[0:07] Good evening. I am opening the January 6th meeting, regular meeting of the Corn

[0:15] Madiraa Town Council. Um, we just had a closed session and we have nothing to

[0:22] report out of that closed session. I ask for a roll call, please.

[0:29] Council member Andrews >> present.

[0:31] » Council member Beckman >> here.

[0:33] » Council member Azio >> here. Vice Mayor Casissa

[0:36] » here. >> Mayor Thomas

[0:37] » here.

[0:40] » So, um, we'd like to have open time at this time. Any Oh, I'm sorry. We have to

[0:47] pledge first. Pledge of allegiance, please.

[0:52] » Aliance to the United States of America to the

[0:57] republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[1:03] justice for all.

[1:08] All right.

[1:12] Now, we will begin open time. Any member of the public is allowed to

[1:19] speak for three minutes about anything that is not on our agenda this evening.

[1:25] Uh those of you who would like to speak uh raise your hands to be recognized and

[1:31] we will direct you to the podium. Please speak into the mic loudly so that you're

[1:38] picked up uh for those online and everyone in the room. Thank you. Uh next

[1:44] will be Miss Batty and we'll start with you sir.

[1:49] » Bob Middlestead uh ebike access. Thank you, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and council

[1:54] members. Two years ago, two Redwood High School

[1:59] students rode in the J about what they called quote undercover undercover

[2:04] motorcycles on their campus. We now call them emotos. They tried to

[2:11] remind public officials at the time and the local police that the number one

[2:15] priority was keeping roads and the kids safe.

[2:20] Here we are in 2026, two years later, and the problem has only gotten worse.

[2:27] It's now been widely publicized in the New York Times, CBS News, the J, and the

[2:34] Legislator Leg Legislative Commission report by the Manetta Transportation

[2:39] Institute. In response, we can try and pass the

[2:43] buck. We can congratulate ourselves on everything we've done, but to be honest,

[2:49] I think we need to face the fact that more needs to be done, and I think we

[2:55] should redouble our efforts. This is a multiaceted problem, but at bottom, it

[3:00] is a law enforcement problem. So, I asked the CMP

[3:06] um a uh representative why they were not doing more to cure the emoto problem at

[3:13] Redwood High School. Um which is just down the street from the police

[3:17] headquarters after all. And this is what I got this afternoon. Quote, "Parents

[3:23] are not enthusiastic about us going after children, nor our schools. We are

[3:30] not the Gestapo. I found that that response chilling.

[3:36] Um, parents don't get to decide when to let their children break the law and

[3:41] schools from the ones I've talked to and I've talked to a lot want the police to

[3:46] help them enforce the law and get rid of the emot. And the Gustapo comment goes

[3:52] without any further thing. So, here's what I ask this court to do as part of

[3:56] our continuing dialogue. First, agendaize the issue for an upcoming

[4:01] meeting and declare the policy of this community is that emoto enforcement at

[4:07] Redwood High School and beyond is important to the community regardless of

[4:12] what some scoff parents might want. And second, remember that the Central Marine

[4:19] Police Council is charged with quote developing policy for the CMPA,

[4:26] not the other way around. And I don't think we should tolerate a

[4:31] policy of deferring to parents who want their kids to break the law. In fact,

[4:35] it's a crime for parents to allow juveniles to operate motorcycles without

[4:40] licenses. Uh and finally, the CMPA and I did agree on one thing, which is the

[4:46] importance of going after the manufacturers on a consumer product uh

[4:50] protection basis. So, I've submitted a petition um calling on the DA and the

[4:56] attorney general to do just that. And I ask each of you to consider signing it.

[5:01] Thank you. >> Thank you.

[5:11] » Hello everybody. I'm Susie Batty. Um hello to all of you who I know pretty

[5:17] well, most of you. Um I am here because uh we had a flood the last few days and

[5:23] I happened to be um uh part of the neighborhood response group in East

[5:28] Corder Madera. So I thought it would be a good idea for me to just give you a

[5:33] threeinut quick thing and I wrote these points down and I'll try not to talk as

[5:39] much as I usually do. I'll try to just get these points out and maybe some of

[5:43] them will be helpful um in my notes. Um my first note to

[5:48] myself is compliments and that really is true. Um I think in general things went

[5:55] fairly well. Uh there were delays on some things but uh the the street

[6:01] sweeper has not stopped. He's been through Mariner Cove time after time

[6:05] after time from as soon as they could get in there until um until even even

[6:11] today. Um I do believe that um and public works and the fire department was

[6:18] present um more so the uh the fire department I saw there the first day uh

[6:24] late in the afternoon. You know, it took a while to see what was going on and

[6:28] this was January 1st and I want to remind everybody that that's one thing

[6:32] to think about. It was a holiday and it had to be a difficult time for all the

[6:36] departments. Um, I realized that and I think in general they did a pretty good

[6:41] job. There should have been some uh we ran out of of sandbags uh in in Mariner

[6:47] Cove and I think uh we needed to somehow figure way and this is communication of

[6:53] letting the people in Mariner Cove know what and when and where they could get

[6:58] those sandbags. A lot of this boils down I think to communication. Um, I think

[7:02] the alerts could have they they were prominent when they uh after a while,

[7:08] but in the very beginning it was a little bit slow getting alerts out. I

[7:12] think um I'm also thinking that people got on next door like during and after

[7:18] and all that and there was, you know, somebody should have done this, somebody

[7:21] should have done that. I think it would be really good if the town had someone

[7:26] who monitored next door and could see the comments that are going on and we

[7:32] need somebody who will uh correct the information, make sure that the

[7:37] information that people are yakking about is correct. Um so I think that

[7:42] would be very helpful. Um vacation time for uh particularly for uh public works.

[7:49] I'm I know that some towns do this and there might be a way of splitting their

[7:55] vacations in such a way that particularly in the winter months in the

[7:58] times when there we know that there's going to be problems that probably out

[8:02] there people shouldn't shouldn't have less vacation. They deserve plenty of

[8:06] vacation but maybe it can be divided up in such a way that we at least have a

[8:11] pretty big staff because on January 1st we only had one. I know that my time is

[8:16] up. The one thing that I think is important is that uh can the town please

[8:21] schedule a meeting particularly for Mariner Cove with the experts there so

[8:25] that questions can be answered and that it could happen really soon. I'd like to

[8:29] see it happen at Cove School. Neighborhood response group was asked if

[8:33] they could do it. I don't think it's our place. I think it's better for the town

[8:37] to do it. And thank you for the dumpsters that were delivered today.

[8:41] It's going to be very helpful to the residents. Again, it's uh getting the

[8:45] word out. So, thank you. >> Thank you.

[8:49] Anyone else like to speak? David, good to see you.

[8:58] » Hello, David Bell. Uh 33 Echo. Um want to just simply say echo everything Susie

[9:04] said, but for Marina Village.

[9:21] Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Lauren Cosgrave and my

[9:24] husband Shawn and I own 23 Harbor Drive in Marina Village with our two daughters

[9:30] age 8 and nine. During the recent storm, our home flooded as a result of water

[9:35] over topping the burm behind our property. This was not a case of

[9:40] groundwater seepage or an unpredictable failure. It was a visible, repeatable

[9:44] overflow of a known structure. This burm has been a point of discussion

[9:49] between homeowners and the town for over 10 years. And regardless of formal

[9:54] ownership, it is clearly functioning as a flood control infrastructure.

[9:58] When it over tops, water is directed towards homes and streets and neighbors

[10:03] and including my home. We are not here tonight to assign blame

[10:08] or debate fault. We are here because this problem is foreseeable and it will

[10:13] happen again unless it is addressed in an engineered way. We are asking the

[10:17] city to do three things. Commission or share a professional engineering

[10:22] evaluation of the burm and surrounding drainage on Harbor Drive. Clearly

[10:27] identify responsibility for preventing future over topping of impacts to homes.

[10:32] and provide a timeline for implementing a long-term mitigation solution.

[10:37] This flooding has real consequences financial, emotional, and safety related

[10:42] for families living here. We are committed to being constructive

[10:46] partners, but temporary or peacemail fixes are not enough. Our request is

[10:51] simple. Please acknowledge this is a predictable risk and commit to a

[10:55] permanent solution so residents are not put in this position again.

[11:00] Thank you. Is there anyone else?

[11:09] » Hi. Uh, my name is Robin. I live on 37 Kargo near Susie. I actually lived on

[11:14] Harbor when I was in high school. Um, so couple things. I I won't get to all the

[11:19] details, but I have some older family members that uh for decades have been

[11:24] very angry about the lack of dredging in the area. So, I've heard a lot over the

[11:29] years about local regulations and problems with

[11:35] SQUA and the strategies for flood management and um probably way more than

[11:42] I would like. I understand there's been various plans over the years with the

[11:47] flood wall and raising homes and things like that.

[11:51] My understanding um is that you know issues related to SQA stop things or

[11:59] stall things for years or decades um not just with flooding but also with

[12:05] I've seen it with bike infrastructure and and many things in so I'm wondering

[12:10] if the city has made any efforts to work with the state on like streamlining SQA

[12:17] reviews or like you know there's a stadium in LA that famously got put up

[12:23] quickly with SQL streamlining processes. So I'm very curious to hear about that.

[12:29] Thank you.

[12:42] Hi, my name is Karen Grant. I live on Meadow Crest. This isn't the issue I

[12:46] came for tonight, but I think it was absolutely ridiculous that the town

[12:50] closed for two weeks. Unless you're a school kid or a school teacher, who

[12:55] takes two weeks off at the holidays? Most people get Christmas Eve, Christmas

[12:59] Day, New Year's Eve, New Year's Day. Has this always been the case? I was really

[13:04] up against the gun to get a permit because the solar

[13:10] um tax relief is ending. And it was I just couldn't believe the town shut down

[13:16] for two weeks and gave themselves two weeks off. Thank you.

[13:27] Would anyone else like to speak in the room? Uh how about online?

[13:34] » We have three hands raised from attendees online. We'll start with Patty

[13:38] Stolier. Right. >> Go ahead, Patty. Good evening. Thank you

[13:43] everybody. Um I just want to report out a couple things from the Twin Cities

[13:49] disaster preparedness committee meeting yesterday. Uh one is we kept reiterating

[13:55] that people were thinking this was due to the rain. It was not due to the rain.

[13:58] It was due to the king tides and the rain didn't help any. But it wasn't

[14:04] anything like 1982 when we got 16 ines of rain in three days. Um and so uh that

[14:12] meant it was very predictable. People sort of took it in stride when

[14:17] they heard that the king tides were coming. And we talked about the

[14:20] possibility of maybe having blue flag days when there was going to be a a

[14:25] really urgent necessity to uh get the word out and call people's attention to

[14:31] the potential threat. And the other was um maybe some signs in neighborhoods

[14:37] that are low. I think there's one over by Lucky that says this area is prone to

[14:42] flooding, but um that would be good to have those. I think uh the town did an

[14:49] amazing job overall. Uh, as Susie said, getting the word out a little bit late,

[14:55] but um, I kept trying to correct people and Bob Bundy kept trying to correct

[15:01] people on Next Door if they were thinking that the towns had, you know, a

[15:05] hundred years to figure this out and why haven't they stopped the rain and the

[15:09] tide. So that I think people just need to get an inflatable Bobo punching bag

[15:16] and let their um uh frustrations out rather than posting on Next Door. But um

[15:24] I think overall we weathered so to speak the storm pretty well and um hats off to

[15:31] Cord Madera and we made all the news. Thanks.

[15:39] Um, next we have Roy Walford.

[15:46] » Go ahead, Roy.

[15:50] » Good evening. I uh echo the compliments to the town

[15:56] staff who was on the point, fire department. They're real good. Also, Mil

[16:00] Valley Refuge. Uh my wife asked her to give them a call, say, "Hey, pick up the

[16:05] garbage real early." uh because uh the day before uh it was

[16:10] one day delayed in picking up garbage because of the holiday

[16:16] and the trash cans, all the cans were floating down Seawolf Passage and I was

[16:20] going out trying to pull them up, knocking on doors saying, "Hey, pull in

[16:23] your cans because the tide was coming in." And I have, my wife and I have

[16:28] lived uh here since 1974. And the most our garage or house ever

[16:35] flooded was a few inches into the garage.

[16:40] We had on Friday three and a half inches uh of water in the garage and the

[16:46] following day we had 8 and 12 in and we had sandbags and everything else. The

[16:50] following day I got smarter about sandbags. I also got a submersible pump.

[16:53] So I pumped out water as fast as it came in. So if anybody's sandbagging, get a

[16:57] submersible pump. But the real key issue here is with all the things going on

[17:02] with the earth, the astronomical, there was uh there there was a confluence of

[17:08] unexpected items that were not predicted. So the predictable tide uh

[17:14] was in the 7.2 ft area. It wound up being about 8.71.

[17:23] Now, there was another flood just 200s of a foot less in 1998,

[17:30] and it was on February six. You go check the records, and it was an 8

[17:38] uh 57, something like that. We never flooded from that. What's the

[17:43] difference? Well, there were a lot of things. There was an offshore storm

[17:47] surge with the wind blowing from the southsoutheast. It pushed the water in.

[17:51] We had lots of rain, lots of runoff, settlement, subsidance.

[17:58] We settled our we had subsidance uh between 1998 uh and this year of

[18:04] probably a little over a foot and that one foot made all the difference. And it

[18:09] was obvious that an awful lot of the houses uh along the shoreline have

[18:15] lowlying land. They need to build that up. And I know Bob has been talking many

[18:22] years uh about getting a burm or a levy out there. It's needed and it's got to

[18:28] be at least 10 foot. We've got lots of material to build those leveies. It was

[18:34] from dredging Cordadera Creek in the mid70s when the fairies were coming in

[18:38] and it build up a lot of the levies that are out in the marsh right now. So, uh,

[18:43] I hope the town really presses to to get those barriers built up because we don't

[18:48] know when another storm was hit and a predicted tide is being predicted for,

[18:53] uh, December, but we don't know if all the astronomical, astrological, and all

[18:57] those things will come together all at once.

[19:00] » Thank you. Thank you, Roy. Okay. And then we have one hand raised from

[19:05] Elizabeth Oul.

[19:10] » Go ahead, please. Hi, this is Elizabeth and John at uh 19

[19:16] Harbor and uh we live two doors down from Lauren who spoke uh a few speakers

[19:22] back and we're probably echoing most of what she said but um I think our house

[19:28] was hit the hardest in our neighborhood. We have tens of thousands of dollars

[19:35] worth of damage to our house and uh we just we really need the burm to be

[19:41] reinforced along this stretch of San Clemeni Creek. Uh it's it's affected so

[19:48] many homes along here. Uh and um we were just wondering if there's any chance

[19:55] it's three days later, but for the governor, Mr. Newsome uh to

[20:02] declare some kind of state of emergency after the fact to get some kind of uh

[20:08] help, financial help to uh deal >> FEMA or whatever to deal with

[20:15] » uh what we we're going through right now. It's uh it's um it's not a good new

[20:21] year so far for us. So uh that's all I wanted to say. Uh thank you and and I

[20:27] seed the rest of my time.

[20:32] Thank you. And then one more hand [clears throat] raised um from Peter

[20:38] Butt.

[20:42] Go ahead, Peter. Oh, he might have changed his mind and

[20:47] the hand went down. Oh, it's back up. Sorry,

[20:56] » Peter. Go ahead. Sorry, I'm here. Uh I live on Golden Heind Passage, uh

[21:03] part of the NRG with with Susie and I've heard a couple of mentions um about

[21:09] communication and and there's there's a lot of of um long-term planning, right,

[21:14] and and uh discussions that have obviously taken place over the years and

[21:18] and and for the foreseeable uh future as to what solves are. But from a from a a

[21:24] shorter term communication standpoint, um I I don't feel and and maybe it was a

[21:29] miss on my part. I'm a little bit of a weather nerd. I tend to to look at

[21:32] websites, but I don't feel that the advanced warning and notification was as

[21:39] solid as it could have been. Whether that's Alert Marin or or Nixie or, you

[21:44] know, from the town itself, but something that seems to be an easier

[21:48] fix. Um, you know, at some point you can only fight the water so much, but at

[21:52] least getting people prepared as best they can to be as as as have as many

[21:58] sandbags as they can and and whatnot. Uh, I felt like I was a little caught

[22:03] off guard and again, maybe that was just me, but thank you.

[22:10] » Thank you. No other hands raised from attendees um

[22:15] online and the comments that we received via email were added to the website and

[22:20] are available for the public to view. Um and no additional emailed public comment

[22:24] has been received. >> All right.

[22:27] Thank you. Um thank you to everyone who Oh, wait. We have another person in the

[22:32] house. Please step forward.

[22:39] » Good evening. U Thank you. I just I'm Lucinda Smith and I would like to make a

[22:44] request. Um I love the fact that we have the board over there, but when we're

[22:50] having detailed information showing on it, it's sometimes difficult to see it.

[22:55] And I was wondering, I know you have to have it for the the uh council, but I

[22:59] was wondering if we could have another one that would be behind the mayor,

[23:04] which would be more visible for all of the audience to see. just I know it's an

[23:09] expense but a consideration. Thank you. >> Thank you. And is there anyone else?

[23:19] » All right then. So, >> yeah.

[23:28] Yeah. And and thank you, Mayor Thomas. One

[23:33] piece of clarification. We do have an item a special meeting item on after the

[23:37] regular agenda which is the proclamation of a local emergency. So this is I

[23:42] appreciate everyone speaking now. I'd like to first off just um really thank

[23:48] everybody for providing coming here tonight if you if you did or speaking

[23:53] online. I think we are still in a lot of ways um just coming off. I think today

[23:59] is the first day we had some drying out. We had flooding even as late as

[24:03] yesterday um with road closures and um and I know

[24:08] other structures and garages closed um flooded as well. But I I think it's

[24:14] really important for us to hear uh from our community uh what happened. Um we

[24:20] aren't in all places at all times. So, I think knowing what the damage was, uh,

[24:26] and really I'm I my heart goes out to those that were really severely flooded.

[24:30] That's the first I'm hearing that actually some homes themselves were were

[24:34] flooded and I was actually at um Lauren's house, I guess, before it got

[24:39] really bad on uh Saturday. So, uh, but thank you for coming here. Um, and I

[24:45] also understand council member Cassiso is over at that same area of Harbor on

[24:50] the other side of 21. And so it's it's just really important for us to hear the

[24:54] concerns um about what what went wrong. You know, what I appreciate some of the

[25:00] comments about seeing staff out there and what we did okay and did right. I

[25:05] mean, there's always room for for being better as staff, being better prepared.

[25:10] Um uh and so I think hearing from all of you is really most important for this

[25:16] evening. I know we'll have um opportunity in the near future to

[25:20] discuss sort of more of the narrative of how we responded and how we intend to do

[25:27] better going forward. Um, I will like I I also wanted to use some of this time

[25:33] just to alert inform the council of um

[25:38] some of our current thoughts and some of the things that we observed

[25:44] um and uh talk about perhaps uh following up at the next meeting or

[25:50] certainly in the future. There were some suggestions for having separate

[25:53] meetings. We have a flood board as well that has regular public meetings on just

[25:58] these types of issues, but we will certainly be following up. And

[26:02] importantly, I think one thing we certainly can do

[26:06] is um this was a this was an extreme event. Um this was uh I kept hearing the

[26:12] news calling it an epic flood, which is not I think that's only on the West

[26:16] Coast they're going to be using that word, but but it was an extreme title

[26:20] event. Um I think there were uh many of us not just CO Madera, Larksburg, up and

[26:28] down Marin in the county. I think it's fair to say a certain degree caught off

[26:32] guard by the extreme. We we knew the king tides were coming. We've had king

[26:37] tides tides before, but that additional confluence of wind and the storm surge

[26:43] and the rain as well. Um I don't we've we were at record levels if not record

[26:49] levels we were like this far below record record levels from a actual title

[26:53] event and so um it was uh something that we were not expecting when uh until

[27:01] Friday and then certainly once Friday came around and we got the understanding

[27:05] that it was going to be about a foot and a half above expected tide um we started

[27:10] preparing in and uh more significantly Um, so,

[27:17] uh, this event did expose our vulnerabilities that we've been

[27:22] talking about for a long time in terms of title flooding.

[27:27] Uh, we haven't seen this, as I said, it was a record event in decades. Um, this

[27:32] wasn't just an event that affected private property. We had major regional

[27:36] highway infrastructure impacted uh, on Saturday. I'm looking over at Chief

[27:42] Martin. I know his his team and and CMFA was out there on the highway carrying

[27:48] people out out of the water and and uh towing cars and really supporting and

[27:53] making sure that critical infrastructure could could be safe to pass as much as

[27:58] possible. Um we had low-lying commercial areas that

[28:03] were severely affected. Um, I did reach out to some of the property owners, the

[28:08] the family who owns Big Five and and SF Fitness. I think their their take is it

[28:14] was they did a pretty good job mitigating. It was it was uh um

[28:20] certainly they were significantly impacted but not to the extent that I

[28:26] think it looked like from some of the images and we you know I reached out to

[28:30] say we're there to support you and what can we do and I would say that to

[28:34] everybody here as well like the needs what you know what are the things that

[28:38] the town can do this is the time that it would be helpful to hear that we did

[28:42] hear from some that the that um the a debris box would be helpful. And so

[28:50] we've got one out there with the help of MVRS early today out at Cove Parking

[28:56] Lot. Um but if there's another location uh in Marina Village, let us know. We we

[29:02] there are actually better locations to to um place those perhaps at the end of

[29:08] of uh Harbor Drive, street end, one of the street ends. We're happy to do that

[29:12] and get get right on that. Um uh but we also had town facilities

[29:18] damaged. Our corporation yard um I I should say flooded for the last 4 days

[29:24] and is out of commission. Um our interim public works director Chris Goods here.

[29:30] Um that power is out there right now. Um so we it was pretty extensive damage. We

[29:37] haven't seen that at the courtyard for many many decades as well. Um, and we're

[29:43] we're figuring out how to actually so while our maintenance team was out there

[29:47] actually trying to do all the good work of uh keeping our pump stations running

[29:51] and delivering sand uh their own they flooding as well at at um the

[29:56] corporation yard. And so we'll we'll be talking about that. We're currently

[29:59] doing an initial damage assessment and estimate for the town. Um and we'll be

[30:06] working on that with respect to mostly our corporation yard and some pump

[30:10] facilities as well. Um, and so I do want to just comment and thank our the team

[30:17] that was out there during the weekend, uh, starting, you know, really New

[30:21] Year's Day, uh, through, uh, yesterday. Um, our public works team,

[30:29] in particular, interim director Chris Good. Um, I also really want to

[30:32] highlight Superintendent Wes Sitler's work. He was non-stop for days. um our

[30:39] entire maintenance team uh Nick Udeni, Neil, Lucas, uh other Nick and uh also

[30:46] just mention our support that we had as we always do from Flores as well. They

[30:51] were out there in force as well and so that was really important to have those

[30:54] extra hands. um you know they our infrastructure held

[30:59] up relatively I I think it's fair to say well um given the circumstances um you

[31:06] know our staff they're monitoring and keeping all our pump stations

[31:10] uh working I think it can't be understated the importance um not only

[31:17] the extreme on Saturday but this has been four days our infrastructure has

[31:20] been dealing with these floods so it's not just a one-day event of an record

[31:24] tide it's the length I think of the high tides which we haven't seen before as

[31:29] well. And so that infrastructure, all the pumps working constantly over that

[31:33] period of time really tested them and they held up well. We had one pump uh I

[31:39] think one pump station over at Black Kettle Lagoon um burn out and so that's

[31:44] in that's actually out right now and we're um trying to seek uh repair and

[31:51] potentially replacement for that. Um, our public works staff also assisted

[31:56] assisted CMPA with road closures um throughout town. I

[32:02] want to thank CMPA for being out there. Um, [snorts]

[32:05] uh, we had brought in some overtime um, some additional officers to support that

[32:10] effort. Again, not only most of their focus was along the major um, exits and

[32:16] entrances to Highway 101. Um and public works also uh as much as

[32:23] we could procure and deliver additional um sand to uh the stations as well as as

[32:31] out there. And I understand certainly there's probably some lessons there

[32:35] learned as well. But according to West, we had about 30 to 35 tons of sand. Uh

[32:41] well over,200 sandbags were deployed to the sandbag stations throughout town.

[32:47] Um what we um uh I'll just quickly report that with

[32:56] the corporation yard um we currently where we have um as you know we we have

[33:02] some hazardous materials there. We do have to do some cleanup with Serpro and

[33:06] some professionals. will be hiring some professionals to uh assess the damage

[33:12] and it could be several weeks that um that facility can't be used at this

[33:17] time. So, I just giving the council a heads up on that and we'll be trying to

[33:22] make some temporary arrangements for our staff in the meantime in terms of use

[33:25] the use of that facility. Um,

[33:31] you know, I I think uh again just want to

[33:36] focus on um taking in information at this point. And so uh if there is

[33:42] additional information that the community wants to uh share with us, we

[33:48] have set up a an email address. Um we're going to tempor we're going to use for

[33:53] now public comment at uh court ofa.gov uh for um reporting concerns. It's the

[34:02] public there's many eyes looking at that public comment email. So I think it's a

[34:05] good a good way to make sure that we're receiving any uh concerns from our

[34:11] community or needs that are um raised over the next few days. Um, and as well

[34:18] we've talked about getting a form out there just to get a better handle on the

[34:23] damage that's occurred at various different locations. Um, we have a bunch

[34:28] of uh images and photographs. That's also useful as we continue our

[34:34] discussions about how to better protect uh the community out there uh on the

[34:38] east side, but also other areas of town. Um and so this is a process of where we

[34:44] actually um are going to hopefully better understand the weak points in our

[34:51] flood protection and address those um as quickly as possible. I know we have a a

[34:56] good uh opportunity with our strategic planning session with the council coming

[35:00] up to talk about that and I assume we will do so. Um and this will be uh one

[35:05] of the most important topics to discuss that. Um

[35:10] with that I think I can unless the council has questions for me um I can

[35:16] stop my report at this time. Um, you know, I I do think at the end of the

[35:22] day, we have to look at this as an opportunity to raise awareness

[35:28] um and urgency as well, not only with our community, but our regional partners

[35:34] and find longer term solutions to uh this recurring issue. Um hopefully not

[35:40] as extreme as we've seen, but we know it it will recur. So, thanks.

[35:46] Thank you very much. Um, council, do you have any questions?

[35:51] » I have one. Ready? >> I'm going to put you on the spot, Adam.

[35:55] » I think I've raised this before. Am I allowed to ask a question?

[36:00] It turns it into an agenda item. We can wait till the the next meeting then.

[36:04] I'll bring it up then. >> Okay. Thank you.

[36:06] » Okay. Great. Then we will move on to an interview for a applicant to the

[36:15] commission on aging and that

[36:21] applicant is an Sparkman. Hello,

[36:27] welcome. Good evening, mayor,

[36:31] uh, vice mayor, and council members, and thank you for the opportunity to apply

[36:37] for this, uh, role and for speaking tonight. Thank you very much.

[36:42] » Okay. Well, we will give you one minute for an opening statement if you'd like

[36:47] and then you'll have four questions that I believe have been provided to you

[36:52] ahead of time and um you'll have two minutes to answer those and then each of

[36:59] those and then um a closing statement if you prefer. All right. So um you may

[37:07] share a little bit about yourself please. Thank you.

[37:10] We have lived here in Cto Madera for 35 years and it's been a great great

[37:15] experience. We live on the east side. We're the hill dwellers on the hill

[37:20] dweller side and our kids went to school here um actually through the Reed system

[37:26] but then to Redwood High and a lot of their friends over here on the west

[37:29] side. So, it's um been a a good journey and I'm very proud of the town and I

[37:36] wanted to talk about um age related issues and I want to congratulate Corda

[37:42] Madera for being an age friendly town and um we have discussed that fact and

[37:50] I'm going to stop my opening right now. Okay, I'm going to move in to the

[37:55] questions but before I do that, can I say one more thing please?

[37:59] » Yes. I'm a I have an interest in this because I'm a nurse attorney and I did

[38:03] healthcare law so it's really near and dear to me. Um so that's my opening

[38:08] statement. >> Wonderful. So the first question is what

[38:13] well it almost answers that but you can reiterate if you want to add anything.

[38:17] What motivated you to apply for the commission on aging and what do you hope

[38:21] to accomplish with your participation? >> Thank you. Yes, I did allude to that a

[38:27] bit, but actually some more distinct events took place in the last 10 years.

[38:33] Um, a family member has um aged older than me and requires a lot of of help

[38:40] and a lot of hospitalizations, all of that. And I'm sure you and your

[38:45] families have been through it. So, it's a lived experience, but also um we've

[38:50] discussed this. I'm um on the dis the Marin Healthcare District and this is

[38:54] one of our subjects because aging adults, you know, have um

[39:00] [sighs and gasps] food, housing insecurity, everything.

[39:04] You know, they really do face a lot of issues here in Marin and they're

[39:08] growing. So, that's what spurred my interest. But in particular, and I don't

[39:14] know if you're aware of the civil grand jury issued a report in 2022 to 2023

[39:20] on the silver tsunami in Marin, and I've been kind of following that. So that's

[39:26] that's what motivated me as well. >> Um, what do you see as the most pressing

[39:34] issues facing older adults and family caregivers in Marin today? There's two

[39:40] kind of parallel um threads. One thread is in the medical arena. You know, it's

[39:47] very hard to get PCPs through primary care doctors. I was speaking with a

[39:52] woman at a at a Marin Villages event recently and it took her one year to get

[39:57] a PCP. So, that's an issue. It's also an issue with a hospitalization.

[40:03] Oftentimes, not having family members at advocates, things of that nature. and

[40:08] then post hospitalization going to post-accute care is very challenging.

[40:12] Those are hard transitions for the family. They really are. So those are um

[40:18] pressing issues on the medical side, but there's also issues on the home side

[40:23] with your caregiver, your activities of daily living. It's very challenging. You

[40:29] can be very isolated. You have IT challenges, home repairs, and you want

[40:34] to stay in place rather than go to a facility. So, it's kind of a mixture of

[40:38] both of those threads. Those are the issues.

[40:43] Um, how do you see the role of commission in promoting dignity,

[40:47] independence, and quality of life for older adults and caregivers in Marin

[40:52] County? Um, in terms of the commission, I see

[40:56] them as kind of a as a hub, a central hub, and then you

[41:02] have spokes going out with the towns and the agencies and some of the um like the

[41:09] hospitals and other healthcare entities. So, I see the commission as the hub in

[41:14] in coordinating and um in in addressing all of these challenging issues. That's

[41:20] how I see the commission. Wonderful. That's really good answer.

[41:26] Um, and then how would you encourage broader community input and engagement

[41:31] in the commission's work? I would say uh

[41:37] the commission and or towns actually also need to promote their good work

[41:42] like uh the commission can share best practices like with court of Madera

[41:47] we're age friendly. I don't know of the other towns if they are things of that

[41:52] nature. Sharing also um challenges how you overcome those um resources.

[41:59] So that's what I see as kind of a one of the solutions.

[42:03] » Yes. >> Thank you.

[42:08] » And um if you would like to give a one minute closing statement, you may do so

[42:12] now. >> You could have a little water.

[42:15] » Absolutely. I had an In-N-Out Burger and they're too soft. [laughter]

[42:19] I know they make you thirsty. Water in there. Okay.

[42:36] In closing, I I want to see this as an opportunity

[42:40] to um kind of promote our town and our our best work and also our elders. When

[42:46] we moved in, we had neighbors and the women in our neighborhood bought the

[42:52] development on Ring Mountain. And I don't think people know about that. And

[42:56] do you know how much we use Ring Mountain and how important that is to

[43:00] our health and not only medical but mental and that's the other thing in

[43:05] closing the mental health is just so ignored and we really need to address

[43:09] that. So thank you all for your consideration. We really appreciate it.

[43:14] Thank you very much. [laughter]

[43:18] All right then. Um, would anyone like to make a motion or uh

[43:26] make a comment? I will move that we have an Sparkman serve the remainder of the

[43:33] 2026 term on the age council. And um I would like to say that I'm so excited

[43:40] for you to step up because I know that once we get our intergenerational center

[43:46] going, you will be one of the smiling faces that I see there. It's a great

[43:50] place to lobby people to get involved and and do things. I think it will be.

[43:55] » We'll second the motion. >> All right. Please take a vote. And just

[44:00] for the record, we didn't receive public comment on that item. Um and no hands

[44:05] raised. No hands from um Zoom attendees are raised at this time either. Um so we

[44:13] have a motion and a second. And I will call the vote. Council member Andrews,

[44:19] » yes. >> Council member Beckman,

[44:21] » absolutely. >> Council member Ravasio,

[44:24] » wholeheartedly. >> Vice Mayor Cassissa,

[44:27] » yes. >> Mayor Thomas,

[44:28] » enthusiastically. >> Thank you. The motion carries.

[44:31] » Thank you, Ann. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Look forward to it.

[44:42] » Thank you. >> Yes.

[44:54] We move on to the consent calendar. The purpose of the consent calendar is to

[44:59] group items together for which uh which are routine or have been discussed

[45:04] previously and do not require further discussion. They will be approved in a

[45:09] single motion. Any member of the public may comment on the consent calendar.

[45:14] Town council, town staff, or the public may request removal of an item from the

[45:20] consent calendar. Um, do we have any public comment on the consent calendar?

[45:29] Okay. Uh, anyone on the council wish to, uh, remove an item or discuss an item on

[45:37] the consent calendar? All right. Then, may I have a motion to

[45:41] approve? >> I'll make the motion to move the consent

[45:44] calendar. >> Second.

[45:47] » Council member Andrews. >> Yes.

[45:49] » Council member Beckman. >> Yes. Council member Ovasio,

[45:52] » yes. >> Vice Mayor Thomas, Vice Mayor Casissa,

[45:56] sorry. >> Mayor Thomas,

[45:58] » yes. >> Thank you. The motion carries.

[46:00] » Thank you. Uh next we have um a public hearing, the first reading and possible

[46:08] introduction of an ordinance related to the subdivision and development of

[46:12] qualified Senate Bill SB9 projects and amending portions of title

[46:19] 17 subdivisions, title 18 zoning and title 22 objective design and

[46:24] development standards of the Cord Madiraa municipal code. And I believe

[46:30] that uh principal planner Martha Batitalia has the report for us.

[46:36] » Yes. Good evening, honorable mayor and members of the council. This evening,

[46:41] you'll be holding a public hearing and considering amendments to the town's

[46:45] existing SP9 regulations. A planning staff proposes amendments to

[46:50] the existing regulations to ensure compliance with Senate Bill 450. Uh the

[46:56] draft ordinance also includes several minor clerical and clarifying amendments

[47:00] that have been identified by staff. Uh the draft ordinance is included as

[47:04] attachment one uh to the packet and the proposed changes to the ordinance are

[47:09] shown in strikethrough for text proposed to be deleted and underlined for new

[47:13] text.

[47:17] Uh the first portion of the presentation includes some background information on

[47:21] state laws. Uh, Senate Bill 9, also known as the

[47:25] California Home Act, was signed by Governor Nuome in September 2021 and

[47:31] became effective on January 1st, 2022. The bill allows homeowners within single

[47:37] family zoning districts to build up to two housing units on their existing

[47:42] parcel or to legally split their single family parcel into two separate parcels

[47:47] and develop each with two units.

[47:52] Next slide. U most single family residential

[47:56] properties in the state were affected by SB9.

[48:00] This legislation applies to all single family residential zone properties

[48:04] within an urbanized area with some limited exceptions which includes such

[48:10] things as if the parcel is located in a historic district. The map on the slide

[48:15] shows the zoning districts in Cord Madera and SP9 applies to all parcels

[48:21] that that are zoned R1 which is the beige color and it's the most common of

[48:26] the residentially zoned parcels in in town. Also applies to R1A shown in

[48:31] yellow to R1B shown in lime and to R1C shown in green. Next slide.

[48:39] Uh there are two different scenarios uh for development under SB9. Uh the first

[48:44] is additional development when the lot is not being subdivided.

[48:49] Um on a vacant lot, two new SP9 units can be built and the minimum size per

[48:55] state law is 800 square ft for each unit. SP9 allows for an additional unit

[49:01] on a property that is developed with an existing uh residence. And this type of

[49:06] scenario is not very common in court of Madera. In instances when a property

[49:11] owner is not subdividing their property, it's more common for an owner to add an

[49:16] additional unit using ADU state law. Um SP9 also allows for property to be

[49:25] subdivided into two approximately equalsiz parcels. Uh following the

[49:30] subdivision, each parcel but must be a minimum of 1,200 square ft and

[49:35] homeowners can build uh two homes on each of the lots for a total of four

[49:41] units.

[49:44] Next slide. Uh Senate Bill 450 uh was signed by Governor Nuome in September

[49:50] 2024 and it became effective on January 1st, 2025.

[49:55] Uh this bill amends SB9 in several ways. U most notably uh the bill prohibits

[50:02] local agencies from imposing objective zoning subdivision or design standards

[50:07] that are not applied uniformly to the underlying zoning district. A

[50:12] development standards that are applied to SP9 projects can be more permissive

[50:16] than the standards applied um to the underlying zoning district, but they

[50:20] cannot be more restrictive. and staff is proposing several um amendments to the

[50:26] existing SP9 regulations to comply with this bill.

[50:31] Slide. Uh the next section includes some

[50:34] background information on prior ordinances adopted by the town and also

[50:38] on applications that have been received. uh given the limited time between when

[50:45] SB9 um was signed in January in September 2021 and when it became

[50:51] effective on January 1st, the town council adopted an urgency ordinance in

[50:56] January 2022 to regulate projects submitted pursuant to SB9.

[51:02] The urgency ordinance adopted by the town council established a ministerial

[51:07] review process for projects submitted under SP9 and it also included objective

[51:12] standards. Uh subsequently on December 6, 2022, the town council adopted an

[51:19] ordinance uh which became effective on January 5th, 2023 which established the

[51:24] permanent regulations for SB9 units and for lot splits.

[51:31] Next slide. Uh, the permanent SP9 ordinance included amendments to title

[51:37] 17 subdivisions, title 18 zoning, and title 22 objective design and

[51:42] development standards. The ministerial review process that was included in the

[51:47] permanent ordinance was the same as what was established in the urgency

[51:52] ordinance. The permanent ordinance included a new chapter, chapter 1831A,

[51:58] which established the review process and also included the development standards

[52:02] for both two-unit developments and urban lots split applications.

[52:08] And most of the objective standards that were in the urgency ordinance were

[52:11] carried forward into the permanent ordinance. And staff believes that most

[52:16] of the existing objective standards can continue to be applied to eligible

[52:20] projects.

[52:26] Uh, since SP9 became effective on January 1st, 2022, the planning division

[52:32] has received 11 SP9 lots split applications as shown on this table. And

[52:38] this table was also in the staff report as well. Consistent with state law, the

[52:43] applications have been reviewed ministerally for compliance with

[52:46] development standards in both the urgency and permanent ordinance. Eight

[52:51] of these maps have been recorded and the application at 489 Monaceto was

[52:57] withdrawn because the property owner was unable to meet the fire hydrant

[53:01] standard. Uh to date, the town has not approved any SP9 units. Uh the property

[53:07] owners of 208 Chapman Drive submitted a design review application for an

[53:12] approximate 1,800 square foot residence on the new lot created through the SBI

[53:17] lotslit. And this uh design review was approved by the planning commission and

[53:22] it's currently under construction. Next slide.

[53:27] This map shows the location of the urban lots applications that have been

[53:31] submitted in CTO Madera. Uh most of the applications are in the hillside

[53:36] neighborhoods and this map is included as attachment three to

[53:43] uh the town council also previously adopted an ordinance in December 2021

[53:48] which established objective standards for qualifying multifamily projects in

[53:53] Porta Madera and this also included SB9 developments and these objective

[53:59] standards are applied uh to projects when dis typical discret ary processes

[54:04] are not uh are not used. The objective design and development standards also

[54:09] referred to as odds toolkit is codified in title 22 of the municipal code. The

[54:16] odds toolkit includes a zone the T3 edge neighborhood zone which applies to SP9

[54:23] projects that are proposed on in single family districts.

[54:27] The permanent SP9 ordinance adopted by the town council in 2022 included some

[54:32] changes to the T3 edge zone to better align those development standards with

[54:37] the R1 zoning district standards. Planning staff is proposing uh some

[54:42] additional changes at this time uh to comply with SB450 and changes are

[54:48] proposed to the height standard to the E parapit and also to the side setback

[54:53] standard. Those two are highlighted in yellow on this table slide.

[55:02] The town's existing SP9 ordinance includes different size and height

[55:07] requirements per unit which is based on the setbacks of the unit.

[55:12] These next few slides also include additional information on allowable size

[55:16] and heights and also on the existing fire access and suppression standards.

[55:23] The urgency ordinance adopted by the town council in January 2022 included a

[55:28] maximum unit size of 1,000 square feet. The permanent ordinance adopted by the

[55:33] council in December 2022 included a two-tiered approach to size which which

[55:39] limited the unit size to 800 square ft if the unit was reducing side and rear

[55:44] setbacks which is allowed under state law. and a unit could be up to 1,200

[55:50] square feet if the proposed unit met the setbacks of the T3 edge zone which again

[55:55] are similar to the R1 zoning district. Staff felt that the proposed increase in

[56:01] size could function as an incentive to comply with the setbacks of the T3 edge

[56:06] zone instead of units reducing setbacks to 4 feet as allowed by state law. And

[56:13] if a homeowner wanted to build a unit larger than 12,200 square feet, they

[56:16] could submit a design review application. And this is what the owners

[56:21] of 208 Chapman elected to do. And to preserve the town's existing 1,200

[56:27] square foot cap on SP9 units while complying with SB450,

[56:32] the design review chapter is also being amended to exempt uh new units that are

[56:37] 1,200 square ft or less from the discretionary design review process. And

[56:42] these units would be required to comply with uh the objective standards in

[56:47] chapter 18. Next slide.

[56:53] The existing T3 edge neighborhood zone currently allows a maximum height of 22

[56:58] feet to the highest eve parapit and a maximum height of 30 feet overall. Uh

[57:05] the height standard to the highest EVE parapit is inconsistent with SB450

[57:10] because the underlying residential zoning district uh permits a maximum

[57:14] height of 30 ft and it does not have a separate height requirement to the EVE

[57:19] parapit. So the draft ordinance uh removes this

[57:23] height requirement to the EVE parapit. The permanent ordinance adopted in

[57:28] December 2022 included two different height standards for SP9 projects. The

[57:34] allowable height is the same as the height established in the T3 edge

[57:38] neighborhood zone if the project meets the setbacks of the T3 zone which again

[57:43] mirror the R1 development standards. In cases where units were located were

[57:50] reducing setbacks. The maximum height was 16 ft and that height could be

[57:55] increased to 20 feet if the structure is in the flood plane and is being raised

[57:59] to comply with FEMA and Madera Municipal Code. And the next few slides include

[58:04] examples um of the allowable heights. So in the first example,

[58:10] uh this project meets the setback of the T3 edge neighborhood zone as being

[58:15] amended to comply with SB450. So the setbacks are 20 ft for the front,

[58:21] 6 feet for the side, and 25 ft for the rear. In this case, the maximum height

[58:26] is 30 ft and the maximum unit size is 1,200 square ft. And the draft ordinance

[58:33] is removing the height to the eve and parapit and also modifying the side

[58:38] setback from 10 feet to six feet. And these changes are being made to comply

[58:42] with SB 450. Uh this next example uh the unit is

[58:49] reducing uh the setbacks to 4 feet as allowed by state law. So the setbacks

[58:55] are 20 ft for the front and then four feet for the side and rear. In this

[59:00] case, the maximum unit size is 800 square feet and the maximum height is 16

[59:05] feet. In this example, uh the parcel is not located within a flood flood plane.

[59:13] Uh this third example assumes that the property is in the flood plane. And in

[59:18] this case, the height of the structure can be raised an additional four feet.

[59:22] So for each foot the structure is raised to comply with FEMA regulations, the

[59:27] height can increase by a foot. So the maximum height is 20 feet, which allows

[59:33] for a 4ft array. Um, in addition, the side and rear setbacks are increased by

[59:40] one foot for each additional foot of height. So instead of a 4ft side and

[59:44] rear setback, the setbacks are 8 feet. and the maximum size of the unit is 800.

[59:54] Uh the adopted ordinance also included several objective standards related to

[59:59] fire access which are shown on this slide. Planning staff discussed these

[1:00:04] existing standards with the central marin fire department fire chief Ruben

[1:00:08] Martin and Chief Martin confirmed that all of these standards apply to new

[1:00:13] homes in the WOOI. Um so as such um no changes are proposed to these existing

[1:00:18] standards. Next slide.

[1:00:22] The adopted permanent ordinance also included several fire suppression

[1:00:26] standards which are shown on this slide. And one of the existing fire suppression

[1:00:31] standards um requires that when the unit is located 5 ft uh to a a fence that the

[1:00:37] fence material needs to be a non-combustible material. This standard

[1:00:41] is not required for other residences and so it's proposed to be removed um from

[1:00:48] the ordinance to comply with SB4.

[1:00:54] The draft ordinance also includes some additional amendments to title 17 and

[1:00:58] also to title 18 as well. The ordinance revises the time that a final parcel map

[1:01:05] um can be obtained once a tenative map is approved from one year to two years

[1:01:10] and this change is being made to ensure consistency with the subdivision map

[1:01:14] act. Additionally, revisions are proposed to section 1721040

[1:01:21] and these amendments bring the current code language into alignment with how a

[1:01:26] map is actually filed. This existing section is very outdated and it doesn't

[1:01:32] align with um how maps are actually filed.

[1:01:36] Uh the ordinance also includes a new section section 1824115

[1:01:42] and this section adds relevant housing crisis act provisions into the zoning

[1:01:47] ordinance. Um among other things, the housing crisis act precludes the town

[1:01:52] from approving a project that would reduce the number of dwelling units on a

[1:01:56] property. And it also includes requirements for a developer to comply

[1:02:00] with replacement or relocation requirements of a protected unit that's

[1:02:05] demolished. And the ordinance includes uh defines what a protected unit is.

[1:02:14] The planning commission held the public hearing on December 9th to consider the

[1:02:18] proposed draft ordinance. Um, on December 9th, prior to the the hearing,

[1:02:23] staff provided the commission with a revised draft ordinance. The revision

[1:02:28] included the addition of two new definitions in sections 1831A30.

[1:02:34] These new definitions were for right-of-way and street and also

[1:02:39] included a a rec a modification to a a section to clarify that each resulting

[1:02:45] parcel must have access to provide access to or adjoin the public vehicular

[1:02:50] ride of way. Um staff believes these changes reflect the intent of the

[1:02:55] current language. The planning commission adopted a resolution

[1:02:59] recommending that the town council adopt the ordinance with several modifications

[1:03:04] which include revising the general plan consistency section to state that

[1:03:08] certain policies and programs related to slopes and environmental constraints

[1:03:13] cannot be applied to SB9 projects. correcting a government code citation

[1:03:18] and then revising a section to clarify the procedures apply to

[1:03:21] non-discretionary projects.

[1:03:26] Next slide. Uh so there are several options available to the council this

[1:03:29] evening. The council could consider introduction of the ordinance as

[1:03:33] presented or consider introduction of the ordinance with modifications or

[1:03:38] could direct staff to return with additional information and analysis and

[1:03:42] continue the discussion at a future. That concludes the staff presentation.

[1:03:46] I'm available for any questions. In addition, Chief Martin is here available

[1:03:51] to answer questions about fire access and also the assistant town attorney and

[1:03:56] Danforth is also participating remotely. >> Thank you very much.

[1:04:02] Um, do let's see do public comment. >> Okay. All right. Do I have questions

[1:04:09] from the council? >> Jim. Yes, [clears throat] I'm looking at

[1:04:15] the access and fire suppression standards.

[1:04:20] Uh it says

[1:04:24] of a proposed unit is located more than 150 ft from a frontage roadway. Could

[1:04:30] you define what frontage roadway means? So that would basically be your fire

[1:04:36] apparatus access roadways. So it's any roadway that has uh meets the current

[1:04:43] town accord standards and some of these that do not. So this basically every

[1:04:48] roadway that's here. So what we're saying is that it needs to have access

[1:04:52] to a public rideway or a public roadway. Okay.

[1:05:00] And then it says, "Uquire a minimum 20 foot wide driveway

[1:05:06] for any project in the wildland urban interface that includes a new driveway.

[1:05:14] If you're connected to a couple of thousand foot long

[1:05:20] private driveway that doesn't meet the 16 ft standard,

[1:05:26] would you just ignore that?" >> No. If uh that driveway sits solely on

[1:05:31] one parcel in one property, they would have to improve that entire driveway to

[1:05:37] 16 ft. >> Okay? And if it's a half a dozen or

[1:05:41] dozen parcels all connecting to a shared driveway,

[1:05:45] » and so what we can only do is um allow or require these improvements or roadway

[1:05:51] infrastructure improvements on the existing parcel that's actually creating

[1:05:56] a project. So, for example, I can't have one property owner fix the entire

[1:06:01] infrastructure for 12 parcels. Um, they can only improve a pond and widen a

[1:06:06] roadway that sits adjacent to their property. And you and you actually

[1:06:12] currently require them to do that. >> Yes, we do.

[1:06:14] » Okay. And

[1:06:18] if they're connecting to this private driveway, but they're also

[1:06:24] one of the big lot, you know, the big lot that's getting split

[1:06:27] » is on a main street. >> Would you require them to have a

[1:06:32] driveway to that main street? >> Um, if we anticipate requiring access to

[1:06:38] get to the property, then yes, we would require a driveway to be 16 ft in length

[1:06:42] for us to get to the residence. Yes. Okay.

[1:06:45] » Now, if the residence has say a short 25 ft driveway, which is typical for most U

[1:06:53] single family residences, and we have access from that frontage roadway, that

[1:06:57] won't we won't require the long access and turnarounds that fire departments

[1:07:02] need because we can access it from the existing roadway.

[1:07:05] » Okay. >> Thank you.

[1:07:12] » Uh, anyone else have questions? I I just had a couple.

[1:07:15] » Okay, good. >> Um, information overload, but I

[1:07:19] appreciate all the work. [laughter] It seems assuming the height

[1:07:22] requirements higher than what we the town had before. Is that correct? Or is

[1:07:27] that the way I'm reading it? >> Well, the the main change is uh we're

[1:07:31] removing the height standard to the EVE parapit because that standard doesn't

[1:07:37] apply to the under in the underlying zoning district. So that's being

[1:07:40] modified so that if a if if a if a unit complies with the setbacks then it can

[1:07:45] be up to 30 feet and there's no longer a 22 foot height standard. Um and then the

[1:07:51] the height of the structure is either 16 if they're reducing setbacks then the

[1:07:55] max height is 16 ft up to 20t if it's in a flood plane and that is similar to how

[1:08:00] we treat allowable height of ADUs as well if they're reducing setbacks.

[1:08:04] » Okay. And all these changes are pretty much ma mandated by state law. Correct.

[1:08:08] Correct. >> Okay. And then just one quick question

[1:08:11] for you, Ruben. On one of these properties, um, it notes that a property

[1:08:15] owner was unable to comply with the fire hydrant requirement. Can you just

[1:08:19] background what that was? >> Yes.

[1:08:22] » Um, thank you, uh, Council Member Casa. Yes. So, our uh objective standard for

[1:08:27] our fire hydrant requirements is there needs to be a hydrant with the ability

[1:08:32] to supply 1,000 gallons a minute um within 350 ft of wherever that

[1:08:37] resident's driveway or access point is going to be. So, if you for example can

[1:08:43] think of I'm going to walk out my front door, go to the roadway, whether I go

[1:08:47] left or right, do I have a hydrant within 350 ft? Um the property in

[1:08:52] question unfortunately there was no water man that it sat through the middle

[1:08:57] of the roadway all the way up quarter Avenue. So it would have been too cost

[1:09:02] prohibitive for the property owner when you split it to put in I think it was

[1:09:07] 1500 ft of linear pipe. Um so it would have been a multi-million dollar

[1:09:11] project. >> Okay.

[1:09:12] » Just to split it. >> Okay. Thanks.

[1:09:16] » Uh any questions? Thank you Martha. Um just a question

[1:09:23] about 209 itself. So I don't know if you know all the details of that law but I

[1:09:28] understand there are requirements regarding ownership and occupancy of

[1:09:33] these projects of these properties that are involved. Is that true? And do you

[1:09:37] know what those requirements are? So SP9 has a requirement that the applicant uh

[1:09:44] needs to intend to live in one of the units for three years once the the map

[1:09:49] is approved. So there's an affidavit requirement uh that an applicant submits

[1:09:54] um stating the intent to reside in one of the units. So, not that they've lived

[1:09:59] in it prior or they live in it currently, just that they plan to live

[1:10:02] in it after it's built or >> Yeah, it's they need to intend to reside

[1:10:07] in one of the units for 3 years after the map is approved.

[1:10:12] » Okay. Thank you.

[1:10:19] » Uh now we'd like to open it up to uh public um comment. Uh is there anyone in

[1:10:26] the room who would like to um step to the microphone and

[1:10:33] yes we have one. Thank you.

[1:10:43] » Hi Karen Grant again. Mine is the property at 1161 Meadow Suite Meadow

[1:10:48] Crest which I subdivided under SB9. I I first want to clarify. I

[1:10:56] feel like after attending the planning commission meeting on this, you're

[1:11:01] debating all this, but it's my understanding that you've been out of

[1:11:05] compliance with SB450 for a year now. So, you kind of have to adopt the

[1:11:12] changes to comply with California law. Anyway, um it took me three and a half

[1:11:19] years. I feel the town was an obstacle to doing it, which wasn't the intent or

[1:11:25] the spirit of SB9. It cost me $50,000. Um, the way the town deals with outside

[1:11:34] consultant, they have just one that kept reviewing my plans. The public works

[1:11:40] pays whatever bills come in. They don't question them. There's no transparency.

[1:11:44] I could not see their hours. They kept making revisions and I'm like, "Why

[1:11:49] didn't you make this the first revision or the second? Why are you bringing it

[1:11:53] up now? Nothing's changed." Um, I got a bad attitude from the town that I was

[1:11:59] questioning, you know, if they were patting my bill

[1:12:03] or not, whether this outside company. So, I think it could have been

[1:12:07] streamlined. The town could have been more helpful. It could have been less

[1:12:11] money. We intended to um age in place, which Cordon Madera says it's in favor

[1:12:17] of. We were going to build two 1,200 foot homes, one for a daughter who's a

[1:12:24] single mom, uh and the other for my husband and I and rent out or sell the

[1:12:29] big house. But since it took us three and a half years and was such a mess to

[1:12:35] deal with the town, we just have an accepted offer. a young couple will come

[1:12:40] in and build a $5 million mansion, which, you know, it it doesn't meet the

[1:12:46] housing needs of California. It wasn't what the intent, it wasn't what we had

[1:12:50] planned. Um, so very disillusioned of how this was handled.

[1:12:56] And I just hope the town, if you really like, we need infill. We need more small

[1:13:02] homes. We need um people are going to age in place. they might want to do what

[1:13:07] we were planning, but it took us so long and was such a mess, we just didn't even

[1:13:12] want to touch it. So, I just want to say that first of all, you got to come in

[1:13:18] compliance with the law. 450, I think, was put in place because SB9 wasn't

[1:13:23] towns were finding ways to stall it or not comply or whatever. Um, there may be

[1:13:29] another Senate bill after this if things don't start moving in a more timely

[1:13:34] manner. And I don't know, that was just my case. I don't know what's happened

[1:13:41] with the rest of if everybody else's experience has been that, but thank you

[1:13:46] very much.

[1:13:51] » Thank you. Uh, do we have anyone else in the room who would like to speak on the

[1:13:55] matter? Yes.

[1:13:59] Albert D Lima with WA Associates and u my my question is to do with um buyer

[1:14:08] access roadways and Mr. Martin. Um, at the uh at the last uh planning uh

[1:14:16] meeting about this topic, um there we were told that um the fire

[1:14:24] access roadway doesn't necessarily have to be 20 ft

[1:14:29] wide per the um court of Madera Municipal Code. Um that's not um what

[1:14:37] I've been experiencing. um and dealing with um fire uh

[1:14:44] department and trying to see what's compliant and um I'd just like to get uh

[1:14:51] some clarity on, you know, if there's an existing frontage road, you're doing

[1:14:56] your lot split that's been a fire access road for the neighborhood for, you know,

[1:15:03] as long as the neighborhood has existed. Um, is that allowed to continue or or

[1:15:10] not? Because I get um one set of answers from planning and a different set of

[1:15:16] answers from fire and um we need to um unite the two.

[1:15:25] » Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to speak on this topic?

[1:15:30] Right.

[1:15:40] Thank you, Lucinda Smith. Again, thank you, council, for giving us the time to

[1:15:45] kind of express our concerns and questions. I do have some questions.

[1:15:50] Um with regard to the buyer impact fee, is it applicable just to the new uh

[1:15:58] applications or is it applicable to all residents courta? How will it be build?

[1:16:04] Is it build to the property owners or is it build to the um developer?

[1:16:10] Um I wanted to talk about the number of units that we have to provide housing

[1:16:15] for. 725 I believe is the number over the current um arena period or your

[1:16:24] current period. We're two years into that period and we've already approved

[1:16:29] or are about to approve 549 units which is over 50%. So I wonder

[1:16:37] what happens in a year or two when we have another one come through and then

[1:16:42] another one come through. How long will we let these go on so that our town

[1:16:48] doesn't get completely overbuilt? We don't have the infrastructure to support

[1:16:53] it. So, I'm concerned about that. Um, and I I wanted to

[1:16:59] um

[1:17:06] what's the basis for determining the fire impact fee and who it applies to? I

[1:17:11] think I kind of already covered that question, but I wanted to understand who

[1:17:17] pays for it and and how it's built out to

[1:17:23] u

[1:17:28] and and I guess that's about the ends of my questions, but thank you very much

[1:17:33] for your time. >> Thank you. Anyone else in the room? Uh

[1:17:39] any people online? >> We don't have any hands raised from our

[1:17:44] attendees online and we didn't receive email and public comment for this item.

[1:17:48] » Okay. Um would would you guys like to uh address

[1:17:53] any of those questions or >> Yes. Uh thank you, Madame Mayor and

[1:17:57] members of the council and u members of the audience. Uh Ruben Martin, your

[1:18:01] local fire chief here with Central Fire Authority. Um so yes so to clear up the

[1:18:06] confusion is uh the fire department requires a 20 foot wide fire apparatus

[1:18:11] access road to get to a property. Um I believe the um the question that the

[1:18:17] gentleman had of whether um an existing roadway which is 15 ft in width can

[1:18:24] still be sufficient enough to add three or four or five units on it. We felt

[1:18:30] under our review and our objective standards that this was the opportunity

[1:18:35] to improve the frontage of the roadway as we mentioned earlier

[1:18:40] taking it from 15 ft to 20 ft in order for the new residents of the new

[1:18:46] property owners have adequate access to their homes and so that way they can

[1:18:50] receive adequate emergency services. So for us it's a 20 foot wide fire

[1:18:54] apparatics access road to the properties that are being built.

[1:19:00] Um and then um when it comes to uh the fire impact fees, so Lucenda, the fire

[1:19:06] impact fees are designed um so the fire department um can maintain adequate

[1:19:13] level of service with our equipment and our facilities as the town continues to

[1:19:17] grow. Um the intent behind it is for all new development coming in is for them to

[1:19:23] pay the impact fee and whether it's the developer or if it's a single family

[1:19:28] residence whoever is designing that or in charge of the finances would be

[1:19:32] responsible for making those impact fees.

[1:19:40] And just another point of clarification, the number of units that uh Linda

[1:19:44] mentioned, 529. Um to date, there's been one multifamily

[1:19:49] project of 99 units that's been approved. There's another application

[1:19:53] that's currently under review, an assisted living facility with 150 units.

[1:19:58] And then we anticipate in next sometime hopefully this year, there'll be an

[1:20:02] application at the Macy's site which could be up to 300 units. But at this

[1:20:06] point, we have not seen an application for that site. So, we don't um we don't

[1:20:11] know for sure what that what that will look like. Um and then in regards to the

[1:20:16] the kind of processing of SP9 applications, um whenever there's new

[1:20:20] legislation, it oftent times takes a little while to get implementation off

[1:20:26] the ground. We continue to develop um materials. So since the Kurin's

[1:20:32] application, we now have additional information on what should be on maps

[1:20:36] and then FAQ information um as well. But we do use uh outside consultant to do

[1:20:42] the technical review of maps because we do not have a surveyor on staff. Um so

[1:20:47] that is why it can still be expensive to subdivide land in in California.

[1:20:56] » Thank you. So, I will bring it back to the council

[1:21:01] for any comments. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I thought we checked

[1:21:06] online. Did we check online already? Okay. All right.

[1:21:10] Okay. So, um we'll bring it back to the council for comments and possibly a

[1:21:16] motion.

[1:21:20] » I I would like to comment about what Martha just said. There was a lot of

[1:21:24] kickback on 209. There were people who said, "Are you kidding me? You're going

[1:21:28] to take a single family home and turn it into four units." So, there was some,

[1:21:34] you know, let's wait and make sure that the state is serious about this. So, I

[1:21:39] think you were just an early adopter and, you know, just like the first kid,

[1:21:44] you get you get the unproven parents, you know. So I think now, not that

[1:21:48] you're an unproven parent. I think that now that we realize that the state is

[1:21:53] really digging in on these things and we have to do them. We're doing them. It's

[1:21:58] not the end of the world. If you were starting right now, I think you would

[1:22:01] have a much better experience. And I do apologize for whatever contribution I

[1:22:06] made to saying what. So thank you. >> Anyone else,

[1:22:14] Jim? and and I'll move that

[1:22:18] » they uh >> excuse oh sorry

[1:22:21] » I really hope they're serious about enforcing the width of the roadways for

[1:22:26] uh these lot splits and uh roads connecting

[1:22:31] to the lot splits cuz in the past we've sort of uh

[1:22:38] gone with the minimum level of uh when there's push back we've sort of

[1:22:46] backed off and I think the town over the last 30 40 years uh where we ended up

[1:22:54] [clears throat] today was not well served by backing off at

[1:22:59] those times. So anyway, good. [clears throat]

[1:23:03] » Thank you. Uh so you need motions, right? So do we have a motion or do you

[1:23:11] want to Oh, sure. >> I just wanted to make one one quick

[1:23:13] comment. Um, you know, first of all, I I don't think there's too much to say here

[1:23:16] substantively. The law is the law and we will comply. Um, but I did want to just

[1:23:21] echo and and thank Pat for her sentiments. Um, you know, I think it

[1:23:25] it's really unfortunate when members of the public are trying to exercise their

[1:23:29] rights under the law and they find it difficult to do so. And I know that for

[1:23:32] example, when SP9 was passed, I believe I was mayor at the time and and you

[1:23:36] know, our town attorney was looking through this thing and said this is kind

[1:23:38] of halfbaked legislation. And I think, you know, we are the town, uh, you know,

[1:23:44] in my assessment as a government agency is pro housing and I'm really proud of

[1:23:48] that fact. Uh, but I think a lot of times we're working with very confusing

[1:23:52] or ambiguous state law and we're trying to sort of piece together, you know, the

[1:23:57] local version of these regulations as we believe we're required to do. And

[1:24:01] sometimes these things kind of evolve in real time as our understanding of what

[1:24:05] state law is changes, as the courts change their interpretation of what

[1:24:08] these state laws are. So, all of this is just to echo, you know, Pat's sentiment.

[1:24:12] I I I am sorry that that you had a a a dismaying experience um you know, trying

[1:24:18] to uh do your lot split, trying to trying to do your project. Um and I just

[1:24:22] I I hope you know that that that was not the intent of certainly the town or any

[1:24:26] of our staff members. Um but with that, I'm I'm happy to make uh a motion here

[1:24:30] to introduce the ordinance. >> Second.

[1:24:33] » And I'll second or Jim K. >> Council member Andrews.

[1:24:38] » Yes. Council member Beckman, >> yes.

[1:24:40] » Council member Roasio, >> yes.

[1:24:42] » Vice Mayor Casisa, >> yes.

[1:24:44] » Mayor Thomas, >> yes.

[1:24:45] » Thank you. The motion carries

[1:24:58] » microphone. >> Oh, sorry. Okay. Um, let's see.

[1:25:05] All right. So with that, we will go to council reports. So we're going to do

[1:25:09] them. Yeah, we'll do them now. We won't wait till the third meeting.

[1:25:14] All right. And so we will start with the town manager.

[1:25:22] » Um I I think I've exhausted my time with my report, which is entirely on the last

[1:25:29] several days of flooding that we've occurred. So I'll seed back to the

[1:25:32] council. >> All right. Great. So, uh, which, uh, uh,

[1:25:35] Jim, do you have a report for us? >> No.

[1:25:38] » Okay. Um, Eli, >> come back to me. I got to comb through

[1:25:43] my calendar. >> Got it. I know. I

[1:25:45] » I'm ready. I'm ready. >> Take it away. Just a couple things. Um,

[1:25:49] I met yesterday with the Marin Healthy Youth Partnership and they, uh, thanks

[1:25:55] to the kids are on a campaign to ban tobacco sales from Marin County. Ross

[1:26:01] and Tibberon have already done it, but they don't have any people selling

[1:26:06] tobacco, so it was rather easy for them. Um, but I'm hoping Cord Madera will take

[1:26:11] that on. And um,

[1:26:17] what was the other one? The other one was oh the MCCMC's

[1:26:24] legislative committee which is a subcommittee of the mayors of councils

[1:26:30] and and uh mayor and mayors in Marin County has been challenged regarding the

[1:26:36] Brown Act. So, um, we have always said that because MCCM isn't technically, um,

[1:26:46] I don't know all the details, but we're going to allow public in the meeting

[1:26:50] until we get a final ruling on whether the subcommittees also have to abide by

[1:26:55] the Brown Act or whether just the overarching committee does. And that's

[1:27:00] all. >> Thanks. Uh, just a couple things. Uh

[1:27:04] 12:18 I attended the um quartermad employee Christmas party. Always a fun

[1:27:10] time. And then yesterday I attended at Marine

[1:27:13] Transit Board meeting. Just a couple of things there. Um one thing um we've been

[1:27:17] working on project on East Francisco Boulevard for new maintenance facility.

[1:27:21] Uh we adopted the final initial study and uh mitigated um declaration

[1:27:26] yesterday. So basically this year we'll move into the design phase of that

[1:27:30] project and hopefully in 27 um that project will get off the ground. One

[1:27:35] other thing a couple other things on Marin Transit um we appointed Robert

[1:27:39] Betts as the new general manager for Marin Transit. Um Nancy Whan who was the

[1:27:45] general manager she was there for about 10 years. She actually retired. Um she

[1:27:49] is a Cordera resident. So, just a shout out to her because she did a great job

[1:27:52] with Marine Transit guiding Marine Transit through COVID um electron trying

[1:27:57] to gear up for electronic buses. So, she did a tremendous amount of work. Um it's

[1:28:02] a retirement welld deserved. And then we reordered yesterday also. So, I was

[1:28:06] appointed um vice president of the board and that's it. Thanks.

[1:28:11] » Yes, anticlimactic. I think I only had one thing actually and it was today. We

[1:28:15] had a central marine sanitation agency ad hoc committee meeting still trying to

[1:28:18] hammer out the details of that proposed uh deal with Sanfell Sanitary District

[1:28:24] but the the lawyers are on the case

[1:28:30] » since we were in the holidays I don't have too much I think the one one thing

[1:28:35] I did I think I won't mention but um I did um

[1:28:43] is that two days ago, I think it was, uh took a tour of the uh flood um areas,

[1:28:51] flooded areas here with our Congressman uh Jared Huffman and a number of people

[1:28:58] from um uh Marin uh emergency um uh what OEM and then also there was one thing I

[1:29:11] thought was interesting. There was also someone there from uh one of the weather

[1:29:14] services that had been uh doing some reporting for us and uh he explained

[1:29:20] that how they admitted that there were some things that they just couldn't

[1:29:28] foresee with this latest storm. And um they are working on their models with

[1:29:35] what they learned that they couldn't see before but could see after and they're

[1:29:42] trying to work on their forecasting models to give a little more better

[1:29:45] picture of what the strength of the tides and basically the confluence of

[1:29:51] conditions what they would create. So it was kind of a very very you know he was

[1:29:58] very humble and very clear that like yeah we we really feel that we could

[1:30:04] have given um that that there was it was bigger than they had thought it would be

[1:30:10] but because this particular confluence of of uh conditions uh was kind of

[1:30:16] something they hadn't seen before that it would all strike at once. So I

[1:30:20] thought that was that gives me hope. I think you know learning from these um

[1:30:26] occurrences it just makes us able to prepare better

[1:30:31] uh next time. So that was a very very interesting um uh uh meeting for us. So

[1:30:39] that's my biggest meeting. [laughter]

[1:30:45] So, uh, with that, we got the we are adjourned.

[1:30:52] No, >> we're not.

[1:30:54] » Oh, number nine. Oh, yeah. So, the um Oh, yeah. Well, I know we have that, but

[1:30:58] that's another meeting, right? So, what I was trying to what I was getting at

[1:31:02] though is that we got the reports done and the Oh, and the other the only other

[1:31:07] thing is um does anyone have anything to suggest for the upcoming

[1:31:13] um agenda for the January 20th meeting?

[1:31:19] » Can we make a a suggestion not necessarily for that meeting but for a

[1:31:23] soontobe future meeting? the issue of the ebikes. You know, we've been asked

[1:31:28] many, many times to take that on if we could get Chief Norton here from the

[1:31:32] police and maybe I mean, I know Eli has written to Lori Fugali asking her to get

[1:31:38] on these issues of the manufacturers who are producing illegal bikes and selling

[1:31:44] them to our parents. Is there is there anything we could do if we put it on the

[1:31:48] agenda, at least people can come and talk about it and hear what's going on?

[1:31:52] I think based on some of these comments we've had in the past several months, we

[1:31:58] I did arrange with CMPA that Lieutenant Duanius or one of the lieutenants would

[1:32:03] attend the next uh BPAC meeting and discuss it there. If the council wants

[1:32:08] to have that discussion instead at the council level, of course, that's your

[1:32:12] discretion, but I think that's an appropriate venue to have that

[1:32:16] discussion and really provide an update on their enforcement, which they've been

[1:32:19] doing. >> Okay. I know they just canled the BPAC

[1:32:21] meeting for next week though because public works is kind of busy. So I

[1:32:26] understand that. But an upcoming meeting, I guess that

[1:32:30] would work.

[1:32:34] » I support that, you know, but we need to um

[1:32:39] respond it with some kind of a decision.

[1:32:46] Um so so um do I uh adjourn this one or keep

[1:32:53] going and call the ones to order? Okay,

[1:33:01] we don't we do >> okay.

[1:33:06] » So what say you attorney

[1:33:13] » if Okay. Uh so this is specifically about the agenda of the next meeting.

[1:33:20] Okay.

[1:33:26] » And David Bell, uh flood control board. Uh I think with a lot of emotions and

[1:33:30] we're all limited to providing input and open comment. Uh I know the agenda was

[1:33:35] developed prior to the title uh wave. Um well the king tides. Please put on the

[1:33:42] agenda for the next meeting a discussion of the the flood events and a plan for

[1:33:49] the town to hold maybe more popup sessions, meet with the community, uh

[1:33:54] delve into what Miss Ba uh Miss Batty proposed, maybe meeting at the Cove

[1:34:00] School, put something on the future agenda to show the town is addressing

[1:34:04] the king tides and the flooding events.

[1:34:13] All right. Um, thank you. And I'm I'm sure we will need

[1:34:18] to, you know, we want to be well prepared.

[1:34:21] » I think that that was the intention. Yeah. I expect we can have some

[1:34:25] discussion on a more full discussion about some of our past

[1:34:30] work that we've done with respect to um addressing this issue and what we can do

[1:34:35] going forward. And so that sounds like a good opportunity to discuss further.

[1:34:40] » Right. Sounds good. Definitely. So we with that we will adjourn this meeting

[1:34:47] and then we have another meeting afterwards. It's you are free to stay.

[1:34:53] » Yes. It's open to the public >> and we will let them know.

[1:34:58] » All right. Now right into

[1:35:03] » next.

[1:35:10] » So do they know what the next meeting's about?

[1:35:12] » Okay. Um yeah, I think it was noticed.

[1:35:23] » Okay. So actually some people are staying. So, uh, if anyone is

[1:35:29] interested, yeah, if anyone is interested, this next meeting is about,

[1:35:33] um, declaring, uh, an emer local emergency that would be taking, um,

[1:35:40] helping us to get funds for fixing the corporate yard, uh, the corpyard, um,

[1:35:47] damages from the storm. Yes. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Okay.

[1:35:55] So, I'll call this meeting to order. Um, do we

[1:36:02] have any public Oh, you have to do the roll call

[1:36:06] again. Okay. Roll call. No one's left. >> Um, Council Member Andrews,

[1:36:13] we're doing roll call. >> Oh, I'm here. We have President Council

[1:36:16] » member Beckman >> here. Council member

[1:36:20] » here. >> Vice Mayor Casissa

[1:36:21] » here. >> Mayor Thomas

[1:36:22] » here. All right. Then um is there any public

[1:36:27] comment regarding this uh item 3A only the consideration and possible action to

[1:36:35] adopt resolution 01206

[1:36:41] proclaiming a local emergency in the town of Cord Madera.

[1:36:49] We did receive public comment um via email prior to the start of this meeting

[1:36:54] and it was added to the website. We haven't received any additional public

[1:36:59] comment and currently from our 11 attendees online, we don't have any

[1:37:04] hands raised um at this time.

[1:37:07] » Okay. And um shall we please have the uh report who's

[1:37:14] » Absolutely. uh mayor and council members. Um so this is an item uh that

[1:37:20] obviously is related to the recent events of the last weekend in the last

[1:37:25] several days. Uh and I'm requesting that the town council proclaim a local

[1:37:30] emergency uh for the town of Cordadera.

[1:37:34] Uh we've attached to the staff report a resolution that would fulfill the state

[1:37:40] requirements for an emergency proclamation and allow

[1:37:44] further state and federal processes relating to providing financial

[1:37:48] assistance to Cordera for local emergency

[1:37:52] um response. And and really I want to um uh make sure that this is

[1:38:00] clear that this is really related to uh the town's response and damages that um

[1:38:07] we've incurred obviously the most significant one at this point. We're

[1:38:11] estimating the the value of the damages to the corporation yard. um we have to

[1:38:17] basically do a this is a procedural move where we actually uh proclaim this, send

[1:38:22] it up to OEM and then OEM was going to support us with advocating with the

[1:38:27] state. Um and I think as well as our other county jurisdictions as well who

[1:38:33] also participate in this and um it may allow for reimbursement uh of some of

[1:38:40] our uh expenses particularly with the corpyard overtime

[1:38:46] uh pump we heard you know we have damage to a pump um those sorts of things and

[1:38:52] um but it's not assured I want to be clear about that uh the governor has not

[1:38:58] declared a state of emergency or any declaration of emergency uh statewide.

[1:39:03] Obviously, the federal government hasn't either. And my understanding is it's

[1:39:09] um it's it's certainly not a given um that we will receive money, but I think

[1:39:14] we if we do this step, we can we may it might happen. So, without doing it, we

[1:39:21] have no possibility of recouping any uh expenditures on this. Um so,

[1:39:27] That is uh essentially my report for this. Again, there's a resolution sort

[1:39:33] of describing the events and why um this serious nature of the events and

[1:39:40] [snorts] um we will be working if adopted we'll be working with OEM going

[1:39:44] forward. Um and I think actually it's been great to work with OEM on this

[1:39:50] process in particular with Steven Torrance. I've been in communication

[1:39:54] with him over the last couple of days and he's been providing guidance as well

[1:39:57] in terms of the appropriate steps to take for this. So,

[1:40:02] » thank you. Uh, any questions? >> Yes. [clears throat] How long would this

[1:40:09] state of emergency be in effect?

[1:40:18] Ratifi. So, go every 60 days. I'll I'll turn it over our town attorney,

[1:40:22] » Amy Acriman, town attorney. Uh, under state law, uh, the council has a duty to

[1:40:29] terminate the state of emergency as soon as practically possible. Um, if it isn't

[1:40:36] terminated, it needs to be ratified every 60 days. So, it's really dependent

[1:40:42] on the nature of the emergency. >> Basically, every 60 days, we'd have to

[1:40:47] review it unless it Yeah. I mean, for example, I know we had

[1:40:52] one during COVID that lasted for a very long time and it was

[1:40:56] » 2020 to 2023. >> The last time we proclaimed a local

[1:41:01] emergency was related to atmospheric rivers in 2023 related to a landslide we

[1:41:06] had up on um Marina states, I think it was up on the um one of the hillsides on

[1:41:13] the east side of town uh to repair that damage. So, this isn't infrequent. Um, I

[1:41:19] don't I don't believe we would necessarily go

[1:41:23] past a six, you know, first this might be the only time we actually would do

[1:41:28] this. Um, so

[1:41:33] » question anyone else? >> So, is it possible that this emergency

[1:41:38] declaration could help with, you know, we heard about the the burm

[1:41:44] uh breaking down and the water coming through. So actual damage to

[1:41:49] infrastructure, roads, areas within our neighborhoods, not just the corporation

[1:41:55] yard, but the community itself. >> Well, town town property. It theor it

[1:42:01] theoretically could. Um, some of those that we are describing are not town

[1:42:06] owned facilities or property. Even some of the BMS are out in in in not in

[1:42:11] frankly they're some of those I think are stateowned property with fish and

[1:42:15] wildlife and others. So >> So that wouldn't be covered.

[1:42:19] » Those particular those particular BMS not under this? No. And yeah.

[1:42:25] » Is there a way to get emergency declaration that would cover losses like

[1:42:31] that and have it inventoried or is it too late for that or No.

[1:42:38] Amy Amy wants something. >> Well,

[1:42:41] so I will say I think in general my understanding and again talking to OEM

[1:42:47] uh it is very unlikely that um any governmental assistance will be

[1:42:55] provided to private property owners. Uh even in the worst disasters, they only

[1:43:00] cover uninsur um sorry uh

[1:43:05] losses after insurance already pays for its share of the losses and damages. And

[1:43:11] so that's not specific to your question

[1:43:15] about BMS and lot certainly pump >> streets and sidewalks

[1:43:19] » pumps pump infrastructures. Some of these other

[1:43:23] » BMS are not are not townowned facilities.

[1:43:26] » Okay. But so they just have to be town owned. So the pump stations, the

[1:43:30] infrastructure, the pipes, >> anything that's been damaged would be

[1:43:34] inventoried. And then >> Correct.

[1:43:36] » Okay, good. That's good to hear.

[1:43:41] » Yeah, just I just have a couple. One is resolution says it's town

[1:43:45] manager/emergency operations manager. Is that you?

[1:43:49] » Okay, just checking [laughter] >> by the really spoken

[1:43:53] » dual title, >> another title. And I'm just going to

[1:43:55] zoom in on one particular area. The burn behind like um 192123.

[1:44:01] Do you know is that burn private? Is it state? Or do you know I know the

[1:44:05] property lines may extend out or if Chris knows

[1:44:08] » Chris here. I don't know if we've gotten that surveyed, but I my understanding is

[1:44:12] when when R.J. Well, I'll I'll hand over to you Chris. Go ahead.

[1:44:16] » Yeah. Um our understanding is it's I mean it's in private property. We did

[1:44:21] find records that at some point the town had dredged San Clementi Creek and

[1:44:25] actually put material up there, but it's not clear if we ever actually got

[1:44:30] permanent easements or anything for continued maintenance.

[1:44:34] So, as far as we know, it's private property.

[1:44:37] » Okay. So, we're back to the point. Any money we get would just cover town's

[1:44:40] property. It wouldn't cover anything on Harbor.

[1:44:46] I I don't even know from it's hard to ascertain damage to a burm. I mean, our

[1:44:52] you know, it's an existing facility and it's not necessarily damaged. It was

[1:44:56] over topped during this event because of the high tides.

[1:45:00] » Okay. All right. Thanks.

[1:45:08] » Wait, you need public comment first?

[1:45:13] » We already took public comment. We do public comment.

[1:45:18] » Hey Adam, just one more quick question. I assume that at that Larksboro, Mil

[1:45:22] Valley, other towns are going to be filing the same thing we are.

[1:45:26] » Well, my understanding is for this event uh the deadlines tomorrow. I have shared

[1:45:32] our proclamation with Larkpur certainly as uh and so I'm not I haven't heard if

[1:45:37] they are actually putting this on the agenda. The other thing to note is that

[1:45:41] as an emergency operation manager, I could have signed this and then there's

[1:45:45] seven days by for the council to ratify it, but since we already had this

[1:45:51] meeting scheduled, we just figured we'd put this directly on and let the council

[1:45:55] um you know, make the resolution and make the decision tonight.

[1:45:58] » Okay. And I know it's a double-edged sword, but um with the co-op yard,

[1:46:02] possible put in insurance claim through our insurance carrier

[1:46:07] going through that process today of just thinking about that. Um and so I'm not

[1:46:13] sure uh exactly what we're still going to we have some questions for Bay

[1:46:18] Cities, our insurer and property insurance and what's covered and what be

[1:46:22] excluded under this. >> Okay. And then I'm sorry, is Larks

[1:46:25] helping us out at all with trying to store their co-op yard? I've talked to

[1:46:28] Yeah, I've definitely talked to uh city manager Dench Wards. He's offered to

[1:46:33] support our our team to the extent they they can and it's needed uh in their

[1:46:38] corporation yard. So, we'll be if if there's a need, I think we're just need

[1:46:42] to sort of uh dry out ourselves in a sense and sort

[1:46:48] of start to put it together a game plan as soon as tomorrow and figure out what

[1:46:52] we're going to do on this temporary basis. We're still receiving

[1:46:55] information. And I should say there was also some uh because you know we had to

[1:47:00] turn the power off because of electrical concerns as we saw. I'm not saying you

[1:47:05] know they're doing investigations right now on the fire over on industrial but

[1:47:09] saltwater gets into electrical circuitry down at that level. That's a concern. So

[1:47:14] we're being very obviously very cautious about

[1:47:18] making sure it's safe um before opening that facility back up.

[1:47:23] » Right. It also affects any of the equipment with salt water getting in the

[1:47:27] croen. Okay, thanks.

[1:47:31] » It may have been in the report, but um I I'm not quite remembering. Do we have a

[1:47:36] dollar amount of the damage yet or we >> So the the process with this

[1:47:43] proclamation will also send an initial damage um estimate up to OEM. It's it's

[1:47:49] very you're spitballing a little bit. I'm just saying like it's

[1:47:53] » X dollars. So, >> we don't know yet. We're still we're

[1:47:57] still we have um >> contractor sort of assessing the

[1:48:01] situation. We've had our building uh official and inspector down at the site

[1:48:06] taking a look and just going to have to continue to go ahead.

[1:48:09] » Okay. Thank you. So with that, um, do we have

[1:48:14] a motion to approve, uh,

[1:48:19] yeah, the proclamation? >> Make a motion to adopt resol Oh, go

[1:48:23] ahead. >> Sorry. Motion to adopt resolution number

[1:48:25] 012026.

[1:48:29] » Council member Andrews, >> yes.

[1:48:31] » Council member Beckman, >> yes.

[1:48:32] » Council member Oasio, >> yes.

[1:48:34] » Vice Mayor Cassissa, yes. >> Mayor Thomas,

[1:48:36] » yes. >> Thank you. The motion carries.

[1:48:38] » Thank you. All right then. Um, and with that we

[1:48:44] adjourn our third meeting. >> Third and final meeting.

[1:48:52] » Three meetings.

[1:49:00] [music]

Corte Madera Town Council Regular Meeting January 6, 2026

Transcript