City Council
Mayor Patrick Slayter
Vice Mayor Neysa Hinton
Una Glass
Sarah Glade Gurney
Diana Rich
City Manager/Attorney
Larry McLaughlin
[email protected]
Assistant City Manager/Attorney/City Clerk, MMC
Mary Gourley
[email protected]
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
`MINUTES FOR Meeting of June 7, 2022
As Approved by the City Council at their regular meeting of June 21, 2022 The City Council Regular meeting will be held via teleconference pursuant to AB 361. Pursuant to AB 361 (2021), Teleconference Restrictions of the Brown Act Have Been Suspended, as Well as the Requirement to Provide a Physical Location for Members of the Public to Participate in the Meeting. The City of Sebastopol City Council meeting will not be physically open to the public and all City Council Members will be teleconferencing into the meeting via Zoom.
Please note that minutes are not meant to be verbatim minutes and are meant to be the City’s record of Actions Taken (Approved Motion of Agenda Item(s)).
5:30 pm Convene City Council Meeting - Meeting Start Time (ZOOM VIRTUAL FORMAT) CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Slayter called the regular meeting to order at 5:34 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: Assistant City Manager/Attorney/City Clerk Mary Gourley Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follow
• Wallin is maiden name
• Melissa Hanley is a distant cousin
• Met Once
• Not see as conflict for voting purposes
INTERVIEW(S):
1. Interview for Vacancy (one) Category C on the Design Review Board (Responsible Department:
Planning/City Administration) Term Would be for May 2022 through December 2023. a. One Application Received: Applicant: Melissa Hanley
The City Council conducted the following interview: Melissa Hanley.
City Council Action: Interview applicant Melissa Hanley.
Minute Order Number: 2022-179
ADJOURNMENT OF SPECIAL MEETING: Mayor Slayter adjourned the special meeting at 5:50 p.m. 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: Councilmember Una Glass – Excused
Staff: City Manager/Attorney/City Attorney Larry McLaughlin Assistant City Manager/Attorney/City Clerk Mary Gourley Administrative Services Director Ana Kwong
Fire Chief Bill Braga
City Engineer Mario Landeros
Planning Director Kari Svanstrom
Police Lieutenant Ron Nelson
Mayor Slayter stated the Vice Mayor has requested a moment to honor a local resident.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• I did want to recognize, as we have done occasionally in the past, tonight a member of our community that we lost tragically just a few days ago.
• It was only five years ago that I took a moment of silence to honor his father, Dennis Kerwin, who we lost. • Unfortunately Blake Kerwin was killed in a tragic accident last Thursday night. • There was a vigil held in his honor at the Sebastopol plaza on Saturday night. • Blake was born and raised in Sebastopol.
• He is the same age at my son Jared.
• His family was involved heavily in the community.
• His mother taught local little league and Blake attended Twin Hills and Analy was involved in a variety of sports.
• It's unfortunate when we lose any member of our community but especially somebody so young, at 23 years old.
• I wanted to dedicate this meeting in his honor and recognize him and our community's loss today. Thank you.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I feel I would be remiss if not to say a couple of things also. • There are no words to describe the grief and anger that I think we collectively feel at the news of the mass shootings that have taken the lives of 19 children and two adults specifically at Robb elementary school in Uvalde, Texas.
• It weighs heavily on my heart and I think it probably weighs heavily on everyone's hearts. • The Sebastopol City Council grieves with the families and the cities in Uvalde, Texas, Buffalo, new York, Cleveland, Ohio, Laguna Woods, California, Chicago, Illinois, and all the others that have suffered from mass shootings in the U.S. our hearts break for these communities and we all have a collective loss that we have suffered.
• It's also important to acknowledge that we offer our condolences and any assistance we can bring to those in our direct community who have been impacted by these events, be it physical or mental support that these people need.
• We are here for you and we can connect people with help. • In recognition of the tragic loss of life that occurred, the City of Sebastopol lowered its flags to half-staff to honor the lives lost.
• It is our fervent hope that this never has to happen again. • The City supports reasonable and meaningful actions that prevent gun violence and protect our children and our community.
• When senseless acts of violence happen, you may find yourself needing a place to turn or simply a friendly voice at the end of the phone.
• If you need help, please reach out to 1-800-746-8181. • While not a solution that solves it, it is a first step in getting the support and help that you may feel due to these events
SALUTE TO THE FLAG: Mayor Slayter led the Salute to the Flag.
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 are being utilized for this meeting. • Members of the public may view and listen to the meeting by use of Zoom and Live Stream 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, will be asked to adhere to protocols and /or will be removed from the meeting.
Reminder please leave your microphones on mute until called upon and if you would like to provide your name during public comment you are welcome to do that but do not have to.
PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS: The following were presented:
• Proclamation – Proclaiming June 2022 as Elder Abuse Awareness Month • Proclamation – Proclaiming June 2022 as Immigrant Heritage Month • Proclamation – Proclaiming June 2022 as (LGBTQ+) Month • Proclamation – Proclaiming June 19, 2022 as Juneteenth Day Reference Order Number: 2022-180
Mayor Slayter provided the following corrections to the agenda:
Item Number 9 Agenda already corrected/revised to show correct Cancellation date of August 16, 2022 Item Number 14 This was incorrectly posted as a Public Hearing and does not need to be. The item is a regular discussion and action item as the Public Hearing as noted in the Resolution is scheduled for June 21 2022.
The Council would need to hear the item tonight and approve resolution setting the public hearing.
Tonight action will cover:
1. Initiating Proceedings,
2. Approving the Engineer’s Report; and
3. Declaring Intent to Levy, which then sets the date for the public hearing for 6/21/22.
PLEASE NOTE:
Public Comment on all items listed on the agenda will be limited to two minutes, per person, per item. The Public Comment Portion of the Agenda will allow for 20 minutes at the beginning of the meeting and public comment not heard during those 20 minutes will continue at the end of the agenda, following the last calendared item and before Reports.
Council welcomes and encourages additional comments via email. Public Comment Emails can be sent to:
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA :
During General Public Comment, the public is invited to make comments on items of public interest that are within the City Council’s subject matter jurisdiction and that are not listed on the current 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.
Royelyn Wootten commented as follows:
• I live in Sebastopol.
• I strongly oppose to switch to smart water meters in Sebastopol. • Some people think they save water and energy.
• But even the company providing them stated “there has never been a claim that the new meters save energy, save water, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, unquote. Smart water meters will harm the emf aware and injured community. They will harm our quality of life, since they are in direct opposition to the Sebastopol general plan written in 2016. Disturb our sense of safety and peace and create a nuisance throughout our City. Adding smart water meters will increase emf, electromagnetic frequency, in our county. Peer-reviewed published studies find emf radiation threatens nature and causes a wide variety of health impact”
• Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes in the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general wellbeing in humans, unquote. • This information can be found at emfscientist.org. Thank you very much.
Peter Mancus commented as follows:
• Driving around today I saw for the first time what looked like a modified pride flag on the flagpole by City Hall. The third flag after the U.S. flag and the state flag. • I object to that and my objection has nothing to do with the LGBQT+ community. • If the flag had a bill of rights flag or a pro second amendment or pro guns or pro NRA flag, I would object to any unofficial government flag
• I think that flagpole is probably bought with taxpayer money. • Government is supposed to be neutral.
• When government puts that type of a flag or any message or cause flag on the flagpole, they enter the public marketplace of ideas.
• They convert that neutral flag to a public forum.
• But the flagpole has limited space for messages that you can put on the flagpole. • I am certain this community, the City Council, would not put a pro NRA pro second amendment, pro bill of rights, pro Christian message flag on that flagpole. • In that sense the government, this Council, is being selective and discriminating. • It is also manifesting its hypocrisy.
• I just listened to Councilmembers with proclamations saying they support this and that but they really don't.
• It's a manifestation of horrible, illogical cognitive dissonance. • The flagpole should not be politicized.
Jack Piccinini commented as follows:
• I'm a resident of Sebastopol.
• I missed the Council meeting on the discussion of the future of the fire department and I wanted to take the opportunity this evening to comment on that topic.
• I didn't realize I only had two minutes so I’ll speak quite quickly. • The contentiousness of that forum was derived from the lack of process on addressing such a critical topic that has a human impact and has many stakeholders involved. • While the ad hoc committee indicated that they had spent a great deal of time on it, hard work and time does not translate into process.
• Now, before I go further, I want to qualify myself as being able to make this observation. • I'm a 44-year fire service manager in Sonoma County.
• I facilitated mergers, JPAs, contract for Services, and I was one of the key architects of all of the reorganization and consolidations taking place in Sonoma County within the last year or so. • So with that, I will state that on something so critical, that a well-facilitated, meaningful process is the key. • A well-facilitated meaningful process results in three things. • It helps us manage us through the emotional phase of these kinds of issues, it makes the issues and solutions seeking process objective, and it can only be objective, and third, it delivers objective interest based and collaborative options to present to our stakeholders. • As Councilmember Gurney observed, it was not an option a, b, c, to choose from during the ad hoc committee's presentation. This process would correct that.
• I recommend the use of a meaningful process as the key to navigating through this critical discussion in determining the future of the fire department.
• I will close by offering any assistance I can with my experience to help facilitate such a process. • We just need to all work together. Thank you very much.
Martha Glaser commented as follows:
• I'm here again to say I would like to continue living as I do in my home of 19 years in my town with my analog water meters in the sidewalk in front of our family's house. • I like my cement block cover.
• I don't need to have it replaced with plastic.
• Why toss a perfectly respectable piece of concrete with a piece of plastic which will only be destined for microplastic decay?
• A very wise professor of environmental health studies, a public health physician, Director of the Institute of Health and the Environment at University of Albany as well as professor of Environmental Health Sciences within the School of Public Health. His institute is part of the World Health Organization. • His earlier work focused primarily on basic neurobiology, so he knows a lot, he knows what he's talking about.
• I think he's got great credentials and I’ll say some of what he said. In a letter addressed to the water committee, and the WSSC water service is one of the largest wastewater utilities in the nation • Dr. Carpenter was responding to a report on potential impacts on human health of advanced metering infrastructure or AMI, that's the water meters.
• I will attempt to put it, the whole letter, in the public record later. • They occupy similar frequency band and consist of brief pulses throughout the day. • He says the smart water meters will do the same.
• He goes on to make other important observations and says there is no safe level of radiofrequency radiation. There is no safe level of radio frequency radiation identified.
Roberta commented as follows:
• I'm a resident of Sebastopol.
• I love this town.
• I absolutely oppose the smart water meter.
• The council's failure to comply with Sebastopol, the general plans, health and wellness goal to minimize emfs, smart meter band and zero waste purchasing policy and the telecommunications of 1123 which requires public notification of technical vetting prior to a planning commission review. • I'm totally opposed to this smart water meter.
• There has never been a claim according to cisco that the new meters save energy, save water, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
• That's what Syserco says.
• It doesn't make sense to promote these toxic emitting smart water meters as an urgent climate solution action because it's not true.
• I'm an EMF sensitive person.
• I want to continue living in Sebastopol.
• I would like the commission and the county there to remember that there were goals to minimize EMFs.
Frank commented as follows:
• I would just like to thank the City Councilmembers and the Mayor for hearing my comments. • Here's the deal. I have my niece with me all summer, like she's in my possession the entire summer.
• My brother and his sister-in-law won this cruise around the world and they're going to be gone for three or four months, so I got my niece the whole summer.
• At first I said no because I don't want to take care of a kid, but they're like, please, please, she's only comfortable staying with you and that made me feel good. • I said all right. She's very quiet. She's 13 years old. She doesn't really talk to me. She doesn't really interact with me,
• I get it, she's 13 years old, she only wants to be on the phone. It's incessant on the phone, TikTok, Instagram, Facetime.
• When she's on Facetime, it's like she's a chatter box or something. It's like she never wanted to stop talking.
• My question for the town, if maybe, we could turn off the internet from 11:00 a.m. to about maybe like 7:00 or 8:00 p.m., just so she could like just talk to me and interact with me. • I don't know if you have the power to do that, but I think that would be the best way for her to get off of her phone.
• These kids these days are too connected to the phones, technology.
Kyle Falbo commented as follows:
• This one is very brief. It's hopefully just a quick update from Planning Director Svanstrom • Requested information on the Woodmark Apartments, the current application status activity • The website is only as current as May 23rd, 2022.
• At that time there was a seven-day window in which the applicant had to appeal. It is past that seven day period and it's time for us to get a little bit of an update as to what the status is. • It would make it much easier for members of the public to be able to make decisions, organize, make efforts, but in order to do that we have to have updated information.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• Some of these comments are very, very good and interesting and entertaining and intelligent. • I want to thank the people that spoke on the wireless water meter issue. • I urge them to try to get their stuff published in the Press Democrat, 200 words or less, you can get it published in the media, and The Gazette where we have been ridiculed regularly. • I would just like to point out that apparently our progress is outpacing our moral and ethical growth not to mention good sense.
• Frank, thank you for speaking up about your niece with the cellphone. • Those things are and have been used, that frequency, 2.4 gigahertz, used in the military as a weapon. • It is biologically not good for us in the long run. All this radiation is literally an assault on us. • Our neurological systems are being rewired. It goes to insomnia and cancer. • One in two men will get cancer sometime in their lifetime. One in three women will. One in four men with die from it and one of five women will die of cancer.
Carter Kargan commented as follows:
• I moved here two months ago, I haven't been out of the house more than five days. Every time I get out the door I get Covid.
• It's a real nightmare, I just want to be safe.
• I just moved here from the East Coast.
• My dad owned two pizza places, opened up a pizza place of my own. • So happy to be a Sebastopol guy. See you on the streets.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• These are comments that I’m making as a citizen.
• Imagine the person most important to you going to the store, to school, to church, to a concert, or to work and then not ever coming through the door again.
• Another day, another mass shooting or two. Yet collectively we can't seem to agree on much. • So nothing happens, nothing changes.
• It takes courage to acknowledge when one has made a mistake. • Yet it seems our society isn't willing to admit that what we're doing just isn't working anymore. • Why are we willing to perpetually offer ourselves and our loved ones as sacrificial lambs so that a minority of Americans can continue to control public policy that is of paramount importance to all of us? • It's now nigh-on established that we have embarked on the sixth mass extinction in earth's history. • Yet when we found out about it we had another handful of chips and washed it down with a nice dry creek zin. This time we're not threatened by a comet. This time we are the comet. • I bet four bits we don't do anything about it this time either. • A journalist wrote, our civilization destroys the foundations that support it. We don't have the courage to back away to stop or to restrain ourselves.
• The solution seems clear to me. But I also acknowledge my ideas are anathema to others. • I know there are many others like me who are willing to change. Something is better than nothing. • We need to be pragmatic, not emotional.
• It is time to rest an increasingly perverted reading of laws ratified 231 years ago away from those that wish us towards a grotesque version of freedom where we are increasingly frightened to simply go outside.
• Is this freedom, I ask?
• I had hoped that we could make some changes that will let many more loved ones walk through their doors and back into the arms of those waiting for them to come home.
Mayor Slayter responded to public comment as follows:
Turn off internet: Well beyond City ability to turn off internet • Woodmark: City issued a letter of inconstancy on May 20th • They did not appeal that and did submit a response June 2nd • City is in the process of reviewing that now
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 stated Statements of Conflict of Interest.
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.
Mayor Slayter read the consent calendar.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment on the consent calendar.
Rod commented as follows:
• I have one of my sculptures has been approved.
• I had a question on the insurance on that.
• Is that available?
• What is the situation on that?
• I understand the City shouldn't be responsible for any injury or whatever but I would like to be protected too.
• Is there insurance involved in that or can I get it?
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• I have a question on the water main
• I would like to know how things work.
• I would be interested in what material is being used
• As long as we're talking about water mains, I’m assuming that this will be wireless-free, like low tech. • Can you just tell me what material that water main is made out of, please? Mayor Slayter responded to public comments.
City staff will reach out to Mr. Morgan regarding insurance for the art piece.
Mr. Landeros commented as follows:
• On the first question, wireless devices, the project calling for installing new water service lines which are polyethylene plastic line and connecting to the existing meters which I do not believe are wireless at this time. To the second question, as far as the water main, it is a ten-inch PVC or plastic pipe. • All industry standard things.
Mayor Slayter asked if any Councilmember wanted to remove a consent calendar item. There was no request to remove any item from the consent calendar.
Mayor Slayter called for a motion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Gurney moved and Vice Mayor Hinton seconded the motion to approve Consent Calendar Item(s) Number(s) 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 with correction to Item Number 9.
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
2. Approval of Minutes of May 17, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes (Responsible Department: City Administration)
City Council Action: Approved Minutes of May 17, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Minute Order Number: 2022-181
3. Approval of Minutes of the May 23, 2022 City Council Special Meeting – Closed Session – Bargaining Units Meeting Minutes (Responsible Department: City Administration) City Council Action: Approved Minutes of the May 23, 2022 City Council Special Meeting – Closed Session – Bargaining Units Meeting Minutes
Minute Order Number: 2022-182
4. Resolution Authorizing Continued Use of Teleconference Meetings Based on Circumstances of the COVID-19 state of emergency and that the following circumstances exist:
a. 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. b. The State of California and the City of Sebastopol continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
Resolution needs to be submitted to Council every 30 days. Last approval: May 17th 2022. June 21st 2022 would be too late for the 30 day requirement.
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.
Resolution needs to be submitted to Council every 30 days. Last approval: May 17th 2022. June 21st 2022 would be too late for the 30 day requirement.
Minute Order Number: 2022-183
Resolution Number: 6433-2022
5. Extension of Emergency Proclamation of Local Emergency (COVID-19) issued by the Director of Emergency Services (Responsible Department: 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: 2022-184
Resolution Number: 6434-2022
6. Approval of Resolution Calling and Giving Notice of a General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, (The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each year) for the Election of Members of the City Council as required, and Requesting the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors to Consolidate the General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election to be held on that date pursuant to Elections Code; and Approval of Resolution Adopting Regulations for Candidates for Elective Office Pertaining to the Candidate Statement of Qualifications and Requiring Each Candidate Filing a Candidate Statement of Qualifications Pay in Advance to the Local Agency an Estimated Pro Rate Share ($800.00) as a Condition of Having His/her Statement included in the Voters Pamphlet for the Municipal Election to be held on November 8, 2022).
a. (Three Seats: Councilmember Glass, Gurney, Slayter)
b. Nomination Papers will be available once the nomination period has opened (not earlier than the 113th day nor later than the 88th day before the municipal election). Appointments will be required.
c. Nomination period opens: July 18, 2022, 7:00 a.m.
d. Standard nomination period closes (deadline to file papers): August 12, 2022, 5:00 p.m. e. Extended nomination period closes (deadline to file for a seat if one or more of the incumbents do not file): August 17, 2022, 5:00 p.m.
f. Deadline to register to vote: October 24, 2022
g. Election Day: November 8, 2022
h. Who Can Run for City Council:
• Be at least eighteen years of age
• Be a citizen of the United States
• Be a resident of the State of California
• Be a registered voter for not less than 30 days preceding the date of filing candidate papers. Registration will be verified before issuance of nomination papers.
City Council Action: Approved Resolution Calling and Giving Notice of a General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, (The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each year) for the Election of Members of the City Council as required, and Requesting the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors to Consolidate the General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election to be held on that date pursuant to Elections Code; and Approval of Resolution Adopting Regulations for Candidates for Elective Office Pertaining to the Candidate Statement of Qualifications and Requiring Each Candidate Filing a Candidate Statement of Qualifications Pay in Advance to the Local Agency an Estimated Pro Rate Share ($800.00) as a Condition of Having His/her Statement included in the Voters Pamphlet for the Municipal Election to be held on November 8, 2022). a. (Three Seats: Councilmember Glass, Gurney, Slayter)
b. Nomination Papers will be available once the nomination period has opened (not earlier than the 113th day nor later than the 88th day before the municipal election). Appointments will be required. c. Nomination period opens: July 18, 2022, 7:00 a.m.
d. Standard nomination period closes (deadline to file papers): August 12, 2022, 5:00 p.m. e. Extended nomination period closes (deadline to file for a seat if one or more of the incumbents do not file): August 17, 2022, 5:00 p.m.
f. Deadline to register to vote: October 24, 2022
g. Election Day: November 8, 2022
h. Who Can Run for City Council:
• Be at least eighteen years of age
• Be a citizen of the United States
• Be a resident of the State of California
• Be a registered voter for not less than 30 days preceding the date of filing candidate papers.
Registration will be verified before issuance of nomination papers.
Minute Order Number: 2022-185
Resolution Number: 6435-2022
6436-2022
7. Approval of Artist/Sculptures for Ives Park Community Sculpture Garden (Requestor: Public Art Committee/Responsible Department: Planning Dept)
City Council Action: Approved Artist/Sculptures for Ives Park Community Sculpture Garden Minute Order Number: 2022-186
8. Adoption of Resolution Approving the Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) List of Roads (Responsible Department: City Engineer)
City Council Action: Approved Resolution Approving the Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) List of Roads Minute Order Number: 2022-187
Resolution Number: 6437-2022
9. Approval of Cancelation of the Regular City Council Meeting of August 16, 2022 (Corrected) (Requestor: Agenda Review Committee)
City Council Action: Approved ancelation of the Regular City Council Meeting of August 16, 2022 (Corrected) Minute Order Number: 2022-188
10. Approval of Master Agreement 2010-01-36 Amendment 33 with GHD for the Construction Management Services for First Street Water Main Replacement Project (Responsible Department:
City Manager)
City Council Action: Approved Master Agreement 2010-01-36 Amendment 33 with GHD for the Construction Management Services for First Street Water Main Replacement Project Minute Order Number: 2022-189
11. Approval of Revised Job Description and Title Change for Police Communications Dispatcher (Responsible Department: Police/RGS Personnel Consultant) City Council Action: Approved Revised Job Description and Title Change for Police Communications Dispatcher Minute Order Number: 2022-190
Resolution Number: 6438-2022
REGULAR CALENDAR AGENDA ITEMS (DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION)
12. Appointment for Vacancy (one) Category C on the Design Review Board (Responsible Department:
Planning/City Administration) Term Would be for December 2021 through December 2023 (Responsible Department: Planning/City Administration)
Mayor Slayter presented the agenda item. This is an open seat on our Design Review Board and we have a number of categories. C could be for anyone. We happen to have somebody who also fits in the category A, which is a licensed design professional who has applied for the seat. We completed an interview.
Director Svanstrom commented this seat as a term ending date of December 31, 2023.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions. There were none at this time.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• I would like to just simply note that we really need to have some people on the City Council and also on the committees and the Planning Commission who are EMF aware, who recognize the harm and danger of wireless radiation and mitigate it, reduce it, as is written in the general plan and has been for the previous 25-year plan.
• It is summarily being ignored.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• We have one open seat.
• We have one applicant.
• We did one interview.
• As far as I am concerned, what we have here is an opportunity to appoint somebody to the Design Review Board who is a licensed practicing architect and who has deep roots in the community and who has an extremely worldly vision of design and a host of ideas. • I'm in support of this applicant
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• So am I, with great enthusiasm in support of appointing her to the position. • I was impressed with her experience, she is highly qualified, and I value her perceptions of the community.
• I'm thrilled to have a next generation person, she's actually close to my daughter's class. • I think we need an infusion not just of that energy but also of that whole mindset. • She wants to future proof our community for the next generations of people. • There was so much of interest in her application we probably could have talked for hours • A 20-minute interview was very stellar.
• I am grateful she applied and encourage us to appoint her.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I agree completely
• She's the whole package, professionalism, compassion, commitment to community, expertise, collaborative interest.
• I’m completely in support of it. I think she will contribute tremendously to the already impressive efforts of the Design Review Board
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• I wholeheartedly agree.
• She's a multigenerational member of our community who went away and came back and has invested with buying a home in town.
• I really identified with everything she said about energy and her goals for the future, ADUs, and making sure that our generations that grew up here hopefully can get a handle back into our housing market and come back to raise their families.
• I so appreciate that she'll bring a great perspective to our Design Review Board Councilmember Glass concurred.
MOTION:
Councilmember Glass moved and Councilmember Gurney seconded the motion to approve Melissa Hanley to the Design Review Board for Category C with a term ending date of December 31, 2023.
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 Melissa Hanley to the Design Review Board for Category C with a term ending date of December 31, 2023.
Minute Order Number: 2022-191
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.) NONE PUBLIC HEARING(s):
13. Public Hearing: Public Hearing on Comprehensive User Schedule (Responsible Department:
Administrative Services Director)
Administrative Services Director Kwong presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Conduct the Public Hearing and Adopt Resolution Updating Schedule of User and Regulatory Fees for Use in Fiscal Year 2022-
23. Director Kwong introduced Terry Madsen.
Terry Madsen, ClearSource, provided a presentation.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of staff/presenter. There were none at this time.
Mayor Slayter opened the public hearing.
Kyle Falbo commented as follows:
• So we just had a wonderful presentation on an update of our fee schedule and unlike most within the last two years in which we had a major update to our fee schedule, it seems like it's going to just status quo increased by inflation.
• However I was very surprised to see a presentation by what appears to be a contractor. • I know the Administrative Services budget for contract Services for this fiscal year is $422,000. • The presentation that we had was quite brief.
• The presentation doesn't seem like there was any heavy lifting that was there. It's surprising to me that that level of work isn't happening in-house, that it isn't within the scope of our City employees to be conducting the type of analysis we just saw and the update that we receive. • So it's very important to me that the Council is very clear in communicating with the public about the costs of these contract Services for presentation such as we just had • I have to do this because it's very, very difficult to get a direct answer, specifically a dollar amount, not something that says what we would generally see as a benefit package for a comparable position, as I had in my most recent public comment.
• I want a specific dollar amount that is being spent on the contractor Services of the contractor of ClearSource that we just received a presentation for and in the future, please provide those types of details, the true costs of outsourcing the work that the citizens of the City are expecting to be done by the City's employees.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• I was wondering what the presenter was talking about
• I had no clue what he's talking about.
• I'm computer-free. I don't have the rest of the agenda and stuff like that, but Kyle, bless his heart, clarified some of that to me was his comments and his incisive observations. • I would like to agree with him about the dollar amounts that are presented to the public and City Council
• Case in point, what happened was with this last thing with the wireless water meters snafu, is that the City Council and nobody knew except me who got a public records act, that these shyster were getting $2.2 million on the wireless water meters which you know will assault us. • So anyway, you all didn't even know that, probably don't even know it now • It was not revealed until after you had signed the contract that they would be paid, and up front, I might add, before the whole thing was put into place
• I would like you all to be a little bit more clear about your financial dealings and also the stuff that you need to be clear on what you're voting on.
• The language needs to be made by not the narrative that's provided by the corporations and the business so that it keeps it unclear from you and the public.
Hearing no further comments, Mayor Slayter closed the public hearing.
Mayor Slayter responded to public comments:
• There is no government agency in existence in the United States that does not use consultants for one thing or another; oftentimes because individual expertise on particular items, it is not cost-effective to have a person who is an expert on one item.
• Do we have a contract amount for this particular piece of work that can be shared with the member of the public?
Terry Madsen commented as follows: Contract amount: $3960.00 so less than $4000 City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I wanted to thank Terry Madsen for the presentation and I recognize there was deep analysis done in order to efficiently and effectively provide us with a cogent and organized presentation • Similarly to our Administrative Services Director, I appreciate the oversight and direction given to this particular expert.
• Then to Kyle, I do appreciate the public interest in getting down to the details and the nitty-gritty. • In terms of the proposal itself, I’m completely in support of it. • I just wanted to recognize that the actual dollar amounts increases are fairly reasonable to the public as I looked over them, tracking inflation.
• Thank you for being cognizant of the City Council's concerns about the impact on the community and the need to cover our expenses without being overly burdensome. • I would be in support of this.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• That was something I wanted to address as well.
• I appreciate that while we know that things are changing in the economy, that it's much more appropriate to bring up our fee structures a little at a time so our community doesn't feel the burden of them, especially since many of these fees are related to things that we want to happen in our community. • I appreciate that, and am in support as well.
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• I was so heartened to get this proposal that did not cause sticker shock after the shock of last year. • Thank you for this very reasonable gradual increase and report that helped us make this decision.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I am in agreement with my colleagues that this is a reasonable increase. • It is, as was noted in the staff report, this is something that's promoting generational equity. • So what that means is that it's a slow, steady increase over time, rather than a big herky-jerky jump. • The cost recovery, we're still basically donating lots and lots of Services to our community. • The cost recovery is not 100% across the board.
• We acknowledge that.
• We think that that's the right thing to do as the Council on this item. • I'm also in favor of this. I will be supporting it
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I just wanted to comment, remember back to the parking fees. • That was a long time since one of the years I was the Mayor, which is more than ten years ago or longer, and the majority of the Council felt that was just too much of an increase. • So I think we all prefer this more incremental, slower change, and it keeps us more on track so we don't make the mistake we made, leaving our parking fees as low as they were, as long as they were. • I very much appreciate us doing this with some regularity.
MOTION:
Councilmember Gurney moved and Councilmember Glass seconded the motion to approve Adoption of Resolution Updating Schedule of User and Regulatory Fees for Use in Fiscal Year 2022-23.
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 adoption of Resolution Updating Schedule of User and Regulatory Fees for Use in Fiscal Year 2022-23.
Minute Order Number: 2022-192
Resolution Number: 6439-2022
15. Public Hearing: Public Hearing on Abatement of Weeds (Responsible Department: Fire) Fire Chief Bill Braga presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Conduct the Public Hearing and Adopt Resolution for Abatement of Weeds.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of staff/presenter. There were none at this time.
Mayor Slayter opened the public hearing.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• Would just like to thank the Chief for his wonderful service and acknowledge that as far as I know he's doing everything right.
• I would also like to mention that he has probably received in the mail an invitation requesting $25 from every resident, the invitation comes for free pancakes and a tour of their facility and activities for all ages. • Anyway, the point is that I would just like to mention this is exactly the kind of PR that our wonderful Sebastopol Fire Department needs to do in order to maintain their independence and their support from the residents here.
Kyle Falbo commented as follows:
• The first thing I wanted to mention is that we should always be paying attention to our pollinators when it comes to weed abatement.
• Our weeds are not necessarily just a nuisance, they are also providing a habitat species • If we have the choice, letting those weeds go as long as possible until the weed abatement period can help our pollinator.
• The fire ad hoc committee spoke extensively about the deep level of research they went through in terms of their recommendation for consolidation.
• I would like to know from that fire ad hoc committee what their research was regarding the weed abatement and the responsibility of weed abatement as we just received from our Chief Bill Braga from our own City Fire Department and how weed abatement will be handled under a consolidation. • Hopefully in your extensive research you covered that.
Hearing no further comments, Mayor Slayter closed the public hearing.
Mayor Slayter responded to public comment as follows:
• We had a question about weed abatement by Gold Ridge Fire Department, • Ideally we would be able to ask a representative of that particular agency to answer. • We do not have anybody from that agency in the meeting right now. • I do know that Gold Ridge as a more rural fire district, they take their weed abatement very seriously, and they do have a robust program to address that.
• The fire ad hoc committee does not have the particular specifics about the way they administer that. • That is something that would be part of any negotiation. • It is not part of a preliminary analysis.
• So other than the existence of the program and know that it's robust, that's all that I can report on that. • I'll ask my counterpart on the Fire Ad Hoc Committee, Councilmember Rich if she has any particular knowledge about their program.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I have personal injury about Gold Ridge's program because in my neighborhood, they were very instrumental in facilitating the clearance of substantial property that is in the county that borders the City limits,
• I am aware of their very proactive efforts in weed abatement, and honestly was impressed by how diligent they were and how well they compared to our very diligent Chief's efforts at weed abatement. • I think we have two wonderful districts who are equally adept in addressing these issues and collaborating on these issues.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I would like to thank the Chief.
• This list started out long, and every year it gets shorter and shorter, and this year you're saying it's already handled so that many compliments to your efforts to bring people up in the information, education so they want to be proactive.
• All you have to do is give them that little nudge, the list. • So thank you very much for your work.
MOTION:
Councilmember Gurney moved and Councilmember Rich seconded the motion to approve Adoption of Resolution for Abatement of Weeds.
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 Adoption of Resolution for Abatement of Weeds.
Minute Order Number: 2022-194
Resolution Number: 6441-2022
Agenda Item Number 14:
Public Hearing: Public Hearing to Levy and Collect Annual Assessments for FY 2022-20223 for the City of Sebastopol’s Lighting Special Assessment District; Resolution Approving the Engineer’s Report and Confirming the assessment Diagram and annual assessments and authorize levying of annual assessments for FY 2021-2022 for the City of Sebastopol Landscaping and Lighting Assessment District (Responsible Department: Administrative Services Director)
Administrative Services Director Kwong presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Conduct the Public Hearing to Levy and Collect Annual Assessments for FY 2022-20223 for the City of Sebastopol’s Lighting Special Assessment District; Resolution Approving the Engineer’s Report and Confirming the assessment Diagram and annual assessments and authorize levying of annual assessments for FY 2021-2022 for the City of Sebastopol Landscaping and Lighting Assessment.
Mayor Slayter asked for questions of staff/presenter.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I just had a question, clarification question.
• I know part of this effort is to build some slight reserve, but it looks like it's fairly minimal. • It looks like the projected balance this fiscal year in reserve is a little over 14,000, and this change would bring us up to a little over 17,000 in reserve that is otherwise covering projected costs. • Is that correct?
Director Kwong stated that is correct.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comments.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• Again, you know, I’m computer free so I don't have the rest of the information about each item on the agenda
• Anyway, this is landscaping and lighting.
• Is this street lighting?
• I thought I heard her say something about safe.
• I know a number of people who can't drive at night and these lights that are being hoisted on us like so much other technology, there's no evidence that they are safe visually because the LEDs they cause a host of visual problems, especially when they're too bright, as many of the street lights are here, • I’d like to see some evidence that shows that from a physical health point of view visually that these lights are safe
• I’d like to know what kind of lights they are. Are they LEDs? • Because I know they're certainly not the old safer incandescent bulbs, which have been outlawed • I’d like to have some of that information available to the public. • What kind of lights and safety from a visual health point of view.
Mayor Slayter responded to public comment as follows:
• The law that enables the City's action on this is I believe it's 1972 and it's called the landscape and lighting assessment.
• In our case, it is the lighting assessment.
• We use general funds for landscape maintenance.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented it refers to the Act itself.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• This item is not about the particulars of the equipment • A couple of years ago the City was able to have a significant upgrade in energy savings with switchover to low temperature LEDs, 3,000 kelvin color lightbulbs which largely replicate the old high pressure sodium lamps luminaries that were installed before, and the amount of energy that we are saving is paying for those lights
• I’m not sure what the payoff is at this point. I think we're only a couple of years away from the amount of energy that we're saving paying for the upgrade, and then we will see this assessment. • I am hopeful that it will decrease fairly significantly because the investment that we have made in the purchase of the energy efficiency bulbs and fixtures will have done its work, and then we can reap the savings and use a lot less energy and be more sustainable all at the same time.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
There was none.
MOTION:
Councilmember Rich moved and Vice Mayor Hinton seconded the motion to approve to Adopt Resolution of intention to levy and collect the annual assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23 for the City of Sebastopol Street Lighting Assessment District, preliminarily approving the annual Engineer’s Report and setting the date of the Public Hearing in accordance with provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 and said hearing is June 21, 2022.
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 Resolution of intention to levy and collect the annual assessments for Fiscal Year 2022-23 for the City of Sebastopol Street Lighting Assessment District, preliminarily approving the annual Engineer’s Report and setting the date of the Public Hearing in accordance with provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 and said hearing is June 21, 2022.
Minute Order Number: 2022-193
Resolution Number: 6440-2022
REGULAR CALENDAR AGENDA ITEMS (DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION) CONTINUED:
16. Discussion and Consideration of Approval of City Sponsorship (Responsible Department:
Administrative Services)
Sonoma County Library - Sebastopol Regional Library (Public Works In Kind Support) Administrative Services Director Kwong presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Approval of City Sponsorship:
Sonoma County Library - Sebastopol Regional Library (Public Works In Kind Support) Mayor Slayter opened for questions of staff/presenter. There were none at this time.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• The library is probably the most loved and well used building in town perhaps probably. • Anyway, I just want to point out that maybe about ten years ago or so we were privileged to have Carl Riley, who's book I’m holding in my hands
• He wrote tracing EMF in building wiring and grounding • He saw that some of the people, the kids in the library were having some behavioral issues, and so he set about with his instruments, his meters and stuff measuring the magnetic fields, which he had done for years and years and years in schools throughout California. • Ge was just here visiting because he was from the east coast. He was about 90 something at the time. • Just by coincidence that we got in touch with one another, and I had already gotten his book, so we had a great conversation and I got a copy of the survey he did for free • This is about health, so anyway, this survey was passed around and the electricians were involved and stuff, and it was a real cheap, easy fix to fix the electrical in the library, except for Matthew Rose • He just stopped everything, so nothing happened, and that library continues to be a very unhealthy hot spot from an electrical magnetic point of view.
• I can't be around it. I can't use it. It needs to be fixed.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I am deeply in favor of this.
• I think anything that we can do that promotes acceptance and delivers the message that hate is not welcome here is valuable.
• I think recently we have all seen the power of art done by children and to have a vibrant and wonderful example of that that we can all enjoy on a daily basis when we walk down to check our post office boxes with our dogs, I think that that is just a delightful thing. • I am 100% in favor of this and will be supporting it.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I'm sorry Matthew Rose isn't here because it's very inspiring to listen to him speak on this issue. • He takes it so seriously and wants so much to do this community work • I'm also in support of this
MOTION:
Councilmember Gurney moved and Mayor Slayter seconded the motion to approve City Sponsorship:
• Sonoma County Library - Sebastopol Regional Library (Public Works In Kind Support). Anti-Hate Project 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 City Sponsorship:
• Sonoma County Library - Sebastopol Regional Library (Public Works In Kind Support). Anti-Hate Project Minute Order Number: 2022-196
Mayor Slayter called for a break at 7:54 pm and reconvened the meeting at 8:04 pm.
16. Approval of Resolution Supporting a Woman’s Right to Choose (Requestor: Vice Mayor Hinton and Councilmember Rich)
Vice Mayor Hinton and Councilmember Rich presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Adopt Resolution Supporting a Woman’s Right to Choose.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• Vice Mayor Hinton and I are joining forces to bring this forward to the full City Council. • We're all aware of the threat to Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose that we've been reading so much about recently in the press.
• This is a decision in 1973 that guaranteed federal constitutional protections for a woman's right to choose in the U.S. and established the foundation for a whole array of personal privacy rights. • When we look at the threat to Roe versus Wade, I think specifically within our community we need to recognize that the threat is not just to an individual's personal freedom, women in particular, but also creates equitable issues that have been an overriding concern for us here in Sebastopol and Sonoma County.
• Individuals who are particularly affected by a limitation on a right to choose are the disadvantaged groups that we all try to keep in the forefront for ourselves and for our community. • This particular proposal is calling on the City of Sebastopol to step up and recognize and respect a woman's right to choose, the private personal privacy freedom issues that this issue brings to the forefront, and also taking a united stand and asking Congress as well as President Biden to act with haste to ensure that the right is preserved for future generations. • I’d emphasize that point. It's a woman right to choose. It's equity. It's also future generations, something that a group that we have always wanted to protect the people who are growing up in this Country and hopefully will benefit from the freedoms and rights that all of us have come to take for granted and are being threatened.
• That's what's at issue in the resolution that's being proposed. • I also want to just say that I am really heartened by the various issues that have come before us at the City Council here tonight.
• We have proclamations that were equity directed and really looked at concerns of a variety of diverse interests.
• We have the anti-hate project that was just discussed and user fees even that are quite fair to our community, and now we're looking at this woman's right to choose. • I'm proud to bring this before the City Council, and I’m hopeful the City Council will be supportive of taking a strong position on this issue.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• When it first came to the public's attention that this was even a possibility, it came to the forefront of my mind that Sebastopol of all communities might want to make a statement to this effect and I’m glad when Councilmember Rich reached out to me to be able to kind of co-author • It's just awful to think about that this landmark decision could be reversed in today's world almost 50 years later
• As we know and have read the national news, the states that might add laws if the national decision is reversed will really impact our lower income and women and families that don't already have a lot of choices and this would be devastating and set, in my opinion, us back, obviously decades. • I don't know in this small way I feel like we can make a statement through our processes involving our City.
• I know that our citizens that voted and put me in this seat would, I believe, endorse this action, and so I’m happy to bring it forth tonight for consideration by our full council. Thank you.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of staff/presenter.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I appreciate the two of you teaming up and bringing this forward. • It's such an important issue
• One of the dangers you didn't mention is that actual physical threat of harm to those women who need these Services if this were to go forward
• My question to you is how about if we pass this tonight, we authorize the mayor to send out a letter to all the other majors of the cities to ask them to do the same. • This is a statement as you both have mentioned, it’s a really important statement from our community, and I would like other communities in Sonoma County to stand up and do the same. What do you think? Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I think that's an excellent idea
• That would be an additional step that would make the message even stronger. • I'd like to make sure everyone's aware that despite the portion of this issue so far there are very few City councils or other governmental entities that have stepped up and tried to create this tide of messaging that hopefully will move the needle farther than we might be able to just as an individual City council. • Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• Just to follow up on that, we did research other cities that were possibly pursuing these actions and surprisingly, there was not that many.
• I think it's an excellent idea to forward this to our Mayor and Councilmembers Association. • Maybe it could even be brought up by our Mayor at that time and if other cities want to join together to make an important statement with nine cities signing on, it would certainly be a very impactful statement to have our entire County behind it.
• I've read a lot of social media that says we're calling on our elected officials, and I’m like that that's why it's important that we are elected officials.
• We need to make these kinds of statements, especially about important issues and it does matter, and then they get public support and hopefully momentum because this decision hasn't been decided yet. • So now is the time. I don't know when else at time
Councilmember Glass commented as follows:
• I just wanted to thank both Vice Mayor Hinton and Councilmember Rich for bringing this forward • I also completely agree with Councilmember Gurney's suggestion that we move this hopefully to start a movement in our entire county to get the cities and hopefully the County to pass a similar template. • I just wanted to voice my support for that.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment.
Kari Svanstrom commented as follows:
• I’m speaking as a resident of Sebastopol
• I just want to thank the Councilmembers for bringing this forward and I am in full support of this • It's great to see the local activism for these important issues brought forth, thank you.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• Sebastopol has a long and storied history of putting statements of support for things that we feel are important out into the world
• I hold this flag here as a symbol of that,
• We have passed pride month proclamations and support for immigrants and proactive statements of support for all manner of diversity, and freedoms, and thing is one where we had a member of the public ask us for this, I believe it was a month ago right after the decision was leaked or the proposed decision was leaked, and the request from the member of the public did not go unnoticed by all members of this Council I am sure, but at the same time, it felt a little weird given my gender for me to have done it • I appreciate wholeheartedly my colleagues who did join together and team up on this and got it on an agenda quickly
• It's an important stake to have in the ground to try to keep a sliding down that slippery slope we may not want to go down on so many fronts, so I will be supporting this item MOTION:
Councilmember Glass moved and Councilmember Rich seconded the motion to approve Adoption of Resolution Supporting a Woman’s Right to Choose.
Discussion:
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• There was a suggestion to authorize Mayor Slayter to use this resolution as a basis for sending a letter to other mayors and perhaps consistent with Vice Mayor Hinton’s suggestion, it should go to the Mayors and Councilmembers group.
• Asked Vice Mayor Hinton to expand on what your proposal would be to modify the motion.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• I believe the Mayor and Councilmembers meeting got moved to zoom for later this week • I would also request that our Mayor bring this up at the mayor's section of the executive board section meeting, and verbally ask if this might be something they'd be interested in passing and joining in to come together as the mayors of all cities have done in previous issues and support this resolution at that level.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• Historically what we have done is when letters like this are authorized is that our City Clerk distributes them to the City Clerks and then those City Clerks distribute them to every Councilmember around the County as well as up the food chain as well to the Board of Supervisors and even to state and federal offices.
• It's just sort of a matter of how far we want to send our message Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
I'm just checking on our process. This would not be an agendized item.
Mayor Slayter commented it would simply need to be a part of my report.
Councilmember Gurney commented I wouldn't ask them, I would urge them. We've got to put our oomph behind this and give them a real strong nudge to do what we're doing.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• They've sent letters before on items that came up suddenly, and they weren't agendized items. • I'm not sure of the process because I haven't participated at the mayor level, but I do know that letters have gone out when Mayor Glass was mayor
• Without knowing the formal process, I think we can certainly give a pitch, a strong pitch to make this happen without making it go through two months of waiting to hit an agenda.
Councilmember Glass amended the motion and Councilmember Gurney seconded the amended motion to approve Adoption of Resolution Supporting a Woman’s Right to Choose and Authorize the Mayor to send a letter to other Sonoma County Cities encouraging them to do the same and bringing this item up at the Execute Board Section Meeting of the Sonoma County Mayors and Councilmembers Association verbally and urged the coming together of the mayors of all nine Sonoma County cities/Town and support resolution at that level.
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 Adoption of Resolution Supporting a Woman’s Right to Choose and Authorize the Mayor to send a letter to other Sonoma County Cities encouraging them to do the same and bringing this item up at the Execute Board Section Meeting of the Sonoma County Mayors and Councilmembers Association verbally and urged the coming together of the mayors of all nine Sonoma County cities/Town and support resolution at that level.
Minute Order Number: 2022-195
Resolution Number: 6442-2022
Councilmember Glass departed the meeting at 8:30 pm.
Agenda Item Number 18:
Presentation from City Consultant Muni Services and Request for Direction to Staff on Extension of Utility Users Tax (UUT) for November 2022 Ballot (Responsible Department: Administrative Services) Administrative Services Director Kwong presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Provide Direction to Staff on Extension of Utility Users Tax (UUT) for November 2022 Ballot.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of staff/presenter.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
Thank you for that presentation. I appreciate what I’m hearing, which I think is a recommendation. So in the staff report there's a variety of options laid out, but am I to understand that the recommendation from staff is from what you just laid out, increased by 0.25% to 4% and eliminate the sunset clause. Is that what you are recommending?
Director Kwong stated that is correct.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• Thank you for your report.
• I wonder if we can go back to the slide that has the proposed ballot language on it. • I couldn't quite understand that, when I looked up to read it, this slide says shall the • City council approve to bring before the voters of the City of Sebastopol a ballot measure to increase the utility user tax rate from 3.75 to 4% and remove the sunset date of the current tax. • If I’m following this out loud, I think our action is more direct than that. • Wouldn't we be saying shall the City increase the tax too? • We don't need them to approve bringing it to them as voters if you follow me. • It's a little hard to follow without seeing the language.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I was a little unclear also
• First off the question about what is the actual action that is being recommended this evening
• As I understand it, the actual ballot language is to be determined and authored by the office of the City Attorney.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• That's correct, with Muni Services assistance.
• We have to create the ballot language as well as impartial opinion about it. • There's many steps to go.
• This is the first step to initiate the process, as I saw that question at the end of the slide presentation, I took it to be more or less the question before the council tonight or summation of the recommendation the staff is making.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• Can the City Manager or maybe the Administrative Services answer first what's our renewal? • How many years have we renewed this generally?
• That would be question number one, and number two, I seem to recall but I can never remember it that we can only tax up to a certain cap, and I always am unclear where we are with that cap, and if we were to increase this to the recommended 4%, does that max us out on the cap or is there still room to go? Mayor Slayter commented that is related to the Sales Tax cap only.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin concurred.
Director Kwong commented as follows:
• Stated the renewal was ten years ago
• Stated it is set to expire Jan 2024
Councilmember Rich commented that's been typical if we don't do a no sunset date, correct? Director Kwong stated that is correct.
Councilmember Rich questioned if we do not do the sunset date it will go on forever.
Director Kwong commented or until any future Council changes the measure.
Councilmember Rich commented is there any downside to eliminating the sunset clause.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• In my opinion, we should not have a sunset clause.
• They were doing an exercise of caution in earlier days for fear the voters would not support tax measures without a sunset clause, but our history in the last ten years to me has demonstrated that our voters will indeed support tax measures without a sunset clause.
• Therefore, to avoid what we're having to do right here, we are recommending against sunset clauses.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• We're now in June of 2022.
• We're talking about getting this on the November ballot. • Do we have time to get it onto the November ballot?
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• Agenda Review took a look at that.
• That was our very first question
• This seems like an accelerated schedule, which I think is what I’m hearing from you, and we were assured and that's the reason that it's here on this agenda is that our timing is okay for this, and that it is possible and appropriate to move forward with it.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• The one time we re-upped this the hearing was on June 19, 2014 • I found the papers this weekend
• We are a whole meeting ahead of last time
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I remember also that it was I don't want to say contentious but we had a long discussion about sunset clause and rates and all those things.
• At the time it was actually a decrease in the rate.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
Is there any obligation to designate or limit in any way how the funds that are collected are distributed? Has to be utility tax but other than that, other than utilities? Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I believe that the ballot language is for municipal Services. • It's all purposes.
• This is not a special tax.
• It's not for any single item.
• It's for the general operations of the City
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• That was correct, Mayor.
• There was some discussion about potential special tax measures to support certain designated uses because of the two-thirds vote requirement, and staff elected to bring you what you're seeing tonight, which would be a general tax.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment.
Kyle Falbo commented as follows:
• Again tonight we see an agenda item that is masking the true cost of this item. • It states in the item that it's going to cost $15,000 to put this on the ballot, right? • That's money that goes out to the County.
• Then it states in here part of the recommendation is authorizing for more contract Services, this time to Avenue/Muni Services which is stated in the fiscal impact as the cost for such Services and fees have been built into the budget of '22, '23, but there is no specific dollar amount • Once again, we are asking Council to approve blank checks to our City Manager, our Administrative Services, to the tune of in the case of the City Manager, $214,000 of contract Services, and Administrative Services, $422,000, and that's for the budget of '21, '22.
• So I plead that when we see agenda items such as this, that we are very specific about the dollar amounts that we are issuing out in contract Services to outside agencies. • So what is it we're paying for?
• We're paying for some sort of exploration of a ballot initiative and the language. • I was under the impression that we had a City Attorney and that City Attorney would be able to produce the legalese and the legal language that would be necessary on a ballot initiative. • I'm again confused as to why we are so reliant on contract Services and how just so much of our City's budget is relying on outsourcing our labor
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• Thank you, Kyle. Thank you for being on top of this stuff and bringing up this very, very important information. What caught my attention, of course, again is as usual I believe I heard the word wireless. • So I’m interested in where our City money go pay for wireless. • Now, I know that the City is the recipient probably in excess by now probably $4,000 a month, and I’d like to get the hard figure on that for the cell tower that's located on the City property at City hall right next to the library.
• It sticks like a dagger in the heart of the City.
• I would like to know the exact amount and who pays that to the City, the thousands of dollars that all of the macro cell tower owners receive monthly for the placement of the cell tower on their properties. • But anyway, so my question is, again, what is the outlay to the telecoms for wireless that is part of what you were talking about.
• Let me know if you didn't understand what that question was. • My question, again, was I’d like to know where the moneys go from the City to wireless providers what it is for and I’d also like to get the exact amount that the City is receiving from the macro tower that is on City hall property.
Mayor Slayter responded to public comments as follows:
Consultant Cost:
• Just for background we've worked at the City on the previous iterations of the utility tax having helped you craft the measure that's before you that broadened your tax base in the past, just to give you that background.
• A lot of our work for the City of Sebastopol is on a fixed fee basis so we work with you currently to help audit to make sure the vendors are paying the proper amount of tax, they're collecting and remitting it properly.
• A lot of our work is to look at ordinance reviews and things of that type. We're doing a lot of that work. • The cost for this is a minimal amount on an hourly basis in addition to our fixed fee that would not exceed, I don't believe, $5,000 on this one because it's very small. • If you chose to have us help work on a campaign, helping with additional materials, that's generally another five.
• I think this is a nominal amount because we also worked with the City on many other things. So message of the costs were incorporated in our fixed fee basis. Cost for this: Not exceed $5000 Crown castle revenue: If the public is asking how much revenue the City received for the lease of the cell tower annually, that's approximately $40,000.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
The Council discussed the options in the staff report:
1.Extension of Current Utility User Tax (UUT) 3.75%; or
2.Extension of Current Utility Tax (UUT) 3.75% and removal of sunset clause; or
3.Expansion of Current Utility Tax (UUT) 4.0%; or
4.Expansion of Current Utility Tax (UUT) 4.0%; and removal of sunset clause;
5.Authorization to contract with Avenue/Muni Services, a firm specializing in UUTs, to review the ordinance for Council consideration and advise on the wording of the ballot language at the future City Council meeting
6.Authorization to budget for Ballot Measure in FY 22-23 Fiscal Year City Budget.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• In reviewing the item, my inclination is to support this tonight, but at the same rate that it has been for taxpayers at the 3.75% and then with no no sunset as recommended by the staff report • I do believe our public is supportive of what this provides for our City. • We're a small City and we don't have a lot of sources of revenue. • However, I hesitate to raise the tax rate at this stage of the game, and so by just extending it without a deadline, we would, in fact, be saving the City money as has been pointed out by a member of the public because it's going to cost us 15,000 to put on the ballot and approximately another 5,000 in consulting fees to prepare the tax measures.
• That would be my initial thought this evening, thanks.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I have a question about how this works.
• There's a pie chart graph and a staff report about the revenue by industry • I think it's 52% from electric use.
• What if you put solar on your home and you've net out your electric cost for the year. Does that mean you pay no tax?
• How does that work for people who have done a solar installation? The consultant commented as follows:
• Very briefly what happens when you have solar, and I have solar in my home as an example, you're selling it back to your local utility whether it's PG&E, for example, • When you get your bill, they'll net those hours.
• The City is still receiving the revenues, it's just being netted back through PG&E is the short simple answer.
• It's rather convoluted
• You're getting the money directly from the utility provider. • You're using solar.
• You would normally have to pay for electricity.
• They net it back, and they submit that revenue to the City. • You're getting money from the solar usage.
• It's just being sold back to the utility.
Councilmember Gurney commented are you telling me that PG&E s going to pay my tax on my solar.
The consultant commented as follows:
• In a sense they are because you're using solar
• You would normally pay a bill on it.
• The excess goes back.
• It's all calculated in their bills it's laid out in a not so simple format. • You can see it's multiple pages, but you're getting the money from those guys, and part of our service and our fixed fee program is to audit to make sure they're submitting the correct amounts to the City. • That's something our audit folks work on, on your behalf as well.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• That's great. So you're watching PG&E to make sure they're doing it right for all the solar installations. • Those just continue to increase in our community more and more solar.
The consultant commented that is correct and then it goes into climate credits and a lot of other things beyond the conversation right now.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• I support doing this, and I think our public has consistently been supportive of the measures the council have initiated from this to the UUT with small changes in dropping the sunset clause • I think we have the favorable public.
• It's just a question of can they manage another quarter percent or is that going to take people over their own limits and make them go negative on this
• I think we want to be sensitive to that political climate right now given everything else that's going on in our personal lives in terms of the threats of the pandemic and also inflation and the economy in our uncertain future.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• Is there some way to give us a sense of what the impact on an individual user in our community might be from this increase?
• In terms of the person who lives in ex-door to me in Sebastopol or anywhere in Sebastopol, is the impact on the bills that they pay for electricity going to be a matter of pennies. • Is it a matter of dollars?
• Do we have any way to calculate that?
Director Kwong commented as follows:
• What we have here is for an example telecommunication and cable, electricity and gas and garbage for a total of $12, for example, at the current rate.
• If the City goes and increase a quarter percent, you're look at $0.74 increase per month for a household of one.
• If you're looking at a household of four, for example, the increase would be $1.20 per month.
Councilmember Rich commented on a bill that started out at, what.
The consultant commented bills start out at $320 for one person, for four person, the bill is $480.
Councilmember Rich commented for a family of four you're looking at a current bill of how much and what would this increase result in.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• The average household of four has a utility cost of service for what is under the UUT of $480. • So you multiply 480 times 3.75% or 4%.
• That would be $18.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• It would go up in your assumptions from $480 to $498. • On the revenue side, if we could understand from staff you're looking at the increased rate 4%, I think it was an additional $45,000 - $50,000 a year.
• How would that benefit the City?
• Can you give us a sense of obviously we need funding, but where are we thinking we would fill in the gap there with that money?
Director Kwong commented as follows:
• My thinking was that when the UUT was renewed one time in 2014, the City did lower the tax a quarter percent, and when everything that is inflation and things that are costing more than revenue can hold, I think that it's not breaking the bank to go back into what it used to be was a 4% originally. • That was my thinking behind only increase a quarter percent. • It's certainly up to the Council if you want to go more or you want to stay the same, that would be okay. • But anything helps the general fund, even though it's very minimal $46,000 annually.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I think it would be helpful to know how this 4% would fall in terms of other Sonoma County jurisdictions. • We see in your staff report that you indicate Fairfield has 2%, Vallejo has 7.5%, but how would we be comparing to other jurisdictions in Sonoma County?
Director Kwong stated we fall in the middle. We're not too low. We're not too high. We're somewhere in between.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I'm curious first off why prepaid wireless is a quarter percent less than the rest of them. • I don't think that nestles us a lot of money every month anyway. • As I look at the impact to my bottom line, my household's bottom line and to acknowledge that a quarter percent increase in the UUT
• I get that.
• At the other side, having been a part of City budget discussions for a number of years, I understand that the additional revenue raised by a quarter percent increase in this is, oh, it's about half of what we grant every year for community benefit grants, and we see what that does in our community and the good that that brings, so I’m torn.
• I can certainly understand why we would go either direction with it, but you know, I think I’m probably coming down on the side with the modest increase is reasonable and acceptable to the great majority of our residents. That's where I am with it.
• the City manager alluded to it that the elimination of a sunset clause does seem to be something that is supported by our community.
• I think that the evidence supports that.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I don't really know if people would notice a quarter percent change or not. • Every household is different in their budgeting and experience of their money.
• The issue for me is what do we say to the voters?
• Are they going to hear, we're raising your taxes?
• I'm not sure that's a message that people would appreciate right now, as opposed to we just want to keep things as they've been
• It's been in place for a long time, and we just want it to be forever. • I don't know which is the more acceptable message,
• That's the issue right now.
• I don't know how the money falls for different households. • I’m curious about the messaging and what you all think that our community would support.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• I'm going to have to try to get this vote done.
• I'm losing my internet.
• I stick with my original message, and having had a marketing background for 25 plus years, I think we want to get this passed and continue the support for our City. • That for me is the most important thing.
• I don't want to have to be discussing this in a year when we're going to go out on this measure early and try to get this approved.
• I think that it's kind of a double whammy to say we're increasing it and, oh, by the way, it's going to go on forever.
• I think that the marketing message and the support I want to offer tonight is to stay at the same percent, but that we will extend this tax until the voters would revoke it if that's the right term. • That's really where I feel very strongly tonight.
• I don't think it's a time to be increasing a tax for our community at this stage in the game.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• This is a really interesting discussion to me.
• I'm actually on the side of eliminating the sunset clause. • I think that going up to 4% is reasonable given our budgetary constraints, the limited sources we have for revenue, and our budget challenge is coming up.
• To me, the interesting piece here is that I know my fellow budget committee Councilmember, Vice Mayor Hinton, to be fiscally conservative and yet she's in support of just maintaining it and getting the sunset clause eliminated.
• I'm in a quandary.
• That, I have to say, does persuade me to go toward that side. • Not sure why, but Vice Mayor Hinton is very fiscally conservative and watches the money closely. • I'm leaning toward approving it, but I’m confused.
• I would love to hear some more information from Vice Mayor.
Vice Mayor Hinton commented as follows:
• I think it's always when we put a ballot measure on, it's really about what's going to get passed. • Councilmember Gurney's right behind me in saying that, while I know that we as a small City can always use the money, we have to go out to the voters on these things. • It's really our best guess,
• I also sat for a while on the fiscal oversight committee for west county high schools, and we talked a lot about ballot measures.
• This discussion is kind of separate from Councilmember Rich and I had a budget meeting this morning so I think we're coming off that, but this for me is now in a different silo. It's like what will the voters approve, and what's my best guess at that.
• Yes we do always need money
• I am at kind of the tail end of my career and yes, for me personally, could I approve it and probably as Mayor Slayter said, I wouldn't really notice it.
• But, again, there are so many people in our community that are not in that same position, I just don't think it's in our best interest to go for both things at this time in this ballot measure. • That's why I’m advocating for my position.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I think the messaging is just a lot simpler if you say is it 3.75 and we want to keep it there, no sunset clause.
• The minute you do an increase, you've got to explain to people why do you need more money, why don't you find some other revenue source.
• The whole explanation gets much more complicated than you liked it before, I hope you like it now. • We hope we deserve this continued support for our City revenue stream. • It's so much simpler to just make that same ask.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• I agree with that.
• I think that that's an incredibly valid statement and perspective on it. • There's also absolutely nothing that if the economy roars and roars and roars that in a couple of years the ask can always be there to increase some other percentage. • All the prognosticators about the economy are saying that we're heading into a bit of a slowdown. • That's all trying to read tea leaves, but I tend to sort of believe it. • Maintaining the current rate, I think it does have a significant amount of palatability for our community.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I would appreciate getting the comments and input from our consultant and also from staff given the nature of the discussion at this point on the suggestion that we simply go for eliminating the sunset clause and not increasing the rate.
City Manager/Attorney McLaughlin commented as follows:
• I'll just say I don't think the relatively small gain from the 0.25% is worth the pain of having to explain to voters that we are seeking a tax increase.
• The amount is just not enough to offset the bad pr of having to constantly explain why it's an increase.
The consultant commented as follows:
• The work we did in 2014 to modernize your ordinance really captured things that were really not in full force at that time, such as video streaming, things of that nature. • You have incorporated a lot of that far into your current ordinance. • Your ordinance is keeping up with technology, which is always a challenge with these type of taxation. • You're in a good spot there.
• The upside is in a good spot with the current language. • I think it's harder to explain generally if you go forward with a new tax certainly. • I think you're in a good position with the language provided.
MOTION:
Mayor Slayter moved and Vice Mayor Hinton seconded the motion to Provide Direction to Staff on Extension of Utility Users Tax (UUT) for November 2022 Ballot as follows:
Extension of Current Utility Tax (UUT) 3.75% and removal of sunset clause Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Gurney, Rich, Vice Mayor Hinton and Mayor Slayter Noes: None
Absent: Councilmember Glass
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Direction to Staff on Extension of Utility Users Tax (UUT) for November 2022 Ballot as follows:
Extension of Current Utility Tax (UUT) 3.75% and removal of sunset clause Minute Order Number: 2022-197
Vice Mayor Hinton departed the meeting at 9:10 pm.
19. Presentation and Consideration of adoption by Council of the Sebastopol Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (Responsible Departments: Planning and Fire Departments) Planning Director Svanstrom and Fire Chief Braga presented the agenda item recommending the City Council Adopt the Sebastopol Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Director Svanstrom introduced Juliana Prosperi, Consultant, Wood Environment.
Ms. Prosperi provided a presentation.
Mayor Slayter opened for questions of staff/presenter.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I look at this report, and there are all these proposals that have dollar amounts next to them and high expectations.
• I am curious about what the plan might be for use of this document moving forward because it's pretty clear to me that we don't have funding in our City budget to cover even a portion of the items that are in this plan.
• Is the concept here to use the plan as a basis for applying for funding in order to then implement these projects?
Director Svanstrom commented that is one proponent.
Ms. Prosperi commented as follows:
• This plan does make the City eligible for specifically funds under the federal emergency management agency's hazard mitigation assistance or HMA program.
• That's a whole program specifically providing both a combination of competitive and noncompetitive grant opportunities to cities, tribes, counties, across the united states for hazard mitigation projects. • For example, those are all the different types of projects that could be eligible for funding. • Most cities don't have that financial capacity so they do apply for those grants. • Those specifically under the hazard mitigation current program or the building resilient infrastructure and communities or brick program.
• That's a newer program that replaced an older program related to pre-disaster mitigation. • It's a competitive process.
• You would have to track the grants among other state grant opportunities out there to implement the projects.
Councilmember Rich commented as follows:
• I had one specific question regarding the assessment of extreme weather conditions. • I was surprised to see that, although extreme heat was recognized as a risk in our area, extreme cold was not.
• I'm curious about that.
• Do you feel that that's well supported? Because we have seen extreme cold incidents.
Ms. Prosperi commented as follows:
• I know it came up as a public comment that we add in freeze during the next update. • I guess I can add that these plans are intended to be living plans and that's emphasized in these five-year updates.
• But if you wanted to add severe cold to the severe weather category or hazard profile in the future, you can. And then with that making sure there's a link to mitigation project.
Director Svanstrom commented as follows:
• I would say when you go through the risk assessment of the likelihood and the impacts potentially from that, there's maybe some plant loss and certainly we want to make sure we have winter shelters for homeless and things like that.
• But just in terms of the number of hazards that are available to communities who are trying to prioritize the ones, we have almost 100 degrees predicted for later this week. Ten years ago this was not happening.
• I too want to note we did have folks from our climate action committee review this as well. • I went through everything in detail, and I know some others from the CAC made comments. • It's funny when I wrote the RFP for this, I made sure it had climate change and power outages and evacuations and wildfires and flooding and then I released it and then the pandemic hit • I dealt with pandemic and a local hazard before, plan before. • That's actually another thing that we have to address. • I think it's just the likelihood of a severe cold is much less likely to impact our community than the heat and the rain and the drought.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I'm going to have to complement you on your high energy and getting through so much material at this hour is really important because we have been going since 5:30, and you're carrying us through a very lengthy document and making it quite compelling.
• I think all of us need to kind of live in this for the next year and sensitize ourselves to the issues because they're really broad-reaching when you look at all the potential disasters that could happen to us.
• I just want to confirm, one thing I understand in the response to Councilmember Rich's question, it sounds like all of this work creates great opportunity for a grant writer if that person is in our future budget.
• Because we'll be ready to be a successful applicant hopefully and apply. • But it sounds like a real specialty to successfully apply for these kinds of grants. • Is that tracking with you?
Director Svanstrom commented as follows:
• I would ask Juliana to comment on the FEMA grants.
• I don't know how complex they are or Chief Braga, if he's got experience with those. • I do know there are some projects included in here like the Calder creek and some of the stormwater projects that are potentially, you know, for state grants and things and having it in this document helps show that it is part of our awareness as a community and in a document by the council should the council adopt.
Ms. Prosperi commented as follows:
• It's considered a technical capability that when we look at the existing capabilities for these plans, we look at that while we're actually profiling the community, understanding your different departments. • We'll look at if there's a grant writer, and that actually is a question in one of the tables. • I think it's in chapter two where we cover the existing capabilities. • So it's like your fiscal capabilities, your administrative capabilities and technical staff. • Do you have a GIS department, for example?
• But in this case I couldn't bring it up, but I was looking whether or not we check that box if the City had or did not have a grant writer, there obviously are more than just the FEMA grants that mitigate hazards. • There's community development block grants.
• There's various other coastal type resiliency grants, climate change grants all over the state of California that are focused on climate adaptation that are also really designed and related to hazard mitigation. • So I do think there's huge value in having a staff grant writer to track all those grants to really make that implementation part of this plan in particular successful. • Just to give you a comparison, some of the cities we work for do have a grant writer, and they will be submitting up to 25, 30 grants a year.
• It just depends on the size of the City.
• That City's bigger than the City of Sebastopol for that example. But, you know, they're ones just tracking. • That person may sit in like a finance department,
• Someone that's just familiar with grants, grants that go beyond just hazard mitigation, too.
Chief Braga commented as follows:
• I do agree.
• I have been involved with some FEMA grants over the years with the fire service. • They can be very challenging, very difficult to apply and to fill it out. • I like hearing that maybe down the road the City can budget a grant writer. • There's a tremendous amount of grant opportunities, and you really need to have an expertise to be able to work one of the big challenges is tracking all the opportunities and then finding the match and then successfully putting the papers together.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• Other question I had was about the survey.
• Because I can't remember when the survey went out, the one with the 130 some responses. • Because sitting right now, in a week, anticipating 100-degree weather why wasn't drought the first answer?
• maybe you asked me in February of 2019 I would have answered flooding is the worst.
Ms. Prosperi commented as follows:
• Falloff 2020.
• End of August 2020, we kicked off the planning process and usually that survey will go out.
Councilmember Gurney commented as follows:
• I think the answer is seasonal to that one.
• Suddenly we're not thinking about earthquakes and we're not aware of all the things that we used to be more aware.
• More things to worry about I guess is what I’m saying. • This is a comprehensive document.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• There's several high-priority action items and r that list the fire department as the lead organization. • With Chief's upcoming retirement, well deserved. Congratulations. Once again. • How will this impact the City's ability to implement the high-priority items? Chief Braga commented as follows:
• the good news is I’m actually not retiring until the end of this calendar year. • So, the 31st of December.
• I’m in the process of updating our emergency operations plan. • Which I know there's concern out there with parts of the operation plan that we are currently updating.
Cooling centers. Warming centers.
• The EOC - How we're going to staff the EOC.
• All of that dovetails into what I’m working on.
• All of this will be implement-ed before I leave.
• I’m hoping within the next couple of months I’ll be back to to the Council with another look at our emergency operations plan.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• Question about details on the EOP included in this plan, in the local hazard mitigation a plan. • Is the current EOP available to the public?
• What's the stats of the update?
Chief Braga commented as follows:
• Just a slight repeat.
• The EOP is in process.
• Again, my retirement will not impact the completion of our EOP.
Mayor Slayter commented as follows:
• For the general public, in order to view our current EOP is in our Sebastopol municipal code. • Chapter two section 2.36.
• They can go into our website, the City's website and do a search for municipal code. • That link will pop up and the public can look at the entire municipal code or, more specifically, under the emergency operations-type plan.
• Final question - Regarding power outage readiness.
• I think this is probably getting more into the EOP, rather than the hazard-mitigation plan. I'm not sure this is particularly relevant to this particular topic. And given the hour, I think I’ll just ask staff to get in contact with the member of the public and answer that question. • I think that this plan, the Council has been discussing it for some time or we approved it, that we saw the need for it in order to access FEMA grants and state grants and all other types of things to protect what we consider to be vital infrastructure.
• Specifically for members of the public, the need for this became vitally clear a couple of winters ago when the community center and Morris street flooded.
• We were unable to access relatively easily grant money to help us with flood mitigation for that particular facility.
• I know that I pushed very hard to move this along
• This document came to fruition in such detail and such depth in a relatively short period of time, I’m quite heartened by what I see here and think that this will be incredibly useful document for us. • The requirement, based on outside agencies, state and federal, for us to review and update as necessary.
It goes back to the UUT discussion of slow and incremental is the best way to do it and if we do it every so often, then we don't have this gigantic 450-page lift all at once.
Mayor Slayter opened for public comment.
Linda Berg commented as follows:
• I think you probably heard it plenty about complaints but here's something I think you're going to find interesting.
• I've been listening to KSRO and there's a new ad in there. • everybody that's interested in fire prevention, should be interested in this. • Anyway, Steve Conroy has come up with a whole different way of fire prevention • A mist. And one of the ways it's applied is a 7 gallon tank truck and pulling the generator behind it with a canon that referred to this very small amount of water and it can be applied to your own home relatively easily.
• There's a back tank you can spring on your house, deck or whatever. • It sounds like a really interesting new thing.
• You maybe want to look into it.
• Anyway, it's much better than the stuff they dropped from planes.
City Council Discussion and/or Deliberations:
There was no further discussion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Rich moved and Councilmember Gurney seconded the motion to Approve Adoption of Resolution adopting the Sebastopol Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Mayor Slayter called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Gurney, Rich, and Mayor Slayter
Noes: None
Absent: Councilmember Glass and Vice Mayor Hinton
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Adoption of Resolution adopting the Sebastopol Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Minute Order Number: 2022-198
Resolution: 6443-2022
ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
June 7, 2022 City Council Regular Meeting will be adjourned to the June 21, 2022 City Council Meeting, 6:00 pm, Zoom Virtual Meeting Format
Mayor Slayter adjourned the June 7, 2021 City Council meeting at 10:13 pm to the June 21, 2022 City Council Meeting, 6:00 pm, Zoom Virtual Meeting Format.
Respectfully Submitted,
Mary Gourley
Assistant City Manager/Attorney/City Clerk