| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:01.11 | Unknown | So deep that in my... |
| 00:00:04.82 | Heidi Scoble | Audio's up, I'll start with our video. Video's up, we're admitting our 15 participants. as soon as all of them are Entered, I will start. Good evening, Mayor Hoffman and Councilmembers. This meeting is being held pursuant to section three of Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Newsom on March 17th, 2020. And all members are joining this meeting telephonically through the zoom and is broadcast live on the city's website. and on cable TV channel 27. |
| 00:00:36.63 | Jill Hoffman | Very well, thank you, Madam Clerk. Welcome to the City Council meeting of Tuesday, February 9th, 2021. This is the closed session. portion of our meeting tonight. Heidi, would you please call the roll? |
| 00:00:55.16 | Heidi Scoble | Council member Sobieski? Thank you. |
| 00:00:56.97 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:00:57.68 | Heidi Scoble | Council member Blaustein. here. Council member Cleveland Knowles. Yeah. Vice Mayor Kellman. Here. Mayor Huffman. |
| 00:01:06.60 | Jill Hoffman | Here. |
| 00:01:07.45 | Heidi Scoble | All members are present and we have a quorum. |
| 00:01:09.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you very much. I will announce that item D1 will be discussed in closed session. And that item is conference with legal counsel anticipated litigation. Do I have any public comment for Closed session, item D1. |
| 00:01:31.56 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:01:31.58 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, would you like me to read the public comment Spiel that? Yes, on how to participate. |
| 00:01:36.40 | Unknown | THE PARTICIPATION. |
| 00:01:37.82 | Heidi Scoble | At this time, members of the public may address the city council regarding all closed session agenda items video or audio public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you'd like to make a comment, please raise your hand in the zoom application and you will be called upon when it's your time to speak to raise your hand from a phone press star nine. Each speaker will be notified when the time has elapsed. |
| 00:01:59.17 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Heidi. We're deviating a little bit from the past practice, which was where the mayor would call on speakers, but because of the new way that the Zoom is working, some kind of update, names are flipping around. as people raise their hands alphabetically. And so it's easier from this point forward, I think we're just gonna have the clerk call on members. of the public and let them know when they're going to be up. Heidi, but I'm not seeing any raised hands. Do you see any raised hands? |
| 00:02:30.78 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, there are no raised hands at this time. |
| 00:02:33.56 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, very good. In that case, I will close public comment. And We will adjourn to closed session. Thank you. And we'll be back at 7 o'clock. Thank you. |
| 00:02:48.11 | Unknown | shine. Bye. high as a mountain and deep as a river come rain or come shine |
| 00:03:02.03 | Ian Sobieski | Cheers. |
| 00:03:06.60 | Unknown | And yes. When you met me you It was just |
| 00:03:12.25 | Ian Sobieski | was just |
| 00:03:14.47 | Unknown | One of those things |
| 00:03:18.97 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:03:19.04 | Unknown | But don't ever bet me cause I'm gonna be true if you'd let me |
| 00:03:30.73 | Ian Sobieski | Let me |
| 00:03:34.09 | Unknown | You're gonna love me like nobody's loved me. Come rain or come shine. |
| 00:03:36.96 | Ian Sobieski | like. |
| 00:03:41.68 | Ian Sobieski | you Thank you. you |
| 00:03:48.69 | Unknown | Happy together, unhappy together, and won't it be fine? |
| 00:04:03.06 | Unknown | Days may be cloudy or sunny. We're in or we're out of the money. |
| 00:04:09.75 | Ian Sobieski | Right? |
| 00:04:10.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:04:11.52 | Ian Sobieski | We're out. The money. |
| 00:04:16.63 | Unknown | But I'm with you always |
| 00:04:16.85 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 00:04:16.99 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. |
| 00:04:17.32 | Unknown | Bye. Always. |
| 00:04:21.22 | Unknown | I'm with you, Rain. Ozshiiine! Thank you. I'm gonna love you like nobody's loved you. |
| 00:04:39.48 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:04:39.68 | Unknown | Come rain or come shine |
| 00:04:43.85 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. you you |
| 00:04:47.04 | Unknown | High as a mountain Deep as a river. I'm real. Come shine. |
| 00:05:02.84 | Unknown | And it's When you met me |
| 00:05:07.98 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:05:08.03 | Unknown | Thank you. It was just one of those things. you |
| 00:05:14.78 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. |
| 00:05:16.93 | Unknown | But no. ever bet me Cause I'm gonna be true. If you let me Yeah, I love me like nobody's left me. Come me. Oh, come shine. |
| 00:05:43.52 | Ian Sobieski | you you |
| 00:05:46.66 | Unknown | Happy together. unhappy together. And won't it be fine Thank you. |
| 00:06:00.92 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:06:00.94 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:06:00.97 | Ian Sobieski | . |
| 00:06:01.80 | Unknown | Days may be cloudy or sunny We're in or we're out of the money |
| 00:06:06.17 | Ian Sobieski | Baby. We are. Yeah. |
| 00:06:13.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:06:13.63 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:06:15.92 | Unknown | But I'll love you always. |
| 00:06:17.74 | Unknown | You always |
| 00:06:20.53 | Unknown | I'm with you rain or shine. Rain or shine |
| 00:06:46.26 | Unknown | Be sure to tune in to the Jazz Lounge. where we explore the many facets of jazz from the 1950s and 60s. From the earthy vocals of Carmen Macrae |
| 00:06:57.86 | Unknown | Just a little lovin' Early in the |
| 00:07:05.06 | Unknown | to the sophisticated vocalese of Lambert Hendrickson Ross. Tune in. and explore the golden age of jazz. Step into the Jazz Lounge with me, Alan Berland, your host. There's no cover, no minimum. every Friday and Monday night, beginning at 8, on Radio Sausalito. |
| 00:07:27.15 | Unknown | Here's a public service announcement from the Marin County Department of Public Health. Free COVID-19 testing is coming to the parking lot at Sausalito City Hall on Wednesdays beginning January 6th. Scheduling appointments is done online via the curative.com website. The test is free whether or not you have insurance and 100% contactless. Results are typically delivered within 48 hours by email or text message. If you're elsewhere in Marin, there are additional testing locations in Larkspur, San Anselmo, Nevado, and Bellinas. |
| 00:08:01.14 | Unknown | That's free COVID-19 testing in the parking lot at Sausalito City Hall, Wednesdays beginning January 6th. For an appointment, just go online to curative.com. |
| 00:08:11.60 | Unknown | This is Bill Charlotte. and you're tuned to Radio Sausalito. |
| 00:08:23.31 | Ian Sobieski | . you |
| 00:08:24.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:24.15 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:08:25.45 | Unknown | I used to think I could live without you. |
| 00:08:31.97 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. |
| 00:08:34.90 | Unknown | But I admit That I change my mind |
| 00:08:39.38 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. Bye. Thank you. |
| 00:08:40.32 | Unknown | you I |
| 00:08:40.74 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. . you Ah. |
| 00:08:44.15 | Unknown | I go to sleep. And I dream about you Thank you. And through the day, you can always find me blue. |
| 00:08:56.71 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. Blue. . |
| 00:09:03.34 | Unknown | Because we're part of |
| 00:09:04.82 | Ian Sobieski | Pardon you |
| 00:09:08.75 | Unknown | Blue. |
| 00:09:09.23 | Ian Sobieski | Do |
| 00:09:12.35 | Unknown | And brokenhearted |
| 00:09:15.34 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:09:18.90 | Unknown | There was a time I was jolly |
| 00:09:22.54 | Ian Sobieski | Oh, Thank you. |
| 00:09:27.40 | Unknown | You know the reason I'm melancholy blue. And oh so lonely |
| 00:09:41.66 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. you |
| 00:09:44.26 | Unknown | Ooh. |
| 00:09:45.97 | Ian Sobieski | . |
| 00:09:47.38 | Unknown | I want you always We made a blunder and lots of times I wonder, dear, if you're blue. I'm not too. |
| 00:10:45.97 | Unknown | Bye. And oh, so lonely |
| 00:10:48.86 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. Oh Oh. |
| 00:10:50.02 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:10:51.03 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. you |
| 00:10:52.79 | Unknown | True, I want you only We've made a blunder And lots of times I wonder, dear, if you're |
| 00:11:33.53 | Ron Albert | . |
| 00:11:34.27 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:11:39.97 | Ian Sobieski | . |
| 00:12:39.37 | Ian Sobieski | . you |
| 00:12:54.97 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. you you you |
| 00:13:18.02 | Ian Sobieski | . |
| 00:13:24.45 | Ian Sobieski | . |
| 00:13:30.94 | Ian Sobieski | . |
| 00:13:38.15 | Ian Sobieski | . |
| 00:14:02.67 | Ian Sobieski | Some resource along the highway. |
| 00:14:42.54 | Unknown | Autumn in New York. Why does it seem so inviting? Thank you. Bye. |
| 00:14:54.34 | Ian Sobieski | you Thank you. you you you you |
| 00:14:56.84 | Unknown | Autumn in New York It spells a thrill of first nighting |
| 00:14:57.07 | Ian Sobieski | Ah, |
| 00:15:01.46 | Ian Sobieski | There's a fellow |
| 00:15:06.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:15:09.49 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. you |
| 00:15:11.45 | Unknown | Glittering crowds |
| 00:15:13.25 | Ian Sobieski | Brown. |
| 00:15:15.03 | Unknown | And shimmering clouds in canyons of steel. |
| 00:15:15.47 | Ian Sobieski | Shimmering clouds in canyons of Yes. Bye. you |
| 00:15:24.97 | Unknown | They're making me feel . |
| 00:15:30.97 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:15:31.02 | Unknown | you I'm home. |
| 00:15:39.23 | Unknown | It's autumn in New York. That brings the promise of new love |
| 00:15:44.85 | Sybil Boutillier | the |
| 00:15:45.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:15:52.96 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:15:53.03 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:15:53.99 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:15:54.13 | Unknown | Autumn in New York is often mingled with pain. you |
| 00:16:05.10 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. |
| 00:16:08.30 | Unknown | dreamers with empty hands. Thank you. me save for exotic lands. It's autumn in New York. It's good to live it again. |
| 00:16:27.00 | Unknown | you |
| 00:16:35.49 | Unknown | Autumn in New York The gleaming rooftops at sundown you you |
| 00:16:47.84 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:16:49.81 | Unknown | I'll tell them in the... |
| 00:16:50.42 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. Yeah. you |
| 00:16:53.68 | Unknown | It lifts you up. When you run down |
| 00:16:56.18 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. Thank you. Oh. |
| 00:17:03.67 | Unknown | And daddy's ways and daddy voices. |
| 00:17:05.42 | Ian Sobieski | It is. Oh, my gosh. Thank you. |
| 00:17:09.96 | Unknown | For lunch at the Reds. |
| 00:17:16.66 | Unknown | will tell you that it's divine |
| 00:17:30.53 | Unknown | This autumn in New York Transforms the slums into Mayfair |
| 00:17:40.19 | Ian Sobieski | Oh. Bye. |
| 00:17:40.86 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:17:40.88 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:17:44.94 | Unknown | Ah, to me, New York. |
| 00:17:48.54 | Kay Carlson | You'll need |
| 00:17:48.76 | Unknown | You'll need no castle in Spain. you |
| 00:17:58.80 | Unknown | Lovers that bless the dark. On benches in San Trupal Greek autumn in New York. It's good to live in. Thank you. |
| 00:18:20.59 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:18:20.60 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:18:20.97 | Ian Sobieski | Again. you |
| 00:18:34.24 | Unknown | Next time on Jazz Rhythm, the saga of Artie Shaw continues. I'll be offering a deep exploration of this complex and talented man of many parts and leaders. CLARINET IS. WRIGHT. cultural critic and American icon. and sharing with you the treasures in a new box set of classics and rarities, he's selected as a lasting self-portrait. Hi, I'm Dave Radlauer inviting you to join me for an intimate portrait of Artie Shaw on the next Jazz Rhythm. |
| 00:19:04.44 | Unknown | Jazz Rhythm airs Wednesdays at noon and 7 p.m. here on Radio Sausalito. |
| 00:19:10.75 | Unknown | School days, school days. |
| 00:19:13.62 | Unknown | Here's a public service announcement from the Sausalito Women's Club. |
| 00:19:16.34 | Unknown | Readin', writin', rhythm, and take |
| 00:19:18.90 | Unknown | Each year, the Women's Club Scholarship Recognition Fund awards scholarships to deserving students to help support their education goals. The gifts are for students who are permanent residents of Marin City or Sausalito and who are attending or plan to attend an accredited college, university, vocational, or art school in the coming year. Applications are now online at swcsrf.org. |
| 00:19:41.90 | Ian Sobieski | . |
| 00:19:43.91 | Unknown | Applications are due March 12th for this year's Women's Club Scholarship Awards. Get one for your deserving student at swcsrf.org. |
| 00:19:54.09 | Unknown | Hey, everybody, this is Sean Jones, and you're tuned to Radio Sausalito. |
| 00:20:36.97 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:20:48.97 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. |
| 00:21:45.97 | Ian Sobieski | . . . you you |
| 00:22:18.98 | Ian Sobieski | you . Thank you. you you you |
| 00:23:51.20 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:23:55.40 | Ian Sobieski | . |
| 00:24:37.89 | Ian Sobieski | . |
| 00:24:48.64 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:25:53.86 | Unknown | I'm sorry. Oh. What a Sunday kind of love A love to last past Saturday night The kind of love that I can know at first sight. I want a Sunday kind of love. |
| 00:26:21.54 | Ian Sobieski | you you Thank you. . |
| 00:26:22.40 | Unknown | you |
| 00:26:22.47 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:26:22.55 | Unknown | you |
| 00:26:22.60 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:26:22.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:26:22.77 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:26:23.41 | Unknown | I want a love that's on the square. Can't seem to find somebody who cares I'm on the lonely road that leads me nowhere Why, what a Sunday. kind of love. you I do my Sunday dreaming and all my Sunday scheming every minute, every hour, every day. I'm searching to discover that certain kind of lover Who will show me the way my arms need someone to inform? To keep me warm when Monday gets cold. |
| 00:27:30.96 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:27:32.77 | Unknown | The kind of love that I can have and hold. I want a Sunday kind of love. |
| 00:28:15.21 | Unknown | My arms need someone to inform To keep me warm when Monday gets cold |
| 00:28:28.03 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:28:28.84 | Unknown | you |
| 00:28:28.89 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:28:28.91 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:28:28.93 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:28:29.27 | Unknown | The kind of love that I can have and hold. |
| 00:28:31.34 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:28:36.74 | Unknown | I want a Sunday kind of love. I want a Sunday kind of |
| 00:29:10.14 | Unknown | Hi, this is Julie, and this week from the farm, I'm bringing you Choro Negro and the trio music of Catherine Bent, Adam Barham, and Maria Campos. This is Latin music, Brazilian music mixed with jazz at its very best. You'll learn all about Choro music this week on Dream Farm Radio. |
| 00:29:29.80 | Unknown | Relax with Dream Farm Radio every Wednesday at 4 and 8 p.m. |
| 00:29:37.26 | Unknown | Tell your friends about the radio station that features the best of the old. |
| 00:29:46.76 | Unknown | And. |
| 00:29:47.31 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:29:47.62 | Unknown | The News. |
| 00:29:53.18 | Unknown | This is Radio Sausalito. |
| 00:29:59.56 | Unknown | This is Dina DeRose, and you're tuned to Radio Sausalito. |
| 00:30:25.72 | Ian Sobieski | . Thank you. Thank you. . Bye. . |
| 00:31:24.48 | Ian Sobieski | . . . Thank you. . . |
| 00:33:45.03 | Ian Sobieski | you Thank you. Thank you. . Bye. . Bye. Bye. Bye. . Bye. you Thank you. |
| 00:34:52.58 | Unknown | How I felt. |
| 00:34:53.04 | Heidi Scoble | Bye. |
| 00:34:53.34 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. you |
| 00:34:57.43 | Heidi Scoble | Okay, we're ready to go. So we're gonna let our 64 participants in. |
| 00:35:01.86 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:35:10.15 | Heidi Scoble | and Madam Mayor, |
| 00:35:11.03 | Jill Hoffman | to go. |
| 00:35:11.85 | Heidi Scoble | out. |
| 00:35:13.44 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Heidi. Welcome to the open session of the regular city council meeting February 9th, 2021. We have no announcements from closed session. |
| 00:35:27.46 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:35:28.24 | Jill Hoffman | Um, Could I have... Well, Oh, I'm sorry. I think we need to take roll first and then do approval of the agenda. Is that right, Heidi? |
| 00:35:43.90 | Heidi Scoble | That is correct, Madam Mayor. |
| 00:35:45.47 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, if you could take the role, that would be great. |
| 00:35:48.64 | Heidi Scoble | Councilmember Sobieski. |
| 00:35:53.45 | Heidi Scoble | Oh, Councilmember Sobieski. is |
| 00:35:56.64 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you very much, Heidi. I'm here. Thank you. |
| 00:36:01.03 | Heidi Scoble | Councilmember Blaustein. here. Councilmember Cleveland Knowles. I'm not sure. |
| 00:36:06.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:36:07.15 | Heidi Scoble | Vice Mayor Kelman. |
| 00:36:08.43 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. |
| 00:36:09.40 | Heidi Scoble | Mayor Hoffman. |
| 00:36:10.81 | Jill Hoffman | Here. And may I have a motion for approval of the agenda for this evening. So I moved. Thank you. Heidi, could you please call her? |
| 00:36:22.47 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 00:36:22.51 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:36:23.13 | Heidi Scoble | Councilmember Sobieski. |
| 00:36:27.25 | Ian Sobieski | There we go. Yes. |
| 00:36:30.17 | Heidi Scoble | Councilmember Blaustein. Yes. Council member Cleveland Knowles. Thank you. |
| 00:36:34.34 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:36:35.40 | Heidi Scoble | Vice Mayor Kellman? you |
| 00:36:37.71 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor Hoffman. Yes, thank you. Motion passes unanimously. to approve the agenda for this evening. Um, Under Mayor's announcements, I will note that we had a special city council meeting on Friday February 5th to discuss the matter of the tent encampment in Sausalito and possible courses of action in the council at that meeting. did approve to resolutions. |
| 00:37:10.69 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:37:11.04 | Jill Hoffman | and those resolutions are being carried out by the city staff. Those resolutions can be viewed on the city website. and in the current and we have more updates on that situation to come later in our committee meeting uh reports but i wanted to announce that straight off the bat because i know that it's a matter of interest in our town Okay. Is anybody else hearing an echo? |
| 00:37:41.70 | Ian Sobieski | I got it. |
| 00:37:42.51 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yes. Oh, thank you. Thank you very much. And so we move on now to Um, item. Two on our agenda, communications. And Heidi, would you like to read the... the notice to the public on that? |
| 00:38:05.34 | Heidi Scoble | Yes, at this time, members of the public may address the city council regarding communications items that are not listed on this agenda. Video or audio public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you'd like to make a comment, please raise your hand in the Zoom application and you'll be called upon when it's your time to speak. To raise your hand from the phone, press star nine. Each speaker will be notified when the time has elapsed. And it does look like we have, |
| 00:38:29.22 | Unknown | and it doesn't work. |
| 00:38:31.55 | Heidi Scoble | Pardon me, Madam Mayor. Oh, it looks like we have Go ahead, please. |
| 00:38:36.18 | Unknown | No head. Okay. |
| 00:38:38.54 | Heidi Scoble | We do have, It looks like six public commenters. I'll identify the order. We have Charlene Eldon who will speak first, Judy Wetter, and then Robbie Paulson. So with that, we'll start with Charlene and we're going to unmute you and ask you to start your video. |
| 00:39:02.40 | Charlene Eldon | Yeah. Hi everyone. Um, first and foremost, I want to ask what the city is actually providing I've heard that health and human services are showing up, but nothing has been provided. and that the camp is just being moved rather than rehoused. But like the last city council meeting I'm here because I find it unacceptable that city council is allowing Susan Cleveland Knowles to continue holding office. She along with her husband Jeff Knowles and many others knowingly and willingly segregated Sausalito schools as parents and board members at Willow Creek. Once the Attorney General's order came down, the City of Sausalito under Susan's mayoral leadership filed against the desegregation. And once COVID had clearly been ravaging the BIPOC communities, especially Black communities, I personally called in to City Council to ask for more protections and resources for Marin City. Then Mayor Susan Cleveland Knowles told me that Marin City was not in Sausalito's jurisdiction. Therefore she could not provide anything as City Council. Bill Ziegler, co-founder of the Willow Creek Academy Charter School was quoted in 2016 saying that black kids were inferior and incapable of success. Susan Cleveland Knowles knowingly participated in the segregation and is not adequate leadership for us as a city. And this is not the way to move forward, especially in light of the attack on the capitals on January 6th. I'm calling for her immediate removal and a statement from city council disavowing beliefs in white supremacy, which Susan Cleveland Knowles, as far as I know, with upheld with her direct involvement in the segregation Thank you. |
| 00:41:00.42 | Sherry VanColo | Judy Witter. |
| 00:41:00.51 | Judy Witter | Thank you. Hi, good evening. When I moved to Sausalito in 1995 and began Tureen housing for sale, I remember our broker telling us that Sausalito had very few families. For 26 years I've watched while Sausalito worked hard to attract families, And there are now a lot of families and a lot of kids in both Sausalito and Marin City We know that the use of cannabis in adolescence is the number one predictor of future opioid use. This is nothing new. Like many of us, I have personal experience. In 1967, in a different wealthy suburb with parents who adored us, my 17, my then 13 year old brother began smoking pot. |
| 00:41:34.36 | Unknown | This is not. THE END OF |
| 00:41:50.00 | Judy Witter | an action which completely derailed his future and from which our little family never fully recovered. But that is only one reason, and there are many, that I'm firmly opposed to a recreational cannabis storefront business in our city. I ask the Council to hold public workshops to engage the community and hear all our concerns during a thorough public hearing so that we can weigh all the social, health, and economic ramifications of this serious topic and so that we may all make a truly informed decision. Thank you. |
| 00:42:27.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:42:28.97 | Heidi Scoble | the next speaker please. Yes, we have Robbie Paulson, and then we'll have phone number, and that ends in 0734, and then Ava Crisante. Thank you. |
| 00:42:43.83 | Heidi Scoble | Robbie, you've been unmuted. |
| 00:42:50.33 | Robbie Paulson | Ahoy! from Camp Cormorant here. on the southeastern corner of Bridgeway and Locust Streets. I will read as much as I can of this charter in three minutes. This is the Smallcraft Harbor District. Once we send this in to the Board of Supervisors, they have 10 days. to decide if it's sufficient or insufficient. And if they decide insufficient, they have to come up with reasons for that. We the Mariners of Rainbow Bay are water protectors, threatened with the extinction of our community. All the humans, animals, birds and fish on this blue and green planet, winter of 2021, are on the same boat. Our representation has been taken away along with the mailbox, Sausalito voting rights, and public docs. With this petition to form a Smallcraft Harbor District, we meet our obligation under section 7010, 7011, and 7012 of the California Harbor and Navigation Code to write a charter. Sailors living on their boats are at the intersection of BCDC, Bay Conservation and Development Corporation, RBRA, Richardson's Bay Regional Authority, Coast Guard, Marin Sheriff's, Sausalito, and the other towns surrounding Rainbow Bay. LAFCO, which is the local agency formation committee, is formed in every California county specifically to deal with overlapping jurisdictions. The duplication of contradictions between these agencies is expensive in both money and its cost to self-government our first constitutional right. There are salaries, pensions, environmental studies, lawyers, consultants, and meetings billed to taxpayers. I'm gonna finish there because I'm not gonna be able to read the whole thing in 30 minutes. We have sent it to the city council. And there is an alternative to taking this camp away. We were served with an eviction notice today saying that it was unsafe. In fact, this is a safe way, according to the governor and to federal authorities, keeping homeless people together and not scattering them. Under COVID regulations, it is mandatory to keep the camps together. The eviction notice said health reasons were one of the reasons. And the other one was environmental. This place here has never been used in 20 years except as a toxic dump. We are cleaning the place. We are putting compost piles. We are making paddles. And we are using this to the best way we can. And thank you very much, City Council. Thank you, Melissa Blaustein, especially. |
| 00:45:31.01 | Unknown | We are |
| 00:45:47.64 | Unknown | Amen. Yeah. All right. And then I guess I have one comment. I just would like to thank Melissa Blasstein. for, for, having compassion, having And that Melissa is actually looking at this. that long-term solutions can be made and that this, this whole, Um, these empty platitudes of compassion by the city council. threatening us with police and eviction. in the midst of a pandemic, in the midst of a housing crisis. I'm just so glad that Sausalita has at least one council member who has demonstrated compassion and wisdom. |
| 00:46:38.53 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, next speaker, I think Heidi, you said was Eva? Oh, no, I'm sorry. Pardon me. It's the phone number. Madam Mayor, the phone number appears |
| 00:46:48.64 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, the phone number appears to have dropped. |
| 00:46:50.41 | Peter Romanowski | Yeah. |
| 00:46:50.83 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:46:52.57 | Peter Romanowski | Thank you. Can you hear me now? Hello. This is... |
| 00:46:56.84 | Jill Hoffman | THIS IS A |
| 00:46:58.88 | Peter Romanowski | Okay. |
| 00:46:58.90 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. answer okay could you please reset the timer and i believe this was our caller so yes sir go ahead hang on okay yes sir go ahead |
| 00:47:00.87 | Peter Romanowski | Okay. |
| 00:47:08.48 | Peter Romanowski | Yes, my name is Reverend Peter Christian Romanowski, and I'm the chaplain for the Anchorage. and waterfront. And I've been in or around here since 1967. And, um, I am a missionary to the Mariners. and second generation. My great-grandfather, uncle, came here in 1890 doing the same work I'm doing, reaching mariners and waterfront people. for the Lord. under the auspices of the Lutheran Church. of Finland. and he established the finished Siemens in San Francisco on Church Street in Tenderloin. And that developed into a church called St. Francis Church. near Safeway, which is a historically famous church that my ancestor was a co-founder. I have a long history here. I've been anchored out longer than anybody on the Bay due to a an unwanted divorce, you know, My father-in-law was supervisor of the county and had limitless power to separate me from my wife because I chose to ministry. rather than go into the business. And I just want to share that this is a golden opportunity to show California and the world, how compassionate. THE END OF THE END OF THE we can deal with. for instance, the Tent City. because these tent cities are everywhere. There are refugee camps. They're not just Ted cities. These are refugee camps for the homeless. and about relocating them and making them strike camp Half of them are disabled, if not more, physically disabled. some mentally. it's impossible for them to strike camp. I mean, we're talking about broken, homeless people. We're not talking about a bunch of young young bucks, you know, pitch intense, you know. and And they won't move. I mean, and they're not going to move after the same two hours. And, and, um, Because, you know, they don't believe it. The city's alternative is good striking camp behind the tennis courts at Marine ship. And the alternative is what? The police are going to write tickets. Okay, take a... are not criminals. are not criminal tickets. So nobody's going to be arrested. AND NOBODY CAN BE ARRESTED. And what would you arrest them for? give them a $500 ticket for camping, give one to them every day. I mean, it's still not an arrestable offense. This is a golden opportunity to show the state of California how to deal compassionately with the homeless and Kent cities because What you do here will be used as a template for every homeless camp in the state. Every homeless camp will use this as an example and start breaking down and tearing up. these camps which are made of of influence disabled mental patients that have been dumped a lot of just regular, you know, crippled people that have been dumped. |
| 00:50:08.68 | Heidi Scoble | Your three minute time limit has elapsed. |
| 00:50:09.69 | Peter Romanowski | time. Thank you. God bless you. Bye-bye. |
| 00:50:18.48 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 00:50:21.38 | Heidi Scoble | We have Ava Crisante next. |
| 00:50:23.03 | Ava Crisanti | Next. Thanks so much. Can you hear me? Thank you. |
| 00:50:29.41 | Ava Crisante | Hello. Yes, we can hear you. Go ahead. Thanks so much. I did have an opportunity to visit the encampment last Friday. And I did notice that there were several women who were about the age of our district representative, Susan Moulton Peters. I was really struck by that, that these were older women who didn't have the financial security of our elected representatives, but were doing the best they can. And they were lovely women. They didn't strike me as mentally ill. They didn't strike me as addicted to any drugs. They were simply poor. So I hope we can, think of those women and their plight. I've been rereading Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath Chapter 14 is really beautiful, but the entire book is so relevant. an environmental and a political and, uh, a very human crisis that everyone's going through in that book. I also want to bring up something else. Yesterday I interviewed long-time Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle who allowed me to record him rather than tell you about the interview in detail. I plan to make the entire audio recording available to the public. The interview includes questions that local media has never asked Sheriff Doyle and voters in the county deserve to know his answers. My interview questions covered three topics. The first of which is the demographic data that the county itself provided in response to my PRA request on sheriff arrests. The data shows black individuals in Marin County are arrested at a rate that dwarfs the demographic arrest disparity. in the deep south where black individuals are arrested at a rate that is two to three times their demographic presence in counties and parishes But in Marin County, Black individuals are being arrested at over eight times their demographic presence in the county. To be specific, Data provided by county council covering sheriff arrests from 2015 through 2020 shows that black individuals were arrested at 8.357 times their demographic presence during that period. I note that county council explained that there was a sheriff computer upgrade, quote, sometime in 2014, so they couldn't provide anything before April 2014. But county council did provide data for sheriff arrests referred to prosecution from 1990 through 2020, a 31-year period which shows that the rate for black individuals over that period is 8.88 times their demographic presence in the county. This gross disparity in arrests is hitting Marin City residents particularly hard, which the county was made aware of through a series of lawsuits in the 1990s. These lawsuits are now more relevant than ever because they indicate that the county was on notice about racial harassment by its sheriff's department and failed to take appropriate action. I am asking Board of Supervisors and all of the local city councils to request an investigation by state and or federal investigators of the Marin County Sheriff Department. The two other parts of the interview with Sheriff Doyle covered the fruitless 2019 SWAT team raid on Marin City, which Marin Sheriff deputies participated in, Where Sheriff Doyle really seemed to lose his cool is when I asked about the possibility that Bay Area law will have participated in the November 2020 200 plus Trump car caravan that invaded Marin City and prompted a complaint by the county to the California Secretary of State. I provide this MP3 file. |
| 00:53:33.62 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 00:53:33.64 | Ian Sobieski | Good morning. |
| 00:53:34.21 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:53:34.35 | Ian Sobieski | Good timing. |
| 00:53:34.80 | Unknown | from the |
| 00:53:35.04 | Ava Crisanti | That's it. |
| 00:53:47.78 | Ava Crisante | Thank you. |
| 00:53:47.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:53:47.86 | Ava Crisante | Thank you. |
| 00:53:47.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:53:48.00 | Ava Crisante | Thank you. |
| 00:53:48.22 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:53:48.83 | Ava Crisante | Um, |
| 00:53:50.07 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, next up. |
| 00:53:50.90 | Heidi Scoble | Bye. I'm sorry. |
| 00:53:51.09 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:53:51.24 | Heidi Scoble | Bye. |
| 00:53:51.49 | Jill Hoffman | Huh. |
| 00:53:52.03 | Heidi Scoble | Pavelko is next. Thank you. |
| 00:54:00.13 | Unknown | I am. Thank you. Oh, thank you. I just moved to Sausalito last year and this is my first city council meeting. I wanted to provide a personal story that I think provides a different perspective than what has been shared so far. about the cannabis issue. feel for all of the families who have dealt with opioid addiction because my brother was addicted to opioids. And, you know, he definitely had mental health. issues, being bipolar runs in my family, especially on the male side of things. But doctors never really could fully figure out prescription medicine that worked for him. And so You know, he has been taking doctor-prescribed opioids, doctor-prescribed SSRIs, and that sort of stuff. But cannabis has really been the only thing that has helped him and have a functioning life. He he wouldn't be alive today. You know, my family, we celebrated that he's still alive and that he is actually less dependent on even doctor prescribed medicine today. And I truly, I'm so thankful that he has cannabis to turn to. for those reasons. I feel very lucky that he's still here. He was in the depths of despair when he was addicted to heroin and other opioids because they were just more available and cheaper than what he could get from a doctor, unfortunately. And learning just how he was able to get a lot of these prescriptions, whether they were doctor prescribed or not, in California, as well as other places. And I think I really want everyone to know that, you know, if you want to talk to someone who's been through this, if you don't know how to talk to your family members, I really encourage you to reach out to me because I've been through it and I want to help. I want to be part of the education and the solution. Where my family lives in Arizona, it's landlocked version of Marin County. There is a lot of money. There is not a lot to do. There is way more to do here for fun. A lot of kids from my high school, even the smart ones, became addicted to really hard drugs. And I don't want to see that happen here. And I think it can be prevented and avoided. And I want to be part of the solution along with anyone who is willing to join me. Thank you so much. |
| 00:56:44.88 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, Heidi, I don't see any other hands up. Are we . |
| 00:56:51.82 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, you are correct. There are no additional hands being raised at this time. |
| 00:56:55.94 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, very good, thank you. I'm going to close. public comment for matters not on the agenda. The next matter that we have is item number three, action minutes of previous meetings. We have action minutes from our January 26th special meeting, our January 26th regular meeting, and our February 2nd special meeting. I make a motion to approve the minutes, Mayor Hoffman. Thank you. Thank you, but first we're going to take public comment. Okay. And so I have a public comment on this item. |
| 00:57:38.33 | Jill Hoffman | I don't see any. |
| 00:57:39.20 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm glad the BSB had a comment too. Thank you. |
| 00:57:43.07 | Jill Hoffman | Are you, yes, do you need to make a comment on the, |
| 00:57:46.85 | Ian Sobieski | Well, I just keep getting muted by our system somehow, not by me, so I'm not sure if that's I should log in with a different computer or not. But Heidi can let me know just so she knows I keep getting needed by this system rather than by Oh, now I'm a co-host, so maybe I'll solve the problem. There's just a typo in the February 2nd minutes. Just wanted to let you know. It still has Mayor Susan Cleveland involved They're awful. |
| 00:58:12.21 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. Um, Okay, and do we have any Do we have any other comments about these meeting minutes? from the council. Okay. Do we have any public comment on these Meeting minutes. |
| 00:58:28.55 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. Madam Mayor, we have a phone number that ends in 0734. I will unmute the speaker. |
| 00:58:38.05 | Lisa Davidson | Thank you. |
| 00:58:42.49 | Peter Romanowski | Oh, is... Is this also about the special meeting that just happened a few days ago? Is that part of this agenda or am i mistaken or if I just, have I missed anything? I mean, is so that, We had a special meeting about the 10th. City, right? |
| 00:59:01.03 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And these meeting minutes do not pertain to that meeting. |
| 00:59:01.82 | Peter Romanowski | Yes. |
| 00:59:06.82 | Jill Hoffman | That subject is not on our agenda this evening. |
| 00:59:10.58 | Peter Romanowski | Oh, okay. Okay. Thank you. Good night. |
| 00:59:13.52 | Jill Hoffman | Exactly. Okay. All right. I don't see any other public comment now. Do we have emotions? to approve the minutes. I make a motion to approve the minutes, Mayor Hoffman. |
| 00:59:22.97 | Melissa Blaustein | Yes. |
| 00:59:25.75 | Jill Hoffman | Very good, thank you. Do I have a second? Second. Okay Heidi, could you please take the role? |
| 00:59:30.85 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 00:59:32.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:59:32.30 | Heidi Scoble | Councilmember Sobieski. |
| 00:59:34.22 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. |
| 00:59:35.79 | Heidi Scoble | Council Member Blasting. Yes. Councilmember Cleveland Knowles. Yes. Vice Mayor Kellman? |
| 00:59:43.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:59:43.59 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 00:59:43.62 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor Hoffman. Yes. So the motion passes unanimous. Moving on to our next item on the agenda is council member committee reports. We have a committee report from the tent encampment, but I'll also ask if anybody else has any reports to report out. So go ahead, whoever wants to go first is fine. |
| 01:00:12.56 | Melissa Blaustein | So in addition to our special meetings that we were all at, I had two meetings and I had a meeting of Transportation of Authority, Marin, executive committee where we talked about an equity plan for transportation in Leroyne County and that will come to the full board later this month. Sausalito Pedestrian Bike and Advisory Council met last night with a really great discussion on three items. |
| 01:00:35.68 | Unknown | that |
| 01:00:42.20 | Melissa Blaustein | they gave feedback on our city manager search, which was very helpful and very interesting. They highlighted familiarity with Sausalito, Morin, county and particularly small town government. experience with infrastructure planning and projects. and communication and ability to collaborate with various groups. And then next we talked about the Ferry Landside Improvement Project. and a lot of very robust suggestions on circulation in that area. that they will have a subcommittee and we'll be continuing to add input on that And then we talked about a possible quick strike grant that the federal government was offering for various transportation improvements. So that's where |
| 01:01:35.55 | Jill Hoffman | on the agenda. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much. Anybody else? Yes? |
| 01:01:39.66 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. Janelle, you want me to give an update on the city manager, staff, |
| 01:01:44.36 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:01:44.38 | Janelle Kellman | So why don't you cover city manager and EDAC? |
| 01:01:46.83 | Ian Sobieski | Okay. I just wanted to let everyone know we have 38 applications. We're city manager. So the city manager hunt is going well. I actually met a member of the community the other day who saw our outreach. and said Are you guys having a hard time finding anybody to apply? Because I see a bunch of advertisements. So you must be struggling. In fact, we have 38 applications, so that's going well. Nine nominations have come from the public so far. and the in addition to reaching out to our community, which again, for everyone on the call, think a real resource is the network. our community, your professional network on LinkedIn or your personal network on Facebook. And if you haven't yet, please consider posting any of the materials that we've provided the community to announce this opportunity or consider who you know who would make a great city manager. and nominate them or approach them to see if they would nominate and apply themselves. And if you don't have those materials, please reach out to... Vice Mayor Kellman or myself. As I said, we had nine nominations from the community so far. And our recruiter is engaging in addition to a good search for traditional candidates, the firm has a targeted approach to LinkedIn. other professional databases for non-traditional candidates. So this will all continue through February 15th, and then we will take the next step. Thank you. |
| 01:03:24.92 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yes, Vice Mayor Kilman. |
| 01:03:27.47 | Janelle Kellman | Yeah, I don't know if Councilmember Sobieski, do you want to cover EDAC as well? |
| 01:03:31.13 | Ian Sobieski | I'll let you take that. |
| 01:03:32.13 | Janelle Kellman | Okay, sure. So on Monday, the Economic Development Advisory Committee met. We had a really great conversation around COVID recovery, have some fantastic ideas around things that we can pursue for our local businesses, measures that we can take as a community. We talked a little bit about the Love Sausalito program, which I think you all know is being run through the chamber. Um, but, uh, Julie Vieira from the chamber is a, uh, a non voting member on EDAC. So we are really focused on trying to find solutions and talking to business owners and figuring out what they need and how we can be of service. And at the same time, I also sat in on behalf of Mayor Hoffman and Council Member Sobieski, whose committee normally is on the MCC MC, the Marine County Council of Mayors and Council Members meeting. specifically related on COVID-19 recovery. And that was pretty interesting because everybody sort of conceded that they all felt very frustrated. So we were able to share that frustration, but then also talk about some proactive measures. So some of the immediate measures are things that are powered by consumers, some of the longer term or county-led economic grants. And then we're going to have a series, I think of blue ribbon panelists to talk to us about some specific topics, economic development, what's gonna happen to restaurants, what the credit market looks like, How do we revitalize historic downtowns and the like? So that was a really great meeting. And then we did actually have a League of California Cities North Bay Division meeting with Senator Mike McGuire as well, where he just let us understand some of his priorities, talked to us about living about housing, about COVID, really informative and just great to be able to touch base with Senator McGuire. |
| 01:05:17.24 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. Council Member Blaustein, do you have a report other than the update from the tent and campment working group? |
| 01:05:26.69 | Melissa Blaustein | No, the sustainability commission meeting is this Thursday and HPC was prior to the last meeting. So the NCCMC groups that I'm a part of have not met recently. So no updates. |
| 01:05:36.11 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. OK, thank you. So I'll just kick off all the work that we've been doing with the tent and cabinet working group. And then, Council Member Blaston, you're welcome to jump in or interrupt me as you see fit. So, as always, our primary effort continues to be a search for appropriate shelter. And for the reasons that we've stated before, given COVID and the closure of many of the shelters, and not just Marin County, but everywhere, the stress on the system is quite high right now. So, but that remains our primary focus. I will note that the notice was posted this morning regarding enforcement. at the tent encampment but that I wanted to note that the notice stated or that no enforcement will happen prior to Tuesday at 9 a.m. on February 16th. So the earliest enforcement activity might be on Tuesday. So I wanted to make sure people understood that. We met with the with the on Friday I met with a group from the Richardson Bay Regional Agency including the harbormaster and the chair of the of RVRA as well as our supervisor and other HHS County Health and Human Services people that were there. We discussed again for alternate shelter for the people in the tent encampment. Another part of that that we're trying to determine and confirm is RVRA's previously stated policy that they would not abate occupied vessels in a way that would render an occupant without shelter during COVID-19 pandemic. So we have been trying to confirm that with RVRA. We have not been able to confirm Our understanding was that this was their policy. also continuing to press for that assurance. We continue to push for collaboration or work toward collaboration with our regional partners here in Southern Marin. to address this issue in a substantive way, particularly other member municipalities of RBRA, which include Belvedere, Tiburon, Mill Valley, as well as the county. We have been working with Senator Mike McGuire on solutions and future funding efforts for affordable housing and solutions for this situation and going forward. Although those particular efforts will not bear fruit for months if not longer. So good news is that today the Board of Supervisors pass a resolution to accept a grant Um, for COVID-related emergency solutions. one grant was in the amount of $600,000 and another grant was about $5 million. And so We've been told by our supervisors, Stephanie approximately 253,000 of that is going to go to outreach services through the downtown streets team, for two additional the downtown street team to step up liaison with Southern Marin including out on the water with RVRA and on the ground in Southern Marin. That's good news. And the advantage of that is that it helps people transition into the assessment for homeless services through the county funded by the state. There's also a further grant of about $762,000 for Project Home Key to start that up again. Um, which is an emergency shelter that provides hotel room for homeless people. But we'll see if any of that can be directed toward our people here in Sausalito. We are certainly pressing for that, so we'll see and how successful were at. we are with that effort. Anyway, I'm sorry I've gone on, but I wanted to make sure that we got out all of our substantial efforts that we're making. Council Member Blaustein, feel free to |
| 01:10:10.85 | Melissa Blaustein | Oh, I wanted to add that first... Sorry, city iPad. Per one of the recommendations in public comment, I did also reach out to the Buckle of Foundation and I wanted to make sure that folks know that that also operates through county services. So we are pursuing every possible avenue through county services and going through their channels and we're continuing and committed to finding housing for these people and it's been a top priority and we've had several |
| 01:10:21.67 | Unknown | sure that's. |
| 01:10:35.22 | Melissa Blaustein | hours of meetings on this topic and if you have questions or comments you can reach out to me or to um mayor hoffman and i also forgot to report out on the cannabis committee because council members sobieski and i did have a chance to meet and discuss that this weekend so |
| 01:10:41.33 | Unknown | And, |
| 01:10:49.06 | Melissa Blaustein | I just wanted to let folks know because there has been quite a bit of public comment on this issue in particular that Councilmember Sobieski and I had our first meeting on this and we appreciate everyone's recommendations for continued public engagement and conversation and we intend to convene a series of town hall style discussions around cannabis in a variety of formats. So please do reach out to myself and Councilmember Sobieski on this issue. I don't know Councilmember Sobieski if you wanted to add something to that point but I just wanted to since we had several public commenters address it. |
| 01:11:01.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:11:18.79 | Ian Sobieski | Only that many, thank you very much, Council Member Glousteen. And yes, we are getting a schedule together how to execute on this and as part of that, We do want to engage the public. So we've been getting a lot of public commentary and we would like to ask anyone, for instance, there were at least one or two speakers on the subject today, If you want to be on the mailing list for this, and you haven't already submitted a letter, then please do provide your contact information to the city, to Heidi or me or Councilman Blostein. so that we can be sure to invite you to do any event that we put on. |
| 01:12:00.23 | Kay Carlson | Thank you. |
| 01:12:00.37 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 01:12:03.90 | Ian Sobieski | So thank you. |
| 01:12:06.24 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. Thanks you guys for all the hard work, everybody. on all of our committees and efforts. And so. Do we have any other committee reports or are we Everybody reported everything they needed. Okay. Then I will at this point open it up for public comment on this item on the agenda. Go ahead, Heidi. I see a couple of hands up. |
| 01:12:28.99 | Heidi Scoble | Yes, we'll start off with the phone number that ends with 0734, and then we'll have Charlene Eldon. So we'll unmute. 0734. |
| 01:12:39.69 | Peter Romanowski | Hello, back again, Reverend Romanowski. Anyways, a suggestion is because we have all these empty hotel rooms in South Guido and the city has been shut down virtually all winter. Um, I would suggest the city council appropriate money to put these people in these empty hotel I personally have had to put somebody in twice. Out of my budget, I'm on a fixed income, so it's surety. And if I can do it, you know, all the millionaires that are living on a hill. that have two or three houses and houses in Hawaii, Airbnb, empty houses and all this stuff. That would be a suggestion. Also, the San Francisco Foundation, they have an emergency grant program, which I've tried to tap into on my cell phone. But because the libraries closed, which was our main access for computers, for the anchor outs and the waterfront people. It's been difficult to fill out the grant forms online. and as CEO of a 501c3 non-profit religious organization, Um, I'm not sure what I can write, we qualify for a grant for the anchor routes who are displaced and the homeless people. I just need help. I just need somebody to help me. fill out the forms. I know there's good people out there. And my number is 415- 374-0734- And I can be found easy. You know, I'm the chaplain on the waterfront. I'm everywhere. I'm usually on Sunday every morning. We have service in the front of City Hall. um, and a nonviolent protest gathering and service. every Sunday, you know, all afternoon, even into the night, you know. when the weather is good. And the San Francisco Foundation was founded to give the money to the poor, religious organizations, and educations. And we have seen none of this. We have seen none of it on the waterfront. In nearly four decades, I have not seen one dollar of a San Francisco Foundation bug fund money, whatever you call it. And the politicians and lawyers have taken the money out of the county, which was specifically Let it set aside for the county core and have spread it all over creation. one of the things that it's caused is homeless camp. It is the doing of politicians. I call it Camp Havel. camp, uh, Joe Hoffman I'm not sure if you're Goldberg Uh, I mean, these are the ones that created this camp. And forever, their names will be associated with this camp. And politicians will be recalled. There's going to be a recall. in Sausalito. Political reputation will be soiled for life. you'll be tainted. If you don't do the right thing, and you'll never be able to go to a higher off. You know, I've done this before. I filed recall papers on a district attorney. and it ruined her political career, even though she beat us. you know, and let it ruin it. And we're not actually ruin it. |
| 01:15:42.14 | Ian Sobieski | And we're not actually ruling it. |
| 01:15:44.77 | Peter Romanowski | Okay, thank you. God bless. Bye-bye. |
| 01:15:52.01 | Heidi Scoble | You have Charlene Eldon. |
| 01:15:52.06 | Charlene Eldon | You have Charlene Eldon. |
| 01:15:57.38 | Charlene Eldon | I want to speak personally on this homeless issue. I'm disabled and I would be homeless or in section eight or state housing if it weren't. or the help of my family, which is to say the help of my white privilege and generational wealth. I recognize that and my anti-racism work recognizes that. I also have chronic pain as part of my disability and I do use cannabis to treat it. So I wanted to echo what another caller said. Because I know that a lot of people with symptoms like mine can indeed be saved from the overprescription of opioids That is now... killing Southern Marin children, according to local mothers. I take these issues of race, homelessness, criminalization of poverty and drug use and homelessness very personally. That's why I show up to these meetings. That's why I do community work. That's why I write pieces on white supremacy. I sheltered with my Jewish aunt at the beginning of COVID and during our Zoom Seder, which was my first Seder as a non-practicing Jewish person of Ashkenazi descent, whose family escaped the programs to come here, We spoke about our collective mission to look at those who are suffering. and say not only that that could be me, Wouldn't that be awful? But that that is me. These people who are suffering here are me. I could be homeless. I could be a drug addict. I could be any of these marginalized things that have been criminalized and punished here. White supremacy, the belief that I have accused Susan Cleveland Knowles and the other Willow Creek Academy and Sausalito leaders of in my article that was sent to all of you. over a month ago. has been proven dangerous to all of us. BIPOC, Black, Jewish, poor. Recently, our County DA refused to prosecute for a case involving a young white man who drew a swastika. Yet the black children in Sheriff Doyle's department in Sheriff Doyle's, excuse me. his jurisdiction. are tried as adults and seen as inherently criminal. One of my interns was recently out with a group of her students and had four sheriff cars pull up on her because they were making an art project outdoors. |
| 01:18:41.52 | Charlene Eldon | So not only could all of these issues be me, but this is me. I take it personally and I speak as a proxy with white privilege. Thank God. because otherwise I would be in the same exact position. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:18:58.46 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 01:18:58.48 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. We have Ally B. |
| 01:19:07.05 | Heidi Scoble | Allie, you've been unmuted. |
| 01:19:14.68 | Ally B | Hello, can you all hear me? Yes. Oh, wonderful. OK, thank you. And thank you for this chance to speak. |
| 01:19:17.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:19:17.11 | Sherry VanColo | Oh my. |
| 01:19:21.13 | Ally B | I know a number of you on the board, so I appreciate all of the work that you're doing every meeting. But I wanted to share I've been a Sausalito resident for over 10 years. My two kids have gone to school here since preschool and kindergarten. I work at a software company in Sausalito. Um, And I wanted to discuss or just share my own personal concerns regarding the opening a cannabis storefront here in Sausalito. I know this is gonna be more on the agenda later, I just wanted to throw in my two cents. Um, and acknowledge that I personally have enjoyed my fair share of cannabis. delivered right here to my front door in Sausalito. But I just wanted to quickly refer back to some claims that were made at an earlier meeting that opioids are worse than cannabis, And there are bigger fish to fry, so cannabis is a low risk. So in terms of these three points, the first one, it's easy to contest there are several peer reviewed publications stating that cannabis use in adolescence is the number one predictor for future opioid use. So that I think we have to just acknowledge. Um, Also, while claiming there are bigger fish to fry, Well, perhaps there are also big fish to fry, but let's not kill off our younger fish along the way. Um, And lastly, cannabis is not always low risk for adolescents or adults, in particular today when it's so much stronger and legal. And I, myself personally, I've lost my own ability to keep a healthy balance with weeds. I've actually been going to Marijuana Anonymous for the last couple of years. So, you know, I can attest firsthand, it's not always low risk. But even more concerning is that in all of the meetings I've been going to, a number of new members joining particularly recently, our high school kids. And just within the last year, four of these kids have shared during meetings, publicly within meetings that they join MA through rehab And they ended up in rehab because they were sent there after having psychotic episodes from smoking weed. So again, I think this is something that we really have to take into account as seriously regardless of any financial benefits. So given you know what what I am seeing happening right now to some kids smoking weed I do not trust the cannabis industry to act as a public health expert. I will trust you. doctors, educators, recovery professionals, And I just ask that the board please rely only on this I'm not sure. you know, level of cohort. to inform any decision about a cannabis storefront. So thank you again, I greatly appreciate the chance Speak. |
| 01:22:08.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:22:08.86 | Ally B | Thank you. |
| 01:22:15.24 | Heidi Scoble | We have two additional speakers. We have Sherry Riley Colo and then Eva Crisante. So we'll start with Sherry. |
| 01:22:27.07 | Heidi Scoble | Sherry, you've been unmuted. |
| 01:22:39.80 | Heidi Scoble | We will move on to Ava Crisanti and we'll check in back with Sherry. MS. |
| 01:22:50.93 | Heidi Scoble | AVA, YOU'VE BEEN UNMUTED. |
| 01:22:53.43 | Ava Crisanti | Thanks so much. Can you hear me? |
| 01:22:56.08 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 01:22:56.10 | Ava Crisanti | Hello? |
| 01:22:56.11 | Heidi Scoble | below. |
| 01:22:56.50 | Ava Crisante | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:22:57.21 | Ava Crisanti | Terrific. |
| 01:22:58.04 | Ava Crisante | Thank you very much. Yeah, with regard to opening storefront cannabis, a cannabis storefront in Sausalito, I have to say as someone who doesn't smoke and doesn't drink and just isn't interested in that sort of thing. It does seem to me that there is a racial equity issue. And if you are seriously going to consider a cannabis storefront. on the the focus should really be on a Black-owned business. I say this because the primary victims of the war on drugs, or as it's sometimes called, the war on black people. the primary victims were from the black community and the mass incarceration which is described in Michelle Alexander's The New Jim Crow, Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. Incidentally, she's from Rang County. That's a landmark book. 250 weeks on the New York Times bestseller published in 2010. But that was absolutely devastating for the black community. And of course, The enforcement of drug laws rarely touched people white people in this county. So there's a real disparity in how the drug laws were enforced and it's important if you're going to do a cannabis storefront, that it has a very specific racial equity focus and it must be black owned. It's not that hard to do. It's not that hard to find that. um, And I would look I would look locally in Northern California. Um, I know you can do this, but it's, it really is odd how there's all this talk about equity, but when it comes down to nuts and bolts, there's almost an allergy to recognizing what actually can be done. Thank you. I say this too because I was, uh, I was writing down Bridgeway recently and I noticed that one of my favorite cartoonists, Phil Frank, you have a statue to him now. which is really lovely. I grew up reading Phil Frank's comics in the Chronicle, but it seemed like so amazing to me that you put up a statue of a cartoonist who came here in the 60s or 70s. There's still no statue to my knowledge. Perhaps I'm wrong. There's still no statue. commemorating the black marine ship workers, male and female. And My great aunts had the honor of working with black partnership workers during World War II. They spoke so highly of their black colleagues. They were so amazed by their ingenuity and how they took skills from the South and managed to increase efficiency in the shipyards. Where's their statue? Just, I beg you. I beg you to think about all these things. Thank you. |
| 01:26:01.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Do we have any more speakers, Heidi? |
| 01:26:05.11 | Heidi Scoble | I believe we have Sherry, so let's try to get Sherry back. |
| 01:26:09.45 | Sherry VanColo | Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear me. |
| 01:26:12.19 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:26:12.20 | Heidi Scoble | Yeah. |
| 01:26:12.54 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 01:26:13.31 | Sherry VanColo | Okay. Sherry VanColo. I've been a Sausalito resident since 2009. I left in 2012 but returned in 2016. And then finally in October 2019, And I was on board John Stary's 85 foot 1914 Commission Suzanne Bowie tender. And it sunk in this last storm, but prior to that, he kicked me off the boat when I had to be psychiatrically hospitalized for 40 days, including shock treatments. I'm disabled, bipolar, 64, been working in this country since 15 and voting every election. And I did not vote for Trump. And I'm so thrilled we have a new administration that I'm in contact with. I have founded America in Riley Cares. a GoFundMe page of $100 million so I can end homelessness criminalization, marginalization of the poor all over this country. We deserve human basic needs and comfort. We deserve homes. an opportunity for substance abuse treatment and health care affordable. Fuck the prescription companies. and the hospitals. My bill in 2016 for Marin General Hospital when I was patatonic for seven weeks was $559,000. And my brain surgery at the University of Florida by the world's renowned Australian neuropharmic surgeon was $225,000. Now, there's something wrong with that. But right now I'm faced with living in a tent. And your police force brought by the eviction notice again, and I told him to shove it up his ass. And I'm a very respectful woman. I'm Christian. I serve God only and no one else tells me what to do. I've been on my own since I was 17. Divorced since 93 and single. My daughter won't even have anything to do with me because of the way this country views homelessness and mental illness and substance abuse. I'm a recovering meth addict, and I am this close away from being a junkie on meth 24-7. If you keep insisting, I must break camp every morning at sunrise and store shit when I have no car, no wagon, arthritis in my whole body, Come on now, an asthma. I don't want COVID. I've been tested five times. My daughter had it as a nurse in Missouri and almost died at 29. I'm immunocompromised and you know this. And I want to purchase the Montessori School in Sausalito and start a holistic healing center for everyone. Free for the homeless. Your three minutes has elapsed. |
| 01:29:22.16 | Heidi Scoble | Your three minutes has elapsed. |
| 01:29:24.90 | Sherry VanColo | All right. Thank you. |
| 01:29:26.42 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Help us. Thank you. Okay. I don't see any other hands for public comment for The item on our agenda, which was committee council member reports. Heidi, do you see any other Speaker? |
| 01:29:43.83 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, there are no additional hands that are raised at this moment. |
| 01:29:48.15 | Jill Hoffman | Very well. I will close public comment and we will move on to the next item on our agenda, which is the consent calendar. I will note that this item is the consent calendar. The items on the consent calendar is for items that are routine and non-controversial. At this time, I would ask whether any council members would like to pull, remove, or discuss one of the consent calendar items. Yes, Councilmember Susan Cleveland-Knowles has her hand up. |
| 01:30:16.67 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, I actually had a question. We removed an item from consent on January 12th, which was the RDS contract for $50,000 and it contained a number. of really important economic development items and revenue generating issues such as renewing our telecommunications software. agreements and I didn't see that back tonight. And I was hoping that the finance committee had had a chance to look at that and was wondering where that stands. Thank you. Hope to see that back on our agenda. very expeditious way. I understand we had said that that did not have an impact on staff's work, but I understand that may be may be impacting our ability to do some important projects. |
| 01:31:10.77 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. I, with regard to that item, I believe it was on our agenda for us to discuss it at finance, but we were not able to have our finance committee meeting this week. So we're our next finance committee meeting, I believe is on Monday. This... What day is it? Next week. |
| 01:31:31.26 | Ava Crisanti | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:31:32.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. On the 18th. Uh, My understanding is it will be on our agenda, the finance committee agenda meeting on the 18th. It is Can the city manager... weigh in on that or |
| 01:31:48.57 | Chris Zapata | Yes, you're absolutely correct. The finance committee did have it on a prior agenda. They have canceled that meeting due to a lot of activities in town and within City Hall for this week. The next meeting is on Thursday, the 18th of February. This item will be on the Finance Committee agenda. not simply consideration of the RGS contract, the Finance Committee is asked to look at contracting on the part of the city to understand the number of contracts, the department focus for each of them and how the dollars are being spent. And so as a part of that, the RGS contract was included in that request. |
| 01:32:32.01 | Melissa Blaustein | Well, I think it's great the Finance Committee is looking into that, but I would not want to hold up this contract given the staff report and all of the items that were on there that Mr. Mora is working on on the head. So I hope we can, you know, if you want to look at contracts in general, great, but I would love to move that one forward. |
| 01:32:44.81 | Unknown | it. |
| 01:32:50.10 | Melissa Blaustein | as soon as we can. |
| 01:32:51.52 | Jill Hoffman | I'm just... Okay. I understood any other, anybody have any, Any issues though with the consent items that are on the calendar tonight? No, I don't. I don't know. I'm not seeing any hands or indications of a response from any council members. I have a quick, just a quick one. |
| 01:33:08.42 | Melissa Blaustein | Bye. Just can I ask, since it's been a while that we've had a presentation of a COVID update and there's a change in tears from coming soon from the county potentially around vaccinations that at the next council meeting we perhaps have a public presentation of at least where we stand on the. vaccination efforts because I've been hearing from a lot of community members that they're not sure about how that process will go. So I would just ask that next time, perhaps that it can stay on consent now, but that next time would just be a short presentation from staff if time will last. |
| 01:33:37.01 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, we will discuss that at the next agenda setting and figure out how to do that in an expeditious and efficient manner. But I understand that that's a concern and something we would want to provide. Okay, but going back to the current, I don't see any opposition to or questions, any further questions about the current from the council members on the current consent item. Okay, very good. I'm going to open it up for public comment. on the consent calendar. |
| 01:34:08.75 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, we have Charlene Eldon who has raised her hand and I will unmute her now. Okay, thank you very much. |
| 01:34:20.70 | Charlene Eldon | I just wanted to let everyone know that if the wheels are turning a little bit too slowly with bureaucracy here, funding is going to be available for direct mutual aid through the people organizing for police free schools in Marin. Sherry, your story was heartbreaking and similar to my worst nightmare and what I could easily go through in this country. as a disabled person, as we know, civil rights are just not guaranteed here. So I'd like to know if there's a way that city council can help with a fundraising effort for a nonprofit, like what the police free schools people are doing. And best of luck to you, Sherry. I'm hoping that the evictions don't go through because clearly that would be extremely inhumane. Thank you. |
| 01:35:18.92 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. I don't see any other hand, so I'll close public comment. on consent calendar items, Um, Could I have a motion to approve the consent calendar? I'm out. Do you have a second? I'll say it. THANK YOU. |
| 01:35:38.97 | Heidi Scoble | please take the role. |
| 01:35:39.23 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:35:41.48 | Heidi Scoble | Council member Sobieski? |
| 01:35:43.05 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. |
| 01:35:43.07 | Heidi Scoble | Yes. Council member Blastie. Yes. Council member Cleveland knows. Yes. Vice mayor Kelman. Yes. and Mayor Hoffman. |
| 01:35:55.76 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, and so the motion passes unanimously. And now we move on to our next item on the agenda. I have six public hearings. first matter that we have. Excuse me, is item 6A. certification of the revised final environmental impact report including the recirculated revised draft EIR response to comments, mitigation monitoring and reporting program, |
| 01:36:17.63 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:36:22.77 | Jill Hoffman | and adoption of the final draft general plan update And that presentation is going to be given by our Community Development Director, Lily Whalen. |
| 01:36:41.94 | Jill Hoffman | I see Lily, but Lily needs to be unmuted please. |
| 01:36:44.90 | Lily Whalen | There we go. Thank you so much Heidi. Good evening, Mayor and Councilmembers. I'm going to, I'm working on a couple of different computers tonight, so I'm going to share my screen and hopefully |
| 01:36:58.58 | Lily Whalen | This works. |
| 01:37:07.17 | Lily Whalen | Okay, I think we're there. Okay, everyone can see my screen? I think so. Perfect. Great. Hey, so good evening again, Mayor, council members. I am I'm very excited to be here tonight after participating in over almost four years of hard work on developing a brand new General plan for Sausalito. I'd first like to thank all council members on their hard work and dedication on pushing staff, the consultants and working with the Sausalito community to develop this plan. which will be with us for the next few decades here. I'd also like to say a special thanks to the thousands of community volunteer hours that were put into the creation of this general plan. from formal advisory meetings to informal pop-up workshops. |
| 01:38:03.74 | Lily Whalen | So tonight we'll be giving first a brief overview of the general plan process, the final general plan Overview and key planning Commission concerns and then the final environmental impact report overview and some key issues. and findings, and then we'll conclude with staff recommendations. And there's a variety of presenters tonight and I'll run the PowerPoint presentation for the whole I don't hear. |
| 01:38:34.15 | Lily Whalen | Sorry. I think I am on a different slide. So, I think you can see that now. So this shows the agenda. I think we're all on the same page here. Next slide is here at the objective of the meeting. and that is to receive the presentations, to ask clarifying questions, receive public comment, and then finally to deliberate and take action on the general plan and the environmental impact report. |
| 01:39:08.30 | Lily Whalen | So for the public's benefit, these next few slides cover high level policy and regulation documents for the city and their creation. And the broad purpose of the general plan is to provide policies that will guide decisions on future development and resource conservation that's consistent with the vision of the community and in a sustainable manner. A general plan is a legal requirement in the state of California. And it provides about a 20 year timeframe of a vision for future conservation and development. It provides the basis for local land use decisions, identifies important community issues, and sets the ground rules for future development. Thank you. While the general plan is the policy framework that guides development in a community and provides a broad policy vision, There are additional tools that the city can utilize to implement the general plan of vision, objectives and policies, and these include the zoning ordinance and specific plans. The zoning ordinance implements the policy vision and provides regulations for each zoning district in the city and determines what's permissible to build on a given parcel of land. It's hike bulk location on the parcel design and use. Specific plans are a hybrid between zoning and general plans in that they combine both policy guidance and the detailed development regulations typically found in the zoning code. For example, and we provided this in the staff report, general plan program EQ 4.2.4, requires an ordinance amendment regarding impervious services. And this is a program that will require a public process to consider amending the zoning ordinance to modify the impervious surface definition with the intent to ensure that curvious surfaces are encouraged. The definition of impervious service as it's currently defined in the zoning ordinance does not change with adoption of the new general plan with this policy. the work to study and take such a change through the public process will be required to implement this program. And policy. |
| 01:41:18.20 | Lily Whalen | This slide shows the seven required general plan elements per state law. And that's land use, open space, conservation, housing, circulation, noise, and safety. And the general plan may be adopted in any form deemed appropriate by the city, including the combining of elements. This slide here shows where we've landed on the current final draft general plan elements. And you can see that The final draft has nine proposed elements. made up of. housing, land use and growth management, circulation and parking. Environmental quality, which covers air quality, conservation, and open space. health, safety, and community resilience, which covers noise and safety. sustainability, climate change, mitigation and resiliency, which is an optional element waterfront and marineship, which is again, an optional element. health, safety and community resilience, which covers noise and Safety, which I already mentioned. And then community design and historic and cultural preservation, which is an optional element. We also have an economic element, which is also optional. |
| 01:42:33.47 | Lily Whalen | This slide summarizes some of the key events that occurred since the general plan update began in 2017. In April of 2020, the public review draft, which the planning commission and general plan working group reviewed and commented on was published. the final draft general plan and a recirculated Revised Draft EIR was released in October of last year. the Planning Commission and the City Council reviewed and commented on those documents in November of 2020. And then in January of this year, the final EIR was published. |
| 01:43:16.50 | Lily Whalen | The staff report in this slide show and provide some details on the exhaustive and diverse public outreach to the community from the very formal City Council meetings to over 40 meetings of the general plan advisory. committee, community focused workshops, walking tours, pop-up workshops and electronic commenting options, particularly when we got into COVID. With that, I'm going to introduce Tom Ford and Jeff Bradley of the M Group, and they will be giving this portion of the presentation, which is going to be focusing on the general plan itself. |
| 01:43:58.15 | Tom Ford | Thank you, Lily. This is Tom Ford. Thank you, Mayor and members of the city council. It's been fun. Been meeting you for almost a year now on Zoom. And we're happy to be here tonight to bring this to you. Zilli pointed out, The general plan has nine elements, the most forward looking sort of 30,000 feet statement, if you will. are in the introduction, and that's the vision statement. and the 11 community goals. Those were provided in the staff report. All right. printed out in detail. The vision statement generated, I think it first appeared in the April 6 public review draft and then it was worked on in concert with the general plan working group, so it received a lot of attention there. The community goals go back even further actually probably 2018, where they emerged out of the GPAC process. They then were reviewed by council there was some editing done at that level. And then they were provided at any subsequent workshops, such as the September 2019 Marineship workshop. As Lili noted, this general plan that we have here has nine elements. A few of them are optional. I'm going to talk about a couple of those. And then it also has a housing element that wasn't part of this process. And I want to talk about that first. Particularly with the new RHNA numbers that are getting a lot of attention and publicity these days. There's been some confusion about how housing and residential development is handled in this general plan. This general plan process started in about 2017, I think as Lily just said, And that was about two years after your current housing element was adopted housing elements last, as you can see, for about eight years each cycle. We're about to go into the sixth cycle. And so by January 2020, 23. I think that's a good question. you should have in place your next housing element. So what this current general plan before you tonight looks at is housing that's needed for the Reno cycle. that the housing element in 2015 recognized. So as you start to go through your next process, any type of land use or land intensity change that you contemplate in order to find places for your VENA numbers, your targets. You'll need to do an associated CEQA review of that process. Right now the general plan doesn't make any land use changes, nor does it make any development intensity changes. next As I said, you have a few different optional elements, Lily pointed out the economic element and community design elements. But you also have two additional elements. At the joint working session in January 14, 2020, I believe it was the city council basically authorized the general plan working group to make a decision about any optional elements that might also be included. So at our first general plan working group meeting, we decided that there would be a waterfront element and there would be a sustainability element. as we kept going through the process, each of those elements Their name evolved, so we now know it as the waterfront and marine ship element. It allows us to really make your general plan even more about you than it would be. It allows you to have a piece of the general plan that's really just dealing with the entire waterfront. from the Marine ship and the other side. all the way down to the southern edge and how that waterfront changes. Different kinds of policies and programs can be developed to discuss that. |
| 01:47:55.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:48:03.74 | Tom Ford | Next. The sustainability element, which as you can see is now called sustainability, climate change mitigation and resiliency elements. It's been a pretty fascinating story how it evolved. It received some early attention with the general plan working group and then if you'll The sustainability commission requested that they be allowed to work on it with us and really restructure a lot of the material that was there, but they felt could be presented in a different way to make it more pertinent. So we did that. And that was a great process that we went through with two or three of their members, and we got to the version that you see in front of you today. And it really draws on a lot of the work that the community has done, both at the various different committees, but particularly the work that generated the climate action plan and the LEAP plan, the low emissions action plan. So all of those are referenced and reinforced and, um, called out in the policies and programs of this element. Next. |
| 01:49:22.36 | Tom Ford | Sea level rise is an issue that shows up in many different elements of the AS AN ISSUE IN MANY DIFFERENT ELEMENTS OF YOUR GENERAL PLAN Um, And so there's a lot of cross referencing between programs and policies to support that. in the sustainability element itself underneath I'm not sure. Objective 3, there's actually a whole series of There's two policies in a whole series of programs for how to implement detailed programs to help assess the problem on an ongoing basis. dovetail and coincide with county efforts, including the BayWave plan and the BayWave model. and also programs for moving forward in various ways, whether it be land use, economic development, for such. So here are those four objectives from the sustainability and resiliency, regarding sustainability and resiliency, but in the sustainability element, Um, So the two policies that I mentioned on the previous slide come under objective three. And objective four is pretty interesting also because it has policies and programs that that talk about how the different elements should, policies and programs in the different elements should interact. and how they can be handled together. how they might be updated through different processes, for instance. when you update your climate action plan. if the LEAP program, if the LEAP plan is revisited, how that might be affected. So this is the overall guiding structure of the sustainability element. |
| 01:51:19.22 | Tom Ford | So that's sort of a summary of what you have before you as a general plan. But as you know, the final draft general plan was published on October 20th. And going back to the the two meetings before that, the one planning commission meeting and the one council meeting right in advance of of publishing that plan. conversation started about two specific uh, items. a program both in the land use element a program regarding zoning overlays that would allow residential development. if they were to be considered and approved. and another one about the existing Marinship office uses. So most recently these were discussed on January 20th at the Planning Commission meeting. So I'm going to give you just a brief summary of where we stand with program LU 119.2, the zoning overlay issue. And then my colleague, Jeff Bradley is going to talk about how the conversation around LU 2.15 has progressed. |
| 01:52:33.95 | Tom Ford | So program LU 1.19.2 is new to this plan. It was not in the 1995 plan or was it even amended or adopted It's a new program, it's a new policy, with two programs, so you can see the policy there before you. affordable housing and senior housing. So that's what this policy is about, trying to enable you either at your next housing element or over the next 20 years to have policy guidance for finding affordable housing and senior housing sites in the community. Program 1.19.2 specifically talks about zoning overlays. During the working group process, this program was rewritten in a way to really tie it to when it is considered for use that that that implementation would be tied to the housing element process or um, any kind of way to react to proactively with recent housing legislation at the state level. next. And I could point out that Sausalito already has a series of overlays. You have one. The Marinche is an overlay. you have an senior housing overlay and you have some historic overlays as well. |
| 01:53:55.44 | Tom Ford | So, At September 30th, the planning commission recommended that this actually be removed from the general plan, that program be removed. The council directed on October 13th that it be retained. And so it was. in the, um, October 20th final. final draft general plan. It continued to receive discussion in subsequent planning commission and city council meetings, but most recently a couple of weeks ago at the Planning Commission meeting The Planning Commission decided they would reverse their previous decision to remove the entire program and bring it back with the stipulation that it included language that excluded land-based areas of the marine ship from ever being even considered for the feasibility of a residential overlay zone. So that's where it stands right now. That's being recommended to you by the Planning Commission. Next. |
| 01:55:01.89 | Tom Ford | So, and that's my first bullet point there. But my second bullet point, I just want to talk to you, I want to remind you what the overlay the potential of, The language is written pretty loose. It's not implementing it right now. It wasn't part of the general plan, but it gives you the option to do it later. And so some of the things that it does is it provides that policy basis at a later date, you can decide in any part of the city whether it might be an appropriateness of a residential overlay zone This particular program is tied to housing element process. And, zoning overlays would also be considered under this program. in relation to recent or new housing laws. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to my colleague Jeff. who's going to talk about Land Use Policy 2.15. |
| 01:56:05.88 | Jeff Bradley | Thanks, Tom. This is Jeff Riley with M group. Thank you. Members of the mayor, members of the council. Pleasure to be here. This policy, LU land use 2.15 is a carryover from the 1995 general plan. And it's gone through, as you can see here in this summary table, quite a few revisions and different recommendations from the planning commission and the council through this process but the basic question this policy seeks to answer is existing office uses that exist in the Marine ship going back to April 5th, 1988 and before and existing up to the current time. Are those uses considered legal non-conforming uses? Are they considered permitted uses? Are they considered legal conforming uses? And so we've taken a deep dive on this and I have several slides to walk you through this. So we could see the next slide. We may come back to this slide later. So, |
| 01:57:23.79 | Jeff Bradley | So the planning commission at their November 4th meeting recommended That the policy be revised to make the existing office uses non conforming rather than the conforming as described in the existing 1995 general plan. You can see the small edit there at the bottom in bold, underlined text. And the next slide shows at the November 17th meeting, the city council discussed this issue at some length and directed that the policy language revert to the 1995 general plan language to make existing offices in in dedicated office buildings be classified as legal conforming uses. Other uses not in office buildings would be classified as legal nonconforming uses. |
| 01:58:17.56 | Jeff Bradley | And on January 20th, we went back to the Planning Commission for their recommendation as part of this adoption process. And they looked at what the what the Council had had directed and basically to kind of sharpen their. arguments and sharpen their concerns around this issue and recommended that. the language be changed from legal conforming to permitted. |
| 01:58:48.13 | Jeff Bradley | In essence, the planning commission was seeking to achieve consistency with the mask, the, excuse me, the friendship specific plan and seeing the word permitted to have a different meaning than conforming. |
| 01:59:03.15 | Jeff Bradley | And so staff and consultants and city clerk went back and due to this extensive discussion at the planning commission meeting. Lily, could you go to slide 27? Oh, yeah, you're on it. Sorry. You're good. Um, we needed to really do more research on, on the history of this 1995 policy. Uh, the, the basic questions of, uh, what was the intent of the council back in 1987, 1988, uh, around the term permitted juices as used in the, in the marineship Pacific specific plan and what the, and what the city council intent was with this terminology. There was a quite a bit of spirited, uh, discussion around these terms. Review of the meeting minutes from 1987 and 1988 demonstrate clearly that the city council at that time Consider the existing office buildings and existing office uses in existence prior to adoption of the specific plan as permitted and legal conforming land uses. These terms were used interchangeably in the minutes at the public meetings by the council and the planning director to describe the policy. And this is consistent with how we see the use of the permitted uses language in the specific plan. And we also see the use of the term legal conforming uses in the 1995 general plan. Next slide. |
| 02:00:37.70 | Jeff Bradley | As a result of all this research and review of the public records, staff and consultants are offering a revised policy if the council is interested going in this direction. this policy continues the classification of office buildings as legal conforming permitted use is However, it also establishes a path for a separate study. to take a more detailed look. at the status of pre 1988 office uses not in office buildings and would allow the city to consider this category of uses separately and determining the preferred policy in terms of conforming first noncomponent classification. |
| 02:01:20.11 | Jeff Bradley | a program that goes along with this policy pulled over from the 1995 general plan with the recommended addition of a field inventory to provide a more detailed information on the actual land uses currently in the Marineship to assist in decision making. |
| 02:01:39.14 | Jeff Bradley | And with that, we hand it over to Elisa, the first card. |
| 02:02:08.78 | Unknown | Good evening. |
| 02:02:09.97 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . Bye. |
| 02:02:36.60 | Melissa Blaustein | Heidi, I can't hear the presenter if she's speaking. |
| 02:02:40.35 | Lisa Davidson | Okay, can you hear me now? |
| 02:02:41.41 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. |
| 02:02:41.43 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 02:02:41.45 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:02:43.15 | Jill Hoffman | There's, we can hear you, but there's a significant echo. |
| 02:02:52.25 | Jill Hoffman | We cannot hear you now at all. |
| 02:02:59.79 | Jill Hoffman | Ms. Davidson, we can't. We can't hear you at all. |
| 02:03:04.68 | Melissa Blaustein | So Mayor Hoffman, this is Councilmember Cleveland, knows it sounds like she has her phone and her computer audio on at the same time. |
| 02:03:12.73 | Lisa Davidson | Yeah, I'll just try and use my computer. it just cuts out sometimes, Hopefully that'll work out okay. Okay, thank you. |
| 02:03:21.57 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:03:21.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:03:22.87 | Lisa Davidson | So good evening. Everybody can hear me now. |
| 02:03:26.38 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. |
| 02:03:27.63 | Lisa Davidson | Yes. |
| 02:03:27.67 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:03:28.80 | Lisa Davidson | Okay. So I wanted to go over the final environmental impact report for the city of Sausalito general plan. |
| 02:03:41.08 | Lisa Davidson | I first wanted to talk about the environmental review timelines So we began with the notice of preparation. It was published on October 17th. of 2019 it was available for review and comment until December 9. 2019. And we had a scoping meeting on November 4th 2019. A recirculated revised draft EIR was released on October 28 2020 The close of the comment period was December 11 2020. The final EIR was published on January 8th 2021 And it included public comments on the revised draft EIR and then the city's responses to those comments. And then a revised final EIR was published January 28th. 2021 and that revised final EIR incorporates a comment letter from Cox Castle Nicholson dated December 11. . And now we're in the final stage where we're having a public hearing to certify the revised final EIR and approved for the Sassolita general plan. |
| 02:05:09.96 | Lisa Davidson | We received a number of comment letters on the revised draft EIR. We received two letters from state agencies one from California Department of Fish and Wildlife one from Caltrans, We received five comment letters from organizations, |
| 02:05:26.05 | Ally B | . |
| 02:05:27.34 | Lisa Davidson | Eight letters from individuals. And then we also received oral comments at the November 4 planning commission meeting and the November 17 city council meeting. |
| 02:05:42.23 | Lisa Davidson | So I wanted to go into a little bit about the responses to comments on the revised draft EIR. and we prepared a number of master responses for the comment letters received and those are to address similar comments made by organizations and individuals So our first master response was on program EIR. We, stated that the program level analysis is appropriate for a general plan. and that the general plan is self-mitigating. |
| 02:06:23.77 | Lisa Davidson | and that future development proposals will be reviewed for environmental compliance. We also prepared a master response on sea level rise, inundation and subsidence. And within that response, |
| 02:06:39.11 | Ava Crisanti | Thank you. |
| 02:06:39.13 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:06:39.22 | Ava Crisanti | Thank you. |
| 02:06:39.25 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:06:39.32 | Ava Crisanti | then, |
| 02:06:39.53 | Ian Sobieski | I'm not. |
| 02:06:40.94 | Lisa Davidson | we discussed that CEQA does not require an analysis of the environment's impacts on the project. We also discussed that the project specific effects of sea level rise are speculative. |
| 02:07:00.83 | Lisa Davidson | And that is the exact scope and details of sea level rise the cumulative effects of sea level rise and then also the secondary The effects of sea level rise on the city are uncertain speculative and they're difficult to predict based on the available scientific data. |
| 02:07:24.52 | Lisa Davidson | However, for informational purposes, the general plan and the revised draft EIR do disclose as much as possible about the effects of sea level |
| 02:07:38.40 | Lisa Davidson | that mass response also states that project specific development will be subject to the general plan policies regarding sea level rise. |
| 02:07:56.25 | Lisa Davidson | We also prepared a master response that addressed the comments submitted prior to publication of the revised draft EIR. And then within the responses to comments document, there were revisions to mitigation measures for biological resources. There were some revisions to address typographical errors. And the revisions are minor modifications and they do not change the significance of any of the environmental issue conclusions within the revised draft EIR. |
| 02:08:31.77 | Unknown | THE FEDERAL. |
| 02:08:36.48 | Lisa Davidson | The contents of the revised final EIR are listed here. that, the whole package, the whole revised final EIR before you for your decision-making purposes includes the revised draft EIR, the revised draft EIR appendices, the responses to comments on the revised draft EIR and the errata. And then, also the mitigation monitoring and reporting program. |
| 02:09:11.77 | Lisa Davidson | I wanted to now highlight the conclusions of the revised final EIR. |
| 02:09:14.47 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:09:14.68 | Ava Crisante | Thank you. |
| 02:09:14.72 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 02:09:14.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:09:19.83 | Lisa Davidson | The general plan has been developed to be largely self-mitigating. The policies and programs in the general plan update are designed to protect the environment and the environmental resources. |
| 02:09:32.50 | Lisa Davidson | mitigation is included in certain instances to reinforce and enhance the protections identified in those policies and programs. |
| 02:09:37.41 | Unknown | THE FAMILY IS NOT |
| 02:09:44.40 | Lisa Davidson | There were no significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the EIR. impacts that were reduced to less than significant with mitigation include air quality, |
| 02:09:57.77 | Unknown | I'm going to go. |
| 02:09:57.83 | Unknown | I'm going to be, |
| 02:09:58.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:09:58.56 | Lisa Davidson | biological resources, noise and transportation. And all other environmental topical sections were found to either have no impact or a less than significant impact. |
| 02:10:26.42 | Lisa Davidson | and I'll turn it back to Lily here. |
| 02:10:28.70 | Lily Whalen | Thanks, Lisa. Wrapping it up. Here. and with the staff recommendation. As you can see in your staff report and on the slide here, we're recommending that you take public comments regarding the Final draft general plan and revised final environmental impact report. And then you take two actions this evening. We're recommending you first. adopt the draft resolution, which is in Your packet as attachment 3A, which certifies the revised final environmental impact report including the recirculated revised draft EIR response to comments, the Nation Monitoring and Reporting Program, And then you also take a separate action to adopt that draft resolution in attachment 3B. which adopts the final draft general plan. And that concludes... our collective presentation this evening for you, and we are available for questions that you may have. |
| 02:11:32.76 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Um, Thanks, Lily. Thanks very much. Thanks very much, not just to you, but to everybody on the team that gave this really thorough presentation today and all the tremendous amount of work. that you guys did over the past three years, including the general plan update committee, the general plan working group, countless hours by members of the community and members of our current and past city council. whether or not I needed to thank everybody that worked on this, but I mean, it was like 50 people, right? Or a hundred people. We may post that at some point, thanks to people on our website. But anyway, this is a blanket thank you right now. Does anybody have at this point for mainly for the members of public? So I'll just explain how we're going to. We will ask questions of the staff if we have follow-up questions from the presentation we just had. And then we're gonna have a public comment on the presentation and public comment on this matter. and then we'll bring it uh then we'll close comment and we'll come back to the council for our discussion and possible action so that's how we're going to um, go today. And I have I do have a question but does anybody else have a question they want to kick us off? Yes, Councilmember Blaston has your hand up. |
| 02:12:54.56 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:12:54.60 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:12:54.65 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:12:54.68 | Jill Hoffman | I have. |
| 02:12:54.70 | Melissa Blaustein | I have a variety of questions. So I don't know if you want to let me do one and then pass it off to someone else. Just Lily, can you speak to for the public and also members of the council who don't know how often we can can or are legally able to revise the general plan in the event that we might need to after the certification? |
| 02:12:56.81 | Jill Hoffman | So. |
| 02:13:13.70 | Lily Whalen | Yeah, sure. Thank you, Councilmember Blaustein. So the state of California allows cities to make amendments to their general plans four times a year. |
| 02:13:23.27 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, thanks for that. And then could you speak to, and I know I had asked you about this earlier, but specifically also for the public, in terms of the issue around legal conforming use or permitted use for the purposes of enforcement of the marineship specific plan or the new general plan, in terms of conforming versus permitted, which language would be more acceptable to make it easier for your department to enforce the uses as we had decided? |
| 02:13:38.85 | Unknown | of |
| 02:13:48.18 | Lily Whalen | Sure. So from a planning perspective, it makes the most sense to have the conforming language in the general plan and the permitted language in the zoning ordinance. There's a list of permitted uses in the zoning ordinance. So that's that's that's the makes the most sense from our perspective in the planning world. if the council chooses to use those terms interchangeably. They mean the same thing. So we would they would mean the same thing if either one of them is used. |
| 02:14:18.77 | Melissa Blaustein | And just for clarification, could you speak to, if we were to adopt an overlay, what the process is in terms of before an overlay even becomes considered for the council? Because I'm assuming based on the presentation that we don't necessarily get an overlay just because the language is considered in the general plan. |
| 02:14:35.12 | Lily Whalen | That's, that is correct. And so the process to establish an overlay would be a public process to establish the parameters of the overlay, what the overlay does. um and what the the benefit would be to the property owner and what the benefit would be to the city um namely |
| 02:14:51.05 | Unknown | them. |
| 02:14:52.49 | Lily Whalen | If we're talking about affordable housing, there would be an affordability component, I'm assuming, built into the overlay. There'd be a public process to establish that and then a zoning ordinance amendment to. actually make that a part of the zoning ordinance and then projects as they come in. could apply to apply that overlay on their property if it meets the standards that have been set by the overlay through that public process in the zoning ordinance. |
| 02:15:23.32 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:15:23.52 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:15:23.54 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. The last question that I would have is Is it typical, what's the consistency with the zoning late ordinance as we approach the housing element? |
| 02:15:33.41 | Lily Whalen | Can you repeat that question, Councilmember Blasdy? |
| 02:15:35.27 | Melissa Blaustein | Just what would be the consistency of the zoning overlay in terms of our processes on the housing element? Is that standard? to have some sort of option for an overlay or |
| 02:15:45.26 | Lily Whalen | So my preference was COB, Jean Gatza, I think, with the upcoming rena that we will have which we'll get into in the next agenda item here we have about over 700 units that will be. identifying or planning for in the arena cycle. and having every tool available to look at would be helpful from a planning perspective. including an overlay tool. |
| 02:16:11.04 | Melissa Blaustein | Thanks, that's all my questions. |
| 02:16:11.07 | Lily Whalen | That's all my |
| 02:16:13.47 | Jill Hoffman | No, that's okay. That's fine. and So any follow-up questions based on council member? I mean, I have questions, but I'll open it up to everybody else. I just have one or two. Go ahead, Council Member Cleveland-Nulls. |
| 02:16:27.58 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, I mainly have one question and it came up in correspondence from Adam Kravatsky who been attending a lot of our meetings and Thank you. He asked about kind of a area for sea level rise and responsible asset management and did not think that that was something that we had |
| 02:16:47.10 | Unknown | management. |
| 02:16:51.68 | Melissa Blaustein | adequately captured in our current general plan. But I did know in reviewing the general plan and then Mr. Ford highlighted it in his presentation that we do have policies 3.1 and 3.2 on our sustainability element that talk about a sea level rise adaptation plan and kind of planning for jobs and other issues that seem like it would take into account some of those economic elements or could take into account. the economic elements that he was discussing. And we have that also in our implementation program as a priority to for the next zero to two years. So I was just wondering, Lily, or anyone else. the concerns raised by Mr. Kravatsky could be folded into those follow-up planning programs. |
| 02:17:47.28 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 02:17:47.30 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:17:47.31 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 02:17:47.89 | Melissa Blaustein | on some of the funding I guess. |
| 02:17:48.34 | Lily Whalen | Thank you. |
| 02:17:50.23 | Melissa Blaustein | limitations. |
| 02:17:52.75 | Lily Whalen | So unless Tom or Jeff want to jump in and address that, I would need to take another look at Mr. Cavrazi's letter. And if you could let us look at that and get back to you, unless Jeff has a response to that right now. |
| 02:18:09.39 | Jeff Bradley | Thanks, Lily, Jeff, again. Yeah, I looked at Mr. Kvatsky's letter and I saw what he identified as something that could possibly come out of the policy you referenced 3.1 in the sustainability element about first doing a sea level rise assessment and then doing a sea level rise adaptation plan. And that adaptation plan could identify areas more specifically that could benefit from focused planning efforts around how to address issues of compatibility of structures and life safety within areas that are maybe experiencing increased levels of seawater. So I saw that kind of as an implementation tool that could be used in the future. |
| 02:19:02.81 | Melissa Blaustein | Great, thank you. |
| 02:19:07.03 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. I'll ask any other assuming other questions, but go ahead. Anybody else want to? Yes, Vice Mayor Kailman. |
| 02:19:14.84 | Janelle Kellman | Sure, thank you. Jeff and Tom, good to see you guys. And Lily, thank you so much. Just two clarifications. One is because I'm getting old and I just can't remember. What did the prior council end up deciding regarding the restrictions from the Marin ship specific plan. Did those get incorporated or was there a commitment to incorporate the restrictions? as contained in the marine ship specific plan or was it some looser language kind of on a case by case basis? Do you guys recall? |
| 02:19:52.88 | Jeff Bradley | I'd like to double check. Thank you. But I do believe we capture that in the land use element. |
| 02:20:02.51 | Janelle Kellman | Because I think the critical part of this process obviously is that When we looked at the 95 plan, the MSP coexisted, but part of this project or, opportunity was to fold the MSP into the general plan. So I just couldn't remember what we did. |
| 02:20:19.32 | Melissa Blaustein | My memory was that we generally gave that direction, but that there was some language that said as applicable. So for example, there was some very specific that nobody thought should be carried over so that there was some flexibility in the to make modifications as legally or time, the passage of time would have. would make more prudence. |
| 02:20:45.31 | Janelle Kellman | Yeah, I think that council member Cleveland, that is sort of what I remember that it was, a partial incorporation, but I couldn't find where it was. Well, I'll ask my second question, Lily, if you want, while you're guys are checking it out. Okay. So the other thing I just wanted to clarify, so I sat in on the Planning Commission meeting where they spent about three hours going through this very same topic. And I just have to commend you all. I mean, they did an incredible job teasing out the issues going back and forth with staff. I mean, it was it was really quite phenomenal. I hope everyone had a chance to to listen to it. And one of the topics that came up was permitted versus conforming uses. And I think I just heard you say they are the same. But that is not what I heard in a three hour planning commission meeting. And it's also not my understanding you know, as a, former land use attorney that that is actually the case. My understanding is that the zoning rules for a particular area can change over time as an area evolves. And then when this occurs, properties are permitted to continue the activity but that continued use is referred to as non-conforming. And so I just want to clarify, cause I think you met, stated to the Councilman Blaustein that they were the same. |
| 02:22:03.16 | Lily Whalen | Yeah, thank you, Vice Mayor, for allowing me to make that distinction there. So what I was saying or trying to say, and maybe I made a mistake. What I was trying to say was that permitted and conforming would mean the same thing. Non-conforming is different. Okay, so farming that is means that it's it's it does not conform. to the city's existing uses that are allowed. |
| 02:22:31.54 | Janelle Kellman | Okay. Thank you yeah because I took something different away from the very long planning Commission session, so I just wanted to confirm what staff's perspective on that was today, thank you. |
| 02:22:44.62 | Jill Hoffman | So I have, um, I have a question. As I understand it, this issue of the overlays, right? um, that If we don't, let's, I mean I'm gonna scope it out and then I'll bring it in, but even if we didn't have any overlay at all. that wouldn't preclude the housing element process or the Housing Element Update Committee. to address the same issue. In other words, we are looking at a specific piece of property and we're thinking that we want to rezone this so that we can include it in our housing element update and open it up for development for affordable units or just units in general. Is that correct? With or without the overlay, the housing element update process committee can still look at that and through that process we can still act on Um, rezoning those pieces of property with or without an overlay. |
| 02:23:56.74 | Lily Whalen | Thank you, Madam Mayor. I think I understand the question. I think I understand the question is, if there was no program policy in the general plan, Um, directing the city to examine the feasibility of overlay zones. Through the housing element update process, could the city Um, rezone properties for housing. |
| 02:24:22.20 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:24:22.22 | Lily Whalen | Is that kind of the general question? Yes. |
| 02:24:24.77 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. |
| 02:24:25.38 | Lily Whalen | Yeah, and the answer is yes, you could go through an amendment process to various elements of your general plan. to make them consistent with what you're doing with your housing element. |
| 02:24:41.36 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. And then more specifically- I'm sorry. the recommendation that's perhaps before tonight from the Planning Commission is to remove that portion of the proposed overlay that affects the Marin Chef That's also true of the branch. the housing element update process can still look at the And in fact, be even more specific about what parcels we may want to consider rezoning for residential use. |
| 02:25:17.13 | Lily Whalen | Is also correct, Madam Mayor if if this policy remains in the general plan as recommended by the planning Commission, there would need to be then. Also a subsequent amendment to the land use element of the general plan. to modify that policy because the city would be going in a different policy direction. |
| 02:25:37.94 | Jill Hoffman | But they would still, those options are still on the table. I mean, those options are still available with or without the overlay. tonight. |
| 02:25:46.61 | Lily Whalen | That is correct. If the council decides to move forward with an overlay with the planning commission's recommended language. policy direction that your staff would be getting is that we would be looking at overlays in areas excluding the land-based housing in the Marinship, unless the council reversed that direction. |
| 02:26:07.07 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, which we have the authority to do four times a year, right? Through an amendment. |
| 02:26:11.98 | Lily Whalen | Thank you. |
| 02:26:12.03 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF THE END OF THE END OF END OF Thank you. Yeah, okay. Um. With regard to this whole This whole thing about legal conforming, legal non-conforming, permitted, not permitted, you know, the semantics, the double negatives. So it's kind of, you know, Um, overwhelming sometimes but as we can see from all the discussions that we've had at the city council planning commission meetings Um, so. But to drill back to you know, the original, um, the original time this came up was in the Marin ship specific plan. And they just, in that plan, they just used the term permitted, correct? It's... And then, That's great. Okay, and then this whole conforming, non-conforming came up in later in the general plan, I don't have whatever year that was. Oh, here it is. The 1995 general plan, right? |
| 02:27:11.65 | Sybil Boutillier | Okay. |
| 02:27:12.59 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and so then, and so what we've been Do I have it right? What we've been trying to do lately is sort of, figure out what these words meant and when they meant it and then how to move forward. That seems to me in a nutshell maybe is where we're at. Okay. And And so the characterization of just the word permitted for these office buildings that were office buildings at the time of the when the Marinship Plan was passed, that's still an accurate characterization of what these buildings are, right? They're permitted. |
| 02:27:54.51 | Jeff Bradley | All right. |
| 02:27:55.69 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Okay, I'm just trying to see where we can remove ambiguities and areas for confusion going forward. If we're consistent, then that might be helpful. for the next group that comes in and tries to figure this out. Okay. I think those are all my questions right now. Anybody else have any further council member Sobieski? Oddly quiet, is there? |
| 02:28:21.31 | Ian Sobieski | Oddly, no. It's OK. I don't have any more questions right now. I spoke with Lily at some point. So, |
| 02:28:27.38 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, thank you. Any other questions before I open it up for public comment? |
| 02:28:31.35 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, just a quick follow up to your question about the overlay and the planning commission's recommendation. I just wanted to confirm with staff or with the city attorney that currently Water based housing is sadly not permitted by BCDC. um, despite our efforts. Is that correct? Yes. Thank you. |
| 02:28:57.37 | Melissa Blaustein | And I have a question for the city attorney on that comment, just on the overlay as well. |
| 02:29:00.07 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:29:02.99 | Melissa Blaustein | If we don't adopt it, we can still include it in our housing element, but we would have to go back through the process of amending the general plan. So essentially we'd be changing the decision we made tonight to go back in and allow it later on. |
| 02:29:11.68 | Mary Wagner | We'll be right back. AND, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO You have the opportunity to amend the general plan in the future if you need to, so that it's consistent with the housing element. Yes. I mean, the housing element is part of the general plan, obviously, right? inconsistencies between or programs that you're putting into the housing element with another element of the general plan, such as the land use element, then you would also need to amend that section to make them consistent. Thank you. |
| 02:29:38.12 | Melissa Blaustein | So, |
| 02:29:38.66 | Mary Wagner | if we have a |
| 02:29:38.97 | Melissa Blaustein | don't adopt an overlay it's unlikely that the housing element is consistent with the general plan if we were to pursue all the options on the table. Is that correct? |
| 02:29:46.83 | Mary Wagner | Not necessarily. So if you adopt the language that the planning commission recommended, for that would exclude land-based housing in the Marinship from the overlay. And then in the future, as part of the housing element, decided to include that as some portion of land-based housing, we would also recommend that you amend the land use language to make them consistent. It's not inconsistent for you to take out this policy and then add language to the housing element that would consider an overlay. And I see Tom popped back up, so he might have something to add to that. |
| 02:30:24.59 | Tom Ford | Yeah. Thank you. Mayor, I just wanted to say one thing. I don't want to complicate this more, but if you're talking about the Marineship and Lily or Mary, you can correct me if I'm wrong, If you want to make a land use change there, it's not as simple as a general plan amendment, I think you also have to go to a voter initiative to rescind that graphic initiative to keep on a change. |
| 02:30:46.45 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, not to overly complicate it. That would depend. on what the direction was and |
| 02:30:49.45 | Tom Ford | on what. |
| 02:30:53.06 | Mary Wagner | impacts on many things like the FAR |
| 02:30:53.08 | Tom Ford | Okay. |
| 02:30:56.73 | Tom Ford | Sure. |
| 02:30:57.65 | Mary Wagner | So Mary, to run the overlay, |
| 02:30:58.78 | Janelle Kellman | question to the ground. Yeah, to tie that with a ribbon. You don't need an overlay in order to contemplate housing in our city. And if you don't include certain portions of our community in the overlay, you can still contemplate housing for all portions of our city. The overlay is simply one of many tools that is utilized to signal to future policymakers that there was an intention but it needed I see Jeff nodding, I see Tom nodding. |
| 02:31:32.20 | Mary Wagner | I'm waiting for you to finish before I nod. Yeah. You are correct. If you do not include the overlay tonight in the land use you're not foreclosing the opportunity for that discussion or inclusion in the housing element. If you By including it tonight, you are signaling that you're considering housing in all zoning districts, particularly given the fact that you have a potentially very large RENA number, as I think your community development director indicated in her presentation. So, If the council were to choose to take that out tonight, |
| 02:32:12.48 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:32:12.73 | Mary Wagner | It would be helpful to staff if you tell us that does not foreclose this discussion as part of the housing element as we understand we'll have to look at many opportunities for housing throughout the city. |
| 02:32:24.69 | Janelle Kellman | Thank you. It's interesting, one thing that We're only looking at it from what does it preclude, Um, not to relive the October 13th, 2020 city council meeting, but, um, Goldfarb-Littman did a really nice housing presentation that kind of indicated that with some of the major housing bills coming down the pipeline from the state, three in particular, that if you signal too hard in your general plan, you may lose local discretion down the line. So it seems like there's some prudent nature to retaining local control. I don't know if you want to comment on that. |
| 02:33:02.83 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, I think if you go back to the very general nature of the language that's included, regarding the overlay. I don't believe we'd be tripping over any of those issues. You know, it basically says as part of the housing element, you will consider the opportunity for potentially exploring an overlay |
| 02:33:23.93 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions at this point from the Council to the presenters? Okay, I see no indication from the council that they have questions, so then I will... Um, move on to public comment on this item. And so I understand there might be a lot of public comment on this and If I could have people signal by raising their hand if at some point you would like to speak on this that will help me evaluate whether or not we might need to reduce our public comment time in order to Thank you. Finish. by tomorrow morning. Um... Okay, so right now, |
| 02:34:08.97 | Melissa Blaustein | I think it's not fair. Just from my experience last year with this exercise, there were always more hands that arrived and most people did not actually indicate their intent at the beginning. |
| 02:34:09.44 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:34:23.31 | Melissa Blaustein | for your Consideration. |
| 02:34:25.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you for that. That was my fear and that's what happened on Friday when I was trying to manage our time for that special meeting. I think at this point I'm going to go ahead and reduce our public comment time to two minutes. And we'll go with that, with the, you know, with the understanding that anybody can submit public comments in written form. And so let's go ahead. So we're going to set the clock at two minutes, Madam Clerk. And I'll just let you call out who, where we're at and who's going to speak. |
| 02:35:05.75 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you, Madam Mayor. We have our two minute comment timer set. I'll call on The phone number that ends in 0734, I believe it's Mr. Romanowski, and then Michael Rex, and then Peter Van Meter. So I've unmuted Mr. Romanowski. Thank you. |
| 02:35:27.70 | Peter Romanowski | Oh, hello. Hello again, and this is my prayer and my quick two minutes. I first came to the town in 1964. My in-laws owned the industrial center building, the ICB office, the 3030 office building. built the biggest condo complex here and the whole block in the front of City Hall. That was just a small portion of their real estate holdings. And this is a family I married into, so I'm very familiar with this area. But the thing that I've seen deteriorate is the waterfront. It's been systematically destroyed. And by people moving into Verne County, It's also newbies coming up. They have no concept. of a working waterfront. CK fish dock has been driven out I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE There should be no office development on the waterfront. And there should be only, only low income housing fishermen, you know, and waterfront essential work And it's not on a marine ship I'm not sure. . than at Martin Luther King's school. low-income housing here. I mean, it's obvious. One of my parishioners from Kent City went to school. in the building that you're in when it was a school. And she's living in a tent. and with a dislocated elbow, you know, And people are living on $350 a week, a month, Social Security. while the average income here is what, you know, a poverty level is 45,000. For a family of two poverty levels, the average income is $100,000. of. The people getting all the poverty money are people making $30,000, $40,000 a year. People like me that live on 12,000 a year and those who live on welfare, we don't even exist. We are treated like we don't, but we do exist. and we will march up to your house. |
| 02:37:30.32 | Heidi Scoble | Your two-minute time has elapsed. |
| 02:37:30.33 | Peter Romanowski | you We are ready. Okay, thank you. |
| 02:37:43.21 | Heidi Scoble | Michael Rex has been unmuted. |
| 02:37:54.77 | Michael Rex | I don't have a video. Oh, here we go. Hi. I'm Mike Warax, local architect. I'm speaking on two topics. First, on behalf of Clipper Yacht Harbor. on the environmental quality element for open space, page 225. We ask that you remove. the Clipper Peninsula from consideration to require the property owner to and they can dedicate their property as open space or that the city pursue a purchase of it. Clipper has no interest in such dedication, nor do they have ever any intention of selling it to the city. So of the six parcels that are being considered, Number five, Clipper Yacht Harbor, we ask be removed. Um, tonight. Thank you. And then I'd like to speak on the policy L.U. . five. changing the status of office uses. What's in the draft currently should be removed. That's a significant land use change that you said you would not do. And, I We are not just talking about buildings. The intent of the marine ship plan is clear in your staff report that We're talking about uses. So to continue to allow office buildings to exist But a question. can of that are not in buildings originally intended to be that we have used for offices. is a fundamental change that harms those businesses and devalues that property. And staff suggestion that you kick the can down the road and consider this at a later date. is a waste of time. recommendation but add the word recognize all office buildings and office uses that were in place when the marineship plan was created. then you're done tonight. Please make that change. Thank you. |
| 02:40:14.51 | Peter Van Meter | Good evening. Can you hear me? Hello? Yes. |
| 02:40:21.58 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, we can hear you. |
| 02:40:21.63 | Peter Van Meter | Yes, we can. I want to thank everybody, first of all, for this process. I gave you my general observations two weeks ago, so you'd have time to be thinking about them. But tonight I'm going to specifically talk about the hot topics we've discussed so far. Namely. All right. LU 2.15. Absolutely do not remove the land side and the friendship from consideration. That's consideration only. leave in the potential to discover the overlays. And you have big arena, there's no other land in Sausalito. You don't wanna cram housing into existing residential neighborhoods, basically ruin our residential neighborhoods with monster buildings next door. You want it in the Marin ship if you're going to have to have it at all. Secondly, regarding the office use, The staff report and research made it clear that the intent from the beginning, as we see in a specific plan in the prior plan, is to have both office buildings and office uses, the permitted uses, as they existed in 1988. And so it's very simple to change the statement to recognize that all office use and office buildings established for 488. the state. continuing as permitted and forming uses. as far as that study to go in and dig out You know, what might exist as other office use, that's a witch hunt. You're gonna be arbitrarily making decisions about what is office use and not office use in various industrial buildings. I mean, somebody sitting at computers doing financial planning or sitting at computers doing product design. What's the difference? They look like offices. They're sitting at workstations. It's going to be in the eye of the beholder. So do not get into that kind of mess where you're going to get tenants wanting to feel threatened. feel like they're going to be evicted or they're going to have to move out. Thank you. |
| 02:42:18.07 | Heidi Scoble | Our next speaker, our commenter will be Raymond Hsu, and then we have Vicki Nichols. |
| 02:42:30.95 | Heidi Scoble | Raymond, you've been unmuted. |
| 02:42:39.25 | Raymond Hsu | Thank you. Mayor Hoffman and City Council members, I really appreciate you giving me the time to speak. Like the prior speakers, I am here to talk about policy LU 2.15. I really wanted to reiterate what the other two members about the office buildings and really need to add and change the wording to all office buildings and office uses. and the CFO of SWA Group. We've been here in Sausalito using Sausalito as our headquarters for the past 50 years. I'd hate to. see the that we are no longer able to use this space and use our history here at Sausalito as a landscape architecture firm. Again, I implore you to really make that change to, the wording of LU 2.15 so that it's all office buildings and office uses. Thank you very much. |
| 02:43:49.04 | Vicki Nichols | Good evening, Mayor Hoffman and council members. Um, Having gone through this process as a planning commissioner for the last number of years, I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE I'm kind of glad tonight the ball is in your court. I'd like to make a couple of brief comments. First of all, I heard something tonight that was very disturbing to me. And I feel like it's a part of an integrity process that we have been telling the community throughout this process. and that was that the whole MarinShip specific plan would be the word was always used, migrated to this new general plan in. CODAL, until it was adopted. I heard tonight that there may have been adjustments as appropriate. I have no idea what that means. And now I'm curious to see what parts were deemed appropriate and may have been removed. very disturbing since we really reassured our along this whole process, that it was going to be moved intact. The housing overlay districts or housing overlays. I agree and have had championed that they did not need to be included here. They can be included with the housing element. And I agree, we have no idea but we're seeing a trend that as the new housing laws come down the pike, we are going to be losing are. last semblance of local control. So let's wait as we get closer to the process, see what we are really going to get in RHNA numbers. We know they're outrageously high. I expect our community and the county to be rigorously defending ourselves against these number in the process. So I think we can get some reductions. Let's talk about it then. We have the process to make these changes then And, uh, The water-based housing, that is a challenge. BCDC is not permitting that now. But BCDC is becoming more realistic about housing and other... |
| 02:45:53.77 | Heidi Scoble | Your other time has elapsed. |
| 02:46:02.32 | Heidi Scoble | We have Christina Feller. |
| 02:46:08.94 | Unknown | Good evening, Mayor Hoffman and members of the City Council. |
| 02:46:09.04 | Unknown | Good evening. |
| 02:46:12.83 | Unknown | I just wanted to make a quick comment. on one item that was presented by the M group really slightly mischaracterized the planning commission. in our meeting with CORE. and specifically at no time has it dispersed our decision on the overlay and housing friendship. I just wanted to make that connection with the record. we had a 5-0 against housing in the red ship. in November and again last month. at the Senate Commission. So if you could say something, whether that's Thank you. |
| 02:46:58.58 | Heidi Scoble | Our next speaker is Alice Merrill. Alice, you have been unmuted. |
| 02:47:04.69 | Alice Merrill | Thank you very much. Can I give my time to Vicki Nichols so she could finish what she had to say? She was saying basically what I would say, only more articulately. Can I give it to her? My two minutes. |
| 02:47:22.93 | Jill Hoffman | I'm sorry, Ms. Merrill, but we have to be fair to everybody. And I'm sorry, but because of the number of speakers tonight, we limited public comment to two minutes. But she's welcome to. |
| 02:47:34.51 | Alice Merrill | Well, I'll just say what she was saying about, she's just saying it a lot better. But anyway, we need to keep We need to keep the housing The whole housing discussion out of the Marin ship right now in this particular thing so that when we come up in 2023. with all these requirements that we're going to have from California, we have to be able to look at a big picture And Vicki always said that it all is in the design and you could put a lot of houses in a small space if you do it nicely. And you do it with a nice design. But also We just need to not be not be getting crazy as I always say about housing in the Marin ship and I am not being a NIMBY person. I would be happy to have somebody live next door to me, but, um, the marineship is special and unique. And we'll be gone. once we get a lot of housing in there. unless we have the RHNA things that we can look the whole picture. Thank you. |
| 02:48:48.93 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, we have Sandra Bushmaker, who's just raised her hand. Sandra, you have been unmuted. Thank you. |
| 02:48:56.22 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. Good evening, council. I do wish to repeat things that I've said over the last four years at all the various meetings I sent you a correspondence tonight. I remain concerned about two things in the Marineship. One is the city has the golden goose who is producing income for the city with the current uses presently and we should be able to grow those current uses. And additional office space and housing is not compatible with the three uses in the Marineship specific plan, light industry, arts, and maritime. And lastly, I want to say that we are not getting a grip on the toxicity issue in the Marin ship and we do not have a grip and I'm shocked to hear the conclusions of the EIR report tonight that there's insignificant impact with sea level rise, AND subsidence and liquefaction And we haven't even mentioned the toxicity issue. I would implore that council to incorporate the marine ship uses that are presently in the marineship specific plan. AND, YOU KNOW, not deal with any housing elements whatsoever tonight. And that's about all I can say in two minutes. And I would highly encourage you to not ignore what has the physical environment that exists in the marine ship presently. It is suitable for the arts, it's suitable for maritime and it's suitable for light industry. And as I said, since this financial I'm not sure. I call it the golden goose for Sausalito. Let's encourage that growth in those three areas. And I'm not at all convinced, and I don't feel at all satisfied that those are being preserved under the present discussion. Thank you. |
| 02:51:03.37 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 02:51:03.39 | Heidi Scoble | Ron Albert is next. And we will unmute Ron. |
| 02:51:15.86 | Ron Albert | Am I unmuted? |
| 02:51:18.64 | Heidi Scoble | You are unmuted. |
| 02:51:19.98 | Ron Albert | Okay. Good evening. Thank you, Mayor and Council members for your service. I'm not going to repeat the points that were in my letter or in the petition that has approximately 275 signatures, which I know you've all seen. I moved to Sausalito in 1989. I started serving on the Planning Commission in 1996. And I've been advocating that some properties on the east side of Bridgeway which most people don't even realize are in the marine ship. because they think of the Marineship as the waterfront, not the Bridgeway street front. But again, I've been advocating that some of those properties be considered for affordable and senior housing. since about 1998. So... I've been on this issue for a long time. I am a real estate attorney, but I've never earned any income in any way related to affordable housing. thousands of dollars and hours to the subject because i think it's the right thing for our community to do as well as for the state to be doing. Um, This new general plan was an opportunity for us to do the right thing. and craft a nuanced plan that recognize the very eclectic nature of the east side of Bridgeway. protected our maritime and industrial businesses. and created the opportunity for some affordable and senior, how do I say? but so far we haven't done the right thing. In a few years, the council's going to have two very Uh, tough choices. Number one. Don't adopt a new housing element. Mary Wagner is able to explain to you the onerous outcome that will result from that. And two, adopt a housing element and have an angry mob descend upon City Hall. And that will happen. Your two-minute time has elapsed. The housing element. |
| 02:53:26.42 | Heidi Scoble | Your two minute time has elapsed. |
| 02:53:36.43 | Heidi Scoble | Our next public commenters will be Kay Carlson, Sybil Boutillier, and Joan Cox. Kay, you have been unmuted. |
| 02:53:54.72 | Heidi Scoble | Okay, you will need to press your unmute button. |
| 02:53:59.02 | Kay Carlson | Good evening, everyone, and thank you, Mayor Hoffman and City Council. You've done a yeoman's job here. But I agree totally with Sandra Bushmaker. I'm an artist in the ICB for the last 30 years. And when I come to the ICB now, And I have to watch where I park because my car may be in water when I come out later in the day. I don't want that for seniors who might live there It doesn't make any sense. And so That has to be addressed. I don't, you know, and yes, the arcs and maritime and live industry are there and we have a happy marriage. So I know the need for housing is there But I don't think this has been well thought through. And I hope that the all the arcane language that's going through about permit, you know, conditions and permits and all of that. get straightened out so there is a Um, that there's a policy that makes sense to keep this neighborhood the way that it is being described, which is your golden egg. Thank you, everyone. |
| 02:55:32.21 | Heidi Scoble | Sybil, you've been unmuted. Oh. Thank you. |
| 02:55:35.60 | Sybil Boutillier | Thank you. |
| 02:55:35.94 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:55:36.43 | Sybil Boutillier | uh... |
| 02:55:36.92 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 02:55:37.56 | Sybil Boutillier | Good evening. Council members, Thank you so much for this hearing. I was very distressed that at the 12th hour, the new. Planning Commission. decided to add this restrictive I'm not sure. Praise. into the housing element that we've been talking into the land use element that we've been talking about for of three and a half years. And, um, I think, and had come to some agreement Um, previously. Um, I think that, um, As Amir Hoffman said, there's been about 100 people that have been regularly involved in this process. and about 20 at the most. Who have? been consistently talking about importance or restrictions or non-restrictions in terms of considering appropriate places. for the over 3,000 seniors in South Salido. And, The... low income workers who have to drive here or take buses here. every day in order to keep our businesses working. And So I think this was not helpful or well thought through Now one minute. to add at this time. In one week. of just putting it out only to city of South Toledo residents without a whole lot of effort, |
| 02:57:19.47 | Unknown | Without. |
| 02:57:21.84 | Sybil Boutillier | We got 275. Individual. to say that that was not a useful phrase to put into the general plan at the last minute and that we should leave it open to consideration. Our two minute time has a lot. |
| 02:57:40.00 | Lisa Davidson | Your two-minute time has elapsed. |
| 02:57:51.09 | Heidi Scoble | Joan Cox is our next commenter and Joan you've been unmuted. |
| 02:57:56.37 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Hi everybody, for those of you who don't know me, I moved to Sausalito in 1984, served on the planning commission for eight years, city council for four years, Chair of the General Plan Advisory Committee and did not miss a single meeting of that group. We decided at the outset that we would not update the housing element as part of the general plan until that update is due in 2023. The housing element and the accompanying zoning ordinance are the proper place to identify all appropriate housing sites throughout town. Ron Albert made mention of an angry mob objecting to huge housing developments in town. That happened at City Hall in the mid 2000s and Sausalito failed to pass a housing element for two cycles with harsh consequences. And that was the prospect before us in 2010 when we had to identify sites for over 270 new units of housing. But we persevered and identified creative solutions that did not overly impact any single neighborhood. And I'm confident we can do the same thing again. The general plan is not the place for spot zoning or addressing the appropriate use of any specific person. that should be in the housing element. Also I wanted to address the CDC I've been meeting with the CDC on a monthly basis for years. I agree with prior speakers that the CDC's strict prohibition against water based housing is lightening up. Their executive director continues to believe that the water is not the proper solution for our housing shortage, but we have been working with Senator McGuire and others to prevail upon BCDC to adapt its policies to accommodate not just our wildlife, not just our bay, but also our residents. Thank you all. |
| 02:59:52.17 | Heidi Scoble | Our next public commenter is Tom Hoover. YOU'VE BEEN UNMUTED. |
| 02:59:58.39 | Tom Hoover | See if I've unmuted myself. Let's see, start my video. |
| 03:00:04.47 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, sir, we can hear you. |
| 03:00:05.87 | Tom Hoover | Okay. Yes, let's see real quick. I've been with the Historical Society now for actually 39 years. I've served on the old landmarks board. And, um, I first came here in 64 and moved here in 68. And so I've lived and worked here for at least a half century and more now. And I want to agree uh, I have been able to participate in this lately because of problems, but I want to agree And second, What Sandra Bushmaker said, and that it's important to The whole point behind the Marin ship specific plan, which I was there for, Um, is to preserve and for exactly those uses. that she did and it's okay to keep the, offices that were already there. I was actually there back in the 70s when the language was put in to the general plan or one of the laws at that time that allowed all of these huge office buildings to occur that then when they saw the monstrous thing that was happening to Sausalito They had to put in the Marin ship specific plan to stop. So I want, to make sure that that migration of the specific plan that John Cox talked about and that I had heard, Um, you know, actually happens. and that. I would love to see and I know that we have problems with it. But, We also need to avoid what happened in San Rafael, where it ended up being a hornswoggle, in using it. affordable housing than to build rich houses. And. One last thing is that I want to be able to talk with BCDC too From Anglo-Saxon times, people who lived on their boats have lived on them. And it was a bourgeois convention of the 80s that residences were not allowed on the water. And that's, you know, I don't have time, obviously, to go any further. Thank you. |
| 03:02:14.39 | Heidi Scoble | Our next public commenter is John DeRay. John, you've been unmuted. |
| 03:02:20.13 | John DeRay | Hello, thank you everyone. Thank you for your hard work on this matter. I just wanted to make a comment about housing on the Um, East side of Bridgeway. I think what's not been brought up at many of these meetings is a dirty little secret that If you do this on private property, You cannot do it on a small scale. We've had one of the property owners talk about the economics not working out for these projects. And the other thing is realize that what we're talking about here is mostly market rate housing, luxury condos, and then some portion of affordable units as well. that's one thing to consider. And sort of as evidence of that, you know, the property owner has, really threaten things like the view corridors. He needs his view corridors over his properties reduced or eliminated, and he's threatened to sue the city in order to accomplish that. The other thing I wanted to comment on is overlay zones. mixed use in residential overlay zones. were used. in Alameda. to approve a project that led to 760 Uh, condos. in what was once a marina. and a boatyard and it resulted in the closing of Svensson's boatyard. So the 11,000 So, and the boat owners in Alameda Most of them now have to go to Richmond in order to get their boat service, because that was the primary boatyard. Thank you. in the area. So, you know, we need to be aware of these unintended consequences. If it's going to happen, it's going to happen, but people just need to be aware. of this is what will happen if we surround the boatyards with housing and hundreds of people potentially to complain about the 24-7 noise, which happens when you haul out in the middle of the night because of the tides. Thank you. |
| 03:04:28.82 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, I do not see any additional hands that are raised at this time. Thank you. |
| 03:04:33.32 | Jill Hoffman | Okay? Thank you. |
| 03:04:33.88 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 03:04:33.91 | Jill Hoffman | Very good, thank you. I will close public comment then on this matter and we will move on to our council discussion. Thank you. Um, so I'm, Okay, so does anybody want to kick us off? Fairly brief comments. Yes, Councilmember Cleveland Knowles. |
| 03:04:58.09 | Melissa Blaustein | Just as a point of process, because we have a lot to work through, I was thinking maybe we, if it is, perhaps we could move through talking about the EIR first and see if there are any issues because obviously if we have issues with that we can't move any further. Then have time for each council member to make general comments and bring up anything that wasn't raised in the staff report. and then address the overlay issue and then the office use or whatever order you wanted. But if we did them in an order, then maybe we might move through it more quickly. |
| 03:05:36.96 | Jill Hoffman | I was thinking along the same line. Unless somebody has a question or a question or a question unless somebody has an issue with that process. understanding we're going to get to everybody, you know, we're going to get to the whole thing, but just to break it up into kind of lumps that we can, we can attack. So, I think that's a good way to start with the EIR, and then we'll go with general plan issues that weren't in the staff report, if you have any other problems with the general plan. And then we'll go on to the two issues that were raised in general plan, which is the overlay and then the issue of permitted versus nonconforming versus conformity and how that language and whether or not we want to do an additional program. to look at the non-office use. No, non office building. office use. So, okay, so let's start off then. I don't see any objection from the council to proceeding that way. Um, And so let's talk about, if anybody has any questions or comments about the EIRR, let's voice those now. And do I have any hands to anybody that wants to address the EIRR? |
| 03:06:49.62 | Melissa Blaustein | I just had one question, which is, I know right before their last planning Commission hearing we received some correspondence. Um, from a SQL lawyer. And I just wanted to make sure, I know we've received a lot of correspondence today. I just wanted to ask our city attorney or staff if we had gotten any additional correspondence and whether there was anything else we needed to respond to before we Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:07:17.48 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. So our city attorney or our EIR team or the city attorney, Any other outside counsel that we've retained in this matter? I don't want to weigh in. Go ahead, Mary. |
| 03:07:31.44 | Mary Wagner | So all the comment letters that were received on the EIR have been responded to and incorporated into the final EIR. |
| 03:07:39.67 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Does that answer your question, council members? |
| 03:07:43.60 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:07:43.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:07:43.96 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 03:07:43.98 | Jill Hoffman | Does anybody have any questions or comments about the the EIR proposal and then knowing that will be a separate vote that we have when we get to the end of this process. So we'll vote on the, we'll have our discussions. Then we'll go to EIR, whether or not our discussion or any of the things that we bring up affect the EIR or programmatic changes that would affect the EIR. So we'll go to EIR. address that and then if not, then we'll learn on the AR and then we'll go vote on the general plan. um, the general plan update. Yes, Vice Mayor Kalman has your hand up. |
| 03:08:22.47 | Janelle Kellman | Great. Yeah, no, I think that's a great way to proceed. So I think it might be just worthwhile for the record. to revisit the question around Um, the sea level rise as an example. around sort of the purpose of the EIR, right? And so I think that consultant made an interesting point, which is the EIR is intended to show whether there is an impact of the project, which is the general plan on something, right? And so is there a deleterious impact of the project on sea level rise? It's not the other way around, right? Whether sea level rise is impacting the general plan update. And that's what I heard the consultant say. Um, but I thought it just be great to clarify that and, and. correct any misperceptions if I have it wrong or if anyone else has questions, but I just wanted to run that down. |
| 03:09:16.69 | Jill Hoffman | I saw the consultant was on. or marriage. |
| 03:09:19.71 | Mary Wagner | And Madam Mayor, if I may, I mean, I think I can give you an overview answer, but I also think it'd be helpful to have Alex Merritt, who's on the line, who has been assisting the city, who's from the legal perspective. on this to jump in and weigh in. I mean, I think I've heard him say it and I'll let him say it himself, but I think you know, the way he's put it succinctly is that the, EAR evaluates the impacts of the the environmental impacts that the project has, not the reverse, but if Alex is, able to unmute himself, perhaps he can fill that in a little bit better for you. |
| 03:09:57.54 | Alex Merritt | Yes, good evening, council. Yes, that's correct. CEQA generally requires an analysis of the project on the environment. It does not require SQL in reverse, which would be an evaluation of the environment on the project. And there are a number of recent cases on that point, which we could be happy to share with the council. That is addressed in more detail in the responses to comments. I think the broader point is that sea level rise is really a planning issue. to address the future planning document and not an EIR. |
| 03:10:27.92 | Janelle Kellman | So Alex, is there any obligation for the EIR? So thank you for that. And so I'm glad that you guys were able to clarify. Is there any obligation for the EIR to take changing environmental conditions into account in developing certain policies, or does that wholly at the discretion of the drafters of the general plan or the general plan. |
| 03:10:50.34 | Alex Merritt | In general, if it's not an impact of the general plan on the environment, then it's not a CEQA issue. There is a potential overlap, for example, on Soil contamination where the project could be bringing new development closer to the shoreline and then sea level rise could interact with that new development and increase the chance of a release of contamination. And so the EIR does evaluate those secondary impacts of sea level rise. |
| 03:11:17.56 | Janelle Kellman | Okay. I'm sorry, Madam Mayor, may I ask one more question? Yes. |
| 03:11:21.16 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 03:11:21.17 | Alex Merritt | Yes. |
| 03:11:21.73 | Janelle Kellman | Sure. Great. So. And then, Alex, there was there's been some discussion on many of the meetings around use of a programmatic EIR or an additional ER for the housing element. Can you just articulate for us what the SQL process will be When we do go through the housing element, um, is it intended to tear off of this document or will it be its own separate document? |
| 03:11:47.14 | Alex Merritt | Well, I think it's too early to say exactly what the CEQA document will be since the plan hasn't been prepared or conceived yet. But in general, there will be a separate CEQA review for the housing element, and it could potentially tier off of this document, or it could potentially be a separate standalone document. depending on what direction the city goes. |
| 03:12:06.01 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:12:06.03 | Janelle Kellman | Thank you. |
| 03:12:06.06 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:12:06.18 | Janelle Kellman | Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks, everybody. |
| 03:12:09.20 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Yes, Councilmember Cleveland Knowles. |
| 03:12:12.74 | Melissa Blaustein | If people don't have additional questions, I just had a few comments on the EIR. Sure. So, you know, I've been following this process closely for many, many months, and I reviewed the EIR and believe it's adequate, accurate and complete and I really want to thank |
| 03:12:30.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:12:33.11 | Melissa Blaustein | Alex and Mary and all of the staff and consultants who worked on the EIR and especially on some of the thornier public comments that we got. I just really appreciated their development in this last round. of the global responses that address the issue that Vice Mayor Kellman just brought up about sea level rise |
| 03:12:52.42 | Unknown | you |
| 03:12:56.62 | Melissa Blaustein | but also talked about the programmatic aspect of this document and the fact that we are not at a project level Um, And also just, I think really brought to the fore that our general plan that we're considering tonight does not change any of the city's existing land use designations. And has a lot of self mitigating features due in part for the hard work of the sustainability commission and all of our boards and commissions. um, You know, I just think it's a great document and I, forward and also hear something from other council members to certify that |
| 03:13:35.48 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:13:35.62 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:13:35.75 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, thank you. Okay. Any other comments about the EIR? If not, then we'll move on to other discussion to just I'm seeing no indication that there's further discussion or comments about the EIR. So we'll move on to... Um, Thank you. general plan issues that people might want to address that haven't already that were not part of the staff report that people might want to have concerns about that they want the council to address. So are there any other other issues other than what we see in the staff report today. about the, any concerns about the general plan. proposed update. I'm seeing no indication. So then we'll just move on to Um, the two issues that we have. There were, I guess, three. So we have We have three issues that were called out in the staff report. One is the issue of the overlaying. The other one is the issue of the conforming the language conforming, non-conforming or in any issue of Um, office. non-office building. office space. I probably could have said that better. It's the issue of use of office space in buildings that were not office buildings at the time of the marinship plan. So, Anyway, we can drill into that here in a minute. Okay. So let's talk about, I'm thinking let's take, take the overlay first. Does anybody want to kick us off or I'm happy to dive in on that one. Thank you. |
| 03:15:23.16 | Melissa Blaustein | I could start. As everybody who has been watching city council meetings on this topic knows from the past, I'm working with many colleagues. I feel very strongly that we should keep land use policy 19.1 as it stands. currently without the limitation. I, you know, to some of the questions, to staff. I feel we have a huge obligation at this point to be as transparent as possible and to give as clear direction to staff tonight. that we hopefully that we will keep housing. throughout the city. only for affordable housing, senior housing, and workforce housing. That's what LU policy 19.1 is about, it's not about market rate housing, not about condos, it's only limited. to affordable, senior and workforce artistizing. So I would like to keep it on the table. And the reasons to do that. you know, tie to the fact that not only is our RHNA number going to be high and we don't know exactly what that is, but we also just basically need additional housing and Sausalito. We need additional senior housing as many, many, many residents and Sybil and others have noted over and over again, we have a very high percentage seniors in town. The population is growing and their needs are growing. And we have very few dedicated affordable senior units. Secondly, as we've talked about, we have a shocking lack of diversity in a town. where our main industry mid last century was an African-American workforce population that came here from the South of the United States and could not live in our town. due to systemic policies that did not allow them to live here. I would love to turn the corner, on that policy in Sausalito. Amen. start to open up more housing opportunities for former families of Marineship workers and other workers, including our maritime workers and our essential workers, Um, to make this a more equitable community. Lastly, as we know, we have a huge number of workers who come here every day from vast |
| 03:17:56.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:18:01.74 | Melissa Blaustein | you know, from very, very far away. their commutes are retiring and they are very hard on our environment. And we have a lot of policies and our sustainability element to reduce our vehicle miles traveled or VMT. So adding housing here is just critical. And I know that this is a task primarily for our housing element. But now we are doing our general plan to set the stage for the next 40 years. of development and we need to set not only the stage for our housing element, but we need to set the town. And I think leaving this policy in, having the overlay is a great tool to be as creative and flexible as possible. is something we need to do. I thought it was interesting, Ron Albert's correspondence to us raised a number of issues that I had raised in the past, but I don't, they have not kind of continued along the theme. that I think are important at least to state and perhaps include in the general plan Housing and the overlay, I don't consider that anything but affordable housing. I don't consider it anywhere but Bridgeway adjacent. I really don't consider it in anything but current office at use replacing existing office. Absolutely not within 100 feet of the water. Of course, toxic contaminants need to be addressed. That's a requirement of, California law. Um, but we could put that in. I mean, we could add all of these caveats just to kind of remove the fear that this is waterfront market for the opening the door to waterfront market rate condos, which is absolutely not anything that I personally would like to see. And just lastly, You know, we have talked so much about the vision for the marinship. And the vision is of our maritime art and light industrial. And any housing would need to be consistent with that. And I believe that the elements laid out in Ron's letter went a long way to making sure that we can keep um, the character and livelihood of the Marinship Con. So sorry for the speech, but... issue I care passionately about. So those are my thoughts. |
| 03:20:24.60 | Jill Hoffman | I think you're muted. Thank you. Thank you. Does anybody? What do you like to go next? or Yes, Vice Mayor Kalman. And hold on. Ian, did you have your... Ian, you're on another page for me, so Okay, all right, so we're going to go Vice Mayor Kailin next. |
| 03:20:41.47 | Janelle Kellman | And this is great, right? volunteering to go next because Councilmember Cleveland Knowles and I've been working on this for so long. I think it would be helpful if you know we we had kind of different viewpoints for everybody to discuss. I think most people know I've spent three years, first as a member of the General Plan Advisory Committee, Then on the general plan working group, And then as the chair of the planning commission, so I've spent a lot of time with this topic, with this document, so I don't say any of this lightly, then I want to agree with Councilmember Cleveland Knowles that we absolutely need to provide for our seniors and to create diversity. but we need to achieve this in areas that are not flooding, not sinking. not have potential contamination. It comes down to a very basic issue of ingress and egress. If we can't ensure that, then we really have no business allowing this type of use in that area. And I'll also point out if it comes to racial diversity and equity, Environmental justice and racial justice go hand in hand. So if we know an area is contaminated, flooding, and sinking, I am not comfortable talking about putting our BIPOC populations in those areas. And so that's a big distinction that I make on that. So I definitely support the Planning Commission recommendation having been on all of the meetings, I will say that the commission never flip flop. In fact, the G PAC, the working group, and the Planning Commission all consistently, either by unanimous or majority vote, voted to either specifically not allow land-based housing in the Marinership or to exclude the marine ship from the housing overlay Three years of a public process, three different public resident serving communities all came up with that same conclusion. Nobody ever, it didn't change over three years. So I wanna offer two things for consideration. There is no downside. There's no downside of precluding the overlay decision from the general plan decision making and moving forward with an approval based on the recommendation of a planning commission. We will review all other appropriate areas in the future during the housing element process. And we are not precluded from revisiting this during zoning. And in fact, as Councilmember Cleveland knows pointed out, this sets the tone what you put in the in the general plan sets the tone. And if we want to have the opportunity to be very specific, Bridgeway office or other portions of the partnership, then the right place to handle that is in the housing element where we can be more granular. But if you include it now, then it looks like a broad intention. Then we all assume we'll all be around for the housing element, but you know, we're signaling to future policymakers and we'd be sending the wrong signal. The second reason, and this is something I'm actually quite passionate about, is our opportunity to retain local discretion. So if you've been following the housing debate, many communities, including Mill Valley and Palo Alto, are challenging the state laws that strip local government from their authority when it comes to housing. we actually retain greater control and local discretion by not including an overlay in the general plan. And this assessment for me is based on what we heard at the October 13th, 2020 Council Meeting. where the city's housing attorney indicated that the general plan rules housing, not zoning. And so Goldfarb-Lipman did a really great PowerPoint and they made three points. First, they said the general plan is supreme The second thing the PowerPoint says is that the maximum density and uses in the general plan establish the allowed uses and density And the third thing it says is if the uses in the zoning and the general plan are inconsistent the general plan controls. And so what that attorney advised us, and I'm just reading from the PowerPoint, what the attorney advised us was that we are at risk of losing local discretion. if we put certain language in our general plan. And I guess my final point is that The overlay has to be consistent with the underlying zoning. And if it's not consistent with the zoning in the Marinship, then why not exclude it from the Marinship, now and come back to it during the housing element discussion. I think this is actually the best of both worlds because it's consistent with Three years of community feedback. And it gives us the opportunity to really dive in, provide a more granular study during that housing element process. Thank you for letting me drone on for a little bit, but I appreciate being able to give a counterpoint. |
| 03:25:18.41 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Councilmember Blaustein or Sobieski, would you like to go next or I'm happy to go as well? |
| 03:25:27.71 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm happy to go next unless Councilman Sobieski would like to. Okay. Well, I haven't had the opportunity to thank everyone who worked on the general plan. I was on the general plan advisory committee as well, alongside vice mayor Kellman. and there were of volunteer hours that went into this process. I think we can all be really proud of the document and what it's come to. And one of the things that I'm personally most proud of is the social justice piece of the general plan. The language that we recommended, and most of which was suggested by the Sustainability Commission, Actually, at the time, the Planning Commission was not consistent or in agreement with our recommendations that the Sustainability Commission had suggested around social justice, and we pushed really hard. for further recommendations that were more specific and more clear around the issues of social justice and why we needed them and how they related to housing. Why do I bring that up? because how can we have a conversation about social justice in our community and about diversity without thinking about how that is directly related to housing and to folks access for housing. And I don't think we've seen a more clear example of that than ever in the past few weeks where for the first time our community is dealing with a group of unhoused here at the Dumpy Park encampment which has just further shown a light on the seriousness of the housing crisis that we're facing in Marin County, in California and in Sausalito. And yes, indeed we are about to deal with a housing element which is approaching us 2023 and that's the next item on the agenda. But in going into that, considering the RHNA numbers and considering our situation and the fact that we need to be able to provide for our city's workers and we need to do more to make our community more diverse and welcoming, I think that it's critical that we keep every option on the table and do a full assessment of every option. I also would not like to see BIPOC members of our community living somewhere where there's excessive sea level rise. However, we owe it to every member of every community to do a full assessment to know exactly where there might be, issues of subsidence or issues of sea level rise and where there aren't. So the idea of taking something off the table before we have engaged in a full, comprehensive, aggressive approach to look at every possible place where we might put housing in our community that makes sense. And that will protect the waterfront because I think we all agree, we've all heard here, that none of us want to see big condos along the waterfront. And we all want to do what we can to preserve the maritime traditions of the the marinship. It's not my first choice for housing by any means. I'm just an advocate for making sure that we do a full assessment of every possible opportunity for housing and housing for not just for anyone, housing for seniors, housing for people who really need it, affordable housing and workforce housing. And so for that reason, I would really like to see us keep land use policy 9.1 in there going into the housing element. So we set the tone for having a conversation about being more open to a discussion around housing. And I think it's really important to note that it doesn't specifically say this is gonna be housing in the Marinship. This is gonna be housing on Bridgeway. It just says we're open to having a conversation about affordable housing and senior housing in our community. So for that reason, I would really not like to see any options taken off the table before we can do a true and thorough assessment of what makes the most sense, which will be the job of the housing element. |
| 03:28:43.19 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Thank you. Council member Sobieski, would you like to go or would you like to go? |
| 03:28:48.42 | Ian Sobieski | No, I'm happy to go. Uh, Right. So I think this this matter of force of this overlay is an issue that does very little to have an overlay. All it says is that we should consider potentially having an overlay zone. doesn't say we're gonna have housing in the merchant, Droscheosis. Uh, The discussion about whether to do it is left for the housing element. It's not a decision to be made today. It does indeed send a signal to adopt. It would send a signal if we now remove They would send a signal if we accepted the Planning Commission's Amendment. That then would suggest that the consensus in the City Council today is that that effort should not consider the marinship. in any case for all the reasons perhaps that Various people have written letters and voiced concerns, issues around toxicity or around sea level rise. or the threat of some housing in the Marin ship to our working waterfront or the threat that having housing in the east of Bridgeway might undermine the industry that's there. Um, We don't come together by talking around this issue. We should get to a place where we're we're looking at specific projects and make specific decisions about whether they enhance our goals of maintaining Sausalito's small town character increasing the amount of light industry increasing the amount of art space in the Marinia. enhancing the vitality of our working waterfront. I believe a project that includes housing and the friendship could possibly be more beneficial to these goals. in a project that does not include housing in the merchant. Developers are used to making concessions in exchange for doing their projects. In negotiating those concessions, we can advance a whole set of broad goals, things that we care about and are passionate for. We need to break this long game of distrust around this issue. I'm amazed to discover that advocates for one side or another simply have never spoken to each other or refuse to speak to each other now. Our account is too small for this. Our housing process should involve, to the extent possible, specific design proposals and clear constraints. We need those who advocate for industry and the marineship before the working waterfront for artists to advocate for constraints on building. but promote these aspects of the friendship. that actually increased these aspects. that make more of the things we love in that area. I'm open to any housing idea if the idea enhances our small town character, increases the amount of light industry, artist space, and ownership, enhances the vitality of the working waterfront, does not threaten people with toxic uh a toxic environment accounts for sea level rise, these are stringent constraints. And it may be. that there is no design. No set of concessions, no imagined possibility that can achieve these goals for our town. But who knows until we see a design? We landed on the moon, 26% of Holland is below sea level. We have a stringent approval process and engaged citizenry. We have a creative community, we're artists, we're Mariners. We can have more of these things if we use our creativity to collaborate with one another. Let's stop talking abstractly and open our minds and our hearts to hearing each other out and working with each other. Don't give up on what you want, but see if you can get more of what you want for our town by giving others some of what they want. So, This issue of the overlay zone is the force and the issue of housing, of the signaling is the force. And I believe we should accept the wording as. in the journal. |
| 03:32:55.33 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 03:32:55.37 | Ian Sobieski | Jeff. Thank you. |
| 03:32:59.13 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. Um, You know, I fall out on the side of, uh, is that I don't particularly like the overlay language. And I've been fairly open about that throughout the process for the city council. And my question to... Um, My question to Lily was, was related to that. So the overlay doesn't really bring anything other than a broad policy directive, which is contained in the main heading of that program so policy LU 1.9 affordable housing and senior housing Um, So consider areas for affordable housing including very low income, low income and moderate income housing, affordable senior housing, senior housing, workforce housing, live workspace for artists and maritime workers, as well as opportunities for water-based housing, keeping the goal of long-term affordability. So that's the broad policy statement. What exactly does the overlay bring? I don't think it brings anything but creates uncertainty. And when you create uncertainty, that's confusing for the public and it's also creates ambiguities for the landowners and their path forward. And so I, that's why I'm, I agree with the planning commission and with the prior general plan update committee and the general plan working group. that overlay in general doesn't particularly bring anything other than uncertainty to the plan. I agree that Zoning and these issues should be addressed in the Housing Element Update. You will have to rezone anyway and as Tom Hoover said you may have to actually have a measure to repeal the fair traffic initiative if you want to change the zoning in the marine ship in significant ways. And so again, You know, I think this lends for uncertainty and not something that should be included in a general plan update. uh, you know, as it I suppose there's a compromise, but I don't think it's compromised because other members aren't gonna wanna do it. But I think the, I think striking out or at least you know, creating the language except in the Marinship. you know, gets you at least some certainty about, consistency with the former marinship plan as it's adopted and absorbed into the general plan update. And keeping in mind that it doesn't preclude further action by housing element update or by an action by a future city council. if as Council Member Sobieski brought up, you have a specific plan. And a specific plan is before a city council, that's specifically looking at you know, the impacts, not only the impacts, but the seismic issues, the toxicity issues, and the sea level rise issues for a specific project. project and then we can decide with regard to that project, is that the right project for this area? Rather than creating an expectation, which I believe the overlay does, artificially, an artificial expectation about what can happen in certain areas, specifically the marine ship which has you know, a history of a specific plan and a specific idea for what's allowed down there. and current zoning. So for those reasons, you know, I have, I think it's more problematic specifically LU 1.19.2, which is the whole overlay. When you have the broad policy statement in L-U- 1.19. And then the other issues that you have with whether or not as a city council, we want to recommend, which is what this appears to do, is recommend an area of um, you know, former long-term industrial use, a former shipyard, that has subsidence issues, that has toxicity issues, designating that for affordable housing with regard to environmental justice issues. Are we creating the expectation that affordable housing is going to be in this area? |
| 03:37:26.43 | Unknown | Yeah. Yeah. |
| 03:37:32.35 | Jill Hoffman | you know, is not particularly well suited, I don't think currently, for housing. However, That doesn't preclude none of this discussion precludes, frankly, one way or the other, of, The opposite of that, which is if you have a project that came, comes before us that we could approve it. I mean, it would have, you would have to go through zoning changes. You're gonna have to do zoning changes anyway. So all of this discussion Um, You know, is going to create more problems, I think, than it's trying to solve. And so those are my main Um, my main problems with the overlay and why I would, frankly, I would have voted to just remove this section because of the expectations, I think, the unrealistic expectations that it sets. But, you know, we're all in agreement that the land use policy 1.19 is what we're all focused on, right? Like we all support that. which is affordable housing, senior housing, and you know, senior housing and affordable senior housing, sorry. So that's where I fell out on this. So, Anyway, those are my thoughts. I think. Does anybody have any comments based on mine or based on the other? comments that we've heard from city council members. |
| 03:39:00.98 | Melissa Blaustein | I think the only thing I would add is, you know, to Vice Mayor Cummins point, I think our city attorney did address the issue of whether this particular language to consider the overlay and perhaps do this is not at all at the level of the type of language that Barbara Kautz was talking about. at our prior meeting and that we actually have heard from her that this language would not at all put us at risk. of being susceptible to um having our general plan over a ride. any particular zoning until we took further action. And if anybody wants further clarification from Mary at this point, that's fine. But I believe that's what she said earlier in the meeting. So that's the only thing I would know. And with that, do we want to take a motion on each of these items as we move through or what's your preference, Madam Mayor? |
| 03:40:01.33 | Janelle Kellman | Before we move on. |
| 03:40:02.39 | Melissa Blaustein | before you move on. |
| 03:40:03.30 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:40:03.32 | Janelle Kellman | Thank you. |
| 03:40:03.45 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:40:04.21 | Janelle Kellman | May I make a follow-up statement, Mayor Hoffman? Sure, so thank you for that. And I guess what I wanna offer out Is this, it seems like we're all actually on the same page about utility of the housing element. right? We all feel like we're going to have some good discretion there. We're going to dig in. We're going to look at granular issues. Um, I guess I just wanna circle back to Mayor Hoffman's which I hardly agree with, on not creating uncertainty. not creating expectations, using racial justice as a reason to put potentially ASSUME WILL PUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN AN AREA THAT IS known to be contaminated and flooding and sinking. when we know we have something coming up. the housing element process that will allow us to give this the due in service and due diligence it really requires. And it will give us the opportunity, as Councilmember Sobieski mentioned, to be collaborative, to be creative, It's just, I think, the right process of the two So I think it's maybe there's a process argument here and I'm just wondering Others have thoughts on that. |
| 03:41:18.51 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, I think, I mean, I said, I disagree with that process. I mean, I transparency to me Trumps. Um, kicking the can down the road to the housing element. I think we should be transparent right now that we are open to considering affordable housing, And every tool in the toolkit, including an overlay, Everywhere in town and we are not picking out the friendship specifically and we are not excluding the friendship. So I think that transparency, if we adopt the language that the planning commission proposed We are affirmatively stating that we are taking an option off the table. And I'm not ready to take an option off the table. And so I don't want to do a bait and switch. Um, indicate tonight we're taking it off the table and then, you know, we're starting our housing element right away. And if we don't give clear direction to staff, we're going to be You know, we're already looking at a 600,000 to a million dollars for that process. I mean, we need to let our consultants and staff know what's on the table and what's off the table. So I think transparency, clarity, and the biggest range of options is our best approach. |
| 03:42:28.54 | Janelle Kellman | You make excellent points, and I completely see where you're coming from. So, I'm just surprised that we're not having a little bit more discussion around the fact that for three years, all of our volunteer organizations who have put maybe even thousands of hours into looking at this. all consistently voted either unanimously or by majority. to follow what the Planning Commission recently recommended. And I just think if we go in this direction, we should at least make a statement as to why we would you know, not take those volunteer hours into Yeah. I think it's a... |
| 03:43:09.35 | Melissa Blaustein | With all due respect, Councilmember Kellman, I remember that there was a community forum in which a number of residents were asked about whether or not they would consider senior housing within the Marinship and the vast majority of representatives at that meeting said yes. Afterwards, there was a variety of follow-up public comment |
| 03:43:14.23 | Janelle Kellman | number one. |
| 03:43:14.56 | Ian Sobieski | I'm sorry. |
| 03:43:24.43 | Melissa Blaustein | which said that that wasn't the case and people didn't understand. And so if that's the defense that's being used, then perhaps some of the community engagement wasn't properly I mean, I feel like everyone put in several hundred hours and people had different perspectives and no one is saying this is where the housing is going definitively. Again, I will say again, it's not, it's absolutely not my first choice to put housing in the marinship. I would prefer that we have solutions everywhere else in town and we do not have to have housing in the marinship. I just think given what's at stake here, we can't take anything off the table until we have done a full assessment of every option. And there has been a lot of public comment throughout the process of folks who are asking us to pursue every option. |
| 03:43:40.92 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:43:46.90 | Unknown | solutions. |
| 03:44:03.42 | Janelle Kellman | No, and I, Mayor Mrakas, Mayor Mrakas important conversation, I actually went back and pulled those survey results and I actually the majority 129 said we wanted to maintain the industrial character, and I think something like 34 said they wanted senior housing. And I know that surveys often reference, so thank you for bringing it up, but I think this is an excellent conversation. I mean, I think we're going to go through all these things that the housing element. I just wanted to sort of explore all the different avenues since we've spent three years on this we owe it, I think, to the public so thank you. |
| 03:44:39.21 | Ian Sobieski | I mean, I'd like to just... emphasize something. There really does seem like a zero-sum game thinking in this discussion, in the community as well. I'm sorry. I'm profoundly actually, in a sense, disappointed that feel like that there's such distrust it's as if as if despite all the tools that we have at our disposal to prevent construction of something that's on toxic ground or that's going to fall into the sea or that substandard, we feel like we actually don't have those tools. I can't believe the scrutiny that we will all bring to bear on any specific proposal. when the time comes after after all the steps that will have to be taken before you even get to that point. that, any of us are gonna let any of that happen. I mean, is there any chance honestly, that anyone really thinks? that a project's going to get approved on toxic soil. And is all 225 acres of the landship toxic anyway? Surely that's not the case. and Is all the friendship going to be underwater? No. And even if portions are, are there really no engineering solutions? for water inundation that are collaborative? MR PRICE, I'm not sure. It seems as though there are answers to these concerns, Answers are brought about by actual engagement. And, The idea of excluding areas Well, that's fundamentally not engaged, at least in those areas, it's rolling them off. It's, uh, And so I'm puzzled by that. And so I'm answering your call. Vice Mayor to maybe elaborate a little bit more. in service to those who object. And I even wrote my little speech, I thought I answered them, but I'll say it again, I kind of think that we can get more of what we want in terms of a working waterfront. we can get more of what we want in terms of Studio is a space for artists and places for artists to live. You can get, more of what we want in micro fabrication and industry and innovation center. if we cooperate with land owners that have a profit incentive and want to build housing for people that have trouble affording it. Uh, And there's no guarantee that that will be the outcome, but we don't have to say yes, we get a veto. So, we Work is yet to come to see if we get to that kind of outcome. And I want to clearly articulate that housing is not the only goal that as long as I'm voting, I would use as the witness test for a successful proposal. uh, we have indeed a golden goose in the friendship and not just because it's a third of our business tax revenue. We have a golden goose because it's a cornerstone of the character of our town. It's in our history and it's in our blood. It's something that even if we didn't make any money out, as a community, I think we'd want to support. It's a value. And so I don't understand why we can't bring this idea of values to an engaged discussion about specific projects. and why we have to be so afraid. as to fight these battles in the abstract instead of in That's my comment on why we should Exactly. tool of maybe having an overlay zone and they decided to have one. It's not actually happening. It's just saying we, We can select. |
| 03:48:21.08 | Jill Hoffman | So if I could respond to that, some of those comments, I think that as our discussion has gone on, we sort of drifted into language that I don't think is accurate. So As I understand it, based on my questions to the staff. So With regard to the overlay and with regard to language that would say excluding the Marin ship area. We are not excluding that from consideration. We are just not at this point in time, including that in the broad policy subheading under Land use 1.19. So I don't think, I don't think my position isn't no housing ever in the Marinship. My position right now is that the Marin ship based on its history. which is, you know, a specific area in Sausalito via the Marinership Specific Plan that was, um, intentionally kept separate from housing in our past, right? So the emergency specifics plan said industrial, with some other limited uses with Office. buildings that were already there. And then you have the fair traffic initiative that reinforced that idea. And then we've had a lot of discussion about amongst the city council about what uses you know, we want to consider in the marinship. I have a problem with Um, including the Marin ship for those reasons in the overlay that you're laying over all of Sausalito. um, as a policy in the general plan update when more importantly to Councilmember Sobieski, it's really something that you would want to look at on a case-by-case basis which is the purpose for the housing element update And if at the end of the day, the housing element you know, committee comes forward and says, this is what we want to do for this portion or that portion because we've looked at it. But I feel very uncomfortable saying that affordable housing should go in our one large industrial area. in Sausalito that we have to really be careful about that. And that's the intent for, and my intent for saying, I think that, We should say, except for the Marin ship, We're looking at this overlay overall of Saucleo. And I do believe that it gives us less control over that area. given some of the some of the initiatives that are coming down from the state. And even if there weren't initiatives coming down from the state, the general plan sets or you rely on the general plan as precedents over zoning. It gives a little bit more control as we move forward for this particular area and to protect the industrial nature of the marineship for our economic sustainability. But really it has to do with I don't want to tell people This is a dandy place to raise your kids if it's going to flood and it's toxic. and all of a sudden somebody decides to put affordable housing on there. I am not for that at this time and that's what I'm trying to project by taking the Marinership out of the overlay. So just to be clear, that's my perspective on this. So I think I'm not sure, I think I'm seeing a trend here. on a vote if we had a motion. Yes. |
| 03:51:58.45 | Unknown | Yes, I have a motion. |
| 03:52:00.10 | Jill Hoffman | Before we did a motion, what I would like to do is ask staff first if Anything, I mean, cause I believe the motion is going to be what's already in there. But I said that I would ask staff if any of our discussion affected the EIR. I think the answer to that is going to be no. And then, And then I believe we need to approve EIR first, and then we can move to the sections of the general plan. um, is, Is our Is it our environmental person? Alex, are you still on the line? Or married, perhaps? |
| 03:52:39.17 | Mary Wagner | We're both still here. So I think we can get, you guys can take We can get kind of an informal direction on these specific issues that you're dealing with on the general plan itself. And if you want to take votes to kind of memorialize that, will then have you take action on the EIR when you're done with the specifics that you're dealing with on the general plan. But then when you actually go to vote on the general plan, your motion would include whatever changes that you're directing at that time. So your formal final action on the general plan will occur after you certify the EIR. Does that make sense? |
| 03:53:19.51 | Jill Hoffman | because Thank you. It does to me, it doesn't make sense to everybody else. the So, okay, so then we'll, I think we're finished with this discussion, the overlay discussion, unless anybody has something else they wanna weigh in with. Okay. Okay, so then let's move on to the issue of how we wanna talk about the office buildings and permitted and the proposal that we change out legal in land use section 2.15, that we change out legal conforming. The recommendation for the planning commission is that we substitute the language legal conforming instead with permitted. and change. Anyway, insert permitted, remove legal conformity. So we're swapping those terms out. Um, I'll launch this off on that. If anybody, okay. Councilmember Poligianals, it looks like you have some |
| 03:54:19.57 | Melissa Blaustein | No, go ahead, Mayor Hoffman. Let's. Right. |
| 03:54:22.04 | Jill Hoffman | want to lay this off. Um, You know, I was looking through this issue and trying to figure out I mean, you know, and I haven't been immersed in this like you guys have. So But I figure that anybody else coming new to this is going to have the same issues that I have. Weed our way through what is this issue about legal nonconforming, legal conforming. These are terms of art that sort of evolved over time and even you know, popped up. over time. So when the Marinership specific plan you know, was, um, was enacted in 1988. Um... The language was new commercial office is no longer permitted, no longer permitted use. Existing office buildings, office buildings and uses may remain as permitted. So Marinship specific plan uses the term permitted. in the 1995 general plan, as I understand it. Um, the language. used at that time. start was as legal conforming uses. So recognize office buildings as office uses. in the Marin ship established prior to adoption of the Marin ship specific plan as legal conforming uses. You have these two different different references and two different planning documents. that I think has created some confusion. about what they mean. And then you have this legal non-conforming or legal conforming, and it's very confusing. and confusion. creates, um, it creates ambiguity that then makes it difficult, I think, for Um, understand what exactly what exactly the restraints are on their building or or possibilities for use of their building at a later time, Um, and also the public and also the planning department and also code enforcement. So it creates these these problems. Wouldn't it be great if we could reduce some ambiguity and make it easier on the staff, the public, the owners and everybody. That's why I'm in favor of You know, just come up with using one term. for offices that are office buildings, that existed at the time of the 1988 marineship specific plan column per minute. That's it. And then staff proposes perhaps that we might want to do additional study on what to do with office buildings that were not office buildings at the time of the 1988 Marine Ship Specific Plan, but may have had office uses in those buildings. And so, and to figure out how we wanna move forward that, Those are also. Um, you know, whatever we want to call it, like legal non-conforming, legal conforming. different than the intent of the marinship specific plan which was had to do with office buildings that existed at the time of the 1988 marineship. specific plan. I mean, that's kind of what I'm thinking because I'm trying to go back to what's the intent for the marinship as we're moving through time. and specifically how do you characterize these buildings that are there now? And so I think it would remove some ambiguity and uncertainty if we just said, permitted for those buildings. So that's, that's my thought. Anyway, happy to yield the floor at this time. |
| 03:58:11.32 | Melissa Blaustein | I'll jump in. I guess the theme is what a long, strange road it's been. Untangling this web has been really confusing, but I have to say that listening to the Planning Commission hearing, And then actually reading the 1987 and 88 City Council minutes, which were verbatim minutes that the staff attached to our packet for tonight. added unbelievable clarity about where the city council was at that time. And I think, I mean, they described everything so perfectly in a nutshell. I so wish that I had had those, that language, like a year and a half ago or whenever we were And I'm sure Jeff our consultant does too, because we kind of, um, really went around in a giant circle on this, but coming back to kind of our theme of not changing any land uses through this process, which And regardless of whether we should have, that's where we ended up. It was abundantly clear to me when I read the 1987 and 88 reports and the staff report that what they meant and explicitly corrected the record at that time was that all existing office uses and office buildings are conforming uses or permitted uses, whichever word you want to use. And so that's where I would like to go tonight. I don't see any reason to change that original intent. It's clear, it's unambiguous, it gives direction to property owners, it's not increasing the amount of office at all. from that time, which was a very clear direction from the city council in 1987 and 1988, no increase in office other than accessory, which we've also dealt with. through a very long process and luckily aren't discussing tonight. So I would go with that. would use conforming because that's illegal use. I will use permitted, I don't really care. I think we all know that they mean the same thing. And that's where I would end up tonight. |
| 04:00:37.71 | Jill Hoffman | Okay? |
| 04:00:38.28 | Janelle Kellman | THE END OF |
| 04:00:38.32 | Jill Hoffman | And it's not that much. |
| 04:00:38.38 | Janelle Kellman | else |
| 04:00:39.02 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 04:00:39.23 | Janelle Kellman | I don't know. |
| 04:00:39.44 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:00:39.61 | Janelle Kellman | dive into this. Sure, always happy to. So I'm looking at the staff report and staff has made recommendation for us. Oh, here it is. So this is on page 15 of our staff report staff recommended revised policy LU 2.15. So I'm wondering if we might have and I want to hear obviously from our two other council members, but some direction towards Following the recommendation of the of staff, but as Councilmember Cleveland-Norals mentioned, actually using the word permitted as opposed to legal conforming. So it would read in the office uses contained within as permitted uses in the Marin ship. And I think the reason that I would suggest that is twofold. Well, when I ON THE DEEP DIVE ON THE 87 DISCUSSION, I THOUGHT, OH, MY GOD, HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF. I MEAN, THEY WERE LITERALLY HAVING THE SAME CONVERSATION WE WERE HAVING. AND WHAT WAS FUNNY IS LIKE ALMOST TO A TEE WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION BECAUSE COUNCIL SAID IN 87, ON JANUARY 27, COUNCIL SAID, HEY, MAKE SURE OFFICE BUILDINGS NOT BE MADE NONCONFORMING. Right. So they couldn't have just said be conforming. They made some double negative. So not be made nonconforming. And then later at the March 22nd, 1988 meeting, they they cite the Planning Commission recommendation. The Planning Commission recommends that the language be legal nonconforming. And so then ultimately as a compromise, the council says, existing office buildings and uses may remain as permitted uses. So I think that's the language. that should be put here and leave the conforming non conforming out that's what they said is consistent I think that's. was pretty clear. So I don't know. That's my perspective. |
| 04:02:36.20 | Melissa Blaustein | Can I just ask a clarifying question, Vice Mayor? Sure, of course. So are you saying that that's it? That sentence would just rest as is and not the, rest of the staff recommendation. Thank you. |
| 04:02:49.99 | Janelle Kellman | Oh, no, that's the sentence that I would use. And the office, so where they said recognize office uses building and the office uses contained within as permitted uses for the language. I'm just suggesting we use permitted because it seems like 30 years ago, they came to the same compromise that we're potentially about to come to. Thank you. |
| 04:03:11.41 | Melissa Blaustein | Right, but the one, the issue I just wanted to understand where you were is there's two, two types of uses. There's office buildings and office uses. And the staff report takes out office uses, but when you were reading the 1987 thing, you, you inserted office uses. |
| 04:03:17.43 | Unknown | Very. |
| 04:03:29.31 | Melissa Blaustein | So I just didn't understand |
| 04:03:29.53 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:03:31.32 | Melissa Blaustein | your I understood most of what you said, but I didn't understand if you were proposing include office buildings and office uses or not. |
| 04:03:42.79 | Janelle Kellman | I am, thank you for that clarification. I am a supportive of language that matches the language in the Marineship specific plan. And that language does say buildings and uses. Great, thank you. |
| 04:03:56.58 | Melissa Blaustein | I would love to weigh in if I could, Mayor Hoffman. I'm especially nostalgic for your 1988 because that's when I was born. So I enjoyed very much. |
| 04:04:05.54 | Sherry VanColo | Very much. |
| 04:04:07.60 | Melissa Blaustein | So we have so many minutes around the non-conforming and legal conforming use. And I very much agree that we should continue to be per the decisions of the last three years consistent with the marineship specific plan around this and use the language of, if we compromise on permitted, I don't care just as long as it says permitted buildings and uses. I was really moved by the gentleman from SWA who came on and said his office has been there for |
| 04:04:22.33 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 04:04:22.36 | Unknown | AND I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT |
| 04:04:35.75 | Melissa Blaustein | you know, They've been operating there for about 50 years and that's technically a use, not an office building. So I just want to make sure that those folks that are there don't get kicked out under the new proposal. And I would be in agreement with vice mayor and council member. |
| 04:04:53.01 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thanks, Councilman Sobieski. |
| 04:04:56.69 | Ian Sobieski | So, you know, for me, this was just a forensic question. And the staff did a amazing job. finding and synthesizing these minutes. for the general public watching. Staff report on page 12 and 13 and 14 is what is most germane. So, I would direct everyone's attention to the last paragraph on page 12, which says that Staff review of these minutes indicate the council direction to consider the existing floor area of office at the time as permitted and legal conforming land use. And on page 14, The review of these meeting minutes make it clear that the city council intended that existing office uses within the MarinShip that predated the MarinShip specific plan be considered both conforming and permitted uses that these terms were used interchangeably between the marine ship specific plan and the 1995 German So like our mayor, I believe we should be clear and reduce the chances of confusion. The terms of art may have changed a little over time, but today, according to Lily, There's really no question that legal conforming is the term of art. that reduces the chance of confusion. I believe that what's consistent with all the minutes. which by the way, in the minutes, many people use that phrase, legal conformity. unpermitted interchangeably as synonyms. that we're going to be calls on us to not be So easy. and to use the best word, phrase we can. So legal conforming, I believe, is the word. should use. And so this proposal, oddly, that staff came up with. seems to try to pull their punch at the last moment, even though they weren't such a definitive staff report, the policy recommendation is a little bit garbled. It's not clear. when they say office uses contained within, do they mean within the building or within the Marinship? um, I think it should just clearly be reworded to say recognizes all office uses and office buildings built or established. prior to April 5th, 1988. uh, as permitted legal conforming. office uses in the merchant. period. And that should be the end of the um, of that. policy. you to end with that period. |
| 04:07:51.65 | Melissa Blaustein | Can I just add a suggestion? I mean, I don't, it's 1045 and I don't really want to sit around and decide if we're going to use permitted or legal conforming or conforming. So I'd be happy, whatever we language we come up with, maybe we should just add a sentence that says. |
| 04:08:02.40 | Unknown | WE HAVE A |
| 04:08:08.22 | Melissa Blaustein | permitted and legal conforming mean the same thing. to ask. I mean, Sure. Like I don't, I really, Lily said earlier that she thinks they're legally the same. And I don't really care which one we use. I see Janelle's point that using the original language is kind of harkens back to the, you know, the original document and I understand that might be Deanne, your point? So maybe if we just stated whichever one we choose, we just make a statement that we're not We're not picking that term because it means something different than the other term. So I'll just throw that out there so that we don't. |
| 04:08:50.61 | Ian Sobieski | Sounds good if you like that. |
| 04:08:51.79 | Melissa Blaustein | Bye. |
| 04:08:53.14 | Jill Hoffman | Can I, do you mind if I ask one follow up to Lily? Because my, This is my understanding. So many people have sort of projected different meanings onto these words, which is why we're here now. So they mean different things to different people in different contexts from what I understand. Lily, what can we do to make this clear. and not, Yeah. and not create even more confusion at 10.45 when we still have one more thing to do tonight. |
| 04:09:29.05 | Lily Whalen | What thank you may happen. So what would make it clear? I think as policy direction if you if the council would want it to go with permitted uses. I think that's fine as long as there's also a statement that says, and I don't want to use the double negative, but they're not non-conforming because I think that's the important part is that We're not. We're not excluding the word conforming or non-conforming. And... excluding the word conforming might lead us back to the same place 30 years from now. and confusion over what existing permitted means. And so if it's clear in the policy language that that doesn't mean that they are subject to chapter 10.62 of the Thank you. zoning ordinance, which is the nonconformity section. And I think that would be clear. Does that help? |
| 04:10:19.78 | Melissa Blaustein | Lillie, if we said after the sentence, if we said permitted uses are legal conforming uses. |
| 04:10:28.55 | Lily Whalen | That's clear to me. If the council wanted to use the word permitted, you could say they're permitted uses and then we could, we could call it craft something also that Clarify similar to your comment earlier. Yeah, council member. Remember Cleveland Knowles that that what that means is that they are not nonconforming, but we can phrase that better. So there's not a double negative. |
| 04:10:54.67 | Jill Hoffman | Here we go. Okay, so go ahead, Vice Mayor Kelman. |
| 04:10:57.76 | Janelle Kellman | Yeah, just wanted to throw out for everyone to consider, you know, in 95 when that language conforming was inserted in the Marineship specific plan still existed. And it existed to apply a more granular series of zoning direction protections and intentions And so they worked hand in hand. Now we're being asked or we've been directed by the prior council to integrate the Marinship Specific Plan into this document. And I think that without the additional language of the intention of the maroon ship specific plan, It wouldn't be appropriate to also include this additional language. that has been recommended that I wouldn't be able to support. And then I'll also that there's probably a reason that ADA Council having heard from the Planning Commission, having started in a different direction, settled on permitted. Right? They understood that's what made most sense for them and it turns out that That's what our zoning ordinance says. It says permitted. And that's what the Marinship Specific Plan says. It says permitted. And I think, that's actually the language that is most consistent. So I just wanted to throw out that we're in a different place Now, because we no longer have the language, the intention, the specificity of the Marinship Specific Plan. So as we bring it in to the general plan, I can absolutely get behind the permitted language. I can add in the buildings and uses. that so many have desired. but I do not believe permitted and conforming are the same thing. I don't think case law supports that. So I wouldn't be comfortable putting that in. |
| 04:12:39.00 | Melissa Blaustein | So I think that, so if they're not the same thing, then can you tell us why they aren't the same thing? |
| 04:12:45.48 | Janelle Kellman | Yes, I absolutely can. So the zoning rules, in my opinion, the zoning rules for a particular area can change over time as an area evolves. For example, the Marinship Specific Plan and offices that exist before and after. When this occurs, properties can be permitted to continue the activity they were engaging in prior to the zoning change. or properties can be permitted to maintain their existing structure. even if not currently allowed. And this continued use is actually referred to as a nonconforming use, since the property is legally permitted to be used for something that would not be permitted under current zoning regulations. |
| 04:13:24.42 | Melissa Blaustein | So you're Janelle you're just saying that permitted means non conforming, which is exactly the opposite of what the Council in 1988 was discussing they were talking about conforming uses. |
| 04:13:36.27 | Janelle Kellman | Is that what you just said? I do believe that permitted means not conforming. I do not think permitted means conforming. I think |
| 04:13:44.27 | Melissa Blaustein | I think we're talking completely across each other and you're directly contradicting what staff and the city attorney have said. I mean, we should have Mary come on. |
| 04:13:54.27 | Janelle Kellman | I am contradicting staff and the city attorney with respect. I've had multiple conversations on the topic. I do believe this perspective and I offer it with respect to the fellow council members, because I do believe that it mirrors the language in the marineship specific plan. And I do think it's important that we're integrating that specific plan into this general plan. And that is a change in circumstance. So I welcome your thoughts. I appreciate your feedback. But I thought about this and I think to achieve you know, the intention of bringing the specific plan into the general plan, this makes the most sense. |
| 04:14:31.01 | Jill Hoffman | So, But we can all agree, I think we all got to the point where we agreed that we were going to land on one term and that I think the best term taken from what I've heard from from the plan for the emergency ship specific plan was permitted. And that was the clearest, even though, even though you know, especially when people look at Later. But I know Councilmember Sobieski thought that thought that conforming was better. |
| 04:15:02.47 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 04:15:02.87 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:15:02.97 | Melissa Blaustein | now I feel we have to use conforming because Council Vice Mayor Come and thanks. PB, Sarah Silver, Permanent, Permitted means non conforming so i'm. much more in favor of using conforming, legal conforming or conforming. |
| 04:15:18.46 | Ian Sobieski | I think this highlights exactly why we have to be precise with our language. I had no dog in this fight. The staff report, though, is clear. It's just a forensic examination of the minutes. And the clear evidence is that legal nonconforming is what the meaning of the intent was. That's the closest approximation to our current language, and that's what fairies should be. |
| 04:15:46.29 | Melissa Blaustein | I'd really like to hear from the city attorney just for clarification, because I think what the vice mayor said is important and I think what council member said is important. I just wanna understand because whether or not we all believe it means a certain thing, what powers those words give the city means something different. |
| 04:15:52.55 | Ian Sobieski | We've been all set as a |
| 04:15:53.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:16:01.70 | Melissa Blaustein | really want to understand. Please, if I may. |
| 04:16:03.86 | Jill Hoffman | of the THE END OF Yep. Yeah, anybody, you know, any staff, what's the way? When? |
| 04:16:12.16 | Mary Wagner | Sure. So I think we're talking about three terms, permitted, conforming, and legal non-conforming. |
| 04:16:18.27 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 04:16:19.08 | Mary Wagner | Legal non-conforming. and permitted are not the same thing. A legal non-conforming use is a use that was permitted at a certain time under the zoning regulations. The zoning regulations then change, and it's no longer a permitted use. It's a legal non-conforming use because it existed at the time legally. and then the rules changed and it's allowed to remain. for so long as it remains. there are implications for that, that if the use ceases or if there's a change that that use cannot automatically be reinstated. a conforming use, in my opinion, and a permitted use are the same thing. I do agree. and Lily and I spoke about this earlier today, that from a general plan perspective, conforming is the better word to use in the general plan and permitted is the word that comes up in the zoning ordinance. You will see a use with a P next to it in the zoning ordinance, meaning it's permitted. To me, that answers the question, but if there's more clarity or information I can provide, I'd be happy to. |
| 04:17:29.26 | Jill Hoffman | So, What functionally is the difference between using the term permitted Thank you. |
| 04:17:36.47 | Mary Wagner | forming. I think it's important for the council to tell us what your intent is with the use of the language. So if your intent is that office buildings and office uses that were in existence in April 5th, 1988, I believe. are allowed to remain. as. permitted conforming uses. to bring that language forward. If that's your intent, then I think we can work with that. I do believe you could say in your opinion that using the words legal and permitted as they were used in the MSP and the 95 general plan are the same. You could say it that way if you wanted to. |
| 04:18:27.36 | Kay Carlson | Okay. |
| 04:18:28.59 | Mary Wagner | Well, I would recommend. Sorry, excuse me. No. |
| 04:18:28.63 | Kay Carlson | Well, |
| 04:18:35.46 | Melissa Blaustein | Oh, is that we have LU 2.15 say Existing Marineship office uses recognize all office buildings and office uses built or established prior to April 5, 1988. adoption date of ownership specific plan and the office uses contained within as permitted legal conforming office uses. in the market. |
| 04:19:01.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. And so, and you said legal and conforming? No, legal. |
| 04:19:08.08 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:19:08.30 | Jill Hoffman | conforming. |
| 04:19:08.98 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 04:19:09.08 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. legal conforming. |
| 04:19:10.92 | Melissa Blaustein | which is I think what our city attorney just said. She and our community development director recommended as the appropriate language in the general plan. |
| 04:19:20.65 | Melissa Blaustein | you Can I ask another question about that, Mary? Legal question? Would that mean that the enforcement for the Marineship Specific Plan as it was developed would maintain and continue? Because I think that's important for the direction. Like, would that be or would it not? with what, I guess that's what I'm trying to understand. to Would it change our enforcement as it operates now as it is for the uses in the |
| 04:19:46.41 | Mary Wagner | So if I'm understanding the council's direction correctly, it would not be a change from the existing. THE END OF THE END OF THE the existing uses. So no, it would not be a change in enforcement. I'd welcome your community development director to weigh in. if there's a concern about how it's been applied. I don't, and that's where the language about the modification to the program came in. But I think that you could say, what you've said tonight and that's that's clear to me on what your your recommendation is but i would ask um lily to weigh in if she has a different opinion |
| 04:20:26.13 | Lily Whalen | So I'll just add that the staff was proffering the this policy recommendation here for the council's consideration. because of how, um, permitting has been issued over time. And I think there's been |
| 04:20:44.49 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 04:20:44.76 | Lily Whalen | not crystal clear clarity on how office uses in non-office buildings have been treated. And so that's how we came up with that policy due to the amount of conversation that has been occurring in the community over the last couple of months on this policy. But as we stated in the staff report, we think that the council's clear intention from the 80s was that office uses in office buildings and other office uses in the our uses that are not nonconforming and so they are conforming and permitted uses allowed to remain allowed to go away and then come back. That's what that means. |
| 04:21:31.52 | Melissa Blaustein | But Lily, from a practical perspective, would it change, was there any time that a use permit was denied based on this language. |
| 04:21:40.24 | Lily Whalen | Yeah, that's a good question. So I cannot recall, and I did go back and just tried and did a sampling of use of, the occupational use permits that were granted over time to see how they've been given to office uses in non-office buildings and i i cannot recall a time i did not find any permits that were denied that doesn't mean though that staff didn't have a conversation with a you know tenant at the or a potential tenant at the counter and given them information that an office use couldn't go into a tenant space because it had been replaced by a permitted use. I will, since I do, I am speaking right now just recommend to the Council if you are going in this. |
| 04:22:26.75 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 04:22:26.78 | Unknown | Right. |
| 04:22:27.00 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 04:22:30.31 | Lily Whalen | or suggest to the council if you are going in the direction of making a policy statement that office. Buildings and office uses are legal conforming that you have a conversation about how that will be applied if it's applied on a parcel basis or if it's applied per tenant space, for example, um, You know, for there was an office use in a particular tenant space on a parcel. If that's tenant space has that office use. you know, existing permitted able to transfer over to different uses and then come back as office or if it's a limit on square footage of office on a particular parcel which it appears that that was the intent of the Council in the 80s. but it's, |
| 04:23:19.57 | Janelle Kellman | Lily, so the other things you're getting at are covered in the Marineship specific plan. So are you indicating then that there is we lose some additional direction in simply pulling out language without having the benefit of the larger Marinership Specific Plan document. It's almost like we're sort of cherry picking but we don't have Because the Mission Pacific Plan speaks to a lot of that, and we went over a lot of that on some other provisions around ancillary and accessory office use. I guess my question for staff is, do you have any concerns at all around cherry picking language without having the full power and weight of the marineship specific plan to lend additional insight is that of concern to the staff at all Thank you. I don't know. |
| 04:24:06.47 | Melissa Blaustein | Just as a companion question, right, to a companion question, I think that I just want to ask, I think the friendship specific plan is going to stay in full force and effect. |
| 04:24:06.58 | Janelle Kellman | Just as a question. |
| 04:24:16.94 | Melissa Blaustein | if I understand correctly, until any zoning amendments are made. We're not losing it. |
| 04:24:23.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:24:23.49 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 04:24:23.81 | Unknown | plan. |
| 04:24:24.25 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 04:24:25.74 | Lily Whalen | That's correct. And I don't, to answer your question, Vice Mayor Kallman, I don't have concerns if the policy as, and then say by council members Cleveland Knowles went forward tonight. I don't think that even if we didn't have the Marineship specific plan, I don't think the MSP would inform that policy. I think we could we could tackle that policy and enforcement on its own. if that answers your question. |
| 04:24:53.78 | Janelle Kellman | It does, thank you very much. |
| 04:24:58.90 | Janelle Kellman | Thank you. |
| 04:24:58.93 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. So I think we're ready to go back. We have the motions. I feel like we're ready. |
| 04:25:10.47 | Mary Wagner | Mayor Hoffman may make a suggestion on process. |
| 04:25:15.03 | Jill Hoffman | I think. I don't know. |
| 04:25:15.23 | Mary Wagner | If you're ready, if you're ready. If you're ready to start entertaining motions. |
| 04:25:20.02 | Jill Hoffman | I think so. Let me ask you this. have we... Decided what. the language we exhausted that do we know what language we want to use because i'm It's still not entirely clear. Are we using permitted and conforming? Are we just going to say legally conforming? parentheses. that we have. |
| 04:25:44.26 | Ian Sobieski | Council member Susan Cleveland also proffered some language that sounded That's good. |
| 04:25:50.77 | Melissa Blaustein | I was going to say that we would state that, but it doesn't sound like Vice Mayor Kalman actually agrees with the statement that I was originally proposing. So I don't think I would propose that. So I would propose what I had read before on this particular one. And I guess I can make it as a motion, a proposal. that LEU 2.15 existing lines of office uses And then recognizing all office buildings, and office uses built or established. prior to April 5th, 1988. And this is then just the rest of this existing policy, parentheses, adoption date of friendship specific plan and the office uses contained within as permitted legal conforming office uses in the Marinship. So the only change to the existing policy language and the staff report on page 15. is and office uses. And then it's striking the language. Bye. I mean, I don't know why staff struck the language, the rest of this language that says with the exception of accessory office. uses approved for program LU 3.13, but I'm happy to. |
| 04:27:14.47 | Jeff Bradley | I could share my screen, so I'll make sure we understand the same set of facts. |
| 04:27:24.55 | Melissa Blaustein | Sure, I mean, it's up to the mayor. Thank you. |
| 04:27:26.67 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. If you guys think it would be helpful, I think it probably would. |
| 04:27:43.58 | Jeff Bradley | Do you guys see a word doc? Okay, so I inserted and office uses as described. And then since we're including office buildings and office uses within the main policy, we can delete the entire part in red here. that had been PB, David Ensign PB, David Ens |
| 04:28:30.58 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, that's my proposal. Thanks. |
| 04:28:36.94 | Ian Sobieski | Is the phrase and office uses contained within a useless appendage in this paragraph? Or does it have some meaning? |
| 04:28:46.42 | Unknown | It has meaning. and legal compliance. |
| 04:28:56.04 | Ian Sobieski | Okay. Do you need a second for that or is that not working? Yeah. |
| 04:29:00.82 | Jill Hoffman | I think we're not ready to do that. We're going to do the EIR first, and then we're going to do the overlay, and then we're going to come back to this. is that |
| 04:29:11.45 | Janelle Kellman | And Mary Hoffman, out of curiosity, did staff have any office use data prior to 1988? |
| 04:29:20.86 | Unknown | Yeah, that's what they use to issue the use permits. |
| 04:29:25.88 | Janelle Kellman | Right, so I'm just wondering if I had asked staff and I think they were gonna continue to look into it. So maybe Lily, you can. |
| 04:29:32.46 | Lily Whalen | Sure, thank you, Vice Mayor Coleman. We do have occupational use permits that have been issued over time and the data |
| 04:29:32.47 | Janelle Kellman | Sure. |
| 04:29:41.72 | Lily Whalen | We have a lot of occupational use permits. So I think we have, I think We have the records of those who applied legally for permits to occupy tenant spaces. It's all on an address-based |
| 04:29:58.01 | Ian Sobieski | Uh-uh. |
| 04:29:58.43 | Lily Whalen | So it's not a single database that's easy to access. It's paper files. We've scanned the paper files. So we've scanned the paper files. there will be a record keeping project MR KIRBY, to live. |
| 04:30:11.03 | Ian Sobieski | to do that. Lily, then do you need us to also amend 2.15.1 to direct you to establish a inventory of April 5th, 1988 uses for the purpose of enforcing this policy? |
| 04:30:29.21 | Lily Whalen | Thank you, Councilmember Sobieski. I think that would be helpful. |
| 04:30:32.84 | Ian Sobieski | So can we, amend to 15.1 to that effect, which is basically maintain an inventory and location square footage information, of office uses in the Marin ship on April. current as of April 5, 1988. period. |
| 04:30:53.84 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:31:03.72 | Ian Sobieski | which is the rest of that. |
| 04:31:07.51 | Melissa Blaustein | Lily, did you, I couldn't hear if you agreed that that was helpful or not. Maybe I missed. |
| 04:31:14.74 | Janelle Kellman | I believe she said it was helpful. And I think that's a great add, Councilmember Sobieski. |
| 04:31:19.80 | Lily Whalen | Yeah. I agree. This is a good add. if I can, council members, just the, I just want to make sure that the the legal non-conforming uses that's still in the policy here. Yeah, you're intentionally keeping that in. |
| 04:31:38.02 | Melissa Blaustein | Legal conforming uses. Yeah. |
| 04:31:40.81 | Lily Whalen | legal non-conforming so I think there needs to be a change |
| 04:31:41.43 | Melissa Blaustein | She's done. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Thank you. I don't know how that got in there. |
| 04:31:50.12 | Jeff Bradley | the, The part that the council has been discussing is the office buildings and office uses pre-98 are considered permitted legal performing office uses. The second sentence deals with |
| 04:32:03.74 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. Accessory. Right. |
| 04:32:05.45 | Jeff Bradley | the exception with the exception of accessory office uses approved for the program. All other legally established office uses are considered legal non-conforming uses. So if they're not covered by the main provision consistent with the specific plan and the 95 general plan, and they're not accessory office uses, then by definition, they're not conforming uses. |
| 04:32:34.66 | Lily Whalen | if I can. That's the logic. Yeah. |
| 04:32:36.14 | Jeff Bradley | That's the logic anyway. Yeah. |
| 04:32:40.06 | Lily Whalen | it. |
| 04:32:40.88 | Jeff Bradley | I think. |
| 04:32:41.88 | Lily Whalen | I don't think that they would be legal non-conforming uses, though, Jeff. If they're not. if they're |
| 04:32:50.64 | Jeff Bradley | It could possibly be. |
| 04:32:52.09 | Lily Whalen | building or office use that was established after the MSP should be should be in that first category there as a legal Peace. |
| 04:33:05.88 | Melissa Blaustein | No, but I think these are, Lily, I think the second paragraph is meant to talk about accessory. So accessory office has always been allowed. So these are, I think it's meant to say that You can't have any new office except for accessories. And that if it's a new accessory use being developed now, like so say a light industrial use comes in, And it requires 2,500 square feet of office. That's a new office. Wouldn't that be? I see you think that's just illegal. because it's accessory use, legal conforming. |
| 04:33:43.44 | Lily Whalen | Yeah, if the industrial use has accessory office use that's that's approved through the program on the screen here. So I think that the second sentence is trying to say with the exception of those accessory offices. All other legally established office uses are considered I think this is actually a remnant from the prior recommendation in November where the recommendation was split between office buildings as being deemed conforming uses and then office uses otherwise, with the exception of accessory office uses, those office uses in non-office buildings. in November, the direction was that they were non-conforming uses. So I think this is a remnant from that, but Jeff, you could correct me if I'm It is just too late for me right now. |
| 04:34:34.08 | Jeff Bradley | That's definitely a possibility. I viewed it as addressing office spaces that may have been established outside of the specific plan and that were essentially Not. Even though a permit may have been issued, it wasn't strictly consistent with the policy. |
| 04:35:01.32 | Melissa Blaustein | So perhaps we could just state that accessory uses are dealt with in this other policy, just as a statement. And I don't see why we have to or just leave it out. I mean, we have a different policy about accessory uses. |
| 04:35:19.36 | Janelle Kellman | I'm sorry, Jeff, would you repeat what you just said? Can you just repeat that? |
| 04:35:25.36 | Jeff Bradley | Well, during the GPAC phase of the general plan update, we heard a lot of concerns from GPAC members and members of the public about spaces evolving over time from industrial applied arts to office. Right. And there was a concern that a lot was happening at such a granular level, it was difficult for the city to enforce their standard requirements around new office spaces. It is possible that there's like, you know, two or three categories of office space in the Marine ship. Maybe office space that's been there for a long time and it clearly falls under this conforming use provision, permitted use. I'm gonna use those changes. I'm gonna use both those terms from now on just to avoid any confusion. And we have them both in here now, excuse me. And then you have accessory office uses that come in as part of a larger industrial building. That's fine. There's also offices that are there, but main, and I can't point to any specific cases, But they may be there like right now today, and they may not be in accessory office shoes, and they may not have been existing since April 5th, 1988. And so, I think the attempt was to sort of just describe the total universe of offices and how they could be possibly categorized. Thank you. |
| 04:37:03.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:37:04.17 | Melissa Blaustein | And that would be appropriate that they'd be legal non-conforming. I mean, that's really the only way to treat them. It's not like we're going to. Is that what the recommendation was from the GPAC, that that's how they were treated? |
| 04:37:21.36 | Jeff Bradley | Honestly, I don't know if we ever got that nuanced on that part of it. |
| 04:37:25.72 | Janelle Kellman | WE DID, JEFF. AND THAT CATEGORY IS ACTUALLY NOT COMPLIANT. THEY'RE ILLEGAL, AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM. SO I THINK THEY'RE CONSIDERED NON-CONFORMING USES, BUT NOT LEGAL NON-CONFORMING USES. BUT I ALSO JUST WANT TO SUGGEST, FOR THE GOOD OF THE ORDER AND THE TIME, THE CLOCK, YOU KNOW, I THINK YOU HAD LEGAL DELETEED AND I WILL JUST SUGGEST TO MY FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT IF YOU WERE TO CONTINUE TO DELETE LEGAL, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE VOTES. I WOULD BE WILLING TO VOTE FOR THIS LANGUAGE WITHOUT LEGAL NON-CONFORMING. right over by your cursor, Jeff. and accept the permitted legal conforming use that we just engaged in a dialogue on in the interest of reaching compromise. So would anybody, care to mention or care to comment on if we would remove the legal part of the non-conforming at the end of that sentence, Jeff, |
| 04:38:21.19 | Jeff Bradley | I'll do whatever you guys tell me to. |
| 04:38:23.09 | Janelle Kellman | Would that be amenable because these are actually non-compliant uses? And then we would go ahead and accept the remaining language as we've Thoroughly discussed. |
| 04:38:35.98 | Melissa Blaustein | I am just very concerned that we're making a change that we haven't even discussed at all. I mean, no one seems to be able to say if this was a, discussion that came out of GPAC and then to just overturn it. right now, I just feel really uncomfortable doing that. I mean, there's a huge difference between those two choices. But nobody, even our community development director and our consultant can't tell us why that sentence is in there. Or our community, our consultant just told us it was a consensus of GPAC, but he wasn't sure. So I think we either take it out |
| 04:39:07.34 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:39:07.35 | Ian Sobieski | So, yeah. |
| 04:39:07.44 | Janelle Kellman | So, |
| 04:39:07.62 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:39:10.14 | Melissa Blaustein | or we Leave it as is. |
| 04:39:13.88 | Janelle Kellman | Okay, so I can be okay with taking it out. But if it stays, then I would say remove legal but it was both g pack and the working group. I remember we spent a lot of time on this in the working group. And you're right was it was pretty confusing at the time as well. So maybe we can hear from some other Council members in terms of Uh, removing this. |
| 04:39:37.54 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I mean, I... You guys are the ones that were If the people that were most intimately involved in this cannot This is... you know, figure this out, then this is the whole issue, right? With this whole conforming, non-conforming, permitted, legal permitted. I mean, You know, so And You know, at this point, I'm at a loss what to do, right? Because it's 1118. We haven't got a straight answer, I don't think, about what the effects of this are or even the history of it. And so I'm trying to figure out where to go from here, right? So what's the responsible course of action right now with regard to this language? I hate to say it, but Do we need to table this? We need to figure this one out. |
| 04:40:26.87 | Melissa Blaustein | This is what I would recommend. If I did not want to kick anything down the road and he can down the road. but maybe we can put this last sentence in the, Stephanie Rohdieckle, Staff. bucket. Um, |
| 04:40:43.56 | Jeff Bradley | If I may, Madam Mayor. |
| 04:40:43.63 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm sorry. |
| 04:40:43.81 | Alex Merritt | I know. |
| 04:40:43.90 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. |
| 04:40:44.30 | Sybil Boutillier | If I may. |
| 04:40:46.01 | Melissa Blaustein | Sure. |
| 04:40:46.28 | Sybil Boutillier | Thank you. |
| 04:40:47.37 | Jeff Bradley | Um, it's, my memory is getting jogged and I know this. Bye. This policy used to be much shorter. It tracked perfectly with the 1995 general plan, except we made the mistake of trying to change it to nonconforming. I know we're talking about |
| 04:41:09.72 | Lily Whalen | All right, Jeff, I'm just going to put this table up here because I think this is what you need here. |
| 04:41:13.63 | Jeff Bradley | Okay, thank you. I did want to point out this second sentence is actually not needed because it was it was addressing the fact that we had had bifurcated the issue between office buildings and office uses. And so then the second sentence is trying to explain what happened what what's the fate of office spaces that are not part of dedicated office buildings. So in fact, by adding the short edition that the council seemed to agree on in the first sentence actually negates the need for the second sentence. |
| 04:41:51.82 | Lily Whalen | I agree with Jess. |
| 04:41:54.05 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. So, So, Mayor, if it's okay with you, I think, We might be ready to start making some motions |
| 04:42:04.56 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. And vice mayor, does that make sense to you? That explanation from Jeff. |
| 04:42:10.92 | Janelle Kellman | Yeah, I think that's fine. I think that's fine. I do think it's addressed elsewhere. I think it is consistent with what the working group and GPAC said previously, but I do think it's addressed elsewhere in the general plan. Okay. So. |
| 04:42:27.91 | Lily Whalen | Madam Mayor, I'm sorry to interrupt you. I'm sorry. Just for implementation of this policy in the future, it would be helpful. |
| 04:42:27.95 | Janelle Kellman | I'm not a member. |
| 04:42:35.42 | Lily Whalen | to get council direction on if your intent is the same as the council in the 1980s that There is this kind of concept of you know, the square footage of office that existed in April 5th, 1988, and that can be transferred around the parcel or, if, the office use is related to a specific tenant space or a building, or if further study of that needs to occur. |
| 04:43:09.04 | Janelle Kellman | I thought we went over that pretty in depth when you guys had the whole analysis and then you had the math problem. Um, and we looked at if you had a, uh, an office and then you wanted to make sure that. If you had multiple tenants, everybody got their fair share. |
| 04:43:26.44 | Lily Whalen | A little bit different. So this, because this policy is basically saying that the office use that existed in 1988 that amount that can remain on that parcel. My question is implementation of that policy. And if a tenant space has You know, if the office use has moved to another tenant space in the building, Does it need |
| 04:43:50.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:43:50.31 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 04:43:50.38 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:43:51.70 | Lily Whalen | you know, Does, How is that office regulated among the parcel? And in the 1980s, the council I think they had an understanding that it could be the cap was what it was on that date and it can be transferred around. it would be helpful to get council confirmation that that's how you'd like that applied in the future. |
| 04:44:12.24 | Janelle Kellman | So, Lilly, how are you doing now? |
| 04:44:12.86 | Lily Whalen | You're doing it now. |
| 04:44:15.46 | Janelle Kellman | How are you implementing it now? |
| 04:44:17.97 | Lily Whalen | We are not doing that. |
| 04:44:19.73 | Janelle Kellman | Yeah. |
| 04:44:20.10 | Lily Whalen | We don't have a record of how much office space existed in April 5, 1988. on a particular parcel in a comprehensive database. So we would have to go to the address and do that research, which would be the program that |
| 04:44:36.30 | Ian Sobieski | On the bottom of page 12 in your report, you say, it appears that there was an understanding that square footage of existing office uses could be transferred within a given parcel but not exceed the amount that existed at MS at environment specific plan adoption. |
| 04:44:36.40 | Lily Whalen | or something. That's interesting. |
| 04:44:54.74 | Ian Sobieski | So if we're staying consistent with the idea that all of this effort for the last hour has been to try to maintain the original intent And I think the council was Direction is clear. Let's keep the original intent. So that's just hiding in your report, and that should be the sense from us. |
| 04:45:13.51 | Melissa Blaustein | I agree with council member sobieski, but I'm also not sure if that's logistically like how that logistically works. So what I would, So what I would suggest for tonight is that we give that direction to staff and then if there is a problem with to explain if that's not feasible since that's not what they've been doing. So it just seems like how you negotiate that internally within a building might be. I don't know, I can't even imagine what some of the issues would, but I like, I like the general direction that if we can be consistent with the original intent, we are. and have staff come back if there's an implementation issue. |
| 04:45:52.62 | Jill Hoffman | I think that's acceptable. And anybody else object to that approach? |
| 04:45:57.08 | Lily Whalen | Does that work for staff? Sorry. Yes, thank you very much. |
| 04:46:04.05 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Okay, now I think we're ready to go back. induced emotions. Let's start with the EIR. Does anybody want to make a motion on the EIR? |
| 04:46:16.30 | Mary Wagner | And Madam Mayor, if I may just make a statement for the record that, you know, all these changes you've discussed tonight to the general plan programs and policies don't create any new significant environmental impacts that weren't previously analyzed under the general plan EIR. And all of your consultants agree with that. you're able to move forward with certification of the EIR and then with the changes you've been discussing about the general plan. |
| 04:46:45.28 | Melissa Blaustein | Right. |
| 04:46:45.31 | Mary Wagner | Thank you. |
| 04:46:45.34 | Melissa Blaustein | And... |
| 04:46:45.87 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. With that, I'd make a motion that we certify the revised final environmental impact report, including the recirculated revised draft EIR, response to comments, mitigation monitoring reporting programs, MMRP. second. Uh, |
| 04:47:02.98 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:47:03.04 | Heidi Scoble | Could you call the roll, please? |
| 04:47:03.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:47:04.75 | Heidi Scoble | I mean, not Lily, Heidi. Sorry, I think Councilmember Sobieski. |
| 04:47:09.46 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. |
| 04:47:10.52 | Heidi Scoble | Council member Blaustein? Yes. Council member Cleveland Knowles? Vice Mayor Kelman? Mayor Hoffman. Yeah. |
| 04:47:19.75 | Jill Hoffman | this. Okay, and then our next motion is how does the next motion need to be styled? |
| 04:47:31.80 | Mary Wagner | So if the if the Council would like you could now take motions on the two issues that you spent a significant amount of time on tonight discussing the housing overlay and then the office, if you would like to do it that way. You could take separate actions on those as there may not have been complete consensus. And then that direction is implemented into the general plan. And then you take a final vote on the general plan. or if somebody is able to craft one motion, that incorporates all of it, you could do it that way too. Just thought it might be a little less confusing take an action on the overlay, an action on the office, and I think we have pretty clear direction and language on that. and then just vote on the general plan, incorporating those changes. |
| 04:48:14.65 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, I think we need to take three. I think we need to take three because I think we're going to have different votes on them. based on my Thank you. Thank you. reading of the tea leaves. So does somebody want to make a motion with regard to the overlay? |
| 04:48:30.69 | Melissa Blaustein | Sure, I'm gonna overlay land use element policy 1.19.2. I would make a motion to keep the language without the uh, as it was when it went to the Planning Commission without the added language from the Planning Commission. Okay. |
| 04:48:52.12 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Do, wait a second. Thank you. |
| 04:48:53.59 | Alice Merrill | on it. |
| 04:48:56.48 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:48:58.47 | Janelle Kellman | Okay. |
| 04:48:58.79 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Do we have any alternate motions? |
| 04:49:04.16 | Janelle Kellman | I mean, I don't think we have support for it, but I might as well make them alternate motion that we adopt the planning commission's recommendation. to not have the Marinship included in the overlook. Thank you. |
| 04:49:15.97 | Jill Hoffman | I would second that motion. As I understand it, we vote on the most recent motion first. Heidi, I have you call the roll on that. on the... |
| 04:49:29.87 | Ian Sobieski | Which one is inverted up? |
| 04:49:31.80 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, that's my question. |
| 04:49:34.35 | Ian Sobieski | Who's not? Janelle? |
| 04:49:36.54 | Jill Hoffman | Janelle's motion, yeah. Otherwise styled as the life layer. |
| 04:49:39.86 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:49:40.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:49:40.44 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 04:49:40.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:49:42.38 | Heidi Scoble | Councilmember Sobieski. |
| 04:49:43.81 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:49:46.21 | Heidi Scoble | Council member Blastie? Council member Cleveland knows? Vice Mayor Kelman? |
| 04:49:57.11 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 04:49:57.14 | Jill Hoffman | and Mayor Hoffman. Yes. So I believe that motion fails on a 3-2 vote. And so let's go, we'll now take a vote on the original motion, the first motion that was made. That was the Susan Cleveland-Knowles motion. Council member Sobieski. |
| 04:50:18.93 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. |
| 04:50:20.31 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:50:20.33 | Heidi Scoble | Council member Glaustein? Yes. Council member Cleveland Knowles? Yes. Vice Mayor Killman. for the rest of the day. I know you're hopping. |
| 04:50:29.04 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. know And that motion passes on a 3-2. Okay, moving on. Then the next motion is, is our office motion. Thank you. |
| 04:50:43.25 | Melissa Blaustein | So I think Jeff had the language drafted. Do we want to share his screen again so that everybody can see it? |
| 04:50:50.49 | Kay Carlson | Adios. |
| 04:50:55.26 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 04:50:55.35 | Unknown | unless Jeff has gone home. |
| 04:50:56.93 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. Yeah. So, yeah. |
| 04:50:58.57 | Unknown | He's over. |
| 04:50:59.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:50:59.24 | Ian Sobieski | I was... |
| 04:50:59.26 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:50:59.28 | Jeff Bradley | Thank you. |
| 04:50:59.38 | Melissa Blaustein | It was a lot of fun. |
| 04:51:01.05 | Jeff Bradley | I wouldn't miss this. |
| 04:51:01.84 | Melissa Blaustein | I wouldn't miss this. He's pouring himself a drink, I know it. |
| 04:51:04.81 | Jeff Bradley | I wouldn't miss this for the world. |
| 04:51:06.62 | Melissa Blaustein | Oh, Jeff. |
| 04:51:07.76 | Jeff Bradley | Thanks. |
| 04:51:08.66 | Melissa Blaustein | I wish I believed that. Would you make that any bigger, Jeff? Yeah. |
| 04:51:20.99 | Melissa Blaustein | All right, okay, so I make a motion to adopt LU policy 2.15, existing internship office uses as drafted by Jeff Bradley on the screen, which reads, I'll just read it into the record, recognizing all office buildings and office uses filter established prior to April 5th 1988, adoption date of the friendship specific plan. And the office uses contained within as permitted legal conforming office uses in the |
| 04:51:52.45 | Tom Ford | Second. |
| 04:51:54.88 | Jill Hoffman | Um... I just need to ask for a clarification if that's okay. Do we need to add in language that we... um that we direct staff to the to come back to us if there's a problem with implementation on this or Or do we just, I mean, I'm just asking Mary, I suppose her staff, |
| 04:52:18.17 | Melissa Blaustein | PB Sarah Silver, Oh, and then yeah I also, so I should have been the motion sorry Jeff just scroll down to all you to point 15.1 as amended. and to provide staff direction to come back. to the council. Oh, no. And to implement the policy with the direction of the 1987 and 1988, City councils. that the intent. And you had the page number bottom of page 12. |
| 04:52:52.98 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. Page 12, bottom page 12. |
| 04:52:58.52 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 04:52:58.55 | Unknown | Uh, |
| 04:52:59.33 | Ian Sobieski | Last sentence, additionally, it appears that there was an understanding that the square footage of existing office users could be transferred within a given parcel but not exceed the amount that existed at the membership specific plan adoption. Thank you. |
| 04:53:17.74 | Melissa Blaustein | And just for future reference, that's printed on the bottom of page 12, top of page 13 of our staff report for staff's reference. |
| 04:53:29.13 | Melissa Blaustein | and |
| 04:53:33.99 | Melissa Blaustein | if there are implementation issues for staff to return to the council on a later date. Thank you. |
| 04:53:40.81 | Unknown | Thank you, John. you |
| 04:53:48.97 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. So I believe we have a motion. We have a second. We have an amendment to the motion. I think the person that moves the motion accepts the amendment. But since you made the amendment, I'm guessing that you accept it. |
| 04:53:59.92 | Melissa Blaustein | I do, and thank you for everybody's help. |
| 04:54:02.99 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Okay. So I think we're ready for a poll for the role to be taken. Councilmember said |
| 04:54:09.97 | Heidi Scoble | Yes. |
| 04:54:10.15 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:54:10.30 | Heidi Scoble | and then, |
| 04:54:10.37 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:54:10.42 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 04:54:10.44 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:54:10.66 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. |
| 04:54:11.89 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:54:11.90 | Heidi Scoble | Council member Blasting. Yes. Council member Cleveland Knowles. Thank you. |
| 04:54:17.10 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 04:54:18.74 | Heidi Scoble | Vice Mayor Kilman? Yes. Mayor Hoffman. |
| 04:54:22.92 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. Okay, thanks you guys. We're very close. And now would somebody like to make a motion for a final vote on the general plan? And I would actually invite one of our City Council members who actually worked on the general plan working group and the general plan and the general plan update committee to make the motion in a second, I think that's They've earned that. |
| 04:54:51.17 | Janelle Kellman | I'll go ahead and then make the motion that we adopt the draft resolution attachment 3B, adopting the final draft general plan. Thank you. I'll second that. |
| 04:55:02.50 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 04:55:02.51 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 04:55:02.53 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 04:55:02.56 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. |
| 04:55:02.80 | Janelle Kellman | Thank you. |
| 04:55:02.95 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 04:55:03.00 | Sherry VanColo | Thank you. |
| 04:55:03.83 | Janelle Kellman | And... |
| 04:55:03.97 | Melissa Blaustein | And can I just ask a question before we vote? |
| 04:55:03.98 | Janelle Kellman | And can I just |
| 04:55:06.73 | Melissa Blaustein | Yes. |
| 04:55:07.00 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 04:55:09.18 | Melissa Blaustein | that people can vote for this with the clarification that you're not voting for the thing you already voted no on. Right. |
| 04:55:19.86 | Janelle Kellman | I understand that as well. Yeah, Mary, do you have a different opinion? |
| 04:55:23.40 | Melissa Blaustein | I mean, |
| 04:55:23.49 | Janelle Kellman | Thank you. the way. |
| 04:55:23.98 | Melissa Blaustein | why did we take those other |
| 04:55:25.70 | Mary Wagner | Yeah, no, I think that's clear, that your position on those two issues are clear. |
| 04:55:31.98 | Melissa Blaustein | that. I mean, you can still vote now. I just wanted to clarify what we were |
| 04:55:35.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 04:55:38.63 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 04:55:39.03 | Jill Hoffman | I mean, do we need to do an accepting accepting |
| 04:55:39.12 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 04:55:42.78 | Jill Hoffman | I think it's clear. Okay. Yeah, accepting the prior. vote on the motion, I don't know how it Mary, do we need to do that or do we? |
| 04:55:54.74 | Mary Wagner | No, so the general plan now includes those two changes you just voted on. And we have clear understanding of who voted for what on those two issues. So I think, you know, it's of course up to you individually. But if you can support the general plan as it stands and knowing that we understand what your vote was on the overlay. And I think you can move forward. And we have those changes incorporated now into the general |
| 04:56:19.43 | Jill Hoffman | Very good. And unless anybody has another clarifying question, I believe we're ready to vote. Um, Heidi, would you please call her all? |
| 04:56:29.42 | Heidi Scoble | Council member Sobieski? Council member Blasting. Absolutely. Council member Cleveland Knowles. Yes. Vice Mayor Kellman. |
| 04:56:41.10 | Janelle Kellman | Yes. |
| 04:56:41.35 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. Mayor Hoffman. Yeah. |
| 04:56:43.97 | Jill Hoffman | us. |
| 04:56:44.49 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. |
| 04:56:44.51 | Janelle Kellman | Thank you. |
| 04:56:45.62 | Jill Hoffman | Let's take it. |
| 04:56:46.03 | Janelle Kellman | I've also taken my |
| 04:56:47.04 | Jill Hoffman | moment. |
| 04:56:47.75 | Janelle Kellman | to savor |
| 04:56:48.79 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:56:48.84 | Janelle Kellman | I just want to thank everybody. That was an excellent discussion. We really dug into the issues, exactly what our job is. So thank you, everybody, for indulging my comments and sharing your own. Yeah. |
| 04:57:00.23 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, I had a lot of like long thank yous and everything and but we didn't quite get the chance to do it. But given the lateness agreed on all counts vice mayor and mayor so it's been a long and involved process but it's really great to come across the finish line. with our new council. I agree. Well done. |
| 04:57:18.14 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:57:18.15 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:57:19.15 | Jill Hoffman | Well done. |
| 04:57:19.98 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 04:57:20.03 | Jill Hoffman | Bye, Tass. We'll miss you. Bye, Tom. Okay, and on tour. On to our next item on the agenda. Thank you. Item number two. On our agenda tonight. |
| 04:57:32.01 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:57:32.03 | Sybil Boutillier | Thank you. |
| 04:57:32.04 | Ian Sobieski | I'm not. |
| 04:57:32.41 | Sybil Boutillier | Thank you. |
| 04:57:33.19 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. which is also represented, I believe, by Ms. Whalen. Let's see, business item. |
| 04:57:49.00 | Jill Hoffman | So housing element 2023 through 2031, Solicitation of proposals from qualified consultants. Establishment of a proposal review ad hoc committee. Formation of a Housing Element Advisory Committee. And Lily is going to explain this to us in less than 10 minutes, maybe. |
| 04:58:16.79 | Melissa Blaustein | So I would personally, I've read the staff report twice now for two different meetings and I would be willing to forego the very thorough staff report and presentation unless other council members you know feel like they need it but i did review it for our prior meeting and i did review it for tonight |
| 04:58:33.05 | Ian Sobieski | and I think that's a great thing. I read the staff report thoroughly. |
| 04:58:38.33 | Jill Hoffman | Me too. I'm... in favor of that. And vice mayor, how do you feel about that? I feel like you're saying it. Yeah, I also read it. Just got some more. So we're good with dispensing with the with the presentation. Okay. We're doing two things in the staff report. Lily, can you just put up your screen of what you're asking us to do tonight? To be clear, we're not assigning tonight. We're not selecting. even close to selecting the formation of the Housing Element Advisory Committee. What we're doing is By the way, we've already appointed the Housing Element Working Group I did that, I believe, two meetings ago. Um, or last meeting, I think, where um, Anyway, we appointed Councilmember Cleveland Knowles and the vice mayor Kelman to the working group, the working group is going to come back with recommendations on the scope, of the advisory committee. So just to be clear, to give everybody background on that. And so |
| 04:59:52.19 | Janelle Kellman | And so... Are we going to take public comment on this? |
| 04:59:55.50 | Jill Hoffman | Um, Yes, but let me get through just in case there's any confusion when we get to public comment, kind of where we're at, right? So it. We have a working group made of two council members. They're going to come back and advise us on the Housing and Element Advisory Committee, what that's going to look like, the scope. who's, you know, maybe how to select members for the housing element Not what we're doing tonight. What we are doing tonight is establishing a proposal Review ad hoc committee Um, And I like the... I like the recommendation from, anyway, the staff is recommending that it be made up of two council members, um, staff members and a planning commission member. and perhaps members from the community So I think we're going to have a discussion on that. So just so people, who would like to make public comment just understand That's the very narrow process that we're addressing tonight. Now, I would like to now Given that, open this up for public comment. And I see three hands up. |
| 05:01:11.17 | Heidi Scoble | I'm sorry. Thank you. |
| 05:01:13.12 | Jill Hoffman | I see four hands. So, uh, we had- |
| 05:01:14.99 | Heidi Scoble | Oh, sweet. |
| 05:01:15.94 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 05:01:17.54 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, excuse me for interrupting you. I was just gonna jump in and identify that we have Michael Rex, that's our first speaker. And then we have Charlene Eldon, and then we have Mr. Romanowski. Okay, very good. Michael, you've been unmuted. |
| 05:01:37.34 | Michael Rex | Hi, yes, I'm Michael Rex. I'll make it really brief. I want to second or reference Peter Van Meter's letter on the general plan and what happened with the general plan of GPAC committee. I would like to see some of his recommendations incorporated in in this new housing element advisory committee instead of meeting once a month for two hours. So it takes two years. I suggest they meet every two weeks for at least three hours. that You change the structure of how you obtain public input. I was discouraged from participating in the general plan because I sit there for two, two and a half hours listening to GPAC. They deliver a They'd make decisions. And then you get three minutes to talk And then they go home. They never discuss or consider So why offer it? What I would like to suggest is that after staff makes a presentation, and questions are asked of staff or consultants. And then they hear from the public on those subject items, So when the the They have staff's input plus the public's input and the public doesn't have to wait all night long and get just three minutes. And then who you put on that committee? You should put on housing advocates. not the people that want to stop housing. if you want a productive group. Okay. people who are concerned about housing can respond to what that group's proposes during the public hearing process. Please put housing advocates heavily stacked who know about housing on that committee and I appreciate you considering this. |
| 05:03:39.73 | Heidi Scoble | Your two minute time has elapsed. |
| 05:03:41.79 | Michael Rex | Thank you. |
| 05:03:52.66 | Heidi Scoble | Charlene Eldon has been unmuted. |
| 05:03:56.52 | Charlene Eldon | Yeah, this was a very long night for none of the humanitarian crises that are facing our community right now. And frankly, I find it a waste of the community's time to focus on this. when racism is still a public health crisis. COVID, which we now have four strains of in the Bay Area, is still a public health crisis. This tonight seemed like a display of wealth fighting wealth. over the Marin ship. and using an entire night of city council to discuss one paragraph. When there are people outside who need housing and there's a woman on city council who helped segregate the schools, this needs to be dealt with and addressed. in a very serious way. because there are human lives on the line. So I'm not sure what pandemic you've been living through but it's not the same one as the people outside right now. Thank you. |
| 05:05:11.60 | Peter Romanowski | Hello, Reverend Romanowski back again. Yeah, that was long and tedious. The one thing that was to keep the city, a dust for a center building from slowly becoming an office building. Oh, You kind of touched on that. Anyway, it's a thought. Another thought about housing and the anchor out problem and And, you know, it's Galilee Harbor. Galley Harbor was permitted to take in the anchor out. They hate the anchor routes more than anybody on the whole waterfront. They took out. The dingy dock. with the anchor outs. THE FAMILY IS And the city council voted FOR IT. And the dinghy dock at the scooter maker was taken out for the anchor house. And the city council voted for it. City council voted to criminalize |
| 05:06:00.13 | Unknown | And |
| 05:06:03.61 | Peter Romanowski | A LIVING ON YOUR BOAT MORE THAN THREE DAYS ON THE HARBOR WITHOUT THE POLICE COMMISSIONER'S PERMISSION. |
| 05:06:08.87 | Unknown | or maybe not. |
| 05:06:10.19 | Peter Romanowski | City Council has made a $500 fine to land a kayak. on any shore. So if you know, you folks are the previous administration has been totally out of focus And I'm sorry I haven't. been online for the past year. But Galilee Harbor needs to be investigated by the grand jury. It's a houseboat harbor. There's not a single maritime piece of activity in that whole harbor. The artists have taken over. And then they sell their boats. on the market. instead of a instead of moving on and leaving their boats or space for the anchor routes, which was originally intended. Now, I'm just pointing this out because some of you are new. but they need to be thoroughly investigated. Their permit needs to be suspended. There needs to be a grand jury indictment. It's slowly turning into a floating condo harbor. with 100% occupancy. occupancy, which is not even a marina. Thank you. is allowed to have. They're only allowed to have 10%. Also, we need to leverage... |
| 05:07:14.06 | Heidi Scoble | Your two-minute time has elapsed. |
| 05:07:16.90 | Peter Romanowski | Thank you so much. Thank you. |
| 05:07:21.25 | Heidi Scoble | Our next speakers will be Vicki Nichols, Sandra Bushmaker, and Sybil Boutillier. |
| 05:07:28.49 | Heidi Scoble | Vicky, you have been unmuted. |
| 05:07:41.87 | Heidi Scoble | While we're waiting for Vicki to unmute herself, Vicki, can you hear us? |
| 05:07:46.88 | Vicki Nichols | Yeah. I thought I was unmuted, pardon me. So I'll go quickly, I know you've had a long night. I agree with Michael on some of his comments about |
| 05:07:47.74 | Heidi Scoble | I thought it was. |
| 05:07:56.33 | Vicki Nichols | what the process for the general plan felt like. The meetings that I attended, I felt like The public comment was taken gratuitously is too strong a word, but there didn't seem to be any, um, of the comments that were made. And surely the public had some points to bear that that helped the committee. So I would hope that there was a different way there. It often felt sometimes too with the two council people that it was top heavy and they were in control with all respect to the two members. So I would hope that it's more open and I can agree with having housing advocates, but I think you have to have a mix. I'd just like to quickly stand up for Galilee Harbor. Galilee Harbor was allowing That's a private community that is regulated. They're in compliance with everything and they're private corporation or, not a corporation, but private entity. So they were allowing access privileges to their dinghy dock and allowing their address to be used for those that didn't have a dress those were not rights of anybody. Those were sort of privileges. And I think they were... there was some disagreement about that. THE FAMILY. I'd like to commend Galilee Harbor, and I think there's some misunderstanding about them. I feel strongly about that, THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THE FAMILY. THE FAMILY. a model of water living that should be emulated and applauded through a lot of hard work on their part. Thank you. |
| 05:09:46.07 | Heidi Scoble | syndrome. |
| 05:09:46.41 | Sandra Bushmaker | Yeah. |
| 05:09:46.63 | Heidi Scoble | Speaker 1, you've been unmuted. |
| 05:09:48.91 | Sandra Bushmaker | Hello again, I just would like to encourage a balanced mix of the public members to this housing element committee. And I think stacking it one way or the other is not appropriate. I think we should have a balance of representation. Thank you. I do agree with the prior speakers about Public comment. during the process and that we should incorporate public comment and have it be an integral part of the process. So thank you very much. Good night. |
| 05:10:27.13 | Heidi Scoble | Sybil, you've been unmuted. |
| 05:10:33.88 | Sybil Boutillier | it. Thank you very much. I wanna applaud and congratulate the city council on on passing the general plan after really almost four years of very hard work very long nights and days. And, um, It's been a monumental effort and Um, I think that in many ways it struck a nice balance. And I'm so happy some of the new things have been incorporated in it that leads more towards the social determinants of health and also, equity for all different types of folks. And I wanna echo what Sandra Bushmaker said |
| 05:11:20.13 | Unknown | and, |
| 05:11:24.69 | Sybil Boutillier | in terms of the Um, representation. on a housing element committee. you know, to, um, really look at having a diversity of I'm not sure. community opinion and know how And, um, will be very important. and lead to the best results. Thank you very much for all of this work. and for the work ahead for taking that on. Thank you and good night. Congratulations again. |
| 05:12:10.15 | Jill Hoffman | I see that Tom Hoover's hand up, but I can't believe that he wants to make public comment, although I think it could be true. |
| 05:12:16.33 | Heidi Scoble | Yes, I will unmute Tom Hooper. Thank you. |
| 05:12:20.17 | Tom Hoover | Yes. Let's see, start my video. Yes, thank you. I just wanted to make a note. and I think that's a good question. one of the founding members of Dalilee Harbor and someone who's worked in that area since it was Bob's Boat Yard. that I'm hoping It's very difficult for me to want to say something as Harsh is what I have to say. but I'm hoping that you didn't. actually I think Peter Romanowski's ignorant and slanderous remarks and also untrue remarks about the nature of Galilee Harbor, its legal status and the things that we have done. We, where, you know, our marsh, one of the goals of Galilee Harbor from BCDC as a charter is to protect the marshes, as we talked about, the, how shall we say, the non-human cultural artifacts that were talked about. And all of the anchor outs coming in were trashing the marsh and trashing us. And I had, you know, druggies landing on my houseboat. And one of the reasons that they were asked to go away is because They were Rude. and illegal. and me. And so, It's their own fault. for mistreating what has, what as Vicky pointed out, we gave and tried to give to that part of the community. And I'm sorry. but I really, It's Pardon me, I just wanted to say that's very harsh. but, that was, what he said. was untrue. and slanderous and libelous. Thank you. |
| 05:14:07.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Mr. Hoover. My apologies. I had you confused with Tom Ford. So I'm sorry. That was the basis for my comment. So my apologies, sir. And thank you for your comments. |
| 05:14:19.23 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor we have Charlene Eldon raising her hand again she has previously provided public comment for this item. |
| 05:14:26.21 | Jill Hoffman | Okay then. Then we're finished, I suppose, if there's no one, no one else has their hand raised for this. I don't see any. So we're finished with public comment on this item. Thank you very much, everybody who provided comment. Okay. So I think Unless somebody has another idea, we're left with, the main, purpose and Lily weigh in if you need to, but the main thing we need to do is to um, form the, a selection of a qualified planning consultant and an ad hoc committee to select the planning consultant. I'm going to tell you my thoughts on that because I'd like to just, I'd like to just wrap it up and move forward. So, I like the recommendation on the staff report aren't there any but Hang on a second. Thank you. One, two, three. |
| 05:15:30.76 | Lily Whalen | Mayor Hoffman, I pulled up on this slide here, kind of what's summarized on the, oh, sorry, this isn't that. Thank you. You're looking for the ad hoc committee? |
| 05:15:42.19 | Jill Hoffman | That seems to be the main action we need to take tonight. Then we need to think about the housing element advisory committee formation and maybe give direction on that. the thing that we need to take action on tonight, which is the selection of the, ad hoc committee for the qualified planning consultant. So I think it's on page seven of the staff report or it might be I think Lily's trying to bring it up. Yeah. So, okay, good. Thank you very much. So, and this is only to review, um, proposals to select the consultant. So the proposal, and I liked the proposal Except for one aspect and I'll get to it and then everybody else can weigh in and we can figure out how we want to move forward. But I like the two city council. So you look under membership. Um, Um, two city council members. I like that. I would suggest that we do the two working group members, which is, um, that just makes sense to me that it'd be, um, council member, uh, Susan Cleveland Knowles and the vice mayor, uh, be the two city council members, a planning commissioner, um, I WANT TO TELL YOU ABOUT our new one of our planning commissioners. So I would suggest that either be the chair, which is Christina Feller, or the new planning commissioner who was Ashley, who was the chair, Planning |
| 05:17:02.93 | Unknown | I think she's |
| 05:17:04.13 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, Jeffrey Luxembourg. He was the... Community Development Director for, am I saying that, am I correct on that, Lily? from his career. So anyway, he's a planning commissioner. He's very well suited for this kind of assignment. I'm assuming that he will be amenable to serving in that capacity. And then two members, you know, because we haven't talked to Two members from either the Retired Housing on Task Force or Mayor's Blue Ribbon Committee on Housing. I can't imagine that there's going to be for this purpose, not for the advisory Committee. But for this purpose, I don't know that any Any from those two different? elements and in other words, a retired housing element task force or the mayor's Blue Ribbon Committee on Housing, although they're great people and great experience. But their experience is really going to be redundant, I think, of the two City Council members that we have now that have been assigned to the working group. So |
| 05:18:10.18 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 05:18:10.19 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:18:10.23 | Melissa Blaustein | I would say. Mayor Hoffman, I was going to completely agree with you and was going to make the same suggestion just for this phase of the process. having a smaller group and if you would like the subcommittee to have a public meeting and make sure that those members of the former housing element |
| 05:18:18.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:18:28.24 | Melissa Blaustein | Working group or you know, invited to give input on how we should approach this task. I'm sure we'd be happy to do that. and any other public who wants to be involved. Um, So I just think it would be a little more nimble. And I, so I agree with you on Yeah. |
| 05:18:44.49 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so let's, unless there's an objection to that, I like the four staff members. I think that's fine. I will call out that this process is public and that the proposals will be public and You know, if you guys, it might be good to have the public meeting. you know, a public meeting when you are looking at the proposals and maybe evaluating if you think that's appropriate. But I leave it to you guys. I leave it to you guys. I have confidence that you will be able to |
| 05:19:10.19 | Janelle Kellman | Right. |
| 05:19:15.35 | Jill Hoffman | chart the right path forward. |
| 05:19:17.22 | Janelle Kellman | Can I make a suggestion? So I didn't realize that an ad hoc committee was actually a brown-eyed or a public committee. So I'm wondering if in the interest of time, maybe we could talk just real quickly about myself and Councilmember Cleveland Knowles and maybe two planning commissioners, I think both Chair Feller and Commissioner Luxembourg would be IT DOESN'T MEAN THEY'RE GOING TO BE ON THE HOUSING ELEMENT. IT JUST MEANS THAT WE CAN GET THIS PROCESS GOING. And then I also want to just clarify, that the four members of city staff won't be voting members. We clarified that prior as to this entire action, but we'll have also their insights. So I'm wondering what you all would think about having it be a four person, just again, this is just the review, just to get this moving. |
| 05:20:06.94 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. and this is specifically for proposal review, Um, for the consultant. So I. I think that's fine. So I- |
| 05:20:17.67 | Melissa Blaustein | So I like the original, I thought one two council members, one, Planning Commissioner and staff is fine. I mean, I think we're not voting. just making recommendations to the council We're not actually selecting the Consultant, right? |
| 05:20:36.33 | Jill Hoffman | No, I don't think so. I don't know, Lily, I don't think so, but is that, have I |
| 05:20:40.75 | Janelle Kellman | that right. |
| 05:20:40.77 | Jill Hoffman | that right. |
| 05:20:41.45 | Janelle Kellman | we'll make recommendations to the council regarding the selection of the consultant So. |
| 05:20:45.56 | Lily Whalen | So... Thank you. |
| 05:20:47.40 | Janelle Kellman | Right. |
| 05:20:47.42 | Lily Whalen | Sorry to interrupt there. Vice Mayor Coleman. How we've done it in particular with the general plan consultant when we made that selection four years ago, we did have a review committee and that committee made a joint recommendation to the council on a particular consultant. Of course, the council will have We will publish all of the proposals that come in. The council will vet them publicly. But the intention was to make a recommendation from this review committee. Yeah. |
| 05:21:18.32 | Unknown | And did this class vote before? |
| 05:21:21.42 | Lily Whalen | the prior committee did hold a vote on the general plan consultant because there was a division between the recommendations. |
| 05:21:33.12 | Janelle Kellman | Oh, interesting. Well, I think if we're not gonna have someone from the Retired Housing and Women Task Force or the Blue Raymond Committee, I like the idea of not having it be top heavy on council members and having two planning commissioners if we're not gonna have a housing element task force member. So then there would be four of us plus staff So, It seems balanced again, just for the RFP part. I think that's, |
| 05:21:56.98 | Jill Hoffman | I think that's a good thing. |
| 05:21:57.53 | Janelle Kellman | that's |
| 05:21:57.97 | Jill Hoffman | Fine. I can't think. |
| 05:22:00.57 | Janelle Kellman | If they agree to do it, sorry, I don't mean to promise them. Right. They might say no thank you. Sure. |
| 05:22:00.59 | Jill Hoffman | if they, I'm not going to do it. |
| 05:22:04.94 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:22:04.99 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 05:22:05.03 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. |
| 05:22:06.28 | Janelle Kellman | You're doing it, yeah. |
| 05:22:07.42 | Melissa Blaustein | I would also add, I mean, so if one of them, one of the two already mentioned can't do it, I think, um, you know, Morgan Pierce would have some pretty good expertise and, um, |
| 05:22:20.49 | Unknown | I agree. |
| 05:22:20.67 | Melissa Blaustein | Nastassia Assad as well. So maybe in that order, the first two that were mentioned and if one of them can't do it, I think they'd all be good. |
| 05:22:20.86 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:22:29.46 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, I agree. Yeah, Maureen's fantastic. |
| 05:22:32.37 | Jill Hoffman | OK, so I think we have consensus on that. Do we, does staff understand what we're going to do and do we need to take a vote? |
| 05:22:40.80 | Lily Whalen | I understand the direction on that item. Okay. |
| 05:22:45.16 | Janelle Kellman | I think we're- Who's going to ask the planning commissioners? I guess council member Cleveland Falls and I can, put our heads together and make that happen. |
| 05:22:55.60 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 05:22:56.08 | Janelle Kellman | That's right. |
| 05:22:56.33 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so then, So with regard to the Housing Element Advisory Committee formation, So I like the sort of the some of the input that the staff included in the staff report. But, When I appointed the working group, and I think the working group agreed at that time, The idea is that the working group, meaning council member the vice mayor Kelman and council member Cleveland Knowles is going to consider how to move forward. Given your experience, just finishing up with the general plan update and council member Cleveland Knowles, your work on the former housing element update. And so, and then come, come forward to the city council with a recommendation on, All of these things, like size of the committee, how we're going to select committee members. Um, And. and the role in keeping with some of the concerns that have been raised by members of the community. um, on the best and most efficient way to move forward with this. That's kind of what I'm thinking. How do you guys feel about that? The working group, how do you feel about it? And then other council members if you want to weigh in with recommendations or suggestions, I'm happy to |
| 05:24:09.09 | Janelle Kellman | Yeah. |
| 05:24:09.13 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 05:24:09.55 | Janelle Kellman | That was my understanding of the direction you gave to us at the last Council meeting where we talked about this. So that works for me. Is that work for you, Susan? |
| 05:24:17.75 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, absolutely. And I think, I mean, I really want to appreciate the extensive comments by people orally and in writing that we received on the, how the GPAC functioned. And I think perhaps the vice mayor and I can do a little deep deep dive on lessons learned. from that process and kind of try to turn that around to a you know, come some creative and positive recommendations for a housing alignment task force. I just would love to get, I personally think our traditional forms of public comment have been very frustrating for all involved. So I would just love to get the council's full direction to the vice mayor and I that we should, and staff that in our consultant outreach process, highly value consultants that have some kind of innovative ways of getting public input in non-traditional forms. Um, you know, it's just other than the three minutes kind of thing. I think it's just hard for people. |
| 05:25:23.80 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. And discouraging sometimes too. |
| 05:25:25.99 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 05:25:27.95 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, I think that's, I think we got, and so Lily, do you have the direction that you need and do you have the decision points that you need? |
| 05:25:37.06 | Lily Whalen | I do. I didn't hear and I apologize. I didn't hear where the council fell out on direction to release the RFP or not. It should should staff be working with the working group on getting that to the RFP itself, to a place that it's ready to go. And then we can release it. without full counsel authorization, but once the working group is comfortable with it. Okay, I'm seeing non |
| 05:26:00.43 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I'm comfortable with that. Is the rest of the city council comfortable with the working group specifically looking at the RFP to get it out? I'm kind of full of that. Okay. Council Member Sobieski, are you good with that? Yes. Okay, very good, thank you. Okay. Yes, Lily. |
| 05:26:16.67 | Lily Whalen | to work. |
| 05:26:16.72 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:26:17.01 | Lily Whalen | Then I have all the direction I need tonight. Thank you very much. |
| 05:26:19.82 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. Can I make just one more comment, Mayor? |
| 05:26:20.55 | Lily Whalen | Very good. |
| 05:26:22.96 | Melissa Blaustein | Sure. you know, I'm sure |
| 05:26:23.94 | Lily Whalen | you know, |
| 05:26:26.07 | Melissa Blaustein | I don't I'm sure other council members might have felt this way, but I found the price tag for this task of one element of the general plan to be quite staggering. and especially given our really difficult upcoming budget discussions. I'm not questioning that it's realistic, but I would |
| 05:26:47.50 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:26:49.88 | Melissa Blaustein | I would love to get other council members We should. Ask consultants and the other jurisdictions who are on our same schedule if there's any efficiencies to be found by joining with other local jurisdictions in Southern Marin or other where other places to kind of team up on some of these tasks and maybe share costs or work out something. I mean, $600,000 to a million dollars, I think is the range staff gave us. Um, It's pretty hefty. So anyway, just throwing that out there. I don't know if other people had ideas. I was a little. I don't know why I'm shocked. I shouldn't be shocked because we've seen similar I'm |
| 05:27:38.97 | Ian Sobieski | lot. |
| 05:27:39.44 | Melissa Blaustein | I see. |
| 05:27:39.74 | Ian Sobieski | I share your shock and I'm stunned by it. end. this is a great place to use some creativity and try to figure out if we can get the job done in some other way. easier said than done perhaps. terms of comments, I mean, it's stunning. And, uh, The work product should be stunning if it's gonna cost that much, it should be really And so what would a stunning work product look like if we're not gonna get that? should be cheap. |
| 05:28:12.40 | Chris Zapata | We hear you. |
| 05:28:12.50 | Ian Sobieski | Seriously. |
| 05:28:13.56 | Chris Zapata | Yeah, I know there's been significant research gone into estimating in that number. There are variants and I think Councilmember Cecilia A. Councilmember Cleveland also has put some good ideas on the table. I'm excited that she's part of this group and going forward. Councilmember Cecilia A. We, we, too, are shocked by the number, but we didn't want to come forward with a lowball and then only to find out that we should have said what we needed to say tonight. So we hear you. We too have the shock and the number and we do hear the need for innovation if that number is going to be that high. At this point, we don't know. It could be. |
| 05:28:55.04 | Janelle Kellman | Marcia is part of the cost because we have a rezoning effort and a zoning ordinance update as well as identifying currently 700 sites. |
| 05:29:03.73 | Chris Zapata | That and the civic engagement that takes place in a city like Sausalito. You know, you just finished the general plan, you know how much involvement there was in managing that process takes time and time of consultants translates to dollars. |
| 05:29:19.88 | Janelle Kellman | Do we get any SB2 funds for, I don't know, handling our design review guidelines? Thank you. |
| 05:29:25.92 | Chris Zapata | Yeah. |
| 05:29:25.97 | Melissa Blaustein | No, you know, staff report that's like $15,000. |
| 05:29:26.29 | Janelle Kellman | you know. |
| 05:29:29.33 | Chris Zapata | Right. It's nominal and we can and have and will continue to pursue a grant funding for any of the possible pieces of this. |
| 05:29:41.08 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. I mean, another approach I was thinking about is just approaching Senator McGuire and others, you know, I mean. |
| 05:29:41.41 | Chris Zapata | They don't know. |
| 05:29:48.99 | Melissa Blaustein | They've got to recognize that with the 700 units. COVID. that this is kind of a, you know, so maybe we could get some state assistance given the priority that they are putting on housing. |
| 05:30:06.19 | Chris Zapata | Yeah, he is very aggressive in that regard. And I do think I would enjoy hearing our concern and our needs. So it's a very good idea. |
| 05:30:16.53 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, yeah, I mean all efforts for cost efficiencies and collaborating on redundant areas I think is great. Great idea. So... Okay, so with that, I think we're ready to move on to our next uh item on the agenda which is number eight it's city manager reports city council appointments and other council business um We do take public comment for all of these items under eight at once. So We take public comments one time for all of these things. If you want to weigh in on any of these issues, now is your chance, including city manager information for council on our search for a new city manager. So Anyway, now's your chance to make public comment, and then we're gonna move quickly through these items under Section 8. So, I don't see any hands though. Heidi, do you see any hands up? |
| 05:31:24.50 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, we just had Vicki Nichols raise our hands. Okay. Very good. Vicky, you're unmuted. |
| 05:31:32.74 | Vicki Nichols | Hi there. Hey, I was wondering, I was wondering how, if you've given any thought about once you get your candidates, what kind of process you're gonna go through There was, Adam had some process that was used several times. I sat on a citizen's portion. where you had citizens, you had other department, that would be working with this new city manager and you had other peers in the community, other city managers. So the individuals had to go through sort of three of the community and it was a really interesting process. I helped select two of the police chiefs And I think I helped select the architect for the public safety buildings is the citizen committee. But I hope you would have something like that where all those aspects could be looked at people are then vetted vetted uniformly it was I thought it was pretty a pretty good process so I don't know what you're thinking about but be interesting to hear how you're going to be able to let the community provide some input on the individuals. |
| 05:32:48.71 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. I don't see any other hands, so... If you confirm that, Heidi, then we'll close public comment. |
| 05:32:57.16 | Heidi Scoble | Madam Mayor, we do not have any hands raised at this time. |
| 05:33:00.55 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and then we're gonna move on to... Joe, can I just say? |
| 05:33:05.97 | Melissa Blaustein | ask your question. |
| 05:33:07.13 | Sybil Boutillier | Sure. |
| 05:33:07.91 | Melissa Blaustein | Mayor, sorry. So just for a city manager report, I'm super excited about our February 27 strategic planning session that was really one of my favorite um, that we did as a council together last January, I think. And it was a real effort. It was a great opportunity for the whole council to kind of come together, share ideas, Thank you. share thoughts about prioritization. But it did require, I remember from that process, a lot of work friend. from the consultants and us getting the materials in time. So I realized today that that's not as far off as |
| 05:33:47.75 | Unknown | and then, |
| 05:33:52.60 | Melissa Blaustein | It seemed a long time, it seemed in December. So I was wondering if Marsha, our city manager and city manager could give us an update on kind of when we might. be seeing that packet and kind of any other expectations or reading materials things of that nature. |
| 05:34:12.47 | Chris Zapata | be happy to. I've also asked the Olya Carter, your assistant city manager to stay present. I realize the hour is late, but we do have this request and then also Your priorities for the year have been three as you're aware city manager recruitment, the general plan slash housing element work and then the third is budget budget budget so we'd like to give you a status update on the calendar that you adopted. I believe it was the end of December, middle of December. Ulya, can you come forward? Are you still here? Are you still awake? |
| 05:34:46.55 | Melissa Blaustein | Is that a sub-date on the mid-year budget? |
| 05:34:49.13 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 05:34:49.26 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 05:34:49.36 | Chris Zapata | both the budget and then answer your question regarding strategic planning because they're to me in my mind they're intertwined |
| 05:34:55.84 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, absolutely. Thank you. |
| 05:34:57.78 | Chris Zapata | Amen. |
| 05:34:58.48 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:35:00.96 | Chris Zapata | Do we see- do we have Ulya? Yes. I thought you would be. Thank you so much. Can you answer the question and then give a very brief what's going on with the budget calendar, the mid-year update? |
| 05:35:13.21 | Unknown | Well, let me start with a very quick budget update and what is happening in the finance department right now. We are working on the last stages of CAFRA production right now, so finance staff is, preparing the CAFRA report as we speak, and we are in the process of scheduling the Finance Committee meeting to have an in-depth discussion on CAFRA in the next couple of weeks. In parallel, we are closing the a cooler too. that ended December 31st of 2020. and the, As of right now, we are starting on preparing the mid-year budget review that is scheduled to go to Council in March. And this is consistent with the calendar that we put together before you. in January. And back to your question on the strategic plans. It is, Marsha, do you want me to kick it back to you? |
| 05:36:12.17 | Chris Zapata | I'm sorry. Sure. So the finance committee has been talking about the strategic planning initiative. We do have consultant under contract. The finance committee talked about it at their last meeting and was not sure the dollar spent would, I'm summarizing here, they're both sitting in the room, but that the dollar spent was where we wanted to go, given the conservative outlook for the budget going forward. So we do have a meeting scheduled on the 18th where we can close that discussion and determine in fact where we're going. One of the reasons you haven't heard from the consultant. in my estimation is because of that conversation. If we were wavering a bit, we didn't want to get too far out front with their efforts. So we will know, we'll have a better picture of it on the 18th. That doesn't leave a lot of time till the 27th, given that part of the task is talking individually to the council members before we get into a session. But both the mayor and the vice mayor are on that committee, and I'm sure we'll have a good decision coming out of that. here next week. |
| 05:37:12.01 | Janelle Kellman | It's not that we are not interested in discussing this. trying to figure out what the budget looks like so that, you know, we just talked about the housing element and there's a lot of other things we want to spend money on. So we're just trying to wrap our heads around the budget where we are admittedly a little behind on our meetings just because of everything that was happening with Dumpy Park and so staff It was extremely busy, but we will continue to discuss this and we will look at this with an eye to the budget. And Jill, maybe you have something to add |
| 05:37:37.13 | Jill Hoffman | No, I mean, that's kind of where we're at. And just whether or not we were gonna be able to be prepared for the strategic plan in February. And the other question was whether or not there was going to be significant change from last year to this year and so that was something we were talking about when we were in one of the finance committee meetings was you know, does Um, what's the priority, right? Is there really significant change between the priorities from last year to this year? But if there's not, and if know the council just looked at last year and gave i think it was a seven or six year plan strategic plan, then You know, so I mean, And were we at the point in the preparation of the budget to be able to for staff to be ready to quickly pivot from the presentation and wrapping up at the CAFR to a dive directly into strategic plan within maybe days of just wrapping up the CAFR. So all of these things were sort of on the table and then we weren't able to do a finance committee meeting this week. So I mean, that's just kind of the way it's. |
| 05:38:52.80 | Melissa Blaustein | Well, thanks for the background and update. I mean, personally, I don't see how we can do mid-year budget and go into a COVID-19 Um, budget planning with reduced funds without having as a group, especially with a new group, new city council have coalesced around our priorities. So I would, I would, |
| 05:39:11.21 | Lisa Davidson | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:39:15.69 | Melissa Blaustein | You know, staff can do it and we can get the funds, I think it's absolutely essential and will give us, you know, we did our strategic planning without any context of what was coming in front of us in just two months. So our plan was like, Oh, this is going to be. |
| 05:39:31.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:39:37.49 | Melissa Blaustein | amazing, we can buy this and you know, like we were unconstrained and not unconstrained But we were not expecting a global pandemic that would Shave. at least $4.5 million up our budget. So I would heartily recommend a |
| 05:39:53.52 | Ian Sobieski | So. |
| 05:39:57.47 | Melissa Blaustein | I thought the consultant |
| 05:39:57.57 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. |
| 05:40:00.54 | Melissa Blaustein | If it's the same one, he was a good facilitator, I think it's helpful to have an outside person. But even if we did it with a volunteer, Yeah, we're probably, are we already under contract? Thank you. |
| 05:40:12.44 | Chris Zapata | Yes. |
| 05:40:12.50 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. That's wow. So we have some penalty if we don't, I guess. But in any case, I thought it was very helpful. So I got my feedback. |
| 05:40:23.24 | Janelle Kellman | Yeah, feedback heard and the need to shift priorities with COVID is of course understood. So just be patient with us. This is on our radar and we will report back to the full council the opportunity and the timing. |
| 05:40:38.14 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Okay, Marcia, you had- That concludes my report, unless you have questions. I think, did you give the update for the city? I think you did for the city manager. |
| 05:40:50.03 | Chris Zapata | search. |
| 05:40:50.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:40:51.20 | Chris Zapata | Actually, I think the subcommittee gave a very good update You know, the number of candidates, you know, what they've been working on. The only thing I'm not, it's been a long meeting, so forgive me, but the only thing the council had asked for dates to be selected for interviews at the end of February and March, and we, staff is polling, and we should have an answer on that here in the next day or so. So it looks as if we'll have interviews at the end of the month, beginning of next month, and stay right on that schedule that you saw when you hired the consultant. Okay, very good. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 05:41:23.50 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 05:41:24.71 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 05:41:25.25 | Jill Hoffman | So moving on then to appointments to boards, commissions, and committees. Um, I think the only action we have tonight is to accept the resignation. of Jessica Rogers from EDAC Um, and direct staff to solicit applications to fill that um, bacon soup. And then we also have accept pedestrian and bicycle committee resignation. of Bjorn brief and firm. I think is from PBAC and direct staff to continue to solicit applications to fill that vacancy. So do we need to have separate motions? Do we need to have motions on this, Mary? Or can we just accept the resignations? |
| 05:42:13.35 | Mary Wagner | We do need motions and a vote. Thank you, Madam Mayor. |
| 05:42:16.18 | Melissa Blaustein | Do you put them together, Mary? Sure. |
| 05:42:17.78 | Mary Wagner | Sure. Yep. That would be great. |
| 05:42:19.96 | Melissa Blaustein | And just on the Bjorn Gripenberg thing, we are working with the PBAC. He was kind of on alternate that's the Marine Bike Coalition kind of representative. So PBAC is working with Heidi so that when those people change jobs, we don't have to go through this because there's already a new person in his in his position. So, Anyway, just a kind of context. I'll make a motion to accept both resignations with huge thanks. to Bjorn, but also to Jessica Rogers. I think she just really shown was a rising star on the EDAC, and I'm really sorry to see her go. |
| 05:42:54.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, good, it's the same. I mean, agree and second, do we have a second? I'll second. |
| 05:43:01.12 | Lisa Davidson | Thank you. |
| 05:43:01.13 | Tom Ford | MS. |
| 05:43:02.57 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, very good. Heidi, could you please take the roll? |
| 05:43:04.53 | Heidi Scoble | Thank you. Welcome to Member Sobieski. |
| 05:43:07.51 | Tom Ford | Yes. |
| 05:43:08.65 | Heidi Scoble | Council member Blaustein. Yes. Council member Cleveland Knowles? Vice Mayor Killman. |
| 05:43:15.41 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Mayor Hoffman. Okay, moving on, future agenda items. Does anybody wish to add things to our, for future agenda items, we have plenty of big items on our future agenda. But I'm happy to entertain additions. not entirely sure when we will be able to get to them. |
| 05:43:42.97 | Melissa Blaustein | I just like to emphasize the priority on the budget and that all our resources, extra resources really need to be heading in that direction and the mid-year budget update. |
| 05:43:51.15 | Ian Sobieski | and |
| 05:43:54.83 | Melissa Blaustein | extra item I had was that arduous contract that I mentioned during consent. |
| 05:43:59.42 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:43:59.44 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 05:43:59.46 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:43:59.49 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 05:43:59.56 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:43:59.57 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. agenda and I was going to say something else, but I'm too tired. Anyway, that was... it. |
| 05:44:13.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:44:13.44 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. |
| 05:44:13.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:44:14.46 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 05:44:14.49 | Jill Hoffman | Uh, yeah. |
| 05:44:14.56 | Melissa Blaustein | Bye. |
| 05:44:14.68 | Jill Hoffman | Um, |
| 05:44:15.18 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 05:44:15.20 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 05:44:15.22 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 05:44:16.13 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, anybody else? |
| 05:44:16.65 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm sorry. What I was going to say is I was given the importance of the budget and the fact that we are going to just be really I don't know, I haven't seen the numbers yet, but I'm expecting |
| 05:44:27.69 | Unknown | you |
| 05:44:28.90 | Melissa Blaustein | super tough choices and like a few other things that have come up. I was wondering if, the, maybe the cannabis committee can discuss maybe slowing that discussion down. That's another huge topic and maybe they can do outreach. |
| 05:44:43.33 | Charlene Eldon | that. |
| 05:44:45.44 | Melissa Blaustein | and public engagement to get us a little further down that path and not, um, Anyway, I just kind of see all these other priorities looming and it's obviously up to the agenda setting committee, but that would be my feedback that perhaps we could |
| 05:44:54.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 05:45:01.24 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. get a little time on that. |
| 05:45:04.76 | Ian Sobieski | If everyone else is okay with that, you happen to just say what Melissa and I were saying to one another correct me if I mean correct. Council Member Gwaltestein, but I think we both agree that there are other very pressing issues and we can proceed with them. gathering some public feedback and public dialogue around this issue without having it be on the council agenda over the next cycle or two. |
| 05:45:29.60 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, I would also say that's what we've heard from the community is a big call for more public feedback. So I think that we would be doing our |
| 05:45:29.62 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 05:45:36.65 | Melissa Blaustein | duty as committing subcommittee members to facilitate those discussions first anyway and would need some serious time before it came before the council. |
| 05:45:44.62 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, good. That's my sense as well. So that's good feedback. |
| 05:45:45.41 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm not sure. |
| 05:45:50.54 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so I'm hearing no other future agenda items. I'm gonna move on. Thank you. you Are there any other reports of significance? They none. In that case, I will now adjourn the meeting. Very good. Good work today, you guys. Thank you. Thanks for your hard work. Thank you, staff. Thank you. |
| 05:46:07.64 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Thanks, Steph. Thank you. |
| 05:46:09.65 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 05:46:09.78 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 05:46:09.81 | Jill Hoffman | Good night, everybody. |
| 05:46:09.92 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. |
| 05:46:09.97 | Melissa Blaustein | everybody thanks staff thanks thanks everybody |
| 05:46:14.02 | Melissa Blaustein | Oh, thank you. |
| 05:46:29.27 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
Judy Witter — Against: Opposed a recreational cannabis storefront in Sausalito, citing personal family trauma from adolescent cannabis use and its link to future opioid addiction. Requested public workshops to thoroughly examine social, health, and economic impacts. ▶ 📄
Robbie Paulson — Neutral: Spoke from a homeless encampment, discussed petitioning to form a Smallcraft Harbor District to address overlapping jurisdictions. Criticized an eviction notice for the camp, arguing it is safe and compliant with COVID guidelines. Thanked Councilmember Melissa Blaustein for compassion. ▶ 📄
Peter Romanowski — Neutral: As a chaplain, urged compassionate handling of the homeless encampment, describing residents as disabled and unable to relocate easily. Argued that police enforcement (tickets) would be ineffective and that Sausalito has a golden opportunity to set a positive state-wide example. ▶ 📄
Ava Crisante — Neutral: Shared observations from visiting the encampment, noting the presence of older, non-addicted, simply poor women. Presented data alleging racial disparities in Marin County Sheriff arrests (Black individuals arrested at over 8 times their demographic presence) and called for a state/federal investigation into the Sheriff's Department. ▶ 📄
Unknown (Pavelko?) — In Favor: Shared a personal story about her brother, for whom cannabis was the only effective treatment for mental health and opioid addiction, crediting it with saving his life. Expressed a desire to be part of the solution and education around cannabis to prevent hard drug addiction in the community. ▶ 📄