[0:00] or tablet locate the 3 dots
[0:01] captain lately and put a check
[0:03] mark on your preferred
[0:04] language. Click done to
[0:06] activate begin the
[0:08] interpretation when she doing
[0:09] the Spanish Channel, we
[0:10] recommend you shut up the main
[0:11] audio. So you'll only hear the
[0:14] Spanish interpretation.
[0:14] Although she You please
[0:16] restate this in Spanish. Just
[0:21] want to thank you.
[0:23] >> This is because most of 69
[0:23] Espejo see Quentin meet those
[0:28] who summoning up was content.
[0:28] And think that but this
[0:32] evening, the list and point
[0:35] she went complete, though,
[0:35] boosted double dip back that.
[0:37] But the this up and saying
[0:37] that that the sound of
[0:40] protests, been it's been, you
[0:46] >> 6 And that's it peak in a
[0:49] isis in quintet or 1008 will
[0:51] be Kate. The good is plenty to
[0:52] skip, but it's insult, but
[0:52] they hit him in APRIL alone
[0:53] that meat and the media has
[0:54] been, you know.
[0:58] >> So they and thing that he
[0:59] set. It's still a team of We
[1:00] important day. But I think
[1:02] that with this end, he this
[1:04] forced to put this epa some.
[1:05] Go right ahead. Rhonda, thank
[1:11] you. Mayor.
[1:13] >> Thank you very right. The
[1:14] time is a seed to reading and
[1:15] we will call to order a
[1:16] regular meeting. Many city
[1:18] clerk.
[1:24] >> Thank you, Mayor.
[1:25] Councilmember Rogers,
[1:27] Councilmember MacDonald here,
[1:27] Councilmember Fleming
[1:30] Councilmember Ben Willows here
[1:31] councilmember over as
[1:31] PRESIDENT, Vice Mayor Kathy,
[1:34] you're mayor step here. Let
[1:34] the record show that all
[1:38] councilmembers are present.
[1:38] >> Thank you. We have 2 closed
[1:40] session items on the agenda
[1:41] today. Item 3.1, our
[1:43] conference legal counsel
[1:44] regarding anticipated with
[1:45] mitigation and also item 3.2
[1:46] is a conference legal counsel
[1:49] regarding existing medication.
[1:50] We'll go to public comment if
[1:51] you're online and was to make
[1:51] comment, please raise your
[1:55] hand or press star 9, seeing
[1:55] no members of public in
[1:59] council chambers were right
[1:59] resume commenter zoom online
[2:02] MADAM Zuma. Clark, Lauren,
[2:03] anybody online?
[2:04] >> We have no one raising
[2:06] their hand on
[2:07] >> We will close public
[2:08] comment and recess into closed
[2:23] session. Thank
[4:52] All right now,
[4:53] welcome back, everyone. Thank
[4:54] you for being here. Fred. Rica
[4:55] meeting Open session. MADAM
[4:59] City Clerk.
[5:00] >> Deputy City Clerk. Rhonda,
[5:00] can you have the interpreters
[5:03] make the statement in
[5:04] regarding how to participate
[5:06] from the Spanish Channel? A
[5:07] gun.
[5:07] >> Yes, going to go ahead and
[5:09] then they can repeat it in
[5:11] Spanish. If the interpreter
[5:12] currently on the Spanish
[5:15] Channel could commence again
[5:16] for those who are just joining
[5:17] the meeting, live
[5:19] interpretation Spanish is
[5:21] available and members of the
[5:22] public or staff wishing to
[5:24] listen Spanish can during
[5:26] Spanish channel by clicking on
[5:28] the predation icon in zoom
[5:31] toolbar, it looks like a glow.
[5:33] If you are on your cell phone
[5:36] or tablet locate the 3 dots,
[5:36] tap them lightly and put a
[5:39] check mark on your preferred
[5:40] language. Click done to
[5:42] activate and begin the
[5:44] interpretation. Once we you
[5:45] join the Spanish Channel, we
[5:47] recommend you shut up to make
[5:50] audio. So you only hear the
[5:51] Spanish interpretation if you
[5:54] are providing public comments,
[5:56] please indicate you need
[5:57] interpreters support before
[6:00] starting your comments. This
[6:01] will be after the item is
[6:04] presented and we call for
[6:05] public comments. Remember to
[6:07] speak in short statements of 2
[6:09] to 3 sentences, then pause for
[6:10] the interpreter to repeat what
[6:12] you've stated in English. He
[6:14] will be given 4 minutes to
[6:15] speak to allow additional time
[6:18] for the interpretation show.
[6:18] Will you please restate this
[6:22] in Spanish? Yes, Ron, think
[6:23] you.
[6:25] >> This because that those as
[6:27] a nation, that season those 2
[6:28] communities, they summon it
[6:31] up. Please protect. And and
[6:33] that that this a that yet
[6:36] Jason going to to come up with
[6:40] that Polsky a at and that that
[6:40] day in video month, Kitty
[6:41] saying that this young and
[6:42] they put a 6 and that has been
[6:47] 6 is. And I say, don't take
[6:48] any substance ceasing wind.
[6:48] That will be some of those who
[6:52] say not let them make that we
[6:54] can to those candidates. So
[6:55] but I him and people will meet
[6:58] of us. The nuance 6, it done
[7:01] both He said it's still a team
[7:01] of classes. We put date, but
[7:04] at the left lane that but the
[7:06] sun because person but this
[7:07] epa, nice experience is
[7:08] important. But in the south of
[7:12] us, the man to name a list.
[7:13] It's the news. He just a lot.
[7:14] But the in those come and that
[7:18] is fully closed. Put forward
[7:19] in the kit and is it coming?
[7:19] Sat in a Houston said they
[7:21] will need deputy.
[7:22] >> In 6 men But it is that
[7:27] those updates. Stone is, you
[7:28] it was known at outset,
[7:29] desperate. They play that if
[7:30] it didn't explain local state,
[7:33] I expect case cynical as he
[7:34] didn't want to meet with
[7:36] those. But I'm not. I if
[7:37] anything, it pull of the sun.
[7:38] And but I like to put this
[7:42] one, what you see the U.S..
[7:43] >> All right. Thank you. MADAM
[7:43] City clerk, would you please
[7:44] call the roll?
[7:46] >> Thank you. Mayor
[7:47] Councilmember Rogers,
[7:49] Councilmember MacDonald here,
[7:50] Councilmember Fleming
[7:52] Councilmember Ben Willows Air
[7:53] Councilmember Alvarez as it
[7:54] Vice Mayor Okrepkie here.
[7:56] Mayor step here. Let the
[7:57] record show that all
[8:01] councilmembers are present.
[8:02] >> Thank you again. Welcome
[8:04] everyone move on to item 4.1,
[8:08] our South Santa Rosa specific
[8:09] plan draft preferred
[8:09] alternative. All right. And
[8:10] welcome members are planning
[8:16] been great to have you back.
[8:20] Oh, here we go.
[8:22] >> Thanks. Good afternoon,
[8:23] mayor and council members and
[8:24] members of the Public, Amy
[8:25] Nicholson, supervising
[8:28] planner. Before we dive into
[8:29] the presentation, I'd like to
[8:31] take just a few moments to
[8:33] frame where we are in the
[8:34] specific plan process and what
[8:36] we are asking. Of the council
[8:39] today. So this presentation is
[8:41] focus on the draft, a
[8:44] preferred land use and
[8:44] circulation alternative for
[8:46] the South Center is a specific
[8:48] plan and that reflects the
[8:48] feedback on the 3
[8:51] alternatives. Were previously
[8:56] presented preferred
[8:57] alternative establishes a
[8:58] physical framework for the
[9:00] plan. So this is where housing
[9:01] commercial and other types of
[9:05] uses MAY occur. And at what
[9:06] intensity. And it also shows
[9:08] how people can safely move
[9:11] with men and through the plan
[9:15] area. So are primary. Ask is
[9:15] whether council is comfortable
[9:16] with the draft. Preferred
[9:19] alternative has proposed so
[9:20] that we can move into the next
[9:24] phase of policy development.
[9:25] As you'll hear in the
[9:26] presentation, community
[9:27] feedback has been critical in
[9:31] shaping the preferred
[9:32] alternative particular,
[9:34] particularly related to land
[9:36] use and density as well as
[9:36] connectivity and
[9:37] transportation safety
[9:41] improvements. We have heard
[9:43] significant concerns about
[9:45] housing affordability as well
[9:46] as displacement as a result of
[9:48] the specific plan. The
[9:50] importance of Mobile home Park
[9:50] preservation, tenant
[9:53] protections. And support for
[9:57] annexation. So you won't see
[10:00] these policies directly
[10:01] reflected in the draft
[10:02] preferred alternative that
[10:03] will be presented this
[10:06] afternoon but know that these
[10:08] will be part of the policy
[10:10] development process that staff
[10:13] is beginning work on now and
[10:15] will be presented to the
[10:17] council and the community as a
[10:17] part of the next round, which
[10:19] we anticipate will be later
[10:24] this fall. Just one other
[10:26] important important point that
[10:27] I'd like to make is the
[10:28] partnership between the city
[10:29] of Santa Rosa in the county of
[10:30] Sonoma. We've been working
[10:34] closely with the planning
[10:37] staff as well as starting
[10:38] conversations with the
[10:38] Community Development
[10:42] Commission as it relates to.
[10:43] Housing policies. Given that
[10:44] much of this plan areas
[10:45] actually within the county's
[10:48] jurisdiction. So our goal at
[10:50] the end of this process is
[10:51] that both the city Council and
[10:53] the Board of Supervisors adopt
[10:57] this planned so that it
[10:58] applies regardless of
[10:59] jurisdiction and any future
[11:03] annexation decisions. So with
[11:04] that, we welcome the council
[11:04] specific feedback on land use
[11:08] and circulation alternatives
[11:09] as well as any continue to
[11:10] impact on policy priorities as
[11:11] we move forward in the
[11:22] process.
[11:23] >> thank you. Supervisor
[11:23] Nicholson for that
[11:28] introduction Greetings, Mayor
[11:28] staff members of the council
[11:29] man is caught him. Okay. I'm a
[11:30] senior partner in the morning
[11:32] division. I'm very excited to
[11:35] present the draft preferred
[11:35] alternative portion of the
[11:36] South Centre is a specific
[11:43] plan. Thanks for background to
[11:44] an introduction. Supervisor
[11:47] Nicholson, I will move through
[11:48] the presentation.
[11:50] >> Just to talk about will be
[11:51] chatting about today. So we'll
[11:54] go over what the project has
[11:55] consisted of thus far at this
[11:55] point in the process and then
[11:56] describe the draft referred
[11:58] alternative itself and then go
[11:59] on to a next steps in the
[12:06] specific plan process. So this
[12:09] specific plan process started
[12:11] with visioning exercise isn't
[12:12] getting feedback about issues
[12:14] community members vision for
[12:14] the use Greater South Center
[12:19] is the area this consisted of
[12:19] virtual workshops, in-person
[12:23] workshops, a survey table
[12:24] various events and
[12:25] celebrations and things of of
[12:27] of that nature in the
[12:30] community. We eventually
[12:32] released. The alternatives
[12:34] report which reflected that
[12:35] feedback I've received
[12:36] throughout the average
[12:38] process. And as you'll
[12:41] remember, we did hold a study
[12:42] session with the City Council
[12:44] on MARCH 24th earlier this
[12:46] year and got some feedback
[12:48] that discuss later on in my
[12:50] presentation. So all that
[12:51] feedback that received on land
[12:54] use and circulation
[12:57] alternatives report is a
[12:58] serving is informing the
[12:59] preparation of the draft
[12:59] preferred alternative that we
[13:03] are discussing today the
[13:05] outreach that we've performed
[13:07] for that first far is that we
[13:08] did hold a virtual workshop
[13:10] late JULY. And our reach is
[13:11] actually still ongoing sort
[13:12] table in community events for
[13:13] meeting with neighborhood
[13:14] groups. We do have another
[13:15] survey open that is available
[13:19] for folks to take as well. We
[13:21] did present it to the planning
[13:22] Commission. We have a study
[13:23] session with them on Thursday
[13:25] of last week. Today's study
[13:26] session, obviously with the
[13:30] council and then on AUGUST,
[13:32] 25th, we are presenting to the
[13:33] county Board of Supervisors
[13:35] has a supervisor. Nicholson
[13:37] mentioned it is crucial to
[13:38] engage in an ongoing
[13:39] partnership with the county
[13:40] and ultimately get the boards
[13:43] by in on this effort. Then
[13:47] later on this year resident
[13:47] Wilson mention will move on to
[13:48] the preparation of the actual
[13:50] specific point itself. And
[13:52] that will include the creation
[13:53] of those goals and policies
[13:55] and the associated
[13:56] Implementation strategy. We'll
[13:56] also be preparing the
[14:00] environmental impact report
[14:01] shooting for adoption by the
[14:03] council in both the border,
[14:04] both the council and the Board
[14:05] of Supervisors later on in
[14:11] spring of 2027. And then the
[14:12] slide. It might be a little
[14:12] bit hard to see. But this kind
[14:14] of shows where we are in
[14:15] overall process. You'll know
[14:17] that we're a little bit over
[14:21] half way of two-year process.
[14:21] I will note as well that
[14:23] you'll see a lot of deliver
[14:25] exciting deliverables and
[14:26] milestones between now and
[14:28] good option of the plan. And
[14:29] I'll talk a little bit more
[14:30] about that during my
[14:35] discussion of next steps. So
[14:36] just to kind refresh the
[14:37] council's memory about what
[14:40] the alternatives consisted of.
[14:43] So as I mentioned, we took
[14:44] feedback from the community
[14:44] lived experiences and their
[14:45] visions for the South Center
[14:48] is area and brought forward 3
[14:51] district approaches for
[14:52] development and land use
[14:52] changes in addition to
[14:55] transportation network
[14:56] improvements to hopefully
[14:57] address those issues and
[14:57] achieve the vision is for the
[15:01] neighborhoods in this area.
[15:02] And all feedback did inform.
[15:05] As I mentioned, the creation
[15:06] of this trap preferred
[15:06] alternative that we're
[15:11] discussing today. And briefly
[15:13] recap each of the 3
[15:14] alternatives that we discussed
[15:15] in our meeting last last time
[15:17] during our study session. So
[15:19] the first alternative is a
[15:21] mixed use corridor on Centers
[15:24] avenue. It also uses smaller
[15:25] or larger parks on the eastern
[15:29] portion of the plan area. And
[15:31] then a consistent across all 3
[15:32] alternatives as you'll notice.
[15:34] We are maintaining the
[15:36] existing industrial
[15:36] designations to the West and
[15:39] southwest of the plan area.
[15:40] And then the second
[15:42] alternative is city center
[15:44] growth. So that really focuses
[15:45] increased residential
[15:46] developments surrounding the
[15:46] Costco shopping Center or
[15:50] center is a marketplace. And
[15:52] finally, number 3 is centers,
[15:53] which kind of takes a stripped
[15:54] down version of both one into
[15:57] and combines them to focus
[15:58] increased residential density
[16:00] to the south of Costco and a
[16:01] stripped down version of the
[16:04] mixed use district attorney of
[16:06] one primarily in the southern
[16:07] southern portion of the
[16:13] center's Avenue corridor. And
[16:15] so I've touched on a bit
[16:17] already, but we did, as I
[16:19] mentioned, a hold person and
[16:20] virtual workshops. We
[16:21] presented to broad range of
[16:23] the city and county boards of
[16:26] boards and commissions. We did
[16:27] hold study Sessions of the
[16:28] Planning Commission and City
[16:29] Council. In addition to the
[16:31] Summit County Planning
[16:33] Commission, we post a lot of
[16:35] exciting social media content,
[16:35] including Instagram, Real
[16:37] which I was very happy with.
[16:38] In addition to, you know, bus
[16:42] to our subscribers. And as I
[16:44] mentioned, tabling at existing
[16:48] celebrations, Cinco de Mayo
[16:50] the Bear Farm Harvest
[16:51] Festival. Was a great time
[16:52] being out in the community
[16:55] hearing from folks. You'll see
[16:56] a screen shot on the right
[16:58] side of the screen of our of
[16:59] our face. But one of our
[16:59] Facebook posts on that we
[17:00] posted about this effort as
[17:05] well. And then as far as
[17:06] takeaways, I want to start
[17:08] with just kind of summarizing
[17:09] the feedback of the council
[17:13] provided to during the MARCH
[17:14] 24th workshop. So we've heard
[17:15] a lot of feedback about
[17:17] Moreland specifically. We knew
[17:18] we wanted to see investment in
[17:22] infrastructure Moreland and
[17:23] that is bike and ped bicycle
[17:24] and pedestrian improvements.
[17:27] Increased connectivity to
[17:29] Centers avenue and then
[17:31] focusing on that investment
[17:31] for existing Moreland
[17:33] residents and not increasing
[17:34] residential densities in the
[17:38] Moreland neighborhood due to
[17:39] existing to potential
[17:40] exacerbation of existing
[17:41] infrastructure needs in the
[17:46] area. We also heard that we
[17:47] like to focus on supporting
[17:49] both new and existing
[17:49] businesses, particularly along
[17:53] the center is Avenue corridor
[17:55] and then we heard some
[17:56] excitement from the council
[17:56] about the of the Greenway
[17:58] connections that flows through
[18:03] the along the Todd Creek limit
[18:04] the are the reaches of the
[18:05] Todd Go through the planning
[18:09] area. And then we also heard
[18:10] support for him feel closer to
[18:12] the urban core, acknowledging
[18:14] some of the costs of
[18:15] infrastructure as you get
[18:17] further away from the the true
[18:20] Santa Rosa Urban core. And
[18:24] then we did broad support for
[18:26] keeping displacement issues
[18:26] and equity issues at the
[18:29] center of our approaches to
[18:30] the discussions of these of
[18:37] issues. And a lot of the
[18:38] public take away. The takeaway
[18:40] is that we received the public
[18:41] engagement are kind of on your
[18:44] screen as you'll see. And
[18:45] there's a lot of overlap
[18:47] between what the council and
[18:47] with County Planning
[18:48] Commission and center of
[18:54] Planning Commission all said
[18:55] but we did kind of we did
[18:58] notice we that we experience
[18:58] that most people like various
[19:00] parts of each alternative but
[19:04] didn't have super clear
[19:05] oftentimes we noticed and
[19:06] share that there needs to be a
[19:10] better East-West connection
[19:11] from Orland across one-on-one
[19:13] into the center is Avenue
[19:13] corridor and also back from
[19:20] west to east and then my that
[19:24] be provided by new multi-modal
[19:24] crossing a Bellevue, which is
[19:25] consistent with the center is
[19:28] a general plan 2050, and is
[19:29] supported by our
[19:31] transportation public works.
[19:34] Folks and then additional
[19:35] investment and Moreland. I
[19:36] didn't mention sidewalk safer
[19:38] streets, lighting public
[19:39] transit connections and just
[19:39] overall better connections
[19:44] throughout the city.
[19:45] >> And then there's a lot of
[19:46] excitement about Centers
[19:46] avenue improvements to allow
[19:50] for.
[19:55] >> Multi-modal experience and
[19:56] and then also, as I mentioned,
[19:57] keeping equity displacement.
[19:58] Top of mind as we navigate
[20:04] throughout this process. Ok,
[20:07] moving on to the draft
[20:07] preferred alternative. There
[20:08] are a couple maps that are a
[20:12] little bit hard to read. It's
[20:14] always a struggle trying to
[20:14] get all necessary information
[20:15] like to communicate. So the
[20:16] stock, let's through it. And
[20:17] if we need to revisit
[20:19] anything, I'm happy to do
[20:23] that. So we We did take that
[20:25] mixed use district from the
[20:25] first alternatives and
[20:27] centered on Center's avenue
[20:31] with a higher density
[20:33] residential to the south and
[20:33] north of couscous. We
[20:37] ultimately combines the urban
[20:38] the center of the city center
[20:39] growth with the mixed use
[20:43] district alternatives. And
[20:45] then we decided to integrate
[20:46] smaller parks throughout. I
[20:49] think a lot of the folks
[20:50] preferred kind meandering
[20:54] creek pathway that connects 2
[20:54] little outdoor open space
[20:56] moments along the along the
[20:57] Pathway and also provides an
[20:58] opportunity to traverse the
[21:00] plan area without needing to
[21:04] be on center is avenue. And
[21:06] then you'll see a broad
[21:08] diversity of housing with the
[21:09] high density housing centered
[21:12] along the center's Avenue
[21:14] corridor with media and then
[21:15] density as you stray further
[21:17] from the Saint Rose Avenue
[21:19] corridor. Keeping in mind of
[21:19] the infrastructure costs
[21:20] associated with the touch
[21:24] development. And then as I
[21:24] mentioned, maintain is
[21:26] industrial uses to the West in
[21:29] the south and I'd like to also
[21:31] note that none of the plan
[21:31] area, 17 mobile home parks are
[21:32] proposed to read as a nation
[21:39] of any kind. Okay. So I talked
[21:40] a little bit of
[21:41] transportation, but I was
[21:42] mainly focusing on the land
[21:44] use and that slide. So I just
[21:47] kind of briefly touch upon the
[21:48] transportation improvements
[21:49] that are contemplated with the
[21:51] draft, the preferred
[21:54] alternative. I mentioned the
[21:55] center's avenue improvements.
[21:56] So as you MAY remember, the
[22:00] city just adopted. They're
[22:01] active transportation plan.
[22:03] And the county is also adopted
[22:05] as well. So the thought is to
[22:07] just integrate the scientific
[22:08] findings and recommendations
[22:09] of those plans and in truth
[22:09] and then to this plan to make
[22:12] it a seamless, a seamless
[22:16] transition integration. And I
[22:17] mentioned the multimodal pass
[22:19] along the creek that would
[22:20] connect neighborhood Park
[22:22] cynic in existing and new
[22:26] neighborhoods in the plan area
[22:26] and then improving the
[22:27] one-on-one crossings both
[22:30] Baker and Todd Road. And then
[22:32] a new multi-modal crossing a
[22:33] Bellevue and potentially a new
[22:34] bike, a ped crossing at Rules
[22:39] Avenue. And then will now kind
[22:41] of zoom in a geographically to
[22:42] the both the north and in the
[22:43] central and southern parts of
[22:46] the plan area to see what are
[22:46] the actual changes from what
[22:47] is currently designated up
[22:50] there. We're getting so
[22:52] looking at the northern part
[22:54] of the plan mention that we're
[22:55] looking at increasing
[22:56] residential densities around
[23:00] the Costco area, leveraging
[23:02] the existing multitude of
[23:05] options for grocery and
[23:06] entertainment and kind of
[23:06] other daily needs that are
[23:08] provided in that Costco
[23:09] shopping center integrating
[23:12] existing and new neighborhood
[23:13] parks. I mentioned that the
[23:14] improved highway, 1, 1,
[23:19] overcrossing as well. And
[23:20] improving district overall
[23:23] existing corridors and new
[23:25] noon necessary connections to
[23:27] enhance walkability for both
[23:27] new and existing residents of
[23:33] the neighborhood. Moving south
[23:34] to the central and southern
[23:37] portions of the plan area so
[23:38] that this is where you'll see
[23:39] that mixed use district on
[23:41] Centers avenue with commercial
[23:42] centers and active retail
[23:43] frontage to enhance the
[23:46] walkability experience in the
[23:47] area. And they also noticed
[23:50] that transit hub is kind of a
[23:51] translucent because folks in
[23:54] transit wanted the flexibility
[23:59] to adjust specific location as
[24:00] development occurs. And as the
[24:01] city has an opportunity to
[24:01] procuring necessary right of
[24:06] way. And then you'll also
[24:07] notice the low and medium
[24:10] density housing to the east of
[24:12] the connection from Mel to
[24:12] Petaluma Hill Road Condit
[24:15] operative, your slide there.
[24:17] And then as I mentioned, all
[24:19] industrial uses are maintained
[24:19] and then you'll see Greenway
[24:23] connection that starts all the
[24:24] way. The top right of your
[24:24] screen, the northeast portion
[24:27] of the plan area, that
[24:28] neighborhood park and follows
[24:30] the creek path way all the way
[24:31] down through the transit hub
[24:32] and then eventually hopefully
[24:36] connecting with the runner
[24:37] Park. The smart train, smarter
[24:44] trail down to run a park. So
[24:47] here is our total projected
[24:48] build out and just want to cut
[24:49] caviar by saying this is a
[24:51] full build out realistically
[24:53] would likely not occur for
[24:54] several decades. So well,
[24:56] seems very striking at this
[24:57] point. It would be quite
[25:01] incremental in nature. And
[25:04] most of those new the 6300
[25:06] residential units would would
[25:07] result from the new mixed use
[25:08] areas along the center's
[25:10] avenue, which we envision and
[25:12] up to 40 units per acre. And
[25:16] they're also be a nearly
[25:17] 3 million square feet of a new
[25:17] nonresidential construction.
[25:19] And again, that is permit from
[25:23] the mixed use and industrial
[25:29] areas of the plant area. Okay.
[25:33] So I don't think I mentioned
[25:35] U.S. The specific plan area
[25:38] severely lacking in green,
[25:40] open spaces, which is why I'm
[25:41] really excited about that
[25:44] creek pathway and the job, the
[25:45] potential to build a new
[25:46] neighborhood parks that are
[25:46] all connected by that creek
[25:47] path. Where think it will be
[25:51] quite nice. But just 2, just
[25:53] take the city park standard is
[25:57] 6 acres per 1000 residents and
[25:59] the plan would include park
[25:59] space that would meet the
[26:01] standard of future residents.
[26:03] But that would likely be
[26:04] developed prior to full build
[26:06] out so existing residents
[26:07] would get to enjoy the benefit
[26:10] of the parks, provided
[26:11] specific plan and that would
[26:13] be more of the medium term
[26:14] need that is addressed and as
[26:21] opposed to be longer term.
[26:25] Next As I mentioned, we are
[26:27] continuing outreach. Our draft
[26:28] preferred alternative. The
[26:29] survey is still open. We have
[26:29] some meetings scheduled some
[26:34] table exciting tabling events,
[26:37] but that will continue through
[26:39] summer. And late summer early
[26:40] fall will start conducting
[26:43] some analysis of the preferred
[26:44] alternative and understanding
[26:45] the infrastructure and
[26:45] circulation needs of full
[26:48] build out. Towards the end of
[26:52] the year as Supervisor
[26:55] Nicholson mentioned, we will
[26:55] starch work shopping and
[26:58] actual specific plan and are
[27:00] with with the release of those
[27:03] things. And that will also
[27:04] include study session with the
[27:05] commission and the Council on
[27:14] those policy ideas. Yeah,
[27:15] eventually looking what other
[27:16] mentions looking to adopt the
[27:18] specific plant in spring of
[27:20] 2027. And that would be the
[27:21] specific plan and
[27:21] environmental impact in
[27:26] report. Okay. That's my
[27:29] presentation. The final slide
[27:29] just a few helpful qr codes
[27:30] for folks in the audience for
[27:34] for anybody watching online on
[27:35] the far left, one is just the
[27:36] website that is that is online
[27:38] on the city's website about
[27:40] this plan. Middle One is if
[27:42] you want to sign up for e-mail
[27:43] distribution, major milestone
[27:44] announcements and things of
[27:46] that nature. And then as I
[27:47] mentioned, preferred
[27:47] alternative survey is open
[27:49] right now. So if you want to
[27:50] take that, maybe save the
[27:51] bookmark, you can scan that qr
[27:55] code on the far right. And
[27:56] finally, there's our e-mail
[27:57] address, the Self Sr specific
[27:59] plan. That's That's our city
[28:00] Dot org. And then we have a
[28:01] phone number on there for both
[28:05] English and Spanish speakers.
[28:06] That concludes my
[28:08] presentation. I'm happy to
[28:09] entertain questions or or
[28:14] facilitated discussion.
[28:14] >> Current Connor, Amy just
[28:15] couldn't. Gabe, thank you very
[28:17] much. This is just a huge
[28:18] project project, unusually
[28:19] important for the city. Thank
[28:20] you for bringing this back to
[28:20] us. Looking to counsel the
[28:26] questions, MR. Alvarez. And
[28:27] thank you for the that's been
[28:30] put into the outreach. And
[28:31] really, you participation from
[28:32] the community less felt
[28:33] disenfranchised for decades.
[28:35] With that being said, I know
[28:38] it's hard to gauge metrics
[28:39] when it comes to
[28:40] participation. But how have
[28:42] you personally feel about the
[28:44] civic engagement from our
[28:46] community in regards to the
[28:46] future. Santa Rosa in the
[28:50] Southwest Corridor.
[28:51] >> Yeah, that's a great.
[28:52] That's a great question. I
[28:54] think you kind of speaks to
[28:55] the heart of And I think the
[28:56] people behind you speak to the
[29:00] fact as well right? Yeah, I
[29:01] think I think in some ways I
[29:02] will never feel like enough
[29:03] because there's always
[29:05] somebody who didn't hasn't
[29:05] heard about the planning
[29:09] process that we've been doing.
[29:09] But I do think throughout the
[29:11] employment of all the
[29:12] different strategies that I've
[29:15] discussed, you know, some some
[29:16] pretty conventional kind of
[29:17] government outreach come come
[29:21] see us at our workshop. Verse.
[29:22] Let me come eat with your
[29:24] neighborhood group or you'll
[29:25] see me at the Cinco de Mayo
[29:26] celebration or something like
[29:28] that. I think throughout the
[29:29] def all the different
[29:30] approaches that we took, I
[29:31] think I think we've gotten
[29:35] better. A better response. And
[29:37] I think a normal traditional
[29:38] conventional government
[29:42] outreach effort and I have
[29:43] been PRESIDENT Some of
[29:43] meetings and I'm impressed
[29:44] with the knot of people and
[29:46] the quality of comments and
[29:48] him and ideas that are being
[29:51] shared with the law. So I do
[29:51] appreciate it.
[29:54] >> in regards to alternatives
[29:55] and hearing. But the lived
[29:56] experience from the residents
[29:58] of Southwest Santa Rosa, what
[29:59] seems to be the biggest hurdle
[30:04] that they for seeing besides
[30:05] time and and you stated a
[30:08] little bit of the equitable
[30:10] housing when it comes to the
[30:12] word affordable. Are other any
[30:12] factors that you worry? The
[30:13] residents of Southwest Center
[30:16] is?
[30:18] >> Yeah, I think trying just a
[30:20] bit of my presentation, but I
[30:23] think just general lack of
[30:24] infrastructure investment,
[30:25] they don't feel safe walking
[30:27] on the street. They don't feel
[30:28] comfortable writing anything
[30:30] other than a car to go
[30:31] shopping or take their kids to
[30:32] school or do other kind of
[30:36] daily need just because of
[30:37] general lack of infrastructure
[30:39] development in the area.
[30:40] >> Would you feel that? That's
[30:41] part of the reason that
[30:43] committee believe
[30:45] connectivity, 2 Saint Rose
[30:46] Avenue from Southwest Santa
[30:46] Rosa is so vital and one of
[30:47] the concerns of the community
[30:53] absolutely. And in regards to
[30:54] the way that we're looking at
[30:58] the the corridor, as you know,
[30:58] with the quarter, but the
[30:59] central housing model or the
[31:02] different alternatives. How
[31:03] will all the houses are being
[31:05] built? Currently? Influence
[31:11] our? And result, for example,
[31:12] done medal every single time
[31:13] that drive anywhere near
[31:15] Bellevue or gone done Meadow.
[31:17] I have to pay attention to the
[31:19] road as it changes the housing
[31:20] is incredible amount of
[31:22] housing that's coming in and
[31:23] infrastructure being
[31:25] introduced in the area as
[31:26] well. But I'm wondering the
[31:30] decade from now, how will this
[31:31] study incorporate the new
[31:31] housing that's now being
[31:35] built?
[31:38] >> So I think as part of the
[31:38] analysis that is associated
[31:40] with this plan, we are
[31:43] considering projects that are
[31:43] recently construction projects
[31:45] that are currently under
[31:45] construction and finally
[31:47] projects that could be
[31:48] constructed and compliance
[31:51] with those plans. So and you
[31:52] know, 10, 10 years from now,
[31:53] if there's some projects that
[31:56] have popped up, we have
[31:57] analyzed the infrastructure
[31:59] needs of those of of those
[32:00] projects and ideally, it would
[32:03] be an improved experience.
[32:04] >> Now, this is a very loaded
[32:06] question. I do not expect the
[32:07] answer, but I ponder whenever
[32:12] we speak of housing. We are
[32:13] doing our best to build
[32:16] housing in Santa Rosa, even to
[32:16] the point where some are
[32:21] saying it's too much. With the
[32:22] increase in inventory
[32:23] ultimately in your opinions.
[32:24] And this is after all, just
[32:27] opinions lead to more
[32:28] affordable housing for those
[32:30] that live in the area or will
[32:32] we do see gap that exists in
[32:33] this extremely loaded
[32:34] question? And I do understand
[32:38] that.
[32:39] >> Thank you, councilmember. I
[32:42] believe that's an excellent
[32:45] question. Oftentimes from the
[32:47] whole conversation of building
[32:48] housing. How does it affect
[32:51] the economic vitality of Santa
[32:51] Rosa? And what does it look
[32:52] like in the future? Because
[32:53] housing does a lot of things,
[32:55] right? It brings people brings
[32:56] revenue with those
[32:57] individuals. Those individuals
[32:58] have needs and we have a lot
[33:00] of stress on the need for
[33:01] affordable housing. So really,
[33:02] what does it do to housing
[33:04] prices is often part of the
[33:06] process. I think a lot of that
[33:07] is dictated by the market is
[33:09] very difficult to determine
[33:10] what the value of prices,
[33:11] housing prices will look like
[33:14] 10 to 25 years from now. I
[33:16] think when we look at the
[33:17] strategies and it really and I
[33:18] you'll hear it from some of
[33:21] the public comment today. It's
[33:21] really about ensuring that we
[33:24] have the appropriate mix types
[33:25] for Ford abilities and
[33:26] protecting certain housing
[33:26] types. This development comes
[33:27] in also recognizing
[33:29] development is needed. But how
[33:30] do you really create that full
[33:31] spectrum of affordability? And
[33:32] that's really what a lot of
[33:34] these plans attempt to look
[33:36] at. It is I can't state that
[33:38] an affordable units truly
[33:38] affordable 20 years from now
[33:40] because that's the value of
[33:42] the dollar. But ensuring that
[33:44] we have that spectrum of
[33:45] affordability is really
[33:46] critical to these plans in
[33:47] understanding how we get that
[33:49] appropriate mix tape that
[33:51] really does drive our economic
[33:52] development desires does make
[33:53] sure we're taking care of our
[33:54] community from those from that
[33:56] variety of spectrums. And I
[33:58] think what you see today from
[33:59] the preferred alternative is a
[34:01] blending of those various
[34:02] types in attempt to try to
[34:04] meet that, to understand where
[34:05] the densities makes sense from
[34:06] a transportation standpoint
[34:07] from an economic development
[34:09] standpoint, also understand,
[34:10] and this will be a future
[34:11] conversation from the Counter
[34:13] Council where we need to
[34:14] protect that existing housing
[34:14] stock because that is
[34:15] important to the community
[34:16] from an affordability
[34:18] standpoint. So very critical
[34:19] part of the plan, but very
[34:20] difficult to determine at
[34:21] total dollar amount of what
[34:22] that looks like in the future.
[34:24] And thank you for taking a
[34:25] loaded question. And this was
[34:27] it just gives greatly
[34:27] appreciated.
[34:28] >> And I just asked you look
[34:30] towards the future. The
[34:31] following question is for you
[34:33] just look in the rearview
[34:34] mirror and the question is
[34:35] when it comes to the
[34:38] infrastructure that we
[34:38] currently have, you know, use
[34:41] Kern as an example with this
[34:43] lack of sidewalks, even in
[34:44] from Southwest Community Park,
[34:46] where we just all a light near
[34:50] for Burbank Avenue. Could you
[34:52] explain why there aren't
[34:53] sidewalks to this point and
[34:56] ultimately his responsibility.
[34:56] It is an understanding that we
[34:59] had with the developers of of
[34:59] yesterday compared to us
[35:05] moving forward.
[35:06] >> Yes, that that is another
[35:08] excellent point. Typically the
[35:09] expansion of infrastructure is
[35:12] often done with development
[35:14] and sidewalk is a really good
[35:15] example that most of the
[35:16] sidewalks that we have in
[35:17] Santa Rosa were a part of a
[35:18] development. Was the
[35:20] developers responsibility.
[35:21] Now, the problem that creates
[35:21] is how do you create
[35:23] continuity through that side?
[35:26] Way in for sidewalk?
[35:27] Infrastructure because there's
[35:28] often gaps where development
[35:29] is not occurring or developers
[35:33] not required to do so. So
[35:33] really one of the focuses that
[35:35] we have placed through the
[35:36] lens that we pondella Mont
[35:37] applications is how do we
[35:37] ensure that closing that
[35:39] sidewalk? Connectivity gap?
[35:40] There is a legal next. This is
[35:41] what the city can ask for is
[35:44] part of developments. So
[35:45] sometimes that creates
[35:46] challenges and increase that
[35:47] cap and infrastructure. I
[35:49] think what is a really
[35:49] important point to a specific
[35:52] plan because in many ways it
[35:54] is aspirational. It develops a
[35:55] set of infrastructure needed
[35:58] to support full density. It
[35:59] doesn't always factor into the
[36:00] city's current fiscal
[36:03] constraints. So when we
[36:04] determined really a cost of
[36:05] service analysis or a cost to
[36:06] the plan, which is a piece
[36:10] that will evolve it really
[36:11] attempts to understand how you
[36:12] come up with creative funding
[36:13] solutions that help to close
[36:15] the gap because you can't
[36:16] completely rely on development
[36:17] because development does occur
[36:18] in various areas and it
[36:20] doesn't necessarily go in a
[36:22] logical pattern. So as we
[36:23] progress through this and
[36:23] understand those really in
[36:26] critical points to the
[36:27] community, I think it
[36:28] important pieces injecting
[36:30] some creative revenue
[36:30] strategies where we can look
[36:31] at this plan area to
[36:32] understand how we could
[36:33] potentially address that in
[36:35] the future. That always, that
[36:36] hasn't always been factored in
[36:38] previous plans. Becomes very
[36:40] aspirational. And the reality
[36:41] is, is the appropriate funding
[36:41] is not necessarily there to
[36:44] close those gaps. But this is
[36:46] a good opportunity to take
[36:47] those challenges that we know
[36:48] of and try to figure out a
[36:49] better model moving forward
[36:52] that can prevent And just can
[36:56] minor of Burbank Avenue.
[36:58] >> And where there's a bit
[36:59] where this is not develop
[36:59] planning and residential and
[37:01] up and down the poured over
[37:02] Burbank Avenue and yet side of
[37:04] the street has sidewalks and
[37:04] even on that side of the
[37:09] street, is there anything that
[37:13] residents can advocate for in
[37:14] ordered have those sidewalks
[37:15] place, although it's already
[37:20] been developed.
[37:21] >> Yes, usually. And obviously
[37:23] this is getting into Director
[37:24] Hennessy's arena on how those
[37:25] types of projects are funded.
[37:25] So I'll talk about that. It
[37:29] really at a high level that's
[37:30] very much some of the
[37:32] challenges, right? Sidewalk is
[37:33] the private property owners
[37:33] spawn civility, the expansion,
[37:35] the sidewalk comes in through
[37:36] development. When we look at
[37:37] concepts such as safe routes
[37:39] to schools or other
[37:40] initiatives where they've
[37:41] looked at connectivity in
[37:42] providing safe routes through
[37:45] a pedestrian path. Those
[37:46] usually require other funding
[37:48] sources to close those gaps. I
[37:49] know much of the discussion
[37:52] about Rosalynn was gaps and
[37:52] infrastructure in
[37:53] understanding where sidewalk
[37:54] is and where you where it is
[37:55] and how do you focus on
[37:56] creating that connectivity?
[37:57] And where is the appropriate
[38:00] funding source for that? So I
[38:01] think it's always it's always
[38:02] interesting when development
[38:03] isn't occurring because that
[38:03] is based on what the economy
[38:04] is doing. We do go through
[38:06] peaks and valleys, but the
[38:07] need in the community still
[38:09] exists in the Valley of
[38:10] development. And how do we
[38:12] understand how that's
[38:14] prioritized over other capital
[38:15] looks projects and the
[38:16] expenditures associated with
[38:17] that that are needed to fund
[38:20] some of these. But that really
[38:21] becomes part of the capital
[38:21] project mix and understanding
[38:24] where those come in. As I
[38:26] mentioned in the previous
[38:27] response, understanding how
[38:28] much can be placed on
[38:29] development in pushing further
[38:31] for that is a critical piece
[38:31] to to make sure that that we
[38:33] don't have to piecemeal that
[38:35] together. But it is a bit of a
[38:37] challenge with those
[38:37] understanding the appropriate
[38:38] funding strategy for closing
[38:42] the sidewalk apps.
[38:43] >> And before I get the mic
[38:43] back where they want to thank
[38:45] both our city staff and my
[38:49] colleagues for the effort to.
[38:50] Install the sidewalk stall
[38:53] high visibility crosswalk in
[38:54] front of group from McMahon
[38:55] and Burbank and what has been
[38:57] done in that intersection
[38:58] there is greatly appreciate by
[38:59] many in the community. And I
[39:01] definitely want to give a pass
[39:02] to those that I know have so
[39:05] much to do with it, which is
[39:05] are so many more than I could
[39:14] Thank you. Thank you. MISS Of
[39:17] Thank you, Mayor.
[39:21] >> Thank you so much for the I
[39:22] think first, I just want to
[39:27] say that I the combination of
[39:28] the the alternatives of wanted
[39:31] to, you know, I know bringing
[39:31] it back from the last time
[39:34] that you were here. I really
[39:34] like the direction that we're
[39:38] going in now. Because it
[39:39] encompasses so many things, I
[39:39] think that's that's really a
[39:43] good thing. Couple things that
[39:48] I'm concerned about that.
[39:49] >> know in the beginning it,
[39:52] you know, it was mentioned
[39:52] that some things weren't
[39:54] necessarily going to talk
[39:54] about.
[39:57] >> Today that we're in a
[39:59] central part of this plan. I
[40:03] guess, is the the issues of
[40:03] displacement and affordability
[40:05] and mobile home parks.
[40:07] Annexation, all those things,
[40:12] which to me is everything. So
[40:17] I said, I just want to ask. In
[40:17] terms of displacement and what
[40:18] what folks, I think what I'm
[40:21] hearing from the community are
[40:22] concerned about is being
[40:24] pushed out of their homes.
[40:26] Once this development, which
[40:28] is the great thing. But
[40:28] there's a fine line between
[40:31] improvements and pushing
[40:32] people out as was done in San
[40:35] Francisco, quite frankly. So I
[40:37] don't want to see that happen,
[40:38] especially to this particular
[40:39] area, which I think is a
[40:42] really special area. So what
[40:45] I'm wondering is what kind of
[40:46] protections do we have? And we
[40:46] can talk about we're going to
[40:48] fight against displacement.
[40:50] But what kind of protections
[40:53] do the residents really have
[40:55] to? To the extent that it can
[40:56] ensure that they will not be
[40:57] displaced from this
[41:04] development in the long term.
[41:06] Thank you for that. The
[41:10] question councilmember. I
[41:14] would start the limited areas
[41:15] where
[41:16] >> we are proposing land use
[41:17] changes within preferred
[41:25] alternative. There are areas
[41:26] intended or envision for
[41:28] higher density housing and
[41:30] mixed use and then serve the
[41:32] lower spectrum of residential
[41:34] densities primarily within
[41:35] areas that do not contain any
[41:37] residents at all. Right now,
[41:41] these are parcels that are
[41:42] used for unlike commercial or
[41:45] industrial uses or they are
[41:49] vacant. And so Ed.
[41:53] >> We have made
[41:54] >> real attempt are focused. I
[41:55] understand where existing
[41:56] residents are located and
[41:58] where land-use changes are
[41:58] suggested are proposed as a
[42:01] part of this process. Another
[42:06] piece I would add is that.
[42:07] >> The policies related
[42:09] displacement or tenant
[42:11] protections. Those can be
[42:12] included as part of the
[42:15] specific plan as we move into
[42:16] policy development. So my
[42:16] comments previously were just
[42:20] to say that we hope to hear
[42:22] the council's feedback on the
[42:24] land use in circulation
[42:26] changes today. But of course,
[42:27] any feedback on policy
[42:28] direction as we move forward
[42:32] is also really important.
[42:33] Great. Thank That's And I hear
[42:37] what you're saying and one
[42:38] thing to that, I will ask
[42:38] about the traffic study. I
[42:40] notice that it's it's not out
[42:44] yet. The traffic study. Okay.
[42:46] Will that go to the planning
[42:46] Commission first and then
[42:47] maybe we'll see it later or.
[42:52] >> What's the plan for that?
[42:57] >> So once we've gotten the
[42:59] feedback from the community
[43:00] and from various boards and
[43:01] commissions in the council on
[43:02] the Board of Supervisors.
[43:05] >> We'll take all that
[43:07] feedback and prepare a final
[43:10] preferred alternative and then
[43:11] will performed the traffic
[43:12] analysis and infrastructure
[43:16] analysis. I don't believe that
[43:17] study session specifically on
[43:19] that portion, but it will made
[43:20] publicly available and we'll
[43:22] do continue conversations
[43:23] about policies and to a
[43:27] specific part itself.
[43:28] >> Okay. Thank you. I was just
[43:31] concerned about it because we
[43:31] know we know currently center
[43:32] is avenue was used as an
[43:35] alternative to want to one.
[43:35] And in high traffic peaked at
[43:38] times a day. So I know the
[43:40] idea is that we're going to
[43:41] have that or circulation
[43:43] multi-modal all that stuff.
[43:44] Wonderful. But I still have
[43:49] concerns. 10 years out, 20
[43:51] years out long that's going to
[43:53] look like for the community at
[43:56] at that point, once the
[43:58] though, all those 6,000 rather
[44:00] homes get built, you know
[44:00] what, what that traffic is
[44:03] going to look like. And you
[44:03] see that all just yeah. Just
[44:04] add very quickly to what
[44:10] Connor was mentioning. So
[44:11] there's a couple pieces next
[44:14] steps that I think are really
[44:15] important for.
[44:16] >> The community and our
[44:17] decision makers, including
[44:19] both Planning Commission and
[44:21] the council. So Amy mentioned
[44:22] earlier, we will be bringing a
[44:23] study session forward. Once we
[44:27] have a draft. But the draft
[44:28] policies ready, which is that
[44:30] the draft actual specific plan
[44:32] itself and it will include all
[44:32] the policies and we will bring
[44:33] it forward to both the
[44:34] commission and the council in
[44:38] a study session with a focus
[44:40] on. Did we get it right with
[44:43] looking at addressing some of
[44:43] the protections and the
[44:44] displacement issues that have
[44:46] been brought forward. So there
[44:48] will be that process in
[44:50] addition to additional
[44:51] outreach and a similar manner
[44:53] as what Connor Mission we've
[44:56] already done to the community,
[44:59] but specific to the
[45:01] evaluation. That will be part
[45:02] of the draft er that will come
[45:04] as a public hearing to the
[45:05] Planning Commission. So it
[45:07] will be out for the public for
[45:09] review as well as the planning
[45:10] Commission. Ultimately, it
[45:11] will come to the council as
[45:13] part of the final er and
[45:14] specific plan. So you'll have
[45:15] a chance to look at at that
[45:20] point as well. Thank you.
[45:23] >> Let's see. I had just one
[45:24] other question.
[45:25] >> Okay. So in it with respect
[45:29] to mobile home parks
[45:31] >> they are part of this plan,
[45:31] right? And I know that we're
[45:33] talking about the county and
[45:35] city. My understanding is
[45:36] there's about 14 mobile home
[45:40] parks in this. 4 of which are
[45:41] in the city. And I I passed
[45:42] them every day when I come
[45:47] home
[45:48] >> you know, looking at that.
[45:48] That's why I'm really
[45:49] concerned about displacement.
[45:51] I know that to my
[45:56] understanding is the counties
[45:57] policy is so much stronger
[45:59] than ours. And I know that's
[46:01] what I've heard. I haven't
[46:02] looked at myself, but it's
[46:05] what I've heard. So I'm
[46:06] wondering because I know the
[46:07] last time that you are all
[46:08] here and we were talking about
[46:09] how you are going to work
[46:12] together with the county. Is
[46:16] there some room for you all to
[46:16] look at their policy and see
[46:17] if we can strengthen our
[46:21] policy to match that if not
[46:21] all of you, I would. I would
[46:23] hope that both the county, the
[46:25] city would look at making them
[46:25] even stronger what we don't
[46:30] want is for folks to be.
[46:32] Displaced and or displaced
[46:33] rather. And and for me that
[46:37] that is really important. So
[46:38] I'm just wondering, you know
[46:38] what, what do you foresee in
[46:40] terms of that? And when you're
[46:41] putting together the final
[46:47] plan? Thank you for the very
[46:51] important question. But
[46:52] tomorrow we actually have a
[46:54] meeting with city and county
[46:55] staffs.
[46:56] >> Specifically to it to
[46:59] discuss housing policies as we
[47:00] move forward through this Part
[47:03] of that conversation, we'll be
[47:05] looking at the existing
[47:06] protections that are in place
[47:07] within the city and how those
[47:09] differ from what the county
[47:11] has and that can help to
[47:13] inform how we develop policies
[47:14] as we move forward in the
[47:17] specific plan process. So
[47:22] we're very mindful of. The the
[47:25] layers jurisdiction and
[47:26] different staffer involved in
[47:27] in these protections and and
[47:28] implementing them and want to
[47:31] ensure that. We are addressing
[47:34] the comments that we hear and
[47:37] that we are truly
[47:38] understanding what's happening
[47:40] now then what can be done in
[47:40] the future as a part of the
[47:44] specific plan. And I just have
[47:45] one more question. It's around
[47:48] the 6300.
[47:53] >> a future housing I I am not
[47:54] against market housing. Want
[47:54] to be really clear about the
[47:55] exit think that was
[47:58] misunderstood. I am. I am for
[48:01] a diversity of different
[48:03] housing types. I really want
[48:04] to see more affordable
[48:05] housing, not just market rate.
[48:08] And I know the way things are
[48:09] set up now that what ends up
[48:09] happening more 9 times out of
[48:12] 10. I'm just going to say is
[48:13] that we end up with market
[48:17] rate housing and I think, you
[48:22] know, when I look at a couple
[48:23] of last housing projects that
[48:24] were done that were actually
[48:29] affordable and and how. From
[48:29] my understanding how quickly
[48:30] they were filled versus the
[48:31] market rate, which doesn't get
[48:33] feel very quickly. I think
[48:36] it's a question of what we
[48:39] need versus what we want. I
[48:41] know we want nice. Nice
[48:41] looking housing. I do, I think
[48:47] it all should be nice on him.
[48:48] C is as a person that I
[48:49] consider myself low-income.
[48:54] Not poor, but low-income. And.
[48:56] Much of my my district is that
[48:56] in my district isn't the only
[49:00] one and I I so I see what the
[49:01] needs are more than what we
[49:06] would what we want. And so
[49:06] just thinking about that even
[49:07] the number the number of folks
[49:08] that are considered low
[49:13] income. That try fill those
[49:14] needs as well. Not just
[49:16] marketing and I'm sorry that
[49:17] it question. But I guess my
[49:18] question of at thinking about
[49:23] that is how can we promote
[49:23] that? As we're looking for
[49:24] folks to develop of this
[49:28] house. Beyond the 50% that we
[49:29] have right now, it's I don't
[49:33] think is enough and the low
[49:37] what folks, I always tell me
[49:39] too low fees that are charged,
[49:39] if you choose not to do any
[49:45] affordable housing. Thank you
[49:48] for that question. So, yeah, I
[49:49] think those are very valid
[49:50] points. So the 6300 units that
[49:52] were mentioned, those are not
[49:54] identified as
[49:54] >> market radar affordable it.
[49:58] It is just a total number. And
[49:58] so I think, you know, as we
[50:00] start looking at the policies
[50:01] that we've talked about, we
[50:04] can certainly add in some
[50:05] language to help emphasize the
[50:06] fact that we really want this
[50:10] to be diversified area. But,
[50:11] you know, I also do want to
[50:13] emphasize the city has our
[50:13] regional housing needs numbers
[50:14] that we have to address. And
[50:17] so there will be an emphasis,
[50:18] you know, from our perspective
[50:20] to make sure that we are
[50:22] addressing that as we move
[50:22] forward with policy and in our
[50:28] conversations with developers.
[50:32] >> Thank you. MISS McDonald.
[50:36] Thank you for the
[50:37] presentation. I too appreciate
[50:38] the mixture of the alternative
[50:39] plans. I think you guys did a
[50:41] great job from council
[50:44] feedback and I appreciate
[50:45] that. I I was looking for a
[50:50] slight 11 on a couple things
[50:52] >> you're seeing in here that
[50:54] Mobile home parks were not
[50:55] proposing re designation and
[50:57] just going off of what?
[51:02] Councilmember Ben Willis said.
[51:03] Is there a way for us to
[51:05] protect the mobile home parks
[51:08] from being re-designated to
[51:09] anything but that or have you
[51:11] seen policies put in place
[51:14] where there's sort of an
[51:16] overlay to prevent them from
[51:17] selling to make them even
[51:20] affordable housing because we
[51:21] know mobile home parks are one
[51:22] of the most affordable ways
[51:23] for families to be able to
[51:26] stay in parks. And that goes
[51:29] for our senior parks as well
[51:30] family mobile home parks. And
[51:30] I'm just curious, have you
[51:35] seen any language like that?
[51:36] >> Thank you for that
[51:41] question. So I to start the
[51:43] time as mentioned. Already
[51:44] have in the city a mobile home
[51:46] land use designation as well
[51:47] as a specific zoning district
[51:49] for that. It's different in
[51:51] the county. But in the city,
[51:53] we do have that. And the the
[51:54] allowed uses within that
[51:58] mobile home zoning is very
[51:59] limited. But something
[52:00] certainly that, you know,
[52:01] given all of the comments and
[52:02] concerns that we are receiving
[52:04] from folks that live in those
[52:06] areas, certainly something
[52:07] that we can start looking at
[52:08] as we move forward again from
[52:09] a policy standpoint, but also
[52:11] looking at our zoning
[52:12] regulations to see if we want
[52:14] to shrink that down even more
[52:18] to make it more limited to
[52:22] that housing. And so any
[52:25] future requests to change it
[52:25] to something other than that
[52:27] would be through both general
[52:28] plan amendment which would
[52:29] have to come before the
[52:31] council. Thank you for that
[52:32] clarification on on that
[52:34] process. And what we can do is
[52:37] we potentially titan language
[52:38] moving forward on those
[52:39] specific areas that are
[52:42] currently designated as mobile
[52:43] home parks.
[52:45] >> what I notice on slide 11,
[52:46] specifically, if you're able
[52:48] to pull it up, you don't need
[52:49] to.
[52:50] >> But I see a lot of light
[52:51] yellow. That's as low
[52:53] residential medium-low
[52:54] residential. When I'm looking
[52:56] at your color coordinated map,
[52:59] which I appreciate, by the
[53:00] way, but I am seeing a lot of
[53:03] mixed use and it and as you
[53:06] said, Jessica, was that that
[53:08] 6300 units, they're not
[53:10] determined of how that is
[53:11] going to go. But if I'm
[53:12] looking on these color
[53:14] coordinated maps, wooden, it
[53:15] show that we actually have a
[53:16] lot of area that's going to be
[53:20] for. Low residential or is
[53:22] that considering that price of
[53:23] the market or just low
[53:24] residential of how many
[53:26] they're putting in those
[53:29] areas? Those designations are
[53:31] density. So low density
[53:34] residential today. Units per
[53:38] acre me say The colors
[53:39] differentiate amount of units.
[53:41] Second on the side doesn't
[53:42] identify the affordability. So
[53:47] yeah, when I said the 6300
[53:48] units aren't and what I meant
[53:49] by that is that they are
[53:52] identified far as the level of
[53:53] affordability that those
[53:54] units, it is just the density
[53:56] of those areas that's going to
[53:56] do with the affordability.
[53:57] Thank you for that
[53:59] clarification not makes more
[53:59] sense. What councilmember
[54:02] basically thing because I was
[54:03] thinking they actually meant a
[54:06] fairly large area. So thank
[54:07] you for that. I think that is
[54:11] most of my. Questions. One of
[54:14] the questions I had it you had
[54:15] on the map, Connor, where you
[54:17] had connectivity from south to
[54:21] our part the east to west on a
[54:22] couple different roads. Could
[54:23] you tell me what that would
[54:24] look like for connectivity? I
[54:26] know we just did the Hearn
[54:27] we're talking about a bridge
[54:31] can to connect, you know,
[54:32] North West and northeast. But
[54:33] could you tell me what that
[54:36] might look like? France
[54:37] connectivity? Would it be
[54:38] under over the freeway or what
[54:43] are looking at for those?
[54:44] >> Sorry, could you? Thank you
[54:45] for the question. Could you
[54:46] clarify? Are you looking at
[54:49] specific think it might be?
[54:50] >> Under the trance and or
[54:51] transportation or there was
[54:54] something that said improved
[54:55] existing highway 101 cross
[54:56] Crossing. So I think it's on
[55:01] slide. Twelves. There's some
[55:02] little arrows going back for
[55:04] us as proposed highway 101
[55:05] crossing. You have a couple
[55:09] different areas.
[55:11] >> All-Star carrying improved
[55:12] existing. So part of the
[55:15] feedback and I mean, driven on
[55:16] Todd Road crossing many times
[55:19] and it's not a very
[55:20] comfortable that will be
[55:23] partnering with City County
[55:23] public works folks to see if
[55:27] there's any sort of traffic
[55:28] design changes or striping and
[55:29] things of that nature. It just
[55:31] kind of identifies that it is
[55:31] existing issue that we'd like
[55:36] to improve. It light for to
[55:40] improve the experience of
[55:40] vertically that rose to the
[55:42] Moreland neighborhood, getting
[55:44] Centers avenue and then moving
[55:45] north, you'll see a proposed.
[55:48] I went to one crossing that
[55:49] first one that Robles that is
[55:50] kind of a contemplated to be
[55:55] just a bike and ped bridge.
[55:56] And then the one North
[55:57] Bellevue is contemplated to be
[56:01] vehicles as well. And as we
[56:01] know from the herd
[56:03] overcrossing things get put on
[56:04] maps are in plans and that
[56:06] takes years and years of cip
[56:08] proposition and fundraising.
[56:09] But this is kind of that
[56:10] planning exercise at this
[56:13] point.
[56:14] >> Great. That's helpful to
[56:15] know. I'm glad you're meeting
[56:17] with the county to remind them
[56:21] that any area that still in
[56:22] county jurisdiction should be
[56:23] having infrastructure done by
[56:25] the county coffers. Before we
[56:27] take over from the city. So I
[56:28] hope you can convey that
[56:29] message in your meetings
[56:33] tomorrow as well. Thank you.
[56:33] Thank you. And the questions
[56:38] from council. Let's open it up
[56:39] to public comment. Then we'll
[56:41] start in council chambers and
[56:42] we have some names in front of
[56:44] If you do want to make public
[56:45] comment, you consider card the
[56:46] back. Otherwise, please be
[56:47] waiting by the podium when
[56:48] it's time speak.
[56:49] >> And if you're online,
[56:51] please raise your hand or dial
[56:52] star 9. Still, we move to
[56:54] online public comment next. We
[56:56] know you have a comment. Let's
[56:59] start with those who submit
[57:01] their cars start with Caitlin
[57:03] and again Linda. Caitlin,
[57:05] Abby. And if you can use both
[57:05] podiums so that we can move
[57:09] through this efficiently. That
[57:10] would be appreciated. And if
[57:12] you do need help with
[57:13] translation, then we will have
[57:15] an extra 2 minutes. It will
[57:17] meet him in a public comment,
[57:18] it's at translator is required
[57:20] provide extra 2 minutes. So,
[57:23] Linda, you have the floor.
[57:25] >> Hello, everybody. It's
[57:26] Lena. For the record have not
[57:27] gone. Tenant organizer with
[57:27] the North Bay Organizing
[57:29] Project in Sonoma County
[57:31] tenants Union last week. Santa
[57:32] Rosa Planning Commission. We
[57:33] had over 35 residents who live
[57:37] in the Santa Rosa plan area.
[57:39] The South Center is a specific
[57:40] plan and brought for their
[57:41] concerns and need for
[57:43] essential anti displacement
[57:45] protections for the mobile
[57:45] home parks and aims of
[57:47] emergency concerns happening
[57:49] right now, residents of
[57:50] Western and cause a mobile
[57:50] home parks are primarily
[57:52] immigrants. Spanish speaking
[57:53] families, veterans, survivors
[57:56] of domestic abuse, single
[57:56] mothers, people living with
[57:57] disabilities and elders living
[58:01] on fixed incomes. Many of the
[58:03] folks who live in these parks
[58:04] experience displacement, not
[58:05] only from the 2008 financial
[58:07] crisis, but also from the 2017
[58:09] wildfires. Folks are enduring
[58:11] pressures not only from
[58:13] possible displacement from the
[58:14] south Rent Santa Rosa,
[58:15] specific area, but also from
[58:16] corporate investor, Harmony
[58:17] Communities who recently
[58:22] bought their parks. Residents
[58:23] have faced an onslaught of
[58:24] intimidation and harassment by
[58:24] harmony, including seven-day
[58:27] notices. The overnight removal
[58:27] of 40 shaved essential shape,
[58:28] providing trees, park
[58:30] maintenance to glatt, it's
[58:32] cetera. You know, harmony is
[58:35] investing right now. Not 5 of
[58:37] the 9 parks that Harmony
[58:38] Communities owns is in Santa
[58:40] Rosa. And 3 of those are in
[58:41] the unincorporated area in the
[58:42] South. Santa Rosa specific
[58:44] plan. If the city and county
[58:45] move forward, we need to see
[58:47] some essential renter
[58:48] protections that includes
[58:49] baseline targets for
[58:51] preserving housing for
[58:55] extremely low and very
[58:56] low-income households,
[58:57] protecting mobile home parks
[58:59] through specific land use
[59:00] designations, stronger, rent,
[59:01] stabilization and safeguards
[59:03] against Park closure. We want
[59:05] to see just cause protections
[59:06] for all renters in Santa Rosa
[59:06] to match or exceed protections
[59:10] in the county. We want to
[59:11] adopt a rent, stabilization
[59:13] and cap of annual rent
[59:16] increases by 3%. You know, we
[59:16] support investment in plant
[59:17] area but want to make sure
[59:18] that the folks who live here
[59:18] can stay rooted here. Thank
[59:19] you so much.
[59:25] >> Thank you, Caitlin. Thank
[59:26] you. And good afternoon, Mayor
[59:28] stop and council members. I'm
[59:28] Kate by housing policy analyst
[59:32] at Legal aid Sonoma County.
[59:32] And today I'm here to urge the
[59:36] city to invest in South Santa
[59:37] Rosa without displacing the
[59:38] low-income working Latino and
[59:39] immigrant families who live in
[59:40] these neighborhoods and called
[59:43] him home median household
[59:44] income. Here is a $60,000.
[59:47] That's a full 35% below the
[59:49] citywide average. And this
[59:50] area which has long deserved
[59:52] access to services to
[59:54] infrastructure and 2 basic
[59:55] amenities. The residents in
[59:59] the rest of Santa Rosa enjoy
[59:59] they deserve to have
[1:00:00] investment that starts with
[1:00:01] protecting housing, stability
[1:00:04] of families who live here.
[1:00:05] This area has 17 mobile home
[1:00:09] parks or 1000 homes in rv's.
[1:00:10] These are some of the last
[1:00:10] naturally occurring,
[1:00:12] affordable housing that we
[1:00:14] have and corporate investors,
[1:00:15] as you've heard, have already
[1:00:16] been acquiring parks in
[1:00:17] anticipation of rising
[1:00:19] property values in the area.
[1:00:22] When a single new affordable
[1:00:26] units of housing cost $500,000
[1:00:27] to develop preserving what we
[1:00:29] have is one of the most cost
[1:00:30] effective tools that the city
[1:00:31] has its disposal to prevent
[1:00:34] displacement and homelessness.
[1:00:36] And the plan zoning should
[1:00:37] reflect the city's actual
[1:00:38] needs. Appreciate the comments
[1:00:40] from some of the council
[1:00:42] members today. City is on pace
[1:00:45] to build only 56% of its very
[1:00:49] low reena targets by 2030.
[1:00:50] Meanwhile, it's on target to
[1:00:51] build 231% of its above
[1:00:54] moderate income housing. And
[1:00:55] we see this in the low
[1:00:56] density, the single-family
[1:00:57] zoning on the east side tied
[1:01:00] to the Todd Creek Development,
[1:01:01] which is rumored to be the
[1:01:02] first project to come forward
[1:01:02] to materialize out of this
[1:01:06] plan. Placement also cares
[1:01:06] environmental consequences. I
[1:01:08] want to highlight that in a
[1:01:09] community that's already
[1:01:10] significantly environmentally
[1:01:13] burdened and has had
[1:01:14] significant health disparities
[1:01:15] from the rest of the city and
[1:01:17] the county. So please
[1:01:18] highlight and to displace the
[1:01:19] measure part of this plan.
[1:01:20] Happy to work with council and
[1:01:21] staff on any of those specific
[1:01:24] policies. Thank you. Thank
[1:01:26] you. Calyn over at me. And
[1:01:27] then Norman Marina, an Angel.
[1:01:28] Abby will start with you in
[1:01:30] the norm or in an angel.
[1:01:31] >> Have had. Thank you so
[1:01:33] much. Good afternoon, mayor
[1:01:34] and council members. I'm
[1:01:35] representing Santa Rosa Yimby
[1:01:38] an all volunteer organization
[1:01:41] of over 500 Santa Rosa
[1:01:43] residents dedicated to
[1:01:44] building Santa Rosa into an
[1:01:45] affordable, vibrant and
[1:01:48] low-carbon city. We're pleased
[1:01:49] that the proposed alternative
[1:01:50] addresses are top priorities
[1:01:52] for Santa Rosa. One of which
[1:01:54] is concentrating housing
[1:01:57] density near downtown,
[1:01:58] improving connections between
[1:02:03] East and West and recognizing
[1:02:04] the need for multi-modal
[1:02:05] corridor improvements along
[1:02:08] Santa Rosa Avenue.
[1:02:11] >> We encourage you to propose
[1:02:12] some additions.
[1:02:15] >> To the plan, which include
[1:02:17] increasing the density near
[1:02:21] the Eastern Urban wildlife
[1:02:21] interface to generate the
[1:02:23] revenues that will be needed
[1:02:25] to offset the new roads,
[1:02:29] utilities and vegetation
[1:02:31] maintenance that the new
[1:02:33] development will require in
[1:02:37] our proposed low density is
[1:02:39] not adequate to pay for the
[1:02:39] costs of maintaining the
[1:02:41] necessary public
[1:02:43] infrastructure. Secondly, in
[1:02:43] order to maintain the
[1:02:46] affordability of the Moreland
[1:02:47] neighborhood, encourage
[1:02:48] increased housing supply in
[1:02:51] that neighborhood. Offering
[1:02:52] additional housing
[1:02:53] opportunities will help keep
[1:02:55] the cost of housing at an
[1:02:58] affordable level. And 3rd to
[1:02:58] retain the possibility of a
[1:03:02] future smart station in the
[1:03:05] South area that will serve the
[1:03:06] proposed cluster of industry,
[1:03:10] housing and retail as we in
[1:03:10] the future decreased
[1:03:13] dependency on cars. Thanks so
[1:03:16] much, MISS Arnold. Thank you.
[1:03:16] Norm a marina and then angel
[1:03:17] and use both podiums. Please.
[1:03:23] >> Normal.
[1:03:24] >> Hi. My name is Norma
[1:03:24] Fernandez. And I lived in was
[1:03:28] to mobile home park for 15
[1:03:28] years. I live in one of the
[1:03:31] mobile home parks. They're 17.
[1:03:33] And if I'm not wrong and I
[1:03:36] just come to ask him plea that
[1:03:38] we would not be removed. We
[1:03:38] know you're building. We know
[1:03:41] it looks beautiful rcd. If it
[1:03:44] looks nice and clean, we're
[1:03:45] part of harmony are many. We
[1:03:47] have no management. We have no
[1:03:50] one to look after us. We're
[1:03:53] just the bandit I buy by the
[1:03:53] freeway at an apartment or
[1:03:57] space number. 64 and I have no
[1:03:59] lightning. I've been asked and
[1:04:01] rejected my petition if I
[1:04:02] don't like it, I can be
[1:04:05] removed. We have the big board
[1:04:06] that, of course, they're going
[1:04:07] develop new apartments. They
[1:04:09] could make more money. I am a
[1:04:12] widow. I have my grandkids. My
[1:04:14] son and myself leaving that we
[1:04:16] all live in different mobile
[1:04:18] homes. We try to keep it clean
[1:04:20] ourselves. We think we deserve
[1:04:23] a little sharing a little
[1:04:25] respect were all together here
[1:04:26] and we appreciate each and
[1:04:29] every one here.
[1:04:30] >> That is taking a little a
[1:04:31] little easier on and say
[1:04:33] hello, we're not alone when
[1:04:34] that, but that home before my
[1:04:35] husband passed away, I was
[1:04:37] excited to get it. Now I'm
[1:04:39] afraid now. I can speak out if
[1:04:40] I don't have a light mean
[1:04:42] outside and I'm in the dark
[1:04:43] spot. Well, that's ok, because
[1:04:46] if you complain you're out, if
[1:04:47] you don't like it, you can
[1:04:49] afford a new warehouse. I know
[1:04:51] I cannot. That's why I'm
[1:04:53] there. I appreciate having a
[1:04:54] home, but I do not appreciate
[1:04:58] being left alone. When I see
[1:05:00] the streets, developing a lot
[1:05:02] new mobile homes in apartments
[1:05:04] and it looks gorgeous. I want
[1:05:05] to look like that too. I want
[1:05:08] to have a house like that.
[1:05:09] >> how we're going to do it if
[1:05:10] we cannot even keep our little
[1:05:13] mobile home safe. We all fear
[1:05:14] we are all talking about it.
[1:05:15] And I appreciate your time and
[1:05:18] please make sure we have
[1:05:19] enough to get inside our
[1:05:20] parking spot. We do not have
[1:05:22] ability to get in there. If
[1:05:24] somebody goes to mobile home
[1:05:26] Parks, thank you. Appreciate
[1:05:27] it.
[1:05:28] >> Thank you. Ms Fernandez,
[1:05:29] Marina Angel and then Alex
[1:05:36] Marina.
[1:05:37] >> And when a start of a new
[1:05:39] Levy man, up to the U.S. Will
[1:05:41] be kept in the side. You
[1:05:42] living in those top goal, you
[1:05:43] not been normal. This blast.
[1:05:44] And then Reebok is Maureen is
[1:05:46] momentum. Marino siento I we
[1:05:47] get the instructions.
[1:05:50] >> Thank you, Mayor.
[1:05:51] >> Let me bring one of the
[1:05:55] interpreters back over.
[1:05:57] >> Claudia or low shot lotion.
[1:05:58] Am I bringing you back to
[1:05:58] English side? If so, please
[1:06:16] raise your hand. Ok, low show.
[1:06:17] >> We have snow on the side of
[1:06:21] the is.
[1:06:22] >> Okay on those this blessing
[1:06:23] and you don't really think
[1:06:27] that one. You normally Miami
[1:06:30] this something was Bacchus,
[1:06:30] get in on those who want a lot
[1:06:35] rain that. In honor of this
[1:06:36] getting mean in your normal.
[1:06:43] So Thi You give them put them
[1:06:43] on the open sea on unless
[1:06:44] Kaczynski Senate see them put
[1:06:46] in that now on the d a isn't
[1:06:50] this asked that animals see
[1:06:51] Yeah. You have a one just
[1:06:53] based on a silent best game.
[1:06:53] Which of this in on those pull
[1:07:00] them of this. I at ease. Nice
[1:07:01] to see them I knew that. But
[1:07:02] again, no known women then was
[1:07:05] the little storm was just so
[1:07:06] that the name was they did
[1:07:06] join with pro that you so
[1:07:12] violent reign fact, I knew
[1:07:12] then that can North Beth in
[1:07:13] ways that eventually they be
[1:07:14] in that.
[1:07:17] >> Casing at that moment do,
[1:07:20] ok, we would like to have r.
[1:07:23] Rent to fair and we would
[1:07:27] also. Like to not be
[1:07:29] discriminated against or
[1:07:31] harassed. We would like to be
[1:07:32] paid attention to the things
[1:07:36] that we need. We don't want to
[1:07:36] be denied.
[1:07:37] >> And we also want to keep
[1:07:40] our home. We are older adults
[1:07:41] and we have hard time
[1:07:41] functioning and moving around
[1:07:46] and we cannot move so fast and
[1:07:48] we want them to respect us and
[1:07:49] not raise our rent. So end up
[1:07:52] with a look at. We have the
[1:07:52] need to get the in Festus
[1:07:53] Court. This about You just put
[1:07:54] up with it. Think they want to
[1:07:55] in place to get used advocate
[1:07:58] eating, to put this u n okay,
[1:08:05] put Guess going lie.
[1:08:06] >> invisible. Kevin wasn't
[1:08:06] just based on island. That's
[1:08:07] I. Yeah. I mean, you something
[1:08:12] in me. Wilson was thrown
[1:08:13] that's what news is. The give
[1:08:13] most apoyen knocking on the of
[1:08:14] I and others because it
[1:08:15] normally and that's where we
[1:08:16] let me in fact, it in this
[1:08:17] that most. We'll see you on
[1:08:20] the ballot is give on.
[1:08:24] >> So we you guys. We would
[1:08:27] like you guys to please stop
[1:08:28] harassing us. When you go over
[1:08:29] there did not raise our rent.
[1:08:30] We are older adults. We need
[1:08:32] help. We also have children
[1:08:33] there and we don't want to
[1:08:40] move. Thank you.
[1:08:43] >> And Marina, thank you for
[1:08:45] coming across the U.S.. We
[1:08:52] want to see Angel Alex
[1:08:53] >> We'll be sharing his
[1:08:53] comments in Spanish and has
[1:08:54] asked that. I interpret for
[1:08:58] him. Thank you very much.
[1:08:59] >> We went that but I you
[1:09:00] know, I'm going a part of the
[1:09:02] deal.
[1:09:03] >> So afternoon, everyone, my
[1:09:04] name is on But the
[1:09:06] >> So you in this way
[1:09:08] >> I'm from in Atlanta.
[1:09:09] >> They will quote that knew
[1:09:11] even then that. But okay.
[1:09:11] >> I have 4 years living in
[1:09:14] Western Mobile home park.
[1:09:15] >> So you'd be deemed this a
[1:09:20] companion capital owner.
[1:09:20] Mothers go missing Comaneci
[1:09:21] Thelma, Guinea and the singer
[1:09:23] and the utility.
[1:09:24] >> You know, I am a recent
[1:09:26] victim of the company, Harmony
[1:09:27] Communities about 4 months ago
[1:09:29] they started charging me rent
[1:09:32] and I have lost 1001 those
[1:09:35] under anatomy and doesn't want
[1:09:36] you $1500 paying extra for the
[1:09:39] rent. They're charging me.
[1:09:39] >> But I will say this. You
[1:09:41] indulge in the
[1:09:43] >> I used to pay $780 for
[1:09:44] MySpace rent.
[1:09:46] >> In moment that on their
[1:09:50] o'Malley's, any main call, you
[1:09:51] settles yet meant that on the
[1:09:53] inside most elite. My.
[1:09:54] >> And they just they increase
[1:09:56] it to a is that, you know, is
[1:09:58] in Spanish, Mexican Spanish
[1:09:59] that I can't even say. But
[1:10:00] from one day to the next they
[1:10:01] increased it.
[1:10:02] >> Only double by wind
[1:10:03] overnight. Yeah, man,
[1:10:07] Sacramento.
[1:10:11] >> I called Sacramento up.
[1:10:12] >> Macomb against Sacramento
[1:10:13] Judge will come at the end.
[1:10:14] Can double the U.S. Have We'll
[1:10:16] get several not gone by in
[1:10:19] Wailua. Casey Kenney a and
[1:10:20] give me the lesson for love
[1:10:21] it. But there's also report
[1:10:22] that.
[1:10:24] >> So I called the company I
[1:10:26] called Harmony Communities.
[1:10:26] And when they told me what
[1:10:27] their response actually was,
[1:10:28] it was said that we could find
[1:10:29] another place to live. That
[1:10:31] was the response that they
[1:10:31] gave me.
[1:10:33] >> important key will come But
[1:10:36] I was today in Milan.
[1:10:37] >> And I came here looking for
[1:10:37] support, hoping that you can
[1:10:39] give that to us. And to me.
[1:10:41] >> When I thought that, but I
[1:10:42] >> Very good afternoon to
[1:10:48] everybody.
[1:10:49] >> Prices per report, senior
[1:10:50] Next. We'll go to Alex tough
[1:10:57] Ina and then Dwane think Alex.
[1:10:58] >> Mayor and council members,
[1:11:01] thank you for leading. Letting
[1:11:02] Alex, from the latest in a
[1:11:04] county. I'm here to share a
[1:11:06] statement from the resident of
[1:11:06] West. Plus, that was not able
[1:11:10] to make it today. So bear with
[1:11:12] me as I read both in Spanish
[1:11:14] and English, you know, but can
[1:11:15] stay in a Houston neighborhood
[1:11:18] West. Plus, everything you
[1:11:19] need those. Gun and bless it.
[1:11:20] And center the U.S. On news.
[1:11:21] My name is Christina. I'm a
[1:11:24] member of West. The senior
[1:11:25] Sunni. Those.
[1:11:28] >> And I have been a member
[1:11:35] >> resident of plus for 10
[1:11:36] years, the moon those said the
[1:11:37] buck somewhere. Is the idea
[1:11:41] banks somewhat annoying. He is
[1:11:41] the out in media. Me from list
[1:11:42] that you that, you know,
[1:11:46] personally that the I live in
[1:11:49] one of the 17 parks that
[1:11:50] mobile home parks in the area
[1:11:52] that of the plan that we're
[1:11:53] talking today. And this park
[1:11:54] has brought me the ability to
[1:11:56] have stability with my family.
[1:11:57] And I and the ability to live
[1:12:01] in Sonoma County. Because of
[1:12:03] the that is the condo we had
[1:12:04] make media. And with just one
[1:12:07] us as he visited bad local me
[1:12:08] that that's part of business.
[1:12:12] It The cost of living here in
[1:12:13] county is very expensive and
[1:12:14] it's very hard for many
[1:12:17] families like mine to afford
[1:12:17] food, transportation and many
[1:12:22] unnecessary costs. Does the
[1:12:24] high season got to do that by
[1:12:26] the King? Let me Saints w that
[1:12:30] I went to a that continue that
[1:12:30] investment which is in the
[1:12:31] South. There is a center
[1:12:36] squatters centers on that is
[1:12:37] yeah, out of it as close as
[1:12:39] model is that by the cake. So
[1:12:39] but think I knew it was nose
[1:12:42] down. Ever since army charge
[1:12:46] of this park.
[1:12:46] >> The.
[1:12:48] >> The threat of instability
[1:12:49] for us as a park has become a
[1:12:53] reality for every day.
[1:12:54] Residents, many of our rents
[1:12:58] have been raise $2030400. They
[1:12:59] have taken away amenities of
[1:13:00] the park, including trees that
[1:13:02] been there for 30 years and to
[1:13:07] provide us shade this. Is it
[1:13:11] the most? Maybe a significant
[1:13:11] is that pretty soon. Let us
[1:13:12] cause more delays in getting
[1:13:14] those Santas that Kaepernick,
[1:13:15] what lenders said, are going
[1:13:20] listen to We need significant
[1:13:21] protections.
[1:13:22] >> For our community and our
[1:13:23] mobile homes before any plan
[1:13:24] is approved for south of Santa
[1:13:27] Rosa.
[1:13:27] >> No vending. That's the
[1:13:31] company that I and that could
[1:13:32] get out of the sense that
[1:13:34] united don't sell our
[1:13:35] communities and our
[1:13:36] neighborhoods just for people
[1:13:36] that want to enrich
[1:13:42] themselves. Working with was
[1:13:45] on the if know anyone missing
[1:13:46] that you can only We don't
[1:13:48] have anywhere to go. There's
[1:13:49] no affordable neighborhoods to
[1:13:56] go to in this county. This
[1:13:57] assume to wouldn't can do to
[1:13:59] spend get on those in a way
[1:14:00] and throws more one in for
[1:14:01] descendants. But I can on
[1:14:06] those But I and in the seek an
[1:14:09] honest I was given a subtle
[1:14:10] about it. This is an urgent
[1:14:12] matter and I'm asking the
[1:14:13] county of Sonoma and the city
[1:14:16] of Santa Rosa to put on
[1:14:17] protection. So we don't have
[1:14:21] to leave our community. It's
[1:14:21] been a look at them want them
[1:14:25] used make the Simon you the
[1:14:26] gag I hope you take into
[1:14:28] account my to my statement in
[1:14:29] my testimony and that we find
[1:14:32] a solution. Thank you.
[1:14:33] >> Thank you, Alex Delfina.
[1:14:38] And then wane Delfina.
[1:14:43] >> actually don't My
[1:14:44] apologies. Good afternoon.
[1:14:46] Hearing Council members. Thank
[1:14:49] you for allowing me to speak
[1:14:50] today. My name is enough
[1:14:51] Loriano. I'm a caseworker at
[1:14:54] legal aid of Sonoma County. I
[1:14:55] will be sharing a common will
[1:14:55] be in Spanish. So if and that
[1:14:59] the translator could be ready.
[1:15:00] And from tenant, I have one of
[1:15:03] the local parks.
[1:15:04] >> Yes, I'm ready. Please go
[1:15:05] ahead. And if you could please
[1:15:07] speak in short sentences.
[1:15:08] Appreciate it. Thank you so
[1:15:10] much. Okay. Now he's.
[1:15:11] >> My name is or what I am a
[1:15:15] leader at Western Plaza United
[1:15:21] Neighbors. The one in the
[1:15:22] state openness and revealing a
[1:15:26] bucket put we to say sign us.
[1:15:27] >> I live in district 3 in
[1:15:28] been living in the park for 22
[1:15:33] years.
[1:15:33] >> I am a citizen just like
[1:15:35] any other person. And I am
[1:15:35] asking for respect and
[1:15:40] dignity. Because I've been
[1:15:40] living here and pain for
[1:15:46] friend. And it is my right to
[1:15:46] be able to have some were
[1:15:47] comfortable and stability
[1:15:54] where I'm living. Does it can
[1:15:56] harm an isis ocado their lives
[1:15:58] doing that. But it on this
[1:15:59] place on the and those commit
[1:16:00] not believe that the on the as
[1:16:01] those important that. But I
[1:16:06] mean,
[1:16:07] >> ever since harmony to place
[1:16:08] of the management of the car
[1:16:12] of the park. The reality of
[1:16:14] being removed from my home has
[1:16:20] been a daily reminder for me.
[1:16:21] >> Lucas to pass on coming up
[1:16:23] us on as as the temple people
[1:16:27] going into it. He died emv
[1:16:28] medal got bet on total
[1:16:29] sidewall is on we will. And so
[1:16:32] lieu of that just personas
[1:16:34] units to income of those. What
[1:16:38] body with the Bulls. Yemeni,
[1:16:39] though, the let the system,
[1:16:45] which was scene in bucket.
[1:16:49] >> So what has been happening
[1:16:50] is that lately is been that
[1:16:51] they have been.
[1:16:52] >> Could up?
[1:16:55] >> All of the
[1:16:59] >> trees where I live. And I
[1:17:02] feel like this is creating a
[1:17:06] lot of Tom is security for me.
[1:17:07] And second of all, a lot of
[1:17:08] people are leaving because
[1:17:12] they are depressed.
[1:17:13] >> They are just leaving
[1:17:14] because their very sad with
[1:17:19] what's going on.
[1:17:19] >> As this event, solely
[1:17:22] Moses, but those cement, the
[1:17:23] appear to be. So does that
[1:17:26] include another? The Sonoma
[1:17:26] that I have, but a solution
[1:17:28] that is the problem. Not so
[1:17:31] busy on a city on.
[1:17:34] >> Okay. And this is urgent
[1:17:38] and what we want this to
[1:17:39] >> County board of directors
[1:17:43] to do is do the which we are
[1:17:46] requesting.
[1:17:49] >> Number what in many the so
[1:17:50] see But because the cause
[1:17:52] moving this. But every and
[1:17:53] this place me this was
[1:17:54] incident,
[1:17:57] >> We would like some kind of
[1:18:02] a norm to say that we cannot
[1:18:04] be removed from our home, be
[1:18:06] displaced from it for the
[1:18:11] residents.
[1:18:12] >> Therefore, without loading
[1:18:14] onto sublease they're looking
[1:18:15] at is but in the dome and
[1:18:16] those how was he was thinking
[1:18:19] at
[1:18:21] >> To reinforce the rental
[1:18:23] ordinance so that we can avoid
[1:18:28] to abusive rent, increase.
[1:18:29] >> Could add incentive because
[1:18:30] you're in a specific put the
[1:18:33] down, put on those. But is
[1:18:35] U.S. Has movie listened and
[1:18:35] the law, annoying could put
[1:18:38] American, though the Sonoma
[1:18:39] going be in that. They had, I
[1:18:41] was the most you on the be in
[1:18:41] the even though they time and
[1:18:45] economy ca.
[1:18:46] >> And for there to be some
[1:18:48] kind of a Sony ordinance
[1:18:54] place. 2 protect people in the
[1:18:55] mobile home parks in the
[1:18:56] unincorporated areas of Sonoma
[1:18:58] County.
[1:19:00] >> Thank you. Do for you now,
[1:19:12] MR. MR. Do 2 minutes to
[1:19:12] >> Hello, my name is Dwayne
[1:19:13] DeWitt on from Rose. And I'd
[1:19:16] like for you, folks too, Kim
[1:19:17] possible direction to the
[1:19:18] staff to go back to the
[1:19:20] community. The preferred draft
[1:19:22] is not something that many in
[1:19:23] the community are supportive
[1:19:25] of. As you can see by the
[1:19:28] attendance tonight, there are
[1:19:29] many folks who've come here
[1:19:30] and didn't understand exactly
[1:19:31] how this preferred alternative
[1:19:35] has been coming forward. I
[1:19:36] have attended meetings of this
[1:19:38] South Sanford, Santa Rosa,
[1:19:41] specific plan. And felt it was
[1:19:42] perform It was like a
[1:19:44] presentation that wasn't
[1:19:45] really interested in what the
[1:19:47] community wanted to say. It's
[1:19:49] a matter of fact. I wasn't
[1:19:50] invited back and I understand
[1:19:51] that from the city's
[1:19:53] perspective because they don't
[1:19:53] want to hear something that's
[1:19:54] different than the way they're
[1:19:56] going to do it. But if you
[1:19:59] saying that this is a
[1:20:01] community vision you need to
[1:20:02] have with the community wants
[1:20:03] to say and have the community
[1:20:06] bring forward their desired
[1:20:08] preferred alternative, not
[1:20:10] staffs. So this is one of the
[1:20:10] dilemmas we face here at the
[1:20:12] city of Santa Rosa. It's about
[1:20:15] planning with the community,
[1:20:17] not what you're going to do to
[1:20:18] them. But what you might do
[1:20:22] with them for them. Those are
[1:20:23] distinct alternatives which do
[1:20:25] not happen here very often.
[1:20:27] It's a matter of fact. The
[1:20:28] city staff directs you and how
[1:20:30] they're going to take things.
[1:20:31] And then you give it a little
[1:20:34] chance. A little area here.
[1:20:35] You know what? We call it. You
[1:20:37] do the happy talk and you blow
[1:20:38] sunshine up our tailpipes and
[1:20:38] say, oh, yeah, this is going
[1:20:41] to get good. It's a matter of
[1:20:41] fact. This is not happen and
[1:20:44] good for us, especially for
[1:20:46] extra housing in the places
[1:20:47] where it's needed. I don't
[1:20:49] know any of these folks here.
[1:20:51] So they listen me to come down
[1:20:54] here. I'm down here because I
[1:20:55] know Roseann gets mistreated
[1:20:55] South Santa Rosa. Marlins
[1:20:58] going to get mistreated and
[1:20:59] you don't even have the money
[1:21:01] to take care of City Hall. Let
[1:21:02] alone a whole big section of
[1:21:04] Saint Rose Avenue as you go
[1:21:06] forward. So please back to the
[1:21:07] drawing board a couple more
[1:21:08] meetings. It won't make much
[1:21:09] difference. But at least it'll
[1:21:10] make us feel like you might
[1:21:14] have listened. Thank you.
[1:21:15] >> Thank you, MR. DeWitt. Is
[1:21:16] there anybody else in council
[1:21:17] chambers who wishes to speak?
[1:21:19] I see one person at the
[1:21:19] microphone. If you do is to
[1:21:20] speak, please be making your
[1:21:21] way towards one of the
[1:21:26] podiums. Go ahead.
[1:21:27] >> My name's in the blank. I'm
[1:21:27] interpreting for that aside.
[1:21:28] Neighbor at Western Mobile
[1:21:33] home park.
[1:21:34] >> Witness, that is me numbers
[1:21:35] that is sent even won an idea
[1:21:38] that I've been, you know, some
[1:21:39] federal, men go to prison
[1:21:40] Jaime Diaz about gizmo, mobile
[1:21:44] home. Was there.
[1:21:45] >> Good afternoon to everyone.
[1:21:48] My name is that and I live on
[1:21:49] Santa Rosa Avenue and icon
[1:21:50] representing the families of
[1:21:54] Western Mobile home Park.
[1:21:56] >> It's almost like switch on
[1:21:58] I was little boys, this most
[1:21:59] both which end with the Vols
[1:22:01] to see more news.
[1:22:03] >> We are here listening to
[1:22:05] these new proposals and we
[1:22:06] asking where pleading with you
[1:22:10] that you hear our testimonies.
[1:22:11] >> It's some of us on the
[1:22:13] board, a body of conflict, the
[1:22:14] skin, most and least one
[1:22:14] thought. You've got that. This
[1:22:17] is an in built on.
[1:22:19] >> We have been experiencing
[1:22:19] several conflicts that have
[1:22:23] result that have the have not
[1:22:24] been resolved and every day
[1:22:25] things are getting worse for
[1:22:29] us.
[1:22:32] >> It's the most being means
[1:22:32] this enough family for me to
[1:22:33] put by those, you know, timing
[1:22:34] was good. Look us that give up
[1:22:38] a set.
[1:22:39] >> I'm seeing my own family
[1:22:40] worried and my neighbors and
[1:22:41] we don't quite know what's
[1:22:45] going to happen next.
[1:22:46] >> I went to a family of Qasem
[1:22:47] a chill in all of con of the
[1:22:51] fee can sent a
[1:22:52] >> We're seeing so many
[1:22:53] changes in our park and
[1:22:53] harmony does not let us know
[1:23:00] what these changes are.
[1:23:01] >> Have money. So don't look
[1:23:01] on local most important number
[1:23:02] 8, but also to know the name
[1:23:03] listening or not points that I
[1:23:06] just but I want this.
[1:23:07] >> They don't they don't
[1:23:10] notify us of the changes and
[1:23:12] harmony. We don't know who
[1:23:14] they are and then they don't
[1:23:16] respond to. Our questions are
[1:23:22] worries. And we have
[1:23:24] >> bus and I get w let's buy
[1:23:27] tickets. But and need
[1:23:29] >> We already experienced 3
[1:23:32] managers overseeing our park.
[1:23:33] But those people have left
[1:23:37] already.
[1:23:38] >> Well, the most of got to
[1:23:39] northamptonshire non. They'll
[1:23:41] be in.
[1:23:42] >> We can really see that
[1:23:43] something is not working well
[1:23:47] here. It's something first
[1:23:48] one. And then Monday
[1:23:49] Ninamandell seem and I get in
[1:23:51] which program must months.
[1:23:55] >> You know, without a manager
[1:23:56] there so we are without
[1:23:58] manager or anybody. The care
[1:23:59] of the management of the park.
[1:24:00] We are seeing a lot of
[1:24:01] problems happening in the
[1:24:05] park.
[1:24:06] >> Putin momentum by the most
[1:24:06] to him. Any one. Guinness
[1:24:09] coach and a struggle says.
[1:24:11] >> So now we are asking about
[1:24:11] harmony or somebody really
[1:24:16] listen to our voices.
[1:24:17] >> Forget the name that.
[1:24:18] Unfair the most predicts him.
[1:24:18] But I was just I mean, yes,
[1:24:20] good ss. Because we have a
[1:24:23] right to a roof. And we are
[1:24:26] asking protection for our
[1:24:27] family and we are fighting for
[1:24:28] our homes. Thank you for your
[1:24:30] attention.
[1:24:31] >> Thank you. Reena and
[1:24:36] Theresa Fred.
[1:24:36] >> Good afternoon. Members of
[1:24:37] the City Council. My name is
[1:24:39] Fred, all about come. The
[1:24:41] co-chair of the Santa Rosa,
[1:24:42] Sonoma County, naacp Housing
[1:24:45] Committee. And we didn't quite
[1:24:46] get our letter out in time,
[1:24:47] but I'm going quote a couple
[1:24:53] points from the letter the 2
[1:24:56] census tracks in this South
[1:24:57] Center of the speed. Specific
[1:25:01] plan are 4, 5%, black. Sonoma
[1:25:02] County and Santa Rosa are much
[1:25:04] less than that of the Bay area
[1:25:10] percent of black and 6%. The
[1:25:11] concentration of black
[1:25:13] residents in the plan, areas
[1:25:15] of significant and warns
[1:25:16] deliberate intention to
[1:25:17] preserving community housing,
[1:25:23] stability and opportunity. So
[1:25:25] Santa Rosa specific plan
[1:25:26] represent an extraordinary
[1:25:28] opportunity to demonstrate
[1:25:30] what equitable equitable
[1:25:31] development can look like. One
[1:25:31] community's most vulnerable to
[1:25:33] displacement are considered
[1:25:34] before and not after major
[1:25:39] investment. Cursed my switch
[1:25:40] hats and on some from my own
[1:25:47] letter here that on page, 29
[1:25:48] of and the displacement
[1:25:50] strategy. There's a lot of
[1:25:51] options and ordinances
[1:25:54] presented by staff. And
[1:25:54] there's also been quite a few
[1:25:55] presented by members of the
[1:25:57] public. I would suggest then
[1:26:00] in the program and policy
[1:26:01] development study, which by
[1:26:02] the way, was not listed. And
[1:26:03] one of the next steps of
[1:26:05] what's coming next. I found
[1:26:09] that so interesting. Staff
[1:26:12] could could put grid to show
[1:26:14] all these things and the
[1:26:15] public's ideas to and what
[1:26:16] they would cost, who they're
[1:26:17] going to benefit. And a couple
[1:26:21] of. Things here is I live in a
[1:26:23] mobile home park. I wonder
[1:26:24] when our park is going to be
[1:26:26] next. I don't think preserving
[1:26:28] land use designation isn't a
[1:26:29] few needed closure in
[1:26:30] conversion ordinance update
[1:26:31] and strengthening and rent
[1:26:35] stabilization, strengthening.
[1:26:36] Plan a little more balance
[1:26:38] with the socioeconomic pieces.
[1:26:41] >> Thank you, Fred.
[1:26:42] >> Are there others in council
[1:26:47] chambers who wish to speak?
[1:26:48] Seeing no one making their way
[1:26:51] to the podium. Let's go
[1:26:52] online. If you are online, if
[1:26:54] you could raise your hand or
[1:26:55] press star, resume host, we'll
[1:26:56] we'll call on You. MADAM Zoo
[1:26:57] host. We have any hands
[1:26:59] raised.
[1:27:00] >> And seeing no hands raised
[1:27:04] zoom.
[1:27:05] >> Thank you. To close public
[1:27:07] comment thank you to everybody
[1:27:08] who came out today and made
[1:27:09] and made those point made
[1:27:12] those impassioned pleas to
[1:27:13] bring back to council for
[1:27:15] comments final direction.
[1:27:16] >> Any thoughts from our
[1:27:22] group? Question is from
[1:27:24] >> thank to all the public
[1:27:25] members of the public who came
[1:27:25] out to speak and share
[1:27:27] concerns of the U.S.. I'm just
[1:27:32] wondering if staff could
[1:27:34] clarify the concerns around
[1:27:35] the public's comments around
[1:27:40] harmony in the management with
[1:27:40] the matter before us as
[1:27:41] understand the concerns of the
[1:27:44] members of the public around
[1:27:47] the management company. But
[1:27:49] unclear how that ties into the
[1:27:53] issue of the rezoning. The
[1:27:57] excuse me, the planned change.
[1:27:59] >> Thank you for that
[1:28:00] question. So, yeah, so what
[1:28:02] we're focused on here is land
[1:28:04] use policy that will
[1:28:06] ultimately result in potential
[1:28:07] zoning regulations, both in
[1:28:10] the city and the county. You
[1:28:11] know, the the the issues with
[1:28:12] harmony that is with a
[1:28:16] particular property owner, you
[1:28:16] know, certainly we are
[1:28:17] definitely hearing the
[1:28:21] concerns raised by the
[1:28:22] residents of those areas. We
[1:28:25] have been conversation with
[1:28:28] our housing division as Ms
[1:28:29] Nicholson mentioned earlier,
[1:28:30] we're going to be working with
[1:28:32] the county cdc on, you know,
[1:28:36] how we can help from a policy
[1:28:38] perspective. But in a in
[1:28:38] particular, with the residents
[1:28:41] that are here today, they are
[1:28:42] from a park that is located
[1:28:43] within the county
[1:28:45] jurisdiction. So there's not
[1:28:48] at this point a lot that the
[1:28:49] city can do from our
[1:28:52] perspective to assist, but
[1:28:52] certainly in a going continue
[1:28:56] those conversations with the
[1:28:58] county. Okay. So the residents
[1:29:01] who are here today live in the
[1:29:02] park that
[1:29:05] >> management harmony. Our
[1:29:06] county residents. And
[1:29:07] unfortunately the city does
[1:29:09] have resources for residents
[1:29:10] who live in parks within the
[1:29:14] city limits. But those are not
[1:29:14] available to county residents.
[1:29:15] Is that is that right? I
[1:29:18] believe that is correct. We
[1:29:22] have our Yeah.
[1:29:23] >> I'm just just helping. So
[1:29:24] it would. But I'm just trying
[1:29:27] to assist our are listening
[1:29:27] public.
[1:29:28] >> Would it make sense for
[1:29:29] those folks who are in that
[1:29:31] situation in contact? The
[1:29:34] county housing department?
[1:29:35] Thank you for the question.
[1:29:36] Megan passenger, director of
[1:29:39] Housing Community Services. So
[1:29:40] yes, the city does have
[1:29:41] resources available regarding
[1:29:43] the mobile home rent
[1:29:44] stabilization ordinance that
[1:29:46] we provide to parks. Residents
[1:29:47] within the city limits. The
[1:29:49] county has similar services
[1:29:49] available.
[1:29:50] >> Through the Community
[1:29:51] Development Commission, so
[1:29:54] residents of parks in the
[1:29:54] county jurisdiction should
[1:29:58] reach out to the county cdc
[1:29:59] for questions and guidance on
[1:30:00] how they work through the
[1:30:01] rent, Stabilization Ordinance,
[1:30:03] which is very similar to the
[1:30:05] cities and any concerns they
[1:30:07] have regarding park. And is
[1:30:08] that something that's of the
[1:30:10] folks here today could ask you
[1:30:11] for that contact or or the
[1:30:12] website yesterday to meet with
[1:30:15] them at the conclusion of
[1:30:15] item.
[1:30:18] >> Thank The other question I
[1:30:22] had was around gentrification.
[1:30:23] That's that's the sound.
[1:30:24] Something that's more within
[1:30:24] the purview of the matter
[1:30:25] before us. And I'm just
[1:30:28] curious to know what measures
[1:30:30] it will be taking around
[1:30:31] preservation and protection as
[1:30:31] we move forward. And if you
[1:30:34] could just review those and
[1:30:35] see if we can satisfy some of
[1:30:36] the concerns of our of our
[1:30:36] members of the public here
[1:30:44] today. Thank you for the
[1:30:49] question.
[1:30:51] >> I think focuses on a lot of
[1:30:53] that. The comments that we've
[1:30:55] heard today on specific
[1:30:56] measures related to
[1:31:00] preservation the affordable
[1:31:01] housing anti displacement
[1:31:03] strategy, which was done
[1:31:03] specifically for this area,
[1:31:05] was also referenced, but at
[1:31:06] least one public comment or
[1:31:10] that does include pretty
[1:31:11] diverse mix of ways to protect
[1:31:14] residents and preserve either
[1:31:15] deed restricted or just
[1:31:16] naturally occurring,
[1:31:17] affordable housing.
[1:31:22] >> So we will be continuing to
[1:31:23] kind of flush these out as
[1:31:25] they apply to the issues that
[1:31:26] we're hearing in concert with
[1:31:29] county staff and then bring
[1:31:29] those specific items for
[1:31:33] council to review it this fall
[1:31:36] has options to integrate into
[1:31:37] the specific plan answer your
[1:31:37] question that that does thank
[1:31:41] you for your health.
[1:31:42] >> Thank you for those
[1:31:42] clarifications. Other comments
[1:31:48] from council. MRS. And the
[1:31:51] most respectful manner that
[1:31:55] >> Nov. I would hope I believe
[1:31:57] that I do have the support of
[1:32:02] my colleagues to invite our
[1:32:03] regional partners and at the
[1:32:06] lectern level 2 continue the
[1:32:06] conversation. How we come
[1:32:11] together. Provide the median
[1:32:12] housing in the most effective
[1:32:14] and efficient manner possible.
[1:32:14] And I'm grateful that our
[1:32:17] staff. Are having that
[1:32:20] conversation. But again, I do
[1:32:21] invite our regional partners
[1:32:22] to join us and having that
[1:32:26] conversation as well. Thank
[1:32:31] you. Spend
[1:32:32] >> And along the lines of
[1:32:35] Councilmember Alvarez was just
[1:32:37] saying. I appreciate that. I
[1:32:38] see you reading copious notes.
[1:32:39] I appreciate that. You are
[1:32:40] listening to what the public
[1:32:44] is saying it is true that many
[1:32:45] of these parks are in the
[1:32:46] county, but they're also part
[1:32:49] of the
[1:32:50] >> And there are parks that
[1:32:52] are in the city, not as many
[1:32:57] in this particular plan, but
[1:32:58] just to say we have many parks
[1:32:58] throughout the city of Santa
[1:32:59] Rosa. So so with thinking
[1:33:03] about that, I I do agree with
[1:33:04] some of the things that some
[1:33:04] of the speakers were sent and
[1:33:07] that is that we before we move
[1:33:08] forward, we need to figure out
[1:33:10] how we make sure that.
[1:33:12] >> Displacement doesn't
[1:33:15] happen. Whether know whether
[1:33:16] you live in mobile home Park
[1:33:17] rv Park.
[1:33:20] >> Oran in an apartment
[1:33:21] building.
[1:33:21] >> I think that's something
[1:33:22] that we need to look at. I
[1:33:24] think I'm going to say this to
[1:33:27] my counsel. Don't the load
[1:33:27] Council members we need to
[1:33:28] step up. We need to step up
[1:33:33] take some action. I we've been
[1:33:34] watching what's happening in
[1:33:36] other jurisdictions and that's
[1:33:36] great. But I think we need to
[1:33:37] step up and do something to
[1:33:40] protect our residents. So and
[1:33:41] that's not on you necessarily.
[1:33:45] That's really on us. If we
[1:33:45] want to really make a
[1:33:47] difference protect our
[1:33:50] community the only other thing
[1:33:51] I would say is I actually am
[1:33:54] still happy with the direction
[1:33:58] this is going I know you're
[1:33:58] going to continue to take
[1:33:59] community input. I think
[1:34:01] that's really important. And
[1:34:05] and and get more feedback
[1:34:06] because I want to ensure that
[1:34:07] we incorporate as much as what
[1:34:10] the community wants is
[1:34:11] possible. So very much in
[1:34:15] favor of that.
[1:34:17] >> And I also thinking about
[1:34:17] protecting our community, but
[1:34:18] also that whatever development
[1:34:19] we do.
[1:34:22] >> That word equitable
[1:34:24] development that that to me, I
[1:34:26] think that was in the in acp
[1:34:26] letter and I did read it even
[1:34:28] though it came to us at the
[1:34:29] last minute. I read the whole
[1:34:32] thing. You know, I represent
[1:34:35] people of color represent
[1:34:37] Latinos. Echo the to me is
[1:34:39] really important in any kind
[1:34:40] of development that we do so
[1:34:42] and I know you you for that
[1:34:44] for me. Not just now, but even
[1:34:45] of the time commission, those
[1:34:46] of the things that that I
[1:34:47] think are important. So with
[1:34:49] that all. That's all I have to
[1:34:51] say. Thank you. Thank you, MR.
[1:34:55] Donald. Thank you, Mayor. I
[1:34:58] just have a few more comments.
[1:34:59] I notice in the specific plans
[1:35:00] that are being brought
[1:35:02] forward.
[1:35:03] >> We have an increase of
[1:35:04] people, an increase of
[1:35:05] services that we're going to
[1:35:07] need infrastructure. And I
[1:35:09] know that sometimes you you
[1:35:09] have this great plan in place.
[1:35:12] It takes us a long time to get
[1:35:12] there.
[1:35:14] >> But have we ever done a
[1:35:15] crosswalk of about how much
[1:35:16] money this will cost less to
[1:35:19] do it, whether it's
[1:35:20] infrastructure.
[1:35:22] >> Public safety, if you're
[1:35:23] looking at it, it looked like
[1:35:24] we were going acquire more
[1:35:27] parks, that type of thing. I
[1:35:29] oftentimes we look at these
[1:35:30] specific plans and we have
[1:35:32] this dream, but I'm not seeing
[1:35:33] the pen and pencil part of it
[1:35:34] of how we're going to take
[1:35:37] care of that and maybe it's in
[1:35:39] there it all of your
[1:35:40] documents. But when it comes
[1:35:41] to me to approve these plans
[1:35:43] and we're looking at policy, I
[1:35:45] think it's wise of us to
[1:35:46] actually look at what we're
[1:35:49] biting off to make sure that
[1:35:51] we can chew it and that we can
[1:35:51] actually take care of all of
[1:35:54] these areas appropriately
[1:35:56] because we're seeing already
[1:35:58] now how Sandra spread in the
[1:35:59] city. So I don't know if you
[1:36:00] have any feedback on that now,
[1:36:01] but I think just moving
[1:36:02] forward, that would be helpful
[1:36:05] for me. Yes, thank you,
[1:36:07] councilmember question. So
[1:36:09] it's an excellent point. And
[1:36:11] yes, part of every specific
[1:36:12] plan, one of the requirements
[1:36:13] included in that is an
[1:36:17] implementation plan. And that
[1:36:19] addresses the short-term
[1:36:20] projects, mid-term and
[1:36:20] long-term projects, potential
[1:36:24] costs and potential funding.
[1:36:25] Rep for new or not revenue.
[1:36:27] But but funding mechanisms put
[1:36:31] those measures into place and
[1:36:32] then who would be responsible
[1:36:34] for doing that? So, yeah. So
[1:36:36] when the final specific plan
[1:36:37] comes before the council for
[1:36:38] consideration, you'll see that
[1:36:39] as part of it definitely would
[1:36:42] welcome any feedback on that.
[1:36:42] Thank you. That's very
[1:36:47] helpful. Thank you. Ms Rogers.
[1:36:48] Thank you, Mayor. I just
[1:36:51] wanted to thank staff for the
[1:36:52] presentation and for all the
[1:36:53] hard work that you're doing.
[1:36:57] And I think although many of
[1:36:59] our speakers where from a live
[1:37:00] outside our jurisdiction. I
[1:37:03] think that this was great.
[1:37:05] >> reminder that now is the
[1:37:07] time that we can collaborate
[1:37:08] with the county and that this
[1:37:10] will allow us to collaborate
[1:37:14] even more. So with the county
[1:37:18] too, ensure that the low
[1:37:19] income housing remains
[1:37:19] protected and that's within
[1:37:23] the city limits. And without I
[1:37:23] mean, an outside of the city
[1:37:27] limits and how important it is
[1:37:31] in that the lines that we draw
[1:37:32] are imaginary, but people's
[1:37:33] livelihoods and their housing
[1:37:36] in there families are very
[1:37:38] real. So I do want to thank
[1:37:39] everyone that came out to
[1:37:42] speak with us and I I can
[1:37:44] speak for myself, but I think
[1:37:45] that I can also speak for my
[1:37:49] colleagues that we do what to
[1:37:51] protect the housing that we
[1:37:53] have. Not only do we want to
[1:37:54] increase the housing stock
[1:37:55] that we want to protect the
[1:37:59] housing that we have in. We
[1:38:01] appreciate you coming out to
[1:38:03] tell us to remind a little
[1:38:03] reminder goes a long way. So
[1:38:08] thank you very much. Thank
[1:38:08] you. Any other question or
[1:38:09] comments or direction from
[1:38:12] council?
[1:38:14] >> I'll just follow up on ms
[1:38:16] Rogers and it's been a while
[1:38:17] point with with the reminder
[1:38:19] that a positive reminder that
[1:38:20] there are a lot of attorneys,
[1:38:21] a lot of elected officials and
[1:38:23] a lot of city managers across
[1:38:24] the county right now working
[1:38:25] on exactly the issue that
[1:38:26] you're here to talk about
[1:38:28] today. As many of you know,
[1:38:30] well, you see what's going on
[1:38:30] in Petaluma in Windsor, in the
[1:38:33] city of Santa Rosa. We are
[1:38:35] part of that discussion. So
[1:38:36] please don't think that the
[1:38:37] city of Santa Rosa City on its
[1:38:40] hands. We have our staff and
[1:38:41] our elected officials here or
[1:38:42] are paying very close
[1:38:43] attention to this discussion
[1:38:44] because we do need to protect
[1:38:44] our housing. With respect to
[1:38:48] to the specific plan, I just
[1:38:49] continue to be excited with
[1:38:51] the ideas that are coming
[1:38:52] forward and impressed with the
[1:38:52] incredible want to staff work
[1:38:54] that's gone into this. This is
[1:38:58] the last large. Relatively
[1:39:00] undeveloped piece of land in
[1:39:02] the city within our with
[1:39:03] boundaries and I say
[1:39:04] relatively and of the
[1:39:05] undeveloped because of course,
[1:39:06] we have thousands of people
[1:39:06] living there. We have
[1:39:07] businesses. We have major
[1:39:10] pieces of infrastructure, but
[1:39:12] it is it is going to grow. It
[1:39:14] is going to dense if I I'm
[1:39:16] excited, but I see that even
[1:39:17] even the talk of bridges or
[1:39:17] pedestrian overcrossing to or
[1:39:21] want to one as we continue to
[1:39:22] try to our city to back
[1:39:24] together after building a
[1:39:25] freeway right through and the
[1:39:26] improvements in the quality of
[1:39:27] life that's going to have for
[1:39:30] all residents in the city with
[1:39:30] special reference to those who
[1:39:31] are living in Southeast and
[1:39:33] Southwest Santa Rosa along
[1:39:35] this corridor. So the plan is
[1:39:37] put forward that incorporate
[1:39:39] all the community feedback it
[1:39:41] It proves means gives us and
[1:39:42] abroad a line from what that
[1:39:45] part of the city can look like
[1:39:47] and and how great it can I
[1:39:47] mean, it's it's a good part of
[1:39:49] the city now, but we can make
[1:39:50] it better with a lot of
[1:39:50] infrastructure investment and
[1:39:53] with good planning. This is a
[1:39:54] step towards that. So staff,
[1:39:56] thank you very much. And thank
[1:39:56] you all the members of the
[1:39:58] community that put time in
[1:39:59] today in our community
[1:40:02] meetings to help push this
[1:40:03] forward. Backed a staff room
[1:40:05] and you've you've gotten some
[1:40:06] feedback from a son serving
[1:40:06] from the community. Do need
[1:40:08] anything else for today. I
[1:40:12] think we're good. Thank you.
[1:40:15] Director has been we're going.
[1:40:17] Yes, thank you, mayor. Just a
[1:40:18] really quick recap. I think
[1:40:20] the critical pieces, the
[1:40:21] council to understand that we
[1:40:22] are moving forward now with
[1:40:23] the preferred alternative that
[1:40:24] was presented. So we'll do.
[1:40:26] The technical studies will
[1:40:26] look at the displacement
[1:40:27] issues that potentially can
[1:40:29] can exist with that.
[1:40:30] >> But this is a critical
[1:40:31] decision making point for us
[1:40:33] because we are now investing
[1:40:34] resources and understanding
[1:40:35] the financial analysis. The
[1:40:37] traffic study, all those other
[1:40:38] parts and pieces. So thank you
[1:40:39] for the feedback. This really
[1:40:40] helps us hold our timeline.
[1:40:42] Staff will move forward with
[1:40:43] Council direction. We're
[1:40:44] looking forward to the next
[1:40:47] generation. Thank you all.
[1:40:48] >> All right. We will move
[1:40:51] ahead then want to item 6. Our
[1:40:51] report on our clothes
[1:40:52] Sessions, MADAM City,
[1:40:55] Attorney.
[1:40:56] >> Thank you, mayor. There's
[1:40:56] one reportable action out of
[1:41:00] closed session. The city
[1:41:01] COUNCILMAN Closed session on
[1:41:03] item 3.1 anticipated
[1:41:04] litigation pursuant to
[1:41:05] Government Code Section 5, 4,
[1:41:08] 9, 5, 6.0. 94 has identified
[1:41:11] on the posted agenda on a
[1:41:12] motion by Councilmember
[1:41:14] Fleming, seconded by Vice
[1:41:16] Mayor Okrepkie the council
[1:41:17] voted unanimously to give
[1:41:19] direction to legal counsel, to
[1:41:20] initiate litigation against
[1:41:22] Pierce manufacturing at all.
[1:41:23] There are no additional
[1:41:26] reportable action is taken.
[1:41:27] >> Thank you very much, indeed
[1:41:29] public comment. I just want to
[1:41:30] thank all the members of the
[1:41:31] public again, who took the
[1:41:32] time to come out. Your please,
[1:41:33] please come back anytime
[1:41:35] states stay engaged with this
[1:41:37] issue. Back to our closed
[1:41:38] session report. Any public
[1:41:43] comment on that? Seeing none.
[1:41:45] We'll close public comment.
[1:41:47] And we had then to item 9, our
[1:41:48] city manager and city
[1:41:51] attorneys reports. City
[1:41:54] manager, not anything for us
[1:41:55] today.
[1:41:55] >> Yes, I thank you, Mayor
[1:41:58] Mayor and council. I have
[1:42:01] several great items to talk
[1:42:02] about. First. I'm really proud
[1:42:04] to announce that Moody's
[1:42:06] ratings, one of the world's
[1:42:08] top credit rating agencies is
[1:42:09] upgraded the city of Santa
[1:42:10] Rosa's credit rating to a a
[1:42:12] one. The second highest credit
[1:42:14] rating in their system
[1:42:14] assigning a stable outlook
[1:42:18] across the board. And a one
[1:42:20] rating is an exceptional
[1:42:21] achievement and a powerful
[1:42:22] external validation of its
[1:42:22] strength, resilience and
[1:42:23] positive trajectory of our
[1:42:26] community. Achieving this
[1:42:26] level of financial recognition
[1:42:30] was no accident. It's the
[1:42:31] direct results of difficult
[1:42:31] but necessary decisions made
[1:42:35] by eu Council and the work of
[1:42:36] our city departments and the
[1:42:38] proactive strategies of the
[1:42:38] city leadership team both
[1:42:42] today and previously today,
[1:42:43] specifically highlight
[1:42:45] highlighted our track record
[1:42:46] of budgeting and our decisive
[1:42:47] proactive response to
[1:42:51] budgetary pressures, including
[1:42:53] discipline spending, executing
[1:42:53] significant spending
[1:42:54] reductions while strictly
[1:42:55] maintaining our General Fund
[1:42:58] Reserve strategic depth
[1:42:59] management implementing highly
[1:43:00] effective strategies to manage
[1:43:02] pension debt such as the
[1:43:06] Calpers Fresh Start program.
[1:43:08] Which secures an estimated
[1:43:09] 37 million and long-term cost
[1:43:11] avoidance community
[1:43:12] partnership. The final support
[1:43:14] of our residents who have past
[1:43:16] success who have passed
[1:43:17] successful voter approved
[1:43:18] measures to protect Essential
[1:43:21] City services, responsible
[1:43:23] planning developing public,
[1:43:24] really disclose long-term
[1:43:26] contingency plans to ensure
[1:43:26] our financial stability
[1:43:28] regardless of future economic
[1:43:30] shifts. The on city
[1:43:31] operations, Moody's recognize
[1:43:32] the undeniable strength of
[1:43:35] Santa Rosa itself. Our local
[1:43:36] economy continues to thrive as
[1:43:38] a prepare regional center for
[1:43:39] government medical services,
[1:43:42] retail and tourism. This
[1:43:44] upgrade reflects our robust
[1:43:46] property value growth, solid
[1:43:48] resident incomes and the
[1:43:49] ongoing construction projects
[1:43:49] that underscore a deep
[1:43:51] continue to invest in our
[1:43:53] city. These upgrades confirm
[1:43:54] what we already know. Santa
[1:43:56] Rosa's economy and community
[1:43:57] are steadily moving in a
[1:43:59] highly positive and prosperous
[1:44:00] direction. I want to
[1:44:04] congratulate and thank the
[1:44:05] council our team for all of
[1:44:07] the hard work they did to
[1:44:09] achieve this upgraded ratings
[1:44:13] structure. I think it's great.
[1:44:14] Absolutely. Our cfo is not
[1:44:18] here to take a bow. He's
[1:44:19] hiding steadiest hiding in the
[1:44:21] back. Thank you to the whole
[1:44:23] team. I also want to say that
[1:44:24] the Santa Rosa Police
[1:44:25] Department will host a
[1:44:26] community meeting on
[1:44:27] SEPTEMBER, the 17th about the
[1:44:29] use of its flock, automated
[1:44:31] license plate reader
[1:44:33] technology. The meeting
[1:44:34] explain how alpr assist with
[1:44:36] serious criminal
[1:44:37] investigations outline privacy
[1:44:38] safeguards such as vehicle
[1:44:40] only data collection. 30 day
[1:44:43] retention case based searches
[1:44:44] and audits and provide an
[1:44:45] opportunity for residents to
[1:44:46] ask questions and offer
[1:44:48] feedback Spanish translation
[1:44:50] and accommodations will be
[1:44:51] available and the meeting is
[1:44:52] being promoted through a
[1:44:54] variety of avenues, including
[1:44:55] social media civic, ready and
[1:44:58] future radio announcements
[1:44:59] more to come and be published
[1:45:03] on that. In addition, 7 Santa
[1:45:04] Rosa police officers were
[1:45:05] honored by Mothers Against
[1:45:08] Drunk Driving for their dui
[1:45:10] enforcement efforts in 2025.
[1:45:13] The Srpd made 614 dui arrests
[1:45:15] with the 7 recognized officers
[1:45:18] accounting for nearly 60% of
[1:45:20] that total honorees included
[1:45:22] Officer Anthony Metairie,
[1:45:23] Officer Brendan Sawyer,
[1:45:27] Officer Chase McIntyre officer
[1:45:29] John Fisher. Officer Hannah
[1:45:31] Combs. Officer Diego Asensio
[1:45:35] and Officer Mike meager
[1:45:38] Officer Anthony Metairie
[1:45:38] receive special recognition
[1:45:41] for making more than 100 dui
[1:45:41] arrests and recording the
[1:45:44] third-highest total in
[1:45:45] Northern California. The these
[1:45:45] awards reflect the
[1:45:46] department's continued
[1:45:48] commitment to traffic safety
[1:45:49] impaired, driving enforcement
[1:45:50] and reducing traffic related
[1:45:52] injuries and fatalities. Thank
[1:45:54] you all to those 7 officers
[1:45:55] for their hard and continue to
[1:45:58] work. I'm also happy to share
[1:45:59] that the Ross Street
[1:46:01] activation is now underway,
[1:46:02] bringing new energy activity
[1:46:03] and opportunities to connect
[1:46:04] in the heart of downtown Santa
[1:46:06] Rosa through OCTOBER 31st. The
[1:46:09] east side of Ross Street will
[1:46:09] serve as a vibrant community
[1:46:11] gathering space featuring live
[1:46:13] music lunchtime, food trucks
[1:46:14] and family-friendly activities
[1:46:15] designed to welcome residents
[1:46:16] and visitors while supporting
[1:46:19] our downtown businesses. We
[1:46:20] are proud to support this
[1:46:21] effort through funding
[1:46:22] partnership and coordination
[1:46:24] assistance from our Economic
[1:46:26] Development division. This
[1:46:27] activation reflects the power
[1:46:28] of collaboration and we
[1:46:29] appreciate the many but
[1:46:31] downtown businesses, community
[1:46:33] partners and event. Organizers
[1:46:34] who helped bring this vision
[1:46:36] to life. And I encourage
[1:46:37] everyone to visit downtown,
[1:46:39] enjoy the activities and
[1:46:39] support our local businesses
[1:46:40] through the activation period
[1:46:43] for more information visit
[1:46:45] downtown Santa Rosa Dot Org.
[1:46:49] And I have one more mayor. I
[1:46:50] am pleased to announce that
[1:46:52] the registration is now open
[1:46:54] for fall into fitness. These
[1:46:55] are free class demo day taking
[1:46:59] place on SEPTEMBER. 19th at
[1:47:00] the Finley Community Center.
[1:47:02] This Free Community event
[1:47:03] invites adults and seniors to
[1:47:05] explore a variety of exercise
[1:47:06] and dance classes designed to
[1:47:09] support a healthy heart body
[1:47:11] and mind participants can
[1:47:12] register for up to 3 classes
[1:47:14] at no cost through advanced
[1:47:15] registration, although advance
[1:47:18] registration is required.
[1:47:19] Fallen to fitness is made
[1:47:19] possible through measure m
[1:47:22] Parks for all which supports
[1:47:23] parks and recreation programs
[1:47:26] through Sonoma County to view
[1:47:27] available classes and register
[1:47:29] visit sr City dot org forward
[1:47:30] slash calendar and we hope
[1:47:31] you'll join us at the Finley
[1:47:33] Community Center on SEPTEMBER.
[1:47:35] 19th. Thank you, mayor. That
[1:47:37] concludes my report. Good up.
[1:47:38] A good update. We are a
[1:47:39] healthier and safer city with
[1:47:40] a higher credit rating. That's
[1:47:42] our report for this.
[1:47:43] >> This meeting? Excellent.
[1:47:45] Alright. MADAM City Attorney.
[1:47:46] >> Thank you, mayor of a
[1:47:47] report of settlements and
[1:47:49] active litigation. There are
[1:47:50] no settlements or judgments to
[1:47:51] report out for the month of
[1:47:54] JULY. As of 8/6/2026, are
[1:47:56] active. Caseload was 33
[1:47:58] litigation matters with child
[1:47:59] eats assigned to approximately
[1:48:01] 25% of the trial court level
[1:48:03] matters. 4 cases are currently
[1:48:04] on appeal following rulings in
[1:48:06] favor of the city at the trial
[1:48:08] court level and the litigation
[1:48:10] report is attached to the
[1:48:10] agenda materials and I have
[1:48:11] nothing further to report this
[1:48:14] evening. Thank you. Thank you
[1:48:15] very much the public comment.
[1:48:16] Are there any members of the
[1:48:17] public who wish to comment on
[1:48:18] either of these reports, MR.
[1:48:27] Do it.
[1:48:29] >> Hello, my name is Dwayne
[1:48:31] from Roseland. Thank you. For
[1:48:33] those recent reports from the
[1:48:34] interim city manager and the
[1:48:39] attorney. It's nice to hear
[1:48:39] that they'll be a meeting
[1:48:43] about the flock cameras. This
[1:48:44] has become an issue that's
[1:48:46] growing for a number of
[1:48:48] people. And I'm hoping as
[1:48:48] specially because the chief of
[1:48:52] police is come by tonight.
[1:48:53] That he'll make a point of
[1:48:56] making sure the meeting is set
[1:48:57] up so that half of the time is
[1:49:00] for the residents. I've been
[1:49:01] to a number of city meetings
[1:49:06] over the years and typically
[1:49:07] evolves into the city, talking
[1:49:09] at the people who've come
[1:49:11] talking out a more given him
[1:49:13] some more talk and you can
[1:49:17] have a two-hour meeting. It
[1:49:17] comprises one hour and 45
[1:49:21] minutes. City staff and
[1:49:21] different people talking to
[1:49:22] the residents who then all
[1:49:26] they get 15 minutes. So the
[1:49:27] whole flock camera issue has
[1:49:33] become fraught with this,
[1:49:34] understanding this information
[1:49:34] and other things that are
[1:49:37] problematic to folks in the
[1:49:40] community. So this would be
[1:49:41] excellent opportunity for the
[1:49:43] police department and city
[1:49:44] staff, even elected officials
[1:49:49] to be there and point out to
[1:49:51] the community. It's what they
[1:49:53] want. The community is asking
[1:49:54] about information. They want
[1:49:58] safety in the future and
[1:49:58] explain how this might be able
[1:50:04] to deliver some of those. You
[1:50:04] might call questions that come
[1:50:07] from the greater community,
[1:50:11] deliver answers for those. So
[1:50:11] don't go in with a preset
[1:50:15] agenda per se make to our
[1:50:16] meeting one hour for the city
[1:50:18] staff and one are for
[1:50:21] community to talk and interact
[1:50:22] have it be an interactive
[1:50:25] discussion. Not just one side
[1:50:27] leads. Thank you kindly. Going
[1:50:30] take you to Wayne.
[1:50:31] >> Are there any other members
[1:50:32] of the public in council
[1:50:36] chambers who wish to speak?
[1:50:37] Seeing none. We'll go online
[1:50:37] if you're online was to make
[1:50:38] public comment. This item,
[1:50:39] please raise your hand or
[1:50:42] press star 9. MADAM Zoom host.
[1:50:44] Is there anybody with her hand
[1:50:45] raised online?
[1:50:45] >> Thank you, Mayor. We have
[1:50:48] no one wishing to speak on
[1:50:48] Zoom.
[1:50:49] >> Thank you. We'll close
[1:50:50] public comment on this item
[1:50:52] and more on to item. 10
[1:50:53] statements of abstention are
[1:50:54] accused my council members. Do
[1:50:54] we have any statements of
[1:50:55] abstention recusal this
[1:51:00] evening? Seeing none. On to
[1:51:00] mayor and Councilmembers
[1:51:01] reports. Do we have any
[1:51:04] reports this evening? MR.
[1:51:08] Donald kick us off.
[1:51:09] >> Thank you, Mayor. I just
[1:51:10] have a couple of things to
[1:51:13] report out I was able to 10. I
[1:51:15] think it was a last Wednesday
[1:51:19] night market last week and see
[1:51:20] drummer from Guns n Roses. So
[1:51:24] if you know, I wasn't at the
[1:51:24] really big event politically,
[1:51:28] it's because I was listening
[1:51:29] to that.
[1:51:31] >> I also want say
[1:51:33] congratulations to the Rincon
[1:51:36] Valley Library for their
[1:51:36] amazing renovation. Open the
[1:51:39] doors yesterday and and it
[1:51:41] looks like a bookstore going
[1:51:41] in there. They've done a great
[1:51:44] job, making it a resource,
[1:51:45] have for community members.
[1:51:47] And I know a lot of students
[1:51:48] go to that library after
[1:51:49] school. And so I just want to
[1:51:52] congratulate them. And thank
[1:51:54] you for opportunity come and
[1:51:55] speak to all the committee
[1:51:56] members that were in
[1:51:56] attendance. And thank you to
[1:51:57] city manager net for his
[1:52:00] attendance as well.
[1:52:04] >> Thank you. Anyone else? I
[1:52:06] want just bunch of real quick
[1:52:08] items you mention, not every
[1:52:08] dimension police night out a
[1:52:09] couple weeks ago when we had
[1:52:12] the police to put up a dames
[1:52:13] again. Thanks, rpd for putting
[1:52:14] together. We have hundreds of
[1:52:15] people that that's that's a
[1:52:18] great tradition. Thank you to
[1:52:20] city staff here as well as in
[1:52:21] Rohnert Park in Windsor for
[1:52:22] being part of the business
[1:52:22] line. Sonoma County
[1:52:23] presentation on where our city
[1:52:26] budgets are right now as well
[1:52:27] as the ballot tax measures and
[1:52:28] a number of jurisdictions in
[1:52:31] the county are going out with
[1:52:32] it was well attended meeting.
[1:52:34] We probably want to add 150
[1:52:35] plus people. They're just
[1:52:37] talking through municipal
[1:52:37] municipal finances, both Santa
[1:52:39] Rosa and our and our
[1:52:40] neighboring cities. That was
[1:52:43] an important meeting. We did
[1:52:44] have the Clean Power Board
[1:52:46] meeting a couple weeks ago.
[1:52:47] Interesting subject discussed
[1:52:48] the cost of electric
[1:52:50] electrification for
[1:52:51] lower-income neighborhoods. So
[1:52:53] think about the lower income
[1:52:53] neighborhoods and our county.
[1:52:56] How do we give them the get
[1:52:58] those neighborhoods, the
[1:52:59] benefits ev of solar cells of
[1:52:59] more reliable electricity,
[1:53:02] lower electric costs. Sonoma,
[1:53:03] clean power as ever is ahead
[1:53:04] of the curve and trying to
[1:53:05] figure out how we make that
[1:53:08] happen here in our county in a
[1:53:09] And of course, the fair I know
[1:53:10] the county tries to end game,
[1:53:12] for the fair, but we had 10
[1:53:12] days of the fair. And that
[1:53:13] really happens in Santa Rosa
[1:53:16] as everybody knows. Attendance
[1:53:17] was good. It was a lot of What
[1:53:18] a what a great addition for
[1:53:22] the county. A week ago we had
[1:53:24] this change council chamber
[1:53:26] right here was full MARCH. The
[1:53:27] 7th and 8th graders actually
[1:53:30] 3rd through 8th graders who
[1:53:32] were who had were winners in
[1:53:33] the read on Sonoma County
[1:53:35] reading effort across the
[1:53:36] county. They chose to come
[1:53:37] here and learn about city
[1:53:39] government. It's a great
[1:53:40] program county wide. They're
[1:53:41] going about 7,000 kids in
[1:53:43] Sonoma County participating re
[1:53:46] on Sonoma. Again, to encourage
[1:53:48] reading for encourage reading
[1:53:49] skills. So kudos to that and
[1:53:52] to the school districts who
[1:53:53] are involved. And then finally
[1:53:55] an unusual conversation this
[1:53:57] week I was at San Quentin on
[1:53:59] Saturday and found myself in
[1:54:01] policy conversations with
[1:54:02] relevance to our vies for into
[1:54:02] partnership. That's been
[1:54:04] windows in this in this
[1:54:06] Rogers, believe it or not, we
[1:54:08] have we have a committed group
[1:54:09] of men inside San Quentin who
[1:54:10] wake up at 05:30am, in the
[1:54:12] morning to watch our council
[1:54:14] meetings. And so when I'm in
[1:54:15] there, too, with my basketball
[1:54:18] team to play basketball, a
[1:54:19] policy session sometimes
[1:54:21] emerges and this time around
[1:54:22] what was concerning for for
[1:54:24] the for the colleagues I was
[1:54:26] with was on the increase in
[1:54:27] gun violence in our area and
[1:54:30] the increase in youth
[1:54:31] violence. They've noticed that
[1:54:34] and particularly some for some
[1:54:35] residents, former residents of
[1:54:36] Santa Rosa, Future residents
[1:54:37] of Santa Rosa with their
[1:54:38] family. Still here. Want to
[1:54:43] know how they can help. So and
[1:54:45] touching They mentioned that
[1:54:46] they feel as though they've
[1:54:50] participated, they they helped
[1:54:50] create the conditions for the
[1:54:52] problem that we're seeing here
[1:54:53] and they want to they want to
[1:54:54] give back in some way. And
[1:54:55] that led into a conversation
[1:54:55] about what the violence
[1:54:56] Prevention partnership does.
[1:55:00] What are city Some discussion
[1:55:02] of how they can participate
[1:55:03] from San Quentin now with
[1:55:05] their media labs in terms of
[1:55:06] videos in terms of terms of
[1:55:07] public presentations, how they
[1:55:09] might how they might
[1:55:11] participate. Much discussion
[1:55:13] about what Srpd has done, what
[1:55:14] we have done here in terms of
[1:55:18] gun seizures in terms of terms
[1:55:19] ghost lab, ghost manufacturing
[1:55:21] arrests, et cetera. They were
[1:55:24] glad to hear that news. But
[1:55:25] again, it turned into
[1:55:28] substantive conversation. So
[1:55:31] shout out to Johnny and Jonas
[1:55:31] to residents to 2 individuals
[1:55:32] will be coming back to our
[1:55:33] city Sunday. We're ready to
[1:55:37] worry to plug you in. And then
[1:55:38] the San Quentin Kings, the
[1:55:40] name of the team we play when
[1:55:41] we go in, they would want it
[1:55:44] noted for the city record that
[1:55:45] they did actually because
[1:55:46] pretty badly in and in a
[1:55:47] basketball game, it wasn't. It
[1:55:51] wasn't very close this time
[1:55:54] around by 2 long. But 2
[1:55:54] longtime friends, their land
[1:55:55] cookie. I want to also be on
[1:55:56] the record that I outscored
[1:55:57] both of them, even though I
[1:55:59] was injured. So if our minutes
[1:56:01] could reflect And and to that
[1:56:03] to the gentleman watching,
[1:56:06] first of all, good morning.
[1:56:07] Thank you. Thank you tuning in
[1:56:08] for interest in the city and
[1:56:10] I'll see you in SEPTEMBER.
[1:56:13] That concludes our report. Any
[1:56:15] public comment on these items?
[1:56:20] In council chambers MADAM
[1:56:21] Zuma, host is any online, have
[1:56:23] their hands raised?
[1:56:26] >> Nobody is commenting on
[1:56:27] zoom.
[1:56:27] >> We'll close public comment.
[1:56:32] We will move on to item 11.2.
[1:56:33] We have a few of us here who
[1:56:34] are going to California cities
[1:56:37] in a couple of weeks and we
[1:56:39] need we need delegate voting
[1:56:44] rights to a few of them. And
[1:56:46] so MR. Dunham internal review
[1:56:47] from for a motion for our
[1:56:47] undesignated voter and
[1:56:50] alternate.
[1:56:54] >> Thank you, I move to
[1:56:55] designate Councilmember Rogers
[1:56:56] as voting delicate and
[1:56:59] councilmember Alvarez and
[1:57:01] myself as the 2 alternatives
[1:57:02] for the upcoming Cal City
[1:57:04] Conference. Second that.
[1:57:05] >> We have a motion and a
[1:57:07] second. Any public comment on
[1:57:13] this item? In council chambers
[1:57:16] anybody online, MADAM To host.
[1:57:18] >> Nobody is raising their
[1:57:18] hand online.
[1:57:19] >> we have a motion. A second
[1:57:22] City clerk call the vote.
[1:57:25] >> Thank you, Mayor
[1:57:26] Councilmember Rogers, I
[1:57:26] Councilmember MacDonald by
[1:57:30] Councilmember Councilmember
[1:57:30] Ben Yes, councilmember over as
[1:57:33] our vice Cookie. I mayor step
[1:57:36] yes. Let the record show this
[1:57:37] passes unanimously.
[1:57:38] >> Thank you, Ron 12 approval
[1:57:41] of minutes. We have 2 sets of
[1:57:42] minutes. Our JULY 2026 regular
[1:57:43] meeting minutes and AUGUST
[1:57:45] 4th, 2026 regular meeting
[1:57:46] minutes. Are there any
[1:57:48] amendments or corrections to
[1:57:49] these minutes? Looking to my
[1:57:54] colleagues. So we do an
[1:57:57] extension. You want to make
[1:57:57] that announcement?
[1:57:58] >> I need to abstain,
[1:57:58] apologize for not saying it
[1:58:00] earlier for the obvious 4th
[1:58:05] meeting as I was out of town.
[1:58:06] >> Thank you. All right. Any
[1:58:08] other corrections or
[1:58:10] amendments seeing none over
[1:58:11] the public comment in council
[1:58:13] chambers? Are there any
[1:58:14] members of the public who
[1:58:14] would like to make comment on
[1:58:15] either set or either set of
[1:58:19] minutes? Seeing none in
[1:58:20] council chambers. MADAM Zoom
[1:58:21] host, anybody online with her
[1:58:22] hand raised.
[1:58:22] >> We have no public comment
[1:58:26] via them.
[1:58:27] >> Thank you. All right. Then
[1:58:30] Ms MacDonald stipulation that
[1:58:31] she is that she's abstaining
[1:58:32] from item. 12.2 will be will
[1:58:32] adopt both those minutes as
[1:58:36] submitted. And move on to
[1:58:39] consent. We have items 13.1
[1:58:41] through 13.6. Are there any
[1:58:42] questions regarding the
[1:58:42] consent calendar, anything to
[1:58:48] be pulled? Seeing? None. What
[1:58:49] a public comment winning
[1:58:50] numbers. The public like to
[1:58:51] make comment on consent, MR.
[1:59:02] Do it. You have the floor.
[1:59:03] >> Hello. My name is Dwayne Do
[1:59:07] it. I'm from Roseland I'm
[1:59:08] definitely concerned and
[1:59:10] hopeful that the downtown
[1:59:12] connectivity to support
[1:59:13] housing density is actually
[1:59:16] going to occur and bring good
[1:59:16] things forward since sizable
[1:59:19] amount of money that's being
[1:59:20] spent and one of the things
[1:59:24] that we hear often is that we
[1:59:25] want more housing density
[1:59:29] downtown. But we haven't been
[1:59:30] getting it. It's a matter of
[1:59:31] fact. People in the past that
[1:59:33] have come here before and told
[1:59:35] you they're going to do
[1:59:37] projects to get more housing
[1:59:38] downtown, then return and say,
[1:59:40] well, it didn't pencil out so
[1:59:43] we didn't do it and we don't
[1:59:45] get that housing that's
[1:59:46] promised. This is the kind of
[1:59:48] stuff that needs to be paid
[1:59:50] attention to you. Folks need
[1:59:53] to keep a tight rein on what
[1:59:55] kind of promises you take.
[1:59:56] It's a matter of fact. You
[1:59:59] know, there's a term he caught
[2:00:01] a proverb, actually, perhaps
[2:00:06] once burned, twice shy. So you
[2:00:08] could be looking different
[2:00:09] developer that MAY come here
[2:00:10] and say we're going to get
[2:00:12] more housing downtown. We're
[2:00:14] going to increase that housing
[2:00:15] density and make sure that you
[2:00:18] get it in writing because
[2:00:19] apparently that hasn't
[2:00:20] occurred before and that's why
[2:00:22] they've been able to slip
[2:00:24] through, if you will, and that
[2:00:28] we don't get that housing.
[2:00:28] That whole dilemma didn't
[2:00:33] pencil out. So as this goes
[2:00:35] forward, which is 13.3 kind of
[2:00:36] an ominous number, if you
[2:00:40] will. You'll make sure that
[2:00:41] somehow these people that
[2:00:45] build this project for 13 can
[2:00:50] be 3.7, 7, 9, 141,000. That's
[2:00:51] a lot of money. 3 million,
[2:00:54] almost 4 million dollars.
[2:00:55] Gonna show somehow that we get
[2:00:56] that housing density. Thank
[2:01:00] you. Thank you to Wayne. Any
[2:01:01] other members of the public
[2:01:02] like to comment on the consent
[2:01:04] calendar.
[2:01:05] >> Seeing none in council
[2:01:08] chambers met MADAM Zuma, host,
[2:01:09] anybody online.
[2:01:10] >> Thank you, Mayor. We have
[2:01:12] no one raising their hand
[2:01:12] online.
[2:01:13] >> Thank you. We'll close
[2:01:14] public comment and I look to
[2:01:17] vice mayor creepy for motion.
[2:01:18] I move to adopt consent items.
[2:01:20] 13.1 through submitted by
[2:01:20] staff.
[2:01:24] >> Second, it. When I was
[2:01:25] close talking about what MR.
[2:01:26] Alvarez with a motion and a
[2:01:27] second, MADAM City clerk, you
[2:01:29] can call a vote whenever
[2:01:30] you're ready. Thank you. Mayor
[2:01:33] Councilmember Rogers.
[2:01:36] >> Councilmember MacDonald, I
[2:01:37] councilmember Fleming
[2:01:39] Councilmember Ben Willows.
[2:01:40] Yes, councilmember over vice
[2:01:43] Cookie. I mean, your step?
[2:01:46] Yes. Let the record show this
[2:01:47] passes unanimously.
[2:01:47] >> Thank you very rights where
[2:01:50] we are just a few minutes
[2:01:52] before 5. You know what? Let's
[2:01:54] let's move right into our
[2:01:55] report item for the evening
[2:01:58] item. 15.1. Our report
[2:01:59] regarding the approval of Real
[2:02:00] property Exchange agreement
[2:02:05] for City Hall campus, 9100
[2:02:06] Senators Avenue and a portion
[2:02:08] of that. And then 6.30, per 6,
[2:02:13] 3, 6, 5, 5 for street and 5
[2:02:14] 23rd Street with a decoration
[2:02:15] exempt surplus land and
[2:02:22] related actions. A
[2:02:23] high-profile item for those of
[2:02:26] you read the papers. Thank you
[2:02:26] for it. To all those who
[2:02:28] showed up tonight to talk
[2:02:29] through this. It's important
[2:02:39] for the city. MISS Scott, MR.
[2:02:47] Wagner, MR. Hennessey.
[2:02:47] >> Good Evening. Council
[2:02:48] members. We are happy to be
[2:02:49] here tonight. Excited to be
[2:02:50] here tonight to talk to
[2:02:52] addressing the city hall
[2:02:55] liability and the proposed
[2:02:57] exchange agreement. I am Jill
[2:02:58] Scott, the city's real
[2:02:59] property manager start off the
[2:03:02] discussion. I'm here with our
[2:03:04] deputy director or excuse
[2:03:05] director of just give it a
[2:03:08] motion. Our director of
[2:03:09] transportation and public
[2:03:12] works and cfo, MISTER Wagner.
[2:03:15] We also have our consulting
[2:03:17] law firm bk in in the audience
[2:03:19] to help us out with any
[2:03:20] questions they've been working
[2:03:23] with us to this whole process.
[2:03:25] >> So just going to go over a
[2:03:26] little road map of how the
[2:03:27] presentation is going to go
[2:03:29] because it's a little We want
[2:03:31] to make sure we had all the
[2:03:31] points. Any answers. Many
[2:03:37] questions as we can. Rt Pw
[2:03:38] Tractor Director Hennessy is
[2:03:40] going to start out with the
[2:03:40] liability and what's going on
[2:03:41] at the city Hall campus right
[2:03:46] now. Our cfo is go through the
[2:03:48] fiscal impact. Then I minister
[2:03:49] with salt alternatives that
[2:03:52] we've considered the exchange
[2:03:54] itself the transaction and
[2:03:55] what it looks like and how the
[2:03:56] improvements and the
[2:03:58] transition would go. They're
[2:04:01] going turn it back over to cfo
[2:04:02] Wagner to go through the
[2:04:03] financial review and the
[2:04:06] proposed council action. So
[2:04:10] next slide to MR. Hennessey.
[2:04:14] >> Good afternoon Council. As
[2:04:17] a slide on for a new shows. We
[2:04:20] have more than 9 figures in my
[2:04:24] ability on the That doesn't
[2:04:26] happen overnight. That is not
[2:04:27] specifically my fault or your
[2:04:30] fault. This is a generational
[2:04:30] issue that has happened over
[2:04:33] decades. What we have figured
[2:04:36] out, though, is how to fix it.
[2:04:40] And I walk through some of the
[2:04:41] specific issues. It is our
[2:04:42] million dollars needed to fix
[2:04:44] these buildings for a variety
[2:04:49] of things from structural
[2:04:50] repairs to sewer and water
[2:04:51] issues and ada issues amongst
[2:04:56] other things.
[2:04:58] >> These cost to the city here
[2:04:59] is
[2:05:00] >> cfo we'll talk a little bit
[2:05:03] more about that. We are not
[2:05:04] paying for annually. And as a
[2:05:06] result of that, it continues
[2:05:07] to grow rather having us
[2:05:08] address it in a meaningful
[2:05:17] way. Joe mentioned this, this
[2:05:18] liability is systemic both
[2:05:20] within our facilities
[2:05:21] portfolio and within our our
[2:05:23] budgeting over the last many
[2:05:24] decades. With respect to the
[2:05:28] buildings and the site itself.
[2:05:32] We have structural issues,
[2:05:32] including exterior conditions
[2:05:34] that have deteriorated past
[2:05:36] the point of repair that need
[2:05:37] complete replacement
[2:05:38] structural deficiencies of
[2:05:39] started to crop up in some of
[2:05:41] the buildings. We have ada
[2:05:42] issues all over the place,
[2:05:43] including the elevator out
[2:05:46] here. The ramps essentially we
[2:05:47] would need to rebuild the
[2:05:50] building to make it 88
[2:05:52] compliant. We also have as
[2:05:54] best of sunlight issues
[2:05:55] throughout a number of the
[2:05:56] buildings. And I think the
[2:05:59] biggest thing that I want to
[2:06:00] fixing this requires everybody
[2:06:00] working in these buildings to
[2:06:04] be out of them. You know, we
[2:06:06] cannot deal with lead and
[2:06:06] asbestos issues with people
[2:06:10] working around here. You've
[2:06:13] all heard the anecdotes of us
[2:06:15] buying hvac parts from the bay
[2:06:16] because we cannot find
[2:06:20] suppliers sell them anymore.
[2:06:23] That those are truthful
[2:06:23] anecdotes are facilities.
[2:06:27] Coordinator superintendent is
[2:06:28] frequently shopping and
[2:06:29] second-hand sites to find
[2:06:30] pieces equipment for us to
[2:06:35] keep the building running.
[2:06:36] Some of the specific examples.
[2:06:37] I know. I've got a couple
[2:06:39] slides here just showing some
[2:06:40] some pictures because I know a
[2:06:42] lot of the public sees the
[2:06:43] council chamber MAY be some
[2:06:46] reception areas, but the 300
[2:06:47] plus staff members who work in
[2:06:49] these building see this every
[2:06:53] day. We have hvac units with
[2:06:53] Faye Linda Quirk. We have
[2:06:57] water leaks stained carpet
[2:06:58] replacing that carpet. It is a
[2:06:59] challenge because it would
[2:07:00] expose who knows what
[2:07:04] underneath them. Have paint
[2:07:06] caused by leaks even in the
[2:07:09] point of 2 point of crack
[2:07:10] concrete walls that's not
[2:07:10] supposed to happen as
[2:07:12] especially not supposed to
[2:07:13] have then. Where will those
[2:07:15] concrete walls are important
[2:07:18] structurally for Keeping the
[2:07:23] building operate. Sealing
[2:07:25] leaks are not only water
[2:07:27] lines, but sometimes sewage
[2:07:30] lines we've had. Those leaks
[2:07:31] mostly contained by the
[2:07:33] ceilings. And as you staying
[2:07:34] there, we've also had some
[2:07:34] sewage leaks not contained by
[2:07:35] the ceilings and make their
[2:07:36] way down to the desk and
[2:07:40] ground level. You'll remember
[2:07:42] a few years ago that we had an
[2:07:43] infestation of fleas that send
[2:07:43] everybody home for a short
[2:07:44] period of time. While we got
[2:07:47] that taken care of. These are
[2:07:51] all costs to us in terms of
[2:07:52] fixing city facilities but
[2:07:53] also costs to us in terms of
[2:07:54] the ability of staff to
[2:07:58] deliver services for the
[2:07:59] public. So the great part is
[2:08:02] that now we know what it costs
[2:08:04] to fix. And cfo Wagner will
[2:08:08] tell us how to get there.
[2:08:08] Thank you, Director
[2:08:11] Hennessy's. So all Echo one of
[2:08:13] the points that Dan made in
[2:08:14] that myself and dinner are
[2:08:14] willing to come back to
[2:08:16] councils address this issue,
[2:08:17] too.
[2:08:17] >> To put a Band-Aid on to
[2:08:22] this. Campus not to fix it,
[2:08:23] but to put a Band-Aid on it so
[2:08:24] that we can immediately
[2:08:27] address. The problems here
[2:08:30] that make this campus a place
[2:08:31] that we the public cannot
[2:08:31] reliably count on to be able
[2:08:34] to conduct their services
[2:08:35] here. That indeed is a
[2:08:39] 48 million dollar band did.
[2:08:40] And again, we are willing to
[2:08:41] return to council with dot to
[2:08:45] be able to execute that plan.
[2:08:46] Roughly what an understanding
[2:08:48] of how that would really to
[2:08:49] our budget would we would
[2:08:49] anticipate the 6 million
[2:08:53] dollar annual cost to fund
[2:08:54] that 48 million dollars. We
[2:08:57] would do so through debt. Now,
[2:08:58] as Dan mentioned, that would
[2:09:00] be fully burden costs of
[2:09:02] finding a new place for our
[2:09:03] employees to work until we
[2:09:04] were able to fix all the
[2:09:06] issues here. It would be
[2:09:07] complex and it would be very
[2:09:10] challenging to execute. But
[2:09:11] again, we are at a place with
[2:09:14] our current failure that we do
[2:09:16] need to take action. And one
[2:09:17] of the consistent themes that
[2:09:19] will be throughout this
[2:09:21] presentation is that this is a
[2:09:22] issue that has developed over
[2:09:24] decades and part of that issue
[2:09:27] is in action. And we're going
[2:09:29] to talk about that a little
[2:09:30] bit more in the presentation.
[2:09:34] Next slide. 6 million dollars
[2:09:36] is a meaningful impact to our
[2:09:39] budget. We're going to talk
[2:09:40] about leader our exchange
[2:09:40] concept and how that equals
[2:09:41] less than 1 million dollars a
[2:09:45] year. The way I'm
[2:09:48] characterizing for my Ron
[2:09:50] finances that there is a
[2:09:50] 5 million dollar Delta there
[2:09:52] between these solutions and
[2:09:54] again, the 6 million dollars
[2:09:57] is not a solution. It is a
[2:09:58] Band-Aid. 5 million Dollar
[2:10:01] Delta really is a meaningful
[2:10:01] impact to the service that we
[2:10:04] can provide the community. Our
[2:10:05] general fund, which would have
[2:10:07] to bear the burden of that
[2:10:09] expense is responsible for
[2:10:10] providing the services that
[2:10:13] the community expects and asks
[2:10:15] for first that being our
[2:10:16] police fire emergency
[2:10:18] response, our streets and
[2:10:20] infrastructure keeping our
[2:10:21] parks clean and well
[2:10:23] maintained. And as long as
[2:10:23] well as the community services
[2:10:25] through our recreation
[2:10:27] programs. At the end of the
[2:10:29] day, we have one high in Santa
[2:10:30] Rosa and how we choose to
[2:10:32] divvy it out is the way to
[2:10:34] provide the most service to
[2:10:35] the community. Ultimately the
[2:10:38] end of the day, this inaction
[2:10:39] on see by the city over the
[2:10:42] decades to create this problem
[2:10:43] has left us where we have to
[2:10:45] make this start decision on
[2:10:47] how we are going to invest
[2:10:49] that pie best to maintain our
[2:10:55] city services. The second
[2:10:56] thing that I would I would
[2:11:00] impress is that
[2:11:01] >> these couple of decades of
[2:11:03] the city discussing this and
[2:11:05] this has been discussed at
[2:11:06] this table for a very long
[2:11:09] time and very long
[2:11:11] presentations. I would really
[2:11:13] describe that as the city was
[2:11:16] stuck in spiral of a rebuild
[2:11:18] concept and that it's very
[2:11:21] rare to be able to know you
[2:11:21] haven't identified facility
[2:11:23] that you're able to move into.
[2:11:25] That will meet your needs. We
[2:11:26] do have that opportunity
[2:11:30] today. But when you don't have
[2:11:31] that, you have to build from
[2:11:34] the ground up. The last time
[2:11:36] the city took a very serious
[2:11:39] approach at looking at this
[2:11:40] issue. The twenty-twenty
[2:11:41] initial estimate was
[2:11:43] 64 million dollars. That is
[2:11:48] the large number but what's
[2:11:49] even larger is taking that
[2:11:51] number from just 6 years ago.
[2:11:51] And today we're looking at
[2:11:55] around 82 million dollars. We
[2:11:57] have this existing liability
[2:11:58] on our books for this campus
[2:12:02] and it grows each year. Unlike
[2:12:03] an actuary report from Calpers
[2:12:04] where they'll tell us exactly
[2:12:05] how much it is each year. We
[2:12:09] have to look at this and
[2:12:10] ultimately that 30% increase
[2:12:13] just makes the rebuild concept
[2:12:16] more unfeasible than it was in
[2:12:17] 2020 more unfeasible than it
[2:12:19] was prior to the Great
[2:12:22] Recession. And we really need
[2:12:23] to exit that strategy. We need
[2:12:23] to come up with something
[2:12:24] different that we're here to
[2:12:32] propose today.
[2:12:33] >> ok, so we've had a lot of
[2:12:33] questions about what's
[2:12:38] happened over the years
[2:12:39] personally, myself and our
[2:12:40] city manager of been working
[2:12:42] on these concepts for over 10
[2:12:43] years. But I'm gonna go back
[2:12:44] in history a little bit for
[2:12:45] the public, even though this
[2:12:47] has been to.
[2:12:48] >> In public means so many
[2:12:51] times over the years. Back in
[2:12:51] the 2 thousands, they
[2:12:52] attempted a man, a master
[2:12:57] planning process for city hall
[2:12:58] and and recognize that the
[2:12:59] times I it wasn't a long-term
[2:13:03] solution that is affordable in
[2:13:04] 2000 Ten's they evaluated
[2:13:06] selling or rebuilding and even
[2:13:08] bought more property a little
[2:13:09] earlier than not the West
[2:13:12] America Bank building too
[2:13:15] extend and expand on a rebuild
[2:13:16] of the property. But the high
[2:13:17] costs and the limited market
[2:13:22] interest made that not
[2:13:24] feasible. And the 2000
[2:13:26] twenty's. So here is where I
[2:13:28] came earlier in the 2020 is
[2:13:30] probably 2018 we started we
[2:13:31] looked at, we studied for over
[2:13:34] an entire year. We looked at
[2:13:36] the public private partnership
[2:13:37] side. So we went through a
[2:13:41] years long study and some some
[2:13:44] MAY say we over analyzed and
[2:13:44] my opinion. We were at the
[2:13:47] point of over analyzing all of
[2:13:49] this. We brought in every
[2:13:51] expert you could think We
[2:13:55] brought in, you know, finance
[2:13:56] experts. We we put in private
[2:13:59] equity. We brought and on
[2:14:00] brokers from in the area from
[2:14:02] outside the area. We did
[2:14:03] market surveys. We did
[2:14:03] studies. We did test surveys
[2:14:08] with the community. We started
[2:14:10] a master planning process. We
[2:14:12] looked at all of our property,
[2:14:12] every piece of property we own
[2:14:16] in the downtown. We looked at
[2:14:17] selling those at the highest
[2:14:18] possible price that we could
[2:14:20] come up with for appraised
[2:14:22] value and we still couldn't
[2:14:23] get to a number that the city
[2:14:26] could afford on a rebuilt
[2:14:27] that's selling every single
[2:14:28] piece of land we own in the
[2:14:30] downtown. Including parking
[2:14:35] garages. So Twenty-twenty we
[2:14:36] realize that we're just not in
[2:14:39] a place where and at that time
[2:14:43] where rebuild as possible. And
[2:14:45] as cfo Wagner just went over
[2:14:46] and the slide previous to
[2:14:46] this, those numbers even
[2:14:50] gotten larger. Now. In 2025,
[2:14:52] we decided to test the market
[2:14:53] a little bit. Let's see what
[2:14:54] our properties worth. And
[2:14:55] let's see if we sell some of
[2:14:56] the pieces individually rather
[2:15:00] than a whole. Where we would
[2:15:02] come out, too. So we decided
[2:15:04] to put up for sale 6.55, for
[2:15:05] street, which is the West
[2:15:05] America Bank building to see
[2:15:09] what would happen. We received
[2:15:10] after a pretty significant
[2:15:12] amount of time. We received 2
[2:15:15] offers both of the officers or
[2:15:18] so significantly below the
[2:15:19] appraised values that the city
[2:15:21] declined to move forward with
[2:15:24] those. And at that time with
[2:15:24] that told me, in my
[2:15:25] professional opinion, is that
[2:15:30] this? City Hall campus is
[2:15:32] worth more as a whole than it
[2:15:32] is peace million that are
[2:15:34] separating that. Next slide.
[2:15:38] Please. So this slide just
[2:15:41] shows you that we've we've
[2:15:42] tested analyzed, brought in
[2:15:48] every expert. To the Nth
[2:15:49] Degree on rebuilding what we
[2:15:50] could do to rehabilitate this
[2:15:50] campus and what needs to be
[2:15:54] done. We had significant
[2:15:54] amount of studies done
[2:15:57] facilities, study's done
[2:15:58] 100 million dollar liability
[2:15:59] at 6 million dollars a year
[2:16:03] for 30 years. I'm thinking
[2:16:05] it's just it doesn't work for
[2:16:06] the city. We don't. We don't
[2:16:07] have the funds as our cfo tell
[2:16:10] you. Building new on the
[2:16:13] existing site. Like I said, a
[2:16:16] minimum of 82 Million. It's
[2:16:17] probably closer to 100 million
[2:16:20] at this time. And estimating
[2:16:21] 5 million dollars a year for
[2:16:22] 30 years. Again, not a
[2:16:22] sustainable option for the
[2:16:27] city. Next slide. Please. So
[2:16:29] after years and years of
[2:16:30] studies of talking to everyone
[2:16:32] we can talking to every expert
[2:16:39] we came up with a or an
[2:16:39] opportunity for an exchange
[2:16:41] which we want to talk to you
[2:16:43] about tonight. And this
[2:16:45] opportunity is the first
[2:16:46] opportunity I-10 to 12 years
[2:16:48] of working on this that I can
[2:16:51] say is a sustainable
[2:16:53] opportunity and is in my
[2:16:55] professional opinion, a great
[2:16:56] opportunity for the city to
[2:16:59] get out of 100 million dollar
[2:17:01] liability. And let's just say
[2:17:02] that one more time,
[2:17:03] 100 million dollar taxpayer
[2:17:04] liability on this campus. Next
[2:17:07] slide. Please. So what's an
[2:17:12] exchange? I've been asked many
[2:17:13] times what a property
[2:17:14] exchanges. It's exactly what
[2:17:15] it sounds like. So let's think
[2:17:17] of the definition exchange.
[2:17:17] It's you give something you
[2:17:19] get something usually of equal
[2:17:21] value or or becomes of equal
[2:17:23] value. And that's exactly what
[2:17:25] a property changes. So what
[2:17:26] staff is proposing tonight is
[2:17:29] that the city of Santa Rosa
[2:17:30] Exchange, what we call the
[2:17:31] city Hall campus. Now, I'd be
[2:17:32] very specific about what those
[2:17:33] properties are. That is 100
[2:17:36] Santa Rosa Avenue, which is
[2:17:37] the campus that this is
[2:17:42] sitting on today.-1.6 one
[2:17:44] acres. So director Hennessy is
[2:17:46] going to go into this slides
[2:17:48] coming up. But the city is
[2:17:52] keeping keeping full. 1.6, one
[2:17:54] acres of all of the creek
[2:17:57] property. So all of the
[2:17:57] property of Santa Rosa Creek
[2:17:59] and Matanzas Creek that is
[2:18:00] covert under here will remain
[2:18:02] in the government's hands.
[2:18:04] That will provide flexibility
[2:18:05] in the future. So what what
[2:18:06] can be done with those
[2:18:10] properties? So 100 Rose Avenue
[2:18:11] minus a 1.6 acres which we
[2:18:14] will be keeping 90 Santa Rosa
[2:18:17] Avenue 6.55. For street and
[2:18:17] 6.31, 0st street that are all
[2:18:18] the properties here and across
[2:18:19] the street on First Street and
[2:18:23] we would exchange all of those
[2:18:25] properties for 5 23rd Street,
[2:18:26] which is owned by museum on
[2:18:29] the Square llc. That is an
[2:18:30] existing downtown office
[2:18:32] building that meets all of the
[2:18:33] city's needs. And I'll go into
[2:18:39] the next couple of slides. How
[2:18:40] we got to the point of
[2:18:42] recommending this property at
[2:18:43] 5 23rd Street. So where we
[2:18:45] came from is the city have a
[2:18:46] need? Moss has a need and
[2:18:48] desire and the need to line.
[2:18:51] That's the hardest part. A
[2:18:52] finding in exchange property
[2:18:53] that works and needs have to
[2:18:57] align for both. So how this
[2:18:59] fits in the state law. So the
[2:19:00] Surplus Lands Act, which I
[2:19:03] know you've all heard me talk
[2:19:04] about it. Not probably at this
[2:19:05] point. I'm a you have to
[2:19:07] designate this is this is how
[2:19:08] the city governs or how the
[2:19:11] state governs, how governments
[2:19:14] sell property and it has to be
[2:19:15] designated either non-exempt
[2:19:17] surplus land or exempt surplus
[2:19:19] land. There is an exception in
[2:19:22] the state law that in the
[2:19:24] surplus lands out that allows
[2:19:25] and property exchange for
[2:19:29] government use. For agents.
[2:19:32] What they call agency use
[2:19:34] obesity use. So we are asking
[2:19:35] tonight that the council
[2:19:38] declare this property exempt
[2:19:39] surplus land and that we are
[2:19:41] and that allows us to be able
[2:19:44] to exchange that property for
[2:19:44] agency the existing city hall
[2:19:49] property would be transferred
[2:19:50] 2 Mott's llc and then 5 23rd
[2:19:51] Street would be transferred to
[2:19:56] the city for agency use. So it
[2:19:57] all you ation. Here's another
[2:19:59] question. We've got a lot of
[2:20:00] that we wanted to go over is
[2:20:02] how did we get to the
[2:20:03] recommendation of 5 23rd
[2:20:05] Street? There's a lot of
[2:20:06] properties in the downtown
[2:20:07] have. Why did this come out at
[2:20:08] the top of the less? I will
[2:20:10] tell you, this came out far
[2:20:11] beyond any other property. It
[2:20:12] was a no-brainer really to
[2:20:16] bring this one to you we
[2:20:17] looked at all the different
[2:20:19] properties and the downtown.
[2:20:24] So There are we look to bronco
[2:20:26] through first we looked at him
[2:20:27] for size and functionality
[2:20:28] tenant, relocation because
[2:20:29] obviously we don't want to re.
[2:20:31] We don't want to be display
[2:20:34] scene. Commercial tenants more
[2:20:35] than we need to. We want to be
[2:20:37] very careful about that. So a
[2:20:38] building that has 15 people
[2:20:42] and it is not not the best for
[2:20:42] us. Our businesses are very
[2:20:46] important to us. We looked at
[2:20:47] tenant improvement costs.
[2:20:49] Would what condition is the
[2:20:50] building? You know, how many?
[2:20:51] How much money do we need to
[2:20:54] put in nt eyes with that said
[2:20:55] exchange feasibility, not
[2:20:56] everybody's going to want to
[2:20:56] exchange a property or how or
[2:21:00] once a city property and then
[2:21:02] long term city suitability. So
[2:21:02] do we have room for growth and
[2:21:04] what does it look like for the
[2:21:07] future? When we looked at it
[2:21:08] all the properties in the
[2:21:10] downtown, it was important. We
[2:21:12] knew to counsel and we knew
[2:21:13] for staff and and the business
[2:21:14] community. It's those 300
[2:21:17] employees that we have remain
[2:21:18] in the downtown. So we did not
[2:21:18] look outside of the downtown
[2:21:22] area. When we got to size and
[2:21:23] functionality, which was one
[2:21:25] of them that cut the majority
[2:21:26] of the properties out in the
[2:21:29] downtown. They're are not. We
[2:21:30] would have to buy 2 properties
[2:21:31] and most instances to be able
[2:21:35] to. Have enough space to
[2:21:37] situate all of our employees
[2:21:38] that in the downtown now, let
[2:21:39] alone. You know, we wouldn't
[2:21:42] be able to put them together
[2:21:45] so we can, you know, have a
[2:21:45] one-stop shop or any of the
[2:21:48] issues any of that items that
[2:21:49] we want to bring forward for
[2:21:50] the community to make this an
[2:21:53] easier serviceable area.
[2:21:57] Exchange feasibility we had a
[2:21:58] partner, a development partner
[2:22:00] Hugh Futrell and Montel see
[2:22:01] that was interested in
[2:22:03] exchange that wanted to do
[2:22:06] that. And then we had to look
[2:22:06] at costs and disruption. So
[2:22:09] how could we move people
[2:22:13] without disrupting service?
[2:22:14] And that's something that we
[2:22:14] negotiate within the contract,
[2:22:15] which I will talk about a
[2:22:20] minute. So here's the here's
[2:22:22] the crux of the agreement. How
[2:22:23] did we establish fair value?
[2:22:27] So we have a very specific
[2:22:28] business protocol that we do
[2:22:29] in the city with every real
[2:22:30] property transaction that we
[2:22:33] do. And it's based on
[2:22:35] appraisal on outside
[2:22:36] appraisals by qualified
[2:22:38] appraisals. And we stuck to
[2:22:39] that process of which we do
[2:22:40] with every acquisition that we
[2:22:42] do here in the city. And we
[2:22:43] did it again with this one.
[2:22:44] And sometimes we did it with
[2:22:47] multiple appraisals, which is
[2:22:48] very common. So it's very
[2:22:51] common even in right away
[2:22:52] transactions by one Palm Beach
[2:22:55] Party get their own appraisal.
[2:22:56] And then, you know, to go, she
[2:22:56] ate between the 2. And that's
[2:22:57] exactly the same process that
[2:23:00] we followed here. So let's
[2:23:01] start with the Fy 23 Street.
[2:23:03] The appraised value range
[2:23:04] between appraisals was 12.4
[2:23:06] million to 18.7 million.
[2:23:10] Again, that might seem like
[2:23:12] very big Delta to the
[2:23:15] community. That is not it is
[2:23:16] typical for us to see an
[2:23:18] appraisal that there is a very
[2:23:19] big delta between one
[2:23:20] appraisal and the other
[2:23:23] appraisal. It is and my job
[2:23:24] and my staff's job in the city
[2:23:28] manager's job to know and
[2:23:29] understand what the value is
[2:23:31] and to negotiate appropriately
[2:23:31] for the city and for the
[2:23:32] taxpayers and for the council.
[2:23:34] And that's what we did here.
[2:23:38] So we looked at very similar
[2:23:39] properties. We looked like
[2:23:41] what it was going on downtown.
[2:23:45] And we came to a fair value
[2:23:46] that was agreed upon by both
[2:23:48] properties at 15.7 million.
[2:23:49] And I will tell council and
[2:23:50] the community that I think
[2:23:53] this is a very, very
[2:23:55] appropriate value. The
[2:23:57] exchange has to be beneficial
[2:23:58] for both parties. And this
[2:23:59] very beneficial to the city
[2:24:01] and it works for our exchange
[2:24:05] partner. The existing city
[2:24:06] Hall campus. Again, I'll go
[2:24:08] back to my comments before
[2:24:10] that. I truly believe that the
[2:24:11] campus is worth more as a
[2:24:13] whole that it is separately
[2:24:13] the appraised value for the
[2:24:17] city Hall campus has a
[2:24:18] combined to campus was a
[2:24:20] little over 13 million dollars
[2:24:23] when we negotiated this value.
[2:24:24] Again, these negotiate
[2:24:25] somewhere very detailed and
[2:24:27] and extensive when we
[2:24:28] negotiated this a value of
[2:24:31] 11.1 million. We had to take
[2:24:32] other things into
[2:24:35] consideration that were not in
[2:24:37] the appraised So the appraised
[2:24:38] value is going to be exactly
[2:24:39] what the property is worse
[2:24:41] could be in its best
[2:24:43] condition. This is not in its
[2:24:47] best condition during during
[2:24:49] the negotiations. We had
[2:24:50] environmental studies done,
[2:24:50] which we had planned in
[2:24:54] advance to be doing those
[2:24:55] environmental studies just for
[2:24:56] lead and asbestos abatement,
[2:24:57] not even all the other payment
[2:24:59] that needs to be done for
[2:25:01] anybody to do anything with
[2:25:02] this campus came back at 4 and
[2:25:03] a half million dollars. Our
[2:25:06] ada came back at U.S.
[2:25:07] Astronomical number. Those are
[2:25:09] the things that we had to take
[2:25:10] into account for. We're
[2:25:13] keeping 1.6 acres of land. We
[2:25:15] are not transferring that
[2:25:16] land. So that had to come into
[2:25:18] play is also as a reduced
[2:25:22] value. So the 11.1 by 3 value
[2:25:25] I feel is a very fair value as
[2:25:25] well. So when I say net
[2:25:27] exchange differential, what I
[2:25:30] mean is the difference. The
[2:25:32] delta between the value,
[2:25:33] negotiated value of 5 23rd
[2:25:34] Street and then negotiated
[2:25:36] value of existing city Hall
[2:25:39] campus. That is 4.5 million.
[2:25:40] And that is what the city
[2:25:43] would pay to Montz llc at the
[2:25:43] close of escrow for the
[2:25:45] exchange to happen. Next
[2:25:49] slide. Please. What is the
[2:25:51] city gain? The city gains a
[2:25:52] lot. The taxpayers gain a lot.
[2:25:54] I can't harp on this and not
[2:25:57] design or cfo. Really harp on
[2:25:58] is we are eliminating
[2:26:00] 100 million dollar liability
[2:26:00] from the taxpayers from the
[2:26:08] city. We gained so much being
[2:26:11] in one building. It's
[2:26:12] consolidating departments and
[2:26:14] its customer service. It's the
[2:26:16] ability to put a one-stop shop
[2:26:17] and so that we can our
[2:26:21] community can walk in and get
[2:26:22] almost every service that they
[2:26:23] want and one place instead of
[2:26:25] walking into 5 different
[2:26:27] places are having to go here
[2:26:28] or across the street or
[2:26:29] across, you know, wherever
[2:26:32] they need to go. Its strength
[2:26:34] shun strengthens the
[2:26:35] collaboration across city
[2:26:36] services and city departments
[2:26:38] and even allows us to move
[2:26:38] other departments into the
[2:26:40] building that are not to are
[2:26:41] not downtown already. And that
[2:26:45] has. Even more facts, right?
[2:26:47] And it allows us to
[2:26:47] collaborate more with each
[2:26:49] other, which gives us a better
[2:26:50] customer service. It also
[2:26:51] brings a significant even
[2:26:56] more. Employees down to use
[2:26:57] the services to go to the
[2:26:59] businesses, to have to go out
[2:27:00] after work. It helps our
[2:27:04] community and so many ways
[2:27:04] it's it's a some markets, a
[2:27:06] smart community investment
[2:27:08] next slide. Please. Turn this
[2:27:12] over to director Hennessey as
[2:27:15] Joe mentions or keep in about
[2:27:16] 1.6 acres and it's highlighted
[2:27:18] by that image on the scene
[2:27:19] from close to center as Avenue
[2:27:20] looking back towards Nome
[2:27:22] Avenue.
[2:27:23] >> The 1.6 acres is at its
[2:27:25] widest at certain center is
[2:27:27] avenue and then kind of comes
[2:27:29] back through here and almost
[2:27:31] scrapes this corner of the
[2:27:32] building before heading down
[2:27:33] Sonoma to all the way to the
[2:27:36] street. The purpose of the
[2:27:38] retention of this is because
[2:27:40] it has a number of potential
[2:27:44] uses for First and foremost is
[2:27:45] the creek uncovered
[2:27:46] infrastructure that is under
[2:27:50] that that land. Right now. It
[2:27:52] does lot of work for us with
[2:27:56] respect to flood as you know,
[2:27:58] fema has released updated fund
[2:27:59] risk maps that we are
[2:28:00] reviewing in concert with our
[2:28:01] partners at the Sonoma County
[2:28:04] Water Agency for how we're
[2:28:06] going to address those risks
[2:28:08] moving forward. Retention of
[2:28:11] this property gives us a
[2:28:12] number of options to do that.
[2:28:13] And in fact, it gives us the
[2:28:14] same number of options that we
[2:28:16] have today to do that. So
[2:28:18] essentially, by keeping this
[2:28:19] property, there is no change
[2:28:20] to what the city and the
[2:28:22] county collectively can do
[2:28:23] with respect to mitigate flood
[2:28:28] risk in the future. This also
[2:28:29] does provide, you know,
[2:28:30] pointing out towards Juilliard
[2:28:31] Park towards Luther Burbank,
[2:28:33] home and Garden tours to
[2:28:34] intersection of Sonoma Avenue
[2:28:37] and Saint Rose Avenue gives us
[2:28:39] the opportunity for other
[2:28:40] things, too like Placemaking
[2:28:41] we'll be happy to answer any
[2:28:48] questions you have on that.
[2:28:51] >> How we make the move for.
[2:28:53] This another area of where
[2:28:54] really thought through what we
[2:28:56] don't want to disrupt service
[2:28:59] to the public at all. And so
[2:29:00] we had to think about how we
[2:29:01] prepare 5.24 the city to move
[2:29:02] into it. If the council does
[2:29:06] approve this transaction
[2:29:07] tonight, so will need to
[2:29:09] complete design and tenant
[2:29:10] improvements or estimating
[2:29:12] right now that those will be
[2:29:14] between 17 20 Million. But
[2:29:15] those will come back to
[2:29:16] council will make it closer
[2:29:18] for appropriations and for
[2:29:19] review. When we get closer and
[2:29:22] get a more defined dollar
[2:29:24] amount, we'll need to put a
[2:29:26] plan together and relocate
[2:29:29] existing commercial tenants
[2:29:30] and then we need to just
[2:29:32] prepare the space for city
[2:29:33] departments to move into an
[2:29:35] order to do that. We needed to
[2:29:38] lease back on this property
[2:29:40] and that this was another
[2:29:42] thing that we had to take into
[2:29:43] consideration and the value of
[2:29:45] the property. And in the
[2:29:46] exchange partner, we needed to
[2:29:50] be able we can't move 300 or
[2:29:52] 400 people overnight and we
[2:29:53] can't disrupt services like
[2:29:54] that to the community. We have
[2:29:56] to be able to supply those
[2:29:58] services. So Hamas agreed to
[2:29:59] through their negotiations to
[2:30:02] allow us to lease back 2 years
[2:30:03] on this campus at 100 Santa
[2:30:04] Rosa Avenue. So we still
[2:30:06] having these in this chamber
[2:30:07] for 2 more years doing these
[2:30:10] meetings and one year at City
[2:30:12] Hall Annex 90 Santa Rosa
[2:30:13] Avenue. Mostly because most of
[2:30:15] our it operations happened out
[2:30:16] of there and will need time to
[2:30:19] prepare those and move them.
[2:30:22] And and they agreed to lease
[2:30:24] back for a total of $2, but is
[2:30:27] $2 total for all of that lease
[2:30:28] back consideration? And that
[2:30:31] was a big deal for the city.
[2:30:33] And and then the 3rd part is
[2:30:35] we need to consolidate and set
[2:30:37] up our one stop shop. So we're
[2:30:38] not disrupting service. So
[2:30:40] we'll do that. He eyes over in
[2:30:42] the new building. The tenant
[2:30:43] improvements to transition
[2:30:46] people in space into it. When
[2:30:47] the public counter space is
[2:30:50] complete and ready. Then we
[2:30:52] will move public counters from
[2:30:54] here to there. But we won't be
[2:30:55] moving those and tell the
[2:30:56] spaces ready. So there's no
[2:30:56] disruption in service for the
[2:31:00] community. Next slide. The
[2:31:05] other thing is is there's
[2:31:05] closing. So lake, even when
[2:31:07] you now say you're buying a
[2:31:08] house, you come to an
[2:31:08] agreement. You negotiate
[2:31:09] agreement just like we have
[2:31:13] you open escrow during that
[2:31:14] escrow period. You have an
[2:31:15] inspection period. You're
[2:31:16] looking at the house. You're
[2:31:17] looking at the property. It's
[2:31:17] the same thing with an
[2:31:18] exchange agreement or any
[2:31:22] acquisition for that matter.
[2:31:25] So during if council passes us
[2:31:27] tonight during this time and
[2:31:30] when we close escrow, there'll
[2:31:30] be some things that we still
[2:31:32] need to work through and work
[2:31:34] on. So where need to establish
[2:31:36] a process? Tonight's Exchange
[2:31:37] agreement, if you approve this
[2:31:40] also approves it. Iwork letter
[2:31:42] to and establishes a process
[2:31:43] for design, pricing
[2:31:45] construction and tenant
[2:31:45] improvements on 5.20. But it
[2:31:46] does not approve the
[2:31:47] appropriations for that yet.
[2:31:49] So we will be back to council
[2:31:53] and public session to talk
[2:31:55] about the scope and the amount
[2:31:55] and the appropriations that
[2:31:59] will need for that. We need to
[2:32:00] finish up relocation plans
[2:32:01] with the tenants. Help find
[2:32:02] those tenants space if they
[2:32:07] want our help work out, what
[2:32:08] their what they will be
[2:32:09] through the relocations. So
[2:32:12] there is a state relocation
[2:32:13] process that we are mandated
[2:32:15] to follow and which we will
[2:32:16] and which we need to help
[2:32:16] those tenants. And we will
[2:32:17] have some payments to those
[2:32:20] tenants as well for their
[2:32:21] moving expenses. Among other
[2:32:25] things. There was one tenant
[2:32:26] in the building that had
[2:32:29] already had plans to long
[2:32:31] before the city had come into
[2:32:34] play. That one 10, came to us
[2:32:35] and said, would you be
[2:32:36] interested? We'd like to
[2:32:39] leave. Could you take over our
[2:32:39] lease? And we said yes,
[2:32:43] because the hot makes it a lot
[2:32:44] easier for the tenant and for
[2:32:44] the city. We can move some
[2:32:48] staff that we need. We'll need
[2:32:50] to move out of the chamber
[2:32:50] building at the close of
[2:32:52] escrow. So we'll be moving
[2:32:54] some staff from there and here
[2:32:58] and allows us some extra space
[2:33:01] for transition. The city
[2:33:02] assume the lease rent from
[2:33:04] SEPTEMBER first through
[2:33:04] DECEMBER 31st. When we expect
[2:33:09] to close escrow part of
[2:33:09] relocation is an appraisal
[2:33:10] process that we do that we
[2:33:14] hire outside experts for and
[2:33:14] they up raise the cost of
[2:33:15] their fsa. Furnitures and
[2:33:18] fixtures and equipment. And
[2:33:21] then we can either pay to have
[2:33:22] them moved or we can offer to
[2:33:24] purchase sighed equipment. And
[2:33:26] this case they had very nice
[2:33:27] furniture that would work well
[2:33:30] for the city. So we offered
[2:33:32] them 50% of the appraised
[2:33:34] value and they did accept. And
[2:33:37] so the city is paying 55,008,
[2:33:37] 77 for the existing furniture
[2:33:41] and not space for the city to
[2:33:42] go out buy that furniture
[2:33:45] would be much more expensive.
[2:33:48] The assignment in this
[2:33:49] agreement, the assignment of
[2:33:50] the lease would end at the
[2:33:51] close of escrow and there and
[2:33:52] we would let them out of their
[2:33:53] lease and that would be the
[2:33:56] end of any lease payment that
[2:33:57] we have other tenant
[2:33:57] arrangements will and the
[2:34:01] relocation process will keep
[2:34:02] going through through this
[2:34:06] process. The other thing that
[2:34:09] we will need to do and the
[2:34:10] developers asked for is a
[2:34:12] development agreement,
[2:34:13] development agreement has a
[2:34:13] completely separate processes
[2:34:18] of his own. It will come back
[2:34:19] to planning Commission for
[2:34:20] consideration. So we'll work
[2:34:22] on trying to negotiate a very
[2:34:23] draft development agreement
[2:34:27] with the developer. That will
[2:34:28] go to planning Commission for
[2:34:28] their input in for public
[2:34:31] input and a public meeting,
[2:34:33] then it will go to city
[2:34:34] Council twice and a public
[2:34:36] meeting for your input and the
[2:34:38] communities put input again.
[2:34:39] So it's total of 3 public
[2:34:40] meetings and it does have its
[2:34:41] own environmental process.
[2:34:45] Next slide, please. So from
[2:34:51] today until closing today, if
[2:34:52] Council approves the exchange
[2:34:53] agreement, if you authorize
[2:34:54] and you adopt the secret
[2:34:55] findings for the Exchange
[2:34:55] agreement that transaction
[2:34:59] begins. After this. The 85 day
[2:35:01] due diligence period will
[2:35:04] start during that 85 days. We
[2:35:07] will too We will do at a lot
[2:35:08] of testing. We already have.
[2:35:09] It is lined up just in case
[2:35:11] counsel prove said we will
[2:35:13] begin testing on the building
[2:35:13] to make sure that we know all
[2:35:17] of the ins and outs of this
[2:35:19] building. So this is also part
[2:35:20] of how we would set up a
[2:35:23] facilities plan going forward.
[2:35:24] And I think I've mentioned in
[2:35:27] past meetings that we very
[2:35:28] much planned to. This will
[2:35:32] these 2 guys right here. Our
[2:35:33] cfo and director Hennessy will
[2:35:34] bring forward a plan to
[2:35:35] council to probably with the
[2:35:39] budget every year to make sure
[2:35:39] that we have enough money in
[2:35:41] the budget every year to
[2:35:42] properly maintain the new
[2:35:42] building so that we're not
[2:35:43] getting back in the situation.
[2:35:46] We are now. So we'll have
[2:35:47] other things. Relocation
[2:35:50] plans, a stop. Assignments,
[2:35:51] transaction documents that
[2:35:52] will have to that will have to
[2:35:53] work through. Some of those
[2:35:54] will have to come back to
[2:35:56] council for approval. Some of
[2:35:58] those will be under the city
[2:35:59] manager's authority to approve
[2:36:02] her. This exchange agreement,
[2:36:03] the ones that require
[2:36:04] appropriations will be back to
[2:36:07] the city council. Once we
[2:36:09] satisfy all of those
[2:36:12] conditions and we're ready to
[2:36:13] close, we plan to close on
[2:36:13] DECEMBER 31st. That's our
[2:36:18] goal. I should say. The city
[2:36:19] would acquire than 5 23rd
[2:36:21] Street Mott. So we'll see what
[2:36:22] occurred. Why the exchange
[2:36:24] property? The city hall cancel
[2:36:27] the Kent campus. The payments.
[2:36:28] 4.5 million dollars and the
[2:36:31] least back time will begin now
[2:36:34] sometimes with government. We
[2:36:35] don't like this, but we do
[2:36:36] have a lot of regulations. We
[2:36:37] have especially a lot of
[2:36:42] regulations with Acquisition
[2:36:44] process is and this is a type
[2:36:45] of the acquisition process and
[2:36:45] sometimes that causes a delay
[2:36:52] that we don't like so if. Due
[2:36:54] solely to our we have to
[2:36:59] extend escrow. Part of the
[2:37:00] agreement is that we will
[2:37:04] payments. $37,500 a month,
[2:37:04] which would be prorated daily
[2:37:08] if it's a half a month for
[2:37:08] every month that we go over,
[2:37:11] we did put a cap on that at
[2:37:11] $450,000. But its side does
[2:37:17] happen. It could cars the 4.5
[2:37:18] million to be slightly more.
[2:37:23] Next slide. Please. That turn
[2:37:28] this over to our cfo thank
[2:37:30] you, for the remainder of
[2:37:31] these sides, I'm going to get
[2:37:34] into some more of the
[2:37:34] specifics.
[2:37:35] >> Around how this transaction
[2:37:38] is going to proceed. As you
[2:37:40] mentioned, there's a 4.5,
[2:37:41] 5 million dollar difference
[2:37:41] between the exchange
[2:37:42] properties that that she took
[2:37:46] us through. The overall
[2:37:48] implementation costs of 17 to
[2:37:49] 20 million dollars. The way
[2:37:50] that I would describe that
[2:37:50] from a finance perspective is
[2:37:53] that's being fully burdened.
[2:37:55] So given analogy, when I
[2:37:55] bought my first house, we
[2:37:57] bought the house and we didn't
[2:37:58] have the money for the couch
[2:37:58] and the moving expenses and
[2:38:00] all that stuff. We're not
[2:38:02] doing that here. We are fully
[2:38:05] baking in all of the moving
[2:38:07] expenses, the tenant
[2:38:08] improvements that are going to
[2:38:09] happen in the building. The
[2:38:10] architectural designs, the
[2:38:11] professional services that are
[2:38:13] going to be needed. We'll add
[2:38:14] that. I think we're going to
[2:38:16] be on the low end of that
[2:38:19] estimate. We've put together a
[2:38:20] very thoughtful, well baked
[2:38:22] planted to kind of make that
[2:38:24] all there. At the end of the
[2:38:26] day, we're anticipating the
[2:38:27] ongoing expenses to the
[2:38:28] general fund to be around a
[2:38:29] little less than 1 million
[2:38:31] dollars. What we're going to
[2:38:32] do is we're gonna have to go
[2:38:34] out and raise some debt for
[2:38:34] this. There's different debt
[2:38:35] tools that we can use as a
[2:38:37] city to be able to finance
[2:38:40] that I can say publicly. Now
[2:38:42] it's about public knowledge.
[2:38:43] I've been meeting with rating
[2:38:46] agencies recently. We are very
[2:38:46] credit worthy where a very
[2:38:47] strong financial positions to
[2:38:49] be able to take this action
[2:38:49] based on the strength of our
[2:38:57] community. Let's drill down on
[2:38:59] the specifics just a little
[2:39:00] bit more. The 4.5 million
[2:39:03] dollars worth of the exchange
[2:39:05] amount council has already
[2:39:07] assigned to fire 4.5 million
[2:39:10] dollars of that money. This is
[2:39:10] prior council action to
[2:39:12] address facility needs in the
[2:39:15] city that we're allocating in
[2:39:19] this way. That's best to use
[2:39:20] of those funds. We're asking
[2:39:22] for an additional less than
[2:39:23] $50,000 as part of this action
[2:39:26] to meet that differential
[2:39:27] difference of the 4.5 versus
[2:39:32] the 4 points. 5, 4, 6, As Joe
[2:39:34] mentioned, there's going to be
[2:39:35] around little let little more
[2:39:38] than $80,000 with additional
[2:39:39] expenses tied to the take over
[2:39:42] of the lease at the new
[2:39:42] property to get some office
[2:39:46] space for us right away. And
[2:39:46] to have smoother transition
[2:39:47] with one of the established
[2:39:51] tenants. Are you mention less
[2:39:53] than a million dollars of
[2:39:54] ongoing annual costs spread
[2:39:54] over potentially what would be
[2:39:58] 30 years? Key to that number
[2:40:01] is a number that we spoke
[2:40:02] about earlier. 1 million
[2:40:05] dollars is a lot less than
[2:40:07] 6 million dollars. That is
[2:40:07] something that comes up very
[2:40:09] frequently in these
[2:40:09] conversations. But as point
[2:40:13] important point out,
[2:40:15] fundamentally, today's action
[2:40:15] is about maintaining in
[2:40:17] safeguarding the services that
[2:40:18] we're providing to the
[2:40:20] community. Joe mentioned
[2:40:24] there's going to be a $2 lease
[2:40:25] back. I will share that. There
[2:40:27] was coincidentally a $2
[2:40:28] donation to the city today
[2:40:30] over at the revenue counter.
[2:40:33] Sam Davis is ready to receive
[2:40:34] that money. But overall we'll
[2:40:35] be able to lease back this
[2:40:40] property for $2 that's a great
[2:40:41] deal for us because it's going
[2:40:42] to give us transition time
[2:40:44] that we're going to need as an
[2:40:46] organization to execute this
[2:40:48] move in all of the complicated
[2:40:49] ways they're going to happen
[2:40:54] potentially after today. So
[2:40:56] today's council action just to
[2:40:57] summarize is is asking council
[2:41:00] to declare an exempt surplus
[2:41:03] land adopt an example exempt
[2:41:03] surplus Land resolution
[2:41:05] declaring the identified
[2:41:07] exchange property exempt a
[2:41:09] surplus land make the required
[2:41:10] sequel. Findings and second
[2:41:14] approve the exchange adopt the
[2:41:15] exchange agreement resolution
[2:41:16] approved the real property
[2:41:18] sheens agreement with Montel c
[2:41:20] adopt the secret findings
[2:41:22] authorize the city manager to
[2:41:23] execute these change agreement
[2:41:25] and all related transaction
[2:41:28] docks. I will give a brief
[2:41:29] closing on any subject that
[2:41:31] has been talked about at this
[2:41:32] South table for decades and
[2:41:39] for a very long period of time
[2:41:39] like the actions council has
[2:41:41] been taking over the past 3
[2:41:45] years. This is a big swing on
[2:41:47] an area of deep, deep need in
[2:41:49] our city. These large
[2:41:51] liabilities that are in the 9
[2:41:52] figures like the one we're
[2:41:53] addressing today have real
[2:41:54] impact on the way that we're
[2:41:56] able to provide service to our
[2:41:57] community and our budget
[2:41:59] issues that honestly we've
[2:42:00] been facing now for the past 3
[2:42:03] years. Staff is brought
[2:42:05] forward different resolution
[2:42:09] towards this problem that
[2:42:10] addresses the flaws that have
[2:42:15] made the prior propose actions
[2:42:16] Today's pros actions that
[2:42:17] additional piece of that
[2:42:18] puzzle that we've been putting
[2:42:19] together to help maintain our
[2:42:21] services to the community. And
[2:42:22] with that, I'll turn it over
[2:42:25] to council. I think that's the
[2:42:27] last light. I hope her That
[2:42:31] was that was enough. Thank
[2:42:34] you. So becoming Thank you for
[2:42:35] that. They years of work on
[2:42:35] this on this project. We have
[2:42:37] certain excited from the
[2:42:38] beginning.
[2:42:39] >> We're not going to count
[2:42:40] questions yet. Our rushing to
[2:42:45] turn over to MISTER For trial
[2:42:47] and who is our partner in this
[2:42:47] proposed deal? All right. You
[2:42:50] would you like to take 5 or 6
[2:42:50] minutes and then talk about
[2:42:51] your perspectives on on what
[2:43:02] we're discussing here. There
[2:43:03] it is. I should know. Thank
[2:43:09] you. Mayor and council members
[2:43:10] will be brief thank you for
[2:43:11] taking the time on this.
[2:43:14] >> And thanks very much, too,
[2:43:15] to your staff for professional
[2:43:17] staff for the extremely
[2:43:20] focused, extremely detailed
[2:43:21] work in the course of extended
[2:43:25] period of time, there has been
[2:43:26] yes is in that conversation.
[2:43:28] There have been knows. But
[2:43:31] there's always been logic and
[2:43:33] it has been from my standpoint
[2:43:36] to exemplary experience. Just
[2:43:36] to just very, very, very
[2:43:41] quickly. When my partners and
[2:43:42] I first considered this
[2:43:44] possibility, there were
[2:43:46] reservations. The 5 23rd
[2:43:47] Street building is in certain
[2:43:50] respects and iconic building
[2:43:51] required tremendous capital
[2:43:54] investment on our part. We
[2:43:56] have been very, very reluctant
[2:43:59] to sell the assets that we
[2:43:59] created in the city of Santa
[2:44:00] Rosa. Almost invariably, we
[2:44:03] have kept well, we've built,
[2:44:05] but we will yourselves
[2:44:05] ultimately around to the
[2:44:07] notion that this does make
[2:44:08] sense, make sense for the
[2:44:09] city. It makes sense for for
[2:44:13] ownership. We also had
[2:44:14] concerns that my partners
[2:44:14] expressed to me because I'm
[2:44:18] responsible to a board other
[2:44:22] jurisdictions have What can be
[2:44:23] sure to become train wrecks
[2:44:25] when it comes to evaluating
[2:44:26] expanded the facilities or
[2:44:29] relocations. As a company. We
[2:44:30] did not want to be associated
[2:44:32] with another train wreck.
[2:44:36] There is no train wreck. My
[2:44:39] partner's looked at the
[2:44:40] numbers. I looked at the
[2:44:40] analysis and I was absolutely
[2:44:43] convinced of the precision.
[2:44:44] The diligence, the extreme
[2:44:46] detail of the analysis you've
[2:44:48] now that's for the city to
[2:44:51] decide that's for the public
[2:44:52] to evaluate a counter party.
[2:44:55] But I'm saying that that did
[2:44:56] come into consideration as we
[2:44:57] evaluated this this
[2:45:01] transaction. The second issue
[2:45:05] my partners. Ask Because they
[2:45:06] know my history. They know I'm
[2:45:10] of a certain age. Now they
[2:45:11] also know that the first time
[2:45:13] that I appeared before this
[2:45:14] and before this council in
[2:45:15] this exact council chambers
[2:45:19] almost exactly 47 years ago.
[2:45:20] And there have been 4 e
[2:45:22] projects that my company has
[2:45:23] done here. 12 of them in the
[2:45:24] downtown core, all buildings
[2:45:27] that we've built. We don't
[2:45:28] entitle buildings. We don't
[2:45:30] acquire land except but
[2:45:34] executing the project, MR. Do
[2:45:35] it made a comment about that?
[2:45:36] Our record is very, very
[2:45:40] clear. And that I think the 12
[2:45:40] buildings we built in the
[2:45:42] downtown core, which has been
[2:45:43] a particular emphasis of ours
[2:45:45] has included 5 housing
[2:45:46] projects of news for all all
[2:45:50] income ranges. Downtown
[2:45:54] really, really matters. And
[2:45:55] this is an opportunity from
[2:45:56] our standpoint, apart from the
[2:45:58] economics of the exchange to
[2:45:59] do something special over and
[2:46:00] above the numbers that could
[2:46:04] have major impact on creating
[2:46:04] the sense of residents sense
[2:46:06] of attraction to sensitive
[2:46:12] since of visit this. Let's
[2:46:13] call it the can attract the
[2:46:14] whole community to downtown
[2:46:15] and make downtown thrive. Even
[2:46:18] more. A good part of my career
[2:46:19] has been focused on exactly
[2:46:20] that point. As you as you
[2:46:22] know, and this is an
[2:46:25] opportunity to to help execute
[2:46:26] that difficult cobi other
[2:46:28] partners inevitably involved
[2:46:30] sophisticated and it is a
[2:46:31] collaboration in the in
[2:46:32] between city. There was
[2:46:33] comment about the development
[2:46:34] agreement which is subject to
[2:46:35] further review when the time
[2:46:39] comes. I also want to stress
[2:46:40] something else as we move
[2:46:41] forward. Should you choose to
[2:46:44] approve this exchange? On our
[2:46:47] end contact with the
[2:46:48] community, transparency with
[2:46:49] the community outreach to the
[2:46:52] community to hear what people
[2:46:53] think. What matters. Clearly,
[2:46:55] we have our own ideas at this
[2:46:57] point but to shape that in a
[2:47:00] way that the public likes that
[2:47:00] serves, the needs of the
[2:47:01] community will be fundamental.
[2:47:02] And that has to be a very open
[2:47:06] process. I want to thank the
[2:47:07] staff again, I want to thank
[2:47:08] you for the opportunity. It's
[2:47:10] been a very long opera, very
[2:47:14] long process. I would say look
[2:47:16] forward to whatever decisions
[2:47:18] you in the course of meeting
[2:47:20] today. MR. Trial. Thank you
[2:47:20] very much. Thank you for
[2:47:23] taking time to speak.
[2:47:24] >> All right. Now, as for get
[2:47:25] back to council Rogers
[2:47:28] annually to
[2:47:29] >> Thank you. Hugh stepped
[2:47:31] away. But I think one of my
[2:47:34] questions was why would a
[2:47:34] developer want a development
[2:47:37] agreement? What is that? Mean,
[2:47:38] or what is that insurer for a
[2:47:45] developer?
[2:47:46] >> We're going bring up Ethan
[2:47:46] bk law who is working on this
[2:47:58] for us.
[2:47:59] >> We thank you. Councilmember
[2:48:00] So when a development
[2:48:03] agreement is, is it it's an
[2:48:03] agreement provided for under
[2:48:08] under state law that allows
[2:48:09] developers to have more
[2:48:10] certainty and what they
[2:48:14] ultimately want to develop. So
[2:48:15] what it does is gives the
[2:48:17] developer what's called vested
[2:48:18] rights and what it means is
[2:48:20] generally the developer will
[2:48:23] ebb the opportunity to to to
[2:48:25] build and develop in the area
[2:48:29] in a manner that's consistent
[2:48:30] with the with the rules in
[2:48:34] place today. So when you when
[2:48:34] you give someone when you
[2:48:35] enter into a development
[2:48:37] agreement with the developer,
[2:48:38] they get certainty that the
[2:48:41] rules are going to change when
[2:48:43] they ultimately come forward
[2:48:44] for development. So if there's
[2:48:45] a development agreement per
[2:48:49] term of 10 years, then during
[2:48:51] that 10 year know that they
[2:48:51] are going to be able to
[2:48:54] develop their property
[2:48:55] consistent with those rules.
[2:48:58] And then if it's a there's a
[2:49:00] specific plan amendment or if
[2:49:01] there's a zoning change or
[2:49:07] something like that that won't
[2:49:07] affect their ability to
[2:49:08] develop. And so so that's the
[2:49:10] reason why developer would
[2:49:12] typically wanted development
[2:49:13] agreement. Again, what we're
[2:49:15] dealing with today's just know
[2:49:16] that the property
[2:49:17] transactions. So that's
[2:49:20] something that will come
[2:49:21] forward in the future. But
[2:49:22] that's ultimately there is
[2:49:23] help her looks for something
[2:49:30] like Thank you. And in.
[2:49:31] >> Why would there be a delay?
[2:49:33] I know we're government. Why
[2:49:35] are we giving enough time?
[2:49:38] Because I feel like Christmas
[2:49:41] is going to be here tomorrow.
[2:49:42] So are is there enough time
[2:49:44] with us being government for
[2:49:49] this? Actually, too. Close
[2:49:54] DECEMBER 31st.
[2:49:55] >> And all honesty. I think
[2:49:57] it's tough. It's going to be a
[2:49:58] hard push on our end to get
[2:50:00] all of those things done. Now,
[2:50:01] if everything aligns, we have
[2:50:04] enough time to do the work. We
[2:50:06] don't have control of outside
[2:50:10] things that come up and happen
[2:50:11] in a perfect world. They would
[2:50:16] easily closed by a van I'm
[2:50:17] anticipating my schedule that
[2:50:18] there could be issues that
[2:50:19] come up that we have to deal
[2:50:22] along the way. And so I think
[2:50:23] it is going to be a hard push.
[2:50:30] But this was a very detailed
[2:50:32] important part of the
[2:50:33] negotiation there were some
[2:50:36] parts that that there had to
[2:50:36] be some give and take during
[2:50:37] the negotiation. And so that's
[2:50:38] why staff agree to where we
[2:50:42] are. Okay.
[2:50:46] >> so of the departments that
[2:50:46] potential potentially be
[2:50:50] housed at 5.20. How many are
[2:50:55] currently in least properties.
[2:50:56] >> We do not have any lease
[2:50:57] properties. We don't have
[2:50:58] staff in any lease properties
[2:51:02] at this moment.
[2:51:05] >> In staffing right as we've
[2:51:06] talked about is not had a
[2:51:07] all-time high. Its actually.
[2:51:13] >> At a low. With that and
[2:51:15] hoping to increase in the
[2:51:17] future will 5.20? I gotta get
[2:51:22] used to saying that. Well,
[2:51:25] 5.20, be able to accommodate
[2:51:28] an increase in staffing for
[2:51:28] the departments that we
[2:51:30] believing that will be housed.
[2:51:33] And 5.20.
[2:51:36] >> Have my Ashley anticipated
[2:51:41] this question. So yes, we We
[2:51:42] assuming a growth factor and
[2:51:43] each floor for each
[2:51:44] department, but just to be a
[2:51:47] little more specific about
[2:51:50] this, because I do know
[2:51:51] Councilmember Okrepkie also
[2:51:52] asked this last time at our
[2:51:54] study session. So I wanted to
[2:51:54] have the information available
[2:51:55] for you in the public, which
[2:51:59] is. The city hall campus right
[2:52:00] now. So I'm not talking about
[2:52:01] square footage of talking
[2:52:02] about building square footage.
[2:52:05] So not usable square footage.
[2:52:07] Again, just a square foot each
[2:52:09] building. If you add it all
[2:52:10] together, we have 97,811
[2:52:14] square feet. Of that. We can
[2:52:17] only have people and 82,000
[2:52:22] Square feet. Now of that, what
[2:52:27] is actually usable is 16,
[2:52:29] 5,000 square feet. 65,000
[2:52:31] square feet of 97,000 total
[2:52:31] square feet because of the
[2:52:33] conditions of our buildings
[2:52:36] and the wasted space.
[2:52:36] Honestly, we have a lot of
[2:52:37] leases space in here. You can
[2:52:38] kind of see in the council
[2:52:43] chamber. The new building, the
[2:52:46] usable space and and 5.20,
[2:52:48] there is a 12,000 square-foot
[2:52:49] 4 Square-foot Basin, which I'm
[2:52:52] not I'm not including is
[2:52:53] 75,000 Square feet. So we're
[2:52:56] gaining over 15, almost 16,000
[2:52:58] Square feet. And what we have
[2:53:01] now and that leaves growth
[2:53:02] space. We're also thinking
[2:53:03] about moving things around a
[2:53:05] little bit and MAY not need
[2:53:05] everything in that building.
[2:53:06] But that also allows us.
[2:53:09] >> To move. Additional
[2:53:12] employees. And so we MAY be
[2:53:13] able to, for instance, move
[2:53:16] some of tp w r or you know,
[2:53:18] admin staff from across town
[2:53:21] into this building. So it
[2:53:22] allows the city a good amount
[2:53:27] of flexibility. In my last
[2:53:29] question is there is a lot of
[2:53:34] history that is housed at 5
[2:53:35] 20. So have we determined if
[2:53:36] that history is going to stay
[2:53:40] or is it? Leaving the photos?
[2:53:44] Yes, yes, they are stain
[2:53:45] according to MR. Futrell. They
[2:53:46] go with the building and we
[2:53:49] get to keep those. There's a a
[2:53:51] wall of history of photos and
[2:53:52] the new building that shows
[2:53:54] all of the work they did. It
[2:53:54] starts when it was the 18 team
[2:53:58] building and it shows the old
[2:53:59] like I know you call them
[2:54:00] where you push the buttons and
[2:54:00] picked up the phone or, you
[2:54:03] know, whatever, whatever those
[2:54:05] are called.
[2:54:05] >> It shows the that era and
[2:54:07] then it shows when they bought
[2:54:07] the building and redeveloped
[2:54:08] it where they have these, they
[2:54:12] even have large Sabah leads
[2:54:15] and and that he lcd office
[2:54:16] from these massive saw
[2:54:17] believes they had to use to
[2:54:21] cut into the building and
[2:54:24] create windows months and Mr
[2:54:24] for child did fantastic job
[2:54:26] and lot of work to redevelop
[2:54:26] that for this part benefit.
[2:54:30] Now.
[2:54:34] >> Thank you. Spend Thank you,
[2:54:38] Well, first of all, thank you
[2:54:38] for not only what you brought
[2:54:41] forward today, but for working
[2:54:42] on this for years and years.
[2:54:43] I'm so sorry, but thank you
[2:54:47] for all that. I just have 2
[2:54:50] quick I wanted to ask just a
[2:54:51] little bit. Just really to
[2:54:52] clarify for the public is a
[2:54:53] beginning. A lot of questions
[2:54:56] about the development part. It
[2:54:57] does say in the staff report
[2:55:00] that that's going to be done.
[2:55:01] Seems like it's saying at the
[2:55:02] close of escrow or before the
[2:55:04] close of escrow, if you could
[2:55:05] talk about that the
[2:55:06] development agreement. Yes,
[2:55:08] that will happen before for
[2:55:09] the close of escrow. So we
[2:55:12] will have 3 public meetings,
[2:55:13] one at Planning Commission and
[2:55:14] 2 at City Council where the
[2:55:18] public will have plenty
[2:55:21] chances to have input. The
[2:55:23] planning commission will have
[2:55:23] and put the city council have
[2:55:24] and put before anything is
[2:55:27] adopted. All right. Great.
[2:55:28] Thank you. And then the only
[2:55:30] other thing that would I think
[2:55:31] we've been getting a lot input
[2:55:35] on is the creek. Just wanted
[2:55:36] to ask Doctor Hennessy if you
[2:55:37] talk a little bit more about
[2:55:37] what that's going to look
[2:55:43] like. We don't frankly, based
[2:55:45] on what we're talking about
[2:55:46] today and what we know this
[2:55:48] 1.0, 6, one acres that we
[2:55:49] talked about will look exactly
[2:55:51] like it does today.
[2:55:52] >> All options remain on the
[2:55:53] table to us. Nothing has been
[2:55:55] decided. All we've done a
[2:55:55] separate that land out from
[2:55:56] this exchange so that the city
[2:56:01] keeps it. All options are at
[2:56:02] our disposal. Okay. All right.
[2:56:03] So that that's to be
[2:56:04] determined then. Okay. All
[2:56:07] right. Great. Thank you. Thank
[2:56:12] you, MISTER. Donald. Thank
[2:56:13] you, Mayor, thank you for the
[2:56:14] presentation. I want say up
[2:56:16] front, I'm in full support at
[2:56:17] this exchange.
[2:56:19] >> I think it's critical for a
[2:56:21] lot of different reasons that
[2:56:24] we're moving. And and mostly
[2:56:24] it's a liability of the
[2:56:25] deferred maintenance that we
[2:56:26] have on the current buildings
[2:56:29] that we have the condition of
[2:56:30] our buildings and how that
[2:56:32] results in taxpayer money
[2:56:35] going to basically throw good
[2:56:36] money after some things, bad
[2:56:37] things, Mr for child taking on
[2:56:41] the bad. I just want to make
[2:56:43] sure that when they questions
[2:56:44] come across it's just for
[2:56:45] clarification purposes, not
[2:56:45] because I'm not in support of
[2:56:49] this. When was the last time
[2:56:51] we had a full assessment done
[2:56:52] on the property because the
[2:56:53] site about 100 million dollars
[2:56:55] of of maintenance. But what
[2:56:57] year was that that we had that
[2:57:01] study done the last?
[2:57:01] >> Facilities, complete
[2:57:03] facilities assessment was done
[2:57:06] in 2016. We have escalated
[2:57:08] those What we have added to
[2:57:08] that in pieces. But the last
[2:57:09] complete assessment was 10
[2:57:12] years ago. Okay. So with that
[2:57:14] said, if you haven't done that
[2:57:17] full assessment knowing about
[2:57:18] how much the cost of
[2:57:20] construction has increased
[2:57:21] since 2016, what would your
[2:57:23] guess be if that was more of a
[2:57:24] realistic number?
[2:57:26] >> Of the liability that we
[2:57:28] currently have we escalator
[2:57:28] that number 200 million
[2:57:29] dollars and put the plus sign
[2:57:31] after it because I have no
[2:57:33] idea. It's definitely more
[2:57:34] than 100 million dollars.
[2:57:35] Whether that's, you know, as
[2:57:36] we get into this and it
[2:57:39] uncovered different things.
[2:57:42] Who knows. But I am certain
[2:57:43] that we don't know everything
[2:57:45] we would need to fix today
[2:57:45] until we started fixing it.
[2:57:47] And then we would find out
[2:57:50] more like a true remodel.
[2:57:52] Okay. So that that's I think
[2:57:53] something that's critical for
[2:57:56] us to to also know is that we
[2:57:57] actually don't know the
[2:57:58] potential the cost of what it
[2:57:59] would even costs for us to fix
[2:58:00] this current liability that
[2:58:03] were sitting on the numbers
[2:58:05] that we shared earlier. Our
[2:58:06] best estimates best without
[2:58:07] starting to tear the building
[2:58:09] to part of victim. Okay. And
[2:58:12] so I I think that that's
[2:58:13] something else you mentioned
[2:58:14] that I hadn't heard before was
[2:58:16] the ada.
[2:58:17] >> That hasn't been completed
[2:58:17] in these buildings. You have
[2:58:19] any idea about how much that
[2:58:22] would That assessment was done
[2:58:23] at the same time across the
[2:58:25] full campus. That number was
[2:58:26] on the order at 8 million
[2:58:28] dollars. But that number is 10
[2:58:29] years old. And frankly, so
[2:58:30] this all these buildings were
[2:58:31] built before the adoption of
[2:58:31] the Americans with
[2:58:34] Disabilities Act.
[2:58:35] >> I don't even know how we
[2:58:38] would fix some of the issues
[2:58:38] like, like complete
[2:58:39] reconstruction to make these
[2:58:41] some of these ramps great
[2:58:44] accessible. It would be major
[2:58:45] construction project.
[2:58:46] >> And on the new property, do
[2:58:49] we have any of concerns?
[2:58:51] >> Everything has been updated
[2:58:53] since the adoption of the ada
[2:58:54] approved by city staff through
[2:58:56] that building permit process.
[2:58:57] And so we have no concerns
[2:58:57] really accessible. That's
[2:59:01] right. Thank you.
[2:59:02] >> And so so I am trying to
[2:59:04] make sure that the community
[2:59:07] and all of us know that really
[2:59:08] we have to do something is
[2:59:09] critical at this point because
[2:59:13] of the liability. Scott, you
[2:59:16] mentioned the 4.5 5 million
[2:59:17] dollars that we've already set
[2:59:17] aside in reserves. Was that
[2:59:21] the money that we were going
[2:59:22] to appropriate for starting
[2:59:23] some of the critical needs of
[2:59:28] the campus is right now. Yes,
[2:59:28] thank you for your question.
[2:59:32] COUNCILMAN Member Donald.
[2:59:34] >> Specifically as part of the
[2:59:35] adopted for this current
[2:59:38] fiscal year. The 2026 27
[2:59:39] budgeted. We have been having
[2:59:41] conversations about. Our lack
[2:59:45] of facility funding and now we
[2:59:45] have breaking point and many
[2:59:46] of our facilities. And at
[2:59:50] Point Council's specifically
[2:59:51] directed to assign 4.5 million
[2:59:52] dollars towards this function
[2:59:55] of the city. So so those those
[2:59:57] are those are funds that are
[2:59:58] essentially already accounted
[2:59:59] for as a way to think about it
[3:00:00] from a budgeting accounting
[3:00:03] perspective.
[3:00:07] >> And I see the.
[3:00:08] >> The more like rip back. If
[3:00:10] we're not able to close.
[3:00:12] >> Escrow it says if you'll
[3:00:14] state I got to tell you, it
[3:00:15] feels a little steep on the
[3:00:17] potential of a half a million
[3:00:18] dollars. But when I look at
[3:00:20] this pace, it you're talking
[3:00:24] about. And these back at it
[3:00:25] feels that that's an
[3:00:26] appropriate amount. Keeps a
[3:00:27] fire underneath us and makes
[3:00:28] do our job make sure that
[3:00:30] we're getting these public
[3:00:32] meetings So so I appreciate
[3:00:35] the negotiation. Part of it.
[3:00:38] And and I'm not thrilled about
[3:00:40] that and or that figure. But I
[3:00:43] understand the reason for it.
[3:00:44] So I will just say that not
[3:00:45] happy about that part, but
[3:00:49] other than that great job and
[3:00:52] then finally, Joe, you spoke
[3:00:52] about it in the presentation.
[3:00:53] I know it's something that
[3:00:56] we've talked about several
[3:00:56] times is moving forward. And I
[3:00:58] think this is in a critical
[3:01:00] component for the community to
[3:01:02] know is what policies we going
[3:01:05] to put in place to ensure that
[3:01:05] there's deferred maintenance
[3:01:06] funds appropriated every year
[3:01:08] from the city of Santa Rosa.
[3:01:12] So we don't have 6 decades
[3:01:13] neglecting our buildings. And
[3:01:13] when will that be brought
[3:01:18] forward to us?
[3:01:19] >> You have a chief financial
[3:01:21] officer and a director of
[3:01:23] transportation public works
[3:01:24] who want nothing more than to
[3:01:24] decrease the maintenance
[3:01:27] liability of the city. So
[3:01:29] should this happen. You would
[3:01:31] see this as part of next
[3:01:31] year's budget. Scott, my way
[3:01:35] back highlighting this issue
[3:01:36] continuing a ban women will
[3:01:36] probably asking for something
[3:01:37] else to decrease liability and
[3:01:41] some arena. And I know it's
[3:01:43] not popular to set money aside
[3:01:44] for deferred maintenance, but
[3:01:45] we just don't want to put
[3:01:46] ourselves in this position
[3:01:47] again.
[3:01:47] >> I think that the community
[3:01:51] deserves us to appropriate
[3:01:53] money and their money really
[3:01:55] so that we can take measures
[3:01:57] and set aside money moves
[3:01:59] forward. I know we spoke about
[3:02:02] this specifically during the
[3:02:02] Calpers conversations. Scott
[3:02:06] has that liability goes away
[3:02:06] that potentially in the future
[3:02:08] we would be able to capture
[3:02:10] that. One of my clarifying
[3:02:12] questions around this is the
[3:02:13] cip funds that we set aside
[3:02:15] every single year to do
[3:02:16] deferred maintenance. Dan,
[3:02:19] does a portion of that go to
[3:02:20] our buildings or is that
[3:02:21] strictly reserved for other
[3:02:23] parts of cip? A very small
[3:02:26] portion of The 1.2 million
[3:02:29] dollars from the general fund
[3:02:30] that goes into the ada
[3:02:31] improvements account that can
[3:02:34] be used on city facilities,
[3:02:36] not just for buildings but for
[3:02:37] all city facilities, which
[3:02:38] includes.
[3:02:39] >> Curb ramps and parks and
[3:02:40] other things. So that gets
[3:02:42] stretched thin very quickly.
[3:02:44] That is the only eligible
[3:02:45] funding source that I have
[3:02:47] through Cip to improve city
[3:02:48] buildings. That's very
[3:02:51] helpful. I think for us to
[3:02:52] know from council as well as
[3:02:55] the community to know that
[3:02:55] deferred maintenance funds
[3:02:57] have to come out of general
[3:02:58] fund and that we have to
[3:02:58] appropriate that because you
[3:03:01] cannot just be earmarked as a
[3:03:01] cip.
[3:03:04] >> Funded projects. So I
[3:03:05] appreciate that. And I want to
[3:03:07] commend all of you for
[3:03:08] bringing information forward
[3:03:09] so that it's an understanding
[3:03:12] that it's not just a swap of
[3:03:16] property, but that this is a
[3:03:18] fiscal decision really for the
[3:03:20] council to make for community
[3:03:24] and and to me, this makes
[3:03:26] financial sense for us. I know
[3:03:27] the 6 million dollars a year
[3:03:29] that we need to appropriate to
[3:03:30] go down to 1 Million. That's a
[3:03:33] pretty easy math equation. The
[3:03:34] savings that we won't be
[3:03:35] needing to appropriate from
[3:03:36] the general friend looking at
[3:03:38] our deficit. So thank you for
[3:03:41] laying it out the way that you
[3:03:42] did. I don't really have any
[3:03:43] more questions other than I'm
[3:03:45] I'm hopeful that you'll get
[3:03:46] the direction that you need
[3:03:47] from council today and not be
[3:03:49] in favor of it. Thank you.
[3:03:52] Anything else from council?
[3:03:53] All right. Members of the
[3:03:54] public, this is your chance.
[3:03:57] We'll start with people in
[3:03:58] council chambers.
[3:04:00] >> Beginning with looks like
[3:04:00] Abby Arnold, Richard Carlisle
[3:04:05] and Derek Stephen.
[3:04:06] >> There's been ongoing might
[3:04:09] not want to have listed here.
[3:04:09] Duane Shedding some stuff. You
[3:04:14] folks beat you to punch.
[3:04:16] Richard and Eric Abbe, go
[3:04:17] ahead.
[3:04:20] >> Good Evening Council and
[3:04:21] mayor, I'm representing Santa
[3:04:24] Rosa Yimby tonight. An all
[3:04:25] volunteer organization of over
[3:04:28] 500 Santa Rosa residents. We
[3:04:30] are very pleased to support
[3:04:32] the proposed exchange
[3:04:34] agreement, which we think if
[3:04:36] done right will quickly bring
[3:04:39] more people downtown, save a
[3:04:41] lot of money for the city and
[3:04:43] uncover Santa Rosa Creek,
[3:04:46] which is long hidden under
[3:04:48] this building. We some
[3:04:48] recommendations for the
[3:04:52] development agreement, but in
[3:04:52] the interest of time and
[3:04:55] moving ahead with this
[3:04:56] tonight, I refer you to our
[3:04:57] written comments and we will
[3:05:00] be there at your community
[3:05:01] meetings. Thank you so much.
[3:05:04] And please approve it.
[3:05:05] >> Thank you. MISS Arnold.
[3:05:06] Thank you. Center is a would
[3:05:13] say it's Richard and Derek.
[3:05:13] >> The mayor.
[3:05:14] >> Members of the Richard
[3:05:17] Carlisle. I'm retired civil
[3:05:21] engineer and urban planner.
[3:05:23] I'm very much favor of this
[3:05:26] exchange. I was a young
[3:05:29] engineer 50 some years ago.
[3:05:32] Doing working for the
[3:05:33] engineer. That was the urban
[3:05:35] renewal engineer. So I did a
[3:05:42] lot of this.
[3:05:42] >> I connected designed the
[3:05:47] street. The connected.
[3:05:48] Mendocino Avenue was Santa
[3:05:52] right through the square. And
[3:05:53] 50 years later, I got to
[3:05:54] design debris, put the square
[3:05:57] back together again. And the
[3:05:58] same thing with Prince
[3:06:00] Memorial Greenway. I was able
[3:06:03] to do the redesigned that.
[3:06:09] This is your front porch. You
[3:06:10] have to have good urban
[3:06:15] design. This is another chance
[3:06:18] to make it right. Well,
[3:06:19] there's opening it up with the
[3:06:25] creeks. Obviously some housing
[3:06:29] can be put on this. And I'm
[3:06:32] glad that we got a local
[3:06:32] developer. Hugh Futrell who
[3:06:33] has a track record. He
[3:06:34] understands what the city
[3:06:37] wants, what the city needs.
[3:06:38] But remember, this is your
[3:06:39] front porch. You can put all
[3:06:40] the bedrooms on the front
[3:06:45] porch. I think it's really
[3:06:50] important. That you some
[3:06:52] public input. You get good
[3:06:57] urban in on this. On the map.
[3:06:59] Thank you.
[3:07:00] >> MR. Cole, thank you very
[3:07:04] much.
[3:07:07] >> Council, thank you so much
[3:07:10] for the opportunity to speak.
[3:07:11] Derek Stephen, Real chore and
[3:07:12] resident long time in the
[3:07:15] Jaycee neighborhood. Very much
[3:07:17] would like to say thank you to
[3:07:19] staff and 2 consultants for
[3:07:22] this report. It's a very
[3:07:24] meaningful report to have at
[3:07:24] this juncture of time in our
[3:07:28] history in Santa Rosa, I will
[3:07:31] urge the council to consider
[3:07:32] this unanimously as this is an
[3:07:34] important historic moment and
[3:07:37] the city of Santa Rosa and the
[3:07:39] son of George and Stevan
[3:07:40] architect now deceased. But he
[3:07:40] appeared in these council
[3:07:44] chambers over many years and
[3:07:45] supported many local projects
[3:07:46] as an architect in the
[3:07:48] downtown core and residential
[3:07:50] designs. And but they and
[3:07:52] beyond one of the things that
[3:07:55] I think this report from staff
[3:07:57] and consultants is highlighted
[3:08:00] is not only cost savings, but
[3:08:05] it's a social value and this
[3:08:07] is in transit to the community
[3:08:08] and to civic pride, but also
[3:08:11] civic use for many generations
[3:08:12] to come. I would definitely
[3:08:17] like to urge the design team
[3:08:18] in future generations of use
[3:08:19] of this building to look at
[3:08:23] the tops base. I don't know
[3:08:23] the engineering. Certainly,
[3:08:25] sir, you would. And MR.
[3:08:29] Trailwood. But a roof garden
[3:08:32] for the public and staff to
[3:08:34] use in the throes of Kaiser
[3:08:36] Permanente's Roof Garden in
[3:08:38] Oakland. When I was a member
[3:08:39] of the team at Kaiser, we
[3:08:42] enjoyed it quite extensively
[3:08:45] on the top of a parking garage
[3:08:46] and was built because MR.
[3:08:47] Henry j Kaiser said build a
[3:08:49] roof garden for people to use
[3:08:51] and was open for the public
[3:08:52] and perhaps that could happen
[3:08:54] here in Santa Rosa. Another
[3:08:55] beautification project. And
[3:08:56] lastly, my mom, Terri,
[3:09:00] Stephen, is a big proponent of
[3:09:01] keeping. The fountains are
[3:09:02] bringing them back to
[3:09:02] courthouse square. So where
[3:09:04] are those mountains are? If
[3:09:04] they could come back? That
[3:09:08] would be great. Thank you.
[3:09:09] >> Stay tuned, MR. Stephen,
[3:09:09] thank you very much. We're
[3:09:10] going to Betty Andrews and
[3:09:11] then doing too wet that he and
[3:09:17] chambers. Welcome. You have
[3:09:18] the floor. Thank you. Thank
[3:09:20] you, mayor. Members of the
[3:09:21] council.
[3:09:22] >> My name is Betty Andrews.
[3:09:24] I'm a 38 year resident of
[3:09:27] Santa Rosa and I then working
[3:09:28] throughout that time as a
[3:09:29] professional civil engineer
[3:09:30] had an opportunity to work
[3:09:32] with my friend and neighbor,
[3:09:34] MR. Carlo, who you just heard
[3:09:40] from back at the beginning of
[3:09:41] focus on Santa Rosa Creek and
[3:09:44] the possibility of lightening
[3:09:45] this feature of our downtown
[3:09:50] area. I worked on that Creek
[3:09:51] Masterplan in the early
[3:09:53] 1990's. I worked on Prince
[3:09:55] Memorial Greenway. I also
[3:09:57] worked on the hydrology and
[3:09:58] hydraulics studies that found
[3:10:00] created the foundation for the
[3:10:04] fema flood maps that are
[3:10:06] provisionally out there and
[3:10:07] soon to be adopted for the
[3:10:10] city of Santa Rosa. And I want
[3:10:13] to applaud the staff for
[3:10:14] coming up with a solution. As
[3:10:15] a resident, it's been hard to
[3:10:17] see how we were going to solve
[3:10:17] this problem. So I like
[3:10:20] everything about it. With one
[3:10:21] exception. I'm worried about
[3:10:28] that. 1.6, 1 acres. I do not
[3:10:30] understand the basis for
[3:10:31] director Hennessy's statement
[3:10:34] that all options are
[3:10:36] preserved. It's a very narrow
[3:10:38] corridor that has been set
[3:10:45] aside in this plan. I e do not
[3:10:47] know what analysis developed.
[3:10:50] That number. And that form of
[3:10:53] land to preserve options along
[3:10:59] the creek the Sonoma Water
[3:11:03] staff who have been working on
[3:11:05] solutions for Santa Rosa Creek
[3:11:05] to deal with those culverts
[3:11:11] have not been consulted with
[3:11:12] those cold hurts are the
[3:11:12] biggest hydraulic constrained
[3:11:14] in the entire city of Santa
[3:11:18] Rosa. And this is a
[3:11:19] generational opportunity to
[3:11:21] make sure we set aside enough
[3:11:23] land to thank. Thank Sanders,
[3:11:37] MR. MR. Do it.
[3:11:41] >> Hello. My name is doing to
[3:11:42] from Rosen. But I've been in
[3:11:43] Santa Rosa all my life. Pretty
[3:11:46] much. Remember the Occidental
[3:11:48] Hotel lasted for 100 years
[3:11:51] until 1976, when urban renewal
[3:11:52] decide they were going to help
[3:11:55] downtown.
[3:11:56] >> So
[3:11:56] >> it's been interesting to
[3:12:00] hear these discussions. One of
[3:12:01] the things that's most
[3:12:02] important for the public to
[3:12:04] evaluate the taxpayer
[3:12:06] liability is give the public
[3:12:07] the actual opportunity to
[3:12:10] speak more at the meetings.
[3:12:12] Taking away the 3 minute
[3:12:15] making it too running
[3:12:15] everything clicks. Everybody
[3:12:19] goes your way is not the best
[3:12:20] way to have the public be
[3:12:21] served. And that's what we
[3:12:24] learned from urban renewal. As
[3:12:28] it stands now. You haven't
[3:12:29] talked much about how museum
[3:12:34] on the square got tnt
[3:12:36] building, which was owned by
[3:12:37] the city of Santa Rosa's
[3:12:39] redevelopment agency in the
[3:12:41] past. And there was a deal
[3:12:43] done for the building to go
[3:12:45] over too. A developer with an
[3:12:45] idea that housing would get in
[3:12:48] there. I went to those
[3:12:51] meetings. I participated. One
[3:12:51] of the things that happens
[3:12:54] when we get a lockstep kind of
[3:12:56] crew like you got here today
[3:12:59] is we're going to lose. We're
[3:13:02] going to lose money. So I ask
[3:13:04] you not to give any money to
[3:13:06] the proposed developer. Just
[3:13:10] do a straight across exchange.
[3:13:11] You've already made your mind
[3:13:13] up to give the land up. So
[3:13:13] don't give any of our taxpayer
[3:13:18] money over. I've watched
[3:13:19] development agreements.
[3:13:22] Violated. I've seen it. I know
[3:13:24] what's going to happen here in
[3:13:26] the future. The taxpayers are
[3:13:26] going to be on the hook for
[3:13:27] things that cost more than
[3:13:29] you've been told and down the
[3:13:31] road. You won't be
[3:13:33] accountable. No one will be
[3:13:34] held accountable. You get to
[3:13:39] walk away. Sadly. Thank you,
[3:13:41] MR. Do Does anybody else in
[3:13:42] council chambers wish to
[3:13:43] speak? Fred, are you making
[3:13:46] your way to the microphone?
[3:13:47] >> Good afternoon. Again. As
[3:13:48] long as I stayed here this
[3:13:49] long, I might as well throw in
[3:13:55] my $0.2. This reminds me of
[3:13:56] Varias complicated decisions
[3:13:59] that I've had to make myself
[3:14:01] with lot of factors. And so it
[3:14:05] seems to me that that the
[3:14:08] staff and and everyone is is
[3:14:09] making reasonable jean here.
[3:14:10] So I think that, you know, I
[3:14:12] don't know problem with that.
[3:14:14] I'd like follow up on Betty
[3:14:16] Andrews comments. Did have a
[3:14:19] chance to meet with want to
[3:14:19] Sonoma. Water's top engineers
[3:14:20] talking about the Central
[3:14:24] Center rose up watershed
[3:14:27] project and the covert there.
[3:14:29] If you look at the future
[3:14:32] modeling with the in the
[3:14:33] Russian River sustainability
[3:14:34] study, that's no more water
[3:14:37] recently did. There's a
[3:14:38] shocking map of of flooding in
[3:14:40] downtown Santa Rosa and then
[3:14:41] engineered told me that was
[3:14:43] all because of the the covert
[3:14:44] that's on that area. That's
[3:14:46] that's the real problem. It's
[3:14:50] not the Matanzas Dam. And so
[3:14:53] that flooded all the way up
[3:14:54] Montgomery Village. And so
[3:14:55] that looks like it could be a
[3:14:57] future serious problem. So I
[3:15:01] think that it would be
[3:15:02] worthwhile with Austin, normal
[3:15:03] water to 10 loss. Step back
[3:15:04] and look at that covert there
[3:15:05] and see if you got enough
[3:15:07] land, maybe you need another
[3:15:09] half acre or what what you
[3:15:11] need to do to make it so that
[3:15:13] that off future flooding map
[3:15:15] would be greatly reduced.
[3:15:17] Thank you. Thank you, Fred.
[3:15:17] Anybody else in council
[3:15:24] chambers, MR. Floor is yours.
[3:15:26] >> a resident here in Santa
[3:15:29] Rosa. I sent a letter last
[3:15:30] week to the council which I
[3:15:34] hope you had a chance to read.
[3:15:36] But I've been an advocate
[3:15:37] liberating the creek since the
[3:15:40] day. I moved here and
[3:15:41] discovered that the creek was
[3:15:44] flowing under our city hall.
[3:15:45] And so I think there's an
[3:15:46] intention here when I began
[3:15:46] talking about the idea of
[3:15:50] integrating the creek, I heard
[3:15:51] from countless people who for
[3:15:53] decades have been advocating
[3:15:53] for the same things. This is
[3:15:54] not a new idea has been around
[3:15:56] for a really long time. To be
[3:15:59] clear, I'm in full support.
[3:16:01] Not just a full 4. I'm in. In
[3:16:03] support in concept of this
[3:16:04] kind of this project of this
[3:16:04] transfer. I appreciate the
[3:16:08] work the city staff has done
[3:16:10] manage are our city's
[3:16:12] financial situation. I in
[3:16:16] fact, support of development
[3:16:17] here, I'd love to see more
[3:16:17] housing. I'd love to see more
[3:16:23] housing on this property but
[3:16:24] last night when the fit that
[3:16:25] the maps were finally released
[3:16:27] to the public. As you heard
[3:16:27] from it. But Andrews was her
[3:16:30] name said so eloquently. We're
[3:16:33] talking about 1.6 acres that
[3:16:35] narrows to incredibly narrow
[3:16:36] degree. We're talking about
[3:16:37] the length of the width of a
[3:16:41] covert, whether or not that
[3:16:42] can accommodate daylighting
[3:16:44] the creek to any meaningful
[3:16:45] way to make that creek real
[3:16:49] part of our community. I'm
[3:16:50] really doubtful. And that's my
[3:16:52] wish that again increase
[3:16:52] creeks team was so some water
[3:16:56] been consulted prior to this.
[3:16:58] I feel like you're all
[3:17:02] probably moving this evening.
[3:17:04] So what I'll simply say to
[3:17:05] staff and of course, the
[3:17:07] developer Emaar for trial is
[3:17:10] to please take a look at how
[3:17:13] that the creek can become a
[3:17:15] centerpiece for the community,
[3:17:16] a benefit to the new
[3:17:17] development that's going to be
[3:17:18] taking place here and really
[3:17:19] become a landmark for Santa
[3:17:22] Rosa. Thank you, Evan, thank
[3:17:22] you. Anybody else in council
[3:17:25] chambers.
[3:17:28] >> Seeing none. Let's go h#
[3:17:28] #
[3:17:29] #
[3:17:29] .
[3:17:29] Does anybody have their hand
[3:17:31] raised? If you are online?
[3:17:32] Yeah. Raise your hand or press
[3:17:35] star 9. Lauren, anybody there.
[3:17:36] >> Thank you, mayor. We
[3:17:39] currently have 2 hands raised
[3:17:41] 3 hands raised. We will start
[3:17:42] with Joey and then next will
[3:17:45] be chops. And then Ellen.
[3:17:48] Julie, I'm going to go ahead
[3:17:51] and enable your permissions to
[3:17:52] speak. You'll hear the timer
[3:17:54] to alert you to the 2 minutes.
[3:17:55] Please go ahead. When you're
[3:17:58] ready.
[3:17:59] >> Hey, there. Can you hear
[3:18:03] me? Yes, we can.
[3:18:06] >> Hello, I want to.
[3:18:07] >> I have good memories in
[3:18:08] these chambers on the Santa
[3:18:11] Rosa resident. My whole life.
[3:18:12] Grateful for the opportunity
[3:18:15] to address city council just a
[3:18:16] few Still there's they can
[3:18:19] pass this on to the board. I
[3:18:20] really want to echo what the
[3:18:23] last speaker said as well
[3:18:27] Indians Andrews about the
[3:18:28] creek and concerned about the
[3:18:31] creek. I want. And in the
[3:18:34] 1950's was a time of concrete
[3:18:35] hazing and channeling. And i
[3:18:36] really and it was before the
[3:18:39] term ecology really existed.
[3:18:42] And here we are in 2026 of
[3:18:44] this great opportunity that
[3:18:45] again, does seem like you're
[3:18:46] going to vote yes on. And I
[3:18:47] think there's a lot of good
[3:18:47] reasons for.
[3:18:52] >> But I would really like you
[3:18:54] I would like to put it in the
[3:18:55] strongest language possible in
[3:18:58] these in this development
[3:18:59] agreement to mandate
[3:19:00] Daylighting the creek
[3:19:04] featuring the creek. I'm
[3:19:05] thinking of South Bend and how
[3:19:09] Mayor Pete Buttigieg groove to
[3:19:10] national prominence with the
[3:19:11] good work he did featuring the
[3:19:12] creek and saying, wait, this
[3:19:15] can be amazing. And building
[3:19:18] on I think some of the
[3:19:19] mistakes made with Prince
[3:19:19] Memorial. Let's learn, let's
[3:19:23] learn from what many
[3:19:26] municipalities have done and
[3:19:26] let's fate have the building's
[3:19:27] faced a creek really again
[3:19:30] featuring it as an asset. If
[3:19:32] anybody's looking for good
[3:19:33] summer read just finished one
[3:19:38] called. Is a river, a life. By
[3:19:39] Robert McFarland. And he's got
[3:19:43] a really good section. Kind of
[3:19:47] some what I'm saying here. So
[3:19:48] again, the I have some
[3:19:50] skepticism about the 1.6 one
[3:19:50] acres as well. I'd like you to
[3:19:53] take a closer look at that.
[3:19:54] And I do think is great idea
[3:19:57] and a great project, but let's
[3:19:58] do it right. Once in a
[3:19:58] generation opportunity to
[3:20:01] shake your time.
[3:20:08] >> Thank you, Joey. Next will
[3:20:09] be chops teen club followed by
[3:20:14] Allen. Chop Simon, a billing,
[3:20:15] your position, your
[3:20:18] permissions.
[3:20:19] >> Hi, good evening, MR. Mayor
[3:20:20] members of the council, my
[3:20:23] name is Kevin Anderson. And
[3:20:23] then in the West and Historic
[3:20:26] District of Santa Rosa also
[3:20:26] work in the downtown core is a
[3:20:28] program director at Trump's
[3:20:30] team club and then many
[3:20:31] interactions with many of you
[3:20:32] and respect the time and
[3:20:33] energy put you put into making
[3:20:34] the city quite a good place to
[3:20:35] live. But Santa Rosa can be
[3:20:38] better, much better. It is
[3:20:38] empty each of you to recognize
[3:20:41] the opportunity. You have. The
[3:20:42] amenities we have here in
[3:20:44] Santa Rosa can rival any other
[3:20:46] city here we have a small town
[3:20:47] feel of the big count energy,
[3:20:49] however, as many of already
[3:20:50] mentioned, fly under the
[3:20:51] radar. And there's one major
[3:20:53] reason our downtown has been
[3:20:54] gutted for multiple urban
[3:20:56] renewal projects gone wrong.
[3:20:57] None of you made the choice to
[3:20:59] the most historic buildings.
[3:21:02] My for Courthouse squares,
[3:21:03] destroy the walkability on the
[3:21:04] housing connection. Here we
[3:21:07] are over 50 years later with
[3:21:09] an opportunity to bring that
[3:21:11] to downtown that charm. Not
[3:21:12] only must we like the Santa
[3:21:14] Rosa Creek. We must make it a
[3:21:16] prominent feature. The
[3:21:17] downtown landscape. Somebody
[3:21:19] mentioned bend. But you can
[3:21:21] also think about Creek in
[3:21:22] Libya, Park and downtown kind
[3:21:23] of the San Francisco
[3:21:23] Embarcadero after the 89
[3:21:28] quake. Madonna utilize the
[3:21:29] creek path from the West and
[3:21:29] the Sonoma Avenue for our
[3:21:33] daily by commute to school
[3:21:34] birds. Fish river otters are
[3:21:34] just a few of the amazing
[3:21:38] gives. We get daily. Urge you
[3:21:39] to not let opportunity slip
[3:21:43] away on it. I love the words,
[3:21:44] MISTER Hugh, for tell. And I
[3:21:45] totally agree. This can be a
[3:21:45] game-changer for downtown
[3:21:47] Santa Rosa. He talked about
[3:21:49] contact with the community of
[3:21:50] transparency shape than we the
[3:21:54] public like I love this. But
[3:21:56] we need to make daylighting
[3:21:56] binding condition. Not an
[3:21:59] aspiration set design standard
[3:22:00] creekside development that
[3:22:02] faces the creek. And let's
[3:22:03] look at the whole space with
[3:22:05] the other John o'Shea, federal
[3:22:05] building next door. Look at
[3:22:08] the whole thing. In a minimum
[3:22:10] up, John mentioned this a
[3:22:12] minimum, the public design
[3:22:14] process even well publicized
[3:22:15] workshop. Before we go into
[3:22:15] any development agreement.
[3:22:20] Thank you.
[3:22:21] >> Thank you. Next will be
[3:22:28] Ellen. Helen. I'm going to.
[3:22:29] Enable your permissions to
[3:22:30] talk. Please go ahead when
[3:22:35] you're ready.
[3:22:37] >> Thank you. Very impressed
[3:22:39] by all the work that has gone
[3:22:41] into this and appalled by
[3:22:45] deferred maintenance. How
[3:22:48] overall it seems to be
[3:22:49] excellent agreement. However,
[3:22:51] I agree the creek is a
[3:22:52] sticking point. Literally a
[3:22:53] sticking point. When you
[3:22:57] speak, has it covered? I'm
[3:22:58] absolutely in favor of
[3:22:59] daylighting. I think making
[3:23:02] features wonderful. But far
[3:23:06] beyond that, the call Kids k.
[3:23:10] Liability far beyond perhaps
[3:23:12] 100 million considering was
[3:23:13] happening with our climate and
[3:23:14] what floods have taken place
[3:23:17] in other areas. So I do think
[3:23:21] the while this he's obviously
[3:23:26] on track to happen tonight.
[3:23:29] You have something that case.
[3:23:30] Huge and needs to be addressed
[3:23:38] here.
[3:23:41] >> Thank you, Ellen. And I am
[3:23:44] seeing there hands raised on
[3:23:48] zoom.
[3:23:49] >> Wonderful. Thank you.
[3:23:52] Alright, we will bring it back
[3:23:53] to before we open it up to 2
[3:23:56] to thoughts here. All right.
[3:23:57] Some several several of the
[3:23:58] speakers did raise an
[3:24:01] important issue. And one of
[3:24:02] the city is well aware of it
[3:24:03] as the importance of this site
[3:24:05] and that creek for flood
[3:24:07] control. And we certainly
[3:24:09] wouldn't want more get out
[3:24:10] there that that we were not in
[3:24:12] touch regularly with Sonoma
[3:24:14] Water. Fact I myself is with
[3:24:16] the snow water team at the
[3:24:16] Matanzas Stammer
[3:24:17] rehabilitation discussion just
[3:24:20] a week ago. We are well aware
[3:24:21] the fema fund, fema flood maps
[3:24:21] we've been doing with those
[3:24:25] for a couple years now. Are
[3:24:26] centers of water team has been
[3:24:28] noise is constant focus on
[3:24:30] this issue. Dan, very briefly
[3:24:32] can use can use confirmed for
[3:24:33] the public that we we do have
[3:24:35] flood control issues in mind.
[3:24:36] We're well aware of the
[3:24:37] importance of of this
[3:24:38] particular particular section
[3:24:39] of covert. Now want to
[3:24:41] highlight that. The 1.6 one
[3:24:42] acres that we mentioned is not
[3:24:44] a random number. We've done
[3:24:44] surveys out there to know
[3:24:47] exactly where the culverts
[3:24:49] are. We've kept an amount of
[3:24:51] land be on the edge of the
[3:24:52] culverts to give us
[3:24:52] flexibility in terms of what
[3:24:53] we do in the future.
[3:24:56] >> And so like I mentioned,
[3:24:58] respect to the land available
[3:24:59] where where the culverts
[3:24:59] currently exist. All options
[3:25:03] are on the table to anything
[3:25:04] that would happen on this
[3:25:05] property. We would still have
[3:25:07] to move some somebody out of
[3:25:07] the way these buildings out of
[3:25:09] the way to make something else
[3:25:12] happened. We have now from the
[3:25:14] edge of property that we're
[3:25:14] keeping to the exchange
[3:25:16] agreement all the way into
[3:25:17] Sonoma Avenue. If we need to
[3:25:18] to reconfigure and make things
[3:25:20] happen. So there are still
[3:25:22] lots of options on the table
[3:25:24] and frankly conditioning any
[3:25:27] of that on MR. Futrell would
[3:25:28] make exchange agreement fall
[3:25:33] apart keeping us with the
[3:25:34] property allows us flexibility
[3:25:35] of that land moving forward.
[3:25:36] Perfect. Thank you. And I
[3:25:37] think that underlines as well
[3:25:39] for the public is rightfully
[3:25:40] interested in the creek as all
[3:25:43] of us here are.
[3:25:44] >> How complicated and how
[3:25:46] public and how frequent those
[3:25:47] conversations are going to be.
[3:25:47] That is not going to that.
[3:25:49] That's not gonna be a simple
[3:25:50] meeting or 2. That's gonna be
[3:25:51] a long discussion of how that
[3:25:53] and how that creek is best
[3:25:53] best used for the city. So
[3:25:55] absolutely. Stay tuned with
[3:25:56] that. Let's go back to
[3:26:02] council. Final final thoughts.
[3:26:03] What I'm looking for, a
[3:26:07] motion. And I think I think
[3:26:09] I'm looking at Rogers. Yes,
[3:26:10] there we
[3:26:14] >> I would just like to thank
[3:26:17] staff Thank Not llc. Thank
[3:26:21] you. The consultants and thank
[3:26:23] the mayor for allowing me to
[3:26:23] make this motion because this
[3:26:27] is a very historical like the
[3:26:30] meeting because I'm just so
[3:26:32] excited. And at the potential
[3:26:35] what is about to transpire. So
[3:26:37] with that, I would like to
[3:26:38] make a motion to adopt 2
[3:26:39] resolutions as presented by
[3:26:40] staff in way.
[3:26:45] >> Are there?
[3:26:46] >> Reading of the trading of
[3:26:49] the attack saying it.
[3:26:50] >> he's got that, this is how
[3:26:54] excited we are. People. We are
[3:26:55] we good with the motion a
[3:26:58] second. MADAM City clerk. All
[3:26:58] right. If that passes muster,
[3:26:59] then let's let's call the
[3:27:02] roll.
[3:27:03] >> Call thank you, Mayor
[3:27:05] Councilmember Rogers Side,
[3:27:07] Councilmember I councilmember
[3:27:08] Fleming Councilmember Ben
[3:27:11] Willows. Yes, Councilmember
[3:27:12] office.
[3:27:12] >> All say is a kids play to
[3:27:14] most of the critical center is
[3:27:17] a I don't care how old I If
[3:27:19] it's over earth and shown I
[3:27:23] will be in that creek. So
[3:27:24] >> Thank you. Vice Mayor
[3:27:26] Okrepkie I mayor step yes. But
[3:27:27] the record show this passes
[3:27:31] unanimously.
[3:27:32] >> That that is worthy of a
[3:27:33] little lies. All right. A big
[3:27:34] swing, indeed. Thank. Thank
[3:27:35] you, city team for getting to
[3:27:39] this point. So after
[3:27:40] consulting with my colleagues
[3:27:41] were going to power on just to
[3:27:42] show that the city of Santa
[3:27:44] Rosa never rests even when
[3:27:45] we're going in getting into
[3:27:48] our 4, go back to our public
[3:27:51] comment on non agenda matters.
[3:27:54] Our first public comment and
[3:27:55] gender matters. And those of
[3:27:56] you heading for the door. Be
[3:27:57] aware that we've got exciting
[3:27:59] items left to come. We're
[3:28:01] talking about storm water
[3:28:03] charges. Yeah, no, no. Need to
[3:28:06] rush hour. But first. First,
[3:28:07] this is your chance to to to
[3:28:09] make public MAY comment on it
[3:28:13] was not listed on the agenda.
[3:28:14] Anybody in council chambers is
[3:28:16] not simply walking towards the
[3:28:17] door was to make comment
[3:28:17] items, not just on the agenda
[3:28:20] Fred. Even kick us off. All
[3:28:21] right. Bring some order to the
[3:28:27] room, Fred. Here you're out.
[3:28:29] >> Again, been sort of new to
[3:28:32] Santa Rosa and I felt like
[3:28:34] coming to the city council is
[3:28:34] kind of like visiting the
[3:28:42] Oracle of Delphi the council
[3:28:44] someone inscrutable and my
[3:28:44] journey find the Isle of
[3:28:48] Equity in a just society. I
[3:28:48] have found that the Oracle to
[3:28:52] be tremendously transparent.
[3:28:53] But this evening, I have to
[3:28:56] say that I was very impressed
[3:28:57] with councilmember well as
[3:28:58] comments and really appreciate
[3:29:01] that. Thank you very much.
[3:29:03] >> Thank you, Fred and Oracle
[3:29:04] Delphi. Appreciate that. All
[3:29:05] right. We're going ebb economy
[3:29:08] and then to Wayne Ave Europe.
[3:29:13] >> Mayor and council members.
[3:29:14] >> I am.
[3:29:14] >> Here tonight to invite each
[3:29:17] of you to participate in this
[3:29:20] year's a week without driving.
[3:29:22] It's Thursday, OCTOBER, first
[3:29:25] through Wednesday, OCTOBER
[3:29:29] 8th. And it's a national
[3:29:30] observation the use
[3:29:34] alternatives to cars each year
[3:29:36] we ask elected officials and
[3:29:36] community leaders to
[3:29:39] experience the world as this
[3:29:40] experience by about 30% or
[3:29:44] more of your constituents who
[3:29:45] are dependent on public
[3:29:47] transportation options walking
[3:29:49] and biking. These are your
[3:29:51] constituents who are too young
[3:29:55] to old physically unable
[3:29:56] financially, unable or legally
[3:29:59] unable to have a personal car
[3:30:01] to drive wherever they need to
[3:30:03] be. Even if you are only able
[3:30:07] to participate for one or 2
[3:30:09] days, we really urge you to
[3:30:10] make the commitment and try to
[3:30:13] get around without a car for
[3:30:15] day or 2 during the week
[3:30:17] without driving. I hope you'll
[3:30:20] join North Bay Transit Rise
[3:30:22] Riders in experiencing are
[3:30:24] wonderful biking and walking
[3:30:26] assets as well as our local
[3:30:28] public transportation and that
[3:30:29] when you're doing that, you
[3:30:31] can note any needed
[3:30:34] improvements and you can
[3:30:36] recognize those parts of the
[3:30:38] system that are so wonderful
[3:30:41] and that deserves your
[3:30:42] recognition. Santa Rosa is
[3:30:44] proud to be part of this
[3:30:44] national movement. I'll be
[3:30:45] writing about it for
[3:30:48] Streetsblog again this year.
[3:30:49] And again, the dates are
[3:30:50] Thursday, OCTOBER first
[3:30:53] through Wednesday, OCTOBER 8.
[3:30:54] And if you let me know, I'll
[3:30:57] make sure that you get talked
[3:30:58] about your experiences
[3:30:59] described.
[3:31:02] >> Nationally through streets
[3:31:03] plot. Thank you. Thanks for
[3:31:04] organizing, Connie, Dwayne and
[3:31:06] then Daniel Daniel.
[3:31:10] >> Connie, welcome.
[3:31:10] >> Thank you. This is in
[3:31:13] regards to the city naming
[3:31:14] department. I was here
[3:31:15] starting this several years
[3:31:15] ago and spoke to some eu
[3:31:18] council members that had.
[3:31:20] >> The city naming department
[3:31:20] kinda revises. We're going to
[3:31:23] try get through this anyways.
[3:31:27] This is in regards I'm a Santa
[3:31:28] Rosa resident submitting this
[3:31:28] request regarding an unnamed
[3:31:30] trail in Highland Park. My
[3:31:31] friend Rick for Ella took his
[3:31:33] life on the trail and Memorial
[3:31:36] Tree and rocket already been
[3:31:37] approved by the centers are
[3:31:41] commissions and the city Rick
[3:31:41] was born and raised in center
[3:31:42] isn't spent. Most of us live
[3:31:46] in this community. And in how
[3:31:48] were fired from young age he
[3:31:49] carved in the trail and in the
[3:31:50] main trails with youth groups,
[3:31:53] friends and adults. The park
[3:31:53] was his happy place who works
[3:31:57] as a local contractor in the
[3:31:57] area getting freeway wall
[3:31:59] schools, public buildings,
[3:32:01] private residents throughout
[3:32:03] Santa Rosa. Many people
[3:32:03] recovered. Howard Park knew
[3:32:06] him as doing bike tricks from
[3:32:07] Pharma says this petition
[3:32:10] seeks to name the name trail
[3:32:12] and memory of him because of
[3:32:13] the lifelong connection to the
[3:32:15] park in the community. Most of
[3:32:17] all the communities supported
[3:32:18] this. I'm moving number 2.
[3:32:23] That has to reference to 5, 1,
[3:32:25] point, 2, at least 1000 of the
[3:32:25] Santa Rosa resident
[3:32:31] signatures. And at with 50% or
[3:32:32] more living within a half a
[3:32:35] mile of the city. Nowhere in
[3:32:41] that does it say that there's
[3:32:41] 1000 required signatures. And
[3:32:44] in addition, an additional 500
[3:32:44] the way it's worded and the
[3:32:47] way I talked to this, the
[3:32:47] staff and previous people
[3:32:51] waiting for this for years, it
[3:32:52] was 500 friend Sonoma County,
[3:32:55] Santa Rosa residents and 500
[3:32:58] from half a mile moving
[3:33:00] further. The petition and
[3:33:02] despair and see we submitted a
[3:33:03] total of 8,000 in my mind and
[3:33:08] it came back at 570 were Santa
[3:33:09] Rosa residents and then they
[3:33:15] counted 304.
[3:33:15] >> Connie, thank you. Thank
[3:33:16] you for coming to speak
[3:33:17] tonight. I'm sure that our
[3:33:18] staff will be willing to talk
[3:33:20] to speak further with you in
[3:33:21] the back. Moving on, then to
[3:33:34] DeWayne Daniel.
[3:33:34] >> Hello, my name is doing to
[3:33:37] wit. I'm from Roseland. I come
[3:33:38] today because I want to ask
[3:33:43] you to put up some posters.
[3:33:45] Prisoners of war missing in
[3:33:46] Action Day, which is one month
[3:33:50] away from today. It's next
[3:33:52] month. It's a national day of
[3:33:54] recognition and it's important
[3:33:55] because America is always at
[3:34:01] war. My entire lifetime. We've
[3:34:04] or somewhere or another. We're
[3:34:07] at war right now. It's not
[3:34:10] something that's talked much
[3:34:11] about, but we did a sneak
[3:34:13] attack on a country. We killed
[3:34:16] over 160 children. Think about
[3:34:21] that. Pearl Harbor, a sneak
[3:34:21] attack started World War 2 for
[3:34:24] America. There's a lot of
[3:34:25] things that go along with the
[3:34:27] fact that there are prisoners
[3:34:30] of war and missing in action.
[3:34:32] Military members still
[3:34:33] unaccounted for. We'd like to
[3:34:36] get some posters up here and
[3:34:37] get the city and the community
[3:34:41] to understand that.
[3:34:44] >> We believe U.S. Veterans
[3:34:46] believe and the city's open
[3:34:47] government ordinance. That
[3:34:48] specifically stated you would
[3:34:49] embrace a culture of open
[3:34:49] government.
[3:34:52] >> To ensure public trust.
[3:34:55] >> engage the community.
[3:34:57] >> Establish a system of
[3:34:58] transparency, public
[3:34:59] participation and
[3:35:02] collaboration. We're hoping
[3:35:03] that that's going to be
[3:35:04] something that you really
[3:35:06] delve into now that you talked
[3:35:08] about these new plans, you
[3:35:09] have what you're going to do
[3:35:11] to us here in the city. I'll
[3:35:14] leave you with this. You had a
[3:35:15] policy that if you would
[3:35:17] turned in a written comment.
[3:35:19] You couldn't speak on that
[3:35:23] same matter. And that meeting.
[3:35:25] That's what you did. If Red
[3:35:27] recently. But tonight, some
[3:35:28] people and turned in comments
[3:35:30] and then came and spoke again.
[3:35:30] You need to have equity and
[3:35:31] fairness and all you do. Thank
[3:35:35] you. Kind.
[3:35:36] >> Thank you Wayne. Actually,
[3:35:38] address that point directly
[3:35:40] because the city relies it
[3:35:41] better. That interpretation of
[3:35:42] policy regarding the written
[3:35:44] versus spoken comments was an
[3:35:46] heir. So we have fall
[3:35:48] apologize to Fred and in fact,
[3:35:48] called the the all-in buck for
[3:35:51] real change. If you'd like,
[3:35:52] you can submit public to
[3:35:52] submit written both written
[3:35:53] and verbal comments. That's
[3:35:56] the explanation. Daniel, you
[3:36:00] have that you have the floor.
[3:36:01] >> First and foremost, I just
[3:36:02] want to thank the city council
[3:36:05] and the public for being here
[3:36:05] today. I just wanted to
[3:36:07] comment on specifically on the
[3:36:09] creek that it was kind of a
[3:36:12] good decision from a financial
[3:36:16] standpoint, not the best. But
[3:36:17] I also want to Vice-mayor for
[3:36:20] working on Harper Avenue. It's
[3:36:21] the first ever seen anything
[3:36:25] being done there in a long
[3:36:28] time. And then also on the
[3:36:29] topic on technology as well. I
[3:36:32] want to talk about
[3:36:32] >> new policies that have not
[3:36:35] been risen yet like
[3:36:36] >> specifically for DoorDash
[3:36:39] drivers, Lyft drivers like
[3:36:40] Amazon.
[3:36:41] >> Specifically setting aside
[3:36:44] like apartments to follow
[3:36:45] policies to allow those people
[3:36:48] to deliver certain things or
[3:36:50] even for the state or public
[3:36:54] offices. I think making the
[3:36:55] committee specifically for
[3:36:57] innovation, innovative
[3:36:59] policies to work on, do things
[3:37:03] like Waymo's to bees past
[3:37:05] specifically at a local
[3:37:07] ordinance level recently.
[3:37:09] Sacramento just pass a law
[3:37:11] that allowed the increase of
[3:37:14] Waymo's from San Francisco to
[3:37:15] Sacramento. Obviously we
[3:37:16] should pass at a local
[3:37:20] ordinance. But looking at that
[3:37:21] from a general specific point
[3:37:23] of view, we should make a
[3:37:26] committee focus on innovative
[3:37:27] policies that allowed us to
[3:37:30] look at things that are
[3:37:33] happening in the current
[3:37:34] society. But thank you so much
[3:37:34] to the city Council, the
[3:37:37] public today. Thank you.
[3:37:38] >> Daniel, thanks for taking
[3:37:39] time to come and speak. Are
[3:37:40] there any other members of the
[3:37:40] public in council chambers who
[3:37:45] wish to speak?
[3:37:48] >> Seeing none that we will go
[3:37:49] online. MADAM House. Does
[3:37:51] anybody online have their
[3:37:51] hands raising? If you're
[3:37:53] online press star 9 or raise
[3:37:54] your hand?
[3:37:55] >> Thank you, mayor. There's
[3:37:57] no one on zoom, wishing to
[3:37:58] speak.
[3:37:59] >> Her facts. Alright, we'll
[3:38:01] close public comment. And with
[3:38:02] that, we'll conclude this. The
[3:38:03] first public comment non
[3:38:04] agenda matters. Bringing us to
[3:38:10] then item 16.1. Which is our
[3:38:11] public Let's see if the public
[3:38:13] hearing is an ordinance or
[3:38:15] introduction. The ordinance of
[3:38:16] the city Council, the city of
[3:38:17] Santa Rosa, amending the Santa
[3:38:20] Rosa City code. Chapter 14
[3:38:22] dash. 21 waterways,
[3:38:22] regulations to include
[3:38:23] definitions prohibitions on
[3:38:26] irrigation of non-functional
[3:38:29] turf, compliance deadlines and
[3:38:29] enforcement provisions. I
[3:38:30] think that's the end of that
[3:38:34] long title. All right. This is
[3:38:36] this is an exciting one given
[3:38:38] to us by the state. If I'm not
[3:38:39] mistaken, which emphasize
[3:38:43] throughout. But Musk way for
[3:38:56] yours.
[3:38:57] >> All right. Good evening.
[3:38:59] Mayor stopped vice mayor and
[3:39:02] council members. My name is
[3:39:03] Lisa Quail are and will be
[3:39:07] walking you all through.
[3:39:08] Spiciness specific revisions
[3:39:09] to our city's waterways
[3:39:11] regulation. That is indeed
[3:39:13] required by state law,
[3:39:13] specifically Assembly Bill.
[3:39:19] 15, 72. So California Assembly
[3:39:24] Bill 15 72 was signed into law
[3:39:26] 2023 and it explicitly
[3:39:27] prohibits the use of potable
[3:39:29] water to irrigate what's been
[3:39:33] termed non-functional turf a
[3:39:34] host of property types,
[3:39:34] including commercial
[3:39:38] industrial institutional
[3:39:39] Properties, Homeowners
[3:39:40] Association, common areas.
[3:39:44] There are some exemptions to
[3:39:44] this prohibition which
[3:39:45] includes irrigation that would
[3:39:48] be allowed to preserve the
[3:39:49] health of established trees.
[3:39:52] Another perennial plantings
[3:39:53] public parks where people
[3:39:56] recreate on lawn would be
[3:39:57] exempt cemeteries and in the
[3:39:58] event of an immediate health
[3:40:01] or safety need, you could have
[3:40:02] the ability to keep irrigating
[3:40:06] on social turf. So by JANUARY
[3:40:09] of 2027, which is approaching
[3:40:10] the city of Santa us updated
[3:40:13] city code to be 15 72
[3:40:15] compliance and we must notify
[3:40:18] those impacted by the
[3:40:19] regulation. This is a
[3:40:19] requirement folded into the
[3:40:25] regulation. So the purpose, as
[3:40:27] you might suspect is really to
[3:40:33] proactively help urban water
[3:40:34] suppliers preserve our water
[3:40:35] supply, especially during in
[3:40:39] light of. You know, cyclical
[3:40:42] periods of drought that
[3:40:42] commonly experience up within
[3:40:43] the region, water, scarcity,
[3:40:47] et cetera. It also builds upon
[3:40:48] previous conservation
[3:40:50] legislation that passed sb
[3:40:54] 606. And ab 16. 68. That was a
[3:40:55] 2018 timeframe. When that
[3:40:57] pass, it's referred to as
[3:40:58] making conservation a
[3:41:00] California way of life
[3:41:01] regulation that regulation
[3:41:06] had. Water efficiency targets
[3:41:07] set for commercial industrial
[3:41:08] institutional accounts for the
[3:41:11] outdoor usage. So this. New
[3:41:13] regulation kind of to give
[3:41:17] backs off of that. The state
[3:41:20] did formally acknowledge that
[3:41:22] potable water use for non
[3:41:22] functional turf is considered
[3:41:24] wasteful and unsustainable. So
[3:41:28] the ordinance that is being a
[3:41:29] presented tonight during the
[3:41:33] first reading is a way to
[3:41:34] reviser waterways, regulations
[3:41:36] so that we are, in fact, in
[3:41:37] compliance with state law and
[3:41:39] really trying to support the
[3:41:41] long term goals, conservation
[3:41:42] goals of the state and its
[3:41:47] regulators. There is a
[3:41:48] staggered compliance timeline
[3:41:51] for different property types,
[3:41:52] too terminated their
[3:41:54] irrigation of non-functional
[3:41:55] turf. So as soon as JANUARY,
[3:41:59] first of 2027 Department of
[3:42:01] General Services, local
[3:42:01] government and public agencies
[3:42:02] have to discontinue irrigation
[3:42:05] of non-functional turf. That
[3:42:08] also includes public schools
[3:42:12] followed the next year by that
[3:42:12] commercial industrial and
[3:42:13] other institutional
[3:42:17] properties. And then in 2029
[3:42:20] H.O.A. Common areas come
[3:42:21] coming service. Public service
[3:42:22] developments, I believe is the
[3:42:25] other term. They have to come
[3:42:27] into compliance with a
[3:42:29] regulation and then the 2031
[3:42:31] deadline doesn't apply to save
[3:42:31] Santa Rosa, but for local
[3:42:33] governments that are in
[3:42:34] disadvantaged communities,
[3:42:35] they have an extended timeline
[3:42:39] of for compliance. Just to
[3:42:41] back up a little bit because
[3:42:43] I'd mention the term and folks
[3:42:44] MAY be asking what is
[3:42:46] nonfunctional turf.
[3:42:47] Essentially it's irrigated
[3:42:49] lawn that is purely decorative
[3:42:51] and not regularly used for
[3:42:54] recreation or public or
[3:42:55] community gatherings. So
[3:42:56] feeling time you walk on the
[3:42:57] turf is it then effectively it
[3:43:02] is nonfunctional. These are
[3:43:02] some examples of areas and
[3:43:04] non-functional turf within
[3:43:05] within the city of Santa Rosa
[3:43:07] within our service area. A
[3:43:10] couple of business park
[3:43:11] examples where you see the
[3:43:14] narrow strips there along
[3:43:18] abutting the around business.
[3:43:19] Park signage is pretty common
[3:43:22] throughout our community. And
[3:43:26] then the other example
[3:43:26] suspected non-functional turf
[3:43:27] at an H.O.A. One of their
[3:43:31] common areas. And associate
[3:43:32] deadlines are listed on the
[3:43:37] site as well. The city of
[3:43:39] Santa Rosa to be proactive. We
[3:43:40] did do an internal screening
[3:43:41] of all of our city and
[3:43:42] irrigation accounts to see if
[3:43:43] any of those were. In fact,
[3:43:44] you're getting on functional
[3:43:48] turf. The good news is is that
[3:43:52] after detailed review in and
[3:43:53] js and doing some selected
[3:43:54] site, reconnaissance or water
[3:43:57] use efficiency team found only
[3:43:57] 2 sites to have non-functional
[3:44:01] turf. At the end of the day,
[3:44:02] parks and recreational areas
[3:44:04] where Dean excluded due to the
[3:44:05] functional nature of the turf.
[3:44:09] And then also they have. As
[3:44:10] you know, several established
[3:44:12] areas of established trees and
[3:44:14] again, the turf can be
[3:44:14] irrigated to preserve the
[3:44:15] health of those established
[3:44:21] trees. This is an example of
[3:44:24] one of those facilities with
[3:44:25] city-owned facilities with
[3:44:25] non-functional turf. It's for
[3:44:29] station number 3. Pretty small
[3:44:29] patch, looking about 1000
[3:44:30] square feet. A non-functional
[3:44:36] turf. The fire. So they
[3:44:38] decided that they wanted to
[3:44:40] replace that non-functional to
[3:44:40] not just discontinue the
[3:44:41] irrigation to meet to come
[3:44:42] into compliance with
[3:44:45] regulation, but if they wanted
[3:44:46] to install waters landscape
[3:44:47] estimated cost of doing that
[3:44:49] is about 7 to $11 per square
[3:44:52] foot. So however, run our fire
[3:44:53] station anywhere between 7
[3:44:56] $11,000 to do that. Her for
[3:44:58] turf replacement. Just as a
[3:44:59] side note, we do have a cash
[3:45:01] for grass rebate program
[3:45:02] that's administered out of the
[3:45:04] water. Use efficiency section
[3:45:05] that could offset that cost
[3:45:07] about $1000 if they were get
[3:45:12] preapproved machine likely it.
[3:45:16] So we are very aware that the
[3:45:17] public might be a little
[3:45:20] confused with this regulation.
[3:45:21] And so we have a
[3:45:24] communications plan in place.
[3:45:25] We are obligated by law to
[3:45:29] notify affected I believe
[3:45:30] postage was put on that first
[3:45:31] batch notification letters
[3:45:34] this afternoon. Should hit
[3:45:36] mailboxes by the end of the
[3:45:40] week. We so all all affected
[3:45:41] accounts will be notified
[3:45:44] restarting the process. Now we
[3:45:46] have some water, smart branded
[3:45:47] fact sheets in guidance
[3:45:48] documents which will live on
[3:45:53] our city website, which is.
[3:45:55] Presented here on the Www City
[3:45:56] Sr City Dot org for its last 4
[3:45:58] to slash in Ft. We've also
[3:46:02] designated an email address
[3:46:03] where customers can send us
[3:46:04] questions and the water
[3:46:05] sufficiency team will respond
[3:46:09] in a timely manner. To help
[3:46:10] demystify the regulation,
[3:46:11] provide some guidance, offer
[3:46:12] some resources and for
[3:46:16] commercial landscapes for to
[3:46:17] you know, a lot of hearts
[3:46:22] keeps. Gravel, other things
[3:46:23] that could potentially
[3:46:24] exacerbate the Heat island. We
[3:46:27] would like. We are working on
[3:46:28] some resources to encourage
[3:46:30] them to replace if there going
[3:46:32] to replace the turf. To, you
[3:46:37] know, keep it green. And do
[3:46:38] you do that with efficient
[3:46:44] irrigation and mind? As I
[3:46:44] mentioned, the water use
[3:46:47] efficiency team. We do have
[3:46:48] resources to support our
[3:46:48] commercial industrial
[3:46:49] institutional counts as well
[3:46:54] as ways. Not just again, meet
[3:46:55] the requirement of the
[3:46:56] regulation to discontinue
[3:46:59] irrigation, but 2 maintain a
[3:47:00] static Lee pleasing landscapes
[3:47:01] or cash for grass program
[3:47:05] would. Support that outcome
[3:47:09] rate of keeping our city
[3:47:10] beautiful. We will for
[3:47:12] commercial counts. We rebate
[3:47:15] for every square foot of turf
[3:47:17] removed. I mean, our design
[3:47:17] criteria and a little water
[3:47:21] use landscape goes We kept we
[3:47:22] will revisit rebate them at a
[3:47:23] dollar per square foot with a
[3:47:25] cap of $10,000 annually per
[3:47:26] meter. We also have efficient
[3:47:31] irrigation rebates to you
[3:47:32] know, at $1000 lifetime year.
[3:47:35] So that includes a hardware
[3:47:38] and things like smart
[3:47:39] irrigation controllers for
[3:47:43] commercial accounts. So this
[3:47:46] brings me now action item for
[3:47:49] this evening, which is.
[3:47:50] Introducing an ordinance to
[3:47:51] revise the city's waterways
[3:47:54] regulation. And city of Santa
[3:47:58] Rosa did adopt the codified or
[3:47:59] waterways regulations under
[3:48:00] City Code chapter 14 dash. 21
[3:48:04] in 1999. As the name implies,
[3:48:05] the purpose was to promote the
[3:48:09] efficient use of potable and
[3:48:10] recycled water by prohibiting
[3:48:11] water uses which constitute
[3:48:15] water waste. And folded into
[3:48:16] that regulation is an
[3:48:18] enforcement mechanism where we
[3:48:20] can for violators of our
[3:48:25] waterways, regulation. We have
[3:48:25] you know, process for issuing
[3:48:27] written warnings, then
[3:48:29] followed by administrative
[3:48:32] fines, escalate the longer the
[3:48:35] violation persists and then
[3:48:36] ultimately with Director Berks
[3:48:37] approval, we could end up
[3:48:40] discontinuing water service.
[3:48:41] Do everything we can to
[3:48:44] prevent that outcome. But it
[3:48:45] is enforcement measure that we
[3:48:46] could end up taking for
[3:48:51] violators. So the waterways,
[3:48:53] regulation included as
[3:48:54] attachment to agenda package
[3:48:59] has the proposed lines. The
[3:49:00] ordinance has a proposed highs
[3:49:02] to the waterways, regulation
[3:49:06] in summary, it includes 13 new
[3:49:07] definitions taken verbatim
[3:49:09] from statute from the new
[3:49:12] regulation. It's simply to to
[3:49:14] clarify terms that are listed
[3:49:15] in the prohibition. Mike, what
[3:49:15] is a common area? What is
[3:49:18] nonfunctional turf? What is
[3:49:19] functional turf? What our
[3:49:23] common interest developments.
[3:49:25] We also clarified waterways to
[3:49:28] is and or sorry, we included a
[3:49:32] new reference to water waste
[3:49:32] citing potable irrigation
[3:49:36] non-functional turf. We took
[3:49:37] verbatim from statute, the
[3:49:38] prohibition and inserted that
[3:49:42] as a new prohibition and our
[3:49:42] waterways regulation. And then
[3:49:45] we just referenced the new
[3:49:46] prohibition in our enforcement
[3:49:49] section of the regulation,
[3:49:51] enforcement, mechanized
[3:49:53] mechanism has not been
[3:49:55] modified. And I just wanted to
[3:49:58] note that by using the exact
[3:49:59] language in the regulation
[3:50:02] from California water code. We
[3:50:04] really are trying to reduce
[3:50:05] confusion for businesses,
[3:50:07] landscape, landscapers,
[3:50:09] property managers and others
[3:50:10] that work in multiple service
[3:50:15] areas across the region. As
[3:50:16] far as budget impacts Co
[3:50:17] adoption. This ordinance
[3:50:19] really has no immediate budget
[3:50:22] impact. I wanted to note that
[3:50:24] customers that have that fall
[3:50:25] under this regulation that
[3:50:28] have more than 5,000 Square
[3:50:31] feet of irrigated landscape
[3:50:32] have to self certified
[3:50:33] directly to the state and not
[3:50:37] the city of Santa Rosa, which
[3:50:37] means that that administrative
[3:50:40] burden doesn't fall on our
[3:50:40] shoulders and then we dealt
[3:50:45] with at the state level.
[3:50:46] Potential long-term costs
[3:50:47] really folded into the
[3:50:48] customer service is we want a
[3:50:52] already provides. We? You
[3:50:54] know, offer complant support
[3:50:57] for other conservation
[3:50:59] regulations. We enforce the
[3:51:00] waterways, regulation and we
[3:51:01] monitor some of those sites
[3:51:04] that are under inforcement.
[3:51:06] Any future funding requests
[3:51:07] will follow the normal
[3:51:08] budgetary approval process
[3:51:11] would be addressed at the time
[3:51:12] if there were any increases
[3:51:15] that were needed. So the
[3:51:18] timeline for approval is
[3:51:20] listed on the screen We are
[3:51:24] through the first 2 items. Bp
[3:51:25] you did make a recommendation
[3:51:29] to council on JUNE 18th
[3:51:32] approve the ordinance. So
[3:51:35] tonight is AUGUST 18 through
[3:51:36] here City Council to introduce
[3:51:37] ordinance and host a public
[3:51:39] hearing. And take public
[3:51:43] comments regarding the changes
[3:51:45] if council moves to adopt the
[3:51:46] ordinance. A second reading
[3:51:50] would occur on SEPTEMBER 15th
[3:51:52] and then the proposed
[3:51:54] effective date of the new code
[3:51:55] change would happen
[3:51:55] approximately OCTOBER 16th.
[3:51:57] That's 31 days. Following the
[3:52:03] second reading. So I'll end
[3:52:04] with the formal recommendation
[3:52:09] to council tonight. The Public
[3:52:09] Utilities and Santa Rosa Water
[3:52:11] recommended the council
[3:52:13] approve the first reading and
[3:52:16] introduce an ordinance
[3:52:17] endings, Santa Rosa City Code
[3:52:22] chapter 14 dash. 21 water
[3:52:25] waste regulations to include
[3:52:26] clarifying definitions, a
[3:52:27] prohibition for irrigating
[3:52:29] non-functional turf with
[3:52:31] potable water compliance
[3:52:33] deadlines per affected
[3:52:35] property type enforcement
[3:52:37] provisions and make other
[3:52:38] clarifying changes. This item
[3:52:40] has no impact on current
[3:52:44] fiscal year budget. And at
[3:52:46] this time I would be happy to
[3:52:47] field any questions from the
[3:52:51] mayor, vice mayor and council.
[3:52:52] Lisa, thank you very much. I'm
[3:52:53] sure you can sense the
[3:52:55] enthusiasm from from the
[3:52:57] >> Thank you. Thank you for
[3:52:58] your presentation. All right,
[3:52:59] friends. What questions do we
[3:53:05] have? It's been wheeless.
[3:53:06] >> Thank you, Mayor. Thank you
[3:53:07] for the presentation. I was
[3:53:08] just wondering them because
[3:53:11] we're a I know we have to do
[3:53:12] this. It sounds like this is
[3:53:14] something they have to do. So
[3:53:15] there's no really debate
[3:53:16] around that. But I'm just
[3:53:19] wondering since this is.
[3:53:20] Relatively new home. And
[3:53:23] during one sits effective,
[3:53:25] which I guess is up tober
[3:53:28] 16th. Is there any kind of
[3:53:29] grace period for the property
[3:53:31] owners or any anybody that
[3:53:33] might? I'm just wondering
[3:53:34] people are going to start
[3:53:36] getting code enforcement right
[3:53:38] away or is there a grace
[3:53:40] period? Weather understanding
[3:53:40] what the non-functional turf
[3:53:44] isn't all that. Thank you for
[3:53:49] your question. Just revisit.
[3:53:53] There is staggered compliance
[3:53:55] timeline. So the first
[3:53:56] property types that are
[3:53:56] affected or local government
[3:53:59] public schools and I just
[3:54:02] wanted to reiterate to comply.
[3:54:03] They just have to turn off the
[3:54:08] irrigation. So. You know, it's
[3:54:10] it's sort of a simple
[3:54:11] compliance measure. We do
[3:54:12] understand that that could
[3:54:13] lead to some areas turning
[3:54:14] going from green to Brown,
[3:54:16] which folks in community might
[3:54:21] not like so much.
[3:54:24] >> The the state does have
[3:54:25] there's a hardship provision
[3:54:26] that was writ written into the
[3:54:30] regulation that does allow.
[3:54:31] >> Impacted properties to
[3:54:33] appeal to the state and ask
[3:54:34] for a three-year extension.
[3:54:35] They do have to demonstrate
[3:54:42] some type of economic hardship
[3:54:44] there wasn't. But a number of
[3:54:44] qualifying hardship categories
[3:54:46] that they could appeal to the
[3:54:47] state on. So those appeals go
[3:54:47] directly to the state, not to
[3:54:50] the city of Santa Rosa and the
[3:54:53] state this time has not
[3:54:56] released information about how
[3:54:58] to formally go about doing
[3:55:00] that. So we're sort of waiting
[3:55:02] to see when the information
[3:55:05] will be released. So we can
[3:55:06] direct customers to that
[3:55:07] process to request hardship
[3:55:13] extension. Ok? Thank you.
[3:55:13] >> Thank you. Any other
[3:55:18] questions? All right. What a
[3:55:19] public comment are there any
[3:55:19] members of the public here in
[3:55:20] council chambers wish to
[3:55:24] comment? Seeing none. We'll go
[3:55:25] online. MADAM Zuma, host, is
[3:55:27] anybody online have their
[3:55:29] hands raised as press star 9.
[3:55:33] >> They do not. Mayor.
[3:55:34] >> All right. I confess I'm a
[3:55:34] little surprised when give
[3:55:35] some comment on this item, MR.
[3:55:42] Rogers. Good question. That's
[3:55:43] right. We're doing a public
[3:55:47] hearing our way. All right. So
[3:55:48] Karen, hoping the public
[3:55:49] hearing back to back to
[3:55:50] council chambers any made any
[3:55:51] members. The public here was
[3:55:52] to participate in public
[3:55:55] hearing. There are non I back
[3:55:57] to back to admitting that was
[3:56:00] alert no colors on zoom.
[3:56:01] >> Then we're closing the
[3:56:02] public hearing. Thank you.
[3:56:03] Thank you. I wasn't I wasn't
[3:56:04] paying All right. Any final
[3:56:08] comments from the dais? All
[3:56:09] right. You have that. You have
[3:56:10] the difficult duty tonight.
[3:56:11] Reset bringing is before
[3:56:12] especially after a long day.
[3:56:13] So thank Thank you. Thank you
[3:56:15] for getting him for bringing
[3:56:17] us into line with state
[3:56:17] regulations. It was something
[3:56:18] that had to be done. Thank
[3:56:19] you. Senator is a water team.
[3:56:20] We will comply even if it's
[3:56:25] half heartedly. All right. I'm
[3:56:26] looking for a motion from
[3:56:27] let's see who ms been? Willis
[3:56:29] yours. Looking make make make
[3:56:34] a motion for us. Okay.
[3:56:35] >> I moved to approved the
[3:56:36] first reading and introduce
[3:56:36] the ordinance as presented by
[3:56:40] staff. Second. It.
[3:56:41] >> We have a motion and a
[3:56:42] second. MADAM City clerk can
[3:56:44] call the vote whenever you're
[3:56:44] ready.
[3:56:46] >> Thank you, Mayor
[3:56:46] Councilmember Rogers, I
[3:56:48] Councilmember Macdonald, I
[3:56:50] councilmember Fleming
[3:56:51] Councilmember Ben well oath.
[3:56:52] Yes, Councilmember Alvarez,
[3:56:55] Vice Cookie. I step yes. Let
[3:56:56] the record show this passes
[3:56:58] unanimously.
[3:56:59] >> All right. Thank you and
[3:57:00] thank and thank you again for
[3:57:02] for the presentation. Thank
[3:57:03] you. Move on to our last item
[3:57:06] of the evening item. 16 point
[3:57:07] to our public hearing on the
[3:57:09] placement of annual storm
[3:57:10] water enterprises charges on
[3:57:12] the Sonoma County property tax
[3:57:14] roll. All right. This is gonna
[3:57:15] be a good awake again.
[3:57:16] Jennifer, are you doing this
[3:57:22] one? All right, Nick. Are all
[3:57:34] yours? State staff is making
[3:57:35] way for the door for the
[3:57:35] doors. Peter, you're walking
[3:57:40] out on this one. Shame on you,
[3:57:41] Nick. We're here. We're here.
[3:57:46] We're paying attention.
[3:57:47] >> Thank you, mayor and
[3:57:49] members of council. My name is
[3:57:50] Nick Lanham, a research
[3:57:51] program coordinator with the
[3:57:53] storm water creeks team. Stay.
[3:57:54] I mean, the over the placement
[3:57:55] of annual storm water and or
[3:57:56] press charges on the Sonoma
[3:57:59] County property tax roll. Just
[3:58:03] a very brief enterprises
[3:58:04] create by council and of
[3:58:05] course, title 16 of the city
[3:58:09] code in 1996, provides funding
[3:58:10] for the implementation of
[3:58:12] cities and pds permit and
[3:58:13] funds activities like creek
[3:58:16] restoration, Stewardship, foot
[3:58:17] protection, public education,
[3:58:21] other activities as well. The
[3:58:23] calculate assessment is based
[3:58:25] on nie er you equivalent
[3:58:27] residential unit and considers
[3:58:28] parcel amount of impervious
[3:58:30] surface and land use for each
[3:58:34] parcel. Current year. Ufi is
[3:58:35] $43.52. And that was approved
[3:58:36] by council during the 2026
[3:58:41] 2027 budget process. To
[3:58:44] simplify process for property
[3:58:45] owners is requested that these
[3:58:46] charges be id on the Sonoma
[3:58:46] County property tax from the
[3:58:50] city's behalf. These charges
[3:58:51] been collected annually on
[3:58:52] that actual since they
[3:58:52] established in SEPTEMBER of
[3:58:56] 1996. It's in the best
[3:58:57] interest of the city that
[3:58:59] these parcels not built by the
[3:59:00] county due to a minimum charge
[3:59:02] of $10 and or parcels with
[3:59:03] known incorrect ownership be
[3:59:06] exempt from these buildings.
[3:59:08] Any charges not collected will
[3:59:08] not affect other parcel
[3:59:13] charges. Today's public
[3:59:14] hearing in accordance with
[3:59:14] title 16 of the city code will
[3:59:15] adopt the stormwater
[3:59:17] Enterprise charge report
[3:59:19] approved placing the charges
[3:59:20] on the county tax bill for
[3:59:21] collection and allow the
[3:59:21] public the opportunity to
[3:59:22] protest the method of
[3:59:26] collecting charges. Therefore,
[3:59:28] the board of Public Utilities
[3:59:30] in Santa Rosa Water or
[3:59:31] recommend that council by
[3:59:33] resolution adopt by 2 0rd
[3:59:35] vote. The stormwater
[3:59:35] Enterprise Charger port and
[3:59:36] approved placement of the
[3:59:38] stormwater enterprise charges
[3:59:39] on the Sonoma County property
[3:59:41] tax roll to be collected by
[3:59:45] the Sonoma County auditor, a
[3:59:45] controller treasurer tax
[3:59:47] collector at the same time and
[3:59:48] in the same manner as Sonoma
[3:59:50] County property taxes are
[3:59:52] collected unless those charges
[3:59:53] do not meet the county minimum
[3:59:55] of $10 and or partial owner
[3:59:56] contact information is known
[3:59:58] to be incorrect. This item was
[3:59:59] no impact on current fiscal
[4:00:01] year budget. And I'm happy to
[4:00:02] answer any questions. You
[4:00:05] have. That was masterful neck
[4:00:10] bring it back to council.
[4:00:11] Surprise. Surprise. No
[4:00:12] questions. All right. Over to
[4:00:13] public hearing, Sarah, to
[4:00:15] start a public opening this up
[4:00:16] to the public during am are
[4:00:17] any members, the public
[4:00:17] hearing House chambers that
[4:00:20] wish to speak?
[4:00:21] >> Seeing non online host.
[4:00:23] Anybody online.
[4:00:24] >> We have no one was wishing
[4:00:26] to speak Zoom.
[4:00:27] >> Thank you so much. Alright,
[4:00:31] causing a public I feel like I
[4:00:32] should make comments or or ask
[4:00:33] a question or something, but
[4:00:33] I'm I'm too tired. I'm not
[4:00:35] doing it. Were now. We're
[4:00:36] going to thank you for going
[4:00:37] to thank you for your work.
[4:00:39] This is again necessary
[4:00:40] necessary work on behalf of
[4:00:43] the city in the county. And
[4:00:43] with that, a look see MISTER
[4:00:46] Alvarez for Motion.
[4:00:47] >> Thank you, Mayor. I like to
[4:00:48] make a motion to adopt a
[4:00:49] resolution is presented by
[4:00:50] staff and we for the reading
[4:00:52] of the text second, we have a
[4:00:53] motion and a second and MADAM
[4:00:54] City Clerk, Inc, all whenever
[4:00:57] you're ready.
[4:00:58] >> Thank you. Mayor
[4:00:59] Councilmember Rogers and
[4:01:02] Councilmember MacDonald.
[4:01:03] Councilmember Fleming
[4:01:07] Councilmember Yes, Bres vice
[4:01:11] Cookie. I mayor step yes. Let
[4:01:14] the record show this passes
[4:01:14] unanimously.
[4:01:15] >> All right. Thank you. Thank
[4:01:16] you for the work in the
[4:01:17] presentation. Both Nick, an
[4:01:18] entire Santa Rosa Water team.
[4:01:21] Thank you for being here That
[4:01:23] is the and of our substantive
[4:01:24] items. We have one more public
[4:01:28] comment on non agenda matters.
[4:01:30] So opening that There is no
[4:01:31] one, no member. There are no
[4:01:32] members of the public hearing
[4:01:34] Council chambers to make host
[4:01:35] anybody online for our our
[4:01:37] second public comment on non
[4:01:38] agenda matters.
[4:01:38] >> No mayor, we have no one
[4:01:40] online wishing to comment.
[4:01:41] >> And then we are officially
[4:01:41] adjourned. Thank you,
[4:01:55] everyone.