| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:26.20 | Walfred Solorzano | being held at Hotel Europe, Vladislava Skaricha 5, Sarajevo 7100, Bosnia Herzegovina, Here's a govina. Thank you. Staff and members of the public are also participating through Zoom. This meeting is broadcast live on the city's website and on cable TV channel 27. |
| 00:00:50.74 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you very much, City Clerk. Will you please call the roll? Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:00:56.27 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Bloss Team. |
| 00:00:59.11 | Jill Hoffman | I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. under the age of 18 in the room with me and then I'm participating via Zoom. Do we have to take a vote? I just wanna make sure we do this right. |
| 00:01:09.13 | Sergio Rudin | Normally you would if you were participating for just cause or under emergency circumstances, but you are not. |
| 00:01:15.97 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. Just want to clarify. |
| 00:01:18.82 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Huffman. |
| 00:01:21.18 | Jill Hoffman | Here. |
| 00:01:22.18 | Walfred Solorzano | Council member coming. |
| 00:01:23.56 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:01:23.58 | Walfred Solorzano | Vice Mayor Cox. Here. And Mayor Sobieski. |
| 00:01:28.00 | Mayor Sobieski | And I am here today, we're going to adjourn into closed session where we will cover conference with real property negotiator. MLK school site 100 Ebtide of negotiating parties are at least a friend saying and conference with legal counsel anticipated litigation pursuant to paragraph two of subdivision section 54956.9. This is cut by spare. |
| 00:01:51.79 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Mayor. I will be recusing myself from the first item you announced due to the proximity of my residence to the subject matter of that item. |
| 00:02:00.20 | Mayor Sobieski | And we will now open it up for public comment on closed session items only is there any public comment? |
| 00:02:04.89 | Walfred Solorzano | If any of the members would like to comment on any of the closed session items only, you can fill out one of those slips, or if you would like, just kind of go up to the podium. Anybody would like to comment on closed session items? All right. And then seeing none on Zoom. |
| 00:02:20.41 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, we will close closed session. We will adjourn to close, I'm sorry, closed public comment and we will adjourn to closed session, we'll be returning at 7 PM. |
| 00:02:30.32 | Mayor Sobieski | Go ahead and begin. We have returned from closed session. There are no closed session announcements. We're gonna begin the meeting with the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. |
| 00:02:57.29 | Mayor Sobieski | We'll begin the evening with a special presentation on the statue gift to Sausalito's sister city, Keshkesh, and who is doing the honors? Welcome. |
| 00:03:12.37 | Cheryl pop | Okay, click. |
| 00:03:28.74 | Cheryl pop | That's it. Hello, dear city council. I know that you all know me, but for the benefit of those who don't know me, who are listening to this presentation, I'm Cheryl pop. I am a. Long-time resident of Sausalito. a local business owner, that little bookstore on the waterfront. But tonight I'm wearing one of my many volunteer hats and I am representing the Sausalito-Cashkash Sister City program, which I have chaired for the last eight, nine, ten years, whose county? And here with me my colleague who refuses to stand up but the boss Mr. Jim Meyer is also here to answer any questions you might have. So we're here to give you a quick but exciting update on our sister city program. As you may recall, 10 years ago, thank you, Herb Weiner, Sausalito and Kashkai signed a twinning agreement between the two cities forming our sister city program. which made a huge amount of sense based on all the Portuguese heritage and history that we have here. Five years, sorry for the clicks. Five years later, Sausalito, I'm sorry, five years later, Cache Cache granted and gifted Sausalito with tons, and I mean tons, of calzada stones |
| 00:04:39.85 | Unknown | Five years. |
| 00:04:47.92 | Cheryl pop | traditional stones, a classic compass rose mosaic design. and the artisans who they sent over to construct this beautiful new plaza which we have downtown, the Prasha de Qashqash. Here you see the groundbreaking ceremony, then the dedication ceremony with our then Mayor Joan Cox, with the Prime Minister of Portugal. Thank you. And as you know, this is the beautiful finished product, a true gift to the city of Sausalito and tribute to our friendship. And as you may recall, it was a very novel public-private partnership. The city gifted their land to the project, provided some in-kind services, but we, the citizens, raised over $200,000 in cash to underwrite the project. Another gift to the city, which vastly improved the appearance of that area. Even the president of Portugal came to see our handiwork. Just a few years ago, a very charming man, I got to walk through Gabrielson Park holding his hand. Secret Service and the photographers were going nuts. But it's thanks to the really wonderful relationships we have forged with our Council Generals in San Francisco, We have been so fortunate to welcome a prime minister, a president of a foreign country to our little village, and I'm not sure many presidents or prime ministers have graced our shores. Fast forward to 2023, last year, our official 10-year anniversary. Is this the right slide? I'm not sure. Yes, I think so. Okay. It was our official 10-year anniversary with Qashqash, and in return, we gifted to them a replica of the Bolinor statue that you see here to commemorate this milestone. You likely know and recognize this landmark in the north end of town. It was created by the very talented Sausalito artist, John Liberton, who you see standing there. John's very artistic stainless steel contemporary rendition of these sails seemed a very appropriate gift based on the nautical maritime heritage that the two cities share. And bolinar is a Portuguese word for close to the winds. Of course, we had a big party. Sausalito likes to party with lots of visiting dignitaries to celebrate this anniversary. Melissa, you see there, who was mayor last year, and Francisco Cray, who is a Portuguese dignitary representing the city and accepting this gift. |
| 00:07:11.56 | Unknown | way to begin. |
| 00:07:20.64 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:07:20.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:07:20.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:07:29.04 | Cheryl pop | And what was last year a grand plan, today, I'm excited to say, is a reality. Bolinar has been replicated and produced in Portugal. Jim was just there overseeing all the final details. He saw it with his own eyes. It really exists. Once again, we have funded a very important public project with private donations. And on Friday, July 12th, There will be a formal dedication ceremony in Qashqash. We will be there. Our mayor Ian Sobieski will be there. Councilwoman Jill Hoffman will be there. And many, many Portuguese political and civic leaders. Here's an aerial view of where the Bologna will be located for those of you who are familiar with Qashqash. And I just want to say, every one of our city and council members has been to Qashqash, and that means so much to us. I don't think that's ever happened before, but all of you have been there, so you kind of know the lay of the land and the landscape here. But... It's a five minute walk from City Hall. It's right in the heart of downtown Qashqai. It's on the waterfront, and here's another view. Click, it's right on the marina. by the Club Naval Yacht Club, which hosts our Sister City Youth Sailing Exchange Program with our Saucido Yacht Club Junior Sailors. So it's a perfect location. It's got great visibility. It's close to where everybody comes. Thank you. The program itself, if you're not familiar with it, is an internationally recognized new sailing exchange program. We've been doing this for eight years now. It's an incredible life-changing opportunity for these kids, an invaluable educational, cultural experience for them. The students stay with Portuguese families. They go back and forth between Club Naval and Sausalito Yacht Club every other year. And it's not just the kids that get to have fun. Our Sister City program also offers an adult tour. And here are some delegates and ambassadors from previous years. And we've got another great group going with us this year. |
| 00:09:34.96 | Bonnie McGregor | Thank you. |
| 00:09:36.08 | Cheryl pop | So to conclude, here is the upcoming calendar of events for this exciting accomplishment. And we are here to thank you for your time, thank you for your support and enthusiasm for everything we've done with the Qashqai Sister City Program, and especially this wonderful gift of Bolinar from the city of Sausalito to the city of Qashqai. Any questions? |
| 00:10:01.02 | Mayor Sobieski | Any questions? Congratulations. We'll see you in Portugal. Thank you. |
| 00:10:11.19 | Mayor Sobieski | Moving on to the next item. We're gonna adopt the draft minutes from May 21st. Excuse me, Mayor. |
| 00:10:14.89 | Jill Hoffman | Excuse me, Mayor. Sorry to interrupt. But we used to have a portion on the agenda where we would do approval of the agenda, and we would talk about whether or not we wanted to propose changes to the agenda. That ceased to be a part of our agenda, I think, in April of this year. And so I would like to propose a change to the agenda, for tonight's agenda, that we flip business items A, which is the adopt a resolution of intent to establish the proposed downtown Sausalio property business improvement district and the item B 5b which is a fiscal year 2025 budget review become item a and that item a become item B I think it's important to understand and look at that program in the context of our budget which is item B so it doesn't make sense to me to look at this type of an expenditure without understanding or knowing it within the context of our current budget or proposed budget so that's my |
| 00:11:16.13 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor, would it be okay to poll the audience and find out how many people are here to speak to item A and how many people are here to speak to item B? Because I would like to make sure we accommodate members of our public. |
| 00:11:28.48 | Mayor Sobieski | Sure, how many people here in the audience are here for item 4A, the, I'm sorry, 5A, the proposed downtown property improvement, business improvement district? And 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, how many are? 11. How many are here for the fiscal year 2025 budget review? We'll have Chad has. He has to take it. Okay, that's the poll. |
| 00:11:55.75 | Jonathan Leon | Thank you. |
| 00:11:59.58 | Mayor Sobieski | So yeah, I'm inclined to want to keep the, please, I'm sorry. |
| 00:12:04.36 | Ian Kelman | Oh, I'm inclined to honor the council members request. I'm happy to get a big picture look at everything before we do anything else. And it is, I think, the most important item on this agenda. Be great to have more people hear all about it and hear where we are on our budget. So I actually think it's a really great thing we have so many people here. So I'm happy to honor my colleagues request. What about |
| 00:12:27.85 | Jill Hoffman | What about compromise? What about compromise? |
| 00:12:28.27 | Ian Kelman | What? |
| 00:12:29.38 | Mayor Sobieski | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:12:29.70 | Ian Kelman | about it. |
| 00:12:29.94 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:12:31.63 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. |
| 00:12:31.78 | Mayor Sobieski | Sorry, Melissa. Thank you. |
| 00:12:32.77 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, sorry. |
| 00:12:35.34 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, I didn't have my hand raised. Oh, okay. I'm happy to, well, I'd like to hear Councilmember Hoffman's compromise. |
| 00:12:36.38 | Mayor Sobieski | Oh, OK. Thank you. |
| 00:12:42.88 | Mayor Sobieski | Oh. I just feel like |
| 00:12:45.31 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, my compromise. Why don't we? We had other. Are you guys here for item five? |
| 00:12:52.42 | Mayor Sobieski | Yes, sir, that's we're going to get to that in just a second, actually. You know, the |
| 00:12:59.84 | Jill Hoffman | The compromise was why don't we just delay the action until after we hear the budget, right? So we can hear the presentation, we can hear a public comment, and then we can just delay our discussion on item 5B until after. or, Or if it makes more sense, just flip all of it. I mean, people who are here, they could leave and come back when it's cooler. |
| 00:13:23.35 | Mayor Sobieski | Well, I mean, we have five discussions of the budget. We had two meetings, we had this meeting, we have another meeting, we may have a special meeting. It's definitely obviously critical and required. I would hope we could dispatch with the business improvement district in short order. And then have the rest of the evening to deal with the discussion of the budget when the key pieces of information we still don't have. Because tomorrow is the critical meeting with the insurance carrier. So we won't even know a really material piece of information about the budget until our next meeting actually. |
| 00:13:58.82 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I think that |
| 00:14:03.27 | Mayor Sobieski | I said my piece, so I don't know. |
| 00:14:08.91 | Ian Kelman | the change and have a broader discussion |
| 00:14:13.75 | Mayor Sobieski | I'd like to keep it as is. I'd like to keep the agenda as is. |
| 00:14:17.04 | Jill Hoffman | Should we make a motion then? So I make a motion to amend the agenda tonight to hear the P bid, which is a request for funding, a five-year request for funding, that we hear after we have the budget discussion, so that we have a full understanding of the context of this in our current budget situation, which is quite serious. I will second that. |
| 00:14:44.43 | Mayor Sobieski | There's a motion made and seconded. This is to a quick vote. Please since we. |
| 00:14:49.21 | Walfred Solorzano | Council, sorry, Councilmember Blalstein. Thank you. |
| 00:14:53.09 | Eva | respectfully know |
| 00:14:53.97 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. OK. It was a no vote. Councilmember Huffin. |
| 00:14:57.95 | Eva | Thank you. Uh, |
| 00:14:59.67 | Walfred Solorzano | Yes. Councilmember Cameron. Yes. Vice Mayor Cox |
| 00:15:09.26 | Jill Hoffman | No. |
| 00:15:10.59 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:15:11.57 | Mayor Sobieski | also vote no so we'll keep the agenda as is. So moving on to the consent calendar item. |
| 00:15:17.73 | Jill Hoffman | Five feet. Thank you. |
| 00:15:20.46 | Mayor Sobieski | I'm sorry. |
| 00:15:22.60 | Jill Hoffman | You said you were gonna address that. |
| 00:15:24.12 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:15:24.14 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:15:24.16 | Mayor Sobieski | I'm sorry, the consent calendars first. We have a consent calendar and I'm going to explain it to everybody. I think some people are here for one of the consent calendar items. So the consent calendar. |
| 00:15:24.78 | Jill Hoffman | I- THE FAMILY. the kids. |
| 00:15:34.23 | Mayor Sobieski | Generally are considered non-controversial items though. Apparently one of them is not at least, and can all be voted on together. Any city council member can ask for an item to be removed from the consent calendar and it will be heard later in the meeting. The consent calendar items are 3A, Alzheimer's Brain Awareness Month Proclamation. 3B, adopt a resolution calling for an election to fill three seats on the city of Sausalito City Council to be held. and consolidated with the general the municipal election scheduled for November 5th, 2024, and request that the Marin County Registrar voters conduct the election. 3C, adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to approve the downtown parking study agreement funded by 110K of state grant funds. 3D, adopt a resolution amending parking regulations to establish a no parking zone fronting 115 Third Street and opposite the driveways of 22 Atwood Avenue and 101 Prospect Avenue. 3E approve flock license plate readers agreement for $70,000 for two years utilizing state grant funding. 3F adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to sign the agreement with the will the end group for the comprehensive user fee study and development impact the study 3g adopt a resolution approving an encroachment agreement for the exterior renovations in the public right away adjacent to 241 to 53 glenn drive 3h receive and file report regarding becoming a charter city and then 3i receive and file the employee retention and recruitment update and that item actually i'm going to ask to be pulled and put at the end of the agenda Any other requests to pull anything? |
| 00:17:21.35 | Unknown | Public comment. |
| 00:17:22.32 | Mayor Sobieski | We're going to get the public comment. I'm just letting people know if anything is equal. I have my. Maybe get another opportunity. |
| 00:17:25.91 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:17:25.93 | Jill Hoffman | I have my... I have my hand raised. |
| 00:17:28.15 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Oh, sorry. |
| 00:17:29.44 | Jill Hoffman | I have my hand raised, Mr. Mayor. |
| 00:17:31.09 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:17:31.11 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry. |
| 00:17:31.41 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:17:31.65 | Jill Hoffman | I would really like to pull item 3D, just given all of the correspondence that we received on this issue. I think we owe it to the members of the public who have weighed in, we've received many letters. |
| 00:17:41.45 | Mayor Sobieski | Could I propose that maybe we take public comment and then we could ask to pull it off the agenda that way they can make public comment on it now while they're here. And then we have another wrap to leave it on consent, but we might pull it off consent based on public comment on the consent calendar. |
| 00:17:50.36 | Morgan Pierce | I'm sure I would support that. |
| 00:17:58.17 | Jill Hoffman | And then Mayor, 3H says in the title, receive and file a report, provide direction to staff. The recommended action at the end of the staff report is receive and file, but I think this is an important item and I would like to provide direction to staff regarding pursuing whether or not to become a charter city. And so I think we need to pull it off to be able to give direction to staff. |
| 00:18:21.24 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. So we'll pull 3H off, 3H and 3I. We'll do 3I first because it tags with the budget item and then 3H. Anything else? All right, so for those, so we will now hear public comment on the consent calendar items 3A through 3G, still preserving the right as per Council Member Blessings request to potentially pull one more item off the agenda or kick it to a future meeting. So public comment, please, on the consent calendar for those items only. |
| 00:18:49.68 | Walfred Solorzano | Okay, I'll call them, I'll call people by the order that I've received their cards. If you want to speak, please fill out one of these speaker cards and then return them over to this area. Thank you so much. First speaker is Nora Waddell followed by Ted Barton, then Charles Hamilton. |
| 00:19:10.32 | Nora Waddell | Hello, good evening everyone. This is my first time at City Council. I grew up in Sausalito, so I'm very happy to be here. Thank you. I would like to speak to the parking restriction across from 22 Atwood and request that it be removed from consent and also to refuse that parking restriction. I live on the 2nd Street stairs with my elderly mother, she is 89 and my 5 1⁄2 year old daughter. We have parked on the street for 50 years. My mother continues to park on the street. Parking on North Street is very challenging. Um, We rely on that parking since we are on the public stairs. Those two parking spots and that one parking spot in particular at 301 North Street is one of the closest ones to our house and so we would have to go up on outward or all the way up to the park it's already a hardship um also we have four rental units on second street my father was an architect and established those units three of those have one off street parking that means there's three people parking cars on the street one unit has no off street parking that means that's one or two cars on the street. So one off street parking that means there's three people parking cars on the street. One unit has no off street parking that means that's one or two cars on the street. So we really are already beyond capacity in our neighborhood with parking. So removing that parking spot at 22 Outwood would be further encroaching upon the public good that has been continually encroached upon in our neighborhood over the years that I've lived there. Thank you so much. |
| 00:20:58.81 | Walfred Solorzano | Ted Barton? |
| 00:20:59.50 | Ted Barton | Thank you. |
| 00:21:05.47 | Ted Barton | Hello. Thank you. My wife and I own the house at 317 2nd Street on the stairs down from North Street. We don't have any street access, no parking, no garage. Parking is limited in our area and it is a premium. It fills up quickly as most streets in Sausalito do. I can see it as like having a view here in Sausalito. If someone tries to block your view, you fight for every inch and parking kind of feels that way. The previous owners of 22 Atwood We're longtime South Dakota residents and appreciated the value of available street parking They kept that in mind when they rebuilt their home and put in a garage on North Street. I'd like to read from the Sausalito Planning Commission resolution Number two. 2014-XX about the 22 Atwood redesign, and which says right here, I'll get right to it. Proposed entrances, exits, internal circulation and parking spaces are configured to provide an appropriate level of traffic safety and ease of movement. |
| 00:22:14.67 | Jill Hoffman | Can you speak up? I cannot hear what you're saying. |
| 00:22:16.73 | Ted Barton | Okay, I'm just going to read what the Planning Commission said at this time. The project is designed to meet current building codes to ensure adequate health and safety. The project is required to meet current public improvement and engineering standards to facilitate traffic safety and ease of movement. A new two-car garage will be provided on North Street which has been designed not to impact existing on-street parking and is set at an angle to facilitate ingress and egress. Therefore, the project will not create adverse impacts to traffic circulation and safety. |
| 00:22:52.81 | Ted Barton | This design was improved to keep on-street parking. And that was part of the reason why I believe you gave it a green light in the first place. My house is on stairs is what it is. But I chose that. 22 Atwood's Garage is what it is, and they chose that. |
| 00:23:09.59 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:23:09.60 | Ted Barton | You're out of time, sir. Thank you. |
| 00:23:11.58 | Walfred Solorzano | Next speaker, Charles Hamilton. Very helpful. Oh, okay. Great. |
| 00:23:13.01 | Jill Hoffman | That would be very helpful. |
| 00:23:17.97 | Alice Merrill | Wilford, who is it? |
| 00:23:19.02 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:23:19.04 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:23:19.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:23:20.22 | Charles Hamilton | Charles Turtelinski. Thank you. |
| 00:23:22.19 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:23:22.21 | Charles Hamilton | Hold on. Oh, Charles Hamilton. Which one? |
| 00:23:24.98 | Unknown | THE END OF |
| 00:23:25.16 | Walfred Solorzano | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:23:25.25 | Unknown | Thank you. . |
| 00:23:26.04 | Walfred Solorzano | . |
| 00:23:26.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:23:26.78 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:23:27.34 | Charles Hamilton | Thank you. |
| 00:23:27.37 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah. |
| 00:23:27.83 | Charles Hamilton | Go ahead. The floor is yours. |
| 00:23:28.35 | Walfred Solorzano | I like to afford that. |
| 00:23:32.05 | Unknown | Good afternoon, everybody. And I'm also speaking to this parking on North Street |
| 00:23:40.67 | Kieran Culligan | Well, |
| 00:23:41.60 | Unknown | Well, Atwood. I'll keep this brief. Just I want to add, I know that my other neighbors have the exact numbers of houses and parking spots needed and everything. But myself and my partner that live at 213 North Street I'm a documentary filmmaker, Academy Award winning. I have a lot of film equipment at times and it's very difficult to park. So it is at a premium. Yeah, I think I'll just leave it at that. And then also, if they have any trouble maneuvering in and out of their garage, I do have a list of about six or seven driving schools that I'd be happy to recommend them. |
| 00:24:22.05 | Unknown | And |
| 00:24:39.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:24:40.83 | Walfred Solorzano | Next speaker, Karen Maddox, followed by Mary Carey, then Beth King. |
| 00:24:52.12 | Karen Maddox | Hello, esteemed council members and neighbors. I'm here to ask for your consideration to remove this from the consent list because parking is really tough on our street. We have several people who have injuries or who are older folks, and we only have a few spots and they get taken up. And when they are, we often have to draw it. We often have to walk several blocks away up steep hills, sometimes almost by the women's club. It can be that bad. So I personally travel for work with luggage and and this is a couple times a month. So getting just running my normal life and my business and having it be able to go get my car and bring it closer to the house is a really big deal. These neighbors have a two-car garage, It's unfortunate that they don't know how to back out of their driveway. |
| 00:25:59.59 | Mayor Sobieski | Sir, sir, please do not interrupt the speaker. You will have an opportunity for your own public comment. |
| 00:26:04.65 | Karen Maddox | We will have an opportunity. I will arm wrestle you after. |
| 00:26:09.93 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:26:09.98 | Karen Maddox | . So, I'm just asking for some consideration for the folks in the neighborhood. I've lived in this house for 16 years. And we have a really special group of people, a really loving bunch of people. And our lives matter too. I don't know if the people that moved into that house even live here. full-time and we all do thank you thank you |
| 00:26:37.05 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, next speaker is Mary Carey. |
| 00:26:41.91 | Mary Carey | I... My name is Mary Carey. Thank you for listening to us. Thank you neighbors. We've been in Cecily though since the 1970s and North Street has been part of the family. And we're talking about the same street here. And we have names for the sections of parking. It's so hard to park. We have the nosebleed. We've got the bamboo, which they're trying to take from us now. And we've got the Rockstar, which is already taken away all the time for people doing construction projects. So right now, the North Street Stairs Rockstar has been taken away. And I play in bands. I have to carry my guitars from the nosebleed way down in. I'm about to turn 65. It's scary to us, the idea of losing parking spaces, especially when the garage was built to allow people to easily go in and out. The former owner who built the house didn't have any trouble with it. Sausalito approved it so that we could get in and out. We only found out about this morning, so I'm a little bit upset. Anyway, thank you. |
| 00:27:53.73 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, next speaker, Beth King, followed by Charlie Tulinski and then David Corey. |
| 00:28:01.09 | Beth King | Hello, I'm Beth King. I live at 209 North Street. My family has owned the property since the 70s. North Street is, as Mary just said, it's a joke. It's always, you know, if you get a parking place, you've won the lottery because it's very difficult to park on our street. I'm actually here to present to you Just a survey that we did today. We addressed how many people who live on North Street who actually need to park on North Street because they have to park a car on the street. And who else impacts our street? And what we found out is that there are 14 people on North Street that depend on parking on the street. But there are 29 people altogether because this includes 3rd Street that is, am I saying that right? 2nd Street, I'm sorry, 2nd Street that is just below us. All the people that live on the stairs that need to park on North Street. And then we also have people on Atwood that don't have parking that need to park on North Street. So it's a very, very tight situation. And there's old people, there's young people, there's all different ages. But it is extremely difficult no matter what day or time of the day it is. So thank you for your consideration. |
| 00:29:33.68 | Walfred Solorzano | Charlie Klinskey. |
| 00:29:35.87 | Charles Hamilton | Charles Terlinsky. Thank you. Thank you for making some time for the comment on this. I live on 317 Bridgeway, 317 and 319, and I think a couple points that were made here were, are relevant. the address of the actual location, of the parking garage that we're talking about, is Atwood. We're talking about North Street. So I think it's important, maybe this never got considered, Atwood. is using North Street. I'm on Bridgeway. I've got other people on the steps, you know, on Bridgeway in that area that we don't have immediate. I don't have parking. I don't have private parking, and that's perfectly fine, but as you've heard. parking is at a premium and therefore losing an extra spot for for purposes that I think that research was very useful and very helpful. And thank you for diving into that because I think that says it all. there was a the entire design was was approved for a particular reason and a particular use case and changing it now. uh, wouldn't make any sense. We'll hope you do not do that. Thank you. |
| 00:30:50.12 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, we have David Corey followed by Jeffrey Jacob, then Bill Goldman. |
| 00:30:59.84 | David Corey | Hello, David Carey. I live at 209 North Street. It's a privilege to address you this evening. I largely just want to reiterate everything's been said so far. It's been my experience as well. I do want to say that we have met Fred and his wife, who now own 22 Atwood, and they're lovely people, and our opposition is nothing personal. They may not realize how it affects the rest of us who do depend on North Street parking. And I know it was touched on, but I think it's really important that when we can't find parking on North Street, our first option is to go up a block farther opposite Southview Park. since the park has been renovated, there's even less spaces available. So we're parking overnight, and now people that want to come and use the park, they're looking for a place to park on North Street opposite the park, And the residents of North Street are now parked there where they could have parked below. So it's an interference to the public good in that way. So parking is truly a premium. Our experience is that. And hopefully you can agree with us and remove this from the consent calendar. Thank you. |
| 00:32:21.43 | Walfred Solorzano | Jeffrey Jacobs |
| 00:32:28.22 | Unknown | Hello, Mr. Mayor, City Council, citizens of Sausalito. My name is Jeffrey Jacob, 27-foot sloop. Now across the channel, but I'll be in Sausalito waters soon enough. that I'm here to talk first in commendation of the people that are Speaking about parking, there's three parking places for every car in California. that there's no sidewalks once you get above Bridgeway So people do not walk. there's no public transportation up there. To have even one bus or van which would relieve the parking problems greatly. that, There is now $110,000 to a, this is item 3C. for a parking study. This isn't making a new parking lot. It's not putting black asphalt which by the way reflects a lot more heat than white asphalt. It's being on the board right now on Bridgeway. Avenue. And Caledonia. that, It is known that the cities become hotter when they pour Pavement. That's $110,000 for a parking study. There's $70,000. This is for license plate readers. as if there's going to be another person looking at every person that enters and exits Sausalito. There's also a, I didn't get the price for this, but there's a consultant This is item number 3F. It's being hired to hire consultants. Do we get the irony of this? So. Shema Yisrael Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Echad and Shema the Palestinians too. that we are here for something bigger. than money. Thank you. |
| 00:34:30.88 | Walfred Solorzano | Bill Goldman followed by Frederick O. Lewis and then Bonnie McGregor. So Bill Goldman. |
| 00:34:49.83 | Bill Goldman | Council, thank you for hearing us. My name is Bill Goldman. I live at Channing Way and I'm speaking to you about not an access problem or a convenience problem or a congestion problem, but a safety problem. Prospect Avenue, because it is now become from a single, from a double lane street to practically a single lane street that is obstructed every time there are workmen in pickup trucks addressing the, renovations that are continual on the streets. And my concern, and I hope you can take it very seriously. is the safety issues, because how could Emergency vehicles. Fire trucks, emergency medical vehicles get through this maze to reach the people a long prospect and Channing way. That is worth serious consideration. Thank you. |
| 00:35:59.96 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Frederick Lewis. |
| 00:36:06.83 | Unknown | Good evening, everyone. I'm the owner of the property at 22 Atwood. When I purchased a property, the owner of the property said the biggest mistake he made was the design of the garage. And if you come down North Street from up top, you cannot enter when there's a car parked across the street. If you back up and turn maybe seven, eight times, you can get in. Even then, at that point, you can only get a single car in. As it is, we parked two vehicles on North Street. Thank you. So there would be a net savings of a single parking space if we're able to park two vehicles in the garage. Currently, it's very difficult to get in And I would challenge anyone, if a car is parked across the street, It is impossible to turn inside the garage. without making at least eight, nine, 10 turns, Most instances, you're worried about hitting the car across the street. So, The idea is currently we have two cars parked on North Street. There is a net savings if we can remove the car from across the street. and the area is one parking space is removed. now we will no longer have to park 2 cars on North Street so there is a savings. And if anyone were to see the design, they would completely understand what I'm saying. It's impossible to pull your car in. |
| 00:37:29.87 | Unknown | No, no comments, please. He told me it was impossible. That's why I never parked there. |
| 00:37:30.45 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. No comments, please. Who told me it was impossible. That's why I never parked there. Let's not, let's please not have this dialogue. |
| 00:37:35.07 | Unknown | The other owner never parked there. The other owner parked on Atwood. He's the one that personally told me that was a mistake that he made, was the design of the parking space. Maybe you get one car in, but you'll never get two cars in, and the one car you'll have to come from the opposite direction, and that's the only way you're going to get it in. So there would be a net savings of a single parking space. If they were to deny it, we'll continue to park two cars on North Street, and there will be an additional parking space at the Lou's. |
| 00:38:08.38 | Mayor Sobieski | Please don't have... Yeah, nobody asked you. These outbursts are not helpful to the dialogue, please. Next. We're out of time, sir. Thank you very much. Okay, thank you. |
| 00:38:09.70 | Unknown | Nobody asked you. |
| 00:38:14.84 | Walfred Solorzano | Next. You're out of time, sir. Thank you very much. Next speaker, Bonnie McGregor, then followed by Alice Merrill. |
| 00:38:26.98 | Bonnie McGregor | Thank you. I'm glad it's cooling down a little bit. |
| 00:38:27.92 | Walfred Solorzano | That is cool. |
| 00:38:31.32 | Bonnie McGregor | Thank you. Well, I'm here to see Bonnie McGregor. I live at 90 Princess Street. And I've lived there now for 15 and a half years. And I'm here tonight to discuss or hope to see some wonderful results out of the parking downtown parking survey that's being done. Well, I've kept track of it. I used to actually write it all down and take pictures and I just started drowning in the information. I'm going to say over 90% of the time between where the parking meters end and up to the Presbyterian church. And there are, oh, probably 15 spaces along there. Over 50% of the time, I say about 90% of the time, over 50% of the cars parked there do not have an Area B sticker. And what I've noticed is that people who are willing to spend a tremendous amount of money to come downtown and eat dinner, which we appreciate, but they want free parking. Also, the bed and breakfast next door has their guests park along there. And you've got the vendors, merchants, and also the employees trying to park along there. So meanwhile, I usually spend, when I first moved in there, it was 15 to 20 minutes, and that was not too bad. The average wait time now, and has been for the last year or two years, |
| 00:39:44.08 | Unknown | Excuse me. |
| 00:39:54.51 | Bonnie McGregor | 45 minutes to an hour. I waited an hour today in the middle of the day to get a parking place. So I hope we can get something done about it. My recommendation is the signs from the parking meters to the Presbyterian Church should say, excuse me, that's from smoking when I was a kid. |
| 00:40:09.78 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:40:11.15 | Bonnie McGregor | They should say residents only 24 seven in the area B sticker. That's all it needs to say. Simple for people driving by to read. They don't get confused. You know run into another car because they're trying to read all the verbiage on the sign. So that's why I'm here |
| 00:40:29.83 | Walfred Solorzano | Alice Merrill? |
| 00:40:40.78 | Alice Merrill | Hello, and my name is Alice Merrill. So here I am chiming in on something that just parking is so hard here and to, I don't know what this situation is, but to take out a place is tough, any place. I have a friend who lives on North Street, and I can't go visit her. I can't ever park there. And if you wanted to go to the park, We need to coordinate our thinking when we do things. And you guys are trying and Everybody is, but. I feel for the people who live there who are losing a spot. Who are their and have been there. all the time. Thank you. |
| 00:41:30.73 | Walfred Solorzano | We have a speaker on Zoom, Jonathan. |
| 00:41:38.14 | Jonathan Leon | Hi, can you hear me? Thank you. |
| 00:41:40.03 | Walfred Solorzano | Yes. |
| 00:41:40.84 | Jonathan Leon | Thank you. Hi, my name is Jonathan Leon. I live on Third Street. I used to live on the Second Street stairs. I've been in this neighborhood for 30 years. Parking is at a very high premium. The people have made clear the reasons for that in this neighborhood, both the renovation of the park, the fact that there's only, the Atwood is not a stickered area. So people who work on Bridgeway park there during the day as well as along North Street. I'm not sure. This house was designed to be able to access, like his neighbor, at an angle coming from Princess and along Atwood down on to get to the garage. not to come down North Street from the park. That's what the angle of the garage is. And the engineering study that was done with this building said there wasn't going to be any problems. If you do feel the need, which is not, I don't see the pressing need for this, but to limit the amount of parking. It should be a reduced size of what's going on here. This is eliminating more than a full space. To add the garage that was two houses up, years ago. only a portion of like five, six feet was designated red instead of a full parking space to get out of a garage. So this is an existing condition. It was reviewed by the Planning Commission. It was approved from this engineering study. There's so little parking. So many of these units on North Street and on the second street stairs don't have off street parking. that to privatize a space, and there are already cars parked in this garage, by the way. It shouldn't be taking space from the general public for private use. |
| 00:43:37.31 | Jonathan Leon | Thank you. |
| 00:43:37.33 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. All right. Anyone else? No further public speakers. Okay, we'll close public comment. |
| 00:43:38.34 | Walfred Solorzano | No problem. |
| 00:43:42.22 | Mayor Sobieski | Vice mayor. |
| 00:43:42.30 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE Thank you. I would like to make a novel suggestion as a former planning commissioner and because there were several references made to the Planning Commission decision that approved this garage. This issue begs a site visit. It is impossible to imagine this in a vacuum. As eight years on the Planning Commission, I could never make a decision if I hadn't actually seen the site with my own eyes and understood the geographical constraints. So I would like to recommend that we pull this off our consent calendar and refer it to the Planning Commission for consideration. I'm not sure why this didn't go to the Planning Commission in the first place. |
| 00:44:23.85 | Mayor Sobieski | Looking at Council Member Blasstein, since you made the first inquiry on this, are you good with that suggestion? How about my colleagues? |
| 00:44:30.11 | Jill Hoffman | I'm comfortable with that. I think it deserves additional review. |
| 00:44:32.83 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Anyone else? Council Member Kellman? |
| 00:44:35.75 | Ian Kelman | Yes, thank you, and thank you everybody for coming. Flashbacks to Planning Commission. I think Jonathan and I were actually on the Planning Commission during the 2010 approval of this. I'm sorry. All right, so there you go. I want to add an additional, I support the Vice Mayor's suggestion, but I also want to ask the City Manager to help us take a harder look at the signage in that area. I thought Ms. McGregor's comment is very well received in terms of how are we signing this area, who is able to park here, is this for residents, are commercial businesses using the parking to the detriment of our residents. I think that's worth a hard look, and sometimes signs go up that aren't necessarily applicable for that particular use case. So I'd like to add that if my colleagues agree. |
| 00:45:21.45 | Jill Hoffman | I would endorse Councilmember Kelman's suggestion. I listened with great interest to Jonathan Leone's comments about people who work on Bridgeway parking on residential streets during the day, when there are lots available for that very purpose. So I would endorse that recommendation. I agree. |
| 00:45:44.85 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, that's the direction on this item to the staff then. And we will not hear that, well, that item is disposed of. So we're gonna now, it'll be referred to the planning commission. |
| 00:45:55.11 | Jill Hoffman | And can we just thank everybody for showing up to alert us to this issue so that we can make a rational, well-reasoned decision. We appreciate it. |
| 00:46:04.36 | Ian Kelman | May I make one more suggestion, Mayor, is that the city manager turned to us at the next meeting indicating a date certain for this. I mean, we can't give a date certain from the dias appear for planning commission. We don't know their calendar and their schedule. But I think we should have an awareness as to when this will be heard and conveyed to the planning commission that we feel is to be a priority to be heard. But I don't know what else they have on the planning commission. |
| 00:46:26.03 | Jill Hoffman | Well, what I'd like to suggest is the city clerk has the speaker cards. And so I would like, when this goes to the Planning Commission, I would like every single speaker who spoke tonight to receive notice that it's going to be heard by the Planning Commission and on what date. |
| 00:46:41.40 | Walfred Solorzano | For the record, not everybody puts their contact info on the speaker cards. |
| 00:46:46.07 | Mayor Sobieski | We might invite members of the audience who wish to be kept informed to write their name and number down on a sheet of paper and hand it to the city clerk before you leave. |
| 00:46:53.89 | Jill Hoffman | Or email the city clerk. It's just cityclerk at Sausalito.org. Thank you. |
| 00:46:58.26 | Mayor Sobieski | I've... |
| 00:46:59.93 | Jill Hoffman | .gov..gov, sorry,.gov. |
| 00:47:02.93 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. All right, so item 3D is dispensed with. So we're gonna vote on the consent calendar items three A, B, and C, three E, F, and G. Can I get a motion to approve those items? |
| 00:47:18.29 | Unknown | I'm gonna get mayor |
| 00:47:18.46 | Mayor Sobieski | I'll make it. We're voting to accept items three, A, B, C, E, F, and G. Items three H and I are pulled off the consent calendar for later in the program. |
| 00:47:30.76 | Jill Hoffman | So moved. Second. I'll second. |
| 00:47:33.20 | Mayor Sobieski | second all in favor roll call please as one of our members is out of |
| 00:47:33.83 | Jill Hoffman | on paper. |
| 00:47:37.61 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:47:37.63 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:47:37.64 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Blasting. |
| 00:47:38.52 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:47:38.55 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:47:39.91 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 00:47:40.78 | Walfred Solorzano | Uh, sorry, Councilmember Huffman? |
| 00:47:43.72 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 00:47:44.14 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. |
| 00:47:46.87 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Kelman? |
| 00:47:49.17 | Ian Kelman | Yes. |
| 00:47:49.47 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Vice Mayor Cox? Yes. And Mayor Sobieski. |
| 00:47:50.81 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. |
| 00:47:53.10 | Mayor Sobieski | Yes, all right, moving on now to public hearing items. |
| 00:47:57.96 | Walfred Solorzano | We never voted on the minutes. |
| 00:48:01.99 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, we'll go back to item 2A. Thank you very much for catching that city clerk. This is adopting the draft minutes of the May 21, 2024 city council meeting. Can I get a motion to approve those minutes? |
| 00:48:15.41 | Ian Kelman | So moved. I'll make a motion. Okay. |
| 00:48:16.66 | Sharna Brockett | And then, |
| 00:48:17.05 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:48:17.06 | Sharna Brockett | Thank you. |
| 00:48:17.18 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Okay, Melissa, but okay. Seconded all, let's do roll call please again. |
| 00:48:19.43 | Ian Kelman | second. |
| 00:48:24.27 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:48:24.30 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:48:24.32 | Walfred Solorzano | on some blasting? |
| 00:48:26.51 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 00:48:27.12 | Walfred Solorzano | Council member Hoffman. |
| 00:48:30.73 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 00:48:31.42 | Walfred Solorzano | Council member Kilman. |
| 00:48:33.40 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 00:48:33.77 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Vice Mayor Cox. |
| 00:48:36.22 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:48:36.23 | Walfred Solorzano | Yes. |
| 00:48:36.64 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 00:48:37.35 | Walfred Solorzano | And Mary Sobieski. |
| 00:48:38.95 | Mayor Sobieski | Yes, all right, public hearing item 4A, public hearing on article, Well, that's a number, X3D, I'm not good on my Roman numerals, so I'm not sure what number. That is Section 6 of the California Constitution on the proposed sanitary sewer fees for fiscal year 2425 through 2627. Introduction and waiver of first reading of ordinance 32024, an ordinance of the city council in the city of Sausalito, setting fees for sewer services for fiscal year 2425 through 2627. Director McGowan, you have the floor. |
| 00:49:12.03 | Kevin McGowan | Good evening, Mayor, members of City Council. This evening we have a short presentation from HF&H. I'm not sure if Rick Simon is going to give the presentation or Gabe Sasser. We also have Vivian Housen who should be in the audience if we have any questions about the capital program as well. So with that, I'll probably turn it over to Great. I'm looking at our lovely clerk to see if she found the presentation. |
| 00:49:39.82 | Rick Simonson | Thank you. No. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:50:08.62 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:50:08.64 | Rick Simonson | Please go right ahead. Here we go excellent well good evening I'm Rick Simonson Senior Vice President with HF&H consultant we have been working with staff over the last four or five months to develop the rate study plan for your sewer system we were first in front of you in April to get approval to mail notices to each customer of your sewer service area and we're here tonight for the protest hearing And next slide, please. So they, So the agenda will give you a little brief background for those members of the public that may not have been in attendance at the April meeting. go through our rate study objectives and the process, Describe the revenue requirement. Those are the expenses necessary to operate your sewer system. The proposed rates, bill impacts that customers can expect and a comparison to some neighboring agencies. We'll pause for some feedback from council to ask any questions and move on to the staff recommendation for tonight's hearing. A brief background, your sewer system is run as a sewer enterprise fund in the city and what that means are that the rates and the revenue that's generated from those rates can only be used for the sewer collection system. The sewer collection system costs are not funded by any general fund monies nor can the revenues generated from the rates for the sewer services be used to fund any general fund activities. The revenues must stay within the enterprise. What that means in years in which revenues exceed expenses those are held in reserves for future expenses. Next slide. So there can be some confusion with the city's collection system. The city provides sewer collection services to all customers in the cities except for floating homes. The collection system is owned for floating homes and operated by the Sausalito Marin City Sanitary District. For the city collection operations for all other residents and commercial businesses in the cities, they're charged on the tax roll. Sewer rates were last studied five years ago in 2019 where the council adopted a five-year rate plan. The last increase for that five-year rate plan was effective July 1 of 2023. That was a 4% increase. Now, the wastewater that is collected from your customers within your collection system is sent to the Sausalito Marin City Sanitary Conveyance System, which brings it down to their treatment facilities. So the services we're discussing tonight and the rates for services do not include treatment which is billed by SMC SD also on the property tax bills. So customers will see two charges on the property tax bills. Only one of which we're here tonight to speak to. Next slide. Thank you. What are those charges? Just briefly, they're made up of two different components. First, there's a fixed charge. That's the same per dwelling unit for different customer classes. So all single-family customers are charged one fixed charge per dwelling unit, duplexes, two based on their fixed charge amount, and multifamily is also charged a fixed cost per dwelling unit, duplexes, two based on their fixed charge amount, and multifamily is also charged a fixed cost per dwelling unit. There's also a volumetric component to make up the total charge. And that's based on average winter water use from the previous winter. So that is used as a proxy to estimate how much wastewater is generated on the properties and sent to the treatment facility. That's the reason the industry uses winter water use is there's less irrigation, We're trying to capture only that which goes into the sewer system. For commercial customers, they also do have a fixed charge, but it's based on how much flow they have as it relates specifically to an equivalent dwelling unit of the single family. So they have a multiple of more than one EDU per property. They also are subject to a volumetric charge. Next slide. So our rate study objectives when we undertake this process, first and foremost, we need to provide for sustainable revenues for your operations, maintenance of your aging system about 80, or my apologies, |
| 00:55:01.27 | Rick Simonson | About 20 miles of sewer pipe and four pump stations to maintain those facilities. Also, we need to conform with legal constraints and the rate setting best practices. First, rates need to be cost-based. and equitable among your customer classes. No one customer class can subsidize a number. Another, you cannot increase your commercial rates to help alleviate the pain on your residential rates. They must be equitable. and also to maintain prudent reserves in cases of emergencies and emergency repairs and day-to-day cash flow. Next slide. What's the first step in the rate study is to understand their annual revenue requirements. So working with staff, looking over the next five year period, we see expenses to operate the facility increase from this current fiscal year, 23, 24, of about 3.5 million are increasing to about 4.5 million by the end of the fifth year in 2829. It's made up of general operating and maintenance costs and admin overhead is the bulk of your expenses in addition for large repairs that were made in the past with the debt issuance they're still paying off debt and that's the light green bar you see there. And next in the blue bar, we see the capital expenditures that are projected over the next five year period. About $5 million in capital repairs are needed for the aging infrastructure based on an assessment by the city's contract engineer of repairing aging pipes A majority are over 80 years old. We've also indicated in the solid black line your current revenue at current rates. If rates were not to change over the next five year period you'll see we can't keep up with the capital expenditures and by the end of the fifth year couldn't pay all the debt service that is required to pay back that bond issuance. We know some sort of rate increases necessary. That can be a combination of rate increases or use of reserves. Next slide. So this chart here just summarizes in working with staff and getting a reasonable increase in how we may approach increasing your revenues also making use of reserves. So the bottom part of this graph with the solid and dotted green line shows your projected fund balance both without rate increases the dotted green line by 28 29 you'll be nearly out of reserves and well below what we call a minimum minimum reserve level indicated in that red line. That's necessary to keep your day-to-day operations as you need to pay operating and capital costs on a day-to-day basis, but because you bill in the tax roll, You basically receive your revenues in two large chunks in December and April of each year. So you need a minimum level of reserves. What we've devised here with help with staff and committees is a reasonable plan I've highlighted just these first three years, that's what we're here to discuss today, approving just the next five years of rate increases. With 5% increases in revenues and making use of reserves, which is indicated by the sloping solid green line going down towards the target blue line, we can meet your needs over the next three year period. So again, a combination of rate increase and also using reserves that have been built up within the fund. So what's that mean? Next slide. To your rates, this is an indication of first, your fixed charges. Again, that differs from customer class by customer class. Also your volumetric charge, which is paid by every customer class equally on the same per 100 cubic feet rate. I'll note in the 24-25 column, though we're increasing or projected increase revenues by 5%, it's not just a 5% increase to your current rates. With the cost of service study, as I mentioned, it needs to be equitable and there's a realignment of your rates with the cost of service. So you'll notice the fixed charges are going down and there's a shift from fixed to variable revenues and you'll see the variable charge increasing. Again this will net a 5% increase in your revenues. The two preceding years, 25, 26 and 26, 27, those will be uniform 5% increases to those realigned rates. Next slide. Here's a small chart of some sample bill impacts over the next three year period, broken down by customer class. I'll just briefly review the single family, your largest customer class. And the average single family customer winter water use is 125 gallons per day. So this depicts the annual bills on the first line. of currently would be $807.85 for a year. That would actually decrease slightly under the new rate structure for 24.25 to 806.79, or savings of $1.06 on the property tax bill, which equals about nine cents per month. Thereafter a 5% increase for 25.26 and 26.27. And through the realignment of the cost of service rates, you'll see there is a different impact to each of the customer classes. Again, this is based on average water use and every customer uses water differently. So the impacts on the tax bills will differ from customer to customer. Next slide. We're also asked how do we compare to our neighbors? So we've plotted here, many of the city of Sausalito's neighbors where The current and the proposed city of Sausalito rates are depicted with the green bar on the bottom, which is the charge by. to treat water from the SMC SD and the yellow bars are the rates that we're discussing today. So overall based on the recent rate increases at SMC SD and what we're proposing here tonight, the average single family tax bill for both collection and treatment, would increase about $33 for the year. Again, that includes both collection and treatment, though we're here tonight just for the collection as SMCSD has already increased their rates. So you don't move relative to the other neighboring jurisdictions. And I can pause there. Next slide is for actions for tonight. I will pause if there's any questions from council that I can answer now before we move on. |
| 01:01:59.35 | Mayor Sobieski | Yes, but I was informed by our city attorney that I need to say some magic words, which is we are opening the public hearing on this matter. Go right ahead, Vice Mayor. |
| 01:02:08.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, can we go back to slide eight? year-end fund balance projections. Yes. With that downward. |
| 01:02:14.72 | Cheryl pop | Yes. |
| 01:02:18.65 | Jill Hoffman | I just want to clarify, we are adopting, if we pass the proposed We are adopting three years, even though you have five years in that chart. |
| 01:02:34.04 | Rick Simonson | That is correct. |
| 01:02:34.85 | Jill Hoffman | So you kept making reference to five years, but tonight we're only adopting three years. This is a five-year projection of what our Uh, fund balance will look like, but we're only adopting three years. |
| 01:02:51.12 | Rick Simonson | That is a great clarification. That's why we've highlighted those first three years. The full study was a five-year outlook, just to look into the future and how these next three years adopted rates would play out. |
| 01:02:56.84 | Jill Hoffman | Right. |
| 01:03:03.42 | Jill Hoffman | but the notice that went to ratepayers only gave them notice regarding the upcoming three years. |
| 01:03:09.16 | Rick Simonson | That is correct. |
| 01:03:10.12 | Jill Hoffman | And one of the reasons for that is that it is a city council priority to possibly consolidate with Sausalito-Marin City Sanitary District certainly in less than three years and so we need not Tie their hands. in terms of how they will manage the entirety of collection and treatment should that consolidation occur. |
| 01:03:34.29 | Rick Simonson | Accurate, yes. |
| 01:03:35.45 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. Okay. Those were my questions, Mayor. Thank you. |
| 01:03:38.20 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Other questions, please. Councilmember coming. |
| 01:03:43.06 | Ian Kelman | Sure, since we have the benefit of our Director Hess here, I'm wondering if you could help us with this Director Hess into context with some of the budget. information we're going to see in one of the items tonight. Anything you want to flag or we should know or direction you want to give? |
| 01:04:03.53 | Chad Hess | Good evening, Mayor, Council, General Pollack. In the fiscal year 24 budget, we are using their updated rates. So I am accounting for this increased rate in our fiscal year 25 budget. Thank you. So. |
| 01:04:16.88 | Chris Zapata | Yes. |
| 01:04:24.46 | Mayor Sobieski | Any other questions, please? |
| 01:04:27.68 | Ian Kelman | I'm sure. |
| 01:04:27.97 | Jill Hoffman | So. |
| 01:04:28.03 | Ian Kelman | I'm sure it'll come up. |
| 01:04:28.56 | Mayor Sobieski | Nice to meet you. |
| 01:04:28.56 | Jill Hoffman | Nice to meet you. |
| 01:04:28.91 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. |
| 01:04:28.95 | Mayor Sobieski | Go ahead, Councilor Merrill. |
| 01:04:31.53 | Jill Hoffman | I have a question that was relayed to me by a resident that I forwarded to our city manager, and I hope that I made it to you. It was a question for the consultant. The question was that the rates, as they appear, there's a single-family rate, and that rate doubles for duplexes. But then when you look at multifamily units, it's not a clear per you know, per unit cost. It's the same as the single family residence, even though the multifamily units may be the same size as the single family residence. And so the question was, why is that? And can that be adjusted so that, you know, that the percentage rate, I suppose, is the same for the duplexes for the other multifamily? |
| 01:05:20.09 | Rick Simonson | So if we go to slide nine, I'd like to just point out. So if you look in the 24-25 column, the cost of service, single family is 637 as a fixed charge. And it is less as you go down the list as the difference in water use and the fixed capacity that those customers need. And this is on a per dwelling unit basis. So each dwelling unit is charged that fixed charge. So it does decrease if you're in a duplex, your piece of the duplex, one resident within the duplex is 378, which is less than the single family rate. |
| 01:05:59.73 | Jill Hoffman | And so, I'm sorry, and so when you go down to the multifamily per dwelling unit, it's the same price per the dwelling unit? |
| 01:06:05.96 | Rick Simonson | crisis. For each dwelling unit, but less than a full single family or duplex because they typically use less water on average and need less capacity in the system. |
| 01:06:09.00 | Jill Hoffman | We're used to winning. |
| 01:06:21.20 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. |
| 01:06:22.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:06:22.06 | Rick Simonson | Does that help? |
| 01:06:23.11 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:06:23.16 | Rick Simonson | Thank you. |
| 01:06:23.21 | Jill Hoffman | I think so. |
| 01:06:23.86 | Rick Simonson | Okay. |
| 01:06:25.06 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:06:25.08 | Jill Hoffman | that please. |
| 01:06:25.62 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:06:26.24 | Jill Hoffman | The other part of the question was, can we make an adjustment? We've already published these rates to our ratepayers, so we're not able to adjust those rates tonight without re-noticing the rates to our ratepayers. Is that right? |
| 01:06:39.36 | Rick Simonson | This that's correct. These are the maximum rates. You cannot do anything higher on any one of the rates listed here. But these rates for cost of service are based on the analysis of water demand patterns by each customer class. So these, you can't put your thumb on the scale and say, well I'm gonna charge a little less to this customer class versus this one. So these are all cost based based on the demand patterns of each of the classes. |
| 01:07:04.04 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:07:05.39 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, if I can make sure some clarity on this one, if I could. Could you indulge me? Could you speak into your microphone, please? If you could indulge me, I have a question for the consultant. So 5% is the maximum, but they could go to 4 or 3 if they chose to. |
| 01:07:06.37 | Rick Simonson | Yes, city manager. |
| 01:07:19.33 | Rick Simonson | Thank you. These are the maximum you could do something less. Thank you. |
| 01:07:23.11 | Mayor Sobieski | I want to make sure that was clear. Thank you, city manager. Please, vice mayor. |
| 01:07:26.23 | Jill Hoffman | follow up on that. If you go back to slide eight, which is the prior slide, If we do less, we're going to be in the red sooner. We need these rates to maintain the, to not go into a negative fund balance in the fourth or fifth year, is that right? |
| 01:07:42.99 | Rick Simonson | to maintain the reserves at a reasonable level and to put monies towards the needed capital projects to repair and replace the 80-year-old pipes, this is the recommended increase. |
| 01:07:59.53 | Jill Hoffman | And when you initially came to us, you gave us the option of a more aggressive capital improvement program, which would have cost us $1.7 million per year, rather than the average annual cost these rates reflect, which is $787,000 per year. Is that right? |
| 01:08:16.82 | Rick Simonson | That is correct. |
| 01:08:17.52 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not sure. And so we purposely adopted a more conservative rate increase in order to be respectful of the impact of rates on our customers and still be respectful of the consent decree that continues to exist from the EPA. |
| 01:08:31.76 | Rick Simonson | That is correct. There's needed improvements and we looked at different scenarios for spreading that out over time and things looked much worse the first scenarios that we presented. |
| 01:08:44.33 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 01:08:46.80 | Rick Simonson | Okay. |
| 01:08:47.08 | Mayor Sobieski | We will now open public comment. |
| 01:08:48.47 | Ian Kelman | sorry go ahead so mike i'm trying again with director hess in the room um |
| 01:08:48.92 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Go ahead, Councilman. |
| 01:08:53.95 | Ian Kelman | So what I... Thank you. I'm on the committee, so some of this we've gone over, so forgive me. But to the vice mayor's point, what I want to make sure is that we're not in the red, right? I want to make sure that the community knows exactly what it is they were noticed of and what we are going to be potentially approving. But I also want to get a sense, you said it puts us enough money in the reserves that we can pay for key infrastructure projects. And I don't know, Director McGowan's also here. I'm trying to get my head around what some of those key infrastructure projects are going to cost, how much of this rate increase is actually gonna allow us to remedy or address some outstanding key infrastructure projects. Just something to piece it all together. So I'm not just looking at the comparison on the chart, but I'm thinking of it in the context of our overall budget and how we're actually gonna get the work done. whether it's Director McGowan and your capital program or what. So if somebody could kind of bring it down a level and just help us understand what exactly this enables us to do, I think that would be great. Or maybe Vivian, yeah, hi. |
| 01:09:56.98 | Kevin McGowan | It's probably best to bring Vivian up to address that specific question. |
| 01:09:59.19 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. |
| 01:09:59.22 | Vivian Housen | Okay. |
| 01:09:59.48 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. |
| 01:10:00.19 | Vivian Housen | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:10:01.03 | Ian Kelman | Thanks for having me. |
| 01:10:02.92 | Vivian Housen | Hi, Vivian Hausen, VW Hausen Associates. So your question is what does this program specifically allow us to do? |
| 01:10:09.48 | Ian Kelman | Within the context of the fact that we're going into a deficit budget and that we have a long list of capital improvement programs and we want to reduce our risk profile. |
| 01:10:21.92 | Vivian Housen | So we looked at the capital, the city completed inspection of its gravity sewers a couple of years ago. So we have data about the condition of the existing sewers. And we took that data and we looked at what needed to be repaired what are the critical repairs and identified critical repairs and the cost of those repairs came out to be between four and a half and $5 million In order to implement a program that would address those repairs we had to look at the risk. What's the risk of leaving them unfixed versus fixing them faster. This program that's proposed will fix them in about a 7 year time frame which is within industry standard of acceptable time frame for addressing these types of repairs. If we went with a lesser program it would extend the program out further and could increase risk to the city of potential failure because these defects will get worse over time. So we do need to take care of them in a certain amount of time. |
| 01:11:21.29 | Ian Kelman | Excellent. Thank you. Exactly what I was looking for. I knew I had seen it in our presentations for the subcommittee, but I couldn't exactly remember what it was. Thank you. |
| 01:11:28.54 | Jill Hoffman | Can I do one clarifying? Vivian, the survey we did was a TV survey. So we actually did closed circuit TV looks into the pipes to understand their condition. Yes, that's correct. It's a very thorough, time-consuming, expensive survey to really effectively reduce our risk. |
| 01:11:40.76 | Vivian Housen | Yes, that's correct, yes. |
| 01:11:49.33 | Vivian Housen | Yes, yes. So we looked inside just about every pipe with a camera and have documented the defect. |
| 01:11:49.74 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, so we looked inside it. |
| 01:11:54.56 | Ian Kelman | That's right, and then this money is going into the sewer fund that can only be used for maintenance of sewer. So it's not general fund money, it can't be used for any other infrastructure projects. It must be used for this increasing level of service for this particular item. Thank you. |
| 01:12:07.96 | Vivian Housen | Yes, that's correct. |
| 01:12:11.10 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay. |
| 01:12:12.03 | Kevin McGowan | public comment oh director McGowan I guess one other item before you open up to public comment we have received one written protest on this this rate increase just for the record you should know that thank you |
| 01:12:25.38 | Jill Hoffman | Well, can we just make it clear that in order to prevent us from taking action on this tonight, we would have had to receive... protests from 50% of our affected residents. Is that right? |
| 01:12:37.93 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:12:37.95 | Mayor Sobieski | That's correct. |
| 01:12:38.39 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:12:38.52 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:12:40.70 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:12:40.78 | Mayor Sobieski | We will now open public comment. City clerk. Thank you. |
| 01:12:45.05 | Unknown | All right. |
| 01:12:45.14 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:12:45.31 | Walfred Solorzano | Anybody would like to speak on this item? You can go up to the guys. |
| 01:12:48.48 | Mayor Sobieski | Please just come up if you're in the audience, if you don't have your slip, If you have a slip, hand it to the city clerk. |
| 01:12:56.41 | Amy Svenberg | Thank you. |
| 01:12:57.51 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:12:57.52 | Amy Svenberg | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:13:01.46 | Amy Svenberg | Mayor, council, nice to see you this evening, and thank you for opening the window. So I represent Poetry and Copita, and we support the infrastructure and the betterment of the infrastructure of the town. It's important to know that the businesses do carry a large portion of this, so I wanted to give you some data. So Copita in 2023 paid $10,000 in water bills. So that's just money that we pay to MMWD. But the sewer, well actually I'm so sorry, it was $7,900. But our sewer tax is $10,000. And our sanitation tax is $19,000. So businesses really do support a huge number of this tax revenue, which is greatly needed. And so I just want to express that and say thank you for taking care of our town. But do vet these numbers. When we do capital projects, we get multiple bids, and we try to get the best deal around around and we contribute so much to this that we really ask that you take that into consideration, so thank you. |
| 01:14:13.04 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Sorry, on Zoom we have Georgette O. |
| 01:14:25.38 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Georgette, if you can unmute yourself. |
| 01:14:32.60 | Georgette Oserman | Sorry, I was muted. My name is Georgette Oserman. I live at 370 Sausalito Boulevard. I have a single family home. Right now, my bills are For this, $811.98. For sanitation, $1,940. It's a lot of money. And here's my question to you. I was told several years ago that Should anybody in this town do any project over a certain dollar amount? I think it was at the time 40 or 50,000. They were subject to a sewer inspection and any repairs had to be done by the homeowner. which means that a lot of the homes that are up in the hill with these old pipes are pairing them themselves. So my question is, where is all this money going? I mean, this is a lot of money to pay for sanitation and for sewers. Thank you. |
| 01:15:36.49 | Walfred Solorzano | No further public comment. All right, we will close public comment. Actually, we have Babette McCool. Sorry. |
| 01:15:38.09 | Mayor Sobieski | you Come back. |
| 01:15:46.90 | Babette McDougall | Can you hear me now? |
| 01:15:48.89 | Mayor Sobieski | Yes, we can go ahead, Ms. McDougall. |
| 01:15:50.80 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. So thank you for allowing me to speak. I live at the corner of Girard and Litho, and I have to echo what the previous speaker just said. I know that our sewer lateral is probably well over 100 years old by our reckoning, and it's finally starting to break down. So of course it needs to be repaired, replaced, and so on. And we already have been informed that each and every resident can expect to reach into their individual pocketbooks to underwrite these costs. Now I think realistically speaking, we all know that we all have to bear some personal responsibility, but I would just like to applaud and echo the previous speakers comments, because this is a lot of money on top of what we are already reaching into our pockets to pay. Thank you. |
| 01:16:41.20 | Mayor Sobieski | We will now close public comment. And is there a motion to be made? |
| 01:16:44.69 | Jill Hoffman | May I ask a question? Please. In response to public comment, City Manager, do we have a program for residents to be able to finance their sewer lateral repairs so that they don't have to bear the brunt of that expense all at one time? |
| 01:16:45.91 | Mayor Sobieski | Please. |
| 01:17:03.85 | Kevin McGowan | Good evening again, Kevin McGowan, Public Works Director. Yes, we do. There is a limit to that as well. In other words, those who are repairing their laterals can apply for a $1,000 grant from the city itself in order to help them repair that system. |
| 01:17:19.20 | Jill Hoffman | And further question for you, Director McGowan. When we bid these projects out, we are, as a general law city right now, are we not required to take the lowest bid that comes in when we competitively bid these repair projects for construction? |
| 01:17:35.93 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, that's correct. The most responsible bidder, you bet. |
| 01:17:40.11 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and my final question might be for the consultant, but I thought I heard you say that the manner in which rates are calculated is a combination of fixed and volumetric based rates. And the volumetric based rates are based on the volume of water used by a residence or a And that volume of water used is measured in the fall when it's in the rainy season, and so there's less water likely being used for irrigation or other things. services to make that assessment more fair. But one way that a business or a residence can cut down on their potential rates is by reducing their overall use of water. Do I have that right? |
| 01:18:32.22 | Rick Simonson | That is correct. |
| 01:18:33.02 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:18:33.07 | Rick Simonson | Thank you. |
| 01:18:33.73 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Those were my questions in response to public comment. |
| 01:18:37.44 | Mayor Sobieski | Is there emotion? |
| 01:18:42.82 | Ian Kelman | Where's the motion? |
| 01:18:48.74 | Mayor Sobieski | whoever looks it up first. |
| 01:18:49.55 | Ian Kelman | for. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry, I'm looking for the ordinance title. |
| 01:18:58.04 | Ian Kelman | Vice President, do you want to do it? |
| 01:18:59.65 | Mayor Sobieski | We are looking at the language of the correct motion. |
| 01:19:03.17 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:19:03.19 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, but it's, here we go. |
| 01:19:11.29 | Jill Hoffman | the actual motion isn't in the staff report. Thank you. |
| 01:19:17.06 | Mayor Sobieski | City Attorney, do you have a form of the motion that you could put into the record? |
| 01:19:22.60 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, I would suggest that you vote to find that no majority protest exists and introduce and waive the first reading of Ordinance No. 03-2024, an ordinance of the City Council of Sausalito, setting fees for sewer services for fiscal year 2024-25 through fiscal year 26-27. |
| 01:19:44.55 | Jill Hoffman | I will adopt that motion with the correction that the ordinance we have in our packet is actually entitled Ordinance Number 2024-03. |
| 01:19:56.40 | Mayor Sobieski | Emotions on the table. Is there a second? |
| 01:19:58.13 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 01:19:58.15 | Ian Kelman | a second. |
| 01:19:59.82 | Mayor Sobieski | Let's call the question. Can you please call the roll city clerk? Thank you. |
| 01:20:02.93 | Walfred Solorzano | down somewhere blasting. |
| 01:20:04.61 | Ian Kelman | Yes. |
| 01:20:04.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:20:05.41 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Hoffman? Yes. Councilmember Kuhlman? |
| 01:20:07.23 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 01:20:09.19 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:20:09.20 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 01:20:09.69 | Walfred Solorzano | America. |
| 01:20:10.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:20:10.08 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:20:10.18 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:20:10.28 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:20:10.30 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yes. |
| 01:20:11.38 | Mayor Sobieski | And Mayor Sobieski. Yes, motion carries unanimously. We'll now move on to item 5A, adopt a resolution of intent to establish the proposed downtown Sausalito property business improvement district. Pursuant to property and business improvement district law of 1994. Thank you, Vivi. |
| 01:20:21.69 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:20:21.71 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:20:28.05 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Vivian. |
| 01:20:28.88 | Mayor Sobieski | and initiate balloting. |
| 01:20:31.77 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you very much, Mayor. |
| 01:20:32.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, HFNH. |
| 01:20:35.56 | Brandon Phipps | And good evening to you, Vice Mayor, Council members, members of the public and staff. Nice to see you all again and pleased to be here to discuss item 5A regarding the adoption of a resolution of intent to establish the proposed downtown Sausalito Business Improvement District and initiate the mail-in balloting process. I first, oh, and yes, I believe I have a presentation. Thank you, Mr. City Clerk. Next slide, please. Great. First, I'd like to go through the history on this project, which extends back to February of last year, almost a year and a half ago, when the City Council authorized the release of an RFP for consulting services associated with the potential formation of a Sausalito Property Business Improvement District, or PBID. As you can see here, we've come a long way since then, through the interviewing and selection of a firm, New City America Incorporated, retaining the selected consultant for an initial district investigation, an expansion of their services to include formation-relating services, and the creation of a proposed district boundary and budget, which was endorsed by City Council in December of last year. we've come even farther since then, drafting and endorsing a management district plan associated with the proposed district and initiating and completing a petition process to more formally assess the support for the P bid. And thank you, council for your continued support throughout this process. That brings us to the item before city council this evening, the consideration of adopting of a resolution of intent to establish the proposed P bid, which will initiate the balloting process for the district. And this is really the, Penultimate step to district formation next slide please. As touched on in the previous slide, on March 5 of this year, council endorsed the Draft Management District Plan, or MDP, associated with the proposed PBID and authorized the city manager to initiate the petition process. So since that time, we have collaborated with our consultants, New City America, Inc. We have distributed a petition to property owners within the proposed PBID boundaries, and we have received the results of that that petition which are summarized here. So I'll first note that the information you see here is only reflective of responses received from non-city property owners. In other words, city-owned parcels are excluded from this data. Of the 27 total responses received from owners within the district, 26 were supportive and only one was in opposition. This level of support based on assessed property value equates to 61% of supportive responses, 1% of opposing response, and 37% of no response. Next slide, please. This is good news. The results of the petition are positive. They indicate that the city has received more than sufficient levels of support to adopt a resolution of intent to form the PBID. Next slide, please. Though if council chooses to adopt the aforementioned resolution of intent, next steps for the city are shown here, which will start with the initiation of the mail-in balloting process leading up to a public hearing preliminarily scheduled for July 30th of this year, where ballots will be opened and counted by city clerk. After the tallying is complete, if there is no majority protest, the council may adopt a resolution of formation which legalizes and formalizes the formation of the district. And if and when this step occurs, the first meeting of the interim board of directors will be held where certain elements of the district will be discussed and voted on, including the election of interim officials or officers, the selection of a name for the district, the approval of bylaws, as well as some incorporation-related steps, such as the filing of incorporation papers with the California Secretary of State, and the submittal of approved bylaws to the IRS. And finally, the Interim Board will work to enter into a contract with the City of Sausalito to administer the day-to-day activities of the district. Next slide, please. Thank you. Now of course if City Council chooses to form the district following a successful ballot measure, there will be fiscal impacts associated with that decision. So with that in mind, in collaboration with the Director of Finance, thank you Mr. Hess, CDD staff have prepared a five-year revenue projection associated with the PBIDs formation and the first five years of its operations and that's attached to this agenda item. The results of the revenue projections indicate that although the city will incur costs equal to assessments of approximately 650,000 over the first five years of the district, the increases in city revenues as a result of district related activities in transient occupancy tax, sales tax, as well as parking fees will result in a net increase in city revenue by approximately 156,000. And just to clarify, that is net of the assessment amount of 650,000. Moreover, if the city chooses to reduce its spending on activities that may be taken on by the district, such as marketing. website management and maintenance, as well as certain lighting programs, Net gains to the city could exceed 624,000 in total over the first five years of the district, representing a significant positive financial impact to the city. Finally, If we add in the additional assessment revenues that will be provided by the district's property owners equal to what the city will be assessed. 650,000 ish. We can see that increases in the city's revenues and non city monies invested that overall support the vitality of our downtown will increase to approximately $1.3 million. So as indicated by and in this financial projection, the formation of the Downtown Sausalito Business Improvement District will result in a positive financial return to the city. Next slide, please. So with all that said, staff's recommendation this evening is that council move forward with the adoption of the resolution of intent, which will initiate the balloting process for the downtown Sausalito PBED. Next slide, please. Thank you. I am available to answer any questions before I give the floor to Mr. Thornburg and Ms. Green. |
| 01:26:59.44 | Ian Kelman | Mayor? Great. Yeah. Thank you very much, Director Phipps. Quick question on the survey results, and I also see, Mayor, that Councilman Blasthien has her head up. So the survey results, 26 yays, 1 no, but 20 no replies. That seems to be a significant lack of interest in this program. What attempts were made to engage these 20 and how can we be sure that their interests will be represented? Are they participating? What's the breakdown? I mean, that's of concern, I would think. |
| 01:27:01.10 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:27:01.14 | Unknown | Thank you. . |
| 01:27:01.36 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. |
| 01:27:09.80 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:27:37.96 | Brandon Phipps | Yeah. So thank you for the question, council member. I will say a no response does not necessarily indicate a lack of interest in the district, first and foremost. But I will also agree with you that there were some challenges associated with reaching out to certain property owners in the district. I'd say for two reasons. Reason number one, we're on a reduced timeline. We're trying to meet the timeline needed for us to put this item on the November ballot which will allow us to begin district operations January 1, 2025. So that's resulted in a reduced petition process timeline which I think has impacted our ability to get responses. Some people are hard to reach. And we don't have their contact information. . I think I'll leave it at that. What I will say, and I think Cass and other members of the steering committee who assisted in getting these results, they can kind of speak to some of the challenges that they experienced in going through this process. But I believe that, again, as mentioned, we've received more than sufficient responses and support in order to move to the next step. |
| 01:28:45.16 | Ian Kelman | Okay, and can you pull up your financial projection slide so we can parse that carefully? |
| 01:28:51.50 | Brandon Phipps | certainly And I just request we repost it. |
| 01:28:58.32 | Jill Hoffman | Are these, sorry, excuse me, are these slides attached to the agenda? |
| 01:29:01.90 | Ian Kelman | I don't see them. No. |
| 01:29:03.97 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, I would again reiterate my request that whenever staff provides a slideshow, that they'd be attached to the agenda within enough time for the council members to look at them before. Because there's information contained, as I said before, there's information contained in the slides that's part of our assessment, and sometimes it's interesting information that we need time to look at. |
| 01:29:08.58 | Unknown | you know, |
| 01:29:26.53 | Ian Kelman | The financial projections slide, please. |
| 01:29:26.82 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:29:28.61 | Brandon Phipps | And I'll just I'll just note that so I appreciate the comment councilmember. I'll just note that more detail Is provided in the attachments associated with the agenda item then is contained in this PowerPoint |
| 01:29:41.15 | Jill Hoffman | I also just want to add on that point, Councilmember Hoffman, because that this public comments associated with this item are appearing in the wrong place on the agenda and granicus at this time. So if you look at our business items versus our public hearing, all the public comments for this for this item business are appearing under public hearings. So there so those letters are there just so that members of the public and council can see those because I know we received a lot of correspondence and while we're on the topic of that. |
| 01:30:08.10 | Ian Kelman | Okay. So I'm going to, if okay, do you want to run through this? And Director Hess knows some of the questions that we talked earlier today. Okay, I just want to make sure I understand this. The five year assessment estimate of 65715 is as to all contributors, right? |
| 01:30:10.60 | Mayor Sobieski | Proceed, Kelman. |
| 01:30:26.56 | Brandon Phipps | No, that is Citi's contribution only. |
| 01:30:29.07 | Ian Kelman | Okay. The increases in city revenue, you believe, are going to come at a rate of 1%. Is that the smart goal that you are attributing to TOT, sales tax, parking fees? |
| 01:30:43.70 | Brandon Phipps | That is the SMART goal, excellent acronym. I will say that this revenue projection was meant to be practical, both practical and conservative. And what I am attempting to communicate with this revenue projection is that even in a conservative scenario where we're only Increasing to T by 5% over five years where we're only increasing sales tax within the district by 5% over five years and we're only increasing our parking revenues by 5% over five years still results in positive financial return to the city. |
| 01:31:19.02 | Ian Kelman | Okay, and so based on your background, you're a community and economic development director, what do you think is the biggest opportunity here for us to actually achieve 1% gains? |
| 01:31:33.47 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:31:35.53 | Brandon Phipps | I think the formation of this district would be a great first step. |
| 01:31:39.15 | Ian Kelman | Okay, so let's just take it down to the level that my question is about, which is within the district, TOT, sales tax, parking fees, how, which of those do you think holds the biggest opportunity to achieve that 1% gain? |
| 01:31:53.70 | Brandon Phipps | Well, just based on sheer numbers. |
| 01:31:59.78 | Brandon Phipps | 1% of increase in parking revenues actually is greater than a 1% increase in TOT by about 5,000. Interestingly enough, increases, therefore, in parking, at least by the numbers, represents the largest opportunity. So that's one thing for consideration. But I would also say, and I would kind of defer to some of the business experts who have been a part of the steering committee and have helped us through this process because they're the ones who are in the trenches every day and they're the ones who are joining hands with the city to help us in increasing vitality in this downtown district and rooting additional economic activity there. But I would also say there's great opportunity for TOT generation and growth. |
| 01:32:44.23 | Ian Kelman | On the parking side, does your 1% projection take into account the loss of parking from the ferry project? |
| 01:32:53.83 | Brandon Phipps | It does not. It is all else equal. So this model does not take into account any rate increases that could occur. |
| 01:33:02.16 | Unknown | you |
| 01:33:02.40 | Brandon Phipps | So that could actually result in greater increases if we were to account for that. And it also doesn't account for any loss of parking. |
| 01:33:09.91 | Ian Kelman | Interesting Okay. And do you have any suggestions as to how a regular strategic plan could incorporate that and how we might monitor the successful achievement of these goals? |
| 01:33:28.64 | Brandon Phipps | I think the board will be, and the nonprofit formed as a result of the district formation, will be the mechanism and the body that will, you know, essentially track these things. And I'm happy to discuss kind of the governance of the bid as appropriate. But I mentioned an agreement, or I think I refer to it as a contract in my presentation, that the nonprofit will enter into with the city. Let me just refer to a certain element of my notes so that I can provide an appropriate response. So yeah, the contract, as mentioned, will actually be in the form of a disbursement agreement, which will essentially have the city approving its allocation of received assessment revenues to the district. So those funds can be used as stipulated in the management district plan. And other elements of the agreement could include, or actually are required to include, Brown Act and open meeting requirements, as well as a commitment from the district to present to the city on an annual basis, detailing previous year performance, as well as expected performance and activities over the following year. And at least from my perspective, if I'm the interim board, I want to back into some smart metrics that we can provide city council on an annual basis. |
| 01:34:49.88 | Ian Kelman | Yeah, if I'm a council member, I want that. So let me ask one more question. Yes, Scott knows this. So just to clarify as well, so the five-year assessment estimate 650K and change, you're saying that we could see $624,000 in city revenue increase over the same time period. we almost make all our money back but not quite |
| 01:34:56.81 | Amy Svenberg | . |
| 01:35:20.98 | Brandon Phipps | That's actually net of the assessment dollars. So, and I would refer to it more as an economic gain because it's not purely an increase in revenue. It's also a reduction in city spending as a result of being able to move some of our current expenditures, marketing, website management, maintenance, lighting programs from the general fund into this 501c3 that will ultimately, you know, manage the assessment revenues. |
| 01:35:45.94 | Ian Kelman | Okay, I'm just trying to do the accounting in my head right, because we've already decided that, for example, the CDA contract was not going to be reinvigorated. So that's not included in your assessment of the potential upside, are you? |
| 01:35:56.47 | Brandon Phipps | So at the time of the drafting of this financial projection, the CDA marketing contract was still in full force. projection as it stands does account for those revenues. |
| 01:36:08.82 | Ian Kelman | I see, I see, okay. And then we've also had some conversation about doing something with destination, visit Sausalito, merging or somehow facilitating |
| 01:36:17.61 | Brandon Phipps | Yep, yep, so that represents about 15,000 of this 90. |
| 01:36:23.40 | Ian Kelman | Okay, okay, I think I have more questions. Thank you very much. |
| 01:36:26.91 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Councilmember Blavstein. |
| 01:36:30.55 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you very much. And thank you, Brandon, to your department and to everyone who's been involved in the outreach on the PBID and also to all of the members of the public that we've already heard from on this issue. This is not the first time we're hearing about it. So some of these questions might be duplicated. And for that, I'm sorry if you've already been tuning into the PBID conversations. But a couple of kind of general setting questions. Brandon, I know you worked closely with our consultant on this. Can you maybe just give an overview the evidence you saw for other business improvement districts that there could be an up to 1% or more revenue generation on these types of programs. |
| 01:37:06.56 | Brandon Phipps | Oh, certainly. I mean, I don't have any case studies that I can reference, you know, in the moment at current, but what I will say is, Business improvement districts are a good economic development tool, period. And they have demonstrated themselves to be strong, useful, agile tools in downtown areas that have a want, a need to root additional economic activity there. And part of the reason why they're so successful is because we put some of the fate of the district in the hands of the people who have most to gain and lose, the property owners and the business owners in the district. So speaking from a very high level, it has been proven, I'd say time and time again, that this tool can be very valuable for downtowns looking to increase their vitality, financial success, and ultimately, you know, levels of rooted economic activity. And again, I'd say, The revenue projections that I've provided are conservative. Some business improvement districts, like certain ones in San Diego, Little Italy, have been wildly successful and have, I think, blown these 1% metrics out of the water. So I would just say that it's very possible that the district, in its success, will exceed what is shown on these revenue projections. |
| 01:38:31.78 | Jill Hoffman | And also just to clarify sort of the role of the business improvement district. This is the businesses saying they'd like to tax themselves to be able to further contribute to the work that the city is doing essentially. |
| 01:38:43.83 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you for the question. And I will agree with you with the slight clarification that it's primarily property owners who are pushing this forward. However, you know, it's important to note that business owners often act as and in partnership or act as proxies for and in partnership with property owners in the district. So in many cases, the business owners and the property owners are working hand in hand, and it is up to the property owner to decide to what extent they want to pass on these assessments to these partner businesses. |
| 01:39:17.68 | Jill Hoffman | the chamber of commerce was very involved in your discussions around the pbib and as well are a number of businesses |
| 01:39:23.50 | Brandon Phipps | Absolutely, and I'd just like to thank the chamber for all of their support and participation in this process up till now. |
| 01:39:30.07 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and then I wanted to get into the revenue assessment because I think it's important to have this conversation so that we are being fiscally responsible about how we are choosing to spend our money for potential future revenue. So just to put this into context, and maybe these are questions for Tad, but if you look at the four areas that the PBIT's been broken into, we have demand creation, which includes marketing, you know, outreach, etc. infrastructure improvements, administration management and contingency reserve. Chad, could you maybe just give us an idea of how much we're spending now on demand creation, how much roughly we're spending on infrastructure improvements for the Pbid and how much roughly we're spending potentially on administrative and management, just to give a window into what we might be able to see resolved as a result of these projections. |
| 01:40:15.65 | Chad Hess | Thank you, Mayor, Council Members. My name's Chad Hess, Finance Director. Our current spend for this type of demand creation is right around $90,000. So in the past, it's been $75,000 for the CDA contract and about $15,000 for Destination Sausalito. Those are our two primary marketing efforts of our community. |
| 01:40:38.21 | Jill Hoffman | What about infrastructure improvements? How much did we spend on lighting, for example? |
| 01:40:42.01 | Chad Hess | Yeah. So two years ago, the members of the community raised about 30,000, 35,000 for lights being installed. Last year, the maintenance the city contributed was about 2,500 to replace several strings of lights on those trees that they they decorated. |
| 01:40:42.48 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:40:58.86 | Chris Zapata | Chat the city council put $10,000 into that lighting program as well |
| 01:41:03.66 | Chad Hess | Thank you. I was not aware of that. |
| 01:41:07.10 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, great. That's helpful for putting it into context, the potential funds that might be saved. And then just so we're clear, because I understand that the marketing contract was not considered in our outgoing or our proposed budget that we're going to hear this evening. I recall that in our prior conversations, the EDAC and those involved in these discussions, and perhaps this is a question for Scott, were willing to not push forward and advocate for those types of contracts because they were working so aggressively on the P-BID and were under the... in these discussions, and perhaps this is a question for Scott, were willing to to not push forward and advocate for those types of contracts because they were working so aggressively on the PBID and were under the impression based on our prior discussions as a council that the PBID would likely be moving forward. Scott, can you maybe weigh in on that? I don't know if or Brandon. |
| 01:41:47.14 | Scott Thornburg | Thank you for that. Yeah, our plan was, as you'll recall, we submitted no budget requests this year. We believe that many of the activities that EDAC has been pursuing, in partnership with staff and community members could be taken over by the bid going forward. That includes marketing, that includes some events, that includes lighting programs that we were, members of our committee were instrumental in making those things happen. So yes, our plan was to support the bid and encourage those activities to follow there. Thank you. |
| 01:42:19.31 | Jill Hoffman | Scott, how much did EDEC previously request and how much was EDEC previously allotted over the past two years on these types, just generally as a committee, since I understand you haven't asked for any funding this year? |
| 01:42:30.09 | Scott Thornburg | Yeah, we've never had a, as far as I know, we've never had a budget that's set aside for EDAC specifically, but we, in partnership with staff, will execute specific events, and then through staff, we fund those. So if that's an event like Holiday by the Bay or Wednesday Night Live, where we were specifically looking to increase off-season and midweek support for businesses, then it's a few thousand dollars to bring in a band or to to bring in tenting, things like that. So low expenses generally. The only other one would be the marketing budget, which is, you know, the city moved forward with and then asked EDAC to help to manage. Thank you. |
| 01:43:16.31 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, great. I thought, I think I remember that there was a budget item specifically for EDAC upon its formation. I'm not sure what the exact amount was. Chad, do you make me know? |
| 01:43:26.34 | Chad Hess | I'm not familiar with that. No. |
| 01:43:27.95 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I'm sorry. All right. But with the marketing budget, it's upwards of 100,000 plus, probably, if we include all of the events that have been mentioned. |
| 01:43:34.59 | Chris Zapata | I can respond to that if I like. Yeah, please. Mayor and Council. Yeah, post-COVID, the City Council had an allotment to the businesses which the EDAC folks manage, and it was $227,000 is my recollection. |
| 01:43:37.20 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, please. |
| 01:43:49.37 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, great. Yeah, that's what I wouldn't. I think that's the number that I was looking for in the context of this conversation. Thanks for that. Okay, and then my last question is, What if the improvement district doesn't work? What if. There is not a potential expectation of revenue resolved. What if we don't get to 1%? What are our options? And perhaps that's a question for Director Phipps, and maybe you can talk us through that. |
| 01:44:11.36 | Brandon Phipps | Sure. Yeah, I believe, well, first and foremost, many of these projections look to five years ahead as five years is the time at which we can, the city and the nonprofit can consider dissolving the district. If it's not working, you can vote to dissolve it. I also believe that the city has an ability through an alternative means to potentially dissolve the district through a vote before the five year. Thank you. However, I believe that that's a little bit more of a more challenging than than the review at the five year timeline. |
| 01:44:55.10 | Mayor Sobieski | And sorry. Dr. Bostin, you're muted. Can you unmute yourself? You're speaking. |
| 01:44:55.49 | Brandon Phipps | And sorry. |
| 01:44:58.94 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks. Sorry. Thank you. But essentially, if there were a situation where the city needed to make a decision in a budget emergency, for example, that would be a feasible under the pay bid. |
| 01:45:12.28 | Brandon Phipps | Yes. |
| 01:45:13.71 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you, Director Phipps. I really appreciate your effort and your presentation. |
| 01:45:17.07 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you, council member. |
| 01:45:18.39 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. are the, There is more presentation, right? |
| 01:45:22.27 | Brandon Phipps | Yes, we have Mr. Thornburg and Ms. Green here, but I am available to answer questions as needed before they speak. |
| 01:45:28.48 | Mayor Sobieski | Yeah, so did you want to ask Director Phipps some questions? Okay. Please go ahead. |
| 01:45:34.15 | Jill Hoffman | And I'm going to follow up on the CDA contract and the use of that for the $154,000 156, 333 revenue that's listed on your attachment four as the PBID and it's listed somewhere on your slides. I just don't know which slide it's on. And so that number is based in large part On the CDA contract, right? That's $75,000 or that 156? Correct. And we all acknowledge and agree that that contract was not renewed by the city, correct? |
| 01:46:04.17 | Brandon Phipps | Correct. |
| 01:46:10.39 | Brandon Phipps | I'm not sure if we all do, but I do. |
| 01:46:12.23 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. Anybody not? I mean, that contract is no longer, that contract was not renewed by the city. Well, we renewed it for six months through March. Yeah, but we didn't renew it after that. Correct. |
| 01:46:17.99 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:46:18.04 | Brandon Phipps | So. |
| 01:46:18.38 | Unknown | you |
| 01:46:23.17 | Jill Hoffman | So that's not, anyway, that contract is no longer in play. Whatever happens later happens. So, and also with regard to, again, and this is a question that Councilmember Kelman asked, the $15,000 for the destination Sausalito, we've talked about that being a redundant website and that that should go away as well, correct? Correct. |
| 01:46:44.84 | Brandon Phipps | I do recall discussions of that nature. |
| 01:46:47.38 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and I have a follow-up actually for Mr. Thornburg. So and my follow up is I'm surprised that now in response to council, I'm confused. with Council Member Blaustein, that you're saying that you didn't ask for any budget, for this year, but but you and I talked, you sent me an email and you want to discuss the EDAC budget for 2024. You you agree, right? |
| 01:47:15.97 | Scott Thornburg | I sent a letter a few weeks ago where I specifically said that we were not requesting any budget. This was after you and I had a conversation. And yes, in our conversation, I recommended that the city consider a few expenses. This was also before we knew about our insurance liability. Once we learned about the insurance liability and the city's situation financially, we recommended that we not make any expenditures on the EDAC front. So our recommendation is that we were not putting forward any recommended budget requests for staff. |
| 01:47:50.26 | Jill Hoffman | So part of that was that you sent me an attachment to prepare for our meeting that said proposed EDAC budget fiscal year 24-25, correct? |
| 01:48:01.21 | Scott Thornburg | Yes. |
| 01:48:02.97 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and part of that was there were first line is crossed out, but there's lines three, four, three, line three was product brand project and that was $7,500. Line four CDA marketing $75,000. Line five is place making and signage updates for $5,000. Number seven holiday by the bay for 5,000 and nine is wifi improvements parking. And that was for 5,000. Correct? |
| 01:48:39.69 | Scott Thornburg | We put forward several recommendations of ways that we believed that the city could invest and generate a revenue return. And as a part of that discussion, I was recommending proposed budget items for consideration. |
| 01:48:54.98 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, and so... Thank you. That's why I was confused by the question by Councilmember Blasting. So you did actually propose a budget and we did discuss it and, you know, based on feedback from maybe from me and maybe whoever else you talked to, the decision was not to go forward with your request. Is that, have I got that? |
| 01:49:15.07 | Scott Thornburg | I mean, Councilmember, with all due respect, I didn't really get any feedback from you. Oh, you had a lot. |
| 01:49:20.59 | Jill Hoffman | Oh, you had a lot. |
| 01:49:22.43 | Scott Thornburg | In our conversation, you did not provide any feedback about the suggestions that I was putting forward. I heard from other council members that said, given the state of city finances, we should not put forward. And I'm going to be honest, as a volunteer, as the new chair of EDAC for only a few months, it would have been really helpful to have that council in our discussion, |
| 01:49:44.57 | Jill Hoffman | Well, I think, okay, I'm shocked that you would say that I wouldn't, I didn't provide any feedback. I think my feedback was I'm not clear that EDAC should expect to have had a city Funded budget. and that we needed to look at it in the context of our overall budget, which as I understood it at the time was going to be a deficit budget. So. |
| 01:50:07.99 | Scott Thornburg | I don't recall us having that direct conversation. I do recall you expressing concern about the state of the city's finances And there was no, at the time, recommendation that EDAC should not put forward any budget recommendations or proposals for staff to consider as part of its budget. |
| 01:50:32.94 | Mayor Sobieski | Can we move on to the rest of the presentation? |
| 01:50:33.44 | Jill Hoffman | I don't think Yeah, I'm just looking through my notes and see if I have anything pertinent to this line of question. I don't think I have anything Thank you. |
| 01:50:42.65 | Mayor Sobieski | at this point. Let's move on to the rest of the presentation. Director Phipps, please. |
| 01:50:50.16 | Brandon Phipps | The next part of the presentation is a few words for Mr. Thornburg and Miss Green. |
| 01:50:57.40 | Unknown | Thanks, man. Welcome back. |
| 01:51:02.35 | Scott Thornburg | Thank you. Thank you, Council, for your attention to this matter this evening. I'm really excited about this. Councilmember McCallmon mentioned earlier, given the business response, what does this tell us? Well, in my two and a half years volunteering with the city officially, I've worked with a lot of businesses, and I've always been very pleased to see that our business community really cares about Sausalito and I think this is a great example of that we've seen a really profound turnout from the business community with established business leaders that care about Sausalito that are committed to the long-term health and vitality of our community and want to do more and I really appreciate that as a resident and taxpayer here in town. As Council Member Hoffman said to me earlier today in a conversation about our budget, we do have some financial concerns and Sausalito needs a dramatic increase in revenue. I believe that the P bid is just that. It's a first of its kind program for Sausalito. It's a test. It's a creative solution to a real challenge. And in fact, improvement districts were mentioned 15 times in the general plan that was approved unanimously by this council. And I think that's a recommendation that we should continue to care for. Tonight EDAC Vice Chair Cass Green will be speaking to the business support and next steps for this initiative. But before she does that, I just want to say thank you to Cass and our other volunteers that have collectively spent hundreds of hours researching and sourcing feedback from the business community to prepare this tonight. On behalf of EDAC, they are volunteers, and we really appreciate their time. So thank you for your attention tonight, and I'll welcome Cass to the mic. |
| 01:52:56.66 | Cass Green | Thank you. Thank you, Scott. And I want to reiterate what Scott just said. |
| 01:53:01.45 | Scott Thornburg | Thank you. |
| 01:53:01.47 | Mayor Sobieski | Could you please move your microphone down? |
| 01:53:02.73 | Cass Green | Sorry. Thank you, Scott. I want to reiterate what Scott just said and my computer just went dead on me. |
| 01:53:03.38 | Scott Thornburg | Thank you. |
| 01:53:11.27 | Cass Green | I'll just go from the screen. There we go. It's coming back. All right. So, and I want to thank all the volunteers because everybody has been just incredible. So, next slide please. |
| 01:53:12.10 | Unknown | I'll just go from the screen. |
| 01:53:25.28 | Cass Green | So I want to make four different points tonight from what our work has brought together. is that we've all worked together, including you guys, and I thank you for all the help that you've, and the support that the council has provided. to create the PBID. The downtown, what we found out from the survey is that downtown businesses and landlords support the creation of a P bid. And as we'll hear tonight, and you've heard in the past, so do many of the residents. Um, The establishment of a P bid is a good financial step for Sausalito and the P bid is one of the rare opportunities that Sausalito has to actually increase city revenues. Next slide. So why did we pursue the P bid? Why did EDAC pursue it? One was you told us to. The second is that it's part of the general plan. As Scott was saying, it's mentioned several times, so it's part of the direction of the general plan. Then in 23, you guys told EDAC this is your top priority. And over the last year and a half, and through six city council meetings, including tonight, The council has consistently supported each step forward towards the creation of a P bid, including hiring the consultant, the percentage split between private and city landowners, the management plan and the benefit category, percentages, the engineers report and the inclusion of two city staff on the eventual P bid board. Next slide. So to number two, the downtown landowners and And the businesses support the P-Bid. We, 49 petitions went out in April in late April and we are as Brandon was saying we are in a very tight timeframe right now. 61% of the private landowners, 61% of their assessed value, came in in support of the P bid. So that is 11 percent more than we needed. And the support is great. You're right, we couldn't find some people. The ballots were sent to their legal addresses. We followed up with phone calls. There's some people that have just disappeared into thin air. But I want to point out that of the responding landlords, 98% of them support the PBID. So we have strong business support. And as you have heard in the past and will hear tonight, we also have strong support from residents. Next slide. So this is a representation of just some of the companies and businesses. Many of the businesses, yes, it is a landlord initiative, but many of the businesses, including Michael Lappert, went to all of his seven landlords and told him, pass the P bid assessment on to me. And so they voted for it. And so we even did that in above tide rents one of the apartments in the building next to us. We called up our landlord and said we'll pay for that. Besides our own assessment. We're going to pay yours too. So many of the businesses did that. And so it's this isn't just a landlord initiative. This is the businesses and the land orders of Sausalito. Next slide. So the next, and Brandon's been explaining this, I think, in quite detail, but establishing a P bid is financially good for the city of Sausalito. Without a vibrant and flourishing business community and the parking fees it's generated, Sausalito residents would be paying higher taxes and assessments for the city to operate its current operational levels. The P bid will be an equal, public-private partnership, which we really welcome which will build demand and increase business tax and parking revenues. Creating increased demand for Sausalito's businesses enhances the city's abilities to serve its residents because so much of the revenue of the city of Sausalito is based on its business taxes and its parking fees. The next slide. As we mentioned, as I've mentioned before, it doesn't require, and as Brandon's slides just showed and his staff report showed, the Pbid does not require new city net expenditures. The Pbid is going to pay for itself even under really conservative assumptions. So we are asking, that we'd be able to tax ourselves and join in a partnership with the city. to create a vibrant P-Bid. If you look at Petaluma, Downtown Redwood City, Little Italy and San Diego, they're all examples of widely successful CP bids. These things work. But more importantly, the P bid will generate new and much needed revenue to the city of Sausalito And that's, what I understand is a very critical need. Next slide. This is a consolidation of Brandon's slides, the staff report Bottom line. that the net total revenue will be $624,698. That's under really conservative assumptions. The businesses in Sausalito believe that the assumptions in the um, staff report are, are very conservative and that we will easily exceed and give you smart results and smart metrics. Next line. And then finally, The establishing a PBIT is a unique opportunity for Sausalito to increase revenues. The opportunities to increase revenues in the city are very limited. Property taxes increases are severely limited by statute. Business tax rates cannot increase without losing customers and businesses to competing neighborhoods, other communities. Filling unused business capacity in all Sausalito sectors will increase business act revenues and allow for more services to revenants. To make money, you need to invest money. And I want to give an example of that before COVID my brothers and I decided to invest $2 million into our hotel. We finished the investment with all of our $2 million loans and we ended up and it COVID hit. And that was a scary time. We had no revenue. We had bid off, you know, this big investment, but we, We're always confident. that we were going to make money. because we knew what we were doing as business people, as do the other businesses in Sausalito. Today, last year in 2023, that investment we made, which was for two new beautiful suites, generated over $80,000 in TOT tax to the city of Sausalito. So I remind you that we pay over $900,000 a year in TOT tax. Next slides. So the sources of the revenue for the city of Sausalito are few. 18 and business tax revenues make up 56%. You've got the charges for services, and I want to point out that that includes $2.7 million in parking fees, and we're looking for the P-Bed to generate more parking fees. Next slide. If we just look at the tax revenue, 57% of that is business tax revenue. It's sales tax, it's GOT, it's franchise taxes, it's business license taxes. All these taxes can increase with the establishment of a P-bid. Next slide. We see and we look forward to determining what our task will be. But the most important task for us is to fill the capacity of this city in the off months and in the midweek. Lots of occupancy on the weekends, and especially the weekends in the summer. But I'll tell you, the winters are rough. They are really rough. They're rough for everybody, not just the hotels, But the restaurants and you look out, the parking lots are empty. And so our biggest goal is to be able to take that capacity that exists and make it earn revenue. Next slide. So finally, I've said this before, a rising tide lifts boats. All boats. We want to join together and lift all boats. You know, sure, I could take our assessment for the end above tide and just invest it back into the end above tide. But I want to invest it into the city of Sausalio because I think, This will be effective for the city of Sausalito and it will increase the revenues and it will help the city and it will help the residents. I was married here. I put myself to college work in here. I love this city. So We request that we be allowed to make this work. that the businesses be allowed to help the city of Sausalito in the fiscal problems that you have, that you trust us. These are the companies that made it through COVID, that are long-established COVID companies. My family's company has been in this town for 60 years, and we've been successful here, and we will continue to be successful. So please adopt the resolution of intent. We urge you to do so. Thanks very much. And then Scott, did you want to summarize? Questions? Other questions please? |
| 02:02:43.91 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Any questions you want to summarize? Other questions? Other questions please? It's a final round of questions before public comment. Any questions? Councilmember Hoffman. |
| 02:02:54.25 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, thank you for being here tonight. I appreciate it. We all appreciate it. We appreciate all the work. And let me just be clear. that my comments I hope nobody feels that they reflect poorly upon motorcycle passing and but also the efforts that everybody has gone to on this my you know my view is the current the current fiscal impact to the city and the situation we're in with our deficit spend so Let me ask you first off, so can you do you can you tell us what the percentage is for in above tide for the bid? I have it in my notes this 1.65%. Is that about what you think it is? |
| 02:03:32.95 | Cass Green | That's right. I think it's going to be about $4,500 a year. |
| 02:03:36.61 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so that's fine. And then you offered to pay for somebody else's? |
| 02:03:40.63 | Cass Green | Yeah, our next-door neighbor. |
| 02:03:43.11 | Jill Hoffman | And who's that? |
| 02:03:44.49 | Cass Green | Oh God, Mark, are you still here? high tech. |
| 02:03:49.03 | Jill Hoffman | And what's the percentage for that? |
| 02:03:51.16 | Cass Green | They're on El Portal. |
| 02:03:52.76 | Jill Hoffman | I mean, Mark's gonna know better than I am. So 1,200 you said? |
| 02:03:59.15 | Mark Flaherty | Thank you. Thank you. 12 to 69, they're $26,000. |
| 02:04:02.58 | Jill Hoffman | I'm sorry I can't hear you 26 El Portal and it's |
| 02:04:04.22 | Mark Flaherty | you |
| 02:04:06.40 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:04:06.41 | Scott Thornburg | 12 to 16. |
| 02:04:09.01 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, an additional 12 to 600. |
| 02:04:20.00 | Jill Hoffman | And you would agree, Cass, that there's nothing to preventing the district to form without the city. |
| 02:04:27.57 | Cass Green | the district wouldn't form without the city. |
| 02:04:29.85 | Jill Hoffman | And that's because the district wouldn't want to form because it wouldn't have the city's 50% funding? |
| 02:04:36.41 | Cass Green | That's part of it, most definitely. But I think what you're seeing is what the businesses want. They want a public-private partnership. 57% of the city's taxes. You know, $2.1 million every year in TOT from the four hotels. There's a, they make huge investments into the city. And what we want to move forward with is a community that is a public private partnership. |
| 02:05:10.54 | Jill Hoffman | I have a follow-up question, but it's for Brandon, if that's okay. I'll pass. |
| 02:05:15.45 | Mayor Sobieski | Let's do a, each person asks all their questions and we'll move on and then we'll do public comment. Okay, gotcha. So, go to the question. |
| 02:05:19.99 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, gotcha. One request that I have is that we've seen other slides here. I would request that those be attached to the agenda as well. Is there any problem with that? Thank you. Okay. |
| 02:05:28.37 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:05:28.41 | Cass Green | Okay. Thank you. |
| 02:05:29.98 | Jill Hoffman | So, Brandon, I think we've discussed this, you and I, directly, but it is an anomaly among business improvement districts that the city would be at 50% or over 50%. |
| 02:05:41.86 | Unknown | Thank you. you |
| 02:05:42.14 | Brandon Phipps | you Yes, yes, I would agree with that. |
| 02:05:44.03 | Jill Hoffman | and most business districts are... Thank you. on the range or order of this, and this was also confirmed by our consultant, on the order of 15 to 20 to 25%. |
| 02:05:53.87 | Brandon Phipps | I agree. |
| 02:05:55.09 | Jill Hoffman | And so, |
| 02:06:04.76 | Jill Hoffman | I think that's all I have for you right now. |
| 02:06:07.57 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you council member. Council member Blaustein. Thank you for the questions. Council member Blaustein, any questions? |
| 02:06:08.67 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you for the questions. |
| 02:06:12.32 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I have a couple of questions. Thanks Cass for being here and Scott, and I really appreciate your passion for this topic. I wanted to just, because you've been a member of the business community for a long time Cass, and you've seen a lot of different iterations of city engagement, You know, going back to when we had the Business Advisory Committee before EDAC, And I remember from what I recall during those times, there was a big push from the business community and a big ask. Well, there was an ask from the city, the business community around the TOT. And could you just kind of give refresh our memories about that? Because I know that had a lot to do with our relationship with the business community now. |
| 02:06:50.05 | Cass Green | Do you want to ask that? I might be better to refer this to Mark because he was more involved in. Yeah, Mark, sure, please. |
| 02:06:55.09 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, Mark, sure. Yes, please. Thank you. |
| 02:07:02.89 | Jill Hoffman | Bye Mark. |
| 02:07:06.35 | Mark Flaherty | Thank you. |
| 02:07:06.37 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:07:06.48 | Mark Flaherty | Thank you. |
| 02:07:06.92 | Mayor Sobieski | Could you identify yourself with the records, please? |
| 02:07:07.02 | Mark Flaherty | So specifically, what were you asking? The, sorry. |
| 02:07:08.98 | Mayor Sobieski | What were you... So you can... |
| 02:07:12.46 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:07:12.58 | Mark Flaherty | identify yourself with the record. Mark Flaherty, the general manager of the end of Buck Tide. |
| 02:07:12.61 | Jill Hoffman | I was asking about when we previously I was asking about when we previously increased the TOT rates and your involvement and the business community on that. |
| 02:07:22.48 | Mark Flaherty | Thank you. The TOT increased from 12% to 14%. At that time, the city requested that we buy into that increase, which we did with the proviso that the city would make specific and very substantial attempts to fund promotion of the town using those TOT funds. |
| 02:07:23.09 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:07:50.43 | Jill Hoffman | And I'm sorry, go ahead, please. |
| 02:07:52.49 | Mark Flaherty | No, no, no, you can continue. |
| 02:07:54.66 | Jill Hoffman | Just in your assessment as a business owner, after that increase, did you feel like the city kept its end of the bargain on that agreement? No. |
| 02:08:07.71 | Mark Flaherty | No, our assessment was that the city was not as good to their word as we thought they should be. |
| 02:08:18.86 | Jill Hoffman | And how do you feel like the city has been doing? I know we have a new CEO at the chamber who's really working with the city on a regular basis to to re enrich the relationship between the business community. So what would the P bid mean for you in terms of the way the city partners with businesses? So just I would love to hear from you as someone who runs a business every day. |
| 02:08:37.07 | Mark Flaherty | I think it would be, well, I really appreciate the energy that the Chamber has dedicated to this particular effort for the PBID formulation. But I think that the city... needs to buy into this. They really need to step up, I think, and make good on their word to support the business community. With that increase in TOT funds, we always felt that we were left without a real purchase in the city. And I think that the PBID will be a nice group of both businesses and city representatives that will be able to really give some vitality and oomph to the promotion of Sausalito as a destination and as a place for residents and visitors to enjoy alike. but it requires funding. It requires funding. We have over 50 restaurants in the town of Sausalito. Our residents can't support those many, many restaurants. We have to make the town a vital place for everyone, regional visitors, faraway visitors, and certainly the residents to enjoy. And the city needs to help the businesses in making that happen. |
| 02:10:19.20 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you so much. And so just to wrap up on that, Director Hesk, I have a question for you about the TOT. |
| 02:10:29.81 | Jill Hoffman | And this may require a little bit of on the fly computing. So I apologize. I know we didn't get to connect today, but I was wondering, you know, do you have record of what year we initiated that 2% TOT increase? Oh, good question. I don't know off the top of my head, but I can- Why don't we just do it this way? Assuming right now we have a 14% DOT, how much additional revenue do we make than if we had a 12% DOT? Just looking at the numbers as an accountant who is very savvy. |
| 02:10:55.53 | Chad Hess | Very savvy. Yeah. I don't do mental math. Um, Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So 2% of like 2.1 million, um, 2% of a million is what? 200,000. |
| 02:11:05.76 | Jill Hoffman | So what you're saying is if we're paying $126,000 into the business improvement district, that increase of the 2% annually, |
| 02:11:13.08 | Chad Hess | It's a small percentage of |
| 02:11:14.02 | Jill Hoffman | All percentage, Joe. Thank you. |
| 02:11:15.37 | Chad Hess | Yeah, it's a very small percentage. |
| 02:11:15.56 | Jill Hoffman | It's a very small percentage of that. |
| 02:11:17.92 | Chad Hess | Yeah. |
| 02:11:18.14 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so it's a small percentage of the, Thank you. |
| 02:11:20.84 | Chad Hess | that. |
| 02:11:20.88 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:11:20.98 | Chad Hess | of the whole TOT that we collect. I mean, we collect over 2.1 million. in TOT and if they're asking for |
| 02:11:25.87 | Jill Hoffman | there. |
| 02:11:27.59 | Chad Hess | 165,000 back in return it's it's a pretty small percentage. |
| 02:11:31.51 | Jill Hoffman | And it's less than the 2% increase that we agree to in partnership with the business community, just looking at the broad numbers. |
| 02:11:37.28 | Chad Hess | Thank you. |
| 02:11:37.41 | Mayor Sobieski | THE END OF |
| 02:11:37.48 | Chad Hess | Thank you. |
| 02:11:37.53 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Okay, great. Just wanted to reflect that. Thank you very much. |
| 02:11:42.15 | Mayor Sobieski | Councilmember Kelman or Vice Mayor, any questions? No questions from the Vice Mayor, any questions? Thank you. |
| 02:11:48.84 | Jill Hoffman | I have a follow-up question. |
| 02:11:49.44 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, last question, then we'll get a public comment. |
| 02:11:51.47 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. This is based on the questions, and this is for Director Hess. Is he still in the room? Where'd he go? There he is. Here. Here. So, transient occupancy tax, we talk a lot about that, it seems. What, can you give us a quick definition of what that is? |
| 02:12:08.21 | Chad Hess | Um, it's a tax that is levied upon a temporary occupancy of a space less than |
| 02:12:14.81 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:12:14.82 | Kevin McGowan | TODAY. |
| 02:12:15.11 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:12:15.25 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 02:12:15.26 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Fantastic. |
| 02:12:17.03 | Chad Hess | Less than 30 days. |
| 02:12:18.35 | Jill Hoffman | And is that a fee that's passed, that's paid for by the tenant of the unit? |
| 02:12:24.01 | Chad Hess | Yeah, it's typically passed on to the renter or the occupant of that space. |
| 02:12:30.43 | Jill Hoffman | You can see it on your bill, in fact. Yeah, it's a line item. I've perused my bill. |
| 02:12:31.53 | Chad Hess | Yeah, it's a line item. I've looked at hotel bills as well. Yes. Yeah. |
| 02:12:36.37 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:12:36.41 | Chad Hess | Thank you. |
| 02:12:36.85 | Jill Hoffman | All right. |
| 02:12:38.75 | Chad Hess | So it's typically paid by the individual leasing that room. It's collected by the business. |
| 02:12:44.15 | Jill Hoffman | Like by this and then pass to us. Remitted to us. |
| 02:12:46.04 | Chad Hess | Remitted to us, correct. |
| 02:12:47.68 | Jill Hoffman | And are you aware that the San Francisco transient occupancy tax is also 14%? |
| 02:12:55.24 | Chad Hess | I am not. I am now. |
| 02:13:00.17 | Jill Hoffman | You learn so many things at a city council meeting. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:13:04.54 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Thank you. And now open public comment, city clerk. |
| 02:13:11.12 | Walfred Solorzano | And first one we have that up sorry done that low. |
| 02:13:19.10 | Walfred Solorzano | And then after it's Carolyn and Ravel. |
| 02:13:22.04 | Don Dagla | Hi, I'm Don Dagla. I'm a member of EDAC and my family has been involved in different roles in Sausalito for now about 120 years. I've worked here for the last 60 and I've lived in three different neighborhoods here. I am passionately in support of the approval of the PBID for a variety of reasons. Number one is I think it's common sense. I think it's going to pay off all my intuition and from what I've seen. suggest that it will. I also think that the danger in public administration when we have bad years where there are economic pressures that you guys frankly have to deal with that are very, very tough, and you have a lot of tough decisions to make, it's easy to fall into a pattern of fighting over how a limited size of pie is divided and lose track of the fact that the only long term solution is to make the pie bigger. so that there's more for everybody. And then we can scrabble about the bigger pie, which is a lot easier. I know that you are facing very tough challenges here, but I do believe that this is something where five years from now, you will be very glad you approved it. San Rafael just renewed theirs. There's all these other success stories. So my message is number one to convey, I have a lot of empathy for the tough calls you're having to make right now, and I do not trivialize that. But for the future sake of the city and our ability to do things and grow and move positively ahead, I respectfully submit, I deeply believe that this needs to be done. Thank you very much. |
| 02:14:51.27 | Carolyn Revell | Carolyn. Good evening and Carolyn with L with the young It's also beautiful, as you know. asking you to adopt the resolution to establish a downtown property owner's business improvement district and initiate balloting. I've joined the steering committee meetings over the past year and have been impressed by the willingness of the property owners and business community to tax themselves in order to provide a higher level of services than otherwise available. I'm also familiar with a long-established downtown management organization called the Bethesda Urban Partnership. It was created in line with the sector plan that I co-led in Montgomery County, Maryland. And we can learn from the experience of that downtown management association. Bethesda Urban Partnership, like the one we're proposing here, maintains and enhances streetscape amenities such as planter boxes and street trees, oversees trash collection, organizes art festivals and concerts, has a team wearing t-shirts that say, ask me to advise visitors and help with maintenance. runs a circulating shuttle, shuttle bus and assist with transit and parking. because it had an ongoing structure and management during COVID, Bethesda Urban Partnership could respond rapidly to help struggling restaurants by transforming two closed streets into outdoor seating for any adjacent restaurant to use. attracting 72% of people surveyed They came several times a week. or at least once a week. The Bethesda Streetery, so-called, had a ripple effect across the community, becoming a place of connection and vibrancy and a boon to local businesses. Like the proposed Sausalito bid, Bethesda Urban Partnership has to be reauthorized every five years. The leadership develops a strategic plan, and the county's Office of Oversight measures BUP's achievements against the plan. Last fall, it reauthorized the partnership for its seventh five-year term, a testament to its success. The Sausalito City Council has a similar ability to have input into the planning for the Sausalito P bid and a future council can decide whether to Reauthorize it. I urge you to adopt the resolution. Thank you so much |
| 02:16:56.50 | Walfred Solorzano | I urge you to adopt the resolution. Thank you so much. Adrian Brinton followed by Yoshi Tensei. Sorry. |
| 02:17:10.56 | Adrian Brinton | Hi, Adrian Brinton, I'm a resident here in Sausalito. Some great discussions tonight. You know, a lot of talk about the budget and the impact on the city finances, which is super important, and we should be thinking really carefully how we invest in our city. And it was great to see the numbers back and that this can pay for itself and that this is a good investment. There were concerns that other cities pay or pay differently, there's different models for pbids, What do we want to do? What do we want to do for our city and what's right for our city? And I think investing with the businesses makes a ton of sense. We heard from our business owners about the taxes they pay, about the different things that have happened in the past. All that stuff aside, this is a great investment for the city and it's really good to see that. We can't bury our heads with our budget deficit. We've got to take action to build our revenues. We've talked about that in the budget meetings. This is a great opportunity to do that. The parking is a huge thing, right? We have a ton of spare capacity in non peak times right now. If you go in and you look in the parking lot on Monday and there's 50 open spaces, that's $75 a day in a revenue that we're not getting. If we start doing events and we bring people into town on off peak weekends and off peak days, that's money in the bank for us. When we remove those spots, we remove the 31 parking places that $75 a day on peak days that we lose. That has an impact for sure, but we can more than make up for that. by adding more capacity when people are not parking. So I think that's a great opportunity here. you know, driving the off-peak demand is great. If the businesses come in with a pivot and they want to generate peak demand, You know, it's a mess down there on the peak weekends when the parking lots are full, it's ugly. So we don't want to be bringing more people in when the city is already full, but we have a ton of days where the city is not full and bringing that in will help our finances substantially. Thank you very much. |
| 02:19:04.60 | Walfred Solorzano | Yoshi. Sorry, I didn't get your last name correct. |
| 02:19:10.07 | Yoshidome | I'm sorry for my beautiful handwriting, Tomei. I'm not sure. My name is Yoshidome, owner of the Sushirang, Caledonia Street. I've been to Sasariro ownership for 38 years. And also I do remember 2002, first time they raised the TOT tax 2%. They started having hospitality committee. I'm sitting there with Mark J. Spiraz, other people, 13 years. Now this time it raises 2% tax again. That's where it started EDUC. But... whatever reason did not work well the as we speak this month another long time restaurant shutting down after covid effect downtown san francisco got a very very bad reputation visitor tourist is not coming to bay area wine country and around here it's really really risk we're facing you know the keeper vitality of the South Lilo business community restaurant surviving this is the best program I've seen long time I was a chamber board of directors 12 years and Also sitting at the hospital committee. This is the best way to promote in South Korea business community, I believe best for the residents also. The talk about all the budget, everything else we have. Again, 50 plus restaurant will not survive just for the local residents, local business people. We rely on all the visitors. Without them, we are dying. Downtown San Francisco, more than 30% restaurant already shutting down. Please accept this program and let Sassero keep survive and keep salty. Thank you. |
| 02:21:08.53 | Walfred Solorzano | Uh, Carly Tolberg. |
| 02:21:15.16 | Walfred Solorzano | Followed by Amy Svenberg. |
| 02:21:19.52 | Carlito Berg | Hey everybody. Just so you guys know, Yoshi is my Japanese grandfather. If it wasn't for Yoshi, I wouldn't be alive. My parents met at Sushiron where my dad, I was with his two kids and my mom was on a date with another guy. So thank you, Yoshi. You know, there's only two things that are certain in life, death and taxes. And to me, the property owners voting to tax themselves is means they have a lot of certainty. |
| 02:21:46.28 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:46.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:21:53.87 | Carlito Berg | So what does that really mean? It means we should tax ourselves and just live it up till we die. So the idea about co-investing with business owners in this P bid is a good one. If I could raise in any of our operating businesses a revenue stream by one percent and get over the term of that investment, over 100 percent return on that investment, I would be ecstatic. You guys should be, too. Um, You know, obviously the 10 year treasury is at at 4.34% today. In the worst year of the P bid with the worst estimations, it does better than the risk free rate. Why wouldn't you do that? You know, This unlocks the vision of a highly motivated group of people. And the people who've sat forth here tonight and who've supported this initiative, you guys know can change the way the city operates for the better and make it beautiful. and sustainable and wonderful. The last thing I'll say is, you know, you guys are all very accomplished, and you don't need to be an amazing EPA attorney, a nonprofit and startup maven, a cracking municipal attorney, a wonderful, brilliant military attorney who served our country, or even an aerospace engineer, to know this makes sense. And for the aerospace engineer, it's not rocket science. Trust the businesses. This is going to work. |
| 02:23:18.01 | Walfred Solorzano | Amy Svenberg followed by Alice Merrow. |
| 02:23:23.75 | Amy Svenberg | Thank you, Carlito. You are so great. Of course, I represent Poggio Copita, and I'm the chair of the Chamber of Commerce. Just to reiterate, we really do believe this program. Cass did an incredible job explaining every aspect and all the months, years of hard work. But I'd like to thank you as well, members of the council, because you have taken the time to meet with us individually. We hear you, and we understand your concerns, but we believe in this. We can... as businesses need to drive revenue, and we need to drive revenue that is going to trickle down to you. So we implore that you adopt the resolution of intent, and we thank you for your consideration and look forward to moving forward on this next steps. |
| 02:24:13.63 | Walfred Solorzano | Dallas Merrill. Followed by Bonnie McGregor. |
| 02:24:21.46 | Alice Merrill | Hello. My name is Alice Merrill, and... There are two things. I think that this subject probably should have come after we heard about the whole budget. I'm hearing glowing things. I hope they're true, but I still think this should have come after we knew about what the budget really has in it before we start connecting ourselves. The second thing is, there is a pending FPCC, FPPC investigation about whether our mayor lives within the PBID district. the area of however you guys recuse yourselves. There's been a lot of conversation about who recuses for what reason and where are they and why are they there and et cetera. And this is actually under investigation. And so I would. I would say that until this is resolved, that our mayor shouldn't be voting. And I believe that he shouldn't even be in the conversation if he's within that district of recusal. And I know nobody else is going to bring this up, but it's. It's a thing, and we need to follow the rules and be transparent and be a really, really thoughtful city government. Please, thank you. |
| 02:25:59.44 | Walfred Solorzano | Bonnie McGregor. |
| 02:26:08.40 | Bonnie McGregor | Once again, I am Bonnie McGregor, 90 Princes. Thank you. And I don't know as much about this particular project as Carolyn Revelle is, and I can't possibly follow up and add to much of what she has said. We are both on the board for Sausalito Beautiful, and that is our purpose in that group is to make Sausalito more beautiful. And I think this program, will provide more opportunities for us to plant more trees, new flower boxes, more lighting and what have you to make the town more interesting to the people who live here to come down and shop and eat. as well as the opportunity to expand bringing in people from all over the state, all over the country, and we get a lot of Europeans. And Asians here, too. So I am very much in favor of moving forward with this. We do have to invest in order to expand. And I'm sure we can figure out some way to handle the deficit situation we're facing right now and including the insurance problem to jump off the little cliff and move forward with this project |
| 02:27:18.04 | Walfred Solorzano | Steven Woodside? |
| 02:27:26.28 | Steven Woodside | I'm sorry if I interrupted. I was on remote and I just decided to come down. To my friend Alice, I understand there are Many times conflict questions raise when someone lives within 500 feet of a potential project or a district or a zone. That is a 500 feet rule created by the FBPC. in order to say there's a presumption of a financial interest But it is rebuttable. I can't think of a way that somebody living 400 feet from this district who doesn't have to pay the tax Who doesn't have a business has a financial interest? So I think it is a from my perspective. that you should go forward. The person who raised this served with me on the landslide task force. She lives within 200 feet of the worst landslide we have seen recently. 200 feet. Never disclosed. No presumption. Nobody complained because she did a good job. She has no conflict. Neither does our mayor. So I just wanted to make that clear. Secondly, You have some brilliant people in the community who've looked at this. I have experience with a few others that have been phenomenally successful. throughout the state. There's almost never a failure, and in this case, I think we have room for optimism, so thank you. |
| 02:29:05.64 | Jill Hoffman | May I ask a question of Mr. Woodside? I'm going to put you on the spot because I know you're the former county council of the county of Marin and you've encountered these types of issues before. And you previously wrote to us about this. Can you, if you recall, speak about the public generally exception to the FPPC guidelines? Yeah. |
| 02:29:23.27 | Steven Woodside | Yes. Yeah. Let me just put it this way. I'm old enough to have voted for the Political Reform Act in 1974. That act was adopted in the wake of Watergate, in the wake of all kinds of stuff. The then young Governor Jerry Brown was a supporter as well as Common Cause and others. It says, You cannot have a financial interest in something distinguishable from the public generally. That's the act. Now the FBPC had years of trouble trying to figure out how to enforce it. So they adopted a rule, if you're within 500 feet, You're presumed to have a conflict, but... Let's take a look at it. And in this case, if the mayor had a business Maybe it's arguable. that he has a financial interest. So anyway, I haven't done a complete analysis. I don't know what the FPPC staff will do, but I'm sure You know, you're often faced with these problems. This is a small town. Most of you live within 500 feet of something. |
| 02:30:44.37 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And as the county council, and obviously having litigated various cases, would you agree that anybody can file a complaint about anything? It doesn't mean the complaint has merit. |
| 02:30:57.94 | Steven Woodside | Oh, absolutely. I had to defend a few of those. Thank you. |
| 02:31:02.11 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. I have a follow up question for Mr. Woodside based on those questions. Mr. Woodside, I have a couple of questions for you. Sure. You were aware that there's a there's an ethics advisory from the FPPC directly related to Pbids to business improvement districts and that ethics advisory from the FPPC Clearly stated that a member of a city council meeting a member of a city council in that case, who live within 500 feet of The district, did not live in the district, but he lived within 500 feet. He had an ethical conflict and could not vote. Were you aware of that advisory opinion? |
| 02:31:40.30 | Steven Woodside | The one that I'm aware of I think comes from Menlo Park and it the opposite result. |
| 02:31:47.17 | Jill Hoffman | I'd like to well then I'll ask our city attorney because that's been provided to our city attorney as far as I know That there is an ethics and I can for for certainly forward that to you as well, but I I'm I I can assure you that there is an ethics opinion squarely based on a on a business improvement district that related to a renter, a council member who rented in the district. who had a conflict and could not vote. And the other part of the opinion was that the other council member owned a property within 400 feet of the district and also was prevented from voting. |
| 02:32:13.79 | Unknown | and the other |
| 02:32:24.19 | Steven Woodside | Okay, the one I'm aware of had someone living up the hill from a district |
| 02:32:30.75 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF |
| 02:32:30.82 | Steven Woodside | And the FPC said he was up the hill sheltered by trees had no financial interest and there's no conflict. |
| 02:32:38.08 | Unknown | I'm sorry. |
| 02:32:38.26 | Steven Woodside | You're going to find an opinion on both sides of this issue. All you have to do is look and Google it. |
| 02:32:38.30 | Unknown | You're going to. |
| 02:32:38.97 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not. I'M HAD TO PROVIDE. I'm happy to provide that to you, sir, so that you can have that for your future. |
| 02:32:47.53 | Steven Woodside | Okay, now I just want to make a full disclosure here. in 2023, I decided to become inactive. So I'm no longer able to give you legal advice. I choose not to. But I'm happy to argue it because we elected. |
| 02:33:04.05 | Jill Hoffman | Elected. I'm not. |
| 02:33:05.03 | Steven Woodside | All five of you, all five of you to serve us. |
| 02:33:08.67 | Jill Hoffman | You and I are always happy to argue with each other. I'll just let's just stipulate to that. No, we don't have the other portion is under the that ethics exception that you just talked about. There's also an exception that if if the council member is the proponent of whatever, whatever is before the council that that exception does not apply. Were you aware of that section under the FPC guidelines? |
| 02:33:11.67 | Steven Woodside | No, we don't have to. |
| 02:33:33.09 | Steven Woodside | I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. |
| 02:33:35.20 | Ian Kelman | Would the colleagues be okay? Sorry, Mr.. I'm not comfortable with a member of the public providing or not providing legal advice. Not providing it. Right, of course. I'm just a member of the public. I want all funds. |
| 02:33:42.62 | Steven Woodside | I'm not providing it. I'm just a member of the public. I want all five of you to vote, please. |
| 02:33:45.75 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. I'd love you to vote, please. Yeah, so maybe instead our just our city attorney, who I hope is still with us, just would want to weigh in what the practical impacts might be and we can Thank you. We leave Mr. Woodside of the podium, thank you for your involvement. But Sir Duke, can you maybe just chime in and direct the conversation a little bit for us? |
| 02:34:03.83 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, I mean, ultimately, the decision as to whether to participate when you think there's a potential for a conflict of interest resides with the individual member who has the potential for a conflict of interest. So this is not a decision that the members of the public get to make for our participating council members. It is not a decision the city attorney gets to make for our council members. It's not a decision other council members get to make for our council members. So, you know, ultimately, you know, this issue has been raised with respect to the mayor, the decision is the mayor's to make. With respect to the, FPPC opinion. There are two, one of which I have seen related to Um... which was mentioned by Councilmember Hoffman. Additionally, one was mentioned just now by our public commenter, that opinion actually appears to deal with the city of Mountain View, not the city of Menlo Park, but that came out just this year. Actually, that came out late last year. And it also deals with Pbid. So I do think that there is probably some potential on both sides of this issue. Additionally, there was discussion about whether public generally applies. You know, again, that is going to be something that the FPPC would look into. Ultimately, again, you know, the mayor has stated on the record he's received legal advice on this issue and that he's going to follow his legal advice you know that he received from his outside counsel the decision is his and you know Typically the process um you know if there is an enforcement action by the fpc it would typically occur after the decision not before and there's not any sort of requirement that the city council wait or delay in making a decision while waiting for the fpp to ppc to decide whether or not it wants to take any sort of action on this so |
| 02:36:06.13 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, thanks city attorney. So let's move on. |
| 02:36:07.17 | Jill Hoffman | I have a problem. ON. I have a follow up on that with the city attorney. As a follow up city attorney, what's the effect on the vote that's taken if there's found to be a conflict? |
| 02:36:19.51 | Sergio Rudin | None. At least not necessarily any particular effect. Typically, if there is a conflict of interest that is found by the FPPC, The most usual result is a fine of the affected council member who has participated wrongly. there can, in very rare instances, be some sort of litigation to invalidate a decision, but again, it's a high burden for that litigant to prove that the action would not have been taken in the absence of the conflicted council members participation. |
| 02:36:54.27 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Can we continue with public comment please, city clerk? |
| 02:36:58.39 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, next person, Senator Bushmaker. |
| 02:37:06.24 | Sandra Bushmaker | Hello everybody. Yes, I think that given this discussion with the conflict that it's prudent to either continue the matter of this business improvement district or for the mayor to recuse himself until we have resolution from the FPPC. of this particular investigation. I'm also concerned, just as an aside, The comments for the PBED were placed under the sewer item on the agenda and I hope that Rick can be corrected And I want to say with regard to the PBID, I do not oppose PBIDs. Oh, before I get into that, I just want everybody to know I was a 30 year business owner and manager of a business here in Sausalito. I know very much what it's like to own a business and function here in Sausalito. So with regard to the PBED, I do not oppose PBEDs generally. I just oppose this one at this time. I'm very concerned about our budgetary issues. This is going to cost the city over five years, $650,000 and an un quantified amount of city staff and city administrative fees, which are mentioned in the staff report, but not quantified. I think that I also oppose the city being a 50% owner in this business improvement district. Given the fact that we have budgetary issues and we have insurance issues, I think this is not the highest priority for the city at this time. And as I said, I can support Business improvement districts generally But this one is not one that I could support. Thank you. |
| 02:38:52.70 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, next person, Teresa Ancona. |
| 02:38:59.30 | Mayor Sobieski | Hey Zancona, you need to unmute yourself. |
| 02:39:01.58 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:39:02.30 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Can you hear me now? Yes, go ahead. Thank you. |
| 02:39:05.73 | Teresa Ancona | I'm sorry I couldn't be there this evening I was here at work I'm Adana Angelino at 621 Bridgeway. So I'm the owner, operator, and property owner here. And with all due respect to Ms. Bushmaker, actually, I feel like this is probably the city's highest priority because what we're discussing tonight is actually about generating more revenue for the city. when the city needs more revenue. So that to me seems like the highest priority. for the city council. know and we're talking about the city actually investing with and in the business community every day the business owners and the property owners come down here and we invest rain shine pandemic no pandemic visitors no visitors we are here constantly supporting the community and now we're asking the community to come back and supports the businesses as well. to be a mutual partner in this project. And you know, that's, That pretty much sums it up. Thank you. |
| 02:40:18.88 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, next person, Babette McDougall. |
| 02:40:22.34 | Babette McDougall | Can you all hear me? |
| 02:40:23.59 | Walfred Solorzano | Yes, please. |
| 02:40:24.03 | Mayor Sobieski | Go ahead, Ms. McDougal. |
| 02:40:24.87 | Babette McDougall | All right. Thank you very much. Well, first of all, I'd like to say that I have sometimes prefaced my remarks by saying I classify this as tough love. I'm going to say this is probably biggest example of tough love for yours truly because If you check the record and if you just think back, I have actually spoken in favor of the PBID since its inception. Thank you. I am not opposed to it. However, I have to tell you that Surprisingly, even though I am not an elected official, but I have had a business in Sausalito since the late 1990s, and I reside in Sausalito also since the 1990s. I think I moved to Sausalito in 80-something. come to think of it. So I was here as a resident longer than when I finally moved my business over. All right, so here's the point. point I have three points to make. First of all about the I'd like to thank Alice Merrill for bringing the issue of Mr. Sobieski's current investigation for conflicts of interest It was my understanding that not only do you have a residence nearby, but you have a rental property, which I believe if that is true, then that would classify you as a vested interest partner in this. So, again, this is something that I have supported from the beginning. But I think we have to be very realistic about our standards of ethical conduct. And it's disappointing to see that once again our mayor fails to rise to that standard. So moving on to the issues of the PBID itself. I have to tell you, shockingly, even though I'm not even in California and haven't been for a while, I actually got, I'm trying to count, Almost 15 telephone calls. from people in Sausalito saying, what are we doing we're we're broke why are we looking to a shell out so much money and i specifically asked the city for those very reasons to do a cost benefit analysis as any good marketing person would do you don't just look at the opportunities which is all i have heard from the city we also look at where we could explode and this whole thing could go horribly wrong |
| 02:42:28.33 | Walfred Solorzano | Next person, Eva. |
| 02:42:39.47 | Eva | Thank you. Yeah, with regard to the FPPC investigation, I don't know if you guys remember, but one of your more illustrious residents, Kate Sears, had a case before the FPPC. excuse me. Um, know in that case it the the determination appeared to be very political um It was disappointing that it happened that way. But I think it's important to remember that sometimes the outcomes of these these cases are highly politicized. or can be if they're higher profile. It is, It is remarkable that this wasn't considered before. I... I also find it a little interesting because... When I follow when I try to follow coverage of Sausalito in, say, the Pacific Sun, I think the last article they did. was a kind of tough job on on Mayor Subisky. And it seems like it seems like, you know, there's there's a kind of confusion about what needs to be looked at what's worth investigating and um It is, you know, this is a highly credentialed council and it's worth asking if there wasn't a little bit of arrogance. in how you handled some prior issues I'm not sure. that's come back to bite you in the hindquarters. But it is, you know, I think the, the FBPC investigation, it's not chopped liver, but it's also the outcomes of those are not always, you know, they're not always just. |
| 02:44:39.06 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, and Morgan Pierce. |
| 02:44:45.91 | Morgan Pierce | Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Sobieski. Vice Mayor Cox, commissioners, numbers of staff, and my fellow Sauce Leadons |
| 02:44:53.30 | Mayor Sobieski | Can you hear me okay? Yes, we can. Go ahead. |
| 02:44:55.90 | Morgan Pierce | Great. My name is Morgan Pierce, architect and landscape architect, past chair of the Planning Commission, past chair of the Historic Preservation Commission, and current president of the South Slido-Beautiful. I would first like to thank you for your foresight in supporting the study of the PBID. and for your fortitude in helping to shepherd it through the gauntlet of approval necessary Um, to reach this point. As you know, the PBID is a creative mechanism to leverage both private and city funds for the shared maintenance and improvement of our downtown business district. and creates a unique partnership between the city and its commercial property owners to achieve long-term enhancements coupled with an establishment of a collaborative partnership. It is through forward-thinking efforts such as this, backed by Saucena's cadre of tireless volunteers that our community will truly be able to achieve the distinction it deserves and serve as an inspirational model for successful business and government collaboration. This is not a financial burden to our community. but rather an investment in it. I implore you. to continue using part for the P bid, Doc this resolution. And imagine a sauce leader that is welcoming solvent. and beautiful. Thank you. |
| 02:46:10.39 | Walfred Solorzano | All right. Kieran Culligan. |
| 02:46:14.49 | Kieran Culligan | Hi there, Karen Colgan, Sassolidore resident. I'm really saddened to see this FPPC topic. being weaponized to further a political agenda. I just looked up the FPPC case list and there's no active case shown for this. So there could be a complaint and anyone can make a complaint about anything, God bless America, but it would be inaccurate and a misrepresentation to say that there's an investigation as we heard from a couple of speakers. Onto more important topics. I'm not a business owner, but I'm really interested to see the town thrive and to have a more resilient budget. Thank you. heard from a couple of speakers. On to more important topics. I'm not a business owner, but I'm really interested to see the town thrive and to have a more resilient budget. You heard a little bit and heard some questions on the revenue uplift models. In my business consulting days, I would have explained that to you as a simple break-even model. So it's what you would have to believe for this to make sense. It could be more, a lot more, it could be less, but it's really about looking at something together, seeing if it can make sense. What do you have to believe? We've heard from EDAC, business owners, city staff, they think it looks good. I would trust their voices. They should carry a lot of weight. I hope you agree with me. There's also a question around where the best lever to pull, like is it parking or sales tax or TOT? These aren't independent variables. The programming that would happen with the PBID is going to impact all of these things. It might be with different mixes, but it all works together. We heard about rising tide lifting all boats. That's what I would have said too. And it really is interesting how business owners are equally incentivized for off-peak demand, which means parking capacity isn't the issue here. So if you're losing a few spots in the ferry landing, that's not the issue. The issue is empty parking lots. I THINK IT'S A LOT OF The best level we have is to do stuff. Demand generation is a contact sport. Generate ideas, prioritize, put things in motion, measure, learn, react, do it again. The city's not gonna do that. I think it's very clear. So let's take advantage of this co-investment opportunity and make it happen. |
| 02:48:06.44 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:48:06.50 | Kieran Culligan | Thank you. |
| 02:48:09.80 | Walfred Solorzano | I don't know. No further public speakers. |
| 02:48:12.12 | Mayor Sobieski | Last one, N.S. |
| 02:48:16.21 | Mayor Sobieski | You're the last speaker. |
| 02:48:17.66 | Jill Hoffman | I see Charles Melton's hand is raised in the attendee, and so is Peter Van Meter's in the online. |
| 02:48:23.03 | Mayor Sobieski | for more comments. Go ahead. |
| 02:48:23.97 | Jill Hoffman | Good night. Thank you. |
| 02:48:24.75 | Ines Ponyay | Hello, Ines Ponyay, Sox Alito, and I'm also on the board of the Chamber of Commerce. There seems to be, maybe I'm, don't understand it, but from what I understand, is that we're taxing the property owners of downtown of that district. And the majority are willing to pay a little extra. And from what I understand, This 50% of the city is going into partnership with us. It's not a gift. They own 50% of the property in the downtown area. So why shouldn't they be a partner with us? I mean, this is not just like money coming out of nowhere. This is their property owners. They pay the tax for this bid. We're partners together. So I THINK THERE'S SOME MISUNDERSTANDING. I'M MISUNDERSTOOD, OR EVERYBODY'S MISUNDERSTANDING THINGS. I DON'T KNOW, BUT I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S FAIR. THE CITY NEEDS TO CONTRIBUTE 50% AS THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE contributing. That's, is, am I correct about that? This is not a gift. This is what the community is doing. This area is doing. This is not coming out of a, A budget. Thank you. |
| 02:49:47.25 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, Charles Melton. |
| 02:49:56.26 | Charles Melton | good evening my name is charles i'm a social leader president thank you for the opportunity to provide comments tonight um as the previous speaker said i shared sentiments i'm pretty concerned about the comments about regarding the fppc uh to be used as a tactic to distract the delay and derail the proceedings of our city council um maybe call me a pollyanna but i truly believe that everyone sitting behind the dais is acting in the best interest of our city. I elected and voted for each of you there. I know many of our residents did and believe that you are acting with the best regards to this. Ethics is important, but also having trust in our government and trust in our city councils is also critically important. And I do not endorse the weaponization of such aspects to try to derail processes like the ones and any of the processes our city council goes through. In regards to the P bid, I cannot think of a better priority for the city in regards to getting its financial record back on track. I appreciate the robust discussions of our city council and the staff and outside consultants and studies and mass reporting to model this and to inspect this and think about all critical aspects about this. I really appreciate the diligence of this. There was a comment in regards to the TOT tax and actually who pays that. As a Sausalito resident, I've stayed in a hotel in Sausalito while being a resident. I paid that tax myself as a taxpayer. I couldn't think of a better way for my TOT taxes that I contributed to the city to go to reinvest back in our downtown area to make it more vibrant and accessible and a better downtown that contributes more tax revenue back to our city. I really think that the best way for a city to get its financial plans or financial health under control is to make very smart decisions. And this PBID is a very smart decision. It's an investment by the government, it's investment by our businesses, and it's investment by our community that benefits everyone |
| 02:50:41.43 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:51:47.53 | Charles Melton | us, saving our way to prosperity. Saving does not solve the problem. It simply kicks the can down the road for someone else to address. Please don't have change and please vote for the PBIT tonight. Thank you. |
| 02:51:59.97 | Walfred Solorzano | And then Peter Van Meter. |
| 02:52:05.78 | Peter Van Meter | Yes, good evening. You've heard all the reasons why the P bid is a wonderful thing for Sausalito. I'm not going to repeat them. I'll just capitalize on what Morgan said earlier. public private partnerships work This is a great opportunity to move that forward. as a concept. for the positive financial benefit of Sausalito. and the increased enhancement of our downtown business district. So please move this resolution to a formal vote. That's gonna be when you get your final decision as to what the people in town want to do. what the businesses and property owners want to do. Please take it to that next step. by passing that resolution here tonight. Thank you. |
| 02:52:51.07 | Walfred Solorzano | And we have Sharna Brockett. |
| 02:52:57.31 | Mayor Sobieski | Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can, Ms. Brockett. |
| 02:53:00.47 | Sharna Brockett | Okay, great. Thank you so much for everything you do. Zooming in from Bend, Oregon, I'm on vacation and I couldn't stay away. But all my travels up here to Bend and through different towns and through California and through Oregon. I just keep noticing that there's these these vibrant downtowns, a lot of them have business improvement districts, I see that they're thriving, they're really They're bustling with visitors. There's, you know, unique retailers. There's outdoor restaurants. They have clean sidewalks. They have hanging baskets or planners. They maintain their street trees and a lot of them have like unique art, artwork and benches throughout. And I'm sure as a lot of us embark on our summer travels, we're gonna see the same things. I often ask myself, like, wow, you know, Our downtown, you know, I think we all agree there's a lot of potential there. But after all, we're Sausalito. We're the jewel of the bay. and we're known for our arts community. Why aren't we doing these things? Why don't we have more murals and artwork? and planters and hanging baskets. I'm going to go to the next slide. And so this is really our chance to do something. And I'm so excited to see that a majority of our businesses downtown are wanting to self-tax themselves. to create the PBID. and I really ask that the city council vote today to continue the process and meet them halfway. I truly believe that people want to come and spend money in places that are beautiful and visually appealing. and new businesses, new businesses who we really want to come and fill these empty storefronts They want to set up shop. in places that are clean and well-maintained. And the PBID can help that. They can complement what the city's doing and go beyond what the city's doing to really make it nice. So please move forward with this next step and following the staff recommendation to support the PBIT. Thank you. |
| 02:54:54.34 | Walfred Solorzano | All right, and I think we're no more public speakers. |
| 02:54:56.55 | Mayor Sobieski | We're done. Okay, we'll close the public comment then, bring it back up for maybe one comment from all of us each. I'll just go first since there were some people questioning ethics and bringing that up. It's hurtful and disappointing to hear, but I honor and respect the integrity of those who are asking that question. I asked it too. Maybe I'll preface my remarks by just saying I'm not in this job to make money. I have waived my city council salary. That saved the city more than $10,000 of the last three years. I'm working something like 40 hours a week for free for the benefit of the town that I love. I am not perfect, and I don't know all the answers, but my motivation in my heart is clear and clean and I know in my heart I have no conflict of interest. But of course, there's a matter of the law. And so at my own expense, I spent thousands of dollars to hire an attorney to look at the law, to look at the multiple cases, the one that the complainant Ms. Bushmaker filed to the FPPC, upon which I should digress to say there is no investigation. There's simply a complaint filed. And those cases were looked at, as well as more than a half dozen other relevant FPPC cases that take into account things like whether you live up a hill, whether there's vegetation, whether, for example, in my particular case, to get to the point in the most direct path humanly possible, because humans can't fly, it is 2,000 feet to the point that as the bird flies is 500. These are all relevant considerations in the adjudication of an issue of whether we have a conflict of interest. As a public official, I need to make that decision so I can actually participate. The easiest thing is to not. But then that would obviate the whole reason I got into this business, which is trying to bring to bear my life's experience to help Sausalito. Now, I don't know much about the law, so I had to hire a lawyer, but I do know a lot about making money. And I know in my startups that when they start cutting, because business isn't going well, they're in what we call the death spiral. It is all well and good, and my colleagues, I will be with you, joined at the hip to scrutinize our spending to be more efficient. But the way we get out of our fundamental problems as a town, The way we level up our level of service, the way we fix our $100 million perhaps plus, Infrastructure deficit? is not to clip around the edges, it's to grow revenue. That may be other taxes, but I am not a taxer. I would prefer to grow the incredible assets Sausalito has. Our unfair competitive advantage is our geographic location. and our capacity to service it. We're like an airline. that, It's packed in the summer months. And we're still flying the planes empty in the winter. And a lot of gnashing of teeth is about whether we should get a bigger plane so we can carry a couple more people in the summer without cognizant of the fact that in the winter then we'd be flying that plane just as empty. What we want to do is figure out strategies to fill the airplane all year round. Now, I can't need to tell you that government is not very nimble and fast. This model of public private partnership allows the people in the trenches. to operate nimbly, quickly, with local knowledge. local control. Two, benefit themselves, the incentive is aligned. And when they benefit themselves, they benefit the city by filling our parking lots. TOT tax is big. I mean, it's a 10% tax. A visitor to Sausalito has to spend $600 on ice cream cones or t-shirts. be equal to the revenue the city gets from one hour of parking. The business model of the city is parking. We have an enormous remnant inventory that's going to waste perishable goods thrown out every day into the dumpster because we don't have a business approach. And? My interest in participating in this matter from the get go, When I was on EDAC. all along has been to carry that message and that flame. And I hope it's persuasive to my colleagues, because again, I will be with you in the budget discussion we'll have after this and in the next several meetings in scrutinizing our spending, because there are places to cut. But one place I wouldn't suggest cutting is laying off all our parking enforcement officers. That would save some money. but it would impact revenue. And one place to invest are in things like this PBID, where it's community driven, filled by a room of people who we enjoy and trust and are part of our team, and who have brought enormous effort to this effort. I don't know for sure if it will be successful, but it's off to a good start from what I see here in this room and what I hear in the community. So those are my comments. And I would like to recognize anyone else who wishes to speak. |
| 02:59:54.99 | Mayor Sobieski | Council Member Kelman. |
| 02:59:55.98 | Ian Kelman | Thank you, Mayor. Appreciate that. I really want to thank everybody for coming to the number of meetings we've had on the PBIN. Scott and Cass, thank you for your hard work, and Brandon and Chad and the city manager as well. I actually think this is a very fascinating exercise because I take it in the context of the number of different initiatives that we've had that have been focused on the downtown area. And I think everything is about narrative. Everything's about storytelling. Everything's about perspective. And I think that if we were to do it again, Um, looking at CDA, Bank of America and the ferry, lands on improvements and the P-bid, we probably should have tackled the P-bid first. And here's why. And I see Don shaking her head. I thought your comments were great. Thank you. Here's why. It's a really interesting program. I think a P-Bid is quite an interesting opportunity. I agree in moving forward with new revenues. I will point out, however, that this conversation has gotten skewed because of those other topics and the ways that we spent money we spent 341 000 simply planning to talk about the fairyland side improvements 341 000 just to talk right and so it's been feeling like we've been spending a lot of money on things without And being told, we're going to see more revenue, we'll see more revenue without any SMART goals aligned. I know not everybody in here likes when I talk about SMART goals. They're intended to bring discipline to our actions so that you can hold us accountable. That's what they're intended to do, okay? So I just want to point out that I think the issue here has been the city's contribution. Somebody asked about the city being a property owner, they of course are. But the map was drawn to include non-revenue producing city owned properties. So when you put the map on a park, that's never going to produce a revenue, it becomes a crazy consternation. And also, I just want to mention, Bethesda, um, Urban partnership, an excellent example, is funded primarily by revenue generated from the Bethesda parking lot district fees, in addition to the commercial urban district property tax, not by the city. City of San Diego, that is actually funded by parking dollars as well. Through various city programs, including the transit occupancy tax, and from city parking meter revenue, not 50% from the city. So that's really what we're here to talk about. We're here to talk about why are we putting 50% of this to the city? And I would say that, man, I wish we had talked about this as the first downtown improvement item and not the very last, because I think it's getting an unfair critique because of that. So my recommendation is, first of all, All of you stay for the budget conversation so you can understand the further context. So please, that's an invitation. Please stay for the budget conversation. I also think we gotta clean up that financial projection slide. If we don't have 31 parking spaces, I don't want 31 parking spaces in that analysis. I understand that was an older number, so totally fair. Quantify the city's contribution by its very loose. In the staff report, just have some more rigor around what it is we're funding and why and what we expect from this process. Every single bid example that somebody has mentioned, whether it's San Diego, Bethesda, has that in the strategic plan. There's a rigor to the way the money is spent and there's accountability for the elected officials and members of the public who promoted it. I think in retrospect, I suspect there's already three votes, so I'll add my fourth to support it. But I will just put this on the record. In retrospect, the 50% is out of line, given the way the jurisdiction is drawn. I know we've already made that recommendation, so I'm not re-litigating that. We probably should have done something like a declining into a rev share. So 40% the first year, 30%, 25%, and then it's supposed to be doing its job, right? Let's pull the additional revenue from additional parking lot from additional TOT, right? So then everybody has to get in the game to see that it works. That's how this actually probably should be funded. So that's kind of where I see this. I also just say, I think there's a lot of healing to be done with the business community and the city. Having sat through all of these meetings and hearing the tremendous amount of consternation and concern on both sides, and so I think, I want to welcome this as a beginning towards that conversation. But I really think it needs to be on the record that this 50% is pretty extraordinary and really out of the ordinary. And if there's any interest for my colleagues to adjust that payment schedule so that it years four and five are actually hinging on a rev share, I think that would be maybe a fair middle ground for how we achieve our goals. So thank you and look forward to seeing you all for the budget conversation. |
| 03:04:58.13 | Mayor Sobieski | Who would like to go next? |
| 03:05:02.25 | Jill Hoffman | I'll go. I'm happy to go next if that's helpful. Mayor Sobieski, just on the heels of some of Councilmember Kelman's very thoughtful comments, which I appreciate and I also want to acknowledge and appreciate your comments and say that I know that we are all |
| 03:05:03.21 | Mayor Sobieski | to go next. |
| 03:05:03.97 | Mary Carey | Thank you. |
| 03:05:16.42 | Jill Hoffman | uh, in many ways volunteers and give a lot of our time and you and in particular Mayor Sobieski have a very big heart and I appreciate your comments and candor regarding that and I hope that we can all be respectful of each other and our commitment to service here from the dais but with that said |
| 03:05:31.17 | Jill Hoffman | I, I, I've always appreciated our business community, but I appreciate so much more their willingness to engage in a public private partnership. I think it's really exciting that our business community wants to provide their own funds to support an initiative that can potentially help our revenue streams grow. And by all intensive purposes for our revenue projections, that's the case because these revenue projections, as mentioned by both Chad and Brandon, are considered to be conservative assessments. So we might actually expect to make even more money from our business improvement district. However, I do want to acknowledge and of course, I'm in favor of the business improvement district, but I want to acknowledge and address some of the comments from Councilmember Kelman in just saying that thinking about this from an important fiscal perspective of how we can justify the 50 percent going forward I appreciate and I'm open to your suggestions around how do we decide where this money comes from? I think one of the things that's great about the PBIT and how confident I am in the PBIT success is that we will see those increases in the parking fund and we can demonstrate that. And I think it might make sense for us going forward if we wanna create additional transparency for the community just to show that, like, look how much more parking revenue we have. And if we didn't make it, we should be checking in on each other. And we should also set benchmarks in this five year period, as I've mentioned, and as we've all discussed that demonstrate how we are doing and how our revenue projections I expect are not only meeting, but exceeding the 1% and how that might be applied to the way we make these payments out. Because I think where we did let the business community down is that they committed to that additional TOT increase several years ago and we're asking for a percentage of that. And now they're asking for a percentage of that again. to go towards this PBIT. And so this is an opportunity for us to do some healing, as Council Member Kelman pointed out, with our business community, to work together in a partnership with our business community that potentially benefits both of us. And also that allows us the opportunity to really look at our revenue streams and assessments and make this a proof case that we can say, look at how much money we're generating because we made this decision. And also to challenge each other to say really candidly if it's not working and have that conversation as well. So I'm really excited about what our PBID will bring forward. I'm confident about it. I can see and feel the passion of our business community and their commitment to making this work. But I also appreciate and the request for transparency and consideration of our budget. So I think it's important to go forward and make sure we do have benchmarks and we respect those requests as well. So that's where I stand. And of course, I will be voting in favor of the resolution. Thank you. |
| 03:08:09.39 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Who wants to go next? |
| 03:08:11.38 | Jill Hoffman | Also, I apologize for any background noises. I am in Bosnia, so it is 7 a.m. here. |
| 03:08:15.09 | Mayor Sobieski | So it is 7 a.m. Councilmember Hoffman? Thank you. |
| 03:08:25.37 | Mayor Sobieski | We have a face-off. Thank you. |
| 03:08:32.47 | Mayor Sobieski | Your microphone's off, go ahead, Ms. Hart. |
| 03:08:34.92 | Jill Hoffman | What was that? |
| 03:08:35.29 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. No. |
| 03:08:36.90 | Jill Hoffman | Right? . Thank you. Okay, all right, well, since the vice mayor has pulled rank on me, I guess I'll go. Okay, so no surprise here. You know, the really disturbing thing is the financial analysis that we were given, because I can't, I'm trying to figure out you know, we have a revenue over assessment line, which says 156,000. But admittedly, that was based on the assumption that we were going to we still had in contract with CDA and then we were still going for the destination Sausalito so That's, you know, $90,000 should have be backed out of that. Under any of the combination that we were presented with tonight, It... the return on our investment doesn't make it to our investment. So even our investment, right? So our investment from the, the total investment from the whole district is supposed to be about 1.2 million per year. Um, and, THE FAMILY. this revenue production that we've been provided with doesn't even make it to that. So as one of the callers said, this is viewed as at best a break even budget, for this effort. when we're looking at our current environment, our current fiscal environment. So we started this, let's go back to the chronology a little bit because I always hesitate when we start these assessments for whatever effort that we're doing here in Sausalito and you think, well, you know it comes up to the City Council level and we're going to say, well, let's look at it, let's explore it, let's get some further information. And then when it comes back to us, it's just continually, you know, we're harangued because we approved it at some prior point. The point is it constantly comes back to us and we reevaluate. And so that's what we're doing today. The new, you know, we looked at this for the first time on December 19th of 2023. And it came back to us in March of March 5th of 2023. In the intervening time, we were provided with a budget assessment. Our first meeting in May. that showed very clearly that we're going to be in a deficit from $2 million to $4 million per year at least this absolutely this year. And that's because our insurance premiums are going up dramatically. The best case scenario is that They're going up 1.7 on top of the 1.7 we already pay. So our premiums are doubling. We are going to be in a serious financial crisis. situation. I think it's fair to say it's a crisis since it's almost 10% of our total budget And this conversation that we're having, we're adding to the city's deficit spend. So when you talk about who's investing and whose money we're talking about, we're talking about the residents of Sausalito. And the reason that I wanted to look at this in the context of our total budget is to do the cost analysis of the moving the money from Sausalito from our our budget, our unallocated budget, which is essentially what we're doing. to A further our deficit spend so we're digging a bigger hole in our in our you know bigger hole in our budget Than what we currently have so I mean this is this is a serious thing We should be looking at this in the context of our total budget we should be looking at this in the context of our and we have to look at our strategy for reducing our biggest risk right now, which is our insurance payment. Our second biggest risk is our unfunded pension liability. And our third risk is our infrastructure. But our infrastructure goes back to why we lost our insurance. And the number of lawsuits that we have, the high number of lawsuits the city of Sausalio has against it, is also one of the increased risk factors. by which we use we lost our insurance. So when you're looking at what is our strategy for Sausalito to attack these big risks that we have, This doesn't fit into a priority on that. I'm sorry. It just doesn't and when you look at this as a break-even effort where we may get a return on investment. It's a pretty rosy picture. But if we don't perform, you know, and that we're not even close to, even a break even which which I can't even understand why a break even effort by the city of Sausalito and the people of Sausalito would justify this spin at this time. As I asked, I believe it was cast green who was up there. There's nothing that prevents the district from the property owners from going ahead and forming their district. And as I discussed with the chamber, with both the executive director and the president of the chamber, You know, there's nothing wrong with forming a district, with creating some credibility, with getting a track record and coming back to the city. and asking us to partner on whatever project or maybe even partner on the actual bid at a later time. The two strategies we could have at this time is to pause until we get through our budget assessment, which I think would be the most responsible thing. or pause it for a longer period to give the effort a chance to gain traction. The most disturbing, or one of the most disturbing things about this was the effort An intention to boost the city's contribution to 50% which is an outlier and an anomaly and in business district so if you're looking at this and you're looking at it for red flags and Of credibility that's that's a pretty big one at least in my book the other one is that we're we're Getting further into a deficit spend by approving this and finally let me just address a Um, the FPPC issue and I, you know, after reading all of these, uh, I'm reading a lot of these. opinions. The practice and pattern of a lot of cities is that the first thing that's done when something comes before the city council is that the city attorney sends in a request to the FBPC for a written opinion. That's why we have all these written opinions. I would like the city to adopt that pattern of practice, where if we have whatever it is that's coming up to the city council, that the city attorney just writes in, just requests an opinion from from the FPPC and then we don't have to have this kind of conversation, which I think is, which is unfortunate given everybody's hard work and the respect that we all have for each other up here on the diet. So I personally am adopting that from this point forward and I think that we should just all do it as a pattern of practice. So those are my thoughts. I don't think this is the time to increase the city's deficit spend. I think this is a time that we really need to drill in on a strategy going forward and how we're going to attack those things. And if we don't fit into that specific criteria, whatever it is we're looking at, then it's a great idea, but we're going to have to hold it until we can get ourselves back into a balanced budget. |
| 03:15:52.78 | Mayor Sobieski | Vice Mayor. |
| 03:15:53.99 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:15:54.01 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Mayor. I also appreciate all of the effort that went into this to get us this far. This is not our last meeting. We're going to have one more meeting on this if we move forward this evening, so. Thank you all for staying the course. This has been a challenging and intellectually challenging process, but I think I was impressed with a lot of the data. that we heard this evening, especially from Cass. 61% of private landowners voted in support of the PBID. Businesses and landowners support the PBID. 98% of responding landlords support formation of the PBID. And that's without counting any feedback from the city of Sausalito. As Anes points out, we own 50% of the affected property. I was inspired by comments from many of you and by a letter we received from Carlo Berg regarding sprinkling some magic dust on our beloved Sausalito. I was also impressed by Don Daglo's and the mayor's comments about the danger in public administration of falling into a pattern of fighting over a limited size of pie. that is divided and ignore the long-term solution of making the pie bigger. So I'm an eternal optimist, and I am being optimistic about the prospect of this undertaking. I am envisioning a hub of activity downtown with shops instead of vacant storefronts, restaurants, and lively businesses everywhere. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I WANT PBIDs have been successful for our neighbors. They're not a panacea, but look at Petaluma, look at San Rafael, look at at least eight PBIDS in San Francisco, Civic Center, Polk Community, Fisherman's Wharf, Japantown, Midmarket, Moscone, Noe Valley, Yerba Buena, Changes reaped in these neighborhoods have included increased cleanliness of the sidewalks, garbage cans, retail spaces, particularly when comparing the areas inside and outside of those district lines. PBIDs allow for the hard work to take place that make places sparkle with civic pride, economic dynamism, and solid sales and property values. I am persuaded that investing 133,000 from the city into the P bid is a sound investment. We are only increasing our deficit if there's no return on on our investment, but I believe our benefits in approving the P bid are considerable increased to T sales tax business license tax and parking revenue to name just a few. I also believe that boosting our local economy will have a ripple effect throughout Sausalito. That is why it is not surprising that there were 15 references to the PBID in our general plan including direction to encourage creation of BIDs in appropriate areas. I have reiterated many times my interest in creating revenue opportunities for the city and I am persuaded this is one of those opportunities. I was really inspired by the comments by Councilmember Kalman of using this vote as an opportunity to continue to build our partnership with our business community Um, I am persuaded that the businesses are seeking a public-private partnership, and I am in favor of that. With my support, I do continue to have some recommendations that we have previously discussed. We should include a requirement that the board slash nonprofit track expense and increased revenues, smart metrics, benchmarks, results, to ensure rigor and accountability in the way the money is spent. The meetings of the governing body should be Brown Act meetings open to the public. There should be an annual report to the city detailing the previous year's performance and expected performance over the next year. And I want to remind us, we can vote to dissolve the P bid if it's not working. So those are my thoughts. Thank you. |
| 03:20:01.01 | Ian Kelman | Vice Mayor, would you be open to entertaining my suggestion of a declining contribution with potentially looking at a rev share? |
| 03:20:13.04 | Jill Hoffman | So I don't know if that's a logistically feasible approach given where we are. Given we already sent out ballots that contemplated the Setting up of this in a particular way But I would like to pose that question to staff to find out if that's something you don't have to answer tonight But before but if you're able to answer tonight great |
| 03:20:36.02 | Chris Zapata | Yeah, city attorneys on on the call. He can answer that. Now, I don't know that a city's declining participation in the PBIT is legal. So Sergio, if you can weigh in, that'd be great. |
| 03:20:47.06 | Sergio Rudin | I believe it is not. That's the short answer is because the assessments have to be fixed based on analysis that is performed in the engineers report, which will set forth the expected Special benefits that are going to be accruing to each parcel and those special benefits in theory would remain the same throughout the term of the P bid. Basically, you come up with a formula by which you decide how, how, how much each parcel is supposed to pay. And then that formula is the formula that's valid for the life of the PBIT, unless you either change the kinds of benefits or the kinds of products and services the PBIT is doing, in which case that's a good reason to go you know, go back and modify the management plan and, you know, review whether the engineer's report is appropriate or whether or not you have to you know, modify it. |
| 03:21:38.66 | Ian Kelman | Sergio, using Bethesda and San Diego as examples, couldn't we create the management plan that articulated the transition into, however, I mean, I don't know exactly how Bethesda, I'm just looking at their public website, but they were mentioned by members of the public and if they could do it, we can figure it out as well. And I think it's a nice incentive structure to be able to address some of the concerns articulated around our budget as well. And then we're all in it together in a big way because we're taking the upside over the increase and we're hitting our goals. |
| 03:22:15.96 | Sergio Rudin | So I will say Bethesda, probably not a particularly... relevant example because their their business improvement districts would not be formed under California law wouldn't be subject to all of our same restrictions as prop 218 and Got it. all the same processes, but San Diego certainly would be a relevant example because all of the same laws would apply to them. I think you are raising some good points, you know, the structure and certainly those are things that we can examine and discuss, but I don't know that we necessarily have. As Joan points out, we already have a draft engineer's report. There's already been a petition of the landowners, you know, the landowners have... submitted that petition to the city council and so you know your action in light of that petition and the prepared documents are do you want to prepare a resolution of intention you know, basically if you want to do something other than what's before you guys tonight, I think, you know, staff would probably have to, |
| 03:23:11.71 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:23:11.83 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:23:11.88 | Unknown | to the next. |
| 03:23:17.74 | Sergio Rudin | consider whether you need to rework the management district plan on the engineers report. |
| 03:23:23.93 | Mayor Sobieski | Council Member Busting. |
| 03:23:24.99 | Jill Hoffman | Thanks. just to offer support of councilmember Kelman's suggestion if it's not we if there's not a legal structure for the revenue sharing maybe we just say that we are assessing the um, the success of the district annually for consideration of whether or not it's meeting its goals with regards to some of the revenue structures as mentioned by Councilmember Kellman with regards specifically to parking. You mentioned parking and one other specifically. |
| 03:23:50.00 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. I think it was a TOT. I was just reading from the Bethesda and the San Diego. |
| 03:23:50.27 | Jill Hoffman | I think it was a tear. |
| 03:23:55.60 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, so maybe we just have a, if we can't, if there isn't a legal structure, because again, I want to support your concerns, we at least have an annual assessment that considers those benchmarks, and then we're allowed to review, you know, how the bid is doing and make a decision or consideration. both at the five-year mark, which is obviously when the group itself would, but for the city to have transparency, we could do that annually. |
| 03:24:18.44 | Ian Kelman | So I endorse that. |
| 03:24:19.58 | Jill Hoffman | I don't know. |
| 03:24:20.48 | Ian Kelman | Thank you, Councilmember Boston. I appreciate that. I hear the vice mayor is in favor of that as well. |
| 03:24:27.68 | David Corey | Is there a motion? |
| 03:24:28.53 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. |
| 03:24:28.54 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and make a motion that the city council adopt a resolution of intention to initiate the balloting process for the downtown Sausalito property business improvement district. and separately that we direct staff to continue to explore the safeguards that we have enunciated this evening, including potentially a potential assessment on the district based on certain pre-established performance parameters, smart metrics to ensure rigor and accountability in the way the money is spent, requirement that the governing body be a Brown Act committee with open meeting requirements and an annual report to the city detailing the previous year's performance and expected performance over this over the following year |
| 03:25:23.41 | Mayor Sobieski | Is there a second? Thank you. |
| 03:25:24.43 | Jill Hoffman | Megan. |
| 03:25:24.47 | Mayor Sobieski | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:25:24.53 | Ian Kelman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:25:24.59 | Mayor Sobieski | . |
| 03:25:24.64 | Ian Kelman | Sorry, Council Member, I just want to ask the Vice Mayor to entertain. I don't know if it's a friendly amendment or it's just a question for staff, but I would love to see Director Phipps if you could, in the next go around, provide an updated financial projection slide. Also, I'm old and my eyes are tired on a black background, or white background, black writing, just simple simple. |
| 03:25:27.02 | Jill Hoffman | That's just what I was going to say. |
| 03:25:45.97 | Ian Kelman | It's easier to read. But if you would update that, I don't know if that has to be part of the motion, but just for clarity's sake. |
| 03:25:51.22 | Jill Hoffman | I will include that in my direction to staff that is a part of this motion. |
| 03:25:55.89 | Ian Kelman | Yeah. |
| 03:25:55.89 | Mayor Sobieski | Is there a second? |
| 03:25:57.10 | Jill Hoffman | I think Councilman Boston. |
| 03:25:58.50 | Mayor Sobieski | Second. Second. Motion is made and seconded. Can you call the Royal City Clerk? |
| 03:25:58.84 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Blosty. Yes. Council member Hoffman. |
| 03:26:07.09 | Ian Kelman | you |
| 03:26:07.13 | Walfred Solorzano | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:26:07.21 | Ian Kelman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:26:07.36 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:26:07.38 | Ian Kelman | you |
| 03:26:08.26 | Walfred Solorzano | Council member. Come on yes. Vice Mayor Cox yes. |
| 03:26:13.81 | Mayor Sobieski | Yes. |
| 03:26:15.58 | Ian Kelman | Mayor, so I'm aware, no one's leaving because we're talking about the budget. I'm aware that it's 1030. At our last council meeting, Council Member Hoffman suggested that we set aside time for a separate strategic planning session as to the budget. Yes. Given the late hour, might it make sense to actually defer consideration of the budget item that is on the agenda tonight? And might get a date certain for that? |
| 03:26:31.07 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 03:26:44.81 | Jill Hoffman | I would want to ask the city manager his perspective on that. We received some comprehensive materials that we need to consider. At the same time, we know that we don't yet have a key piece of information that we would like to include in our consideration tonight. So if we were to meet on, Mr. City Manager, if we were to meet on our scheduled June 18 date and perhaps the following Tuesday, June 25th, could we accomplish your goals for adoption of the budget within those two meetings? |
| 03:27:22.20 | Chris Zapata | We were going to propose a special meeting anyway, as we spoke about it in agenda setting. And that meeting wouldn't just be the budget. It would be the economic reserve policies that we have. It would potentially be the insurance that we would either have or not have. So there is a need for two meetings and a special one on the 25th. I would recommend seeing what we get to on the 18th. A lot of the information that we've provided is significant. There's a full-on budget book that's in draft form for you that the finance staff has worked really hard on. There are some trending in it as well that I think is important to note. And also, you know, we need to get some clarity on what the insurance situation is going to turn into. So, yeah, next Tuesday to start it fresh but we do have some items on that agenda that I think are really important related to infrastructure so if my recommendation would be is this be the first item non-negotiable on business and then you know you're gonna have a meeting on the 25th and if you're not comfortable on the 25th you can have one on the 26 to 27th the 28th the 29th |
| 03:28:28.15 | Ian Kelman | I've blocked out the 25th. Don't change it on me. |
| 03:28:30.19 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, so it looks like we're blocking out the 25th as a potential special meeting. Mayor, not a potential meeting, excuse me. We're committed to it, fair enough. I'm asking, that was a question mark there. So we're all good on that, just to get my colleagues looking at Jill's. |
| 03:28:31.38 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 03:28:31.39 | Ian Kelman | I blocked out the 25th. |
| 03:28:36.71 | Chris Zapata | Mayor. |
| 03:28:44.88 | Ian Kelman | I'm assuming it's an evening meeting, is that what you're just saying? |
| 03:28:47.61 | Mayor Sobieski | I'm just being councilmember Boston is the 25th. Okay for you |
| 03:28:51.86 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 03:28:52.40 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay. |
| 03:28:52.86 | Jill Hoffman | And is that a 6 p.m., 7 p.m.? |
| 03:28:55.79 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:28:56.74 | Mayor Sobieski | We could do six if we're good. 6 p.m. Yeah. Is that good? |
| 03:28:57.65 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:28:57.68 | Jill Hoffman | better 6 p.m. yeah is that good agree start at 6 p.m. no closed session prior |
| 03:29:02.63 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, so Council Member Austin, is that okay for you? |
| 03:29:04.65 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 03:29:06.68 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay. Great. All right. We have those. So we have two. So that item is, uh, |
| 03:29:07.25 | Jill Hoffman | Great. |
| 03:29:12.79 | Mayor Sobieski | The budget I'm just perfect. We start to take public comment on that item. And so we will then just a sense of the council and I guess the manager a report on the charter cities are you even prepared to do that tonight? |
| 03:29:26.88 | Jill Hoffman | I don't need a report. I just would like to give proposed direction and see if the council. Do we want to do that tonight or no? Yes. |
| 03:29:31.05 | Mayor Sobieski | Do we want to do that tonight or no? Thank you. Okay, so we will hear the matter unless someone objects to the charter city issue. Well, we will take up 3 H on the charter city. I'm happy deferring the receive and file employee retention issue to a subsequent meeting because I think it goes along with the budget. All right, so we'll hear one more matter 3 H, but first we'll take comment public comment on the even though there will be no action or just further discussion on item 5 B, which is the. |
| 03:30:00.12 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 03:30:01.13 | Mayor Sobieski | fiscal year 2025 budget yes, because my robusty. |
| 03:30:01.84 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor. Are we still going to hear 5C because it's relatively quick? It'll be quick. I mean, I'm open to whatever. I just want to understand. It seems like this will be quick. So 5C and 5H. |
| 03:30:10.01 | Mayor Sobieski | It'll be quick. I just want to understand. It seems like this will be quick. |
| 03:30:14.03 | Jill Hoffman | 5C was moved was referred to the planning commission. We're not gonna hear fighting. |
| 03:30:18.16 | Mayor Sobieski | We're not going to hear 5C. We disposed of 5C. It's going to the Planning Commission. The parking issue? |
| 03:30:23.68 | Jill Hoffman | No, not the parking issue. The next, the third business item on our agenda. The residence, the public hearing. |
| 03:30:28.03 | Jill Hoffman | to the, |
| 03:30:28.39 | Mayor Sobieski | I'm sorry, you're quite right. I forgot about that one. What's the sense of the council on 5C? |
| 03:30:32.81 | Jill Hoffman | THE CITY. I say it's punnet. Okay, what it? Let's, yeah, punnet. |
| 03:30:38.23 | Unknown | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:30:38.76 | Mayor Sobieski | We're going to defer that one also, Councilmember Blustein. We're going to defer that. Okay, thanks. I just wanted to get a sense. Thank you. We're going to take public comment first on fiscal year 2025 budget review. Is there any public comment? |
| 03:30:42.34 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thanks. I just wanted to get a sense. Thank you. |
| 03:30:44.98 | Walfred Solorzano | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:30:45.06 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:30:45.08 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:30:48.47 | Walfred Solorzano | See you then. |
| 03:30:48.50 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Thank you. We will close public comment. 5C, is there any public comment on introduction and waiver of first reading of ordinance number 4, 2024, city of Sausalito amending municipal code section 258040 relating to residency requirements on city boards and commissions and committees. Any public comment? Seeing none. |
| 03:31:09.68 | Walfred Solorzano | See you, Nance. |
| 03:31:10.22 | Mayor Sobieski | We will close public comment on that matter. and we will take up the deferred, uh, Actually, let's just close out public comment, any public comment on receiving file the employee retention recruitment update. Any public comment on that item? See you then. |
| 03:31:28.66 | Walfred Solorzano | No. |
| 03:31:29.56 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, we will close public comment on that item and we will take up item 5.3H, which is the receive and file report regarding becoming a charter city, provide direction to staff regarding becoming a charter city. Does staff have anything to say or does the vice mayor just want to give her direction? |
| 03:31:46.84 | Chris Zapata | The city attorney prepared the report. If he has some comments to make, I defer to him, Mayor. City attorney? |
| 03:31:52.95 | Sergio Rudin | In light of the late hour, I will defer to the council to provide direction and ask any questions that you may have. |
| 03:31:59.48 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, to the council for questions and or discussion. We can do it all in one vote. Thank you. |
| 03:32:04.51 | Jill Hoffman | What are we on? We are on the Charter City consent item that was pulled. |
| 03:32:05.42 | Mayor Sobieski | We are on Charter City consent item that was No questions? |
| 03:32:10.83 | Jill Hoffman | So if there are no questions, we should take public comment, and then I'll make a recommendation. Okay. |
| 03:32:12.83 | Mayor Sobieski | There are no. |
| 03:32:17.45 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, public comment please on this matter. In the room? Seeing none. No public comment, all right, we'll close public comment. |
| 03:32:24.86 | Jill Hoffman | So thank you city manager and city attorney for your comprehensive report comparing a general law city to a charter city, explaining that becoming a charter city would require dedication of resources as well as the cost of an election, but nevertheless enunciating a number of primary advantages of city charter status, including some significant financial advantages. And for that reason, I would like to direct staff to continue moving forward with a process to facilitate our consideration of whether we would like to further explore becoming a charter city. So I'd like this to come back to us as a business item with some Um, timeline of what it would look like, what it would cost, and continue to explore the pros and cons specific to Sausalito rather than generic. |
| 03:33:22.52 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. I agree with that. I think it's good to explore that, and there are some advantages that still flow from being a charter city, so it's a worthy effort. |
| 03:33:33.54 | Mayor Sobieski | Any other comments? Any comments, Councilmember Blasting? No. Okay. All right. We'll close that matter and move on. Communications, this is a time for matters not on the agenda. If anyone wishes to make a comment, please indicate here in the room. We have several here in the audience, city clerk and online. Please raise your hand. Please just give it. Please give it to the city clerk. Take your podium. |
| 03:34:01.35 | Walfred Solorzano | Oh, that was for earlier. Let me see. Sorry. Yeah, but Beth McDougall. |
| 03:34:08.62 | Mayor Sobieski | That's this is the time Ms. Merrill. So please bring your slip up to the city clerk. We'll start with that last minute. You can start. |
| 03:34:12.52 | Walfred Solorzano | We'll start with that last minute. |
| 03:34:18.19 | Alice Merrill | Okay, thank you very much. My, not on the agenda, is parking. um, I just really think that there needs to be some kind of rational thinking put into the parking for city employees. I mean the people in the restaurants and in drivers and in the shops and et cetera. right now. Um the Michelle's hairdresser and fingers, she asked me, begs me all the time to say please say something because at four o'clock Certain restaurants just take up all the spots because they can after four o'clock or whatever the time is. And I know that drivers, those people are running out every two hours to see if their car has been has been tagged. There's, and drivers is paying tickets when people get them. You just have to come up with something for the people who are working here so that the business owners are not suffering and struggling and they're used to be some part of a parking I thought that they would could. and now they can't. I just really think that some thinking needs to be done about parking for people who are working here. Thank you. They come from a long way away. They have a lot of traffic to go home, and that's beside the point, but still it adds, and it's tough. for everybody and um... I know that you guys are really working on the revenue for the city from parking tickets And I see that happening a lot. I just think that they should there should be some consideration for the worker bees. Thank you. |
| 03:36:14.36 | Walfred Solorzano | Babette McGoole. |
| 03:36:17.51 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. I want to just say that It's actually quite gratifying to see so many council members specifically acknowledge members of the public and their specific input. I really like to see more of this advantage. of an example of democracy at work. I'd like to see you guys feel a little more emboldened by these kinds of moves in the right direction to feel more comfortable engaging your constituents directly. And I'm looking forward to this gradual movement, if that's what it is, toward reinstating democracy into the council chambers as it once was. before things went a little sideways just before COVID. And the final thing is I want to also point out that this is not the first time that I personally have had the raise the issue of ethical standards. I've had to address Councilwoman Cox. In fact, if you recall, Ms. Cox, when we were talking about adopting some meeting minutes, I said, did I really understand you to say that you think including a standard of empirical standards of conduct and ethics would tie the hands of future councils? And you nodded your head yes. So this is not the first time the question of ethics has been raised. You should not have to take it ever so personally as you have, as are maybe some of our observers have also done. It is not intended the way it was construed. However we must be concerned about an ethical standard of contact It's the only way forward. for consensus to arrive in an equitable manner within a democratic framework. And everyone knows that democracy is at risk these days. So if ever we should be mindful of this and we should think more thoughtfully about a standard of ethics and conduct, This is the time. So please understand it's all meant with the best of intentions, whether it comes from me or others. Thank you. |
| 03:38:11.94 | Walfred Solorzano | I'm seeing no further public speakers. Sorry. And it's... |
| 03:38:19.79 | Mayor Sobieski | Yes, please just come to the podium. Is there anyone else in the audience? Okay, welcome. |
| 03:38:25.27 | Ines Ponyay | Hi again. |
| 03:38:25.92 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. I'm wearing your socks, just so you know. |
| 03:38:27.89 | Ines Ponyay | Oh, many of you are, thank you. I want to address the parking on holiday weekends and the charges that are going on. I looked at my revenue from this Memorial weekend to last Memorial weekend, and I was down 30%. And I think that we're sending a wrong message out to our local visitors, because I think we have people from maybe Corte Madera or Novato or Petaluma that just want to drive down here and stroll around Sausalito and enjoy our town. And the optics that they're getting is it's $25 whether you stay an hour or eight hours or all day. And that's not just in our lots. This time it was on all the parking meters. And so I think I'm losing, and I've heard them, because I parked, I heard people going, what, $25, it's all or nothing? And they leave. I get we need to have money. We need to make more money, more revenue. But the optics that we're putting out by doing this kind of behavior is not helping us at all. It is because I have talked to other people, local people, and they're like, well, why would I go to Sausalito? It's $25. They don't know it's just holiday. They're thinking it's all the time. So, I mean, you go to Mill Valley, you pay, you know, it's shorter in Mill Valley. Or you go to the mall, it's free in the mall. So, Think about how you're raising money, please. |
| 03:40:05.97 | Mayor Sobieski | Any other comments? |
| 03:40:07.98 | Walfred Solorzano | See you next week. |
| 03:40:08.40 | Ian Kelman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:40:08.57 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:40:08.60 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, we'll close public comment and come to council member committee reports. Council member Kelman. |
| 03:40:14.34 | Ian Kelman | Yes, I'm going to share some good budget information. So we heard today that we were granted the SB1 Ocean Protection Council money's $250,000 to begin an assessment for gate five. So huge thanks to Chris and to Katie Tal Garcia for helping push that through. And then also I mentioned at the last council meeting that we were looking at a solid green boating and gentrification maritime vessels. We're gonna meet with them this week because they identified a grant from the California Department of Energy that's a $1, pardon me, a $1 million minimum grant with a $5 million maximum grant. And this is probably the last year we're going to see this with the budget cuts. So at minimum, it's a non-competitive grant process. It's for a virtual power plant. And so the idea is you bring something online, you can turn it on and off when you have peak flows from the grid. So that I think would be really good news for our budget conversation. So thank you for the help on that as well. |
| 03:41:16.76 | Mayor Sobieski | Anyone else? Councilmember Blosky. |
| 03:41:21.79 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, just really quickly. We had a Marin County Council Members and Mayor's Committee meeting last month that was hosted in CMFL where we appointed two delegates to the BAFA committee. And I just want to flag the importance of BAFA and what this might mean for us going forward. So BAFA is the Bay Area Affordable Housing Bond, which could result in up to $20 billion in affordable housing funding for MTC, which is all the 11 regional counties of the Bay Area. And so right now, the county's initially formed committee is going to discuss how we as a county might engage around the future of BACA and what it looks like but cities are really going to need to play a key role in determining the and deployment of the funds should the BAFA fund, which will have to go before voters on the ballot pass. So I just want to flag that that's something that's being worked on at the county level and that we should all start to think about and educate ourselves on because it could have big, big impact in our community going forward. Also at that meeting, we had the opportunity to hear from the new PG&E Vice President, who spoke about the work being done in Sausalito and mentioned us as a sort that great case study for community engagement. So perhaps we should get an update on how that's going. And we heard from Jamila Jordan, our County Equity Director, who I'd love to have come and speak to the council about some of the projects that she's been working on. the county level that we might replicate and, in Sausalito as well. And then we additionally had a transportation authority of Marin meeting and notably had an update on some of the legislative issues that TAM is considering. One in particular was SB, I think it's 1301, which would have brought together MTC and AVAG around transportation funding measures. And this was what made it to the Senate for, so the big consolidation effort, mostly to fund larger public transit programs that had some deficits, but there were some concerns about return to source and other amendments. And it's not going to go before um the the it's not going to go before the committee um during this session so that's just an important update because again that could have huge budget repercussions for all of marin county and for our community as well so i wanted to make sure we provided those updates thanks |
| 03:43:26.17 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Anyone else? If no one else, we will close council member committee reports and go to the city manager for his report. |
| 03:43:34.64 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 03:43:36.04 | Mayor Sobieski | you |
| 03:43:36.06 | Chris Zapata | I'll be brief, but it's important mayor and council in public in your inbox. You have a letter that was sent to the underwriting committee for prison, which outlines what I believe is Sasslito's case To be accepted. It's 13 bullet points that I show the factors that we believe lower our risk profile steps that we've taken That we can take will take and so on Please take a look at your inbox because some of you have asked me about you know the status of the insurance um um opportunity with prism so tomorrow is the big meeting with them one o'clock Sergio and i will be there i'll be happy to report back when i'm done with that i'm unhappy to report that the second candidate that we offered a job to declined this afternoon so you know we're back to square one with that and we may come back to you with some new ideas about you know sweetening that CANDIDATE THAT WE OFFERED A JOB TO DECLINED THIS AFTERNOON. SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE BACK TO SQUARE ONE WITH THAT AND WE MAY COME BACK TO YOU WITH SOME NEW IDEAS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SWEETENING THAT, UM, THAT SALARY RANGE AND, YOU KNOW, CREATING SOME OTHER THINGS THAT MIGHT MAKE IT MORE ATTRACTIVE TO SOMEBODY TO TAKE THAT POSITION. BUT IN INTERIM, WE'RE GOING TO ASK PRISM AND BE OPEN TO THE IDEA THAT PRISM COULD HELP US WITH THE SHORT-TERM CONTRACT OR SOME TYPE OF REFERRAL OF somebody that can work on a part-time basis until we hire someone full-time. and be open to the idea that prison could help us with the short term contract or some type of referral of somebody that can work on a part time basis until we hire someone full time. Again, thank all of you for your work on it. Some of you have given me great ideas and people to follow up with and I've tried to do that as Sergio. So, you know, this is an all hands on deck approach. Tomorrow we'll keep our fingers crossed and you know, we'll try to be the best new member of this pool if we can. So that concludes my report. Thank you, Mayor and Council. |
| 03:45:06.21 | Mayor Sobieski | You're dubtailing on that, I guess I will just add to that. I forgot to mention the vice mayor and I did meet on Friday, as we will every Friday at noon, to bird dog and help partner with the city manager and team on that issue. Councilmember Busty. |
| 03:45:22.39 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I've mentioned this, I think, at our last few meetings, but I feel that the risk management position is really critical. And I had discussed potentially us posting the job as a remote position, given the success of Chad as a remote director. I think that since this is really urgent and how critical this role is, we should really consider that and then consider potentially a more aggressive search whether or not that's using the recruitment firm. But if we can avoid that through changing the way the posting is, I would recommend consideration for that because given the competitiveness of this type of position, I just think it's really critical that we seem attractive and that we hire ASAP. |
| 03:45:58.39 | Mayor Sobieski | I'm not sure. |
| 03:45:59.48 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Councilmember Blaustein, for that comment. I actually had a similar discussion with Director Hess this afternoon. If we do adopt some sort of hybrid position, I do think it's important that there be at least a monthly presence in Sausalito. So much of Sausalito's risk comes from its topography, its geography, its relationship to water, its proximity to the Golden Gate National Recreation Area and the highway and our narrow streets, et cetera. And so I think experiencing Sausalito personally would be an important aspect. I was disappointed to hear that the candidate that turned us down today has not yet visited Sausalito or California because I firmly believe that had he done so, he may have reconsidered. I came out here on vacation in 1984 Day four, started looking for a job. Day five got hired. Went back to the East Coast, gave two weeks notice, and started working out here two weeks later, and that was in July of 1984. So California is a magical spot. |
| 03:47:13.24 | Jill Hoffman | Look, I'd like to know what? Yeah, I'm sorry. I'm gonna follow up on that. Yeah, I think it's different I mean respectfully I think the risk assessment person really has to spend a lot of time here because of our topography because of things that happen continually And there's a lot of work to be done physically here in Sausalito. So I mean, yeah, we do need to hire somebody It works out great with Chad cuz he's dealing with numbers and he's on the computer all day anyway and he's out here I think on a monthly basis if not bimonthly Chad cuz he's dealing with numbers and he's on the computer all day anyway and and he's out here I think on a monthly basis if not bi-monthly I think he's about here for the city council meetings but the risk assessment person needs to be I think closer but one of the things okay |
| 03:47:13.90 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:47:13.92 | Alice Merrill | Oh, shit. |
| 03:47:14.52 | Jill Hoffman | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:47:52.58 | Jill Hoffman | You know at one point we talked about sharing a risk assessment person with Mel Valley or somebody you know, Mel Valley to Brown Bellator have we explored that recently? No. Okay, might that be an avenue? Okay, that's it, thanks. |
| 03:48:07.63 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, anything else? Let's move on to future agenda items. |
| 03:48:12.35 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor I had a couple. |
| 03:48:13.39 | Mayor Sobieski | Please, vice mayor. |
| 03:48:14.33 | Jill Hoffman | I would like us to adopt a policy that requires all materials related to our agenda items be attached to our agenda items within a certain time. I don't know what that time will be. But I It is very difficult for me to see PowerPoint presentations for the first time and not be able to follow along. I cannot read things on a computer screen. I need to see them printed out. the city clerk is painfully aware of this because he prints out my packet for every meeting. It really would serve me and I think it would serve staff. to have a requirement that they finish their presentation and have it submitted and finalized and if it's not ready move it to the next meeting When things get moved to the next meeting once or twice, they will magically start being ready on time for the current meeting. So I would like us to consider adopting a policy regarding that because our requests have not yet been addressed. I also would like us to reconsider our parking policies for holidays and such. I do not like hearing that our raised rates for the Blue Angels and Memorial Day and the Fourth of July results in less business for our business community. So I don't know what the solution is, but I'd like us to explore that. |
| 03:49:43.89 | Mayor Sobieski | Okay, thank you, Councilmember Blaustein. |
| 03:49:47.51 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:49:47.53 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I asked for this before, but just I appreciate it. Alice Merrill's comments. We really need to take up a plan for employee parking, especially for the employees on Caledonia. They've asked many times. We've discussed it as a future agenda item before, and I'd like to see that on the agenda this summer so that we have a resolution for our employees working in Fasilito who otherwise don't have somewhere to park I mentioned this every time, but I wanna see more disaster preparedness and table tops on the agenda. And I mentioned this in passing, but I'd love to have Jamila Jordan present on the equity programs that the County of Miranda is doing. have a discussion with and learn something from her. |
| 03:50:25.62 | Mayor Sobieski | Council Member, thank you Council Member for blessing. |
| 03:50:27.46 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:50:27.47 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. Yes, I have a time sensitive one. So at the last city council meeting, I requested that we place the Munchip Blue Economy Innovation District initiative onto a city council agenda because it is time sensitive. And I think there were at least three people who said thumbs up on that. It has to be sometime in June. So can we commit to that as a council to add that to an agenda? |
| 03:50:58.00 | Jill Hoffman | I actually thought it was Councilmember Hoffman that requested that at the last meeting. |
| 03:51:01.75 | Ian Kelman | Oh, sorry, I got so excited about it, I wanted it to be my idea. |
| 03:51:04.73 | Jill Hoffman | I was surprised when she said Blue Water that it wasn't yours. That's why I remember. |
| 03:51:06.34 | Jill Hoffman | That was great. |
| 03:51:09.83 | Jill Hoffman | That's why I remember. I'm yielding to the movement of Councilmember Kelman. |
| 03:51:16.21 | Ian Kelman | So thank you, yeah. The late hour makes me forget my first name. So can we commit to that in June? |
| 03:51:25.64 | Mayor Sobieski | I think we asked staff to do the work. I only saw one draft recently, so. Yeah, I think that- And it seemed to have parts lifted from Morro Bay in there. I read, it's halfway through it and read something about Morro Bay. So I think it needs some work from staff, but I hope we can get it on the agenda. |
| 03:51:32.26 | Ian Kelman | Yeah, I think that. |
| 03:51:33.37 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:51:43.93 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. |
| 03:51:43.95 | Jill Hoffman | Great, so we'll see it, one of the June meetings, we'll see it then. |
| 03:51:44.49 | Mayor Sobieski | So we'll see it, one of the June meetings, we'll see it. Yeah, it's the direction of staff to do the prep. |
| 03:51:49.35 | Jill Hoffman | June 25 is a special meeting, so I think it would be June 18. Okay, great. So we'll see you on June 18. Thank you for that, Jennifer. |
| 03:51:53.74 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 03:51:55.83 | Ian Kelman | I mean, I'm not. |
| 03:51:55.83 | Mayor Sobieski | I mean, I would ask at the same time I saw we saw a letter from the Clipper yacht owner, Marina owner, Pedersen also has some. |
| 03:52:04.94 | Ian Kelman | I did not see an, was there an attachment? |
| 03:52:07.15 | Mayor Sobieski | No, it's just an email, and I don't know if there's a there there, but there's a reference to also a ballot initiative related to the Marinship. So if staff can, I'd be interested in seeing that, if at all possible, alongside. But if not, whenever, if there's a there there, I'd be interested in that. |
| 03:52:09.89 | Ian Kelman | Thank you. |
| 03:52:24.30 | Jill Hoffman | I would just say cross that bridge when we come to it. Let's see what we get. |
| 03:52:26.97 | Mayor Sobieski | Sure. Yep. I'm afraid there is public comment, but stand by. We're not done. Is there any other future agenda item? That's Mayor Hoffman. |
| 03:52:34.85 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I think this is something I talked with the city manager about. Now, I can't remember what you told me, but I'm so sorry. Gun violence awareness. This is gun violence awareness month. I was approached at a League of Women Voters event, and that whether or not City Council had issued a proclamation, I looked on it, and we hadn't. And so,'m sorry I can't remember you told me did you want me to bring it up on a future agenda items okay there you have it okay so I will say that Friday is the actual day for gun violence awareness day but all of June is the best so thank you thank you and I would support that |
| 03:53:03.47 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 03:53:03.72 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 03:53:03.74 | Unknown | I will say that |
| 03:53:09.91 | Mayor Sobieski | Yep. Thank you. Thank you for that. It'll be on. You too. I think our city clerk is taking notes. And just so you know, I meant to read out loud the Alzheimer's proclamation. I asked the city clerk to put it back on the next agenda. I'm going to read it out loud. I know that several members of the community wanted to chime in on that. So, time for public comments, please. |
| 03:53:15.41 | Jill Hoffman | Me too. |
| 03:53:35.82 | Steven Woodside | I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO I'm prompted to speak only by your last comments about possible item for the ballot. and coming back in June with something, and I know there are early deadlines to get on the ballot, it would be, without knowing what's involved. Usually these things take more time and more public input. And if you're planning to put something on the ballot without a lot of public input, I think, I don't know what's involved, but it could be a disaster, especially if you really want something to be voted on. So that's my comment, sorry. |
| 03:54:19.98 | Scott Thornburg | I'll be very quick. Thank you. In our EDAC meeting yesterday, Councilmember Hoffman pointed out that in order for our Dixon parking study and the recommendations therein to be put into action, it requires council direction to staff. It's my understanding that there is a parking fund that is |
| 03:54:26.61 | Unknown | you |
| 03:54:42.84 | Scott Thornburg | Not sure exactly what the management structure is for that, but Just would recommend I know that there's been some discussion for the mayor to put together a group to look at this. I would encourage you to pursue that as quickly because it's not it's not about how many parking spaces we had, but it is about the the use of them and I think this is this issue that in as brought up this evening is a great example of the thing that we just need to look at so. Thank you. |
| 03:55:06.20 | Mayor Sobieski | Thank you. Ms. Merrill, did you have a public comment? |
| 03:55:13.07 | Alice Merrill | I did. And just to be a little, you know, I don't know, crabby snarky. I put a card in. And the two men jumped in front of me so I just want to say you know we live in a whatever. Okay, I am going to second the Blue Economy Initiative. That was on my list. I wanna just, I love it and please get it on. And you know that I care about the Marineship probably more than parking for car for for drivers people and it will and it will promote the Marinship area as a very important place for the, you know, for this city. So thank you. Thank you very much. You've been very, Interesting tonight. Thank you. |
| 03:56:01.26 | Mayor Sobieski | Good night, Ms. Merrill. All right, that's the end of the meeting. We will adjourn and wish everyone a good evening and see you in two weeks. Good night. |
| 03:56:11.35 | Rick Simonson | Thank you. |
| 03:56:11.37 | Scott Thornburg | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:56:17.24 | Mayor Sobieski | RECOMMENDED. |
Ted Barton — Against: Reads from Planning Commission resolution approving 22 Atwood garage design that was intended not to impact on-street parking; argues against changing it. ▶ 📄
Charles Hamilton — Against: States parking is at a premium; suggests the garage owner may need driving lessons if they have trouble maneuvering. ▶ 📄
Karen Maddox — Against: Asks for consideration due to tough parking; mentions older residents and personal need for luggage access; notes garage owner has a two-car garage. ▶ 📄
Mary Carey — Against: Longtime resident; parking is extremely difficult; losing spots is scary; former owner of 22 Atwood had no trouble with garage access. ▶ 📄
Beth King — Against: Presents survey showing 29 people depend on North Street parking; situation is very tight for all ages. ▶ 📄
Charlie Tulinski (Charles Hamilton) — Against: Notes address discrepancy (Atwood using North Street); parking is premium; original design approval should stand. ▶ 📄
David Corey — Against: Opposition is not personal to new owners; parking loss forces residents to park farther, interfering with public park access. ▶ 📄
Jeffrey Jacob — Neutral: Comments broadly on parking and city spending; not directly about the specific item. ▶ 📄
Bill Goldman — Against: Speaks about Prospect Ave. safety concern due to narrowed street from parked cars, impeding emergency vehicles. ▶ 📄
Frederick O. Lewis — In Favor: Owner of 22 Atwood; states garage design makes entry impossible when car is parked opposite; claims net savings of one parking space if restriction passes, as they would park two cars inside. ▶ 📄
Bonnie McGregor — Neutral: Speaks about downtown parking issues, not directly about the North Street item. ▶ 📄
Alice Merrill — Against: General comment that parking is hard; losing any spot is tough on residents. ▶ 📄
Jonathan Leon — Against: 30-year resident; parking is high premium; garage was designed for access from Atwood, not North Street; original engineering study found no problems; restriction privatizes public space. ▶ 📄