[0:03] Okay, I will call to order the city of Bvida council meeting for Monday, April

[0:09] the 13th, 2026. Can I get a roll call, Beth?

[0:13] » Council member Cooper >> here.

[0:16] » Council member Burke >> here.

[0:17] » Mayor Wilkinson >> present.

[0:19] » Council member Mark >> here.

[0:21] » Council member Carropat here. >> And with that, I think we will be

[0:25] adjourning to a close session.

[0:46] Uh, for the record, there are no attendees.

[2:11] Okay, we will uh reconvene our city council meeting um in relation to the

[2:16] close session items. Um we there is nothing

[2:23] » can we >> sorry there's nothing to report in

[2:26] relation to the uh conference with labor negotiator and in relation to um the

[2:33] conference with legal council in relation to existing litigation. I would

[2:38] like to report out that the city and the owners of 339 Golden Gate Avenue have

[2:44] agreed to settle the pending litigation relating to the construction project at

[2:49] 339 Golden Gate Avenue. As part of that settlement, the owners will make a

[2:54] contribution to the city of $100,000 which the city will use to fund parks

[2:58] and open space projects in Belvadier for the public's benefit. We are pleased to

[3:04] have this matter settled. Thank you. Beth, do I need to do a roll call again?

[3:10] I don't. No, we're good. Okay. So, we will um we're going to move the agenda

[3:14] around a little bit and we are going to move up to the first item, the open

[3:19] forum. Item seven will move to the beginning. And so, uh the open forum,

[3:24] this is an opportunity for any member of the public to briefly address the city

[3:28] council on any matter that does not appear on this agenda, but that is

[3:32] within the city council's subject matter jurisdiction. Upon being recognized by

[3:36] the mayor, please limit your oral statement to no more than three minutes.

[3:40] Under the Brown Act, council members may not deliberate or take action on items

[3:44] not on tonight's agenda. Matters that may warrant a more lengthy presentation

[3:49] or council consideration may be placed on the agenda for further discussion at

[3:53] a later meeting. Um, can I see whether anybody wishes to make public comment?

[3:57] Please come up. >> Would you mind just stating your name

[4:02] and address for the record?

[4:09] Turn. Okay. Sorry. Thank you. Sorry. My first meeting. My name is Kathy Roas. Um

[4:15] and I live at 12 Cove in Belvadier. um we are new to the community, but um

[4:21] what we wanted to just kind of address with um the city council is the pump

[4:27] station renovation um that just became the notice just went

[4:32] up this week, so it was kind of news to the community. Um there's a noise

[4:38] concern. Their generator will be at 83 dB. That's before their enclosure, which

[4:44] we don't know what it would be after. We that's all we've been told so far.

[4:48] There is a meeting tomorrow at 1:00 with everybody. Um Tony Rubio will be there

[4:53] from sanitation 5. But our concern is it's a very industrial look. There's a

[4:59] big monor rail going up with a pulley system over the tanks. Um the generator

[5:04] is going up in the front. We don't know what that enclosure looks like, but the

[5:08] Montreal itself over the tanks is 9 ft plus the pad. And we know they had to go

[5:14] with a 3T the F themma pad. So, um I don't know where that's going to put

[5:18] that if they could do a smaller pad over there or not. I'm not sure. We just we

[5:22] just got actual schematics. There was a very generic drawing that went up um

[5:28] Monday. Um but that's our concern is one the um visual impact. It's a very

[5:34] industrial look. It doesn't really fit into the neighborhood. I'm not sure that

[5:38] they're an organization that has to abide by any setbacks, any easements,

[5:45] any design review, anything. Um, but we have the visual impact. There are

[5:52] neighbors that are just going to be sitting looking at the um monolith, you

[5:56] know, in their backyard. So, that's a concern. The noise is a concern. Um we

[6:01] also is it possible um we don't know that they're subject to any review or

[6:06] design reviews but is it possible that they are um there's oversight bodies

[6:12] like CQA or BCDC because they're within 100 ft of water.

[6:17] So is it possible that they need to be um maybe reviewed by them? So right now

[6:23] they were there today marking so they're ready to go. Um, and I don't know that I

[6:31] kind of reached out to the town um today to say did anybody have any knowledge? I

[6:36] didn't hear that anybody had any knowledge of the project, you know, and

[6:40] even if they don't have to report to the um design review or anything or the

[6:44] building committee, the um there's also a thing about fitting in

[6:49] with the neighborhood and being working with the neighbors. I think they so far

[6:54] have seemed to be a very pleasant group to deal with, but I don't know how set

[7:00] right now the monolith is going in where right now all they do is they back a

[7:04] truck in and they service the tanks that way. Um I asked today um Tony Rubio

[7:11] today when we were on site if there's a reason they're going for the monolith.

[7:15] Are they really wed to it? Um he said, "Well, the truck is diesel and it's

[7:20] loud." And I said, "Well, I have to tell you, I live next door and I've not heard

[7:23] it once since we moved in in November." Um, so are they really wed to that or

[7:27] not? Because that's a like our neighbor in the back, his um him and his wife

[7:32] really are home most of the time. They're she's housebound and that's

[7:35] their view like right there. Um, so, you know, we have some concerns about this,

[7:41] um, that it's kind of just flying by and can we make it more can we make it more

[7:47] suiting to, you know, fit in with the neighborhood, make the sure the noise

[7:50] level is um, quieter. And we talked to Tony today, you know, they put up an 8ft

[7:55] fence with lattice. I'm not sure anybody really wants to see the sanitation, you

[7:59] know, because that's when you come into Belvadier, I mean, it's a main

[8:02] thoroughare, like when you're coming into Belvadier itself. Um, lots of

[8:06] people walk by there, bike by there, everything. Um, I think we could make it

[8:10] in keeping with the neighborhood. I think it's, you know, I know they

[8:14] probably are not something that they need to abide by all the um, design

[8:18] review and everything. I don't think that they have to. Sanitation 5 has

[8:22] indicated that they don't have to report to anybody, but um, in a nice way they

[8:26] did it. >> Kathy, do you mind just wrapping up if

[8:28] you don't mind because a little bit past the three minutes.

[8:31] » Okay. Um yeah, I think that's kind of was we just were wondering like did

[8:36] anybody have any knowledge of this? Do is there anything that we need to like

[8:41] talk to anybody about? I mean is it just that we just let them do what they need

[8:45] to do and I mean it's going to be there for you know the lifespan is 25 30

[8:49] years. Okay. >> Thank you for your comment.

[8:52] » Okay thank you. >> Is there any other public comment?

[8:59] Anything online Beth? There are no hands raised.

[9:03] » Great, Robert. I know we don't address. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see you. I'm

[9:08] sorry. Come on up.

[9:15] » Mayor, members of council, thank you very much for all you do. Um, I want to

[9:21] talk about the recommendations for a full-time project manager for Malard

[9:25] Point. >> This is actually agendaized potentially

[9:27] at another time. So, do you mind holding your comment for that time?

[9:31] » Sure. >> Thank you.

[9:32] » Um, Robert, in relation to the pump station, I know we don't directly

[9:36] address public comment, but is there anything you would like to uh uh to pass

[9:40] on to the to the council and members of the public?

[9:44] » Yeah, I would just say that it's it's on our radar now. We'll be looking into

[9:47] this and myself, uh, Tony, who is our public works director, and Rebecca

[9:51] Marquick will decide whether or not uh there's any additional review that needs

[9:54] to happen. Um, and if needed, we'll have a conversation at council at the next

[9:59] meeting. >> Okay. And will you be attending this

[10:01] meeting? Somebody from the city be attending this meeting tomorrow.

[10:04] » Uh, yes. I don't think we've had the invite yet, but we'll make sure we go on

[10:07] that list. >> Okay. Thank you.

[10:11] Okay. And if there's nobody else, we will close our um public forum and we

[10:16] will move on to item number three, reports and presentations. Um 3A is city

[10:23] council reports. Does anybody any members of uh city council have reports?

[10:27] » I do. >> Go ahead.

[10:29] » Um so this um last month I attended the um RBR meeting and I want to report that

[10:37] they're down to uh two boats that are legally anchored um to stay in

[10:43] Richardson Bay until October of 2026. Um, of the two, one is actively looking

[10:50] for housing and is being assisted by RBR in trying to find um, housing and the

[10:57] other boat um, has agreed that they will be leaving Richardson Bay by the October

[11:02] date in um, October, the BCDC deadline. Um, we are going to be reviewing our

[11:10] budget um, this next month in May. And um we've been um the members of RBR have

[11:19] been asked to um uh um get some feedback um for our um

[11:28] director. Um, uh, next year's budget, um, we're going

[11:35] to be facing a $300,000 shortfall,

[11:40] uh, due to the 2023 board's decision to guarantee housing for the first year,

[11:45] which includes the social worker for the, um, individuals.

[11:51] Um the proposed budget for 2026 um is going to be 3% lower than our

[11:58] contribution last year. So our contribution for next year is proposed

[12:02] at $129,893.

[12:07] Um and um

[12:12] they proposed two budgets. one not considering the shortfall of the 300,000

[12:18] and one um considering the shortfall. Our instruction was to proceed with the

[12:23] 2627 budget not including the shortfall and it

[12:29] probably will be coming back. The um shortfall for Belvadier would add an

[12:34] additional 34,500 to our uh contribution. So the total

[12:39] would then become 164,393.

[12:45] Um then in 2027 um it's anticipated that that housing

[12:51] shortfall will total $1 million and our contribution at that time um

[12:59] they're projecting would be $115,000 additional to our regular um assessment.

[13:06] and they're projecting that estimated around now around um 245,000.

[13:13] » So the director has asked and I know this is not an agendaized item for full

[13:18] discussion but just to have some um guidance from the cities on how they

[13:26] will feel um if requested to pay those additional funds for the housing. So

[13:33] what I'm asking is just sort of a general

[13:37] statement that I can go back to RBR next month during our um budget session and

[13:44] um give them some um just initial broad nothing specific because we don't have

[13:49] all the details yet of um how the city of Belvadier feels if they're going to

[13:54] be asked for those additional contributions from our budget. Are are

[13:59] these um mandatory fees if you're a member if you remain a member and is it

[14:04] mandatory that we remain a member of the group as a city?

[14:09] » Well, I think if the majority of the board agrees that they're going to cover

[14:14] the additional housing cost, then that would be become our responsibility.

[14:20] um as far as the agreement and Robert can probably speak better than I on

[14:27] that, but I think that at any time a member can can withdraw from the um the

[14:34] board >> and is the JPA I should say

[14:37] » is every uh marin jurisdiction part of that right now like Salelo, Mil Valley?

[14:44] No, the only towns that are included are the town of Tibrron, the city of Mil

[14:50] Valley, Belvadier, and the county. And the county pays the biggest portion of

[14:56] the budget. >> So, Salelo, even though it's located

[14:59] primarily on Richardson Bay, is not part of the JPA.

[15:03] » They removed themselves from the JPA, and I'm not quite sure what year, but it

[15:08] it's been a while they since they removed themselves.

[15:12] What I don't understand there is you're saying there's there'll be two

[15:17] uh people or families that they'll be providing housing for just for one year

[15:24] » all the previous Yeah. So in 2023, the board decided that they were, you know,

[15:29] it was at a time when there was federal money out there and state money out

[15:34] there and we were getting grants um from the federal government and from the

[15:40] state and the board felt that the RBR could put in their budget a guarantee

[15:47] that when these people transition, because it was a it is a big transition

[15:51] from somebody living on the water to going to land that they would make sure

[15:57] that, you know, they were successful in that first year. So, they guaranteed the

[16:02] housing any shortfall in the housing, you know, they um didn't get county

[16:07] money or the um was lacking and coming in with the section 8 money from the

[16:12] federal government. And um and they agreed that they would have a social

[16:17] worker work with these people for the first year.

[16:21] » But but I thought I thought it was more than just one year. Well, the housing is

[16:25] supposed to be forever, but RBR just their position was is they were going to

[16:31] make sure that people would get the guaranteed housing for the first year.

[16:35] » But therefore, if we've only got two new people, how can that be a million

[16:38] dollars? >> Well, because they have people left over

[16:41] from this year that are going to be in the year.

[16:44] » But but if only if they're only funded for one year, why why does it become a a

[16:48] a successive year obligation? Because you said you're talking about 2728

[16:53] budget. That's more than it you think is from October of they're moving October

[16:58] 26 and so it runs into the next fiscal year for that reason.

[17:01] » Well, it runs into the next fiscal year and then the one person that's there

[17:06] now. Let's say he doesn't get off until 2026. You know, he's going to be there

[17:11] and there might be I don't know all the figures. So, this is sort of a generic,

[17:16] but these are good questions and I can take them back and I know we need to

[17:19] have more answers, but I was just looking for some general broad

[17:25] statements on the possibility of us assuming that additional responsibility

[17:31] on this JPA. My sense was it was a um the the housing

[17:37] agreements had uh longer than one-year broader commitments on assuming a level

[17:44] of funding that RBR um would not be responsible for but were able to

[17:48] facilitate that hasn't come through and my sense is that they're feeling

[17:51] obligated to maintaining and upholding those those housing guarantees for the

[17:56] broader um group of individuals who have been um relocated inland. Um that was my

[18:02] understanding of it. I could be wrong, but that's my broad understanding of it.

[18:06] And so it's a it's a compounding um expenditure cost that RB is is assuming

[18:13] and asking their their member municipalities to cover with their

[18:18] participation.

[18:22] » I can give you my opinion. um we only get 20.7% of our property

[18:29] taxes that are paid from Belvadier residents come to the city of Belvadier

[18:32] and the rest of them go to many other places. I'm just not quite sure why with

[18:36] that small amount of revenue that we get that we would we've already made a

[18:40] commitment uh to RB. I'm not sure that we're in the business

[18:46] of providing uh housing support on a long-term basis

[18:51] outside of Belvadier, but it feels like a that's not a small amount for our

[18:55] budget, I would say. Um you're talking about rising to nearly quarter of a

[18:59] million dollars. Um so that would be my opinion. I'm not

[19:04] sure what others think. >> Can we have this conversation, Andrew,

[19:07] or is this are we getting a little far field?

[19:10] I think this is probably a good time to put a put a pause button there and

[19:14] continue the discussion at a future time.

[19:15] » I mean I I I I have to say that um similar one report I would have in a

[19:20] minute is is um for for a similar type of expenditure plan um um transit

[19:26] authority marine can send a representative to give up a description

[19:29] and some details. Maybe maybe RBR can come with an agenda item in the future

[19:33] um to describe what the what the specifics are and ask ask more formally

[19:37] for some guidance. That would be an appropriate way to

[19:41] proceed. >> Okay, perfect. Um, does anybody else

[19:44] have any updates for the council? >> I do.

[19:48] » Um, just real quickly, um, as I mentioned from a from a transit

[19:51] authority marin perspective, uh, two quick things. uh one uh we'll be seeing

[19:56] I'm sure Robert you've already seen it uh a measure AA expenditure plan needs

[20:01] to be ratified by all the 10 cities and towns in Marin which is reclassifying

[20:05] their dollars um into some some new categories. I won't get into the

[20:09] specific specifics of it but it pulls some local funding away and puts it into

[20:15] um interchanges and reimagining roadways that um cross over between different

[20:20] jurisdictions. Uh so individual communities will be losing some part of

[20:25] their local streets and street funding which has been um mitigated to some

[20:30] degree because we had some outspoken um uh uh representatives. Thank you Pat

[20:37] Carropat when she attended a few months ago. They've they've shifted it to give

[20:41] a one-time double payment of those Measure A funds, which is basically

[20:46] taking year 35 of the um Measure A funding program, moving it back to this

[20:51] year. Um so that it'll pay for that shortfall going forward, which um I know

[20:57] Tony and Helga are already planning to use um for the for the for the for the

[21:01] sidewalk and and paving portion of the seaw wall project. So I think that's a

[21:06] good opportunity there to help mitigate some of those expenditures. Um the

[21:09] second real announcement quickly is that the uh TAM's support of uh crossing

[21:16] guard programs across the county um has been finalized and I've notified um Reed

[21:24] Union School District as well as the Tibberon Peninsula Traffic Alliance. Um

[21:27] they they're aware of this but I just I just notified them of the final aspect

[21:30] of it. Um unfortunately we're losing three sorry

[21:35] four sites and gaining one for a net loss. um they're hopefully able to

[21:40] mitigate that with a swap and potentially um finding some budgeted um

[21:46] way to do so. Uh these were three losses out of 10 or 12 across the county. Um

[21:52] the state sorry TAM has um because of a national um standards requirement has

[22:00] been forced to bring two guards to places where there is a median and two

[22:04] sides of the street which effectively lost six or seven sites um that had

[22:09] guards before and the re school union district um

[22:14] is the unfortunate um uh uh has has the consequence of losing some sites because

[22:19] of that. Um, so just that quick announcement, not not the best news, but

[22:24] that has happened. >> Anything else, Jane?

[22:29] » Um, I just wanted to announce that I've agreed to attend the fourth annual Marin

[22:35] Youth Town Hall presented by the Marin County Student Elections um, Ambassador

[22:40] Program uh, as a representative from Belvadier. It'll take place on Sunday,

[22:46] April 26 from 2 to 4 in the afternoon. And it's a great opportunity for any

[22:51] high school students interested in how uh local government works to uh come and

[22:58] learn. And I would encourage any of our community uh high school students to

[23:04] attend. Um I also attended the March B Ready Belvadier meeting chaired by uh

[23:11] council member Carropet and the determination there was that the

[23:16] theme for the year would be shelter in place whereas last year the theme was uh

[23:22] get ready to go. So um a few other items were discussed uh we had we we were

[23:29] introduced to the portable LRAD alert siren system.

[23:35] um which was under consideration. And um we also discussed putting together a

[23:41] list of medical support people in our community, doctors, nurses, medical

[23:47] assistants um who might be willing to help out in case of a communitywide

[23:54] um natural disaster emergency. So it was um a lot of good things were discussed

[24:01] and thank you. And we also had the opportunity to meet um the uh new um

[24:10] representative at the uh Tbron Fire Department um Miss Ramirez um who um

[24:17] works with communities and emergency plans. And so we were able to make a

[24:21] nice connection with her and she's on board for assisting us with anything

[24:26] that we need the Tibberon Fire Department for.

[24:31] Okay. Um, do we have any public comment in relation to our city council reports?

[24:39] Seeing none in the audience, any online? >> No hands raised.

[24:42] » Okay, great. We're going to move on to the city manager report 3B. Robert,

[24:46] » yes. Thanks, Mayor Wilkinson. I just have a couple of quick items. I'll start

[24:50] off by taking a moment to announce a bit of good news. We have a new addition or

[24:54] soon we'll have a new addition to our city hall team. Jules Fogerty will be

[24:58] joining the city as our new administrative technician at the front

[25:01] desk. His start date will be April 27th. Jules holds a degree in economics and

[25:07] sustainability from UC Berkeley and brings uh his experience in data

[25:11] analysis from his work at local startup firms. He's also recently served as a

[25:15] member of his hometown sustainability committee. So, he's familiar with

[25:19] government operations, which is a big bonus. Uh I do think he's going to be a

[25:23] great fit. We look forward to his arrival. I do encourage members of the

[25:26] council and the residents to stop by city hall again towards the end of this

[25:30] month to welcome Jules uh to Belvadier. And then regarding Melor Point, uh staff

[25:37] continues to meet with the developers team. The focus these last few weeks has

[25:41] been on the final map. A few of the larger outstanding items from the final

[25:46] map are the subdivision improvement agreement, the affordable housing

[25:50] agreement, and the regulatory agreement. Uh, these agreements are currently being

[25:54] reviewed by our attorneys and will be sent back to the Malard team hopefully

[25:58] this week. If you've been closely following this project, then you may be

[26:02] aware that the tenative map is set to expire midmay. Malard will be submitting

[26:07] a letter to the city asking for an extension of the tenative map. This is a

[26:12] process that is allowed per government code and is also uh in the city's

[26:16] municipal code as well. Once the city receives the request for the extension,

[26:20] the map is automatically extended for 60 days or until the applicant uh the

[26:26] application for the extension is approved, conditionally approved or deny

[26:30] deny whichever comes first. The developer is targeting the June uh

[26:35] meeting to bring the final map to city council and uh you know, we'll see how

[26:40] that uh continues with regard to the overall schedule for that project. Um,

[26:44] on a related note, I'm also happy to report that staff intends to bring

[26:48] aboard an outside project coordinator for the Malard Point project this April.

[26:53] Approval of that uh coordinator position is on the consent calendar tonight for

[26:58] consent for council's consideration. So, that might come up again, but that's all

[27:01] I have for now. >> Thanks, Robert. Does anybody have

[27:04] questions? >> Nope. Do

[27:08] » Oh, Jane, go ahead. >> Sorry, Robert. Could you um just

[27:12] reexlain the 60-day extension and then how that comes to the council and what

[27:20] you said about 30-day, 60-day, whatever comes first. I didn't catch that.

[27:26] » So, yeah, I'm sure Rebecca can fill in the gaps here, but from what I

[27:30] understand, there's uh in this in the government code and the city's municipal

[27:34] code, there's a section which addresses this in the subdivision map act.

[27:38] » Okay. Um it allows for extensions of a tenative map uh when an applicant

[27:43] submits a an application for that request. Um the city I don't believe has

[27:49] a official application we've ever adopted. Uh in this case I think we're

[27:53] considering a memo a letter from uh the Malard team is as sufficient. Um but

[27:59] there is a 60-day period which uh does allow that tenative map to be extended.

[28:04] Um Rebecca do you want to add anything on to that? I I think you summarize it

[28:08] very well. It's, you know, as Robert mentioned, per the government code as

[28:12] well as in our Belvadier municipal code. Essentially, once we get that, we're

[28:16] asking them to submit a letter to us. Um, and then that kind of essentially

[28:20] buys them 60 days on that tenative map. Um,

[28:25] and they're hopeful that within those 60 days that they the final map will be

[28:31] before the city council. >> Oh, okay. So it's not like it becomes

[28:35] » the tenative map decision doesn't come to the city council to determine whether

[28:41] I thought you said something like whether it's denied or accept. I I I

[28:45] messed that talking about the final map, >> right? So if we have everything all of

[28:50] the conditions of approval are met for the final map

[28:54] » prior to that 60-day expiration, then the final map will come to the council.

[29:00] If we if the condition of appro conditions of approval have not been met

[29:04] within those 60 days, we will also bring it to council for an extension or we

[29:10] will instead bring it to council for approval of the extension.

[29:15] » So there's a second extension opportunity if the 60 days tolls. Is

[29:19] that the idea? >> Yes.

[29:22] » But that's a decision then that gets made at the council level or again at

[29:26] the staff level. at the council level.

[29:29] » At the council, >> our code says actually our municipal

[29:32] code says planning commission, but we figured we would just bring it to the

[29:36] council. >> So there's So I misunderstood what

[29:38] Robert said about, you know, the the you know up until it's either approved,

[29:42] denied or or or um continued. Um but so with a letter in in the in absence of an

[29:49] of an application, I understand that or um they would receive a 60-day extension

[29:56] of the um period with which they could get approval for their final map. Um

[30:01] assuming they present they have a final application or final um all the

[30:06] information um uh the checklist is complete by within that 60 days. It

[30:09] comes to city council for approval. If it's not, you'll bring a application to

[30:14] further extend or further um renew the um tenative map um for some period of

[30:19] time based on their needs at that point in time.

[30:22] » That is correct. >> What discretion does the council have to

[30:25] you know approve, deny or continue or what

[30:28] » to be determined by? >> Yeah.

[30:32] » Further further guidance on that should we be in that position.

[30:35] » Thank you. >> Um can I can I ask one? Oh, sorry. Okay.

[30:40] It's on a different topic. >> Um, a question for Rebecca since we're

[30:45] on this topic is can you give us an update on completeness in terms of

[30:49] mallet point? I know there's a lot of talk about where they are as it relates

[30:54] to completeness. >> Yeah. So, it's still considered

[30:57] incomplete the project. >> Um, so there's sort of different

[31:02] » areas of the project, right? There's the bulkhead and there's the demolition and

[31:06] then there's the final map. Um, so we're getting closer to it being, you

[31:14] know, sort of in we're moving towards completeness. Um, but there are still

[31:18] some sort of outstand larger outstanding items in, you know, Robert mentioned

[31:23] those three agreements. Also, the relocation consultant, we're working on

[31:27] getting that person in contract. Um, and that's another of the sort of larger um

[31:33] outstanding items that need to be complete before

[31:37] we're moving forward with anything. >> Thank you. Can Can I follow up on that

[31:41] real quick? And unless is I know Rebecca, we spoke about this today. Um

[31:47] uh I would I would I would suggest that uh uh certainly

[31:53] you and your department or the the the coordinator that that we're considering

[31:56] hiring uh and this was this is a subject of a lot of the public comment that

[32:00] we've received in in writing is among other things uh consolidate these

[32:05] checklists so that by permit you know the the um the demolition and the and

[32:10] the tenative final map and I don't know if the bulkit has its own separate

[32:14] permit or not but Um, specific to permit, I would have a published um,

[32:19] consolidated checklist of where things stand and what's complete, what's

[32:22] incomplete, so that there's a comprehensive guideline for um, the

[32:26] community and also perhaps your own staff to be able to work through. I

[32:29] think that would be a I know you have them behind the scenes. It would just be

[32:32] I think probably good to have this individual consolidate and present as

[32:36] well. So >> that is certainly one of our goals with

[32:38] this individual as well as organizing the Malard point page and all of those

[32:43] documents sort of goes in hand inhand with what you're saying.

[32:48] » So um yeah I was going to say something but should we hold that for when it

[32:52] comes up on the the >> Jane you wanted to ask a question about

[32:55] something else. >> Well it's about Malard Point but not

[32:58] what's coming up tonight necessarily. So, um, my question is where the

[33:03] demolition permit fits in with the final map.

[33:08] Is that, um, where, how does that fit in your timeline with this with the out the

[33:16] final map? Is it totally separate from the demolition permit? Are they

[33:20] connected to the between the final map and the demolition permit?

[33:27] Do you do you know? >> That's a good question. I don't know.

[33:30] » Okay. I mean, I don't think that would the demolition permit until we have a

[33:35] final map. So, I think it's on this final map approval, right? We're not

[33:40] going to issue right a building permit for something that we don't have a map

[33:44] for. >> Okay. Thank you.

[33:46] » So, I do know. Yeah, >> that's exactly um what I was uh curious

[33:50] to know. That helps. Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks.

[33:57] » Okay. I will. Um, yeah, there's there's some reverberation.

[34:01] » Yeah. Would you mind turning your volume down? Someone someone has a a phone on.

[34:06] » It's echoing throughout the room if you don't mind.

[34:10] » Thank you. >> Okay. Um, okay. So, we if there is,

[34:13] let's see if there's any public comment on the city manager report, but just

[34:17] bearing in mind that the item to discuss the construction coordinator for

[34:23] Malipoint is a separate item. So, is there uh any public comment on the city

[34:28] manager report? Seeing none in the room, is there

[34:33] anything online? There are no hands raised.

[34:35] » Perfect. Thank you, Beth. Okay, we'll move to 3C, the sorry, the police chief

[34:41] report. Jason, you're up.

[34:47] » Thank you. And good evening, Mayor Wilkinson and council members. Tonight I

[34:51] am pleased to present the police department's

[34:54] uh first quarter report for 2026. During this quarter, the department

[35:00] handled 8889 incidents which included one part one

[35:04] offense of lararseny and two part two offenses uh suspicion and fraud. They're

[35:09] highlighted in bold. Uh and the remaining 886 incidents are classified

[35:15] as all other incidents. During this quarter, the department

[35:20] conducted 46 traffic stops, made three arrests, referred two cases for

[35:25] prosecution, and assisted Tibbrron on two occasions. We also received multiple

[35:30] citizens appreciation with zero citizen complaints.

[35:37] And also this quarter, we were pleased to swearing officer Tyler Preston as our

[35:41] newest police officer. He has since completed his field training and has

[35:45] been working as a solo patrol officer. During this quarter, we updated two

[35:51] flexible policies in alignment with amendment laws and best practices. And

[35:55] these updates are detailed in the staff report. And regarding our RIPA data, uh

[36:01] officers detained 49 individuals stemming from 46 traffic violations, one

[36:06] suspicious activity, and two welfare checks. The perceived racial

[36:10] compositions consist of 27 Caucasians, 10 Hispanics, six Asians, one Pacific

[36:16] Islander, and five Middle Eastern or or Southeast Asians. Of these 49 contacts,

[36:21] 46 were officer initiated, while three were related to calls for service. In

[36:26] all, BPD issued 11 citations, gave 35 warnings, and made three arrests.

[36:33] And during this quarter, police department personnel attended in-person

[36:37] and online training that were either mandated or for knowledge and skill

[36:40] enhancements. And lastly, as part of our community policing, we always take great

[36:44] pride in joining and participating in community events. And this concludes my

[36:48] report and I'm available for questions. >> Do any council members have questions?

[36:56] Seeing none, um, do any members of the public have public comment in relation

[37:01] to this item? Seeing none, is there anything online?

[37:05] » Mayor Wilkinson, there are no hands raised.

[37:07] » Great. And Jason, I just wanted to make a comment that I have seen your police

[37:10] officers very actively out in the community. Um, it's greatly appreciated.

[37:15] I've had feedback from a number of members of the community to uh just to

[37:18] say thank you for that. >> Thank you for your kind words and I will

[37:21] certainly relate that to you. >> And I echo that. I've heard feedback

[37:24] also. >> Fantastic. I I guess that's hence the uh

[37:27] uptick in traffic violation. >> I'm just hoping I'm not one of those

[37:30] traffic violations going forwards because that's it seems like that

[37:33] number's gone up. Is that because you're the police officers are more actively

[37:37] patrolling or >> Well, it it was kind of uh multifolds.

[37:41] Number one is with the addition of a new officer. It made traffic enforcement a

[37:45] lot easier or enforcement's u you know invisibilities because at times we would

[37:49] have up to two officers out and about as opposed to one. And secondly, we are

[37:54] trying to to identify enforcement um challenges, if you will. Um and so this

[38:00] quarter we decided to do a lot of uh traffic enforcements.

[38:04] » Okay. Thank you so much. >> Can I ask a question? Is this still a

[38:06] question or we have we closed this? We've had the public comment, but can I

[38:09] still ask a question? >> I'm just curious. I know I know that the

[38:12] county has done a done this is relating to ebikes and helmets on on on

[38:17] um kids and underage riders of ebikes. I know the county has had had a had a

[38:21] pretty sophisticated PR campaign to try to let that be, you know, let parents

[38:26] aware of that and and and law enforcement as well.

[38:30] Do you stop kids, you know, with, you know, under 16 without helmets, um,

[38:34] tandem riding and so forth? Because I know it's still a it's still a safety

[38:37] hazard. I'm just curious what what our policy and our approach is with that.

[38:40] » Sure. Thank you for the question. Um, normally for for us, it's hard for us to

[38:44] discern at times whether someone's 16 or or

[38:48] under. I mean, some are very obvious, but some are a little harder. So, what

[38:51] we can do is we can stop based on probable cause. Um, and that's usually

[38:56] associated with traffic violations. Or sometimes if it's pretty obvious that

[39:00] they're riding ebikes, we do in the short answer is yes, we do uh stop.

[39:07] » Thank you. >> Okay. Uh we are moving it on to item 3D,

[39:12] which is a presentation from our Balvid Tbron library director, Crystal Giran.

[39:47] Good evening, Crystal Dan with the Belvad Tibbron Library. Uh, thank you,

[39:50] Mayor Wilkinson, council members, and staff for having me tonight for the

[39:53] annual presentation on what is happening at the library. I want to acknowledge

[39:58] that you have three board members that you appoint. That's Roxan Richards,

[40:01] Emily Paplowski, and Tony Hooker. And Tony Hooker is uh here tonight in

[40:05] chambers as well. So just as a a general overview of the

[40:10] library. So our mission is to nurture curiosity, spark connections, and foster

[40:14] lifelong learning. And we do that in a variety of ways through our programming

[40:18] and the services that we provide. Um before we go into the fun stuff, I'll

[40:22] tell you some of the technical stuff though. Uh we for the fiscal year 2526,

[40:26] we have a budget of 3.75 million in revenue and we use up all of those

[40:32] funds. We've got 18.2 to FTE, which is about uh 13 full-time staff and 13

[40:38] part-time staff. So, we are um well staffed at the library. We have a very

[40:42] healthy reserve. The bulk of our operating costs goes to our personnel uh

[40:47] costs and that also includes not just salary benefits and wages, but also

[40:51] includes our insurance um workers comp insurance kind of staff development as

[40:56] well. Our next area where we spend some of our money is in our administrative

[41:00] overhead and the technology. Um, we spend about 13% in collections and

[41:05] programs, which you'll learn a little bit more. And then lastly, 3% on the

[41:08] bond repayment. So, if you'll remember in the 90s, we took out a bond to pay

[41:12] for the original building at 1501 Tibbron Boulevard. Um, we will finally

[41:17] pay that pay that off um next fiscal year. So, we'll likely use that

[41:22] continued revenue to offset programs and services going forward.

[41:27] Just some library usage at a glance. So, we have um in the nine months past for

[41:32] the current fiscal year, so this is July 2025 through June, I'm sorry, through

[41:36] March 2026, we've had just over 124,000 visits. Um this is on par for our annual

[41:43] uh goal that we see typically annually, just over about 150 or so. Um we have

[41:48] currently 8,026 card holders. That's a pretty significant number given the

[41:53] population of both Belvadier and Tibbron. These are 9492 proper card

[41:57] holders. Um, and that that that typically stays around the 8,000 number.

[42:03] We've had um we've answered over 13,000 reference questions. These are questions

[42:08] like, you know, can I get some book recommendations or I need some help

[42:12] doing some research on the certain topic. And then I think also what's

[42:16] important to note is um the Belvadier Tibon Library has four public meeting

[42:20] rooms that are available. uh other libraries, two other libraries in the

[42:23] county only have small what look like phone booths, little pods that you can

[42:27] use. We're the only ones that have that infrastructure built in and there are

[42:30] just high utilization from those meeting rooms and that's anything from tutoring

[42:34] pairs so a tutor and a child meeting after school to folks working remote

[42:38] taking Zoom meetings during the day um to folks playing bridge in the evenings.

[42:43] And so we've had over 3,200 room bookings for the year so far. And then

[42:48] the other significant note is that we've had over 17,000 attendees to our

[42:52] programs. Now I'm really proud to share that the Beltip Library hosts the

[42:56] highest number of programs of any library in Marin County and we also have

[42:59] the highest business hours um in any for any library in Marin County. So that's

[43:04] something to be very proud of and I think that speaks to the resources

[43:07] available to us and then the staff capacity that we do have and make

[43:10] available locally. >> Chris, while you're on the slide, could

[43:13] I just ask a question? directionally are these numbers up flat or down from a

[43:18] year ago. >> So we are on par for kind of an annual

[43:20] baseline that we've hit so far. Yeah. >> Yes. So it's about 75%. It's right

[43:26] compared at the nine month for the fiscal year.

[43:31] » So in the library we are uh all of our work is driven by a strategic plan and

[43:36] there are four goal areas within that strategic plan. This first area is uh to

[43:40] ensure that the library is a warm welcoming space for neighbors to connect

[43:44] and we live that in a few different ways. So we host largecale community

[43:47] events like Shakespeare in the park um which we just hosted two weeks ago on a

[43:51] beautiful Saturday afternoon um and a senior fair that we are actually po um

[43:55] hosting uh in conjunction with the ranch and that'll be this Friday from 10 to 2

[43:59] at the Bellip Library. I want to thank council member Cooper who was at the

[44:02] Shakespeare in the Park event this uh two weekends ago. Um, that was a great

[44:06] event that was an inaugural event that we hope to host annually going forward

[44:10] in the springtime. Another area of focus that we've had

[44:13] over the last three years is expanding our library of things. So, the library

[44:16] of things are basically all the things that you can borrow from the library

[44:19] that aren't books essentially. Um, some of the highest items that circulate the

[44:24] most frequently are, believe it or not, still are laptops and hotspots. So, that

[44:28] just speaks to the fact that not everyone has a device and not everyone

[44:31] has internet available to them. So, they are utilizing those resources. We also

[44:35] um a fruit picker is something we added last year and that circulates so

[44:39] frequently which is part of our sustainability work. Uh a label maker, a

[44:44] mending kit, and a pressure washer. So these are all the types of things that

[44:47] you can borrow from the Beltib Library. A few other items to note are um fun

[44:52] things like a ice cream maker that you can borrow, karaoke machine,

[44:56] uh ukuleles, a croquet set. If you've got grandbabies visiting, you can borrow

[45:01] high chair from the library as well. These are all part of our work towards

[45:05] um providing things that could be reused instead of wasting instead of buying and

[45:09] spending money on wasteful things.

[45:13] And another area of work for our strategic goals are delivering

[45:17] responsive services to the community. So we host a weekly one-on-one tech

[45:21] support. This is on Mondays. We have a tech dropin hour. This is highly

[45:25] utilized by community members. So, this is folks coming in and asking for

[45:28] support in how to set up their new laptop that they've purchased, how to

[45:32] get their email accounts connected because something's going on. So, um you

[45:37] might liken it to like the Best Buy in the library world. So, people can drop

[45:40] in with a lot of technical questions and staff provide some one-on-one support to

[45:44] them. It's a highly utilized service service available. Another big

[45:48] initiative this year that's going on right now is we working with the Reunion

[45:52] School District and this is actually in relation to legislation that passed a

[45:56] few years ago that mandates that all school all children will have a a public

[46:01] library card by the third grade. And so we're working with the district right

[46:05] now to enroll all of their current students with a public library card. Now

[46:08] this is if they don't already have one. And um going forward it'll just be part

[46:13] of the uh registration process for new students coming in that they'll be

[46:16] enrolled with their public library card when they enroll in the district. Um we

[46:20] are using an opt out process so that um we get more participation. So right now

[46:27] um the period just closed where parents had to opt out and choose to not have

[46:30] their child receive or get enrolled with a public library card. Um we've had just

[46:35] under 30 students opt out of that process. So that's a pretty good rate

[46:39] for us.

[46:45] Another area of focus for us is that we're partnering with organizations to

[46:49] leverage resources. And so we partner really frequently with the Rotary Club.

[46:53] We do some we co-host some programs together with the ranch like the senior

[46:57] fair coming up chamber of commerce and the autobond. Another area of work is

[47:02] really building out our sustainability and resilience work. And in the last

[47:06] year, one project that we did was worked with Bay Ren, which is the Bay Area

[47:09] Regional um energy network. They did an energy audit for us and we also asked

[47:14] them in that process to look at the infrastructure needs the library would

[47:18] have in order to operate as a community resilience center. So what that means is

[47:22] right now when the power goes out, which it did I think what a week or two ago,

[47:27] uh power went out in the library just the way it did um all around the

[47:30] peninsula. Now, people come to the library assuming that we have power and

[47:33] we're still running, but we actually don't. And so, uh, what we've had Bayron

[47:37] Run do is engage in this process to tell us how much solar would we need, what

[47:41] does a potential backup battery system look like so that we can operate for,

[47:45] uh, 3 days or 72 hours uninterrupted to provide that resilience for community

[47:49] members. And really, the focus is on members who maybe don't have solar in

[47:53] their home. So, folks who have limited resources, folks who are maybe in rental

[47:57] units. Um so your really your most vulnerable members of the community

[48:01] would have a space when there's a climate emergency or natural disaster

[48:04] they could potentially go to the library and at least have some respit there

[48:07] during that time. We are working with the town of Tibrron for this project and

[48:12] we'll be engaging this group if you haven't heard about it already. Um and

[48:15] so essentially the plan is for the town hall building and the library to be able

[48:19] to provide this resilience for the community and be that central location.

[48:24] More to come on that if you have not heard from your emergency preparedness

[48:28] advisory uh liaison. That's a mouthful.

[48:33] Our last area of strategic plan focus is connecting community members to

[48:37] resources, expertise, and opportunities. Um and one thing I want to highlight

[48:42] with this is that we do have programs where we work with local residents. So

[48:45] we spotlight local talent through our local authors event. We've got a lot of

[48:49] talented talented folks who live on the peninsula and so we host a quarterly

[48:52] author event where we put a call out for authors. We um group thematically and

[48:58] then we host a program for them to speak to the work that they're doing. We also

[49:01] recently hosted an artisan fair and this was crafters and makers from the

[49:05] peninsula um to post their items for sale on a two-day weekend um fair

[49:10] essentially. The other thing that's important to note about the maker space,

[49:13] which is a really innovative space in the library, is that we often see

[49:17] entrepreneurs who are coming into the maker space to 3D print their prototypes

[49:22] and then they shop those prototypes around with investors. And so that's a

[49:25] really interesting use, I think, not something that we would have imagined

[49:28] initially when when thinking about the maker space. Other things that people

[49:32] are doing in the maker space also include digitizing old old media. So if

[49:36] you've got old 8 millimeter film or old VHS, you can digitize that at the

[49:40] library. um they're using the sound booth. We have a sound recording booth

[49:43] to um record their podcasts now too. And so there's just a lot of dynamic use of

[49:49] the library here.

[49:52] Just a few initiatives that are forthcoming. Uh it is the end um this

[49:57] year marks the end of our three-year strategic plan. So we'll be uh I'll be

[50:01] working with the board to find out what does a refresh look like going forward?

[50:04] How do we engage with the community to find um just some more data to inform

[50:08] planning for the next few years? And the other part is um it's part of our

[50:12] current plan and will likely carry over is how do we serve residents who are are

[50:17] homebound potentially have limited mobility, have special needs, who aren't

[50:21] coming to the library physically anymore. We've observationally noticed a

[50:24] drop off with our residents, folks who we would see regularly who are just

[50:28] aren't coming anymore and we and they'll still call and try to connect with

[50:31] staff, but they're clear but they're not physically able to. And so there's some

[50:36] missed opportunity and connection that residents are seeking. And so we really

[50:39] feel it's an opportunity to partner uh likely with local safety who does the

[50:44] welfare checks to provide some level of service to those residents who maybe

[50:48] have mobility challenges. And with that, I'm happy to answer any

[50:53] questions. >> Thanks very much, Crystal. Um who has

[50:57] questions?

[51:01] I don't have any questions, but I every time I hear what you're doing and go to

[51:06] the library or read your newsletter, I'm always just so impressed at how dynamic

[51:12] everything is and how really you serve so every single um aspect and area in

[51:20] the both communities of Tibbron and Belvadier. And we're just so lucky.

[51:25] We're just so lucky. So, thank you. Thank you.

[51:27] » Thank you, council member. I'll share that with staff.

[51:30] » Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. I mean, here here it's you you're doing

[51:33] a tremendous job and um the numbers are impressive. The programming is

[51:38] impressive. The things that you lend out. I mean, Jane and I were like, "Oh,

[51:41] maybe we'll get the ice cream maker." Um,

[51:45] » it's just it's it's it's amazing. So, thank you for all you do and your team

[51:49] does for our community. >> I think if I can add with the library

[51:52] with all those unique items that were added, those were actually all

[51:55] communitydriven. So, we um solicited a cohort of residents. It was about 10

[52:00] members who provided input over a three-month process about what are the

[52:03] things that you want the library to lend out. And it was all those fun things

[52:07] that library staff would probably never have come up with. And that's what we've

[52:10] added to the collection. And they're popular. So, it's really communitydriven

[52:13] collection. >> And I just want to jump on the bandwagon

[52:17] and saying that Crystal, you're doing a fantastic job in um leading our library.

[52:24] I think that you touch from small little baby toddlers all the way

[52:29] up to um we won't go how old but um very old

[52:34] people who really use the library for many many things and I think that um you

[52:41] you touch a lot of people's the library is touching a lot of people's lives that

[52:46] people didn't realize um that it had the capability and I think the foresight of

[52:52] our community members that pushed for the expansion and the idea that it would

[52:57] become really a community center were right and that you have taken it to the

[53:04] next level and I think that we should all be very appreciative that the um

[53:10] I don't know what it is the agency or the board whatever um hired you um in

[53:15] the position and that we're very lucky to have you. You're are very much a

[53:18] treasure to this community and thank you.

[53:20] » Thank you. Okay, Crystal, I have a question. Um,

[53:26] which is you mentioned the solar plus storage, which sounds very exciting.

[53:30] Yes. >> Um, how does that get funded?

[53:33] » That's a good that's the million-doll question, of course. Or maybe that's the

[53:36] $2.5 million question. >> So, what what will likely happen next in

[53:41] terms of next steps is we will come to I'll likely be doing a study session, I

[53:46] hope, with the council um and with staff to figure out is this a priority for the

[53:51] community? What are the needs here locally? We'll be doing this on the

[53:53] Tibbron side and the Belvier side. Um because it's a shared facility space

[53:57] with Tibrron, we'll likely have a memorandum of understanding where we'll

[54:00] talk about some of those mechanics. I do think we're not there at the point of

[54:04] the funding question yet. Um the town, myself and the Bayron folks are pretty

[54:08] confident that there are still state funding. I was going to say federal, but

[54:13] I was walking that one back. But there's potentially still state funding

[54:16] available. There's some climate bond funding that'll likely be coming down

[54:19] available for agencies to become community resilience centers. Um, I kind

[54:23] of had the foresight of that coming down a few years ago, which is why I was

[54:26] pretty active in moving us towards this work and and investing so much time into

[54:30] sustainability and resilience. Um, so I I suspect it'll be a combination of

[54:36] public and private fundraising that funds the community resilience center

[54:39] and the infrastructure needed. >> Okay. And you're working closely with

[54:43] MCE presumably because a lot of those grants come through MCE,

[54:46] » correct? Yeah, they will become a key partner.

[54:48] » Okay, perfect. And then the other question was you'd mentioned that um uh

[54:53] participation generally is is sort of flat and that's consistent with your

[54:57] with your plan. Is there a longerterm plan to try and grow activity in terms

[55:02] of number of people passing through the library or you add a level that you're

[55:06] comfortable with? >> So, we've exceeded our so that for a

[55:09] long time the goal was to get back to prepandemic levels. We've now exceeded

[55:13] that and so that's great. I think to your question um the two initiatives

[55:17] that I mentioned which is the school student success card initiative is going

[55:20] to draw a new um user base that maybe isn't using the library as frequently

[55:24] because they might have resources on school. So that student population and

[55:28] their families we potentially will see coming into the libraries more

[55:31] frequently. the other piece which is um the homebound individuals which is what

[55:35] I mentioned um like I said we see folks up into their 90s and then all of a

[55:39] sudden they're not coming through the door anymore and so we want to make sure

[55:41] we're still meeting their needs and um so another way to think about it is just

[55:45] the library beyond the walls we don't need to have people physically coming

[55:48] into the library but if we're serving them in some kind of way I think that's

[55:51] meeting our our goals and so that is definitely still a priority for us.

[55:55] » Okay, good. Well, thank you very much. I just I know Tony is on the board. I

[55:59] don't know whether you wanted to make any comment at all.

[56:04] Oh, okay.

[56:12] » Council,

[56:22] » thank you very much. And Crystal, thank you for everything you do. Um, just hold

[56:25] on there for a minute. I see whether there's any public comment on this item.

[56:30] I see none in the room. >> No hands raised.

[56:33] » Okay, perfect. Thank you very much for your time. Thanks.

[56:35] » Thank you. >> Okay, we are moving on to item four,

[56:40] which is the consent calendar. The consent calendar consists of items that

[56:44] the city council considers to be routine or council has discussed previously and

[56:49] do not require further action. Unless any item is specifically removed by any

[56:53] member of the city council, the consent calendar will be adopted by one motion.

[56:58] Council will take public comment on all items on the consent cal calendar when

[57:02] the cons calendar is called. Jane, would you like to remove any items

[57:08] from the consent calendar? >> Just a few. I would like to remove 4 I,

[57:13] 4J, and 4K. >> Does any other council member want to

[57:17] remove any other items?

[57:21] » Nope. In that case,

[57:24] » I can move the consent calendar for item 4 A through 4G. Although that's

[57:29] premature, isn't it? I'm sorry. >> Do I need to take public comment first?

[57:32] Yes. >> I apologize.

[57:34] » Is there any public comment in the room in relation to 4 A through 4?

[57:41] Any online? >> I see none.

[57:43] » Can I get a motion to move items 4 A through 4 H?

[57:48] » Sorry. Now I will move 4 A through 4 H. >> Second. Uh can we get a vote? All in

[57:54] favor? >> I

[57:55] » I against motion passes. Okay. So let's move to four. I uh Jane, this was you.

[58:04] What is your question or this is on the uh

[58:10] » the um Reena numbers and the housing element. Um well, first of all, I want

[58:15] to thank um our director of planning and building, Rebecca Markwick, because this

[58:21] was a very complicated um form and when we first got it, it was a very

[58:28] confusing, but um uh then some changes were made and it clarified so much that

[58:35] um I really wanted to just pull it to thank you for that. And I the only other

[58:41] question I had was that we um we did promise um HCD, you know, a

[58:49] lot of goals, policies, programs, and that we're going to need to do even

[58:55] though they've just um recently given us our authorization for this. Um

[59:02] I I um listened to a MCCMC meeting of Marine Council members and um they were

[59:12] told at that meeting that we need to begin planning for the seventh cycle as

[59:18] early as 2027 which is like five minutes from now. And I was just thinking,

[59:27] you know, how what plans do we have to begin meeting the current

[59:34] um uh element six update and all those

[59:39] programs we have to do? Do you discuss this with other planners in the county?

[59:45] Do you have ways to get some assistance for all this?

[59:49] Yeah. So the um there's a monthly meeting of burn county planning

[59:54] directors um that's sort of hosted by the um the county and we are um

[1:00:01] certainly in discussions and talking about how this next cycle the seventh

[1:00:06] cycle housing element can sort of be looked at sort of as a more countywide

[1:00:11] approach to at least certain chapters and um sort of using our resources

[1:00:17] as a county versus you know individual cities

[1:00:22] um working on every element of the seventh cycle. And to answer your

[1:00:27] question about the sixth cycle, now that it's been we have our um our letter from

[1:00:34] HCD certifying it um or substantial that we're in substantial compliance. Now, I

[1:00:39] will put together a spreadsheet and sort of go through and assess all of those

[1:00:44] programs and policies and really dig into implementing them.

[1:00:49] Okay. >> Which we have allocated for in the next

[1:00:52] year's budget as well. >> Oh, great. Okay. Thank you. And and

[1:00:55] thanks again because I know that was a >> Thank you. And just so I can touch Let

[1:00:59] me just touch on the changes a little bit so we say it in in a public form

[1:01:02] here. >> So I really uh primarily you want to

[1:01:05] look at um table B which went from the total units was at 30 and through some

[1:01:14] updates into table A2 it's now at 35. And then our so our total um remaining

[1:01:20] reena numbers went from 130 to 125 as a result of adding some units in table A2

[1:01:29] and you have those on the dis as well. There are some at the back as well.

[1:01:35] » Okay. Does anybody have any questions relating to 4 I?

[1:01:40] » I don't have a question but can I make a comment? Sure. Just to reiterate what um

[1:01:44] Rebecca has said is that that this is three years into the eight-year cycle

[1:01:48] and going from um uh

[1:01:54] 12 permitted units in the first two years to third 23 in the third year is a

[1:02:01] uh step in the right direction. We have a long way to go and I think what Jane

[1:02:04] was talking about is the programs and policies that um will get us there still

[1:02:08] need to be implemented. We got a late start obviously hence the these numbers

[1:02:12] show that um but it's quite dramatic in 2026

[1:02:18] as the staff reported uh is looking promising as well. I mean I think

[1:02:23] there's 17 or 18 projects under construction for new units and there's a

[1:02:27] pipeline of 35 40 um projects in review or have entitlements. Um Malor Point

[1:02:33] isn't in these numbers at all either. So any potential um development as they're

[1:02:38] um entitled to would be a benefit to that as well. And my second point is

[1:02:43] just that this doesn't happen accidentally. Uh I think there's been a

[1:02:46] strong concerted effort for years by the planning staff and the planning

[1:02:50] commission um to a great degree led by Pat um prior to her time here on the

[1:02:55] city council to educate and um express the opportunities associated with second

[1:03:00] units um for homeowners. and that's yielded real results. Um, and I think

[1:03:05] these numbers show that and I think we can look forward to a steady progression

[1:03:11] probably not maybe not in the same step up we've seen this year because this is

[1:03:14] really our first year of this effort um um while we were able to divert our

[1:03:20] efforts from the housing element formulation to actually implementation.

[1:03:24] Um and whether the full arena is achievable or not to be determined but I

[1:03:30] think we we'll give it a good shot. So, I just wanted to thank the the planning

[1:03:33] staff in particular and the planning commission um really for the past three

[1:03:37] or four years because that's been a strong effort to like I said educate and

[1:03:41] let people know about the opportunity for these second units. So, thank you

[1:03:44] very much. >> Okay. Do we have any public comment in

[1:03:48] » I'm sorry. Go for it. >> Um I did have a couple questions and I

[1:03:52] think it relates to B. So I think is the in in

[1:04:02] In the acutely low, you have one deed restricted. Was that for 333 Bella Vista

[1:04:08] ADU that was approved?

[1:04:13] » Uh I don't know to be honest, but I can get back to you on that. I can

[1:04:18] » because that is because they they the one thing they went for was the more

[1:04:22] square footage. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, and I think that it's

[1:04:26] important for us for us and also to show HCD

[1:04:33] that the programs we created during our six housing cycle is working.

[1:04:40] um that um we should make notation for the properties that did deed restrict

[1:04:46] for to in order to get the um incentive for the more square footage and I know

[1:04:51] 333 Belvadier or Bella Vista was one of them. The other one is is that

[1:04:58] and I don't know how or when it's reported is 431 Golden Gate also did a

[1:05:03] moderate back in 2020. So, I don't know if it got reported then or if it gets

[1:05:09] reported now because it's actually finished. I don't know how HTD looks at

[1:05:13] that.

[1:05:16] I'm pretty sure now that you're asking me that that low is um 431

[1:05:24] Golden Gate, but I will I'll look into it and send an email to the council.

[1:05:28] » Okay. Um and then um the the only other um uh um comment I have I just saw that

[1:05:39] the latest updates that um were done um was that um uh

[1:05:49] it would I think it would be nice to have like a living document that as we

[1:05:54] get these applications for the like the year that you're

[1:05:59] actually almost like daily or not daily but weekly, monthly,

[1:06:04] whatever, you're you're updating a an N anxl that's a living document that um

[1:06:11] has the information so that it's not such a big lift. it was such a huge lift

[1:06:18] um in making sure we don't let anything fall through the cracks um that if we

[1:06:24] could create a a live document not doesn't necessarily have to be HCD's

[1:06:29] document but a live document and it tracks

[1:06:32] um uh um applications you know because ADUs

[1:06:38] we don't know which ADUs are being approved because it just comes in to you

[1:06:42] by address so you know an ADU that you know you got an application, you

[1:06:47] approved it, the building permit was issued, it was final. If they took the

[1:06:52] incentive for the more square footage so we can say that our program, Peter, you

[1:06:57] know what it is for incentives for ADU, we were able to create in this, you

[1:07:03] know, eight cycle period, we were able to create two or three units from that

[1:07:08] incentive. So we can go back to HCD and show that the programs that we push that

[1:07:14] we knew our community would go for are being successful.

[1:07:18] And if um projects come in and ask for an SB9 or there's an SB 330 that we can

[1:07:25] kind of keep track of of of the the the uh basis of what's going on. And I think

[1:07:32] that if we could maybe get a quarterly report of how we're progressing with our

[1:07:38] um housing short report saying, you know, x amount of applications for ADUs

[1:07:43] or whatever came in. Um so we're kind of keeping track um through the year to

[1:07:49] kind of know where we're at and and and I think it's good for the community to

[1:07:53] know where we're at. Um the housing element is such a um hot button

[1:07:59] um concern these days that I think the more we have out there and show that

[1:08:05] we're really doing the best we can because that's all we can do is the best

[1:08:09] we can I think it's um it's a a good thing. So, um I just want

[1:08:17] to say that, you know, the report was tremendous and you did a great job and I

[1:08:23] know it was a lot of work and um it was over a very complicated period and uh

[1:08:30] but I'm I'm hoping that if we do do some kind of live document that it'll be

[1:08:35] easier than having to, you know, pull our hairs

[1:08:39] out for hours to make sure we get all the housing numbers because that's what

[1:08:44] we need to do to show HCD that we're doing our job. So, thank you.

[1:08:49] » Thank you. >> This shouldn't be a great idea.

[1:08:51] » This shouldn't be a Rubik's, you know, a mousetrap or a Rub Goldberg that that we

[1:08:56] need to invent. I mean, I I quite confident I works should be able to do

[1:09:00] this. I mean, track it.

[1:09:04] » You don't >> I don't We do have a spreadsheet, but

[1:09:08] it's um >> Excel might be better.

[1:09:09] » Yeah, but it's just it's just >> it's just an old spread. Yes, that

[1:09:13] spreadsheet needs to create a new one and we will move forward in a more

[1:09:17] organized fashion. I think that's a great idea.

[1:09:20] » Just bring on consent every quarter. That would be helpful I think for us to

[1:09:23] see. >> Yeah.

[1:09:24] » So the only thing is is that for what Peter just said about putting it in

[1:09:28] eyeworks is that we don't get to see that as a public. I mean the eye works I

[1:09:35] mean it doesn't show. You could. >> Well, you'd have to know that four

[1:09:40] lagoon went in and pulled an ADU permit. I mean, who's going to know that but me

[1:09:44] and maybe my couple neighbors that are going to know that?

[1:09:47] » But I think if members of the public, if we know every quarter, that's

[1:09:50] sufficient. So, can you look into that providing that quarterly to the council?

[1:09:54] » Yes. >> Um, okay. Is there any public comment on

[1:09:57] 4 I? Seeing none in the room. Is there any

[1:10:00] online? >> I see none.

[1:10:02] » Great. Can I get a motion to approve for I?

[1:10:05] » So moved. >> Second. All in favor?

[1:10:08] » I. Motion passes. >> Um, okay. Now we're going to move to 4J.

[1:10:12] Jane, you're open again. >> Okay. So 4J is the um this is related to

[1:10:20] the >> 130 uh Bay View and um Hi Nancy. Um, so,

[1:10:31] um, I did go visit the the area and I noticed that the streets quite narrow

[1:10:39] there and there are some public parking spaces on the street

[1:10:44] right right in front of the fence there. And um, Sammy, do you have the ability

[1:10:51] to put up that RL or not the picture? >> Yes.

[1:10:55] » Oh. Um, and so I I'm I've been very aware recently about um what I see as

[1:11:06] the duty that we have whenever we can to widen streets

[1:11:11] um mainly on Belvadier Island, but also on Corinthian if possible. And I think

[1:11:17] it's a great safety issue and a direct benefit to the community to be able to

[1:11:22] widen the roads whenever we can. So, I really think that this property presents

[1:11:29] a great opportunity to work together with this RL um with the potential to

[1:11:35] widen the street at some point by changing the RL line to go along the

[1:11:43] fence line on the outside um rather than uh the drawing that shows

[1:11:50] the RL going to the street right now. But um there was the um the homeowner is

[1:12:00] not asking to do anything outside of the fence. All the planting and hedges

[1:12:06] um are on the inside of the fence, not on the street side. And so my request

[1:12:13] that I hope seems reasonable since it wouldn't impact at all what um um Miss

[1:12:21] Barber is planning on doing uh would be to move to take the if you look here

[1:12:29] take the um edge of oops sorry edge of the driveway you you see that says edge

[1:12:37] of carport and then it the Um, and then there's the gate with the

[1:12:43] stairs. So, if you take the gray line in front of the carport and just continue

[1:12:51] it straight along what's considered the fence line,

[1:12:56] you would be able to capture back around 20 to 24 in along there, which at some

[1:13:03] point we could go ahead and widen the street um without having to go back and

[1:13:08] revoke that in the future if we wanted to widen the street. So, uh, the

[1:13:13] homeowner gets exactly what they're asking for. They haven't asked to put

[1:13:17] anything out there. And I'm suggesting that as a city we re we recapture that

[1:13:23] um dirt right now and be able at some point to create um a wider road there

[1:13:31] which would I think be safer for everybody driving and um be able to move

[1:13:37] the parking spaces in a teeny bit creating a wider lane of passage. So, is

[1:13:43] that something that you think, Nancy, is reasonable for you?

[1:13:50] » Okay.

[1:13:53] » Can I ask a question? >> So, Jane, are you talking about that

[1:13:57] little strip of dirt there in front of the fence?

[1:14:00] » Right. It's it's that that little strip of dirt there is in

[1:14:07] the revocable license that the picture that you gave us and I'm just saying

[1:14:14] move the line back to your fence. >> Okay.

[1:14:19] » Do you want the >> Can you get Nancy? Do you mind going to

[1:14:23] the mic where it is so I'm not touching your fence?

[1:14:26] » Oh, but Nobody's there.

[1:14:31] » But don't our don't our RL don't our revocable licenses

[1:14:38] cover the area of the right away from someone's property line outbound based

[1:14:44] on the proposed improvements. So unless this proposed improvements

[1:14:50] were to pull that back and repave it, leaving it

[1:14:55] as it is would would define their revocable license as they're proposing

[1:14:58] it, which is to do do nothing with it. We we we would have to I agree with you.

[1:15:03] I mean, great opportunity to to recapture it, but we would have to write

[1:15:07] into the into the revocical license that that area that sliver from the fence

[1:15:12] outward to the existing curb edge of street. um uh is to be approved as

[1:15:20] asphalt arguably at the city's discretion.

[1:15:24] » It would have to say something along those lines, wouldn't it?

[1:15:27] » Why can't you just >> ask change the line?

[1:15:31] » Yeah. Unshade that part. >> But that's not I mean our our our I

[1:15:36] thought our our licenses are the property line outward.

[1:15:41] » Sorry. >> Our licenses are for the property line

[1:15:43] outward. We don't distinguish within our right away. I don't believe. Do we?

[1:15:46] » Yeah. Do we? >> No, we do. The only If we were to

[1:15:50] unshade that part that's in front of the what they're calling the repair existing

[1:15:56] 36 inch tall fence, then Nancy would not take on the responsibility and liability

[1:16:02] of that area. Then it would be okay. >> The city's

[1:16:06] » responsibility. >> So, do you feel okay with that, Nancy?

[1:16:10] » I still I'm confused. Um, my concern is that there is a hill on the other side

[1:16:19] of the fence and I just want to protect the the parking space that's there so

[1:16:23] that nobody falls down the hill, >> right?

[1:16:25] » And so that's why that I wanted and I don't I mean if you want to move the

[1:16:31] fence further in the property, I'm okay with that.

[1:16:34] » Um, >> no, that's not being proposed. I mean,

[1:16:37] you would keep the fence as it is. The paperwork would only change.

[1:16:40] » Oh, okay. that that the paper >> the paperwork would change in the sense

[1:16:44] that that gray line um you would not in a sense have a license to alter affect

[1:16:49] modify the space in front of the fence towards this towards the street and the

[1:16:54] city would have the right at some point in time should they deem it necessary

[1:16:57] appropriate or or reasonable to pull it back to that line of your fence and pave

[1:17:01] it and maybe move the the parking space in a little bit towards your property if

[1:17:05] they could coordinate it with the property next door for example.

[1:17:08] » Yeah, because I agree with you. It's very the street is very thin right

[1:17:11] there. And I mean it would be great to move the parking space in further.

[1:17:14] » It would be great. Yeah. Thank you. >> Andrew, do you see any issues with

[1:17:18] what's being proposed here?

[1:17:22] » I may be a little bit outside my wheelhouse here, but I think I

[1:17:25] understand. Um Nancy, is that your name? I I think you're saying that the little

[1:17:29] buffer right between the the little bit of the curb and uh I don't know a foot

[1:17:33] or two before the fence, you feel like that's a safety precaution, right? So

[1:17:37] people don't get too close to the fence. Right.

[1:17:39] » There's a hill on the other side of the fence, right? Fence has to be somewhere

[1:17:42] in that area. >> Well, the fence wouldn't move. Fence

[1:17:44] would stay where it is. >> Okay.

[1:17:45] » Right. But I I think if I hear what you're saying, that just does provide a

[1:17:49] little bit of extra room >> just in case so people don't get too

[1:17:52] close to the fence and the hill on the other side.

[1:17:57] » Car, >> right?

[1:17:59] » Yeah. But that's typical on the island. You know, sometimes you have those

[1:18:02] retaining walls and you almost sideswipe the side of your car trying to get close

[1:18:07] enough to the Yeah. And you know, and then the person has to get out before

[1:18:11] you actually park there. And that's very common on the island to have to do that

[1:18:15] kind of a thing. >> Realistically, is the the would the so

[1:18:20] the liability would shift to the city if you were to redraw the line. And so I

[1:18:24] mean looking at this now, I have no idea of knowing how secure that edge is near

[1:18:29] that fence. So I think we would need to understand that before we took on the

[1:18:34] responsibility of it because right now the way the RL

[1:18:38] reads is it would be your responsibility. So for instance if

[1:18:41] somebody were to come in closer to the fence and that were to cave in that

[1:18:45] would be the homeowner's responsibility to fix it. Is that correct?

[1:18:51] » There's a curb there right now. So actually there is a curb out on the

[1:18:55] street before the dirt. But if the curb gets moved in in the future because

[1:18:59] we're trying to get back space, what happens?

[1:19:02] » Who's responsible for cars damaging the fence for example?

[1:19:06] » I mean, I guess I think it would be an insurance issue, but

[1:19:11] » yeah. >> Andrew, what do you recommend here? Do

[1:19:12] we can we change this on the fly or you would rather bring this back next month

[1:19:16] or what do you recommend? >> And is there any urgency from the

[1:19:20] applicant's perspective? >> And does u Mr. Boyd have any comments as

[1:19:25] he's sitting here?

[1:19:33] Yeah, >> I don't I mean if it's really just

[1:19:35] deleting that shaded portion. >> Oh, sorry.

[1:19:42] » Boris, can you hear me? >> Yes.

[1:19:43] » Um I guess I just my question would be what is the purpose of the RL being

[1:19:48] outside the fence line? if that's just a a strip of dirt. Um, is there a reason

[1:19:53] that you've included it in your RL application?

[1:19:57] » Um, that would be up to the architect that

[1:20:01] I don't know whe

[1:20:06] » it's probably just because it's the dirt and they went to where the street is.

[1:20:10] That's all. >> I'm sure

[1:20:12] » Rebecca, >> I think also if she were to ever want to

[1:20:15] landscape it, right? I mean, it's just a sort of dirt area. Like, that's probably

[1:20:19] why they included it, I'm guessing. But I I think it would be fine if this is

[1:20:24] the direction the council wants to go is to look at it tonight and just say

[1:20:29] delete the portion in front of the fence, unshade. I think I think as a

[1:20:34] practical matter, no one's going to stop Nancy from from landscaping that if if

[1:20:37] she wants to, if the city hasn't done anything with it, even if we do

[1:20:41] um remove that shading, I I think I think it's a good forward thinking

[1:20:44] perspective that Jane's proposing that where we can where it's not an obstacle

[1:20:49] to the homeowner that we're we're leaving the open open the possibility

[1:20:53] for the city to widen streets where possible. And like everything else, if

[1:20:56] you if you don't do it once, you're screwing yourself up in the future

[1:21:00] because of this of this license. You don't want to, you know, rogue it

[1:21:03] unnecessarily. So, I would suggest we just approve this with a condition that

[1:21:07] that line gets pushed back to 6 in beyond the fence. Something like that.

[1:21:11] So, you have a little bit of a buffer. >> Nancy, is that something that you're

[1:21:14] comfortable with? >> So, the fence stays where it is and just

[1:21:18] the line goes back to where the fence is in short to

[1:21:21] » short of it. Yes. >> Fine.

[1:21:23] » Perfect. Um, yes.

[1:21:27] » Uh, it's not related to this. It's a it's a broader topic.

[1:21:31] » Um, okay. Let's open. We haven't done public comment on this item yet. Let's

[1:21:35] open. >> Maybe I should make my comment now.

[1:21:36] » Well, let's do a public comment, then we'll bring it back to discussion.

[1:21:38] » Sure. >> Um, are there is there any public

[1:21:40] comment in the room? Is there any public comment online?

[1:21:44] » No hands raised. >> Okay. Let's bring this back for

[1:21:45] discussion and a motion. But Kevin, I think you want to say something. I would

[1:21:49] just suggest I mean I think this raises a really important point that we should

[1:21:52] at some point tackle which is our approach to RL's in the city. So it

[1:21:57] doesn't it's not about you specifically. It's just I mean if we want to have a

[1:22:00] policy going forward in terms of taking every opportunity when the RL comes

[1:22:04] forward, how do we want to approach that to potentially give the city the

[1:22:10] opportunity to widen the roads? We should just be consistent. So we always

[1:22:14] approach them in the same way where we're trying to do our best to reclaim

[1:22:18] land or street space for the city. Okay. >> So

[1:22:22] » and we've had an initial discussion with staff around that. So I think there's a

[1:22:25] plan to have this as a as a proper discussion brought back to the city

[1:22:28] council in coming months. Um Peter, would you like to make a motion?

[1:22:33] » Sure. um to move item 4 J, the re license at 13 Bay View Avenue. Um as

[1:22:41] presented with the modification or the condition that the the line um the

[1:22:45] shaded portion outward of the fence on the um uh eastern portion of the

[1:22:50] property is moved back to within 6 in of the existing fence line.

[1:22:56] » Second. >> All in favor? I

[1:22:58] » I thank you.

[1:23:01] » Thanks, Nancy. Okay, now we're moving on to 4K, which is the motion to approve

[1:23:07] the contract with Philip Seabbrook Associates for project and construction

[1:23:11] coordination services for the Malad Point project. Jane, this was you that

[1:23:15] asked to pull it. Do you have questions or comments?

[1:23:18] » Um, I have a I I thought I'd start with questions and then I have a comment

[1:23:23] later. >> Okay. Um, so I know it's hard to talk

[1:23:27] about this because it's not on the agenda where we get a presentation and

[1:23:32] people hear about it and then we ask questions. So, I'm just going to jump in

[1:23:36] and ask questions, hoping people understand that this is about um uh us

[1:23:42] authorizing funding for the position of a project coordinator to help the um

[1:23:49] community and the city uh throughout the process of um the Malard Point project.

[1:23:57] So, that's sort of the background. And then um so a couple of questions I had

[1:24:03] were um to whom does this project coordinator report um ideally.

[1:24:13] » So good question. I think that person's going to report to both myself and

[1:24:17] Rebecca Marquick. >> Okay.

[1:24:19] » Yeah. >> And you'll also be giving feedback etc

[1:24:23] from anything that you or questions that you need. you'll it'll be a give and

[1:24:28] take situation. >> Great.

[1:24:31] » Um and then um how do you see um public reporting

[1:24:37] um how do you expect reporting like a structure so that it comes to the city

[1:24:43] council or to the community on a regular basis? I mean we've built in Robert

[1:24:48] reporting to the about Malard Point. I'm curious about this individual. So, when

[1:24:53] Robert and I talked to um a couple different people, this was something

[1:24:57] that we discussed and um you know, Robert reports to council right now. We

[1:25:01] thought Robert should continue to report to council, but this person will give

[1:25:07] Robert a summary. Right now, I give Robert a summary. So, this person will

[1:25:10] take on that responsibility. It could be, you know, some months a lot more

[1:25:14] detailed, some months, you know, just they're continuing to do the demolition,

[1:25:18] right? So there there'll be that that component of it. Um we also talked about

[1:25:24] this person having specific office hours at city hall like Tuesdays from 11 to 1

[1:25:30] or something like that. Um we also talked about having um sort of a

[1:25:37] community meeting before we issue the building permits to, you know, go over

[1:25:42] what exactly the city's issuing the permit for, what the first steps are.

[1:25:46] Um, so really engaging with the community, having a separate email,

[1:25:52] maybe you know, I don't we haven't talked about this, but a separate phone

[1:25:55] line, you know, so we can really pinpoint and narrow these malard

[1:25:59] specific questions to this person with Robert and I overseeing

[1:26:05] all of it as well. >> Oh, great. Yeah, that'll actually you

[1:26:09] stole one of my ideas, but I'm glad you got it. I'll mention it later.

[1:26:14] Um, okay. So, I know that in reviewing um

[1:26:21] the demolition permit and conditions, I was noticing that the um there's a

[1:26:29] couple of conditions that include working with the Belvadier Lagoon uh

[1:26:34] property owners association. And I was wondering if you felt that this project

[1:26:40] coordinator could also work with the Bla

[1:26:45] to get these conditions accomplished to help to make sure that whatever BLPA is

[1:26:51] working on, the city understands it, what the city's working on rather than

[1:26:56] it feels a little disjointed right now. And I was hoping maybe that person could

[1:27:00] help actually coordinate the different um parts of the community that are

[1:27:06] involved. >> Yeah, I mean I I think you know I've

[1:27:09] certainly have talked to BLPOA. I've talked to the Malard team. I've sort of

[1:27:14] understood you know the meetings that they've had. The city hasn't necessarily

[1:27:17] been involved but I've been pretty involved with hearing the outcomes of

[1:27:22] those meetings. Um >> okay.

[1:27:25] So I think yeah when this person comes on we'll certainly debrief and say this

[1:27:30] is where we are with BLPOA and then maybe sort of reassess you know what

[1:27:35] this person's role would be in that um in those yeah meetings. I

[1:27:40] » mean I realize you're not going to know every single thing that they're going to

[1:27:43] be doing yet because it'll I imagine develop as

[1:27:47] » the needs arise. >> Yeah. Um

[1:27:52] so in thinking about the um job description and expectations I think the

[1:27:58] community has a lot of very um valid expectations for this role and certainly

[1:28:05] we've received quite a few letters that um have touched on many of the different

[1:28:10] aspects and I I thought that um in Mr. Sebrook's letter that he wrote to the

[1:28:16] city um that under his number one he actually listed

[1:28:22] um uh the suggested services that he felt were important and um I I do feel

[1:28:31] that they um capture a lot of what we read in in letters from the community.

[1:28:40] Um in his number one he said um ensure conditions of approval are adhered to

[1:28:46] oversee demolition and preparation for development provide monthly written

[1:28:51] updates which we've talked about um including status timelines outstanding

[1:28:57] issues etc. I don't have to read the whole thing working with uh utility

[1:29:02] agencies which are a big part of this uh project and establishing meeting hours.

[1:29:07] So, it it did seem to me that um he actually uh wrote up a really nice

[1:29:14] description, job description, so to speak. And as as you mentioned earlier

[1:29:19] on, Rebecca, that you are also hope hopeful that the coordinator will help

[1:29:24] with um organizing uh the the permits uh that all all the conditions that need

[1:29:30] for the permits and the website organizations. So, do you feel that this

[1:29:36] this uh paragraph is something that we can all agree on going forward will sort

[1:29:42] of be the baseline of what the job is? Does it seem?

[1:29:46] » Yes, I think this I think um well, I know that this letter from him is based

[1:29:52] on a conversation that Robert and I had with him. So, he took what we were

[1:29:56] asking him and summarized it here. I also think um the letter that we

[1:30:01] received from Susan Kloff summarizes um a lot of the aspects you know it's like

[1:30:06] she was sitting in on the meeting with Robert and I because everything yeah

[1:30:12] with with Eric is in her letter. So I think the combination of this plus

[1:30:16] Susan's letter you know and we we didn't necessarily want to have a bullet point

[1:30:20] list because as you mentioned it will probably evolve and change and you know

[1:30:25] we need to meet the needs of the community. Yeah. as well as city.

[1:30:29] » Great. Okay. Um I think those are my questions. I have a little comment

[1:30:35] after. >> Any other questions? So I I had a

[1:30:38] question. Um it sort of relates to this and um so what it is is that um we got

[1:30:46] the application and the city took it and then sent it back with their first

[1:30:50] incomplete letter. and John Mo at that time did this really nice chart with

[1:30:56] everything that had to be done, all the conditions, approval conditions for the

[1:31:01] demo and then the final map and everything else and and so then um

[1:31:08] Malard Point put their comments in when they came back and then the second time

[1:31:13] he went in and said, "Okay, you know, I take this. No, you got to work on that.

[1:31:17] Yeah, this is good. No, that's not get good." And then when we got the the next

[1:31:22] one back there, he didn't continue with that nice chart to see the progress. It

[1:31:28] was like a chart that showed the progress, you know, from

[1:31:32] not much to a little bit to a little bit more. And so now it's back in Malard

[1:31:38] Point's hands to come back to us. But it would be nice if

[1:31:45] John Mo or this new person could take that chart and continue with what has

[1:31:52] because it's so difficult on the website to figure out what actually is remaining

[1:31:59] and not remaining um on this new incompleteness letter

[1:32:04] that came out in March because he just did a a sheet, you know, and he didn't

[1:32:10] do the chart and the chart was really I felt very easy that you could go in

[1:32:16] and you could see what the progress of everything is and if they sat there and

[1:32:20] said oh you know you have to do something with your geotech or something

[1:32:26] then you could go and say well what's going on in the geotech and you could

[1:32:29] get the geotech report so it would be nice to either have John Mo continue

[1:32:36] using his flowchart or maybe it's time for the new person to take it over, get

[1:32:44] it up to date, and then when Malor Point comes back, then John Mo or whoever is

[1:32:50] going to do the comments can continue on with that that flowchart because right

[1:32:55] now it's very difficult to see exactly what's outstanding. Sometimes

[1:33:01] it's partially accepted but not accepted and you have to go back to that chart to

[1:33:06] see what he was talking about in the beginning. So I I think that

[1:33:11] well for myself I'm talking but I think for the community too if there was just

[1:33:16] a nice continuation of that flowchart it would help everybody know how we're

[1:33:21] making progress and what is remaining. So that was um kind of my question is if

[1:33:29] John Mo or this person can take it over. >> That flowchart was actually um produced

[1:33:34] by the Malard team not John Mo. >> Oh

[1:33:36] » that it was there they created did a good job. So, let's continue.

[1:33:40] » So, we can probably get it from them and continue and implement our comments

[1:33:46] moving forward. >> Yeah, because it I I don't know. I

[1:33:48] thought it was a good way to see how they were progressing and what needed to

[1:33:52] be done. So, thank them for a very nice flowchart, but let's

[1:33:55] » but continue. >> Yeah, continue.

[1:33:57] » Could that be included in the monthly update if you're going to be bringing a

[1:34:00] a monthly update anyway in the report? >> Yeah.

[1:34:03] » Okay. Um, any other questions from council members? No. Let's open this up

[1:34:08] for public comment. Please come up to the mic.

[1:34:17] » Please just identify yourself for the record.

[1:34:22] » My name is Tom Price. We and my wife live at 53 Peninsula Road. We've lived

[1:34:27] in Lagoon for just short of 50 years. And this is our fourth uh project that

[1:34:32] we're working on right now. What I wanted to really do is just to

[1:34:36] point out to the council the complexity uh of building on the lagoon right now.

[1:34:43] Um I've built multiple buildings, probably half million square feet of

[1:34:46] both commercial and and residential. Uh this is the most complex project I've

[1:34:53] ever been involved with. We're dealing with first the lagoon, FEMA, new

[1:34:58] regulations to it. Um, our home has both an ADU and a junior ADU. I think they

[1:35:05] cap for two additionals. Um, we're in a flood zone. Um, the cost and the

[1:35:14] complexity of the engineering, the boring of everything we've done this so

[1:35:19] far. If you want to go by and look at it sometime, you'll be amazed at the

[1:35:23] complexity of the of the foundation that's being put in place. And so what

[1:35:28] my point is is to really as we look at a project director and or program reviewer

[1:35:36] whatever the exact title is is to reemphasize the need for this. Uh the

[1:35:43] developer has been very slow. Uh we did not have a incomplete item on there. We

[1:35:49] had some comments that we needed to update answer questions, but um with

[1:35:54] over two years to still be trying to figure out a a property lines seems a

[1:36:00] little unusual to me, but that's beside the point on this. It's what it is

[1:36:05] saying is the attention to detail and complexity on this is required to

[1:36:10] complete this project as it's been approved by the city and the planning

[1:36:14] commission is extremely complex and you need someone who's really good and

[1:36:19] really knowledgeable to look at it and make sure that it's done properly. So

[1:36:24] with that, I just want to say I hope you support this. Uh it's really important

[1:36:29] to the community and to all of us. So thank you very much. Thank you, Tom.

[1:36:34] Jill, come on up. Again, please just identify yourself for the record.

[1:36:42] » Hi, I'm Jill Barnett at Steep Peninsula Road and I'm speaking for my husband

[1:36:48] Andy as well. So, adding a dedicated project manager for Malard Point is the

[1:36:55] right thing to do. the complexity as Tom was saying of the project and we look

[1:37:00] forward to your affirmative vote this evening. Um it is critical at this time

[1:37:06] that the role emphasize completeness of the statutory requirements and

[1:37:11] coordination of the project plans and conditions of approval rather than

[1:37:17] simply pushing the project along. In our communications with more than 500 Brig,

[1:37:24] our 500 Brig group, um, a consistently expressed concern is the difficulty

[1:37:30] following the process of the project because of its complexity and

[1:37:34] incompleteness reviews. It seems a simplified I just learned this thing. A

[1:37:41] swim lane diagram posted on the city website would make things clear and

[1:37:47] ensure that nothing is missed in in proper reviews or done out of sequence.

[1:37:53] The swim lane diagram could show each step of the project. Responsible

[1:37:58] Belvadier administrator or reviewer, responsible local, state, and federal

[1:38:04] agency laws, timeline and critical dates, and progress report status to

[1:38:11] completion. It's been two years since the project received design review

[1:38:16] approval. With the May tenative map expiration coming up, it's hard to

[1:38:22] understand how this project can keep moving forward when so many key issues

[1:38:27] are still incomplete. Clear communication with neighbors and

[1:38:31] residents will allay any fears and concerns. So,

[1:38:36] » thank you. >> Thank you, Jill.

[1:38:37] » Um, so it's called a swim link. >> Yeah. Swim lane. Swim lane.

[1:38:42] » A lane. >> It's like a flowchart like what you

[1:38:44] » a critical path flowchart. >> What? It's a critical path flowchart,

[1:38:48] » right? >> Yeah,

[1:38:49] » Peter can do one. >> Okay. Uh, any public comment online?

[1:38:57] » Mayor Wilkinson, there are no hands raised.

[1:38:59] » Okay. Um, okay. Let's bring this back for if there's any discussion or just a

[1:39:04] motion. Um I I would just like to uh since since

[1:39:09] Rebecca mentioned that the um one chart that is on the website was done by

[1:39:17] the developer, I did review it and notice that it does not contain all the

[1:39:22] conditions of approval. And so I think as we um if we were to use it, I think

[1:39:29] it needs to not just continue but actually be expanded to include all cont

[1:39:35] conditions of approval covering all departments because I I do think that

[1:39:40] was missing. Um so thank you Tom and Jill. Those were

[1:39:48] wonderful comments and um I want to thank everybody that took the time to

[1:39:53] write letters, especially Susan Kluff who got a shout out from Rea.

[1:39:58] I hope she's listening. Um anyway, um I think uh I I obviously support this uh

[1:40:08] person and um I would also like to suggest that we

[1:40:14] organize a special meeting where Mr. Cabbrook and the project coordinator are

[1:40:19] introduced to the community. And I I think it would be great if we could do

[1:40:24] this sooner than later, not not wait for um the building permit necessarily. I

[1:40:30] think it would save a lot of time in the long run because anybody in the

[1:40:34] community could come and meet them face to face and be able to have a um

[1:40:39] discussion, ask questions. And then from there, uh going to the emails or

[1:40:46] visiting hours, I think I'll flow a lot more easily rather than having him have

[1:40:50] to deal with every single person one-on-one. So, I um greatly

[1:40:55] appreciative that you had the thought of a community meeting and I would just

[1:40:58] recommend it early on perhaps with others following as needed. So, thank

[1:41:04] you for that. >> Uh I'm very much in support of this and

[1:41:09] I think I mean as we've discussed at council on a few occasions I think

[1:41:13] everybody is. Um the only suggestion I would have is I mean Cabbrook was

[1:41:17] obviously picked for their expertise is I would go to them with the problem not

[1:41:21] the solution. Um I mean I think there's been some interesting ideas in terms of

[1:41:25] types of charts and so forth. Um the Malard chart but again I think we should

[1:41:29] be very clear as to what it is we need and want. I would hope that they have

[1:41:34] access to best practices that are far beyond what we've seen so far. And I

[1:41:39] mean we might come back with an even better or they'll come back with a

[1:41:42] better recommendation but I think the needs have been outlined I think fairly

[1:41:46] well and go to them with the problem and ask for a solution.

[1:41:52] » Sorry. Thank you. Uh just just I support this absolutely as well. Just one quick

[1:41:56] comment and um uh reading the fiscal impact in the staff report I do um

[1:42:02] understand the uh approach here is defined it in

[1:42:07] the existing budget for this year and and allocated for the next year. Uh I

[1:42:11] don't know how much of next year we've planned for the fees associated with

[1:42:16] this project um the demolition and the site work associated with that but

[1:42:20] risking Kevin's um um solution versus a a problem um I do think one of the tasks

[1:42:29] this person needs to do is very accurately and very very specifically

[1:42:33] contract for or add detail to the expected cost of these projects so that

[1:42:38] we get applicable and appropriate fees up front so we don't have to do it on a

[1:42:41] retroactive basis. So that would be that would be the

[1:42:45] that's the problem, not the solution. Thank you.

[1:42:50] » So, and I just wanted to um add that um actually it's our next agenda item. Um

[1:42:58] but I brought up something to our public director um Mr. void when um uh he was

[1:43:05] working on the um with the um stabilization project, sorry. And um we

[1:43:13] talked about travel time and um he was able to um discuss with them travel time

[1:43:21] because they come from Soma and it's you can be in traffic for a long time. So, I

[1:43:27] would hope that I haven't seen the contractor or anything, but I would hope

[1:43:30] that the staff would try to address that travel time upfront um

[1:43:38] in the sense of that it's not something that gets out of control that we're

[1:43:44] paying for sitting in traffic for two hours and maybe come up with, you know,

[1:43:48] normally it's wherever there's Santa Rosa, I think, you know, 45 minutes to

[1:43:53] an hour and we'll pay you X amount, you hour, hour and 15 minutes. And then if

[1:43:58] they sit there in two-hour traffic, we're not paying for somebody to sit in

[1:44:02] traffic because the travel time um can creep up quite quickly and really put a

[1:44:07] project in over um budget. So, I would just add that we keep an eye on that and

[1:44:12] maybe discuss with them a way of controlling it. But I am 110% in favor

[1:44:19] of this and I am happy it's finally being done and I can make a motion. Go

[1:44:25] ahead. I make a motion to approve um item number 4K.

[1:44:31] » Second. >> All in favor?

[1:44:33] » I I motion passes. Okay. We are moving on to item number

[1:44:39] five which is our public hearing 5A discussion and adoption of a resolution

[1:44:43] updating and establishing user and regulatory fees.

[1:44:51] I believe this is your item.

[1:45:02] got a little >> and we have Terry here as well. Hi,

[1:45:04] Terry. >> Good evening, everybody.

[1:45:08] » So, thank you and good evening, Mayor Wilkinson and council members. The item

[1:45:13] before you this evening is to present the annual update of the city's user fee

[1:45:17] schedule. On April 14, 2025, council adopted an updated schedule of user and

[1:45:24] regulatory fees based on the results of a comprehensive cost of service study.

[1:45:30] This is an interyear update to apply authorized inflationary adjustments and

[1:45:36] to adop adopt sorry and to update some of the fees based on feedback on the

[1:45:42] current fee schedule. If approved this evening, the updated user and regulatory

[1:45:47] fee schedule will be effective on July 1st, 2026.

[1:45:51] I want to highlight a change in the name of one of the public work fees. The fee

[1:45:56] for slurry seal should be renamed to paving fee with the two categories

[1:46:02] renamed A slurry seal and B overlay. This new naming better describes what

[1:46:08] the fees cover. This is only an administrative update to the proposed

[1:46:13] fee schedule. And at this time, I'll turn over the

[1:46:17] presentation to Terry Madson, president of Clear Source Financial Consulting,

[1:46:22] who will present the changes that were made as part of this year's update. And

[1:46:26] staff and Terry will be available for questions regarding the proposed fee

[1:46:31] schedule. >> Well, good evening, mayor and members of

[1:46:35] the city council. Thank you for allowing me to speak with you this evening. Just

[1:46:38] uh by way of orientation, city clerk, will you um open the presentation or

[1:46:42] would you like me to share my screen?

[1:46:49] » Um I'll go ahead and share. Let's see if this works.

[1:46:54] » And if it doesn't work, then we'll um come back to you.

[1:47:00] » Do you guys see the presentation? >> Yes, we do.

[1:47:03] » Okay. Well, thank you so much. I know you've had a very full agenda this

[1:47:07] evening and a lot of important topics. So, I will avoid being long-winded.

[1:47:11] Helga did a wonderful job orienting you. I just have uh you know about 10 slides

[1:47:16] to walk through to make sure that uh to reorient the city council to this topic

[1:47:21] and any interested members of the public. But just um in terms of an

[1:47:26] agenda for the evening, we'll we'll talk about background, some historical

[1:47:30] precedent that Helga uh uh described and then we'll ask the council um to

[1:47:36] consider adopting an updated fee schedule that would be effective July 1,

[1:47:40] 2026. So, by way of reminder, um communities

[1:47:46] uh derive revenue from a number of sources and typically um when they

[1:47:51] receive tax revenues, they they attempt to use the tax revenues to fund services

[1:47:57] that provide broad benefit things like we would think about as communitywide

[1:48:01] benefit. And most commonly we would think of these as public work services,

[1:48:06] public safety services, park maintenance services, sort of that we all have

[1:48:11] access to at any point in time. when um we provide services to a specific member

[1:48:18] of the community, a specific resident or a specific business um as part of like a

[1:48:23] regulatory activity or a discretionary activity, we frequently target recovery

[1:48:28] of costs from the receiver of service so that all other residents and businesses

[1:48:33] in Belvier wouldn't have to be paying for um let's say my square footage

[1:48:38] addition to my home or or something like that. And we um use user and regulatory

[1:48:43] fees as a common mechanism for recovering our costs. And most commonly

[1:48:48] in Belvadier and in in communities throughout the state, we would think of

[1:48:52] this as permit processing services, plan review services, construction inspection

[1:48:58] services, and so forth. These are um services that the the city provides as

[1:49:02] part of um compliance with California building code, your own municipal code,

[1:49:07] and so forth. um and and we look to recover costs of providing those

[1:49:12] services. The world we deal with and the topic for

[1:49:16] this evening is limited to what we would consider service-based fees. So there is

[1:49:21] uh a human providing service on behalf of Belvadier. It's either your own

[1:49:25] in-house staff or contract service providers, but we're typically thinking

[1:49:28] of building fees, planning fees, engineering fees. We are not um

[1:49:34] discussing any sort of taxes, any assessments, any utility rates. These

[1:49:39] things that sort of um we think about most commonly as affecting us on a

[1:49:43] day-to-day basis. They are not a part of this evening's topic. Um we're we're

[1:49:49] strictly limited to these um periodic discrete user and regulatory fees.

[1:49:55] As Helga mentioned, there was a study completed in calendar year 2025. As part

[1:50:00] of that study, the city council adopted updated fees that were effective July 1,

[1:50:05] 2025. In the resolution that adopted those

[1:50:09] fees, effective July 1, 2025, the city council authorized annual inflationary

[1:50:15] adjustments for the years between fee studies. Um, so this evening's action is

[1:50:20] intended to comply with the direction council has already provided. Um, we

[1:50:26] simply want to provide the council an opportunity to review the changes and

[1:50:30] review any non-inflationary changes that might be proposed. Staff anticipates

[1:50:36] completing that sort of periodic study, you know, like we did last year, the

[1:50:40] more um intensive study every 3 to 5 years. And in the interim years, you

[1:50:45] would do these inflationary adjustments with minor sort of discrete changes. So

[1:50:51] this year for 2627 we're we're treating this as an interim

[1:50:56] year that should primarily be an inflationary adjustment to existing

[1:51:00] fees. Um prior to making that adjustment um

[1:51:07] because last year you you um completed your first comprehensive fee study um in

[1:51:13] some time. It might have been the city's first actual comprehensive fee study.

[1:51:17] Um, but it it had been some time since you had any sort of significant update

[1:51:21] to fees. So, you you did identify or we identified um and presented to you some

[1:51:27] significant underreovery. There were proposed fee adjustments that we

[1:51:31] anticipated would uh enhance cost recovery. And so just to test those

[1:51:36] outcomes, we've looked at forecast um expenditures and revenues for the fiscal

[1:51:43] year 2526 um based on the information we have

[1:51:46] available to date. And we do see what we anticipated would happen is actually

[1:51:52] happening. So that's comforting. And so we would say that um we feel comfortable

[1:51:58] with the direction that you could continue these inflationary

[1:52:03] adjustments in between your fee studies and then every 3 to 5 years you do a

[1:52:07] formal fee study to figure out do we need to do any sort of recalibration?

[1:52:11] How do we look from an aggregate cost recovery perspective and so forth. So

[1:52:15] the annual change to CPI for this year as outlined in the resolution is 2.18%.

[1:52:21] So, the majority of fees in your fee schedule are proposed to be adjusted by

[1:52:25] 2.18%. There are a handful of other discrete

[1:52:30] changes that are intended to enhance fee schedule clarity or more closely align

[1:52:35] fees to services provided. Um, you'll see these in um, you know, I I believe

[1:52:41] it's a planning fee where you have historically had like a standard and a

[1:52:47] major and um, Rebecca's team identified there is such a thing as sort of like a

[1:52:52] minor that that is easier to process and we could um, you know, it would be more

[1:52:59] appropriate to collect a lower fee based on the typical level of effort provided.

[1:53:02] So those are the kind of uh, refinements that we're proposing. There are three

[1:53:07] new fees proposed. One is for a city tree pruning request. Another is for a

[1:53:12] road closure sign placement associated with an encroachment in the right ofway.

[1:53:16] And then finally the police department. Um it's very rare, but um if you had to

[1:53:23] uh tow a vehicle and administer the release of that vehicle, um you would

[1:53:28] have a vehicle release fee. So, those are the three proposed for city council

[1:53:32] consideration in addition to your routine inflationary updates. At the

[1:53:38] conclusion of this evening's public hearing, staff recommends that the

[1:53:41] council would adopt a resolution establishing and updating user and

[1:53:45] regulatory fees. These would be the fees that would be effective July 1, 2026.

[1:53:50] Thank you so much for your attention. I'm available to receive any feedback or

[1:53:54] questions. Thank you, >> Terry. Thank you very much for that. Um,

[1:53:57] okay. Let's go to city council for questions for either Helga or Terry. Go

[1:54:02] for it. >> Hi, Terry. Thank you. Um, two two quick

[1:54:05] questions. Uh, maybe I'm mistaken about this, but it

[1:54:10] also looks like the um longerterm encroachment permits, uh, those are new

[1:54:14] as well. >> Oh, go ahead, Helga.

[1:54:18] » Sorry, I can answer that. Um, we those fees were on our website, but they were

[1:54:24] not in our fee study. So, >> so, so we had that in our misal code,

[1:54:29] those longer term, those those one week, two week, 3 week or two week, 3 week,

[1:54:34] four-w week. >> Um, no, they were available on our

[1:54:37] website for people to purchase those, >> but that was in in our adopted fee

[1:54:41] schedule originally. >> No. So, that's why we're including them

[1:54:46] in the this, >> but the fact that it was on the website,

[1:54:49] it still wasn't adopted to us in a fee schedule.

[1:54:52] » Correct. >> Okay. That's just that's my question.

[1:54:54] and and Terry um your CPI of 2.18. Can you just tell me what that term covered?

[1:55:01] » It's the prior year annual regional CPI. So if you looked at your regional CPI,

[1:55:08] it has, you know, let's say January, February, March, April. At the end of

[1:55:12] the CPI window, they say the annual CPI was this amount. We use the annualized

[1:55:18] number. >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:55:21] » Yep. I have um some questions. Um might be

[1:55:26] Rebecca. Sorry. Um can you tell me give me an example of the difference between

[1:55:33] a uh exception standard and a exception minor? What like what

[1:55:40] » kind of project? Um, a good example is we had a a project that went through a

[1:55:44] design review exception for a landscaping project on the lagoon with

[1:55:50] some um decking and landscaping and um when we went to go final it, they had

[1:55:58] planted a tree that was not part of the approved plan and was going to require

[1:56:04] retroactive design review for this tree because it was going to be over 12t

[1:56:08] tall. So, in our current fee schedule, it would have cost them, I think,

[1:56:12] upwards of $8,000 to have this retroactive design review fee for one

[1:56:18] tree. So, we we we realized while we had these new fee schedules, we needed

[1:56:24] something that was just a little bit more minor in scope. And so, um, hence

[1:56:30] we're here right now with something that would fall into the minor.

[1:56:37] So it wouldn't be anything that like is a maintenance kind of type thing like a

[1:56:41] roof or painting colors or >> no painting and roofs go under um

[1:56:48] exemptions. >> And then um my other question was hold

[1:56:53] on. Oh, I have a few. Um, so city city city tree pruning request

[1:57:01] fee. Um, is that like if somebody asks for a tree to be trimmed and it's not

[1:57:08] time for trim, but they want it trimmed because it's blocking their view or

[1:57:11] something, then they have to pay for it, or is it general maintenance? I mean,

[1:57:16] why why would somebody be paying for a city tree pruning? What what would be

[1:57:20] the circumstance? I'll let Tony Boyd to answer that

[1:57:25] question. >> Yep. Uh thank you.

[1:57:29] » Can you hear me? Okay, there we go. Um thank thanks for the question. Um so

[1:57:34] right now it's kind of a convoluted process if anybody wants to um have a

[1:57:40] city tree pruned. Um and it's outlined in city code. Um what's needed is for a

[1:57:46] person to send a letter to the city manager um who then directs staff to

[1:57:52] send letters um with copies of that original letter to all the the residents

[1:57:57] within 300 ft of the home uh giving them the opportunity to to comment. And um

[1:58:04] basically this this is a um available to anybody uh but there's been no fee

[1:58:09] attached to it in the past. So anybody can for free just you know ask for this

[1:58:13] process to be run and it uses quite a lot of staff time and staff hours. So

[1:58:16] » So you're just trying to recover your staff time.

[1:58:18] » Exactly. Just great. >> And then um let's see which one is this

[1:58:26] number. Oh that was number 15. number. Um,

[1:58:30] oh, the um sign placement fee is does somebody have to pay for the sign

[1:58:38] placement and or does sorry or you know if somebody comes and picks up the sign

[1:58:42] they can put their own you know no parking the road closed you know Monday

[1:58:47] 8 to noon or something. >> Yes. Um so uh anytime there's a road

[1:58:53] closure um there are quite strict requirements for signage um that need to

[1:58:57] go into place uh 72 hours before um um and up until now that's uh that

[1:59:05] requirement has been for the contractor um to place those. Um sometimes

[1:59:10] contractors um you know especially if they're coming

[1:59:13] from a long way away um that's quite difficult for them. um you know, we we

[1:59:19] require them to do it one way or another, that's fine. Um but if they uh

[1:59:23] if they make a mistake in where they put the signs or they, you know, have a

[1:59:27] wrong detail on a sign or so on, um staff have to spend quite a bit of time

[1:59:32] kind of chasing them to to get back out and and adjust their their signs. Um, if

[1:59:38] the option was available for them to just pay the city a fee to place those

[1:59:42] signs, um, uh, and have our crew do it ourselves, um, that would, um, probably

[1:59:49] make it, uh, easier for us and we can, uh, collect a fee for it.

[1:59:53] » Okay. And then one last question. I think it might be you. Sorry. Um

[1:59:58] 1G is um

[2:00:04] projects modifying city property requiring inspection. What's that? Give

[2:00:11] me an example. >> Yeah. Um so typical example would be um

[2:00:18] a sewer lateral replacement requiring uh somebody to cut into the road. Um uh so

[2:00:24] right now when when a contractor takes out an encroachment permit to do that

[2:00:27] kind of work um uh there's nowhere on the permit that that um uh it gives them

[2:00:35] the the uh requirement of of having to have an inspection.

[2:00:39] » Okay. >> Um and an inspection is needed for that.

[2:00:42] » Okay. Great. Perfect. Thank you.

[2:00:47] » Excuse me. Can I jump in since there um what is

[2:00:52] lane ema abandonment or lane vacation? I don't think they're going to Europe.

[2:00:59] So I just wondered it's on page 14 and it's number six and it's under public

[2:01:05] works and it says lane abandonment. Does that mean somebody's taking over

[2:01:11] lane? >> I I don't know.

[2:01:14] » Don't uh >> you may not know. I sure don't know.

[2:01:17] Terry. >> Oh, Terry might know.

[2:01:20] » Well, I'm not sure if Tony's encountered it or if it occurs in Belvadier, but it

[2:01:24] is a common fee we see um where there might be easements offered or and

[2:01:29] sometimes they think they call them Tony, they call them summary vacations

[2:01:32] or right-of-way abandonments. And so, you're just giving yourself the

[2:01:36] potential to recover costs if that did ever occur in Belvadier. I'm not sure if

[2:01:41] it does occur, >> but we don't know what it is. probably.

[2:01:47] » Yeah, it's it's not likely. Um that's Yeah, very good question cuz um the only

[2:01:53] lane abandonment or vacation that I'm aware of would be by the city. Um yeah.

[2:01:59] » Okay, thanks. So, we'll just leave it there and whatever. I just didn't know

[2:02:04] what it was. Um okay, >> nothing else. Kevin,

[2:02:09] » um I have just a couple of quick questions. The first was um for Terry.

[2:02:15] Um obviously our cost recovery given that we budgeted for nothing this year

[2:02:19] has been pretty impressive and I was curious in your experience whether it's

[2:02:25] I haven't been any negative behavioral effects of us increasing these fees. Is

[2:02:29] that typ is that typical or are we an outlier or or are you surprised by the

[2:02:34] extent of our cost recovery? >> I'm pleasantly surprised. I you know I

[2:02:40] always have anxiety of is what we anticipate will happen actually going to

[2:02:47] happen and in this case it it does seem like it has happened. I thank the city

[2:02:51] council for >> um you know sort of having mercy on us

[2:02:56] last year and taking a conservative approach and waiting to see the revenue

[2:02:59] before it showed up. That was what my primary concern. My primary concern is

[2:03:03] anytime you have sort of significant changes, you just want to make sure that

[2:03:08] this is really likely this is this will actually happen in practice and that I

[2:03:12] didn't make some sort of mathematical error. This type of CPI change gives me

[2:03:16] a lot less nervousness and anxiety than last year. So, thank you for um sort of

[2:03:22] waiting to see the actual revenue show up. um in terms of you know sort of uh

[2:03:28] behavior modifiers or anything like that. I didn't actually expect that

[2:03:32] because we we haven't seen that. So what we hear from the development community

[2:03:36] is what they value most is service. Um so they value this idea of access to

[2:03:43] your um your planning team, your building team and so forth because

[2:03:47] they're trying to move projects um through the pipeline. And so I I guess I

[2:03:53] was not concerned about behavior modification. I was concerned, you know,

[2:03:58] is this math going to work? It it feels like it has worked. I do think you'd be

[2:04:01] wise to, you know, every 3 to 5 years think through this again. I noticed in

[2:04:06] the in this earlier in this meeting, council member Mark mentioned that maybe

[2:04:11] because of some of your efforts um to sort of encourage certain types of

[2:04:17] development, you're actually seeing the fruit of that effort. And so um I think

[2:04:23] the world works in in development cycles. And I don't know what cycle

[2:04:27] you're in, but I just feel like if we could look at a longer picture of time

[2:04:32] and figure out how how do we stand? Because I could think about, for

[2:04:36] instance, if this Malard point, I know nothing about Malard Point. I just typed

[2:04:40] in on the website and saw that it's a potential for multiple units. But I

[2:04:44] would imagine when they make it to the building permit stage, the city would

[2:04:48] collect some significant building permit fee revenue, but you would also be

[2:04:52] obligating the city to conduct future plan reviews and inspections that may

[2:04:58] happen over a long window of time. So, we want to think through a broad window

[2:05:02] of time versus just a couple months or a few month window of time.

[2:05:06] » Great. That's great. And then I have a a question for I guess this is for

[2:05:09] Rebecca. When we first approved the um the new user fee schedule, we baked in

[2:05:14] this idea that there'd be a backdoor, meaning if sometimes fees looked

[2:05:18] excessive versus the amount of time that was actually committed that you had that

[2:05:22] option to do something different. And I was just curious how often that actually

[2:05:27] gets used. We haven't used it. I will say that that

[2:05:33] one example I gave, they actually submitted under the old fee schedule.

[2:05:37] So, we were able to use the old fee schedule instead of charging them the

[2:05:40] $8,000 for that one tree. Um, but that's the only sort of,

[2:05:45] » you know, but no, no one's no one has said, "This is so much money. It used to

[2:05:52] be $2,000. Now you're making me pay $15,000 for a comparable project." And

[2:05:58] so there was no um we haven't received any feedback and asking for that back

[2:06:03] door. >> And just in terms of uh yourselves sort

[2:06:06] of empirically, >> do the fees to you sort of feel right

[2:06:10] still in terms of the hours that you spend on each of these, you're tracking

[2:06:13] that to some degree. >> Yeah. And for from what I can see is

[2:06:17] that that exemption fee is um you know we spend time on these exemptions and

[2:06:22] it's amazing to see how much actual time we had previously all these years spent

[2:06:26] on exemptions and never recovered a fee. >> Okay.

[2:06:30] » Um yeah >> thank you. Um

[2:06:32] » can I follow follow? Sure. >> Um I I I imagine part of that part of

[2:06:36] the um the way to fi figure that out Helga would be to is a question of how

[2:06:40] granular your your data is on cost or cut reverse the revenue. I mean if it's

[2:06:45] just department head total um top line you're not going to have much much

[2:06:49] detail. But if it's you know project by project or if it's it's item by item or

[2:06:53] or or or line budget line item by budget line you might have to be able to see

[2:06:58] what your revenue is versus the cost of things. And if we are surpassing revenue

[2:07:01] versus cost, we're clearly charging more for that service than than we than we

[2:07:05] do. I don't know if it is that granular, but that would be a way to because we

[2:07:09] don't want to overcharge for the cost. >> Correct. And um we did look at that. We

[2:07:15] did it by revenue line item. And Terry, I don't know if you want to expand on

[2:07:20] that. >> Yeah. So I uh council member Mark I

[2:07:24] think that without doing another truly

[2:07:28] comprehensive study uh the data that we have access that we readily have access

[2:07:33] to is sort of like these broad account codes like this is building permit fee

[2:07:38] revenue this is uh zoning fee revenue and so forth. every time we do a broad

[2:07:43] study. Um, even in broad studies, I would say we have not encountered a city

[2:07:50] that maintains data at a at a level granular enough to sort of say, well, I

[2:07:58] can just export this data from the system and this will inform my fees

[2:08:02] going forward. because we use these ideas of like the 6 out of 10 rule. Um

[2:08:07] especially when you're setting flat fees. And so we we really do want to

[2:08:11] work with staff as the experts and say, you know, when you process an exemption,

[2:08:17] what would what would typically happen? What would you be likely to encounter in

[2:08:22] terms of your initial application review and so forth? And so, um we do feel like

[2:08:29] technology is getting more and more robust. you have access to tracking

[2:08:32] better information. But even if you tracked, you know, highly granular

[2:08:37] information, we would still go to staff and say, "How do we interpret this and

[2:08:41] how can we sort of reasonably average it out?" Because that's our mandate in

[2:08:46] California is estimated reasonable cost of service.

[2:08:49] Terry, do you think the um just just quick separate question um the uh the

[2:08:55] shortfall we're seeing in public works, I'll leave technology aside because

[2:08:58] that's not such a big number, but the 60% of cost recovery that you're seeing,

[2:09:02] um is it is that too early to tell? I mean, maybe that's a more uh uh the

[2:09:08] slower progression that you might have anticipated more broadly in in our

[2:09:11] planning building. Or do you or do you or or perhaps do you see a gap in our in

[2:09:15] our fees there that that that isn't accounting for something or isn't isn't

[2:09:20] recovering something more significant? >> So, Council Member Mark, I'm I'm happy

[2:09:25] to answer my my gut thought. I just don't want you to treat me as married to

[2:09:29] this thought, but I did see it and think what what might be happening. And I

[2:09:35] haven't run it by Tony or Rebecca yet, but my suspicion is that um there is

[2:09:40] public works engineering effort that happens at the planning stage. And so

[2:09:45] maybe Tony's team is providing effort um at like an entitlement review stage and

[2:09:52] so forth. and it might be coming in as a planning revenue rather than as an

[2:09:56] engineering revenue. And so it might be an area for cleanup in future years. My

[2:10:00] other thought was I know that there might be some reduced encroachment

[2:10:05] permits for these very short-term encroachment permits. I think I heard

[2:10:08] that when you're trying to encourage um people to move quickly through the city

[2:10:13] and get their projects done quickly. So, um, I think there's a couple potential

[2:10:17] scenarios, but I would I would have to dive into them with the team and I think

[2:10:22] they're beyond sort of this inflationary review.

[2:10:25] » Thank you. >> Um, okay. Let's open this for public

[2:10:29] comment. I see nobody in the room. Is there anything online?

[2:10:32] » Uh, no hands are raised. >> Okay. So, uh, can I bring this back

[2:10:36] unless there's discussion? Can I get a motion for

[2:10:40] 5A? >> No one has a comment on

[2:10:42] » I'm sorry. I I do have a comment because I'm I'm I'm still so still concerned

[2:10:45] about those longerterm encroachment permits. I mean, I'm sort of having

[2:10:49] built in the city and being involved in planning and so forth. I'm curious,

[2:10:52] Tony, what what you think about this. I mean,

[2:10:57] this is the kind I understand this is a benefit to the city because of the

[2:11:01] revenue associated with it and it's and it's a long-term um um for that. But the

[2:11:06] but the only purpose for this is to is to is to uh stick a a a dumpster in the

[2:11:12] street or to have exclusive use of the street for deliveries for a a contractor

[2:11:16] that that's not really costconcious. I mean do you find people wanting these

[2:11:21] long-term permits? I mean I know we allow dumpers on the street but we we we

[2:11:25] we generally um through our um uh construction staging plan and and and

[2:11:31] and parking and so forth. um we tend to discourage that um the dumpsters being

[2:11:36] on the street. So So what's the point of a long-term encroachment permit?

[2:11:42] » Yeah, that's a great question. And I think um what precipitated the thoughts

[2:11:48] on this was a a recent construction project where they have um asked for a a

[2:11:54] long-term encroachment permit um uh 3 months I believe it was.

[2:11:58] » For what purpose? um for um uh multiple purposes actually.

[2:12:05] Um so instead of uh returning to the city and um obtaining new encroachment

[2:12:10] permits for um different concrete pores, deliveries

[2:12:15] um uh

[2:12:18] you know um basically things related to their construction project.

[2:12:23] um instead of uh you having multiple uh encroachment permits just having one

[2:12:28] that they and I think in in this case we um arranged for them to be able to renew

[2:12:34] it um either every month or every 6 weeks or um can't remember exactly what

[2:12:40] um but yeah so the idea is that when when that's needed um that uh a single

[2:12:47] encroachment permit would be um sufficient. Yeah, I I see the benefit

[2:12:53] for the city. I see the benefit for the um for the contractor, property owner at

[2:12:57] that point. It's a it's a problem for the neighborhood though.

[2:13:00] » I mean, that what that means is that's exclusive use of that space. They they

[2:13:03] can, you know, stick vehicles there. They can have um ongoing construction

[2:13:07] and it doesn't >> The point of a lot of the language in

[2:13:10] our encroment permits is to minimize impact on the neighborhood and to keep

[2:13:14] it as reasonable and as as as limited as possible. Um, this is sort of giving

[2:13:19] someone a blank check to just not a blank check, but a but a but a but a

[2:13:23] permission to be um um cavalier with with the um congestion and the

[2:13:28] neighborhood quite frankly. So, I'm a little bit concerned about that. I don't

[2:13:30] know how the rest of the um um um council feels about that. Uh I'd almost

[2:13:36] rather aster and say come to the city for a um discussion of a long-term um

[2:13:41] license if if if you wish it or desire that that can be discussed and

[2:13:45] negotiated. I don't know if I' if having a fee there. I don't I don't want that

[2:13:48] to be a standard procedure. >> Um I mean there's a fair amount of

[2:13:52] discipline. That's even why we had the half day in there's a fair amount of

[2:13:55] discipline in there to know you've got a day or two to do this or a week at most

[2:13:58] to do this. >> You know, if you've got a month-long

[2:14:00] permit and a lot of people are are less interested in price than they are in

[2:14:04] convenience um when they're doing these projects, they're just going to get it

[2:14:07] and they're going to have that exclusive use. They're going to put cones there.

[2:14:10] They're going to they're going to put, you know, parking vehicles. They're

[2:14:12] going to leave their LOL out front. you're going to leave, you know, all the

[2:14:15] things out there that you don't necessarily want in the street.

[2:14:18] » Yeah, absolutely understood. And and um I I can't disagree. this this does uh

[2:14:24] really uh make uh the process easier from a staff perspective but from um

[2:14:30] from your perspective what you're saying there I um I would agree that uh you

[2:14:34] know either creating more hurdles for them to you know have to multiply uh

[2:14:39] apply multiple times um or restrict them in another way um have a maximum number

[2:14:45] of days per month that an encroachment permit can be used uh something like

[2:14:49] that um yeah >> Terry do you have any experience from

[2:14:53] other agencies in relation to this? >> I think you are truly a unique community

[2:14:59] in relation to this.

[2:15:03] » That was said very politely, Terry. >> Um, in many ways,

[2:15:10] » um, I agree with Peter. I think

[2:15:13] » so. How do you want to modify this? >> I think you only you don't have the

[2:15:17] ability to do anything beyond uh a certain period, like two weeks or a week

[2:15:20] or whatever it is. It's like you have to come back and reapply.

[2:15:24] » I I mean, if you just didn't have it in there, which is which is it wasn't

[2:15:27] adopted by the by the by the council beforehand anyway. So, I think it's

[2:15:30] reasonable to to go back to that website. Notwithstanding. Uh if someone

[2:15:35] raises the question, you can always negotiate something I think pretty

[2:15:38] comfortably to expand that. I don't think we have a missile code that would

[2:15:41] would prevent that from happening. Uh >> but meaning you want to strike you want

[2:15:46] to go up to two weeks and then strike three weeks and one month. I mean I

[2:15:50] don't think I we we've never had anything over one week in my experience.

[2:15:53] » I would keep it at a week. >> Yeah.

[2:15:57] » I mean you know to be clear that is how it has been done to this point. Um I

[2:16:02] think on occasion there have been asked people have asked for extensions uh and

[2:16:07] so on and but there's nothing to to stop that from continuing. I mean, I I sort

[2:16:11] of um think Ghard would turn over to his grave if he saw this because he was he

[2:16:15] was I mean, honestly, he was very focused on minimizing impact on

[2:16:19] neighbors. Um so I don't >> he certainly was. Yeah.

[2:16:22] » So I I think that was the intent and the focus of our

[2:16:26] » Yeah. >> permits encroachments. So, council

[2:16:29] member Mark, what you would say is looking at the existing the proposed fee

[2:16:33] schedule under encroachment permit, you would have category A, B, C,

[2:16:39] and G. >> But you would not have D, E, or F. The

[2:16:44] two week, 3 week, or one month.

[2:16:50] » Ideally, yes. Sorry. >> Ideally, yes.

[2:16:53] » ABC and and G. Well, relettered, but yes.

[2:16:59] Yes. >> Um, it sounds like we have council

[2:17:03] agreement on that. Um, unless are there any other comments or

[2:17:09] can we go to a motion? Okay. Peter, do you want to make the

[2:17:14] motion your amendment? I'll move that uh we uh approve item 5A adoption of uh res

[2:17:21] resolution updating and establishing various user and regulatory fees with

[2:17:25] the uh modification of the public works encroachment permick as discussed in

[2:17:30] this conversation >> and also Peter to change the name of um

[2:17:37] » I'm sorry you're right >> uh under public works number nine to

[2:17:41] paving fee and option A to leave that as S slurry seal

[2:17:48] and option B becomes overlay. Okay. Can I get a second?

[2:17:54] » All in favor? >> Second.

[2:17:56] » I >> I

[2:17:57] » I >> Thank you,

[2:17:59] » Terry. Thank you very much for your help. I say again that you are the most

[2:18:04] valuable bang for your buck consultant that we have. Um you've raised enormous

[2:18:09] revenue for the city. So, thank you for your guidance.

[2:18:11] » Good evening. Thank you all. Bye-bye. >> Good night, Terry.

[2:18:15] Okay, we're moving to our final item. Item number six, discussion and action

[2:18:20] to award the Beach Road Seaw wall construction contract to Gordon N. Bore

[2:18:25] Construction. Um, this is Tony, I believe, for the staff report. Or is

[2:18:31] that you? You, Robert? >> That's correct. Tony's gonna kick it up.

[2:18:34] » Tony, go ahead.

[2:18:50] Thank you, mayor. And um I had written here, good evening,

[2:18:55] council members, but I guess um it's it's a bit late for that. Um you are

[2:19:01] familiar with the beach road stabilization project having received a

[2:19:05] presentation at the annual retreat in February from the city's design engineer

[2:19:09] stats and engineering providing details on the project design.

[2:19:13] Um, and at the time of that meeting, the request for proposals for construction

[2:19:18] of the project had just been posted on February the 22nd. And since then, a

[2:19:23] procurement process has been conducted, the final step of which is this city

[2:19:28] council meeting where staff is recommending awarding of the

[2:19:32] construction contract. The BRSP subcommittee comprising of

[2:19:38] three members of the public and one city council liaison, council member Peter

[2:19:41] Mark, was appointed to oversee the project and provide a platform for

[2:19:46] public engagement. The subcommittee met on February the

[2:19:49] 26th to review the project plans and RFP details and again on March the 25th

[2:19:56] after proposals were received to receive information and to and to discuss the

[2:20:00] proposals. Of the four proposals received, Gordon

[2:20:05] N. Ball Incorporated was determined to be the lowest responsive and responsible

[2:20:10] bidder with a bid of 3,511,620.

[2:20:16] This was approximately 310,000 or 10% higher than the budgeted amount for this

[2:20:22] the major portion of the project. To bridge the gap in funding, staff has

[2:20:28] identified four sources of funds within the existing and forecast CIP budget

[2:20:32] that can be allocated to this project. These are

[2:20:37] $125,000 from the Marin measure AA funds. Measure

[2:20:43] AA is the county's transportation tax, an annual pro proportional grant

[2:20:48] allocation to the city used for transportation related infrastructure

[2:20:52] work. $33,000 from the city's road impact fee

[2:20:56] fund, which received higher than expected revenues and would be used to

[2:21:00] pay for the paving restoration portion of the project.

[2:21:04] 172,000 from the retaining wall repair CIP fund, which would be a rollover in

[2:21:09] the coming fiscal year. After the the infrastructure condition

[2:21:14] assessments currently taking place are completed, a more defined retaining wall

[2:21:18] project priority is likely to take its place. and $15,000 rollover amount from

[2:21:25] the sidewalk repair CIP fund which would be used to cover the cost of the

[2:21:29] sidewalk restoration portion of the project. This amounts to $345,000

[2:21:35] which would cover the funding gap of 310,000 and provide 35,000 to the

[2:21:41] construction contingency maintaining it at approximately 11% of the budgeted

[2:21:46] construction costs. These reallocations would be

[2:21:49] incorporated into the into the city's budget for fiscal year 2627.

[2:21:57] Within the project's existing allocated budget, staff has identified cost

[2:22:01] savings such as lower than expected costs for environmental mitigation,

[2:22:06] sequent analysis, and surveying and mapping. The amount of these savings

[2:22:11] will only be known in the coming months, but when they are realized, they will

[2:22:14] also be added to the contingency budgeted for this project.

[2:22:19] While this construction contract is the largest portion of the B RSP project, it

[2:22:24] should be noted that two other components of the project will be coming

[2:22:28] to council for approval at the May meeting. The first is a contract to be

[2:22:32] approved for a portion of the project construction to be completed by a

[2:22:36] different contractor. This work will be on the properties of number 16 to 30

[2:22:41] Beach Road. It includes removal of pedestrian gangways between the sidewalk

[2:22:45] and buildings and setting up temporary utility structures to the homes for the

[2:22:50] duration of construction. The city has identified Hadley

[2:22:54] construction for this portion of the project and is finalizing details of the

[2:22:57] scope and costs for the contract. The second will be the approval of temporary

[2:23:02] construction easements for 16 to 38 Beach Road. Staff have been working with

[2:23:08] the property owners on these agreements.

[2:23:12] In conclusion, staff and the BRSP subcommittee recommend that city council

[2:23:18] award the contract for the BRSP construction to Gordon Nball

[2:23:22] Incorporated and authorize the city manager to sign a contract with them.

[2:23:28] And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

[2:23:32] » Are there any questions from council members?

[2:23:34] » Can I if you don't mind? Um, as as a representative to the uh beach road

[2:23:39] civilization subcommittee, I just wanted to uh thank Robert and and Tony for

[2:23:44] their work on this as well as desks and engineers and um I'm sorry, the

[2:23:49] gentleman from project manager >> uh Adrien.

[2:23:52] » Adrian Adrien. Yes. Uh but also but also just ju just just note that uh the

[2:23:57] subcommittee did look into this quite a bit. Worked with Tony on the RFP and the

[2:24:02] process and have to say we're quite frustrated with the legal constraints of

[2:24:07] the bidding and and awarding process which is labyrinthlike and and very

[2:24:11] little agency for the client there I have to say. Um, but our recommendation,

[2:24:17] as Tony pointed out, was to make the recommendation to city council, but to

[2:24:21] focus on trying to trying to find those funds within the specific beach

[2:24:27] stabilization project and or other um budgets within public works from this

[2:24:33] year or rollover years that we can we can identify. um and then work with

[2:24:37] Stson and the contractor to sharpen pencil as much as allowed within the um

[2:24:41] contracting process to value engineer what we can within that project. Um I do

[2:24:47] have to say that the savings that you would hope for SQA and engineering and

[2:24:52] project management I agree what you're saying but but I wouldn't add that to

[2:24:56] the contingency. I would I would I would reduce the project scope on that to

[2:24:59] whatever savings you have on that. I mean because I understand we've already

[2:25:02] gone beyond above it. So, it should be an attempt to uh uh return that to our

[2:25:07] broader budgets as opposed to necessarily just rolling it into that

[2:25:10] project, if you understand what I mean by that. But otherwise, I can recommend

[2:25:14] and support this this um uh contract.

[2:25:21] » Any other questions? Jane, >> I have just one. Um in the alternative

[2:25:27] section it says the city could reduce total length and related quality of

[2:25:32] sheep piles in the design for some overall savings. And was that an option

[2:25:38] that was discussed or just presented in the subcommittee?

[2:25:44] it it was discussed um and it's um a fallback option I think uh is probably

[2:25:52] the best way to put it. Um at this point um

[2:25:57] staff believes that that we are able to uh to get the funding together to to go

[2:26:02] forward with the complete project. Um if there are any other um changes to the

[2:26:09] scope um or or or changes in the costs um we don't know if there will be any

[2:26:16] any other funds to be found. Um and in that case um we you know we would we

[2:26:23] would probably have to reduce the scope of of the uh the work. Um and so that

[2:26:28] would be our next step. >> Yeah. But but didn't you say we have to

[2:26:33] find more funding to remove the gangways and create utilities for those?

[2:26:38] » Um no, that that has been budgeted. >> Oh, that has Okay.

[2:26:41] » Yes. Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. I misunderstood,

[2:26:44] » Jane. As as as the as the committee was looking at this, we had yet to um um

[2:26:48] confer with or or Helga and Robert and Tony had yet to find the funds for it.

[2:26:53] Oh, okay. So, so, so leaving that last subcommittee meeting was you can we can

[2:26:58] only make this recommendation contingent upon the fact that you are can find the

[2:27:02] funds within your existing budgets or within this budget. Um, and if not

[2:27:07] because it's important to make our window of time here to mitigate that

[2:27:09] risk. There might be some alternatives to reduce the scope.

[2:27:12] » Okay, >> that was that was this that and

[2:27:14] hopefully we we we haven't been able to do that but it is still a fallback

[2:27:17] should should prices continue or we aren't able to make those budgets even

[2:27:21] work what these are. >> Yeah. Okay. And I also want to thank the

[2:27:25] staff and the subcommittee um for the work on this important infrastructure

[2:27:30] project and I can support um expending the funding for the

[2:27:35] project.

[2:27:39] » I had uh one quick clarifying question. Is Blue Iron a sub of They're the sub.

[2:27:44] » Yes. >> Yeah, I thought so, but just wanted to

[2:27:46] be sure. >> Thank you.

[2:27:51] Oh, um yes, thank you Tony for the work in the

[2:27:55] subcommittee. Um uh it's been a project long coming and I think it's time has

[2:28:01] arrived and that we need to go ahead do the project. Um and find the money

[2:28:08] wherever we find it and get this project done because it's as time has proved it

[2:28:13] doesn't get cheaper with time. So I'm in full support.

[2:28:18] » Thanks. And Tony, my quick question. Is the timeline moved at all in terms of

[2:28:21] implementation? >> Not not yet. Um there are as as I

[2:28:28] mentioned, there are a couple more moving parts. Um the contractor has uh

[2:28:33] said that um they haven't been awarded the contract yet, but um they would be

[2:28:39] able to start um at the very beginning of the window, which would be June the

[2:28:43] 1st. Mhm. >> Um there may be remaining work by PG&E

[2:28:48] uh to be done uh before that. Um and there are um two permits that are still

[2:28:55] outstanding. U so um if things fall into place as we hope then yes it would the

[2:29:03] project would start on June the 1st. Um if if not the the project window that

[2:29:08] we've given the contractor is June the 1st to uh October 30th. Um and that's a

[2:29:14] that's something that the jurisdictional agencies um have uh the limits that

[2:29:19] they've given us. Um so um potentially it it would be moved um

[2:29:24] to a later date >> and the PG& point you made there, I mean

[2:29:28] how how much of a block could that be? >> Um so PG& have assured us um um every

[2:29:38] time we've spoken to them that they are able to do this work that they need to

[2:29:41] do. So, they need to um they need to modify some of their facilities in Beach

[2:29:46] Road to allow these uh sheet piles to be installed. Um we've had progress

[2:29:52] meetings with them every every two weeks for the last few months. Um and it seems

[2:29:57] like uh they're more or less on track to be able to do the work, but as we

[2:30:02] approach June the 1st, it is the time is getting tighter and tighter. Um we're

[2:30:06] meeting with them on site tomorrow and um you know we're we're gonna seek their

[2:30:13] uh confirmation that they that they will finish the work by then.

[2:30:18] » Okay. Sound a little nervous but thank you.

[2:30:21] » Well yeah and and the reason is is is they're not able to give any um you know

[2:30:25] they're not uh any uh real uh assurances that it that it can be done. They they

[2:30:30] sort of say yep it looks like it should be fine kind of thing. um they don't

[2:30:35] really put anything on paper or in writing and and um yeah, so we're

[2:30:40] working with them as as closely as possible. Um but um yeah, it's I I I I

[2:30:47] feel like I'll believe it when I see it basically with BG.

[2:30:50] » But so if for example this whole thing got pushed into next year because the

[2:30:53] permitting and stuff didn't come through, what does that mean in terms of

[2:30:55] the price of the quote? That's a great question and um I think

[2:31:03] that would have to be something uh that we'd negotiate with the with the

[2:31:07] contractor. Um yeah and uh from speaking to Adrian uh from uh Adrien Cornier from

[2:31:15] from FA um he's he's mentioned that this has been uh that he's been involved in

[2:31:22] in these kind of negotiations before where there's been some kind of um

[2:31:26] allowance for uh a um you know an in an inflationary factor to to the price. Um,

[2:31:35] but we we we wouldn't be able to say in if until we face the the situation.

[2:31:40] » And you're doing everything you can with these agencies to try and get them to do

[2:31:45] what they need to do. >> Yes. Um Yeah. And so the two permits

[2:31:51] that are outstanding are the BCDC permits. Um they're having a meeting

[2:31:55] this week, Thursday. Um and uh this permit's on the agenda. So that'll be a

[2:32:01] yes or no uh on Thursday. Um the other permit is the Army Corps of Engineers

[2:32:06] who are usually um a fairly straightforward permit. Uh I'm led to

[2:32:11] believe. Um but in this case um they um seems like they've had some kind of

[2:32:17] audit of their processes and um it's taking a little longer than than usual

[2:32:23] uh for that uh to come through. But um my understanding is that it's still a

[2:32:29] fairly straightforward process. Um it's just going to be a little delayed.

[2:32:35] » Okay. Thank you. Um public comment birth. Nothing.

[2:32:41] » Okay. Right. So let's bring this back if I don't think there's any further

[2:32:45] discussion. Does anyone want to make the motion?

[2:32:48] » I can make a motion. But before I do that, Tony, just real quick, um two

[2:32:51] things I wanted to mention. Um I understand from our previous discussions

[2:32:55] that PG& will be doing a a fairly substantial um upgrade and then

[2:33:00] preparing it for Hadley to do the connections and interconnection and so

[2:33:03] forth. Um but as a fallback um could you consider temp power to those to those

[2:33:07] residences so you don't have to um delay arguably um um so that they can do that

[2:33:14] after the fact if if you because we've seen through all of our CTL analysis

[2:33:17] that PG& is a wild card you don't want to you don't want to bet on. So I mean I

[2:33:22] would I would ask them is there any sort of sort of alternate strategy that you

[2:33:26] could do as a construction site would do with a temp situation um during that

[2:33:31] process just put in the back of your mind is something when you when you

[2:33:33] speak with them. >> Yeah that that's a great idea um and I

[2:33:37] think yeah we are meeting with them tomorrow so that's something I can I can

[2:33:41] definitely ask. they uh they were planning so so for them the temp

[2:33:46] electrical service is is a separate project from the from the joint trench

[2:33:49] work that they're doing in the street >> um but they plan to do it at the same

[2:33:53] time as the joint trench so >> um

[2:33:56] » don't let don't let the larger project stop the necessary project of the temp

[2:34:01] » right yeah absolutely um I think it's um I think it's a great idea yeah

[2:34:06] » the other thing that you heard from the subcommittee um was don't underestimate

[2:34:09] the uh the the complexity perhaps with uh resident notification communication

[2:34:15] as well as the the um asbuilt surveys of those adjacent properties. Um so don't

[2:34:21] don't don't kick that down the road too far because that's going to take some

[2:34:24] time um and some effort both communication and um dealing with both

[2:34:28] tenants and the and the property owners themselves. But but with that I can make

[2:34:33] a motion to approve item 6A the beach real estabization projects award of a

[2:34:38] construction contract Gordon and Ball Construction Inc. in the amount of

[2:34:43] 351620. >> I'll second that.

[2:34:46] » All in favor? >> I.

[2:34:48] » Motion passes. Um and again thank you to everyone involved. Can you just list off

[2:34:52] the uh volunteers on the committee so that we can thank them directly?

[2:34:59] » Yeah, absolutely. We um >> I'm sorry to put you on the spot here.

[2:35:03] » No, no. Yeah, it's just that I've blanked on the the name of the chair.

[2:35:06] » John Tatum. >> John Tatum um is is the chair of the

[2:35:10] committee. Um Patrick Federer uh from the finance committee and Keith Pagan um

[2:35:16] is the third um member of the community from

[2:35:20] » and they've done they've all done a fantastic job. Thank you very much.

[2:35:23] » Thank you to those individuals. Okay, I think we are done for the night. Thank

[2:35:27] you to my fellow council members for being um uh so detail oriented in

[2:35:31] everything. It's what we need. Um and with that we will adjourn. Thank you so

[2:35:37] much. That's

City Council Meeting: April 13, 2026

Agenda

Transcript