| Time | Speaker | Text |
|---|---|---|
| 00:00:00.67 | Melissa Woodside | We didn't want you to miss anything. Okay, we're back now in open session, ready to begin our regular meeting of the city council. Let's begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. |
| 00:00:17.14 | Walfred Solorzano | I will lead you to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. |
| 00:00:22.04 | Melissa Woodside | I did. |
| 00:00:24.62 | Samantha Schubert | Thank you. |
| 00:00:34.09 | Melissa Woodside | Having just celebrated Flag Day on Sunday, that was a robust pledge. Thank you, Melissa. So let's take the roll call, please, Madam Clerk. |
| 00:00:46.84 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Cox? Here. Councilmember Hoffman? Here. Councilmember Sobieski? Here. Vice Mayor Blaustein? Here. Mayor Woodside? |
| 00:00:55.04 | Melissa Woodside | here. Thank you. We just returned from our closed session. We considered the items that were posted on the agenda. There is no action taken to report out at this time. So now let's turn to the agenda for a moment and ask if there are any Additions, substitutions, or suggestions regarding the agenda. |
| 00:01:16.31 | Melissa Blaustein | I would request that given the amount of correspondence we received on item 5F, 7F? The business item on the aim initiative that we move that up to after the budget |
| 00:01:28.02 | Melissa Woodside | 5F. |
| 00:01:28.86 | Melissa Blaustein | 5F up and hear it as 5F. D or five. I'm getting the numbers wrong, but after we hear the budget item, um, so that we have. |
| 00:01:34.26 | Melissa Woodside | D. |
| 00:01:38.39 | Melissa Blaustein | ample time and folks who are waiting to give comment. Don't have to wait until 9pm. Thank you. |
| 00:01:44.39 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. Potentially. So, |
| 00:01:44.57 | Melissa Blaustein | potentially. |
| 00:01:45.64 | Melissa Woodside | So so it's clear to the audience, um, What this means is that we will deal, if this is approved by everyone, we will take up the three budget items, 5A, B, and C, as regular items. and then go directly to the initiative matter. And that would become the new 5D. It's hard to predict exactly when that would happen, but you wouldn't have to wait until the very end of the meeting. Maybe if I could just have a quick show of hands of how many people are intending to speak on matters not on the agenda. Seeing none. And anyone online, we can't tell what they would be speaking to. Okay. And then, um, a show of hands of how many people would want to speak to now 5D, that is the initiative matter. Okay. Okay. Okay, but that may change as people come in. Okay, so unless there's objection, we will make that change to the agenda. Mr. Interim City Manager, you may have another thought for us as to one item. |
| 00:02:58.59 | Chris Zapata | Yes, thank you, Mayor, for the opportunity. I'll just go right to it. I'm recommending the removal of item 3G on the consent calendar. This is the proposed first amendment to the contract with CSWST2, and the amount of $45,000 for additional design coordination on parking lot one reconstruction project. Since the preparation of the staff report, the consultants agreed to continue their work on the project, including coordination with SWA on the development of downtown conceptual plans at no additional cost to the city. So as a result, the proposed amendment is no longer necessary, and the item I'm happy to report is effectively moot. |
| 00:03:38.29 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you very much. That's no additional cost. I heard that correctly. Okay, correct, Mayor. |
| 00:03:43.54 | Councilmember Cox | Can we please extend a special thank you to Director McGowan? That was really his accomplishment a couple of days ago. So thank you, Director McGowan. |
| 00:03:52.30 | Melissa Woodside | I don't see him in the room today, but we'll pass that along. |
| 00:03:55.00 | Councilmember Cox | The interim city manager. |
| 00:03:56.43 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Thank you. Okay, so... Do I have a motion to approve the agenda as modified? So moved. |
| 00:04:06.61 | Melissa Blaustein | Second. |
| 00:04:07.18 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, we can do this by a voice vote. All in favor? |
| 00:04:10.54 | Melissa Blaustein | I. |
| 00:04:10.94 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. |
| 00:04:11.27 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, that's unanimous. So now we move on to special presentations. And just as a reminder to people, special presentations are indeed special presentations. They're not intended to be discussed in detail. No action is expected to be taken as a result, but we do schedule these from time to time to hear reports from the community, our community partners, et cetera. So tonight, we have a special presentation from the Sausalito Center for the Arts. If you would please come to the dais and identify yourselves. We look forward to hearing your presentation. |
| 00:04:49.96 | Unknown (SCA presenter) | and both sides where the supervisor is the city council. Sorry, I'm not in the San Francisco. City council members. |
| 00:05:01.45 | Unknown (SCA presenter) | Oh, it was an hour. Okay, we'll start over again. And the Audience. I'm here to talk about our progress with Sausalir Center for the Arts, and I'm here to give you an impact report. Since launch, we consider February of 2020, the start of Sausalir Center for the Arts. We've had over 100,000 visitors at Sausalir Center for the Arts. Next slide, please. we've hosted over 2,000 visitors at Sausalir Center for the Arts. Next slide, please. We've hosted over 2,000 artists. We've had over 150 exhibitions. 30 full month exhibitions, meaning that 150 exhibits or events, 30 of them are full on exhibitions that are month long. And they've had 12,000 event RSVPs. So the little art center that could is becoming regional, or it's already regional, you'll see in the next slide. So we've taken 1,500 of our RSVPs and we've sort of dissected the RSVPs and we see that one third of the people who come to SCA come from Marin County, two third come from the rest of the counties in the Bay Area, the rest of the eight Bay Area counties. So people come from everywhere in the Bay Area to attend our events. Next slide, please. SCA is drawing visitors from everywhere to downtown Sausalito. Next slide, please. We started doing a parking study. We wanted to know the economic impact of SCA, you know, to the city of Sausalito. So we now have about 600 of these studies. This, What you're seeing here is about 275. We haven't yet updated these slides because we just finished the results of the 600. But the results haven't changed that much. I need to move this down a little bit. What it shows is that when we asked, was SCA the main reason you came to Sausalito today? 9% of the respondents answered yes. The reason they were in Sausalito and they walked through SCA was just to come to SCA. And then we asked it, the next question was, how did you get to SCA today? 96% of the respondents said that they got to SCA by car. That's the next slide. Yeah, so 96% of the respondents drove to SCA. So let's go to the next slide. So we asked them, did they park? And 96.1% of the people use metered parkings or street parkings. Next slide, please. And then we asked them how long were they gonna be parking? And then, and two to four hours, 49% of the people who responded parked for two to four hours, and then 19% parked more than four hours. So these are Really great results. Next slide, please. And then we wanted to know if people come to SCA, if they spend money with businesses, you know, in Sausalito. And this was important because I know that, you know, parking is what delivers, you know, money to the city of Sausalito. But we wanted to know if most of the businesses in the city benefit from the activities at SCA. And so when we asked, did you plan to visit Sausalito restaurants or shops, 75% of the respondents said yes. So next slide, please. And then we asked them how much are they planning to spend at the rest of the businesses? And 32% were going to spend $30 to $60 or $15 to $30. No, actually, I'm sorry. My slides are black and white, so I can't see. 32% of the people were going to spend 30 to $60, and then another 22% were going to spend $15 to $30, and then $60 plus, 36%. So people spend a lot of money as a result of their trip to SCBA. Okay, next slide, please. So... We know that the building belongs to the city, but we've invested a lot in the building. We've remodeled, we've painted, we've replaced the carpets, we've repaired plumbing, electrical, security system, we've put fire alarm, we've done stuff to make the SCA a gallery. We've put a signage outside, display equipment, tables, chairs, added AV equipment, lighting, our walls are movable. And just last year, our founder, Monica Finnegan, worked on a donation and we put in a pantry, which is worth $40,000, but it was all on donation. Next slide, please. So, We are evolving within the walls of a former bank. We are attracting so much interest. SCA is growing and reaching art and culture lovers. all over the Bay Area. and how is through the events and exhibitions and, all of our activities. Next slide please. So these are some of the pictures of the events that we have our art openings at tracks somewhere close to four to 500 people. This is once a month where we have the art openings and so many people pour into SCA as a result of the art openings. Our or nightly event, after-fight events are usually sold out. So a ton of people come to SCA. or nightly event, after-flight events are usually sold out. So a ton of people come to SCA as the results are events and exhibitions. Next slide, please. So some of our signature events are Paint Sausalito. It's an annual event. Painters come to the city of Sausalito. These are plein air painters. They fan all over Sausalito. They paint for three days, and they paint scenes of Sausalito. The next one is Standing in the Dust. In 2014, in 2024, we had a photojournalist, a Persian photojournalist who came with a New York Times and a Washington Post journalist. It was totally a big deal. There were articles about her in New York Times, in Washington Post, in San Jose Mercury News, in all the local newspapers wrote about, and it was really a moving exhibition. We've had all kinds of other events, classical music. You can see Daniel Adam Maltz. He's been to SCA twice. He's coming back. He's always a sold-out event. We've had the Eco Evolution. We've had all kinds of different, the eco-evolution. We've had all kinds of different kinds of exhibitions that you can't catch in other, you know, arts galleries or arts centers. Next slide, please. So one of our strategies is to partner with other organizations, other nonprofit organizations around the Bay Area. This is a fabulous strategy for us because by doing this, we bring the members of those organizations with us. For example, we partner with San Francisco Open Studios. They have 800 artists, ICB Artists Association, you know them. Marine Open Studios. ACGA, this is important because they're a Palo Alto organization. They have over 500 members. They're a 50-year-old organization. So they came to SCA. You know, all kinds of local organizations. Currently, National Sculpture Society is in our space, they're in New York Society, the Western Division is there, so all kinds of organizations and we strategize and we partner with them and we bring them as a group with their members. Next slide, please. Open Inquiry is one of the exhibitions that we had this year. We partnered with UC Berkeley, UCLA, and UC Davis, and we showed the work of 20 artists or alumnis from each school. This was widely successful. You had to see our opening reception. We had to close down the RSVV after 500, and we had several events, and the UC Regents came, all kinds of people, you know, alumni, students, they, it was rocking. next slide. Sassanier Center for the Arts Open was a very successful exhibition. Last year was the first time that we dared to do this exhibition, and I say that because it was modeled after the young exhibition, and one of the young curators actually helped us pull this together. It was really successful because 1,482 pieces of art was submitted, close to 700 artists applied to be accepted. The show was really big and it was just really a fantastic event. We're doing it again this year and this year we have a curator from SFMOMA. Chester Arnold is another curator of the show, and a very reputable gallery from Oakland. She's going to be the third curator on the show, and we really look forward to it. It is in the month of October. Next slide, please. We host other nonprofits at SCA. As you can see, the names of the nonprofit, Mountain Play, Saus Little Village, some of the other nonprofits that come to SCA and they show their members work and they participate with us. Next. Our creativity and energy is really gaining momentum and gaining attention. I say that, next slide please, because we've been around for 33 months and there's 33 articles, some of them major articles that's been written about SCA. So one per month here in the paper. Also, the readers of Morin IJ, without even us noticing, we were chosen as the favorite gallery of Morin County, Best of Morin, Pacific Suns Best of Morin, so we're being noticed by everybody. So we're growing despite modest resources and very tough times for nonprofits. We've done Yeah. Virginia Nights. Thank you. to the For a long time, we only had one full-time employee, and that was me, 16 dedicated board members, 50 active volunteers, who are, so many of them are here today. And I'm glad to say we have a second employee now, so it's the two of us, Michelle Jader, who is our second employee. I am really excited that she's joined our team. And we selectively, from time to time, uh, these contractors. So our, you know, our team is very small and very lean. And next slide. So this is a challenging time for fundraising. As you know, federal grants have shrunk. So there's a lot more competition for money, for funding. And, you know, everything is basically operation costs has gone up. But and everything, most of the time, most of the money goes to social justice and not art. So it's been really tough, but despite all of these, we're making it happen. Next slide. And we are gaining momentum. And next slide. So this is what's happening now at SCA and what's coming up. Currently, as I said, National Sculpture Society is at SCA. This exhibition is going to end by the end of this week. And then our first member show, Showcase 25, is going to start. And we're so excited because we're taking the back part of SCA. Michelle Jader, our new employees, helping us make that a member gallery. So it's going to be lower-priced items, and it is going to be basically supporting the main exhibition hall. So Showcase 25 opens on July 11th, and it is our first ever member show, and it promises to be an incredibly fabulous show. The next one, the next show is landscape show. The Salsalito Landscape Festival, which is a combination of paint Salsalito that I talked about, and also landscape artists of the Bay Area. And then on the bottom, our After Five program, because we have a lot of events that happens after five. So word of mouth, which is the same as, you know, the moth and then Jerry Garcia's birthday. And then we have a couple of classical music and ballet and things like. which is the same as, you know, The Moth, and then Jerry Garcia's Birthday, and then we have a couple of classical music and ballet and things like that. That's going to be happening in the next month or so. So I just want to thank City of Sausalito. Thank you all for giving us this time. And thank our donors and sponsors and institutional sponsors and everybody and the members of public for supporting us. The support really matters. And, you know, it couldn't be done without all of you. Thank you very much. |
| 00:20:41.12 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you, Shiva, for your presentation. |
| 00:20:50.60 | Melissa Woodside | As I said earlier, this is not something that we're going to be acting on or discussing in any detail tonight. But for those who weren't able maybe to see all the slides, if you go to the agenda and the presentation, all of those slides can be readily accessed and you could follow through on your own. So, again, thank you very much. And you thanked us, so I'll say you're welcome. |
| 00:21:16.02 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, we have now a city manager's report. Thank you. |
| 00:21:21.28 | Chris Zapata | Brandon? |
| 00:21:22.55 | Melissa Woodside | you |
| 00:21:22.57 | Chris Zapata | Yes, thank you, Mayor, for the opportunity and City Council. Good evening. I'm delighted to share some good news to start. Sausalito's Parks and Recreation Department, in partnership with the Make Room Artist Studio on B Street and the Sausalito Foundation, has launched Keys to the Bay. That's Sausalito's outdoor painted piano program. The first of what we hope will be multiple pianos placed around town. Keys to the Bay is an effort to transform Sausalito's parks and waterfront into a living, playable outdoor art and music gallery, a destination that invites residents and visitors alike to stop, to play, and to connect. The inaugural piano is now located on Tracy Way. An official ribbon cutting and first song ceremony took place on June 11th on Tracy Way at 4.30pm. I just want to express my appreciation to our Parks and Recreation Department for bringing the program to life, the Make Room Artist Studio for their creativity, and to the Sausalito Foundation for their generous support. That's exactly the kind of initiative that reflects the spirit and character of our community, and we look forward to seeing that grow. I'd also like to take a moment to provide the council with a brief update on the city's economic development front. I'm pleased to report that we have a number of active economic development initiatives underway, and I want to make sure that council, as well as the community, is aware of the breadth of what is in motion as we welcome our incoming city manager on July 1. So first, this was heard at the last council meeting agenda. The design assistance team program, as the council will recall from the staff report. Received and filed right on June 2, the city has been exploring an application to the AIA Architects Foundation's design assistance team, a pro bono technical assistance program administered through Communities by Design. That pairs communities with multidisciplinary teams of volunteer professionals to tackle complex challenges related to community resilience, land use, community design. I'm pleased to share that city council working group has been formed, composed of mayor Woodside and council member Cox. Um, it has been established and will work in collaboration with staff to develop a DAT application for submittal. And we look forward to collaborating with these working group members, advancing that effort and keeping the full council informed as those, projects progress. Secondly, The Marinship Visioning Roadmap. The council has executed, or the city has executed, a professional services agreement with Perkins & Will. This is a nationally recognized planning and urban design firm with subconsultants Cosmont Companies and CMG to develop a high-level planning roadmap for the 215-acre Marinship District. The scope does include a facilitated in-person planning work session with city staff and council and the preparation of strategic recommendations to guide the drafting of a future request for proposals for comprehensive marinship planning as directed by council. We look forward to scheduling the formal kickoff of this contract following the onboarding of the incoming city manager and are eager to begin this important planning conversation. I'll end with some, some items related to economic development tools and revenue generation strategies. The city has also been in discussions relating, um, to additional chats with Cosmon companies regarding potential economic development. strategies that could meaningfully benefit the city's financial position. So earlier this spring, on April 2nd, a meeting was held with Mayor Woodside, Councilmember Sobieski, City Manager Zapata, and the Assistant City Manager to discuss a range of financial and infrastructure tools available to the city. Those discussions touched on mechanisms including community facilities districts, enhanced infrastructure financing districts, as well as climate resiliency districts, all of which represent potential pathways for revenue generation, as well as infrastructure investment. Staff will continue again to develop this work and look forward to bringing additional information to the council as it matures. So taken together, I believe these three initiatives were represent reflect the kind of proactive forward looking economic development posture that positions Sausalito well for years ahead. We have irons in the fire and we are committed to keeping them hot through the city manager transition and beyond. So looking ahead finally, Mayor, I just want to flag that the council later this evening, actually fairly soon, will hear from me and the finance director on two significant budget items. On the 2025-26 year-end update, we'll be asking council to authorize a drawdown from the city's Section 115 trust fund to resolve projected year-end shortfalls without touching the city's 25% reserve. On the FY26 fy 26 27 budget staff will be asking the council to adopt a balanced budget that reflects the staffing and capital investment priorities we've discussed over the course of this budget cycle and we look forward to walking council through both of those items this evening that concludes my report thank you council |
| 00:26:38.09 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you very much, Mr. Phipps. We will be getting to the budget shortly. I do have a couple of follow-on announcements. Well, first, thank you for mentioning that Member Cox and I are working on drafting and being able to submit an application for the design assistance team program that the American Institute of Architects is making available, perhaps, to our community. |
| 00:26:38.40 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 00:27:03.12 | Melissa Woodside | And we're excited about that and we'll, do our best to get an application in as soon as possible that betters our chances of of receiving if you will the grant and the. lending, if you will, of some very talented people to our community to help us planning. Two things related to Marinship Park, and these are possibilities. They're not certainties, but lately a couple interesting possibilities. One is a number in the community has been interested in having a place to view the World Cup Finals. And the spot Marinship Park, that's our local soccer field. One of them. And it seems to be ideally suited for a gathering on a Sunday afternoon. The finals are on July 19th. It's not a certainty yet, but several people are working together to try to make that happen. Obviously, it's something that has to be permitted by the city and a lot of coordination before that can happen. And it'll take some money in order to rent a proper screen so the viewers will have a nice view. And I don't know how many of you have been tracking the World Cup But the local match tonight is at 9 p.m., and unfortunately I won't be able to make it. Austria plays Jordan. The other thing I wanted to mention about Marin Ship Park, and this is something that has emerged from the community again as a possibility, And it's gathering support here and there. Um, there, in September, mid-September, a little later, is something called World Peace Day. And the idea that has come primarily from the Sausalito Foundation and others in the community is to perhaps look at MarinShip Park as a location for a monument to peace, a celebration particularly with peace with Japan. There are a number of anniversaries coming up in this year related to that. The council general from Japan has expressed interest in working with us. So again, stay tuned, but that might be a nice location for a monument to peace and the possibility of dedicating something like that or at least starting something like that later this year. Having said that, moving on to communications on items not on the agenda. |
| 00:29:28.55 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor, may I ask you a follow-up question? |
| 00:29:30.15 | Melissa Woodside | Sure. |
| 00:29:30.45 | Jill Hoffman | On the AIA Working Group Design Assistance Team application, I was wondering when the public might be able to see that application or the other members of the council, will that be on the Will that be on the consent calendar before that's, um, submitted or how will the other members of the council be able to see that? |
| 00:29:50.10 | Melissa Woodside | since we are at this point, likely not going to have a meeting that we held that is on June 30th, we would like to get the application in soon. And so our thought would be we would circulate it, we would post it, and then see what happens following that. But we really |
| 00:30:10.52 | Jill Hoffman | One way communication. |
| 00:30:12.02 | Melissa Woodside | Probably. |
| 00:30:12.54 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, that's fine. |
| 00:30:13.06 | Melissa Woodside | Yeah. |
| 00:30:14.24 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. it. |
| 00:30:15.31 | Melissa Woodside | Yeah, we should come back to ratify. But the key, the key is it will be public, very public, uh, And then just so everyone is aware, The application does not necessarily cast in concrete All the particulars. Usually the AIA comes back and then negotiates nuances, things that best fit our community and their notion of how best to approach such a task. So. We'll keep you advice. Okay, thank you. |
| 00:30:43.79 | Carolyn Revell | Thank you. |
| 00:30:43.81 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:30:46.29 | Melissa Woodside | Um, So, not on the agenda communications, do we have any? |
| 00:30:52.67 | Jill Hoffman | Master Mariner. master mariner show at, uh, at Corinthian Yacht Club on Father's Day. Should anybody be interested in wooden boats? |
| 00:31:00.38 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, the 21st, coming right up. Okay. Yes. |
| 00:31:05.56 | Walfred Solorzano | We have Sandra Bushmaker. |
| 00:31:07.59 | Melissa Woodside | So remotely, Ms. Bushmaker. |
| 00:31:10.66 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you very much. Good evening, council and public. I just, with regard to the SEA, It was a very interesting presentation. I was, um, Concerned though that we the city may not have received the financial reports that are required by the lease. If so, I would like to have those, if they have been received, I would like to have those reports be made public. There was been a lot of discussion about that when the lease was first executed. And there were certainly certain reports that were supposed to be made to the city. Uh, That's all I have right now. Thank you. |
| 00:31:51.95 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, thank you. Any other comments, matters not on the agenda? |
| 00:31:56.64 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing none. |
| 00:31:57.59 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, anyone in the audience? not on the agenda or is it on the consent? Okay. public comment, Mr. Cox, and I'll make full disclosure, Rob is my immediate next door neighbor and friend. |
| 00:32:14.72 | Rob Cox | Thank you. Thank you, Mr Mayor, Council members and staff. I am here today to happily report that the Work on the Edwards Avenue Marion Avenue retaining structure has started today. And I'm very happy to report on that since, uh, It's a project that is really important to me and our neighbors there up as we are resident on High Vista Road above Edwards Avenue, as well as all the people who Use Edwards Avenue every day. It took a while to get to this stage, but we're very happy it's come to this. The city received 30 years ago a recommendation from a geotechnical advisor to shore up that area above Edwards Avenue. And the landslide task force of the city recommended it be shored up. about five years ago. And it's been 13 years that I've been coming to you at the council and talking to staff about this important project. So I'm very thankful to all of you, to staff, to the consultants and contractors who are working on it. And onward and upward. Thank you. |
| 00:33:36.58 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you, Rob. Anyone else? |
| 00:33:39.77 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing none online. |
| 00:33:40.81 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. We'll now move to the consent calendar. As we indicated earlier, one of the matters on that calendar has been deleted, no longer necessary, and that's item 3G. But as to the rest of these matters, they're typically taken in one vote. These are matters that have either been subject to previous direction or not controversial and can be taken as a single vote altogether. Um, However, we do want to make sure that we hear from the public before we taken action. Anyone have a comment on closed session items? Seeing none. |
| 00:34:22.48 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing none on, oh, nevermind. We have Jenny Silva. |
| 00:34:28.43 | Melissa Woodside | Ms. Silver. Welcome. |
| 00:34:31.59 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 00:34:31.61 | Jenny Silver | Hi. Thank you. Hi, thank you. And I have to confess, I don't remember which one 3G is, so I don't know if that's my item or not, but... I did want to comment on the second reading of the ordinance. I submitted a letter earlier today, but I remain very concerned that the views sink Um, Software is going to Hinder our ability to meet our housing goals, not help them. and that it's not going to function in a objective standard One of the things I pointed out in the letter is that the I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE margin of error on the software is 1 to 6%, and when we have a 5% standard, We could be it could give us very inaccurate results and results that are non-repeatable. I think these issues should be further vetted with the public. And I also think that the contract with the single source vendor should also be THE CITY IS A put before the public. So those are my comments. Thanks. |
| 00:35:41.45 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, thank you. Any other comments on items on the consent calendar? |
| 00:35:47.68 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing none online. |
| 00:35:48.88 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, so I'd like to entertain a motion to approve the consent calendar with the exception of the deleted item. |
| 00:35:54.75 | Samantha Schubert | So moved. Second. |
| 00:35:56.22 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. Motion sent. All those in favor? |
| 00:35:59.74 | Samantha Schubert | Bye. |
| 00:36:00.07 | Melissa Woodside | Aye. That passes unanimously. Thank you. |
| 00:36:10.95 | Melissa Woodside | So we have now business items and as promised, the first three items relate to the budget. We're going to take those in sequence, first, second and third. Then we're going to move to the item that appeared last, but we made a decision earlier that we would consider the AIM related matter as the fourth in order after hearing about the budget. Mr. City Manager, Budget. |
| 00:36:35.92 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. |
| 00:36:35.96 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:36:35.97 | Chris Zapata | Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor, Councils, Council members of the public. Item 5A, I'm just going to do a quick precursor before the Finance Director's presentation. This is the FY2526 year-end budget update. Finance Director Angeline Loeffler will present shortly. What staff is asking the Council to do on this item is fairly focused and specific. This is to authorize the disbursement of $1,118,476 from the Section 115 Trust Pension Fund to fully resolve the projected year-end shortfalls in both the general fund and the sewer fund. The 25% general fund reserve is not affected as a part of this staff recommendation. And I do want to give council some confidence that we've done our homework. We have consulted with our city attorney, our auditor, Dowey and Associates, our Section 115 Trust Administrator, Schuster Advisory Group, as well as NHA Advisor, who is, of course, a municipal finance advisory firm with familiarity in city finances. We've also separately reached out to our former city manager for additional perspective, and no concerns were raised regarding the legality or eligibility of the proposed disbursements. I'd also note that the city continuously evaluates its financial position, and tonight's action is one step in that ongoing process. So we do not consider the books necessarily closed on our broader financial analysis, and we look forward to continuing that work and returning to council as appropriate. So with that, I'll turn it over to our finance director. Thank you. |
| 00:38:26.42 | Melissa Woodside | LaFleur. Welcome. |
| 00:38:28.73 | Angeline Loeffler | Good evening. Good evening, Mayor and Councilmembers. Tonight, I'm providing you the updates on the fiscal 2526 budget, including the updated projection and proposed path of the closing of the general funds and store funds. Next slide, please. As part of the ongoing budget monitoring, we updated the projections to the budgets as through the 10th of the 2026 we're currently projecting 475 thousands of shortfall in a general fund and 643 thousands in the store fund which the figures are same. There was no changes since the the last presented on the June 2nd council meetings. Additionally, on the June 2nd, the Council requests the additional analysis regarding whether certain previous incurred pension and OPED expenses can be reimbursed from the Section 115 trust fund to help offset the other so far, we confirm as the interim city manager indicated previously that we confirm with the various outside the expertise to confirm that those expenses we're trying to offset is in fact are eligible and meets all the legal requirements of the other distributions. Just one idea we iterate that these are reimbursements would address the both of the shortfalls for the general funds and the SOAR funds without impacting any of the 25% the reserve policies. Next slide, please. This is the general summary of the general funds projections that it still remains at the same as the 474,000. It is projected shortfall as of the June 30th of 2025. And of course that number is will may get go plus minus depending on how the actual amounts comes through through the June 30th. So these amounts are based on the May 10th of the 2026 projections. Next slide, please. We're also projecting the 643,000 of the sewer fund shortage, which is resulted from the untimely reallocation of the accounting after the sewer operation being... transfer to the districts and ultimately those the the recording of the sewer fund is as part of the general funds expenses it just has not been timely we allocated back into the the general funds that's as a result of that one's All the remaining employees' salaries and the benefits should have been shifted back to the general funds after the transfer of the sewer funds to the districts in August, and as well as a complete final transition took place in October of 2025. However, because of the idea, the accounting was not really fully reshifted to the general fund, which is we will continue to record them under the sewer fund. But ultimately, those expenses are the obligations of the general fund. Next slide, please. And this is the brief recap of what we have received as through the, uh, the store operation transitions with the, uh, this agreement with the city and districts. So we have actually received the, all of those expenses we immerse from the districts and in total of the 3.4 million with the access of the 300,000 of the excess, the, any of the, uh, the following residual costs that remains in the sewer funds to be covers. So as you can see at the bottom number, we have the 300,000 residual that will let that in the SOAR fund from the funding that we have received from the districts. Next slide, please. And these are actually the breakdown of the sewer fund allocation was untimely shifted over to the general funds that was remained at the sewer funds. And the salaries and benefits takes, as you can see, majority of the portions of those, the overages, which is mainly... involved with the 14 of our current employees who was actually being allocated to do the work on the sewer operations prior to the transfer so they were actually allocated Part of the salary was coming out from the sewer revenue, but that is once after the transition completed, all of those employees remains with the city will have to revert back to the general funds under the salaries. And as I indicated, on the $300,000 of surpluses from the sewer, the amount that we received from the district has been applied to the offset, those are some of those liabilities, which is leading into the 643,000 and still need to be the cover by the general funds. Next slide, please. |
| 00:43:51.42 | Angeline Loeffler | As a result, staff is recommending total of the $1.1 million of the withdrawal from the Section 115 trust funds to cover. Part of the $3.4 million that we have received from the districts includes $2 million of the OPEP and pension liability, which is the staff is recommending using part of those portions to offset the shortages in the general funds and currently in the sewer funds. And once again, reimbursement is fully confirmed with our city attorney and other the expert parties outside that those eligible reimbursements are, in fact, compliance with any of all the requirements that the city is host. Next slide, please. This is the, I know it's a little bit hard to read, but it is in your attachments as a full printouts on that one. So these are the list of the qualifying eligible expenses that we can actually utilize from the Section 115 Restricted Trust Fund to reimburse the city's general fund's liability. Ultimately, so we're using for the OPEP expenses, mainly we're probably looking on the Item 2 OPEP and the pension expenses based on actuality reports. And for the the pension expenses most clear-cut transparent item is the reimbursement of the UAL expenses for this city has made the payments to the CalPERS at the beginning of the each year's |
| 00:45:34.96 | Angeline Loeffler | Next slide, please. And these are just quick diagrams of how the fund is flowing in from the trust fund distributions and how it's flowing into the general funds and then going back out to balance both the general funds and sewer funds. So we are requesting disbursement of the entire of the $1.1 million, but that all of those will be going into the general funds. First. to offset the reimbursement of the UAL payments, which is the totaling of 2.9, which is far exceeding the amount of distribution that we are requesting tonight. Next slide, please. Once again, this is a little bit small to see on the slide deck itself, but you do have a full attachments on the staff reports that on the page four has a full detail, a little bit more readable and a little bit on a bigger funds in that sense. So this is just the flow of that 1.1 million drawdown and how it impacts and how much if you see on the top portions of that slice right there is we are putting that 2 million that we have received from the districts transferring into the section 115 trust fund before we do any of the distributions because we wanna make sure that we are following through with the requirements that since those 2 million is restrictive funds, we have to follow through the proper process to properly disperse and offset and we reimburse the general funds for that portion. Next slide, please. |
| 00:47:29.38 | Angeline Loeffler | With the various explanations going through, tonight's step is recommending the councils to authorize first the use of the Section 115 Trust Fund to get the distribution of the $474,000 of the general fund shortage, and as well as the $643,000 of the sewer shortage, which is ultimately general funds. The obligations just happen to be recorded on the sewer funds and totaling of the 1.4 millions. And once again, these actions will not impact the 25% of our reserve funds. Next slide, please. And that will conclude my presentations for tonight. And I'm open for any questions on any of the shortfalls and any of the staffing. And then there is actually the three additional slides that you'll actually see on the after these three slides is just for the references to kind of give you the better clarity of how we are using these Section 115 trust funds, as well as what is the health of the section 115 trust funds for after this distribution take places. |
| 00:48:45.99 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, now's the time for simply questions from the dais and encourage my colleagues to form questions and be brief if possible. Melissa first. |
| 00:48:56.62 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah, I just just so that the general public kind of better understands. I had a great conversation with our interim city manager yesterday to get some clarity. Could you. explain. Because my understanding was that we thought that we only had one employee who was considered a sewer fund employee. How many did we actually have? |
| 00:49:15.84 | Angeline Loeffler | We had a total of 15 employees under the sewer who actually worked on the sewer, and then one employee has been transferred to the district, and the remaining 14 employees is still with the city. Right. |
| 00:49:29.57 | Melissa Blaustein | So then only one of the employees technically should have been accounted for the sewer fund, and that's how we ended up with the shortfall. And that's why we're using the general fund and the OPEB. That is correct. Great. I just wanted to clarify what's there. Thank you. Thank you, Angelina. |
| 00:49:35.43 | Angeline Loeffler | Right. That is that. |
| 00:49:42.86 | Melissa Woodside | Other questions? |
| 00:49:44.97 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 00:49:45.03 | Jill Hoffman | Yep. |
| 00:49:45.15 | Melissa Woodside | Go. |
| 00:49:45.39 | Michelle Dumont | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 00:49:45.66 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. you |
| 00:49:46.05 | Jill Hoffman | That actually. And so, and to follow up on that, we had one full-time employee. I thought there were two. Yes. Cause we also had a, you and I had a long conversation. So I thought there were, so I thought there were two full-time sewer employees, but there's only one full or we had two, but one actually stayed with us and one actually went with the sewer. |
| 00:49:54.11 | Michelle Dumont | Yeah. |
| 00:49:54.55 | Carolyn Revell | I'm sorry. Exactly. |
| 00:50:04.25 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 00:50:04.27 | Angeline Loeffler | With we actually, with the total of the three employee was the full time, two employees are still with us and one employee that was full time was actually transferred to the districts. |
| 00:50:15.53 | Jill Hoffman | So he's... happily with the district now. And then we have two guys that are with us still. And then we have... another 12 employees that percent varying percentages. And we allocated what we thought were percentage times that they actually worked on sewer what we considered sewer tasks related to these performed. |
| 00:50:35.81 | Angeline Loeffler | We love you. Yeah. TODAY. |
| 00:50:37.70 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. And you showed me the list. It's a very interesting list of percentages, right? Like some guys worked 50% on the sewer work and some guys worked 20% and |
| 00:50:37.75 | Angeline Loeffler | Thanks. |
| 00:50:45.43 | Jill Hoffman | it's just a very interesting breakdown, but, And so when they, when the sewer district was transferred over to the Marin, it's also a Marin City Sanitary District. We transferred all of that over. Then obviously we're not getting fees anymore to pay our guys for the work that they did on the district because we don't have the sewer district anymore. It's all now with the sewer district. So That's why we now have to cover their salaries, right? And so that came up to the tune of $643,941 or $491. So, and that now has to come out of our general fund. Yes. And that's where that deficit or shortfall has come from. |
| 00:51:24.01 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes, after the SOAR operation transfer, ultimately all of those employees' salary is part of the general funds' obligations. |
| 00:51:24.51 | Jill Hoffman | appetite. |
| 00:51:31.51 | Jill Hoffman | And that's sort of the legacy sewer hangover that we have from that transfer. And, but, but we also got, but the good news is we also got a return of some of the, the pre-pension payments that we had made. Right. And that's what we're talking about when we talk about the pin, the one 15 trust monies that we were refunded basically from the sewer district. Yes. Have I got that right? Okay. And so, and those two numbers together. |
| 00:51:50.63 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |
| 00:51:54.08 | Jill Hoffman | the, um, 400,000 and something and a 600 the 474,000. 985 that's just various budgetary overages or shortfalls that deficit number. That's just the general. That's just a general general fund deficit number. it. combined with the 643,941 from the sewer. |
| 00:52:17.21 | Vicki Nichols | Thank you. |
| 00:52:17.33 | Carolyn Revell | Thank you. |
| 00:52:18.58 | Jill Hoffman | consolidation. And that brings us to our total deficit for two for fiscal year 2526 of 1 million 118 467 of our total That is a shortfall. |
| 00:52:30.22 | Angeline Loeffler | That is correct. |
| 00:52:31.49 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. Okay. Thank you so much. And I appreciate your time that you spent with me. Um, and it shortened my questions for tonight. So thanks. |
| 00:52:39.76 | Melissa Woodside | Other questions? Mr. Sobieski. |
| 00:52:42.19 | Ian Sobieski | And just one thing to point out is even after this thing that you're recommending, the amount of money in the 115 trust is higher as a result of this |
| 00:52:49.88 | Angeline Loeffler | That is correct. And if in fact, if you can turn into the very last slides, and And these are some of those projections that I had kind of put together after the finance committee meetings yesterday. We wanted to make sure that after the distributions, we have enough money to cover through that UL tensions, those bell curves. So I did the brief... the descriptions of the how as we drawing down those pensions the ul payments and then i want to make sure that within that 10 years we still have enough to last to handle all of those and based on the my idea quick projections, we do have enough to pay those URL for the next 10 years and we may, depending on how well the CalPERS performs, we may still have some little leftover residual and depend if the CalPERS does really poorly, doing the negative investment returns, then we may have put in additional, a little bit more in there. But overall, within the ranges, we do have enough funding after the distributions of these section 115. |
| 00:54:02.78 | Ian Sobieski | That's really big news, but that's going to be in the next... item, right? Yes, yes. But just focusing on the sewer thing, my point is that even with the sewer recommendation, the balance in the 115 trust has gone up as a result of the, |
| 00:54:06.86 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes. |
| 00:54:16.30 | Ian Sobieski | uh, the merger. Yes. Yeah. Thank you. |
| 00:54:20.08 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, Ms. Cox, you have a question? That answered it? |
| 00:54:23.15 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 00:54:23.25 | Councilmember Cox | Bye. Yes, I was. caught off guard to be hearing this information in this item. So I wanted to be sure that we were getting full opportunity to review and discuss the treatment of the 115 trust in the subsequent items. |
| 00:54:41.04 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 00:54:41.32 | Councilmember Cox | So, |
| 00:54:41.34 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. it. That would be for the next item for the proposed budget for the forthcoming fiscal year. So a quick question. What you're referring to now is reversing an accounting error, in order to balance the budget that ends on June 30th. |
| 00:55:02.43 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes, that is correct. |
| 00:55:04.39 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 00:55:04.49 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |
| 00:55:04.54 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. That was my question. |
| 00:55:07.75 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |
| 00:55:07.77 | Jill Hoffman | What's the accounting error? |
| 00:55:09.51 | Melissa Woodside | The accounting error was not properly accounting for those funds. |
| 00:55:14.35 | Jill Hoffman | for those sewer employees. SEWER funds, right. |
| 00:55:15.68 | Melissa Woodside | Sewer front. Right. Right. Yeah. Okay, seeing no more questions, I'd like to hear comments from the public on this item. Are there comments? Aha. |
| 00:55:30.53 | Melissa Woodside | So we have first Carolyn Revell. Welcome, Carolyn. |
| 00:55:40.99 | Carolyn Revell | Good evening, Mayor Woodside, Vice Mayor Blaustein, and members of the Council. I'm Carolyn Revell speaking on behalf of the Downtown Sausalito Association. We're pleased to see that as directed by Council at the June 2nd meeting, DPW and financing staff have included funding for T-008 Princess Street improvement in the CIP projects list. And that list is referenced in a memo from staff, both on this item and the next item. It's the same memo. This will be a joint project between DSA and the city, creating a sidewalk bulb out at the intersection of Princess and Bridgeway to address pedestrian issues and animate this entrance corner with plantings and perhaps seating. as a kind of a design prototype of what could happen. Design studies are ongoing in coordination with city staff. speaking on behalf of Sausalito Beautiful, our board. We're also pleased on the same CIP project list to see funding proposed again for a city parks master plan and downtown street replacement, which would probably be on Princess Street. We once again hope to contribute to these projects in our partnership with the city. Thank you. |
| 00:56:52.19 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you very much, Ms. Revelle. Ray Withy? I have a speaker card for Ray. Are there any other speaker cards on this item? There may be people online, but let's hear from Mr. Withey. Hi. Good evening. |
| 00:57:06.97 | Ray Withey | Mr. Mayor, Madam Vice Mayor, Council, staff. So I actually came in for the next agenda item, but I thought this was a sufficiently... Interesting that I'd really like to say a couple of things. I've studied this transaction. I was unaware until this staff report came out that we'd actually found $2 million of found money. I mean, I just did not know that. And obviously to clean up the sewer balance sheet is necessary, so. I just wanted to say I'm fully supportive of staff's idea to actually use the pension trust fund to pay off these shortfalls. The one thing I wanted to remind us, and I'll pick up this a little bit later in the next agenda item, is that In effect, we've got a $1.1 million shortfall in fiscal year 26. Our current budget predicts, guess what, a $1.1 million shortfall in fiscal year 27. These are very different beasts. Don't get confused. There's a lot of one-time transactions in the 26 budget that you need to peel away to truly understand the underlying financial landscape. Don't go. astray because the numbers just happened to be the same. Okay. So anyway, I'm fully supportive of staff's position here. Thank you. |
| 00:58:44.00 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you and we're warned. We'll try not to get confused transfer too much of this thinking on this item into the next. Anyone online wishing to be heard? |
| 00:58:56.93 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing none online. |
| 00:58:58.43 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. Well, this is an important matter. Is there a motion to approve the staff recommendation? |
| 00:59:04.95 | Melissa Blaustein | I move we approve the staff's recommendation |
| 00:59:08.44 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, a motion in a second. We can do this on a voice vote. All those in favor, say aye. |
| 00:59:13.15 | Melissa Blaustein | you |
| 00:59:13.16 | Walfred Solorzano | Aye. |
| 00:59:14.04 | Melissa Woodside | Opposed seeing none passes unanimously. Okay. Now. next year's budget. Mr. City Manager, do you want to take the lead? I would like to see you in the next video. |
| 00:59:25.01 | Chris Zapata | love to mayor. Thank you for the opportunity. And hello again. So once again, I'm going to try to just boil this down What staff is requesting this evening of City Council is straightforward. Adopt a balanced budget totaling $29.4 million, including $24.4 million in general fund operations and $5 million for capital improvement projects. The budget is balanced through a combination of Section 115 trust disbursements and a draw on the City's unassigned general fund reserves. The 25% reserve is not affected. As with item 5A, the proposed disbursements under this budget, $175,000 from OPEB Trust and $287,000 from the Pension Trust, have been reviewed and confirmed as eligible by the same group of advisors, city attorney, Bedellin Associates, Schuster Advisory, NHA Advisors. Staff is confident in the same way that these disbursements are on solid legal and financial footing. I also want to briefly reassure the council on the health, as we just discussed, of the Section 115 trust fund itself. The pension fund currently has available a balance of approximately $6 million. This is partly based on the approvals that the council will make this evening. And the OPEB fund approximately $2.7 million. The proposed disbursements have the trust well capitalized, as discussed as well, to continue smoothing the city's pension obligations through the peak UAL payment years ahead. And as noted on 5A, we do remain actively engaged in evaluating our financial position on an ongoing basis. Adoption of this budget is not the end of the conversation. Staff look forward to continued dialogue with the council on our financial picture, and we very much look forward to welcoming an incoming city manager, Elaine Forbes, on July 1, and engaging with her on the city's budgetary approach as a part of this transition. So with that said, thank you very much, and I'll pass the mic to our finance director, Ms. Loeffler. |
| 01:00:44.14 | Carolyn Revell | million. |
| 01:01:25.21 | Angeline Loeffler | I can't even ring again. I'm here to present the upcoming fiscal year, the 26 and 27, including the staffing updates and the proposed operation and CIP budgets, and also the updating the general fund unassigned fund balances. Next slide, please. |
| 01:01:48.78 | Angeline Loeffler | Tonight that we're mainly focused on the three of the areas on the updating on the request of the staffing positions and the recommendations for the FY 26 and 27 budget, including the CIP programs, and as well as updating of the general funds unassigned fund balances. And as and these updates are reflects the council's directions from the June 2nd meetings. Next slide please. I'd like to start with the doing the additional resource that is the city staff has done which is predominantly the assistant. The interim city managers has been spending great amount of time along with our HR managers to do a little bit of deeper dive into the permit concierge positions. And staff conducted the research into the comparable positions, both regionally and statewide. What we found is that dedicated the permit concierge program is typically used much larger and growth oriented series such as the Los Angeles Orange County Hollywood and that's not which which is that's not aligned with the city's also listed size and development profiles available examples are typically the free equity oriented services or the private sector permit expediting so given that position is not recommended at this time Next slide, please. The apartment review positions are normally at the normally cost recovery basis rather than the revenue generating. So our concierge positions would improve the services for those able to access to the access it could provide unintentionally created inequity if the fee was charged to support the fundings. So based on that one, staff is recommending deferring dispositions pending a broader staffing and a policy reviews with the follow-up plan for the mid-year budget reviews in January of 2027. Next slide, please. Outside of the primary concierge position, staff is requesting three positions based on operation needs, community development directors, administrative aid, as well as the IT manager or the ed liaison. These positions are the strength of essential functions and improve the services that we deliver. and the cost the breakdown allocation is for the three positions is come up to be about $526,000, including the salaries and along with any of the fringe of benefits that was associated with the positions. Next slide, please. |
| 01:04:53.33 | Angeline Loeffler | STAP was asked to come back with a little bit more clarity on the administrative aid positions along with the IT positions. So currently, one administrative aid is shared between the human resource departments and the recreation as a part-time, the half-time for each of the departments. Since the workload has been increasing significantly for each of the departments, they request that having the full supports, one individual, the employees for each department, rather than sharing the one positions with the two departments. Because of this role, it requires the significant public interaction in person-related work and looking into the possible AI tool to replace these positions was unsuitable considering all the human interactions that was required to design for these two departments position. So we recommend that the AI replacement is not the suitable as an alternative for this position. Next slide, please. IT liaison and the manager position was asked whether it's how the funding structures for these particular positions. So currently, the way that IT is being supported at the city is hybrid positions between shared responsibility of the finance and IT functions currently for the past three years. and as due to the increase in demands on IT, cybersecurity, and also increases in the demand of workload in finance, having these hybrid positions is no longer the efficient and effective. So staff is requesting having the creating a brand new positions for the IT, separating these hybrid positions into two full positions. And the way that IT position was structured was the cost neutral. The way that we developed the IT position is basically fully funded by the working within the existing budget of the adjustments to the marine IT contract. So there will not be any impacts on additional funding source requires to support these IT positions. Next slide, please. |
| 01:07:29.12 | Angeline Loeffler | Now I'd like to present the total, the budget amounts. The interim city managers recommends the 26, 27 budgets is balanced as the 29,396. which is included the $24,379,843 of the general fund operations, as well as the $5,16,752 for the CIP projects. Once again, this budget is not drawing anything from the 25% reserve policies, and this is also incorporated into the part of the, the city council's review the recommendation for the general funds transfer policies. Next slide, please. Since we are proposing for the additional withdrawal from the Section 115, I'd like to kind of provide you with what happened with the fundings, the balance of the budgets without having that drawing any of the Section 115 trust funds. So without having the trust funds withdrawal, we were looking at about 1.5 million 1. almost 1.6 million of the short shortfalls of the fy 26 and 27 budget which is including three of the positions the expense allocation which is the amount to 526 000. Next slide, please. |
| 01:09:07.53 | Angeline Loeffler | During the May 21st of the 2026, during the finance committees, the finance committee has recommended the using of the portions of the OPEP, the pension trust OPEP and the pension trust funds to partial offset of the hour general fund shortage. And city council has directed on the June 2nd meeting to make sure that we are in full compliances. As you have heard and verified through the previous presentation, as well as the interim city managers, we did actually confirm the withdrawing of those fundings are the compliance, full compliances with the requirements, section 115 trust requirements, as well as verify the eligibility of those distributions that we are requesting. |
| 01:09:15.47 | Carolyn Revell | you know, |
| 01:10:02.60 | Angeline Loeffler | Next slide, please. This is, once again, the same information that we have received and same application will be applied to the funding offset of the Section 115 trust funds for the FY26 and FY27 budgets. Once again, we will be using the offsetting of the OPEP, the actual reports, the accrual liability, as well as the upcoming UIL payments for the FY27, which is due on July of 2026. Next slide, please. This is another quick flow of the funding, how the funding will be coming in and how it's flow into the section trust funding, section 115 trust funds and into the general funds to cover their shortfalls in the FY27 and that actually coming up to be to the general fund to be balanced in that sense. Next slide, please. With the considerations of the withdrawal from the Section 115 trust funds of the 175 of the OPEP expenses and as well as 287,000 of the pension, the UL expenses, which is due on July of 2026, we'll reduce the budget shortfalls to the 1.1 million, which still needs to be covered through the unassigned fund balances. So it reduced the unassigned fund balance withdrawal by withdrawing the portion of those shortfalls from the Section 115 trust funds. Next slide, please. |
| 01:11:57.82 | Angeline Loeffler | And just quick dive into the CIP projects. And the CIP projects has been updated to the 5.16,572,000, which is including the additional projects add-on to the Princess Street improvement, which will draw down an additional 45,000 of the Measure L, and the other 35,000 will be coming in from the donations, which is increased to the 5.5 million of the CIP fundings. and there will be no, any other general funds will be pulling in outside of the Measure L for the next year's CIP projects. Next slide, please. And these are the quick breakdowns of how the CIP projects funding sources will be for the next year, which is, as you can see, all of those are the restricted fundings. There's no funding is pulling from the general fund outside of the major L. Next slide, please. |
| 01:13:04.63 | Angeline Loeffler | And here's the updates on the general unassigned fund balances. And the update is unassigned fund balance is 4.4 millions. excluding the 25% of the other reserve fund policies. Thank you. and staff has identified the minor errors on their prior calculations of their fund balances on in computing is still making the corrections and based on the previously provided was a 5.4 on a fund balance to revise fund balance of 4.4 which is also illustrated detail the breakdown of the is illustrated illustrated in one of the attachment general fund balance that will actually show the detailed breakdown of how the staff has came up with the 4.4 million of the unassigned fund balances. And also the staff has confirmed on that the 1 million of the savings from the CIP, The other funding, in fact, it was the savings from the CIP funds is not compromising any of the project has not been eliminated. So it was the strictly coming in as a savings of the CIP from the current years. |
| 01:14:19.23 | Carolyn Revell | you |
| 01:14:22.05 | Angeline Loeffler | Next slide, please. With all that recommendation, staff is recommending that incorporating into the three of the approval of the three positions that was presented, which is the community development directors, administrative aid, and the IT positions, and also authorize the use of 175,000 of OPEP their distributions as well as 287,000 of patient trust distributions for the smoothing of the UIL payments for the upcoming years. And so total of $1.1,305,000, the $35,452,000 and use from the withdrawal from the unassigned fund balance, which will leave the unassigned fund balance of 3.2 million after the distributions of the withdrawal of the 1.1 million to cover the rest of the shortfalls to bring the FY27 budget to the balance amount. And once all this information has been approved, then the final budget book will be put together and posted on our website. In fact, it will be available in both in electronic format through the OpenGov as well as the ability to print the PDF versions as well too. Next slide, please. And this is the slide that I just wanted to include it in there for the show the councils after the distribution that what is the ending balance of the hour, the section 115 trust funds. So we currently have the 2.2 million and 4.4 before the deposit of the additional the 1.5 and 443 that we have received from the districts as part of the sewer transfer that will bring up the balance of the six million for the patients and 2.7 for the opep and with the three of the draw the four items that draws down we'll actually still have the higher the ending balance then what we begin with. So with that amount and then based on the projections of the next 10 years of the projections with the UIL drawdown, that will be sufficient to cover all the purposes and then we should be able to zero out the Section 115 trust funds after the 10 years. And this is in an effort to also not to overfund the Section 115 patient trust funds instead of using the all, that was the recommendation behind to it, so try to not to overfund fund the Section 115 as the restricted funding. Next slide. And that is the conclusion of my presentation. I'm happy to open up for any questions. |
| 01:17:28.96 | Melissa Woodside | So, Ms. Cox, you have a question? |
| 01:17:32.40 | Councilmember Cox | I have several if that's all right. Can you turn back to slide five, please? |
| 01:17:41.16 | Councilmember Cox | So here we list the IT manager liaison position as a cost of $152,913. Can you turn to slide one? Uh, seven, please. In slide seven, we say that the new position is intended to be cost neutral. And so if it's going to be cost neutral, why in slide five and in subsequent slides are we showing an expense of one hundred and fifty two thousand nine hundred thirteen dollars? |
| 01:18:15.11 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you for the question. So cost neutrals is because of the we adjust the marine IT contract. So if without having that IT position, we may have to bump up the marine IT contracts, which is which is enough of the amount that it's in there. So if we don't have the IT positions, that means marine IT contract will be increased to the budgeted amount. |
| 01:18:39.80 | Councilmember Cox | This doesn't say, OK, Your slide does not say that we will not have to bump up. It does not say without this IT position, we will be required to bump up our expense. It says outsourcing costs may continue to decrease, and the city will benefit from a more proactive. So it's not clear that what you are saying right now, which is that without this IT position, our expense, our costs, our payments to Marin IT will need to be increased. priest. That is not cost neutral. That is saying we're going to incur increased expenses to Marin IT. Do you have a budget for Marin IT to validate that our cost in the coming fiscal year will be $152,000 more expensive if we don't hire this IT person? |
| 01:19:39.71 | Angeline Loeffler | the way that the Marine IT contract is, is some are fixed amount. And also as well as there's a lot of hourly billable hours, which is not having the full IT positions to handle some of those main cores. That means billable hours will get increased throughout the years, and that's how we neutralize the cost. |
| 01:20:00.04 | Councilmember Cox | So then this is not cost neutral. This is still continuing to cost us an additional $150,000 next year to keep. So essentially, we need to pay $150,000 more next year than we paid this year just to keep pace with our IT needs. Is that what you're saying? |
| 01:20:18.79 | Angeline Loeffler | No, that is not correct. So the IT budget remains constant from the current year to next, and the way that we modify work with the marine IT to reduce their contracts, having these IT positions in place. So IT budget will not be increasing by another $150,000 now. |
| 01:20:40.44 | Councilmember Cox | Then then going back to slide five, why do are we showing an additional expense of one hundred and fifty two thousand dollars if this is a cost neutral hire? |
| 01:20:50.99 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. because IT budget, the other expenses based on the marine IT, These updated contract is the total expenses on the budget, included budgeted amount has been reduced by the $152,000. And this is the illustration of what it's going to cost to bring the IT positions in there. And as well as once this position gets established and more things can be handled within the in-house versus outsourcing it. And that was what I was referring to, the cost of the marine IT work. will make continue to go down. |
| 01:21:27.30 | Councilmember Cox | Okay. Can you turn to, I'm still not clear, but I give up. Can you turn to slide nine, please? Um, you make reference to section 115 trust disbursements. I really appreciated your slide, the second to the last slide where you distinguished between our 115 Trust and the Sausalud of Marin City Sanitary District 115 trust or, or, I guess the the Saucyde Maroon City Sanitary pension funds and UAL as opposed to our 115 trust. So Is this slide referring to our 115 trust? |
| 01:22:10.06 | Angeline Loeffler | the only reason I made the distinctions is where the payment is coming from, but ultimately the payment that we have received from the, The Marine District, Sanitary District is also our pension fundings. because those are accounted for our current employee who remains with our city for that 14 employees. So it is all cities funding. |
| 01:22:35.12 | Councilmember Cox | So I know that we discussed at our last meeting, a finance committee recommendation that We start drawing down our 115 trust this year, not next year. this upcoming fiscal year and not the following year. That was a finance committee recommendation. I had asked that we have that as a decision point tonight, but I'm not seeing that decision point or an analysis of the impact of that decision on our budget. it appears that you have simply incorporated into the proposed budget the Finance Committee recommendation without And again, this was a complaint that I had at the last meeting was that we didn't have minutes from the Finance Committee meeting. Also, interim city manager and board clerk. There is a list of people who have requested to be notified when there is a finance committee meeting. That list of people is not currently being notified because we have a change. in who is our acting clerk. But that list includes myself, Adrian Brenton. Sandra Bushmaker, and Who's the person who ran for city council two years ago? |
| 01:23:54.86 | Melissa Blaustein | When amicus. |
| 01:23:56.69 | Councilmember Cox | Jackie Amricas at a minimum. Those people, and there is a list somewhere floating around of other people who have been requested to be notified about finance committee meetings. So I'm making formal requests now. that that be done moving forward. Because there was another finance committee meeting yesterday that I did not know. How about. So and it's difficult to keep up with these very important decisions when we can't observe our experts in action. So, um, What your, can we turn to the second to the last slide? It's, Slide 18. |
| 01:24:43.37 | Councilmember Cox | So what is, how much of what is, So is what you're saying that the Sausalito 115 Trust drawdown is completely covered by funds from Sausalud and Maroon City Sanitary District? Is that what this slide means? |
| 01:25:06.64 | Angeline Loeffler | the majority of what we're receiving from the districts will be distributed to cover the shortfall for the current year and the upcoming years. |
| 01:25:20.06 | Councilmember Cox | What short, no, no. What I'm asking is this slide shows deep, shows |
| 01:25:33.62 | Councilmember Cox | How much money are we by how much money are we drawing down our section 115 trust in the coming fiscal year if we adopt your recommendation and that of the finance committee? |
| 01:25:45.89 | Angeline Loeffler | It's total of the $175,000 from the OPEC funds and the $1.4 million. million of the pension trust funds. |
| 01:25:55.87 | Councilmember Cox | And It appears from the second line on this chart that all of those monies are more than covered by deposits from the Sausalito Marin City Sanitary District. So really, we're not, the net impact is we are not drawing down our 115 trust at all. We are. relying on monies from the Saucyut-Maroon City Sanitary District that. in order to cover that drawdown. Is that right? Yes. |
| 01:26:28.65 | Angeline Loeffler | Correct, the bottom line is our current patient amounts will be untouched. |
| 01:26:36.05 | Councilmember Cox | So we, so If my... hope was to not draw down our 115 trust in the coming fiscal year. My hope has been realized miraculously. |
| 01:26:52.35 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes, it has been unintentionally. Yes, it has been. Okay. |
| 01:26:52.36 | Councilmember Cox | Yes. |
| 01:26:56.84 | Melissa Woodside | And remember, we're asking questions. |
| 01:26:57.06 | Angeline Loeffler | and I'll tell you. |
| 01:26:57.31 | Chris Zapata | Thank you. as a |
| 01:26:59.30 | Melissa Woodside | All right. |
| 01:26:59.57 | Chris Zapata | Okay. |
| 01:26:59.89 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 01:26:59.96 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |
| 01:26:59.98 | Councilmember Cox | Yeah. Thank you for that. |
| 01:27:02.54 | Chris Zapata | And I'll just add that the ending balances in both of the accounts are actually greater than the beginning balances as of May of this year. |
| 01:27:11.30 | Councilmember Cox | Yeah, so I don't fully understand that even though I took accounting in college, but I'm pleased at the outcome. Thank you. And that was a comment. Apologies, Mayor. |
| 01:27:23.85 | Melissa Woodside | No, that's okay. You're allowed one. to get the information. Thank you. Any other questions at this point? |
| 01:27:34.01 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, Joe? |
| 01:27:48.56 | Jill Hoffman | Sorry, this is a question. It may not be. It may be for you and it may be for our interim city manager. And it's something I think I discussed with both of you yesterday. And it's so we've talked about we're approving. This is a perspective budget, right? So now we're approving. We just approved. Erika Endrijonas, M.D.: deficit for this past year budget that we have to true up here, I think, our next item right we're going to vote to you know balance our budget and we're going to pull from different funds to do that. Erika Endrijonas, M.D.: And so, this is a budget perspective Lee we're looking at we're projecting what we think we're going to spend for the next year, and it looks like we're going to have. maybe at the end of the year, Thank you. you know, million dollar, about a million dollar budget and how we're going to get there. Um, but What we're constantly saying is, well, we'll see where we are at mid-year, right? And what we're going to do at mid-year and how we're going to pivot maybe at mid-year. And so now my question to you is, Okay. how are we going to do that? Or what do you think your recommendations are going to be to us at mid-year if we approve this budget? And it looks like we're going to be at a million dollar deficit at the end of the year or heading in that direction. Do either one of you. have a recommendation at this point about what we would be looking at at mid-year on how we could bring us back in line by the end of the year. for bringing us back into balance by the end of the year. Either one of you wanna jump in with it? thought on that about what, how we might want to look back or, or when we get to this point at mid-year, what we want to look at or what my notes might guide us on at mid-year. |
| 01:29:19.97 | Chris Zapata | Certainly, Councilmember. Yeah, and thank you for the question. I'll just say, first off, we are always reevaluating our financial position because the world is dynamic. Markets change, revenues increase, new projects come in that change the city's position. So with that in mind, I think part of what we want to do is be reactive to the changes that we see over the next six months. It is a bit of a crystal ball question in the sense that we do not know what those changes are going to be at this time. So keeping track of those dynamics, I think, is going to be an important aspect of what's going to backfill what city's ultimate strategy is going to be. For example, we may actually see a revenue increase as opposed to a shortfall at the mid-year budget, in which case we would completely change our pathway forward. That being said, I also want to respect the vision of the incoming city manager, as well as the council on this. And I appreciate that the incoming city manager is going to bring some of her expertise to the city as far as what might be creative, innovative, reasonable strategies to help to increase revenues from the city side and to double down on some of those things in the case that we do continue to observe this shortfall in 2026, 2027. Now, that being said, you know, I'll parrot some of what I have heard and discussed with our former city manager, you know, the simplest way to put it is, well, if we're overspending, we probably need to think about reducing our spending. And if we have more revenues than we are spending, we can probably comfortably expand our service provision or the number of projects that we take on without realizing a shortfall. So we've talked about a number of economic development tools. I won't be getting into those this evening, but some of which were mentioned earlier. EIFDs, climate resiliency districts, CFDs to help to catalyze development, spur a revisioning. But additionally, there are tools that we can look at on the back end. When I joined the city, for example, we had, I believe, implemented a reduction of 10% in salaries, which was one quick way to resolve a budget shortfall. So I'll end there, but I'm happy to expand further. |
| 01:31:36.89 | Jill Hoffman | So let me ask you, thank you for that. And one thing that is of concern is the differences we've talked about between one time expenses and ongoing expenses and the real cost and the real problem with no, let me just say challenge with ongoing expenses. And one of the biggest challenges is the addition of employee expenses. And so tonight we've talked about three. um, costly additions of employee expenses and one is the community development director and the administrative aid and also the IT position that you just talked with Councilmember Cox about how you balance that. Is that a neutral or is that not a neutral? And we can sort of work our way through that. But the other one is also that we're now absorbing the total cost. of our employees that are no longer covered by different variations of the sewer fund. So that looks to me like it's pretty clear that's another six hundred thousand and something Um, that they're going to be fully employed, don't get me wrong. from the city of Sausalito, but they used to do. portions of their functions were sewer work. They're no longer gonna be doing sewer work. They're just gonna be doing full-time public works or janitorial or what they used to be doing. But now it's totally Um, is total city work. And that looks to me like 600,000. So to me, that looks like if you add those two numbers together, So you've costed it out in our budget now is $500,000 ad. for in this budget and then from the prior budget we know that the new sewer addition, the accounting error, as the mayor called it. it's really about another 600,000. So that's about another one, a million of ongoing hard costs that we're going to have going forward. And so my follow up question to you, both of you, is How do you it's really, really difficult to pivot from that kind of add to a budget. And so. Any thoughts on that? |
| 01:33:39.79 | Jill Hoffman | because we love our employees. Let me just add. I mean, and part of it is we just to, okay, and then the third thing is, we just approved, you know, a direction to our interim city manager 3E on our budget today. um arrays um to our seiu employees right or to get a memorandum understanding to approve a race or ACIU employees, right? And we're supportive of that. We're a five-oh supportive of that on our council. And so this is like a triple or a quadruple whammy, whatever you wanna call it, of ongoing hard costs. |
| 01:34:11.05 | Melissa Woodside | Can we get back to questions, please? |
| 01:34:11.84 | Jill Hoffman | budget. That's the question. That is the question. I mean, that's the question. So I don't know. I mean, that's what I'm asking. You're asking us to approve a million dollar But I think it's more than that. If you add all of these things up, what's the pivot on that? |
| 01:34:29.86 | Chris Zapata | Yep. Yep. Thank you for the question. So in order to, right, again, this goes back to, I'll just try to simplify it as much as I can. In order to address a shortfall, what must the city consider doing? Reduce our spend or increase our revenues? I do come from a bit of an economic development side of things. So from that lens, I see a number of opportunities that the city could take on to increase revenues in a relatively short period. Some of the things that we have discussed, for example, specifically include the adoption of impact fees, of course, following an AB 1600 fee study, um, which would ensure that new development pays for its impacts on the city, which would increase city revenues on a per unit basis or, or depending on how uh we construct our nexus study additionally you know we have had a lot of discussions recently and back to the economic development item that i described earlier related to changing our land uses one of the things that i know that we've discussed at the council level is hotels and how might we be able to increase our t ot revenue through land use and revisioning um i know that we've also spoken councilmember hoffman about leveraging what what i like to speak to as the city's biggest asset which is our waterfront how can we continue to expand revenue generating opportunities there um if we do Some of those things and that the list is ongoing, right? I think that that's one pathway to start to address a shortfall if in fact we end up being there at the midyear budget. |
| 01:36:03.48 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 01:36:09.07 | Melissa Woodside | I have no questions. We need to hear from the public. Public comment on. the budget for the next fiscal year. |
| 01:36:21.41 | Melissa Woodside | Mr. Withy, having cautioned us not to... over generalize or adopt thinking from the prior item Welcome. |
| 01:36:31.43 | Ray Withey | Thank you. Good evening. Again, in light of your discussion, I've now completely torn up what I was going to say because I may be able to be helpful. So, First of all, the way in which I view this budget and the way in which I would suggest you view this budget is basically a placeholder to start the year waiting for your city manager to show up on July 1st. That's number one. Okay, because I think Elaine is sufficiently sort of senior enough to understand that part of what she needs to do is ask the question, does the actual OPEX model need to be restructured in any way? Okay, so that's the first thing. Now... There are a number of challenges. Council Member Hoffman is absolutely correct. in that um, There we are in a situation where we don't have enough revenues in this budget to cover expenses. One thing that perhaps we could get Angelina to clarify, but I think you'll find, Council Member Hoffman, that her projection of a $1.1 million shortfall does include all the new headcount that has to be accounted for in the sewer as a result of sewer but we need she needs to clarify that for you I think the challenge ahead is is clear. You've got a UAL-driven shortfall in the future years ahead. We've put trust funds there in place to actually manage that. I am pretty excited about about where you stand. Just think about it for a moment. At the end of the next fiscal year, so in June 2027, You will have. According to budget, $3.2 million in unassigned fund balance, $4.6 million in pension trust fund, $2.5 million in OPED trust fund, and all of that is sitting on top of $5 million plus of a 25% reserve. I think that's a pretty exciting way to address the challenges of the future. |
| 01:38:50.02 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Withy. I have one more speaker card from Alice Merrill. Any more speakers wanting to be heard on this topic in the room? Okay. Ms. Merrill. |
| 01:39:04.82 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. |
| 01:39:04.87 | Linda Pfeiffer | Thank you. |
| 01:39:04.98 | Alice Merrill | Thank you. I would say that A lot of this is right over my head, but I would say that just now, how to raise more cash, basically. go to the waterfront. We have wonderful, beautiful waterfront. Now, wait a minute here. You know, it's got boats, it's got things covering most of it. And except for that one part that everybody is in the middle of trying to, um, to, in my world, destroy. Be careful, please. |
| 01:39:41.53 | Melissa Woodside | Comments online. |
| 01:39:44.48 | Walfred Solorzano | We have Babette McDougall. |
| 01:39:46.82 | Melissa Woodside | Is McDougal? |
| 01:39:51.10 | Babette McDougall | Thank you, Mr. Mayor, for acknowledging me. So I just want to say thank you all very much for this rigorous discussion about the budget. It really is helpful. I find Ms. Hoffman and Ms. Cox in particular are always really good at drilling down on these details, and I appreciate it. So one of the things that I always used to like under our former finance director was this long, pages long running list of everything that we were spending money on. And I kind of like that approach. I just like to look at every single category and just run the numbers sometimes. And I'm wondering if we're going to go back to that or if I'm going to call what we're doing in the current system more scenario-based. So rather than have scenario-based reportings of how we're doing financially, can we do both? Can we do the scenarios against the running tab of all? all the nitty-gritty of what we have to expense over time. without any, I mean, correction, with any given fiscal cycle. Thank you so much. I yield back my time. |
| 01:40:47.07 | Melissa Woodside | Other comments from online? |
| 01:40:50.09 | Walfred Solorzano | Next we have Sandra Bushmaker. |
| 01:40:52.55 | Melissa Woodside | his postmaker. |
| 01:40:54.68 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. Good evening again. I too share Alice Merrill's concerns. I did hear Mr. Phipps forecast for the three projects and one of which included, in addition to including the waterfront, as a desirable location for development, revenue generating development. I also heard the use of the cosmont. company as subcontractors. I don't know if you were still here, Mr. Phipps, when they did a report for the EDEC But one of the things that they brought up was turning in lots more restaurants in the Marine ship, a lot more bars, a lot more other kind of functions that are unrelated to the maritime arts and industry there. So I remain concerned. that this effort included with the AIM initiative is a uh, A worrisome trend. Thank you. |
| 01:42:02.16 | Melissa Woodside | Anyone else online? |
| 01:42:03.14 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing no more comments online. |
| 01:42:04.93 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, we'll back for discussion. I'm going to just take a lead by saying that this is a recommended balance budget. And from my perspective, the risky area is the three added positions that are unless something changes ongoing. And. we're using some one-time monies to fund those. That's not a good long-term policy, and I think that's acknowledged by everyone from every point of view. How we stabilize it is to be determined. I don't think the focus in terms of additional revenue is exclusively or maybe even predominantly in the marinship. One of the proposals for Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District could be much broader, and depending on growth, property sales, et cetera, et cetera, in those areas could be generating money that would stay here. predominantly rather than go elsewhere. That's, that's the technique. how it plays out in the future, we're gonna wanna be very careful. I acknowledge we wanna be careful. We don't wanna destroy the working waterfront or the industries that are important to us. But we do know there's some vacant land and some land that will be someday improved in some way that generates a greater tax base. So yes, we should be careful and we should be cautious about adopting this budget, assuming that it's all just gonna work out fine. We have to closely monitor it. We have an incoming city manager that's requested a couple of these additional positions. We've honored that. AND WE'RE GOING TO watch very closely. So that's my perspective. I'm prepared to adopt the recommended budget as is, It is complicated here and there. The use of these funds and how it's accounted for is confusing at times, but it is balanced, and it's been reviewed by accountants or auditors or city attorney, et cetera. So I'm prepared to move forward. So just wanted to say that out of the box. Melissa. |
| 01:44:17.62 | Melissa Blaustein | I want to give a big thank you to Steph for the amount of time and energy. Thank you. |
| 01:44:22.61 | Alice Merrill | it off. |
| 01:44:25.11 | Melissa Blaustein | I mean, if you wanna go, Council Member Sobieski, go ahead. |
| 01:44:27.95 | Alice Merrill | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 01:44:28.28 | Melissa Blaustein | I appreciate it. I just want to thank staff. This was a challenging time to present a challenge. Sorry, I've fully... Balanced budget, given the departure of our city manager and our interim city manager, really picked up a lot of the pieces working with our finance director to bring this forward. So really appreciate the hard work of staff and also the intense scrutiny and research of my colleagues and of the finance committee. It took a lot of work to get us to where we are. Are we all thrilled with our current budget or our current concerns for our fiscal future? No, but there are steps we can take. And these three positions, our forthcoming city manager has indicated, will help us to increase efficiency. So I really believe in Elaine Forbes. I know she has a breadth of experience and knowledge and a lot of big ideas about how we can do a better job of spending, how we can increase revenues. And I look forward to our mid-year budget review, which is normally a very challenging discussion with Elaine at the helm, because I know she'll have some really creative approaches and solutions. And I appreciate our former Mayor Wray Withey mentioning some really critical points about the status of our budget and what we really have to look forward to in terms of our total balance, our unassigned fund balance, and what our next planning for the fiscal year ahead will look like. Is there a need for us to find new revenue sources? Of course, but we are on the precipice of a large conversation about planning for our economic development, as we heard from our interim city manager. And I think that there is a lot to look forward to, in addition to a lot of things that we really need to drill down on to make sure we can keep these three positions that we've added and that we keep our balanced budget going forward. So I think we're all aware of what's at stake. And I'm also prepared to approve of this budget today. So thanks again to staff and to my colleagues for their hard work on it. |
| 01:46:23.22 | Melissa Woodside | It's Cox. |
| 01:46:24.42 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 01:46:24.43 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and make a motion that the City Council adopt a resolution approving a balanced budget for fiscal year 2026 to 2027. And And just briefly, I will say I so appreciated former mayor with these comments. I fully agree. And I'm very grateful. You know, we always have a mid-year. budget adjustment but we have the flexibility to adjust more frequently than that if necessary and i also appreciate council member sobieski's comments at our last hearing on the budget where he reminded us that every year we predict a shortfall and every year we have had a surplus and so i don't necessarily think that will happen this year with the addition of three new positions, but I am hopeful that we will see that some of the numbers that we are predicting will turn out better than what we are predicting. But more than anything, I... really want to give our new incoming city manager the benefit of the doubt and follow her recommendation to increase staff in the manner that we are doing in order to allow her to manage our operating expenses in the most efficient manner. And so I look forward to seeing what that will yield. And we have the flexibility to pivot if we need to. as the year moves forward. Thanks. |
| 01:48:02.14 | Melissa Woodside | So we have a motion second and Jill, you want to add comments? |
| 01:48:06.09 | Jill Hoffman | Sure. So, yeah, except for We had a shortfall that we just talked about in last year, 25, 26 of a million. uh, 1 million, 100. or $476,000. So that was a deficit for last year of for 2526. So that was item 5A. And so and. you know, what are the semantics you want to use? We just approved a deficit budget going forward. So we you know, we decided to plug the shortfall with a million dollar transfer over from our unassigned fund balance of, you know, a million dollars, but that's how we got it to balance. So we have a deficit operating budget. We just approved, we're going to approve that here in a minute. And so, just so that we're all clear on the semantics. And, um, and so I, I'm, going to approve it, but I'm going to approve it with, with great reluctance, um, and great trepidation because I usually would not approve a shortfall or a deficit budget. But. I'm doing it in support of our new city manager who came in. These recommendations from her for the new staff were were to us at a, you know, as a recommendation moving forward and what she thought we needed you know, to as tools for her. And I want to give her those tools moving forward. even though it's going to put us, I think, in a very difficult position for the very reasons that I was asking our our inner city manager, because these aren't, decisions to be taken lightly. These are not one-time expenses that we normally use your you would normally use your unassigned one time expense from a general fund right these are on these employee expenses are things that you take on with Understanding you're going to be paying them for a long time. It's a commitment to the people that you that work for you. that you're accepting into your town. and you want to keep them for a long time. And so you don't ever make hires or you don't ever allocate funds for positions lightly. And I don't take that lightly, ever take that lightly. And so when I approve this budget, you know, we're going to be looking at this at mid-year very, very seriously. And so if we're still in shortfall, at midyear, you know, look for some tough decisions on how we're spending and people who come to us asking for things, even if they're one time expenses. Um, Don't be surprised if this year is a belt-tightening year once we get to mid-year. But as much as we... you know, like to support things in our town. Um, I think we have to start looking at are general or our unassigned general fund balance is will now be down to 3 million. We can't keep using it annually at 1 million, right? So last year, Sorry. And I have I just have one more comment. Last year we had, so 25, 26, we just approved it on the item before. We had another million dollar. right that we had to true up and pay up. We had a deficit of, 1.1 and something. So we use that from our pension trust fund. And we can't keep doing that from an assigned fund balance because we've only got three after this year, if we have to use the 1.1 million, we've only got 3 million left. So that only gives us runway about two more years left of unassigned fund balance to plug a deficit in our in our, in our, budget. So, I mean, this is, we're getting to crunch time on what we can afford to do now. If it's good news, then it's good news. And we like good news, but I'm just saying I'm cautiously, I'm, approving this budget. |
| 01:52:04.15 | Melissa Woodside | So there's a motion second, I think. Oh, yeah. |
| 01:52:07.10 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. I would like to make a comment if I'm sure right, Mayor. Of course. |
| 01:52:08.87 | Melissa Woodside | Right. |
| 01:52:10.47 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, so I mean, I'm also going to support the budget approval, knowing that it's a temporary budget approval akin to what Ray Withey said, waiting for a new city manager to take a look at things. And I appreciate all the comments here. We'll see what the year actually ends up as. You know, we still have a month and a half of revenue in that forecast, and the audit will tell us whether we ended up with a surplus or not this year. We're making a forecast of a budget deficit. But I just want to kind of say what I said last time is, you know, I'm here to try to be of service. And my five and a half years on city council, going through this many times, I feel like we're missing the forest for the trees. We have the point is that. when I emphasized about us projecting deficits and actually having surpluses is that the team, the staff here, the city council, interacting with the community has done a pretty good job at managing the ship, the OPEX. We move money around, we cut spending, we negotiate well with our staff and have managed over the last five years and more to run balanced budgets with slight surpluses, right? But as you know, I showed my M&Ms last time. This is the budget of the city. I actually didn't bring them this time, but it was still sitting here on the desk. That's $25 million, right? So one of these M&Ms is $1 million, right? If you look at our total deferred infrastructure bill for roads, stairways, Storm drains. It's this thing. So, no matter what we save, in our budget, if we're having a $1 million surplus, we're never going to attack this big problem. And so the path to glory here is not taking away free M&Ms at the city clerk's desk. And it's not cutting the children's librarian or nipping around the edges of supporting the arts or, charity, uh, nonprofits in town, we're not going to get there. And so I concur actually with the thesis that we have a money problem but it's not exactly an opex problem as ray withy pointed out we have four million dollars in our Trust fund, we have two million in our OPEB. We have three and a half million in a signed fund balance and we have a financial reserve of 25%. OpEx-wise, we're in pretty decent shape. to kind of muddle through keeping levels of service sort of where we're at and maybe with some degradation, vulnerable to a big economic impact, But what no one is talking about is how we're actually going to up level service for our staff. How we're going to add more police, how we're going to add more permit tax, how we're going to quicken the permit process time by having more bodies at City Hall. How are we going to fix our infrastructure, sea level rise, storm drains, and otherwise? These are tens of millions of dollars. And if nothing changes, nothing's going to change. So I'm open minded to the changes, but we've said no to all kinds of revenue things, from new hotels to short term rentals, to new taxes, to economic development. Something's got to get we need to make adult trade offs. And I just want to point that out that at the beginning of this year, we made a strategic goal of trying to find $10 million more a year of annual revenue for the city. And so far it is June and we've identified zero. Last month, we turned down a tax measure for Charter City, which was proposed that would have generated it. I'm not a fan of taxes. That was my last choice. But we turn that down. So, so far we have $0 on the table. So, you know, when I ran problems last time, I talked about trying to solve problems and I'm just highlighting the problem for the community. We can all oppose each other's ideas or we can try to come together to find a way of meeting the goal. |
| 01:55:46.03 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Um, I won't say anything more other than I think we need to adopt the budget by resolution. And with the permission of the maker of the motion, second, I'll read the resolution that's proposed by staff. It's pretty short. A resolution of the City Council of the City of Sausalito approving the budget for the 2026-27 fiscal year, whereas the City Council of the City of Sausalito adopts an annual budget to carry on the various funds, departments, divisions, and programs of the municipality. and to provide for the payment of bonded indebtedness of the city each fiscal year, and to control the use of public monies, and whereas the city council reviewed the city manager's recommended budget on June 16th, that's today, 2026, and whereas the city council reviewed the city manager's recommended staff reorganization and approved a position count for fiscal year 2026-27, and whereas the city council approved a capital improvements for fiscal year 2026-27, and whereas the City Council approved a capital improvements program and financing plan for fiscal year 2026-27, Now, therefore, it is hereby resolved, ordered, and declared as follows. that the fiscal year 202627 budget totaling 29,390 6 $6,600 in total, including $24,000,000 370, I think there's a typo here, 379,000 and some odd number of dollars for general fund operations and 5 million $51,752 for capital improvement projects is hereby approved. That's the resolution on the table, so we have a motion and a second. Okay, and we can do this by, I believe, Mr. City Attorney, by voice vote. Okay. All those in favor? |
| 01:57:44.58 | Susan Frank | Bye. |
| 01:57:45.95 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, thank you. The next item is related to the GAN limit, which is a limit adopted by the voters of California, I think in the late 1970s. And if I can maybe reduce this discussion quickly, the resolution recognizes that we are a couple million dollars below the GAN limit. at this point, and this is a technical calculation. It's been confirmed by our auditors and by our accountant. And, pleasure. Is that a fair summary of where we are? |
| 01:58:22.16 | Angeline Loeffler | Yes, that is correct. We're actually 2.4 million below the computation. So the city is actually for the 18 million and actual the appropriation came out to be 20 million. So we're actually 24%. point 2.4 million below. the idea appropriation limits. |
| 01:58:42.83 | Melissa Woodside | And the numbers don't match precisely the total budget because not all of our funds are subject to the GAN limit. Is that correct? |
| 01:58:51.02 | Angeline Loeffler | That is correct. It is only on the tax-related revenues, not all the revenues. |
| 01:58:58.00 | Melissa Woodside | OK. Thank you. Unless there are questions or a desire on the part of the public to comment, I'm open to that. If anyone wishes to comment on this last item related to the budget. |
| 01:59:12.10 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing none online. |
| 01:59:13.21 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, I entertain a motion to approve this last item. |
| 01:59:18.62 | Walfred Solorzano | So. |
| 01:59:18.96 | Walfred Solorzano | moved. |
| 01:59:20.85 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. So there's a motion second to approve the, in effect, GAN limit calculation. And anyone want to say anything more? Okay. All those in favor of the motion? |
| 01:59:36.68 | Walfred Solorzano | I, I, |
| 01:59:38.18 | Melissa Woodside | And that passes unanimously. Okay, the long awaited item that's been moved from the bottom of the agenda to this point is related to the AIM initiative. And We don't need a break, do we? We're OK to keep going? Okay. |
| 01:59:57.94 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 01:59:58.62 | Melissa Woodside | No, I just want to make sure sometimes after a couple hours, people ask for a break. So we'll go right into it. I just want to make a couple comments so that we're all on at least the same page as to what is before us tonight. Thank you. What's before us tonight is certification by the county registrar that there were more than enough signatures on a petition, an initiative petition, And that is before us. for consideration of putting it on the ballot. because the petition itself, the proposed law, if you will, requires a vote of the people, we have no choice whatsoever but to put it on the ballot. So having said that, there are other issues that people have raised that need discussion and decision tonight. but I would propose that we consider two motions. would be to put it on the ballot in November and take care of that. at the front end. Second motion, and that's to be discussed, and there may be different points of view on whether or not there should be a report, what should be in the report, et cetera, et cetera. the, government code provides. for the Council to request reports Usually that's in the context of receiving a report on a matter where we could on our own receiving the petition, simply decide to declare the law the new law. that's not an option for us tonight. So I hope that helps a little bit to make sure that what we're not here tonight to do necessarily is to debate the merits of the petition. Okay? That will be for the voters. I suspect a vigorous debate, but Tonight, we want to make sure we are doing what we are required to do. and consider what else we may ask staff to do in the next little while. I hope that's helpful. |
| 02:02:09.70 | Jill Hoffman | Mayor, I have a question. |
| 02:02:10.67 | Melissa Woodside | Sure. |
| 02:02:10.87 | Jill Hoffman | This is a clarification question. And this is a question for our city attorney. City attorney, does the vote on the report, does that have anything to do or affect the timing? on the vote. for the certification for the ballot. The staff report seemed to indicate there was some sort of uh, there was some sort of effect on the timing of that. All right. Are you there, Sergio? |
| 02:02:46.56 | Walfred Solorzano | Uh-oh. Is Sergio still online? |
| 02:02:50.86 | Melissa Woodside | So, Thank you. |
| 02:02:52.09 | Walfred Solorzano | wait. |
| 02:02:52.43 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. So let's |
| 02:02:55.35 | Walfred Solorzano | Good to get back. |
| 02:02:56.24 | Melissa Woodside | We can, we're going to take a break and try to get Sergio. Okay. |
| 02:02:56.82 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:02:56.87 | Walfred Solorzano | Maybe do not. Okay. Ready? |
| 02:03:03.77 | Melissa Woodside | I mean, |
| 02:03:13.39 | Unknown (SCA presenter) | Do it. I can't hold it. I can't hold it. Do it. Do it. |
| 02:03:15.23 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. |
| 02:03:17.68 | Unknown (SCA presenter) | All right, Batman. Bye. Yeah, it's not used enough. |
| 02:03:23.21 | Melissa Woodside | I know. |
| 02:03:24.16 | Unknown (SCA presenter) | And it's cool. Yeah. |
| 02:03:30.25 | Adrian Brinton | Thank you. |
| 02:03:30.27 | Unknown (SCA presenter) | Australia. |
| 02:03:30.70 | Adrian Brinton | Thank you. |
| 02:03:31.21 | Melissa Woodside | Colleen John Cox. I'm sure she's nobody. |
| 02:03:41.28 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, I'm calling. |
| 02:03:46.25 | Jill Hoffman | We lost one. |
| 02:03:47.81 | Melissa Woodside | Well, we still have a quorum. So we're back in session and Joe asked a question of Sergio, but Sergio's computer had overheated and he's been able to get it back going. Is that right, Sergio? |
| 02:04:03.22 | Sergio Rudin | Yes, I apologize for the technical difficulties. |
| 02:04:05.96 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, and you may not have heard the question, but it relates to whether there is a, a, a prescribed timeline for making the decision on putting on the ballot dependent upon the issuance of a report, or put another way, Are we able tonight? to in effect, call the election and have it go forward and make a second decision requiring some sort of a report. |
| 02:04:41.14 | Jill Hoffman | In other words, is there a certain sequence we have to follow or |
| 02:04:43.77 | Melissa Woodside | That's another way of putting it, sure. |
| 02:04:46.03 | Sergio Rudin | So... um, I assume we're calling the item and I can just launch into this question and then do a minimal staff presentation. |
| 02:04:57.69 | Melissa Woodside | That would be fine. That would be fine. |
| 02:05:00.55 | Sergio Rudin | Um, So, Elections code 9215 Peter Carr, C.A.R.D. gather you know outlines the Council's options with regards to an initiative once it's been certified as sufficient. Peter Carr, C.A.R.D. The county did certify this position as sufficient based on statistical sampling. And once you receive the petition, which you are doing this evening, you have a choice. The choice is you can place the measure on the ballot immediately. Or you can order a report. which has to be presented to the council within 30 days. Or, typically, you can just decide to adopt the measure outright, which here you can't do because the measure amends a prior voter approved measure. So it has to go on the ballot. So the council's only two options here are to... order the preparation of a report or to place the measure on the ballot. Now there's, Also potential third option, I would say, which is you can place the measure on the ballot and tell staff to do a report anyway. Um, That's a little atypical because usually the purpose of a report is to help the council understand whether or not to adopt the measure outright and what the impacts of the measure are, or whether to bear the cost of calling an election. Here, since you don't really have a choice of placing it on the ballot, You're going to do it either way, regardless of when you receive a report, You can choose your sequence, as it were, this evening. Um, and whether you want to report at all. Again, typically, Elections code says that the council can order a report on the impacts of the measure. This includes their fiscal impacts, the consistency with the general specific plan, any impacts on land use, impacts on vacant parcels of land, impacts on business and employment, infrastructure and any other matters requested by the council to be in the report. So those are your options this evening. |
| 02:07:00.48 | Melissa Woodside | So if I understood you correctly, we could tonight. take up by motion to place this initiative on the November ballot. |
| 02:07:13.35 | John DeRay | Yeah. |
| 02:07:13.88 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:07:13.91 | John DeRay | Thank you. |
| 02:07:13.96 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:07:13.98 | John DeRay | Thank you. |
| 02:07:14.05 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. And then as a separate matter, take up the question of a report, its timing, et cetera. Is that an option? |
| 02:07:22.40 | Sergio Rudin | Yes, there is a resolution in your agenda packet that would... place the measure on the ballot. Um, And so your action would be to adopt that resolution and then have the city clerk transmitted to the county. |
| 02:07:39.04 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, if I may just, in light of that, |
| 02:07:39.19 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 02:07:45.36 | Melissa Woodside | I want to hear from the public on this eventually, of course, but in the meantime, get a sense from the dais as to kind of the order of March here. |
| 02:07:56.91 | Jill Hoffman | May I have one follow-up for Sergio on that? |
| 02:07:59.34 | Melissa Woodside | Sure. Go ahead. Go ahead. |
| 02:08:00.77 | Jill Hoffman | Um, City Attorney, are there any other legal issues for going down one path or the other? In other words, the normal path under the code is you do one thing to the other, which is you either adopt it and put it on the for the ballot right as as you've As you said, I think we all understand on the dais that it's qualified and, you know, you know, we're going to adopt it at some point. either you adopt it for the ballot or you order the report and then after the report, then we would adopt it on the ballot. After we received the report, we would adopt on ballot. Is there any legal issues or ramifications from having the report first and then putting it on the voting to put it on the ballot after we received the report. Any issues from that or flow from that? the signatures, their signatures have been certified Any issues from going down that path? |
| 02:09:00.56 | Sergio Rudin | I would say that the issues are Thank you. There are not many legal issues, but there's a couple. One is, I think, regardless of the sequence of events, I think the report needs to be focused on the impacts of the of the measure on the city. and it can't advocate for or against passage of the measure, Those are restrictions on use of public funds with regards to you know, measures on the ballot. Um, There is, under the elections code, if you first order the report, Um, There is a sequence of events prescribed by the elections code under which the city staff must return within 30 days of the report, and then you must take action within 10 days of receipt of the report. that could trigger the need for you guys to have special meetings. Whereas if you place the measure on the ballot this evening, Um, one of the benefits is that you could give staff a longer time to complete the report, or you could order the report to be presented at the next convenient regular city council meeting, thus avoiding the need for special meetings. So those are some of the things I can think of. Additionally, if for some reason you have concerns about the resolution this evening, You're not prepared. for any reason to place it on the ballot right now. you could order the report and have 30 days to think about it. |
| 02:10:27.31 | Melissa Woodside | Given the choice, if you will, I think I'd like to ask for a sense of where uh council members are now so we can put it at least up for discussion and have public weigh in. Ms. Cox. |
| 02:10:45.81 | Councilmember Cox | We have no choice but to put it on the ballot. It is not discretionary. It has qualified, and it must go to the voters. I would tend to take the city attorney's recommendation to immediately make the decision to put it on the ballot And then um, have. received the report at should we decide to move forward with a report which as the city manager, as a city attorney said, could be helpful to staff in understanding the impacts upon our general plan, our housing element, et cetera. Then we can receive it at a regularly scheduled city council meeting at which the public can attend here, understand. And I think it would, you know, beneficial to inform the public and to have the adequate time to put that together. It's a complex initiative with potentially complex ramifications. |
| 02:11:47.03 | Melissa Woodside | So that would be my inclination. So just cutting to the chase, you would you would suggest that we act now to put it on the ballot and then take up as a separate question the question of a report and its timing. Okay, I'm seeing two nods in this direction. |
| 02:12:05.95 | Jill Hoffman | I, okay, just because the elections code is so complicated and because I don't know all the ramifications of not following the elections code in the sense. And because there's no downside really other than following, you know, following the timelines. I would rather just follow the election code. I do absolutely think that we need a report, not just for staff, but for everybody else to understand. the public to understand the ramifications of this, you know, 266 page initiative. I think everybody's trying to figure out what it all means. Um, and it'd be enormously helpful to have, um, an analysis of it. So I would prefer just to follow the code, um, an order report tonight. And if I absolutely agree, we're going to vote to put it on the ballot. I mean, I completely agree that they've got the signatures and it's going to be on the ballot. Um, and so I would just prefer to order the report. um receive it um at whatever the next meeting is in 30 days and then um within 10 days um yes have a meeting and vote to put it on the ballot it may be um whatever meeting that is and that fits in and that may be the only thing on the agenda and so be it i mean i don't know Well. But that would how that would negatively affect anybody? I mean, |
| 02:13:25.63 | Melissa Woodside | So you've heard from all of us now, I think. But before we actually put a motion on the table. Sure. Having, hopefully you've heard from each of us, I'd like to hear from the public on that question, okay? |
| 02:13:44.75 | Melissa Blaustein | Can I just ask today for any one question? |
| 02:13:46.44 | Melissa Woodside | Sure. All right. |
| 02:13:47.52 | Melissa Blaustein | Just to be clear, Sergio, if we do put it on... the ballot tonight that is in fact following the election code. |
| 02:13:54.98 | Sergio Rudin | Correct. And basically what you're doing is you're following the elections code and putting the measure on the ballot and then ordering staff to do a report anyway under your just general authority to order staff to do things. |
| 02:14:04.48 | Melissa Blaustein | But confirming it in no way compromises following the election code to vote now to put it on the ballot and then to continue to order the report subsequently. |
| 02:14:12.31 | Sergio Rudin | In my opinion, no. And that's because I think the city has separate authority to put together analysis of the impacts of a ballot measure on the public agency itself. |
| 02:14:23.40 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, thank you. Okay, so... Now that those in the Chambers and those online have heard a sense of human. you will, from where we are now. On this particular issue alone, does anyone want to make a comment, public comment? Yes. Well, I think what I'm trying to do is get past that question, that first question. Are we going to vote tonight to put it on the ballot or not? And once we get past that question, we know there are going to be questions about reports, et cetera, et cetera. I just want to. |
| 02:14:57.33 | Ian Sobieski | You want to take comment twice? Yeah, I think you've got- |
| 02:14:58.78 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I think we got. four votes to it looks to me like if I can read the tea leaves. You probably have four votes. |
| 02:15:05.43 | Ian Sobieski | public comment from both my Adams. I agree that you should have two motions, but maybe just to spare everyone, then the headache of trying to split their comments in half. |
| 02:15:05.47 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not sure. Yeah. |
| 02:15:10.98 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 02:15:13.84 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:15:13.85 | Ian Sobieski | So they just run one round of public comments. |
| 02:15:13.92 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. We're gonna take one round of public comments. You can address anything under the sun related to the AIM initiative. but you only have two minutes. We have quite a few and we're going to try to get through these. And just recognize, we're gonna, we know at one point or another we're going to put on the ballot. So, One round of public comment. on what's on the agenda tonight. And please, I'm going to take these in the order they were handed to me. The first person who wishes to speak this item is Jim Madden, followed by Joel Carr. Mr. Madden. |
| 02:16:00.24 | Jim Madden | I'm not sure. Good evening, Council. I support the AIM initiative because it places land use decisions where they belong with the elected city council and appointed planning commission rather than requiring a citywide vote for routine land use matters. As someone who worked through the permitting process for the Lighthouse Restaurant, I can tell you firsthand how difficult the current process can be. It took me nearly two years to obtain approvals for an existing restaurant and no significant construction. so it's not an easy process to get through the city. My family also owns the Sausalito Yacht Harbor. We have a significant investment in the future of the waterfront. We would never support anything that would harm our business or the character of Sausalito. Reality is our waterfront infrastructure is aging and deteriorating because current rules have made reinvestment extremely difficult. AIM will help create a path to rebuild infrastructure, address sea level rise, and support a vibrant working waterfront. It also allows a broader range of compatible businesses that are currently permitted to bring more activity and vitality to the waterfront, restaurants, commercial fishermen, artists, maritime business, and other enterprise, create a more vibrant and economically healthy Sausalito, while preserving the character that makes our community special. Also, the 47-foot height limit, it's not about bigger buildings, it's about allowing modern maritime facilities that can support the maritime industries that are the foundation of our waterfront. |
| 02:17:26.08 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Madden. Joel Karl, excuse me, is the next speaker, followed by Gail Schell. |
| 02:17:36.09 | Joel Carr | Good evening, Council. Thank you. I'm Joel Carr. I'd like to say that we think of ourselves as a liberal population in California and in this town. What we have become, in fact, is anything but that. Liberal does not equal obstruction or stagnation. In California, as in the rest of the country and in Sausalito in particular, we have frozen everything and made it virtually impossible to get anything done whatsoever. whether that be improvements to the infrastructure of our city or thoughtful changes to existing regulations, virtually anything, we are all frozen in a block of ice. Thanks to the highly overused word, no. It's just easier to say no than to agree to do the hard work that it will take if we say yes. The misinformation running around about the initiative is absolutely stunning. This is about aim, that is artists, industry, modern time and makers facilitation. This is not about new housing. It's not about absurd diagrams of massive blocky buildings filling sites on the waterfront. It's not about high rise hotels, sex shops, and all of the other in-new suggestions that have come out from the no side. This is meant to enhance and revive our ownership waterfront. Naysayers are clearly unaware that cities require parking which uses land area. One parking space for a thousand square feet of site area means that for nearly all the sites with no building, four stories, the total lot coverage area would be 50%. And that doesn't even account for the legally required side, rear, and front yard setbacks. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. If you think it's true, go and actually read the information, the disinformation, gossip, or scare taxes. Thank you. |
| 02:19:41.32 | Melissa Woodside | here. |
| 02:19:42.15 | Joel Carr | tactics. Thank you. |
| 02:19:43.97 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. Gail Schell followed by Adrian Brenton. |
| 02:19:50.06 | Gail Schell | Hello, Council. Nice to see you. Thank you for listening to us. I became involved with the AIM initiative because I live on the north side of Sausalito, and I do spend a lot of time walking my dog and riding my bike in the waterfront area. And I know that you will hear from a lot of people tonight about preserving that area. And my first thought on that is, I believe that we've preserved it in amber. and it's stuck and I do think it needs to be unstuck. And you'll hear about a lot of people coming up tonight about talking about reasons. What I want to share with you is my personal experience I was one of the people who gathered signatures on the petitions. And it was interesting the kind of response I got when I was out there with citizens of Sausalito. There were people who looked at the pictures, looked at the petition and said, oh, my God, I'm so glad somebody's finally doing something about this. So there's definitely I believe a groundswell of of energy wanting to release our waterfront from that amber I also want to share with you the things that kind of resonated with people when they didn't know about the initiative and they asked. And the thing that seemed to really click for people was the idea that The people who are down there right now, their hands are tied in many ways in terms of expanding or reinvesting and to realize that we have, One business grandfathered in allowed to sell their wares out of their shop and other businesses not allowed that same opportunity seemed so unfair to people who had not heard about it before. So that was probably the thing that really landed the most with people. And I just want to share that with you because it was my experience. It was hearing it from real people. and it just meant a lot to me. Thanks for listening. |
| 02:21:33.77 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Adrian Brenton followed by Ray Whitby. |
| 02:21:39.43 | Adrian Brinton | Hi, Adrian Brinton. Thank you for taking my comment. As you know, I've been fairly active promoting this and been involved in a lot of aspects. I wanted to start with some good news. We looked into the five story renderings and we found that five story buildings are in fact not possible under AIM 100%. You cannot put a five story building in a 47 foot envelope. So I just want to make sure that that's very clear. There are a lot of other rules that come into play in our municipal code when we get into looking at buildings on larger sites that will severely limit the effective FAR. So I don't want to get too technical, but if you have questions about it, please reach out to us or look at our website. We have a lot of great information about how this actually works. And really, you know, the reality is People aren't building office space right now. Our offices in the MarinShip are actually dying. They're mostly half empty, and the owners of those offices would like to reuse those spaces to turn them into more profitable uses, which right now are actually industrial uses. The industrial space is what we have a shortage of. We have a shortage of space for those companies that are really making the MarinShip what it is and what we love about it. So, you know, this is really the playbook that we're seeing. You know, we invent a scary scenario, we send it around, send it around through five or six different channels. We scare people, And then the scared people, you look at them, you go, oh my God, people are scared. We need to stop this. And it's really the playbook that we've been playing for the last 20 years. And it's really not serving us anymore. We want to see not the stop everything plan. We want to see the do something plan. So aim is the very first step in doing that. There's a lot of other steps that are going to come out after that. And we really look forward to doing that together with everybody. We can use our creativity. to actually build the marine ship that we want. We heard our budget. This is absolutely about our budget. We have got to bring the revenue generation of the marineship up to a level where it can support our town relative to the size of the district. Thank you very much. |
| 02:23:40.14 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Ray Withey followed by Vicki Nichols. |
| 02:23:44.15 | Ray Withey | Thank you. |
| 02:23:45.99 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:23:46.02 | Ray Withey | Good evening again. Um, I thought that I should at least, because I was one of the proponents of this AIM initiative, I should come up here and actually tell you why I did that. So first of all, Let me remind you. that the recent The most recent conversation about the marine ship has been going on for 15 years. My starting point is the Wyoming report. Now, I came into that a couple of years after the WAM report. But with the WAM report under my shoulder, I campaigned in November 2012, and of which the Marineship was a critical component. Now what did I experience over the next eight years? Well, we did a marine ship. Plan, steering committee. We then started the general plan in which at least 40% of the conversations was about the marineship. We had two business advisory committee sponsored reports on the economics of the marine ship. We had a residual land value study done on the marine ship properties. And then finally, we had the Cosmot report, which was an economic development study. And guess what we did? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. The only thing that we've done And in the last five years, I admit, council has been working on the housing element and putting some housing there. The only reason that action was taken is because the state imposed significant penalties if you didn't. The consequence of not acting are severe. It is economically severe over the medium term, and it could lead to Sausalito's bankruptcy if we don't improve the economic vitality of the marine ship. |
| 02:25:50.09 | Melissa Woodside | Vicki Nichols followed by Susan Frank. |
| 02:25:52.87 | Vicki Nichols | Good evening, Mayor Woodside and council members. I'm going to follow your request and talk about should we put this on the ballot or not. But I have a few other comments. My name is Vicki Nichols. I live on Lima Street. And I'm going to focus just on the initiative and what you're charged with and what you've agenocides this evening, and that is putting this on the ballot. In my particular view, this is not ready for public. There's some inconsistencies here. |
| 02:26:00.01 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:26:22.00 | Vicki Nichols | There does need to be an analysis, not by staff, by a formal, professional, experienced land use company to identify unidentified consequences and inconsistencies. I've just read a few pages of it, and I already see if I was a planning commissioner, I'd go, well, wait, this page says this and this says this. So this is not ready the way it's written, in my opinion. I was on the planning commission when this was passed over as a draft to the council to consider for the general plan. The idea then was I think we could all stipulate, everybody in this room, that our Marinship specific plan is old. It's needed a refresh, a rewrite, whatever you want to call it. So when we sent that over, the agreement was that that would go in its entirety, to the general plan and it would be worked on later. By doing this and revoking 1022 and then just the other new entitlements you've done all that in one document One vote, I don't think people read 266 pages. So I'm just going to skip to the chase here. This needs a study. to inform the residents. We have a good example of J and K that just went through. When people found out a couple weeks later that the entitlements at 1 and 3 Harbor Drive were multiple stories, and you could say to them, you just voted for this, there was not a clear understanding. Don't repeat this process. The public should be informed. And. Believe me, there will be a group that will do it if you won't vote to get the study done. |
| 02:28:06.27 | Melissa Woodside | Susan Frank followed by Fred Moore. |
| 02:28:12.78 | Susan Frank | Mayor Woodside and Council, hello. I haven't been here since you've been seated, so it's a pleasure. I think the description that is in AIM is brilliant, and the words are perfect. Yes, the Marin ship needs to be rethought. but it's going to require a lot of thinking about it. And... The one thing I'm not as confident about is increasing the height of a building to 47 feet and increasing the FAR. That... is potentially a huge problem and could cut off this community from its waterfront. So I think if you can look at that so carefully, and that's why I think there needs to be a report on the AIM initiative, not the words and not the vibrancy, That's important for us and it's important for the Marineship. But what. is vital is that we look at the impacts of very large, tall buildings in front of our waterfront. You think about it. It's cutting us off. So, Please be careful with this. |
| 02:29:45.31 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Fred Moore. followed by Sharna Brockett. |
| 02:29:52.28 | Fred Moore | Good evening, Mayor and Council members. My name is Fred Moore. I'm one of the three signing proponents of the AIM Initiative. I care deeply about Sausalito. I'm a homeowner, a neighbor, and a volunteer with VIPS, Sausalito Center for the Arts, Sausalito Foundation, Sausalito Historical Society, Sausalito Beautiful, and SCC Cares. I attach my name and my reputation to AIM because it offers a constructive path forward for Sausalito, restores the typical democratic process for land use decisions, and protects the character and quality of the life we all enjoy. AIM is not a blueprint for any particular project. It does not mandate or promote any specific development. Rather, one fundamental element of AIM is to ensure that all proposed developments follow the full suite of applicable city and state requirements and is subject to robust public review and comment as you know that includes land planning a design review building code compliance environmental review evaluating traffic and transportation impacts aesthetics and visual resources air quality geology hydrology water quality noise public services utilities. Together with recommended project mitigation measures and a no project analysis. Even though all these safeguards for the community are stay in fully intact, the voters retain the ultimate safeguard, a public referendum vote, which can stop any out of scale proposal. I'm happy to meet with any of you and any neighbors to discuss AIM. You can flag me down around town at the cruising club, Bachi, or at the community events where I volunteer. I am committed to be part of the solutions that help move our community forward. In just 10 days, our community of volunteers gather 1,000 signatures. Tonight, please adopt the resolution to submit AIM to the voters in November. Thank you again for all the time and effort you put in saving our city. Thank you. |
| 02:31:50.34 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Shana Brockett, followed by Alice Merrill. |
| 02:31:57.34 | Sharna Brockett | Good evening. I just want to say how excited I am as being the organizer of our volunteers for Sausaludens for our Thriving Waterfront. And as you know, we were all volunteers. We had no paid people collecting signatures. And we worked over Memorial Day weekend and we got a thousand signatures. And so excited. And we got those in ten days. So record time. Um, You know, I don't know when Sausalito last saw a citizen-led ballot initiative. Maybe that was 40 years ago with Ordinance 1022. Yeah. The cannabis one. Okay. So that was not too long ago. But anyways, we're very excited about this and very proud. You know, the residents of Sausalito are exercising their same democratic rights that the residents exercised in 1985, the right to put a question directly to the voters. So we're excited about that. You know, I think we've talked a little bit about this here, that there is a cost to doing nothing. And we're seeing that now. And it's time to make a decision and stop kicking the can down the road when it's going to be too late. And I do want to add that, you know, you can go to our website, Sauceliterthrive.org. We have a ton of information there. We have FAQs. If you really want to go into the nitty-gritty, you'll find there that, you know, every one of any proposal that comes our way has discretionary review process, as Fred just mentioned. And so it's not like it's a free for all. It's everything will go through the city government process with public input and all sorts of discretionary review, environmental impact included. And yeah, so we're proud of this. Please put AIM on the ballot tonight. We got the signatures. There's a lot of people behind this, a lot of momentum, and we want to see it on the ballot in November. Thank you. |
| 02:33:43.99 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Alice Merrill will be followed by Andy Greer. |
| 02:33:48.07 | Alice Merrill | Hello. So go ahead and vote. Put AIM on the ballot tonight. because it's going to get there anyway. What I always want is... I want community to talk to each other. I want people to understand what the small things are that were bothering people that can be worked out if you can sell your product or you can't. That's something that could be worked out without having to have the city council in making the decisions about what kind of buildings go in. I'm sure that this could have been a citywide And, loved thing that people could have have really embraced it. I certainly would. I'd embrace having the changes that are needed to make the businesses that are down there more vibrant, more, more healthy, more organized, more whatever. But having it just... dumped. on Memorial Day weekend on the community feels very separating and very un and community to me. And I know that they think that I'm a no person. I am not. want things to be good. I want things to change. I have seen plenty of change. Most of it's been okay, but, um, Let's not just, it's like the baby in the bathwater. So, um, We need to have community groups, please. Why can't it be explained in a way that it can be worked on instead of just, oh, throw everything out? You know, I'm just frustrated. I want to say that in the letters... The yes letters were 17 and the no letters were 27. that might be how it works. Who knows? But, Just let us work together instead of against each other. |
| 02:35:56.54 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you, Alice. Andy Greer followed by Lauren. |
| 02:36:05.05 | Andy Greer | Hello? You should request the report for a review. AIM is the wrong tool for the right problems. No one disputes that the marine ship faces real challenges. Aging infrastructure, sea level rise, economic pressures, and evolving businesses needs all require action. The question is not whether change is necessary. The question is whether AIM is the right mechanism to achieve it. AIM attempts to solve multiple complex problems through a single ballot initiative that immediately repeals longstanding protections and dramatically increases development intensity before the community has completed the planning necessary to understand the consequences. The better approach is to plan first and legislate second. First, the city should complete a comprehensive marine ship master plan. The Marine ship is not just another commercial district. It is a working waterfront with marine industries, artists, fabricators, houseboats, historic shipyard resources, businesses that have evolved over decades. Before rewriting the rules, the community should decide what aspects of the Marine ship are most important. to preserve. What should change and where growth is appropriate? AIM removes existing guardrails before replacement protections are in place. The Marineship specific plan and overlay currently contain detailed provisions designed to preserve industrial uses. protect view corridors and went commercial displacement of marine businesses and would repeal these protections immediately without adopting an equivalent replacement framework. The city has already invested decades studying the marine ship, the 1980 specific plan, the steering committee, the marine rails, historic evaluation, general plan updates, housing elements. work. All identified important community values. These efforts consistently recognize that the need to balance economic vitality with preservation of the working waterfront. Thank you. |
| 02:38:32.32 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Thank you, Andy. Lauren DeWingler followed by Miriam Brown. And I see no other or have no other Cards from people in the room. Lauren? |
| 02:38:48.20 | Lauren DeWingler | you council for providing a platform for us to share our concerns um I think the city of Sausalito first deserves to know who is funding the AIM initiatives marketing. As a 501c3 founder myself, I also realize they may not have to disclose this in their tax filings, but I do believe it's important transparency when advocating for a ballot measure. I also see it as confusing people. which appears to be a tactic. And I personally have five close friends of mine who admitted to me they did not realize what they signed. Secondly, Sausalito is not as stringent as supporters say. You can request a variance or special use permit for just about anything. And I also hold the belief that when you buy waterfront property, it comes with a certain level of responsibility. its ability to do it under the zone you purchased it under. I'd like to see cleanup of toxic areas before passing the problem on to a future buyer. not just protecting a place but leaning into it with a diverse financial strategy. This does not have to be bonds. I believe it should come from grants from our federal government who caused the pollution in the first place during World War II and be sold to a property owner who wants to own and manage a boatyard and now sell it to retail or a housing developer. So this is not about an outdated ordinance from my perspective. I've seen 1022 help our waterfront grow with slow intentionality and community involvement since 1985. I see this as a pro-development policy grab and one I strongly feel we don't need. The economic opportunity is an M&M, if you will, sitting right in front of us. Investing in our small boat yard and railways will generate more revenue in the long term than a retail plan could ever begin to offer. without selling our soul. to housing or any other major projects that everybody has, even the, even aim supporters have, um, said they don't want to do. As a true Sausalito local and credentialed mariner, I feel what AIM is proposing and how its proponents have also gone about doing so has been misleading and deceptive from my perspective. And if passed, I'm really worried would be detrimental to our town. Thank you. |
| 02:40:54.71 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Miriam Brown. |
| 02:41:00.88 | Miriam Brown | So my idea when I was approached |
| 02:41:03.58 | Melissa Woodside | We want to make sure this is heard by everybody. So if you could speak into the mic. Thank you, Miriam. |
| 02:41:07.03 | Miriam Brown | THE FAMILY. Hi everyone. When I first heard about this, right away I thought about the children. because Most of them are in. pretty much. doesn't give the children what they really need. Playgrounds or playgrounds? but no longer can you swing next to each other. like the fun days. So anyway, I thought let's include the children Let's not overlook them. And I would say starting with a pool Olympic size, where they can learn as a baby how to swim there, where they can They can compete. They can do high divers. I mean, something, why can't we be part of the Olympics? That's all I'm going to say. But I really feel that let's remember the kids and not do the same thing. over and over again. Okay. Thank you. |
| 02:42:08.40 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you, Miriam. I'm seeing no other cards or hands raised in the chambers. Are there comments online? |
| 02:42:16.96 | Walfred Solorzano | We have Sandra Bushmaker. |
| 02:42:19.05 | Melissa Woodside | is Bushmaker. |
| 02:42:20.69 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:42:20.72 | Sandra Bushmaker | Good evening again. I submitted a letter against the AIM initiative for quite a few reasons, but first I wanna talk about placing this on the ballot. I am a supporter of doing an Election Code 9212 report, an unbiased critical report of the impacts of this initiative, this huge impactful initiative on our city. And I would really like the City Council to have that Uh, and the public have that. prior to putting this on the ballot. I recognize that you don't have a lot of discretion about putting this on the ballot. I was concerned about the proponents when they were obtaining signatures showing pictures of the machine shop. This is not even one of our assets. This is a federal And I wonder about the miscommunication. There are many inconsistencies in the Initiative. One of which that makes a lot of sense to me, is the general plan and our ordinance state that the city should and shall preserve the heritage history An existing vibrant community, industrial community. That's policy LU 3.4. this aggressive land development provisions, increasing the floor area ratio by 650% and the building heights to 47 feet, is not compatible with that. policy. And just as an example of the inconsistencies on page 19 paragraph B it says there should be no setback requirements. except where the parcel is adjacent to residential zoning districts. And then in other places in the document, it talks about setback requirements. So there's some problems with this particular document. I too am concerned about Who wrote this? Who paid for it? This is a massive, massive change in our town, and I'd like to know exactly who's behind it, besides Adrienne Britton, Sharna Brockett, Ray Withey, and Fred Moore. |
| 02:44:37.05 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:44:37.09 | Sandra Bushmaker | Thank you. |
| 02:44:37.54 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. Yeah. |
| 02:44:39.72 | Melissa Woodside | Others online? |
| 02:44:41.44 | Walfred Solorzano | Next, we have Babette McDougall. |
| 02:44:44.04 | Melissa Woodside | Ms. McDougal. |
| 02:44:57.40 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 02:44:57.42 | Melissa Woodside | I think you're happy. |
| 02:44:57.50 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 02:44:58.03 | Babette McDougall | And. |
| 02:44:58.25 | Babette McDougall | you |
| 02:44:58.96 | Sandra Bushmaker | on. |
| 02:44:59.97 | Babette McDougall | Can you hear me? |
| 02:45:01.76 | Melissa Woodside | We're barely hearing you now. |
| 02:45:03.80 | Babette McDougall | Okay. Let me try again. First of all, you may wish to know that one is not able to see the timer. when one is online? just so you're aware. Second, I just want to just say regarding this, I did submit a letter. I'm sorry it did not get added to the agenda. However, I will say that my letter reflects the very confusion that we find in the community itself. No two people seem to share the same idea about what this is actually about. up. Now, that's really not good, especially as many have said, it's a rather complicated and in many ways convoluted and contradictory document. that seeks to probably create perhaps mentally an entire United States of America just out of one small little color scheme. just ain't possible. So I would like to encourage you to think carefully about the report before you move too precipitously with the ballot initiative, now I realize have legal constraints. But at the same time, There's a rule that says, well, if you collect the signatures, you get to put it on the ballot. That doesn't mean that it's a good ballot initiative. It just means you collected. signatures. And Sausalito It's too small a place to ruin. It's just too small a place to ruin. So I ask everyone to be as prudent. And as careful as you possibly can, I thought Ms. Hoffman's comments were right on the money with regard to the level of confusion among the population. I think everybody knows that We don't like looking at unsightly scenes around our town. On the other hand, What's wrong with looking at a wart once in a while? If we didn't have warts, we wouldn't know about warts, would we? Not that they're great. but I really don't understand why we just cannot look at the critically at what we have that is indeed treasure And think very judiciously and selfishly if that's what it takes because this is our community first and foremost. about how we're going to evolve it over time. I wouldn't be too hasty if I were you all. Thank you so much. I yield back balance in my time. |
| 02:47:08.84 | Melissa Woodside | You ran out of time. But you finished right about on time. Okay. Anyone else online? |
| 02:47:18.80 | Walfred Solorzano | Next, we have Erin Nathan. |
| 02:47:23.17 | Erin Nathan | Good evening, council. |
| 02:47:23.74 | Melissa Woodside | Nathan? |
| 02:47:24.40 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 02:47:25.65 | Erin Nathan | Yes. Good evening. Hopefully you can hear me. Thank you for considering this initiative. I did want to address one thing quickly, which is the length of the ballot measure, which I also carried around and helped gather signatures for. In those 266 pages, 128 of those were actually crossed out, and that is the 1989 Marinship-specific plan that was repealed. Then 61 more of those pages were actually just the existing law that were put in there for context. And then 24 pages were actually just And only eight of those pages are new language. So while I understand that there was a lot of paper involved in the signature packet, the actual effect of this measure is really eight pages. And so I think it's important that we are being objective and truthful about what is actually being proposed. The second part of what I want to say is that Over 50 of our waterfront businesses have endorsed this. Everything from marinas, sports fishing operators, makers who can't sell what they produce on their premises. Even the opposition agrees in this direction. The Working Waterfront Coalition's own website calls for higher floor area ratios, reduced setbacks, and limited on-site sales by craftsmen and makers. We just talked about having a budget. We talked about M&Ms, and we talked about no appetite for raising taxes. These industrial rents in Sausalito, they're the highest in the Bay Area. And this is partly because there's nothing available to lease. AIM fixes this. It unlocks economic activity, which unlocks tax revenue, and it makes community development agreements and land trusts possible. This is something that is a solution to a major problem that we have as a city. And this is why a thousand residents signed this in record time. Please let the people vote and approve this resolution. Thank you. |
| 02:49:27.25 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you, Mr. Nathan. Anyone else online? |
| 02:49:29.78 | Walfred Solorzano | Next, we have Linda Pfeiffer. |
| 02:49:32.52 | Melissa Woodside | Just find her. |
| 02:49:35.13 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yes, can you hear me? |
| 02:49:37.02 | Melissa Woodside | we can. |
| 02:49:38.34 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay, my name is Linda Pfeiffer, and I want to say earlier in this public comment I heard one woman describe the Marin ship as encased in amber. What an insult to the men and women who work every day in the Marin ship who kept this town afloat during COVID and 9-11 when tourism was dead. I can assure that These people are not encased in amber, they are embraced by our gratitude. And I think this is an example of how the public or misled by the way AIM was presented. AIM would increase height limits to 47 feet, allow 650% increase in FAR. AIM states CEQA will occur later by developers if AIM passes. How can citizens vote on AIM without fully understanding the impact of AIM's broader zoning changes? I'm concerned AIM may change the citizens' initiative process that SOS students enjoy today to protest controversial density projects. And some citizens are so confused, they've asked, well, is AIM a general plan in housing element update? Or is it a zoning ordinance to increase density in the marineship and the waterfront? And what are the exact boundaries of AIM? Finally, before putting this on the ballot, I would like to see the city complete a 92-12 report that is unbiased in analyzing the true extent of Ames' impact in Sausalito, which I believe would be extremely negative and would leave Sausalito looking nothing like the beautiful seaside village we all enjoy today. |
| 02:51:21.01 | Melissa Woodside | Anyone else online? |
| 02:51:23.86 | Walfred Solorzano | Next, we have Sam Schubert. |
| 02:51:27.81 | Melissa Woodside | Mr. Schubert. Pardon? Yes. Oh, sorry. |
| 02:51:34.07 | Samantha Schubert | Thank you. |
| 02:51:34.15 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Samantha. My bad. |
| 02:51:38.76 | Samantha Schubert | Yeah, she sat next to you on that. |
| 02:51:41.17 | Melissa Woodside | I know, I'm just looking at the name. |
| 02:51:41.36 | Samantha Schubert | you know. |
| 02:51:44.70 | Melissa Woodside | We can't hear you, but you're on. Ms. Hubert? |
| 02:51:55.21 | Samantha Schubert | now apologies. |
| 02:51:58.18 | Melissa Woodside | Now we can barely hear you. Oh, |
| 02:52:00.98 | Samantha Schubert | Oh. I'm so sorry. Can everybody hear me now? |
| 02:52:08.61 | Dan Morgan | Yes. Okay, great. |
| 02:52:09.96 | Samantha Schubert | Thank you. Hi, my name is Samantha Schubert. I live in Sausalito. The AIM initiative would remove residents' voting rights on major land use decisions if adopted. Having your vote removed should concern every resident AIM leaves the vote up to a majority of the city council, which changes over short periods of time. However, development lasts for generations. Decisions should continue to involve the people of Sausalito directly using their voices and their votes. If the AIM rhetoric talks about maintaining properties, current owners have always been able to maintain and build. The owners who are not maintaining their share of Sausalito should be recognized and in all of our minds, it should raise the question of why. The properties that have been the poster children for the AIM rhetoric are the same properties that benefit Sausalito's houseboat community and water-based economy. These are treasured local businesses to houseboat residents, boat owners, water-based businesses, and of course, Sausalito's tourism. Indeed, owners cannot build anything they want, but they can if AIM passes. AIM increases height limits to 47 feet. Land FAA. Indeed, owners cannot build anything they want, but they can if AIM passes. AIM increases height limits to 47 feet, land FAR by 650%, and water FAR by 900%. I urge all of us to maintain height limits, maintain the FAR, maintain your voice, vote no on AIM in November and request a further investigation into the initiative. |
| 02:53:52.98 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you, anyone else online? |
| 02:53:55.14 | Walfred Solorzano | Next, we have Michelle McCullough. |
| 02:53:57.62 | Melissa Woodside | the show. |
| 02:54:00.02 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:54:00.04 | Michelle McCullough | Hi, can you hear me? |
| 02:54:01.08 | Melissa Woodside | Yes. |
| 02:54:02.42 | Michelle McCullough | Hi there, this is Michelle Mokala. I'm a Sausalito resident and taxpayer here for about 10 years. And I'm now the executive director of the Sausalito Chamber of Commerce. And I just wanted to let you know that the board did vote and we unanimously voted to endorse the AIM initiative. And I personally, as a resident, worked alongside Sharna, Adrian, Aaron, all of my many neighbors here on the Northside Gale. And I'm elated and excited and happy that I got to be part of this group. And I encourage people to visit Sausalito Thrive.org because I agree with you, Babette McDougall. Babs, you always say what we need to hear. Let's protect this little gem of a town. Let's come together and let's not fossilize Sausalito. Let's keep it alive by working together and building what we, all of these stakeholders that have commented, want to see in our small waterfront town. And I want to be clear, nobody wants Fisherman's Wharf or Mall of America. So what do we want? Who are we, Sausalito? That's the exciting part right now, coming together and imagining as a community what could be in the 21st century. Because I'll tell you what, I love 1985. I love that year. I wish it was still 1985, but it simply is not. And times have changed. And so is the landscape of our residents. So please, I'm gonna leave you with one last quote from Paul Valerie. The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up. So please wake up and dream with us, Sausalito, because the sky's the limit and somebody's got to pay the bills. And I hope it's not my property taxes. So please. Let's come together. Let's work together. Let's talk about this. And there will be many conversations between now and November. So let's just be open to how we can come together and focus on the similarities, not our differences. It's time for yes. Thank you. |
| 02:55:50.36 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you, Michelle. Anyone else? |
| 02:55:53.47 | Walfred Solorzano | Next we have Dan Morgan. |
| 02:55:55.75 | Melissa Woodside | Mr. Morgan. |
| 02:56:01.40 | Melissa Woodside | Can't hear you yet. |
| 02:56:06.16 | Babette McDougall | on this. |
| 02:56:12.24 | Melissa Woodside | Mr. Morgan, we see your hand raised on the screen. We don't see you personally. We see your name. We can't hear you. How about... |
| 02:56:19.12 | Dan Morgan | now |
| 02:56:19.98 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 02:56:20.03 | Dan Morgan | Now you can. |
| 02:56:20.10 | Melissa Woodside | Exactly. Thank you. |
| 02:56:20.79 | Dan Morgan | Thanks. Okay, good. |
| 02:56:21.03 | Melissa Woodside | Oh, yeah. |
| 02:56:22.46 | Dan Morgan | Hello, Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. I'm sorry to be the one to follow such a wonderful presentation by Michelle. But I do want to add one thing that we've not talked about tonight. Most of the buildings in the Marin ship are predate the 1970 error. era. And, uh, the Marine ship specific plan in 1022 came along rendered. all of the buildings that I'm involved with, And most of the other buildings as legal non-conforming use. The AIM initiative would bring most of those buildings, if not all of them, into compliance with codes and if there were a disaster such as a fire we would be able to rebuild Otherwise, it's my understanding that if there was a casualty in property mass or just one, and it's legal non-conforming, it'd have to be returned To conforming, which would limit the owner's property rights. I just wanted to point that out because that hasn't been brought up yet. but I support EM initiative I support your putting this on the ballot. getting a report to show the community. a great asset the AIM Initiative is. Thank you. |
| 02:57:38.36 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Anyone else on? |
| 02:57:40.88 | Walfred Solorzano | Next we have Charles Melton. |
| 02:57:45.39 | Melissa Woodside | Mr. Melton. |
| 02:57:47.90 | Charles Melton | Good evening, Mayor and City Council members. My name is Charles. I'm a Sausalito resident who cares deeply about our working waterfront. Sausalito needs a working waterfront, but we also need a waterfront that works for Sausalito. Our waterfront is remarkable. On this very shoreline here in our great city, ships 10 stories tall, over 100 feet, were once built. They're very vessels that helped define this region. Today is home to maritime industry, waterfront businesses, artisans, makers, and craftspeople. That legacy deserves to be protected and right now it's at risk. Let's be honest, our waterfront needs help. It's already subject to sea level rise, flooding, subsistence, and deteriorating infrastructure. Sausalito could become the first Bay Area city to lose its working waterfront, not to development but to neglect. The hard truth is that without action, without real solutions, we risk losing our waterfront entirely and that loss would be irreversible. Which brings me to one of the questions I have for this council. IS IF THE CITY DID COMMISSION A 9212 REPORT WHEN MEASURES J AND K WERE BEING CONSIDERED, WAS SUCH ANALYSIS REQUESTED WHEN THE BLUE ECONOMY INITIATIVE WAS BROUGHT FORWARD A COUPLE YEARS AGO? IF THE ANSWER IS NO, WHY APPLY THAT STANDARD TO THE CITIZEN LED INITIATIVE? IF THE ANSWER IS YES, THEN FOLLOW SUIT. Commission report be consistent. But here's what excites me. The opportunity in front of us is real. Sauceliter's waterfront is one of the most storied, beautiful, vibrant working waterfronts in the Bay Area. And AIM gives voters and the city council |
| 02:59:13.54 | Babette McDougall | Game gives bitters. |
| 02:59:16.34 | Charles Melton | as your own path forward. a chance to modernize our infrastructure, protect our maritime heritage, support the artisans and makers who give this waterfront soul, and build a waterfront economy that serves Osolito for the next 100 years. AIM doesn't close doors, it opens them. It returns a democratic voice to residents at every step of the long and complicated process through our city council and gives our waterfront the fighting chance it deserves. Thank you. |
| 02:59:43.10 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Anyone else online? |
| 02:59:45.75 | Walfred Solorzano | Next we have Sue King. |
| 02:59:50.11 | Melissa Woodside | Ms. King. |
| 02:59:51.37 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:59:51.39 | Sue King | Hello. |
| 02:59:52.07 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 02:59:52.10 | Sue King | I'm Sue King. Can you hear me? |
| 02:59:53.97 | Melissa Woodside | Yes, we can. |
| 02:59:55.00 | Sue King | Thank you. I've been a resident since 1980. And I care a lot about the friendship. And I've heard two people speak tonight, a fellow called Andy and Linda Pfeiffer. whom I'm always reading and listening to, And I think that both of them have wonderful presentations and wonderful interpretations of this whole AIM initiative. in the respect. that, We do need to go back, I believe, to the drawing board because it's quite confusing and a bit vague. |
| 03:00:31.11 | Carolyn Revell | I'm not going to be a |
| 03:00:33.93 | Sue King | But both of their approaches, which are similar, take into account many things that were discussed about the marineship over the last years. and that we're all, we're old residents are all very afraid of having them overturned. Applecart upset. So. I know it has to go on the ballot, but I'm sure watching with a lot of interest. Thank you. |
| 03:01:01.46 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. others online. |
| 03:01:04.41 | Walfred Solorzano | Next we have, sorry if I mispronounce this, Leao. |
| 03:01:08.95 | Melissa Woodside | Leao, we're seeing a perhaps first name. |
| 03:01:13.91 | Leao | Can you hear me? |
| 03:01:14.96 | Melissa Woodside | Yes. |
| 03:01:15.95 | Leao | Perfect. Hi, I am a resident artist in Sausalito, and, you know, I assume the council is going to put the ballot up for a vote, and that's fine. I do also request to have some sort of investigation to just confirm information. I also do want to say that I support investment and improvement in the marineship, but what I do not support is weakening community oversight in exchange for promises of future development. Growth should strengthen the working waterfront not create pressure to phase it out. Many of the activities being promoted as future possibilities under aim already have pathways to exist today. Artists can sell their work maritime businesses can expand waterfront serving businesses can operate the challenge. The challenge is often investment and implementation. Not a lack of permission. Sausalito is one of the few remaining places where maritime industry, artist spaces, boatyards, marine innovation, and waterfront culture still exist together. Not only in California, not only the Bay Area, but the country and the world. Once they... Once these uses are lost, they are extraordinarily difficult to bring back. I believe AIM creates unnecessary risk to this unique ecosystem. I also believe that the citizens that live in this admittedly small city in keeping their voices and their right to vote on major changes throughout the city. Thank you. |
| 03:02:40.95 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:02:43.43 | Walfred Solorzano | Next, we have Kieran Culligan. |
| 03:02:46.62 | Melissa Woodside | Kiran? |
| 03:02:50.01 | Kieran Culligan | Thank you. |
| 03:02:52.22 | Melissa Woodside | We're not hearing you, Karen. |
| 03:03:00.20 | Kieran Culligan | How about now? |
| 03:03:01.25 | Fred Moore | Thank you. |
| 03:03:01.27 | Kieran Culligan | Yes. My name is Kieran Culligan. I'm a Saucelita resident. I'm actually standing out looking over the I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO 24-7. Yeah, during World War II. And I've watched some amazing things happen here. I'm watching and Matthew Turner being able to poke into machine chops and showing my kids how things get welded and built. But on the net, I've watched a whole lot more crumbling than I've seen building and vibrance. in the Marin ship over the time I've been looking at it, sometimes up close and sometimes far away, literally crumbling in some cases that I can watch. And it makes me think I'm setting this AIM initiative. I wanna know what it can do. about its prospect, but I think it's right to do the report. And is it perfect? I'm sure it's not perfect. But it's also galvanizing. It's a recognition that we have underinvested in the Marinship. and what it can do for this community, what it can do for the maritime aspect of Northern California. And, you know, so it's, I don't think the answer here is just like, yes or no to this initiative. Like, it's yes to this initiative or something else that we're going to do to have a meaningful impact. And so between now and August 7th. City Council could propose a different initiative, they could have modifications that they wanna put forward as a different version of aim that city council and individuals could petition city council to have a plan that we would do as an alternate, but like, I wanna see something else. It's not just like yes or no. Like now's the time to put forward some real ideas because there's a real idea on the table and we're going to vote on it soon. So I'm really excited about the prospects and what can be done. Does it require study? Yes. Do we want to make sure we do it right? Yes. But this is something meaningful for town and I hope that I can be looking out here in another nine years of living in Sausalito and see something different. |
| 03:05:03.83 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you, Karen. I'd be very happy to talk with you offline. We are not able to introduce a so-called initiative are of our own at this point in time. We'd have to go through a whole lot of processes, including CEQA, but I just want to indicate that we do have limits on what we as a council can do. But I hope I Again, I'd be happy to talk to you about it at length if you wish. The next... Anyone? |
| 03:05:35.35 | Walfred Solorzano | Next, we have Michelle Dumont. |
| 03:05:38.51 | Melissa Woodside | Michelle. |
| 03:05:41.04 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:05:41.06 | Michelle Dumont | Hi. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. I'm Michelle Dumont. and I'm an architect here in support of AIM. Sausalito is a waterfront town, but the Marin ship so often feels separated and detached from the rest of the city, despite the fabulous history and the great work that happens there. every day. I really believe that it is a chance to reconnect it to Sausalito without erasing what makes it special It's going to support the artists, fabricators, boat builders, makers, and small businesses already there. while protecting the creative and working character of the marine ship. I support putting aim before the voters, and I'm incredibly excited for this future. Thank you to everyone working so hard to move this forward. |
| 03:06:31.48 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Can you tell about how many more we have wishing to speak? One more, okay. Okay. |
| 03:06:39.85 | Walfred Solorzano | Next we have John. |
| 03:06:42.42 | Melissa Woodside | Hello, John. |
| 03:06:44.49 | John DeRay | Hello, Mayor. This is John DeRay. Can you hear me? |
| 03:06:47.29 | Melissa Woodside | We can. |
| 03:06:48.14 | John DeRay | John Derray, Thank you, thank you city council, my name is john derray i'm a member of the sauce leader working waterfront coalition. Our coalition is advocated for every zoning compliant proposed development and redevelopment in the industrial zone, since our existence about nine years ago. The aim initiative is not the right tool to improve the marine ship. It removes view quarter protections. It increases allowable development density in the industrial zone by 650%, not double 650% in the water zone by 900%. It increases maximum height by 47%, not including density bonus. If there is residential, which could happen. No concern for traffic generation on Bridgeway at all. And if you think about 10 to 12 million new square foot of development, there is going to be traffic impacts. The initiative takes away residents right to vote on development plans in the industrial and water zones throughout our town. The state has already stripped our local control of housing decision and residents are in no mood to further give up this precious right to vote on these matters. It is true very few communities have the right to decide on zoning and use issues but Saucyus is unique it combines a world class tourist destination. With a maritime industrial artist ecosystem less than a mile away, it is the epitome of economic diversification we are being asked to instead let this approval process flow flow through the planning Commission to the city council so that three votes can decide instead of 2500 votes. If there is a do something plan that's potentially so good, go ahead and present it to the voters and let them vote on it. Furthermore, there's no mechanism for the AIM initiative to guarantee affordability. Especially with the special marine ship assessment tax being talked about that and all other costs will be passed on to higher lease rates. It's not the 90s. Most of the makers in the marine ship are content to do online sales and not be disturbed in their space. One last thing. I urge everyone who has not seen the Marineship documentary to watch it. It's on the Saucerite Working Water Fund Coalition website. I think you'll be surprised what you see. Thank you. |
| 03:08:48.49 | Carolyn Revell | you |
| 03:08:48.52 | Andy Greer | we have. |
| 03:08:56.79 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. No more online? |
| 03:08:58.88 | Walfred Solorzano | you |
| 03:08:58.93 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:08:58.95 | John DeRay | Thank you. |
| 03:08:58.99 | Walfred Solorzano | No more public comment. |
| 03:08:59.83 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, that concludes the public comments. Back to the dais for consideration. I would suggest that we take up first the question of moving the aim initiative to the ballot. |
| 03:09:15.57 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, in keeping with your structure there, which I agree with, I'd like to go ahead and have the two motions. And the first would be to take recommended motion number one, adopt the resolution placing the arts, industrial and maritime preservation and improvement initiative on the ballot. Second. |
| 03:09:31.27 | Melissa Woodside | There's a motion in the section. further or any discussion? |
| 03:09:43.11 | Jill Hoffman | My preference would be to follow the election code and order the report first and make the vote afterwards, understanding that we would vote to approve to put it on the ballot. So I haven't seen or... The city attorney hasn't told us that there'd be any negative impact from following the election code. It's just a scheduling issue. And I would rather follow the election code and do it that way. |
| 03:10:10.62 | Melissa Woodside | I believe the city attorney has informed us that we would be following the election code if we were to vote tonight to put it on the ballot. Sergio, am I wrong about that? |
| 03:10:19.60 | Jill Hoffman | Well, no, what he said was that we would follow the election code if we want to do the report that the the under the. The process is, no, let me finish. Please, Mr. Mayor, let me finish my comment. To follow the election code is to order the report under the code |
| 03:10:29.06 | Carolyn Revell | Thank you. |
| 03:10:37.60 | Jill Hoffman | and follow the timing under the code. which I believe is 30 days to come back no later than 30 days. We could order it |
| 03:10:44.99 | Councilmember Cox | Bye. |
| 03:10:45.01 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah. |
| 03:10:45.03 | Councilmember Cox | 40 days, 30 days for the report, 10 days for the report. |
| 03:10:47.96 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not. |
| 03:10:51.69 | Melissa Woodside | I'm going to close off this discussion and ask the city attorney to please give us his advice. |
| 03:10:57.45 | Jill Hoffman | Bye. Thank you. |
| 03:10:57.78 | Melissa Woodside | YOU. |
| 03:10:57.85 | Jill Hoffman | No, my comment was correct. It's 30. The mayor. No, later. No, the mayor interrupted me. |
| 03:11:01.53 | Carolyn Revell | mayor. |
| 03:11:04.28 | Jill Hoffman | The 30 days for the, no later than 30 days for the report. And then within 10 days of receiving the report, no matter when it is, if we do it less than 30 days, you have the order for, the council takes action to order the initiative to go on the ballot. Is that right, city attorney? |
| 03:11:26.34 | Melissa Woodside | Mr. City Attorney, would you please, in your own words, let us know whether we are legally able to act tonight to put us on the ballot. |
| 03:11:36.14 | Melissa Blaustein | And if we're following the election code, which is the question that I already asked that the city attorney responded to saying, indeed, we are following the election code, but please city attorney. |
| 03:11:36.34 | Melissa Woodside | Bye. |
| 03:11:45.86 | Sergio Rudin | Both options are legal. I tend not to present the city council with options that are not legal. So both options are legal. |
| 03:11:52.36 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:11:52.38 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:11:52.48 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:11:53.29 | Jill Hoffman | No, that wasn't my point. My point is to follow the election code. We're deviating from the election code. It's not that it's not legal. We're just deviating from the election code. |
| 03:12:02.52 | Melissa Woodside | Excuse me. |
| 03:12:03.67 | Jill Hoffman | My point without being interrupted, following our protocols on the council, not to be interrupted when a council member is speaking, |
| 03:12:04.41 | Melissa Woodside | would not be interrupted by former mayor. |
| 03:12:13.28 | Jill Hoffman | is that my preference would be to follow the election code. There's no downside to following the election code per our city attorney. Now, I understand the council's not going to follow the election code, that we're going to deviate from the election code, And It looks like we're going to have a motion to simply vote to put it on the ballot, which we can do. and then direct staff to perhaps follow another course, which is just a direct staff to do a report or have staff do a report by some other method. |
| 03:12:46.12 | Melissa Woodside | If- |
| 03:12:46.59 | Jill Hoffman | I finished my comments now, and I believe somebody might want to make a motion, and we can proceed with that. |
| 03:12:53.58 | Melissa Woodside | We have a motion pending. |
| 03:12:54.91 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. |
| 03:12:55.81 | Melissa Woodside | put it on the ballot. We have an attorney. our city attorney. who knows the law, telling us we can do this right now. And it's consistent with the law. That's what he said. I'm sorry. |
| 03:13:06.90 | Councilmember Cox | I'm going to disagree. |
| 03:13:09.36 | Melissa Woodside | Oh boy. |
| 03:13:10.15 | Councilmember Cox | May I ask a question before we vote on this? You may. Thank you. |
| 03:13:12.82 | Melissa Woodside | You may. |
| 03:13:13.26 | Dan Morgan | Thank you. |
| 03:13:14.47 | Councilmember Cox | Um, Mr. City Attorney, if we place it on the ballot tonight, does that trigger any other deadlines for any of our, for any, for the proponents or opponents of the AIM initiative. Does placing it on the ballot this evening start any other timelines or deadlines? |
| 03:13:37.12 | Sergio Rudin | The draft resolution includes direction to the city attorney to prepare the impartial analysis. So that would, And I would assume regardless of when you place it on the ballot, you're going to direct the city attorney to do that. Additionally, it sets forth the deadlines for the ballot measure arguments and rebuttals to be submitted. Those again come from the county rather than the city setting the deadlines under the elections code because this is a consolidated election. So I don't expect those deadlines would change either based on when you act to place it on the ballot. |
| 03:14:13.30 | Councilmember Cox | Yeah, the resolution says that ballot arguments are due August 17. And rebuttals August 24. So that does not change regardless of whether we put it on the on whether we approve it to be placed on the ballot this evening or whether We do it following a report should we choose to undertake that report Correct? |
| 03:14:35.05 | Sergio Rudin | I, they, yes, that is my understanding. |
| 03:14:37.80 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Okay. So there's a motion, a second. And we... calling the question, so all those in favor of putting this matter on the ballot in November, please say aye. Aye. |
| 03:14:50.03 | Samantha Schubert | Bye. |
| 03:14:50.71 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:14:50.76 | Samantha Schubert | I'm sorry. |
| 03:14:50.95 | Michelle Dumont | Thank you. |
| 03:14:52.08 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. |
| 03:14:52.19 | Jill Hoffman | No one said it was illegal. I just said I would prefer to follow the election code. |
| 03:14:58.69 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, it's going on to ballot. |
| 03:15:01.12 | Miriam Brown | Okay. So it's past June. |
| 03:15:02.56 | Melissa Woodside | It's passed unanimously. Okay. OK. Before we move on to another business item, we have the question of reports and, um, We've heard from the public, we've heard a number of people talk about that subject. Is there a motion? |
| 03:15:23.67 | Melissa Blaustein | I move that we, I mean, we're happy to have discussion, but I absolutely move that we have a report on the initiative. . as suggested by the staff report with the questions outlined. |
| 03:15:33.32 | Councilmember Cox | And may I clarify that the report be prepared by an outside a firm rather than staff, that that be prepared by a firm such as Shute Mahali or an expert in the preparation of such matters. What would the cost of that be? |
| 03:15:52.07 | Melissa Woodside | And how can they do it in 30 days? I mean, this is... |
| 03:15:54.35 | Councilmember Cox | They do it all the time. We have... |
| 03:15:56.07 | Melissa Woodside | WE HAVE A |
| 03:15:56.74 | Councilmember Cox | THE FAMILY. I commission these reports all the time in my job as a municipal lawyer. So it's easily done within 30 days. |
| 03:16:05.53 | Jill Hoffman | And I think it would be a wash because it would either be by outside counsel, such by a firm that actually specializes in this. Um, and it would either be outside counsel or our, you know, our attorney. So I think. the value of having the added impartiality of outside counsel can't be can't be overstated. So I think, um, I would support that. And I think the added layer of that, um, Yeah. that for our staff and in for trying to get, have them do a 30 day report rather than have the resources of somebody that actually specializes in this type of exercise would be welcomed by our staff. I will say when we did |
| 03:16:51.97 | Councilmember Cox | It was prepared by a law firm. It was prepared by the same law firm that employed the city attorney, but it was prepared by an elections expert within that law firm who was not familiar, who was not otherwise familiar with the city of Sausalito. |
| 03:17:09.32 | Melissa Woodside | If there is a motion, I haven't heard a second, but before, I would like to speak to the concept. We have. online. the person who knows most about our code is an expert in this field. and who will be required to do an impartial analysis that should. And if we were to ask staff, it would be the city attorney and the former or maybe Thank you. You're still a community development director, Mr. Phipps, and your charge will be to be objective. And you both know our code. You both have read this initiative. And Hiring an outside firm without giving real direction is a disaster in my view. |
| 03:17:59.05 | Ian Sobieski | in my view. So yeah, I would like to chime in then. And I know Councilmember. I was going to propose a friendly amendment to council member Blasin's motion. |
| 03:18:09.62 | Councilmember Cox | So I did propose a friendly amendment, and it hasn't been accepted or rejected yet. |
| 03:18:15.22 | Susan Frank | Are we discussing it? |
| 03:18:16.06 | Ian Sobieski | I would like to make a friendly amendment to your emotion. But I... |
| 03:18:19.15 | Susan Frank | Thank you. |
| 03:18:19.18 | Melissa Blaustein | THE END OF Okay. |
| 03:18:19.64 | Ian Sobieski | I don't know if you have to reject. I'm not sure what she's saying. I think she says you have to either reject or accept hers. |
| 03:18:24.53 | Melissa Blaustein | Well, I thought you were going to weigh in on her suggestion. I just. |
| 03:18:26.51 | Ian Sobieski | I disagree with it and I would like to make a, friendly amendment to your motion. let me explain why you I believe oh yeah so I think that uh |
| 03:18:32.16 | Melissa Blaustein | So let me explain why you disagree with that. |
| 03:18:34.35 | Michelle Dumont | Thank you. |
| 03:18:38.54 | Ian Sobieski | We have a very short time to do this report. As the mayor said, the city attorney intrinsically understands our code. He's been advising our planning commission for years. He understands our. Current code has been advising the city. So to our CDD director, you know, I want to try to, I was cautious about supporting a report because it could pick up a political football, and I want to do everything we can to avoid that. So I think that we should limit the scope of the report to items one through seven as delineated precisely in the staff report without any modification or addition and direct it as it says pursuant to section 9212. |
| 03:19:15.56 | Councilmember Cox | one through eight in the staff report. |
| 03:19:16.15 | Ian Sobieski | in the staff report. Refer to the proposed initiative to a city agency or agency. So referring it to our city staffs appropriate, and limiting it to items one through seven, I'm sorry, of the staff report as written. |
| 03:19:29.55 | Melissa Blaustein | What if we met in the middle and did items one through seven as suggested so that we all know the scope of the report, but we had an outside attorney, but only those one through seven items as suggested by staff who has reviewed the code as a consensus building middle ground? That's |
| 03:19:45.82 | Councilmember Cox | Agreed. |
| 03:19:49.97 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:19:50.16 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:19:50.21 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:19:53.95 | Melissa Blaustein | Because I mean, from my, just to explain my perspective, I think that there's been a lot of extensive hard work done on this, on this initiative. And it came forward because there's a lot of, of obviously a lot of community support, but there's also obviously we've gotten a lot of letters from folks. And I think. and I think we're, you know, the report is a lot of the people who are in the community. will allow staff to continue to comment on when they present the initiative as well. And if we want to direct staff as well to do something with regards to it. But I just, I... I think additional transparency around the initiative is always a good thing. So I second |
| 03:20:36.16 | Ian Sobieski | the motion. So my injection to that council member Boston is that the outside agency has very little experience with a code as is. So our current code as is, with the friendship specific plan and the existing Saucieto municipal code has many contradictions and problems that get in the way of the efficient working of our government. So we have in house a great deal of resources of lived experience that can comment on that and looking at the work in isolation from the broader experience is going to be lopsided in and incomplete. |
| 03:21:19.80 | Melissa Woodside | There's a motion in a second. Um, And I've spoken against having outside counsel who's not familiar with this despite the fact that I knew Clem Schutt and all the rest of them at Fern, they're great. In one month, they're gonna come and analyze this and answer those questions. for how much money and with what direction, who's gonna tell them what to look at Thank you. |
| 03:21:46.00 | Councilmember Cox | I think it should be. So I think the advantage of this approach is that you have our city attorney doing the ballot Uh, impartial. argument and then you have another outside firm doing the independent analysis called for by 9212. So it's a belt and suspenders approach. And I think that staff and the city attorney should be working with whatever outside firm is chosen. |
| 03:22:11.91 | Melissa Woodside | So it would be the city attorney would be the one to consult, not any of us trying to direct an outcome, because I would- |
| 03:22:18.56 | Councilmember Cox | I would. |
| 03:22:18.98 | Melissa Blaustein | Yes, I don't think any of us should be involved. We, I wouldn't support this if any of us were involved, period. There should be absolutely no outside direction beyond these one through seven questions that we've all agreed on, period. Period. And. |
| 03:22:24.68 | Councilmember Cox | . |
| 03:22:24.85 | Melissa Woodside | THE END OF |
| 03:22:25.04 | Councilmember Cox | THE END OF |
| 03:22:30.98 | Councilmember Cox | IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET YOU |
| 03:22:31.31 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:22:31.35 | Councilmember Cox | the staff and the city attorney, but not the city council. on. |
| 03:22:37.30 | Melissa Woodside | So presumably within the city manager's authority, he could hire a firm for up to $50,000, which would then require a budget augmentation. |
| 03:22:47.02 | Miriam Brown | Yeah. |
| 03:22:47.04 | Melissa Woodside | Yeah. and we have a that would be the direction of the three who want to go that way. So I'll just ask for a |
| 03:22:55.12 | Ian Sobieski | Yes. I mean, Just like to explain why I'm going to vote no on that. |
| 03:23:01.08 | Melissa Woodside | You may. |
| 03:23:01.11 | Ian Sobieski | You may. So I do think that There could be another alternative where we have an internal report from our own team, if you're going to go that way and have an external report, and then the two would work together. It would be, it would ensure that the institutional knowledge that we have in house is part of it. Otherwise, it's going to be obscured. by the outsiders who know very little about Sausalito. |
| 03:23:26.53 | Melissa Blaustein | you want to propose a friendly amendment where there's some sort of specific Engagement from staff. And I think that- |
| 03:23:32.81 | Samantha Schubert | Thank you. his perspective on this? |
| 03:23:35.22 | Melissa Woodside | I think- Let's let Ian finish. Okay. And we can get to that, don't worry. |
| 03:23:40.32 | Ian Sobieski | So did you turn on your camera for a reason? |
| 03:23:43.05 | Sergio Rudin | No, it's just been on the whole time. Simply because I'm afraid that if I turn it off, I mean, I get it back on. |
| 03:23:50.44 | Ian Sobieski | Just trying to make sure you didn't have anything to say. uh, So Yeah, I think I would then make my friendly amendment that we have a report written by staff that has all these seven points And that there be, if that's the insistence of my colleagues, that there'd be a separate report done by this other organization that you guys are talking about that I know nothing about. |
| 03:24:17.61 | Ian Sobieski | You accept that. |
| 03:24:18.23 | Melissa Blaustein | More information is is good from my perspective, as much transparency as possible. If we want to have a city report and an independent agency report and then have a robust discussion about both, I welcome as much transparency and discussion around this initiative as possible. So I would happily accept that amendment. And I, and I think, I don't know how to do that, but. |
| 03:24:34.72 | Jill Hoffman | how we would do that. I think there's going to be enough I think there's going to be enough, um, discussion about the conclusions about the an about the report, about you know, about an the independent report anyway. and I don't think we should have competing reports. And so- I'd love to have more. Oh, continue, sorry. So go ahead. I don't think we should have independent reports. And the whole idea about having- |
| 03:24:57.57 | Melissa Blaustein | THE END OF |
| 03:25:03.51 | Jill Hoffman | a completely separate firm do a report is to give further not leg... further credibility to that report in its independent nature. And so and and actually and insulating the staff from claims that they're biased one way or the other. |
| 03:25:27.17 | Melissa Woodside | All right. |
| 03:25:27.69 | Jill Hoffman | And so, and if I could finish, I don't think we should have competing. I don't think we should have competing reports. I think that, that, that obviates the whole thing that we were trying to achieve by having an outside report. |
| 03:25:29.36 | Melissa Woodside | And so I think that's the value of it. And so I don't think |
| 03:25:45.58 | Melissa Blaustein | So. |
| 03:25:45.83 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:25:47.10 | Melissa Blaustein | I feel like as much information and perspective on this initiative as possible is beneficial for our community. So if we could get a staff report from people who have spent years studying our code, in addition to an additional, like another report from an independent agency, the only thing that comes from that is more perspective. and more feedback and and and more emboldened conversation and perspective, which is what I hear the public is asking for. And I'm inclined to support both. So I would prefer. |
| 03:26:13.42 | Ian Sobieski | You accept my motion, my amendment, then I'll second your motion. |
| 03:26:14.70 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. Thank you. |
| 03:26:17.51 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:26:17.52 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:26:17.54 | Councilmember Cox | But. |
| 03:26:17.76 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:26:17.86 | Councilmember Cox | THE END OF THE END OF THE |
| 03:26:17.89 | Melissa Blaustein | TODAY. |
| 03:26:17.98 | Councilmember Cox | So now we have two separate motions. |
| 03:26:20.65 | Melissa Woodside | second. |
| 03:26:21.10 | Councilmember Cox | and, |
| 03:26:21.18 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:26:21.29 | Melissa Blaustein | Well, it's the same motion. It's the same motion with two amendments, then. There's two reports. |
| 03:26:22.48 | Melissa Woodside | Yeah. |
| 03:26:25.89 | Councilmember Cox | There was already a motion that was seconded that is pending. |
| 03:26:30.06 | Melissa Blaustein | No, I accepted your friendly amendment. It was not second. And I seconded it. Okay, so then you have to do another motion. |
| 03:26:35.02 | Linda Pfeiffer | So that's |
| 03:26:35.56 | Councilmember Cox | I'm going to do another thing. |
| 03:26:35.97 | Linda Pfeiffer | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:26:36.03 | Jill Hoffman | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:26:36.52 | Melissa Woodside | Let's not debate the process. We have |
| 03:26:36.54 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:26:36.64 | Melissa Blaustein | That's... |
| 03:26:36.96 | Councilmember Cox | That's it. |
| 03:26:37.15 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:26:37.30 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:26:40.91 | Melissa Woodside | Some competing things here. The maker of the motion is prepared right now to ask for two reports. Okay, let's be clear about that. Thank you. |
| 03:26:48.81 | Councilmember Cox | And can we be clear about that? It's by whom? So one by staff? |
| 03:26:53.13 | Melissa Woodside | That's what she's saying. |
| 03:26:54.12 | Melissa Blaustein | by an independent firm as requested so that we're doing both and getting as much information. And it's all for questions one through seven as. |
| 03:26:55.19 | Melissa Woodside | Right. |
| 03:27:01.23 | Melissa Woodside | One through seven. So that's that's your. You're accepting two friendly amendments. which is unusual. |
| 03:27:07.64 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. you |
| 03:27:08.57 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 03:27:08.59 | Melissa Blaustein | Yeah. |
| 03:27:08.75 | Melissa Woodside | Yes. Okay. But we know where you're coming from. Okay? |
| 03:27:14.04 | Melissa Blaustein | I think as much information and transparency around this initiative as possible is only beneficial to our community as a whole. So that's my perspective. |
| 03:27:21.97 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:27:22.07 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. |
| 03:27:22.51 | Sergio Rudin | Council, if I may weigh in, in terms of the direction and how you've structured your motion. I would be concerned about a lawyer being able to handle all of topics one through seven by themselves without assistance, in part because topic one deals with the fiscal impact of the measure. Topic three or no topic five deals with the community's ability to attract and retain businesses and employment. And these are things that are typically outside of, you know, somebody who's a land use attorneys bailiwick. You would either have to rely on staff or you would have to rely on an outside consultant, like say Cosmont or those kinds of people who would do |
| 03:27:57.83 | Carolyn Revell | Montt. |
| 03:28:01.88 | Sergio Rudin | you know, analysis of the fiscal and business impacts. Certainly a lawyer can opine on items too about consistency with general specific plans, housing element, planning and zoning. effect on land use and land use changes, impacts on agricultural lands, open space, as outlined in the general plan. So that's number seven. Um, Lawyers typically can't opine on traffic congestion, at least not without third-party analysis. you know, impact on existing business districts. Even if the council does direct that an outside firm prepare the report, they're still going to likely have to interact and deal with staff to get that background information. and or they'll have to subcontract with some sort of specialist like a Cosmon or e-comp developed consultant. So, you know, potentially if this requires a lot of, consultant time that may be outside of the city manager's spending authority to do. Good. |
| 03:29:04.10 | Melissa Woodside | Likely would be. |
| 03:29:05.46 | Councilmember Cox | I would advise that it be an outside firm that does consult with staff and with the city attorney. |
| 03:29:12.94 | Melissa Blaustein | I think that the outside firm can do the legal pieces, but I think staff has the opportunity and the right to do a full report of all seven as well, because that's what we're asking for. |
| 03:29:23.43 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, so he can still be the direction is that the law firms start with its wheelhouse and if it has the capability to answer the questions It does, but maybe it doesn't do all the points, but the staff will do all the points. |
| 03:29:35.43 | Councilmember Cox | And I would like to confine it to the city manager's authority. I don't want to spend more than that. I hope not to spend that much. |
| 03:29:42.45 | Jill Hoffman | And I would think that if we have these reports in-house and that the staff is going to report rely on these reports that the city attorney just talked about, that these would be shared with the outside counsel that's going to do the reportage. Yeah, we have the Cosmont report. We have reports. I mean, our staff isn't going to go out and hire outside consultants. So I would think this information is going to be shared. |
| 03:29:56.93 | Councilmember Cox | I mean, to. |
| 03:30:04.98 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. So. |
| 03:30:07.06 | Melissa Woodside | So I think we have a motion. Would you like to restate it? Do you want to? |
| 03:30:10.35 | Jill Hoffman | I'm not sure. |
| 03:30:10.42 | Samantha Schubert | Does that make sense? Ian seconded it. |
| 03:30:13.23 | Melissa Woodside | No, we have two seconds. We have two friendly amendments. I think it's clear what, Melissa, you are asking for. Before we vote on it, I just want to say that we're asking for trouble. We have the IJ sitting in here that will probably do an analysis. We have positive people. We have the working waterfront. We're going to have so much information. that the true objectivity, no matter who writes it, will be questioned by the people who don't like what's in the report. That's my prediction. But go ahead, have at it. I'm gonna vote no for that reason. because I think we're asking for trouble. The report is moot. The matter is going to the ballot. This is going to be really hotly debated. And we've heard really good presentations from both sides tonight as to the reasons for and against. And we're going to hear more. We're gonna hear a lot more. And I would rather not, invite the trouble of someone criticizing Sergio for what he writes in an impartial analysis and Brandon for what his financial analysis is and the outside firm, whether it's Shute Mahali or somebody else, for what they failed to address that's of great concern to positive people or the working waterfront or somebody else. That's my concern and I've said it, so I'm just going to vote no. Thank you. |
| 03:31:36.04 | Councilmember Cox | And. |
| 03:31:36.34 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Watch it all unfold. |
| 03:31:38.11 | Councilmember Cox | And with, may I address that? You may. |
| 03:31:41.25 | Melissa Woodside | You may. |
| 03:31:43.36 | Councilmember Cox | This is different from many ballot initiatives in that it is self-executing. It takes place, it takes effect 10 days after certification of the election results. The measure as written designates all existing uses throughout town, with the exception of the historic district, as nonconforming. It deletes eight general plan policies. The city will have no transition period. So staff has to be prepared to administer a fundamentally different regulatory framework the moment the measure takes effect. I believe an independent analysis will identify some of these challenges now so that between now and When and if this initiative passes, we can be prepared to address those gaps immediately. And so that's why I believe an independent analysis serves a purpose beyond what is often served, which is to allow the city council to have additional information in choosing whether or not to place it on the bill. |
| 03:32:47.76 | Melissa Woodside | I'm very sympathetic with your point that once something is passed by initiative, there is a transition. There's a requirement if something goes into effect immediately. In 1985, it took months to... to counsel. Simply put a pause and then try to make the transition to make it sensible. And You know, it's not like we're completely stuck. the moment this passes, if it does. or 10 days after. That's my comment. And I don't want to debate this any further. I think the votes are going to go forward. We're going to have some additional reports to read. |
| 03:33:25.94 | Ian Sobieski | In keeping with that, since we are apparently hiring a good law firm to look at. I hope that we. |
| 03:33:30.03 | Councilmember Cox | that we've got. that we're going to be |
| 03:33:31.55 | Ian Sobieski | But just to feed off what you just said, in addition to just identifying the effect on internal consistency, maybe we should ask them to propose some of the things you said on how to, how to remedy any issues. |
| 03:33:41.67 | Samantha Schubert | I love it. Yeah, I love it. I accept that amendment too. Okay, I'll second that. I'll second that third amended motions. |
| 03:33:49.39 | Melissa Woodside | So now we're giving instructions as to what the outside counsel is to address, besides the seven points. |
| 03:33:55.85 | Councilmember Cox | was an amendment to the motion. Well, the eighth point is any other matters the legislative body requested. |
| 03:34:01.48 | Melissa Woodside | The notion was over seven points, just to remind everybody. |
| 03:34:06.23 | Melissa Blaustein | right? |
| 03:34:06.29 | Melissa Woodside | I'm not being technical, but that's what |
| 03:34:06.31 | Melissa Blaustein | I, I, |
| 03:34:06.60 | Councilmember Cox | I mean, |
| 03:34:06.97 | Melissa Blaustein | I've been. |
| 03:34:09.04 | Melissa Woodside | Melissa and Ian of Aswim. |
| 03:34:10.58 | Melissa Blaustein | find the path to most, most transparency possible around this. I love what council member Sobieski suggested. |
| 03:34:17.67 | Councilmember Cox | And so that would be, we would be doing one through eight, because the eighth matter would be a recommendation from the firm about how to address any gaps. I think it should be. |
| 03:34:25.87 | Melissa Blaustein | I think it should be clear that it's not just number eight as written here, it should be. And additionally, a recommendation from the firm on how to fill these gaps. |
| 03:34:34.32 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 03:34:34.34 | Sergio Rudin | Thank you. |
| 03:34:34.36 | Jill Hoffman | And I think that's a good thing. I'll call the question. |
| 03:34:36.03 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay. |
| 03:34:36.68 | Sergio Rudin | Council, if I may before you vote, my one suggestion is to the extent there are inconsistencies or legal issues with the AIM measure, that could result in liability to the city should the measure pass. I would recommend that your outside counsel provide you that information confidentially rather than in a public report. |
| 03:34:55.92 | Councilmember Cox | Do you accept that Fourth Amendment? Thank you. |
| 03:34:58.27 | Melissa Blaustein | THE FAMILY IS GOING TO BE |
| 03:34:58.45 | Councilmember Cox | Okay. I second that fourth amended motion. |
| 03:35:02.49 | Melissa Woodside | and so much for transparency. |
| 03:35:04.34 | Councilmember Cox | that. |
| 03:35:04.97 | Jill Hoffman | With that, I call the question. |
| 03:35:07.47 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. |
| 03:35:08.93 | Melissa Blaustein | Well, wait, don't we legally? Okay. |
| 03:35:11.06 | Ian Sobieski | And I'll just, when I echo your comments, I think we're also asking for trouble if they were, but it's only just want to say for the record, I think that you've made very prescient comments and it's worth underlining them for the mental health of the community. I think that Uh, people do like to go to the news channel that they like to watch Fox or MSNBC, and there's a lot of not talking to each other. And I really. can't be more delighted by how much conversation there is. So Andy, when you were speaking, about the master plan for the Marin ship. I'm remembering a meeting three years ago where we had the master plan for the Marin ship. on our agenda. And it didn't pass. |
| 03:35:47.31 | Melissa Woodside | You had two votes. |
| 03:35:48.37 | Ian Sobieski | And so I think we're moving in the right direction. And I love this engagement, but I do worry. that. there's politics at play with and that people like that there's a danger of, um, What do you call it? Uh, cherry picking. to mislead. You know, there's a lot of emphasis on this height limit thing, but very little discussion about the discretionary review process. And so I am worried that we are going to set this up by, and that does worry me, but I think there are three votes for this. And so I'm going to- |
| 03:36:22.85 | Melissa Woodside | I think there are four votes for it. |
| 03:36:23.94 | Ian Sobieski | I'm going to try to make it a better, so. |
| 03:36:28.01 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, and I echo one comment you made. We are having the most... |
| 03:36:28.50 | Ian Sobieski | You know, |
| 03:36:34.24 | Melissa Woodside | vibrant discussion about the marineship in my memory. and maybe in the memory of most people in this room. I hear no, okay, there are a few here. There were. Okay, my birthday was yesterday, I'm 78 years old. I know, I know. But okay, I'm sorry. That was an aside. I want to. Agenda items. I know we do, and we have a call for the question, but I'm going to ask for a roll call. |
| 03:36:53.25 | Samantha Schubert | I know. |
| 03:36:53.74 | Babette McDougall | I know. |
| 03:36:59.67 | Walfred Solorzano | it. |
| 03:37:07.53 | Walfred Solorzano | Councilmember Cox. Yes. |
| 03:37:08.32 | Melissa Woodside | Yes. |
| 03:37:08.85 | Walfred Solorzano | you Councilmember Hoffman? Yes. Councilmember Sobieski? |
| 03:37:12.29 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 03:37:12.31 | Melissa Woodside | us. |
| 03:37:13.37 | Walfred Solorzano | Vice Mayor Blaustein? Yes. Mayor Woodside? |
| 03:37:15.97 | Melissa Woodside | know. Okay, moving on. Thank you all very much. This has been very interesting and entertaining. |
| 03:37:22.40 | Sergio Rudin | Council before we move on just one administrative item is the presentation of the report. Um, In the interest of avoiding a special meeting and in the interest of reminding you that you're not bound by a 30-day limit since you've already placed the measure on the ballot, Would it be the Council's preference to hear this on the 21st of July? |
| 03:37:45.72 | Councilmember Cox | Yeah. |
| 03:37:45.77 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah. |
| 03:37:45.91 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:37:45.92 | Melissa Woodside | What? The 21st of July? |
| 03:37:47.05 | Councilmember Cox | THE FAMILY. |
| 03:37:48.62 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, that would be your second regular meeting of July. |
| 03:37:52.64 | Councilmember Cox | 35 days from |
| 03:37:53.82 | Melissa Woodside | And when you say hear it, what are we going to do, receive it and file it? |
| 03:37:56.62 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. I don't know that we didn't hear it at all. I think it can simply be published. |
| 03:38:01.28 | Melissa Woodside | Well, I think, let's be clear, I think receive and file would be the proper thing, so we are not debating what's in the reports. |
| 03:38:08.28 | Melissa Blaustein | I don't think we should debate it from the dais. That's not going to be a positive agree. |
| 03:38:11.99 | Melissa Woodside | So Vice Mayor and I will make sure we get this on the agenda for the 21st. assuming there's a report or two reports available. That'd be. Okay. For receiving and filing. And no late reports. Pardon? No. |
| 03:38:27.10 | Ian Sobieski | No late reports. No late reports. That's the deadline. |
| 03:38:27.55 | Melissa Woodside | No late reports. Okay. |
| 03:38:30.98 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. |
| 03:38:32.02 | Melissa Woodside | Now, calling the election, there was a lengthy resolution. Do I have to read it? |
| 03:38:38.71 | Sergio Rudin | No, you do not. You can just move the staff or you can move the resolution in the agenda packet. |
| 03:38:43.62 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. We've approved. And I just want to make sure I didn't have to read the whole thing out loud. Okay. |
| 03:38:51.80 | Sergio Rudin | Yeah, I do not think that is necessary. |
| 03:38:54.00 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, thank you. Thanks to all of you for being here and being so patient to those who are waiting for the next item. Let's move on. |
| 03:39:18.83 | Melissa Woodside | So we have, just so as people leave, just so I, we have two items. The first is... What on the original agenda was 5D. and that's the traffic analysis on Caledonia Street. We have had some comments submitted In writing. and Mr. McGowan, sorry you had to wait so long. |
| 03:39:40.52 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, Council. Thank you. |
| 03:39:42.98 | Melissa Woodside | I do have an intro waiting moment. |
| 03:39:44.22 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. |
| 03:40:03.96 | Melissa Woodside | Good night, everyone. |
| 03:40:06.91 | Kevin McGowan | All right, thank you again there members of city council only a few slides on this so item 5 E this evening relates to the installation of no parking areas in front of marked and unmarked crosswalks per assembly bill for 13 next slide. |
| 03:40:07.87 | Melissa Woodside | Definitely. |
| 03:40:26.84 | Kevin McGowan | On April 21st, 2026, staff recommended that the council approved an additional $64,000 contract from Measure L funds to support a study related to the impact of AB 413 on Caledonia. At that April meeting, many members of the public addressed the council regarding this item. At that time, staff noted that there are many opportunities to modify parking on Pine Street, which is a one way street to allow more parking in the area. The slide in front of you is a diagram of the 21 parking spaces that will be removed upon implementing AB 413 on Caledonia and some of its side streets. Keep in mind that AB 413 is already a state law. and part of the vehicle code. Next slide. All right, a couple of quick pictures for folks. I'll just make it quick here. So currently Pine Street is a one-way street running eastbound towards Bridgeway. It's not terribly steep in a certain areas. It does get steeper as you head up the hill. And that's an important aspect to keep in mind for folks who might want to access Caledonia. Next slide, please. The current configuration of Pine Street has both angled and parallel parking spaces. Staff examined the roadway to determine how many additional parking spaces can be installed in this area by changing the parallel parking spaces to angled parking spaces. Currently, there are 14 standard-sized spaces on the north side of the street and 16 on the south side of the street, totaling 32 parking spaces, including the removal of one which is shown in red in the diagram on the screen. |
| 03:42:17.34 | Melissa Woodside | And that would be consistent with the law, that removal. you |
| 03:42:21.73 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, sir. |
| 03:42:22.05 | Melissa Woodside | Sir. Okay. |
| 03:42:24.27 | Kevin McGowan | Sorry to interrupt. |
| 03:42:24.80 | Melissa Woodside | Sorry to interrupt. |
| 03:42:26.92 | Kevin McGowan | That's all right. These are generally not marked with T's and L's. Some of them have T's and L's, some of them don't. but just want to note that because you can probably get some more parking there if you have a smaller car. Next slide, please. Installing angled parking on the north side of the street would yield a total of 24 parking spaces on the north side while maintaining the 16 spaces on the south side. This change would yield an additional eight spaces in the area. for South Caledonia Street to utilize. So again, the street isn't too terribly steep. That's one of the things I want to note. Next slide, please. Okay, a couple other pictures, not terribly large. My apologies, I should have made them a little bit larger on the slide. There are other cross streets which do have available parking. Both Turney Street and Litho Street appear to have sufficient additional parking to service the area of Caledonia. However, some of these streets are fairly steep, which may deter those who utilize Caledonia and can't walk up them. Next slide, please. All right, staff request directions from the direction from the council on whether to proceed with securing a traffic engineer to study the area to determine What additional measures can be implemented to reduce the parking impact In this area of Caledonia, based on AB 413. Council can direct staff to install no parking in compliance with AB 413. And council can also direct staff to re-stripe some of the spaces on Pine Street with angled parking, which will add an additional eight parking spaces to the area. Relocation of the 15 minute parking spaces and the accessible parking spaces on Caledonia. And there I think there's a couple on the side streets as well that'll still need to occur. and this concludes my quick presentation. I did want to note that there is additional parking here on Litho Street, which is on... I'll point to that side of the building, south side of where I'm standing. However, that street's fairly steep. And again, it's hard walking up and down that street for those who might be challenged with walking a long distance. So there is parking, but there are some issues associated with topography. And RV? |
| 03:44:57.57 | Melissa Woodside | And are these, excuse me, are these recommendations, were they the subject of an analysis by parametrics? |
| 03:45:03.96 | Kevin McGowan | uh, No, they have not. This is just me indicating to you that there is a potential to put some additional parking on Pine Street. And the original, um, The original approach was to hire parametrics to do a more official study to take a look at that distance in front of each one of the crosswalks that are there on Caledil. |
| 03:45:27.22 | Melissa Woodside | separate questions. Got it. Thank you. Sorry to interrupt. Questions? |
| 03:45:31.96 | Kevin McGowan | you |
| 03:45:31.98 | Ian Sobieski | That's it. |
| 03:45:32.97 | Melissa Woodside | the end. |
| 03:45:33.56 | Ian Sobieski | Yes, hi, Director McGowan. So back in April, when we heard this, our friend Steven Rosenfeld there from the REN IJ wrote an article entitled Sausalito Neighbors What Design Approach to Traffic Project. And my recollection of that meeting, which I looked over after reading the staff report, was that we had consensus to hire a landscape architect to be the lead on this project and have the traffic engineer be the sub. but in the staff report that I see attached to this, it is about hiring a traffic engineer, not having a landscape architect. So, there was the promise of potentially recovering 50 new parking spaces. And, maybe being able to have a quickie solution that might be eight or more. Can we still here tonight direct you to hire a landscape architect to be the lead on this project? |
| 03:46:18.89 | Kevin McGowan | Sure, you can direct staff to do that. I haven't reached out to issue an RFP for that yet to find out what that to get a proposal for it. But yes, |
| 03:46:29.08 | Ian Sobieski | So when we had that meeting in April, I thought that was the direction. I'm sorry I didn't actually look to see what the motion was, but am I wrong? That wasn't our direction to... |
| 03:46:36.71 | Kevin McGowan | My understanding is that your counsel asked to take a look at this area because we had an opportunity to take a look at some of the parking to see if we could do some temporary striping. In order to install the no parking in compliance with the state law without impacting the community significantly. |
| 03:46:56.57 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. I'm going to just look up the minutes while other people ask questions. Okay. What happened? Miss Kong. |
| 03:47:03.10 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. Attached to the staff report is a proposal from parametrics dated August 4, 2025, which has as an optional task recommendation of alternative parking restriction distance, saying it's the understanding of parametrics. There's been interest expressed in evaluating if an alternative parking restriction distance may be appropriate, under this California vehicle code section, which allows for such a distance to be established If determined, it is justified by established traffic safety standards. So this is what we have talked about each time we've heard this item, which is that if we adopt certain traffic calming measures, we may be able to avoid the removal of all of the parking spots, which on its face, we are required to do to strictly comply with this requirement. So is it Is there a reason we haven't exercise to this option to have parametrics do this work that was proposed nearly a year ago. |
| 03:48:11.48 | Kevin McGowan | I think originally there wasn't sufficient funding to cover it. So we were coming back to the council to request that. However, you did approve a budget for this year. |
| 03:48:21.06 | Councilmember Cox | Yes. |
| 03:48:21.26 | Kevin McGowan | Yes. |
| 03:48:21.49 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. |
| 03:48:21.60 | Kevin McGowan | So, |
| 03:48:21.89 | Councilmember Cox | So we don't just have parametrics carry out this task to address AB 413? You can at this point, yes. Great. |
| 03:48:30.33 | Melissa Woodside | So, Mr. Sobieski, you wanted to follow? |
| 03:48:32.60 | Ian Sobieski | I looked in the minutes, Director McGowan, and in the minutes of the meeting for April 21st, here's what it says. Council Member Sobieski, that's me, moved. seconded by Mayor Woodside and unanimously carried, our dear vice mayor being absent to direct staff to appropriate $68,680 for a design led Caledonia streetscape study with a landscape architect as the lead and a traffic engineer and support focused on parking AB 413 compliance and long-term streetscape design for Caledonian adjacent streets. So that was a motion made and moved and carried unanimously in April. |
| 03:49:08.82 | Kevin McGowan | Is there a question there? |
| 03:49:11.23 | Ian Sobieski | Well, Yes, why have we not done that? |
| 03:49:14.14 | Kevin McGowan | because there wasn't sufficient funding to cover that cost. |
| 03:49:17.54 | Melissa Woodside | So maybe cut to the chase. Is there sufficient funding to do that now? Yes. Are we still unanimous that that is the course we want to take? |
| 03:49:23.62 | Jill Hoffman | Yes. |
| 03:49:27.77 | Jill Hoffman | Well, sorry, may I follow up? So is there, so we have, we budgeted that this year? |
| 03:49:35.57 | Kevin McGowan | this year meaning the one I'm in today. |
| 03:49:38.77 | Jill Hoffman | Right. For 27. Yeah. For 26, 27. |
| 03:49:41.57 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. No, we would still need additional funding for the 2526 budget for the 2627 budget. Yes, that was approved this evening. So there is sufficient funding at this point. |
| 03:49:52.95 | Jill Hoffman | Okay, so has this project been funded? city manager. Because we just approved a deficit budget. Is this part of the deficit budget? |
| 03:50:00.29 | Chris Zapata | What I just heard from the director, I believe, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, is that this has been budgeted for the next fiscal year. |
| 03:50:07.34 | Jill Hoffman | Okay. And that's the 68,000 that Councilmember Sobhia just talked about. |
| 03:50:12.10 | Kevin McGowan | Yes, now there is sufficient budget in order to do this. Yeah. |
| 03:50:15.80 | Melissa Woodside | So since we already took that action, question now is, would the funds available? what's the next step? That to me is the question. And it's for the, for us and for the audience to weigh in if they, if they wish. |
| 03:50:34.29 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. Well, this is just question time, of course. So I want to honor your process of just asking questions and then getting comments. But I, I guess when I, when the thing that informs my question is that I did follow up with former city managers about it on this. And the last up that I got was that they were talking to landscape architects. So I thought this project was moving forward. This is the first I'd heard that it was not moving forward. Um, And I guess I have a question either for our city attorney or whoever can answer it. Can we be more directive? In this case, I feel like we're letting process get in front of the solution. We have, I know SWA has looked at this area. I know they've done cross sections. I know that they have a proposal that could capture 50 parking spaces. So actually increase the number of parking spaces, even with complying with AP 413. So are we, is there a path for us to direct the hiring that's that we waited to, do this work or does it have to go through this RFP process? That's what I don't know as a lay person and not a municipal lawyer. Sergio? Sergio? |
| 03:51:40.93 | Sergio Rudin | Well, you can't direct or approve a contract this evening that's not on the agenda. You could agendize that for subsequent discussion, and that would allow staff the time to get a proposal from SWIA. and, you know, iron out what a contract would need to look like. So if, that's the direction you would like to go, I would recommend you Agenda is that for a subsequent meeting. Um, But in terms of, you know, consultants and hiring of design professionals, the Municipal Code, doesn't actually have a specific requirement for an RFP for design professionals. It just suggests that you should do that because it is a matter of best practice. Um, Let's see. This is in chapter 330 of municipal code. Um, So, um, basically requires that Professional services amount less than 75K shall be procured through negotiated contract and should be solicited through a minimum of three sources unless that is waived by the procurement officer. |
| 03:52:50.54 | Carolyn Revell | minimum of a year. |
| 03:52:55.11 | Sergio Rudin | Um, Contracts above that amount have to be approved by council and the code indicates that there is flexibility by the council to award a contract that it deems to be a best value of the city. So again, usually best practice to go see what is available on the market rather than directing a work-to-way specific contractor. |
| 03:53:15.73 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you for answering my question. |
| 03:53:21.13 | Melissa Woodside | Question. |
| 03:53:22.13 | Jill Hoffman | Yeah, I just want to follow up. on the issue of the parking spaces along, um, along Caledonia. And even though we, uh, we are constrained, I know by. the state law that we need to do certain things and Councilmember Cox talked to you about retaining certain parking spaces with traffic calming, you know, um, efforts and I think we I just want to make sure that we're also going to maintain as many parking spaces it. as legally allowed, even though, you know, we're going to try different methods and also talking about landscaping and hiring, hiring a landscape architect to make it more you know, pleasing, but we're not giving up parking spaces for that. I mean, I think that was part of the direction last time as well. So I just want to make sure that that's part of this iteration as well. And part of an RFP. Yes. Okay. Thank you. |
| 03:54:20.45 | Melissa Woodside | If there are no more questions, are there any public comments? I see. couple of |
| 03:54:31.91 | Melissa Woodside | Carolyn Revell, followed by Joseph Rowland. |
| 03:54:39.18 | Carolyn Revell | Good evening. I'm not a parking expert, but as you know, I like ideas of comprehensive planning, and I agree with, or very much appreciate, Commissioner, Council members, Sobieski, reminding the Council of the discussion of having a landscape architect do a comprehensive plan. So I would like to speak in favor of going ahead and hiring a landscape architect, SWA or whatever, whoever you feel you need to hire, to look holistically at this area, not just the parking, and not just Caledonia, but the surrounding area in the hope of getting enough parking spaces to address the concerns of the merchants. I've gone to several meetings of the Merchant Association, and I know that the loss of 22 parking spaces is quite critical for them. In addition, Sausalito Beautiful is continuing to fund tree planting along the street, and we are very much in favor of anything that will enhance the streetscape of Caledonia. Thank you. |
| 03:55:41.06 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you, Carolyn. Joseph Rowland followed by Fred Moore. Hi, good evening. |
| 03:55:48.86 | Joseph Rowland | I spoke here about a month and a half ago with regards to this measure. like Councilman Sobieski, I was under the impression that we were moving forward with a Landscape, design, lead. with engineering as a component. It is crucial for the businesses along Caledonia Street, I own an air salon, basically at the corner of Caledonia and Johnson. The loss of parking spaces would be detrimental to my business. Many of you must realize that who come to my business or frequent businesses on Caledonia Street. The solution on Pine Street sounds viable, but it is a small drop in the bucket compared to what we will lose. And we don't implement the idea of a planscape that is long term for Caledonia Street. Not only for my business, But for any business that plans to move into any vacant space, you can expect to get revenue from vacant spaces. So look at the whole picture and determine what's best for Caledonia Street and the city of Sausalito. Thank you. Thank you. |
| 03:57:08.96 | Melissa Woodside | more followed by Adrian Britton. |
| 03:57:13.00 | Fred Moore | Good evening again, Mayor, Council Members. I need to, I guess, repeat most of the comments that I said before. I was here at that prior meeting. I was a strong advocate of a landscape-led holistic design for parking in the entire area. I worked with a planning and engineering firm before. Many battles with the traffic engineers and their sometime myopic view on things versus a holistic approach so I am surprised that a holistic approach wasn't presented to you tonight so I would hope that you go back and support your prior motion which was unanimous to ensure that the Thank you. person who is pushing forward with this is a landscape architect versus a traffic engineer and have the traffic engineer providing input to make sure there's nothing technically wrong with the design. So thank you very much. |
| 03:58:04.60 | Melissa Woodside | Adrian Britton. followed by Vicki Nichols. |
| 03:58:10.98 | Adrian Brinton | Hi, Adrian Brinson, thank you for taking my comment. I typically am very supportive of businesses. I think they're super important for our town. And I advocate, I'm on the board of the DSA and I'm often advocating for |
| 03:58:15.03 | Carolyn Revell | I don't know. |
| 03:58:24.28 | Adrian Brinton | things that support our businesses. I think that seeing this come back like this now is very disappointing. The AB 413 went into effect at the beginning of 2025, and really it started in Sausalito on July 15, 2025, when a pedestrian was struck and the crosswalk at Tony in Caledonia. In July 2025, we delayed. In October 2025, we delayed. in March 2026. We delayed. And in April, we said that we wanted to get the landscape architect going. And we really haven't moved forward in any meaningful way. So I absolutely agree that we need a landscape architect to take the lead on this. And we need to recover as much parking as we can. But we also need to just do the daylighting now. Get it done. If we can move one street to try to recoup some in the short term to angle parking, something to try to lessen the blow, that's great. But at the same time, this law was passed because it's dangerous to cross the street. I suffer that every day when I walk my dog on that street and crossing that street with the cars parked right up to the edge. This will make a meaningful difference in the safety. So let's keep going with the design, but let's also do the daylighting. |
| 03:59:32.23 | Melissa Woodside | Vicki Nichols. No other... cards. from inside the chamber. |
| 03:59:39.91 | Vicki Nichols | Good evening. I had actually volunteered to be on this committee when I was still living on Caledonia Street and I never heard anything about it. But one thing I want to talk about right now is that's a commercial residential zone. In the building where you're proposing taking the most parking spaces, they're all at Caledonia Litho, Turney. I lived at Caledonia and Turney for 42 years. I can tell you that those four spaces right outside our windows are not going to be accommodated by eight a block away. Sushi Rand will take those in a minute, which is fair enough. But they also have parking behind the... theater, too. Seven units in that corner building. This needs to be re-looked at, I think. I'm with Council Member Cox, though, that we want to follow the law. And the biggest threat to California Street is people speeding on the street. So it's not, it is a visual, problem because people drive big SUVs. You can't see around them, but a lot of people are speeding. So this needs to be hopefully re-looked at. There's no garages for these older buildings. We have to park on the street and we pay you for permits to park there and we can't find parking. |
| 04:01:01.84 | Melissa Woodside | Anyone online? |
| 04:01:11.51 | Kieran Culligan | Hi there, Kieran Culligan, Saucyutu resident. I'm also pretty confused and frustrated on the process for this one. Adrian Brinton nicely outlined the delays upon delays upon delays for something we've known about for years now, both before it was active when it was in the warning period and now for the over, you know, approaching a year and a half, that it's been actual state law fully implemented. And I also heard pretty clearly at the last time this was discussed, consensus to move with a design-led project and that Department of Public Works was supposed to come back in May. I know a lot's going on, so it's only a couple weeks delay. To present immediate plans for implementing a before 13 and any mitigating options like we heard for pine street that could be done now. and there's a very specific reason two specific reasons for it to be done now. One, you have actual notice that someone has been hurt. in one of these intersections that you have delayed I would feel horrible, honestly, if I was sitting in your seat on the dais or in public works, having, you know, I feel responsible. They haven't pushed you hard enough on this topic. Like people have gotten hurt. because if you your delayed actions. More people will continue to get hurt. If this doesn't happen, that is a safety factor. It makes less, it makes us less safe, less walkable makes me horrible. I have to think about, like, do I feel comfortable having my kids to be able to walk across the street? And it's a huge liability that's actual notice of a dangerous condition. It's state law. something needs to be done about it. You're conflating parking. and required state law. Implement now. then do the study. And that can be done on the timeline. It needs to be done to organize this area to do it right. But they shouldn't be conflated. They've been conflated for a long time. It's confusing things. It's delaying things. I need to see action. Thank you. |
| 04:03:20.01 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing no more comments online. |
| 04:03:21.78 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, let's bring it back to the dais for discussion and possible decision. |
| 04:03:29.29 | Councilmember Cox | I'll lead off. The recommended motion is to provide direction to staff on whether to proceed with a detailed traffic analysis of the Caledonia Street area based on impacts from AB 413. I... I recommend that we readopt the motion that we made at our last meeting. and give direction to staff with regarding what timeframe to accomplish this within and when to come back to us. I do want to go ahead and give direction to staff to carry out the proposed revisions to Pine Street that Director McGowan has identified. And I want to thank and acknowledge Director McGowan for providing those alternatives to us. And I understand that Yoshi Tomei participated in that dialogue, which Bye. appreciate the identification of additional parking spots, but I am very mindful of the comments from residents who live there. You know, I don't have the same experience as Adrian. I'm there all the time. I've never... you know, the speed limit is 20 miles an hour. So I've never had a close call. I've never had anyone not be respectful of crosswalks, uh, as I'm shopping at drivers or, uh, getting sushi or other errands on Caledonia street. So, um, I think we have many, competing interests to manage. I don't want to deprive our residents of parking spots. unnecessarily. So I'd like to include in our motion this evening, that we proceed with all due haste to get this work done. |
| 04:05:14.84 | Ian Sobieski | Do you think you could split your thoughts into separate motions so we can take action on them? |
| 04:05:18.91 | Councilmember Cox | Okay, my first motion is I move that we give direction to staff to proceed with the proposed traffic parking changes on Pine Street. |
| 04:05:31.15 | Ian Sobieski | That's the addition of the six spots. Yeah. Okay, I'll second that. |
| 04:05:36.82 | Melissa Woodside | So, um, unless there's many more discussion, there's a motion to second. All in favor say aye. Aye. |
| 04:05:42.81 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. |
| 04:05:42.82 | Melissa Woodside | you |
| 04:05:43.04 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. |
| 04:05:43.08 | Melissa Woodside | Okay. |
| 04:05:43.15 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. |
| 04:05:43.16 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Thank you. |
| 04:05:43.40 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. I move that we, well, why don't you make the motion because you have the minutes in front of you. |
| 04:05:49.66 | Ian Sobieski | I'd like to reiterate the motion I made last time, but I just want to foreshadow that I'm going to suggest changing it slightly. |
| 04:05:54.62 | Walfred Solorzano | Okay. |
| 04:05:54.89 | Ian Sobieski | because I think Now time is of the essence. |
| 04:05:57.61 | Walfred Solorzano | Yeah. |
| 04:05:57.81 | Ian Sobieski | We need to get rid of these 21 spots and implement AB 413. I think that's a worthy enough excuse to skip a three party RFP process and simply hire this, uh, um, landscape firm that knows this space. So I'm going to modify the direct staff to hire S SWA and all haste. Um, so let me just read it. It'll be, uh, |
| 04:06:10.75 | Kevin McGowan | Agree. |
| 04:06:20.39 | Ian Sobieski | We hereby direct staff an appropriate $68,680 for a design-led Caledonia street street study with the landscape architecture firm SWA as the lead and a traffic engineer in support focused on parking, AB413 compliance, and long-term streetscape design for Caledonian adjacent streets. |
| 04:06:39.69 | Councilmember Cox | may i suggest that we identify parametrics since we already have as the traffic engineer |
| 04:06:44.47 | Ian Sobieski | engineer parametrics and support with that friendly amendment. |
| 04:06:47.02 | Councilmember Cox | And then can you |
| 04:06:48.03 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:06:48.06 | Councilmember Cox | a time frame on it. |
| 04:06:48.92 | Ian Sobieski | And that they're Preliminary reports should be due. I mean, I think it's a good thing. |
| 04:06:54.98 | Councilmember Cox | 30 days. Implementation within 90 days. |
| 04:06:56.72 | Ian Sobieski | I'm going to say, yeah. Well, let's say... how to structure that. Yes. |
| 04:07:03.11 | Councilmember Cox | I'm speaking to the director. |
| 04:07:04.53 | Ian Sobieski | No, that's it. say that a preliminary report in 30 days with a recommendation on a new deadline that we can maybe pick a recommendation that would be on consent and we could modify it |
| 04:07:20.21 | Kevin McGowan | So we have to implement the contract. And that is with SWA and then with a sub or somebody else. Well, we said parametrics. Or parametrics. We have a proposal from parametrics already. It's going to take time to get the contract signed. Within 30 days doesn't seem reasonable to me. |
| 04:07:28.41 | Councilmember Cox | We said parametric. |
| 04:07:38.55 | Ian Sobieski | Do you have any capacity to work with someone on a time and materials basis? |
| 04:07:42.96 | Kevin McGowan | If you direct us to do so, sure. |
| 04:07:44.86 | Ian Sobieski | So how about we do it on a time and materials basis up to $65,000. |
| 04:07:47.68 | Kevin McGowan | and not exceed amount. |
| 04:07:49.07 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah, up to $68,680 on a time and materials basis. |
| 04:07:53.35 | Kevin McGowan | That's for the traffic engineer. I haven't received a quote from the SWA. |
| 04:07:58.11 | Ian Sobieski | So you'll have your total budget and I think I imagine that both these people that know and care about sauce ladle will work within this container. I bet. |
| 04:08:06.02 | Jill Hoffman | Perhaps we can ask the director McGowan, how we might want to praise our motion. |
| 04:08:11.93 | Kevin McGowan | That's kind of you. It's the first time somebody asked me that. So I would request more time because having just 30 days to do this, even at time and materials, doesn't sound reasonable. |
| 04:08:24.42 | Councilmember Cox | you The issue is we now have public comment calling out Sausalito for no ...perpetuating a dangerous condition on Caledonia Street. That puts us at legal risk. So we've now had this happen at two successive meetings. And so we now are in an emergency situation to take immediate action to not face liability if heaven forbid someone else gets injured. |
| 04:08:51.89 | Jill Hoffman | Not that we are agreeing that that's the situation. Exactly. Be clear. Right. We have a public comment on this. Yeah. We're not agreeing or substantiating these claims, but we are acknowledging that we would like to move forward. |
| 04:08:55.64 | Councilmember Cox | Not that we're agreeing. |
| 04:09:07.70 | Jill Hoffman | in a faster way with this project, because we have given direction in the past. We like to move forward consistently with that prior direction. Now, what we, I think what we would like to say is that Perhaps we would like to give direction. Our motion would like to be. encapsulated, perhaps like we've said, what would be a reasonable time that you think you could live with and that you think you could actually perform on? Because we certainly wouldn't want to give too short of a time that you wouldn't be able to perform on, Director McGowan. would, |
| 04:09:41.10 | Kevin McGowan | Thank you. I would like to bring it back to the council on July 21st, which is the second meeting. No, I... |
| 04:09:46.16 | Jill Hoffman | I... That's reasonable. That's 35 days. |
| 04:09:46.90 | Kevin McGowan | That's- THE CONTRACT BACK |
| 04:09:49.62 | Councilmember Cox | Thank you. Not the contract. Yes, we want action. Yeah. We want results. Yeah. |
| 04:09:52.10 | Jill Hoffman | We weren't. |
| 04:09:54.46 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. Okay. July 21st. July 21st, second meeting in July. So the motion is to direct staffed and appropriate $68,680 for design-led Caledonia streetscape study with the landscape architect SWA as the lead and parametrics traffic engineering support on a time and materials basis focused on parking, AB413 compliance, and long-term streetscape design for Caledonia and adjacent streets by July 21st, 2026. |
| 04:10:22.04 | Jill Hoffman | And that's on consent? Could be. Yeah. That'll be on a consent calendar. If we need to pull it, we can pull it. Yeah. Thank you, George McGowan. I appreciate that. Second. |
| 04:10:29.29 | Melissa Woodside | here. the question you can have the question. I just want to comment that, um, having been almost hit about five times. Having my dog almost hit maybe more, went in the crosswalk. I hate to say it, but... |
| 04:10:47.79 | Walfred Solorzano | On Caledonia? |
| 04:10:48.75 | Jill Hoffman | Thank you. |
| 04:10:48.77 | Melissa Woodside | YES. |
| 04:10:49.07 | Walfred Solorzano | Thank you. |
| 04:10:51.10 | Melissa Woodside | Um, |
| 04:10:51.20 | Walfred Solorzano | Sorry to hear that, Stephen. |
| 04:10:52.72 | Melissa Woodside | Well, but, you know, I shouldn't let my own personal experience dictate a public policy, but the public policy has been. already adopted by the state to daylight these things. And we had this issue in 2025. And it's been punted and punted and punted. I don't want to point fingers, but it's not. Thank you. It's not a good result. So I'm only going to support this because you're setting a deadline. And if the deadline is not done, the red paint comes out. Okay? Thank you. |
| 04:11:27.17 | Samantha Schubert | Red paint. The red paint. |
| 04:11:27.21 | Melissa Woodside | Red paint. |
| 04:11:30.99 | Samantha Schubert | Thank you. |
| 04:11:31.56 | Melissa Woodside | So. |
| 04:11:31.61 | Samantha Schubert | Thank you. |
| 04:11:32.36 | Melissa Woodside | So, No, I get it. And I wanted to help you. I do want to help you. I want to help all the businesses there. I think some of those might be redesigned. |
| 04:11:34.36 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. |
| 04:11:34.38 | Babette McDougall | I get it. |
| 04:11:35.16 | Ian Sobieski | Yeah. |
| 04:11:41.28 | Melissa Woodside | so that you can have some temporary short-term parking that's reasonable. near a corner, but there's a way to design it, right? And we don't have that now. We just have straight crosswalks. We went all over town. when this law was implemented first, first became effective, we painted red everywhere. But we wanted to make an exception for Caledonia Street because of its special characteristics. And that was in twenty twenty five. |
| 04:12:09.36 | Babette McDougall | Yeah. |
| 04:12:09.53 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. Not good. all the questions. |
| 04:12:13.57 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:12:16.37 | Melissa Woodside | All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Passes unanimously. |
| 04:12:19.66 | Ian Sobieski | So in service of that, Mr. Mayor, I'm wondering if I could make a third motion, which is that we actually paint and have 413 compliance by day certain. So we just gave staff an obligation to come back with the work on the solution. But how about we commit to a date when the red-pink comes out? |
| 04:12:36.40 | Councilmember Cox | Well, can we do that on the 21st? We're hearing this again in one month. So I'd like to do that on the 21st with the benefit of the information that the director is bringing back to us then. |
| 04:12:40.75 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:12:48.65 | Ian Sobieski | I understand it's my feeling that I would like the day certain. I will be able to look. And so that's my notion. Maybe there's no one to second it. But I would like by August 1st, 2026 to have AB 413. I'll second it. |
| 04:13:00.21 | Melissa Blaustein | I'll second it. I fully agree with that. Okay. Thank you. |
| 04:13:03.19 | Jill Hoffman | You said it, Dave. That's hard to correct. What do you think? We've done so much public works in last year, and let's not forget we did an amazing job We've done so much public works in the last year. We've resurfaced how many streets. We've put up so many crosswalks. We've done an amazing, incredible job with this AB. whatever the number is. So to criticize us for not doing it on one street, I get it. People are frustrated, but I don't want to lose it. All the work, the amazing, incredible job we've done. and throughout town this year on public safety, new bike lanes, almost the whole length of Bridgeway, miles of new bike lanes. Okay. So let's not forget this miles of new crosswalks. So director McGowan, what do you think is an outside reasonable outside date that we could have this project done? |
| 04:13:51.19 | Kevin McGowan | As far as the red paint or as far as the red paint isn't the issue? |
| 04:13:54.51 | Jill Hoffman | you But yeah, red paint, but you, yeah, yeah, exactly. Because we're talking about landscaping and all kinds of things. That's going to take a long time. But just red paint, right? The basic outlines. |
| 04:14:05.21 | Kevin McGowan | The red paint isn't really an issue. We need just a couple days of our maintenance staff to take care of it. |
| 04:14:09.43 | Jill Hoffman | Give me an outside date. |
| 04:14:10.88 | Kevin McGowan | If we're going to bring it back to the council on the 21st and at that point, You say, let's do the red paint. We'll, we'll get it done by August 1st. |
| 04:14:19.98 | Ian Sobieski | Thank you. |
| 04:14:19.99 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, I second. So that's my motion. Is that done better? Okay. |
| 04:14:24.97 | Melissa Woodside | So motion seconds and. |
| 04:14:26.37 | Melissa Blaustein | THE FAMILY IS GOING TO BE |
| 04:14:28.34 | Melissa Woodside | Question, all in favor? |
| 04:14:30.07 | Melissa Blaustein | Aye. |
| 04:14:31.16 | Melissa Woodside | I'm sorry. |
| 04:14:31.25 | Melissa Blaustein | you Mr. Mayor have to recuse myself from the next item as I live within 100 feet of the Spencer Fire Station. |
| 04:14:36.60 | Melissa Woodside | THE FAMILY. |
| 04:14:36.97 | Melissa Blaustein | it was. |
| 04:14:37.04 | Melissa Woodside | Thank you. |
| 04:14:37.10 | Melissa Blaustein | Thank you. Well, I'll be back for council member reports, so I'm not going anywhere. |
| 04:14:41.98 | Melissa Woodside | Well, I'm not feeling great, so. I would like to take the next one. No, I think this item is ready for decision. |
| 04:14:50.49 | Ian Sobieski | I agree. This is the firehouse. |
| 04:14:50.60 | Melissa Woodside | I agree. |
| 04:14:52.36 | Ian Sobieski | Just move it. Take public comment and vote on it. Yeah. |
| 04:14:55.38 | Melissa Woodside | Yeah. Is there a public comment on the last business item, defense or fire station? Seeing none in the room. Anyone online? |
| 04:15:05.08 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing none online. |
| 04:15:06.11 | Melissa Woodside | Okay, is there a motion? |
| 04:15:09.11 | Ian Sobieski | I'll move approval. Second. |
| 04:15:11.12 | Melissa Woodside | OK, motion in a second. Um, Melissa has recused herself due to the location of her home in proximity to the fire station. All those in favor of the motion? Aye. That passes four to zero. |
| 04:15:24.61 | Walfred Solorzano | Okay. I. |
| 04:15:33.62 | Babette McDougall | Thank you. |
| 04:15:37.53 | Melissa Woodside | You want to take the ride. |
| 04:15:38.95 | Linda Pfeiffer | Yeah, and that was your reaction. |
| 04:15:39.47 | Melissa Woodside | Yeah. I'm sorry. |
| 04:15:41.80 | Linda Pfeiffer | Okay. Yeah, yeah. |
| 04:15:44.37 | Melissa Blaustein | All right. Close out the meeting here as our mayor is not feeling well. So the next item on the agenda, and let's get through this as quickly as possible, is item six, council member reports and other council business. Do we have any council member committee reports? Okay. Seeing none. What about future agenda items, item six B? None. Great. I see that item 6C are minutes from boards and commission are posted. Any other reports of significance? Seeing none. Do we have any public comment on items 6A through 6D? |
| 04:16:23.75 | Walfred Solorzano | Seeing none online. |
| 04:16:24.78 | Melissa Blaustein | Okay, meeting is now adjourned at 9.27 PM. Thank you, everyone. All right, thanks, everybody. Thank you. |
| 04:16:32.27 | Samantha Schubert | Great job. |
| 04:16:37.17 | Miriam Brown | Thank you. |
| 04:16:37.19 | Walfred Solorzano | and rate you on E. Transcription by CastingWords Thank you. |
| 04:16:41.56 | Councilmember Cox | I'm so into it. |
| 04:16:42.33 | Angeline Loeffler | Thank you. |