| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00.03 | Unknown | And you're... You know? |
| 00:00:07.71 | Serge Avila | Good afternoon, Mayor Kellen and council members. This meeting has been held to government code section 54953E. And in light of the declared state of emergency, the regular meeting of the city council for August 30th, 2022 will be conducted telephonically through Zoom and broadcast live on the city's website and cable TV channel 27. |
| 00:00:31.91 | Mayor Kellen | Great. Thank you. Good evening and welcome back. Good to see everybody after our summer break. Welcome to Tuesday, August 30th. regular special regular city council meeting for Sausalito. Go ahead and call. the room to order. |
| 00:00:47.92 | Serge Avila | Councilmember Sobieski? here. Councilmember Leverett-Knowld |
| 00:00:51.70 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 00:00:51.72 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:00:52.46 | Serge Avila | Councilmember Hoffman. |
| 00:00:54.03 | Unknown | I hear. |
| 00:00:54.96 | Serge Avila | Vice Mayor Blaustein. |
| 00:00:56.60 | Unknown | here. |
| 00:00:57.30 | Serge Avila | Mayor Kellman. |
| 00:00:58.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:58.44 | Mayor Kellen | Bye. |
| 00:00:58.59 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:58.64 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 00:00:59.33 | Serge Avila | Five members are present and there is a quorum. |
| 00:01:01.83 | Mayor Kellen | Great, thank you. Let me go ahead and move to item 1B. These are the items to be discussed in closed session. Item one is conference with labor negotiators pursuant to section 54957.6. NMD2, its conference with legal counsel, existing litigation pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9 D1, name of the case, is the city of Sausalito versus the California-affiliated risk management authorities. Item D three is a conference with legal counsel. |
| 00:01:27.88 | Unknown | Indeed. |
| 00:01:30.31 | Mayor Kellen | Existing litigation pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9A, Name of the case is Winston Ashmead and David Johnson, and the city of Sausaludum. Item D4 of Conference of Legal Counsel. This is existing litigation pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.91. Again, name of the case, Sausalito Yacht Harbor Persistently of Sausalito. and NMD5 Conference for Legal Counsel, Existing litigation pursuant to California Government Code Section 5956. 0.91 name of case city of South Florida versus the California affiliated risk management authorities. I will go ahead and take any public comment on closed session items. |
| 00:02:11.71 | Mayor Kellen | Serge, do we have any public comments? |
| 00:02:15.88 | Serge Avila | Madam Mayor, it does not appear as we have any raised hands, but if you'd like me to provide instructions, I can do that. |
| 00:02:22.66 | Mayor Kellen | Yes, that would be good, but I'm going to do that. |
| 00:02:24.55 | Serge Avila | Sure. Video or audio public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you would like to make a comment, please raise your hand in the Zoom application and you will be called after time to speak. To raise your hand from a phone, press start nine and each speaker will be notified when the time has elapsed. Madam Mayor, it does not appear as we have any questions. public commenters at the moment. |
| 00:02:49.76 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, we'll go ahead and close the public comment and we will adjourn to closed session. Thanks everybody. |
| 00:02:56.65 | Serge Avila | And Madam Mayor, as we are working on assigning folks to a breakout room, I will be moving you over to the closers now. |
| 00:03:05.59 | Ian Sobieski | We search, is there a phone number I can? |
| 00:03:05.79 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 00:03:05.81 | Serge Avila | So- |
| 00:03:08.00 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. Serge, can you hear me? We can hear you, Ian. Well, you can, but I don't think Serge can. |
| 00:03:12.73 | Serge Avila | Thank you. |
| 00:03:12.74 | Ian Sobieski | We've been. |
| 00:03:12.90 | Serge Avila | We can hear you because he has |
| 00:03:13.89 | Ian Sobieski | Oh, Thank you. |
| 00:03:14.70 | Serge Avila | Thank you. |
| 00:03:14.72 | Ian Sobieski | Do you have a phone number I can call in on for the closed session? |
| 00:03:17.52 | Serge Avila | Thank you. |
| 00:03:17.54 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:03:17.55 | Serge Avila | Thank you. would you like me to text that to you? Yes. Thank you. Sure. Give me just a moment. Let me just assign folks. Thank you. |
| 00:03:26.31 | Ian Sobieski | The other things I don't mind being a minute or too late. I've read all the reports and can catch up. Thanks. |
| 00:03:30.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:03:30.92 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:03:30.94 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:03:37.41 | Unknown | It was a little nerve wracking just to do the breakout room. |
| 00:03:44.16 | Unknown | Are we being recorded? you |
| 00:03:47.47 | Sergio Rudin | We should not be in the breakout rooms. It should be now recording in the break cover. |
| 00:03:51.64 | Serge Avila | There was no recording in the breakout room. I am moving you over right now. |
| 00:03:51.67 | Sergio Rudin | So look at- |
| 00:03:57.36 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 00:03:57.41 | Ian Sobieski | And that's it. |
| 00:03:57.46 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:03:57.48 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:04:08.97 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:04:24.78 | Unknown | Okay, thank you for whomever brought my... |
| 00:05:20.54 | Unknown | . |
| 00:05:48.58 | Unknown | you |
| 00:05:56.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:06:02.83 | Unknown | Councilmember Blaustein, I'll be reassigning you. |
| 00:06:15.20 | Unknown | Whose will? |
| 00:06:48.17 | Unknown | . |
| 00:06:57.72 | Serge Avila | is confirming phone number 6520. It's Ian Sobieski. |
| 00:07:03.46 | Ian Sobieski | Yes, it is. Hi, Serge. you |
| 00:07:04.98 | Serge Avila | Thank you. Hello, Ian. Let me move you to the breakout room. |
| 00:07:21.41 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:07:22.56 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:09:55.35 | Unknown | Zoom. And I will |
| 00:10:01.46 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:10:08.11 | Serge Avila | Great. Our audio is back on. We're recording through Zoom and I am admitting all public now. |
| 00:10:14.30 | Unknown | Great. |
| 00:10:14.57 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:10:24.73 | Unknown | and I'm going to go ahead and get it. |
| 00:10:25.03 | Serge Avila | or all members of the public have been readmitted to the session. |
| 00:10:29.92 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:10:29.94 | Mayor Kellen | Great. Well, welcome everybody to the city council meeting for August 30th, the city of Sausalito. um, We're coming back from closed session and nothing to report. So I will go ahead and approve our agenda. Do we have a motion and a second to approve tonight's agenda? So moved. Second. Great. Serge, please call the roll. |
| 00:10:51.09 | Serge Avila | Councilmember Sobieski? Yes. Councilmember Cleveland Knowles? |
| 00:10:55.61 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. |
| 00:10:56.00 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:10:56.50 | Serge Avila | Council member Hoffman. Yes. Vice Mayor Blaustein. Yes. Mayor Kelman. |
| 00:10:57.87 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. Yes. |
| 00:11:01.97 | Serge Avila | Thank you. |
| 00:11:02.02 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. |
| 00:11:02.04 | Serge Avila | Yes. Motion passes. |
| 00:11:03.98 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, great. The next item is special presentations and mayor's announcements. I will take this opportunity to announce that we're going to have a town hall on the housing element. City Manager, do you have the exact date and time on that? Is that this Thursday? we find that as well. I believe that's Thursday, September 1st at 530 p.m. Now we posted on the city's housing element website where you can find the agenda and the Zoom link. if you wish to dial in. So again, a housing element town hall this Thursday, 9-1 from 5.30 to 7 p.m. Okay. All right, so moving on to our meeting minutes. Any comments from council members on the meeting minutes? |
| 00:11:50.87 | Cleveland Knowles | if there aren't on the commercial, or do we have to take public comment? Yes. |
| 00:11:54.84 | Mayor Kellen | Any public comment on the meeting minutes? And Serge, maybe just since the first time, if you could just announce how to make public comment. |
| 00:12:04.07 | Serge Avila | Sir, video or audio public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you would like to make a comment, please raise your hand in the Zoom application and you will be called upon when is your time to speak. To raise your hand from a phone, press start nine and each speaker will be notified when the time has elapsed. |
| 00:12:23.64 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, great. Again, looking for public comment only on our meeting minutes. |
| 00:12:29.74 | Serge Avila | Metamayer, I see no hands raised. |
| 00:12:31.95 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, so I think we had a offer of emotion from Councilman Cleveland Knowles. Make a motion to approve the minutes for all five days. |
| 00:12:38.31 | Serge Avila | Second. |
| 00:12:40.67 | Mayor Kellen | Great. Councilor Sobecki did a second. Please call the roll. |
| 00:12:44.69 | Serge Avila | on some members of Zabieski. Thank you. Yes. Council Member Cleveland Knowles. |
| 00:12:48.35 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. |
| 00:12:48.40 | Serge Avila | Yes. Council Member Hoffman. Yes. Vice Mayor Blaustein. |
| 00:12:50.75 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. |
| 00:12:52.82 | Serge Avila | Yes. |
| 00:12:53.02 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. Yes. Okay, great. We're moving on to the consent calendar. So matters listed under the consent calendar are considered routine and non-controversial, require no discussion, are expected to have unanimous council support, and may be enacted by the council in one motion. There'll be no separate discussion of consent calendar items. However, before the Council votes on a motion to adopt the consent calendar items, Councilmember City staff or members of the public may request that specific items be removed from the consent calendar for separate action. Items removed from the consent calendar will be discussed later on the agenda and public comment will be heard on any item that was removed from the consent calendar. We do have quite a few, and I believe a few are also coming off consent. So let me just read through them real quick. Item 3A, Bernanke's amending Chapter 12.16 of the Sausalito Municipal Code Noise Control to prohibit use of gasoline powered landscape equipment. and 3B. Southern Marin Fire Protection District, April to June 2022 quarterly report. Item 3C, authorize an agreement with much more than consulting for human resources services, not to exceed $86,400 through December 31, 2022. and with 3D. Authorized real estate portfolio management agreement with Michael K. Wagner not to exceed $66,500. popular $60. retroactive to July 1, 2022, and through December 31, 2022. Item 3E, adopt the land acknowledgement statement and signature blocks. Item 3F, adopt a resolution of the city of South Florida for the installation of the critical outdoor alerting system known as the long range acoustic device or LRAD Item 3G, Library Q4 Report for Fiscal Year 2021-22. 3H, Director of Communications Annual Report for fiscal year 2021-22. I adopt a resolution to conduct the city's council and all other city board commission and committee meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns. Item 3J. adopt resolution authorizing the city manager to award the construction contract composed for the base bid plus the bid alternative for the 2022 streets rehabilitation project It amounts of $577. $5,577 authorized a construction contingency of the project. in the amount of $102,423 for a total authorized amount of $680,000. I am 3K, adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of South Slita approving and authorizing the City Manager to California Consulting Inc in an amount not to exceed $30,000. to assist the city with grant applications for various projects within SOS LIDA, Item 3L, consideration of 2021 Marin County Civil Grand Jury electrifying marine building, eliminating natural gas as a fuel source in residential and commercial buildings. Item 3M, Miscellaneous Classification and Compensation. item 3N. approve approve decision of city council resolution 6179 authorizing the city manager to enter into an agreement with five case housing for encampment services, Item 3.0. receive and file the resident and non-resident spending analysis for CSO's leader performed by HGL companies, Item 3P. I accept resignation of Randy Valls from the Library Board of Trustees and item 3Q, Authorized the city manager to solicit public information services for the November 8th, 2022 election. specific to measure L not to exceed $25,000. Okay, so we'll go ahead and open public comment, and then we'll bring it back to the council, where the council have the opportunity to pull items off of the consent calendar. So if members of the public would like to comment on item on consent, now is your time. And Serge, I'll hand it over to you. |
| 00:16:11.46 | Serge Avila | Madam Mayor, we do have a public commenter, Peter Van Meter. You've been asked to unmute yourself. |
| 00:16:18.12 | Peter Van Meter | Good evening. Thank you. I'd like to comment regarding item 3i. It's long overdue for us to go back to live meetings. Like other jurisdictions in the county, you can start out doing this on a hybrid basis. You need to do this in order to get citizen involvement and face-to-face interaction with the council members and other committee members in town. That's essential for the furtherance of democracy, basically. And you can start out by doing hybrid. I would suggest that you take this off the agenda. of the consent calendar. Someone make the motion here tonight to have this be considered for implementation starting on inauguration of new council on December 5th, whichever the first meeting of December is. |
| 00:16:56.12 | Unknown | And we're, |
| 00:17:04.01 | Peter Van Meter | That would be a very suitable time to go back to live meetings where we can all congratulate the new council members, et cetera. And to do that on whatever basis works the best for the city, but please. get rid of. Zoom only meetings. Secondly, I'd like to comment briefly on item 3L, your response to the Grand Jury Report. I know you're not going to change the memo or documentation tonight. I just think it's essential to point out that the, |
| 00:17:30.37 | Unknown | All right. |
| 00:17:30.94 | Peter Van Meter | specific plan did exclusively explicitly REWARDING. that explicitly did not include removal of gas for cooking purposes. There's a lot of debate in the general plan. As you get into studying this issue, as you go forward, realize that total electrification as well is gonna be putting a lot of stress on the electrical grid. All electric cars we're going to have And that gas removal should not happen in my opinion. until the grid has the capacity to handle all of the contemplated electrification. We're gonna go into an era of constant blackouts. If you don't continue to have gas, there's an alternative source for heating, cooking, and other purposes in our society. So I know you're not gonna change the grand jury response tonight, but I'm just letting you know on the alert, when you get into the studies that are called for in your response, |
| 00:18:15.18 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:18:22.56 | Peter Van Meter | is consider these factors along with the added cost of converting to electric only. As you know, I've said this before, to do a load of cleaning with our gas dryer is one quarter the cost of electrical. So economic impact will also be significant. Thank you for taking off item 3i. and going back to live or hybrid meetings. Thank you. |
| 00:18:44.80 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you, Peter. I see Pat's hand is up. |
| 00:18:49.80 | Serge Avila | Pat, you've been unmuted and asked to share your video. |
| 00:18:54.00 | Pat | Hi. Yes. We hear you. I do want to concur with Peter on the getting back to a, in-person city council situation and I agree that We should investigate and adopt the ability to do both in-person and concurrent Zoom participation for those who cannot attend the in-person. I think other towns have reverted kind of situation and we should as well. Thanks. |
| 00:19:24.10 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:19:24.61 | Pat | Thank you. |
| 00:19:24.62 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 00:19:24.95 | Pat | Thank you. |
| 00:19:24.96 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. So do you see any other hands from the public? |
| 00:19:29.05 | Serge Avila | Meta Mayer there and all their hands raised. |
| 00:19:31.29 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, closing public comment on the consent calendar, bring it back to council. I see councilman Hoffman and then the vice mayor. |
| 00:19:38.09 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, I had a clarifying question. with regard to 3C for the city manager and that's with regard to the agreement with much more consulting. not to exceed 86,400 through December 31st. When I was looking through the staff report, it was unclear whether or not that reverted back to was retroactive July 31st, and then there's also a notation in the staff report that there was still 20 something thousand left of allocated funds for this contract. So I was unclear on the, economics of that. And I believe in, so I would ask her that the city manager give us a quick summary of that. |
| 00:20:22.73 | Mayor Kellen | Do you want to pull it off or? Thank you. |
| 00:20:24.36 | Jill Hoffman | No, I just know I wanted to confirm that and then I don't think I want to pull it off. I think that we can just deal with it this way so that then we can go ahead and make the motion so we don't have to pull it off. |
| 00:20:24.38 | Mayor Kellen | No, I just. |
| 00:20:36.34 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 00:20:36.36 | Unknown | City Manager, do you want to |
| 00:20:37.04 | Mayor Kellen | to speak to that? |
| 00:20:40.48 | Chris Zapata | Yeah, thank you for the opportunity. Thank you for the question, Council Member Hoffman. It is a little fuzzy, but what has essentially happened is last year, when the much more consulting team was authorized up to $96,000 for a six-month period to do the HR function in the city, they did not bill for about $20,000. So that's a loss. That's a loss that they've incurred. It's consistent with trying to reduce costs in the city, and it doesn't carry forward, and we don't pay them. So I think the clarity that, and Debra's on the phone call as well. She can clarify if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that money was due to much more. They chose not to bill for it, to be in solidarity with the city manager, taking a pay cut. And so they took a pay cut as well. So that's gone and won't be applied to their bill from last year, nor could it be applied to the contract that we're asking you to approve tonight. |
| 00:21:37.94 | Jill Hoffman | And so the contract that we're approving tonight is retroactive to July 31st. |
| 00:21:42.68 | Chris Zapata | it would be effective for this fiscal year. |
| 00:21:46.54 | Jill Hoffman | So it's not, in other words, it's not 86,000 for four months, right? From tonight through December. |
| 00:21:52.86 | Chris Zapata | Yeah, that's correct. It's from July 1st to December 31st. |
| 00:21:56.05 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 00:21:56.08 | Chris Zapata | Okay, thanks. |
| 00:21:58.47 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Thanks very much. I think that satisfies my question on that. Thank you for my patience. Thank you. |
| 00:22:06.96 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Thank you. Vice Mayor. Thanks. Two items. I just wanted to comment on item 3M, the miscellaneous, that it's fantastic to see that there is consideration for a sustainability coordinator. That's been a lot of hard work by the mayor and the sustainability commission to make that happen. So I just really wanted to acknowledge how excited we all are. |
| 00:22:22.08 | Unknown | So I just wanted to make sure that |
| 00:22:25.32 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | about that happening and make sure it doesn't get completely left off because it will be great and really impactful for us to have a sustainability coordinator here in Sausalito. And on that note, because we have such a fantastic sustainability commission who does such great work, I did want to pull, item 3i, which is the grand jury report on electrification because the sustainability commission had a conflicting recommendation from the city's recommendation and response. |
| 00:22:49.05 | Unknown | and I think, |
| 00:22:49.93 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | forwarded, I had quite late this evening, but the city manager forwarded the recommendations from the sustainability commission. And I would at least like to see The change to the recommendation 3F, to which we said partially disagree with regards to the impacts of gas versus electrical electrification. And I believe I hope Mark Palmer from the Sustainability Commission is here because he offered to weigh in. But I can't, there he is. There he is. Hi, Mark. Anyway, I'll let you decide on that, but I just wanted to bring that forward. |
| 00:23:23.64 | Mayor Kellen | Great. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Okay, so we'll pull that off of consent. Councilman Cleveland Knowles? |
| 00:23:30.26 | Cleveland Knowles | Yeah, I just wanted to concur with some of the public comments about having a discussion about returning to in-person, but I do think we need to make the findings clear. in the item 3I on continuing to be remote since we are remote tonight and we haven't made them in a while. So I'm not in favor of taking that off consent, but I was going to mention it at future agenda items. And then just on the 3L, I think it If there's an inconsist, we did have a long discussion about electrification in our general plan context. And if there is a, um, |
| 00:24:02.69 | Unknown | And if that's not, |
| 00:24:05.32 | Cleveland Knowles | disconnect between our general plan and the staff response or a disconnect between our sustainability commission and the response. I'm just wondering if we have more time and we could move that into our next meeting. so that staff could take another look at that. I know the grand jury reports often have a very tight timeline. Thank you. |
| 00:24:30.25 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you for that, Councilmember. I don't know if you want to speak to that, Vice Mayor. Would you like it to be heard tonight or do you want to? |
| 00:24:36.85 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | So. |
| 00:24:37.52 | Mayor Kellen | From what I understand, |
| 00:24:39.17 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | The grand jury report response must be submitted by September 6, so I don't know that we have leeway, although I do know that Kenneth Henry has committed to having our action with regards to the recommendations of the report as a business item in October and onwards, so that we would be appropriately moving forward with the county's recommendations and requirements for electrification. So there are two pieces here there's. the process of the city implementing electrification itself, which is going to be on the agenda as a business item in the future, and the grand jury response. So I don't know if, uh, We could. potentially ask for an additional extension and hear it at the next meeting if that's ever done. I know that there are definitely discrepancies between the staff recommendations, the information according to the sustainability commission and what I reviewed within the general plan, as well as our response. So I just wanted to make sure we do get an opportunity to flag it. |
| 00:25:34.42 | Mayor Kellen | Bye. Well, um, Okay, well, we'll get to that in a second. I'm fine taking it off and focusing on the grand jury response. And if we do identify inconsistencies that require more time, then we can decide what to do. Does that sound reasonable to you, Vice Mayor? |
| 00:25:46.34 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Yeah, and we have the, and maybe we can pull it up on the screen, the response from the Sustainability Commission or Mark. Yeah, when we get there, we will. Great, perfect. |
| 00:25:56.97 | Mayor Kellen | And are you okay moving it to after the other business items? Thank you. |
| 00:26:01.19 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Sure. Well, I don't know if a representative from the Sustainability Commission will be available at that time, which is my concern. |
| 00:26:09.56 | Mayor Kellen | Let's see what else we have going. Okay, maybe we can sort that out as we hear from Council Member Sobieski. |
| 00:26:16.34 | Ian Sobieski | I just wanted to alert you that I'm having bandwidth issues, so I turned my video off. I can hear and participate. I'll see if I can fix it. And just wanted to let you know. |
| 00:26:25.91 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, thank you, Ian. So I was going to ask the city attorney his recommendation for Item 3D, the contract for Mike Wagner. It is missing a crucial exhibit, Exhibit A, as I mentioned to you, and that defines the real estate services to be provided, including lease negotiation, which is, as we know, one of his core services to the city. What is the best way to remedy that? Is it to give direction, take it off consent, give direction, take it off consent, put it on another meeting agenda. your thoughts there? |
| 00:27:01.28 | Sergio Rudin | I'm not sure about the timing, but I think it's the attachment A to exhibit one, which identifies the properties that are covered by the agreement. It may be that the city manager has an idea what those properties are, we could fill it in tonight, You could tell. |
| 00:27:17.62 | Mayor Kellen | Attachment A to exhibit A, pardon me, I misspoke. Attachment to exhibit A, which defines the real estate services to be provided. |
| 00:27:20.90 | Sergio Rudin | Yes. Sorry. |
| 00:27:26.41 | Sergio Rudin | The exhibit has the services and I maybe if I misread my key attachment is the properties party move. to be the benefit. as part of that real skill. |
| 00:27:38.44 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, let's share from the city manager then. |
| 00:27:41.88 | Chris Zapata | Mayor and Council of Public, let me apologize for the incomplete submittal. What I would recommend is you take no action on this. And I remove it from your agenda. We're going forward on the next agenda with the full, uh, uh, level of information that's needed for you to vote on it. I can speak with Mr. Wagner about his patients and I think we'll be fine, but we should provide you with the complete packet and we haven't done that tonight. So my apologies, we can bring that back at the first meeting in September. |
| 00:28:07.95 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, thank you, city manager. I just want to make sure the public sees everything and has all the attachments when we vote on it. Okay, so it sounds like there is a request to remove item 3L. from the consent calendar for later discussion tonight. And there's also a request to by me to remove item 3d. So it'll come back to us. Anybody oppose that or have another opinion? |
| 00:28:31.31 | Jill Hoffman | Um, I do, Ashley. So I'm trying to remember I'm trying to remember the parameters for responding to a grand jury report. There's certain timelines, parameters, you know, about how you respond. I'm not sure I want to get it. I'm not sure we're prepared to get into a discussion here at a city council meeting on what an appropriate response would be to the grand jury report. The one that's already drafted by the staff understands sustainability wants to. has given a recommendation, but I'm not sure you know, the open meeting tonight. without it being on the agenda and we're discussing some sort of, you know, Amanda Solliday, she's a good question. I think that's a good question. perhaps council member, the vice mayor talked to the staff about and giving her the authority to do that, to accommodate the sustainability recommendation. I'm not sure that we should be trying to do that on the fly at a city council meeting. So that's my only recommendation with regard to that. I would say take it off. and what's the deadline? Can anybody... |
| 00:29:42.98 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | by the way. |
| 00:29:43.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:29:44.36 | Jill Hoffman | What's the deadline for? |
| 00:29:44.56 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Yeah. |
| 00:29:44.58 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:29:44.60 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | I've been told that other recommendations, other jurisdictions have requested extensions on this specifically. A member of the City of Ability Commission just texted me, but I'm happy to move forward in that way, Councilman Ruffin. They sent a very extensive response that mirrors the staff response, but it's not exactly the same. And I agree, we haven't all had a chance to review it. So whatever you think the best way forward. |
| 00:29:45.44 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 00:29:51.75 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:30:05.49 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I- |
| 00:30:05.66 | Jill Hoffman | I know. Yeah, I think I feel more kind of that. Let's just take it off and with direction to staff to try to get an extension. you know, and to accommodate further review and what the suggested changes are from the sustainability commission. I think that's the proper course of that. |
| 00:30:19.04 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | to the future. And if we can't get an extension, would you authorize me to work with the sustainability commission and staff to finalize the report or what's the. |
| 00:30:27.63 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, and then maybe a one-way communication, this is the draft, right? out to the full city council. And if there's any issue, then we can, you know, whatever. I can't imagine that you're not going to get an extension, but if you do, that's what I would suggest. Okay. |
| 00:30:42.02 | Mayor Kellen | Okay. So then we are going to remove item 3L, I'll rewrite them 3D. So do we have with those removals, do we have a motion to approve the consent calendar? |
| 00:30:53.04 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:30:53.06 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 00:30:53.75 | Cleveland Knowles | I'll make a motion to approve the consent calendar of 3A through 3Q minus 3D and 3L. Okay, thank you, Ian. |
| 00:31:02.96 | Mayor Kellen | called the role? |
| 00:31:05.75 | Serge Avila | Council Member Sobieski. Yes. Member Cleveland Knowles. Yes. Council Member Hoffman. Yes. Vice Mayor Blaustein. |
| 00:31:09.41 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 00:31:09.43 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Yes. Yes. |
| 00:31:11.94 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 00:31:14.08 | Serge Avila | you |
| 00:31:14.12 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. |
| 00:31:14.17 | Serge Avila | Mayor Kelman. Yes. Motion passes. |
| 00:31:15.77 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. Okay, great. Thank you. Onto item four, which is public hearing items. |
| 00:31:21.66 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:31:21.71 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:31:21.74 | Cleveland Knowles | Yeah. |
| 00:31:21.76 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 00:31:21.95 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:31:22.20 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. |
| 00:31:22.32 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:31:22.37 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:31:22.81 | Cleveland Knowles | Do you want a motion on 3L to request staff to request an extension? And if they can't get an extension to authorize Vice Mayor Blaustein to work work on a short amendment. to the staff report with a report back to the city council? Or do you think we've provided that direction? |
| 00:31:43.50 | Mayor Kellen | I'm comfortable having it be on the record. If the city attorney feels like there needs to be a motion, I'm happy to entertain that motion, but I think We're on agreement on that. |
| 00:31:50.77 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 00:31:50.82 | Sergio Rudin | statement. Having it clear on the record is always better. |
| 00:31:55.22 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, is that okay, Councillor McLean-Phermanos? Okay, great. All right. Thanks, everybody. That was a good conversation. Appreciate that. I will move on then, like I said, item four, public hearing. We have no public hearing items, but we do have two business items tonight. So I'll go ahead and Welcome, I believe, Kevin McGowan, Director of Public Works for Item 5A. for a report on Pacific Gas and Electric Company system upgrades within the city of Sausalito. And before we get started, I just want to give a huge thanks to the subcommittee members Councilmember Sobieski and Councilmember Cleveland Knowles. I was on this committee with Councilmember Sobieski last year, and Councilmember Cleveland Knowles very graciously stepped in and I think has done an excellent job with Councilmember Sobieski. So thank you both, and thanks for bringing this to us. And so, Director McGowan, over to you guys. |
| 00:32:41.99 | Kevin McGowan | Kevin McGowan, Good evening there members of the city council on Kevin McGowan i'm your public works director, I have a short presentation to deliver to you this evening. Kevin McGowan, With the help of pg so i'm going to share my screen just give me one second here to bring up the presentation. |
| 00:33:00.67 | Kevin McGowan | Let's go. There we go. You should be seeing a green screen that says PG&E system upgrade and update. We see it. Thank you. Wonderful. Thank you very much. Joining me this evening are members of PG&A, Mark Van Gorder, Austin Sharp, as well as Tracy Craig and Sarah Craig. Austin is going to go ahead and help me with some of the presentation material about their upgrades. And I have additional slides for us to take a look at with regard to subjects related to this. So this evening we are summarizing some of the information provided by PG&E related to the potential undergrounding and upgrade of the electrical systems, or some of the electrical systems here in Sausalito. Sausalito is currently serviced by PG&E with a four kilovolt system. The current substation for the city is located off of Rodeo Drive. And this system utilizes older equipment, which has reached the end of its life expectancy, such that PG&E has initiated an upgrade project. In addition, the demand for more power in Sausalito has increased such that the four kilovolts system is not sufficient to address or provide future demands or address future demands. So to provide more information on this, on the upgrade of their project, I'm going to go ahead and run the slideshow and I'm hoping that Austin Sharp and PG&E representatives are on the call and they can go ahead and talk through some of the next seven slides. And then I have a few after that. Austin, are you with us this evening? |
| 00:34:49.73 | Austin Sharp | I am. Can everyone hear me? |
| 00:34:52.67 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, sir. We're good. |
| 00:34:54.42 | Austin Sharp | All right, perfect. Thank you, Kevin. Thank you, council members. Glad to be here this evening to talk the 4kb to 12kb system upgrade and provide a little more context and be here to answer any questions that you have. So as Kevin mentioned, PG&E is planning to do a 4kb to 12kb upgrade. This project is really focused on the reliability and capacity that we can provide the city of Sausalito moving forward. As Kevin mentioned, our facilities have reached near the end of their useful life and much of the equipment that we have serving the areas that you see outlined above will need to be replaced so that we can serve in a broader capacity as we expand use of electric vehicles, electric use in general. So what this project will entail is the upgrade of much of the equipment on the poles that you see in this area. We will not be upgrading any wires, but we'll be upgrading insulators, switches, transformers. There will be some pole replacements. So as we've been working with the city of Sausalito over the last couple of years, it's really been to address what the folks of Sausalito care about, their sight lines, and the ability to get reliable electric service. So as we're planning out this project, we have it broken down into five phases. We'll go into those in a little more detail in a moment. And in each of those five phases, we have an outreach plan for the residents in that community, a very robust one that includes webinars, letters, mailers, individual contacts that they can take so that we can work one-on-one with those residents on any issues or concerns that they have as we begin doing construction in those areas. We have also been working with the city's underground committee as referenced earlier to provide information if the city so chooses to go with an underground option. That is something that I believe Kevin will be talking about in a little while and will be here to answer questions in regards to as well. And after I have a little bit more information here about the project. So Kevin, if you want to go forward a bit. |
| 00:36:52.33 | Austin Sharp | All right, so our original schedule for this project was 2022. That project was deferred so that the city would have the opportunity to look into potentially initiating an underground project. So that's what you see on the screen there, everything saying that the project is TBD. Hey Austin, you're no longer on your screen. |
| 00:37:07.80 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 00:37:07.82 | Mayor Kellen | Hey Austin, for no longer- |
| 00:37:09.49 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 00:37:10.70 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. |
| 00:37:11.41 | Austin Sharp | I think it's Kevin's screen, sorry. |
| 00:37:13.22 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, but good to see you. |
| 00:37:16.14 | Austin Sharp | Good to see you as well. I think we lost the presentation. |
| 00:37:20.14 | Kevin McGowan | Let's try this one more time, my apologies. All right. |
| 00:37:25.93 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. |
| 00:37:25.94 | Austin Sharp | Thank you. |
| 00:37:25.97 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. |
| 00:37:27.16 | Austin Sharp | Thursday. Perfect. So as you can see here, all the start dates are TBD, as we did defer the project in the spirit of collaborating with the city on any information that they would require to potentially make that decision on going underground. So all of this work as well as pending customer outreach, as I mentioned before, working with the city on encroachment permits and making sure that we're answering any questions as we do this large scale project. So what we are looking at right now is that this project will go in 2023 as we are, again, ending the near the useful life of this equipment. And we are going to have to start changing the capacity needs out in these areas to make sure that we can offer service going forward. We will be initiating customer outreach in the near future to the first phases of the project. We'll be sending out information to these residents. We'll be planning webinars that they can attend to have their questions answered and we'll have contacts again that they can reach out to if they have any questions about what work will be taking place in their area and the potential for any site impacts that this work Thank you. answered, and we will have contacts again that they can reach out to if they have any questions about what work will be taking place in their area and the potential for any site impacts that this work may provide. |
| 00:37:46.53 | Unknown | or, |
| 00:38:33.85 | Austin Sharp | Can you go to the next slide, please? |
| 00:38:38.54 | Austin Sharp | So this will just be a couple slides going over a little more detail of each project area, mostly just giving you a map view of the streets and locations. This is not in specific order of which phases would go first. We are still in the planning phase on that. And again, we would reach out to any residents as we have the schedule going forward in 2023. |
| 00:38:53.15 | Unknown | that's, you know, |
| 00:38:59.53 | Austin Sharp | So the first project neighborhood here would be Curry Lane, Platte Ave and Toyin Lane. Go to the next slide, please. |
| 00:39:08.68 | Austin Sharp | Project Neighborhood 2, B Street, Bonita Street, Caledonia, Casnell, Filbert, Gerard, Litho, Locust, and Marie. Next slide, please. |
| 00:39:22.60 | Unknown | and neighborhood three, Bridgeway, Caledonia, Easterby, Filbert, |
| 00:39:30.51 | Unknown | in spring. Next slide, please. |
| 00:39:40.93 | Unknown | Thank you. See an update over there, I don't see an update on mine. |
| 00:39:44.60 | Kevin McGowan | We are seeing project neighborhood four at this point. |
| 00:39:50.86 | Austin Sharp | Looks like it just took a second to update. Thank you, Kevin. Casnell, Crescenta, Crisane, Currie Ave, George Lane, Gerard Ave, Glen Drive, Locust Street, Montemar Drive, Turney Street, Vista Clara Road. |
| 00:40:04.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:40:04.30 | Austin Sharp | and the last |
| 00:40:04.97 | Unknown | uh, One of the neighborhoods, please. |
| 00:40:11.87 | Unknown | It's just a tad bit behind, so I'll just wait a second here for it to look. |
| 00:40:18.91 | Unknown | Yes, we should see project neighborhood five |
| 00:40:21.09 | Kevin McGowan | your |
| 00:40:21.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:40:21.34 | Kevin McGowan | screen. |
| 00:40:21.63 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:40:23.47 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 00:40:25.24 | Unknown | there we go Curry Lane, Gordon Street, Plaid Ave, Spring Street, Toyin Lane, and |
| 00:40:31.03 | Austin Sharp | Woodward out. Go to my last slide, please, Kevin. |
| 00:40:39.43 | Austin Sharp | So each of these areas will be conducting various forms of work. As you can see represented up here, we are touching over 200 poles within these five different locations. We are not performing the same amount of work in every location. So there will be a small number of police. You will have about, about 91 poles out of the 200 plus will be replaced. Some will be taller. Some will be the same size as been put in. It really will depend on... |
| 00:41:08.12 | Unknown | they have, that. |
| 00:41:09.74 | Austin Sharp | Bye. Thank you. have about 99 transformers replaced. 26 of those will be larger in size. Some of these poles will have new equipment on them, roughly 53. That new equipment will be things like switches and maybe potentially transformers, as well as insulators and conductors. There will be very few new poles actually set, poles that did not exist prior to this. That will be four total poles. And mostly what you will see is a slight difference in the change in kind of the shape of the pole out in the area. So now you have kind of a four flat frame poles. You'll have kind of a triangular reframing of the pole. So it will look slightly different. And we understand that in Sausalito, the sight lines are a very important part of the community. So much of our outreach will be. geared to getting customers and residents to contact us so that we can look at your individual location. You can see what poles near you will be impacted. We can give you an assessment of what it might potentially do to a sight line in the area. Very far ranging and extensive as the work that we do on the overhead side, but it will be related just to the polls that we are touching the other. |
| 00:42:19.41 | Unknown | by that information to the residents as they reach out and we do our outreach program. |
| 00:42:24.14 | Austin Sharp | So Kevin, I believe that's all I had for my overview. I'll send it back to you. |
| 00:42:28.97 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you, Austin. I appreciate the help. PG&E also has an outreach program for this project. They are utilizing a consultant to help them with this, and it's fairly significant in order to reach out to some of the general public on this specific project. I have a few more slides for everybody just to run through some things. Sausalito has executed several undergrounding projects over the years. To give you an idea of this effort, you can see the extent of the overhead lines on older photos and soft Sausalito has executed several undergrounding projects over the years. To give you an idea of this effort, you can see the extent of the overhead lines on older photos in Sausalito along Bridgeway. So these are really old photos, but just seeing how many electrical lines there are in these old photos is pretty interesting. Sausalito's last undergrounding project occurred in 2006. Other efforts in 2010 for an undergrounding district on San Carlos and Bulkley were disbanded due to the lack of private property support. In 2020, a little bit of history for us, just to kind of back us up to how we got to this point. In 2020, PG&E installed a new poll and recloser system on 4th Street in Old Town to better address public safety power shutoffs, otherwise known as PSPS events. This action initiated public interest regarding view impacts from PG&E overhead lines. In September 2021 city staff provided a report to Council on changes to the California Public Utility Commission's Rule 20 program. In January 2022, the city's undergrounding subcommittee met with PG&E regarding their 4KV to 12KV overhead system upgrade project. The city noted to PG&E that the undergrounding, that undergrounding these facilities would be beneficial to all parties and the city requested that PG&E provide information on the potential costs for undergrounding these facilities. In August 2022 just this month, PG met with the subcommittee council members and staff to present information regarding their system upgrade project, similar to the slides that you've just seen. PG&E estimated that the cost of undergrounding the new 12KV system could cost between 15 and 60 million. These numbers may not address construction in areas with hills, tight roadways, and hard rock, which we have all these things in Sausalito. Based on Sausalito soils, hills, tight roadways, and difficulties related to excavation, a more reasonable estimate is in the range of $35 to $60 million for undergrounding the new 12KB system, as mentioned earlier. PG&E estimates a cost of $8 million is needed to upgrade their current overhead system to the 12 kV system. Currently, the city also has $2 million or $2 million in work credits from the Rule 20A program, which could be allocated to undergrounding overhead lines on arterial roadways. Other cities throughout the state have faced these same types of issues and have addressed them differently. In the town of Tiburon, the town of Tiburon has moved forward with a Rule 20B projects. Each fronting property owner where the overhead lines are undergrounded is fiscally responsible for supporting the cost of undergrounding those lines. In some cases, the city did pay for some of that work that might be on a main arterial as well. In the city of Del Mar, the city of Del Mar passed a ballot measure to support the cost of undergrounding within their jurisdiction. So that's a different method. In the city of Manhattan Beach, they utilized an assessment district to to approach an assessment district approach to fund their undergrounding efforts. There may be more funding mechanisms available to the city, but ultimately the residents within each of these jurisdictions ended up funding the undergrounding effort. A couple more slides. PG&E's existing system within Sausalito is older and PG&E is concerned that the equipment will fail, cause outages and impact the overall community. With more people working from home, electric vehicle charging from home, and other demands on the system, PG&E does not believe that the current four kilovolt system is sufficient to address future demands. Therefore, PG&E believes it is necessary to replace the current system as soon as feasible. The city of Sausalito is not within a high-risk threat district as defined by the CPUC or the California Public Utilities Commission, such that PG&E is not required to underground the systems within the city. The maps approved by CPUC are shown on this slide and also can be found on CPUC's website. I think we've given you a link to that within the staff report, or at least an attachment. Developing funding plans and details to underground systems does take time. There is a concern that the existing system will continue to fail if the city instructs PG&E to not upgrade their 4KV system while acquiring funds to underground the system on behalf of the city and its residents. So this is a complex project. I'll just add that to my little dialogue here. But that concludes our short presentation regarding this subject. PG&E representatives are present as well as city staff to assist with your questions and comments. Thank you very much. And let me stop sharing my screen right now. |
| 00:48:44.03 | Mayor Kellen | Great. Thank you, Director McGowan. Awesome. Thank you very much. Let's turn to the subcommittee members and see if, Councilmember Cleveland Knowles or Councilmember Sobieski have anything they want to add or tease out from that presentation that we should be aware of. Councilmember Clivenall, is there anything to add? |
| 00:49:00.43 | Cleveland Knowles | Yeah, I hope hopefully Councilmember Sobieski has a good enough internet connection to also chime in. But I think, thank you to Kevin and to Mr. Sharp for the presentation. And for the work, I also did wanna, if I understood correctly, PG&E has delayed the project so that the start date, instead of spring 2022 would now be in January 2023, which will give us a little bit more time. So I just wanna acknowledge that and thank you. I think the main question here that, and probably, Mayor, you were engaged in this as well, in prior discussions is how to leverage the amount of money that PG&E will be spending anyway upgrading from the 4KV to the 12KV. and use that for undergrounding instead of doing the overhead lines, First, all the disruption to the neighbors, all the anxiety about that, and then going back and doing the whole thing, hopefully, again, with the underground system. So that's the kind of issue that we're trying to avoid. cost factor of course is the critical piece there. And I think if the other council members you have to have discussed and answered questions, et cetera, agree, I think we'd be asking Um, for authorization to go back and work with Kevin, the city manager and our financing people to see if we can develop some options to, I guess how I would say it is to do it right the first time and get it undergrounded. all at once and skip the overhead line upgrade phase. So I'll let Ian, who's been more involved in this, chime in. But I think that's what our recommendation from the subcommittee is. And hopefully we can do that in a timely way. so that PG&E would still be able to have an acceptable schedule to achieve their goals. |
| 00:50:56.99 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. Great, great. Thanks for teeing that up. Councillor Sobieski. |
| 00:51:00.55 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you, Susan. I don't need a good internet connection when you summarize things so succinctly. And gently, I, this is a project that really blindsided me when I joined the council. because we're basically replacing half the city's electrical system And there was no not even an inkling to consider underground. Now, obviously, underground is expensive. This is that classic case in government where you have different agencies and one agency has a mission, and is focused on accomplishing its mission And And there are other, well, there are other considerations to try to integrate together. So... in Sausalito, you know, if we can find ways to get other funds to help underground this, do it right the first time, then we absolutely... should because of our engagement PG&E has taken at least some some tentative steps in coming up with a, uh, an estimate, but it's really back of the envelope. It's really crude. It's simplistic not to take anything away from, that because they didn't represent that it's anything more. But the numbers they came up with vary widely and widely. My own cursory... Research online has found cases in San Jose and San Francisco that have substantially cheaper implementation of undergrounding. So this is a topic we really should execute. thoroughly and investigate thoroughly. before we engage in the wholesale replacement of half the city system. I'm cognizant and I think we all should be that the 4K system is old. But that's all the more reason for PG&E to help us and us to help ourselves in really tackling getting the sharp pencil out and really answering the questions. I'll point out one thing PG&A may not know is that the sewer district has found that we may need to replace as much as 25% of the sewers in town. So at least in places where we're replacing those sewers, and doing any trench work to do the sewer repair, we're gonna build a trench. So at least in those places, shouldn't we run conduit so that we can underground those sections of of the overhead electrical wires. There's a lot here and that we have a lot on our plate. So if I'm chagrined about anything, it's that, that because of other pressing items, occupying our attention, we're not focused on this as much as we could be, but it's better late than never and we still have a chance given that they've deferred the start date of this work. So I would call on PG&E to work aggressively with the city and with private engineering firms and for the city itself to |
| 00:53:33.34 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:53:45.33 | Ian Sobieski | get the resources necessary to really answer the question about whether there's a way to meet Councilmember Cleveland Knowles' call to do it right the first time. |
| 00:53:55.85 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you, Councillor Sobieski. Any other questions with that tee up for Austin? Yeah, Vice Mayor, go ahead. Thank you. |
| 00:54:03.03 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Yeah, I wanted to dig in a little deeper into the CPUC assessment for high risk, because in looking at neighborhood four, that's to me, and also in SMFD assessments, somewhat of a high risk fire area. And I would like to get a sense of why, if you could answer, what qualifications we're not meeting there in consideration. And maybe that's not a question to be answered tonight, but I just feel that a lot of our hillside is very subject to fire risk. |
| 00:54:35.06 | Austin Sharp | Yeah, would you like me to go now? Sorry, I don't want to step up here. |
| 00:54:36.62 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | If you have the capacity to answer, it would be fantastic. |
| 00:54:38.44 | Austin Sharp | Oh, yeah. |
| 00:54:38.61 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:54:38.72 | Austin Sharp | Thank you. |
| 00:54:40.53 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, I would second that question. It's so weird to just cut Sausalito out. Everything else is high risk except Sausalito. That seems just implausible. |
| 00:54:41.04 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | So. |
| 00:54:41.29 | Austin Sharp | I do not ask that question. |
| 00:54:49.41 | Austin Sharp | Yeah, so the CAL FIRE and the Public Utilities Commission were the main drivers of the high fire threat districts. I was going to answer that. We would have to follow up with you offline in regards to their process in essentially, getting that granular about how they deemed one area versus another, a high fire threat. So what I can say is the experts did look at that. It is driven by CAL FIRE, the Public Utilities Commission. They did look for input from the utilities, but it really is based on their expert input that they put together, the high fire threat district maps. And in many ways, what PG&E is doing is prioritizing our undergrounding work based on those high fire threat maps. So looking at tier three and then tier two, and then potentially anything beyond that. But for the most part, what we're doing is we're |
| 00:55:29.59 | Unknown | then. |
| 00:55:35.19 | Austin Sharp | pooling our resources and our available funds to address the most high risk fire areas over the next 10 years. |
| 00:55:42.78 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | I would love to send you the modeling that SMFD did of a brush fire from the top of that hill down to just to further. Give an example of what our concerns are for that area, because I think there's a substantial amount of fire risk in Sausalito, so I just wanted to bring that to the forefront, I appreciate your time on this and I definitely want to thank the. for how much time they put in, but I did one of them dig deeper into that because it just seemed bizarre that we would be excluded. It's a great question. |
| 00:56:09.04 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. |
| 00:56:09.55 | Austin Sharp | Yeah. |
| 00:56:09.56 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. |
| 00:56:09.58 | Austin Sharp | take that back. |
| 00:56:10.54 | Mayor Kellen | Chief Welch is on the call. So I know she does. |
| 00:56:10.81 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Yeah, we can take that back. I know she does. |
| 00:56:13.97 | Cleveland Knowles | Yes. |
| 00:56:15.40 | Mayor Kellen | He's welcome to chime in here, Chief Welsh. |
| 00:56:18.42 | Cleveland Knowles | And Melissa, we did ask that question in our subcommittee as well. So we're pushing on that. Thank you for bringing it up in the public meeting. I appreciate it. |
| 00:56:27.45 | Mayor Kellen | Councilman Hoffman, any questions for Austin? |
| 00:56:32.45 | Jill Hoffman | No, thanks. I think the other issue brought up by the council members is they did a thorough job. So thanks. |
| 00:56:38.74 | Mayor Kellen | Great. Also, I have a few questions. So on this topic of risk, Um, So let's just assume for sake of argument that you don't conclude the fire risk is high, but we have tremendous wind patterns here that could very easily and often do throw a line off grid and lead to PSPS and another kind of, not a mandated outage, but an outage because of the of the risk of that high wind through Hurricane Gulch on Wolfpack Ridge. How do you guys think about risk in the community? Are there other factors from the CPUC besides fire right now? |
| 00:57:15.14 | Austin Sharp | when it comes to undergrounding, I'm assuming you're asking. |
| 00:57:17.89 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. |
| 00:57:18.45 | Austin Sharp | or just enjoy. Yeah. So when it comes to undergrounding, I mean, that really is the main driver of risk is the high fire threat assessment, as well as the conditions in a given area. So to be clear, anything that is not in a high fire threat district does not think there is zero risk of fire. It really means that we are taking additional steps and measures within those areas to ensure that we are not allowing ignitions to take place or that we're ensuring that our system is as safe as it possibly can be. And one of those solutions is undergrounding. So the other part of this is that undergrounding is not the only way that we go about with fire safety. We have many programs that kind of interlock with each other to overlap and ensure fire safety within a given community. Our vegetation management programs, enhanced vegetation management routine, our enhanced power line safety settings that auto switch off the line if something were to come in contact, PSPS, as you mentioned, and our maintenance and system hardening activities. So we have kind of a sliding scale of things that we do based on wildfire risk. And really undergrounding, I think it was mentioned, you know, Kevin put it through in the presentation and said it well, it takes a lot of resources, it takes a lot of planning, and it takes a lot of time. It's not something that is easily pulled off. So we often overlap those wildfire safety measures, even in areas that we would eventually underground. But to kind of bring it back to Sausalito, with it being in the tier one, it would not be in the same priority as the other areas in tier two, tier three, that we are looking at to be the first run of this 10 year, 10,000 mile program. Could I say it would never be undergrounded? I couldn't, but I could say that the timeframe that it would likely take to potentially consider for undergrounding, we would need to upgrade our system to ensure that we have the capacity to serve Sausalito. Really the issue that we're trying to solve or the problem we're looking at is a reliability and capacity one to ensure that people can get their, you know, EV chargers, that they can expand their electric footprint, make sure they're getting cleaner and greener. |
| 00:57:41.43 | Unknown | There should be a lot of people |
| 00:59:25.74 | Austin Sharp | and that we can serve that need going forward. We don't have to reject potential applications. We can actually serve everyone within that area of Sausalito. So that is the issue that we're looking to solve with this project. It is not based on wildfire safety. We are doing all of those other programs all the time to ensure wildfire security. |
| 00:59:43.84 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah, this is interesting though, you come at a time when we're looking at our housing cycle and doing a very high RENA allocation. And so let me, promised to get you something from our housing element. our sixth cycle housing element update, figure three inventory of sites, environmental hazards. I can't show it on the screen right now, but you really should take a look at that because there's gonna be an inconsistency between what you're telling us the PUC is allowing, the CPUC is mandating for you to do and what HCD is mandating for us to do. And so I think that's something that needs to get that smoothed out. So we'll make sure you get that again, it's from the housing cycle. So, uh, Let's go to something else we talked about or we've talked about in the past, which is the Rule 20A monies. So I understand whether it's Rule 20A or one of the other undergrounding allocations where we actually have money, quote unquote, in the bank. |
| 01:00:30.05 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:00:38.40 | Mayor Kellen | And I believe one of those programs is getting phased out. Is there a way for communities like Sausalito to at least access those funds for programs that are being phased out so we can apply them to future undergrounding? |
| 01:00:52.52 | Austin Sharp | So I don't have the full scoping on if that would be possible, but one avenue that could be utilized for that Rule 28 funding, and as we talked to the underground committee, is that you can use those Rule 20 funds as collateral to apply and get an estimate for the underground work under Rule 20B or 20C. So I'll combine a couple of responses here because this is something that Councilmember Sobieski brought up. We are bound by the Rule 20 process when it is an agency initiated underground project. PG&E would not be initiating an underground project. So it would have to go through that channel. So you can kind of transfer those Rule 28 funds to be collateral for the estimate for Rule 20B or 20C. And that's really where we would need to get started to get a much better price estimate for the underground in this particular area. As he mentioned, we did give him a back of the envelope, a very wide range. And that is because without the ability to go through a full engineering design review, we would not be able to give a much more granular cost assessment. It really has to go through that application process. So we do have rule 20 experts within the company that would be more than happy to assist on how you would be able to utilize those funds for some other capacity. |
| 01:02:05.74 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 01:02:05.76 | Jill Hoffman | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:02:05.83 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 01:02:05.93 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:02:05.95 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. I have more questions on that, but they're probably too complicated right now. So since Mark is here and earlier tonight we talked about the grand jury, Sarah Mastrianni, Ph.D.: response electrification is PG&E the PG&E submit a response, you have an opinion doesn't relate to your system upgrades. Sarah Mastrianni, Ph.D.: There's some public comments that there's a greater pull on the grid electrification is difficult because it's a higher demand. Did you guys submit comments on that? Do you have thoughts on that? |
| 01:02:34.16 | Austin Sharp | I don't have any information on that. I will tag Mark Van Gorder. Mark, did you have any information on our potential response to the grave? |
| 01:02:42.51 | Mark Van Gorder | No, we don't have any. into response to the, can you hear me all right? Yes. Yes. So the quick answer to your question is no, we don't have a response to the grand jury's comments. While, you know, just as a by way of introduction, my name is Mark Van Gorder. I handle local government affairs for Marin and Napa counties. I would like to thank Kevin McGowan, especially in public works, managers of PADA, and Councilmember Cleveland Knowles, Jill Hoffman, Mayor Komen and Councilmember Sobieski for meeting with us, talking about this over the past year. I think we've had a lot of fruitful discussions about this. undergrounding opportunities. And, Again, I think we want to reiterate that, what we first heard when we brought this forward was the concerns about the viewshed and the concerns about how the transformers, the poles, electric wires, could impact the views, we took that very seriously. We brought on Craig Communications. Tracy and Sarah Craig are here to answer any questions about the outreach, but The idea behind that was that should there be impacts to the viewsheds. We wanted to have substantial outreach to the community, directly with the customers, Talk about the potential impacts of those. any new equipment. and, uh, And so that was our intent. And along the way of that discussion, understandably, the issue where the question came up, could this be underground? So I just want to say in the conversations that we've had over the past year, with four of you. Uh, Vice Mayor Blossian, I think you're the one person perhaps we have. haven't had a deeper discussion with, but happy to. Um, We remain committed. to working with all of us. uh, towards this option. of undergrounding. And just want to put that out there. that as we move forward with the public outreach, we're happy to include comments. and language that we can work with you on David Ensign PB, David Ensign PB and really dive into what would this look like and what the costs be. So just by way of introduction, wanted to cover some of those topics. |
| 01:05:10.19 | Mayor Kellen | I appreciate that. Thank you. Okay. Vice Mayor, I see your hand is up. Yep. |
| 01:05:16.58 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Yeah, interesting that you brought up views and also because I noticed if you could go back to the presentation, Austin, where you put the number of polls, I think it was something like 99 where the height was going to be increased. I'm just, again, wondering, you know, Is that because of a necessity for technology upgrades is that just because it gets, I mean, And what is the plan for public outreach on that, on those? I think it was the slide just two back. Where is it? There it is. |
| 01:05:52.78 | Austin Sharp | Yeah, the table. |
| 01:05:53.96 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Yeah. Okay, so 99 transformers were placed and then it looks like 53 of the proposed poles are gonna be taller. |
| 01:06:01.84 | Austin Sharp | Correct. And yeah, there's various needs throughout the area over here. It could depend on the equipment that we're placing could depend on where we believe we have to set the poll. Not all polls will be set back in the exact location that they were prior to this as we do the poll replacements. And so this table was originally produced for the underground committee to give them an idea of what views would be impacted in the area. So on the outreach side, what we're planning on doing is, as I said before, have some interactive webinars. where we would talk with the residents in the area if they would like to join and go over a map of the area and actually call out the work that we're doing within those zones. Secondarily, as was mentioned, we have Tracy and Sarah Craig on from Craig Communications. We have hired additional individuals to essentially be one-on-one consultants with the residents out there so they can understand the poles that are near them and what may be changing and what equipment could be larger, what equipment could be changing, because we do understand, this has been brought up by the city from the very beginning, that the sight lines are very important. So all the outreach is really around being able to interact with residents and understand what their sight lines are. It's very difficult to assume from the ground level what you see, what you see from your den versus another area, and what you really don't want impacted. And if possible, we would try to work with those residents. That is not a guarantee. Our operational needs may be such that we can't change anything or move something, but we want to be able to be as transparent as we possibly can and give people as much notice on the potential changes to the poles around them. |
| 01:07:39.19 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Thanks for that. And Mark, thanks for offering to continue the conversation and be committed to undergrounding. I'm sorry we haven't had a chance to have a one-on-one conversation since I wasn't a part of the working group, Definitely follow up on that. But I wonder if perhaps as part of your engagement with Craig Communications and in commitment to working with us, if you might include options and educational opportunities for neighborhoods to get a better understanding of 20B or of assessment undergrounding districts so that that our residents are aware of I'll turn it over. |
| 01:08:06.31 | Sergio Rudin | 100%. Absolutely. |
| 01:08:09.13 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Okay. Great, thanks. |
| 01:08:11.93 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you, Boismar. Okay, this is just a receipt of a report, there's no action. I see you, Councilor Sovetsky, you have your hand up, and then we're going to go to public comment. |
| 01:08:23.26 | Ian Sobieski | I was just wondering if PG&E would comment on this opportunity that may exist. to a dovetail with work on upgrading our sewer system that would involve trenching, to underground electrical systems in those areas. It's not a 28 project, it's not a 20B project, 20C project, it's just practical. So how do we make stuff like that happen in the bureaucracy of the system? |
| 01:08:52.65 | Austin Sharp | Yeah, it would still have to go through a Rule 20 project. It would have to be a request for PG&E to go underground. The method of excavation is up to the applicant. So if you were able to bundle together other work that you were doing, As we discussed during the underground committee, PG&E, the cost that we provided was really just the cost for PG&E equipment to go underground. It did not include civil construction, |
| 01:09:16.11 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:09:16.21 | Austin Sharp | easements, getting, you know, working with property owners for things like that, base maps. So if there is a project out there that could potentially meet a footprint, you would still go through the rule 20 application process. And then we see if we could meet that need and timeline to underground with the project that you currently have out there and whatever cost would be borne by the city. Thanks. |
| 01:09:39.01 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:09:41.39 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, thank you, Councillor Sobieski. I'm going to move over to public comment. I see a few hands up. surge, we let people know how to make public comment again. |
| 01:09:51.86 | Serge Avila | Sure. Video or audio public comment participation is limited to three minutes per speaker. If you would like to make a comment, please raise your hand in the Zoom application, and you will be called upon when is your time to speak. To raise your hand from a phone, press start nine, and each speaker will be notified when the time has elapsed. Madam Mayor, it looks like we do have a few public comments, starting with David Sudo. David, you've been unmuted and has to share your video. |
| 01:10:21.94 | David Sudo | Good evening, city council. I just want to point out what some city council members pointed out is There seems to be an inconsistency between CAL FIRE's hazard map and CPUC maps. I don't know if they're using a different grading system, or if CPU sees using obsolete risk assessments, But, In our current CAL FIRE hazard maps, Lincoln and Butte, |
| 01:10:47.64 | Unknown | Uh, |
| 01:10:47.69 | David Sudo | That neighborhood is in Cal Fire's fire hazard. risk assessment. investment. And I'm sure people are trying to get insurance Uh, are feeling that too. I'm not sure where the inconsistency is, but I would love to have a better explanation as to why there's an inconsistency between CPUC maps and CAL FIRE maps. Thank you. |
| 01:11:17.05 | Mayor Kellen | Bye. Thank you, David. |
| 01:11:21.42 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker is Joan C. Joan, you've been unmuted. Joan Cox. |
| 01:11:31.51 | Mayor Kellen | adjourned. |
| 01:11:31.97 | Unknown | And you can see that. |
| 01:11:32.03 | Unknown | you're still on mute somehow. |
| 01:11:38.75 | Unknown | That's not muted. |
| 01:11:48.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:11:48.13 | Mayor Kellen | and we're not hearing it. |
| 01:11:49.53 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:11:52.07 | Mayor Kellen | Serge, can you please help Joan on the audio, maybe we'll take another public comment. |
| 01:11:55.54 | Serge Avila | See you. |
| 01:11:58.73 | Serge Avila | camera, it's turned on. Not sure why we're not getting any feed. |
| 01:12:03.69 | Joan Cox | Okay, can you hear me now? Thank you. Gotcha. No, yes, you're in. Oh, great. OK. I wanted to share some work that we did as a city council, as a subcommittee back in 2018 on undergrounding. We lined up eight former mayors who would be pleased to walk door to door to support a ballot measure, should we decide to have the city finance this and then assess it against homeowners through their tax rolls just as we do our sewer and sanitary district fees. I also wanted to raise the idea, Ian mentioned the undergrounding work that we need to do for the sanitary system, but we also consider, undergrounding fiber optic cable while we're in the trenches. Other cities have undergrounded fiber optic cable and then rented it out to Google and others. So undergrounding fiber optic cable would be a potential revenue source as well as solve some of Sausalito's notorious internet issues. Absolutely. that's another potential manner in which to generate and make this more financially feasible. And I really wanna thank and acknowledge Susan Cleveland Knowles and Ian Sobieski for the work they've done with PG&E to Um, move the prospect of undergrounding forward and to explore its feasibility. And I heartily endorse their comments that It, let's not be penny wise and pound foolish and do this work twice. Let's, try, let's put our heads together and come up with a creative way. to do the right thing the first time around. Thank you. Thanks, Jim. |
| 01:14:00.23 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker is Jan Johnson. Jan, you've been unmuted and asked to share your video. |
| 01:14:08.82 | Jan Johnson | I'm all for undergrounding. I think it's a wonderful thing. However, I paid to underground all of my utilities 20 years ago. So I would hope that if you're going to assess the residents to underground the rest of the city that you exempt those of us who have already borne this cost. I just can't afford to pay for other people's undergrounding when I've already spent a fortune on my own. That's it. Thank you. |
| 01:14:42.35 | Mayor Kellen | Thanks, Jen. |
| 01:14:44.16 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker is Kevin Carroll. Kevin, you've been unmuted and asked to share your video. |
| 01:14:54.70 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 01:14:54.72 | Kevin Carroll | Good evening. |
| 01:14:55.84 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:14:56.36 | Kevin Carroll | I'll hold the video. |
| 01:14:56.39 | Sergio Rudin | out. |
| 01:14:58.13 | Kevin Carroll | I took a customer who was involved in the 4th Street |
| 01:14:58.20 | Unknown | I where it would |
| 01:15:02.11 | Unknown | Oh. |
| 01:15:03.14 | Kevin Carroll | surprise. in the past to the airport today. And we were discussing it on the way down |
| 01:15:06.85 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:15:09.71 | Kevin Carroll | One thing that occurred to me was that when a neighbor wants to |
| 01:15:12.61 | Unknown | a neighbor. |
| 01:15:14.45 | Kevin Carroll | remodeled their house or expanded |
| 01:15:14.60 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. Bye. Thank you. |
| 01:15:17.05 | Kevin Carroll | are required to put up story polls And so I'm wondering if PG&E couldn't put up waterproof cardboard or plywood examples of the equipment. that there are going to be much larger equipment, apparently, these new transformers and shutoffs, to the polls that will be affected. And it would work for two ways. give people an idea of what they're going to be looking at. But also, too, it might encourage them to actually go for an assessment district to put the money out, to put it underground. Thank you. |
| 01:15:54.58 | Unknown | Thanks, Kevin. |
| 01:15:57.01 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker is Vicky Nichols. Vicky, you've been unmuted. Asked to share your video. |
| 01:16:02.90 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Kalman and council members. |
| 01:16:03.81 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:16:03.86 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:16:03.88 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 01:16:03.94 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 01:16:06.69 | Vicki Nichols | Boy, what a topic. I appreciate PG&E being here because this is something that is a shock to everyone. I'm gonna just speak practically. And as this is such a huge change, the better outreach you do, which it sounds like you've done everything to engage someone, But there are two ways to notify residents. Many of us are renters. We never get a notice our owners get a renters you go through the assessor's office. There's a way to get these. I'm seeing nodding, you know how to get these lists. The other thing would be, I hope, using my own block of Caledonian attorney as an example, We currently have some trees that need to come down. The sidewalk is cracked. We have a poll right there. So I hope that there's a good deal of coordination on this so that we're not replacing sidewalks after doing polls, et cetera, et cetera. And I'm all for the undergrounding, I agree. Let's spend the money now. In terms of the different maps, every agency is using their own thing. So, you know, it's just a matter of being, good communication and talking about this. I've been working with a lot of vegetation management with the various fire agencies and habitat protection, et cetera, et cetera. It's just a matter of getting everybody at the table and agreeing to listen to each other's concerns and figure out how you're going to do that. and how you're going to communicate that to the public. So good luck, it's a big project, but let's go underground, thank you. Thanks, Vicki. |
| 01:17:39.47 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:17:40.23 | Vicki Nichols | Any other Republicans? |
| 01:17:40.97 | Mayor Kellen | that search. I do see Pat's hand up. |
| 01:17:42.27 | Serge Avila | I'm going to... Bye. Pat just rose her hand just a moment. Thank you. Pat, you've been unmuted and has to share your video. |
| 01:17:52.55 | Pat | Hi. Got it. Um, I have to say, it's nice that this button is reactions because my reaction to this presentation is that when all the words are, The nice words are done What we are going to be having here is an outreach by PG&E and a start date of January. I've not heard anything from Mr. and his name is blocked out, Mr. Gorder. that indicates that there is flex in that start date or the ability to generate flex and perhaps I'm shocked that this has been in progress for a year and this is Maybe it's my bad, the first I've heard of it, Um, I don't see as we have any ability between now and January to orchestrate and implement a program to even do some undergrounding or to change the maps to do undergrounding in areas where it would be cheap to do it. And I don't. And I see Mr. Corder is nodding his head. I would like to hear that there is some ability to do more than work with the city in terms of telling the resonance, the bad news. Um, But, in terms of reframing this perhaps if we can. Thanks. |
| 01:19:20.74 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. Thank you, Pat. Okay, any other members of the public wanna weigh in here? |
| 01:19:26.88 | Serge Avila | metamaker, all their hands raised. |
| 01:19:29.21 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, we'll close public comment. And so Mr. Vangler, you are welcome to respond to that. It's an interesting question. |
| 01:19:36.38 | Mark Van Gorder | Sure. First, I don't want to steal Austin's thunder. I would like to credit Austin Sharp for really taking the lead on this project. Again, we have been meeting with the subcommittee of the four council members, so three council members and Mayor Kellman for about a year and talking about the options and talking about this process in the program And so to your question, Pat, Um, We, We are. prepared to do everything we can to hold off the overhead project longer. Um, and work with the city if the city would like to file an application. But I think that's, you know, the critical path. is filing the application so that we can, as I said before, get less than a, or sorry, more than a back of the napkin estimate. the design, the construction, where this would go in the sidewalks. It has to be an assessment of all the other underground utilities, as was already mentioned. You have some sewer, stormwater, gas, and all other manner of things underground So to your question, Pat, simple answer, We will do everything we can to postpone the plan Overhead. work. And we too, would like to see if we can make this work. the, unknown in this. is, when you know, How much longer will our equipment Last. And we're assuming that it's coming to its end of life. Austin, you may wanna tag on to what I've just said, We stand ready to work with the city. January is not the end. a firm heart, a start date. We have Flex. That's not the start date. We can postpone this out, but I think what we need to know from the city. at some point is whether or not there's interest in filing that application. And I'll just stop there. |
| 01:21:42.25 | Austin Sharp | Yeah, and I think you said it very well, Mark. I think you covered all the points there. The only things that I would add is, you know, if the map changed tomorrow, would that necessarily change the timeframe that we would need to perform this overhead work versus the timeframe of an ground. very unlikely. Really what we're looking at again is how can we mitigate the most risk in those tier two, tier three areas and how can we prioritize that work? Right now Sausalito is not part of that tier two, tier three. And as Mark said, we would look for the ability to push this out as long as we possibly could, barring any sort of failure, which then we would have to do the work anyways to get the system back up so we were not generating you, we were not keeping you without service, but it really is incumbent on, you know, we're. of failure, which then we would have to do the work anyways to get the system back up so we were not generating you, we were not keeping you without service. But it really is incumbent on working with the city, getting that application in, seeing where that funding is going to come from the city, getting a better estimate for the city so a proper decision can be made on whether or not they could pursue undergrounding and what that time frame would look like and when PG&E would have to do this work. So the longer we defer the closer we get to that day where we would have to go forward with the work. We stand ready with the outreach plan, letters, postcards, flyers, websites, webinars. We understand the importance of the sight lines and the impact of this community. We wanna make sure we're working with each person that could be impacted. This is a complicated problem. And it's been good collaboration with the underground committee and with the city, but we are up against our ability to serve that area of Sausalito reliably and be able to provide the capacity that's needed barring all the questions that we have here tonight. And really it's a matter of Can we get the ball rolling on that application so we can see what that cost will be and make those decisions? |
| 01:23:26.69 | Mark Van Gorder | And I can just tag on to if I, you know, Mayor, at your pleasure, I know there've been a number of questions Sausalito being in the high fire district, you know, mapping of Cal Fire, and your local fire agencies about high fire threat areas. At your request, Mayor, in one minute, I could show the council and the community attendees, the CPUC fire map, that shows that 50% of our area 50% of our service territory where we serve all manner of, from the northernmost part of California down to the Santa Barbara area. is 50% is in high fire threat areas. And a large portion of West Marin is in the highest fire threat area. So again, that's available here if you want me to share my screen. |
| 01:24:20.73 | Mayor Kellen | So Mark, is that screen, is that, Screen share just going to show that South Slido is not in one of your higher fire risk areas. |
| 01:24:28.72 | Mark Van Gorder | The area of the project is not. But I know that I like it. My only point there is that, again, it's not a PG&E map. It's a Public Utilities Commission map And the question I think is asked, why isn't PG and E undergrounding. this project. if the company were to pick, and it already has in fact, areas in western Marin So Lucas Valley Road, the Woodacre area, Fairfax, some of those areas out there are much higher fire threat risk areas. And so when we're addressing risk and we're spreading out the costs and the dollars throughout our service territory, we have to prioritize the highest fire threat areas |
| 01:25:07.77 | Mayor Kellen | to recognize that. |
| 01:25:13.21 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah, so let me offer this, Mark. And I appreciate everything you're sharing with us. I would sense that the community finds these responses deeply unsatisfying. because they are not addressing our overall community concern. And so I think You know, you've spoken to reliability and capacity, and I haven't yet seen those numbers on either, and I haven't heard of outages in that area, and I haven't heard that that information or those polls or those transformers are failing. We've only, as you mentioned, been talking to you for a year. Your general rate case is filed to cover a period of three years, so that I would assume that we have at least three years to work with you on a timeframe. Let's say we lost two years, so we have another two years. So I think it'd be really helpful if you sent over a few things, if you sent over some information on reliability and capacity. If you sent over some information about flexibility as to start date based on what I was able to pull up on your general rate case. If you updated slide 11 to be a bit more mindful to some of the issues that we repeatedly see in town around, you know, are vehicles going to be idling? Are they going to be blocking streets? Are you going to have dedicated customer service representative that somebody can call? Like they call me on a Friday at 8 p.m. If I can call you to tell you someone's trapped in their home, that would be great. Are you going to have Paul material there's great pull material for carbon sequestration now, how are you going to improve the you know the Community that you're impacting. And what type of tree removal will we see on that slide 11 you're giving very technical engineering responses to a community that's very concerned. But I also feel like this is an enormous opportunity for you to hear sauce leader and hear what we're looking for here. and continue the collaborative conversations that we've had around how do we get to undergrounding. And so I think we're in good hands with the subcommittee who recognizes that we need to take those steps and those measures. But I'm going to rely on you guys to work with us to facilitate that, because that makes a lot of sense for our community. Even if the maps don't show us in our fire region, and even if you have these concerns that we've heard about for the last year, I think what we're asking you to do is help address our community. And let's focus on what we have here, what we want to achieve. And so we're open to ideas and concepts there. But I just want to sort of call that out from a neighborhood profile. |
| 01:27:34.91 | Austin Sharp | Yeah, and thank you for that. And I think we can absolutely provide a lot of that detail. Some of it would be provided in the encroachment permits. Others would be provided with our sharing of information for the outreach planning. We are looking at 2023 to potentially construct this. I think we can look to maybe some reliability information, but we cannot commit to that timeline of two to three years out. on that. We are looking at the reliability of this. And again, if it's possible that some of this could fail in the intervening year to two years, we would have to go and construct that. If it did fail, we'd have to go work under an emergency standard to bring it back up. So I'm sure we can provide a lot of this information. I'm sure we can continue to talk. The one thing that we do need to do because of those timeframes is start applying for some of those encroachment permits. And we, you know, kind of do concurrent paths with the underground committee, the encroachment permits and the customer outreach plan. Because I think you bring up a lot of valid points there, especially in regards to, you know, are we going to be mindful in the community with our construction? Are we going to have a plan for our customers to get ahold of someone? All of those things, I think we can put together a pretty comprehensive overview of and provide a little more detail on. |
| 01:28:45.04 | Mayor Kellen | Thanks, Allison. Really appreciate that. Councilor Sobieski has his hand back up. |
| 01:28:48.48 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, I just think maybe I fixed my bandwidth issues. You'll see, let me know. So I just wanted to share Austin and Mark, There has been an arc in our relationship because the way that this started was an outreach campaign from PG&E to let us know what you were gonna do. we've been banging the drum on this undergrounding. And I do appreciate that you have begun to open up about it and engage with it to some degree. But honestly, the feeling still is that we're being rushed along, sort of bum-rushed on it with a threat of losing our power from an old system. the mayor's questions. or So it would be nice to know if If there are facts to back up the the belief that the system is on the cost of failing. But even if the system did fail, I could imagine it could be repaired temporarily, at least to give us the time to do this right. So I think what you're hearing is the community wants to do this, at least to consider doing it right. What we did not do in this dialogue is PGD did not come to us and say, Here we've studied undergrounding for your community and here's what we'd ask you to pay. And here's what we'll provide. to underground. Instead it was, here's our four KV to 12 KV project. And we're trying to get this alternative on the table. But it's energetically. Task-wise, completely different. And I share Pat Zuck's concerns that that it's just gonna get started sooner rather than later and that there will be a pro forma uh, pro forma attention paid to these concerns rather than real college try. I understand that things are siloed over there, but it's kind of missing the point. You're an agency that provides a particular thing, but we're all on the same team to create a better world. So can't we try to use our creativity, you know your bureaucracy better than we do, to try to figure out how to actually answer the question. about what contributions you'd need from home to underground the system. And not saying, you know, our job is this and your job is that. the lateral so we're not even going to opine to that. uh, You know, there've gotta be private firms we maybe could hire together. get opinions, I don't know, because I don't feel like we've really been working at it as a team. to try to tackle this problem. It's been polite, but it's not that we're all really working as a team to really answer this question. It may be that the community can't afford it at the end of the day. I don't think that's true, knowing what I know about finance. and that's the frustration is I think it's within reach, but, But our little city government doesn't have the expertise to do it. We need your help. |
| 01:31:35.76 | Austin Sharp | Yeah, and I'll address a couple of things there. If we do have a failure, we would not provide a temporary fix. We would have to go in and essentially make sure that it was going to be reliable for the long term. We didn't have any future failures because we would have a duty to serve. So I just wanted to make sure that that was clear from the outset. And I can totally understand how it seems that way. I think you mentioned, you know, I know our bureaucracy better than anybody, and I do. And a lot of what we are governed by are rules by the Public Utilities Commission, and a lot of those things are put in place for equitable purposes. Really, for the opportunity to underground, it does have to go through a Rule 20B or 20C process. And that Rule 20B or 20C process is very stringent. we can provide you the oversight or consultation of how to go through that process with us. But at the end of the day, the undergrounding project would need to be initiated by the city and the funds would have to be generated by the city. We can attempt to help as much as we can in guiding the city through that process and getting them over to other cities who have gone through this process. Tip around was mentioned by Kevin in the presentation. There are potential ways to use your rule 20 funding. We are looking at, can we move the application a lot faster? But at the end of the day, that really is the process that we have to go through. And it is the process that governs the potential to underground this project. |
| 01:32:51.33 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 01:32:51.46 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:32:51.53 | Unknown | you |
| 01:32:58.99 | Austin Sharp | We do want to work with you, but it is a matter of can we defer this project or give you time to make that decision. |
| 01:33:06.03 | Ian Sobieski | in the future. Awesome. I appreciate the answer, but I have to say, as just a regular citizen, that feels awfully unsatisfying. and, Just period. |
| 01:33:16.56 | Unknown | Yeah. This is I hear from Councilman of Cleveland Laws |
| 01:33:18.85 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 01:33:19.93 | Unknown | Oh, yeah. |
| 01:33:20.25 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you, Mary Kellman. I was just gonna say, I think, It sounds like at least the council and the community are in agreement and that the task at this point is to move forward as expeditiously as possible. on an application and other options for financing, et cetera. And so I just, I There's no kind of disagreement on that, I think. Kevin has been really excellent leading the charge along with our city manager. And we can try to come back to you as quickly as possible with some options later this fall. |
| 01:34:00.84 | Mayor Kellen | And I just want to echo, I think what I'm hearing is we want to collaborate with you, Austin and Mark, we know you guys have been working really hard on this. if there's a process we need to go through, I think what I'm hearing is we want to try to do it. So we'll look to you for leadership and guidance and figure out how to make that happen. If it's us starting a filing, if it's figuring out how to pay for it. Please, we look to you for that information. |
| 01:34:28.41 | Mark Van Gorder | And that's exactly right. Thank you for that, Mayor. Um, And I just want to, you know, there are a good number of participants listening into this, and I don't know how many may live in the areas that we just showed on the maps. So I don't want there to be a sense of, fear that this is coming and that no one's doing anything about it and the PG&E isn't isn't here. Our CEO. you know, has three legs to our company stool, if you will. One, the number one. is delivering for our hometown. The number two is, is serving our planet. And, Um, Good God, we're forgetting number three. But let me see. It's late. The main point I wanted to focus on was delivering for the hometown. That is where we're coming from. Austin and I, Uh, And here as well as Tracy and Sarah, who haven't talked yet tonight, Um, They will be rolling out. and running with the community outreach program. uh, I just want to reiterate, We do not have the pedal to the metal. to get this overhead project done. We're not trying to use the end of life of the equipment as any kind of scare tactic. I just want folks to hear that from me. the The reason we say that is if the equipment should come to end of life, if it should fail, and the electricity stopped flowing to businesses or residents, we need to, for obvious reasons, go in and repair that equipment. We would like to get the application going. I hear Mayor, and I think that's a great question. and other council members saying that that sounds like something you'd be interested in looking at working with Kevin and and managers of Patahan. So we stand at the ready to do that. We just wanna get the outreach program going as well about what is all is involved, because should the council decide not to pursue underground, that's something the community doesn't choose to do, We would like to talk with residents now about a future overhead program, where the poles and transformers might go. Somebody was asking earlier about story poles and that sort of thing. And all of that is going to take a considerable amount of time. Both can happen in parallel. It's not an either or. We can pursue both. |
| 01:36:59.12 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, thank you, Mark. Really, again, appreciate it. Any other questions from council members for members of PG&E? If not, I trust that... |
| 01:37:06.95 | Ian Sobieski | I trust that. I did just one question because You called them to tell us what we should do. I'm wondering, are they taking on responsibility that they're gonna tell us what to do? be here loud and clear that we want to really take a sharp pencil and thoroughly understand the option of undergrounding collaborating with potential sewer line replacement, doing financing for it, but are they gonna tell us what we need to do? Or are we kind of on our own to search the internet and figure this out? |
| 01:37:35.12 | Mark Van Gorder | Yeah. No, we will absolutely, we will work with managers, a part of probably, I'm assuming, Public Works Director McGowan. and provide step-by-step how we can put, you know, sharpen the pencil, you know, figure out what a really firm cost would be. We have some flex in those costs, but getting that application in is the step. That is the next step. to working with us to get this moving forward. |
| 01:38:04.28 | Ian Sobieski | Can you assign someone to PG&E to help us with the application? |
| 01:38:08.31 | Mark Van Gorder | we will find somebody who will help with that. Yeah. |
| 01:38:11.72 | Austin Sharp | Yeah. |
| 01:38:11.73 | Mark Van Gorder | Yeah. |
| 01:38:11.97 | Austin Sharp | for you. |
| 01:38:12.16 | Mark Van Gorder | Absolutely. |
| 01:38:12.49 | Austin Sharp | Absolutely. |
| 01:38:12.65 | Mark Van Gorder | do. |
| 01:38:12.71 | Austin Sharp | Thank you. |
| 01:38:12.73 | Mark Van Gorder | that. |
| 01:38:12.97 | Austin Sharp | And I think the other part of that too is giving you all the potential options for executing an underground project. As we talked about the underground committee, sometimes the city is the project manager for it. Sometimes they designate another person. We want to make sure you can get the best cost for the potential work so we can engage with other communities who have done the same thing as well to give you some idea what that would look like too. So we have no issue providing as much assistance as we possibly can once we get the application and quote process started. |
| 01:38:44.83 | Mayor Kellen | And Austin, I'm trying to put that out. |
| 01:38:45.23 | Austin Sharp | I can't see my |
| 01:38:46.56 | Mayor Kellen | Oh, let me just say, Mark, it probably goes without saying though that you'll help us with that in a timeframe that allows us to actually complete the application. um, so that we don't sort of miss key deadlines. |
| 01:38:57.53 | Mark Van Gorder | I also wanted to mention too, Aaron Shaw, Ph.D.: Understanding the Council has a full agenda regularly, but you know at some point in the future, I think we could come back and for your benefit and for the community's benefit walk through that process right talk about you know i mean tiburon does these fairly regularly. in smaller areas and underground. I mean, we can have a a meeting in fairly short order, walk through what that process looks like for undergrounding if that's of interest to the council. |
| 01:39:28.73 | Mayor Kellen | Okay. Sounds like it sounds like it is. So I will hand it back over to our very talented and astute subcommittee on this. Again, thank you very much. Thanks to the subcommittee for working on this. And I know we will be talking to you very soon. Okay. Great. Thanks, everybody. |
| 01:39:46.56 | Unknown | everybody |
| 01:39:48.07 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 01:39:48.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:39:49.37 | Mayor Kellen | We're able to discuss that tonight. We'll move on now. |
| 01:39:50.72 | Unknown | I'm going to go. |
| 01:39:50.74 | Unknown | Good night. |
| 01:39:51.77 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. I'll move on to item 5B. Item 5B is consideration of a potential acquisition, the Sasson Machine Shop. located at 25 leadership way. And I'll hand it over to Mike Wagner. |
| 01:40:04.17 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor, sorry to interrupt you, but I have a conflict of interest. Sorry. |
| 01:40:09.07 | Mayor Kellen | Sorry. |
| 01:40:09.88 | Jill Hoffman | because my property is within a thousand feet of the machine shop within And so I will not participate. I will not participate in this item. So you can't give public comment. Yes, I can. Thank you, Kelsa. |
| 01:40:22.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:22.87 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:23.97 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:40:24.37 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:26.47 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:26.48 | Mayor Kellen | Okay. Mike. |
| 01:40:27.34 | Unknown | What? |
| 01:40:27.39 | Mike Wagner | All right. |
| 01:40:27.88 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. |
| 01:40:28.51 | Mike Wagner | Thank you. Thank you, Madam Mayor, members of, oh, I lost my screen here, one second, forgive me. |
| 01:40:35.15 | Mayor Kellen | things. |
| 01:40:36.47 | Mike Wagner | Can you see my screen okay? |
| 01:40:37.48 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:40:37.74 | Unknown | No, we don't see it at all. |
| 01:40:39.39 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:40:44.89 | Unknown | Right, there we go. Uh, You can see it now, correct? Thank you. |
| 01:40:52.89 | Unknown | Nope. |
| 01:40:53.09 | Mike Wagner | Thank you. You still cannot see it. |
| 01:40:55.14 | Unknown | Correct. |
| 01:40:55.37 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 01:40:55.40 | Mike Wagner | That is so strange. Here, let's try one more time. How about now? |
| 01:41:00.15 | Mayor Kellen | Yes, coming up. |
| 01:41:01.43 | Mike Wagner | Thank you. Thank you, Madam Mayor. members of the community. Good evening. My name is Mike Wagner. I am your contract real estate manager and the principal consultant at MKW Real Estate Advisors. I'm here to present an update regarding a potential acquisition under the GSA process of the former 37,800 square foot machine shop property, located at 25 Liberty Ship Way. and to request this council to provide direction regarding next steps. |
| 01:41:35.05 | Mike Wagner | Prior to being invited to submit a formal application to purchase the property, if that's what the council ultimately decides to do, The GSA requires that the city inform it of three things. the intended uses of the property, the amount of time it will take the city to prepare and submit a formal application and the reasoning for this length of time. In addition, if the council decides to move forward under the GSA process, there are a number of additional steps need to be taken in order to proceed with the preparation of a formal application to purchase. And I will discuss these in greater detail momentarily, however briefly. an architect with historic property Experiences needed to help complete a portion of the purchase application. This architect together with staff needs to engage with the National Park Service to negotiate which architectural features of the buildings must be preserved, Additional environmental work is recommended given the contaminated state of the property. And finally, funds for the architect and environmental engineer need to be appropriated. There have been many regarding this potential project. And here I present the four most recent. Note in July of 2021, the council authorizes city manager to submit a letter of interest to purchase the property. under a negotiated sale conveyance |
| 01:42:59.12 | Unknown | vein. |
| 01:43:00.33 | Mike Wagner | where the property would be transferred to the city with limited restrictions for its market value in its as is condition. Subsequently, in April of this year, the council changed direction and authorizes city managers to notify GSA that it wishes to pursue a public benefit conveyance instead where the property would be transferred to the city with greater restrictions, likely for lower or no cost. These restrictions would include a requirement that the property be used as a historic monument, which limits its use to public benefit purposes. This is the track that the city is currently on with GSA. The city has requested a number of deadline extensions for the information being requested by GSA. The current deadline is tomorrow, September 1st. providing the requested information. Again, that is the intended use of the property, the amount of time the city were required to complete the purchase application, and the reasoning for that amount of time is the final step toward being invited by the GSA to submit a formal application. Under a public benefit conveyance, which I will call PBC going forward, Thank you. Property must be used as a historic monument for the benefit of the public. Thus, the building will need to include public uses, such as a museum or other interactive exhibits. Historic monument uses may also include private revenue generating activities, so long as the revenues are applied to the debt service and operating expenses. So what this means is that we could rent out the property to private users. The National Park Service has final design review approval for historic monuments, and it is charged with negotiating which architectural features must be preserved. GSA recommends that engagement with the Park Service start as soon as an architect is engaged by the city, to assist with the preservation plan section of the application. The formal purchase application comprises four parts. Number one, preservation plan. which must include identification of each architectural feature where improvement work is proposed. This is why we need an architect and why the park service should be engaged early. Since the main building is in an unsafe, unstable condition, many features will be subject to this requirement. For example, The barrel roof, which has failed to the extent of one third of it has collapsed. Exterior walls, two of which are being held up by temporary buttresses, Windows and doors which are failed or non-existent and the mezzanine which is crumbling. Other features of the original structure will also need to be assessed, such as lighting, signage, and fixtures. The second part of the application is a use plan, describing the planned uses and exhibitions in the building. The third part is a financial plan reflecting the sources of redevelopment funds, capital costs, expected revenues, and projected operating expenses. and describing how any positive net operating income will be used. And finally, the city has to submit a statement of the city qualifications and capabilities to execute a project like this. Naturally, this would include resumes, assigned personnel, and relevant prior experience. Staff estimates that the cost to prepare the preservation plan by a qualified architect to be approximately $200,000. Regarding the time needed to prepare the application to purchase, I am estimating 35 weeks based on eight weeks to prepare, issue an award, an RFP for an architect, six weeks for a contract preparation and approval. 12 weeks for the actual work. five weeks for review and revision. And finally, another four weeks for final approval by the council. The other parts of the application could run concurrently. Now that I've described what is needed to prepare a formal application, I would like to spend some time on the hazardous materials impacting the property. The property has primarily been used in the past as a rail yard, a machine shop, and a materials lab. All of these uses are associated with the release of hazardous materials. In 2001, the Army Corps conducted some testing and found many hazardous materials, most notably hydrocarbons in their constituents and polychlorinated biphenyls. commonly called PCBs. The Army Corps proceeded to clean up some of the PCBs in a limited area of the property, However, the property, including portions of the structure, remain contaminated with PCBs and other hazardous materials. DCBs are associated with increased rates of melanomas, liver cancer, gallbladder cancer, of bipolar tract cancer and other cancers, and they may also be linked to breast cancer. Shortly after 2001, the Army Corps issued a draft final removal action report or the PCB contaminated soil. According to this report, the goal of the remediation or cleanup was to remove the largest mass of PCB contaminated soil and generally reduce the concentration of PCBs to a level that would permit industrially use of the property. However, again, PCBs continue to contaminate the project and continue to pose health risks. Note, industrial uses do not permit housing, parks or daycare uses. and additional remedial work will most likely be needed to prevent office uses. The Army Corps then issued a memo to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control commonly known as DTSC. finding that the property was suitable for transfers. However, this should not be construed to mean that the property is safe or clean or that the city may not be exposed to potential liability. later in 2001. The city obtained its own summary of environmental issues report from EKI Environment. which concluded the following based on the information in the public record. Shallow soils are contaminated with hydrocarbons. PCBs are still present at random locations on the site. VOCs are present in groundwater. Certain areas of the property have widespread impacts of PCBs and VOCs. Like I said before, residential school, senior care, hospital park, and similar sensitive uses will be prohibited by deed restriction. the cost to remediate the site and $21 according to the EKA report, are ranged from 900,000 to 1.9 million Note the structures would likely need to be demolished before the cleanup could begin. Also the structures themselves are contaminated with some of the hazardous materials. necessitating disposal at rated landfills at a higher cost than typical landfills. EKI suggested that the city enter into a standard voluntary agreement with DTSC. to confirm that no further cleanup actions are required. However, I'd like to point out that these agreements commonly require additional cleanup work before they are executed by DTSC. because in your consultant's opinion, the property is not fully characterized as to hazardous materials. I'm recommending additional environmental work to develop a best practice course of inquiry. To summarize, To proceed to the next step in acquisition of the property under the GSA process, the city needs to form the GSA of the intended use of the property and any direction from you tonight on this, the amount of time it will take the city to prepare and submit a formal application I've suggested 35 weeks. And the reasoning for this length of time which I detailed in my presentation. If the city decides to proceed in this manner, staff is requesting authority to engage with the National Park Service to identify which architectural features must be preserved issue an RFQ or P for architectural services, issue an RFP for environmental services. And we are requesting appropriations of $225,000 for the needed architectural and environmental work. I'm happy to take questions. Thank you for your consideration and time. |
| 01:51:01.81 | Unknown | Thank you, Mike. If you pull the. Screen share down. |
| 01:51:06.94 | Unknown | against |
| 01:51:09.32 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. Okay, council member Sobieski and I are the, working group and we do have a recommendation for counsel after we've had discussion. based on the information you've seen tonight. Siga questions from council members. So councilman, Cleveland knows. |
| 01:51:24.08 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. Did you and Council Member Sobieski want to provide your recommendation before we start asking questions or |
| 01:51:31.39 | Mayor Kellen | you |
| 01:51:31.41 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 01:51:31.42 | Mayor Kellen | Uh, |
| 01:51:31.76 | Cleveland Knowles | SHOWING THEM. |
| 01:51:31.96 | Mayor Kellen | Sure, I wasn't sure whether we should or we should take public comment first, Um, What do you think city attorney? |
| 01:51:39.07 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, I think we should just because it will inform the comment as well. Sure. |
| 01:51:43.90 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah, so with everything that we have seen really uh GSA sort of was pushing us down this, public benefit conveyance track. They really wanted us to work with the Park Service. They really couldn't tell us what our Yeah. our obligations would be both as the contamination as to the historic resource and created a big unknown. It's no secret that I'm a big fan of this. acquisition. I think it's a great location for us. I think it speaks to our history. but we have been sort of repeatedly faced with these roadblocks around what's there and what do we have to do with our obligations? We were not able to get an appraisal from GSA. They did not release that. That would have been the second path, which is negotiated sale. So we never actually even knew how much it could potentially be sold to us for. And so what Councillor Sobieski and I came up with because we felt like we were sort of repeatedly led down another path from the federal agency, the latest one being this $200,000 historic preservation plan before we could even apply to be in the PPC process. That what we are gonna recommend tonight is that the city manager be authorized to make an offer of $10,000 to GSA for the property. with a contingency that allows us to negate that offer and pull out based on further environmental studies. |
| 01:53:14.68 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, if I might just elaborate on that, we've spent a lot of time, the mayor and I, |
| 01:53:19.81 | Mayor Kellen | A lot of time, actually. |
| 01:53:20.60 | Ian Sobieski | Thanks. picture. Thank you. She's not going to spend a lot of time, but she thought, um, Dealing with PG&E sounded maybe a little convoluted there. They have nothing on the GSA. you know, everyone sees what a disaster that building is and how neglected it has been. And the irony of the fact that it has 24 seven security that's costing the government, hundreds of thousands of dollars is not lost on us while they nickel and dime this process. But the result is that we, spun our wheels for two years. Um, first going down a negotiated path, but didn't actually get to any kind of negotiation because of the government's process and then trying to explore this PPC path. We're not, there's a lot of unknowns basically here. Mike's report is devastating. about the unknowns, the scary unknowns. So what the mayor is saying is, We're not offering to buy the building, we're offering to We are suggesting that We, Stop work on this. Save, stop spending staff time. Stop spending city council time on it. But. Don't drop it altogether, rather. The proposal is to, leave an open offer out there that if the government wants to take it, they can, which is that that we'll pay $10,000 for the building, but we have a six month, contingency period where we can cancel the contract for any reason, like a typical homeowner has an inspection contingency. if the government takes that offer either now or sometime in the coming months or even a year or two, if they can't sell it in the private market, then we may, as a city council, decide that we want to spend the money to do the kind of investigation. that would take the building at that kind of price point. But the mayor and I agree that we don't recommend spending any more money or time uh, investigating it, investigating it absent. clear obligation on the government to sell it to us for a price certain |
| 01:55:17.23 | Mayor Kellen | And I also wanted to share with the council, this was after As Ian mentioned, much deliberation and I think in some respects that's coming at it from different outcome perspectives, but when the GSA, put up the $200,000 just to enter the game. A fee. that was a very difficult path for us to articulate based on our current budget. situation. So that's kind of where we ended up here and we welcome feedback and looks like there are questions. So Ian, if you don't have anything else, I'll start with the council questions. Okay, Councilman Cleveland-Noros. |
| 01:55:52.28 | Cleveland Knowles | So I'm just, this is, completely new information and very hard to assimilate given the entire staff report going through the public benefit acquisition process, I thought we had rejected a negotiated sale at least a year ago. Now we're back in that box. |
| 01:56:15.65 | Ian Sobieski | Susan, it's actually not. I'm sorry it's confusing because we wouldn't be playing by their rules on the negotiated sale. Basically, all we're saying is we're saying that we're recommending not to acquire the building. but not just to say no, that's not the only answer. It is to leave on the table, a offer to buy the building if they agree to a price. and give us a six month window to do all the diligence we need to do and we can cancel the contract for any reason. but that is not the negotiated sale process that they outlined or that we would have to play ball So, Odds are that the realistic outcome of this recommendation is that the government will Nothing will happen and we're not going to buy the machine shop. It may be that they can't sell it to the private marketplace. It may be that politics change somewhere and it's possible. So it's really just, uh, Rather than saying no, is there something we can do that keeps the option, keeps a possibility on the table. without spending any more time or money on this issue. |
| 01:57:20.43 | Cleveland Knowles | Okay, I guess maybe... our city attorney or somebody could just help me understand how this is even possible. I mean, it's not an option that the federal government has placed on the table that we've been talking about. In this framework of their sales process, this isn't even in there. So, And it's not, we don't have you know, I mean, it wasn't kind of presented to us as an option for tonight. I would just like to kind of understand what we're talking about tonight. I mean, I have a lot of questions on the staff report, and I really want to just acknowledge and appreciate |
| 01:57:50.74 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:57:59.19 | Cleveland Knowles | Mike Wagner for going into all of the detail in the report and So that's kind of where I am in that kind of realm. I am interested to hear the working group doesn't support moving down that path. but I'm kind of confused about what we're actually suggesting within the federal disbursement or whatever the right Um, within that framework. I mean, it doesn't seem like that's been an option that's on the table. So maybe Greg could help me. put it in a bucket. |
| 01:58:36.57 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. If you don't mind, Council Member, let me give it a shot. And then since Greg is still coming up to speed and then he and I have talked at length and I'm sure he'll give an excellent answer as well. But my apologies first that this does seem just associated with this staff report. uh, we were really torn around the $200,000 price tag just to enter the game. And we were also dissatisfied by with the prior conversations we had. that forced us out of the negotiated sale process. And, um, I guess collectively we didn't feel like we were really given that option and we were sort of forced by the GSA to move in this direction. We wanted to. going to re-examine that and our opportunities there. And my understanding in, having been a member of the federal government at EPA and having worked with the SHPO and other agencies, You know, they waited 20 years to decide what to do with this. You know, yes, we had been told go PBC route, but we also felt like it's fair game to come back and say, hey, actually, we want to reexamine this with you. and look at some other options around this. Had they not introduced some additional price tags, we felt we could have entertain those. I think we'd be having a different conversation. Lisa, I would be, Uh, in a different frame of mind around it, but it was hard to overcome that. But that said, if you are in a different frame of mind around that, And we're looking towards finding a $200,000 grant somewhere. I'd love to hear that. But if, yeah, so that'll just add that. |
| 02:00:12.09 | Cleveland Knowles | No, I mean, |
| 02:00:13.30 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. |
| 02:00:13.37 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:00:13.40 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 02:00:13.42 | Cleveland Knowles | No, I mean, my primary concerns around this are cost. And I think- A 10,000 K price tag sounds fantastic, but Ian just remarked that the building needs 24 seven, which of course is a huge price tag. There is a 900 to $1.9 million estimate for cleanup on the site. you know, et cetera. I mean, it's a negative cost. So even with a $10,000 purchase price, Um, I guess I need to understand more about what it would cost us in addition to $10,000 to the federal government if we ever got there. Um, on an ongoing day-to-day basis, A, to upkeep it in its present condition, and then B, to even start down the path of any kind of remediation. So, Thank you. Um, |
| 02:01:18.76 | Cleveland Knowles | So I guess what your recommendation is we do not ask for more time. We throw out some offer that's revocable And then we just wait and see |
| 02:01:29.96 | Unknown | happens. Is that kind of what I'm understanding? That's a fair summary, yes. |
| 02:01:37.73 | Sergio Rudin | Mayor, would you like me to add something? |
| 02:01:39.40 | Mayor Kellen | Yes, please. Thank you, Greg, for your patience. |
| 02:01:41.56 | Sergio Rudin | that. |
| 02:01:41.98 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 02:01:42.06 | Sergio Rudin | What? |
| 02:01:42.08 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 02:01:42.11 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. Yeah, I think the... The. the recommendation proposed, I think, And why in that is there are some federal government requirements and state law requirements that will have to be part of the contingency of the good energy experience. So I would be recommending that being included in any kind of a, Thank you. the doctoral proposal that we made. Thank you. But for example, in order to acquire property planning commission determined that of acquisitions from the system, Like, Yeah. we want to do our due diligence. of the condition of the property. what use we could use for out of it. and follow the federal government government. So that would be, I think that would need to be included in the proposal, which is in this six months due diligence period. the extent we need to take care of those if in other words if If the GSA responded favorably, the agreement would have a lot of to make sure you can think in. |
| 02:02:50.07 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:02:50.14 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. Bye. |
| 02:02:50.96 | Unknown | Sure. |
| 02:02:51.34 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 02:02:51.37 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:02:51.39 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:02:56.65 | Unknown | I'm having a little... |
| 02:02:57.97 | Cleveland Knowles | hearing Greg, but yeah. Okay, so I think I got the basic thing that there's lots of contingencies that would also have to follow onto this offer and state law and other. |
| 02:03:02.10 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:03:12.33 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. And also, just to clarify, that that cleanup, that 900,000 to 1.9 million is if you wanted to remediate to a non-industrial, non-commercial use. That's what that money would be for. So if you wanted to do some type of retail, but if we wanted to say, as an example, move the corporation yard there, create a parking lot, You wouldn't have to engage in that level of remediation. So there's different use cases and it gives us the opportunity to play with those use cases as well. |
| 02:03:40.83 | Cleveland Knowles | Okay, and I guess that's my next question was, You know, the staff report suggested that if we did move forward, We need to present a use plan. I was part of that. And I still, I thought when we left at our last meeting that, that, was gonna be part of the conversation that we came back with tonight about What is of viable use and it was originally contingent um, with the federal government's allowed uses for the you know, to get the property for free. But what, so if we are moving forward on this, is this just sort of, we're just pushing this process out into the future about what the uses would be, or is there some sense of what we'd be considering. |
| 02:04:30.81 | Mayor Kellen | The uses that we've discussed with GSA, and I think we've discussed publicly, are the industrial commercial uses like a parking lot like a corporation yard area Um, Everything else is beyond our knowing right now because we don't know the costs to remediate to be utilized for a different type of use. So that was what we could do today. based on current site status, as well as crew and zoning. |
| 02:04:53.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:04:55.57 | Cleveland Knowles | So that would not, parking or courtyard would not entail. rehab or preservation of the existing sharks. |
| 02:05:05.96 | Mayor Kellen | Sure. |
| 02:05:06.67 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:06.74 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:05:07.04 | Mayor Kellen | So, Two separate things obviously, right? So on the contamination front, my understanding is it would not require remediation of the contamination based on the type of use. because we've structured this potential offer in this manner, we recognize we need more information. As to the question for the historic resource, that is still an unknown, and that would be one of the contingencies we would include in this offer because it is not within our knowing at this point. |
| 02:05:35.66 | Cleveland Knowles | So I guess the question for Mike Wagner, what, I mean, what, Do you have any, I assume you are aware of this proposal. Do you have a cost estimate for keeping the use of something like that and security, et cetera, and then maintaining the property understanding the liability, there's liability against the neighboring property if the building falls down, et cetera. |
| 02:06:08.60 | Mike Wagner | I do not have cost estimates to turn it into a parking lot. Um, I, I could certainly put one together. I can't do it at this moment exactly, but, I looked at the cost in terms of putting another structure there that did conform with the national monument requirements of the federal government. but turning it into a parking lot or doing the the road yard idea I'd have to spend some time put together some numbers for that. |
| 02:06:45.02 | Mayor Kellen | Michael, let me ask a follow up on that. Is it reasonable as an analogy... Well, you know, when the prior council purchased the Bank of America and they looked at the ATM lease as a way to offset some costs, similarly, such an acquisition could potentially involve the Butler building. which is not subject to any of these constraints, which could also be rented as a potential offset. So it would sort of be that similar paradigm. |
| 02:07:08.00 | Mike Wagner | I believe the Butler building is also potentially contaminated. There's not a lot of- |
| 02:07:13.03 | Mayor Kellen | I don't think that's accurate. |
| 02:07:16.12 | Mike Wagner | Oh, OK. |
| 02:07:17.18 | Mayor Kellen | I think that was actually a building that could be used today. It has animals in there potentially, but I think those can |
| 02:07:23.12 | Mike Wagner | in the |
| 02:07:23.56 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:07:25.37 | Mike Wagner | There's a different situation. Well, it doesn't mean you can't use it if it's got contamination under it. It's just a matter of risk. |
| 02:07:25.57 | Mayor Kellen | There's a difference. Situation. Well, that's amazing. |
| 02:07:32.84 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. Yeah, I think what we're trying to get across from the working group is that, you know, to Susan's, I think, line of inquiry is, yes, there's a lot of unknown. Fair point. And we certainly can see that. And so that's why we wanted to structure the offer in such a manner that we recognize that unknown, but at least it gives us an opportunity to try to still move forward. Yeah, I understand. |
| 02:07:53.70 | Cleveland Knowles | Okay. I'm going to have to regroup about other questions. I mean, at this point, I feel like I'm comfortable not making you know, telling the GSA we're not making the proposal tomorrow. And then I would, prefer, I think, for this to come back. at the offer with a lot more fleshed out details about what our carrying costs would be, what our process would be, what the contingencies would be. Et cetera. um, |
| 02:08:23.16 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:23.25 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:08:23.57 | Cleveland Knowles | I just, I'm not exactly sure why we didn't have a little bit more of this. flushed out and have a little bit But anyway, here we are. So, I mean, it's not a terrible idea and I'm glad that you guys came to a, consensus about a path forward. fantastic. It's just not anything. that was even kind of put in front of us and I'm worried about the liability |
| 02:08:48.41 | Unknown | And, |
| 02:08:52.38 | Cleveland Knowles | and the contingencies. |
| 02:08:55.19 | Mayor Kellen | And I'll just say, this is not on mic at all. You and I were trying very hard to come up with a really workable solution taking into account. the late hours is on us. I just want to make it clear. |
| 02:09:08.88 | Ian Sobieski | Well, so, I mean, the headline is, maybe we shouldn't have. |
| 02:09:09.67 | Mayor Kellen | And... |
| 02:09:12.56 | Ian Sobieski | articulated our, recommendation at the front end, because the headline is on the basis of all the work in the staff report. The working group recommends me do not proceed with the PBC. this is already after on the basis of all our work last year, we recommended not pursuing the government's negotiated path to sale either. So we could just say we're done. know and move on. And in fact, that's kind of what we're saying, except we're saying, But hey, on the way out the door, Let's send a letter to the government. saying, If you can't find another buyer, We'll buy it. where we'll enter a contract, we'll only consider maybe doing all the work to buy it. But we have to agree on a price up front before we launch into spending tens of thousands of dollars or doing all, all the things you even outlined, Susan, to put a more flushed offer out there. So it was really just an idea. to try to let the government know that if they if they're in negotiation with private parties, this winter and next spring, and they can't reach an agreement that, hey, the city might still be in queue, but our standard for moving to spend any more staff resources on it is that we'd be in a binding contract with GSA for a price |
| 02:10:29.47 | Sergio Rudin | No. |
| 02:10:30.11 | Ian Sobieski | that we can cancel for any reason whatsoever. |
| 02:10:32.95 | Sergio Rudin | Cool. |
| 02:10:33.29 | Ian Sobieski | So establishing all those things you just outlined, uh, we could do after we're in contract because now we know we're in contract. So we should figure out if we want to actually proceed. Uh, I'm not saying that there, maybe there's no chance in hell that the government will actually enter such an agreement, but that was our, uh, |
| 02:10:39.43 | Sergio Rudin | not. |
| 02:10:52.07 | Ian Sobieski | not to steal the headline, which is, We just, we recommending not to proceed with the PVC or the negotiated sale, but are recommending this little, little thing at the end to try to keep the city at the table in case things go sideways between the GSA and private parties. |
| 02:11:09.82 | Mayor Kellen | I'll just say I had a little bit of a different perspective around the intent of making this happen, which was I actually wanted to make an offer. contingency. So, but that's okay because this is a compromise that Ian and I worked through that we were you know, kind of excited to explore. Okay, so let's go to the vice mayor. |
| 02:11:26.46 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Yeah, I have a number of questions about this. I mean, I had a lot of questions and concerns about the staff report, |
| 02:11:26.48 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. |
| 02:11:32.37 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | for a couple of reasons. Obviously, all of those that have been outlined about the cost, which is top of mind given our structural deficit and the situation that we're in. Because if we had the money to spend on all of this investment, Of course, it would be exciting to acquire a property and consider a path forward. But now that this offer is on the table, I'm just, I have a, Quite a few questions. I guess the first one that I would ask We have an assessment of what the, toxic cleanup, okay, what the cost would be to pursue this environmental study is $200,000. Let's say we make this offer, with the environmental contingencies, Mike Wagner, I would ask you, how much does it usually cost to do an environmental impact assessment to understand then what the toxicity levels would be if we do pursue this just from a ballpark? I know you don't have to necessarily know. |
| 02:12:22.25 | Mike Wagner | Well, I think that, I mean, in this case, I think there's two steps to that. One is you hire an environmental engineer to develop a work plan. get that work plan approved by people like the water board. And I doubt DTSC's approval is needed, That's the usual case, because if the city were to have title to the property, I believe we might fall under state law, and that would be the reason to me to do that. Once you had a work plan developed, then I think the next step in the contract would be to do some additional testing. That is if they recommended that. I don't think think the site is fully characterized. I think it's partially characterized. And that's why I'm recommending the additional work. |
| 02:13:05.69 | Mayor Kellen | And Mike, we talked about this, let's not just make the assumption that the city would undertake this work, right? The vision would be a public-private partnership where you do negotiate with a private developer for particular uses, where they take on that liability and that cost. right? And so you, If the city is able to obtain the property at little to no costs and then engage in a public-private partnership. where we're able to either share or transfer some of that a claim responsibility becomes a much different assessment |
| 02:13:33.14 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Mike, in your experience given if a developer knows that the building area has been assessed as contaminated, would they enter into that sort of agreement without having a cleanup or an understanding of the assessment? |
| 02:13:33.24 | Mayor Kellen | Sure. |
| 02:13:45.32 | Mike Wagner | Well, I think it depends on which developers bite. I think the first thing the developer would do would be to analyze what the highest best use of the property is and determine if the revenues they could generate on the property were sufficient to cover things like debt service and operating expenses and return on investment and things like that. I think they would do that first and take into account The current estimate on hazardous material cleanup costs, There is a possibility that some of the risk could be covered to environmental Uh, pollution liability insurance, for example, But- carriers of that type of insurance are gonna want the site fully characterized. So there's a lot of things that would go into that, And I'm not sure I answered your question. |
| 02:14:38.57 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | And |
| 02:14:38.70 | Mike Wagner | Did I answer your question? |
| 02:14:40.47 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Yeah, I'm just think from a risk standpoint, are we just hoping that the developer would be willing to pay for it, It's kind of like, We don't know if there's it's a risk. because, Thank you. |
| 02:14:49.91 | Mike Wagner | It's a risk. Thank you. Yeah. I mean, |
| 02:14:52.93 | Mayor Kellen | I mean, it's an unknown. |
| 02:14:53.40 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Bye. |
| 02:14:54.29 | Mike Wagner | Unowned. |
| 02:14:55.10 | Mayor Kellen | But you want to remediate, Mike, it's, you can, |
| 02:14:55.17 | Mike Wagner | It's really an unknown. |
| 02:14:56.12 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:14:59.54 | Mayor Kellen | You can use commercial or industrial use, you could put dry dock storage in there. and not have to incur these additional costs. Dry dock storage, as some people on this call probably know, |
| 02:15:04.18 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:15:04.20 | Unknown | and not- |
| 02:15:04.62 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:15:09.18 | Mayor Kellen | would pencil out in a very positive fashion. And so again, let's just make the distinction between these cleanups. |
| 02:15:12.53 | Mike Wagner | Thank you. |
| 02:15:15.74 | Mayor Kellen | if you're not using as commercial or industrial. I just want to make sure that's clear. Yeah. |
| 02:15:19.76 | Mike Wagner | I think under that type of scenario, my advice to the city would be to get a legal opinion whether DTSC and the water board would have jurisdiction after we took title And if they were going to have jurisdiction, then I think we need to engage with them understand what, if any, actions they might take or require. Right? And that's where an environmental engineer would be helpful. |
| 02:15:48.04 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | And what does an environmental engineer typically cost if we had to hire one for this type of project for members of the company? |
| 02:15:53.03 | Mike Wagner | Well, you know, it's difficult without them getting into it. I, you know, I didn't, I didn't solicit proposals on this, but I imagine the first step would be to sit down, understand, and I think EKI would be probably the likely people to do it. |
| 02:15:56.16 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | it. on this. |
| 02:16:05.44 | Mike Wagner | They understand the universe of public information on this, give us some advice on I think the first thing to do is get the legal opinion of whether the Water Board and DTSC would have jurisdiction after the city took the title, and then knowing the answer to that question, then engage with an environmental engineer. And right now I'm estimating $25,000 to take the first step in that work. But again, I think the legal opinion is crucial. The federal government proposes to put a deed restriction on the property saying that we can only use it for certain purposes, right? And that and I don't know. legally if that it stops the state from being able to come in and impose different additional requirements. I think that's the first step, really. The Costco. |
| 02:16:55.84 | Unknown | economy. |
| 02:16:56.96 | Mike Wagner | You know, $25,000 to $50,000 probably. |
| 02:16:56.98 | Unknown | Oh, go ahead, Sarah. |
| 02:16:57.70 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | I'm going to go. |
| 02:17:00.35 | Mike Wagner | for phase one and phase two work if it was required. |
| 02:17:04.48 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | And at this phase, we don't know if we could use the Butler building or put in dry dock storage. or any sort of industrial use that's outside the confines of the federal requirements. |
| 02:17:15.50 | Mike Wagner | We can put in revenue generating uses. And I think dry dock storage would definitely... come under industrial uses. that I think would be possible. Again, the question being, you know, and I don't know, maybe Greg, you can shed some light on this if you know, the question being, Are we going to suddenly become subject to state has his materials laws in the jurisdiction of the water board and DTSC. And how will that change the environment, right? Does that deed restriction do it or? Or do we need to do more work? Are they going to require more work? that's what we're doing. That's really where I think I need the help of an environmental engineer to navigate that. an attorney and an engineer. |
| 02:18:01.13 | Sergio Rudin | I would refer to their engineering student. My understanding is... |
| 02:18:06.25 | Mayor Kellen | Greg, I'm so sorry, your microphone is very- |
| 02:18:07.97 | Sergio Rudin | I'm part of it. Thank you. |
| 02:18:09.13 | Mayor Kellen | It sounds like you're under |
| 02:18:09.27 | Sergio Rudin | It sounds like you're underwater. |
| 02:18:10.16 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | I'm not sure. |
| 02:18:10.50 | Mayor Kellen | yeah we |
| 02:18:11.02 | Sergio Rudin | I keep changing the settings and it's not working. |
| 02:18:11.04 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:18:11.39 | Mayor Kellen | Peace. |
| 02:18:11.60 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:18:11.65 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 02:18:13.76 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | That was better. or you just did worked a little better? |
| 02:18:17.23 | Sergio Rudin | Okay, I have it on auto and high volume. of the community. Um, So I think I agree with Mike said. we would, you know, that's a big question. My understanding was that once it's no longer done in property, it would be understood. It could be the Retoy Board, um, but it's proximity to it. make it subject to most of the worst of the ones And we would rely on the experts to tell us what rubble or clean up will be fired because they're not going to depend on the use of that kind of food, the desiccular, the curators, the loss. retro or clean up and put If we have other uses in where the public is going to be there, it's probably in Iowa. |
| 02:19:11.55 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Okay, I kind of got most of that. It's a little difficult, but good job on trying to articulate it with the microphone that you have. I mean, I love the idea of moving the corporate yard there. My biggest concern here is the cost and not knowing the cost. And I also like, I would like to get an understanding of, say so I'm appreciating Councilmember Cleveland knows his approach of saying no to the what's given in the agenda now and then having a second meeting where we come back and consider what would go into this offer, what would be legally required, what would the planning commission have to do, Because if we can just acquire it and the cost is feasible given our structural deficit, and it's a great deal and we can move the corporate yard and then put housing in the corporate yard Anytime that's an option, it's definitely a great site that's been been talked about. In the event that we don't acquire it, I just want to understand because there's also concern about the historic use and the continued and consistent zoning for as a national historic location. Greg, maybe you can answer this as well. Um, If it was put up, if we said no, or if the government didn't take our 10K offer safe, we're gonna put that forward, how is the zoning protected? at this point. Would it still need to be consistent with historic uses? And I guess what I wanna make sure would happen if we didn't acquire it is that we would still have control over what the footprint of that building looked like, what the use was, and that it was consistent with the zoning. |
| 02:20:44.94 | Unknown | Greg, you're on mute. Yep. |
| 02:20:44.97 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:20:45.67 | Unknown | it. |
| 02:20:49.66 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:20:49.68 | Unknown | You're still on mute, Greg. |
| 02:20:53.97 | Unknown | Okay, he can't hear me either. Greg, we cannot hear you. |
| 02:20:56.97 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 02:20:57.34 | Sergio Rudin | I think |
| 02:20:58.52 | Mayor Kellen | There you go. |
| 02:20:59.22 | Sergio Rudin | I'm trying to Thank you. This is the one microphone. I'm going to test another one. |
| 02:21:05.07 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:15.75 | Unknown | you |
| 02:21:16.02 | Sergio Rudin | I propose, I'm sorry. |
| 02:21:17.98 | Unknown | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:21:18.10 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, I think that our zoning, our underlying zoning would be in place effective question and a general plan consistency for any of the needs of the needs of the family. It's already zoned for a certain use. It can, that use could possibly be allowed. But I think it's been abandoned for longer. It doesn't have any backpages. So you have to comply with the general. |
| 02:21:49.03 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Okay, I think I got that. And so then with the proposal from Councilmember Cleveland Knowles be in support of what the working group came up with that. We write, we say no to this option. And then we write a letter saying, we're saying no, but you'll hear from us later. And then we have a meeting where we discuss the potential acquisition at the 10K office. I'm not sure. |
| 02:22:13.94 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Who's the question for? I guess I'm asking the working group or casual. |
| 02:22:15.32 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:22:15.34 | Ian Sobieski | All right. |
| 02:22:15.35 | Unknown | I'm gonna say. |
| 02:22:17.58 | Ian Sobieski | I mean, I'm not sure what the need of another meeting is because |
| 02:22:21.40 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:22:21.53 | Ian Sobieski | I'm not going to. |
| 02:22:21.97 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | I'm not comfortable making an offer without knowing the full costs associated with it. Because if they say yes and they dump all of the potential huge environmental improvement costs on us, makes me quite concerned about the physical effect. |
| 02:22:34.20 | Ian Sobieski | quite concerned about the physical effects. Right. So there's a key detail missing. Council member. The offer doesn't cost us anything. If it's accepted, it doesn't cost us anything. because we can get out of the offer at any time for any reason. So, If you make an offer, they're going to buy your house for $10,000 subject to an inspection contingency. If you sign that offer, then you'd have to sell me your house. but I can not proceed with the cell for any reason. I changed my mind, I found rats, uh, Didn't like the color. Thought it had cost too much to paint. We're out. there isn't any more cost. |
| 02:23:09.20 | Unknown | listen to the |
| 02:23:11.94 | Ian Sobieski | The rationale of this approach is only to incur any additional costs in even thinking about it or having any more meanings about it. Only if... the GSA is obliged to sell us the building. If they are obliged to sell the building, well, then we should figure out if we actually want to buy it, given all the other issues. So I don't know that we need to spend any more staff time or city council time or anyone else's time. just let the GSA decide if they're going to bind themselves to sell it to us or not for $10,000. And then we can, in the happy event that they did that, then we can spend the money and time to figure out what we need to know to actually proceed. |
| 02:23:51.81 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Is this legally Sound. |
| 02:23:55.96 | Ian Sobieski | It's an offer. It's just an offer. They don't have to take it. |
| 02:23:59.14 | Mayor Kellen | It doesn't bind us to any cleanup remediation. In fact, it's why we came up with this strategy. so that we could have, because we were up against a deadline, so that we could have the flexibility to then pursue a public-private partnership situation where we could then figure out how much it might cost to do whatever we wanted to do there. free up the corporation yard so they could build senior housing The corporate arc is city owned and then we use qualify for certain grant monies and other opportunities for affordable housing. And then we have this whole that could be a courtyard along with the Butler building, which to my knowledge does not have contamination. to the extent that the machine shop does. It gave us the most flexibility to Ian's point without incurring any additional costs, staff time, any environmental review. because we just didn't know how much more time we wanted to put towards it, but then still retain that opportunity. And let's not forget that there's a deed restriction that runs with land. such that the machine shop is obligated to be commercial or industrial use. And so if there was a scenario where someone tried to change that use, that would be where a much higher cost might come. But you could, again, use industrial or commercial use on-site. based on current standards right now. |
| 02:25:15.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:25:22.70 | Cleveland Knowles | We're not going to do, I mean, you know, we have to make a call on our current corp yard very soon. I mean, I don't think this process is going to move quickly with the GSA. So, I mean, I just want to be clear about what we're what we're doing and not doing if we move forward. I don't want to put other processes on hold. on some that the federal government's gonna bite at some $10,000 offer. you know, years down the road. So, I mean, we can make the offer If that's what you guys really want to do, it sounds like Greg thought that we need to condition the offer on a lot of different things. So at a minimum, that should come back on consent. I would like to understand better about the difference between the Butler building and the Michigan tab. from a, I mean, Janelle, you seem to have some information that has never been presented to us before that that was not part of the contamination report. So I'd like to verify that. um, |
| 02:26:23.03 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. Yeah, sorry, Councilmember Cleveland Knowles. Certainly not intentional. And my recollection was that it had come before this council a number of times, but you're kind of pointing out sort of part of the problem of the process is that changed hands and the information flow hasn't been as seamless as I think we would all like. So I appreciate that. And I know that, you know, Councillor Sobieski and I would Be happy to work with you and the vice mayor to figure out that path forward if we can get some agreement around this particular way of to proceed |
| 02:26:59.11 | Cleveland Knowles | So did I misunderstand the city attorney who said that we needed to come back with an offer that complied with various conditions and protocols? Really, Greg, your microphone is so hard to hear. I don't know if you have a headset. |
| 02:27:06.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:27:06.95 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 02:27:06.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:27:07.01 | Mayor Kellen | Um, |
| 02:27:14.23 | Cleveland Knowles | Can you call in, Greg? I thought that that's what you had said. And I think it's important to understand Kind of... what our options are. I'm also interested to hear public comment at some point. So maybe we'll go |
| 02:27:29.48 | Serge Avila | And Madam Mayor, if I may, this is Serge. Greg has called in. All he needs to do is to press start nine so that he can unmute. |
| 02:27:38.63 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 02:27:38.65 | Unknown | Awesome. |
| 02:27:42.68 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:27:42.70 | Sergio Rudin | Great. |
| 02:27:42.97 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:27:43.03 | Sergio Rudin | Can you unmute yourself? |
| 02:27:45.18 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:27:45.21 | Unknown | There you go. Nope. Nope, we still don't hear you. |
| 02:27:50.97 | Mayor Kellen | Um. Councilor of Cleveland Knowles and Vice Mayor, would you guys be okay if we took some public comment and then came back and Greg can figure out his audio? Okay. So, Serge, let's go ahead and open up the public comment. |
| 02:27:55.84 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:27:55.86 | Unknown | Please. |
| 02:28:02.90 | Serge Avila | Yes, Madam Mayor, our first speaker, it's Vicki Nichols. Vicki, you've been unmuted. |
| 02:28:08.94 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. Good evening. I can't tell you how disappointed I am that this has come back The day before a response is again due. We've been talking about the same thing The acquisition of this building could be for free if it's the public yard. et cetera, et cetera. With all due respect to the working group, it sounds like rather than consider that there's already been discussion about, how this could be used, public-private partnerships. The government is offering this building on condition of certain guidelines. This is public money. This isn't people that you're trying to always get a way around. So I'd like the council to stipulate. I am so frustrated right now that you really don't seem to really care about any historical preservation here. You haven't demonstrated it in any way. And to put this money out is a very common operation, you have to spend money to be able to get these historic grants, et cetera, et cetera. I would ask that our city manager, who Mr. Zapata, I know he's been the manager in Anaheim, A national city, both cities have come up conferences for the California Preservation Foundation. So I'm sure he's familiar with some of these practices. But I am just so frustrated that, you know, if you don't want to preserve things here, through viable means, then just go on the record and say that to us. This is a process that could work, but if you don't want to, You're doing everything possible to delay it and assume that you can make real estate considerations and throw deals out That isn't how it works. So please make a decision and go on the record. So we'll know where you guys stand. Thank you, Vicki. |
| 02:30:10.57 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker, it's Sandra Bushmaker. Sandra, you're being unmuted. Nice to share your video. |
| 02:30:16.06 | Sandra Bushmaker | Good evening, everybody. Good to see you. Difficult, difficult questions you have to resolve tonight with this issue. I just wanted to confirm with the city attorney that these Deed restrictions that exist today will run with the land regardless of what the disposition of this property. So that's number one. Number two, I think that the working groups, um, compromise to keep our finger in the pie, so to speak, without costing the city an arm and a leg is worth the effort. Whether it's successful or not, we don't know. But I think it is a way to to not bind the city for all these additional costs, which we are in no shape to assume at the moment, but still look at the long possibility of perhaps we can acquire this property. And, but these And lastly, the estimates of cleanup, I think, are very low at 1.9 million. I am not an expert in hazardous waste, but I suspect that those costs are going to be far, far greater. So basically the point I wanted to make was the, Making sure those deed restrictions run with the land in perpetuity. regardless of who the owner is. And I would just like confirmation from the city attorney on that. Thank you. Thank you, Sandra. |
| 02:31:47.40 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker is Jan Johnson. Jan, you've been unmuted. Nice to share your video. |
| 02:31:52.89 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:31:53.04 | Jan Johnson | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:31:59.50 | Jan Johnson | Hi. I have great fears that you're buying a money pit. that the cleanup, the demolition of the building if you don't keep it, or the reconstruction of the building if you do keep it, plus the toxic cleanup, it's going to be way more than $2 million. as someone who grew up in a toxic, Um, chemical environment and have had relatives die of pancreatic cancer. I cannot see how you can ask city employees to work on a contaminated site without putting the city at risk of horrendous lawsuits. which will be way more than what you've cost to have this building. It seems that you keep saying we're getting this building for free or we're getting it for $10,000. You're not getting it for free. You are buying... all the liabilities of that site. I will. It's just to me, unconscionable that a city that's in deficit spending for two years and is about to blow through its reserve fund wants to spend potentially four to $6 million on a toxic cleanup. which will take several years before you can then move the corporation yard. And |
| 02:33:26.32 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you, Jen. |
| 02:33:29.04 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker, it's Peter Van Meter. Peter, you can unmute it and ask to share your video. |
| 02:33:36.14 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:33:42.49 | Peter Van Meter | Can you hear me now? |
| 02:33:43.57 | Unknown | you |
| 02:33:43.58 | Mayor Kellen | We can, yeah. |
| 02:33:44.53 | Peter Van Meter | All right, in summary, Stop the madness. Just get away from this deal. completely. Chad Johnson just summed it up perfectly. I couldn't say it better than absolute money pit that's involved here. I mean, your biggest risk in the $10,000 deal is that they might accept. That's the scary part. And then you're going to have the 200,000 or whatever, even to figure out what your first steps are. let alone the money pit that follows after that. The two, four million, I don't know. The number is going to be huge. We know that. And I think that she summed it up perfectly. So please just Do nothing, be non-responsive, let it disappear. just Forget about it. And you're going to have control later. if they ever consult to somebody else, you've got the zoning, you've got the permit process, you've got everything. So don't be afraid of what some stupid person that actually bought it from the GSA might do. You know, there may be a stupid fool out there somewhere. Let's not let that be the city. Thank you. |
| 02:34:46.07 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you, Peter. |
| 02:34:47.15 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker, it's Councilmember Hoffman. You've been unmuted. |
| 02:34:51.37 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, thank you. So thank you for the working group for coming up with this solution. I think the thing that everybody probably needs to focus on is that the this gives us the ability to, you know, at no risk right we're going to make the offer as Council Member Sobieski said, then it's up to us to decide whether or not we go through with it. or not based on some additional information that we have. So, I don't see a downside, frankly, to this. And if we can get to a point where we can you know, get moving on. preserving or at least, you know, getting to the point where it wouldn't cost us anything or we have a partner to address this building and save what's left of it in the historic aspects of it. I think that's worth it. And especially if we can come with the way that complies and fits in with our industrial waterfront and the working waterfront and gives us more capacity down there. I think that's absolutely necessary. Um, there's a potential for 42,000 square feet in that building. So that's a lot of room for other industrial uses and other industrial businesses along the working waterfront to support our economic sustainability down there. of Sausalito. I think this is a good idea and that the way that you've got it figured out and the way it's represented is there's very little downside to the city. So we make the offer. You know, we decide later if we want to proceed with the sale or not. And it gives us the maximum flexibility. So I would say that this is a good method and good path to proceed on. So thank you for all your hard work on that. Thank you, Jill. |
| 02:36:39.32 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker is Seville Boutillier. Seville, you're being unmuted and asked to share your video. |
| 02:36:52.38 | Unknown | I can't hear you yet, Sybil. |
| 02:36:59.72 | Sybil Boutillier | Okay. Mayor Kelman, can you hear me now? Yes, we can. Oh, thank you so much. I think that this is a very good path forward at this point because it gives us the option to look a little more deeply into whether or not some of the uses that we see as possibilities for this site could come to be. And these might be possibilities that do not require extensive mitigation of the toxics that exist there. For example, the corporation yard, or as has been mentioned, you know, the corporation yard, if it was moved there, freeing up the current corporation yard for a higher use, may not require the entire site and the rest of the site could be used for a working waterfront um, revenue producing, um, industry or dry storage or something along those lines. So Either way, there's a lot of good that could come from this, but we need a little more time to look into it. Personally, I would like to see, for the benefit of our housing element, to move the corporation yard there and then to free up the corporation yard for low-income and especially senior housing. And there's some opportunities to get possible funding for that. But that would certainly be a use that would not require, I believe, as much cleanup. And so I'm very much in favor of this. And I think that the council, the working group, has come up with a very good next step given all the issues that are involved. And I thank you for that. Thank you, Sybil. |
| 02:39:09.81 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker is Joan Cox. Joan, you're being unmuted. Nice to share your video. |
| 02:39:18.96 | Joan Cox | Thank you, Serge. Hello, council. I wanted to remind you of another resource for cleanup. And some of you have heard me speak in the past about insurance archeology. which is a largely untapped resource for funding public agency risk. Historic insurance policies were made on a claims made basis, meaning there's no deadline to when the claim can be made so long as it arose during the time that the property was in use. These policies yield millions of dollars and are specifically geared towards environmental cases, including CERCLA, Superfund, asbestos, et cetera. The great thing about insurance archaeology is that many of the policies that were written when the pollution at the machine shop was occurring did not have today's pollution preclusions and therefore, Um, Some of the larger carriers, including an English carrier are on the hook for millions of dollars because these environmental claims were not as well understood back in the 60s, 70s. and early 80s, and therefore were not The coverage was not precluded under the policy. That's a great resource. that the city can tap into to address environmental issues on this site, should the city Acquire it and should the city So wish. Um, I hate to see the city Give up. this huge parcel right in the center without investing additional effort to try to find a viable path forward. So I appreciate the work of the working group. I also wanted to commend your city attorney for bringing up pollution liability policy. That is something that you can procure for pennies on the dollar, you can procure Um, millions of dollars of coverage for $2,500, $5,000 in premium. I'm not sure that it requires a full environmental analysis. The whole purpose of pollution liability is to hedge against environmental conditions that you're not certain exist there and to protect contractors and others who are performing work on the land, from suffering ill consequences uncovered. anyway, those are just a couple of thoughts. I encourage you to try to keep this alive. if you can. Oh, and the final thing I wanted to say is, I hope that you are continuing to pursue a political solution to this. Jared Huffman years ago offered to gift this, um, site to the city for a penny. I don't know why. Um, |
| 02:42:23.49 | Mayor Kellen | Sorry to cut you off. Yeah, I will. Thank you for that prompt. I'll mention that as well. |
| 02:42:24.18 | Joan Cox | Sorry. Okay. |
| 02:42:29.73 | Serge Avila | Our next speaker, it's Tanguy Delamote. Thank you, you've been unmuted and asked to share your video. |
| 02:42:44.97 | Unknown | Good evening, Mayor. Good evening to all the members of the council. I just would like to keep you going in the right direction to get the city to keep fighting for this site. In providing a business use case, presenting my company, I work for a Swedish company that is called Candela. We do some electric foiling boats. And I have a boat here. I run the U.S. branch of the company and I'm based on Bridgeway. I'm a Sosolito resident for the last four years and I think this site would be an ideal place for my company to develop a production facility right in the center of what used to be a great boat building and ship building location. So this might not require the cleanup that was mentioned earlier. And it sounds like the size of the site is exactly what I'm looking for, is about 40,000 square feet. And so I would really encourage the council to push that proposed way forward in making an offer. And we might be able to work together to revive and keep some of this historic vibe in Sausalito in being a great shipbuilding. And actually the forefront of new technology with electric foiling boats that could be zooming around the bay. At the moment, we have sold already 12 boats in the US for next year to be delivered. The boats are half a million dollars each. And we are looking at bigger models that could also be built. And we can generate probably between 50 and 100 jobs between boat builders and engineers and marketing people. So the Swedish company has asked me to find a solution. My only worry is the timeline so I hope we can not lose too much time but basically I encourage the city council to do what was recommended by the working group and I hope we can work together in the future |
| 02:45:09.82 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you, Zanjie. Good to see you. |
| 02:45:11.82 | Unknown | Thanks. |
| 02:45:13.13 | Serge Avila | our next speaker. It's John. John, you have been unmuted and has to share your video. |
| 02:45:17.45 | Unknown | you |
| 02:45:23.56 | Unknown | John, we cannot hear you. |
| 02:45:28.59 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:45:33.35 | Mayor Kellen | Sorry, John, we're still not hearing you. |
| 02:45:41.41 | Serge Avila | um, And Madam Mayor, it does not appear as John is responding. |
| 02:45:45.72 | Mayor Kellen | Okay. Sorry, John, we're not going to be able to take your public comment. Okay. Any other members of the public wish to comment on this? Okay, then we'll go ahead and close public comment and bring it back up and the vice mayor has our hand up. |
| 02:46:04.67 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Great. So I am obviously still concerned from a fiscal standpoint, but this seems like since we're not paying $250,000 out of the gate. We get to have some real understanding of what the cost could be. and we have time to make a plan. And the working group has demonstrated this creative solution that allows for contingencies. If we can, you know, maintain the deeds that we have, support the working waterfront, see more support for the industrial uses, and also if we can see more housing, which I would love to see housing in the corporate yard if we could do that. And if we can prove that it's not a money pit, as many public commenters have suggested, because I would not be comfortable with an acquisition that would put us in a situation that would be negative for our structural deficit, which continues to be my biggest concern, because if we had a surplus, I would say yes, let's buy it right now because would be great to have an opportunity to see what this could turn into. I do wanna honor Vicki Nichols' comment about doing this at the last minute and make sure that if we put a six month contingency on this plan, We're not hearing about whether or not we're gonna make the sale in the fifth month. So I would like this to be a |
| 02:47:12.96 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:47:12.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:47:15.07 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | because I think there is a good chance that the federal government might actually accept this offer. So I would like for the working group to continue forward given that and have a clear plan and a clear budget that would make us give us the opportunity to have answers to the questions like what would the real cost of an environmental cleanup be? How do we ensure that this is going to be positive for the city if we do move forward? was exciting to see that there's already a business that would be interested. So, you know, I appreciate the creativity. Um, and I'm, I'm willing to keep this thing, the ball rolling to see what unfolds if we don't have to put $250,000 into it right now. So that's where I'm at. |
| 02:47:52.92 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you, Vice Mayor. I just want to say that means a lot. I mean, this is hard. And, you know, we the elements of everything everybody says. And also then, Joan, I'll remute you. But then also, how do you, |
| 02:47:59.42 | Unknown | I think everybody says. Right, excellent. |
| 02:48:06.69 | Mayor Kellen | Give yourself the opportunity to do something with historic preservation and give yourself the opportunity to build out I don't know, 30,000 square foot. E-Foil boat company. I mean, it just sounded really very interesting. So thank you for that. That means a lot. Councilmember Cleveland Knowles, do you want to weigh in? |
| 02:48:22.11 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:48:23.35 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 02:48:23.36 | Cleveland Knowles | Yeah, I didn't know if our city attorney gotten audio back so that we can hear whether we can Sure. authorize this offer tonight. |
| 02:48:34.21 | Greg (likely City Attorney) | Can you hear me now? I'm on the phone. |
| 02:48:36.32 | Cleveland Knowles | Oh yeah, much better. |
| 02:48:37.49 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:48:38.40 | Greg (likely City Attorney) | Okay. Not ideal, but thank you. Yeah, we've... I mean, the agenda item is acquisition of real property and it's identified. So I, we, We can. The council can entertain making an offer or an offer on the property with the contingencies. And then there was another question from the member of the public about THE LAST WEEK. or not the, uh, David Miller, Deed restrictions would continue on the property i'd have to look at those because sometimes they can be changed, but normally they run with the land and can't be changed without the original grant or permission. that maybe somebody You know, years and years ago, that's can't, we can't locate them. |
| 02:49:26.80 | Cleveland Knowles | So Greg, you're comfortable that if we went forward with this tonight, that you could draft some kind of an offer that would have all the contingencies that you were mentioning might need to be included. |
| 02:49:41.33 | Greg (likely City Attorney) | Yeah. Um, that we, I would have to get right on it tomorrow, but I would be able to do that. I'm sure I have access to some |
| 02:49:48.62 | Unknown | sure I have. |
| 02:49:51.57 | Greg (likely City Attorney) | documents that I can create an offer. but have appropriate contingencies in it. |
| 02:49:59.06 | Cleveland Knowles | Okay. And then just last question to the city manager or Mr. Wagner about whether you have any concerns or thoughts about this course of action. |
| 02:50:10.13 | Mike Wagner | Uh, Um, I, my, well, my recommendation would be to definitely put a deadline on such an offer, not to let it hang out forever, um, whatever period of time you want to use, but, Um, My sense is that the six months may be short. Um, considering the amount of time it takes to get on council and get consultants these days. do work, you know, people take time to get, big. to get working here. not necessarily myself, I just mean other people we might need to consult. I think my recommendation if we're going to take this course of action is to definitely put a deadline on the offer. consider a nine month contingency period Um, And, you know, I couldn't possibly speculate on what the G, how the GSA will, will, will, respond to this. I, you know, I haven't floated this by them. So, I think it's worth a try. |
| 02:51:09.77 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 02:51:11.81 | Greg (likely City Attorney) | I think that's a good point about the deadline for, um, acceptance. No. Do we want it to be a long period of time? there was some discussion in the working group about a longer period of time for that from the due diligence period. |
| 02:51:25.68 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah. Let me ask Councilmember Sobieski, your thoughts on the time period? |
| 02:51:34.41 | Ian Sobieski | I share my screen since I have this habit of writing these things. |
| 02:51:38.03 | Sergio Rudin | out. |
| 02:51:38.69 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. you |
| 02:51:39.53 | Sergio Rudin | So, |
| 02:51:39.62 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 02:51:39.82 | Sergio Rudin | get proposed. |
| 02:51:41.65 | Ian Sobieski | motion. |
| 02:51:42.03 | Sergio Rudin | Okay. All right, so there you go. So, Look, the city attorney can, |
| 02:51:48.97 | Ian Sobieski | So, |
| 02:51:50.23 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 02:51:50.25 | Ian Sobieski | can fill in additional contingencies as he sits, he's fit. But the headline that everyone should know that I've said to vice mayor Blomstein is that, the proposal is that we, ask the city manager to enter into a binding contract with the GSA to acquire the machine shop that's binding on the GSA. they have to proceed with it. But we, the city have, and reflecting Mike's feedback, a nine month due diligence contingency period where we can come, we can, uh, cancel the contract for any reason. |
| 02:52:25.64 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 02:52:28.19 | Cleveland Knowles | you |
| 02:52:28.78 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:52:28.79 | Sergio Rudin | um, Right? |
| 02:52:32.03 | Ian Sobieski | Just to say it again. The cost of doing this is the cost of the city manager's time and the city attorney in writing the offer letter and hitting send on email. |
| 02:52:44.17 | Cleveland Knowles | You're saying this would stay open for four years, Yann? |
| 02:52:44.23 | Ian Sobieski | Right. |
| 02:52:47.54 | Ian Sobieski | Well, that's the second point, which is how long do we have the offer to hang out there? It would shock me despite the vice mayor's thought to the contrary that the government would accept this offer, right away. as they try to discharge their obligation to get rid of this building off the government books, they may find it hard to sell, get in all the constraints on it, on all the unknowns. So, the thought would only be that In the minds of the people that work there, they know that this thing is in their back pocket When they finally get tired of trying to transact, it just hangs out there. So we can revoke it at any time, but why not just Have it be other. Uh, you know, We won't call you anymore. Call us if you want to sell this building. but we wanna do it under a, entering a specific, with a binding contract with a specific price. And truly it's, let's not do any more work on this. So it's just directing staff to not do any more work on this building. And until the GSA enters into a contract like this, we're not gonna do any more work because we have other things to do in town. So, COB, Dan Burke, COB OSMP COB, Dan Burke, COB OSMP These are the three legs of this stool. to say, and again, the headline is not to take it away. The headline is we're not doing the PVC. and we're not doing a negotiated sale, there's too many unknowns too many known unknowns out there for us to deal with. But if we enter into a binding contract from GSA, HAB-Jacques Juillandas, We're willing to maybe spend that money, but we wouldn't until we had another city council meeting to appropriate it. and decide what to do. So this accomplishes a couple of things, which is we get to move on to other tasks, um, but we, leave open the possibility that if the government can't sell the building to anyone else, that they will engage with us. |
| 02:54:50.61 | Mayor Kellen | Ian, I know we talked about this earlier today. I don't, I'm a little confused by a nine month due diligence contingency, but then also a four year |
| 02:54:58.19 | Ian Sobieski | sort of |
| 02:55:01.61 | Ian Sobieski | The four years is just how long the offer hanging out there. The nine months is how long do we have between when they sign it and we enter into a binding contract and we can still get out of it for any reason whatsoever. |
| 02:55:12.31 | Jill Hoffman | Got it. |
| 02:55:13.26 | Ian Sobieski | Four years is just You could just say such authority to the city manager. remains until revoked. |
| 02:55:22.40 | Sybil Boutillier | the |
| 02:55:22.57 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 02:55:24.33 | Ian Sobieski | instead of four years, it could just be an offer that's out there. |
| 02:55:27.55 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah, and I'll just say for, this is great, thank you. You and I already talked about this. I had suggested two years instead of four. I'm open to feedback from others. |
| 02:55:38.86 | Ian Sobieski | Two years it is. |
| 02:55:41.54 | Mayor Kellen | The student manager has his hand I'm not sure. |
| 02:55:46.23 | Chris Zapata | Yes, Mayor, members of the council. I was asked by Councilmember Cleveland Knowles to provide input on this. And let me just say this, Whatever city councils want to do that isn't immoral, unethical, or illegal, you know, I'm compelled to carry out. And in 30 years, I've had a habit of speaking truth in council meetings and certainly Uh, At risk, as I know, based on my experience in Anaheim, when you tell someone the truth and they don't like it, sometimes that results in them telling you, move on down the road. So in this particular case, it sounds to me like a question that I was asked was what staff's recommendation and I was asked that pointedly. And my response was you appointed a subcommittee to. provide direction to the rest of the council. We didn't appoint city staff to do that. City staff was compelled to do the work of the subcommittee and has been doing that for some time. And so if you're asking me about, you know, the work that's been done, applause for you and Councilmember Sobieski and your ability to compromise. But I can tell you that the work in front of us that is aside from this is quite involved. And, you know, I've preached this since day one, which is SOSTA needs to focus on the basics. It's finance, it's infrastructure, and it's bandwidth. And so if this is going to create more bandwidth issues where somebody is going to have to do work, then I would tell you, and you asked my recommendation, I would tell you, let someone else do it. But I'm hearing that this is not going to cost us any time on the staff side. It's not going to cost us any money. And there seems to be some genuine opportunity there. But I have my reservations. So let me just say this. If I was king of the world for one day, |
| 02:56:58.44 | Unknown | And you know, |
| 02:57:32.88 | Chris Zapata | I would tell you not to do this, but I'm not. I'm your city manager, so I will do to the best of our ability whatever this council tells us to do. And so I hope that answers your question, Councilmember Cleveland Ols. I answered it as honestly and truthfully as possible. I don't think at risk, but I think it could upset some people on either side. |
| 02:57:56.17 | Mayor Kellen | Okay. Do folks want to debate this more or should we just put a motion on the table and see if we have the the votes for it. |
| 02:58:02.65 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:58:03.04 | Mayor Kellen | and move on. |
| 02:58:03.59 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 02:58:04.47 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 02:58:04.49 | Cleveland Knowles | I just have one more question. And then I don't know if Greg's hand is still, is that for some new point or if that was residual. But so my last question is just, just remind me why the working group was not, proposing that we go through the negotiated sale process, which would is the kind of sanctioned process for making an offer. |
| 02:58:33.40 | Cleveland Knowles | I just don't remember. We talked about that a year ago and I... |
| 02:58:34.20 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:58:34.22 | Ian Sobieski | I remember when we talked |
| 02:58:37.23 | Cleveland Knowles | So. |
| 02:58:38.44 | Ian Sobieski | Well, maybe the mayor will have additional reasons. My recollection was that we'd have to pay for an appraisal Um, That appraisal, of course, has to do with what uses are. There's a lot of assessment of the building. that has to be done of the very unknowns |
| 02:58:52.16 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 02:58:52.18 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:52.28 | Sergio Rudin | you |
| 02:58:52.40 | Ian Sobieski | that, that we would have would create a range of values. and, And that range of values could actually wouldn't get us anywhere because we'd have range of values from negative 2 million to to 7 million, so what do you do with that? So I think that was part of the problem. And, uh, We tried to get the GSA to to share with us their appraisal. but they wouldn't. |
| 02:59:19.87 | Cleveland Knowles | Okay, that's helpful. |
| 02:59:21.56 | Ian Sobieski | I mean, this is a little unusual. If you sell your house, you put it on the market for a price. |
| 02:59:21.91 | Cleveland Knowles | Yeah. |
| 02:59:26.43 | Ian Sobieski | The GSA is not doing that. They're just saying, we're interested in selling the building. Tell us what you'll pay us for. |
| 02:59:32.91 | Jan Johnson | Thank you. |
| 02:59:32.95 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 02:59:33.77 | Jan Johnson | Bye. |
| 02:59:33.84 | Unknown | Okay. That's helpful, thank you. |
| 02:59:35.21 | Ian Sobieski | We'll pay you $10,000 for it, subject to the ability to get out of the contract as we do our diligence. |
| 02:59:35.93 | Jan Johnson | Thank you. |
| 02:59:43.93 | Greg (likely City Attorney) | My only comment, that's why I raised my hand, was that to set instead of set just enter into a contract I would authorizing city manager to make an offer. and enter into a contract because the first step under this proposals that we make an offer. Thank you. and then we won't know if we're in contract. until we have an acceptance. which of course we will have all of our contingencies as suggested. if the council decides that they don't want to proceed. the property conditions. So yeah, this is so. Make an offer and, yes, that's my suggestion. |
| 03:00:23.30 | Ian Sobieski | And to council member Cleveland knows it, a further answer to your question is it's already taken a lot of staff time to Chris Zapata's just comment. The third bullet point on here is probably as important as the other two, this motion is to direct everyone to just stand out, like send in this offer, and don't do any more work on this issue until directed by city council. So it's done. and we can all move on. unless the GSA says okay. Well, and now we're someplace that we have some certainty and about whether we want to expend the resources. to do any of these things. |
| 03:00:56.48 | Cleveland Knowles | Yeah, okay. And for whatever it's worth the time when that's same. Thank you. to me. It is. |
| 03:01:04.16 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | two years or the four years? |
| 03:01:05.62 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. |
| 03:01:05.84 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:01:05.98 | Cleveland Knowles | Thank you. The two years and the nine months. |
| 03:01:10.53 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Vice Mayor, do you have Changes to this? I just wanted to check on the two years. I would definitely prefer that to four. |
| 03:01:20.36 | Mayor Kellen | Okay. Great. Well, again, I just want to thank all of you. This was a really, really helpful dialogue, and especially to my fellow committee member, who stuck with me through all the different iterations of this and also to the city attorney who is enormously helpful over the last couple of days on this and Mike Wagner. So I'm going to go ahead and make this motion. |
| 03:01:39.66 | Unknown | I'm gonna go ahead and go ahead and go ahead. |
| 03:01:41.74 | Mayor Kellen | Uh, It's here on the screen. Am I gonna try to repeat it? authorizing, directing city manager to make and offer and entered into a binding contract with GSA to acquire the machine shop for some of $10,000 with a nine month due diligence contingency. |
| 03:01:58.65 | Ian Sobieski | Yep. So I would move the, you made this motion with the three points written here. |
| 03:02:06.07 | Mayor Kellen | Yes, with the three points written here. |
| 03:02:06.46 | Ian Sobieski | But this or just a ripple thing. |
| 03:02:09.85 | Mayor Kellen | Okay. So should we please call the roll? |
| 03:02:15.35 | Serge Avila | Councilmember Sobieski? Yes. Councilmember Cleveland Knowles? |
| 03:02:19.10 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. |
| 03:02:19.39 | Serge Avila | Thank you. you No, see you later. |
| 03:02:20.74 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. She's recused. I'm sorry. |
| 03:02:24.46 | Serge Avila | Vice Mayor Blaustein? Yes. |
| 03:02:28.90 | Mayor Kellen | Yes. |
| 03:02:31.00 | Serge Avila | Motion passes, Fort One. |
| 03:02:32.92 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you, everybody. And thank you enormously members of the public as well. We'll see what, what happens. Okay. Well then we'll move on now to item six communications. So it's time for the city council to hear from citizens regarding matters that are not on the agenda. except in very limited situations, state law precludes the council from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items in business that are not on the agenda. The council may also refer matters on the agenda to city staff or direct the subject be agendized for a future meeting. I see one handout. |
| 03:03:05.89 | Serge Avila | Sandra Bushmaker, you've been unmuted. Nice to share your video. |
| 03:03:09.82 | Sandra Bushmaker | Good evening again. I just wanted to bring the issue to your attention of the letter that I sent to you requesting you to agendize joining the litigation against HCD for the the reading numbers. Now I realize that your city attorney has said that this is probably a loser case. or has implied that this is probably a loser case, but there may be other benefits to joining this litigation. where The city is going on record with other cities in California in order to make a statement to to Sacramento on these issues. I'd like to see some discussion on this issue. I would like to see the city attorney review the complaint in order to properly advise the council whether or not to join this litigation. But I think it's worth discussion. It's still an ongoing issue. We have all suffered the consequences of these horrific numbers that have been laid on us, along with other consequences from Sacramento, And I think that it's worth pursuing a discussion anyway. So that's what I have to request of you tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Sandra. |
| 03:04:32.21 | Mayor Kellen | Anybody else with their hand up? |
| 03:04:34.94 | Serge Avila | Meta Mayer, there are no other hands raised. |
| 03:04:37.42 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, we're gonna close public comment for item six. Councilmember Committee reports item seven. Anyone have anything to report? |
| 03:04:47.02 | Mayor Kellen | Okay. Um, I guess we take public comment on council member community reports just That's what you do. I don't see any hands open for public comment. Okay, we'll move on to item eight. This is the city manager report. City Council appointments on the council business will take public comment on items eight. B through 8E, do we have any public comments? |
| 03:05:10.55 | Serge Avila | and a mayor, there are no hands raised. |
| 03:05:12.81 | Mayor Kellen | I do see one. Vicky, just raise your hand. |
| 03:05:16.67 | Serge Avila | And Vicki Nichols, you're being unmuted. |
| 03:05:19.36 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 03:05:19.37 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. I am very concerned about the audio quality of tonight's meeting. I could not hear what the city Attorney was opining on a couple of important questions. And this is the record of the meeting, unless there's some kind of transcript. I think some important things were said. Maybe you guys were able to hear it more importantly, How does this go forward as the official record? |
| 03:05:46.54 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 03:05:46.83 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 03:05:47.59 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. Thank you, Vicki. Okay, any other public comments? This is on the city manager report other council business. Okay, so I'll hand it over to the city manager for his report. |
| 03:06:01.38 | Chris Zapata | Thank you, Mayor, members of the council, members of the public. I want to speak at this late hour briefly about personnel. I want to provide information to the community Obviously the council has awareness of this. So we have had some notices of departures by some key city staff. I want to point them out to you. Our public works manager, Lauren Umbertas, has left us and is going to work for the city of Fairfax as a public works director. Our payroll person in finance, Helena Menos, has submitted her resignation. And the one that is most troubling is Serge Avila has tendered his resignation to become the city clerk of San Anselmo. So those are all big losses anytime you invest in folks and they do work for your community and their public service and they find something that is of interest to them and makes sense to them or decisions come That is really, really hard to take, but we wish them all well. Certainly Serge, certainly Lauren, certainly Helena. On the other side of personnel, we've completed our or interviews for the Community Development Director, we interviewed three qualified candidates. We're in the process of making an offer to the top candidate. We'll see what happens with that. We also have interviewed two human resource managers. We have a couple more to do, but that's in good stage right now. And then lastly, I'd like to report that we're still negotiating in good faith with SEIU on a contract for this year, and we'll have more to report on that at a later date. Thank you. |
| 03:07:41.12 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you, Chris. Any questions for city manager? Well, we appreciate all of your hard work and, um, what you do in bringing city hall together. And certainly we're going to miss the individuals that you, just articulate him. Okay, well, we're going to move on then to the next item, which is board's commissions and committees, and we don't have anything to report here, but I will Just observe that in the future agenda items list, for next time it does show that we will bring this topic back. Um, in the near future. So I just wanted to note that. But vice mayor looks like you have a comment. |
| 03:08:19.21 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | I just wanted to know that the Disaster Preparedness Committee reached out to say that they were having difficulty achieving quorum. And so I would like us to resolve that issue when we review this as well to either appoint new members or just to assess because it's a really critical |
| 03:08:27.19 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 03:08:27.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:08:27.34 | Mayor Kellen | to the |
| 03:08:27.41 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:08:27.43 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 03:08:34.99 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | committee. And I know that there are some others that have the same situation. I would assume that we're going to review that. when it's on the future agenda, but wanted to make sure that was brought up. Thank you. |
| 03:08:44.52 | Mayor Kellen | Yeah, thank you for that. Yeah, I would like to review that. That's a good segue. actually to future agenda items. So I do want to Here, the city manager's assessment of where we are. on that issue. Do other folks have items they wanna add that are not currently on that? spreadsheet for future agenda items. Yes, Vice Mayor, your hand is still up. I don't know if it's a holdover. Go ahead. |
| 03:09:09.18 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Go ahead. Thank you. |
| 03:09:10.63 | Jill Hoffman | it's. |
| 03:09:10.80 | Vice Mayor Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:09:11.62 | Mayor Kellen | Councillor Hopper. |
| 03:09:13.06 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not sure where to bring this up, but I noticed Go. I don't know, very recently that we have a city council meeting on November 8th, which is election day. So we typically don't have city council meetings on that day. And I will note that our city council chambers are is a polling place. |
| 03:09:32.87 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:09:33.16 | Jill Hoffman | And so I COB, Jean Gatza, NMT, Anyway, I think we probably need to move that meeting, I think there's a November 1 is also a Tuesday and i'm guessing that whoever did the schedule we were doing the schedule that people thought that was going to be election day but. COB, Jean Gatza, So anyway, I would suggest that we move that day. |
| 03:09:38.05 | Unknown | meeting. |
| 03:09:41.36 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 03:09:52.46 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. We'll follow up on that one. Councillor O'Claire, I'm also. Oh, whoops. |
| 03:09:57.88 | Cleveland Knowles | Yeah, I similarly had an issue or just a question about our two meetings in September, which are only a week apart, the 13th and 20th. And I do appreciate, Mayor, your. getting back to me on and explaining that the 27th is a holiday. So I appreciate that that's not a good day. for a council meeting, I will likely be unable to attend on the 20th. or I will be very late. So if there's any interest from other council members, I'm trying to find an alternative time in September that's not on a holiday or not on the 20th, but I would appreciate that. If there's not, that's fine. But I did just wanna raise it and I appreciate Mayor Kalman, you're getting Back to me on that. |
| 03:10:44.32 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 03:10:44.32 | Unknown | And. |
| 03:10:44.44 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 03:10:44.49 | Mayor Kellen | Thank you. |
| 03:10:44.59 | Cleveland Knowles | Okay. |
| 03:10:44.98 | Mayor Kellen | to discussing it. Thank you. It's the second day of Rosh Hashanah, which is near here. I have noted that other communities on occasion do morning meetings and we seem to be quite effective in mornings, so if that's ever of interest, I would be willing to review that and so we could of course do a Tuesday morning or another morning, but I just throw that out there. We don't have to decide right now. So it's- |
| 03:11:07.24 | Ian Sobieski | I would like to second that. I think that's a great, it would be a great experiment here with that meeting if we could find a morning meeting. |
| 03:11:09.95 | Mayor Kellen | I think that's it. |
| 03:11:15.23 | Ian Sobieski | to replace that, I vote for that. And I've seen other thumbs up, so... |
| 03:11:19.32 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, great. |
| 03:11:19.87 | Ian Sobieski | I know not everyone as the same, it may be flexible, but we could just see if there is a time that works for everybody in the morning. |
| 03:11:29.36 | Mayor Kellen | Okay, yeah, I'm open to it. then we will get a follow-up and find that out. So for our second meeting, so the intention would be for our second meeting in September, we're going to try to accommodate a morning meeting. Yes. Okay, sounds good to me. Thank you. Okay, anything else for future agenda items before we move on to reports of significance? Okay, other reports of significance? not seeing any, I will suggest that we adjourn. Thank you everybody. Good to see you all, have a good evening. Thank you. |
Pat — In Favor: Concurred with Peter Van Meter on returning to in-person meetings with concurrent Zoom participation, noting other towns have reverted to this model and Sausalito should as well. ▶ 📄