City Council
Mayor Patrick Slayter
Vice Mayor Neysa Hinton
Una Glass
Sarah Glade Gurney
Diana Rich
City Manager
Larry McLaughlin
[email protected]
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk, MMC
Mary Gourley
[email protected]
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
`MINUTES FOR Meeting of January 4, 2022
As Approved by the City Council at their regular meeting of January 18, 2022 The City Council Regular meeting was held via teleconference pursuant to AB 361.
Please note that minutes are not meant to be verbatim minutes and are meant to be the City’s record of a summary of actions that took place at the meeting.
6:00 pm Convene City Council Meeting - Meeting Start Time (ZOOM VIRTUAL FORMAT) CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Slayter called the regular meeting to order at 6:02 pm.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Mayor Patrick Slayter – By video teleconference Vice Mayor Neysa Hinton – By video teleconference
Councilmember Una Glass – By video teleconference
Councilmember Sarah Gurney - By video teleconference
Councilmember Diana Gardner Rich - By video teleconference
Absent: None
Staff: City Manager/City Attorney Larry McLaughlin
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk Mary Gourley
Administrative Services Director Ana Kwong
Engineering Consultant GHD Toni Bertolero
Police Chief Kevin Kilgore
COUNCIL PROTOCOLS FOR MEETING:
City staff read the protocols for the meeting.
• This meeting is being conducted utilizing virtual settings for teleconferencing and electronic means consistent with State of California Executive Orders regarding the COVID 19 pandemic and AB 361. • Live stream and zoom is being utilized for this meeting. In case of technical issues, meetings will be uploaded to the City web site as soon as possible after this meeting. • Members of the public may view and listen to the meeting by use of Zoom as noted on the City’s website and as noted on the agenda.
• Members of the public wishing to speak to the City Council may do so during public comment or may comment on agenda items during the discussion of each item and must be logged into Zoom. Live Stream is a viewing only format.
• Anyone using abusive, vulgar, offensive, threatening, or harassing language, personal attacks of any kind or offensive terms that target specific individuals or groups will be muted and removed from the meeting.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG: Mayor Slayter led the salute to the flag.
PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS:
• Proclamation - The Sebastopol Service and Action Coalition will be doing a Helping Other People (HOP) Day on January 15, 2022, partnering with Katie Davis of the Senior Center. Katie will collect projects seniors want done, and the service clubs will get volunteers to do the work. The coordinator for the Service & Action Coalition is Don Canardo, of the Sebastopol Gravenstein Lions Club.
This item was removed from the agenda.
Reference Order Number: 2021-001
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Speakers are allowed to speak for a maximum of three minutes so that all speakers have an opportunity to address the City Council.
Power point or visual presentations for public comment shall not be permitted unless approved by the Agenda Review Committee two weeks prior to the requested meeting date.
Speakers may not "yield" a portion of their allotted time to others.
The Mayor has the authority to limit or extend the time allowed for speakers dependent on the number of speakers in attendance.
The Mayor can poll the members of the public for an indication of the number of people wishing to speak, then call on individuals to speak.
It is the goal of the Council to conclude the public comments portion of the agenda within 20 minutes. If the public comment period exceeds twenty minutes, the presiding officer, typically the Mayor, reserves the right to reduce the time per speaker or carry over public comments to after all business items are completed.
The City Clerk will monitor the time for public comments and inform the speakers when the time limitation has been reached.
The Mayor could survey the members of the public, as appropriate, to move agenda items up or back to address the members of the public items of concern.
Public participation is encouraged on all public agenda items.
Council and staff will treat participants and each other with courtesy. Derogatory or sarcastic comments are inappropriate.
The public will likewise be encouraged by the Mayor to maintain meeting decorum.
In Council meetings when citizens are agitated, the Mayor may call a short recess to calm the situation.
If a member of the public is unable to attend the Council meeting, written communications may be sent to the City Clerk by e-mail or by regular mail.
Communications received after distribution of the agenda packet will be made available to the Council at/or as soon after the meeting.
Peter Mancus commented as follows:
• The City Council has adopted some really strange double standards regarding what citizens can say without offending the elected officials.
• It is a matter of public record about three-and-a-half years ago Mayor Patrick Slayter in a public City Council meeting, within minutes after pledging his allegiance to the U.S. Flag publicly advocated that we citizens should voluntarily burn, surrender, give up all of our rights. • His rationale was to better protect parents' ability to protect their children. • He never connected the dots.
• I asked him for three-and-a-half years to explain his rationale. • He swears allegiance to the U.S. Flag, he takes an oath to support the Constitution, and then he advocates he wants to burn about half of it, all of our rights.
• He just now pledged his allegiance to the flag.
• He has never withdrawn that statement. He has never apologized for it. • I find it hard to believe I'm the only one out of 7,800 people in this community that objects to this double standard.
• He's our Mayor again, a man who is a self-confessed domestic enemy of the U.S. Constitution, because you can't defend what you want to burn. It is hypocritical. • The other four City Councilmembers know it, but they all circle the wagons and protect him. • No one else in the community objects. This place is sick. • This is not the way the United States should run.
• All of the public officials take an oath to support the Constitution, but he doesn't do it. • He wants to burn half the Constitution, all of the amendments, and reduce us all to a state of having no rights. That's wrong. I object, and he refuses to address that point. • The rules say I can't call him a political coward or a hypocrite. That's an infringement on my first amendment rights. He can exercise his right to say we should burn all of the amendments, but I can't really take him to task, to hold him accountable.
• It is the new year. When are we going to have a new start? • When is somebody on the Council going to have the political courage to stand up and say they agree with me and publicly rebuke him?
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• I got to the public records act, and it is really interesting how the City has been swindled and conned and lied to and flim-flam and bamboozled
• Part of it was a bromance with the bad boys from shyster company • Our own staff never did support this wireless stuff, and yet somehow it got passed by the City Council because they didn't know that the City did not support it • Did you know that the bad boys from shyster are being paid $1.25 million for the scam, the scandal they perpetrated on us, plus there's a $200,000 plastic roof slated to go on, by the way, a no-bid contract on City community center roof.
• Discussed 5G. We're going to be subjected to this same fifth generation wireless that has been banned temporarily at least by the government because it interferes with the altimeters in the airlines. • I applaud Councilmember Rich, who says she is looking into this and she is going to get to the bottom of it • Sebastopol got screwed and there's more.
Moshe commented as follows:
• What I observe from corruption to corruption, the City of Sebastopol is getting closer to be built to the ground. Apparently the elected officials forgot who elected them. • I am talking about the December 21st Council meeting hearing about approving the finance of this toxic water smart meters, completely unnecessary.
• It connects to the convoluted project that was approved illegally for the library improvements and inserted with it the smart meter
• Discussed looking like corrupt officials of Sebastopol were hoping that the public did not notice, but the public did.
• I sent you to about ten days ago, two weeks ago, observations of my two hearings. There was no reply.
Invited all public officials, come debate. Tell me that I am wrong, that my observations are incorrect. • But I haven't received a reply yet. Please, call me or e-mail me. We will have a conversation. • It looks like these e-mail record, the public officials lied to the public. It says smart meters are, okay, they're safe, they will be manually, low emissions, all of this garbage. • I am quoting Dr. Sharon Goldberg. She said all of the radio frequencies are toxic and dangerous to all life, humans, animals, plants, all debate, all was proven.
• You insist on putting them and wasting public money on this convoluted project. • I would like to see it be challenged. I am still calling for the City officials, abandon the smart meter, toxic, dangerous project.
• If you do it, you will murder many people and there will be blood, blood, blood on your hands.
Arthur George commented as follows:
• West County Advocates.
• I would like to submit a brief recap.
• It seems that the will of the Council is;
• One, no new unhoused encampments and no contesting encampments. • Two, protection of residential streets from incursion of oversized RV vehicles and the unhoused, and • Three, recognition for the need of some form of limited nightly overnight parking for otherwise unhoused persons and oversized RV vehicles.
• While I was critical of Chief Kilgore's proposed parking options at the last Council meeting, after further review it seems all of these Council bills can be accomplished through Chief Kilgore's proposed options. • A prohibition on all oversized vehicles on residential streets would impact the unhoused who might seek refuge there and homeowners and renters with RV, it would impact police and fire services, would safeguard public health from public waste and improve sidewalk access for pedestrians and handicapped persons.
• An evenly drafted and evenly applied ordinance to ban all oversized parking would serve the greater good, albeit at the encumbrance of all RV owners, housed and unhoused. • Public safety and health sense would be rational basis for such ordinance, even surviving strict scrutiny Constitutional review.
• Even with timed parking on commercial and industrial streets and bans on all oversized vehicles in residential streets, limited serial overnight parking could still be allowed on commercial and industrial streets.
• Several of my associates suggest that such one-night overnight parking during limited hours is not sufficient.
• They are concerned unhoused women remain wakeful with interrupted sleep at night for fear of assault and are unrested when required to move on during daylight. • They suggest that a 72-hour rule with teeth, a revised City ordinance that would require vehicle movement of a block or 25, 50 or 100 yards rather than the current 6 inches to deter fixed encampments would enable more restful sleep.
• I urge the Council to consider this.
• Complete removal on the East side of Morris and no overnight parking was proposed but not supported by the Council at the last meeting, suggesting that the Council does recognize the need for some overnight parking.
• If overnight parking were to be allowed on Morris, whenever time parking begins it could become a red tow-away zone much as San Francisco converts streets to tow-away zones • This would facilitate overnight parking and complete clearance for the relief of merchants. • The question remains, where are they to go during daylight hours? Outward on to unincorporated county streets?
• Would the County recognize the neat to provide safe parking facility outside of Sebastopol? • Sebastopol has done much in support of safe parking but the resources and geography are limited.
Martha Glaser commented as follows:
• I wanted to thank you, first of all. I really feel gratitude toward Councilmember Glass, Councilmember Gurney and Councilmember Rich for their voiced empathy and care for people who do feel the differences with higher rates of EMF frequencies. That meant a lot. It certainly means a lot to hear that you all three
• I want to get to the bottom of what is really going on here as far as what commitment the City has made in your name, in our name, for adding meters that we actually really don't know anything about. • We don't know what has been purchased. We don't know what has been ordered. • It is really sad to me that staff did give the Council a way to pause it last time, and that I am really sorry that Council didn't just take a minute to pause and reflect before rushing to sign a contract when I don't think you know exactly what's going on.
• A public records act request that has recently been done, it is clear that the messaging -- and I call it the messaging that was consciously given to the public intentionally from staff, not our elected officials, to really persuade, to sell it to the Council, to the public and to the Council specifically to vote on it was that they will continue to read our meters manually, and the City has no plans to convert them to wireless.
• Discussed an email from February 25th, 2021, relevant to the decision that was made stating that the EMF emissions would be every 15 minutes.
• That's quite different from a message that says four times a day in a 24-hour period. • So I would invite Council to look back at the records. • I would like to throw-back to the Council to pause this while you actually really learn and find out what is this, because you have a commitment to have the lowest EMFs possible. • I recognize that you are trying to service some customers who do want to have the monitoring. • Surely there has to be a way for us to work this out.
Rick Geggie commented as follows:
• I hope you all had a very wonderful holiday and are ready for another year of very difficult decisions. • In the existing contract is there any procedure for opting in and opting out. • How much is this contract worth?
• I respect the Councilmembers who said, no, we don't want to get a reputation for reneging on a contract. • The question I have is how much would it cost to buy our way out of the contract? • Has anyone looked into what can be done, what devices can be applied to the smart water meters to ameliorate the effects of the EMF on people, on the soil, on animals, et cetera? • I think it might be a fruitful middle course to follow. • Thank you very much for listening to me and giving me an opportunity to express my concerns, and I salute you all for the difficult jobs you are doing. Especially you, Chief. That's a big one. • Sandi Maurer commented as follows:
• At the last Council meeting the purchase of $2.2 million worth of smart water meters were approved, and I have spent some of today looking through a public records act request that Linda had received from the water department.
• I have read e-mails between the City staff and Syserco on the smart water meters, and I have also read or heard the Council meetings where this item was discussed in October and December. • As a member of the public, as a resident of Sebastopol, as a director of the EMF safety network, which is a nonprofit-sponsored project, I could not tell you what was ordered or what we can expect from these meters.
• What I read today was that they ping every 15 minutes or they transmit four times a day and the rest of the time they're off or they transmit every four seconds all day, night, at one Watt of power and will need additional repeaters and collectors, or the data transmissions for the meters can be set to either none, to touch stick, to drive-by or remote.
• It is very confusing frankly, I do not understand why we couldn't have had just a transparent and honest conversation about what the meters that were being ordered were. • It feels like this issue has been downplayed.
• I really appreciate our City manager for so much but an email was sent to the superintendent after I had sent questions on the meters and whether or not they would be wireless, and staff said just repeat that we will read the meters manually and that the City has no plans to convert to wireless. • But this was in February of 2021, and there was lots of discussions about these meters being wireless for two years before that. So this is very confusing.
• I understand we did put in an appeal. We put in a public records act request. • Looking forward to getting some straight answers from the City, and we understand that our recourse now is to sue, but we cannot appeal.
• Let's get to the bottom of this.
Kyle Falbo commented as follows:
• The last City Council meeting the City Manager/City Attorney spoke to us about the $1.2 million that were fraudulently taken from our City coffers.
• At that time in response I had very direct questions regarding that report. • I will repeat those questions because no one on the Council nor City staff addressed those questions. • One, how was it possible for this breach to have happened in the first place? • How was it that a City staff member's e-mail was accessed fraudulently to enact this crime? • Second, what are the I.T. protocols of our City? What I.T. employees does our City have? • How do we know that this won't take place again, as it did a month later with the police department? • Three, the City Manager tried to paint a picture that, oh, well, we have insurance that covers these things. • This money will get returned, and maybe it will, maybe it won't, but at the end of the day insurance companies are a for-profit organization. They're not going to lose money on paying us out. • We will continue to pay increased insurance premiums that will eventually cover the loss. • How much has our insurance premium increased as a result of this or other civil litigations that our City has faced over time.
• I understand when civil litigation needs to be done in private sessions and I would hope that our City Council is getting informed of any sort of civil litigation that happens and that these things aren't just handled through insurance companies behind some black box • How much are our insurance premiums going up every year as a result of civil litigation or a fraudulent loss through $1.2 million as a result of these things.
• As my elected officials, I am asking you to address these concerns of members of the public when members of the public ask direct questions to the Council and City staff. • It would be my hope that elected officials would respond to those questions and address those questions in the City Council meetings that members of the public are attending and asking these questions during public comment.
• Thank you so much for all that you do. I appreciate all of the hard work that you do, and I assume, as the previous member of the public stated, you are going to have a lot of tough and difficult decisions Mayor Slayter responded to public comment:
• There are a few questions I will ask staff to give a brief answer for. • These are not agendized items so we cannot get into any discussion and I know that staff understands that as well.
• Regarding the Syserco project with the whole suite of energy upgrades that are going to be taking place there was a question about the water meters in specific. • Will there be an opt in or opt out component to that, or is there one planned at this point? City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented I don't see our Public Works Superintendent on the meeting who is more familiar with that than I am, but I don't believe there is an opt in or opt out feature proposed.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• Something that many folks don't understand about water meters is that some are located on private property behind a property line and others are located in the public Right-of-Way, and so there's no standardized location for those.
• It is not like an electric meter that's 99.9% on the side of a house or a building. • The opt in and opt out, it would be a different situation given the private and public ownership of the land where those pieces of equipment are located.
• Another question was the cost of the contract? There are many components to that, and I'm not quite sure how staff would be able to answer that, other than with a total.
• Is it possible to give the summary of the breakdown with the pay-back time with the energy savings that are anticipated
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented in the absence of the Public Works Superintendent and not having that file here, I don't think I would be able to give that breakdown but we have been asked in other instances to give a report at the next Council meeting.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• Information was located in the staff reports for the project itself and then the funding for the project. • There were fairly detailed breakdowns of parts of the project and what the individual line items were. • It is not accurate to say that this contract was for the purchase of water meters. • Requested staff to consolidate all of the questions we've been receiving, both tonight in public comment as well as via e-mail and assemble the answers to these really important questions and that also would go to alternatives, what other devices might be possible within the bounds of the contract that the City has agreed to and addressing some of the concerns and other questions from the public.
Mayor Slayter commented regarding the financial fraud, the question was, how is it possible for this breach to occur.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• I believe a City employee opened a link which shouldn't have been opened, and the perpetrator of the crime gained access to an e-mail address book so to speak, which was utilized to send an e-mail purporting to come from the administrative services director. • The email went to a County employee
• I was not asked to report on this at the last meeting. • I was asked to report on our efforts to retrieve the missing funds. • However, I think it would be useful for the Council to receive a report from the Administrative Services Director on the efforts and changes that have been made, actually quite sometime ago, to the City's I.T. protocols, et cetera, which are actually along the lines as have been suggested by some public speakers. • These are actually measures that the City has already adopted previously, including several of the very specific alluded to measures that have been described in the public comments. • I would also like to address that at this point in time there have been no, as in none, lawsuits resulting from any party with regard to the missing funds.
• As I alluded to last time in my report, the counsel of the City has a pending claim against the County of Sonoma.
• So that is not litigation in and of itself, but it will at some point in time, conceivably it could become litigation. At the present time we have none filed for or against. • Also, to our knowledge at this point in time there have been no premium increases as a result of the actions for which we filed claims.
• I would be the first one to admit that I would not be surprised if there is increases in premiums in the future.
• We received across the board through our outside insurance pool, where we have outside insurance policies, I'm on that board, and we have received across the board consistent premium increases recently due to a large number of factors, including lawsuits filed in many different areas, including property losses due to flooding and wildfires, et cetera.
• We have across the board sustained almost perpetual premium increases. • It is difficult to ascertain really the cause of those increases in many cases.
• But to my knowledge we have not received any increases to date as a result of the fraudulent cyber fraud wire transfer.
• Although I'm not prepared to elaborate on it this evening, the two instances which were referenced, the one at the police department and the one involving county treasurer's office were two completely different scenarios. The one at the police department never did gain access. The City's protocols actually prevented that access, therefore, we sustained no loss from that and the damage was minimal. • We are talking about two completely different scenarios which were actually unrelated to each other, and in the police department we actually ended up being protected by our protocols.
Mayor Slayter commented I'm hearing that will be coming forward are reports responding to the raft of questions regarding the Syserco proposal and a report on I.T. policies and the status of our consultants who do that work.
STATEMENTS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Conflicts of interest may arise in situations where a public official deliberating towards a decision, has an actual or potential financial interest in the matter before the Council. In accordance with state law, an actual conflict of interest is one that would be to the private financial benefit of a public official, a relative or a business with which the Councilmember is associated. A potential conflict of interest is one that could be to the private financial benefit of a Councilmember, a relative or a business with which the Councilmember is associated. A Councilmember must publicly announce potential and actual conflicts of interest, and, in the case of actual conflict of interest, must refrain from participating in debate on the issue or from voting on the issue and must remove themselves from the dais.
There were no Statements of Conflict of Interest stated at this meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR: The consent agenda consists of items that are routine in nature and do not require additional discussion by the City Council or have been reviewed by the City Council previously. These items may be approved by one motion without discussion unless a member of the City Council requests that the item be taken off the consent calendar.
The Mayor will read the consent calendar items; ask if a Councilmember wishes to remove one or more items from the consent calendar; and then open public comment to the members of the public in attendance. At this time, a member of the public may speak for up to three minutes on the entire consent calendar and request at that time that an agenda item or items be removed for discussion.
If an item or items are removed from the consent calendar, the item shall be placed at the end of the regular agenda items unless otherwise determined by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tern.
Councilmembers may comment on Consent Calendar items or ask for minor clarifications without the need for pulling the item for separate consideration. Items requiring deliberation should be pulled for separate consideration and shall be placed at the end of the regular agenda items unless otherwise determined by the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tem.
1. Receipt of Minute/Reference Orders for Calendar Year 2021 (Responsible Department: City Administration)
City Council Action: Approved Receipt of Minute/Reference Orders for Calendar Year 2021 Minute Order Number: 2021-002
2. Approval of Calendar Year 2022 City Council Meeting Dates (Responsible Department: City Administration)
City Council Action: Approved of Calendar Year 2022 City Council Meeting Dates Minute Order Number: 2021-003
3. Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2021 (Responsible Department: City Administration)
City Council Action: Approved City Council Meeting Minutes of December 21, 2021 Minute Order Number: 2021-004
4. Resolution Authorizing Continued Use of Teleconference Meetings Based on Circumstances of the COVID19 state of emergency and that the following circumstances exist:
a. The state of emergency as a result of COVID-19 continues to directly impact the ability of the members of City Council and the members of the City’s subordinate Committee’s, Commission’s, and Boards to meet safely in person; and
b. The State of California and the City of Sebastopol continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
City Council Action: Approved Resolution Authorizing Continued Use of Teleconference Meetings Based on Circumstances of the COVID-19 state of emergency and that the following circumstances exist:
a. The state of emergency as a result of COVID-19 continues to directly impact the ability of the members of City Council and the members of the City’s subordinate Committee’s, Commission’s, and Boards to meet safely in person; and
b. The State of California and the City of Sebastopol continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
Minute Order Number: 2021-005
Resolution Number: 6394-2022
5. Extension of Emergency Proclamation of Local Emergency (COVID-19) issued by the Director of Emergency Services (Fire Chief)
City Council Action: Approved Extension of Emergency Proclamation of Local Emergency (COVID-19) issued by the Director of Emergency Services
Minute Order Number: 2021-006
Resolution Number: 6395-2022
Mayor Slayter read the consent calendar.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment on the consent calendar. There was no public comment.
Mayor Slayter asked if any Councilmember wanted to remove a consent calendar item. There was no request to remove any consent calendar item from Council.
Mayor Slayter called for a motion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Gurney moved and Councilmember Glass seconded the motion to approve Consent Calendar Item(s) Number(s) 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
Due to absence of the Planning Director, Mayor Slayter requested Item 8 be continued and opened the item.
8. Public Hearing - Introduction, First Reading and consideration of Amendment to Ordinance –Planning Commission (Responsible Department: Planning Department). This item was continued from the December 21, 2021 City Council Meeting.
Mayor Slayter opened the Public Hearing and Continued the item to the February 1, 2022 City Council Meeting.
The Council was in consensus to continue the item to the February 1, 2022 City Council meeting at or after 6:00 pm.
City Council Action: Continued the item to the February 1, 2022 City Council Meeting at or after 6:00 pm.
Minute Order Number: 2021-009
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS/PRESENTATIONS: (Please Note: Although informational/presentations items are routinely informational in nature, some informational items may contain request for actions such as support, direction to staff, follow up, or receipt of item based on the presentation/information provided.)
6. Quarterly update on Police Department Audit Recommendations (Responsible Department: Police) (Chief Kilgore)
Chief Kilgore presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Receive and Discuss the report and provide comments or direction to City staff.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of presenter.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I Thank you, Chief Kilgore, for that very informative and well-presented report out. • Wanted to recognize what a lot of work this reflect, boiled down into this spreadsheet. • I note that there are some entries that have been grayed out. As an example, I think 46, 48, 49. • Can you give us a sense of what color coding means?
Chief Kilgore commented as follows:
• 46 is just basically a title. Each of those are individual recommendations under number 46. • There is no recommendation for number 46.
• There's nothing to fill in in that grayed area.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I was really impressed in a lot of these entries that haven't yet been addressed with the fact you gave us a projected completion date, six-plus months as an indication. • There were a number of them where there was not any indication of a projected date. • It simply said ongoing, and that for me was most notable up in the evaluation section • There are a lot of entries at the beginning where that happens, where the word "ongoing" simply shows up. Number 4, 8, 9, 38.
• On those ones that you indicate "ongoing," I would hope is that perhaps at the next report, if you can't today, you could give us an indication of a projected completion date.
Chief Kilgore commented as follows:
• The ones that are listed as "ongoing," are always something that we're continuing to work on. • We are never going to have a time frame that everything related to that is going to be accomplished at its full expectation.
• Those will likely remain ongoing, especially when it comes to evaluation performances, reviews and things like that.
• This is a continual learning process that we continue to work on, and if there's something that we can provide timelines and an actual outcome that's going to come from it, then that's where the timelines are provided.
• There are some things that are just going to always be an ongoing status.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• That might be interesting in the future if you had an opportunity with all of the color coding to give us a sense on those items that you have begun the process.
• Maybe that's what you mean, that you have begun the process and melt the obligations that you could have at this point reasonably and will continue to work on them. • That for me would be different from it simply hasn't been addressed yet. • I would appreciate that as a consideration when you look at the next report.
Chief Kilgore commented as follows:
• If you look at the status there, it states in progress. • That is a continual process.
• We started that process, we're in progress of it, we are continuing to address the issues as they come up, and so it is an ongoing matter.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• The reason for my confusion comes up is because we do see that coding also in areas where you have projected completion dates. For instance, 46.10 is indicated as in progress, but you have a completion date.
• It sounds like "in progress" means that you have begun, and you have done as much as you can. • If there is a completion date, then that means it will be completed. • If instead it says "ongoing" in that column, that's an indication you will be ongoing in terms of your addressing that particular issue into the future.
• Would that be accurate?
Chief Kilgore commented as follows:
• Stated that is correct.
• With item 46.10, that actually has an end goal outcome with looking at a cahoots type program. • If we bring that to fruition, then we get to Mark it as accomplished within the eight-plus months that we're provided.
• When we are talking about evaluation processes and things like that, that's just an ongoing educational matter that is not something that is ever going to reach its full potential of being accomplished. • It is an ongoing matter.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• Those things that are ongoing, continually ongoing, maybe create another color code and change it to rather than "in progress," that's just "continual.”
• It would be more accurate.
• It would color code things in a way that would differentiate between things that do have a target date and those that are forever, things that will always be worked on.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• have yet to meet the good police chief in person.
• I trust that he is a fine, fine person, has a good sense for the job, and I'm happy that he's here.
• I feel kind of badly our police department, gets so criticized. For my opinion and experience living here 20 years, there is no good reason because I know how good our cops are. • We've got a police department that was sworn by the legendary and still living Jeff Weaver, who truly, truly is well known and a legend, according to another cop from Marin County. • I wanted to tell you that you all just haven't lived until you've been subjected to arrest and so forth by a S.W.A.T. team, that were at your house on a wrong address. • Discussed an article's in "the gazette" about our current sheriff. It talks about systemic sadism, which is exactly what is happening with our sheriff's department and has been forever. • Not only they refuse to admit liability, but they refuse to do anything at all to change. This fully sums up the sheriff's department. Our cops, of course, are just the opposite. They truly are exemplary. We need to -- we need to recognize how good they are individually and as a group. • I suggest everybody pick up a copy of this month's "gazette" and take a look at the article Kyle Falbo commented as follows:
• Seeing the spreadsheet tonight, thinking about historically, we've come a long way. • If we think back to the story about how this came about, it was July 21st 2020, when this Council approved the deep dive look at our police department by Jerry Threet. • I do want to remind this Council and the public of some of the other things that were approved with that agenda item at that time, July 21st, 2020.
• If you'd like to see the minutes of this, however, they're not listed on the Website for that date. You're going to have to go and look at the approved minutes for that date, which happens the next meeting, which I believe Is August 4. You have to do a little bit of diving to actually find this position, especially in the commentary that happened.
• In addition to the extensive work that Jerry Threet provided, during phase 1 it's proposed the budget subcommittee conduct a financial review of the police department's line item budget and provide a report back and recommendations, if any, for proposed changes, such items to review but not limited to existing and potential contracts with agencies for social services for mental health, domestic violence, and homelessness.
• The discussion that was revolved around this this concept was pretty specific, that there would be two aspects of this.
• One, a financial audit of the police department, line item, would be reported back. • Two, that there would be a citizen oversight committee. • It the stated in the agenda item. It's discussed. It never came to fruition. In fact, the next meeting in which it was discussed, it was kind of just tabled.
• It was kind of said, we weren't able to find a facilitator, so it was stated by Mayor Slayter at the proposal of the scope of work of the July 21 meeting, community input facilitation, but the Council was unable to secure a facilitator.
• Mayor Slayter mentioned this aspect would resume soon. A loose timeline was discussed for a committee/panel to take place near Labor Day of 2020.
• Councilmember Hinton stated she heard loud and clear that the public wanted the police budget reduced and she was well aware of the large percentage of our budget going to police services, and she cited specific numbers in the hundreds of thousands annually paid in overtime to the department. • That overtime, which has radically increased over the last two years in the budget, is overtime that's often connected to mutual aid requests.
• Two additional times at this meeting, Councilmember Hinton called for a fiscal audit of the department's financials.
• I'm calling on Council to follow through with their decision on their vote at that time, and let's see that community oversight committee.
• Let's see that line item budget audit of our police department.
Mayor Slayter responded to public comment as follows:
• The couple of questions that came up, financial review of the police department. That is something that is continual.
• It goes on every single time we approve a budget, and I know that the budget committee has spent an inordinate amount of time scrutinizing the particulars of the police department budget in excess of other departments the last couple of years since this work was accomplished. • That may not have been as overtly stated or noticed. I know that it went on the part of first the budget committee, and then the Council did as well when the budget as a whole was presented to the Council. • The discussion of a citizens oversight committee was something that we as a Council took as a possibility.
We did not say that we were going to impanel a citizens oversight committee. That was never a promise on the part of the Council.
Chief Kilgore commented as follows:
• In response to the critical look and review of our budget, I can tell you that I spend probably at least once a day looking at our budget to see where we are spending, why we are spending, and how we can do that in an effective way so that we are not overspending.
• Since my tenure has begun on March 1st, I can tell you, Mr. Falbo, that our department has not provided mutual aid to any other agency on an overtime basis since I began. • We simply cannot afford to lose our people to another agency, or for them on a mutual aid request, when we don't have enough staffing to handle our own areas right here, which is the most important thing, to me.
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• I'm just making this remark relevant to oversight of the police department budget and scrutinizing that. • As I recall, the budget committee looked at this, at the police department budget, both before and after Chief Kilgore joining us.
• The biggest line item by a long shot in the police department is personnel. • The budget subcommittee wanted to get more information about how exactly personnel time is being spent.
• When we're putting our police out in a patrol car, is there time being spent or are they being put out in a patrol car, how much time is being spent on paperwork, how much time is being spent on foot patrol, et cetera.
• What we determined at the time was that we didn't have any data to work with so we could not evaluate, really, how our dollars are being spent, how they're being invested because at that time, we did not have information.
• I expect that our new chief is working to put the systems in place and is monitoring how personnel time is being spent.
• We can't have relevant information, I would expect, until there is a period of time that has gone by so you can actually present information about how our police personnel and services are being invested. • What kinds of services we are providing. Are we spending time on robberies? Are we spending time on traffic enforcement?
• That's a response from the budget subcommittee and evaluating the budget of the police department.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• First of all, Chief Kilgore, I really appreciate the progress that you're making, steady progress. • That is a huge amount of recommendations, just the sense of number. • Obviously we recognize you're a new chief, so you walked into this thing. • I feel really good about it.
• I just want to clarify. The speaker who's referenced some of the comments I made, I think it's fair to say that I originally did advocate for possibility of a financial audit when we were discussing options and hired Jerry Threet for his review, and at the time my recollection of my position and the Council's position was to start with Jerry Threet.
• As my subcommittee member just stated, we did not have a lot of information. • We had a new chief coming in. We really needed to get things in place and kind of prioritize. • We do review the police budget with a fine-tooth comb, as we do with all City budgets. • We spent more time this year reviewing the City budgets, working on budget subcommittee, than in any other year by a long shot. I think it was 28 or 30 hours. That doesn't include the department heads who review their own budget before they even come into the meetings with us. • I just want to stay on the record that we do a really thorough job reviewing this budget. • It does cost a lot to have a police department our very own police department, and all that entails in a small City like Sebastopol.
• The option would be to sub it out, like other small cities have done, and we have never been in favor of that. I'm personally not in favor of that, and I'm very proud of our police department.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I'd like to thank the chief for his report.
• I particularly find the color coding really helpful as we look at this. • I guess you've got a few suggestions as to how to make it even clearer to us and to the public. • Very impressed with the work and the sort of steady pressure on all of those recommendations. • I think it's remarkable how conscious and aware our chief is and our community is about how we want to be as a community and be policed, so thank you for that work. • I have very little experience in this work of a police audit. • I've noted that Jerry Threet is in our audience.
• I'm wondering if it would be appropriate, Mr. Mayor, to invite him to make a comment on our progress and our circumstance. If he's not comfortable doing that, I'm fine with that. • I'm just thinking it would be helpful to have our consultant's pulse on kind of the progress that we've made, if he feels willing to say anything.
Mr. Threet commented as follows:
• I didn't prepare anything to say, but I'm happy to just reflect on what I think is tremendous progress that the chief has made working on the recommendations.
• I had sent him an e-mail myself earlier, just congratulating him on the amount of progress made in a short period of time.
• There are a lot of recommendations. Some of them are relatively complex. • I'm personally very encouraged by the progress, and particularly I've heard from community members that the work that the department is doing and the areas of mental health crisis and homeless folks is actually pretty impressive.
• So I'm very proud that they're doing that work.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• We're happy to see you here virtually and to hear your thoughts on the really tremendous advances and work that's been done.
• This is not an easy time to be police chief in Sebastopol. • There is more work than one human can humanly do.
• I just really want to thank Chief Kilgore for the extraordinary effort that has gone on with all that's going on in our community, certainly in regards to the police department. • We have multiple things happening all at the same time. • And somehow or another, you are able to juggle all those balls. • And I know that I appreciate it, and I will just go ahead and go out on a limb, a very, very short limb, and say that all my colleagues, we all really appreciate all your efforts. • Thank you for that.
City Council Action: No action required. City Council received the report.
Minute Order Number: 2021-007
PUBLIC HEARING(s):
7. Public Hearing - Introduction, first reading and consideration of an Ordinance amending Chapter 8.36 - Disposable Food Service Ware Containing Polystyrene Foam, of Title 8 - Health and Safety, of the Sebastopol Municipal Code (Responsible Department: City Manager/GHD) Toni Bertolero, GHD, Engineering Consultant, presented the agenda item recommending the City Council introduce the ordinance, conduct a public hearing on the first reading of the ordinance and provide direction to staff for the second reading of the ordinance with changes, if any.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of presenter.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• This is essentially what Santa Rosa's ordinance is.
• Are there other municipalities in the County of Sonoma who are looking to this? • Model codes and uniformity across the region, for many, many reasons, has been useful. • I think back to the old days with building codes where every City had its own amendments to the standard code.
• It was very difficult to follow who was doing what.
• How is this looking across the County?
Ms. Bertolero commented as follows:
• I'm not aware of other agencies that are proposing to adopt the Santa Rosa model. • I know that the County has their own.
• I believe Sonoma also has their own that they've passed. • Everybody's a little bit different.
• I think that the Zero Waste subcommittee looked at the various ordinances of various agencies and they really liked the Santa Rosa model, if you will because it was very comprehensive. That's the reason they made that recommendation.
• Other cities could follow suit. As far as I know, they have not yet. • Santa Rosa, being the larger City, it's actually kind of nice to point to them and say, well, they're roughly half the entire County. Following them as sort of the big guns on this is probably not a bad thing to do.
• I think a lot of people will be used to it because of that. • As far as I know, there are not other cities that are adopting it but if they will, I will certainly provide that information to Council in the future.
Mayor Slayter opened the public hearing.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• I thought this was another opportunity to point out that it's kind of disingenuous to try to get rid of some plastic in one area while introducing a whole bunch more plastic in other areas, like our infrastructure. • Specifically the poly plastic wireless water meters that our public works superintendent chose over stainless steel, which is more durable and less like lie to be cross-threaded. • That's a $700 piece of material that will last about five years. • Then it will go into the landfills and the oceans, so forth, and have to be replaced. • Just like our smart water meters that are all plastic and we're in the process right now of a third wave of replacing them.
• They started 2010 here in town, then were replaced in about 2015, in that area. • Now they're being replaced too, this time PG&E didn't make any kind of announcement, they're doing it stealthily.
• People have told me their meters are being replaced without their knowing it against their will. • Also that goes also to the $200,000 plastic that is part of that $5 million scam by shyster • Somebody needs to look into that of replacing the more durable, existing metal roof that we already have.
• We need to expand our observations. Look at the bigger picture of what we're doing. The new stuff. New is not always better.
• So I'd just like to hope somebody looks into these other items of the water meters and the roof there on the community center.
Hearing no further comments, Mayor Slayter closed the public hearing.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• Two acknowledgements I want to mention.
• At the December meeting when the Zero Waste committee gave its report, the youth member Argus went through a series of slides and talked about the Santa Rosa ordinance and the changes that Zero Waste was hoping that this Council would adopt, that being tonight's work. • I'd like to acknowledge that I actually believe Sebastopol was first and we encouraged Santa Rosa to get on this. I also appreciate Santa Rosa's improvements to our work. • So I'm ready to go forward on this this evening.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• I also just wanted to weigh in and thank the subcommittee for the recommendations. • It's been four years since we passed our original ordinance as things move and change. • I am ready to vote tonight and appreciate the update tightening things up.
MOTION:
Vice Mayor Hinton moved and Councilmember Rich seconded the motion to approve for introduction of first reading of ordinance, waiving of further reading of ordinance, with no changes for Ordinance amending Chapter
8.36 - Disposable Food Service Ware Containing Polystyrene Foam, of Title 8 - Health and Safety, of the Sebastopol Municipal Code.
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved for introduction of first reading of ordinance, waiving of further reading of ordinance, with no changes for Ordinance amending Chapter 8.36 - Disposable Food Service Ware Containing Polystyrene Foam, of Title 8 - Health and Safety, of the Sebastopol Municipal Code.
Minute Order Number: 2021-008
Proposed Ordinance Number:
8. Public Hearing - Introduction, First Reading and consideration of Amendment to Ordinance –Planning Commission (Responsible Department: Planning Department). This item was continued from the December 21, 2021 City Council Meeting.
Mayor Slayter opened the Public Hearing and Continued the item to the February 1, 2022 City Council Meeting.
City Council Action: Continued the item to the February 1, 2022 City Council Meeting at or after 6:00 pm.
Minute Order Number: 2021-009
Mayor Slayter called for a break at 7:39 pm and reco9nvened the meeting at 7:49 pm.
REGULAR CALENDAR AGENDA ITEMS (DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION):
9. City Council and City Staff Committee Assignments and Update of Sub-Committees (Planning Commission, Design Review Board, Public Arts Committee, Climate Action Committee, Zero Waste Committee) (Responsible Department: City Administration/Planning/Engineering). This item was continued from the December 21, 2021 City Council Meeting.
Mayor Slayter presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Discuss, make recommendations to assignments or request removal of committees if no longer needed for the Calendar Year 2022 City Council and City Staff Committee Assignments.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of presenter. There none at this time.
The Council discussed each committee, provided updates to the committees, and made recommendations for changes to the Committee list.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• So it occurs to me, again with your map your neighborhood idea, we just simply cannot continue to ignore as a City the effect of the electronic magnetic fields, microwaves that come off the power lines, the buried power lines which are in millions of instances incorrectly configured, meaning they're apart, which amplifies the magnetic field which is promoting cellular growth which is cancer very likely to interfere with the signal, if those wireless meters are placed beneath the sidewalk. • I don't know if anybody understood that.
• We need to place some radio frequency meters in people's hands and or we need to have somebody, don't have to be paid, plenty of people have meters that we would be more than happy to let you know the sources of our being crystallized and slowly killed • Where those cell towers are located, I'm sure most don't know there are four and where they are and how they got there and the effect of the magnetic fields from the incorrectly configured power lines and underneath the sidewalks and overhead too.
• But it is a thing, it's an elephant in the room, to not continue to ignore it. • So it would be nice if you had a liaison, one of you, who would listen to the EMF community and educate yourselves and the public at large about this huge issue. • You can figure out a way to use the gas meters that I gave to public works. They have sat there unused collecting dust all these years. They are totally disinterested. It's frustrating. • People like myself whose lives center around the avoidance of electromagnetic fields where the rest of you shows what is actually a testament to the wild success of the telecoms keeping you as ignorant as you are
• Find a way to be receptive to education as education is a wonderful thing.
Kyle Falbo commented as follows:
• I want to put out my appreciation for all of the work you do for these different subcommittees, it's above and beyond what anyone expects of City Councilmembers.
• That said, in the coming year, in the name of transparency to the public that more regular reporting out from these subcommittees take place in our City Council meetings, in particular, something more informative of the action items taking place in those meetings. • I think very often some of these things get put to the end of the meeting, end of the night, it's very late and it comes down to, we met, it was fine, we're making some progress. • It would actually be great to see a little bit more substance in those reports as we move forward. • Thank you very much.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
The Council went through the committee list line by line and made changes to the Committee list.
MOTION:
Mayor Slayter moved and Councilmember Glass seconded the motion to approve 2022 City Council and City Staff Committee Assignments as discussed.
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved 2022 City Council and City Staff Committee Assignments as discussed.
Minute Order Number: 2021-010
10. Discussion and Consideration of Regional Seat on the Sonoma County Continuum of Care (CoC) Board.
The CoC has revised the CoC’s Governance Charter and has reconfigured the CoC Board Composition to better reflect the geography of Sonoma County. As such, there are assigned seats for Santa Rosa and Petaluma, along with four more regional seats (North, Central, West, and East). The West County seat is to be appointed by the City Council of Sebastopol and assumes a two-year assignment, with Board meetings held once a month, and the specific date and time of the month subject to a Board consensus early in the term. The seat can be held by a City elected official, a staff member, or a community member from anywhere in West County. This item is to determine the process for appointment and to have a CoC Board member selected by March 2, 2022. (City Administration) City Administration presented the agenda item recommending the City Council discuss and provide direction on the appointment process for the Sonoma County Continuum of Care (CoC) West County Seat. City Council should discuss whether to:
1. Make the appointment to the CoC Board from the Sebastopol City Council and make the appointment tonight for a primary and alternate Council appointment; or
2. Direct Staff to conduct a recruitment / appointment process similar to City Commission/Board/Committees. If the Council chose this option, staff would recommend the following timeline for deadline for submittal of applications (Jan 6th – February 16th) with interviews to be scheduled for March 1st 2022 City Council Meeting.
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• As I reported overtime past year several time, I was attend these meetings I was invited to because I was Mayor at the time, they were discussions about various cities complaining that the small cities did not have a seat at the table.
• The way the Continuum of Care (CoC) works is oversees dissemination of funds that come from HUD and from the state of California to local cities and also to non-profits to administer homeless services. • The County was kind of treating the small cities as though they didn't really have a stakeholder and the way that it works the way that the HUD rules work is you have to be a City of a certain size in order to get funding so Cities that's are large enough get funding directly from HUD or that qualify as having a seat at the table in Sonoma County are Santa Rosa and Petaluma. • The COC was being governed with them having a seat at the table plus the County having several seats at the table, plus various other providers.
• That's how those particular cities have more access to funding for things related to homeless services so there was a feeling by many of the small cities but also some of the cities in South County plus staff people and various individuals involved in this issue that smaller cities were getting ignored and that the needs of these individual cities in terms of homeless services were being ignored • Because as we know, for the most part, in the County of Sonoma, who provides social services, who provides health services, et cetera, is County government, not small municipal government. • We were just sort of out of the loop.
• That meant we had no funding to deal with these issues and we're just sitting there without the funding that comes from HUD and that come from the State of California to enable a small City to deal with homeless issues or unhoused issues or those kinds of social service issues so this group got together and as we discussed, we advocated to our supervisors, we discussed with CDC staff the need for the cities to be included in the loop.
• It was proposed by a subset of that group what should we do, in terms of having City representation.
• Several years ago, the Continuum of Care primary people on the board were providers which is kind of an inherent conflict of interest because the providers are figuring out how to spend money, but also not representing the interest of local cities.
• Then they reformulated it about two years ago and then HUD came back and said it was not formulated properly so then it went back to the old method.
• CDC staff started talking about how to reformulate this governing board again in a way that was more equitable and geographically responsive.
• This group came up with the idea of there being for the small cities a North County representative, East County, South County and West County
• North County is going to appoint a representative and appointing bodies are the City of Healdsburg, City of Cloverdale and Town of Windsor.
• In East County there's only one City and that's the City of Sonoma so they are going to be appointing. • In West County there's one City, that would be us so our body is appointing. • In the Southern area Petaluma already has a seat at the table. • Cotati and Rohnert Park are working together to appoint somebody from their point of view. • I was advocating this model to our supervisor. I reported on this several times that this was going on and we finally ended with a new model to allow the City a seat at the table and actually have information about what's going on in terms of funding stream for homeless services and the social services associated with that.
• The question tonight is do we want to appoint somebody who is on our Council, or do you we want to appoint somebody else?
• It is at our option that we could choose to leave it open, so, that if somebody from our City Council wants, or volunteers or the Council wants to appoint somebody from the Council that we can make that appointment from ourselves from among ourselves or we can also say, if we want to appoint somebody that we deem as an expert, the City Council can choose to be somebody who is an expert or we can have a whole process where we open it up and ask people to apply. • I would at this point, where I am interested in that seat. • I think it is in our City's interest to have somebody from our City representing our City on the CoC because we need to have access to the information, we need to know what's going on in that about body, because that is where the funding comes from.
• We really want to be in that mode. That is the evolution of this particular seat. • It is a giant step forward for the small cities to finally have access to funding and access through the COC. • During the year I was Mayor, we advocated as a group, and I remember Don Schwartz bringing it forth and there was an executive opinion that more cities should get a voice and the couple larger cities that had the voice did not necessarily want the small cities to have a voice. • It has been going on for a long time and I'm so glad that we are here and we are finally having a small City getting a voice because it's important, and we need to have access to some of that funding also. • I do think it should be an elected official from our Council because we have been really close to this for a long time.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of presenter.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I want to make sure that Councilmember Glass, I think you can answer this question, when I look at the board, I see there's two at-large seats that are currently. • The applications for those are due in February to March selection date. • I want to make sure that I'm correct about it.
• The information you provide, that we recognize that even if we appoint someone from the City Council there's still that at-large position out there that we could encourage our West County fellow citizens to apply for.
• Am I correct that there are two at-larges and are there limitations to the positions that you are aware of.
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• There is a regional seat. There is at large seat
• Someone that immediately comes to mind is somebody who has been very active in our County, and I actually personally gave her a letter of recommendation in this past year to get on what was a previous COC recommendation.
• We have people here in Sebastopol.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• The next thing is to understand the election.
• My understanding from looking at the Continuum of Care site, the election, looks like anyone can be a member.
• Can you help us understand who votes for those positions? Councilmember Glass discussed the at-large positions and how that works and her understanding of the at-large and this whole charter has just been re-written.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment.
Suzanne Lande commented as follows:
• I very strongly support Una Glass in having this position • I do sometimes attend this CoC meetings as a member of the public • I do know that personally the at-large person who is someone with lived experience who's and she does a good job.
• But we need an elected doing it and I think Una would be perfect • It would benefit Sebastopol, our funding for our homeless and also, Guerneville and Forestville and other areas too.
• Councilmember Glass’s knowledge would be, she'd strongly have my support.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• The one question I had but not ask because others answered it that was whether or not she was interested.
• I was grateful to Councilmember Glass that she did indicate her interest. I would support her taking this role.
• From the comments I just have one more question, this is about the appointed people elected people on the board.
• That means 8 of the 17 positions are voted on by the other nine, chosen by the other nine. • If I understand it right, that strikes me as an odd way to do it. That is unusual. • It just doesn't make sense to me that nine people pick • I encourage them to look at the issue and would be interested as well at those at-large positions.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I'm behind her taking on the role and pleased she is willing to. • She just has as I have learned through the ad hoc committee for the unhoused has a connection that goes deep on the funding issues and deeper than that, related to the unhoused. • I think I would offer additional experience and additional voice as alternate for Councilmember Glass. • I think she'd be an excellent choice for us and that I would like to see us encourage others within the community to apply for the at-large positions.
MOTION:
Mayor Slayter moved and Councilmember Gurney seconded the motion to approve to make the appointment to the CoC Board from the Sebastopol City Council and make the appointment tonight for a primary and alternate Council appointment.
Appointed Councilmember Una Glass as Primary
Appointed Councilmember Diana Rich as Alternate
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved to make the appointment to the CoC Board from the Sebastopol City Council and make the appointment tonight for a primary and alternate Council appointment.
Appointed Councilmember Una Glass as Primary
Appointed Councilmember Diana Rich as Alternate
Minute Order Number: 2021-011
11. Discussion and Consideration of Direction to Staff for Relaunch Sebastopol Contract (Responsible Department: City Administration)
City Administration presented the agenda item recommending the City Council:
1. Create an Ad Hoc Committee to Conduct Second Interview and Provide Recommendation to City Council; or
2. Request proposers provide presentation (second interview) to the Full City Council at a special City Council Meeting; or
3. Direct staff to make recommendation to City Council based on interviews conducted by City staff.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of presenter.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I did not understand if staff was prepared to make a decision. • How did this come back to the Council? I don't think of us as the hiring body. That is why I'm a little perplexed here.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• This came to the Council because interest that staff received from a number of Councilmembers on the selection of the position and the agenda review committee decided that it made sense to bring it to the full Council to determine the next step.
• That seemed like the body that had the greatest interest should make the decision Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• Questioned what the affect would be other than staff selection in terms of delaying implementation of this Relaunch of Sebastopol plan
• Delay is concerning. Requested an indication of what sort of delay would be caused by having an ad hoc committee get involved in this or have the full City Council get involved. The delay could be great • In the absence of an ad hoc committee or full City Council involvement, how quickly could we move forward on the relaunch, Sebastopol project?
• If we could have a timeline comparison it on would help my decision making.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• It would be up to the agenda setting committee, which meets later this week to decide what meeting that fits in.
• I don't think there's much of a delay, it's up to agenda setting to decide what we may there could be a bit more delay, just naturally if you appoint a committee to do a second interview and come back with the Council in the recommendation.
• You have the same scheduling issues to get the committee together and then that would be followed by an item brought to the Council with the agenda setting committee, and they would have to decide. • There's more delay with that.
• The staff that did the interviews. The group of staff that did the interviews really didn't have an in-depth discussion if we thought another interview would help or not Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I thought the idea was there would be a special meeting if the decision tonight was for it to come back to the full Council.
• Is that what was proposed?
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• The proposal would be if it's the full Council, wishing to make interviews that that would be scheduled • We all know the difficulty in polls and alignment made calendars. • Until that goes out and people answer it's difficult to, to pay what the scheduling of that is. • We all understand the urgency of this item.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment. There was no public comment.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I am in favor of the recommendation which would be number two on our agenda item, request proposer's provide presentation, second interview style to the full City Council in a special City Council meeting
• Understanding the scheduling limitations, it should be limited time that answers the most number of questions and the greatest amount of need.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
I would be opposed to an ad hoc committee, there's too much inherent delay I would be in support either allowing the staff to make the decision as we requested they do or set a City Council meeting at the earliest day in order to get the full City Council to make a decision, thanks.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
I like the idea of setting the special Council meeting as well for us to weigh in.
Not just on the standpoint that a lot of us have interest in how it should roll out, but having a public meeting so that the public can see the process and weigh in
There was a lot of interest in feedback the last time we hired a consultant about work plan and we heard a lot from our public about that.
I would like a transparent process.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I think we will save time if we do a separate interview. • We may as well get ourselves together and do that.
• I have a scheduling suggestion to make if the agenda review committee would consider this. • Perhaps we use this special meeting date that is set later in this month to get this interview done and the decision made because then we are going to do the relaunch sooner and we have a later meeting that I think we are calling a retreat where we will talk about our processes and how we do our reporting and get through a shorter meeting etcetera.
• I'm in favor of a second interview
• We are all invested in this and our public is very invested as well.
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• I'm actually fine with staff making the decision.
• Without that, I am fine with the entire Council making the decision and scheduling a special meeting. • I'm just really anxious to watch Relaunch and this not taking another two or three months. • We are all trying to recovery from the COVID economy particularly many of our downtown merchants etcetera and the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned, I can go for either of the options.
The Council was in consensus to have a special City Council meeting to have the proposals present their proposals in a public meeting with scheduling to be done by the Agenda Review Committee.
City Council Action: The Council was in consensus to have a special City Council meeting to have the proposals present their proposals in a public meeting with scheduling to be done by the Agenda Review Committee.
Minute Order Number: 2021-012
12. Designating Voting Delegate and Alternate(s) to Vote in the Mayor's Absence for the 2022 Sonoma County Mayors and Councilmembers City Selection Committee Meetings and Sonoma County Mayors and Councilmembers Board and General Membership Association Meetings (Responsible Department: City Administration). This item was continued from the December 21, 2021 City Council Meeting.
Mayor Slayter presented the agenda item recommending the City Council discuss and designate a Voting Delegate and alternate(s) to serve as representative(s) on all occasions that the Mayor may be absent.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of presenter. There were no questions.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment. There was no public comment.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I'm fine being the last person.
• I have not attended many of the meetings.
• Last one I was at was with Mr. Foppoli from Windsor doing his thing in the meeting and that was plenty for me.
• Anyone can go ahead of me.
MOTION:
Mayor Slayter moved and Councilmember Rich seconded the motion to approve the following Delegate and alternate(s) to serve as representative(s) on all occasions that the Mayor may be absent as follows in the following order:
Voting Delegate and Alternates in Order Listed:
Mayor Slayter
Vice Mayor Hinton
Councilmember Glass
Councilmember Rich
Councilmember Gurney
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Glass, Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved the following Delegate and alternate(s) to serve as representative(s) on all occasions that the Mayor may be absent as follows in the following order:
Voting Delegate and Alternates in Order Listed:
Mayor Slayter
Vice Mayor Hinton
Councilmember Glass
Councilmember Rich
Councilmember Gurney
Minute Order Number: 2021-013
CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
13. City Manager-Attorney/City Clerk Reports:
14. City Council Reports/Committee/Sub-Committee Meeting Reports: (Reports by Mayor/City Councilmembers Regarding Various Agency Meetings/Committee Meetings/Sub-Committee Meeting /Conferences Attended and Possible Direction to its Representatives (If Needed) on Pending issues before such Boards)
Councilmember Rich reported as follows:
• The ad hoc committee for the unhoused has continued to be very active. The RV village plans are moving forward. Dan Davis is out there doing demo of the property. We have met regularly despite the break. • Worth reporting is that SAVS was the operator of a warming center over the coldest period this past week or so, and it dipped below freezing. SAVS operated a warming center for two nights Friday and Saturday night from 8:00 P.M. to 8:00 A.M. at the Community Church where a lot of the local advocates, volunteered to staff it. Community Church made their space available. • That was a good result and the ad hoc committee for the unhoused will be submitting a complete report at the next scheduled City Council meeting
• The Sebastopol in action coalition group, which includes the rotaries and Kiwanis and lions and active 30- 30 club have continued to meet.
• The two pieces of interest to report there is that through the efforts of that group CVNL to host a landing page and volunteer Website for local volunteer efforts. • It is a very nice professional opportunity for everyone within the community to participate in volunteer listings for free.
• That through the efforts of the Sebastopol service in action coalition, there's a partnership with the senior center that on January 15th there will be eight seniors in town who will have a variety of projects done on their behalf, simple things outside yard. It should take 2-3 hours during that morning. • I will mention that Rebuilding Sebastopol has been involved in that effort too. • Zero Waste committee is moving forward with their banner. Their new local artist designed banner for the Website, which should be really, really cool.
• The climate action committee is just really go, go, go, on policy questions.
Councilmember Gurney reported as follows:
• I want to just mention a few quick items from the SCTA/RCPA meeting, that was in December; the January meeting is cancelled.
• We reviewed the legislative policies for both organizations so those principals are outlined for staff, as they are our unofficial lobbyists so that we are watching all legislation to make sure that we know if it's important for us to take a position on.
• We also have had a long technical discussion about PDAs Priority development areas and I want to impress upon this Council how important those are to have designated for the purpose of receiving funding.
• It's one of those boxes, a really significant box that needs to be checked off on any application for the application for funding to be more successful.
• We have a pretty sort of narrow strip area in town, what we might suggest to the planning commission that they review it and update it.
• The future of transit ad hoc committee gave its report. • Three operators continue in their collaborative work, looking at coordinating communication systems whether it's phone lines, websites, just another step, I think they are now on phase two in the report. • There's a discussion we have another ad hoc committee that is talking about organizing a funding mechanism for climate protection work in other words some kind of measure that goes on the ballot. • The interpretation is maybe 2022 is not the year to do it because of competing measures but they are continuing to explore that.
• The community benefits organization had a dynamic meeting featuring our civic spark fellow. • She got the group energized talking about her outreach plan to make sure as she does her work, our community is engaged in the work she is doing and they started answering her survey questions and time ran short so that everybody wanted her to come back for a second session.
• This is our civic spark fellow doing action work with our CBOs. • It was very, very lively and dynamic.
Councilmember Glass commented we had a tremendous number of meetings over the past month as noted by others, but all my other things were cancelled.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• The legislative committee was cancelled.
• I did do a technical committee which I am asked to do as Vice Chair of the Russian River Watershed Association on December 16th.
• Councilmember Rich and I this morning had a Local Who Made a Difference Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• As I noted the design guidelines subcommittee has met a couple of times • we didn't meet in the last probably three or four weeks and I expect that the planning director will reconvene us soon.
• Sonoma clean power, I will continue to plug and heartily encourage everyone to go visit the advanced energy center in downtown Santa Rosa.
• There are all kinds of great things that you can go and experiment with, you can cook with induction. You can get information about energy upgrades for your home, which is now kind of the big push and programs working on the transportation sector for a few years with the electric vehicle programs. Now moving in to advanced energy builds for new construction as well as some retrofits for existing homes for energy retrofits and there's a lot of really, really great information that is going on there. The headquarters construction project is complete and that is a wonderful reuse and adaptive reuse of an existing building and it's super energy efficient and certified and all the things that you expect. • GSA: the big push was reported on at our ground water sustainability plan for the Santa Rosa basin was complete and released to the public and submitted, and that was a major, major couple of year project that was done.
• The fire department subcommittee has not met and we do need to. • Sebastopol world friends, that board continues to be very, very active. • They continue with their scholarship program which the goal there is eventually, hopefully some time in the future, that no worthy student is unable to go because of any financial reason and even no student regardless of need, needs to pony up money out of family coffers, it's a strong program and growing stronger.
• The senior center has changed to quarterly meetings with their board. They meet on zoom. • Chamber of commerce went back to zoom meetings
• They are planning the apple blossom festival tentatively.
15. Council Communications Received. There were none.
16. Future City Meeting Dates/Events (Informational Only): (See City Web Site for Up-to-Date Meeting Dates/Times)
ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
January 4, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting was adjourned to the Regular City Council Meeting of January 18, 2022 6:00 pm (ZOOM VIRTUAL MEETING FORMAT)
Mayor Slayter adjourned the regular City Council Meeting at 9:47 pm.
Respectfully Submitted:
Mary C. Gourley
Assistant City Manager/City Clerk, MMC