Capitola City Council 09/10/2026

Good evening. Welcome to this regularly scheduled meeting, September 10th, 2026, 6 PM start time. May I have a roll call? >> Council member Clark >> here. >> Council member Orbach >> here. Westman >> here. >> Vice Mayor Jensen >> here. >> Mayor Morgan >> here. >> Uh yeah, just uh thank you for just a second. Um uh before we move forward this evening, I would like to just take a moment to reflect on tomorrow's anniversary of September 11th of 2001. 25 years ago, our country experienced the tragedy that took the lives of 2,977 people that forever changed the countless families and communities. As we remember those we lost, let us also remember the incredible courage of our first responders and for the way our c our country and our communities came together in the days that followed. I would like to ask the mayor if we could just take a moment of silence to honor and remembrance of them. >> Thank you. No better time to start the pledge of allegiance. Would you all join? 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. Any additions or deletions? >> Staff recommends pulling item 8E from tonight's agenda. >> Great. Thank you. >> AE has been pulled. We'll bring us down to proclamations or presentations. We have a proclamation recognizing September 2026 as childhood cancer awareness month. Um, this will be presented to Jordan Thorp, the president of Jacob's Heart Board. Um, I'll do a quick overview of the proclamation. Oops, we have a couple. So, childhood uh cancer awareness month each year 19.2 Two in every 100,000 children in our community will be diagnosed with cancer. Cancer remains the leading cause of death by disease among children. Jacob's Heart has been keeping medically fragile children and families housed, fed, and emotionally supported. Jacob's Heart holds the memories and honors the legacies of hundreds of children of of our local community who have been lost to cancer. It's important for all Capitol City residents to recognize the impact of pediatric cancer on families within our community and honor the children in our community whose lives have been cut short by cancer. So, I'm Marggo Morgan, the mayor of city of Capola, hereby declare September 2026 childhood cancer awareness month in the city of Capola and here do by honor Jacob's Heart Children's Cancer Support Services for the outstanding support to our community and acknowledge the organization's contributions to childhood cancer awareness month. So, I will present this proclamation. Okay. that once or twice. >> All right. Good evening, mayor, city council members. My name is Jordan Vorp. I'm the board president for Jacob's Heart Children's Cancer Support Services. On behalf of Jacob's Heart and the kiddos and families we serve, we would like to thank you for your recognition of September as childhood cancer awareness month and for standing alongside families in our community who are facing childhood cancer. When a family hears the word words, your child has cancer, life suddenly stops. At Jacob's Heart, we walk alongside families from the moment of diagnosis and throughout their entire journey. Our families are navigating so much more than medical treatment. They may be traveling hours for work, specialized care, or even missing work to be at their child's bedside, struggling to put food on the table, keeping the lights on, and deciding between medical care or keeping a roof over their family's head. What I hope you remember tonight is that childhood cancer does not just affect one child. It impacts an entire family. It impacts an entire community. While we can't single-handedly eliminate childhood cancer, we can stand with our families in solidarity, provide support, and ensure they are not alone. By issuing this proclamation, Capola is helping us bring greater visibility to childhood cancer and most importantly showing the local families that their community sees them, remembers them, and stands with them. Thank you for going gold and recognizing Childhood Cancer Awareness Month and standing with the families of Jacob's Heart. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> Would it be possible to get a picture with you all? Wonderful. you volunteering for me. Thank you. >> All right. Wonderful. Great. Thank you so much. Our next uh presentation is a proclamation honoring the Santa Cruz Regional 911 dispatchers. I'll hand it over to our chief. Good evening, Mayor Morgan and city council. Thank you. We're gonna This is all-encompassing um proclamation as well as an award, life-saving award from excuse me, from Red Cross. So, I'm actually going to switch gears and we're going to start with the Red Cross component of it. So, um on March 31st, an 11-month-old infant experienced a life-threatening medical emergency in the Opal Cliffs area. The successful response was the result of an exceptional coordination between emergency dispatchers who are here this evening and the capital police personnel. So, I'd like to welcome up Sergeant Scott Newton. Thank you, Capital PD family, for coming. And then I'm going to introduce Dave with the Red Cross to do the Red Cross component of this acknowledgement. >> Hi everyone. Thank you for inviting the American Red Cross to be here tonight. I am Dave Seabourg. and the there we go the interim executive director of our central coast chapter and it's my honor tonight to present one of our distinguished life-saving awards to Sergeant Scott Newton of the Capitol Police Department. So this award is for individuals who take action during an emergency to either save or sustain a life. Um, this is one of our one of the special moments we get to have with American Red Cross. And we hope this story inspires everyone in the room to really get trained in CPR and first aid because you do not know when someone might need your help. And we are all capable of learning this training and doing the hard part, which is stepping in and taking action when it happens. Um, and with that, on behalf of the American Red Cross, we really would we've we've talked a lot about your story. We would like to recognize you with the certificate of extraordinary personal action to Sergeant Scott Newton for your service. Thank you so much. So, another really important component of something like this that takes place are our dispatchers. So when somebody calls in to 911, there's an entire process that that takes place where the call then is sent to an officer. And in this instance, I'd like to invite up our dispatchers that were working um during this event. You don't mind? Don't be shy. This is a nice crowd. So our dispatchers play a very critical role. Our dispatch would play a very critical role in coordinating our response. And in this instance, and I guess it's a statement for me about my age, but I've been able to watch this profession move into a place where they're actually able to see our GPS locations and send us calls for service because we're simply in the area. So, some of you who are Capitol residents may wonder, well, why was Sergeant Newton on Opal Cliff? So, it's not that far from the city and we we util they utilize the tools that they have at their dispense to um send the closest unit, especially when something like this is taking place. So, using their ability to monitor the off the officer's GPS location, the dispatchers were able to recognize the Capitol officers were the closest available law enforcement resource despite the incident occurring outside of Capitol's jurisdiction. Their situational awareness and quick coordination helped to get our officers to the scene without delay. Each individual demonstrated exceptional professionalism and teamwork. Their combined efforts helped to ensure the right resources arrived quickly and ultimately contributed to saving the infant's life. So, we have a call taker, we have an a dispatcher that's speaking to the officer. This is a complete team effort here. And so oftent times they're sitting up in a obscure location and they don't always even always get closure when a critical incident like this takes place. So we just want to make sure that we're acknowledging them and Mayor Morgan this is your cue for the proclamation. >> Thank you for that and thank you everybody standing up with us. Um it's a remarkable remarkable collaboration. Um, so honoring the 911 dispatchers on um I'll kind of re rest reate. On March 31st at 2026, the Santa Cruz Regional 911 dispatchers responded to a critical incident involving an 11-month-old infant, demonstrating exceptional professionalism, composure, and dedication under extremely time-sensitive circumstances. Kim Perez working as a call taker and sheriff office radio dispatcher demonstrated exceptional efficiency by creating the emergency call in approximately 35 seconds. Paula Zapeda working as the EMD dispatcher provided reassurance and critical support to the caller while ensuring that the caller understood help was coming. Jacob Mones working as Capitol Police Department dispatcher demonstrated outstanding situational awareness and recognizing that Capitol Police Department patrol units were already in proximity of the incident and immediately alerted those officers. The coordination the coordinated actions of Kim Perez Pala and Jacob Munes exemplify the vital role of emergency dispatchers in protecting life and supporting first responders. The city of Capola recognizes that emergency dispatchers frequently serve as the first point of contact for individuals experiencing some of the most frightening and urgent moment of their lives. So, thank you all to that. Um, I, Mayor Marggo Morgan of the city of Capitol, recognize and commend all three of you of the Santa Cruz Regional 911 for their exemplary professionalism, teamwork, and dedication during this critical incident. and I extend the city's sincere appreciation for your efforts to protect and preserve the lives of those that live here. So, thank you so much. What an amazing job. >> Photo photo up. Thank you guys. All right. Thank you all for showing up tonight. Great crew. We have our item four, report on closed session. >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. The city council met in closed session to discuss the one item on the closed session agenda. Deliberation occurred, direction was provided, and no reportable action was taken. That concludes my report. >> Great. Thank you. Additional materials for this evening. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. We have quite a few additional materials this evening, so bear with me a moment as we go through them. For item six, city received one email and one piece of correspondence that was included in the agenda packet. For item 8A, four emails and one staff memorandum with an updated version of the September 3rd special meeting minutes was received after publication of the agenda packet. For item 8B, one email, one staff memorandum with an updated version of the elections code report was received after publication of the agenda packet. For item 8E, four emails were received after publication of the agenda packet. One was received just before the meeting started is available for public review online but not in the back of the room because it missed the cut off for the printed packet. For item 9B, one email was received after publication. For item 9 C, a staff memorandum with updated information and one email was received. For item 9D, three emails were received after publication of the packet. And item 9E, two emails were received after publication of the agenda packet. All materials are available for public review online and all or all materials with the exception of the one email for item AE are available in the back of the room for public review. Great. Thank you. We'll take us to oral communications. I just would like to note that we have updated our equipment here. So if you do choose to line up this evening, I would recommend lining up on that side of the room just to avoid any noggin mish. Hi, my name is Goran Kloppich. I'm former security guard of Zelda on the beach. I have a question. Does anybody uh can somebody provide me information how I can get uh uh hold of uh Andro Deli? He's the pre previous chief. He speaks pretty well English. you know, when I was telling him about some cocaine trafficking that was happening back in the day, I had uh deputies uh uh sometimes showing up uh and harassing me here in Capitol, which will maybe result in a lawsuit against the city of Capitol. I can go wherever that I want. I can say whatever I want. I'm protected protected by the first amendment uh of United States of America. Uh its freedom of speech. If I want to say that uh there's some illegal drug distribution going on and I know about it, I can say that. Even if it means uh maybe that I'm arrested or it has consequences in court, if I have to appear in court, I will do that. I know where the court building is. I like to go to court. I was an officer in the army one time. I believe in certain values. Thank you very much. God bless you. And by the way, we lost we lost 40,000 pe 40,000 people in the New York because we were not watching out for al-Qaeda on PLO. >> Thank you. >> I welcome not as tall as the others. Good evening everyone. Thank you for your time today. I'm Dr. Victoria Travis, the national program director for Med Project USA. Med Project USA is the organization approved by Cal Recycle to implement the state drug and sharps takeback programs. I'm here today to clarify certain presented information that was presented to the city council last week concerning the expansion of state programs due to the sunset of the ordinance. Med Project has a clear transition plan, a long history of implementation, and a strong commitment to make this a successful transition to the state programs. Capitol residents will continue to have robust and free takeback services with the state program. The sunset of capital's ordinance does not end producer funded medicine or sharps takeback services for cal uh capital residents. Med Project has a robust plan that provides for transitioning the capital of services to the statewide programs and we have already successfully completed this transition in the unincorporated areas of Santa Cruz County and in the city of Santa Cruz. All participating med project uh medication dropbox sites in these two jurisdictions were successfully transitioned into the state program without interruption in services. Can you hear me? Okay. We're having a hard time. >> Oh, I'm sorry. It sounds loud to me. Is that better? Okay. Residents continue to have access to free takeback services funded by pharmaceutical producers. The practical change is primarily which jurisdiction governs the services. Is this okay? Okay. Access for residents to drug takeback services will remain very similar, if not the same. Med Project will transition eligible existing medication dropboxes like the one that you might see on your way outside behind me uh into the statewide covered drugs program. Residents will continue to have free access to drop off their unwanted medications and secure dropboxes through or through prepaid mailback services. Capola residents will also continue to have access to free sharps disposal services through the state sharps mailback program. The two sharps dropboxes in Capola will be replaced with free sharps mailback packages that are issued to residents when they purchase or are dispensed covered sharps products. Each free sharps mailback package includes a sharps container and prepaid return packaging. Residents can also access Sharps mailbox services through the Med Project website and toll-free call center. This is a highly utilized service in the state program that has served over 35 million California residents since 2022. Uh during 2024 and 2025, the state programs distributed over 518,000 sharps mailback packages to residents and collected over 920,000 lbs of household sharps waste. I hope this clarifies the transition plan for Capola and I'm open to any questions. Thank you. >> Thank you. Hi, welcome. >> Hello. >> Good evening everyone and thank you for your time. My name is Jesse Miles. I'm with the law firm Beverage and Diamond and outside council for Med Project LLC. We respectfully request that the council not amend chapter 8.4 4 of the Capitol Municipal Code that it rescend urgency ordinance 1077 and recognize the transition to the state pharmaceutical and sharps waste stewardship program. Please consider Beverage and Diamond's September 9th letter along with Med Project USA's companion letter addressing service continuity for additional detail on these subjects. I will now highlight four points from Beverage and Diamond's letter for the council's consideration. First, the urgency ordinance is invalid because the city did not establish the immediate public health necessity required by California Government Code section 36937. The city had 10 years notice for the September 8th sunset, but acted only 5 days before it. The city's report states that Santa Cruz County staff contacted the city in late August and encouraged action to address the 2016 ordinance's sunset. On September 2nd, Med Project sent the city a letter confirming the services would continue in order to rebut the city's interrupted service concerns. The next afternoon, Med Project's national program director and lead director of legal and compliance spoke with the city manager and public works director, further assuring this continuity. Yet, the special meeting minutes do not reflect any discussion of or reference to Med Project Service continuity asurances before the council voted. Thus, the city's 11th hour attempts to address a 10-year-old sunset provision and the absence of program continuity concerns do not constitute a public health necessity. Second, California's SB212 independently preempts the urgency ordinance. SB212 preempts local programs by ordinances effective on or after April 18th, 2018. Ordinance 1077 became effective immediately, more than 8 years after SB212's preeemption date. This preempted ordinance did not simply remove a sunset provision. It created a stewardship program that extends in perpetuity rather than the 2016 ordinances contemplated tenure expiration. Third, because the or urgency ordinance did not lawfully remove the 2016 ordinance sunset provision, the 2016 ordinance sunset on September 8th. Attempts to amend chapter 8.4 would attempt to resurrect the 2016 ordinance entirely and extend it indefinitely. Finally, SB212 would also preempt any additional efforts to amend chapter 8.4 of the Capitol Municipal Code because it would also uh go past the preeemption date more than 8 years after SB212's preeemption. In conclusion, we respectfully ask the council not to further amend 8.4 the municipal code, resend the urgency ordinance, and recognize SB212's transition that Dr. Travis described. Thank you again for your time. Thank you. >> Hi. Welcome. >> Hi. I just want to make sure we're on general comment, not on the agenda. Right. >> Correct. >> Okay. You're not going to hear this from me often, but I want to say thank you. I know you always hear me arguing about something, but I want to say thank you. I think it I want to believe Jessica Khan. My neighbor Craig Curtis sent out a email about maybe four or five days ago about a little safety hazard in front of New Brighton Middle School. Some sidewalk that was collapsing. He sent out the email the next day. Somebody came out and fixed it. I believe it was Capitol Public Works that came out. That's why I want to say thank you, Jessica, because I know SoCal Creek Water District, he sent out an email to New Brighton Middle School, Capitol Public Works, and um SoCal Creek Water District. It was fixed the next day after he sent out the email. So awesome job. Thank you. I appreciate that. Jessica, if you were involved with that, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other public comment? >> Hi, welcome. >> Hi, good evening. >> Good evening everyone. I'm Megan Morrisy and tonight I'm here representing Capola Cares and I'm just basically making an announcement. Um, so this year, Capola Cares is partnering with the Capola SoCal Chamber of Commerce to put on the Capola City Council candidate forum, which is going to be held on Wednesday, October 7th at 6 PM right here in these chambers. Um, we're uh Jodie Beal from Lookout Santa Cruz will be the moderator and we've been working with her um and her team, which has been fabulous. Um, and all of the candidates have been notified and are planning to attend. So, that's good news. Um, and the last thing I want to announce is that if residents want to submit questions for the forum, we're going to be taking questions in advance of the forum and then kind of, you know, uh, seeing what most of the questions are about and really using that information to help formulate questions for the actual forum. Um, and the email address is Capitol Carares950110gmail.com. And the um flyer that I just passed out to everyone is going to be um used for marketing the event and will be displayed by uh Lookout and the city and um our own website and the chamber's website and um hopefully we'll get this out all over town in the uh in the next couple of weeks. Okay. Thank you very much. Great. Thank you. Would anyone else wish to speak? All right, we'll close public comment. Item seven, we'll start with staff comments. So, usually this is the part of the meeting where I give you guys updates about some of the daily goings on, municipal business, maybe some update on a project. Um, today I'm going to give you a different kind of update. Um, this is a personal update and I just wanted to take a moment to announce to the community and council and to staff that I'm going to be retiring in December. It has been an extraordinary honor to serve this community for nearly two decades. Challenges we faced overcome together as a city team have shaped me personally, professionally, and I'll always be grateful for the experiences and the people who've made this journey meaningful. had the privilege of working with more than 16 different city council members through eight election cycles. It's never a job I thought I would do this long. I've grown so much and I appreciate each and every one of you. So, thank you. Details will be coming out shortly. >> Thank you. >> Any other staff comments? All right, we'll go to council comments. >> I'd like to announce the uh art and wine festival coming up this weekend put on by the city and the chamber. Um Saturday and Sunday. There'll be some road closures. Should be a lot of fun as usual. And along with that, Saturday at 6:30 we're going to do the Monterey Avenue art project that's on the railing. Um that'll be at again 6:30 starting at the bottom and we'll have a little ceremony and display it for everyone. So hopefully everybody will come. Thank you. >> Hi everyone. Good evening. Um first I'd like to say that I am sad to hear the news um from our city manager. Uh and I want to thank him for the 16 17 I don't know 20 years of service to the city of Capola. we are really losing a lot of institutional knowledge with his um departure. Um but I but I know this council will choose um and decide um collectively to move forward in a way that would make sense for the city. Um so thank you for your service uh Jamie. And um the other shout out I'd like to give is to our public works team and director Khan. Um I am watching the evolution of 41st Avenue as it is getting repaved and repainted. It looks great. I can't wait for the additional bike delineators to go in so people can't hop from, you know, our uh 41st off ramp to then on-ramp back onto the freeway, that shortcut. Um so, thank you for all the hard work. >> I would like to reiterate uh Council Member Orbach's comments. Um, it's been a pleasure to work with you, Jamie, and um, I wish you all the best in whatever happens in the future. And having being a retired city manager, I have to say you're going to love it. >> Yeah, echo the congratulations to you um, as you move on to uh, retirement or your next um, opportunities. Um, with that um, just one quick update. Um, I attended the RTC meeting um this last week um where our biggest item is that we approved the response to the um Santa Cruz County uh grand jury. Um and so that response was formalized, approved by the commission and then um will be forwarded and there's been news uh media coverage about that. That was our biggest item on the agenda for that u meeting and we have nothing else to report. Thank you. Joe, you took my two notices, but yes, come on out for a great weekend. Um, starting with art and wine, so that's great. Um, yeah, I'll say thank you, Jamie, for your your work for the city. Um, I've got to work with you for six years and that's pretty remarkable. and was mayor twice. So, that was really helpful to have you kind of steward and um your endless knowledge of the city and of the weather will, you know, we'll live live on forever here. So, I I'm really excited for you and congratulations. We'll miss you though. Thank you. All right, consent. As uh we heard earlier, we will be pulling item 8E off the consent. So, we're looking for um a motion. These can all be enacted in one. >> I have a comment about one of the items that I was wondering if I could address first >> please. Yeah. >> Um on 8D um it seemed like it was a very long uh staff report about a lot of great things going on at the Brisbane Park. Um it as I read the staff report um it came back and talked about maybe in September, October that um there'll be the public art display will be coming forward to the council for approval. I was just wondering at that time, could we maybe refresh the staff report and have a little bit more in-depth discussion about the good things that are going on at Rispen Park and stuff like that. So, I don't want to pull the item tonight. You know, we can move forward, but just I thought maybe this way we could celebrate some of the progress we're making there at that time if that's fine. So, I don't know if I need a second to have that move forward, but I don't need to pull the item. >> Great. Then I will move items 8A and 8 D. >> I'll second it. One point of clarification. Staff's recommendation was not to pull item. >> It was to continue it, right? >> Oh, sorry. We're continuing. >> Yeah. >> It would not be discussed further this evening. >> So, we'll do that as a separate motion >> or take no action. >> No, because staff already continued it. >> Okay. So, we have a first and a second. Sorry. Uh, all those in favor? I >> I >> All right. 98 Capitala Warf status update. >> We have director. Thank you. Katie, I'm reading slides. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Before you tonight, I have an update on the Capitol Warf. Next slide, please. Um, so the background is back in 2023, we experienced severe storms and major damage to our warf. Following that, the city council um in early 2024 um gave us permission to demo the two structures out there, the Fishing and Warf House, and to initiate a long-term planning project for a master plan for the Wararf. In spring of 2024, we came back with seven options which range from have nothing out there, just open space to uh bring back what we had previously with a restaurant and fishing concession and a lot of different ideas in between. Um at that meeting, the council directed staff to do a hybrid approach of the the restriction. and there was uh a lot of support for the marketplace idea, an open marketplace, but also um building in the fishing concession into that marketplace. So, this past April, we published um an RFP. We had the warf master plan which showed that marketplace with fishing concession. We released the RFP. We um had it open through July, the end of July. And at that point, we had only had one letter of interest, so we extended it an extra month knowing that August is probably the most challenging time for restaurants that want to be on a warf to respond. Um, but however, and there was many uh notices sent to restaurants up and down the California coast that are on warfs, but the end result was one letter of interest, but due to timing, it it's not a good time for this. It's a local uh restaurant tier. So, with that, I'm here tonight to discuss what's next. Um, in the staff report, there are four options laid out, and there were a lot more details to these options that we'll be uh requesting feedback on, but the first is uh keeping the existing uh fishing concession and then not having a food and beverage out there. The second is a fishing concession along with a smallcale food and beverage concession or concessions. We'll be asking for direction on that. Option three is the fishing smallcale food and bev and then um with a limited lease term and then extending the current RFP for the master plan. Um and then option four is kind of whatever the council decides tonight. It can be any variation. Um and if we can go to the next slide. So within each of these options there's considerations. If you were to go with option one, we'd also want feedback on a public restroom out there and also the marine rescue watercraft storage. That's the jet ski for our lifeguards. Um and then within option number two, we would add to that those two considerations as well as if you were to choose a um smallcale concession. We'd like to know if that should be mobile, a prefab building, open to either, what the lease duration would be, and are we talking about one, two, three? And then from there under option three it's the same considerations but we wouldn't be looking for food feedback on a permanent restroom or storage space because that is part of the current RFP. So um next slide please. So tonight we're simply looking for directions on next steps for the warf. And with that, I can um answer any questions you may have and we can bring back that last slide when you're discussing. But >> thank you. You want to start with questions? >> I don't have any questions at this time. Thank you. >> Yeah. Um thank you Katie for the uh presentation. Um just a couple questions as we looked at these options. Um I've heard before about late weight load restrictions on the warf. Um are there any updates on those or how do those play into some of these factors? >> There are weight restrictions on the wararf. Um that has played into having mobile vendors such as uh food trucks out on the wararf. Um the wararf can sustain more weight in terms of another building out there. But when we had mobile vendors and they were um just for the celebration, the the couple celebrations we had out there, we had to make sure whenever we had a mobile vendor that they were within the weight limit and it was really technical. There was an idea at one point floated of um rotating mobile vendors, but it's just too hard to schedule that way. So there would be weight limitations. >> Perfect. And then um can you just give an overview on um how the outreach has been like to the BIA around these different options? We consulted with them on those. >> So we um did extensive outreach during the first phase of this. There was a survey that went out to over a thousand people. um this item with the different options went to all of our commissions locally and the BIA at that point um was brought up to speed on this as well. more recently since publishing this staff report. Um I have not reached out to the BIA directly on this the update to the or >> if we um I'm sorry could you guys bring up that slide again with the options? I had a question. Sorry I think it's option three. Um so like on option three where we have mobile or prefab lease duration would you be looking also for like when we talk about prefab like if that's three and let's say they all were going to I don't want to pick a business that will affect um somebody just sells um hamburgers um only um you know what impact would that would the BIA have some push back on like does that take away some of their business or if they were selling if it was a taco van uh you taco Mexican food vendor or different type thing. How is that going to get played into making sure we're not pulling people away from other businesses or have you contemplating that yet? >> We would definitely engage with the BIA and the local businesses. Um, at one point we had looked at whether or not we could give a preference to local businesses and we're not able to do that uh for legal reasons, but we would definitely um have report to them on what where we're headed in this direction and they would of course be able to um submit and participate in anything that any direction we got from the council tonight if it included food and bev. >> All right. Thank you. And um just one more um regarding the bathroom uh out there which I think is definitely needed whatever option we get to um from you know the other council members but um we still have we have plumbing that's out there for future bathroom. Is that correct? I'm seeing a great nod from Jessica. Thank you. Um and then um we were credited back the bathroom that we were originally going to have in that project. um that was rem removed from the scope so as a credit back. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> Thank you. Um those are all my questions I have at this time. Thank you. >> Questions? >> Yes. Could we go back to the one, two, three, and four slide? So looking at option one, it says restroom. marine rescue watercraft storage and if we go to any of the other options is that not going to be included. >> Oh, so in option two the MRWS is the marine rescue watercraft storage >> not in. >> So in the third one we did not include that um because if we're extending the RFP for a year that was that could be part of a proposal. However, you have the discretion to tell us that you'd like it to come back and have that incorporated. We would just have to update our RFP for the long-term plan. >> Great. And the last one, clarifying the RFP for one year that is only for concessions or the restaurant here or is it for the fishing concession we have out there already? Um, so the RFP would be for the smallcale food and bev and depending on the lease terms of the fishing concession. I don't know when that goes back out to RFP, but I think the um this would be for the purposes of this slide. It's for the food and beverage. >> Thanks for clarifying that. And I I'm I'm a little confused. Um, so in option three, it says extend current RFP for one year. So I was assuming that was the RFP for the restaurant marketplace. That that's that's not the RFP for a small food. >> No. So that extend current RFP for one year is for the master plan. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So that that's the Yeah. the marketplace with fishing concession. Sorry, I know there are costs associated with us building the restroom and marine rescue watercraft storage. If we were to so and so option four, could that be just extending the RFP and kind of waiting to see if there are interested parties so that we could do this more holistically in a way that uh won't cost us a ton of money? Yes, you could simply extend the RFP. And I want to clarify that with the um restrooms and the MRWs, we don't have that funding right now, like all the funding right now. So, we would then look for partners for grant money if if we were directed. That would be the next step for those. >> So, that that would be a pivot from the prior decision to go out with an RFP for a restaurant, right? >> Yes. You could definitely direct staff to just extend the RFP for one another year. >> Great. >> Or any duration that you so choose. >> Uh just one clarifying just when we're discussing mobile verse prefab. Mobile is in and out one day kind of thing and prefab is sort of like the the structures we have out there right now for boat and bait. >> Yes. Um well that it can be multiple things. So the mobile could be a mobile food truck if it meets the weight limits. Um you also sometimes will see mobile uh like trailers that are pulled out and they set up food with the back of the trailer being some type of food concession. Um, and then the idea between the for the less expensive structures, it could be anything from a shipping container that's modified um or similar to the structures we have out there today, which um was a um less expensive alternative to a main building, but it it could come in different formats. So if we were to go the prefab route hypothetically, the city would then incur the cost of that unit, the prefab unit or would that be that that's open for discussion. So that could be part of um so once we get direction from the council this evening, we would then set up another RFP for the shortterm uh short-term or long-term smaller less expensive concessions and that would be part of this. Okay, thank you. Any other questions? All right, we'll take this out to public comment. If you wish to speak, please watch your head and you'll have three minutes. Good evening, Mayor Morgan, Vice Mayor Jensen, and members of city council. I am respectfully inquiring about the possibility of installing a public restroom at the end of the capitol, as well as exploring the development of allocation or allocation of permanent buildings that could serve as a workspace facility in the area. The Capitol Warf is a cherished community asset and a major draw for both residents and com visitors. Adding a restroom at the far end of the warf would greatly improve public convenience, accessibility, and overall visitor experience, particularly for those who spend extended time fishing, walking, or enjoying the views. In addition, we are interested in learning whether the city has considered permanent buildings for structures on the warf that could provide dedicated workspace such as facilities. Such facilities could support existing local businesses including capital of boat and bay and would also be highly beneficial to contributing to the long-term vitality of the waterfront. Sorry, I'm nervous. As one possible way to help offset cost associated with these improvements, the city might consider organizing a periodic popup event, something along the lines of a wonderful Warfar walk or similar gatherings. Vendors could be charged a modest fee to participate, generating revenue while creating a lively community event that further showcases the warf. Thank you for your time and for your continued service to this capital. >> Thank you. Would anybody else like to speak? Okay, seeing none, we'll bring it back to council um for some direction. Would you like to start? >> Sure. I'd appreciate having the chart back up. We all need >> We all need guidance. >> Thank you. Well, for me, I think it's important that um uh there be some sort of food uh concession out on the warf, I think that's that's something that we're missing. Um I I guess I should I think if we're going to do um that kind of RFP and ask for someone to come out there, we would want the RFP to be extremely flexible. um to, you know, allow an opportunity for lots of different kinds of of businesses to present ideas to us that we could evaluate. Uh, I'm assuming if we did um some sort of um sort of temporary or short-term uh food concession, we'd put a limit on it for two three years um with the idea that the RFP for the bigger master warf project uh would still be in play. And uh the reality is that if someone was going to do the bigger project, it would probably be 2 or 3 years before they were ever really ready to, you know, start construction and and work on that. And if we want to make um the uh short-term food concession, we have to have a long enough time so it's viable for someone to come in and make some investments out there. Um, so, uh, my my inclination is to, um, you know, keep it, uh, um, I guess vague is not the right word, but open-ended so that, um, um, almost anyone who was interested could see if their idea would work with us. Um, the the restroom is an interesting one. Um, you know, there's there's part of me that really dislikes the idea of having another portable toilet out there for two or three years. Um, so, um, I I would like to see the city look at if are are there ways that we could do something to generate some revenue, uh, to have uh an additional public restroom out there. Um I I hear the concern that you know if someone came in and wanted to do the big master project that might be uh you know a loss but um perhaps um uh you know there's some creative ways to to work on the restroom idea. Um I think I could put off the marine rescue watercraft storage for now. Um that was a great idea when we were talking about a large master project on the warf. But uh if we're looking at just doing something for a couple years with the hope and anticipation that uh later on we might um um have someone interested in doing uh you know permanent building out there. Um, so those those are sort of my initial comments. For me, it it could be a prefab building. It could be, you know, a mobile building, something like a trailer. Um, you know, I understand food trucks don't work out there too well because of their weight. But, um, I'd be open to the shipping container idea. You know, we've seen those examples of those in other areas. Um, so I guess at this point I'm pretty flexible on it, but I would like to see some foods out there. Thank you. >> Um, thank you. One of the questions I have um is just a reminder uh the city got money for the warf um the the old warf house and repairs on the warf. Is that correct? >> The city, yes, we'll be talking about that a little bit later on this evening. received a million dollar million dollars in insurance refund. >> And was that the warf house or that the repairs? >> That was for the buildings. >> Okay. Um All right. So, I think it's just good to keep that in context as we kind of went there. I just have a couple concerns. One thing would be um no matter where we go, I think we're all getting these indicators watching weather and what the winter is supposed to look like. I would say um as much as we always want to move forward, we should be very cautious of what the winter looks like. So if any of these ideas I I would like to have some conditions that we can move through some of the designing and planning, but maybe we should get through this winter and maybe we start to look at that, you know, is that April one or something like that just to make sure that we might have a bigger issue out there than what we have. Next thing is um yeah, I would be opposed to any sort of food truck um no matter what the weight class is. Um, I was I wrote down as opposed to trailers, but if it was a trailer that was brought out there, um, you know, put up on jack stands, remove the tires, and it was skirted out and that was the cheapest, most effective way for somebody to come out there, I could be supportive of that idea. So, it looked like it was a official building, but it could be moved pretty easy. Um I do like um the sealand containers we refer to them as I think myself and the city manager had many conversation about these over the year uh the last couple years about how they can be um they're very cost effective you close them up they lock down you know let's face it you know they're sealant containers they come on boats you know overseas so it'd be very durable type of construction um uh I also would say um another thing no matter where we get with this. I know our planning department has worked really hard on these issues, everything. So, wherever it gets to, I'd like to see it go to the whatever we we kind of give some guidance, but it goes back to planning. They could weigh in on it. Um, and then it would come to council. Um, I think they have spent many hours on this design and the building and the whole warf project. I think it's important to keep them a part of that. Um, and looking at just options to build off of. I personally like option three. Um and then you know looking at maybe if the bathroom can be expedited or something like that and I look to staff to figure out how that could be brought in. Um and that's all I have right now. We can build off in here what every like option two. Um restrooms are a must because it's a long walk from the end of the end of the warf to the restrooms they are now. And it's uh not uncommon for them to have issues for cleaning or or breaking down. So, we definitely need another restroom out there. And I would really hate to see us throw out the marine rescue watercraft storage. It's something we've worked on for so long. And if we take it off now, we'll probably take it off forever. And that is my fear. I know we're going to have to come up with some money to put it in there, but I really want to see that stay. And then I don't want to be like Santa Cruz, but I really like what Santa Cruz has done on the warf out there. They have a sealand container and they have all kinds of things going out there. They serve um drinks and food and seems to work out very well for them. So if we can maybe model something something like that. So I would I'd be in favor of option two. I think there have been some prudent comments made about the storm coming. So I I do also agree that we don't need to rush into anything. Although I I I think option three sounds appealing because we've heard from our community. They want to see a restaurant out there or a more permanent structure out there. I think we should continue to pursue um and have an open RFP whether that be a year or two years or three years. Um and in the meantime, you know, think about some of the econom economic development opportunities, right? having some like durable shipping containers and some um a competitive bid to get some businesses and I agree with uh Council Member Westman to keep it open. I want to see an infusion of new ideas and see some um new things pop up in Capola that the that will keep the community exciting and vibrant. And um so I I agree to looking into option three, looking at the costs of what that would look like and where we would potentially get some funding and um yeah. So, can I just ask a clarification because you both said option three, but option three doesn't contain the bathroom or the um Joe was two. Well, option three doesn't contain the bathroom. Is that >> Why don't we make number three add in the bathroom in the M MRWs? >> Okay. Well, I I'll ask a question to that. Um, so if we extend the RFP that has the MRWS within it, right? >> Yes. >> And then we could also do an RFP for the prefab food and bev at the same time. >> That would be a new separate RFP, >> right? So if we did option three, we would maintain and I would I would Yes, I would like to add um a restroom. Yeah. But then if we keep the extended one-year RFP for the large scale which includes the MRWS but then create a new RFP for the prefab food and bev that would kind of cover all the bases. I think >> and the only comment um I would say about that is one thing I heard from um the bigger scale RFP was it has to be a project that can work for somebody and so if we came in and said oh you also have to build us a watercraft storage as part of that thing and you have to add in a bathroom that might start to limit um maybe the attracting somebody. I would just like to throw out trying to u remind council member Clark with the watercraft storage um I don't know the exact number but ceb raised money and they have allocated north of I want to say 80 something thousands that they want to contribute to a watercraft storage sink. So I think we should keep that in mind as an option in the future too. And I just wanted to remind everybody that they I think they're still planned on contributing that because that's what identified in their fundraising um event too. So >> So uh I have another question for my fellow council members. It seems like we put out the large RFP for the large building and I'm wondering if we want to make certain when we sort of reput it out and it's out there for a year that we're absolutely clear there is some flexibility and that that they don't have to build everything. I mean, if there was someone who just wanted to come in with a, you know, standalone building that was going to be a restaurant that um, you know, it's something we would look at. We're not guaranteeing we would approve it, but that that RFP, uh, the big one has some flexibility written into it that they don't have to do everything at once. I think my understanding is we had that written in there so that we didn't have to pay for the public infrastructure like the bathroom and the and the um headquarters or water storage. I mean that that we didn't have to pay for it, right? Um, so if we move forward with building it on our own, I guess we really have to look at the cost of it to the city because would any of this be grant eligible? So if we were to build the restroom and the marine rescue watercraft storage, we would need to actually look at the placement on the warf because we had it um earlier. It's not at the head of the wararf. So, we'd have to rethink about where we would place that for a future building to be built because you wouldn't want to put that in now and then have to build around it. We'd have to look at pricing and figure that out. We would look for grant money as part of this. And there is some seaweet money um tied to the storage and um it was mentioned earlier that we were refunded the restroom money but I I believe that was utilized in the overall project. So that money is not available that was used to finalize the project. So there's some money for the storage facility. We would have to go after money for um the bathrooms. So the sea money, it has to be for the marine rescue watercraft or could that money go toward building a permanent bathroom at the end of the >> You'd have to talk to them. I do know um has involved some of the fundraising. It was um very much uh people were donating money for a watercraft storage >> and that's probably what it's >> the only thing um I would just like to just elaborate. I think I just want to be really careful. You know, when we went out for the warf project and the city removed the bathroom, it was idea that the there would be a bathroom back out there. And so, I just have a hard time, you know, as we start I just always want to make sure we don't lose focus on some of the commitments that we made to our community. Like there was going to be a bathroom and then we removed it. And now that that money gets absorbed, I think we still have the commitment to our community about there was going to be a bathroom and it's going to have to challenge us on how we bring that up. And that's why I wanted to bring up, you know, there is a million dollars in insurance money that came in and I'm not advocating for that from any point that that be used for that. But we have to remember our community lost an asset and we changed or out a bathroom and because we're in a little bit of financial different position, you know, now I think you just want to keep very clearly that those were commitments and some conversations that we made during this whole process and I just want to bring those up and not to excuse that but that's why I got to option three. Okay. So, given the direction I get tonight, I would bring this back and with those numbers of what is a, you know, so that you'd have a better idea of what we're looking at and the updated RFP. So, it' be really clear. Um, >> yeah. And I think make a more educated decision around what items are included and not included. >> Yeah. >> In the update. >> Sounds good to me. I think the timing wise too just not making any >> well the reality is even if we made a decision in the next month or so nothing's going to happen till next I mean spring anyway >> and then could you just update planning commission you know what that we're working through this and there'll be some direction that in the future they'll be involved. >> Yep. >> Thank you. >> All right. Got enough direction. So, let me just uh say back what I heard for direction. I'm hearing option three, but considering doing a bathroom and a watercraft storage ahead, including that in there. Okay. And then also the duration would be for the uh food concession up to three years. Um and then planning commission review of a project when it comes in. I'd also have to put in some type of selection mechanism um and to be flexible. Is there consensus on um there were some discussions on no food trucks. They are challenging because of the warf. Um I heard support for um shipping containers, a prefab building mobile trailers as long as there's a skirt so it looks like it and it's taken off the wheels. But do you want any any additional feedback on food trucks or keep it really flexible and see what >> Well, it sounds like food trucks are a >> a no-go. >> Yeah. Are kind of tough to work around. So, I mean, I'm >> and I I do think it would be good um as council member Jensen said before to sort of let our local restaurant businesses know that this is an opportunity if they wanted to have a little annex out there of, you know, something that they're doing or, you know, talk to the boat and bait people and see if they want that to be an annex. if they're, you know, talk to the local um, you know, our local businesses and make certain they understand that this opportunity is coming up. Thank you. >> Thank you. Great. Thank you. All right. 9B Stockton Avenue Bridge and Soal Creek implementation update. Director Khan, thank you. Good evening, mayor and council members. I have an update based on direction uh provided at our last meeting. Next slide, please. So, during the August 27th meeting, council uh had a five-part motion directing staff to do several things. Uh one is to implement near-term deck maintenance on the Stockton Avenue Bridge. Then there were several other motions that really accumulated in u putting out an RFP for a bridge engineer to work on a retrofit of the existing bridge and stipulations that went along with that action and then to inspect the creek pre-winter. So um with that the next slides kind of go over how we are implementing those actions. Next slide please. Um so prior to doing any kind of maintenance on the bridge we have to have a bidable project. So that means a bridge engineer has to define the repairs and then prepare a a PSN a plan specifications and estimate and then really um establish all the requirements for this type of work. Um this is while it is implementing the CALR recommendation that is just one line in the report. It is not a construction design or really any kind of details. So this is why a bid package must be prepared and staff is soliciting proposals for this work. We started doing that Friday before last. So far we've received one which is what some of these estimates are based off of. Uh we've solicited I believe four different local groups that we have worked with before and we're expecting a couple more um proposals in the next week specifically to prepare this bid package for this maintenance work. Um, so the preliminary costs we've gotten back do exceed the council authorization of $150,000, which is why we are discussing this again this evening. And uh, in speaking to several engineers regarding this project have identified a lowerc cost option that council may want to consider. Next slide, please. So the polyester concrete overlay is what is in the CALR recommend recommended treatment. That is what staff was directed to do in council's motion last meeting. Um it adds a protective surface, so a concrete overlay, like several inches of concrete to the bridge deck after doing some other work such as um joint replacement if needed. Um removing and replacing unsound areas of the concrete, which is something that the of the existing concrete, which is something that the engineer would need to evaluate. and then would also require recalculation of the bridg's load rating. Uh adding a inch of concrete over a bridge uh adds several tons of weight. So that needs to be evaluated. Um given all of that, the completion of the winter by the this winter is really unlikely even under emergency conditions. Um and the bridge retrofit even when later on may ultimately require removing the entire deck. This is only adding a layer to the top of the existing deck. So the other option that was identified by the other engineer teams was a methacrylate deck treatment um which is a lowerc cost in uh inter room treatment. It consists of a thin liquid resin put on top of the deck which really fills cracks and then um keeps water out from getting into the uh box girder. So it slows further deterioration but does not restore any part of the deck. obviously doesn't replace the deck. Uh this is a much less intensive process because you're not doing any kind of repair work. Um and completion before winter may be possible. So more it's a holdover uh type treatment. Next slide please. Um the polyester overlay is likely something to a 10 to 15year extension of the life of the bridge where the methacryle treatment is more of a uh 3 to 5 year. Um so their costs vary significantly uh both in engineering and construction costs. Um these costs again were estimated with the help of of two bridge engineers that uh staff has spoken to. Again um all in for the polyester overlay again which is the CALR recommended uh maintenance would be approximately $5,000 when you consider traffic control which can vary by the types of traffic control you choose to use. be that close the bridge for a week or continue oneway traffic, any kind of approach work that needs to be done in the pavement on Stockton Avenue itself, and then any kind of inspection or materials testing. Uh when you're replacing concrete, we really don't know how far we're going to have to cut back. So, there's a pretty good contingency in there because you do need one for this type of structure. Um the ceiling treatment is significantly less. Um but still all in is likely to be over $150,000. Uh, next slide please. Um, so that was the maintenance port of the uh, council direction. The initial direction uh was to put out an RFP for a rehabilitation project for the bridge. Staff intends on uh, releasing that later this month and expects to come back to council in October, November with a proposed contract for you to consider. Um, work in SoCal Creek is something we inspect every year prior to the winter. We plan on doing that later this month as well and we'll return to council with our written actions and any kind of additional coordination we need to do with other agencies or property owners. I believe that is the last slide and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> Start on this side for questions. >> So if we went with a CALR recommendation, was there any grant availability for us? So that type of heavy maintenance is eligible for the CALR. Um, forgive me, I don't know the exact uh term of the program, but they have a maintenance and maintenance program. It's something you apply for. It's something you get on a wait list for. It's likely about 3 years before we would be funded. But yes, there is money for that type of work from the state. >> And so both the professionals that you talked to about the bridge, they didn't recommend one or the other or they just talked about the cost differences. They did based on the direction was given by council they did also mention that most of the work that they do to this point is like federally or state funded and so that does kind of reduce some of the requirements because for example we wouldn't have to do a NEPA evaluation because it would be self-funded um but it is more common that these are funded by one of those bridge programs. >> Thank you. >> Thank you Director Khan for the for the work and the quick turnaround time. Um I think the cost of both the polyester concrete overlay and the over and the lower cost methylryate are both more than the 100,000 150,000k that we were previously authorized. Um would proceeding now with either option affect future eligibility for a larger rehabilitation project? >> Unlikely. um the larger the cal the polyester concrete overlay project would probably increase the bridge rating but not or the score that you get when they consider funding but not enough to affect us not being able to get funding for work on the long-term work on the bridge. >> What you're saying is the bridge is in such poor condition that even putting on the deck does would not would increase the score a little bit but not enough that we would not get any grant funding. >> We'd still be in within the range for grant funding. Yes. Got it. Um, >> so thank you for answering the question about the possibility about getting some grand funding, it sounds like, but it it won't be till 3 to 5 years, you said, because you have to get in a queue >> for the maintenance. Yes, that's it's a shorter wait time for a long-term major rehabilitation project, which was the other part of the motion. That program has a different it's a different program, has a different weight list, tends to be longer, further out. So, we'd have to pay for this on our own if we wanted to do it in the short term. Um, can you remind us again the timeline for that uh grant from Senator Leairard? >> So, we were given that grant in 2023. Um, we amended the grant based on previous council direction and I believe currently the grant term ends at the beginning of 2027. we could reach back out and we should reach back out to the state. However, considering we don't have clear direction on where we're going right now, staff has not reached out thus far. >> And that half a million dollar grant from Senator Lair would not be eligible for any of this work. >> None of the maintenance work. No, specifically that work was for um working towards debris mitigation. So is the that grant eligible for the next phase of engineering studies that was part of the original plan >> potentially. It depends on the final scope. >> Okay. Um and you answered my question about the RFP. It's going out later in the month and expected to return in October, September. any interest in um any have you heard of any engineering companies that are interested in bidding for the RFP that we have not released yet? Um I have the ones I've talked to about the maintenance I also made them aware of this larger project that we are going to bed. >> Got it. Great. Thank you. >> We have questions. >> Okay. I just want to make certain I'm clear. It seemed like at the beginning um as as far as a bridge engineer was concerned, you mentioned that they're going to be proposals coming in from more bridge engineers than we have right now. >> Expect more. Yes. >> Okay. So, um I guess I'm a little confused how how we make a decision tonight, you know, about which bridge engineer we're going to use with without knowing what all of those other proposals are going to be. So, the construction costs for the options are significantly different and likely higher than what council has authorized. So, at this point, staff is looking for direction with which option you would like to go with construction-wise because the cost for the proposals would be significantly different. >> Okay. I I I guess for me, you know, um I I sort of feel like there there is a little bit of time here. I mean we've we've moved to the direction of that we want to you know rehabilitate and try and save the bridge for you know 10 years or how however many more years we can get a life out of it and um uh we all we all know that um you know there is all this talk about this El Nino year and we don't know if it's going to start raining the 1 of October, if it's going to start raining in February. I mean, we really don't know what that's going to be. Um, so for me, I I think, you know, we have a little bit of breathing room here. I appreciate, you know, Council Member Jensen wanted to get something on the bridge before the winter, but for me, that doesn't seem like it's really going to be realistic at this point. Um so um uh you know and these these bridge engineers have an expertise that you know I don't think any of us really have up here and um it would be interesting to get a report from you know the bridge engineer that we select which one of these options you know what what are the advantages and disadvantages of each one of these options from a bridge engineer um not from lay council people who don't know bridge engineering. And um so I'm I'm wondering if it's worthwhile for us to delay making a decision till we have the bridge engineer who's going to work for us. And I also wonder, you know, has anyone even spoken to Congressman Leard and ask him uh you know, he was willing to switch from um debris maintenance to, you know, looking at building a new bridge and now we're sort of switching again. Um, is it is it is it worthwhile to to ask him if we could use these funds for that that you know the city's decided that they really want to try and save the bridge for extended period of time. Um, I mean I I I'm always inclined to ask questions of people. I mean, he could say, "No, I only wanted it to be spent on this certain thing. Uh, if you don't do that, then I'm going to take my money back." or he could say, well, um, you know, if that's really the direction the city wants to go in, then yes, you could use part of this money, certainly for the engineering part of it, if not for doing the actual work itself. >> I fully anticipate that the senator would support the city in whatever decision the city wanted to do. Unfortunately, the situation is is that, you know, it's been written into sort of the California law, the California budget, awarded to the Department of Voting and Waterways, and then awarded to the city. So it's not really the senator doesn't control the funds anymore. So at this point we're deal dealing with the department of boating and waterways and if at the end of the day we did run into challenges I think we certainly then could seek Senator Larair's assistance in trying to convince them help move the money but you know he's not he doesn't have direct control of the funding at this point. >> Right. Um, you know, I I I appreciate all of the work you've done, um, Jessica, and how you've gotten this back to us so quickly. And, uh, I I think it was a lot involved in it, but, uh, I just want to make certain that, you know, I have all of all of the information to to make a good decision. Um, and it sounds like, I mean, originally I was going to say, well, maybe we should put out an RFP for bridge engineers, but it sounds like you have a number of them coming in for to be selected from. So, that's that might be an unnecessary step at this point. So, those are sort of my com questions for now. I'll save the rest for comments. >> Um, yeah, and thank you again, Jessica, for pulling um all this information together. I think um two points I'm just going to make more more comments would be um looking forward at where we're going as a community um and the timeline if we decided today we're going to rebuild the bridge I think we all have to face it that has to be an 8 to 10year project before we ever get to that point um and so looking at one step of doing a maintenance item at 175 it lasts three to five years we're going to be doing that most likely twice because the condition the bridge will need it again and we're going to put ourselves back to that at the same time. My next comment it would be no matter what engineer we're going to bring on board, I think we all have and every engineer that's been here and anytime we talk about we look at like Calrans as the authority figure and so it's really going to take a lot for me to have um CALR inspection reports since 2011 saying do one system and we're going to have an engineer come in and say no don't do that do this. I would also have to have verification from Calrans that that other option is also acceptable them and it won't they won't look at us in future funding uh if we're rebuilding the bridge in some years forward um to say well you didn't follow our direction since 2011 and then you came up in 2026 or 2027 and went another direction again I would want to make sure that the engineering firm has a very good relationship with Cal and can provide some sort of a documentation um that we knew that decision wasn't going to um conflict with anything in the future. And so those were my comments are my concerns about the direction we move forward with. I don't know if this question is necessary, but um I was wondering if there was feedback um from any of the engineers about the process of each treatment, like how that would it be one lane open, would it be complete closure for each item? I I don't know if you spoke to that, but just curious. So that you can do one lane, you can do a full closure. A full closure would typically be cheaper at the end because there's no traffic going over. You're not paying for traffic control and you can go faster. Um Okay, cool. So, either or for both. Okay. Yeah, that was just kind of my lingering question. All right. Um any other questions before we go to comment? Okay. Public comment on this item. Anybody wish to speak? Now is your chance. All right. Seeing none, we'll come back uh for discussion. >> Yeah, I think we do need to reach out to Senator Lair um and ask more questions and I I really think we need to go with what Calrans says is the next best thing to do. Looks like we can't do it before winter anyways, but move towards that direction. >> Yeah. Um, I personally don't think it makes sense to spend $400,000 to half a million on a polyester concrete overlay or even potentially $270,000 on a methylryate. If our goal is to pursue a more comprehensive retrofit where we're going to spend the money, you know, to do the technical evaluation that was previously proposed by staff to figure out the scope of work that needs to be done and to do it right. Um, I think that makes the most sense to me to, you know, put out the bid, get another engineer, um, on board and do that seismic analysis, the structural analysis, the geotechnical analysis, so we actually know what we're working with. So, we know what is the best way to move forward because otherwise we're really putting just a band-aid over a structure. Um, and we may need to remove the HOD deck when we do the actual retrofit fitting work. Um, I I just I think it's a lot of money and the it's a lot of money for our city and it seems the best path forward would would be to have a project that would be eligible for the CALR highway bridge program funding and the federal funding. Um, so that's where I am. You >> Well, I I think I'm probably closer to agreement with uh Council Member Clark in that um um I I do think we ought to check on the funding and check with Senator Leairard and uh see what can be done with that. Um there's just a little part of me that says um you know if we're going to be going to CALR and we're going to be asking them for more money um it makes some sense to do what they've been recommending for us to do on the bridge. And um uh I think no matter uh uh what ultimately happens with the other studies we're probably talking about eight or 10 years from now you know doing anything. And so I would certainly um like to do something on top of the bridge if that will preserve it and give us those eight or 10 years to sort of sort of work through this project. Um I will echo that and I just think it's a little further take uh take another step further. I went back and I looked you know um it's not just this stock and bridge. I look at it. Um I went back and I was trying to calculate somewhere. They estimate about 6 million of cars a year go over top of that bridge. Um we have talked many times that this bridge is you know getting up to 90 years old and what is the life expectancy and by making an investment on the bridge of if it was $500,000 and it put that position put us in the position for 10 years that we can move forward on design work. move forward and getting securing grants and getting funding takes a lot of pressure off that I think we all would be able to understand that the bridge is safe um the bridge is um operable and it's going to meet our needs and there you know we I think we also have to go back to CALR has been making this recommendation on a line item since 2011 and to not continue to not do something um of what they're recommending and then knowing by the input from engineers saying it's good, it will last another 8 to 10 years puts us in a position that we can move at a pace that's correct. I also gives a lot of opportunities as we're moving forward that other projects in the surrounding area will be taken care of congestion and traffic will be hopefully becoming less because those projects will be completed. And so I'm leaning towards the uh same thing um uh you know with uh doing what's recommended with the polyester concrete overlay and also reaching out to Senator Lair because if that opens up um and they understand that we're working through the process and we can use that money there is kind of takes where it might take care of our our funding concerns that we have for that. But I think it's an investment in our community. That's very important. >> Could you remind me what the what it would do to the load bearing if we do the the CALR recommended? >> So we recalculate the load rating and that would be something the engineer does before we do any work obviously, but we would have to pay them for that. That's not something he we did in this consulting call. Um, and so it has there's a potential that doing this work lowers the load rating and you can't have certain heavy vehicles go over it. That's something we'd obviously talk about at council prior to moving forward with any work, but that is something we need a branch engineer to do that calculation. >> If I could just add on to that conversation that I had would be in right line with what Jessica said, but that they'd come back. So, if they came back and said a load rating, oh, you can't drive a firetruck or a bus. I think this council would pivot pretty quickly. Um, but it didn't sound like that happens typically, but that's what the engineers um point would be view would be and we'd have a time to pause and make sure we're making the right decision with more information. >> Okay. What I'm hearing is that we will, you know, hear from the engineer about what would be the consequences of, you know, doing this and adding the load to the bridge before we decided to go forward with doing that particular project on the bridge. It we're we really need to get the engineer on board to help us move forward. Um, I just so if we use this money for this project, we would have no money left for the original um RFP for all of the structural, seismic, hydraulic, traffic, environmental conditions conditions assessment to move forward with a comprehensive retropit project. Is that correct? >> Assuming that this work is eligible under the grant after we talk to the grtors. Yes. I'm not sure at right now during this meeting if this maintenance work is eligible to be grant funded by this grant. >> Right. Well, I I don't agree with that. I I think that money should go towards all of the deeper technical evaluation that needs to be done so we understand what we're dealing with with our 100-year-old bridge. >> I think we're kind of missing one big one big point. I think we're all trying to save the Stockton Bridge. Um, so we got to keep that in mind, the historic value and keep moving forward to get the bridge taken care of. >> I have a a follow question, Jessica. Uh, can measure D money be used on this >> on the on the bridge maintenance? >> Yes, it is a roadway >> and we get approximately $250,000 a year. Is that >> Measure D and SP1 combined is around $500,000 a year. So um if the you know concern and I want to be very um open to council's point of view if we want to earmark the senator lair money for that and we make a decision that the next two years we're not going to do any preventive maintenance in our community and use our paving money that comes to us every year of $500,000. We be making the investment other than fixing potholes which sometimes we think we struggle. we'd be fixing the stock bridge just like we allocated all our measure D money to do the 41st Avenue corridor project that we just did then we're not doing potholes. So I think there's other other opportunities other than saying like if we get senator L then we're empty we could you we could use the measure D money for the next two years allocate it look to our wonderful finance director to figure that out but um you know uh provide allocate those funds for the next two years so we do meet the needs of paving our roads which would be our bridge that we probably should have been doing maintenance on over the last 90 years. So that's just added and I appreciate your clarification on if we could use measure D money. Thank you. >> It seems like we sort of need to move forward and um what um the public works director needs from us tonight is um uh um uh some direction on uh first getting a bridge engineer. and she says, you know, she still has more proposals to evaluate. So, um uh uh how how will that process work? Who who's going to select uh you know, who's going to go through the proposals and select the bridge engineer? Because, you know, my experience of trying to talk to engineers about this bridge, you talk to one engineer, they say one thing. you talk to another engineer, they say they say something else and we're sort of have to rely on your expertise. Um, as as far as which one is picked or uh h how is this going to work? >> I would think that our direction would be to continue with the RFP process, give direction. We're doing the poly estster concrete overlay like we talked about uh at our last city council meeting, but the budget is higher. provide them direction. So we I think that helped Jessica make the right selection. Do they specialize in that as an engineering? Number two is do they have the ability to work with cow transfer funding? And so I think those are things that will help her in her making a recommendation to bring back a contract to the council for engineering. I think given direction. >> So are you making a motion? >> I'll make a motion. So, I'm going to make a motion that we proceed with the polyester concrete overlay um as suggested by Cal Trans since 2011. Also, direct staff to continue working with the engineer and making sure that they are specialized in being able to provide us um uh details and specifications for that and to make sure that they um have a background in obviously work with CALR. Um >> so, >> and that'd be my motion. >> Okay. Can can I ask for clarification? So that would mean that um we're we're going to select this engineer. We're going to give him direction of which way we want to go. And if the engineer looks at that and says, "Well, uh you know, I've looked at this. I've calced out because they haven't done any of that yet." And I I absolutely don't think this is going to work. It's going to add too much weight to the bridge. You're going to have all these new restrictions. um if if that took place that would come back to the council and you'd say you know we've we've looked at this we've engine you know we've done run the numbers but in our opinion this is a nogo then um because I don't want the council just to have approved the project right now we're approving hiring an engineer and asking him to look evaluate that option is that correct Correct. But I think this key part is for Jessica to provide the direction that we're doing the polyester concrete overlay so they develop a spec and while they're doing that anything that comes up please we haven't come back and if we have to pivot we pivot at that time >> with that clarification I'll second your motion. >> Can I ask so that engineering cost is going to be $126,000 >> I believe. So it was included in the packet and on the slides but that sounds correct. Yes. I don't have it. That seems like a lot for just engineering to tell us if this is a good idea or not. >> Well, we're still going to have to do engineering regardless. So, my clarifying question was, is this assumed? So, the staff plan or what we had laid out was doing a proposal for the maintenance work. So, and then a separate proposal and RFP, a process for the long-term project. That is still council's direction. Yes. >> Yeah. That we're not changing the previous Yeah. We're still moving forward as previously that we're rebuilding the Stockton Bridge. This is just an RFP for services to do the polyester concrete overlay for the short term which is 8 to 10 years. >> Okay. We have a first and a second. We have a roll call, please. >> Council member Clark. >> I Orbach. >> No. >> Council Westman. >> Hi. Vice Mayor Jensen. >> Hi, >> Mayor Morgan. >> I passes 4 to one. Thank you. May we call a short restroom break at this moment. 3 minutes will come back at 7:40. All right, welcome back. We are on to item C, the undergrounding utility district number six and rule 28 program update. Miss Khan is back. >> Good evening, mayor council members. Uh just so you know, I believe Kathy Pace who joined us last meeting for PG& is on the Zoom. Oh, she is not. She did not make it on the Zoom. >> Okay, never mind. Next. Uh so, but I do have some updates. She did provide some additional information after the publishing of the packet, but did end up as additional materials um I believe on Monday. Uh next slide, please. Um so I think we all know at this point what rule 28 is, but if you're just tuning in, this is an underground utility program ran by the uh electrical utilities for us administered by PG& with a program that is expiring shortly. Projects must be within existing districts. The city has an existing district six that is broken into three subd districts. Um rule 28 projects themselves inside a district must be at least 600 feet or one city block. So at the last I um last council meeting uh staff received direction to uh look into a shortened project along Monterey Avenue from Cherry Avenue uh as you're coming out of the village and the item was continued to get a preliminary estimate from PG&E. Next slide please. Um, so as a reminder, we have a credit balance of about $3 million. Um, about $45,000 has been spent to date and does continue to um be um charged again. So has not and not yet has been deducted from our total. And that's as much as the slide as I memorized. It's okay. Um and rule 28 credits uh cover eligible work done by PG& for engineering and coordination of a project and then the PG& undergrounding portion. Potential city costs include easement acquisitions to move these things underground. Um any kind of roadway or sidewalk restoration we have to do as a result of the project, replacement of street lighting that may have been on the poles that we are removing. And it basically any costs that exceed the credits that we have. Next slide please. Um so the area on Monterey from Fartwater Cherryway is on the bottom of your screen there is part of district 6 A2. Um this project has not had any design done on it whatsoever. So the basis of the estimate provided of PGD is something they do um based on kind of linear foot and the area in general of the project. Next slide please. Um, so they call that a class five estimate. Um, they have it at about $2.7 million. Again, based on surf uh footage, uh, service count, so how many connections are coming off those particular poles and costs from similar projects. Again, we have about $3 million in credits. And again, these this is just a very early planning estimate. Uh, PG& did note there that there's that retaining wall that is part of our historic inventory. So, it really would have to be carefully worked around. And again that increases costs. Next slide please. Um again potential costs but then potential risks are that this program again at this point expires in 2033. Um PG& in that email that was provided in your agenda packet identified concerns with the current project that is much further along which is at the Bay Capola Avenue intersection and this project has not started in any way uh on Monterey Avenue. Next slide. Um so options for council are to go ahead and move forward with that smaller Mon Avenue project, continue advancing the project at the um Cap Toll Avenue and Bay Avenue intersection or really to take no further action and those credits just expire in 2023. And I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> Questions? >> Not at this time. Thank you. >> No questions. just um thank you for your extra work and please pass it on to Kathy PG that is pretty amazing that she could turn around a rough ballpark estimate that quick and so just a thank you for all that hard work. >> No questions. Just a thank you. >> Great. Um I might have a question but I will hold off. Um, any public comment? Hi, welcome. Good evening, Mayor and Council Tori Del Favro. Since it's just my dad and I left in the chambers and city staff, thought I'd come up here for a public comment. Uh, just want to state the last item that you just passed when over budget. Uh, what was planned? So, um I think everybody in the community would say that Stockton Avenue Bridge is an absolute priority over undergrounding utilities. So, to be mindful of any costs that come about from this agenda item. Uh and Stockton Bridge, we love it. We want to maintain it. So, thank you for that. And we need to be mindful of how we're spending our money. And I know the community would prioritize Stockton Bridge over undergrounding a small section of utilities. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right, I'll take it back for comments. Well, um I think the the staff has spent a lot of time, we've spent a lot of city resources and a lot of energy on trying to come up with something that would work for this $3 million sort of funny money grant that we have from uh PG&E and with all of the projects, whether it's the one at Capola Avenue and Bay, whether it's the project that you know, we've just gotten the numbers on for, you know, the portion of Monterey Avenue. Any one of those projects is going to end up costing the city a fair amount of money. Um, you know, the one on Capitol and Bay Avenue is, you know, more estimated. I know their estimate was more refined at, you know, $4.5 million. And I personally can't see spending a million and a half dollars to of the city's money to underground a few utility bowls for aesthetic reasons. So, um, it's it's regrettable, but I think that I have reached the point where I think it's time that we say there's not a project in the city that's going to to work um, you know, using the PG&E credits and we need to stop spending our time and energy on trying to come up with a project that would work because, uh, the costs are just way beyond the resources that we have as a city. Thank you. Uh, I agree with that and I think we're way past the where we are from an infrastructure standpoint that we're not even to a point that we be should be looking at aesthetics. We should be looking at infrastructure and making an investment in our community. And I agree that I would just punt this and appreciate all the effort that we put into and know that we could always look to the community and know that we tried to do the best we could and uh we just don't have the funding at this time to move forward with that. Thank you. Well, I'd like to say um maybe we can just hold out to see if we could do this project. I know you say we might not get it, but we're kind of at that point right now. But if we could do the Monterey Avenue one and it's under budget, if it goes over over budget, we can then say no, we don't want to do it. But, uh one last stitch effort, I don't think it'd be much more work for our staff and be more for P Gen. I I I would like to clarify. I I think it is a tremendous amount of work for our staff to have to coordinate, you know, a new project like that. I think it's time consuming. There's got to be a lot of work with all the other utilities and um you know, figuring out and that's that would be uh another burden on on our staff that they would have to continue working on that project. And I think we have enough irons in the fire and enough projects going that I would like to, you know, not put that burden on them. >> Can I ask Jessica Jessica if she can add to that? >> Uh, Council Member Rusman is correct. There is a fair amount of staff work that goes into this. So, right, those aren't like direct construction costs, but a lot of dealing with easements. the city would have to acquire easements and negotiating those easements with whoever those property owners are and then right with the other utilities doing those negotiations have taken a fair amount of time on that Bay Capitol Avenue intersection thus far. So I would anticipate a similar level of effort for any other project. >> Hate to see us give up money but I'm getting a bigger picture. Thank you. Is there any way we can hold on to that credit? Just hold on to it. I mean, because there is a possibility that this council in the near future may decide because of safety concerns that the previous roundabout plan is a great idea now on Bay and Capola. And if that is the case where we can get grant funding to do that work and to um bundle it up with the $3 million credit um before 2033, then perhaps we should just hold on and see what happens. You mean just like wait it out till 33? There's no if we don't have a project on the line or in the queue. Well, I guess we technically do. Um, and this might be a P Gen question, but would it be possible to have two projects in the queue? >> No, I think I think she said no when he was here. >> Yeah, sorry, I don't I don't remember. Um, it would cancel out. Okay. Um yeah, I guess my concern with the Monterey one is that um there is this risk of like the historicness of that area and um sort of the spec specifications of that um of the street and the retaining wall. Um I'm I'm all for keeping that in our back pocket as uh you know it I had always kind of wanted to look at the cap a bay um intersection. Um, so I I would totally be on board with keeping it there in the queue and if at some point there is some way to utilize it before the 33, I mean, I'd be all for that. >> Would you have to continue? I guess going back to maybe what council member Park said, how much work would that be for you to if you call up Kathy tomorrow said we're proceeding? That's why I'm hearing we're proceeding. There will be work that you'll be starting to do for that to keep to keep in track to even accomplish that. Is that correct or not? >> There's a number of action items left in there mostly to do with utilities and easements. >> Okay. Thank you. So, um, to move things along, uh, I will make a motion that, uh, we let PGD know that we don't have a project, um, uh, to use the credit, the $3 million credit for at this time. >> I'll second. >> We have a motion and a second. Move. A roll call, please. >> Council member Clark, >> I. Council member Orvok, >> no. Vice >> or I'm sorry, Council Member Westman, >> hi. >> Vice Mayor Johnson, >> hi. >> And Mayor Morgan, >> no. Passes three to two. All right. Thank you. On to D, our code amendments. Welcome back, Director Hurley. Thank you. Um, and a weird having me do code amendments in front of you all, isn't it? Here we are again. Um, so I'll give you a little background in the next slide. We're here tonight with more code amendments. This is the last step in our code amendments for the housing element implementation. It's um focused on program 1.4. four, which talks about our community benefit section and also a couple more cleanup items because ADU law changed this past year and then also um tattoo establishments changes. Next slide, please. Um the planning commission has had two meetings on this. First, a study a study session in which they gave us direction on the incentivized zone, the body art studios and ADUs. actually met with the state HCD regarding the housing element updates um and they are they support the changes that we're making that are um and I'll I'll get into more detail on that and then on August 20th the planning commission gave a positive recommendation on the changes you're reviewing tonight. Next slide please. Um so incentivized zone it's a special zone. It's an overlay area in which um developments can get increased height and floor area ratio as long as they provide a community benefit within our housing element. We'd say we said that we would um make the criteria more objective. So we've done that in our updates. Um so these updates are to chapter 17.88 and I'll get into the details on the next slide. So where this is applicable is along 41st Avenue, also Capola Road between Clare Street and 42nd Avenue and the former Capola theater site. Next slide please. When we talk to coastal commission, um the theater site is um something that's discussed in our general plan giving incentives to that site in the village for a future hotel and coastal commission recommended not making any changes to the existing code or that they would want to weigh in heavily on updates. So, we've created a new chapter 17.9 for um that section of code. If a village hotel were to come in, they would also have to include one of the listed community benefits and those are the old community benefits. We didn't want to touch it. So, um I know we received public comment on daycare centers being in there and that is true. Um but that's we wanted to follow their advice. And so 17.88 is the updates we'll be discussing tonight. Next slide. So we've now broken the community benefits into um three different categories. The first includes many of the um original categories but we outline we added a lot more detail of what has to be provided um um giving so for open space transit center and then the second category is a hotel project. this the hotel project and also new commercial space are two new community benefits and this is really based on our economic development focus and providing incentives to get some of those tax generating uses within the city. And lastly uh the density bonus project when we first brought this to the planning commission there were comments that this could um kind of be competing with the density bonus law. So, we've found a way in which as long as a if a state density bonus law project includes a community benefit, we'll give them an extra incentive or concession and that was um amanable to both the state and Yimi weighed in with a positive letter when this went to planning commission. We removed child care centers and bike pedestrian connections. Um those two are tougher in in terms of the incentive should really be pro proportional to what the benefit is. Um and when you're adding an extra story of height and a lot more floor area, we thought those two are really it's hard to um make that proportional. Also, with a child care center, the city's ability to secure that land use for a long time is challenging. If you're building a hotel, hotels don't typically change into apartments overnight. Um we did we've got requirements in there that they remain a hotel for 30 years with through a deed restriction, but um that's where that is. And then for 2020, in 2020, we did a lot of updates to our code and a lot of those updates were actually to make it easier to have child care facilities in Capola. So I've got a couple slides about that at the end. Next slide please. So within those three different categories, a general project can get a F of 2.0 and 50 feet of height. Hotel can go higher at 60 ft of height. Also there's we um actually took a lot of the standards right out of the new mall um standards for hotels. So reduced parking and also the meeting space would be excluded from the F. And then within the density bonus I already mentioned if they produce one of the benefits they could get an extra concession or incentive. Next slide please. Um we also tried to shorten the process here. So, if there's a dedication to the city, such as open space or a transit center, we would still have the applicant come before you for a conceptual review to make sure that the city council wants to accept the dedication and move forward with a community benefit project. Otherwise, if it's not a dedication to the city, it's the typical pro or a shortened process of planning commission recommendation followed by city council action. Next slide. um new commercial space, we included a minimum of 10% of the project's gross total gross floor area. Um and then we also put in a minimum and a maximum. So it could be no less than 5,000 square feet within a project. So if that ends up being 15% of the project, that's what they would be required. And then they could go beyond the 30,000 square feet if they so choose chose. But uh the max that they would have to contribute to a project is 30,000 and that's just based on the recent studies we've received on them all. Next slide please. Um and then again the hotel design standards and operational standards were added. Um these are based on what we had within our the mall updates. We added more operational standards as the planning commission directed us to remove the requirement for a conditional use permit and only require a design permit for a future hotel to streamline. Next slide. So, a couple examples of hotels. We can go to the next slide. I just want to give you an idea of what this height looks like at 60 feet. Um, this is the Maria Soul at 55 feet, four stories. Um, this is right down along the water and in Santa Cruz. Next slide. This next one is in Newport Beach and this has a maximum height of 59 feet which you're seeing in the roof ridges and four stories. Next slide. The code updates also include updates to our ADUs. This is a theme that happens every year because of the um regulations at the state. Um we did receive public comment on this. Our consultant Ben Noble who is on I'm sorry, Ben Noble is on our Zoom meeting tonight and is responsible for doing all these updates. Um Ben has reviewed the changes as well as our attorneys and um they agree with the what we've proposed in here. Uh the letter we received was from Cal HDF and um it's a very similar letter to what we received last year from the same organization and in our review we've got no outstanding issues with state law. Next slide. Um, also, um, municipal code chapter 9.08 prohibits tattoo establishments. Um, it's the zoning code has been silent on this use. We've got legal concerns of how this has been, uh, is kind of flies in the face of the first amendment expression. So, we're amending that this evening. Next slide. So, the new um new regulations will live in a in our supplemental chapter and the planning commission directed staff to allow two within our community commercial and our regional commercial. So, that's 41st Avenue area as well as um Bay Avenue exit as community commercial and then one in the mixeduse village. Um a conditional use permit would be required. So, it would go before planning commission. There'd be an initial 30-day application period. Um, and then if we receive more than the three allotted allowed, then we would go to a lottery or if we receive more for certain locations than allowed. I want to be clear that the 30-day application period will start after Coastal Commission has certified this a ordinance. So, this will be um most likely four months out by the time it's taken effect. And in that time, we'll um publish an application. It'll be available on our um web page. We'll also notify um I'll send notice to the BIA as well as the Chamber of Commerce. We'll post it on our website as well as the newspaper. And then also any interested parties will I'll start making a list and update them as requested. Um so after that 30-day period ends based on that we'll see whether or not we have to have a lottery and that we're also repealing chapter 9.08. So next slide. So we added new standards. These are similar to kind of what we did with cannabis regulations. We took away some of the requirements of like how much separation um but hours of operation are in there or there is minimum separation sorry visibility proced of procedures that was something that was important to planning commission so as people are walking through the village they won't be able to see a that a tattoo be made. Um but yeah this is age limits and then uh there would be no temporary mobile facilities allowed. This would fall um only within estat um business locations that are in interior. Next slide please. Um so that concludes the tattoo ordinance portion. Um and lastly, I just want to provide a couple updates on the efforts that we have done for daycare centers. So significant updates in 2020. We used to all these criteria that you're seeing here that no longer applies. When we get an application, we used to have smallcale and large scale daycarees. We would look at their fencing around their yard. We'd um have separation requirements. That has been rescended. We now allow, we can go to the next slide. Um, we've updated our code that within the residential zone, home daycarees, that's up to 14 children, um, is a permitted use. So, that doesn't go to planning commission or city council. It just it needs to comply with the state regulations. And that's permitted throughout a residential, mixeduse, and our commercial zones. A daycare center, which is typic. more than 14 um children. The only place that a conditional use permit is required is within our residential zones. And that's because our residential zones are really designed for residents that live there. And um the parking associated and some of the impacts associated with a larger daycare would have impacts. So within the conditional use permit, you can look at mitigation measures to just make sure that there the uh business plan um can accommodate a daycare center. And then within the mixeduse zones and our commercial zones, it's a um it's a minor use permit which just goes through staff review for compliance. Next slide. So, I have a really long recommendation that I'm not going to read to you, but we like to put it all out there because there's we're repealing sections and adding sections, but the staff recommendation is listed on this slide. And if you have any questions, I'm available for >> Thank you. Any questions? >> Uh, no. I would just like to thank the planning department, Ben Noble, and our planning commission. um they have done Yman's work in getting this all put together and and organized. Um and personally I think they did a great job. >> Um yeah, thank you Katie for all your leadership on this. Just a couple questions. Um I don't know what slide it was, but you said there was a donation uh or for a transit or something like that. You said it just come to council. What's the thought of it not going to planning so they're aware of it? Is it just to streamline? >> It is. It's to um really if if they want to provide open space for a city park or a transit center or um and one was a parking garage, public parking garage. We thought it's really important that it come to the city council first. There was a little bit of a debate here at planning commission um of whether or not should go to planning commission then city council, but I think ultimately because there are so many objective standards set up for each of these uh uses that it kind of check that box of what the applicant would have to bring to planning commission later. So >> So you had the discussion with them and they're in agreement with it on that. >> Yes. Um, and the other thing, um, you talked about mechanical units on one of the when you like three or four slides back, sorry. Um, about mechanical units on the roof >> for >> like a hotel right before the >> the hotel. >> Julie, could you bring up that slide? I'm sorry. Um, if you go back to the picture of the hotel and then I think the slide right before that keep okay right be uh one more sorry um yes so the rooftop mechanical coming are there still going to be requirement for sight screens >> for screening >> yeah because I would just be concerned like if we're putting mechanical units on the roof what does that do for you know Do we have a site screening ordinance that's in place that will cover us for that or >> We do have a screening ordinance for rooftop areas and improvements and um I'm not sure if Ben if you know off hand or this is something I can make sure is in there before we return with the >> Right. Yes. The hotel design standard is for uh any rooftop mechanical equipment to be fully screened from view either by an architectural um or by an architectural feature. So the the rule is that any rooftop mechanical equipment needs to be fully screened from view. >> Okay, perfect. Thanks for that clarification, Ben. And just the last thing, so on the daycare, they have up to 14 kids. Um, and it's just a streamline process coming to the city. Do we notify any of the neighbors in a residential neighborhood? >> We do not. Um we just we follow the state law on daycare centers and it um has been much more streamlined. >> It seems like that's a big change in a residential neighborhood to have a daycare facility running like 14 kids and drop off and pick up and without notifying anybody in the >> this is has also been um this is something that came out of our housing element as well as one of the updates. So, this has been something and I think under state law they're they are allowed to do it. So, it wouldn't even if the neighbors raised a bunch of objections, it's still going to happen. >> Yeah, I learn a lot every night. So, there's another one. Thank you. >> Questions? >> No questions. Just thank you Katie and staff and uh especially out to the planning commissioner. Thank you. >> No questions. Thank you. Any public comment? All right, seeing none, we can bring it back for deliberation or motion. I will move the recommended actions. >> Excuse me. Um, if I may, mayor, we're >> a clarification that we should do the recommended action as listed in the staff report. I think there's a a reference an incorrect reference on the slide. So, I will move the recommended action as suggested by in the staff report. >> I'll second. >> Great. We have a first and a second. All in favor? >> I. Thanks for all the hard work. Appreciate it. >> Final final. It's our item E, fiscal year 2526 revenue and expenditure update. Welcome Kim. >> Good evening, Mayor and Council. Um, as mayor just said, this is a review of revenues and expenditures for the prior fiscal year, so through June 30th of 2026. Um, overall financial performance was favorable. Our general fund revenues exceeded our general fund revenue budget by 591,000 or 2.8%. Um, our expenditures did exceed our budget by 105,000 or half a percent over um with a so that results in a net positive um operating revenues exceeding expenditures by 486,000. That also, if you recall, when we adopted the budget in June, we were projecting an ending fund balance of 95,000. That estimate's now moved up to 581,000 with this additional revenue coming in, which puts us above our $500,000 target balance. Next slide, please. So, as far as revenue performance, total general fund revenues were 21.6 million, came in just a little bit over 21 million. Again, favorable variance of 591. Largest contributors were sales tax, property tax, toot, and building permit revenue. We had a couple of our um smaller revenue categories that were slightly below budget and I'll touch on those as well. Next slide, please. So, as far as sales tax, um we were had a 9.9 almost $10 million budget. We came in $260,000 over. Um Bradley Burns was about 221 of that. Measure Y 26,000. Measure O 13,000. For property tax, we had a budget of 3.7 million. We came in about 117,000 over budget. So slightly above our projection there. And then toot um we came in we had a um we received 2.3 million which was 98 almost 99,000 above budget. The caveat there is about 45,000 of that was from payments of toot from prior years. That payment plan extends through May I believe of 27. So, we should continue to see those payments coming in and helping the TOT revenue throughout this fiscal year as well. Next slide, please. Um, building permit revenue had a couple of um big permits pulled. So, our budget was 410. We actually came in at 535, which is almost Yeah, 535, which is probably the highest we've been in a while. So, it's 30 and a half% above budget. parking citation revenue. If you recall, we amended our budget from 600,000 down to 450 at midyear. We actually exceeded the 450 at about 57,000, so 12 and a half% above the amended budget. Um, mentioning that because we have a pretty big budget number in this year. So, that's positive for that. We'll continue to watch that revenue really closely. Some of the unfair favorable balances were um the cannabis retail tax and actually I told the fact I put up that one up there just to be bragging because we usually miss that one by a big number and we were pretty darn close this year. So finally getting that one dialed in. Um franchise tax we missed a little bit and pay station revenue was slightly off. I think some of that was due to some um pay stations being down which I believe has been all fixed now at least for now until the next one goes out. Um next slide please. on the expenditure side. So again, general fund expenditures exceeded the budget by about 105,000. A lot of that was due to the city attorney's budget. We went over double on that. Um some of the contributing factors were the districtricting that we just completed. Um we've paid I think 60 to 70,000 out. We still have about 40,000 to pay. um housing element mandated mall resoning, higher levels of PAS than even the prior year, excuse me, and then litigation costs associated with the flume. Um right now we are going through those um legal bills and seeing if there's any opportunity to move some of them out of the general fund into special revenue funds. Um some of those are eligible for special revenue. So I just want to verify that none have hit the um general fund. that um overage was offset by a combined um savings at the department level of about 200,000. So the 305 less than 200 is why we're 105,000 over. Next slide please. Um so again I'm just kind of summarizing uh revenues exceeded the budget by about 486,000 increases our estimated ending fund balance from 95 to 581 and exceeding the target of 500,000. Next slide is insurance. So we also um towards the end of last fiscal year, I want to say it was June, received $1 million insurance settlement for damages to the warf that was for the um I think as Vice Mayor Jensen mentioned earlier for demolition of the buildings. That cost, just so we kind of put that in context, was about 100 a little over 1.2 million. So, it was our um $250,000 deductible that we paid and then the $1 million. Um this is one-time revenue and we don't staff does not recommend using that for um ongoing operating expenses and rather redirecting that settlement into the um reserves. Next slide, please. And the reserves are currently um about $900,000 below the established targets. If you recall when we were um adopting the budget, we intentionally didn't put money into the reserves because we were anticipating some of these funds coming back. Applying the 1 million would not only eliminate that shortage, but also give us about $100,000 above the target, which staff is also recommending stays in the emergency reserve at this point. Next slide. And the reason is we have a couple of non-budgeted items we're currently monitoring. Well, I guess non-budgeted isn't correct for the first one. Um, council authorized the use of up to $150,000 of emergency reserve for Stockton Bridge work. We may or may not use that money. Um, depending on how that all plays out, but since it's been authorized, we're um appropriating it or encumbering it. Um, we recently completed the redistricting or districtricting, sorry, I keep getting correct on that. Um, and I believe we have about $40,000 of additional costs going out to is it Shankman? I think is the >> that Mr. Shankman's bill? >> Yes. Yes, it is. Um, emergency street repairs are just slightly under $50,000 going on up in Lawrence Avenue. And then we're also, um, I think council member Westman mentioned earlier forecast for some super Elino storms. So, kind of want to wait and see how that plays out, especially with the direction they're forecasted to come in from. Next slide, please. Um so we will have an opportunity to review this again the emergency reserve and then just our fiscal year 26 27 performance at midyear budget. I'll also do um in December and we'll be doing a first quarter report on sales tax because we should get our sales tax for September at the end of November. So that meet, the one meeting we have in December, we'll do a first quarter update and then do midear in February and take a look at where everything's how everything's sitting at that point. Next slide, please. Um, we pres I presented this to the FAC at our meeting on September 1st and they did concur with staff's recommendation to direct the full million into the reserves. However, they also asked that we come back and review our fiscal management policy, which includes the reserves and also have a discussion around the $500 target fund balance. Um 500, what did I say? Oh, 500,000 target. It's a little small. U 500,000 target fund balance. We've had that target for 10 plus years. So, it's probably time to take a look at it and make sure that's the appropriate amount. Next slide, please. So, next steps. Um, some of this could change as a result of the audit. Um, we are actually our auditors finished, they've been here this week. They just finished this afternoon with their field work and I did talk to the partner. I don't anticipate any big changes, but there will be some things that move around and if there's a significant amount of legal fees that I can move out of the general fund, that would definitely come back to council. um anticipate getting the um financial statements done in late October, early November, which Jamie reminded me I say every year and never make it, but I will try again. Um and then again, any required year and budget adjustments will be brought forward to council um separately as appropriate. Next slide, please. So, the recommended action is to receive the revenue and expenditure update and provide direction regarding the use of the $1 million insurance settlement. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you. Questions? >> One quick question. Do you have any update on the FEMA money? >> FEMA? I was um in there earlier this week and it has not changed. The last time I saw anything was the first week of um June. >> I always have to ask. >> Yeah, thank you. >> I I try to look every week. >> No questions. Thank you. >> This is just a clarifying question. Um when you say paystation um dollars, that's also including from Park Mobile, >> correct? >> Okay, >> cool. >> So, just parking in general. >> Parking in. >> All right, great. That was my question. Any public comment? >> It's down to the last two. All right, back to council. Uh I certainly um I was there at the finance committee finance advisory committee meeting and I agree with the recommendation that that million dollars go in to uh replenish our reserves that were used for the warf repairs. >> I agree with that and I'll second if that was your motion. >> I'd just like to say thank you to all the members of fact. So thank you. >> I think we're all in grants for the million dollars. Do we need a motion? Nope. Okay, >> I can take direction. >> Great. Thank you for all your hard work. Thank you all for coming this evening. Last item, adjournment. Take care of yourself and others.