Santa Cruz City Council 08/11/2026

Thank you. Thank you. The hour of 1:00 having come and gone, the Santa Cruz City Council will come to order and the clerk will call the role. Thank you, mayor. Council members Triggero >> present. >> Bruner >> present. >> Men >> present. >> Boulder. O'Hara >> here. Vice Mayor Kell Johnson >> present. Mayor Keely, >> President Quorum having been established, let me see if there are any statements of disqualification. Council member Bruner, >> I have a um disqualification for close session agenda item number two, real property negotiations as it relates to my employment. >> Thank you. Anyone else? On close session, we'll get to other matters later. Okay. Thank you. Uh this would be the opportunity for anyone in council chambers or online who wishes to comment on our close session agenda. Uh we have conference with legal counsel and six claims we will be considering real property negotiations at 121 SoCale Avenue and conference with legal counsel on existing litigation James Morrisy v city city of Santa Cruz and California Grocerers Association v City of Santa Cruz at all. No one in chambers who wishes to comment. Do we have anyone online? >> No one with their hand up. >> We have no one online with their hand up. All right. What we will do at this point is we are going to adjourn into close session. We will take up those items that I indicated and we will be back uh no earlier than 200 p.m. or when we finish our work uh whichever is later. At this point we stand adjourn into close session. The Santa Cruz City Council will come back into session. Madame clerk, would you call the role again to establish quorum? >> Thank you. >> Council members Tugaro >> present. >> Bruner >> present. >> Nome >> present. >> Boulder. >> O'Hara >> here. >> Vice Mayor Kellar Johnson >> present. >> Mayor Keely >> present. The quorum having been established uh we will proceed uh to a series of presentations. We are on item four. This is an SEIU assembly bill 2561 presentation. There are SEIU representatives here who will be doing that presentation. Good afternoon. Welcome. Good afternoon my friend. >> Thank you Mr. Keely and council members. Um, good afternoon. My name is Carrie Koslac. I'm an administrative assistant too for the city of Santa Cruz Water Department and I am the SEIU 521 local chapter secretary. Um, I'm here today to present on behalf of your workers. We're going to discuss several pressing issues related to the city's service vacancy rate. um and present the union's understanding of where we're at in maintaining proper staffing levels. We'll be highlighting specific vacancies and discussing the underst staffing of service positions citywide. Um we really want to thank Sarah Deleó and the human resources department for partnering with labor and working with us to address our concerns. Um we look forward to continuing these discussions moving forward with Sarah and HR. Our goal in this presentation is to share our understanding of where things currently are and what the union perspective is on what's happening. Um so again we'll be going through vacant jobs, specific vacancies, um highlighting the administrative assistance series, managerial bloat and the impact on the community and the workforce, temporary work, our lifeguards, our library floaters, um what the issues are, and then we'll have some time for questions. So, we'd like to start out by pointing out that a permanent unit of 481, which is a 9.5% vacancy rate, is actually fairly high, especially when many of these positions are historically filled for long periods of time. Um, one of the main issues we'll be addressing in this presentation is the over reliance on temporary unbenefited work. We thought it would be helpful to talk about a snapshot of the vacancy report to begin with. Um, as you can see, we have several positions where there are many FTEES full-time high vacancies. When we look at the snapshot, you can realize a few different things. The positions that have a high vacancy rate and a high number of budgeted positions, you'll see that they tend to be out of market rate pay. When you compare the number of temporary workers in the same classification, you can see that there are qualified candidates who can fill these positions but are not being hired into these vacancies. One example is there are five admin workers hired on as temporary staff and 4.5 vacant positions. So why aren't we hiring for the administrative assistant 2 and administrative assistant three vacant positions? When you look further at positions that are lower on the vacancy rate, such as our resource recovery workers, resource recovery worker one and parking attendant, you see that the divisions use temporary work at a much higher rate than their budgeting for new positions. The vacancy rate is low, but there are an additional 16 temp workers to the nine budgeted for the parking attendant role. Despite the need for these positions, the departments are relying on unbenefited labor, oftentimes labor which makes less than the city's living wage ordinance. We also want to make sure that it's clear that while this report focuses on the 481 positions that are budgeted and benefited within the city, there's an often undisussed workforce keeping much of the operations solvent that aren't reflected in the report. Those are temporary unbenefited workers. There's no vacancy rate for them and a sizable amount of the city is staffed by these unbenefited temp workers. Around 309 are on the city's payroll uh which almost matches the permanent benefited staff. So when we look at certain positions with low vacancy rates but a high reliance on temporary work, we can see that there's a need not being addressed by the number of budgeted positions in the classification. What's going on with our administrative assistant positions? Um, I want to highlight that our administrative assistants are the frontline workers that um, the public makes first contact with across the city. Their responsibilities are to provide face-to-face interaction with the public, answering calls from customers and constituents, optimizing administrative functions, and assisting directors and other staff. They're the backbone of many of our operational functions of the city. Admin assistants play a really important role in the city. So why aren't they being hired for? And more importantly, why are they being unbudgeted? So from the union standpoint, the most recent budget recommended reducing the number of administrative positions The vacancies in this role are manufactured. We believe the city is not hiring for these public facing roles. The administrative positions are being unbudgeted for analyst roles which don't provide the same public facing and administrative functions needed to keep the city running and the public engaged. This is a worrying trend we've seen with the integration of artificial intelligence and false promises of optimization causing loss of necessary jobs that deprive the public of in-person services and contact. Instead of keeping these positions funded and brought to market, the city would rather budget for analysts and some of those analysts further integrating AI. So the reality of where we are with services um the number of out the numbers outside of fire and police in 2025 the city employed 430 service staff 82 supervisors 162 managers. This means that the city maintains more than a one to two ratio of management to line staff. For every one manager supervising, there are two workers to pave roads, work on water lines, or keep our parks clean and in good shape. We want to highlight that we think that there's a mis prioritization of management over city services. Even if you add in the temporary workers, the ratio only rises to one manager or supervisor to every three workers. That ratio is drastically different in the fire and police departments. In 2025, there was one manager per nine employees in fire and one manager per 14 employees in PD. You'll see throughout the adopted budget recommendations to delete service positions for new managerial and supervisory positions where supervision and management are already existing. The outcome is that the city spends exponentially more money for fewer services. How does this impact our workforce? When you hire new managers, the need for service doesn't go away. Due to budgeting for higher salaried, non-service providing roles, the siphoning of resources away from services destroys the city's ability to retain skilled staff and provide direct services to the public. When unbenefited temporary workers are included in these numbers, it means that about 35% of the city's workforce does not receive health benefits of any kind. Around 100 of these employees also make below the city's the city's living wage ordinance, mainly in our library and parks departments. So I know that these a lot of the numbers are surprising um and we've included the chart that we used which was shared with us from human resources where we got this information the benefits chart put out by HR showing the size difference between the service unit and the supervisor managerial units and you can see that the number 430 represents the number of hired permanent staff in 2025. It does not include our vacancies. What are the solutions from our perspective in SEIU? The solutions include stop the bleeding, stop unbudgeting service providing positions, instruct departments to expand services, and budget for more positions who keep the city structurally sound. Reduce the city's reliance on its temporary workforce. Build permanent and stable jobs since the need exists. Reduce the city's reliance on private contractors and consultants. And bring more of the work inhouse. Bring more temporary workers into permanent status with the city. scrutinize the transfer of public money from services to managerial and supervisory positions when it's recommended. Set standards for AI to ensure that the city is protecting itself from job loss and bring more positions into market alignment and ensure all workers are making above the living wage ordinance. When I did the math for the starting salary of the administrative assistant two positions, it is barely barely above our living wage ordinance. So, our recommendations overall, we think funds should be dedicated for a class and comp increase to help correct outofmarket vacant positions. Budget for limited term positions and bring them into permanency. Budget for new full-time classifications. budget, excuse me, new FTEES for classifications which have a high reliancy on temporary work in relation to our libraries. With a $4 million temporary budget, there's room to budget for permanent library assistant 2 floater positions to help keep libraries fully staffed and especially amidst their ongoing issues with violence at the downtown branch. Library aids make up most of the workforce who do not make more than the living wage ordinance. And then in relation to parks and fire having budgeted FTEEs for warf lifeguards, beach captains and beach lieutenants will maintain safe wararf operations year round. Many of these classifications risk their lives for public safety but don't receive the benefits. The recreation series also makes up many of the workers that are below the ordinance. That is our full presentation and are there any questions? >> Very good. Thank you for the presentation. Let me see if members have any questions they would like to direct to you. Uh I would like to ask you a question for a definitional issue between us. Um my understanding of a number of the folks who have either a supervisory or management job in parks in particular. So let me just go there for a second. I I thought you characterized uh those jobs as distinguishable from what I'll call rank and file. Is that fair enough to use that term? Non-managerial, non supervisory. I thought you kind of characterized those jobs, meaning the supervisory and managerial as if they don't do any service work. Meaning, you know, they don't That is contrary to my experience with a number of the managers and supervisors. They are out there in the parks working alongside their teams and so on. Did I misunderstand your characterization or do we have a difference of opinion? I think probably a little bit of both, but um if my understanding so I can only speak to the department that I work in and while supervisors and managers do have some engagement with the public um and providing services, >> the majority of that face-to-face interaction with the public is happening with our service workers. >> That's a very different point. So I that one I think we probably have some agreement on that. But thank you for allowing me to clarify. I appreciate it. Are there other questions or comments? Uh anyone uh is there any questions, comments? There we go. We thank you for being here. We take that very seriously as you know in the same way we do when we have our meet and confer work or contract negotiations or anything else. And I think I speak on behalf of the council that we thank you. We understand that you are the face of this government to most of the people that we are accountable to and you're also the face not only for our constituents but the 100,000 people a day who come in here seven days seven months of the year also. So thank you very much. We take your work seriously. We take these comments seriously. Best wishes to you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. We are now on item five and we would invite uh Brandon to come forward and for Mr. Morgan, the director of our information technology department to make a presentation. Sir, good afternoon. The floor is yours. >> Good afternoon, mayor, council. Thanks for having us and thanks for the opportunity to celebrate Mr. Brandon Ashby. Uh Brandon has now had 25 cycles around the sun at the city. uh the first half of his career he spent at our IT help desk uh mastering all of the technology and systems that make a full-ervice city sing. Uh he has had uh special assignments to the police department, the fire department, and for the last half of his career here, he's been assigned as a SCADA and network systems administrator at our wastewater treatment plant. Uh he manages the technology solutions there that help to process three and a half billion gallons of wastewater per year. Uh he has responsibility for the SCADA network systems which is that system that monitors tanks, pumps, uh sensors, chemical levels. He manages the laboratory information systems that help our great scientists do their work. He has a data center that has dozens of servers, switches, routers. He manages cyber security. He manages physical access security. And equally as important, he is the frontline customer service agent for about 50 employees out there. So he's essentially a turnkey IT department uh of one. Um for somebody that has shown up to work for 25 years and not sought appreciation or gratitude or uh any of those accretments, it's an honor to be here today to to be uh thankful for Brandon and the great service that he gives to the community and the city. >> Thank you. >> I say we hold on to this guy. Brandon, thank you so much for your decades of service to the city and to the folks that we all serve out in the community is just wonderful. The institutional memory, the continuity so helpful. Thank you. Would you care to make some remarks? >> You're short. I think just having serving a community helps you have purpose in your work. Not just a paycheck, but it's also helping people out there. >> Thank you, sir. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ARE ON ITEM NUMBER SIX. This is an update of the Mterrey Bay Green Youth Service Corps fellow projects. We will have a presentation from our very capable Dr. Dr. Tiffany Wise West who is our sustainability and re uh resiliency officer. Dr. Wise West, good afternoon. The floor is yours. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. I am actually just introducing this presentation, but I'm very pleased to share with you today the one of the projects that has come out of our workforce development grant that funds three ecology action fellows, two city fellows, and dozens of other fellows with other nonprofits in the Monterey Bay area. The three fellows from Ecology Action have been working with our fellow Jennifer Manso on neighborhood resiliency workshops. their fellowship is coming to an end and so we wanted to bring them in to share with you this really important project they've been doing out in the community and Jennifer she's not presenting today but she will be here later in the year to present her other project on community resilience centers. So with that I'm going to allow the ecology action fellows to introduce themselves and share with you what they've been doing. >> Good afternoon and welcome. Thank you so much for all of your good work. >> Thank you, uh, mayor and council. We're really happy to be here to share our progress on this cool project we've been working on. Um, we can go to the next slide. Thanks, Tiffany, for that intro. Um, so where do I point it? So, as Tiffany mentioned, we've been working on neighborhood resiliency workshops across the city. And we're going to give an overview of how we approach the design of these workshops, recognizing the need for them in the city. and um how we conducted outreach and continued to develop and iterate on the workshop design as we received community feedback. And then we'll um share the impact that we had through these workshops on the community towards building neighborhood resilience. Thank you. Um, so yeah, the main >> You're not the only one that has that trouble. The first time they try to use it, not problem. Um, so the main purpose of the workshop series was is to activate city neighborhoods to work together in strengthening emergency preparedness around key local climate risks. So what this me uh means in practice is um providing practical steps and resources to residents to help them uh prepare for emergencies which we know are only getting worse with climate change and also um helping them to have more conversations around the um relational side of things and um building that network of resource sharing. sharing and skill sharing that makes a community resilient. Um so we really emphasized the practical things like go bags and stay kits and signing up for cruise but we also really um made this a community building initiative as well which was really wellreceived. So um this is our map of where we've uh held the workshops and will continue to hold the workshops as you can see. Um we are trying to be as equitable as possible in the distribution of the workshops and um for the first phase we really focused on just getting this pilot project started. So we started with a lot of community interest from neighborhood leaders and that helped us um gather feedback and continue to iterate on the design. This next phase we're really focusing on expanding the distribution to ensure that we're reaching more vulnerable populations such as the low-lying beach flats community and also um people experiencing homelessness in our city. So, um, with that, I will let Angelica finish continue on. >> Good afternoon. >> Hi, good afternoon. >> Okay, I'll speak briefly to our outreach and engagement approach. Um, as fellows at with Ecology Action, we represent a long-standing commitment to meaningful community engagement here in Santa Cruz that we were really excited to bring to this project. You can see much of our approach here on the slide. We participated in a lot of tableabling opportunities that included uh Midtown Fridays, local community events, farmers markets, and uh neighborhood concerts as well. We also designed and distributed door hangers for neighborhood specific workshops and digital outreach also played a big role in this project um using social media posts um uh email newsletters and uh also posts on Next Door. And speaking briefly on our workshop development process uh to start this project and to address the primary risks most relevant for city residents. We referenced geographic climate and demographic data uh to cater our design and each workshop focus depending on the audience we were speaking to to ensure relevance and impact. We also sought insight from the Santa Cruz County Office of Response, Recovery, and Resilience as well as the Santa Cruz Community Emergency Response Team to collaboratively identify possible engagement gaps based on risks. And together we identified the gap being um introductory engagement or instruction on emergency preparedness with an emphasis on neighborto neighbor connections and its relation to climate action. Um and following that discussion, we set out to design uh engaging workshops that uh incorporated a variety of facilitation styles um including what you see on the bottom right of the screen, which is an interactive neighborhood mapping exercise that helps visualize both individual and neighborhood needs, resources, skills, and interdependence. Um and lastly, being a pilot project, we were really excited to prioritize and incorporate community feedback. We facilitated two community feedback sessions and have since made opportunities to um regularly address feedback after each following workshop in the past few months. Um all of which has contributed to uh us being able to incorporate improvements regarding length, content, and outreach of these workshops. Good afternoon. Welcome. >> Afternoon. Thank you so much. Um, so over the last six months, we have conducted eight workshops in seven neighborhoods and reached nearly 100 Santa Cruz residents. And as stated previously, we have six additional workshops planned. So, we only expect these numbers to grow. And as stated, community feedback was an essential component to what made these workshops so successful. And we um gathered this feedback using two main pathways. So the first was with testimonials with the participants. And the second was with entry and exit surveys. And we assessed the success and impact of the workshops using three main sentiments. The first being how people felt more equipped to help their neighbors in the event of a disaster after after the workshop, their confidence in their personal ability to be prepared for a natural disaster, and their comfortability asking neighbors for help in a time of need. And uh these were assessed on a scale of one through five. Uh so on average across all three of these benchmarks, we had our participants coming in at around a low three and leaving at a high four or a five, which another way of looking at that is people came in with about a C or a C+ in their understanding and left with an A minus or an A. So we're pretty happy about that. Um and there's two main takeaways from this data. One is that most of our participants came in with a pretty good understanding of emergency preparedness and what they need to do to be prepared. Um, and the main reason um that we had participants coming to our workshop and this is coming through testimonials and just conversations um is that they wanted an opportunity to connect more deeply with their neighbors specifically around this topic. that is typically not something you just casually bring up to your neighbor. Um and so they were excited about the opportunity to uh talk individually with their neighbors about this. Secondly um is that we need to do a better job of reaching the communities that do not have this um previous understanding of the resources um and knowledge around emergency preparedness and we hope to address this in a few key ways. So, as we look ahead and hope to expand upon these workshops, we're hoping to do additional outreach in key communities um such as Spanish-sp speakaking neighborhoods, families or young parents, students, and our unhoused community which um overall were not equitably represented um in the participation of our workshops. Um, and we hope to do that through properly incentivizing attendance of our workshops, through things like meals and child care. A lot of these workshops happen during dinner time and we do not want that to be a barrier to people attending as well as a need to attend to their young children. Along with that, we also hope to offer more engaging opportunities such as hosting block parties or even um like micro uh 30 minute workshops with communities that offer more targeted relevant information to their specific needs. Um and we are actually uh executing this this week by offering a 30inut workshop tomorrow in the Beach Flats community um entirely in Spanish. And we are also having a workshop at homeless garden project with their unhoused community to speak with them about their concerns. And um that's all we have for you today. We thank you so much for your time and we open the floor to questions and comments. >> Well, thank you all three of you. And you have one other colleague who's not here. Is that it today? >> Jennifer's here. She's waving to us. >> Oh, hi. There we go. Yeah, I thought I saw you around here. Good. Well, thank you so very much. I will open it to questions. Let me see if members have questions they would like to ask you. And we're going to start with Council Member Golder. >> Thank you. I like the format of this. I think the idea of having it with your neighbors is a great idea. This is something that council member O'Hara and council member Bruner and I have been >> working with with fire with Meredith Albert and I know Santa Cruz neighbors and other type types of groups have been together um and the firewise groups also do stuff like this and so I was just wondering how much were you collaborating with all the efforts that are already kind of happening out there or is this something separate? Meredith Albert was an essential um individual that assisted us in offer in in the how we developed the content for this workshop. And we're also working with other community groups such as the VOAD to ensure that all of this information isn't just something that's uh yeah just we don't want to yeah duplicative of what is currently exists. >> I actually I like this one this format better than the ones I've seen before. And I'm wondering, and this may be a question to staff, when we talk about getting the word out, we talked about different seasons or different campaigns or different things, but I know sometimes the city does mailers to all the residents. Like to me, if this came in the mail with and then some kind of blitz media thing to help people remember to prepare, it could be really effective in communicating because 93 participants that came, you know, it's hard to get people to, but if it came in the mail to everybody, they might take the time to make plans to prepare. >> Yeah. And we can look at um that model when we're looking at our seasonal outreach that we're doing. We're looking at all the different platforms for reaching people and we're also pairing it with the audience that we know is missing most. So we're looking at mailers, bill inserts, social media, um our newsletters, our list serves. So all of that and we can look at, you know, this as well. >> Thank you, Madam Vice Mayor. >> Thank you so much for the work and the presentation. Um, Council Member Golders's comment just made me think that there might be an opportunity as we look at neighborhood activation and the neighborhood activation microrant program. Um, integrating something like this or even just having uh a list of neighborhood um doesn't have to be resil resiliency, but neighborhood projects and this would be a great one. So, thank you for giving us something concrete. See if there Council Member Bruner, >> thank you for the wonderful presentation and the work. It's very interesting to hear what you've been working on and focusing on. And uh my question is somewhat similar to Council Member Golders. Our fire department has sheets that have these checklists and uh the sign up. Uh so I I would like to uh see maybe not so many different ones but working more of having one recommended readiness checklist. I think um that might be helpful and not duplicative. Um, this is very well done and I really appreciate the the sheet of identifying neighborhood resources, whether someone has a chainsaw, a fire extinguisher, um, solar batteries, etc. Those are things people don't think about. And as we get into more natural disasters, I think it's really important to have that front and center in everybody's mind. And another thing um I think is really important that I bring up in our public safety committee meetings is neighborhoods include business communities, business neighborhoods. And it's really important to um for businesses to keep in mind having a go bag emergency kits getting to know the neighbors. um because emergencies strike anytime, anywhere. You may not be at home where all of your preparedness is and so um just keeping that in mind for you as you move forward in your work. Thank you. >> Thank you for the questions and comments by members. Anyone with us wish comment on this? We thank you very very much. Excellent work. Thanks to all of you. We love Ecology Action, too. They're a great partner in the community. So, thank you and uh we look forward to more good work together. >> Thank you, our friends. >> Thank you. >> We are on item number seven. This is a mayoral proclamation declaring August the 11th, 2026 as Katherine Breed Day. Um Mr. Hajes and Miss Ro from Save the Waves are here and uh the vice mayor will be leading on this item. >> Thank you, mayor. I have a proclamation before me and I'm going to read this proclamation. Um just bear with me. There's a lot of amazing things here. Whereas on March 22nd, 1993, Katherine Breed was born to Robin and Charles Breed in Pleasanton, California. And Katherine Breed was drawn to the water from an early age and began swimming at the age of four when she joined a summer league team. And whereas from 2007 to 2011, Katherine Breed competed on the Amador Valley High School swim team in Pleasanton, earning 21 All-American honors over four years. From 2008 to 2010, Katherine Breed was a member of the US National Youth Team and stepped up to the national team after a great performance at the 2011 Summer Nationals. And in 2008 and 2012, she qualified for the United States Olympics trial Olympic trials. And whereas Katherine Breed went on to attend the University of California, Berkeley, studying integrative biology in competing as a collegiate swimmer specializing primarily in freestyle while remaining actively involved in her community. After graduation, she planned to attend medical school before switching to f to focus on open water swimming. And in two 2016, Katherine Breed joined San Francisco's historic openwater swimming community at the Dolphin Club, transitioning from pool competition to open water endurance swimming where cold water powerful ties and a culture of bold exploration challenged her to redefine her limits. Surrounded by legendary swimmers and lifelong adventurers, she began pursuing ambitious endurance swims that transform swimming from competition into exploration and on ultimately into a platform for storytelling and impact. And whereas from this transition emerged a guide guiding philosophy beyond the backline, a mindset rooted in stepping beyond certainty, embracing discomfort and forging new paths without predefined boundaries. And in 2017, Kathern Reed swam the length of Lake Tahoe in 8 hours and 56 minutes. Yeah. Breaking a record that stood since 1987. In two in 2022, she became the first person to swim from the Golden Gate Bridge to Half Moon Bay, covering 27 miles. And in 2025, she broke the Fereralon Islands to San Francisco open water swimming record. In addition to these accomplishments, she's completed marathon swims of the English Channel, the North Channel, and the 20 Bridges Swim. Keeps going. In 2024, Kathern Breed founded Sea Dreamers, a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting the ocean through conservation and education. In 2026, Kathern Breed announced a plan to become the first person to swim the entire length of California, covering 900 miles of the Pacific coast from north to south. And today, Katherine Breed's work extends far beyond individual achievement achievement. She is the founder of purpose-driven initiatives that combine endurance sport storytelling and ocean advocacy to inspire meaningful engagement with the natural world. And whereas Katherine Breeda advocates advocates for greater equity and representation in ocean spaces, particularly for women and underrepresented communities while championing the protection of marine ecosystems through experiential storytelling and community engagement. Now therefore, I, Sheper Kalentaria Johnson, vice mayor of the city of Santa Cruz, on beha behalf of our mayor and our city council, do hereby proclaim August 11th, 2026 as Katherine Breed Day and the city of Santa Cruz and encourage all citizens to join me in congratulating her on her extraordinary achievements and her commitment to ongoing ongoing beyond the black line by choosing a lifeguided by curiosity, courage, and connection and creating pathways for others to do the name. So, let's hear a round of applause for Captain Green. >> But I had to I had to read it all because that was quite impressive. >> Seriously, good afternoon. >> Good afternoon. >> Thank you, council. TR, clearly I'm not worthy of accepting this award on behalf of Katherine Breed. U it's just exhausting hearing all of her incredible achievements. Um but my name is Tren Hodes. represent Save the Waves Coalition and uh we are honored to receive this proclamation on behalf of Katherine Breed uh who is somewhere off the coast of Bolinus right now I believe if you check on the on the live stream. Um personally as a longtime swimmer myself I can't cannot even fathom the physical and mental endurance that it takes to accomplish such an incredible feat. It's truly something that has um inspired many many people across the world, not just in California. Um, as many people might already know, Katherine is making this 900 mile swim not only to do something that has never been done before in swimming the entire length of California, but also to bring awareness to the beauty as well as the fragility of California's coastal ecosystems. As Katherine puts it, this swim is her love letter to California. And she is using this incredible feat to bring awareness to the most critical and pressing issues facing our coasts right now, uh, including kelp deforestation, ship strikes on whales, the reemerging threat of offshore oil, and so much more. Uh Katherine is highlighting the great work of many coastal conservation organizations including Save the Waves um that are providing solutions to these threats including the Surf Rider Foundation, Monterey Bay Aquarium, Wild Coast uh and many others. And we are just humbled uh that Katherine invited us and our organization to celebrate her stop in Santa Cruz, which we are expecting will be around August 22nd. So stay tuned for some details. Obviously, uh the timing has to be a little bit flexible with the fee that she's attempting. Um but we would love to share details with that with um the city obviously and and the community so they can attend and and meet Katherine in person. Um so thank you to council for recognizing this incredible person and this achievement and what this signifies for our precious California coastline. So thank you so much. >> Well, thank you and obviously thanks Mr. Hodgees, while you're here, let me just also extend our thanks and appreciation to Save Our Waves. Uh, Save the Waves. That coalition is very, very helpful working with all the other ocean related entities around the Monterey Bay area. I know that you do that on an international basis. We really appreciate that work. It's very very good and serious and scientifically based and thank you for all that good work sir. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. Mr. Mayor and I'm actually stepping in for Sean Burns who is our our local coordinator here in Santa Cruz and I do a lot of international work. So I'm uh humbled and I'll tell Sean uh that you uh recognize all his great work. So thank you so much. >> Thank you sir. All right. >> Indeed. Indeed. Uh we are on item 10. This is a mayoral proclamation declaring June 29th, 2026 as Oliver Tree Day. And uh we are going to have presentation by Council Member Bruner. >> Thank you. I'd like to invite Oliver Tre's family to come. Please step forward to the podium who have waited patiently here today. Thank you so much. And um we will be presenting a mayoral proclamation. Oliver Tree Nickel passed away earlier this year uh unexpectedly and had great musical and cultural impact here locally and internationally and I am honored to present this proclamation. Whereas Oliver Tree was born and raised in Santa Cruz and has often credited the city's culture, extreme sport, community and culture and creative spirit as influences on his work. And whereas Oliver Tree has achieved international recognition as a musician, songwriter, actor, filmmaker, visual artist, reaching audiences around the world through his creative projects. And whereas Oliver Tree's success has brought positive attention to Santa Cruz and serves as an inspiration to upcoming artists and creators. And whereas Oliver Tree's message to his fans and the world was, "No matter how strange you look, no matter how ugly you feel, you are beautiful." And whereas Oliver Tre's foundation, Dr. Oliver Tre's extremely epic art grant for baby geniuses will support and foster emerging artists in music, installation, and performing arts in perpetuity. And whereas words that Oliver Tree lived by, you know, people are coming to judge you in life. And I find it's much easier to just be able to take a deep breath, remind yourself who you are, what you do, what you stand for, what you live for. We're constantly changing and evolving and growing. And if people don't resonate with you at that moment, forget them. And whereas many residents and fans wish to celebrate Oliver Tre's artistic contributions and lasting connection to the Santa Cruz community. Now therefore, I, Sonia Berner, council member, city of Santa Cruz, on behalf of Fred Keelley, mayor of the city of Santa Cruz and the rest of the city council, do hereby proclaim June 29th, 2026 as Oliver Tree Day in the city of Santa Cruz in recognition of his achievements and contributions to the arts. Thank you. >> Yes. Thank you for putting this award for Oliver. >> Yes, sir. Welcome. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, thank you for um doing this for Oliver. He's a true local. He was born in Dominican, went to um with the Gald Elementary, B40 middle school and and Harbor for high school. So, yeah, true creative place to grow up in Santa Cruz, you know. So, Oliver took his creativity and you know, traveled the world. So he got to do a lot of traveling the last two years. He did 82 countries and he had encroached about 134 countries total in his his travel. So he was out, you know, checking out the world and playing music and writing music the whole time. So very strong creative. I'm also thankful for the for Ma to actually get him in Evergreen Cemetery. So that's really good. We have a we haven't buried him there. So it's exciting to have another musician in that cemetery. So, thank you for honoring Oliver and he's up there, you know, really appreciating. He's got a smile and he's got a joke somewhere for you. >> Thank you, sir. >> Also, he spent much of his youth on his birthday, June 29th, at the Saturn Cafe. He loved that place. We are on oral communication. This would be the opportunity for anyone who is with us to address us on a matter under our jurisdiction. but not on today's agenda for a period of time of up to two minutes. In the event that we have folks here and folks online who want to make uh comments under all communication, we'll toggle back and forth uh between the Mr. Euing. Good afternoon. Welcome. >> Can I call a port of order before I start, please? >> I'm sorry. >> May I call a point of order before I start? >> Please do. >> Okay. I listened patiently to the five proclamations, took some notes on them. Only number six. Did you ask if the public were to make comments? I would have loved to have made comments on number four. That completes my point of order. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Hello. My name is James Ying Whitman. It was quite fascinating to you guys were on vacation. The supervisors were on vacation. Hopefully you guys are on vacation. Um I know when to stand up first. Apparently there were a lot of people behind me when I turned around. There were like 20 people behind me and I said what I said. I going to probably try to deliver my shortest corporate feces sandwich and I started with the yummy bread and then the other end of the yummy bread. But I had to leave the meeting when the second woman brought up chest feeding. What are people being taught? It is so challenging. Having almost completed four semesters at um Cabrio in 13 different subject areas, I can say that it's quite confusing. I really could talk at great length about all of my professors, but are they captured and narrow-minded? Oh, it is unfortunate. Um I don't think I can endure going back there. It was just too mentally challenging. Although I really enjoyed it. Uh, so besides that, I started my, it says I have 2 minutes, but that's impossible. It'd be nice, though. I started my corporate feces sandwich with, um, the only thing that, uh, second grade girls need to know about boys is that boys have cooties. and then um kind of talked about artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity because I personally wasn't paying attention to some stuff and um had traffic begin moving it might have been a lot different when I was half my body was underneath a truck on soel very thankful for that artificial intelligence is not designed to kill itself just dumb down the people and kill people 14 seconds. Besides that, I kind of went around about the metrocrats. I really wanted to talk about the World Homicide Organization. I'll do that later. Thanks. >> Thank you, sir. Do we have anyone else who's with us in chambers wishing to provide comment under oral communication? Miss Bush, do we have anyone online? We'll take the person online. Good afternoon and welcome to the city council meeting. >> Hello. Uh, hey Fred, it's Bradley Snyder. Hello, council. Welcome back. uh with the Zoom uh uh image. It's half the screen. You can kind of see that Scott's wearing a tie. Um so I hope everybody had a lot of fun uh sleepovers and pizza parties and everything. Summer's great. Exciting time of the year. Um, this is something I talked to Corey Aldrich, uh, the new CEO of the Metro about, and I I I want to put this past, you know, on this level at this meeting because I think it's a really interesting, um, phenomenon that, uh, the the the 17 Express bus, which, um, you know, has a driver pool out of SCMTD and, um, you know, is an Amtrak, a VTA, SCMTD, and Calra uh, coordinated um, uh, uh route. Uh the one thing that they did was they designed it about 5 years before they put in the green line to South San Jose. And so every time you take that bus going to San Jose and well vice versa coming back and you're going underneath the green line um the so undoubtedly had um had things happened in the reverse order uh the line would have stopped at Hamilton and uh at 880 Hamilton and and there is a light rail station right there that it passes every single route and uh so uh that's just that's just an oversight. Now uh Mr. Aldrich is new to SEMTD. Uh, you know, he's he's from, I think, from the Dakotas is where the originally where he did his work with a transit system in in that area of the country. Uh, but for me, it'd be very exciting uh if they would uh you know, they could there's so many uh so many different organizations involved. Now, uh uh Ryan Kuny worked under Matt Mayan in San Jose, and I'm sure he's familiar with uh Mr. Mayan's interest in bringing BART into downtown San Jose. I only have four more seconds. So anyways, thanks for letting me speak and uh welcome back. >> Thank you. It's online. We'll take the next person online. Good afternoon and welcome. >> Yes. Thank you. 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. I especially like the liberty part, the essence of what America is. With all the democratic communists trashing American principles the last 10 years or so, I think we all need to reaffirm our American roots and values. You must be aware of what they, the so-called DSA, stand for things like abolishing the Senate presidency, their Supreme Court, abolishing ICE, borders and prisons, defunding the Pentagon, mass amnesty for illegals, and very pro- Hamas. DSA influencers like Hassan have been reported to be calling for killing all capitalists, raping their daughters, or impoverishing the white middle class, and endorsing racist DEI principles to mention a few. Refusing to say the pledge gives me the idea you don't all believe in Western American principles. Uh, Proposition C also leads me to believe that it's very anti-private property. The real estate transfer tax is pure wealth confiscation, offering nothing in return to those who have their wealth stolen. Its effect is people become poorer. You must realize property taxes normally and should fund necessary services that everyone can access. Sales taxes as well as income taxes tax new wealth creation. They do not confiscate already taxed wealth uh which is just an abuse of the democratic process. Hopefully, Proposition 43 in November will forever eliminate tax abuses by city outsider self-interested nonprofits like Measure C was. I'll bet when Eden calls, you pick up the phone. As a sanctuary city status, I would think you've seen the effects of open borders in Spain where 50,000 illegals invaded a small Spanish city in a day. Now, there's reports of 13 year olds being raped, various acts of violence. That's the result. I I sure would like to see in your uh uh your budget, annual budget, you have state of the city stats, and I'd love to know how many illegals there are and how what the crime statistics are uh each year as well as gang activity. Thanks. >> Thank you. Anyone else on the line? Okay, anyone else? Last call on oral communication. We're on presiding officer announcements. I have none at this point. statements of disqualification on these agenda items. Council member, >> thank you, mayor. I have to recuse myself from item number 28. I own property within 500 ft of the project. >> Thank you. Any other statements of disqualification? Seeing near none, let me ask the city clerk, do we have any additions or deletions on our agenda? >> We do not. No. >> Okay. Let me see. Uh we are going to now receive a city attorney's report on our closed session. Good afternoon, madame council. >> Good afternoon, mayor. Uh the council met in close session today at 1:00 uh to discuss liability claims. Uh those are the claims listed on your agenda. Also to discuss real property negotiations with its real property negotiator involving the property at 121 SoCal Avenue. Council also met with legal counsel to discuss the existing litigation. Uh the two matters were the case James Morrisy versus City of Santa Cruz and the second one was California Grocerers Association versus City of Santa Cruz. And I forgot to mention that council member Bruner recused herself from item number two, the real property item. Thank you. >> Well, thank you. Council meeting calendar. Miss Bush, anything you would like to draw to our attention? >> No changes. >> Very good. Thank you. We are on the consent agenda. For those of you that might not be familiar with it, we will be taking up items 10 through 23 inclusive on one motion. What I will do is give an opportunity for council members to pull or comment or ask a question on them item. I will then go out to the public uh for a similar uh opportunity. Let me start on my right with Council Member Taggero on the consent agenda. >> No, thank you, sir. >> Very good. Council member Bruner, >> I have a comment question on 17. Uh, and that is the award contract for Poets Park playground improvement project and it looks like parks and wreck. Um, >> Mr. Elliot, good afternoon. >> So, uh, thank you. My my question and comment uh comment reading through this park improvement project item and seeing the attached park playground plans, reading about the community input and the colorful um options that are presented. It looks great. It's ADA accessible. It's being upgraded in such a wonderful way. And through all of the attachments and the agenda report, I don't know where Poets Park playground is. And there's no address listed anywhere. And it says district 4. And the only thing I could find was something about Grant Park. And Grant Park is no. So why is Grant Park listed in the draft cooperative purchasing agreement? And where is Poets Park playground? Great questions. Thank you very much for that, Sure. >> We will be sure to include those details in future staff reports, but thank you very much for calling that out. Poets Park is in Beach Flats, so very close to Beach Flats Park. It's a small pocket park, but a a wellused uh beloved uh pocket park there in Beach Flats. So, we did community outreach on June 20th and July 1st, and the community really shaped uh the vision and chose the uh the the playground design and park amenities for that uh park renovation. So, really good feedback from the community. Grant Park may have been mentioned. That was another uh playground project that we implemented last year. Uh we cut the ribbon at Grant Park on that new playground. That was another example uh of a cooperative purchase uh agreement uh playground that we um undertook that project that we undertook with Ross Recreation on that one. So there may have been a comparison in the staff report uh to the methodology that we used for Grant Park to fund that capital investment project uh at that park but different areas uh Poets Park again being in the Beach Flats neighborhood. Thank you, >> Council Member Nuome. On the consent agenda, >> uh thank you, Mayor. I just have a very quick comment on 16, 17, and 20. Uh all three of those items deal with infrastructure investment uh in my district. Uh one being new playground equipment at Poets Park and Beach Flats and enhanced uh roundabout at Pacific and Beach Street roundabout that will make it uh more accessible for uh and safer for the bike community and new handrails at the civic auditorium. Uh so just really happy that all three of these are on our agenda. Want to thank Director Elliots and Nwen for bringing them forward and for all their work and look forward to continue investment in in my district. Thank you. >> Thank you sir. Madame vice mayor. >> None for me. Thank you mayor. >> Thank you council member. >> None for me. Thank you. >> And council member Golder. Very good. Anyone with us wish to uh comment on the consent agenda? This would be your opportunity to do so. Good afternoon, sir. >> Hello. This is still James Yuing Whitman. >> Want to comment on number 10, the minutes of the June 23rd meeting. And then on item number 21, the three trucks that are being purchased, one for $550,000. It's a front loading refuge vehicle, I believe. And the other two, $700,000 are street sweepers. Well, I sure hope those are quality equipment because usually the city buys really quality equipment except for the electric stuff. So, enough on I wish the electric was better than it seems to be. Uh then on the minutes, seems like I've got quite a bit of leeway. I kind of looked through what was on that previous agenda. than I listened to several of the six times I spoke that day. So I could probably talk about anything. Um the making a reference to the violence against women which I think is really important to u protect and covet. I attended a meeting last Wednesday in this room. There were five women on this side, one in the audience and then the police person. I spoke three times. I was great. I only spoke briefly. I just was rather nice. Didn't have to be, but I was. Um, lo and behold, they had another meeting at 6:30 and they had some of the same information on there. It's just interesting how these strategies worked. Um, once again, I'm This is a very interesting shirt. The World Homicide Organization, I mean, started in 1913 with the Clayton Act. um it's not what people think it is. You know, it has a lot to do with the city and county management system and that it's controlling and directing the populations in a certain way, which is population decline. Now, I could be much more specific. I took several pages of notes from a presentation that Dr. David Martin provided. I suppose I could read some stuff, but I meant what I said about population control. Um, one of the interesting things about the Masons, and he definitely is a Mason, is they like to tell you what they're doing to see if regular individuals are actually going to do something about it. Um, fascinating how the WH is really run by, what was it, Renee Sand, who ran Dhaka concentration camp. Um, then the first inspector general of the UN, 1948, 1953, Brock Chisum. You know, you basically can do anything you want as as long as it's what we want you to do. Otherwise, we're going to take you out or drug you or whatever. So, we're all kind of in this together. And it's just fascinating to make observations of stuff here. That's enough. Except I found this New Yorker with Mr. probably Trump drinking. Hopefully, that's oil and not adrenochrome. Thanks. >> Thank you, sir. Anyone else on the consent agenda? We have someone online. We'll take the person online. Good afternoon and welcome. >> Hello again. Um it's Bradley Snider. Um I'm looking at the um looking at the agenda and um one thing that I'm interested uh on uh it's the sweet uh the street sweeper uh vehicles uh 21 I want to mention something about I'm 21 you so you're buying these uh street sweepers I just want to recommend I'm kind of familiar with heavy equipment um in my family uh growing up they owned a tractor dealership in the Midwest. So, uh, one thing I, you know, you notice about, uh, the climate, and you know, there's a lot of talk about climate at this meeting, but you just the pragmatic, uh, concerns of, uh, central coastal California is that it doesn't rain over the summer. And, um, at this restaurant where I I do a little bit of helping out, um, uh, you know, they have an indoor sort of enclosed courtyard and just washing it with, uh, some, you know, a little pine salt, just basically mopping the cement. uh it does wonders and uh you know I really think the city of Santa Cruz should consider uh like pressure washing's great but seems a little resource intensive but just simply rinsing the sidewalk during the summer once a month or twice a month would do wonders I think for the down the environment downtown um and so you know you've got street sweepers but nothing you know considering that particular uh you know particular effect in the summertime where you get all these stains that just dwell for a long long time and it's basically just someone spilled their coffee or something uh like that. Um you know the liability claims against the city I I have to imagine the well the the the lawsuit you dealt with in close session about the the grocerers was about um taxing soda pop and I've expressed my opinions uh in the past about that. I don't think it's a fair um you know uh I don't know you know it unfairly you know targets people who just prefer a certain consumer product that doesn't seem fair to anybody. Um I wanted to shout out to um Ryder Williams the the lifeguard who um uh sorry I forgot during public comment but you know uh you know congratulations to that kid for saving a life. You know that's just uh an amazing example. you know, anybody should u try to try to do what he did, you know, if they see someone um you know, suffering from, you know, climate the climate effects of the waves. Uh just kidding. Anyway, thanks very much. Have a good one. >> Thank you, Mr. Schneider. Anyone else online? Matters back before the body, pleasure of the body. Council member Trigger moves the consent agenda. Council member uh we got a second. We got a second from Council Member Nuome. Debate or discussion? Seeing and hearing none, the clerk will call the role. >> Council members Triggero >> I. >> Grer >> I. >> Nome >> I. >> Holder >> I. >> O'Hara >> I. >> Vice Mayor Kalentary Johnson >> I. >> Mayor Kuy >> I. Motion passes is awarded. We are on consent agenda public hearing. There are two items. We'll be opening the public hearing on both items 24 and 25. Let me see if uh members have any questions or comments on these items. Let me just ask generally. Any questions, comments? Members of the public, this will be your opportunity to comment. I open the public hearing on items 24 and 25. Last call. Do we have anyone online on items 24 and 25? Seeing none, we will close the public hearing. The matter is back before the body. The pleasure of the body. >> I'd like to move items 24 and 25. Council member O'Hara moves and council member Bruner seconds. Moving items 24 and 25 as recommended after the public hearing. Further debate or discussion. Seeing hearing none, the clerk will call the role. >> Council members Tgerero >> I. >> Rder >> I. >> Newsome >> I. >> Holder >> I. >> O'Hara >> I. >> Vice Mayor Kellory Johnson >> I. >> Mayor Keely >> I. Motion passes and so awarded. We are on item number 26. This is a California public employees retirement system contract amendment. We have materials in our packet. Miss our very competent chief people officer, Miss Deleó is here. Miss Deleó. Good afternoon and welcome. >> Thank you, mayor. Good afternoon, mayor and city council. I'm hoping this is a quick, easy item, but maybe I should never start with that. Um, this is a cleanup to our um Kalpers contract that entire impacts our entire workforce. Um since 75 we were not able to exclude certain temporary conditions of employment. Um and so we are making sure that our contract aligns with that state law. That is the only thing we are removing. Um the hope with this removal is to clean us up, get us in alignment, and make sure that employees who may have worked um in any of these temporary positions that are listed, which include county branch library aids, library pages, school crossing guards, and recreation department employees. um in a temporary nature can now qualify that time once they retire. Um so um that would impact our staff once this ordinance passes. I believe at the second reading anyone who retired after that would be able to collect that time if they had it. And that's all. >> Thank you, Miss Deleon. Let me see if there are questions by members. Council member O'Hara. >> Thank you, Miss Deleon. I do have a couple questions and this might be a reading of the staff report around um the characterization of kind of cleaning up that has been kind of confusing to me. So the staff report clearly explains the need to remove the existing contractual exclusions for certain hourly temporary seasonal part-time employees. So I get that. But what also caught my attention is that the actual motion resolution and ordinance go further. They also removed the contractual exclusion for all appointed members of the boards and commissions. And there's no data or information in the staff report that talks about that being a separate category of exclusion. And I need to understand that because that actually caused me to question that particular aspect of the motion and what we're trying to achieve with that. So anyone who had a temporary nature as an appointed member should still count and so we don't want that language there disallowing that service. >> Are you is that the is that your concern that it's doing the opposite? >> Um what the way I read it is that we're basically offering potentially CalPER's retirement to appointed members of the boards and commissions. No, they would have to be hired as temps and go over there's other eligibility requirements. You have to hit over the 999 hours, basically a thousand to qualify to be enrolled into Kalpers. So just because you're a temp doesn't always mean that you're going to earn time in Kalpers. It's usually if you've exceeded that 999 hour limitation. So we are not giving Kalpers's retirement straight away to any temps. There's other eligibility requirements to meet that. So, if I'm understanding this correctly, if there happens to be a temp employee that moves from temp employee to board or commission and then is continuing to acrue hours, those hours would be potentially correct because as a temp, all your hours together count in totality regardless of the classification itself. It's a 999 limitation as that appointment type of temporary. So, you could be a temp recreation aid for 600 hours, a temp maintenance aid. If you are paid as a temp doing some sort of I don't know that we do that with our boards and commissions. We don't usually hire them as temporary employees, but if we did, those collective hours would count towards that 999. And if they went over, then we would be enrolling them in CalPERS. So sorry, hypothetically, if a temp employee that was a school crossing guard or a parks employee become during that same fiscal year becomes a downtown commissioner, >> that time as a downtown commissioner would be subject to her retirement, the hours counted towards it would count towards their 999. But we don't often there is a council policy not allowing us to go over the 999 hours. It's extremely limited. So, >> okay. Um I'm This is nebulous for me actually. Um I think it's very possible that there could be temp employees that go over 999 by virtue of transitioning from a temp position to an appointed position. And I I'm calling into question whether that isn't our our intention because I don't feel like we are compensating andor even tracking hours associated with commission and board appointments. Why don't I take this back with my staff and I know we have if we can still do the reading today open it up. I know I have to do a second reading with you all and I can come back with that perhaps at our it has to be 20 days apart. So, I believe it's not the next meeting, but the following that the second reading would take place. Would that be acceptable? >> I'm happy to get some advice from the city attorney. And >> sure, we're kind of back and forth here. >> My understanding is that uh people on city boards and commissions are not paid. They receive an optional stipen. Is that correct? >> Correct. Um how exactly that the number of hours they use factors into the Kalpers, you know? Maybe you can comment on that, Miss Deleó. >> I I understand um council member O'Hara's concern because it does read all appointed members of the boards and commissions semicolon and that doesn't speak to >> total hours and so I see why she does have the question and concern and I think it's appropriate to for me to get some final staff check-ins before approvals the next meeting. >> That's helpful. Thank you, >> Council Member Bruner on this item. >> That was uh my similar question regarding all appointed members of boards and commissions and clarity around that. So, thank you. >> Thank you. This will be the opportunity for anyone who's with us who wishes to make comment on this item. This will be your opportunity to do so. In the event we have folks online, we'll toggle back and forth. Anyone on this item? We have anyone online? Matters back before the body. Pleasure of the body. >> Thank you, mayor. Um, I am seeking some advice from the city attorney, Miss Dele Leon, as to whether we are s whether I should be suggesting a continuation or denying the resolution and the publication of the first reading of the ordinance. I think what Miss Deleon presented, the option she presented was to go ahead and pass uh this motion language today and that if there is a problem um with the um uh the city commissioners, that sort of thing, that uh there would be potentially an another first reading at the next uh council meeting, but if everything checks out, then we could do a second reading uh as appropriate. Thank you, the mayor. I I'm happy to move uh staff's recommendation with a express understanding that we might have to return with a second first reading. >> There's a motion second by council member Bruner. Further debate or discussion. Seeing hearing none, the clerk will call the role. >> Council member Triggera >> I. >> Bruner. >> I. >> Holder. >> I. Vice Mayor Keller Johnson >> I. >> Mayor Keely >> I. Motion passes and awarded. We're on item 27. This is the 2025 2030 city of Santa Cruz local hazard mitigation plan and climate adaptation plan and implementation progress report. We have material in our packet and we are going to receive a presentation from Dr. Tiffany Wise West. Good afternoon and welcome and welcome to you. >> Good afternoon, mayor and council members. Uh we're here today to present to you the uh one-year implementation of the 2025 to 2030 local hazard mitigation and climate adaptation plan. I'd like to introduce Michael Dyer who is our sustainability and resiliency project manager too and had substantial work on this report that you see today in terms of data collection analysis and um the report itself. So thank you Michael. He's here to answer any questions that um I cannot. So, just to remind you, um this plan was developed between 2023 and 2025. It was adopted by city council early last year, approved by FEMA in spring of last year, and is the first combined local hazard mitigation and climate adaptation plan in the United States to be approved. So, today um we're going to give you >> Say that one more time. slow it down. >> It's the first combined local hazard mitigation and climate adaptation plan to be approved by FEMA in the country. >> Um so kudos to you all for that. Um we're going to review uh the plan and how or not the plan, I'm sorry, the the governance for how we are ensuring that this plan is implemented over the next five years. We're going to share with you some highlights that are, you know, very detailed in the report. You have the community engagement that's uh been conducted related to the projects in the plan, some adjacent efforts, some challenges that we have mostly related to funding and year 2 implementation priorities. So, we have a lot here. I'm not going to read all of it, but um here's kind of some of the things that I mentioned already in terms of timing. This covers 10 different hazards. You can see everything from erosion, dam failure. For the first time, extreme heat is brought into the plan. Um, we have 27 adopted projects that are in the plan. And again, the governance was approved by our department directors in August of last year. So, thus the one year. And we had some new annexes to the plan that were developed since its adoption, including the multi-hazards and compound events annex, which really, you know, acknowledges that these hazards often don't happen by on their own. You could have a drought that exacerbates the need the uh potential for fire, which then can exacerbate landfills when you or landfills landslides when you have a big storm. Right? So interconnectedness that we hadn't really explored before as well as adaptation pathways for non-coastal hazards. We had already kind of started our adaptation pathways journey for coastal hazards where adaptation pathways is really looking for a signal to uh implement projects versus kind of sequencing them on a time frame with respect to the uncertainty with climate change doesn't necessarily make sense. So our first pass at putting adaptation pathways together uh as well and importantly having this document makes us eligible for certain categories of pre and post hazard mitigation funding from FEMA of which we take a huge advantage of. So this keeps us in uh eligibility for that. So uh we have completed two projects. Um we have 22 of the 27 that are in progress. So, we've started almost all of them. There are eight new public works projects and one parks and wreck project that's not reflected here or in your report that we are considering annexing into the plan that are some high priorities. So, that would be coming later. It doesn't require going back to FEMA, but it acknowledges and brings them in and makes them eligible for that funding. Um the total portfolio and this is a working number in nature because we're still getting our arms around uh the cost of these projects is about $654 million for uh the 27 projects. Already we've secured 152 million of that. Um and since uh the plan has been put in place, we have a 67% grant success rate with the nine grant apps submitted, which we've really ramped up over the past couple years. So, a lot of success there. Um, including the FEMA brick grant. Uh, so some highlights. Uh, just to recap the hazards. Um, and we didn't even include the June 2026 Lighthouse Point um, erosion event in our uh, report because we were drafting it prior to that. But we are including uh the major storm damage at the wararf uh the bluff erosion uh at GCH's which currently uh relocation of that path is is happening and funded and then of course the lighthouse point uh uh erosion event that happened just in June of this summer. These are the two projects that are complete. The water department has installed a backup generator at their admin building as well as completed their utility customer assistance program um for both single family and multi- uh family programs as well as a lot of community engagement conducted there. Um we have some major projects that are under construction of which you are already aware. Murray Street Bridge, the New Creek Pipeline, aquafer storage and recovery and of course the warf resilience improvements. We also have in addition to construction some design milestones and funding milestones uh that have um been completed for the downtown San Lorenzo River drainage and pump station number one project. Um we are in the process of developing developing a basis of design report that's what BOD stands for and design of that pump station. That is the phase one of a FEMA brick grant which is building resilience resilient infrastructure for communities. That was a grant that had been put on pause by the Trump administration and has since started flowing. The second phase of that project is construction. Um it's about 10 a little over 10 million. We early indications are we're we're likely going to get that funding flowing again. Also, this is all pending uh some final confirmation with Caloes, but that is really good news for us because we thought all that funding was gone. Uh Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant uh is under construction starting in January of 2027. Um and then the Lighthouse Field Westcliff Road relocation that's in design right now um and uh is expected to uh be complete by May of 2027. On the right, you can see of our secured funding. We have a whole lot of different uh grants and uh revolving loan fund uh uh sources that we're pulling from, including our local measure Q for the San Lorenzo River Culvert project that's helping to pay for the debris broom to get that performance a little more um maximized or optimized. Um so again, really diverse funding uh for these different projects. In terms of community engagement, I think one of our really proud moments was the uh race the wave tsunami preparedness run and of course uh race the flame is being pl uh planned for this fall. Uh the beach flat Spanish language focus group we conducted uh in December of this past year. Big success continued focus on emergency preparedness. You heard earlier today about the neighborhood resilience workshops and again the one that's being conducted in the beach flats tomorrow. And as I mentioned, our fellow will be sharing with you a little bit later in the year our work on developing both municipal and nonprofit community resilience centers. So those are uh places that people can go to to say pick up air purifiers to get into clean air when there's smoke. Um cooling centers, but they can also serve as long-term education hubs or workshops, things like that. So more to come on community resilience centers. Some adjacent efforts that aren't in the plan itself, but really support um local hazard mitigation includes uh recently uh obtaining the tsunami ready designation. Um the coastal incident response planning framework update uh that our emergency operations manager uh has developed. The wildfire early warning system. There are contracts for critical facility fuel, very important. Um our communications team has launched an emergency preparedness portal and we've developed a critical facility infrastructure list. So very complimentary to the projects in the plan itself. Challenges to implementation. I already mentioned the brick phase 2 fundings uncertainty. We're starting to get a little more certain on that but we'll we'll know more in a couple months. Um, we also have had some internal capacity limitations to undertake some of our projects. For example, the critical facility seismic retrofit. With that said, we're only on year one. Um, we have the additional projects that we mentioned that we need to annex in and find funding for. And for the Brans of 40 flood control project, the, you know, additional challenge of sequencing that project with private development that's occurring in the area. nothing that can't be um overcome but definite challenges. Um I'm not going to read all this but implement uh year 2 implementation priorities. We want to advance at least two major grant applications. We're working on that right now uh with a multi-depal team um try to get some of these other projects started. Um, we also have the coastal funding and financing study which is associated with the shoreline adaptation and management plan project that council directed um staff to complete as part of the Westcliff 5-year roadmap. Um, we have the um some other coastal projects going on. Um we also have launching a GIS hazard and project database and web portal that we're hoping to have a public facing uh portion of that in addition to using it as a tool for tracking for efficient tracking and then a lot more with community engagement. Um you can see I've already mentioned many things um added capacity workshops and events. With that that's my uh presentation for you. I'm happy to answer any questions and the staff recommendation is shown um if you if you are able to uh accept the report. >> Dr. Wise West, thank you. Many thanks to you and your staff uh for this fine work. Let me see if there are questions and comments by members. Council member Bruner, >> thank you so much. I I really appreciated reading through the staff report and the attachments and I just wanted to say I appreciate the tracker. Um I love that kind of data and seeing it in color differentiated columns and um that was really helpful for me to see and the prioritization from highest to high to and so on down the list. So, thank you so much for all the great work to everybody involved. Um, thank you. >> You're welcome. And yes, I should acknowledge that there is a team of city staff that meets twice a year on this and were key to us gathering all this information citywide. >> Thank you, Council Member O'Hara. >> Thank you. And I had an opportunity to express this directly to Dr. Weise West um in the hallway earlier. I just want my colleagues, and I'm sure you know this, to understand that we are so normalized to the exemplary work that this office does, that we can sit and listen to a presentation like this where we can see that we are nearly 70% of awarded grants, hundreds of millions of dollars of investment, and think that's business as usual, but it's simply is not. It is extraordinary. >> It's extraordinary. It's generational. It is the most critical work, you know, that we are doing to ensure that the infrastructure in our community is here for the next generation and the many generations after that. So, I just want to express my appreciation um and then just say out loud how unusual this is. Um, I was just in Wisconsin last week working with seven water utilities that have formed in the 90s a water authority. It's the only in Wisconsin and they have gone through this process of building a 65 mile 48 inch pipeline to bring Lake Michigan water to these small communities. And when I got out there, they sit on top of the Fox River. And I thought, I asked, why aren't you using this water source? It's because the Fox River is completely polluted. And they are living in a completely different world than we are here. >> And some of that is because of California legislation. Some of that is because the city of Santa Cruz has been at the forefront for years doing this work. So, thank you, Tiffany. I really appreciate it. Thanks to staff as well. Um I'm so proud to be a part of this work that you are doing and have a little piece of it. >> Thank you. Again, just want to mention this is a testament to all our staff. I'm just here reporting today >> for the questions and comments. Let me see if there's anyone who's with us who wish to make comment on this item. This will be your opportunity to do so. Miss Bush, do we have anyone online? We will take the person online. Good afternoon and welcome. Hello. I I just have a quick question. I I didn't see any reference to the cost to the local taxpayers in any of these projects and I know there is some and maybe somebody there could ask that question. Thanks. >> Thank you, Dr. Wiseworth. On behalf of Mr. Phillip, I'll be glad to ask the question. >> Sure. Absolutely. We don't have that totaled but what you saw that 152 million is grants. Now in some cases we have matches that we have to bring with that which vary in percentage. That's not something we have totaled. We could and then the rest is our staff time. >> I want to say with regard to grants um I think it's one of those cases where we think it's somebody else's money. Now, this is grant that we have paid somehow in taxes, fees, and exercises of various kinds and we're getting those back into the city of Santa Cruz, not like it's somebody else's money. So, when Mr. Phillip asks, you know, the taxpayers, this is getting clawing back some of our taxpayer money that we paid here back into our community for these very beneficial purposes. Let me see if there are other questions, comments. Anyone else online, Miss Bush? No. Last call. Yes, please. Mr. Yuing, good afternoon, sir. >> No, thank you very much. I like being called Mr. Euing, actually. >> Uh, I thought this list of 10 was about the, you know, the 17 sustainability goals. I'll just list them. Number seven, coastal erosion. Two, dam failure. Five, drought. Uh, I didn't write clearly. Number nine, two, extreme heat. 13, flood. Three, landslide. Nine, sea level. Sea level rise. Two, tsunami, 10, wildfire. I guess what I got to say is we are all in this together. We are all breathing the same air. And when we have any kind of disaster, you know, who's actually looking out and helping each other? That's a big question. I uh it's it's actually a big question. I I question a lot of things going on in these rooms and I wish that uh there was a juror's prudence that was really helping each and every individual. I can observe a similarity to my 13 different subject areas at Cabrio. Fascinating. I loved my professors, but uh I love all you guys too, but I disagree with you guys a lot. Um, so I just kind of have to wonder about all this stuff. I'm pretty sure FEMA was mentioned. I looked in the stuff. I didn't see it in particular. Uh, who's in charge of FEMA in this county now that Carlos Palasios is gone? You know, my understanding is we've been in a state of emergency since March 23rd or March 13, 2020. FEMA's been in control. So, back to when any of these natural processes happen on planet Earth, Santa Cruz is not an island unto itself. California was an island 300 years ago, but that's was then. Um, I'm amazed just to be an observation of this stuff. I was gone for, I thought, five minutes. You went through three other items. It's happened before. It's just okay. Um, so it's just a pleasure to be here. I'm glad nobody resigned in any of the office while you guys were on vacation. Um, I'll bring stuff up next time. Thank you so much. >> Oh, well, thank you so much. All right, matters back for the body pleasure of the body. The vice mayor is recognized. >> Thank you. I'd like to move uh to accept the local hazard mitigation and climate adaptation plan year one implementation progress report. There's a motion. Is there a second? Council member Newsome. Debate or discussion? Seeing and hearing none, the clerk will call the role. >> Council member Tgera >> I. >> Grer >> I. >> Newsome >> I. >> Holder >> O'Hara >> I. >> Vice Mayor Kalentary Johnson >> I. >> And Mayor Keely >> I. Motion passes and so ordered. For those of you who've been sitting waiting patiently, we have arrived. We are on item number 28. This is 900 High Street major modification and density bonus request proposing modifications to application number CP22-0164. We have a fair amount of material in our packet and we have Mr. Bane here to uh help us move through this. The record will reflect that council member Nuome is has recused himself because he has a conflict in so far as his residence is within a legally required limit uh which prohibits him from being able to participate in this. Mr. Bane, good afternoon, sir. >> Good afternoon. Um what we have before you is a uh major modification to a previously approved um application CP220164. Um that this application included a minor land division design permit, slope development permit, density bonus request, and heritage tree removal permit. Um the original project site was a 5.9 acre lot located on the north side of High Street Mey to the northeast of its intersection with Moore Street shown here. Um developed with a church that was constructed in 1957. So the approved project scope uh included subdividing the parcel into two lots. Um the lower 3.7 acre lot retaining the existing church uh campus and the upper lot to be approximately 2.23 23 acres for construction of a 40 unit uh fourstory residential apartment building. So this this project was originally approved by our zoning administrator um and then it was appealed to planning commission where the appeal was denied and the project approved and then it was appealed to city council um where the appeal was denied and this uh back in uh February of 24. So since that approval, the subject property has been subdivided as as approved. Um but no construction has occurred at the site. Uh the site slopes upward to the north as you can see here. Uh it's comprised of mainly open grasslands and and trees. So following approval of the original application, it was determined that the project was not financially feasible. Um, in order to make the project feasible, the applicant has redesigned the building to be a more efficient rectangular shape and footprint, uh, eliminating the wings of the building that had stepped up the slope, uh, increased the unit count from 40 to 47, including a change to the unit mix to include more co-living units and studios, and requested additional concessions and waiverss to decrease project costs. So the building shape modified from um a Vshape with a which is shown on the left extending up the hillside to a more basic rectangular shape that is generally in the same footprint as the as the previously approved. In essence they took kind of that wing that V-shaped wing and placed it on top. Um basically kind of reducing that footprint and not stepping up the hill. Um, with the overall footprint of the building generally being reduced, the building's rectangular dimension has been increased as was the height. Um, adding an additional floor. Um, this is the view from from the north, the uphill side, which can generally only be seen from the UCSC residential units that are above. So, while this new design is a bit more basic from this vantage point, it reduces the overall building footprint. um the general scale of the structure is reduced as well as the amount of grading that would be needed um as the building is not being constructed further into that hillside. Um also um being modified is the bedroom or the unit mix and bedroom count. So um as is demonstrated in this table here um the bedroom count has increased from 85 to 107 bedrooms. Um also u minor change and modification is um the original project proposed two ent two entrances to the project. Um so the proposed project modifies what was the newly proposed entrance to strictly just an emergency um uh vehicle access leaving only the one existing eress point that's currently there. Also um I should mention that the previous uh approval included a condition of approval that required the transformer box be placed underground. Um it has since been determined that the city cannot require this undergrounding and therefore that condition has been stricken. Um under state density bonus law, the project qualifies for four incentive concessions and an unlimited number of waivers. Um the density bonus request proposes three concessions and three waivers um from the development standards and those are listed here. Uh, additionally, it should be mentioned that a new SP330 pre-application associated with the project was deemed complete prior to that, prior to this modification application. Therefore, the objective design standards for multif family housing are applicable to this modification. Um, the project meets 28 of the 31 objective design standards. So except for those three that were as modified um by incentives and concessions and waiverss pursuant to uh density bonus law. Um the zoning code zoning code states that rental residential developments that create five or more dwellings shall be provide uh 20% of the dwelling units as inclusionary units um which shall be made available for rent to low-income households at an affordable rent. Um this calculation is specific to the base density of the project which in this case is 23 units. Um so that's requiring four units. The project is meeting the minimum number of inclusion units by providing the four very low-income units that also qualify the project for the 50% density bonus. Um the zoning code also states that for developments with multiple market rate unit types containing different numbers of bedrooms uh inclusion inclusionary units shall be representative of the market rate unit mix. So the zoning code does allow um states that for developments with multiple market rate units um sorry for compliance with the above mentioned criteria the applicant is proposing to use an alternative compliance uh method available through our zoning code. So rather than providing uh the affordable housing in units that are representative of the unit breakdown, the applicant has proposed to provide the required four inclusionary affordable units as all studio units while providing 10 um additional affordable bedrooms in the co-living units. So in summary, basically the original approval um project provided four very lowincome units and five low-income units for a total of nine. So the proposed modification uh proposed project would provide four very low-income units, four moderate income units in addition to 10 additional bedrooms within the co-living units also being made available to income qualifying tenants as affordable rates. And I should mention that inclusion area is definitely not more forte for forte, but we do have luckily some very knowledgeable, smart um folks from our housing department here that can answer any questions that may come up regarding regarding how these were calculated. So, uh, in conclusion that, um, the recommendation is that the council make a motion to adopt a resolution acknowledging the environmental determination and approval of the major modification and density bonus request proposing modifications to application CP220164 based on the findings listed in the draft resolution and the conditions of approval attached as exhibit A. And I'm available for any questions. >> Mr. Bane, thank you very much for the presentation. Let me see if there are questions or comments. Council member O'Hara is recognized. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um and if um you are comfortable, mayor, I'd like to have the floor for several minutes to walk through several questions. >> You take such time as you need. >> Thank you. Um this particular project was approved um by this council by denying the appeal during um my election campaign. And so this is the first time even though this is in my district I've had a chance to weigh in on this project. Um, and as I was considering how to engage on this project, I wanted to start with a premise that staff does an exceptional job in receiving these development requests, going through line by line those permits and the, you know, all of the different requirements that state density bonus and all of the other California law requires. But it is the role of staff to analyze those conditions and make a recommendation to this hearing body and it is our responsibility to work with the applicant on those findings. And so I'm going to be walking through a number of questions of the applicant. So whomever is responsible for answering technical questions, thank you for um coming up to oblige me with that. So, I'm going to because of that premise that I'm working off of, I want to organize my questions a little bit differently this afternoon and restate a couple, you know, facts first. Um, we already Thank you, Mr. Simon. You can sit for a second. I'm going to go for a little bit and then I I'll call you up. Thank you. We already approved for a 40unit project on this site. The propo the prop proposal before us is now a material different 47 unit project with a different building configuration a different unit mix and an increase from 85 to 107 bedrooms three additional concessions three waiverss and a different approach to sat satisfying our inclusionary housing requirements and while I understand that state law significantly constrains some of our decisions available to us I believe that as I mentioned staff's role is to analyze the application and make a recommend commendation. It is our responsibility as the decision-making body um to make the findings that are in front of us today. So I want I want to walk through this in a very deliberate way. First I want to understand directly from the applicant why the project we previously approved cannot be built. Then I want to take each concession and waiver individually. what the applicant is asking for and why, what staff concluded, and what legal determination council is actually being asked to make. Finally, I want to make I want to discuss the proposed alternative approach to inclusionary housing separately, and I appreciate appreciate that we have staff here that can help with that. All right. So, the first question to the applicant. The staff report states that the original project was approved. I'm sorry. After the original project was approved, it was determined that the project was not financially feasible and that this redesign was undertaken in order to make the project feasible. Can you explain to council directly what made the project we approved in 2024 financially infeasible? >> Yeah. and just cut me off or interrupt here, but I try to be thorough without being too long. Um, we started and the the bulk of the design work of that original project was done in uh mid to early 2022 and we submitted it as a full application at the end of 2022. And so there's really two categories of things that that led to the problem. And also, I just want to say upfront, we would much I'd much rather be visiting a construction site right now of the previously approved project than back here with you all, although I appreciate you having me. So, uh, so we just really wish we could be building that, but the the, uh, so two categories of things. First of all, since that, you know, mid 2022 when we're um making that determination, costs of construction and development are just way up. And it's nobody here's fault, but um you know, tariffs have come on since then. Interest rates are a couple still two to three points higher than which has a massive effect. Um you know, insurance, etc., etc. And you you expect costs to go up, but they've gone up. We thought they'd gone up a ton during the pandemic and that would probably be it and there was a lot of predictions interest rates would actually come down eventually and here we are. So that's one whole category of things. The other is um that we really wanted to go for that design of stepping up the hill giving accessible access to the open space up above and other features that that could um provide. And this is a fairly um it's being this project's really being run on a budget because our goal and the funding from nonprofit sources we have for this and the church's goal is to maximize affordability in the project and not just upfront with the numbers you're seeing, but a lot more than that and on the long term have more affordability in the project. And so we do things step by step and carefully, but it costs a lot to do all the investigations to know exactly what it's going to cost to build. And we still don't know exactly what it cost to build because you have to get to building permit really to know all the details. But you continually hone in on that. And in this particular case, a challenging site stepping up what you don't know. I we don't want to spend tens of thousands of dollars really getting a firm estimate on all of that. uh the construction costs including the foundation and what's in the soil going up the hill until we know what's going to get approved. So, it's a balancing act where we had a sense of it, we thought we could pull it off, then we go through a couple years of work to get it approved. Meanwhile, costs are going up, then we go out and we did more borings in the soil, um and got contractors to say, "This is how much concrete you're going to need. This is what it's going to cost." And both were problems. the overall cost of the whole project went up and that came back more than we had hoped despite having experience with it. So, um we could have absorbed potentially one of those things but not both of them. And so we said, okay, we got a step back. Um meanwhile, we did the lot split. You know, getting it approved was still really important because you get it approved, we unlocked additional funding which helped us figure all this out and advance the project further. So, that was really key. And then we're back here. >> Okay. Um, can you share an order of magnitude um of this financial gap? Is it hundreds of thousands of dollars? >> It's tens of millions of dollars. >> No, millions of dollars. Not tens of millions of dollars, you know. Uh, and so, um, so we just really had to figure out what's going to fill that gap. And to some extent then, not going up the hill is a really big factor and having some additional units is a really big factor. and a combination of those things and a balance in everything we could come up with is is what we came to. >> Okay. Thank you. And um this is a Thank you. Um this is a question for staff. Did staff receive or review a financial proforma or other financial analysis comparing the approved project with the project before us today? >> No. Um, so, so if that's the case, when staff reports, when the staff report states that the approved project was not financially feasible, should council understand that as a representation made by the applicant rather than an independent financial determination made by the city? That was something that as part of their modification application, that was a statement that was made as as part of the submitt to us saying that that is the reason for the modification. And I don't believe that we're required to uh have them provide financial um statements like that. Okay. Maybe for the city attorney. Am I correct that the overall financial feasibility is the applicant's explanation of why this major modification is being requested, but proving that the original project is financially infeasible is not itself the legal test for granting an individual density bonus concession. the applicant does not um it the analysis is more along the lines of does the city have grounds to deny an incentive concession or does the city have grounds to deny a waiver? And there are specific um points in the code about that specifically to the assertion that it's financially infeasible. We cannot deny a an approval of a project based on us not having any data around that that infeasibility. Correct. So if you if for example if you were inclined to attempt to deny a concession for example, you would need to have a written finding based on substantial evidence that the concession or or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions. >> Okay. Okay. Um I'm going to walk through each of the concessions. So the first one is the floatable floating affordable units. Um, the applicant asked to remove the requirement that the affordable housing agreement identify the location of the inclusionary units and proposes allowing the affordable designation to move among units. >> So, Mr. Simon, let's take that concession first. What specific problem are you trying to solve with this concession? Yeah, I'm trying to um make things flexible and make it easy for us to change which units are the affordable units, which does uh multiple things. One is it can minimize our vacancy time and turnover if we know, you know, a lot of times you get a 30-day notice or even longer for someone who's going to move out. If we have another unit, it takes a little bit longer. there's more process with um getting a process to get a new tenant who qualifies for an affordable unit um and income validating that and going through the housing authority and other things. And so there will be situations where we can get a head start and have a different unit uh and get that person in. And when the first unit that was affordable comes up, you'd have a little overlap first, then that one can be open market and we can lease it up faster. One of the things we're really trying to do here is you usually get subsidized all affordable projects or you get forprofit profit maximizing projects and we're neither and we're trying to have more affordability without having any public subsidy. there's not a public dollar in this in the subsidy sense. And so we're trying to make the most flexibility and the minimum overhead while complying with everything. And the other the other thing I want to say is that the church has strong interest in this project being more affordable over time as it can afford to do so. So we got to pay back everybody who's putting money in to build this. But as that financial situation of the project approves, more affordability is one of the key goals and in contracts we have with the church. And so we would really like to have a two or threebedroom unit eventually that's an affordable unit, for example. And we're just trying to not have a whole bunch of recorded agreements with the city. We got to go and change and get the city manager to sign and notoriize and go to the county and get them to file it before we can just say, "Oh, now instead of a studio, we're ready to have a two-bedroom as an affordable unit. Okay. Um, did you quantify an expected cost savings associated with this concession? >> No, we just know that there is cost savings with it. Obviously, it's something we could take time to do, but with everything, we didn't run and try to estimate a number on it. >> So, let me make sure I understand this. So, the concession doesn't necessarily isn't necessarily d been driven by cost savings. It's uh allowing flexibility on behalf of the >> it's it's both and I was trying to emphasize both things both aspects. We're really trying to find every way because this you hear a lot about projects penciling. This project doesn't pencil in the usual sense and was never designed to. We're getting funding sources that won't get a market rate investment return to fund this project. So we're trying to make it as absolutely efficient and yes efficient to do what partly what the project's designed to do which is also about maximize affordability. Yeah, I get that. I guess I'm drawing back to the financial infeasibility and if there isn't any specific cost savings associated with this concession, >> there is cost savings. We didn't run the number. We look at how do we use some concessions to improve cost? And on this particular one, I don't have a number. Yeah. >> Okay. Um for staff, if a council approves this concession, what prevents an affordable unit from being replaced by a materially smaller unit or a unit with fewer bedrooms? Good afternoon, Mr. Butler. >> Thank you, Mayor, and thanks for that question, Council Member O'Hara. The affordable housing development agreement will specify the minimum number of uh bedrooms. And so we would have for example um that while those units aren't identified specifically, we would say at a minimum four studios at very low income and at a minimum four studios at moderate and at a minimum as the applicant has agreed to 10 bedrooms in the co-living spaces as moderate with the other stipulations associated with those um those bedrooms. Okay, >> excuse me. That that uh the bedrooms are low income, not moderate. Sorry about that. >> Thank you. Okay, I'm going to move on to uh concession two, the streamlined tenant selection. The applicant asked to make city marketing of a vacant affordable unit optional at the property manager's discretion based on the assertion reduced reduction in property management time and expense. Um, on concession two, are you asking the city to make city marketing of available afford affordable units optional? What specifically is the cost associated with the city's posting or marketing of an available affordable unit? >> It's the management time. And here again, you know, you know that affordable unit projects are much more expensive than open market projects. And we're trying to hit the sweet spot here. And so we have to convince lenders that we've got a management model that can work with similar to there's no question there's more management time on co-l livingiving yes but on the deed restricted affordable units that we can manage them you know in a way that our cost models make sense and that affects how much we can borrow you know for the project. So in this case, if we we anticipate we are always going to have a lot of folks interested in these affordable units and if somebody contacts us, we'll put them on our list and we'll get back out to them, you know, etc. But having uh and we want to be right on top of like I kind of said pre loading if we know a unit's coming available we want to get going on income qualifying someone getting them in there and by the time we send the form to the city the city gets it up on things and people then people see it and then they contact us. I think we're just going to get hundreds and I mean we know we do. Affordable projects get a thousand people applying for every unit and then we got to tell all those people we already got somebody and I just want to make it more efficient than that. If we need to market it, we're coming to the city to help do that. I just don't I think that just takes a lot of extra time for the modest number of units here. >> Thank you. Um this is for staff. What public purpose does the city's existing marketing requirements serve? And is the intention to provide broader and more equitable public access to scarce, affordable units? I look to our yeah, our housing department to maybe answer that since they're the ones who implement this mostly. >> Thanks, Jessica. >> Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Jessica Duet, housing manager at the city. Um, it would provide another option for uh folks to be able to see that unit online is available or coming coming up for lease. If the developer owner already has a wait list of a thousand that they're going through, um, the chances of, you know what I mean? It's a long process. So, it's one other option. Is it the only option, no. Um, we do have 100% affordable projects in the city where they have this long waiting list and some of them are are are going years before they want to come back and post with the city. So, I I I don't think it's going to be a if the operator is saying it's a big issue, then we can we we can work with it. But typically, yes, we would like to post on our city website. >> Thank you. Okay. I uh Yes, >> Mr. Bmore. >> Thank you. Um I was just going to add as it relates to this that um we um we can um post those online, but the the costs associated with it that the developer has indicated um would qualify for that incentive concession. Um and um I think uh one of the things that we want to um convey here is that um to the points and the questions that you've been asking the the burden of proof falls on the city for establishing that these things do not um do not create uh a cost savings for the applicant. So, I just wanted to to point that out in terms of like where the law falls um on the the burden of proof. >> Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Butler. Okay. I'd like to move on to concession three, the vinyl windows. The third concession is permission to use vinyl windows rather than the materials otherwise required by our objective design standards. Do you can you share the approximate cost difference between the compliant windows and the vinyl windows if you want to use if that's the option you would like to use? Yeah, certainly at least tens of thousands of dollars, but I don't have a quote yet on the window package for this. We'll do that during the building uh permit phase. But, you know, it's something we consider carefully and honestly, if we can come through uh the detailed design process and come pay for other types of windows, we may do that. but would really like the option. Um, and particularly thought about that because this isn't a street facing facade. I just add the church cares a lot about the aesthetics of this project because that's what it's facing is really the church rather than a street. And so, you know, we will have to work together to find um a great look that we're all happy with there. >> Just to make sure I understand Stan, for the entire project, it's in the tens of thousands of dollars potentially >> at least. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Um I think I'll move on to waiver um am I already on waiver five? Hold on. Uh nope. Sorry I went too far forward. Sorry, my apologies. Now I'm all over the place here. Okay. All right. Waiver five is the heights. The project seek seeks a waiver from R1 height standard of two and a half stories 30 feet to construct to a proposed fivetory building. Um for the height waiver, what specifically happens to the project if the 30 foot height standard is applied? How many res residential units will actually be lost? Have you modeled a development that complies with the 30-oot height limit? If so, how many units can the building accommodate? I'd like to have a better understanding of how we ended up with the additional height in terms of objective changes in units etc. >> Yeah, I mean it's a little under 60% of the units because you got lobby and like and it's yeah it might it's probably about half of the units are in the bottom three out of five floors and um because of all the other spaces that need to be in the first floor. And we um yeah, we we've been working on this project for 10 years and we originally and had community meetings around projects with town houses and projects with forplexes up on the top level all kind just looked at everything and and every way we were getting getting blocked by the expense of trying to do different things. So, a compact building where you have enough scale you can pay for all the improvements needed to be made on the property and pay for the construction and the foundation. Um, that's what we've come to is what we believe we can accomplish. Like I said, it didn't meet all the financial feasibility metrics that a normal for-profit project would, but we believe we can get there. I would like to say, I don't think it was entirely clear before, that while the tallest part of the building that's occupied before was four stories, there were six levels because of the way it stepped up the hill. So, we've taken two levels off of the step up and put them on one level down below for what that's worth. >> Okay. Thank you. Um for staff, did staff perform indep uh independent evaluation uh with regard to applying the height st with regard regard to whether applying the height standard would physically preclude construction of the density permitted under I'm sorry construction of the density permitted under state density bonus law. >> Yes. Um we looked at that and obviously they wouldn't be able to add those additional density bonus units without allowing for going over the height. that's um currently there on a for the R110 zone district. >> Okay, thank you. Um on to the next waiver, front setback. The pro project seeks to reduce the required 25 foot front setback to approximately 7 ft for the setback waiver. What specifically happens if you comply with a 25 foot setback? >> Yeah, there's Well, first of all, I want to say really, yeah, there's only enough room just for the building right there as it is. So if you move the building back, you're moving it into the steep hillside and then we've got, you know, could be a million dollars of retaining wall, you know, that you've got behind the building if you really scoot it back a lot. But that's kind of an artificial point because really we drew the new property line that we're setting back from that's not down at the street. It's way up behind the church. And we could have drawn that property line 25 ft in front of the building. just would have been in the middle of a parking lot which just wasn't really a sensible place as we're having easement agreements with the church. It just made a for ingress and egress and parking sharing and all those things. It made a lot more sense to draw the property line mostly straight across the property keeping in mind where the road is and the buildings are and have it be kind of at the edge of the parking lot between that and the building. So, it's this invisible property line that no one up there will kind of know where it is because parking is is shared on the church property and stuff. That's what's within much, you know, 7 ft of the building >> rather than a street or anything like that. >> Okay. So, if if I'm hearing this correctly, we're not talking about a trade-off between building footprint and residential unit units not being feasible. more of you established a property line and the construction of the building that is feasibly a financially feasible has to be or it's preferred for it to be within 77 foot setback rather than a 25 foot. >> Yeah. I mean the property line now already exists. So that was approved before by city council. We did it. We separated the two lots and that's been recorded. So that that is done. So now in this situation with the property line where it was approved to be with this building, yeah, we can't feasibly fit it more than 7 ft back from where that property line now is. I was just kind of explaining more how we >> without carving into the >> carving into the very steep hillside. Yeah. >> Okay. All right. Let's move on to waiver three, building modulation. The staff report says additional modulation on the north elevation would potentially reduce or eliminate residential units. Key word potentially. To the applicant, I want to spend a little bit more time on the building modulation waiver and this question of potentially. Can you explain exactly how compliance with the standard physically precludes the construction of the permitted density? Yeah, it would reduce the number of units because we have kind were just talking about a very narrow corridor between the slope and then the parking lot which is also down a slight level from the bench on which we're building this hope to build this building or trying to permit this building. So there's a narrow corridor. So, um, you can't modulate the building out more. You'd have to modulate it in and cut into the square footage. And these are modest size units meant to not be too expensive. And so, you would have to cut out at least some units to make, you know, what was a whole studio could only be a bedroom on another unit now if you've cut into it, right? So, and we felt that okay, we want to make um architectural um architecturally interesting thing and landscaping etc. on the front of the building because that's facing the church, facing where people circulate through, go to preschool, all that stuff. Um the back is really facing the the vast majority of the back is facing the uh slope and there is there are houses up above set back quite a ways much further now that we've consolidated the building to the lower point. They're really looking downhill. Even that open space above is is sloped. They're looking downhill at the top part of this building. So, we just didn't feel like this is very different than the buildings um you know on streets that everybody's going by. And I felt like I feel like it's a good example of like the objective design standards make sense. Our original plan wasn't subject to the objective design standards, but when we're going back for a modification, we tried to incorporate uh as many as we could. And here figuring out some really expensive way in the back to do it where hardly anyone sees much of it at all didn't seem like the place to invest our dollars in trying to comply with objective standards that we weren't originally and figure everything else out. >> Okay. Um do you have a sense of how how much floor area would be removed if you met the objective design standards on the back for module? You'd have to look back at the new at yeah it's a calculation with the length of the building and I you know how many feet you set in and all that but it'd be a few units I think probably like you could take a couple studios at least out of each floor maybe something like that so it's a substantial amount >> okay thank you and for staff the statutory standard before us is physical proclusion but the staff report uses the word potentially reduce or eliminate residential units what Evans evidence allows council to move from potentially to a finding that the standard actually physically precludes the permitted project. Uh I think the applicant explained it fairly well and my understanding of density bonus law is that you know there's a pretty fine line where if there's anything any any standard objective standard or requirement that reduces the size of a unit or of the project that a waiver would need to be um granted is my understanding of it. So >> good afternoon council members. Alex Gis with the city attorney's office and to kind of expound on what Ryan was Ryan was saying, courts have interpreted the language related to waiverss under the density bonus law to mean that the objective standard can't physically preclude the project as designed. So it doesn't necessarily mean that they couldn't redesign a project that meets the objective standards. We have to evaluate what the project as proposed is and whether any objective standards would physically preclude that project. >> Okay. And maybe this is for you as well. Um is a conclusion that compliant compliance would potentially reduce units sufficient for council to find physical proclusion or does the record need to establish more specifically that compliance would actually prevent construction of the permitted density? The council doesn't need more than what the applicant has stated. The only time the the burden is on us if if we were to deny a waiver, but as far as accepting a waiver goes, there's no evidentiary minimum. >> Okay, that's helpful. Okay, let's move on to the inclusionary housing um and exactly what we're approving. The proposed conditions require for very lowincome studios in perpetuity, four moderate income studios for 55 years and 10 lowincome co-living bedrooms in perpetuity. I want to uh treat this question of inclusionary housing proposal separately. And I want to acknowledge that the proposal before us includes more than the four very lowincome studios. Condition 35 also includes four moderate income studios and 10 low-income bedroom uh bedrooms with within the co-living units. But those 10 bedrooms are a part of an alternative compliance method and council is being asked to affirmatively propose that I'm sorry affirmatively approve that alternative. So I want to understand precisely how that will work. First, for the applicant, will each of the 50 co-living bedrooms be rented individually or to to an individual tenant? >> Yes, rented individually to an individual tenant. >> Will each tenant have an individual lease for a specific bedroom? >> Will a tenant be financially responsible only for the tenants's bedroom teny or could that tenant have financial responsibility for other residents of a larger five or sixbedroom unit? >> No. For the 10 affordable bedrooms, are 10 specific physical bedrooms permanently uh designated as affordable or will the affordable designation float among the 50 co-living bedrooms? >> Yes, it'll float. >> If they float, what is the mechanism that guarantees there is always 10 affordable bedrooms available or occupied by qualifying low-income tenants? It's same exact mechanisms as any of the other apartments that are designated affordable. It's in a contract with the city that has compliance requirements, reporting requirements, uh, you know, turning in or third party verification of income qualification of the tenant. The leases are available, you know, for the city or housing authority. All of those requirements are in the agreement that is recorded agreement on the property, you know, recorded at the county. So, in that respect, as I understand your question, there's no difference at all between how one of these bedrooms is um handled for compliance as a studio apartment or someday some other apartment. >> Okay. As a followup to that, um, understanding that's kind of the inverse of what you just described, could an affordable bedroom become market rate before a replacement affordable bedroom is identified and a available? >> No. >> Okay. Who monitors that and how often? I don't have that in front of me far as far as the city is concerned, but I suspect we'll have um in the affordable housing agreements if a bedroom that is affordable. That's where we went back and forth with the city where I was trying to lower the administrative burden but still have all the compliance. And what we came to is that we're still required to submit a form to the city every time there's a vacancy with an affordable unit which would include one of these affordable bedrooms. So we're not skipping that step. It's just the marketing of it that is optional. But we have to do that whenever there's a a vacancy and so then the city's aware of that and we're reporting on everything. >> Thank you and thank you for the um answering these questions. This is this is a new frontier for us. We have not considered this type of mix of inclusionary. So I want to get through the rest of this. So this questions these questions are about what affordable rent means for these co-living bedrooms. You propose that these bedrooms to be rented at no more than 30% of 80% AMI for a single individual. Is that the tenants's total housing costs or just the base bedroom rent? >> That's total housing costs and it includes in all these affordable units you include utility allowance. So if the owner of the property management isn't paying for all utilities, if tenants are responsible for some utilities, then that amount the rent amount is reduced by an amount to make sure that the rent plus utilities is affordable. That's housing authority has schedules for all of that etc. >> Okay. Are there any required amenity, common area, cleaning, furnishing, service or administrative fees in addition to the bedroom rent? >> No. Now that all this said, we don't have a full management plan yet. We don't have the property management, but no, there's not intended to be the one thing to make sure I don't misspe here is that parking will be charged for we're trying to create a lowcar uh footprint project here, not no cars, but low cars. And both parking spaces will be an additional charge and use of shared vehicles which we will have some shared vehicles so people can live without their own vehicle um and just occasionally use a shared vehicle that would be that could be separate amount as well. >> Okay. And maybe this is to staff and I think this is a followup if I'm tracking this right. If a tenant is required to pay additional feels fees for parking, for instance, um could that cause the tenants's total mandatory housing expense to exceed the affordability cap? >> It it could exceed the amount I proposing because that would be the parking would be on top, but the amount I'm proposing is well under the amount that the Santa Cruz inclusionary ordinance um actually calculates. So, we're we're proposing 30% of the low-inccome limit rather than 35% which is the city's rent cap and for studios for a single individual. And so, um but parking also is an optional amenity. So, it's not required to rent a parking spot. >> Get that. Um thank you. Um and this is I'm try I'm trying to track here. So to staff, I believe, can we make it explicit in the agreement so that an affordable bedroom cannot have a compliantbased rent but additional mandatory charges or even not mandatory charges but charges associated with fees with parking etc that effectively exceed the affordability limit. Should we be considering having an agreement where that is explicit to not be a burden on the tenants? might ask for some assistance from our housing folks since those are the ones that uh write and implement the uh housing agreement. I'm looking through the um the code here and looking for the specific um provision here, but my understanding is that um the items that the applicant Sibly Simon referenced in terms of utility costs and any um mandatory fees as you alluded to for cleaning fees and so forth, those would all need to be deducted in order to make deducted from the rent in order to um not exceed that cap. But I am not aware of anything in our code as it relates to parking. And so our code does not require that parking fees as far as I'm aware. I'm looking to Jessica for confirmation because I haven't found the exact code section. >> Yeah, the we follow the housing authorities utility allowance schedule and that does not include parking as a necessary housing cost. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, I have other questions with regard to this inclusionary mix based on these five and sixbedroom units and the and the bedrooms being the inclusionary units that we are using to calculate that meeting that threshold. Um, and I'm going to go through a couple of these quietly and then I'm going to decide whether I'm going to ask them because I think some of these are maybe not necessarily helpful. Um, I guess what I want to say before I get to the my some of my closing questions is that I asked staff yesterday whether there was any local precedent for using this inclusionary mix, specifically these bedroom u the bedroom calculations. Um, and staff did share that and I think it's a project that was considered maybe even approved but not didn't move forward. an assisted living facility that used a similar methodology. And I kind of came back with that yesterday and did a Google search to see in California if this is happening at all. And it is, but it's happening predominantly or maybe even exclusively with permanent supportive housing or programs that have supportive care associated with the housing development. not just a five or sixbedroom unit of which five or six people are going to be renting individual rooms and clustering in in that housing plan um without any supportive services associated with it. I'm not suggesting that I understand whether that's the plan or not the plan. I actually don't know. It just is occurring to me and maybe Mr. Simon, you have an answer to that that we need to be thinking very carefully about whether this is the right way for us to manage this inclusionary request if we are setting precedent for this type of model without supportive services associated. >> Yeah. the um this is not a project whose goal is to house folks who really need supportive services in general. Not that someone in here couldn't be tied to some services separately, but this is not a supportive housing um project. And there are housing projects have certainly been a number around the Bay Area. um years ago a number of us from the church went and visited uh multiple of them uh Oakland, Berkeley etc. where uh really where this where we got this model um where you can get a sense of cultivate a sense of community um with a certain number of bedrooms and large amounts of uh shared space with those. And it is meant to be a um you know the place this is happening all the time ad hawk is in houses in the west side of Santa Cruz right with university students or young professionals or I know teachers who are in group houses like that right and we'd like to see more of those houses with families and have great housing options that are like that for you know folks at that stage of life and so um so we're trying to purpose build that and it is true like not all the rules were set up with that in mind. And so we're trying to respect the rules and the spirit of the rules and figure out, you know, how to do this, but it's not a supportive housing project in that sense in the way some congregate housing uh projects have been in the past. So then once we're doing that and we're say look, there's huge demand in Santa Cruz for this kind of housing and it's taken up a lot of our houses like can we have some of it here and some of these will be students and some of them won't be students and you know, etc. and can we manage that? And it does take more management time. So when you say there's not I I take your supportive services to mean the kind of things with permanent supportive housing, but there is extra management time that goes into this and um to managing co-housing. But in any case, um then okay, we've got a different type of unit than we're typically contemplating in projects and we'd like to prove this can work really well. And so then we're trying to figure out how do we do the inclusionary ordinance and we looked at it not well you know I think you probably read the materials so there's the inclusionary and spec number of units then there's we looked at number of bedrooms and that got us to seven bedrooms need to in the co- livingiving need to be affordable to comply with the total number in there but then you know talking to staff we thought we should also look at it in terms of number of people who are being served in affordable housing. And when we did that calculation, it came up with 10 bedrooms. So, we took the most um you know, we wanted to look at it different ways since it's a non-conventional situation for the inclusionary ordinance and we took the biggest number that came out of each of those ways. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Um this is these questions are for the city attorney's office. So, I want to end by making the legal distinctions very clear for council and the public. For the three density bonus concessions, what exactly is council's legal test for approval or denial? >> Yes. To deny a concession, the council would need need to make a written finding based on substantial evidence that the concession or incentive does not result in identifiable cost reductions. >> Okay. And for the three waivers, what exactly is council's legal standard? >> Uh at that point, uh the council would need to show that um the waiver does not have the effect of physically precluding construction. Um and there's also another option to show that it and again it would be the city's burden to show a specific adverse impact upon health or safety related to the waiver. >> Okay. And then for the inclusionary alternative compliance proposal, what exactly is council's legal standard? >> It's a good question. Alex, do you want to step in on that one? >> Yes. So, in order to approve the alternate alternative compliance method, council essentially has to make four findings based on substantial evidence. One, that the proposed alternative method of compliance is consistent with the city's general plan and all of its elements. Two, that the proposal conforms to the standards established by for inclusionary units unless the alternative method does not require compliance with that section, which is a little circular. And then the final two are that the alternative compliance meant compliance option will provide as many or more affordable units at the same or lower income levels and two that financing has been committed to ensure that the affordable units will be constructed. >> Okay. Um and for Mr. Butler, I think, um, do we have the discretion and authority as council to deny the proposed alternative path for compliance with our inclusionary housing ordinance? >> So, thanks for that question, Council Member O'Hara. We have articulated in the staff report why we believe those findings can be made, the findings that um were just alluded to by our city attorney, Alex. And um the council would have discretion to uh deny that component of the the project, the alternative inclusionary request, if you could um uh identify one of those findings that um is inconsider or can't be met. Um and so um if that is the will of the council, we could advise related to that. >> Okay. Thank you. Um thank you, Mr. Simon, for taking the time to walk through this. As I mentioned at the beginning of my comments, and thank you to council for for taking the the time to allow for me to walk through this. Um I really want these conversations to change with regard to these development projects. Um, I've been in a few of these conversations during my tenure on council. We are so limited in terms of our discretion to um help shepherd the look and feel of these development projects. We lean so heavily on the ethics and the intentions and the principles of these developers. Um I think it's important for us to have this conversation directly with the developers in terms of what they are trying to achieve what each and every concession and waiver is yielding in terms of benefit not only for the development and their bottom line but for this community. Um, I think I lean to much more on the side of the scale in terms of the benefit for the community and obviously having additional beds, sorry, additional units, maybe that's a whole unit, maybe that's a bedroom is very important. But I also want to ensure that my role in this body that is making these findings and I I heard the four findings that we're supposed to be making for the inclusionary um provision. I have no idea if we've met the threshold of those four findings. There's no evidence in the staff report. Hold on, Mr. Butler. Thank you. There's no evidence in the staff report that suggests that we have met all of those findings. Um, and so for me, it's I'm I'm very tenuous in in allowing any in in letting go of any discretion that we have as a council. Well, I think we should be up here working hard to have these projects built in our community. We need the housing. If we are essentially rubber stamping um a an interpretation and albeit a fine, valuable, important interpretation of staff that this meets the threshold. we are not doing a service to this community, period. And so it's important to have this conversation. It's important to take the time to have this conversation. I think it's going to be very important moving forward as we manage these incredibly challenging dynamics of building more housing in a community that is feeling so much complicated feelings about what these development projects look like to take some time to do this. It's very important to do this. Um, and so I do have a motion once we finish with the rest of council's considerations and the public. Um, and I appreciate mayor the the grace for allowing me to walk through this. >> Of course. Of course. Let make sure that Mr. Butler, did you have something you would like to say? >> I I do. Thank you for for that opportunity, mayor. Um, I just wanted to convey to council member O'Hara, uh, the the descriptions of how the project meets those inclusionary standards are found in the resolution. So, they're not articulated in the staff report, but the resolution has each of those findings. And we believe that that um actually provides more affordable housing because it it does provide more affordable housing in terms of the number of bedrooms than we would get if we strictly applied the inclusionary ordinance. and that's why we were supportive of that uh negotiation and the approach that we ultimately landed on with the applicant there. >> Thank you, Mr. P. Let me reset for folks where we are right now. Where we are is we are still asking questions and making comments as members. What we will do next is go out to the public. Uh we will get your responses, your testimony, whatever you wish to do. Matter will be back before the body. There will be a motion. We'll debate and discuss and vote on one or more motions that may come along. The vice mayor is recognized. >> Thank you. Um, thank you for the questions, Council Member O'Hara. You touched on I think all the ones I had, but a few I I Well, it's questions and comments. Um, I want to ask about the geological feasibility study that was done in the first iteration of the project. Um, we have not completed a second one in this new iteration. That correct? I don't know who would answer that. >> Yeah, the study was about the geology of the whole property. So, there's not that from a geology study as opposed to geotechnical, but geology study um there's nothing about the project making this adjustment that changes that. So then then perhaps it's the geotechnical that that I'm that I want to ask about because the footprint of the the project has changed. There's more height. There's more massing. So more impact on on the land. So has there been another study? Is there plans to do another study? And then legally where um where is the city in terms of what's required? >> We had really studied quite a lot before on this whole area. So this this was a where the building is currently proposed a subset of that but pretty much the whole length of that you know just a little bit less width was a part of the previous proposed building. And so in this whole shelf including everywhere we're proposing to build now we had investigated and had um so determined the soil types and therefore the information needed um to very approximately design a foundation. But then when we get this entitlement approval, if this is moving forward, then we need to unlock the next stage of funding and we have to have a structural engineer >> and our geotechnical engineer do more work and then that's when at a building permit we come back. So, and they'll say, "Oh, you know, everything involved with earthquakes and soil types, you know, you need to build a mat slab or you can have a conventional, well, we anticipate we probably can have a conventional foundation, but we have to over excavate and put new engineered soil in. But that determination is not made yet." And that h a lot more that happens at the uh building permit stage with more work. I think what this study tells us is that it's feasible to build a building there. Not perfectly. what kind of foundation yet? >> Thank you. Um, and then this is this is maybe a comment for our city attorney in terms of the incentive concession too. Um, you option for streamline tenant selection. Um, could we be risking the unintended consequence of having by taking ourselves out of the equation, having the outreach be inequitable and prot and possibly discriminatory towards um the community at large? I mean, when we do our outreach, we do wide outreach. This may narrow our outreach. So, what are the unintended consequences or risks associated? I don't know if that's question for you or for city staff. >> I mean, I suppose that's it's possible that it would limit the outreach, but uh not in a way that's legally um meaningful or subjects the city to legal risk. >> The other thing I would add there is that the project is still going to be required to adhere to the city's local preference standards. And so um they would have to adhere to um all fair housing standards. And if if they found for example that the outreach that they are doing was not um meeting any fair housing standards they they would need to adjust accordingly. >> We do have a different reach than perhaps the partners of this project. And I would I would guess a pretty broad reach for when we do our outreach for um affordable housing. >> That's correct. I mean when we if we post it on the website there there may be um more people different people certainly that see it um as compared to um whatever marketing approaches that uh applicant group assumes. Um, I will say, you know, that isn't the the test for a concession. The test is whether or not it's providing um a cost savings for them. >> Sure. And what I heard was um more efficiency and management that could produce cost savings, but I'm not convinced that that would produce cost savings. And and that gets maybe to my last um point question is if if the burden of proof falls on the city to um demonstrate that there wouldn't be cost savings. I haven't seen the numbers. I mean, council member O'Hara um asked those questions and so as a council member, I want to make informed decisions and I'd like to see some of those numbers. What is the difference between um vinyl windows and non vinyl windows? what is the difference in in cost savings with if we um opt out of the outreach uh to for um the units. So those I think I think it's important to have something concrete in front of us if we're um asked to make these decisions. >> Council member, I just wanted to give a little context because I understand your frustration. And in 2021, the uh court of appeal in a case called Shriber versus City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles used to require pro-forma for every project to ensure that there were actual cost reductions associated with the concession because without that, to your point, how is the city supposed to have the evidence to show it doesn't? And the court explicitly found that a requirement that the project is economically feasible conflicts with the statute and is prohibited under state law. The court further went on to say the applicant is not required to establish that cost reductions will result. Instead, the city shall bear the burden of proof for the denial of a requested concession or incentive. >> So then how do we bear how do we create that proof? >> I that's a question for the state legislature. I would or >> Well, it's a question for us. if if the burden of proof falls on the city, it's a question that we need to answer. And I don't I don't see the proof in front of me. I mean, we we are asked these questions by the community. And and let me just back up and say um I want housing in our community and I support density and I support housing density in certain corridors. So, I just want to make that clear for everyone here, for anyone listening. Um, and I think there's a way to do this where we are dancing well together and we're responsive to the community. I mean, the community says, "Why are we rubber stamping?" And we say, "Well, we've got we've got no discretion and we've got to have the burden of proof, but where is the proof?" I mean, it's it's it's a very frustrating position to be in. So, I don't see the proof. I don't see the proof in front of us in dollars in terms of cost savings. Some of it is much more intuitive in terms of what's what's being proposed as modifications, but some of it might vinyl windows and streamlining of outreach and I mean these may be minor things, but these are things that impact how the building is built, how the community um receives and accepts it. So, um, so I'm having a really hard time with that piece of it is the burden of proof falls on the city, yet we don't see anything in front of us. And I understand, Mr. Guys, what you're saying about the state laws. Um, yet it's still the decision still falls on us. Um, did you have a comment or >> Yeah, I thank you and I understand and hear that frustration. Um I what I would say there is if it's the pleasure of the council you know we can do a set of analyses that you know shows here's the cost of windows x y and z. Here's the cost of vinyl windows. You know we heard the applicant say it's in the tens of thousands of dollars. I I um and and as you alluded to some of these are more intuitive that yes if you're spending less time then it's going to be less money. um happy to provide that information if that's the will of the council. Also want to set expectations that um you know as you indicated some of this is intuitively less and as we generally understand vinyl windows are cheaper and so I don't want to set an expectation for the council or the community that if you asked us to go provide that information that we would come to a different result. >> It would still be helpful to have some concrete numbers in front of us. >> Yeah. Thank you. Those are my questions and comments for now. Thank you, Mayor. >> Council member Briner. >> Thank you. Um I had a couple questions and um I think they kind of touch on maybe some of the questions that have been asked. Um and so I'll I'll start with the vinyl windows. Um, in reading all of this information, um, the question that came to my mind was, why are vinyl windows not allowed in the first place? What are the pros and cons about vinyl windows? And doing a quick uh, research and down the rabbit hole on vinyl windows, I learned about aluminum windows and um, composite windows, wood windows, all the different options out there. And yes, vinyl is the cheapest. And um I think um trying to understand why the city has that in place in the first place. And there were many pros and cons about vinyl windows. Um they're energy efficient. Um con, they may not meet fire rating requirements. They may warp warp over time. there were just like all these things that came up about these vinyl windows. So from a cost perspective, from the research I did, I did find um from many different sites um the material is less expensive. And my question is why does the city not allow vinyl windows? And is there a fire um risk? Is there a safety risk with vinyl windows? Does anybody have the answer to that question? >> Well, I wasn't involved in the adoption of the objective standards. I I my understanding likely that vinyl windows generally are not as attractive on a larger building. And so that was one of the reasons why that was incorporated into the objective standards. I think important context is the city does allow vinyl windows just not on buildings of certain heights. >> Okay. Let me just say excuse me. Let me just say we're really clear. If you would like to speak I'll be glad to recognize you. Get my attention. Allow me to recognize you. I'd be glad to do it. So please get up if you would like to continue that line. Thank you sir. >> Yeah. I just had to look at the city rules when we were figuring this out and there are quite a number of circumstances with a lot of buildings where vinyl windows are allowed in the city. So, it's not that there's a blanket prohibition. >> Thank you. That's the fact. >> The objective standards that exist are for a certain type of buildings. And um in in looking it up, I saw there was a lot of um other places that had that due to historical buildings and and um I was just curious if there was a known history with here in the city other other than aesthetics. >> Uh there is there a safety issue? Is there other reasons besides aesthetics? My understanding is aesthetics I don't there may be more involved that I'm not not aware of but you are correct with historic there are secretary of interior standards where they have to be replacement windows and kind usually for older buildings it's wood and there are some mid-century that are metal those type of things but um in this case it's for multifamily buildings over three stories so usually it's going to be a larger building larger project and so um I guess that was part of the objective standards is is to have a higher quality window for a larger project like that. >> Thank you. Um, okay, that that answers that. And then the other question I had actually came from uh a resident who has property on Laurel Creek and it came post packet production. And they had two questions that I think I know the answer to. um they were concerned um about the impact of subsurface flow of groundwater through springs to surface water. So the hydrarology which I think vice mayor Kalantari Johnson may have been also getting at. Um, so that was part one of their concern and part two was the requirement of storm water and the storm drains which they're concerned would reduce water reaching Westlake Pond and Laurel Creek. Um, so at what point are those uh questions around the hydraology they're addressed? Is that in the building permit stage? Yeah, I mean we so as mentioned there's been a you know um extensive geological and geotechnical studies that have been um been done by professionals and been reviewed by the city. Um and then also there's conditions of approval that basically require that those studies be updated and reviewed as part of the the construction documents. Um, so those will all be in place. In terms of your question regarding storm water, I mean, we did our public works department um did review the storm water um as a storm water plan. Um, and so I'm not aware of any issues that came up regarding um having to have um I think the concerns had to do with storm water that would reduce water reaching Westlake Pond and Laurel Creek if they go if water goes to the storm drains. >> Okay. >> So maybe those would be at some point answered. My understanding was at the building permit stage. I just wanted to get clarity of when those questions could be addressed. >> Yeah, I would just note that um the regional water quality control board um has uh specific storm water control standards and um they require that um post uh project runoff is um not exceeding the pre-ro runoff. And so the uh the amount of groundwater that's you know percolating down is going to be comparable to what it is now in an undeveloped state. Um and they've got those specific standards for a 10-year storm. And so those would be applied. There are some pre preliminary drawings for storm water control measures that are included in all the planning documents. And then at the building permit stage, those are reviewed and finalized um through our team in public works. Um, and that's for consistency with those statewide standards that come down and are uh provided through the regional water quality control board. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Further questions this stage. >> One last question for the applicant. >> Thank you, mayor. Um, Mr. Simon, would the applicant be willing to forego concession number two, streamline tenant selection? Let me do this or I want to I want to inquire. I wonder if that question might be more appropriate after we take and the matter is back before the body and folks are trying to fashion. I'll do it either way you prefer. >> Um if you don't mind, I would like to hear the get a litmus test of that as I'm considering what the motion is. >> Such will be the order. Thank you, >> Mr. Simon. I just really feel it serves people so poorly that if we have to be constantly turning away hundreds of people for every unit and for some reason that's just our job to do that. So we don't want to make that change. So if the interest of this council is to ensure that from our perspective, whatever our city's obligation is to make public information of these units as part of our affordable housing program. You're suggesting that you will not remove that concession because you're worried about people being on a wait list and getting frustrated. not just on a weight list, but how much time we have to spend on something that doesn't help anyone. I just want to spend time helping people get housing. If the city has an obligation to do this for units that don't have any public dollars in them that are affordable, of course, we'll comply with that. But in talking through it with staff, we didn't identify any such obligation that the city has. So, just make making sure I'm clear. You're not willing to forego concession number two, streamline t >> unless there's a requirement that we do that, right? >> Good. >> Council member Brener. >> Um, can I ask a question? Maybe uh the housing program manager, I'm not sure. Um it concerns me that there is a request to avoid this process. So is what is this process? Is it that cumbersome and time consuming? Like is there something city internally that we can improve so that that's not the experience for inclusionary and affordable and lowincome housing uh properties to not want to work with the city in this aspect? >> Yeah, thank you for the question. >> Thank you for the question. Jessica Dit, city housing manager. So I think there may be some misunderstanding of of between the owner operator and what they think is happening at the city side. And maybe that's maybe that's what's happening is we're merely asking for the developer owner operator to let us know when there is a unit available for lease and we post that onto our website. We don't manage a process from from as far as like intaking an applicant. The applicant is directed to go to the owner operators property management service. There is a process with the city as far as income eligibility and working through the housing authority um and doing that process, but that is the my understanding that we're not giving that up. So, the only piece of the process is the marketing outreach of the fact that the unit is available. Um, so I'm wondering if there may be some kind of misunderstanding with the owner operator feeling like there may be more to the process than >> Thank you. So, yeah. Yeah. And it could I ask Mr. Simon um to clarify? Am I misunderstanding? No, I don't think there's any. >> You just are trying to avoid more applicants coming your way. >> Yeah. In Santa Cruz, when affordable housing project stands up, it's not uncommon there's a thousand households that apply for every affordable unit. So, we're not subsidized uh you know, in this uh and how we can show how we're going to manage it and what that is going to cost. and com you know I'm answering questions every day right now from lenders who will fund the next phase of work on this project trying to explain what the project is and what it isn't what our model is and in all that yeah I don't I don't want to have the reputation of thousands of people in Santa Cruz calling us and we never called them back and they don't know if they can get the housing or whatever and and it's and look yeah we could try to make the best possible progress process But I just am looking for ways to manage this in a really streamlined way like we would manage any other housing unit, but put that time and effort into how do we get more affordable housing for everybody. >> I understand. I've seen that. and to manage a a huge list. And I know I sat on the housing authority board for a decade and to have waiting lists closed and to h you need staff people to just manage a waiting list and reach out and I understand that time component uh of managing applicants. Um so answer me this. How will you equitably reach because that is our goal and that was brought up uh reach uh for applicants to have access to this housing if it's not through the city as as requested. >> Yeah, we haven't come up with our marketing plan yet, but certainly um one of some of our priorities are also you know there's a whole bunch of priorities, right? and absolutely committed to um following fair housing law. So, anybody that contacts us will put them on a list 100%. Um we are also another of our priorities is to have low vehicle miles traveled. So, we're certainly going to proactively market to the elementary school next door, the university, folks who are employed right by this project that you know or and that's and we've already you know had meetings voluntarily with the school district you know on that. nothing's set aside for teachers or anything, but we want to actively, you know, market in that ways. And we're going to have a priority to some extent, not yet fully determined how many units, but some for folks who don't own cars at the time they move in. Um, again, about minimizing impact on traffic there. So, all those things are going to be components. But, you know, I know whenever I've put something up on Craigslist or Facebook or whatever, I mean, you get a lot of applicants, right? So, um, honestly, that hasn't, you know, how do we get enough applicants hasn't been a concern. We also, you know, a bunch of the funding for this project came from New Way Homes and New Way Homes has relationships with some employers in Santa Cruz who have contributed towards affordable housing and we will be notifying them in case there they have employees who want to apply. So, we have a lot of ways just to do different kinds of outreach. I appreciate hearing that and I appreciate knowing that and I think the community for the community to know that our local preference policy will still apply and that we still plan on the fair housing standards to be applicable >> and that applies to the non-reg the units that are non-inclusionary units too. I mean we just kind of thought we want to do them all in a fairly similar fashion again to streamline management while complying with everything we need to. Okay, thank you. >> Thank you for the questions. This will be the opportunity for anyone who wishes to address us on this matter to do so. Seating and hearing. Okay, here we go. This is not your time to hesitate. Here we go. And if those of you who do want to speak would line up to my left, your right under this beautiful picture over here, that's the way to do it. We'll take people as you uh as you line up. Good afternoon, sir. Thank you for all your good works in the community. >> Good afternoon. My name is David Pati. Um we just organized to buy a home in district 4. Most every day I am riding my bicycle up High Street to uh District 5 where I am still the pastor of Peace United Church of Christ. Uh which I offer in good human uh good humored acknowledgement that we have been nudging this project along for a very long time. Uh we're grateful for the encouragement of neighbors through the years and city staff and for the patience and goodwill uh of this council as they consider the approval we seek for adjustments to the project which is the way of things that take a long time. uh they have to change over time because it takes such a long time. Uh we have stuck with it through the years because Peace Village is not just a housing project to us. It is a part of our vision for our ministry and our future and the kind of community that we want to build. um uh a diverse community with an increase of affordable and workforce accessible housing in our neighborhood. So, uh I hope you will be with us in this very long endeavor because we'd like to get to the building phase after 10 years. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you, sir. Mr. Hall, good afternoon. Welcome to the council meeting. >> Thank you, uh, Mayor Keely, and, uh, thank you, council members. My name is John Hall. I'm a member of, uh, Peace Church, and, uh, I, uh, want to encourage you to approve this project without further conditions of approval that will result in yet another cycle of which we've been through. uh for many many years. Um and I think it's worth looking at the church, Peace Church, formerly the United First United Church of Christ over the long historical run. Uh this church uh began before the city of Santa Cruz was incorporated. We have been here longer than the city has. And every 60 years or so, uh, we do something really important, something big. The first was in the 1850s, um, starting the church. I wasn't here. Uh, secondly, in the early 1900s, uh, building the church, the first congregational church downtown. Uh, third, in the 1950s, 1957, building our facility and our campus on High Street. And now we come to this point uh where um pastor Dave Bati has already emphasized uh this is part of a a religious vision I would say but it's also part of a community vision uh to make peace village a place that is a center of social life beyond just uh Sunday go to meeting uh it is a place where people live is a place where there's It's already a daycare center and with housing it will be integral uh to the community. So, I think it is a win for the city and I very much appreciate the thoroughess of the discussion that we've had here this afternoon and I would encourage you to apply that same focus to other development projects which as uh has been observed this has not been the case before and uh it is I think a good model to follow. uh because obviously I am like many other people in the community concerned about the kind of community that we build, the kind of physical structure and streetscape and cityscape that we create and I do want to say personally and as a member of the congregation that I think the members of the congregation are very happy with the design. We have worked with Sibly Simon and his group for a number of years and I appreciate uh the integrity with which he has engaged with the congregation to provide something that integrates with the campus aesthetically and socially. One final thing, my daughter uh lived in co-ousing in Oakland and I think it's a model that has a lot of appeal and one that includes people of diverse ages. This will be a diverse housing development and people who call it home. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, sir. Let me tell you what we're going to do, sir. Ju just one second. We have, I think, three people online. So, what I'll do is I'm going to take the first one of them, then you, then them, then the next person in line. So, just be patient for one second. Here we go. We're going to take the first person online. Good afternoon and welcome. >> Good afternoon, everyone. Um, I live in the neighborhood near 900 High Street, and I'm asking you to deny the proposed modifications and hold this project to the design that was approved in 2024. I'm not here to oppose housing. This community accepted a 40 40unit project after years of dialogue. The V-shaped building stepped into the hillside was the compromise. The design responded to neighborhood concerns raised as far back as 2019 and it persuaded the neighbors who formally appealed the project to stand down. The proposed modification abandons that compromise. The approved design was shaped to disappear into the hillside from the street and the field. It would have read as a low building tucked into the slope. The new design stands up against the skyline instead. Nothing in the surrounding neighborhood comes close to that scale. This is an area of one and twotory homes, and this building would tower over all of them. That's not a small revision to an approved project. It's a totally different building. This matters tremendously for the community, and it has permanent consequences for the open field behind the parcel. Every day, people from across the west side come to that open ground for one of the few freely accessible views of the bay left in this city. It's a public good that will be permanently destroyed. And I hope the council thinks clearly and uh and about this change. It's not clear to me listening to the Q&A today that the proposed project would even work in terms of building more affordable, safe, quality, and feasible housing for Santa Cruz. I really appreciate all of the council members questions standing up for the community and asking for evidence of the feasibility of this project. I especially appreciate council member O'Hara's questions about changes in proportion of affordable house housing with the new proposal. From my read of the Q&A today, the new proposal seems to reduce the amount of low-income housing baked into the original proposal. If the developer needs to reshape this project to make the money work, the affordable homes for low-income people shouldn't be the part that shrinks proportionately to the overall number of bedrooms. Finally, there's been very little discussion of traffic. High street is a narrow corridor already strained by daily UCSC commute traffic, local school and neighborhood traffic, and there's no plan for absorbing that added density um in the new proposal. Please hold this project to what was approved and compromised with the community 40 units in this uh the design that was the community helped to shape together. Thank you very much. >> Thank you very much sir. Thank you for your forbearance. >> Mayor Council members Clayton Markle neighbor and I echo many of the concerns of the previous uh previous speaker. you are approving a major change and but aside from the sidelines and everything else the traffic problems we've seen it traffic is only getting worse I know I understand the vision of the church I understand the vision of the developer it's already run up against economic reality everyone has to make it work financially it doesn't sound like it's going to the reduction You're inc you're increasing with by seven units, but you're going to 33 bedrooms. That's 10 I think it's 108 bedrooms now or as much as you would like to have no cars in that neighborhood or minimal cars in that development. There's no there's no stores up there. I've lived up there for a while. I've lived in lived in Santa Cruz for 50 years. I grew up on the west side. My best friend lived up there. I was up there all the time. I've seen it change. It's still changing. And in order to get food, they're not going to shop at 7-Eleven. They're either riding a bus down. There is no bus to get to any any of the stores on the on the far west side. It's just not practical. Someone's going to have cars. Where are those cars going to go? I don't know that that the church has that many parking spaces. I know that when they have events there, our neighborhood fills up. If you have to pay for parking, I'm going to park on the street. This this development cannot be allowed to participate for one thing in the Westside residential parking program. The property has parking spaces. I believe in high density housing. I do. But he's got to be in places that have adequate transit, adequate support. You know, it's not a food desert. Be able to get the food, be able to get to the library store, the entertainment, it's got to be there. This, I'm sorry to say, I don't think is the right place for your vision. In addition, there are many questions about in the geotechnical survey regarding the storm water runoff. We've had issues with water running through our through our yard already just from other neighbors. You pave that much more, that much more runs off into the street, overwhelms. Climate change is increasing. The intensity of raintorms is increasing. We've already seen it. This doesn't allow for that. You can't have any water penetration into the ground. You're going to get sink holes because the geology the report says. Thank you for your time. >> We're going to take the next person online. We'll be right with you. Person online. Good afternoon. Welcome to the city council meeting. Three, two, one, you're up. Hello, my name is um Deb Dela Debrien. I just for to start off, I did grow up in um I guess public housing here in Santa Cruz. So, I understand the need for public housing, but I do not I we should not go through with this at all. I don't believe that this is the right space because of some of the things that both the person that called in initially, I felt like we could just I pretty much have to say what she said already. And then in addition to what Clayton just said, it's a food desert up there. Parking is terrible. The traffic jams are crazy. You can't get in and out of there, even with the school traffic. So to add more to that doesn't make sense. The idea that people are going to move up into this area where there's nothing up there. Everybody who lives there, we have cars. There's no way to get in and out of there other than have a car. Um, and the idea that most people are going to ride their bikes or walk is is just it's one of the lowest walkability scores in Santa Cruz because there's just nothing up there. Um, I the other thing I wanted to point out is the mockup that they just that they have of the new rendition. They don't have it from the approach. They only have it looking down from the hill. It is going to be a huge eyesore. This absolutely should not be approved. Um, part of what makes Santa Cruz so wonderful to live in is how beautiful it is to look at and it would be an awful eyesore to have up there as you're coming up the hill to look at. So, um, that's another thing. Um, I think that's that's all I have because everything else was already talked about. So, thank you for your time and please do not approve this um, project. And as far as the windows go, vinyl windows are really bad environmentally. Um, and so metal windows are much more environmentally friendly and not to mention the um the high VOCC's that come with them. And then I think the fire danger that was um mentioned. So, thank you. >> Thank you. We're going to take the next person online. We'll be right with you, sir. Person online. Good afternoon. Welcome to the city council meeting. >> Hello, uh, Fred. Thank you, uh, council beer. Uh it's a very teachable moment. It's a very odd spot where you've uh decided to try to push the envelope. I know you know uh that I feel that way about all the development going on. uh the the Mission Street uh development that didn't go through uh encountered a lot of resistance and I feel like uh you know uh the the the statements by Adriana Monago um are very very spot-on uh regarding uh you know changes being uh you know very imposing and uh you know the community being very comfortable with the changes that or the original original design. Um, you know, this is a very odd spot because it's in that very strange part of Monica's district in the in the on the county board of supervisors that's part of uh the San Lorenzo Valley that reaches down and it and then there's um the faculty housing at UCSC that also falls in that small area that's uh well gerrymandering you know that's a socioeconomic class where you're trying to uh you know take an area and in some for some political advantage I don't think it's gerrymandering, but I do think it's an odd thing that you're taking a stand on increasing the density in this really uh small part of uh you know your campus. Um that was a very odd t-shirt the gentleman who uh you know who's uh who's uh in in favor of this is wearing it says density and it shows a big city. Well um you know uh college students affect areas next to them um in a lot of ways. Uh one of the things they do is because they are socioeconomically uh disadvantaged um you know it looks like the areas they live in are as well. But um when they leave uh their earning potential and um their socioeconomic uh their financial mobility skyrockets and then the people left in the community uh have very very um entrenched uh economic issues. uh you know they compete for things like jobs, they compete for uh things like the you know standing in line at the McDonald's uh they they compete for a seat on the bus and um you I don't think you should increase the density of this. Um you know it's uh it's housing strain you know that's created by doing all this high density uh development you know artificially inflated rental demand. We look at the student population, it's about 25% of the overall population of the city, but they're only here 9 months of the year. Um, does that mean that they're 25% less than 25%. I don't know. It's very confusing. What I do know is Santa Cruz High students uh get half as likely to get get admitted to UCSC um compared to students from um the East Bay who are applying. And I just don't find it very fair. Okay. Um thanks very much. I only have a few more seconds to waste. Thanks. >> Thank you. Good afternoon, sir. Thank you for your forbearance. >> Hi, friends. My name is Andrew Mariam and I agree with uh most of the comments from the uh previous speakers. Um once again, the the Westside uh neighbors are rallying in opposition to the proposed development. A few years ago, we were unable to prevent the the approval of the uh the permit, the previous permit application, uh which was approved. We went home. We uh we licked our wounds and we waited for the other shoe to drop and waited and developer took their sweet time and they have now come back with what they call a major modification which to me looks like an entirely new um development. One thing that uh I was struck by as I read the application, the new application, I uh was progressively more frustrated and insensed at the way that the developer has used uh manipulated the the state's housing laws, well-intentioned housing laws, uh leveraged them in order to basically ram this decidedly nonconforming uh development with its its concessions, its sweeteners, its incentives uh down our collective throats. But uh permits are not uh granted in perpetuity. the previous permit. One of the conditions of approval was that it had 24 months before uh under which time the developer had to exercise the permit otherwise the permit would become null and void. And I ask I put it to you council members that um the developer has not exercised that uh that permit. The time has run out. It is null and void. And the important part of that is that the developer cannot now claim uh any kind of priority or preference or precedence based on that previous previous permit uh approval. what they are uh what the developer is now presenting is a entirely new kind of of of beast which looks very different and it should be treated as a as a new application. I I hear all the uh the uncertainty and there is a lot of new uh material in this application. It should not be uh it should not have that precedence as simply a modification of the previous permit application. >> Go to the back of the line and uh do not pass go do not collect $200. Thank you for your attention. >> Thank you, sir. We have someone else online at this point. We're going to take that person. We'll be right with you. First online, good afternoon. Welcome to the city council. Maybe Three, >> two, >> good afternoon. Um, >> good afternoon. >> It's Judy Grunstra and I just wanted to echo what the other woman said about vinyl. Um, council members seem to not really understand why vinyl windows are discouraged. Um, so I just wanted to say that I had seen a film called Blue Vinyl which was made in 2002 and it really enlightened me about the toxic byproducts of vinyl as a building material uh the production of it and the disposal of it. So since the city does have a climate action plan, we should uh you know realize that cheapest isn't always the best choice. Thank you. >> Thank you. Good afternoon sir. and thank you for your forbearance. >> Good afternoon, council. Mr. Mayor, Mr. Mayor, could I have uh the plot view of the ingress egress points brought up on display, please? >> Sure. And we won't take this out of your time. Okay. >> Let me ask Mr. Bane if he someone here who can pull that up for us. Give us a second on that. We'll start the clock over in a minute. Okay. I I don't know if uh people had a really good opportunity to take a look at this. >> What you're looking for? >> Yes. Yes, it is. >> Very good. We'll start the clock now. >> Okay. So, my my question is the um this is an in increase to 107 bedrooms. Correct. >> All right. How how many how many people again >> are you estimating? Let's do this. We're We're not going to do questions and answers. You just go ahead and provide your test. You're doing great. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Um I get the overall impression as I've had for the last six years that this is very under capitalized. And my question is with all the fires which are going on when we see that there's an increase in construction materials cost. We've seen this happen over the last five years. You know, looking at the LA thing that happened, looking at what's going on in Spokane. Are you going to keep asking for an increase in number of units just because every time the price of construction materials go up, you have to come up with some feasible way of building? Um, I'm I'm just kind of curious about that. The the other thing is is the looking at the uh the picture up here uh it shows an increase of parking spaces. Uh I don't know how many parking spaces that is, but I'm guessing what >> what 20 some odd up there? 25. >> Okay. Remember, excuse me, Mr. Payne, this is your testimony. We're not doing questions and answers. Second time I've asked you that. Okay. >> Thank you. Um anyway, um I just have concerns. I don't agree with the increase in the number of units. Uh I look at more people. I look at the issue with cars, but that's already been discussed. Um I look at a removal of one driveway. That means that it's going to double the traffic going up and down that hill. And my concern is is that, you know, we're talking about water as well. Uh I can tell you that I grew up uh in that house. It's that's located on High Street and uh my dad built it in 1957 and I acquired it from him not too much longer than that. And I remember water coming down my driveway into the garage. I remember the city of Santa Cruz sandbagging my driveway >> just to keep the water out of the driveway and this happened several times a year during the more wet years. Um so I can testify to the groundwater issues as far as that goes. Uh the other thing is is that uh I attended First Congregational Church from the time I was four years old and all the way through high school and uh it was part of their youth body. Uh, I knew uh Bernie Cornelius very well. He was the pastor at that time and I could tell you he'd be rolling over in his grave if he saw this proposition to what's going on right now. That is not part of what the original church's mission was. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you, sir. Anyone else online? >> Good afternoon. >> There you go. >> You won the lottery on that one. I was ready for my forbearance. Um, hi, my name is Ron Goodman. Um, this project, as you know, sits on complex, environmentally sensitive cars terrain. And as you know, a project like this can cause cars damage that can negatively alter the quality and quantity of water emanating from downstream springs. So I reached out to Eric Zinn who is the geologist for this project to learn more about the hydrogeeological studies that have been done for this project. He stated, "Hi Ron, I did an engineering geology report that focused on the hazards and risks to the foundations of the proposed development. I did not conduct a hydrogeeological investigation. I looked on the city information page which lists three geology related studies. None of them mention the springs or potential carsted impacts. You may be wondering if these issues are a serious concern that need to be addressed. Well, these issues were raised during the recent student housing west project at UC Santa Cruz, which shares the same car system as this project. The university committed to best practice construction to minimize aquafer risks. I believe Pacific Crest Engineering who's working on this project is also responsible for the UCSC engineering work. Unfortunately, I manage the KCAR pond, which is the pond directly below the UCSC project, and we now have evidence that that project damaged our springs. Although we're still working with the university to get all the required data through a California Public Records Act request to document this definitively, at least one of our four primary springs, the largest producing spring, no longer produces any water. It's completely dry. Furthermore, mitigation is almost impossible. A collapse or infilling of a car pool or a damaged conduit is essentially a permanent change to the land. It cannot be undone. Um I'm currently working um with parks and wreck starting in the beginning of August um in helping to manage West Lake Pond. Um and in that in that capacity I would basically say it's really important you do a hydrogeeological study. Unfortunately I already know what the result is going to say because I know a lot about this topic. they're going to say there's no way of knowing. Um, and so you're sort of making that decision. One comment I also want to make is that you uh mentioned that one of the things you have to accept to approve this would be that it's compliant with the general plan. Um, you have a goal NRC 1.1, the wetland and surface water protection policy in the general plan, which I don't believe this would be compliant with if it were to damage the Kurs. NRC 2.1, the biological resources and sensitive habitats would also be violated if this were to impact West Lake Pond, which is a natural pond. Um, and the community facilities and water resource element. Thank you. There's so much more on this topic, but I will leave it at that. >> Mr. Goodman, thank you. And I don't want you to go away feeling slighted. Thank you for your forbearance. All right. >> Thank you. >> Here we go. Good afternoon and welcome. Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor. Uh, city council members. My name is Andrea Toleo and I live up on the west side and I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for additional financial information to look at their ROI over time. You know, it it's a million million million dollar project and I appreciate, you know, wanting to provide affordable housing, but these are major concessions. It's a new project and just to say we can't afford it. It's going to cost us too much money. And the other thing I think we need information. I don't think there's anything wrong with asking for it or we do it somehow. We have to have the information. It's a huge project. Um and the other thing is really the the 10 dorms or the bedrooms. I think that's an interesting approach, but really people come up on the list and you have an 18-year-old and you have a 65y old, you have ch and I guess those aren't for children, right? They're just bedrooms. So families are out of that list already. That's not addressing the affordable housing issues in this county. It's being creative, which I appreciate, but I don't think that's the path. So I would ask you to deny this current project and even go back to the old project with the geotechnical um surveys that they've done in terms of the sink holes up there and are they being addressed with geo with the with the surveys that they're doing. So thank you very much. But I want you to please not accept this new proposal. Thank you. >> Thank you. Good afternoon and welcome as unaccustomed as you are. Welcome >> council members. I'm Deborah Ston. Um Westlake neighbors. Can't thank Ron Goodman enough um to dig into that type of um process as well to protect our Westlake pond which is very cherished. Um in some ways, and I've said this before, the process seems backwards. Um, this does seem to be a completely new project, way different than town homes on the top of the bluff the way it was originally planned. Um, the drillings were done in 2018 and I would like to point out number 41 and 42 on the conditions of approval. This study into the carst system is really a safety issue. It's a safety issue for the developer. It's a safety issue for your approval. It's a safety issue for the people who are going to live there. So the DR adding one to two stories to this project leads to has to lead to further testing, further drilling. They only did 30 ft down. They're going another story up. They have to go another 10t down. They have to know what's their building underneath them before. And I and I get it. It's all back. you approve the project and then we do the building permit and then they do the drilling. Kind of seems backwards because this is an expense that has to be followed through on um seismic activity. This was also in um the DE's and associates recommendations on page nine and 10. So even the seismic activity has changed. We had um it needs updating. Let's just put it that way. We had a 4.6 little shakeup and that fault line goes right through our neighborhood and it's less than a mile away. And the old um the old report, you know, they were saying the closest fault line was 5.8. Well, this fault line just woke up. It was considered dormant. it's not dormant anymore. So, um it just seems like you do need more data in order to go forward on this project. And I think approving a building permit and then going backwards after that you give the B building permit and then they have to do all this and then you they find out it's not even feasible. So, that's my point. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Ellson. Do we have anyone else online? >> No, we don't. Last call for anyone who would like to testify on the matter. Matter of fact, before the Excuse me, I'm sorry. >> We now have someone. >> We got one just right there under the wire. All right, we'll take the person online. Good afternoon. Welcome to the city council meeting. Good afternoon. Three, two, one. Matters back before the body. Pleasure of the body. Council member O'Hara. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I have a motion that I sent to the clerk that I was hoping you could put up on the screen. And as we see this coming up, I want to suggest to my colleagues that I'm open to friendly amendments. Motion to adopt um the resolution approving the project as recommended by staff with one substantive amendment that findings 22 through 25. The inclusionary alternative approach findings under section 2416302 and 2416311 03011 be revised to deny the applicant's proposed alternative inclusionary compliance method because council cannot make all of the findings required for its approval, including the findings of conformance with section 246025. Condition 35 shall therefore be resi revised to require compliance with the city's otherwise applicable inclusionary housing requirements including the represented unit mix requirement while preserving the affordability required for the project state density bonus. Motion authorizes the city attorney and community development director to make the conforming revisions necessary to effectuate this direction with all other project approvals, findings, and conditions remaining as recommended. There's a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second with a friendly amendment. >> There is a second. What does state your friendly amendment? >> Um, and I just sent it to you, Miss Bush. Whoa. Try to keep noise down. Seniors are sleeping. >> Yeah, my my purse decided to >> All right. Uh finally, amendment to strike incentive concession number two, which is the option for streamline tenant selection from the resolution, which is on page 10, and direct staff for future projects to include quantifiable data that demonstrates cost savings when incentives, concessions, or wavens, waiverss are requested by applicants. >> Is that agreeable to the maker of the motion? >> Yes. >> Okay. accepted as a uh as a friendly amendment that is now included in the uh motion in chief. Let me see if there are questions, comments, debate and discussion. Council member Bruner, >> I just have a quick question about the friendly amendment and I wonder if maybe the city attorney's office can speak to that. Yeah, I do believe that the friendly amendment language about striking incentive concession number two uh does subject the city to potential for litigation and attorneys fees exposure. There's a you know a significant uh chance of litigation and attorney's fees exposure with that change. >> I understand. >> Council member, >> um can I open on the motion? >> Say it again. I'm sorry. >> With Can I open on my motion? >> Oh, I'd like for you. Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, with that in mind, I also understand the risk associated with the language that the vice mayor has added and I would like to request again the consideration of the applicant as to whether you would allow for that concession to be stricken from your application. >> The uh >> Okay. I Excuse me for just doing fine. I just want to be clear. I'm going to allow you to answer this question. The matter is back before the body. So, uh, this question will be allowed. Matters back before the body, though. So, the >> Thank you, mayor. >> Council members asked you a question. Go ahead. >> Go ahead. >> You're the referring to concession number two, the streamline tenant selection. if I would voluntarily remove it. >> Yes. And the context being when Mr. Dit came up and suggested that there might be some misunderstanding in terms of the um magnitude and complicating factors associated with us simply advertising the vacancy. Um, I'm asking whether you would be willing as the applicant to voluntarily remove this concession from your application. >> Um, I would consider there wasn't a misunderstanding because there wasn't a big city process. It's just the volume of inquiries we'll have to deal with with that. But I would consider it in the context of our uh inclusionary housing alternative method requests getting approved. But without that, you know, we're going to have to go back and modify the project again and figure out what project can go forward. So, I'm not going to it wouldn't be meaningful. I'm not going to withdraw it as it stands on this motion. >> Thank you, sir. >> Council member, >> thank you, Mayor. I'm I'm willing to engage in this negotiation and I'm going to provide some context for that. The way that this motion is currently stated is um the city does have discretion in the pathway that was identified by staff and the applicant to either accept or deny this alternative inclusionary compliance method. However, the applica applicant has an additional concession that you may apply and it was as my understanding a decision between staff and the applicant to take this method versus a concession to get to the number of units that you are proposing with regard to the bedrooms. I am very comfortable foregoing because I believe you are going to be coming back anyway with an additional concession to meet the same exact standard. I think we can not have another hearing if we are comfortable switching ah my computer this to a concession which I believe you were going to do anyway. And what I'm asking for is the forbearance on um allowing the city to to advertise for this project. I personally don't think that is at all out of scale for what we are trying to do as a community. And even the example of you're going to talk to Westlake families and teachers and people in the neighborhood is quite frankly the exact opposite of what I would hope to be advertising this project for. Maybe there are students that currently go to G that would be better served up at Westlake. Maybe there are students on the far west side that would be better served being because their parents are academics living up there. So what is the problem with allowing the city our discretion to ensure that this is publicly available associated with our current practices. I feel very strongly about this. I understand we're in a position of negotiation. I think we can I can lean on staff because I understand that there is potential for meeting the inclusionary requirements via a concession. I understand that that option is available. I feel very strongly that this is an unnecessary concession. I understand that you have you're worried about the burden of of of managing this. However, our position as a city is to ensure that we are at whatever capacity we have reaching our entire community. And that is not something I'm willing to just place um comfortably in your hands. I want to have that option and I want to exercise that option. >> Council member Golders is recognized. >> I hear you. I I I think a lot of us share the same values. My question about this particular project and I don't know who can answer it is my understanding with this project when it first came before us is it was part of the church and I maybe I naively assumed that it was a way to help like increase membership or help current members of the church maybe find housing. I didn't think it was something that was meant to be opened up to the wider community. But maybe I'm wrong. I don't know if staff or someone can help me answer that. >> That question >> that kind of helps me think about asking. >> Do you have an answer to that? >> I think the applicant actually might be the best person to answer that question what their intent is in terms of >> I'm sorry I didn't hear you. >> I think maybe the applicant might be able to answer their their intent of who they plan to rent to or their intention was. >> This is not meant primarily for church members and in fact that is a fair housing law uh potential issue. You can't discriminate based on religion for example or membership in a certain organization or type of employment variety of things right so no uh we do envision there will be members of the church who live there but like everyone else you know um uh so it's not it's not over um you know bent in that direction and if I can while I'm here I just want to say thank you for expressing that that is a really important point to you and I think we can uh meet it. I just, you know, we do need an afford affordability plan that works. I hope we can come to that. Thank you, >> Council Member Golder. Completed with that. Okay. Other debate or discussion on this item? Well, I've got a few, but go ahead. >> Um, thank you. Um, I have a question for staff. Um, if we were to revise this motion or even go back to the original motion with the voluntary removal of concession 2 and changing the methodology for reaching the inclusionary numbers, what would that motion look like? >> Mr. Butler, >> thanks for that question, Council Member O'Hara. Um so that question would be um or that that motion would include um as you suggested to um reference that the applicant has voluntarily um switched their incentive concession requests going from the uh removal of the notification current incentive concession number two and switching it to the inclusionary um uh alternative means um that we initially had proposed. Um and you could um include in that something similar to what you had in your motion, which is providing direction to staff and the city attorney's office to modify the u the resolution findings accordingly. >> Point of order or maybe parliamentary question. >> Certainly. Um I I know there's motion and a second on the floor. I'm not quite certain how to proceed. Um and I'm leaning on you in terms of if there is interest in modifying this motion. How would you like me to proceed? >> Well, you are the maker of the motion. If you would like to modify your motion and it's agreeable to the second, then those will be accepted. So feel free to to amend your own motion. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, holy smoke smokes. >> I let me ask a question procedurally. I'm going to go back. Yes. With the we have been sitting here for 3 hours and you know 40 minutes uh on this item and I am wondering if what we could do is just take a 10-minute break uh and then we will come back and you will have the floor. >> Thank you. >> Without objection, we are standing recess for 10 minutes. Santa Cruz City Council is back in session and I will recognize that a quorum continues to be present. Uh when we took our break, uh Council Member O'Hara had the floor. So, Council Member, it is back to you. Thank you, mayor. Um, I would like to request to uh remove the motion on the floor. The current motion on the floor. >> Motion on the floor is withdrawn by the maker of the motion. >> Member, you have the floor. >> Thank you. And I would like to move a new motion to adopt the resolution to adopt the resolution approving the project as recommended by staff with one substantive amendment as agreed to by the applicant. that the applicants requested incentive number two related to option for streamline tenant selection be removed and replace it with an alternative concession request to allow for the inclusionary alternative approach per section 246030 proposed by the applicant as articulated in their proposal and the city staff's report. Motion authorizes the city attorney and community development director to make the conforming revisions necessary to the resolution to effectuate this direction with all other project approvals, findings, and conditions remaining as recommended with you can remove you can strike friendly amendment. Miss Bush direct staff for future projects to include quantifiable data that demonstrates cost savings when incentives concessions are requested by applicants. >> There's a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second. Second by the vice mayor. Council member O'Hara, you may open on your motion. >> Thank you. And I have a question to the applicant. I need to have you guys on record that you are in comfortable with this direction of um the proposed motion in relation to concession number two. >> Yes. Thank you. >> We'll never forget a word you had to say. >> Yes. >> All right. >> Okay. Thank you. Matter fact, followed by further debate or discussion on >> No, I just I I appreciate the time energy that went into this. I do have one additional thing that I want to add to this conversation. Um, a few of us, Vice May, Mayor Colintari Johnson and Council Member Nuome and I are currently on an ad hoc committee focused on design guidelines. We have been going through a very regimented process with staff um to engage with the community on what does good design look like? What should it look like in Santa Cruz? Um have been through a design professionals roundt um that came up with design themes for the consideration of the community. had a planning commission meeting of which um we had the entire um courtyard out here filled with folks um looking through different design characteristics and making recommendations based on what we think is Santa Cruz character and what are we looking for for design. So, in addition to this motion, I just want to put up on the screen. Um, Madame Clerk, we have a community survey going on right now that is really looking for community feedback on what kind of design are we looking for in this community. I'm going to put these QR codes up quickly for the community that is here and anybody who might be watching from home. Please take the survey. It's really important that we, and if you can scroll up slightly, left is English, right is Spanish. Um, it's important that we get as much feedback on this as we possibly can. This conversation today really does get to um we are trying to strike a very complicated balance with current California legislation and laws limiting our local control because we need to add housing stock in the state and particularly in our coastal communities where our cost of living, you know, we have the highest rent burden in the entire nation here in Santa Cruz. um we need to build housing, but how do we do that in such a way where we're trying to thread the needle around? What are we looking for um with these new developments? Um that will make us feel better about the direction that we're going. So, please do take these surveys. I don't know how long they're open, but hopefully for another >> through August. >> Through August. Thank you. Um please take these surveys. Take the time to do do so. Um I took it a couple days ago. It takes maybe 10 minutes and it's actually really um an informative process. So I appreciate everybody's forbearance on that um and really appreciate the conversation and the regimented process that we tried to walk through with regard to this particular project. it is the responsibility of the applicant to meet our needs and address the findings that we are trying to address um during these deliberations. So I appreciate the time that you guys took in answering questions um and then some of the concessions that we were able to negotiate and I appreciate the the patience of my colleagues as we walk through this discussion. Thank you. >> Thank you. Vice Mayor is recognized. >> Thank you. Um just a couple of things. Um the geotechnical study was brought up and uh Mr. Sibi uh mentioned that this will be done before permit is issued and um staff also confirmed that. So that was brought up by some of the speakers here. So rest assured that a thorough geotechnical study will be completed before permit is issued. Um and then just well first I want to I want to thank everyone who's here, everyone who called in. Um, I understand this has been a long process and and really at the end of the day, we want to provide housing for our community. Um, and I think all of us would agree on that. It's it's how we how we proceed and where we land that is really important. And I want to thank Council Member O'Hara for u the process you walked us through today. I think that that's really important. Um, and it may uh result in longer meetings, but it's worth it. It's worth it for us to do this, right? Uh many of you continue to ask us to deny the project and I hope that you are hearing and seeing that we are doing our due diligence and denying the project even if we wanted to. I don't know that all of us would want to. Um it's not an option. I made a friendly amendment for one of the concessions to be struck out and our city attorney pointed out that we're at risk of litigation. To me, that was a very important incentive and concession for the city. You know, it's about equitable outreach to our community members. It's about transparency. It's about tracking what's happening in our community. But in my mind, it didn't seem that impactful to the applicant. But even with that consideration, we were reminded that we would be at risk of litigation. So just for the community who's here and who's listening, please know that we are trying to engage. We are engaging. We're not trying. We're engaging in a thoughtful process, but when you ask us to deny a project, you put us in an impossible situation. Um we're with you. Um we are open to hearing your suggestions. We hope that more of these conversations will ensue with future projects. We've given direction to staff to give us more data that is quantifiable and hopefully this will result in a more thorough transparent process in the future. Thank you for the debate or discussion uh Mr. Bane let me ask you a quick question. There was, I believe, either during someone's testimony. In any event, this afternoon or this evening, we've we heard a sentence that I thought said that 24 months have gone by and somebody's permit isn't is voided. Can you speak to that issue? I don't understand what that was. >> Yes. Um I believe that in most cases uh permits most permits are all are good for three years. >> Um >> get a little closer. >> Sorry. >> Thank you. >> Um I did look at the conditions of approval for the original project and it does refer to 24 months uh two years. I think that's in rel I think that's specific or it was relating to the minor land division which those are >> I see >> good for two years versus the other um permits that part of the project. Um that being said they did the subdivision >> and so they've exercised the permit >> and within that two years. >> Thank you. That was my only question. Further questions or comments? Clerk will call the role. >> Council member Tgerero. I >> council member Newsome has himself. Council member Golder. >> Hi, >> O'Hara. >> Hi, >> Vice Mayor Kellory Johnson. >> Hi, >> Mayor Keely. >> I motion passes and awarded. Thank you all for being here. Madame clerk, is there more business to come before the body? >> City attorney, more body, more business to come before the body. >> No. >> Okay. A motion to adjourn would be in order. Council member Golder moves and council member Triggero reluctantly uh second that we will adjourn. Non-debatable. Those in favor signify by saying I. >> I oppose. Motion carries and so ordered. We stand adjourned. Trying to take the survey. Take it.