| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:30.39 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, we're good. Good evening, Mayor Sobieski and council members. This meeting of... |
| 00:00:34.12 | Unknown | Thank you. THE END OF |
| 00:00:38.13 | Walfred Solorzano | of the April 2, 2024 City Council is being held in Council Chambers, located in 420 Litho Street. Staff and members of the public are also participating through Zoom. The meeting is being broadcast live on the city's website and on cable TV channel 27. City Clerk, would you please call the roll? Council member, sorry, council member Blaustein. |
| 00:01:00.43 | Melissa Blaustein | Yes. |
| 00:01:01.49 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Hoffman. |
| 00:01:02.79 | Melissa Blaustein | THE END OF |
| 00:01:02.86 | Walfred Solorzano | THE END OF THE END OF THE Thank you. Council member coming. Here. Vice Mayor Cox. Here. I'm Marisol Bieski. |
| 00:01:08.61 | Steven Woodside | In closed session today, we're going to have conference with the legal counsel on two significant Exposure cases, we will have conference with legal counsel on existing litigation, government code section 54956.9 D1. Yes, in my backyard versus the city of Sausalito, Marin County Superior Court. A second case, conference with legal counsel, existing litigation, government code section 54956.9. The name of the case is Porche versus city of Sausalito. Is there any public comment on any of these closed session items? |
| 00:01:39.93 | Walfred Solorzano | Any members of the public on the closed session item? Okay, yeah, we do have members from the public that want to comment. Please proceed. |
| 00:01:50.04 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:01:50.22 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:01:50.28 | Steven Woodside | Please alert people online. Is there anyone online? |
| 00:01:53.04 | Walfred Solorzano | Not at the moment. Anybody that's online and wants to comment on this portion, please use the raise hand function on the bottom of your screen. |
| 00:02:02.36 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not entirely sure the BBK attorney needs to be. |
| 00:02:02.41 | Walfred Solorzano | I don't know. |
| 00:02:07.13 | Jill Hoffman | camera on. Mr. Clerk? |
| 00:02:12.35 | Steven Woodside | All right. Please proceed. |
| 00:02:16.08 | Sophia Collier | Yeah, hi, I'm Sophia Collier here and I'm representing Save Our Sausalito. I'm here to discuss the 605-613 project, which I'm intuiting might be one of the matters that will be discussed. One of the things that I wanted to raise was that we, Ed and I, are both here and that we are also vitally interested in this. And we have also retained counsel to help us understand it. And what we want to do is to encourage the city to work with us and our council because we want to, we feel that we're here to help. We want to try to find a way forward. We're in a sticky situation. that would, and there was a great job of putting together, getting the, housing element in on time. Amazing thing. Very few did it. But in that effort, there were a lot of details and unintended consequences occurred. So right now we're facing something that is very concerning with a project that is completely out of character to our historic district. under SB 35, which we all know is a very aggressive Great train approach. And we need to navigate this very, very thoughtfully and carefully. So we've retained a council that is a specialist in initiatives because we know that 1022 is an aspect of this very important. and also land use counsel as well. have the council do with the Vulcan mind meld and get together and see if there's a way to find a way forward. And that we know that our council is, will know, and your council will know, hey, what can we talk about? What can we not talk about? So we don't really need to worry about, gosh, is something going to leak out or there are problems? but we're hoping that we can be part of the solution to protect our AND I THINK IT'S A historic district and the beautiful character of our community that's so vital and not have an unintended consequence that would basically destroy the historic district and and our environment. Thank you. |
| 00:04:14.20 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:04:14.22 | Ed Brakeman | you break then. Hello, I'm Ed Brakeman, a resident, also very involved with the Save Our Sausalito effort. We have over a thousand people that have now weighed in and in the in the effort to to make everyone in Sausalito aware of how significant the issues we're facing with respect to development in ways that we've never faced as a city before. And I know two weeks ago we talked about some of the important longer-term issues, but we also have a really significant short-term issue, which does have to do with this proposed FOTS project on Bridgeway. And there's a large group of citizens who are really concerned that this will forever change the way Sausalito. Both the historic district and the waterfront presents itself for us as as residents who enjoy the charm and the beauty that we've had along the waterfront for so many years and want to see that retained and concerned that that will change. In short order, if we don't, all figure out how to come together and create the Sausalito that we, that we want to live in. And so we're trying to take the actions we can to be as informed as possible to come up with solutions that might be, um, uh, effective at bridging the gap between a great housing element plan. And we need to make sure we keep moving forward on that plan and actually get the housing, that is anticipated to happen and work collaboratively on that front. But also we have to make sure we protect the Sausalito's historic district and the other natural resources of our town. I'll leave it at that. Thank you. |
| 00:05:57.78 | Steven Woodside | Any other public comment? I'm seeing no further public comment. Okay, thank you. We'll adjourn to closed session. |
| 00:07:01.87 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Hello, everyone. Good evening. We're returning from closed session. There are no items to announce from closed session. We will reconvene to open session and start with the Pledge of Allegiance. |
| 00:07:12.98 | Unknown | minutes. Bye. Thank you. The problem with the experience is when we get to God. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:07:24.18 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much. and I think that's a good We will now move on to approval of the action, or actually special, I didn't know this was first assignments of the mayor appointments. I thought that was gonna be last, but. I will leap to action to say that I have partial appointments. I'll make some more next week, next meeting, I mean, but the, Changes will be moving myself to the agenda setting committee, even though that's been de facto the case since the beginning of the year. but Councilmember Blaustein will replace me on the Library Board of Trustees, congratulations. Councilmember Cox replaces me on the PBAC Committee, pedestrian bicycle, Councilmember Kelman replaces me on the sewer committee and Councilmember Kelman replaces me and joins Hoffman on EDAC. Well, it meets quarterly, once a quarter. And then Council Member Blas team replaces me on BMCT Transit, which I thought was an error that I was listed there. Oh, sorry. It's just a few appointments. So there'll be, can you hear me now? Sorry, so Blaustein has joined the Board of Trustees of the library. Cox is joining PBAC. Kalman joins the sewer committee and EDAC. Blaustein replaces me on MCT Transit as the liaison. And that's all the appointments for the time being. |
| 00:08:44.42 | Ian Sobieski | Mr. Mayor, might I also sit on the agenda setting committee with you? |
| 00:08:48.02 | Steven Woodside | Yes. Yes, you. It's right there. It said I said it's Cox and me. Cox and Sobieski. |
| 00:08:53.50 | Jill Hoffman | Tux and stuff. So thank you. So sorry, the clarification. So I heard Kelman's joining |
| 00:08:55.14 | Steven Woodside | So- |
| 00:09:00.42 | Jill Hoffman | EDAC. I'm leaving EDAC. Is that what you're saying? She's joining me on EDAC. She's replacing me. Congratulations. |
| 00:09:01.99 | Steven Woodside | No. I think. |
| 00:09:06.44 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:09:06.46 | Steven Woodside | So, |
| 00:09:06.53 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 00:09:06.76 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. For placing me on EDAC. Thanks. Okay, so with those announcements, we'll move on to the action minutes of the previous meeting, adopting the minutes of the March 19th. and May 9th, 2023 City Council meeting. Is there any public comment on those minutes? See you then. We'll move to a vote at all. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? |
| 00:09:30.93 | Ian Sobieski | So moved. |
| 00:09:32.68 | Steven Woodside | Is there a second? |
| 00:09:34.57 | Ian Sobieski | second. |
| 00:09:35.62 | Steven Woodside | All in favor, say aye. Thank you. |
| 00:09:36.70 | Ian Sobieski | Bye. |
| 00:09:37.16 | Steven Woodside | Opposed? motion to adopt the minutes is adopted. Moving on to the consent calendar, these are matters that are generally non-controversial and considered routine. They require no separate discussion and they're expected to have unanimous counsel support and they may be enacted in one motion. Items may be removed from the consent calendar by any city council member. Items removed from the consent council calendar will be heard later in today's agenda. The consent calendar items are adoption of the 2024 city council meeting calendar. Item 3B, authorize the city manager to approve the subscription to Ring Central for the city of Sausalito's updated telephony system. Item 3C, approve an updated publicly available pay schedule. Item 3D, adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute a professional services agreement with Schaaf and Wheeler to develop plans, specifications and estimates for the large trash capture device in the Marin ship not to exceed $109,203. And item 3E, waiver of the second reading of ordinance 3-2024, an ordinance of the city of Sausalito City Council of City of the City of Sausalito amending Sausalito Municipal Code section 2.58.040 relating to the residency requirements of city boards, commissions, and committees. Is there any public, or first off, is there any items that people want to withdraw from the consent calendar? |
| 00:11:04.65 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, I would like to pull off the adoption of the calendar. |
| 00:11:07.98 | Steven Woodside | Okay, the calendar will become item. five, C. at the end of the meeting. |
| 00:11:16.50 | Joan Cox | Mayor, there was some public comment around item 3E, which is the residency requirements that seems to suggest some clarifications might be needed. I'm wondering if other council members felt that same way. |
| 00:11:27.70 | Ian Sobieski | Say that again, I'm sorry. |
| 00:11:28.85 | Joan Cox | There was some public comment suggesting that we maybe needed some clarification around this ordinance regarding residency requirements on city boards and commissions, and I'm wondering if other council members felt that way. |
| 00:11:41.58 | Steven Woodside | I'm not sure we can have a discussion. Do you just want to pull it off? |
| 00:11:43.38 | Joan Cox | Oh, yeah, let's pull it off. |
| 00:11:45.14 | Steven Woodside | All right, so that will become item 5D on today's podcast. calendar so authorizing the consent calendar with items 3b 3c and 3d. We will need to hear a public comment on those three items. Is there any public comment. |
| 00:12:02.94 | Walfred Solorzano | Yes, we have one. |
| 00:12:08.98 | Jan Johnson | this last minute, but... I personally think that if you're going to be on a committee in Sausalito, you should be... |
| 00:12:16.59 | Steven Woodside | item got pulled miss johnson oh i thought you wanted to be now part of the regular agenda item 5d isn't dog yeah i pulled it okay thank you very much |
| 00:12:18.65 | Jan Johnson | I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK. . Thank you. THE FAMILY. |
| 00:12:22.82 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:12:22.94 | Jan Johnson | Thank you. |
| 00:12:22.97 | Walfred Solorzano | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:12:27.24 | Walfred Solorzano | I see no other comments. |
| 00:12:28.54 | Steven Woodside | All right. Is there a motion to approve the consent? |
| 00:12:30.75 | Ian Sobieski | Mayor, I'm so sorry. I actually had a question about item 5B. Sorry about that. |
| 00:12:38.24 | Steven Woodside | you want to pull it or do you want to ask your question? |
| 00:12:39.61 | Ian Sobieski | I want to ask my question. So, hold on one second. |
| 00:12:46.95 | Sergio Rudin | you |
| 00:12:49.77 | Ian Sobieski | Okay. In 2022, Senate Bill 1162 was adopted, which is a wage transparency law and requires that an impoverished employees, that employee, job post Sorry, that we post or publish pay scale in addition to pay rates. And I wanted to find out if we do that or... if we do that? |
| 00:13:24.83 | Ian Sobieski | anything like that. |
| 00:13:25.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:13:28.50 | Chris Zapata | I'm going to ask Kathy Nikitas, our HR manager, to come in and address that question. Vice Mayor Cox in Council. |
| 00:13:35.72 | Kathy Nikitas | Good evening. My name is Kathy Nikitas. I'm the Human Resources Manager. We do publish the scale in addition to all the list of positions. There are some positions that have a range and steps, and there are others that just have a minimum and maximum. |
| 00:13:51.38 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you so much. Sure. That's it. Right? |
| 00:13:53.91 | Steven Woodside | So is there a motion to rewrite in 3B, 3C, and 3D? |
| 00:13:57.91 | Kathy Nikitas | So moved. Yeah. |
| 00:14:00.30 | Steven Woodside | All in favor. |
| 00:14:00.98 | Kathy Nikitas | Aye. Aye. Opposed? |
| 00:14:03.24 | Steven Woodside | Motion passes unanimously. There are no public hearing items. We'll move on to the first business item, 5A, a review of the draft fiscal year 2024-25 capital improvement program. who's giving the kickoff to the presentation. |
| 00:14:17.01 | Chris Zapata | Mayor that'll be myself starting can you put the slides up Wofford please and let me again begin by saying this is a draft Apple improvement program the way it's structured for tonight is it I'll give some information The city engineer slash public works director Kevin McGowan will give a presentation City Council can ask all the questions they want public comment and then we'll seek council direction So can you go to the second third slide Wofford? Yes, great. Thank you. So let me just begin by saying you hire a city manager to make recommendations. And some of the recommendations that have been made in the past two and a half years that I've been here have been infrastructure, infrastructure, and infrastructure. So one of the things that I want, and I think it's well known, that Saucel was an older community. And because it's an older community, it has a lot of aged infrastructure, above ground and below ground. and some of the things that affect infrastructure these days besides age include climate change and rising costs. Cost of projects continues to escalate. Some of the things that people should know about our infrastructure, that it includes not just roads and streets and sidewalks, but drainage, sewer, buildings, our green infrastructure, our stairs, and our digital infrastructure. So all of that is part of this whole conversation in our capital improvement program. And so to give you more scale and context, Saucena has 26 lane miles of road, 2.2 square miles, the 26 lane miles of roads, 21 miles of sanitary sewer collection. That's quite a bit under the ground that people may not be aware of and may not see. 15 parks, 42 stair systems, five public buildings and six leaks buildings. That's all part of our basic infrastructure. So let me say that is part of our corporation and our assets that, you know, are to be maintained and taken care of for the public in an orderly fashion. And it's a very, very, very big and tall order. And this particular administration, city council, city manager, city staff is not the first to tackle it. I think it's very important to note that this has been a priority for a number of years. And when you go back and look at Sausalito's record of infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure, they started with, in the recent last 15 years, with the public safety facilities. I heard the story about trailers and so on being on Bridgeway, which housed our police and fire departments, which are not acceptable, and now you have two brand new or sort of brand new facilities at the end of Caledonia, which meet public safety needs. There was a real desire to improve parks. So certificates of participation and that infrastructure and approximately 10 million and then some was invested in our parks because there were ongoing maintenance needs. The city councils, seven, eight, nine years ago, 2014-15 timeframe passed what was called Measure O, which was a quarter cent sales tax on top of the existing sales tax of one cent to fund infrastructure. And the city councils have stayed true to using that money for the last eight, nine years. In addition, there's been what I call some innovative thinking around setting up funds involving the parking lots, involving the old city hall, and involving our MLK facility so that money's coming into or out of those resources through rents are set aside into a separate fund. They aren't mingled with the general fund at this time. And the idea was that those would be used to fix parking lots, fix buildings, address tenant needs. So that's all been part of the past, and I think it's wise, but there's still so much more to do. When the city council did its strategic planning in 19 and 20, one of the things I wanted to note is there were about 90 or so work tasks, and approximately 60% of those were in public works and infrastructure. So that tells you the attention that people have paid in that regard. Next slide, please. |
| 00:18:30.39 | Chris Zapata | So going back to two years ago, one of the things we talked about is we need to get back to the basics in Sausalito. We need to worry about our finance, our infrastructure, and our personnel. And one of the things we did was provided you an estimated infrastructure needs that when you talk about the basic stuff, building streets, sidewalks, stairs, you were talking about $99 million that was estimated two and a half years ago. And based on the expiration of Measure L, which was, or Measure O, which was set to expire in 2023, the city council unanimously put that on the ballot. The public supported it to extend and expand Measure O for eight years. So going from a quarter cent to half a cent, and that generates approximately $3 million a year. So that's $24 million over the next eight years to invest into infrastructure, which is important. But you still see the gap. That $99 million, let's call it $100 million. Let's call it $24 million, $25 million. There's a $75 million gap there. So in order to do the work, you need money, but you also need people. And so the city council a couple years ago did something very, very important. They authorized the city council to begin looking at incorporating into our budget two additional new project managers, which we put in last year. I'm happy to say we've hired both of them. They're both on staff now, so they can help implement the capital improvement program projects that we have on the books now. The other thing is the city council is adamant that we go out and find other people's money. And so you directed the hiring of a grants consultant. We've done that. California Consulting has been retained as our grant consultant. They've worked with us on a number of grants. We have not been successful as we'd like to be, but I think the work that's been done has provided a good foundation of information that we can use in future applications so we're not constantly reinventing the wheels. Next slide, please. |
| 00:20:27.97 | Chris Zapata | So one of the things I want to say is I've heard that, you know, the city is interested in one area, and that's downtown. I think that's false. The capital investment in the city, as you will see, is citywide. It's investment citywide. It's beyond Caledonia. It's beyond the downtown area. It's throughout the city. And in order to do that citywide, you need to use various kinds of funding. I mentioned Measure L. There's a Titleins fund that I think we haven't paid enough attention to, and we can talk about that later today. There's obviously some county funds that come into this. There's the Parking Fund, the Old City Hall Fund, and the General Fund. So as it stands right now, there are 29 active projects that the city council the last couple of years have approved in our capital improvement program and so tonight we're proposing new projects and one of the things I want to note is if the program recommended is proceeded with that would mean about a four and a half million dollar investment in the city's infrastructure and that's a sizable amount in our budget next slide please So the question is, you know, are we working in a vacuum with our capital improvement program? The answer is no. This went in front of the planning commission recently. That's required by state law. There are some things that are going on that we are trying to align and integrate into this effort, which include the facility RFP, which the council just approved two meetings ago. There's a climate tech grant that we went out and sought for the analysis and smart use of our buildings. There's sea level rise adaptation that's going on right now that's going to have an impact on how our shoreline and water-facing infrastructure is impacted by that. So those are all part of an integrated thought process that when we build a capital improvement program that we effectively don't work in a silo. There's an alignment with safety and quality of life. You know, there certainly is got to be an alignment with finances. We're looking at impact fees as a possibility in sustenance right now. There's a 10-year financial forecast that's being worked on by a special group appointed by then-Mayor Blaustein, which is Mayor Sobieski, Councilmember Hoffman, and former Mayor Ray Withey and Chad Hess. And then there is absolutely an integration into our annual budget development, which we're midway in through right now. So part of the council's efforts recently has been to integrate resiliency and sustainability into what we do with our capital facility programs and projects and grant applications. And so in the hiring of resiliency and sustainability manager, Katie Tho Garcia, that's happening. Next slide, please. |
| 00:23:19.31 | Chris Zapata | So trying to figure out where we're trying to get other people's money and using the California Consulting Group to do so. We have nine current grant applications in process that relate to infrastructure. They involve trying to get funding for Gate 5 Road, the Turner Street Dock, looking at our coastal resilience, our smart idea, smart bioswales, cybersecurity, which is a big, important matter, and sea level rise adaptation. We've submitted a number of grants that did not get funded, and so the community knows that we haven't been sitting on our hands. We've been trying to seek outside funding. We just haven't been successful yet. That includes pedestrian and bicycle safety, transportation and signal improvements, flooding that's involved with Marin City and Sausalito, ship repair, homelessness, and smart city broadband applications that weren't successful. But I say this, those applications have good data in them. So in the future, when we want to apply for those funds, we can update that data. We don't have to start from scratch, but they're not wasted exercises. Next slide, please. So one of the things about a capital improvement program, typically it's a five, six-year program that rolls. You're never done maintaining your properties, your facilities, your infrastructure, just like you're never done maintaining your house. It's part of an annual budget process, and as this is worked through internally with staff before it comes to you, there are factors that the city staff looks at and rates it. That's in your packet. And some of those include safety. That's a predominant factor. Does it align with council goals? What are resources available? Does it pertain and relate to resiliency and sustainability? So some of the things that are in the capital improvement program so the public is aware are drainage projects, facility and park projects, internal projects like cybersecurity, streets, stairs, sewer, and traffic. All those are categorized in the CIP as areas where we want to put some money into to maintain our infrastructure. Next slide, please. So again, I mentioned the Planning Commission has to review. They did for conformance with the general plan per state law. Tonight, what we're asking the city council to do is to let Kevin go through what's being proposed, what's been done, show you some visuals, and then we can get to your decision-making, your direction, and public comment as it relates to a couple of projects that really have what I call the public's interest. One of them is obviously the Bridgeway safety and bike plan. I want to just say that we are not deaf. We heard what the council told us a couple of meetings ago or a year ago that, you know, we aren't to go and take the $563,000. We are to put a pause on that grant, even though it's been allocated to the city. We then came back and you asked us to work on different concepts and designs and alternatives to the original grant, which would have just kept the static boundaries as they are to come back with something creative and different. And so we think we have an approach to not do the old grant, not abandon the funding, but to factor in the concerns that people have about the median, about the bike path, about the emergency access, but to do it on a larger scale, more comprehensive scale, and work into that some things that involve resiliency. But again, we need people to kind of pump the brakes on this narrative that the city of Sausalito is moving forward with the old grant, but to also be open to the possibility that we can do something on Bridgeway that might meet muster for more people than not. So we can get to that. The Bridgeway-Bollard conversation has been something that came about when a resident came and suggested that there was a history of accidents on that corner. So one of the things you see is that in this CIP there's a discussion about that project. The idea that bollards are good for low speed traffic but not good for high speed traffic is one of the reasons the staff is recommending this may not be the year to do it unless you can do it right. So all that to say there's more to come. Kevin's going to provide that information and would appreciate you letting him get through it. And then the questions and the public comments and the direction can follow. Thank you. |
| 00:27:34.66 | Kevin McGowan | All right. Thank you, Mr. City Manager. I'm Kevin McGowan, Public Works Director for Sausalito. And are we on the right slide? So I may end up saying a few things that Chris has already mentioned, so my apologies up front, but I'll do my best to get through this quickly. The Capital Improvement Program is a fluid document, which can change throughout the year and does change over the five-year period. This planning document is utilized to address improvements to our public infrastructure. Similar to other cities in the country, we have a need for many improvements to our roads, buildings, public spaces, but we have a limited amount of funding to facilitate these repairs and improvements. A CIP is utilized to develop a list of possible improvement projects and estimates the amount of funding needed to support these projects. The CIP also prioritizes the improvements. with the intent of providing a recommendation to you as City Council to allocate funds in conjunction with the annual budget. The Sausalito's five-year capital improvement program is, like mentioned before, is updated annually. Next slide, please. |
| 00:28:46.51 | Kevin McGowan | Our engineering division is managing 29 active projects, all in various stages of development, from conceptual designs to construction. The department is also tracking 60 projects on the capital improvement program, some of which may not have been included in prior years. These are both shown in a summary list in your packet as attachment one. In addition, further details associated with all the projects are shown in attachment four. Now, that's a pretty big document, and folks have told me in the past that it's kind of hard to navigate. But I welcome anybody who has questions on that specifically, and we can always take that offline, and I can help with that. Um, each project has a description and an estimated funding source, as well as possible expenses listed in attachment four. Now, we have a typo in one of the attachment ones where it says future projects. I think at the top I have a heading that's off, and it should say fiscal year 2425 instead of fiscal year 2324. I'll eventually change that. So just wanted to mention it. I did see it. I just didn't catch it before the time I got it to you folks. Next slide, please. Next slide, please. As noted earlier, staff utilizes a rating system to assist with prioritizing new projects for funding in the next fiscal year. Attachment 2 denotes the rating criteria, while attachment 3 shows the rating for each project. This is a subjective process and staff is recommending some projects that may not be the highest rating with the intent of addressing multiple types of projects in each fiscal year. Council is welcome to make changes and deletions and anything else that you'd like with this listing as well. Next slide, please. This year, staff is proposing to initiate 14 new projects. These are shown in blue on the map above. Projects such as the 2025 street resurfacing project are not shown since we have not finalized the list of roads to be addressed. Other projects, such as our recommendation to pursue a solution for to the flooding on Gate 5, is shown on this map. Next slide, please. |
| 00:31:13.61 | Kevin McGowan | At this time, staff is recommending proceeding with the 14 projects. We are checking with the Southern Marin Fire Department to see if the city needs to fiscally participate in the urban wildfire program. This project could increase the total to 15. So we've reached out to Southern Marin Fire on that already. Sewer projects are not listed on this slide because the funding for those projects comes from a special fund. and is separate from the general fund. However, staff allocations associated with the sewer projects are a factor into what we can reasonably accomplish each year. Over the next several months, we anticipate working closely with our finance director to finalize these list of projects and their funding sources to support each project. Next slide. So a couple pictures for us. We have some very important future projects listed in fiscal year 2425. The roof on the old city hall is leaking and the existing HVAC systems on that building are no longer functional. We can't get parts for them either. They're so old. Gate 5 flooding needs to be investigated and a solution needs to be designed. Sausalito has an accessibility transition plan, which we need to continue to address. Access improvements are needed at City Hall. That's why we've listed that one on the CIP. Our traffic consultant has recommended developing a design for improvements from spring I think it's Avenue or Street, Spring Street to Napa Street. We have added this project with the intent of seeking grant funds for the design. A local match is needed, and the amount listed in the CIP is intended to address that specific funding. We have not received the grant funding at this point in time, but we are working with California Consulting in order to pursue that grant funding as well as others, such as Coloma Street, as well as the improvements on Bridgeway going from Napa to Johnson Street. We have added two other design projects to the list, including the reconstruction of parking lot one and the Humboldt Street bulkhead design. It's important to move forward with design as much as we can in order to be ready for grant funding if it comes forward. We're a better candidate if we have an actual design ready to go. We have added programs required by law, such as the storm drain capture device program as well. We have also added a project which may benefit the community, which is the design and installation of a permanent stage at Gabrielson Park. So it's just listed there. It doesn't mean we're proceeding with it at this point. Next slide, please. Earlier in March this year, we met with the Planning Commission. Each year, the Planning Commission is required to determine if the CIP is in compliance with the general plan. This year, the Planning Commission stated that the CIP is in compliance for the general plan, but also suggested that additional projects should be added to the CIP. These include moving forward with the next steps related to the geologic hazard study noted by the landslide task force. Staff anticipates bringing the final geologic hazard study to Council in the next few meetings. However, the landslide task force had several additional steps to be considered after the report is finalized. Staff will add items to the CIP for this specific project. However, the extent of that project and the fiscal commitment is not known at this point in time. We'll have to develop that. The planning commission also received public comment from Sausalito Beautiful to install more trees on Caledonia. However, they're There is a project on the list to replace trees on Bridgeway. Some street trees in Sausalito push up the sidewalk and can cause access issues. Staff is working with Sausalito Beautiful to identify when a tree can be removed prior to its root system causing sidewalk uplift. Next slide, please. The staff report also estimates a total fund center amount needed to support these projects. These tables will be utilized to assist the development of the annual budget for fiscal year 24-25. The amounts may also change slightly in the next few months, depending upon the funding that's available within each one of these accounts. Next slide, please. The documentation and the attachments provided to the Council shows a total of 29 active projects. The list shows the approximate costs and funding sources for each project. These projects are in various stages of development, with several taking multiple years to complete, and as such will require fiscal commitment in the next fiscal year to allow the project or program to progress. The city has been setting aside funding to finalize the construction on the south side of Dumfey Park. Staff recently developed an estimate for this work based off of a recently updated plan. and found that the cost of the project exceeded the budget. Staff is discussing this project with a design firm to reduce the density of planting associated with the project, and to clarify the work in the title zone. which may have the highest cost component for the project itself. So we'll have to get back to that final estimate on that. We may need to increase this project's budget to accommodate the proposed improvements. This work may be supported by tideland funds since it is in that zone. Next slide, please. Some of the more prominent projects we are working on include the reconstruction of the Marin Ship Courts, Turney Street Boat Launch, or at least the asphalt area up until the ramp itself, and the Bridgeway Slide Repair below Woodward. Other projects, such as the Signal at Easterby, we will still need to seek grant funding to support that construction. Many things affect the delivery of projects, including funding, staffing allocations, weather, and scope creep. Next slide, please. We have plotted the active, well, that's pretty small. Sorry about that. Should have made it a little bigger on the slide. We have plotted the active projects on the map shown on this slide. Again, some of the projects which address improvements citywide are not shown. Next slide. And then combining the active and the new projects graphically on a pictorial picture in front of you here, we can see the blue dots as the new projects and the red dots as the active projects. Next slide. Over the last several years, we are seeing more projects come up which are emergency in nature, whether from climate change or previous damages not addressed until now. Examples of unexpected work include the flooring repairs at the old City Hall building. and efforts to underground utilities here in town. Recently, one of the tenants at the MLK campus has requested that the floors be repaired in three of the major rooms that are currently occupied. Staff will discuss this project with the finance director to see if there is sufficient funding to address the repair and, if necessary, possibly break up the project into different pieces or place it back on the CIP itself. So we're working with the finance director on this to see if there's sufficient funding in the MLK account to cover what they are requesting. Next slide. |
| 00:39:12.00 | Matthew Hartsell | Yeah. |
| 00:39:25.65 | Kevin McGowan | Maybe a little too fast. There you go. Each year, the Department of Public Works seeks out regular, seeks input regarding new projects from several different sources, including our maintenance division, department directors, as well as several different subcommittees, including BPAC and Planning Commission and others. We also welcome input from the public on projects that should be included. At this time, we are requesting the council review the draft capital improvement program to be incorporated into the 2024 budget. staff will continue to refine and balance the project budget requirements with our finance department. Further refinement will be included in the budget preparation process. And we can also get back to the council itself throughout this process in the next couple months with updates. Next slide, please. Here we go. Last summer, staff presented an item to the council moving forward with Designing improvements for the bridgeway bike lane project from Princess to Richardson. Council was clear that the original concept for removing the center median was not a favorable solution. Council directed staff to move forward with developing concepts for this area with a grant from the Association of Bay Area Governance, otherwise known as ABAG. Our consultant is moving forward with this work and has been collecting data for this section of roadway over the last month. The next step will be for them to develop preliminary concepts per their schedule, which is very small on this slide. Sorry about that, but I can get you a better. step will be for them to develop preliminary concepts per their schedule, which is very small on this slide. Sorry about that, but I can get you a better representation. In an effort to seek out funding, staff applied for one Bay Area Grant Cycle 3 for the construction of the original concept. MTC has recently requested a resolution of support from the city to secure the allocation of these funds. However, based on Council's direction, the original concept should not be pursued such that it is not likely the city will approve a resolution of support for the original concept. And it's not and. Um, So, What we are suggesting, though, however, as an alternative, staff recommends requesting that MTC repurpose these funds to design funds. These funds can be utilized for design. of the preferred alternative that's developed by our consultant. And approved by the city council, of course. An example of an alternative is shown on the screen with moving the sidewalk out towards the water and installing some type of a support system to support a sidewalk. And the system that can address this system can also address sea level rise, as well as improvements related to bicycle access on bridgeway without losing the center median. There is no guarantee that MTC will approve this request, but it's worth requesting this in order to preserve some of the funding. So this is also noted on your attachments as A11. And in some of the more detailed documents you have, I've kept that grant amount that was originally authorized there, plus it's local match. Why? Because we haven't corresponded with MTC yet to request them to change that to design funds. Next slide, please. |
| 00:43:04.81 | Kevin McGowan | While we have 29 active projects and the possibility of additional projects being added next year, some of our projects will have additional steps and may need additional funds. For example, staff will need council's assistance in the future to determine if we should proceed with installing bollards at the sidewalk area at the end of Bridgeway. This is not a requirement at this point in time, but allocation of significant funds may be needed in order to install those systems. Staff is working with our consultant to finalize the geologic hazard study. We intend to bring this to the Planning Commission, I believe next week, as an informational item and will present the report to the Council shortly thereafter. The Landslide Task Force has received a presentation on the draft, that was I think the week before last, and subsequent steps were identified in the Landslide Task Force recommendations, which may also require additional funding as I've mentioned earlier. The draft CIP also includes several projects that may be funded by grants. Typically, a local match is required. And we have done our best to include this estimate for each project in the CIP. At this time, DPW staff are working with our consultant to apply for ATP funds. This is something new in and above what Chris just said, our city manager. ATP funds, which are active transportation program funds, and safe streets for all funds called SS4A. And what we'd like to do is I've recommended to our consultant to apply for those funds for Coloma Street, as well as Bridgeway, some of the improvements out in front of Bridgeway here from Napa to Johnson, And for design funds for a project from Spring Street down to Napa Street, which may include something like a roundabout. Our consultant presented this idea to you when they presented their final study for the bridgeway improvements between Napa and Johnson. Next slide, please. All right. Lastly, this is a very dynamic process. Our intent is to identify capital projects before they become emergencies. Moving forward with a facility assessment study will help address future needs, and we look forward to sending out the request for proposals for that project when Climate Tech has finished developing their draft for the energy savings. Putting local funds into projects that directly improve safety aspects for residents, such as road repairs and repairs to city-maintained sidewalks, is very important. This evening, we're asking counsel, for their concurrence that the general strategy to address capital improvement projects for next year is in compliance with what you are recommending. So that concludes my presentation. And as always, I welcome your input and input from the general public on this particular subject. |
| 00:46:22.92 | Steven Woodside | Director McGowan, thank you very much. We will now move to city council member questions, but first just a thank you to you for your leadership of this department and to all the members of your department, 29 active projects, 60 projects under consideration, all the paperwork, regulation and effort that is required to do and maintain with a relatively small staff. I know it's an ongoing Sisyphean task. Congratulations to you on your leadership. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. So questions, please, from the dais. The Vice Mayor and then Council Member Hoffman. |
| 00:46:57.04 | Ian Sobieski | For those of members of the public who don't know the city of Sausalito currently contributes 40% of its annual property tax revenues to southern marine fire to provide our fire protection services so my first question is why. in the world, would we be asked to contribute more money to Southern Marin Fire. for WUI. given our existing contribution, which in addition to contributions that we make to the county under a separate program. Um, It seems as though that would be a bit of a tall ask, given the agreement that we have in place with them. |
| 00:47:38.20 | Kevin McGowan | I would second that. And that's why I've reached out to Southern Moon Fire to find out why the heck is this on our list? |
| 00:47:44.49 | Ian Sobieski | Great. Thank you. Off to a great start. My next question has to do with the fiscal impact. So on the second to the last page of our staff report, we have the fiscal impact table, and it lists the various funding sources, and then it lists the active projects and the proposed projects and the total per fund source. But what? we don't have is what's the existing balance of the fund sources. And I know you made one, reference to that in your presentation. Oh, I see our finance director, Chad Hess. So I think this table would be a lot more useful to us in evaluating whether we endorse the general direction proposed by staff, if we had confidence that indeed our fund, our existing balances within our fund within our various funding sources would support the level of effort that you're recommending. So is it possible to get that information? |
| 00:48:50.75 | Chad Hess | Yes. So what we can do is we can Take Kevin's table and I can layer that up against our current funding. for these various projects. As we continue to move forward with our budget development for fiscal year 25, as soon as that starts to firm up more than it is now, I will have a better understanding of what resources are available to continue to fund these projects that are being proposed today. What I can do is I can share with you the current resources that are available in these funds, if that would be helpful for you to make decisions. And let me share my screen real quick. |
| 00:49:35.26 | Chad Hess | All right. Is that coming through for you guys? There you go. All right. Perfect. So up on the screen here, this is the basis of our treasurer's report that we publish every quarter. What I have here is cash balances as of the end of February, our last reconciled month. for cash balance. We're currently reconciling March as that ended just a few days ago. |
| 00:49:56.88 | Steven Woodside | Dr. Hanson, would you mind just reading some of those numbers? Because it's a little... Yeah. |
| 00:49:59.90 | Chad Hess | Yeah, certainly. |
| 00:50:01.25 | Steven Woodside | Certainly. numbers. This is the amount of cash at the end of February. |
| 00:50:03.85 | Chad Hess | Where did he at? So, So total, total cash citywide is $31 million. 31, $31.4 million. The funds I think that you guys are curious about The MLK fund currently has $1.2 million in cash as of the end of February. I'm going to go ahead and highlight that in green for you guys. The parking fund has 1.1 million available as of the end of February. Old City Hall has $271,000. as of the end of February. And then if we come down to our tideland, this is one of those funds that we have as a restricted resource, those funds need to be expended within the tideland zone. This fund currently has over a million dollars. And this fund grows, this cash balance in this fund grows by about $300,000. every year based upon the rents collected within that fund. minus the expenses that we incur. We also have $4.6 million in various special revenue funds. These funds are typically restricted for infrastructure improvement. For example, we have our Measure L fund here, which has 1.8 million available in it as of the end of February. And then we have various gas packs. constructing impact fees, the capital projects fund proper, stored drainage and very smaller funds. But overall we have 4.6 million available as of today. for Kevin to tie into. these balances will continue to fluctuate as projects progress. But as far as that future funding goes, more information will be known as the departments continue to provide me with their budget book. for fiscal year 25. And then once we bring things together and focus on our operations budget, the residual will be available for capital. |
| 00:52:00.79 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you, Chad. And then the table that's on page 120, well, It's the second to the last page of the staff report. It says fiscal year 2324 active projects and proposed projects. Is that the typo you were talking about? |
| 00:52:16.15 | Kevin McGowan | That's one of them. My apologies. |
| 00:52:18.39 | Ian Sobieski | Okay. So I'm questioning one of these because it lists parking a proposed project of 170,000. But... You and I talked earlier today about the ferry landing project, and I thought that was earmarked. I thought that the parking lot was earmarked as a possible project for 20, 24, 25. On that. Thank you. page and we had 1.1 million on that. Entry. But... this table is showing that the proposed projects Thank you. to be allocated to parking are 170,000. |
| 00:53:01.32 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. So let me detail that a little bit. If you go into your attachment number one and you go to future projects and take a look at line item FPO27. Sorry about all the numbers. Darn engineers. So it says parking lot one reconstruction. And the first part of that under which should be fiscal year 2425 says $110,000. That's for the design. |
| 00:53:29.74 | Ian Sobieski | Oh, but it actually says fiscal year 23 to 24. |
| 00:53:32.53 | Kevin McGowan | that's the other mistake is that should be 2425. |
| 00:53:33.89 | Ian Sobieski | and I think that's a good thing. Okay. And so really it's 2526 where you're proposing to spend 1.1 million. Yes. So this whole table is a year behind. |
| 00:53:40.76 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. |
| 00:53:44.84 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, I just have to change the header at the top. |
| 00:53:48.24 | Ian Sobieski | Okay. |
| 00:53:53.72 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, those are my initial questions. |
| 00:53:55.53 | Jill Hoffman | I remember |
| 00:53:55.54 | Steven Woodside | somewhere where Hoffman is. |
| 00:53:57.91 | Jill Hoffman | So this is a preliminary question. I was wondering if we were going to get to it in one of the presentations, but we didn't. And this is a conflict issue. I watched part of the, not all of it, but part of the Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday night, this past Wednesday night. Okay. they address the CIP as required by our code. And they were provided with conflict maps of all the council members, And the council members, if we were talking about a project that was within 500 feet of their home or 1,000 feet, actually, they were addressing that and we received a presentation, or they received a short presentation by are retained counsel best best and Krieger about how to address that as a body when you're looking at these CIP improvements. I sent an email text yesterday to our city manager and to you and our city attorney about whether or not that was going to be part of the council assessment presentation because I hadn't received any kind of a conflict map and I didn't see it as part of the presentation. And so... And I sent another email today after I had a conversation with our city manager about it. So I'm wondering why we're not going through that for this conversation, because I see. projects on this that I believe to be within 500 feet and 1000 feet of our council members. I can see now that there's one active project on there that's definitely within 500 feet of my house. And so that you just talked about. my understanding from that I see our city attorney, but the presentation of the Planning Commission was that it's fine for us to sit here as part of the full presentation to understand and know But when we talk about specific projects, If they're within 500 feet of our house or 1,000 feet of our house, we need to call that out and decide whether or not we're going to engage in the conversation. And so I see our city attorneys on the line. Thank you, Sergio, if you want to address that. Because I want to make, you know, I want to make sure I'm compliant. with the ethics rules, I don't believe that I should weigh in if we start talking about the projects that are within 500 feet of my house, within a thousand feet, it's a different analysis. I understand that, but, I'm wondering why we're not talking about this, that at this level, when we talked about the planning commission level and how we should proceed tonight. |
| 00:56:17.80 | Sergio Rudin | So with respect to conflicts of interest, there's various kinds of conflicts that can arise. One is based on ownership of real property. One is based on sources of income. Another one is receipt of gifts. With respect to the Planning Commission, my understanding was that there was one commissioner who as a professional architect, had worked on the design of one of the proposed, or his firm had worked on the design of one of the proposed projects to be included in the capital improvement program. |
| 00:56:45.98 | Matthew Hartsell | Probably. |
| 00:56:47.23 | Sergio Rudin | So with that particular one, because he had a conflict based on source of income, the rules are different than, of course, owning real property within 500 to 1,000 feet. With respect to the FPPC regulation that deals with ownership of property within 500 to a thousand feet, There's a general exception for making decisions on projects that solely concern repair, replacement, or maintenance of existing streets, water, sewer, storm drainage, or similar facilities. So to the extent that you have a project before you that deals solely with that kind of capital improvement program, project. you're not required to recuse. Um, So, and my understanding based on you know, most of the projects before you tonight in this capital improvement project, uh, program would fall within that category. With respect to other projects, you know, yeah, you should, potentially consider recusing if it involves improvements or construction of sewer water or storm drainage or similar facilities, and you're going to be receiving any sort of new or improved services or improvements that are different than are enjoyed by similarly situated properties within the jurisdiction, or if you're going to receive some sort of disproportionate benefit, that's a category of projects that would require recusal. |
| 00:58:01.45 | Sergio Rudin | And if, |
| 00:58:08.28 | Sergio Rudin | So if you've got any specific questions, usually best to address those with me as early as possible. but, |
| 00:58:20.09 | Jill Hoffman | That's why I sent the email, the text yesterday and the email today. So... |
| 00:58:23.18 | Sergio Rudin | So... |
| 00:58:23.45 | Matthew Hartsell | Thank you. |
| 00:58:23.77 | Jill Hoffman | And specifically, I understand that there is an exception if it's the repair, replacement, or Um, Repair replacement or what's the third thing? |
| 00:58:35.41 | Sophia Collier | And that's, |
| 00:58:35.97 | Jill Hoffman | Maureen Reyes-Maintenance yeah maintenance to an ongoing project that that's not what to be clear that's not what i'm talking about i'm talking about specific. additional projects. In the staff report, it looks like there's three I'm not sure. And there may be additional one with regard to the stoplight at Easterby Street, right? Also the Bridgeway bike lane, the is a specific project that's not maintenance repair or replacement of an existing area. That's a substantial change to that roadway. And also this issue of, I understood from the FPPC that It doesn't, ownership is not the only driver for the ethic rule. It's also if you're, if you have a leasehold, within 500 feet. And so we, you know, we may have been operating under an erroneous analysis that if you lease a piece of property that you don't have to recuse if you're within 500 feet. My understanding is the leasehold is also covered by that ethical rule. |
| 00:59:36.74 | Sergio Rudin | It is not. The rules for leasehold interests are actually more generous than ownership of real property. You are only required to recuse if There is a reasonably foreseeable financial effect on the leasehold interest, which includes changing the termination date of the lease, increasing or decreasing the potential rental value of the property, increasing or decreasing the rental value of the property where the official has the right to sublease the property, changing the actual or legally allowed use of the real property, or any decision that's gonna impact the official's use and enjoyment of the real property. So there's not a hard and fast 500 or a thousand foot rule with respect to those. |
| 01:00:22.49 | Jill Hoffman | with regard to leasehold. Okay, thank you for that. As we look at these projects today, I'm, wondering how we are to proceed and if we are going to get conflict maps as the Planning Commission receives. |
| 01:00:40.53 | Sergio Rudin | That is something that you should have and that's something staff should provide to you. |
| 01:00:46.48 | Jill Hoffman | Karen Hollweg, I know that we don't have them for tonight's discussion. |
| 01:00:46.63 | Sergio Rudin | I'm not sure. |
| 01:00:49.89 | Jill Hoffman | And it makes me uneasy at this point. And so, I have, I did. I did want to. maybe clarify with regard to the bridgeway bike lane, what action we were gonna take or expected to take tonight you with regard to the bollard issue was whether or not we were going to proceed with that and what the cost was going to be. And now I'm just listing off the things that I want to talk about. If you don't mind, I'm still doing it. |
| 01:01:21.01 | Steven Woodside | Do you have a question for the director? |
| 01:01:22.76 | Jill Hoffman | Director? Yeah, that was a question, and I'm listing out what I'm going to follow up on for the rest of the council so that you know what the specific projects that I'd like to talk about, because that's why we're here, right, to talk about specific projects. So I have a question, too, about the ferry landing and the phasing issues. I think that there's been... a change of what from what the council was the understanding that we were approving with regard to phasing and what is now defined as the phase one, two, and three projects, as well as the additional ask of another $500,000 for the phase one. And so those are sort of the scope of the questions that I'm going to ask and want to address. |
| 01:02:09.71 | Steven Woodside | Can you ask the question? Go right ahead. |
| 01:02:11.36 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. you So with regard to the Bridgeway bike lane, thank you for your explanation of that. But are we expected tonight to take... any further action, or is that what we're going to discuss? And here's Sergio back. |
| 01:02:25.01 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, I would defer to the Public Works Director as to what he is seeking the council's approval for at this time. |
| 01:02:33.01 | Kevin McGowan | So at this time, I'd like it if I could get approval to send a letter back to MTC requesting they repurpose those funds, the $506,000 for design. Again, there's no guarantee that they will do this, but it at least puts it in a framework for MTC to take action on it. I have provided you with a draft of that letter in the past. I think it was on March 13th. |
| 01:03:00.39 | Ian Sobieski | May I follow on just to clarify? Yeah, yeah, yeah. That letter made it clear that you were seeking to channel those funds from the median to |
| 01:03:02.26 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 01:03:10.38 | Ian Sobieski | consideration of a raised sidewalk between Pritzker Princess and Richardson. a raised and widened sidewalk. So I wanted to be sure the rest of the council had seen that letter and was aware that that is the change. And you described that this evening that you're seeking approval for from MTC before we give you the green light to send the letter. |
| 01:03:32.51 | Kevin McGowan | So I'd like to be a little careful on what I say in the letter. So the way you have paraphrased it is correct. I was referencing an idea, but I think what I'd like to do is change that letter slightly to say whatever comes up, whatever our consultant comes up with as a concept is what we would like to move forward with from a design perspective and not tie it to a specific type of improvement. |
| 01:04:02.54 | Ian Sobieski | So I would say whatever the consultant comes up with that is endorsed by counsel. Yes. |
| 01:04:08.22 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, sorry, I said that in my presentation too. |
| 01:04:13.98 | Steven Woodside | Are there any more questions, Councilmember Hoffman? |
| 01:04:16.61 | Jill Hoffman | on that issue, on the Bridgeway Community. |
| 01:04:18.68 | Steven Woodside | Well, we're trying to move things along. I thought we'd do all your questions and move on to next. If we could do a couple rounds of questions, but we were sort of. |
| 01:04:25.32 | Jill Hoffman | I was just trying to lay out, like, these are the three things that I'd like to talk about. Can I just weigh in quickly? |
| 01:04:30.97 | Melissa Blaustein | Just if we're if we're going to talk about specifically to to one bridgeway I'd prefer to not weigh in. I'm happy to just because, while there are exceptions to the leasing agreement, etc. I think everyone knows in the community. Well, now everyone knows the community that that is extremely proximate or perhaps is my residence so I would prefer to not. |
| 01:04:49.16 | Chris Zapata | Pollard's. |
| 01:04:49.62 | Melissa Blaustein | Yes, I would prefer to recuse myself from any discussions with regards to the Ballard Project, because I don't know if all of those lease exceptions as outlined by Sergio, while I respect your legal advice and agree with it, just for my own level of ethics and comfort, I would like to recuse myself from anything with question 221 Bridgeway. |
| 01:05:06.04 | Ian Sobieski | And so Sergio, if she does that, does she have to leave the room as we discussed the bollards? |
| 01:05:10.71 | Sergio Rudin | So let's yeah, I would recommend that we would segment the decision. The typical process for that is that we would have the discussion on that particular project and whether it should be in the CIP program first and make a decision. with her not present on the dais. And then the council can continue discussing the rest of the CIT program and make a decision with respect to all the other projects. |
| 01:05:32.07 | Steven Woodside | So we are in the position of asking questions. So thanks for declaring that you will recuse yourself for that matter when and if it comes up before the council. Are there other questions from the dais? Council Member Kellman? |
| 01:05:32.55 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 01:05:32.66 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:05:44.88 | Joan Cox | So I think mine might just be a little more simple. One is for Chad. So if Chad is still available to us. Yes, thank you there. Just a quick question for you. You showed us the fund balances, including MLK fund. But as we all know, we hold to significant debt. On MLK. And I'm wondering how we should think about so-called available balances in a fund where we know we owe a lot of money. |
| 01:06:14.63 | Chad Hess | Yeah, that's a great question. So of the funds that are in MLK, 1.2 million as of the end of February. Um, That is twice the amount of our annual debt service payments. Our debt service payment is roughly $620,000 per year principal and interest. out over two payments. So we would have more than sufficient resources available in that fund to pay for that next debt payment. |
| 01:06:42.85 | Joan Cox | Is there any reason to try to pay that down? |
| 01:06:45.65 | Chad Hess | I'm not sure. So that's a fairly low interest rate. We have other higher debts that I would proposed we pay down first if our strategy is to pay down debt. Thank you. |
| 01:06:56.26 | Chris Zapata | Thank you, Mayor, if I can, if I can, Councilman Kalman, if I can ask Chad a question, because you're saying draw down from that fund, but what does that fund generate on an annual basis to replenish it through the rents, because that's not going to be a static number. |
| 01:06:56.86 | Chad Hess | Yeah. |
| 01:07:11.05 | Chad Hess | Yeah, let me pull up what we generated last year. I want to make sure I give you an accurate number on that. Give me one second. |
| 01:07:19.65 | Joan Cox | And then, Mayor, I just have two housekeeping. One, I'll just ask for Director McGowan, and thank you. I know this is a lot of work. You had some slides that I didn't see on the presentation attached to the agenda. |
| 01:07:33.12 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, I have two extra slides that I've added, and I will make sure our city clerk has those. |
| 01:07:36.92 | Joan Cox | Upload this okay. Great, and then my other sort of housekeeping question was, I was looking on the attachment Oh, gosh, it's the massive spreadsheet that shows the future projects and the expenditures. Is there some place where it says design versus construction? |
| 01:07:54.89 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, you have to go to the details on attachment four. So if you go look under the actual project and it will show the same numbers for the budget and it will underneath that it'll show design, construction, environmental and construction management. |
| 01:08:08.91 | Joan Cox | Great, thank you. Good work, thank you. Those are all my questions, Mayor. So when Chad has the answer. |
| 01:08:13.15 | Chad Hess | All right. Yep. I am ready to go. |
| 01:08:15.70 | Adrian Brinton | as well. |
| 01:08:15.97 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:08:16.03 | Chad Hess | I'm lost. |
| 01:08:16.35 | Adrian Brinton | I'm sorry. |
| 01:08:17.52 | Chad Hess | All right, so looking at MLK fund from a cash perspective, this is a statement of cash flows for fiscal year 23. You can see that we collected cash from customers of 1.3 million. We paid various vendors, suppliers. So we had net cash from operations of about 1.1 million. we made a Interfund payment. So that's our loan between the general fund and the MLK fund. So we're paying that loan back. Here is our debt service. So this is the principal portion of our COP debt. And then this is the interest. for that COP plus there's a little interest in there for our inner fund. that up here. To answer your question, that fund threw off or increased in cash, $360,000. So that was the... Okay, Ash. increase for that fund for fiscal year 23. And then if we look at fiscal year 22, We did have a decrease in cash for the MLK fund. But if we look Let me scroll in here. So, Oh, so we did have a decrease in fiscal year 22 because we accelerated the payback. of that inner fund loan. Had we followed the original schedule, this fund would have thrown off about 300,000 of cash as well. We've more than tripled our payback of of that inner fund loan in fiscal year 22. |
| 01:09:42.58 | Chris Zapata | Mayor Mrakas- Mayor if I may as well, Chad that 23 number doesn't reflect the new lease agreement with Lisa France say which my recollection is an extra two hours in a year. |
| 01:09:50.06 | Chad Hess | Thank you. Yeah, that's correct, sir. |
| 01:09:52.32 | Chris Zapata | forward basis that something that be added to that number. |
| 01:09:56.12 | Chad Hess | Yes, I would say that that would be a fair statement. |
| 01:10:01.50 | Steven Woodside | That's why we're blasting. |
| 01:10:03.07 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Great work to you and your team, Director McGowan. Really appreciate all of the time and effort that you've put into this and to staff. And Chad, thank you for your assessments of the budget implications. I had a couple of questions. Specifically, we've received a lot of, just in the past year or so, or maybe longer, a lot of questions about the status of Marinship Park. And I do see the Marinship Park tennis courts on there. But I'm wondering about how that links to the use of the full park itself and the reopening of the fields and what that looks like with regards to our CIP this year. |
| 01:10:34.78 | Kevin McGowan | So those are great questions. And I know our city manager has put a lot of effort into this. It might be best for him to speak to that, some of the efforts that he's done. |
| 01:10:45.73 | Chris Zapata | Well, thanks for that handoff, Kevin. Councilmember Kelman, I appreciate your question as well. And we had a conversation about this earlier, and I know that you have a very, very keen interest in making sure that that park opens again and the mural is protected and the open space is done. But as I understand it, our bid process has been slowed down, but we are out looking to go out to bid to fix the tennis court surfaces the right way, the fencing the right way, and the parking lot the right way. And once that's done, then we will be able to open the entire park. And the idea was, you know, we would bring that back to you as a package. And so my understanding is that's upcoming. Kevin can tell you best to schedule, but then that will allow us to open up that park to the community once more because it's been closed for too long. |
| 01:11:33.62 | Kevin McGowan | Yeah. I'd only add that our new project managers are working on that right now. So Sarah's got that in her ballpark, and she's finishing up the construction spec and trying to get that out as well. |
| 01:11:45.01 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:11:45.81 | Melissa Blaustein | And then what? |
| 01:11:47.38 | Chris Zapata | Kevin Nielsen, I can because I think it's important. So what's the delta. What's what are we asking for for this project, Kevin. |
| 01:11:54.36 | Kevin McGowan | As far as as far as funding. |
| 01:11:55.68 | Chris Zapata | funding. Thank you. |
| 01:11:56.06 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. |
| 01:11:56.13 | Chris Zapata | Yeah. uh |
| 01:11:56.96 | Kevin McGowan | I believe in our packet we had set aside some funding originally for it. And bear with me for a moment. |
| 01:12:09.28 | Kevin McGowan | He had to catch me on this one. I wasn't ready. I'm so sorry. I think we're asking for an additional $150,000 on this project. Why? Because it's found that the original quartz surface is in very, very poor shape, such that the asphalt has to be repaired. I think it's on our new projects here. Hold on, hold on. All right. I don't want to take too much time, so I will look it up and get back to you. |
| 01:12:39.38 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, and then when that does come back, the additional cost of reopening the field would be apart from our CIP planning this year in a separate general fund expenditure? |
| 01:12:48.01 | Kevin McGowan | I did not include it in a CIP project for reopening the field as it stands. I know there's been some discussion about possibly looking into a turf field in that area, and I'm not too sure if that one is moving forward at this point in time. But as far as the field itself, our maintenance staff has been maintaining that. The turf is looking better and better, and especially with this much rainfall. So there shouldn't be an issue with reopening the field as it is. |
| 01:13:17.28 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, so ideally, if we move forward with the CIP as projected, the park will be able to reopen in line with the improvements. Yes. Okay, that's great news. |
| 01:13:25.40 | Sandra Bushmaker | Yes. OK. |
| 01:13:27.26 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, and then a couple of other questions just about with regards to what is and isn't on the CIP. I didn't see a lot about crosswalks on there and any new crosswalks or any rewinding of the crosswalks. And this is something that I hear about quite a bit from residents and I'm wondering why we didn't see more of that in consideration or if I'm missing where it might be in a larger plan. |
| 01:13:48.52 | Kevin McGowan | So usually, well, I'll back up, adding crosswalks to existing streets that aren't controlled tends to be a problem. So we want to kind of avoid that from a safety perspective. Now, if we're going to update existing crosswalks by repainting them, that's a maintenance issue. And so we can add that to our maintenance program. We also have a project on Bridgeway right out in front here going from Napa all the way to Johnson Street. That includes a bunch of improvements associated with those crosswalks. So that is its own project. |
| 01:14:21.46 | Melissa Blaustein | And that's part of the... Karen Hollweg, Yes, the IP right we heard that at a previous Council meeting and update on that so that's great. Karen Hollweg, And then this question might be more for Chad but. Karen Hollweg, I noticed that we do have the North street steps in our capital improvements project, which is great because that's been an ongoing. |
| 01:14:22.91 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. Yes. That's great. |
| 01:14:35.28 | Melissa Blaustein | open project for us, but then we also have this allocation of, I think, $55,000 for our stairs and our stairs maintenance as part of the CIPs. Is that going to be included in the North Street budgeting, or are there other stairs that you're specifically considering working on? |
| 01:14:51.80 | Kevin McGowan | So I'll start with that, Chad. I think that for the North Street steps, we were trying to tap into the stair fund as much as possible because the project needs the funding. However, there is a need to improve stairs throughout the city. We have got, I think it said, 42 different stair systems. And there's definitely a need to take a look at and prioritize which stair system needs to be improved first, except less times two. And so that's why we continue to have an allocation of some funding, at least in the next fiscal year, for a stair program. |
| 01:15:27.63 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, and then I wanted to ask, and this can go for you or the city manager, about the vision for the $90,000 for the permanent stage in Gabrielson Park and what prompted that as part of the CIP. |
| 01:15:39.78 | Kevin McGowan | Well, in discussions with our parks manager, Brian, we have a system down there where we've got a stage system and a basically a storage box that tends to take up room for parking. So the intent was to try to find. something a little bit different and put something on the CIP to make improvements in Gabrielson Park, more of an aesthetic issue itself to make it a better stage, to have it look out over the bay itself. And we basically just added a simple project to the CIP. The details for that haven't been developed at this point. It's just been a rough number of let's think of what this may look like. And we put a project on the CIP for it. |
| 01:16:25.31 | Chris Zapata | Thank you for that question. Let me amplify on that. Yes, please. The capital improvement program is pretty dry, buildings, streets, sidewalks. This is something that's more related to what is probably one of the best things about Sausalito. It's quality of life. So when you go to Jazz by the Bay and you see the crowd out there, and it's really our local residents and people visiting that enjoy that, and they're staring at the beautiful homes up the hill when they could be staring at the beautiful view, which would be world-class. And, you know, if you had that as part of your ongoing or your static facilities facing out to the water and you spend Kevin's estimate is $90,000 and that thing should last you 20 years, you know, you're spending 5,000 bucks a year for something that's really, really impactful. And if you market with something that says Sausalito on it, then, you know, people will know when they see a concert and it's jazzed by the bass, they're in Sausalito and that has marketing value. So, you know, it's one of those things that... |
| 01:16:27.57 | Kevin McGowan | Yeah. |
| 01:16:27.72 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:17:28.05 | Chris Zapata | If you look at my track record, I've always tried to figure out ways that are meaningful in terms of quality of life, whether it's a mural that's the largest in Northern California or a 55-foot tall lady. All these things tend to become controversial at the onset. But once they're there, people wonder why they weren't there from the get-go. So, again, it can't all be, you know, dry road, streets, sidewalks, buildings. I think we had to pizzazz it a little bit with something that I think would be well-received by the public and visitors and would be beneficial for off-day events. People want to take a picture on a stage that says Sausalito on it with Alcatraz behind it and Angel Island. I think you get lots of likes on Instagram. So again, it's something that you can remove. It's not a gotta have, but it's something that I think would, for the dollars allocated to it, might make a big difference in terms of people's feelings about Sausalito that are already strong. |
| 01:18:25.96 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you, City Manager. Thanks, Director McGowan. That concludes my questions. Appreciate it. you |
| 01:18:29.71 | Joan Cox | Did you say it would open up two parking spots if we did that? Would it open up two parking spots in lot one? |
| 01:18:36.00 | Steven Woodside | She was looking at me because I made the comment that Jazz by the Bay often stores their equipment. |
| 01:18:42.04 | Joan Cox | Yeah, no, I was looking at the Google Earth. |
| 01:18:42.35 | Steven Woodside | I know. in parking lots and lot one that are revenue lost for us. So such a stage could be designed so that storage is underneath the stage and spring up parking spaces that generate revenue to the city. |
| 01:18:55.39 | Kevin McGowan | Without knowing all the detail, I would say, yes, that's where we want to go is to try to free up some more parking spaces. |
| 01:19:03.04 | Chris Zapata | things, if I can, Mayor and Council in public. This is a one-time investment. It's not, you've got to keep working on this every year in significant ways. And, you know, it also would require BCDC to approve it. That's really important to note. And, you know, my thinking is if the Title in Funds has a million dollars in it and is growing $300,000 a year, you know, that might be an appropriate place and it has to be checked with Chad and Sergio to take that money from rather than the general fund. So I'm trying to make the case to do it. You can agree with me or not, but again, I'm here to make recommendations and, you know, follow your direction. So thank you for considering it. |
| 01:19:43.98 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:19:43.99 | Steven Woodside | Are there other questions? Let's move on to public comment then, please. |
| 01:19:49.75 | Jill Hoffman | Can you cut me off and then move around to everybody else? So I have two other issues that I want to talk about. |
| 01:19:54.52 | Steven Woodside | I didn't catch you off. Just looking for questions. |
| 01:19:56.07 | Jill Hoffman | So I still have questions with regard to the phasing of the ferry that I want to ask. Right ahead. |
| 01:20:03.77 | Steven Woodside | It's not at all cut off. I invited those questions earlier and invite them again now. |
| 01:20:04.93 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. Well, these are questions and clarifications. Um, at our February 6th meeting, I'm looking at the minutes from the February 6th meeting, the motion was that We approved the local professional group recommended plan. We directed staff to make construction level drawings of the phases that can be funded by phases that can be funded by the grant. directed staff to obtain professional cost estimates, directed staff to identify phases of the plan that can be built within the budget Of the Golden Gate. THB, which is the bridge district. authorized staff to solicit private and public sources of additional funding to construct the phases that cannot be paid for with the grant. direct the city manager to execute an as-needed service contract with SWA to coordinate to continue coordination design work authorized staff to file permit applications and requested that a phasing plan be brought back within 45 days. So those are the minutes that are attached to our February Those are the minutes of the February 6th meeting. I think they're attached to the next meeting in March. So that was the direction. I was surprised to see on the... consent calendar for our last meeting, an update. from the local architects group and staff on phasing, which seemed the phases seem to have changed. And what's included in the phases seems to have changed from our February 6th meeting in the direction that we gave to staff. And so, My question to you is, twofold One is that we now have things in phase one that apparently are not covered by the grant. because We have a request. before us today for another $500,000 from the city to fund phase one, as I understand it. We have things that have moved up into phase one that I don't believe were part of. our discussion of phase one at our prior city council meeting, which includes |
| 01:22:34.18 | Jill Hoffman | the installation of the bike return area adjacent to Humboldt Street. Looks like to me that's been elevated up to phase one. there's the repaving of, as I think we just talked about, repaving of the parking lot and the parking lot improvements had been taken out of the phasing and out of the grant. altogether. and is now added into back into our capital improvement project instead of having that as phasing under you know, under the grant. And so other than I think the city manager may have just addressed that, but is there some from city council that I don't recall to move these things up in the phasing. The phase two is also a little bit different. We've now included Um, |
| 01:23:30.88 | Steven Woodside | Let me let him answer that question. I'm trying to segment the question. |
| 01:23:33.15 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I'm trying to see if I want to get everything out and then he can answer it. |
| 01:23:36.44 | Steven Woodside | Well, then we lose track of what the question is. I'm trying to type the questions up in the interest of time and clarity for the people watching at home as well as me, just to understand what the question is. So one question is... |
| 01:23:36.46 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I'm trying to take the question. |
| 01:23:42.91 | Jill Hoffman | was me. One question is... Yeah, right now I'm talking about phase one and we've we've now gone contrary to what the direction of the council was, which is come back to us with that are covered by the grant. and prioritized prioritize in a way that these are phase one sort of this project as we move through it. Phase two and three, you know, we're unfunded, something that we pursue if we found the money right somewhere and it wasn't like come back to the city for the money it was find it from other private and public sources but not the city but now What we have before is something different from that. And so this is our time to look at this and give you feedback. So, I mean. |
| 01:24:26.66 | Steven Woodside | Actually, we're going to do public comment and then discussion, which is the feedback part. Our tradition is to ask questions from the dais. So just inviting a question. |
| 01:24:33.45 | Jill Hoffman | That's what I'm trying to get to, but I keep getting interrupted. |
| 01:24:34.75 | Steven Woodside | I'm still wondering... Well, actually, no, you're having significant time. I know you can ask a tight question. What is your question of Director McGowan? |
| 01:24:41.65 | Jill Hoffman | I've asked it. I have asked it, and I would ask that you not interrupt me while I'm trying to ask staff questions. I know this is complicated stuff, but I have to explain to staff the history of this and where we're at or nobody's gonna understand my question. So I don't know how you can understand my question if you don't understand my concern with what the council approved on February 6th. what we got at the last city council meeting on february on march 19th on the consent calendar which seems to be a departure from the february 6th direction and now we still have something different again before us tonight. with a removal of a significant spend that I was anticipating would be under the grant plus an additional ask for $500,000. So. do you have a mind, like how did we get here? And I'm perplexed because none of this was at the direction of the council. And now all of a sudden we've got this in front of us as part of our CIP request to the tune of another $1.6 million out of the general fund of Sausalito. That's the question. How did we get here? |
| 01:25:50.35 | Steven Woodside | How did we get here, Director McGill? Could you please tell us how did we get here? |
| 01:25:51.73 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 01:25:54.57 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:25:54.58 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. So those are all great questions. And I just want to say thank you. They are, this is a complex project. And with so many different stakeholders being involved with it, the local professionals group and others, we have SWA now involved, as well as our design team, things are moving rather quickly. The latest estimates are Sorry, the latest estimates from SWA, which included the improvements next to Humboldt, had the estimate for the construction that exceeded the budget. So I came back to SWA saying, okay, how do we phase this? And the the reaction that I got from SWA, as well as the local professionals group, was that you can't segregate that you can't split it up. So what we were planning to do was to bring this item back to you and at the Council Next meeting. We just haven't gotten there yet. In order to give you an update on these specific issues, you had brought up the resurfacing of the parking lot. Originally, if you recall, we were we had something in there for putting a micro seal down. And it's just a thin coat. The idea is so that the striping will pop out and it will make things look better. But the parking lot is in really bad shape based off of the root systems from the trees themselves. Putting a micro seal down won't do much. It won't last long either. So the original... Estimates that we had included a cost for micro ceiling. So taking that out and putting it back into the main project may help. Now, the intent of this entire project, stepping back and looking at not just the Ferry Plaza and these other connectivity pieces, when you look at that parking lot, it does need resurfacing. So I've placed another project on the list, which you have called out, which I appreciate. I know you read my report. So, thank you very much. But at the same time, what we're trying to do is look at a bigger picture right now. I don't think that we necessarily have to approve this. This is just a recommendation for the budget, and we can work our way through this if you don't think it needs to be included. So I'm not sure if I've answered every one of your questions, but it is complex. |
| 01:28:08.82 | Jill Hoffman | No, you've solved part of the mystery. So then the next thing is, let me ask you about phase two then. And phase two is now. the elevation of Tracy way to the same as the adjacent walking surfaces. And my recollection is from, On the February 6th meeting, we specifically did not include that. that that was something that was nice to have if we could find the funds from someplace other than our city budget, but now it's back in and it appears to be raised up from phase three to phase two. it. I may be wrong on that, but it seems to me that the phases have, as you've explained and agree, the phases have moved around from when we |
| 01:28:49.14 | Joan Cox | I think you got a real approval. Remember that. |
| 01:28:49.29 | Jill Hoffman | I don't know. So, okay, so mystery solved on that, I suppose, too. Is that, can you tell me, or I guess the question is, how did that phasing change occur? |
| 01:29:04.77 | Kevin McGowan | Basically, it's been the interaction between the local professionals group and the design team as well. So I'm not too sure if we have decided that these phases are set in stone right now. We still want to bring it back to the council and seek your guidance. So we were thinking of bringing it back next council meeting. |
| 01:29:23.55 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, got it. Thank you. And thank you for that explanation. So I don't think I have any further questions about this project. I had one other one that I was going to talk about too. We talked about the Bridgeway bike lane. We talked about, now we've talked about this. And of course, during our discussion, I'll have some further comments, but And then I think this might be a question for... This might be, I think this is a question for our city attorney. So, I'm not clear. because I saw the map and thank you for the maps on the active projects and the new projects, right? I can see from the map, although I don't know what those projects are, and I don't know how to correlate. There are some that are absolutely within 500 feet of my house, and there are some that are within 1,000 feet of my house. So I'm not sure, Sergio. how I can remain compliant with the ethical rules Um... with regard with regard to those projects because I you know I don't want to prove something that's you know I mean I don't want you engaged in improving something that that's within 500 feet of my house if it's going to run counter to the ethics. |
| 01:30:38.74 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, I mean, if the projects involves street repair or existing infrastructure repair maintenance, you know, I think you can safely participate. I also do not know which projects are within 500 or 1000 feet of your house is the issue. So I can't tell you that you're fine to participate. Um, you know, I'm maybe Kevin knows standing there. Um, |
| 01:31:02.37 | Jill Hoffman | Maybe I'll just recuse from the vote. Maybe I don't know if I need to recuse from the discussion as well, right? |
| 01:31:02.40 | Sergio Rudin | Maybe not. project. |
| 01:31:09.47 | Sergio Rudin | If you need to recuse, you have to recuse from the discussion and the deliberation as well. Yeah. |
| 01:31:12.19 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yeah, of course. Thank you. |
| 01:31:15.56 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 01:31:15.98 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, then I'll do that out of abundance of safety because we don't have the map, and I don't know what the projects are, and nobody knows what the projects are. I'll just step out when we get to after public comment, right? After public comment. |
| 01:31:26.19 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 01:31:26.50 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:31:27.36 | Sergio Rudin | I mean, I would, once you guys are done asking questions, if you're going to recuse from the entire agenda item, I would recuse and step down now. |
| 01:31:35.56 | Jill Hoffman | That's fine. I'll do that. |
| 01:31:39.14 | Sergio Rudin | And then, you know, additionally, um, Mayor Mrakas- Council member Blalstein I would also step down now for done with Council member questions and then we take public comment and then you'd segment the decision by making the decision with respect to the bollards project. |
| 01:31:53.63 | Melissa Blaustein | But I just want to, I mean, I'm a renter, so that's why I wouldn't recuse myself from the, anyway, just to clarify the recusal from 221 versus the recusal in general. |
| 01:32:04.77 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:32:06.19 | Joan Cox | I'm sorry, so wait, Joe, I already recused the whole program. |
| 01:32:09.83 | Jill Hoffman | Because I can look at the map and I can see that there are projects within 500 feet of my house and 1,000 feet of my house, as there are for other council members, by the way. |
| 01:32:16.82 | Sergio Rudin | by the way. Thank you. Yeah. |
| 01:32:18.03 | Jill Hoffman | And I don't know what those projects are. So how can I know if I'm compliant with the ethical rules and our city attorney doesn't know. And so. how would I then therefore comply? The answer from our city attorney is I can't. So the safest thing for me to do as a council member is just to recuse from the whole discussion. which I'm happy to do. And so... |
| 01:32:40.41 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:32:41.03 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:32:41.05 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:32:41.07 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:32:41.12 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:32:41.20 | Ian Sobieski | Well, but most of the projects stay. For example, Coloma Street, pedestrian improvements. Dunphy Park, phase two. Bridgeway, you know, |
| 01:32:49.96 | Jill Hoffman | I understand the difference between ongoing maintenance of streets. These are not, that's not what these are. So, and by the way, I can't tell. And nobody here sitting here can tell me that. |
| 01:33:01.93 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, so we could stand to decision so that you |
| 01:33:02.90 | Jill Hoffman | We could still- |
| 01:33:06.30 | Sergio Rudin | Don't participate in the projects that are within a thousand feet of your house. |
| 01:33:10.08 | Jill Hoffman | right |
| 01:33:10.35 | Sergio Rudin | if we can identify what those are very quickly. |
| 01:33:13.52 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. And I think Kevin can do that. Can you run through the proposed project? |
| 01:33:16.35 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I think there's one project that's the stoplights. |
| 01:33:17.05 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:33:20.10 | Kevin McGowan | That's new. That's the maintenance project. We had one that fell down. We want to put another one up. We want to put a new one up. Yeah. |
| 01:33:20.89 | Jill Hoffman | I can tell you're right. |
| 01:33:24.66 | Jill Hoffman | You put a new one up. Yeah. What about the street resurfacing in front of my house? |
| 01:33:26.66 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:33:28.40 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:33:28.47 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:33:28.59 | Kevin McGowan | maintenance. |
| 01:33:28.99 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:33:29.01 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:33:29.03 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. Kevin, can you run through the projects proposed so the Council can... |
| 01:33:32.86 | Jill Hoffman | Are you going to be there all the council members or just me? I like |
| 01:33:36.98 | Kevin McGowan | of you. |
| 01:33:37.53 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:33:38.46 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I think that's right. I think that's the way to go. I don't want to sit here for, yeah. I would just say mayor. |
| 01:33:39.46 | Joan Cox | I think |
| 01:33:43.02 | Joan Cox | Mayor, I just think that given the concerns raised, and we deduced the housing element, I don't think it would be appropriate for one member to recuse based on that and the others of us not have that conversation. So I don't know if we need to take a quick break or how we wanna do this, but I think we should be consistent on the council. |
| 01:34:03.99 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, I'd make a recommendation. Let Kevin read the projects, and then people can determine themselves what they are, if they're close to them, and then if they think that there is potential for a conflict, then they can be aware and take appropriate action. |
| 01:34:15.01 | Steven Woodside | There are a lot of projects on the CIP that have been published through a part of the staff report. The map was there. The presentation is there. We've all had access to that information. I know we've all studied it and we all know where we live and we all did get our conflict maps from the city attorney. I have mine. and I'm sure everyone has theirs actually. |
| 01:34:30.34 | Jill Hoffman | When did you get your map? |
| 01:34:31.31 | Steven Woodside | when I was elected to city council. |
| 01:34:33.64 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, when you were like, so, but not a recent one. |
| 01:34:36.63 | Steven Woodside | Well, the 500 feet doesn't change. The circle stays the same. I still live in the same place. |
| 01:34:40.49 | Jill Hoffman | It doesn't, but we don't have a new and updated one for all the council members. |
| 01:34:40.91 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. We don't have a... |
| 01:34:43.72 | Ian Sobieski | But all he's looking for is direction on 14 projects and any additional projects we may identify. But the staff report lists 14 projects recommended for the Yelp. So. |
| 01:34:45.59 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:34:45.61 | Steven Woodside | So. |
| 01:34:45.89 | Jill Hoffman | TODAY. |
| 01:34:47.70 | Steven Woodside | Really? |
| 01:34:47.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:34:53.74 | Steven Woodside | So the conflict of interest rules are complicated. It's the liability, of course, of the individual, not the city. And so individuals need to make their choices about whether they accrues themselves. They are complex, as the city attorney can speak to. There are a variety of exceptions, some of which he has named. There's another one he did not mention, which is the public generally exception, which applies for when projects influence a percentage of the community in general. And so everyone, I would hope by in advance of this meeting, would have considered their conflicts and have declared them as Councilmember Blaustein did, so that we can narrowly exclude ourselves from those that we have a financial conflict of interest in. Councilmember Calumni. |
| 01:35:35.59 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, that's my point. We've gone over this. We have maps of things that are going on. If you don't, you know, there's no numbering on the map. So there's no correlation between, okay, this project is blah, blah, blah. And so we've already established that. We haven't been provided with that. The only way to cure it, I suppose, is as someone said for us to sit here and have the staff go through it, you know I don't anyways |
| 01:36:02.93 | Ian Sobieski | If he just goes through 14 projects and says which of those are not maintenance, then that narrows down the field tremendously to potential projects for which you might have to recuse yourself. So shall we just do? Yes, please. Council member. So marine ship vault water storage. |
| 01:36:13.88 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:36:16.78 | Kevin McGowan | Council members water storage. I have that. I'll just run through. There's only three that I can tell from the new list that are new projects. That's the first one, the Marin ship vault water storage. That's a new project that's located down in off of Marin ship itself. |
| 01:36:35.70 | Jill Hoffman | What's the address for that? By Burkell? |
| 01:36:37.00 | Ian Sobieski | That's so good. |
| 01:36:38.47 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. |
| 01:36:39.04 | Jill Hoffman | Bye, Bercow. |
| 01:36:39.68 | Kevin McGowan | Fiber Kale Plumbing. |
| 01:36:40.95 | Ian Sobieski | for California. |
| 01:36:41.59 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, okay, I'm out. You're out for that one. Yeah, that's 500 feet of my house, I believe. |
| 01:36:43.24 | Kevin McGowan | Okay. Gabrielson Park permanent stage. And then the last one for new projects is Bridgeway Improvements, Easterby to B Street. |
| 01:36:55.49 | Jill Hoffman | That's my street. East from B2B. That would be me as well, probably. Okay, so... |
| 01:37:01.42 | Kevin McGowan | The rest of these are generally maintenance, all maintenance projects. |
| 01:37:05.74 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:37:06.19 | Pat Zook | the bees. |
| 01:37:07.41 | Ian Sobieski | And then if we do talk about bollards as a possible addition, which you raised, or some of the other. So the Planning Commission recommended three additions. |
| 01:37:12.60 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:37:18.21 | Kevin McGowan | Yeah, they had new trees, so new trees on Caledonia. |
| 01:37:25.21 | Melissa Blaustein | I don't mean to create a problem for the council. It's just that 221 Bridgeway is my house. And so out of an abundance of any sort of exemption, I would like to recuse for any discussion about 221 Bridgeway. The others, I'm happy to stay. But anyway, I don't know how to. |
| 01:37:36.13 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. |
| 01:37:40.95 | Ian Sobieski | So the GHAD heaven is throughout town, right? |
| 01:37:44.78 | Kevin McGowan | G.H. |
| 01:37:45.51 | Ian Sobieski | the geological... |
| 01:37:46.81 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. |
| 01:37:47.22 | Ian Sobieski | That's public generally. That's not. And then Caledonia Street tree installation. |
| 01:37:47.48 | Kevin McGowan | That's really good. That's the reason. Thank you. |
| 01:37:53.58 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. I don't know if that affects you. and then MLK floor replacement |
| 01:37:58.39 | Kevin McGowan | That's maintenance. |
| 01:37:59.52 | Ian Sobieski | There's maintenance. |
| 01:38:01.22 | Joan Cox | Okay, same with the city hall and then I'm in 500 feet of city hall. |
| 01:38:06.32 | Steven Woodside | All right. Thank you. So let's take public comment now. City Clerk, would you please open for public comment? |
| 01:38:13.91 | Jill Hoffman | City Attorney, can we stay here during public comment? I know I'm going to re-keys on three. I think. from the- what. I understood you to say that if we were accusing anything, we needed to step out for public comment. Of course, we can watch it on our computers. Thank you. |
| 01:38:32.63 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah. |
| 01:38:32.66 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:38:32.68 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 01:38:32.78 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:38:32.90 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:38:32.95 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:38:33.81 | Sergio Rudin | Typically the way that you would segment a public decision, is you announce your recusal on the items that you'd like to recuse from. And you step off of the dais. And let me just pull up the regulation so I don't misquote it. |
| 01:38:59.29 | Jill Hoffman | Peace to be to be. Thank you. I'm not the star. |
| 01:39:02.92 | Sergio Rudin | You have to leave the dais when you recuse. I'm segmenting the decision. |
| 01:39:17.51 | Sergio Rudin | and what is our segmentation regulation set? Um, |
| 01:39:33.06 | Sergio Rudin | So as a practical matter, um, I think... you guys being present for public comment is likely to be substantial compliance with the requirement. Um, |
| 01:39:48.24 | Sergio Rudin | but yeah, |
| 01:39:49.14 | Jill Hoffman | I'm happy to... |
| 01:39:50.34 | Ian Sobieski | THE FAMILY. |
| 01:39:50.50 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:39:50.60 | Ian Sobieski | I'll watch it on my computer. |
| 01:39:51.77 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:39:52.11 | Ian Sobieski | Can we just ask if any member of the public intends to comment on the marine ship fault water storage? Or the... |
| 01:40:02.84 | Steven Woodside | because we have everyone online. It's not a practical solution to pull all the public speakers on this matter. |
| 01:40:11.45 | Jill Hoffman | I'll benefit from it. |
| 01:40:15.55 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:40:15.97 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. I'm going to go watch it. |
| 01:40:16.78 | Sergio Rudin | I mean, you can step down off the dais and watch it in the room. Like that's the regulation does allow that. So you just, if you're going to recuse from items, you step down off the dais, you can watch it from the room. Um, And basically, you deal with the decisions where people have recusals first. And then you would deal with the remaining discussion afterwards, after everybody gets back to the dice. |
| 01:40:40.93 | Melissa Blaustein | And, Sir Joe, just for the interest of the public, can you explain why, as a renter, I would not recuse from the Bridgeway bike lane issue versus |
| 01:40:53.94 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. I mean, typically I would suspect that the Bridgeway bike lane issue, again, that's probably still going to fit within the exemption for repairs, replacement, and maintenance of existing streets, water, sewer, or storm drainage and similar facilities. Secondly, even if it doesn't fit within that, you know, there's a requirement. |
| 01:41:10.34 | Matthew Hartsell | Thank you. |
| 01:41:10.48 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 01:41:10.56 | Matthew Hartsell | Definitely. |
| 01:41:15.94 | Sergio Rudin | typical requirements with respect to leasehold interest is that, you know, it has to change the determination date of the lease. I don't see how a project would do that. It has to increase or decrease the potential rental value of the property, or it has to change the actual or legally allowed use of the real property or impact your use of enjoyment of the real property and Again, I suspect that You know, Of course, anyone can debate anything, but the likelihood of any of those happening seems very low with respect to a project that involves bike lanes. |
| 01:41:52.43 | Ian Sobieski | Plus, we're not deciding on bike lanes tonight. Okay. Great. Thank you. We're not deciding on bike lanes tonight. |
| 01:41:55.61 | Joan Cox | Thank you. I'm sorry, I just have to state. So city attorney, to try to preserve. Sergio, I've stated that I need to recuse from the Easter Bee to Bee project. |
| 01:42:00.34 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. and try to preserve it. |
| 01:42:07.53 | Joan Cox | I'm within 500 feet, but if I do that and leave, we won't have a quorum. |
| 01:42:12.98 | Ian Sobieski | Do we need a quorum to listen to public comments? |
| 01:42:15.27 | Joan Cox | That's my question. I would think so in order to have the publicly conducted meetings. |
| 01:42:21.22 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, if you guys have a project where you can't reach a quorum, then the right thing that the clerk is supposed to do is draw a name out of a hat for the purpose of making a decision on that project. |
| 01:42:31.19 | Ian Sobieski | So question, Sergio, there are three people on the dais who are considering leaving |
| 01:42:31.24 | Sergio Rudin | So. |
| 01:42:36.13 | Ian Sobieski | during public comment because public comment could involve one or more of the projects they're recusing themselves from. If three people leave the dais, we won't have a majority of people on the dais hearing public comment. |
| 01:42:48.38 | Joan Cox | Vice Mayor, Council Member Blossin and I just tag team and maybe the maybe to move things along members of the public will will help us figure out if you intend to talk about one or the other, please let us know and we will enter and exit as appropriate to maintain the meeting. Would that be okay for people just nod so we can move along. Is that okay with my fellow members? Yeah. Okay, is that okay with you? |
| 01:43:11.44 | Jill Hoffman | So we need to state our recusals now, right? Okay, so we're choosing on the, the, um, |
| 01:43:13.73 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 01:43:14.00 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:43:16.40 | Jill Hoffman | Marinship. Vault Water Storage Project and the Bridgeway Project Easterby to B Street. |
| 01:43:27.21 | Babette McDougall | Great. |
| 01:43:28.56 | Joan Cox | Okay, so I think the question is, when you come to the dais, if you're going to talk about Easter B2B, please let me know so I can step off the dais. If it's going to be the bollards, please let Councilman Blassey know so she can step off the dais. Thank you. Thank you for your help with that. |
| 01:43:43.23 | Steven Woodside | Are we ready for public comment, city clerk? |
| 01:43:45.56 | Walfred Solorzano | Oh, yeah. All right. Jan Johnson. Followed by Carolyn Revell. |
| 01:43:56.71 | Jan Johnson | honored everybody. The staff report was confusing to a mere lay person because it made it appear that you were going to vote on than Bridgeway median. And there was $135,000 listed in the budget. So that's why I'm here. I, I think I understand that you did not want to remove the median, but she directed the consultants to study other designs. I guess the question is, what other designs were intended, and was that other design intended to keep the median? Yes. I've lived in Old Town for 31 years. From my perspective, that median is essential for me to be able to safely get across Bridgeway. If I'm standing in the middle of the street with two dogs on a double yellow line with cars zooming in both directions, either I or my pets are gonna die. Thank you. So we currently use it as you cross one lane, you wait until the traffic's clear on the other lane and you can get across safely. I think if you read Mr. Gabbert's letter, and there is another letter from a lady who grew up in Strawberry, who knew Bridgeway pre-median, without that median Old Town is not reachable many times. Every minute delay in responding to a cardiac arrest increases mortality significantly. And if the person survives, it decreases their mental capacity significantly. And the fire data shows that every minute delay in responding to a fire increases home loss and property loss. We've got to keep the emergency lane open, in my humble opinion. As to, you want to step down off the desk. As for the boners, |
| 01:45:51.31 | Steven Woodside | I'm afraid you have four seconds. |
| 01:45:54.18 | Jan Johnson | I've seen two cars put their front ends through the living room. We're out of time. |
| 01:45:59.04 | Steven Woodside | I got to tell you. |
| 01:45:59.21 | Jan Johnson | Thank you. |
| 01:45:59.22 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:45:59.26 | Jan Johnson | Thank you. |
| 01:45:59.27 | Ian Sobieski | Wow. |
| 01:45:59.93 | Walfred Solorzano | Carolyn Rubelle followed by Jane Hook. |
| 01:46:00.54 | Ian Sobieski | Right. . James. |
| 01:46:02.07 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:46:02.12 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. said she needed to leave she needed to step down before Jan made her comment and Jan still had four seconds. |
| 01:46:08.34 | Steven Woodside | She's made her comment. She's going to say it again. |
| 01:46:09.70 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. I couldn't hear her comment because of the commotion. |
| 01:46:10.88 | Steven Woodside | All right. All right. Thank you. Let's go through those steps. |
| 01:46:15.96 | Jan Johnson | And then, |
| 01:46:16.03 | Steven Woodside | Hang on, you got to wait. Wait until she leaves the room, Jan. |
| 01:46:17.31 | Jan Johnson | Thank you. |
| 01:46:17.41 | Ian Sobieski | Apparently, |
| 01:46:17.85 | Jan Johnson | Thank you. |
| 01:46:17.95 | Kevin McGowan | We have. |
| 01:46:18.24 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:46:19.03 | Jan Johnson | She could sit in the room in another chair. Oh. |
| 01:46:26.36 | Steven Woodside | I got to say, honestly, |
| 01:46:27.77 | Ian Sobieski | Sergio, is she supposed to leave the room? |
| 01:46:29.97 | Steven Woodside | Honestly, this is a mockery of city government. You have to say, I don't understand how we can have three attorneys on the dais and have this kind of mockery of public comment. I just don't get it. So please put four seconds back on the clock for Ms. Johnson. |
| 01:46:33.38 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. |
| 01:46:33.61 | Sergio Rudin | and then, |
| 01:46:45.19 | Walfred Solorzano | For seconds, I'll just count it from two minutes because we'll kick it down to one. |
| 01:46:48.26 | Steven Woodside | All right, thank you. Please go, Tammy, should you please have the floor, Vice Mayor? |
| 01:46:48.28 | Walfred Solorzano | of the Thank you. Please go. |
| 01:46:52.41 | Ian Sobieski | May I, a point of order, must we leave the room or must, or is it okay for her to be in the room? |
| 01:46:53.38 | Steven Woodside | All right, when the morning. |
| 01:46:58.61 | Sergio Rudin | You can be in the room and observe it from the area reserved for members of the public. |
| 01:47:02.56 | Ian Sobieski | All right. For areas of reserve to the members of the public. So you have to go out to the, |
| 01:47:13.84 | Steven Woodside | Ms. Johnson, please go right ahead. |
| 01:47:16.78 | Jan Johnson | Two cars in the living room of that building in 25 years, fully into the living room. Of course, Zach. Thank you very much. |
| 01:47:23.06 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Carolyn Revell followed by Jane Hook. |
| 01:47:30.57 | Carolyn Revell | I'm not going to be talking about anything for which you need to recuse yourself. I'm Carolyn Revell representing Sausalito Beautiful. As you review the CIP, I'd like to highlight the issue of funding for street trees. We ask your support to replace the dying calorie pairs on Bridgeway. and to add CIP funding for planting on Caledonia Street. The Planning Commission, as you heard, recommended both projects at their last meeting. Most of the CIP items you've been hearing, of course, relate to traditional infrastructure. But the general plan includes landscape as infrastructure, both community design and and that sustainability element Plan notes the environmental benefit of trees to improve air quality, Thank you. carbon sequestration and increased shade. very important during climate change. and recommends identifying opportunities to expand the tree canopy. The general plan also advocates enhancing the pedestrian-oriented streetscape on both Bridgeway and Caledonia. what street trees do. And as you know, Sausalito Beautiful has been working for several years to add trees on Caledonia. We've added about 20. six of them most recently we paid for ourselves. We can't really afford to do that as a nonprofit. We need to be partners with the city on future tree planting and, Down on Bridgeway, the calorie pairs are dying, which is why we need to replace them. So I think I've made the point we'd like to have the funding for both Caledonia and Bridgeway Trees One other item that I didn't prepare But as we've heard about the different park projects, To me, it seems we really need to have a park master plan to be sure that all the different park recommendations it into a plan. And the very interesting idea of a stage in Gabrielson Park. I want to be sure, of course, that you have a designer involved. in the location of that. stage with the view of the bay in mind. Thank you very much. |
| 01:49:24.83 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:49:25.03 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. All right, Jane Hook followed by Peter Brozick. Shane Hook's gone. All right. So, Peter Brozick? Peter? Nope. Jan Kujewski. Thank you. |
| 01:49:45.31 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:49:45.92 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:49:45.94 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 01:49:45.97 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:49:49.40 | Walfred Solorzano | I have a lot of snips. I'm going through them right now. Was Jane Hook or Peter Brzezik here? Oh. All right, Jang Krijalski. You can't hear me? I'll be louder. Sorry about that. Okay. See, I don't recognize those names. Maybe they got mixed from the planning commission one. Yeah, I think these got mixed over here. All right, this makes it easier. All right, so there's no... Those people aren't there. So Peter Van Meter. |
| 01:50:29.65 | Peter Van Meter | Thank you. There's a lot of clarification needed here tonight on the Ferry Landing Improvement Project. First of all, there was no phasing whatever suggested on February 6th. The erection was go figure out what it's going to cost and then decide what phasing might be required. So there's no phasing at all. Secondly, they Parking lot reconstruction was never included in the grant. And I'll read you that language just for the benefit of the public and people here. It only talks about modifications. to improve circulation. and increase the size of the plaza. Specifically. This project will modify an existing city-owned vehicle parking lot to better delineate the areas for vehicle, pedestrian, and bikeless uses and to improve circulation in this highly congested area. By modifying the parking lot, the project will be able to increase the area available to stage and process ferry passengers and bicycles, and will provide space to allow for rearranging the existing facilities in the promenade to optimize vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle flow. In other words, the only reference in the grant from October 10th, 2017. the pass-through agreement David Miller- Is relative to what I just said there's nothing ever been about reconstructing of the parking lot so staff is right to propose these as two separate projects. David Miller- You have in your plan to move this very landing project ahead to drawings by August have it out to bid and under construction and to be completed by December that's in your plan. So you need to move that forward to meet those dates if we have a problem at BCD approval on this, we need to have staff be directed to go directly to the seat the staff at BC DC and move that forward on their agenda and get the permits that are required to move this project forward. Thank you. |
| 01:52:22.94 | Walfred Solorzano | Alice Merrill. |
| 01:52:31.99 | Alice Merrill | Hello. Thank you. I live at 117 Caledonia. two sort of three things. One is And then, This whole thing about the median strip and do it or not do it or what's it going to look like. We need to have a citywide meeting. We need to have the people who are affected by this to be able to know, what is it that we're talking about, and do we like it or not? And I get it that we don't really know what we're doing. But- To have it buried in the agenda, it doesn't make any sense to me. And I don't like it. It's got to be more transparent. It's just got to be. There was a deal about the ferry landing, parking in the South City Yacht Harbor, and it was a, It was a letter of intent. Did that ever come about? Is there going to actually be? extra parking in there or not. Or was that just to get it through? And then we'll just ignore that part because that's important. That's a lot of spaces that we talked about and we were assured that we would be getting those extra spaces. Okay. And, um, The other thing is, speaking of trees, we have some very diseased trees outside where I live on Tourney Street, and they were supposed to be cut down because they're really just dropping horrible stuff down on any car that's there. And there was a sign to cut them down. And it said, these will be cut down. And it didn't say why it didn't say they're diseased. It didn't say we've had discussions. They just said, they're being cut. People complained, why are you cutting down trees? So they just didn't do it. And so then, How does that ever happen? You know, those are my questions. Thank you. |
| 01:54:33.07 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:54:33.08 | Alice Merrill | Yes. |
| 01:54:33.15 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:54:33.19 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 01:54:33.20 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:54:33.30 | Alice Merrill | The next speaker is |
| 01:54:34.03 | Walfred Solorzano | Nishana Brockett. |
| 01:54:43.33 | Sharna Brockett | Thanks so much. I'm Sharna Brockett. I'm a resident here in Sausalito. I just want to emphasize, I'm really excited about this ferry landing project, the Landside Project, and I think you have heard We've come back time and time again supporting this project. And just really want, I'm excited to see it's, you know, on the active list and really would like to see you break ground this fall. I think that was the time when we determined it would be most cost effective and least intrusive. So really want to emphasize, let's get it done. Let's keep it moving. Let's not, you know, it's been, I think the last letter from the bridge district said it's been 10 years. I've heard 10 to seven years, but it's too long. We need to get it moving on it and stop getting in our own way. So with repaving the parking lot, as Peter just said, that's not really the focus of this grant. And I think we've all have read the scope of the grant. it's really designed to improve the plaza and the promenade and the circulation for the pedestrians and the cyclists. So I'm glad to see that the repaving of the parking lot is a separate project on the CIP list where it should be. And I also understand we have a million dollars in our parking fund to help with repaving. So we do have funds to cover that. And then I think we're all concerned about the climate and sea level rise. We really need to think about how do we repave that lot? Should it be a permeable surface? You know, those are things we want this to last another 100 years. Let's not just throw it in to the ferry landing, you know, and try to use that. And I worry that we would lose the grant money too, if we did that, because it's not part of that. And the last i'll say is that um let's not lose this money to improve bridgeway you know i think we know that traffic professionals are going to come back with some suggested designs and it may and it and let's see what they have to say they're the experts so thank you so much |
| 01:56:42.97 | Walfred Solorzano | Sebo Boutillier. |
| 01:56:52.59 | Sebo Boutillier | Good evening, Mayor. Council members, I wanted to speak in favor of the... Coloma Street project. I think it's a really important safety project. This street does not allow for the type of activity that's actually happening there with seniors walking to the grocery store, people walking their jobs, kids coming back and forth to school. We have a Safe Routes to School project going there. um safe streets for all grant that is open right now the nofa that's due on may 16th and i know there's been some talk about you know working on that and this would be a really good project for that um i just want to say like The other day, there was like a sprinter van parked right on the corner, further blinding that corner. Right across the street was a large van with tennis rackets. It's there a lot of the time. This left about I don't know, 20 feet in the middle of the road for people to come to walk. There was no other place to walk. There was cars parked on both sides. And so the streets, the cars, the people, everybody's in the middle of the street. And it's a blind corner with lots of activity. So let's try to make it safe before somebody gets hit by a vehicle. And we've got a real problem. Thank you. |
| 01:58:35.21 | Walfred Solorzano | Anybody in the house that didn't give me a slip and would like to speak? All right. uh... songs and we do have center bushmaker |
| 01:58:47.96 | Walfred Solorzano | You can unmute yourself. |
| 01:58:49.45 | Sandra Bushmaker | Okay, I think I've got it. Good afternoon, everyone. I'm going to be very quick. I watched the Planning Commission procedure with regard to the Capital Improvement Program, and it went very smoothly with regard to recusals I think we need to have that at the council level as well. Um, I also want to refer you to the Dietrich FPC case in on August 26 2019 it deals with leasehold interests and recusal requirements. With regard to the ferry landing, I too read the scope of work and believe that there is some wiggle room in the word modification, why don't we ask Golden Gate Bridge District whether resurfacing is anticipated in the grant or not. and kind of stop this debate. With regard to the geologic hazard assessment Mapping. you will be receiving that report forthwith. And it's going to be presented, I believe, next time. to the to the council. I do know you were shown a few minutes ago, the red zones on some of the maps. We have a lot of problem in Sausalito. The program, that you will be presented as projects that are derivative from this report. So please anticipate those and Uh, plan for those financial expenditures. Um, Remember that the task force I was on the mudslide or landslide task force made recommendations within three months of the being appointed to the landslide task force to the city council. It's five years ago. Let's get these recommendations turned into projects. Thank you very much. |
| 02:00:41.35 | Walfred Solorzano | Linda Pfeiffer. |
| 02:00:47.93 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, can you hear me? |
| 02:00:49.90 | Walfred Solorzano | I guess. |
| 02:00:53.41 | Linda Pfeiffer | OK. So good evening everyone. My name is Linda Pfeiffer. I'm a resident of Sausalito. and I oppose the removal of the Southern Bridgeway Median Lane. Tonight, according to the staff report on page 12, in a table titled Active Projects Needing Funding, The council is being asked to decide whether to vote to continue OBAC III grant funding of 506,000 for, quote, Quote the original design of eliminating the median area. This is verbatim in the staff report, eliminate the media. That funding is on the table tonight and I'm dismayed at the lack of transparency, Regarding this topic for Saucido residents, it's buried in the staff report. And earlier we heard a staff member, I believe, recommend repurposing the funds. That is on the table, but that is still a choice. in front of this council. And it's a choice that many, many residents have very strong opinions about. Don't you want to hear from your constituents? You've varied whether to continue the funding for the bike lane and elimination of the median area among dozens of other capital improvement projects. On page 12 of the staff report, uh, As I said, it looks like the question before council is whether or not to accept these funds for the original design to eliminate the median. Again, I urge council do not accept this $506,000 grant to eliminate the median instead vote to repurpose the MTC funds. Again, we don't need to spend $506,000 to add to traffic congestion and endanger our lives. A Sausalito resident's life is worth more than $506,000. Repurpose those funds. And please don't compromise our safety. And please add more transparency to this topic next time. Based on the staff report, again on page 11, we see. |
| 02:02:50.51 | Walfred Solorzano | Next speaker is Kieran Culligan. |
| 02:03:06.15 | Steven Woodside | You have to unmute Mr. Culligan. |
| 02:03:06.96 | Walfred Solorzano | Let me see. |
| 02:03:10.81 | Steven Woodside | You have to unmute yourself, Mr. Colleen. |
| 02:03:13.37 | Kieran Culligan | All right, you finally got to me. Thank you. David Myers, I think you've somewhat lost your minds when it comes to recusals the CIP happens every year and i've never seen this time sink and chaos use your judgment does a $50,000 storm drain capture device create a conflict owner from other side of bridgeway sorry I said it. David Myers, It's up to you for this aside regarding the bridgeway waterfront a traffic engineer has never had the opportunity. to see if there's ways to make this stretch of roadway safer, even after a pedestrian death. Until now. Frankly, I'm disturbed by comments that are dismissing ideas out of hand without letting the conceptual design process play out. For the construction grant, keep your options open. Definitely don't commit to locking in design spending now on an extended extended sidewalk design when we might want to do something different, especially if you want to do something different within the next two decades that can have real impact. We're world class at delaying things in Sausalito. Let's just hold off with MTC and TAM until we come back and can talk about designs. Per Ms. Cox's comment. Thanks. |
| 02:04:25.06 | Steven Woodside | No additional speakers, we'll bring it back. |
| 02:04:26.27 | Walfred Solorzano | No, sorry. We have Adrienne Brinson. We have about five, six speakers left. Thank you. Thank you. We're going to get some more. |
| 02:04:36.53 | Walfred Solorzano | Adrian Britton. |
| 02:04:41.43 | Steven Woodside | We can't hear you, Mr. Brinton. Can you please unmute yourself? |
| 02:04:44.95 | Walfred Solorzano | It's unmuted. I don't think it is. |
| 02:04:51.22 | Steven Woodside | know he still can't hear you you might go to the next speaker while he works on his microphone i'll go to charles melton |
| 02:04:54.03 | Walfred Solorzano | is. I'll go to Charles Melton. |
| 02:04:55.89 | Steven Woodside | Please work on your microphone, Mr. Brinton, and we'll come back to you, Mr. Milton. |
| 02:05:03.55 | Charles Melton | Good evening. My name is Charles Melton. I'm a solid resident. I'm not talking about any of the issues that are for recusal tonight, so I encourage everyone to listen to these with open mind. The issue of repaving parking lot one was mentioned from the dais and also in a previous public comment. There's been a misguided proposal to repurpose an existing bridge district grant to resurface parking lot one. This should be fiscally irresponsible and fiscally reckless, costing millions in taxpayer dollars. Our city council received a parking study from Dixon that provided substantial recommendations on how the city can generate additional revenue from the parking lot one. |
| 02:05:03.72 | Steven Woodside | Good night. THE END OF |
| 02:05:34.70 | Charles Melton | Repaving parking lot one was not a fiscal recommendation. Furthermore, in the CIP being discussed tonight, parking lot three and four are listed to be improved and restrained This Council might consider a master parking plan, which includes the recommendations from the Dixon study the plans for parking lot three and four in this in the CIP along with. The vision of repaving parking lot one is previous smokers of members have mentioned putting a plan for public input, much like other plans, including the fairly landing process has undergone is common for our city council. Regarding the Ferry Landslide Improvement Project, project number A002, I strongly encourage the city council to move expeditiously on this project. The bridge district wrote in a city in a March letter warning that, quote, the grant is on the cusp of being rescinded and, quote, it is imperative that Sausalito proceed with all haste in implementing the design approved on February 6th. I'm encouraging our city council to take every immediate step and action necessary so shovels can break ground no later than this fall. I just think there's been a lot of comments about the public media on Bridgeway. The core of the basic of this Bridgeway safety improvement project is public safety. And who does public safety benefit? Everyone. Pedestrians, vehicles, bicyclists, emergency vehicles, businesses, delivery companies, everyone. For me personally, when I cross a road, I use a crosswalk, not a median. But let's go back to the design concepts. Let's get those from the professionals and not lose sight of the various public safety components in this project by simply narrowing in on one median. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments tonight. And thank you to our city council. |
| 02:07:07.21 | Walfred Solorzano | Next speaker is Aaron Roller. |
| 02:07:15.73 | Aaron Roller | Hey everybody, Aaron Roller here. Sausalito resident and former chair of the Pedestrian Bicycle Advisory Committee. Just wanted to speak in favor of the Coloma Project |
| 02:07:15.80 | Kevin McGowan | Okay. |
| 02:07:15.82 | Sergio Rudin | everybody. |
| 02:07:16.34 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 02:07:26.65 | Aaron Roller | that has been on the books for a long time. very urgently going after that crosswalk because it's used by children commuting to school from Marin City. And that was back in, I want to say, 2018 when I first started on that. So that's been a long ways coming. I'm really excited about seeing that and thank you to staff for continuing to get that through and hopefully we can finish that. Also want to speak about the, uh, the bridgeway bike lanes and the, um, Bridgeway Safety Project, Just to mention to everybody that sometimes the process can be a little bit confusing, but that project's been on the, capital improvement plan, I think for three or four years now that I recall. This is the process that, as we discussed it in 2018, and it was well received by the Chief of Police and the Mayor at the time that was in our Pedestrian Bicycle Advisory Committee. that we get it through the process and follow exactly the way it's been going now. I also want to mention, too, that crosswalks are a big part of that project to everybody that is concerned about crossing the street. I, too, am concerned about crossing the street. There's not a crosswalk there for half a mile. So getting a better way to cross Bridgeway there is very important. I was disappointed to read the staff report. mentioned that the public was not well received. Did not mention that it's been, that the project's been approved five zero by city council. more than once. And that was because of the public outcry. So I'd ask the staff to... |
| 02:09:20.86 | Walfred Solorzano | Next speaker is Jenny Silva. video. Let me ask to mute. You can unmute yourself, please. |
| 02:09:32.56 | Jenny Silva | Yeah. Hi, City Council. I just want to mention two things very quickly. First, at the February 6 meeting, there was overwhelming support, huge support for the Ferry Bridgeway landing project, and I urge you to do everything in your power to move it forward quickly so that we could break ground. I think the community will be incredibly disappointed if that project ends up losing its financing and it would be, really a a huge loss for everyone in Sausalito. The community wants it. They've made it very, very clear. Please don't do anything to jeopardize that funding. um, Secondly, Thank you. I just want to comment on the median and some of the other pedestrian safety projects. I hear a lot of residents very concerned about safety and They believe that the solution that was figured out I don't know how long ago the medium was put in. 40 years ago is the best solution. Countries all over the world have taken pedestrians safety very, very seriously. And they have learned what works and it would be a real lost opportunity of Sausalito, went into the design phase, thinking that we know what the best solution is without talking to the experts and without learning from other communities. Everyone knows that Bridgeway is dangerous. The median is not the best solution. There's a lot we can learn from others. So please, let us learn from folks that have achieved success. Thank you. |
| 02:11:21.55 | Walfred Solorzano | Next speaker is Matthew Hartsell. |
| 02:11:28.84 | Matthew Hartsell | Thank you. Good evening. I'm going to speak to the Bridgeway bike lanes. Please let the consultant finish their job and bring their findings back to the city and give the public a chance to, at that point, weigh in on what I assume will be different alternatives. Some may propose removing the median, some may not. and let the consultant share the findings and let the public have the process. This is not the time and the place for that. Um, And let's be clear that the consultant in the city They all have safety, the public safety as the number one concern. And the consultant is a leader in safety improvements for all transportation users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists and transit users. So I'm sure that the consultant is not going to propose any alternatives that would make the current conditions less safe. Many people have said in their comments that the current conditions are safe, and work fine, but they don't work fine for everybody. In fact, right now, delivery trucks park in that median and block emergency access, so If you're concerned about emergency vehicle access, then the current median is actually a problem that needs to be the needs of solution. I also want to remind everybody that While some cyclists may do just fine riding on Bridgeway and its existing conditions, there are many more people. in the population who want to ride a bike, but who don't currently ride a bike in places like Bridgeway because they don't feel safe sharing travel lanes with moving cars. And, and, and those, those people who are actually 60% of the population and include Sausalito children, families, and senior citizens, they need separated bike lanes in order to feel safe and comfortable. And in order to do their part in contributing to, |
| 02:13:35.56 | Walfred Solorzano | We'll try Adrian Brinson again. |
| 02:13:42.19 | Adrian Brinton | Hi, is this working this time? |
| 02:13:42.29 | Walfred Solorzano | is this? |
| 02:13:43.99 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, you're so good. |
| 02:13:44.11 | Adrian Brinton | I'm sorry. Okay, excellent, thank you. I just wanted to make a quick comment on the ferry landing phasing. I think when the discussions happened before, There wasn't any talk about repaving lot one. It was left out of the ferry landing improvements and the ferry land, the lot one needs to be repaved and should definitely be part of the CIP. and should be prioritized accordingly. And we definitely need to consider sea level rise as part of that project. separately from the ferry landing improvements. The bridgeway bike lanes are another area of concern. You know, a lot of comments about cars zooming along the bridgeway and needing the median across the street. cars running into buildings at the end of Bridgeway. You know, those things can be addressed in the street design. Our design of Bridgeway is from 1965 It's out of date. These discussions to make it safer have been going on for years, and we should continue that process. You know, a lot of comments about how people will die if we change Bridgeway. You know, we're talking about re-striping the road. We're not making the roadway more narrow. There is room for emergency vehicles with a re-striped bridgeway. So I think that, you know, I'd love to see the designs that the experts come up with. And I think there are much safer alternatives to what we have today. Thank you very much. I also want to say the CIP project is very hard. And I appreciate all the time that the council and the city staff has put into it. Thanks very much. |
| 02:15:14.59 | Steven Woodside | I see no further public speaker. We'll close public comment, bring it back up to the diocese for any discussion. Council Member Blaustein, I hope Council Member Hoffman will return. I guess. Yes. Okay, request is for a bio break. So we'll take a five minute break and resume at 920. Thank you, everyone. And we'll see you in five minutes. |
| 02:15:49.93 | Steven Woodside | Okay, resuming the meeting. Thank you very much. We will now begin discussion of... of the topic, Director McGowan, you're at the podium. Can we have a quiet chamber, please? |
| 02:16:04.41 | Ian Sobieski | Can people quiet down? Unbelievable. |
| 02:16:09.02 | Steven Woodside | I'm not. |
| 02:16:12.32 | Steven Woodside | Okay. So discussion, please, of the CIP program. Let's start with the bollard issue. That's what Councilmember Blaustein has recused herself on. This is on Bridgeway. Is there anyone who has any questions, comments, perspective on that? |
| 02:16:30.35 | Joan Cox | Mayor, I'd like to offer up one of the things that, is that okay with you to jump in? I'm calling for people to speak. So, thank you. So, Director McGowan, you, I think, had asked us to articulate whether we felt that we were in concurrence with the general strategy. That was sort of an overarching question you asked of us. Big picture. And you also stated in your presentation that you wanted to identify capital projects before they become emergencies. And so, I just want to highlight that because I sort of took that overarching topic to heart |
| 02:16:34.92 | Steven Woodside | I'm calling for people to speak. |
| 02:16:47.36 | Sergio Rudin | Big pick. |
| 02:16:47.93 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:16:54.51 | Carolyn Revell | And so, |
| 02:16:59.69 | Joan Cox | And I will just say that for me, I looked at this with two lenses. I call it my R&R. It's roads and resilience. Does it make our community more resilient? meaning is our infrastructure going to last longer? Is it going to respond to environmental disaster? And does it create better roadways for a number of reasons, including some of the public safety and the criteria? So I just want to offer that up and ask for others' opinion, because then in that respect, I think the bollards do make a lot of sense, especially since we did have a recent crash right there, and it seems to be an area that tends to scuff up the building, the vehicles, which is not good. So that's my lens. I just wanted to share it with you all. And that's my opinion on that particular one, but I don't know if you want to go. |
| 02:17:46.22 | Steven Woodside | Let's just stay on that topic so we can bring Council Member Blaston back. Are there other comments? I have my own, but other |
| 02:17:52.85 | Ian Sobieski | I endorse Councilmember Kelman's comments |
| 02:17:58.89 | Steven Woodside | That's more hopping. Yeah, I guess I'll be the dissenting board. Not dissenting so much, because I think those bollards in a design there to make that corner safer are super essential, but I'm flummoxed by the... the fact that we have this $500,000 grant that could pay for it. All the money wouldn't have to come from my property tax or my sales tax. It could come from the grant that we have. So that's very much tied into good government and being proactive. We had our director, McGowan, who went out on his own and made an application for design funds and construction funds for making Bridgeway safer. And one of the key ways it could get safer is building sidewalks, making sidewalks better, installing bollards to prevent cars from running into houses or running into the sea or running over pedestrians to make a way so that Ms. Johnson could not have to go to the middle of the median and wait for speeding cars to go by but could instead be on a lighted crosswalk to safely traverse bridgeway and so we are going to potentially authorize the spending of our personal property tax dollars and sales tax dollars when we could if we expeditiously It executed the design with the bridgeway safety improvements, spend the grant money. So my question is why we would do that. |
| 02:19:18.84 | Joan Cox | I'd like to respond to that. Me too. Yes, so are you soliciting comments then on the MTC grant because I think Are you asking for comments on the MTC grant as well? Yes, very much so, because I have comments on that, so I want to keep it with your thoughts. |
| 02:19:35.84 | Steven Woodside | My thought only is that I'm all in favor of making that corner safer for everyone involved. There are a lot of things in town that aren't safe. |
| 02:19:44.42 | Sergio Rudin | Mm-hmm. |
| 02:19:44.73 | Steven Woodside | There are sidewalks that literally threw me from my bike, which we'll be talking about later. There are roadways that are downright dangerous. This is one of many dangerous things. So why should this one get this kind of special attention? That's first and foremost among all the ways that we can make things safer. I feel as though it is an important safety project. What really makes it stand out is unlike almost all the other safety projects in town, this one we actually could pay for with non-taxpayer money. |
| 02:20:13.94 | Joan Cox | So, Mayor, I don't disagree with you. My question is, do you want us to opine on the use of the non-taxpayer money, or do you want us to simply say from a safety perspective, this seems reasonable, but we do have to – it's difficult to have this conversation in a vacuum, and I think that's where you're getting at, because we haven't really talked about the MTCG. |
| 02:20:31.30 | Steven Woodside | I propose it would just please, Vice Mayor. |
| 02:20:31.94 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. So what if we go ahead and allocate funds, since there's a majority of us to do that, but say if we design and obtain grant funding for – Bridgeway improvements that include the bollards we simply shift that project into that program |
| 02:20:51.79 | Steven Woodside | maybe we could with a friendly amendment to your motion, direct the people that are doing the work on the bridgeway safety program to direct |
| 02:20:56.78 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. |
| 02:20:58.56 | Steven Woodside | them to look at making that corner safer for vehicles that are potentially running over the curb. |
| 02:21:03.74 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, but in the meantime. |
| 02:21:04.57 | Steven Woodside | Design work's already being done and they could... even come up with the conceptual designs that we could then take further with that funding. |
| 02:21:11.40 | Joan Cox | I would be good so far even though to say that I'm supportive of this project if we have grant funds to pay for it, but not actually coming out of our general fund, which is what I think you're saying. |
| 02:21:22.27 | Steven Woodside | I'm saying what you're saying is what I agree with. Okay. So Janelle. |
| 02:21:24.21 | Joan Cox | Okay. |
| 02:21:24.59 | Ian Sobieski | to the |
| 02:21:25.22 | Joan Cox | it's a good thing. |
| 02:21:25.29 | Ian Sobieski | I'm supportive of the project even if we don't have grant funds. |
| 02:21:28.71 | Steven Woodside | ADVERTISTS. |
| 02:21:28.86 | Ian Sobieski | We had a car run into a house. |
| 02:21:31.87 | Steven Woodside | We have lots of dangerous things in town, and so the... I agree, but I feel like we're not looking at all the dangerous places and what the various risks are. We have landslides. We have the geological survey. There are a lot of places. And so I'm with the Council Member Kelman that we should say this is important. And if we have grant funds, build it. And if we don't, then I think we should have a comprehensive safety assessment across town that includes prioritizing what the safety feature changes need to be. |
| 02:22:04.01 | Ian Sobieski | So then maybe we don't have consensus. I'm in favor of moving forward with it and funding it with grant monies if we can. But we gave direction last year to get proposals. We're still waiting on design proposals. I'm not confident that we'll even carry out those design proposals in fiscal year 24-25. And I would like to see this project not have to wait. |
| 02:22:34.39 | Jill Hoffman | I lean more toward if we have grant money, do it. If not, then it's got to be part of the bigger assessment of what priorities are throughout town. And to Council Member Kellman's point of roads and resilience, I think that's a good lens to look through when we prioritize these projects and what gets built. So that's sort of my view. |
| 02:23:01.17 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:23:01.91 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you, councilman. |
| 02:23:03.67 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, so you're clear, Kevin, that's off the list unless it's part of the grant-funded project. |
| 02:23:08.36 | Steven Woodside | Please bring Councilmember Blaustein back please. |
| 02:23:10.03 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:23:10.06 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, any grant funded project, right? Yes. |
| 02:23:13.15 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, anywhere grants can come from. |
| 02:23:14.22 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:23:14.25 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:23:14.27 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. INCOME. |
| 02:23:15.97 | Steven Woodside | Councilor Merritt, can we get Council Member Gloucester? She's probably watching somewhere. Are you okay? |
| 02:23:22.58 | Kevin McGowan | Let her trip. |
| 02:23:24.73 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:23:27.92 | Joan Cox | Thank you. even see it on the soccer team. you Thank you. to call it on stuff. |
| 02:23:33.88 | Sergio Rudin | I just heard that. |
| 02:23:36.95 | Joan Cox | It's not on, what is it? It's on page six. |
| 02:23:40.32 | Steven Woodside | You're good, come back in, Councilmember Blaustein. Okay, let's resume now. It's really for us to drive the bus here. What do we wanna talk about next in the CIP? |
| 02:23:50.75 | Jill Hoffman | You guys want to talk about the two things that I've recused on, the marineship vault, water storage, and the Bridgeway Easter B2B? Sure. |
| 02:23:58.19 | Steven Woodside | Sure. If you kindly recuse yourself, then we'll refer you to that. Thank you very much, Council Member Hoffman. |
| 02:23:58.60 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:23:58.97 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:23:59.00 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:23:59.02 | Sebo Boutillier | Thank you. |
| 02:23:59.03 | Joan Cox | All right. |
| 02:23:59.17 | Jill Hoffman | THE FAMILY. |
| 02:23:59.34 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:23:59.36 | Jill Hoffman | Here's yourself then. |
| 02:24:00.23 | Joan Cox | Thank you very much. I'll stay for Marinship and leave for B. |
| 02:24:11.57 | Steven Woodside | Okay, so we're gonna talk about the MarinShip vault now. |
| 02:24:12.25 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:24:18.05 | Joan Cox | So I think, is this, Dr. McGowan, was this part of the item that was on the consent? No, that was the trash collection in the Marin ship. This is separate, okay. |
| 02:24:27.66 | Ian Sobieski | This is using recycled water. Thank you. |
| 02:24:32.13 | Joan Cox | . |
| 02:24:33.86 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, that's correct. The idea is to put a small little water storage tank at the end of Spring Street to catch some water that runs year-round in order to... water our medians. This has to do with drought tolerance. |
| 02:24:46.89 | Joan Cox | Are we gonna collect fog? I really want to collect fog. |
| 02:24:48.36 | Kevin McGowan | We were like, Thank you. |
| 02:24:51.08 | Joan Cox | I can. Yes, I think this is a very interesting project. I think it's forward thinking. It is tough. I don't want to get into this $40,000 here, $40,000 there. So I almost wonder if after this one, we can try to just prioritize instead of going piece by piece. |
| 02:25:06.35 | Steven Woodside | We're just dealing because of the recusal. |
| 02:25:08.04 | Joan Cox | Yeah, yeah, so I'm trying, I'm asking for help on how we might consider, so I do think it's important. Is it more important than everything else on the list? |
| 02:25:14.97 | Ian Sobieski | I think it's for design only. It's $40,000. I think it's a de minimis expense for a potential great outcome. |
| 02:25:22.33 | Joan Cox | Yeah, I'm going to support it. I think that's an important use to use of recycled water for our medians, particularly the climate crisis. What do you think? |
| 02:25:29.75 | Melissa Blaustein | I fully agree and I'm excited about the use of recycled water. So I'm on the same page. Thank you. |
| 02:25:34.45 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:25:34.48 | Carolyn Revell | Great. |
| 02:25:34.89 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:25:37.13 | Steven Woodside | I guess my only question, it's a question not for this topic, but it's more of a general question, but for Director McGowan, my question is only, as I started the session out, you have a small staff, you have a lot of projects. There are in your general CIP, and this is one of them, a lot of design projects proposed as well as shovel ready projects that you're trying to build. Do you have the staff? Do you have the capacity to do the design projects and execute well on the new projects and do the maintenance of the city? |
| 02:26:08.97 | Kevin McGowan | We have new project managers, and I'm super excited about that, but we're bringing them up to speed. So they're not quite full speed yet. I haven't run a project analysis for everybody to find out if we can accommodate not just these projects, but also the sanitary projects. So I will need to do that between now and, let's say, the end of the fiscal year. Take a look at that. |
| 02:26:35.33 | Steven Woodside | When we're positive on a project like this, to do the design of this work, is it adding to your pile and you're going to get to it when you can with the resources you have? What are you taking from our direction? |
| 02:26:50.17 | Ian Sobieski | I think we should prioritize in case he doesn't have the staff to do all of the projects that he's telling us he wants to do in 2024-25. |
| 02:26:59.31 | Kevin McGowan | What I'm suggesting is that I bring back to you a work loading diagram that shows when and where we can incorporate this work. |
| 02:27:06.55 | Steven Woodside | Got it. So you'll give us a work loading. Yes. That's great. Thank you very much. So yeah, I'm positive. |
| 02:27:08.80 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. |
| 02:27:13.06 | Steven Woodside | about You're going to Easterby now. |
| 02:27:24.13 | Steven Woodside | Only comments on the Easter Bee project. |
| 02:27:27.17 | Ian Sobieski | Staff is seeking grant funding to support this effort, and then it requires a local match. So I think this should be dependent on obtaining the grant funding. I think it's a worthy project. Again, it's only $40,000. But it's an initial design, which would obviously be followed up by an actual project, and so I hesitate to embark if we don't have grant funding available. |
| 02:27:52.37 | Melissa Blaustein | Is this the project, Director McGowan, that we all heard a few meetings ago with the new proposals Parametrics. |
| 02:28:00.84 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, it was incorporated into Parametrix presentation, and they suggested that we move forward with the design of a section from Spring Street to Napa Street, including the design of a roundabout at Napa Street. So we're seeking grant funding. The amount that you see here, $40,000, is the approximate local match. |
| 02:28:21.73 | Melissa Blaustein | I would be supportive of that, especially given the dangers at that intersection and the presentation that we saw from parametrics and the public comment we received at that meeting, which was very much in favor of pursuing or at least considering these improvements. So I would be supportive of that. |
| 02:28:38.37 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:28:39.28 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:28:40.14 | Ian Sobieski | So we're supporting the $40,000 because without the grant, it's $80,000. The $40,000 is the local match part. |
| 02:28:46.33 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm confident we'll be able to find a match. |
| 02:28:48.54 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:28:48.83 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:28:50.13 | Ian Sobieski | All right, I'll ask them to come back. |
| 02:28:56.12 | Steven Woodside | Yes, I'm sorry you're having some trouble hearing. She's actually just going to, we supported this $40,000 if there's a match in the CIP, and we're getting our colleagues back. You can't hear me now. |
| 02:29:15.04 | Steven Woodside | All right, so we've taken care of the recusal matters. Now the floor is open for other discussion on the CIP. Thank you. |
| 02:29:25.97 | Steven Woodside | Is there any direction? Any other? Okay. Vice mayor. |
| 02:29:28.72 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Yeah, I oh sorry I just wanted to share with the with concern blasting because I think you're out of the room. I just want to say one of the things that director McGowan had asked us to do is to come up with a holistic point of view on on this motorway so much driving the strategy and I just shared that my strategy is R and R. It's a Rosen resilience. Can somebody please step outside to talk. |
| 02:29:52.36 | Unknown | We really want to hear it. |
| 02:29:54.02 | Joan Cox | Okay, yeah, maybe I can talk more slowly for sure. I will do that. So I was just sharing with Council Member Blaustein a philosophy that I wanted to share because she was out of the room about moving forward with capital projects that eliminate emergencies. So are we making something more resilient or are we creating better roadways for a number of reasons, including the criteria? And I wanted to restate that because I did have a question for Director McGowan, which is, I noticed on the map, we don't have any road resurfacing projects in the hills. everything is in the flat area. And we have, from a disaster preparedness standpoint, or five ways in and out, right? We've got Bridgeway either side, you've got Spencer, which is newly repaved, We've got Montemore, which is... definitely not newly repaved. And we've got Rodeo, which is somewhat, and then you hit Woodward, and it's Like... one lane road for two lanes, right? And so I'm curious why we didn't look at roads in the hills if the main criteria is safety. |
| 02:31:07.09 | Kevin McGowan | So I didn't present all the details with the next year's road resurfacing list. I do have a list, and there are roads in the hillside. I think it's Ariana Circle. Thank you. I always say it wrong. But there are more roads in the hillsides that we need to address. So I do have that list. I just haven't presented it yet, so my apologies. I didn't want to dive in. |
| 02:31:32.60 | Joan Cox | No need to apologize. Thank you for educating me on that. I wanted to be clear about what we were and weren't looking at tonight. So thank you for that. Thank you, Mayor, for that. |
| 02:31:42.76 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:31:42.78 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:31:42.79 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Vice mayor, please see who you're next. If you can see the floor to him, Councilman Hoffman, please go ahead. |
| 02:31:45.26 | Joan Cox | I think Jill- |
| 02:31:45.68 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:31:50.71 | Jill Hoffman | One thing that was missing from this project, I think, was the pavement The PMI. I can't remember what the M stands for, payment index, but payment. Peace. |
| 02:32:00.99 | Kevin McGowan | PCI, Pavement Condition Index. |
| 02:32:02.42 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, which was we received a presentation on that back in October. Yeah. I think. |
| 02:32:06.64 | Kevin McGowan | Yeah. |
| 02:32:07.43 | Jill Hoffman | Right. that our score is now an abysmal 58, and at that point it was info to us that it's gonna take another two million on top of the current spend of whatever, one point something, I don't see that anywhere in this. you know, in this capital improvement project, and I'm wondering, maybe when it comes back, can we have an item on that for consideration of You know, this is... This is the $2 million extra it's going to cost to get us up to from an abysmal 58 up to a less abysmal 63, understanding that 70. is the limit for a fail. It's like we're in the fail category, right? |
| 02:32:51.71 | Kevin McGowan | We're getting there, yeah. |
| 02:32:52.89 | Jill Hoffman | So I don't know. I think that that, from my perspective, that would be something that I would be interested in seeing and prioritizing, as Councilmember Kellman said, roads and resilience, right? And that was the index for the whole city, as I recall. And so that's something that I would like to see in the next one. The other thing that I want to talk about was the the stuff that we went into with the ferry, right, the phasing. So I'm happy that it's going to come back. I would request that the staff report, when it comes back, clearly call out what the direction was that the council the changes that occurred between that and what we saw tonight and what we saw that was part of the consent calendar at our last city council meeting on march 19th which also differed from the direction that was given at the february 6th meeting and also you know we've heard a lot about what the grant covers right so i i went back and looked it up, right? Because I was like, everybody's saying different things. So it's attached as Exhibit E to the October 10, 2017 meeting. And I believe that that's the scope of the description of the grant. And so, you know, it does talk about parking lot improvements. And it talks about... know reconfiguration of the parking lots to increase bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle access to the ferry landing, right? I mean, that's the purpose of it. The purpose is to let people get on and off the ferry in a better way. And so I would ask that so that we can focus our discussion at the next meeting, that that be attached as an attachment so that everybody can kind of look at it and we don't have to argue about what's within the scope and what isn't. So that's my discussion with regard to the ferry. I think we already talked about that. And otherwise, yeah, I know it's complicated. Thank you for your heart. |
| 02:34:53.03 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:34:54.93 | Joan Cox | you |
| 02:34:54.95 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:34:55.03 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:34:55.71 | Steven Woodside | Councilman Cummins. |
| 02:34:56.96 | Joan Cox | Yeah, so I know we have all these, this whole list. Let me offer mine. I'm in favor of everything proposed, except I would like to talk about the Ferryland side, the median, and there was one more. I think maybe that's it, just those two. So everything else, if I'm looking at page 15 of the presentation, I'm not sure what list, if anybody could put the list up on the screen, I'll be on the same page. |
| 02:35:26.37 | Joan Cox | Everything else, right? Old City Hall, roof replacement. I mean, I was here when the library flooded. Can't hold that back. Humboldt Street, bulkhead. That needs to happen. Trees, we need. storm drain capture devices. I mean, these are all really important, I think resilience projects. So those would be just the two that I'd wanna talk. Oh, the Gabrielson Park would be the third. So the median Gabrielson Park and the ferry stuff |
| 02:35:51.83 | Steven Woodside | Go ahead, Vice Mayor. |
| 02:35:52.70 | Ian Sobieski | I will say I do agree with that. I don't see the need to discuss the paving this evening since it's coming back to us as part of the ferry landing report I will acknowledge that REAP. Repaving was, in a footnote, not included in the project description that we reviewed on February 6th. So the cost of repaving was expressively eliminated from that cost in a footnote in the staff report for February 6th. And so I knew that was not a part of it. I have had discussions with Bill Hines. In our discussion about repaving lot one, I'd like to include What we heard from a member of the public tonight consideration of some sort of permeable paving, as well as if we repave, we have to remove all of the trees. I'd like to consider a proposal that Bill provided whereby we plant the trees and structure the underground in such a way that they can actually stay for 100 years and their root systems are appropriately managed. So as we consider repaving, I'd like to look at a sustainable sea level rise mitigation approach and spend more than $1.1 million to really do it properly for the long term. But that's not for tonight. I agree with Councilmember Kelman about further discussions on the on the Bridgeway median, I do wanna make it clear that that item was not intended as an agenda item tonight. I do think, this portions of the staff report were misleading. On page 11 of the staff report, it asks that we approve $350,000 for grant money for construction. We voted unanimously nearly a year ago, July 18, 2023 to proceed. with the study by professional traffic engineers to identify possible concepts for how we could improve bridgeway for all users. So I'm. concerned that we you know, that outreach started a month ago, I would love to... honor Alice Merrill's request tonight and the request from July 2023 that we do wide range public outreach to gather feedback on possible solutions. I do endorse the Public Works Director's recommendation that we write back to the Bridge District, sorry, to MTC. to see if we can preserve that grant funding while we finalize and select a potential design. but I don't think we should adopt a resolution this evening or accept that grant funding until we have aligned on a design, even if it ultimately means losing the grant funding. Um, Mm-hmm. Thank you. you Thank you. Gabrielson Park, I... I so embrace the city manager's thinking outside the box, but I have concerns about that, and I don't think we should just... endorse that concept without further discussion about what the impact would be to existing trees I I'm worried about having a permanent installation in a park, in Gabrielson Park. And so if it was something that was removable, I don't know, but in its current form, I'm not prepared to endorse moving forward with that this evening. I would like to consider adding a couple of things that the Planning Commission recommended, which are the... the GHAD recommendations. |
| 02:40:14.31 | Jill Hoffman | the geologic hazard assessment district. |
| 02:40:17.19 | Ian Sobieski | the recommendations of those that were made five years ago. the Caledonia Street tree installation and the MLK floor replacement buildings. So because we don't yet know what the Public Works Department will and will not be able to accommodate with its workflow, I would invite the Public Works Director to include those projects in the analysis he brings back to us so that we can evaluate their feasibility. It might be some of those projects can be done with minimal staff, whereas some of the others would be a huge suck on staff. So I'd be interested in seeing that information returned. And then there was one more. I'm interested to hear the feedback on the diseased trees on Turney Street that were supposed to be cut down and then weren't cut down. So I'd like to find out the status of that and why that, you know, why that didn't happen and if it should happen. But overall, I do endorse the general strategy related to addressing the CIP with guide. Rails suggested by Councilmember Kelman. Thank you. |
| 02:41:33.59 | Steven Woodside | Hey, Council Member Blasting. |
| 02:41:35.29 | Melissa Blaustein | Great. And again, thank you to staff for all of your hard work on this project. And I really appreciate in reviewing what we have this evening, if you look at the totals, which is around $3.1 million in ongoing projects, and then $1.45 in newer projects. just about only half of that comes from our general fund because of really amazing new approaches to how we use our existing funds like the Tideline funds and the Steps funds, which in previous fiscal years we had let sit so I just wanted to make sure to acknowledge that hard work from our finance staff to find new places and new opportunities for funding and that goes as well for the work done to acquire grant funding I do believe though that we we've it looks like we've applied for about nine grants that I see in the staff report. I think that there are many more available so what I would say is I am very supportive of the general strategy of our CIP but I would like us to be much more aggressive in how we apply for grants specifically planning grants so that we don't come into the same issues around conversations that we're having now on some of our construction grants so that we know we're ready and able. And then when we move on to phase two, we can pursue additional funding because there is a lot of ira funding that we can still get before the year's end and so i'd like to think about how we improve and include that in our overarching cip strategy and our conversations with some of our grant consultants i tend to agree with the comments of my council members with regards to the projects as listed i am excited about the idea of a new stage but i'm not sure given our fiscal position and the priorities of other budgets if we should consider that at this stage it's not to say i wouldn't want to hear it as an agenda item and see it more developed and be able to demonstrate why that makes the most fiscal sense for our community going forward so that's something i tend to agree with councilmember cox on i'm happy to have an additional conversation um about the about the median or the fairyland side if we see it necessary my feeling is around the median um you know we all expected i think every piece of public comment this evening that we heard was that this is not what we had all um unanimously decided on and we all expected to be able to see concepts at this phase and we haven't seen any of those concepts and so it's difficult for us from the dais to make any decision about what makes sense going forward as a community without having a robust conversation about it and knowing what it looks like so i'm i'm supportive of councilmember cox's suggestion there as well of just trying to see how how we can get our design process moving forward before we make any significant decisions because we don't know the implications. And I know we're only a month into that, but I'm not comfortable making any decisions about the future of that without having more information. And if we want to talk more about the fairyland side, happy to do that. But I'm very excited to see that project moving forward. and my concerns are what is and is not applicable to the grant. I want to see that project moving forward. And my concerns are what is and is not applicable to the grant. I want to see us get our designs moving by the fall in as much as we can. So, but generally I'm really supportive of the projects, the direction, the effort by staff. I'm happy to engage with our, from the dais about what we think is, will get us to consensus going forward. And I appreciate everyone's consideration and hard work. |
| 02:43:15.93 | Matthew Hartsell | Thank you. |
| 02:43:15.95 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 02:43:16.05 | Matthew Hartsell | TODAY. |
| 02:43:16.12 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 02:43:16.14 | Matthew Hartsell | Thank you. |
| 02:44:58.75 | Steven Woodside | Okay, Councilmember McCullough. |
| 02:44:59.93 | Joan Cox | Sorry, Mayor. I didn't know we were gonna comment specifically. So I think what folks and my colleagues had to say, I very much appreciate Councilman Blaustein and the Vice Mayor. So I just wanna put on record a couple of my own thoughts as to the three issues I was concerned with. So number one, thank you to Councilman Hoffman for reminding me of the meeting minutes for the Ferry Lands live on February 6th. I am reading from the meeting minutes when I say that we directed staff to identify phases of the plan that could be built within the budget of the grant um i also uh director mcgowan probably recalls we had some uh email exchanges and i think at the end of the day um the truth is the district was ready to work with us to include whatever we needed to include in the grant so long as we moved forward. So I don't, you know, whether somebody thinks it was or wasn't included in terms of repaving lot one, there was definitely language about modifying the existing city parking lot. But the issue for us now, in my recollection of February 6th, was that we said, what is the grant going to cover? Let us know what the grant will cover. And I think, Director McGowan, that's what you're telling us. You're gonna come back at the next meeting and tell us. Now that we've asked you to phase it, what does the grant cover? How far can we get? What else do we need to do? And I appreciate you bringing back up micro seal because I, of course, advocated that this be seen as a resilience project. And I think with the vulnerability assessment that we're working on for sea level rise, this will become a really key component of that for our waterfront area. So that's my comment on the ferry. I look forward to the next meeting on that. My comment on the median, I just want to be very clear on this. Judge McGowan, you sent us a one-way communication asking if we would be okay as a council telling MTC we wanted the money and would apply it to something that we got back, get unknown from the study. And I replied to you and said, okay. ask them if it could be used for resilience planning that also improves circulation. And so I think Director McGowan was asking us, even though the staff report said something else, I think in that email he was asking us if we'd be willing to let MTC know we were still interested in the money for some type of planning. But I also know this council did not approve using that money for removing the median or anything specific. There's also some public comments suggesting, and the mayor mentioned it a little earlier, that maybe the monies could be used for South Street Alexander Ave or maybe a crosswalk at 2nd and Main. So there's other areas perhaps they would allow. So I'm curious, Director McGowan, at a later date, to hear your thoughts on having an open conversation. I think Councilman Blaustein articulated what I would have articulated on Gabrielson. So I'm going to add to that. And then I would just say from an adding items, I'm serious about this ingress and egress for disaster preparedness. I want to see Montemar on there. I want to see Woodward down from Rodeo on that list. These roads are not good enough to accommodate a disaster evacuation scenario, and we have to look at that very seriously. I also want to see gate five road flooding. I saw it on the map. I didn't see it on the list. So I just want to re-articulate that. Thank you. |
| 02:48:20.00 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Council Member Kalman. Any other comments? I guess I'll restrict. |
| 02:48:27.18 | Ian Sobieski | I'd like to endorse the gate five comment. |
| 02:48:29.69 | Steven Woodside | Me too, very much. Yeah, I'll be happy to endorse that as well. I'll keep my comments brief. Generally, I support the direction of the plan. I think focusing on resiliency efforts would make a big difference. Director McGowan, I won't take up time now, but we did approve on consent this stormwater retention structure that is a concrete structure. And I know that we had gone back and forth a little bit about costs maybe do a green solution uh i would and i would love to have uh had that been a alternative to any heavy concrete solution just as a design as an ask always i know you did it back you asked ali or someone in your staff to do some work on that i do appreciate you're doing that i didn't want to press the point uh but it would have been in the future if possible it would be nice to take that down to a level a little more one level deeper of analysis i see some nodding heads up here so just to have a green alternative uh i know we are talking about marine ship park and so even though we did approve that consent item i would ask uh i'm just curious i'm just one person so you got to get a couple nodding heads up here about whether in marineship park much as much as we did with the bioswale the bio stormwater treatment facility in uh adjacent to gabrielson park whether there could be features in marineship park that don't disrupt the utility of the park but that could help uh defer some of the load on the infrastructure that's heavy heavy iron down there uh and just generally same thing with the dumpy park expansion uh just as a general question that's always asked and so many of those alternatives as you pointed out with the consent item take up too much space and we don't have the spaceport plus they're expensive but that That always asked. And so many of those alternatives, as you pointed out with the consent item, take up too much space. And we don't have the spaceport, plus they're expensive. But that may not be good to have that as a level of comparison. So that's one piece of feedback that I'm hearing some nods about. So I guess there's a consensus on that. on the uh bridgeway uh safety improvement program my understanding was that the 500k which again congratulations on and thank you for being proactive and applying for that in the first place uh i hope we don't lose it and i'd love to ask you to not just send a letter that encourages them to um let us keep it uh you know we've dragged out other grants a long time the bridgeway The the Ferry grants dragged out 10 years. So my ask would be to try to finesse it as much as you can. You have a great ally in Councilmember Blaustein, who's our TAM representative. Maybe she can be part of the dialogue outside of just the letter writing, which would be a bit of jawboning and back slapping around trying to see if they can just simply extend the timelines. You're already in process with the design effort from Parisi that the city council directed you to do last July. And so it could be that within short order, in the order of weeks to months, you would actually have potential conceptual designs. Some of which, since they are experts who are doing it, might mean keeping exactly the same configuration but through clever painting we might be able to use the 500K to build crosswalks across Bridgeway, to build rider painted bike paths that are shared with cars, but are safer, that deal with the bollards so that our taxpayers don't have to pay for it. So I'd love to give that a chance to really play out and not constrain the extension to be just for design because it'd be great to get that money for construction if we could. And then on the ferry, you know, the I just want to emphasize 10 years old. We got a letter on March the 1st from Dennis Mulligan that said, The grant is on the cusp of being rescinded, quote unquote. So we're a month after that. On the cusp sounds pretty scary to me. We've already burned hundreds of thousands of dollars, more than that if you count for inflation. We have an approved design. We know that doing anything through the parking lot is gonna be expensive. You're gonna have to cut down trees. You're gonna clear cut a forest and dig up the roots and have to treat the under surface. It's a project. I fully support the staff's recommendation to have it as a design task because I think it can become a jewel in the crown of council member kelman's uh r and r as a resiliency and project in as a gateway to sausalito and marin to have a world-class uh subsurface that is a parking surface and treats rainwater and is resilient would be truly a ambitious and worthy thing of our gateway uh area of our. So I support the design efforts, but I want to just say it's obvious that there's not enough money in the grant to do that. And we just got a note today from Director Mulligan that was forwarded to Director McGowan and to myself and my colleague on the working group that is from the Dennis Mulligan that just makes very clear that, and I'll just quote the last sentence. It says that some incidental paving can be paid for by the grant but that the bulk of the funds need to be spent on the effort of pedestrian uh access and uh bike bike pedestrian access to the ferry landing so this is uh relevant to our discussions now and in the future |
| 02:54:19.85 | Steven Woodside | Are there any other comments before we move on to our next office? |
| 02:54:22.57 | Ian Sobieski | Well, I want to make sure direction is clear. So the letter that you gave us, Director McGowan, to MTC is not the letter you're going to send. You're not going to endorse a specific project, but just seek to preserve the funding as we take the time we need to actually align on a project, right? |
| 02:54:45.97 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, if that is your direction. That's it. |
| 02:54:48.30 | Ian Sobieski | direction. |
| 02:54:48.97 | Joan Cox | Yeah, can I also restate it? I want to make sure that oftentimes when we, and by the way, we're using other people's money to do this study. So it's not taxpayer dollars to do this study, which the city manager reminded me of. That just because we're doing this study doesn't mean we have approved anything. and we may get back two three five uh ideas and we may not do anything and i just want to make sure that is abundantly clear uh and in the minutes that there's no approval tonight there is only a curiosity period |
| 02:55:24.06 | Steven Woodside | Yep, I think you have it. |
| 02:55:25.85 | Ian Sobieski | And then with respect to the Golden Gate Bridge District, when we get correspondence from Dennis Mulligan on such an important project, I would ask that the staff forward that to all council members and not just the working group. |
| 02:55:41.98 | Steven Woodside | All right, let's move on to our next topic. This is also with Director McGowan. |
| 02:55:46.38 | Ian Sobieski | May I make a point of order, Mayor? It's 10 o'clock, and we still have two consent items to hear. And this is a major item, the sidewalk. It is. So is this something we want to do this evening? |
| 02:55:51.06 | Steven Woodside | do. |
| 02:55:57.33 | Steven Woodside | It is. |
| 02:56:01.60 | Steven Woodside | I take the sense of the city council. You know, we say we have a lot to do. We don't want to do extra meetings. We take, you know, we try to stay liberal. I know there have been proposals to limit us on time. Something's got to give. So either we do our work and stay late or we limit our time or we have extra meetings. But otherwise, our work isn't going to get done. So I look to my colleagues for how they want to be. |
| 02:56:11.31 | Sergio Rudin | Yep. |
| 02:56:20.91 | Ian Sobieski | I'm happy to have extra meetings, but I do work a full-time job, so I'm up at 536 in the morning. Happy to have extra meetings. I hesitate to take on a project, to take on an item that entails a major sea change in the way we do business at 10 o'clock at night. |
| 02:56:41.87 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:56:42.85 | Joan Cox | I think I am with the vice mayor on this. This is a big change, and so not shirking our responsibility to stay late, as we have done for the last, I think, seven or eight meetings till midnight or so. I don't want to give this short shrift. |
| 02:56:59.92 | Melissa Blaustein | I also don't, and in the interest of compromise, then might we hear the two consent items we pull quickly so that we can be efficient in that capacity and support. |
| 02:57:00.33 | Joan Cox | don't and in the |
| 02:57:07.43 | Steven Woodside | Well, just the vice mayor mentioned having extra meetings. And so you're speaking to one half of her comment. And I'm curious whether you, in the entrance of the work that we have, are open to some more meetings. |
| 02:57:23.95 | Steven Woodside | We'll be. So we will skip this item city manager, we will have to take public comment on it, however, as is our requirements, since it is agenda so though we will not be hearing this matter the staff report had been duly posted. online as well as the presentation, so if anyone wishes to make public comment on item five be provide staff direction or whether to pursue an annual sidewalk repair program we will open public comment for that matter and then move on to the two consent items that were pulled off the agenda. Is there any public comment? |
| 02:57:56.35 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing none. |
| 02:57:57.53 | Steven Woodside | All right, then we'll move on to the two consent items that were pulled off of the agenda. The first of them is 5A, adoption of the 2024 City Council meeting calendar. to accommodate the November general election and August recesses by, well, what we did is the city council meeting on November the 5th falls on an election. The city council meeting on August 6th and August 20 falls during our typical recess. So to make up for canceling those three meetings, we added two special meetings to the calendar on July 30th and October 29th. So that is what the consent item is. |
| 02:58:36.77 | Jill Hoffman | So I pulled a, please go right ahead. Okay. So here's, here's my issue. I'm glad that we canceled or that we're not having the meetings in August. I think that's problematic. |
| 02:58:38.14 | Steven Woodside | Please go right ahead. |
| 02:58:40.45 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:58:49.16 | Jill Hoffman | people are people are expecting us not to have meetings. So my usual concerns are, um, The public expects us to do our job during the meetings that we have scheduled. And so when we start adding meetings or canceling meetings, it's a problem because people can't keep track. The other part that's problematic, and that's why I generally... If we want to have a special meeting, I'm not always against it. But. I want to be very tight about why we're having a special meeting and the need for the special meeting instead of just saying, let's show up for another six hours. and, have we articulated an actual need and what's the agenda going to be? So, um, So let me go back to the other issue is when we have meetings, during holiday weeks. That's a problem for our community, it's a problem for the staff, and it's a problem for our council members to get prepared for that meeting. in attendance. So we still have one meeting during a holiday week. currently on the current schedule. So that's July 2nd. So you want to have a city council meeting on July 2nd. when we're gearing up for Lots and lots of people take that week off as vacation period our staff included we also are trying to get ready for the 4th of july extravaganza that is in Sausalito. You know, that jumped out at me as a problematic date. I was also looking as, you know, because last year we had a meeting you know, within a few days of the Christmas holiday, we also, and also I can't remember if it was during Hanukkah, but it was really close to Hanukkah. on January 19th. And then we also had a meeting the week Thanksgiving. So interestingly, We didn't have the full calendar attached to the staff report. So that's why I went through and actually looked at when all these Tuesdays are going to fall. My point is, I don't think we should have a meeting July 2nd. I see that we want to add a meeting. The proposal is that we add a meeting on July 30th. That would still give us two meetings in July. You know, that, if we cancel the second, I think that makes sense, actually. And then we're going to be, and it actually... gives us another meeting closer to our August break, which is probably a good fail safe if we need it. The October 29th, you know, um, The one thing I was going to suggest on that is that we hold it as a potential special meeting if we need it. So if we get to October and we need a special meeting, then we say, okay, we've reserved October 29th for this, and we can make that decision when we get closer to October 29th. So that's the only thing. I agree if we move If we remove July 2nd, then yeah, I think it makes sense to add July 30th. I would suggest that we hold October 29th as a provisional, as a placeholder for a special meeting, and that's my suggestion. |
| 03:01:51.78 | Joan Cox | I would agree with that. I think those are well-reasoned. I'm okay with that. Any distress over it? |
| 03:01:58.17 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. |
| 03:01:58.73 | Joan Cox | Okay. |
| 03:01:58.76 | Ian Sobieski | I'm very distressed because I know what's on the I have the 12 month calendar that was shared with all of us at the beginning of the year and I know what we're trying to get accomplished this year and The pace at which we are able to decide important issues is slower than it has been in years past, and so I hesitate to take more meetings off of our agenda. |
| 03:02:27.65 | Steven Woodside | Same. There's a lot of work to be done. Tonight is a great case in point. Something's got to give. This can be a comprehensive discussion of the three issues. Shall we put ourselves on the clock so we take less time? Shall we go later every day, say go to midnight and plan for it? |
| 03:02:28.58 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. |
| 03:02:44.56 | Steven Woodside | Or should we do more meetings in addition to these, but at the very minimum we're canceling three meetings and adding two back so we're still losing one meeting when we have a lot of work to do so. |
| 03:02:56.71 | Joan Cox | I appreciate all that. I actually do think we should be on the clock. |
| 03:02:56.76 | Steven Woodside | I agree. |
| 03:03:00.58 | Joan Cox | Frankly, I think that would help us organize our thoughts. But I don't know if that's the topic that's been agendized this evening. |
| 03:03:07.58 | Ian Sobieski | Right. Thank you. |
| 03:03:07.87 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:03:08.32 | Ian Sobieski | It is definitely under the city manager report the protocols, which include that, but I have already asked that we agenda is it as a future agenda item so. |
| 03:03:21.18 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Okay, well, I appreciate that sentiment, Councilmember Kelman. So, Councilmember Boston, do you have any comments on this calendar that's pulled off? The proposal is to cancel three meetings and add these two. you need to see. |
| 03:03:38.16 | Melissa Blaustein | I know, I know, I know. I mean, I would not be opposed to holding additional special meetings at dates that make sense for everyone. So I'd like to find a consensus where we have special, where we still have the same number of meetings as required per the request here. But if the meetings, as mentioned by Councilmember Hoffman, do create problems, i.e. the 2nd of July, I could see where a lot of people would potentially be gone. But if that's the case, I don't want to, I don't, I'm not trying to get out of having an additional meeting. So if we can choose a date where we can do it, I'm happy to add an extra meeting. I just, I do hear that there would probably be less people here on the 2nd, but I |
| 03:04:18.45 | Steven Woodside | Well, actually, people will be here because it's the 4th of July. They're in our parade. Sure. And we also have a meeting, by the way, the day after Labor Day. That's also a holiday week. So this is an issue of having our first and third Tuesdays that often happens. So we can redo our whole calendar right here if we would like, but we should get it done now so we don't have to do this again. That's Member Kelman. |
| 03:04:21.68 | Melissa Blaustein | our parade. Sure. |
| 03:04:41.94 | Joan Cox | Yes, perhaps you and the vice mayor or collectively, we agreed that there were six priorities. We had the priority setting session. We know what those are. So, I found our 90 minute meetings when we had some issues on the homeless encampment during COVID and some COVID, I found those actually very effective. They didn't happen all the time, they happened occasionally on a Friday. I think when we hold ourselves, we fill the time that we are given. And so I would be very open to getting direction from you as the agenda setting committee, now that he added you, as the agenda setting committee to help us identify, and I think we talked about it in closed session, some of the very important issues and find a handful of, it doesn't have to be Friday, but find a 90-minute slot, and that's the time we got, and we're dealing with one issue, and we're getting through it. |
| 03:05:36.79 | Steven Woodside | Well, thank you for that encouragement. We will definitely take that under advisement at agenda setting for one issue meetings that are focused on getting something done. |
| 03:05:43.86 | Melissa Blaustein | I would support. We had a once monthly, I believe, when we had the issue with homeless encampment. And so given what's on our agenda, if we wanted to have a once monthly 90-minute additional meeting, By all means, please pursue that in agenda setting. That is so encouraging. |
| 03:05:55.17 | Ian Sobieski | that in agenda. So encouraging. So encouraging. Now, should we revise our schedule and meet the second and fourth and have the planning commission meet the first and third? |
| 03:05:56.72 | Melissa Blaustein | Great. |
| 03:06:04.80 | Ian Sobieski | to the first and third to accommodate our city manager. who at that time had a conflict with the city attorney, who at that time had a conflict with an existing client, I think that conflict no longer exists. And so I think... |
| 03:06:10.84 | Sergio Rudin | City attorney. |
| 03:06:19.94 | Ian Sobieski | he can weigh in if that's not the case. |
| 03:06:21.59 | Melissa Blaustein | Does that mean we wouldn't have a meeting on my birthday? Because that'd be great. |
| 03:06:23.90 | Ian Sobieski | That's great. We did it on my birthday. We've done it on mine, you guys. |
| 03:06:26.96 | Melissa Blaustein | THANK YOU. |
| 03:06:27.02 | Joan Cox | that's the first time. |
| 03:06:27.09 | Melissa Blaustein | You guys, I'm very happy to be here. |
| 03:06:28.04 | Joan Cox | I'm very happy to be here on my birthday. I can't wait to celebrate with all of you. Vice mayor, I don't have conceptually an issue with that in the least, but I would welcome the opportunity to consult my calendar a little bit more thoroughly than I can right now. |
| 03:06:29.15 | Ian Sobieski | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:06:29.74 | Melissa Blaustein | I don't know. |
| 03:06:40.68 | Ian Sobieski | So I would recommend we adopt this consent agenda item with the revisions that seem to be endorsed from Council Member Hoffman. And then we consider in the future whether we want to go to second and fourth to avoid some of these holiday weeks. |
| 03:06:49.55 | Charles Melton | Thank you. |
| 03:06:49.57 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 03:06:58.57 | Steven Woodside | Sorry, I didn't get that. Which we're not adopting it as is. |
| 03:07:01.35 | Ian Sobieski | We're adopting, well, Council Member Hoffman said no on July 2 and October 29 as a maybe. So put it on the calendar. |
| 03:07:10.19 | Steven Woodside | I'm not okay with any of that. I can't, I don't know why we would, after you were distressed, why would we want to throw away more meetings for canceling another meeting? And I think we have- |
| 03:07:20.20 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:07:20.35 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:07:20.45 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:07:20.49 | Melissa Blaustein | Well, no, I just want to come to consensus. So I'm okay with whatever. I mean, I would support the agenda setting committee and whatever you want to do. So. |
| 03:07:26.41 | Steven Woodside | I would like to make a motion to adopt the item as is, and we can always come back to it. If we want to move to the second and fourth, I'm open to having it back on the agenda, but for now, let's just settle on the calendar since it's here and it's now in front of us so my motion is to approve item 3A the adoption of the 2024. See a council meeting calendar as is. |
| 03:07:46.74 | Joan Cox | Will you entertain a friendly amendment to that? Will you entertain? You don't have to accept it, certainly. I really do think Councilman Hoffman's point about July 2nd is a good one. A lot of people do travel and take the 30th instead of the 2nd I think is just pretty amazing. |
| 03:08:04.85 | Steven Woodside | You mean moving the July 2nd meeting to June, to when? |
| 03:08:08.98 | Joan Cox | So, |
| 03:08:11.38 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. adding. Thank you. |
| 03:08:12.11 | Joan Cox | Bye. So we have two meetings in July, as we normally would have. |
| 03:08:15.19 | Steven Woodside | means we're canceling three meetings and we're adding two. Now we're canceling four meetings and adding two. So we're down two meetings. |
| 03:08:23.45 | Joan Cox | Thank you. No, I don't think. |
| 03:08:25.69 | Steven Woodside | I don't think. We're canceling August 6th, August 20, July the 2nd, and November the 5th. Our organization. |
| 03:08:30.62 | Ian Sobieski | Our ordinance calls for us to meet in August, even though our practice is not to. |
| 03:08:31.34 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:08:36.74 | Joan Cox | I just think we hear from folks all the time how difficult it is to know what is happening in town. And I just think a July 2nd meeting is not a good idea. So I'm happy to meet alternatively to make sure people are in town so they can come to our meetings. I'll just second. |
| 03:08:52.20 | Melissa Blaustein | MARRIED. |
| 03:08:52.44 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:08:52.52 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:08:52.66 | Joan Cox | Motion. |
| 03:08:53.28 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:08:53.32 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Yeah, it can fail. |
| 03:08:53.87 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. So I'm going to propose an alternate motion. And my alternate motion is that we remove the July 2nd meeting from the agenda, that we add July 30th, and that we add October 29th. So the only difference is we're removing July 2nd. And let me just say to the mayor's point, if we're going to start adding in 90 minute meetings, I think that should more than cover the absence of a, or at least, you know, this one July 2nd meeting, which I think is going to be very poorly attended, and anything we do is going to be highly criticized. |
| 03:09:39.47 | Ian Sobieski | If there's consensus on this dais for adding 90 minute meetings once a month, then I would be okay with removing July to |
| 03:09:47.16 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, I'm okay with that too. So July two is gone. We're adding October 29, July 30 and but now I've forgotten. |
| 03:09:56.29 | Joan Cox | Friendly amendment to Councilmember Hoffman's. |
| 03:09:59.26 | Steven Woodside | adding July 30 October 29 and I've missed it actually somewhere in there So we're adding July 30th, October 29th, and we're canceling August 6th, August 20th, November 5th, and July the 2nd. Did you get that, city clerk? Well, you'll hear it. |
| 03:10:16.07 | Walfred Solorzano | Who was the official second for that alternate motion? |
| 03:10:20.09 | Ian Sobieski | Joan Cox second. |
| 03:10:21.99 | Walfred Solorzano | Then another thing, I refuse to put a reminder, public comment. If it passes, |
| 03:10:22.03 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 03:10:26.25 | Steven Woodside | and so Thank you. Thank you. I yeah it'll be public comment in just a moment because it's just an end and you know direction is openness to periodic 90 minute meetings on special topics, so will any public comment on this matter. |
| 03:10:43.05 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah, we have Babette McDougal. |
| 03:10:53.58 | Steven Woodside | No, it is on the matter concerning the calendar of the city council. Thank you. |
| 03:11:00.38 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 03:11:04.08 | Babette McDougall | Am I unmuted now? |
| 03:11:05.26 | Steven Woodside | Am I? Yes, you are. Please go ahead, Mr. Google. |
| 03:11:08.36 | Babette McDougall | Oh, thank you. Well, good evening. First of all, I want to say congratulations to all of you Because this has been a really challenging meeting. And it seems to speak well to what we know, thanks to a track record, and what is still needed to be learned and understood. So, This idea of moving the meetings around throughout which is usually a recess month, if I'm not mistaken. Or is that July? So I just think we have to be mindful that there is a summer recess. So if we have this much work to do, I think we need to just sort of Bite the bullet and go for a calendar, whether we like it or not. Thank you. |
| 03:12:00.88 | Steven Woodside | All right. So the Any other public comment, city clerk? No further public. All right. We're going to close item, or do we need to vote on that? Or that's just general consensus. All in favor of what we, of the motion to. Aye. Aye. |
| 03:12:07.12 | Walfred Solorzano | All right. |
| 03:12:15.39 | Steven Woodside | you |
| 03:12:15.41 | Unknown | you |
| 03:12:15.43 | Steven Woodside | I'm going to go. |
| 03:12:15.49 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 03:12:15.97 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. opposed all right carried item 3e waiver of the second reading of ordinance 3-2024 an ordinance of the city council of Sausalito amending the Sausalito municipal code section 2.58.040 relating to residency requirements on city boards commissions and committees councilmember Kellerman pulled it off at the council so you can open |
| 03:12:39.46 | Joan Cox | Thank you, Mayor. Yeah, I pulled it off because there was some concern that it was from members of the public that perhaps it created a standard way of doing things that would then need to have exemptions to that. And it wasn't clear as to Planning Commission, wasn't clear as to where we wanted to support out of town membership. And I'm just wondering, I know, Vice Mayor, you were instrumental in helping put this together. My recollection in the last three years was that we only had non-sauceated residents on EDAC. That is it. nowhere else. We had 94965 on the housing element, which was a special committee, but every other committee, boarding commission of which we have nine standing boards and commissions had to be a South City resident. And so I'm wondering what you all think about clarifying that or maybe the city attorney who is still there, wants to comment on how we make it clear that it is only as to EDAC, if that is the will of the council. |
| 03:13:41.39 | Ian Sobieski | Well, I will remind you that we did adopt a resolution at our last meeting. Um, Allowing. non-residents to participate in EDAC. So we already took the action contemplated by the ordinance to allow non-residents to attend EDAC, we've not taken that action with respect. |
| 03:14:00.95 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:14:01.91 | Ian Sobieski | boards and committees, and I just wanted to clarify that. |
| 03:14:05.27 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, actually, The direction the council again was to for for the city attorney's office to come back with the resolution that would allow that action. The ordinance goes into effect 30 days after adoption, we would be providing you the. draft resolution allowing membership on EDAC to be by non-residents at the next meeting. So if you adopt this proposed ordinance. |
| 03:14:28.67 | Joan Cox | Okay, thank you. And for my colleagues, I don't need to belabor it at all. I wanted to give an opportunity for public comment because we had received some mail on that and I thought was important. |
| 03:14:39.96 | Steven Woodside | If there are any other comments, we can open public comment. So let's open public comment, please. |
| 03:14:46.04 | Joan Cox | Perhaps Jan Johnson wants to comment on that. |
| 03:14:52.04 | Ian Sobieski | It is open for us to do that for any board and commission under this proposed ordinance. But we've only given direction thus far to do it for EDAC. |
| 03:15:05.09 | Steven Woodside | I have two minutes for public comment. |
| 03:15:06.32 | Jan Johnson | Okay, I think EDAC is okay, but I object to having non-residents tell residents what to do. in any way, shape, or form. If they don't live here, they can influence where they do live, but why are they on committees that are gonna influence you our lives when they're not taxpayers and living here. I think a lot of people agree with me who aren't awake now. |
| 03:15:36.73 | Steven Woodside | Any other public comment, Ms. Brockett? |
| 03:15:42.13 | Sharna Brockett | I actually think we should consider non-residents. And so, for example, I know that businesses contribute 44% of I'm going to wait till... 44, 44% of taxes to our tax base where. property owners, we contribute 25%. And I know there's a whole nother area that I don't, it comes from other places that I understand. But what I'm trying to say is that businesses and like there's experts who perhaps are not residents that we want their expertise. We'd be very honored to have their expertise to help us. So when I'm thinking, Like for example, we talk about supporting a working waterfront. A lot of those people who work in the working waterfront don't live here. Don't we want their expertise to help us figure out how to make our waterfront thrive? I want them. These are the people running our marinas, working on the boats, working in the marine trades. I think it's important to have them part of these committees, you know, with certain committees where it makes sense. |
| 03:16:51.25 | Sharna Brockett | Anyways, those are my main points. And I do think businesses should have some contribution to help us improve our economic vitality. So thank you. |
| 03:17:02.77 | Steven Woodside | Any other public art, Ms. Boutier? |
| 03:17:10.25 | Sebo Boutillier | I just wanted to suggest, sorry. |
| 03:17:10.57 | Steven Woodside | want to do it. |
| 03:17:13.15 | Sebo Boutillier | Just wanted to suggest, I know when the Commission on Aging that I belong to is, has, allows public members of committees, but they're non voting members, so they have the opportunity to be involved in the discussions. be a regular part of the committee, Commission. But they just are not voting members. So the quorum is made up of the actual city resident or 94965 resident members of the committee. But there could be other members. That's just something I put forward as a suggestion. Thank you. |
| 03:17:55.25 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:17:55.36 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:17:55.37 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:17:55.58 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. All right. Thank you. |
| 03:17:57.35 | Sebo Boutillier | I'm not sure. |
| 03:17:57.87 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. We have Sandra Bushmaker. |
| 03:18:04.57 | Sandra Bushmaker | I am opposed to having non-residents on our committees, except for EDAC. We already have business members on the Economic Advisory Committee. And I'm opposed to having non-residents on our other committees, boards and commissions. Thank you. |
| 03:18:23.27 | Walfred Solorzano | Scott Thornburg. |
| 03:18:31.28 | Scott Thornburg | Sorry, trying to get unmuted there. Thank you. For EDAC, I appreciate your diligence here. As you know, we have existing members that are very passionate volunteers that want to be involved, that are business owners, that contribute a lot of tax dollars to the city, actually. And so they would love an opportunity to contribute to the long term vitality and economic success of Sausalito. And I think we should support that. I also think there are a number of other volunteers on other boards and commissions and nonprofits that contribute a lot to the city. And just because they're not residents doesn't mean they don't care about Sausalito. You see this in the Rotary Club. You see this in Sausalito Beautiful, many other organizations. And I would encourage you to consider this carefully. It's not just EDAC, where there are non-residents that are contributing to the success of Sausalito overall. So thank you for your attention to this matter. |
| 03:19:27.66 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, into Pfeiffer. |
| 03:19:37.60 | Unknown | Sorry about this. I'm kind of whetted out. Can you hear me? Okay. So I am opposed to having non-residents on these committees. I know when I was on the Arts Commission, for example, We had a couple artists who were non voting members or advisors, we actually also created an advisory committee and allowed you know, non-residents to serve, but they were non-voting. They were not the soft little art are commissioners. And I think it's very important to preserve the voice of residents on our committees in terms of making decisions that impact the residents of our town. So I am opposed. to allowing Voting. members who are not residents of Sausalito on these commissions and committees. As for business participation, you can always... based on the type of charter of a committee or commission, you can always say, We're going to allocate one seat. to a local a business, owner. non voting. So that's my consent. Thank you. |
| 03:20:56.48 | Walfred Solorzano | Babette McGoogle. |
| 03:20:59.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:20:59.06 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. Thank you. I don't understand why my video doesn't work. Um, So actually, I've raised this issue with you before. I do think what we now call the EDAC committee does need to have broad based representation regardless of police of residence, assuming that these other members are invested in Sausalito. |
| 03:21:20.94 | Matthew Hartsell | members. |
| 03:21:25.32 | Babette McDougall | So I think that particular, it's an economic development agency. So we, as was previously stated, taking advantage of the talent is important. Similarly. We have other commissions that can only the work of which can only be truly known, appreciated, and sustained by these residents, our residents. And so I think Dr. Pfeiffer's point, for example, about confining that to a residential vote. whether that means some ex officio status for others who have expertise to provide, Perhaps there's a way to accommodate that. I don't know. But I think we need to be true to our roots. You need to think about who your true constituents are. Thank you. |
| 03:22:17.22 | Walfred Solorzano | Next person on an iPad. |
| 03:22:22.13 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:22:22.15 | Babette McDougall | hearing. |
| 03:22:22.52 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:22:22.64 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 03:22:23.99 | Pat Zook | Yes. Hi. Are you there? |
| 03:22:26.23 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 03:22:26.25 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:22:26.35 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 03:22:27.58 | Pat Zook | This is Pat Zook here on my iPad. And I'd like to endorse the Sybil's approach, actually. I think her comments that there are people who don't live here who have good advice and meaningful input. is an important resource for us to take advantage of. but that does not mean that they should be voting members of our city commissions and committees. I appreciate the notion that EDAC has or perhaps should have non-resident business owners on panel. I'm not totally in agreement with that, be that as it may, I think our other commissions and committees would benefit from anybody's advice, but should be restricted as a voting percentage to people who actually live here. Thank you. |
| 03:23:24.05 | Walfred Solorzano | Kieran Culligan. |
| 03:23:29.30 | Kieran Culligan | Hey there. I think one of the big topics on my mind here is what controls do you have as council members if you go down this path? And as far as I can tell, you pick who goes on to these commissions and whether you think they're appropriate for that role. They also serve out the pleasure of the council. decide that they're not doing something in the best interest in the city, you can remove them from that role that goes, whether their resident or whether They, um, you've elected people who are not residents. So it feels like this is a natural thing to add. There aren't a lot of risks to it. Some of the commissions of the long list have real voting power. an authority that you're going to look at more closely, like a Planning Commission or an EDAC, that everyone has a real budget. Other ones, it's only an advisory capacity anyways, like PBAC. There's awesome people out there. Um, Bill Hines, I'll call him out, right? Like he makes incredible contributions to our community. even though he does not live in Sausalito. We can ever talk into a commission. I think it would be awesome. to have that option. I don't see how that's better than someone who has like, seven houses around the world and one of them happens to be in Sausalito and that can make them eligible to be on a commission. So glad you're talking about this tonight. Thanks. |
| 03:24:46.03 | Walfred Solorzano | No further public comment. |
| 03:24:48.52 | Steven Woodside | Okay, we'll post a comment. Is there anything, any action we take on this matter? |
| 03:24:53.13 | Ian Sobieski | I was actually persuaded by Sybil Boutelier and Pat Zuck. And I am, I did, so the concerns we heard tonight were heard at the first meeting regarding the ordinance, the first reading of the ordinance. And I do think we shouldn't just have a blank slate to have any concerns. to have any city council allow any by resolution allow any committee to be populated by non-residents. I think we should impose the um, uh, I think we should retain the exemption for EDAC, but we should spell that out in the ordinance. And I think that the ordinance language should be changed to allow non-residents to participate in a non-voting capacity if approved by resolution of the City Council. So it's simply non-voting. |
| 03:25:55.11 | Melissa Blaustein | My recollection was that we had appointed or approved previously the appointments of 94965 liaisons to accommodate for an effort to make inclusion for our neighbors in Marin City to be able to contribute to our boards and commissions and for our friends on the houseboat communities who are not necessarily voting members of the Sausalito residency requirements. So there is a precedent for this. I know that in some cases we were not able to recruit from those respective places, but I think the same approach being applied for expertise or workers in the city of Sausalito at our discretion and our prerogative from the data makes sense. Okay. |
| 03:26:36.03 | Ian Sobieski | Is that a second to my motion? |
| 03:26:39.43 | Melissa Blaustein | mind |
| 03:26:39.97 | Babette McDougall | Restating. |
| 03:26:40.76 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. |
| 03:26:40.78 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:26:40.84 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 03:26:40.91 | Ian Sobieski | Could you restate? I wasn't sure if that was a motion or a comment. Well, now that I have support, I'll make it a motion. So I move we direct the city attorney to make revisions to the ordinance and bring it back to us for first reading. I assume, yeah, he's nodding his head, so we'd have to bring it back for first reading. That specifically enunciates EDAC as a committee on which there can be nonresidents. So we won't need the resolution to approve that. And it should explain why, that because it's economic development, which is largely informed by members of the business community as well as residents, and that for other committees, you simply change the language that allows, by resolution, the city council to allow non-residents to participate to clarify that they may participate as liaisons and or non-voting members. |
| 03:26:40.94 | Melissa Blaustein | Could you? Thank you. |
| 03:27:35.69 | Sergio Rudin | That's pretty clear. Thank you. |
| 03:27:38.51 | Ian Sobieski | Is there a second? |
| 03:27:39.60 | Melissa Blaustein | Sure, second. |
| 03:27:41.41 | Steven Woodside | I should meet and second it any discussion. All in question, all in favor, aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, resolution carries. We'll move on to the next item. It is communication for- |
| 03:27:54.54 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:27:54.67 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 03:27:55.87 | Jill Hoffman | I don't know. |
| 03:27:56.04 | Ian Sobieski | I don't know. Sorry. |
| 03:27:58.47 | Steven Woodside | Sorry, so what's the vote? |
| 03:27:59.58 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:28:00.55 | Ian Sobieski | It's an abstain by Council Member Hoffman. Sorry for that. Thank you. |
| 03:28:04.93 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:28:04.97 | Unknown | TODAY. |
| 03:28:05.14 | Steven Woodside | I'm sorry, we can, as a point of order, back up enough to give you a second to process it and vote again. |
| 03:28:12.04 | Jill Hoffman | I have some, I'm trying to roll it through my head. Like the way that we have it now is that you pass a resolution if you want to appoint a non-member. So that's the way it is now. That's what we did with EDAC, which I think was warranted because, you know, whatever. EDAC was an evolution of business affairs and hospitality, which had non-resident members, and then we were trying to accommodate that. So that was the evolution of that. And so that's why I think, that the resolution that we passed is sufficient. I don't think we need to change the ordinance to specifically call out EDAC. I like the way that we did it with the resolution and that, um, we do it sort of ad hoc as we evolve through this. And the, but you know, if we wanna appoint non-voting, non-resident, so we're really expanding out our 94965 that we have. Right. So, you know, I'm not opposed to that. And I think, you know, on a case by case, I guess, basis, that's okay by resolution. So that's, I guess, I would be in favor of like an alternate motion, which is a little bit different than you would. Anyways, I guess it's going to come back to us for further discussion, right? Yeah. That's my thinking, I'm sorry. I guess I hate to vote no on it, but it's really just an abstention as I work my way through it. So I'll get my breaks. |
| 03:29:29.75 | Steven Woodside | So is it our abstention? Is it a no abstention? |
| 03:29:32.55 | Walfred Solorzano | I don't know. |
| 03:29:33.53 | Jill Hoffman | I'm abstaining. |
| 03:29:34.54 | Steven Woodside | Okay, the motion carries for with four in favor and one abstention. We'll move on to communications. These are items not on the agenda. And for the public to comment on items not on the agenda. If you'd like to make a public comment here in the audience, you know what to do. And city manager, city clerk, I'm sorry. Are there any public comments? |
| 03:29:34.77 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah. |
| 03:29:34.96 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:29:34.98 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah. |
| 03:29:57.91 | Walfred Solorzano | Anybody in the house want to make any public comments? |
| 03:30:01.71 | Steven Woodside | Adam is not on the agenda. |
| 03:30:03.97 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:30:04.02 | Ian Sobieski | All right. Sybil, you seem to want to say something. Yeah. |
| 03:30:04.88 | Steven Woodside | Anyone online? |
| 03:30:08.00 | Ian Sobieski | Not on the agenda. |
| 03:30:11.02 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 03:30:11.04 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 03:30:11.06 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 03:30:11.17 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 03:30:11.24 | Babette McDougall | Good night. |
| 03:30:11.82 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 03:30:11.92 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 03:30:11.93 | Ian Sobieski | you |
| 03:30:15.55 | Sebo Boutillier | I was very happy to hear from the city librarian that he was working on an accessible hearing solution for the city council chambers. And I had an opportunity, along with some hearing specialists, to review it, which looked like a very good solution, given the constraints here and so forth. But I think it would be really helpful if everybody really paid attention to microphone hygiene. Like the ideal is if you can have the mic about two inches from your mouth, like you're about to bite it, It's the difference between hearing this and hearing this. And there's a lot of this. |
| 03:31:06.58 | Matthew Hartsell | Thank you. |
| 03:31:07.99 | Sebo Boutillier | where people are looking in the opposite direction. And so imagine that you're a singer. Imagine you're a singer and the mic is going with you wherever you turn your head. And it would really, really help us, not only before we get the system, but actually afterwards as well, because it's linked to the sound system. So I just want to commend our city manager, because he is really good at this. I've noticed he moves the mic up every time he speaks. And I just hope that the rest of you can just think about it a little bit more. It'd be very helpful. There was a lot of the conversation tonight that I couldn't hear and other people couldn't hear and I had my personal sound system turned way up. So thank you for that. |
| 03:32:07.22 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:32:07.24 | Walfred Solorzano | public comment. We have a Bet MacDougou. |
| 03:32:13.87 | Babette McDougall | Let's see. So can you hear me? |
| 03:32:16.98 | Steven Woodside | Yes, please go right ahead. |
| 03:32:17.64 | Babette McDougall | Is it possible? So Walford, do you need to, do you need to open my video? |
| 03:32:18.82 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:32:21.99 | Steven Woodside | in my video. Let's go right ahead. |
| 03:32:24.74 | Babette McDougall | Yes, so you say. Okay. Here's the deal. I think tonight's meeting is a perfect example of why we as a body We have some work to do. And I think, once again, it's a good idea to think about a parliamentarian It's also a good idea to think about an historian. I thought between council members, Kelman and Hoffman, Especially with Hoffman with her eyes on those details, watching the historical record unfold makes you realize that all of us, especially you five, are way so busy. How can you possibly review a year's worth of work in order to carry it forward into this moment? So I wonder if we shouldn't be thinking about employing someone who could serve as a historian to keep the confluency of our public record on time intact and without having to add extra hours to your meetings to your own point, Mr. Mayor. And, tied to that, a parliamentarian, because after all, Where you sit right now is the cathedral of democracy. So I hope that you will honor it by You're getting very close. I think Vice Mayor Cox, the fact that she acknowledges public comment now very comfortably, is a wonderful forward step. And I think we just keep moving toward reinstating democracy. I don't think you need to fear it. And I really appreciate Councilwoman Kelman's suggesting that we all get on the clock. |
| 03:34:04.22 | Pat Zook | Awesome. |
| 03:34:04.34 | Babette McDougall | I also thought former Mayor Blaustein picked up a few good pointers this evening, too, that we almost dropped. So thank you for that, too, Madam Blaustein. |
| 03:34:12.30 | Walfred Solorzano | it. |
| 03:34:16.76 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Any other public comment? |
| 03:34:18.85 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 03:34:18.86 | Walfred Solorzano | Pat, oh, Ben Johnson? |
| 03:34:22.06 | Steven Woodside | Please, Ms. Johnson. |
| 03:34:27.91 | Jan Johnson | Sorry to take your time, but we were talking about public safety. I live on the corner of 2nd and Richardson, and traffic accelerates from SCOMAs out of town up to Alexander. They treat it like the Indy 500. also in the reverse direction. And I don't know how you can police the traffic speeds, but it would be a wonderful thing. It would keep the cars from running into... |
| 03:35:02.28 | Jan Johnson | Councilperson Valsing's house, or running off the end of the road, or as it happened before, running up the North Street stairs. Maybe traffic cams and automatic ticketing, but after hours or before dawn, people treat it like it's their playground and it's dangerous. Anyway, thank you. |
| 03:35:27.99 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Is there other comments? |
| 03:35:30.50 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah, Pat Zuck. |
| 03:35:35.26 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:35:35.27 | Steven Woodside | Hello. |
| 03:35:35.60 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:35:36.32 | Pat Zook | there. |
| 03:35:36.73 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:35:37.35 | Steven Woodside | We are, Ms. Zucker, right ahead. |
| 03:35:39.39 | Pat Zook | Uh, brief shout out to your city clerk It is a lot of work, I'm sure, but it was really pleasant to see everybody's letter posted with a name under the right agenda item. Thank you very much. |
| 03:35:54.63 | Steven Woodside | Thanks for a compliment. Any other public comment? |
| 03:36:00.94 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:36:00.96 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 03:36:01.75 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:36:01.90 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:36:01.92 | Steven Woodside | closing public comment and we'll move on to council member committee reports |
| 03:36:01.94 | Walfred Solorzano | And |
| 03:36:05.57 | Ian Sobieski | May I respond to one of the public comments, Mayor? Of course. |
| 03:36:08.50 | Steven Woodside | Of course. |
| 03:36:09.68 | Ian Sobieski | So there was a comment made that you can't hear us. A couple of you have seen my frustration tonight because I can hear you. So when you're out there talking amongst yourselves, it makes me unable to hear the speaker who's speaking or my fellow council members. And I have a hearing disorder myself that I cannot hear you know, sort out who's saying what. I just hear a jumble when there's lots of noise. And so that's why I'm asking your courtesy that if you'd like to talk amongst yourselves, just step outside, talk amongst yourselves, and allow us to continue to do our business. So I beg your indulgence and appreciate it. |
| 03:36:51.70 | Steven Woodside | Any other committee reports, please? We'll ask you to raise your hand first, please, and then Councilmember Kellman. |
| 03:36:57.32 | Melissa Blaustein | Great, so I have a couple. So the Sustainability Commission met and they are considering again, the electrification ordinance in light of the state court case around the legality of requirements for all electric versus gas appliances. Additionally and excitingly, they had asked us for a letter of support for MCE's new virtual power plant extension. And if you're not familiar, virtual power plants are essentially the allowance of folks like us consumers who have solar on our homes or other uh power production in our home communities to sell that back in a larger way to create a sort of small virtual microgrid to sell back to mce to continue to grow our access to renewables so that's something that mce received a grant for and they are pursuing and they are looking for letters of support so it's likely that we as the council will be able to weigh in on that at a future meeting, but the city manager has that letter of support, which is exciting. I attended the Transportation Authority of Marin board meeting. last week and uh we heard about the county-wide transportation plan this is a really exciting endeavor by tam to come up with what our future plan looks like with a big focus on equity so we had a long conversation about what that means and we also heard from our lobbyists in sacramento about what positions tam is going to adopt on the current legislative agenda and i did want to note one that is really important coming up, which is the proposed SB31. So SB31 is an integration and a huge funding package for all nine Bay Area counties, which is now represented by MTC, to come together to create a more conformed regional transit strategy. Our concern at TAM is that the smaller communities like Marin will not have the same level of consideration. So we created an ad hoc working group, which I'm planning to serve on to review SB 1031 more specifically. So going forward, we'll be able to report back on that. And I think that's it for my committee report. |
| 03:39:02.30 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:39:02.74 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Congressman Coman. |
| 03:39:04.52 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:39:04.58 | Joan Cox | Great, thank you. So I'll start with sea level rise. This is not an actual committee, but I was curious, so I asked that the first focus group meetings for the Saucydeo Shoreline Adaptation Plan commenced March 26th. Seven RSVPs, three people attended. Unfortunately, that was for our business community in the area. Because of the low attendance, there will be two other meetings for that group, April 9th and April 16th. I also am active in Bay Wave, Marine County's sea level rise organization, and we get to share some ideas and philosophies. And one thing that was shared with me was elevated bike paths that can also serve as some type of seawall or resilience measure. Foster City has a levy project that is currently used for that, and they got state and federal grant funds for that. And then in Miami, there's a project called the Brickell Park that also has a similar sort of multi-use. I mean, that's really a multi-purpose pathway now, if it's resilience and transportation. So I thought that was quite interesting. I also just on my own accord, but because it will impact Sausalito, I'm sure many of you know that Caltrans needs to deal with the flooding off of Highway 1 and Manzanita. And actually, Vicki Nichols has been at the meetings with me as well, not with me, but also in attendance, to hear from Caltrans and hear from members of the public what Caltrans is planning to do. And so I've been going in support of Marin City, who, of course, has a disproportionate impact from the flooding off of Highway 1 and trying to keep track. I been told that this is just a very preliminary community outreach this isn't even the project community outreach this is just getting ready for community outreach outreach um so alice merrill you should like that um and then uh also uh mce you heard about the virtual power plants uh that's a really wonderful project. Our last meeting was mostly about budget, so nothing new to report there. And then I think, I don't know, Council Member Hoffman might be joining me at the League of California Cities in Sacramento April 17th and April 18th. I am the North Bay Division Vice President, and I will go and represent the North Bay and Sausalito. |
| 03:41:24.98 | Jill Hoffman | The landslide task force met, I think you mentioned it, but the landslide task force met on March 21st. We haven't met in a while and we met with, I was not able to attend, so I'm, Anyway, giving you the update of what happened. We met with Director McGowan and the consultant that we had... engage to do some of the mapping and so that's done and that's very exciting. I understand it's coming back to us the the conclusions of the consultants that we had is coming back to the council for an update and further action from the council on the recommendations that were made by the landslide task force in september of 2019 so that's especially in light of some of the landslides that we've seen and movement we've seen in this past winter with all the rain i think that it's good to get this back and get some of these things maybe on the capital improvement if not this year the next year so thank you |
| 03:42:26.72 | Ian Sobieski | I provided my report in writing, so you don't have to listen to it. You can read it. |
| 03:42:26.82 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:42:26.86 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:42:26.91 | Sergio Rudin | THE END OF |
| 03:42:26.98 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:42:32.65 | Steven Woodside | Thanks. City Manager report. |
| 03:42:42.13 | Steven Woodside | City manager. |
| 03:42:42.85 | Chris Zapata | Are you on 8 or are you on 8A? |
| 03:42:46.74 | Steven Woodside | Yes, I am. City Manager, information for council, City Manager Report. |
| 03:42:50.48 | Chris Zapata | Okay, great. Just real briefly, I'm trying to prime the pump on the requested item for a protocol discussion. So in the city manager's report is the council protocols adopted by the city council over the past few years. You can see there have been various amendments, the last one taking place in April 2023. The second item in the city manager report is also a grant report from California Consulting |
| 03:43:21.26 | Chris Zapata | Am I doing okay? from California Consulting that highlights, you know, the grants that are in play right now. I think it would be interesting for the community to see that. It ties into the whole infrastructure discussion, and I heard this evening that we ought to do more of that. So thank you for that. That concludes my report, Mayor and Council. |
| 03:43:41.00 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, future agenda items for my colleagues. Council member Plowstein. |
| 03:43:45.48 | Melissa Blaustein | I've said this before and I'm just going to mention it again is I really need would love for us to have tabletop exercises for disaster preparedness response. I don't know if that's an agenda item or not. I know it's been said that there's one that's being worked on all staff, but I would implore us to include all of the council members and to have more than just one. This is really critical for emergency response and disaster preparedness. |
| 03:44:10.66 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, if I can, I neglected to mention that you'll be getting a report from our staff team here about an exercise involving the whole city, inviting the council boards and commissions to begin that process. So that will happen. I believe the date was May 8th, but it's involving shutting down City Hall half a day. So you'll get a memo on that. So we are listening. Councilmember Blaustein. |
| 03:44:10.99 | Steven Woodside | I'm clear, could you add that? |
| 03:44:35.39 | Steven Woodside | Remember Kelvin? |
| 03:44:36.58 | Joan Cox | Yes, this may also not be an agenda item, but there's some very good AI products that could record and transcribe our entire meeting more accurately than I could. So if we need to pursue that, that would be, I think, useful. I also made the request via text to the mayor and the city manager by June is Pride Month. I would like to have a resolution designating June as Pride Month and allowing us to Hoist the pride flag here for the month I just want to make sure that gets on to the agenda if it hasn't already and then I'm just thematically the same thing We keep saying we have these six priorities from the priority setting session I really want to see all of you know those Elevated each and every time so thank you agenda setting committee for your hard work |
| 03:45:22.71 | Steven Woodside | Any other future items? |
| 03:45:25.26 | Ian Sobieski | I'll just comment that the future agenda items that we worked from at our workshop did not include all of our future agenda items. And so I'm going to update our future agenda item list to include agenda items we've previously put into the hopper that were not included and therefore not evaluated as a part of our top six priorities so that we can just be sure that we are indeed dotting all the I's and crossing all the T's. |
| 03:45:56.21 | Steven Woodside | Any other items? Any public comment on items 8A through 8C? Ms. Merrill. |
| 03:46:04.80 | Alice Merrill | I would like to thank you guys because I remember at a meeting not long ago that you were asked to please have the public comment after the reports because before it was before. And you did it. And I appreciate it. Thank you very much. |
| 03:46:22.06 | Steven Woodside | You are welcome. Any other public comments on items 8A through 8C? |
| 03:46:27.27 | Walfred Solorzano | Sandra Bushmaker. |
| 03:46:34.16 | Sandra Bushmaker | Hello again. Yes. And thank you again for changing our comments to after these items makes more sense. It makes a whole lot more sense. I would like to suggest that the Council have Mike McKinley. Um, present a presentation to the city council at large. on the current structure of our disaster preparedness drills, tabletops, and all of the things that occur. I've heard him give the presentation. It's very good. It's, it's, very informative as to how the California system works from the state to the county and then to the cities. And I think that you could benefit from that uh, presentation. I would like to see it again, too. Thank you. |
| 03:47:25.39 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:47:25.49 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 03:47:25.51 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. No further comments? |
| 03:47:29.97 | Steven Woodside | All right, seeing no other further comments, we're going to move to adjournment, and we're going to adjourn today in honor of Bill Broder, 60-year Sausalito resident, author, and library volunteer. Bill Broder passed away on March 28th, just a few days shy of his 93rd birthday. Bill was born and raised in Detroit. He graduated from Columbia College, served in the Navy, and wrote and taught writing as a teaching assistant under Wallace Stegner and Richard Scowcroft at Stanford. Professionally, Bill worked as a freelance writer specializing in the writing, design, and production of educational materials for museums, schools, exhibitions, and publishing companies. Bill was the published author of more than 15 works, among them a novel written together with his beloved wife, Gloria Curien Broder, who passed away in 2013. Donations can be made in his memory to the Sausalito Library Foundation, which he served in an advisory capacity for nearly 20 years. Please contact the Sausalito Library. For more information, we will miss Bill Broder, and we're adjourned in his honor. |
Ed Brakeman — Neutral: Resident involved with Save Our Sausalito, highlighted community concerns about the proposed Bridgeway project's impact on Sausalito's historic district and waterfront charm. Emphasized the need to balance housing goals with preservation of community character. ▶ 📄