Cox | How does Sausalito address these draconian rules that are designed for larger cities that still have capacity for development? I mean, I, THEIR OWNERS. I mean, I think I mean, do we seek special legislation |
| 01:12:14.29 | Barbara Kautz | to a kid. |
| 01:12:14.44 | Joan Cox | To exempt us based on the fact that we're already fully built out and that we're meeting our very low and low income quotas? |
| 01:12:23.49 | Barbara Kautz | I think right now... The restrictions on your on your discretion are relatively limited. The no net loss bill, you've got plenty of sites. SB 35 could come in. But at that point, but it seems unlikely. But I mean, I guess it would be a possibility. With the Housing Accountability Act, You know, as we do think that the city has control over the design, but really cannot reduce the number of units on the site. That, you know, except under unusual circumstances, that is what we think is the main. restriction, if you like, on your discretion. And some cities are moving to try to get more objective standards. I think it's worth looking. I understand the city's doing a general plan update to the extent the standards in there can be more rather than less objective. That would be good. but whatever objective means. But I think right now, I don't think there are many restrictions. I think the real issue will come when the next housing element is due in 2023. |
| 01:13:36.17 | Joan Cox | Well, but the new legislation is seeking to add a multiplier to our arena or to multiply it by, you know, at least 125%, for example, or by a factor of two. And so... |
| 01:13:50.21 | Barbara Kautz | And so. So at this point, I think you can oppose that legislation. |
| 01:13:55.29 | Joan Cox | Okay. But I think what we're looking for, expert advice about, is how do we pursue a development requirements that are consistent with our constraints? Because right now, all this new legislation, it's not one size fits all. |
| 01:14:18.86 | Barbara Kautz | Yeah, I just want to repeat what I said. I think right now, Sausalito is in good shape. |
| 01:14:25.70 | Joan Cox | I know. |
| 01:14:25.93 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:14:25.98 | Debbie | Yeah. |
| 01:14:26.00 | Barbara Kautz | I think he has to be. |
| 01:14:26.02 | Debbie | Bye. |
| 01:14:26.03 | Joan Cox | I think we have to be. |
| 01:14:26.98 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 01:14:27.06 | Barbara Kautz | Thank you. |
| 01:14:27.08 | Debbie | You will. |
| 01:14:27.50 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 01:14:27.50 | Barbara Kautz | I think we have to- |
| 01:14:27.91 | Joan Cox | I think we have to be forward-thinking because of all the pen. There were 15 bills signed last year, and there are more to come. |
| 01:14:33.36 | Barbara Kautz | 15 bills signed up. Thank you. Right. I don't think there are going to be that many this year, but, you know... Nothing, you know, partly because it's an election year. |
| 01:14:42.45 | Vice Mayor Burns | Can I throw out a solution to your question to ask for her? |
| 01:14:45.54 | Joan Cox | Yeah, give me one more. And it's ironic that we're the neighbor of San Francisco, which is suffering a huge housing shortage, and where Senator Weiner, is situated. I'm asking for a solution. So apparently the vice mayor has a solution. |
| 01:15:06.13 | Vice Mayor Burns | We'll have a solution. that I'd like to test, and this has been the first time I can say it in public, so. and it's forward thinking, I hope, if we were to find a location that we could develop senior housing, And with intent to move seniors out of moderate style, above moderate housing on a Prop 60 tax benefit into the senior housing and freeing up their unit for market. |
| 01:15:30.65 | Calvin Chan | Thank you. |
| 01:15:35.86 | Vice Mayor Burns | Could we turn that into a qualifying for above market meeting of a RENA number. |
| 01:15:42.19 | Barbara Kautz | Well... If the senior housing was above market senior housing, yes. But if you're thinking about affordable senior housing, then it's affordable. |
| 01:15:52.16 | Joan Cox | The RHNA numbers require new development, not |
| 01:15:55.69 | Barbara Kautz | PLAY. |
| 01:15:55.93 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:15:55.98 | Barbara Kautz | But. |
| 01:15:56.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | But if you're... |
| 01:15:56.62 | Joan Cox | But if you- |
| 01:15:57.02 | Barbara Kautz | But if you have a senior housing project, I mean, there's lots of senior housing projects for wealthy seniors. |
| 01:15:57.14 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:16:05.21 | Barbara Kautz | Yes, that would qualify for above moderate. |
| 01:16:07.01 | Vice Mayor Burns | I understand what both of you are saying, but if we created something in a category that we're already full, with the intent of moving people into that, we're actually creating the new unit |
| 01:16:14.45 | Barbara Kautz | Yeah, I know. No, it doesn't qualify. It has to do with the income level of the new unit. That's the way it's set up. Um, I mean, I think the only other forward-thinking idea is really kind of to move more into these objective standards because that seems to be where the legislature is going. |
| 01:16:35.04 | Joan Cox | Okay, any other questions of Barbara? All right, I'm going to open it up for public comment. |
| 01:16:49.28 | David Lay | My name is David Lay. I live in the harbor. I've got five comments, really questions here that fit in a little piece of paper, so I'll get this in. The Lucas property that was denied up in, I'm not sure whether it was San Rafael or the county, Would this law have prevented that denial? And you can comment on this later, I guess. Um, And is the county, with the new limits they passed in the last year, in the last 12 months, I think, do those limits come under this law or not? I'm not quite sure how that works, but it was mainly applied to south of Tam. May some limits on units per acre, I guess. And there was a thing in here where it said a 2 3rds requirement. And then I understood later that that's a requirement over land use. Now, suppose you were developing a property with a single building and gardens around it, but no parking. But the building took up less than Two thirds of the property. What would happen there? and can a supervisor or a council person act as a consultant on getting the Politics of process. through to get the proper design that fits an appropriate piece of property. Um... |
| 01:18:50.24 | David Lay | And that's my questions. Thank you very much. |
| 01:18:54.21 | Debbie | Thank you any other public comment. |
| 01:19:02.12 | Jeffrey Chase | Not one square inch of this earth was created by a man or a woman. |
| 01:19:11.02 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:19:11.03 | Jeffrey Chase | Please don't shout. |
| 01:19:11.10 | Joan Cox | Please don't shout. Please don't shout, Jeff. |
| 01:19:13.03 | Jeffrey Chase | Every single square inch of this earth is God's property. that you now are representing a landlord in Washington, D.C., named Donald J. Trump, who has decided the country is his property. |
| 01:19:32.06 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 01:19:32.08 | Jeffrey Chase | Thank you. |
| 01:19:32.10 | Debbie | Jeff. |
| 01:19:32.31 | Jeffrey Chase | Thank you. |
| 01:19:32.45 | Debbie | . |
| 01:19:32.50 | Jeffrey Chase | Please don't shout. Is an issue that the vote was suppressed? around the country and in Sausalito, California, that, not a penny. FOR THE HOUSELESS PEOPLE, but, $20 million for the people. working with them, they're called case managers. From Goldford, Goldfarb, and Lippmann, my Yiddela's here. are obligated to follow Jewish law. that I am obligated to tell them that, that we are not allowed to use property as a prophet. Center. Only. that when there are people that do not have a place to lay their head, as Jesus and Elijah and Krishna and Buddha did not have a place. That in the east, when somebody is a wanderer and they don't have any money, they're a renunciate, they are honored. They are given a robe of orange. People feel blessed. when they come close to them. Here, now? It's a look. It's a feeling. It's a down pressure. that does not need to happen but is happening. in the name of one thing, and that thing is money. Sausalito was not settled by the moneyed people. It was settled by the sailors. It wasn't the folks were here first. every square inch now on that hill is a place where the coyotes can no longer be, nor the mountain lions, nor a community garden, nor somebody living off the land, nor somebody fishing from a dock, nor somebody gathering wood for a cooking fire. When that is stamped out, for not just the 100 people out here, For the 1,100 people in this county, 71% who were born in Marin. Your responsibility. Not mine. I was born in Detroit. WE HAVE OUR OWN AFFAIRS TO DEAL Trump is a landlord now and acting as one for money interest around the country. If you are going to be a resistance to it, be one. Do not talk about something that's not even being done. There are no projects on SB36. |
| 01:22:02.50 | Debbie | THANK YOU. |
| 01:22:02.72 | Jeffrey Chase | Thank you. |
| 01:22:04.10 | Debbie | Anyone else like to comment? |
| 01:22:05.47 | Sunny Yao | Thank you. |
| 01:22:05.49 | Jeffrey Chase | ourselves. |
| 01:22:06.03 | Sunny Yao | I will. Hello again. Yes. Can you state your name again for us? Oh, yes. For the record, my name is Sunny Jean Yowl. |
| 01:22:10.69 | Debbie | Can you state your name? Oh, yes. |
| 01:22:12.41 | Calvin Chan | . |
| 01:22:16.48 | Sunny Yao | And I am at Anchorage out here in the Bay and have been since the 4th of July because I'm a little bit patriotic. And I used to go with my family to see the fireworks around the Bay Area. So it was marvelous to come back to that nostalgic and fabulously good weather and that. And I remember somebody was saying something about, you know, three-eighths of the problem is addressed. And I said, wow, that's less than half. And I did say earlier that I have some very creative means or creative ideas of people transitional abilities and I want to say When a wealthy person camps outdoors, he's called a naturalist. And when a poor person camps outdoors, he's called homeless. Some people are outdoors because they love nature. They want to wake up and see the sun sparkling through the leaves of the trees and hear the birds singing sweetly to them and be, embraced in the bosom of Mother Nature. SO I HOPE THAT IN THE FUTURE, think about solutions to things. And oh, the most important thing I wanted to say. is that we have some volunteers that have been picking up garbage out to help make Sausalito more beautiful. Because I've talked to people who are houseless out here, and they are also concerned about what a lovely community and a place that Sausalito is. And it takes everybody, and humanity can only rise to the level of the lowest common denominator. So I have seen some people pulling together. I know there are compassionate people out there. And I have put it in a ten year mission on the street to learn about humanity and has been to try to save the world, because I think it's beautiful, and I think that we love life, and there's so many of us that love life in different levels. And so there's a lot of ways that we can address the different situations and the different standards of people, and by God, I hope we're not pulling seniors out of their homes so they could die in a nursing home when they have a home, and they could hopefully keep it and die in their own home that they've lived in for a long time. So I hope that's not the gear of just flipping houses, you know, wealthy houses for like rich foreigners perhaps that are coming in with gold and oil money. I don't know. I don't know what America, I know what America is. I know what it stands for. And when I see a little old lady struggling with a shopping cart across the street, I'm going to go offer her help, just like a Boy Scout would. I hope that we just remember what America is, that we're special here. Thank you, Sunny. Thank you. |
| 01:25:10.96 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 01:25:10.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:25:17.49 | Unknown | I just have a question that also addresses the exclusion for unmet senior housing needs. And my question was, The Housing Accountability Act, when it was described just now, I heard the line General plan trumps inconsistencies with objective standards. So what I was wondering is if I completely misunderstood or if that meant That there was a possibility that if, for example, in the general plan, Thank you. It was stated that Sausalito intended to build Um, low income or below market rate income housing for seniors that that would trump the No, you know, the exclusion for unmet senior housing needs, if that's relevant. |
| 01:26:22.18 | Debbie | Thank you. Any other public comment? |
| 01:26:23.83 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Okay, I'm going to close public comment and bring it back up here for any discussion. |
| 01:26:34.83 | Joan Cox | All right, Barbara, we're going to say thank you so much. We greatly appreciate You're making yourself available to update us We will invite you back. All right. Thank you so much. |
| 01:26:55.10 | Joan Cox | Please don't call out, nope. Thanks. |
| 01:27:03.47 | Joan Cox | All right, next on our agenda is TAM request, council approval of TAM's expenditure plan. |
| 01:27:28.27 | Diane Steinhauser | Thank you, good evening. It's late in the day and I had to pull this up. I had multitasking. It was just suddenly too much of a challenge. So I'm Diane Steinhauser, the Executive Director of TAM. I'm returning after an initial presentation on April 3rd to specifically request that... Um, the council consider approval of our Thank you. final transportation sales tax renewal expenditure plan. On the 3rd of April, we received comments from the council, and we have taken steps to address those comments. Of course, we received comments from all of the jurisdictions around Marin, including the Board of Supervisors, and we grouped them into several categories. And I'd like to very quickly go over this evening the changes we made in the final plan in response to the comments received by you, from you, excuse me. I'd like to briefly mention that I have Molly Graham here, our public outreach coordinator with TAM and also Robert Betts, deputy general manager for planning and operations from Marine Transit who are both available to help respond to any questions. Um, Tam is visiting all of the jurisdictions in Marin in order to meet. |
| 01:28:50.40 | Debbie | Susan, can you mute your phone? |
| 01:28:56.01 | Diane Steinhauser | Yeah, good. Okay. Thank you, Mayor. We are visiting all the jurisdictions in Marin according to the public utility code under which TAM is created. In order to adopt a new expenditure plan, we need to receive 50% plus of the cities or towns approving the plan, representing 50% plus of the incorporated population, and a majority vote of the Board of Supervisors. We are seeking unanimous approval from all the jurisdictions in Marin, and you are our final jurisdiction that we are visiting regarding the expenditure plan. Here's what our expenditure plan looks like. We talked about this in some detail back on April 3rd. Let me just mention that regarding local bus transit, rural transit, Muirwood shuttle, Paradex. some detail back on April 3rd. Let me just mention that regarding local bus transit, rural transit, Muirwood shuttle, paratransit, senior mobility, local transit of which over 60% is for the transit dependent, are all included in that category along with school transportation, school bus. So keep that in mind. Highways and interchanges. When we were here, you mentioned adding Alexander Avenue and Bridgeway to the interchange improvement list. They are now in the expenditure plan as part of our contingent of interchanges we'd like to study and consider improvements for. Regarding local streets and roads, we have quite a broad eligibility list, which I'll show you here, with respect to funds that come directly back to you. The old plan, under which we are currently operating with the current sales tax, puts about 13% of the funds back into the pockets of our local jurisdictions. This raises that to 22%. So you will receive additional funds under this new plan. And then finally, school safety and access. And let me just mention that three aspects of our successful Safe Routes to School program, crossing guards, school education, and safe pathways, and I know that the city has received funds for safe pathways, are all increased slightly under the plan. This is our process. We're coming to the end. We started way back in May of 2017 and have done a very deep and meaningful process over the past year or so with the formation of an expenditure plan committee who met over a six-month period to look at all the needs in Marin, came up with an expenditure plan the TAM board unanimously accepted in December. Very influential was a poll that we conducted in January with 73.2% of those people polled, about 800 people, likely voters, were polled, supporting the renewal of the sales tax. And after initially contacting all the jurisdictions in March, April, we've been back now in June, July to seek approval of the plan from all of our local jurisdictions. And it's been received favorably. I'm now going to talk about the input from the cities and towns. These are the items that were mentioned most frequently. I'm going to cover these elements highlighted in red print. Obviously, the other elements here, let me briefly mention, were very important as well to local jurisdictions. There was strong support of renewal of the existing tax and not raising it. And I do want to mention that we would be proceeding with no new tax. This is just a continuation of the existing. There was a recognition of benefit from the funds dedicated out of the local sales tax. and finally, an understanding, which we've done a lot of education on, of what's funded by Senate Bill 1, which is local street and road work, what's funded by Regional Measure 3, which is four major projects in Marin. And then all the other things that don't get funded are picked up under our sales tax plan. So they all work together. But I'm going to talk about each of these items in red just very briefly. There was an acknowledgement by every one of the limited funds and that needs greatly exceed the funding we have available. Again, local streets and roads was the focus of that comment, and we need to keep addressing the local street and road needs. I'm often asked regarding Senate Bill 1, what happens if it goes away. It really makes these funds all the more important that we continue our dedication to local street and road needs. And in this case, because our plan is old and we need to update it, we're increasing the local street and road funding that's dedicated under the new plan. We also have funds dedicated to the Marin Sonoma Neros, the completion of a very important connector in San Rafael, and then the interchange improvements that i mentioned along uh... including bridgeway and alexander i'll have another comment about bridgeway i'd like to make at the end of the meeting as well |
| 01:33:59.98 | Joan Cox | Can I ask you a question, Diane? So you just commented on the focus on funds for local roads. Yes. But back in 2010 or 2011, I can't remember, there was a decision made to divert funds from local projects to enable SMART to proceed. And my question of you is whether in this new legislation, TAM continues to hold the power to change its mind about how funding is spent. |
| 01:34:08.30 | Calvin Chan | Yes. |
| 01:34:38.84 | Joan Cox | you know, one of the charters in the new legislation is to dedicate funding for commute alternatives and trip reduction programs that reduce peak hour congestion. And so that is already an enunciated goal. So does the TAM board retain the power to shift the allocation of funds? |
| 01:35:03.51 | Diane Steinhauser | Let me just clarify the record in response to your question. In 2011, in June and July, the Tambor dedicated state funds to the SMART shortfall at that time for the extension to Larkspur. That project is now fully funded and under construction. It did not divert any local street and road funds that came from the sales tax measure. Second is the current measure and this measure both prohibit any funds being dedicated to the operation or maintenance of SMART. Now, there is an amendment process built into this sales tax plan where the TAM board, after coming back to all the cities and towns and having a broad public process could consider amendments. However, the sales tax plan very clearly states that no amendment could be done under any circumstances to fund the operation or maintenance of SMART. No amendment could be done to fund the construction, planning, or reconstruction of housing, and no amendment or any funds could be spent on parks as well. So those are all very clearly spelled out in the plan. Regarding the TAM board's discretion, this 23-page expenditure plan goes into the ballot. It will clearly spell out, as I illustrated back in April, exactly how the money's spent. And it's down to the penny with those prohibitions And the fact that the Tim Board can't change and hasn't changed in the 13 years that the existing plan has been operating, overseen by our Independent Citizens Oversight Committee, has not changed how the money is being spent. So. Thank you. Sure. Um, Sausalito, by the way, with respect to local streets and roads, you're receiving about $84,000 currently annually. That will be increased to $140,000. I want to briefly point out that the local street and road funds that you're going to be receiving under the new plan, the $140,000 annually, includes a number of new eligibility categories, and they're briefly illustrated here. We were asked to be as flexible as possible with the allowable use of these funds with respect to the decisions you make on how to spend them. So many jurisdictions said, can we spend these funds on flood projects that are on roads? Yes. Could we spend these funds on congestion relief in local quarters, including a contribution deal, a school bus service? Yes, as long as it's proven it provides congestion relief. Could we spend these funds on alternative fuel vehicles as well as alternative fuel facilities such as EV charging facilities available to the public? Yes. And then finally, municipal fleet costs are also eligible as well as bike and pedestrian improvements, which have always been eligible, but it's under your discretion that any of this occurs. In many cases, our public works departments are saying, you know, the paving and reconstruction of roads is their top priority. Let me respond to another issue that is with respect to safe routes to school. Strong support for the crossing guard program. The crossing guard program is actually experiencing a possible reduction based on our current revenue, not keeping up with costs, and no state and federal revenue available to us that cover the costs of crossing guards. So this sales tax measure actually increases crossing guards funding from the current 4.2 percent to 7 percent. Keep in mind that all three components of Safe Routes to School, both the education in schools, pathway projects around schools, and crossing guards are all increased under the new sales tax renewal plan. This is key projects that we've been able to use that Safe Pathway funding in Sausalito. So we've been able to grant you funds for a number of projects here out of the Safe Pathway program, which is competitive. Please keep that in mind, but we haven't ignored your needs. Yellow school bus program, an expansion to reduce congestion. Let me just mention that Marin Transit does fund 100% of sub-mental school bus service to all of Marin's high schools and many of its middle schools as well. And that will continue in the renewal of this sales tax. Marin Transit also has a youth pass program where over 2,000 annual passes are distributed to our youth for using bus service. and about 60-some percent, Robert says higher, are dedicated to low-income youth that qualify. Regarding yellow bus service, this was an important topic in many jurisdictions. It's a top priority in a just-adopted plan, a short-range transit plan adopted by Marin Transit and TAM. Marine Transit is looking for a way to normalize the distribution of funding that will be available now. We, for the first time, have dedicated funding for school bus service in the plan. Didn't happen in the old plan. It's happening in this plan. Also, Marine Transit and TAM are seeking new revenues for yellow school bus and in that regard on june 28th the tam board approved 1.1 million in sales tax interest reserve to yellow school bus service and we hope to grow that we hope to keep putting money in yellow school bus services looked at as both a need for our families and a strong congestion relieving mechanism amongst our school quarters in Marin. Using greenhouse gas emission reduction as a goal was very important and that was added to the expenditure plan goal statement. You can see the statement there that's included front and center in our expenditure plan. There was interest in oversight and accountability. We plan to retain our Independent Citizens Oversight Committee. They have Brown Act notice meetings. We often have members of the public attend. And they look at how we're spending the money and also review our audits, produce an independent annual report, and we'll continue to meet and oversee the expenditures under this plan. There was concern about the extension of the sales tax in effect for 24 years. It would expire in 2025, and so we're extending it 24 years beyond that. How do we know that this is the right way to spend the money over the next 20 to 30 years? The TAM board is allowed to do a review every six years to consider amendments. The amendments go through a very significant public outreach and vetting process, and then I return to get approval from the cities and towns, much as I'm doing now, in terms of making any amendment to the plan. And again, those funding prohibitions cannot be brought back into play in the amendment process. Smart, parks, housing. We had a long conversation about electric vehicle funding. You experienced some of that when I was back here on April 3rd. The TAM board elected to look at another fund source to support alternative fuel vehicles. We also opened up several categories, and I mentioned earlier, local streets and roads funds. If you so choose to use that on electric fleet vehicles or on electric vehicle chargers, you're welcome to do so. That's at your discretion. We have a very small category for sea level rides, and then, of course, we have a category for transit facilities and and those are also eligible for electric vehicles and electric vehicle infrastructure in response to that alternative fuel demand the tambour directed some rollover funds that we had accumulated in our vehicle registration fee to our alternative fuel program, totaling over $1.1 million over the next three years. You can read here about some of the ongoing coordination with local stakeholders and an effort to expand our EV charging rebate program, EV fleet program, our education and outreach. Just another quick look. Here's what a final expenditure plan looks like. The process we are in now is to return to the TAM board next week on July 26th, recommend a final reading of the ordinance with a merit hearing, adoption of the ordinance and expenditure expenditure plan attached a notice of exemption on the ordinance and expansion expenditure plan under sequa and direction to the board of supervisors to place it on the ballot on november 5th so with that i conclude my presentation be glad to answer any questions that you have thank you any questions of diane |
| 01:44:41.55 | Joan Cox | Okay, I'm going to open it up for public comment. Any public comment on this? All right, seeing that, I'm going to bring it back up here for discussion. Ray. |
| 01:44:53.04 | Jill Hoffman | our TAM representative. |
| 01:44:55.79 | Ray Withey | Thank you, Diane, for that comprehensive update. So the TAM board, as Diane indicated, has received input over the last several months on the expenditure plan and made some tweaks, which Diane's gone through. The most important thing for me was to ensure that the funding for local streets and roads was not diverted somehow into things that didn't have an immediate impact, and that was preserved. So I think that's very good news. There was some flexibility added in definitions and categories. I'm using the wrong words, but you know what I mean. And I think those were all good. And most importantly, as I said at the appropriate time board meeting, the beauty of this plan compared to the previous one is its flexibility and the ability to review it every six years. Part of the reason why we're having a renew early is that the old plan had baked in so many things that were now X number of years, I don't know, 15 whatever it is years later, were not so relevant. So that's good. To the mayor's point, you've got to be a bit careful about making sure that a systematic review is not the same thing as just simply moving funds around, right? And that is, I think, a very important distinction. So I'm very comfortable with the way all that was done. And as Diane explained, your particular concern wasn't about sales tax money anyway. So I think I'm pretty happy. I've already voted for this as a town commissioner, and I will be voting for this as a city council member. |
| 01:46:59.84 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:47:00.34 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 01:47:01.71 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Can I comment? |
| 01:47:02.69 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 01:47:03.11 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:47:03.13 | Debbie | Yes, Susan. |
| 01:47:05.05 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, great, thank you. Yeah, I'm very supportive of the expenditure plan and appreciate all of the work that the... TAM board and staff have done on this and all of the outreach. I'm particularly happy about the increase in money for crossing guards and hope that we might be able to see some of that in Sausalito and the Sausalito Marin City School District. I just want to thank you again for your work on the Safe Routes to Schools and all of our Marin communities. and especially in Sausalito. and Marin City. I also just want to add that I thought your slide on the concept of keeping an eye on emerging mobility technology is extremely important. This is such a rapidly evolving field, and I'm glad that there's at least some flexibility there. baked in over time to allow for that continuing discussion. So So I thank you again for the great presentation. And I'm very supportive. |
| 01:48:09.99 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:48:12.92 | Vice Mayor Burns | I'll just say thank you, Diane, for coming. I think a lot of this work was baked before, and we had our previous discussion, and you came back with it all tightened up and looks good. So thanks for your work, and thank you for the TAM board's work on this as well. |
| 01:48:28.69 | Jill Hoffman | Joe. Same. I don't have a lot. Thank you for all your hard work. I know it's a tremendous effort, and thanks to Ray for going to the meetings and your input as well. I know it's a lot of work. |
| 01:48:41.04 | Joan Cox | Yeah, I'll echo the comments of my fellow council members. I appreciate that TAM has been responsive to Sausalito's needs for pathways and safe routes to schools. I appreciate the hard work of the Citizens Oversight Committee. I appreciate the extension of an existing tax and not an increase. I appreciate the tweaks to ensure that funding for local streets and roads is not diverted at some point in the future. And I appreciate the fact that the review every six years allows flexibility to adapt to changing technology and changing needs so long as as Council Member Withey mentioned that flexibility does not entail diverting funds from local needs, including streets and roads. And so with that, I'm looking for a motion. |
| 01:49:41.30 | Jonathon Goldman | Okay. you |
| 01:49:43.49 | Ray Withey | I don't, do we have a resolution in front of us? And can we? |
| 01:49:43.52 | Jonathon Goldman | Bye. |
| 01:49:49.60 | Joan Cox | Yeah, we have a resolution. |
| 01:49:52.84 | Ray Withey | So... |
| 01:49:53.70 | Joan Cox | Approving transportation. Yes |
| 01:49:55.17 | Ray Withey | Yeah, I've got it. So I move that the council approve TAM's expenditure plan, basically as revised and as presented by the executive director today. |
| 01:50:09.29 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | again. |
| 01:50:13.23 | Debbie | Is that motion adequate for you? you |
| 01:50:15.82 | Joan Cox | Yes. Okay, Debbie, will you call the roll? I mean, the resolution says the half-cent transportation sales tax renewal expenditure plan. Thank you. |
| 01:50:24.75 | Diane Steinhauser | Thank you. |
| 01:50:24.89 | Ray Withey | That one. |
| 01:50:26.64 | Joan Cox | ALL RIGHT. |
| 01:50:27.03 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 01:50:30.64 | Debbie | Council member Susan Cleveland-Knowles. |
| 01:50:33.17 | Ray Withey | Yeah. |
| 01:50:33.97 | Debbie | Councilmember Whitty. |
| 01:50:35.38 | Ray Withey | Yes. |
| 01:50:36.56 | Debbie | Councilmember Hoffman. Yes. VICE MAYOR BURNS? YES. MAYOR COX. |
| 01:50:40.80 | Joan Cox | Yes. Yes, that motion carries 5-0. Thank you. |
| 01:50:43.03 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 01:50:44.34 | Diane Steinhauser | I don't know. |
| 01:50:44.41 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 01:50:44.43 | Diane Steinhauser | . |
| 01:50:44.46 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 01:50:44.48 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 01:50:44.53 | Diane Steinhauser | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:50:45.35 | Joan Cox | CONGRATULATIONS. |
| 01:50:45.96 | Diane Steinhauser | Thank you. And if I can just go off topic for a second. You had brought up, when I was here last time, the confluence of on-ramp traffic northbound from Bridgeway and off-ramp to Highway 1. We're about a day or two away from delivering a report and analysis that we've done now with a consultant team to Jonathan and, and his staff that takes a look at what's happening there with some possible recommended improvements downstream on Highway 1 that could help that situation. So stay tuned for that. I wanted to let you know we hadn't ignored that. have some additional work that I think we can do there. So thank you. |
| 01:51:25.40 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:51:25.55 | Diane Steinhauser | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:51:25.59 | Joan Cox | so much. We greatly appreciate that. AND ALL OF YOUR EFFORTS ON OUR BEHALF. Okay, everybody good to go? Anyone need a break? All right, we'll move on to Public hearing item 5A, Zoning Ordinance Amendment to update historic preservation regulations. |
| 01:52:21.19 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. |
| 01:52:29.86 | Calvin Chan | Good evening, council members, members of our Sausalito community and city staff. It's my privilege this evening to bring forward the Zoning Ordinance Amendment Historic Preservation Regulations Update. |
| 01:52:44.78 | Calvin Chan | The main goal of the historic preservation regulations update, the zoning ordinance amendment, is to make the basic requirements and processes easier to understand, to create certainty and to provide process clarity for all applicants, city staff, decision makers, and any other interested individuals. At their June 20th meeting, the Planning Commission and the Historic Landworks Board unanimously recommended approval of this zoning ordinance amendment to the City Council, approval of this zoning ordinance amendment here and after referred to as the HPR update. This was done after four different public meetings and lots of prior review. This project is categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15061B3. As I mentioned, this project has spanned many different people, and many different people have had a great amount of time and effort put into this. Prior review has included field visits and interviews with city staff, community stakeholders, working with the city council, planning commissioners, the historic landmarks board, study of peer communities as well as best practices, and also significant work with the legislative committee. |
| 01:54:06.37 | Calvin Chan | The legislative committee is a standing city council subcommittee tasked with reviewing possible amendments to our municipal code. Representatives from other boards and commissions, such as the planning commission and the historic landmarks board, were previously appointed to assist the legislative committee for this project. Throughout the legislative committee's discussions on this project, there was a desire to empower and to distinguish the HLB, or the Historic Landworks Board, as the city's historic preservation expert body. This was carefully done with a balance for historic preservation needs with development review by the Planning Commission. Ultimately, after going through a variety of different scenarios and permit procedures, it was determined and recommended by the legislative committee that the HLB can most efficiently carry out historic preservation through a separate advisory process that would precede planning commission design review. The overall goal of the alleged committee was to keep the duties and the responsibilities of the historic landmarks board and the Planning Commission independent, with each body focused on their subject matter review, working in closer alignment through an overall clearer and better defined process for overall historic preservation citywide. |
| 01:55:27.88 | Calvin Chan | There are four main focus areas of the HPR update. These focus areas support the main goal of the HPR update. These focus areas are to make the regulations easier to understand and more user friendly, to improve the administration of permit review, to clarify the review processes for historic resource review, and to be more proactive with solutions for historic preservation citywide. |
| 01:55:57.12 | Calvin Chan | Summarized of the historic preservation regulations update is this top 10 list of highlights for the zoning ordinance amendment. I won't go through this list just one by one, but I'll speak to some of the details in the upcoming slides. The first highlight that I'd like to discuss this evening is renaming or rebranding of the Historic Landworks Board, the HLB, to the Historic Preservation Commission. This was thought of at the Planning Commission and Historic Landworks Board meeting as a way to support the features of the Historic Preservation Regulations update, specifically the empowerment of the Historic Landworks Board as the city's historic preservation expert body and to develop a more proactiveworks Board as the city's historic preservation expert body, and to develop a more proactive approach to protecting our city's historical resources. |
| 01:56:52.49 | Calvin Chan | The second highlight is to revise the Historic Preservation Commission, or HLB's, membership qualification requirements to more closely align with the Certified Local Government Program, or CLG. As you know, the city of Sausalito became a certified local government in 2011. The CLG program, its main goal is to encourage local governments to integrate our local historic preservation interests and our concerns into our local planning and decision-making processes. The appointments to the Historic Preservation Commission come from professionals of specific disciplines and also of individuals who have demonstrated interests or skills and experience in historic preservation. |
| 01:57:39.62 | Calvin Chan | The third highlight of the HPR update program is to strengthen the review of properties which are 50 years of age and older for potential as a historic resource under the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA. As we know, CEQA recognizes historical resources and the main goal is to avoid substantial adverse environmental effects. One of the significant changes of the HPR update is a shifting of the initial data gathering responsibility to the applicant. Currently, the HLB has the responsibility of completing what we've called 50-year review memos. Under the HPR update, the applicant will now have that initial data gathering responsibility. Ultimately, this information is brought forward first to staff for preliminary analysis and then to the Historic Preservation Commission for final review. the Planning Commission and the Historic Landworks Board have recommended consideration of the San Francisco Planning Department's supplemental information for historic resource determination form as a guideline for compiling our own resource materials when it comes to historic preservation. As I mentioned just a moment ago, the city staff will make a preliminary historical resource determination under CEQA, and then a subsequent decision would be made by the Historic Preservation Commission. Ultimately, the Historic Preservation Commission would provide the Planning Commission or the decision-making body, whoever that is, an advisory historical resource determination under CEQA. |
| 01:59:21.22 | Debbie | Calvin, sorry to stop you. |
| 01:59:24.77 | Joan Cox | What is the difference between the city staff's preliminary historical resource determination and the 50-year review memo that used to be prepared by the Historical Preservation Commission? |
| 01:59:38.86 | Calvin Chan | So the HLB or the HPC, right now they conduct the 50-year review memo. So that data gathering responsibility will be transferred to the applicant as part of the HPR update. The applicant will provide that information to city staff who will take a quick glance and do a preliminary determination. That determination of whether or not the structure or site is a potential historical resource then goes to the Historic Preservation Commission, or HOB, for a subsequent determination. Ultimately, all that determination goes to the Planning Commission. |
| 02:00:13.77 | Joan Cox | And you said the city of San Francisco has a template. Is that something city staff intends to use to create the form for applicants to use? Thank you. |
| 02:00:24.76 | Calvin Chan | Yes. |
| 02:00:26.16 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:00:32.86 | Calvin Chan | So here is a chart. This is attachment three of your staff report. This is a flow chart showing the differences between the current and the proposed historical resource CEQA review process. I can go over these in more detail if desired. |
| 02:00:52.87 | Calvin Chan | The fourth highlight that I'd like to cover this evening is the establishment of what we're calling the Certificate of Appropriateness. Certificate of Appropriateness is a very common term used by lots of different jurisdictions to talk about the review process and authorization under historic preservation. A certificate of appropriateness review to be conducted by the Historic Preservation Commission would apply for projects that involve construction, alteration, demolition, and other features that pertain to local, state, national historic registered properties, properties that are within our currently only one historic overlay district, but potentially more in the future, and for any other structures and sites that are identified as a formal historical resource under the California Environmental Quality Act. One of the key features of conducting certificate of appropriateness review is to answer the question, will there be a substantial adverse effect on the significance of the historical resource? Will the character defining features of the structure site be affected in a negative manner by the proposed project? The HPC would review the project and issue an advisory certificate of appropriateness via a documented resolution to the decision-making body. |
| 02:02:13.18 | Calvin Chan | Displayed on the screen is a flow chart that you can see in attachment four, which shows our current historical resources design review process. And here is our proposed process. And this can be seen in attachment five. |
| 02:02:33.94 | Calvin Chan | Highlight number five of the HPR update is placing more emphasis on the Certificate of Appropriateness findings to reflect review under the Secretary of Interior Standards for the treatment of historic properties. The SOI standards are common preservation principles presented in non-technical language. The main goal of these standards is to protect our nation's irreplaceable cultural resources by promoting a more consistent preservation practice. SOI standards include a series of concepts about maintaining, repairing, and replacing historic materials, as well as designing and ensuring new additions or improvements to structures and sites that are historical resources are done in an appropriate manner. The SOI guidelines offer general design and technical recommendations to assist with applying these standards. And this is not a major change from our current to our proposed, but this is a highlighted feature of the Certificate of Appropriateness Program. |
| 02:03:36.00 | Calvin Chan | under the HPR update, the HLB or the HB? |
| 02:03:39.11 | Debbie | Calvin, hold on one second. Debbie, it looks like we've lost Susan. |
| 02:03:44.49 | Vice Mayor Burns | You there, Susan? |
| 02:03:56.76 | Joan Cox | All right, we're going to take a brief break to see if we can reestablish communication with Council Member Cleveland Knowles. |
| 02:04:12.27 | Joan Cox | We're going to take five minutes. |
| 02:04:16.98 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:04:55.03 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. |
| 02:04:55.55 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | All right. |
| 02:04:56.31 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:04:56.51 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:04:56.77 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:04:57.04 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:04:57.10 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:04:57.20 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:04:57.24 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:04:57.27 | Joan Cox | Thank you. to unagy. |
| 02:04:59.05 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:04:59.89 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:04:59.96 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:05:00.97 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:05:21.52 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:05:22.03 | Debbie | There you go. |
| 02:05:26.62 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Hi, Sarah. |
| 02:05:27.53 | Debbie | You're back now. |
| 02:05:30.64 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, but... |
| 02:05:30.65 | Debbie | Yep. And... And then, you know, I'm going to be a little bit I can't see. |
| 02:05:33.03 | Lily Whalen | you know. who have pushed or seconded. Can you see it or no? Thank you. |
| 02:05:39.04 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yep, I can hear you fine. |
| 02:05:40.47 | Lily Whalen | You can hear us, can you see anything? Thank you. |
| 02:05:43.48 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | No. And Rhett had some trouble with that. He had to press the video a couple times before it |
| 02:05:43.51 | Lily Whalen | No. |
| 02:05:59.95 | Lily Whalen | Thank you. Thank you. That's what you're saying. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:06:15.98 | Lily Whalen | you Thank you. |
| 02:06:16.91 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Oh, sorry, bye. |
| 02:06:18.26 | Lily Whalen | Thank you. Okay. Thank you. |
| 02:06:20.21 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And if you just go forward with audio, that's fine. I can put on the granite case. |
| 02:06:23.96 | Unknown | I'm That's really loud. |
| 02:06:43.97 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | THE END OF Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:06:46.03 | Lily Whalen | Susan, we're going to leave it the way it is. Is that okay with you? |
| 02:06:46.27 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Susan, we're going to leave. |
| 02:06:50.37 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. |
| 02:06:50.93 | Lily Whalen | I don't know. |
| 02:06:52.88 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I'll just have the audio. |
| 02:06:55.57 | Lily Whalen | Yeah, you have the audio, but we can actually see you. |
| 02:07:00.55 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | that's okay i'll probably just turn the video off but um yeah that's fine i can hear fine so |
| 02:07:02.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:07:02.76 | Lily Whalen | But, |
| 02:07:03.41 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:07:05.84 | Lily Whalen | Thank you. |
| 02:07:06.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:07:06.28 | Lily Whalen | Thank you. |
| 02:07:06.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:07:06.33 | Lily Whalen | Okay. |
| 02:07:07.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:07:09.79 | Lily Whalen | So I'm just going to leave you on while we're on the break then. Is that okay? If that's okay. |
| 02:07:14.30 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you |
| 02:07:14.42 | Lily Whalen | Thank you. |
| 02:07:14.43 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Hmm. |
| 02:07:14.65 | Lily Whalen | Thank you. |
| 02:07:14.70 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:07:24.02 | Vice Mayor Burns | you Obviously, they're chartered. |
| 02:08:38.08 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:10:19.75 | Debbie | Okay, Debbie. |
| 02:10:28.93 | Joan Cox | Okay, we're gonna resume. I will note for the record that Susan Cleveland Knowles is now participating by audio. We can see her, but she cannot see us, so. Okay, Calvin, sorry to interrupt your presentation. Please continue. |
| 02:10:46.35 | Calvin Chan | Thank you, Mayor Cox. The next highlight is highlight number six. Under this highlight, the historic preservation commission would continue its functions as an advisory board but with a more improved and formalized review process. There would be enhanced on-site public noticing of any certificate of appropriateness review, as well as a more documented formal resolution for the certificate of appropriateness findings. One key feature of the HPR update is the elimination of Joint Planning Commission and HPC meetings. This would streamline the appeal process to remove the Historic Preservation Commission from such proceedings while maintaining each body's own subject matter review. |
| 02:11:32.98 | Calvin Chan | Highlight number eight is the establishment and clarification of the city's local historic register and the local historic resources inventory. We currently already have a local historic register, but the wording will be cleaned up under the HPR update, as well as the establishment of a formal local historic resources inventory. Currently, we have a noteworthy structures and historical resources list. A citywide inventory was desired as part of this HPR update process. At this moment in time, it is not funded, and staff recommends continuing using the noteworthy structures list until that time when the inventory work is funded and completed. highlight number nine. is a change in the local historic register designation recommendation process. The Historic Preservation Commission will have the authority to recommend approval or disapproval of modification of properties to the local register with final designation still remaining at the City Council. For historic districts, the Historic Preservation Commission as well as the Planning Commission will make this recommendation to the City Council. Lastly, under the HPR update, enforcement penalties, or what we'd like to term deterrent measures, will be established under the HPR update. The HPR update would require the restoration of any objects that are structured to a prior condition if there was some work done without the benefit of proper permitting. Additionally, the city would have the authority to withhold a building permit for a site if determined that a historic structure has been demolished or partially demolished without the benefit of the required permits. The city would also have the authority to exercise the recordation of an affidavit with the Marin County Assessor's Office stating that no permits for any new development could be issued for up to five years. So these are very strict enforcement penalties which are put into place as deterrent measures, not so much to scare people into compliance, but hoping that these would be deterrent measures to incentivize people to follow the rules. |
| 02:13:49.39 | Calvin Chan | I've now gone through 10 of the HPR update highlights. This, just to recap, is the renaming and rebranding of the Historic Landmarks Board to the Historic Preservation Commission. A clarification of the qualification requirements to align with COG requirements. Strengthening CEQA environmental review for historical resources. Establishment of the certificate of appropriateness review process to be conducted by the historic preservation commission. Certificate of Appropriateness Findings to reflect review under Secretary of Interior Standards to clarify that the Historic Preservation Commission's functions continue to be an advisory to the decision-making body. The elimination of Joint Planning Commission and HPC meetings. The establishment and clarification of our local historic register and the local historic resources inventory. A change in the way we make recommendations for local historic register and the local historic resources inventory, a change in the way we make recommendations for local historic register properties and the establishment of enforcement penalties or deterrent measures. amendments to the zoning ordinance must be consistent with the city's general plan. The zoning ordinance amendment, or this HPR update program, is consistent with the general plan, specifically our community design and historical preservation element, which contains goals and policies that are, quote, intended to reinforce the identity and delicate beauty of Sausalito. Displayed on your screen and in your staff report beginning on page 8 is some of the objectives, policies and programs that have been highlighted out of the community design and historical preservation element which show consistency of the HPR update to the general plan. |
| 02:15:38.24 | Calvin Chan | Staff's recommendation to the City Council this evening is to conduct this public hearing for this proposed zoning ordinance amendment to update the regulations for our historic preservation program citywide, to introduce and read by title only this ordinance, and to continue the second reading to the July 31st, 2018 City Council meeting for adoption. That concludes my presentation and I'm available for any questions. |
| 02:16:06.50 | Debbie | Are there questions of Calvin? |
| 02:16:10.70 | Joan Cox | I have one. Calvin, on page 8 of the draft ordinance, it says that the Community Development Department shall review and act on applications made solely for the following classifications of projects and that includes additions to single family or two family residences where the addition results in a setback from any adjacent structure on a neighboring property of less than 10 feet. That seems like a very broad category of residences that are subject only to community development department approval. |
| 02:16:51.61 | Calvin Chan | So this is page 8 of 283. |
| 02:16:55.76 | Joan Cox | No, this is page 8 of 51, the draft ordinance. It's attachment 1 to our to our and it's it's item b1 at the bottom of page eight |
| 02:17:14.09 | Calvin Chan | So this is a trigger for administrative design review permits. This is something that is currently in our ordinance already. It is not proposed to be changed under the zoning ordinance amendment. This is a trigger which frequently comes into play when you're a single-family residence and you're planning to do an addition. We want to make sure that there is adequate setback and considerations for privacy, views, light and air, those types of other things that would not normally be captured under a zoning permit ministerial review to be captured under a design review discretionary review process. |
| 02:17:50.98 | Joan Cox | written. |
| 02:17:51.95 | Calvin Chan | I'm sorry. |
| 02:17:51.97 | Joan Cox | broad category of Residences that are subject only to |
| 02:17:55.13 | Calvin Chan | Yes. |
| 02:17:59.82 | Joan Cox | that are not subject to design review and subject only to community development department and approval so I will circle, that's not. If this is already existing, then it's not part of what's being changed as a result of the historic preservation regulations. I'll just take that up with the city attorney. |
| 02:18:23.42 | Ray Withey | Bye. |
| 02:18:23.63 | Joan Cox | Oh, Lily. I see Lily coming to the podium. |
| 02:18:26.14 | Ray Withey | But Madam Mayor, just to clarify, just a sort of follow-up question here, isn't this, haven't we had this in our zoning ordinance for years? |
| 02:18:27.37 | Joan Cox | I mean, just. |
| 02:18:34.66 | Joan Cox | Yeah, but I think it's |
| 02:18:35.58 | Ray Withey | So we'll see issue. |
| 02:18:37.80 | Joan Cox | Because what this says, I mean, it has never been applied in this way, in my knowledge, in eight years on the Planning Commission. But what this says, as written, is that projects that entail additions to single family or two family residences where the addition results in a setback from any structure on a neighboring property of less than 10 feet are subject only to community development department review. That's a very broad. CATEGORY. That's how I'm reading it. So Lily... |
| 02:19:08.03 | Lily Whalen | Thank you, Madam Mayor. So other projects that require design review would be subject to review by the Planning Commission. So for example, if there was a project that |
| 02:19:08.06 | Joan Cox | Go ahead. |
| 02:19:20.31 | Lily Whalen | proposed square footage that met the design review threshold in front of the Planning Commission, and it was proposed by the 10 feet away from a neighboring structure, it would be required to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. So this doesn't exclude Planning Commission review. This is at the lower level. typically would be reviewed at a staff level over the counter as a |
| 02:19:43.14 | Joan Cox | for design review only. |
| 02:19:43.26 | Lily Whalen | or design requirements. Thank you. |
| 02:19:45.62 | Joan Cox | So the design review can be done by the community development director, but the planning commission still has to approve the project. Maybe. |
| 02:19:55.11 | Lily Whalen | put it in. |
| 02:19:55.61 | Joan Cox | way. |
| 02:19:56.00 | Lily Whalen | So, a zoning permit for an addition that doesn't meet a design review threshold would typically not be reviewed at a design review level. But if it hits this particular trigger, it would be reviewed at a design review level by the Community Development Director. There are other levels of review that would trigger the Planning Commission review. So this particular trigger here. doesn't exclude those other projects from Planning Commission review. |
| 02:20:30.98 | Joan Cox | The reason I raise this is if you look at items two, it's, you know, it doesn't increase the structure, it increases the structure by less than 10%. Item three, it's the replacing of awning fabric. All of these other items are on their face de minimis. improvements, but the way that one is framed it entails a much broader class of residences. But as Council Member Withey points out, this has been in our zoning code for quite some time, so I'm still going to circle back with you and the city attorney on this, but I don't need to get this resolved this evening. Thank you. |
| 02:21:16.21 | Joan Cox | All right, Joe. |
| 02:21:17.29 | Vice Mayor Burns | I WANTED TO BE ABLE the HPC board now. I know there was a little bit of discussion at one of the meetings on maybe their expertise in this new process. How did that conclude? Is there additional training available to understand some of this process a little bit better for them? Or do we maybe look at some different qualifications when appointing new HPC members? |
| 02:21:47.04 | Calvin Chan | Absolutely. So this is, you're speaking to highlight number two. Let me flip back to that. |
| 02:21:55.31 | Calvin Chan | So as I stated, we're already a certified local government. We became one in 2011, and under the certified local government program, we are encouraged to appoint professionals who are a historic preservation commission from specific disciplines to the extent that they're available in our community. Right now on our board, we have at least two architects and some other members with demonstrated interest in the skills for historic preservation. There's always opportunity for continuing education, and that is definitely something that the current HPC is really active on. We have done already two California Preservation Foundation trainings within the last couple months regarding historic preservation and ongoing improvement in the skills for historic preservation for not only HBC members but for city staff is something that we're looking into. THANK YOU. |
| 02:22:51.65 | Ray Withey | So I've been tracking this for years, you know, first the guidelines and then the development of this ordinance. I'm trying to understand the level of burden that we are now going to put on every homeowner who wants to modify their residence, because virtually, you know, Nearly all residences that need modifying are older than 50 years. Many of them are in a state of disrepair. Many of them are unsafe. Many of them have not sit on proper foundations. They're not seismically upgraded, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. And so the, at times, rather onerous set of burdens that we put on homeowners in this design review process has now been potentially significantly enhanced. So in the absence of actually knowing what is involved in now the homeowner having to prepare essentially a historic context statement for his own property or her own property. What is actually going to be involved? You're saying you're going to use the San Francisco form, but aren't really what's going to happen as a whole bunch of design professionals are now going to offer specialized services to write these reports, which are going to probably cost thousands of dollars. |
| 02:24:27.79 | Calvin Chan | Thank you, Councilmember Withey. This was a concern that was discussed at a former joint planning commission and HLB meeting. If I can clarify, highlight number three. This SF planning supplemental historic resource determination form is essentially the same information that the HLB currently does already under the 50-year review memo. Information like who is the project's architect, the original date of construction, some photos of the site, and description of surrounding properties. This is basic information that is not entirely too technical that anyone can gather. And the San Francisco planning department has a great set of resources that we would like to model our guidelines after. Just because you're doing a project that is subject to design review and CEQA review for historical resources, it doesn't automatically require someone to go out and hire a qualified professional in historic preservation to complete the historic resource evaluation. The first question that the Supplemental Historic Resource Evaluation Forum is asking is, is this or is this not a historical resource under CEQA? And that initial data gathering is the shift from the HLB to the applicant. The applicant will complete this form. It's about 10 pages or so. It's just fill in the blank. That's something that we're looking to develop and model after and submit it to city staff for a preliminary review. Ultimately, everything still gets funnel the Historic Preservation Commission and then up to the decision-making body. So I want to be very clear that it's not an automatic requirement for a historic resource evaluation. That is only if you are determined to be a historical resource under CEQA. |
| 02:26:16.43 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 02:26:18.12 | Jill Hoffman | Calvin, And I helped develop this way back when, you know, before it went to HLB and before it went to PC and all those things. So I have a little bit of familiarity with it. But it's true that we're not creating any requirements. We're just streamed. The idea is that they're just more streamlined. And the thought is it's going to be a quicker and easier process for people. the homeowner or the developer. |
| 02:26:47.43 | Calvin Chan | Exactly. And also less burden placed on our historic preservation commission to go collect this information that takes quite a lot of time and could take a lot of time from our volunteers. |
| 02:27:01.91 | Jill Hoffman | And that's also been the source of some of the significant delays in getting projects moving further along. Isn't that right? |
| 02:27:10.09 | Calvin Chan | Yes, absolutely. Thank you. |
| 02:27:11.39 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and so the idea is, Ray, that we're streamlining this and making the process faster for whoever's doing the project. |
| 02:27:27.97 | Jill Hoffman | I guess I have a follow-up question. With regard to the funding and the inventory. So, um... The idea is that, sorry, let me ask another question. So with regard to the 50 year review memos, so presumably there are houses in town that have gone through different owners who have done different projects. Do we have, do we keep the 50 year review memos? |
| 02:27:53.50 | Barbara Kautz | Yes. |
| 02:27:53.95 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so if there's been a memo in the past, someone can just pull that memo and use that memo as well. So then the inventory, the idea behind the inventory is that there's one source. You just look it up. Is your house on the inventory or not? That's a pretty good starting point. Again, it gives the project applicants clarity and a little bit more certainty going forward about the process for their home and anybody that's involved in the project about what the process will entail, if it's on the inventory or not. and a little bit more certainty going forward about the process for their home and anybody that's involved in the project about what the process will entail, if it's on the inventory or not. And it's a standard criteria. So you said, you made reference that The cost to do the inventory is not funded. But in the staff report, you talked about other sources of funding for it. |
| 02:28:44.04 | Calvin Chan | you Absolutely. So historic resources survey citywide and the resulting inventory that would come from that survey, it is really important to historic preservation, and it really supports the main goals displayed on your screen. It's creating certainty and providing process clarity not only for our homeowners, our applicants, for our city staff as well as decision makers. The inventory would... in essence provide a baseline for historic preservation for us to reference and to not only evaluate different proposals for projects, but to establish priorities for historic preservation citywide. The inventory, correct, is not funded in this current upcoming budget, but it is something as a certified local government, we do have the ability to apply for funds and grants from the Office of Historic Preservation. It is a. is something as a certified local government we do have the ability to apply for funds and grants from the office of historic preservation it is a competitive process but it is something that the historic preservation commission and city staff are very excited about and will definitely look into |
| 02:29:53.68 | Debbie | If there are no other council questions, I'll open it up for public comment. |
| 02:29:58.71 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I have a question. |
| 02:30:00.11 | Debbie | Oh, sorry, Susan. |
| 02:30:01.27 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Do we know how much? No, that's okay. Sorry, I've just been trying to keep it on mute. Do we know how much that report would cost, Calvin, and what... what the likelihood of getting grants for that would be. |
| 02:30:16.33 | Calvin Chan | So the estimated cost of the citywide historical resources survey and inventory was $60,000. The likelihood of getting a grant, I guess, depends on how good our grant writing is. And I think we have a very good shot. |
| 02:30:33.45 | Jill Hoffman | And we also. For the full amount. Oh, sorry. |
| 02:30:34.26 | Vice Mayor Burns | So... Yes, Bull of Mountain. |
| 02:30:39.31 | Calvin Chan | So the grant amount is up to the Office of Historic Preservation. A recent grant that I looked into just to do some background research, the city and county of San Francisco, they recently received $40,000 from the Office of Historic Preservation as a certified local government to do a Chinese-American contact statement. So there are particular, and this has been discussed by the HLB, there are particular ways in which Sausalito can frame our grant writing to make it more interesting for receipt of the grant, and that's something that we're going to look into. |
| 02:31:18.61 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Great, thank you. |
| 02:31:27.86 | Debbie | I'm going to open it up for public comment. Yes, Vicki, or yes. |
| 02:31:41.63 | Tyanne Johnson | My name is Tyanne Johnson. And I'm just kind of interested that the, within the staff report, it says the historic preservation regulations update supports the goals and policies of the general plans, community design and historic preservation element, quote, intended to reinforce the identity and delicate beauty of Sausalito. I'm not, you know, does that mean that, within the preservation. oversight that there is some concern with preservation of the overall quality of life in Sausalito and the kind of housing structures Um, And I'm not sure who the applicant is. Is the applicant someone who owns the house? Or if there's a project that is proposed, The applicant could be someone that is applying on behalf of a property being preserved that is not their own. I'm not quite sure about that. And the other thing is the penalties for destruction or demolition or partial demolition. And I'm wondering if that relates to a neglect on the part of a property owner leaving a place to disintegrate, to remove its historical nature by letting holes in the roof and letting water come in and letting the place really go down to the point that it might not be qualifying for historical preservation. Thank you. Thank you. . |
| 02:33:30.02 | Joan Cox | I'm not sure. |
| 02:33:30.31 | Tyanne Johnson | Thank you. |
| 02:33:30.32 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:33:39.38 | Gary Taylor | Good evening, friends. I am Gary Taylor, a Sossero resident. I'm here speaking tonight, although I don't have the board's approval, but I don't think anybody from the Sossero Historical Society will disagree with some vague comments I intend to make. To remind you that our rooms right upstairs from where we speak right now are full of photographs, maps, historic information that residents come to us frequently to ask whether it's preliminary for a permit or whether it's just curious. They want to know the history of their house. We are glad to help them. as you have shifted burdens onto the applicants we continue to say wow can we help here and make this easier for residents but i remind you we are not professional planners we should not be put into a position of assisting in some manner and giving advice that we have no business and know nothing about. But just to say that we appreciate the courtesy of the city of Sausalito furnishing these buildings, this building for us. We want to be able to participate however we can help our residents. If you have any suggestions of additional docents that might be willing to help in this process and volunteer with the Sausal historical society, that might be a good way to ease the burden. Now, as Ray was saying, I don't know how much this is going to cost or how much, but it seems just wrong to be putting more of a burden on a homeowner trying to do something simple here. So we offer our services, but in a limited ability to say we offer our facilities to somebody that we're already doing, perhaps you can help us make it better though. Thank you. |
| 02:35:24.51 | Joan Cox | Thank you. VICKY. |
| 02:35:26.34 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 02:35:36.55 | Vicki Nichols | Good evening, Mayor Cox and council members. I can't tell you how happy I am to be here almost And on whatever your vote is, but I hope it's a yes. I'm speaking tonight as a former HLB person and a Sausalito neighbor. This has been going on since 2011. And I've heard a couple of comments, so I just want to share some brief observations. First off, I really appreciate Councilmember Hoffman's comments on the inventory. That is the underlying most serious thing here. And we have in the past had this funded. It has been funded. It was funded when the our iteration of the HLB, uh, really lobbied hard and we got it. And we know that things change and things have to be reallocated. But I think even if you check and see if there's anywhere that money's being held or shifted, it was shifted in this last budget thing, I remember hearing it, that helps leverage Calvin's efforts for the state preservation. They're usually matching funds, so however you can demonstrate that you may have some that's inhaled, that you're not going to use it till 2023 or whatever. That will help. And this is not an uncommon practice. This is done a lot. This really will take the burden off the current HLB members to address Council Member Byrne's question. Sometimes it's difficult to get all the qualifications that are needed to match our certified local government requirements. And this is assuring that you have that level of review that's consistent, that's fair, and done in a reasonable amount of money. I want to thank Calvin, who really kind of came into this, inherited this, and really educated himself and helped do all these revisions. And I think he's made this pretty palatable for... a long process and hopefully it'll be easy for you to be able to approve it Um, And I also want to say something that has occurred to me that was touched on a little bit. And I think you've all been in elections, and I think a number of us in this room can stipulate that we love our little town, our small village-like historical character. And what better time to get this approved and codified as we're doing our general plan. This is the basis of really saying hearing from the community that we value these things by doing these... inventories and getting these things codified, we have a way to legally protect our resources and have a fair way for everybody to be treated as they're going into these projects. I'm not sure if I can. I think that's pretty much it. Oh, and to thank Jerry Taylor and the Sausalito Historical Society. There are great resources up there. I don't think we need docents to do this because you'll have these professionals. You have a great HLB right now that's raring to go. Okay, thanks Vicki. |
| 02:38:48.31 | Joan Cox | Okay, thanks for that. |
| 02:38:50.73 | Vicki Nichols | Yeah. |
| 02:38:50.81 | Joan Cox | Yes. Morgan, welcome. |
| 02:38:54.03 | Debbie | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:38:54.31 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:38:54.35 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 02:38:56.53 | Morgan Pierce | I know, I usually don't get out of bed for these efforts. I usually watch this from the comfort of my couch and streaming laptop, but thank you for addressing this issue tonight. Morgan Pierce, 270 Curry Lane, speaking as a resident, but as you know, I'm also the chair of the Planning Commission and a six-year veteran of the Historic Landmarks Board. I'd like to extend an enormous thank you to Calvin Chan, Danny Castro, and the Sausalito Planning Department, as well as members of the City Council, Planning Commission, and HLB for their tireless efforts in navigating the various policies, stakeholders, and legislative bodies to bring this important update to our historic preservation regulations to fruition. I'd also like to thank the Sausalito Historical Society and Jerry and his folks for offering their access to resources and their assistance in such access. |
| 02:38:59.28 | Debbie | Yeah. |
| 02:39:44.68 | Morgan Pierce | um, invaluable to me over the years, so we'd really appreciate that. I've been involved in the development of this policy improvement project for many years and with many of you in this room, and it was through our intimate understanding of established protocols that we became acutely aware of the need for the changes presented to you this evening. It's my sincere hope that this council will share our enthusiasm and support for these improvements to Sausalito's historic preservation process, which we believe will leverage existing policies to better identify and protect our historic resources as outlined by the United States Secretary of Interior's guidelines for historic preservation, coupled with our historic guidelines and ultimately married to the city's pending historic context statement and historic resources inventory. This legislation serves two primary purposes. One, to better identify, preserve, and enhance Sauceda's unique historic resources. And two, simplify and streamline the process by which these properties, structures, and elements are assessed, presented, and reviewed. Hang on. get back. and review. these. I'm sorry. and reviewed for approval. I'll be happy to answer any questions the council has regarding the proposed changes and encourage them to adopt this amendment when they meet at the next meeting. I did want to highlight a couple of the comments that council members queried. Mayor Cox, we addressed that same line of text in the code, and staff assured us that they would be addressing that under another project. Council Member Withey, you had concerns about an onerous process. I think Calvin addressed that quite well. Again, we don't want to make it costly or onerous for the applicants, but we want to |
| 02:41:18.92 | Calvin Chan | I don't know. |
| 02:41:39.36 | Morgan Pierce | Council Member Hoffman, thank you for addressing the inventory. It is important. We need to get that funded as soon as possible so all of these efforts can move along more seamlessly. So thank you very much. |
| 02:41:51.31 | Joan Cox | Thank you, Morgan. All right, other comments? All right, I'm going to close public comment and bring it up here for discussion. Susan, did you want to make any comments? |
| 02:42:04.74 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yes, thanks. I really appreciate everyone coming out tonight, members of our planning commission and Jerry Taylor. Thank you. Um, I I just really appreciate all the hard work that's gone into this. And I think it resolves some of the confusion and ambiguity in a process that I saw when I was on the planning commission. And so I think the streamlining is important and the relative roles between the new Commission and the Planning Commission is good. You know, I recognize Council Member with these concerns about the shift of the burden to the applicant, but I do think that that will generally help the process and help speed it along. I think that's something that we should keep an eye on. And if it does get overly burdensome, maybe that's something that should be revisited. But I do think we should make the historic inventory report a priority. If we need matching funds, that should be something we look at next year. But as I understand it, by completing that, that will reduce the burden on applicants as well and be an important resource for the city so thank you for everybody for their hard work on this and i'm supportive although i'd like to hear the comments of my fellow council members |
| 02:43:33.33 | Debbie | Who would like to go next? |
| 02:43:35.93 | Vice Mayor Burns | I'll go very generically. It looks like I'm the only one that hasn't had exposure to this prior to this meeting and to this process. So I happened to walk in one night during the first meeting on this just because it caught my ear when I walked by that something about being over 50 and dilapidated. So I popped in. So I don't know how it was used in application before, but it looked like a tremendous amount of work. And now as I've gone through this hearing and reading how much time and effort various commissions and staff have put in over the years. So congratulations to everybody who wanted this and got it done. It looks like it's been a great step, and it looks like we're going in the right direction, especially with an inventory forthcoming. So thank you to all. |
| 02:44:29.75 | Ray Withey | Yeah, as I said, I've been following this since 2011. This is a good outcome. I'm fully supportive of the ordinance. My comments around the burden on the |
| 02:44:51.78 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, I thought... |
| 02:44:53.25 | Ray Withey | Yeah, I thought we got rid of the buzzer. |
| 02:44:54.86 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | or, you know? |
| 02:44:56.58 | Ray Withey | Yeah. |
| 02:45:06.91 | Joan Cox | Hi, Susan. I am back. I'm so sorry. That's okay. |
| 02:45:10.85 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:45:11.87 | Ray Withey | So my comments about, so as I said, I'm thoroughly supportive of this ordinance. And it's been a lot of work and lots of folks have worked really hard on this. So thank you. With regards to my one area of caution, You know, I know how bureaucracies work. You know, by the time you've got an applicant who's now got to fill in a form, within five years that form's tripled, if not gone up in size tenfold. It's just the way it works. It's just the way it works, folks. And so I agree with my colleague, Council Member Cleveland Knowles, that this is something we need to keep an eye on so that bureaucracy around this doesn't just proliferate and then become a really unacceptable burden on the applicant. |
| 02:46:09.11 | Joan Cox | The good thing is we have some say over that bureaucracy. |
| 02:46:13.14 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:46:14.62 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:46:14.64 | Jill Hoffman | Jill. Yeah, I'm delighted that this is here finally. We started working on, I don't know, whatever it was, three or four years ago. And it's part of an overall push to streamline our processes and bring our, you know, how we do things here at City Hall up into a new century. And so I think this is doing it. I think this is a good step. To Ray's point, you know, about shifting the burden from the HLB who prepared these memos, it was not particularly the best use of the Historic Landmark Board, you know, and it took a lot of time. And so we talked about that, you know, early on about who's the appropriate, who bears the burden of this most appropriately. And so that's why we fell out on the side of the applicant. And by the way, the applicant probably has incentive to do the report in a way that they find most favorable to themselves. as opposed to, so I mean, that was something of concern as well. But I think with the balance of when we have an inventory, it makes it easy and clear and takes a lot of the guesswork out of it. And hopefully we'll streamline and give people a little bit more certainty about what they can do with their property and what steps they need to take for all the people that are concerned. So I'm pleased that it's here. I'm glad that it has the support of the council, and I look forward to voting on this. |
| 02:47:43.18 | Joan Cox | I agree with my fellow council members. This process began when I was a planning commissioner, so I too am pleased and proud that this is now teed up for approval this evening. I want to commend the hard work of the Historic Landmarks Board, the Planning Commission, two of whom members came this evening, Jerry Taylor, Calvin Chan, Lily Whalen, and Danny Castro. This has been a really Herculean effort by all involved. I think that these new regulations better identify and preserve Sausalito's historic resources, simplify the process by which the resources are assessed and reviewed. And I'm also appreciative of the qualifications for membership on the Historic Preservation Commission, which are enunciated, but which still allow the flexibility to appoint folks who have this as an interest, even if it's not a profession. So I think it's great on all fronts, and I'm ready to entertain a motion to approve. |
| 02:48:50.21 | Jill Hoffman | do we have a do we have a written motion or oh you got it okay |
| 02:48:52.15 | Vice Mayor Burns | Oh my God. I move that we introduce and read by title only an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito amending the Sausalito Municipal Code to update historic preservation regulations. |
| 02:49:06.17 | Joan Cox | Lily or sorry Debbie will you call the role |
| 02:49:10.36 | Debbie | Council members, Cleveland Knowles. |
| 02:49:13.50 | Joan Cox | you |
| 02:49:13.52 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. |
| 02:49:14.34 | Debbie | Council member Whitty? |
| 02:49:15.41 | Ray Withey | Yes. |
| 02:49:15.95 | Debbie | Thank you. Councilmember Hoffman? Yes. Vice Mayor |
| 02:49:19.78 | Vice Mayor Burns | you |
| 02:49:19.83 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:49:19.84 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 02:49:19.93 | Vice Mayor Burns | Yeah. |
| 02:49:19.94 | Debbie | Excuse me, Vice Mayor Burns and Mayor Cox. |
| 02:49:23.25 | Joan Cox | Yes, that motion carries 5-0. Congratulations to all. This is a really great accomplishment. |
| 02:49:34.25 | Joan Cox | Okay, we're going to move on to the Business Item 6C, revenues options update. So this Thank you. Is everybody good? We took a quick break. Okay. |
| 02:50:07.13 | Melanie Purcell | Good evening. Revenue, it's all about money. All right, real quick, I wanted to do, my name's Melanie Purcell, Administrative Services Director. We're here to bring back just a little more information and update to Council on the revenue options that were discussed during the budget adoption process. I also want to introduce to you Brian Mora. who is assisting the department as I'm transitioning out. And Brian is going to be taking the lead on some of the the additional research and information that is requested by Council. So we will be working together to help shepherd this through, You'll see his smiling face lots. Okay, so real quick, we're gonna talk about the options that were presented, and then specifically get into demand parking, business license, transit occupancy taxes, and then the next steps. In particular, we are asking the council to give us some direction on what you want from staff in terms of bringing forward Actions for your consideration at the next council meeting, what you're asking the finance committee to review. and where you would like staff to prioritize their efforts, in particular beyond these three items. Okay. So as we discussed during the budget, we have a five-year plan that takes us out quite some time, is balanced. However, it does rely on generating some more revenue. In particular, we had proposed transit occupancy tax increase, business licenses, and demand parking. And I've highlighted just these here so you can see that the impact is significant. $400,000 in fiscal year 1920. and another $275,000 in 2021 and thereafter. So it's a significant amount of funding that does not affect the current fiscal year, which is listed as proposed, fiscal year 2018-19, but that started on July 1st. This year is balanced. The demand parking is important for this year. However, we did make a very conservative estimate in that recognizing it would take a little bit of time to put in place. So the forecast was provided to you earlier. This is just the breakdown. Um, But I wanted to make sure that I at least provided the background on where we were going from here. So the demand parking is $100,000 current year and then increases thereafter. The parking revenues is an adjustment to estimates, so that's why it's a lighter color. No action is necessary. business licenses and then the transit occupancy tax. As you can see, the staggered implementation is what was utilized to calculate a balanced plan. Now, we talked about the various options. Impact fees in particular require a study linking the costs of particular capital plans or activities and then establishing a methodology by which you can charge each additional unit of something, their portion of those costs. So for example, if we were to do a tree replacement program for every tree that's removed or impacted via construction, there would be an assessment of an impact fee in order to replace those trees in the community at large. It is a significant undertaking in terms of research and making sure that it's legally compliant And at this time, we don't have a particular estimate because it is tied to capital projects typically or some other types of infrastructure impact. demand parking is increasing our hourly and fixed rates for weekends and summers. Basically, San Francisco has a very assertive model. But you tie the usage and where people park the most to the rates that you charge. In particular, the idea is to increase turnover in those areas that are most desirable and closest to businesses so that you have continued traffic, pedestrian SHOPPER TRAFFIC. in the restaurant and retail arenas, and then decrease in outlying and less less desirable areas. It also is designed to take advantage of high tourist time frames for the city. So we'll go into more detail of that. The increase in the transient occupancy Thanks. is, and it was corrected in another version. I had a Freudian slip, is based on increasing from 12% to 14%. And it is a straight line estimate assuming the current rate of occupancy. That does not include short-term rentals. This is strictly our current inventory of rental rooms. SB 231 is the stormwater utility. As noted, it has not been tested in the courts. There is quite a bit of research and study to go behind that. However, it is something that staff is committed to investigating and exploring as more information and legal research comes available. recognizing the need to find a dedicated revenue source to support infrastructure improvements in our storm water systems. One of the options being considered is whether or not it would be appropriate to merge the stormwater and sewers into a single utility. The tax on marina slips, we did not have additional information on that, however, the principle would be that it would be an additional levy. based on either value or number or location. Grant funding. kudos to Calvin and the Community Development Department. Obviously, we're always looking, always seeking more opportunities for money to support the organization. However, that is also an area that is not able to be budgeted very well. So it is very erratic and usually project specific. So keep it on here as a revenue option with recognition that the directive that staff has heard from council is to continue to pursue appropriate opportunities to the best of our ability. Okay, in progress, and the results pending. I apologize, I skipped a slide. Insurance archeology, this is where we go back and we are currently under contract with a consulting firm that researches possible claims that we can make against insurance coverage that was in place at the time of implementation of particular things that the city has since had to come clean up, fuel tanks, things of that nature. We don't know what the estimated revenue is gonna be. I believe we have a report coming sometimes fall letting us know what that is that would be one time money available then for capital other one time expenditures |
| 02:57:34.30 | Melanie Purcell | So in progress at this point, results pending, are the insurance archaeology and the grant applications. Those are things that we have already initiated and we'll be reporting back to Council as the results come in. And Melanie? |
| 02:57:47.97 | Joan Cox | We have. |
| 02:57:48.03 | Melanie Purcell | include any money |
| 02:57:48.96 | Joan Cox | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:57:49.03 | Melanie Purcell | in our current budget |
| 02:57:49.98 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:57:50.03 | Melanie Purcell | those revenues. |
| 02:57:50.97 | Joan Cox | TODAY. |
| 02:57:51.04 | Melanie Purcell | No, ma'am. |
| 02:57:51.97 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:57:54.40 | Melanie Purcell | So at such time as they come to fruition, we would bring back an amendment to council. The additional research being in progress, the marijuana distribution, you've had a couple of updates from the Community Development Department on that option and it's obviously developing with the distinction between retail delivery and distribution. There are some limitations on the revenue available from that, but that's also an option. Short term rentals, you have a report from the Blue Ribbon Committee. And that also remains an option we had estimated $243,000 in revenue. That was based on having 90 days eligible per year for a single property. It's the 12% TOT rate, $200 per night as the typical rental rate, 150 properties and participation at last count. That was prior to some more aggressive enforcement that was the typical population that we had been seeing, particularly in the peak months. And that also assumes that it's only a 75% collection rate and that we have to pay up to 25% for enforcement costs. So that's $243,000. The marijuana is, ranges depending on what initial excuse me, what form we take. Stormwater utility, we do not have an estimate at this point. That will be heavily dependent on the costs associated and what the market is able to bear, what the taxpayers are willing to bear. Impact fees, again, are very specifically tied back to the cost of a particular service and then are dependent on related development. So they could run the entire gamut. Other future considerations would be, and this was brought up by Councilmember Claven Knolls, is looking at the renewal of Measure O, the Hassen sales tax, sales and use tax for capital projects. That is, the original authorization expires in 2025. It is the single largest dedicated revenue source for capital, it's estimated at $1.2 million. We do not have any renewal assumed in outlying years. It is a one for one transfer into the capital fund. But obviously in terms of long-term thinking, it's something that the city should consider. Tax on marina slips, we have not done any additional research and would be requesting direction from council regarding the efforts there. So diving into demand parking. Again, it's adjusting the parking rates by time, day, location. As noted in the staff report, some of the programs utilized by large cities are hugely data intensive, wonderful capital. But fortunately, we have some amazing staff at the police department who go diving into our data. And they were able to get some data empirical data that coincided very nicely with our historical observation. Our midday traffic and occupancy is our peak, our highest time, so that's from about 11 to two, and during the months of May through September, so no big surprise there. The intent would be to encourage higher turnover in the on-street or meter spaces, and longer-term parking in the outlying and in the lot spaces. So it is a resolution of council and can be updated. as needed so if we decide that this is not working or that it's working great we wanted to work even better those are all options that can be made at the resolution of council The initial proposal that is still being fleshed out a little bit and will be presented in more detail to the Finance Committee on Friday. And I do want to note that all of this, there is much more detail being presented to the Finance Committee at 10 AM on Friday here in the chambers. It'll also be live streamed. So I have that meeting at 9 AM on Friday. |
| 03:02:04.23 | Melanie Purcell | I believe it was posted for 10 AM, but I'll double check. That may have been some miscommunication on our part. The initial proposal is to increase the street parking to $3 an hour in the core areas. It's posted for 9. It is posted for 9. Thank you. So we will start at 9 a.m. I just need to stagger our speakers then. So the intent would be that the core areas where you have the highest demand would increase to $3 per hour on the streets. And that would be double the current rate for these, again, months between May and September, May 1 through September 30, and $4 in parking lots 1 and 2. And obviously this is all open for discussion, but the idea being then that the next downtown perimeter would be the slightly outside of that core area. and increased street parking again to $3 per hour and then $2 in the lots. Sausalito is a little bit different than many of these large cities where our locks we actually charge less for than some of our street areas and that's um a different layup. So then the outlying commercial areas, basically Caledonia and Bridgeway, where there is still retail, and we still want to encourage traffic. However, it's not as high in demand. We would retain those rates at the $1.50. per hour and continue the free parking at City Hall. Can I ask a question now on this? |
| 03:03:31.68 | Vice Mayor Burns | Can I ask a question now on this? I'm Parking lot four, is that where we try to get Caledonia businesses to park? Is that five? |
| 03:03:47.98 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:03:48.13 | Vice Mayor Burns | Yeah. |
| 03:03:48.35 | Melanie Purcell | Okay. |
| 03:03:49.53 | Vice Mayor Burns | Thank you. |
| 03:03:50.21 | Melanie Purcell | Okay. and Lot 5 is currently free. So we would be bumping up the other lots by a dollar each. |
| 03:04:03.15 | Melanie Purcell | So the idea is to just not necessarily make a huge jump except in the meter rates on the streets, trying to encourage people to go to the outlying lots or to the outlying areas and to keep the street spaces turning over. This has no impact on the residential parking program, so it's not designed to target or in any way impact them. And it's the same hours as currently exists, so 9 to 6. |
| 03:04:32.90 | Melanie Purcell | So that's the initial proposal. Obviously, there'll be quite a bit of discussion on Friday with some ideas to come back to council. The business license update, we had two very specific missions in this and that we discussed during the budget process. The number one is to simplify the... the whole structure. It is currently very convoluted. We want to reduce inconsistencies and promote equitable treatment of businesses. So ensuring that regardless of who's administering the program, whether it be different staff members or consultants or whatever, that it's very clear as a business owner and certainly as a resident who pays what. We also want to increase the revenue, obviously. We've had that conversation. But we really do want to reduce the loopholes and the administrative errors, making sure that it is crystal clear and there is less room for issues. It does require an election, and staff is recommending one for November. The original estimate was $400,000 a year, and as I had described at that time, it was taking the existing structure. knowing that we needed to do some simplifying, streamlining, and doubling the rates. what we had found in the initial information coming from the consultants is that we if we reduce our license categories clearly define those parameters so that it is again crystal clear i fall into this category this is the business license that i pay and tiering those based on industries. Most municipalities around the Bay Area have a similar structure in that they have categories and they tier them according to Lasta City. And potentially even be able to reduce the rate that we have for our more vulnerable businesses that serve residents as well as tourists and that would be restaurant and retail. one of the things that came to light is that saucelito has historically treated commercial properties and contractors differently than other cities do so removing the exemptions that we currently have in place that other agencies do not provide for would increase our actual tax base significantly in particular the contractor and commercial rentals so right now they are the the commercial rentals are not part of the business license structure. And the contractors are allowed to deduct their subcontractor expense. So they're only paying on their net receipts as opposed to gross receipts. So those are two elements that are probably the biggest change. The other thing that we want to do is remove, again to simplify things, remove the registration charge. and just have a flat minimum annual payment. that would obviously make it much cleaner. The estimated revenues increase by $1 million rather than the $400,000. It increases to a million. Or it's now 1.4 million? 1.6 total. |
| 03:07:34.61 | Joan Cox | or if now one |
| 03:07:38.54 | Melanie Purcell | So it is a $1 million increase. Now obviously- |
| 03:07:41.66 | Debbie | Can you go back one slide? |
| 03:07:43.27 | Melanie Purcell | I'm sorry. |
| 03:07:43.30 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 03:07:43.37 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. There is. |
| 03:07:44.40 | Debbie | There is. |
| 03:07:45.07 | Joan Cox | . Original estimate is 400. The next slide says it increases by 1 million. So that brings it to 1.4. Thank you. |
| 03:07:53.38 | Melanie Purcell | The original, our current receipts are $600,000. The proposal was to take it to $1 million. This structure that we're talking about would take us to $1.6. That being said, there's some room that we would want to discuss, in particular with Finance Committee, about how we treat restaurant, retail, and other professional companies. categories we definitely want to keep a small number of categories we have over 15 now and that's just too much it's too easy to make mistakes So those details will be forthcoming, and then our recommendation is that the Finance Committee review in detail and come back to Council. Thank you. Is there a question? |
| 03:08:36.93 | Ray Withey | Yeah, I have a question for me. |
| 03:08:37.86 | Melanie Purcell | Question? |
| 03:08:41.30 | Ray Withey | Okay, help me understand how much of this has got to be finalized in terms of what all the new fee structure is going to be. before you write the ballot measure. What's the relationship between the ballot measure and some really detailed |
| 03:09:07.67 | Vicki Nichols | We, |
| 03:09:07.93 | Melanie Purcell | Yeah. |
| 03:09:07.96 | Ray Withey | Changes, right? So what do you need for the ballot measure? |
| 03:09:09.38 | Melanie Purcell | Yes. What we are, we need to have the consultant explain to the finance committee exactly what the pieces are. We have, you know, we've had conversations with them. That's how we got to this point of recognizing it. Brian and I have both made suggestions that we think are important in terms of keeping it streamlined. And then they would work with the city on the actual ballot language and on the supporting ordinance, because there would also have to be ordinance changes in addition to the ballot. |
| 03:09:44.33 | Ray Withey | Yeah, let me sort of refine my question. Does the ballot statement have to include the details of all the changes to the fees that you're going to make? That's really the question I need answered. |
| 03:09:59.95 | Melanie Purcell | I have to defer to the attorneys on the exact ballot language piece. That's part of what would be presented to the finance committee because I don't know. |
| 03:10:05.93 | Ray Withey | the finance committee because I don't know. Yeah, that's fine. My point is, how the hell are we going to get that done by the end of the month? |
| 03:10:15.68 | Melanie Purcell | We're actually almost finished. So the good news is this is the real high-level view of it. |
| 03:10:19.41 | Ray Withey | Okay. |
| 03:10:19.75 | Calvin Chan | Bye. |
| 03:10:21.28 | Melanie Purcell | I THINK I'M GOING TO BE bringing it into a much, much more simplified format it's going to be a lot easier to present. |
| 03:10:29.98 | Unknown | Okay, all right. |
| 03:10:30.82 | Melanie Purcell | I mean, it is... HACTS IT. by two thirds easily in terms of. |
| 03:10:36.03 | Joan Cox | And Melanie, you're going to ask us tonight to appoint an ad hoc committee to work with the consultant to finalize the ballot language, et cetera, with delegation of authority from the city council. |
| 03:10:36.08 | Melanie Purcell | And Melanie, you're going to ask |
| 03:10:50.41 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. And then we'd bring it back with that committee's efforts to the council on the 31st for approval. |
| 03:10:54.63 | Joan Cox | Right. |
| 03:10:58.51 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So just to follow up on these questions, it was my understanding that we were going to have this consultant report for this meeting. So that we can all ask questions before we need to vote to put it on the ballot. |
| 03:11:06.91 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:11:06.97 | Debbie | so that we could... |
| 03:11:12.11 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So did something change or did I just misunderstand? |
| 03:11:18.96 | Joan Cox | I'll let you answer, Melanie. That was the understanding. It's my understanding the consultant's not available this evening. |
| 03:11:22.17 | Melanie Purcell | Yeah. They are not. They will be here on Friday morning. It will be streamed and all the details of that report provided to council. I'm not sure. |
| 03:11:33.22 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Is that report in our packet? I don't know. No, it is not. |
| 03:11:35.40 | Melanie Purcell | No, it is not. It was not complete, and we did not want to release it without it being complete. And so we went back to the consultants to have that refined. |
| 03:11:50.79 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay. |
| 03:11:51.78 | Unknown | So, |
| 03:11:52.04 | Melanie Purcell | Those details will- |
| 03:11:52.06 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:11:52.07 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I think a line of questioning is that this just seems like a very tight schedule to get something irrevocable on the ballot. you know, We can talk about that, I guess. |
| 03:12:03.61 | Melanie Purcell | This will come to, the report will come to council prior to your next packet. So it will come in a separate communication and then come to as well as in your past. |
| 03:12:13.98 | Joan Cox | And Melanie, you're going to make a presentation to the Finance Committee and that will be recorded, correct? Yes. Oh, yes. So any council member can watch the Finance Committee meeting. Absolutely. |
| 03:12:18.89 | Melanie Purcell | Yes, yes. |
| 03:12:24.62 | Melanie Purcell | The consultants will be here on Friday to present it. Okay, so the transit occupancy tax, the city charges currently 12%, that is only on commercial rental, not residential rental, so short-term rentals are not included in this. Majority of Marin cities charge 12%, with 2% going to the county's visitor and convention bureau. Sausalito is not a member of that, we operate independently. Most California cities are charging between 10 and 14%. The estimated revenue from this exercise was $250,000. And yes, it does require an election as well. One of the things that Brian was able to find, and I did email to all of you. If you'll excuse me a second, I'm going to pull it up because I want to be able to show this. to the public as well. |
| 03:13:26.05 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | What are you pulling up, Melanie? |
| 03:13:27.60 | Melanie Purcell | I'm pulling up the information that I sent out this afternoon. to the Council, I wanted to be sure that it was visible to the public as well. It is the chart that was included in the email. Thank you. |
| 03:13:43.94 | Joan Cox | And it gives an overview not only of current TOT, but also |
| 03:13:47.78 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So. I've got the email. |
| 03:13:48.85 | Joan Cox | I'm just stating for the public. It includes prospective TOT based on upcoming ballot initiatives in other cities as well. |
| 03:14:07.93 | Melanie Purcell | Get everything closed. |
| 03:14:16.07 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:14:18.99 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Do we know how many of these other cities have short-term rental policies? |
| 03:14:26.34 | Melanie Purcell | No, I believe that was part of the report. I'll have to get back with community development. |
| 03:14:48.04 | Melanie Purcell | I have to go circular out. |
| 03:14:56.58 | Melanie Purcell | Here we go. |
| 03:15:05.76 | Melanie Purcell | One more time. Okay. So, TOT rates on the ballot in the Bay Area. These are all slated to go in November based on communications as of right now with finance directors. And Brian was able to get this, I understand, Milpitas and... South San Francisco gathered a bunch of this information. You'll notice the vast majority of them are at 10% and going to 12 or 14. Palo Alto very proudly announced that they are going to 16 and will be the highest potentially in the state. Anaheim is at 15, and they're not proposing to go higher. pretty broad spectrum. This is in addition to the information provided prior where we are about, we are in the middle of the pack with the cities that I had already surveyed. The difference being South Lake Tahoe has a staggered approach right now that is 12 to 14%. So they actually have a staggered, and a couple of these are South San Francisco and A couple of the others actually are looking at having a staggered implementation 12, 13, 14%, depending on it. and Brian clarifies, that a number of these are anticipating new hotels coming in or are anticipating needing the funds. So it was just good to know that this is apparently the item of discussion across the bay. |
| 03:16:42.44 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Can I ask a question? |
| 03:16:43.54 | Melanie Purcell | Yeah. |
| 03:16:45.02 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Is it? Are these staggered geographically? Are they staggered by the time the hotels are constructed or any of them staggered by residential short-term rentals versus commercial hotels? |
| 03:16:59.82 | Melanie Purcell | There is... one agency that is targeting short-term rentals. and that is the city of Cupertino is looking only at charging their 12% on Airbnb or other short-term rentals. These are all proposals potentially on the ballot in November. Their councils are having the same conversation. And I apologize. The city of... |
| 03:17:42.62 | Melanie Purcell | The city of South San Francisco is proposing to stagger 12% in 2019, 13% in 2020, and 14% in 2021. So the staggering is based on just fiscal year. |
| 03:17:56.17 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | So legally, we could stagger based on a number of criteria if that was something we were interested in. |
| 03:17:56.22 | Melanie Purcell | Okay. |
| 03:18:04.20 | Melanie Purcell | Yes. |
| 03:18:07.67 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:18:11.81 | Melanie Purcell | So the next steps would be, again, looking as the mayor described at a committee, ad hoc committee, to work with staff to bring language back, pending the review by the Finance Committee on the 20th. July 20th is the Finance Committee. We have confirmed it is 9 a.m., not 10 a.m., THEIR TOOLS. in the July 31st. |
| 03:18:35.98 | Joan Cox | subject to change because one of our members is not available at 9. So I'm not sure how the scheduling. got a miss, but we're going to have to straighten it out. Thank you. |
| 03:18:45.69 | Melanie Purcell | Sounds good. The, So we're scheduled for this Friday. in the morning. to review specifically the business licenses, transit occupancy tax, demand parking, and the ballot process and environmental review. We have presentations by two consultants to go over those specifics as well as staff. Then July 31st, we would bring forward to council which other of those items that you direct us to bring back. And we are asking for your direction in terms of priorities of the other. revenue options that you want us to concentrate the effort on. SO. THE The motion would be to Establish the ad hoc committee with the members as you designate to work with staff to bring language back to the July 31st meeting pending review by the Finance Committee. |
| 03:19:47.02 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you, Melanie. |
| 03:19:48.03 | Debbie | Any other questions of Melanie? |
| 03:19:51.64 | Sunny Yao | Thank you. |
| 03:19:51.68 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 03:19:51.69 | Wendy Richards | THANK YOU. |
| 03:19:51.96 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 03:19:52.23 | Debbie | Yeah. |
| 03:19:53.13 | Jill Hoffman | I saw, you know, there were a number of revenue streams that had... Notation on their additional research was being, you know, additional research was being done or additional study or something like that. But there were a couple that I didn't even see addressed that we had talked about before. One was bike parking as a system that's already up and running, and with some tweaks to it, it to be you know, a much larger revenue generating than it already is. The other one was, was private donations for park to support the, the parks, the work on the parks. And so, you know, I, I don't know if we can get it together by the next meeting, but you know, to a comment earlier by one of our citizens, I think you know, we need to look at all different sources of revenue, especially when we're talking about the parks that were, substantially over what we originally presented to the public and I understand there's a lot of reasons for that but That's a fact. And people will donate you know, for a park, a whole lot sooner they'll donate for a lateral sewer, you know. the Ray Withey lateral sewer connection. You know, it's not quite as easy to do that. We did ask staff, I believe, to look into that and present some information to us on that. and I was sorry that it wasn't part of the presentation tonight, but I would like to discuss that. going forward. and maybe look at what some other cities have done to engage the public in donations for the parks. So it may be plaques or tiles or Whatever. THE END OF So that's one of the things. Those are the two of the things. The other one was You know, the short-term rental program, I don't know if we're going to discuss it in more detail tonight. I know the priority tonight is the things that require an election. I understand that. But we had a presentation a few years ago for the pilot program. are we thinking we're gonna, for the short term rental program, because it was presented to us from the finance committee meeting as a revenue stream upon which our budget was based. So are we thinking that we're going to change that pilot program? Are we looking at... doing something with that or the additional research because that was one of the notations that there was some additional study with regard to that program. |
| 03:22:58.08 | Adam Politzer | Thank you, Mayor. Councilmember Hoffman. to respond to both questions on the park donations i think the direction that we gave to staff directly to our parks and recreation director was for him to work with the park and rec commission to actually come up with a menu for all of our parks on things that you know from trees to benches to play equipment so i think through the agenda setting committee we can ask mike to come back to the council with that plan you know the preliminary plan before he goes I think through the agenda setting committee, we can ask Mike to come back to the council with that plan. Um, you know, the preliminary plan before he goes to the park and rec commission or wait until after he's gone to the park and rec commission to work out the way that the public can support. Um, be it MLK, be it dumpy park or Southview that are currently um on underway the um the small pocket parks we don't want to exclude those so again langendorf uh casno and um Cloudview Park come to mind that you could also use some support from the So that was the direction that that we gave to Mike to come back With a menu and a program for the community to get behind in terms of the short-term rental We are actually looking for direction from the council to do additional work I think the previous council not five of you had given direction that said we are not going to allow and in fact you know we increase the fee so if the current council wants us to look at options here and bring back options for the council's consideration again through the agenda setting committee we can come back with with options based on the direction. I think what staff is seeking, we don't need this tonight, and it may be something that we talk about in July, or we come back in September once we have a little bit more clarity on what we're doing on the ones that are prioritized now, is we do need the council to prioritize all those other items. We can't do them all. Some of them are high-yielding. Some of them we don't know what they would yield. Some of them are fair and equitable to the community. And some of them, you know, obviously have a benefit to the city in terms of revenue enhancement. So I think, you know, it'd be worth us. We wanted to put them in front of you. We wanted to make sure that what we're doing between now and the 31st as pointed out it's a narrow time frame but you know obviously we think that it's something that we that we can do but if there are other things there that you want to give us direction on tonight then we can work with the agenda setting committee to bring those items forward |
| 03:25:43.01 | Jill Hoffman | THANK YOU. |
| 03:25:46.44 | Ray Withey | Yeah, I just want to clarify one thing just to make sure that, so my understanding is that Any TOT from short term rentals was not included in the budget. No. Right. And that the TOT increase was included in the year two onwards forecast. |
| 03:26:00.21 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | No. |
| 03:26:13.20 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 03:26:13.24 | Melanie Purcell | Thank you. |
| 03:26:13.27 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 03:26:13.29 | Melanie Purcell | Correct. |
| 03:26:13.57 | Ray Withey | Okay. |
| 03:26:17.98 | Vice Mayor Burns | Melanie, on the parking, something came up last night at our bike and ped commission as well. Bus parking, is that rate changing at all or is that including any of this? And where is it in, I don't think there's a comparison model with other communities, but where do we sit on that? |
| 03:26:38.65 | Melanie Purcell | I'd love to raise it. That's an opportunity to increase. It actually is not part of the demand parking, but certainly can be. To be honest, we've talked about it as part of the master fee schedule, and it needs to go out, and certainly could stagger it significantly. I can work with staff to weave something into this resolution, if that's the desire of council, or it would come back in September. |
| 03:26:39.46 | Vice Mayor Burns | THAT'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO |
| 03:26:45.42 | Unknown | you. |
| 03:27:06.51 | Melanie Purcell | So. you tell me what you're doing. Thank you. |
| 03:27:08.15 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. Yes. And I think, I mean, what is it a day for a bus? $7 or something? $8. Yes. |
| 03:27:17.93 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:27:18.76 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Agreed. |
| 03:27:21.77 | Joan Cox | I think you have unanimous direction on that, Melanie. |
| 03:27:27.91 | Jill Hoffman | And if I can add one thing on that issue. Thank you for bringing that up. We're still in questions though, right? Yeah. Okay. with regards to raising that parking fee for buses, We also need to have, I think, somebody down there directing traffic. And so when you talk about a fee, parking fee, and the cost of the fee and what you're using it for and things like that, it might be, I don't know if it might be beneficial to tie that to the cost of whatever it costs to have a, you know, Thank you. traffic controller down there. Thank you. |
| 03:28:10.11 | Debbie | Other questions of Melanie? All right, I'm going to open it up for public comment. Any public comment on these revenue options? |
| 03:28:22.40 | Joan Cox | Melanie. |
| 03:28:29.33 | Joan Cox | All right, I see no public comment. Oh, come on up. |
| 03:28:39.44 | Melanie Maharshan | Madam Mayor, council members, staff. Neighbors, I'm Melanie Maharshan of 24 Arana Circle, speaking not just for myself here, but for a number of people who aren't comfortable speaking publicly under current regulations. It's great to see short-term rentals on the possibilities being discussed in the revenue report. I think we've been very cautious about this over the last few years. There's certainly been a lot of discussion, but it's a good time to take another look at it. Thank you, Council Member Hoffman, for your question. I have the same one. I'd love to understand the process and the timeline. I think this is really It's great to see it on the city's list of revenue sources because I know that there are many Sausalito residents who have it on their list of revenue sources that they need to help support themselves and their families, age in place, save for college, save to move from a rental to hopefully purchase a home. Those are the kinds of things that I hear from people who are interested in being able to do short-term rentals as residents here in the city. So a couple of things I think to consider is that once you have an ordinance in place for short-term rentals, if that does happen, there's a lot of administration that can be reduced by having a provider like Airbnb remit the taxes. It's working really well for a lot of other cities, reduces a lot of the administration. I think it's completely fair to charge hosts a fee for registration, $150 or more, for example, of course, depending on the cost to the city, but host fees should definitely cover the cost of administration and enforcement. That shouldn't come out of the revenue, that should all go into the general fund. I think it's really important to bring something like this out into the open so we can really talk about it. There are a lot of good people in Sausalito who are volunteers. They pay their taxes. They vote. They're members of Rotary. They're involved in different programs, and Lions Club, their families at Willow Creek, and they feel like they're living double lives. So I think it would be great to just be able to really talk about this and bring this above ground. One thing I want to say is I see HDL here a lot in our I know that they're a current consultant for us. I have experience in the town of Truckee. We use host compliance in the town of Truckee. I'm on our tourism lodging committee there. We use HDL in Pacific Grove. It's not been a smooth process at all. So if the time comes to look at having a consultant as experienced as HDL is in other areas, certainly not in the short-term rental administration area. I definitely recommend host compliance based on past experience. And as always, I would love to speak more about this. If you ever have any questions, please feel free to reach out. Thank you all for your service. And I'll just say that this is the first time that I've heard that Melanie Purcell might be leaving. So very sorry to see her go. Thank you, everyone. |
| 03:31:44.00 | Debbie | Thank you, Melanie. Any other public comment? Wendy, you came back. I didn't see you come back in. |
| 03:31:55.97 | Wendy Richards | Thank you. at home first, thank you. Wendy Richards thank you um |
| 03:32:03.29 | Wendy Richards | So I'm a resident, and by definition of the business license regime, I am also a business owner. Pretty much anyone who has any extra income becomes a business owner in this community. First of all, these are not quote revenue options, these are new taxes, let's be honest. They're taxes, and somebody has to pay those taxes. We have, as homeowners, just incurred the largest ever tax increase from the federal government, which is a huge transfer from California to California. other states in this country in the non-deductibility of are property taxes and state income taxes. And what I want to see as a resident is I want to see belt tightening. I don't want to just sit here and say, what are our revenue options? Who can we tax? Oh, let's tax these people, those people. No, we're going to all pay for that. If we tax our contractors more on their businesses, guess who pays? The homeowner who employs the contractor. If we raise another million dollars from our businesses, guess who's going to pay even higher prices at Molly's Stones? The residents. If you're talking about increasing the quote, business license that I pay, it's a tax. And you know that I already not only pay a business license as a home-based business, I pay the fee to process the stupid thing. So it's double tax if you look at it. So I'm paying for the contractor who processes it. We're all willing to have services and pay for services in this community. businesses know how to trim fat, cut costs, et cetera. And I want to make sure that that's what's happening here. I don't see that happening. The citizens voted $8 million to be dedicated to parks. They didn't vote for three parks at any price. They said, here's some money, and that money has to go to parks. They didn't say build the parks no matter what at no price imaginable. I mean, It needs to stop. We, as a community, need to stop Pay as we go. Not pass budgets on the hope that we might increase taxes or that we might change the entire face of our community by allowing 90 day rentals, which are all going to happen in the summer. Without a serious debate, that topic needs a serious debate. It can't be driven by the fact that we just have this idea that we can raise additional tax dollars. And making matters even worse, we're ignoring our pension liability. We have huge pension liabilities. Nobody's talking about it. We need to bring that forward. It needs to be in the conversation. This is a five-year outlook. It's only going to make it harder, not easier. But let's have the hard discussions now, and let's stop just adding more taxes. Thank you. |
| 03:35:05.20 | Joan Cox | Somebody hasn't been watching. Any other public comment? All right, I'm going to close. Public comment, bring it back up here for discussion. |
| 03:35:22.33 | Vice Mayor Burns | No problem. |
| 03:35:23.14 | Joan Cox | Sure. |
| 03:35:23.38 | Vice Mayor Burns | Sure. All right. |
| 03:35:24.14 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:35:27.75 | Vice Mayor Burns | I don't want to address too much of the last speaker, Wendy, but I think we're all biting our tongue on a couple items. The reason we're having this discussion is because we've had pension liability slammed on our head for the last six months, pretty much every meeting. Every finance committee meeting, every budget meeting, every time we get together, we're talking about what we're looking at, pension liability from 2025 to 2035, and that's exactly what drove this discussion tonight. and the parks are a different thing. I am concerned about the business license tax in where we are with it as of this moment. It came about as here's $400,000 because we're grossly under market to here's a million dollars that includes commercial real estate, which great, but that's basically where a triple net gets passed, I believe, straight down to the tenant. I would like to know that. I think that the details from this consultant really start the conversation, because that's when we get any type of information that's usable in this conversation. |
| 03:36:50.49 | Joan Cox | Susan, sorry, can you mute until you're ready to speak? |
| 03:36:59.41 | Vice Mayor Burns | So now with the increase, which is great, I love the dollar amount, but I'm concerned about the impacts on our business community, both as a trickle down as well as a direct expense to our businesses. Ironically, I'm a proponent of driving our revenue and driving our revenue from an area where we're deficient, for sure, and from an area where we have high impact like tourists, definitely. But just in a $600,000 increase since our last meeting based on some things that I think will get passed down pretty harshly on our community. I think is a start of a conversation that unfortunately we'll have a short period of time to get through. But it is what it is, and we need to get something going on the ballot. So I'm very excited about the Friday meeting, whatever time I'll try to get there. And to me, like I said, that's really the start of that concern. And TOT, I think, like I just said, just said, we have so many examples of where that should be, could be, especially in a town of small boutique hotels. I think it's quite obvious that we are in line to move that to 14. I think we'll have a lot of great discussion on how that gets spread through our budget and opportunities that we've already talked about as far as leveraging that new dollar into potential more dollar of sales activity. And again, to touch on where we started a lot of this, it wasn't to be a tax, a lot of this was to stimulate, to grow, to invest, to encourage more commerce. And I think we're still on the path of being able to do that with some of those TOT dollars. So that's my comments for now. I don't think there's much more action that we need. But thank you, Melanie, for where you brought us tonight. And I look forward to Friday. |
| 03:38:56.51 | Debbie | Susan, did you have comments? |
| 03:38:59.67 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah, sorry for the noise. Yeah, so on-demand parking, I am definitely in favor of a revisit of our parking structure and especially the bus. Park game. On the business license tax update as originally presented to us as a truing up of our business license tax to other jurisdictions, I was 100% in favor of that. I am now not really sure where we are or what that's going to look like. And that is making me very nervous given a short period of time. So I hope we can get more information on that. I feel like this issue has been on our projected budget for next year. for a very long time with no detail about what impact that will have. looking forward to that discussion Friday and hopefully getting more details and just Sure. who and how it will affect in the community. In terms of transit occupancy tax, You know, I think I agree with Council Member Burns that this is probably a good thing. We should use some of that money to reinvest in the community. I think there are a number of issues that I've heard. in public comment and from the community that are kind of making me wonder about whether we either tier Good time. So, apparently, several of the hotels in town are starting to fees for hotel We have this open issue of short term rentals and how that plays into what level of tax we have. So I would really like to see some discussion about perhaps a phasing of the TOT to allow the higher hotel prices to kick in, and or possibly having a two-tiered system for residential and commercial if we go forward with a short-term rental concept. In terms of the short-term rental, um, issues. I have long been in favor of a very limited short-term rental pilot. that would capture TOT and administrative fees to allow vigorous enforcement of a program that benefits existing residents but does not create a hotel and hotel industry in our neighborhoods. And I think we did really good work on the short-term rental task force with Council Member Hoffman and other community members. And I would like to see some of those ideas move forward. There's some other issues that I don't think are hugely pressing tonight, so I'll hold off on other comments. |
| 03:42:00.89 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 03:42:00.90 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Susan. Jill. Well, I would, to be brief, and for the context of this, you know, what we're trying to do here tonight, I'm in favor of the, the business tax and the increase in the TOT and the demand parking. So those were, I think, the big three things that we were looking at tonight. But generally, you know, to speak to some of the comments that Ms. Richards made, you know, with regard to our budget and what we're doing, and we're focusing now on increasing revenues, but you have to look at the overall big picture, right? And so right now we're in a position of trying to increase revenues because we have the stress on our budget resulting from the unfunded pension liability. We're not doing the other two parts that we should be doing, which is decreasing expenses and increasing efficiency. So it has to be a holistic effort, I think, going forward. I'm happy happier where we are. I think we're moving in the right direction. I'd like to look, as I said in my questions, we have a system that we've created over three years for bike parking. With a little bit of tweaking, I think we could get that up to the point where we have a couple hundred thousand dollars in profit from that without too much effort. Now, to raise concerns about that, If you facilitate increased parking, do you increase more bikes coming into town. THEIR OWNERS. you know, that's also a holistic thing we need to look at. And I think we could do better on that issue with regard to the bike congestion. And of course, the private donations for the parks. I mean, I think that's a big revenue source that we haven't we haven't even looked at yet. And it also helps people become more vested in the parks. And it helps them create more of a personal connection with those parks. And hopefully they don't deteriorate to the point where they've gotten to in the last few years if people were more connected to them. With regard to short-term rentals, it's a big debate. I understand that some people are VMA Lee opposed to it I would I don't know if we're going to move in that direction or not, I think we're going to have further discussion on that. But if you're opposed, I would hope that you would or suggest that you would read the plan, the short-term rental plan that we came up with. It was a very tight program, and it was a one-year pilot program, and it was not very many permits to be issued, but the point was to increase the ability to manage it and create enforcement tools. So we created some pretty... big enforcement tools with the thought that we were going to have the program, which was very large fines. But then we didn't get to the part where you actually have a program. And you can't have an online, you can't participate in online enforcement programs unless you have a program. So that's why, you know, the way it was drafted and conceived was it was very small, very tight. And if it doesn't work, It doesn't work, and it's not renewed at the end of the one-year pilot program. So that's the program that, anyway, when people talk about the short-term rental program, and I talk about the short-term rental program, that's the program I'm talking about. And so I think that's it. Those are my comments and support. Thank you, Melanie. Thank you for a superb effort, by the way, this last year with the budget and all of the pieces of the puzzle. I appreciate it. |
| 03:45:44.51 | Joan Cox | RAY. |
| 03:45:45.41 | Ray Withey | Yeah, so I do agree that we need to be looking at the whole spectrum of revenue options. And we need to be also figuring out ways to be more efficient and saving money. We have built into the budget flatlining of some of the expenditure items that I think are almost impossible to achieve without some restructuring. So in a sense, the budget is also has built in some forced efficiencies. The challenge is going to be to actually execute on that. On the revenue side, I think I agree with Council Member Hoffman. The three areas of demand parking, TOT increase, and the business license. I think I support the Finance Committee looking at this and coming back with whatever they come back with for our consideration at the next meeting. We're on a short fuse, so we've got to make a decision one way or another which route to take. I would caution on the business license. I'm somewhat in agreement with Vice Mayor Burns. I think the way in which you get a business license tax increases and Yeah, that's what they are. And that's okay by me. Achieved is not to go out full blast on every single option in front of you. And so I think the Finance Committee and an ad hoc committee has got its work cut out to come back with something that's prescriptive, achieves the goal budget-wise that we want it to achieve without... necessarily making such changes that might have appearances of wonderful revenue options and yet could cause some harm. But I have confidence the finance committee and an ad hoc committee can work that through. So the other thing is short-term rentals and TOT increase are two totally different subjects. whatever the TOT increase are two totally different subjects. And whatever the TOT rate that eventually got assigned, were we to do short-term rentals is one thing. So I don't want us to confuse the short-term rental discussion with the TOT discussion. With that said, this city council can always request that we move forward and staff start working on that. We don't need, you know, at the moment we said let's do this in the context of the general plan. Let's look at this. If the city council wants to accelerate that and bring back the results of the workshop, that's great. But don't confuse it with a TOT issue. That's all I'm cautioning, you know, two separate subjects. And not one necessarily I would object to hearing, but, you know, it's a separate subject. So anyway, I am in agreement basically with staff's recommendations, I guess. And at the moment, I think we should focus on that, that needs to get done, so that we could get whatever we're going to get on the ballot. Staff doesn't have time between now and then to work on any of these other revenue options. I mean, in my humble opinion. |
| 03:49:35.45 | Joan Cox | I basically agree with the comments of my fellow council members. I will say I consider one of our biggest accomplishments this year is the adoption of a balanced budget that keeps us in the black, both in our general fund and in our pension obligation through 2038. even if Caltrans continues to reduce, CalPERS, sorry, CalPERS continues to reduce the interest rate by which it the anticipated earnings, the interest rate on anticipated earnings. So I am very proud of that work. It entailed hours and hours of hearings. I invite members of the public who were not present at those meetings to review those meetings and to fully understand where we currently are situated. We carefully did take a haircut throughout all the departments. There's an entire chart of expenses that we decided not to fund in the current budget. I have a slightly different perspective from Council Member Hoffman. I do believe we are working hard to increase efficiency. We just invested and spent money on a track it program, which is going to greatly reduce the amount of time human beings spend doing some of our administrative work and do it through a computerized system. We are constantly exploring other means to decrease costs. Last Friday, I had a meeting with Jonathan Goldman, our public works director, and Peter Levy that explores a process for pipe lining instead of pipe excavation and replacement that could pertain to both our sewer and storm water lines, ultimately, that is receiving greater and greater acceptance, including for huge infrastructure projects undertaken by the White House. there's lots being done in Marin and other counties and cities to advance this new technology, which is cheaper, by far quicker, less cumbersome, and that could potentially greatly decrease the costs on our horizon for infrastructure improvements. So I believe we are investing significant efforts to increase efficiency and decrease costs. I agree with my fellow council members that we should direct the Finance Committee to further explore the three options that we've identified in our existing budget, which is demand parking, a TOT increase, and the business license increase, and report back to the City Council at our July 31 meeting, at which our consultant will be present with recommended action to be placed on our ballot. Other priorities for me would include the renewal of Measure O, as well as a tax on marijuana distribution. The only reason I'm not right now pushing harder to research the tax on marijuana distribution is the state of California is still finalizing its own statutes, And so we're not yet in a position to rush through how all that's going to shake out, but I think that should be one of our top priorities. This is something that benefits, you know, that 80% of our residents voted for. It benefits many of our residents, according to them. And so I think it's something we should definitely be collecting revenue on. I, short-term rentals, I agree with, council member withy they were in march of 2017 referred to the general plan advisory committee for consideration and study i'm happy to request that the finance committee perform further work to vet the work of the short-term rental blue ribbon committee figure out the revenue options and recommend you know a path forward but I think the best I think the that right now I agree with councilmember withy we have to have the Finance Committee and our staff focus on the things that have to go on the ballot and have to be enacted immediately in order to keep us on track for the budget that we adopted. at the end of June. Okay, so with that, I will entertain a motion to... designate an ad hoc committee and delegate authority that ad hoc committee, a two person ad hoc committee to work with staff to on ballot language and other details of the ballot measures and the... um, revenue, options that are being explored and to take to the Finance Committee for further analysis the demand parking, TOT increase and business license to return to the City Council on July 31 with recommendations for action. |
| 03:55:26.74 | Ray Withey | So that sounded like a motion to me. |
| 03:55:28.62 | Joan Cox | I'm not. . So moved. Is that everything you need, Melanie? Okay, perfect. |
| 03:55:33.22 | Ray Withey | I'll second it. And I'll second that. |
| 03:55:36.98 | Joan Cox | All right. Debbie, will you please call the roll? |
| 03:55:41.69 | Adam Politzer | Mayor Cox, I think on the ad hoc committee, you need to name the two members of the ad hoc committee. |
| 03:55:46.38 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 03:55:48.60 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 03:55:48.62 | Joan Cox | Well, I'm, I have my committee appointments are at the end of the agenda. |
| 03:55:52.99 | Debbie | you |
| 03:55:55.19 | Joan Cox | I thought of that. |
| 03:55:57.36 | Debbie | Council member Cleveland Knowles. |
| 03:55:59.51 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. |
| 03:56:00.43 | Debbie | Council member Withey? Yes. Council member Hoffman? |
| 03:56:01.65 | Mary Wagner | Yes. |
| 03:56:03.35 | Debbie | Yes. Vice Mayor Burns. Yes. Joan. Yes. Mayor Cox. |
| 03:56:04.92 | Joan Cox | Yes. |
| 03:56:05.19 | Vice Mayor Burns | Thank you. |
| 03:56:05.97 | Joan Cox | Yes. That motion carries 5-0. Thank you, Melanie, for a great report. Thank you, and welcome back, Brian. Look forward to working with you. |
| 03:56:21.90 | Joan Cox | And we'll see you all on Friday. And Melanie, will you circle back with the Finance Committee and firm up the time of our meeting to make sure you're going to have a quorum? Absolutely. |
| 03:56:37.46 | Joan Cox | I know, but I'm going to do, next I'm doing, yeah, 7 o'clock. The three public hearings are going to go very fast, I think. |
| 03:56:48.49 | Joan Cox | Okay, we're now going to move on to our new item 6D, which was removed from our consent calendar, which was item 4I, and that's adopt a motion authorizing solicitation of bids for construction of improvements at Southview Park. |
| 03:57:06.43 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you, Mayor Cox, members of council, staff, members of the community, Jonathan Goldman, your public works director, city engineer, and ADA coordinator. There were a couple of areas of questions earlier. I'm happy to try and address those right now. |
| 03:57:20.94 | Joan Cox | Yes, we have your staff report. This was on for consent. So if you could please address the questions raised about a landscaping plan and also about where members of the public can access the plans and specifications that will be provided to the contractor for bid. |
| 03:57:24.17 | Jonathon Goldman | Yeah. |
| 03:57:24.40 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 03:57:40.92 | Jonathon Goldman | and funding, happy to. Certainly the landscaping question, to some extent, is addressed in the staff report. As we see this project, it really consists of three separate components, a general engineering scope of work, which is what we are recommending that council authorize us to issue notice and inviting bids for this evening. Second scope involves the furnishing and installation of the playground equipment, which also will require Council authorization to award, but is pieces of specified equipment that are bid exempt, they are, |
| 03:58:28.97 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:58:29.10 | Jonathon Goldman | Thank you. |
| 03:58:29.17 | Joan Cox | under CMOS. |
| 03:58:30.05 | Jonathon Goldman | Exactly. Well, or under our procurement ordinance, we're allowed to specify certain equipment, and if it is only available from one manufacturer or one manufacturer's representative, we are not required to solicit competitive bids for that. The third component of the project includes landscaping, and as indicated in the staff report, we have, it's not indicated this way in the staff report, we have conceptual landscaping plans. We have landscaping that exists at the park now and have no reason to remove anything that isn't in the way or dead or at the end of its life. Both the Parks and Recreation Department and the Department of Public Works have, in our judgment, adequate operating budgets to acquire plant materials and install them at the park after the general engineering scope of work is completed and after the playground equipment is completed. With respect to access to the plans, once notice inviting bids is posted, those plans will be available to the public at large. Between now and then, my office is happy to share the detailed engineering plans that would be going out to bid, as well as the playground equipment plans and specifications. There were diagrams, diagrammatic representations of the playground equipment attached to the staff report tonight. We didn't include the detailed, they're basically structural concrete plans associated with the general engineering scope associated with the project and drainage, but to the extent that we have them, those are also available if people want to get them from me. I do also want to touch on funding, and this is an area, because that was a question, it's an area where, again, in the staff report, we point out council has appropriated funds for this project that, in our judgment, are adequate to allow us to solicit bids. Once we open bids, then we know from the marketplace, we actually have a firm fixed price for the playground equipment already. We'll know from the general engineering contractors what that structural concrete work, the drainage work, et cetera, will cost. And as indicated in the staff report, our intention is not to issue notice inviting bids tomorrow. What we want to do is take advantage of what we've seen in the marketplace with contractor workloads and the timing in which notices inviting bids happen. And that will allow us to do several things. One is solidify the per capita grant information that is not solidified enough to have been appropriated and therefore it would be inappropriate for us to ask you to appropriate it tonight we don't know when that grant those grants funds are available or will be available secondly as council is aware because this is this came up in the context of the Dunphy Park Project, we have received a Cal Recycle Grant of up to $750,000. To the extent that we use those grant funds, that frees up Measure O, what we call Measure O General Funds, that would then be available to Council to apply to the South D project at the time of award if you choose to do that. And then in addition, we want to take advantage, and this came up in your earlier conversation about revenues, want to take advantage of the opportunity to work with the community to try and identify opportunities where plant materials, volunteer labor, donation of benches, donation of other elements of the park that make it more attractive than just a general engineering contractor would take advantage of the opportunity to develop those resources in the community. So that's why we are where we are and happy to answer other questions and |
| 04:02:39.14 | Joan Cox | And Jonathan, we're going on break in August, so it's important that you get this authority now so that you can put this out to bid during the break and come back for approval after the break. Is that right? |
| 04:02:49.50 | Jonathon Goldman | It certainly gives us more flexibility than if we had to ask you to hold a special meeting for that kind of |
| 04:02:55.68 | Joan Cox | OK, well, you would not get a special. We've had members who have said they won't attend a special meeting. So OK, I'm going to open it up. Well, are there questions on the dais of Jonathan? |
| 04:03:07.37 | Unknown | you |
| 04:03:10.21 | Joan Cox | to a certain person? No, I've just said there are council members who have said they will not attend a meeting in August. That is true. People generally say that. Okay, if there are no questions up here, I'm gonna open it up for further public comment. Yes, Wendy. |
| 04:03:37.68 | Wendy Richards | This is what got me down here in the first place. So a couple of things. I appreciate all that information. Thank you very much. And I appreciate your commitments. expressed earlier regarding the budgets and the work you're doing. Thank you. Um, So, my I'm still unclear as to what the time, from reading this note and listening just now, I'm still unclear as to why August has this time scale. This note says that there's a lot of information yet to be found, that understanding cash flows from other projects, Um, My request would be that you as a council keep a tight rein on this large of a project, particularly involving the parks where we know that we're already way beyond where the voters thought they were authorizing. Thank you. And I think the suggestion that was made earlier that we invite people to donate is a good one. We already do it. We have Sausalito Beautiful, the dog parks. We needed to improve the dog parks, so what did we do? We created a 501c3. I was on the first board. I helped write the thing. Very simple. People are used to it. People do it all the time. They do it for the schools. They do it for university buildings. Why not get people who are interested in this park to make donations? I would like to see that this project comes back to Council and to the public before any major steps are taken. Now, if there's some urgency about August, I didn't hear that. This said that it wasn't going to happen until 2019. I think that it's very important that we look into serious donations for this kind of project. Also, there seems to be no contingency and there is a shortfall of $45,000. So let's just be clear that there's no contingency and you know. If we find that elsewhere in the budget we can't make ends meet, I don't want to find out later we're raising taxes to pay for a park on top of a hill in the fog. We have a perfectly good basketball court here. It's not full. It's not overused. And when I came earlier tonight, even though the sun was still out here. It was cold and foggy coming over the bridge. So let's keep this in mind as part of this bigger issue that we have with our budgets and have... a tight rein on this and if there is no need to rush it in August let's come back with the final information before putting it out to bid Thank you. |
| 04:06:22.23 | Joan Cox | Just a couple of points of clarification, Wendy. So tonight's action is to authorize... the city to go out to bid. the city will not accept any bid until it comes back to the council for acceptance of the bid. So tonight is just authorizing to go out and get pricing from engineers. And then in September, hopefully they'll come back to us with here's here's the bids we got here are the grant funds that we've identified. I know that Mike Langford our parks director is already identifying various scopes that could be subject to community contributions. He has outlined those at a couple of the community meetings that have been held over there regarding Southview Park. So |
| 04:07:13.26 | Wendy Richards | Thank you. |
| 04:07:14.78 | Joan Cox | you |
| 04:07:14.83 | Wendy Richards | And is there, may I ask a question? Am I allowed? Yeah. Thank you. Is there a... a plan B if the funding is for some reason not available or that we need to use the funding elsewhere, such as at Dunphy. |
| 04:07:31.67 | Joan Cox | Thank you. So we're not going to spend time figuring out a plan B until we know that plan A isn't going to work. But it's going to come back to us for approval before any money is spent. |
| 04:07:32.73 | Wendy Richards | Bye. |
| 04:07:32.75 | Debbie | I love that. |
| 04:07:43.21 | Joan Cox | Thank you very much. Okay. Yes. |
| 04:07:50.23 | Carolyn Revell | Well, we very much, in Sausalito Beautiful, appreciate Jonathan's clarification of the reason for soliciting the bid now to clarify the costs, and simply would say that we do hope there will be an actual design for the landscape. I understand that there's an original conceptual level, but we'd like to be sure that there is a final design, however the plant material is funded. Thank you very much, and thank you, Jonathan, for staying so late. You might not otherwise have had to. Appreciate it. more in |
| 04:08:22.46 | Joan Cox | And Barbara, may I suggest, Barbara, is it Barbara? Carolyn. Carolyn, may I suggest that you or Sausalito Beautiful circle back with Jonathan and Um, you know, offline to discuss what it is you're seeking for the phase three landscaping so that you two can get on the same page? Yes, we do. We do regularly with... |
| 04:08:44.43 | Carolyn Revell | Lauren |
| 04:08:44.97 | Joan Cox | and Mike Lentford. |
| 04:08:46.02 | Carolyn Revell | Thank you very much. Thank you. |
| 04:08:46.05 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 04:08:49.19 | Joan Cox | All right, any other further public comment? Seeing none, I'm gonna bring it up here for a motion. |
| 04:08:57.76 | Ray Withey | So I move to authorize staff to solicit bids for the construction of improvements at Southview Park. |
| 04:09:06.56 | Mehdi Dallavarin | Thank you. |
| 04:09:06.59 | Vice Mayor Burns | Second. |
| 04:09:07.47 | Joan Cox | Second. Debbie, will you please call the roll. And Susan Cleveland Knowles had the second. |
| 04:09:19.57 | Debbie | Council member Cleveland Knowles. Council member Withy? Yes. Council member Hoffman? Yes. |
| 04:09:24.33 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 04:09:24.34 | Vice Mayor Burns | Yeah. |
| 04:09:27.46 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 04:09:28.12 | Vice Mayor Burns | Yes. |
| 04:09:28.70 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 04:09:28.71 | Joan Cox | Mayor Cox. Yes. That motion carries 5-0. We're going to now move swiftly on, and I'm looking at the city attorney as I say swiftly, to item 5B, amendment to the Sausalito Municipal Code 5.12 entitled Taxicabs for Hire Vehicles. |
| 04:10:11.95 | Mary Wagner | Did you switch? Thank you. |
| 04:10:12.81 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 04:10:12.82 | Mary Wagner | . |
| 04:10:12.98 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 04:10:13.03 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 04:10:13.04 | Joan Cox | Thanks guys. |
| 04:10:13.30 | Mary Wagner | Thanks. |
| 04:10:13.53 | Joan Cox | . |
| 04:10:14.58 | Mary Wagner | May. It's like a meal. Thank you, Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. We do have three ordinance amendments that have been worked through with the Legislative Committee for your consideration tonight. They're all first readings and I'll try to be very succinct and know that you have all the information in your staff report and then be happy to answer any questions. So the first proposed ordinance amendment is to the provisions in the Sausalito Municipal Code dealing with taxicabs. You will recall that we had a conversation about taxicab regulations earlier this year. AND THAT, UM, The background is the Marin General Services MGSA. generally regulates taxi cabs throughout Marin County. They deal with licensing and permitting inspections and that sort of thing. But because they didn't deal with some of the unique issues in Sausalito, we brought you an ordinance earlier this year to address some of those concerns, particularly in the downtown area. Thank you. And we established regulations that dealt with how drivers may solicit passengers, how they had to utilize the taxi stand, and those are listed up there for your consideration. Recently, members of the police department have had some concerns about enforcement. They've witnessed taxi cab operators continuing to solicit passengers from parked vehicles in parking lot number one, despite the clear regulations that you already adopted. So they asked for a couple of clarifying changes to the language in the ordinance. One, you'll see the revision to the definition of what solicit means to further clarify that it has to be from a person speaking to another person directly next to the cab in the cab stand. And then to clarify again that you can only solicit passengers from a taxi cab that is stopped in the taxi stand or parked in a taxi cab stand and then only from the driver's seat, etc. So we bring forward these two recommendations for amendments to... the Muni code relating to taxicabs for your consideration. And I'm happy to answer any questions. |
| 04:12:23.13 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Any questions of Mary? Okay, any public comment on this? Seeing none, I'm going to bring it up here, and 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 5.12 of the Sausalito Municipal Code entitled Taxicabs for Hire Vehicles. Exactly. Susan, did you want to comment? Debbie, will you please call the roll? |
| 04:12:58.45 | Debbie | Councilmember Cleveland Knowles. |
| 04:13:01.56 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Yeah. |
| 04:13:02.54 | Debbie | Council Member Withey? |
| 04:13:03.53 | Ray Withey | Yes. |
| 04:13:04.19 | Debbie | Councilmember Hoffman? Yes. Vice Mayor Burns? Yes. |
| 04:13:06.72 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 04:13:06.75 | Vice Mayor Burns | Yes. |
| 04:13:07.02 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Cox. Yes, that motion carries 5-0. Now we'll turn to Item 5C, Amendment of the Saucydo Municipal Code Chapter 13.3 to social host accountability. |
| 04:13:20.17 | Mary Wagner | Mary. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Earlier in the 2000s, every Marin County jurisdiction was asked to consider adopting a social host ordinance, and all of the jurisdictions did. And the purpose of the social host ordinance was to address underage parties where drinking and or drug use was occurring. These types of ordinance hold the adults responsible for any youth drinking that occurs on their property, whether the adults are present or not. The ordinances are enforced by local law enforcement. Your chief is here and can answer any questions you may have about that. This proposed amendment is to update the regulations to include I think that's a good question. that the use of controlled substances and marijuana at these types of parties would also be covered in addition to covering what's commonly known as party vehicles a museum particularly during prom season when a bunch of kids will get together and rent a vehicle together and there was a that we have been working example of a kind of a outrageous event that occurred in 2016. that. was shut down. And so a number of Marin County jurisdictions are currently in the process of updating to include the that again you add marijuana-controlled substances and then also unlawful gatherings in vehicles. It also adds a restorative justice penalty option for juveniles who are TO BE ENGAGING IN THIS TYPE OF of activity. So with that, I am happy to answer any questions you may have. And again, the chief is also here if you have any questions for him on enforceability or the experiences here in Sausalito. |
| 04:15:03.38 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Thank you. Any questions of Mary or the Chief? Seeing none. Any public comment on this? Seeing none, I will close public comment and move that we introduce, give first reading, and read by title only, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito, amending Title 12, Chapter 13.32 of the Sausalito Municipal Code, Social Host Accountability. |
| 04:15:28.42 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I can't. |
| 04:15:30.11 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 04:15:30.14 | Debbie | Debbie, will you please call the roll? Councilmember Cleveland knows. Thank you. Council member Withey? Yes. Council member Hoffman? Yes. Vice Mayor Burns? |
| 04:15:38.33 | Vice Mayor Burns | Yes. Yes. |
| 04:15:41.57 | Debbie | Thank you. Mayor. |
| 04:15:42.04 | Joan Cox | Yes, that motion carries 5-0. We'll now move on to Item 5D, Amendment of Saucido Municipal Code Chapter 12.28, Clean Indoor Air and Health |
| 04:15:54.04 | Mary Wagner | protection. |
| 04:15:54.63 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 04:15:55.62 | Mary Wagner | And Mary. Thank you, Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. The last of their trifecta of ordinances this evening deals with the city's smoking regulations, which were adopted in 2012. And again, this was another county-wide effort to have local jurisdictions adopt regulations, they deal primarily with only not allowing smoking in certain designated areas and includes some kind of complex regulations about smoking in apartment complexes or other multi-unit developments. The proposed amendments are being brought to you largely in part to a presentation you received earlier this year from some local high school students who asked that the council consider adopting a tobacco retailer's license requirement. We have also included THEIR OWNERS. the definition of tobacco products to include, um, electronic smoking devices and liquid tobacco solutions. We've all heard the recent ads on the different flavors of tobacco that are available and how they're seemingly targeted primarily at youth And the proposed amendment also prohibits the sale of these flavored tobacco products within the city, including flavored nicotine, e-cigarette solutions, and flavored traditional tobacco products such as menthol cigarettes. The tobacco retailers license requirement would be that any business that sells tobacco products must receive a license from the city. has to be displayed on site anybody who operates in violation of that requirement could have their license either revoked or suspended and they may be subjects to fines and or administrative code enforcement under the muni code We are recommending a fee of $50 per license to cover the cost of issuing it. It's similar to what other Marin County jurisdictions, including the city of Novato, have imposed. We are recommending that these amendments, unlike other amendments which go into effect 30 days after their adoption, we're recommending that these go into effect on November 1 of this year in order to give us an opportunity to reach out to the business community, to make them aware of these requirements, and so that they can come into compliance. And with that, again, I am available for any questions you may have, as is the chief. and We'll leave it there. Thank you. |
| 04:18:15.97 | Joan Cox | Any questions of Mary or the chief? |
| 04:18:20.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I have a question. Thank you. |
| 04:18:22.23 | Joan Cox | Yes. |
| 04:18:22.50 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I received a call today from someone from the bait shop. And I don't know if other council members did as well. I was unable, I returned the call, but I was unable to talk to the person. Was, did anyone else receive a call? get any input from the business community on this? |
| 04:18:43.66 | Joan Cox | I did not receive a call from the bait shop, although I know the guy. |
| 04:18:47.60 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thanks. |
| 04:18:47.78 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 04:18:50.99 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Okay, thank you. |
| 04:18:53.17 | Joan Cox | Okay, any public comment? David? |
| 04:18:57.38 | David Lay | I know it's late, but I couldn't resist. Um, Milford, Connecticut was on the radio this morning. I grew up there. Thank you. I'm not sure. I can't tell you how important it is to include this vaping. And it's no different than cigarettes as far as getting on any kind of drugs and stuff. And it's the nicotine is the most addictive thing that kids use or anybody uses. And it leads to all these other problems. And it's just a way of getting nicotine into kids. And anything you can do to talk that up, and anything you can do to make sure up and anything you can do to make sure other towns include that in their laws just like you're going to just do it thanks |
| 04:19:45.33 | Joan Cox | Thanks. Any other public comment on this item? Seeing none, I will close public comment and move that we introduce, Joe, go ahead. |
| 04:19:55.30 | Vice Mayor Burns | I just want to speak on this tonight because it's something I've always very much support and support this and want to take it a step further. And the mayor has allowed me to write something and produce something to take this step further. But at this point, I think the city has an obligation to protect our employees and our citizens from carcinogens at least on our own property and I see that we could pass something really quickly that says we prohibit the release of any carcinogen on city property. I don't have to use the word smoking, but if you release a toxin, without authorization on city property, you're violating a health code. And it is a toxin. It is a carcinogen is, and that's the only... You know, don't even have to get in all the smoking rules. You just can't do it. You know, it's that easy. So I'm really surprised that governments across the board haven't done this because it is a known... So. That's it. |
| 04:20:58.09 | Debbie | Thanks. Susan, did you want to comment? |
| 04:21:01.13 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | you. |
| 04:21:01.15 | Debbie | you. |
| 04:21:01.16 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | I just am wholly supportive. I think this is, you know, flavor of tobacco is just unacceptable, and I'm in favor. |
| 04:21:09.72 | Joan Cox | Okay. If there are no further comments, I will move that we introduce, give first reading, and read by title only an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito amending Title 12, Chapter 12.28 of the Sausalito Municipal Code to require tobacco retailers' licenses and prohibit the sale of flavored tobacco products. |
| 04:21:30.76 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | again. |
| 04:21:33.90 | Joan Cox | you |
| 04:21:33.92 | Debbie | Debbie, will you please call the roll? Councilmember Cleveland Knowles. |
| 04:21:39.06 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Thank you. |
| 04:21:39.16 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 04:21:39.22 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Bye. |
| 04:21:39.91 | Debbie | Council Member Withey. |
| 04:21:41.29 | Ray Withey | Yes. |
| 04:21:41.36 | Debbie | Thank you. Councilmember Hoffman? Yes. Vice Mayor Burns? Yes. |
| 04:21:44.48 | Ray Withey | Yes. |
| 04:21:44.95 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 04:21:44.97 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 04:21:45.00 | Debbie | Thank you. |
| 04:21:45.04 | Joan Cox | Mayor Cox. Yes, that motion carries 5-0. We will now move on to city manager reports, council member reports, city council appointments, and other council business. Is there any public comment on items 7B through 7F? Seeing none, we'll move smartly on to city manager information for the council. I'd like to point out to the city manager that despite his challenge to me earlier today, we are merely one minute behind schedule. |
| 04:22:13.44 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. Thank you. Okay, well, I'm going to keep my comments brief, but... Two of the introductions were made earlier, but I thought that I should formally make the announcement. Brian Mora, who was introduced by Melanie Purcell earlier, has rejoined the city as the interim finance director as we start the recruitment to fill the administrative services director. So he's in an advisory role working with staff and will help us through this transition. As council members, Brian joined us after Charlie Francis had retired and helped us in the recruitment effort that landed Melanie with Thank you. with the city. So we anticipate similar success working with the recruitment consultants, and we have proposals due into us by the end of this week. So we'll be moving swiftly on that process. As the mayor and the vice mayor introduced, introduce debbie has joined us back acting in the clerk's role here this evening and also advising and working with Serge, who is working as the deputy clerk as we go through an election season and also making sure that everything in the city clerk's office is addressed also during this transition. And as we heard tonight, our interim community development director, Lily Whalen, who moved from the assistant city manager, city clerk position, is going to be the interim for three months. We'll see how that all goes, and then we'll make a decision on if that becomes a permanent appointment or if she would like to return and work with the my office and the administration office. But right now we're covered. We're in good shape as we go forward. But obviously the administrative services director position is a critical position to fill, and we'll be working hard to do that. I'm sure that the mayor and other council members will talk about the Sister City events that are right in front of us and the sister city trip and program that to kashkai so i will end my report and happy to answer any questions from the council |
| 04:24:46.12 | Joan Cox | Thank you. We'll move on to council member committee reports. Who has a report? Joe, PBAC. |
| 04:24:54.19 | Vice Mayor Burns | PBAC met last night and they are preparing a presentation for the 31st, which will include their comments on the bicycle plan check-in. Somewhat of that is a punt to the general plan, but we worked it out with staff and it is... had been discussed. Plus they have some new ideas, and I think it'll be a fairly informative presentation for this group that, like I said, is a newer group. The library, we saw their fourth quarter report. That group continues to remove just smoothly. committee to be on. That's it. |
| 04:25:38.65 | Jill Hoffman | We had a legislative committee on July 2nd meeting, but almost everything at that meeting was on the agenda tonight. So that's pretty much what we talked about. |
| 04:25:51.65 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | And I attended the Sustainability Commission last week, and they are moving forward. continuing to discuss priorities for the upcoming year. |
| 04:26:06.40 | Ray Withey | So I don't really have any internal committee reports. Externally, we've got a Marine Clean Energy Board meeting later on this week, so I'll report on that next time. And you've heard enough about TAM already, and hopefully the TAM board will be approving this and recommending to the Board of Supervisors that they move forward with the sales tax renewal, because ultimately it is the Board of Supervisors who are going to put that on the ballot or not. So we'll report back on that next time as well. I'd just like to say that I, as part of a larger trip, went to with our sister city program to Qashqai in Portugal along with the mayor and The important thing is this program is about the youth sailing exchange and the Key memory for me is seeing both the Portuguese and our kids together hold up one trophy together. And in the end, that was what it's all about, which is the kids having the experience of a lifetime, enhancing their sailing skills, and basically being good ambassadors, great ambassadors for Sausalito with our hosts and friends in Portugal. So it went very well, don't you think? |
| 04:28:01.35 | Joan Cox | I agree. In addition to that ceremony, we did sign documentation extending our compact with the sister cities, with the cities themselves, and with the respective yacht clubs, extending our agreement for another two years. And we were welcomed by city officials as well as the yacht club officials. So it was a very productive, heartwarming trip. I'm very proud that we have one of the only international youth sailing Sister City programs in the country. So that's something we're all very proud of. |
| 04:28:40.57 | Ray Withey | Can I add one more thing on that, which I forgot to mention? We have two trophies for this. They're identical. It's almost identical. One resides in the Club Naval in Qashqais, and one resides in the Sausalito Yacht Club. And both of them are models of boats, sort of boats, that were made by the kids some years ago. And the materials from which these were made was excess wood from the Matthew Turner. So we decided that it was too much logistics to ship one trophy. So there's a trophy residing in each club, which they duly come together and hold up. |
| 04:28:42.19 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 04:29:34.19 | Joan Cox | Okay, there was supposed to be an RBRA meeting last Thursday. It got moved to July 25 in direct conflict with our MCC-MC meeting. So... I will attend the RBRA next week along with ostensibly the other city members. I can't imagine why it was scheduled today. |
| 04:29:55.66 | Ray Withey | We don't have MCCMC next week. |
| 04:29:58.23 | Joan Cox | Oh, we don't? |
| 04:29:58.92 | Ray Withey | No, there's no meeting in July and August. |
| 04:30:02.50 | Joan Cox | All right, well, then I won't miss anything. Okay, and as the city manager mentioned, We do have, well, I also want to mention the GPAC. We saw an update on the GPAC on our consent calendar, but the GPAC is going to come back to the City Council in September, I believe, to provide an update and to give the City Council an opportunity to participate in the visioning effort so that it doesn't come back to the City Council as a fait accompli and also for the City Council to finalize its approval of the executive reports, the executive summaries related to the understanding component. I do want to remind us that we are having a special city council meeting on July 27 at 8.30 in the morning to welcome Mayor Aya, Sakaide Mayor Aya and his delegation. Directly following the city council meeting, we will go outdoors. We're planning right now, hopefully these plans will come to fruition, to plant a commemorative tree commemorating our 30th, anniversary as a sister city with them just as we did in Sakai Day earlier this year. I'm having a reception at my home on Thursday evening July 26th at 6pm to which all of the City Council is invited. On July 27, there is a gathering at the Seafood Peddler, directly following Jazz by the Bay, to which all of the city council is invited at $30 a head. And on July 28, there is a party at the Bay Model, which is the big celebration event, again, to which all of the city council is invited, and that is $30 a head. In addition, tomorrow Mike McGuire will be coming to lunch at the Spinnaker. I believe all of you have been invited and I heartily urge you to attend if you can. Gary Ferber wants to get a photo op with all of us out in front of the Spinnaker. If there are no further Councilmember Committee reports, we'll move on to appointments. And this evening, I'm going to appoint the mayor and the vice mayor to the ad hoc committee to work with Um, staff and the consultant on the various revenue initiatives. for the ballot. I am going to I removed Joe Burns from the Omit Committee and placed Ray Withy on that committee. And I think I have the authority to create an ad hoc committee. I'm creating an ad hoc committee to work with the Downtown Landside Improvements Project. And to that ad hoc committee, I'm appointing Ray Withey and Vice Mayor Joe Burns. |
| 04:33:15.12 | Jill Hoffman | What is the rule on ad hoc committees? Because we went through this when I was mayor about the rules for... these types of committees. So I mean it was a to-do. Do we need to go over those rules? I don't know. I remember there was a thing. |
| 04:33:33.97 | Joan Cox | If you want to go over those rules, we can add that as a future agenda item. |
| 04:33:39.20 | Jill Hoffman | Well, it goes more to I mean, I don't want to argue about it, but, I mean, there is, to your comment, do you have the authority? Well, I got a nod from the... |
| 04:33:47.51 | Debbie | I got a nod from the |
| 04:33:49.33 | Jill Hoffman | That brought something up in my mind when I was creating committees and blue ribbon committees and things, and there was some discussion about the authority of the mayor to do that. So I don't, off the top of my head, Madam, I can't remember the specifics, but I think |
| 04:34:02.05 | Adam Politzer | off the top of my head. Thank you. I think the brief answer is that the mayor has that discretion. but obviously if the majority of the council members object, Yeah. |
| 04:34:12.14 | Joan Cox | Thank you. So any objections? Thank you. |
| 04:34:14.89 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 04:34:15.03 | Joan Cox | Okay, great. Okay, future agenda items we've included in the packet. future agenda items we're down to just under two pages worth of future agenda items i've told the agenda setting committee and the city manager that i'm determined that those will get handled this year Okay. |
| 04:34:38.60 | Ray Withey | And just because the list is short, we don't need to manufacture more. |
| 04:34:44.04 | Joan Cox | We better not. |
| 04:34:44.73 | Ray Withey | Right. |
| 04:34:45.44 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 04:34:45.98 | Ray Withey | I see next year. |
| 04:34:46.87 | Joan Cox | . TODAY. Thank you. All right, any other reports of significance? If not, we're adjourning five minutes early at 11.35 p.m. |
| 04:34:58.82 | Vice Mayor Burns | I don't know how you pulled that off. Thank you, Debbie, Adam, Mary Ann. |
| 04:35:06.33 | Ray Withey | I thought I was good to be here until about 1. Hi, everybody. |
| 04:35:08.76 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Hey, everybody. |
| 04:35:10.97 | Joan Cox | Good night, Susan. The Press. |
| 04:35:13.96 | Vice Mayor Burns | Thank you. |
| 04:35:14.67 | Susan Cleveland-Knowles | Almost time to get up. Thank you. |
| 04:35:20.28 | Vice Mayor Burns | So, Well, |
Sunny Yao — Neutral: Expressed happiness with societal progress, mentioned having practical and intuitive solutions to unspecified problems, and offered to discuss them after the meeting. ▶ 📄
Unknown — Neutral: Thanked the community for embodying humanity and hard work, encouraged thinking from the heart for the collective good, and voiced a desire for a beautiful Sausalito. ▶ 📄
Mehdi Dallavarin — Against: Complained about the severe disrepair and safety hazards on Edwards Avenue, noted repeated unsuccessful requests for a repaving timeline over 2.5 years, and sought prioritization for road repairs. ▶ 📄