| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:06.22 | Unknown | you Thank you. |
| 00:00:25.07 | Jill Hoffman | All right. Welcome, everybody. I'm going to call this meeting to order and request that we have a real Thank you. |
| 00:00:30.71 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:30.74 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF |
| 00:00:31.03 | Unknown | search. Councilmember Cox? Here. Councilmember Hoffman? Present. Councilmember Withey? Here. Vice Mayor Cleveland Knowles? Here. Mayor Burns? |
| 00:00:39.52 | Jill Hoffman | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:00:40.85 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:40.88 | Jill Hoffman | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:00:41.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:41.19 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Open up public comment on items that are on the closed agenda. There are nobody here, so we'll close public comment We are going to adjourn to a closed session to discuss two items items D1 and 2 not 3 per the agenda Is that correct? There's just the two okay conference with label negotiate labor negotiators pursuant to section 5495 7.6 agency designated representatives Charles Sakai Salosekai regarding the employee organizations Sausalito Police Association conference with legal counsel existing litigation pursuant to paragraph 1 of subdivision D of section 5495 6.9 Gordon versus Sausalito we'll be back at open session at 7 o'clock |
| 00:01:36.32 | Unknown | I'll let you. I found a man I could trust. What a fuck. |
| 00:01:41.82 | Unknown | What? |
| 00:01:44.71 | Unknown | This is how. The re-end. you He's gonna break my heart. Say can't we be brave |
| 00:02:43.99 | Unknown | Never again True with love. rude man They played their game. Without shame and who's to blame? |
| 00:03:02.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:03:02.16 | Unknown | you |
| 00:03:05.62 | Unknown | I Should have seen the signal and stop. What a flower. Now I see the way this ends. He's gonna break my heart. |
| 00:03:12.29 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:03:15.80 | Unknown | Way to... |
| 00:03:21.42 | Unknown | And say, can't we be, can't we be, can't we be here? Can't we be friends? |
| 00:03:31.31 | Unknown | you |
| 00:03:32.59 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:03:42.43 | Denny Zeitlin | This is Denny Zeitlin. and you're listening to Radio 7. |
| 00:03:44.97 | Dave Bradlauer | of salute. |
| 00:03:45.51 | Denny Zeitlin | Thank you. |
| 00:06:52.24 | Unknown | Radio Sausalito thanks Gil Purcell, Jr. for his generosity, which helps us continue to provide this important broadcast service to the people of Marin County. Thanks, Gil. |
| 00:07:02.70 | Unknown | you |
| 00:07:08.03 | Dave Bradlauer | Hi, this is Dave Bradlauer inviting you to join me on Radio Sausalito each Wednesday at noon and 8 p.m. for the best in jumping swing, classic blues. Hot Jazz, Older you you Please join me. every Wednesday at noon and 8 p.m. Radio Sausalito. |
| 00:07:28.57 | Unknown | Here's a public service announcement from Sauce Ligo Parks and Recreation. and Radio Sausalito. |
| 00:07:35.98 | Unknown | The 41st annual Chili Cook-Off is coming up in Robins Sweeney Park on Saturday, September 21st. The event features all the chili you can eat for just $10, plus live music from the band There will be a jumpy house for kids, too. cook-off hours are 1130 a.m. to 330 p.m. That's the 41st Annual Chili Cook-Off at Robin Sweeney Park next to City Hall on September 21st. That's a Saturday starting at 11.30. For more information, just surf on over to Sausalito.gov. |
| 00:08:18.87 | Unknown | Thank you. to the window By the window That is where I'll be, cut tiptoe through the two layers. We'll be right back. |
| 00:08:33.77 | Unknown | Tiptoe from your pillow to the shadow of a willow tree. And tiptoe through the tulips with me. Me too. In flowers we'll stray, we'll Oh, showers away. And if I kiss you in the garden. In the moonlight, will you pardon me? Come tiptoe through the timbre. |
| 00:09:35.08 | Unknown | Needle. The deepened flowers will stray, will kill. We're gonna keep those crazy April showers away And if I kiss you in the garden In the moonlight, will you pardon me? Come to toe through the tulips with me. Come on and tiptoe through the two lips with me. |
| 00:10:12.97 | Unknown | . |
| 00:10:31.71 | Unknown | Where there's music, I'll face it too Thank you. Somewhere there's heaven, how high the moon |
| 00:10:37.03 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 00:10:37.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:10:37.25 | Alan Broadbent | I |
| 00:10:38.90 | Unknown | There is no moon above, but love is far away too. It'll come true. Have you the feels? I love you. Somewhere there's music. where you are. Where there's heaven, how near, how far. The darkest night would shine if you would come to me soon. Until you will, I'll still my heart, how high the moon. |
| 00:11:03.03 | Unknown | . . . you |
| 00:11:17.97 | Unknown | you . . . . you you |
| 00:11:29.17 | Unknown | Choopa-doop-doop-doop-it, choopa-doop-ish. |
| 00:11:32.02 | Unknown | Bada-ba-da-bada-bill, you boo-boo-boo. |
| 00:11:34.07 | Unknown | . |
| 00:11:34.74 | Unknown | you |
| 00:11:34.81 | Unknown | . |
| 00:11:37.07 | Unknown | Bye. I love you. |
| 00:11:58.18 | Unknown | you |
| 00:11:59.80 | Unknown | Thank you. you |
| 00:11:59.97 | Unknown | you |
| 00:12:00.04 | Unknown | Let me see the man, let me see the man. I'm going to be here. you Thank you. Ba-ba-da-doop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop-ee-oop Day of the day of the |
| 00:12:18.21 | Unknown | you |
| 00:12:18.36 | Unknown | you |
| 00:12:19.46 | Unknown | Bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip-bip- |
| 00:12:34.16 | Unknown | There's no moon above, but love is far away too Still it comes true That you love me as I love you Somewhere there's music Where you are. Where there's heaven, how near I'll fall. The darkest night would shine if you would come to me too. |
| 00:13:04.43 | Alan Broadbent | Hi, this is Alan Broadbent, and you are tuned to Radio Sausalito. |
| 00:13:16.29 | Unknown | you |
| 00:14:15.21 | Unknown | Oh. Thank you. Thank you. Everybody's happy. Yeah. Where the night is brighter than day. Up. Sweethearts. And those. Dressed up in the sundae I'm going to do this. on their way to movies and shows. Up on roadway Out of town Thank you. When I walk along the main street you Anywhere, I don't care. I always mind on the street, just another plain street. |
| 00:14:58.67 | Alan Broadbent | Bye. |
| 00:14:59.03 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:14:59.05 | Alan Broadbent | Oh |
| 00:15:04.18 | Unknown | Broadway. Take a little time out. you Where the joy of living holds. Yeah. I'm not. I've been following my roadway |
| 00:18:26.69 | Unknown | Wrong way. Everybody's happy. you Where the night is brighter than day. Oh, Lord, for always, sweetheart, dear. Dressed up in their Sunday best blue On their way to movies And shows up on Broadway. I'll tell them I'm all down. And I walk along Main Street Thank you. Anywhere, I don't care. I always find a man's street, just another plain street. |
| 00:19:09.89 | Alan Broadbent | Bye-bye. Just a little bit. |
| 00:19:13.64 | Unknown | Broadway. Rolling. Take a little time. Thank you. Where the joy of living holds the way. |
| 00:19:55.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:19:56.38 | Dave Bradlauer | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:19:59.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:19:59.99 | Dave Bradlauer | Thank you. |
| 00:20:00.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:20:00.15 | Dave Bradlauer | I just did it. |
| 00:20:01.68 | Unknown | you |
| 00:20:01.73 | Dave Bradlauer | Thank you. |
| 00:20:01.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:20:01.88 | Dave Bradlauer | Thank you. |
| 00:20:01.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:20:02.85 | Dave Bradlauer | Thank you. |
| 00:20:03.27 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:20:03.69 | Dave Bradlauer | I'm not sure. |
| 00:20:03.98 | Unknown | . |
| 00:20:07.07 | Jill Hoffman | All right, if you would please have a seat or we'll have to call the police. |
| 00:20:10.66 | Unknown | I'm not. . |
| 00:20:19.23 | Jill Hoffman | Welcome, this is a wonderful crowd. This is getting to be a regular in Sausalito. I love seeing all the people. Tonight is Tuesday, September 24th, 2019. Open session beginning here. I want to call for a Pledge of Allegiance. Let's do that first. And Bill Sr., would you lead us, please? |
| 00:20:54.48 | Ray Withey | Thank you. Thank you. with liberty. . for all. |
| 00:20:58.60 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you |
| 00:21:05.88 | Jill Hoffman | We did just come out of a closed session, which we have no closed session announcements. I have one item of the agenda that I would like to change. We are going to eliminate 1B of special presentations for tonight's meeting. Rebook that for another meeting. Is there any other changes or an approval? |
| 00:21:25.35 | Jill Hoffman | Move approval as amended. Second. |
| 00:21:28.20 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? |
| 00:21:28.96 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. |
| 00:21:29.77 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you that does bring us to special presentations we have a very special one and that is Captain Bill Frost recognition ceremony and the chief of police John Rohrbach |
| 00:21:45.28 | Adam Politzer | So good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of the City Council. So this is again one of those times when there's sometimes very few. These are really exciting. It's either the hiring of new people or the promotion of current staff. And tonight is the promotion night. I'm very excited to introduce Bill Frost as he makes his way from being a police lieutenant to police captain. I'm He began his career with us in 1996 when he was a reserve officer. But he became a full-time officer just a year later, 1997. So that's when we started actually giving him a paycheck. Then from 2003 to 2006, Bill served as the department's detective. After that assignment, obviously he did pretty good because they promoted him to sergeant in 2007. And then later, he promoted him to lieutenant in 2016. So Bill holds a master's degree in criminal justice. He's a graduate of the FBI's National Academy. He's had many accomplishments in Sausalito in his career. As a sergeant, he was in charge of developing the waterfront management now, but frankly back then it was the Marine Patrol Unit. He served as our city's emergency services manager, also while serving as a sergeant. And of course, recently you saw his work in creating the mobile shower program. So Bill's list of accomplishments are just terrific. In his new role, however, as a captain, Bill's going to serve as the second in command in the department. and provide that administrative direction and support over all the programs. And frankly, he's just going to do what I tell him. |
| 00:23:28.03 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 00:23:30.11 | Adam Politzer | So at this time, we're going to have our city clerk swear in. |
| 00:23:44.86 | Unknown | you you |
| 00:24:54.31 | Adam Politzer | So the next part is the badge pinning, and it's typically the privilege of the chief of police to do the badge pinning. I like thinking that the recipient of the badge, it would mean more if it's somebody they actually cared about. In this particular case, it's his wife, Pamela. So I invite Pamela to come up and pin the badge on Bill. |
| 00:25:08.03 | Alan Broadbent | particular |
| 00:25:51.97 | Bill Frost | City Council members, city staff, I want to say thank you very much for the opportunity to serve. I want to thank my family. My father, Chief Bill, Mother. Darlene, who was the sister of an officer the wife of an officer. and the mother of God. you My lovely wife, Pamela. who herself has 34 years of public safety experience serving the city of Sausalito as what dispatcher first with city of Sausalito Now at the Sheriff's Office. My brother, Nick. who has been my best friend for 41 years. And to my dear friends. are the most important people I have to thank where the men and women of the Sausalito past and present sworn professional staff. No one succeeds all on their own. It takes a team. and without them. I would never be where I am today so thank them Thank you. |
| 00:27:12.74 | Adam Politzer | All right, thank you very much for your time, and we'll leave you to the rest of your meeting. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. |
| 00:27:19.98 | Unknown | Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. We're not done here. |
| 00:27:21.31 | Jill Hoffman | We're not done here. |
| 00:27:34.03 | Jill Hoffman | Will you at least tell us where you're going to be now? |
| 00:27:45.04 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 00:27:51.55 | Jill Hoffman | Since there are people at home still, watching and wondering why I am wearing a T-shirt. I'll do a quick mayor presentation while everybody's exiting that I have made a pledge to not take this shirt off until the end of my term. No, I'm not going to. It's already a little ripe, but I did want to bring awareness to the wonderful event we had Sunday honoring Herbie. I think we'll all remember it as well as maybe even talk about it tonight. But this is one final tribute for me to Herbie to wear this shirt again and then retire it. Communications, this is the time of the evening where we do listen to the community on items that are not on the agenda. Except in very limited situations, the state precludes us from taking any action or engaging in discussions that are not on the agenda. However, the council may refer items on the agenda that are not on the agenda to city staff or direct them to be agendais for future meetings. You have three minutes. I have one card. If there's any others, please fill them out. Otherwise, I will call Alice Merrill up to the podium. You have three. |
| 00:29:03.35 | Alice Merrill | Hello, I'm Alice Merrill. What I want to say to you all is that last two weeks ago, I sat here while you talked and wrestled and discussed and... figured out ways to be to take care of people, to take care of the city, and I thought, What a great job you guys are all doing. And I just really appreciated it. how you just did it, you just did it, and you do it every day, you do it all the time, you do all kinds of different things, events and programs and committees. You're off doing things constantly. And I thank you. I appreciate it. That's what I wanted to tell you. |
| 00:29:48.75 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Alice. We have more time if you'd like. |
| 00:29:50.37 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:29:52.39 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Ellis. Oh, we have one more. Jerry Taylor. |
| 00:30:00.93 | Jerry Taylor | I'm really here to say goodbye to Jill. But as long as we're here anyhow for that. I'm very, very delighted to tell you that after just seems like a couple of, weeks or five years or something like that. We are primed to open up the Ice House Plaza. and we are going to do that on October 26th. And we will be contacting park and rec staff to discuss the logistics with them and things like that. Thank you. We're going to have a good time. And I just wanted to show you that keeping in context with what we're doing. Anybody. can have a ribbon cutting ceremony. That just calls for a red ribbon and a giant pair of scissors. I got some of those in one of my closets too, but we are, recognizing that those buildings, that building in the white there, those are the railroad tracks. Starting in 1876, that was Sausalito's hub right there. So what would we do in 1869, 150 years later after 1869? We'd have a golden spike ceremony. So welcome to the Golden Spike Ceremony, October 26th. This year, Ice House Plaza, late morning, Details will be forthcoming. You'll all be directly invited. We'll get the news out appropriately. Thanks for all your help. The city council has been very supportive of this. The planning commission was very supportive of all this. The staff has been very supportive of this. We're going to be pleased to turn this over to your care and custody soon. Thank you. |
| 00:31:31.08 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Jerry. Thanks for the work. |
| 00:31:31.21 | Jerry Taylor | Thank you, Jerry. |
| 00:31:35.77 | Jill Hoffman | Any other public comments on items not on tonight's agenda? Seeing none, I'll close public communications and bring it up here for action minutes of the previous meeting, which we have as August 27th. Move approval. |
| 00:31:49.74 | Unknown | Second. |
| 00:31:51.38 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? Aye. Aye. Minutes goes 5-0. We're now at a council member committee reports. These are reports that the council has attended committees over the past couple weeks that we are assigned. And who'd like to go first? Jill's reaching for her mic. |
| 00:31:52.44 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:32:06.53 | Sandra Bushmaker | We had a mudslide meeting, but you're going to get more of that, or landslide later in the agenda. We also attended the BCDC. Um, It was very... I felt like it was a very, Well received report from Sausalito, I felt like lots of support and positive direction from the BCDC staff. about the direction that we're moving and the success that we've had with not just better management, but also better services to the people that are living out there and better options for them. should they wish to transition off the water. So that's always been our goal, and I think we've achieved it, and that was sort of well-received by BCDC, I felt. So I don't know. Joan might want to weigh in, too. But she did. And by the way, Joan did the presentation. It was excellent. |
| 00:32:50.32 | Jill Hoffman | That was very good, and it is available on audio. If anybody wants to go to BCDC's site, it's right there for the listening. |
| 00:32:56.26 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. And I think that's it for me. |
| 00:33:01.17 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 00:33:01.33 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Sure. So in the morning we had the BCDC meeting. In the evening I attended the RBRA meeting, at which RBRA was presented finally with the results of the ecological mooring study, which in a nutshell, outlined where moorings could feasibly go and not interfere with eelgrass, unfortunately the best locations for the moorings are not particularly feasible for the boats because they're in quite turgid waters. not where many of the Yanker Outs are now moored. And so... That solution, if it's ever pursued, I think is going to need significant additional study and analysis. In addition, Ray Withy and I attended the GPAC meeting last week, General Plan Advisory Committee. We'll hear more about that on one of our agendized items. |
| 00:33:56.99 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Right. |
| 00:33:59.85 | Ray Withey | Yes, in obviously GPAC, we're gonna be talking about that later on. I attended an all-day meeting of the MCE, Marine Clean Energy Strategic Planning Retreat. It would be impossible for me to summarize it. So I will forward a link to... I think it's now up on MC's website of the whole proceedings. There are some aspects of that you may wish to specifically look at, including a report from the director of, coordinator of, I may get his title wrong, emergency services or emergency planning, I can't remember which for Napa County and together with senior planning director from Danville who reported on the PG&E outages and quite frankly and rather scarily the chaos that ensued as a result of that. I can't do it justice, so as I said, I'll forward to staff the link, you need to see that. But just to give you a flavor, PG&E for Calistoga had 400 people in its database of medically needed people who were gonna need to receive special treatment. There were in fact 4,000. The whole of the emergency services of Napa County had to be mobilized to save lives. One individual was down to 15 minutes of power left on his heart, artificial heart, and sheriff's deputies were racing around to try and solve that problem. PG&E had no knowledge of his existence. It was an incredibly scary report. So look at it, because I think you'll get some insight as to what, as individuals, we need to do and understand that you just, unfortunately, can't rely on government. You've got to do it on your own, scary as it is. But there's also a lot of other stuff with MCC that we need to talk about. We can't tonight. Otherwise, I could spend the next hour doing so. So I'll forward the link. And I've also got a link now as of today for the MCC, that's the Marin County Council of Mayors and Council Members Pension Committee Report. It's going to be formally released tomorrow evening at the MCCMC meeting. That also link is up on their website. So that's another important thing to, and I know I promised to do that earlier, but it wasn't, its final version wasn't available. It is now. The mayor and I attended the North Bay Division of the League of California Cities quarterly meeting yesterday. up at Sonoma Raceway at Sears Point. And the topic of conversation was the necessary infrastructure improvements needed to Highway 37. If you think of some of our sea level rise problems are daunting, the current estimate over the next 20 years for that project is upwards of $5 billion. And then finally, the BAC Business Advisory Committee meeting for last week was postponed to this Thursday so I'll report on that next time and I will now I've got the links forward that to staff so that it can be Yeah, our residents can read the various reports that I've just referenced |
| 00:38:00.57 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Vice Mayor. |
| 00:38:04.23 | Unknown | So I attended the last Sustainability Commission meeting, and Council Member Withey got great props for his mention of the Sustainability Commission at our last meeting and the great work that they're doing both around the art festival and on other items related to emissions and and EV issues so at the last meeting they had a pretty lengthy discussion with a representative of Tam about grant possibilities for electric vehicle charging stations in town and where placement of those charging stations might be advisable They also did have several recommendations for the art festival some of which councilmember with the already mentioned, but Definitely high on the list, a water filling station, better event-specific signage on the composting and recycling, and more reusable and maybe less expensive wine and beer glasses that could also be branded for the art festival so that they would be able to earn money off of those. Secondly, I just wanted to proactively mention that I am attending the Transportation Authority of Marin meeting this week, which will also be a joint meeting for an hour with the Transit Authority of Marin board. And one of the presentations that we'll be getting is on an initiative that people may have heard of called Bay Area, which is a plan for a $100 billion transportation funding initiative that would be multi-jurisdictional funding. One of the things that's come up recently is that their funding source, they've done a lot of polling on the funding source, and it sounds like they are going to be proposing instead of a mix of funding sources, just a straight one cent sales tax. And I attended a presentation in San Francisco on this matter, and there was a lot of concern about the regressive nature of that type of a sales tax and also how that will harm local governments like ourselves if we want to increase our sales tax for other necessary local matters so i just wanted to mention that i do plan on probably commenting along those lines unless council members on this body feel strongly about it i'll come back with a fuller report afterward but i um i do think that uh source warrants uh the funding source warrants some additional discussion it's not a very not to pun but a fast track and is headed at least now for the november 2020 ballot and that's all i have to report |
| 00:40:56.66 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. And of our committees that I have attended as liaison, the bike and ped committee met last week and discussed a few items. The best part of the meeting, I don't see if he's in here tonight. Oh, there he is. Kevin McGowan was introduced to the group, who is our city engineer at Department of Public Works works and it was good for them to get to dialogue with Kevin a little bit because he obviously has tons of experience in the items that they're bringing forth and it's going to be a great relationship they still are talking about some very proactive progressive things within the community as far as traffic and things related to streets and crosswalks like the coloma crosswalk at mlk and and the bridgeway project also as you've seen commercial vehicles parking in the reds and how to reduce that that item one of the neatest things i thought they reported on which is their in errands relationship with the safe routes to school update which now does have a performing stars work walking school bus grant to walk children from the Golden Gate Village to school as well as crossing guards posted at Willow Creek Academy something that wasn't needed for many years. And as it grew and grew, it became needed. that you know somebody who was driving across the county a lot I'm passing schools all the time with tons of crossing guards Why don't we have any in? Sausalito? Yeah, that's been. |
| 00:42:38.06 | Unknown | Yeah, that's been fantastic. And it's really, |
| 00:42:39.39 | Jill Hoffman | And it's really neat seeing that out there. It's just fantastic. So that was good information. Bringing up the schools, I've attended a few meetings, quite a few meetings from various areas. Outside of the task force that we have on this committee that works with the district board, I've met with a group that represents both Marin County Office of Education, the local schools, some other business leaders, and looking at kind of that bigger picture next step process with our school as well as having very frequent one-on-ones with the superintendent in Tokyo dr. Artelko Garcia |
| 00:42:40.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:43:17.74 | Jill Hoffman | And the report there on all those is all of the discussion going on. multiple levels, multiple channels, multiple discussions from this AG report to what unified schools look like to what's going on with our current school. It's like unraveling an onion when you're looking at 40 years past and trying to overcome political, social, financial issues. So I don't expect anything other than great vision for steps forward. And the biggest message I think we can continue to promote is we're committed to a quality public school and that our residents need to believe in that belief And for a better second word, not bail on it. We, a good thing, a better thing is coming through this process. And I think we can find that, but we need revenue and there's gonna be a revenue campaign, we need revenue, and we need leadership, and ultimately we need families and parents and people to stay put so there's gonna be a lot more messaging on this but I want to revow our our commitment that this council wants to make sure that we have a quality public school in our town that's it for councilmember committee reports next up we have a consent calendar before I open up for public comment I want to see do we have any recusals of the four items Okay, so we're clear on that. I'm gonna open up to public comment. This is the time where Community can talk on the items on the consent calendar There are four. Would there anybody like to speak? I have one card coming up. |
| 00:45:04.25 | Jill Hoffman | Jeff Jacob, you have three minutes on consent calendar items. |
| 00:45:12.16 | Denny Zeitlin | Thank you, Mr. Mayor, City Council. city workers and citizens of Sausalito. |
| 00:45:22.02 | Denny Zeitlin | If we've been paying attention to what's going on, in the bigger picture. |
| 00:45:30.09 | Denny Zeitlin | September's weather. Today a very hot day. 12 degrees above... the record high. the average record high for the day. We're two degrees above the average record high, the record highs that we're having presently, |
| 00:45:52.65 | Denny Zeitlin | There is a climate emergency. |
| 00:45:59.09 | Denny Zeitlin | Sausalito is part of that. I'm going to sink this in with the bicycle and pedestrian advisory. committee and who should be appointed. to this. and who has been. appointed to us. |
| 00:46:18.36 | Denny Zeitlin | A man who was heading it, Dr. Fauci, I think I'm pronouncing his name right, was also running the vending of bicycles. The one thing that with lead this climate emergency. to be mitigated, I don't know about ending it. I'm not that crazy. is if we take the money. out. of politics and religion. |
| 00:46:52.50 | Denny Zeitlin | Politics being power. religion being ethics. Power without ethics. is weak. |
| 00:47:07.20 | Denny Zeitlin | Strong on the surface. and with nothing inside of it. except counts. of dollars. And pants. |
| 00:47:22.32 | Denny Zeitlin | So the demands of the Extinction Rebellion are simple, there are three. One, acknowledge that this is happening Two, reduce. And three have meetings. to research the reduction in detail. That's what I most admire about going through this process of coming here to City Council learning about politics. Uh... is. It's all in the details. When money is not at the top of the pyramid, is not the most important. is not the be all and end all. Then we have a society worth living in and not protesting. Thank you. |
| 00:48:13.33 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Jeff. Any other public comment on consent items? Seeing none, I'll close public comment and bring it up here for any questions, polls, comments. |
| 00:48:23.05 | Jill Hoffman | Move approval of the consent calendar. |
| 00:48:24.99 | Unknown | Second. |
| 00:48:25.67 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? Aye. Consent calendar passes 5 to 0. |
| 00:48:26.55 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:48:26.56 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:48:29.86 | Jill Hoffman | That brings us to... our business items. Having no public hearing items, we'll start business items now. We have our first, number 7A, adopting a resolution awarding the Ferry Landing Landsite Improvement Award and RFP. Kevin McGowan, Public Works Director, presenting. |
| 00:49:09.46 | Jill Hoffman | takes a while to get used to our high tech. |
| 00:49:13.43 | Kevin McGowan | Good evening, Mayor and members of the City Council. I'm Kevin Gallin, Department of Public Works, and I'm glad to be here this evening. It's a nice cool weather, so I'm wearing a coat. Tonight I am providing you with a brief update on the Sausalito Ferry landslide improvement project. Let's see if I can make this work correctly. Golden Gate Bridge and Highway Transportation District operates a ferry landing in Sausalito with service to San Francisco. We all know that. The ferry platform is old and rusted and is pretty much in need of replacement. So the bottom picture is there, kind of illustrates some of the current conditions of that ferry docking system. you Golden Gate has applied for a federal grant to replace the structure and the pylates. Thank you. The underlying property, including the land side of the gate gangway, is owned by the city of Sausalito. So that's one reason why we have involvement in this project. So just to provide you with a little bit of background, you may know more than I do on this one. Golden Gate plans to, plans on approaching the replacement of the ferry dock in phases. The first phase being the installation of a temporary ferry landing near the existing landing itself. So in blue on this picture here, let's see if I can get the cursor up a little bit. |
| 00:50:44.57 | Kevin McGowan | So right here we've illustrated basically that they're gonna install a temporary very dark and in order to replace the existing Constraints are in place on the construction. Performance of the construction during July and August, which is the heavy tourist season, is not allowed per the agreement between the city and Golden Gate. So I want to kind of bring that up as well. There are constraints associated with Golden Gate's construction. The majority of the construction will be performed from the water side, with some staging areas needed on the land side as well. This is also limited by regulatory permits, and they have some regulations that only construction can happen between October and November in the water area itself. They also have the ability to work in June. work not within the water can be performed at other times of the year. So if they're not doing work in the water itself, they can do some construction on the temporary dock or some of the other phases. |
| 00:51:55.95 | Kevin McGowan | The second phase of the project includes the removal and the replacement of the existing dock, including some of the pilings and the gangway itself. So that's circled in yellow on the screen in front of us. Their schedule is generally to, actually I've got it on the last slide as well, so it's something I forgot to cover, so excuse me. Their scheduling for the initial phase, the temporary dock, is the summer of 2020, and that's from June, October, and November. The next phase, phase two, which is to demolish the existing dock as well as part of the gangway is scheduled to occur in the summer of 2021 during the same months of June, October. |
| 00:52:40.68 | Kevin McGowan | And then the third phase for Golden Gate's project is to remove the temporary system and the gangway that was installed in order to reconstruct the actual boat dock. Okay, so that's kind of our quick summary of the Golden Gates project. Now, if there are additional questions, we can also visit their website, which has a full presentation. You may have seen these before, but this is from their presentation on what gets removed and replaced for their project. |
| 00:53:13.57 | Kevin McGowan | As part of the dock replacement project, improvements on the land side of the ferry landing are needed. The Federal Transit Administration Grant, FTA, as well as funding from Golden Gate and the city of Sausalito support the design and implementation of improvements on the land side of the Ferry Land. You may have seen this diagram before in previous presentations. The immediate need of the fire ferry land side improvement include the area noted in red, which is a little bit hard to see on my diagram here. which is down here in red around the outside, near the actual fairyland. However, the city is also pursuing a study of possible improvements to the general parking and wayfinding areas that serve the ferry landing itself. |
| 00:54:15.93 | Kevin McGowan | The federal transit grant is for about $2 million, coupled with $400,000 is allocated from Golden Gate. In addition, the city has allocated about $100,000 to the project as well for a total of $2.5 million. for the entire project. The intent is to study the area and make immediate improvements to the ferry land side, which can include access improvements, improve circulation, and improve parking and connectivity improvements. So again, I kind of stole this picture from a previous presentation. You may have seen this before. This kind of lays out some... preliminary work that will help us study this particular area. It also addresses prior improvements and other infrastructure that's currently there. |
| 00:55:11.61 | Kevin McGowan | So next I'd like to kind of run through some quick timelines associated with the city's land side project. And the estimated timeline for the plaza and design and construction And the idea is to be in compliance with Golden Gate Transit so that when they finish their project, our project is finished basically at the same time. if not sooner. So the design of the plaza area has a similar timeline as the study and the, or visioning plan. The important aspect to consider is that we need to have the construction of the plaza area completed at the same time as Golden Gate. The idea here is to, I won't read every single bullet, but the idea is to put together a professional services contract with a design firm to look at the visioning, as well as possibly move forward with some of the design phases. And again, the idea is to be in construction close to the spring of 2021, and have construction move forward so it finishes at the same time as Golden Gate Transports. We also have a visioning portion, which should happen a little bit before the actual design phase. And this includes moving forward with studying the area around the very land side docking area. And that basic schedule is to try to move forward in the spring of 2020 to develop a vision for the entire area. |
| 00:56:48.36 | Kevin McGowan | The city requested proposals from qualified firms interested in planning and design of the ferry landing and land site project and received a total of three proposals in July of this year. Last week, an interview panel composed of the mayor, thank you, Mayor, appreciate you joining us for that, and members of the business community, city staff, as well as the public, assisted the city with selecting a preferred consultant. per federal regulations or federal requirements for the federal transportation grant, the cost proposals are only open for the selected consultant. We can't open all of the cost proposals at one time. So, And this particular project had two different packages. And I'll try to explain this a little bit. which is called package A, obviously included the visioning portion, which is to work with the community to try to lay out concepts for the full area around the ferryman. plus the development of a 30% design. Package B included the visioning, like we talked about, as well as the full design of the entire project. Now, we have opened proposals from all three consultants who are listed here on this slide. And the selection committee basically selected Harrison Associates, so we opened their proposals. And their costs are noted here for this project. They're quite large. And before we move off of that, I want to kind of explain that we only have $2.5 million for this project. So under a general kind of engineering projects, we try to lay out a project based off of what the total amount we have. In this case, we have 2.5 million. And, in general. Usually design costs range from about 12% to maybe 15% for a specific project. We also have to include items such as contingency for construction as well as construction management if we move forward in that manner. In order to try to look at this to figure out how much money do we have for our design phase, we've broken the total amount that we have into different components. And just looking at about 12.5% of the construction cost, we only have about $230,000 for the visioning and the design phase of this entire project, which is... you It's kind of problematic when you see the recent proposals that we have. In this case, I've got a little note here that we're only looking at design for actual construction, and the way I've looked at this before is that I haven't included anything for the actual visioning portion. I've only looked at it straight from previous experience associated with construction versus actual design. So I wanted to make that clear. |
| 00:59:57.88 | Kevin McGowan | So with that, procedurally, like I mentioned before, we're only allowed to open the first proposal. So our approach at this point is to talk to the consultant, to the selected consultant, to see if we can negotiate and talk to them a little bit about what they're proposing and narrow their scope down. bring it down to a point that maybe we can meet the budget for this project. And we wanted a little bit, at least I did, to get a little bit of your guidance in this aspect of how do we proceed? when we know we have proposals in that are quite in excess of what our budget is, and how do we move forward with that? So throughout the day today, I've asked Adam for help with this particular slide, so if he feels he needs to step in, I'll please welcome his guidance. Our approach at this point is to talk to the low bidder to see if we can work with them to drop their scope down. And then if we can't reach some negotiation point where we can actually move forward with this, we move to the second consultant and open their proposal and then work with them to see if we can work on the scope together. Amen. Another option that we might consider is to simply rewrite the scope and re-solicit all the proposals as well. So at this point, that's all I have for my presentation, and I welcome any feedback that you might have or questions at this point. |
| 01:01:26.85 | Jill Hoffman | I have a question, are there any others? Mine kinda gets back to, Now that we have the numbers, I'm totally thrown. My question means very little, but on the construction schedule. Where we would potentially begin in 2021, that means that the temporary dock would be completely demolished via the water? Is that what we're expecting, the temporary float? Because the temporary float comes out in 2022. |
| 01:01:52.72 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 01:01:52.77 | Kevin McGowan | that they wouldn't |
| 01:01:58.51 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, that's correct. I think it's my understanding that Golden Gate would like to start by next summer installing the temporary dock. |
| 01:01:59.55 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 01:02:05.98 | Jill Hoffman | Yep. |
| 01:02:06.79 | Kevin McGowan | and they move people over to that. |
| 01:02:08.44 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 01:02:09.02 | Kevin McGowan | And then in 2021, they demo the existing dock and rebuild it right there and then. And then in the next summer, Thank you. Sometime between there, they'll pull people back to the new dock and then in the next summer, 2022, they will remove the temporary dock. |
| 01:02:24.64 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and we won't want them to do that on our newly or under-constructed land side, so they will be taking the complete demolition via the water route. |
| 01:02:34.68 | Kevin McGowan | That's my understanding as well. |
| 01:02:35.61 | Jill Hoffman | And that probably came up during our discussion, though I can't really remember. want to confirm. All right, thank you. |
| 01:02:45.67 | Ray Withey | I can, thanks for that presentation. Um, uh, Thank you. Let me make sure I'm clear here. It seems a little strange regulations about you can only open one of them. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but I understand there's a lot about the federal government that doesn't make a lot of sense. Were we able to open the bids to see who was the lowest bidder or was it that the panel convened to determine what was the preferred proposal and then that was opened? I wasn't quite clear on what the process was. |
| 01:03:27.55 | Kevin McGowan | I think you have it correct, that the panel met to determine the best qualified consultant for this project. |
| 01:03:36.11 | Ray Withey | irrespective of cost. |
| 01:03:37.16 | Kevin McGowan | irrespective of cost. |
| 01:03:39.60 | Ray Withey | So we don't know that Harris was in fact the lowest bid. |
| 01:03:43.40 | Kevin McGowan | Mr. No. |
| 01:03:45.27 | Ray Withey | Okay, okay. I understand. Thanks. |
| 01:03:50.13 | Unknown | And did we give the budget to the proposers? |
| 01:03:55.08 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not sure of. Yes, not the exact budget, but they knew that we had. Well, I mean, we knew we had 2.5. |
| 01:03:57.57 | Unknown | I mean, this Thank you. |
| 01:04:00.71 | Unknown | Well, I mean, we knew we had $2.5 million, right? And that's, yeah, I mean, that was the source of a lot of public discussion over a long period of time. And that, as I understand it, the 2.5 is essentially for design and construction. Is that correct? |
| 01:04:19.12 | Adam Politzer | That's correct. |
| 01:04:20.46 | Unknown | Okay, and then this proposal is for just design, full design. |
| 01:04:28.62 | Kevin McGowan | This proposal is composed of two different packages. The first package A is for visioning plus development of 30% design package. Package B is for visioning plus 100% design of the impression. |
| 01:04:44.07 | Unknown | Right, and that's 1.5%. |
| 01:04:46.88 | Kevin McGowan | One put four. |
| 01:04:47.36 | Unknown | when they were fully aware of the total budget. Thank you. |
| 01:04:51.20 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. |
| 01:04:53.45 | Unknown | And does that include when you showed the slide that had the red dotted line and the yellow dotted line? Yeah. So is this vision... plus design just for the red dotted area. |
| 01:05:12.23 | Kevin McGowan | I believe the visioning is for everything in the yellow. It's the idea to come up with concepts associated with areas that feed into the ferry terminal. The design itself is simply for the red area. So you've got a planning phase. |
| 01:05:27.69 | Unknown | So your full design, either your 30% or your full design is only for the specifics in the red area, but they're expected to come up with a vision that incorporates the yellow area? |
| 01:05:40.06 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, that's my understanding. |
| 01:05:42.03 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:05:44.26 | Adam Politzer | I want to just give a little bit of context because obviously, Kevin, if you can go back to the slide with the package A and package B. Just as a reminder to the council, when we opened the design bids for Dumpy Park, it was $400,000 just for design services on something that the Friends of Dumpy Park had already provided the design. That's been the beginning of these incredible costs for all of our capital projects are these design projects. services, feds that have been coming in. now adding the visioning process, which was important to the community and to the council. you know, that's compounded this. What we tried to do is be creative by giving. firms that may be smaller. that we just want to bid on package A. the option to just bid on the visioning process but may not have the capability or staff or time to do the entire full design services. And so that was part of the RP that went out. and this is where we are. Go ahead. |
| 01:06:54.07 | Unknown | And can I ask one more question? you Thank you. This may be a question for my colleagues on the dais that are on the general plan advisory. Council, but this visioning. anticipated here, is that at a more practical and pragmatic level than the visioning that's occurring in the general plan? Would that be fair to say? Okay. So when you say vision in this context, we're talking more about uniformity of wayfinding, circulation, parking. Okay. Okay. |
| 01:07:30.13 | Ray Withey | So again, for people listening at home, and to make sure I'm fully understanding this, basically what we potentially have a budget, if I've understood the numbers, we have a budget for $230,000. The actual bid has come in at 1.4 million. Is that basically it? That's correct. Okay. |
| 01:07:51.83 | Jeff Bradley | That's correct. |
| 01:07:58.06 | Jill Hoffman | How you engineer that. |
| 01:08:00.46 | Unknown | Can you go to our options? I guess we should take public comment, but can we go to the options? |
| 01:08:06.89 | Unknown | Amen. |
| 01:08:07.90 | Adam Politzer | Let me jump in, because I think the options got eliminated somewhere along the conversations. |
| 01:08:12.61 | Unknown | along with conversations. |
| 01:08:13.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:08:18.65 | Adam Politzer | The options that Kevin and I discussed, and he went through the first option, which is go back and negotiate with the preferred consultant Harris and see if we can reach agreement in terms of price and terms that we can support as staff and come back to council and award contract. If we can't, then we would move to the next preferred consultant. and do the same process with them, see if we can negotiate price and terms, assuming that their numbers are somewhere similar. And then obviously we have the third consultant, which would be the last of the options and work through with them if there is a negotiated price in terms that we could reach. Assuming that we cannot reach agreement, then we would come back and ask council to reject the bids. and give us direction to go back out with either a new scope or with new direction the other option is for us to in any one of those first three consultants if we're able to successfully negotiate pricing terms that are above the 230,000 I think is the number we had there for design services, is come back and tell the council how we would pay for that increase so let's say it's somewhere in the name of $500,000 then we would look at the parking fund as a source of funding. We would look to the Golden Gate Bridge District for additional grant sources and then obviously we would look to our own grant sources transportation authority Marin could be one so if you know if if any of those options sound good or all of them sound good, then give us that direction and we'll come back at your October 8th meeting with an update and hopefully and potentially with some solutions to continue to move forward in the process as we've outlined before. |
| 01:10:23.15 | Jill Hoffman | We also have, as we went through this process last year and last time, we have $2.5 million that's going to do a certain project around the park, lot one, and some transportation. And then we have a lot of residents, rightfully so, with a lot of great vision and a lot of great ideas, and there's a lot that we can do. That is now interceded into this project proposal because the planning of all of that takes money. Do we have that opportunity with this going back to the consultant and saying, Let's limit all that back down to just doing the bare minimum. All that visioning and everything might have to take place on our dime or in a different way than having this company do that at at a high premium. uh... i we want those discussions very valuable some great ideas if we pay them for a lot of meetings to have that. It's Kenny writing for that to an end. |
| 01:11:22.96 | Jill Hoffman | But we could also open the second proposal just and see what their phase A is. If we wanted to segregate out phase A from phase B. because phase B is really the design of the red area. Phase A is the visioning of the entire yellow area. |
| 01:11:42.38 | Jill Hoffman | It's more the extent of the plans that they're providing us. It's more the extent of the project. |
| 01:11:45.48 | Jill Hoffman | It's more the extent of the project. |
| 01:11:50.58 | Adam Politzer | Yeah, I think that's important to clarify. It's 100% construction design, from design service all the way through construction is plan B. Plan A is just 30%. |
| 01:11:58.87 | Alice Merrill | Right. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:12:00.50 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:12:00.67 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 01:12:00.74 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 01:12:00.76 | Jill Hoffman | you but it's visioning. Visioning on both. Exactly. |
| 01:12:02.93 | Adam Politzer | THE FAMILY. Thank you. |
| 01:12:06.51 | Adam Politzer | both have |
| 01:12:07.74 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 01:12:10.73 | Adam Politzer | So they both include visioning. |
| 01:12:12.65 | Jill Hoffman | Right? Thank you. |
| 01:12:14.00 | Adam Politzer | Which is the element we're going to have to shrink in. |
| 01:12:15.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:12:15.79 | Jill Hoffman | Exactly. or a fund from some other source. |
| 01:12:22.05 | Jill Hoffman | All right, any other questions before we open up to public comment? And then we'll come back. All right. cool off I'm going to open up to public comment on this item. Is there anybody who would like to speak to the item on the board? Nobody. Going to close public comment. Well that was no help. Just waiting for a lifeline to come out of the public. |
| 01:12:46.18 | Jill Hoffman | to come out Go ahead. Okay. So this whole process of the qualifications-based selection is under the government code, section 4526. And there are various engineering and design and architect lobbies in California that prevailed upon the legislature to have municipalities choose their preferred vendor without looking at price so that we weren't simply taking the lowest price proposal, but we're actually selecting the best qualified. Okay. So, I think what Adam talked about opening the second envelope if we're unable to reach agreement with Harris and then opening the third envelope if we're unable to reach agreement with BKF engineers will provide us a whole lot of important information about the feasibility of our scope and our budget. Because when I oversee these types of procurements for other municipalities, we frequently have the best proposer way out of the ballpark in terms of the budget. And sometimes you have to settle for the next best proposer who has a more realistic budget so we're looking at the Taj we're likely looking at the Taj Mahal proposal so I think it's really important as we move forward that we do go through the process recommended by the city manager which is to try to reach agreement with Harris if unable try to reach agreement with BKF if unable try to reach agreement with SWA that way we get to look at all three proposals understand the nuances and that will be the inform us if we then do need to re-scope and Redo the manner in which we're going to approach this project or if we simply need to find additional funding |
| 01:14:34.69 | Unknown | Thank you. Yeah, I would agree with that. I am very unwilling at this point in time to re to draw our scope back down to the basics, which is essentially repaving lot one with no kind of overall envisioning. We had a lot of public speakers that our last several meetings on this who had very, excellent ideas about how the area near the ferry landing, lot one, two, and three, could really be better utilized and more activated and provide a better space for residents in addition to the tourists that are already there. So I'm committed to kind of pursuing the course of action that you've laid out, and I appreciate your context of how that might work. And hopefully one of the other two proposers can come in closer to where we are. But even if not, I'm unwilling to or I'm reluctant to scale back at this point I just think 2.5 million dollars out the door for a repaving project is not really what is in the best interest of the city |
| 01:15:44.72 | Sandra Bushmaker | I agree with the process of looking to see what the rest of the bids show, and then I think that will inform us. I assume you'll come back to the City Council and give us an update. at some point where we're at. But I think, you know, We do have to look at the scope and if we really just can't bring it in in a reasonable time for a reasonable amount of money, we may have to just actually look at bringing back what we're actually trying to achieve. The most important thing, I think, is the flow of congestion down there and figuring out ways to address that first because that's a safety issue and that's for everybody involved down there. So I think that would be the priority if you're re-scoping. And then we've just spent a lot of time and effort and money on these three beautiful renovations of our parks I don't know if we had the wherewithal to tackle something another big project and big revisioning of Gabrielson Park in that area too so it may be time then anyway to consider perhaps a different kind of scope at this point |
| 01:16:59.93 | Ray Withey | Well, I agree with the process, I mean, it makes sense, but You know, based on our experience over the last number of years and based on my conversations with, you know, people who are running projects up and down the county, if not in the region, design and construction costs are just... escalating beyond what even engineering estimates are anywhere near. I mean, they're coming in two, three times, engineering estimates, and we just gotta face that fact. So yeah, this is gonna be a tough one, but I agree with the process. |
| 01:17:40.92 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I'm on board. However, one thing I will say is The right side of that is going to continue to go up. That left side is not necessarily. So I wish the 2.5 was on an escalation of cost because by the time we get to 2022, two and a half might get us, maybe get us partially of a paving project. So, ultimately, We have to decide. Not tonight, luckily, because I think we have a good path. And you guys are getting used to this. The staff is getting used to kind of going back and doing this. So we have that direction. At some point, we're going to have to say we've heard a lot of ideas. Bam, go forth and spend that money before we lose it or before it just gets so – upside down that we get nothing out of it. So, good direction. All right. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:18:31.51 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:18:31.53 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:18:31.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:18:31.73 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:18:31.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:18:31.78 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yep. |
| 01:18:32.07 | Unknown | Can I just add, I think it would be important for staff to continue to look for... Thank you. Grant opportunities. I mean, the ferry landing is a really important regional... transportation area and you know brings not only a lot of visitors but also commuters and I think it could be that we could get some additional grant money. So I would just encourage staff to keep an eye out for some innovative projects that might help us with certain pieces of this project. |
| 01:19:09.77 | Jill Hoffman | I will offer... In that our discussion with the consultants in these types of projects, they also bring that. option not option as like a specified but they they're doing these part they're also looking for grants which is a benefit and I think that was synonymous with all of them but yeah we've we've definitely got it always be like I think it helps when you have a plan |
| 01:19:23.02 | Alan Broadbent | . |
| 01:19:27.96 | Bill Meeker | THE BUSINESS OF THE |
| 01:19:31.82 | Unknown | Great. |
| 01:19:32.08 | Bill Meeker | Thank you. |
| 01:19:36.74 | Unknown | Absolutely. |
| 01:19:41.51 | Jill Hoffman | All right, next up we have item 7B, adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute amendment number 2. the professional services agreement with M group. And starting this will be Bill Meeker. |
| 01:19:54.52 | Bill Meeker | Hi, I'm Bill Meeker, I'm a planning advisor replacing Lily Whalen during her family leave. And this evening before you, you have a request that the City Council consider adopting a resolution approving Amendment No. 2 to the agreement with I'm a group for the preparation of the general plan update. This particular amendment is to cover the cost of additional transportation analysis and other related environmental analyses that are mandated by recent changes in the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines. The cost of the amendment of the additional studies will amount to a total of $33,205, thus increasing the total cost of the general plan update and all those accompanying studies to a total amount of $873,672. This includes a First Amendment, which was done earlier this year, that endorsed the preparation of a economic study for the MarinShip area that was prepared by EPS. I do have with me this evening, Mary Bean from First Carbon Solutions, who is the lead for the environmental consultant that's working with M-Group on this, if you have any specific questions regarding this amendment. |
| 01:21:15.08 | Jill Hoffman | Do we have any questions for... Bill or Mary. We don't have any questions. Okay. We're going to open a public comment, though, so they might. Is there anybody who would like to speak open public comment on this item? The consultant fee, seeing no public comment. They don't. Bill, come on up. Any comments? |
| 01:21:21.65 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:21:34.56 | Jill Hoffman | Any motions? |
| 01:21:36.78 | Jill Hoffman | I think this is made necessary primarily by the revisions to the CEQA guidelines, but also there's new data from TAM that we'll use for our VMT analysis. And so I believe this modification is justified and I'm prepared. to move that we adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute amendment number two to professional services agreement with M group, Increasing the budget for the general plan update to cover additional costs for work to be performed by the environmental consultant. |
| 01:22:15.12 | Ray Withey | I also agree that this is necessary, and if we don't get on with it, the state's going to do something else, and we're going to get even more increases. So I second that motion. |
| 01:22:27.75 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? Aye. That passes five to zero. |
| 01:22:28.59 | Bill Frost | Bye. |
| 01:22:33.91 | Jill Hoffman | Don't go anywhere. Next up, we have 7C, the monthly general plan update, progress report on the marineship workshop. I think you can probably have a team tonight, but we'll start it off a few weeks. |
| 01:22:43.98 | Bill Meeker | but we'll start it up through the monthly update and also engage the council with respect to some issues regarding the recent meeting and discussions regarding marineship with us this evening we have Jeff Bradley from who's the head of M group as well as Tom Ford who is our project manager they will be doing the presentation |
| 01:23:20.41 | Unknown | I was going to do this in two parts. You had two memos from us. We don't have a presentation about the first memo, which is basically the GPAC update or the GPU update. because most of the information we have to talk about will be based on what we heard at the Marinship Workshop. So before I talk about that, the first thing is there was a GPAC meeting on September 3rd. We basically were setting up and speaking with them in advance of the workshop. So we were going over over the workshop order we introduced the EPS study the economic study for the marine ship and the GPAC was able to provide some guidance to EPS as to some of the components of their presentation at the workshop |
| 01:23:36.40 | Jerry Taylor | I've heard. |
| 01:24:13.37 | Unknown | Additionally, in the memo, the first memo, we put together a list of some of the issues that you'll be seeing coming before you this fall. The city manager requested that we start to give you a list of things that you might want to be thinking about, issues that are sitting out there, and that the GPAC's been discussing, things that we heard at the workshop. And then we also provided a short list of some of the resources, because if you go on the website, it can be kind of daunting, all of the different resources and documents that are available. But we point to about six or seven that you might want to particularly pay attention to. As we start meeting on the next GPAC meetings, we're going to be relying a lot on the general plan audit that we went through with the GPAC about a year ago, looking at policies and programs that are working in the existing general plan and maybe need to be pulled forward. What's the new policies that we need to be developing? And then some of the other policies, of course, are just going to fall away if they're no longer relevant. So do you have any questions about any of the issues I identified in the memo or some of the resources that we also identified? |
| 01:25:29.41 | Unknown | I do. |
| 01:25:34.37 | Jill Hoffman | I have a slightly different recollection of a couple of the of the enunciated visions. One was the segmentation. So... I appreciate it. |
| 01:25:47.89 | Unknown | We're just on that first part. |
| 01:25:51.46 | Jill Hoffman | on vision alternatives. Thank you. |
| 01:25:54.15 | Unknown | I'm just talking about the very first thing. |
| 01:25:54.60 | Jill Hoffman | No, we're just on his monthly update. Oh, okay. |
| 01:25:55.82 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 01:25:56.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:25:56.19 | Unknown | update. |
| 01:25:58.15 | Unknown | The memo titled Monthly General Plan Update Progress Report. Okay. And we identified some things that the council might be, some issues the council might consider. |
| 01:26:01.70 | Jill Hoffman | OKAY. |
| 01:26:02.03 | Unknown | Thank you. The council might be. Would that mean? |
| 01:26:08.73 | Unknown | Would that be the matrix then? Include, that's one of the documents we point out, the issues matrix that identified a series of issues and how it's been considered. |
| 01:26:19.00 | Jill Hoffman | When do you see some of the consultant recommendations getting dropped in? |
| 01:26:23.34 | Unknown | certainly during the EIR alternatives, that would be happening. But also this fall, as we start to recommend policy decisions or policy overviews for each of the elements, we'll be bringing those in then as well. |
| 01:26:42.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:26:43.17 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:26:45.51 | Unknown | So just following up on that, I'm a little bit confused. So in order to start an EIR, we need a project description. |
| 01:26:53.27 | Jerry Taylor | Good night. |
| 01:26:54.56 | Unknown | So, If we don't have the recommendations on that matrix until after we're looking at alternatives for the EIR, how are we starting the environmental analysis? |
| 01:27:06.12 | Unknown | The project description for the NLP will be done probably within about a month because it's general enough that we're just notifying other agencies and things. And also the amount of development that's been spoken about is not dramatically different than what's existing, and we haven't been hearing from any requests to make land use changes. So there's not a lot of change that's been envisioned from what we've been hearing in terms of things that would create more impacts. |
| 01:27:39.82 | Unknown | So that's, I listened to the last GPAC meeting, and that's not really what I heard. it. |
| 01:27:48.19 | Unknown | I think one of the big things that's out there is they haven't discussed or made a resolution on residential use in the marineship. That might have been one of the things you heard that there was no resolution of. But in the second memo that we have tonight, they put together, using some ideas that we put forth and some information that came out of the workshop, they put together some things for a general plan level vision of the marineship that you could consider tonight and either augment or give further direction on. |
| 01:28:22.76 | Unknown | Okay, thank you. |
| 01:28:26.51 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:28:26.54 | Sandra Bushmaker | Okay. Sorry. I'm a little bit lost about where we are. And it would help in future presentations if you're referencing a certain report or a certain matrix or something that you're expecting us to comment on, that it be part of your PowerPoint. Because we have three different GPAC things on our agenda, and I'm sitting here trying to figure out what you're talking about. What I did, Jill, is I. |
| 01:28:49.53 | Jill Hoffman | What I did, Jill, is I clicked on the document he's talking about, his plan number one, the second one down on our list, which is the progress report. Then it has in the resources on the second page. |
| 01:29:03.48 | Alan Broadbent | Peace. |
| 01:29:09.27 | Jill Hoffman | Which that combined with the other document had that has all of our resources, I think is a great new tool. That was, and I'd like that for our public to be easy, to access easy as well. |
| 01:29:13.46 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:29:13.61 | Sandra Bushmaker | you |
| 01:29:17.66 | Sandra Bushmaker | So you're looking at attachment one? I'm looking at the page on Granicus, right? And it's staff report, and it's attachment one. |
| 01:29:23.07 | Jill Hoffman | It's attachment one, GPU monthly update. |
| 01:29:24.69 | Sandra Bushmaker | Okay. OK. So, |
| 01:29:29.44 | Jill Hoffman | Page two, there's four blue links under resources. |
| 01:29:33.44 | Sandra Bushmaker | Right, okay, so I saw that, but I don't understand the marinship part that he's suggesting that we're going to have input. That's the next attachment. |
| 01:29:41.94 | Jill Hoffman | Detachment. |
| 01:29:43.48 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, that's a tetra too. |
| 01:29:44.24 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 01:29:44.29 | Jill Hoffman | That's attachment two. |
| 01:29:47.88 | Unknown | And I was just answering a question in reference to the video that she had seen of the previous GPAC meeting. |
| 01:29:51.58 | Sandra Bushmaker | that she had seen up the place. So where in attachment two of the 18 pages of attachment two, Are you asking us to make comments on alternatives, visioning alternatives? Is that page three? |
| 01:30:06.09 | Dave Bradlauer | Not yet. |
| 01:30:07.98 | Unknown | We're pulling up the memo. It's this memo that I did not make a PowerCoin presentation about. I apologize. But all we have to speak of, really, is GPAC meeting September 3rd. And the rest of what happened last month was a Marineship workshop and a subsequent GPAC meeting, which is in my next memo, which is 18 pages. |
| 01:30:10.93 | Dave Bradlauer | Okay. |
| 01:30:11.25 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 01:30:30.24 | Jill Hoffman | But you're asking us tonight to endorse the vision alternatives. Is that right? |
| 01:30:35.42 | Unknown | Later. |
| 01:30:36.53 | Jill Hoffman | But at some point tonight, we're trying to understand what is on our agenda tonight. |
| 01:30:37.10 | Unknown | Yeah. Yes. That's agenda item B, I believe. |
| 01:30:42.44 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, great. So right now we're on agenda item A. Okay. |
| 01:30:45.27 | Unknown | We're in 7B and I want to go to 7C. |
| 01:30:48.41 | Jill Hoffman | And we're just really. |
| 01:30:48.97 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 01:30:49.04 | Jill Hoffman | receiving a report. |
| 01:30:49.31 | Sandra Bushmaker | THE END OF THE END OF THE Okay, thank you. Thanks for that clarification. |
| 01:30:55.85 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, for clarity, we're on 7C is the whole thing, but you're on second part of 7C. |
| 01:31:00.07 | Unknown | I'm still trying to finish up oh I'm sorry 7C correct I'm sorry So, Yeah, I mean, if you have any comments, fine. But otherwise, I'd like to, then I can move on to the next memo, which is the longer one. It's 18 pages, and I do have a PowerPoint about that. Are we good? Yeah, let's do that. |
| 01:31:22.04 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:31:47.12 | Unknown | Okay, so now what I'd like to do is recap you The Marine Ship Workshop, I know all of you were there. and talk about Just basically, here's an outline of that second memo. We took all of the information that we received and developed some what we call organizing themes. And from that, M Group developed some alternatives that the GPAC could consider. We discussed that with them, and we received input from them, and now we're here to try to take that action further. So. There were over 140 people that signed in. We actually have sign-ins for 140, but there were also additional people who chose not to sign in. And as you saw, when you were there, we collected data from a series of sources. We looked at where we asked people to tell us where they live or work. We had questionnaires that were either multiple choice or free form where they could give us text. All of those text answers we put into an Excel sheet so that we could sort, and all of that is available through the website. There's a special page, marineship-workshop, where you can access all of the things, including the exercises at the end where we were writing things and people put preferences in the way of dots. So from that, we sifted through that data, and we came up with a series of themes. The ones at the top there are not in italics. We took to the GPAC, and the GPAC discussed and considered these. And then the last one that's in italics, they voted on, and they asked us to include this, to create a new theme that would be part of the themes that came out of the workshop and it's maintain and enhance the industrial character of the industrial zone. What we did then is we have these organizing themes which were based on input from the workshop. And then we also have the last year and a half to two years of going through the first two phases of the general plan process, the understanding and the visioning phases. And from that, M-Group developed some options for a way to take all of that information and move forward as a way of thinking at a general plan level about the marineship. So we took these three visions, and they're all defined in the memo, and we discussed them with the GPAC, the Sea Level Rise Resiliency, which if you might recall, received a lot of attention by various people at the workshop as a critical issue. We identified it on maps, if you'll recall. It's particularly critical in the northern part of the marineship in terms of what people are predicting. Then we have a water-dependent use, which might be similar to the way the W district works now. You take a certain amount of the district and you demand that uses there have a water-dependent purpose. And then another one, marine-related businesses, a third alternative. Okay. So let me just real briefly talk about these. We thought about some pros and cons. I'm sorry, we have a question. |
| 01:35:02.23 | Unknown | about some pros and cons. |
| 01:35:03.53 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:35:05.05 | Unknown | So can I just ask, How? |
| 01:35:09.03 | Unknown | Can you go back? |
| 01:35:13.55 | Unknown | No, the next to the three visions. So what is your, what do you think of as a vision? |
| 01:35:22.14 | Unknown | vision. It's not a bullet point. It's more of a description of what we think potential uses, potential character, and what people want to have happen there. |
| 01:35:35.74 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:35:36.38 | Unknown | It probably doesn't get down into the nitty gritty of an FAR. or parking standards, but what do we want this place to become? How does it fit into the rest of the community? |
| 01:35:51.54 | Unknown | Right, but I just don't see, and we can maybe wait to the public comment or the comment part, but sea level rise resiliency is a thing that... either we will do or won't do, but it's not a vision. It's a goal or a strategy or a way to get to preserving. |
| 01:36:05.15 | Unknown | Well, for sure. They're a way to get to preserve it. |
| 01:36:09.37 | Unknown | history or preserving jobs or, but it's not a I don't perceive that as a vision I perceive it as a means to an end |
| 01:36:18.60 | Unknown | Attached to this vision is the potential for like an institute that studies the issue, and it would be located in the marine ship, and it uses that physical change that's going to happen to try to develop cutting edge policies, equipment, technologies, building techniques, and be based in the marine ship. |
| 01:36:42.65 | Unknown | And so that would be a change of use from what's permitted now. That would be kind of a research, educational think tank? Probably. |
| 01:36:51.09 | Unknown | Probably, if you think about the kinds of people that do that, they're sitting in what essentially is an office building. |
| 01:36:58.11 | Unknown | So, at this. |
| 01:37:00.23 | Unknown | They would also need water access, so they'd be testing things, but they'd also be designing things. But the vision itself would be centered around... this idea of not only being resilient, but developing resilient for others, like-minded communities in a similar physical situation. |
| 01:37:20.18 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:37:24.45 | Unknown | So, So the research, as we say here, takes a central role in the resiliency process. alternative? Some pros are it obviously meets a community concern that it was expressed pretty widely at the workshop. And it may connect existing businesses to new development business opportunities because of what they do. The cons, it could potentially disrupt the arts community, which we heard a lot at the workshop of being a concern that people wanted to preserve that. And then also it would need to take into account some of the historic resources that exist in the marineship. The water-dependent use, again, there would be a certain area, and the area should be carefully drawn. It can't be the entire marine ship area because that might not be economically feasible. But you would have a certain area that would be attached for a maritime cluster or businesses that have a waterfront dependent use, that they require being on the water. Some cons, it might limit the economic vitality depending on how that zone is drawn, and it also doesn't address historic or arts preservation, as we spoke about with the other alternatives. The marine related business is a little bit more flexible. because it allows some more pliability in some of those different uses that people were saying that they wanted to see in the marineship. And it also allows for a better maintenance of the historic attributes and assets. The cons are that it complicates the land use mix, and it may lack clarity on what is an allowed use or a permitted use and what is not. |
| 01:39:33.43 | Unknown | So what the GPAC did, and we made it clear that they could do this, is they didn't have to accept any one of these three visions. They could make a hybrid of using any component of those three or some other component that they desired. So what they ended up doing was saying, well, we like all three. The resiliency is an important issue no matter what alternative you're looking at. So they wanted to blend. They made a recommendation to blend all three alternatives, but they had some stipulations, as we show here, that any alternative should support the artist community. That innovation lab that I talked about would be a key component or an anchor in this vision for what the marineship can become. Some pretty clear direction to maintain the existing marine and industrial uses. And then to also seek additional sources of funding to advance this research goal. Respect the historic context because they understood there's a lot of different attributes there. And then another thing the existing specific plan does look at three different areas in the it divides the whole area into three sub areas and that we might take a similar approach to how the future of the marineship is thought of. And it doesn't have to be the three same sub-areas, and that we might take a similar approach to how the future of the marineship is thought of. And it doesn't have to be the three same sub-areas that is used in the current specific plan. It might be something that is told by where the sea level impact might be greatest, where the existing land uses are such, and that might start to define sub-areas. Can I ask a question? |
| 01:41:17.73 | Jill Hoffman | Can I ask a question here? |
| 01:41:19.84 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 01:41:20.53 | Jill Hoffman | So I know that that was something that Councilmember Withey discussed and that I supported, but my recollection was that that was not something that the GPAC endorsed. the last thing about considering sub areas. So I just want to ask you, perhaps that's something you're recommending, but is it your recollection that that was not something that the GPAC aligned on? |
| 01:41:45.24 | Unknown | I think the GPAC discussed it. Maybe you didn't take a vote. |
| 01:41:49.12 | Jill Hoffman | No, they did not endorse that as a body. |
| 01:41:49.98 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:41:53.69 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:41:56.97 | Unknown | I think it's a valid idea. I know that there's one for the second. |
| 01:41:58.57 | Jill Hoffman | I just want to be clear that it's your recommendation. I happen to agree with you, but that was not something that the GPAC endorsed. |
| 01:42:05.93 | Unknown | Good. |
| 01:42:10.48 | Unknown | So one thing that they, that GPAC spoke about, but was unable to draw a conclusion on, is the idea of, finding a way to limit housing potentially in the marineship, but with a specific focus, either senior or affordable housing. |
| 01:42:31.86 | Jill Hoffman | Can I make another clarifying question? So I don't recall any discussion of any affordable housing other than senior housing. And I've gotten three emails from various GPAC members to clarify, so. |
| 01:42:46.29 | Unknown | and affordable for senior. |
| 01:42:46.97 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not at that. |
| 01:42:47.59 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:42:47.73 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:42:47.74 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:42:47.81 | Jill Hoffman | workforce. |
| 01:42:48.45 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:42:48.52 | Jill Hoffman | I heard lots of work on that. |
| 01:42:48.53 | Jill Hoffman | Affordable for seniors. |
| 01:42:50.41 | Unknown | you |
| 01:42:50.56 | Jill Hoffman | I heard a lot of Workforce, Work, Live, the whole thing. |
| 01:42:50.68 | Unknown | I heard a lot of work for her. Workforce. This is the general. |
| 01:42:56.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:42:57.31 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:42:57.36 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 01:42:58.34 | Jill Hoffman | The Saturday meeting? |
| 01:42:59.34 | Jill Hoffman | No, this is GPAC. I'm talking about with the GPAC. So the GPAC focused their question to the city attorney on |
| 01:43:00.85 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, thank you. |
| 01:43:06.86 | Jill Hoffman | senior housing. But you're correct that the general plan workshop did raise other types of live work or workforce housing. |
| 01:43:19.40 | Unknown | And I thought at your GPAC meeting that Member Blaustein did raise the issue of the Blue Ribbon Task Force recommendations including workforce housing. |
| 01:43:29.64 | Jill Hoffman | But in response to that, we said that's being addressed through the legislative committee that we're not redoing the housing element. And so that was the response to that comment. So the GPAC's guidance. |
| 01:43:40.36 | Sandra Bushmaker | you |
| 01:43:42.43 | Jill Hoffman | recommendations was to do some research on is it possible to do spot zoning or an overlay or some in some manner identify an area for senior housing |
| 01:43:54.26 | Unknown | Correct. So because of that request that they made to the city attorney, they have not actually discussed it in a way that they could vote on or make a recommendation. But it would be interesting to hear any comments that you folks might have tonight. And that leads us to what we would like to get tonight, discuss and recommend a vision for the future of the marineship area at the general plan level as the general plan process goes forward. And if you have any input that you can provide on a potential for a residential use in the marineship. |
| 01:44:33.01 | Sandra Bushmaker | So I have a question about this slide. So I don't see that in the staff report or in the agenda that we're going to be asked to recommend general plan vision for the marine ship tonight. Am I missing that somewhere? |
| 01:44:47.84 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:44:48.89 | Sandra Bushmaker | So I have a |
| 01:44:50.26 | Unknown | It's in there. It's where... |
| 01:44:52.31 | Sandra Bushmaker | It's not in the staff report. |
| 01:44:53.68 | Unknown | Yeah. very, very, |
| 01:44:55.72 | Sandra Bushmaker | Okay, it's not apparent. I don't think there was proper notice of this and I don't think we should consider this |
| 01:45:01.27 | Jill Hoffman | To do what? To discuss? |
| 01:45:04.09 | Sandra Bushmaker | discuss and recommend, we're being asked as a city council and recommend a general plan vision for the Marinship tonight. when I couldn't figure out. I'm a city council member, I read the staff report. I read most of the other reports. It wasn't apparent to me. provide input for potential residential use and ownership, I didn't see that either. I mean, I see these comments throughout and I have- |
| 01:45:23.77 | Jill Hoffman | M. Gruper recommends the council consider the seven themes as it considers and provides recommendations for how the marineship shall be addressed in the general plan update process. |
| 01:45:31.43 | Sandra Bushmaker | I'm looking at the staff report right now. for general plan update monthly progress slash workshop and gpac considerations. Is there someplace on this page? No, it just says review. |
| 01:45:42.01 | Jill Hoffman | It just says review, discuss, and provide directions. Thank you. |
| 01:45:44.83 | Sandra Bushmaker | . |
| 01:45:45.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:45:45.15 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 01:45:45.35 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:45:45.40 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 01:45:45.50 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF |
| 01:45:45.69 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 01:45:46.33 | Jill Hoffman | So, |
| 01:45:46.55 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 01:45:46.60 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 01:45:49.42 | Sandra Bushmaker | I don't think this is properly noticed. |
| 01:45:58.21 | Sandra Bushmaker | Happy to have discussion, but I don't think it's properly noticed for us to make any recommendations tonight. |
| 01:46:07.02 | Jill Hoffman | don't let it go. OK. |
| 01:46:11.64 | Jill Hoffman | Are you done? Anything else? Questions? I think we had a few. Thank you. |
| 01:46:19.24 | Jill Hoffman | I addressed mine. |
| 01:46:20.20 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. All right, I'm going to open up to public comment. Public comment on, there we go. I knew we were going to get some participation tonight. Now they're all coming up. You're just now getting your green cards. Fill them out. Get them to staff. David, why don't you come on up? I saw you hit it first. |
| 01:46:41.41 | David | I attended the excellent marine ship workshop. I thought it was better than some of our past workshops that really got the community able to clearly enunciate some of their concerns and things. I would say the biggest theme that I saw is cognitive dissonance. It's a word I would have because everybody acknowledged that sea level rise was a huge problem, but everybody wanted to preserve as much of the marine ship as it is right now as possible, and those two are not. you can't achieve goal A and goal B at the same time. So GPAC and city council are going to have to make a tough decision there on whether they want to emphasize A or B. And tying back to our previous discussion, you know, our lots 1 and 3 and 4 are all on the waterfront. And our entire, you know, we had this whole discussion about sea level rise on marinship and I think we need a sea level rise conversation about the rest of our town our bulkheads most of our bulkheads in the rest of the town are over 50 years old and a sea level rises we're going to need to have a another large project to deal with sea level rise and just the age of those systems. And I think that would be another good chance to look at visioning and also additional funds from outside sources to accomplish our project goals for the downtown area. Thank you. |
| 01:48:20.89 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Sandra Bushmaker. And then I have no other cards. There's got to be more cards. There's got to be more cards. |
| 01:48:29.27 | Sandra Bushmaker | Sandra Bushmaker, resident of Sausalito. I attended the workshop. I've also been attending GPAC meetings. I remain uh, befuddled for lack of a better word, uh, on why the council is giving direction to the GPAC at this point when the mission of the GPAC is to facilitating concert with the city staff consultants and the public. an update of the 1995 general plan. I just raised that. actual words of the GPAC mission. I found the workshop to be a visioning workshop, not a solution workshop. And I am unclear. after attending the GPAC meeting, after the post-workshop GPAC meeting, on what the outcome of that meeting was in terms of what the next steps are. I felt that the discussion was limited It needs a more thorough discussion of what the outcome of the workshop was and what the GPAC is going to do with it. So those are my observations, and I'd sure like to see this go back to GPAC I agree with that. Councilmember Hoffman that number one Was not. Thank you. That was nice. |
| 01:49:45.74 | Jill Hoffman | That was not your time, I don't think. Keep going, keep going. |
| 01:49:47.81 | Sandra Bushmaker | Keep going. |
| 01:49:48.05 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 01:49:49.58 | Sandra Bushmaker | I have another minute. Can I save it for next time? Thank you. That was basically my point, is that it seems that the GPAC, |
| 01:49:52.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:49:52.11 | Alan Broadbent | Don't wait for me. |
| 01:49:52.70 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:49:59.62 | Sandra Bushmaker | needs more internal discussion within the GPAC group to come to some resolution before it comes up to council. And I also question procedurally why we're having City Council involvement on GPAC deliberations when the mission is what the mission says. And, um, Lastly, I do think the GPAC in the city needs to consider visiting other countries, such as the Netherlands, and look at their water management and see incursion preventive measures. I think we can do something like that in Sausalito. Thank you. |
| 01:50:39.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:50:39.30 | Sandra Bushmaker | Do you have some funding for us to do that, Sandra? |
| 01:50:41.76 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:50:43.95 | Sandra Bushmaker | working on it. |
| 01:50:46.87 | Jill Hoffman | Mickey Nichols, and then is there anyone else who would like to speak? Oh, yeah, I do have another one. |
| 01:50:53.07 | Vicki Nichols | Good evening, council members. I'm going to agree. I'm going to go back to the whole... concept and discussion about sea level rise. Sea level rise for the Bay Area is not going to be done in isolation. We can talk about what Sausalito is going to do all we want, but I think some of the council members have been sitting on a joint committee for, what, two or three years. This can't be done in isolation. So talking about having an innovative lab down there and this and that is just really sort of pushing for a zoning change when in actuality you have in Tiburon the Estuary Ocean Science Center, which is fabulous, former Romberg, that's working on this all the time. And we have a grant from them off of Dunphy Park. So we don't need an innovation lab in the marineship per se. And... We have all kinds of resources to reach out to. And I agree with... I guess it was David, that this is, the marineship is not the only area that's on the maps that's going to experience sea level rise. It has to be looked at holistically, and I'm not sure that. Just talking about it here is the way to go. I agree with Sandra Bushmaker that we know from some of the research and work that I've been on different other committees, Holland obviously is way ahead of us. Holland, they're sending people over to help cities work on this. So there's all kinds of expertise here that we need to not try to engineer here in our community and take advantage of some of the experts. I agree that the sub-areas, even though that wasn't a question you were asking us, don't make sense. And I agree with Jill that wasn't clear that that this is shocking to me, that you're going to discuss and recommend a vision after one, as I expressed to you earlier, after one workshop, I think you're going to get a lot of pushback because I think this room would have been quite a bit more full if they felt that was what was going to be happening tonight. So. I think we just need to be a little bit clearer from the consultants and maybe it's sometimes the semantics. Just make it simple. Just say what it is that you think we're going to be discussing and doing. and that will help. And one thing I would like to say in connection with the innovative lab kind of thing or zoning change, I don't think any zoning should be changed down there until we can assure the community that we are enforcing the existing uses similarly to what you did on Airbnb. If we can't enforce what is down there now zoned, then changing, go ahead and changing them, I think is foolish. Thank you. |
| 01:53:46.07 | Jill Hoffman | Would you say that that policy then should take place through the entire town or just in the Marineship? |
| 01:53:52.09 | Vicki Nichols | I think we should always, no zoning should be discussed, and this is a huge area, so we're talking about this now primarily. |
| 01:53:57.98 | Jill Hoffman | I know. |
| 01:53:58.46 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 01:53:59.47 | Vicki Nichols | But we're potentially talking about a lot of zoning changes, moving around areas and all that. We know that we have a lot of businesses out of compliance. I'm not complaining one way or another. I'm sure it's fine. But if we can't control the enforcement, we've had people come in here and say they want to get some industrial space. They can't. Well, I'm not sure that's the whole thing. |
| 01:54:18.25 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I'm not sure that's okay. Yeah. Thank you. |
| 01:54:19.57 | Vicki Nichols | Yeah, that's what I mean, enforcement. |
| 01:54:24.36 | Jill Hoffman | Ron Albert. |
| 01:54:31.14 | Ron Albert | uh, Good evening, Ron Albert, 66 George Lane. I was still gathering my thoughts because this presentation has been a little confusing to me here too as to exactly what was going on tonight and what the council was being asked to do. I agree with Councilmember Hoffman that discussed and recommended general plan vision for the marinship was far more than I thought was going to be taking place here. Thank you. Probably the consultant on reflection wishes they'd phrase that a bit differently. But it sounds like you're coming up soon on preparing the NOP. I've forgotten what that acronym stands for, but what the initial replies on the EIR will be. And I think you've got enough information to start providing direction on what that NOP is going to look like. I agree with former mayor and council member Bushmaker's comments to some extent regarding the GPAC. But the GPAC, that stands for General Plan Advisory Committee. They're advising you. You're making the final decisions. You're all very well informed as to what's been going on at the GPAC. You all attended the visioning session at the Spinnaker, so you're very up to speed here. And I'm very happy to have a lot of from what I understand, my limited following of the GPAC, it's very unlikely to reach consensus on a number of issues. So that's going to be weighed on you eventually anyhow. So, um, I think you were struggling with getting clarity on exactly what it was you're supposed to be doing tonight, and I'm having the same struggle. But I do think you're in a position to start providing direction on what that NOP is going to look like, what you're going to want them to study in the EIR, and certainly based on the visioning session at the Spinnaker, there's been a sea change within the city of Sausalito. Every one of those groups mentioned a potential for housing. So the EIR should certainly consider, is housing feasible here? What are the advantages, disadvantages, all of that. It should be on the table for consideration at this time. Thank you. |
| 01:57:16.43 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Any other public comment? Comment going once. Oh, yeah, Pat, I'm sorry. I wasn't really doing that, Pat. I really didn't. |
| 01:57:28.25 | Pat Zook | Pat Zook, I have to agree with- |
| 01:57:29.68 | Jill Hoffman | I'm just going to agree with, sorry. |
| 01:57:31.23 | Pat Zook | Ms. Knowles, I'm confused as well, and I'm on the GPAC. But I'm also concerned. I feel like we are doing a mad dash without much forum and finalized content. for you or even us to comment on the advisability of putting housing in the marine ships. without understanding what that would mean. is a disservice to the town and the businesses and the workers who are in there now. Um, That's number one. We asked for some information from the city attorney. The initial response was give me the policy and then I'll give you the results and I think that is the upside down way. to evaluate the possibility and the impacts of the vision. It doesn't take that much intelligence to look at our density bonus ordinance and realize that... The impacts could be. material and severe, particularly in context with the economic analysis that was done, whether or not I agree with it. It did say. Your residual land value is great with office and great with housing. I don't necessarily liked that the form and the content of that analysis nor did some people who commented on it at the GPAC or at the envisioning workshop But, Given that statement, If you recommend inserting housing in the marine ship. You ought to understand what you're recommending. And I would urge you to wait for the GPAC to comment and analyze and get some information. on the results. I'm also, and I'm gonna run out of time, but I'm slightly concerned that Some of the... GPAC motions and in fact some of the visioning content has gotten a little bit messed up. The most... outspoken and consistent comment in that visioning exercise was to maintain the character of the artists and the marine and the industrial businesses and areas. Sea level rise is a condition which would have to be looked at in order to do anything. It's not an objective. You know, it's not a goal, sea level rise. Sea level rise is going to happen. What we do about it in the context of the development or the lack of development that we choose to adopt is, is a different... construct. Um, I do hope you let us do a bit more work. I think the two hours that we have tend to be rushed and disorganized. I do know that, and I listened to it several times, the notion of divvying up the Marineship into three groups was originally presented by Joan as a negative vote. Vote if you don't want it. And people were confused. And you explained it, and we never got back to even discussing it. So all of a sudden it's here as a... and objective. THANKS, PAT. |
| 02:00:48.92 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks, Pat. |
| 02:00:49.35 | Pat Zook | Not so. |
| 02:00:52.21 | Jill Hoffman | All right. John DeRay. |
| 02:00:59.60 | John DeRay | Thank you for letting me speak tonight. I had a thought after the last GPAC meeting, and I just wanted to bring it up. It's regarding vision and residential and the Marinship-specific plan. I realized that No one on the City Council has articulated why you want to retire the Marineship Pacific Plan. I understand you have complete authority to do that, and that's obvious to everybody. We've heard that it no longer works, that it's problematic, but no one on the City Council has specified exactly what is wrong with it. and and what has forced all five of you to agree that it needs to be retired. So hopefully you can do that perhaps in memo form to let us understand what you're thinking. I'm not saying we're going to... or may not agree with you, but I'd like to hear it. I'd like to hear because... The document, I think, has created and saved so many art, industrial, and maritime jobs over the last 30 years and has been responsible for Sausalito's economic engine. And the fact that this deserves to be retired, I just don't understand that. We saw the data, 62% of business license tax comes from the Marin ship, 53% of property tax, and 35% of sales tax. So the only thing I can think of is perhaps you think because residential is not an emergency-specific plant. So if that's the case, let us know that that's what you're thinking. And if you are willing to accept the potential risks and liabilities of a residential, especially a senior, development in a zone that's experiencing sea level rise, subsidence, toxic soil contamination, this increased density bonus effect, increased traffic, being next to industrial and maritime-generated noise, and you would be willing to displace a portion of Sausalito's economic engine, please let us know. This week I went through the marineship specific plan again I read through it and what struck me are some of the goals I just want to read the first three or four number one preserve and enhance the maritime history of the in character of the marine ship number two preserve and enhance the industrial character of the marine Number three, no new commercial office development will be allowed in the MarinShip. If it's your intention to retire the MarinShip-specific plan because it's been inadequate in achieving these goals, THE FAMILY IS And instead it's allowed office conversion and real estate developers to violate these original goals in the Marinship and would be willing to replace it with something that's more enforceable in order to achieve these goals, then I would join you in calling for an update and replacement of this Marinship-specific plan. Thank you. |
| 02:04:01.91 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:04:09.65 | Jill Hoffman | Jeff Jacobs. |
| 02:04:13.47 | Jill Hoffman | or any other public comment? You have to only look at them. Look at us, three minutes. |
| 02:04:19.94 | Denny Zeitlin | Excellent. We're keeping it to three. In honor of Jubilee, Freedom. set the captives free. putting punishment over people's heads. from selected groups of people, in our community. is an abomination. Forgiveness, forgiveness of debts. student loans and mortgages. PUT PEOPLE IN THEIR individually and as a family, in debt for generations. |
| 02:04:58.59 | Jill Hoffman | Bring it to the Marin ship. |
| 02:04:59.43 | Denny Zeitlin | and fruit trees. |
| 02:04:59.45 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:05:01.49 | Denny Zeitlin | which is the avocado tree that was killed. at Dunphy Parking Lot. cannot reproduce if there's not two trees. I'll tell you why the Marinship Specific Plan would want to be retired. Might have something to do with number one issue in Sausalito. to mariners and public access. of which I'll be fighting in court on Thursday at 9 a.m. With Sausalito, the last marineship specific plan, as well as the conditional use permit, have not been enforced. to ensure public access for 100 people who are living out there. I like... that you're looking for housing, for people that need it. when we're being imposed upon by a man who says he will solve homelessness named Donald Trump in federal centers. |
| 02:06:02.53 | Denny Zeitlin | The Marinship specific plan specifically says. There will be public access of 2% of any dock in the Marin ships. Schoonmacher's, which is where we have our beef on Thursday, 9 a.m. Courtroom C. |
| 02:06:22.98 | Denny Zeitlin | I don't understand why the city hasn't enforced this on the marinas. or on the businesses. The fuel dock as well. is seizing boats after two hours, they are required by the conditional use permit. Once I check it, probably. Definitely by the Marinship Pacific Plans. to have a public doc all day long. So if we won't follow what we've done, to pay now a group over $800,000 when they're planning people in Sausalito and in Marin County. does not smell very Righteous to me. |
| 02:07:10.94 | Denny Zeitlin | I'm hoping that they're not just telling you what you want to hear. And this is an unimpeachment session. But the impeachment's going on. |
| 02:07:21.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Jeff. |
| 02:07:21.08 | Denny Zeitlin | The President. and in the little picture. |
| 02:07:24.93 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you for that. you Any other, Jeff, any other public comment? Seeing none, we will close public comment and bring it up here for discussion. |
| 02:07:33.92 | Jill Hoffman | May I ask a question of the city attorney? |
| 02:07:37.64 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 02:07:38.23 | Jill Hoffman | So, Councilmember Hoffman has raised the issue about what we gave notice of. terms of notifying the public about what we were going to be undertaking tonight and I share her concerns as well as those members of the public that spoke to this so I'd like to hear your feedback |
| 02:08:00.16 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, I think there's a clear description on page... two and then three of the memo that you received from the M group. Um, and clearly labeled action for council. So I think that the information is included, but I do believe if the council isn't prepared to move forward and wants to have a greater kind of noticing about this specific issue, we could do that. I would look to the M group on what that would do to their schedule of information that's going back to the GPAC and then back to you. But we're certainly – I believe it's – |
| 02:08:38.67 | Jill Hoffman | Can I? |
| 02:08:38.99 | Mary Wagner | Clearly stated. |
| 02:08:40.26 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, and can I just say, because I'm not really getting this, I'm sorry. We have said up here many times and said, there's a lot going on, when do we get asked something? You know, I mean, the whole book says, we've been waiting and waiting and waiting for an opportunity to opine. It says a general plan vision, not the general plan vision. I didn't get the feeling that we were providing the exact final vision tonight. I thought we were doing what we've been asking to do, which is provide direction back. And we brought that up at multiple meetings, and they just had a big meeting on vision, and they wanted our input back, I thought, to say, how do you guys stand on this? Give us a vision here. Let's work with something. We can discuss it and they can try to pick out of there a vision to work with. But I don't think they were, were you guys intending for us to give you the actual MarinShip vision final? |
| 02:09:35.12 | Jeff Bradley | If I may, Mayor Burns, Jeff Bradley, working with our project manager, Tom Ford, and your staff on this important project. Sitting here listening to the discussion, I was trying to come up with an answer to that question that you just posed. What we're trying to do is check in with the council, essentially, once a month on this project. And usually that simply takes the form of an update where we tell you things and you listen, and so you have a sense of what's going on. Occasionally, we will try to probe the minds of the collective body and get a sense of whether we're on the right track or not. So the analogy I'm thinking of is guardrails. We're working very closely with the community, working very closely with the GPAC, and once a month it'd be good if when we have this time with the council, you provide a guardrail function and say, we understand you went to this workshop and 140 people told you X, but based on what we're hearing now that's not a direction we want you to go in. I don't want to use a specific example because it could literally be anything. But it's a chance to work with the community and the GPAC in such a way that when we do get to you later in the process with a fairly fleshed out detailed document that you don't send us back to the drawing boards and say we weren't apprised enough, we didn't feel connected to this project, we understand you tried your best and you talked to a lot of people and you took a lot of inputs, but you got a lot of things wrong and you need to redo it. And we don't want to run the project that way. The city doesn't want that kind of outcome. And so we are going to periodically come to you and ask for maybe not a hard recommendation like this suggests. You know, vision is a big thing, obviously. We still need to take all these pieces that we collected from the workshop that we're talking about with the GPAC, and we really need to reflect it back to you as a proper vision statement. We could say, yes, that is, or no, that's not the vision we want. But there's still work to do in the vision, but we're looking for that guardrail function. |
| 02:10:54.41 | Alan Broadbent | We'll be right back. |
| 02:11:54.17 | Jeff Bradley | To use a specific example, there was a lot of talk about senior housing as a possibility at the workshop. Obviously, that raises a lot of issues, as discussed tonight by the public speakers. Land use compatibility with existing industrial uses, what might happen in terms of the new laws at the state level. Once you allow housing here, you do give up a modicum of control, maybe more than a modicum of local control, as we all know from the housing element experience there's a huge body of allow housing here, you do give up a modicum of control, maybe more than a modicum of local control, as we all know from the housing element experience. There's a huge body of housing law, and it's only getting bigger and more robust every day. There's so many SBs and ABs in regard to housing, it's literally overwhelming. Having said that, if the body says, well, everything being equal, we want to at least explore housing in the marinship, or no, stop talking about housing in the marinship, we're going to deal with that citywide as part of the next housing element update. That is like gold for us. We are responsive to the community, and the council represents the entire community. So that gives us great guidance that we don't go down a path that at the end of the day is not where you want to go. |
| 02:13:09.69 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Any other clarifications? |
| 02:13:13.26 | Jill Hoffman | But I think what we are interested in tonight is giving you enough of what, as you frame the guardrails, so that you can start the environmental documenting. |
| 02:13:23.10 | Jeff Bradley | All right. When we started this project back in 2017, it was really meant to be a technical update to the existing general plan, bring it up to current requirements from state law have a modern EIR that is not as old as the EIR from the 1995 general plan which affects not just the EIR but all the development that's done in the city at some point points back to that new general plan EIR in most cases. and that there really wasn't going to be any land use changes with the possible exception of the marineship. I'm not saying that meant there was going to be changes in the marineship. No one has told us as a consulting group that the city is in favor of office, or housing, or museums, or research institutes. We have literally been given just direction to work with the community and figure it out. So that's what we're trying to do. So we're throwing a lot of stuff out there. We really need direction in terms of what the future of the marineship is. If the direction is no change, that's good to know because we can incorporate that into the vision. If the direction is mostly no change, preserve the artistic nature, preserve the water-dependent uses, preserve the industry and the marine-related businesses, but allow for some small change around the edges, whether it's housing or making it actually more restrictive in terms of what uses can locate actually on the waterfront. that's the kind of guidance we need. I wouldn't necessarily frame it as a recommendation at this point because you're the final decision makers and you want to preserve as much discretion as possible until the end when we bring the document to you. |
| 02:15:16.01 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:15:19.47 | Jill Hoffman | Well, you kind of played into something I was going to say later, but you brought it up in sort of John DeRay. Preserve. How would you deal with the word? We're going to preserve. What's preserved? in a general plan document change. |
| 02:15:33.81 | Jeff Bradley | Preserve, like preserve the working waterfront or preserve the existing stock of space that's available for artists and makers of all types. |
| 02:15:34.40 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 02:15:42.22 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 02:15:42.23 | Unknown | types. |
| 02:15:42.83 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 02:15:42.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:15:43.89 | Jeff Bradley | Well, really you don't create a plan that immediately creates an incentive to do something else. So if you were to double the FAR in a given area, you're going to get a lot of industrial developers looking at that. Say, well, now I can build a much larger building than I could yesterday. You don't flip the switch on something in terms of a development regulation or policy that creates a drastic difference than what existed before. And you could also have policies that are protected. Like in Morro Bay, they put in a citizens initiative that basically restricted the entire waterfront to commercial fishermen and businesses that were directly related to recreational fishing. So they have a very strong maritime fishing emphasis. |
| 02:16:39.56 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. I'd just confuse it if I said, then how do you preserve and enhance at the same time? Okay. Anything else? |
| 02:16:47.31 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:16:47.32 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:16:47.36 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:16:47.39 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:16:47.56 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:16:47.59 | Unknown | Thank you. So, oh, questions? |
| 02:16:51.20 | Dave Bradlauer | Yeah. |
| 02:16:53.14 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:16:53.45 | Dave Bradlauer | Thank you. THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:16:56.40 | Sandra Bushmaker | So, um. I don't see anything in the memos and reports I looked at about ordinance number 1022 in the context of what we're recommending for the marineship. And so... And for people who are watching, Ordinance 1022 is sometimes called the Fair Traffic Initiative, but it's really about, Floor area ratio and uses and size and a policy initiative that was They wanted to address and reduce the increase in automobile traffic generated by new development in the city's commercial industrial zones. And to preserve the maritime character of those areas by reducing permissible density in commercial industrial areas. How has that been addressed in the context of whatever the 133 pages of recommendations that we have tonight? you know, with that ordinance, And what is the plan to apply that ordinance to whatever recommendations we have. My concern is that we're wording this backwards. That we have an ordinance that specifically talks about density and uses. But I don't see that it's been addressed. And so to me, the realm of possible is what's in the ordinance. If we want to do something with that ordinance, then that's a very different sort of discussion that we should be having, in my mind. |
| 02:18:31.14 | Jeff Bradley | I... May I respond? Thank you. |
| 02:18:33.08 | Sandra Bushmaker | Yeah, yes, isn't that right? |
| 02:18:36.60 | Jeff Bradley | I knew there was a question in there somewhere. We're very familiar with what I call the Fair Traffic Initiative. |
| 02:18:36.82 | Sandra Bushmaker | There was a question. |
| 02:18:45.31 | Jeff Bradley | However, it is an ordinance, and we talked about this a little bit at the workshop on September 7th. And in the hierarchy of planning documents, the general plan is really the preeminent document that, really rules the day. Obviously, the ordinance was put in place with a voter initiative, so any changes to it would have to go back to the voters. That's no small thing. I don't mean to sugarcoat that or minimize it. That's huge. But the general plan itself, should set the vision for that area and the vision for that area could be a hundred percent consistent with ordinance 1022. If the policy is maintain the marineship, um, consistent with the fair traffic initiative, that is a fully legitimate general plan level policy. And no one on the consultant team is fighting that or disagreeing with that or trying to say that's not an option. I mean, that is, to some extent, that's the go-to option. That's the default, essentially. But who wants to go back to the voters and say, we're going to undo this thing that you put in for good reason back in 85? Thank you. 85? |
| 02:19:57.67 | Sandra Bushmaker | But isn't that the path that we're heading down? And by the way, my apologies to those of you on the general plan update committee, because I know you guys are really far into this. But we can't discuss this outside of sitting here on the dais right now. And so if I wanted to get input from my fellow members in the council, This is when I have to do it. So anyway, my apologies for those of you who think we're digressing. |
| 02:20:22.02 | Unknown | Especially maybe. But so can I just, you know, maybe you guys have. we've talked about this before, but my memory of our meeting several way back in the beginning was that because the general plan is above an ordinance, that our decision collectively and unanimously was that we thought that the planning process should be unconstrained by the existence of the fair traffic initiative. And if we get to a point where there is a decision to move forward with something that's consistent with that ordinance, then we don't need to go back to the voters. But if we get to something that is inconsistent in any way, then we do, but that this planning process is not to be constrained by that. And all of the consultant reports that I've seen have clearly stated that that's the law right now, it's a voter initiative, and it would take a vote to change it. And that's in our report today, too. |
| 02:21:12.11 | Sandra Bushmaker | And that's in our report. So, can I ask then, perhaps going forward, When it looks like, I mean, I'm guessing you guys are familiar with 1022 and the constraints that it has. If there's something in A MEMO, REPORT. or I think that's a recommendation. that looks to you as if it might bump up against what's allowed in 1022. Can you drop a footnote? |
| 02:21:40.24 | Jeff Bradley | Yes, our entire matrix, if you will, of analysis has a recommendation section from both the GPAC and the consultant team, and then we have options for... other options to look at that have been discussed, and then another column of pros and cons. And so if there was a policy that said, you know, change these land uses in the MarinShip, one of the highlighted items would be that, hey, big FYI, this would require a change to the initiative, which would require a city-wide referendum or initiative. |
| 02:21:59.34 | Alan Broadbent | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:22:16.52 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:22:22.34 | Sandra Bushmaker | Mary, what would the vote requirement be on something like that? Is it 51% or is it two-thirds? And again, I'm just throwing this at your head. |
| 02:22:34.00 | Mary Wagner | I believe it's a simple majority. |
| 02:22:35.22 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 02:22:35.42 | Sandra Bushmaker | Okay, thanks. |
| 02:22:38.95 | Jeff Bradley | And we are pushing a little bit to get feedback, not just from the council, but also from the G-PAC, and from the workshop with the community. And try not to hold back, because from my experience working on two housing elements, the Marin ship was too hot to handle. They said, don't touch it. We're not going there. That's going to be part of the general plan update. And then when the other consulting group came in and took a stab at actually, I think, updating the partnership specific plan or doing some type of background study or technical analysis, it got to a certain point where it stopped, essentially, and it was like, well, we're going to do that in the general plan update. So we feel professionally responsible to kind of force this issue and kind of get all this out on the table so that And that's why we hear all this focus, that discussion about sea level rise in regards to the marineship, because obviously, you know, we have maps that show it, show the impact for the whole city and the whole Bay Area, obviously. But we're trying to focus discussion on the marineship to really get some of these issues to break loose, and I don't mean that in a way means everything's going to change. It could be a hybrid of, it could be anything on the spectrum of no change, big change, or something in the middle. But whatever it is, we want to get to that and wrestle it to the ground and get it into |
| 02:24:07.59 | Unknown | I'm ready to come. |
| 02:24:08.86 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. How are you guys feeling on where you want to be in the comment line, since you're so close to the process? |
| 02:24:14.56 | Jill Hoffman | I think we should go last so that we don't unduly influence you. |
| 02:24:18.14 | Jill Hoffman | That's kind of what I was thinking. |
| 02:24:19.13 | Unknown | Okay, chill. |
| 02:24:19.64 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 02:24:23.72 | Jill Hoffman | because I'm not closing this one up |
| 02:24:29.50 | Unknown | So I have a couple of thoughts. I listened to the last GPAC meeting, I thought it was a really interesting discussion. I guess I'll address the process issues first. I thought some very good process issues were raised here and by members of the public. Just listening to the last GPAC meeting, I did not feel that there was a uniform vision or a complete vision coming from the GPAC and and that it would have benefited from another couple of hours of discussion and i think that might have come and i'll talk about this in a little bit might have come from the staff report i thought was not spot on in terms of choices for vision but also i do agree that those two hours are packed and it's hard to have dialogue with 13 people who all have very strong and excellent opinions. So I would really like the GPAC to finish as soon as possible a complete vision for review. I would also respectfully suggest that the gpac consider Alternative formats for discussion, breaking in. you know, having subcommittees, breaking into groups, It's just people who had really good points were not able to have dialogue and respond to one another. And I just think that's an... It's a difficult job. I think people are acting in good faith. They're working hard. You're doing a good job chairing, but it's a very difficult way to make forward progress. And I would like to see forward progress, and I would like to see us be working through these issues. So that's one comment. Second, I'd like to talk about vision. I kind of alluded to this earlier, but I was very confused and not... I don't know what the right word is, happy with the visions that were articulated by the staff report. I do not feel, as I said earlier, that sea level resiliency is a vision. I also actually don't think that the water dependent uses is a vision, it might be a vision for one tiny part of the marine ship, but you showed it on a map, but it's not a vision for the whole, Swath. And the marine, I can't remember what the third one was, marine uses is maybe closer, but not defined or complete. I would encourage the consultants and the GPAC to really come up with a robust vision that encompasses, I thought, on the GPAC's recommended hybrid alternative. I don't know if we could get there, it's a slide or two right before this. That there were really good elements of a vision. There, stop. So supporting the artist community, maintaining marine industrial uses, respecting historic context, all great elements of a vision. Funding, I don't see as a vision. Once we have a vision, we can go out and seek funding. The Innovation Lab, it's one thing. I don't think it's necessarily a vision. So what I, you know, I thought John Dure brought up an important thing to go back to the specific plan. What was that vision? Some excellent visioning on the uses that were permitted, but in... in opposition to office, really, was how a lot of that was done, and that's not a bad thing, but that was the time and that was the context. I would like to see a vision that talks about Yeah, not only preserving, but enhancing, and enhancing the things that are our public goods our infrastructure enhancing circulation stormwater drainage sewage you know all the things that are really starting to fail in the marine ship um you know ways for people to get around it's um you know that those are things that need investment my vision would also probably include public amenities you know pathways parks, access to the water, access to the shore. These are things that members of our community want. I mean, I walk down there all the time and there's just really no you're going across private property, there's no way to move through there in a in a way um that makes sense um And then I think the zoning is another important element of vision, even though we're not getting into the FAR, we're not getting into the granular detail there, But we do need to think about, yes, the water-dependent uses where appropriate, and other maritime or marine uses as the primary. Arts, light industrial, and also the associated jobs that are with those uses. But also, I think there was a lot of discussion that some zones, not all of them, desirable for other compatible uses. And I think there's accessory, retail is a potential use for artists. Food service, affordable or senior or workforce housing. And again, these things cannot all be side by side with industrial, there need to be areas that could be appropriate or not appropriate. But this kind of vision of a more holistic community in addition to the zoning, I think is really important. And I would like to see a lot more emphasis on the public structure and the public infrastructure, because that's something that we are stewards of, and kind of the other uses are going to be dependent on the market to provide for us. So I think that discussion was a really good start. I was really interested in the back and forth and the opinions that people had, but I would like to see it kind of wrapped up. more completely and i thought these things a lot of this was a really was a really good start so that's the second that's the second thing vision And then thirdly, I think we're all struggling to what we're driving for in this general plan process, and especially in the Marin ship. And I just wanted to offer And I believe I spoke about this at one of our first general plan meetings where I was about a model that has worked successfully in San Francisco and I think in other jurisdictions where we're both We're talking about a general plan amendment, but we're also simultaneously talking about the related zoning map and planning code amendments, because that addresses the fear that people have about what is actually gonna be allowed to happen. So what I would like to see roll out when we have a vision... is the concrete Zoning. that comes with it, including potentially any changes or no changes. And that, I think, is really, it's so hard to stay at a general plan level when talking about a really small area like Sausalito and the Marin ship. And so getting into that zoning discussion and having those things both wrapped up together and then done together in the environmental impact report is both efficient and it's calming in a way that lets people know exactly what we're talking about. And this kind of, fear about what do you mean by light industrial? Or what do you mean by accessory use? we can address that. And accessory use could be 15% of the space is limited to retail or 10% or 5% or nothing. But that will allow us to have an actual understanding back and forth between various constituencies about what we mean when we say X, Y, or Z. And I think that... It's a little bit harder, but it also, I think, is a little easier because it gets us to a place of certainty. And I do think... I guess my fourth thing is just these kind of subsidiary issues that people have been talking about. I've spoken before on the housing issue. I am open. to limited, restricted housing, affordable, it would have to be a small amount, affordable, senior workforce. And I have, you know, I'm not practicing as a land use attorney now. I have in the past, and I'm optimistic that our city attorney will be able to provide us with the tools that could restrict the those designations to really ensure that we get what we are setting out for and not what we don't want. The fair traffic initiative, I think that is an important thing. I do feel like that's the thing that we need to address when we get to where we think we've got a plan. The things about the fair traffic initiative that I think are hard is that it precludes housing, that's one thing. So if that's something that ends up being on the table, that will be difficult. Also accessory uses, some kinds of, you know, maybe accessory retail or other uses may not be consistent with the fair traffic initiative. those parking ratios are from another era. And Certainly we want to control traffic in our jurisdiction, but a lot of those are leading to the 50% of greenhouse gas emissions in Marin County, from automobile traffic. So people drive, a lot of people drive into Sausalito every day because they can, they can park, at their jobs and we want people to get to their jobs, but we would really love people to be getting to their jobs more on transit and more in other more sustainable ways by carpooling, vanpooling, and other things. So those are the issues I see with the Fair Traffic Initiative, I don't have an opinion at this point because we don't have a Thank you. have a plan about whether it should be modified, but I do feel that in some ways it may not be as flexible and modern from a transportation and a greenhouse gas emission standpoint that Sausalito, looking forward, wants to be. So those are my comments. Sorry, I was long-winded. |
| 02:36:01.17 | Jill Hoffman | Well, yeah, and you said a lot of things that are really high level, and I appreciate that, your experience. It was on display right there, and that's great, because those are the detail I think you were looking for, because they're all still writing, so it definitely was. In fact, they haven't even looked up yet. |
| 02:36:06.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:36:06.40 | Adam Politzer | Thank you. |
| 02:36:06.47 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 02:36:19.59 | Jill Hoffman | So I'm going to start right kind of where you left off, I think, but in a much less detail. one of the things I you know and I used to drive the seniors around Every trip goes to the post office or Molly Stones from anywhere in town. So I'm not even sure the Marin specific plan would pass a CEQA test right now. Um, it, that is where seniors want to be on a daily basis because I'm driving them there all the time. Um. But I just say that anecdotally because I think the community... was very clear in what I was hearing about some type of housing that makes sense to the sustainable greenhouse admission climate change goals that we keep talking about every time we shake somebody's hand and say consider climate change, consider climate change. Well yeah, that means putting some people next to where they work. in, in, and where they play and where they shop and where they go. So if we want to really consider climate change, I think a 35-year-old document gets long in the tooth when it talks about transportation, traffic, or some of those items. I never have a good time with preserve and enhance. I always think of preserve. I think of Bodie, California, one of my favorite places to go. It's preserved and arrested decay decay I don't think anybody wants that for our Marin ships and I have yet to find anybody that I've talked to that wants to do anything other than have a very prosperous and active marine work, working waterfront, marine life down there. I have not seen that conflict that we seem to be accused of presenting because I've yet to find anybody who wants to do anything other than, I wouldn't say preserve it necessarily, but make it a much better place. because I look at some of these organizing themes, which I'm... I don't have to find anybody who wants to do anything other than, I wouldn't say preserve it necessarily, but make it a much better place. Because I look at some of these organizing themes, which I love them, I love the nouns in there, it's the verbs that I'm not sure how we're going to fit in here. When we focus on sea level rise, I kind of hear we need to budget and plan for sea level rise. The word sustain, you know, well, I talked about that and consider well every time we consider a plan in the last 40 years That means put it on a shelf Especially when it comes to this area. Establish economic sustainability. I see consultants providing us economic sustainability for the shelf. Consider housing for seniors and low income people. Yeah, that's exactly, I don't want to shelve that. I think we should consider that in our vision and what it means to put people closer to their needs and to their work. The artist community is the hardest one for me because I want an artist community down there. I think an artist community is vital to that area. It's the number one component of my vision for Sausalito. How we verb that often is support. sustain, maintain, and those almost sound like subsidize which is perfectly okay I think it is a phenomenal quality to our community but we have to be able to support it in a way that allows it to be there and you have to Support has to come with some some funding along the way. I was kind of thrown where economic development How it should be considered here? I have a hard time considering anything without economic development because if you're going to support and on it an artist community Which I want to do you need to have an economic development plan on how you're going to support something at some of the square foot rents that we need our artist to pay to stay in our community, in which we have gone to great lengths as a council to make sure they continue to pay. So... I'm not sure our visions are completely different as I hear they are. We want a lot of the same things. It's verbs sometimes that how we get there that I think we need to really look at. Because that's going to be where we look at are we really going to do something about climate change? Are we really going to plan properly? Are we going to refer back to a preserve of a 35 year old document? |
| 02:40:52.19 | Jill Hoffman | I'm curious, and some people brought it up, and we've heard about it recently at other council meetings about the illegal or down in the industrial area. And I would like to find that out. And we don't really have the staffing capacity right now to send a bunch of people down and knocking on doors. But I would be curious on how much of that is industrial change. How many people that used to go out and work on something now work on something on a computer? How many people that used to design sales by putting sales up in the air and watching them flap now design sales on computers? because remember, when all those documents were built, or when those documents were formed, there was no computers, there was no CAD, there was none of that. So how much work gets done in an office setting that truly is an industrial or maritime use has grown a lot in the last 35 years. So I would love to see what's happening in those places that we say are sellouts to offices and that's keeping us from being light industrial or whatever else. Because I'm not sure that's the exact type of change that's happening in that industry that we need to be thinking about when we go through this type of general plan update. That's why we do general plan updates. I think 20 years is ridiculous. I think we should be looking at these things every five years in this type of quick moving environment we're in. Not as a full general plan update at 832,078 cents, but at, When it comes to traffic and some of these things that are changing daily, Yeah, I think a 35-year-old document's getting long in the tooth. So I don't know how we do that, how we have that answer provided to us on really what's happening in some of those industrial spaces. But I have a feeling, and I'm just anecdotal here, I have a feeling that is part of the confusion of the uses and how they still relate to industrial, light industrial, and maritime. And they now have more of an office experience. look and form to that same type of work. I think that's it for me. I can't think of, again, I wanna thank the people that have put so much time in this. And I want to also talk about, I'm sorry, September 3rd. I thought that was great. For me, it started off a little slow, and for the first couple minutes, I was concerned about how I was spending it because my lawn was growing. I needed all sorts of other things to do. I didn't want to leave towards the end. I thought the conversation and how it got into people in our community that were really visioning, and I just loved walking around and seeing the different people together, who was at what tables and imagining what conversations they would have. So I thought that was, if David's still here, I will agree that was one of the better discussions we've had on this topic, and we've had many. So that's it. Thanks. Thanks. |
| 02:43:38.58 | Sandra Bushmaker | TODAY. I think principally we all probably agree on general broad, um, And I appreciate the comments tonight. you know, Councilmember Cleveland Knowles in her assessment of Kind of. What we need out of the general plan update committee or general plan whatever it is committee Oh yeah, advisory committee. And I think, you know, I believe it was a comment at the GPAC meeting that they didn't want to do away with the Marinship specific plan until there was a more concrete alternative to that plan. And I think that is the right way to go. So I would like to get to go back. Just as a procedurally process from going forward when you have, when you expect us to give you a recommendation as a council, that needs to be clearly called out in the staff report. I don't believe that it was clear tonight. Other members may disagree, but I don't believe that page three of two, the second of three memos where you're calling for an action is proper notice. of what you're expecting us to do. I think my input would be on the type of plan that you're looking at in the in the G pack Um, If you're talking about housing and you want to address that in Your recommendation. then you have to deal with the ordinance. I mean, it would be ridiculous to go through all of this. us adopt a plan, go to the voters, and the voters say no. I mean, you have to build that in, so I don't know how you cannot build that in. in your planning, if you're going to include that in the type of investment that we're making in in this process. Here are my comments and main concerns about housing in the Marineship. And I'm not against housing, I'm not against affordable housing. But these are my concerns, especially after I just, you're going to hear about the Landside Task Force next, which is a lot about. Um, Soils, a lot about hydrology on our hillsides, but I'm also concerned about the hydrology of So concerns with residential housing in the marineship include, environmental toxins that are there from the industrial nature of the location. As seen with other former military bases in the Bay Area, specifically the issues at Hamilton Field and housing they're having there. The issues at Treasure Island, issues of Naval Air Station Alameda. I'm not sure. the seismic instability of the marine ship as a whole, and sea level rise, of course. And so, if you're talking about, as BCDC stated in one of their reports, residential neighborhoods are much more difficult to move or convert to other uses than our commercial and industrial areas. So you have to recognize that and call that out and deal with that if you're making a recommendation to have housing in that area. There's a fundamental difference in land use and telling someone you can establish a home on this seismically unstable sinking potentially toxic former Naval shipyard. So what we tell a family, what do we tell a family from our perspective as a city council when there's an environmental event? Be it a flood, earthquake, or rise of some sort of sickness, a cluster of sickness in the area that could be related to environmental toxins, that we as a city allowed housing to be built there when it really wasn't perhaps amenable to housing. So I understand that you want Thank you. I hope that that's going to be part of the environmental impact report or I hope as opposed to the environmental impact report being how housing would impact the environment. What I would want to see is how would. the um, the area as it exists right now impact the people that are going to be living there probably for years. So that's a big concern. that I have and I would like that called out. I think that's enough for now, thank you. Thanks for all your hard work, and I'm not, not, you know, I do realize how much hard work everybody's put into this, I do. And thank you to our members on the city council for all of your hard work. |
| 02:48:12.02 | Ray Withey | Where shall I start? So first of all, I would like to thank all those who attended the workshop, because I thought it was actually, I was very encouraged, actually, with the workshop. I thought it was a great pleasure. large part it was very well done people were very Creative and weren't frightened of stating their views that's for sure and I think a lot of issues that were brought up that have been Almost taboo to bring up before and I was really pleased about that I So... Let me just go through a couple of points. I don't have a story to tell here. I've just made points that I'm gonna go down them, so there's gonna be a little bit of disconnect, apologies. So, First of all, and I'm happy to sit down with anybody who wants to sit down with me on this, I would want to see the marineship specific plan retired, even if we change absolutely nothing. there is no reason at this point why the policies and future programs that we're going to propose cannot be put in the general plan or the zoning ordinance the marineship specific plan provided a vision 30 whatever it was years ago and What's on the ground now... good or bad whatever and maybe with some cheating along the way by some folks is produced what's there now so even if we were changing nothing there is no point now in using such an old document when what The good parts of it. game without changing a thing could be in the general plan and in the zoning ordinance. Now one thing is clear, you can't retire the marineship specific plan Without... actually Amending the zoning ordinance, you've got to have them both done at the same time. Because if you try to retire the marine ship specific plan and leave the zoning ordinance as it is, you've got documents out of whack. But the problem is they're already out of way. Our zoning ordinance that was written in 2003, There are so many contradictions between that and the Marineship-specific plan. And if you want the perfect example of that, go back to 2012 where the Planning Commission was considering one of the projects before it at the time that then came on appeal to the City Council in 2013. It was my first or second meeting on the City Council, and that's why I remember it so well. I was at the Planning Commission when that was first heard. The project was the Harmonia thing that went into the record plan. Just look at it. Planning commissioners were opening up the marineship specific plan and were using Appendix B of the marineship specific plan as if it was uses in the zoning ordinance. They were using it as the zoning ordinance. Okay, and I don't think that's right. That's not what the intention of the Mariner Ship Specific Plan is. The zoning ordinance is supposed to be compatible with the Mariner Ship Specific Plan. It is not in many places. So as an exercise, I'd like to see us say, okay, first of all, step one. Let's say there's going to be absolutely no change in the Mariner Ship. What should the zoning ordinance really look like? And what would the general plan really look like? And then, I mean, there should be no controversy. You haven't changed anything. And then from that point, ask the question, okay, are there any uses that need changing? Is there any FARs or whatever that need change in? Flag the ones that if you do change them, hit the ordinance, the fair traffic initiative, and then you've got to make the decision. Do we go to the public and ask them to vote, or do we just say, no, we won't do that? You know, that's a decision to be made. |
| 02:52:46.76 | Alan Broadbent | you |
| 02:52:46.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:52:46.83 | Alan Broadbent | you know, |
| 02:52:48.86 | Ray Withey | Um, So... First of all, the marineship specific plan needs to be retired for purposes of clarity. We're going to find ourselves in big legal trouble one day because of that. Second thing, there needs to be a understanding of the relationship between the GPAC and the City Council. Jeff, I think, put it very, very well. You've got to receive input from the City Council and to provide some direction on certain issues to GPAC, or GPAC's gonna go down its merry way, it's gonna come up here and we're gonna say no. How much money have we just wasted? Thank you. There's got to be this back and forth. There's got to be this back and forth. Um, There's also got to be some recognition of the realities of what's on the ground right now. There's just got to be. You're not going to undo it, and so of what's on the ground right now, because in some cases, you've got buildings built. You've got improvements already made in certain parts. |
| 02:54:02.33 | Ray Withey | I was the one that proposed we look at, initially for planning purposes, the Marin ship is not anymore a monolithic unit. I mean, you might like to pretend it is, but it isn't. The south is totally different from the north. And in the middle where you have the boatyards, well, you don't have boatyards at the north. You don't have boatyards at the south. You have boatyards in the middle. So it would be very sensible to look at the north, the middle, and the south, and ask the question, what's on the ground right now? And... Do we want exactly the same policies for areas that are now so they've evolved to become different? |
| 02:54:52.03 | Ray Withey | Sea level rise. |
| 02:54:57.09 | Ray Withey | Sausalito is never, ever, ever going to have the money to be able to tackle the big infrastructure projects that sea level rise brings. We are going to have to, as Vicky pointed out, this is all going to be done on regional, state, federal even, major, major infrastructure development. And in many cases, it won't work. In many cases, we're just going to have to make the decision that some areas, we're just going to have to retreat. But you don't just retreat by letting the water come in. You actually got a plan for retreat. It costs money to retreat. It costs big money to retreat. We've heard several up here mention about toxicity in environmental. I don't even want to think about what the nature of, because council member Hoffman's quite right. You know, old shipyards when they retire, there's going to be a lot of crap in the ground. But the problem is, if sea level rises, if sea level rises, That's going to start washing all of that into the bay. And so... The state is going to be way ahead of us. way ahead of us. Eventually there's gonna be regulations in place that demand every business in the Marinshire to have an environmental plan for how it's going to deal with sea-reliable rise. Even if you retreat, you're gonna have to prove that you're not contaminating the bay by letting the water come in. And so CalOcean and the other agencies are going to shut us down long before the waves are lapping into the, you know, various business office buildings, into the office buildings or the machine shops or the welding shops, you know. |
| 02:56:59.42 | Ray Withey | I have... Also, the M group came up with the idea of an innovation lab. I actually don't like the term. What struck me about that was the realization that very few of the landowners, unless they have an actual marina there. There's a, let me back up, why do you think Clipper was able to invest the money and raise their land levels up by building a seawall. compared to the shipways or the boat yards, look at those two properties. Look at Ken Peterson's property versus Joe Lemon's property. Why has there been different levels of investment into that? Well, your residual land value study shows you why. A parcel that has the cash flow from numerous, numerous slips is going to have a positive residual land value. It's that simple. It's that simple. Okay? There's no way that the city is going to have any money to do any of this. So unless we can find a way, and this is where I've got to be careful, I've been talking to people down in the Marinship, and they say, Ray, the problem is you've got to use different language. Thank you. I've got to use different language because when I use the word investment or when they I use the word capital They decide to stick a big notice over my head saying developer Okay? But I can assure you, unless there's a way to find capital, Yet sea level rise is gonna take over certain areas. Businesses will have to be shut down because of toxicity. And so, it seems to me that The only way you're not going to be able to attract enough essentially private money to actually make the investment in the marine ship you need. You're going to need significant nonprofit money. And the idea of an innovation lab, which again, I don't like the title, but the concept of a nonprofit wraparound where you can combine preserving the boatyards. Keeping the jobs of those who work in the boat yards. The teaching aspects and the schools of boat building, et cetera, coupled with the theme of using the whole area itself to figure out how to actually come up with innovative sea level rise solutions, can only be done by non-profit input. There's no way private money is going to be able to pull it off. And so the concept of an innovation lab or a nonprofit wraparound, an investment from a major maritime foundation, nonprofit foundation, to help inject the funds so that we can keep many of these uses going is going to be needed. Otherwise, we're going to have to retreat across the whole of the Marin Church. And finally, the Marinship is only one part of Sausalito and I'm very concerned, extremely concerned, that we are now not spending enough time in the GPAC looking at the whole of Sausalito. you know, for all of these various things, sea level rise or whatever, we haven't even begun to discuss reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. We haven't even begun to discuss it. It's probably the overriding risk factor for every community. Okay? We haven't even begun to discuss it in the GPAC. And so I would like to see a subgroup of the GPAC perhaps supplemented with some other folks including possibly some more people from the planning commission or at least one more from the planning commission plus others work specifically on the marinship and report into the GPAC into the council so that you can really get to discuss the issues. We haven't even scratched the surface. If we want to change anything, we have no basis to change anything. We haven't scratched the surface of anything. Um. there are 10 scores of hours of work left still to do just on the marine ship. And we begin in the rest of Sausalito's short shrift if we don't figure out a way to just double, triple the effort that's going into here. I think that was, as I said, there wasn't a consistent story there. I'm just following my notes. Yeah, so that's about it. I think I'd like to see us work on the zoning ordinance change. along with the general plan changes as it relates to the marineship because that's the only way we're going to get to enough specificity to be able to figure out what to do. And the final thing is, and I realize that's out of scope for the M group. Don't worry, Jeff. I'm no, not even beginning to suggest that this is in scope for you. This is something staff's got to do. Okay? might not know they have to do it but that's something staffs got to do because there isn't the funds to do this but if not if what we're going to end up with is ending up spending close to a million dollars and leaving the same level of confusion that I believe we have now. Jeff, okay, you got it. |
| 03:02:53.57 | Jeff Bradley | Just since we're on this topic and we're all here, don't want to waste this opportunity to suggest sort of a middle approach, kind of like we did with the housing element, where we had the high-level goals and policies, but then we also had implementation programs actually baked into the policy document. So now we're back to the general plan. And within those implementation measures, we're not rewriting the zoning code, but we're providing a roadmap of what would exactly need to be changed in the zoning code to implement these policies and objectives. So that's one way to do it within the context of the general plan update. But then that actual follow-on work of actually revising the zoning code, which is part of your municipal code, is a separate project. But you would have clear guidance within the general. |
| 03:03:46.16 | Ray Withey | Yeah, that's all very well and good, but I live the house in Elman, Jeff. Thank you. I watched as we put the housing element together, then sat on our hands for a year and did nothing. And then came back and tried to put all the implementing ordinance in place. And we had the biggest political fight that went on for two years, just to implement the ordinances. Okay, that's a waste of time, waste of money, waste of effort, it should all be done simultaneously. |
| 03:04:18.91 | Jill Hoffman | Bring us home, Joan. |
| 03:04:21.20 | Jill Hoffman | All right, well, I agree with much of what I've heard up here tonight, and I'm pleased that we are aligned on what I consider to be some of the really important goals for the Marinship. So I also want to thank the workshop participants. It was so gratifying to see so many residents turn out and participate and provide such diverse views. I also want to thank the M Group for the manner in which they compiled a whole host of complex information into a presentation that could be understood and utilized effectively by the residents to identify their vision and also the way that you compiled the various themes and issues identified by our residents so that both the g-pack and the City Council could see in a nutshell what came out of the workshop I agree with the comments from the dais tonight that the city council is the ultimate decision maker about all of this. is to facilitate, not to decide. And in fact, the GPAC has demonstrated its inability to reach consensus on a number of issues. But that's why we constituted the GPAC the way we did. because we wanted that diversity of views because it makes for a stronger dialogue and therefore a better decision in the end, because we've considered all viewpoints. So I agree with Councilmember Withey. It's important that the city council weigh in as the process evolves instead of simply... providing input to a finished product that might have gone down a rabbit hole from the City Council's perspective. With respect to the marine ship specific plan, there was a unanimous vote up here to retire it, but that vote did not mean to not utilize its content. much if not all of the Marin ship specific plan should be migrated into our updated general plan and updated zoning ordinance. And as a planning commissioner for eight years I can tell you reconciling the zoning ordinance with the Marin ship specific plan was frequently a challenge for us. Especially in the example that Councilmember Withee mentioned. I'm sorry. I agree with the vice mayor that the M group and the GPAC need to come up with a robust vision for us to consider. Sea level resilience is not a vision for the marine ship, nor is funding. But there were some excellent components of visioning identified in the Marinship Specific Plan and at the Marinship Workshop. For example, sustain the working waterfront, maintain the artist community, preserve the maritime and light industrial uses that support the robust economy down there. And I agree with the Vice Mayor that our vision needs to include important goals such as improved circulation, improved water access, improved shore access. I'm also amenable to ancillary uses that support the working waterfront and light industrial uses. But as we've heard both up here and at the GPAC, it's important that the ancillary uses actually be compatible with the primary uses. And so you don't want to have someone trying to take a nap next to a jackhammer in a light industrial area. Um, I continue to endorse the plan we adopted earlier in this process, which is to undertake our visioning without constraints and then reconcile that vision with the process required to achieve them. It's possible our vision will be 100% compatible with Ordinance 1022. If it's not, and we want to do something different, we'll have to go back to the voters. And we're all... aware that that will be part of the implementation process. um, But I do believe it will be incumbent upon us as we consider the use of the marine ship and uses throughout Sausalito that we be respectful of climate change, sea level rise, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, So we are going to have to grapple with those issues, certainly within the next 20 years. actually within the next five. And so our general planning process has to start to consider what impact Um. mitigating those issues we'll have on our zoning and use decisions. I agree with councilmember Withey that sea level rise is not Sausalito's issue alone it's a regional issue and yes decision makers should inform themselves about water management and sea incursion preventative measures. used elsewhere. However, For the purposes of the general plan, our zoning and planning decisions have to be respectful of the data our experts have already compiled that show what areas of Sausalito are going to subside or be reclaimed by the sea. I support the concept of an innovation lab, but that is not a vision, it's simply an example of a permitted use. I'm sorry. I support the idea of segmenting the various areas of marineship because that is reflective of the actual uses that exist there now and will facilitate the manner in which we address sea level rise whether we decide to retreat or mitigate. I agree with Vicki Nichols, it's important to demonstrate enforcement of existing zoning. There are a lot of businesses out of compliance down there. Um, Constraining. our ability to invite. profitable businesses that actually fit within the zoning ordinance. So we heard from Mr. Testa that he can't find the warehouse and light industrial space he needs to employ, what, 75 people in the maroon ship because of other uses that are not consistent with the Fair Traffic Initiative and with the Marinship-specific plan. I am a huge advocate of senior housing, but I am concerned we may give up local control by allowing housing in the marineship. I think we have to fully understand the risks of making that decision. And I think we have to carefully consider whether that's a decision we make now, with the 2023 update of our housing element because right now we're in compliance with all of the housing requirements imposed by the state of California through 2023 so why not Keep that arrow in our quiver as we have to grapple with the requirements we'll face in updating our housing element in 2023. I agree with the Vice Mayor that zoning map and planning code amendments should accompany the general plan. at a minimum as an implementation measure, but if not, a contemporaneous process that we undertake with our legislative committee and with our city council so that we have a holistic process. So those are my thoughts. Thank you. |
| 03:11:32.95 | Jill Hoffman | All right, how you doing? You have everything you need? |
| 03:11:41.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:11:41.09 | Jill Hoffman | And this is taped. |
| 03:11:44.93 | Jill Hoffman | This is taped, right, Serge? Nothing went wrong with that? Okay, good. Oh, you know, we've got to do it all again. |
| 03:11:56.71 | Jill Hoffman | All right, we're done with that. |
| 03:11:57.18 | Jill Hoffman | So we've given direction. I don't think we need to pass a resolution or anything. |
| 03:12:01.57 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Thank you. See, we have two items in. You guys can leave. We do have two good items left. We're going to hear a lot from Council Member Jill Hoffman. So I'm going to turn it over to you for your landslide task force update. |
| 03:12:22.16 | Sandra Bushmaker | I eagerly awaited landslide task force. |
| 03:12:34.93 | Sandra Bushmaker | All right. Santa. |
| 03:12:46.07 | Sandra Bushmaker | So we have both right now? No, Sandra, you're up. Yeah. |
| 03:12:49.02 | Vicki Nichols | You're up. |
| 03:12:53.12 | Sandra Bushmaker | Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council, staff, visitors, other members of the Landslide Task Force, also known as the Landslide Task Force. It's a great pleasure to be here tonight to introduce our report to the City Council. I just wanted to make sure you all got it in late mail. that all the council get received the Final report in late mail. Yep. Okay. Great, thank you, and the PowerPoint. All right. I would like to Just give us a little quick background. First of all, we named our report an opportunity for SOSA leader to take proactive steps. Subtitle, hydrologic and geotechnical conditions are the twins for preventive analysis. The task force was created by city council motion on June 11th, 2019 and was carried by a five zero vote. The members, As you can see in the slide, our Jill Hoffman Chair, Ray Withey Council Liaison, Michael Stewart, Resident and engineering geologist Christine Feller. Resident Planner and Planning Commissioner, Steven Woodside, resident, former county council, and myself, resident attorney, former city council member and mayor, current vice chair of the Disaster Preparedness Committee for a short time. Title, because it's got a longer title. All right, our remit and scope of this... task force was to identify the needs of sauce the city of Sausalito for an update and assessment of its vulnerable ability to Future mudslide disasters causing harm to the residents and property. Assess the collective contributing factors in an effort to identify early warning signs and proactive measures to identify a preventive program. to help mitigate potential slides in vulnerable areas using modern methods and modern technology. develop a plan for the residents to report changed conditions in their neighborhoods and develop a program to attempt to minimize risks from mudslides, landslides, and water invasion. We had six meetings since the task force was implemented. Starting on June 26th, we met every other week until September 12th of 2019. Our written report has been submitted to the council. We've met every other week until September 12th of 2019. Our written report has been submitted to the council with two attachments. That is the geologic assessment by San Rafael, which is what they call Exhibit F, and that's their enhanced geologic requirements through their planning department. I'm not sure which department it is. Anybody remember? and information on the geologic hazard abatement districts and other funding mechanisms. I've referred, we referred you to other reports that we reviewed and those are available on the city website. The organization of the report is One, the Roman numeral one, mudslide task force creation and charge, Roman numeral two, the resources that we reviewed, and they were quite extensive. And three, recommendations to Sausalito City Council for action. Four, conclusions and requested action. So we want to make it clear tonight that we welcome any questions or comments that the council may have for the task force members. We have. I just want to introduce the members again. I'm speaking for the scope of the task force review. Christine Feller is going to include Mike Stewart's input, who was unfortunately unable to be here tonight, on geotechnical and hydrologic findings. Steven Woodside. The formation and advantages of a god, G-A-A-D, spelled G-H-A-B-A-D. And Jill Hoffman will make the conclusions and recommendations. I would like to comment that The work that this task force did was very measured. very constrained and very focused. We tried to make a calm, cool approach to this issue which was so inflammatory and so upsetting to our residents, particularly this most recent landslide that we had. Many of us remember in Sausalito the tragic death in 1982 and I was living here at the time and remember that we were scared to death. We thought 101 was going to collapse, and it was a very difficult, difficult time. So with that, I want to introduce Christine Feller, who will give her strata report. |
| 03:18:03.64 | Christine Feller | Good evening, how are you? Part of the basis of this report is really looking at The ground. the ground cover, the strata, the water, whether that be aquifers, whether that be springs, of which we have many here, in this area. and really looking at the larger issues of what's happening geologically in our area. of. These photos here are probably not uncommon to what you see if you drive up around Marin Headlands, around some of the neighborhoods around here. it's considered chert, and chert is just a type of rippable rock that's part of a sedimentary layer of rock over much deeper, stronger rock like a granite or a limestone. We sit in a condition here in Sausalito and much of Southern Marin between two fault lines. And those two fault lines actually push this kind of chert up. I'm not sure. Now, not to get too much into geology and rocks, but what's important about this for the purposes of tonight And what we're explaining in this report is that this type of church is common throughout our area. It is what's considered a ripable rock, meaning you can just literally take a bulldozer and just rip it, claw it. You don't have to dynamite it, you don't have to drill it, you don't have to do anything like that. So there's a natural instability to it. for certain purposes. You can build on it, you can, you know, plants grow on it, and so on and so forth. So I just wanted to sort of start start with that as the basis of what we were looking at, and also talk about how this relates to water. when we get huge rainfalls like we tend to do, like we certainly did this last winter, So I think that's a good question. Water is a very powerful element. and it will carve away rock very quickly. Water is more damaging than fire, believe it or not. and water will always find its way through gravity, wherever it wants to go. And part of what happens in the substrata are voids. So even if you're doing geological testing, every now and again there might be a void in the rock. This is not unusual. It's not unusual. in Marin, it's not unusual in other parts of the world. and it's not unique to Sausalito. It's just a building condition that we deal with. all over the place. Now, There is a current map of of Sausalito, but this was actually published in 1976, and it was based on an aerial photo. It wasn't actually based on any modern day topographic technology. So it's important to recognize that the base of a lot of decisions and a lot of assumptions that we've all been making in Sausalito even predating some of us here. was based on really something that was done by hand, based on an aerial and not technology. So part of what we're saying is that really were looking at and recommending to you this evening which is also reflected in the report is let's get a consultant to actually administer some type of geographic topographic map. We actually need to have proper information to be able to be making assumptions on even some of the things we're talking about regarding GPAC, the earlier discussion. about zoning. about buildability. about neighborhoods and proper uses and so on and so forth. So it's really important to start with the basics correct information. from there, we can start to build upon that and build a matrix that identifies what requirements are in certain areas. For example, what you might be doing way up on Wolfpack Ridge is going to be different than what you're doing on Spencer, which is different than what you're doing down in the Marin ship. These are all very different substratic conditions, and it's not a one-size-fits-all. So it's pretty important that we that we actually do this. The map can be prepared in what's called a GIS format, which is a geographic information system format And that can include additional layers to it that are And I'll describe this as basically on the on our hillside and on the substrata. It's called Lidar, and it's very commonly used. I've used it elsewhere. And it's a very accurate way to help understand water flow. and what's called sloughing, which You know, again, after rainfall, you might see there's a tiny little debris flow at the bottom of your hill or right along the curb. you can map these sorts of things and begin to identify and zone different areas for certain unique requirements, whether that be building requirements or whether that be use requirements. open space requirements You name it. I'll note that probably 80% of debris flow, whether it be minor or major, is generally on a slope that's 27% grade or steeper. So that's a pretty good giveaway of what we should be looking at in different parts of our city here. Um, We mentioned We mentioned a little bit about San Rafael, Sandra mentioned that. And the city of San Rafael actually has, we looked around at other jurisdictions and we looked around it. places like Oakland and Alameda County Santa Barbara, Montecito, that have had far more catastrophic issues than we have had here. just to try to learn and benchmark what other jurisdictions have done in their response. And we want to have a measured response and a proportionate response to some of the events that have happened here in Sausalito and be proactive in planning ahead for natural issues, particularly because we are in between two fault lines. So the city of San Rafael does have a really excellent, suggested language for their geotechnical reports and the type of scope that we should be looking at as a consultant in terms of what those requirements should be. So I think benchmarking and learning from some of our neighbors and other jurisdictions is quite important. And then that will help create that hazard map Um, maybe hazard map is not the right word for it, but it basically identifies far more buildable areas and probability areas. on some of these steep sloping areas that we have here in Sausalito. And that's important when we talk about new construction and remodels because Sausalito is pretty well built out But of course, there's a lot of additions, remodels, renovations, retrofits, so on, and all of these conditions have to be considered there, not just new build. So finally, just in terms of this part of the presentation, if we can, yeah, thank you, go to the next slide. I just wanted to share a couple photos again these are going to be very familiar to to everybody here these are the type of examples of remediation to support unstable hillsides. that have shown signs and symptoms of a larger potential issue anything from sort of the railroad ties with deep structure and steel rebar to what I like to call, which is all the way over here on the right, sort of that fake rock looking, type of treatment, which is actually a pretty pretty beefy shotcrete type of solution with soldier piles into the hill to kind of create stability around it. Um, And these tend to be very, very successful and long lasting. So, These would not be uncommon solutions in certain areas that we're looking at here. just some examples. And that's about it for my portion of the presentation. So I'll hand it over to Stephen to you. |
| 03:27:36.18 | Jill Hoffman | Christina, can I ask you a question while you're there? Yeah. So other jurisdictions have different requirements in their reports on a |
| 03:27:37.48 | Christine Feller | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 03:27:45.48 | Jill Hoffman | construction project than we do or the, and the geo technical people provide different information. |
| 03:27:54.86 | Christine Feller | So in other jurisdictions, they have looked at what the issues have been or what these symptoms, as I'm calling them, have been, and they have proactively looked at revising and updating what their code requirements might be so they can elect to do that. in their municipal codes. So, for instance, tolerance levels or live load issues, you know, designing to certain types of criteria can be amended in what the municipal codes are and that would trigger the need for a consultant like a geotech to actually perform a more robust report which would include additional testing or more stringent testing on the substrata. |
| 03:28:49.38 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:28:55.98 | Steven Woodside | Hi, Mayor Burns and members of the council. I have to confess first it's past my bedtime, so I apologize if I'm out of line. not as cogent as I would hope to be. But one of the things we looked at is the existing data, the existing maps and so forth, and we found that they're really quite obsolete. And one of the challenges that I think we all face is to identify with much more detail what the geotechnical conditions are on which we live. And how do we do that? We recognize that the city has limited resources. We recognize that we've had a couple of very significant slides in recent memory and history. But how do we go about to address the underlying conditions so at least we have a good baseline? and one of the vessels or legal mechanisms is a creation of a separate legal entity that might enable the city to garner the resources either by receiving grant funds or perhaps imposing an assessment that can do several things. The important thing that I think we recognize after a while is that The first step, the analysis, the geotechnical analysis, which can be very expensive, It's possible using a mechanism of a GAD or a geologic hazard abatement district to um, do just that and i think most residents myself included would appreciate very much if we brought ourselves up to date today and perhaps by the imposition of a relatively small assessment we can at least garner the information for the baseline what happens after that the district could go further and consider particular mechanisms to abate the hazard. That might require additional assessments, but one of the things that we discovered in our looking at other areas of the state where these mechanisms have been created is that is that some of them were done just for the purposes of establishing the baseline, figuring out what it is that we have underneath this, and what some of the problems are, and how they might be evaded before going to a next step. So I'm just going to keep it simply to that. We encourage you to seriously consider creating a separate legal entity. It's not the city. It has potential to garner some funding, and it is relatively simple to create, and it may give you the opportunity to at least take that first step of analysis without trying to find the funds that you really don't have to do it. Good question. Sure. |
| 03:31:24.99 | Dave Bradlauer | Thank you. |
| 03:31:51.73 | Unknown | Yeah, so you said on the slide that that's something that could be done by resolution of the city council, but at least a lot of other districts that have the authority to impose property assessments have to be voted on by the property owners in those districts. So is this a special? |
| 03:31:56.74 | Steven Woodside | Right. |
| 03:31:57.07 | Bill Meeker | you |
| 03:31:57.13 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 03:32:08.86 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:32:08.88 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:32:10.50 | Unknown | Thank you. It has a... |
| 03:32:11.09 | Steven Woodside | It has a history and an unusual mechanism of both. What it allows you to do is to create a district that has the ability to impose an assessment that can only be rejected by a majority of the assessed value within the district. It's a unique kind of feature in our California law. It's been around a long time. It's still viable. It doesn't require an election. It simply requires a consideration via a protest vote. And if a majority of the assessed value in the district says, no, don't spend a dime on this, It doesn't go any further. |
| 03:32:51.60 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:32:51.62 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 03:32:51.88 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:32:52.03 | Jill Hoffman | And the district is set up by resolution. I know it's by resolution, but what I'm saying, would it be by sloped properties? Or would it be we wouldn't do it in... |
| 03:32:54.54 | Unknown | Congratulations. |
| 03:32:55.37 | Steven Woodside | to the next episode. |
| 03:32:55.43 | Unknown | I know. |
| 03:32:56.03 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:32:56.08 | Unknown | Right. |
| 03:33:02.29 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:33:02.30 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:33:02.32 | Steven Woodside | and the district. I think our view was since we have various places within Sausalito that have had some issues in the past that you might start out by considering citywide. |
| 03:33:09.91 | Alan Broadbent | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:33:22.00 | Steven Woodside | Let's take a look at this citywide. that's possible. And it's done, it's been done in other areas where you've had a history of let's say a landslide or mudslide. They'll take a broader look at a scope for analysis. In effect, you raise the money to pay for geotechnical analyses, engineering analyses. So at least you have before you an up-to-date assessment of what's going on. |
| 03:33:50.01 | Unknown | And did the committee have an order of magnitude of the cost of this study? |
| 03:33:54.40 | Steven Woodside | Well, I think we had some discussion. We think your city has perhaps set aside something like $50,000 of city funds. Our sense, without knowing, we had one engineer on our group who has done this before and been involved in other areas. That's probably light with respect to the cost of a full-blown assessment. But I guess the point is that on a per parcel basis, it would be a pretty modest sum per parcel if you were to go in this direction. |
| 03:34:02.38 | Unknown | dollars a city. |
| 03:34:31.10 | Unknown | Okay, so order of magnitude in the hundred of thousands as opposed to. |
| 03:34:33.80 | Steven Woodside | It's more than we think our guests. Our guess is it's more than 50, but it's not a budget breaker for most households, for example. Thank you. |
| 03:34:44.97 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. Yeah, and one of the attachments that we had to the report has a lot of information about the GADs and other municipalities locally here in the Bay Area who have used them for different assessments. So, you know, we're not asking you to vote on that tonight. This is just something to consider going forward. And the other issue is that the revenues collected by this mechanism can only be spent on the activity for which it's formed. So it's a way to segregate funds pretty easily. And then we had some other funding issues too. Did you want to brief the slide too, Zeman? |
| 03:34:45.06 | Steven Woodside | AND I THINK IT'S A GREAT |
| 03:35:14.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:35:22.15 | Steven Woodside | Well, only if you had questions about it. I think the big picture is since you don't have a robust funding mechanism to do the analysis and we think it is costly, it would be very beneficial to everyone to take a close look with experts. |
| 03:35:37.94 | Sandra Bushmaker | Okay, thanks. oops, I'm going the wrong way. Okay, can we get through the recommendations? |
| 03:35:48.94 | Sandra Bushmaker | Real quick, I just wanted to assure the council that this city attorney and Kevin McGowan, the Department of Public Works, had reviewed and edited our report, and we incorporated all of their edits and comments into our report. |
| 03:36:06.41 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 03:36:06.49 | Sandra Bushmaker | you |
| 03:36:06.80 | Sandra Bushmaker | you |
| 03:36:06.95 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 03:36:06.97 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thanks, yeah, thanks for bringing that up. And we also, Kevin was generous enough to meet with us. We also met with members of the public work staff as well. They were tremendously helpful in showing us, the first step we had was what do we know? And so that was very enlightening. So, okay, so now we're to the recommendations from the. from our group and from our task force. And so our recommendation is that the City Council direct staff to return to the City Council with a request for to obtain consulting services for hydrologic and geologic assessment. of Sausalito's vulnerability to future mudslide disasters causing harm to residents and property. And so, in assess the collective contributing factors in an effort to identify early warning signs and proactive measures, to identify preventive program. TO HELP MITIGATE potential slides in vulnerable areas using modern methods and technologies, developed a plan for residents to report change conditions in their neighborhood, And develop a program to attempt to minimize risk from mudslides, landslides, and water invasion. And develop a high hazard mapping to denote areas of potential debris flow. in addition to FEMA recovery mapping. That's our main recommendation. we had you know, 11 more recommendations that are more specific and will... require staff input. And so the idea is that we didn't want to micromanage the staff and how to respond to this and who's going to take what thing. That's really something I think staff would sort of sit down and say, The municipal code inconsistencies that were uncovered during one of the conversations that our task force and when they met with Lily. create new building remodeling guidelines under number six in compliance with the city's geological and hydrologic study. So, and hydraulic study. So, I mean these are two through 12 are just sort of smaller recommendations that we would want input from staff. And then it would come back to city council about how to move forward on those. The real recommendation that we're asking for the council tonight is number one, for the staff to come back with the RFP. And the thought is too that the staff would be able to access the expertise that was in the task force with regard to Michael Stewart who is a geologic engineer and with Christina who's a planner and so, and help inform the RFP. And that would come back to the city council within whatever days you want to say, 90 days or 60 days or something, whatever the staff. |
| 03:38:44.68 | Jill Hoffman | Josh, get something on this. |
| 03:38:46.06 | Sandra Bushmaker | Sure. |
| 03:38:46.27 | Jill Hoffman | So after, so the RFP, does the RFP take everything you have in here, assess the collective contributing factors in an effort to identify, develop a plan for residents? Is that all part of the RFP or is the RFP end right there at the bold? |
| 03:38:57.54 | Sandra Bushmaker | to the community. I THINK, |
| 03:39:00.51 | Jill Hoffman | and the rest of its staff. |
| 03:39:01.72 | Sandra Bushmaker | We would, the bold part I think is the main part, but Christine's shaking her head. But I would say this is our recommendation. That goes to staff. And staff would come back and say, this is way too broad, and give us input on what the RFP would actually look like that's manageable. And so, but Christine is coming to the mic. |
| 03:39:21.15 | Christine Feller | If I may. Items 2 through 12, actually all of these, we are recommending that city staff review all of them. and then they assess what they think they can do in-house and what they couldn't do in-house. And they can obviously tap into all members on the task force to see how we might be able to help with any of this as well. then we're asking the city staff to report back to you with their recommendation or slash assignments, and then go from there with your action, whether that be to, yes, we agree, go write an RFP or go solicit proposals that would be fine. Because in here as well is the possibility or the recommendation of also, you know, joining a coalition or creating a coalition with Southern Marin and sort of some of our other cities around here that have similar issues so we can... begin to share resources and look at, you know, more strength in number in terms of securing resources. funding, grants, and the like, because we did look into the California Office of Emergency Services, and they, Joan's shaking her head, she knows that they definitely have grant programs, provide resources, so there might be some collective good in things like that, but that's listed in here. |
| 03:40:53.86 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and that's in there, but going back to the first recommendation, we have a request for a proposal. |
| 03:40:58.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:40:58.92 | Jill Hoffman | Does that include assessing the collective contributing factor? I'm just worried, I'm not worried, I'm just wondering how big this RFP is |
| 03:41:01.20 | Unknown | No. Thank you. |
| 03:41:07.88 | Christine Feller | Well, the RFP is, I mean, part of what we're trying to do with this particular RFP is part of what I touched on, and that is GIS mapping. We need to have a base to start with. |
| 03:41:19.66 | Jill Hoffman | Because that's one discussion, if we stopped it right there, that seems more manageable. And that's 50K or more. |
| 03:41:21.87 | Christine Feller | Yes. |
| 03:41:23.44 | Sandra Bushmaker | And that's 50K. |
| 03:41:24.71 | Jill Hoffman | more |
| 03:41:25.85 | Sandra Bushmaker | because that's... I think that's the feedback that you would be looking for from the staff, right? That the recommendation from the City Council is, sorry, yeah, the recommendation is adopting these recommendations to the city staff to return to us with an RFP. And we can say within... Within the budget that you currently have, what can you do? I think the highest priority is the mapping. preserved. And then you build on that as you move forward. |
| 03:41:53.65 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I'm thinking finances, and I'm also thinking two parks, a third one, getting ready to break ground, a landslide group, all those things for the two-person staff we're talking about. How much we do want to task them with trying to figure out in that arena? Or how much, cuz I can see them doing a lot of this, not in the next couple months, but I can see them taking on some of this instead of paying an RFP to do it. |
| 03:41:55.33 | Sandra Bushmaker | Yeah. |
| 03:42:12.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:42:12.85 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 03:42:12.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:42:13.00 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 03:42:19.23 | Jill Hoffman | and you're paying the consultant to do it. |
| 03:42:19.25 | Sandra Bushmaker | that you're paying a consultant to do it. Yeah, I mean, I think that's the thought process. And to access the expertise that's on the task force as well, as you sort of move through these recommendations. Main thing is to recognize that we need to address the issue that we need to look at, number one, is the mapping. Like, what's there, and then how do you move forward from there? And these other things all kind of flow from that as well. So. |
| 03:42:45.08 | Jill Hoffman | We have another question. Let me get Susan Aswan. |
| 03:42:48.95 | Unknown | Yeah, so just kind of on process, two questions for staff. So did our city engineer or city manager have a chance to evaluate this recommendation? And then the second is I guess for the city attorney about whether we can provide this direction tonight. |
| 03:43:02.28 | Adam Politzer | city attorney about whether- Yeah, I have not had an opportunity to review it. But as I understand, as Council Member Hoffman stated, or former Mayor, Senator Bushmaker stated, your staff has looked at it, but we haven't had discussion about how to move forward with this. I think that clearly there's lots of good information in here and useful recommendations. But I think as Council Member Hoffman is suggesting, let staff now have an opportunity to adjust this and look at how we can move forward. And I would imagine that there will be questions from staff in terms of some of the things that are being proposed to understand and get some clarity from the task force. So there will probably be some back and forth necessary as well. |
| 03:43:53.80 | Unknown | Okay, thanks. |
| 03:43:56.80 | Jill Hoffman | And just thinking of our normal processes, Without it being stuff other than the $50,000 that we have considered in a budget, we also use our finance committee as a platform before we go to RFPs usually as well. |
| 03:44:10.89 | Sandra Bushmaker | Oh, yeah, and I would agendize a presentation by Stephen Woodside to come and talk to the finance committee about the GADs and how they operate and how you move forward with that. The scope of the GADs is really interesting. It can be as narrow, as wide, you know, as you need it. Yeah. |
| 03:44:26.21 | Bill Meeker | Bye. |
| 03:44:26.23 | Unknown | It sounds like it is. |
| 03:44:29.62 | Sandra Bushmaker | You know, and anyway, there's a lot of information on those. RIGHT. |
| 03:44:35.14 | Ray Withey | Yeah, I was just going to say that it's only going to be a month away before we're starting our strategic planning process. And this sort of thing long term can be programmed in short, medium, long term into that. |
| 03:44:40.46 | Sandra Bushmaker | Yeah. |
| 03:44:47.93 | Jill Hoffman | But I think we do want some answers earlier, too, and I think we want to send Jill off with feeling like we were actually doing it. |
| 03:44:54.85 | Adam Politzer | Mr. Mayor. Absolutely. Just one clarification that's necessary. As you mentioned, staff, in terms of who we have on staff, we don't have geotechs or hydrologists. Those are all folks that we end up contracting out. So recognizing that there may be some expertise here in the community to provide that. So we wouldn't be asking our public works director to give professional opinion on things that are outside of his field. |
| 03:45:28.45 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:45:28.67 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Public comment. I'm going to open up to public comment. I see Vicki either leaving or coming up for public comment Anybody else? The other card, okay. |
| 03:45:42.76 | Vicki Nichols | Vicki Nichols, and I'd like to speak now as the chair of the Planning Commission. We have talked about the idea of this mapping. We think from a planning perspective, as Christina alluded to, it would be very helpful. As Susan and Joan can attest, when we got projects, we were We didn't ask many geotech questions, number one, because we're not the experts, and that review was done by the city separately, as Adam talked about. So just having even a map, though, for us to know the areas would be helpful, as well as applicants when they come in, if they're trying to do a project. If they're new, they don't know where they are. they could start right off the bat. In terms of GIS planning, I would, if you haven't, I would check with the county. They have an excellent department There may be a way to work with them on some of this. If you just want to do your mapping at the front, I know they have interns that work there. And I believe that Chris Chu on sea level rise was going to do the shorelines. So maybe they've already done some work in Sausalito not related to slide areas, but you might be able to piggyback on that. I think that's pretty current. |
| 03:47:01.13 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Any other public comment? seen none. Anybody else want to make comments? |
| 03:47:07.34 | Jill Hoffman | No, I think we should do exactly what's recommended, which is now transmit these recommendations to staff, analyze and come back to us with the recommended path forward but I do think it's important to get keep moving this process along I don't want to see a whole lot of delay before we actually undertake the geologic mapping that we put that we specifically put money in the budget for |
| 03:47:33.75 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Let's just give them a little direction because there's a ton, and I'm glad there's a ton up there. It gives us the whole profile of what we're going to be looking at. But for this current direct staff to look at it, is it just within the GIS mapping that we really – If they come back to us – |
| 03:47:48.92 | Jill Hoffman | If they come back to us. Yeah, I mean, I think they should assess everything and then come back to us as they will. But if it were me, I would just do what's in bold, an RFP to do the geologic mapping that we've been seeking for years. |
| 03:48:05.89 | Ray Withey | I mean, I think this is going to take a fair amount of staff time to digest and look at all these recommendations. But I agree, what's involved there, I don't think our $50,000 is going to go very far. But until we actually know what the price tag is, |
| 03:48:22.60 | Adam Politzer | Go very hard. |
| 03:48:31.22 | Ray Withey | We can't do anything anyway. but for me. |
| 03:48:33.23 | Jill Hoffman | But, for example, I love item six, which is to piggyback on San Rafael's process for new building and remodeling guidelines. I mean, that's something that we could. utilize the legislative committee to move forward. So that's something I've been, as a planning commissioner, I wanted to see for the longest time. |
| 03:48:54.16 | Jill Hoffman | Based on us having the same similar geo and hydraulic situation that that. Right. San Rafael does. |
| 03:49:02.32 | Sandra Bushmaker | Some of this too, especially these other two through 12, that may just be also sitting down with the staff saying, this is planning department. This is, you know what I mean? And deciding at least what department's responsible for what. And or legislative committee or whatever, what have you. I think that would be really helpful too. So I think you have direction, I think we're unanimous on that. I think we're finished with this. Thank you to the task force. Yeah. Thank you to council members. |
| 03:49:26.81 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:49:26.84 | Jill Hoffman | finish with this. |
| 03:49:27.50 | Unknown | you |
| 03:49:27.67 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yeah, thank you to council members, Hoffman and with you. |
| 03:49:33.62 | Sandra Bushmaker | Yeah, yeah. Or liaison. |
| 03:49:34.32 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Early in. |
| 03:49:35.65 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 03:49:35.72 | Ray Withey | I just want to say thank you to the task force members. I mean, I'll be... Perfectly honest. I only was able to show up for three meetings and everybody else did all the work So thanks to everybody who did that |
| 03:49:52.51 | Jill Hoffman | you This is the display of good, talented people in our community doing stuff for us. Thank you. |
| 03:49:58.03 | Unknown | Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:50:00.81 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. All right. So if there's nothing else, I'll wait. There's something else. |
| 03:50:08.94 | Jill Hoffman | Item 7E, consideration of filing, filling Councilmember Hoffman's seat while she is on active military duty. Mary. |
| 03:50:18.72 | Mary Wagner | Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council. As you're well aware, on September 10th, Councilmember Hoffman, who is also a U.S. Navy Reserve captain, announced that she has been called back to active military duty. Her deployment is effective September 27th, which is this upcoming Friday. And she let us know that this will be obviously her last council meeting before she returns. She is expected to return by July 31st, but that could be shortened or extended by the Navy. Under U.S. and California law, when a member of a legislative body is called to active military service, their seat is not considered permanently vacant, but the council has the option of appointing an interim member to sit in that seat and fill that role while Councilmember Hoffman is on active military duty. When she announced her call to duty, Councilmember Hoffman recommended that the council consider appointing Tom Riley to serve in her absence. Mr. Riley served on the city's vice and ped advisory committee and additional information about him, including a letter. and his bio and professional resume are included in your packet. And Mr. Riley is here this evening. The options before you tonight include appointing Mr. Riley or another member of the community to serve while Council Member Hoffman is on active military duty. That appointment would be in effect until Council Member Hoffman returns. And the law indicates it's actually the earlier to occur of the return or the end of the member's term in office. Her term extends into 2022, and we certainly hope and expect that she'll be back well before that that happens the other options you have are to leave the seat unfilled until councilmember Hoffman returns or direct staff to return with any additional information that could help you make that decision and before I'm available to answer any questions for you, I did want to take the opportunity to thank Councilmember Hoffman, not only for her service to the city of Sausalito, obviously, but of course also to her service to our country and to her family as well. Thank them for that impact that it has on the entire family. It's a huge commitment, and I want to take a moment to say that, and then I am, of course, happy to answer any questions you might have. |
| 03:52:42.47 | Jill Hoffman | Is there any questions of staff? Is there any public comment? Anybody would like to speak? Don't run, they're running in the hallways, Alice. |
| 03:52:56.40 | Alice Merrill | This may sound a bit petty, but I would like to see it be more of a discussion about someone who's going to take her place for a little while, rather than just a person who is suggested. it. This person is going to represent the people in town, and maybe it needs to be a little bit bigger of a picture. That's what I'd like to say. Thank you. |
| 03:53:29.18 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:53:29.27 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 03:53:29.69 | Jill Hoffman | Any other public comment? Seeing none closing public comment. who would like to offrocks. |
| 03:53:40.57 | Sandra Bushmaker | I'll start. I'm not going to repeat the comments. I made a lot of comments at the last meeting. And Alice, I do take your comments. I do understand your perspective. But from my perspective, it's a little bit different. I'm not quitting. I'm not, it's not an election. It's, I'm leaving, I still consider this, as I said before, this is my seat. |
| 03:54:02.17 | Alan Broadbent | Yes. |
| 03:54:02.41 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:54:02.44 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 03:54:03.42 | Sandra Bushmaker | Certain people elected me, and it's my responsibility, I feel. to not only fill my seat or recommend somebody, of course I wouldn't fill up we're gonna vote on it, but to recommend somebody that I've given a lot of thought to the talent that they would bring to the council temporarily while I'm gone. we wouldn't normally have access to his talent. And so it was a happy circumstance that Tom was available, that Tom said yes and allowed me to state his willingness to serve. I'm going to go to the in this position. considering the enormous amount of time and effort as we see this evening to prepare and publicly sit on a council such as this. I want to thank my family for supporting me, my tough and resilient Navy family whose bags are packed usually and ready to go wherever, wherever the world sends, wherever my country sends me. I want to thank them and my fellow council members as well for their support for me and for my service and for their support after I announced. So, thank you. |
| 03:55:17.67 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:55:17.81 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 03:55:17.84 | Jill Hoffman | you Thank you. Yeah. |
| 03:55:22.09 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I also want to join city staff and all of us in thanking Jill for her service to our country and commending you. in I, of about the very professional way you've handled this challenging issue. So thank you for that. It's a happy coincidence that you chose Tom Riley because ever since he resigned from the PBAC, I've been after him to figure out what other leadership role he can take in our town. And he had just told me maybe... four or five months ago that he was coming to a spot in his career where he would have more time to volunteer for our town. So I had talked to the city manager about figuring out how best to utilize his talents, and I really cannot think of a better way than to fill in for you in your absence. So he has my unqualified support for this. |
| 03:56:19.55 | Unknown | Yeah, I can weigh in, too. Just echoing everyone, thank you, and thanks to your family. And also echoing Joan, just thank you for your thoughtful approach to this circumstance and for taking the time to think it all the way through. I agree that 10 months is too long for the city council to operate as for member body. I think it's very valuable to have the diversity of opinion that we have. I also really appreciate the thought that you gave to recommending a replacement. I had the opportunity to talk to Mr. Riley to review the materials and I think he seems like a great choice. And I do hear what Alice had to say and can certainly understand the community feeling like maybe we should have more of a process, but I also feel that you did not have a lot of time or notice for this, that it is still a seat that you fill and that there is a special provision of state law that allows you to come back to your seat. when you return. So kind of as a, caretaking. role that Mr. Riley will be playing. I think that it is fitting for you to be able to recommend someone. And I appreciate that, so I'm very supportive. |
| 03:57:47.59 | Ray Withey | Yeah, in sort of analyzing this, I think the first thing is, well, do you just leave the seat open, right? And all I can say is that would be very, very unwise. I mean, I was mayor in 2017 when Herbie retired. we I sort of was helping lead this council fact. four of us were the council of four and it was only because of the really cooperative way this council operated but I can tell you and trying to go through some of the difficult issues that we had to deal with that year not least of which was the ferry landing decision it was one of the most stress I'm being honest here is one of the most stressful, I'm being honest here, it was one of the most stressful periods actually of my life, worrying about the fact that we only had four people. So I would definitely not recommend that. So then, okay, so then what do you do? And I echo what's just been said, the very thoughtful approach that you took. And I'm very supportive in moving ahead with this appointment. And of course, I also personally offer my warm wishes and wish you a successful mission and come back to us. |
| 03:59:31.41 | Jill Hoffman | that said perfectly and I agree Tom is a fantastic choice I think you handled this perfectly Steve thank you so much for both of you for for doing this and for your service I have absolutely no reservations in going forward with this I think it's an absolute perfect situation and handled ideally so |
| 04:00:02.30 | Jill Hoffman | I move we appoint Tom Riley to fill Jill Hoffman's seat for the period of time that she is recalled to active duty with the United States Navy |
| 04:00:14.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:00:14.96 | Jill Hoffman | All in favor? Aye. That passes 5-0, including Jill. Now, do we, and I think we want to, do a... |
| 04:00:15.82 | Unknown | I. |
| 04:00:23.53 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:00:26.01 | Jill Hoffman | I swear in. |
| 04:00:26.86 | Unknown | you Thank you. in the elsewhere. |
| 04:00:30.47 | Jill Hoffman | Is that for everybody? |
| 04:00:31.80 | Unknown | If he's still willing after this whole evening. He got my vote when he's still here. |
| 04:00:33.08 | Jill Hoffman | this whole evening. He got my vote when he's still here. If he left, I don't know what we're going to do. Okay. |
| 04:00:48.64 | Jill Hoffman | It depends. |
| 04:00:49.03 | Unknown | you I'm here, never mind. |
| 04:00:51.71 | Jill Hoffman | You hate wearing yours. I'm surprised you had them this long. |
| 04:00:54.80 | Unknown | Here, sir. |
| 04:00:56.91 | Jill Hoffman | Do you want to be up there, Jill? |
| 04:00:57.77 | Unknown | Thank you. Why not you give them that? |
| 04:00:59.58 | Jill Hoffman | Here. |
| 04:01:00.69 | Unknown | I don't know. Hold on. Thank you. |
| 04:01:03.97 | Unknown | you |
| 04:01:33.97 | Unknown | the Constitution of the United States. in the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution. Thank you. you Thank you. and I'll see you in California. you |
| 04:01:44.82 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:01:45.11 | Unknown | Thank you. really without any menstruation. |
| 04:01:49.22 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:01:49.29 | Unknown | for the heart of this salvation, for the purpose of salvation, for the purpose of salvation, that I will, will, and will. a little well. you |
| 04:02:36.91 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 04:02:40.34 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 04:02:40.54 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 04:02:40.71 | Alan Broadbent | Thank you. |
| 04:02:41.01 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:02:41.03 | Alan Broadbent | you |
| 04:02:41.23 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Oh, wait. |
| 04:02:45.22 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:02:46.92 | Jill Hoffman | Certainly not. |
| 04:02:53.62 | Alice Merrill | So where's the future? |
| 04:02:54.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yes, we have no other items. I don't know if we want Tom to be up here while we return because he is now part of the council. |
| 04:03:01.77 | Unknown | That was amazing. for the morning. What do you guys feel? |
| 04:03:08.23 | Bill Frost | Okay. |
| 04:03:08.45 | Unknown | anything. |
| 04:03:09.26 | Bill Frost | Thank you. |
| 04:03:10.39 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:03:10.59 | Bill Frost | Thank you. |
| 04:03:11.03 | Jill Hoffman | Bring him back with her. |
| 04:03:11.25 | Bill Frost | . |
| 04:03:11.52 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:03:16.94 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. I don't know if we can get past it. |
| 04:03:23.59 | Adam Politzer | Mayor Burns, we have a cake and apple cider in the conference room for everyone to enjoy. |
| 04:03:31.62 | Jill Hoffman | The city manager has told me we have cake and cider for everybody except those people viewing at home. We're going to adjourn into the back conference room. |
| 04:04:39.32 | Unknown | She's not agreeing with the water. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:04:58.71 | Unknown | Amen. |
| 04:05:06.97 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. |
| 04:05:09.83 | Unknown | Yeah, they're ready. |
| 04:05:12.97 | Alice Merrill | I do. Amen. |
| 04:05:36.65 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:06:03.33 | Denny Zeitlin | Thank you. |
| 04:06:37.15 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. I would tell you to look at the kickoff. |
| 04:06:39.86 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:06:42.63 | Unknown | Okay. Thank you. |
| 04:06:44.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:06:45.60 | Unknown | you |
| 04:10:17.97 | Unknown | you Thank you. you Do you like flowers? |
| 04:10:20.79 | Bill Frost | Thank you. you you you |
| 04:10:22.81 | Unknown | It's short. |
| 04:10:29.55 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. you Thank you. Thank you. you Eight, eight, seven. Thank you. |
| 04:10:45.78 | Sandra Bushmaker | I mean, I don't know, is it hot in here? Thank you. |
| 04:10:53.71 | Bill Meeker | I'm going to put a fair comment. |
| 04:11:13.96 | Unknown | you I'm tired six years ago. Oh no, that's not the line. You just did, I'd give her a little bit of a line. |
| 04:11:17.42 | Alice Merrill | . |
| 04:11:17.98 | Alan Broadbent | . |
| 04:11:20.78 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Amen. Yeah, I will. |
| 04:15:24.35 | Unknown | Goodbye. It's more like that. |
| 04:15:38.60 | Unknown | All right. |
| 04:16:13.78 | Mary Wagner | Yeah. I love it. Let me make sure I didn't pick it up with my staff. by the state. |
| 04:16:34.50 | Mary Wagner | you |
| 04:16:37.84 | Mary Wagner | just asking. |
| 04:16:38.57 | Unknown | you |
| 04:16:39.77 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. Yeah. |
| 04:16:42.57 | Unknown | on. Thank you. or whatever I can find. Thank you. |
| 04:17:20.84 | Bill Frost | Well, Jerry, you're welcome. |
| 04:18:01.49 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. you I won't be here at 10. |
| 04:18:03.79 | Unknown | We're here. Thank you. |
| 04:18:04.97 | Unknown | you |
| 04:18:05.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:18:05.07 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:18:05.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:19:12.88 | Unknown | Hi. It's anointed. |
| 04:19:25.01 | Unknown | We don't have a set of keys to lock our doors. and we need one of our police officers to come and lock the door for us. It's search. |
| 04:19:41.26 | Unknown | Yep, I'm in the council chambers. |
| 04:19:47.33 | Unknown | Sure. Thank you. |
Jerry Taylor — Neutral: Announced the opening of Ice House Plaza on October 26th with a Golden Spike Ceremony, highlighting historical significance since 1876. Thanked city council, planning commission, and staff for support. ▶ 📄