MINUTES
Wednesday, September 7, 2022 5:00 P.M. Closed Session
6:30 P.M. Open Session
REGULAR MEETING
CITY COUNCIL, AIRPORT COMMISSION,
MARINA ABRAMS B NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, PRESTON PARK SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITY NON-PROFIT CORPORATION, SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE FORMER
MARINA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND MARINA GROUNDWATER
SUSTAINABILITY AGENCY
Council Chambers
211 Hillcrest Avenue
Marina, California
Zoom Meeting URL: https://zoom.us/j/730251556
Zoom Meeting Telephone Only Participation: 1-669-900-9128 - Webinar ID: 730 251 556
In accordance with California Government Code §54953(e)(1)(A) and (C) and the Proclamation of a State of Emergency issued by Governor Newsom on March 4, 2020, under the provisions of Government Code §8625 related to the COVID -19 (coronavirus) pandemic, consistent with recommendations by State and local health officials regarding social distancing and in order to prevent an imminent risk to the health and safety of attendees as determ ined in Resolution 2022-105, public participation in City of Marina City Council public meetings shall be electronic only and without a physical location for public participation until the earlier of May 31, 2022, or such time as the City Council may ado pt a resolution in accordance with Government Code §54953(e)(3). This meeting is being broadcast “live” on Access Media Productions (AMP) Community Television Cable 25 and on t he City of Marina Channel and on the i nternet at https://accessmediaproductions.org/
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL & ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM: (City Council, Airport Commissioners, Marina Abrams B Non -Profit Corporation, Preston Park Sustainable Communities Nonpr ofit Corporation, Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency Members and Ma rina Groundwater Sustainability Agency)
Cristina Medina Dirksen, David Burnett, Lisa Berkley, Mayor Pro -Tem/Vice Chair Kathy Biala, Mayor/Chair Bruce C. Delgado
3. CLOSED SESS ION: As permitted by Government Code Sect ion 54956 et seq., the (City Council, A irport Commissioners, Marina Abrams B Non -Profit Corporation, Preston Park Sustainable Communities Nonpr ofit Corporation, Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency M embers and Ma rina Groundwater Sustainabili ty Agency) may adjourn to a C losed or E xecutive Session to consider specific matters dealing with litigation, certain personnel matters, property negotiations or to confer with the City’s Meyers -Milias- Brown Act representative.
MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 2
a. Conference with Legal Counsel, Anticipated Litigation, Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to § 54956.9(b): Three cases
6:30 PM - RECONVENE OPEN SESSI ON AND REPORT ON ANY ACTIONS TAKEN I N
CLOSED SESSION
Heidi Quinn, City Attorney reported out Closed Session: Council met in Closed Session with regard to the item listed under 3a, Council received information, provided direction and no reportable action was taken.
4. MOMENT OF SILENCE & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (Please stand)
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
a National Recovery Month Proclamation, Sun Street Center b Jacob’s Heart Childhood Cancer Awareness Month Proclamation c Monterey Peninsula College 75th Anniversary Proclamation
6. SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE FLOOR: Any member of the Public or the City Council may make an announcement of special events or meetings of interest as information to Cou ncil and Public. Any member of the pub lic may comment on any matter within the City Council’s jurisdiction which is not on the agenda. Please state your name for the record. Action will not be taken on an item that is not on the agenda. If it requires action, it will be r eferred to staff and/o r pla ced on a futu re agenda. City C ouncil members or City staff may briefly respond to stat ements made or que stions posed as permitted by Government Code Section 54954.2. In order that all interested parties have an opportunity to speak, please limit comments to a maximum of four (4) minutes. Any member of the public may comment on any matter listed on this agenda at the time the matter is being considered by the City Council. • Fernando Munzo – Spoke about leaving messages with the Mayor and City Manager regarding a conversation with police chief Nieto during a non-sanctioned event. Looking to have a sit-down meeting with the City Manager and Mayor to discuss this conversation but was told city can't take any stake in it that it was on her own time.
• Amy Warren – Instructor for Guitars Not Guns P rogram an d a nnounced that the Marina Teen Center Guitars Not Guns band just perf ormed at the West End Festival 2 weekends ago .
Encourage anyone who's interested in le arning guitar we're playing more guitar to stop by the Team Center any Saturday morning between 10 am and noon . C oncerned that the public comments published online for tonight's meeting are incomplete hopes that before the meeting continues where at some point, somebody could check and make sure all the public comments are actually publicly available.
• Brian McCarthy – Shocked along with some other residents to see the item regarding the card room license on tonight's agenda, which has now been pulled. Commented on the language in the staff report about staff having no concerns proposal Municipal code change . Spoke about gambling addiction statistics in California. Wou ld like to see a robust discussion before Council makes a decision on amending the municipal code to allow for a non-conform abandoned use. • Pat Grant – Asked if it was true that the city staff has spent time and money to significantly increase gambling in our town? Sad that they would degrade the quality of life in our city. • Jeff Markham – Commented on staff proposal to address Patto n Parkway erosion issue, but disappointed that tonight's regular meeting of the City Council does not include an update o n the problems in Cypress Knolls. Requested that an update be provided by city staff.
MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 3
• Roger Frik – Expressed appreciation for your l eadership and the Council members who supported the work on that wall.
• Jasmine – Expressed concerns about the speed lim it along Imjin P arkway and asked i f c ouncil considered redlight cameras? Commented on the cardroom matter and con cerned about the sitemap location and ask if that site map had a footprint on the Monterey San Gilia along the on ramp to highway one.
• Tommy Bolea – Spoke about the developments taking place in North and South Marina and central Marina dying because of it. Commented on bu ilding a new fire station at 3056 Del Monte Blvd ; and the accident study. Spoke about the new car wash going in next to Walmart and the water that will be use and the noise.
• Karen Andersen – Asked when will the fire department start extinguishing the fires in the old derelict duplexes in Cypress Knolls so that the smoke and toxic fumes from those fires aren't being spread all over the neighborhoods . S upport Jasmine's comments regarding San Gil ia as an environmentally protected habitat there around the high school, and the reduction of the speed limit on Imjin Parkway.
• Glenn Woodson – Requested that the city of Marina ad dress in a public meeting or form how the traffic studies are be ing adjusted to deal with the whole expanding building that's going on at the Dunes area. Commented on CalTrans not expan ding bridge on westbound Imjin and the traffic congestion along 2nd Ave in the mornings. Briefly comment on the MST Surf Line project. • Nancy Amadeo – Informed the public that the Planning Commission makes land use decisions, and all meeting are open to the public for comment and can request to receive agenda via the websit e.
Council makes policy decisions and the only time they would be seen by the City Council would be if they had been denied. and the applicant is appealing . Thanked the public works and traffic committee for putting up barriers along Cardoza so quickly. Commented about the startup of the commissions.
• Council Member Burnett – Questioned the process about have pervio us speaker talk about an ite m that in on the agenda but then that item was continued to another meeting. • Council Member Medina Dirksen – Announced MPUSD will be having a Marina High new Multi- use Pro Field Project community meeting and feedback session September 2 9th from 5 to 6 :30 at the Marina High School Cafe. Also announced this Friday, Saturday, and Sunday the Friends of the Marina L ibrary will be having a book sa le; Saturday will be at face painting free clothing exchange free produce and Food courtesy of the Food Bank and a dad's read featuring our own district for staff assistant Eric Mora. Asked if agenda item 11a could be heard next. Hats off to fire department and public works for responding to the fires, and that have been plaguing the barracks. • Mayor Delgado – Spoke about the Labor Day event held at the Vince DiMaggio Park last Saturday. Saturday, we had a cleanup along the woods near Salinas Avenue, behind Preston Park and kudos to Police Department and Public Works Department, they worked hard with the Gavilan prisoner crew from Soledad prison to trim up a lot of oak trees, remove a lot of dead, ugly pine trees that were fire h azards and ugly so t hat whole place now is safer . This coming Sunday. We have a cleanup on monthly cleanup starts at 10:00am and end at noon meet at 10 :00am at the southern junction of Lapis Road and Del Monte Boulevard. On September 17th Friends of Marina Parks is backed by popular demand, and their first return project. Volunteers are encouraged to go to Windy Hill Park at the top of DeForest Road and the east end of Beach Road where they'll be spreading chips, sweeping sidewalks and doing other things to spruce up the Windy Hill Park from 9:00-Noon.
MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 4
7. CONSENT AGENDA FOR THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FORMER MARINA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: Background information has been provided to the Successor Agency of the former Redevelopment Agency on all matters listed under the Consent Agenda, and these item s are considered to be routine. All items under the C onsent Agenda ar e normally approved by one motion. Prior to such a motion being made, any member of the public or the City Council may a sk a quest ion or make a comment a bout an agenda item and s taff wil l provide a response. If discus sion or a lengthy explanation is requ ired, that item will b e removed from the Consent Agenda for Successor Agency to the former Marina Redevelopment Agency and placed at the end of Other Action Items Successor Agency to the former Marina Redevelopment Agency.
8. CONSENT AGENDA: Background information has been provid ed to the City Council, Airport Commission, Marina Abrams B Non-Profit Corporation, and Redevelopment Agency on all matters listed under the Consent Agenda, and these items are consi dered to be rou tine. All items under the Consent Agenda are normally appro ved by one motion. Prior to such a motion being made, any member of the public or the City Council may ask a question or make a comment about an agenda item and staff will provide a response. If discussion or a lengthy explanation is required, that item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed at the end of Other Action Items. a. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE:
(1) Accounts Payable Check Numbers 100567- 100757, totaling $1,900,383.03 b. MINUTES:
(1) August 3, 2022, Special City Council Meeting
(2) August 16, 2022, Regular City Council Meeting
c. CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY: None
d. AWARD OF BID: None
e. CALL FOR BIDS: None
f. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS:
(1) City Council consider adopting Resolution No. 202 2-110, regarding the Ralph M. B rown Ac t (California Go vernment Code §§5495 0-54963, making c ertain findings; and authorizing t he city to continue to i mplement remote teleconferenced public meetings of the City Coun cil and its constituent bodies for the period September 20, 2022, through October 20, 2022. g. APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS:
(1) City Council co nsider adopting Resolution No. 2022 -111, approving a Professional Services Agreement with Raimi+Associates for the preparation of Objective Design Standards for an amount not to exceed $167,000; authorize the Finance Director to make necessary accounting and budgetary entries; and authorize the City Manager t o execute the Agreement on beha lf of C ity with Raimi+Associates subject to final review by the City Attorney. h. ACCEPTANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: None
i. MAPS: None
j. REPORTS: (RECEIVE AND FILE):
(1) City Council receive Investment Reports for the City of Marina, City of Marina as Successor Agenc y to the Marina Redevelopment Agency, and Pre ston Park Sustainable Community Non-Profit Corpor ation (PPSC -NPC) for the quarter ended Jun 30, 2022.
MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 5
k. FUNDING & BUDGET MATTERS:
(1) City C ouncil consider adopting Resolution No. 2022 -112, approving the allocation and appropriation of $95,000 from unallocated General Funds to the Capital Im provement Program adding the Patton Parkway Retain ing Wall Repair Project HSR2201; and authorizing Finance Director to m ake ne cessary accounting and budgetary entries
l. APPROVE ORDINANCES (WAIVE SECOND READING): None
m. APPROVE APPOINTMENTS: None
Denise Turley, 8g(1) asked what is the project about?
Mayor Pro Tem pulled agenda item 8k(1) for quick discussion BERKLEY/BIALA: TO APPROVE THE CONSE NT AGENDA MINU S 8k(1). 5-0-0-0 Motion Passes by Roll Call Vote.
8k(1)
Mayor Pro Tem B iala asked that additional language be add ed to the resolution, second Where as to include the following language: “on March 10, 2022, the City Manager and the Mayor Pro Tem conduct with a site tour with residents residing at 3 0 0, 2 Independence Avenue to assess the level of erosion along patent parkway after this resident sent multiple photos of the area affected” DELGADO/BERKLEY: TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM 8k(1) WITH THE ADDI TIONAL LANGUAGE SUGGESTED. 5-0-0-0 Motion Passes by Roll Call Vote
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
a. City Council open a public hearing, take testimony from the public and read by title only and approve first reading of Ordinance No. 2022-, amending Marina Municipal Code, Title 5 to modify Section 5.32.090 to allow the a ssignment of a second cardroom permit in the Marina Municipal Code. Continued to October 6, 2022
10. OTHER ACTIONS ITE MS OF THE SUCCE SSOR AGENC Y TO THE FORMER MARINA R EDEVELOPMENT AGEN CY: Action l isted for each Agenda item is that which is requested by staff. The Successor Agency may, at its discretion, take action on any items. The pu blic is invited to approach th e pod ium to provide up to four (4) minutes of public comment.
11. OTHER ACTION ITEMS: Action listed for each Agenda item is that which is requested by staff.
The City Council may, at its discretion, take action on any items. The public is invited to approach the podium to provide up to four (4) minutes of public comment.
Note: No additional major projects or p rograms should be undertaken w ithout review of the impacts on existing priorities (Resolution No. 2006-79 – April 4, 2006). a. City Council consider adopting Resolution No. 2022-113, approve a concessionaire agreement with Chaparral Country Corporation, In c. of Woodside CA to provide recreational faci lities and programs to the public at t he Marina Equestrian Cen ter Park; and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement on behalf of the City subject to final review and approval by the City Attorney; and direct staff to provide notice to vacate to the Marina Equestrian Association.
MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 6
Council Questions: We're not talking about other possibilities for concessionaires or what's wrong with Chaparral or what's wonderful about Chaparral we're just speaking about the agreement, correct? with Chaparral or what's wonderful about Chaparral we'r e just speaking about the agreement , correct? What are the rules for things We talk about closed session in closed session? Would it be appropriate to discuss this contract in cl osed session since we’re talking about real property terms and conditions? Regarding the let ters from Panetta and Lynch , c an the public speak about the two new pieces of information in the pa cket? Are there mat erial or non -material changes in th e new 16-page agreement presented to Council tonight? What is the current zo ning for this property? If it's zone Park and we assess it fair market value because we want t o buy it from the National Park Service, is it fair market value of park property as the highest and best use given that that’s its zoning? If we were to tr try to transfer the property to other government entities, such as the county capable of operating the site as a public park under NPS regulations, from what you know about the County do you think they would be interested? A ccording to public comment that's comi ng in the last couple of days there is a new lawsuit, and there was an old lawsuit. but the old lawsuit may have been required to have been disclosed when the R FP, Section F(b) proposers were required to provide a listing of any lawsuit initiated with the last 5 years. Chaparral Ranch said they had none, but apparently there was a case in the County of San Meto that was not disclosed, was the 2018 case disclosed? With the new lawsuit is there anything we should be aware of? It was mentioned that volunteer holiday celebrations would be allowed under into the future , are you aware that those holiday celebrations in the past were put on by the Marina Equestrian Association Volunteers? Who do you think might step in to fill the shoes of those organizers of those large holiday celebrations that have been occurring at this at the question center? Did you know that it was a 22 hour a day endeavor that the Question Association Volunteers provided for the emergency evacuation of those horses ? Do you think that in the future there will be groups that would step forward for 22 hours a day, several days in a row for emergency evacuations if there's no more volunteers at the equestrian center? So just for clarification here. These options that We're talking about this is going to be decided by the Department of the Interior and City Council has no voice in that, correct? So to the extent that the contract itself is to have some tweaks or changes to it, is there a timeframe that the NPS would allow us to make some, you kn ow, continue to make minor revisions to it before they would shut that off ? If we choose to buy i t (the land) the land still gets turned back over to the National Parks Service and the GSA then we would be competing like any other potential buyer for the price of that property , correct? On page 11 of the agreement is it listed that the base rent will be increasin g of the 5-year period? Why would we be starting off at a base that actually is lower than what the M EA is currently paying? Where is the f unding going to come from for the ADA restrooms? What is Chaparral committing to do as far as improvements? Will a timeline and schedule of performance be placed in the agreement for Chaparral? At what point do we go back to increasing the rent? What is David Seigenthaler’s official title? The letter for Panetta and the letter that followed from N PS was there direct communication between Congre ssman Panetta and Mr.
Lynch? What is the status of that communication today? Is Mr. Lynch t he boss of Seigentha ler? What is the reporting relationship? How much money are we anticipating the city to put into the MEC to get it up to minimal standards before handing it over? Who in the city will oversee the maintenance? Can we name someone and put it into the agr eement? The preservation of historic buildings, is it the concessionaire or the city ’s prerogative to designate historical sites that we want to keep preserved? How is the process done? Who provided us the options that we're considering tonight was this options that staff generated? Or was this options that only that had to be approved by the NPS? Is there room for other options? Does the NPS have to approve any other options? How is the private boarding of horse belonging to a corporation any differ ent than courses belongi ng to a nonprofit? How does the NPS know that we ’re not in compliance? What is the MEA currently paying? Does the fact that one's a profit for profit, and the other a nonprofit make any difference in how much we charge rent? The Asbestos/Lead Based Paint Report, is it true that horse will be boarded in these buildings, and or is it true that courses will be boarded in buildings with historic significance? MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 7
Is there some requirements as to when you have historic buildings, how th ey must be maintained? Might we incur liability if a horse was injured or ill, because of the conditions of lead, based paint or and or asbestos in our buildings ? How w ell was the property inventoried? Since a year has lapsed between the time the agreem ent the concession aire was selected in your experience in contracts/agreements what would you consider material changes to the material information that may or may not would litigate investigations by outside organizations, governmental organizations ? What if there is a change in their financial circumstances , what would happen then? Page 34 of our packet , Exhibit B, just to get confirmation is that the agreement that we're talking about is the 13.176 acres that comprise identified object s C & D on the ma p only, the other parcels are not part of this agreement , correct? Do you see a need to add language to the contract that specifies that that parking area shall remain public access? Page 13 in the original concession agreement item, 11 d reads “the city shall provider repairs and upgrades to infrastr ucture designated and exhibit h in a timely manner with unavailable funding available to city after the repairs and upgrades concessionaire, and at its own expense shall be responsible for maintenance of the infrastructure as designated in exhibit h”. Do you see a need to add a similar paragraph for the concessiona ire that he would, you know, complete the upgrades or upgrade complete whatever he's going to do in a timely manner ? Is there a need to add language that the concession aire shall abide by prevailing wage? Can we do an inve ntory of all the equipment out at the MEC that belongs to the city? Are there re-evaluation periods in this agreement along with the automatic rene wals? If city were to purchase the park, do we have an estimated cost?
Does a no vote on staff recommendation indicate the city will not compl y with the NPS , that it will automate, revert one of those 4 options that was spelled in the Lynch letter? The 1998 quit claim deed, the 1998 program of utilization all allow for some long-term boarding is that is that a correct statement? What legal venue do we go to, to object if we think a there's a poor written record ? Is there a Lands appeal board to hear these kinds o f conflicts? If we negate the RFP where we have already awarded Chaparral is the concessionaire doesn't that open us up to a lawsuit ? Did the NPS officially approve the 1998 POU?
Delgado/Medina Dirksen: not approve lease with chaparral country, and that we direct staff to discuss with National Park service the other options, such as getting an appraisal, the fair market value, and other options that they list.
Substitute Motion
Burnett/Berkley: we approve the selection of chaparral as defined in the agenda, and that we, continue to revive the operating agreement with the items that have been discussed this evening and asked Staff to come back with a updated agreement for discussion and final approval (Motion Withdrawn) Council Member Berkley seconded with an amendment as follows: that we approve the concessionaire agreement; and
(1) to first, visit and do appropriate inventory of all items (2) that we increase the base rent Once improvements are completed by year 2, and that rent should be kept in line with some type of index that should never fall below fair rental value after the first 6 months
(3) that we should include historic preservations of buildings to highlight their historic importance, (4) and we should include as part of item, 11d, which is on page 13 of the current document, that we have improvements to be made by the concessionair e in detail with a t imeline similar to what we did with the city;
(5) that we include prevailing wage as a requirement for all work done on the property that that be leased,
MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 8
(6) that the parking lots be usable by all park visitors (7) that we have staff come back to us with these revisions within 30 days, and give notice by October first, and give it so that it's a ninety-day notification for vacate; (8) And that on January first of 2023 chaparral can begin their new concession air serve as our new concessionaire.
Council Member Burnett withdr ew his subs titute mot ion and Seconded Council Me mber Berkley’s amendments
New Substitute Motion
BERKLEY/BURNETT: that we approve the recommended agreement, and that we direct staff to do the following:
1. to first, visit and do appropriate inventory of all items
2. that we increase the base rent Once improvements are comple ted by year 2, and that rent should be kept in line with some type of index that should never fall below fair rental value after the first 6 months
3. that we sh ould include historic preservations of buildings to highlight their historic importance,
4. and we should include as part of item, 11d, which is on page 13 of the current document, that we have improvements to be made by the concessionair e in detail with a t imeline similar to what we did with the city;
5. that we include prevailing wage as a requirement for all work done on the property that that be leased,
6. that the parking lots be usable by all park visitors
7. that we have staff come back to us with these revisions within 30 days, and give notice by October first, and give it so that it's a ninety-day notification for vacate.
8. And that on January first o f 2023 chaparral can begin their new concession air serve as our new concessionaire.
Public Comments:
• Glenn Woodson – Commented on the changes could material affect, and this should be postponed until the entire council in public get a chance to review . A sked if this contract is a categ ory 1 or category 2? Given the contentious nature of this, we should be requesting that the contractor provide detailed se rvice level agreements and metrics that give c omplete transparency.
Commented o n the contract and asked mul tiple questions relating to compliance . Asked if concessionaire will be required to get appro val to expand or remove structures such as the HAM Radio station. Commented on RFP responses
• Margaret Davis – Agrees with Councilmember, Berkeley, and what Glenn just said that there needs to be a scheduler performance as t o what the tenant is going to do. Without them they are unenforceable. Opposes buying property that which is already used for free to accommodate non- resident borders . Spoke about possible issues with removing the MEA without installing a concessionaire. Noted that the city should allow Chaparral to move in as soon as possible after giving the notice, if for no other reason than saf ety. R eminded Council and the public that the historical buildings are a veterinary hospital for horses. They were designed to board horses and historically sick horses were boarded in the buildings.
MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 9
• Cathleen Venn – Spoke about the classes she offers at the MEC at a discounted rate and the various different program s and event s that take place without any city acknowledgement. Expressed concerns about Chap arral’s intensions to use the barns to house the h orses. The barns lack adequate ventilation, and no opportunity for horses to look outside. Spoke about proper ventilation for the barn/stalls; spoke about newly emerging veterinary research indicat ing acceptable space standard for housing horses. Commented on the historic buildings. • Julie – Commented on a June 13, 2018, NPS letter where they were seeking business proposals for the Rock Creek Park Horse Center in DC.
• Jennifer Pendergast – Commented on the list of shady things on Chaparral and doesn’t understand why, Marina is going into business with this corporation. Spoke about Chaparral ’s budget and GoFundMe page. Spoke about the current f ree activities provided at the MEC. Opp oses moving forward.
• Jenna Larkin – Spoke about the current volunteers might be conflicted with working with a for - profit c orporation being investigated by OSHA . Commented on the city not understanding the market value for boarding horses and the costs a ssociated with it. Commented on a statement made by Council Member Berkley regarding Jimmy Panetta. • Jeff Markham – Noted that the 1990 Quitclaim deed does not mention the Lands to Parks program with the NPS AND only mentions that the equestrian center be used for public for a public park in public recreational, recreational purposes. Feels the city has allowed itself to be bullied by the NPS with no remedies.
• Lindsey Beery – Commented on the RFP process and Chaparral ’s taxes/financials. Believes city staff knows that the concessionaire will fail and hopping it will be turned back over to the NPS and auctioned off to the highest bidder. Stated wanted a horse park but then neglected it. Believe the council is being pressured and bullied into making a decision that’s bad for the community. • Amy Warren – Commented on the letter from Jimmy Panetta’s office and the letter from David Siegenthaler’ s office. Noted the Equestrian Center is not like it use to be in 2007 and since 2012 the property has been available for public use . Commented on the MEA ’s boarding agreements, wait list, rotations. Stated MEA’s response to the RFP was not give a fair hearing. Spoke as to why the MEA can provide free or reduced lessons.
• Krystal – Stated that Chaparral’s response to the RF P provided fault docume nts. Read a quote made by Council Member Berkley from an article and asked if she still felt the same. Asked if the city council could disqualify Chaparral due to current documents and move forward with the second choice, the Marina Equestrian A ssociation? Asked that the MEA not be evicted unt il a contract has been signed so that the park is looked after and protected. Noted that the barns flood in the aisles as well as the tack rooms when it rains. Spoke on the current conditions of the barn stalls.
• Michelle Bacon – Commented on the con cessionaire agreement and stated that all agreem ents can be negotiat ed and any agreement that is non -binding is not executed. Anyone can change their mind. Believe council should reconsider their decision on Chaparral due to the new information being provid ed by the public . Spoke about the OSHA visits to Ch aparral’s location, and their budgets. Thinks that going back and revisiting this a nd looking into how it's worded ex actly one word can change everything with the national park service • Evan Kort – Supports Mayor Delgado’s motion.
• Andria Greene – Spoke about the MEA and what they provide at the MEC facility. As stewards of the city, mayor and Counter Council members it’s your job is to promote the public interests of our community. Commented on Chapa rral’s treatment of horses and reviews of their existing locations.
MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 10
• Brian Mc Carthy – Thinks this issue has brought out the best in Marina, and I'm proud of community members on all sides of the issue . C oncerned that we keep using this term of private boarding and yet there's been codified definition of private boarding. Spoke about d escendants of Comanche which is a is a significant historical resource to the city of Mari na. Agrees with Congressman Panetta who said that we should be making our own decisio ns here. Believes we need to continue to talk about the fact that the amateur radio station is a part of this part. It's in the POU it's a vital resource to the city. Agrees that there is a poor relationship with the NPS. • Kate Spencer – Encourages the co uncil to look at all the options and do a cost/benefit analysis.
How m uch would the city actually have to put forward in order for chaparral to commence operations? Commented on contract details the city would be respons ible for and the dilapidated buildings wanting to be used. Council should investigate the fair market value of the property.
Commented on the lessons learned from a for-profit corporation getting low wages. • Paula Pelot – Noted that the concessionaire has already been selected and the comments coming in are te etering on the verge o f defa mation. Stated that Rock Creek Park is not a Lands to Park program therefore, it is not restricted under the Land of Parks Act. Noted i t was a past council member who pointed out that the city was in vio lation of the deed and now it’s being remedied.
Support the motion and hope the council does too.
• Jasona Prowes – Asked how is a private corporation boarding their own h orses for profit use, with no regulations, no oversight, and no commu nity involvement better than public boarding facility that offers use to the entire community ? Let’s get creative and figure out a bet ter solution to the conflict of NPS regulation which says no private use.
• Gail Morton – Provided history of how Marina obtained the ME C and surrounding la nds. Noted The National Park Service under the Lands to Park has deemed that private boarding is a private use and they are against private use because of the covenant and the deed . Spoke about w hat are the responsibilities of the city f or this prop erty. Getting Chaparral in there and ge tting that operating as public park is what the city still needs to look at. Supports the motion. • Nichole Fisher – Asked if the discrepancies in Chaparral’s finances were ever explained and were they ma de public per the RFP? Spoke about conditions in th e RFP that were not follo wed in Chaparrals response relating to lawsuits , litigations, claims and settlements . Commented on new information being presented by the public reg arding Chaparral. Thinks the r eevaluation of the current proposal would be appropriate, if not a disqualification altogether. Council should be given the opportunity to retract their original votes or delay the vote to allow time for due diligence. • Laura – Concerned about all the new information being presented by the public and Council should too. A sked why the city would put the MEC in the hands of an out-of-town corporation when a local non -profit has roots in the community ? The C enter is providing a great service to the community.
• Amanda Kort – Spoke of her equestrian family’s heritage. Believes an independent or neutral horse person should be brought to act as a consultant through this process. Also asked why the council will risk our community equestrian center and put it in the hands of a large corporation that does have a lot of red flags? Appreciates the Mayor motion. • Nancy Amadeo – Spoke about the relationships between the D epartment of Interior, the NPS and Lands to Parks program. Commented on the Program of Utilization, which was approved in 2013 minus the privat e boarding. Expressed concerns about buying back this park. In support of the motion. Spoke about the Mayor’s comment on giving the concessionaires agreement to Chaparral.
Spoke about the MEA members comments on how Marina can do this to them.
MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 11
• Liesbeth Visscher – Noted that wo differ ent issues are being discussed and it is hard to accept for the current users, bu t City Co uncil already has made a decision a year ago. Supports Council Member Berkley’s motion.
• Jasmine Ruvalcaba – Commented on the cost , terms and conditions of the historical buildings in the agreement, specifically 11d . A sked what repairs will be done. What are the costs of the asbestos survey on the four bui ldings in Exhibit H. is it to remediate or cleanup? Commented and asked questions on the restrooms. Is there an estimate of the required building permits that are needed, and who will pay for those? Asked what kind of fr ee programs Chaparral would be offering?
• Denise Turley – Stated that over the 20 -years she’s live in the area she has never seen a horse or person on a horse and vehicle traffic near each other. Someone’s doing a good job of keeping them separate. Urged council to trust the process. Supports Council Member Berkley’s motion. • Greg Furey – Thinks the dye was cast w hen the city took over the property with the deed restrictions that were in place. Thinks the MEA has done a wonderfu l job but was painted into a corner a long time ago. Upsetting that people call up an d vilify an organization. Stated he visited Chaparrals other si tes. Commented on OSHA visits for any comp any that has work related accidents/injuries. Spoke about tour ists coming in and the gateway to the national monument.
Hopes council will make a decision that benefits the community. • Tommy Bolea – Stated that it ’s sad that we farm everything out to a third-party company. Noted that Monterey runs the swimming po ol with its employees , Marina should too. Spoke about the surrounding area adjacent to the MEC.
• Laura Hoover – Express support for Mayor Delgado’s resolution, the city still has options and no need to rush a decision. Take the time to make the right decision. • Amy – Spoke about the many people coming through that just want to see and touch the horses.
Commented that C haparral just p uts up a fence around thei r horses, and nobody's allowed to get near the horses unless you're paying customer . Hopes the public can still have access to the horses with no charge and be written in the contract.
Substitute Motion #2
Biala/Medina Dirksen: it ha s to d o with one. The b asic compliance issue is to terminate the agreement with MEA. that sets us in a compliant mode with the NPS; And then the other issue of the chaparral, we wait to make that decision on the next meeting, or whenever it can be available night the sooner the better; so that we get the some of the basic questions that were asked by some of the public and the and the Mayor and the Councilwoman Medina Dirksen to see what is valid about those comments
Council Member Medina Dirksen asked for an amendment to this substitute motion, that we send Notice to Vacate after we get answers to some question in a closed session meeting.
Council Member Berkley Called for the Question. 4-1(Delgado)-0-0 Mayor Delgado asked for Roll Call Vote for Substitute Motion #2 Council Member Medina Dirksen asked Mayor Pro Tem Biala to restate her substitute motion.
Restate Substitute Motion #2
Biala/Medina Dirksen: Direct staff to provide notice to vacate to the Marina Equestrian Association within 90 days. 1-4(Medina Dirksen, Burnett, Berkley, Delgado)-0-0 Substitute Motion # 2 Fails by Roll Call Vote
MINUTES for City Council Meeting of Wednesday, September 7, 2022 Page 12
Council Member Medina Dirksen asked for Council Member Berkley to restate her substitute motion Restated Substitute Motion
BERKLEY/BURNETT: TO ACCEPT THE AGREEMENT AND DIRECT STAFF TO DO THE FOLLOWING:
1. TO VISIT AND DO APPROPRIATE INVENTORY OF ALL ITEMS AFTER THE M EA HAS VACATED.
2. TO INCREASE THE BASE RENT O NCE THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE COMPLETED BY YEAR 2, THAT RENT SHOULD BE KEPT IN LINE WI TH SOME TYPE OF AN
INDEX AND SHOULD NEVER FALL BELOW FAIR RENTAL VALUE AFTER THE FIRST 6 MONTHS.
3. SHOULD INCLUDE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF THE BUILDING S TO HIGHLIGHT THEIR HISTORIC IMPORTANCE.
4. PART OF THE CURRENT ITEM NUMBER 11 D. ON PAGE 13, THAT DESCRIBES THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY FOR IMPROVEMENTS. THAT IT SHOULD
ALSO DESCRIBE THE IMPROVEMENTS TO MADE BY THE CONCESSIONAIRE IN DETAIL, AND WITH A TIMELINE.
5. WE SHOULD INCLUDE MEN TION OF REQUIRED PREVAILING WAGE AS A REQUIREMENT FOR ALL WORK DONE ON THE PROPERTY.
6. WE SHOULD INCLUDE THE PARKIN G LOTS BE USABLE BY ALL PARK VISITORS.
7. THAT VOLUNTEERS BE INCLUDED, AS WAS ENCOURAGED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCESS.
8. THAT WE GIVE NOTICE OF INTENT TO VACATE OR PLAN TO VACATE BY THE TENTH OF SEPTEMBER TO THE MEA, AND THAT THEY HAVE 90 DAYS.
9. STAFF TO COME BACK IN 45-DAYS WITH THE REVISIONS TO THE AGREEMENT.
10. THAT ON JANUARY 1, 2023, CHAPARRAL WILL TAKE OVER THE CONCESSIONAIRE.
11. THAT IN THE CONTRACT WE INCLUDE A BREACH OF A MATERIAL TERM AND ADD SOMETHING REGARDING ANY DISCOVERY OF FRAUD IN THE CONTRACT. 3-2(Medina Dirksen, Delgado)-0-0 Motion Passes by Roll Call Vote
12. COUNCIL & STAFF INFORMATIONAL REPORTS:
a. Monterey County Mayor’s Association [Mayor Bruce Delgado] b. Council and staff opportunity to ask a que stion for clarification or make a brief report on his or her own activities as permitted by Government Code Section 54954.2.
13. ADJOURNMENT: The Council meeting adjourned at 12:40 A.M.
Anita Sharp, Deputy City Clerk
ATTEST:
Bruce C. Delgado, Mayor