City Council
Mayor Stephen Zollman
Vice Mayor Jill McLewis
Councilmember Phill Carter
Councilmember Neysa Hinton
Councilmember Sandra Maurer
Interim City Manager
Mary Gourley
[email protected]
Meeting of Tuesday, October 21, 2025
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
MINUTES FOR MEETING OF OCTOBER 21, 2025
As Approved by the City Council at their regular meeting of November 4, 2025.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Zollman called the meeting to order 6:00 pm ROLL CALL:
Present: Mayor Stephen Zollman
Vice Mayor McLewis Zoom – ADA Accommodation
Councilmember Phil Carter
Councilmember Neysa Hinton Arrived 6:04 pm
Councilmember Sandra Maurer
Absent: None
Staff: Interim City Manager Mary Gourley
City Attorney Alex Mog
Administrative Services Director Kwong
Public Works Operations Supervisor Billings
Police Chief McDonagh
Vice Mayor McLewis replied she was attending by zoom via medical accommodation.
REMOTE PARTICIPATION UNDER AB 2449 (IF NEEDED): To consider and take action on any request from a Council Member to participate in a meeting remotely due to Just Cause or Emergency Circumstances pursuant to AB 2449 (Government Code Section 549539(f)). Assembly Bill 2302 (2024) (“AB 2302”) revises rules for when members of local legislative bodies may participate in meetings remotely. Specifically, it amends the number of meetings that may be attended remotely for just cause and under emergency circumstances and clarifies the definition of the term “meeting,” for purposes of remote attendance. AB 2302 caps the number of remote meetings a member can attend each year based on the frequency of a legislative body’s meetings: Five meetings per year for those meeting twice a month.
None Requested.
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The City of Sebastopol acknowledges that we live and work within the unceded ancestral homelands of the Southern Pomo and the Coast Miwok people. We pay our respect to the past, present, and future generations of these peoples, including the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria.
PROCLAMATIONS/PRESENTATIONS/INTRODUCTIONS: NONE
STATEMENTS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: Conflicts of interest may arise in situations where a public official deliberating towards a decision, has an actual or potential financial interest in the matter before the Council. In accordance with state law, an actual conflict of interest is one that would be to the private financial benefit of a public official, a relative or a business with which the Councilmember is associated. A potential conflict of interest is one that could be to the private financial benefit of a Councilmember, a relative or a business with which the Councilmember is associated. A Councilmember must publicly announce potential and actual conflicts of interest, and, in the case of actual conflict of interest, must refrain from participating in debate on the issue or from voting on the issue and must remove themselves from the dais.
There were no statements of conflict of interested announced.
PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA (FIRST COMMENT PERIOD): Up to Twenty (20) Minute Time Limit (Two Minutes for up to ten speakers). Additional public comment will be held at the end of the discussion and action items for up to an additional twenty (20) minutes. Mayor has discretion to allow for additional time beyond the 20 minutes allocated for public comment dependent upon the subject matter or number of speakers.
Process for calling on Speakers: Mayor or designee shall ask for public comment as follows: Speakers to be called on in an alternate manner (One speaker in person to be called on first; then one speaker remote to be called on second with additional speakers to be called on in the same manner) based upon the time limit.
Mayor Zollman opened for public comment. The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment:
Oliver
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 aloud the title of each consent item (either full agenda title or a simplified version of the agenda title), and 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 two (2) minutes on the entire consent calendar and request at that time that an item or items 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. Council Members 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.
Mayor Zollman read the consent calendar.
Mayor Zollman asked if any Councilmember wanted to remove a consent calendar item. There were none.
The following item was clarified.
Three Seats (not 4) on Public Arts Committee- Liaison will be appointed by the Design Review Board.
Mayor Zollman opened for public comment. The following member(s) of the public spoke during public comment:
Kyle
Mayor Zollman called for a motion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Maurer moved and Councilmember Hinton seconded the motion to approve consent calendar items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8.
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
1. Approval of City Council Special Meeting – Closed Session Meeting Minutes of September 29, 2025 Responsible Department: Interim City Manager
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the minutes is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional financial impact is anticipated with approval of this item.
City Council Action: Approved City Council Special Meeting – Closed Session Meeting Minutes of September 29, 2025
Minute Order Number: 2025-322
2. Approval of City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2025 Responsible Department: Interim City Manager
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the minutes is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional financial impact is anticipated with approval of this item.
City Council Action: Approved City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2025 Minute Order Number: 2025-323
3. Approval of City Council Special Meeting – Interviews with Recruiting Firms for City Manager Recruitment Meeting Minutes of October 13, 2025
Responsible Department: Interim City Manager
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the minutes is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional financial impact is anticipated with approval of this item.
City Council Action: Approved City Council Special Meeting – Interviews with Recruiting Firms for City Manager Recruitment Meeting Minutes of October 13, 2025 Minute Order Number: 2025-324
4. Approval of Waiver of Fees: Porchfest. Event was held September 13 and applicant paid fees in the amount of $500. Applicant is requesting a fee waiver and reimbursement of previously paid fees.
Responsible Department: Public Works
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted salaries; however there would be a financial impact of loss of revenue ($500) to the General Fund.
City Council Action: Approved Waiver of Fees: Porchfest. Event was held September 13 and applicant paid fees in the amount of $500. Applicant is requesting a fee waiver and reimbursement of previously paid fees.
Minute Order Number: 2025-325
5. Approval of Notice of Completion for the Fire-Related Building Improvements at the Community Cultural Center Project (CIP #0713-24.09.
Responsible Department: Public Works
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional fiscal impact is anticipated with approval of this item.
City Council Action: Approved Notice of Completion for the Fire-Related Building Improvements at the Community Cultural Center Project (CIP #0713-24.09
Minute Order Number: 2025-326
6. Approval and Receipt for Upcoming Openings on the Climate Action Committee (CAC) for the term of Dec 31, 2025, through Dec 31, 2027. The Climate Action Committee was created by the City Council. Terms of office are two-year staggered terms, and include one Councilmember and six members of various climate and environmental backgrounds. Listed below are the upcoming vacancies:
a) Upcoming vacancies on the Climate Action Committee (CAC) Name: Term ending date:
Kenna Lee December 31, 2025
Lisa Pierce December 31, 2025
Responsible Department: Planning Department
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report and conduct recruitments is covered within existing budgeted salaries. Publication costs for display ads in the newspaper and outreach expenses to announce openings on social media are included in the Planning Department’s budget. No additional fiscal impact beyond these budgeted costs is anticipated with the receipt of this item.
City Council Action: Approved Receipt for Upcoming Openings on the Climate Action Committee (CAC) for the term of Dec 31, 2025, through Dec 31, 2027. The Climate Action Committee was created by the City Council. Terms of office are two-year staggered terms, and include one Councilmember and six members of various climate and environmental backgrounds. Listed below are the upcoming vacancies:
a) Upcoming vacancies on the Climate Action Committee (CAC) Name: Term ending date:
Kenna Lee December 31, 2025
Lisa Pierce December 31, 2025
Minute Order Number: 2025-327
7. Approval and Receipt of Upcoming Vacancies on the Public Arts Committee (PAC) for the term of Dec 31, 2025, through Dec 31, 2029. Listed below are the upcoming vacancies:
a) Upcoming Vacancies on the Public Arts Committee (PAC) Name: Category: Term ending date:
Barbara Harris Category 1 December 31, 2025
Robert Brent Category 2 December 31, 2025
Jeff Stucker Category 3 December 31, 2025
Lars Langberg Category 4 December 31, 2025
Responsible Department: Planning Department
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report and conduct recruitments is covered within existing budgeted salaries. Publication costs for display ads in the newspaper and outreach expenses to announce openings on social media are included in the Planning Department’s budget. No additional fiscal impact beyond these budgeted costs is anticipated with the receipt of this item.
City Council Action: Approved Receipt of Upcoming Vacancies on the Public Arts Committee (PAC) for the term of Dec 31, 2025, through Dec 31, 2029. Listed below are the upcoming vacancies:
a) Upcoming Vacancies on the Public Arts Committee (PAC) Name: Category: Term ending date:
Barbara Harris Category 1 December 31, 2025
Robert Brent Category 2 December 31, 2025
Jeff Stucker Category 3 December 31, 2025
Lars Langberg Category 4 December 31, 2025
Minute Order Number: 2025-328
8. Approval and Receipt of Upcoming Openings on the Design Review Board for the term of Dec 31, 2025, through Dec 31, 2027. The Design Review & Tree Board terms of office are two years and will be until December 31st, 2027. Listed below are the upcoming vacancies:
a) Upcoming Openings on the Design Review & Tree Board (DRB) Name: Category: Term ending date:
Lars Langberg Category A (licensed architect) December 31, 2025 Christine Level Category C December 31, 2025
Melissa Hanley Category C December 31, 2025
Responsible Department: Planning Department
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report and conduct recruitments is covered within existing budgeted salaries. Publication costs for display ads in the newspaper and outreach expenses to announce openings on social media are included in the Planning Department’s budget. No additional fiscal impact beyond these budgeted costs is anticipated with the receipt of this item.
City Council Action: Approved Receipt of Upcoming Openings on the Design Review Board for the term of Dec 31, 2025, through Dec 31, 2027. The Design Review & Tree Board terms of office are two years and will be until December 31st, 2027. Listed below are the upcoming vacancies:
a) Upcoming Openings on the Design Review & Tree Board (DRB) Name: Category: Term ending date:
Lars Langberg Category A (licensed architect) December 31, 2025 Christine Level Category C December 31, 2025
Melissa Hanley Category C December 31, 2025
Minute Order Number: 2025-329
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS/PRESENTATIONS: Informational Items or Presentations are items that are informational only and do not require action by the City Council. Presentations shall be scheduled as necessary for the promotion of an event or service or general information items to the Council and should be limited to ten (10) minutes total in length of item (total length includes questions of Council to presenter and public comment).
9. Informational Presentation from the Public Arts Committee related to:
a. Attendance at Recent Events
b. Barlow Hotel Agreement
c. Philosophy regarding public art
d. Support for the Public Arts Committee and future arts events e. Accepting less than the standard 1% public art contribution from the Barlow Hotel project and request that the city budget an apportionment that eventually totals the standard 1% for public art projects.
Responsible Department: Planning
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional fiscal impact is anticipated with receipt of this item.
Jeffrey Stucker, Public Arts Committee Chair, presented the agenda item recommending the Council hear the presentation; ask questions, open the public comment, and receive the presentation.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions of the presenter or staff. Council asked various questions of staff and presenter.
Mayor Zollman opened the public comment. The following member(s) of the public provided public comment:
None
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
The Council thanked the presenter for the informational presentation City Council Action: None Required. Informational Presentation Only.
Minute Order Number: 2025-330
PUBLIC HEARING(s): NONE
REGULAR CALENDAR AGENDA ITEMS (DISCUSSION AND/OR ACTION):
10. Discussion and Consideration of Proposed Actions as Recommended by the City Attorney in response to concerns raised by over the Actions at Woodmark Development Responsible Department: City Attorney
Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted contract services for a not to exceed amount approved for ten hours of City Attorney time.
City Attorney Mog presented the agenda item recommending the Council consider Proposed Actions as Recommended by the City Attorney in response to concerns raised by over the Actions at Woodmark Development.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions of the presenter or staff. Council asked various questions of staff and presenter.
Mayor Zollman opened the public comment. The following member(s) of the public provided public comment:
Resident
Robert
Jeanie Bates
Galina
Kate
Lena
Resident
Oliver
Resident
Redwing
June
Kyle
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
The Council discussed the agenda item and request.
Mayor Zollman called for a motion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Hinton moved and Councilmember Maurer seconded the motion to direct the city attorney to:
• prepare an urgency just cause ordinance and regular just cause ordinance • set number of units at 40 units and one at 45 units
• Sunset clause to set at one year
• 3 months of tenant relocation
Councilmember Hinton commented she was not recommending a sunset clause.
Councilmember Maurer withdrew her second.
Councilmember Hinton moved and Mayor Zollman seconded the motion to direct the city attorney to:
• prepare an urgency just cause ordinance and regular just cause ordinance • set number of units at 40 units and one at 45 units
• 3 months of tenant relocation
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer and Mayor Zollman Noes: Vice Mayor McLewis
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action:
Minute Order Number: 2025-331
11. Request from Climate Action Committee for Letters of Support for the California Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Assembly Bill 1243 (Addis, coauthored by Damon Connolly and Chris Rogers) and Senate Bill 684 (Menjivar).
Requestor: Climate Action Committee
Responsible Department: Planning Department
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted salaries; No additional fiscal impact is anticipated with receipt of this item.
Interim City Manager Gourley presented the agenda item recommending the Council consider Request from Climate Action Committee for Letters of Support for the California Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Assembly Bill 1243 (Addis, coauthored by Damon Connolly and Chris Rogers) and Senate Bill 684 (Menjivar).
Councilmember Carter provided additional information.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions of the presenter or staff. Council asked various questions of staff and presenter.
Mayor Zollman opened the public comment. The following member(s) of the public provided public comment:
Woody
Sunny
Steve
Carrie
June
Oliver
Kyle
Jim
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
The Council discussed the agenda item and request.
Mayor Zollman called for a motion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Maurer moved and Councilmember Carter seconded the motion to adopt resolution for the California Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Assembly Bill 1243 (Addis, coauthored by Damon Connolly and Chris Rogers) and Senate Bill 684 (Menjivar).
The Council discussed the motion.
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved and Adopted resolution for the California Polluters Pay Climate Superfund Assembly Bill 1243 (Addis, coauthored by Damon Connolly and Chris Rogers) and Senate Bill 684 (Menjivar).
Minute Order Number: 2025-332
Resolution Number: 6709-2025
12. Receipt of FY25-26 Budget at a Glance Format. To receive the informational item for "Budget at a Glance" which is a summary document that presents key financial information from a larger, more detailed budget in a simple, easy-to-understand format.
Responsible Department: Administrative Services
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted salaries. No additional fiscal impact is anticipated with receipt of this item.
Administrative Services Director Kwong presented the agenda item recommending the Council receive the FY25- 26 Budget at a Glance Format which is a summary document that presents key financial information from a larger, more detailed budget in a simple, easy-to-understand format.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions of the presenter or staff. Council asked various questions of staff and presenter. There were none.
Mayor Zollman opened the public comment. The following member(s) of the public provided public comment:
None
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
The Council discussed the agenda item and request.
Mayor Zollman called for a motion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Hinton moved and Councilmember Maurer seconded the motion to receive the budget at a glance format for the city web site.
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Receipt of FY25-26 Budget at a Glance Format which is a summary document that presents key financial information from a larger, more detailed budget in a simple, easy-to-understand format.
Minute Order Number: 2025-333
13. Approval of Amendment to Flag Policy. Policy is to Amend the recently approved flag policy to list specific banners on poles and Council Policy on discussion of Presidential Directives Responsible Department: Public Works
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted salaries as well as staff time to raise/lower flags. No additional fiscal impact is anticipated with approval of this item.
Public Works Operations Supervisor Billings presented the agenda item recommending the Council Approval of Amendment to Flag Policy. Policy is to Amend the recently approved flag policy to list specific banners on poles and Council Policy on discussion of Presidential Directives.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions of the presenter or staff. Council asked various questions of staff and presenter. There were none.
Mayor Zollman opened the public comment. The following member(s) of the public provided public comment:
Susan
Kyle
Magick
Woody
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
The Council discussed the agenda item and request.
Mayor Zollman called for a motion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Carter moved and Councilmember Hinton seconded the motion to approve the Amendment to Flag Policy with the following amendment:
Mayor in consultant with City Manager
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Amendment to Flag Policy. Policy is to Amend the recently approved flag policy to list specific banners on poles and Council Policy on discussion of Presidential Directives Minute Order Number: 2025-334
Resolution Number: 6710-2025
14. Consideration of Request for Creation of and Appointment to Ad Hoc Committee to Prepare for the 125th Celebration of the Incorporation of the City of Sebastopol (1902- 2027) Request is to allocate staff time to coordinate with all of our current private businesses (to include the pending Hotel Sebastopol), nonprofits and agencies i.e. library Admin to start soliciting ideas for the celebration as well as ways to fund it.
Responsible Department: Interim City Manager
Fiscal Impact: Staff time required to prepare the agenda report is covered within existing budgeted salaries; however the total costs are unknown at this time. If the Committee is approved, part of the scope of work would be to propose a budget and present to the budget committee for consideration prior to consideration by the City Council at a publicly noticed meeting. It is anticipated that staff time of at least 2 hours per month is anticipated for the first few meetings with increased staff time as the city gets closer to the event.
Interim City Manager Gourley presented the agenda item recommending the Council Approval Creation of and Appointment to Ad Hoc Committee to Prepare for the 125th Celebration of the Incorporation of the City of Sebastopol (1902- 2027) Request is to allocate staff time to coordinate with all of our current private businesses (to include the pending Hotel Sebastopol), nonprofits and agencies i.e. library Admin to start soliciting ideas for the celebration as well as ways to fund it.
Mayor Zollman asked for questions of the presenter or staff. Council asked various questions of staff and presenter. None
Mayor Zollman opened the public comment. The following member(s) of the public provided public comment:
None
City Council Discussion/Deliberations/Direction:
The Council discussed the agenda item and request.
Mayor Zollman called for a motion.
MOTION:
Councilmember Maurer moved and Mayor Zollman seconded the motion to approve the creation of ad hoc committee for the 125th Birthday Celebration of the City and appointed the following to the committee:
Mayor Zollman
Councilmember Maurer
Mayor Zollman called for a roll call vote. City staff conducted a roll call vote.
VOTE:
Ayes: Councilmembers Carter, Hinton, Maurer, Vice Mayor McLewis and Mayor Zollman Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
City Council Action: Approved Request for Creation of and Appointment to Ad Hoc Committee to Prepare for the 125th Celebration of the Incorporation of the City of Sebastopol (1902- 2027) Request is to allocate staff time to coordinate with all of our current private businesses (to include the pending Hotel Sebastopol), nonprofits and agencies i.e. library Admin to start soliciting ideas for the celebration as well as ways to fund it and appointed Mayor Zollman and Councilmember Maurer to the committee4.
Minute Order Number: 2025-335
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA: Two minutes per speaker for up to twenty (20) minutes total for public comments but can be reduced at Mayor’s discretion depending upon the number of speakers or Mayor has discretion to allow for additional time beyond the 20 minutes allocated for public comment dependent upon the subject matter or number of speakers.
None
COUNCILMEMBER(S) REQUESTS FOR FUTURE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS None
CITY COUNCIL/CITY STAFF REPORTS/COMMUNICATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/FUTURE MEETINGS:
15. City Manager and/or City Clerk Reports: (This will be either verbal reports at the meeting, or written reports provided at or prior to the meeting)
a. Monthly Departmental Reports – September 2025
b. Report from Police Chief on Inspection of North Bay Animal Services City Council Action: Received the items.
Reference Order Number: 2025-336
16. City Council Reports/Committee/Sub-Committee Meeting Reports: (Reports by Mayor/City Councilmembers Regarding Various Agency Meetings/Committee Meetings/Sub-Committee Meeting /Conferences Attended and Possible Direction to its Representatives (If Needed) on Pending issues before such Boards. ((This will be either verbal reports at the meeting, or written reports provided at or prior to the meeting)
The Council provided report outs to the City.
17. Council Communications Received (Information/Meetings/Correspondence Received from the General Public to Councilmembers) None
CLOSED SESSION: NONE
ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Mayor Zollman adjourned the October 21, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting at 8:44 pm to the next Regular City Council Meeting of Tuesday, November 4, 2025 at 6:00 pm, Sebastopol Youth Annex, 425 Morris Street, Sebastopol, CA.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary C. Gourley
Interim City Manager/City Clerk
Attachment: Zoom Transcript
City Council Meeting - October 21, 2025
IT IS NOW 6:00 AND WE CAN PROCEED WITH THREE IN PERSON. SO, WE CAN GRAB HIM AND WITH THE CONSENT OF MY FELLOW COLLEAGUES WE CAN ACTUALLY START.
SO LOOKING AT MY COLLEAGUES, CAN WE GET STARTED? IS THAT OKAY? OKAY, THEN WE WILL START THE MEETING THEN. ARE WE OKAY? TECH? YES? MARY? ARE WE OKAY? ALL RIGHT. SO, I WILL CARTER? HERE.
COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
YES.
ZOLLMAN?
PRESENT.
AND COUNCILMEMBER HINTON IS LATE AND WILL BE HERE. IF YOU WOULD JOIN ME WITH THE SALUTE TO THE FLAG.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
AND THANK YOU FOR EVERYONE WHO HAS COME OUT IN PERSON AND ON ZOOM AND WELCOME TO THE MEETING.
I NEED TO STATE QUICKLY I AM ATTENDING VIA ZOOM. I'M ATTENDING VIA ZOOM. DUE TO MY MEDICAL ACCOMMODATION AND I DON'T HAVE ANYONE IN THE ROOM WHERE ME. THANK YOU.
AWESOME. THANK YOU. AND LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT. THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL, WE PAY OUR RESPECTS TO THE PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE GENERATIONS OF THE PEOPLE. WE HAVE NO PROCLAMATIONS. MOVING ONTO STATEMENTS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. SEEING NO FROM OUR VICE MAYOR, I HAVE NONE EITHER. WE ARE NOW MOVING INTO THE FIRST PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. AND AGAIN, THIS IS FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA.
THIS IS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA. IT IS A 20-MINUTE TIME LIMIT. IT IS TWO MINUTES PER SPEAKER. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT, SEEING NONE, I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM.
IT LOOKS TREMENDOUS. A COUPLE OF PEOPLE I HAVE SPOKEN TO IN THE LAST WEEK WHO NORMALLY DRIVE
THROUGH THE CITY AND CAN'T WAIT TO GET TO THE HOMES TO THE WEST ARE SAYING HOW MUCH MORE ENJOYABLE IT IS TO ACTUALLY SEE THAT. WHEN THEY ARE STUCK IN RUSH HOUR TRAFFIC. IN THE EVENING. SO LOOKING FORWARD TO CHRISTMAS. WHEN THE CLOCKS GO BACK, THAT WILL BE A GREAT REASON FOR PEOPLE TO ACTUALLY NOTICE THE CITY AS THEY DRIVE THROUGH. SO THAT'S MY COMMENT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU OLIVER. IF THERE IS ANYONE IN CHAMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA. OUT TO ZOOM. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AN ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED.
THANK YOU. AND YES, TO FOLLOW UP ON PUBLIC COMMENTER, YES, I DO WANT TO THANK PUBLIC WORKS AND ALL OF THE ADMINISTRATION TO INCLUDE OUR WONDERFUL INTERIM CITY MANAGER. I HAVE NOTED, TOO, AND THANK YOU TO MEMBER OF THE PRESS WHO DID THE WONDERFUL VIDEO. SO YAY. YAY FOR THE HOLIDAY SPIRIT. WITH THAT, WE ARE GO RIGHT INTO THE CONSENT CALENDAR. AND WE HAVE A COUPLE THIS EVENING AND THE FIRST ONE IS APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING. CLOSED SESSION MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 29. AND THERE IS NO FISCAL IMPACT ASSOCIATED. NUMBER TWO, APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 7th. SIMILARLY, NO FISCAL IMPACT. ASSOCIATED WITH STAFF TIME
AND THAT IS COVERED WITHIN OUR RESOURCES AND NUMBER THREE, APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING INTERVIEWS WITH RECRUITING FIRMS FOR CITY MANAGER RECRUITMENT MEETINGS OF OCTOBER 13, 2025. NUMBER FOUR, APPROVAL OF WAIVER OF FEES FOR PORCHFEST EVENT WAS HELD ON SEPTEMBER 13th AND APPLICANT PAID FEES IN THE AMOUNT OF $500. APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A FEE WAIVER AND REIMBURSEMENT OF PREVIOUSLY PAID FEES. THE FISCAL IMPACT, THE STAFF TIME REQUIRED TO PREPARE THE AGENDA IS COVERED WITHIN THE ALLOCATED AMOUNTS IN THE BUDGET. NUMBER FIVE, APPROVAL OF NOTICE
OF COMPLETION FOR THE FIRE RELATED BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS AT THE COMMUNITY CULTURAL CENTER PROJECT, CIP, 071324.09. AND THE FISCAL IMPACT IS SIMILAR TO THE ONE STATED BEFORE. NUMBER SIX, APPROVAL OF RECEIPT OF UPCOMING OPENINGS ON CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE.THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE WAS CREATED BY CITY COUNCIL. TERMS OF OFFICE ARE TWO YEAR STAGED STAGGERED TERMS AND
INCLUDE ONE COUNCIL MEMBER AND SIX MEMBERS OF VARIOUS CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL BOBBING GROUNDS. LISTED BELOW ARE THE UPCOMING VACANCIES. IN ESSENCE THERE ARE TWO THAT WILL BECOME AVAILABLE. AND MOVING ONTO NUMBER SEVEN, APPROVAL OF AND RECEIPT OF UNCOMING VACANCIES FOR THE TERMS BETWEEN DECEMBER 31st OF THIS YEAR AND DECEMBER 31st OF 2029. AND THERE ARE ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR OPENINGS THERE. AND NUMBER EIGHT. APPROVAL AND RECEIPT OF UPCOMING OPENINGS ON THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FOR THE TERMS DECEMBER 31st OF THIS YEAR THROUGH DECEMBER 31st OF 2027.
THE DESIGN REVIEW ENTRY BOARD TERMS OF OFFICE ARE TWO YEARS AND WILL BE UNTIL DECEMBER 31st, 2027. AND, THE NUMBER OF OPENINGS ARE ONE, TWO, THREE. AND THAT CONCLUDE IT IS CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS AND I WILL TURN TO MY COLLEAGUES TO SEE IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO PULL ONE. I'M STARTING TO MY LEFT. STARTING TO MY RIGHT LOOKING AT VICE MAYOR. WE WILL GO OUT TO PUBLIC COMMENT THEN MARY.
THANK YOU MAYOR. I WANTED TO MAKE ONE CORRECTION ON THE PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT.
THE OPENING, THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD LIAISON. THERE WOULD BE ONLY THREE OPENINGS. HIS TERM IS UP ON DESIGN REVIEW AS WELL. IF HE GETS REASSIGNED.
THANK YOU.
THIS IS FOR THE CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, WE GO TO CHAMBERS FIRST AND GO OUT TO ZOOM.
SO I'M REALLY CURIOUS ABOUT YOUR SPECIAL MEETING WHICH YOU MADE A RECOMMENDATION OR WENT AHEAD AND IMPROVED RECRUITMENT FIRM FOR THE CITY MANAGER POSITION. I'M GENUINELY CURIOUS ABOUT TO PROCESS AND THE PRIORITIZATION OF PUBLIC COMMENT AND PUBLIC IMPUT. I WOULD LOVE TO
HEAR ABOUT THE DISCUSSIONS HAD IN THAT MEETING AND ABOUT HOW THOSE WERE AND HOW SPECIFICALLY OUTREACH TO THE PUBLIC AND ENGAGEMENT TO THE PUBLIC.WE HAVE HEARD SOME FOLKS IN OPERATING IN THE CITY HAVE NOT REALLY VALUED PUBLIC COMMENT. THIS IS COMING FROM SOMEONE AT AN ORGANIZATION THAT IS CURRENTLY IN AN EXECUTIVE SEARCH FOR A PRESIDENT AT SONOMA STATE UNIVERSITY. SO, MULTIPLE
SESSIONS BEING HELD FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT FOR GETTING WHAT THE VALUES OF THE COMMUNITY ARE AS
PART OF THAT DECISION MAKING PROCESS AND I WOULD LOVE TO HEAR HOW THAT SPECIFICALLY WAS PART OF YOUR DECISION MAKING PROCESS AND COMING TO THE DECISION WITH THIS FIRM.
THANK YOU FILE FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO THE CHAMBERS. IF ANYONE FROM CHAMBERS, SORRY, FOR ZOOM. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONELY COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS ONLY? SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED.
THANK YOU. I CAN MAKE SOME COMMENTS BUTLY TURN TO STAFF TO OUTLINE THE PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH IN ORDER TO AT LEAST INITIALLY SELECT A RECRUITING FIRM.
STAFF DID BRING, STAFF WENT OUT WITH REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS. WE SENT IT OUT TO MULTIPLE AGENCIES.
WE HAD FIVE THAT WERE RESPONDED TO THAT CAME TO THE CITY WITH RECRUITMENT AND VETTED THEM BASED ON THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS. WE BROUGHT THREE FORWARD. ONE OF THEM WITHDREW. SO WE INTERVIEWED TWO OF THEM. IT WAS A PUBLIC MEETING. THERE WAS TIME FOR PUBLIC INPUT. WE GO THROUGH THE VALUES OF THE COMMUNITY. THAT IS THE PROCESS FOR THAT. THE PROCESS WILL BE ONCE WE
AWARD THE CONTRACT, THERE ARE DETAILS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF WORK WITH COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND OUTPUT, POTENTIAL SURVEY. THINGS LIKE THAT.
IT WAS WELL STAFFED. WE HAD OUR EMPLOYMENT LAWYER PRESENT AND HR MANAGER PRESENT ALONG WITH OUR INTERIM CITY MANAGER WAS PRESENT WITH 30 PLUS YEARS OF EXPERIENCE SO I WANTED TO THROW THAT IN. SO WITH THAT, WE ARE MOVING ON INTO THE INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATION. SORRY. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM INS.
SO MOVED.
THANK YOU. GALILEE SECOND.
MARY, ROLL CALL?
SO MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER MAURER AND SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HINTON. CARTER? YES.
HINTON?
AYE.
MAURER?
YES.
MCLEWIS?
YES.
MAYOR ZOLLMAN?
YES.
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
NOW WE WILL GET TO THE PRESENTATIONS. THIS EVENING WE HAVE ONE. AND THE PRESENTATION BY THE PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE. RELATE TODAY THE FIRST ATTENDANCE AT RECENT EVENTS TO BARLOW HOTEL AGREEMENT. THREE, PHILOSOPHY REGARDING PUBLIC ARTMENT. THE NEXT IS SUPPORT OF THE PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE AND FUTURE ARTS EVENTS. AND THEN ACCEPTING LESS THAN THE STANDARD 1% PUBLIC ART
CONTRIBUTION FROM THE BARLOW HOTEL PROJECT AND REQUEST THAT THE CITY BUDGET THAT EVENTUALLY TOTALS THE STANDARD 1% FOR PUBLIC ARTS PROJECTS AND THE RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT ISEN MAAING SO I'M TURNING IT OVER.
SO THE PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE DID MAKE A REQUEST TO DO A PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL. OR
THEY SENT A LETTER TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND WE REQUESTED THEY DO A PRESENTATION REGARDING THE LETTER SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY. ZACH, CAN YOU MAKE JESS TUCKER COHOST? HE IS MAKING THE PRESENTATION AND HE IS ON ZOOM. CAN YOU HEAR US AND SEE YOU? I CAN.
WE DON'T HAVE YOUR VIDEO ON.
THERE WE GO. OKAY.
THANKS FOR HAVING US ON THE AGENDA. WE WOULD LIKE TO APPRECIATE ALL OF YOU COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR ALL OF YOUR TIME. ALL THE ENERGY. YOU PUT INTO CARRYING ON ALL THIS MULTIFACETED BUSINESS OF OUR CITY. ONE OF THE ITEMS IS RELATED TO THE PACK. ON THE PUBLIC LIBRARY. BRUCE JOHNSON. SOUTH ENTRANCE. AND THEN, SEBASTOPOL SPIRE TO THE EAST ENTRANCE OF THE CITY. SO HISTORICALLY, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND OR OTHER CITY STAFF ATTEND THESE OPENINGS. AND ARE DEDICATIONED TO SHOW THEIR SUPPORT FOR PUBLIC ART. UNFORTUNATELY, AT THE BRUCE JOHNSON'S DEDICATION, THERE WAS NO ONE THERE. HOPEFULLY T WAS JUST A ONE TIME OVERSIGHT. HOWEVER, THE PACK DOES APPRECIATE THE ATTENDANCE OF AND THE COMMENTS MADE BY MEMBER MAURER AT THE SEBASTOPOL SPIRE DEDICATION.
AND ALSO, THE LEADERSHIP OF MEMBER MAURER FOR THE RECENT SEBASTOPOL WALKS EVENT. WHICH FOCUSED ON PUBLIC ART INSTALLATIONS IN TOWN. HATS OFF TO HER AND MEMBER CARTER FOR BEING PRESENT AT THAT EVENT. WERE ANY OTHER MEMBERS AT THAT EVENT? OKAY. ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THE
PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE HAS FOR COUNCIL IS WE ARE INTERESTED IN WHERE THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL STANDS IN TERMS OF THEIR PHILOSOPHY SEASONED SUPPORT OF PUBLIC ART IN THE CITY MOVING FORWARD.
PART OF THIS RELATES TO THE BARLOW HOTEL AGREEMENT AND THE AGREEMENT BEING FOR LESS THAN THE FEE IN THE MUNICIPAL ZONING AND BUILDING CODE. AND THE AGREEMENT SITE'S MINIMUM OF $50,000 TO BE USED FOR PUBLIC ART. SO, EFFORTLY, THE CONSTRUCTION FEES, THE ESTIMATES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION FEES IS THEY STAND RIGHT NOW, 16 TO $24 MILLION. 1% OF THAT IS ANYWHERE FROM 160,000 TO $200,000 WHICH IS THREE TO FOUR FULL-TIME IT IS MINIMUM $50,000 IN THIS AGREEMENT. SO THE PAC WOULD REALLY APPRECIATE FURTHER DETAIL AND EXPLANATION ON HOW THAT AGREEMENT CAME ABOUT. AND ALSO, THE PAC REQUESTED THE CITY SOMEHOW A PORTION THE REMAINING BALANCE OF THE 1% IN LIEU FEES TO THE PAC ART FUND. AS WE ARE STILL CURRENTLY TRYING TO MOVE TOWARD THAT NORTHERN ENTRY SCULPTURE. PLEASE FEEL FREE TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS ALONG THE WAY. WE WOULD LIKE TO GET AN EXPLANATION TO ANY
AGREEMENTS THAT WOULD BE MADE WITH PIAZA DEVELOPMENT AT SEBASTOPOL HOTEL OR WHATEVER THEIR CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATES WHERE THOSE RANGE TO. FINALLY, THE PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE ALSO URGES CITY
COUNCIL TO AGENDIZE AND TAKE A DEEPER DIVE INTO HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS AND A FUNDING ARRANGEMENT FOR PUBLIC ART. PERHAPS EQUAL TO 1%. HOUSING HAS NOT BEEN INCLUDED IN THE INLIEU FEES OF PUBLIC ART. WE KNOW MANY IF NOT ALL OF THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS ARE PROFIT MAKING VENTURES. AND, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CANOPY DEVELOPMENT. SO, WE REALLY URGE CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK AT THAT POSSIBILITY THANK YOU FOR THAT.
DOES THAT CONCLUDE THE PRESENTATION?
THAT CONCLUDES IT. YES.
OKAY, I WILL OPEN IT UP TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR QUESTIONS. I KNOW I HAVE A COUPLE. I CAN START EITHER TO THE RIGHT OR LEFT OR JUST JUMP IN. OKAY, FIRST I WANTED TO SAY I APPRECIATE ALL THAT YOU DO AND YOUR FELLOW COMMISSIONERS. Y'ALL ARE VOLUNTEERS JUST LIKE WE ARE. THE QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE PHILOSOPHY, I CAN ONLY SPEAK FOR MYSELF. MY PHILOSOPHY FOR ALL OF OUR COMMISSIONS THAT WE HAVE.
CLIMATE ACTION, PLANS, ARE PARTNERSHIP, ESPECIALLY IN THIS DAY AND AGE OF REDUCED FEDERAL FUNDING SO I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT HOW YOU ARE PARTNERING WITH OTHER AGENCIES HERE IN OUR CITY.
NAMELY SEB ARTS, SPECIFICALLY THE FILM FESTIVAL. I'M NOT SURE YOU RECEIVED A PUBLIC COMMENT. BUT IF YOU HAVE NOT IN REFERENCE TO TONIGHT'S MEETING I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO REVIEW IT. IT WAS FROM A COMMUNITY MEMBER WHO IS HEAVILY INTO THE ARTS. HEAVILY INVOLVED WITH MANY ORGANIZATIONS.
THERE IS CHARLES SCHULTZ, THERE IS A PERSON THAT IS IN OUR COMMUNITY. THERE ARE SEVERAL MAJOR ARTISTS IN OUR OWN COMMUNITY. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF IN YOUR WORK AND IN YOUR FUTURE WORK IS OUTREACH AND PARTNERSHIP PART OF YOUR DIRECTION THAT YOU SEE FOR THE PAC? YEAH. THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. THANK YOU. THIS IS SOMETHING WE HAVE DISCUSSED BECAUSE WE ARE ONLY MEETING ONCE EVERY TWO MONTHS. A LOT OF THESE THINGS HAVE TO TAKE PLACE WITHIN OUR SHORT
AND INFREQUENT MEETING TIMES BUT WE DO HAVE DISCUSSION TO LOOK AT PARTICULARLY SEA AND HOW WE MIGHT PARTNER WITH THEM. MOVING FORWARD IN TERMS OF ART EVENTS. POTENTIAL ART FESTIVALS, INCLUSION OF HIGH SCHOOL. THESE ARE ALSO SOME OF THE HOPING THAT THE PAC HAS THAT WERE INCLUDED IN THE GRANT FOR THE CALIFORNIA ARTS COUNCIL YOU ALL APPROVED A FEW MONTHS AGO.
I HAVE ANOTHER. BUT I DON'T WANT TO LOCK UP THE AIR TIME.
THIS IS A QUESTION FOR STAFF. WE, THE COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED A MURAL. DID WE ALLOW A BUDGETS IN THAT OR DID THAT GO TO THE PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE? WE'LL LOOK.
OKAY, THANK YOU. AND DID THE BARLOW HOTEL, I BELIEVER THEY AGREED TO SPEND 50,000 ON ART AND SO, BUT ARE THERE ANY OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUNDING TO COME TO THE PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE?
TO CLARIFY, WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REQUIRES IS THEY WILL INSTALL OUR VALUES AT LEAST $50,000. WHICH IS ANYONE CAN COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENT TO INSTALL ART. SO WE ALL KNOW THE AMOUNT THAT THEY WILL, HOW MUCH THE ART THEY INSTALL WILL BE WORTH WE DON'T KNOW YET. THE $50,000 IS LESS THAN THE NORMAL 1% REQUIREMENT.
PLEASE, COUNCILMEMBER HINTON.
SO CAN YOU ELABORATE? I RECALL THE HOTEL SEBASTOPOL BEING 50,000 AS WELL. THEY WERE GOING TO INSTALL IT. I DON'T RECALL THE DETAILS OF THAT AGREEMENT. IF WE HAVE AGREED TO THIS 50,000 MINIMUM VERSUS A PERCENTAGE OF THE BILLED.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO SEBASTOPOL. BUT FOR THE BARLOW, IT WAS THEY HAVE TO INSTALL ART. WORTH AT LEAST 50,000 AND THAT ART WILL GO TO THE COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT BEFORE GOING TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FINANCIAL APPROVAL OF WHAT THAT WILL BE. FINAL APPROVAL. SO THE VALUE OF THAT ART NEED TO BE AT LEAST 50,000. SO IT IS POSSIBLE IT WILL ONLY BE 50,000. IT COULD BE THAT IT IS VALUED MORE THAN THAT.
IS OUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BASED ON THE ONE PERCENT OR IT SEEMS LIKE THIS 50,000 IN MY RECOLLECTION WAS SEBASTOPOL HOTEL. IS THAT JUST PART OF THE AGREEMENTS THAT WE HAVE STRUCK? SO IT IS PART OF THE AGREEMENTS NOT BASED ON THE 1%. IT IS A MODIFICATION OF THE NORMAL REQUIREMENT. I DON'T. WE CAN CHECK WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS THE SAME THING AS SEBASTOPOL HOTEL SEBASTOPOL. I WILL SAY THIS WAS PART OF THE OVERALL NEGOTIATION THE COUNCIL MADE. THERE WERE OTHER FEES TO MAKE THE PROJECT FEASIBLE.
THANK YOU.
YEAH, THAT KIND OF GOT INTO MY PART. I DID ASK STAFF A QUESTION AND THEY DID RESPOND BACK TO REFRESH MY OWN MEMORY WHY IT IS THAT WE ENDED UP HAVING LESS THAN THE 1%. IT WAS AGAIN JUST FOR CLARITY, IT WAS TO INCREASE THE FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT. IS THAT, WHY THAT HAPPENED? CORRECT.
JUST FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SO THEY CAN DECIDE WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THAT INFORMATION.
AND SO, THAT IS THE SITUATION AND HOW THAT HAPPENED WITH THE BARLOW. SO AGAIN, I HEARD SOME REFERENCE TO THE PIAZA AND A QUESTION FROM THE PRESENTER. WHERE ARE WE WITH THAT? AS FAR AS
WHETHER THEY WILL BUILD SOMETHING WHERE WE ARE FOR SURE MORE GUARANTEED TO GET THE NORMAL 1% AND NOT BE NEGOTIATED DOWN.
SO, WE DON'T KNOW YET WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD. WHEN THEY ARE READY TO PROPOSE IT, IT IS REQUIRED TO BE INSTALLED BEFORE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS ISSUED. SO THEY HAVE TO TAKE UNDER
THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THEY HAVE TO BRING THEIR PROPOSED ART TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE PUBLIC
ART COMMITTEE FOR COMMENT AND RECOMMENDATION AND THAT PROPOSED ART TO COME TO THE I CAN COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL.
RIGHT. SO, WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY IS THE FACT THAT THE HOTEL PIAZA DOES COME AND OFFER US SOMETHING, THERE IS A BUILT IN REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE 1% UNLESS SOME REASON, WE DECIDE THAT IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE THE FULL 1%. IS THAT NOT RIGHT? I'M SEE AGO SHAKING OF THE HEAD AND SEEING SOME WHISPERING OVER HERE.
I THINK WE NEGOTIATED AN AGREEMENT. I THINK WE DID. I RECALL PUBLIC ART BEING THE CENTERPIECE OF THEIR CENTER SQUARE WITHIN THE BUILDING. HAVING SAT ON THE COUNCIL DURING THAT NEGOTIATION. AND
MOST, OR, I ASSUME IT IS THE SAME WITH THE BARLOW THEIR PUBLIC ART WOULD BE ON THEIR PROPERTY AS A FEATURE OF THE HOTEL.
AND THEN, LET ME APOLOGIZE, MAYOR. LET ME PULL THAT. WHILE YOU ARE DISCUSSING OTHER ISSUES, FIND THAT AGREEMENT AND SEE.
WHAT I'M SENSING FROM THE ARTS COMMITTEE IS THE FACT THAT THEY ARE NOT HAVING WARM FEELINGS ABOUT US HAVING NEGOTIATED DOWN FROM 1%. SO IF WE COULD HAVE CLARITY WITH WHATEVER WE ARE DOING WITH THE PIAZA WHERE HOPEFULLY, WE WILL STAND FIRM ON THE 1%. THEN THAT IS WHAT I'M KIND OF LOOKING FOR.
AT THIS POINT, WE ARE JUST ASKING QUESTIONS. WHEN WE GET TO THE NEXT, I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR WE WANT TO GET WITH THIS. WE ARE ALWAYS WEIGHING THE FULL 1% VERSUS THE FEASIBILITY OF MAKING IT HAPPEN FOR OUR COMMUNITIES. AND IT GOES BACK TO YOUR QUESTION. WHICH I WILL ADDRESS OF WHY WE
DIDN'T THINK OF OTHER DEVELOPMENTS AND I'M SURE WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE IN PLACE THAT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS DON'T HAVE AN ART FEE. BECAUSE GENERALLY THEY ARE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. YOU BROUGHT UP CANOPY. AGAIN I WOULD LEAN TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. I'M SURE WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE FOR
THIS AND IT HAS BEEN VETTED THAT WE ARE NOT DOING PUBLIC ART EXCEPT FOR MORE COMMERCIAL
PROPERTY SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ORDINANCE READS BUT I HAVE NEVER HEARD A PUBLIC ART REQUIREMENT BEING FOR A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY. SO I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS THAT. AND
NOR DO I WANT TO, I LOVE PUBLIC ART BUT I HAVE TO CONSIDER WHEN I'M VOTING FOR THINGS THE FEASIBILITY OF MAKING A PROJECT WORK. WHICH RIGHT NOW, WE KNOW WE HAVE HIGH INTEREST RATES AND A LOT OF OUR PROJECTS ARE NOT MOVING FORWARD THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED IN THE COMMUNITY. THE OLD ROUND TABLE PIZZA ON MAIN. THE LIVERY. SO, THERE'S, IT'S ALWAYS A BALANCE. I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I'M COMING FROM.
OKAY. THERE ARE QUESTIONS FROM MY COLLEAGUES? AND VICE MAYOR I'M LOOKING UP TO MAKE SURE I DON'T MISS YOU.
IT IS SHIFTING GEARS A LITTLE BIT. THE QUESTION, THERE IS A QUESTION ABOUT ATTENDANCE AND ATTENDING THESE DIFFERENT THINGS AND I TRIED TO LOOK THROUGH MY CALENDAR HERE. I AM HEARING FROM MR.
STUCKER. I SAW ONE EMAIL THAT WENT TO THE MAYOR. I HAVE JUST BEEN TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. HOW ARE WE NOTIFIED FOR THESE TYPES OF EVENTS? BECAUSE IT IS REALLY HARD FOR ME TO FIND THAT IN OUR EMAILS.
SO DO YOU KNOW WHO SENDS THOSE TO US?
WHEN THE PACK PLANS SOME OF THESE DEDICATIONS AND OPENING EVENTS, WE HAVE A PRETTY THOROUGH DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT NEED TO HAPPEN. CITY STAFF TYPICALLY SENDS OUT THE NOTICES, THE PROMOTIONS, THE PR AND THE INVITATIONS. AND OTHER CITY STAFF. I FOLLOWED UP. I KNOW I DID WITH THE COAND OPENING. AND SEND EMAILS OUT PERSONALLY.
I APPRECIATE THAT. I JUST. I'M NOT SEEING ANY OF THEM IN MY EMAIL SO I DON'T KNOW IF THEY ARE GETTING SNAGGED SOMEWHERE. I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW WE GET NOTIFIED BECAUSE WE DO RECEIVE A LOT OF EMAILS.
SURE, I APPRECIATE THAT.
I'LL JUMP IN ON THAT. YES. I HAVE NOT RECEIVED CALENDAR INVITES. SO MY SUGGESTION IS WHOEVER YOU THINK THE STAFF IS DOING, WHATEVER IS AT A MINIMUM TO GET CALENDAR INVITES OUT.
I DO WANT TO SAY I SUPPORT ART BUT ALSO DEVELOPMENT AND THESE KINDS OF THINGS TOO. I HAVE GOTTEN
THE INVITATION TO SEE THESE EVENTS BUT THEY HAVE CONFLICTED PRETTY SHEERLY WITH SOME OF MY OTHER THINGS IN LIFE. I REGREET THAT. BUT I APPRECIATE THEY ARE THERE. AND WE HAVE THIS. IT IS A LUCKY THING TO DO FOR THE PURR LIB.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE GO OUT TO PUBLIC COMMENT? NO? I JUST WANT TO MAKE THE COMMENT. JEFF. I AM LOOKING THROUGH MY EMAILS NOW THAT COUNCILMEMBER MCLEWIS BROUGHT IT UP AND I REPLIED APRIL 7th AND HAD A CONFLICT IN MAY WHICH I HAD REPLIED AS WELL. SO I TRY TO ATTEND BUT ANT CULLS ATTEND EVERYTHING. YOU OBVIOUSLY GOT THE REPLY.
THANK YOU. AND THE PACK FULLY KNOWS TO EXPECT ALL FIVE COUNCILMEMBERS TO SHOW UP IS NOT LIKELY FOR A LOT OF REALISTIC REASONS. WE UNDERSTAND THAT. JUST HAVING SOME CITY REPRESENTATION IS A GREAT LOOK FOR THE CITY.
SO, NOW.
THE HOTEL SEBASTOPOL, THEIR AGREEMENT REQUIRES THEM TO PAY AN ART IN LIEU FEE OF $250,000. WHICH IS ROUGHLY IN THE 1% RANGE UNLESS THEY BUILD PROVIDE THE ON SITE ART. LOOKS LIKE THAT ART WAS ALREADY APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE. AND I WILL NOTE OUR ORDINANCE REQUIRING PUBLIC ART DOES DOES NOT APPLY TO RESIDENTIAL PROJECT THAT'S ARE 100% RESIDENTIAL.
THANK YOU. I GUESS NOW WE ARE GOING OUT TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
THANK YOU. THIS IS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE PRESENTATION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, COME OUT TO CHAMBER FIRST, AND THEN ZOOM. IF ANYONE IN CHAMBERS WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT. SEEING NONE? I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE ARTS PRESENTATION, RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED.
GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU AGAIN VERY MUCH FOR BRINGING THE AGENDA ITEM FORWAR. AND FOR PRESENTING TONIGHT. AND ALSO NOW COMMENTS FROM MY COLLEAGUES.
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU FOR COMING TO US AND SHARING WITH THE PACK'S PERSPECTIVE WITH US. I
AM VERY MUCH DEVOTED TO PUBLIC ART AND GUESSINGS THAT THERE SUNT A LOT OF MONEY IN THEIR BUDGET RIGHT NOW FOR PUBLIC ART. BUT I AM HERE AND I AM AVAILABLE TO WORK WITH YO ON SMALLER PROJECTS. DO THINK WE HAVE A MURAL PROJECT THAT WE HAD PROPOSED AND SENT TO YOU. WAITING TO HEAR IF THERE IS MONEY IN THE BUDGET OR NOT. THERE WAS NOT $3,000 IN THE BUDGET FOR THAT. OKAY.
WELL, I'M AVAILABLE TO WORK WITH YOU ON THAT IF YOU WOULD LIKE. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM MY COLLEAGUES BEFORE WE RECEIVE AND FILE? MY LAST COMMENT AGAIN, I STARTED THIS PARTNERSHIP. PARTNERSHIP. PARTNERSHIP. AGAIN, WITH INCREASING SLASHING OF FUNDING, I
WOULD LIKE TO DEFINITELY SEE THE PARTNERSHIPS WITH OUR VARIOUS ENTITIES AND INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE EXPRESSED INTEREST IN DOING MORE IN THE ART WORLD. WITH THAT, WE WILL DEFINITELY RECEIVE AND FILE AND MOVE INTO OUR VERY FIRST REGULAR CALENDAR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 9. THE DISCUSSION AND
CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ACTIONS AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY IN RESPONSE TO CONCERNS RAISED BY THE ACTIONS AT WOOD MARK DEVELOPMENT. STAFF TIME REQUIRED TO PREPARE THE
AGENDA REPORT IS COVERED WITHIN THE EXISTING BUDGETED CONTRACT SERVICES FOR AMOUNT NOT TO SEED 10 HOURS OF CITY ATTORNEY TIME. TURNING IT OVER TO ALEX.
GOOD EVENING. MAYOR. COUNCIL MEMBERS. THE COUNCIL IS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE SITUATION. THERE HAVE BEEN 48 UNITS CONSTRUCTED. AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT. THE PROJECT WAS FUNDED IN PART BY FUNDING FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE TO BE FARM WORKER HOUSING. TENANT INS THE
APARTMENT COMPLEX RECEIVED THAT SAID THEIR LEASES WOULD NOT BE RENEWED UNLESS THERE WAS A FARM WORKER IN THEIR HOUSEHOLD. THAT IS THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF THE TENANTS THERE. SO THE WOULD BE SILL DIRECTED WE EXPLORE SOME OF THE OPTIONS FOR WHAT COULD BE DONE. THE COUNCIL DIRECTED. VERY BRIEFLY. YOU KNOW L HAVE BEEN SOME DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS ABOUT PURSUING LITIGATION. WAS THIS FRAUD OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES. NOT A WHOLE LOT OF TIME WENT INTO EVALUATING THOSE OPTIONS FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS. ONE, THE MOST COMMON CLAIMS SOMEONE
WOULD BRING IN CALIFORNIA'S UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW IS NOT THE CLAIM THAT THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL COULD BRING. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE BROUGHT BY TENANTS OR OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES. BUT THE CITY COULDN'T BRING IT. THE OTHER REASON IS THERE MAY BE OTHER LAWS OUT THERE THAT THE CITY COULD HAVE TO BRING. BRINGING A LAWSUIT IS VERY EXPENSIVE. IT IS ALSO JUST VERY FACT INTENSIVE TO PUT TOGETHER THE LAWSUIT BEFORE YOU EVEN GET TO THAT, IT INVOLVES A LOT OF INVESTIGATIVE WORK. GIVEN WHAT THE COUNCIL HAS EXPRESSED ABOUT RESOURCES THAT WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT WAS FOCUSED ON MUCH.
INSTEAD, THE PROPOSAL BEFORE THE COUNCIL IS TO CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT TO ADOPT A LOCAL JUST CAUSE EVICTION ORDINANCE. INTO OUR TENANT RELOCATION ORDINANCE. THOSE ARE OFTEN COMBINED SUCH THAT AN ORDINANCE HAS BOTH ELEMENTS BUT DOESN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE THAT WAY. STATE LAW HAS
EXISTING JUST CAUSE REQUIREMENTS WHERE YOU NEED EITHER NO FAULT OR AT FAULT REASONS TO EVICT A TENANT. STATE LAW ONLY APPLIES ONCE. ALL TENANTS HAVE OCCUPIED UNIT FOR AT LEAST A YEAR. DOESN'T APPLY TO PROPERTIES BUILT WITHIN THE LAST 15 YEARS. I HAVE USED THE WORD EVICTION SO FAR. WHEN WE TALK EVICTION. TECHNICALLY, YOU KNOW, WE USE THAT IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT CONTEXTS. WHEN WE USE IT LEGALLY, WE MEAN YOU GO THROUGH AN UNLAWFUL PROCESS IN COURT. FOR THAT. HOWEVER, ATTENDANT UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW WHO HAS THE LEASE AUTOMATICALLY CONTINUES ON A MONTH TO MONTH BASIS. SO, THESE JUST CAUSE EVICTION REQUIREMENTS APPLIED TO THAT SITUATION AS WELL. EVEN IF SOMEONE'S LEASE HAS EXPIRED. IF THE LANDLORD TERMINATES IT, IT HAS TO WOMAN CRY ORDINANCE. AS LONG AS IT OFFERS BROADER PROTECTIONS THAN WHAT THE STATE ORDINANCE OFFERS. SO WOULD ESSENTIALLY SET THE STATE AS THE BASELINE AND EXPAND IT HOWEVER THE COUNCIL WANTED. IF THE COUNCIL WANTS TO. IN SONOMA COUNTY THERE ARE OTHER JURISDICTIONS THAT DO THIS. PARTICULARLY SONOMA COUNTY AND PETALUMA HAVE JUST CAUSE EVICTION PROTECTIONS THAT ARE GREATER THAN WHAT IS IN STATE LAW. SO IF, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE DESCRIBED, THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THOSE ARE DESCRIBED IN THE STAFF REPORT. PREVIOUSLY, I HAD MENTIONED YOU KNOW. BEFORE THE COUNCIL HAD ALLOCATED ANY TIME BE USED. INITIAL CONCERN WAS DO FEDERAL REGULATIONS PREEMPT THIS. BASED ON THE NUMBER OF CITIES AND JURISDICTIONS OUT THERE WITH THE LAWS THAT APPLY TO FEDERAL PROJECTS DEEMED RESTRICTIONED. SO THAT IS NOT A CONCERN ANYMORE. MANY OF THEM. LET ME PAUSE TO SAY. ALTHOUGH THERE ARE THESE ORDINANCES THAT
APPLY TO PROJECTS WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS WITH THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS ARE NOT AWARE
OF ANY CASES WHERE SOMEONE HAS CHALLENGED THAT AND THE COURT HAS SAID YES, IT IS ENFORCEMENT OR NO IT IS ENFORCEABLE. MOST OF THESE ORDINANCES HAVE A CATCH ALL OF THIS DOESN'T APPLY TO THE EXTENT. THEY APPLY IT TO THOSE PROJECTS AND HAVE THAT SORT OF CARVE OUT THERE. THE COUNCIL IF THE COUNCIL DESIRE TO DO THIS, WE'LL HAVE TO DETERMINE AT SCOPE. SO YOU COULD APPLY TO ALL UNITS IN THE CITY. OR, YOU COULD ONLY APPLY IT TO UNITS OF OVER A CERTAIN SIZE. YOU COULD ONLY APPLY IT TO UNITS THAT ARE DEED RESTRICTED. UNDER EQUAL PROTECTION LAW, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO TREAT LIKE PEOPLE AND LIKE ENTITIES SIMILARLY. THERE NEED TO BE A RATIONAL BASIS WHY WE ARE TREATING ENTITIES DIFFERENTLY.
THAT IS A RELATIVELY LOW STANDARD. BUT IT IS STILL A THRESHOLD. AS THE STAFF REPORT DESCRIBES, THERE ARE REASONS WE MIGHT TREAT SMALLER COMPLEXES DIFFERENTLY. AND THEN THE LAST THING TO TOUCH ON
IF THIS IS THE DIRECTION THE COUNCIL WANTS TO GO IN, IS WHETHER OR NOT TO ADOPT AN URGENCY ORDINANCE. THE NORMAL PROCESS FOR ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE IS FIRST READING AND SECOND READING.
GOES INTO EFFECT. THAT WOULD MEAN THE ORDINANCE WOULD BE IN EFFECT. IN MID DECEMBER. DECEMBER 18th. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THERE MAY BE TENANTS WHO HAVE RENEWAL DATES BEFORE THEN. I RECALL MEMBERS OF THE PLAYER SAYING THAT. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE GOES INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE FIRST. YOU HAVE TO MAKE A FINDINGS PRESERVING THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY TO JUSTIFY THAT. WHAT IS
PRETTY TYPICAL OF WHEN YOU ADOPT AN URGENCY ORDINANCE IS YOU ALSO JUST ADOPT IT AS A REGULAR ORDINANCE SO THAT IT GOES INTO EFFECT AS A REGULAR ORDINANCE ON THE NORMAL TIME LINE. AND THAT DOESN'T TAKE ANY EXTRA WORK TO DO. IT IS JUST THE SECOND ORDINANCE. IT'S THE SAME BODY AND ALL THAT. IT IS A QUICK OVERVIEW OF WHAT IS IN THE STAFF REPORT. I DID NOT TOUCH ON RELOCATION. SO RELOCATION ASSISTANCE EXISTS UNDER STATE LAW FOR THOSE SAME UNITS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO JUST CAUSE.
IF TENDENCY IS TERMINATED. A CLASSIC EXAMPLE MIGHT BE LANDLORD IS MOVING INTO THE UNIT. IT IS NOT THE FAULT OF THE TENANT. IT IS NOT LIKE THE TENANT BROKE THE LEASE OR FAILED TO PAY RENT. UNDER STATE LAW, THEY GET ONE MONTH'S RENT. THE STAFF REPORT GOES INTO SOME OTHER CITIES IN THE AREA DO.
PARTICULARLY AFFORDABLE PROJECT. THE ACTUAL RENT IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN THE FAIR MARKET RENT. IT IS STILL ONE MONTH. BUT WHATEVER IS GREATER. AND THEN ALSO, WE AGENDIZE THIS. WHETHER THERE WAS A DESIRE BY THE COUNCIL.LOCAL OR FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE LEADERS ON THIS ISSUE. SO, WITH THAT I WILL PAUSE TORSIVE IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS.
GREAT. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?
I HAVE NUMEROUS QUESTIONS. BUT I WILL JUST START WITH ONE. YOU SAID 15 YEARS IT HAS TO BE BUILT WITHIN 15 YEARS?
THAT IS STATE LAW. SO WE COULD MAKE OUR ORDINANCE WHATEVER WE WANTED. IT DOES NOT APPLY TO UNITS BUILT LESS THAN 15 YEARS AGO. SO UNITS BUILT, LET ME JUST SAY. IT WOULD NOT APPLY TO THE UNIT BUILD AFTER 2010. UNDER STATE LAW.
SO STATE LAW CANNOT COVER THIS.
RIGHT.
THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND. SO WE ARE ABLE TO ESTABLISH THIS KIND OF ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE AT LEAST IN DECEMBER AT SOME POINT.
CORRECT.
AND ARE WE ABLE TO CONTACT THE USDA DIRECTLY OR CAN WE WORK WITH SOMEBODY WHO HAS A BETTER RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM?
I DON'T KNOW IF MARY DOES.
COULD YOU START OVER? I'M SORRY. I COULDN'T HEAR THE FIRST PART OF WHAT YOU WERE SAYING.
I'M SORRY. I SAID WE CERTAINLY COULD REACH OUT. IT IS NOT SOMETHING MARRY AND I HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH. DOING THAT. BUT WE CERTAINLY COULD. THE COUNCIL PROBABLY IS BETTER RIPS THAN STAFF DOES.
COULD THE COUNCIL WRITE A FORMAL LETTER OR GROUP REQUEST? YES. ABSOLUTELY. I MEAN, I THINK MY UNDERSTANDING FROM READING JUST NEWSPAPER ARTICLES IS THAT THERE WERE REPRESENTATIVES OF SOME OF THESE ENTITIES AT THESE MEETINGS. SO THEY MIGHT ALREADY BE AWARE. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS NOT OPEN RIGHT NOW. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU'LL HAVE A LOT OF,
GIVEN THE PARTICULAR ADMINISTRATION, I'M SURE THIS OFFICE IS NOT SOMETHING THAT IS OPEN SO THAT MIGHT BE TRICKY BUT THE CITY COULD CERTAINLY COORDINATE WITH A FEDERAL ELECTED OFFICIAL.
THE LAST QUESTION IS, IF WE MADE THIS ORDINANCE FOR BUILDINGS WITH FIVE PLUS UNITS, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO RESEARCH THAT NUMBER? OR IS THERE LIKE, DO WE HAVE TO REALLY HAVE A GOOD REASON FOR THAT FIVE?
YOU DON'T HAVE TO COME UP. FOR NOW, WE WOULD INCLUDE IN THE ORDINANCE FINDINGS YOU KNOW.
ESSENTIALLY THAT SMALL BUILDINGS ARE HARDER, YOU KNOW, ARE SMALLER, THEY ARE ON DIFFERENT MARGINS. THEY OPERATE DIFFERENTLY. THIS IS A COMPLETELY RANDOM THRESHOLD. UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW, YOU DON'T NEED AN ON SITE MANAGER FOR A BUILDING LESS THAN 16 UNITS. SO THERE ARE REASONS FOR WHY YOU MIGHT EXEMPT A SMALLER PROPERTY.
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?
SO WE HEARD THE NUMBER FIVE. BUT, I'M CURIOUS SINCE THEY HAVE ONLY BUILT OUT HALF THE UNITS. IS THIS PROJECT BASED ON HOW MANY UNITS ARE CURRENTLY BUILT OUT OR HOW MANY UNITS WILL BE BUILT OUT? WHAT'S THE NUMBER?
SO THEY HAVE BUILT OUT, I THINK 48. AND THE APPROVED AMOUNT IS 86 I BELIEVE. 84.
SO AN ORDINANCE, WE WOULD LOOK AT PROJECTS OVER 80 AND THIS WOULD QUALIFY OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE PROJECTS OVER 45 AND THIS WOULD QUALIFY?
IT WOULD BE PROJECTS. YOU WOULD WANT THE CURRENTLY EXISTING UNITS. WE WOULD WANT AN ORDINANCE THAT DOES NOT ONLY APPLY TO ONE ENTITY. BUT.
COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
I CAN JUST SAY I HAVE HAD MY HAND UP SINCE THE BEGINNING. I HAVE FELT FRUSTRATED AND IGNORED.
I JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO BE RECOGNIZED TOO AT SOME POINT.
YES, SO LET'S GO WITH YOU VICE MAYOR AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER MAURER.
OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY WITH ALEX, THERE ARE OTHER PARAMETERS THAT COULD BE UTILIZED WHERE THERE COULD BE A SUNSET CLAUSE?
SURE. WITH THIS ORDINANCE OR ANY ORDINANCE THE CITY DOES, YOU COULD HAVE IT EXPIRE AFTER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME.
AND THE OTHER THING YOU MENTIONED WAS THE NUMBER OF UNITS. ISN'T IT TRUE BASED ON WHAT I HAVE BEEN RESEARCHING AND IN DISCUSSIONS THAT WITH THESE. IT COULD BE A SIGNIFICANT HARDSHIP AND IMPACT SOME OF OUR OTHER HOUSING HERE OR WE HAVE HAD YOU KNOW, SOME ISSUES WITH LATELY. SO IF WE DID GO WITH A HIGHER NUMBER, IT WOULD COVER WOODMARK. I FORGET THE NUMBER. BUT IT WOULD
COVER A NUMBER OF APARTMENTS AND IT WOULD ALSO PRECLUDE A LOT OF THE SMALLER PLACES THAT COULD BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED BY THIS. IS THAT A FAIR STATEMENT? DO YOU THINK? YEAH. SO, I'LL NOTE. A LOT OF THESE DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE NOT WITH THE CITY. SO STAFF HAS PUT MARY
WITH HER IMMENSE EXPERIENCE HAS PUT TOGETHER A LIST OF HER BEST GUESS OF THESE UNITS SO THERE IS PROBABLY FIVE OR SIX PROJECTS IN THE CITY THAT HAVE MORE THAN 4040 UNITS. LANDLORD WOULD BE BETTER ABLE TO ANSWER HOW THIS WILL IMPACT THEM. I'M SURE. IT OBVIOUSLY MAKES IT HARDER FOR THEM TO EVICT PEOPLE. FOR EXAMPLE, A REASON OF JUST CAUSE TO EVICT SOMEONE IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE BROKEN A MATERIAL TERM IN THEIR LEASE. SO THAT IS, YOU CAN EVICT SOMEONE FOR THAT. BUT YOU KNOW, THERE IS
A SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF WHAT THAT MEANS AND THEORETICALLY SOMEONE COULD DISPUTE WHETHER IT WAS MATERIAL OR NOT. A LANDLORD WOULD BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO YOU. BUT CERTAINLY IMPACTS WHEN SOMEONE COULD BE EVICTED.
SO, JUST ONE LAST QUESTION. HAS ANYONE FROM THE STAFF REACHED OUT TO ANY OF THESE, YOU KNOW, FOLKS WHO OWN THESE COMPLEXES I MEAN FROM? I KNOW WE HAVE THEM ON PETALUMA AVENUE.
ELDERBERRY COMMONS. WOODMARK. A VARIETY OF LARGER SMALLER BURBANK. HAS ANYBODY REACHED OUT TO THEM?
NO.
THANK YOU.
AND THANK YOU, SORRY MAYOR.
THANK YOU FOR CALLING THAT OUT, COULD BE MAURER.
WHAT IS THE VOTE NEEDED TO PASS AN URGENCY ORDINANCE?
YOU WOULD NEED FOUR VOTES FOR AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AND THREE FOR A REGULAR ORDINANCE.
THANK YOU.
UNDER THE AUSPICES OF LIABILITY AND COST, SO, THE GENERAL SENSE IS WHAT I HAVE GOTTEN AND WHAT
PEOPLE ARE REALLY WANTING TO DO TO PROTECT THE FOLKS AT WOOD MARK AND THOSE MOVING FORWARD
ARE THAT THERE BE A LOCAL JUST CAUSE ORDINANCE THAT COVERS DEEP RESTRICTED HOUSING SUCH AS AGAIN, WHITMARK. ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING PROTECTIONS. PROTECTIONS THAT TAKE EFFECT ON THE FIRST DAY OF TENANCY. THAT FAIR RELOCATION ASSISTANCE OF THREE TIMES THE MARKET RATE FOR THE UNITS. BE IMPLEMENTED AND I WILL PAUSE THERE. AS FAR AS RISK OF LIABILITY, ALEX WOULD JUST THAT BEING
THE REQUEST, FROM WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING WITH THE MINIMAL LIABILITY RISK TO THE CITY WOULD BE MINIMAL.
I WOULD SAY THE RISK WOULD BE MINIMAL. YOU KNOW. YOU CAN'T PREDICT WHAT SOMEONE WILL DO. THERE ARE OTHER JURISDICTIONS WITH SIMILAR ORDINANCES IN PLACE WITH THIS COUNTY. THAT HAVE NOT BEEN SUBJECT TO LITIGATION.
MOVING ONTO THE SECOND PART. COSTS. WE HAVE TEN HOURS TO GET YOU HERE. IF WE DECIDED TO MOVE
FORWARD WITH AN EMERGENCY PROVISION WHICH EXPEDITES THINGS IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE, WHAT BALLPARK FIGURE ARE WE LOOKING AT? COULD THAT BE ASSUMED? SO YES IT COULD BE ASSUMED IN THAT AMOUNT. IT WAS SEVEN TO EIGHT HOUR TO GET HERE. AND THEN, IT WOULD BE PROBABLY BETWEEN FIVE TO TEN HOUR TO DO AN ORDINANCE. YOU KNOW. DEPENDING ON WHAT THE COUNCIL WANTS TO GO WITH. THERE ARE ORDINANCES TO USE AS EXAMPLES. BUT, YOU KNOW, FOR
EXAMPLE, PETALUMA'S HAS LOST, I DON'T THINK THE COUNCIL HAS SPOKEN SO EVEN COPYING AND PASTING SOMEONE'S ORDINANCE REQUIRES DOING A LITTLE WORK TO MAKE IT WORK FOR THE CITY.
THANK YOU MAYOR. I SAW YOUR HAND GO UP. WAS IT TO ALERT THE VICE MAYOR? COULD YOU, APOLOGIES, I READ EVERYTHING. BUT CAN YOU REMIND ME WHAT UNIT OR WHAT COMPLEXES HERE WOULD BE DEED RESTRICTED IN SEBASTOPOL THAT OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD? I DON'T KNOW IF MARY OR ALEX WOULD.
SO, WE BELIEVE THAT THE LARGE PROJECTS THAT ARE RESTRICTED WOULD BE PETALUMA AVENUE HOMES, THE BURBANK HEIGHTS APARTMENTS AT THE SENIOR COMPLEX. BURBANK ORCHARD. THE NORTH 2 APARTMENTS.
SO THOSE ONES MAY NOT BE. HOLLY HOCK. AND WOODMARK.
THOSE ARE WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW?
NONE OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS PART OF THAT.
SO THESE ARE ALL AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLEXES.
SORRY, I'M THINKING SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.
I THINK ELDERBURY HAS 31 UNITS.
IT IS CONSIDERED UNDER THAT TOO IF WE DID.
YES. DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU SET THE AMOUNT. UNDER THAT 22? 24? OKAY.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO OUT TO PUBLIC COMMENT? ANOTHER ONE ABOUT TIMING. IF WE WERE TO DO AN URGENCY TODAY. DO WE WAIT UNTIL THE NEXT NOVEMBER 4th MEETING TO ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING?
YEAH. THERE IS NO ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU. SO THAT IS THE DIRECTION OF THE COUNCIL. WE PREPARE IT SO IT IS READY TO GO ON NOVEMBER 4th. WE WOULD HAVE IT STRUCTURED AS YOU ADOPT THE URGENCY ORDINANCE AND A FIRST READING OF THE REGULAR ORDINANCE.
NOT SEEING ANYMORE FROM MY COLLEAGUES SO BACK TO PUBLIC COMMENT. MARY? THANK YOU MAYOR. THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE JUST CAUSE EVICTION DISCUSSION. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, I WILL START WITH CHAMBERS AND GO OUT TO ZOOM. IT IS A TWO MINUTE TIME LIMIT. SOMEONE IN CHAMBERS WANTS TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT?
MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, JUST TO ANSWER A QUESTION FROM EARLIER, I BELIEVE THE FIRST PERSON WHO WOULD BE OUT WOULD BE ON DECEMBER 14th. THE OTHER NIGHT, MY NINE-YEAR-OLD SAID HE WANTED AN ORDINARY LIFE. WHEN I ASKED HIM WHAT HE MEANT BY THAT, HE SAID A LIFE WHERE WE COULD STAY IN OUR HOME AND NOT HAVE TO LEAVE AND DIE IN THE STREET. PERHAPS A FUTURE IN ACTING. THIS WAS ONE EXAMPLE OF THE DAMAGE AND STRESS THAT THE COMPANY HAS CAUSED. AS A TENANT OF WOODMARK I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO WHAT WE HAVE TO SAY REGARDING THE SITUATION. I'M ASKING THAT
YOU VOTE IN FAVOR OF A JUST CAUSE ORDINANCE AND DEED RESTRICTIVE HOUSING THAT STARTS ON THE FIRST DAY OF TENANCY. THREE TIMES MARKET RATE RELOCATION ASSISTANCE. FINALLY THAT WE DO NOT HAVE TO SIGN OUR RIGHTS AWAY FOR FUTURE LEGAL ACTION. I BELIEVE THAT THERE IS MORE WORK TO BE DONE TO MAKE SEBASTOPOL A MORE INCLUSIVE PLACE BUT BY VOTING YES IT IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. ROBERT CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE? CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
EVERY BAD DECISION THE CITY HAS MADE THE LAST THREE YEARS STARTED LIKE THIS. LET'S AGREE TO A PARTNERSHIP. AND THEY ALL TURNED OUT TO BE COSTLY, DIFFICULT, AWFUL DECISIONS AND THIS ONE IS KIND OF MOVEING IN THAT DIRECTION. YOU ARE RUSHING TO PASS AN ORDINANCE AT THIS POINT, NO ONE HAS ASKED THE QUESTION, EXACTLY WHICH RESIDENTS WILL BENEFIT. HOW WILL THEY BENEFIT. THE LADY WHO SPOKE SAID SHE WANTS TO STAY IN HER HOME. WILL THIS ORDINANCE KEEP HER IN HER HOME? SHE WANTS RELOCATION ASSISTANCE. THAT COMES FROM THE STATE. IS SOMEONE WORKING WITH THEM? IT FEELS LIKE
YOU ARE RUSHING INTO SOMETHING YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND AND RUSHING TO PASS AN ORDINANCE TO MAKE EVERYBODY FEEL BETTER AND I JUST WONDER WHAT THE RISKS OF THAT ARE, WHO IS GOING TO SUE US? THE LAST TIME WE PASSED AN ORDINANCE LIKE THIS, WE SPENT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN LITIGATION EXPENSES.
WHAT IS THE LEGAL RISK TO THIS OSAR HAND AND HOW MUCH WILL THAT COST US? THANK YOU.
THANK YOU ROBERT. NEXT I WILL COME INTO CHAMBERS.
GOOD EVENING. I'M JEANIE BATES. A LONG TIME RESIDENT OF SEBASTOPOL. RETIRED PSYCHOTHERAPIST AND
MEMBER OF THE SONOMA COUNTY TENANT'S UNION AND I'M CURRENTLY SUPPORTING THE TENANTS AT WOODMARK FACEING THE PROSPECT OF LOSING WHAT THEY THOUGHT WOULD BE THEIR FOREVER HOME.
THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN. I APPRECIATE THE WILLINGNESS OF THE THE CITY COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE TEN HOURS OF CITY ATTORNEY TIME LAST TIME OUT. TO RESEARCH AND EXPLORE OPTIONS TO ASSIST THESE
TENANTS AND I APPRECIATE THE EFFORTS OF THE CITY DIGGING INTO WHAT IS REALLY A LEGALLY COMPLICATED SYSTEM SITUATION. NOW AT THIS POINT IN OUR PROCESS WITH YOU ALL, OUR CITY'S GOVERNING BODY, WHAT
MAKES SENSE IS TO REQUEST YOU PROVIDE DIRECTION TO THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A JUST CAUSE EVICTION ORDINANCE. A RELOCATION ANNOUNCE AT LEAST TIE TIMES THE MARKET RATE. AND THE SECURING OF THE RIGHT TO TAKE LEGAL ACTION IN THE FUTURE. THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE ANY OF YOU FOLKS BUT IT DOES INVOLVE WHAT THEY HAVE AVAILABLE TO THEM TO DO. I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT THIS INVOLVES MORE HOURS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S TIME. AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT SEBASTOPOL HAS LITTLE BUDGETARY FLEXIBILITY.
ABOUT 20 SECONDS.
OKAY. HOWEVER, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT GRANTING THIS REQUEST IS A SMALL STEP TOWARD JUSTICE FOR THESE FOLKS WHO HAVE BEEN DEALT A BAD WITH NO CLEAR LEGAL COURSE FOR REDRESS. I WANT TO BELIEVE MY TOWN, OUR TOWN, CARES ENOUGH TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. GALINA CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE?
THANK YOU. I DID NOT PREPARE A STATEMENT TONIGHT BUT I HAVE BEEN ACTIVE IF THESE PAST MEETINGS. I'M CURRENTLY LIVING AT WOODMARK. I THOUGHT I WAS THE FIRST TENANT SIGNING UP ON DECEMBER 15th BUT UNDERSTAND FROM MELISSA, MAYBE I'M THE SECOND. I THE THE CITY COUNCIL DOES WHAT THEY CAN TO
PROVIDE A RELOCATION ALLOWANCE THREE TIMES THE MARKET RITE AND ALLOW FOR LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AFTER THIS OCCURS. I MYSELF AM A SOON TO BE 65-YEAR-OLD WOMAN. I HAVE NOBODY. I HAVE ONE RELATIVE THAT LIVES AROUND THE CORNER WHO IS A FORMER EMPLOYEE OF THE COUNTY. SHE OFFERED ME HER COUCH WHEN I HAD NO PLACE ELSE TO GO. WHEN I GOT THIS PLACE, I THOUGHT I HAD FOUND MY FOREVER HOME
WHERE I COULD LIVE RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER FROM MY COUSIN AND HAVE AFFORDABLE RENT FOR THE REMAINDER OF MY LIFE. AND NOW, I AM FINDING MYSELF HAVING TO SELL MY POSSESSIONS IN ORDER TO GO SOME PLACE AND I HAVE NO IDEA WHERE. I'M GOING TO HAVE TO LIVE IN MY CAR. THERE IS NO PLACE ELSE. I AM IN THIS POSITION. I'M A NATIVE OF SAN FRANCISCO. I RAISED MY CHILDREN IN PETALUMA. I'M IN THIS
POSITION OF HAVING TO LIVE LIKE THIS BECAUSE I HAD AN ACCIDENT IN THE WORKPLACE WHERE I WORKED IN THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY AND GOT DIVORCED FROM MY HUSBAND. THAT IS WHY I'M IN THIS SITUATION. AND I JUST WOULD HAVE NEVER IMAGINED THAT I WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS. AFTER I WAS GIVEN THIS OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE HERE AND NOW HAVE TO GET UP AND LEAVE. I MEAN, JESUS. I CAN'T
TELL YOU HOW EMOTIONALLY DISTRESSING AND HOW PHYSICALLY UPSETTING THIS HAS BEEN TO EVEN REQUIRE MEDICAL INTERVENTION WITH THIS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LISTENING TO ME. I APPRECIATE IT.
THANK YOU GALINA. NEXT I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS. WOULD SOMEONE IN CHAMBERS LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT?
GOOD EVENING. I'M KATE FIBEY, OUR HOUSING TEAM AT LEGAL AID PROVIDES FREE LEGAL SERVICE TO LOW INCOME RESIDENTS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY. PRIMARILY ASSISTING TENANTS FACING EVICTIONS AND HABITABILITY ISSUES. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH RESIDENTS AT WOODMARK. WE URGE THE COUNCIL TO SUPPORT DRAFTING A JUST CAUSE ORDINANCE. WOOD MARK IS EXEMPT UNDER THE STATE TENANT PROTECTION ACT. THIS MEANS THAT TENANTS AT WOODMARK LACK PROTECTIONS THAT APPLY TO MANY OTHER TYPES OF RENTAL HOUSING CURRENTLY HERE IN SEBASTOPOL. AND THIS IS A VERY SIGNIFICANT GAP IN PROTECTIONS.THESE RESIDENTS ARE LOWER INCOME BY REQUIREMENT AND MORE LIKELY TO BE VULNERABLE. IT WOULD HELP FAMILIES MANAGE MOVING EXPENSES. MANY ARE STRUGGLING TO FIND AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO MOVE TO. GIVEN THE LACK OF AVAILABLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING HERE IN THE COUNTY. AND THE SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME IN WHICH TO MOVE. WE ASK FOR PROTECTIONS FOR OUR PART
LEGAL AID WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE RESIDENTS OF WOOD MARK AND THE CITY IN MAKING SURE
TENANTS ARE INFORMED AND ABLE TO ASSERT THEIR RIGHTS INCLUDING UNDER ANY RIGHTINGS CREATED UNDER A JUST CAUSE ORDINANCE.
THANK YOU.
NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. SONOMA COUNTY TENANTS UNION. CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE? GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS LINA FROM THE SONOMA COUNTY TENANT'S UNION AND WE HAVE WORKED CLOSELY WITH LEGAL AID AND TENANTS TOGETHER TO BUILD POWER OF TENANTS. MANY OF WHOM
YOU HAVE SEEN SPEAK WHO ARE EXERCISING THEIR COURAGE AND RIGHT TO REALLY SPEAK FOR WHAT THEIR NEEDS WILL BE IN THIS SITUATION. AND I WANT TO DEBUNK SOME OF THE MISCONCEPTIONS. WE HEARD THIS MIGHT BE VERY COSTLY FOR THE CITY. THIS IS ACTUALLY NOT COSTLY FOR THE CITY. WHAT JUST CAUSE WOULD
DO IS REQUIRE, HOLD COMPANIES MORE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE DECISIONS THAT MAY HAVE HAD ADVERSE EFFECTS ON THE TENANTS WHO LIVED THERE LIKE WOOD MARK. WE URGE CITY COUNCIL TO REALLY PUT, GO TO WORK FOR OUR TENANTS HERE. AND TO PUT TOGETHER JUST CAUSE ORDINANCE THAT AFFECTS DEED
RESTRICTED HOUSING LIKE WOOD MARK AS WELL AS THREE TIMES RELOCATION ASSISTANCE TO REALLY UPHOLD
THE RIGHT FOR THESE RESIDENT TO TAKE LEGAL ACTION AND STAY THE ENTIRETY OF THEIR LEASES WITH DIGNITY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. IF THERE IS ANYONE IN CHAMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT?
GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS GABBY. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME TONIGHT AND PREVIOUS MEETINGS TO LISTEN TO US. I'M HERE PLEASING THAT YOU PLEASE VOTE IN FAVOR OF A JUST CAUSE ORDINANCE AND DEED RESTRICTED HOUSING. AS MENTIONED IN PREVIOUS TIMES. THIS WILL PROTECT
VULNERABLE FAMILIES LIKE MINE TO STAY AND ALLOW US GIVEN THE INFLATION COSTS AND THE COSTS ONLY RISING. WITHOUT LIVABLE OR SUSTAINABLE WAGES. TO STAY IN SONOMA COUNTY. THREE TIMES THE MARKET RATE RELOCATION ASSISTANCE WILL ALLOW US. I DON'T WANT TO SIGN MY RIGHTS AWAY FOR FUTURE LEGAL ACTION. AND GO AGAINST A COMPANY WHO HAS UNLIMITED RESOURCES AND I WOULD JUST BE WANT GOING UP AGAINST SOMEONE WHO HAS PREYED ON SOMEONE LIKE ME. SO, AND THEY KNOW THAT AS WELL. SO THANK YOU. AND, PLEASE DO WHAT'S RIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. OLIVER, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE?
UNMUTE.
CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
I CAN.
GREAT. THANK YOU.
SO, THE PREVIOUS MEETING WHEN WE WERE DISCUSSING THIS WHEN I WAS PHYSICALLY IN THE ROOM, I WAS SAYING THIS HAS CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT ALL OVER IT. IT IS SAD WHAT IS HAPPENING. MY COMMISERATIONS TO THE PEOPLE OF WOODMARK, THAT IS A POWERFUL BIG COMPANY IN TEXAS. DIFFERENT STATE, DIFFERENT JURISDICTION. EVEN IF THE COUNCIL DOES PASS SOME SWORD OF RESOLUTION IT'S LIKE A PEA SHOOTER SHOOTER AGAINST A TANK. WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO PENALIZE THEM. FAR MORE SERIOUSLY. IT IS HARD FOR SOMEONE TO FIND SOMEWHERE TO RENT IN THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL. RENTAL HOUSING IS VERY, VERY TIGHT. WE HAVE THESE KINDS OF ORDINANCES ON THE BOOKS. LANDLORDS ARE NOT GOING TO RENT. THEY ARE JUST GOING TO TURN THEIR PROPERTIES INTO AIRBNBS AND THINGS. IT IS JUST NOT WORST THE RISK. IF YOU
HAVE A BROAD BRUSH APPROACH TO LANDLORDS SAYING YOU WILL BE HEAVILY PENALIZED IF A TENANT DOESN'T LIKE SOMETHING HAPPENS ET CETERA. SO THAT IS A HUGE PROBLEM AND IT SEEMS OUT OF FOCUS.
WHAT IS BEING ASKED FOR BY THE NON-PROFITS AND SO ON. I DON'T SEE A LEGAL PATH. I JUST DON'T SEE THIS.
LIKE ONE OF THE PREVIOUS PUBLIC COMMENTERS, I CAN SEE THIS COULD BE FRAUGHT WITH FUTURE LAWSUITS FOR THE CITY. SO IN CLOSING THIS TO ME SHOULD BE A COLLECTIVE ACTION BY THE TENANTS VERSUS THE
WOODMARK PROPERTY DEVELOPERS WHO ILLEGALLY RENTED TO THEM AND THE FEDS WHO HAVE COME DOWN VERY HARD ON WOODMARK LANDLORDS AND SAID YOU WEREN'T ALLOWED TO DO THAT. THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL ARE ALMOST LIKE AN INNOCENT BYSTANDER IN ALL OF THIS. WE COULD GET PULLED IN LEGALLY.
BUT IT WILL COST THE CITY A LOT OF TIME AND MONEY AND IT COULD BE A HORRENDOUS BACKLASH WHEN POWERFUL FORCES DECIDE TO ATTACK THE CITY.
NEXTLY COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS. IF ANYONE IN CHAMBERS WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT.
GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR PAYING ATTENTION TO OUR PLIGHT WITH THE WOODMARK. I HAVE SOMETHING HERE THAT I THINK IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO WHAT WE ARE ALL INVESTIGATING. IT IS AN EMAIL I RECEIVED FROM WOODMARK ON MAY THE 13th, 2024. THAT IS SIX MONTHS
BEFORE ANY OF US WERE EVER INTERVIEWED, PUT INTO THE APARTMENTS, SO IT IS SIX MONTHS WINDOW OF TIME TO DO THE RIGHT THING, GET THE WAIVER. ET CETERA. MAY I READ IT TO YOU? 13th OF MAY, 2024, THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST IN OUR BEAUTIFUL 48 UNIT FARM WORKER'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMUNITY.
LOCATED IN SEBASTOPOL, CALIFORNIA, THE COMMUNITY IS MADE UP OF TWO BED ONE BATH THREE BED TWO BATH UNITS. RENT AND INCOME RESTRICTIONS APPLY AND CAN CHANGE WITHOUT WARNING. TO QUALIFY, FARM WORK IS REQUIRED TO BE A SOURCE OF INCOME WITHIN THE HOUSEHOLD. CURRENTLY. WE ARE GATHERING QUALIFYING NAMES FOR A LOTTERY LIST. OUR LOTTERY WILL BE SELECTED LATE IN 2024. IF YOUR
NAME IS CHOSEN, YOU, WE WILL REACH OUT TO YOU TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION AND SET UP AN INTERVIEW APPOINTMENT TO COMPLETE THE QUALIFYING PAPERWORK. IF YOUR NAME IS NOT CHOSEN IT WILL REMAIN ON THE LIST. ONCE WE DO EXHAUST THE LOTTERY LIST, WE WILL WORK THROUGH THE INTEREST LIST ON THE FIRST COME FIRST SERVE BASIS. THAT IS PRETTY BAD. SO OF COURSE, I HAVE KEPT INSISTING I WAS NOT A FARM WORKER AND LIKELY TO BE BECAUSE I'M A RETIRED REGISTERED NURSE. THEY KEPT SENDING THESE AND INTERVIEWING US.
THAT IS TWO MINUTES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM.
REDWING, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE?
CAN YOU HEAR ME?
I CAN.
CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
I WILL JUMP IN WHEN YOU HAVE ABOUT 20 SECONDS LEFT.
I'LL BE BRIEF. FIRST, THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ALL OF THE TENANTS AND THE PEOPLE REALLY ASKING FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE. I HOPE THAT CAN HAPPEN. I LIVE NEXT DOOR TO WOODMARK AND HAVE BEEN DEALING
WITH THE REPERCUSSIONS OF WHAT'S GOING ON THERE FOR A VERY LONG TIME INCLUDEING THE FACT MANY,
MANY OF US CAME TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE PLANNINGS COMMISSION BEFORE WOODMARK WAS BUILT
AND BEFORE THEY BYPASSED SONOMA COUNTY AND WENT TO THE STATE WITH A FRAUDULENT BILL SAYING
THAT THERE WERE FARM WORKERS THEY WERE GOING TO HOUSE HERE AND GIVE THEM TRANSPORTATION TO THEIR FIELDS WHICH WE ALL KNEW WAS A LIE. I JUST REALLY HOPE OUR CITY GOVERNMENT HAS ADVOCATES FOR THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL AND THIS COUNTY. THE NEXT TIME SOME COMPANY FROM OUT OF TOWN LIKE
IDAHO WITH A PRETTY INTENSE REPUTATION IF YOU DIG DEEP INTO WHO THEY ARE, THAT YOU WILL DO YOUR
RESEARCH AND HOMEWORK BEFORE ALLOWING THESE KINDS OF COMPANIES TO COME INTO OUR COMMUNITY ONLY TO MAKE A HUGE PROFIT AND NOT TO CARE ABOUT THE COMMUNITY THEY ARE BUILDING HOUSING IN.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS. IF THERE IS ANYONE IN CHAMBERS WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE. I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM.
JUNE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE?
YES.
CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
YES.
GO AHEAD PLEASE.
HI, THIS IS JUNE AND I JUST REALLY WANTED TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE COUNCIL TAKING ACTION ON THIS EMERGENCY ORDINANCE. I THINK AS IT IS, IT IS WELL RESEARCHED AND IT IS REASONABLE ACTION THAT IS NOT TOO BROAD. IT DOESN'T PUT THE CITY IN THE LEGAL MIX. IT HAS BEEN DONE BY OTHER AREAS IN OUR COUNTY SO IT BRINGS US UP TO THE STANDARDS OF THE SURROUNDING COUNTY. AND, IT IS NOT GOING TO SOLVE IT FOR THE FOLKS THAT HAVE BEEN MISTREATED BUT IT WILL AT LEAST PROVIDE THEM SOME HELP. THIS IS A BIG CORPORATION. IT MAY NOT BE MUCH OF A PENALTY TO THEM. BUT THEY CAN CERTAINLY EASILY PAY THAT AMOUNT TO THE FOLKS THAT CAN REALLY USE THE HELP. AND, IT IS A MINIMAL PROTECTION. AND IT IS ALSO AGAIN, AT NO MALT SO IT IS NOT GOING TO BE A PUNISHMENT ON A GOOD LANDLORD. AND ID IS DEED
RESTRICTIONED SO WE ARE LIMITING WHAT LANDLORDS ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED AS WELL SO I THINK IT IS A
VERY MINIMAL SAFE REASONABLE PRODUCTIVE STEP THAT IS HELPFUL EVEN IF IT DOESN'TSOEVER ALL OF OUR
PROBLEMS BUT IT IS CAUTIOUS AND I THINK THAT IT IS A GOOD THING TO MOVE FORWARD ON SO THANK YOU FOR ALL THE GOOD WORK ON THIS.
THANK YOU JUNE. NEXT I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS. IF THERE IS ANYONE IN CHAMBERS. SEEING NONE IT WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. KYLE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF PLEASE? CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER? GO AHEAD PLEASE.
THE LAST SPEAKER MAKES A GOOD POINT. RIGHT? WE HAVE A DEVELOPER WHO TOOK ADVANTAGE OF OUR CITY. IN THE SENSE WE DID NOT HAVE THE NUMBERS OF AFFORDABLE UNITS AND THAT WAS THE REASON WHY SB45 WAS ALLOWED TO BE TAKEN INTO PLACE AND WE LOST OVERSIGHT OF THIS. AS A RESULT OF US NOT HAVING OBJECTIVE STANDARDS. WE COULDN'T IMPLY ANY OBJECTIVE STANDARDS TO WOODMARK AND ITS DEVELOPMENT. THEY RECEIVED ONE MILLION DOLLARS IN FEDERAL SUBSIDIES. THIS IDEA THAT WE HAVE
ALREADY ALLOWED FOR THIS ENTITY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF US IN MULTIPLE WAYS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, AT THE STATE LEVEL? WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO TRY TO STOP THAT FROM HAPPENING AGAIN. AND ORDINANCES LIKE THIS ARE DESIGNED TO DO THAT. SO, TAKING THE RIGHT STEPS TO PROTECT OURSELVES IN
THE FUTURE, FROM ALLOWING OTHER ENTITIES TO PREY ON US IN THIS WAY, IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO DO. AND THERE'S A LOT OF REALLY GOOD EVIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN PRODUCED. YOU SHOULD TRUST THAT THE
MONEY YOU HAVE SPENT ON YOUR LEGAL TEAM TO RESEARCH THIS IS JUSTIFIED RATHER THAN LISTENING TO
SCARE TACTICS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO HAVE NOT DONE RESEARCH ON THE AMOUNT OF
LITIGATIONS THAT HAPPENED AS A RESULT AND MOVE FORWARD AND DO THE RIGHT THING AND LOOK AT WHAT HAS BEEN DONE ACROSS THE STATE. THE BAY AREA FOR PROTECTING FOLKS LIKE THIS. THANKS.
THANK YOU KYLE. NEXT I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS. IF THERE IS ANYONE IN CHAMBERS. SEE NONE, BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY.
SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED ON THIS ITEM.
THANK YOU MAYOR. BRINGING IT BACK UP TO THE DAIS FOR MY COLLEAGUES FOR QUESTIONS AND OR COMMENTS. OR A MOTION.
I'M JUST GOING TO SAY I SUPPORT SOME KIND OF POLICY SORT OF LIKE WHATEVER MAKES RATIONAL SENSE OVER 24 UNITS. AND HAS THE THREE TIMES PENALTY FOR THIS POLICY. BUT I AM TRULY DISAPPOINTED IN THE COMPANY THAT IS DEVELOPING THIS AND FEEL VERY SORRY FOR THE SITUATION. I WOULD LIKE TO DO SOME MORE RISK ANALYSIS. I CANNOT THOROUGHLY LOOK THROUGH CASE LAW, BUT I WOULD WANT TO KNOW THE PERCENTAGE OF HOW THIS GOES. LIKE FOR EVICTIONS, THERE IS, NO FAULT. OTHER THAN THAT, I SUPPORT THAT.
TO CONSIDER IT FIRST OF ALL, I WOULDN'T BE IN FAVOR OF CONSIDERING ANYTHING LESS THAN THE UNIT'S 48 WHICH IS WOODMARK'S NUMBER. I AM REALLY WORRIED AS A VICE MAYOR BROUGHT UP. IT IS UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER STAKE HOLDERS IN THE ROOM. THAT WOULD CERTAINLY WEIGH IN IF THEY KNEW WE WERE ABOUT TO PASS AN ORDINANCE. THAT WOULD IMPACT MULTIPLE OWNERS WITHIN OUR JURISDICTION. I FEEL THIS ONE IS RUNNING UNDER THE RADAR. ALTHOUGH I WANT TO HELP. I KNOW THE TENANTS HAVE SPOKE BEFORE THAT OFFERS HAVE BEEN MADE. NOW WE ARE TALKING THREE TIMES THE RENT.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE DIFFERENTIAL IS. THREE TIMES THE RENT. I WISH I HAD THAT INFORMATION. WE CAN'T GO BACK AND FORTH. BUT I NEVER KNEW WHAT THE OFFERS WERE. AND NOW WE ARE GOING INTO THIS THREE TIMES CONSIDERATION. AND I'M INTERESTED IN BECAUSE THIS IS SPECIFICALLY AN ORDINANCE FOR WOODMARK.CAN WE APPLY IT TEMPORARILY SO WE CAN HELP THEM WITHOUT UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES. I SENT AN EMAIL PACTLY A CLEAR AGO ON OCTOBER 15th. TALKING ABOUT WHY THIS DEVELOPMENT WASN'T FINDING FARM WORKERS. WHY IT WAS BUILT WHAT ITS INTENT WAS. I SENT IT TO JEAN RILEY AT THE TIME.
TALKING TO THEM. EVERYBODY WAS TALKING ABOUT IT. WHY WAS THIS BUILT AND WHY WASN'T IT BUILT? I FELT LIKE THEY GOT LEGITIMATE WAIVERS. I FEEL CONFLICTED. HERE WE ARE MOVING QUICKLY ON AN URGENCY ORDINANCE. THAT MAYBE WE DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND. SO I'M CURIOUS IF WE COULD DO SOMETHING SHORT TERM.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY I'M DEEPLY EMPATHETIC TO THE SITUATION HERE. BUT, BASED ON MY QUESTIONS EARLIER, I HAVE DEEP CONCERN ABOUT AN EMERGENCY ACT. I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT TONIGHT.
BECAUSE, BASED ON MY YEARS OF ATTENDING THESE MEETINGS, I HAVE NOT SEEN THINGS QUICKLY SOLVED.
THE COMMUNITY NOT BEING QUICKLY INFORMED.WE HAVE HEARD ABOUT THE VARIOUS LITIGATION GOING ON IN THE PAST AND PRESENT. THERE IS ALWAYS RISK FOR LITIGATION WITH THE CITY. ALL OF THESE THINGS COMBINED, AT THIS POINT, I COULD NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE. I COULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF SOMETHING THAT IS TEMPORARY A YEAR OR LESS. I WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTIVE OF ANYTHING LESS THAN 40 UNITS. I JUST, I HAVE SO MANY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS. AND I THINK THAT OTHERS WHO HAVE BEEN IN THE CITY FOR A LONG TIME OWNING PROPERTIES NEED TO WEIGH IN ON THIS. AND IT IS VERY UNFORTUNATE FOR HOW THIS PROPERTY CAME ABOUT. AND I HEAR US BEING CHIDED A BIT HERE AND THERE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ABOUT THIS PROPERTY. THERE WASN'T A LOT THAT COULD BE DONE ABOUT IT.I COULDN'T SUPPORT ANYTHING UNDER 40 UNITS. IT WOULD BE TEMPORARY GIVEN THE SITUATION. SO THAT'S WHERE I'M AT TONIGHT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR RESEARCH ON THIS TO OUR ATTORNEY. AND I WANT TO THANK ALL THE PUBLIC FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I WOULD SUPPORT AN URGENCY ORDINANCE BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO PROTECT 100% OF THOSE RESIDENTS AND NOT LEAVE ANYONE BEHIND. SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE COULD TAKE A STRAW VOTE TO SEE IF WE HAD THE VOTES OR EMERGENCY ORDINANCE. BECAUSE LIKE THE ATTORNEY SAID, WE NEED FOUR VOTES. SO I'M JUST ONE PERSON HERE.ATTORNEY SAID IT WAS RELATIVELY LOW RISK. WE COULD GET SUED FOR ANYTHING. THAT IS ALWAYS A RISK WITH THE CITY. I SEE THIS RISK AS SOMETHING THAT IS LOW. ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THE COUNTY ALREADY HAS AN ORDINANCE AND SO DOES PETALUMA. I WOULD SUPPORT AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE. COULD WE HAVE BOTH ON THE AGENDA NEXT MONTH.
THAT IS FEASIBLE AND THAT IS WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND DOING EVEN IF YOU WANTED TO DO THE EMERGENCY ORDINANCE. BECAUSE THE URGENCY ORDINANCE REQUIRES YOU MAKE CERTAIN FINDINGS AND
SO, YOU USUALLY, IT IS BEST PRACTICE TO ALSO ADOPT THE REGULAR ORDINANCE JUST IN CASE SOMEONE CHALLENGES THOSE FINDINGS. YOU HAVE THE REGULAR ORDINANCE IN PLACE.
THANK YOU. I'LL CHIME IN TOO. BECAUSE I THINK WE ARE AT LEAST LOOKING AT A STRAW POLL. I AM FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF DOING AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE. TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE AT WOODMARK AS WE HAVE BEEN REPEATEDLY HEARING BOTH HEAR IN THE CHAMBERS AND OTHER EVENTS. THESE FOLKS DID NOTHING WRONG AND THEY WILL END UP BEARING THE BRUNT OF DEVELOPERS. I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY LIVE WITH THEMSELVES BUT I WILL LEAVE IT AT THAT. I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE. AND WE COULD GET INTO MORE OF THE DETAILS. IF IT WOULD SUPPORT. I HAVE ONE.
I HAVE MORE QUESTIONS. I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE STRAW POLLING AND YOU WANT TO MOVE ON THIS. BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU JUST SAID YOU WOULD PASS AN URGENCY ORDINANCE AND A FULL ORDINANCE. I THINK I CAN GET ON BOARD WITH A TEMPORARY ORDINANCE TO SOLVE THE WOODMARK PROBLEM. THIS ISN'T IN FRONT OF US EXCEPT FOR YOU GUYS FOR WOODMARK. AND I WANT TO SUPPORT WOODMARK. BUT I'M NOT
COMFORTABLE WITH THE OTHER LONG TIME TENANTS UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES BY MAKING A BROAD ORDINANCE. SO, THAT FOR ME IS THE REAL DECISION. CAN WE PASS SOMETHING THAT SOLVES THE WOODMARK ISSUE WITHOUT IT BEING A FOREVER ORDINANCE? I'M NOT INTERESTED IN PASSING A FULL ORDINANCE THAT WOULD IMPACT PEOPLE THAT ARE STAKE HOLDERS THAT ARE NOT EVEN AWARE OR DISCUSSING THIS TONIGHT.
THEY DON'T HAVE THE LEGAL AID SITTING IN THE ROOM. REPRESENTING THEM. SO, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO BE FAIR TO ALL OF OUR CITIZENS.
WE COULD CERTAINLY BUILD IN A SUNSET DATE WHERE THE ORDINANCE WENT AWAY AFTER A YEAR IF THAT IS WHAT THE COUNCIL WANTED. YOU COULD ALSO IF THE COUNCIL WANTED INCLUDE THE REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE REVIEWED AFTER A YEAR.
WHAT DOES WOODMARK MEAN? IT SOUNDS LIKE THEIR TRIGGER IS DECEMBER.
I WOULD SAY THAT IS THE INITIAL TRIGGER. IF YOU HAVE THIS GO AWAY AFTER 90 DAYS, WOODMARK COULD WAIT IN THE 90 DAYS AND DO IT. YOU DON'T WANT AN ORDINANCE THAT IS VERY SHORT TERM. I WOULD ASSUME YOU WANT SOMETHING MORE LIKE A YEAR. THAT'S A NICE ROUND NUMBER. BUT, NOT TO SAY YOU COULDN'T DO SOMETHING SLIGHTLY LESS. BUT THE POINT BEING IF YOU DO IT REALLY SHORT OF LIKE 90 DAY.
I HEAR YOU. AND THAT GIVES THE TENANTS AT WOODMARK A CHANCE TO SAY THIS ISN'T FAIR BECAUSE WE WERE SOLD A BILL OF GOODS. THIS WAS FARM WORKER HOUSING. WE WERE TOLD WE COULD BE THERE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY ARE PULLING THE RUG OUT?
AND TWO OTHER COMMENTS. WHAT WE HEARD ALLUDED TO IN THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. IF YOU GET TENANT RELOCATION, IT CAN'T BE CONDITIONED ON ANYTHING. WHAT THOSE TENANTS SUGGEST THE PAY-OUTS WOODMARK IS OFFERING REQUIRES THE TENANTS TO SIGN SOME SORT OF AGREEMENT THEY NOT SUE. THAT IS WHAT I TOOK FROM THOSE COMMENTS. WHEREAS IF IT IS IN THE ORDINANCE, YOU CAN'T WAIVE ANY OF YOUR OTHER RIGHTS AS A CONDITION OF GETTING THAT PAYMENT.
AND LET ME ASK ANOTHER QUESTION. SO THE THREE TIMES MARKET RENT. DOES THAT MEAN THE RENT THEY ARE PAYING NOW? WE HEARD SOME OF THEM ARE PAYING VERY LITTLE. 700 OR MONTH. IS THAT 700 TIMES THREE OR MARKET RATE?
FAIR MARKET WOULD BE THE MARKET RATE. YOU KNOW. I HAVEN'T. I DON'T REMEMBER HOW EACH ORDINANCE DOES IT. HUD PUTS OUT A NUMBER FOR SONOMA COUNTY OF WHAT THE FAIR MARKET RATE IS FOR TWO BEDROOM THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE MORE OR LESS THAN WHAT IS IN SEBASTOPOL. BUT THAT MIGHT BE WHAT WE CALL FOR BUT IT IS NOT THE ACTUAL RENT. IT IS SOME GUESSTIMATE OF WHAT IT WOULD RENT FOR IF THERE WERE NO RESTRICTIONS ON IT. AND IT COULD JUST BE PUT ON CRAIGSLIST FOR ANYONE.
AN URGENCY ORDER IS THIS MEETING PLUS ONE OTHER.
IT WOULD BE THE NEXT MEETING SO NOVEMBER 4th. SO, TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COUNCIL'S CONCERNS WE
COULD ALSO REACH OUT TO WHO WE BELIEVE ARE THE OWNERS OF THESE OTHER BUILDINGS SO THEY COULD COME TO THAT.
WITH 48 UNITS OR MORE. THAT IS WHAT WE WANTED.
IT IS UP TO THE COUNCIL WHERE YOU WANTED TO SET THE THRESHOLD. IF YOU GO ABOVE 40 YOU ARE GETTING INTO REALLY SMALL GROUP THAT THERE MAY BE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT. BUT 40, THERE'S STILL A HANDFUL OF PROJECTS. FIVE OR SIX.
WHAT WOULD BE THE CONCERNS IF WE WENT TO 48? I HAVE TO ASK THESE QUESTIONS BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE I'M THE SWING VOTE.
ONE ORDINANCE. IF IT IS ONLY AFFECTING ONE PROPERTY, YOU ARE STARTING TO LOOK, THIS IS, SEEMS ARBITRARY DISTINCTION.
WE ARE DOING IT FOR WOODMARK.
WOOD MAN MARK IS LIKE MANY SITUATIONS, YOU HAVE AN EVENT THAT TRIGGER'S THE COUNCIL'S ACTION AND THAT IS FINE BUT IT STILL APPLIES MORE BROADLY. AND SO, AT SOME POINT, THAT COULD BE AN ISSUE.
NOW LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE NO IDEA WHETHER WOODMARK WOULD MAKE THAT CLAIM OR NOT.
I THINK 2800 OR 3,000 IS THE MARKET RATE IN SONOMA COUNTY.I SPENT A LOT OF TIME TO UNDERSTAND THIS BETTER. THAT IS THE INFORMATION I WAS GIVEN.
WE HAVE AT LEAST THREE. IS ANYONE PLANNING TO MAKE A MOTION? I'LL DRAG IT OUT FOR ONE MORE STATEMENT. FOR BROADNESS AND FAIRNESS, I'M DEFINITELY PRO DEVELOPER FOR A LOT OF REASONS BUT I DEFINITELY FEEL LIKE THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT AS WELL. AND PROTECTING IS NECESSARY. I WOULD LIKE TO DO WHAT WE CAN. AND SATISFY AN URGENCY NEED. I WILL SUPPORT THE URGENCY. KEEP IT BROAD, RIGHT? AND YOU KNOW, I WOULD SUPPORT REVIEWING IT AFTER A YEAR RATHER THAN SUNSETTING IT AFTER A YEAR.
OKAY.
I'M OKAY WITH THE REVIEW AFTER ONE YEAR, BUT NOT OF SUNSET.
WE CAN CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT.
YES. IT IS A REQUIREMENT THAT YOU REVIEW IT AND COME BACK. THE COUNCIL COULD DECIDE AT ANY POINT TO REVIEW IT. AFTER A YEAR, WHEN YOU REVIEW IT, YOU CAN DECIDE NO CHANGES ARE NECESSARY. AND KEEP IT IN PLACE.
I'M STILL FOR 40 UNITS.WE ARE CREATING A SOLUTION FOR SOMETHING THAT LOOKS LIKE A TEMPORARY SITUATION. VERY UNFORTUNATE SITUATION. ANYWAY, I'M SAYING I'M STILL AT THE 40 UNITS OF SUNSET. I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE URGENCY. NOTHING GOOD EVER HAPPENS WHEN WE DO THESE QUICK DECISIONS WITHOUT THE REST OF THE STAKE HOLDER INS THE ROOM.
I WILL GO AHEAD.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION WHETHER YOU GUYS AGREE WITH IT OR NOT.
WE COULD SEE WHAT OTHER UNITS ARE WITHIN THE CITY. I WOULD LIKE IT TO COME BACK AS A SUNSET CLAUSE WHICH WE COULD EXTEND IN ONE YEAR. WE HAVE AN ELECTION COMING UP IN ONE YEAR. AND WE DON'T KNOW WHO COULD BE SITTING ON THIS DAIS SO THAT SEEMS REASONABLE. AND, THAT IS HOW I WILL VOTE FOR IT TONIGHT. I AM MOVE TAG IS MY MOTION.
DOES THAT INCLUDE TENANT RELOCATION?
SURE. TENANT RELOCATION.
CLARIFICATION. SO, YOUR MOTION IS 40 OR 45.
THEY WOULD RESEARCH AND GIVE US MORE INFORMATION.
IT WOULD INCLUDE A SUNSET CLAUSE THAT WOULD BE REVIEWED THAT HAVE BEEN REVIEWED IN ONE YEAR.
SO IT IS NOT NECESSARILY SUNSET?
WE COULD BRING IT FORTH.
SO THERE WOULD BE WRITING IN EXTENSION BEFORE ONE YEAR IS UP? IS THAT CORRECT? YYES.
WE COULD MAKE IT SO IT SUNSET INS ONE YEAR. BUT WE CAN FIGURE OUT. NINE MONTH IFS NOW, IT COMES BACK TO REVIEW OR SOMETHING.
I WILL SECOND THAT.
CAN I HAVE REITERATION? EITHER FROM THE MOVE OR THE STAFF?TO PREPARE AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AND A REGULAR ORDINANCE AT THE NEXT MEETING. TO SET THE UNITS AT 40 UNITS FOR ONE. AND TO LOOK AT 40 UNITS AND TO HAVE A SUNSET CLAUSE FOR ONE YEAR. TO RETURN THE ORDINANCE. WITHIN NINE MONTHS FOR REVIEW AND TO INCLUDE THREE MONTHS OF TENANT RELOCATION.
I DIDN'T ADD THE NINE MONTHS. IS THAT BECAUSE THE EMERGENCY EXPIRING IN SO MANY DAYS? IT DOESN'T EXPIRE. BUT IN ORDER TO APPROVE AN URGENCY, YOU HAVE TO MAKE CERTAIN FINDINGS SO IT IS
BEST PRACTICE TO THE OTHER ONE BECAUSE IF SOMEONE WANTS TO CHALLENGE FINDINGS BY THE TIME THEY GET TOGETHER TO CHALLENGE IT, YOU HAVE THE REGULAR ONE IN PLACE.
OKAY. I'M FINE WITH BOTH ORDINANCES. I'M NOT INCLUDING THAT IN THE MOTION.
THE MOTION INCLUDED A SUNSET LAW TO EXTEND IN ONE YEAR, I TOOK THAT TO MEAN IT WOULD BE REVIEWED WITH POTENTIAL FOR EXTENSION. IS THAT NOT WHAT YOU MEANT? SUNSET WOULD END IN ONE YEAR. ASSUMING WE PASSED IT AT THE NEXT MEETING IT WOULD COME UP THE FOLLOWING NOVEMBER.
YOU SAID THE NINE MONTHS WAS JUST TO CUE US.
THAT ISN'T PART OF THE MOTION.
WITHOUT THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THAT REVIEW, IT CAN'T BE A SECOND WITHOUT THAT.
IT CAN BE REVIEWED. IT INCLUDED A SUNSET CLAUSE WITH A POTENTIAL TO EXTEND IT. THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTOOD. AND SO, HOW DO YOU EXTEND IT IF YOU DON'T REVIEW IT? SO THAT IS WHY I'M WITHDRAWING MY SECOND. BECAUSE I REALLY NEED THAT REVIEW. TO BE PART OF THE MOTION.
I WOULD CLARIFY THAT. ALL OF THE CITY'S NORMAL POLICIES WOULD STILL APPLY. SO WHILE IT WOULDN'T BE A
REQUIREMENT TO REVIEW IT BEFOREHAND, AS OUR AGENDA REVIEW POLICIES, ANY TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS
CAN, ANY ONE COUNCIL MEMBER CAN REQUEST THE ITEM AND ANY TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS CAN MAKE THAT A PRIORITY FOR SCHEDULING.
IT WOULDN'T BE A LEGAL REQUIREMENT OF THE ORDINANCE.
WHAT YOU JUST READ, THE EMERGENCY IN IT WOULD BE JUST CAUSE. EMERGENCY JUST CAUSE ORDINANCE.
SOMEWHERE IN THERE IT MENTIONS JUST CAUSE.
IT DOESN'T, BUT I WILL ADD IT.
IS THAT WHAT WE, IS THAT THE UNDERSTANDING?
WHAT I HAVE NOW IS TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE URGENCY JUST CAUSE ORDINANCE FOR THE NEXT MEETING. TO SET THE NUMBER OF UNITS AT 40 UNITS FOR ONE. AND TO 45 UNITS AS A SECOND. SUNSET CLAUSE SET AT ONE YEAR. AND THREE MONTHS OF TENANT RELOCATION.
CORRECT.
OKAY. THAT'S WHAT IT IS ON THE TABLE. THEN I WILL SECOND IT. AND THEN WE WILL GO TO ROLL CALL.
SO WE ARE ADDING A SUNSET CLAUSE OR NOT.
THERE IS A SUNSET CLAUSE AFTER ONE YEAR.
TOTALLY, WILL YOU QUEUE US TO LOOK AT THIS TWO WEEKS BEFORE SO WE CAN? THAT'S ON YOU COUNCILMEMBER CARTER.
YOU HAVE TO HELP ME OUT HERE. I THINK WE ARE RELATIVELY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
I'M DOING THIS FOR THE BENEFIT.
I'M LOOKING AT THE CLOCK. I'M LOOKING AT THE CLOCK. SO, I THINK WE HAVE A MOTION THAT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED SO NOW WE ARE TO ROLL CALL.
THANK YOU MAYOR. SO I WILL REPEAT IT AGAIN. SO AS MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER HINTON AND SECONDED
BY MAYOR ZOLLMAN TO PREPARE AN EMERGENCY JUST CAUSE ORDINANCE FOR THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO SET THE NUMBER OF UNITS AT 40 AND TO SET THE UNITS AT 45 TO SEE WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE
TO HAVE THE ORDINANCE SUNSET CLAUSE SET AT ONE YEAR AND INCLUDE THREE YEARS OF TENANT RELOCATION. COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?
YES.
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?
AYE.
COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
YES.
VICE MAYOR MCLEWIS?
NO, BECAUSE STAKE HOLDERS ARE NOT IN THE ROOM.
MAYOR ZOLLMAN?
YES.
MOTION PASSES 4-1 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS CARTER, HINTON, MAURER, AND MAYOR ZOLLMAN VOTING IN FAVOR AND VICE MAYOR MCLEWIS VOTING IN OPPOSITION.
I AM GOING FOR A TIME CHECK. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE A BREAK FOR ANY PARTICULAR REASON? AT LEAST FOR FIVE MINUTES? SEEING SHAKINGS OF HEADS? SO WE WILL MOVE AHEAD. SO, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11.
REQUEST FOR CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE FOR LETTERS TO SUPPORT FOR THE CALIFORNIA POLLUTERS PAID CLIMATE SUPERFUND ASSEMBLY BELL 1243. SENATE BILL 684. THE REQUESTER IS THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE. THE RESPONSIBILITY DEPARTMENT IS PLANNING DEVELOPMENT. THE FISCAL IMPACT STAFF TIME TO PREPARE THE AGENDA REPORT IS COVERED WITHIN THE EXISTING BUDGETED SALARIES. NO ADDITIONAL FISCAL IMPACT SO, THE REQUESTER WAS CLIMATE ACTION. BUT AGAIN, THE RESPONSIBLE PARTY IS PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SO I'M TURNING TO MARY.
WE WILL DO A QUICK INTRODUCTION. THIS ITEM WAS BROUGHT FORWARD BY THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE. THE TWO ASSEMBLY BILLS, ESTABLISHED WHAT IS CALLED A CALIFORNIA POLLUTER'S PAID PROGRAM. ADMINISTERED BY CAL EPA. THE BILL DIRECTS CAL EPA TO COMPLETE A CLIMATE COST STUDY AND IDENTIFY RESPONSIBLE PARTIES.IT IS FOR MITIGATION. ADAPTATION. AND PROGRAMS AIMED AT DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES. FUNDS COLLECTED FROM THE COMPANIES WOULD BE EARMARKED FOR PROJECTS SUCH AS WILD FIRE RECOVERY. OTHER CLIMATE RELATED EFFORTS. THERE'S A BUNCH OF DETAILED INFORMATION IN HERE. AND I WILL ALLOW COUNCILMEMBER CARTER AND PUBLIC COMMENT TO GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION. THE CITY DID REACH OUT TO SONOMA COUNTY CITIES. DID JUST RECENTLY ADOPT THEIR LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING. THIS ITEM WAS CHANGED PREVIOUSLY FROM THE LAST ITEM. CONNELLY IS ADDED AS ONE OF THE COAUTHORS. CITY STAFF REACHED OUT TO THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE. THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY STANCE ON THIS. THEY ARE WAITING TO FORWARD AS IF IT COMES BACK IN JANUARY. SO, THE COUNCIL HAS THE OPTION OF ADOPTING THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. THE COUNCIL CAN DO LETTERS OF SUPPORT WHICH WE HAVE DONE IN THE PAST WHICH IS OUR PRACTICE TYPICALLY. OR IT CAN DENY THE RESOLUTION AND THE REQUEST FOR THE LETTERS AND WAIT UNTIL THE BILL COMES BACK TO THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE.
THE REASON WE ARE BRINGING THIS UP, IS SO WE CAN LEND OUR SUPPORT FOR THE SENATORS PUTTING THIS UP. SO AS THEY DON'T INTO THE ELECTION SLEDGE ISOLATIVE SESSION.IT WILL POTENTIALLY SET US UP FOR
RECOOPING ANY FEES FOR NATURAL DISASTERS AND SET US UP WITH FUNDING BESIDES FEMA THAT WE COULD CAPTURE SO IT IS IN OUR BEST INTEREST THAT WE DO AFTER THIS. I WILL KEEP IT SHORT.
THANK YOU TO THE BOTH OF YOU. AND SO, QUESTIONS? FROM MY COLLEAGUES? SEEING MONEY, TO MY RIGHT. I'M LOOKING TO OUR STAFF.
IT WOULD NEED TO BE THROUGH PUBLIC COMMENT.
OKAY.
SO, WITH THAT, I'M LOOKING TO MY LEFT TO SEE IF THERE ARE QUESTIONING FROM MY COLLEAGUES HERE, LOOKING ONLINE. VICE MAYOR, YES, I SEE A HAND.
I WONDERED IF COUNCIL MEMBER CARTER, DID YOU TALK WITH DAMON? IS IT CHRIS ROGERS? REGARDING THESE ITEMS?
JUST CHRIS. HE IS QUITE BUSY. THAT IS MID NOVEMBER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
OKAY. THANK YOU.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
THIS IS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE REQUEST FROM THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE FOR THE CALIFORNIA POLLUTER'S SUPER FUND ASSEMBLY BILL. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, COME TO CHAMBERS FIRST. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT? GOOD EVENING. MAY NAME IS WOODY HASTINGS, I WORK AT THE CLIMATE CENTER, A STATEWIDE NON-PROFIT WORKING ON CLIMATE CLEAN ENERGY POLICY. IN SACRAMENTO. WE ARE FOUNDED HERE IN SONOMA COUNTY.
I WANT TO THANK THE CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE FOR REVIEWING AND PUTTING FORWARD THE RECOMMENDATION. AND I THANK THE CITY COUNCIL FOR PUTTING THIS ON YOUR AGENDA. I REALLY WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT WHAT THIS IS ABOUT IS PROTECTING SEBASTOPOL'S GENERAL FUND. PROTECTING THE BUDGET. WHY, HOW? BECAUSE WHAT THE FUND IS DESIGNED FOR IS DESIGNED TO HELP AS COUNCILMEMBER CARTER WAS JUST REFERRING TO, COST OF RECOVERY FOR THE CLIMATE CALAMITIES. WILD FIRE, HEAT EPISODES, FLOODS. WE HAD THEM ALL. RIGHT? SO THAT'S WHAT IT IS ABOUT. IT IS AN UNUSUAL PROCESS. THIS 2025 SESSION IS OVER. BUT THESE BILLS ARE TWO YEAR BILLS. THEY WILL COME BACK WITH THE SAME SPONSORS IN JANUARY. IT WILL BE CRUNCH TIME IN JANUARY. THERE ARE RULES FOR HOW QUICKLY THEY NEED TO BE OUT OF COMMITTEE. SO THAT IS WHY THE REQUEST TO DO THIS IS FROM THE BILL AUTHORS. THE CLIMATE CENTER WORK CLOSELY WITH THEM BEFORE THE LEGISLATION WAS EVEN INTRODUCED. THERE ARE OVER A DOZEN OF THEM IN HAND SO THEY CAN HIT THE GROUND RUNNING. JUST A LITTLE MORE ON THE MERRITTS OF THE BILL. WHO WOULD BE THE RESPONSIBLE PARTIES ARE THE BIGGIES. BREAKING IN BILLIONS IN PROFITS. RECORD BILLIONS IN PROFITS AND IT WOULD BE A SMALL, SMALL LOW SINGLE DIGIT PERCENTAGE OF THEIR PROFITS AND I HAVE FACT SHEETS AND STUFF ON THAT. IT IS BASED ON LONG TERM FEDERAL LOSS. IS THAT TWO MINUTES ALREADY? OKAY, WELL YOU KNOW WHAT? I WILL JUST END THERE AND SAY I DO RESPECT THE PROCESS AND CAL CITY'S APPROVAL. BUT I THINK THE CITY COUNCIL CAN MAKE THE DECISION. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. I WILL GO BACK OUT. I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM.
DO YOU SEE THE TIMER?
YES.
GREAT. GO AHEAD PLEASE.
I'M SUNNY AND I AM NEWLY APPOINTED TO THE CLIMATE COMMITTEE AND THANK YOU SO MUCH. WENT TO MY FIRST MEETING. AND I AM REALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE COUNCIL SIGNING THIS LETTER. IT IS VERY DEAR TO MY HEART. WE FEATURED IT AT OUR JC CLIMATE ACTION NIGHT. WHERE SEBASTOPOL STUDENTS, SONOMA STATE. ALL FEATURED THIS BILL. WE HAD AN ARTIST BRING AN ENORMOUS MURAL THAT WAS PAINTED WITH ASHES FROM THE FIRE BY ARTISTS WHOSE HOMES BURNED DOWN IN THE LA FIRE. IT WAS A REALLY EMOTIONAL MOMENT OF CLIMATE ACTION NIGHT. WE COLLECTED DOZENS OF CARDS FROM THESE STUDENTS AND OUR PARTICIPANTS FROM THE PUBLIC URGING LAWMAKERS TO PRESENT THIS BILL. WE THEN LATER MET WITH OUR LAWMAKERS AND ASKED THEM TO SUPPORT THE BILL. I WILL BE PROUD TO GO BACK AND TELL OUR STUDENTS THAT SEBASTOPOL CITY COUNCIL VOTED TO ENDORSE THIS BILL. AS WOODY SAID, IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL FOR THE CITY. WE KNOW ALL TOO WELL HOW MUCH WE HAVE SUFFERED FROM CLIMATE DISASTERS SUCH AS FLOOD AND FIRES AND EXTREME HEAT. AND THE FUNDS FROM THESE COMPANIES COULD GO TO HELPING OUR COMMUNITY. WITHOUT THIS BILL, ALL OF THE TAXPAYERS WILL CONTINUE TO PAY FOR THE COST OF CLIMATE CHANGE WHILE POLLUTERS RESPONSIBLE AVOID PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE. I KNOW MANY OTHER CITIES ACROSS THE STATE HAVE SIGNED THIS. I WOULD BE PROUD IF OUR COUNCIL COULD SIGN ON INTO THIS LETTER OF SUPPORT. IT IS MEANINGFUL THAT WE DO IT NOW BEFORE IT COMES UP AGAIN WHEN THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION GETS VERY BUSY. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT I WILL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS. SEEING NONE I WILL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
I CAN.
GREAT. GO AHEAD PLEASE.
I WANT TO THANK ACTING CITY MANAGER GORLEY FOR A MUCH IMPROVED STAFF REPORT FROM TWO WEEKS AGO. AND NOW, JUST SPEAKING ABOUT THE MEASURE ITSELF, OIL COMPANIES SPENT $10.6 MILLION LOBBYING AGAINST THIS. [ CAPTIONERS CHANGING ]
IF THIS EVER COMES TO BE. THE PROFESSOR AT UC BERKELEY, WHO STUDIED THE CLIMATE SUPER FUND BILL EXTENSIVELY, AND CONCLUDED IT WOULD NOT INCREASE GAS PRICES IN THE STATE. THAT'S BECAUSE CALIFORNIA'S PUMP PRICES ARE PRIMARILY SET BY GLOBAL CRUDE OIL MARKET, WHICH IS VOLATILE. SHE SAID
MAJOR OIL COMPANIES WOULD CONTINUE TO FACE MARKET COMPETITION FROM SMALLER OIL PRODUCERS,
SELLING GAS AT BRANDED AND UNBRANDED STATIONS IN THE STATE, WHICH LIMITS BIG COMPANY'S ABILITY TO RAISE RETAIL GAS PRICES WITHOUT LOSING CUSTOMERS. ALSO, A CALIFORNIA LAW PASSED IN 2023 PROHIBITS REFINERS FROM PASSING ALONG NON-OPERATIONAL COST, SUCH AS THE SUPER FUND FEE TO CONSUMERS.
WITH THE SUPPORT OF THIS MEASURE, WE CAN HELP THE TRANSITION TO A MORE EQUITABLE -- IN A MORE EQUITABLE MANNER, AND MAKE THE POLLUTERS PAY. PASS THIS MEASURE 5-0 LAST WEEK, AND I HOPE THE CITY WILL DO THE SAME TONIGHT. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, STEVE FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I'LL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS. IF THERE IS ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT? CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF, PLEASE? HELLO. THIS IS KARI WHEATON ON JIM'S ZOOM THAT SAYS CHIMERA ARTS, BUT IT'S NOT CHIMERA ARTS, FOR THE RECORD. I JUST WANTED TO SECOND EVERYTHING THAT SONNY, WOODY, STEVE JUST SAID. I THINK THIS TO
PROTECT OUR CITY AND COMMUNITIES WITH JUST A FEW CRUMBS FROM THE KING'S TABLE OF THE OIL COMPANIES. SO THERE IS JUSTICE IN THAT. AND ALSO, WE'RE HOPING OUR WONDERFUL ELECTED OFFICIALS ENCOUNTER LESS RED TAPE IN JANUARY. YOU KNOW, LESS TO SLUG THROUGH BY GIVING THEM OUR ENDORSEMENT IN THEIR POCKET TO BACK THEIR NOBLE DEEDS. SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. I HOPE WE CAN JUST PASS IT HAD AND NOT FUSS TOO MUCH ABOUT IT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I'LL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS. IF THERE IS ANYONE IN CHAMBERS. SEEING NONE, I'LL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. JUNE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF, PLEASE? YEAH. I JUST WANTED TO SAY A WORD OF SUPPORT, AND ALSO JUST TO ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT'S BEEN AN
UNUSUAL PROCESS, BUT I'M REALLY GLAD WE'RE HERE NOW, AND THAT THERE'S CLARITY THAT IT'S A
RESOLUTION THAT'S BEING ASKED FOR, AND SO, YOU KNOW, NOT THE USUAL WAY WE'VE DONE SOME LEGISLATION IN THE PAST, BUT IT'S WHAT THE AUTHORS ARE ASKING FOR. AND THERE'S A LOT OF BENEFIT FOR OUR COMMUNITY. WE'RE JUST GETTING A LITTLE TINY BIT OF THE PROFITS, NOT THE OPERATION COST. BUT THE POLLUTERS, THEY MAKE A LOT OF PROFIT. THERE'S SOME IMPACTS ON US FROM THAT PROFIT. WE'RE GOING TO GET JUST A LITTLE BIT BACK TO HELP US DEAL WITH THE IMPACTS FROM THEIR PROFITS. AND HELP OUR LEGISLATORS THAT WE WORK WITH, PARTNER WITH THEM. JUST SUPPORT THE RESOLUTION, AND THAT'S IT.
THANKS.
THANK YOU, JUNE FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, OLIVER, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF, PLEASE? YEAH, I'M UNMUTED, YEAH.
THANK YOU.
CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
YES.
GREAT, GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
JUST A QUICK POINT. EVERYONE SPOKEN HAS BEEN IN FAVOR OF THIS. I WOULD JUST CAUTION REFINERIES
THAT ACTUALLY CREATE THE ORIGINAL GASOLINE AND DIESEL AND SO ON ARE PULLING OUT CALIFORNIA HERE
AND EVEN NEWSOM IS STARTING TO FREAK OUT ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE'RE HEADING VERY RAPIDLY TOWARDS $8 GAS AT THE MOMENT IN CALIFORNIA. IN CALIFORNIA, GASOLINE IS ALREADY THE MOST EXPENSIVE IN ALL OF AMERICA FOR DIESEL. COMMERCE BASICALLY RUNS ON, WHICH IS EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE THAN PREMIUM GASOLINE AT THE MOMENT. SO THE CHALLENGE FROM A POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE IS THE MORE PRESSURE YOU PUT ON THESE BIG GLOBAL PRODUCERS. WE ARE ALREADY IMPORTING HUGE AMOUNTS OF OIL AS IT IS. IT'S AN ENORMOUS EXPENSE. YOU KNOW, YOU MAY SCORE A MINOR VICTORY AGAINST THESE BIG GLOBAL COMPANIES, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO FIND A WAY TO WIGGLE OUT OF IT. WE WILL BE LEFT WITH SIGNIFICANT COSTS TO DEAL WITH GOING FORWARD. SO I'M NOT AGAINST WHAT IS BEING DISCUSSED HERE.
JUST GIVEN WHAT'S BEEN SAID, I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT. BASICALLY YOU'LL BE PAYING A LOT MORE FOR ENERGY BASED ON THIS SORT OF POLITICAL MANEUVERING. THANK YOU. THAT'S MY COMMENT.
THANK YOU, OLIVER FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. KYLE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF, PLEASE? I CAN.
THANK YOU.
CAN YOU STILL SEE THE TIMER IN
YES, I CAN.
GREAT, GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
I'M JUST REALLY HOPING TONIGHT, WE CAN GET SOME CONSISTENCY FROM OUR COUNCILMEMBERS. I'M
HEARING, YOU KNOW, A PROPOSAL THAT'S BEING PRIMARILY GENERATED WITH PUBLIC INTEREST, THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT IT. BUT I DO NOTICE WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF THE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE ROOM. SO UNFORTUNATELY I THINK FOR CONSISTENCY SAKE, I WOULD HOPE SOME COUNCILMEMBERS WHO
HAVE HAD SOME HESITANCY ABOUT MOVING FORWARD WITH A DECISION WOULD WANT TO REFRAIN FROM BEING IN SUPPORT OF SOMETHING LIKE IT HAD UNTIL WE CAN GET THOSE POLLUTERS INTO THE ROOM.
BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S IMPORTANT MAYBE WE HEAR FROM THOSE FOLKS AS WELL. SO MAYBE JUST A LITTLE BIT CONSISTENCY TONIGHT, AND THE VOTING PROCESS. THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
THANK YOU, KYLE FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. I'M GOING TO ASSUME JIM, IS THAT YOU? YES.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
YES, I CAN.
I JUST HAVE TO RESPOND. I FEEL I'M A STAKEHOLDER. I THINK WE'RE ALL STAKEHOLDERS. THE ADMINISTRATION
RUNNING THE COUNTRY RIGHT NOW IS RUNNING US INTO A CLIMATE DISASTER WITHOUT ANY HOPE OF GETTING BACK WITHOUT US ACTING LOCALLY. THIS IS CALIFORNIA. WE NEED TO HOLD THE POLLUTERS ACCOUNTABLE. I THINK THE FEAR MONGERING AROUND $8 A GALLON GAS IS LIKE WHO KNOWS. THERE'S SO MANY THINGS THAT GO INTO THE GAS PRICES THAT WE HAVE NO CONTROL OF. BUT THIS IS THE WAY. WE CAN
TAKE A STAND RIGHT NOW AND SAY TO THE POLLUTERS AND THE BIG OIL WHO HAVE BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF
DOLLARS WHO BUY POLITICIANS, WHO CORRUPT THE WHOLE SYSTEM WITH THEIR MONEY, THAT WE WANT THEM TO PAY WHEN THEY SCREW UP AND CAUSE CLIMATE BASED DISASTERS. SO I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH US TAKING A STAND AND SAYING THIS IS A GREAT BILL. WE ENDORSE IT. WHO KNOWS IF IT WILL PASS, BUT WE HAVE TO TAKE A STAND NOW BECAUSE TIME IS RUNNING OUT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU, JIM FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I'LL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS, IF THERE IS ANYONE IN CHAMBERS. SEEING NONE, I'LL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED ON THIS ITEM.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. BRINGING IT BACK UP FOR ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AND/OR MOTION. LOOKING TO MY LEFT, COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE ENACTMENT OF THE PROPOSED POLLUTERS BILL A, CLIMATE SUPER FUND ACT.
SECOND.
YOU BEAT ME TO IT. I WAS LEANING IN AS WELL, YOU DID ALL THE WORK.
CAN WE ALSO DO COMMENTS? I MEAN, I KNOW WE HAVE THAT MOTION ON THE TABLE. DOES THAT HAVE TO GO FIRST OR CAN WE MAKE COMMENTS?
NO, GO AHEAD, COMMENTS.
I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT AS CHAIR OF THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE. I KNOW A FEW PEOPLE HAVE REACHED OUT TO ME. I DID REACH OUT TO CAL CITIES, AND I HAD MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM. AT
THIS POINT, JUST BECAUSE THIS BILL IS NOT, YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY CONSIDERED ACTIVE, THAT'S WHY THEY DON'T, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NO STANCE ON IT. I KNOW THERE WAS SOME QUESTION ABOUT THAT IN THE PAST.
SO FROM CAL CITIES, THEY HAVE NO STANCE ON IT SIMPLY BECAUSE IN THEIR EYES, IT IS NOT DOING ANYTHING RIGHT NOW. SECONDLY, THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE DOESN'T TAKE ANY ACTION ON ANYTHING FOR THE SAME REASONS, YOU KNOW, ANY BILLS THAT ARE CURRENTLY MOVING THROUGH. I TOO REACHED OUT TO DAMON,
AND HAVE BEEN TRYING TO REACH HIM AND THE STAFFERS TO GAIN A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WAS GOING ON WITH IT AND KIND OF TRACE IT THROUGH. YOU KNOW, IN PRINCIPLE, I DO AGREE WITH THIS. YOU
KNOW, I ALWAYS HAVE CONCERNS BECAUSE WE WERE TOLD PG&E WOULD PAY FOR EVERYTHING THAT
OCCURRED BECAUSE OF THE FIRES AND YET HERE WE ALL ARE PAYING MUCH HIGHER ELECTRIC BILLS AND GAS, WHATEVER. SIMPLY BECAUSE THE STATE DIDN'T WANT TO PUT TOO MUCH PRESSURE ON PG&E, OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT CRUMBLE. SO I MEAN, I THINK, YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH ALL THIS. I JUST FEEL THERE IS SOME WAYS WE END UP BEING IDEALISTIC WITH THIS. BUT I DO HOPE IT COMES TO FRUITION THE WAY WE, YOU KNOW, IT'S WRITTEN. I ALSO JUST, IN GENERAL AGAIN, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THIS. I JUST THINK WE SHOULD KEEP AN EYE ON WHAT HAPPENS WITH IT BECAUSE IT IS NOT UNCOMMON FOR THESE BILLS TO SHIFT. SOMETIMES THEY CAN SHIFT GREATLY BY THE TIME THEY ACTUALLY DO START MOVING. SO WHEN WE, YOU KNOW, VOTE TO
APPROVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS, KNOWING IT'S ACTUALLY NOT EVEN AN ACTIVE BILL RIGHT NOW OR WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH IT. I JUST THINK WE SHOULD KEEP AN EYE ON IT SIMPLY BECAUSE WE ARE PUTTING OUR
NAME ON IT AND APPROVING IT, SO I WILL, FROM A LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE SIDE, I WILL COMMIT TO KEEPING
TRACK OF IT AND SEEING WHAT'S GOING ON, AND IF THERE IS ANYTHING CHANGING THAT'S MATERIAL TO US AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT WOULD CHANGE HOW WE FEEL ABOUT IT. SO JUST TO KEEP EVERYBODY INFORMED. THAT'S JUST WHAT I WANTED TO SAY.
GREAT, THANK YOU. I THINK WE'RE TO ROLL CALL.
SO MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER MAURER AND SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER CART ER TO ADOPT 1243 AND SENATE BILL 684. COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?
YES.
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?
AYE.
COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
YES.
VICE MAYOR MCLEWIS?
YES.
MAYOR ZOLLMAN?
YES.
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
THANK YOU. JUST DOING A TIME CHECK AGAIN. ANYONE INTERESTED IN A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK? LOOKING TO MY RIGHT.
I AM.
ALL RIGHT, WELL, THERE WE GO. WE'RE TAKING A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK. WE'LL RESUME AT 8:15. THANKS. [ MEETING WILL RESUME AFTER A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK ]
IF EVERYONE CAN MAKE THEIR WAY BACK UP TO BE AWESOME. AND CODY, JUST DOING A TECH CHECK. WE'RE STILL GOOD? COUNCILMEMBER -- ALL RIGHT. WE'RE READY TO GO. CODY SAID YES ON TECH. MARY, ARE WE GOOD ON YOUR END? ALL RIGHT, SO WE ARE MOVING RIGHT ALONG HERE. AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12, WHICH IS RESEAT OF THE FISCAL YEAR 25-26 BUDGET AT A GLANCE FORMAT TO RECEIVE THE INFORMATIONAL ITEM FOR "BUDGET AT A GLANCE" WHICH IS A SUMMARY DOCUMENT THAT PRESENTS KEY FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM A LARGER, MORE DETAILED BUDGET IN A SIMPLE, EASY-TO-READ FORMAT.
YES, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. SO GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS. THIS ITEM WAS ON
CONSENT CALENDAR AT THE LAST MEETING, AND IT WAS PULLED OFF BECAUSE THERE WAS CONCERN FROM THE PUBLIC REGARDING -- THERE WERE TWO COMMENTS WITH CONCERNS, SO THE ITEM WAS PULLED OFF. I DID ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS IN THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH SECTION OF THE STAFF REPORT. SO THE
PURPOSE OF THIS ITEM IS TO REQUEST OF THE COUNCIL RECEIVE THE REPORT AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PUBLISH THIS BUDGET AT A GLANCE ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE. IT WAS CREATED TO EXTRACT THE FULL BUDGET
DOCUMENT TO BE CON SIZED, ASSESSABLE FORMAT, AND MAKING IT EASY FOR THE PUBLIC TO FOLLOW AND UNDERSTAND THE CITY'S FINANCIAL PLAN. SO WITH THAT, I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE COUNCIL MIGHT HAVE OR THE PUBLIC MIGHT HAVE, AND THAT'S THE END OF THIS REPORT.
GREAT, THANK YOU, ANNA. I CAN'T REMEMBER WHO PULLED IT, BUT WHOEVER PULLED IT -- OOPS, COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
I DON'T REALLY HAVE MUCH TO SAY ABOUT THIS EXCEPT THAT OUR ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR, SHE ADDRESSED THE ISSUE. AND I DID CHECK IN WITH ONE OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTERS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FIX THAT SHE CREATED WAS WORKED.
VERY GOOD.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU AS ALWAYS. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO OUT TO -- COUNCILMEMBER HINTON? I JUST WANTED TO SAY I LIKE THE RAINY DAY UMBRELLA. THAT'S VERY CUTE.
YES, INDEED. VICE MAYOR, ANYTHING BEFORE WE GO OUT TO PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, MARY, PUBLIC COMMENT?
THANK YOU. SO THIS IS PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE AGENDA ITEM FOR RECEIPT OF THE FY25-26 BUDGET AT A GLANCE. IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, I'LL GO TO CHAMBERS FIRST. SEEING NONE, I'LL GO OUT TO ZOOM. IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
THANK YOU. BRINGING IT BACK UP FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR MOTION? WE DO.
I'LL MAKE IT.
THERE WE GO. I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE RECEIPT OF BUDGET AT A GLANCE FORMAT AND AUTHORIZE THE STAFF TO POST THE DOCUMENT ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE.
I'LL SECOND.
ROLL CALL.
THANK YOU HAD, SO MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER HINTON AND SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MAURER TO APPROVE THE BUDGET AT A GLANCE FORMAT AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO POST IT. COUNCILMEMBER MCLEWIS? COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?
AYE.
COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
YES.
VICE MAYOR MCLEWIS? VICE MAYOR MCLEWIS?
CAN YOU NOT HEAR ME? I SAID YES.
SORRY, I COULD NOT HEAR YOU.
MAYOR ZOLLMAN?
YES.
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
THANK YOU. MOVING RIGHT ALONG TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 13, APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO FLAG POLICY. POLICY IS TO AMEND THE RECENTLY APPROVED FLAG POLICY TO LIST SPECIFIC BANNERS ON POLES AND COUNCIL POLICY ON DISCUSSION OF PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVES. THE RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT IS PUBLIC WORKS, AND LET ME READ THE FISCAL IMPACT. STAFF TIME REQUIRED TO PREPARE THE AGENDA REPORT IS COVERED WITHIN EXISTING BUDGETED SALARIES, AS WELL AS STAFF TIME TO RAISE, LOWER FLAGS. NO ADDITIONAL FISCAL IMPACT IS ANTICIPATED WITH THE APPROVAL OF THIS ITEM. AS INDICATED, PUBLIC WORKS IS THE RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT.
THANK YOU, MAYOR, COUNCIL. SO THIS IS JUST A CITY FLAG POLICY. IT WAS APPROVED ON SEPTEMBER 2.
COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO COME BACK WITH APPROVED BANNERS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE POLICY, SO THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO APPROVE THOSE IN THE FUTURE. WE ALSO INCLUDED THAT, WHICH CAME UP DURING THE
DISCOVERY WAS SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT LOWERING CITY FLAGS, SO WE INCLUDED THAT IN THERE, WHICH WE
WILL CONTINUE TO LOWER UPON PRESIDENTIAL PROCLAMATION OR GUBERNATORIAL PROCLAMATION, UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE MAYOR.
THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FROM MY COLLEAGUES? SEEING NONE? NOT SEEING ANYTHING FROM THE VICE MAYOR. I GUESS WE'RE GOING OUT TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
THIS IS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE AMENDED FLAG POLICY. IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, I'LL COME TO THE CHAMBERS FIRST, THEN GO OUT TO ZOOM.
HI, MY NAME IS SUSAN LAMONT. I DO NOT LIVE WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS, AND I THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS ON THE AGENDA. I, AND MANY OTHERS, WERE QUITE HORRIFIED WHEN WE DISCOVERED CITIES WERE LOWERING THEIR FLAGS FOR CHARLIE KIRK. THIS WAS A MAN WHO WANTED THE RIGHTS OF MANY CITIZENS IN THIS COUNTRY AND NON-CITIZENS, TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM. HE WAS SOMEONE WHO SAID THAT TRANS PEOPLE WERE THE WORK OF THE DEVIL. THERE WERE PEOPLE HE WANTED JAILED. THERE WERE PEOPLE HE WANTED THEIR RIGHTS TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM. BUT YET AUTOMATICALLY THE FLAG WAS LOWERED. SO DONALD TRUMP HAS PARDONED MURDERERS. ALMOST EVERYBODY HE HAS AS A FRIEND IS A CHILD MOLESTER OR A PERPETRATOR OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE. HE COULD ASK YOU TO HONOR THEM. YOU NEED SOME GUIDELINES.
WE ARE NOT IN NORMAL TIMES. AND IF WE PRETEND WE'RE IN NORMAL TIMES, THIS IS JUST SORT OF THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG. SO MUCH MORE COULD GO WRONG. AND I CAN SEE THIS MAN WOULD HAVE BEEN HONORED IN 1825, BUT THIS COUNTRY HAS MADE GREAT PROGRESS, AND NOW EVERYONE HERE HAS THE SAME RIGHTS.
SUSAN, YOU HAVE ABOUT 15 SECONDS.
WE SHOULD NOT HONOR ANYBODY WHO WOULD TAKE ANY OF THOSE AWAY. WE SHOULDN'T EVEN DISCUSS IT.
WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO DISCUSS IT. IF YOU WOULD LOOK AWAY FROM THE WORDS OF CHARLIE KIRK FROM WHAT ELSE WOULD YOU LOOK AWAY?
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I'LL GO OUT TO ZOOM. IF THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE FLAG POLICY, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. KYLE, CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF, PLEASE?
YEAH. I CAN UNMUTE MYSELF.
OKAY. GO AHEAD WITH YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE.
SO AGAIN, JUST LOOKING FOR CONSISTENCY FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS. I DON'T SEE THE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE ROOM THAT WHICH THIS POLICY, WHICH IS CLEARLY DIRECTED AT, TRYING TO CIRCUMVENT ARE THERE. SO
WITHOUT HEARING FROM THESE AFFECTED PARTIES, NAMELY THE GOVERNOR OR THE PRESIDENT, I CAN'T EXPECT THAT CERTAIN COUNCIL MEMBERS WOULD VOTE AND APPROVE THIS. MAYBE WE WANT TO SUGGEST A SUNSET CLAUSE, RIGHT? THIS IS CLEARLY TARGETED AT ONE INDIVIDUAL, ONE, YOU KNOW, COLLECTION OF
INDIVIDUALS, SO WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE SUNSET CLAUSE BE ONE DAY AFTER THE NEXT PRESIDENTIAL TERM EXPIRES, RIGHT? THIS TYPE OF DECISION MAKING, WHERE YOU'RE PUTTING YOURSELF
LITERALLY AT LITIGATION BY SUGGESTING THAT ORDINANCES ARE TARGETING ONE DEVELOPER IS REALLY UNFORTUNATE. THE IDEA WE WOULD CHOOSE TO PUBLICLY MAKE STATEMENTS THAT PUTS US AT RISK OF LITIGATION BY DOING SO, AND THEN TO SUGGEST THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S THE POINT. MAYBE THE
POINT IS LIKE I'M GOING TO PUBLICLY MAKE THESE STATEMENTS, SO THAT WAY WE CAN'T ACTUALLY PASS SOMETHING. WHEN THERE'S CLEARLY PUBLIC GOOD DOING THESE THINGS. AND SO I JUST FIND IT REALLY UNFORTUNATE. I HOPE COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE CONSISTENT IN THEIR MESSAGING ON THIS AGENDA ITEM IF THEY ARE ON THE AGENDA ITEMS AS WELL.
THANK YOU, KYLE FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I'LL COME BACK INTO ZOOM. I'M SORRY, INTO CHAMBERS, IF THERE IS ANYONE IN CHAMBERS. SEEING NONE, I'LL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF THERE IS ANYONE IN ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. CAN YOU UNMUTE YOURSELF, PLEASE?
YES.
THANK YOU. CAN YOU SEE THE TIMER?
NO.
OKAY, I'LL GIVE YOU A CUE WHEN YOU HAVE ABOUT 20 SECONDS LEFT.
OH, NOW I CAN SEE IT. OKAY, THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE TO SECOND EVERYTHING THAT SUSAN LAMONT SAID. I WAS SHOCKED TO SEE OUR FLAG WAS LOWERED. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL, YOU
KNOW, HAVE A POLICY ABOUT FLAG LOWERING THAT REFLECTS THE FEELINGS OF THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY. WE HAVE NEVER SEEN LARGER DEMONSTRATIONS IN THE HISTORY OF THE CITY, OPPOSING THE LIAR WHO IS NOW RESIDING IN THE WHITE HOUSE. THIS IS OBSCENE THAT IT HAPPENED, AND IT CAN'T JUST BE A
POLICY THAT IF A PRESIDENT OR A GOVERNOR SAYS THIS BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHO THOSE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE. WE NEED TO HOLD THE POLICY OF LOWERING A FLAG IN OUR HANDS, IN THE CITY'S HANDS, IN THE CITY'S PEOPLE. IF WE WANT TO HAVE -- WE WANT TO LOWER THE FLAG, WE KNOW THERE'S GOING TO BE
CONTROVERSY, THEN WE NEED TO BRING IT UP AND LET THE PEOPLE COMMENT ON IT BECAUSE WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THIS COUNTRY NOW IS APPALLING. WE ALL KNOW THAT. WE CANNOT JUST GO ALONG AND
SUPPORT THESE KIND OF POLICIES THAT'LL ALLOW FOR, YOU KNOW, THIS MANIAC AND HIS MINIONS TO BE ABLE TO TELL US WHAT TO DO. SO I STRONGLY SUPPORT THE COUNCIL MAKING SURE OUR POLICY WILL REFLECT THE PEOPLE OF THIS CITY AND NOT THE PRESIDENT OR THE GOVERNOR. IT MUST BE A DECISION THAT WE HAVE A WAY OF MAKING. WE MIGHT HAVE TO DIVIDE A METHOD OF DOING THAT, BUT I FEEL LIKE THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. SO NO, DO NOT LOWER THE FLAG FOR SOMEONE WHO WANTS MANY PEOPLE THAT WE LOVE DEAD.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU MAGICK FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEC, I'LL COME BACK INTO CHAMBERS.
GOOD EVENING, WOODY HASTINGS AGAIN. I'M JUST GOING TO CHIME IN SUPPORT OF THE FLAG POLICY THAT'S BEFORE YOU. BUT ALSO TO MENTION I BELIEVE YOU RECEIVED SOME WRITTEN COMMENT THAT SUGGESTS AN
AD HOC COMMITTEE BE FORMED TO FLUSH OUT SOME MORE GUIDANCE FOR DECISION MAKING, FOR THE MAYOR WHO WOULD NOW BE ENCLOUDED IN DECISION MAKING. SO JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW, I SUPPORT THAT, AND I SUPPORT ALL THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT, I'LL GO BACK OUT TO ZOOM. IF THERE IS ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE AGENDA ITEM FOR THE AMENDED FLAG POLICY.
PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED.
THANK YOU, MARY. BRINGING IT UP. DISCUSSION, COMMENTS? COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
I'M OKAY WITH THE CHANGES TO THE FLAG POLICY, BUT I THINK IT'D BE BETTER IF THE DECISION WAS NOT LEFT TO ONE PERSON BECAUSE THAT POSITION ROTATES. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE MIGHT NOT LIKE THE DECISION OF ONE PERSON. WE'RE A FIVE-PERSON BOARD. IT SHOULD COME BACK TO COUNCIL. SO THAT WOULD BE THE CHANGE I WOULD REQUEST.
OTHERS? LOOKING TO MY RIGHT, COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?
WELL, I MEAN, I AGREE WITH THAT OVERALL. I ALWAYS WANTED TO COME BACK, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF WE COULD MAKE A DECISION THAT FAST. I MEAN, ALL OF A SUDDEN IN THE EXAMPLE THAT WE'VE GONE BACK TO THE FLAG POLICY. THE EXAMPLE EVERYBODY WAS UPSET WHEN WE LOWERED IT. IT WAS A SPLIT-SECOND DECISION OR A DAY DECISION. I DON'T -- SO IT CAN'T COME BEFORE. SO IN THIS INSTANCE, I THINK IT THIS NEW POLICY SAYS THE MAYOR IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CITY MANAGER, RIGHT? NO.
NO, OKAY.
SO I WOULD KIND OF LIKE TO HAVE IT WITH CONJUNCTION TO THE CITY MANAGER BECAUSE THAT'S A CONSTANT. THAT'S A PERSON THAT RUNS THE CITY. IT'S TRUE THE MAYOR ROTATES AND DOESN'T HOLD ANY OTHER SPECIAL, SPECIALNESS.
YES, WHATEVER. YOU HOLD THE GAVEL. SO I DON'T KNOW. I WOULD BE OPEN FOR THAT, BUT I JUST DON'T SEE
HOW WE COULD BRING IT BACK BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE TO AGENDAIZE IT, AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, RIGHT, THE FLAG HAS TO HAPPEN. SO --
COULD IT BE A CLOSED SESSION? NO?
SAME THING, I THINK --
YES. I SUPPORT THE TWO-PERSON THING BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, A MAYOR IS HERE AND THERE NEXT DECEMBER, YOU KNOW? I WOULD SUPPORT THAT.
OKAY. IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS A MOTION.
I WOULD --
SORRY. VICE MAYOR?
I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT AS WELL, HAVING THE CITY MANAGER, INTERIM CITY MANAGER AND THE MAYOR. SO I COULD DEFINITELY BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
OKAY. ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION?
YEAH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT THE FLAG POLICY WITH THE AMENDED CHANGE TO HAVE THE CITY MANAGER INVOLVED. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO WORD THAT WELL.
SO WHERE IT CURRENTLY SAYS UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE MAYOR, IT WILL NOW SAY UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE MAYOR AND CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER.
SOUNDS AWESOME.
YAY, I'LL SECOND.
ALL RIGHT, ROLL CALL?
THANK YOU. SO MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER CARTER, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HINTON TO APPROVE
THE AMENDED FLAG POLICY WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT THAT THE LOWERING OF THE FLAG WITH THE MAYOR IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER, LANGUAGE TO BE CHANGED. COUNCILMEMBER CART ER? YES.
HINTON?
AYE.
MAURER?
YES.
VICE MAYOR MCLEWIS?
YES.
MAYOR ZOLLMAN?
YES.
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
ALL RIGHT, MOVING ALONG TO OUR LAST ITEM HERE. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR CREATION OF AND APPOINTMENT TO AD HOC COMMITTEE TO PREPARE FOR THE 125th CELEBRATION OF THE INCORPORATION OF THE CITY OF SEBASTOPOL 1902-2027. REQUEST IS TO ALLOCATE STAFF TIME TO COORDINATE WITH ALL OF OUR CURRENT PRIVATE BUSINESSES TO INCLUDE PENDING HOTEL SEBASTOPOL, NON-PROFITS, AND AGENCIES, I.E.
LIBRARY ADMIN TO START SOLICITING IDEAS FOR THE CELEBRATION, AS WELL AS WAYS TO FUND IT. THE RESPONSIBLE PARTIES, THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER. FISCAL IMPACT, STAFF TIME REQUIRED TO PREPARE THE AGENDA REPORT IS COVERED WITHIN THE EXISTING BUDGETED SALARIES. HOWEVER, THE TOTAL COSTS ARE UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME. IF THE COMMITTEE IS APPROVED, PART OF THE SCOPE OF THE WORK WOULD BE TO
PROPOSE A BUDGET, AND PRESENT IT TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE FOR CONSIDERATION PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION BY THE CITY COUNCIL AT A PUBLICLY NOTICED MEETING. IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT STAFF TIME
OF AT LEAST TWO HOURS PER MONTH IS ANTICIPATED FOR THE FIRST FEW MEETINGS WITH INCREASED STAFF TIME AS THE CITY THAT'S CLOSER TO THE EVENT. AND TURNING IT OVER TO OUR WONDERFUL INTERIM CITY MANAGER.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO YOU PRETTY MUCH DID THE WHOLE STAFF REPORT. AS YOU'RE AWARE, WE WILL HAVE OUR 125th ANNIVERSARY IN JUNE OF 2027. WE ARE HOPING THIS IS GOING TO BE A BIG EVENT. I HAVE A LOT OF IDEAS THAT I WON'T PUT OUT THERE NOW. BUT WE REALLY WANT TO REVITALIZE THE CITY. IT'S ABOUT
BRINGING THE COMMUNITY TOGETHER, YOU KNOW, BEING PROUD OF OUR HISTORY, HOW LONG WE'VE BEEN A CITY. AND REALLY JUST MAKE IT A FUN EVENT. MAKE IT AN EVENT TO BE PROUD OF. WE WOULD LIKE FOR TONIGHT, IT WOULD PROBABLY TAKE ABOUT A YEAR IN ADVANCE TO BE ABLE TO PLAN THE WHOLE PROCESS. I
WILL BE BRINGING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT INTO IT TO DO SOME OF THE PRESCOPE OF WORK WITH US WITH OUR CONSULTANT. RIGHT NOW, I'VE ALREADY ADDRESSED IT WITH THEM AS FAR AS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS HOW WE COULD DO. WE ARE HOPING TO WORK WITH ALL OF THE CHAMBER, THE CENTER FOR THE ARTS, THE COMMUNITY CENTER, ALL OF OUR ORGANIZATIONS TO SEE HOW WE COULD DO THIS. AND
WE WILL BE BRINGING IT BACK, THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT WE'LL DETAIL OUT SOME OF OUR EVENTS AND GET COUNCIL APPROVAL, OF COURSE, FOR ANYTHING THAT WE DO. SO OUR REQUEST TONIGHT IS TO ALLOW US TO CREATE THE SUBCOMMITTEE. APPOINT COUNCIL MEMBERS, ONE OR TWO, TO THIS AD HOC COMMITTEE. IT WOULD BE ONLY FOR A YEAR. AND THEN TO BRING IT BACK WITH A SCOPE OF WORK, PROBABLY WITHIN THE NEXT MONTH OR TWO. AND THEN REALLY START THE PROCESS NEXT YEAR, ONCE WE KNOW WHAT THE BUDGET IS, OUR SCOPE OF WORK. WE WILL BE LOOKING TO DO GRANTS. WE ARE HOPING A PART OF THE T-MOBILE GRANT WILL BE ABLE TO HELP FUND SOME OF THIS. BUT YEAH, I HAVE SOME BIG IDEAS. BUT THAT'S IT. THAT'S THE ITEM FOR TONIGHT.
AWESOME, WHAT A WAY TO END THE COUNCIL MEETING. SOMETHING THRILLING AND SOMETHING WE COULD LOOK FORWARD TO. ANY QUESTIONS FROM MY COLLEAGUES BEFORE WE GO OUT TO PUBLIC COMMENTS? LOOKING TO THE RIGHT, LOOKING TO THE LEFT? LOOKING AT THE VICE MAYOR? SEEING NONE. WE'LL GO OUT TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
THIS IS THE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE TO PREPARE FOR THE 125th ANNIVERSARY, THE CITY OF THE INCORPORATION OF THE CITY. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, I'LL COME TO CHAMBERS FIRST? SEEING NONE, I WILL GO OUT TO ZOOM. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY. SEEING NONE, THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
ALL RIGHT, BRINGING IT BACK UP FOR DISCUSSION AND/OR MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER MAURER? I VOLUNTEER TO BE ON THAT COMMITTEE.
I AM SO EXCITED FOR THIS. THIS SOUNDS AMAZING. [ LAUGHTER ] ME TOO. I'M HAPPY -- OH. NO, NO.
I DON'T WANT TO BE A PART OF IT. I AM NOT A PARTY PLANNER, TRUST ME.
THERE YOU GO. I'M HAPPY TO JUST JUMP IN, UNLESS YOU THINK WITH STAFF, IT'S GOING TO MAKE IT MORE COMPLICATED, AND WE WILL JUST LEAVE IT WITH ONE. I DON'T KNOW. I'M DEFERRING TO STAFF.
YOU CAN HAVE TWO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THE AD HOC COMMITTEE.
I'M HAPPY TO DO IT UNLESS SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO? VICE MAYOR? NO.
I HAVE TOO MANY EVENTS ALREADY.
OKAY. UNLESS COUNCILMEMBER MAURER HAS AN OBJECTION? I'D LIKE TO JOIN YOU.
OKAY, GOOD.
THANK YOU. SO IS THERE A MOTION? ANYONE?
I'LL MOVE THAT THE MAYOR ZOLLMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER MAURER ARE THE AD HOC COMMITTEE FOR THE CELEBRATION PLANNING. DOES THAT WORK?
SO I MOVE TO AMEND YOUR MOTION THAT THE COUNCIL IS APPROVING THE CREATION OF A SUBCOMMITTEE ON BOARD THE 125th ANNIVERSARY, WE WILL RETURN WITH THE SCOPE OF WORK AND POTENTIAL FUNDING, AND THAT YOU ARE APPOINTING COUNCILMEMBER MAURER AND MAYOR ZOLLMAN TO THE COMMITTEE.
OKAY, SO MOVED.
SECOND.
THANK YOU. SO MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER MAURER, SECONDED BY MAYOR ZOLLMAN TO CREATE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE FOR THE ANNIVERSARY AND APPOINTED MAYOR ZOLLMAN AND COUNCILMEMBER MAURER TO THE COMMITTEE. COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?
YES.
COUNCILMEMBER HINTON?
AYE.
COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
YES.
VICE MARE MCLEWIS?
YES.
MAYOR ZOLLMAN?
YES.
MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
AWESOME. WE ARE MOVING ON TO OUR ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT AGAIN FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO AS YOU STATED, THE SECOND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. IF YOU SPOKE IN THE FIRST PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, YOU HAVE PROVIDED YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT. THESE ARE FOR SPEAKER WHO IS HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO SPEAK DURING PUBLIC COMMENT. IF YOU'D LIKE TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT, COME TO CHAMBERS FIRST. SEEING NONE, I'LL GO OUT TO ZOOM. IF ANYONE ON ZOOM THAT WOULD LIKE TO
MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT DURING THE SECOND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND VIRTUALLY? SEEING NONE, THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT.
AWESOME. WE ARE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM, WHICH IS PROPOSALS FOR AGENDA ITEMS FROM MY COLLEAGUES. COUNCILMEMBER REQUESTS FOR FUTURE COUNCIL ITEMS. LOOKING TO MY LEFT, LOOKING TO MY RIGHT TO SEE, LOOKING TO THE VICE MAYOR, AND I SEE NONE. OKAY. SO THEN WE'RE NOW GOING TO GET DOWN TO CITY COUNCIL, CITY STAFF REPORTS. WE ALWAYS TURN TO OUR WONDERFUL INTERIM CITY MANAGER FIRST.
THANK YOU, MAYOR. THERE ARE THE MONTHLY REPORTS FOR LAST MONTH FROM ALL DEPARTMENTS. THERE IS ALSO A REPORT OUT FROM THE POLICE CHIEF ON THE INSPECTION OF THE NORTH BAY ANIMAL SERVICES. AS REQUESTED, HE'S BEEN DOING MONTHLY CHECKS. THAT'S ATTACHED AS WELL. THERE'S THE AGENDA REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING TOMORROW. JUST AS A REMINDER, THE SEBASTOPOL BLOOM EVENT IS HAPPENING THIS WEEKEND, SO THERE WILL BE MULTIPLE VACATIONS. WE ARE WORKING WITH THEM TO ENSURE THE EVENT GOES SUCCESSFULLY. WE ARE MEETING WITH HIM. WE MET WITH HIM TODAY TO GO OVER ALL THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. THERE IS STILL SOME ITEMS HE NEEDS TO MEET, BUT HE IS PRETTY MUCH 99% THERE WITH ALL THE CONDITIONS TO BE MET. THANK YOU, LAURA, FOR THE VIDEO ON THE HALLOWEEN. WE DID MORE DECORATIONS, AND WE DID SOME BANNERS -- I MEAN SOME WRAPAROUNDS ON THE BANNERS. YES, WE ALREADY STARTED ON OUR CHRISTMAS PREPARATIONS AS WELL. SO BIG KUDOS OUT TO CITY STAFF, PUBLIC WORKS FOR GETTING THAT DONE.
YAY.
SO WE ALSO PROMOTED --
THE CHIEF IS RIGHT.
WE PROMOTED ONE OF OUR POLICE OFFICERS TO SERGEANT. WE PROMOTED ONE OF OUR DISPATCHERS TO PUBLIC WORKS, I'M SORRY, PUBLIC RECORD SUPERVISOR AND DISPATCHER. IS THAT THE TITLE? IS THAT THE TITLE? SUPPORT SERVICES SUPERVISOR. AND WE DID HIRE AN ADMIN TECH FOR PLANNING. WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE BACKGROUND WITH THAT. SO WE ARE STARTING TO GET STAFFED UP AND THAT IS IT.
MOST AWESOME. TURNING TO MY COLLEAGUES FOR ANYTHING THEY WOULD LIKE TO SAY. COUNCILMEMBER MAURER?
YES.
I'M AFRAID I HAVE TOO MUCH TO SAY. WE HAVEN'T REPORTED OUT FOR A WHILE. BUT I NEVER REPORTED OUT ON THE LABYRINTH, WHICH HAS BEEN RESTORED. I BELIEVE THE SIGN IS THERE. I JUST COULDN'T BE MORE PLEASED. I JUST WANTED TO PUT OUT MY THANKS. SO I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A DEDICATION AT SOME POINT. AND SO I'LL RESERVE MY THANKS FOR THAT. BUT PUBLIC WORKS AND MARY, THANK YOU SO MUCH. BUT
ALSO LEAH, LEAH WHO DONATED HER TIME AND LAURA WHO REPORTED ON IT, AND COUNCIL WHO APPROVED THE PROJECT. SO ANY WAY, MORE THANKS. LOTS OF VOLUNTEERS, ETC. PHIL AND I DID A PUBLIC ART WALK ON 9/27, AND WE DID THAT WITH PUBLIC ARTS COMMITTEE, SEVERAL MEMBERS AND FORMER MEMBERS OF THEIR COMMITTEE. I HAD A RUSSIAN RIVER WATER SHED ASSOCIATION MEETING. THEY HAVE SOME NEW HANDOUTS ON HOME FIRE SAFETY. THEY HAVE A VIDEO CONTEST COMING UP AND A SAFE MEDICINE DISPOSAL, WHICH I BELIEVE HOPEFULLY WILL BE AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ON OCTOBER 25, WHICH WOULD BE COMING UP, HOPEFULLY. MANY MOONS FESTIVAL WAS FABULOUS. WE DID SUPPORT THAT FESTIVAL WITH REDUCING THEIR FEES. IT WAS JUST A WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL EVENT. AND I HOPE THEY DO IT AGAIN. I DID ART TRAILS OVER THE WEEKEND, AND THAT WAS REALLY FUN. NOT A COUNCIL EVENT EXACTLY. BUT I MET WITH DENNY ROSATI ON THE PARKS, SONOMA COUNTY PARKS WHO IS DOING A SURVEY ON THE PARKS. I MET WITH HIM THIS WEEK.
WE HAD A BUDGET MEETING. OH, REGARDING THE RUSSIAN WATER ASSOCIATION, THERE'S A NEW LAW. YOU CANNOT HAVE NON-FUNCTIONAL LAWNS. SO FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS, I'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT REMOVING THE LAWN IN FRONT OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND PUTTING IN DROUGHT TOLERANT. NOW IT'S A LAW. YOU CANNOT HAVE NON-FUNCTIONAL LAWN. SO I'LL BE BRINGING BACK THAT LATER. I DID A WEEK WITHOUT DRIVING. I JUST LOVED IT. LAST WEEK, TWICE, I TOOK -- I WALKED IN, TOOK THE BUS BACK. I GOT A RIDE IN AND TOOK THE BUS BACK, BUT I'VE BEEN TAKING THE BUS A LITTLE BIT MORE, SO IT WAS GREAT. I GUESS THAT'S IT.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? COUNCILMEMBER CARTER?
I RARELY DO THESE, BUT I'LL DO ONE TODAY, JUST TO MAKE UP FOR THE NEXT THREE THAT I WON'T. BUT I ENJOYED A WEEK WITHOUT DRIVING ALSO. I HAD A COUPLE OF FAILS, YOU KNOW, IT'S OKAY, BUT I DEFINITELY LEARNED WHAT BUS ROUTES COULD BE BETTER, WHERE WE COULD WALK MORE. I KNOW THE DOWNTOWN
STUDIES IS GOING TO BRING SOME THINGS TO OUR ATTENTION SOON, SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT AND THE WEEK WITHOUT THE CAR KIND OF HELPED THAT OUT. THE SECOND THING IS CREATING THE COMMENTS MET TWICE. I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE BASE WE'VE CREATED TO ESTABLISH SOME LEARNING ABOUT OUR OPPORTUNITIES GOING FORWARD. IT'S A STRONG GROUP. IT'S LIKE A PACKED HOUSE, AND I'M VERY GLAD IT'S INCLUSIVE. SO FAR VERY POSITIVE WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE GOING FORWARD.
VICE MAYOR?
SURE. GOSH, SINCE OUR LAST MEETING, YOU KNOW, WE'VE DONE AGENDA REVIEW. I'VE ATTENDED THE VARIOUS CLOSED SESSION IN SPECIAL MEETING. I DID DO A VIDEO WITH THE MAYOR AND THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER, SOCIAL DISTANCING OUTSIDE. WE DID A VIDEO FOR WORLD SEBASTOPOL, THE SISTER CITIES. IT'S 513th ANNIVERSARY, SO THEY ASK US TO DO SOME TYPE OF HELLO AND GREETING FROM THE CITY. SO I DID PARTICIPATE IN THAT, AND I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S FLEXIBILITY WITH DOING THAT. I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION, I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU KNEW HIM, BUT I JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS MY CONDOLENCES.
NOVATO CITY COUNCIL MEMBER PASSED AWAY UNEXPECTEDLY LAST WEEK. I JUST GOT TO KNOW HIM
THROUGH ATTENDING THE CAL CITIES AND A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS, SO I WANTED TO SAY THAT PUBLICLY IF ANY OF YOU KNEW HIM AND YOU WERE NOT AWARE THAT IT HAPPENED. IT WAS LAST MONDAY.
JUST EXPRESSING MY CONDOLENCES. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.
OKAY. IN ADDITION TO REGULAR TYPE MEETINGS. SEBASTOPOL WALKS ALSO TAKING PLACE. WE ARE TOURING ALL OF OUR VERY HARD WORK OVERSTRETCHED, NON-PROFITS. NEW PEOPLE, CHAMBER, COPPERFIELD'S BOOKS IS ACTUALLY HOUSING SOME OF OUR NON-PROFITS. THEY EITHER DON'T HAVE A HOUSE OR TOO FAR TO WALK TO. SO 9:00, SATURDAY, THEY WILL BE THERE. SPEAKING OF NON-PROFITS AND STRUGGLING ONES. I DEFINITELY
AGREE WITH COUNCILMEMBER CARTER, AND I REALLY, REALLY LOVE HIS PARTICIPATION ON THE SEBASTOPOL COMMONS. GREAT GROUP. AND WE ARE WANTING TO MESSAGE, NOT OFFICIALLY, BUT MY OWN PERSPECTIVE.
WE'RE LEARNING WHAT WE'VE LEARNED IN THE PAST, BUT WE ARE LOOKING NOW TO A COLLECTIVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE CAN DO TO MEET THE NEEDS ACROSS THE BOARDS. ALL THE NON-PROFITS, THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES, EVERYBODY. JUST WANTING TO KIND OF MESSAGE THAT EVERYONE IS WELCOME. IT IS A STANDING COMMITTEE, SO PUBLIC COMMENT IS VERY MUCH APPRECIATED IN WRITING, COMMON PERSON. WE SET UP TWO SUBCOMMITTEES TO GET WORK DONE. SO WE HAVE A FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE AND A COMMUNITY ASSESSMENT SUBCOMMITTEE. SO THAT'S GOING TO KICK US INTO GEAR. GET WORK DONE BETWEEN MEETINGS.
THE NEXT MEETING IS NOVEMBER 10 FROM 2:00 TO 4:00 P.M. THEN OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED MONTHLY MEETINGS WILL ALWAYS BE AROUND THE SECOND TUESDAY OF EACH MONTH BETWEEN 2:00 AND 4:00. SO THERE YOU GO. SO I GUESS WITH THAT AND NO MORE, WE ARE ADJOURNED. ARE WE ADJOURNED? I GUESS WE'RE ADJOURNED. YAY FOR US. OKAY, THANKS, EVERYONE. [Event Concluded]