[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:16] Good evening, everyone. Thank you for joining us today for the city council meeting Tuesday, October 14th, 2025, and let the record show all council members are present. And with that, I am going to invite the 4-H members up to the podium to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
[0:45] Please put your right hand over your heart and join us for the Pledge of Allegiance. Ready? Begin.
[0:50] I pledge allegiance to the front of the United States of America and to the Republic for
[0:58] which it stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
[1:07] Thank you.
[1:13] Thank you more, Bay 4-H.
[1:15] It is national 4-H week, so I think we're going to be hearing from them in a few minutes at public
[1:19] comment.
[1:19] Thank you for joining us.
[1:21] With that, I will turn over to our city attorney, Mr. Stack.
[1:26] Good evening, Mayor Councilmembers and members of the public.
[1:29] The City Council did meet in close session two times since the last regular meeting.
[1:35] The first closed session meeting was on Monday, October 13th, and during that item, they
[1:40] discussed two real property negotiation matters, and one anticipated litigation matter.
[1:45] No reportable action was taken under the Brown Act.
[1:48] For that closed session agenda or meeting.
[1:51] meeting. And the second closed session meeting was this afternoon to the October 14th and
[1:56] the council met to discuss the city manager recruitment and no reportable action was
[2:02] taken under the ground act. Thank you, Mr. Hurstek. With that, we will move into merit council
[2:09] member reports, announcements and presentations. I'll kick off and pass it down in a minute.
[2:15] I have a shout out to the Maritime Family Fund day and the group down there.
[2:21] What a great event.
[2:22] I think all of us attended.
[2:24] I'm pretty sure I saw other council members down there.
[2:27] We kept our distance, but it was a great event.
[2:30] It felt like back in the day when we used to have rock and ram.
[2:33] It was very community and family oriented.
[2:36] And it was just a really nice afternoon and a great effort by that group down there.
[2:40] Thank you.
[2:41] So this Sunday from 2 to 4, Council Member Landham and myself are going to be hosting a town hall meeting at the community center, and I'm sure she'll share a few words on it when it gets down to her, but we'll be talking all things about the waterfront and Moral Bay.
[2:58] I just got back Friday from the League of Cities, California Cities Conference.
[3:04] Thank you to the city for sending me.
[3:07] It was a great opportunity to network and resource.
[3:10] There were a lot of vendors at the Expo who have a lot of products and
[3:15] things that the city uses in regards to infrastructure maintenance,
[3:21] administrative resources and things as well as attending many sessions.
[3:25] I found it was a little challenging because each time slot there was five different sessions to choose from.
[3:32] So it was very difficult to pick, but most of them I attended was on small cities and good governance.
[3:38] So hopefully I'll be able to utilize that information in my job here.
[3:43] Tomorrow night, we have our public works advisory meeting.
[3:46] And tomorrow night at the public works advisory meeting, there will be an update from a slow cog on the Morbay Estuary Climate Resiliency Transportation Plan.
[3:57] As well as October 22nd in Las Osas, where there will be a workshop.
[4:03] And, getting back there, huh?
[4:06] And so I hope everybody I'll be able to attend that.
[4:09] The city is still working, our public works director is working with slow cog to try and schedule a date here, and as soon as we can confirm that we will share that with you.
[4:19] And with that, I will pass it to my left.
[4:24] Thank you Madam Mayor and thank you all for being here and thank you to our 4-H members for an excellent job
[4:30] I'm a big fan of fan of that United States flag and you did it justice. So thank you for that
[4:36] Like the rest of my council members. I've attended several meetings
[4:39] I'll be short and just say that it's a privilege to sit up here and be your public servant and represent you on the city council
[4:45] I want to hear what you have to say if you've got any input or feedback for me
[4:51] My email address is on the city website.
[4:54] I also have a newsletter that I send out periodically.
[4:56] So please feel free to contact me, either via my cell phone.
[5:01] My number is on my card.
[5:03] And I just want to hear from you.
[5:05] We're here to serve.
[5:07] Thank you.
[5:09] Chair pro Tim.
[5:12] Thank you, Mayor.
[5:14] I wanted to remind the public that we have a joint CFAC,
[5:18] which is our Citizens Finance Committee,
[5:20] which we're going to be discussing tonight.
[5:22] Council meeting on October 21st at 3 p.m. at the Vets Hall, that's here in this building and we're going to be discussing revenue opportunities for our city and community.
[5:33] I also recently attended the nonprofit roundtable that was conducted by the Moral Bay Chamber of Commerce.
[5:41] I was able to hear a myriad of guest speakers and was invited to speak on tonight's agenda item.
[5:48] I'm just questions with regard to the Grant Committee process as well as the special events
[5:54] policy and fees conversation that will be coming up in the near future.
[6:01] It was just a great conversation, got a lot of feedback and some things to consider for
[6:05] this evening.
[6:06] I also attended the fundraiser for the Moro Bay Maritime Museum at the Moro Bay Yacht Club.
[6:13] The volunteers did an incredible job there.
[6:16] They raised a really great amount of money and put a lot of work into it.
[6:22] This is the Maritime Museum, of course, is something that draws a lot of visitors
[6:26] and it serves our community as well, so that was wonderful.
[6:30] I want to remind people that we do have a trick-or-treat event on October 25th from 235-3.
[6:37] This gives the kiddos an opportunity to go along around the businesses and pick up some treats
[6:43] and costume contests and things like that, so and that is it for me.
[6:53] Hello, I attended the San Luis County Housing Trust Fund building strong foundations a seminar that was put on by our very own council member Eccles, and it was really fun to see him in his real job.
[7:12] And I think he don't count on him as running for or going for a city manager job or anything like that because he's doing great at his real job.
[7:28] And he put on a great panel.
[7:30] there were the directors of People's Self-Help Housing and Haslow Housing Authority of San
[7:35] Lois. There was an architect from Firm and San Lois and also San Lois, the city of San
[7:46] Lois, the best-boz community development director. And they all spoke and it was really interesting.
[7:53] Good job. And I also attended, he and I both also attended a visit Moral Bay Board meeting.
[8:02] That was the first time I had done that, where they were talking, they had a presentation
[8:10] for Christmas lights, for the holiday lights. I don't know where they're going with that,
[8:15] but they did receive a presentation of that.
[8:18] I attended the WAMPAC meeting and the Harbor Advisory Board meeting.
[8:24] At the Harbor Advisory Board meeting, I learned that we have the healthiest fishing stocks in
[8:31] the world, some of the healthiest fishing stocks in the world, and that the federal government
[8:37] is indicating that they want to help because they feel like we're no longer competitive,
[8:43] and they want to change that, help change that.
[8:46] And so that sounded like really good news for our Fisher people and also at that meeting the Harvard Director reported out that the Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for the infrastructure at the harbor that they have that they built, which is a lot of the revetments and I would think even the peers and a lot of that infrastructure.
[9:15] So that's also what I heard when I went to DC and I reported out on that just if anyone
[9:22] remembers.
[9:24] And I think that they told me at the time that they had tons of money, it was a problem
[9:34] getting it out.
[9:37] And so I encouraged our Harvard Department to really pursue that and our staff to really
[9:43] they pursue that because they claim they are responsible for it and in fact if we even
[9:47] did work on it, it sounded like it would be a problem because it's their infrastructure
[9:54] and we shouldn't be doing that, that's the way I understood it.
[9:59] I attended the County Water Resources Advisory Council meeting where we heard the update
[10:08] from the county to do the decal, doing the decal feasibility study.
[10:14] They have hired Corolo engineering to do the study.
[10:18] And Corolo has identified, originally identified 22 sites for decal for the county.
[10:25] And they narrowed it down to 12, and surprise, surprise, Moro Bay is ranked very high on that list.
[10:34] We had two sites, actually they did three different sizes of diesel in Moro Bay, like a small
[10:45] medium and large, and then they had an additional site, they called a sterile bay.
[10:52] And that is the dog beach area where Cuyukus's outfall is.
[10:58] And, yeah, that's the town hall, yeah, come to the town hall, all things waterfront,
[11:09] and you can, you know, the mayor and I will tell you what we know, and you can ask questions
[11:14] and give us suggestions, and we'd love to see you there.
[11:22] Yes, good evening. I also attended quite a few meetings, the IWMA, the planning commission
[11:28] meeting, the Harvard advisory board meeting, the waterfront master plan meeting.
[11:33] I like going to meetings because I learn a lot.
[11:36] No, I'm serious.
[11:37] I have a hard time sometimes in gathering all this information and the advisory boards which
[11:44] are vital part of our governmental structure here in Moral Bay gives me the guidance and
[11:51] the knowledge for myself to do a better job up here as your city council person.
[11:56] The other thing I want to convey here is the Friends of the Moral Bay Harbour Department,
[12:01] which is a 501-C-3 has just donated a couple more trash cans along the harbor walk leading
[12:09] up to Target Rock.
[12:12] They're the blue ones that you see over there by Coleman Park.
[12:15] We just ordered two more of them for the harbor department to help out with trash picked
[12:21] up over there.
[12:22] and then the other thing is we've just made a commitment to print the 2026
[12:30] tide books for Moral Bay. So those will be forthcoming here in about a month.
[12:36] And then the Friends of the Moral Bay Harbour Department is going to hold a
[12:39] movie night at Rosa's Landing between Rosa's Landing and the Libertine at
[12:44] night and it's going to be a free movie and it will be I think the same day as the
[12:52] the lighted boat parade at the month mistaken.
[12:54] So that would be a fun event to see a movie out there at the Embarcadero.
[13:01] So that's all I have.
[13:02] Welcome everyone.
[13:07] Thank you everyone.
[13:08] We did forget a couple other events that are coming up just to throw it out there.
[13:12] I know it was mentioned and I would encourage anyone to go to the Morbay Chamber website or
[13:17] visit Morbay that's got all the events listed with the downtown Trunker Treaty.
[13:21] We would forget if we didn't remind everybody about the witches' paddle.
[13:25] So that is on Saturday, October 25th.
[13:30] So that will be just before we meet again, so make sure you make it down there to participate
[13:33] or watch.
[13:35] With that, I will turn it over to City Manager Lucer.
[13:39] Thank you.
[13:39] Good evening, Mayor and Council and community.
[13:41] Just a couple of things tonight.
[13:44] We are continuing with the City Manager recruitment, moving forward, applications are being reviewed
[13:50] and interviews are scheduled for no mid-November on that.
[13:53] That, I did want to just briefly talk about last week we had a water main break from an outside contractor and that required the city to issue a precautionary water boil notice.
[14:07] We've had some comments about concerns, I guess, about people not getting information perhaps regarding that notice and I just wanted to briefly talk a little bit about two noticing opportunities.
[14:19] One is the reverse 911 system, and it's used to provide emergency information that is an opt-in system, and that can be found on the county website under public alerting, slow county public alerting, you can sign up for that with your cell phone, if you've got a landline, if those are still out there for some folks that sometimes comes automatically.
[14:42] Exactly.
[14:43] There's also a new alert system called alert slow, and that provides important information
[14:48] less significant usually than the reverse 911, such as severe weather, major highway closures,
[14:54] that sort of thing.
[14:55] And again, that can be found on the slow county website under public alerting.
[15:00] So you are not automatically signed up, but you can opt in. The city of Morbay is also investigating the potential of perhaps looking at our own alert system for city-only issues. And that water, that precautionary water boil notice did come down pretty quickly, additionally. Just also to bring to your attention. We're pretty excited. The Morbay fire department of the last few years has received approximately 100,000
[15:29] dollars for battery-powered extraction tools, also known as the Jaws of Life.
[15:35] And we were alerted earlier this week that the California Office of Traffic Safety will
[15:40] be featuring Moro Bay in their annual 2025 report regarding these grants.
[15:45] So that's nice for the City of Moro Bay.
[15:47] I am going to turn it over to Public Works Director Greg Qualik.
[15:51] He's going to interview a couple of new city staff to all of you.
[15:55] Thank you City Manager, Luke, or thank you Mayor, members of the City Council on the Moro
[16:00] I'm very pleased to invite up our new city engineer, Nate Stong.
[16:05] Nate Stong, if you could come up to the podium.
[16:07] And just by way of short introduction, Nate studied civil engineering at Cal Poly.
[16:12] He has over 20 years experience doing civil work.
[16:16] He's worked for the cities of Placerville, where he was city engineer for six years.
[16:20] He's also worked for Pismo Beach in the city of San Luis Obispo, as well as private entities.
[16:26] These Nate has a wealth of experience, I've learned quickly in the two weeks he's been here doing drainage work,
[16:33] creek work, transportation work, and the list goes on, so I'll just let Nate say a few words.
[16:41] Thanks, Greg, for that introduction, and a good evening, Mayor and members' council.
[16:46] My name is Nate Stong, and I'm super pleased to be excited to be here and an opportunity to work with the team at the City of Moral Bay.
[16:54] and leading the engineering division within public works,
[16:59] I've met each of the five staff in the division,
[17:02] and it's just a strong team that I've found so far in my two weeks.
[17:06] Looking at an extensive list of projects, very interesting projects,
[17:12] complicated value to the community,
[17:15] and I look forward to delivering projects.
[17:19] Again, I'm just so excited to be leading.
[17:24] A whole gamut of types of projects, flood control, a study of moral creek, and low lying
[17:31] areas, and things can be done there with the grant, Cal OES, I'm very excited to look
[17:37] at that one.
[17:38] Traffic and transportation issues, development review, working with developers on their projects
[17:45] and ensuring code compliance, and additions are satisfied, the FEMA side, floodplain mapping,
[17:52] And then I'm just on a general note, I see a lot of challenges coming in and typically try to treat those as opportunities so there's places we can have success my
[18:06] three minutes up.
[18:09] I think I'll leave it at that. I appreciate the opportunity.
[18:12] Thank you.
[18:13] Thank you, Nate, and next I will bring up Matt Evers, Matt Evers is our Utilities Project Manager.
[18:22] This is a position that the City Council created in this year's budget to handle the backlog of water and sewer projects that we have on the books.
[18:31] Matt studied, and you'll correct me if I'm wrong, ag systems at Cal Poly and also got his MBA from Cal Poly and went on to work for
[18:39] or Pappitch, I don't know the phone name of the business,
[18:43] but Pappitch, and they've actually done very good work
[18:46] for us in town, dating work.
[18:48] Matt lives in the city.
[18:49] He is the father of four children,
[18:52] so he has quite the family.
[18:53] I happen to meet them at Amorabe event
[18:55] before he had even applied for this job.
[18:58] So we're very excited to have him and Matt,
[19:00] I'll let you say a couple words.
[19:01] Yeah, evening mayor, members of council, public.
[19:05] Excited me on the team to be serving this community
[19:08] as Greg said my family lives here so I have vested interest in the success here
[19:13] and look forward to the growth and as Nate had said we have a great team there's
[19:18] a lot of projects to be built a lot of improvements to be made and I'm excited
[19:22] for it and my background on the contractor side knowing how important the
[19:28] project pre-planning specification development I think will help drive very
[19:33] very good, successful projects for the city.
[19:38] Thank you.
[19:42] Thank you both.
[19:43] Welcome to the team, we're glad to have you here.
[19:45] Thank you.
[19:46] Anything else, city manager, looker?
[19:49] No, thank you.
[19:50] And do we have any updates from any of the subcommittees?
[19:55] No.
[19:56] Thank you.
[19:58] With that, we will move into public comment.
[20:00] I do have a few speaker slips.
[20:02] I'm going to start with our 4-H Club first this evening
[20:05] and invite them up to the podium.
[20:06] You have three minutes.
[20:07] Good
[20:27] evening mayor, City Council and the great community of Morabe.
[20:31] My name is Case.
[20:34] Thank you for the opportunity to let us know about the 4-H.
[20:37] Us week was National 4-H week.
[20:41] We would like to let you know Morabe has a very active 4-H club with 30 members and 9 adult volunteers.
[20:50] Morabe 4-H club meeting meets the first Tuesday of the month 30 p.m.
[20:56] at the Mono Moral Grinch Hall,
[21:01] for each is the largest use of element in the program in the nation,
[21:07] for each motto, to make the best better.
[21:12] Did you know there are over, there are 60 million
[21:18] alumni and 4-H. Moral Bay 4-H Club currently has projects in leadership, sewing, cooking, garden,
[21:25] and beef, sheep, swimming, poultry, small pets, and animals, scrapbook, floral design,
[21:31] and mind dancing.
[21:35] 4-H welcomes youth ages from 5 to 19 years old, and what the 4-H's stand for are head,
[21:45] heart, hands, and health.
[21:48] You can email more of A4-H at more of A4-H Club at Yahoo.com for more information.
[21:54] Thank you members of the council.
[21:57] And I would ask if the club leader has anything she wants to add to that.
[22:02] And thank you, Tammy Haas, for leading this 4-H club.
[22:05] I've been a proud part of 4-H for over 30 years, so thank you all for being here.
[22:09] We appreciate it and
[22:17] they have homework to do with that.
[22:19] I will invite up Linda Winters.
[22:21] That's the last speaker slip I have.
[22:22] Public comment will be open to the general public after Ms. Winters.
[22:40] That is a tough act to follow.
[22:44] Good evening, Mayor, Council, City, Staff, and the Chiefs.
[22:49] I was originally going to only report about the Family Fund day where the Moral Bay Lions helped to serve almost 500 hot dogs.
[22:59] The Memorial Service for John Weiss and last night's Monday night dinner that returned to being held exclusively here in this city.
[23:12] building where we served 73 people attended and we served 97 meals.
[23:21] We did successfully beat the rainstorm by only a matter of minutes.
[23:27] When I got home in enough time to feed my cats and myself and I took a little power nap to be awakened by a tornado warning on my phone.
[23:38] My first reaction, who's scamming me?
[23:42] And then I realized it was real and that some of the folks that live in mobile homes were truly the most vulnerable.
[23:50] You might all know that I've been a long time advocate to the mobile home residents.
[23:56] A lot of them have my name and number and about half of them called me wanting to know what they should do.
[24:01] I will remind them all, stay calm, stay away from windows and have an emergency kit ready.
[24:11] I also reminded them this important info.
[24:16] The time to prepare for an emergency is before the emergency, not during the emergency,
[24:24] right, chief?
[24:29] But here's the good news.
[24:30] the creek didn't overflow because we also had flash flood warnings.
[24:35] That was another warning.
[24:37] My new roof didn't leak and it didn't blow off.
[24:42] I haven't had much sleep in this last 24 hours.
[24:48] So if you see me nodding off, please give me a gentle nudge.
[24:53] And I think that's all for now.
[24:55] I'll see you at the town hall meeting on the 19th.
[24:59] my teeth, if not before, thank you.
[25:03] Thank you, Linda, and thank you for that reminder.
[25:07] I think we're all a little roomy today after that all night long, and I would just do a shout out.
[25:11] I see our shift from our fire department here.
[25:14] Thank you all to our public safety police, fire and harbor.
[25:17] I know it keeps all of you up, so thank you for the job you do for us.
[25:22] Public comment is open for items not on the agenda.
[25:34] Council staff, I just come by every once in a while to tell you how much I appreciate
[25:38] your work. You guys are working very well together. You seem to respect one another. I think
[25:44] there's a variety of opinions up there. And staff, I couldn't say enough about staff as
[25:49] well, super happy with our staff right now. I just want to take about you all the time
[25:55] and I think you're doing a great job. Thank you.
[25:58] Hello
[26:07] everyone, Nicole Dorfman and I am here tonight representing React Alliance.
[26:13] We are a local grassroots nonprofit whose goal is to educate the public about the impacts
[26:22] of offshore wind energy and so in that vein I am here to share an event that we are having
[26:30] Next Saturday, October 25th, Shindig Hard Cider in Slow has graciously offered to host
[26:38] us for a wonderful evening of music with Dante, Marsh and the vibe setters and be in the
[26:44] hive.
[26:45] If you like to dance, if you like good music, please come out.
[26:48] There'll also be some burgers by the eat gas food truck and mini donuts by Sugar Lips.
[26:56] We'll have information table there, and I think it's just going to be a whole lot of fun.
[27:02] So I hope you can come out and join us, have a fun evening, and support a wonderful local
[27:08] cause.
[27:09] And speaking of React Alliance, I understand that there is some information that's come out
[27:15] about offshore wind.
[27:17] Our organization is very eager to know what it is.
[27:20] So we're looking forward to when the information can come public.
[27:27] Maybe the Council left there can give some information about that.
[27:32] But we so appreciate all your support and your attention.
[27:35] So thanks for all you do.
[27:49] Yes, it's a two o'clock, a tornado hit our house.
[27:52] Anyway, my name's Gary Johnson, a resident of Morro Bay.
[27:56] Welcome the mayor and the city council.
[27:58] So I want to talk a little about why do we need a services in Moro Bay, like the Fire
[28:04] Department, Police Department and other services, but I'd like to say recently we had a Moro
[28:09] Bay National Night Out sponsor in the Moro Bay Police in the families event was very exciting
[28:16] for all of us.
[28:17] I was so excited to see, I've been there many times, so many young people, babies and carriages
[28:23] and people, little kids two and five years old all the way up to us old people, or I would
[28:28] the old people, but me, anyway, I'm 88, so I'm old, I guess.
[28:32] Anyway, well, all that said, it's my opinion, from this event, I feel that there's several
[28:38] important groups, very important to our town.
[28:43] One is for 24-7, we've got the police department and fire department, the Harvard department,
[28:50] we've got the Coast Guard, we've got the ambulance services, and our pleasure for 24-7.
[28:55] You could be two in the morning because I can attest to that.
[29:00] So that's why we need these services.
[29:03] People come to me, why do you need these services in Morabay?
[29:06] Here's a small town.
[29:08] Well, I'm to explain into them what we go through.
[29:11] And it's an alayka, Yuka's, Cambria and Los Ososuits.
[29:15] So at any given events like in the voting, if you're kayaking, or if you're outside the
[29:21] rocks, swimming, etc., you made some type of service in medical assistance, or it may
[29:27] not be medical. So we have a residence of 10,000 people, okay? No. Been here 30 years,
[29:36] I kind of witnessed that we got maybe 15,000 or we might have 20,000. We could even have
[29:42] higher than that. So here we got services, I just mentioned, supporting 10,000 people.
[29:48] Now all of a sudden these five people services got to support 25,000, so any one of those 25,000 people that need help were going to service them.
[30:00] Most importantly, too, our taxpayers are paying for it in more of they. So, I think it's trying
[30:08] to make the non-residents, it's cost of this tax service, as I would say. And I'm not
[30:15] been an expert in this area, maybe they don't pay much or whatever. But my opinion, part
[30:21] of all this, I think that the parking fee, I need more information, because I've got friends
[30:29] that want to do the rocket. Don't do the rocket. I don't favor the one at the boat ramp
[30:36] because I go there all the time and I park my car and we look at the scenery and all
[30:41] that and have a good time. So anyway, we shouldn't tax. More of they should have an example.
[30:47] We should have a little stiffer put on our car. We don't pay any kind of parking fee. Thank
[30:53] you.
[30:58] Anyone else for public comment for items not on the agenda? Come forward, please.
[31:06] I'm Margaret Carmen, and I want to say thank you for having things like the 4-H can come here because did they just bring tears to your eyes, and I want to remember that head, heart, hands, and health should be our carpathic motto.
[31:21] And City Manager Lucca, I want to say it was really easy to sign up for reverse 911.
[31:27] I tried three times and could not do alert slow, so I probably need some help.
[31:31] But it was very easy to do reverse time one one and I'm sorry. I was five minutes late and if somebody mentioned that on October 22nd
[31:39] from 6 to 7 30 at the Nazarene
[31:43] Church in Moral Bay the
[31:46] Slow cog will have a meeting about the Moral Bay estuary climate resiliency plan and the last one they had
[31:53] All the cyclists were there and there were only myself and one other Moral Bay residents and we need you to come
[32:00] because it infects us, and we need to tell slow-cog what we would like, and not just one group of people.
[32:09] Okay, and this is what I was really going to get to talk about, too.
[32:13] I'm curious, and I mentioned this at the planning commission, but it was really kind of inappropriate,
[32:18] that the precautionary water boil notice, I'm just curious,
[32:23] If since it was another contractor, I heard it was this company hired another contractor and then all your city
[32:32] Staff time, you know, does that other company have to pay your staff time back because we talk about it is
[32:39] precious and we do pay for it and the other thing is
[32:42] Culligan closed down and didn't sell water for those days. Well, how do they go about getting reimbursed?
[32:50] So as a taxpayer, I'm just curious what happens when a contractor messes up our water and do they have to or is it just part of their contract that they don't have to do anything about it?
[33:02] And I'm going to just end with a happy note on my face about seeing those children. It was really wonderful. Thank you.
[33:13] Excuse me, Ms. Carmen. Could you tell us again at the date of that meeting?
[33:18] I didn't get that.
[33:20] Next Wednesday, October 22nd, from 6 to 730, but the Nazarene Church in Los
[33:29] Us on South Bay Boulevard. Thank you.
[33:39] Betty Winholz, I have mentioned this individually to a few people on staff and on
[33:46] council, but I think I want to say publicly that if you have not signed off on this
[33:53] this project at the Vets Hall that I hope that you won't until this staff is moved back up to the front.
[34:01] I really find it disconcerting that some staffs here and some staff isn't and I think it's unequal and I find that I don't like that.
[34:12] And so I'm hoping that you will put that in there before you sign off on it.
[34:17] If you've already signed off on it, then I think you need to do something about that and
[34:21] and get some more desks and nice chairs
[34:23] and bring your staff back up front.
[34:35] This will be pretty brief.
[34:36] I just wanted to clarify one of the points
[34:38] about the friends of the Morabe Harbor Department,
[34:41] the movie night in particular.
[34:42] It's actually planned to be on a Thursday
[34:45] before the boat parade.
[34:47] The second draw will actually have the Santa's house open.
[34:50] There's still a few loose ends.
[34:51] It's not totally cemented in,
[34:53] but we've gotten through a number of the big hurdles
[34:55] and we're super excited about that.
[34:57] We don't think we're gonna have bad Santa
[34:59] that got crossed off the list.
[35:00] maybe Elf but we're not sure Rudolph the red news right here. That's still to be determined. Thank you.
[35:08] Anyone else for public comment on items not on the agenda please come forward.
[35:19] I'm Katie Schlaught. I'm a writer and I wanted to come up and speak to you guys about the
[35:25] Memorial Elementary School. It was originally on the
[35:30] since sorry but since we skipped over it I just wanted to go ahead and give you guys a quick thanks
[35:35] for making that seriously and pursuing
[35:41] full district. Thank you guys for your hard work.
[35:50] Anyone else for public comment for items not on the agenda?
[35:54] A.G.P. are there any raised hands in the queue?
[35:57] Thank you, Marrowickson. There are currently no raised hands in the queue.
[36:01] With that, I will close public comment and bring it back to council.
[36:07] Any response on the, well, you know what?
[36:09] actually I can, there's a flyer in the back of the room regarding that town hall meeting
[36:14] if you can scan.
[36:15] It's got a UPC code on it for that climate resiliency update as well as tomorrow night
[36:21] on the P web agenda.
[36:23] SlowCog will be doing a presentation.
[36:24] I announced all that earlier and Moral Bay is currently working with SlowCog to host an
[36:30] event here tentatively looking at Wednesday, the October 29th of the Vets Hall if it's available.
[36:36] So we will keep you updated on that.
[36:40] And with that, we'll move in to consent agenda.
[36:46] And before we start that with Council's indulgence, I've been asked to poll item 6F from the
[36:53] agenda tonight.
[36:54] 6F was requested to be continued at the next meeting as per Chief Watkins request.
[37:02] and that was regarding a AB permit.
[37:06] I have council support to move that to the next item.
[37:10] Thank you very much.
[37:12] That I will open public comment on items
[37:16] on the consent agenda, less success.
[37:25] Betty Winholz, I want to speak to the last one.
[37:28] I think it's letter G with regard to Los Osos
[37:31] and investigating whether or not the city
[37:35] We should engage with districts in terms of our fire to services.
[37:42] And I see how that is an incredibly great advantage for Los Osos.
[37:47] I'm not seeing the advantage for the city of Morabay.
[37:51] One is do the to the distance and with that would do, I don't know if it's just a matter of supervision or what.
[37:57] And maybe that's part of your exploration.
[38:00] but it's curious to me and so I hope when you pass this you have some parameters on what you're looking at or you just looking at everything because there's not a lot there that gives the public a chance to respond to. Thank you.
[38:24] Anyone else for public comment for items on the consent agenda?
[38:29] AGP are there and he raised hands in the queue.
[38:32] Thank you, Mary Wicksom.
[38:33] There are currently no raised hands in the queue.
[38:36] Thank you.
[38:37] With that, I will close public comment on the consent agenda and bring it back to council.
[38:42] Does anyone wish to blow off start out?
[38:43] I'm going to pull 6G.
[38:45] Does anyone want to pull anything else?
[38:48] I'd like to just pull 6C per minute.
[38:51] I
[38:58] have a motion to approve the other items, please.
[39:01] I move that we approve item six items, all other items except for C&G and the one we eliminated,
[39:12] which was F.
[39:13] Second that.
[39:14] Thank you all in favor.
[39:16] Hi.
[39:16] Hi.
[39:20] Erie's 6C.
[39:22] Yeah.
[39:22] I just like to clarify reading the staff report, Chief McCrain.
[39:28] I mean, it looks like that you're requesting to purchase a new engine and pretty much we have $500,000 of it currently and that the remainder will be $250,000 and hopefully we'll be able to gather that within the next three years.
[39:47] I just like a little bit of an explanation of where you think those funds will be coming from.
[39:51] Yeah, thank you for the question.
[39:55] So every summer when we participate in a mutual aid system, responding to fires around
[40:00] the state, we get paid for our personnel time and we also get paid for our vehicle use
[40:07] on those incidents.
[40:08] And it's done to reimburse for the wear and tear on city vehicles that, you know, occurs
[40:15] on those incidents.
[40:16] And over the last two years, and then this summer as well, we've been able to take
[40:21] that money that's set aside for that vehicle depreciation from the number of
[40:25] fires that we've went on and put that into a separate account towards
[40:28] replacing the engine that primarily goes out on it.
[40:37] You probably don't go
[40:38] far. That's the next items you also.
[40:44] Any other questions on item 60? No we can
[40:48] wait and vote on that when we finish with the next one. That's okay with you
[40:51] guys. Thank you Chief McCrain. I pulled item 6G. I've had some comments from some
[40:57] members of the community as well as myself in regards to and I speak at this evening in regards
[41:03] to the potential proposal with Los Osos providing fire services.
[41:10] I have a lot of questions and a lot of concerns.
[41:15] Right now, moral base, we approved looking at opening station two because of the standards
[41:21] of cover and the desire to have a better response time.
[41:24] You're purchasing another fire engine, we're looking at county EMS, and now we're looking at potentially providing fire service to Lasso.
[41:31] So there's a lot on the plate there right now.
[41:35] A lot of the questions that I have that are concerning and others have shared is about pension carryovers that would come from potential employees from their reduction of the level of service potentially during that transition.
[41:48] if some of our senior staffing is there, depending on what staffing were to continue on.
[41:53] If we absorb the Cal Fire, County Fire employees, are we held to there if the long-term
[41:59] employees at their level pension that we are going to assume.
[42:05] I'm not sure how they get their fire tax money. If it's through a 2-18 vote, what happens
[42:11] at the contract goes away. So a lot of, and I know it's premature, but a lot of questions,
[42:16] lot of concerns and moving forward, I would, I guess like to ask if there's an opportunity
[42:26] because I see this as kind of a long-term project that potentially there's, and I hate
[42:33] to say this, subcommittee, or some sort of communication with a couple council members
[42:38] so that we have an opportunity to participate in what this looks like for the level of service
[42:44] for our community during the process, I just feel that knowing some of these other things
[42:49] like what's going on with the county EMS services that's been going on for several years
[42:55] and we weren't really perv2 until now when it's been going on for while I don't want that
[43:00] to happen with this project. So I guess I'd entertain some response to that.
[43:06] Okay, thank you for your questions. There's a lot to unpack there. So a little bit of background,
[43:12] I was approached by the General Manager for the loss of CSD and they wanted
[43:18] some information about options available to them for fire services. They're
[43:24] currently under contract with Cal Fire. The price of that has continued to go
[43:29] up and they wanted to explore other options. They wanted to see what their
[43:33] options were for standing up their own fire department again, potentially looking
[43:37] at exploring shared services with moral basins. We are so close that we worked
[43:42] closely together and then just to evaluate this cost and what the opportunities would be.
[43:48] So we've had some very high level discussions and at the high level it looked like there
[43:53] were some values to both agencies to make it worth exploring.
[43:58] What they're asking for is, for us to put a response back, they put a formal request
[44:04] to us to evaluate what opportunities are present there and what that would look like.
[44:10] High-level discussion would be that we would provide staffing to staff their fire station and their fire engines.
[44:17] They own the station, they own the equipment, we would be providing staffing.
[44:21] During that discussion it was that we would have to hire additional personnel to accomplish that because of the staffing level they would require.
[44:30] So there's a lot that we'll have to unpack and go through to determine long-term per's obligations.
[44:35] funding they would have to fund a front for recruitment and training and outfitting of the
[44:40] so at this point it's been a high level discussion there are some
[44:47] opportunities where with shared overhead it does present the opportunity maybe to fund some of the
[45:00] Government, exactly what their level of service that they're wanting, what their commitments are. But to devote a serious amount of staff time to respond to this, I wanted to present it to council. You know, a couple emails are a high level phone call. That's one thing but actually working into this and putting some effort into putting a response together. Council needs to weigh in and if they support me spending time on this. You know, based on the discussions we've had, I do feel like there are some opportunities
[45:29] for both cities. We do work closely together, we train closely together, that interoperability,
[45:35] having our personnel using the same equipment, same standard operating procedures and policies.
[45:41] There is some value to that. Having more personnel at the different stations allows for better
[45:48] coverage, move people around during times like in the summertime when we're busy. We have a larger
[45:53] full of people that we can staff stations and provide that mutual aid support and you know both
[46:00] of the communities are so closely ingrained yet we have a lot of our residents or our employees
[46:05] that live in Los Osos and vice versa so it just makes sense for that local control level but again
[46:12] I don't want to devote staff time to responding to this without council support.
[46:17] Thank you I guess that's a lot of what I'm concerned about because you have so many of these other
[46:21] things going on at the time and limited resources and we spent a lot of we, the city, you,
[46:27] your department as well as the police department and spent a lot of time looking at the potential
[46:31] of hardware merging and in the end it was an exercise to determine that path but a lot
[46:40] of time was invested into that to not utilize it.
[46:43] I'm concerned with all these other things going on and a lot of it for me is about protecting
[46:49] being on the level of service in our community, but also the funding, if they cancel the contract
[46:54] five years from now, where does that leave us with staffing that we've hired and things
[46:58] like that?
[46:59] So I just, again, I'm trying to make the point based on the other concerns that have come
[47:05] about with the EMS, the county level that I don't want to head down this path with the
[47:11] city spending a year, six months or a year working on this, that we're not part of what
[47:16] that process looks like because it does involve our citizens and that's our responsibility
[47:21] ultimately.
[47:22] Absolutely and that was my reason for bringing it to council.
[47:28] I think that's a good suggestion, the subcommittee, I don't think that's a bad idea.
[47:33] Yeah, perhaps we can follow up on that with the city manager and the chief and see if there's
[47:39] an opportunity so that there's more participation.
[47:43] I just, again, I'm gun shy after this whole thing with the county AMS and, you know, that's already happened. I don't want to do it again where we're getting information where even does a lot of time into it.
[47:58] Thank you for that chief.
[47:59] I think some sort of incremental approach is important with this, and I would presume
[48:08] that chief, you would bring it back to us if you hit a point of fatal flaw in the process.
[48:15] But one of my concerns and probably other council members' concerns is the amount of time
[48:20] and effort expended in totality, and if it's a direction that we don't, that we decide
[48:29] resources. So I fully support the idea of a subcommittee too. Normally, I don't like subcommittees.
[48:34] In this case, I think it would be have have utility. Thank you, Chief.
[48:42] Well, thank you
[48:42] with Council support. I'll circle back with the city manager and the fire chief and have them
[48:46] come back with what potentially could be some sort of option whenever that might look like to provide
[48:51] information and input during the process. Thank you. I move that we approve items.
[49:13] We will move into our first business item this evening and that will be an appointment to the advisory board for the citizens oversight finance advisory committee.
[49:25] and we want to have one applicant here at the seat.
[49:30] The other applicant who applied was unable to attend.
[49:35] So, Brandon,
[49:43] hang on one second.
[49:45] Since we're just for housekeeping, the City Attorney's Deck,
[49:49] do any public comment for an appointment?
[49:52] Because it's an agenda item I would take public comment.
[49:55] Perfect, just clarify.
[49:57] With that, I will open public comment on item 8A.
[50:01] A.G.P. are there any raised hands in the queue?
[50:04] Thank you, Mayor Wixam.
[50:05] There are currently no raised hands in the queue.
[50:07] Thank you.
[50:08] With that, I will close public comment and bring it back to Council.
[50:11] I have a mayor.
[50:12] May I ask of the Council just a question if we wanted to take a look at, you know, things
[50:18] you happen.
[50:19] This gentleman got sick.
[50:21] We were able to review his resume.
[50:24] I was just wondering if the council would be willing to maybe look at postponing this or
[50:33] other option if we want to explore that right now before we thank you. Sure. I'm not interested in postponing it because we have a joint
[50:40] CFEC meeting and we have two very qualified applicants and
[50:44] the conversation surrounding this item also is
[50:49] regarding
[50:51] changing the timeline on this as well as holding over the other application because we have two more openings in about 60 days or 90 days and we didn't want to have to start all over again so I would be interested in the other applicants application being held over but I will certainly I if I were to weigh in I would agree with you, especially since we have the similar situation with the planning commission and I think that would make that person feel left.
[51:20] you know like they didn't get a fair you know I just think to keep you know
[51:24] keep things consistent we should just unfortunately I'm sorry to hear that
[51:30] he's not well but I would tend to agree I think that we don't need to hold it
[51:37] over let's just look at the one day can see right now yeah I agree as well I think
[51:42] the fact that we've got the two open seats coming up January 31st
[51:47] Lins itself well to taking care of business tonight and then having that the second applicant tonight hold over to that to that next date
[51:56] Thank you. I appreciate that
[51:58] So that being said we have one applicant are you interested in?
[52:03] Reviewing that applicant or would you like to just okay? I see one yes, no
[52:08] Yeah, I'm I know yeah, I'm comfortable perhaps we can ask it's a four or once perhaps we can ask mr
[52:16] to come forward and provide a brief statement in regards to your application.
[52:24] Thank you, Mayor and Council.
[52:27] As you know, I'm already interested in how this city works, finances are minor in business
[52:34] with economics and I've read these CFAC reports as boring as they are.
[52:41] I'm excited to see maybe I can contribute to the analysis.
[52:44] You've had some fantastic people, some recent subcommittee reports there,
[52:47] or just amazing and if I can provide an opportunity
[52:52] to work with you, I'll be more happy to take care
[52:54] of this short term or however pleased to be appointed.
[52:58] Thank you.
[53:00] Thank you, Mr. Brannon.
[53:01] Wait, before you leave Mr. Brannon,
[53:03] any questions of Mr. Brannon?
[53:06] No.
[53:07] Nope, thank you, Mr. Brannon.
[53:08] I'm way appreciate you're applying.
[53:11] So we have some options this evening
[53:13] that were presented by staff
[53:14] regarding the open positions because we have three seats that would be opening on
[53:22] January 31st. The suggestion would be to make this opening vacancy a four-year
[53:30] term so that it would set off from the other two so we don't have three seats
[53:35] opening up at the same time and this applicant doesn't have to reapply in three
[53:39] months. So that would be an option there. Anyone comments?
[53:46] I like that option, Mayor.
[53:49] Can you repeat that? I'm sorry. Let me turn it over to the city clerk.
[53:54] Yeah, thank you, Mayor. The recommendation to avoid having three seats
[53:59] term out at one time was to extend this term for two more years so the term
[54:06] in January 31st, 2028. So it'd be just over a two-year term for the remainder of this term.
[54:15] And then we would have two seats available January 31st of 26 and two seats in 2027.
[54:22] That sounds like a good solution to me. So it's staggered so we don't have that with three
[54:27] openings. So where, pardon me, the reason that I asked is I wanted to be Mr. Brandon, if I may
[54:33] address you. I wanted to make sure that you were aware of how long the term was.
[54:39] Okay, great.
[54:43] That was one consideration and the second consideration then was to hold
[54:50] over this applicant if they are in rest and still holding up this seat that they would not need
[54:55] to reapply and the application would just move forward to the January openings with the two seats
[55:00] to open there. I agree. Okay. So with that I will ask for a motion.
[55:08] I approve. I move
[55:09] that we approve.
[55:13] Eight A, which is appointing Mr. Barry Brandon to the CFAC advisory board for
[55:22] two years.
[55:25] Oh, and that we're going to carry forward the prior applicant or the applicant
[55:32] that wasn't able to come tonight.
[55:35] Do I have a second?
[55:36] I'll second that please.
[55:38] That was difficult.
[55:40] Sorry, everybody.
[55:41] No, that was good.
[55:42] Thank you.
[55:42] All in favor.
[55:43] Aye, aye.
[55:44] Opposed?
[55:45] Motion carries.
[55:46] Mr. Brandon, thank you for joining us.
[55:48] And I also see our CFAC chair here this evening.
[55:51] Mr. Peck, thank you for joining us.
[55:52] We look forward to our joint meeting next week.
[55:55] And Mr. Brandon, you have a lot of homework.
[55:59] Thank you.
[55:59] And Mr. Brown, or excuse me, Mr. Jones, Michael Jones, sorry about that, it was like a sleep last night, definitely.
[56:10] Thank you for applying and we hope that you will hold your application over for our January openings.
[56:16] Thank you.
[56:18] Without a move on to item 8B and turn this over to our ICM and Finance Department.
[56:24] Thank you again. Good evening, Mayor and City Council.
[56:26] This is the subject of tonight's item 8B is adopt resolution number 5425 which revises the City of More Bay Community Grant Policy.
[56:38] Just briefly as background, the city has annually allocated grant funds to various community groups.
[56:43] Those funds have ranged from approximately $7,000 in fiscal year 2015-16 up to a total of 60,000 in fiscal year 223.
[56:54] This year, fiscal year 2526, the adopted budget includes $35,000 of grant funds to allocate
[57:02] from the general fund.
[57:04] These grants and funds are a mechanism by which the City Council and the City can assist
[57:10] non-profit agencies in providing director and direct services to the Morabe residents
[57:15] and community.
[57:16] In 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution 6719, which approved the Community Grants
[57:23] policy and addressed the types of activities and organizations that could apply and as
[57:29] well as the evaluation criteria and a number of guidelines for applicants to follow for
[57:36] submission of those requests.
[57:39] The policy documents and procedures that were outlined in resolution 67-19 have been used
[57:46] for the past five years and we have heard over those years, especially in recent years,
[57:51] that the application is unnecessarily repetitive and somewhat confusing and the overall process
[57:57] seems onerous. So we're bringing this item to you tonight to consider streamlining the
[58:02] process. We're asking you tonight to discuss and provide feedback on the revised policy
[58:07] document that's attached to the staff report, the potential priority projects or use of funds,
[58:13] and to also discuss the review and approval process for the award of grant funds. And then
[58:18] consider whether you would like to set a maximum funding level per application.
[58:23] In the staff report, we then go on to provide you, if you do make changes tonight, we'll
[58:28] go ahead and advertise the grant period and follow through, awarding the grants potentially
[58:35] at the December 9th meeting, and that would mean the successful applicants would have about
[58:40] six or seven months to complete their awarded projects a little bit shorter time than typical.
[58:46] Just to conclude, we believe that this revised policy will improve the city's effectiveness
[58:53] with this program and recommend that you consider adopting Resolution 54-25.
[59:00] I'm having to answer any questions, but we've really got two experts here with us tonight
[59:05] that have worked with us policy for a number of years at City Clerk, Dennis Swanson, and
[59:09] our finance director, Emily Conrad, and I'll turn it back to you, Mayor.
[59:12] Thank you very much. Ms. Looker, questions for staff? Council Member Loughey, questions?
[59:21] The one question, Finance Director Emily Comrade, is do you actually review all the applicants
[59:33] and then recommend the awards right now currently, if I may ask, or is do you just basically
[59:42] you do like an expel spread sheet of all the people that apply and then send it to our
[59:47] way. How's that handled please?
[59:51] Thank you. I'm going to need to
[1:00:00] So correct me if I'm incorrect, but I believe we just compile them for city council's review or subcommittee of city council for their review and selection. If I may, mayor, can I help out with that since I've been a part of the process. So councilmember Lafay, the last couple years. I was assisted with two members of CFAC. This last year it was Jean Johnson and Brian Dwarfman.
[1:00:28] and we went through, I believe it was 16 applications that were submitted for a total of $60,000 in award money, and that's how we were doing it, and we kind of divvied up the funds and awarded the funds, and then it was brought to full council that helps.
[1:00:48] No, I did. I remember the two meetings. I went to both CFAC and the city council.
[1:00:54] So truthfully, they were very laborious to listen to.
[1:01:00] If we're even considering, in my opinion, awarding any grants to any nonprofits,
[1:01:07] it has to be handled a different way as far as I'm concerned.
[1:01:10] I'm not sure what that way is, but-
[1:01:12] Well, just two questions, first one, thank you.
[1:01:15] Thank you.
[1:01:16] I guess I'll ask Ms. Swanson, because I don't think Ms. Conrad is here in 2013-2014.
[1:01:23] So that's when this program started and the money from that at that time it was we got this note that it was $73,000 and that was all from the general fund at that time.
[1:01:41] I believe so at that time there was no formal policy in place so during the budget process on profit agencies that were aware that the city might be awarding some funds would be listed and the council would divvy up them a little bit of money that was available it was to 7 to 9,000 range.
[1:02:05] And that had gone on for a few years and then they determined it would be better to make a policy and have a process where all non-profits have an opportunity to apply for and be considered to grant funds and fund projects that will fit the community.
[1:02:21] And then 73,000 is quite a bit more than in the subsequent years and so it would not must have been like a windfall year or something.
[1:02:30] I believe that was when ARPA funds were available, which would, you know, increase the amount available for about three years.
[1:02:36] Oh, okay. All right, thank you.
[1:02:39] And I want to make sure you heard that I spoke clearly in the $7,000 to $9,000 range, not $79.
[1:02:47] So in the early years, it was a very small amount that was available for a time.
[1:02:51] Well, I mean, this one year, this particular year, 13 and 14 was $73,000.
[1:02:58] So in that year, $58,000 of that amount was paid to the Morabe tourism bureau.
[1:03:06] So I think there was an arrangement for a one-time payment there, so only $15,000 of grants
[1:03:12] were awarded to non-profit.
[1:03:14] Okay.
[1:03:14] Thank you.
[1:03:16] Yeah.
[1:03:17] Just for clarification, that would have been before ARPA funds, and I believe it was when
[1:03:21] the city was paying for the tourism to be open, the tourism bureau was separate.
[1:03:29] Go ahead, Council Member, if you have any questions.
[1:03:36] I think what my biggest question is is having done this, I agree, Council Member Lafay.
[1:03:44] It was a very cumbersome project for us.
[1:03:48] And it oftentimes, you know, can be more subjective because we weren't getting a lot of the quantified and qualified things that we needed from, I think, the applicants.
[1:04:03] And that made it more complicated, and in fact, I think it possibly would have eliminated some had we asked for more details, I think.
[1:04:15] I appreciate this scoring rubric, rubric.
[1:04:20] We didn't have this when we were going through the process, and
[1:04:25] the only thing that I would ask is that did staff go through and
[1:04:31] compare the rubric with the application, because it would just be to me it would make sense that it would allow for ease that the applicant would be filling out the same things.
[1:04:45] And we would just, you know, go through our list and make sure that we got the answers that we needed or if we needed more information or something was missing, then we can kind of, you know, disqualify or qualify was that considered because I noticed there are discrepancies.
[1:05:01] It's really hard to follow between the two and if that was considered or if we could consider doing that.
[1:05:07] If that makes sense, that was the intent was to ensure the questions led them to having
[1:05:18] a successful application and scored by the rubric and also they would be provided with
[1:05:22] the scoring rubric so they would know what they were being judged against.
[1:05:27] Okay, thank you.
[1:05:28] I did not know that we were going to be supplying them with rubric so that's great.
[1:05:33] Thank you.
[1:05:33] because I did question that as I was going through everything.
[1:05:39] The other question that I did have was what you were referring to in the collaborative
[1:05:46] requests area that I think it's down lower on the form.
[1:05:53] And were you meaning, because that's confusing to me.
[1:05:56] So I guess I want to ask the question, does that, were you meaning two nonprofits working
[1:06:00] together so they were, was that what you were referring to?
[1:06:04] Any directives to what you're looking at?
[1:06:06] Yeah, let me get it right on the
[1:06:22] application form.
[1:06:30] Yes, item F and it reads, if a collaborative request please provide a description of prior
[1:06:34] collaboration activities and proposed responsibilities of collaborative members.
[1:06:38] Yes,
[1:06:42] I would just comment that while that has not happened it could be that two nonprofits
[1:06:49] and
[1:06:53] the other one that I had was that if the community grant funding was used for travel because travel and expenses is mentioned on the application form, this was also something that I found, you know, if you're paying for the travel and expenses, you know, how is that going to benefit, you know, a larger group.
[1:07:16] So to me, that was maybe more applicable to an individual, so maybe fewer people would benefit from that.
[1:07:24] So I was a little confused about that part, and then there was also a mention about events, too.
[1:07:31] And so I just wanted to put those out there.
[1:07:36] That events was mentioned in an area, and I did not know if this was being used for that or not.
[1:07:45] So, I was just a question I had.
[1:07:51] I don't have any questions.
[1:07:54] Thank you.
[1:07:55] Oh, yeah.
[1:07:56] I just wanted to know when it became.
[1:07:58] When it was see fact that was.
[1:08:02] You know, going through this.
[1:08:03] Was it always that way?
[1:08:07] My recollection is that some years.
[1:08:11] The council subcommittee led a community,
[1:08:13] a group of community members not affiliated with the non-profits, of course.
[1:08:17] and they did a group review and then brought a recommendation to Council and more recently maybe the last two or three years it's been
[1:08:25] Consolease on to the seat back along with two seat back members that did that internal or pre review prior to Council
[1:08:32] Right. Thank you. Any other questions but that I will open public comment on this item
[1:08:47] Good evening Council Mayor my name is Dean Allen Quest. I am the CEO for the Morabay Chamber of Commerce
[1:08:55] I appreciate the city's commitment to accountability, but we have concerns about how these policies
[1:09:00] changes will affect the organizations doing frontline work in Moral Bay.
[1:09:06] I acknowledge why these policies exist last year the city received 16 grant applications
[1:09:11] requesting $114,000 against a $60,000 available funding.
[1:09:17] We support accountability and proper documentation of how public funds are used.
[1:09:22] Something to consider, these changes disproportionately burden smaller organizations in our community, the ones often run by one or two part-time staff members doing the most direct work with various populations.
[1:09:37] The enhanced documentation requirements, detailed expense tracking, June 30th spending deadline, and July 31st reporting deadline create a significant administrative load for our smaller nonprofit operations.
[1:09:50] that are operating on smaller budgets, the staff time required to manage these compliance
[1:09:56] requirements can exceed the value of the grant itself.
[1:10:00] For example, Monday, the Chamber hosted a nonprofit roundtable, and we had 17 nonprofits
[1:10:09] in the community attend.
[1:10:11] One of the larger nonprofits in our county, which will remain nameless, said they spent more
[1:10:17] more money than they received due to the laborious requirements that were needed for these grants.
[1:10:26] Asking organizations with limited capacity to meet the same administrative standards
[1:10:31] as larger nonprofits with full-time finance staff is not equitable.
[1:10:37] We've reviewed the scoring rubric you'll use to evaluate applications.
[1:10:40] It's well designed but it has an implicit bias that concerns us.
[1:10:44] look at the assessment evaluation category.
[1:10:47] It requires clear picture of how data will be collected
[1:10:50] to demonstrate the degree to which outcomes are met.
[1:10:54] That language assumes established systems
[1:10:56] and sophisticated infrastructures.
[1:10:59] Many grassroots organizations excel at delivering services,
[1:11:03] but lack the capacity to build data collection systems.
[1:11:07] For example, a food bank serving 100 families monthly
[1:11:12] might score poorly on this evaluation
[1:11:14] Despite an obvious and measurable impact, this tool will systematically disadvantage the organizations that may be most responsive to immediate local needs, but lack the infrastructure of established agencies.
[1:11:29] So this was the second roundtable we've had with our nonprofits.
[1:11:34] Many of these nonprofits are run by one, maybe two individuals, and a number of volunteers.
[1:11:41] So this does put an undue burden on their staff, whether they have the ability or
[1:11:49] the education to even do some of the things that are required.
[1:11:54] Thank you.
[1:12:05] Betty, when holds again, Morabe.
[1:12:08] On your first page on the very first sentence, it says the City of Morabe is a full
[1:12:13] service city providing police, fire protection, public works, harbor, recreation, and community
[1:12:19] development. Where is the word parks? I think the word parks needs to be in there.
[1:12:24] That's something that we're very proud of and it's one of our major assets and that people
[1:12:30] both locally and outside enjoy. So I'd encourage you to add that. I would like to agree with
[1:12:37] the previous speaker that this has been and to some extent still is a laborious process.
[1:12:45] It's so formal, you know, I think back to when Neil Farrell who works on the Stereo Bay
[1:12:51] News, he and three other people got together back in the early 1990s and said, let's put
[1:12:57] some murals up around Moro Bay.
[1:12:59] And it was like four volunteers and they worked it and they came to the city and they asked
[1:13:04] for a little bit of money.
[1:13:06] How would that fit in something like this today?
[1:13:09] I think this is overly still burdensome to some extent.
[1:13:13] It's very formal.
[1:13:15] I don't know that it needs to be this formal.
[1:13:17] I think a lot of it's cleaned up when you look at attachment A, and they've taken out
[1:13:23] of a lot of stuff.
[1:13:24] But I don't know if attachment one, the application itself, is new or old, and it's just
[1:13:32] And in some places, it actually asks the same question in two different ways as was stated earlier.
[1:13:39] So, and for me, the Rubik also has built in bias because it's subjective.
[1:13:48] Is this an exemplary project based on what?
[1:13:52] And so, I know you need to have something, I don't know if this is it, and
[1:13:57] And it's a little bit too much for me and so I encourage you to go back to the drawing board or at least pair it down somewhat.
[1:14:05] The application's five pages long. That's crazy.
[1:14:12] Anyone else for public comment on this item?
[1:14:15] A.G.P. Are there any raised hands in the queue?
[1:14:17] No, Madam Mayor, there are no raised hands in the queue.
[1:14:19] Thank you with that. I will close public comment and bring it back to council.
[1:14:23] Any other questions before we go into the.
[1:14:26] I will start down on my right, Council Member Lafay.
[1:14:30] Well, having not started to nonprofits here in Moral Bay and having heard what I just, you know, tried to read here, I think this whole policy needs to be scrapped.
[1:14:43] I am not in favor of even doing a grant policy this year as far as I'm concerned. Until it becomes more simplified, I agree with the last speaker.
[1:14:53] here.
[1:15:00] The viable project should be done, not so much like we're doing it right now, but to be very
[1:15:07] honest with you, I'm not a favor of continuing this program this year.
[1:15:15] I have no comments
[1:15:16] right now.
[1:15:18] Mr. Pro Tem, comments?
[1:15:22] Yeah. Council Member Lefei, I had thought along the same lines, but felt that maybe that
[1:15:30] That would be a different discussion.
[1:15:32] So it's interesting to hear that from you as it, you know, we have dwindling money.
[1:15:40] We went from 60,000 to 35,000.
[1:15:44] And my challenge with this is you have a few reoccurring submissions.
[1:15:51] And so if you get multiple reoccurring submissions, how are we going to then accommodate for that?
[1:15:59] Are we going to say that, you know, we rotate that around?
[1:16:02] I just, I think there is further discussion to be had.
[1:16:07] I also felt that community benefit, you know, we look at, I know that we've had submissions
[1:16:14] where, you know, there was one person being brought in to, you know, conduct a speaking engagement
[1:16:24] to we get high schoolers maybe sent to Hawaii to Moral Bay in Bloom, where we know that there is a large benefit to what they do in terms of the greater community who had impacts.
[1:16:40] So, that becomes a challenge determining what is that community impact, which is to me the criteria that we want to be looking at, but then how do you measure that?
[1:16:58] So, say by the sea productions, for example, if we're getting lighting or seating for them, by the sea productions could say, here's the estimate.
[1:17:07] this is and cost it out get an estimate and they could say we do I don't know 25
[1:17:13] performances a year and 50 people come and we so we could have a really good
[1:17:19] metric of you know the return on what we're giving awarding them so again to
[1:17:28] one of our speakers comments yeah is this getting too laborious for what we're
[1:17:34] we're trying to achieve with this grant awarding.
[1:17:39] So those are my comments right now.
[1:17:43] Council member Eccles.
[1:17:45] Thank you Madam Mayor.
[1:17:47] First I wanna thank staff for doing the good work
[1:17:49] on the revision of the policy.
[1:17:54] I run a 501C3
[1:17:56] and I've been on both sides of the grant equation.
[1:18:00] I've served on grant review committees as well.
[1:18:04] Again, the work that staff did on this is really a high level for, I would say, grants of maybe $50 to $100,000 and above.
[1:18:15] So staff provided us with an option for best practices.
[1:18:21] That said, it also frustrates me that staff resources were used on this.
[1:18:29] I feel similar sentiment to Council Member Lafay.
[1:18:32] Okay, I think this is a well-intentioned program, but honestly, I feel it's not something
[1:18:39] that the city should be doing at all, particularly with general funds, because what happens
[1:18:44] is these are taxpayer dollars that are in the city coffers, and they're designed to provide
[1:18:53] for the essential services that one of our public speakers mentioned, public safety streets,
[1:18:58] rates, infrastructure, facilities, parks, and I don't think that general fund dollars should be redistributed as gifts based on really the subjective notions of five individuals.
[1:19:13] I think those general fund dollars should stay in the general fund and be spent on city services for what they're meant for.
[1:19:19] I
[1:19:23] made a few notes, yeah, and I'll just conclude by saying, the CEO of the Chamber of Commerce
[1:19:30] made an excellent point that the staff time on the recipient can exceed the value of the
[1:19:38] grant received and in looking at this process, I would say that's a factual statement, but
[1:19:44] that's only half the equation.
[1:19:45] The other half is the staff time and effort on the city's behalf, the process, the accounting, and then the council time.
[1:19:56] So I, at this point, and I think it's something that can be addressed, that will need to address down the road, maybe simplifying the processes was done before on individual basis.
[1:20:06] But for tonight, I would love for us to move down the direction of just rescinding the original resolution, 6-7-19, and then taking it down the road as Councilmember LaFace stated as well. Thank you.
[1:20:24] Thank you, Councilmembers.
[1:20:27] I mean, I want to start out by saying that the three years coming up that I've been up on the
[1:20:33] Dias and been a part of this, all the nonprofits are worthy of our support.
[1:20:39] And so it is always difficult when you choose the ones and not the others.
[1:20:44] And that in itself is always a little unsettling.
[1:20:49] I mean, we're fortunate that there are a lot of service clubs that are very supportive
[1:20:55] of the fundraising and provide a lot of funding for a lot of these organizations.
[1:21:00] And I know, I think we all know during these challenging times financially that all the
[1:21:05] nonprofits are looking for whatever support they can get.
[1:21:09] That means that $35,000, when we spend an hour up here deliberating and we're talking
[1:21:15] in about multi-million dollar budgets and infrastructure projects at use of our time in productivity, I would rather, and I agree with, I think, most of the sentiment up here that I would be interested in pausing this, rescinding it and re-evaluating what it would look like we have as was alluded to in kind requests that come to us, we had one that was made and we haven't responded back yet.
[1:21:44] that we had the one with the murals with Mr. Farrell where they did that.
[1:21:48] They're in kind request that we support through the recreation department on fee reductions and permit waivers,
[1:21:56] or where our community services organizations, whether it be the volunteers at the police,
[1:22:02] or somewhere partner up and help with nonprofits and things.
[1:22:06] Looking at partnerships, how the city can perhaps we can support some of these nonprofits,
[1:22:11] but through a partnership with them instead of doing this whole process picking and choosing.
[1:22:17] I mean, yes, you are still to a point.
[1:22:19] You would want some criteria of how that partnership with that looks like.
[1:22:23] And I think that those are things that I know are coming back to us.
[1:22:27] I would look for a head nod from the city managers for as events, policies,
[1:22:31] and economic development, which are both coming back to us.
[1:22:34] And it seems like this is something that could fit within those two conversations.
[1:22:39] I don't want us to just do a way and I agree with the taxpayer's dollars, but I also feel
[1:22:45] have an opportunity to help support these organizations, especially those in our community.
[1:22:51] And even the county ones that we've supported are all worthy and some, but I think we get
[1:22:59] approach it maybe in a different way that might be less cumbersome than this process and
[1:23:06] and still allow us to participate in supporting some of those.
[1:23:09] So, my hope out of this is that in those two conversations with economic development and event policies, we can revisit these.
[1:23:19] The Chair will be willing to entertain a motion.
[1:23:23] And with the Chair's indulgence, I'll check with the city attorney.
[1:23:28] Is the language proper and just saying to rescind if I move to rescind resolution number six, seven, dash one, nine.
[1:23:39] I'm not sure how the city has historically done that and whether the clerk would have a preference on making sure that it's clear in the record, that the resolution that would be rescinded has been rescinded so we can definitely adopt the resolution to rescind the resolution or I think it's also appropriate to just do it by motion and have it reflected in the minutes but I want to be cognizant of maybe historical practices
[1:24:04] cases or just so we don't have this outlier.
[1:24:07] In this case, the motion makes sense because we're not amending the policy which is simply
[1:24:13] resending for me.
[1:24:15] Thank you.
[1:24:16] I appreciate it.
[1:24:17] Given the guidance that I just received, I move that the Morabase City Council rescind
[1:24:23] resolution number 67-19.
[1:24:26] I'll second that.
[1:24:27] Thank you.
[1:24:28] Voice vote all in favour?
[1:24:29] Aye.
[1:24:31] Opposed?
[1:24:31] Motion carries.
[1:24:32] thank you.
[1:24:35] Being on to item 8c, short-term rental ordinance implementation, quarterly update.
[1:24:43] Good evening, Mayor and Council. I'm Mayor Lansingwell of your committee development director
[1:24:47] and I have a PowerPoint presentation here. AGP could pull it up.
[1:24:53] Thank you, AGP.
[1:24:55] So when the committee development department started our implementation and enforcement
[1:25:00] of the short-term rental ordinance, I committed to providing quarterly updates to the City Council.
[1:25:04] I'm pleased this evening to provide the third quarterly update of the year.
[1:25:10] This has been a real collaborative effort with our planning division, building division,
[1:25:15] co-enforcement, finance department, city manager, city attorney, and I'm really pleased
[1:25:19] to be able to highlight our accomplishments today with implementing and enforcing the
[1:25:25] short-term rental ordinance.
[1:25:28] I'll briefly go over the background that I believe the council is fairly familiar with already.
[1:25:33] So the current version of the short-term rental ordinance was enacted in September of 2021.
[1:25:40] In the beginning of this year, we initiated what we've been calling an audit of all of the existing
[1:25:47] STRs to get them all into compliance and to issue short-term rental permits.
[1:25:55] And our last quarterly update in June, the council did authorize issuing new STR permits for
[1:26:00] commercial property, properties only.
[1:26:03] So, so far with this annual audit process,
[1:26:05] we've only been issuing an STR renewal permits,
[1:26:09] but in June council authorized the department
[1:26:11] to begin issuing new STR permits
[1:26:13] for commercialized-owned properties.
[1:26:15] We haven't received any viable applications yet
[1:26:18] for a new STR on a commercialized-owned property.
[1:26:22] We received some interest from landowners.
[1:26:25] However, the properties for various reasons
[1:26:27] were not eligible to be used as short-term rentals.
[1:26:30] so we weren't able to issue those STR permits.
[1:26:34] And in August of this year, we initiated our proactive
[1:26:38] code enforcement efforts on the STR ordinance,
[1:26:41] so working with a company called Decker,
[1:26:44] they have a web service called Rental Skate,
[1:26:48] that allows city staff to identify all of the short
[1:26:51] credentials that are advertising on the various online hosting
[1:26:54] platforms.
[1:26:55] We compare those records to our permitting records.
[1:26:58] and then if we identify illegally operating SCRs we issue cease and assist orders and take action to shut them down.
[1:27:10] So here are the numbers outlined in the staff report just letting the council and public know where we are so far this year with our STR renewal permits.
[1:27:20] So looking at the column on the right hand side for October, the current update.
[1:27:25] So we've identified 251 properties that at some point in time have had a business license or a TOT account for a short-term rental.
[1:27:36] We call those our total known on record short-term rental.
[1:27:40] So that's what we start with.
[1:27:42] Through this year's process, we've closed 86 of those for various reasons.
[1:27:48] Many of them, we send out a notice letting them know that they need to apply for a short-term rental permit.
[1:27:55] and inspection and meet all the requirements of the ordinance then we hear back say they're not
[1:28:00] interested in continuing to operate and so they close out and we have others that have just
[1:28:07] the sunsetted out. Additionally we've received five applications that were not eligible for renewal
[1:28:14] for various reasons and we denied those applications. That leads us or results in 160 will be called
[1:28:21] potentially active short-term rentals and kind of breaking those down. So, so far this year,
[1:28:29] we've issued 86 STR renewal permits. There's 45 currently in process, so those are ones where we
[1:28:35] they've applied. We've started reviewing them and they, you know, some of them just still need an
[1:28:40] inspection to be completed or we're still verifying that they met the minimum TOT requirement,
[1:28:46] verifying that they may all have required requirements before we can issue that permit.
[1:28:50] And the third category here is STR renewal permits that have not started at 27.
[1:28:56] These are ones where simply they haven't received our letter yet to start the process.
[1:29:00] Because we time these renewal letters with the current business license and
[1:29:05] those all expire on a monthly, at the end of the month, each month, throughout the year.
[1:29:10] So we still have a couple more rounds of letters to send out to start renewals on those 27.
[1:29:16] And then there's an additional two STR permits that we've denied, and those have been appealed, and they're appending appeal hearings or settlement agreements.
[1:29:30] So the big question that comes up is we are all aware of the cap of 175 full home, residential, short-term rentals.
[1:29:39] So where are we relative to that 175 cap?
[1:29:42] At the last update in June, I reported that there were currently 137 potential full home residential SCRs that are permitted and that number is now down to
[1:30:00] Potential commercial zone, short-term rentals and 16 residential home shares, and of course, the commercial and STRs and the home shares are not subject to the 175 cap.
[1:30:13] Here's a map showing all of the short-term rentals that were listed out on the previous slide. Of course, it's not easy to read at this scale, but these maps are attached to the staff report and available for the public and council to review. They are color-coded with the orange dots representing the short-term rental
[1:30:32] permits that are in process, the green ones representing the 86 issued SCR permits and
[1:30:37] yellow dots are the ones the 27 that haven't started yet and then the red are the ones
[1:30:41] that have been closed or denied. And the circle around the dots on the left represents the 175
[1:30:47] foot buffer requirement.
[1:30:53] As I mentioned beginning in August of this year the city started our
[1:30:59] proactive code enforcement efforts to close down illegally operating short-term rentals using
[1:31:04] Decor's rental skate. We've issued a season assist orders to 15 properties so far.
[1:31:14] Again, these are ones that are advertising as STRs, but they don't have the required permits.
[1:31:21] I'm working with a number of property owners. There's so many different variations and
[1:31:25] different situations that we need to sort through. Some of these STRs do have a path to compliance,
[1:31:31] other's have no pass to compliance.
[1:31:38] As I outlined in the staff report, there is a option for the council to direct staff to bring back an ordinance to increase the fines for short term rentals.
[1:31:49] I do what I mentioned like we've talked about a previous council meetings.
[1:31:53] Our goal when imposing fines is to achieve compliance. Compliance is always our goal. We're not looking to penalize or collect revenue.
[1:32:00] it's all about using fines as a tool to get short-term rentals into compliance,
[1:32:05] whether that means shutting down or coming in and getting the required permits.
[1:32:09] Our current citation penalty structure and the municipal code is established
[1:32:15] per state law and the way it works is after we issue a cease and assist order,
[1:32:20] giving the time frame to achieve compliance if that compliance is not achieved
[1:32:24] by the deadline, will issue a $100 citation for the first violation, $200 citation for the second violation and a $500 citation for the third violation if those are within a one year time period.
[1:32:37] Again, those amounts are prescribed by state law, however, another state law went into effect a few years ago, SB 60, which does authorize cities to increase the penalties for short-term rentals that do not comply with local short-term rental ordinances.
[1:32:52] There are some limitations on those penalties so they have to be based on a
[1:32:59] demonstrated health and safety issue and it can't be for an initial failure to
[1:33:06] obtain permits.
[1:33:12] And so just kind of wrapping up the presentation here, there are a
[1:33:14] few decision points where the council may want to provide staff a direction. The
[1:33:17] first is on that question of whether council would like to direct staff to come
[1:33:22] I'm back with an ordinance to increase the amount of citations per SB 60 additionally as we're wrapping up our 2025 audit year.
[1:33:32] This is a good time for Council to start thinking and possibly provide direction to staff on the question of do we want to allow a new residential SCR permits to be issued recognizing that at this point.
[1:33:46] My staff feels confident in telling the council and public that we are well below that 175 cap on the full-hole residential
[1:33:54] STRs and there are about a hundred and I believe 86 properties on the wait list
[1:33:58] Some of which have been waiting on the wait list for quite some time now and just waiting for an opportunity to
[1:34:04] Get a permit and legally operate an STR and so this should be a good time for council
[1:34:10] Maybe start a discussion on whether to be interest in releasing some properties off off the wait list
[1:34:15] at the end of the year.
[1:34:17] And then as part of that discussion,
[1:34:19] there is an important distinction between a home share
[1:34:21] and a full home rental.
[1:34:24] So another option could be directing staff to go ahead
[1:34:28] and issue new STR permits but for home shares only
[1:34:31] as the home shares tend to have lesser neighborhood impacts
[1:34:34] compared to the full home rentals.
[1:34:35] And also the home shares aren't subject
[1:34:37] to that 175 cap.
[1:34:40] And that concludes staff's presentation
[1:34:42] and available for questions.
[1:34:43] questions. Thank you, Mr. Singh-Walt. Questions? I'll start on my left, our pro-10. Questions?
[1:34:53] Thank you, Mayor. I was curious about how many, let's see,
[1:35:03] have we gone through and evaluated
[1:35:05] already those 186 that are on there? Do you know if there are some that would not be viable?
[1:35:15] Yeah, that's that's a great question if HEP could just pull up the PowerPoint presentation again.
[1:35:21] So here's those maps and the one on the left you see the red radius the the buffer around all
[1:35:28] of the SCR dots on the map so that represents the 175 but buffer I don't have the wait lists
[1:35:35] overlaid on this but you can see there are very high concentrations of short-term rentals
[1:35:40] in certain areas, you know, particularly around the beach track area.
[1:35:45] So for a property to get off the wait list and get an SCR permit to operate as a new
[1:35:50] STR, they would have to comply with the 175-foot buffer requirement.
[1:35:55] The reason why we have so many overlapping concentrated STRs on this map is these were all grandfathered
[1:36:00] in and the ordinance specifically exempted these grandfathered STRs from the buffer requirement,
[1:36:05] but a new STR would have to meet the buffer requirement.
[1:36:07] So you could see, yet if we overlay the wait list on here that many, many, I imagine well more than half of the wait list properties would be buffered out.
[1:36:19] I really appreciate putting up that slide again, I think it's great for the community and for us to see that visually, so thank you for that.
[1:36:30] Thank you.
[1:36:31] My question for you, Director, is on the enforcement issue,
[1:36:36] what are some of the challenges that you've run into?
[1:36:39] Is there, once someone figures out
[1:36:43] that they're operating illegally,
[1:36:45] is there a high rate of recidivism,
[1:36:48] or just what's been our experience in terms of enforcement?
[1:36:54] So, it's been mixed, again, every situation
[1:36:58] and is that requiring a lot of research.
[1:37:02] You know, for example, through our decade,
[1:37:05] the service that we use,
[1:37:07] we're able to see historic bookings
[1:37:10] and we're able to clearly show that, you know,
[1:37:12] you've had bookings during these time frames
[1:37:15] and we also have reviews that are cataloged by a decker
[1:37:19] that we can, those are actually the most easily
[1:37:23] enforceable, verifiable information that we have.
[1:37:28] However, sometimes the SCR operators will dispute that information, and so we have to review
[1:37:33] their records.
[1:37:34] They'll provide us copies of text messages and emails from Airbnb and BRBGO.
[1:37:40] So just sort it through all of that information before you were able to make a final decision
[1:37:45] and have a case that we can actually prosecute if we take it to a hearing officer.
[1:37:49] That just requires a lot of work.
[1:37:51] the other situation that I alluded to in the staff report is of course
[1:37:56] short-term rental is defined as a property renting to guests for stays of
[1:38:01] less than 30 days so we'll have short-term rentals once they receive our
[1:38:05] cease and assist order they will change their ad to advertise a minimum of 30 days
[1:38:10] which is in compliance with the ordinance but that requires a lot of follow-up and
[1:38:14] staff time to make sure that you know during evenings and weekends and all
[1:38:20] All times of the year, it still is listing the property only as a minimum 30-day stay.
[1:38:24] So there are certainly challenges that we're facing with that.
[1:38:28] And last question, do you think that at any time in the future there might be a possibility that the city could get an app that would be used to register all the STRs in the city and the citizens would be able to go on the app and
[1:38:45] and also report violations or check on the permitting status of a particular property.
[1:38:54] It's something that I've talked about for a couple of years, and so I just like to continue
[1:38:58] to bring it up hoping that someday it might happen.
[1:39:01] I could see that potentially as a project for an intern or a class at Cuesta or Cal Poly or
[1:39:07] in a couple of years we could just have AI do it for us, but I would love to see, well let
[1:39:13] me just ask you.
[1:39:14] Do you think that's a possibility at some time in the future?
[1:39:16] Thank you.
[1:39:16] Yes, I think the technology is certainly available.
[1:39:20] I think next year we will have a capacity to focus on something like that.
[1:39:25] This year has been a major work effort for my department.
[1:39:29] And Director Conrad is the department as well working together,
[1:39:33] inspecting every single one of these thoroughly reviewing all of the insurance information,
[1:39:38] house rules, significant amount of review information for each of these short
[1:39:43] but next year we won't have to do all of that again.
[1:39:46] Next year for the next three years properties will be able to self-certify a lot of that information.
[1:39:51] So that's going to free at some time where we can look at some of those additional endeavours such as an app.
[1:39:58] Thank you. I saw a lot of those apps down at that conference.
[1:40:02] I was just up for the legal city so we may not have to invent.
[1:40:07] I don't have any questions right now. I'll pass it down to my right.
[1:40:11] Let's see, so with the penalties, $100, $200 and $500, and then with SB 60, we can increase those to 1500, $3,000 and $5,000.
[1:40:26] Which one of those two scenarios is getting 100% cost recovery?
[1:40:34] So citations aren't, they're set by state law, so it's not like our user fees where we do a fee study to determine what the cost of recovery is.
[1:40:44] These are just the maximum citations we can impose under state law with the goal of achieving compliance.
[1:40:50] Okay, thank you.
[1:40:53] And they can't be initial failure to obtain permits, why not?
[1:40:59] So, I can't say exactly what the legislature had in mind when they enacted it that way,
[1:41:06] but if I had to guess, I would say because they are steep fines and there could be property
[1:41:12] owners that claim they didn't realize that permits were required.
[1:41:15] So for that, you know, the first time when we notify them saying you'd permit for this,
[1:41:20] we can't impose these steep penalties until they're aware of that and continue to not comply.
[1:41:26] Okay, and then well one thing I just wanted to ask if there is a way or do you think it would be more understandable?
[1:41:37] Am I looking at the map wrong?
[1:41:39] You showed the two maps and one, the one with the radius that shows the 175 foot radius has also includes the closed ones.
[1:41:51] And to me, am I wrong, it might be helpful to see the other one with the radius too, with the closed ones taken out of it, because they're obsolete now, right?
[1:42:02] No, thank you for the comment. You're 100% correct on that, and that is something I intended to do. We didn't have a chance to create that additional map, but you're correct.
[1:42:11] Okay, maybe the next time or something.
[1:42:13] And so did we include or have we addressed unhosted hotels because I feel like this was part
[1:42:22] of the this original ask was the unhosted the definition of what is an unhosted hotel
[1:42:29] and how are they because
[1:42:34] it kind of gets into if all hotels become unhosted then what do we have
[1:42:40] have anymore. You know, they're just kind of these buildings that are being run without
[1:42:46] any oversight. And how are we?
[1:42:51] So I'm hosted hotel. So I think the best way to describe
[1:42:57] the difference between short-term rental and hosted hotel is a short-term rental is a
[1:43:03] residential use. If you look at our zoning code, it's the finance of residential use, which
[1:43:10] can be difficult to wrap mine around since it does operate similar to a hotel like a commercial
[1:43:14] use but by definition it's the short term rental of a residential use versus the unhosted
[1:43:20] hotel is commercial structure built to commercial code commercial use. So that's the distinction.
[1:43:30] I think there is some overlap between the two you know there have been some smaller unhosted
[1:43:36] hotels that the planning commission has approved over the last few years where they've added
[1:43:41] a condition that requires the unhosted hotels to comply with all of the short-term rental
[1:43:46] regulations since unhosted hotels do present similar impacts as short-term rentals.
[1:43:53] So just like both unhosted hotels and short-term rentals, you don't have on-site property
[1:43:59] manage are there and oftentimes on-site property managers, the most effective way to control
[1:44:04] the guests and minimize impacts on neighbourhoods.
[1:44:06] So I think there are some opportunities like that to incorporate as we review, you know,
[1:44:11] development projects for unhosted hotels, incorporate the short-term rental regulations
[1:44:15] as conditions of approval on those use permits.
[1:44:19] Yeah, because if you had your commercial district, all the businesses, I mean, I think of downtown
[1:44:25] San Luis and they don't have very many, like if Moro Bay became what that is with a lot
[1:44:29] of vacancies, they could be turned into short term rentals or unhosted hotels that are
[1:44:34] short term rentals, and you can have a real problem on your hands.
[1:44:40] And then the difference between a unhosted hotel and a hotel, both in commercial district
[1:44:50] the bed. One, two, three, four, five, four, five, four, five, four, five, four, five,
[1:45:00] So that's sort of confusing, too. You know, that's right. There's, I mean, we have hosted hotels. It also advertised our B and B and B and B, so that's something that's really out of our control. Yeah.
[1:45:12] And did, did, did any of this talk about a minimum requirement for revenue, you know, you have to meet a threshold of. That's in the short-term rental ordinance, $500 minimum, TOT, which we verify through this TR permit process. Okay. And then.
[1:45:28] And this may be just kind of getting out there too much into the weeds and let me know
[1:45:34] if it is, if it's a whole separate subject, I'm not sure, but a way that people evade
[1:45:42] the permitting process for this is by listing 31 days at rental as 31 days.
[1:45:52] And is there, you know, I was kind of just trying to look that up if there's other cities
[1:45:56] that have, and this may be a question ultimately to include Mr. Stack, but is
[1:46:02] there a way to try to keep that, you know, because that they're avoiding the
[1:46:10] whole situation by purposely renting for 31 days, which is when we're trying to
[1:46:18] protect neighborhoods, that's harmful to a neighborhood, but we're just there
[1:46:22] under the rate of, you know what I mean?
[1:46:25] So if a short-term rental is, you know,
[1:46:28] legitimately renting for 31 days and not less than 30,
[1:46:32] they're complying with the municipal code
[1:46:33] there's really nothing the city can do
[1:46:35] to enforce in that situation
[1:46:38] because they're in compliance.
[1:46:41] The greater concern is the ones
[1:46:43] that are claiming to be operating for less than 30
[1:46:47] but they find ways to work the system
[1:46:49] to be able to actually run out for less than 30 days.
[1:46:52] and those are getting more difficult to verify and enforce, but we're working hard at it.
[1:46:57] Okay, thank you.
[1:47:02] Excuse me, most have been answered, but two questions.
[1:47:06] Are you sending out citations right now, and if so, are they being collected?
[1:47:11] Yes, so we've collected several thousand dollars in citations from short-term rentals this year.
[1:47:17] I will say the majority of citations that we issue are actually paid.
[1:47:24] Sometimes they take a while, but eventually they pay and when they don't pay, we send them to the state franchise tax board and
[1:47:31] the FTB adds our citation as a lien on their income tax return and they collect it through the income tax and pay the city that way.
[1:47:38] So we do get paid.
[1:47:40] Thank you. And then who hears the appeals? Is that your department?
[1:47:46] So the sorts of mental ordinance specifically states that all appeals have to be heard by an independent third party.
[1:47:54] And we've contacted a contractor with an attorney to provide that service.
[1:47:57] Thank you.
[1:47:59] Thank you. There's no further questions.
[1:48:01] I will open public comment on this item.
[1:48:10] Thank you very randomly.
[1:48:13] This short-term vacation rental ordinance basically has the results of what when we adopted it has destroyed a neighborhood.
[1:48:24] And for example, if you look at a beach colmar from Siena to Easter, one block long, there
[1:48:32] are that I know for sure six short-term vacation rentals.
[1:48:37] The difficulty is not only are there six there, there adjacent to one another on one end
[1:48:44] and adjacent to another on the other end.
[1:48:46] So basically, as we guys can all look back, this was a boon to some realters who turned
[1:48:55] some properties either they owned or somebody owned and turned them into short-term vacation
[1:49:00] rentals.
[1:49:01] So I would like to see if there was an effort, this grandfather clause that you have, if
[1:49:06] you're with a corporation, they'll never grandfather out.
[1:49:09] So I'd like to see some way to look at it and say, all right, your short-term vacation rental
[1:49:16] does not last forever. I need, I believe, we need to put some time limit on it and say okay,
[1:49:23] three years, five years, some of these people in business on these properties for over five years.
[1:49:29] And they've turned South Beach Cormor, which is a nice neighborhood, into a commercial zone.
[1:49:35] And it's also on North Beach Cormor, it's just as bad. So the damage to our neighborhood is tremendous
[1:49:44] and all the folks who live with the South in the time,
[1:49:48] they don't see it, but these lots are small,
[1:49:51] we're close together, and it exacerbates the problem.
[1:49:56] And until we look at this, then it's just tragic.
[1:50:00] I do know that there was one house on Beach Comer
[1:50:04] that was just sold.
[1:50:05] It's now no longer on the vacation rental, thank goodness.
[1:50:10] But when they're next door to each other
[1:50:13] because their grandfathered in, it just traumatizes
[1:50:17] an neighborhood.
[1:50:18] So to build this town, I know that all we get money for
[1:50:21] and that pays for our, no, it doesn't.
[1:50:23] It destroys the essence of moral bay.
[1:50:28] We don't want to turn this town into an industrial part.
[1:50:32] We have R1 zoning.
[1:50:34] It's R1 zoning.
[1:50:36] R1 zoning means R1 zoning, not commercial zoning.
[1:50:39] So please, I know it's difficult to look at it,
[1:50:41] but this is a voice of a resident that lives amongst it,
[1:50:44] and it's not good.
[1:50:45] Thank you.
[1:50:55] Michelle Lester-Cattery, North Moral Bay.
[1:50:57] I'll just piggyback on what Mary had to say.
[1:51:00] It is destroying the neighborhood feel.
[1:51:05] It's a constant turnover of strangers in our neighborhoods
[1:51:09] with our children.
[1:51:12] The ongoing destruction of our infrastructure, our streets,
[1:51:17] the parking is an issue, most of these people will not adhere to the noise, you know,
[1:51:23] our noise ordinances. And, you know, you don't want to call 911 at 1030, 11 o'clock at night,
[1:51:30] because, you know, you're taxing, it's on our community resources, and I don't want to do that. Or,
[1:51:36] you know, it's just, it's not acceptable. We need to try and work on grandfathering some of these out
[1:51:42] and having a limited term on them because, like Barry said,
[1:51:46] they're owned by corporations.
[1:51:49] And which will go on forever?
[1:51:51] The other thing is, again, the fire pit situation.
[1:51:54] I know that Chief McRain has talked about it,
[1:51:56] but they need to be phased out.
[1:51:58] They need to go to propane.
[1:51:59] We don't need the extra risk.
[1:52:01] We don't need the extra taxing on our homeowners insurance
[1:52:04] because of these.
[1:52:06] I just think that the city could, you know, possibly increase the
[1:52:12] And again, grandfather, take a look at that area of the ordinance.
[1:52:18] Thank you.
[1:52:27] I would like to say Betty Winholz, amen to the previous two speakers.
[1:52:31] We know that some people are individual owners, but there are like in my name I heard some of the zones three or four.
[1:52:40] So I very much support the idea of looking at the grandfathering.
[1:52:44] And because of that and because of the nature of people have bought houses specifically to rent them out to me that borders on what was talked about earlier as the difference between an unhosted hotel and a vacation rental because they've bought in to make it a commercial in our residents.
[1:53:05] So that's why very much believe that unhosted hotels should be considered vacation rentals and that they should have to abide by the same rules.
[1:53:13] And in commercial they're unlimited so it doesn't matter but they need to have those stricter appliances.
[1:53:20] So in terms of the other requirement or questions that were asked of you, definitely do not start.
[1:53:27] I would not until you're completely finished with your evaluation of allowing more people from the list to go and
[1:53:34] become new vacation renters hotel, you know.
[1:53:39] And I would, of course, unhost the in-home people are great, and there's fewer of them,
[1:53:47] but maybe more people will consider that as we have single older people living in large houses.
[1:53:54] The other thing I wanted to say, and I'm going to remember it, is that I also very much believe in raising the fees.
[1:54:02] So, looking at the grandfathering given a timeline, considering vacation rentals as duplicates
[1:54:13] of unhosted hotels, we've got one coming up before the planning commission soon, so that
[1:54:18] will be interesting, and then raising the fees and do not raise the limit or allow more
[1:54:25] people to come in, because you all, when this comes back after the end of the year, and Mr.
[1:54:30] single spin finish his presentation do you even want to stay at the 175 or you
[1:54:36] going to look at reducing that. Thanks.
[1:54:42] Anyone else for a public comment on this
[1:54:43] item?
[1:54:51] Jeff Heller. I was on council when this ordinance was passed and I thought it
[1:54:55] was out that all of these homes were grandfathered in.
[1:54:59] Lososos has a limit of 55 short term vacation rentals and a 500 foot buffer.
[1:55:05] That seems reasonable to me. I'd like to see two-thirds of the number licenses
[1:55:09] is pulled. There are two ways to do it. I think the SB 60 might be a little extreme, but I have
[1:55:15] no problem with adding it as zero to each of the figures that were useful. And we need
[1:55:21] to implement some way that licenses can be revoked. In other words, neighbors should have
[1:55:27] the phone number for the local representative who's supposed to bond with an hour and resolve
[1:55:33] all the issue. Let the neighbors, police, their neighborhood document it. Are the issues
[1:55:39] getting resolved within an hour or are they not? The representative come, the party
[1:55:45] quiets down, the representative drives away, the party starts again. If some authority to
[1:55:50] the neighbors to rescind licenses that they continually are disturbed by the parking, the
[1:55:56] noise, whatever, fines are great, but we've got to reduce the number. The number is just
[1:56:01] completely unacceptable. You can start in Southern California to work your way
[1:56:06] up the coast of all the beach towns that have been destroyed by short-term
[1:56:10] vacation rentals. We want an aggressive policy to take a look at Palm Springs.
[1:56:15] They have a very robust program, but I think they have more revenue than we do, too.
[1:56:20] But there's some clauses in the way they're operating that I think is
[1:56:23] outstanding. Very stringent, and they shut them down. That's the direction we need
[1:56:27] to go in if we want to try and get the neighborhood back that we had just a few
[1:56:33] years ago so thank you.
[1:56:38] Anyone else for public comment on this item? AGP are
[1:56:42] there any raised hands in the queue? Yes Madam Mayor we have one speaker raising
[1:56:46] their hand Maggie Jiren. I'm going to allow you to talk. Go ahead.
[1:56:54] Hi can you hear
[1:56:55] me? Yeah. You can't hear me. We can hear you. We can hear you. Go ahead. Oh okay
[1:57:01] Okay, okay. Well, hi, my name is Maggie Juren, and I'm here to present the other side of what some of the speakers have said.
[1:57:09] Along with my partners, we own beach and bay getaways and new relax vacation rentals.
[1:57:14] First of all, I want to say that for our companies, the SDR permitting process has gone pretty smoothly, and I especially want to thank the city staff and
[1:57:22] fire department that have been working on this process. They've been easy to work with and very helpful with any questions we have had.
[1:57:29] Needless to say, we are ready to be done with this because of the time consuming process.
[1:57:35] It has been for our staff, but I also feel like it has been very effective in identifying
[1:57:40] which STRs are actually active and paying money to the city.
[1:57:45] I know there has been talk and there was tonight again in previous council meetings about
[1:57:50] the possibility of reducing the 175 permit limit for residential non-hosted rentals, but
[1:57:56] But I am here to ask that this limit not be reduced, and in my opinion, it is not necessary
[1:58:01] to reduce it, and here is why.
[1:58:04] There is and will continue to be natural attrition.
[1:58:07] Since the new regulations went into effect, our company has lost seven homes from our more
[1:58:12] way inventory, mostly due to the non-transference of the license upon sale of the home.
[1:58:18] The loss of revenue to the city from these homes is conservatively estimated 30,000 a year.
[1:58:25] Also, due to the 175-foot proximity rule, there will be many of the wait list homes that
[1:58:31] will not qualify for a license based on that regulation.
[1:58:35] So I would anticipate that it could take years before the number would reach, the number
[1:58:39] of SDRs would reach 175.
[1:58:44] And please note, compared to other cities that have tourism as their primary industry, Moral
[1:58:50] Bay has a very low percentage of the total housing units that are SDRs,
[1:58:55] contrary to what someone presented.
[1:58:57] Although you may be sick of hearing me say this, it is important to recognize
[1:59:01] that almost all of the licensed SDRs and those on the homes on the wait list
[1:59:06] would not convert to long-term residential housing.
[1:59:09] Because the owners purchased them for their own use as well,
[1:59:12] and many of them would need to command a rent amount that would exceed any working
[1:59:16] person, anything that any working person could afford.
[1:59:20] As has been stated so many times before, the housing shortage in Moro Bay is largely due
[1:59:25] to the high percentage of second homes, some of which are probably the source of noise
[1:59:30] disturbances that our community experiences.
[1:59:33] I was part of the original citizens community that drafted the current regulations, and the
[1:59:38] process was a very fair one, and I'm very still very proud of the checks and balances that
[1:59:44] that were integrated into these regulations.
[1:59:46] So I just ask that the council members please let these regulations achieve their purpose,
[1:59:51] which is to create a fair balance of providing
[2:00:06] And as a last note, just to answer a question that was brought up about the 30-day rentals, please note that this is set by the state of California Department of regulation. And so that is granted. That's property rights. Thank you. And thank you for listening.
[2:00:35] I have a question regarding I know when I have my town hall meeting and I don't think I've talked about I've asked about this very much but I'm something reminded me about that tonight is there are instances where
[2:00:55] There are certain people have multiple short-term rentals.
[2:00:59] And I'm not talking about the realitors that are advertising them and managing them.
[2:01:03] I'm talking about property owners.
[2:01:05] And I know that in other cities it's become a problem where like a corporation or
[2:01:11] something like that will come in and just buy houses to turn them into short-term rentals.
[2:01:17] And are we monitoring that at all?
[2:01:22] So the city more a city of more obeys sort of rental ordinance does not prohibit an individual from owning multiple sort of rentals.
[2:01:30] Would you have some individuals who own a few short-term rentals within the city.
[2:01:35] I was involved in drafting Lososos, Lososos is sort of rental ordinance that does actually have a prohibition on an individual owning multiple SCRs.
[2:01:45] But the city of more obeys ordinance does not have that same provision.
[2:01:49] Okay. Thank you. And let's see, grandfathering out the time limit. Let's see, that was my
[2:02:00] note. I don't even know why I wrote that. But was that based on a question that someone
[2:02:07] brought up, I think? If I, can I respond to public comment? I may actually get to the question
[2:02:13] in that you had on that.
[2:02:15] So regarding the concentration of short-term rentals
[2:02:18] in our residential neighborhoods,
[2:02:20] I just want to say that I agree with the public commenters,
[2:02:24] absolutely that significantly changes
[2:02:26] the character of a residential neighborhood
[2:02:28] when you have high concentrations of short-term rentals
[2:02:31] with visitors coming and going throughout the week
[2:02:35] that absolutely diminishes the residential character
[2:02:39] of a neighborhood, which is the purpose of that 155-foot buffer requirement to over time through attrition and reduce the concentration and really restore the residential character of those neighborhoods.
[2:02:53] As we heard one, you know, speaker state, the short-term rental ordinance does not allow short-term rental permits to transfer with ownership.
[2:03:02] I think that is a key element where the number will come down through attrition, and that is a real
[2:03:09] success of our short-term rental permit process because every one of these
[2:03:13] properties now has to come in for their annual renewal permit, and we do a very thorough title check on each one of these properties when they come in for the renewal permit, and there has been
[2:03:23] one or two that we've already denied because when we did a detailed title search we found that the property had transferred in the past, and so
[2:03:32] at that point in time, they should have lost their right
[2:03:34] to continue that STR.
[2:03:35] So we are enforcing that.
[2:03:37] And given enough time, the concentration will come down
[2:03:41] by attrition, and our short-term rental permit process
[2:03:43] is going to ensure that.
[2:03:48] I think also there is some confusion
[2:03:53] between the grandfather short-term rentals
[2:03:55] and illegally operating short-term rentals.
[2:03:58] So just to clarify,
[2:03:59] There are grandfathered properties that under the current ordinance have a right to continue.
[2:04:05] So they're legal, they have to get their annual permits from us to go through their inspections.
[2:04:09] But they have a legal right to continue, not indefinitely, because again,
[2:04:14] it won't transfer with ownership, but they do have a right to continue.
[2:04:17] Then of course, there's the illegally operating ones, and
[2:04:20] those are the ones that we are sending season assist orders on.
[2:04:24] And even though I mentioned earlier, there are some challenges with enforcement.
[2:04:28] we will close them all down and just finally there was a comment about a upcoming
[2:04:36] unhosted hotel project that was a reference I believe to 1180 Front Street
[2:04:41] 10 room unhosted hotel. I just want to bring that up as a good example of a
[2:04:47] project where it requires a coastal development permit is going to go to
[2:04:51] planning commission and the planning commission can add a condition that
[2:04:56] that requires that hotel to obtain an SCR permit and comply with all of the SCR regulations.
[2:05:01] That's something we can address through the permitting process on this.
[2:05:09] One question you mentioned, and I do agree with the character of neighborhoods.
[2:05:16] If I live next to seven short term rentals, I'd be upset too.
[2:05:22] So you said that they have the legal right.
[2:05:25] The legal right is based on the ordinance that was passed two years ago.
[2:05:30] Is that correct or incorrect?
[2:05:33] In other words, if we were looking at changing the ordinance to take some of these legal license short-term rentals that were granted as grandfathered in,
[2:05:47] you made a statement just a minute ago that they have the legal right to operate, which is true to the ordinance that is in place right now.
[2:05:55] If we chose at a later date, that's not what we're here for today, to change that ordinance, would that then preclude them to operate, yes or no?
[2:06:08] Well, so I will say that, yes, when I say they have a legal right to continue to operate, I mean, under the current ordinance.
[2:06:15] And I don't know if the city attorney may want to comment on, you know, other options.
[2:06:22] Yeah, Brightseck, City Attorney, to the extent that the, this Council or
[2:06:28] a future council seeks to amend the S.D.R.
[2:06:31] ordinance to limit the time period of the grandfathering outside of the, it can't transfer.
[2:06:37] We would have to do, you know, a legal analysis of does this a fringe in fringe upon, say, a personal right?
[2:06:43] Or is it a property right?
[2:06:45] The way the city has constructed it, it has done its best to make it clear that it's not considered
[2:06:50] a land use permit and land use entitlement that it doesn't run with a land that it's a personal
[2:06:55] right. And so that takes the judicial scrutiny down a notch, but it's still even at a personal
[2:07:01] right level. We might have to account for, okay, we'd have to give them some period of time to
[2:07:06] wind down, but the exact time period would depend on specific circumstances and what the amendment
[2:07:12] might look like. But it's definitely an issue that would need to be analyzed and included
[2:07:17] in the staff report.
[2:07:17] I see it's curious on that.
[2:07:22] Questions?
[2:07:24] Thank you.
[2:07:24] Thank you, Mr. Singh-Wald for that very detailed report.
[2:07:32] I will say that as I walk the neighborhoods in North Moral Bay and the beach track both,
[2:07:37] I appreciate that since this has, since you've taken this over and taken this on,
[2:07:42] I see so much more compliancy.
[2:07:43] There's vacation homes I didn't even know existed because now they're signs are up,
[2:07:47] which is allowing an opportunity for checks and balances for neighbors that are in those beach tracks and North Moral Bay even in the residential beds.
[2:07:59] The grandfather is a challenge, and that was done by past councils, and yeah, I think we could have a whole different conversation about that, but I think a way to approach it rather than trying to find a way to undo something they did right now is to just look at it through attrition.
[2:08:15] And if our desire ultimately and not tonight would be to lower those numbers down that there would probably be different paths and could incorporate so that, you know, I don't there's no future grandfathering was very self serving the people who did that I feel.
[2:08:34] We know how many home shares are on the list. Is that separate?
[2:08:38] I think 11 requests for home share permits right now.
[2:08:46] So you're asking how many home shares are on the wait list?
[2:08:48] Yes.
[2:08:51] So home shares wouldn't be on the wait list because that's a wait list for the full home
[2:08:57] residential because those are the one subject to the cap.
[2:09:03] The only thing preventing the city from issuing new SCR permits for home shares is the fact
[2:09:09] the council said not to issue any residential SCRs and you'll let's say we get through this audit year and council
[2:09:17] Does authorize new home share SCR permits to be authorized anyone who wants one can get one because there's no there's no cap
[2:09:25] So they're just on the list with everybody else right now because we paused right so again
[2:09:30] There's there's no need to put them on a list because there's no there's no limit to the number right home shares allowed
[2:09:37] Thank you
[2:09:47] I just wanted to ask one question about, so I've been kind of researching it on the
[2:09:53] fly and there's such a thing as a mid-term stays, which are rentals that are 90 days,
[2:10:03] which are registered like short-term rentals to prevent people that are working with that loophole where they say that they're over 30 days, but they're really a short-term rental.
[2:10:17] And I don't know if that's like a fully vetted legal thing that we could do or I just would wonder if Mr. Stack knows anything about that.
[2:10:29] Yeah, Brandt's actually the attorney, the law is always trying to catch up to what changes are on the ground.
[2:10:36] A public speaker did refer to the concept that you're, they call it, and it's legally kind of but a bundle of sticks.
[2:10:43] When you own real property, there's a variety of rights you have, one of which is to rent the property out.
[2:10:49] And there is past case law that talks about generally, you can't restrict monthly rentals of property because maybe back at some point in time there was a reason to do that.
[2:10:59] That was maybe inappropriate, but so now as things change and say there is a new type of use
[2:11:06] Could a court look at it differently maybe, you know
[2:11:09] It really would be it would depend on on the facts and circumstances and
[2:11:14] You know reasonable investment back to expectations
[2:11:17] So it would be to the extent that we're trying to keep the law caught up to real life
[2:11:21] It's gonna be cutting edge and we'll have to have the facts and analysis and do our best if we want to try and address it
[2:11:28] But there's not the clarity on, yes, this will work or not.
[2:11:32] There might be some things to stay away from for sure, but you might be in a gray area that might dictate how much time or resources you'd want to invest in something that might not work or create a legal challenge.
[2:11:49] So I haven't looked into it yet personally, but I do know generally, yes, there is the concept out there that we can't restrict more than 30-day rentals.
[2:11:57] But that case law is, you know, from a period ago that, again, things have changed, maybe that case law would change under the new circumstances.
[2:12:07] But I can't say, for sure, right now, I'm not having the analysis.
[2:12:10] Thank you.
[2:12:15] Yeah, just my final comment.
[2:12:17] Thank you. I appreciate the methodology that you've spelled out for us at the beginning of the year of taking this quarterly approach.
[2:12:25] And we've seen the ramp up in enforcement and good job.
[2:12:29] Thank you.
[2:12:35] I just want to echo that, this is great work, your continued effort on this is really
[2:12:44] good, Mr. Singhwald.
[2:12:47] I appreciate the process, and I think the process is waddling out the ones that are not
[2:12:55] clients and wrongdoers and for me, I'm not at this moment about lowering where we are.
[2:13:05] It seems to be lowering by attrition already on its own.
[2:13:08] And I kind of like to see the process work a little bit longer.
[2:13:13] For me, I think there's a balance that we need to find right now.
[2:13:17] I don't know if I'm necessarily interested in allowing for
[2:13:22] for other residentials at this moment in time, I leave that for discussion, of course.
[2:13:28] But the home shares, I don't personally see the issue as to why we went along for that.
[2:13:35] I know at the previous meeting we allowed for commercial to be given permitting.
[2:13:42] So I think maybe we wanted to discuss the home share part.
[2:13:46] I think that because the, as he just alluded to, the home share falls under the regular vacation.
[2:13:52] I don't know where the commercial is exempt from that because it's not in the residential neighborhoods is that?
[2:13:59] So let me clarify, so the cap of 175 SDR citywide applies to full home residential, both commercially-zoned SDRs, which the council already authorized, new permits to be issued for.
[2:14:15] and home shares are not subject to the cap.
[2:14:18] So whether it's tonight or in January,
[2:14:21] the council could authorize new SCR permits for home shares
[2:14:24] that anyone who wants one would be able to apply
[2:14:27] for a permit and as long as they meet the code,
[2:14:30] we would issue a permit and they can operate.
[2:14:32] I think I like the idea of letting them finish up
[2:14:36] to January and coming back and we can address all this.
[2:14:39] I did think and correct me.
[2:14:42] I thought we had already given direction
[2:14:47] I thought at our last meeting we had already done that, if not, if not, I would entertain
[2:14:52] that question.
[2:14:54] I thought we did too.
[2:14:54] Tonight, I certainly would be in favor of provided direction on and out.
[2:15:00] Going to SB 16. Yeah.
[2:15:04] So thank you for that, and I apologize if that was previous council
[2:15:10] message. And I know the question came up last time. I know it's been discussed. I expected
[2:15:15] it to come up again tonight, which is why I added that option in the staff report. We
[2:15:19] just wanted to make sure it's very clear that we're getting that direction from council.
[2:15:24] So we can go and put the resources into preparing an ordinance that bring it back for adoption.
[2:15:28] and we will now do that.
[2:15:30] Thank you very much, Mr. Simwell.
[2:15:32] Another met them, we'll see this again in January, correct?
[2:15:36] Correct.
[2:15:37] Yeah, I really appreciate them.
[2:15:42] I think Decker has been 100 times better than HDL, that's for sure.
[2:15:45] So thank you for making that change and bringing this forward.
[2:15:50] We have one item left on the agenda that I know we all want to get through,
[2:15:53] but how about a five-minute resume?
[2:15:59] Thank you for joining us as we resume.
[2:16:01] No more on our last item of the evening, item 8D, discussion and request for direction regarding potential of establishing a local campaign finance contribution limits.
[2:16:13] Now, we'll turn it over to our city attorney and city clerk.
[2:16:17] Good evening, Mayor and council member.
[2:16:19] I do have a brief PowerPoint, if you could pull it up.
[2:16:23] PGA PowerPoint, thank you.
[2:16:25] That's my first PowerPoint.
[2:16:27] So I try to make it brief, to give a little background, some key takeaways, and then
[2:16:32] kind of outline potential options for further direction.
[2:16:36] Next slide, please.
[2:16:40] As background, this discussion item is the result of council direction back in December 2024,
[2:16:46] which followed election results of the initiative measure a 24, which had received significant public involvement and there were large cash and kind contributions and the city does not have any local campaign contribution limits and historically there have been no campaign contribution limits applicable to local agencies under state law so for a long period of time there were no campaign contribution limits.
[2:17:15] campaigns. Campaign finance laws generally, there we go, stay on this slide for now. From
[2:17:24] the local to federal government have faced legal challenges over the years, primarily
[2:17:29] based on First Amendment protections, and that has resulted in some Supreme Court case
[2:17:34] precedent which kind of helped outline the go and no-go areas for regulation of campaign
[2:17:42] finance. And in addition, under state law, so long as it complies with the federal constitution,
[2:17:49] they can also impose further restrictions on local agencies. And next slide, please.
[2:17:58] In January, effective January 2021, AB 55571 established the default limits on local campaign
[2:18:08] contributions and these were applicable on candidate-controlled committees only and
[2:18:14] the amount gets updated by anally for inflation and the limit is currently $5,900.
[2:18:21] AB 571 does allow local jurisdictions to establish their own limits, including establishing
[2:18:28] a lower limit, a higher limit, or no limit.
[2:18:31] If no limit, local limits have been imposed, then the state default would apply.
[2:18:37] Next slide, please.
[2:18:40] AB 571 operates within an area of campaign finance law which has been upheld by the Supreme Court and that's specific to candidate-controlled committees.
[2:18:50] These have been upheld by the Supreme Court based on a determination that they impose a lower restriction on speech and serve an important interest of preventing corruption or the appearance of corruption like pay to play type schemes.
[2:19:05] However, the Supreme Court has rejected limitations on independent expenditures by organizations,
[2:19:13] associations, committees, unaffiliated with a candidate, and they have also similarly rejected
[2:19:20] limits on ballot measures, finding both restrictions in both those cases impose significant limitations
[2:19:29] on speech and do not have the same risk of corruption.
[2:19:32] For example, the Supreme Court has said for independent expenditures, they lack the pre-arrangement
[2:19:38] and coordination that could lead to quid pro quo type scenarios.
[2:19:42] For ballot measures, the Supreme Court has said those are about issues and not candidates.
[2:19:49] And so in those cases, the Supreme Court didn't find compelling nexus to preventing corruption.
[2:19:57] Next slide, please.
[2:19:58] Staff
[2:20:02] has provided a few alternatives for council consideration when it comes to regulating
[2:20:09] contributions to local candidate-controlled committees.
[2:20:13] Staff does not recommend considering local limits on independent expenditures or ballot
[2:20:18] measures because of the established Supreme Court precedent, but when it comes to local
[2:20:23] candidate-controlled committees where the law is clear you would have the legal authority
[2:20:28] 42 imposed local limits.
[2:20:30] The options set forth include taking no action
[2:20:34] and letting the state default limits continue to apply,
[2:20:37] and those would be enforced by the Fair Political Practices Commission.
[2:20:42] Or council could direct staff to bring back a proposed local ordinance
[2:20:48] that could provide limits on contributions such as below $1,000,
[2:20:54] which may simplify, simplify reporting requirements for campaigns.
[2:21:00] A $500 figure or a threshold could also be established,
[2:21:05] which is the current trigger for disclosure and recusal under the Levine Act.
[2:21:11] And that's where if you have a campaign contribution for the next 12 months,
[2:21:16] generally speaking, that you could not hear a land use permit for that,
[2:21:21] regarding that contributor.
[2:21:22] So, that is a limit that some local jurisdictions have imposed in the idea of not having deal
[2:21:30] with that issue, right?
[2:21:33] And then another option would be to establish no campaign contribution limits so there
[2:21:39] would be no local or state enforcement because there would be no limits.
[2:21:45] That is the, this concludes the next slide.
[2:21:47] This concludes staff's presentation, I'm available for any questions and also the city clerk is available for questions if any about reporting.
[2:21:56] And I look forward for Council of Direction and discussion.
[2:22:00] Thank you for bringing this and doing that a little bit of research to see where we go with this. I have a couple questions.
[2:22:08] was my understanding that if you received a $500 or more donation from a donor and then you were to hear an item based on just simplicity of a land use issue, you could return the money in here the item is that you could return the donation in here the item.
[2:22:30] I think part of it goes to intent, if you're unaware and you happen to vote on something I think my understanding is the law does provide you a grace period to return the money.
[2:22:39] I think if you know someone has contributed, I don't believe there's an option to return the funds but I may be mistaken on that it's not my expertise.
[2:22:55] So, part of this came about because of the money that came from A-24, and I know a lot
[2:23:01] of it was in kind, not as much necessarily cash, but it's what sparked the kind of
[2:23:06] controversy and question, bless you.
[2:23:09] So if there was residual money from that campaign, can that be used and also unions and things
[2:23:18] things like that, how does that, where do they play into what they can donate to individual
[2:23:23] candidate campaigns?
[2:23:25] I think so there are established regulations regarding how you can roll, you know, funds
[2:23:30] from one candidate committee to another, say, candidate controlled ballot measure committee
[2:23:35] that provide clear guidelines on how to do it, regarding, say, an independent expenditure or
[2:23:41] a ballot measure committee unaffiliated with a candidate in order, I think generally speaking
[2:23:48] they would not be able to roll over the funds unless they could somehow comply with the requirements
[2:23:52] to contribute to a candidate's campaign committee.
[2:23:56] So you'd have to disclose everyone who contributed, so I think it's probably not practical, whether
[2:24:04] there are scenarios that experts in campaign finance law can come up with maybe, but generally
[2:24:09] speaking, if you're going to contribute to a candidate-controlled committee, the campaign
[2:24:13] contribution limits apply and the disclosure rules apply.
[2:24:16] And so that you need to comply with those.
[2:24:20] So how does that work then if the union wants to give you $1,000 or $5,000 or something?
[2:24:26] You're not allowed, when she said these campaign limits in place, then that wouldn't be allowed for individual candidates.
[2:24:32] If you establish, so under the state default, if we don't establish local limits.
[2:24:37] Right.
[2:24:38] Contributors could provide contributions and aggregate under that amount.
[2:24:43] And they just would have to identify who made the contribution.
[2:24:47] There's low thresholds for anonymous donations, but above that diminimous level,
[2:24:51] you have to identify who your contributors are.
[2:24:55] And if you establish the local, lower local limit, I think generally speaking, under first amendment,
[2:25:02] everyone has to be subject to the same rules.
[2:25:05] We can't discriminate, that might be a strong word, but we can't discriminate based on viewpoint,
[2:25:09] point, protect a classification, things like that or political activities like a union.
[2:25:16] So generally speaking, we want the rules to be one size fits all and everybody has to
[2:25:21] comply with those.
[2:25:23] Thank you.
[2:25:23] And I was just using those as an example.
[2:25:26] So my name and friends don't, I'm just asking questions to my left.
[2:25:32] Just for amplification purposes, it is unfortunate because this started as a result of the
[2:25:39] the PAC contributions to A24, but just so that everyone's 100% clear.
[2:25:45] The way the law is set up, we don't have the ability to restrict the amount of dark
[2:25:51] money or PAC money that comes into local initiatives on the ballot.
[2:25:56] That's correct.
[2:25:57] That's the current state of Supreme Court precedent.
[2:26:01] Okay, thank you.
[2:26:02] And then I say a question, and I'm pretty sure I read this in your report.
[2:26:04] where the campaign limit lets presume we come up with a $500 limit.
[2:26:13] The individual, the candidate, is unlimited in the amount that they can loan their campaign
[2:26:19] and then they can repay that, of course, at a later day.
[2:26:22] They can make their contributions, personal contributions are unlimited.
[2:26:27] There are limits on loans, which I believe is currently $100,000.
[2:26:33] And that's also generally speaking, at least the fact we can't prohibit personal contributions
[2:26:39] to your own campaign is based on Supreme Court precedent.
[2:26:43] Gotcha.
[2:26:43] So unlimited personal contributions to your own campaign and then sounds like a rather
[2:26:50] large amount that you can loan to your campaign.
[2:26:53] I guess the significant factor there is the lending, candidates lending, sorry, it's getting
[2:26:59] late.
[2:26:59] The amount that a candidate can lend him or herself is not limited to the 500, but it's limited by some other
[2:27:07] arbitrary number.
[2:27:08] It would be limited under state law.
[2:27:11] Yeah, that could be a component
[2:27:13] potentially of a local campaign
[2:27:15] contribution limit would also be to reduce the personal loan limit.
[2:27:19] Again, we'd have to base it on
[2:27:22] findings and analysis that there is
[2:27:25] some public interest we're trying to
[2:27:26] to serve and avoid, you know, corruption, appearance of corruption type issues, I believe
[2:27:34] some local jurisdictions have gone into the personal loan issue.
[2:27:38] Thank you.
[2:27:43] I did reach out to Mr. Stack with regard to this because I had some questions that I just
[2:27:49] want to clarify on.
[2:27:51] In terms of, is it true that in terms of some independent group wanting to, I don't
[2:27:58] know, run three paid advertisements for a candidate. Can they do that? If it's unaffiliated
[2:28:05] with a candidate, they can do that. Yep. And that's why you'll see, you know, there's
[2:28:13] always the disclaimer at the bottom of the ads. The Democratic, yeah, I got you. Put your
[2:28:18] name on there. So, so in other words, I guess I'm saying we're kind of limited to how much
[2:28:24] We can't really do here, right?
[2:28:28] It really is limited to candidate control committees.
[2:28:31] Yeah.
[2:28:33] Okay.
[2:28:33] And the one, so I think you can modify or impose limitations regarding that category with
[2:28:40] the one exception that we can't impose limits on personal contributions to your own campaign.
[2:28:51] Public comment is open on the side.
[2:28:55] Here are there any raised hands in the queue?
[2:28:56] There
[2:29:00] are no raised hands in the queue.
[2:29:02] That I will bring it back to Council closed public comment and questions move into the.
[2:29:12] The comment that I have here is I'm not exactly sure what we're task to do tonight but I'm
[2:29:18] not in favor of limiting individual contributions for candidates.
[2:29:23] If you limited it to $500 or whatever then that would mean that if the individual is running
[2:29:29] And I'll speak for myself, that would have to loan the campaign a lot more money.
[2:29:37] So my position here is that it'd be easier for me to, because it takes, I think,
[2:29:44] probably, and I'm just throwing this number out, $15,000 to $20,000 to run a campaign,
[2:29:50] or at least that's what it costs me.
[2:29:52] I'm probably not as smart as you folks, but my point being is that I'm not
[2:29:59] in favor of.
[2:30:00] Individual campaign, contributions.
[2:30:05] Well, I would beg to differ with you, Mr. LaFaye. You didn't even run against anybody. I don't know why you spent that money.
[2:30:19] I don't know. I, I like the idea of the less reporting. Yeah, the less reporting, you know, sounds easier. I don't know. I ran
[2:30:32] And I think I raised like $3,000.
[2:30:35] I mean, I didn't try to raise money, but I had $3,000 donated to me.
[2:30:40] And I don't know.
[2:30:42] I think it's, I'm not a good person to ask, I guess.
[2:30:45] I was really interested in this as if it would, you know, apply to something like a
[2:30:51] valid measure or, you know, dark money kind of funding, but it's unfortunate that it doesn't.
[2:31:00] I'm interested in limiting a contribution that could be made.
[2:31:04] I think that it helps in a small community like ours, as I've seen through past elections
[2:31:09] when Mayor Peters was serving and marries and others, where they were able to have unlimited
[2:31:16] funding and it doesn't allow for an even playing field as far as, you know, just campaigning
[2:31:27] in a small community. It just feels like things can be bought. And that's the appearance,
[2:31:32] whether they are or aren't. I'm not here to debate, but that's the impression that it gives
[2:31:37] me. And so if there's an opportunity for us to, you know, limit when you look at the donations
[2:31:43] that were made from people, you know, we're a town of 10,000 people and you know, somebody
[2:31:49] gave $5,000 basically in 2022 and 2024. And I'm not talking about personal contributions
[2:31:55] are personal loans, but loans or donations that were made.
[2:31:58] And as council member Landerm alluded to, that's more than she raised for
[2:32:03] her whole campaign, and yet she walked and knocked in M1.
[2:32:06] So I just want to make sure that anybody in the community has that equal opportunity
[2:32:11] without having to raise that magnitude of money.
[2:32:15] And so I would be supportive of the, you're just going to work towards getting more
[2:32:20] donations at a smaller amount for your support rather than somebody just giving you five or $10,000.
[2:32:27] That doesn't even have to be from our community, necessarily.
[2:32:31] Pass it to my left.
[2:32:33] Thank you.
[2:32:34] Yeah, I would beg to differ from a comment that I heard earlier.
[2:32:38] Council Member Lafay did run against somebody.
[2:32:40] It was me and it was a very heated contest.
[2:32:45] And I seriously, that I didn't quite understand Council Member Lafay, you're coming about the loans because you can loan yourself what you need to and then recoup or of course contribute unlimited to your own campaign.
[2:32:59] I agree with the mayor's comments that she just mentioned.
[2:33:04] I think it's a small community. We have a little over 8,000 registered voters here.
[2:33:09] I think $500 just to me sounds like a reasonable amount, that way there's no undue influence by a small group of residents.
[2:33:21] And it does kind of level the plane field.
[2:33:23] I just think, and we saw, frankly, some of the division that occurred in the community with A24,
[2:33:30] with the large amounts of money, unprecedented amounts of money that came in for a citizens initiative.
[2:33:36] If I know that's a different item, but the similarities exist just in terms of how much money
[2:33:43] is being spent on a particular race.
[2:33:45] So I would be in favor of a $500 limit for, what is it, candidate-controlled committees?
[2:33:54] Pro-10 comments?
[2:33:57] Would you think $4.99 would be better because then you wouldn't have to have the, you would
[2:34:04] Would you avoid the mandatory disclosure and recusal requirements?
[2:34:08] Brian Stacc here, I think it's over 500 is the trigger.
[2:34:13] So so long as it's 500 below is my understanding because I'm almost certain that's how it is because the jurisdictions before the limit when this first came up a few years ago, the state established at 250 and then they raised it to 500 recently and all the jurisdictions that I've seen, it's even numbers, it's 250, it's 500.
[2:34:34] so I'm almost positive the law says above that number.
[2:34:38] Yeah, and I think if that changed,
[2:34:40] it's up to the candidate advising his or her donors.
[2:34:44] It's why we see a lot of $99 checks
[2:34:46] so that people don't have to disclose their personal information.
[2:34:51] Mr. Stack, are you asking for a motion tonight or direction?
[2:34:54] I think direction on if you want us to proceed,
[2:34:57] generally speaking, preparing and processing
[2:35:00] a draft ordinance and then what the potential contours of that ordinance you're thinking at this
[2:35:06] time you'd like to see. So I've heard $500 as potentially the target if so kind of confirmation
[2:35:13] on the range to consider and analyze and then also the enforcement issue. So once we even hose our
[2:35:20] own local limit the FPPC won't enforce that absentee contract with them. And I know they have that
[2:35:30] a contract form on their website.
[2:35:31] I don't know how many local jurisdictions
[2:35:33] are actually contracting with FPPC to do it
[2:35:36] and how effective that's been or cost prohibitive.
[2:35:39] You know, so it's both the amount of the limit
[2:35:42] and then also tentative direction on enforcement
[2:35:47] and whether we, you know, to use the state
[2:35:49] but pay for them to do it.
[2:35:51] And it's, I think, primarily complaint driven,
[2:35:53] we send a complaint to the FPPC and they process it.
[2:35:57] or you can, you can stand up a more local enforcement measure where it's, you know, say the city attorney could, could file a civil action.
[2:36:07] Your stickions have handled a variety of ways.
[2:36:09] Could you, can, if we move forward with this, with direction to do that, can you bring back some recommendations of what those options would be with that.
[2:36:18] So we wouldn't know what it would look like.
[2:36:20] I guess also want direction whether you want any more another agenda item before a first reading, or would you, are you comfortable with staff coming back with?
[2:36:34] Let's start with if there's council support to look at a $500 campaign limit.
[2:36:42] I just want to ask one thing, Mr. Stack, because I don't know, my understanding was that
[2:36:50] then the obligation would fall onto the city.
[2:36:53] So is that?
[2:36:55] If that's correct, yeah, the FPPC would no longer automatically enforce free of charge to the
[2:37:04] And so we either would need to stand up a local enforcement measure or we, and I think
[2:37:10] we could do it a variety of ways where we also empower ourselves locally to do enforcement.
[2:37:14] But we also can enter into a contract with the FPPC and that way as situations come
[2:37:20] up we can decide which enforcement remedy or tool we want to use.
[2:37:28] Thank you.
[2:37:29] I would just presume that enforcement would be sort of self-regulating by the other candidate
[2:37:36] in the race.
[2:37:37] So yeah, I would hope, but yeah, if it sounds like we have support for the $500 limit
[2:37:44] and do we want to look at what those options would be as far as how we would enforce it locally
[2:37:50] versus, you know, in what it would look like contractually, I think, without going too far
[2:37:55] down that.
[2:37:55] And then do we want it to come back before first reading for the $500 limit?
[2:38:04] I'm okay with it.
[2:38:08] I mean, I'm inclined to have it come back, but if you think if you think you have everything you need at this point.
[2:38:14] You know, I just want to be mindful and respectful of the council's time and sometimes it's helpful to come back and sometimes.
[2:38:20] You know, it's not necessary.
[2:38:22] I think it's, there's, you know, maybe three questions that will be the big
[2:38:26] substantive ones and I think we could do it on a first reading and a public hearing
[2:38:31] and you can make tweaks and then we re, you know, reintroduce at that meeting and
[2:38:35] then we do the second hearing, the second meeting later, yeah.
[2:38:38] One, two, three, four, good.
[2:38:42] Okay.
[2:38:43] Question?
[2:38:45] Appreciate that and thank you, Ms. Swan, on that too, and all the other items.
[2:38:49] Thank you.
[2:38:50] The advisory boards and all those things.
[2:38:52] Thank you.
[2:38:53] Thank you to our finance director for her work on that with CFAC also appreciate that
[2:38:59] Well, thank you for the phenomenal report tonight future agenda items
[2:39:04] I have some if nobody else does I can see future agenda items
[2:39:10] Working on something
[2:39:13] Okay
[2:39:15] So um where shall I start um it's late
[2:39:20] It's been a
[2:39:21] But I'll preface this all by saying I haven't had any for a long time.
[2:39:26] One is I think it would be a nice thing to include on the agenda.
[2:39:32] I notice that HAB does this and they have the future agenda items that they have that
[2:39:38] is included on their agenda.
[2:39:40] And it's just a really nice, a good way to keep track for the public of what has been talked
[2:39:50] about and I think that would be nice if I had if I could get support for for
[2:39:54] that. I don't think it's a future agenda let's just do it. I don't I think maybe
[2:40:01] you could meet with the city manager and the city clerking get some. I'm not
[2:40:06] have you seen the Habs agenda they have all their future agenda items like the
[2:40:10] track of them in in the agenda each agenda. They're just an advisory board
[2:40:15] not a policy making and we have, there's our self-generated.
[2:40:20] Well, so where are, I just think it's a good idea because they can kind of get in my
[2:40:27] mind, they kind of get buried and a new council member might not know what has already been
[2:40:33] discussed and what is upcoming.
[2:40:36] Well, that information, just checking with the city clerk, that information's provided to
[2:40:40] Councils still are planning track?
[2:40:44] Well, it's not provided.
[2:40:45] I mean, if you ask for it, maybe you would get it,
[2:40:47] but I don't get it.
[2:40:49] And does anyone else get it?
[2:40:50] Yeah, I get it.
[2:40:51] No, no, no, not the tentative ones.
[2:40:54] The future agenda items.
[2:40:55] Like, for instance, the short-term rental,
[2:40:59] like, you know, it took a while for us to get to this one.
[2:41:03] We can just request that.
[2:41:05] And, well, I know, but why wouldn't we want to just put it?
[2:41:08] because it changes constantly and it changes things drop off as new kind I mean wouldn't it be nice
[2:41:14] to keep track of that? I know that they do but I would like to know where we are and I think maybe the
[2:41:21] public might you know they hear this stuff and it seems like it might be a good idea to include that
[2:41:28] interested in us in the time months ago that we
[2:41:32] and staff's priorities, and the priorities that the council gives, it could be missing
[2:41:38] to the staff, but they were less important, and I don't want that staff's not addressing
[2:41:46] something, or I don't want to get into a big debate.
[2:41:49] Right, yeah.
[2:41:50] The limited discussion, but there are a variety of, I mean, the city manager could report out
[2:41:54] of future council, you know, item.
[2:41:57] I mean, I myself have made future agenda items that I don't even know, I don't even remember
[2:42:02] what they were.
[2:42:02] So, I might say the same thing again, so it's just a good idea.
[2:42:08] I might have thought I said something and I didn't, you know, can we circle back to it maybe at the next one?
[2:42:14] Yeah, so no one wants to put that on there?
[2:42:16] Well, I support it and maybe the nuance is the future agenda item is a means of tracking future agenda items.
[2:42:27] Mayor, may I put in?
[2:42:29] So we have a couple of Excel documents that we use.
[2:42:32] We have the tentative agenda, which we send out.
[2:42:34] Well, you'll be getting it tomorrow.
[2:42:35] And then on a separate Excel spreadsheet
[2:42:38] is the future agenda items mostly declared
[2:42:41] at the end of your meetings.
[2:42:42] So what I would suggest for the beginning
[2:42:44] and that has been given out, I'll just say infrequently,
[2:42:48] not on a regular basis like the tentative agenda,
[2:42:51] but perhaps we could attach that to a tentative agenda
[2:42:55] on like a monthly or a couple times a monthly basis
[2:42:58] So you can see basically it's the item when it was brought up,
[2:43:01] who brought it up, so that information,
[2:43:03] so you can be confident that it's, we are tracking it,
[2:43:06] but I understand what Council Member Landrum is saying.
[2:43:09] So maybe we attach it and send it to you,
[2:43:11] so at least you have it, it's, you know,
[2:43:12] it's not a private document, certainly that way you will know
[2:43:16] that we're keeping track, or we missed something.
[2:43:20] Thank you, that would be great.
[2:43:22] So it doesn't need to be an official conversation.
[2:43:24] Okay, great.
[2:43:25] then I'll move on so this is kind of involved and it stems from just thinking about, you know,
[2:43:41] all of these things. We have, as far as our goal of economic vitality, so it started out, I was
[2:43:52] I was interested in a, like, how can you get vacant buildings?
[2:43:57] How can you encourage vacant commercial properties to not be vacant anymore to get them,
[2:44:03] to put businesses in them and things like that?
[2:44:06] And I talked to the chair of the CFAC, Steve PAC, and
[2:44:13] he was telling me about a vacant CTACs and in commercial property, so I looked into that.
[2:44:19] I am, you know, really conscientious of property rights, but then again, there are, you know,
[2:44:28] they can properties in Moral Bay, like both entrances to Moral Bay.
[2:44:34] Can you tell us what you just want and what you're asking for?
[2:44:36] Well, because we're not supposed to be made the, I know.
[2:44:39] It's looking at the city attorney there.
[2:44:41] It's kind of, it is kind of convoluted because I'm just going to combine all of these different ones.
[2:44:46] commercial. So that that's a I guess it's just this whole broad picture of is
[2:44:52] that there is that a something that we want to talk about is it um well they're
[2:44:56] bringing the council member land from
[2:45:00] I'm sorry, I'm just wondering maybe this is stuff that could be discussed at the joint meeting. Is it possible that? Yeah, I'm wondering because it sounds like it might be. Kind of, but then it is a revenue opportunity. They are definitely revenue opportunities, but it's how to how to create policies to to get to those. You know, and then and then when I looked into
[2:45:29] to the vacancy tax, you can also do that.
[2:45:33] Well, I don't think you can do it on industrial property,
[2:45:37] vacant industrial property, but now that the visitor property
[2:45:40] is-
[2:45:41] Council member, I don't know.
[2:45:42] Zoned, yes?
[2:45:43] Having discussion.
[2:45:45] I'm not discussing anything.
[2:45:47] Yeah, but do you just need to ask what the item is you want?
[2:45:51] Okay, a conversation.
[2:45:52] Then I'll go one by one.
[2:45:53] I was gonna try to condense them, but I won't.
[2:45:56] Economic development coming up, so are these things that fit under the economic development agenda?
[2:46:02] What do you mean we have economic development on our agenda?
[2:46:09] What they can see, commercial they can see.
[2:46:12] Well, I also, okay, then I would like to look at what we can do with the Vistra property.
[2:46:18] As far as its zoned commercial, visitor-serving commercial.
[2:46:23] So can we encourage the property owner to get that building?
[2:46:32] It's bright in our city.
[2:46:34] Can we do something about that?
[2:46:39] That Claire, and I would support that.
[2:46:42] Yeah, I would support that.
[2:46:44] Okay.
[2:46:45] And then.
[2:46:46] Let's stop it.
[2:46:47] Do you have clarity on what it is?
[2:46:48] She's asking for.
[2:46:49] Okay.
[2:46:50] Okay.
[2:46:51] Thank you.
[2:46:51] And, you know, a lot of this kind of, if I would summarize this, this is like an economic development position, really, within the city, but okay, so then also there's at least two vacant lots on the Embarcadero, and we are talking about parking and charging for parking, and I would like to look at maybe see if we can look at a way to encourage the property owners to use those as parking, kind of as a low-hanging fruit rather than doing all these
[2:47:21] drastic measures like charging at the rock and
[2:47:27] I don't know if that's Mr. Stack is I don't know if
[2:47:31] that's you or Mr. Singhwald or I don't know if I have the manager.
[2:47:40] I'm not sure what the question
[2:47:41] is. I mean I understand what the item is that they think they're the probably a couple privately
[2:47:46] owned vacant lots on the Embarcadero and I believe what Councilmember Landrum's question is
[2:47:51] is, are we able to use them, are they able to be used, can I say, without the permission
[2:47:57] of the property owner, that's what I'm, I think, and that I don't know the answer to
[2:48:02] that question.
[2:48:03] I know we've tried to use them, man, I'm guessing no, I know we've tried to use them before,
[2:48:07] but yeah, I feel like that's not, yeah, sorry, I'm not verbalized.
[2:48:15] That's a prime stacker city attorney, this agenda item is for describing the contours of a potential future agenda item and so some of it sounds like we could take into consideration at staff level when we bring back the economic development component and so it's like if we get direction from the council that's how you want to see it and then if there's something that doesn't quite fit with the economic development does council want us to put a future agenda item on say parking related to these sites or you know, okay, this is that's
[2:48:45] Thank you.
[2:48:46] And then the other two are not related to that at all.
[2:48:51] They are, well there is one, it is looking at a vacancy tax on residential property in light of the conversation we just had of short term rentals and what they do to the housing stock and to neighborhoods.
[2:49:08] and we have to kind of face the fact that that is an issue in Moral Bay and I don't know I'm just not that I am in favor of that
[2:49:16] I just am curious about what the possibilities are there and I would like to know about that I don't know if anyone else does.
[2:49:23] I would support that.
[2:49:25] Before you talking about, you're talking about attacks on secondary homes.
[2:49:29] Yes, we're talking about other communities that have done attacks on secondary homes.
[2:49:34] Or have attempted.
[2:49:37] and then these two are totally unrelated. I think it would be nice to have a check-in,
[2:49:45] like a recap of what's our camping ordinance and we have new council members now and I think
[2:49:52] it would be nice to.
[2:49:53] This is asking for an update on that, yeah.
[2:49:56] And then also an update on the massage partners.
[2:50:07] on the ordinance that they're working on.
[2:50:09] Yes.
[2:50:13] The only other thing is, if we could maybe somehow get the microphones to, if we could get an update on the microphones.
[2:50:21] But what, maybe that's not a futile agenda, I'll just, thank you, with that we're adjourned.
[2:50:28] We're going to go home.
[2:50:29] What about, did you go to sleep last night?
[2:50:33] I thought we were going to, I thought they were going to fix.
[2:50:35] Yes, sir.
[2:50:36] Are you guys ready?