| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00.42 | Steven Woodside | do. |
| 00:00:12.01 | Jill Hoffman | Take a drop. |
| 00:00:25.82 | Allie Baer | Recording in progress. |
| 00:00:28.85 | Walfred Solorzano | Good evening, Mayor Blalstein and council members. This regular meeting of September 5, 2023 is being held in council chambers located at 420 Litho Street. Staff and members of the public are also participating through Zoom. This meeting is being broadcast live on the city's website and on cable TV channel 27. |
| 00:00:48.09 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, city clerk. And I will now call this meeting to order at 5 30 PM on September 5th. Would you please call the roll? |
| 00:00:54.98 | Walfred Solorzano | on some of our cocks. |
| 00:00:55.92 | Steven Woodside | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:00:56.23 | Walfred Solorzano | Council Member Hoffman. you you |
| 00:00:58.10 | Steven Woodside | Here. |
| 00:00:58.35 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:00:58.44 | Walfred Solorzano | you Councilmember Kelman. |
| 00:00:59.99 | Steven Woodside | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:01:00.02 | Walfred Solorzano | Vice Mayor Sobieski and Mayor Blostin. |
| 00:01:02.28 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:01:03.94 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 00:01:03.95 | Steven Woodside | Here. |
| 00:01:06.60 | Walfred Solorzano | All right. |
| 00:01:07.26 | Steven Woodside | All members are present. |
| 00:01:07.94 | Walfred Solorzano | All members are present. |
| 00:01:09.59 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Okay. And so our first item on the agenda this evening is closed session. On this evening's closed session, we have a conference with labor negotiators. Sarah Silverman, Public Employment and employee employee appointment and conference with legal counsel on anticipated litigation, so I will now open it up for public comment on closed session items, and I will allow, I believe Council Member Cox will be recusing herself from an item so go ahead. |
| 00:01:37.23 | Steven Woodside | Are there any members of the public who would like to comment, city clerk? |
| 00:01:41.15 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing none. And let me see for those that are in attendance. If you wanted to make any public comments, you use the raise hand function of zoom and there are no people present no members of the public present right now in the meeting physically. |
| 00:01:55.56 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Councilmember Cox? |
| 00:01:56.87 | Joan Cox | Thank you, Mayor. I will be recusing myself from the second item on the closed session agenda, public appointment of the city attorney. Thank you. |
| 00:02:04.20 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Thank you. Thank you. We'll now move into closed session. We'll return to open session at 7 p.m. |
| 00:02:09.97 | Natalie Netter | All right. Thank you. Well, I'm going to say, I can see it's yours. Thank you. Thank you. And I wanted to talk to you about the future. |
| 00:02:30.03 | Jill Hoffman | I'm going to go to the next slide. Thank you. |
| 00:02:45.07 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and get it. Thank you. I'm going to be able to get the same thing by the way. Three, six, three, four, four, four. |
| 00:03:07.51 | Natalie Netter | Wow. |
| 00:03:10.92 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. and it's a good thing. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:03:40.16 | Chris Zapata | All right. |
| 00:03:45.63 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:03:45.65 | Steven Woodside | Okay, are we ready to go? Okay, welcome back to this regular meeting of the Sausalito City Council on Tuesday, September 5th. And we're calling the meter back to order at 7.03 p.m. I do have one announcement from our closed session. which is that by five zero vote, the city council voted to authorize litigation and the defense and details will be available upon request. after the litigation is filed. |
| 00:04:09.06 | Babette McDougall | Peace. I'll just cancel meeting to order. |
| 00:04:11.32 | Steven Woodside | We did. |
| 00:04:11.87 | Babette McDougall | Did we say the Pledge of Allegiance point of order? Don't we begin every council meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance? We don't centralize. Bye. |
| 00:04:22.10 | Allie Baer | Thank you. |
| 00:04:22.17 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. you |
| 00:04:23.05 | Walfred Solorzano | OK. Thank you. If we can, I can talk to you on the side about it and give you a historical outlook. |
| 00:04:28.23 | Babette McDougall | So, |
| 00:04:28.26 | Natalie Netter | So, |
| 00:04:28.33 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 00:04:28.39 | Natalie Netter | I am doing the Pledge of Allegiance before city council meeting. Am I the only one? Thank you. |
| 00:04:34.62 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. |
| 00:04:34.64 | Steven Woodside | Okay, well, what's... |
| 00:04:36.06 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:04:36.92 | Natalie Netter | I was going to say the place of religion and I think it was a good thing. |
| 00:04:37.15 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. When did I use that? Can I weigh in here? Yeah, we did. We did used to do it in person at some point when we were, I mean, you're bringing up, ma'am, I haven't, but during COVID-19. For whatever reason. it was stopped and I don't know why, because I was not, I was, deployed during that time. So, um, yeah, we've been back, but we haven't done the fellowship legions. So we go back. |
| 00:05:03.70 | Steven Woodside | I don't have any issue with adding it back in. It's not on tonight's agenda, so we can't. Okay. You have an issue? Okay. Well, we'll discuss it. We can add it to future agenda items. Thank you for bringing that to our attention. |
| 00:05:16.08 | Babette McDougall | Thank you, sir. |
| 00:05:17.25 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Okay, great. So those are the only announcements from closed session. So let's move on to approval of tonight's agenda. |
| 00:05:32.75 | Jill Hoffman | Ah, I'm trying to pull the engine up. There it is. Okay. |
| 00:05:33.89 | Steven Woodside | We tried to fully enjoy it. |
| 00:05:38.96 | Jill Hoffman | I would request an amendment with regard to the consent calendar that 3C be removed from the consent calendar and that we discuss that in open session. Otherwise, So when we go through the consent calendar items, that's |
| 00:05:49.97 | Steven Woodside | you would make the request to remove it from the consent calendar as per the date. |
| 00:05:53.23 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, I see. Yeah. |
| 00:05:55.49 | Steven Woodside | Okay, but we will motion, but now we know. So when that comes up, I won't ask you if you want to remove anything from the consent calendar. We've been on break for a month, folks. So we're just getting back in the groove of things. Okay, great. So, so we have a motion on the agenda for to approve the agenda. Do we have a second? Okay. uh all in favor say aye aye aye okay motion carries unanimously and i'll go ahead and move on to mayor's announcements and i do have a few announcements this evening there are a couple of uh events this weekend in the city of sausalito and marin city that i wanted to make sure the community is aware of on saturday from two to four there is a safety day at uh mlk park at coloma and it's being hosted by Sausalito Village and by Southern Marin Fire and there'll be a lot of great tables and learnings about disaster preparedness and safety. So I hope you can make it. And then on Sunday from 10 to 12, there's going to be a grandparents day in Demphe Park, for those of you who could attend. And from 12 to four at the 100 lot in Marin City, there's gonna be a Marin City Sausalito Wellness Day. So we have a lot of events coming up this weekend. I also wanted to share that members of the Um, The city staff and council will be receiving an email soon from myself and Councilmember Kelman, as well as our HR director, who has been hard at work on this, about our DEI policy and our new diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging statement, which I'll read here and just talk a little bit about what we have coming forward, because there's been a lot of great work done over the last year to move this forward and bring someone on board to help us with it. So the city of Sausalito is committed to and accountable for promoting an inclusive culture that supports and celebrates the unique attributes and perspectives of all members of the community. We embrace individual uniqueness and value inclusion as a core strength and an essential of our public service mission. This commitment extends across all community segments, including races, ethnicities, age groups, socioeconomic status, religion, gender identities, abilities, and LGBTQIA+. Our city is made stronger by embracing and respecting our differences. So the first thing that we're going to do is invite all of our members of our staff and city council to participate in a DEIB survey. And we'll also be offering DEIB training sessions. And then we'll also have a city employee DEIB work group as well. So there'll be a lot of opportunities for... COB, Elaine McLaughlin, Engagement and I want to thank our new human resources manager for her hard work on this and the city manager and Council member kelman who sits with me on the diversity equity inclusion equity task force. COB, Elaine McLaughlin, And I also wanted to share out that we have been asked to and accepted to be a part of the national League of cities. City Inclusive Entrepreneurship Program. And in partnership with the Sausalito Chamber of Commerce, we will hopefully be able to develop um, a grant program for entrepreneurship, and hopefully we'll bring that forward with EDAC and other committees in the future. But that's exciting and there'll be funding as well for the city through that program. So sorry for so many mayoral announcements, but there's a lot happening in the city at this time, which is great. So I will now go ahead and move on to item two, which is our action minutes from the previous meeting. So could I have a motion to approve our action minutes? |
| 00:09:11.35 | Ian Sobieski | Some of... Some of those changes. |
| 00:09:17.50 | Natalie Netter | You can open for discussion. |
| 00:09:23.18 | Steven Woodside | Did we actually, |
| 00:09:23.35 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. the action minutes? Do we have? Would you like to make a public comment? |
| 00:09:30.36 | Natalie Netter | You're referring to July 18th. Yes. |
| 00:09:32.65 | Walfred Solorzano | you |
| 00:09:32.74 | Steven Woodside | Yes. |
| 00:09:32.95 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:09:32.97 | Steven Woodside | Yes. |
| 00:09:42.54 | Babette McDougall | stepping stool. My name is Babette McDougall. I live at 115 Gerrard Avenue. I'm currently convalescing elsewhere. But I just want to say that because I am convalescing elsewhere geographically, I'm not always able to get on the city's website. And when I do find to get on the city's website, it's not uncommon for me to get bumped off. So it's very difficult for me to rely on the city's website or certain other websites in this region for my main source of information. email has been. mission critical, you might say. So the agenda and the minutes that you attach to the agendas that are in the current weekly news blast, email news blast, apparently don't agree with what you post online. And As a result, I think it gives a very confusing impression about how you are treating public comment. It's always been my experience that if someone is able to file a letter that makes it into your workbooks, that that becomes part of the official record. But I never see that reflected in the minutes. So I guess I must not be looking in the right place. So I would just like to request that we find a consistent protocol that we can all rely on, And that even when there are opposing points of view, that they are fairly represented. I certainly don't agree with everything that you're doing. And I've tried to make that clear. but I don't see it represented. Thank you. |
| 00:11:18.85 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you, Babette. Do we have any further comments on the September, |
| 00:11:24.78 | Damien Morgan | you |
| 00:11:24.84 | Steven Woodside | Do I do? |
| 00:11:24.87 | Damien Morgan | Thank you. Just for the gentleman who bears announcement, |
| 00:11:27.65 | Steven Woodside | Do we generally take public comment on the mayor's announcements? |
| 00:11:30.47 | Walfred Solorzano | If it's an item. Is this the attorney in here? You can comment on that. But I believe it would be consistent with this message. Thank you. |
| 00:11:40.02 | Sergio Rudin | I don't think you guys do, but anytime something is listed on the agenda as its own distinct item, |
| 00:11:46.40 | Chris Zapata | Oh, yeah. |
| 00:11:48.75 | Sergio Rudin | it doesn't hurt to take public comment on it. So, |
| 00:11:53.93 | Steven Woodside | Okay. |
| 00:12:00.71 | Damien Morgan | Good evening. Thank you. Regarding the Marin City event, when Sausalito partners with Marin City, the events are usually always in Marin City. Is it too much to ask that when Marin City and Sausalito has events, you can have them in Sausalito? You know, the idea of some people are more comfortable in some communities and some are uncomfortable in other communities. That's kind of old way of thinking. So have some events of partnership inside Social city limits. just always in Marin City. The idea of Wellness Day is great. It's fine. I'm going to sing the same tune I've been singing regarding partnership and events, The one day events are great, but I'm still going to sing the same song regarding opportunities other than one day of coming together. There has to be other things that we can do as a community, knowing that Marin City has been on the wrong end of segregation and racism, redlining, and all the above. racism, Segregation. Redlining. and more. So does a buck just stop at one day events in Marin City? Thank you. That's a question. |
| 00:13:27.20 | Steven Woodside | I think you do have any further public comment on mayor's announcements? |
| 00:13:30.55 | Unknown | I've seen none. |
| 00:13:31.47 | Steven Woodside | Okay, and just to be sure that we're at our point of order, do we have any further public comments on our action minutes? |
| 00:13:37.67 | Unknown | seen then. |
| 00:13:38.74 | Steven Woodside | Okay, so I had a motion to approve. Did we have a second for the minutes? Second. Okay, all in favor say aye. Thank you. |
| 00:13:45.77 | Joan Cox | Bye. |
| 00:13:46.20 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:13:46.21 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:13:46.52 | Steven Woodside | Bye. Okay, so the next item on the agenda is consent calendar items. Matters listed under the consent calendar are considered routine and non-controversial, require no discussion. are expected to have unanimous council support and may be enacted by the council in one motion in the form listed below. There will be no separate discussion of consent calendar items. However, before the council votes on a motion to a drop to the consent calendar items, council members 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 when public comment will be heard on any item that was removed from the consent calendar. This evening we have item 3a except the library Q4 report for fiscal year 2022 23 3b except the Sausalito bike return monthly report. 3C, approve Memorandum of Understanding with the Sausalito Police Association for the period of July 1, 2023 through June 30. 2025 3D acceptance of the Sausalito Police Department's crime and traffic report calendar. 3E approve an amended agreement with Sausalito bike return. 3F adopt a resolution to approve the transportation authority of Marin funding. 3G, adopt a resolution, authorizing the city manager to sign BCDC permit for improvements at the end of Main Street 3H, adopt a resolution directing staff to move forward with the modified Alexander Beach sewer improvements. 3i receive and file report regarding city capital projects for fiscal year 2324 3j adopt a resolution authorizing city manager to allow compromise or settle claims under the government claims act. 3K authorizes city manager to submit an application for $201,900 in community resilience center planning grant. And 3L authorize the release of a request for proposals, infrastructure modernization, utility savings, and sustainability program. So I'm now going to ask members of the council if there's any items you'd like to remove from the consent calendar before we open it to public comment. I understand council member Hoffman has requested that item 3C be removed. |
| 00:15:45.86 | Jill Hoffman | That's correct. Call out 3B and 3E, which have to do with the Sausalito bike return. I don't want to remove those from the consent calendar, but I do want to make sure that we address this in the next few months about what we're going to do for next season. One of the issues was we waited really late to address this issue until it was April. And, you know, and I just want to make sure that we don't forget about that this year. and that we have it on in certainly in this at least a summary submitted to the City Council, maybe on a consent about the reconciliation between you know, whatever the process was this year, it seems to me that the bike counts are really, really low. And when I'm looking at the, when I'm looking at the report from 3B and also the request on 3E for additional money to fund the program through the end of, this season, it indicates to me that we might need to do a review and maybe change course and adjust. And so that's going to be a bigger discussion about whether or not there's just an RFP or how we want to move going forward. So anyway, I don't want to call those two items out, but I do want to call remove 3C from the agenda. So thank you. Thank you for indulging me on that. |
| 00:16:55.28 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Of course. Would that be a feature agenda item then that we should put on? |
| 00:16:59.59 | Jill Hoffman | I think, yeah, it's going to have to be, I think, a future genital item. I think the reconciliation can come to us before that, though, if we can get it done, right? And so that can come to us probably on the consent calendar so that we can review that. and start thinking about how we want to address bike management downtown next year. |
| 00:17:18.97 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:17:20.59 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:17:20.61 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much. Okay, I'm going to go ahead and open it up for public comment. And I see that is at the stand. So we'll start with her and then city clerk, if you could remind members of the public how they can make public comment at this time, please. |
| 00:17:32.68 | Walfred Solorzano | If you are in person, there are speaker slips over by the TV on that desk and you can fill it out, bring it back over here. If you are on Zoom, then there is a raise hand function. Just click on that and we will call you when it is your turn. |
| 00:17:49.13 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 00:17:51.96 | Babette McDougall | Ms. McDeagle, please. Once again, Babette McDougall, 115 Girard Avenue. I just want to make a general comment. Uh, Director McGowan about this, and he agrees that a general comment is more appropriate than something more specific. When I see this laundry list of monies, and we're not clear, like, for example, 3F, like Frank, and it refers to the Transportation Authority of Marin, which is a fantastic locally based organization, but sadly, it falls under an umbrella known as MTC. I flinch every time someone says NTC now, because I read the contract for that half million dollar block grant for the Bridgeway Improvement. project. which clearly stipulates that the money is a trade. for the citizen's voice that you folks seem to think is okay to sell for a half a million dollars. which I find totally inappropriate. Most of the people that I've spoken to in the town seem to agree. So I just want to call out generally that anything that comes through MTC is that has remotely connected to those same terms and conditions where you're accepting money in exchange for granting them decisioning rights on future development projects of unknown proportions. or location. at the time of said agreement, is absolutely acceptable. to this I mean, it's out of character for this community. The wolf's been knocking at this door of Sausalito for generations before you, before me. Before my grandfather. The idea is to keep the wolf at bay, not to invite them in and accept their money. and then exchange it for citizens' voice. That's absolutely the wrong way to go. We don't trade our democracy for any reason. Thank you. |
| 00:19:47.59 | Steven Woodside | Do we have additional public comment? OK, great. |
| 00:19:55.13 | Damien Morgan | Hold the time. I'm sorry. This is on consent calendar, correct? |
| 00:19:59.17 | Steven Woodside | Yes, exactly. |
| 00:19:59.40 | Damien Morgan | All right. Okay. I read your police report regarding citations year to date. |
| 00:20:01.70 | Steven Woodside | Um, Bye. |
| 00:20:07.86 | Damien Morgan | And that had 177 citations. I imagine that was a six month period. So like one a day. Um, Here I have something that was written in the LA Times, Stop minor traffic stops. They are an excuse to randomly search cars. and can turn deadly. about black people, black folk. What I'm getting at is, What's happening now is these fancy cars in Sausalito, every region in Marin County, Um, Teslas, the Jaguars, Range Rovers, all these different cars are driving around with no front license plate. in Sausalito today. I wasn't in town. And there are many, many, many, many, many cars driving around with no front license plate. My point, they're not being stopped. White people are not being stopped for no front license plate. But this here, these many reports show that that's a tool to stop, harass, and possibly kill Black folks. Black folks have been killed while pulled over for no front license plate. And Sausalito, today, I'll repeat it again, Mill Valley yesterday, there are hundreds of white people. driving around. Right now in your parking lot, down the street, there are dozens of cars with no front license plate driving around. I didn't want to get pulled over. |
| 00:21:42.68 | Damien Morgan | one citation a day While hundreds and hundreds of cars drive through your town, no front lines. But I'm not one to advocate for harassing or pulling people over from minor minor fractions infractions. But again. You guys, you all will not get pulled over. It is true. The numbers show it for no front license plate. |
| 00:22:04.67 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you very much. |
| 00:22:05.98 | Damien Morgan | Thank you. |
| 00:22:08.67 | Steven Woodside | Do you have any further public comment on consent calendar items? |
| 00:22:12.62 | Walfred Solorzano | I've seen none. |
| 00:22:13.75 | Steven Woodside | Okay, I just wanted to make a note about item 3H. I believe there was an area of clarification from the Department of Public Works that was requested. Director McGowan. |
| 00:22:30.01 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, Council. I hope everybody's doing well this evening. As far as 3H, I have a couple of quick things to mention that we did get a email from one of the residents in this particular area. And it's important to note that the residents have paid the city for a sewer conveyance in years past. The exact amount is not known right now. So we did give an inquiry to our consultant that helps us with the tax issues. So we'll find that out, and I will respond specifically to that resident in an email form. And since he actually sent that to all of you, I'll copy you on it just so that everybody has a copy. We're asking council to approve the resolution, which is simply to move forward with the project to work collectively with the city with Sausalito Marin City Sanitary District to include this work. and connecting these properties to the city's system on Alexander Avenue. That's really all there is to it. We're just kind of changing the original scope that we brought to you in the CIP. This cooperative effort will expedite the work. And with some luck, we should have minimal interruptions or disruptions to those properties that are affected. So that's the intent. That's all I wanted to clarify. Thank you. |
| 00:23:47.12 | Steven Woodside | Sure, you can ask a clarifying question, Councilmember Cullen. |
| 00:23:48.80 | Joan Cox | I ask a clarifying question. |
| 00:23:48.90 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 00:23:50.47 | Joan Cox | Another issue raised by the resident was who would maintain the system once the easements were granted, assuming the easements are granted by these residents. Is it his intention to maintain this system? |
| 00:24:03.94 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. At this point, we're not sure if we're going to move forward in that direction. Most of the other common sewer laterals are maintained by private individuals. We don't generally maintain them ourselves from a city's perspective. So at the beginning stage of this process, I would say no. But we like I mentioned, we're at the beginning stage of trying to figure this out so that we could get this all working. |
| 00:24:31.08 | Joan Cox | depending on the Delta between the cost of installing the system, and the amount already paid by these residents. Is it possible to negotiate some accommodation if it turns out that the amount to install is less than the amount already paid by these residents for conveyance |
| 00:24:47.04 | Kevin McGowan | the years. Yeah, that is our intent in order to negotiate with these residents to try to get this system up and running and not have any disruption that will have flow going into the bay. We really don't want that. And so we will, I don't think it'll be me who's negotiating. It'll be somebody else who's more skilled at that to talk to the folks, the property owners themselves. |
| 00:25:09.23 | Joan Cox | Thank you and appreciate all the efforts you've been undertaking for the last several months to get this issue resolved. Thank you. |
| 00:25:16.89 | Steven Woodside | I just want to make sure I open that up for public comment in case there's comments as we discussed the item on 3H. |
| 00:25:22.53 | Walfred Solorzano | We have a Natalie Netter that you want to speak on for the consent. |
| 00:25:26.51 | Steven Woodside | Oh, great. |
| 00:25:30.51 | Natalie Netter | with all of you. Thank you. |
| 00:25:31.79 | Walfred Solorzano | No, this is for the consent items. Did you want to do? |
| 00:25:34.44 | Natalie Netter | Because... at the end. |
| 00:25:35.96 | Walfred Solorzano | Okay, got it. All right. Okay. Public comment. |
| 00:25:37.07 | Natalie Netter | Thank you. |
| 00:25:40.70 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:25:40.73 | Joan Cox | Okay. |
| 00:25:41.07 | Steven Woodside | Certainly. |
| 00:25:41.44 | Joan Cox | public comment item 3h all right so mayor i would like to comment in response to the comments on 3d and 3f So if we need to remove those from consent in order to do so, I'd like to do so. |
| 00:25:53.91 | Steven Woodside | I think we can. |
| 00:25:56.06 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 00:25:56.11 | Joan Cox | Well, |
| 00:25:56.19 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 00:25:56.62 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, I mean, if you want to pull them each. Yeah. |
| 00:25:57.90 | Chris Zapata | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:25:59.32 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. We can. Okay. Let's start with item 3C, which is the police union contract. And I think that the presentation from staff would be coming from the city manager. I know you had some amendments to the report that you were going to share with all of us before we. Waited on the item. |
| 00:26:17.67 | Melissa Blaustein | Could I suggest that we just put those at the end of our regular agenda? Just, I mean, the treasurer's report seems like it would impact the discussion on finances. I don't know what people think, but. |
| 00:26:30.04 | Joan Cox | I'd like to keep 3D and 3F close in proximity while the members who commented on those are still here rather than waiting to the end. But I agree about 3C being heard after the treasurer's report. |
| 00:26:42.01 | Steven Woodside | That's fine. Okay. That's fine. |
| 00:26:43.64 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:26:47.07 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:26:47.09 | Joan Cox | Do you want to start with three? |
| 00:26:47.91 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:26:47.96 | Joan Cox | then? Sure. Okay. I did just want to comment, you know, 3D had statistics for 2019, 2020, 2021. And the statistics quoted were from 2019, not from year to date 2023, which had... 55 citations excluding parking, And I just wanted to speak from personal experience. I drive a van with no front license plate, and I have been sighted. for driving a van with no front license plate. If a white member of the city council can be cited, I think that pretty much anyone in town can be cited. that was my comment on on on item 3D. |
| 00:27:36.75 | Steven Woodside | Is there any other comment on item 3D? Okay, since there's no action except that we approve and accept the report for formal reasons, I think we have to make a motion to approve and accept the report now that the item's been pulled. Okay. |
| 00:27:50.20 | Joan Cox | Thank you. So moved. |
| 00:27:52.80 | Steven Woodside | of a second. |
| 00:27:55.68 | Joan Cox | seconds. |
| 00:27:56.33 | Steven Woodside | Okay, all in favor. |
| 00:27:57.73 | Joan Cox | Bye. |
| 00:27:58.38 | Steven Woodside | Okay. And then the three F was the next item that you wanted to pull? |
| 00:28:01.62 | Joan Cox | Yes, thank you. 3F concerned the TAM funding agreement. I read the entire funding agreement as well as the enabling resolution and nowhere in the funding agreement or the enabling resolution did I see any abdication by the city of its powers, decisional powers. In fact, the resolution specifically that conveys to the public works director the disposition of the grant funding received. |
| 00:28:36.27 | Steven Woodside | Okay, thank you for that. Do we have any further comments on that item? Okay, so then we have to make a motion to approve the item and- |
| 00:28:43.24 | Joan Cox | So moved. |
| 00:28:44.08 | Steven Woodside | Okay? Thank you. Okay, and now before we just, we need to make a motion to approve the consent calendar with items 3H, 3C, and 3D removed. Did we take a vote on 3F? We just had a vote. Okay, all in favor. |
| 00:29:00.11 | Joan Cox | Bye. |
| 00:29:03.34 | Walfred Solorzano | Just for clarification, did we vote for the consent calendar right there or just 3F? No, just 3F. Got it right. |
| 00:29:07.37 | Steven Woodside | No, just react. Okay. So we'll move item three C to the end and then let's approve the consent calendar barring items three C three D and. |
| 00:29:18.04 | Jill Hoffman | 3. |
| 00:29:18.83 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:29:18.83 | Joan Cox | So moved. |
| 00:29:18.96 | Jill Hoffman | So moved. Do you have a second? Second, except I think 3C now becomes 5D, business item 5D. Yeah, we're moving it. |
| 00:29:27.97 | Steven Woodside | business item 5d that's correct thank you exactly yes thank you for that i second okay thank you very much so next item on the agenda is okay all in favor |
| 00:29:38.17 | Joan Cox | Bye. Bye. Thank you. |
| 00:29:40.80 | Steven Woodside | Okay, now we'll move on to item four, which is public hearing items of which there are none so we'll move to item five, which is business items. So our first item on the agenda is 5A and then as an update on our section 115 trust so I believe we're hearing from the city manager and Chad as well as Ryan Acasio who's our parse consultant. |
| 00:30:00.88 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, thank you, Mayor and Council and Public. This is something that was put in place by the City Council in prior years, I believe it's 2015, where the city was an early adopter of setting aside money in a protected, restricted fund called the 115 Trust. and our administrator of that program, PARS, is here tonight to talk about it with our finance director. So at this point, I'd like to ask Chad to introduce the PARS people and comment on what he knows about this particular program and how it relates to Sausalito's finances and what we're trying to do to make a sustainable government and plan for the future with respect to pension costs. Chad? |
| 00:30:41.52 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes. So... Tonight we have Ryan Acasio, from PARS and Andrew Brown from Highmark Capital. They are here to discuss the Section 115 Trust and the performance of that fund over the last several years. that we've been investing in that. As of the end of the balance sheet date of the fiscal year end, 630, the city of Sausalito has invested $5.4 million within the PARS frost account. for future pension and OPEB obligations. The purpose of this trust is really to segregate those assets and grow those assets until they are needed down the road or in the future to help pay for those larger. UAL costs. or the CalPERS system. With that being said, I'm going to turn it over to Ryan and Andrew to give an update on our Section 115 trust. |
| 00:31:32.68 | Ryan Acasio | Great, well, thank you very much. Good evening, Madam Mayor, members of the council. Again, my name is Ryan Acasio. I'm a senior vice president with PARS, and this evening I'm here to present the update on the city's 115 trust Um, I believe you should have received a copy of the presentation that's going to be shared on the screen. I think with that, go through. Advance to the next couple of slides, please. |
| 00:32:09.77 | Ryan Acasio | Okay, yeah, so just as a reminder of who the PARS 115 Trust Team made up of three components, PARS, public agency retirement services, as our name implies, we administer retirement programs such as this 115 trust, In this arrangement, we serve as the central point of contact. with ongoing record keeping that includes not only processing contributions and disbursements when those come in, but also behind the scenes monitor any plan compliance. So any changes with regard to IRS changes or GASB or state government code, handled that. The trustee U.S. Bank They are tasked with safeguarding the plan assets and serve as the plan fiduciary. and are the custodian of the assets. So in this arrangement, PARS does not touch or handle any of the assets or the money. We simply do the administration. And the investment management is handled by Highmark Capital Management. Andrew Brown will be speaking shortly with regard to the investment selection of the city, but they use open architecture with their investments and have both active and passive platforms out. available. Next slide, please. And then today we'll talk about this 115 combination trust unique to PARS where we have the ability to administer 115 program. to fund four liabilities for both pension. and OPEB, so in lieu of rising This is a way for the city to get the money to get the money. to manage those assets locally. and then also set aside on the OPEB side for retirement health. uh, expenses. you're able to do that, so we'll cover that shortly. And the next slide, please. And then again, this is just an illustration of what that combination trust looks like. illustrated by these two separate buckets. one for OPEB, one for pension. These assets cannot be commingled. We do separate sub accounting for that. Approximately 1.85 million in OPEB, 3.62 in pension. flexible investing on both sides. You have access to these at any time, as long as it's used for those specific liabilities or expenses. Next slide, please. And just a brief summary of the OPEB side. This was started in March of 2015. with the city manager as a planet administrator and the current investment selection, the moderately conservative index plus Again, Andrew Brown from Highmark will be providing information on that strategy and how it's done. As this opened in 2015, there was an initial contribution made of about 400,000 Total contributions to date about 1.65 million. And the account balance as of July 2023, 1.8 million Next slide, please. And then just a graphical representation of the account history since inception. So again, that 400,000 initial contribution. and the plan year ending 2015. subsequent contributions in years, ranging from about a little over 100,000 upwards to just shy of about 400,000, with the last contribution coming in 2022 of about 300,000. Again, the assets as of July 31st, $1.8 million. And then the next five days. Next couple of slides, just showing the actuarial results kind of helps guide the direction of the OPEB portion. where you are, this is a snapshot of the plan as of the specific date, in this case, June 30, 2021, about 139 participants broken out doing actives about 62 and 77 retirees. And then the next slide shows more specific information regarding OPEB liability and the discount rate used. And this is where the city can align with their investments and their particular risk tolerance to try to achieve this, in this case, the discount rate of 4.55%. So as of June 30, 2021, the total OPEB liability was about 7 million. So, the assets were about 1.7 at that point. And the difference is about 5.2 million. So, a funded ratio. Just the assets to liabilities of about 25%. a snapshot as of June 30, 2021. If the city has a more up-to-date, you know, we can update the slide as well. Next slide, please. And then a quick summary of the pension program, again, started in 2015, similarly invested in a moderately conservative index plus. account, initial contribution of about $650,000 and total contributions to date as of July 31st. Um, 3.3 million. and the account balance as of July 31st, $3.6 million. And next slide, please. And then again, similarly, just a graphical representation of the history to date. You know, contributions submitted looks like almost every year or every other year. with the notable views exceptions. No disbursements to date. Again, 3.6 million as of July 31st, 2023. And this next slide, just the... Pension funding status, again, this is a snapshot of the city's CalPERS pension. plan as of June 30th, 2021. We like to show just the comparison of the previous year where the liability went up slightly from about $1.9 million to $1.5 million. 114 million. Assets went up to about just shy of 90 million, funded ratio about 78. percent. I think what you can note here is despite the assets increasing Um, and the funding ratio increasing as well, the employer contribution the Volatility associated with the retirement system, and this is where, you know, by setting assets aside in a 115 trust, the city has local control of those prior to sending it to the retirement system. and can try to sort of mitigate some of that pension rate volatility. With that, I will turn it over to Andrew Brown. and he can give his Uh, review on the investments. |
| 00:38:44.21 | Andrew Brown | All right, thanks, Ryan. I think it's two slides forward, please. |
| 00:38:44.31 | Ryan Acasio | All right. |
| 00:38:50.30 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, three. One more. Thanks. Good evening, Madam Mayor, City Council. My name is Andrew Brown. I'm a Director of Investments with Highmark Capital Management I have been the portfolio manager for both the OPEB plan and the 115 Trust since day one. And it's good to be back to present in front of you My presentation will cover three topics. First off, an economic and market forecast. Secondly, I'll touch on performance. And thirdly, I'll review the positioning for the plan as of most recent month end. In looking at your agenda, it looks like you're going to adjourn at roughly 10.15 or sometime around then. So I'm going to try to give you the 45 second version of our economic forecast here on page 15. You know, we ended the year thinking that we would see a recession in the United States economy. You can see that from our GDP forecast at minus 0.4 to plus 0.4 to plus 0.4%. We're not going to see a recession this year. When all is said and done at the end of the year, we're probably going to see GDP growth of around one and a half percent. We did think we're going to have a recession because the Fed raised rates so aggressively last year. And we thought that that would impact the economy and slow the economy this calendar year. He hasn't done it yet. Probably we'll do it next year. So right now, yeah, we stand by our number because it's our published number. But, yeah, we're not going to see a recession this year. We probably will see S&P 500 earnings slow a bit. 195 to 205 indicates, I don't know, 5% or slow decline year over year. We might be right around 205, so I'm not giving up hope that we get that economic stat wrong. Unemployment, unemployment is now 3.8%. it could creep up to maybe right around 4.5 to, well, it won't be 5.2%, but it might creep near that 4.5% level As the economy slows down, we may see a pickup in unemployment. And in fact, last month's unemployment went from 3.5% to 3.8%. So maybe the trend is beginning to be a little bit more unfavorable there. Yeah. Thank you. Corp ECE inflation inflation has come down significantly over the last 18 months. We put forth a 3.3 to 3.8% inflation forecast for Corp ECE. Right now it's at 4.2%. So yeah, I think that there's a fair chance that we will get this right. And that's important because the federal reserves looking at inflation, looking at unemployment or employment said differently and trying to balance the two. Right now, by our accounts, we think the Fed has done this year. So that 5.25% Fed funds target the high end of our range. We'll stand by that. We think the Fed's done for calendar year 2023. And if we're right about a recession being booked out in 2024, we could very well see the Fed starting to cut interest rates next year. So short summary, our prediction for a recession is likely to be wrong. We look like we'll probably book about one and a half percent growth this year, but we think the economy will slow in 2024. Next page, please. You know, in thinking about this presentation, typically I focus on the one-year column because either meetings with staff or council, typically it's done once a year. up. I'm happy to address any time period on this page, especially My fingerprints are on every number here as I've been the portfolio manager. And as so much as I am going to focus on the one year number, I'd like to let you know that this is for the moderately conservative pool that you're invested in. And this pool is roughly a 30% stock, 70% bond type of asset allocation. You'll see black colored font and you'll see light brown shaded font on this page. The black colored font would be investment returns for the investment pool. The lighter brown shaded font is representative of some type of benchmark. With respect to the investments, almost all of the investments are in index-based investments, so you should see the investment return pretty close to the underlying benchmark. I'll start with the first line item cash equivalence, which is just money market. that's going to be a little bit. Mike Wilberg, Money Market is really the beneficiary of the Fed raising rates over 500 basis points over the last 1516 months. Mike Wilberg, When we look at the last 12 months money market returns 3.96% and in fact right now our money market generates a 5.2% yield so so cash returns have been very solid over the last 12 months. Thank you. The flip side, unfortunately, of the Fed raising rates so aggressively over the last 15 months is found on row three, where fixed income returns minus 2.58% return. So here we have... we still have a little bit of a hole to climb out of with respect to 2022. And this is important because with respect to a moderately conservative investment platform, two thirds of the portfolio is invested in fixed income. So Two thirds of the portfolio is still facing that headwind of a minus 2.5% of last 12 months. on. Sorry, thank you for your indulgence. I feel I've been bearing the lead, really, with respect to the investment returns of, you know, the headline should be the equities. The equities at 10.5% over the last 12 months, we've definitely seen a strong rally in the equity markets. |
| 00:44:32.64 | Natalie Netter | is, you know, Thank you. |
| 00:44:42.19 | Andrew Brown | hasn't been necessarily due to earnings. It's more so just the multiple has expanded. But yeah, stocks have generated a 10.5% rate of return over the last 12 months. If we put it all together, yeah, we're slightly in the black over the last 12 months at a 1.2% rate of return And I'm looking at the bottom line, the last row on this exhibit, a third column over from the left when I get that 1.2%. Thank you. If you look just the column over to the left of that, the seven-month return, which is the year-to-date period, Yeah, 6.2%. Obviously, all the gains from the last 12 months have been reaped in the first seven months of this year. So quick summary, 1.2% total rate of return for the last 12 months. Cash has offered a little bit of contribution, but it's really been stocks that have been doing the heavy lifting. Next page, please. |
| 00:45:46.62 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, with respect to moderately conservative, it just relates to an asset allocation policy where, and it's reflected at the top of this page or the middle column, where equities 20 to 40% is our policy strategic range for stocks. they're in the middle of the page fixed income or bonds, 50 to 80%. And cash can range from 0% to 20%. Our current allocation is depicted in the far right-hand column. where stocks are currently at 29%. the fixed income would be 66%. And then cash money market is at a 5% allocation. And I probably should have pointed out, and I apologize for this, that both the 115 Pension Trust as well as the OPEB Trust are invested in the exact same pool, hence $1. They both generated the exact same return and have this exact same asset allocation. So for efficiencies, we just created one exhibit for investment returns and asset allocation, but it does cover both plans that we're invested in. You want to see the question? |
| 00:46:57.13 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:46:57.16 | Natalie Netter | in the last age. You want to speak to those questions? |
| 00:46:57.84 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:46:58.16 | Andrew Brown | Thank you. If you want us to do that. |
| 00:46:59.02 | Melissa Blaustein | to say the last time. |
| 00:46:59.52 | Andrew Brown | Thank you. |
| 00:46:59.61 | Natalie Netter | I'm sorry. |
| 00:46:59.62 | Andrew Brown | Yes. |
| 00:46:59.64 | Natalie Netter | Thank you. |
| 00:46:59.69 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Yeah. Just just the- You want to save us to save our questions to the end or ask them as we come along on these slides. |
| 00:47:00.37 | Andrew Brown | You're going to say it. |
| 00:47:06.93 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, but actually I'm pretty much done. I was just gonna point out that the last page is just the index fund returns for the plan that we're invested in. So with that, it is a perfect time to field some questions. |
| 00:47:23.40 | Steven Woodside | Okay, so I guess we'll start with the vice mayor since you clearly have some questions. Go ahead, vice mayor, so we have to keep. |
| 00:47:27.38 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you very much, Mayor. I was wondering to what extent the fixed paper portion of the portfolio, which makes up two-thirds of it, was exposed by having long-term paper that was exposed to the interest rate hike and whether on a nominal basis you're carrying a lot of paper losses in that section of the portfolio that haven't shown up yet. |
| 00:47:48.61 | Andrew Brown | Ah, great question. Could I ask the person navigating to go to the previous page? I think it's probably going to be page 17. Yeah, and let's take a look at the middle part of the holdings page here. So we have four holdings within fixed income. Your question focuses on longer dated investments. The longest dated investment vehicle that we have would be under the fixed income section, the second row from the top there. iShares Core US Aggregate Bond ETF. So that's going to have a duration of currently about 6.4 years. It is our longest dated position It wouldn't be what I would classify as longer dated, you know, treasury. It's not like, you know, 10 year, 30 year positions, but in case, but in terms of that minus two, 2% in change decline over the last 12 months. Thank you. |
| 00:48:44.49 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:48:44.67 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, that's going to be the lion's share of the decline for attribution for fixed income in that one line item there. |
| 00:48:44.69 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:48:54.78 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, I have a bunch of questions, but let me just ask two and then turn it over to other people. How does your performance compare to CalPERS? |
| 00:49:04.40 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, so this is a 30% stock, 70% bond portfolio, and it's index-based. So in fairness to my friends in Sacramento, it's an apple and oranges proposition if you're gonna compare it to the main pension plan. Yes, they do have OPEB type of investments. And we do have... We do have other asset allocation models that are a better uh, a comparative tool of us versus them. They didn't have a very good year. over the last 12 months, they kind of stub their toe primarily in real estate. So when we compare our returns versus our 60-40 portfolio versus their 60-40 portfolio, we are doing much better over almost all time periods, but especially over the last 12 months. |
| 00:50:04.37 | Melissa Blaustein | I guess maybe the same question in a different way. Did you ever create a correlation coefficient of your portfolio performance versus the CalPERS performance? And if so, are you highly correlated or highly uncorrelated to CalPERS? |
| 00:50:04.59 | Andrew Brown | Maybe you can ask. |
| 00:50:19.54 | Andrew Brown | Uh, the, the, the easy answer is no, we've never done a correlation coefficient, um, us versus them. No, for, for either the index based platform, which is what you're invested in or the, uh, the active platform, which is what we also, which is what we also offer our, our clients. |
| 00:50:40.59 | Steven Woodside | Just to add on there, actually, I mean, because I was curious about the comparisons to CalPERS as well, since our pension obligations are highly dependent on the performance of that fund. And it looks like in June, they announced that they actually had 5.8% returns. Whereas last year they had a negative. 6.1% returns, although they do have a 6.8% discount rate. So that's actually a lot more high performing than 1.75%. But with the discount rate, it's at 72% overall performance. So I don't know if a coefficient would be helpful for us. I mean, they have a much more varied portfolio type. If you look at their investments in private and public equity versus their investments in the strong portfolio. And I think, and please tell me if you agree with this, I would love your perspective on this as our financial advisor. But one of the biggest issues from what I understand with CalPERS is that they often make much riskier investments than you make or that we're inclined or able to make as a public entity in our own OPEB and Section 115 trust. Is that correct? |
| 00:51:38.05 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, a lot of things going on in that statement and interweaved a couple of questions in there. Yeah, so comparing our 30% stocks, 70% bond court, |
| 00:51:45.45 | Natalie Netter | Yeah, a lot of questions. |
| 00:51:45.98 | Eva | I'm sorry. |
| 00:51:48.12 | Andrew Brown | That's great. Um, our 30, 70 allocation versus their underlying pension plan that did make 5% and some change. they should make more because they're taking a whole lot more risk. Because, and they should. So no harm, no foul there because, you know, they're trying to generate six and three quarters. My 30% stock 70% bond portfolio probably well not probably we think it's probably going to target a 5.3% rate of return so so we're aiming lower, so we would expect calipers to generate a little bit higher rate of return. That said, a 5% and change portfolio return for them last fiscal year is probably a little bit less than what they would expect. to generate. But yeah, I mean, given that that portfolio probably has 70% ish, in equity, and you said it, you know, hedge fund, private equity sort of investments. Those are riskier type of investments. giving it a whole lot more of a higher expected rate of return |
| 00:52:50.27 | Ryan Acasio | Thank you. |
| 00:52:54.52 | Andrew Brown | So, This would not be the best portfolio to compare against, but We do have more aggressive allocations that we could compare against. And our more aggressive allocations did pretty well last year. |
| 00:53:11.20 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, the reason that I'm Pressing is just given that so much of our pension obligations are reliant on how CalPERS perform. So it's helpful for us when we're making decisions about our investments to have predictions around how helpers might do so given that and sorry for continuing to ask you about CalPERS, but given that the 2023 year won't end in a recession, despite what all of the economists predicted, do you think that that it looks like it'll be better year for CalPERS and then our overall financial picture will do better. Maybe this is a question for Chad, but I think it's relevant when we make an assessment of how our portfolio is doing. |
| 00:53:44.78 | Andrew Brown | It might be a better question for Chad, but I tell you what, I mean, even though it's disappointing showing you about a minus 2.5% run rate for the last 12 months on bonds, gosh, with yields on most of our fixed income investments at 5%, and if the Fed is gonna cut rates next year, I feel pretty good about having a 30% stock 70% bond portfolio, in other words, that 70% in fixed income, I would feel very strongly about it. But one thing that, you know, rather than talk about CalPERS so much, and I know that obviously their returns are important for what the city does, but, you know, just maybe as a homework assignment for you all, think about the underlying investment objective or just the objective for the 115 trust. Because right now you've booked about 3.6 million in assets. And that pretty much matches one year of pension expense. whatever CalPERS does. And so, you know, I guess maybe the homework assignment that I would ask you guys to think about it and maybe, you know, visa be Chad give me an answer if you could. Is you know what is the time horizon that you foresee needing these funds if that time horizon is short, ie one to two years, maybe three. maybe we want to consider getting a little bit more conservative. If however you think that you can have a four, five, six year horizon or longer, Um, You know, holding the course on a 30% stock, 70% bond portfolio might be appropriate, or maybe even entertaining, taking a little bit more risk. Um, And I know that there's some dynamics in what I just said there, Yeah, that's the main thing that I wanted to just throw out there. And yeah, I don't expect an answer tonight. Like I said, I know you have to go to 1015 or longer, but I'd be interested in some feedback on that in the weeks to follow. |
| 00:55:34.07 | Steven Woodside | I've been, |
| 00:55:37.62 | Steven Woodside | Okay, and then I have one more question, then I'll pass it to Councilmember Cox and then Councilmember Kelman and then back to the vice mayor because we have a number of questions. But I was just wondering about your professional investment opinion on 70% in bonds, given the Fed's reliance on quantitative easing and the lack of a recession. Do you think that that's going to impact how bonds perform and should we shift more funds? to a stock portfolio or are you not concerned about the performance of bonds in the continued reliance on that economic program? |
| 00:56:01.90 | Andrew Brown | They're doing tightening now. Knock on wood and I just knocked on it. |
| 00:56:04.50 | Steven Woodside | Now come what? |
| 00:56:07.01 | Andrew Brown | QE might be in the rearview mirror. I think it's... I'm glad I said what I said a second ago, a 3070 portfolio for your 115 trust. I think it's predicated on time horizon. Yes, what the Fed does is so important, but it's the time horizon of the plan. As far as OPEB goes, you're 25% funded. you're in the third inning of this engagement. you certainly could embrace more risk, my opinion. I know working with Charlie Francis, I don't know, eight, nine years ago and counsel at that time, counsel plus Charlie were very conservative. And so they didn't want to take a whole lot of risk. That being said, eight years later, you're 25% funded. Third inning, you can certainly embrace an increase in equity allocation, in my opinion. And it would be very appropriate for the OPIP plan. |
| 00:57:06.72 | Steven Woodside | Thank you for that. Okay. So we'll go to Councilmember Cox and then Councilmember Kelman. |
| 00:57:10.14 | Joan Cox | Bethany Usher, And thank you for your presentation and thank you for that last comment, because one of my questions was why are the pension and OPEC funds invested in an identical manner, given their goals and longevity are different. |
| 00:57:27.46 | Andrew Brown | Fair question. And so, yeah, I think I answered it a second ago, but just OPEB is a multi-decade horizon period of time. It gives you the opportunity to take more risk doesn't mean you have to accept more risk And I think in the onset of the plan eight years ago, Council plus finance manager wanted to maybe put their shins in the water rather than diving in the water. water. And then Alternatively, Pynchon, the time horizon was a little less certain. And so given the uncertainty of the time horizon, in other words, city might need assets sooner rather than later. Um, a conservative bent was applied at that time as well. |
| 00:58:18.45 | Joan Cox | I, your chart shows that your bonds fixed income are typically, the range is 50 to 80%. And so- That's cool. and we're at 66%. despite the fact that it's not just this past year that was a negative 2.58, The three-year trend is at a negative 3.72. And since inception, the yield is only 1.05. compared to, right. |
| 00:58:45.10 | Natalie Netter | That's right. |
| 00:58:46.42 | Joan Cox | Yeah. And so my question is, why are we still staying at 66%, why are we not? at the lower range when you compare performance since inception, you're at 1%. there and you're at eight you know, nearly 9% in equities. |
| 00:59:09.35 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, absolutely. I mean, and so when you look at that, that far right hand column on the performance, cash is barely above 1%. Bonds. barely above 1%. And equities at 8.7%. When we think about our 20 to 30 year horizon, We we make the call that fixed income should get 4.25%, maybe 4.5%, maybe slightly more than 4.5%. Right. So that's that's future looking. We look at the last eight years. Yeah, I mean, the numbers that you recited are what we have to show. Why do we have that? Well, we've had it. You know, most of that period of time has been a low interest rate environment where income from fixed income has been paltry and measly. And then you top that off on with 2022, when the Fed raises rates almost 5% and fixed income generates a minus 13% return last year. that creates quite the hole to climb out of. We're doing it slowly. What do we have, 2.2% for the first seven months of this year? But when we, to your question, your underlying question, why do you have 66, 67% in bonds? It's the go forward forecast where fixed income is generating a nice healthy coupon of 5% And if the Fed cuts rates, then yeah, we're going to be quickly climbing out of that hole that 2022 delivered to us. So it's more forward looking than backwards looking. But yeah, we can't deny what's happened over the last eight years for fixed income. |
| 01:00:46.09 | Joan Cox | And then my last question is you said CalPERS aims at six and three quarters return. Um, What is your goal? Your performance since inception eight years ago is three and a half. What is your goal? |
| 01:01:01.37 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, so we would put forth for OPEB, well, I guess OPEB is in the same plan, but OPEB with a 20 to 30 year horizon, moderately conservative, 30 percent stock, 70 percent bond, 5.3 percent long term estimated return. And what are actual assumption or that's what we would offer the actuary. |
| 01:01:18.31 | Joan Cox | I'm sorry. |
| 01:01:23.18 | Joan Cox | And pension, your goal was also 5.3% long-term? |
| 01:01:28.40 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, you know, pension, we don't necessarily offer a pension it, an expected rate of return for a 115 pension trust But if the client said, hey, well, what could we expect to get if we were in this for 10, 15, 20 years, we would give the same number for OPEB. I mean, 115 trust is a relatively new animal. And I don't think we have any client at all that's been in this plan or any plan since over six years. But a 30 stock, 70 bond portfolio, we would say 5.3 over multi-decade. period of time. |
| 01:02:08.56 | Joan Cox | But we've been in eight years, which is two years short of a decade. And we're at 3.5. So what are you performing based on what you would expect? |
| 01:02:12.75 | Andrew Brown | Yeah. |
| 01:02:15.28 | Natalie Netter | Yeah. |
| 01:02:20.05 | Andrew Brown | You have underperformed a 5.3% bogey with all the fingerprints on fixed income and the cash money market returns. Stocks have done what they should have done. Bonds haven't. |
| 01:02:31.99 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 01:02:33.59 | Joan Cox | I just am wondering if there's an opportunity to make a course correction, since we're obviously underperforming based on your goals. I don't think there's much opportunity in the pension, because we need to use that money in 2026, 2027 to smooth our obligations as the pension obligations reach their zenith. um, Thank you. But I'm encouraged to hear that we're only in the third inning for OPEB, and I wonder what is available to do to course correct there. |
| 01:03:08.45 | Andrew Brown | Yes, we have three investment options that would be, quote unquote, a little bit more aggressive to a lot more aggressive than the moderately conservative. Our moderate strategy would target a 50-50 allocation, 50% stocks, 50% bonds. We have something called balanced, which would be kind of the traditional 60-40. allocation, 60% stocks, 40% bonds. And then we have some capital appreciation, which typically our return stream from capital appreciation, that's the one that maybe we compare a little bit more readily to CalPERS's pension plan. Our capital appreciation is 75% stocks, 25% bonds. Um, given a multi-decade horizon, as I said, the third inning, I think one can make an argument for any one of those three as a possible destination for the OPEB plan to be managed on a go-forward basis. |
| 01:04:02.89 | Joan Cox | So I'm not suggesting that we reallocate now, given that we're expecting a recession next year and a tightening that will likely benefit bonds. But what was missing for me from this report was a recommended path forward based on the underperformance over the last eight years. |
| 01:04:21.81 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, I don't think I would make a recommendation without talking to my client first and getting a feel as to their risk tolerance and and investment objectives. But I have a better vibe now. |
| 01:04:21.82 | Joan Cox | Yeah, I don't |
| 01:04:35.51 | Steven Woodside | Great. Councilmember Kelman. |
| 01:04:38.31 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Andrew, and thank you for being so agile on your feet. I think what maybe you're seeing is there is a need to perhaps provide a summary slide or two that touches on these questions. We're working really hard up here to connect the dots, but basic things like what is the trust's purpose? Is it capital preservation? Is it generating income? Is it achieving long term growth? I think that needs to be established at the outset. And maybe that's the question for us. But assuming you have a recommendation, we'd like to hear that. You've mentioned time horizon multiple times. I don't see the time horizon in this document. So if we talk about bonds and volatility in the face of inflation and a fixed income asset, That all depends on time horizon, and I have no idea what time horizon we're looking at. So it's really hard for me to really thoroughly evaluate this presentation. Risk tolerance, you just mentioned that. Great segue. So the only place I see that is that first sheet. It tells me the current investment strategy is moderately conservative, index plus. I'd love to see some recommendations around that risk tolerance so then we can understand whether higher bond allocation may be appropriate based on underperforming assets. Income needs, you mentioned that earlier. I like to see that on a very basic layperson's understanding. Chad does a really great job for us on giving us, not quite cheat sheets, but very easy ways to evaluate it and connect the dots. Talked a little bit about recession and inflation. It's obviously going to impact whether or not we overinvest in bonds or not. What's the inflation protection mechanism built into the 115 trust? And then what's your diversification based on what's happening in the market with NPLUS against CalPERS? I'd also, as a lawyer, would like to see any insight, if there's any recent changes or updates in CalPERS trust laws that are coming down the pipeline, either proposed in assembly or in the legislature, or something that we should be aware of on the horizon, depending of course on what time horizon we decide to go with. So I'm just, I think that's sort of what I'm hearing for my colleagues and I would love to see two slides in here that just all of those, so that I can better understand even a slide like this. Sure. Part of my question is, are you hoping to get that feedback from us tonight? Or is that something you will be recommending to us? |
| 01:06:49.97 | Natalie Netter | It's part of my question. |
| 01:06:51.20 | Andrew Brown | Thank you. |
| 01:06:58.41 | Andrew Brown | Yeah, I think maybe the next best step might be sitting down with a staff, Chad, or a team of Chad's and working through that. |
| 01:07:11.35 | Ian Sobieski | Great. Thank you, Andrew. Nice, Mary. Keep it up. |
| 01:07:14.14 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, just to reiterate that point, I think you're getting some feedback from Councilmembers Cox and Kelman that they'd probably like to see this again, at least in a report form that includes some options and some thinking that's laid out. So at least a conscious choice can be made. I will say I'm not surprised at all of the questions. return given that 60-40 mix in a zero interest rate environment over this time. So that seems like a very expected return given the actual performance of bonds in this period of time. And I'm actually only glad we're not more caught with long-term exposure as Silicon Valley Bank is not around because they were too exposed to long-term paper. So in some sense, we dodged a bullet on that one. So personally, I'm not looking for you to beat CalPERS and my questions weren't encouraging you to try to do so. Of course, that'd be nice. What I'm interested in though is whether you're correlated to CalPERS or not. It does... None of us any good in our financial planning if we open a Schwab account and a Fidelity account and we buy $1,000 of Apple in one account and $1,000 of Apple in another account. It's the same stock in different accounts. So we really want to be uncorrelated. And ideally, both accounts would grow at a great return. And that is, of course, as you know, possible. So I would, in part of your report, really be interested in the degree to which a portfolio can be created that's uncorrelated with CalPERS, whereas the mayor pointed out our most of our eggs are in that basket. So, In terms of an insurance policy, it'd be nice to have a financial, this other pot of money, this other pot of investments that we control that has a highest possible expected rate of return, perhaps a little more risk, as you say, but also that we could expect to be uncorrelated with with, uh, toppers over a range of Monte Carlo simulations. Thanks. |
| 01:09:11.11 | Jill Hoffman | Can that some more happen? So I think, and Chad, you can chime in here too, but I think it's important to remember the genesis of the 115 Trust and why we have it. The 115 trust is in response to CalPERS not meeting the discount rate over a period of years, resulted in and the compounding of the interest on that failure of cowpers to meet their projected return rate, which we're calling a discount rate. Um, the city of Sausalito's response for that, as are all participants in CalPERS. So We started in 2008 with the first year they missed the discount rate. That compounded annually. And so, and then every year they missed the discount rate that was added to our, I might want to call it debt, our failure to pay down that discount rate that we are unfunded liability. resulting from the failure to meet discount rate, resulted in our ballooning unfunded liability, which is now at about 30 million, in addition to our regular pension payments. So. I think when, I can't remember, I think it was Andrew said, look, it's apples and oranges. When you talk about CalPERS and what we're trying to do with our 115 trust, What CalPERS discount rate or their rate of return for civilians who don't speak government you know, government funding talk. Um, you know, their projected rate actually this year was 6.8%. It looks like I just looked it up. Um, And they failed to meet that, the return rate this year for 2023 for CalPERS looks like it's 5.3%. So that delta of CalPERS failing to meet their 6.8% return rate. results in a debt, if you will, an additional debt for Sausalito for whatever that percentage rate is compared to the overall pension liability. for our current and former employees here in Sausalito. So, you know, when you're talking about rates of return and investments, like, you know, it is apples and oranges. CalPERS discount rate has nothing to do with what we're trying to do with our pension debt. 115 Trust accept that CalPERS failure to meet their stated discount rate continually adds to our debt. So, you know, Whatever they're doing with the CalPERS investment funds has nothing to do with what we're trying to do with our 115 trust. The 115 trust was set up so that we could draw on that to make payments for this ballooning pension debt that we're going to see in the next, from 2007, I think, to 2019. 20 sorry sorry 20 yeah 27 to 32 2032 so there's this and and chat has a knife graph of that, but you know you can see how our payments balloon. The idea was that we pull on our 115 trust as a savings account, basically a segregated savings account, so that we can, so that that debt that is coming due on the order of millions of dollars in these years. Karen Hollweg, Does not overwhelm and bankrupt the city of Sausalito so that that's the purpose that the 115 trust was set up for now. Karen Hollweg, The questions that we've had tonight about what's our rate of return on the 115 trust valid questions are we appropriately invested. are we comfortable with increasing the risk? What I would find interesting, and again, I think Chad might have shown me this earlier today, but is, you know, in 2021, it looked pretty good. Like all the investments, everybody's investments look pretty good. They look pretty bad in 2022. You know, so you have this volatility, right? So the idea for conservative investments is to maintain stability and some return on investment, but not absorb the risk that we've seen in the past few years, because, you know, that's the point of segregating these funds. I'm not saying I'm not interested in finding out, you know, in adjusting our investment strategy. I'm just saying, It's important to look at it in that context as we move forward and make decisions. Yeah, I agree. The OPEB, we could probably get more aggressive with that. with that fund, that particular fund, with the pension fund. you know, um, You know, I, again, I'm interested in everybody's ideas and your professional investor, you know, advisors ideas about how to increase the return. without a corresponding increase in risk, which I know is always what you're looking at, right? In investing and nobody has a crystal ball and can you know, conclusively see what's going to happen in the future. So That's why we rely on professionals to help guide us in this. So I think... It seems like we're sort of clear on what we're looking at, right? We would like to engage in looking at can we increase returns without too much increasing risk, especially on the 115 trust with the OPED. You know, we'd be interested in understanding how we might more aggressively invest that to increase the returns into the fourth quarter. |
| 01:14:22.90 | Steven Woodside | Did you have a question, too? Um, I think it's good. We're kind of all giving comment as we give our questions. So I just, isn't that right? |
| 01:14:29.73 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I knew it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Anyway, yeah, Chad, you disagree with anybody and disagree with that summary? |
| 01:14:39.77 | Steven Woodside | I wholeheartedly agree. Okay, well, I'm going to open it up to public comment, and then we'll bring it back up here for the council's additional recommendations or comment as well. |
| 01:14:51.73 | Walfred Solorzano | And... If anybody would like to make public comment on Zoom, you can use the raise hand function. See none in house, see none on Zoom. |
| 01:15:02.13 | Steven Woodside | I'm quite shocked that there's no comment on this. Okay, I'll go ahead and close public comment at this time. And do we have additional, I think that our consensus is quite clear and I appreciate Councilmember Hoffman did a good job there, I think of summing up much of what we all agree on in terms of direction, but I want to make sure everyone has a chance to weigh in. Councilmember Cox looks like you wanted to say something. |
| 01:15:22.85 | Joan Cox | Yeah. I just wanted to say, you know, we're kind of going through this with a fine tooth comb. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to do that. And, I'm grateful to the council that eight years ago started this because this is a good problem to have is to figure out how best to invest these monies that we've been so carefully squirreling away. So I just wanted to acknowledge the efforts of our former leadership and also thank you for giving us for the first time in my um, history, the opportunity to understand our portfolio, how it's invested and how we might improve it. |
| 01:16:04.21 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Anyone else want to add anything on that? Okay. |
| 01:16:08.04 | Chris Zapata | Well, Mary, before you leave, I have a few comments I'd like to make. |
| 01:16:10.73 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Yes, please city manager by all means. |
| 01:16:15.33 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. Yeah. You know, I like to begin at the beginning where the city's pension challenges began, which was in 2001. When we went to enhance benefit packages across the state of California, that took our pension costs that year from around $400,000 to the amount you see now. And that was the beginning. I also want to point out that that was corrected in 2013-14 with the Public Employee Pension Reform Act in California. So that, you know, the pension benefits for employees hired after that date are much different than the pensions for people that were hired to that date. There are also variations between public safety pensions and non-public safety pensions. So that's a backdrop. When you set up the 115 Trust and you set that aside, I thought that great. So when I got here, I thought it was important that you not look for your money, that you understand where your money is, how much is in there, how it's performing. You're actually paying a management fee for this service. So to have the folks from the PARS program here tonight is you're getting your money's worth. But I also want to say that last year when we had Bartels do the pension analysis for us at the latest and greatest time, that's when the decision was made that this money in this trust should not be touched until the spiking in 26, 27, and 28. And I also want to point out a month ago that you as a city council, after we finished the year about a million to the positive that you directed that money be put into this account. And that's what jumped the pension 115 to about three, three million, six hundred fifteen thousand, three hundred dollars and 78 cents today. And so that's an offset to the obligation that you have. And if you see that number, which is 30 million one year, 24 million another year, 28 million, it just going to bounce around. But ultimately, it will go down. And it will go down when the folks that are the classic employees that receive the enhanced benefit packages, you know, leave the earth like me. So I am not one of those persons that is a classic. But those of us that are getting up there in our years, we know that when we leave that obligation leaves and then you have the one for the pension reform act pensioneers who are much less benefited, creating much less obligation. So the city doesn't use so much of its money paying for its pension so that it doesn't provide money for projects and other things that might be necessary. So to date, Sausalito uses three and a half million dollars in pensions before we spend a dime. And so if you have a $22, $23 million general fund, it's really not that. You're taking that $3 million up front. So it's a challenge for many, many cities in California. It certainly is a challenge for Sausalito. So what I heard, and I think Chad and I are happy to work on it, is that we come back with some recommendations about whether or not we want to get more aggressive in certain sides of the fund, whether there might be other investment opportunities, because as you know, we have money in Marin Bank, and we're trying to put money in treasury bills, and we're trying to manage our cash in a way so that the return is higher than 3%. But again, everything has what I call risk. And so one of the things that we have to be mindful of is if you are aggressive, you may enjoy that one day or you may rue it one day. So I want to make sure that's not. Thank you. |
| 01:19:50.15 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, City Manager. Yes, Council Member Huffman. Thank you. |
| 01:19:52.06 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, I have a follow up for Chris. Because I'm looking at our pension trust scenarios that we did when we adopted. Thank you. that we adopted back in 2018. And as you said, we, um, We had not been making payments into the trust fund as, you know, under the different scenarios that we had set forth at that time at that city council meeting. We did, though, I think made a good decision this year to put, as you said, a million dollars into it to plus it back up. So I think we're relatively on track with what those projections were back in 2018. But I just want to ensure that going forward, when we look at our budgets for the next one, two, three, four, five years up through 28, 29. we had the projections of continuing to continuing to fund our pension trust. And that was all based on the calculations at the time about how we could smooth the payments through those years. And so they become quite substantial in 25, 26 of investing a million dollars back into the pension trust fund and 800,000 in 26, 27. and 500,000 in 27, 28, and 200,000 in 28, 29. So I just want to make sure. that that strategy remains on our radar as we prepare our budgets for the next fiscal year as well. So thank you. And thank you for your information and update to us. |
| 01:21:25.41 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, City Manager. And thank you very much to Chad and Ryan and Andrew for a really expansive presentation and for bearing with us as we comb through all of the pieces of the complexities of these two funds and what they look like. And I think direction is really clear, as I heard the City Manager mention what was going to be investigated with regards to coming up with recommendations and investment options that might be a little bit more aggressive. The only thing I didn't hear mentioned that you shared out, City Manager, was the request from the vice mayor for an assessment of whether or not there's a correlation with CalPERS and whether or not we might explore more diverse investments. So I think the direction there is clear. And so I will, the only item response here is to file and receive the report. So I think that since there's no action taken, we'll go ahead and move on to item 5B. And thank you so much again to our presenters for being here. We really appreciate the update and we will agendize this item again in the future to see what action we might take. to continue to improve our fiscal situation. And on that note, we're going to keep talking with our finance director, Chad Hess, who will take us through the Treasurer's Report ending June 30th, 2023. |
| 01:22:37.33 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, before Chad puts his slide up, but while he's putting his slides up, members of the public and council, I can make a few introductory statements or comments. In October of 2021, when you had your initial retreat in my first year as city manager here, one of the things that was stressed was that the city needs to focus on its basics, its infrastructure, its people, and its finances. And so working through Measure L last year, working on the audit this past year, completing the budget this year, talking about the 115 Trust, doing the work with Bartels, I want to thank you for doing exactly that, focusing on your finances. One of the things that's going to come out of this particular presentation is more focused on the city's finances, because we need to demystify what Sassilo's finances are. We need to be able to show the public, the community, the organization, and you as our board of directors or our city council, where you stand in terms of your fiscal health. And so I'm happy to say that things have gotten much better over the last two years, but not by magic. There were some hard decisions made, some hard work done. And so what Chad's going to present to you tonight is a little bit not normal, but because we want to make sure that there's an opportunity for questions and direction, we put this on the business agenda with the consent of the agenda setting committee. So Chad's going to run through our funds and our city budget in his treasurer's report. Chad? |
| 01:24:07.44 | Angeline Loeffler | Awesome. Good evening, Madam Mayor and City Council. Thank you for the honor to present tonight. As Chris said, the Treasurer's report is typically something we put on the consent agenda, but today we wanted to bring it as a business item just to give an opportunity to discuss. and provide some additional direction on are CAF resources. So today's agenda, we're going to talk about the location of tax, where we hold it. and the investment rate of return. WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT How we where we hold our funds by or where we hold our cash by fund general ledger fund. We're going to talk about the progress we've made over the fiscal year. since the fiscal year end, and then open it up for discussion and direction. Next slide, please. So here on this slide here, you can see where we physically hold our cash. The Bank of Marin holds $18 million as of 630, which represents 73% of our portfolio. Local Agency Investment Fund, which is managed by the state of California, or also known hold it. held 4.1 million as of 630 or 17%. of our portfolio. BNY Millen holds 10% of our portfolio or two and a half million dollars. The bulk of that is for sewer construction funds. as well as the 2006 A and B that we're going to be debt service payments. Outside of the city's portfolio or outside of our primary funds, we hold our Sexton 115 thrust through PARS, which as of 630 had $5.4 million. invested in that for us. Next slide, please. On this slide here, you can see the rates of return that we get from our various institutions. Um, Bank of Marin now offers 4.07% on our deposits. |
| 01:25:52.96 | Unknown | I'm going to go. |
| 01:25:57.47 | Angeline Loeffler | within that institution, which is a dramatic increase from the last time we reported this, where there was no interest being earned on our cash. in Bank of Marin. waste. provides a 3.15% return. over the last year. um, The last statement, last one year statement as of 630 was 3.95%. And then Bank of New York Mellon was right around 5% return on our various accounts. within that institution. Next slide, please. Here we can see the allocation of cash by fund. um, I have broken this out into a few different categories. And I think more refinement will be coming. But I wanted to try to break things out in a little more meaningful groupings, cash for operations, cash for infrastructure. Cash for Debt service. for sewer. And then there's also some various items that are a mix of infrastructure and operations. I wanted to point out some of the larger contributors to our increase in cash. Overall, we've had an increase of cash of 3 million 885,000 over the last fiscal year. The primary funds that are holding that increase in cash are the Section 115 Trust for pensions. which has increased 1,083,000. mainly due to our contribution made last year of an excess million dollars. The other area of a significant increase is the sea level rise grant. We received the million dollar funds from the state. of California. That has a positive impact of about a million dollars on our overall cash position. A couple other areas that I want to note, the MLK fund had an increase of $361,000, and that is after our debt payment. The parking fund had an increase of $279,000. as well as the Tidelands Fund had an increase of $396,000. So, which is available for special projects within that Tidelands grant. Next slide, please. I did want to provide an update on a few items since June 30th. In effort to increase our rate of return, we have reduced our cash position in LEIF by 3,750,000. And then we've increased our position in US Treasury bills. we've purchased $6 million in treasuries that have an average yield of 5.4%. Those updates were made after June 30th and will be reflected on the next Treasurer's Report. dated September 30th. 2023. So again, I want to just provide this after this update on where we hold our cash. Again, this is basically cash basis, what's available at a point in time. um, As we've emphasized in the past, we have cash available, but we still have a surplus of Deferred maintenance. that we need to invest some of these resources in. We also have pension obligations, debt obligations that we need to consider as we look at our cash positions. I'm not sure. at a point in time. So with that being said, I will go ahead and open that up. to questions from the council. |
| 01:29:15.04 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much, Chad. So we'll start with Council Member Cox. There's your hand raised. |
| 01:29:19.19 | Joan Cox | Thank you, Chad, for that great report. And thank you for transmitting this report to us so far in advance and inviting us to meet with you and to ask any questions that really helps us digest what is at first blush, very complex information. And also thank you for the most thorough treasurer's report I've seen since serving on the council. you mentioned further refinement of your cash balances by fund. And to that end, I'm wondering, If the general liability and workers comp funds, which essentially represent self-insured retention might actually be segregated into that a separate fund by that moniker, since they are not technically cash available for all operations, but are actually available for specific purpose. |
| 01:30:14.22 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes. So if we go off a couple of slides, go forward. Um, to the table one, go up. Within the cash operations, I think there is some refinement that could be had. So as you can see here, we do have general liability and workers' compensation funds. Those are our internal service funds and the cash in those funds is held to pay future claims. Um, I think on the next version of this report, I will pull those two out into a separate category and we'll call it just cash for insurance. Um, As well as the Oprah. |
| 01:30:49.15 | Joan Cox | And- |
| 01:30:50.91 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |
| 01:30:52.66 | Joan Cox | I was you go ahead and finish because you're going to answer my next question. I'm sorry. Thank you. |
| 01:30:56.78 | Angeline Loeffler | And then as well as the OPEB and pension trust, I'd like to pull out and put cash for retiree benefit. just to, provide a little more description on what those pools of cash are available for. |
| 01:31:11.16 | Joan Cox | And then you had also mentioned the donations and grants sub fund, which is a little bit misleading, perhaps. And can you describe how you would propose to refine it? |
| 01:31:22.89 | Angeline Loeffler | Yeah. So this donations and grants subfund is an internal fund only. For financial reporting, that's grouped with the general fund. And. In the past, that fund has been used to track grants various grants. that we receive from stage or county. In the recent past, it's been used to collect various charges for services for culture and recreation mainly, which could be a general fund item. There are better ways to track our grant dollars within either the general fund or a special revenue fund. So I would like to roll that fund donations and grant sub fund into the general fund for internal and external reporting. um, It really has. lost its purpose. and should be rolled up into the general fund. |
| 01:32:16.06 | Joan Cox | And then finally, you mentioned the importance of understanding our deferred maintenance obligations as juxtaposed to the cash that's apparently available for operations. And I know that on consent this evening, we did approve $65,000 for a facility assessment study to perform an evaluation of the city's existing buildings to determine when significant maintenance of these buildings, such as roof replacement. HVAC replacement and other significant Improvements are needed to keep these facilities functioning correctly. Do you have an ETA on that facility's um, assessment study and when we might actually learn better what deferred maintenance obligations could offset this cash that's evidently available for operations? |
| 01:32:55.35 | Ryan Acasio | and- |
| 01:33:08.96 | Angeline Loeffler | I do not know when that study will be available. As soon as it is available, we will bring it to council and that will give us a much better idea of how to allocate these resources. |
| 01:33:19.66 | Joan Cox | All right, again, thank you so much. These are great issues to have. And I very much appreciate the increase in transparency of the city's finances based on this Treasurer's report and the refinements I know you'll continue to make. Thank you. |
| 01:33:39.10 | Steven Woodside | Any other questions from the Dice Council member coming? Yeah, I do. |
| 01:33:41.58 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:33:41.60 | Ian Sobieski | I do. Thanks, Chad. Always very happy to see your very clear cut, easy to understand reports. Can you talk to us a little bit about where you think we're going with the reserve policy? We talk about this a lot amongst ourselves, but I think it's sort of fundamental to how we evaluate the cash on hand. And maybe if you could just for also members of the public, help us understand what are some of our options? What is our policy? What's the purpose? If you have recommendations at this point around the target reserve level, I think that'd be helpful. |
| 01:34:15.52 | Angeline Loeffler | So as it stands now, our reserve, the general fund is set at 15%. of the current year's or I should say prior years expenditures, the audit of expenditures. So those reserves can fluctuate a little bit and they increase as the expenditures increase since it is a percentage. of expenditures. There's been a lot of discussion on reserves and where we need to go with them, whether it be a percent or whether it be a five. a dollar amount. There's a lot of research and a lot of publications out recently that talks about taking a risk-based approach to your reserve. Um, And that level really is dependent upon the community, the community at hand and the risk that that community faces. um, As we learn more about our facilities and their deferred maintenance, I think having that insight will give us a better opportunity to evaluate our reserves and really take a more risk-based approach. Um, But as it stands now, our policy is pretty basic, but needs additional refinement as we continue to dig deeper into our finances and bring additional transparency to the public. Um, it comes down on comes down to our perceived risk and how much is enough. As it stands now, we have considerable resources in the general fund um, that are earmarked as assigned for contingencies as well as unassigned, to the tune of about 10 million. Is that enough? I don't know. I think we need to have more information from our facilities assessments and our deferred maintenance to make that evaluation. |
| 01:35:59.40 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, I have a thought on that if I can. |
| 01:36:01.54 | Steven Woodside | Of course, is that it? Councilmember Kelman, any questions? Okay, I wanted to make sure. All right, go ahead, city manager. Thanks. |
| 01:36:05.98 | Chris Zapata | Yeah. So the government, the government finance officers association typically sends out what they believe is the right amount to hold in event of emergencies. It's two months or 16.67%. You're at 15 and then some. The other part is talk to rating agencies that look at your, um, your credit score or your bond ratings, you know, they have their ideas about how you should save and spend in, in order not to impact in a negative way, your bond rating and the future if you should borrow. So all that to say in those conversations, nowhere have I heard a hundred percent or 50% or 40%. It's always been something to the tune of 16.67%. Some cities have their own policies. But I think what Sausalito really needs to look at is a number, not a percentage, but a number. Is it 5 million? Is it 10 million? Is it 15 million? Whatever you are comfortable with, and then work around that as opposed to a percentage, because the percentage will move. And I also have been pretty aggressive about stating that when Chad talks about a risk-based analysis, we have risk. They're called bad streets. And so in the idea of taking current cash, sitting in the bank and doing better with it in terms of the interest rate, that's a good step. But turning that cash into something that truly benefits the community that may save you money now because costs continue to arise, materials continue to rise, and our roads just keep getting worse. So next meeting, we're gonna have a conversation about our roads and our pavement management index. And hopefully I can convince you all to look at putting some money into streets out of that $10 million because I believe it's a little excessive. I think it's a little much to have on hand, especially when you have needs that are out there that are obvious to see with respect to our streets and sidewalks and buildings. So you may not agree with me. You may say we need more money. And, you know, thank you. But no, thank you, city manager. But we do need to have that conversation. Thank you. |
| 01:38:17.22 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much. Can I ask a follow-up question? Absolutely. |
| 01:38:18.01 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:38:19.95 | Steven Woodside | So, |
| 01:38:20.04 | Joan Cox | Thank you. In order to inform that discussion, can you let us know what our 15% policy translates to based on last year's budget? |
| 01:38:34.15 | Chris Zapata | Now, Chet can do that, Matt. |
| 01:38:35.07 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 01:38:35.09 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:38:35.11 | Angeline Loeffler | Yeah, give me a few minutes. |
| 01:38:35.16 | Chris Zapata | Yeah. |
| 01:38:37.64 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:38:37.69 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |
| 01:38:37.91 | Unknown | I'll have that. |
| 01:38:49.94 | Joan Cox | I didn't need an answer right away. I was asking to inform our audience. |
| 01:38:51.97 | Ryan Acasio | asking. |
| 01:38:55.15 | Joan Cox | Our consideration at the next meeting of the city manager's recommendation that we adopt a number as opposed to a percent. I wanted to know what is the number today so that we can start to use that as a benchmark as we evaluate spending money on streets as opposed to maintaining our reserves at 15%. |
| 01:39:15.62 | Chris Zapata | So let me do some city manager arithmetic for you. A general fund is $20 million. 10% of that is $2 million. Another percent of that, or half of 5% of that would be, you know, what, $500,000? So, you know, your amount that you have, you should have by your policy right now is about two and a half million bucks based on a $20 million general fund. So it's actually probably closer to a little over $3 million is my recollection, but we can get that number for you, but that's the scale. So there's a Delta of $7 million between that and you know, what your policy is calling for. |
| 01:39:51.40 | Angeline Loeffler | Chris, you're exactly right. 3.1 million is what we had as assigned. fiscal year 22. And then there's an additional $7 million of unassigned in the general fund. |
| 01:40:04.75 | Joan Cox | Okay. So I'm not clear about the statement that that's what our policy, our policy is 10 plus five, which is roughly 3 million. Correct. And, you know, we spent over a million unexpected money on homelessness. We spent over a million on a landslide. We incurred huge losses during, due to a pandemic. And so I feel as though though that that 3 million is, is, you know, was well reserved. And thank goodness, we had it to see us through those challenges. So I will want to understand by how much you're recommending we reduce that 3 million to spend on streets and such. |
| 01:40:14.57 | Timothy McLeod | Correct. |
| 01:40:47.49 | Chris Zapata | Let me be clear. I would never advocate going below 15%, which is a $3 million number. |
| 01:40:51.35 | Joan Cox | Oh. Okay, then I completely... |
| 01:40:53.16 | Chris Zapata | misunderstood you. There's a number between 3 million and 10 million that may make some sense. Yeah. |
| 01:40:57.68 | Joan Cox | Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. Okay. Thank you. |
| 01:41:02.88 | Steven Woodside | Do we have other questions from the dais? Councilman Hoffman? |
| 01:41:08.43 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, this is just a follow up from my notes. So our current reserve policy is 15% of what number? |
| 01:41:17.63 | Angeline Loeffler | the general general fund expenditures. |
| 01:41:20.36 | Jill Hoffman | Got it. Okay. Thank you. Thanks. |
| 01:41:22.96 | Steven Woodside | I had a, just a few quick questions about the, decisions that were made around moving cash. And I also just wanted to note that You and the city manager did a great job in negotiating with Bank of Marin to increase our interest rate from nothing to 4.07. So thank you. for being thoughtful about where we could be making more money. You mentioned in your report that we reduced our cash in life by 3 million. and we increased our US Treasury by 6 million. Could you just talk a little bit about those decisions was, and especially after hearing from our OPEB advisors about our financial management and projections, are they in line with what their economic predictions are? And are we thinking about long term or is that a? Just like that. |
| 01:42:06.18 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |
| 01:42:06.89 | Steven Woodside | more explanation. |
| 01:42:08.20 | Angeline Loeffler | So within our investment policy, the city manager and myself are able to invest in specific things. We can invest in lay and the US Treasury. without restriction to the percentage of the portfolio or bringing that in front of city council. If we're going to invest in other things, then we need to bring that information forward for your blessings. |
| 01:42:32.10 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 01:42:33.35 | Angeline Loeffler | With the treasuries that we've purchased, we've purchased a series of three month, six month, and 12 month treasuries. And my goal is to build a treasury ladder that has a maturity every month. and able to give us a higher rate of return by purchasing, you know, a series of 12 month securities, one maturing each month over time. And that gives me liquidity. also gives me stability by investing in treasuries. one of the more secure assets out there. And then it also gives me that flexibility by building that ladder that I will have the ability to to use those cash and match up our cash investments with our larger disbursements. So as I build this ladder, I'm planning for our UAL payments, our bond payments, to really try to match those majorities with our large expenditure outflows. |
| 01:43:25.56 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Thank you very much, Chad. Do we have other questions from the dais or can I open it up? Okay. Yes, please. Vice mayor. |
| 01:43:31.23 | Melissa Blaustein | Chad. Hey, so we have 18 million at bank and rent paying 4%. And 4 million at leaf. 3.1%. And of course you have 6 million in treasuries at 5.5%. So if we put that money into treasuries, that would be $250,000 of extra money. So it's kind of expensive to be having it at Bank of Merida in life. What's the rationale for not? And they're short term, they, they're going to be super volatile, they're going to move with the Fed funds rate. So what's the rationale and, and, and having not having all that in the risk free return of the T bill? |
| 01:44:10.84 | Angeline Loeffler | Yep. So I did decrease our leaf position early in July. Um, So I have decreased that and invested it into treasuries. I've purchased 6 million in treasuries after that. um, I will be increasing my the position in treasury bills over the next couple months as we build out that ladder. Um, I don't want to commit all of it at once. I want to have that flexibility of having my ladder. available for liquidity. But my goal is to increase the position in treasuries earning a much higher yield over the course of the next two, three months. |
| 01:44:46.27 | Chris Zapata | If I may, Mayor, I'd like to add some flavor to that answer. If you're looking at from a pure return vantage point, Vice Mayor Sobieski is absolutely right. You could do better by putting all your money in treasury bills. But if you look and you see banks closing in Sausalito, moving their main offices out, whether it's Wells Fargo or Bank of America, and you look at the community banks that are left in your city that a lot of residents rely on, that loan locally in Marin County and Sausalito to take that 4% money when we could have got five, but actually loan it within your community and create investment jobs and financial well-being for local residents and county residents. There's a trade-off there. And so in meeting with the folks from the Bank of Marin, we asked them for information on exactly how they invested money in Sausalito, because the money you hold in account from the city of Sausalito should be benefiting Sausalito to the extent it can. So that's a bit of a trade-off, but that was part of the calculation, and I wanted to make sure that you all heard that, because, yes, you could put it all in Treasury bills and pull it all of the bank. I mean, I wouldn't recommend that. And that's why they went up on their amount from whatever percent it was to 4% to get closer to the Treasury bill return so that we could make a balanced argument that maybe we should leave some of that money in this local bank so it doesn't shut its doors as well. |
| 01:46:11.66 | Melissa Blaustein | Well, that's certainly laudable. I appreciate the support of local banks. It'd be great to maybe get a fulsome... education a little bit about all the ways Bank of Marin helps us. I know they do lots in the community and it'd be good to to get that. I had another financial question though for you, Chad, just Just in terms of trends, so So our current cash position, in total across our OPEB across all our assets is, is what? in 2020. |
| 01:46:39.89 | Unknown | 30 million, 30.2 million. |
| 01:46:44.14 | Melissa Blaustein | And so what was it say 10 years ago at year end of 20? 13. |
| 01:46:49.10 | Angeline Loeffler | 2013, the total cash position as of June 30th was $14,444,000. |
| 01:46:57.83 | Melissa Blaustein | So in the last 10 years, we've gone from 14 million in cash position to |
| 01:47:03.95 | Unknown | 30.2. |
| 01:47:06.05 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. Right. But that's my question. How is it? I mean, when I joined Council, there was a narrative about fiscal mismanagement. And for sure, I drive these same streets. And it seems as though we're not investing in our infrastructure And today we're investing in our people with the, with the contract stuff, but how is it, How can you square with me the narrative that South State has been running perennial budget deficits, and yet the cash position of the city's increased from $14 million to $30 million? If I have a deficit deficit in my case, personal account, my checking account does not go up, it goes down. So. How can we have doubled the amount of cash if we've been running perennial deficits in Sausalito. |
| 01:47:50.80 | Angeline Loeffler | So when we talk about deficits, we typically are talking about our general fund deficits. or our general fund proper, which does carry the bulk of our expenses. However, we do have other funds within the city that generate significant resources for the city. Um, When we look at it in aggregate, we have had a deficit spend or deficit decrease in balance over the last 10 years in fiscal years 19, 20, and 21 on a cash-on-cash basis. Prior to that, we ran surpluses for considerable amount of time. The last, Fiscal year 22. I'm sorry, fiscal year 22, there was an increase in cash, and fiscal year 23, there was an increase in cash. But the trend is, is we, haven't been running a deficit in terms of cash spending. over the last 10 years. There are years where we have deficits, but overall doubled our cash position in 10 years. |
| 01:48:52.29 | Melissa Blaustein | Financial accounting tells one story, but we also don't expenses that are hidden, right? Like we don't amortize the cost of our buildings maintenance that we |
| 01:48:52.43 | Angeline Loeffler | or financial aid. |
| 01:49:01.83 | Melissa Blaustein | like there's maintenance in MLK Park on the school buildings, and we don't amortize those anticipated expenses as current year expenses in our in our accounting, right? So they're kind of hidden expenses. |
| 01:49:14.82 | Angeline Loeffler | it. |
| 01:49:15.07 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:49:15.16 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:49:15.24 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. we're getting a little technical. In MLK, we do record depreciation expense in that fund. But if we look at, The Tidelands, we don't. And that's one of the nuances of governmental accounting. Um, So yes, to your point, It is, Yeah. It gets complicated in the generally accepted counting. but overall cash on cash, we've had an increase over the last 10 years. |
| 01:49:45.35 | Melissa Blaustein | I personally would find it helpful in meeting the city manager's call to our action on and where to invest in our infrastructure to really have a simple statement that we can all understand. about investing in our infrastructure, investing in our people and saving for a rainy day. Like that's the way we all manage our own lives. And that's, I think, a way we can all comprehend our financing. So while I appreciate we need all the gap, all the accounting principal |
| 01:50:02.97 | Chris Zapata | Yep. |
| 01:50:10.54 | Melissa Blaustein | stuff for our audits to make sure money's not being absconded with. in terms of making planning, I mean, how much do we give raises to people or invest in paving roads? or save money against future pension obligations, it'd be great to get, as part of this, you know, leveling up of our financial reporting. a simple dashboard that we can use to see those trade-offs uh, to make those choices. |
| 01:50:35.84 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes, it is a work in progress. Um, There's a lot. to clean up and I think this year's this treasurer's report is a reflection of the progress that we're making. And, you know, as we continue to move forward, I look forward to bringing more informative reporting. to counsel. A big part of that is our facility assessments that we've talked about. and really understanding those, those, deferred cost. and what we use. We've added cash over the last 30 years, but at the detriment of what? At the detriment of our deferred maintenance. to some degree. So I think having more information those. those future costs. to maintain our roads, our buildings, our investments. is a key part of what do we need to do with this cash going forward? |
| 01:51:26.58 | Chris Zapata | Yeah. One thing I want to just stress is some might term this cash is ongoing, but I term it as one-time money. And so when you have a reserve with what I call one-time money, you should make sure that the expense for that money is one-time as well. You shouldn't create a situation where you're funding reoccurring obligations with one-time money. So whatever Cassa City has on hand and wants to invest in certain things like infrastructure, they might want to think about it as a one-time expense from a one-time source. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:52:05.04 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much. Okay, I'm gonna go ahead and open this up |
| 01:52:16.13 | Steven Woodside | Yes, please. Hello. |
| 01:52:18.25 | Babette McDougall | So I have to fill out a every time I want to jump up, it's going to be rough. So thank you for acknowledging me, Madam Mayor. I just want to say that I am familiar with these financial institutions of which you speak. I think you're in a solid place with Highmark Capital. I think the things that the city manager points out are absolutely mission critical. I like what the vice mayor had to say about the perception in the community. That's actually quite real. And, I don't know how to answer the questions. I've learned a lot here tonight. And I think I've heard this around town, too. It's a messaging problem. So I think we really need to look at this messaging issue. If we have good news to share, we should be sharing it. There's an awful lot that's not really great to say. So I just want to commend you on your very analytical discussion tonight. Thank you. |
| 01:53:17.36 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Babette. Do we have any Zoom commenters? City clerk? Oh, here comes, I can come to the, but one more in house, but. |
| 01:53:29.41 | Damien Morgan | Thank you. Regarding MLK, Park. You have an increase, which is great. A little history in 1987, The city of Sausalito went into agreement with the Marin City Salcido School District, a 20-year lease purchase contract. in 87. In 97, That was the one and only amendment 10 years later. That amendment was signed by the city of Sausalito William Bill Ziegler. Ziegler was on city council in 97. He signed the amended contract. Ironically, William Bill Ziegler is the same person who was one of the founders of Willow Creek. So A little something strange there happened. 97- sped up the 20-year contract, signed a 10-year amendment at the 10-year mark. He founded Willow Creek in 2000, three years later. in. He's the same person. that Joan Cox and I were at a meeting at the yacht, not the yacht club, but the cruising club. And he said that he said as a running for reelection that all black Mean. are in jail. All the black moms are at home on drugs and black kids can't learn like white kids can't. This is an ex-counsel person and he's a founder of Willow Creek. My point, what I'm trying to get at is The enrollment in South Dakota, Tennessee School District is down now. the bond that was promised for Marin City improvements is not happening. There's no money there for Marin City. All the money is going to Sausalito to the school on Nevada campus. Some of us, a few of us are concerned that you are positioning yourself to purchase that building as you did the NOK facilities. I'm not asking you. I'm finishing up. Are you behind the scenes with the Marin County Office of Education? with Mill Valley in partnership. going to buy that. or your benefit. We're watching. And advocating won't do it. like 825 Drake Avenue. only legal. Or could we get it done? |
| 01:55:57.68 | Steven Woodside | Do we have any Zoom comments? No, we do not. |
| 01:55:58.86 | Walfred Solorzano | No, we do not. |
| 01:55:59.60 | Steven Woodside | Okay, so we have no further public comment at this time. I think most of us provided our feedback to Chad and the direction is quite clear. But before I kind of give a summary, I just want to give everyone an opportunity to additionally Weigh in if you think there's more we want to review. Okay, great. Well, I really appreciate that, Chad and City Manager. I think we agree that we need to review our reserve policy and make some decisions about what that looks like in the long term. And I appreciate the vice mayor's suggestion of a simple dashboard that will explain our infrastructure funding, our people funding, and our... funding for a rainy day and what that looks like. And I think we're getting a lot closer to being much more clear in how our financial reporting looks, thanks to the city manager and to Chad. So I really appreciate that. And I think we'll look forward to the next Treasurer's Report and a conversation around all of these items as potential future agenda topics. So thank you very much, everyone, for that. I'm going to give us a five minute break because there's been a request for a quick adjournment. So we'll be back at nine. We're going to get started again here, and we are going to move on to business item 5C, which is the discussion and direction to staff regarding preparation of report on the Sausalito Cannabis Delivery and Retail Business Tax Initiative. And I believe our city attorney is presenting the staff report. |
| 01:57:22.88 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, this is should be a relatively straightforward item. As you're likely aware, there's already a initiative measure that is being circulated for signature throughout the city. Once the measure gathers in a signature that has to be presented to the city council at a meeting, and since the measure proposed a tax, the city typically has to place it on the ballot. State law also allows the council to ask staff to prepare a report that analyzes the fiscal impact, the impact on the general plan, impact on land use elements, and any other matters that the council might want to request as part of a report on the measure before it puts it on the ballot. However, since some of those items may take some time to study, it is usually a good idea for cities to begin the process of preparing the report while signatures are still being gathered. So that is the issue that is being presented before the council tonight. I'm available for any questions. |
| 01:58:25.77 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Sergio. Councilmember Cox, you have a question? |
| 01:58:28.88 | Joan Cox | I had a question about, so I had someone approach me outside of Target for a signature on this. And what they said was that they were asking me to sign this because Sausalito schools and recreation were underfunded. And this was, and so I'm wondering what, and how the solicitations can be appropriately regulated. I, of course, notified the ballot signature seeker that they were mistaken, that Sausalito First of all, Sausalito doesn't fund the schools, our property tax funds the schools. And second, that our recreation department is thriving and not underfunded. And she said, well, that's what her boss told her to say. So Um, I would like to understand what can and cannot be said as these signatures are being gathered because we saw last year, some grave misinformation that was being distributed regarding some ballot measures. |
| 01:59:39.28 | Sergio Rudin | So there are some state law provisions in elections code 18600 through 18603 that criminalized certain acts, including wealthily making false statements or misrepresentations regarding the contents or effects of local initiatives or referendums, or intentionally making false statements with response to inquiries by voters in the course of, you know, gathering signatures. Um, Generally, if those things are happening and people are concerned, they can, of course, report them to the police department, which would be responsible for investigating whether that is in fact occurring and then referring to the district attorney for prosecution. So state law does have some provisions that regulate that already. |
| 02:00:28.23 | Joan Cox | Okay, and then let me know when we're ready to make recommendations regarding the report. |
| 02:00:32.45 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, we have to hear the comment, of course. Are there other council questions from the US? Yes, councilman. I'm just... |
| 02:00:37.03 | Ian Sobieski | clarification. Can you just confirm my reading of the initiative is that it exempts Sausalito based businesses, including production and warehousing from the tax? Is that correct? That you are based in Sausalito, you would not pay this tax? |
| 02:00:53.82 | Sergio Rudin | So, no. At present, the city code only allows delivery. So we have no businesses in Sausalito and none could be established under the code. As said, The staff report does it have attached the city attorneys and partial analysis and ballot title in summary. If there were future storefront businesses that were added. I'm not sure. because the council decided to change the municipal code to allow more cannabis businesses, this tax would apply to those storefront cannabis businesses. Now, that being said, this tax is only a tax on retail sales. So there are certain classes of cannabis businesses that this wouldn't apply to. none of which presently exists. So that's cultivators, distributors, manufacturers, processing facilities, Those would not be subject to the tax if they were ever established here, just because the tax doesn't tax them. |
| 02:01:49.64 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 02:01:49.98 | Joan Cox | Can I just follow on on that? If we do approve the additional analysis, which I'm hoping we do, I would specifically like further feedback regarding this issue because my reading of the cannabis initiative also is that it exempts future Sausalito-based businesses, including production and warehousing, from this tax. I feel it's sort of evil genius in the way that it's written. And so I wanted to ensure that we understand the implications of the initiative as written. |
| 02:02:29.62 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Councilmember Cox. Do we have other questions from Councilmembers before we open up public comments? |
| 02:02:34.38 | Ian Sobieski | I just have another sort of new, this new ordinance question. If somebody proposes something like this and the city does not have a mechanism in place for collecting the tax or monitoring the tax. Who's. What burden is it to make sure that, and how does that get carried out, right? Does the city need to send notifications to every cannabis business that could possibly deliver to Sausalito? And then if so, who would pay for this? how does this even get implemented? And if there's constraints around that implementation, how might we, does that become prohibitive in some manner or how do you consider that? |
| 02:03:18.40 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, that is a very good question and one that I do not, as a practical matter, have the answer to at this moment. That is certainly something that the city could and should probably study in a report. Now, typically, with respect to the collection, the tax measure itself says that it would be collected by the city tax collector. the same way that the city's business license taxes, et cetera, are collected. The city does have contracts with HDL for audit services and things like that. So they may be able to provide some assistance with the city. Perhaps our city finance director, to the extent that he has any input on this issue can also help answer this question for the council tonight. |
| 02:04:02.06 | Steven Woodside | Yes, Vice Mayor, you have a question as well. |
| 02:04:03.53 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, Sergio, do you happen to know Under current law, we have a sales tax. Under current law, if I buy something and it's delivered to me in Sausalito, Sausalito gets some sales tax through... I think a quite complicated accounting mechanism that various merchants of scale participate in. Do you happen to know whether the cannabis deliveries that currently occur inside Sausalito are... part of that tax payment system or do they exist outside of it because of its semi-legal federal state versus state nature? |
| 02:04:41.33 | Sergio Rudin | And I do not know off the top of my head. I know the city has the statewide Bradley Burns sales tax, which is 1%. And then on top of that, the city's enacted, I believe it was Measure L recently, that is the transactions and use tax, which is another... I will say sales like tax, it works slightly differently. It's administered by the CDTFA, which helps provide additional enforcement mechanisms because under state law, the city has to contract with the state to administer that tax. And again, it's a lot easier for the city to administer that tax because the state has much more information about how those transactions occur. And Chad, do you have any additional information about HDL and their audit services for overseeing that as well? |
| 02:05:30.16 | Angeline Loeffler | I don't. I don't have anything specific on that. Thank you. |
| 02:05:33.35 | Unknown | um, |
| 02:05:33.79 | Angeline Loeffler | I know if The tax revenues are coming through the regular mechanisms. There's not a separate cannabis sales tax that we're receiving. It would be through the Bradley Burns or the Measure L. So, um, that we currently get. |
| 02:05:46.51 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. you know for a fact that they are able to participate in that system given the federal restrictions on using the banking system to do transactions in the cannabis industry? |
| 02:05:59.10 | Angeline Loeffler | I'll validate that. I believe, I know we don't get a special tax. I know we don't get a special payment, but let me do a little research on that then for you. |
| 02:06:06.66 | Melissa Blaustein | That could be part of the report too, I suppose. |
| 02:06:13.09 | Jill Hoffman | Councillor Hoffman, do you have a question? I do. |
| 02:06:13.30 | Steven Woodside | We're helping. |
| 02:06:13.53 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 02:06:17.14 | Jill Hoffman | This will probably be a... addressed in any report that we do, but Um, I, believe the initiative sales says that the initiative would have to pass by majority vote. Um, Is there any distinction that it's a tax and that there's a higher threshold level for it to pass? |
| 02:06:38.94 | Sergio Rudin | So in general, There are two types of taxes. There's a general tax, which is for regular municipal use. It's not dedicated for any specific purpose. It just goes into the city's general fund. Um, That normally only requires a 50% plus one vote to pass a special tax which establishes a revenue source for a specific purpose and is restricted to a particular use. Prop 218 requires and Prop 26 also requires that those be passed by two thirds majority vote. |
| 02:07:13.28 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Thank you. I think that's the only question I have right now. |
| 02:07:19.04 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Thank you, Councilman Proffman. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and open it up to public comment. |
| 02:07:25.89 | Walfred Solorzano | Anybody in-house? |
| 02:07:28.73 | Chris Zapata | Yeah. |
| 02:07:33.74 | Timothy McLeod | day. Thank you, Mayor and City Council members. So my name is Timothy McLeod. I'm the sponsor of the Ballot Initiative. And it came about because when I ran for City Council, I heard from residents about them being uncomfortable with the city's financial stability. And so what we've heard today is actually it's encouraging. I think what is somewhat discouraging is if we enter into a recession next year, what that's going to do, how that's going to impact tourism, the TOT, parking fees, special use fees, which have increased, which is all good news. But what does a recession do to our capacity to operate? And I think I also appreciate that city manager Zapata and vice mayor Sobieski called out roads, infrastructure, sidewalks because |
| 02:08:32.11 | Ryan Acasio | Thank you. |
| 02:08:33.12 | Timothy McLeod | What I heard from residents, and I'm sure you all heard this as well, is why haven't those been addressed? Why are those still issues? And so we put forth this measure because for that reason, to provide a buffer, provide an additional source of revenue. And I do want to just mention that similar cities, both in Marin and outside of Marin, have already passed this. So San Rafael, Santa Rosa, City of Sonoma, Healdsburg, Alameda, Richmond, Cloverdale, and Oakland. So this is not novel. This is not new for any municipality. I do understand that there are sensitivities here. So really the takeaway is that this does not authorize any retail cannabis that would have to come about through either another measure or the city council would have to vote on that. That's really the clear distinction. I do also last, just to address council member Cox's comment on the script or what the petition collectors that has been addressed, I was made aware of that last week. It is completely incorrect. And so they are now working with the petition gatherers. Thank you. |
| 02:09:49.46 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Do we have any further public comment in the council chambers? Yes, Alice Merrill. |
| 02:10:01.39 | Alice Merrill | Hi. Just tonight, this was proposed as something like parks and streets in front of one of the stores here in town. So it's been addressed, but it hasn't been. actually done. So meanwhile, if it's been addressed and not done, then where's the problem here? So I do not trust that this is something that... isn't somehow tricky. It's just too tricky. And I like the old days when we were well. I take it back. It's always been tricky in one way or another. Somebody's always trying to do tricky, but anyway, um, I am not against cannabis, period. I've not ever been against cannabis since I had small children, since I see people walking into cannabis. I ask alcohol stores all the time. I think it's a made up mess that our politicians have done over the last 50, 60 years. It's bad. But I don't want it to get dropped into Sausalito in a way that like Richmond, maybe they have that but they have people who deliver. We don't. Why are we going backwards? as in upside down to get to where we want to go, which would be for me. to just have it be easy to do and not a big deal. So thank you. I mean, to have cannabis in Sausalito. Thank you. |
| 02:11:45.26 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Allison. Do we have any other public comment from in the council chambers? Yes, Babette. |
| 02:11:56.73 | Babette McDougall | Wow. I confess when I, thank you, when I saw that on the agenda, it just so happened that I coincidentally had a discussion with a couple of these physicians with which I work currently. And of course, CBD is all the discussion right now. And I learned from these physicians that The mainstreaming of cannabis production, like local cannabis based farms to supply local collectives so that the likes of you and I might go and get some CBD capsules or something to rub on our sore wounds or whatever. Turns out that the cartel has taken over and the honest mainstream farmers have been forced in some cases at gunpoint, out of business. And I just speak to this because I found this to be a rather shocking statement. And I'm just, this must speak to the vetting process in general, And this is why I learned that a lot of physicians are very reluctant to still prescribe these products. for public benefit and health reasons because of this cartel insertion. So what about the vetting process? How do we know we're dealing with legitimate businesses? Yes. |
| 02:13:12.89 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Babette. Do we have anyone else in the council chambers who would like to make public comment at this time? Okay, then let's go ahead and take public comment from Zoom city clerk. |
| 02:13:22.09 | Walfred Solorzano | Sandra Bushmaker. |
| 02:13:23.86 | Steven Woodside | I think. |
| 02:13:24.03 | Sandra Bushmaker | Sandra. |
| 02:13:25.23 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:13:25.24 | Sandra Bushmaker | Hi, everybody. Good to see you all tonight. Uh, A couple of things on this issue. I'm kind of curious why this is on the agenda now when we don't even have all the signatures on the purported petition. And so that's the question that came up in my mind. Secondly, um, I too was approached by one of the canvassers and I was told it was to deal with Sausalito's deficit is what I was told. In questioning the canvasser, they knew nothing else. They didn't know how their money was going to be collected. whether there was how it was going to be managed, whose responsibility was it, who was going to know where the deliveries were made. They knew nothing about this. I, in reading the report, I share the, uh, the exemption concern that was raised by two council members that retail cannabis should Sausalito vote for it in the future. would be exempt from certain taxes. That was my reading of the documents as well. As far as the report goes, I would like to see that The report include The impact on city call staff in managing this particular asset or this particular flow of money. I would like to know how it's going to be collected. Uh, And how are we going to enforce it? And what kind of a police state are we going to be creating to collect this particular money? like I said, how are we going to know there's a delivery that was made? And it creates a lot of negativity in my mind, and I think we need to pay attention to that. Thank you. |
| 02:15:11.52 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:15:13.55 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you, Sandy. |
| 02:15:13.97 | Steven Woodside | Nice to see you again. |
| 02:15:15.88 | Walfred Solorzano | All right. Uh, Nuri, Rafael. |
| 02:15:22.34 | Narit Raphael | Hi there. Hello, Madam Mayor and Council. My name is Narit Rosh, oops. My name is Narit Raphael, and I am the CEO of Own a Life, a cannabis concierge based out of San Rafael, which is also licensed by the state of California. I'm also speaking on behalf of Nice Guys Delivery from the city of San Rafael. I've been in touch with your city since 2015 regarding cannabis regulations and ordinance when Lily Wayham was working with you guys. The proposed 4% tax will increase the financial burden on cannabis businesses and add an additional layer of cost for your residents only. These taxes often drive customers to cheaper and unregulated black markets, which would basically make the illegal. market thrive in your area instead of going from a state regulated, tested company to um small scale operations such as delivery businesses cannot afford to pay another four percent on top of our existing expenses. I'd also like to add that legally I could have all of my sauce ladle clients meet me outside of your town and delivered to them, let's say to Whole Foods and Mill Valley, and I just wouldn't have to deal with your tax at all as Kalman City |
| 02:16:28.88 | Ryan Acasio | just, |
| 02:16:33.69 | Narit Raphael | Councilmember Kelman mentioned, there's really no way to track this as I could just completely skirt around. Um, If you were to Google the cannabis industry or have any sort of knowledge of the industry, you would know that we are on a brink of collapse because of overtaxation. We currently have five layers of taxation from sales tax, state tax, federal tax, excise tax, and then a city tax from where we are licensed by. You should also know that the city of San Rafael just dropped our tax from four to two percent to try to save the industry from completely falling apart. Timothy is also wrong about all these cities he just listed. Those city taxes are because they give out licenses to people. So they are collecting tax within their licensees. This is making cannabis just so expensive that only the 1% can afford to purchase it, which is just fueling the war on drugs here. I have to say, this is the most out of touch cannabis initiative I've seen in a long time. I just, I'm flabbergasted that one of my favorite cities in Marin would be trying to stand behind this. Thank you. |
| 02:17:42.72 | Steven Woodside | Thanks, Norit. |
| 02:17:43.45 | Walfred Solorzano | Alison Burr. |
| 02:17:49.05 | Allie Baer | Hi, Allie, you're still on mute. Sorry. Hi, I'm Allie Baer. Thank you for including this staff report on your agenda tonight. Thank you all again for your unanimous support last year of voting no to Measure K. 74% of Sausalito voters voted against that retail cannabis initiative. And many of us voted no because we wanted to protect our local controls. And now we have the Sonoma Cannabis Corporation, SPARK, and the Sonoma County Conservation Pack, Joining our local person, Tim McCloud, to petition for this cannabis delivery and retail tax. And yes, I keep saying retail, because I know the petitioners are claiming that this has nothing to do with retail, But the petition says retail many times and It's written very clearly to benefit SPARC as a future cannabis retail business. far more than it would benefit Sausalito. If this petition gets enough signatures, it will lock in a tax cap on delivery and retail in Sausalito that is 50% lower than surrounding cities. So even with this very low and locked tax cap that limits any real financial gain to Sausalito anyway, whatever gain it might deliver would be negated by the cost of the extensive work the city would have to put into enforcing this tax. So I know several people have raised these points already. So I just wanted to emphasize, let's say no to this petition for the same reasons we said no to Measure K. Let's protect Sausalito from another large cannabis corporation and now a Sonoma PAC as well, that's trying to override our local control and dictate our tax laws for their financial gain with no obvious benefit to our city. So again, thank you, city council members and mayor I do ask that you request a staff report that really considers all the significant challenges this petition would bring to our city. So thank you very much. Thank you. |
| 02:19:57.00 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Next speaker, Jennifer Conway. |
| 02:20:07.06 | Jennifer Conway | Hi there, everybody. Thank you again, just echoing what everyone said about adding this to the agenda and considering a staff report. There've been a lot of wonderful questions asked already and clearly there's a lot to understand about this. um, And if it does take as much time as indicated earlier by Sergio, then I think it would be in the best interest to get a head start on it and understand what the real benefit and or potential future drawbacks there are to our community and for letting this end up potentially on the ballot. And as we remember from the last election, That just took a lot of energy from the community and from you all, I'm quite sure. That just wasn't productive when we have obvious more important things to deal with. So thank you for considering a report. Thank you, Jen. |
| 02:20:56.38 | Walfred Solorzano | Next speaker is Judith Wetter. |
| 02:21:02.12 | Judith Wetter | Good evening, everyone. Judy Wetterer, 28-year resident of Sausalito. Thank you again very much for considering this tonight and I urge you just for all the reasons that you all brought up that, podium as well as the speakers who I'm not sure. or we, there's so many questions that we would need to before we could even entertain this. And one of the other ones that stuck out to me was You know, we don't know really, I don't know what the other cities are doing. And are there non-payments? If somebody doesn't pay the taxes, how do we recover that. And or is anybody ever forgiven taxes if they're not doing well that year? That sounds like something that's also part of this and I can't imagine that we do that, Other Um, Sausalito businesses and opt-based I was not paying taxes because they had a bad year. doesn't seem fair at all. And then the last thing that just came up tonight with Mr. McCloud, sounded to me as though he was saying that they understood that that there had been some misrepresentations by the people collecting signatures And so if that's the case, how can we accept any of the I just don't know. think we can. Thank you again very much for bringing this up tonight. |
| 02:22:38.68 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:22:39.52 | Walfred Solorzano | Next speaker is Monica Gray. |
| 02:22:45.76 | Monica Gray | Hi, good evening, city council members and mayor. I am Monica Gray. I am the owner of Nice Guys Delivery, licensed out of San Rafael, California. Narit spoke on behalf of my company earlier, and I just wanted to briefly address some of the things that had been mentioned. Everything that Narit said is completely accurate. I know that we are going through a really difficult recession time right now, but now is not the time to be collecting money from legal cannabis businesses. And I just wanted to remind everybody that the Current, there are legal businesses and then there was the illicit market. I'm a mother of two. I grew up in Mill Valley. I had Sausalito high school friends that I went to at Tam High, and I'm not a cartel member. And I am a struggling businesswoman with small children, co-owned, no investors in my business. And Nareet has a similar situation. And we are struggling as business owners. There is no other industry. Alcohol is not taxed to be delivered into a city or to be purchased at a bar other than sales tax. We are paying our sales taxes. We are paying our sales taxes towards Sal Salido. We have already given... millions of dollars to the city of San Rafael, but that's because they gave us a license to operate. I just wanted to mirror the fact what Norit said. This is this is something that If you're not going to offer licenses within your jurisdiction, it doesn't make any sense to tax those companies that are doing business within your jurisdiction as cannabis businesses, especially legal businesses, because we are struggling. We're over-regulated. We are over-taxed. We are taxed to the federal level by 280E, which is 22% of cost of goods, and we cannot write any of that off. Majority of businesses are dying in the legal industry. You are forcing the illicit market to come into the city of Sausalito. And I just wanted to address that and highly recommend against this measure. And yeah, thank you for your time. I really appreciate it and have a good rest of your night. I hope you're able to leave soon, but thank you. I really appreciate it. Now, |
| 02:25:01.83 | Eva | you |
| 02:25:01.84 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:25:02.03 | Eva | you wanna get me. |
| 02:25:02.98 | Walfred Solorzano | Next speaker, Eva. |
| 02:25:07.02 | Eva | Thanks. I just felt like I should gently push back on the notion that was suggested earlier that all the cannabis is coming from cartels now. That sort of fear-mongering is really dangerous. And if physicians are, in fact, saying that, they should probably correct themselves. I have not heard any physicians say that. I would point out that that, you know, they're they probably should have said something about what essentially became a cartel run by the Sacklers and various pharmaceutical companies when it came to opioids. And that is unfortunately the terrible gift that keeps on giving and the crackdown on opioids is why there is now a quote unquote fentanyl crisis, unquote. It's our passion for criminalizing things that people wanna do. I don't do drugs, I don't drink, but I am keeping an eye on what's happened to this country as a result of the war on drugs. And you might know that the Drug Enforcement Administration was started in 1973 when I was five years old with a $73 million, I'm sorry, $75 million budget. It's now $3.28 billion a year. And we've never had such a bad fentanyl crisis. So obviously, you know, having businesses that are allowed to function and allowed to run is important. I'd also point out that alcohol deaths are a serious problem that seem to be getting no attention whatsoever. But we're obviously seeing fewer alcohol deaths than we used to because the product is taxed and... |
| 02:27:17.79 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Do we have any further public comment at this time? |
| 02:27:22.58 | Walfred Solorzano | SEEN none? |
| 02:27:25.23 | Steven Woodside | Okay, we'll go ahead and close public comment and bring it back up to the dais for discussion and direction. Who would like to get us started? |
| 02:27:34.34 | Ian Sobieski | I'd like to add one question for direction. So I think it's a great idea to have us do a report on this. Interesting question about why it's on the agenda. I don't know if anybody wants to answer that, but notwithstanding that, I do think |
| 02:27:35.59 | Steven Woodside | FOR DURING THEM. |
| 02:27:45.70 | Ian Sobieski | doing a more thorough report and The statement that I think Mr. McLeod made around potential tax revenue deserves a little bit of analysis. I think there's a lot of assumptions about how much money will come in, and I think The public probably wants to know what that really looks like. And since there's all these other examples, we probably have some good data points. So I would ask that that be included in the report. Great. |
| 02:28:09.00 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:28:09.12 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:28:09.17 | Steven Woodside | from a cox |
| 02:28:09.83 | Joan Cox | you Thank you. I'll endorse that. I'm also interested to know what type of tax would be required in order to carry out the promises contained in the ballot initiative, whether indeed it would be a special tax requiring a supermajority if it's intended to be earmarked to benefit specific streets and parks, for example. I would like to understand whether what we heard heard tonight regarding these other cities what we heard from night sky delivery about these other cities san rafael santa rosa richmond cloverdale oakland it seems my understanding is that these are cities that license uh not cities that exempt city-based businesses from their tax. So I'm interested to know what has been approved in these other cities when it comes to deliveries. I was very interested in the issues raised by Sandra Bushmaker about the impact on city hall staff, how collected, how enforced. I think we need to understand what the financial impacts to the city would be if this initiative is approved. And I would like clarification. You know, we're hearing opposition to this initiative tonight, and we're being asked to deny this petition. My understanding is that's not up to us, that once adequate signatures are collected, it goes on the ballot. And so I'd like to understand what that process is, if my understanding is correct, because I don't want voters to think that we're endorsing something simply by putting it on the ballot if we have no choice about putting it on the ballot. |
| 02:30:03.99 | Steven Woodside | Can I ask the city attorney to respond to that? Because I believe he would probably already have a correct answer. |
| 02:30:10.56 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, short answer to that one is, The petitioners have 180 days from receipt of the title and summary from the city attorney's office to gather signatures. Once they gather the requisite number of signatures, which I believe is 10%, Um, of the registered voters. They have to submit to the city clerk. The city clerk is then going to verify the signatures and typically I'll ask the city clerk to confirm this, but normally they're done by the county registrar. Most cities normally contract out that verification process to the county registrar. Then after that, the signatures are verified, the petition is required by law to be presented to counsel. And the council's only choice are to put it on the ballot for the next regular election, which would be in November 2024, or it can call a special election. So. And also it can order the report. But if we had delayed this item, then city staff would only have 30 days to prepare the report and do any sort of research that the council would like us to do so. |
| 02:31:21.75 | Walfred Solorzano | And just to follow up on what Sergio said, yeah, 10%, so they need 564 signatures. We don't verify the signatures, we just verify that everything is completed in compliance to Secretary of State, then they do get sent out to the register of voters and then they verify those signatures and everything as follows with, as Sergio mentioned. |
| 02:31:44.11 | Joan Cox | And then my last question was, If indeed, this only applies to out-of-town businesses, Sausalito has no jurisdiction over out-of-town businesses, only over businesses that are in Sausalito. What would be the mechanism by which Sausalito would be expected to enforce the taxation of businesses and the compliance of businesses outside of the city's borders. |
| 02:32:17.52 | Jill Hoffman | Great. |
| 02:32:18.10 | Joan Cox | you |
| 02:32:18.79 | Jill Hoffman | What's your name? |
| 02:32:20.73 | Melissa Blaustein | I would like the report to include what I asked and we didn't have the answer to, which is currently what's happening with cannabis deliveries in Sausalito in terms of collecting tax. I almost wanted to ask the owner of the good guys delivery. Cause she said that she's paying her sales tax in Sausalito. So I wanted to ask her how she's doing that mechanically, but I didn't want to delay the proceedings here. So perhaps someone from the staff could call her and find out. Um, and that'll lead me to the answer. |
| 02:32:49.96 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Vice Mayor, Council Member Hoffman. |
| 02:32:52.01 | Jill Hoffman | I had a follow-up sort of clarification with our city attorney, Sergio. It's, As I understand it, in the past. we've looked at two other cannabis initiatives and we, at that point, when they did qualify for the ballot, we could have just adopted them as an ordinance, but those were for retail cannabis businesses and sauce later to allow that, to amend our code to allow that. The distinction here is that because this is a tax, We don't have the ability to do that. Is that, do I have that right? Or have I garbled that up? |
| 02:33:27.45 | Sergio Rudin | No, that is correct because Prop 218 and Prop 26 requires voter approval of all taxes. |
| 02:33:34.91 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. So that, so if anybody was confused about that, um, so that's a distinction. And then the other, question and the staff or the mayor and the vice mayor can respond to this too, but about why it's on the agenda now. I think it's because the timeline is so tight according to you know, the law that once they qualify, we have to get it to the city council within a certain period of time. If we want to report, we have to do it within, I think it's, I think Sergio, you just said 30 days, right? So the way that our council meetings work and the way that sometimes we take longer breaks, like we just came back from a break, you know, that we want to ensure that staff has enough time to look at this, assuming that we order the report today. So I'm in favor of the report. Um, I, uh, the, The staff report sets forth the code sections that set out different areas that the report should include, and to the extent that they would apply to a tax-only, I think that's a good idea to go through that analysis. I agree with the other panelists. Um, comments tonight by the council and requests for inclusion of different aspects. And so Um, you know, I'm in favor of the report and I believe that we should order it. Interestingly, Since the initiative hasn't actually qualified for the ballot, the question is, when do we issue the report? And when does it come back to city council, right? We are kind of in, you know, a city attorney, I'll leave this to you too, but we are kind of in a gray area. We're going to order the report, but then when do we... Do we? you know, when does it come back? When does it, when does it return to the city council? When is it published to the, to the public. my inclination is that would be after the initiative qualifies for the ballot. But, um, You know, I'm just throwing that out there for discussion. We don't have to decide tonight. I don't think so. |
| 02:35:29.63 | Steven Woodside | City Attorney, do you want an opportunity to respond to the timeline question from Council Member Hoffman |
| 02:35:34.00 | Sergio Rudin | Sure. Legally, we have to provide the report to the council within 30 days of when the initiative qualifies. So if the council wants it early, we certainly can, but I will agree that there is no specific reason we would have to come back early. |
| 02:35:50.87 | Steven Woodside | Okay, thank you very much, and I would echo Council member Hoffman's comments about the reason that this is on the agenda now in addition to extensive public comments and requests for it to appear on the agenda. And so I think what what we have consensus on from all council members is that we would like to see a report on this initiative, in addition to items one through eight, as suggested in the elections code nine to one to, which is a report on the fiscal impact effect on internal consistency of the city's general and specific plans effect on use of land. impact on funding for infrastructure of all types. impact on the community's ability to attract and retain business and employment impact on uses of vacant parcels of land, impact on agricultural lands. And then as to item eight, which is any other matters, the city council requests. What I heard from our fellow council members here is What type of tax would be required to carry out the promises contained in the initiative? Would this be a special tax requiring a supermajority? What we heard about from other cities, San Rafael, Richmond, et cetera, are those licensees cities that are exempt. What is the impact of this initiative on City Hall staff? If the initiative only applies to out-of-town businesses without jurisdiction, what's the mechanism by which Sausalito would be expected to enforce the taxation of the business compliance? And currently, what is the situation with cannabis deliveries in Sausalito in terms of taxes collected by the city of Sausalito? So I hope that direction is clear, Sergio and city staff. |
| 02:37:21.26 | Sergio Rudin | Yes, thank you. |
| 02:37:22.27 | Steven Woodside | Okay, great. All right. Thank you very much. So with that, we're going to go ahead and move on to Yes. Yes, please. I was trying to forget. |
| 02:37:28.46 | Jill Hoffman | I was trying to figure out a way how to articulate this and I may not, Sergio, you may have to help me out with this, but the comments that were made by the delivery business person, the nice guys, I think it was, about the market impact and the availability of cannabis and the increased costs to Sauselio residents, you know, as a likely effect of this increase, this tax increase, somehow Um, I think I would like to have that called out in the report or commented on. I'm not sure. if I'm saying this right, articulating this correctly, but that to me is also an important issue that I want to look at. |
| 02:38:16.30 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, it sounds like you are asking us to look at impact on market conditions. And I know earlier another council member suggested that we need to include a comparison with the taxes of surrounding jurisdictions and their impacts on those markets. |
| 02:38:30.48 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 02:38:30.78 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:38:31.08 | Jill Hoffman | All right. Thank you. |
| 02:38:31.84 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:38:33.68 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:38:33.70 | Steven Woodside | it. Sorry. No problem. That's great. And I think that's a good addition and I appreciate everyone weighing in and I look forward to seeing that report. So we'll move on to item 3D, which has been moved from The sorry 5D, which was originally 3C on the consent calendar, which is the discussion of the Saucyda Police Association's report contract. |
| 02:39:00.25 | Steven Woodside | Hi, Debra. |
| 02:39:01.58 | Deborah Machmore | DEBORAH MACHMORE, M.D.: Hello Mayor Council members, I'm Deborah much more human resource consultant with the city of Sausalito and tonight. DEBORAH MACHMORE, M.D.: The thing the item. 3D? 2D? No, 3D. Anyway, 5D. That was it. 5D. 3C to 5D. And this item asks for the council to authorize the city manager to execute the memorandum of understanding between the city and the Sausalito Police Association for the period from July 1st, 23 through June 30th, 25. And so city representatives and representatives from the Sausalito Police Association met on numerous occasions and discussed matters in good faith regarding wages, hours, and other terms of conditions of employment to come to agreement to bring this to you tonight. And we do have slides for you, but before we go into them, Noli's going to help me with this. We have some handouts, I think, that are going around now. The current memorandum of understanding expired on June 30th, 2022, and we did a one-year extension through agreement with the Police Association that brought that to June 30th, 2023 um the city has a great but has valued the work done by public safety um and all of the working within the community and on behalf of the city and has over the years beginning in 2001 provided enhanced retirement benefits. There were legacy benefits that included longevity pay and based on terms of service and lifetime medical for qualified members. There was also a $39 million commitment and payment to build a new fire station and police station. And those payments will go through 2039. The recruitment incentives were initiated last fall because it was a really hot market for police and difficult to recruit. And we wanted to attract qualified police officers to serve the community and to work with the city. Also, we wanted to retain our police officers, so retention incentives were put in place, and the next slide will help us cover some of those retention incentives. So in 2022, several of them in over the years 2022 and 23, signing bonuses were paid for three new academy recruits. And there were $15,000 paid in 22. And in 23, the city will pay another 15,000. Five police officers moved one to four steps up their range in merit increases, and in 2022, that cost aggregated to $109,244. Three officers were permanently promoted, and three officers were temporarily promoted. All in all, the total costs each year, $140,000, $122,000 in 2022, $82,193 in 2023. They average about $10,000 for each academy recruit and about $22,600 for each officer promoted. In addition to that, there were one-time bonuses in 2022 of $17,500 for sworn personnel. |
| 02:39:18.54 | Jennifer Conway | 360. |
| 02:39:18.98 | Ryan Acasio | That 5.3. |
| 02:42:48.31 | Deborah Machmore | 12,500 for non sworn personnel. together. Thank you. to meet additionally with all of this going on because we understand how many choices our police officers have and how important the commitment the city council had to Asosolito Police Department. Also, the police association worked with the city diligently to help recover from fiscal challenges. And so there, um, they, we had, we hadn't, that was the one year agreement and the one time bonuses instead of an increase in 2022. Um, so the costs of this Sausalito Police Association agreement are sustainable, um, |
| 02:43:17.83 | Ryan Acasio | Thank you. on. |
| 02:43:37.32 | Deborah Machmore | In the staff report, we do have some fiscal impact, but on the next slide, since the staff report was written, we have actually reviewed that fiscal impact. And there are amended numbers on the handout that the council has and also that the public has now that bring that fiscal impact over the two years to $631,543. |
| 02:44:14.31 | Deborah Machmore | you were you able to adjust the next one no okay so um another important fact um that we're not going to show this slide but um to recruit a police officer the reason for the retention incentives for police officers is because the cost to recruit one vacancy in a police officer exceeds $100,000. And and in 2022 the city was faced with the loss of three seasoned police officers and there were three other police officers who were being tempted in they were as far as in background and and applying with other municipalities so our locations so it was very important to find a way to be fiscally sustainable and conscientious about the budget, but also retain the officers and the brain trust that we had in the police department. That's all I have. |
| 02:45:15.14 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much. Okay, we'll bring it up to the dias for questions. I'll start with just a question that I had. We had received a number of emails correspondence asking about transparency on this item. Could you just clarify why until this point it would have not been discussed in open session around negotiations and how we handle that type of issue? |
| 02:45:35.58 | Deborah Machmore | During negotiations, we were actually prohibited from discussing proposals in the open that are being placed at the table, and that's by the Myers-Millius Brown Act and other labor laws. But in addition, it is just a strategy that you try to hold when you're in a negotiating status. Additionally, it's a small city and a small organization, and it's easy to see a number on a chart and figure out exactly who that person is, and we try to insulate folks from that. Thank you. Councilmember Cox. |
| 02:46:19.25 | Joan Cox | Yes, we've received some correspondence concerned that we did not include the fiscal impact of this and our other MOUs in the budget that we approved at the end of June for this existing fiscal year. Was there a reason that we did not include the cost of in salary increase of potential prospective salary increases in our budget that we approved in June? |
| 02:47:00.74 | Deborah Machmore | So the budget that we approved in June held, is Chad still on? Oh. |
| 02:47:07.14 | Joan Cox | Bye. |
| 02:47:07.17 | Chris Zapata | I am. |
| 02:47:07.27 | Joan Cox | you know, |
| 02:47:07.86 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 02:47:07.88 | Deborah Machmore | Thank you. |
| 02:47:07.92 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 02:47:07.93 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:47:07.95 | Chris Zapata | Let me ask it this way. |
| 02:47:08.03 | Joan Cox | you know, |
| 02:47:08.05 | Deborah Machmore | Let me ask it this way. |
| 02:47:08.91 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Is it not true that we did not want to telegraph what our bottom or upper |
| 02:47:16.20 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:47:16.22 | Deborah Machmore | Thank you. |
| 02:47:17.70 | Joan Cox | parameters were for negotiations at the time that we approved our budget. That is true. Okay. |
| 02:47:24.32 | Deborah Machmore | That is |
| 02:47:24.98 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:47:24.99 | Joan Cox | But did we know that we needed to nevertheless identify funds to accommodate any increased salaries at the time that we undertook the study of our existing budget. |
| 02:47:37.82 | Deborah Machmore | Yeah, knowing that there were fiscal constraints, staff was very conscientious about seeking out funding sources and areas where we could pay for these new money that might be coming in. And Chad can jump in if there's other things that he wants to say. And knowing that we'd have to come back and tell you where we'd go. Thank you. |
| 02:47:59.11 | Joan Cox | And so as a part of the discussion and negotiation of these salary increases, did you indeed identify sources for the proposed uses? |
| 02:48:11.75 | Deborah Machmore | We did identify sources for the proposed uses. Thank you. |
| 02:48:17.03 | Chris Zapata | And if I may, Council Member Cox and Mayor Blasley, members of the council, all that will be clear. We will provide a summer report when all the labor negotiations are wrapped up to show the council, the public and the community when and if adopted, how we intend to fund those without impacting our current budget. fiscal position. We believe that Sausalito is working on trying to invest in any investments you've made in our personnel, especially our public safety. Some of these agreements, you know, have come on the heels of COVID and other things where the market has really made it really hard for any city to recruit police officers. And so in our minds, this particular deal is one that the public may have concerns about why it was not included in the budget. And I'm glad you asked that question, because we couldn't, as you said, tell people where we thought we would be, because then that would have essentially created a need for no negotiation that would have been known. So now we know what we're proposing and what we're asking. And I want to tell the public and I want to tell the council that, you know, we have been given deep thought in how we would make sure that there is an ability to sustain and afford these contracts. Because if we didn't have that ability, we wouldn't recommend it. But I believe that'll be clear once we finish with this process in the next month. |
| 02:49:42.58 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you very much, City Manager. Do we have additional questions from other council members? |
| 02:49:50.34 | Steven Woodside | So thank you for your support. |
| 02:49:53.97 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, thanks. Thank you for this report. I will note that you handed to the city council, I believe to people here in the City Chambers, an addendum to the staff report. And this applies to and sets forth some of the incentives and increases in pay that were provided to the Sassily police officers in 2022, and then those costs going forward in 2023. My question is, is this going to be attached to the staff report for tonight and posted online? |
| 02:50:38.11 | Walfred Solorzano | I'll make sure it's posted tomorrow. |
| 02:50:40.52 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. And a follow up, and also with regard to the numbers that are set forth in this staff report. So the staff report lists the fiscal impact, but I believe Deborah, as you just discussed, those numbers are incorrect, $80,000, I think, |
| 02:50:46.87 | Ryan Acasio | So, |
| 02:50:59.15 | Jill Hoffman | to the negative, I believe someone can correct me if I'm wrong. There's a difference of $88,122. um, Delta that should, um, That should be reflected in the fiscal impact. So my second question is, are we going to issue an amended staff report that corrects what's set out in the fiscal impact? |
| 02:51:25.68 | Deborah Machmore | This is in the attachment that will be an addendum to the staff report. |
| 02:51:31.94 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so I think it's gonna, I think it's going to be confusing to people to not somehow note somewhere on the staff report, like if people go back and look, right, later they're going to go back and look at the staff report. They have to understand and know that those numbers are not correct. |
| 02:51:44.65 | Ryan Acasio | Right. |
| 02:51:49.54 | Jill Hoffman | that are on page three. of the staff report and they need to look at the addendum. So I'm not sure. exactly functionally how to do that. I just want to make- |
| 02:51:59.60 | Walfred Solorzano | I'll title it so that it says amended staff report. Okay. And I think that'll tell whoever's looking for it. It might give them a guide to, okay, this is the second one. I should look at this. This has the correct numbers. If that's okay with counsel. |
| 02:52:03.18 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 02:52:12.56 | Jill Hoffman | I think maybe an asterisk or something there. Oh, add an asterisk. Yeah, or something that says, hey, you need to look at the addendum for the actual numbers. All right. Sounds good. Or something like that. I don't know. So I think it's important for people to understand what the full impact of, obviously, the pay increases. So I think those are all my questions. |
| 02:52:14.55 | Walfred Solorzano | I'll add an asterisk. |
| 02:52:21.07 | Walfred Solorzano | you |
| 02:52:21.08 | Chris Zapata | All right, sounds good. |
| 02:52:35.66 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Thank you. Do we have any further questions from the dais at this time? Okay, seeing none, I will open it up to public comment. |
| 02:52:51.03 | Unknown | See none. |
| 02:52:52.35 | Steven Woodside | Okay, I'll go ahead and close public comment and bring it back up to the dais for discussion and council action. Does anyone want to get us started? |
| 02:53:03.00 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. Since I pulled off, yeah. |
| 02:53:04.10 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:53:04.11 | Jill Hoffman | since I pulled off. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So here's, this is my concern that I've been, there's no, no news to my fellow council members. I'm concerned about our fiscal position, notwithstanding assurances that now we do have the money to pay for these, contrary to what was presented to the public. with regard to our budget that showed that we were, I think, $800 and something dollars in deficit in June. And yet here we are now three months later approving Last in July, we approved a contract that's going to be, I think a couple of million, I can't remember. Oh, wait, I have it right here. that over three years will cost us almost a million dollars and that we're considering the contract tonight that's gonna add another million dollars over three years in total cost. I expect that those numbers were going to double with regard to non-union staff in Sausalito. So at the end of the day, in three years, we've added another $4 million into our cost. And so, you know, respectfully, I know the city manager is working to develop ways to pay for this. But the way that you pay for this is out of, obviously, $4 million. hopefully revenues and not reserve. Revenues, though, we work really hard to increase revenues so that we can pay for capital improvements, so that we can pay for streets. And the claim, you know, We have, I agree that we do need to invest in our staff. Absolutely. I think that we did invest in our police department in 2022 to the tune of $140,000, and we did that not with a renegotiated situation. union salary increase, but we did that within the framework to the maximum extent we could possibly do it. in 2022. to increase the pay of our police officers. So we, um, promoted almost all of the non- non-new officers, so non-recruits, right, up to the top step level. So now all of our officers are at the top pay step level. Officers as they work their way through the system or work their way through longevity, They can receive step increases or promotions within the system without renegotiating a union contract. But we did that for all of our officers. in 2022. So we have significantly invested in our police department. And any claims that I'm not for that, I think, are erroneous because I 100% I supported that effort. We also gave everybody bonuses that year in the police department. So in that cost was $140,000, $122 in one year alone. That was an increased cost for our police department The cost of this year carrying forward is $82,000. 193. I think that adding that to another 14% increase over two years. is just, it's too much. And we're getting to the point where we're close to being not sustainable for an independent police department. I 100% believe that we should have an independent police department and saw Salido. I have always said that I have always voted yes on all police contracts in the past. I've been this is my ninth year on the Council. And so any claims that I don't support the police department are absolutely false. And when I can tell you. that the level of professionalism and the compassionate way that our police dealt with are THE END OF THE END OF THE homeless encampment and continue to, to contact, contact, and engage with people who are experiencing homelessness and Sausalito and other people in distress is outstanding. And I couldn't be more supportive of the police department. This is a completely different analysis of |
| 02:56:57.22 | Ryan Acasio | THE END OF I'm not sure. |
| 02:57:03.89 | Jill Hoffman | Are we ready? to engage in significant Pay increases at this point when we're just now reaching a balanced budget when we're just on the edge of of getting to the point where our expenses do not I'll overshadow our revenues. And so my approach and the approach that I have advocated throughout this process is a more measured approach. a smaller pay increase combined with a bonus that we did last year is a more prudent way to work our way back into fiscal balance and deliver on our promises and obligations to, um, devote a significant amount of our and significant amount of our current our current, uh, reserve, I guess, to capital improvements. We have a lot of deferred capital improvements across Sausalito. And so for the sake of the stability of our budget, and our financial stability, I think I don't support this direction. |
| 02:58:18.86 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:58:18.97 | Steven Woodside | macauxia. |
| 02:58:20.82 | Joan Cox | Thank you. I just wanted to clarify a couple of things from my perspective. The first is that I don't believe that the city manager is currently developing the strategy and approach for paying for this. I believe that the cost that the staff report and the prior reports that we received have notified us that the cost disagreement is sustainable, and we have already identified the revenue sources necessary to accommodate this. I believe that this agreement accommodates the goals that we have announced to the city staff, including the city manager. It accommodates our philosophy of mid-market compensation in an effort to develop and retain Um, A. competent, loyal and experienced staff. I believe it puts an end to the high rates of turnover that we've seen. We've hired 60 employees, I think, in the past couple of years, largely because of our financial constraints and the resultant exodus of qualified people from our staff. And I think that We have already announced a strategy of investing in our people and investing in our infrastructure. And I believe our budget reflects that commitment. And I believe our direction to staff reflects that commitment. And so I don't think one has to suffer in the because of the other. I believe we have the resources to do both, as reflected by a lot of the financial reports that we've received, including the treasurer's report that we received this evening. We did our best in negotiating with SEIU and SPA. We already adopted the SEIU MOU to... have some consistency and some parity between how we treat our employees. And so, um, this is a two-year deal, whether, whereas SEIU was a three-year deal, but the percentages and the goal of accomplishing a mid-market level of compensation in an effort to, um, advance our retention rate is consistent, and so I'm prepared to accept the city managers recommendation that we adopt the resolutions. authorizing the execution of the MOU Thank you. |
| 03:01:27.29 | Steven Woodside | Councilman Kellman. |
| 03:01:28.07 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, I'll chime in. So I think that the document that was handed out today is... really important because it does show the changing nature of the fiscal impact And we saw in depth tonight treasurer's report, as well as decisions we made around putting money into 115 trusts. Those are decisions we made, like we're making this decision to increase the salaries of our officers. And what they wanna offer to the community is that This feels like we're coming towards a real wonderful celebration point of two and a half years of very hard work of this council on rebuilding City Hall and rebuilding the staff in this community. We have a new finance director. We have a new HR director. We have a new community development economic director. We have a sustainability resilience manager, we have a new city manager. None of those things were in place when At least three of us took office, right? So we have worked very, very hard to continue to build and provide stability for this community. We have a philosophy that we have worked hard to develop and get our heads around towards middle of the market pay. will say that now that we are there, Now I think when we move forward in negotiations, things can be a lot harder to move us further from where we are. This is a stable point for us. We saw the treasurer's report. Everybody sitting in this room saw that. And we are in a much, much better place. my ability to move forward with this and actually now vote in favor of it is that I think we are in a really wonderful, stable environment within the city of Sausalito. And if people have questions about that or are comfortable about it, please contact any of us. Certainly call me to discuss it. But I also think we're now signaling we're here. So for negotiations in two years, where would we want to be? So I think that dynamic is going to be probably quite different in the two year negotiation stance. So that's just want to offer that up that and congratulate my colleagues for getting us here through a lot of really, really hard work. So that's what I want to add. |
| 03:03:46.68 | Melissa Blaustein | Thanks, Janelle. I thought that was a really great summary. Uh, Yeah, I mean, and I want to echo what you said, the philosophy, the pay philosophy, I think that's consistent here is that we need to retain our people. That means we need to pay them what market is and that's middle of the market. And and that's the that's going to make future negotiations easier and hope. Maybe that's a theme that our successors up here on the dais can carry forward and can become part of the culture of the agreement with. not just this group. our great staff, but future generations of staff, which should help reduce the volume on the, and any rancor in those negotiations and provide a clear signal of where the anchor point is. In other words, you know, I, I was looking, I know we're trying to get a grip on our finances, but, Russ Irwin, who used to live here in town, he wrote an article in Nextdoor once where he said Sasslita doesn't have a a revenue problem and has a spending problem. That was his analysis of the economics. I think what's becoming clear is that We didn't have a revenue problem. We didn't have a spending problem. We had a savings problem where we were because we didn't have a clear sense of our finances. we were, understandably cautious and hence putting a lot of money in the bank. That's why our cash has gone up from 14 million to 30 million. uh, And that's a good problem to have, but it meant that we delayed investments in our infrastructure and we delayed investments in our people. So as you just said, Councilmember Kelman, I think the first step was to, to invest more in our people. And the next step is to invest more in our, infrastructure. And from there, then we get to the answer of how much tax is enough? Like, I don't want to pay any tax, but I also want to have roads and I want to have police officers. So I know you have to have some tax, but how much? And that's the level of service question, which is, do we want to have a pavement quality index of 0.7, 0.8 or 0.9? Do we want to have 16 police officers or 20? Yeah. Do we want to have lighted streets or not? These are the kind of the questions that we can all then debate about the right balance to have. And I think that's the discussion we're going to be having going forward. But I feel like this was a good first step, fully cognizant, I think, of my colleague, Councilmember Hoffman's concerns about getting forecasts wrong. And so I do have a lot of confidence in the representations made by the city manager about budgeting, and I think that the new financial team that we have on board is crackerjack. And I think as you can just see, the financial reporting is getting clearer and clearer. And I think we can rely upon it to make our going forward decisions. One fact that stunned me, I only learned about today, Tell me if I'm wrong about this number. Is it true that we have hired 62 new employees? Is that, did I hear that number correctly? Am I wrong about that city manager? 62? So, I mean, we only have like 75 employees and in the last four years, three years, we've, we have 62 new employees. I mean, this is a completely different city government under the leadership of Zapata and my colleagues. So I think it is a step in the right direction and requires a constant, constant lens and engagement of everyone, but I'm. cautiously, I'm happy to take this, vote in favor of this first step. |
| 03:07:05.94 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Vice Mayor, and thank you to my colleagues for pointing out that we've worked really hard over the last few years to get us into not only a stronger fiscal position, but a stronger a personnel position and building a team that we can be really proud of here in Sausalito. And I think our police department is no exception to that. And the Sausalito PD has had a rough few years considering the challenges that were brought forth in dealing with the unhoused in our community and providing services and responding to a number of calls that perhaps they hadn't expected when they signed on to the job and doing an excellent response at that. And I have continued to be impressed by them as I have by all of our city employees and And, you know, we have to make difficult choices of where we spend our money. And our budget really is a demonstration of our values. Where our money is spent shows what it is that we really care about as a community. And I think the vice mayor has it exactly right, is the first place that we should be making our investment is in our people and then in our infrastructure because our people will help us solve those problems and think about how we can save going forward. And I think we are in a much stronger fiscal position. We have more revenue from parking this year than we expected and from business licenses and reimbursements that we got a grant to hire police officers, which was fantastic. We've seen property tax growth and we're continuing to see more of that. And I think we're really on the right track and I'm just really proud of that. And I really appreciate the effort that all of our city employees put in and what they bring to our community. You know, the, the difficulty of retaining employees at the cost of a hundred thousand dollars plus to get a new police officer on board. basically justifies the cost of this contract in and of itself. But there's also a testament to what it means to work for the Sausalito PD. And I really want to commend interim chief Gregory and what she does for the team here in making officers want to stay and building a really strong community because other cities are offering $100,000, $200,000 sign on bonuses. And we're competing with that. And I think the reason that people stay is because Sausalito is such a special place. And we are really supporting that with this new agreement. And I'm proud of our fiscal picture and where we stand now. So I'm going to go ahead and bring forward a motion to approve the city manager's suggested memorandum of understanding for the agreement and ask for a second. Second. Okay. Should we take a roll call vote? Do we have to do this? Okay. Roll call vote. |
| 03:09:35.96 | Walfred Solorzano | John Sommerberg Cox. Yes. Councilmember Hoffman? |
| 03:09:39.62 | Steven Woodside | No. |
| 03:09:40.65 | Walfred Solorzano | Council member coming. |
| 03:09:41.71 | Steven Woodside | Yes. |
| 03:09:41.76 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Vice Mayor Sobieski. you Yes. And Mayor Blossy. |
| 03:09:46.50 | Steven Woodside | Yes. Okay. Motion carries four to one. Thank you. So now we'll move on to item six on the agenda, which is communications. And for those of you that have been here waiting since the beginning of the meeting, I truly appreciate your patience with us. This is the time on the agenda for members of the public to provide any public comment for items that are not on the agenda. If you would like to provide a public comment, fill out a speaker slip or raise your hand in the zoom application. The city clerk will call on individuals who have raised their hand in the order they were raised after you are called on you will be unmuted to allow you to share your comments remember public comments are each allowed a total of two minutes to speak and those in the council chambers can just approach the podium because i i see i whatever's easiest for you city clerk natalie |
| 03:10:26.26 | Walfred Solorzano | Is that Natalie Netter? |
| 03:10:32.62 | Natalie Nutter | Natalie Leonard- Hello everyone good evening um I am Natalie Nutter and I lived in sauce little for about four and a half years now. Natalie Leonard- I live on bridgeway so i've raised this with the city council before and also the police department, they are aware of these issues um. You know, there are RVs parked along Bridgeway that are there for over 72 hours. One that was right outside of my window. And I hear them at night screaming, probably on drugs or alcohol. I hear their RV going on all night long. Thank you. I also have experienced them using the restroom on the sidewalk and I think that something has to change. I haven't seen, I know the police department has, you know, came to my calls that I've made at midnight or during the day when I feel afraid. Um, and I appreciate that, but. I feel like there needs to be some more enforcement on this. I also see them dumping their trash all alongside the sidewalk. I also see them putting their trash in our trash cans that we pay for. And also, Let's see. They do also have expired licenses. I unfortunately forgot to put my expired license on my car and I got ticketed for that, but I don't see anything happening with the ones that they don't do. Um, and then I'd also just to close this out, um, advocate for permit parking for residents that live on Bridgeway. I think maybe doing two-hour parking would be something that I'd like to advocate for. I know you guys are doing it on Napa Street, so I'd like for that to be extended to Bridgeway. Again, I'm a young girl going home at night. When I get home late from work, I feel very uncomfortable, so I would like something to change. Thank you. |
| 03:12:35.58 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:12:35.90 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:12:35.93 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:12:37.01 | Walfred Solorzano | Next speaker, Alice Merrill. |
| 03:12:42.19 | Chris Zapata | Just hand it. I could have done that. |
| 03:12:48.87 | Alice Merrill | Well, hello. I am here to ask you to put on the agenda, possibly, a discussion about what's going on in Marin City right now with the 825 Drake Avenue and the... The Board of Supervisors, They allowed this developer, they gave him $40 million in bonds and 1.8 million in grant monies so that he could do this. I have a letter signed by the... um, the president of the Sausalito Women's Club, asking you to... to at least give support that this doesn't go through that Marin city we've walked. Oh boy. I mean, our history is obvious, uh, and it's still happening there. And I would very much like for this group to somehow acknowledge, and I, I do what you can to, um, make the stop in Marin City. And I'm going to give each of you a signed copy of this. |
| 03:14:04.32 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Allison. |
| 03:14:10.60 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah. Laurel Morris Spalter. |
| 03:14:24.47 | Laurel Morris Spalter | Thank you. My message is just very, very simple. And that is that we are a community that is... completely connected to Marin City and that we need to be in solidarity with what is good for them. And there's nothing, there's nothing more that I can say, except for that we have to connect with what is best for them. And that is to be in solidarity with them about saying no to 825. |
| 03:15:07.87 | Natalie Netter | Thank you, Laurel. |
| 03:15:07.96 | Walfred Solorzano | Okay, next speaker is Jerry Spolter. |
| 03:15:24.04 | Jerry Spolter | Hi, Jerry Spolter, 147 San Carlos. Whatever my wife said is absolutely correct. |
| 03:15:31.89 | Chris Zapata | Yeah. |
| 03:15:32.24 | Jerry Spolter | And I think that 825 Drake, for those of you that are familiar with it, I know it's not really part of the Sausalito community, but we profess to be part of the community. Marine City community and what's happening at Jazz by the Bay and the Sausalito Center for the Arts. We're trying to integrate. our two communities, the tunnel between the two communities and that. And this 825 Drake is just an abhorrent addition in terms of it's the open space. It's the last piece of open space in Marin City. It's where we have dumped all of Marin County's low-cost housing and that. And I think as Alice mentioned, to the extent that the city council can take the same position that the women's club have, that our several churches have, the pastors have, And that is go on record as opposing 825 Drake. It's not difficult. It's a resolution. We support the people of Marin City, the underserved, the low income, and that the City Council of Sausalito oppose the development at 825 Drake. Thanks. Thanks for all of you for staying up late and listening to people like us talk at you. |
| 03:17:00.12 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Jerry. |
| 03:17:02.42 | Jerry Spolter | I'll see you next time. |
| 03:17:02.45 | Walfred Solorzano | Chris Durbin. |
| 03:17:10.00 | Chris Durbin | Good evening. I'm here for the same, about the same issue. You all received a letter I'm going to set something down from several of us asking you to consider the issues about 825 Drake. It's so unfair to them. They have, you know, like point one percent of the land of Marin County, and yet they have the vast majority of low income and multifamily housing already. And if Marin City was Sausalito, a real city, There's no way that SB 35 could be imposed on them. But it's an unincorporated area. Our county. didn't oppose it, said their hands were tied. But, you know, then they went on to approve 40 million in tax-free bonds and like Alice said, 1.850. 1,850,000 in a land trust kind of a deal. I forget what it's called, some thing like that. And they're also asking HUD to give 25 project-based, um, Section 8 vouchers to it, which will give the developer, the Idaho, the multimillionaire developer from Idaho, market rate rents. And it's, And like Jerry said, I've heard there were like five developable acres left in Marin City and, um, They just want, they're not against development. They just want to have a say. You know, they have young families who want to stay and They want to have a stay in how the rest of Marin City is developed and So I join everybody else in saying, please, please stand in solidarity with them. Our, our supervisors, Stephanie Moulton-Peters did vote against the $40 million bond, um, tax-free bonds for them. So we've. we're in solidarity with her too. Oh. Can I just have one more minute? Thank you. |
| 03:19:14.80 | Steven Woodside | one I brought it- You can have the second half of Laurel's minute that she didn't use. Thank you so much. Because I brought a show and tell. |
| 03:19:22.03 | Chris Zapata | because I brought |
| 03:19:23.53 | Chris Durbin | you |
| 03:19:23.82 | Chris Zapata | Okay. |
| 03:19:27.21 | Chris Durbin | I consider you guys a group. Thank you. This is the parcel, the one acre parcel that the developer already removed the 100 year old Redwood and what have you. And this is what they want to put on it. It's a five-story, 74-unit, one to three apartment buildings that's going to completely cover senior housing, which is right here, right? Right. We'll be right behind it. And It's just, you know, it's just immoral and wrong on so many levels. And we just really hope you will stand in solidarity with them. Thank you so much. Thank you for letting me have a little more time. You're welcome. Thank you. |
| 03:20:21.70 | Allie Baer | I do mean. Hello. |
| 03:20:24.21 | Damien Morgan | More about Marin City. Thank you to Mr. Spalter for bringing up the Saucel City of Arts. The Saucel City of Arts, don't take it from me. Talk to the folks who were involved, the very Black folk that were involved, who asked to be involved in They have stepped down. Um... The one board member, his name is LaShawn Holcomb. you He stepped down not soon after for being asked to be involved. Another woman who's an art specialist, she went away. So... What's happening here is these promises are being made. The big issue is that you, the city, you all with the board of the center of arts, you guys raised money on the backs of black folks. You went to the foundation, you went to other places, saying you were going to Use some part of this Center of Arts to partner with Marin City, to partner with Black Folk, our neighbor in good faith, but it hasn't happened. Don't take it from me. to the people that stepped away and stepped down. Ask them. So uh, I wasn't going to bring this up, but since you brought up a scenario, I'll just share with the community that the promises have been broken again. And emails went out to some of you all. You probably don't give a darn, but emails went out to you guys about – Them stepping away and promises being broken. And actually it was very hostile. I've been told how they were treated. Very hostile environment. But I want to support black business bringing opportunities, not just to come in and sing and dance and go away. It's more, we offer a lot more in this world than singing and dancing. Thank you. |
| 03:22:24.23 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Do we have any further communications? |
| 03:22:26.72 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah, we do. We have on Zoom Jane Netter. |
| 03:22:38.82 | Walfred Solorzano | You can unmute yourself. |
| 03:22:41.91 | Joe Nitter | Can you hear me okay? |
| 03:22:42.06 | Walfred Solorzano | You hear me okay? |
| 03:22:42.69 | Joe Nitter | Thank you. |
| 03:22:42.70 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:22:42.72 | Joe Nitter | Thank you. |
| 03:22:42.74 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:22:43.28 | Chris Zapata | Yes. |
| 03:22:44.31 | Joe Nitter | Okay, Madam Mayor, Member of City Council, my name is Joe Nitter, I'm an owner of a unit on Bridgeway. I'd like to reinforce Natalie's comments earlier. There's a problem with parking over the years in that particular block of 1700 block of Bridgeway for the past several years. It's gotten better, but it's really turned out to be a lot worse lately. Inoperable vehicles, trash and debris, unlicensed vehicles, people living in their vehicles, boats, debris, using the sidewalk as toilets, loud noise, bad language, everything you can imagine. My daughter was followed one night with one of those residents there. She feels uneasy with her safety for going up and down the stairs from our driveway to Bridgeway. Most of the vehicles have more than one car, so they have to park on Bridgeway. Yeah, you have a municipal code section restricting RV living, housing, cars, or vehicles equipped with campers no longer than eight consecutive hours. I don't know why that's not being enforced. That's a municipal code section of yours. We see in some areas of Sausalito restricting trailer parking under your Resolution 4870. We would like to see something similar to that possibly. We appreciate Stacey, the police chief. She has provided additional patrol in that area. You've received many letters and comments and phone calls of this area. My specific request is that to be added to the residential parking permit area C. We're in the same zoning R3 as the area of Napa and Caledonia area. We're in the same zoning area. This request, my request is this matter be referred to staff to consider an agenda item to be added to this block of Bridgeway as an area C parking permit with no overnight parking except for the residents of that location. |
| 03:24:29.34 | Ryan Acasio | And. |
| 03:24:35.90 | Joe Nitter | or at least have some other area that these RVs can park where they're not right in front of our residents causing these on. the unexpected and very, very dangerous situation for the residents of that. |
| 03:24:52.96 | Walfred Solorzano | Eva? |
| 03:24:58.08 | Eva | Thanks. Can you hear me okay? |
| 03:25:00.39 | Chris Zapata | Yes. |
| 03:25:01.57 | Eva | Thank you. I wanted to address the comments of Chris Durbin. I thought it was interesting that she professed solidarity with Stephanie Moulton Peters. I find a lot of the, the late stage activism amongst white homeowners in support of people in Marin city against eight 25 Drake to be a, Fairly obviously disingenuous. You know, there's a great New York Review of Books article that came out by Piper French that is much better reporting than you'll find in local media. This is not surprising given the quality of the Marin IJ and the Pacific sun. But it's an important read. It's worth noting how lackadaisical Molten Peter's resistance to 825 Drake has been And it's also, as the Piper French article makes clear, Damon Connolly says, really did nothing to expand the reach of the possible sites for this development outside of Marin City. And yet many of the white women homeowners who've been most vocal against 825 Drake have continued to donate to Damon Connolly's campaign and to be vociferous in their opposition to any contenders to Damon Connolly. It's a little bit suspect. There is a larger... and to be vociferous in their opposition to any contenders to Damon Connolly, it's a little bit suspect. There is a larger land claim for black descendants of the shipyard workers, and that's indicated by the 1958 Risley letter Bruce Risley out of Marin City. and that should really be examined. I think, uh, the, uh, City Council should put that on their agenda. And, and, and these white homeowners should really examine what they're doing, because it's, it's pretty obvious, you know, how, how weak they're. |
| 03:27:04.43 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 03:27:04.45 | Walfred Solorzano | much. |
| 03:27:08.23 | Walfred Solorzano | And no more public speakers. |
| 03:27:11.88 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Thank you, members of the public, for those additional... Oh, Babette! Come on down. Never too late. |
| 03:27:19.00 | Babette McDougall | Right. Thank you. I appreciate that. First, I just want to say that I'm really glad that I was able to be here tonight. And I'm really glad that so many people came forward to express how they feel about our community. I'm here for the same reason. I want you to know that I almost feel like I'm a, A teacher again, only this time it's government one-on-one. I flinch every time I hear about the Metropolitan Transportation Commission because of that agreement letter. accepting a half a million dollars as a trade to give them decision rights over future development in this town, over which we will have no say, because we just signed it away for a half a million bucks. I say, do not accept that money, that special interest knocking at your door. They will own you for the rest of your life. They probably already do. Who knows? One way or the other, they're coming at you. That's what happens. That's what happens in Monte Carlo. That's what happens in places like this. That's why I call it the Monte Carlo precipice. So, I think we really need, just like I saw each of you flinch when I said, wait, you didn't say the Pledge of Allegiance. I saw each one of you flinch. in discomfort in your chairs. Now, that was very telling to me, too. So what did the oath of office tell you about this job? That's my question. doesn't need to be answered now. It's just something to think about. I really think you need to think about the vision for this community. If you really think that we need a developed shoreline in order to be our sweet Cordial. Little selves, you're wrong. We need an open shoreline. We need open conservation easements, and we don't need development on our parks. I find that incredulous. And I really think that anytime somebody offers you money in exchange for a vote, like they do in Chicago and elsewhere, during the famous daily days. I think you need to say no. If you need money, then let's get people to help you find that money. If it's that difficult to find a good grant maker, and a good grant writer to bring that money into this town, then you need to turn to the citizens and all your resources and marshal them. This has happened so many times just since I've been involved in this community, first since post-9-1-1. When revenues really went in the toilet, over 90% fell. I don't know if you're aware of that. But we brought it back up. So now we're post-COVID and we're starting over again. I'm sorry about being beeped. But we need. to realize who we are as a people. We stand together under that flag. Thank you, Babette. |
| 03:30:08.86 | Steven Woodside | I appreciate it. Okay, so that concludes our communications and we'll move on to council member committee reports. And I just wanted to start this off under then Mayor Hoffman's leadership. She suggested something that none of us ever actually did, but I would like to bring back. because there's been a lot of questions about transparency and committees and just wanting to know, for instance, especially around the downtown, what happens in the weekly meetings or Myself and Councilmember Cox are working on potential housing at the corporate yard. So in an effort to further encourage transparency, I would like to ask that at the next meeting If you are serving on a committee that met between now and the next meeting to have a written report that you submit as well. and that it be submitted the Thursday before the meeting when the agenda goes forward. I'll have something sent. It doesn't have to be much. It can be two or three lines or a paragraph, but just to encourage further transparency and to reinforce council member Hoffman's idea that none of us ever delivered on. I'm just going to reinstitute that policy because I think it would be really helpful for us. So with that, I will now allow us to also additionally give verbal committee reports with that reminder in front. Anyone, we haven't had a lot of committee meetings because of giving the break, but yes, please. Councilmember Hoffman. you |
| 03:31:32.87 | Jill Hoffman | Um, So I would like to report on the North Executive Committee for the Cal Cities group that we did a legislative meeting in with our elected officials in Sacramento, I think last week. And we talked to both our state senator, Senator Mike McGuire, and our assembly member, Damon Connolly. And we specifically addressed... Interestingly, something that actually is related to the issue at in Marin City, the Drake development, and that's SB 35 and the extension of SB 35 via SB 423. And so we talked directly with Senator McGuire and Assemblymember Connolly about this, about the extension and about SB 423 development. Generally, I think cities like ours view that the extension is a bad thing and that it takes away our local control. and we were asking for their support. I'll let you know that Senator McGuire is supporting um, SB 423 and assembly member Connelly is as of last week was still opposing. So, um, if you're concerned about this, I urge you to reach out to both of our elected officials. We also talked about, um, AB 1567, which is a 55 million bond measure. It's co-sponsored by Assemblymember Connolly, and it's focused on many water-related things, but mainly safe drinking water and flood prevention. So we support that, and we support him in that effort. I will also say, just an FYI, our state senator, Mike McGuire, was just elected to be the next president pro tem of the Senate, which means he's the leader of the state Senate, which is a good thing, we think, because congratulations to him. And that he's, my experience has been, and I think all of us actually hear that he's been very supportive of Sausalito and issues that we've tackled here in our town. So we're very excited that he's going to be the next president pro tem of the California State Senate. And I think that is all my committee report for today. Thank you. |
| 03:33:54.57 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:33:54.60 | Ian Sobieski | Anyone else? Yep, I'll jump in. I have a handful of climate and economic development related items. So on the climate front, I sit on the BCDC Regional Task Force for elected officials who are focused on coastal adaptation and sea level rise. We met out at the Richmond Levee System at the Richmond Wastewater Treatment Plant. So it was a great opportunity to meet with Supervisor Goya from Contra Costa County, with the head of BCDC, Larry Goldschmidt, as well as BCDC staff and other electeds to talk about a very expensive new levy project that they will be constructing to protect the marginalized communities in Richmond. They've been working very closely with the tribes in that area. The community engagement on this project is absolutely outstanding. It's a really great example of the type of adaptation efforts that are being undertaken in our area. I also sit on Bay Wave, which is Marin County's Sea Level Rise Steering Committee. And we received a really interesting presentation from Kate Higman, who's a resilience manager up in San Rafael. It's interesting because it's focused on sea level rise and subsidence. So subsidence is when something is built on fill and then it begins to sink. And so we have that issue on our waterfront. And so there's a lot to learn also from the geotechnical work being done in San Rafael. And then on the economic development front, I'm working with the Blue Economy Task Force to figure out how we might apply for some NOAA and ADA, Economic Development Agency, grant monies to figure out ways to develop a larger ecosystem focused on decarbonization and new economic avenues and more resilient tax base. And then today I got asked to give some feedback on a new effort being I'm not sure if you're done up in Sonoma. They have a huge plan up there for an agricultural and climate innovation center. And they don't have any industrial space planned. And they said, oh, it's also you don't want to partner with us. And I said, yeah, yeah, we would love to do that. So I'll send you guys the specific plan was really interesting. It's a very ambitious project, but they have a lot of funding from the county and the state. So we'll see what happens. |
| 03:36:03.76 | Melissa Blaustein | Great, thanks. So just a heads up that EDAC is, you know, many of our boards and commissions are now doing court meetings just once a quarter. So the next EDAC, Economic Development Advisory Committee meeting that Councilmember Hoffman and I are liaisons for is on September the 11th. And their agenda includes a presentation and foreshadowing of the Sausalito boat show, which should be really exciting. New experience on the working waterfront, as well as a report from Brian Vitale about his creation of the toast to Sausalito beer and wine event, which is going to be on Caledonia as well as a, as a list of other agenda items. So that agenda should be published shortly. I should also note that one of the other liaisons had been Julie Vieira. Today is Julie Vieira's last day. employed in Sausalito. And so she has given her all for Sausalito for many years. Running the chamber is not an easy thing, as we all know, so I'm sure we all I want to wish her well and thank her for everything she's done for the town. So I wanted to acknowledge her contributions to the economic well-being of Sausalito. |
| 03:37:12.88 | Steven Woodside | Do you have a council member? No. Okay. I have a few different report outs. I was recently appointed to the transportation authority of Marin's EV ad hoc committee, and we had a meeting in August where we reviewed some of the new programs for EVs and potential funding sources that will come forward. at the countywide transportation authority Marin meeting. We voted in favor of many of those. And there are a lot of exciting new grant programs that are coming forward for EVs and hopefully new pathways to encourage fleets, citywide fleets to adopt EVs. We're gonna be applying for some that will be quite competitive, so we'll have to take action quickly, We're hopeful that that will be funds that we'll see coming back to Marin and to Sausalito. Many of you know that our Sister Cities organization hosted not one, but two Sister Cities this summer during our break. We had an amazing visit from our friends in Qashqash. We had Um, the council member in charge of international relations and sports, uh, Francisco Cray, join us along with, um, uh, Bernardo, the director of tourism, um, and the Commodore from the, um, Kaishkaish Naval Yacht Club. So that was a lot of fun. And then we also hosted the mayor and a delegation from Sakaide, our sister city in Japan. And we have all been invited and I would encourage all council members to join me in visiting Sakaide for their 35th anniversary celebration of our sister city's relationship. And I just had the opportunity to visit Kaishkaish and spend some time with the mayor and the, again, the international affairs council member. It was a really fantastic visit and I was able to visit their smart cities hub. They have a really fantastic, what they call the cockpit. And I got a lot of great ideas that we can hopefully bring back to Sausalito. And we also visited their, Innovation Hub, DNA Kaish Kaish, a number of good ideas there that we could bring back to the blue. economy here. So that was definitely exciting. And then you heard in my mayor's announcements, the DEI committee updates. And I just wanted to add additionally that I've had some conversations with Paul Austin about hopefully having pop-ups for entrepreneurs at the Sausalito Center for the Arts for Marin City Entrepreneurs. So we're continuing conversations there. And also, Council member Cox and myself. are planning to have a tour of the corporation yard with a representative from the state and we'll report back out on that. That visit is on the 25th. And on the economic development side, I mentioned already, but it's really exciting that we've been included into these Inclusive Entrepreneurs Program at the National League of Cities, which comes with funding. And we also have a lot of support I met with and was able to meet the new administrator for the Small Business Administration here His name is Chris Norton. He's really fantastic. And he came to City Hall and we had a meeting about how we can further support economic initiatives there as well. So that's it from me. Yes, plug. |
| 03:40:07.00 | Melissa Blaustein | A shameless plug for an only in Sausalito kind of event. Shakespeare Shakes is a local grassroots Shakespeare event. That's again, doing a Shakespeare, a bridge Shakespeare play on the water. So Saturday and the seventh, eighth and ninth, was that Saturday and Sunday, right? On the Issaquadoc, go to shakespearshakes.org, get your kayak, go watch Shakespeare from the water. If you can't get on a kayak and you need to see it on land, it's also at the Sausalito Center for the Arts on Thursday night. |
| 03:40:37.51 | Jill Hoffman | I had a follow-up question. Yeah. I hope that's okay. Yeah, of course. The meeting with the state representatives for the corporation yard was regarding what? you |
| 03:40:45.03 | Steven Woodside | you |
| 03:40:45.05 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:40:45.08 | Steven Woodside | So, |
| 03:40:45.20 | Jill Hoffman | to, to, |
| 03:40:45.27 | Steven Woodside | We've mentioned this at prior meetings, but the potential for a 100% affordable project there in partnership with the state. |
| 03:40:51.78 | Jill Hoffman | And that would be through what program? And Rotary Housing. |
| 03:40:53.22 | Steven Woodside | and rotary housing. |
| 03:40:54.68 | Jill Hoffman | With Rotary Housing and through the state, would it be a Homekey facility? No, it's not a Homekey project. |
| 03:40:58.75 | Steven Woodside | So it's not a honky project. |
| 03:41:00.15 | Jill Hoffman | So who would be ministering? |
| 03:41:01.98 | Steven Woodside | shrines. |
| 03:41:02.51 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:41:02.77 | Steven Woodside | So we haven't decided or determined anything. It would all come back to the council. So at this point, we've just had conversations with Senator McGuire's office. And so the representative who's responsible for the program that the state administers, which involves either leasing or selling, giving the property back to the state essentially to provide for and pay 100% for the development. As a surplus land under the surplus land act. |
| 03:41:23.12 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 03:41:25.97 | Steven Woodside | I don't believe that it's an extension of the Surplus Land Act, but we will include that in our written report. And nothing is being decided until it all comes before the council with a full report, but we're just out of transparency, letting everyone know. |
| 03:41:37.14 | Jill Hoffman | everyone knows these things get very far along down the road when it comes to the council so sorry that corporation yard Anyway. Okay. Thank you. |
| 03:41:49.07 | Steven Woodside | Okay, great. Anything. Okay, so now we'll go on to take public comment on items 8A through 8E. And this is city manager reports, city council appointments and other council business. |
| 03:42:07.74 | Steven Woodside | Do we have any public comment? It looks like Damien's coming forward. Okay, great. |
| 03:42:12.95 | Damien Morgan | Thank you again. in regards to a committee that was started. in 2020 and that, DEI, Racial Equity Committee died immediately. A few months ago, Melissa, uh, Mayor Blaustein, Councilwoman, Kelman, myself and Paul Austin, and city manager here. Sorry, I forgot your name, sir. What's your name, sir? Stupid. Jesus Christ. Excuse me. Not to be rude, Chris here, we were in a meeting, starting a committee. And, I'm wondering, I haven't got any feedback for you, Ms. Blaustein, regarding where we're going. We haven't had any meetings. you know, for the last three or four or five years, they've been asking about economic opportunities. Let me say this though. that. By working with Marin City, you're not doing Marin City any favors. The city of Sausalito, I mean, you owe Marin City. segregation. Ah. Redlining. the desegregation order from the state of California attorney general, that was due to people in Sausalito, how they were governing the school district. You owe it to Marin City for economic opportunities. So Ms. Blaustein, When are we meeting? |
| 03:43:55.38 | Damien Morgan | met once. You can put it out there that I'm being hostile, but no, you've been hostile by ignoring me. I've been trying to reach you, and you've been ignoring me. Why? |
| 03:44:05.31 | Walfred Solorzano | Sorry, under Brown Act rules, the council doesn't have to respond. |
| 03:44:10.40 | Damien Morgan | Give me my time back. my time back. I totally understand that. I... I know the brown neck, a person can ask, a person can sit here and stare at somebody. I understand that. I can ask, I know that She doesn't have to. I'm still going to ask. So if I can have my time back, please. |
| 03:44:31.34 | Walfred Solorzano | You have a few seconds. |
| 03:44:32.58 | Damien Morgan | It was about 20 seconds. |
| 03:44:40.34 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. or 20 seconds after that. |
| 03:44:44.34 | Damien Morgan | So again, going back, this committee started in 2020. They went nowhere. I believe that the city wants to do something. I believe you do. But. It seems to be falling by the wayside again. meeting with Paul. You don't want to meet with me because I don't know why. I think I know why, but I want to know, Ms. Kelman, maybe you can tell me in the future when we're going to meet as a committee. Thank you. you Ms. Blountine is ignoring me. Thank you. |
| 03:45:20.89 | Walfred Solorzano | Apologies, sorry. |
| 03:45:22.56 | Steven Woodside | It's okay. Okay, let's move on to city manager information for council. |
| 03:45:32.11 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, counsel, I'll be brief. The city manager report is on the accident at 475 Coloma that happened in the latter part of August while we were on research. Like the last water break, which happened about a month earlier, it was eerily in the same spot almost. Our mayor happened to be on the scene, so she called immediately. Bottom line is 2,800 people were out power. So what we had was Marine Municipal Water District, PG&E, Southern Marine Fire, our police department, our public works department, our communications, people all working together so that we could deal with that situation, which, again, points to preparedness and readiness. And I just want to say that this was an accident created by a car that hit a fire hydrant. And the response by PG&E and all the groups involved, including our city staff, was first rate. So that was done. I also want to report that this morning, I had the pleasure of meeting with the Chamber of Commerce Chairperson Teresa Ancona and the new President and CEO of the Chamber, Daryl Nimero. Good meeting to talk about partnerships and how the city can work with the Chamber to enhance the business environment in Sausalito. And that concludes my reports. |
| 03:46:53.95 | Walfred Solorzano | Sorry, we did have one more person on Zoom that wanted to make public comment on those items. Ava? |
| 03:47:02.56 | Eva | Yes, thank you so much. I did want to add that I have been pouring through the archives from the 1950s. you know, both at County Archives and wherever else I can get it, including UC Berkeley. And I think what Damian Morgan was talking about, there's a pretty long record of that, and particularly in the 50s and particularly with regard to housing. And it's one of the reasons the Risley letter is so important. And I really urge the mayor, Melissa Blaustein, who's who's. you know, made a lot of, I think, tried to reach out and, and has, you know, kind of talk the talk, and now it's time to walk the walk and get this matter on the agenda. The Risley letter lays out a very strong land claim for the descendants of the, the black descendants of the black shipyard workers in Marin city. And certainly the rest of the archives fill out that story. That's not so much on the city of Sausalito in terms of reparations, but their role in pushing back on Risley and any effort from Marin City to kind of create its own, what Risley was aiming for and got very close to was cooperatively owned, public, cooperatively owned affordable housing. And He, you know, I mean, he was a powerhouse and he had the support of the entire community. And The way Sausalito pushed back on that effort is historic. It's important. It should be part of that DEI effort that you ditched, and it should be on. |
| 03:49:09.93 | Jill Hoffman | you or |
| 03:49:12.40 | Steven Woodside | Peace. I don't know if we perceive civil left, but we do need to make an appointment to the Commission on Aging. |
| 03:49:23.35 | Steven Woodside | My mic's not on. Item 8C is appointments to boards, commissions, and committees. It says none. A couple of things on this point. The first is that we have a number of vacancies on our existing boards and commissions, so I would encourage any members of the public who are interested in serving on any of these to apply. And in our next, perhaps our next meeting or the following, we'll be interviewing a number of candidates and sending out another announcement and currents about the vacancies. I know we do have to make an appointment to the Commission on Aging because Sybil Boutillier, who has served us for many years and done an excellent job, is stepping down. So we should definitely add that to the next agenda and encourage folks to apply for that as well. The next item is future agenda items, 8D, who would like to get started on future? Yes, Councilmember Cox. |
| 03:50:09.86 | Joan Cox | So I just made some notes throughout this evening from public comment on various items. So one possible future agenda item is consideration of a resolution concerning 825-DRAKE. Another is a consideration of whether to add the Pledge of Allegiance back to our agenda. Another is to identify a way to ensure that members of the public have access to correspondence related to agenda items. I think it's already on there. Okay. A member of the public wrote to me requesting that we ask for a report from the Saucelita Marin City School District. |
| 03:50:46.88 | Walfred Solorzano | already on there. Okay. |
| 03:50:59.27 | Chris Zapata | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:50:59.28 | Joan Cox | Thank you. We haven't had one since the new, well, just the new superintendent was just recently appointed. So I think it would behoove us to reach out and offer our continued collaboration with the district. Another is consideration of rezoning of areas of Bridgeway to be consistent with the manner in which we zone Napa Street and other streets. I think city staff is already working on that. but I'd be interested to hear |
| 03:51:30.50 | Steven Woodside | For parking specifically? |
| 03:51:32.88 | Joan Cox | . And then. I know that the mayor at one point was working on a smart cities initiative. So we've approved the RFP this evening |
| 03:51:43.97 | Steven Woodside | Okay, perfect. |
| 03:51:44.93 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:51:44.96 | Judith Wetter | Perfect. |
| 03:51:45.40 | Joan Cox | Okay. |
| 03:51:45.98 | Steven Woodside | And that's all I had. Thank you for thinking of the smart cities RFP. Anybody want to add anything? |
| 03:51:56.34 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, I think the city manager already indicated that this was gonna be a presentation to the city council, a presentation on the global Global presentation on the pay increases that we've that we've approved so far and that we're going to also considering additional pay increases. And once those are done, let that come to the city council for one presentation of all of the costs and and sources for payment of those but i think city manager already said we were going to do that i'm just adding it in um and also as i said earlier bike management for 2024 well first reconciliation i suppose um audits uh too too aggressive of a word but like a reconciliation of the bike management um you know in the past like five years and then a discussion about what we want to do for next year My suspicion is that bike traffic is way down and is probably going to stay way down. And so we need to pivot a little bit about how we're doing our bike management, I think, going forward. So those are my two things in addition to some of the other things I might list too. |
| 03:53:09.34 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 03:53:10.60 | Jill Hoffman | Anyway. you |
| 03:53:11.43 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. I had previously asked that Bridgeway Marina LOI come to full council, and I know it's been hanging on on the future agenda. I'd like to see if there's interest in expanding that. with an interest in looking at that whole area basically from community boating center down to where the joinery is to understand what our opportunity is there. And the city manager and I have spoken about this. I'd love to see our community and economic development director talk to us about that area. If there's any conversation about it at EDAC, I'd like to hear about it. But I think we should consider that opportunity collectively. And so if there's interest in that, I would want to expand just the Bridgeway Marina conversation to see what's going on there from a planning perspective as well. |
| 03:53:56.72 | Melissa Blaustein | You know, it's, Janelle, it's not too late to maybe suggest that that be on the EDAC agenda if you wanted to have them Talk about it next week. |
| 03:54:03.81 | Ian Sobieski | I actually would like the council to think about it first and then give direction to EDEC. If that's okay with you. Yeah, sure. Thank you. That's great. |
| 03:54:10.31 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, sure. I'll just add one more item, which is that I've heard from some of the merchants on Caledonia that they were. While they're happy that we've improved our parking practices, many of their employees were adversely impacted by the change to need for resident parking permits because they have to move their cars every two hours. So if we can also consider how we might uh, provide for an employee parking program along somewhere near the close to the Caledonia corridor. you That would be great. Okay, any other reports of significance? Okay, well, there are two people that we need to adjourn the meeting for this evening. And I will... I will start and then I will pass the gavel over to Councilmember Cox. I'm sure that all of you at some point, if you are at all involved in the city of Sausalito or have been in the last 50 to 60 years, had the opportunity to interact with me or talk with Bill Werner, who was truly a pillar of community involvement and engagement here in Sausalito, and also a very kind man with an extremely gentle heart and a great passion for giving back to the community, and was one of the most dedicated public servants that I have ever seen in our community or any community. And I was lucky enough to live next door to Bill and to also run against Bill in my first election for office. And so we were able to spend a lot of time together. And I learned a lot of lessons from him. And the last time I sat with him was on his birthday. And we were talking about what he was going to include in his holiday card. And he was sharing that his holiday card was going to be sort of like the closing of a new door, closing of one door and the opening of a new one. And so I just really hope that we can think about how Bill would want us to open the next door and Sausalito and continue to honor him and everything that he gave for our community. So Bill Werner, you will be dearly missed. And we're, of course, keeping everyone close to you and your family and Pat and our thoughts at this time. And I'm going to pass it over to Joan because, well, I was, well, I know that Joan lost her mother. So we were going to also close the meeting in honor of council member Cox's mother this evening and let you say a few words as well. If you want, you don't have to say anything. We can just say your name and honor her as well. |
| 03:56:32.06 | Unknown | I didn't know who in the world you wanted me to talk about. That is so nice. My mother. Thank you. |
| 03:56:40.31 | Joan Cox | insisted that we not have a funeral for her because she didn't feel as though she had contributed anything worthwhile. And yet she raised three daughters. She volunteered at the Ronald McDonald House tirelessly. She volunteered throughout the community on the finance committee throughout her, um, nursing facility, she gave more of herself and was selfless throughout her life. And so it's just indicative of her that she would not want a funeral because that's how humble she was and so the thought |
| 03:57:19.04 | Unknown | of adjourning this meeting in her honor as well is just unbelievably amazing. So thank you so much for that, Judge. |
| 03:57:28.98 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:57:29.06 | Steven Woodside | on them. Do you want to do the gavel? Okay. |
| 03:57:32.79 | Joan Cox | All right, so we're going to adjourn this meeting in honor of my dear friend, Bill Werner, and my dearly departed mother. Thank you. |