City Council Meeting Page 1 of 18 March 14, 2022
7 City of Lafayette
Meeting Minutes
Teleconference Meeting – Watch on the City of Lafayette’s YouTube Channel at March 14, 2022 http://bit.ly/LoveLafayetteYouTube Submit public comments to [email protected] 7:00 p.m. before or during the meeting.
To protect public health, our residents, officials, and staff, and aligned with the Governor’s recent executive order N-29-20, certain teleconference requirements of the Brown Act have been suspended, including the requirement to provide a physical location for members of the public to participate in the meeting. Here is how to participate in the meeting and provide public comment:
1) Watch or Listen: Meetings are broadcast on the City of Lafayette’s YouTube Channel:
http://bit.ly/LoveLafayetteYouTube. An archived, on-demand video of each meeting is maintained on the channel as part of the public record.
2) Submit Comments Before the Meeting: Members of the public can provide public comment by sending an e-mail to [email protected] (for City Council meetings). Those e-mails will be distributed to the members of the City Council, the City Manager, and the City Attorney, and will be posted as part of the public record.
3) Live Remote Public Comments: Members of the public may submit live public comment via Zoom conferencing. You must download the Zoom app or software. Zoom meetings can be accessed by telephone, computer, or smart device. When the Mayor invites public comment for the item on which you would like to comment, please use the "raise hand" feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone only) to alert staff you have a public comment to provide. Each speaker is allowed three (3) minutes to speak.
Any graphic a speaker wishes to use as part of public comment must be emailed to [email protected] for City Council meetings by 3:00 p.m. the day of the meeting. Zoom Webinar joining instructions will be posted on the meeting agenda prior to the start of the scheduled meeting. 4) Join the Meeting Remotely: Use the links below to join the meeting and provide remote live audio public comment.
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81983110526?pwd=dzVDaXZjTVlEVWRUWjBLSGRLL1g3Zz09 Passcode: 138538 or join by phone: Dial 1 669 900 9128; Webinar ID: 819 8311 0526 Passcode: 138538
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Gerringer called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. via teleconference.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: City Council: Mayor Gerringer; Vice Mayor Anduri; Councilmembers Candell, Dawson and Kwok
City Council Meeting Page 2 of 18 March 14, 2022
Absent: None
Staff Present: Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager; Tracy Robinson, Administrative Services Director, Greg Wolff, Director of Planning and Building Services; Chief of Police Lt. Ben Alldritt; Suzanne Iarla, Communications Analyst; Mala Subramanian, City Attorney
3. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Dawson) to adopt the agenda. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, Dawson, and Kwok; Noes: None).
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS - (for Items Not on the Agenda)
LAUREN HERPICH referred to the noise ordinance and questioned the status of it being agendized.
L.C. referred to the CCAS (Contra Costa Animal Services) draft agreement with the City and said the agreement is below the basic standard of care for shelters. She spoke about the 18 cities being notified of a reduction in service, but the county contract calls for an additional $1 million this year and an additional $2 million next year. In spite of increases, the services will not be reinstated, as promised and she asked the City not to approve the agreement and go back to the table for renegotiation.
ANNIE WRIGHT said she humanely traps abandoned cats, said they rely on rescue groups, and said she helps with fostering and finding home. She cited the lack of services with the county, as well as rescue groups. She echoed comments from Ms. Herpich relating to the contract and asked the Council to reconsider the agreement and improve the scope of services.
ERIKA FROGGA spoke about the rise in canine distemper which is spreading at a high rate within the wildlife population and threatens the County’s dog population. The Animal Services has closed its clinic, putting the brunt of services on non-profit rescue groups or citizens. However, they reopened and take up to only 4 animals per week, and she asked the Council not to sign any contract until they meet the needs of taxpayers and for allotted services that are paid for.
CASSIDY said she is a resident of Alameda and is a volunteer for Lindsay Wildlife Experience. She interacts with wild animals in need of care, said she has become a veterinary nurse and she was distressed to find that the County Animal Control Services had cut positions and funding for services. She echoed speaker comments to ask that the Council not approve the County’s new agreement because they are well funded but refuse to care for injured animals.
LISA FULTON said she has been involved for 5 years with the cat rescue and voiced concern with the proposed County Animal Services agreement, especially spay neuter services. She asked the Council not to sign it until they examine it or meet with them to explain what residents expect as taxpayers, said all of the cats are offspring of abandoned pets or those not fixed and she cited reasons for the problem. She asked to ramp up spay/neuter surgeries, invited the Council to her neighborhood to see the numerous cat population, and hoped the problem can be solved.
City Council Meeting Page 3 of 18 March 14, 2022
JAMIE CONK echoed comments of previous speakers, said she has been helping cats and kittens and has realized the extent of the issues and problems throughout the County. The contract does not address the issues in the county and cities and thinks the problems have gotten worse, especially with cats, asked that the Council not sign the agreement and talk with other City Managers for another solution. She also cited encroachment into the deer population and thinks it is also important to take care of the wildlife.
City Manager Niroop Srivatsa said the noise ordinance update is not one of the 16 projects in the current fiscal year’s Work Plan, and the Council will review the new Work Plan in May. Regarding animal control, all cities in the county have received a draft agreement and she and the Police Chief are scheduled to meet with the director in the next couple of weeks to review the contract. Additionally, Animal Services is meeting with all Contra Costa Police Chiefs as well as with the Public Manager’s Association. Once all questions have been answered, the matter will return to the Council with their recommendations.
5. PRESENTATIONS
A. Introduction of New Employees
1. Tracy Robinson, Administrative Services Director
TJ Meyersieck, Assistant Recreation Coordinator
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Administrative Services Director Tracy Robinson introduced new employee TJ Meyersieck, the City’s new Assistant Recreation Coordinator and she provided a background of his education, experience, and he enjoys working with kids in his own community.
Ms. Meyersieck said he is excited to be part of the team, is enjoying his time at the Community Center given he grew up living across the street and now able to be part of it.
Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers welcomed Mr. Meyersieck to the City.
2. Lt. Ben Alldritt, Chief of Police
Sergeant Amanda Sears
Officer Rodrick Smally
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Chief of Police Lt. Ben Alldritt stated Sergeant Amanda Sears is working tonight and will hopefully be able to be introduced at an upcoming meeting. He then introduced Officer Rodrick Smally and provided a background of his public safety experience in juvenile probation which will assist the City, and he welcomed him to Lafayette.
Officer Smally said he enjoys working with juveniles and young adults, said he worked at a group home before working with the probation department. He has been on a couple of calls thus far and looks forward to working with the City.
Mayor Gerringer and Councilmembers welcomed Officer Smally to the City.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Gerringer asked if there were any requests for removal of items or public comments or requests for removal of items, and there were none.
City Council Meeting Page 4 of 18 March 14, 2022
A. Minutes
1. February 28, 2022
Recommendation: Approve.
2. March 5, 2022
Recommendation: Approve.
B. Resolution 2022-19 Allowing for Video and Teleconference Meetings during the COVID-19 State of Emergency under AB361
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2022-19.
C. Request for Funds for Fire Abatement on City Owned Property on El Nido Ranch Road Recommendation: Approve allocation of funds of $34,440 for removal of dead trees and dry vegetation on City owned property on El Nido Ranch Road.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Kwok) to adopt Consent Calendar Items A, B and C. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes:
Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, Dawson, and Kwok; Noes: None).
7. OLD BUSINESS
A. ARPA Subcommittee Anduri and Dawson and Thomas Myers, Economic Development Manager Lafayette American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Update and Funding Recommendations Recommendation: 1. After April 1, 2022, transfer $500,000 from unallocated ARPA funds to reimburse the General Fund for revenue losses. 2. Allocate an additional $56,500 to Lafayette Partners In Education (LPIE) for Lafayette children who attend public schools in the Acalanes Union High School district that are outside the Lafayette City limits. 3. Reallocate $350,000 from the previously allocated ARPA funds for the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce to General Fund Revenue Recovery, and after April 1, 2022, transfer that amount to the General Fund. Authorize immediate payment of $350,000 from the General Fund to the Chamber of Commerce to assist in the general economic recovery of Lafayette’s business sector. 4. Reallocate $100,000 from the previously allocated ARPA funds for Business District to General Fund Revenue Recovery, and after April 1, 2022, transfer that amount to the General Fund. Budget the same amount in the General Fund (11-110) to hire a consultant to develop a comprehensive business marketing website to spur economic growth and recovery of Lafayette’s business community. 5. Initiate a one-year pilot program to extend current arrangements to allow outdoor sales and dining until March 31, 2023. This will include allowing restaurants to use on-street parking, private parking lots, and sidewalks for dining and retail sales as long as there is adequate space for pedestrian travel. Additionally, it is recommended that the current relaxations of the sign and parking ordinances to allow A frames, banners, and the use of private lots for outdoor activity be extended until March 31, 2023. If additional Council action is required to achieve these objectives, we will return to Council for formal approvals.
City Council Meeting Page 5 of 18 March 14, 2022
Economic Development Manager Thomas Myers gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding ARPA funding recommendations, stating the main change to the existing allocations from the Department of Treasury is that their final ruling effective April 1, 2022 will allow cities that receive less than $10 million to move their losses over to the General Fund. This allowance can be used for general government services. The Council can transfer up to the maximum amount of the funds received from ARPA in July last year and the upcoming allocation in July of 2022.
He said the ARPA Subcommittee’s recommendations are in alignment with the change in the final rule, which he described as outlined in the staff report and he said he was available for any questions.
Councilmember Candell asked if staff knows why the Department of Treasury made that change. Mr.
Myers said it will be easier for the City to allocate funds and the Department of Treasury is trying to make it easier for those cities that did not get as much and so that the reporting requirements will not be as stringent. They will still have to make reports as to what was done with the money and how it was used, and they have been consistent with the intent of ARPA funds for economic recovery.
Councilmember Dawson added that it is easier for subrecipients to report back as well.
Vice Mayor Anduri asked if staff could report on the 5th recommendation regarding outdoor dining and the one-year period.
Ms. Robinson stated in order to extend the outdoor dining program, they would like to initiate a one-year pilot program that would extend the arrangements until March 31, 2023. This would include allowing restaurants to use on-street parking and private parking lots and sidewalks for dining and retail use as long as they maintain adequate space for pedestrian travel. To do that, staff recommends the current relaxation of the signs and the parking ordinances to allow A-frames and banners be extended to March 31, 2023. There will likely be additional Council action that will need to occur in terms of resolutions in order to make this happen. But tonight, they are seeking the Council’s approval to move forward with the pilot program and prepare the proper resolution so they can continue the program through 2023.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period.
GRACE DIXON thanked the Council for considering her request via letter to consider ways to fund park projects in the next disbursement of ARPA funds. Her approach may be out of the box, but she is taking a realistic view of the limited budget, staffing, on-going openings, increasing land values and competition with housing needs. She has also looked at the City’s past and present history of parks projects, some of which she described. Additionally, creating 3-6 small parks will put Lafayette in a good position for 3-6 one-quarter mile radius opportunities for land value recapture.
LAUREN HERPICH echoed Ms. Dixon’s comments and recognized her time and energy on this subject. She supported the idea of using ARPA funding to support and development downtown walkable neighborhood parks and gathering spaces.
City Council Meeting Page 6 of 18 March 14, 2022
CHERYL MACDONALD voiced support of the outdoor dining as well as signs for small businesses. In a year’s time she hoped the Council might consider better signage for those businesses hidden from view off of the boulevard.
Vice Mayor Anduri thanked Mr. Myers for his work on this as well as the gift card program and asked for comment on it.
Mr. Myers noted they launched the program late last week and the primary purchasers of the gift cards have been Lafayette residents, so this is good. They have expended approximately $9,000 of the $30,000 allocation for the gift card program, which changes every 10-15 minutes and which he is monitoring to ensure they do not run out of funds. He will provide an update to the Subcommittee tomorrow and keep the Council informed.
Vice Mayor Anduri thanked Councilmember Dawson who worked diligently on the increased allocation for Lafayette Partners in Education (LPIE) and mental health support for all Lafayette High School students.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Dawson) to 1. After April 1, 2022, transfer $500,000 from unallocated ARPA funds to reimburse the General Fund for revenue losses. 2. Allocate an additional $56,500 to Lafayette Partners In Education (LPIE) for Lafayette children who attend public schools in the Acalanes Union High School district that are outside the Lafayette City limits. 3. Reallocate $350,000 from the previously allocated ARPA funds for the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce to General Fund Revenue Recovery, and after April 1, 2022, transfer that amount to the General Fund. Authorize immediate payment of $350,000 from the General Fund to the Chamber of Commerce to assist in the general economic recovery of Lafayette’s business sector. 4. Reallocate $100,000 from the previously allocated ARPA funds for Business District to General Fund Revenue Recovery, and after April 1, 2022, transfer that amount to the General Fund. Budget the same amount in the General Fund (11-110) to hire a consultant to develop a comprehensive business marketing website to spur economic growth and recovery of Lafayette’s business community. 5. Initiate a one-year pilot program to extend current arrangements to allow outdoor sales and dining until March 31, 2023. This will include allowing restaurants to use on-street parking, private parking lots, and sidewalks for dining and retail sales as long as there is adequate space for pedestrian travel. Additionally, to relax the sign and parking ordinances to allow A frames, banners, and the use of private lots for outdoor activity be extended until March 31, 2023 and return to the Council, as needed for formal approvals. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, Dawson, and Kwok; Noes: None).
B. Suzanne Iarla, Communications Analyst
Update on Hybrid Meeting Solutions and Returning to In-person Meetings Recommendation: Staff recommends continuing to hold public meetings online while the state of emergency is still in effect and social distancing is recommended. Staff also requests the City Council discuss and provide staff with direction on: 1. What factors should be considered to determine when to return to in-person meetings. 2. Desired safety protocols for in-person meetings.
City Council Meeting Page 7 of 18 March 14, 2022
Communications Analyst Suzanne Iarla gave an update on hybrid meeting solutions and requested direction on returning to in-person meetings. She gave a background of the City’s holding of public meetings on-line and the Council’s prior direction to staff to look into providing remote or in-person participation for certain meetings, or what is called “hybrid” meetings. She described remote participation per AB 365 and requirements, and once AB 365 is no longer in effect, Brown Act regulations will apply. AB 1944 would potentially modify Brown Act teleconferencing rules, and this is proposed legislation.
As recently as March 1st Contra Costa Health Services strongly recommends public agencies provide on-line or teleconferenced meetings; , their most recent recommendations for in-person meetings can be discussed. The City is working with a consultant to design and install a hybrid meeting system that would offer remote participation, which she described. The installation in the Community Hall is almost complete and a remote participant could participate via audio and/or video and/or share their screen and be able to see anything being presented on screen in the room.
The Arts and Science Discovery Center room is a bit more challenging because it had no video infrastructure beforehand, and this design and procurement is underway. For the smaller conference and meeting rooms at the Community Center, they have procured basic video conferencing devices and staff has utilized those for a couple of internal meetings and these could be permanently mounted in a room or left to be portable and moved from room to room as needed.
Hybrid meetings do require more staff time to set up, operate and to manage so an additional person would be required to operate the audio visual and streaming system for the PC and City Council in the Community Room of the Library. In the Arts and Science Room, they are hoping the staff liaison could simultaneously manage the in-person aspects of the meeting as well as Zoom teleconferencing and livestream components.
For smaller conference rooms, if they were to hold hybrid meetings, it would fall on staff to facilitate that and may not be efficient.
She then spoke of the risk of technical disruptions during an on-line or hybrid meeting because they rely on having power, internet and even phone connections. So, compared to in-person meetings, there are more technical things that could go wrong.
Staff would like the Council to discuss when and how to return to in-person meetings. Staff recommends continuing to hold public meetings on-line while there is a state of emergency still in effect and social distancing is recommended. Staff is seeking direction on what factors should be considered when returning to in-person meetings as well as desired safety protocols, and she reviewed the following questions for the Council to consider:
Question 1: What factors does the City Council want to consider in determining when to return to inperson meetings? Since the pandemic started, the City has been diligent in prioritizing the health and safety of its community members. The City has taken direction and guidance from CCHS regarding how to safely operate facilities and provide city services. The City Council has used state and county health orders and Health Officer recommendations to continue meetings online for the City Council and all subsidiary advisory bodies. For meeting rooms with a hybrid option that will allow members of the public (as well as staff and consultants, etc.) to participate remotely, the “host” of the meeting (the City), still needs to consider the health and safety of those participating in-person.
City Council Meeting Page 8 of 18 March 14, 2022
1. Should the City continue to meet online while it is recommended by the county and/or state?
2. Once in-person meetings resume, when hybrid meetings are held, should the City offer teleconferencing as a courtesy option for the public or rely on AB 361? • AB 361 allows for teleconferencing for both members of the body and the public and requires a meeting to be continued if a technical problem arises that prevents remote participation during a meeting
• If the City does not exercise AB 361, members would be required to attend meetings in person (or meet the full teleconferencing requirements of the Brown Act), and the public would be encouraged to attend in-person with teleconferencing only offered as a courtesy.
3. Are there other factors the City Council wants to consider in determining when to return to in-person meetings, such as required or recommended social distancing, face coverings (mask), contact tracing, etc.?
Question 2: Are the factors the same for “the big four” and other advisory bodies to return to in-person meetings?
If the City Council chooses to resume in-person meetings during the local health emergency, the City Council could regard other advisory bodies differently than the “big four” (City Council, Design Review, Planning Commission, Transportation & Circulation). For example, advisory bodies that meet in rooms that are not equipped for hybrid meetings, cannot accommodate social distancing, and are less likely to have public hearings or other urgently time-sensitive items, could continue to use AB361 to hold online meetings, regardless of whether the City Council decides to resume in-person meetings for other commissions and committees.
Question 3: What safety protocols does the City Council desire for in-person meetings? Once the City resumes in-person meetings, what safety protocols should be established?
1. If providing social distancing per CCHS recommendations cannot be achieved in a given room, should staff evaluate other locations, such as rooms at the Community Center?
2. Should staff develop a written safety protocol outlining the expectations for public meetings?
3. Recent changes lifted State and County orders previously requiring face masks be worn indoors, however, the CCHS currently advises cities (as the meeting host) to require face masks be worn Page 7 of 7 by all attendees. For City Council and subordinate advisory bodies, should the City require (versus just recommend) face masks be worn indoors? a. If yes, should the requirement be for all attendees, or based on their (self-identified) COVID19 vaccination status?
b. If yes, since masking can interfere with communications, should there be an except for a person actively speaking? What about for everyone at the dais?
4. Should all meeting attendees be asked to self-certify they are feeling well before entering the meeting room? Should this be announced via passive signage at or near the entrance or some other method? a. If not required of all attendees, should it be required of members and staff?
5. Should there be a voluntary attendance sheet to collect names and contact information only to be used to assist in contact tracing of any cases linked to a public meeting? a. Should the City promote/encourage meeting attendees to activate the CA-notify app on their smartphone while attending meetings?
City Council Meeting Page 9 of 18 March 14, 2022
6. At what point would these safety protocols end? Would they be required in perpetuity, or would they end concurrently with the state of emergency? Vice Mayor Anduri asked and confirmed with Ms. Iarla that the Council can elect to utilize AB 361 for some bodies and not for others which should be clearly outlined in the agenda. If not using AB 361, the City must be clear on how the public can participate.
Vice Mayor Anduri said having a hybrid meeting is more complicated than an in-person meeting. He asked how much more complicated is it than what the Council is doing now via Zoom. Ms. Iarla said it is more complicated for staff to have to manage both technology occurring in the room as well as the streaming and having anyone participating and having multiple ways to be heard. So, hybrid meetings are more complex than either an inperson only meeting or an on-line only meeting.
Vice Mayor Anduri said right now if Xfinity went out in Northern Lafayette, this meeting would be over because they would not have a quorum. It has been said that if using a hybrid approach the technology breaks down, they must end the meeting. This is true now anyway, but he asked how much more likely is it that the technology would fail them if they were to develop the hybrid meetings. Ms. Iarla said she did not believe it would be any more risk to have a hybrid meeting than to hold on-line meetings now. The Zoom and streaming would be originating from the library so if the library had an internet or power disruption that would impact the ability to have the on-line component of the meeting.
Councilmember Candell said if they have a meeting with a hot topic and they are expecting a big crowd, she asked if it is possible to opt to have some meetings fully on-line and some meetings hybrid. Ms. Iarla said her understanding is they would have the opportunity to choose and be mindful of being clear to the public, so they understand expectations of how the meeting is run.
City Attorney Mala Subramanian noted that on the agenda, every 30 days the City is required to adopt a resolution making certain findings. There may be an issue if they have a gap and stopped adopting that resolution. If they kept adopting it but chose to meet in person but gave themselves flexibility, this would be a way to do it and say they are not able to accommodate everyone physically in one room and have social distancing of 6 feet, so they would want it held via Zoom.
Councilmember Kwok asked if there is a forecast of when the Governor’s Emergency Order might terminate, and he asked in the absence of that, the Council would have to return to in-person meetings.
Ms. Subramanian said AB 361 is worded interestingly. There are parts that reference requiring a state of emergency which is set to expire at the end of March, but she believes will be extended by the Governor.
However, in other parts of it there is not a requirement for a state of emergency—just a requirement for a finding of local or state officials recommending social distancing. So, in theory, if the state of emergency did lapse and they still have the county recommending social distancing, they could still utilize AB 361 Councilmember Kwok said if the county did not determine there was a health risk, but the City determined there was, he asked if they could decide that themselves.
Ms. Subramanian said they can, but they are not health officials so it would be helpful to have something to rely on if they had some facts or supporting information of community statistics.
City Council Meeting Page 10 of 18 March 14, 2022
Councilmember Kwok said if it did expire on March 31st, in order to stay remote and on-line, they would need to rely on AB 361 and then continue under that ruling for as long as they had something to rely on. If the County became more relaxed, they could have nothing to rely on and then return to the original situation. Ms.
Subramanian nodded.
Mayor Gerringer asked if the City looked at the Community Center in terms of their ability or she asked if it was included in the other smaller rooms. Ms. Iarla said the rooms where advisory body meetings are larger than Conference Room 265 or the room at the Police Station, so they have some flexibility in the rooms, such as availability in the evenings if things get shifted around.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period.
CHERYL MACDONALD asked if Rooms 265 and 240 are mentioned in this and, if so, would the meetings that take place there are part of this or would they still be on Zoom. She also asked if the Health Officer said the City can return to in-person meetings, she asked if they no longer can use the hybrid system. Or she asked if the City could make a case given additional attendance to continue with the hybrid meetings. Lastly, she voiced support for all meetings as hybrid, given she enjoys being able to participate this way.
CAROL SINGER said since the PTR Commission and its subcommittees are not one of the big 4 bodies, she asked who should decide what kind of meetings to hold under the guidelines.
Councilmember Candell asked if Ms. Singer knew the preference from the Commission and subcommittees.
Ms. Singer said she has not spoken with the Commission and possibly they could hold the Commission meeting in-person and the subcommittees as virtual.
Mayor Gerringer replied to questions of speakers, stating for the smaller meetings, Rooms 265 and 240 are part of this and the other Commissions and advisory groups are part of the discussions. If the County Health Officer allows the return for in-person meetings, she wondered if the City could remain hybrid.
Ms. Iarla said the smaller meeting rooms was meant to be inclusive of 265, 240, the conference room at the Police Station, the meeting rooms at the Community Center. In terms of when there is no longer a health reason to be offering on-line or hybrid meetings, the Council could still choose to offer hybrid options for the public to participate; however, once those health situations are resolved they will be following the full Brown Act in terms of how the public can participate in the meeting. So, if a Councilmember was teleconferencing into the meeting, they need to be doing it from an accessible location and agenda posted on the door. If the pending legislation gets approved, that may make a change to the Brown Act because right now, staff would have the agenda posted on the door where the Councilmember is staying and the public must be able to attend at that location, as well.
Mayor Gerringer referred to Ms. Singer’s question as to whether the PTR Commission and their subcommittees could decide for themselves, and Ms. Iarla said staff would like to hear from the Council as to when to go back to in-person and whether they would apply to all advisory bodies or just some of them.
Councilmember Candell said it sounds like Ms. Iarla did not include the rooms at the Community Center to be hybrid. Ms. Iarla explained they were not in the first tier. The request for funds to be appropriated were specifically for the rooms the big 4 meet in. Staff has actually procured two video conferencing systems that could be used, but their attention was not focused there because it would be a less robust solution.
City Council Meeting Page 11 of 18 March 14, 2022
Mayor Gerringer asked for comments on Question 1, specifically 1.1 and on:
Question 1: What factors does the City Council want to consider in determining when to return to in person meetings?
Since the pandemic started, the City has been diligent in prioritizing the health and safety of its community members. The City has taken direction and guidance from CCHS regarding how to safely operate facilities and provide city services. The City Council has used state and county health orders and Health Officer recommendations to continue meetings online for the City Council and all subsidiary advisory bodies. For meeting rooms with a hybrid option that will allow members of the public (as well as staff and consultants, etc.) to participate remotely, the “host” of the meeting (the City), still needs to consider the health and safety of those participating in-person.
1. Should the City continue to meet online while it is recommended by the county and/or state?
• Councilmember Candell recommended following the County’s guidelines. • Vice Mayor Anduri agreed but would want the ability to consider it on a local level even if the County changes its guidance.
• Mayor Gerringer recommended following county guidelines, and noted that the County Board of Supervisors is returning to in-person meetings on March 29th. • Councilmember Kwok asked what is the benefit of being in-person and he asked what the Council, staff or the community are missing by being on-line. His sense is there is a lot of benefit from doing things on-line in terms of convenience. While hybrid could be a solution, there are risks of increased costs and staffing. So, his feeling is to wait as long as possible and even petition the State to abandon the idea of going back in person.
• Vice Mayor Anduri agreed to keep doing this as long as they can because it promotes public safety not to have in-person gatherings. The big plus is that this makes it much easier for people to participate. He does not think participating on-line takes away at all from the effectiveness of input and he thinks they are getting more input by doing it this way. The one factor is they have the feeling of the community gathering and discussing issues, but in terms of what is communicated among the public and to the Council, the only thing he can see that is different now is the “outbursts of support” versus “boos for speakers”.
• Councilmember Dawson agreed and thinks there is an added public benefit of more participation from a diverse group of people. The additional cost and staff time is interesting, so if they were going to do the hybrid meeting, they should look at technical impacts.
• Councilmember Candell said she misses the occasional cake and celebrations which involve a community gathering piece. She thinks though the Zoom meetings are a plus and they should keep it as long as they are able.
• Mayor Gerringer agreed and thinks being back in person when the time is right will be important. She also wants to support the rest of the Council for being on-line until it is safe.
2. Once in-person meetings resume, when hybrid meetings are held, should the City offer teleconferencing as a courtesy option for the public or rely on AB 361? City Council Meeting Page 12 of 18 March 14, 2022
• AB 361 allows for teleconferencing for both members of the body and the public and requires a meeting to be continued if a technical problem arises that prevents remote participation during a meeting
• If the City does not exercise AB 361, members would be required to attend meetings in person (or meet the full teleconferencing requirements of the Brown Act), and the public would be encouraged to attend in-person with teleconferencing only offered as a courtesy. • Mayor Gerringer noted the County will continue to operate under AB 361. The sense was that it gives flexibility when they move forward for them to make their own findings, whereas if they stopped doing it, they would move forward to being back in person. Walnut Creek does not rely on AB 361.She is supportive of staying with AB 361 as long as that option is available when they go back into hybrid meetings. • Vice Mayor Anduri asked and confirmed that the other plus with doing that is a Councilmember or Commissioner can participate via Zoom from out of the county, and he voiced his support of that.
• Councilmembers Kwok, Candell and Dawson also voiced support of staying with AB 361.
3. Are there other factors the City Council wants to consider in determining when to return to in-person meetings, such as required or recommended social distancing, face coverings (mask), contact tracing, etc.?
• Councilmember Candell recommended not going back until masks are not required and social distancing is not required, given she thinks it will be hard to enforce. • Councilmember Dawson asked and confirmed the Board of Supervisors were not requiring masks. She spoke about a recent meeting where half had masks and half did not. She would want to enforce some sort of protocols returning. • Councilmember Kwok echoed Councilmember Candell’s comments to not go back until masks and social distancing is not required.
• Vice Mayor Anduri agreed and said they should not go back until COVID is truly endemic.
They are losing over 1,000 per day and is shocked at the loosening of standards. • Mayor Gerringer summarized that the Council wants to wait until it is endemic, and agreed.
Question 2: Are the factors the same for “the big four” and other advisory bodies to return to in-person meetings?
If the City Council chooses to resume in-person meetings during the local health emergency, the City Council could regard other advisory bodies differently than the “big four” (City Council, Design Review, Planning Commission, Transportation & Circulation). For example, advisory bodies that meet in rooms that are not equipped for hybrid meetings, cannot accommodate social distancing, and are less likely to have public hearings or other urgently time-sensitive items, could continue to use AB361 to hold online meetings, regardless of whether the City Council decides to resume in-person meetings for other commissions and committees.
Mayor Gerringer asked if it is helpful to weigh in on these, given they want to wait until there are changes and not a need for protocols. She asked if Ms. Iarla had enough information for them to move forward until they go back to meeting in person.
City Council Meeting Page 13 of 18 March 14, 2022
Ms. Iarla said if the Council wants to delay discussing as to whether they should develop any safety protocols for in-person meetings until they are closer to that time, this is something they can do. The list of prompts might change.
She summarized for Question 1 that there was consensus that the Council did not want to return to any public meetings in person until there were no more social distancing, recommendations or requirements, masking, or health orders recommending against indoor gatherings like meetings.
For Question 2, the Council provided feedback that for now, they would include all advisory bodies as well as the City Council and “the big four” at this time.
Councilmember Kwok questioned if Ms. Iarla needed any feedback on the buildout of the technology in the Don Tatzin Community Hall or other locations. His idea is that they should continue to build it out and be ready for hybrid meetings even if they are delayed. Ms. Iarla said unless the Council tells them to stop, they are currently still proceeding with getting the built out and doing testing, etc. and having that technology ready to go.
Councilmember Kwok referred to Ms. Singer’s comments earlier about whether the PTR Commission can decide themselves to meet remotely or would they need to follow what the Council determines.
Ms. Subramanian said the way AB 361 is worded; each body can make the findings for itself. The City has had the Council make the findings on behalf of all of the Commissions for ease. But, in theory if the Council wanted to go back earlier and other commissions wanted to stay on Zoom and utilize AB 361, they could adopt their own resolutions, however, this might cause some discussion by the Council.
Councilmember Dawson noted this might create a different policy and treat staff differently across meeting bodies.
Mayor Gerringer said the Council sets Commissions by policy action, so having them all Commissions do something different and develop their own resolutions is not the way the system is set up and not something she was thinking about as efficient.
Vice Mayor Anduri agreed and thinks the return to in-person meetings should be set by the Council.
Councilmember Candell also agreed.
Mayor Gerringer stated there is no action on this item, confirmed staff had direction on Questions 1 and 2, and that the Council does want to move forward with the technology end for hybrid meetings to be able to continue robust engagement with residents from wherever they are.
8. STAFF REPORTS
A. Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager
City Council Priorities for FY 22-23
Recommendation: Approve the following priorities: (1) Wildfire prevention and preparedness and utility safety, (2) Improve pedestrian and traffic safety and multimodal mobility, (3) Create a Downtown and Mt. Diablo Corridor Specific Plan, and (4) Develop a fiscal sustainability plan for the short-term and long-term.
City Council Meeting Page 14 of 18 March 14, 2022
City Manager Srivatsa stated on March 5th the Council held a special workshop to discuss and develop priorities for the upcoming fiscal year and selectedthe four priorities: 1) Wildfire prevention and preparedness and utility safety (carryover from the current year) 2) Improve pedestrian and traffic safety and multimodal mobility (carryover from current year), 3) Create a Downtown and Mt. Diablo Corridor Specific Plan, and 4) Develop a fiscal sustainability plan for the short-term and long-term.
Staff informed the Council that the General Plan is currently underway and GPAC is almost done with the Housing Element, that staff cannot undertake two large forward-looking plans at the same time. Therefore, the Council directed staff to return today to confirm the priorities and to start to flesh out the idea of pivoting away from the General Plan to a more focused Downtown Specific Plan. She will turn over the presentation to the City Attorney and then to the Planning Director who has prepared a memo of how one might do that.
Staff believes it is time to look at the downtown in greater detail to be more proactive than reactive to development and to implement some of the new policies and measures the Council has identified as important to the community, such as pedestrian/bicycle mobility and sustainability.
City Attorney Mala Subramanian said as the Council may recall, Councilmember Kwok recused himself from discussions related to the BART property out of an abundance of caution. He sought an FPPC opinion letter.
The FPPC responded with a written advice letter and found he did not have a conflict of interest related to his property so he will be able to participate as it relates to rezoning the BART parcel. Because there is a discussion about possibly including the BART property as part of this specific plan, staff wanted to update the Council and the public.
Director of Planning and Building Services Greg Wolff stated priority number 3 was recrafted from the carryover goals from last year, pivoting from the General Plan Update process to focus more on the downtown which was identified as the area within which the majority of the anticipated housing units would be constructed currently being discussed by GPAC. Tomorrow night is the last scheduled meeting of the GPAC on the update, and there is an expectation they will make a recommendation to the PC and thereafter the Council.
There will be additional growth in the downtown, and it warrants planning to be able to accommodate those units through infrastructure, services, and an appropriate mix of land uses. Following their submission to HCD in a draft form, staff will be working on necessary updates to the Land Use Element and Safety Element this summer and fall as required by law to bring those elements into compliance with the Housing Element Update.
Staff has reviewed the goal setting workshop and is prepared to make this pivot if the Council determines this is what they would like to do and limit the geography of the planning document. Instead of a General Plan, the focus would be on the Downtown and the Mt. Diablo Corridor and, if deemed appropriate, adding in the BART Station parking lots as well.
There was discussion around being able to accommodate the new units and the new residents but doing so in an aspirational way; a way that is sustainable, welcoming, and beyond land use, the next highest contributor to GHG emissions is transportation and how residents will get around. The circulation element aspect of the downtown needs to be scrutinized and re-thought in a lot of ways.
City Council Meeting Page 15 of 18 March 14, 2022
Lastly, testimony was heard tonight and previously about building community and inclusivity and community as Ms. Herpich noted. Parks and opportunities for the community to gather bolster and foster community.
There has been a Parks Master Plan and Downtown Specific Plan that envisioned parks in certain locations, and in many ways, what staff is hoping for if the pivot is made for a DSP 2.0 which is updated to reflect the greater degree of growth, identify specific actionable outcomes and implementation plans on how they achieve those goals rather than just plan for them.
Staff would recommend that if the Council continues on its course on its pivot from the General Plan to perhaps meet with City Council liaisons for Planning and scope out such a plan and determine what the desired outcomes would be. Staff is committed and involved in the Housing Element update with statutory deadlines to meet, is short-staffed and losing their primary planner on that, but they must continue that effort.
Staff is receiving applications for planners to bring them up to full staff but it will take some time, but are happy to make the pivot and work with liaisons to scope that out, and if appropriate, put out an RFP and bring back more detailed information to the Council.
Ms. Srivatsa said staff has identified the desired outcomes in the priorities including goals set by commissions.
Others were things the Council would like to see achieved under each priority. Regarding next steps, on March 25th, the Management Team will meet in an all-day retreat and will look at the Council’s desired outcomes, current workload and with the help of a facilitator, start to develop work plans for each department. They are also trying to incorporate the recommendations of the Management Partner’s report which stressed the need for metrics and the need for work plans so the community has an idea of the levels of service the City is able to offer. Staff would also like to meet with a subcommittee of the Council to flesh out this idea of a downtown plan and return to the Council on April 11th with more information. This will include a draft scope of work for the downtown plan, a possible timeline and a budget. The timeline is impacted by the Housing Element and also impacted by the need to update the other two chapters of the General Plan. Today, staff’s recommendation is for the Council to confirm the four priorities so staff can begin working on their implementation.
Councilmember Dawson asked if the City would need to contract out for staff and asked if the RFP might be someone like an urban planner.
Mr. Wolff said the City is already using a contract firm to backfill planning positions and they still have an additional FTE to backfill as well as Mr. Fox’s position. There is a shortage of planners throughout the Bay Area given the level of need. Ms. Srivatsa added that she and Mr. Wolff have discussed an urban planning firm teaming up with a transportation planning firm that has expertise in sustainability, ped/bike mobility and safety.
Councilmember Candell asked if they need to ask GPAC if they can pivot or rename GPAC at all.
Ms. Srivatsa said staff does not have an answer for this today and it is also a question of when GPAC stops working on its current task and what does the City need in terms of citizen involvement in a downtown specific plan. They will work with the subcommittee and bring back suggestions on April 11th.
City Council Meeting Page 16 of 18 March 14, 2022
Councilmember Candell said with the downtown and particularly the BART parking lots, if they choose to do this planning process, she asked if they get to plan as if it is what the community wants or do they have to align with state laws. For example, she asked if they could choose to desire to plan for 3 or 4 stories and replace parking and units of a size they want or, in the plan she asked if they must follow AB 2923 and only choose that.
Mr. Wolff said BART has indicated its willingness and desire to work with the City if and when the BART lots are redeveloped. If the City adopts objective standards, land use guidelines, their goal would be to comply with those to the degree they do not violate or conflict with AB 2923. They have been told they need to accommodate for 5 stories but that does not mean universally. They could plan and envision full parking replacements, and whether that could come to fruition would depend on the pro forma on the cost of doing that.
Vice Mayor Anduri said if they were to start the specific plan and if the specific plan were to call for what was just described for full replacement parking, 4 levels, larger units, he asked how that would impact staff’s discussions with HCD when pointing out that the General Plan calls for 825 units on the BART parking lots.
Mr. Wolff said he does not know if would impact HCD’s review of the City’s Housing Element, but he can give this more thought.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period.
GRACE DIXON said she listened to the goal setting and she is very supportive of the four Council priorities. She is very excited about the concentration of the Downtown Mt. Diablo Corridor Plan but has questions about the timing. There has been discussion of a downtown overlay or park fees regarding the Quimby Act, and she asked how this will play into the new corridor vision and when will it happen. She asked when the parking ordinance will be re-written in the new corridor plan, asked if VMT will be used to update and change the parking ordinance, noted parks and playgrounds are not listed as a use in commercial zones and asked if those are an allowable land use and asked if these could be put in the City Code, and when. She asked if the noise ordinance will happen in the new corridor plan because of potential parks and school expansions.
DAVID CLARK asked what impact would the corridor plan have on the existing DSP, asked if it would supplant it, augment it, put it on hold, and the same question would apply to the Downtown Creeks Plan. He did not see mention of creeks in the corridor plan and he thinks creeks should be added. With regard to the 15-minute neighborhood bullet point, there is a network of pathways, easements, trails, etc. along the creeks and he thinks this could be aspirational with that item.
In the November 9th meeting, the Council held discussion on nexus studies, impact fees, and whether these will be funded or expanded. The Council reached the conclusion they will expand those fees, and he asked if those have been incorporated into this concept in terms of consideration of an overlay district or creek impact fee, or expanding the nexus study to include things like pathways along the creeks. He likes this approach and thanked the Council.
CHERYL MACDONALD echoed Mr. Clark’s first set of questions, said she listened to the goal setting meeting and suggested talking about the service industry because it is often overlooked. She would also like to find out how to say thank you to Ms. Allen before she leaves.
City Council Meeting Page 17 of 18 March 14, 2022
Ms. Srivatsa said there are lots of good suggestions about the Quimby Act overlay and the impact fees and the creeks plan. Those are important and as they develop the scope of this plan, staff will flesh it out so it could include many of these things, as well as the noise ordinance. Her suggestion would be to be strategic in what they exactly want out of this plan, especially if they want the plan done quickly. The more they add to the scope of work, the longer it will take.
Possibly, the next round of discussions would be what to focus on and what is urgent they need to handle by way of code amendments or design standards that will help the City be able to accommodate development in a manner in which the community wants.
Mayor Gerringer asked for Council comments regarding approving the four priorities or a motion.
Vice Mayor Anduri made a motion to approve the four priorities and asked if the Council would then discuss the bullet points underneath which gives guidance to staff before it goes into its retreat.
Mayor Gerringer said staff will be coming back on April 11th with these and the Council would discuss them at that time. She thinks if and when the Council votes to approve these, they could talk about staff’s suggestion for a Council subcommittee and a timeline.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Anduri/Candell) to approve the following priorities for FY 22-23: (1) Wildfire prevention and preparedness and utility safety, (2) Improve pedestrian and traffic safety and multimodal mobility, (3) Create a Downtown and Mt. Diablo Corridor Specific Plan, and (4) Develop a fiscal sustainability plan for the short-term and long-term. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, Candell, Dawson, Kwok and Gerringer; Noes: None).
Mayor Gerringer thanked staff for their work and summarized that on March 25th, staff will review priorities, look at outcomes the Council began to brainstorm during the goal setting session, review items that will carry over from last year, and staff will come back on April 11th. The Planning Commission liaisons can work with staff to look at developing the scope, timeline and a budget which would also include how that impacts the GPAC and their work moving forward beyond the Housing Element Update.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS – None
10. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR – None
11. COUNCIL/COMMISSION REPORTS
A. Councilmembers report on activities and consideration of matters a Councilmember wishes to initiate for placement on a future agenda.
Mayor Gerringer thanked the DEIB Committee with liaisons as Councilmembers Candell and Kwok for the very good presentation and conversation last Thursday at the Library. She also reported that the Tri-City meeting will be hosted by the City of Orinda which will focus on update of the Lamorinda Action Plan.
Vice Mayor Anduri thanked the City Manager and staff for moving quickly to fly the Ukrainian flag and asked if this is the first time a flag from another country has flown from that flagstaff, and Ms. Srivatsa said she did not know. Mayor Gerringer also recognized the sunflowers at the base of the flag.
City Council Meeting Page 18 of 18 March 14, 2022
Councilmember Kwok reported the Environmental Task Force met a few days ago and passed a recommendation that the City look into an ordinance for EV charging for all owners and renters in new multi-family construction.
Councilmember Dawson reported last weekend she and Mayor Gerringer were at the Lafayette Hillside Memorial for a vigil for Ukraine which was a nice turnout. She thanked Ms. Robinson for being so central to the ARPA subcommittee discussions.
B. City Manager’s Update
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Ms. Srivatsa recognized that it was Ms. Iarla’s idea to buy the sunflowers and wrap them around the flagpole. She reminded the Council that next Friday the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce is holding the Joint Citizen of the Year Dinner to honor Bill Fraser and Janet Thomas.
12. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter from Jay Lifson, Executive Director of the Lafayette Chamber of Commerce, requesting permission to use Lafayette Plaza for Lafayette Rotary Club Annual Candy Scramble on Saturday, April 16th from 9:30am to 11am including No Parking on Plaza Way and a portion of Golden Gate Way.
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2022-17.
Mayor Gerringer opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/Dawson) to adopt Resolution 2022-17. Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Gerringer, Anduri, Candell, Dawson, and Kwok; Noes: None).
13. ADJOURNMENT – 9:49 p.m.
APPROVED:
__________________________________
Teresa Gerringer, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Joanne Robbins, City Clerk