| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00.03 | Justin Sperger | I don't. Yep. That's all it's good. Yeah. |
| 00:00:03.54 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:03.56 | Katie Garcia | We have changed. |
| 00:00:05.92 | Justin Sperger | Thank you. |
| 00:00:06.04 | Chris Zapata | So, we did some project Marshall. That was the one project. |
| 00:00:10.73 | Justin Sperger | Thank you. |
| 00:00:10.75 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:00:11.64 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. Bye. |
| 00:00:12.32 | Unknown | So long, Shabu. Thank you. |
| 00:00:20.23 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 00:00:20.70 | Walfred Solorzano | Good afternoon, Mayor and City Council. Today's special and regular meeting is being held at 420 Little Street, South Carolina, inside Council Chambers. It's also being broadcast live on the city's website, Zoom and cable TV channel 27. |
| 00:00:40.94 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Good afternoon and welcome to the special meeting for the city of Sausalito City Council for Tuesday, September 16 2025. I'll call the meeting to order and ask the city clerk to call roll. |
| 00:00:52.85 | Walfred Solorzano | and some of them lost in. |
| 00:00:54.32 | Steven Woodside | Here. |
| 00:00:55.18 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Hoffman. |
| 00:00:56.24 | Steven Woodside | Here. |
| 00:00:57.02 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Sobieski. Vice Mayor Woodside? Here. Mayor Cox. |
| 00:01:01.29 | Steven Woodside | Here. It is so nice to see all of us here in person. It's been a few weeks. So welcome. All right, we will adjourn to close session to consider items C1 through C3. C1 is conference with legal counsel Anticipated litigation, government code section 5495.6.9 D2. Significant exposure to litigation, two cases. C2 is conference with real property negotiators concerning 558 Bridgeway. The agency negotiator is the city manager and city attorney and negotiating parties are Bridgeway 558 real property. And C3 is Conference with Real Property Negotiators, Government Code Section 54956.8. And the property is 300 Spencer. Agency Negotiator is the City Manager and City Attorney. And the Negotiating Party is... Is our southern wind fire protection district, are there any public comment on our closed session items. |
| 00:01:56.32 | Walfred Solorzano | Scene nine. |
| 00:01:57.50 | Steven Woodside | With that, we will adjourn to closed session. We will resume at 5 p.m. |
| 00:02:16.80 | Steven Woodside | Good afternoon and welcome back to the city of Sausalito City Council meeting for Tuesday, September 16 2025. We will open with the Pledge of Allegiance. |
| 00:02:34.47 | Steven Woodside | I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. City Clerk, will you call roll? |
| 00:02:52.00 | Walfred Solorzano | Austin? Yes. Council member Hoffman? |
| 00:02:55.63 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, here. |
| 00:02:58.97 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Sabieski? Vice Mayor Woodside? Here. Mayor Cox? |
| 00:03:02.97 | Steven Woodside | here. We held a closed session. There are no closed session announcements. I will ask for a motion approving our agenda. |
| 00:03:13.08 | Melissa Blaustein | So moved. |
| 00:03:15.78 | Steven Woodside | Is there a second? |
| 00:03:19.83 | Steven Woodside | Guys, can somebody second this? Second. All in favor. I. |
| 00:03:24.29 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:03:24.86 | Steven Woodside | I see Ian, are you going to vote? Yes. Okay. That motion carries 5-0. um, There are no special presentations. I do want to make an announcement regarding our chili cook-off. We have the chili cook-off from 12 to 4 p.m. at Dunphy Park. 14 chefs are participating. We do need one more judge. The cost is $30 per person for all-you-can-eat chili. And that's this Saturday at Dunphy Park. So is everybody going? |
| 00:04:05.80 | Melissa Blaustein | Definitely gone. |
| 00:04:06.69 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Anybody interested in serving as a judge? |
| 00:04:12.82 | Jill Hoffman | I have a |
| 00:04:13.85 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:04:13.88 | Jill Hoffman | you |
| 00:04:13.90 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:04:13.97 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. I've committed to shifts at the boat show. |
| 00:04:17.63 | Melissa Blaustein | Judge. |
| 00:04:19.40 | Melissa Blaustein | that means I can have a lot of chili, right? |
| 00:04:22.20 | Steven Woodside | And you get to taste the best chilies. |
| 00:04:25.37 | Melissa Blaustein | I'll volunteer. I just want to reveal a bias. If it's really too hot, I may have a hard time with it. |
| 00:04:27.13 | Steven Woodside | All right. |
| 00:04:32.09 | Steven Woodside | No, I don't like hot stuff. I served as a judge one year and I was just fine. And people have beer and tequila to help you with that. |
| 00:04:36.71 | Melissa Blaustein | That's the hint. |
| 00:04:40.31 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. |
| 00:04:44.29 | Steven Woodside | All right. Um, I'll move on to communications. This is the time for the city council to hear from citizens regarding matters within the jurisdiction of the city council. They're not on the agenda. Except in very limited situations, state law precludes the council from taking action on or engaging in discussions concerning items that are not on the agenda. I have a speaker card from Alice Merrill. Welcome, Alice. |
| 00:05:15.26 | Alice Merrill | Hello, everybody. Um... sing the song. the West Marin song is really good. Okay, so what I'm here for is I have a request. It's going to sound petty and not very nice and blah, blah, blah. often one of our council members, and I can say who it is if you want me to, up a movie of some property. and says, look, we have this wonderful, huge book That could be housing. And it happens to be Carla Berg's property. And he has done it. This person has done it. a number of times. And Thank you. . It's already been decided that Carla Berg's property is too close to where the ships are built. It is not housing. He could do other things with that property that is not housing. He could have some work things with boats of all things or office space. But I don't think it's appropriate for one of our city council members to keep showing that property, Carmelberg, he has offered everybody run for council money, whether or not they've taken it, And I truly think that we shouldn't have to look at that again. Thank you. |
| 00:06:43.19 | Walfred Solorzano | We do have some speakers online. We have Sandra Bushmaker. |
| 00:06:47.71 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:06:47.73 | Sandra Bushmaker | Welcome, Sandra. Thank you. I just wanted to bring up this Measure K business again. I brought this up, uh, At the last meeting, And, |
| 00:06:59.46 | Walfred Solorzano | Sandra, we can't hear you. |
| 00:07:01.30 | Sandra Bushmaker | I brought this up at the last meeting. Can you hear me now? Can you hear me now? Thank you. |
| 00:07:08.99 | Steven Woodside | Can you hear me now? I'm going to go on to the next one while she gets. |
| 00:07:09.10 | Sandra Bushmaker | Can you hear me? |
| 00:07:10.73 | Walfred Solorzano | I will go to Bet MacDougall right now. |
| 00:07:13.84 | Steven Woodside | Hello, Babette. |
| 00:07:16.96 | Babette McDougall | Hello, can you hear me? Hello. |
| 00:07:22.34 | Walfred Solorzano | Bye-bye. |
| 00:07:23.61 | Babette McDougall | Yes, I'm here. I unmuted. Thank you. So is there an issue on our end? |
| 00:07:28.97 | Steven Woodside | and, |
| 00:07:34.31 | Steven Woodside | So I see them speaking that's being transcribed online. We're just not hearing it. Thank you. |
| 00:07:39.37 | Babette McDougall | Well, if you can see the transcription, then I shall continue. I just want to say generally... No, don't continue, Babette. All right, thank you. |
| 00:07:49.16 | Steven Woodside | So she's saying if you can see the transcript, then she'll continue. Let's take, we should take a couple of minutes and get this fixed on our end. We do need to be able to hear from the public. |
| 00:07:58.98 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:00.85 | Adrian Brinton | care for you. |
| 00:08:06.44 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 00:08:06.55 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:06.67 | Adrian Brinton | Okay. |
| 00:08:07.08 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:07.13 | Adrian Brinton | Thank you. |
| 00:08:07.21 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:10.60 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 00:08:10.64 | Melissa Blaustein | There's a power script. |
| 00:08:12.85 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:08:13.54 | Melissa Blaustein | Over. |
| 00:08:25.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:08:34.23 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. I'm just going to wait until you get set up on the monitor. Okay. |
| 00:08:40.15 | Melissa Blaustein | So we were hearing public comments. Sandra Bushbaker, you were the first Person for public comment. |
| 00:08:48.00 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. Okay, can you hear me? Okay, great. I am discussing Measure K, Your motion that you filed to put this measure on the ballot, the last sentence in that motion says that the ballot question should say, quote, subject to a 32 foot height limit. comma, be adopted, close quote. I just recently checked the county website and the last phrase in the measure that will appear on the ballot is, quote, maintaining building height limits be adopted. That is very different from having a 32 foot height limit. And I'm very concerned that what was passed in a public meeting of this council is not what is appearing on the. ballot measure. And I would like to have some explanation because that 32 foot height limit means a lot to many of the voters here in Sausalito. Thank you. |
| 00:09:53.17 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. City Attorney, are you on the line? |
| 00:09:57.59 | Sergio Rudin | Yes, I am present and I am prepared to answer that. I believe on August 5th during the council's motion to adopt the resolution placing that on the ballot, the council directed a minor modification to the question that was to appear on the ballot beyond what was in the scope of the draft resolution included on the packet. So I, my understanding is that the Language that has been submitted to the county is in fact accurate and consistent with the council's motion to place it on the ballot. Um, I'm prepared to answer any other questions on this. |
| 00:10:33.82 | Melissa Blaustein | Will you please research |
| 00:10:35.97 | Steven Woodside | the assertion by Ms. Bushmaker, who says that the motion that was made by the council included language that did not end up on the ballot. |
| 00:10:48.34 | Sergio Rudin | Yes. So the language quoted by Ms. Bushmaker is the language that appears in the draft resolution that was part of the city council agenda packet. I do recall that staff had discussed a modification to that form of ballot question to change the language from subject to 32 foot height limits and changing the question to maintaining current building heights. In substance, the measure did not change. The measure still requires a 32 foot height limit be imposed. The only thing that I believe occurred was the council did direct changes to the form of ballot question. |
| 00:11:23.28 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Well, you just confirm that Sergio, will you go back and look at the tape and confirm that? I was not present in that part of the meeting. |
| 00:11:27.30 | Sergio Rudin | I was not. |
| 00:11:27.74 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. I'm happy to do that. |
| 00:11:31.52 | Steven Woodside | Thank you so much. |
| 00:11:32.43 | Melissa Blaustein | Mayor, if I could just quickly add my recollection, because I was present, is that the existing height limit is 32 feet. Sure. And it was staff's recommendation that we use that language rather than the specific number. |
| 00:11:49.20 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, thank you for that. I just want Sergio to clarify that. All right, next speaker is Babette McDougall. |
| 00:11:58.28 | Babette McDougall | Are we all met? Can you hear? |
| 00:12:01.15 | Melissa Blaustein | We hear you, we hear you, Babette, go ahead. |
| 00:12:02.86 | Babette McDougall | Okay, great. Thank you. Well, you know, Actually, I'm really glad to see this resounding endorsement of the value of the citizen voice. That really warms in my heart. Because what I wanted to say is I'm going to once again beg you, urge you, to reinstate Robert's Rules of Order. You know, just take, Rosenberg was drafted to specifically omit the citizen voice. Just take the point of order issue just as one example. Many times you, Madam Mayor, have said, well, if someone wants to call out a point of order from the floor, I will recognize them. But in fact, there have been a number of instances just this calendar year alone. where this has in fact happened, where someone has tried to point out a point of order from the floor, and they've never been recognized, and because it's not covered in Rosenberg, because the citizen voice is not covered in Rosenberg. So I would just like to encourage you to re-adopt Roberts. The meaning of democracy is more valuable and important to us than ever And why not go with the golden book of what engages the people line for line, word for word, equal representation across the board, why don't we want to go back to Roberts. I know Janelle Kelman urged this council to do that very same thing. before she took her departure. And I would like to really urge you forward This is a really great show. where you yourselves are walking the talk saying the voice matters. So could we go a step further and bring back Roberts? It's really not that hard. It's like a dictionary. You don't have to read it cover to cover. You just need to have it to look up what you need. I thank you for that. happy to. yield back the balance of my time. Thank you. And happy. |
| 00:13:50.35 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:13:50.37 | Walfred Solorzano | I bet we didn't hear that. City Clark, what's on the phone? No further public comment. |
| 00:13:55.21 | Steven Woodside | Okay, with that we will close communications and move on to our consent calendar matters listed under the consent calendar are considered routine and non controversial require no discussion are expected to have unanimous counsel of support and may be enacted by the Council in one motion in the form listed below. We have items 3A through 3K. on our consent agenda. 3A is adopted draft meeting minutes of September 2, 2025. 3B is authorized the mayor to endorse PG&E undergrounding efforts in Marin County at the September 18, 2025 CPGC hearing. 3C is proclamation honoring National Hispanic Heritage Month. 3D is a proclamation honoring the 50th anniversary of the creation of the Sausalito Historical Society. |
| 00:14:44.03 | Melissa Blaustein | I need by Jack Tracy. |
| 00:14:45.46 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:14:45.48 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. 3E. |
| 00:14:46.96 | Steven Woodside | is receive and file mayor letter of support for age-friendly Sausalito grant application to county. 3F is receive and file update on the infrastructure modernization, utility savings and sustainability program. 3G is adopted a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute the professional services agreement with WSP for the gate five area drainage management study in an amount not to exceed $509,867.65 from the US EDA grant plans. |
| 00:15:07.47 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:15:15.97 | Melissa Blaustein | 3H is approved, updated, publicly available pay schedule to include |
| 00:15:19.97 | Steven Woodside | to the police association pay range schedules and update pay ranges for community service directors, the librarian and finance director positions. Three, I, adopt a resolution of proving an encroachment agreement to allow construction of a new front entryway landing and a new front guard rail adjacent to an existing front garage structure in the right of way. and to retroactively permit an existing front barrage encroachment in the right-of-way at 324 Sausalito. 3J is to adopt a resolution approving an encroachment agreement for a 42 inch fence, trash pad, stairs and railing and major landscaping in the public right of way at 430 B Street. And 3K is response to Marin County civil grand jury report. The worrisome future of Marin housing, NIMBY resistance takes a backseat to economic reality. I'm going to ask that we pull items 3I and 3K for a brief discussion. |
| 00:16:14.70 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Would any other council member like to pull any other items? Yes, Jill. Mayor, I had just a couple of brief |
| 00:16:24.03 | Jill Hoffman | questions for Director McGowan, our Public Works Director on 3G. I don't know if you want to pull that or just want me to ask him |
| 00:16:33.72 | Melissa Blaustein | I think it's actually Katie Garcia, is she here? |
| 00:16:36.89 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:16:36.90 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Okay, so yes, you can, I'll go ahead and have you ask questions. |
| 00:16:47.06 | Alice Merrill | I believe she's on this one. |
| 00:16:47.10 | Melissa Blaustein | I wish you could. |
| 00:16:50.59 | Alice Merrill | on. Oh, she went to her office. |
| 00:16:54.47 | Walfred Solorzano | All right. Let me get her here. |
| 00:16:55.10 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 00:16:55.82 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:16:56.97 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. I'm not sure. |
| 00:16:57.21 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:16:57.46 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 00:17:00.19 | Melissa Blaustein | maybe I can address |
| 00:17:01.19 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:17:01.21 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:17:01.36 | Walfred Solorzano | their model |
| 00:17:02.01 | Melissa Blaustein | Well, let's let Council Member Hoffman ask her questions. Thank you. I did send Kevin. |
| 00:17:08.04 | Jill Hoffman | email. I think he's ready to be 100% of my questions and I think he can summarize. Okay, we received a grant for this and the summary of my questions are that there are private people that own the parcels in the Marino ship and there are public lands that we own and so every time we get a plan of this people ask what are the public parcels and what are the private parcels and the question to Kevin was what are they? There is a grant that we received but we're also paying the city's also donating some money and cannot donate but we're paying some money for it. Kevin, can you give a summary of this and summarize it for us? |
| 00:17:45.05 | Kevin McGowan | I'll do the best I can. I have a little quick handout which has my great crayon on it to show which ones are public roads and which ones may be easements. So |
| 00:17:56.42 | Melissa Blaustein | Can we have the state clerk add just to the staff report for this so that the public is aware? of where they is that we get about that. |
| 00:18:03.09 | Unknown | or the is that we |
| 00:18:05.30 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. right now. |
| 00:18:06.82 | Unknown | Right now. |
| 00:18:07.89 | Melissa Blaustein | They don't have extra copyvalles, I'm sorry. |
| 00:18:07.96 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 00:18:08.01 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:18:08.08 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 00:18:08.13 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:18:08.15 | Kevin McGowan | you |
| 00:18:10.63 | Melissa Blaustein | But I love it. |
| 00:18:10.76 | Kevin McGowan | I will put it up for public comment in a moment. So the simple way to look at this is that on Gate 5 Road, it's a public roadway almost up until you get to Colombo. And there's a little section in there on the map, which I'll show to Ms. Merrill in a little bit, which is a easement. It's a roadway easement. It's not dedicated right of way, but it's dedicated easement and public utility easement. Now that public roadway continues on all the way up into until you get to the bar to landing. And that's where it stops. So at bar to landing, it becomes a private road, almost till you get to Bridgeway, about 200 feet before that. But that whole section in there is a mixture of public right away and public easements. And so giving you a little sketch to kind of cover that. We'll need to dig in a little bit more on that, on some of the recorded maps in the future, just to double check, which was donated to the city and accepted. So we will get there eventually. |
| 00:19:15.24 | Jill Hoffman | But in this instance, we received a grant in the amount of how much? I think it's probably a million. |
| 00:19:21.08 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. 600,000 plus. That is. |
| 00:19:23.39 | Jill Hoffman | And we have the cities that also contributing a certain amount of money for this project. So we're matching. But at any rate, so my question and my request is that when we have projects like this or updates on this, if we could just include this information going forward in staff report so that in the interest of transparency, so that everybody knows that even though there's a mixture of public land and private land that were, most of the money balance is coming from a grant and that were also money, but it's sort of the greater good or moving forward and so we all understand what's going on. |
| 00:19:23.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:19:24.19 | Katie Garcia | Thank you. |
| 00:19:24.22 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:19:24.24 | Katie Garcia | Thank you. |
| 00:19:44.64 | Adam Blair | done it. |
| 00:20:01.45 | Chris Zapata | Thank you for that question, if I can, and Katie will help me with this. So yes, we can provide this information as part of our future reporting and any solution for it and attach it as well. So the public has what you all have. But the second part of it is Katie can explain the grant itself. In this particular item, we're asking for you to approve a contract, which is $509,000 change from the federal grant, none of that's coming from the city at this time, the structure of the grant is about 600,000 and change. |
| 00:20:31.89 | Katie Garcia | Yeah, the structure of the grant is roughly, we have federal funding in the amount of $614,000. And then the city has, excuse me, the rough numbers here, but roughly $70,000 for the grant. to contribute as part of cash match from, and that will come from the sea level rise adaptation grant because this project is directly related to sea level rise in the area. And then we are also contributing non-cash match in the form of staff time to develop things like an RFP. |
| 00:20:53.22 | Unknown | And. |
| 00:21:09.23 | Katie Garcia | Thank you. |
| 00:21:09.74 | Unknown | Thanks very much. That's good news. I just want to make sure that all the information is there. |
| 00:21:14.03 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. And I also want to thank and acknowledge Katie for writing to all of the gate five property owners to let them know that this work is coming that the city takes their concerns seriously and we are addressing them. So thank you for the problem. |
| 00:21:26.28 | Katie Garcia | If there are any interested parties who would like to be added to my list, please email me because I don't know that it's comprehensive. |
| 00:21:33.43 | Unknown | I have an action for you, actually. Oh, it's Joseph. Joseph. |
| 00:21:33.53 | Katie Garcia | All right. |
| 00:21:36.17 | Unknown | So sea level rise is one thing, the binary of self-esteem subsidence through a great field. It's a strange study focused on subsidence as well. |
| 00:21:43.93 | Katie Garcia | Yes, it will incorporate, as far as perhaps the more technical expert on that, but it will incorporate the sea level rise adaptation guidance, which we're undergoing through the adaptation plan, and then also taken to subsidence general topography, geography of the area. |
| 00:22:00.53 | Melissa Blaustein | you |
| 00:22:00.72 | Katie Garcia | Thank you. |
| 00:22:00.77 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:22:00.94 | Katie Garcia | Thank you. |
| 00:22:00.97 | Melissa Blaustein | As a point of order, I'm just going to ask, although we're all sitting around a conference table, very close quarters, we need to speak up so that those online can bear us. All right. |
| 00:22:11.38 | Steven Woodside | I'm going to go. |
| 00:22:11.50 | Melissa Blaustein | I have both. |
| 00:22:11.97 | Steven Woodside | item 3i because on my draft agenda it did not have the word retroactive I inquired about the word retroactive at our last meeting and now retroactive appears again |
| 00:22:24.31 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:22:24.51 | Steven Woodside | in the agenda. |
| 00:22:25.04 | Melissa Blaustein | the title. So I'd like to ask Director, yes, please. I see a staff member raising their hands. |
| 00:22:37.91 | Adam Blair | Good evening, Mayor, Vice Member, Council Members. I'm Adam Blair, Associate Planner with the Community Development Department. Just about- |
| 00:22:44.12 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:22:45.51 | Adam Blair | I'm sorry. Just enough for the public record, this encroachment agreement for 324 Salcelito was council made a motion to postpone this encroachment agreement to tonight's meeting because the word retroactive was used in the staff report, which was not consistent with the- |
| 00:22:46.89 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:23:03.09 | Steven Woodside | That was the title on the agenda. |
| 00:23:04.93 | Adam Blair | Correct. Yeah, it was not consistent with the language in the planning commission resolution as well as the findings. I just wanted to note that in the staff report in this item tonight that has been corrected. So the language in the staff report is consistent now with the planning commission resolution and the findings. I can't speak as to why that word is still in the agenda title. However, it is my understanding that the council may make a motion to amend the agenda title just to ensure consistency. For the title, the staff report and the resolution. |
| 00:23:31.61 | Steven Woodside | for the, Thank you, Beth. So we will take action on this. I'm going to ask that we remove the word retroactively. This was not on the agenda matrix. I'm not sure how it ended up on the agenda. It's not in the staff report. So I'm going to remove the word retroactively from the agenda title as we approve these items. |
| 00:23:49.82 | Unknown | Do you want to give any direct motion for that? |
| 00:23:49.85 | Steven Woodside | and have a great day. I will in a moment. And then, so it'll be to approve the consent calendar as amended after we take public comment. The last item is 3K. The Vice Mayor and I have worked on the grand jury response to the |
| 00:24:07.33 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:24:07.37 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. regarding the Marin Howling. |
| 00:24:10.20 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:24:10.47 | Steven Woodside | We have some further tweaks |
| 00:24:12.02 | Melissa Blaustein | would like to make for it. And so we're asking tonight that you approve this as finalized by the |
| 00:24:22.67 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:24:23.23 | Melissa Blaustein | How's it? |
| 00:24:23.68 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:24:24.06 | Melissa Blaustein | Subcommittee. |
| 00:24:24.97 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:24:25.03 | Melissa Blaustein | the city council. |
| 00:24:25.67 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:24:26.82 | Melissa Blaustein | If I could just add, The substance of the narrative is fine. There's a lot of information in the response that's accurate and we think is fine. What we're concerned about, I think, is more in terms of where we are saying, do we agree or disagree or partially agree, partially disagree. And I think there are many instances where, for example, the findings of the grand jury, we actually don't have a disagreement with abortion, like a sentence, but we have a disagreement or we have something to add about our own. So what we'd like to do is just smooth over that language so it's more reflective of what we are doing and how we feel about it. Just one more comment about this report. You know, grand juries are 19 people picked at random. This grand jury, in my view, did a very good job summarizing the housing crisis and what cities and counties face, thoughts about the state mandates and such. I think our response is that while we think they've done a good job and we agree with much of what's in the report. We also have, we want to let the grand jury know that we are making progress. And in the draft that was prepared by several staff level, it does make that we're doing a lot of things now. So I think the essence of the report is good. We would like to take another crack at some language without changing. |
| 00:25:56.90 | Melissa Blaustein | But then what's the due date on it? |
| 00:25:58.22 | Melissa Blaustein | Next week. Next week. Yeah. |
| 00:25:58.67 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Yeah, that's why we're asking for this tonight and I do want to acknowledge assistance |
| 00:26:02.98 | Steven Woodside | City Manager Phipps and his staff for a lot of hard work that they put in to really try to customize it for Sausalito. We just need, we think a little bit more work will make it a better report. And of course, all of our supporters and detractors will be referring back to this. And so I think it's important that we have an accurate report. uh, customized response for stuff. |
| 00:26:24.49 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. How can we do it? Just to say that we can, so take a look at it, even though, I mean, right, so that we can see the final product. |
| 00:26:34.03 | Melissa Blaustein | on my own estate account. I'll put it on, we'll put the final product, we'll ask you to ratify it. |
| 00:26:38.97 | Steven Woodside | product at the next meeting but we have to turn it in before the next meeting. Okay so for the for 3k the item is to approve in |
| 00:26:49.03 | Melissa Blaustein | to |
| 00:26:49.96 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:26:49.97 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:26:50.55 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:26:50.62 | Melissa Blaustein | But through the artisan. |
| 00:26:51.98 | Steven Woodside | What about just authorized you? |
| 00:26:52.89 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:26:53.08 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:26:53.15 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. |
| 00:26:53.16 | Steven Woodside | To authorize the Housing Subcommittee to finalize the version that you see in your style request. |
| 00:27:00.10 | Melissa Blaustein | and then we'll come back the next maybe four to six. |
| 00:27:01.99 | Steven Woodside | you |
| 00:27:02.11 | Melissa Blaustein | it will bring the final back in the next meeting. Okay, with that, I'm gonna open it up to public comment. Any public comment on the consent calendar? I see none in our room, anything online, |
| 00:27:14.76 | Walfred Solorzano | We have our bed with Tudor. |
| 00:27:18.19 | Melissa Blaustein | to you. Thank you. |
| 00:27:19.32 | Walfred Solorzano | not texting. |
| 00:27:19.98 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. |
| 00:27:20.30 | Walfred Solorzano | Amen. |
| 00:27:20.74 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:27:20.90 | Walfred Solorzano | of the |
| 00:27:20.97 | Melissa Blaustein | So... |
| 00:27:21.50 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:27:22.96 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 00:27:23.15 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:27:23.17 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 00:27:23.20 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:27:23.22 | Babette McDougall | Am I on? |
| 00:27:23.29 | Melissa Blaustein | THE FAMILY IS NOT ABLE TO |
| 00:27:24.53 | Babette McDougall | You're on. OK, thank you. OK, so point of clarification. We're going to pull 3K from consent, correct? Yes or no? |
| 00:27:34.05 | Steven Woodside | THE END OF THE END OF THE Time for public comments. |
| 00:27:36.41 | Babette McDougall | Yes, well, I would gladly defer my 3K comments if it's going to be pulled. That's why I'm asking questions. |
| 00:27:43.33 | Steven Woodside | We're not pulling it. This is your opportunity to comment. Okay. |
| 00:27:46.15 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. Well, then, you know, I think it's frankly a rather bit of a mischaracterization to keep saying it's the not in my backyard problem still. Frankly, that is not it. The open space designation in Marin County, North Bay generally, came about precisely because of our limits of growth problem. The Bureau of Land Management mapped the entire region back in the 50s. We know where the high fire zones are. We know where the risk zones are for flooding and everything else. They said, don't build here. Well, it got built anyway. It's really not a question of not in my backyard. It's a question of the reasonable limits of growth and what the very fragile terrain in this region can reasonably withstand. Overbuilding it like L.A. will only deliver L.A. disasters. That's number one. The other thing I'd like to speak on with regard to the consent items are items 3G. And I'm glad to see that we have both our DPW director there, as well as Katie Because first of all, I want to say, wow, Look at WSP stepping up to Sausalito. That's awesome. This is a worldwide company, well-respected. And if they're willing to come to town, I'd say Gate 5 Road is a great test for anybody to merge. Jump through the hoops. Because if you can get consensus on gate five and make meaningful change happen, then we are in good hands. And I, with that, attendantly, WRT, I thought, on the third workshop did a great job of opening it up to public discussion that model put forward by miss garcia i would like to encourage because while you consider bringing back robert's rules if you can just take a of the print. |
| 00:29:29.39 | Melissa Blaustein | That's the end of your time, Bebeth. Thank you. All right. |
| 00:29:31.40 | Babette McDougall | I'll be right back. |
| 00:29:31.57 | Walfred Solorzano | Bye. |
| 00:29:31.65 | Babette McDougall | I know. |
| 00:29:31.89 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 00:29:33.12 | Walfred Solorzano | Our next speaker is Sandra Bushmaker. |
| 00:29:37.66 | Sandra Bushmaker | Hi, I just want to comment on 3K. I am somewhat bothered by the term housing crisis and having our city council endorse, quote, a housing crisis. The population, I've sent you all an article questioning those statistics. I think that the correct way to phrase it would be a affordable housing crisis because our population in California has only increased in the past 10 years by point zero zero three percent. And yet we have plenty of market rate housing. We don't have affordable housing. So to use the term that there is a housing crisis I think is incorrect. And as you know, during our housing element, we found a process, we found out that The RHNA numbers were based on grossly inaccurate numbers, And I think that we are making a mistake by continuing to use the word housing crisis. And that's my comment. I would like to see affordable housing crisis and stop this nonsense with, Housing crisis. Thank you. |
| 00:30:44.55 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:30:44.96 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 00:30:44.97 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:30:45.84 | Walfred Solorzano | Oh, I get breathing. |
| 00:30:49.26 | Melissa Blaustein | Welcome, Adrian. |
| 00:30:52.45 | Adrian Brinton | All right, thank you. |
| 00:30:54.17 | Melissa Blaustein | Yes, we hear you. |
| 00:30:55.56 | Adrian Brinton | I just wanted to have a compliment to the previous speaker I recently published a Marine Voyage article entitled Don't Be Fooled, Warren's Housing Crisis in Israel. And it addresses many of the points and the information that's being put out about the lack of affordable housing and the reasons for population decline. Our town is being hollered out As older people stay longer in their large houses and we don't build any housing, People are moving further and further away. And that's many of the reasons why the population is dropping. It's a sign of the sickness, not a sign of the health. So I think that absolutely, having the council address the housing prices. is extremely important. Thank you. |
| 00:31:40.51 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:31:41.07 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:31:42.18 | Adrian Brinton | No further public speakers. |
| 00:31:43.48 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, with that, I will close public comment. I'm sorry, I didn't see your hand rang. |
| 00:31:49.03 | Unknown | earlier, Sybil, go ahead. Thank you. I just wanted to speak for a moment about the L3E and thank the Mayor and the Council for Um, We're writing a referral letter for the grant that H family applied to the Board of Supervisors community grant opportunity to allow us to more efficiently Bye. to the survey of all the seniors in Sausalito, which we last did 12 years ago. And there's now 3,140 seniors on the voters' rule between the ages of 55 and 104. And we want to get the survey out to every one of them. And this money, if we were awarded it, it would allow us to vary efficiently expeditiously record the data instead of hundreds and hundreds of hours of volunteer time like it took us last time. So I'm hoping that we'll be awarded it. If not, we'll still do the survey. We'll just do it a little differently. And so I just want to thank you. And that will allow us to then update the Age-Friendly Strategic Action Plan, which is really most of its goals really over the last decade. kind of bringing it up to the modern day. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:33:20.38 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 00:33:20.49 | Unknown | Yeah. So when was the last time you guys did a strategic? It was 2014. Yeah. Thank you. It was. Thank you so much. Thank you. |
| 00:33:33.03 | Steven Woodside | All right. |
| 00:33:34.03 | Melissa Blaustein | public comment and I will seek a motion approving items 3a through 3k with the amendments that we discussed to item 3i to remove the word retroactively and to 3k to also |
| 00:33:47.97 | Steven Woodside | the housing subcommittee to finalize and transmit the response. |
| 00:33:52.34 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:33:54.16 | Steven Woodside | Second. |
| 00:33:55.34 | Melissa Blaustein | All in favor? Thank you. Aye. All right, that motion carries five zero. All right, folks, I have good news and bad news. The good news is our sound system in the chambers is fixed. The bad news is we're gonna have to take five minutes to reassemble back in the chambers. |
| 00:34:07.41 | Unknown | the |
| 00:34:12.62 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. All right, and then so we will return |
| 00:34:21.99 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 00:34:23.62 | Walfred Solorzano | Good morning, to the panelists. |
| 00:34:40.57 | Walfred Solorzano | Sergio, if you can say something, please. |
| 00:34:45.76 | Sergio Rudin | Hi, City Council. Can you folks hear me? |
| 00:34:49.53 | Steven Woodside | We hear you. |
| 00:34:50.81 | Sergio Rudin | Great, and I can hear you. |
| 00:34:54.57 | Steven Woodside | All right. Um, And we have Kevin. All right. Oh, I said 6.05, so they have one more minute. Okay. All right, folks. It's 6.05 p.m. We're going to resume with our business items. |
| 00:35:12.86 | Steven Woodside | The first of which is 5A, adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to award a construction contract for the 2024 2024, Isn't this 2025? |
| 00:35:24.02 | Kevin McGowan | We are in 2025, that's correct, but this is the 2024 street resurfacing. Thank you. |
| 00:35:29.25 | Steven Woodside | All right, Roadway Rehabilitation Project to Majora and Gelati, Inc. |
| 00:35:29.50 | Kevin McGowan | Project. |
| 00:35:32.96 | Steven Woodside | For the base bid amount of $1.914 million, authorize Alternatives 3, 4, and 5 for an additional award amount of $179,380, authorize a construction contingency in the amount of $209,620 for a total construction cost with a total construction cost of $2.303 million. um, And I think, Is this also part of it? Authorize the city manager to execute the professional services agreement with CSW ST2. |
| 00:36:09.65 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, because they are construction management firms for the budget. |
| 00:36:11.86 | Steven Woodside | Oh. to exceed 162.86, authorize an additional 112,061 in measure L funding to support the project and determine the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15301. And I welcome our Public Works Director, Kevin McGowan. |
| 00:36:30.52 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you, Mayor. Members of City Council, Kevin McGowan, Public Works Director. I'd like to introduce Ali, the project manager. who will walk us through a quick presentation for this item. All right. |
| 00:36:44.16 | Ali Iqbal | Good evening, Mayor, City Council members. My name is Ali Iqbal. I'm the project manager for the 2024 road rehabilitation project, which is five bay. for this evening's agenda. Next slide. |
| 00:37:03.14 | Ali Iqbal | So tonight we'll be talking about our current status and conditions of our roadways. the history of what we did in the past, And what we're doing now, And in the future, We'll talk about the project itself and a bid alternates. We'll talk about the need for the construction management services, WE'LL SUMMARIZE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS. And we'll conclude with your questions and comments. |
| 00:37:31.71 | Ali Iqbal | In 2022, the city's 26 miles of order were evaluated by a company called Patent Engineering. through a grant from MTC. We apply to this grant every couple of rooms and we'll do so again this year. Payment Engineering Company provided a report that assigned a road, each road, a Payment Condition Index, a PCI, zero being the worst, 100 being the best. The city utilized this report to help us identify what was for the rehabilitation project. Staff also did site visits to verify what was in the report. And we also took feedback from the community |
| 00:38:18.37 | Ali Iqbal | So back to the report. In 2018, we had a PCI of 64. And then in 2022, it went down to 58. In those five years, we spent a total of 3.7 million construction projects. which amounts to about $753,000 a year. So back to the report. In addition to the PCI waiting for each roadway, Payton Engineering provided us some scenarios. Here are two that stood out to put things in a little perspective. to maintain the PCI of 58, the city would be to allocate $1.8 million for five years. to increase the PCI by five points, bringing it up to a 63. the allocation would need to be 2.9 million for five years. So you can see where $753,000 a year puts us. but things are changing. Next slide. |
| 00:39:33.94 | Ali Iqbal | with a little bit of researching the last eight years, We spent $6.4 million, and that can be seen in the breakdown on the table. These projects this year alone mainly the Bridgeway Safety Project, Napa to Johnson. which is likely starting this week. The Coloma Safe Out to School Project which were finalizing plans and getting ready to seal. and the 2024 roadway rehabilitation project. So all three of those to nearly $5 million for a million dollars. So you can see that in this room, with as much of the eight year worth of construction. the 5.4 million versus the 6.5 million. What's even more promising is Next year, with an allocation for the world of resurfacing to be $2.6 million, $300,000 more than this year's allotment. So let's talk about our project. Next slide. So a little bit of how we got here. In November 19, 2024, City Council improved the list of roads for the 2024 roadway resurfacing project. On July 1st of this year, City Council delayed authorization for DPW to solicit bids based on doing additional research to include cool-pave, bio-retention and road dieting into the project. A few weeks later, on July 22nd, DPW presented the options of CoolPave, Bio-retention, road dieting, on the respective streets of El Portal, Locust and Easterly. DPW had taken his role to talk to this, had no time was needed to investigate. that stated that these roles may come back and be included in the 2025 Worldwide Revaluation Project. Also in that meeting, city council instructed DPW to place those roads back on the list and not to delay these roadways repairs. But to continue to keep in mind complete streets Improvement opportunities. and future projects. Well, I won't talk about every road that's listed on this. On this chart, I'm just gonna name a few. For the two inch grinding and resurfacing We picked some streets that had a very low PCI. |
| 00:42:19.45 | Ali Iqbal | Do you want to guess what around the circles, PCI, was? Dose 14. Locust was a little bit better. And then it was a 20. |
| 00:42:33.71 | Alice Merrill | Haha. |
| 00:42:35.73 | Ali Iqbal | So much of what we aim for is preventing from getting such a low rating. So that's where micro ceiling comes into play. Um, We try to micro seal these roads that are in fair to good condition. So about a 60 to 85 PCI rating. So for example, Napa, Bridgeway to Caledonia, had a 65 PCI. Woodward from spring to Easterby had a 68. PCI. You'll also see bridgeway between Nevada and Easterby was also to be micro-sealed. There's been ongoing discussions whether to narrow the lanes in this area from 12 feet to 11 feet. This would likely float traffic down. And it would also provide. An extra foot. for the bike path. That decision doesn't need to be made now. I think The Metrics, our traffic consultant. and other stakeholders to make that final determination. |
| 00:43:45.65 | Ian Sobieski | I missed your word. Which section are you talking about? Sorry. |
| 00:43:48.14 | Ali Iqbal | Bridgeway from Napa to Easterby. Thank you. when we rehabilitate a roadway, we address curb ramps as well. I noted the 4th Street, North Street code ramp as a miscellaneous because these roads were not in our project to be resurfaced. But I singled this out because there's been complaints, resident complaints, with those with strollers who weren't able to go to Southview Park. |
| 00:44:20.21 | Steven Woodside | I'm going to pause for one second. Is this presentation in our packet? Because it's very difficult to see this on the screen. It's not big enough. And I'm not seeing it in the attachments to the packet. Thank you. |
| 00:44:37.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:44:37.28 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:44:37.94 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:44:37.96 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, if I may, I apologize. This is a late-looking presentation that we did not distribute as part of the packet. |
| 00:44:45.76 | Steven Woodside | Is it possible to attach it to the packet because We, This is not helpful. to us. I can't read any of those words on that screen. |
| 00:44:56.37 | Chris Zapata | Yeah, absolutely. We can attach it. |
| 00:44:57.97 | Steven Woodside | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:44:59.05 | Ian Sobieski | Mayor, just since we're talking tech, I do believe that the screen can be set so that we're seeing just the slides and we could hide the transcription, which isn't as important, and maybe even hide the little window off the left. |
| 00:45:00.86 | Steven Woodside | Yes. |
| 00:45:10.90 | Steven Woodside | Walford, are you able to hear that comment? |
| 00:45:23.45 | Walfred Solorzano | to do. |
| 00:45:25.51 | Steven Woodside | Let's get rid of closed captioning so we can actually see the better. That's a little better. I can squint and make out some of the street names now. But I think it would be helpful to us and to the public to have the presentation attached. |
| 00:45:39.55 | Jill Hoffman | I don't. Um, But I don't know, do people who are watching us on Zoom need to close captioning? I don't know. I'm just posing a question. |
| 00:45:49.59 | Walfred Solorzano | I think it would be a best practice for ADA. |
| 00:46:00.01 | Ian Sobieski | So I think snap. I think you can turn closed captioning on at your end, I believe. That is correct. |
| 00:46:05.72 | Adam Blair | Yeah. |
| 00:46:05.76 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 00:46:05.79 | Sergio Rudin | That is great. |
| 00:46:06.92 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:46:07.13 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. the public who likes closed captioning. |
| 00:46:10.03 | Ian Sobieski | turn it on on their computer if you can't see it look at the bottom of your screen and there should be a little button that allows you to turn closed captioning on if you need to |
| 00:46:11.28 | Steven Woodside | or whatever. |
| 00:46:17.49 | Steven Woodside | The future as staff is preparing these presentations, it would be helpful to know that it's difficult to perhaps format them in such a way that they're bigger on the screen so that we can actually... |
| 00:46:31.04 | Unknown | I'm not sure. |
| 00:46:32.76 | Steven Woodside | We can't read 12 point font. |
| 00:46:34.57 | Unknown | Yeah, okay, understood. and, you know, |
| 00:46:36.93 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:46:36.98 | Unknown | I wanted to include those pictures, so that's why I took a little bit more space. |
| 00:46:40.13 | Steven Woodside | And just do it on the next page the next time. The pictures are great. Your presentation is great. So this is not critical of your presentation at all. |
| 00:46:44.30 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 00:46:44.76 | Ali Iqbal | Thank you. |
| 00:46:46.63 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:46:46.65 | Ali Iqbal | Okay, thank you. So I wanted to talk about the curb ramp. That's on 4th Street and North Street, just opposite of Southview Park. So you could see the challenge that we have with with with with strollers being able to cross. There's no way to cross. That's a relatively 30 percent slope. So it was a challenge to do that. But that was important for us to do. So that's why we included in this project. We also had five bid alternates for the project. But more on that on the next slide. |
| 00:47:26.66 | Ali Iqbal | So you can see the heavy price tag on bid alternate one and two. That's because these roadway resurface, because this included the roadway resurfacing and repairing the sanitary sewer line. Since the sewer department has essentially transferred to the Sausalito Marin Sanitary District, We cannot bet on work that isn't ours. |
| 00:47:51.38 | Ali Iqbal | And we wouldn't want to pave a roadway before the sewer work is done. |
| 00:47:59.48 | Ali Iqbal | We have notified the senator district that these lines need replacing so they are aware of it Alternative three. Thank you. Um, You can see the roadway cracking. That's on Tourney Street between Bonita and Girard. Girard. which we recommend. Alternate four. is a drainage ditch is damaged. You can see it's peeling away on Ebtide, We recommend that being fixed, especially that ebtide is being resurfaced. And for alternate five, that is That's the intersection at Atwood, North Street, and Third Street. |
| 00:48:48.62 | Ali Iqbal | CPW believes that there's subterranean water underneath there that keeps bubbling up and destroying this roadway. Our project includes putting a sub drain underneath there. to capture that, drainage and take it away from the site. |
| 00:49:09.63 | Ali Iqbal | Backslide. |
| 00:49:15.25 | Ali Iqbal | Yeah. No. Yes. Uh... This project is relatively complicated, such that day-to-day operations is needed. We request hiring CSW for the construction management They would handle daily questions such as traffic control, resident notification, curb ramps, slopes, tabulating asphalt quantities, Um, my workload already consists of a Dunphy park and Sausalito center of the arts, EV charging stations. old city hall improvements. managing climate tech, the Dorothy Gibson house. construction and site work. the Bridgeway Safety Project. From Napa to Johnson. the Block 303 Sewer Project, among others. And Sarah's list is likely just as long. I'll still be the project manager, but just not the construction manager. And now to the recommendations. The staff report has several recommendations for the project, including Find that the project is exempt from CEQA, that the project is exempt from design review. that council approves the bid documents. that council authorizes the city manager to execute the construction contract authorize the contingency. approve the additional allocation for Measure L to balance the project budget. And lastly, authorize the city manager to execute the agreement for the construction management firm to assist staff. |
| 00:51:02.78 | Ali Iqbal | Thank you. That concludes the presentation. and we welcome your questions and comments. |
| 00:51:09.00 | Kevin McGowan | step in, but Before we give it back to the council, I just wanted to include something that I think maybe we forgot a slide. Had to do with some things that Ali talked about, bioretention, road dieting, cool pavement. We did take a look at that from a complete streets perspective. And some of these, while it's a great idea in some areas, they had some consequences. In other words, we took a look at some permeable pavers down off of, I think it was the end of locust. And while it's a great idea, it might present a tripping hazard in the future if we put these in place. In addition, some other things such as putting in bioretention and narrowing some of the roadways such as on Easter Bay could have a other consequence, which... would be that the delivery trucks that visit the 7-Eleven down on the corner couldn't get in and couldn't get out. So there are other things that come into play that we have to take a look at. And I know Ali talked about that very shortly, but we just wanted to mention that we will continue to include looking at complete streets with future resurfacing projects and anything having to do with roadways in general. Thank you. |
| 00:52:23.51 | Steven Woodside | Kevin, can I ask you a question? I might. Um, A member of the public wrote to us, inquiring whether there's been any consideration to revise the drawings calling for 12-foot lanes on Bridgeway from Nevada to Easterby, Lanes which aren't that wide today. and recommending that all travel lanes be 11 feet max in order to calm traffic and afford a precious few inches for bike lanes, which are substandard for much of that stretch. |
| 00:52:56.36 | Kevin McGowan | That's a great question. And I think Ali kind of addressed part of that, that the lanes between Nevada and Easterby are generally around 12 feet in width. And we reached out to our traffic engineer who suggested that Restriping them at 11 feet is possible. And we would address that at the time in which the paving is done. And we do something called cat tracking out there to lay out the stripes to see if it would work well. We intend to do that. In other words, lay out the new lane widths at 11 feet, see how they look, possibly involve others who might be interested, to make sure that they work well in that area, like our traffic engineer. and then move forward with possibly re-striping them as 11-foot lanes and a wider bike lane. |
| 00:53:46.07 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Other questions of staff? Yes, Vice Mayor. |
| 00:53:50.92 | Melissa Blaustein | If I could just follow up on the last point, either for Kevin or Ali. In other words, the actual lane width in that section is not yet determined. I believe it's 12 feet. Well, when I say determined, you haven't made a decision at this point. whether it's going to be 11 feet or 12 feet? We haven't made a decision yet. And then I'm not sure I understand the term cat tracking. Is that sort of a, temporary striping that you then evaluate, or how does that work? |
| 00:54:19.94 | Kevin McGowan | So when let's let's back up for a sec when Ali says that it hasn't been determined. The idea is to lay it out first. and to take a look at it. because we don't want to have an in consequence at the junctions between let's say the areas that are not paved compared to those that are paved. In other words, you'll have to move that striping out in order to accommodate things. We want to make sure that it's more seamless. So the way we do that is we lay out the lines first on the new pavement, our new micro seal, to see how it looks. That's called cat tracking. It's a simple little dots on the roadway. And if that looks like it will work well from a traffic perspective, we'll move forward with it. So at that point in time, we will try to make the decision to narrow those lanes slightly to increase the bike lane width at the same time. |
| 00:55:09.93 | Melissa Blaustein | So you haven't ruled that out at this point. |
| 00:55:11.46 | Kevin McGowan | Not at all. |
| 00:55:12.07 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:55:12.09 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:55:14.62 | Unknown | Yes. Thank you. |
| 00:55:16.41 | Jill Hoffman | And so what kind of notice will be given to the residents there and for residents in Sausalito before those decisions are made? I know that going south, I believe into town. I mean, we were in town, but. South into further like south and from let's just say from Easterby to Nevada, it has that weird, intersection, right? Where it moves from, I don't even know if you'd consider it two lanes. It goes from two lanes to one lane, sort of in that where you peel off into you know caledonia street and then it goes to one line that's how it goes from two lanes to one lane right there Um, And so, and it has that weird transition from a bike lane. to two lanes over, you know, it has that weird, very strange transition. Will there be some sort of notice and decision making process with public input before all of a sudden these lane configurations change or will it just be a decision with public works? |
| 00:56:20.68 | Kevin McGowan | We generally hadn't planned on seeking public input. And generally, I think that you'll see that the transitions won't be very different as you move Let's just take a look at Bridgeway. As you move closer to gate six, Those lanes are closer to 11 feet than the are to 12. So they're a little narrower. compared to other sections on bridgeways between, let's say, Nevada and Easterbeak. which are more 12 feet. Generally, the driver won't see the difference. What I'm mostly concerned about is the transitions, where you have a 12-foot lane transitioning into an 11-foot lane. You want to make sure to have a good long taper for that. From a driver's perspective, I don't think that you'll see the difference. We would like to move forward if it's okay with Council to do that. I'm anticipating that we would want to reach out to you and say, We're ready to do this and we'll have a changeable message sign up that says lane configuration modified ahead or something very simple. |
| 00:57:20.54 | Jill Hoffman | I think people that use that transition point are gonna be interested in knowing how, especially the transition from as you go south from Easterby to Nevada, how that transition lane is going to work because it's very awkward right now as it is. So I'm interested to see how that's going There is basically no transition right now. It's just you kind of hope that you're not going to get run over when you... if you're on a bike and you move from one, you know, one side of the road to the other, and you don't make that turn right turn on a Caledonia. So anyway, as we move forward through the process and that transition happens, and the road narrows and the bike lane, that bike lane going that way changes, I think people are gonna wanna know and have noticed how that's gonna happen. So maybe a public meeting on that. |
| 00:58:09.92 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. Maybe I should correct you a little bit is that Our microcele goes from Nevada to Easterby. It doesn't go from Easterby to Napa Street. That's where that transition is located. |
| 00:58:23.52 | Jill Hoffman | Right. Okay, sorry. So it's not going to go. Oh, okay. So I'm sorry. Then I'm. |
| 00:58:27.14 | Kevin McGowan | Bye. |
| 00:58:28.16 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, pardon me then. Okay. |
| 00:58:29.39 | Adrian Brinton | I'm going to go. |
| 00:58:29.51 | Kevin McGowan | Yeah. |
| 00:58:30.52 | Jill Hoffman | So I don't have to worry about that part. So let me just say, let me just back that up then. Um, I do think, though, that people are going to be interested in any configurations in the roadways. And I would hope that we do have some sort of public process on, um, If we're changing the roadways and narrowing roadways that we have a public process and notify people that that we're changing the roadways, that we're narrowing the lanes and for whatever reason, and that people are gonna be able to weigh in on that. Because I have had a lot of, I have had some questions about that because it has come up in meetings that we're considering that. and as part of that process. So I'm going to request that if, you know, take that for what it's worth, but I will request that in some way when we move up to that. |
| 00:59:20.66 | Kevin McGowan | We'll be glad to work on that from our side and see if we get a little public outreach on that section. |
| 00:59:24.57 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thank you. |
| 00:59:24.98 | Kevin McGowan | Sounds good. |
| 00:59:25.14 | Melissa Blaustein | THE FAMILY. |
| 00:59:25.45 | Jill Hoffman | No, I appreciate that. |
| 00:59:25.97 | Melissa Blaustein | that. Councilmember Blaustein. Yeah, thank you. Um, Sorry, Director McGowan, you might have to come up again. So I wouldn't. Good thing no, Council Member Sobieski also has questions. And thank you for your hard work on this presentation. Both Ali and Director McGowan really appreciate it. I don't think it will be surprising to either of you that I'm typically very concerned about sustainability requirements. And I'm a little bit disappointed that we're not moving forward in any capacity with the recommendations that we had had us look into because Evidently, the three streets that you mentioned are not appropriate for it at this time. I would like to hear from you about what your plans are for complete streets going forward, if not in this iteration, then in the next for our project. Um, repaving programs. |
| 01:00:17.80 | Kevin McGowan | Yeah, I think that, you know, we have different projects moving forward that you have seen on the CIP. certain projects are more Um, applicable to Uh, to complete streets. A good example is Kelowna. Paloma Street is moving forward with a design that includes some more landscaping as well as other features. And it's a wide street, so there could be some more things that we could include there as far as safety, narrowing lanes, doing other things on that specific street. Sausalito is an interesting place in that we have a lot of roadways that are way up on narrowly. 11 feet is... would be great on some of our roads, but we don't even have that. So, In some cases, our hands are kind of tied when we do some resurfacing or maintenance work that we really don't have too many opportunities to put in bio-attention or to do road diets. But we'll try to keep an eye on some of the bigger roads. And I think that you just heard something about narrowing roads and making it a little bit dare I say, safer for cyclists or automobiles to slow things down. and that would be narrowing the lanes themselves. There may be some more opportunities in downtown with the let's say, parking lot one or parking lot three whenever we get to those to look at some additional bioretention. That would be the appropriate areas to do that stuff. instead of up on the hillside where water runs off extremely fast down to the low areas. or even looking at gate five, which we just talked about. Are there bioretention areas in that area that we could utilize in order to have some of our stormwater filtered before it gets into the bay? So we're trying to keep an eye on that. At the same time, we want to push forward and try to get our roadways resurfaced. We know our citizens would like to see that as much as possible and to make sure that we accommodate everybody. So sometimes it's difficult and we have to make a few trade-offs. But as staff, we'll keep that in mind as much as we can And when we do see opportunities, we'll bring them back to you. |
| 01:02:32.74 | Melissa Blaustein | So to follow up on the point, I appreciate that feedback. We had also talked about cool pavement materials and potentially using paving materials that are more climate resilient. Is that something that has been considered in respect to this repaving program or perhaps our next, if not this one? |
| 01:02:48.69 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, I think we took a look at trying to put CoolPave down on El Portal. And in general, cool pave is used in areas that are excessively warm, especially things like Arizona or in Sacramento where you get intense heat with intense sunshine. And here, when we have The fog. which we've had most of the summer, I dare say, things have kept very cool. And you know, maybe there's a better place to install cool pave within our city, some place that doesn't have too many trees, that has a lot of sunshine. And it could be in the Marineship area. It could be other places as well. We're not throwing that possibility out. But there were some other concerns that we had raised earlier about friction components and putting cool pave on a hillside where that, that friction coefficient could, could change. So from an engineering perspective, we had a few questions. |
| 01:03:44.72 | Melissa Blaustein | And I know that Katie Tho Garcia hosted a shoreline sea level rise adaptation workshop this past Wednesday, and that we've been actively working with consultants on our sea level rise mitigation plan. To what extent has DPW been in contact with our consultants and are we thinking about C-level rise mitigation, if not through directly bioswifts, but other projects going forward as we consider our next repaving, if not in this iteration. |
| 01:04:10.52 | Kevin McGowan | I think you heard this evening about item 3G. That was great. that was related to Gate 5. It's a very important project. In the last couple of weeks, you've heard additional projects from our, our community development director right out here in front of city hall about sea level rise as well. We're working closely with all those folks in order to assist in some of the engineering aspects and trying to incorporate some of the improvements that we see in our capital improvement program into those projects. |
| 01:04:43.36 | Melissa Blaustein | Would you be willing for the next iteration of the pavement improvement project or repaving program? to potentially present to the sustainability commission so that they may give feedback and have a dialogue about where For instance, if you're identifying Colma as a potential location where there might be other potential locations so that we can be ahead of the curve and get robust community feedback. |
| 01:05:03.57 | Kevin McGowan | I think you know we would love to do that. Okay. |
| 01:05:07.08 | Melissa Blaustein | A softball. I had to do it, you know. Okay, great. And then just the last question. And then I'm sorry, I promise I'm done. But what is the, I know this is a number of roads and you are going to thankfully have help, Ali. Obviously, it's a lot of project management to take on for yourself. But should we expect the work and implementation to happen within the next 12 months upon beginning the contract? Or is it more like a 12 to 24 month plan? |
| 01:05:29.80 | Kevin McGowan | So weather is a key issue. Okay. And so keep that in mind. We have a good contractor for this. Majoran Gelati is a good contract. They work fast. We've worked with them before. I would hope that we would anticipate trying to do some of the slurry seal work or the micro seal work first, because it's dependent upon temperature of the air. And and a little bit more than regular asphalt work. So we'll have to meet with our contractor, but I'm hoping that we can get going on this fairly soon. I can't guarantee that we'll have it all done by, let's say, the end of... Thanksgiving, but we'll do our best to get a lot of these things finished. Great. Thank you so much. |
| 01:06:10.53 | Ian Sobieski | Council member Sobieski. Hi, director McGowan, I have a question for you and I have one for you, Mr. City Manager. Maybe I'll start by... Riffing off first of super excited, but I'll ask the question first, which is a narrow one, ripping off of my colleagues question about the policy of complete streets, which is Being in our general plan as a policy statement and I hear you talking about how you are incorporating that into your processes, but I also hear Ali and Sarah and yourself being extremely busy and you're in investing as much this year as in the past eight years in our infrastructure and promising to do that yet again the year after. My question is we have a relationship with Parisi, for instance, when we have traffic engineering questions. Would it be appropriate given your workload, to simply have a box in your workflow aligned with our policy from 2019, which is that there will always be a consideration of complete street issues, whether it's traffic calming or bioswales or whatnot, where appropriate. where that job is just outsourced to something like a David Parisi so they can just give you the answer, yes or no, it is appropriate, it isn't, and your staff doesn't have to always be asked by us or worry about it, you can just, do the fiduciary thing and check the box. |
| 01:07:28.58 | Kevin McGowan | So I'm part of the Marine Public Works Association. and in reaching out to them on this specific issue, Some other communities have actually done that where they have a specific consultant who they've hired to look at the complete streets aspect of almost every project Now, These have generally been larger communities, San Rafael, Novato, where they have the, the background, and the funding to do so. And it's not necessarily Cheat. We are a smaller community. And We can definitely do that. But I would put a little caution into that of where we want to use this consultant. We know that on some of the steeper streets, like I mentioned before, they still need to get resurfaced Do we need to look at bioretention on very steep hillsides? I would not suggest it because it has an implication of additional slides, adding water to the slope. I think we all kind of know this, but if we concentrate having this consultant look at areas that can accommodate some of these things like bioretentions, then yes. So When you say yes, check a box to everything, I would be hesitant to do that, but to some projects. And for instance, the mayor earlier mentioned that we had, why is this 2024 resurfacing and not 2025? Well, it's because we started this project in 2024. We're ready to get going on 2025 where we start looking at the list of roads. This is the appropriate time to start taking a look at the roads and saying, okay, which one of these can accommodate complete streets. So this is a good time to bring that up. And our staff will look at that and possibly include that analysis into the request for proposals for the design of the next cycle. |
| 01:09:23.92 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, I'm unfamiliar, thank you for that answer. I'm not familiar with the nature the workflow details of things with David Parisi and the metrics, do you bring them in just on an as-needed basis whenever you think you have a traffic engineering problem, or are they sort of always by the loop of your traffic? I was answering questions from behind. |
| 01:09:46.03 | Kevin McGowan | The oil is there. So it just. We have them in as an, we have them as an on-call basis. Yeah. And we bring them in when we need to. |
| 01:09:53.77 | Ian Sobieski | Got it. |
| 01:09:54.14 | Kevin McGowan | However, if there is a very complex project, possibly on Coloma, They may be a subcontractor to those who design the project itself. |
| 01:10:02.48 | Ian Sobieski | And so what you're suggesting is that for implementing the 2019 city council policy and the general plan policy around complete streets, you could have a similar relationship, but you use it just like you do metrics at your discretion in places where it makes sense. We could do that. Yes. Yeah. Okay, to do that forward, would that be something we need to give you direction about today? Would it be... How would we encourage you to do that? I mean, what's the process? Is that part of this discussion or? |
| 01:10:29.73 | Kevin McGowan | I think you are already encouraging us to do that as we speak about it. So what I'm suggesting is let's include that in the 2025 resurfacing project and include it as part of the RFP. So that whoever designs the resurfacing project, we will work with them to identify areas where complete streets can be implemented. |
| 01:10:49.98 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, thank you, sir. And City Manager, I guess I wanted to ask you a question because it really was striking that we're gonna be investing as much in infrastructure this year as we have in the chemo relatives. Eight years. uh, Where did all the money come from? |
| 01:11:06.98 | Chris Zapata | Thank you for the question. From your approval, first, the citizens' support for Measure L, second. We had a significant amount of Measure L money that we built up over the last couple of years that's specific for infrastructure, roads' infrastructure. So there's money that that comes from. There's also money from some county pass-through funds. And what else, Kevin, are we getting money from to fund us? Measure L, there was a general fund subsidy for the whole capital improvement program. But in terms of streets, we'll get specific money from the county. But the predominant amount of it's coming from Measure L. |
| 01:11:41.98 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. Yes, Measure L, Measure AA from the county. And I think there's some construction impact fee that goes into it as well. |
| 01:11:49.82 | Ian Sobieski | Okay. And so is this money then coming, it's coming from those sources, but then in addition to that, it's the city council's approval of money that was sitting on our balance sheet? |
| 01:12:00.20 | Chris Zapata | Yes, when we approved the capital improvement program this past year for $17 million in change, roads were a part of that. And so this is a commitment to doing that road work. We still have a lot of work to do with stairs and sidewalks and certainly storm drains. But that came from us showing you that there was, in fact, a built-up farm amount that we thought should be invested in infrastructure as quickly as we could, as smartly as we could. And so that's why you see this big, I think, investment. And the one thing that you also invested in that I think needs to be known by the public is two more project managers. So we added two two years ago, which are Sarah and Ali. You approved two more contract project managers to assist in putting this through so that we don't have an overwhelming workload for just, you know, two project managers. So you have made some policy decisions based on your finances in need that are now resulting in hopefully some visible improvements to our sorely needed streets. |
| 01:12:10.26 | Adam Blair | Thank you. |
| 01:13:10.70 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, and my last one, it's a softball. Melissa asked Director McGowan a softball. My softball deal is when you joined us as our city manager, you have got three priorities. |
| 01:13:20.03 | Chris Zapata | Thanks. |
| 01:13:20.39 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:13:20.57 | Chris Zapata | What were they again? I called them back to the basics. The first one being your people, the second one being your finances, the third one being your infrastructure. And I felt like if local government paid attention to those three things, then you can work on the fun stuff, which comes after you take care of your people, your finances, and your infrastructure. So back to the basics and infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure was one of the things that we highlighted. Kevin and I actually did, and we showed the actual need that we saw out there in a variety of areas, including, you know, stuff that you're talking about tonight. So streets being one of them, obviously, undergrounding is one thing that is much bigger than the city can take on. But one of those things that we highlighted is in need of our facilities, working through the direction from the council. You know, we've identified, you know, what our needs are over the next couple of years to the Bureau Veritas report. So it was a lot of planning, a lot of understanding, and some fine tuning of our approach from just basics to where we are now, which is let's start to spend the money to improve the process, the projects, or to implement the projects and improve the infrastructure of the community because it sorely needs it. |
| 01:14:40.93 | Unknown | THANK YOU. |
| 01:14:42.11 | Chris Zapata | Councilmember Hoffman. |
| 01:14:43.03 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. So just to make sure we're not veering off track with our direction tonight, our agenda tonight is to award the construction contract for the 2024 roadway rehabilitation project. So we're not talking about rolling a complete streets direction into the public works staff or any future projects. So what we're doing tonight is, authorizing the city manager to reward a construction project for the 2024 roadway rehabilitation. If we want to talk about complete streets, or something along those lines that would be at a future properly agendized meeting. I just want to make that clear. I hope the minutes will correctly not reflect anything about complete streets. or anything about direction to our staff on that issue. And that that would be properly jendized. I think we had a lot of discussion on that this summer. on July 3rd and then the subsequent meeting and plenty of public feedback on the subsequent meeting about implementation of those programs without proper notice and how that would affect streets. in our community without proper public input and how that would affect people's streets. that we're clear. We all understand what we're talking about tonight. |
| 01:16:08.89 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, if I can respond to Councilmember Hoffman's point. Thank you. |
| 01:16:11.98 | Jill Hoffman | THANK YOU. |
| 01:16:12.24 | Chris Zapata | city manager |
| 01:16:12.80 | Jill Hoffman | to the next year. |
| 01:16:12.97 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:16:12.99 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:16:13.00 | Chris Zapata | Please. Thank you. Yes, this is about $2.2 million in streets. And no, you don't have to add this as part of your conversation tonight because it's already in the documents that the city has adopted long ago, whether it's your general plan or sustainability, your what is it called, carbon footprint mitigation. Throughout the city, it's cities planning documents have been adopted by prior councils. So we don't have to do that tonight. It's already in there. And so tonight, all we're doing is making a commitment to honor that when we bring stuff back and the council ultimately have the final say on what you do and the public will be a prize of that as well. |
| 01:16:57.34 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not sure what point you're making. I had a hard time hearing it. I'm not sure what point the city manager was making to my comments. It seemed to me that Councilmember Sobieski was trying to insert something about a future plan and direction to the Public Works staff. about inserting complete streets. projects. that it wasn't on the agenda. It's not part of our. discussion tonight. I just want to make clear that that's not What? we're discussing tonight. What we're discussing tonight is adopting a resolution. to award a construction contract for the 2024 roadway rehabilitation project. That's my understanding of what we're doing, and I'm ready to vote on that and move on to the next agenda item. Hold on. |
| 01:17:45.09 | Steven Woodside | Just |
| 01:17:46.41 | Unknown | you |
| 01:17:46.42 | Steven Woodside | unemployment. So what the city manager said is we don't need to discuss it tonight. We've already previously discussed it at various meetings. I agree. And I'm happy to move on. The city manager was saying. |
| 01:17:54.79 | Jill Hoffman | And I'm happy to move on. |
| 01:17:57.06 | Steven Woodside | Agreed. Woodside, Vice Mayor is next, and then I'll hear from Thank you. |
| 01:18:03.35 | Melissa Blaustein | I prefer to have the... |
| 01:18:03.69 | Steven Woodside | THE END OF THE END OF THE I prefer it. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:18:08.11 | Melissa Blaustein | I prefer to have the debate about what we're doing and not doing for when we get to that stage. But for question purposes, I'd like to focus on a couple very narrow points. You were recommending alternatives 3, 4, and 5, which I believe are an alley. Maybe you can. You can quickly answer these. I don't want to take too much time, but I know members of the public are very interested in what's on the list now and perhaps what will be on the list in the near future. So what's on the list now that you're recommending are all those streets that are on the formal list plus alternatives three, four, and five, which as I understand it are... a portion of tourney street and two on north street. |
| 01:18:50.53 | Ali Iqbal | No, it would be Turney Street. It would be the Ebtide drainage ditch. And it would be the intersection on North Street on North Atwood Third Street. |
| 01:19:00.77 | Melissa Blaustein | Right. And then your alternative one, which you're not recommending tonight, as I understand it, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that you need to resolve what's going on underneath the surface with respect to sanitation before you invest in repaving. Did I understand that correctly? That's exactly right. Okay, thank you. No further questions. |
| 01:19:20.15 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:19:20.18 | Melissa Blaustein | question. |
| 01:19:20.45 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:19:20.50 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Go ahead. |
| 01:19:21.80 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, I'll make my comments during comment time in response to my colleague and but I would have a further question, director McGowan and Ali either one just about the lane with issue, the construction that starting I think next week between Mapa and Johnson Street, what are the lamewits there going to be? I'm sorry, would it what? What are the lane widths on the section? Okay, so how does this relate to what we're approving tonight? The lane widths for the part from Easterby to Napa. |
| 01:19:48.01 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:19:48.02 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 01:19:53.51 | Walfred Solorzano | Okay. |
| 01:19:54.08 | Ian Sobieski | Just so I don't know. |
| 01:19:55.30 | Kevin McGowan | I don't know at the top of my head. |
| 01:19:57.12 | Ian Sobieski | All right, well, sorry. According to the drawing, it's 11 feet. But I was just curious then, when you're, as my colleague said, when you're looking at that Easterbead in Napa section, if it's gonna be something other than the current width, whether it's 11 or 12, will that be something that we're opposed of here in time to take some action? |
| 01:20:19.41 | Kevin McGowan | You know, that one section from Easterby to Napa... It needs to be reanalyzed. I think you may recall that staff looked at possibly putting in a roundabout there at Napa Street. And there were some other discussions at the Pedestrian Bicycle Advisory Committee at their level, to really look at that section and whether you have one lane or two from Easterby all the way down to Napa was the real question, because the merge of cars that are merging to go onto Caledonia right now, where bicyclists have to cross that lane of traffic, tends to be problematic. So we do have some thoughts and we do have some ideas on how to address that. And I believe that parametrics provided some initial sketches on how to address that as well. Thank you. |
| 01:21:13.70 | Steven Woodside | I just don't want to get far afield. Okay, thank you. All right, that's the end of our questions. I will open it up for public comment. Clerk, anybody online? |
| 01:21:24.90 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:21:25.01 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Yes, we have. |
| 01:21:26.96 | Walfred Solorzano | That's a bit more to them. |
| 01:21:31.54 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. So once again, I just want to get back to the fundamental idea of Consultants versus staff. year over year, if we find that we're on this cozy first name basis with parametrics or others, I believe it really is time for us to ask a real question, which is year over year, if we can find the money to pay a consultant year over year, maybe we can staff that position in-house. And I bring this forward because it has to do with institutional memory, and what it is that has an ongoing record that the citizens themselves can look at any time. And by farming it out to consultants, as much as I love consultants, I really believe we have to draw the line between those that we can honestly staff and we deserve to have it within our house versus people like, I suppose, just to use it as an example, gelatis. I don't expect us to totally ramp up with that kind of bandwidth. I mean, that's a very specialized thing. So of course that's contracted out. But when it comes to the brain trust, The brain trust belongs inside City Hall. That's my honest opinion about that. And I'm not sure. |
| 01:22:44.25 | Steven Woodside | And I'm not sure I'm going to ask you to confine your comments to the resolution that we're considering regarding awarding a construction contract. |
| 01:22:55.27 | Babette McDougall | If you're asking, Am I, are you hearing me? I don't know. |
| 01:23:00.33 | Steven Woodside | I'm... to find your comments to the subject that we are considering voting on as opposed to the city's practices with respect to independent |
| 01:23:01.11 | Babette McDougall | Right. |
| 01:23:09.02 | Babette McDougall | consultants. |
| 01:23:09.75 | Steven Woodside | you |
| 01:23:10.22 | Babette McDougall | Yes, ma'am. I don't disagree with awarding these contracts. Our roads are in sore need of attention. Our infrastructure tax dollars are withheld from us by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. We deserve our own rightful infrastructure tax dollars. They're ours. They come out of our taxes. It's what we pay in the first place for the privilege to live in this community. So I'm very much in favor of moving on with improving our architecture. I'd like to see the lawsuits go down. I actually direct people who come as guests where we can go depending on the time of day and the visibility and whether or not it's a safe area to walk on once the sun goes down because of the trip hazard. So, yes, absolutely. I want to see the roads get better. that I don't know. |
| 01:23:56.27 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:23:56.29 | Babette McDougall | TODAY. |
| 01:23:56.38 | Steven Woodside | THE END OF |
| 01:23:56.41 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 01:23:56.54 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. City clerk, |
| 01:24:01.20 | Walfred Solorzano | We have Adrian Benton. |
| 01:24:03.31 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:24:03.33 | Adrian Brinton | Welcome, Adrian. |
| 01:24:07.34 | Adrian Brinton | I think so much again for taking my comment. Thank you to the city staff for preparing this and being ready to pave some streets. I know I drive on Multimar a lot and I'm very excited to see that get paved. Um, I was a little confused by all of the discussion about complete streaks and agendizing and you know, kind of it being appropriate to talk about in context of this project and this approval. because we do have We have a resolution 5653 that we passed in 2017 and our general plan was subsequently updated to require including complete streets, in our street designs. If there was an exemption where we found they weren't appropriate, It looks like it's meant to be called out in writing so that we can have a record of that. haven't seen that, I'd love to see that. I think as our director of public works mentioned, many streets are just clearly not appropriate and it would be very easy to document that. But many streets, there's a lot of questions as to whether they could be or not. And I think documenting the reasons why we do or do not do those things is extremely important. In regards to the lane widths, I'm on that section of Bridgeway a lot. We just reduced the speed limit there. There's no incentive to reduce feeding on that street with the lane which they are now and if we make them wider, there will be more instances of speeding. At times, I hate to admit this, I've been driving on that street and noticed traffic moving with me as well. Thank you. Up to 45 miles an hour comfortably. And reducing the lean widths will help that. The netco standards show that the lenient wits are reducible. Carisi is probably well aware of these. And I hope that the city staff will take that under advisement and help us produce safer streets for everybody, not just cyclists, but also for people on foot. and for people driving, I don't wanna hit somebody And when I see somebody doing 45 miles an hour, they probably don't want to hit somebody. Thank you. Thank you for taking my comment. |
| 01:26:08.12 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:26:09.23 | Unknown | Thank you. City Clerk, we're not seeing the clock, is it? Yeah, it's not. |
| 01:26:12.03 | Walfred Solorzano | popping up. I'll have to check that later. No further public comment. |
| 01:26:18.04 | Steven Woodside | you OK, Alice Merrill has a comment. |
| 01:26:28.72 | Alice Merrill | Thank you, one of the regulars. I was kind of wishing you'd forget about me. I just, really when we hear Parisi and parametrics pop up as the gold standard, because they're very specific about their requirements and what they want, and it is usually it needs to be talked about with the whole town, not just the people, those guys. And really, that's all. I hope that we can get some kind of work done on the streets that are the ones that were in the pictures, you know, they need it. Let's just do it. And get going. Thank you. And the whole complete streets, if I understand what that means, that's like road dieting. And I do not agree with that. Thank you. |
| 01:27:16.61 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:27:16.63 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:27:17.57 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:27:17.59 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 01:27:17.96 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. All right, seeing no further public comment, I'll bring it up here for discussion. I wanna lead off with one slight variation into the motion that we will be recommending this evening, anytime we approve, a construction project it's important that we also approve the plans and specifications or that we also or that we delegate authority to the city engineer to approve the design of the lane configuration. So that we can enjoy design immunity under government code section 830.6 so that's not part of the recommend the motion tonight, but I am going to ask the city attorney to read language into the record for us to include. in the recommended motion. |
| 01:28:04.45 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, it's my recommendation that the Council approve the resolution as set forth in the agenda packet subject to the following modification to section three, which currently reads the Council approves plans and specification for the 2024 roadway rehabilitation project on file with the city clerk's office. I would recommend the council add to that and delegates to the city engineer authority to approve the design of lane configurations pursuant to government code 830.6. |
| 01:28:35.27 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. We will include that in our motion. I'll go ahead and make that motion. |
| 01:28:39.25 | Melissa Blaustein | And I'll second it. And good catch, Mayor. |
| 01:28:41.39 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Well, and the city attorney. And now I'll open it up for a comment from the dialogue. |
| 01:28:49.04 | Melissa Blaustein | MISSING. |
| 01:28:49.31 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:28:49.34 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Council member Blaustein. I'm happy to start. I know that there has been significant feedback from our community about the need to immediately improve our roads, which of course I think all of us on this dais are in agreement that we need to improve our payment index score and that there is much work to do. But this is a tremendous step by our public works department to start moving the needle on Getting back to basics and making. larger infrastructure improvements. So again, really grateful to our voters for Measure L and for providing us with the additional funds required to move forward and make this project a reality. I also appreciate that we received significant public feedback the first time we heard this project and had a conversation around road diets, bioswales, and complete streets. And I just want to say for the record that I am rather disappointed that there isn't a larger consideration for complete streets and more sustainable futures for our roads. And I would like to see us, if necessary, potentially agendize this as a separate item, or at least think further with a sustainability lens when we're making these decisions as a community, because we are facing significant challenges with regards to resiliency and the impacts of climate change. And so while I'm thrilled that we are repaving our roads, I think it would be remiss to not make considerations about large scale projects such as this without that in mind. So as I mentioned to director McGowan, the next time that we're making a robust road improvement, I'd like to see an ongoing conversation and dialogue with our sustainability commission. just to get feedback and ideas. But it was also clear based on the public response that we heard to the suggestions for roads diets, for example, in places like Easterby, that some neighbors didn't have significant information or outreach. And so that's something else that I'd like to see us do a better job of going forward because there are complete streets programs that have been successful. There is additional funding available through our measure AA dollars, for example, through transportation authority. So my, my huge support and thanks for moving this project forward. and for improving our roads immediately, which we absolutely need to do, But I think we're aware that that will require even more investment. And if we don't take steps now to ensure that these investment dollars are going towards resiliency, we're just going to regret it further later. So I'm in support of the motion, but wanted to make sure that those comments were heard. Vice Mayor. |
| 01:31:16.17 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:31:16.74 | Melissa Blaustein | Yes, I prepared to vote yes. And it's great that we're doing this. We're doing, we're addressing infrastructure. And I just want to say, as the new connoisseur, I was aware of it. for coming onto the council or even deciding to run, that we have a general plan. We have complete streets. The frustration for me is that people want to interpret, whether it's smart streets, road diet, complete streets, they read into it things which I'm not sure are there. I'd prefer to call them smart streets and sustainable streets myself, but that's not the label that's, I guess, well understood in the community itself. My main issue is Emergency access, our streets that provide emergency access should be safe. Okay? 11 feet wide lanes are safe. And they also serve to keep people from speeding. You have a 12, 13, 14-foot wide lane. People think it's a freeway, and they go speeding. Okay? So I think part of the notion of complete streets is really safe streets, finding them right sized so that traffic is calmed at the south end of town. entering our town, we don't have complete streets. We have no sidewalk. We have no bike lane. We have narrow, narrow, narrow, right? And near accidents. And there's not much we can do about it without some major investment in that part of town. So to me, being complete means looking at all our major arterials from one end to the other and doing the best job we can to have them sustainable environmentally, sustainable fiscally, and safe. Thank you. |
| 01:32:55.21 | Steven Woodside | Who's next? |
| 01:32:56.34 | Jill Hoffman | Yes, Councilmember Hoffman. I'll go next. I support this motion. I would have supported it July 1st. I think we should have approved this July 1st when it first came in front of the council. Um, I would have, you know, obviously I supported it July 15th when it came back, we had substantial substantial feedback from the community that they did not support the changes to the streets that were attempted Whenever you talk about streets, it's not streets, it's neighborhoods. And it's not, you know, sidewalks. It's, it's, you know. it's neighborhoods in front of people's houses. And you can't change that if you don't talk to the people who live in those neighborhoods. and they're affected by your changes. So when you narrow streets, you take away parking and you take away access and you take away emergency access. So there's a reason why the streets leading out of the hills on the north side of town are wide is because they provide access. And now they provide emergency egress and ingress for people who come out of those narrow streets, out of the hills, and they provide ways to exit the city. either going up through the hills or coming down out of the hills, people have to have a way to get out. And so they provide a service and they provide parking for people who live. in this part of town and some of the people don't have garages. A lot of people don't have garages, so they have to park. Yes. Where? Out on the street. And so... Anytime you touch that configuration, you don't touch one house, you touch a lot of families who live there. I need a place to park. Until we have a society that don't rely on cars, families usually have to have cars to get to school and every place else that families need to go. So, you know, I agree when you talk about these things, you have to have a lot of public outreach and a lot of public input. That didn't happen in this case. And so, when the city manager talked about, well, we've already talked about that. We've got this already in our general plan. Okay, but it's not something that we're gonna We can't automatically lay it over. a street plan because you have to have a lot of public input on whatever it is you're doing with your streets. If we're not just repaving them and you're talking about reconfiguring, you absolutely have to talk to the neighborhoods and get the impact and input from the neighborhood. I would hope that we don't make that big mistake again. at the city council level. And so I'm happy to support this resolution and I'm glad we're moving forward with it. |
| 01:35:38.36 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, hi, Mayor. Thanks. So just looking off at that point, government is really slow. It annoys me that we have to establish million dollar general plans that have numerous meetings and a lot of public input to create policies. And then those policies get enshrined. And that's what gives direction to staff. So this issue is much ado about nothing. The Complete streets are in the general plan 5.10.1, and it doesn't mean road diets per se. It means smart streets. It means safe streets. It means doing what is best for all the users. The general plan says... Right. we shall implement a complete streets policy. to all capital projects wherever practical. And the resolution that accompanied it, which is resolution 5.65653, lays out the procedures for what to do. And it really says that whenever we're doing capital projects, we should look at how to make them safer and smarter. That passed unanimously when Ray Withey was mayor and Councilmember Hoffman voted for it. The policy of the city as of May 2017 is complete streets and that means smart streets and what was The reason that makes a difference is, you know, we have an electric stove where those and the heater gets hot and you turn it off. Well, one design would be that the light turns off. and you wouldn't know it's hot. But the way that you designed it to be safe is it still glows. Even though it's off, the little stove still glows, and it's a warning that it's hot. Similarly, you can get people to slow down on our streets by deploying the police or traffic cameras that issue tickets, or you can play with the paint on the surface to help encourage safe behavior. So it is important not to be distracted or misled into thinking that something's happening when it's not. This is really a professional step that's long agreed to city policy and I hope the staff will with enthusiasm and verve continue to apply it. What was missing in the report initially was really a description of what may have been considered and I look forward in future versions that even when there is nothing to be done, that it's noted that we looked at it and there's nothing to be done. And we looked at it and we could do something, but we chose not to. Those are all valid responses. And I hope in future versions we'll see it. But none of that is to take away from the incredible... line of this. which is this continuing creeping excellence. The city council and previous city governments have done a really good job of husbanding its resources, maybe arguably conservatively, so much so that we have year in and year out, built up cash on our balance sheet. And now we could have potentially been investing more on our roads, but now we have the advantage, along with Measure L, which is incremental money, to make the largest investment in roads in Saucyde's history. This is a big step towards the renaissance, and I'm excited for this year and next. |
| 01:38:44.34 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. I will dovetail on that, Councilmember. At the beginning of the year, when we conducted our strategic planning session for the year, one of our priorities was to address long-deferred maintenance on our infrastructure and, in particular, our streets. So I am so pleased to take a major step toward fulfilling that priority with the approval of this item. During my campaign for office in 2022, I also campaigned for Measure L. And so I'm also very pleased that we are utilizing our taxpayer dollars on such an important project for our residents. I do understand that complete streets in our hilly town with narrow streets is challenging. So I am pleased that we will continue to confer closely with our Sustainability Commission as we continue to carry out the... And, mission of our general plan which does include providing complete streets where possible. Regarding the current plan, I beg to differ that we didn't have significant public input. The whole reason we didn't adopt the plan that was presented to us at the beginning of July was to address some of the public input that we received on the initial plan. Ensuring our arterials are upgraded in an appropriate manner not only helps our day to day use, but also enhances our community safety goals and ensures a safe and traversable connection between our neighborhoods. So I am pleased to vote yes for this important project and with that I will call the question. All in favor? Aye. That motion carries unanimously. Thank you. Thank you, Director McGowan. Thank you. All right, with that, we'll move on to item 5B, adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute the professional services agreement with CSWST2. for the development of conceptual and construction level documents parking lot one reconstruction project in an amount not to exceed $243,393. And again, we will welcome our Public Works Director Kevin McGowan. |
| 01:40:40.77 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you, Mayor, members of City Council. I would simply like to turn it over to Sarah Korshidafard, our project manager for this specific project, who has a short presentation for us. |
| 01:40:53.94 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Welcome Sarah. Thank you. Good evening, Madam Mayor, council members. City manager and members of the public. I'm Sarah Khorsidifad, project manager for the parking lot reconstruction project. Next slide, please. The ask tonight is simple. The staff is requesting the council to adopt the resolution authorizing the city manager to execute the professional services agreement with CSW at the amount not exceeding 243,393 for the development of the conceptual design and bid-ready construction documents. Next slide, please. provide a quick background the parking lot reconstruction project was originally planned to be a simpler resurfacing and asphalt rebuild that was included in the previous year's CIPs in April the city issued a request for proposal with an expanded scope asking for planning and design work that would include the reconstruction of parking lot one beyond more than a parking facility to enhance design quality, future sustainability and resiliency of that area. Some of the broader goals include climate smart solutions, green infrastructure, stormwater filtration, and enhanced quality of place. We received by the due date of May 29, three different proposals that were submitted for the RFP. Next slide, please. By the May 29 RFP deadline, we received three proposals, two from SWA and CSW that were aligned with the city's broader vision, and we got a third one that was not aligned with the project's broader objective. During the July 22nd council meeting, staff stood here and presented again, reminding of the urgent need for critical improvement in that area, highlighted the visible deterioration, the damaged pavement, exposed tree roots and outdated infrastructure. And we emphasize that the large location adjacent to the bay makes it specifically vulnerable to sea level rise and flooding. During that same meeting, staff requested direction on advancing the expanded RFP score beyond the simple asphalt resurfacing and sought authorization to begin |
| 01:43:21.04 | Unknown | with the two responsive consultants. Council, directed staff to pursue negotiations were also advised on advancing, expanding, and maximizing the consultants deliverables by adding Thank you. . to be offered. Thank you. to Can you retain the context? spaces to incorporate fees required strategies plus additional requirements. Three, to include construction documents in consultants fees. And four, to anticipate and expand the project to the entire construction. Next slide, please. Follow the region of 26th and council of the staff as the two So, see you soon. and start to address to It's a good thing. and the added scope and direction was by the council to help you with this slide. that takes this I'm going to tell you something. we added to the scope. to prepare new concept design alternatives See you. Thank you. Thank you. Obstruction as students. The total recommended consultant costs subject to council approval is expected to be between 200,000 and 250,000 to complete conceptual designs and to retain existing parking capacity. for consultants shouting The Business Improvement District of Downtown Social Media Association, I assume, And I'm going to have a second, sorry. So you keep kind of of sales on. by our own |
| 01:45:17.73 | Adrian Brinton | Um, |
| 01:45:17.95 | Unknown | So there appears to be an issue with the Marine Corps. |
| 01:45:22.01 | Adrian Brinton | We ignore it. |
| 01:45:24.38 | Unknown | I don't know. |
| 01:45:24.70 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:45:24.95 | Unknown | And I'm cutting it. to everybody. Yeah. I'll wrap that up. So if you want to see I'm still true. She just... Thank you. So is that better? going to be brutal or No, sir. |
| 01:45:44.88 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:45:45.03 | Unknown | Okay. |
| 01:45:45.82 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:45:49.94 | Unknown | I'm sorry, please. but there was something It's true. It's true. downtown. to try and do a sign of the church. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. covering the conceptual design, construction, and two plans, specifications, construction, contingency, and construction management. It's the proposed project cost exceeds the budget, the consortium must produce So. to design a way of additional accounts to the city. is the phase construction design should have been how their strategies budget. such as for this instruction consultant suggested approaches. I will ask the council's 20th, or July 22nd direction for the staff to have the two consultants Check. the truth. So it goes as So that was grossing me. to transfer and selection of sales into the defined So I'm sorry. Mr. to the I'm sure. I know. that for the panelists. Convert in the CDC, the system Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. from both of these in this country. It's 19. I'm sorry. to the panel. since After the panel, consultants that found comfortable Chao. Thank you. See you next time. the idea of people and budget companies science section. . |
| 01:47:50.50 | Unknown | to get better selection. seven years of transformation So I'm clean. I'm sorry to be a little bit construction runs. Subsequent communication confirmed that additional costs 223,000 to 233,000. could be required to find construction voucher to to $430,000, which is significant. to Okay. I was on track that the city council had put it for. the staff. Okay. Split some. Thank you. Thank you. here. obstruction of drunks. Thank you. I don't know. Thank you. |
| 01:48:44.99 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:48:46.67 | Unknown | total vote. cost. |
| 01:48:49.96 | Walfred Solorzano | I'm not sure. And people say, those owners can call you an analogy, but the grapes So I don't know what we're going to do about that. |
| 01:48:59.97 | Unknown | So, Thank you. I, for you, the sound Tonight is different from |
| 01:49:06.97 | Alice Merrill | on how I call it, is people that it's difficult to understand |
| 01:49:12.04 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:49:12.09 | Alice Merrill | Yeah. |
| 01:49:12.31 | Unknown | but staff was saying it's very difficult So, So... Wonderful. |
| 01:49:18.69 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. have some quality for future meetings. |
| 01:49:25.82 | Unknown | I can try to go slow. talk. |
| 01:49:28.51 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 01:49:28.96 | Unknown | Okay. Absolutely. Just slide it. So it's a struggle for me. Is this expectation attached to staff report. Okay. happen. It's our practice to attach presentations to the staff group. Bye. Can you please proceed to the presentation |
| 01:49:49.97 | Steven Woodside | clerk to attach to the agenda item so that those who could not hear you |
| 01:49:52.62 | Melissa Blaustein | so that- |
| 01:49:55.39 | Steven Woodside | will be able to review your presentation. And I would also say for those listeners that you can turn on closed captioning. Perhaps that will help. |
| 01:50:06.04 | Ian Sobieski | The person who texted me said the audio was perfect for the previous item. It suddenly changed, so I just thought maybe staff could consider for a moment whether any dial was touched in the last five minutes. I mean, Marin TV listens to it. |
| 01:50:18.96 | Steven Woodside | as the viewers listen to it. |
| 01:50:29.21 | Adam Blair | in some |
| 01:50:33.26 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, the fidelity of the sound has been compromised for some reason. I don't know. |
| 01:50:47.21 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. Okay. All right. Go ahead and finish up, Sarah. Thank you. |
| 01:50:51.60 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Okay. On the other hand, CSW's proposal fee is under $250,000 and includes all bid-ready construction drawings. In the revised proposal cover letter, CSW further committed that if the total delivery cost of the selected alternative exceeds the established budget, they will revise the construction documents at no additional cost to the city directly addressing the request from the council next slide please please And here is a quick snapshot, especially for those of you who are not able to hear me correctly, that shows a simplified comparison between the two consultants. fee. Next slide, please. If the city council decides not to approve the PSA award to CSW, it is invited to consider and determine the preferred course of action from the options below reject all proposals and direct staff to reissue the RFP. This option may delay the project and may impact on the overall cost of the work. Direct the city manager, second, direct the city manager to execute the professional services agreement with SWA. Based on the communication with SWA, the cost to secure their services can be higher than that of the consultant. recommended by the interview panel such that the budget may need to be amended to cover their fees. And last, provide staff with alternative directions. Next slide, please. Thank you. We appreciate your attention and look forward to your input. |
| 01:52:39.97 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Okay, any questions for Sarah? Yes, Vice Mayor. |
| 01:52:46.13 | Melissa Blaustein | Turn my mic off. Is it on now? Very quickly, Sarah, you're an architect. |
| 01:52:51.60 | Katie Garcia | Yeah. |
| 01:52:52.29 | Melissa Blaustein | And you received the recommendations from the independent panel. |
| 01:52:57.45 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yes. |
| 01:52:57.91 | Melissa Blaustein | And I just, my question is simple. What's your recommendation? |
| 01:53:01.47 | Sarah Khorsidifad | I'll be happy to work with either one of those consultants. They're both qualified. Each may have a different type of advantage. One may be more familiar with the work we are doing in Sausalito with the community's needs, and the other may be more versed in sea level rise adaptation solutions. But short answer, I, Thank you. would be happy to work with either one of them. |
| 01:53:31.00 | Melissa Blaustein | Do you agree with the recommendation of the independents? |
| 01:53:40.47 | Steven Woodside | I don't know if it's fair. We retained a panel to evaluate. So to put a staff member on the spot and to agree or disagree with the panel, I'm feeling that that's a little unfair to put her on the spot. |
| 01:53:54.57 | Melissa Blaustein | for you. I would hope that all of our staff feels comfortable making recommendations to us, which they do on most cases, and I'm not trying to put her on the spot. If she's saying I could work with either one, that's my answer. That's fine. |
| 01:53:56.03 | Steven Woodside | And... |
| 01:54:09.61 | Steven Woodside | And the staff report does make a recommendation based on the parameters previously laid out by the council. |
| 01:54:14.99 | Melissa Blaustein | That's what I understood, and that's why I wanted just to find out if that was... Her recommendation. I just... Okay. Sorry. Yeah. I withdraw those questions. |
| 01:54:19.85 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:54:19.87 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm not sure. |
| 01:54:19.94 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:54:19.97 | Melissa Blaustein | I don't know. |
| 01:54:20.04 | Steven Woodside | I just, |
| 01:54:20.26 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:54:27.11 | Ian Sobieski | Hi, Sarah. |
| 01:54:27.75 | Melissa Blaustein | Hi. |
| 01:54:27.97 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Thank you. |
| 01:54:28.07 | Ian Sobieski | Was the recommendation of the panel unanimous? |
| 01:54:30.86 | Sarah Khorsidifad | can you repeat? |
| 01:54:32.12 | Ian Sobieski | Was the recommendation of the three member panel unanimous, or was it? |
| 01:54:36.20 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Two out of three. |
| 01:54:37.37 | Ian Sobieski | So it was two to one recommendation. So one member recommended... |
| 01:54:39.11 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yes. |
| 01:54:41.67 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:54:41.96 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yes. |
| 01:54:41.98 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. I guess SWA in this case and to recommend that. So, okay. And then one thing from the detail, I saw that in the proposal from CSW, they are offering to do 100% construction drawings within the price. Yes. So when we originally ended and had direction at the earlier meeting in July, the direction was to do 30% drawings within the case. So they went above and beyond |
| 01:54:43.85 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yes. |
| 01:54:44.20 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 01:54:45.06 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yes. |
| 01:54:58.11 | Melissa Blaustein | Yes. Yes. |
| 01:55:11.24 | Ian Sobieski | I think the mayor is the one that suggested that she wanted to make sure it was 30% and that 100% wouldn't exceed some additional price. |
| 01:55:18.95 | Sarah Khorsidifad | This is a big compromise. I think this is the best value that the city could get. |
| 01:55:23.20 | Ian Sobieski | So we're getting 100%. |
| 01:55:24.57 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yeah. |
| 01:55:25.50 | Ian Sobieski | drawings. Yes. We had talked about having 250k as the budget with for 30% drawings to the CSW proposals to do 100% drawings within that amount. |
| 01:55:36.52 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yes, and that was a defining factor for the panelists. |
| 01:55:40.04 | Ian Sobieski | And you're a designer and I mean, that takes work and money, presumably, presumably if we had 30% drawings. and we wanted to then have 100% drawings that we wouldn't get that for free. It would cost something, in fact, so much so that the mayor was concerned about it being expensive. So that would cost some amount of money. I presume. |
| 01:55:57.51 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yes, I'm not aware of the whereabouts and the strategies that the other firm is applying in making their processes efficient However, as a designer myself, I strongly believe that the designer should not be paid for their work. So if that decision for SW was that the cost would be higher, Um, I appreciate that and I respect that decision. |
| 01:56:28.24 | Ian Sobieski | I was just trying to understand if CSW is proposing to do 100% construction drawings when they were only asked to do 30% within the 250 K, presumably. you know, It's a... It's a pie. So if the wedge of the pie devoted to doing construction drawings grows, that leaves less pie for doing conceptual design and conceptual design work. |
| 01:56:50.38 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Because they are doing other projects here for us at the city and they just know how to strategize to make their processes more efficient. That's my interpretation. But again. I respect and I value that the designer may want to charge more for their design work because they believe it's worth more. |
| 01:57:10.26 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, and is there a landscape, it helped me out with CSW, they're an engineering firm, where the landscape architects and their talent. |
| 01:57:16.50 | Sarah Khorsidifad | That's a great question. WRT, the landscape architecture firm that is working on our sea level rise project is a sub consultant and actually there is an equal. fee that would be paid out of the proposal fee to CSW and WRT. So it would be a collaboration between the two. However, it would be the engineering. |
| 01:57:39.03 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. So the design project will be led by the engineers, not by the landscape architects? |
| 01:57:42.12 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yes. |
| 01:57:44.06 | Unknown | Yes. Thanks. |
| 01:57:44.97 | Ian Sobieski | But I looked on the presentation and I saw WRT was just responsible for public outreach and holding public outreach meetings in the presentation that CSW, that you attached to the presentation. |
| 01:57:55.23 | Sarah Khorsidifad | I believe WRT will be in charge of the design ideation part of the work, and CSW will make sure it's constructable. |
| 01:58:05.25 | Ian Sobieski | Okay. Look at what's online right now. Yes, it is. |
| 01:58:08.34 | Steven Woodside | know. So thank you for asking us for questions. Yeah. |
| 01:58:09.99 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:58:10.03 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 01:58:10.84 | Steven Woodside | Other questions of Sarah. Council Member Blaustein. |
| 01:58:13.76 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. I really appreciate that. So, Just for the purposes of transparency, I really appreciate that there was a panel that was put together. And I understand it was... Katie, can you just share the three members of the panel and like the process for deciding who was on the panel and maybe how many times they met? I just want to, I want it to be clear how we came to this decision. I cannot speak to the decision. |
| 01:58:37.97 | Sarah Khorsidifad | on the choices, but I can tell you, Katie Thao Garcia, our Resiliency and Sustainability Manager, David Marlott from the Planning Commission, and Cass Green from our Downtown Improvement District Community Association, both the panelists. And they met the one time or just one time? Yes. I created an assessment that was handed to them during the presentation, and they attended the presentation in person at the city hall. They listened to the two consultants, and they returned their assessment sheet back to me. There was a clear question at the end asking this or that, and they pointed out which one they prefer along with their reasons for why they made that choice. |
| 01:59:29.78 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. And then I looked at both of the RFPs and obviously we know SWA because they've done a number of projects with us, but I noticed that the other firm, which is the staff's recommendation in their executive letter to as the cover letter, they made a commitment as the second point. if this project goes over the $250,000 amount, we will accept the lost cost and still provide the construction drawings. Was there any conversation with SWA about a match for that? agreement or |
| 02:00:01.22 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Thank you. |
| 02:00:02.01 | Melissa Blaustein | Um, |
| 02:00:02.97 | Sarah Khorsidifad | had a follow-up email with SWA asking for clarification because SWA did not submit a revised proposal. They assumed the original proposal would be intact however they just submitted a striked through a fee proposal. In the follow-up email with SWA, SWA confirmed that this additional construction document would incur additional costs and confirmed the amount. So that was put in the staff report. There was no negotiation because that was the goal to keep it independent and objective. |
| 02:00:44.38 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, great. Thank you. I appreciate that. And just since most of us are familiar with SWA, but we're not as familiar with the other firm has Sausalito worked with them on other engagements before or what other local cities and towns we know might have, I noted their references. They had, for example, the county of Marin flood board, but maybe you can just share your experience. |
| 02:01:03.84 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yes, CSW, I'm currently working on the storm drain assessment study with CSW, which will return to the council in October. So I had that experience, I believe. Ali has been working with CSW in a number of projects. And WART, of course, it's known because of their sea level rise project. And interestingly, they're also the sub consultant for the gate five project. So they're having their imprint throughout town. |
| 02:01:37.61 | Melissa Blaustein | They have significant exposure to the city as well. Yeah. |
| 02:01:38.52 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yes. Yeah, so there's a great synergy with having them involved and tying in with the sea level rise study that we are currently finishing. |
| 02:01:48.68 | Melissa Blaustein | And then lastly, one of the unfortunate issues that we've seen with consultants previously is just that we occasionally bypass timelines or deadlines. What was the conversation with both of the firms with regards to how KPIs would be met or a timeline would be put into place for this project? |
| 02:02:05.77 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yeah, that's a great question. The RFP has put in place half a year, six months process. SWO was proposing to fast track the process, which could be possible. So if I want to summarize what would be the timeline, I believe maybe a timeline between four to five months for the entire project with us coming back to the city council after the start of the next year to present to you the alternatives and getting feedback moving forward from there. Great. Thank you very much. |
| 02:02:42.80 | Steven Woodside | other questions of Sarah? Councilmember. |
| 02:02:45.70 | Jill Hoffman | This is a question for Sarah, Ali, and Kevin, either one or all collectively. Any confidence issues with CSW? Yeah. I think |
| 02:03:00.38 | Kevin McGowan | The question was any conflicts with CSW? |
| 02:03:02.56 | Jill Hoffman | conflicts or confidence issues with working with CSW. No, not at this time. |
| 02:03:05.93 | Kevin McGowan | No. |
| 02:03:07.18 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. So you don't have any problems working with them. And in fact, you have confidence in them and look forward to working with them and, In keeping with the selection by the panel? Yes. Okay, thanks. Ali, yeah? Okay. |
| 02:03:22.47 | Steven Woodside | All right. With that, I'll... Thank you, Professor. Oh. |
| 02:03:24.32 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:03:24.48 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:03:24.58 | Ian Sobieski | So I did look up the proposal while we were saying, uh, so WRT is in charge. There are, 12. elements to the work. demolition, layout, paving, striping, grading, and drainage, landscape planting, landscape, hardscape, lighting plan, EV chargers, irrigation, construction details, construction, and specifications. WRT, the landscape architect, has just two of those, the landscape planting plan and the landscape hardscape. So it's the construction firm, as you said, is the lead. And by that, These other things like grading and drainage and layout and paving and EV chargers and lighting are done by the engineering firm designed by the engineering firm. So just to do an apples to apples comparison in the SWA proposal, they have an engineering firm, I believe, as a subcontractor. And the ratios are reversed where SWA is the lead on these various things like drainage and grading and electricity. And the engineering firm is responsible for construction, construction details. Is that a fair question? |
| 02:04:35.86 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Well, yes, I think if I want to work on that project myself, putting myself in their shoes, there would be more of a collaborative effort than one doing and the other doing the other. So I assume they're going to be working together, bouncing ideas off of one another. In other words, they might be asking questions of the engineers if that is something that is feasible and going back and forth in that process so it's really difficult to i think split it time wise plus the design landscape architect entity is going to do the community engagement which as you may know it's a time-consuming process and logistical and all that planning for that will take efforts. On the other hand, the engineering firm, I'm assuming, is taking on more of the project management side of the work, so that is how their task would be split. I'll be happy to clarify that and ask the question if needed. |
| 02:05:36.74 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:05:37.23 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yeah. |
| 02:05:40.10 | Jill Hoffman | And just one follow-up. I assume, I mean, clearly, we're going to see the designs, what they're going to come up with, right? And so if we have a question or concern about what the designs look like, |
| 02:05:45.35 | Adam Blair | Thank you. |
| 02:05:45.37 | Stacey Gregory | Thank you. |
| 02:05:45.47 | Adam Blair | Thank you. |
| 02:05:45.53 | Stacey Gregory | Thank you. |
| 02:05:45.57 | Adam Blair | Thank you. |
| 02:05:50.48 | Jill Hoffman | I mean, we're going to be able to engage in that. Yes. And if there's, I assume because they're going to be working collaboratively, |
| 02:05:52.59 | Unknown | Yes. |
| 02:05:57.55 | Jill Hoffman | the designs as they're written will then be built in collaboration between the two. Yes. Yes. And to follow up on Councilmember Sobieski's question. So, yes. Okay. Thank you. |
| 02:06:08.45 | Ian Sobieski | And I have one follow up to her. It's just about the thing in the report. I'm just trying to understand the mechanism. They say they're going to report to you or the team, CSW and friends will touch in biweekly. I don't know if that's twice a week or every other week. |
| 02:06:16.77 | Unknown | Bye. |
| 02:06:16.91 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:22.85 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:23.08 | Ian Sobieski | Every other week. Every other week. I'm gonna figure out what that word is. So every other week. I think I'm gonna be meeting with you, with Director McGowan, with you too, with Ali. |
| 02:06:23.12 | Unknown | about me. weather. the other. |
| 02:06:25.97 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Thank you. |
| 02:06:30.62 | Sarah Khorsidifad | on the press. |
| 02:06:31.23 | Ian Sobieski | um, |
| 02:06:31.76 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Kevin, typically Kevin and myself. Yes. |
| 02:06:34.94 | Ian Sobieski | And so, |
| 02:06:35.60 | Sarah Khorsidifad | And of course, Katie. Thank you. Yes. |
| 02:06:38.42 | Ian Sobieski | three will be the city's team. Practical. reporting entity and giving feedback and whatnot when they have questions. Yes. And then to the, to my colleague's question, |
| 02:06:46.52 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Thank you. Thank you. Yes. |
| 02:06:47.23 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:47.33 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yeah. |
| 02:06:47.42 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:06:47.43 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Thank you. |
| 02:06:51.03 | Ian Sobieski | When does it come back to city council? |
| 02:06:53.17 | Sarah Khorsidifad | After the start of the meeting, January, sometime in January. Mm-hmm. |
| 02:06:58.42 | Ian Sobieski | That comes back to her question. I'm an adult. It's awesome. |
| 02:06:59.99 | Sarah Khorsidifad | I'm not. |
| 02:07:03.60 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Thank you. intervention, one with ambitious solution and something in between. |
| 02:07:09.61 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 02:07:10.30 | Sarah Khorsidifad | Yeah. |
| 02:07:11.99 | Steven Woodside | All right, I'm going to open it up for public comment. I have no speaker cards from the audience. Anyone online, city council? |
| 02:07:19.38 | Walfred Solorzano | We have Babette McDougall. |
| 02:07:21.17 | Steven Woodside | Okay? |
| 02:07:24.91 | Walfred Solorzano | And |
| 02:07:27.48 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, we have a clock. It was facing me earlier. Now it's facing away from you. |
| 02:07:33.77 | Stacey Gregory | Thank you. |
| 02:07:33.79 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:07:33.81 | Stacey Gregory | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:07:34.01 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:07:34.02 | Stacey Gregory | Thank you. |
| 02:07:34.43 | Steven Woodside | Okay. |
| 02:07:35.14 | Stacey Gregory | For some reason, I can't give her access now. |
| 02:07:36.30 | Steven Woodside | THE END OF |
| 02:07:36.39 | Stacey Gregory | Thank you. |
| 02:07:37.89 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:07:37.91 | Unknown | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:07:39.24 | Babette McDougall | Go ahead, Babette. Thank you. So Let me just say that Gosh, all these letters and abbreviations can get very confusing. And it's very difficult as a resident, but in terms of confidence, and what does instill confidence. I got to say WRT does not exactly win my favor. It was the third and final workshop where I finally saw the better side of them because they opened it up to public discussion and they did a brilliant job. But everything that they put in front of the people to look at was frightening. And it was not anything that anybody would like to see in Sausalito, with a notable exception of Bridgeway Marina, Ms. Blaustein. So this is really a hard thing for the people to have to say, oh, OK, let's just swallow it whole. Now, I have one thing to say about SWA, even though I have no vested interest in this company. I will tell you that they are trustworthy. Over time, they are local. Their data is believable. And I think about going to the predecessor of Bridgeway Marina, Sausalito Marine, and it was SWA that did much of their data crunching. It was for that only reason that that data was actually credible in an otherwise incredible environment, as in incredible as in not credible. So, again, I urge you, be very careful. Someone who has come forward as a good citizen over the years and says, wait a minute, we might have to review this if you want that much information. I just don't see why you would dismiss him out of hand, even though I give a great deal of credence. to the colleagues in the community that independently reviewed the possibilities. I think Taz Green, for example, I would always stand by her. But I have to question the validity of throwing in consultant after consultant when we're looking at WRT as one, that I feel like they can be saved, frankly, by WSB, speaking of who can. really play ball here. But you know, the thing is, You have to understand citizen confidence in this. We are not where we need to be in terms of overwhelming citizen confidence because we don't have- |
| 02:09:45.58 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Annette, your time is up. |
| 02:09:47.93 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 02:09:47.94 | Steven Woodside | Who else? |
| 02:09:50.90 | Walfred Solorzano | No further public comment. |
| 02:09:52.06 | Steven Woodside | All right, I'll close public comment and bring it up here for discussion. Go ahead, Councilmember Sobieski. |
| 02:09:57.83 | Ian Sobieski | So... I think we saw the remarkable goodwill at the ribbon cutting for the ferry landing, which I unfortunately had a miss watch for my car in COVID quarantine. But one attendee called it joyful and it didn't come Easily it was a really long project multiple years and a lot of money was spent in revisions of drawings because we tried to do the design process on the cheap. That project was, which was $2.4 million, not including any money paid to SWA. guess how much it costs in terms of design. More than $500,000. And a large part of that was because of penny wise pound foolish thinking in my view, which is understandable, which is that you kind of get what you pay for and measuring twice and cutting once has benefits. We employ CSW for many projects around the community. They're an engineering company. And BKF is an excellent engineering company, which was also the lead on the ferry landing. We chose to put them in the driver's seat instead of landscape architects. Most people think of landscape architecture as tree planting and flowers and water, but it's really about grading and materials and circulation and safety and best practices. And we are blessed in Sausalito with having a world renowned firm right here, a local firm and any money we give them, by the way, we're going to get some business license tax back from. So I feel like this organization submitted a bid that was higher than its competitor, but has a proven track record in town. It's a pleasure to be able to agree with. with Babette McDougall that SWA has trust. They did the Ice House. They did the Qashqai Plaza and did the ferry landing. They've done all the projects around this area. They're not an engineering firm, though, and CSW, I think, could have a role, and they could have an important role in efficiently doing the engineering and the drawings. But I think to throw CSWA out entirely is to throw away institutional knowledge, years of commitment to that area and research and knowledge, and we shouldn't do it lightly. We could easily face ourselves in a situation where we're not happy with the designs we get in January and feel like we under-invested in that effort. And at the end of the day, when the Marin IJ editorial board complimented us on the design that we came up with, that was because you and Mare and others had the foresight to actually install SWA as volunteers on the working professional group and they gave for free their design experience to be a super layer on top of BKF. So I hope we can ensure that we don't lose that on this project. |
| 02:13:04.02 | Steven Woodside | Thanks. I'm going to go ahead and make a motion and then I'll make my comments. So my motion is that we. Adopt a resolution authorizing the city manager to execute the professional services agreement with CSWST2 for the development of conceptual and construction level documents for the parking lot one reconstruction project in an amount not to exceed 243-393. something that gravely concerns me, every architecture, and I, you know, I have written architectural and construction contracts for, billions of dollars worth of construction throughout California. One of the things that concerns me about the interaction with city staff is that is S S S W a said, listen, if, if we do our designs and the prices come in overbid, we're going to redesign at your expense. as opposed to what is standard in the industry, which is if an architect designs to a budget And the bids come in over budget. The architect value engineers and redesigns at their expense. So. That's a great concern to me is that SWA, despite its being here in our community and having this track record of collaboration with us, said, if our designs come in over budget, we're going to redesign at your expense, not ours. We're not going to fix our mistake. So that's of great concern to me. Yeah. We also gave an assignment to staff. Staff conveyed that assignment to the proposers. One proposer. Comported with the assignment, one proposer did not. And. That too concerns me, the fact that we're going to pay nearly twice as much if we hire SWA especially if you take into account the, um, The refusal to rework at their own expense, if it comes in over budget, concerns me. You know, I did not want us to spend the money that we spent on the Ferry Plaza. I wanted us to spend that money on lot one. because that is sorely in need. So when we first got those grant monies, Uh, my dearly departed friend Bill Werner said that it would cost $2.5 million just to redo lot one. And so I was opposed to for a good period of time, To. uh, expanding our design and our expenditure of monies beyond that basic need. before we had the money in our budget. But I was persuaded by my colleagues, and I'm very pleased and proud of the work that was done. But now we do have to get back to basics, and we do have to redesign the work. And it is expensive. And I'm very mindful of protecting the public fisc and protecting our residents, you know, tax dollars, our tideland funds, and ensuring that we do this in a reasonable manner. I'm not looking for the Motel 6, but at the same time, I'm not looking for the Taj Mahal. And so... Certainly, SWA contributed valuable place making expertise to the design of the overall plaza. I'm not sure that same level of expertise is required with when we have the physical constraints that we have within lot one. I do hope that the local professionals group will continue to collaborate with us in some form or fashion. And if we can find a way to remunerate them, I would be happy to do that. But this is a big. Um, This is a big project. Um. And We're talking about $2.5 million in construction costs. Typically, architectural engineering should not exceed more than 10% of construction costs. So when we have an estimate that approximates $500,000, that's 20% of our construction costs. So that's just... It's rich in my humble opinion. And I do like that CWS has a track record of success working here in the the city, knows our staff, works well with our staff. That's also a challenge for SWA. So I'm comfortable with supporting the recommendation of the selection team who heard the proposals and made a recommendation to us. |
| 02:17:37.04 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm going to second your motion. And with a comment, first of all, I really respect what I've just heard from both Ian and you. it's important that we discuss all those things. But I'm coming from a slightly different view. I really respect the staff recommendation in this case. That's my reasoning. I think long term. We need to be clear on what we're looking for, which I think we did here in the RFP. We do want alternative proposals. We want them to address things like sea level rise, sustainability. We also want them to look at possible... uh additional perhaps occasional uses of that space besides just parking all of those are things we ask for and if whoever is picked doesn't deliver we're not going to be able to move forward so uh But I really want to long-term invest in the staff. We should be clear from the dais what we want. We should ask the staff to do their best work and come back. And nine times out of ten, I'm probably going to accept their recommendation. I'm not punting. I'm really serious about we need to be clear up front what we want. What I saw, and it's not a criticism of anybody on the dais now, nor anybody before, But we kind of have a track record of second guessing and third guessing and fourth guessing a lot of projects. And we as a city, And there's been staff turnover to account for some of that. There are all kinds of reasons. But that has to stop if we're going to go forward in an efficient manner, in a sustainable manner, in a sensible manner, in a smart manner. So I am prepared to support your motion. I will point out that, for example, the key lead person at the recommended engineering firm is LEED certified for sustainability, knows a lot about sea level rise. That's a very important aspect of what's happening in this project. It's not the only thing, but it's an important thing. I don't want to take a side between a landscape architect and an engineer. But this project is going to be managed by our own architect on the staff. So I think that hopefully will compensate. I could be wrong. We'll find out. But I'm going to look forward to seeing three cogent alternatives. Thank you. |
| 02:20:04.05 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:20:04.52 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:20:06.57 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:20:06.58 | Jill Hoffman | Go ahead. Um, so yeah, I'll just echo. Um, I I'd like for us to move forward and again, respecting what the panel recommendation was. I think that's why we have a panel. Um, And, uh, you know, that's why we have three people. We gave them a job to do and they dug into it. And I respect their decision. I think it's really important for us as a council when we give up panel. the authority to do that. We need to support that. And I think CSW obviously was well qualified and has the confidence of the staff. And I think we need to As a council, we need to respect that and move forward. I have nothing but respect for Bill Hines and SWA. They do beautiful work, but I think within the rubric that Sarah gave, that the panel worked under, that they respected that, and they came back to us with a reasonable decision, we need to move forward with that. You know, I was concerned that we deviated from the original budget of $110,000 and we've more than doubled that. And now, you know, I fear that we're we're escalating past something that's sustainable, even financially for us up to 2 and 2.5 million. I'm concerned about that. And I, I'm looking at. what it is that we're doing with a parking lot. You know, it's still a parking lot. and we still need it to function as a parking lot. And fiscally, we still need the income from the parking that's one of our highest revenue generating sources of income for our city is our parking lots. And parking lot one is our number one highest generating still, even though we've vastly undermined it as a revenue generating stream in the past two years. We still need that to be a revenue stream for our city during high season. We need to keep an eye on that. The direction is we're not going to lose parking there. As we pivot maybe to something as a multi-use center, It's going to be an interesting exercise to see what this firm comes back with. And I'm excited to see that actually. So. I hope that we don't go up to 2.5 million, but if we get something exciting, then then let's consider it, I say, and all things are possible in Sausalito. Let's see what they come back with. So. Anyway, let's move forward. Let's move forward. Let's move quickly. And as the vice mayor said, let's not deviate. Right. And that's the other thing I think we have a habit maybe of going off track and wasting our staff's time. and getting involved in things maybe the council shouldn't get involved in. Let's let staff do staff work and move forward efficiently and get things done. So that's the other part that I would hope we move forward on efficiently. So thank you. |
| 02:22:52.28 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Councilmember Blaustein. |
| 02:22:54.17 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:22:54.18 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, thank you. I echo the statements of other folks on the council, but I also really want to acknowledge what council member. So we ask you brought up about design and that we are in the process of creating, Something that will have lasting impact. And of course, SWA has done amazing work for us. And just as you mentioned in your remarks that potentially CSW could play a role, I would hope that at some point SWA could be involved and play a role once we've facilitated the first round of these drawings, potentially. I have a lot of respect for Bill Hines and for the incredible work that the firm has done. But there are folks who we brought forward to help us make this decision. And I think community engagement and public involvement and, and panels are really a great example of how we. you know, represent our community and give back what we've been asked of us. And so. I feel like moving forward with CSW, given staff's recommendation and their good work so far, in the community and that they are a trusted firm. is a great starting point for us for this project and for keeping us on budget and for Moving things forward. That being said, I think there's absolutely a role for staff in terms of saying, Hey, we need more from you from a design perspective. And for, you know, our architect to step up and say, I have a vision for what could go here instead and working really collaboratively to make that possible. I was really pleased that Katie was on the review panel for this project. And I would hope that again, there is a, an emphasis on sustainability and thinking about how we can make this a lasting and revenue generating sustainable downtown, not just a parking lot, because I think it's, it is important to consider what we want to create for, for the next 10, 15, 20 years when we're making these decisions, which is why we got to this point of not just saying, Hey, let's repave it, but rather let's repave it. And let's repave it and get these designs. And I think CSW being within our budget is a, is a compromise of saying we are going to do more than just repave. We are asking more from this team. We expect more. We'd like to see a more iterative and exciting design for the downtown and I would like to see us engage with the local professionals group and with SWA at some phase because we have seen them do amazing work. But at this point, I am ready to support the staff's recommendation and, again, really respect the comments that Councilmember Sobieski brought up about design and hope that we can consider that in our direction to staff. |
| 02:25:24.10 | Ian Sobieski | Councilmember Sobieski. Thank you, Mayor. And thank you for your comments and you and all my colleagues. What I hate is to lose the institutional memory and the expertise of this firm that it's been doing this work in the area. And so then when I'm hearing what you said, mayor and council member Blastine as well. I think about wanting to somehow keep them involved, even willing to enumerate them and customer Blastine's idea. I go back to the meeting where you aggressively said, I want to make sure we have 30% drawings as part of this. and that there'd be a cap if we had 100% drawings. Well, you did better because of your leadership there the CSW proposal is to do 100% drawings within the budget that you originally had thought of. So to my mind, there's a little bit of room there to enumerate. I'm wondering how you would feel about this proposal, which is there's this biweekly meeting that this team is gonna have. Right? So why don't we have an expert on our side who knows this area? Why don't we pay SWA or Bill Hines to be in that meeting at the, as a resource for our staff to transfer their institutional knowledge and be an extra pair of ears listening to what this CSW consortium does. So it will just be a way of helping staff with an extra pair of eyes and ears and knowledge. |
| 02:26:46.72 | Steven Woodside | I would say, A, I don't know if they'd be willing to do that since we aren't awarding the contract to them. There may be some, you know... some displeasure that we didn't select them. But second, I would say, you know, institutional knowledge is important, but so are fresh eyes. And so if I were going to set aside some monies, I would put them aside for January when we get the three concept drawings. And if we're unhappy with the concept drawings, I would encourage collaboration at that point with SWA, perhaps. |
| 02:27:20.61 | Ian Sobieski | I appreciate that, but I really think This... is the first dollar can have the huge impact, this is where they would earn their stripes. If we already blow through half the contract and aren't happy with the designs we're not going to turn around and invest a hundred thousand dollars more in a second fiddle look at the thing and i feel like this is where you have your uh opportunity to really move the needle and all it would be is direction to the city manager under his authority to on a time and materials basis uh offer uh the opportunity for SWA to be in the room to help staff engage with the contract that we're rewarding. |
| 02:28:01.92 | Steven Woodside | So I think if I were CSW, if I were the city manager, I would want to leave that as an option for CSW. I wouldn't want to force the non-selected consultant down the throat of the selected consultant. So, But if the Council wanted to put us, you know, spend 20 or $30,000 for SWA's participation initially, if CSW would welcome that participation. |
| 02:28:33.42 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor, may I respond to that? I think that at this point, we have the recommendation from our panel and from our staff that they have chosen the recommendation from our David Marlott and Cass Green and Katie Tho Garcia that we proceed with CSW. And, These guys are, I mean, all three of them are professional. They understand how these all of these construction groups work and how the contracts work and how these professionals all work. And the recommendation wasn't a hybrid that we bring you know, we do a hybrid of the two groups. |
| 02:29:09.05 | Adam Blair | to have reporters. |
| 02:29:13.55 | Jill Hoffman | Bill Hines is certainly part of this community. If somebody wants to reach back for Bill or if somebody wants to pick up a phone and Kevin's nodding his head, if someone wants to understand where shovel's buried somewhere, they certainly know how to call Bill Hines. And if we. a need arises, then I think that we might come back and consider that and the city manager might certainly recommend that or certainly Kevin is not shy ever about But I wouldn't want to muddy the waters at this point. We've been giving clear recommendation from our, you have a motion before us. I wouldn't want to proceed down this path. We're going with one group I think that would only cause problems within that group. And, and. cause confusion and I see the city attorney has turned on his camera. |
| 02:30:05.51 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, I was just going to comment briefly that, you know, the agenda title here is a word of a contract to CSW ST2. And so I don't think the council can direct the award of a different separate contract to a different separate consultant. That would be an unagendized agenda item. So if that is the direction the council does wish to go, then I would suggest that we you know, agendize that for another evening for discussion. |
| 02:30:29.22 | Ian Sobieski | As a city attorney clarification. But city attorney, can't we direct the city manager to within his authority, not as a separate contract, but within city manager authority, engage in a time and materials effort to achieve a particular end? |
| 02:30:43.53 | Sergio Rudin | You can, and you should do that as a separately noticed agenda item. I see. So, |
| 02:30:48.52 | Ian Sobieski | not appropriate under this. |
| 02:30:49.86 | Steven Woodside | I mean, the city manager doesn't need our authority. He has authority that he can spend without our direction. |
| 02:30:56.10 | Ian Sobieski | I was looking, I wanted to vote for this. So I was looking for some consensus direction to the city manager so he has the, direction that we shouldn't throw away the institutional memory asking as to be able to work for free by passing over materials when they've already done discounts on other projects in town like the ice house and the Plaza is you know asking a lot of a professional firm. |
| 02:31:13.01 | Adam Blair | Thank you. |
| 02:31:13.03 | Steven Woodside | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:31:19.34 | Steven Woodside | They had an opportunity to propose on this, and they were given numerous opportunities to come back, to come to the table, to meet the, you know, to be competitive with. the other proposer and they elected not to. So I don't know how willing They are, but... |
| 02:31:38.78 | Jill Hoffman | Mary Ann Cunningham, Those materials are ours. We own those materials. We pay for those materials. They're ours and our staff actually worked on those projects. Mary Ann Cunningham, And so our staff, our institutional knowledge is here. Our staff worked intimately on all of those digs. And so we have institutional knowledge on all of that. So I'm not as concerned about that. And our staff has been here for |
| 02:31:44.65 | Steven Woodside | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:32:00.99 | Jill Hoffman | I mean, Kenneth Henry alone has been here for like 150 years. I mean, I'm good. And well, not 150 years, but you get my point. I just got a thumbs up from Brandon Phipps. Our director of CDD. Not to diminish what you're saying. I know exactly what you're saying. But I think if we run into trouble, we have to give our person that we're, you know, we have to give our team the chance to get lift off. We have to give CSW a chance to get lift off. you know, we have to give them a good faith try, right? If something happens, I totally support. Right. I completely agree. Bill Hines is right there. |
| 02:32:40.10 | Steven Woodside | And Kevin can come back to us at any time. The vice mayor had his hand raised a while ago. |
| 02:32:44.42 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm about to call the question. |
| 02:32:46.90 | Steven Woodside | Great. |
| 02:32:47.53 | Melissa Blaustein | But before doing so, I, I, I have to say Bill Hines and his firm are as good as it gets. And they're right here. And I would simply like to... suggest to the city manager and to Sarah. Take a close look at how we may involve them going forward, whether it's this project or others. They're right here. volunteer time. Michael Rex volunteered time. Jock Goldman volunteered time. There are others out there who are willing to Turn two. But eventually some have to get paid. I'm not directing anything. I'm asking Sarah and the city manager to look at that as an issue. When you have a world-class firm right here in our midst who knows us, not just where the shovels are buried. but knows how to design, knows how to deal with the community. These are not things that can be passed on in a meeting. I think these are institutional knowledge that are in SWA and in the brains of those people, and they're great at what they do. So I've said too much, but I'd like to call the question. |
| 02:33:52.80 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor, may I just have one, please, I'm sorry, just a tiny bit of indulgence. I meant to thank David Marlott, and I forgot Cass Green. I said Sarah, but I meant to thank David Marlott, Cass Green, and Katie Tho Garcia. And thank Bill Hines and everybody else that worked on the project too, right? Like this is no way- Absolutely. Any comment on anybody So much thanks to everybody in town who worked on that project. And moving forward, I just wanted to be successful. with the team we're picking out and, and give everybody a good shot and going forward. Okay. That's it. |
| 02:34:23.41 | Steven Woodside | All right, with that, I will call the question and say all in favor. Hold on. I just wanted to. We can't. |
| 02:34:30.46 | Ian Sobieski | I just wanted to just want to explain my vote. I'm going to abstain from voting yes or no, because I want to support the direction that my colleagues are going at the same time, the vote of the panel wasn't unanimous. And so I know I'm not going to persuade you all, but I look forward to seeing the work product of CSW and, uh, integrity for how I think we should go in the other direction rather than nobody know I'm simply going to abstain. |
| 02:34:54.16 | Steven Woodside | Okay, and as Councilmember Hoffman said, we will see if we can identify, you know, intersections and means to Yeah. and means to collaborate with our local professional groups and others. Okay. All in favor, Aye. Opposed? |
| 02:35:10.63 | Adam Blair | I'm sorry. |
| 02:35:10.69 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 02:35:10.96 | Adam Blair | Aye. |
| 02:35:13.66 | Steven Woodside | Oh, abstaining. So the motion carries for one with one abstention. |
| 02:35:21.16 | Melissa Blaustein | 401. |
| 02:35:22.12 | Steven Woodside | So. Thank you. |
| 02:35:23.77 | Melissa Blaustein | No. |
| 02:35:23.86 | Steven Woodside | No, 4-1. Okay. 4-0 with an abstention. Okay. City Clerk. I need a letter to sign. Are you working on that? |
| 02:35:36.63 | Steven Woodside | So can someone, I just, I want to sign it and get it out the door ASAP during this meeting. Maybe Maria or someone could help you. Okay. All right, I'm going to move on to item 5C. Introduction and waiver of ordinance number 07-2025, an ordinance of the City Council. of the city of Sausalito amending chapter 1.05 penalty provisions chapter 110. Administrative penalties enacting chapter 1.12 abatement of public nuisances enacting chapter 5.16 short term rental prohibition. Thank you. repealing section 11.12.050 enforcement and penalties and repealing Chapter 12.20 of the Saucydeo Municipal Code to modernize and streamline Citywide Code Enforcement, and I'll welcome our Assistant City Manager, Brandon Phipps. |
| 02:36:26.06 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you, Mayor, and good evening to you, Councilmembers, members of the public and staff. Happy to be here this evening, this time for Item 5C regarding code amendments, as stated by the Mayor. In summary, to modernize and streamline our citywide code enforcement actions and municipal code section. Uh, we do have a slide. presentation prepared, which is attached to the agenda. Thank you. Thank you. Next slide, please. There are a few primary reasons that we're bringing these changes to Council this evening, as summarized here. Much of the sections that make up our code enforcement chapters are fairly outdated, so certain updates are simple to address those outdated elements, as exemplified in some of the changes that you'll see proposed to Section 1.05 and 1.12. Additionally, many of the chapters that make up our code enforcement actions are spread across multiple chapters, and some of the updates proposed are geared towards creating a more organized code enforcement framework. You'll see this exemplified in the removal of Section 4. 1.05050, for example, and others. Staff have also identified certain processes in the existing code, which impact the efficiency with which staff are able to enforce, and in some cases impose challenging requirements on community members as related to achieving code compliance. We see that in a number of places as well. One example is in our STRs ordinance or the way in which we categorize our violations. In total, the changes proposed this evening are meant to make more efficient and more effective our citywide code enforcement processes, with overall goals as stated of modernizing, streamlining, and of course, creating and engendering compliance. To discuss these proposed changes in more depth, we are joined this evening by Code Enforcement Officer Justin Sperger, Go girl. They won't. and City Attorney Sergio Rudin and Mr. Miller, the floor is yours. |
| 02:38:31.61 | Justin Sperger | Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, City Council members. Appreciate y'all being here for this. City staff and everyone watching at home, all the residents of Sausalito, thanks so much. This is a very exciting moment for me. Coming to the city of Sausalito very recently, the first thing I did was took a look at this code that we have and thought, how can we serve the residents better? We just have a ton of longstanding cases going for years in some of those. They've come before you here at the council before planning commission, And it's a horrible burden, not only on the city, but on the folks that get involved in these cases, whether it's someone just trying to build a house or someone who's cut down someone else's tree. We just want to be able to get these cases handled quickly, efficiently, and at minimal cost to the city. In many cases, if we were able to break even, that would be the best case scenario to start from rather than every code enforcement case we handle coming to the city as a loss. So with that, I'd like to just touch briefly on some of the major changes here and what they will mean in the In the short term for us is that We've got a lot of code to read if you wanna get caught up on everything. In the long term, I'm here to answer any questions. We can go more into depth and Attorney Rudin is available for any other legal issues that get a little too complicated for the dais here. So the first change we have is we're making some modifications, just really trying to make the code clearer, more fair, more efficient, streamline the penalties, but keep all that empathy. It's everything that assistant City Manager Phipps had mentioned and more. And what we're doing is we're coming into compliance with current state law. The default penalty was something that Initially, was an infraction here. Once I read this code that we have and I said, wow, we're not actually doing what state law says to the maximum. We're... taking that code and we're taking any misdemeanor and making it an infraction, which essentially ties our hands. It puts us in a place where The penalties were able to give out even for a one-time offense that's not correctable. were extremely low. This was $100 for any offense. So no matter how egregious a one-time non-correctable offense is, we're really stuck at $100 fine. And by modifying the penalty schedule here, aligning it with state code and law, we are now allowing a slightly more flexible and more empathetic approach. We now have the ability to go up to the maximum that the state allows, which is $1,000 for any given infraction on any given day. The second change is in Chapter 1.10. This is the penalty schedule that's included in here. It also includes the option for attorney fee recovery. This is something that we did not have before. Being that the hearing process and the process of code enforcement can be lengthy and we have had some city Greg Phillips, The City Council for Public Health and Public Health We have a couple of new chapters here. We've got chapter 1.12. which is a new nuisance abatement chapter It's essentially taking our old, very, very, very outdated nuisance chapter and updating it. It's streamlining the hearing process. We had a very lengthy and costly hearing process takes a long time to get anybody justice that way. And we've updated it to define all the modern nuisances that we have in the city and given us a process for getting through hearings and to give the people a chance to have their case heard in a timely and efficient manner. We've also added chapter 5.16, which is a much needed clarification on short-term rentals. Our current municipal code has short-term rentals and the prohibition of them hidden in a separate section. And we've now brought it up front into a very clearly labeled short-term rental prohibition, which also prohibits prohibits advertising of the short-term rentals. This makes it a lot easier to enforce because frequently what we would find is being able to prove that someone had actually rented a place to someone and they had stayed is very difficult. And so now what we're doing is coming into compliance with state law and prohibiting advertising for 30 days or less of any short-term rental. We also have updated the penalties for short-term rentals along with this to come in. a little more in alignment with state law, which will give us a higher penalty schedule. And it allows us to touch upon a starting of $1,500, whereas we had started at $1,000 in our current code. So this change will allow us to start at a higher level and progress up to $3,000 to really put some teeth into the ordinance and... I found just on a personal note with short term rentals are our current code has not been quite sufficient to knock all of them out. It's brought it down. I'm really hoping that as long as the city council and the city wants to maintain this prohibition that this new change to the ordinance will give us the ability to maintain that into the future. We've also got a couple of repeals. One of these is tied to the nuisance ordinance. So we are repealing chapter 12.12. This is from the 1970s. It's been a while since it's been updated and our new chapter 1.12 on nuisance will allow this old chapter 12.12 to go quietly into the good night. We're also removing chapter section 11.12.050, which was just an onerous process for any kind of tree permit enforcement. It was a lengthy public hearing, and this process has now been rolled into the standard procedure for moving forward with any code enforcement action. It's treated just like any other violation of the Sausalito Municipal Code, which makes it easier, less costly, and it will take a lot less time to get through. the process. If we could go to the next slide, please. Fiscal impacts and strategic alignment is where we are on this slide. It's a minimal impact. We have improved our ability to collect fines and to recover attorney's fees. And it enhances overhaul compliance and efficiency attempts. while also directly aligning with strategic plan goal E, maintaining a strong organization to deliver effective, efficient and sustainable services. Next slide, please. So the recommended motion tonight is to introduce the ordinance and read by title only, Ordinance 07-2025. tonight to waive the full reading since it is very lengthy and it's it's been a long night for everyone and to direct staff to return for adoption at the next Council meeting. Next slide, please. So that's the main presentation on the overview here, the nuts and bolts. We can certainly go into more of them, but I would just like to add For me, some of the big changes here are really, even in my short time here, it's a long time coming. There's a lot of these cases that we'd love to resolve. And this is really gonna give us the teeth to do it. And it's gonna also allow us the flexibility so that we don't have to be the harsh, horrible, bad guy on the first infraction. We have that ability to work within the law and to really get compliance. Because the goal of code enforcement, it's not to collect fines, it's not to shame people or to give penalties. It's to get people to follow the community standards that we've all agreed to. These changes, I'm really excited that we have them. I hope that everyone has a chance to look at them and to really, think about how this can help us moving forward. And I'd like to just say, I appreciate what the city has to offer and I'm really looking forward to some of this forward modernization moving this into the future and really being able to serve the people here. in a much better capacity for years to come. Thank you. |
| 02:47:46.78 | Steven Woodside | Okay, thank you, Justin. um, Go ahead, council member. |
| 02:47:50.84 | Ian Sobieski | I have a question, sir. short-term rental ban enforcement. So the fine is being increased. How do you catch the perpetrators currently? |
| 02:48:01.43 | Justin Sperger | great question. So there are many different methods that are available. A lot of them are lengthy and time consuming. One of them is you simply could just go online and start looking around for short-term rentals, Craigslist, Airbnb, any of those type of sites where you're now perusing by location, trying to find a rental and really just hoping for the best. That's one method. We don't really have the staff or the time to do that. really under the current code, we just don't have the ability to cost recover that way. So we currently employ a service which is out there, perusing all the sites. They have all the technology that's necessary. And we get daily an update from just about every rental site out there. Some of them I had never even heard of before I started working here. And they will give us a listing. They'll tell us who the host is, a full spreadsheet that has all of the rental information, when they started renting, how many known rentals that they've had over the course of the history that that place has been a short term rental. What's their current ad look like? They'll retain all of the photos and this host compliance service that we have is really the It's the most cost effective and really the front line to gathering data. Once we've got that data gathered, not all of it's perfect. Sometimes it takes a while to establish a location, but we are then able to go off of this list, do a little research, and we then will move on to confirming that the address that we've been provided is correct. And we'll reach out to the owners of the property and start to have that conversation of... Did you know that this type of rental needs to be 30 days or more? And really move from there. And a lot of times we'll get immediate confirmation of folks saying, oh my gosh, I had no idea. We'll modify our listing. Thank you so much. And that's all it takes. Just a simple conversation. Sometimes it's a lot more where we're working with host compliance. We're doing a little research. Sometimes we're getting feet out on the street to go and look at an address and confirm that the photos that are posted online. are the actual location that we're looking for. |
| 02:50:24.29 | Ian Sobieski | So anecdotally, I have the impression that there are a fair number of people. Advertising short term rentals in Bridgeway Marina and various here and there. I mean, you go on Airbnb, you see these listings. Is there a way then perhaps they give us a report that shows what the current situation is and then six months from now after we pass this ordinance, maybe report again to see whether it's solved the problem. |
| 02:50:50.08 | Justin Sperger | We might be able to work out something that meets those needs, but also helps us because a lot of times with these cases, hate to say it, but folks who are looking to not follow the laws tend to find ways to not follow the laws when they're aware of people trying to get them to come into compliance. So we have a lot of folks that will turn on rental listings only for the evening hours or for the weekends when they suspect people aren't working to catch them. In a lot of cases where we've got some of these trickier rentals, we have an active investigation and giving you a list of those. especially for public consumption, might compromise those investigations and make it a lot more difficult and have us invest more time. But there is a very, very lengthy history of addresses that we've seen throughout time. And I believe that we'd be able to find a way to get some data for you to be able to compare the before and the after. |
| 02:51:55.62 | Steven Woodside | Okay. |
| 02:51:57.71 | Justin Sperger | ALL RIGHT. |
| 02:51:58.11 | Melissa Blaustein | Any other questions? Just quickly, you did say that for purposes of Airbnb and all those types of things that the actual advertising would also be made an infraction. That is correct. Okay. |
| 02:52:13.25 | Justin Sperger | Thank you. |
| 02:52:13.27 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:52:13.28 | Justin Sperger | That is correct. |
| 02:52:14.80 | Steven Woodside | Exactly. to enforce. |
| 02:52:15.97 | Melissa Blaustein | Right. I believe so. But that's that's clear from what you're as a change to strengthen it. |
| 02:52:21.25 | Justin Sperger | to strengthen it. If you were to look at just a brief kind of analogy, it's, If you had someone go online on Craigslist and say, hey, I've got a stolen bicycle for sale, it's not selling the bicycle. Thank you. But in that case, It is someone advertising that they're selling stolen goods. It does give you the ability to look more into that under mail code. But under municipal code and civil law, you have the ability to enforce the community standards and the community standard is we are not open to short term rentals and the act of advertising for less than 30 days. shows the intent and it is for the purposes of the code changes, the same action. |
| 02:53:09.92 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. And then you did in various places try to streamline the process. This is both on the plus and the minus side, depending on your point of view of what's going on. However, it will expedite. And in particular, for nuisances, you're proposing the use of a hearing office. hearing officer rather than an elaborate hearing process. That's correct. And where else in the code revisions is something similar taking place? OK, we can see. |
| 02:53:38.44 | Justin Sperger | So we, you know, a lot of the the code was vague when we reviewed it on this subject and The provisions for hearing officers mostly fell back to a mix of city council or a hearing officer, and this is really making it so that in most cases, a hearing that's coming on an appeal will come before city council or city council will have the ability to designate a hearing panel to hear that. And a lot of this is really just in alignment with state law. And it's something where our code not just here, but penalties and such, we conflicted with current state law for general law cities and we're just coming into alignment with that. So some of it is streamlined, but some of it is streamlined simply in that we're just following what we probably should have been following years ago. |
| 02:54:35.29 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, thank you. |
| 02:54:36.13 | Justin Sperger | Sure. |
| 02:54:39.08 | Steven Woodside | I'm gonna open it up to public comment. here. Is there anyone online who would like to make public comments? |
| 02:54:50.80 | Brandon Phipps | Looking to the Zoom application may have I will call them in the order that they were raised first and raised is Sandra Bushmaker. |
| 02:54:56.62 | Sandra Bushmaker | Okay. |
| 02:55:00.16 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:55:08.14 | Steven Woodside | Can you unmute her? |
| 02:55:17.39 | Brandon Phipps | Sandra, go ahead. |
| 02:55:18.54 | Sandra Bushmaker | Okay, very good. I'm really delighted to see this. this strengthening of the short term rentals. We need to get a grip on it. It's all over town. And, uh, Any one of us can go online and find a short-term rental here in Sausalito. And. I was part of that group that got together the 700 signatures years ago to present to the city council opposing short term rentals and there was plenty of community. Um, opposition to having such activity in town. So I'm really delighted to see this. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:55:55.97 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you very much, Sandra, for your comments. Looking to additional raised hands in the Zoom application. Seeing none, Mayor. |
| 02:56:00.79 | Steven Woodside | All right, I will close public comment, bring it up here for discussion. I will... move that we introduce and read by title only ordinance number 07-2025 an ordinance of the city council of the city of Sausalito THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:56:16.66 | Sergio Rudin | And Mayor, just for the record, there does appear to be a clerical error in the agenda packet. The draft ordinance that is attachment one happens to have all of the formatting for exhibits A and B stricken. That is included as attachment two, so the council should be clear that they're introducing the ordinance with Exhibits A and B as set forth in attachment two. |
| 02:56:40.94 | Steven Woodside | and then I loved them too. include that we are introducing a reading by title of Women's Number 6. 7-2-5. together with exhibits A and B. an ordinance of the city council of the city of Saus. Second. Second. All right, any discussion? All right, all in favor? Aye, that motion carries, five, zero. All right, we're gonna move swiftly on to our last agenda item, which is 5D. Introduction and waiver of first reading of, sorry, our last business agenda item. Introduction and waiver first reading of ordinance number 08. Dash 2025, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Sausalito repealing. Chapter 12.12, Trailer Coaches, House Cars, Campers and Mobile Homes. and enacting Chapter 12.12, Vehicle Habitation. Welcome, Stacey Gregory, our police chief. Good evening. |
| 02:57:41.03 | Stacey Gregory | and I think that's a great thing. Although I was listed as the author, Sergio was a big help and he's agreed to Take this item for me tonight. So I'll turn that over to Nate. Thank you. |
| 02:57:51.88 | Steven Woodside | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 02:57:51.93 | Stacey Gregory | Thank you. |
| 02:57:51.95 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Well, thank you for being here, Chief. Welcome back, Sergio. |
| 02:57:55.27 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, thank you, Police Chief, for the introduction. So the ordinance before you tonight is updating the city's vehicle habitation regulations. There are two provisions that are currently in the code that need to be addressed. One is that the city has an eight-hour parking restriction for vehicles on public streets, and that restriction has not been enforced for many decades, in part because it violates the California Vehicle Code, which requires that such parking restrictions be signed. The city does have a 72-hour parking regulation instead, which is legal and is being enforced. So on this basis, I'm recommending that the council adopt the ordinance, which removes that eight-hour parking restriction. Additionally, the city does have a vehicle camping regulation on the books for a very long time. However, that regulation is somewhat vague as to what constitutes vehicle camping. And so there was a Ninth Circuit case that invalidated the City of Los Angeles's ordinance for failing to be clear about what constitutes prohibited conduct of camping in your vehicle. The proposed ordinance before you would address those issues that were raised in the Ninth Circuit case and make corrections appropriately by defining specific things that are prohibited in terms of vehicle camping. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them. |
| 02:59:24.59 | Steven Woodside | Sure. Sergio, and so how did you, there's a new Ordinance 12.12. How did you modify the vehicle habitation process? Requirements. |
| 02:59:35.85 | Sergio Rudin | Ah. Let me, so in the staff report, let me, |
| 02:59:41.67 | Steven Woodside | I know it's in the staff report. I'm just asking. |
| 02:59:43.65 | Sergio Rudin | I'm just... |
| 02:59:44.44 | Steven Woodside | general public. |
| 02:59:46.46 | Sergio Rudin | For the general public, yes. So, One of those ways was to |
| 02:59:53.45 | Stacey Gregory | I'm not. |
| 02:59:54.40 | Sergio Rudin | To address the issues raised in that case, the ordinance defines human habitation, in a car which is prohibited to include more than one of the following activities when it reasonably appears in light of all the circumstances that a person is using a vehicle as a place of residence. And so you have to have more than one of these that is possessing |
| 03:00:12.59 | Adam Blair | more than a |
| 03:00:15.86 | Sergio Rudin | In the vehicle items not associated with ordinary vehicle use, such as a sleeping bag, bedroll, blanket, sheet, pillow, kitchen utensils, cookware, cooking equipment, or obscuring some or all of the vehicle's windows, preparing and cooking meals inside of a vehicle, and making preparations to sleep or sleeping inside of a vehicle. So, This is modeled on language that was enacted by the city of Los Angeles and other cities following this Ninth Circuit decision. So this is modeled on best practices in other jurisdictions. |
| 03:00:46.61 | Steven Woodside | Great, thank you. Vice mayor. |
| 03:00:48.87 | Melissa Blaustein | Now, I appreciate your modification of, in effect, defining those kind of vehicles, which is essentially what that portion does. But my question is, are you eliminating the eight-hour limit? |
| 03:01:02.77 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:01:03.57 | Melissa Blaustein | Yes. And You're basically saying that those types of vehicles could now park for 72 hours? |
| 03:01:13.07 | Sergio Rudin | So the city has a prohibition on parking trailer coaches, house cars and vehicles with campers. Um, for more than eight hours on a city street. The vehicle code requires that when the city enacts vehicle parking regulations, that one, that they put up signage. uh, informing. affected persons about the parking restriction, which the city does not have a practice of doing. The city has a separate ordinance authorizing towing of vehicles left on any city street for more than 72 hours, which the city police department has been using and which... does comport with requirements in the vehicle code. |
| 03:01:58.56 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, so they're subject to the 72-hour rule. |
| 03:02:00.92 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, I'll save my comments till later, but- Okay. |
| 03:02:04.23 | Steven Woodside | Okay. |
| 03:02:05.90 | Melissa Blaustein | I have real concerns about eliminating the eight hour limit. for reasons I'll express later when we talk about the merits. Thanks. |
| 03:02:14.07 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Any other questions? I'm going to open it up for public comment. I see none in the chambers. Do we have anyone online? |
| 03:02:25.19 | Brandon Phipps | Clarifying Mayor, we have one hand raised. That is the hand of Babette McDougall. Okay. And Babette, I will give you the chance to speak. You'll have three minutes. |
| 03:02:30.12 | Babette McDougall | OK. |
| 03:02:34.77 | Babette McDougall | Three whole minutes. Thank you. Oh, it's two minutes. It's two minutes. |
| 03:02:36.29 | Walfred Solorzano | with the Thank you. |
| 03:02:37.81 | Brandon Phipps | I think it's a good answer. |
| 03:02:38.77 | Walfred Solorzano | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:02:38.94 | Babette McDougall | Darn it. Actually, two minutes, Babette. All right, thank you. All right, so I just really would like to hear some clarification because in my neighborhood, we have people living in their vans and then they just move them around from day to day. So I just want to make sure we're clear. |
| 03:02:41.03 | Steven Woodside | Sorry. |
| 03:02:54.65 | Babette McDougall | If somebody, and I'm not against people living in their vans or RVs, frankly, I think it's a pretty good idea under the circumstances that we find ourselves as a society. today. So don't get the wrong idea with me asking this. I just want to know, I couldn't make it out. Are we clear where these vehicles may park for extended 72 hours if people are habitating them to some level? greater or lesser degree. Thank you. |
| 03:03:25.06 | Steven Woodside | So I'll just clarify the ordinance repeals the eight hour parking restriction and the 72 hour is in place, but it also prohibits human habitation, which includes one or more of the three activities that Sergio read out to us. |
| 03:03:47.57 | Melissa Blaustein | So is it clear that that would prohibit someone from living in their camper? |
| 03:03:51.49 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 03:03:51.76 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. but they could park it for 72 hours. |
| 03:03:53.61 | Steven Woodside | They can park it. |
| 03:03:54.46 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:03:54.73 | Steven Woodside | They can park it. I see this chief standing up. |
| 03:04:02.02 | Stacey Gregory | So we're very aware that there are people living in their vehicles. And... And this really is a quality of life tool. for us to use. By any means are we gonna go around looking for people parking in their cars, sleeping? We understand that people have to do that. will be used when say there's a motorhome parked in the 1700 block for nine months and we're trying to remove it because it's a nuisance and it's garbage and there's urine and so that's what we would be using this ordinance for it's not to specifically go and look for people living in their cars If that helps. |
| 03:04:50.09 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, and I will say there are more and more people well-heeled Sausalito residents who own expensive camper vans that they park in front of their home. There are at least three on my street. And every one of those. And one on this Dallas. But, you know, we don't live in our vans. We, you know, if I'm going to use my van, I take it to a U.S. Forest Service road or to Yosemite. But there are people who do use those recreationally. and park them in compliance with the 72-hour rule. Right. |
| 03:05:31.03 | Stacey Gregory | people that live in their vehicle because they have no other opportunity to live elsewhere. We are aware of those people. They do know that they have to move their vehicle every 72 hours and they do do that. We have a rapport with Most of them. So if they are in a neighborhood that has concern about it, you know, they... Usually with contact, they will move. elsewhere. So I just wanted to be clear about You know, the, the ordinance, it's mostly the eight hour. you know, we haven't used that eight hour firm I don't know. Probably 20 years. maybe 15. and this just takes it off the books to one, so the public can't see how come you're not enforcing this eight hour limit. And then, you know, we have new police officers and parking enforcement to come on and see this as an ordinance. and not aware that we're not using it. So it's just clarifying the code. |
| 03:06:26.15 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Sobieski has a question. |
| 03:06:30.43 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you, Chief. Why did you not? Why is the eight-hour... ordinance not a useful tool for you. |
| 03:06:38.38 | Stacey Gregory | It's not really realistic. People are parking to come and visit the city. And this is not just for an occupied RV or a house car. You parked it there, it doesn't matter if you're in or not. So, and then, you know, Sergio, saw it and realized that, you know, it's a liability and, you know, really not legal. for us because it is not properly marked. So for all those reasons, |
| 03:07:07.98 | Ian Sobieski | then, There's a big difference between the Beautiful vehicle. The mayor has it's not even about its document. It's more its size. The camper vans, the sprinter vans, the transit vans are 18 feet, 19 feet, 20 feet. |
| 03:07:16.18 | Unknown | Mm-hmm. |
| 03:07:27.18 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:07:27.20 | Ian Sobieski | Motorhomes, buses, they can be 40 feet, 45 feet. They can be quite big. And both of these, we're treating them all the same. And I'm wondering, from your point of view of it's not a common occurrence, but I'm wondering, in terms of trying to avoid unintended consequences, could we be opening ourselves up for, A bunch of your buses being parked on city streets now and on our narrow streets legally. So for 24, 48, 72 hours. |
| 03:07:57.44 | Stacey Gregory | Well, they do anyway. I mean, you'll see, especially in the 1700 block where there is space for them to do that. In Munial Lot 3, we do have bigger oversized parking spaces where they do come and park. But I don't believe so. I mean, nothing's going to change other than the wording of the code because we haven't had this problem. in the past. I mean, we have, but we We handled those couple rare cases. So it's a case by case. I don't think it's going to change the way, you know, people come to the city or try to park. |
| 03:08:29.25 | Ian Sobieski | Sergio, if we wanted to preserve some sort of more strict parking restriction for larger vehicles, would that also have to be posted, signed, or? |
| 03:08:37.35 | Sergio Rudin | So the council, the council under California vehicle code 22507 can ban the parking of oversized vehicles as defined by the city. Um, as long as it posts appropriate signage, in the locations where parking is prohibited. So if you wanted to set a size limit of 25 feet for vehicles that couldn't park on say bridgeway, and you posted that prohibition after passing a resolution prohibiting it under the vehicle code, that would be enforceable. um, there has been cases in the past of, Most namely, Santa Barbara got sued over trying to ban motor homes throughout the city. And the court held that because they didn't properly sign those in a way that gave notice throughout the jurisdiction that the restriction was. not enforceable. So that's really the issue here is certainly the council can prohibit the parking of motorhomes, you know, through large swaths of the city if so appropriate. It's just we have to follow the vehicle code in doing so. |
| 03:09:43.03 | Ian Sobieski | Would you have to have it throughout the city or could you just have a sign at the north-south entrances in Spencer and Montemar? |
| 03:09:48.70 | Sergio Rudin | Based on the Santa Barbara case, at a bare minimum, the city would be required to post appropriate notices at every entrance and exit to the city. And my recommendation would be for the ease of enforcement. to, post signs in the locations where that parking is also most likely. |
| 03:10:09.77 | Melissa Blaustein | My concern has to do with what's happening in the below San Francisco just effective in November. uh... ordinance will uh... limit in most parts of the city where there are now i believe the estimate was seven or eight hundred large vehicles that the city is very concerned about and they passed the ordinance mayor lorry signed it and other cities around the bay area are taking a close look at that limitation so that they don't become the Thank you. descendant places where they are part. The successor. The successor, sorry. So you're right, better word. But I think we should be concerned because we're not alone in the Bay Area. I see routinely campers in our parking lots doing fine. They might have been there overnight for eight hours, but they pay to park and they leave. Thank you. |
| 03:11:06.09 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:11:06.12 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:11:06.14 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:11:06.20 | Melissa Blaustein | And that's and you are probably aware of those. But if our parking lots aren't aren't properly signed, we don't place limits and there are public parking places that don't require a fee on our streets. We could have a problem that we didn't intend. So I'm really concerned about repealing outright, even though I know it's not enforceable now unless we were to apply the proper signage. That's my concern. |
| 03:11:06.34 | Unknown | I'm not. |
| 03:11:30.50 | Steven Woodside | My concern is enforcement. We are already short staffed on our police force. So I hate to undertake an ordinance or a regulation that we don't have the staff to enforce. So. I would say let's adopt this and see how it goes. And if we need to do something more Um, Restrictive, we can. Bear in mind, we've already changed signage on many of our side streets. limiting the number of hours. We just put up signs around here, limiting it to three hours. Lots of the on ebb tide now there are three hour parking limitations so a lot of the areas where. these types of vehicles tend to congregate We've changed the parking time limitations as well, unless you have neighborhood permit. |
| 03:12:24.42 | Stacey Gregory | Can I make one more comment? Yes, please. The eight hour versus 72 hour, we're not gonna tell when an eight hour when we write a citation. In order to tell it, it needs to be there 72 hours anyway. Um, so if that helps. |
| 03:12:37.18 | Melissa Blaustein | Is this our discussion? |
| 03:12:38.26 | Steven Woodside | This is our discussion. No, yeah. Okay. I had our discussion because we took public comment. |
| 03:12:38.34 | Melissa Blaustein | This is our discussion. |
| 03:12:43.93 | Steven Woodside | Okay. I have something to say. Council Member Hoffman and then Council Member Blaske. This is discussion. You can |
| 03:12:52.03 | Jill Hoffman | I'll ask a question. Chief, another question for you. Chief, what do you think on the size vehicle? Do you think that would be an effective tool of limiting the size, parking for the size of vehicles? Do we go with what we have now and see how it rolls? |
| 03:13:12.36 | Stacey Gregory | Yeah, I'd say go with what we have now. I mean, You know, it gets complicated. And, you know, we don't want to dissuade people from coming. We're assuming that there are people that are going to come and park forever. when most of them are coming to visit our town You know, and when they do park on the street there, if it's paid parking, they're paying for all their spots and things like that. So I don't see that there's an issue at this point. |
| 03:13:41.29 | Jill Hoffman | but it's just discussion. Councilmember Blaustein. |
| 03:13:44.29 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. I appreciate that there is a difficulty of enforcement and I appreciate that there are folks who are know inconvenienced or unhappy with some of the long-term parked vehicles but i just and i don't necessarily need to get consensus from the dais but i just have a really hard time supporting uh something that sort of calls out and victimizes people who are unhoused and sleep in their car and i know that that's not the goal of the police department here and i know that we have an incredibly hard-working and thoughtful police department and team, but I just can't vote for something where it specifically calls out some in their car in their cars, considering the situation we're faced with as a society more generally. So I understand this is a difficult way a difficult position to be in. I personally am just not going to be able to vote for this ordinance. |
| 03:14:46.36 | Steven Woodside | Other comments? |
| 03:14:49.53 | Ian Sobieski | I respect that. I view it as a tool the police use on a case-by-case basis, and I... I'll send their humane discretion, but I very much respect your point of view. |
| 03:14:59.84 | Steven Woodside | I'll echo those comments. We adopted our waterfront management plan in 2017. And we prioritized the removal of marine debris, of boats that were being stored out on the water, but we specifically exempted from our enforcement efforts those boats that were occupied because we needed to... a more compassionate approach. We then adopted the Safe Harbor Program in 2019, And, you know, we paid to allow those people boat dwellers to come and be housed in our marinas and enjoy wraparound services for 18 months. And so, and many of them have transitioned now to more traditional housing. So I think we have a history of treating our unhoused and our needy in a compassionate and thoughtful manner. And I have confidence that our police force who have really spearheaded this effort on our waterfront will continue to do so. |
| 03:16:06.82 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 03:16:06.87 | Steven Woodside | Yeah. |
| 03:16:06.93 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Yeah, I have to echo those comments too, and I completely understand the comments by Council Member Blaustein. I think that we have always prioritized that in Sausalito. And I think this is just sort of a, it's a spectrum tool for the, for the police department and meant as. that's sort of an outside or, you know, the outside parameter for, uh, of the tool for the police to use. And, um, certainly not something to use as a tool of abuse, especially not here in Sausalito when we've gone to always had a position of supporting people and helping people usher them into housing. That's always been our state of goal and I think we've done pretty well on that and showed that our programs have been pretty successful at that. So anyway, I, support the change and support the support the analysis that set forth and why we're doing it in our staff report. And I understand it from a legal standpoint. So I'm gonna go ahead |
| 03:17:20.97 | Steven Woodside | move that we introduce and waive first reading of ordinance number 08-2025 an ordinance of the city council of the city of Sausalito repealing Chapter 12.12. entitled Trailer Coaches, House Cars, Campers, and Mobile Homes, and enacting chapter 12.12 entitled Vehicle Habitation. |
| 03:17:47.04 | Steven Woodside | Second. All right, any further discussion? |
| 03:17:48.76 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 03:17:52.37 | Steven Woodside | All right, city clerk, will you call the roll? |
| 03:17:55.64 | Walfred Solorzano | I was a council member of the boss team. |
| 03:17:56.99 | Jill Hoffman | No. |
| 03:17:58.36 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Hoffman. |
| 03:17:59.80 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 03:18:00.82 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Sobieski. Thank you. Vice Mayor Woodside. And Mary Cox. |
| 03:18:06.88 | Steven Woodside | Yes, that motion carries 3-2. All right. Thank you for a very productive discussion. We're going to now move on to city manager reports, council member reports, city council appointments, and other council business city manager. |
| 03:18:21.24 | Chris Zapata | No approach this evening, Mayor and Council. |
| 03:18:23.49 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. City attorneys. |
| 03:18:27.94 | Sergio Rudin | No further reports this evening. Thank you. |
| 03:18:30.22 | Steven Woodside | All right. Under Councilmember Committee reports, I was requested at our last meeting to attach a grant application for which I wrote a letter of support that's attached in our packet. I have no further reports. Councilmember Hoffman. |
| 03:18:49.96 | Jill Hoffman | I have an updated report on some legislation as it's moving through the state legislature. Of particular interest for people in town has been SB 79. I'm going to give a short That's really my only report is SB 79. Barely, very narrowly squeaked through the legislature. After many revisions, I will report it no longer applies to Sausalito or Marin County, but it does go to urban. It still applies to urban transit counties like such as San Francisco, Alameda, San Mateo, et cetera. And it does allow high density projects exempted from local control near transit stops. And so... the governor has until October October 13th to sign or overturn the legislation. And so if you're concerned about that, One way or the other, you should contact or write to the governor with your concerns or support for SB 79. And that's my report on the legislature. |
| 03:19:56.45 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. That's a relief for us, for sure. Vice Mayor. Yes, we'll do that. Yes. |
| 03:20:03.81 | Ian Sobieski | I just have a point of parliamentary procedure. I didn't know that vote was going to be 3-2. I think it's no longer able to be brought back, right? Okay, I'll bring something up in future agenda items then. Thank you. |
| 03:20:15.98 | Alice Merrill | Okay. |
| 03:20:18.00 | Sergio Rudin | And just on that point, the ordinance does require a second reading. So the ordinance will be coming back to the council for adoption. It still needs three votes at second reading in order to pass. |
| 03:20:32.08 | Steven Woodside | Okay. Yeah. I have no appointments this evening. The vice mayor and I will be meeting at our agenda setting meeting this Thursday. And one of the things we will do is update the future agenda items list. So I have prepared and updated post list. We will align on it this Thursday and you will see it in your packet next. Thank you. next at our next meeting. We only have seven more meetings this year. And so I've had to really nip and tuck. But there are things that are of interest to each of you that I've made an effort to shoehorn in this year. So, including after planning and table top exercise and other things. |
| 03:21:15.06 | Jill Hoffman | is, Thank you. is forensic audit on there? |
| 03:21:17.67 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Forensic audit is not on there. but a recommendation for a Kafir is. or ACFER as it's now called. All right, minutes from boards, commissions, and committees. Thank you for the planning commission meeting. Minutes, city clerk, There are no other reports of significance. I'll take public comment on item 6A through 6C and 6E through 6G, seeing none in the chambers, city clerk, |
| 03:21:45.23 | Walfred Solorzano | Sorry. Sandra Bushmaker. |
| 03:21:52.35 | Sandra Bushmaker | Hi, with regard to SB 79, I would really encourage you to, although it doesn't impact Marin County, it's going to be a massive impact in California. And I would encourage you to write a letter requesting the governor veto the measure. I was very active in the campaign, as you probably know, to try to defeat that and keep Sausalito from its application to Sausalito. Um, Yeah, that was the main thing I wanted to say. Thank you. Thank you. City Clerk. |
| 03:22:28.53 | Walfred Solorzano | We have a better move to go. |
| 03:22:33.51 | Babette McDougall | I just want to make sure we're talking about future agenda items, because if we are, once again, I'd like to encourage you to kindly agendize whether or not we can in fact get serious about adopting a code of ethical conduct on how we conduct the city's business. I brought this up initially. when we were talking about the city's portfolio of real estate and how to negotiate contract over contract. So I'm just asking again, if we're looking at future agenda items, we deserve to have a standard of ethical conduct. We're probably the only town that hasn't got one, for crying out loud. So I'd like to encourage us to think again. about the wisdom and the value of having a code of ethical conduct. I mean, if the American Bar Association insists on it, It must not be such a horrible thing. Thank you so much, Ayyid Bagman Time. Thank you for your good work today. |
| 03:23:29.51 | Walfred Solorzano | No further comment? Oh, sorry. |
| 03:23:31.93 | Babette McDougall | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:23:32.10 | Unknown | Yeah. |
| 03:23:32.17 | Babette McDougall | Did you fill out a speaker card? |
| 03:23:33.63 | Unknown | Thank you. I'm sorry, I did not. I just showed up. I wanted to speak on 5C. Is that appropriate right now? On what? 5C. |
| 03:23:39.77 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. I can't hear you. 5C. |
| 03:23:40.75 | Unknown | I THINK THAT'S A GOOD |
| 03:23:43.20 | Steven Woodside | I'm sorry, we've already taken action on it's too late to comment on 5C. We did open it up for public comment. Any more restrictive on the enforcement efforts? |
| 03:23:51.44 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 03:23:52.97 | Steven Woodside | We have a great day. |
| 03:23:53.04 | Alice Merrill | We already passed 5C. I hope you are more restrictive on the enforcement efforts. Thank you. |
| 03:23:58.91 | Steven Woodside | We are more restrictive on enforcement efforts, for sure. Okay, that brings me to adjournment. This evening, I'm going to adjourn the meeting in honor of Paul Hawkinson, a retired Marin County Judge who both the vice mayor and I appeared in front of and who he worked with, whose rulings steered major criminal cases as well as significant environmental and land use conflicts. He passed away Wednesday. resided in San Rafael. He was well He was brilliant, fair, and respected by his colleagues and those who appeared before him. And so we will adjourn this evening's meeting in his honor. Thank you. |
| 03:24:56.57 | Walfred Solorzano | All right. |
Sandra Bushmaker — Against: Expressed concern that Measure K ballot language differs from council motion—motion said 'subject to a 32 foot height limit,' but county website shows 'maintaining building height limits.' Requested explanation, emphasizing the 32-foot limit is important to voters. ▶ 📄
Babette McDougall — In Favor: Urged council to reinstate Robert's Rules of Order, arguing it better incorporates citizen voice compared to Rosenberg's Rules. Cited instances where points of order from the floor were not recognized, and noted former council member Janelle Kelman also advocated for this change. ▶ 📄