| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:35.94 | Walfred Solorzano | Good afternoon, Mayor City Council. Today's meeting of February 3, February 3, 2026 City Council is being held at 420 Little Street in Council Chambers. It's also being broadcast live on the city's website on Zoom and on cable TV channel 27. |
| 00:00:54.94 | Steven Woodside | Thank you, Mr. Clerk. I'd like to call this special meeting to order and ask that you call the roll. |
| 00:01:01.35 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Cox. |
| 00:01:02.99 | Jill Hoffman | Here. |
| 00:01:03.23 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Councilmember Huffman. |
| 00:01:05.12 | Jill Hoffman | Here. |
| 00:01:06.03 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Sobieski, Vice Mayor Blaustein, And Mayor Woodside. |
| 00:01:10.97 | Steven Woodside | here. We are now about to go into closed session on items C1, C2, and C3 on the posted agenda. Item C1 is a conference with labor negotiator. Our negotiator is Chris Zapata along with Kathy Nikitas. We also will be dealing with public employee employment, the city manager position, and lastly a case uh existing litigation russo versus the city manager position. And lastly, a case, existing litigation, Russo versus the city of Sausalito. All of these are noticed under the provisions of the government code that are listed on the posted agenda. And are there any public comments on closed session before we go in? I've seen none. Very well, then we will go into the special session. Low session. Thank you. |
| 00:02:09.44 | Steven Woodside | Little cat birds. |
| 00:02:12.99 | Unknown | Thank you. Yeah, that's a bad thing to ask. But I used to keep it going in for a story. Yes. You know, it's all family great. |
| 00:02:23.03 | Walfred Solorzano | And did we call the world move on? Yes. Yeah, because it's not on there, but that's what I thought. |
| 00:02:25.61 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:02:32.92 | Walfred Solorzano | It just says reconvene. |
| 00:02:35.31 | Joan Cox | Well, after the |
| 00:02:35.92 | Walfred Solorzano | Oh, I'm sorry. You're right. |
| 00:02:35.94 | Angeline Loeffler | Oh, |
| 00:02:40.68 | Walfred Solorzano | at. |
| 00:02:41.02 | Steven Woodside | Okay. I'll do roll call first. Thank you, everyone. We're now back in session, this time the regular session of the City Council reconvening. And before we reconvene in this session, I'll ask the clerk to call the roll again. |
| 00:03:03.24 | Walfred Solorzano | Council Member Cox. |
| 00:03:05.60 | Joan Cox | here. |
| 00:03:06.26 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Hoffman? Here. Councilmember Sobieski? Here. |
| 00:03:07.53 | Joan Cox | Here. Thank you. |
| 00:03:09.98 | Walfred Solorzano | Vice Mayor Blaustein? Here. Here. |
| 00:03:11.33 | Joan Cox | here. |
| 00:03:11.73 | Walfred Solorzano | And Mayor Woodside. Thank you. Here. |
| 00:03:13.97 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:03:14.06 | Walfred Solorzano | And now we will |
| 00:03:32.60 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:03:38.22 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. We've just resumed from a special closed session and they do have one item to report. We have authorized Best Best and Krieger, our advisor, lawyer, Sergio Rudin's law firm, to defend in the case listed under item C3, Russo versus City of Sausalito. That's all we have to report from closed session. And now looking at the agenda, are there any proposed additions to the agenda? this point. Seeing none may have a motion to approve tonight's agenda. |
| 00:04:13.63 | Melissa Blaustein | So moved. Second. |
| 00:04:14.98 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:04:16.31 | Steven Woodside | Anyone opposed? Seeing none. We'll proceed with the agenda. Item number one is a special presentation from our city manager. |
| 00:04:27.21 | Chris Zapata | Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, members of the public. I am going to present the second item. I'm going to have a public works director, Kevin McGowan, present the storm, the storm update, please, Kevin. |
| 00:04:39.72 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mayor. Members of City Council, Kevin McGowan, Public Works Director. Short presentation for you, and I'll run through some quick slides and go through some things that we have tackled in the last couple of weeks related to high tides. Next slide, please. So as you know, on January 1st of this year, we had some severe storms and tides, which had significant impacts, not just to Sausalito, but to Marin County throughout the whole Bay Area. The event did not involve just one thing, such as king tides. It involved stormwater runoff. It also involved what the county noted as astronomical tides. And I don't have enough background to know exactly what that means, but For us here in town, it was originally noted that we would have a tide of about 6.7. Next slide, please. However, all these factors impacted the tides, which were observed by Marin Office of Emergency Services as about a 7.5. In addition, some of our local residents who have tide gauges observe the tides to be about 8.3, which is 1.6 feet above the predicted tide table. So quite impressive. A couple other pictures that you've seen in your last council meeting, and we'll go through this quickly. Next slide. So again, we observe obviously gate five was underwater at the beginning of the year. A couple of slides that you've seen before. We also took a couple of pictures of out at Spinnaker, which showed these high tides encroaching into the parking lot area. Next slide. Here are a few other pictures as well. One is of Harbor Drive, and I wanna mention that in particular, that Harbor Drive does get flooded quite a bit. And in addition, we've got another picture here of a storage facility where water's coming out of the front gates. So pretty impressive event. Next slide, please. Based on our observations from January 1st, staff further strategized about how to address the next large tide or king tide event, which was just last weekend. This strategy included locating systems and drain systems that flow directly towards the bay. Next slide. In addition, the city staff, as well as Mike McKinley, our emergency operations officer, participated in an after action plan with the county of Marin and many jurisdictions throughout the county. the There are some important information that came out of these meetings. And I don't know if Mike's going to be here tonight. But I'll kind of cover a couple of those quickly. Next slide. In addition, DPW staff met with folks from Clipper Yacht Harbor as well as other property owners off of Gate 5. That's before last weekend's event. The idea was to strategize with them since they have experienced this for many, many years to get their input. find out what they think it needs to be done and then let them know what we strategized in order to address the next king tide. Based on these meetings, we found that Harbor Drive, the Harbor Drive side of Gate 5, was also being impacted by tides, even though they do have some tide gates on the outside edge on Clipper Yacht Harbor. Next slide. With those meetings, staff has been keeping a close eye on the tides and the king tides that occurred from the 29th until yesterday, about an average of about 6.6 maximum according to the tide tables. Next slide. |
| 00:08:40.09 | Kevin McGowan | All right, this slide is a little difficult to see, but this is our overall strategy. We have two areas that tend to flood a lot that are impacted by the tides. One is close to Coloma and Gate 5, and the other one is Harbor and Gate 5. And what we did this time around is we strategized to put in two portable pump stations and barricade off drainage inlets that get inundated by the tide itself. In other words, they're directly connected to the bay. So we put sandbags around those. Next slide, please. a couple pictures for you. You can see the blue structure here, which is basically a portable pump. It's a six inch pump that that delivers water back out to the bay itself. And in the background, you'll see a bunch of sandbags. Those are around a drainage inlet. The idea is to let the tide go to that inlet and not proceed to flood gate five. Next slide, please. We did the same thing on Harbor Drive, another portable pump down there and sandbags around the inlets in order to make sure the tide doesn't inundate the road. Next slide. Again, our staff was present throughout all of this. You can kind of see how it was being inundated on Thursday, the tide continued to rise as it normally does. on the harbor side of Clipper Yacht Harbor, and we put in some our pump station outfalls in order to address that. Next slide. couple other quick pictures. Our staff's there early in the morning. I don't know if you folks know Pat Guasco, but he gets up before the dawn almost every single day, and he was down there quite a bit over the weekend. And next slide, please. This particular design at Harbor required us to make sure that the entrance to Clipper Yacht Harbor stayed open. And with Pat's help, we installed a system where people could drive over the outfall pipes in order to get to that, get to the Clipper Yacht Harbor, which they had an event last weekend, by the way, as well. Now, In particular, there are a lot of properties down here that have their own pumps and they pump directly to the street. We don't know where they all are. So with this event and making sure that Pat was down there, he tried to identify as many of those as he could. There's one shown in the picture to the left hand side that was continually pumping into the roadway itself. We worked with that very quickly in order to address that situation. Next slide. couple other quick pictures for everybody. I'm sure we've seen a lot of these. Next slide, please. Now our systems work as if the tide comes up through these catch basins and they're barricaded off. And in this particular case, over the whole weekend, gate 5 was dry. So was Harvard. drive kind of a good, good, uh, a good conclusion, but there's more work to do there. Next slide, please. Other areas we kept an eye on included Dumphy Park, which has work going on there right now, but we wanna keep track of that tide. If it comes up too high, that has a potential for going over certain areas. The same with the spinnaker down there, same if it's flooding their parking lot. Next slide. All right, some future things to provide to the council. We do have further king tide events. Starting in April, we've got a 6.3. And then all the way in July, we have a 6.9 as well. So each individual month, we may have that impact down on gate five. And For the cost for this is about $8,000 per pump. And that's for seven days. Plus we had to spend an additional amount of money in order to deal with the outfall across Clipper. We're hoping to decrease that cost by re-examining that. We have until April to try to come up with something at this point. But I did want to let the council know that there is a cost to this as well. In the future, we'd like to look into purchasing portable pumps. They're about $60,000 to $70,000 each, and we may be able to get one used. So we're looking into that from a staff perspective, and I'll report back to you on that in the future. Next slide. All right. As I mentioned before, is Mike here? I don't know if he showed. Nope. So I'll just try to cover this on his behalf. Mike has been working with Marin OES And the state of California has reported out that they do have low interest loans for private property residents who may have been impacted by this event and that generally means january 1st event now we don't have a lot of detail on that yet i don't think it has been uh fully vetted and we can report back to council at a later point in time if property owners want to try to secure a low interest loan i just wanted to mention that and In addition, next slide, please. In addition, there's more work to do here. We have a consultant who's working with with Katie Thao Garcia, as well as Sarah Corchidafard to look at improvements here on gate five My opinion is we're gonna need to have two things, a mechanical type of approach, which we've just found out is workable, but we'll also need to take a look at some other areas that need to be raised. For instance, Clipper Yacht Harbor has raised their parking lot for many years and adjoining areas on either side of that are lower. we may need to look at raising adjacent roads in these areas in order to prevent more flooding in this specific area. my intent of sharing this with you is that Yeah, the pump stations type of thing works, but there still needs to be more study in this area, and we'll work forward with that. So that's my short report for today, and I'm here for questions if you have any. |
| 00:14:46.98 | Chris Zapata | Yeah. Mayor, if I may, I want to kind of add a little flavor to Kevin's comments. And Mike McKinley is now with us. First and foremost, you know, Gate 5 Road has been an ongoing situation that the property owners deal with and the city has been dealing with for years and years. And it's a mishmash of ownership. The public street itself, the street that turns into private, the private properties around it. And to address it, Kevin referenced a grant that the city had applied for through the Economic Development Administration. And just to give you some sense of scale, it was an $800,000 application of which the city received $600,000 and matches $200,000 to do a technical study of the area to try to figure out how to deal with this. So it's a big, big undertaking. I think I was appreciative of Mayor Woodside's op-ed in the Marin IJ, which spoke to this matter. He probably will add that today we did bring it up with Supervisor Moulton Peters in terms of you know more of a regional approach because when the 101 floods it affects all of Marin County not just Sausalito not just Mill Valley but even the inland areas get impacted and so it was great to see Caltrans and California Highway Patrol at that post-mortem meeting because they are impacted by it as well. I thought that was a very important meeting in terms of communication. The one thing that I talked to the supervisor about today was I think that it lacks some type of strategic approach. It's technical people talking about how to work on it, but there is a bigger picture that needs to be addressed, and that takes strategy, lobbyists, council people, elected officials, working with the state and the federal government to see if at some point in time you can bring big dollars to a big problem. Thank you. |
| 00:16:46.52 | Steven Woodside | Thank you both. I see a hand raise there. Normally we don't take public comment, but I make one exception here because you are one of the common victims, if you will, from from these storms. So if you care to make a brief comment, we'd appreciate it. |
| 00:17:05.61 | Mauro | I apologize I was late. Yeah, my comment is I've been receiving all the study that has been done in the past 10 years. We have very interesting study done by very good company. Probably cost a fortune already to the city. Rather than keep doing study, I appreciate if we do stuff like the pump or engineering install and more serious stuff. That's the way to do the study. Let's put a barricade somewhere and see if it works. Next year, we do something better. Thank you. Could you please just identify yourself? |
| 00:17:35.34 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:17:41.25 | Steven Woodside | Thank you so much, Mauro. Again, we don't normally take public comments, but are there any quick questions or comments? |
| 00:17:48.12 | Melissa Blaustein | One quick question. I know that the county of Marin declared an emergency and also that the 3% threshold was met in terms of qualifications for emergency funding. This might be more of a Mike McKinley question, but What are our next steps in how we might gain access? Oh, hi, Mike, you're here. What are some of the steps for how we might gain access to any of that funding, especially for businesses or residents living on gate five who are severely impacted? |
| 00:18:15.54 | Joan Cox | I will say two other cities joined the... Right, exactly. Two cities have already also declared an emergency piggybacking on the county. |
| 00:18:18.53 | Mike McKinley | Exactly. |
| 00:18:23.15 | Mike McKinley | Well, I'm really pleased to be here and talk about this. So a collaboration with the county Cal OES and Small Business Administration, the team that came down that I helped coordinate and facilitate was excellent. And attention to detail. I'm not sure. really understanding the problems that folks were having. But anyway, Here's our next steps. So the county met the SBA individual assistance threshold. I was notified yesterday about that. So right now what we've got to do working with Cal OES is to develop an outreach campaign, right? Get out to the morrows of the world here. So that's being worked on right now. The next issue is creating, once we get the outreach, we need a disaster assistance center. So a physical location, folks are going to come in, do their paperwork. show their documentation. There'll be a Cal OES rep and an SBA rep there, and then we'll start the process. Of course, this is for the the small business individual loans, typically 1% to 3%. Hopefully. But that's where we are right now. So to be determined when we're going to... Um, Ashley... get the outreach program going. And I have some thoughts in my mind where we can set up disaster places we could talk to these folks. So it's been a quick turnaround. I was very surprised that they got declared so fast, to be absolutely honest with you. |
| 00:20:03.91 | Steven Woodside | Sure. |
| 00:20:04.64 | Jill Hoffman | When I was at the Cal Cities Conference, Assemblymember Connolly told us that the Coastal Commission may have some grants available for flooding and for businesses along the coast that had some problems with the recent storms. So, Mike, I'll forward that information to you, and you can fold that into your presentations that you're giving. So. |
| 00:20:25.17 | Mike McKinley | Yeah, I appreciate that. There's a lot of moving parts with the grants and the different things that are going on mitigation issues. I WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE Kudos to our public health department to I'm sorry, our public works department, public health to. They did a heck of a job. re plumbing gate five Harbor Road area with pumps and and large hose lines and really mitigated the possibility of flooding again that we had last week. So I'll certainly keep you. abreast of when we get the outreach program going and those other issues. Thank you. |
| 00:21:00.96 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much. Um, Mr. City Manager. One more report. |
| 00:21:07.88 | Chris Zapata | Yes, thank you, Mayor, members of the council, members of the public. I want to talk about this past Saturday's priority planning session. It was a working meeting of the city council that was open to the public and was recorded. The public was able to comment at the beginning of the meeting and at the end of the meeting. And a trove of supporting documents, providing information on that day were provided. This is something that cities do to kick off budget processes. It's important that the city continue this. This year was a little bit different in that not only do you have an upcoming budget to adopt, but you're at the end of your 2020-26 strategic plan. So that was part of the conversation, which was not part of the process in prior years because you were in your plan, and now you are about to wind that down. I felt very, very encouraged by the council's work to winnow down the future agenda list. That was important for us to start to get on an even keel with what we need to do in the coming year. I think that the city council's vigorous discussion about priorities, big priorities, policy priorities, policies that relate to infrastructure revenue and business environment, as well as policies that relate to how the city can in fact be more effective in the allocation of resources on an ongoing basis. I think that the understanding from the council was that there would be a vigorous piece of planning that needs to happen. So the momentum of Saturday was not lost, is not lost. And so, you know, some of the work that you really engaged in is going to come back in front of you. And the question is how soon? And so I leave that to the mayor and the council to announce as to when that's going to happen. |
| 00:23:04.76 | Steven Woodside | can do that now it appears that it's very likely we will reconvene on february the 12th probably about 4 p.m for a special workshop session in order to complete our work um we will of course provide a public notice agenda and so forth for that uh we anticipate having um a report back from the facilitator ms amy uh howarth And she promises to have something to us by the end of the week, which means that early next week we can start looking at it. and posted along with the agenda. So that's to be determined, the date finalized, but it appears it's most likely to be on the 12th, starting at 4 p.m. And I just want to add, I very much appreciate it. I think we all did. |
| 00:23:49.51 | Joan Cox | And I, |
| 00:23:53.28 | Steven Woodside | The participation by many members of the community, it was held in a very comfortable place, at least until the sun made it quite uncomfortable. But the the west end of the firehouse and was again open to the public, as will our next session. Also, we need to determine the location. |
| 00:24:12.31 | Chris Zapata | Mayor, one thing I failed to mention was the other item that I thought was key to the morning is you did discuss, you know, the 2020-2026 strategic plan, and you agreed that you want a 2731 strategic plan, and that's to happen and the date to be determined in the coming year as well, so. |
| 00:24:33.15 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. I'm going to make a couple of, sorry. |
| 00:24:38.37 | Ian Sobieski | Is that the city manager report section that we just did? That is, yeah. I just want to give you a compliment and Director McGowan a compliment and the Department of Public Works a compliment. I have a friend who just moved to town. His name's Doug. He lives on Vista Clara Road. |
| 00:24:41.10 | Steven Woodside | That is, yeah. |
| 00:24:52.49 | Ian Sobieski | He moved in. week ago and had a pothole in front of his house that showed up when PG&E did some work. didn't talk to me about it. but he found the sea. fix click it app on his own. submitted it. That's when I first learned about it, when I went for a hike with him. The next day he texts me. day after he submits it. and says, did you get my pothole fixed? And I said, no, I had nothing to do with it. It was fixed. in one day between submission and being fixed. So congratulations to the whole team, to Council Member Blaustein, who helped spearhead that project, but the team that implements it. So not everything in South Slater has done that fast, but... This was, and it sets a mark for what's possible. So congratulations. |
| 00:25:35.34 | Steven Woodside | So, Mr. Sobieski, can you remind us all how we can use that app, what it is, where we can find it? |
| 00:25:42.42 | Ian Sobieski | Go to the app store and search for C fix click. Download it on your phone. You can take a picture of any issue in town and it creates a trouble ticket. at City Hall. and gets routed to the right administrative person to attend to, and it will and you will keep getting messages until it's resolved |
| 00:26:05.07 | Steven Woodside | Thanks for that. A couple of announcements. At the last meeting, there seemed to be, at the end of the meeting, there seemed to be, I'll put it this way, unanimous interest in our fishing folk to be able to sell fish, crab, et cetera, from the dock. And there is an event coming up. I don't remember the exact date, but it's in February. |
| 00:26:27.93 | Jill Hoffman | February 21st, the Crab Fest down at Klipper, Yacht Harbor. |
| 00:26:31.98 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. And after consulting with the city attorney, and of course staff has worked with him for this particular event, basically off boat sales are already, um, in effect, not requiring any specific permit in the city of Sausalito, unless they are permanent sales activity within the waterfront, uh, uh, district, temporary sales are not subject to a city permit. There may be some restrictions on outdoor displays, sound, and that sort of thing, but with respect to selling of the fish, no permit required. There may be other jurisdictions, however, that will need to be consulted, such as perhaps fish and game and the county health officials. And I know as of this afternoon, the city manager was making inquiry to make sure that hopefully the Marin County health officials can rather quickly turn around what's needed so that that event on the 21st can take place. Any additional comments? |
| 00:27:39.60 | Jill Hoffman | So the good news is that what we may call, or what we probably will call, the Sausalito Fresh Catch Program is good to go. And it is not prohibited by the city of Sausalito at Clipper Yacht Harbor. So we expect that guys that want to sell their fresh catch off their boats are able to do so. They will have to comply with the county health department regulations and fish and game if that's required for their boats, but it's up to them to do that. And SOSLITA looks forward for them to be able to sail their catch off their boats. So thanks to Sergio Rudin, our city attorney, for confirming that, and Brandon Phipps. Thank you very much for working with us this week to confirm that with our city ordinances. |
| 00:28:16.10 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:28:27.06 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Before we get to public comments generally on matters and not on the agenda, I'm going to invite one person to come up this being our first meeting during Black History Month. Mr. Gaston, are you able to say a few words? |
| 00:28:51.74 | Mallory Gaston | Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, it's South Salido City Council. Thank you. Chris My man right here, THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF THE END OF I'm Mallory Gaston. I'm a business owner and a resident here in the Livermore community. It's a salado. Today, I want to honor true pioneer of our city. Joseph James. His legacy serves as a powerful reminder that strength and advocacy requires. required in the ongoing fight for justice. I'm here to emphasize why this fight remains crucial. Joseph was not just a skilled welder at the ranch. He was a trailblazer. He understood that the progress It's not handed down. It's demanded. We courageously challenge discriminatory practices in the shipyards, taking his fight all the way to the Supreme Court. These efforts only paved the way for equality. labor. but demonstrated One person can indeed make a difference. His courage proved that a single, determined voice can be a formidable force for change. That fight does not end with him. Because of Joseph James' advocacy, and a willingness to confront Exclusion. rather than accept it. And due to the doors that he pushed open, I am able to stand before you today as a proud business owner. in a predominantly white community. All right. My presence, my livelihood, and my ability to contribute to this beautiful city It's not accidental. They're a result of people like him. people that came before me. Right. He refused to be invisible. BEYOND HIS ACTIVISM. Joseph was a talented and gifted entertainer. His talents grace Broadway. Hollywood showcasing the rich cultural contributions of African-American community. In 1946, he helped co-found the county's first NAACP chapter. further solidifying his commitment to civil rights and community empowerment. As we reflect, on Joseph's life. Let's remember the values that he championed. quality. justice. and the importance of a unified community. To truly honor his legacy, we must acknowledge that there is still work ahead of us. We must continue to expand opportunities for supporting and growing. minority businesses and socialito. Economic inclusion is not just sound policy, It's a reflection of our values. and who we believe we are in our hearts. Honoring Joseph means not only remembering history, but also applying a lesson. Learn from those that came before us. May we carry forward his belief that Sausalito can be a place where everyone's voice matters. And that's all I have to say about this matter. But. It's true to my heart, right? I love this place. You guys have been pretty nice to me since I've been here. You know? And it seems like I know everybody in this room. Chris, come on. You know, you know, Anyway, thank you guys for having me. All right. |
| 00:32:09.06 | Steven Woodside | Thank you very much. and a very, very important chapter in our city's history. Thank you. So now we go to communications from the public on matters that are not on the agenda, which means we can listen to you and we will, but we can't really respond or act upon them tonight because they're not on the agenda. But we might be able to refer them to staff and take up some of the issues that you raise at a later date. So I would like to make sure, if you wish to speak, that you fill out one of these cards so I can try to pronounce your name correctly. I do have one card so far from Louise Isles. Illith, sorry, I knew. I was close, maybe. Louise, please come forward. |
| 00:33:01.14 | Louise Isles | So city council and mayor and city manager, all of you. Um, I'm here with several friends. on behalf of the Sausalito Point Sausalito HOA. There are a number of us who are very concerned about the should I say lack of responsiveness of the permitting inspection and planning department. We have ongoing since this summer, deferred maintenance work that is happening at Point Sausalito. of which has been the cost for the for this project has been assessed as a special assessment for all of our homeowners. this past year, and the expectation would be We had contractors lined up that this would happen. and be completed by the end of the year. As such, we are not even halfway through it. And a good part of that problem we have to, um, I put the burden of that on the city because of the planning department dragging its feet as far as we can tell. We have it. We have. a Homeowners Association. which I'm the board member of the board, but as well, we have a management, HOA management firm, uh, Simis is the name of it. They are based in Nevada. In any case, are we have a project manager who is from Simis. We hired them. to help us get through this project They said they have never seen anything like it in their years of working with cities. So this is the worst they've seen. in terms of not having permits available, requiring certain permits, where this acting as if this is a new construction, this is deferred maintenance. We're simply trying to, replace rotted wood, redo roofing, paint the buildings which haven't been painted in a while. Am I done? |
| 00:35:04.04 | Steven Woodside | Your time's up, but are you close to wrapping up? Yeah. Because I want to also mention that I have received, I think we've all received written comments from you. E-mails. |
| 00:35:06.82 | Louise Isles | Yeah. |
| 00:35:13.14 | Louise Isles | E-mails from a number of us. |
| 00:35:14.92 | Steven Woodside | of you and |
| 00:35:16.11 | Louise Isles | Yes, it's an extremely frustrating situation. We would hope for some oversight from the city on this problem. Thank you. |
| 00:35:22.80 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. And Ms. Ellis, do we know how to reach you? |
| 00:35:30.16 | Steven Woodside | Okay, thank you. One more comment, someone we haven't seen in a while, Mr. Chase. |
| 00:35:38.65 | Joan Cox | May I just say in response to the prior comment that, um, I appreciate one of the emails we sent that Ms. Ellis's email was the most detailed that we received from the various colleagues outlining the challenges, which helps us be more effective in our response. So thank you for undertaking the effort to provide that level of detail. |
| 00:36:06.48 | Walfred Solorzano | Mr. Chase. |
| 00:36:07.09 | Unknown | Hello, Mr. Mayor, City Council. Sausalito. staff. And a nice audience. tonight |
| 00:36:21.63 | Unknown | I'm going to speak... the Torah. like I've done a few times before, that Sometimes political minutiae ties us all up in knots. that legalities, which my people are very good at, can confuse us. But there's one thing that doesn't confuse me. as much as it used to. And that's the Holy Torah. WHAT IT SAYS HERE, Moses is now at the mountain. I use the portion of the week. So I'm not looking, picking and choosing. from the all-you-can-eat buffet. when I'm reading God's words. Moses. is the prophet. And when he sent, to free the people in Egypt, The game is not even nearly over. But the people are now trusting him. He's brought them to the mountain. He's gotten them out of Egypt. And he says, When his father-in-law shows up, his father-in-law is named Jethro, And Jethro says to Moses, what you're doing judging the people is not good. You must discern from among all the people, men who are well established, God-fearing, people of integrity, who hate money. appoint them over thousands. over hundreds, over fifties, and over tens. And what that means is that the leader must come from the people and be part of the people. Thank you very much. |
| 00:38:19.23 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:38:19.69 | Unknown | Thank you. |
| 00:38:19.70 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. I have no more speaker cards. Mr. Clerk, anyone online? |
| 00:38:24.90 | Walfred Solorzano | We have a |
| 00:38:25.49 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. but, |
| 00:38:25.80 | Walfred Solorzano | McDougal? |
| 00:38:28.23 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:38:28.28 | Mike McKinley | Thank you. |
| 00:38:28.43 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:38:32.38 | Babette McDougall | Good evening and thank you for acknowledging me. So the reason I wanted to circle back and speak to you today Actually, want to read something into the public records since you acknowledge Black History Month. Again, once again, I'm saying this is a quote from Martin Luther King Jr., and it really applies to Sausalito. And it says, quote, We must come to see. that the end we seek in a society at peace with itself, this is the goal. a society that can live with his conscience. Close quote. And that's us right now. If we can come together as a community, of many segments, whether we're business, whether we're merely residential, whether we're something in between or other, If we can come together as a community and agree on how we move forward to evolve this community and not lose its original village perspective. personality. then I think we will have achieved the kind of unity that the people like Martin Luther King envision for our future. This idea of us getting to know each other and getting used to each other is only half of the game. The real game is how we learn to live together. So with that, I yield back my time and thank you very much for being there today. And also. Thank you for Saturday. that's a good thing. |
| 00:39:45.85 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Anyone else, sir? No further public comment. We'll now move on to the consent calendar Thanks again for all of your Letters and communications. We appreciate it. The consent calendar items are Let's see. 3A is to adopt our minutes from the January 21st. minute, 3B is a Black History Month proclamation 3C is a resolution authorizing this city manager to execute the first amendment to the professional services agreement with Schaff and Reeler to include surveying services for large trash capture device project in a livery ship way in an amount not to exceed $142,458. And finally, receiving and filing the bicycle parking program report from the 2025 season. |
| 00:40:49.98 | Steven Woodside | I assume do. Yeah. It's a good idea. Thank you. |
| 00:41:02.63 | Steven Woodside | So are there any comments generally on the consent item before we have a motion to approve? |
| 00:41:08.98 | Walfred Solorzano | I see no public comments. |
| 00:41:12.67 | Steven Woodside | Seeing none, thank you. Is there a motion to approve? |
| 00:41:15.02 | Ian Sobieski | So moved. |
| 00:41:17.08 | Steven Woodside | Second. |
| 00:41:18.75 | Ian Sobieski | Second. Okay. |
| 00:41:19.88 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Anyone opposed? Okay, those items are approved. Thank you. We have two business items tonight, item 5A and item 5B, and we'll take them in that order. And with respect to item 5A, it's a mid-year budget review, mid-fiscal year, excuse me, yes, mid-fiscal year, and we'll start by asking the city manager to introduce it. |
| 00:41:45.06 | Chris Zapata | Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, members of the public. I want to provide some oversight or some overview of what you're going to hear from our finance director. And I want to make sure that the audience understands that the period we're covering mid-year is from July 1st of 2025 to December 31st of 2025. City councils run fiscal years from July through June. And so we're covering the first six months of that. And cities should always look at finances periodically, and six months is a good snapshot into when you should do that and understand where you're projected ahead or not. And so I want to give you some of my takeaways from what I've seen in this projection. I want to make sure that the public understands that every year the city is required to balance its budget. And certainly this year we begin the year with a balanced budget. And so the question is, how are we doing? And are there opportunities for us to do different things? Or are there information that, you know, the council wants us to look deeper into? But this is the time to do that. So my observations are as we began the year with a lot of uncertainty in the economic environment of the city, to me it's not good news, it's actually great news that our revenues are tracking. You know, we projected $22 million in change in revenues, and we'll see pretty close to that. So that's very positive. Some of the things that we had concerns about, whether it was property, not property tax, sales tax and TOT, they're holding strong. So that is good news. One of the things that I see that I really want to pay attention to is our expenses. And when we look at our projected expenses that are part of this report, they create what we call a projected 3.9% shortfall if things play out as we are seeing them at this moment. So again, a 3.9% shortfall. I said it on Saturday, and I'll say it again today. If the city manager can't work with the finance team and the department heads to fix a 3% problem, a 4% problem, or a 5% problem, they're not doing their job. So I don't see this as an item to concern. Certainly, I worry about city finances. That's my job. But I do not see it as a big item because I believe that a lot of times what you see in six-year projections or six-month projections is a lot of city expenses are not known. A lot of city revenues are not known. And so as we work through that to kind of refine what we've given you tonight, I thought of some things that I think are really important to point out. Besides, you know, the capital investments we've made that were significant in parking and the Flowbird parking system we purchased that is, you know, a one-time expense but a benefit to the city for many, many years. The life of those units are, you know, 10, 15, 20 years, but the expense shows up all in one year. The other thing is, you know, we did something really complicated last year, and that was in June of 2024. We defeased $5 million of bond debt and half a million dollars of estate revolving loan fund with our sewer funds, but we supplemented the shortfall with general funds, and that was in June of 2025. And then all of a sudden, July of 2025, we have a new year. And guess what? In August of 2025, Through the bill of sale, the sanitary district provided a check for $3.4 million to the city. In that $3.4 million, there's ability to, number one, make sure that future pension debt, future pension, other post-employment benefit debt is accounted for, and that there is a true up to the general fund. And we believe that true up should be in the neighborhood of about $650,000. So that will certainly have a positive impact on what a projected end of the year might look like. In addition to that review and that work, we obviously are going through an audit that we will use to actually inform further where we are in terms of our budget, but we also can do things at a management level, which I will do and have started. And that's to make sure that the city staff, city departments understand, you know, that, you know, this is not the year to spend more than we're going to spend in the capital improvement program. And we certainly don't want to get to the end of the year with a budget that shows more expenditures and revenue. So to be able to correct that is pretty straightforward. Working with the department heads to find savings, slow expenditures down to make sure that we don't create a situation where we have to come and ask the city council for money to cover a shortfall. That's the goal, and that's what will happen. So I want to make sure that you know. We're on top of that. You know, obviously, when you look at your mid-year projections, sometimes they're dire, sometimes they're not. But when they're dire, you look at service cuts. We're not asking for anything like that. You look at, you know, some type of transfer of funds to augment what revenues you have. We're not asking for any of that. And so as we work on the budget process this year, you have reconstituted your finance committee. There will be more work with the finance committee to do. And then, you know, there will be what I call – an ability to build a budget in the coming year, but to complete the current year, which is from July 1 of 2025 to June 30 of 25 in a way that's not in the red. So I'm confident in that, and I tell you that as someone that's managed budgets for 30 years. So with that, I'll ask our finance director to come up and give you the detail that she has regarding the information that I highlighted. |
| 00:47:39.55 | Steven Woodside | Before she begins, I think Member Cox has a question for you. |
| 00:47:45.00 | Joan Cox | Um, Is it also possible that some of our annual fiscal annual expenses are front loaded so that we incur a higher percentage of those annual expenses in the first half than in the second half of the year. |
| 00:48:01.00 | Chris Zapata | That's a great question. And I asked that exact question to the finance director. You know, we front loaded when pay our retirement of $3.4 million in July, we pay a lot of subscriptions and dues in July. And so the question is, is that factor into her schedule? And she accounted for that council member. |
| 00:48:21.25 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:48:24.24 | Angeline Loeffler | All right. Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor and Council members and the members of Publix. I'm going to be, in addition to what our City Manager has stated, I'm going to go through the section by section a little bit more in details throughout this presentation. Thank you. And I'm going to start by with the quick overview of our budgets, the approved budget for the fiscal year FY25 and 26. Next slide please. So as you can see, we started the years with the surplus of $260,000 with the revenue of the $22,493,000 and projected expenses of $22,233,000. So as the city manager stated, we just started out with the balance and a good start of the years of the starting of the fiscal year 2025, 2026. Next slide, please. And now we're going to actually quickly dive into the quick overview of the revenue, adopted revenues. And based on the revenue, the little charts that you see in here, that 30% of the revenues are coming from our property taxes, which is including secure and unsecure property taxes, and followed by the sales tax revenues and business license and the transit, the occupancy taxes, and so forth. So those are part of our top four, the top revenues that city is actually in the city's general funds. So I'm not going to be going over the every single details of the revenue sources. I'm just going to go through the details of the top two, the property taxes and the sales and use tax revenues. So next slide, please. This is the data that we actually received from the HDL on the past 10 years of property taxes trend. As you can see on the blue bar shows our property taxes. This is only representing the secure property tax portions. As you can see, the past 10 years, we've been seeing a gradual steady increases of our property taxes, which is coming in from the as the increase in the property values in the city of sazolito it's continuously growing and then continuously steadily increasing in the past 10 years and that goes the same thing with our the the blf the the property tax in lieu of the vehicle license taxes which is also you can see it in the orange bars that it is showing the continuation of the increases throughout the past 10 years, which is based on this one, we can continue to see the graduate increase and steady increases of our property taxes. We do not see any forecasts in the near future that has any sudden dives on this property taxes so we can continue to see these property taxes and will be coming in very steady and strong in our the other cities the the revenue sources Next slide, please. And the next I wanted to kind of point out the sales and use tax projections that which is provided by the HDL But even though the projections on this chart for the FY26 is showing the expected declines of the current year, but however cities. This data set is based on the data accumulated through the June of 2025, so which may not be exactly true reflections to our current revenue that we are expecting to receive. through the sales and use tax revenues. So the good news from this chart is even though HDL is projecting 4.5 reductions, the city of Sausalito are expecting to receive higher than what was projected by the HDL by almost 200,000 more this year at the finishing up the fiscal year of 25-26. Same thing goes with the Medjell L, which is at the bottom of the table there. Then also it does indicating that it's gonna show the decline of the 3.2%. In that notations, we are actually experiencing slightly reductions in a measure L taxes that we're expecting to receive in this current year. when we actually adapted the budget for the Medjol L amount for the current year, we actually projected lower than what the HDL was in the project. So we're actually going to be coming above our budgeted amounts, which is good notes in terms of the Medjol L and as well as the sales and use tax portions for the city's. Next slide, please. Just a quick overview of the comparison between the sales and use tax, and as well as a Medial L. Medial L is the predominant source of funding for our capital projects for the city. And then we are actually approximately getting about $400,000 more in average, about like the 16% more than sales and use taxes that we normally get for the city. So as you can see, the chart is actually pretty strong and pretty steady for the past 10 quarters of the trend reports that we have received from the HDL. And HDL is a very close monitoring of these sales tax trends as the sales tax is the volatile source of the income. It really depends on the consumers, the spending habits. But as you can see, we are relatively steady in getting those fundings of the sources. And the measure L measure is just wanted to point out is not included as a part of the general fund revenue. It's actually predominantly allocated for the capital, the improvement process, the other projects. So that's why you will not see measure L fundings. The other resource is not showing up on the general funds, the revenue sources. Next slide, please. Now I'm going to look into the quick overview of the expenses. As you can see, we have the salaries and benefits are almost account for 62% of our general funds. So by default, we have certain portions of the professional services and materials and supplies, and we have a very minimum transfer out from the general funds as a part of expenses. So the salary and benefits, which is including impacted by some of those high costs, the pension benefit is also another reason for driving up the cost at this point. Next slide, please. Now we're diving into the actual mid-year, the updates of our budgets on the current years, as you can actually see it on there. And the city manager has briefly mentioned that we are projected to have 875,000 of the deficits that the idea through the end of the year however that deficit amount and 875 000 does not reflect the the sewer transfer the idea surface amounts because we're still in the process of finance departments in the process of the idea depleting the loans and actually reflected on our books. That's why it's not exactly reflected on our mid-year reviews in that sense. And then estimably we are projected about 650,000 of surpluses based on preliminary numbers of the the debt, the bond debt paid out and as well as the amount of the source, the reserve that we had it on our hand at the time of the transfer. |
| 00:56:45.66 | Angeline Loeffler | Next slide, please. And general fund, as I briefly mentioned, there's a top four, the property taxes and sales taxes. As you can see, we are projecting to have the higher than what we budgeted for, for some of our governmental fundings. And also, as you can see, sales and use taxes, like 2.7 versus HDL's projection was only a 2.5. So Citi is actually pulling it very strong on the sales and use taxes for this year. And also we are anticipating increases in the TOT taxes as well, and as well as the nominal increases on the property taxes. And just wanted to bring your notes on this one is when I did the projections of these the year end projections of these property taxes and sales taxes I usually tends to use a very conservative methodologies rather than a growth aggressive the measure of the projecting it just to ensure that yeah we want to make sure that we are meeting what we're supposed to meet at the end of the year. So there is a higher possibility that we may actually have the higher revenue than what I actually projected in here by the end of the year, so I am very optimistic. We probably will get higher, but I just wanted to make sure I'm being on a safe side on that one, so. And we are experiencing some of those, some down, the reduction in the revenue on the business, like activities that we have within the city So that actually comes down to accumulation of the multiple departments, the revenue generating, which comes out to be about $165,000. and the transfer fund of 250,000 is mainly coming from losing of the sewer fund transfer that we normally get on an annual basis. As we transfer the sewer operation, that transfer will not be coming in. That's where the 250,000 of the loss of the transfer, which is predominant factors on these, the loss on the revenue of the 364,000. With that said, once we actually account for all the sewer funds, sewer, the operation, the transfer surpluses, I'm sure we're going to turn that number into the positive numbers by the end of this year. Next slide, please. |
| 00:59:20.39 | Angeline Loeffler | Now we're diving into the details of the expenses. Overall, we're expecting increases, $770,000 of the expenses within the projected to be in this year. However, that $770,000 does include large amount of the capital improvement. The project costs were allocated. in there rather than on your capital project funding. So that might be something that once we actually just reclassify it and we allocate it, and that $770,000 will drop down to the much smaller amounts as well, too. One other contributing factor on that, the $707,000 increase, is part of the unforeseen a lot of repairs and maintenance of the building is kind of drive up the cost about like 200,000 so that's what is then other driving factors on that one but Once again, with all those reallocations of the fundings and the appropriation of the allocation of different fundings, I'm sure that we'll bring those amounts down to the very minimum increases too by the end of the years. And along with the contingent effort to kind of reduce the expenses, definitely will bring down the expense amounts to the balance by the end of the fiscal year. Next slide, please. And this is some of those additional actions that the staff and along with the help of the city managers will be taking actions to reduce the expenses and bring the revenues a little bit further in. And as of this morning, I actually went in and looked at the business license, delinquents, the accounts, statuses, and surprisingly, we had. large number of the delinquent accounts on the business license accounts, which is the accumulation of, for the past two years, amount to over a million dollars. So I'm gonna be working with the HDL very closely to recoup those and the delinquent amounts with the HDL because it was kind of shocking to see that much of a delinquent amount in under the business license accounts. So we have total of the almost 400 accounts, a business license account with the delinquent balance just in the past two years. So that is something that definitely will help our, the revenue raising for the, before the end of the years as well too. and along with everything else that the city manager has already mentioned, so we will definitely kind of take the further proactive actions to reduce the cost going forward through the end of the years. Next slide, please. Now I'm going to be diving into some of those enterprise fundings and how the enterprise funding will be behaving throughout the They're currently and throughout the by the end of the year. So parking fund is actually The steady source of incomes, our revenue is very comparable to the last year, but the reason that we're going to be facing the deficit amount this year is there's a one-time capital improvement via the cost, which is installations of the Flowbird pay stations for the muni lot, which cost was about $270,000. So because of that one, we're facing the $117,000 of deficit at the end of the year. However, the parking lot funds has the really large amount of the reserve amount from the previous years that could easily offset that amount without any issues, without pulling any of the general funding. Next slide, please. |
| 01:02:57.43 | Joan Cox | ears. |
| 01:03:14.73 | Angeline Loeffler | MLK funding is, once again, it's going very strong and steady source of incomes. And this year, we're definitely going to finish the year with the surplus of the $108,000. And we do have a little bit of the increases in the expenses because of some of those, the repairs and maintenance that went on to the building is a lot higher than what we budgeted for. So even with that high of increases in expenses, we definitely are going to be resulting surpluses at the end of the year. Next slide, please. And Title Fund is also going very strong this year, and then we're also going to be finishing the year with the surplus of the 239,000 much very close to what we budgeted for of the 383,000 and as you probably noticed that there's a spikes on the incomes the revenue from the FY25 to FY26 about $200,000. some thousand dollars in there. There's a one time the revenue source was came in under the Thailand funds, which is kind of, they raised the revenues to go up to the 756,000, which is the resulting of the one time spikes up of the Thailand funds revenue. Next slide, please. Lastly, the old city hall fund also will be resulting in a surplus of $38,000 by the end of the year. Once again, the expense is some of those ongoing maintenance and repairs of the building. Also, as you can see, the expenses actually drop. We're expected to have less expenses than what we budgeted for. because the last year, FY25, we did some major updates on the old city or HVAC replacements and roof replacements, which has kind of caused the regular maintenance to be dropped on the current year, which has increased the surplus amount to the $38,000 from the projected amount of $12,000. And this will conclude the presentation of the details of the FY25 mid-year budget reviews. And I'm opening up for any questions or opening up for the discussions. Thank you. |
| 01:05:45.46 | Steven Woodside | This is question time from the dais and I just want to remind my colleagues let's ask questions at this point so that we can then hear from the public and their comments before we actually discuss some things. I just want to start out with a couple. One is really connecting what we heard from the city manager and you regarding the net truing up, as it were, with the sewer funds. So what I'm hearing from you, and tell me if I'm wrong, is it correct that there's a substantial amount of money, perhaps $600,000, that has yet to be fully accounted for and may well bring some of these numbers closer to neutral. Is that correct? |
| 01:06:32.96 | Angeline Loeffler | Right. Yes, that is correct. Actually, the reason that I didn't actually brought in the detail, the true up amount in here is we're still kind of cleaning out in our Springbrook, the accounting systems on the dissipation of the loans and whatnot. So that's why it's not fully accounted into it, incorporated into the mid-year budget reviews. but we will definitely bring you back with the to the council with the true once we get all the recon to the council with the true, once we get all the reconciliations of the true up numbers for the transfer of the operations. |
| 01:07:05.17 | Steven Woodside | that will happen before we get to our budget deliberations? Absolutely. Yes. Okay. |
| 01:07:08.75 | Angeline Loeffler | Absolutely, yes. |
| 01:07:10.62 | Steven Woodside | And secondly, you show a very steady property tax increase. Can you remind us what percentage of the overall tax stays with the city? |
| 01:07:15.30 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:07:24.14 | Angeline Loeffler | The property tax is normally about the 1% that allocated for the county portions are in there, and then only 1% goes to the city allocated for the basin or geographical areas. |
| 01:07:36.82 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:07:36.85 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:07:37.05 | Chris Zapata | terms. |
| 01:07:37.36 | Steven Woodside | of, |
| 01:07:37.57 | Chris Zapata | City manager. I think I can help with that, Mayor. I understand your question. So you're asking of the property tax that's paid by residents to the city, how much we keep. The answer is 55.5%. When the city and the fire district decided that they were going to do what they did through election in 2009, 10, 11, the city committed 44 and a half percent of its property tax to the fire district for the operation of that service and to not have a fire department is one thing but to not have the property tax is another thing and so we don't get a hundred percent of that property tax dollar that the city used to get it used to be close to 19 cents on the dollar it's closer now to 11 |
| 01:08:26.41 | Steven Woodside | So of the total amount paid by anyone here, we used to retain 19%, and we now retain only 11%. |
| 01:08:36.52 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 01:08:36.64 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 01:08:37.02 | Chris Zapata | Yes. |
| 01:08:37.72 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Okay. And then, um, It shows a steady increase, but as we know from fires and other things, a catastrophe could dramatically affect... property tax base, could it not? |
| 01:08:51.88 | Angeline Loeffler | Absolutely, yes. There's always the impacts by the natural disasters in that sense. And also a lot of these property taxes, not only that, it gets impacted by a number of the transfers. The ownership will also get impacted by that as well, too. As the city of Sausalito gets the house for example, the, uh, someone was holding on their property for 20 years and decide to make the sale of that properties has a tremendous increases in the property tax property taxes because as ownership changes, so city is also expecting that much higher increase. And we did on the property ownership transfer, we've seen based on the HDL, we're actually seeing the 3% increases on those property tax valuations annually. |
| 01:09:48.31 | Steven Woodside | And at the midyear, at this point, we have not touched the reserve that's established, correct? |
| 01:09:55.32 | Angeline Loeffler | No, we have not. |
| 01:09:56.35 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:09:56.37 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |
| 01:09:56.52 | Steven Woodside | Okay. That concludes my questions. Any other questions? Um, Amber Cox. |
| 01:10:03.14 | Joan Cox | Thank you. I just want to reemphasize the property taxes. Um, The piece of the pie that goes to Southern Ruin Fire of 45% each year remains safe. fixed, even though the total amount of the pie, increases each year due to appreciation of property values. |
| 01:10:30.95 | Ian Sobieski | Correct. Yes. Okay. Um, Give me one second. I actually just. deleted my window. So give me one second. |
| 01:10:44.99 | Ian Sobieski | Here we go. |
| 01:10:50.08 | Ian Sobieski | Okay. of the |
| 01:10:56.97 | Chris Zapata | While the council member is looking for that answer, I have one thought that I want to lay out. When she's done, I'll lay it out for you. |
| 01:10:58.47 | Joan Cox | it. |
| 01:11:05.83 | Joan Cox | You also mentioned Measure L. Measure L sales taxes are not charged on groceries or prescription medication, including deliveries by mail, which limits impacts on our residents of the Measure L sales tax. Is that right? |
| 01:11:22.40 | Angeline Loeffler | It depends because even though the prescription medication is considered as a non-taxable, it's not taxable measures. However, any of the over-the-counter medications that was actually delivered to the Sausalito residents, it will be subject to use tax, which is inclusive in our sales and use tax measures. |
| 01:11:48.19 | Joan Cox | Understood, but Measure L was not a use tax. Measure L was a sales tax, correct? |
| 01:11:54.68 | Angeline Loeffler | it was part of the district tax allocation. So it will impact, still impact the, whatever that was still was brought into the, the Sausalito on that aspect. |
| 01:12:06.81 | Joan Cox | You also mentioned that we won't receive a $250,000 sewer transfer. But isn't it also true that we are no longer paying interest payments, sizable interest payments each year, because we defeased borrowing. as part of the transfer to the sanitary district. And so we're no longer paying that large interest expense. Is that right? |
| 01:12:32.04 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. Absolutely, yes. And that is going to be part of all the reconciliation, true up. When we do the complete reconciliation, that will also reflect on the savings of the interest that we're not paying for the rest of the years. Yes. |
| 01:12:46.82 | Chris Zapata | Councilmember Cox that's a great point. I want to amplify the answer from the finance director One year is one year But when we total the amount that the sustenable ratepayers would save as a result of defusing those bonds and paying off the loan It was 1.9 million dollars over time |
| 01:13:05.07 | Joan Cox | So that would qualify for Councilmember Sobieski's big, beautiful um, idea idea right it's over a million dollars Okay. Um, You mentioned 400 accounts with a million dollars in overdue business license tax for the past two years. Who is responsible for our collections of business license tax? |
| 01:13:31.83 | Angeline Loeffler | It's ultimately that we actually relay those responsibilities to the HDL as a part of the contracts. So that is something that we're going to, as a staff, that we have to follow up with the HDL. What is their processes of the collection of these delinquents, their balance due, as well as a delinquent account statuses. Because... |
| 01:13:54.04 | Joan Cox | I'm aware of at least one merchant that was way behind on paying BLT and just didn't even realize it because no one reached out to say you're behind. So Could you circle back to us with a report regarding your dialogue with HDL regarding what measures they're currently taking and what measures we are requesting they take in the future. Because a million dollars on a $20 million budget is a huge receivable. |
| 01:14:21.29 | Angeline Loeffler | Absolutely, absolutely. So just to give you quick updates on that one, based on the preliminary discussions with the HDL, it looks like there has been some miscommunications with the HDL and also the taxpayer is. Some of those, they do use a lot of email as a predominant ways to communicating, which is may not always effective with our business owner in the city of Sausalito. So they usually spend a good amount of time trying to communicate it through the email. Then when everything fails, then they start mailing out the notifications. And also I noticed that some of those mailing addresses may not be up to date on the account. So I think that is something that I'm definitely gonna be working with the HDL to get updated and the updated contact information |
| 01:15:15.16 | Joan Cox | We pay a significant amount to HDL for this service, so they should be. more up to date in their technology in terms of communicating with our businesses, right? Absolutely. Yes. |
| 01:15:27.97 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 01:15:28.00 | Joan Cox | Okay. You mentioned large expenses for the MLK fund. Aren't they largely due to the COP debt? that is related to That... enterprise fund |
| 01:15:44.10 | Chris Zapata | Yeah, I can jump in on that one. The city... when they passed the measure in 2015 or 16, committed to paying it back over 15 years. And that annual debt service is $640,000 and change off the top. It goes out of that fund first and first because we have that obligation to those participation and certificate holders. So, yes, $640,000. I can get you the exact number. |
| 01:16:11.50 | Joan Cox | And city manager, we only have a few more years left on that debt, correct? 2031. Okay. So we've got five years left. |
| 01:16:19.05 | Angeline Loeffler | And for the major contributing for this particular year is actually The repair and maintenance is are gone up tremendously. We budgeted for about 25,000, but through the added, the halfway points, we already spent over 300,000 in a repair maintenance, which is kind of drive up the a lot of expenses. you |
| 01:16:41.81 | Joan Cox | Right. But the biggest chunk from the number that you had on your presentation is the $650,000 a year. |
| 01:16:41.88 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |
| 01:16:49.64 | Joan Cox | Um, you mentioned a one-time, uh, revenue source of the Tidelands Fund for $200,000. Where did that come from? |
| 01:16:59.93 | Angeline Loeffler | That one is from the Spinnaker that we actually had. So it looks like we had the previous, the FY24 through the 25 income, the revenue was accumulated and then we received the 250,000 within the last six months. |
| 01:17:17.69 | Joan Cox | Was that their past due BLT that they brought current? |
| 01:17:22.16 | Angeline Loeffler | Yeah. |
| 01:17:22.18 | Joan Cox | Okay, great. And then what is the status of the audit and do we expect any findings this |
| 01:17:29.18 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes, actually audit is pretty much wrapped around to the with the auditor, we have all cleared all the outstanding items. And we are expected to get the final draft of the audit reports later this week, and they will should be ready to present them on the February 17th of the final draft of the audit. |
| 01:17:29.19 | Joan Cox | you |
| 01:17:51.03 | Joan Cox | But are you aware of any concerns raised by the auditor regarding our finances as part of their process? |
| 01:17:58.22 | Angeline Loeffler | Based on my communications, there's no concerns or findings at this point. |
| 01:18:03.52 | Joan Cox | That's great news. Thank you. That's the end of my questions, Mayor. I have a few. |
| 01:18:09.04 | Melissa Blaustein | if I can't. Vice Mayor. Great, thank you. As part of your preparation for this year's mid-year budget report, did you review our mid-year budget report from 2024, 2025? So it would have been at the January 21st, 2025 meeting. |
| 01:18:24.17 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes, I have. |
| 01:18:25.51 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. And so at that time, we also had a projected significant deficit of actually more than in this projection, right? Okay. And then when we reviewed our budget by the end of the year, it was indeed balanced. Correct. Okay. And in your experience as a budgeting director, just as we look at these numbers, because outright, it does say that we are in a deficit, which is not where we want to be. Um, In our general fund, this is about 4% of the total general fund. Is that typical for you in mid-year budgeting to see this sort of numbers and then pivot to adjust and provide recommendations? |
| 01:18:58.31 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes, absolutely. It's like 4% or 5% is very typical because we do not have a crystal ball, unfortunately, to see exactly how things are going to be, the projecting for the next six months. So usually the midway points, the way that I looked at it as a finance director and with my backgrounds, and it's really kind of giving us opportunity, okay, how we need to finish the year. So this is the good way. And consider that we only like a 4%, less than 4% deficit. And then those 4% is already identified that we are going to be recovering. through the sewer funds, the transfer operations surpluses, and as well as some of those reallocations of those capital, the improvement projects. So definitely it is not uncommon, and it is the good ways for us to regear, and then they make those changes. And it's often we come back with a balanced budget at the end. |
| 01:19:58.84 | Melissa Blaustein | And in fact, based on HDL's predictions, we have the opportunity for significant revenue, up to a million dollars beyond the sewer fund and beyond the operational changes that we're expected to make. |
| 01:20:09.66 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes, absolutely. |
| 01:20:10.93 | Melissa Blaustein | So at this point, assuming we do chase the HDL business license taxes, we have the opportunity for a surplus at the end of the budget year as we enter into our next fiscal chapter. |
| 01:20:20.29 | Angeline Loeffler | That is my optimal, the positive point at this point because the over a million dollar of the delinquent amount within the past just the two years is something that it's not acceptable as a finance director and some of those amounts should be followed through with the hdl and i was kind of surprised that we had that much of the delinquent amount so we definitely will bring those in and then definitely they turn the revenue into the positive numbers at the end of the year. |
| 01:20:50.40 | Melissa Blaustein | Great. And then one thing I wanted to ask about, because I noted in our 2025 mid-year budget that there was some significant reporting or at least some background on prediction. for pensions and the expectations for growth percentages within CalPERS and what our payments into that would be. Do you have any forecasts or projections that might impact our surplus project or our end of year balanced budget based on what those numbers look like right now or anything with regards to pensions that you want to share around the mid-year budget? |
| 01:21:15.89 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes, absolutely. luckily the current year, all the pension ULL was already accounted for within the budget, so we're not really seeing the extra surge based on that one. But at the end of the year, as we're getting into the FY27, we are expected to pay out another large amount of ULL, which is increased from the current year by almost another $200,000. so that would be something that I do need to kind of keep that in mind and considers as I'm gearing towards to the finishing the year and also prepping for the next year budget but it's an |
| 01:21:51.21 | Melissa Blaustein | But it sounds like if we can chase that HDL revenue, we will likely be able to make up the 27 gap as well. |
| 01:21:57.31 | Angeline Loeffler | That will definitely help, yes. |
| 01:22:00.04 | Chris Zapata | Great. |
| 01:22:00.32 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |
| 01:22:00.49 | Chris Zapata | Thank you so much. |
| 01:22:00.60 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you so much. |
| 01:22:01.02 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 01:22:01.86 | Chris Zapata | Let me amplify that pension question because it's really important. We touched on it on Saturday, and I think I made the point that in 2002, your pension obligation, your full payment for the whole organization was $400,000. Last year, it was $3.5 million. So when you have that kind of a challenge, you have to do something about it. The state did something about it in 2013 with the Public Employee Pension Reform Act, which lowered the ability for people to get generous and unsustainable pensions. And then the city council in 2015-16 were early adopters of a 115 trust fund. You took that and made a goal of $6 million. The last accounting we got this past month was $4.3 million in the pension side saved, and there's $2.1 million on the post-employment benefits side saved. So over $6 million to deal with pensions. And on February the 24th at 10.30 a.m., the Finance Committee will be meeting, and that's where we're going to bring forward what we see as how to appropriately invest that money, recommendations how to use that money to either make a big dent in the pension issue or to smooth the pension debt that's upcoming so you have some predictability in the next five years with those funds because that's when we see the rising costs. And so if you have money set aside, you should plan on how you're going to spend it, and that's what we're going to take to the Finance Committee. It will then come to the city council, and the city council can decide if they agree with staff's recommendation or not and then we'll go from there. But in general, Sausalito is like every city that adopted enhanced benefit plans for employees in the early 2000 and is always seeing fluctuations from CalPERS and, you know, increasing cost in the program. And so you saving some money, it'd be a good time to start thinking about how you put that to use. |
| 01:24:09.74 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. I appreciate that. |
| 01:24:13.55 | Chris Zapata | I'm sorry. |
| 01:24:13.70 | Steven Woodside | questions? Sure. |
| 01:24:17.76 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you, Angeline. And I had a question. I think you said, I saw in here where there was some reference to maintenance Oh, or maintenance needs for different, um, I think for MLK and maybe for Gene Hiller. um or old city hall i think it's the old city hall building but generally my question is how do we in our budget account for um deferred maintenance in our city-owned properties we have a very specifically we have a veritas report who very that very specifically laid out annual for the next 20 years maintenance needs for our buildings how do we account for that in our budget |
| 01:25:05.58 | Angeline Loeffler | That should be considered through the capital projects throughout the five years plan. So typically under the general funds budgets, and we typically just look into some of those regular maintenance and repairs. So anything beyond to that one should be accounted for through the capital projects, which we have. |
| 01:25:28.92 | Jill Hoffman | So if I looked at in the budget, so in this budget that we've been presented with, if I look under MLK, somewhere in the budget is going to book somehow the Veritas needs for the MLK property for 2425 somewhere in there. It's the whatever the number was for the MLK maintenance. |
| 01:25:51.40 | Angeline Loeffler | It depends on whether we classify book it as a part of the capital projects, then it should be included under the capital project. If we actually include them as a part of the general fund expense item, that would have been included under the MLK general funds. So based on what I'm looking at, at the budgeted amount for the MLK, it doesn't look like we have any of the major expenses that was recorded under the MLK, the fundings. So that is something that we may have allocated into the part of the capital projects. |
| 01:26:29.78 | Chris Zapata | And if I can amplify the MLK scenario. If we have completed at your direction a facilities assessment, which was really important to do to give us some idea of future costs, we've done that. Sometimes things change. And one of the things that's changed with respect to MLK is the idea of converting a portion of it, two acres of it, into housing within the council parameters that talk about height limits and uses. But in that process, there are always plans to invest in improving the bus barn, as I call it. Now those plans have to be relooked at. So whatever was submitted by Bureau Veritas' improvements to the bus barn may have to be analyzed with the possibility that the bus barn wouldn't be there anymore. So you wouldn't want to put a lot of money into MLK bus barn right now in a way that you would have two years ago because the circumstances have changed. |
| 01:27:32.34 | Jill Hoffman | Sure, I understand that, but I think we have other properties over there. We have the two schools, and we have other things, and so I'm just wondering, and they're revenue-generating. So is the bus barn for right now, but I understand that we would want to put money into that. But I'm just wondering how we book those expenses against the revenue-generating aspects of that, and I'm trying to figure out how we account for that in our budget, or we don't. That's my question. |
| 01:27:59.51 | Chris Zapata | So going back to the capital improvement program that you adopt every year, it's not a stagnant plan. It's a living plan. And so every year you have an opportunity to figure out what it is your needs are there. Now that you have the Veritas study, you can do that more accurately. And so that's what I hope is happening and will happen in the future with any expenditures of a capital nature at MLK, whether it's the schools, the park, or the bus barn, and using that study to inform other decisions, whether it's the parking lots or the fire station that we're renovating. It's been very helpful. So I thank you all for that. But it's all integrated into our capital improvement program, which you approve every year. |
| 01:28:48.04 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, thanks. I think that answers my question. Thank you. |
| 01:28:52.70 | Steven Woodside | Mr. Sobieski, no questions. Okay. We now would like, thank you by the way, very much. I wanna just make an initial comment. You are certainly on top of the, numbers in a short period of time. So. Thank you very much. And the numbers are what they are. And now we'll hear from the public. I have no... Carjet speakers, public comment on this? Thank you. |
| 01:29:21.86 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 01:29:21.89 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:29:21.91 | Walfred Solorzano | Yes. |
| 01:29:22.28 | Steven Woodside | I'm not. |
| 01:29:22.30 | Walfred Solorzano | to, We have Alexander |
| 01:29:24.04 | Steven Woodside | way. Online? Yeah. Okay. I have none in person. Is that right? I'm looking in the audience. None. Okay. |
| 01:29:37.49 | Alexander Wojcalling | Thank you. |
| 01:29:37.50 | Walfred Solorzano | Sir? |
| 01:29:37.87 | Alexander Wojcalling | Thank you. Okay. Hey there, this is Alex Wojcalling and I'm from the EDAC committee and we had a great meeting yesterday actually. And one of the things that came up and I think Jill may highlight this later too, but was just that we have a few businesses in town that have been kind of open and we're getting ready to open and waiting for particularly county. I guess, and health permits. And so I just wanted to highlight that Um, as we focus on some of the larger, uh, buckets for how we can improve city finances and revenue that we have some that are sort of ready to go and I think would be great contributors to our commercial vibrancy. And so if there's ways that I know you guys on the city council can reach out or connect with folks in the county or have relationships there to help nudge things along or resolve roadblocks, I think that would be really welcome for our business community. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 01:30:35.54 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Next person is Babette McDougall. |
| 01:30:43.30 | Babette McDougall | Thank you for acknowledging me. So the reason I want to chime in has to do with I think what is considered in general a bit of confusion and maybe everybody's feeling good about it, or maybe there is not 100% consensus on how we feel. And maybe that's why it gets brought up in a rather awkward way, and that is this 44% commitment of residential property tax to underwrite Southern Marin fire and emergency response for Sausalito. So I don't know. I wasn't there in the meetings when they negotiated the money. All I know is somebody must have had risk assessment on the table. Worst case scenario, best case scenario. What's it really going to cost? Bottom line. Why is Sausalito so much more expensive than any other municipality that also has bought into the program? I'm really not sure, but now that there are far more members, Presently, as compared to before, when Sausalito first joined, Maybe this would be a good time to suggest revisiting everybody's fair share of the payload with regard to Southern Marin. and whether everybody feels good about the use of residential property tax. Certainly, I have not yet been personally disappointed by our fire district. So for whatever that's worth, I give it to you. The other thing to tie in with regard to confusion is the assessments of the sewer district in this conversation So I see two separate line items on my own individual property tax. And then I just got a bill in the mail for another few thousand dollars from this very new district. That was a little confusing. I don't remember having that approved. or somehow made clear to the public, which is why a better follow-up communication with the public at large would really be a good idea. So I think I've left you with enough for one resident's input on what surely is a frustration felt by others than myself. And if it's just my problem, amen to that. With that, I yield back my time. |
| 01:32:42.13 | Walfred Solorzano | No further public comments? |
| 01:32:44.85 | Steven Woodside | Any from the audience? Seeing none, I will bring it back here for comments. If you don't mind, I'll just lead off by saying that This is a snapshot, and things will change, hopefully for the better, as we move forward. And there was some information tonight that leads me to use a word used earlier, how we feel about it. I'll say I'm cautiously optimistic, but we really can't say for certain. and that's why we rely on on the city manager and the staff keep us informed so that if we have to pivot or make some major adjustment, we can do so. I personally think that even though these numbers are sometimes hard to understand, it's really the heart of our fiduciary duty to make sure that we have a balanced budget every year and that we do the best for our community in terms of what priorities we set, how we spent our limited funds. And this is a very important tool, this mid-year review. And what's encouraging to me is that there's no major discrepancy that has to be cured. But it's also true that anytime a report comes out and uses the word deficit, it's scary. So with that, I just am personally happy we have this report and all we're being asked to do tonight, I think, is to both received the report and then if there's any specific direction that we want to give now anticipating the budget that will be developed soon or anything that needs to be addressed at the Finance Committee level before coming back, etc. And off the top of my head, I can't think of anything right now other than. Excuse me. Following up HDL. I think my colleague here is going to specifically request that. And I turn to others to see if there's any comments or specific direction. Yes. Yeah. |
| 01:34:57.23 | Joan Cox | Thanks. I will note that effective January 1, 2026, California's SB 827 mandates that local agency officials such as us complete at least two hours of biennial fiscal and financial training, this requirement. aims to strengthen oversight of public funds, cover budgeting, debt management, and audits. Something that really helps us uphold our responsibility for protecting the public fisc. is clear. factual presentations such as the one you provided to us tonight. So Very many thanks to you. for taking you know, complex a complex subject matter and translating it to layperson terms so that even Public leaders without a lot of financial experience such as that held by our rocket scientist council member can make informed decisions and direct I'm sorry. appropriate actions by our city staff. So very much appreciate that. I do want to reiterate the request that. you circle back to us with a report regarding your efforts to prevail upon HDL to Um, undertake the collection efforts for which we pay them. And I'm also very much looking forward to the finance committee, the outcome of the finance committee meeting coming up in February is regarding how best to um, capitalize upon our healthy 115 fund savings, as well as how best to manage that ongoing investment for maximum return. And those are my comments. Thank you. I will say I was contacted by a surveyor someone doing a survey on Sunday, as I know the mayor was as well. who asked me about the city of Sausalito's financial health. And I was proud to announce that I believe Sausalito enjoys strong financial health. So thank you. |
| 01:37:33.36 | Steven Woodside | Other comments, yes. |
| 01:37:34.22 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm happy to make a few comments. First, I'm very impressed that you're up to speed at this level so quickly. Thank you very much for committing so much time and energy to really dive deeply into our finances. including revisiting previous reports and understanding where we are and where we're going. It's so important. And I think that this is especially critical in light of our discussions on Saturday as we think about our budget as a reflection of our values and determining what our strategic planning process and where emphasis will be together as a community and as a council. And that's why these budget snapshots, as our mayor pointed out, are so important. Some things that were notable, I mean, Obviously, no one likes to see the word deficit in their budget. But I am optimistic given the information that we've received, not only regarding the funds that we are owed for our business license tax, but also the incoming sewer fund and the potential for additional revenue in the year ahead that we will come out with a balanced budget and perhaps even a surplus yet again. So I think that the state of the city's finances continue to be strong. And I have a lot of trust in our. city manager to move forward, to make the necessary changes here to ensure that we do make up that 4%. And something that I don't think was stressed quite enough in the context of this presentation is that last year in our budgeting, We all agreed from the dais that we wanted to maintain 25% reserves, which is actually a rather high amount for municipal reserves. And we have not strayed from that. And we are still on track, and we still have a smaller deficit projection than we did at this time last year, even with higher reserves. So I think that that might be a piece of what we're looking at here as well. I would echo Councilmember Cox's direction of course to make sure that we do collect on our business license taxes because that is not AS WELL. I WOULD ECHO COUNCILMEMBER COX'S DIRECTION, OF COURSE, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO COLLECT ON OUR BUSINESS LICENSE TAXES, BECAUSE THAT IS NOT AN INSIGNIFICANT AMOUNT WHEN WE HAVE A $22 MILLION BUDGET. IF WE'RE MISSING $1 MILLION, IT'S CERTAINLY something that is a gaping hole in our budget process. Some things that I'd really like to see as we complete our budget process in the next six months going forward. is a more clear reporting on the expectations for pension costs. I know you mentioned that it would be $200,000, expected increase in 27, but what does that mean for us as we are going forward to negotiate new employee contracts? What will that mean in terms of potential costs for employee retention. I just would like to see us be very thoughtful about our forecasting so that we can anticipate any sort of, um, unforeseen event together to have the best possible financial position. And I, again, I'll just say, I think that the 25% reserves is a big part of that. So. Thank you for your hard work on this. Thanks to members of the council for paying such keen attention to it, especially our Finance Committee, including our rocket scientists and county council. So I don't think that we could be in better hands in terms of that meeting on the 24th. |
| 01:40:41.72 | Steven Woodside | Mr. Just, oh, I'm sorry. I just looked right first, now left. Okay. |
| 01:40:50.61 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. So I think you Cautiously optimistic is a good way to... Good term. And, um, but I do think that, um, There are some things... you know to further the credibility of the reporting that we've just had and one of the things that I advocated for earlier in the year it was a forensic audit and I still believe that that would further shore up the credibility of our reporting we had over 100 people sign a petition I couldn't see a reason why we wouldn't go forward with that given the circumstances under which we had to let our finance director at the time go And I still am of that opinion. I don't see any reason why we wouldn't return to an annual comprehensive financial report for our reporting at this time, certainly going forward in the future. We talked a little bit about that at our retreat, or not, sorry, our are, or Saturday, session that we're going to talk about. |
| 01:41:50.03 | Steven Woodside | Just workshop. How's that? |
| 01:41:51.30 | Jill Hoffman | workshop, yeah, it wasn't a strategic plan yet. Anyway, our workshop on Saturday I was sorry that we couldn't land on an agreement to pivot from an annual audit back to a what we used to call the comprehensive annual financial report. It's now called an annual comprehensive financial report. That's a detailed audited set of financial statements. That's much more in depth and gives you much more information. We used to do those. We decided not to do that a few years ago. I think that was a mistake in retrospect. I wish we would pivot back to that. This seems now to be at least we should go back to that. I can't think of why we wouldn't go back to that. I understand it's more work for our staff. This year it would be a push, but I think we we should just do it. And if we need more help and more finance help, we should just do it. I'm concerned that we're not addressing the millions of dollars in outstanding outstanding maintenance that our Veritas report identified. I know that we are addressing it and that we're, you know, incrementally doing it through capital improvement, but I think that that needs to be accounted for and booked against our capital assets, the revenue-generating assets, principally our MLK facility, which has... two large schools and obviously one of our biggest parks that we we dedicate a fair amount of money, a large amount of money to a few years ago to rehabilitate Old City Hall, which houses Gene Hiller. Saucelho Center for the Arts, and what we all seem to ignore is the city hall that we're currently sitting in. needs a huge overhaul. And we've never actually addressed that. And that's going to be millions of dollars. And these are things that should go in our budget and they should be accounted for every year and they're not. So these are our weaknesses that I see in the way that we're budgeting. |
| 01:43:59.73 | Steven Woodside | Any more comments? |
| 01:44:02.58 | Ian Sobieski | Samara, I'd love if you'd agree to maybe actually agendize this tax liability that's been hanging out, the HDL uncollected taxes. In business, we would keep track of our accounts receivable with days since order, and If they exceed 60 days past, they start to get stale. All kinds of problems start to happen. Fees accumulate that you have to waive. People move, businesses go bankrupt, that's become uncollectible. I'd like to take a deeper dive into what our process is and what HGL's obligation is. It bothers me that they're sending emails to spam folders instead of picking up the phone. And I think you could pay a collection agency 3% or 2% and we could collect that money in 45 days and that would make a big difference if we put it in a bond, we would pay for the collection agency. So I'd love to see that agenda is if it's so agreeable. In terms of the finances, it's good news. We are in uncertain times, a lot of volatility, tariffs, an uncertain economy, and yet every category. Property tax is above the projected estimate. Sales tax receipts is above the projected estimate. Business license tax is above the projected estimate. estimate. Hotel tax is above the projected estimate. And parking revenue, even though we dramatically changed the parking orientation downtown, parking revenue is above the projected estimate. estimate. So our revenue side is as projected, if not better. And some of the expenses are associated with exactly the kind of capital improvements that Councilmember Hoffman is talking about. They are one time expenses for parking meters and fixing some of our buildings, according to the Veritas report. And this I couldn't agree more with Jill on this. is where this hopefully will get one day the promised land, which is this 10 year model that takes the, outstanding what you would call infrastructure liability, the $26 million we need for our buildings, the $37 million we need for our roads, and amortizes that into a yearly amount that we should be investing to achieve our goal but here is the rub you know we talked about it on saturday just pick the buildings that councilmember Hoffman referred to if we actually tried to capitalize in our operating budget, the $26 million that we need over 10 years to do what Veritas says we do, that's $2.6 million a year on a 20-ish million dollar year budget. That is a 10% increase in the entire budget. There aren't cuts you can do for that. There's not any efficiencies you can do for that. Nickel and diming any of the details in our budget isn't going to get us that money. It drives home the point that if we are serious about actually following through on fixing our roads and fixing our buildings, it's not about tweaking this budget in front of us, it's about figuring out how we can find new sources of revenue, whether it's growing the economy or different kinds of special funds or taxes or grants to actually achieve those goals. So this is a good news budget, but it also, you know, the very questions that are asked here underline some of the challenges ahead. |
| 01:47:06.08 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. With that, I think we're prepared to accept the report midyear. I think there have been a lot of discussions that I'm just going to say come within the scope the same scope. For example, you mentioned 10 year forecasting. Thank you. Um, um CAFR or ACFR annual reports on our financial uh status uh we are going to hear at our next meeting I think we're going to have the results from the audit so what else is is perhaps necessary or what is disclosed by the audit that will be coming up at our very next meeting so I don't think we're um I don't think we'll be without many opportunities to really look at each of the issues that have been raised tonight and see how we're doing and to see what changes we may need into the next fiscal year. So and then we have the finance committee that you and I serve on. Mr. Sobieski, and we'll be taking up all of those questions, including the question of, you know, how do we deal with our 115 trust money? What's the best way to invest it, et cetera? So there's a whole lot of issues swirling around here that we should be deciding as we go forward. And we certainly want to keep the public informed and hear from the public because there are many ideas out there. to be determined. So with that, is there a motion to accept the mid-year report? |
| 01:48:38.02 | Melissa Blaustein | Second. |
| 01:48:38.59 | Steven Woodside | Okay? All in favor? |
| 01:48:40.72 | Melissa Blaustein | Bye. |
| 01:48:41.05 | Steven Woodside | Okay, that's unanimous. Thank you. I'm not sure. I think we're prepared to go into the next item. And before doing that, I think I need to apologize publicly to the three or four officers who were sitting at the back of the room I didn't really. notice what's going on until they left. And I realized when the vice mayor mentioned to me, I thought we were supposed to agendize a swearing in. I didn't see it on the agenda. I don't remember who. What happened to that? And the chief has been ill this week. So we haven't had a conversation that might have straightened all that out. So our apologies to them. They look sharp, and there are new officers, and I think they might be coming back, but we'll make sure that we get to them first thing, so. |
| 01:49:34.70 | Joan Cox | Yep. |
| 01:49:35.19 | Steven Woodside | Okay, but thank you, Vice Mayor, because I think you said... Weren't we supposed to? Yeah, okay. So how does my grandson say it? My bad. |
| 01:49:39.31 | Joan Cox | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 01:49:47.73 | Steven Woodside | Okay. 5B, tourneystreak.repair, assistant city manager, I think you're on. |
| 01:50:01.33 | Chris Zapata | Actually, Mayor, it's my bad, not your bad. So I will work with the process to be better on the officers that were here today. |
| 01:50:10.78 | Steven Woodside | It's my bad squared. |
| 01:50:12.11 | Chris Zapata | My apologies, yes. |
| 01:50:16.09 | Brandon Phipps | All right. Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members, members of the public and staff. Happy to be joining you this evening, as always, this time to present the revised draft RFP for the Tourney Street Floating Dock Improvement Project and Business Partnership. and to get council review and direction on those revisions. This is a follow-up to our January 6th presentation and council meeting where council provided specific direction on modifications to the RFP structure and content. And I've had the opportunity to incorporate council direction into this document and have made additional refinements to create a more comprehensive procurement document. Next slide, please. Before diving into the changes, let me just describe the context. Once again, the Turney Street dock and boat launch serve as one of the only free public launch facilities in southern Marin County. It's not just a recreational amenity. It's also a critical piece of infrastructure for emergency services and access to Richardson Bay. We currently have a concurrent improvement project underway with anchor QEA, which is designing improvements to the boat ramp main dock and the well known Humboldt Street bulkhead. Anchor QEA's scope includes an optional task nine that addresses the floating docks adjacent to the bulkhead and wharf, which are the subject of tonight's RFP. Rather than include those docks in the city funded project, also funded by grant funding, we saw an opportunity to explore a public private partnership that could benefit the public while supporting a compatible maritime business operation, all with no capital expenditure required from the city. Next slide, please. |
| 01:52:02.76 | Brandon Phipps | Okay, at your January 6th meeting, and I'll start generally and then we'll go into the specific, council reviewed the initial RFP Ian provided a specific direction on five areas that need modification. One, the lease duration and renewal structure. We moved to a clearer 10 year term with mutual renewal options. Second was a project duration option, creating a more flexible opportunity for proposers by offering distinct pathways rather than requiring a combined approach. Third, we have an emphasis on innovation and creativity. Council wanted to make it clear that the city values groundbreaking original concepts that could serve as models for other waterfront projects. Fourth, the city council decision making authority, um, ensuring, ensuring that the RFP clearly establishes that while staff and the evaluation committee provide recommendations, it's really ultimately council that retains full and final authority to select both the project concept and the development partner. And yeah, stay here, please city clerk for the city. Excuse me, fifth housing element accommodation provisions. This reserves the city's right to make necessary adjustments related to our housing element obligations, given the proximity of identified opportunity sites. So this direction has been incorporated as stated and I'll walk you through each of those changes now. Okay, lease rooms, yeah, please stay here. Mr. City Clerk, the first major change addresses lease duration. So we originally had 10 to 15 years, which created some potential ambiguity about the tenure. Based on council's direction, it's now a clear tenure term with mutual renewal options. The keyword here is mutual. Neither the city nor the selected party has an automatic right to renew. This gives the city maximum flexibility to evaluate performance before committing to any kind of extension. Renewal decisions will consider multiple factors. The party's performance under the lease facility condition continued alignment with city goals, the community benefit provided as well as market conditions at the time. For short-term projects, we're proposing a lease term of one year with evaluation of pilot performance for any decision about proceeding to a long-term phase, and that hasn't changed since the original proposal. Next slide, please. Second major is really the biggest restructuring I think we did to ensure the RFP provides proposals with three distinct options, rather than requiring a combined pilot and long-term approach. Option A, we have short-term pilot lasting approximately one year. This is good for proposals who want to test an innovative concept with minimal capital investment. |
| 01:54:28.76 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 01:54:44.22 | Brandon Phipps | Option B is a long-term project spanning 10 years with mutual renewal options. This option requires coordination with Anchor QEA on design development, substantial capital investment, facility improvements, and a comprehensive business operation plan. This is for proposers ready to make a more significant commitment. Option C is a combined approach that incorporates both phases. A proposer could start with a pilot to prove their concept, then transition to long-term operations if the pilot is successful. And of course, that would be at the discretion of the city as related to the lease term. And those specific terms this provides risk mitigation for the proposer in the city. The proposer can test their business model before committing to major capital investment in the city can evaluate actual performance before entering into a lease. So this flexibility should ultimately provide for a broader range of proposers. Next slide, please. Okay, innovation and creativity. We've added significant scoring weight for innovation and creative approaches. Out of 35 total points for business concept strength, 12 points are now specifically allocated to innovation and creativity. An additional five points out of 15 for design and construction approach also focuses on innovative design solutions. So that's 17 total points out of a hundred dedicated specifically to innovation and creativity. What are we looking for? originality and Brown groundbreaking concepts that stand out in the marketplace, some creative approaches to waterfront activation that maximize public benefit and some innovative solutions to operator operational or environmental challenges, which certainly do apply to that area of the city. So this RFP now makes this emphasis crystal clear throughout the document in the vision and priority section in the scope of services section in the proposal requirements section and in the evaluation criteria section. Next slide, please. Okay, council decision making authority we added. A new section to the RFP section 11, which is titled city council authority and decision making. And, uh, that makes several things very clear. The evaluation committee scoring and staffs recommendation inform the council's decision, but do not bind it. Council has full and final authority to select both the project concept and the development partner. Council may also consider factors beyond the evaluation criteria in their ultimate decision making, um, if they fit with other initiatives such as housing element implementation, alignment with long-term waterfront planning goals, and community input received during the process. So council may also request additional information from proposers as part of this, direct staff to negotiate with a proposer other than the one recommended by staff, if they determine or reject all proposals. Of course, if none adequately meet council needs. Next slide, please. |
| 01:57:47.70 | Brandon Phipps | Okay, we've made some additional high-level key refinements. Um, You know, I'd like to To also talk about housing element accommodation before I discuss this. So we've added some new reservation of rights language into the RFP as well that explicitly reserve the city's right to make accommodations, modifications, or adjustments to the lease, facility, or site configuration that might be required to implement the city's housing element obligations. So this acknowledges the reality that we have identified housing element opportunity sites in proximate to Turney Street. While we don't anticipate conflicts, we do want to maintain that flexibility to fulfill our housing element obligations under state law. So the language provides that the city will give advance written notice to the selected party where feasible, and the selected party agrees to reasonably cooperate while minimizing disruption to ongoing business operations. This provision will be incorporated into any lease agreement as well, I would imagine, pursuant to the RFP. It's important to note that we're not saying housing development will definitely or surely impact the facility. We're simply preserving our options and being transparent with potential proposers about the consideration. And let's stay here. City Clerk, thank you. Beyond the five specific areas, we've made some other refinements. We've reorganized the scope of services so that you can see the option A through C reflected throughout We've adjusted the evaluation criteria to evaluate proposals fairly, regardless of which option is selected. We've updated the timeline and milestones to reflect the different pathways that might be followed, depending on which options a proposal selects. And we've enhanced several provisions related to environmental stewardship, public access commitments, community engagement requirements, and financial proposal requirements, all aligned with the different project options. Now, as part of this, I'll note, I am waiting on council direction on something that I'll talk about next. There is a timeline element to this that I'd appreciate some clarification from council on, on page 28 of the RFP timeline and milestones. We said initially we would release the RFP in January. Of course, we're in February. So some change, some council feedback on that would be appreciated. Next slide, please. Okay, I want to raise one additional consideration. It's not about council direction, but about the overall structure. So after consultation with city attorney and further analysis, I'd like to present council with a choice about how to structure the procurement. The current approach is a single RFP with three options. The advantages are maximum flexibility, the ability to submit combined pilot to permanent concepts, and a single procurement timeline. The disadvantages are complexity in evaluation. Since we'd be comparing proposals that may not be directly comparable, a pilot only proposal versus a long term proposal versus a combined approach. We also have for consideration an alternative approach. That would be to issue two separate RFPs, one for a short-term pilot and one for a long-term pilot. This could be done sequentially. Run the first pilot, learn from it, and then issue the long-term RFP. So the advantages are clear. with each procurement, the opportunity to test concepts through a pilot before committing to a long-term partnership could be positive, and simpler evaluation criteria could also help. So just wanna share that there are disadvantages too. two separate procurements, equal additional work, and potentially discourages an integrated pilot to permanent proposal. So this is a decision point where staff are specifically seeking counsel direction tonight. Next slide, please. Okay, next steps. So assuming we do get that direction this evening, we'll incorporate the additional direction into our RFP. We'll finalize the RFP. We'll coordinate with city attorney on the legal review to ensure everything's buttoned up. This includes a statement of exemption from the SLA. and a street vacation and will advertise and distribute the RFP. Well then of course manage the evaluation process and return to counsel with our recommendations. As I mentioned, We will be bringing forward documents to exempt the turn east street dock from the SLA surplus lands act and to vacate the right of way currently located in the dock area. Next slide, please. That does it. Thank you very much, counsel, for your time. I'm here to answer any questions. |
| 02:02:29.38 | Steven Woodside | I see a few hands coming forward. |
| 02:02:33.30 | Joan Cox | Yes. I thoroughly reviewed the version of your RFP that embodied both the short term and the long term, because I think that's the best approach. Um, I had a couple of questions and apologies for not getting these to you sooner. Um, It eliminates the pre-proposal meeting and site visit. I think a site visit and pre-proposal meeting are absolutely critical to the success of any RFP. So I was wondering why that was eliminated. |
| 02:03:07.33 | Brandon Phipps | Certainly yeah that was part of my my clarification of the process some of the additional augmentations that I had made to the proposal. My thought here was firstly there were some sparse mentions I had actually removed attempted to remove it from the first first draft but I think there was some echoes. So my thought was. Generally with required pre proposal meetings, you tend to limit your pool of applicants in the sense that certain applicants will not expend. Um, with uncertainty. cost in order to arrive at a proposal meeting. which ultimately they may not be selected for. So that was my thought there. Happy and open to council's input. |
| 02:03:50.30 | Joan Cox | You can do it by Zoom. So I frequently do pre-proposal meetings by Zoom. That way anybody anywhere in the country can participate. But I happen to know that some of the, potential proposers are local and would not be inconvenienced by a pre proposal meeting. So that would be my. I'll cover that in comments. Um, Under project components, it says that one of the bullet points is to support public access and maritime character. I believe that should be require. public access and maritime character because too many of our abilities to maximize public access are currently being thwarted. The Clipper public access has been cordoned off with a, bulldozer up there for a year. um, Another one of our public accesses is routinely cordoned off so that the public can't even access the public parking spots. I would really like to shift that. and there are several places in this RFP where, public access is referenced, so I would like to Is it okay with you to, is there a reason that you don't want to require that as opposed to um supporting it. |
| 02:05:14.57 | Brandon Phipps | Not at all, council member. I would say that if that is something that council feels strongly is a priority that ought to be integrated as a requirement, happy to support that. |
| 02:05:25.22 | Joan Cox | Under ongoing operations and maintenance, you deleted the adjective long-term viability why not require long-term viability together with financial sustainability? |
| 02:05:39.53 | Brandon Phipps | Yeah, for proposers that select option A, long term for them doesn't exist because their term would be one year. |
| 02:05:47.85 | Joan Cox | Okay, fair enough. For long-term projects, have you considered requiring any kind of bond or guarantee to assure that whoever builds this really will have the viability to operate and maintain it. |
| 02:06:03.76 | Brandon Phipps | I thank you for the question and I did consider that my thought was this is perhaps something that we can look into in more detail and integrate into a lease agreement or any future agreement I didn't want to chill or make any assumptions as related to future structure. |
| 02:06:23.50 | Joan Cox | regarding the housing element, you say the city will provide advanced written notice, but you don't say how much. So I think we should. um, would you do you think it would be helpful to say we'll give them 30 days or 60 days or whatever. Thank you. written notice if we're going to take away some aspect of our lease agreement in order to carry out our housing element. |
| 02:06:49.76 | Brandon Phipps | Absolutely. Something that we can also further define and put bookends on in any future lease agreement. I did want to allow city maximum flexibility on this. |
| 02:07:02.01 | Joan Cox | I still think it's only fair that we give them adequate notice. Would you agree? |
| 02:07:06.72 | Brandon Phipps | Yes, I think 60 days would be reasonable. Okay. |
| 02:07:09.02 | Joan Cox | Yeah. Under key milestones, you mentioned several times spot repairs if needed. Who are you anticipating would perform spot repairs? |
| 02:07:19.97 | Brandon Phipps | It would be, at least based on my understanding of the direction I've received on this RFP, it would be the responder or a party hired in collaboration with the responder or the selected party. |
| 02:07:31.44 | Joan Cox | I would suggest you... clarify that because when I was reading this because we're asking them to identify key milestones I was worried that you think the city is going to do some spot repairs of some sort. |
| 02:07:42.70 | Brandon Phipps | Oh, no. |
| 02:07:43.24 | Joan Cox | Okay. Um, I just wanted to point out on page 14 of the RFP, there's no number, the last bullet, there's no number for it. Lease renewal evaluation points. There's also a typo on page 17. It says fee suits instead of features. |
| 02:08:05.18 | Joan Cox | A couple of other things you deleted I wanted to inquire about. You deleted the requirement under business operations to – Thank you. hire and train staff. |
| 02:08:22.42 | Joan Cox | Is there a reason for deleting that? and also to implement the approved business concept. |
| 02:08:29.69 | Brandon Phipps | Yeah, thank you for that. So I think related to staff, I had made an assumption that, you know, by definition, companies train their staff. I didn't feel that it was necessary to state that. If you feel that's necessary, let's include it. |
| 02:08:44.33 | Joan Cox | Thank you. In my experience, when you include something that good companies routinely do, it's no big deal to them. but requiring it is a good way to weed out potential visionaries without substance. |
| 02:08:58.55 | Brandon Phipps | I believe I may have had a Maybe, what do we mean by staff? So city staff, perhaps? Maybe that was why as well. |
| 02:09:07.51 | Joan Cox | Okay. You also deleted participate in periodic meetings with city staff to review operations. Is there a reason you don't want to require that? |
| 02:09:19.44 | Brandon Phipps | This is, I don't want to, I don't want to commit ourselves to you. responsibilities that may be overly burdensome. I'd like for us to, again, build these kinds of you know, meetings, our obligations into a lease agreement where we can have a more detailed discussion based on the specific proposal selected. |
| 02:09:44.98 | Joan Cox | What if you just said participate in periodic meetings as requested by city staff? |
| 02:09:49.97 | Brandon Phipps | for me thank you councilmember |
| 02:09:52.18 | Joan Cox | And then you reduced the reporting requirement from quarterly to annual. Is there a reason for that? |
| 02:10:00.84 | Brandon Phipps | The thought there was If we're going to be looking at a 10 year project, 40 proposals seemed a little much, um, |
| 02:10:12.19 | Joan Cox | 40 reports. |
| 02:10:13.04 | Brandon Phipps | Yes, thank you for the clarification. And as for our one year, My thinking, I mean, I would be willing to, you know, amend that to require quarterly reports for the pilot operation. To me, that it just felt like a lot of reports in a very limited amount of time. And I'd like the operators to be focused on, you know, doing concept development with QEA or thinking about the future uses as opposed to worrying about reports before council. |
| 02:10:42.03 | Joan Cox | What if you were to require quarterly ports for the pilot and the first year or two of operations and then reduce it at the city's option to annual, assuming everything is... you know. performing as expected. |
| 02:10:56.49 | Brandon Phipps | if that's amenable to counsel. |
| 02:10:58.36 | Joan Cox | Okay, those were my questions. Thank you for indulging me. |
| 02:11:02.52 | Steven Woodside | other questions. Um, I'll take a couple, um, Many of the things that |
| 02:11:14.48 | Steven Woodside | mentioned, why did you exclude it? I was happy to see them excluded for the simple reason that this looks pretty complicated. And to the kind of folks who are out there ready to come forward, it may deter them asking for a lot of reports, for example, lots of detail up front, when It's also possible to have an RFP that is less specific. A lot is saved for a negotiation. once you see the big concept. So I'm a little troubled that in many respects, this looks complicated. So I don't wanna repeat going through all the details and ask all the questions. And I very much appreciate my colleague who does this for a living, wants to make sure whatever we have in the RFP is as perfect as possible. on the one hand, And I just worry that sometimes we make it very complicated. as lawyers, as government, et cetera. So that's more of a comment than a question, but it's a way of explaining why I'm not gonna go through Exactly as you did. Blind by the screen. |
| 02:12:30.13 | Joan Cox | I'll respond during our comments. Thank you. |
| 02:12:32.32 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. So, but I just, now there is a real question though, and it was raised by a very knowledgeable Local. Thank you. down at the waterfront today. having to do with access over the underlying ground, part of which is privately owned. by a neighbor. And the question is, well, you've got docs that would back right up to private property. And my recollection, and I'm not going to practice law here, but that Access on the water is a matter of right. on the water. In other words, the underlying owner of the Um, the underlying land below the surface can't... preclude someone from accessing a dock, a marina, et cetera, navigable waters of the United States and all of that. So without going into that, I think that could be an issue here that needs to be crystal clear before someone, before we accept a plan that where that question hasn't been answered. I think it's a legal question. I don't wanna put our city attorney on the spot, but I think, Before we settle on anything here, we need to make sure that's clear, that we're not interfering. I do appreciate very much your inclusion, and I think it was Member Hoffman who raised the question of possible interference with housing. That's at least addressed in the RFP. I don't know if it's adequate, but again, I don't wanna have to question each and every point that you went through, but I did see that. So I appreciate that. And I'm sorry if I've jumped ahead into comment, but I just hope that helps us move this forward one way or the other. Did you wanna add anything? |
| 02:14:09.09 | Joan Cox | I |
| 02:14:25.59 | Jill Hoffman | I have some questions. And I did thank you for including that in the language for the RP. I think that's what I think will be our agreement if we move forward. So I think that's super important. And you did spend some time with me going over where the Site 301 is, which is right up next to that and around and actually surrounding that whole area, which is very interesting. It comes right up next to the stock area and part of it's, owned by Mr. Ravazi, who's here tonight. So thank you for coming, Mr. Ravazi. And I assume you're going to come up to the podium here in a minute. Um, and I did full disclosure talk with Mr. Rovazi this week and so because his site is quite large and part of our housing element. And so thank you for that. And so I'm excited for this project. It's small, but it could be very, very interesting and revitalize that small little corner of that waterfront area that's been dilapidated for quite some time. It's complicated. by um, permitting and some challenging dredging that's going to need to be done to make those, those dock area, those finger docks accessible. Is there anything in here about the city's relationship and support for the permits that are going to be needed with BCDC and other state agencies for the dredging? |
| 02:16:11.18 | Brandon Phipps | Well, thank you for the question. We do require that the proposer receive and get the required permits. I don't recall to what extent I have colored language related to city support of permits. But that is something that I think would be reasonable to put into this RFP if it isn't there. And then as a key element, we do have the submitting party, selected party, collaborating with all additional jurisdictions that may have permitting authority in that area. So BCDC, for example, Coast Guard, that's built in. |
| 02:16:54.53 | Jill Hoffman | Since they, and this is, we, I haven't prepped this question. So, you know, you may not, this may not be a question that you can answer that may have to go through public works. But is it easier for the city to get permits? Because it's city-owned property, is it easier for the city to request the permits out of the agency as opposed to... a private entity that requests the permits |
| 02:17:23.40 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you for the question. I think in all worlds, it is easier for a city to get a permit from itself. Um, That being said, There are ways in which the city can collaborate closely and assist in streamlining an application that's submitted by a private party. We... attempt to do that in all cases. |
| 02:17:46.33 | Jill Hoffman | So since this is a public-private partnership, that may be something we want to look at for this project. |
| 02:17:52.24 | Steven Woodside | I'm wondering how we did it with the Sausalito Community Boating Center. because they had to get permits to build what they built and provide access. I know they got a permit. I know it took them a long time. |
| 02:18:04.24 | Brandon Phipps | Yeah, I believe that that was a separately submitted application, so submitted by the, not by the city. |
| 02:18:12.14 | Jill Hoffman | Not by this. Yeah. Okay. So just throwing that out there. Okay. Thank you. |
| 02:18:17.10 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? |
| 02:18:21.70 | Melissa Blaustein | I just had one. So I appreciate the suggestions of separating it into a more simple temporary RFP and then a more comprehensive RFP after the fact or that we could do concurrently. Um, but I guess what I am most concerned about is making sure that there aren't measures in the RFP that would discourage someone with an innovative business from approaching or at least submitting some sort of material. So do you think that given the temporary use that solves for that, someone could come to you with a pie in the sky, very cool idea, and it would find a place to be tried? Yeah. |
| 02:18:57.40 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you for the question. And yeah, totally appreciate the intent that, and I think just to clarify, Vice Mayor, that you're suggesting that, you know, in an ideal scenario, we will receive a singular proposal from one developer with two amazing ideas, one for a short-term pilot and one for a long-term pilot, right? |
| 02:19:16.61 | Alice Merrill | Sure. Ideally. |
| 02:19:17.42 | Brandon Phipps | So we don't want to, um, preclude ourselves or, or have developers filter into an easier category, if you will. So I think that that's, that's something that I, specifically like Council's direction on this evening. I can certainly see some some cases in which there might be some operational inefficiencies or challenges with a singular approach. For example, the transition construction. uh permitting from required to move from the pilot to the long-term phase. That being said, I think as discussed based on the questions, the good questions provided by Councilmember Cox that, you know, many of these things can be ultimately memorialized in the future agreement. So we need not too many bookends on ourselves now, because we can clarify those things in a future agreement once we've selected the party we wanna make that agreement with. |
| 02:20:16.93 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. |
| 02:20:17.40 | Brandon Phipps | So why not? There is a world in which we would keep that, you know, only provide a singular proposal with both options as our route |
| 02:20:27.98 | Melissa Blaustein | But so, I mean, I guess what I'm looking for is the most clear path for someone who wanted to create an idea that because there's quite a few requirements within the formal elongated RFP that might. scare off someone who had an unusual out of the box idea, for example. So, uh, you know, there's a significant number of proposer obligations, even just on page five of the red line with regards to what they're responsible for within the lines of this. And then a further emphasis on preserving maritime character when we don't necessarily have a clear definition of maritime character and, and also waterfront access. And are we requiring the pilot person to also provide for waterfront access and boat access? I just, it's not immediately clear to me if you have to meet every single checkbox in the larger RFP, if in a pilot, you wouldn't. |
| 02:21:21.81 | Brandon Phipps | Oh, so all appreciated. And I agree. This is a demanding RFP. which is one of the reasons why I've suggested council consider separating the RFPs. |
| 02:21:33.50 | Joan Cox | Right. |
| 02:21:33.83 | Brandon Phipps | Part of the substance that I've added into the draft based on the direction I received from counsel. So if we want to cut that back, you know, shave it back a little bit. I am very happy to do that. Yeah. |
| 02:21:48.25 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:21:48.35 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:21:48.52 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:21:48.68 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. |
| 02:21:49.03 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:21:52.69 | Ian Sobieski | I'll ask. Yeah, I guess I'll ask her. If we approve this tonight... would you be able to release it tonight and when would we get answers |
| 02:22:00.35 | Brandon Phipps | I would not be able to release it. Well, I suppose I could. If council really wanted me to do that, I could probably stay in city hall and make that happen. |
| 02:22:08.54 | Ian Sobieski | I mean, You know what I mean? Tomorrow, this one. Sorry, can we release it right away? And if so, how soon would we get responses? |
| 02:22:17.31 | Brandon Phipps | So I would give I think a month period of an RFP being open is reasonable. For an RFP of this type, if we keep it as is, 60 days could be considered reasonable. But if we want to get responses in a more efficient timeline, I'd suggest we stick to 30 days. So based on what I'm hearing from you, council member, is that The evaluation procedure on page 28 and the key milestones might have an advertisement of the RFP in early February, excuse me, and then we can move, you know, using that as a baseline to fill in all the other dates based on the difference that I had already built in to the initial draft timeline. |
| 02:23:06.18 | Ian Sobieski | Uh, I have a question for Katie. She's read my mind and stood up, uh, So the other team is working on Turning Street Dock. uh, you know, three designs. They're doing that right now. If we release this RFP and 30 days from now, there were a bunch of submissions. Some of that thinking creativity. might be of great value to the team that's currently thinking about Tourney Street, Doc. Are we out of step by 30 days or more? I mean, are they going to finish their work before they get to see these RFP responses? |
| 02:23:41.59 | Kevin McGowan | Anchor QEA is scoped to help us really till the end of 2026. So there will be significant overlap in time in the next month and two, they're really going to be diving into the existing conditions of the tourney street dock in the Humboldt bulkhead so I think the timing should align pretty well |
| 02:24:05.50 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:24:05.51 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 02:24:05.53 | Ian Sobieski | All right. |
| 02:24:05.68 | Kevin McGowan | pending no delays |
| 02:24:08.49 | Ian Sobieski | So there. I know you met with them this past week or week before, and they're gonna be thinking about their three concepts. Their current work over the next 30 days is gonna be about current site. Mostly their energy is going into current conditions, not ideating over, potential designs. So they would be able to benefit from this. these responses if they come in. |
| 02:24:32.99 | Kevin McGowan | Correct. Yeah. For the next month, it's mostly scheduled to be existing conditions. We're scheduling our first community listening session right now. TBD, but everybody hold your calendars for March 9th. That's when it's held on our calendars. And that will be our first community session where we can hear from the public about what's important for the Turning Street Dock, things that we should be thinking about, and then the team will go back to start thinking about the three concepts. |
| 02:25:05.52 | Ian Sobieski | thank you i had another question for Brandon, so I don't think you were here when we did this. We issued, not an RFP, but on RFI. for the Bank of America building. And we got a range of answers that was, it's kind of aligned with what Council Member Blasstein said. We got a range of answers that went from yoga studio, to building a, 20,000 square foot building over parking lot number two and increasing the height at the now SCA to three stories. We got the SCA proposal. We got a food market proposal and I think a proposal for housing. and probably a fifth one pretty wildly different ideas. Uh, And so aligning with what the mayor said and what councilmember glassine said and um engaging with with uh some of the other comments Is there a way of... you know, satisfying our municipal, esteemed municipal attorney's desire for, you know, asking for what we want. It's still leaving. an invitation open for Something, if I were just speaking as a human being out there to the world, I'd say, here's a photograph of what's there now. Here's what the city owns. How would you use it if you owned it that would be pretty amazing if you wanted to run a business here? And it's up to us to say, well, we don't like the ideas that don't provide public access or don't provide enough public access. But, how would we convey the concept of, you know, I bet, A lot of people have walked by that space and thought, you know, if I own this, I would. run a valet boat service like I saw in Catalina Island, or I would run a electric boat taxi business, or I would uh, provide a place for people to land like at Sam's. But those are all three wildly different ideas. One's more about launching, one's about landing and So, Do you feel like the RFP? does that. Do I feel the RFP? provides... an invitation to get a wide range of creative responses. |
| 02:27:21.97 | Brandon Phipps | I think that it does. However, I think it may also chill certain applicants from providing us with their ideas. So there are ways. What's the chill part? Well, it's the chilling part of it. Yeah, no, thank you for the question. I'm just going to speak candidly to this. So I used to write, I used to respond to RFPs. all the time in my time with Cosmo companies after a bit after I graduated from my undergraduate. At times, we would look at certain RFPs And throw them in the trash, because we knew that they weren't going to be conducive to an efficient, effective, profitable solicitation. So we could, and you judge that flavor by how the RFP is written. The more requirements, demands, obligations you put into the RFP, the more likely that's going to happen. the less you put in, the more creativity people have at their disposal to exercise. |
| 02:28:25.32 | Ian Sobieski | Okay, so you, of course, did your red lines, but if you... Did you feel fully liberated to delete as much of this RFP as you wanted, to have as much freedom, or were you holding back? |
| 02:28:39.45 | Brandon Phipps | No, thank you for the question. My rewrite was based on specific council direction. |
| 02:28:46.50 | Ian Sobieski | Got it. |
| 02:28:46.87 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. |
| 02:28:47.02 | Ian Sobieski | you So in your own, that was from the original, you presented, I'm sorry, my memory isn't so great tonight. You presented this before and got the direction from us and that's where you got that feedback from. |
| 02:28:57.74 | Brandon Phipps | Correct. And then even before that, some of the initial structure was based on discussions I had with you. and city manager. To be fair. Thanks a lot. Yeah. |
| 02:29:13.00 | Steven Woodside | You're saying you as in Mr. Sobieski. |
| 02:29:15.54 | Brandon Phipps | Council member said yes. |
| 02:29:17.64 | Steven Woodside | That's not a criticism, but I think we're ready for public comment. Sir, I don't have a card from you, but- I suspect you, oh, maybe I do. |
| 02:29:34.10 | Steven Woodside | Mr. Razavi. |
| 02:29:36.26 | Cameron Razavi | Good evening. Cameron Razavi with Bridgeway Marina Corp. We are the neighbors to this property. I'd like to start by expressing my gratitude to Council Member Hoffman for the very productive dialogue and meeting we had yesterday. So thank you again. And I'd like to also express very clearly my intent and willingness to accommodate and cooperate and certainly not impede any uh one from accessing these parcels even though it is these uh edgewater SLIPS are 100% landlocked or underwater landlocked by our parcels. and the parcel in question, our parcel, it is also in the housing element. if anything is actually developed on this housing element parcel, then it is physically landlocking access to edgewater slips. So in a, um, a realistic situation, we would be the most logical choice to take this over and develop it. However, frankly, it may be too ambitious for me. I don't have any creative out-of-the-box ideas, and that's just the way it is. I'm also 66 years old. I'm not sure if this is a project for us. However, one has to give, it's either our parcel with the housing element intent has to, the, Shall I continue? |
| 02:31:42.00 | Steven Woodside | You know, I think it's a good idea, and the reason is I don't see any others. Maybe there's some online. Oh, excuse me. |
| 02:31:52.95 | Steven Woodside | Okay. In your opinion, I agree with you, Alice. But I think it's important here because It's not a late hour and we want to get this right. Because I think the bottom line is, from my point of view, and I think we're all in agreement, What's there needs to be fixed. |
| 02:32:11.40 | Cameron Razavi | Absolutely. We had a proposal, Mayor Woodside, we had a proposal literally 17 years ago for when the issue first came up, we had Based on my recollection, we had the most, we were offering the most amount of rent at the time for the slips. And we were willing to, of course, fix them and develop them. But anyway, that was a long time ago. I just wanna express again my Thank you. intent to cooperate and make it work for everyone. But... The physical reality of the situation is that if we utilize our parcel for housing development, which we have had at least three in-person meetings with Brandon, Mr. Phipps, and Matthew at the planning department, in addition to a couple of Zoom meetings. We've spent a lot of money and time developing projects. plans for several different options, plans for developing the site for housing one plan calls for seven housing units and these numbers have changed based on directions from the planning department and one calls for I think 20 I think maybe as high as 29 housing units on our parcel now if we do build the 21 or 29 pardon pardon me, I forget, but if we do build those, then there's no physical access. It will certainly make things difficult for one or the other of the parcels. But, you know, I just found out about this yesterday. I want to again express my willingness and intent to cooperate and make it work. If you want us to, we would be happy to also give a proposal. Um, But we're open. You know, if somebody has a, our idea would not be creative or out of the box. Our idea would be, you know, but we do have some advantages. For example, if you're looking for transient, slips for visiting boats. Perhaps we can offer such services at the end of our docks and then utilize our docks to get access to shore. I mean, I think we do have advantages, substantial advantages over anybody else, just because we happen to be the neighbors. So it's something that I'm open to discuss and work with the city, with the planning department, with the council. Again, thanks to Councilmember Hoffman. We really had a very productive, we learned a lot from our one-hour discussion. Whatever the next step is, just want to assure you that we're here to cooperate and make it work, make it a win-win situation. |
| 02:35:54.82 | Steven Woodside | I very much appreciate that. So, Ms. Merrill, would you like to make your public comment? |
| 02:36:03.38 | Cameron Razavi | Thank you. |
| 02:36:09.37 | Alice Merrill | Mm-hmm. um, |
| 02:36:14.68 | Alice Merrill | I'm just going to say that I was never really thinking about that space as looking at it as a for-profit thing. It's very interesting that I hear... you know, these wild and crazy ideas that people are having. I just think it's a place to be able to pull up and... and get out, you know, off your dinghy or just, I don't know why it would be a for profit. It's just a tiny little city dock. But it is complicated. with the housing and with the ownership and it has tidy, tidy, close it is. Um, Maybe we've left it too long. And maybe it's too hard. But if not this, then maybe we can get a dock built at the other end. All right. |
| 02:37:01.07 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:37:01.12 | Walfred Solorzano | Right. |
| 02:37:01.36 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:37:01.38 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 02:37:01.39 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:37:01.44 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 02:37:03.20 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. Any other comments? |
| 02:37:06.51 | Walfred Solorzano | We have Babette McDougall online. |
| 02:37:14.51 | Babette McDougall | Thank you for acknowledging me. So I'm speaking once again as a resident because you're talking about what I look right down on. from my house. And that is an area at when it was, and Mr. Brissati and I actually spoke about this, uh, I think it was in 2023 when we met each other there at the council chambers. We had a chat. And we were speaking about how he came to own this particular piece of property. And in fact, it was supposed to be conveyed to the city of Sausalito. And he had a very colorful story to share. But now we're in the here and now. And you know, the truth of the matter is Sadly, this particular location, even though the city keeps making a great effort to recruit it for help. shall we say, getting the anchor out out of the middle of the bay and getting them tied up near to a shore. that sort of thing. I think that's all laudable. So, you know, I believe in a redemptive soul. And if it's possible that we can somehow transition that slumlord reputation that he's managed to collect, And that's a real, I was horrified to hear that from, your constituents and your colleagues name you that, sir. So it's not my invention at all. So it's not a nice thing to hear. So the shoreline is precious to all of us. And though it may rise and fall over time, and it must be engineered accordingly. And that's the bottom line for this shoreline too. This little stretch of shore is going to need some serious engineering before you think about 29 villas, or, you know, four huts, whatever you're thinking in terms of shore housing down there. God only knows. Just realize that as far as I'm concerned, you're talking about sacred property. And it requires a lot of science and engineering focus before we can get real about what's even probable for our future. Sure. I mean, we could make a lot of mess and a lot of stuff can just fall into the sea and more debris and more cleanup over time. We can do that. Thank you. |
| 02:39:19.21 | Steven Woodside | Any other comments? No further public comment. So bringing it back to the dais, let me take a shot at this. I thought originally what we were looking at is some small docks and we wanted them fixed. And we were open to some creativity, as I understood it at the time, possibly with some, hey, I'll come in, I'll fix your docks for you, if I can operate a water taxi, for example. |
| 02:39:49.76 | Joan Cox | The mayor is directing his comments to the assistant city manager who was talking to you instead of being able to listen to the mayor |
| 02:39:56.66 | Steven Woodside | Okay, I don't think I have to start over. The original intent I understood at the beginning is that we thought maybe people would perhaps come forward to fix those docks for us and, in exchange, be able to operate some sort of business. Not. a hotel. not something like that open, but basically water access. So maybe a water taxi. maybe have a, like the fjord or something like that in one location, if that works. And whatever we did, it had to be coordinated with the neighboring property owners, as it always should. I think always, and a portion of the property you own is floating. A portion of it is solid land, maybe not so solid unless we do something to um, adapt to sea level rise. So we've got a lot of issues to sort out in the vicinity, but I would hope that we can take the simpler course and open it as much as possible at this point, come forward with proposals that, in their essence, provide those type of docs for access in and out, essentially small vessels at that point. Now I'm encouraged by the possibility of end docks that could take motorized craft with deeper keels, et cetera, not just at your location, but elsewhere. I mean, we're really concerned about it. public access to the water and access from the water to our shores. which surprisingly, given all the restaurants we have, we have very little of that. So... I think that's where I'm coming from, and I think we're all in agreement on that. We don't wanna mess this up and make it so complicated. I commend my colleague for doing a great job to make sure we have a solid RFP |
| 02:41:53.38 | Joan Cox | COMMENT. |
| 02:41:58.65 | Steven Woodside | that really reflects an end game as opposed to what I think you're interested in, Mr. Sobieski, is, hey, tell us how you might do this so we get our docs, and what is it that you would do in order to help you pay for it? That's the idea, isn't it? |
| 02:42:15.18 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. I might just chime in. We got into this exercise because we're trying to be fair. Did I step on you, Joan? Go right ahead. You sure? Okay. |
| 02:42:26.03 | Joan Cox | I sort of wanted to explain why so that you could then respond. I will wait. Okay. Go right ahead. So – At some point, we can't let the better be the enemy of the good. And we started off, This was brought to us several months ago. We gave direction. The direction's been adopted. Now we're thinking of changing direction again. As you point out, Councilmember Sobieski, if we don't get this out the door and get proposals in, we're going to lose the window to collaborate with Anchor CEA in an effective manner. That being said, I am twice burned three times shy by our ventures on the waterfront and unfortunately Bridgeway Marina is an example of that. So we worked very hard in 2020 to negotiate a letter of intent with Bridgeway Marina that encompassed the repair of some really beaten up, worn down facilities. And. Um, That LOI was abandoned by Mr. Razavi and the repairs. We stayed enforcement efforts in order to enter into this letter of agreement of intent, and we promised. you know, essentially concierge planning services, to facilitate it, and it never came to fruition. It was never finalized. And so. I would be very reluctant. to encourage Mr. Razavi to propose for this project because he still hasn't carried out any of the promised repairs to his marina. One of our council members was a tenant there, It was. You know, there are electrical, it is our most unsafe marina, in my humble opinion. And I'm a big fan of Mr. Razavi, but I'm not a big fan of the manner in which this business has been operated historically. The other example is the Sausalito community boating center. It took 10 years. to actually, you know, we entered into an agreement with them, and it wasn't until we threatened to pull back the agreement that we actually got the voting center that we were promised. And so I am twice burned, three times shy. And that is why it's very important to me that while this RFP does emphasize creativity and ingenuity at our direction and the evaluation criteria absolutely underscore that, that we balance that with requiring demonstrated financial viability, through an appropriate pro forma together with an appropriate business plan. And so I don't mind shortening the description of that within the RFP, but I don't think we can simply encourage unfettered enthusiasm and creativity without the requisite wherewithal to carry it out. |
| 02:45:33.28 | Ian Sobieski | So, Wow. |
| 02:45:35.66 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:45:35.71 | Ian Sobieski | I'm not sure. Thank you. Thank you. Well, I, uh, uh, you're persuasive, Joan. I, um, My only thought is whether, because I'd love to get this RFP out tonight. And we're just wondering if we could apply your filter to our selection. I mean, you've articulated, I actually agree with it. In other words, the way I would say it is, let's be sure whoever we do a deal with can actually perform. And. even if we select them, we don't have to, just say yes, we get to negotiate. And so we could add bells and whistles around performance of whoever we select. So that'd be my proposals, just to try to get this out the door tonight so that we can get responses as soon as we can. Thank you. Thank you. I would love to make this better too, or better. You're exactly right. I can't let the perfect be the enemy good or the good be the enemy of good enough. And too many chefs can ruin the stew. I did have one question about the scope, though, because it just occurred to me. Is the scope of this project, Mr. Assistant City Director? just those dilapidated floating pairs or do we include an allowance for the proposer to say something about the ramp. for the current pier that's closer to the Salitos. |
| 02:46:47.70 | Brandon Phipps | I appreciate the question. No, this RFP does not contain that expanded opportunity. |
| 02:46:55.34 | Ian Sobieski | That was an omission on my part then. I would like to propose that we allow an ideation for those two things. Right now it's first come, first serve, tie off your dinghy and it's a bit of a mess. There's no incentive for anyone to help organize the boats down there, manage the chaos. You have boats blocking people trying to launch currently in the public boat ramp. The public boat ramp itself could be an interesting concierge business. There's nowhere to park, but if there was a place where someone could take your trailer and go park it somewhere, and let you vote for the day in Crab, and then get your trailer back. I could imagine that being a business. People who want to, just touch and go. So drop someone off and who could eat at Salido's or joinery or walk down Caledonia. might need to be managed. We've seen these in Catalina Island and elsewhere, these sorts of services. So I completely missed that we narrowed the scope to be only the dilapidated docks. That may be all we get as a proposal, but it could be a sweet cherry and an incentive to at least allow people to propose to run some kind of operation, preserving public access and the right to launch your boats and everything. but include that pier and the boat ramp as an, as an element of the ideation. |
| 02:48:14.66 | Steven Woodside | How about if Joan and Ian could, as an ad hoc group, bring something home? |
| 02:48:23.23 | Ian Sobieski | Within a week. this week. Bye, Friday. |
| 02:48:28.71 | Steven Woodside | And we do have a workshop meeting tentatively scheduled for the following week. I think it's appropriate. to, if we want, add one single item as a business item. |
| 02:48:43.58 | Jill Hoffman | And then, you know, Let me follow up on that. So let me just follow up on a couple of comments with regard to Bridgeway Marina and the concept of this project and my concerns on it. And I don't want to project anything that if Mr. Razavi wants to bid on this and he wants to do it in conjunction with his housing element project or that it would, it would complement the housing element project that we should automatically discount that. And yes, I'm glad that you signed. the Bridgeway Marina project LOI when I was deployed on military duty. But that was something that I had been working on for about five years with other city councilmen. So it didn't just happen in 2020. It was something that had been more, been, uh, been worked on before I was even elected in 2014. So. |
| 02:49:32.33 | Joan Cox | Absolutely true. |
| 02:49:33.21 | Jill Hoffman | It was like a 10 year project to get that LOI in place. And so that's why I circled back with Mr. Razavi about his the Site 301 Housing Element site, which is quite a large site. And his plans for that site and I was happy to know that he did have plans for the site, that he does have funding for the plans for his site through his private funding sources, and that He does have some quite interesting plans for that and in keeping with shoreline adaptation strategies along that site and that they would be, I believe, in keeping with Um, affordable sites. So they would meet our affordability, um, strategies. They would meet our. storyline adaptation strategies and and would fit nicely within the strategy that we presented to HCD. There are two, if not three, land side sites as well as water-based sites. Um, And So if we can fold all of those sites in And my concern, as I stated the first time this came up, was that I didn't want to lose that. water-based site that the city owns, or if we're talking about not fold that into Mr. Rosavi's overall plan, which was what we were offering with the Bridgeway Marina LOI. because that was part of the LOI. We were going to swap that for access in his site. If he comes forward with a plan that would fit into his housing element plan that would complement his housing element plan. That would, I think we should consider that. Or if he just wants to redo the docs. He has a business. And he, you know, bring it, I say, because I want to. do our housing element. My number one thing for this year is I want to support our housing element sites. I want those to move forward and I want affordable housing and I want that floating community down there as we, we promise in our housing plan. And that is a city asset, and that city asset should go towards supporting that plan in our housing elements. So that's my focus with this site. |
| 02:52:01.32 | Steven Woodside | So I'm going to suggest another, I'm sorry. |
| 02:52:04.76 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:52:04.80 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:52:04.97 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:52:05.59 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 02:52:06.55 | Melissa Blaustein | But you could go ahead. No, no, please go. |
| 02:52:07.41 | Steven Woodside | No, no, please go. |
| 02:52:08.46 | Melissa Blaustein | I don't know. I'll go after you. It's fine. Go ahead. |
| 02:52:11.21 | Steven Woodside | I didn't mean to leave you out. |
| 02:52:12.95 | Melissa Blaustein | I know. Don't worry. |
| 02:52:13.67 | Steven Woodside | Um, but I'm about to leave you out. of something. |
| 02:52:17.52 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm not. |
| 02:52:19.12 | Steven Woodside | I'm going to propose that Ms. Hoffman and I have a meeting with Mr. Ravasi. to look at this compatibility issue and then since I'm New to this, I have no history on your proposals. I'd be happy to learn more. about them and I'm on the housing committee and I think we're all committed to carrying out as much as we can the obligations we've entered into with hcd so i think it's worth another sit down at your convenience to go over that i i hear through the grapevine you're interested in floating homes perhaps additional slips out there repairs to what's currently there um having a percentage of housing on your slips that may be markedly more in terms of floating homes or floating vessels that have live aboard capacity. than perhaps other marinas are interested in. That's what I hear. And I think it's worth pursuing on a separate track. Not to interfere with this. I think this is a real priority for me personally to have those docks repaired. just for the simple purpose of access and how and what else goes along with it, I think, Hopefully the other ad hoc group can sort that out quickly, and then we'll have some good proposals. So having left you out, is there something you want to volunteer for? |
| 02:53:50.49 | Melissa Blaustein | I just don't, I don't think that we've addressed whether there's gonna be a separate I appreciate everything that we're saying for the, what we need to include and what we need to address, et cetera. But I still feel like it's a, a very strong, I don't know, burden to invitation for this level of detail in our RFP. And I'm, and I, and I don't see us moving forward with the recommendation from the assistant city manager to have a, to have a separate RFP. And I, I, I tend to advocate for that just because I would like to see what sort of creative opportunities might be available for us in order to experiment and iterate. And I. I know we haven't discussed that. So are we as everyone else on the dais really committed to one bigger RFP with two parks because I don't I personally am not but. |
| 02:54:40.22 | Steven Woodside | I'm not. I'm with you on that. And I'm just hoping that whatever you come back with. |
| 02:54:44.72 | Melissa Blaustein | Oh, |
| 02:54:47.45 | Steven Woodside | maximizes creativity within the basic scope of what we're hoping to achieve. |
| 02:54:53.18 | Melissa Blaustein | But that doesn't answer the question still of if it's going to be two RFPs or one RFP with two parts, because it's a very different thing. Jill was going to say, oh, sorry, go ahead. |
| 02:55:01.87 | Jill Hoffman | I always thought we were leaning toward a one-year RFP pilot and then another RFP. |
| 02:55:07.13 | Melissa Blaustein | you |
| 02:55:07.15 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 02:55:07.17 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, me too. |
| 02:55:07.77 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. That's what it is. |
| 02:55:08.38 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:55:08.43 | Joan Cox | . |
| 02:55:08.47 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 02:55:08.57 | Joan Cox | THE FAMILY. |
| 02:55:08.65 | Melissa Blaustein | it's like, |
| 02:55:09.00 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Thank you. I'm recommending one RFP with two options because that allows In other words, again, we're requiring as part of the RFP this coordination with anchor CEA. And so if we enter into a one-year pilot, And that one-year pilot doesn't turn into a long-term. great, we've had a one-year pilot that coordinates with Anchor CEA and any future Um, proposer loses that opportunity is usurped by the one-year pilot if there's a separate proposer who ends up with a long-term deal. So I really see this as ideally having the one-year pilot with the option to extend that as opposed to awarding two separate contracts to two separate proposers because then you lose the opportunity to collaborate with Anchor CEA. |
| 02:56:06.82 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, I think, Melissa, tell me if I'm wrong in thinking that what you're asking for actually can be baked in here because no one would propose a one-year pilot if they didn't have the ambition to do something longer. No one's. interested just in doing one year. They would do for themselves the one-year pilot to see if it worked. So what Council Member Cox is suggesting is that the options on both parties parts that there's phase one And the person that does the first year pilot, if we selected them, could say, hey, this is not working. I'm out. And then we'll pick up the ball. And conversely, we could say, we're not liking the way it's operating and you're out maybe. But so the pilots baked into this bigger proposal because anyone who does the pilot would presumably want to do it longer than one year. |
| 02:56:51.10 | Melissa Blaustein | Right, but my bigger concern is all of the comprehensive as written into this extensive RFP. So if we separate them out, it allows for more agility for the piloting process and then a longer term application application would come out of that. And that's my concern. I agree with that. So if you want to do that through editing of the RFP. I agree with that. |
| 02:57:04.94 | Joan Cox | to come. Yeah. |
| 02:57:11.15 | Melissa Blaustein | Right. |
| 02:57:11.36 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:57:11.38 | Melissa Blaustein | like. |
| 02:57:11.97 | Ian Sobieski | the pilot. |
| 02:57:12.46 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. |
| 02:57:12.85 | Ian Sobieski | And. to be determined and more robust negotiated for the bigger things potentially. |
| 02:57:18.30 | Melissa Blaustein | But why does it have to all be in one? I'm not understanding the excitement about having it be in one, because wouldn't you just then submit a proposal for continuation after the pilot year if you wanted to? |
| 02:57:28.97 | Joan Cox | Well, if you don't, so the government code 1090 has conflict of interest prohibitions. If you enter into a contract with one contractor... and you don't include in that original contract the ability to extend Now there's a conflict of interest potentially between the city and them if you go back out to RFP for a long-term proposal, they may be prohibited because of the relationship they've already cultivated from the city, with the city, from proposing for that longer term unless it's been baked into the initial contract. |
| 02:58:04.37 | Melissa Blaustein | But conversely, they may not want to apply for the long-term project if it doesn't work. And then we're in the same situation. Again. |
| 02:58:10.21 | Joan Cox | With one RFP, they have the option at the end of the one year. But then... |
| 02:58:15.27 | Melissa Blaustein | But then- |
| 02:58:16.35 | Joan Cox | Okay. If you go out for a separate RFP and you get someone who's only interested in one year, That, defeats the purpose of a longer term solution. |
| 02:58:28.15 | Melissa Blaustein | I just feel like there's a clear reason why staff recommended that we separate the two RFPs as it relates to responses and agility. And that's why I was in |
| 02:58:34.61 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:58:36.97 | Melissa Blaustein | in support of. |
| 02:58:37.16 | Joan Cox | Thank you. Let's hear from the assistant city manager why he thinks two RFPs is superior. |
| 02:58:38.14 | Melissa Blaustein | I'm the red. |
| 02:58:39.67 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. |
| 02:58:46.20 | Brandon Phipps | I'm not sure that I explicitly made that statement during my presentation. What I attempted to do was outline some of the benefits, positives and negatives associated with each approach. So I think that the vice mayor did describe some of the benefits associated with a separate RFP. And I'm happy to re-review or summarize some of the advantages and disadvantages of each approach if that's what council would like. |
| 02:59:16.49 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, maybe so. Sorry to make it so long, but I've kind of forgotten where we're at. the one RFP would be just an RFP for a one-year pilot. with a option to extend or would it just be a one-year pilot? |
| 02:59:28.24 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. |
| 02:59:28.25 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 02:59:28.85 | Brandon Phipps | So right now we have three options in the RFP. Option A. you may submit for a pilot only. Option B, you may submit for a long-term only. Option C, you may submit a combined approach. So one way of doing this, |
| 02:59:46.63 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 02:59:46.75 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. perhaps, is to eliminate option A and B, and to maintain only the combined approach, which would simplify, but also commit the city to a partner that can accomplish both short and long term. |
| 02:59:50.50 | Joan Cox | Yeah. |
| 03:00:01.30 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. |
| 03:00:01.31 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:00:01.35 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. |
| 03:00:01.42 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:00:01.50 | Brandon Phipps | Thank you. |
| 03:00:01.75 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, sure. I just, then I would ask the working group to take steps to encourage agility in the RFP so that it's not so. Thanks. I don't know. Thank you. constrictive for potential applicants. |
| 03:00:14.95 | Ian Sobieski | I'll lead you for moral support, I know you've got to be attention here. |
| 03:00:17.43 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. |
| 03:00:17.45 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:00:17.48 | Melissa Blaustein | I know. |
| 03:00:17.77 | Joan Cox | I'm not going to say you I take that direction seriously. So I'm prepared to cut, to slash, and burn while still maintaining procedural protection. |
| 03:00:27.57 | Steven Woodside | And I know that when we come to entering into a final agreement, Often there is a more or less conceptual proposal that comes forward, and then the heavy lift of making sure we're protected can take place as we negotiate a final deal. We're seeking proposals at this point. So I commend all of you for the discussion and staff because here we are trying to deal with something that in my mind was quite simple at the outset, and as usual, |
| 03:00:36.94 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:01:01.42 | Steven Woodside | raises a number of important questions that are legitimate and we want to be clear about what we're doing. |
| 03:01:09.84 | Ian Sobieski | will we work this week and then get you uh so we'll work this week and with joan and then it'll be on the next city council agenda presumably Oh, the special meeting could be on. |
| 03:01:20.31 | Steven Woodside | Yeah, for sure. could be on. |
| 03:01:21.27 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. Perfect. Excellent. Excellent. |
| 03:01:23.43 | Steven Woodside | And I'm recognizing you. I hope you're open to a further discussion with council members. |
| 03:01:23.44 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. |
| 03:01:30.35 | Cameron Razavi | Absolutely, Mayor Woodside, but I'd really like to address Councilmember Cox's mischaracterization and false comments. I mean, these comments are made in a public forum. They're just false. |
| 03:01:39.27 | Steven Woodside | No. |
| 03:01:39.69 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:01:41.65 | Steven Woodside | please not |
| 03:01:45.26 | Steven Woodside | I, I, I, |
| 03:01:50.26 | Steven Woodside | I hear what you're saying. I understand, but now is not the time. |
| 03:01:54.34 | Cameron Razavi | I would write a response to the comments tonight, and I would like them to be addressed during the next public forum. |
| 03:01:56.60 | Steven Woodside | A few. |
| 03:02:04.97 | Steven Woodside | Well, |
| 03:02:05.31 | Cameron Razavi | They're just simply false. |
| 03:02:07.44 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:02:07.47 | Cameron Razavi | Thank you. |
| 03:02:07.61 | Steven Woodside | Okay, I've heard your comments. We've heard your comments. They're on the record. You're free to communicate to us in writing, however you see fit. And we're going to leave it at that tonight. |
| 03:02:18.39 | Cameron Razavi | On numerous occasions, I've asked the council members to meet with me. And we've had subsequent meetings. And this issue has never... |
| 03:02:23.43 | Steven Woodside | Okay, word crack. Please. |
| 03:02:27.92 | Cameron Razavi | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:02:28.90 | Steven Woodside | But... |
| 03:02:28.95 | Cameron Razavi | I'm going to go. |
| 03:02:28.97 | Steven Woodside | up. |
| 03:02:29.05 | Cameron Razavi | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:02:31.06 | Steven Woodside | Sir, sir. Okay. I think we have given direction. We have two groups of two trying to solve some thorny problems. If you want to volunteer for a third group, No, we don't. I'm just teasing. |
| 03:02:50.52 | Melissa Blaustein | No, I'm okay on the groups. |
| 03:02:51.80 | Steven Woodside | groups. |
| 03:02:53.18 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:02:53.29 | Steven Woodside | I want to make one just observation about |
| 03:02:53.32 | Melissa Blaustein | I'll see you next time. |
| 03:02:56.78 | Steven Woodside | contrast that I personally was involved in, some of you are aware. um, We had dilapidated floating docks at the Army Corps of Engineers pier that were unsafe and we had two vessels. And we raised private money, we went to the Army Corps of Engineers and with one signature and one engineer's report, we were able to build to safe boarding docks. I'm not saying the federal government is the best place to go, but at the time, The person who was there said, I want to make this happen. And that was the key. And I think we're trying to do that. And Unfortunately for us, we are in both the city, BCDC jurisdiction, et cetera. When the Army Corps of Engineers on their federal land can say on one signature it's approved, It's quite a different operation. So I hope we can come as close as possible to simplicity in this when we get to the end game. Okay, so good luck too. Joan and Ian. We look forward to what you can come up with with help. Brandon, thank you for helping us understand the nuances here. So anything further on this topic? Okay, good. That includes our business items. We now have a time for council member reports and so forth, including future agenda items. And what we do is we'll go through items 6A, B, C, and D, which are other reports, and then at the end, if there's any public comments, we will hear at that point. So any council member reports? Yes. |
| 03:04:54.09 | Melissa Blaustein | I have a couple. Thank you. |
| 03:04:54.97 | Steven Woodside | Sure. |
| 03:04:55.29 | Melissa Blaustein | So the MLK slash corporation yard public housing to public land to private Public land to housing working group met a few times last week, myself and Councilmember Cox, and then the larger group on that following Friday. We now have a draft joint RFP, which is in process, but is available online. So any member of the public that would like to take a look at the draft RFP, there is now an information page. for the working group where that working draft is shared. And importantly, we also have dates for our two community led Um, conversations, we still need a location for the second, for the first one. But mark your calendars, please. The first will be on Sunday, February 22nd, and the second will be on March 8th. And the goal is that we will have the RFP agendized on the second meeting in March, 17th of March, in order to meet our requirements from HCD. So those are on track and moving along. And thank you to all of the working group members. I think it's been really productive conversation so far. I also had a meeting with the transportation authority of Marin last week. Notably, the carpool hours were adjusted to be shorter because there was a lot of pushback about the length of the carpool hours, though it's still going on both lanes. And now it's from, I believe, 6 to 930 instead of 6 to 11. And we also had a conversation about the Measure AA dollars and the new, and just notably the comment period on the Measure AA dollars and what our plan is for the Measure AA dollars is open for the next, the 45-day comment period began on January 21st. So if we wanted to submit any feedback about how we'd like to see the Measure AA dollars spent or agenda as a conversation, We should consider doing that in the next 30 days or so, even if it's just a conversation and consent item with Kevin to make sure that we do weigh in. And that's it. |
| 03:06:49.23 | Steven Woodside | Do you think we should weigh in? |
| 03:06:51.80 | Melissa Blaustein | I don't think there's any harm in weighing in on how the measure a dollars are applied since we, for example, some of our projects here in South Lido have been funded via the measure a dollars. I'm going to go. |
| 03:07:02.77 | Joan Cox | I'll just add March 8th is at the Spinnaker. |
| 03:07:05.80 | Melissa Blaustein | Yes, March 8th is at the Spinnaker. and Amy. Howworth has said yes to facilitating those workshops for us. So those should be very productive. |
| 03:07:16.70 | Joan Cox | Wonderful. I'll report, I attended the MCC MC Marin mayors and council members committee last Wednesday and. Um, It was determined that both at that meeting, on advice of the county council, MCCMC and the MCCMC Legislative Committee are Brown Act committees that must, a quorum of which must meet in person in one location with provision for additional members to appear by Zoom if feasible. And so, Thank you. Neither of those committees will meet via Zoom. any longer. although hopefully Zoom participation may be available in some forum. um, Because they were planning to meet via Zoom in February and were left in the lurch, Sausalito volunteered to host them here on February 25th at the Spinnaker at 5.30 p.m. Damon Connolly will be a guest speaker at that meeting. And so to the extent you all and the city manager are able to attend, I encourage you to do so. That's it. Thank you. |
| 03:08:35.83 | Steven Woodside | Other reports at this time? Yes, Ms. Hoffman. |
| 03:08:40.19 | Jill Hoffman | We had our first meeting of the Economic Development Advisory Committee yesterday. It was a great meeting. And thank you to Alex for calling in. He's one of our members. And he talked about Alex called in, and I was meaning to bring that up. perhaps, uh, about maybe a future agenda item that we might want to talk about, which is county permits and things that we can do as a city to maybe streamline the ability of Sausalito businesses to get county permits. It's been a big problem with restaurants here in Sausalito. And I thank you to our city manager and our mayor today for talking directly to our county representatives about the ability to get county permits. Several of our restaurants have had problems, yeah, getting county permits, but it's not unique to Sausalito. As I understand it, it's a county-wide problem, and I see our CDD director over there nodding. So that might be a... uh something we discussed yesterday at edac but also um something a future denying but um also um something for uh our annual report from edac a request to put that on as a special presentation for city council in the next month or so the just the usual quick report um As we say in quotes 10 minute. A lot of good stuff coming from EDAC right now. And then I think the mayor's got a couple of reports on some other, our other effort, our task force, our landslide hillside task force. I think you're going to get that update. |
| 03:10:23.53 | Steven Woodside | two updates just to follow up on what you just said about, um, contact with county officials. Stephanie Molten Peters, our supervisor who represents the South Marin. She really convened a meeting of the mayors of Tiburon, Belvedere, Mill Valley, and Sausalito. And we focused on a number of issues, including that very issue. And she seemed quite receptive. She seemed aware of the problem. She's heard from others. not just us, but our city manager followed through immediately and has reached out to the county, is the title now county executive? to try to sort that out. And there are a number of ideas about how to make it cleaner going forward. Sadly, a number of institutions in our own community have had to wait And as it was described by the mayor of Mill Valley, who used to be on their planning commission, he described the process as sequential. You finish with the city, and then they refer you to health. And then, because of something health does, it comes back to the city, and you get ping pong back and forth. And there's gotta be a way to figure that out. So that's good. The other thing is I probably need to not reconvene but actually establish a successor to the landslide task force. Supervisor Hoffman and I having served on it will proceed. There are a couple of people in the community Bye. Pardon? |
| 03:11:55.36 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:11:55.41 | Alexander Wojcalling | They're super-supers. |
| 03:11:55.97 | Joan Cox | Thank you. You promoted her to supervisor. |
| 03:11:59.82 | Alexander Wojcalling | Thank you. |
| 03:11:59.85 | Steven Woodside | I can't. I've had too much habitually referring to supervisors, so That's the first slip tonight. Okay. Um, Council member Hoffman, are you running for supervisor? No, never mind. OK. It was apparent to me that looking back at history, that group, small and as an ad hoc group, was able to bring forward a lot of things in a quick period of time. We have as a priority to implement further some of their recommendations if we can. So what we want to do is assemble, again, find a good engineer. We think we one, and bring a couple other people to the fore and try to produce a report that we can bring back to all of you on next steps. Many of them were outlined in the original report, and I think the council has, more or less accepted that report over the years as a good direction or a good goal. some steps remain to be at least considered. So we'll be working on that. |
| 03:13:10.83 | Joan Cox | I had one more. |
| 03:13:11.74 | Steven Woodside | Sure. |
| 03:13:12.51 | Joan Cox | I also attended the Southern Marin Fire Board of Directors meeting last week as the newly appointed liaison to Southern Marin Fire. introduced myself to the board, was very warmly received, spoken to directly during their meeting by their building committee. And my understanding of their current plan is to fully mobilize the Spencer Fire Station during the severe high fire hazard time of year. with a 24-7 crew. And to also move a truck from Station 4 to Station 2 during that time frame. So that's not inked yet, but that's the vision that was discussed and that I wholly endorse. So I will continue to attend those meetings. I am also meeting with individual board members, including, and also the fire chief, to, really understand and ink and cement that plan. |
| 03:14:21.08 | Ian Sobieski | Sure. |
| 03:14:22.78 | Jill Hoffman | in the state. This goes to some of the public comment that we received today on the point Sausalito project. Um, wanted to address it. Wondering how as a future agenda item and the permitting issues that they raised and the frustrations that they've raised. Um, through our, just trying to look to me like from the letters and especially the letter that we got from their homeowners association president, which was pretty specific. And I wrote down her name. I think it was. Thank you. I can't remember. It was Lori Sharp. Lori Sharp is the name. |
| 03:15:04.46 | Steven Woodside | Ms. Ellis was the one who spoke to us tonight. |
| 03:15:06.66 | Jill Hoffman | She spoke to us, but Lori Sharp gave her letter was the most specific to me. And I'm wondering if We want to look at our permitting process or look at some of the failures that we just talked about with the county, kind of the round robin that was going on, like this is the third I'm hearing this consistently from residents about the round robin of permitting and And I don't want to in any way criticize our staff. And that's not what I'm meaning to do, but, um, I'm wondering if we need to look at the system or process in our in how we're using consultants maybe and how we can help streamline and improve the excellence that we talked about on Saturday and support that. within our department, our building department. |
| 03:16:01.99 | Steven Woodside | I know there have been some personnel additions, most welcome of late. And maybe the best thing is to refer this to staff with a view that we come back with a status report on Permitting generally what we've done to reform, if you will, staff changes. Sure. |
| 03:16:21.48 | Jill Hoffman | There may be suggestions for... um, I mean, listen. |
| 03:16:24.77 | Ian Sobieski | I mean, it was a private request I made, but I don't know why it couldn't be a public. piece of work, Jill, if it was you know, in medicine, if you mess when it was a, complaint or in that case, a mistake, they do post-mortem, right? What went wrong? So we got Ed Fotch's nice letter about alerting us to an issue. There's this complaint. as we know from experience, sometimes it's, you know, it's just one side of the story, but, it's pretty consistent that we're getting this kind of feedback. We see from the pothole that was fixed in 24 hours, that with the right piece of technology change, sometimes it can really change. So I think our very experienced director of CDD, might have some insights for us if we dug into a few case studies. And like, what went wrong? Where did this go sideways? Is it the code being ambiguous requiring a bunch of judgment? unfriendly letters is it complicated forms is it the fact that we're emailing instead of picking up the phone and calling like I don't know that At one level, this is a city council matter because it could just be an administrative one, but if it runs into something we've done like rules or policies and whatnot, or budgetary choices, then there would be a recommendation. So I guess the. The future agenda item would be asking our, an audit in the sense of CDD to audit their procedures the rules they have to operate under and make recommendations to us about more headcount or rule changes to achieve certain permit. outcome and the potential consequences of that. Maybe it would lead to more complaints from neighbors who suddenly find their neighbor gets a permitted deck. removal or whatever, right? We can. |
| 03:18:09.04 | Steven Woodside | We've seen case studies of our own when we hear appeals on occasion. We do know that we get reports from departments on progress they've made over the last year. I think we've seen some statistics about the time from application to approval. So there's some data out there that can be mined and reviewed. And I think it's a good idea because when we hear these complaints, it's very hard for any one of us to try to respond. |
| 03:18:34.84 | Ian Sobieski | Just a little story. Brandon took it upon himself. Do any of you get the HDL letter? Because I'm a lady. Endlord, I get the HDL letter. And the HDL letter used to say, Here's your bill. You know, if you don't pay it within 10 days, you're going to get this fine. And Brandon took it upon himself to write a paragraph that said something like, I'm paraphrasing here, Thank you for operating a business in the city of Sausalito. Your taxes help pay for the police. and the Department of Public Works and keep our sidewalks and city streets safe. we've done your tax assessment here, and then it goes on, right? I mean, that one paragraph makes a world of difference. And I'm wondering to what extent we accidentally and unintentionally have stifled that kind of engagement with are permitting applicants in our process. |
| 03:19:22.06 | Joan Cox | So the city manager related another example to me this week of another unhappy... resident where, you know, there was much ado made when a simple approach could. be implemented. um, I think the postmortem or the best practices moving forward would include the ability of management. to take a big picture view and see what is the best solution. Is it making them go through a variance plus an encroachment permit plus a building permit plus, you know, or could we simply do this for a resident who's lived here for 50 years, whose project has already been approved twice in the past, rather than making them jump through hoops when it comes back for the for a third time in 50 years, things of that nature where there's some ability to exercise some common sense rather than, being so rule driven. Now, rules protect us, as I said earlier, but there has to be some ability to use some judgment. I mentioned a couple of weeks ago, permit SF as an example of a streamlining approach to certain types of permits, rather than forcing 50-year resident to jump through a bunch of hoops that they don't even fully understand so I think there is an opportunity for some ideas from our very experienced and creative assistant city manager. |
| 03:21:01.62 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. And even though this wasn't listed as one of our goals at our last meeting, this may be something we want to visit. when we meet next in the workshop, and I'll just say, From my point of view, there may be some institutional things that we can do in terms of our procedures and I have a certain pet peeve, I spoke to the mayor of Mill Valley They have, and he served on both the planning commission. And he said in the last year, they had one appeal. One appeal from a Planning Commission decision, one. Thank you. |
| 03:21:42.76 | Ian Sobieski | Wow. |
| 03:21:43.49 | Steven Woodside | Now there's a lot of reasons for that that may be unique to Mill Valley, but it's worth our time because every time there's an appeal that takes staff time. And it takes staff time away from doing that direct interface with another applicant to get their project moving, etc. So I encourage us all to think a little bit out of the box there too as we move forward so. That's my two cents on that topic now, but we're going to deal with it. I assume. this year. Oh, yeah, that's what we're talking about. And we're all in agreement that we want to take a good look at this. Okay. |
| 03:22:22.49 | Joan Cox | I'm not sure. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:22:23.67 | Steven Woodside | Nice. |
| 03:22:23.91 | Joan Cox | you |
| 03:22:23.97 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:22:24.01 | Joan Cox | you |
| 03:22:24.09 | Steven Woodside | here. |
| 03:22:24.53 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:22:25.07 | Steven Woodside | that |
| 03:22:28.07 | Joan Cox | So that was all under council member committee reports. |
| 03:22:30.86 | Steven Woodside | and future agenda items. |
| 03:22:32.58 | Joan Cox | Well, so can I just recount the four future |
| 03:22:35.03 | Melissa Blaustein | into items. Sure. One last thing to add. Sure. We did an items. |
| 03:22:35.99 | Steven Woodside | Sure. |
| 03:22:36.39 | Joan Cox | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:22:37.54 | Steven Woodside | Sure. |
| 03:22:37.81 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:22:38.70 | Melissa Blaustein | I heard from Mark Palmer, who joined us at the planning workshop, who requested that we begin to interview for alternates for the sustainability commission because his term and another's term is coming to an end soon. So just thinking about when we might do interviews again for commission posts where they're expiring. |
| 03:22:54.65 | Steven Woodside | Okay. |
| 03:22:55.12 | Melissa Blaustein | I leave that to the agenda setting committee. |
| 03:22:56.96 | Joan Cox | who schedules the... |
| 03:22:57.50 | Melissa Blaustein | it. |
| 03:22:58.99 | Joan Cox | uh, interviews for boards and commissions. Good. My four future agenda items that I recorded from everything people said tonight is HDL, Report. the county permitting process. EDAC. report and direction. and the ideas for streamlining our permitting process or best practices for our permitting process. |
| 03:23:26.70 | Steven Woodside | OK. |
| 03:23:27.24 | Joan Cox | anything. |
| 03:23:27.71 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:23:27.76 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:23:27.78 | Steven Woodside | More on future agenda items. Minutes. I didn't see any. Did anyone? And then public comment. I see none in the room. See none. Good. That's good. And there's 6F appointments, I think, by title only. City manager as Sausalito Zero Rest Waste Marin Joint Powers Authority. and our resiliency and sustainability manager as the alternative. Board member. alternate board member. Yes. Great. Okay, so that's done. We can now adjourn. |
| 03:24:05.44 | Ian Sobieski | Great. |
| 03:24:10.83 | Ian Sobieski | In honor of. |
| 03:24:11.80 | Steven Woodside | And I'm sorry, I meant to call on you, Ian. if you would be so kind. |
| 03:24:16.33 | Ian Sobieski | No. So, Well, I will just repeat what I said on Saturday, the sad news of the passing of Annette Rose, who used to sit at this dais as the former mayor of Sausalito and member of the Sausalito City Council. known intimately by many members in the community much better than me. I had the great honor of becoming her friend over the last several years. And she was here in December of 2024 to square me in. And back in the old chambers, she also served as a supervisor, which is how you knew her so well. And I'm sure you have your own stories as so many in town do. I understand that the Marin IJ is doing a piece on her and so is the SF Chronicle. And in fact, both papers are looking for photographs. So if people have photographs of Annette Rose they want to submit, try to find the, right person at the Chronicle or the IJ. |
| 03:25:05.99 | Steven Woodside | And I think there's a certain reporter in the room who would appreciate if any of us wish to relate further some of our wonderful experiences with Annette Rose. You'd be happy to hear. So she was a very special person. And, uh... What will we miss? I'm not sure. |
| 03:25:26.90 | Joan Cox | And so we're adjourning the meeting in her honor. Yes. And then the city clerk will prepare a certificate that we can send to her family, letting them know. |
| 03:25:29.41 | Steven Woodside | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:25:37.76 | Joan Cox | Right. |
| 03:25:37.85 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:25:37.88 | Joan Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:25:38.90 | Steven Woodside | Thank you. |