02-11-2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 1
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TRINIDAD CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2025 (LIVE/HYBRID)
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Kelly called the live-hybrid meeting to order at 6:00pm. Council members in attendance: Kelly, Tuttle, Breckenridge, Varela, Kenny. City Staff in attendance: City Manager Joe Tagliaboschi, City Clerk Gabriel Adams, Deputy Clerk Anton Souza, Grant Director Becky Price-Hall, Grant Administrator Angela Cather, City Engineer Josh Wolf, City Attorney Russ Gans. Approximately (6) participants were present by videoconference, and (14) were present live at the beginning of the meeting.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. CLOSED SESSION
1. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation (Calif. Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)) (1 Case: City of Trinidad vs. Tsurai Ancestral Society, et. al, Humb. Co. Sup. Court Case No. 180684 IV. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION
No reportable action taken in closed session.
V. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Motion (Breckenridge/Kelly) to approve the agenda as submitted. Passed unanimously.
VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – 01-14-2024 cc
Motion (Varela/Breckenridge) to approve the minutes as submitted. Passed unanimously.
VII. COUNCIL REPORTS/COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS
Tuttle: Nothing to report.
Breckenridge: Announced upcoming Animal Advisory meeting.
Varela: Nothing to report.
Kenny: Attending HCAOG meeting. Elected Chair, Vice Chair.
Kelly: Attended RREDC and LAFCO meetings. Update on CERT shoe drive and upcoming County-wide CERT/Rotary Mardi Gras event.
VIII.STAFF REPORTS – City Manager & Law Enforcement
City Manager Tagliaboschi highlighted accomplishments summarized in the staff report included in the meeting packet, including; Staff attended Tsurai Management Team meeting discussion regarding short and long-term opening of the ALM Trail. Tank and Pipeline project preparing for city-wide shut-down planned for February 18 to bring the new tank online. MOU with WCSD for Intertie is being revised and will return to the Council for review in March. Public Works attended GIS training. Civic Club Valentine event at Town Hall.
Clam Beach Run was a success. Coleman Engineering invoice for Chief Water Plant Operator services was approximately $13,200.
Resident Andrew Davis asked how water customers would know when water service was restored after the outage on February 18. City Manager Tagliaboschi recommended turning a faucet on.
HCSO Lt. McCall was unable to attend tonight and report on January stats.
IX. ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR – NO ITEMS PRESENTED
(Three (3) minute limit per Speaker unless Council approves request for extended time.) Andrew Davis - Trinidad
Regarding the bus survey that was sent out. I responded. Concerned with increased frequency. Considering the impacts of the bus moving through town every 15 minutes if that’s what they’re planning to do. 02-11-2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 2
Councilmember Jack Tuttle noted bus service rotates through town approximately once every three hours or so (not every 15 minutes).
Also, how’s the security guard situation going? I was curious if they could give us an update and if we still feel confident that this is a good expense of city funds. I don’t have an opinion.
Mayor Kelly noted it would be good to have PCS give the Council an activity update, and there has been a lot of community support for their service.
Tyler James – Trinidad
The Trinidad Bay B&B is facing foreclosure. We have faced so many challenges over the years and it’s sad to face this.
Mary Klein – Trinidad
I walk the entire town every day. Crossing Trinity Street at West is the most dangerous.
Richard Johnson – Trinidad area (on Zoom)
I was unable to hear the public speakers due to sound issues. Streetlight at the Library in Saunders Park is not operating, which is a safety issue. It may be useful to have a public discussion on annexation soon. I’m not necessarily advocating for it, but it would be good to understand the process and advantages/disadvantages.
Mayor Kelly noted LAFCO will be presenting information to the Council within the next several months.
Ana Davis – Trinidad
A sinkhole was reported off a bluff trail west of Underwood. Concerned with slides on Van Wycke and relevant conversations to turn Edwards and Hector into one-way traffic due to erosion. The community should be involved in those discussions.
Janine Volkmar – Trinidad area resident
It’s helpful to introduce themselves when speaking at the podium.
X. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Staff Activity Report – December 2024
2. Financial Statements – December 2024
3. Law Enforcement Report – January 2025.
4. Approval of GHD Task Order for STIP Funded Main Street Road Rehabilitation Project.
5. Discussion/Update on Ocean Protection Council SB1 Sea Level Rise Grant Funding Proposal for Axel Lindgren Trail Coastal Access.
Public comments:
Andrew Davis – Trinidad
Regarding item 4, another street-related item. What is the process for determining GHD to be selected for the project? Was it bid competitively? In light of the next conversation tonight (HSIP), all contracts should be paused with them. There’s a strong difference of opinion in the town with the level of safety needed, and GHD is not the best representative to do that. In my opinion they are using professional judgment that is too cautious.
City Manager Tagliaboschi defended GHD, noting they are the City’s on-call contractor for street related matters. In terms of design engineering and principals, GHD is following the professional practices they are credentialed by the State of CA to perform. In my 20 years of experience in public works, their design is what would be expected with any engineering firm. We could be take a better approach making decisions with the community moving forward, but it’s not likely we’ll get a different engineering outcome.
Breckenridge: Pointed out a cultural or aesthetic sensibility difference with GHD but see no technical reasons another company could do better, and for that reason I support number 4 as proposed.
Motion (Kenny/Breckenridge) to approve the consent agenda as submitted. Passed unanimously. 02-11-2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 3
XI. DISCUSSION/ACTION AGENDA ITEMS
1. Proclamation 2025-01; Acknowledging Public Service of Former City Manager Eli Naffah.
Mayor Kelly read the proclamation aloud. Naffah thanked the Council for the honor, noting Trinidad was his favorite City to serve. Passed unanimously.
2. Continued Discussion/Decision regarding Cycle 10 HSIP Project – Review of Pedestrian Safety Improvements.
City Engineer Josh Wolf explained that Trinidad has been actively working for over a decade on various transportation and safety improvement projects to enhance pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, as well as overall road safety. A significant focus has been on the pedestrian safety and connectivity improvements on Edwards Street which include the installation of new marked crosswalks with enhanced signage and Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) to improve visibility and driver awareness. These enhancements aim to provide a safer crossing for pedestrians, particularly vulnerable users such as school children.
However, the Hector Street crosswalk has faced recent public concern over the visual impact of the crosswalk sign system on the coastal viewshed. Some residents have expressed that the sign systems are unsightly and obstruct the coastal views, arguing that the public safety benefits do not outweigh the viewshed impacts. In response, the City staff have been working to identify potential options to minimize the visual impact while maintaining the original design intent.
A comprehensive report is included in the meeting packet providing a summary of previous City efforts over the past 10+ years to improve pedestrian safety and connectivity on Edwards Street which ultimately resulted in the crosswalks enhancements that were recently installed.
Wolf presented information starting with the Project History beginning with the 2010 failure of the Van Wycke Trail and funding opportunities secured for various safety improvements in town. HSIP Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements were described in detail for Edwards and Hector, with an overview of the RRFB’s and why and where they are installed. A map was presented showing the significance of Edwards and Hector as the City’s only non-motorized, uncontrolled pedestrian crossing between upper Trinidad and the Harbor area.
Wolf summarized public feedback has been received in support and against the crosswalk signs installed.
Support included:
• Appreciation of the sign systems and safety enhancements, especially for more vulnerable users such as children and those with disabilities.
• Observed a noticeable increase in driver yielding to pedestrians at crosswalks. • Signs show visitors where to safely cross Edwards and reminds motorists to slow down, keep their eyes on the road, and be vigilant for pedestrians.
Against included:
• Sign systems overdesigned and not necessary; no history of accidents on Edwards Street. • Signs unsightly, contrary to the fishing village “vibe” and obstruct/degrade coastal views. • Signs do not conform to City’s sign ordinance or General Plan. • Public was not made aware of the sign installation in advance.
Potential options to address concerns include:
Option 1: Replace sign panels with smaller size panels, and extend the red curb paint at the intersection with Hector Street to 20 ft, as per CA law. Estimated cost $5000.
Option 2: Lower sign on bluff side and relocate sign on Hector Street Corner. Estimated cost $3,000 to lower the signs; $15,000 to move sign with push button post.
Option 3: Replace solar panel and control cabinet. Estimated cost $10,000.
Combined options 1-3 cost would be approximately $33,000. Several figures were shared to illustrate how the changes would appear.
Wolf clearly stated it is not recommended, nor advised, to remove the RRFB enhancements and retain only the pedestrian and arrow signs, or removing the entire systems. 02-11-2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 4
Breckenridge: Did we research the cost of in-road LED lighting? Wolf apologized for not researching that option, but stated the signage would be required with in-road systems.
Tuttle: How much would cost to remove all the signs and relocate them later to more appropriate locations? Wolf estimated $5-10k.
Varela: Would it be an option to put in plastic bollards in the center of the roadway? Wolf noted the School has bulb-outs at the crosswalk. Hector does not have them, and the concern would be drivers using the shoulder to avoid them.
Kelly: I’ve read all the comments. Frustrated with the amount of time and energy spent on this in response to public safety. These signs on Edwards, in real life, don’t fit visually with the scenery. I hear from the School that they appreciate the crosswalks. One option is to re-size temporarily and re-visit in 6-9 months. The other is to remove the Hector crosswalk and leave the one at Galindo, re-sized.
Kenny: I did some extensive research and found information on the U.S. Dept of Transportation’s website warning that overuse may diminish their effectiveness. Wolf noted he referenced this in the staff report included in the packet.
Did putting a sidewalk on Edwards to Hector create a dangerous, unmarked pedestrian crossing there? Wolf stated it was not as safe as it is today.
Would GHD be interested in giving a different engineering opinion stating the flashing signs were unnecessary due to lack of accident history, distances, etc.? Wolf stated he conferred with several colleagues who supported the design. This was a long-time project where funding was awarded based on justification of the improvements needed. To walk that back now would be a field-day for another engineer challenging the City if it were involved in a lawsuit. It would be an entirely different situation had it never been approved. I cannot take liability for backing off on something we spent so long recommending. I am bound by the professional Engineer’s Act. I have a degree of ethics for the safety of the public.
Breckenridge: Would a sidewalk all the way down Edwards on the north side of the street solve the problem? At some point the sidewalks will go in, and this may be a good reason to prioritize it.
Kelly: At one point there was significant resistance for sidewalks on Edwards.
Kenny: I read the Local Road Safety Plan. At the end of the executive summary on the front, sign sensitivity in Trinidad was pointed out. It also shows that 2 comments were made about these crosswalks. The accident history from 2016-2021 was described, but nothing was identified for Edwards. The Mayor and I spoke with our insurance carrier, who is very committed to a paper trail leading to any changes made at this point. They would insure the City if another engineer recommends an alternative. They don’t want to push the boundaries, however, and would rather stick with conventional interpretations.
Kelly: The Council made a point to move ahead. Thanked Wolf for providing additional information to us.
Public comment included:
Ana Davis – Trinidad
Submitted information in writing. When the discussion about temporary speed humps took place, an overwhelming majority of people in town were opposed. The conversation shifted to conducting a traffic study, but no one considered data showing that speed humps rarely slow down motorists. No one acknowledged there no Federal pedestrian crash data below 25 mph. Instead, the former City Manager asked Councilmembers to survey Ocean Avenue and View Street residents, with the majority in favor of the installation. They were installed based on feelings rather than facts, setting a precedent with residents getting to decide on street improvements. I presented a petition signed by several residents opposing the crosswalk enhancements. You rolled out the red carpet for Ocean and View Streets, telling the rest of us that we aren’t welcome to drive down those streets. This is rift in our community that is widening, and the more people I speak with want to know more about why those streets are receiving preferential treatment. Remove the signs, or remove the speed humps.
Children are most often killed in garages, not intersections. There is zero chance of anyone being killed at a 02-11-2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 5
pedestrian intersection in Trinidad. Spoke on behalf of other residents, the impacts of the signs, and the issues they caused in the community by being installed.
Jeff Bairey – Trinidad
You are all here serving your community, and I appreciate that. Safety is important, but these signs are too big, tall, flash, and unnecessary. I sent comments by email last week, included in the packet archive. There have been no accidents or near misses on Edwards. There’s no traffic study showing it’s unsafe without the signs.
Design immunity exists for that street whether the sign are up or down. The City won’t get sued if they’re taken down. The signs violate current ordinances, and I want to hear alternatives. 10 letters want the signs removed, 4 supported them. At the last meeting, no one spoke out in favor of leaving them. I am a lawyer. I’ve hired engineers in lawsuits over issues like this with various opinions. We should get a second opinion. We need more information. Simulations shown at the January meeting were referenced to have been presented in March 2023. I could not find them there. You only saw them once in October 2023, and in December the contract was signed. The processes haven’t been followed. Just because we have the votes to take them down doesn’t mean we should. We should find a compromise, but what was presented today doesn’t give us enough negotiating ability.
Andrew Davis – Trinidad
I appreciate the presentation. No options change the issue. I’m a very important stakeholder. Nothing presented changes the issue. Property values are impacted by this project, and were not considered. The process was not followed. The Council made a mistake. It’s odd that people were against sidewalks but the City’s solution was to put up signs. This is more judgement than law. This town is exempted from prohibiting parking within 20ft of intersection. Jaywalking tickets are only issued if you’re causing harm to yourself or someone else. Crosswalks are in the worst possible locations. Most people walk down the north side of Edwards.
Tim Needham – Trinidad
If the crosswalk there before was approved by the Council, does design immunity disappear due to improvements made?
City Attorney Gans explained that exceptions for design immunity are as great as the protections are. The Council must act reasonably in whatever design is approved, even if that involves removal of traffic control devices, they’ll need a record of reasonableness.
Dick Bruce – Trinidad
I’ve lived here 48 years and not recall any serious accidents on Edwards – and certainly no fatalities. During crab season there is a lot of commercial activity. The impetus for safety improvements on Edwards goes back to the elephant in the room. The City not fixing the Van Wycke trail led to this issue. The Van Wycke Trail was and still could be a very safe passage to the harbor. The City has access to $170k for pickleball improvements, but why can’t we use some of that money to fix the trails. Take the flashing lights out of the crosswalk signs. I can only imagine what it’s like living next to those flashing lights. The trail improvements were abandoned due to Caltrans standards imposed on the grant funding.
Breckenridge: If the Van Wycke trail was repaired, you’d still have to cross Edwards Street.
Janine Volkmar – Trinidad area
I stop at every crosswalk, and all my friends laugh at me. People will learn about how to interact with crosswalks. There used to be a sign by the gas station saying “oncoming traffic has the right of way”. Our city attorney at the time said the City could be liable. People make mistakes. The sign of a big person is to acknowledge mistakes.
Eli Naffah – Crescent City
Explained how the speed humps were developed on Ocean and View. The City did not ask residents about signage.
Council comments included:
Kenny: Thanked everyone for contributing to the discussion. After listening to everything, I feel like it would have been better to have increased outreach to Edwards Street residents on this project. Signs are heavily 02-11-2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 6
regulated in our ordinances, along with views of the Harbor. We can have the crosswalk without the signs, but we can’t remove them without another engineering opinion supporting it. We should consult with another engineer, with a limited budget of $5k, to see if a different conclusion can be reached. The City insurer will require this to provide coverage if there’s an incident.
Tuttle: The City doesn’t need these signs to keep us safe. I walk down the street all the time. I propose removing all 4 signs and create an advisory committee to develop a solution to meet our unique City’s needs.
City Attorney Gans noted that government code states that if you act with reasonableness with a factual basis and evidentiary record, I would endorse what the insurance company agent says and support Kenny’s recommendation.
Breckenridge: Support Kenny’s recommendation but also would like to see the Edwards Street sidewalk concept prioritized.
Varela: Agree with fellow Council recommendations. Signs should come down. Edwards is not safe for children. There is no clear walking path to the beach. Removing signs does not solve the problem. It’s hard to go against the school, but the residents living nearby do not support them. Transportation will change rapidly in the near future, so we need to consider this in our long-term vision for Edwards. I hear about fatalities in Arcata and Eureka all the time, and we shouldn’t assume it will never happen here.
Kelly: I agree with fellow Council. I also would like to hear more alternatives. I’ve heard a lot of opposition, but I have also heard a lot of support for the crosswalk enhancements. I don’t love the signs, but I’d like to hear a second opinion.
Motion (Kenny/Varela) to seek a second opinion on the issue of whether the road can be deemed reasonably safe with the crosswalks, but without the flashing signs, with a budget limit of $7,500. Signs stay up until this is sorted out. Passed unanimously.
Motion (Tuttle/Varela) Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute necessary contract amendments with GHD for the HSIP project, up to a maximum amount of $5,000. Passed unanimously.
3. Discussion/Decision regarding Revised Draft MOU Between the City of Trinidad and the Westhaven Community Services District regarding the Water System Intertie Project.
Grant Administrator Angela Cather explained that the Intertie Project (Project), for construction of an emergency intertie connecting the City of Trinidad and Westhaven Community Services District, is funded through the Department of Water Resources (DWR) Multi-Benefit Drought Relief Program. The Project has undergone substantial changes due to design changes and a planning/design budget shortfall. Originally construction was scheduled for the summer of 2023, but CEQA, permitting, and project design are taking longer to complete than anticipated. Last year, the City and City’s engineers (GHD) worked closely with WCSD and WCSD’s engineers (PACE) to prepare a scope change that still met the grant requirements and budget. Due to the delays encountered in the planning/design phase, City staff submitted an amendment request to the funder requesting a scope change, budget adjustment, and time extension which was approved in late December 2024. As the amendment was approved, PACE resumed working on the design in January 2025, and completion of the design has a deadline of mid-April 2025 to remain on the amended (funder approved) schedule.
Since October 7, 2022, the City and WCSD have been working on this project under an Interim Memorandum of Agreement, which now needs to be revisited for finalization. Staff is presenting to the City Council an updated draft “agreement” now titled as a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Initially WCSD was to be the project lead for planning, design, and construction, while the City would be the Grant Administrator, and GHD, the Contract City Engineer, would be responsible for review and concurrence of project plans, specifications, and engineering documents or calculations provided for review. Roles and responsibilities have since changed due to budget constraints, so staff recommends the cost sharing portion of the MOU be reviewed and discussed.
Contract City Planner SHN’s responsibilities have not changed. Negotiations between the City and WCSD need to begin this month, so staff recommends Council direct staff to begin negotiations with WCSD. At Council’s discretion, a Council member can be appointed to the negotiation committee; this is not required. The negotiated MOU will come before the Council in March 2025. The MOU also requires that each district 02-11-2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 7
designate a subcommittee (minimum of three members) with the power to authorize a declaration of water emergency and to respond to operators in the event of activation of the emergency intertie. Staff recommends the City Manager, Chief Plant Operator, and City Clerk for Trinidad’s committee.
Notable Changes to the MOU:
Roles and Responsibilities: In order to make the project more cost and time efficient, roles and responsibilities have shifted. This has led to the City and City Engineer, GHD, to take on more roles and responsibilities. While roles and responsibilities for each jurisdiction are outlined in the MOU, these will be negotiated between the districts. Some items have been informally negotiated already. Roles and responsibilities are also listed in Exhibit C (items to be negotiated are flagged).
Cost Sharing: The MOU outlines what would happen if the grant budget is exceeded. Originally, Council approved on July 12, 2022, a cost share of a 50%-50% split between districts, however during negotiations WCSD proposed a cost sharing proportionally, as their system is smaller than the Trinidad water system.
WCSD based their apportionment on respective annual water sales, leading the City Council to agree to a
66.66% City: 33.33% District cost share. Staff is seeking to revisit this and is proposing a 50%-50% split.
Additionally, the City has already contributed $15,000 towards the cost overrun in the design phase, with funder approval from another grant project.
There were no public or Council comments.
Motion (Kenny/Kelly) to a) Direct staff to begin negotiations with Westhaven Community Services District, and b) designate a subcommittee with a minimum of three members with the power to authorize a declaration of emergency and to respond to operators in the event of activation of the emergency intertie. Staff recommends Council designate the City Manager, Chief Plant Operator, and City Clerk. Passed unanimously.
4. Discussion/Decision regarding Improvements to Racquet Court Through the Per Capita Grant.
Grant Administrator Angela Cather explained that the California State Department of Parks and Recreation’s Per Capita Program allocated a maximum of $177,952 in grant funding to the City of Trinidad for parks and recreation acquisition and development projects. The City Council adopted Resolution 2019-12 approving application(s) for the Per Capita Grant Fund and directed staff to develop Per Capita application packet(s) for priority eligible project(s). The City’s application for approximately $65,000 for the Racquet Court project was approved to upgrade the tennis court to include pickleball, resurfacing, and other minor improvements.
It should be noted that funding cannot be used for repairs or maintenance but can be used for projects that increase the use of the space by creating new recreational activities (capital outlay projects for recreational purposes). The addition of pickleball will fulfill this requirement. Resurfacing the court and replacement of the net, without including the additional striping for pickleball, would not qualify as those types of improvements are classified as repair and maintenance.
Current Status: Improving the racquet court, to include pickleball, has been a long-desired upgrade by many within the community. Pickleball is currently the fastest growing sport in the United States among people of all ages and abilities. Pickleball is an inclusive sport, so it’s addition to the court would increase its usage to different demographics. While the improvements to the court to include pickleball is desired, and eligible through grant funding, there have been concerns regarding potential noise. The average decibel (dBA) for a pickleball game, measured at 100 feet from the court is 70 dBA, in comparison to tennis which on average registers around 55 dBA.
While the usage of the court, with the addition of pickleball, will likely increase, the hours of operation of the court would not. Lighting to the court is not being added, so all games whether tennis or pickleball would conclude at dusk.
The project is ready to go out to bid this spring, so staff is seeking approval from the City Council to begin the bid process. The project’s completion is weather dependent, so is anticipated for late spring to early summer.
Council questions included:
02-11-2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 8
Tuttle: We could require quiet paddles to be used. Signage recommending quiet usage would be great. If we don’t use park funds for the court, can we use it for other projects in the City? Kelly: Instead of adding pickleball lines to both sides of the court, maybe we should only add it to the Trinity Street side of the court to minimize disruption.
Public comment included:
Janine Volkmar – Trinidad area
Read a letter from Trinidad resident Emily May objecting to pickleball.
Dorothy Cox – Trinidad
Live next to the tennis court for 48 years. I’ve been impacted by the noise and events at Town Hall events.
During events the tennis court is used to let kids run free. I put up with the tennis player that brings her barking dogs every day. I read letters about how pickleball will create lines of people to use the court. I’d rather not have to deal with that. Only a few houses on Ocean are impacted by the sounds of Town Hall and the tennis court. Big, fat, no for pickleball for me. I don’t mind tennis, but no pickleball.
Aaron Hakenen – Trinidad (video)
Would be interesting to put some tape down with pickleball lines and do a trial period notifying residents to come out, listen, and provide feedback. It will be hard to undo it after the lines are painted.
Several additional written public comments were received, included in the public meeting packet archive.
Council comments included:
Breckenridge: Since there are many courts around the County for pickleball, I’d rather see the money used elsewhere.
Kelly: I came into this discussion in support of the addition, but now agree with Breckenridge. I wouldn’t enjoy it if I knew I was disturbing someone’s peace.
Kenny: Playing devil’s advocate here, it’s a mixed-use neighborhood. We have dogs barking, fire sirens, and a wide variety of human activity. I’m sympathetic to pickleball players. The loudest sound in our area is the school children. We have to make accommodations for sound. I’m torn. I read all the comments. I’m aware of all the litigation happening in the big cities, where several courts are in play at once. We have one court on half the tennis court and can give it a try. If we don’t like it, we can take down the signs and net.
Grant Director Becky Price-Hall noted that expenses so far that have gone towards this project will not be reimbursable if the project isn’t constructed.
City Clerk Adams summarized how the court resurfacing project ended up in the Per Capita Grant Funding framework, and that the sport’s popularity has increased so much over the years that communities are now able to identify possible impacts that were not well known 5-6 years ago.
Grant Administrator Cather noted the grant funds do not expire for several years.
Motion (Tuttle/Kelly) to continue this discussion to a future meeting after taking steps to perform a trial period (test) after lines are taped down and the public is able to weigh in on their experience/impacts. Passed unanimoulsly.
5. Discussion/Decision regarding Water Advisory Committee Status.
City Manager Tagliaboschi explained that the Water Advisory Committee ( WAC) was stood up during the drought , but not specifically as a drought related purpose.
The May 11, 2021, Resolution Stated the purpose for the WAC as:
1) To evaluate water needs of the city
2) Analyze potential options of water sources and Infrastructure 3) Assist the Council in pursuing water related opportunities including funding. 02-11-2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 9
There were also four (4) specific objectives for this WAC to achieve while the committee was active:
1) Provide a public forum to address and discuss water concerns and solutions. 2) Assist the City Manager and Public Works department in addressing water related issues. 3) Make balanced and informed recommendations to the City Council on ways to improve the supply of water. 4) Report regularly to the Council.
On March 9,2021 the Council discussed forming a WAC, Council member Davies proposed “A Water Resiliency Committee be formed to address and plan for improvements to our existing water system that will make our community more resilient to drought.” Ultimately the term “Water Advisory Committee” was chosen as it “seems to have a wide scope that can encompass a broad range of water issues.” There was some discussion as well, in early January 2021 about a “Water Shortage Contingency Plan” so while WAC was not drought specific discussing, planning, and executing methods and programs for drought contingency, and water shortage was at the front of these discussions.
Much has been accomplished since 2021 with water studies and water infrastructure, and an argument can be made that while the stated purpose that formed the WAC are still important, most of the topics and tasks on that list have been addressed with some degree of success. There has been an evolution by Pacific Water Associates of the Luffenhotltz Creek Watershed and the conclusion of the ability of the watershed to deliver enough water for the city needs, even during times of drought, and seasonal dry periods.
The Grants Team secured a grant to construct a new 350K Gallon Stainless Steel Water tank and replaced approx. 7500 liner feet of waterline and a installed a new Pressure Relief Valve Pit on Edwards Street.
This includes new water line from the water treatment plant to the new tank. These water lines were chosen for replacement as they had been identified as the mostly likely to fail, and/or be prone to leaking due to age and pipeline material.
A project with Westhaven Water District is currently underway that will include an intertie between the two water systems. A pump station and waterline that connects both communities in the case of an emergency. This new system will allow for connectivity with Westhaven WSD to provide additional capacity should the need arise in case of water shortage or other emergency needs.
The same claims could be made for obtaining of the objectives of the WAC. The City Council has discussed water in multiple meetings with a variety of topics and the current Council has indicated those discussions will continue. The Council continues to encourage staff to pursue, and support Water and Water Related projects, and grant funding. Reports from WAC meetings were of sparse attendance and some difficulty scheduling meetings that allowed for a WAC quorum.
If Council decides that WAC should be allowed to sunset at this time, there could be future WAC Ad Hoc committee needs, and the committee could be stood up again should the Council agree on that need in the future.
Council comments included:
Kelly: We believe WAC served its purpose. Both Kenny and I served on the committee, and felt most of our topics were long-term strategic and were better handled by the Council. As Chair of the committee, I’m recommending sunsetting it.
Kenny: The drought wasn’t the only reason for the committee, but it was certainly an animating factor. I agree with Kelly that it’s time to sunset the committee. Disbanding the committee doesn’t mean the Council is off the hook from difficult future water discussions.
Public comment included:
Patti Fleschner – Trinidad Area
I think the committee should endure. There was a lot of emotion during the Trinidad Rancheria Hotel water needs discussion. The Trinidad Rancheria has been an important partner in our water district. They’ll go 02-11-2025 City Council Meeting Minutes Page 10
forward with their plans regardless of how the City feels. The committee did a lot of great research and helped relieve the Council of those tasks.
Aaron Hakenen – Trinidad (video)
If you are going to disband the committee, I heard Kelly state there are long-range issues that the Council needs to discuss and I’ll hold you accountable for that. The Council needs to make the time, have the bandwidth, and have the conversations.
Paula Levine – Trinidad area
The tasks were not accomplished. We need an active WAC. The Council needs more community outreach and involvement. My experience is that the City was traumatized by the meetings held discussing Humboldt Bay Water. HARP is still active, but 3-years have passed. I’m hopeful but I won’t be surprised if the Council kicks the can down the road, as it has for decades. The issue of Humboldt Bay Water connection comes up periodically during droughts. It could have been done much more affordably years ago.
Additional Council comments included:
Breckenridge: Makes sense to have the water issues come directly before the Council.
Motion (Kenny/Kelly) to sunset the Water Advisory Committee without prejudice, reinstate it in the future if needed, with the Council fully open to handling long-range planning of the City’s water needs. Passed unanimously.
6. Discussion/Decision to Develop Guidelines or a Formal Policy to Submit Future Agenda Items to the Council for Consideration.
Mayor Kelly explained that the Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tem meet weekly with the City Manager, discuss activity based on input, and prioritize the agenda. If another Councilmember suggests a discussion topic and it doesn’t get prioritized, that member can ask it be put to a formal vote on a future agenda.
Public comment included:
Aaron Hakenen – Trinidad (video)
Are we solving an issue that needs to be solved? The Council represents the City. I want to make sure that citizen comments override a Council’s majority vote. If the majority of residents want to raise a discussion topic but the Council doesn’t, we have an issue.
Council comments included:
Kenny: That goes without saying. Kelly agreed, it would be hard to ignore the public.
Motion (Kenny/Kelly) to adopt that the Mayor and Mayor Pro-Tem meet weekly with the City Manager, discuss activity based on input, and prioritize the agenda. If another Councilmember suggests a discussion topic and it doesn’t get prioritized, the Mayor will note this in the monthly Council report and it be put to a formal vote on the next agenda. Passed unanimously.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
- A/V System improvements (Kelly)
- Annexation (Kelly)
- Emergency Intertie with Rancheria, when they connect with Humboldt Bay Municipal Water. (Tuttle) ADJOURNMENT: 9:55pm.
Submitted by: Approved by:
_____________________________ _____________________________ Gabriel Adams Cheryl Kelly
Trinidad City Clerk Mayor