[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