 All right Good evening everyone Thanks for being here this evening. I'm going to open this meeting of the Capitola City Council And I'll ask our clerk for a roll call, please Thank you councilmember Brown present councilmember Brooks here councilmember Bertrand Vice mayor Kaiser here mayor story here. Thank you. Well everybody join me in the pledge of 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'll ask the clerk if we have any Additions or deletions to the agenda. I should say and staff Any changes? No changes tonight tonight's agenda. Thank you Next well, I'll ask the city attorney for a report on our closed session meeting from earlier this evening Good evening mayor and council and community members The council had closed session on the two items listed on the agenda and no reportable action was taken Do we have any additional materials for this evening's meeting? Yes mayor story. There was one memo from staff regarding I believe it was item Seven C an updated salary schedule and that was distributed before the meeting. All right. Thank you Next we'll have oral communications This is an opportunity for members of the public to address the city council on items that are on our consent agenda or On items that are not on tonight's agenda Is there anyone in the audience that would like to address the council on public comment? Seeing none, I'll Ask the city clerk. Do we have anyone on zoom that would like to address the city council? We do have some people on zoom, but it doesn't look like anyone has their hand up. All right. Thank you. Thank you next we'll go to staff and city council comments. Do we have any Comments from staff staff with no comments this evening Any comments from council members I'll start to my left here Seeing none No comments Okay. Well, I Got a good night's sleep Finally It's about time. Yes Next we'll move on then to the consent agenda items these items will be passed with one vote Unless a council member wishes to pull an item for further discussion Any council members which is a pull an item any pulled then I'll entertain a motion to adopt the consent agenda There's a motion by council member Bertrand seconded by council member Brown We have a roll call vote, please council member Brown I Council member Brooks I Council member Bertrand I agree vice mayor Kaiser. I mayor story. Hi. Thank you Next we'll move on to the general government public hearings portion of our agenda this evening the first item would be item 8a and The item is to consider requests to fly the Christian flag During the month of December the month of Easter and on May 1st the National Day of Prayer in accordance with policy 518 outdoor displays of governmental and non-governmental flags on city prop property The staff recommended action is to deny the request Can we begin with staff report, please? Yes, give me one moment, okay One more moment and you see nope not quite and it's okay So everybody can see everything great. Okay. Thank you mayor. Thank you council for your patience I'm just gonna introduce this item and like you mentioned this is about a flag request You may recall you know proved. Yes. I'm sorry. Unfortunately. It just switched over to show the wrong screen. I see that Thank you one second. I could do an interpretive Okay, I think So this is the pace it's gonna be Okay, so background, thank you again for your patience, I really do appreciate it so In May 2021 council approved our current flag policy It does include a section regarding non-governmental flags Which outlines also procedure for how the members of the public can request to fly a non-governmental flag here at City Hall Okay on September 30th of this year the city received a member of the public's request to fly the Christian flag at City Hall as the mayor read This is quoted directly from the request. It was to fly it for in regards of Christmas for the month of December Fly it for Easter, but where Easter falls in the year for the week of Easter and On the national day of prayer, which as you said is on the first Thursday of May each year And here in a second on my screen and in a few seconds in yours the picture of the flag will be shown It you'll see it on your screen and according to the request the flag was conceived in 1897 and adopted by the Federal Council of Churches in 1942 it has been in use worldwide particularly in Europe Asia Latin America Africa and Canada it was designed to be universal representing all of Christianity, so not one particular denomination and According to the request Christianity is the most prevalent religion in the United States Estimate from 2021 suggests that 65% of adults and 63% of the US population is Christian And the United States was founded on biblical Christian values, so they feel it's important that we pass that on and now we have Some legal Analysis I'll turn it over to the city attorney. Thank you, Sam. Thanks Chloe So if the council will recall and we enacted your flag policy one of the Reasons that we did that and it stated clearly in the policy is to clearly designate flag polls as forums for city speech and So because they are designated as a forum for city speech as opposed to speech by the public Governments are not permit if a government expresses favoritism for one religion versus another or For religion versus no religion that is a violation of the federal and state California state Establishment causes in the Constitution Is that the conclusion of your remarks yes, thank you are there questions from council members? to the city attorney Are there questions on the staff report? Seeing none, I'll Open up the mic see if any members of the public would like to address the city council on this item. Yes, please come up Hello Good evening. Good evening. My name is David Campbell. I am a pastor. I pastor a church here in the city of Capitola And I put in the submission I submitted the proposal for the flag and I just wanted to first say Before I get into what I want to say about the flag is that as a pastor here I pray for all of you and I Encourage my congregation to do the same so we we respect you guys very much and what you do here so I just want to let you know that we we pray for you and encourage that as well so my Question is or my remark is in all due respect to what was just said and the reasoning for The recommended denial of the proposal is I don't actually see the connection to the establishment clause Directly it I believe that it's inaccurate to say that governments are prohibited to Express a message towards religion the My understanding is that the establishment clause was the intent of it the purpose of it the reason it was put into place was to Keep governments from interfering into the church and to keep the government out of the church not the church out of government so that's Why I'm having a hard time seeing the connection To the denial to the establishment clause specifically as you state as their reasoning So that's pretty much what I have to say and hopefully you can clear that up, right? Thank You mr. Campbell and thank you for your prayers We need them at times, so we appreciate it. All right. Thank you. Thank you Is there any other member of the public that would like to address the council on this item? Good evening. My name is Mark Schweeney. I live here locally have property here and Just found out about this. I thought this is a great opportunity for our community as opposed to something we need to reject Maybe too quickly. I just found out about this So I just went up and put the definition. What is a flag and then I would looked up also out of curiosity because that's a big issue too What is religion? So I looked up what is a flag? It's representation is one of the most common reasons for the flag so representation Go through all the different things but most importantly a flag reflects and represents the people who fly it Goes in also that flags of various forms of course and different colors all those kind of things But it finalizes this point again and definition serving for the identification of a friend or foe It's also used as rallying points So it's safe to say that the lgp2q flag that also reflects you or you've who voted for it to fly for a month Is this flag that it's already been flagged the lgp2q flag as opposed? We're just asking for a Christian flag also is this flag a rallying point for you and all the morals or lack of morals it represents Finally do you realize that flying the flag demonstrates that you are also following the religion and giving statements of beliefs More specifically what is religion then look up that definition not my definition And it's a set of beliefs concerning the cause and nature and purpose of the universe Especially when considered as creation of a superhuman agency or agencies usually involving devotional original observances And often containing a moral code of governing and conduct of human affairs and that's like as for definition I won't go through all of them. That's the first one and it goes into second third one Third one is interesting. It says a body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs of Practices or World Council or sometimes religions And fourthly it says it's something one believes in and follows devotedly in a point of matter of ethics or conscience to make a religion or fighting prejudice The religion the Christian flag isn't a religion. We're trying to promote. It's a relationship and who we believe in it is a founding Documents of our country are founded on Christianity the separation church in the state, which he is talking about There's never be to be what church of England did to its Christians It was met so people come over here and to find its own religious beliefs not be stuck to the Christian beliefs of the church of England But here's my plea We're only asking that as long as you want to fly the lgp-2 flag plus plus We also want the right of our government to fly the flag that next to the American flag represents the views of most Americans Secondly and against since you are flying a flag of religious beliefs that it's only a few years old It represents a small part of our country's population Why not allow a flag that represents a set of relation relationship beliefs of our founding fathers? Their beliefs and still the beliefs of most Americans to also fly in honor and remembers of the great foundation of Morals and the majority relationships that still exist today At a time when our society is crumbling a fall apart uploading It's a time that may look back to see what held us together What brought us together what morals and values as opposed one of the things that we keep finding ways to separate ourselves today Which is something we pray Against and pray for the unity that you guys are trying to do so. Thank you for your time and pray for Lee Hopefully you listen to what we're trying to ask for. All right. Thank you. Mr. Sweeney Sir anyone else yes, I DJ Good evening before before I get started here just a few things one I'm getting over your moment, you know, I Can't say it. I don't know the word now Anyways, I don't have COVID. I'm not contagious, but I do have a cough pneumonia is what I have so And thank you for all being here talking about COVID and then thoroughly. Thank you for the lights Big change for a little community look nice So I'll get started here Let me start by saying that I know each of you personally and well I respect the positions that you hold I couldn't be more disappointed in your response to the petition request That was submitted to you like six months ago by the members of our community the petition to discuss the city's flawed flag policy Only one council member requested the LGBTQ flag So certainly any of one of you could have placed this item of the petition on the agenda. I also have shortness of breath so Be but each of you have consciously chose to ignore the people That's not democracy. Democracy is listening to we the people before you make a decision The flag policy is already flawed But tonight your attempt to redefine to meet your political agenda a city is defined differently than a local government a City is we the people the community a local government as you the city administrators Interesting that the Boston City loss on the Christian flag Supreme Court judgment Justice Breyer Said Boston's flag raising program does not express government speech So why the change? Your redefining city to meet the government requirement that Justice Breyer spoke to that mistake cost Boston 2.1 million sell settlement fees About your sentiments We've listened to your words, but your sentiments are demonstrated through your actions and you've clearly demonstrated the following You support the LGBT community by flying their flag in spite of words your words You do not support our cops you denied their flag based on the its presence of the same insurrection where the LGBTQ flag was present some of you protested against our cops and an activist march where they hurled insults and Spit at our officers and not one of you can dim their actions At least one of our council members harassed business owners for displaying police flags during the national law enforcement week Then based on the staff recommendation tonight you do not support Christians Denying a flag request based on the unfounded finding establishment clause, but I'm pretty confident your sentiments are not so strong To turn down your paid Christian holidays an interesting note the establishment clause was written years before They adopted the Christian Christmas holiday So our founders knew about the nexus and actually the establishment clause was supposed to help Christianity and not confine it to one place Go ahead. I would like to go on. Yeah, so what what are your next sentiments reveal? How about pro-life? National sanctity of life is coming up in January or how about straight pride? Do you have the same sentiments for straight pride citizens as as the LGBTQ both have flags for proposal? Here's a bottom line your sentiments have no business being on public display as a Christian. I love our LGBTQ People I love our cops. I love our community. I love our country, but above all I love God We do not need division in our community that you're putting out Council members. There is no positive outcome with your current flag policy You're a choosing to pit neighbor against neighbor tonight You can approve or deny the request recognizing the nationally recognized federally observed Christian heritage But there's a third option you could vote to remove the non-governmental portion of the flag policy realizing that the public display Of your sentiments regarding these issues are not in alignment with the community and will only cause more division discourse in Capitola I pray you make a wise decision That is in the best interest for those of you who are elected to serve if not I plan to see you back here in January when we have at least two new city council members I'm certain we'll listen to we the people. Thank you Is there anyone else that would like to address the council? Seeing none in the audience Yes, city attorney if it would be okay. Mr. Mayor. I'd like to respond to some of the comments Some questions. Why don't we let's go out to zoom first? Let's see if there's any public comments there I don't I don't see any hands Okay, thank you. Thank you Then I'll I'll turn the microphone over to you madam city attorney. Thank you, mr. Mayor So the establishment causes in the United States and the California state constitutions in the United States Constitution it's a derivative of the First Amendment Which states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof It has been read to go both ways to prohibit the Government from establishing a religion and to keep the state out of the church and the church out of the state I think a common interpretation of that is that it does in fact go both ways The California provision of the establishment causes actually it seems a little more pointed all those scholars have Interpreted to be pretty similar to the federal cause the California cause is in the Constitution at section 4 Free exercise and enjoyment of religion without discrimination or preference are guaranteed The liberty of conscious does not excuse acts that are licentious or is Inconsistent with a peace or safety of the state the legislature shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion Justice O'Connor in a Supreme Court case it gave what I thought was a pretty succinct explanation of the establishment clause. She said Endorsement sends a message to non adherence that they are outsiders Not full members of the political community and an accompanying message to adherence that they are insiders Favored favored members of the political community. You can see from that flows the conclusion that a government cannot Express preference for one religion Christianity over perhaps Judaism or Islam or Religion in general over no religion The another another Supreme Court in 1970 so this has been initiated the court has ruled on the establishment cause multiple times another Supreme Court described the establishment cause as prohibiting Sponsorship financial support and active involvement of the sovereign in religious activity I'll also point out that the city's flag policy Requires the city to pay for the flags that it flies And so certainly that's another reason that the city could not spend spend money to pay for a flag that clearly Preferences one religion over another Finally, I'd like to address the Supreme Court's ruling in May of 2022 in short left first shirt left versus Boston In that case Justice Breyer did not say that the establishment cause permits Or even certainly required Boston to fly the Christian flag what Justice Breyer said in that case was that Because Boston had not been enforcing its flag policy And in fact had prohibit had permitted many many many groups to fly flags on city owned flag poles That that in fact made city owned flag poles into a public forum And so if something is a public forum there cannot be discrimination free speech prohibits Discrimination over what type of speech is allowed in that forum? That is why you saw after the short lift case many jurisdictions enact flag policies So that they would be they would separate themselves They would differentiate themselves from the short lift case So what jurisdictions did including Capitola was an act of flag policy that clearly stated that city owned flag Poles are forums for expression of city speech not the public speech And if it is expression for city speech the city as a local government cannot express preference for religion For one religion over the other or religion versus non-religion. Thank you Thank you So with that I'll bring the item back to the council for further deliberation and potential action Is there a council member that would like to lead off? Yes council member Bertrand I'll take Go on it First of all, thank you Those who brought this here TGI knows very involved in this We've actually spent many hours talking about various issues that he brought up when he spoke today just now Originally I had planned not to be at this meeting not because of the agenda But I had something very important in my life That I wanted to do I have not missed any city council meetings except for City business when I went to Cal League So it was significant Um Religion is a big part of my life just as much it is for other people. I'm not a minister or anyone anything like that. I've gone Procule schools Mariners fathers and then the Jesuits which as you know is probably one of the strictest that there are in terms of running a school University of San Francisco and teaching you Christian or Catholic principles of life So I thought about this issue on many levels over the course of my life This is not something new to me How do you express your religion and was expected of? Those around you including government in terms of supporting That expression and what involvement they may have in terms of expression. I remember running up to the top of a hill and In San Rafael there is a big cross on the top. I was in a military academy at the time and You know the issue then was on public land Can you put a cross and you know in San Francisco? There was other crosses that brought this issue up and so in my life I've Followed this issue considerably Even though I was raised Catholic my parents sent me to a Jews community center And I received instruction on what it meant to be a good you And my parents had no problem with that We sent our daughter to Monavista, which is a Christian school and we had no problem with that So our sense of religion is basically that it's a deeply held thing But it's yours So when I think about this particular issue and the idea that our Constitution Has explicitly said there should be a separation between church and state It's not unlike Jesus prayer parable, which I'm sure you all know There are times when you give something the state and there's times that that is given to God And in this case it's true Our country was founded by many religious groups that came from Europe because of persecution The Catholic Church splintered off into many different Religions and there was persecution between various religions and others because maybe they're smaller different views I am not a Religious historian, so I do not know that but I do know that our colonies came about because of that They had escaped from Europe to find a place where they could exercise a religion in freedom but also know that When the Constitution was made by these same people they came here to establish a country based on and they were religious It's inherent in their writings that these are important ideals that they wanted to protect in a new government Even though they were here because of religious reasons and had that history they still Provided for the separation of church and state There's a reason for that and recently I spent a bunch of time reading to try to understand What perhaps is the reason? Their history as they came from a place was there a lot of war and strife between and persecution because of religious views And if you create a system which starts to favor different religious views, we have countries in this world Which are extremely repressive Because they represent one religious view in Exclusion to others to the extent that people are killed in their country Because they have a different religious view so the thing that struck out and what I read I Try to put a lot of thoughts in these things is that we're here us five people are here To protect the Constitution we swore to that and in trying to do that We also want to create Our decisions in such a way make our decisions in such a way, excuse me To avoid strife To try to come up with policies and Exercising policies in this case. That's what we're doing to try to relieve Strive from our community so all of us can live together and in this case all of us live together Irrespective of religious views you have I highly respect I highly respect Without any doubt in my soul That religion is a deep part of our country our religions are much more than Christian religions now This country has gone way beyond The people who came here in the May fire whatever vessels they they were With the different religions that they held in dearness to their existence such that they sacrifice the possibility that People coming across the land those days did not know they were going to get here My relatives did that they had a hike across the isthmus and Panama They did not know they were going to get here, but they wanted to because it was a land of freedom So I sincerely Understand and believe and know because my history that religion is clearly a part of this country But our country has grown We now are willing to accept that the native people the people who are indigenous have their own religions with great value Which the ones who came here did not recognize to the extent that they try to obliterate them We have mozzams. We have all sorts of people But we have all sorts of people many of which are friends of mine And I love their religions when they when they take the time to explain them to me They're not Christian though That's why I bring it up. So the idea is our city attorney mentioned The sense of exclusion comes about and this is not a country of exclusion This is a country of inclusion. It is a hard lesson to act on it is a hard lesson to carry out and As you all know, we're going through that right now But we are a country that is going to succeed in doing that and we are a country that's going to learn our lessons as we Go along and become better at doing that And I hope a negative vote here Doesn't mean to those who put it forth that we're anti-religion What it means to me is I'm in a country that protects all religions Doesn't favor another any one over the other and we do this so that we could live peacefully together Thank you Thank You councilmember Bertrand Other council members like to address this yes councilmember Brown sure. Thank you Thank you everyone for being here tonight pastor. Dave. It's good to see you again I know we've spoken about other issues in the past and then we haven't always seen eye to eye I've always very much appreciated that we've been able to have respectful conversations with each other And and hope to continue to do so in the future I Want to acknowledge the good work of the faith community overall as a community partner in line with nonprofits other government agencies businesses it is by working together that we create Such a beautiful community and of course the faith community in general is is definitely a part of that and I will not deny that I think those who have served on government bodies those who Make decisions on behalf of their communities or their congregations Quite often know that these decisions aren't always personal in nature But made in the consideration of the benefits and consequences Consideration of those who are helped and those who will be harmed and of course in alignment with the advice that we receive from from those Well, I guess I could say those above us regardless if that be In terms of those who have higher authority in law or higher authority in life depending on how you would how you would look at it So I want to start by saying those two things because I do believe that staff recommendation is the best way to go tonight and denying the flag request, but again, I mentioned that In in line with the idea that these decisions aren't always Personal in nature. This isn't a personal attack in my opinion On those making the request as much as it as it is a decision that needs to be made With all the considerations that I just mentioned, but again, I thank you for being here tonight All right. Thank you council member Brown So another council member that would like to address this item. Yes. Yeah council member Brooks Thanks, ma'am. Sorry. I just want to echo our sentiments from both council member of Bertrand and council member Peterson and In total agreement and pastor Dave Mr. Campbell, thank you for your prayers this evening Thank you vice mayor. Yeah, thank you everybody who showed up and who spoke on this item I know it takes a lot to get a group of people together to do anything So that there shows your faith and your your backing behind this and I Want to come off of what council member Brown said and that it This by no means is a personal Situation for me it is more about as Jacques said in inclusion and that's more of where My personal thoughts go and I think the thoughts of the council as we tried to be inclusive with one another and with the city as well so and I do Respect what our attorney has had to say as well and I think that that is Sort of where we have to Be more careful for us as a city to maintain common ground for everybody But everybody. Thank you so much for what you said tonight, and I appreciate all the involvement All right. Thank you vice mayor Kaiser Is there a motion on the on the table? I'll move the denial of the request for item 8 a There's a motion By council member Brooks seconded by vice mayor Kaiser to deny the request And before I ask for a roll call vote, I guess some I would like to also address the item and Thank you for bringing it forth. It is really thought-provoking And because it's true, I think religion is a big part of all our upbringings and all our lives And it should continue to be so And So for that and and to bring it forth, I do appreciate that I think I want to speak to Because this seems to spring from what I hear in my experience on This issue it originated when we Voted to approve the gay pride flag And that's that certainly is seems to be the source of it now. I feel like I I think I want to address For myself personally why I supported that motion Because I felt that one of our tasks and what we are trying to do was to recognize groups that have historically been discriminated against been You know shut out of society Have been treated very harshly And for many of you that don't know me I grew up in the south I grew up in the south in a religious family and There were I would say that even in that social context to the most vilified And discriminated against groups in that society were gays and African-Americans And I think that what we were trying to do in In both the Gay pride flag and the black lives matter March was to bring some recognition That that form of discrimination Needs to come to an end in our society and I think that we were trying to Present a position of inclusiveness where previously it did not exist and To me this is different because I don't know you know the Christian religion is a predominant religion. You're right and But I don't know that we need the same kinds of protection and symbolism Within our religion that those groups Did so I just wanted to maybe explain, you know, my personal positions on why we had agreed to that And I'm going to support the motion as well for the many Reasons both the legal position And also on that position about being inclusive Because as much as we all are I think that we have to recognize that not everyone is Not even in Capitola not everyone is And we do we want to give them a sense that they're not a part of our community I don't think that's our objective. So now with that You know, I'm on my way out from this council I have two meetings left I Want and whoever I want to encourage council members who are Remaining and the new council members that will come forth And I don't know who those are you would none of us know who those are yet But I would encourage them to revisit this flag policy And I you know and and I just I'm to be clear And I'm not saying that in any way of regretting our tribute to the great gay community and flying the gay pride flag And I think though there are different ways That the city can express its support for various causes groups From time to time without it being a part of our flag policy And I and I do feel that we need to have one unifying Symbol within our community within our state within our country and to me that's it's our flag And And I and I'm not trying to get a pause about that But that that is just You know, I really believe that we need to have one symbol on that flagpole That we can all look to to say that regardless of our color Regardless of our orientation regardless of our religion we all Are have a common bound with the values express in that flag and The values expressing that flag are one reason why I'm voting it in support of this motion just to be clear on that as well But I do want to say that and I hope that the council Will continue this discussion, you know when it Gets reconstituted and will consider, you know these thoughts. So with that, I'll ask for a roll call vote councilmember Brown Councilmember Brooks I councilmember Bertrand I agree vice mayor Kaiser I mayor story. I the motion passes unanimously Thank you everyone. Thanks for coming out We'll now move on to the next item which is item 8b Which is consider a cannabis delivery ordinance amendment The recommended action is to introduce by title only waiving for the reading of the text Ordnance of mending capitol a municipal code sections 5.36 and 9.61 Allowing cannabis deliveries within the city of capitol are from any authorized licensed retailers physically located within Santa Cruz County Staff report, please I Just hear so much whispering secrets. Don't make friends Well, I'll get I'll get going here. Good evening mayor and council members I'm here this evening to request an ordinance amendment on our cannabis delivery And so I'll move through a couple of slides here This first slide is just a quick overview Currently we have two retail cannabis licenses that are issued to the apothecarium That's on 41st Avenue, and then also the hook dispensary. That's off of Gross road both retailers are currently in good standing and have past our annual inspections and audits And so they've been really good partners with us and then this last year We we discovered that there was issues with the regional the delivery And so our retail locations could not deliver and to the outside to the county and likewise Of the county was not allowed to kind of deliver our jurisdiction And so that brought up our request tonight, so I'll give you a little bit of background Screen gets caught up here So as far as a little bit of background About our cannabis program that we have the retail cannabis in note November of 2018 the residents passed a ballot measure Implementing our retail cannabis Program we added at that time section 5.3 sex which outlines our retail cannabis cells in our jurisdiction 9.61 Restricts commercial cells of cannabis within the city's jurisdiction and again We proposed in 2022 we discovered some issues and that's why we're proposing the amendments to the to the current ordinance That would allow for retail cannabis delivery both inside our jurisdiction and outside the jurisdiction And so the proposed amendment Like I said, we we had those issues that we discovered and there was lack of consistency with the local regulations our Regional management staff met and we all agreed upon a proposed plan that would Essentially bring all the local jurisdictions on the same line. So there's consistent messaging from our jurisdiction to the local jurisdictions The proposed amendments to 5.36 and 9 6 1 they they will align with our regional partners And it's also will support that the language in it will support an upcoming Senate bill That's that will become an effect in 2024, but Senate bill 1186 which essentially bans local jurisdiction local jurisdictions from allowing Cannabis deliveries for medicinal patients. So language also supports that upcoming bill and So this evening we're considering Requesting to introduce by title only waving for the reading of the text and ordinance amending amending capital immunity code sections 5.36 and 9.61 Allowing cannabis deliveries within the city of Capitola from any authorized licensed retail are physically located in Santa Cruz County And with that I can answer any questions questions Yeah, council member Bertrand. Hi, um So chief, I don't know if you were here. I don't think you're here Yeah, you were on the force when the first ordinance was passed and maybe Jamie City manager can answer his question. I remember we explicitly did not want to have Deliveries into our area and out of our area at the time and the issue. I remember people were doing it Surreticiously they were coming in they didn't seem to care Do you recall the discussion that I'm just trying to relive those issues? Thank you. Council member trans so I think what was happening. This was about a decade ago I think and that was when we passed our original ordinance, which I believe was It's a 961 is 961 the one and that was a blanket prohibition on all cannabis activities commercial cannabis activities and so at that point we were concerned about deliveries coming in I think it was Chief Escalani at the time. He was concerned about how that was going to be regulated And so we passed sort of a blanket Blanket ban on commercial cannabis activities since that time we've modified it several times including when we allowed Laboratory commercial laboratories and testing facilities to operate within the city and then we passed our commercial Sorry retail cannabis licensing ordinance as well. So this would sort of be the third change I think we've made to the rules around what what's allowed commercially and allowing the cannabis deliveries The biggest thing is is this is going to be syncing up with all the other jurisdictions So the city of Santa Cruz right now only allows deliveries from their own licensed retailers and the county only allows deliveries from their licensed retailers This is saying as long as you're licensed in the county you can deliver in the county So that's that's kind of the biggest thing is we're sort of syncing up with everybody else We've got that and the chief did say that and thanks for the history because I remember the discussion about it Yeah, but not accurately Thank you The other questions soon council members chief. Thank you. I had a couple questions It said that the in the staff report it says that the plan will ensure that deliveries are subject to local regulations and taxes How will you're sure that? Capitola gets his fair share of taxes will it be Location specific our destination specific So my understanding is that currently we're all set on the same tax rate It's seven percent. And so I think it's just making sure that the local jurisdictions keep with that and not try and Go higher or lower to be competitive And so I think it's just important that the local jurisdictions make sure that they keep that that that percentage the same But if fire local retailer of pot the carium Will if they deliver outside up of our city limits will they report? To Capitola is taxable income even for those sales Yeah, because that my understanding is the point of sale would be capital the delivery would just be outside So it would be it would be a capital. It's a point of sale determination, right Okay Thank you. I'm that clarifies that for me I had one of the follow-up questions since the other jurisdictions have not yet approved this Should our action be conditional upon? Uniform adoption among the other jurisdictions So I believe that One of the other jurisdictions has already had a first reading was it this week Santa Cruz I think did Santa Cruz had it they went through their planning and it's set to go before their council. I think in the next week or so I Think we could I mean so we have a second reading that would be coming up next meeting And so if council directed we could write the second reading to say it takes effect when say the county of Santa Cruz is takes effect Okay, are you okay with that Sam? Well, we would need to rewrite the we would need to change the effective date in the ordinance No, I mean because the ordinance itself is different So we would want to the ordinance itself says that it takes effect 30 days from its passage So we would want to change the actual ordinance What you might do is just do the first reading tonight. I think we'll know by then whether or not Santa Cruz has adopted the county in the city. I don't know what scheduled there on have adopted There's any if not, you just don't pass it at the second reading I want to bring one other thing to the council's attention about this ordinance But I want to make sure that I'm not cutting off cheap deli. Okay, so there's one other section of the ordinance So that would need to be amended The ordinance itself in your packet is correct There's just a slight glitch in that Recommended action and that is that the ordinance actually does two things one is it trues up? Your ordinance with actions that are being taken in the county as chief dally explained Allowing delivery of all cannabis from any Retailer that is located within Santa Cruz County. That's one two There is legislation that was recently passed that requires Jurisdictions to allow cannabis delivery from anywhere in the state of medicinal cannabis that takes effect in January of 2024 We decided that it made more sense for you rather than Amending your ordinance now and then having to come back and do it in January 2024 to just do both amendments of your ordinance now so and the title of the ordinance in your packet on I'm looking at the wrong one on page 30 of your packet is correct. I think that that is just missing a Little bit of the end So if whoever makes the motion if you just want to say that you want to move the first reading of the ordinance in the packet Ordinance in the packet. That's fine, or I can help you. That's fine. I just wanted to point it out to you. All right. Yeah, thank you Okay, with that, are there any members of the public that would like to address the council about cannabis? Seeing none Chloe do we have anyone on zoom that I Do not see anyone with their hand up. Okay. Thank you With that, I'll bring it back to the council for further deliberation and action I'll move approval of the recommended action And to approve the first reading If I could request if I could ask that perhaps councilmember Brown you mean approval of the first reading waving full title or Approval for first reading only waving Full reading of the text of the ordinance located at page 30 in the packet. Yeah, that's what I meant Okay, that's the motion by councilmember Brown Quoted by city attorney And seconded by councilmember Tran And I can't believe we're discussing home delivery of cannabis and Being a baby boomer, this is you know a big change So with that, I'll ask for a roll call vote Councilmember Brown I Councilmember Brooks I councilmember Bertrand. I agree vice mayor Kaiser Mayor story I the motion passes unanimously Which will bring us to item 8c, which is the Introducing Ordinance amending chapter 15 point zero four of the capitol and Municipal code pertaining to building and fire code Just going to do the staff report on this item So we have a Staff member who is going to be zooming in from upstairs. She has a sick kid at home So she was trying to stay out of chambers Director Hurley. He you are on Thank you, can you hear me okay? Yeah, we can Well, so that's the rub is is that unfortunately our computer is very slow So it may be okay, but it may take 30 seconds for it to look right down here. So Right now we're not seeing oh no right now. We are just seeing your your outline view It seems to be a night of computer glitches Try resume slideshow Katie you see that little button there kind of floating sort of Just in the middle of up right there No No, well, I guess the meetings. Yeah, try one more time slide show from beginning. Maybe try the button on the far left there Yeah Well, maybe we're just maybe we just do the outline view. Yeah, I apologize Okay, so for you this evening is an ordinance amending chapter 1504 for the building and fire code Every every three years we Requirement of the state to update our building and fire code the new addition will take effect on January 1st 2023 so I'm just going to highlight some of the most significant changes our Building official Robin Woodman actually is teaching a class this evening. So she's unable to be here I'm going to talk through these four items that are the most significant changes But she did say that anyone that has questions on any of the technical Updates she's you're welcome to reach out to her on the following week and she'd be happy to walk you through them So the the most significant amendment is that the new code allows Jurisdiction to go beyond our typical permanent expiration of 180 days. There are now options to go up to a full year We are opting to keep we're recommending that we keep the existing code language to expire permits within 180 days as ongoing construction can be a nuisance to neighbors and It's just good to keep the projects moving along for health and safety reasons So we are that is one item that we're Suggesting that we keep at 180 days. There is also on construction concrete construction standards that are being replaced within this update I don't know the specifics behind that, but if you do have questions Robin could get into the details on that With this adoption also comes the adoption of the 2022 California fire code as amended and adopted by Central Fire Protection District and There's a new mandatory law that's not this is not an option for us that we've incorporated in the swimming pool safety act Those were four major changes No, the most significant one being keeping the 180 days for permit expiration The recommended action this evening is to introduce for first reading by title only waving further reading of the tax Proposed ordinance amending municipal code chapter 15 point oh four pertaining to building and fire codes That concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions of the questions Seeing none standing member of the public that would like to address the council on this item Seeing none anyone on zoom that would like to address the council I'll bring it back for a motion I'm gonna try it again. I'm gonna redeem myself this time. I'm I moved to introduce We're on C right introduce for first reading by title only waving further reading of the text to propose ordinance Amending municipal code chapter 15 oh four pertaining to building and fire codes Thank you Okay, we have a motion by council member brown seconded about the city attorney By vice mayor Kaiser I'll call for a roll call vote, please council member brown Council member Brooks hi council member Bertrand I approve vice mayor Kaiser. Hi mayor story. Hi The motion that item passes unanimously, which will now bring us to item D 2022 zoning code amendments the recommended action is to introduce the for first reading by title only waving further reading of the tax and the ordinance amending title 17 zoning of capital the municipal code amending the capital of general plan land use map and Amending the capital of zoning map and to adopt the proposed resolution amending the general plan land use map And I'll bring it back to you Katie Thank you mayor story and council and Jamie. Thank you for running this presentation. Well Katie before you get started I So I'm running it here, and I'm seeing your intro slide But unfortunately, I don't think you're seeing it because it's so slow this evening So it's fine and is it fine in zoom? I'm seeing it. Okay great. Okay. Never mind kick it off Katie Okay, okay, it looks like sorry. So tonight I'm presenting we've undergone a adopted our zoning code Which is a very long process that you all helped us through and it was certified by the Coastal Commission back in 2021 we've noted some issues That need clean up in the code and then there's also been a few new laws that have passed that have also influence the zoning code so we are Our goal is to clean up the zoning code by the end of the year so we can start fresh in 2023 and Here on this slide I have the topics of interest And I'm happy to talk through and I slide for every item that's listed here Night I plan on I've got slides, but I was going to introduce for the cannabis retail sign I've got one six That needs to happen for the Pergolas, Arvors, and Trellis And then also I was going to present on the monarch code in and at this time mayor story I was going to ask There are any other items here that you would like what you or any of the council members would like presented this evening Are there any requests from council members on? Take a presentation Yes, council member Bertrand, Katie. I just have a question is generators the one that deals with also the The windmill type generators Okay Kitty, I have a question about roof decks second-story decks and balconies, but You want may want to just handle that as a question to staff Okay, I can bring up those slides as well. They're actually follow these first three and I can answer the question we get there. Okay, so I'll jump in So our cannabis retail signs The existing code has a max limit of one sign for business and the Then it's limited the one sign is limited to 15 square feet and What or one square foot per linear footage of business whichever is less And then we think that we There's also there are other requirements there but those were the two that we're suggesting the planning commission get rid of just allowing the sign to The sign of a sign to be equal to what's allowed for all other businesses And we took that change to the planning commission. They said, you know Now we've gotten more familiar with the cannabis business establishments in Capitola We would like to suggest that we remove all special sign requirements for cannabis Establishment next slide team So this next slide I list out all of the sign requirements for cannabis establishment The existing code has a max of one exterior sign per business a max sign area of 15 square feet like I just mentioned I'm sorry Selling error there thing the sign that may include only the name of the business and one green cross Sign may not have any reference through symbols or language to cannabis with the exception of one green cross and The sign shall not be directly illuminated except during operating hours. So the planning commission Proposal is to remove all five of those standards If you'd like we can move on to the next item, or I'm happy to answer questions Yeah, go ahead Hergola's trellis and Arbor's the existing code was very confusing there. We're not Clear definitions of the three and then the allowances within the setback standards and encroachment standards Were not clear. So the proposed amendments were to add definitions for pergola's our version trellis's and To allow a pergola to be attached to a building wall You see a lot of homes in a pergola's attached to their the home and Come off of the home into either the front setback or the rear setback that previously There was no allowance for those encroachments Also allows pre-standing pergola's in the rear and an interior side it open on all sides This has been become very popular with all these of the outdoor kitchens that we've recently seen the trend with and then the It specifically excludes pergola's from the floor area calculation If it's open on at least three sides These are just pictures and the new definitions for pergola's trellis and Arbor's The correction that I'm bringing to you now is we noticed the highlighted box was incorrect we meant to update that and I have this adjusted language in the second paragraph saying up to two Arbor's of up to 10 feet in height with a minimum of two open sides utilized to a very walkway so Before the standard was the same for the trellis structure up to 10 feet in height and then it We're supposed to cross that out and then specify what the new standard was for Arbor's So in the motion this evening we get to the slide that language will be included in the slide for the motion That's a correction Next slide please. The last item that I had for discussion Was the Monarch Cove in and I just wanted to give you an overview of why this is before you tonight So the amendments include zoning text the zoning Amendment to the zoning map and also an amendment to the general plan map next slide The background on this is that when we originally Went through our zoning code update. There's a proposed change from visitor serving which it currently is now Made it to our one single family with a visitor serving overlay When the Coastal Commission certified our zoning code, it's the one item. They did not Include in the certification were the changes for the Monarch Cove in and they instructed their staff at the time They weren't saying they were going to deny it They said they needed more time and to understand it better and that they wanted this reviewed as a separate item Following that meeting that was Coastal Commission asked exactly what they would like and what they wanted was more financial documentation to evaluate the Visibility of the hotel into the future. So next slide please So the owner submitted the application for the zoning change would allow Then the option to retire and refer the property to residential use and have the flexibility of Their managing their state The reason for this is also because the scale of the property and the level of profitability as well Next slide So the proposed map amendment the zoning map would and the general plan map would change from visitor serving to our one single family with a visitor serving overlay and And the zoning text would be changed to allow residential use within with a few feet Next slide please You may recall when we went through the zoning code update There were two conditions that if they were to convert if they came in with a CUP to convert this to single family It could be allowed only in conjunction with an overnight accommodation on at least one of the properties Or if they granted a public access public access to a viewpoint. So those are we we're resubmitting that What's drafted in our code tonight is exactly what was proposed back in 2021 Next slide please. So we did go we went through a Financial document we did a feasibility analysis of these ability study. We hired a third-party cosmon Company to look to go over their ongoing cost They did an evaluation which was in the packet this evening and their findings is that their profitability is extremely limited and it's due to The very high cost was running with the old 11 room Victorian building also the extensive gardens on almost two acres of property and All of the restrictions with CUP so events are very limited in the time frame which they can be held at the hotel So with the limited 4% profitability the Cosmon found that the feasibility for ongoing success is the challenge for the hotel and then also they went through evaluation of Residential versus the hotel use and Residential we slightly higher as the hospitality use is extremely expensive to run and due to the limited restriction tax to see if Next slide please. So this evening The recommended action listed here, I won't read read it all for you at this time, but I Will move on actually to one more slide So second story that we even During the zoning code update we had excluded second story decks from floor area ratio and what we're seeing is a trend of larger decks coming in in proposals and a lot of In the closet the issues of privacy in front of in the planning Commission Meeting they were called one night that we had three different applications with second story decks That really brought all the neighbors out the planning Commission said we really need to create some better objective standards and Limitations to the second story deck. So the existing code it requires a design permit has to go for planning Commission There they're and it's excluded from the FAR and then next slide please The new code and items in blue are what the planning Commission added during the last meeting So they've added a new 150 foot FAR exception. So you could have like a 10 by 15 Deck or a couple of different decks, but it's only a 250 square feet before it would start counting towards your floor area ratio It's not allowed to face the side parcel line and butting a single family home There are increased setbacks the second story desk. So They not only have to be within the building footprint, but kind of set in and one addition the planning Commission made with that a Permanent privacy screen will be required for them. There's a rear deck along the side railing facing any single family home they also may not project frozen six feet from the wall and And And the last item was just for that's more towards lower decks. I need that go above 35 inches from the ground counts and Above grade and counts towards that area. So With that, I'm happy to answer any questions Are there questions from council member me a council member? Yeah, thank you I just have a quick question for clarification about the cannabis signs So The slider I believe somewhere in the packet it mentions that it's removing their requirements for cannabis signs so it sounds like the Planning Commission is just removing the limitations on cannabis signs that other signs don't have but then later on to 59 in the packet It says this that this brings cannabis signs standards closer to alignment with other business Identification sign standards, so I'm trying to determine is there still some kind of difference that we're going to see between cannabis signs and other Business signs or are they about to be are they going to be the same thing now? Okay, cool, thank you, I just wanted to clarify the question is in council member council member Brooks Thank You Katie for the presentation regarding the second story decks and balconies I know that there was some spirited conversation around this particular area at Planning Commission, and I'm just trying to think about the Already Made decks and the screening That is required from here on out and if there was any conversations about addressing something like that So that's my first question that my second question is isn't there a requirement of like a 10 foot separation When you build houses and how in relation can we cannot project more than six feet from a wall you're talking about a wall from Another home, I'm just trying to wrap my mind around that So for the your first question about the new standard for Permanent privacy screen along the sides of a very facing deck Any new application would be required to have that existing decks that do not have those would be legal Nonconforming so they could continue as they are your second question about that 10 foot step back So on a property if any building if any Participation within five feet it's subject to fire standards So you need to have to have fire rate of walls or if it gets there are certain Parameters, but it could also trigger sprinklers or fire rate of walls. So there's Definitely have Structures within five feet of the property line, but then I have to be fire rated And the projection of six feet would be for the actual parcel that's being developed with a deck So there if you imagine the home on the back of the home The deck is only allowed to extend six feet off the back of the home Or if it's on the front of the home, it would have a max projection of six feet towards the front But keeping in mind that they still have front and rear step back So it's really it's just kind of for the second story limiting how big these can be and in an attempt to Limit how much activity can be can happen on a second story deck and to prevent to protect privacy Okay, and my last question then is that we went from Not counting towards far to completely counting towards far with an exception of 150 square feet, which sounds really really small to me And I'm wondering if I am just curious about being About why you would want to start counting it towards far now then before and and or so our old code included All second story deck as well as covered front forces on the first story Towards floor air ratio and now with a cap of 150 square feet And we were not having issues at planning commission because people are not building really large So then when we updated the code in 2021 and remove the floor air ratio cap That's when we started seeing the issue of privacy concerns in the larger deck So taking this to planning commission. This was actually the main topic of debate was whether or not to include it in the far again and At first there was conversation about including in the far and also including the first story covered deck and The ultimate vision was well, we should we should be a little more loose in terms of allowing like a little more permissive in terms of allowing second story decks So this exception explicitly had in the code prior to 2021 So it's kind of a middle ground between the extreme of 2021 and not counting it at all and previous code being more limited And can someone create a request like a very is that it called a variance or or appeal the okay and then Last question. I promise because I know everyone likes talking about second story decks tonight I actually wish I could I'm not allowed in my HOA to build a deck or extend a deck strong feelings about that situation, but Um The screening I'm just I guess I'm getting caught up on the screening. Are you going to provide like recommendations for people on which ones to buy I just it just sounds so like it could just look really ugly if you if you don't provide some input or or Could not necessarily like someone could make it up What a privacy screening is, you know Yes, so As we're going through some of these more controversial decks this this kept coming up with the privacy screening But we saw quite a mix of what people wanted for their privacy screening as we started to condition permit So a paid glass is one option um These still require a design permit, so it does go before planning commission um you You could definitely Ask tonight that I get more specific We actually have a bend noble a bendable signing is here at season two We've drafted all of the language for the update But we could go back and add some specificity there for the second reading if you'd like Of exactly what could be allowed or if there are certain things that um You would like to make sure are not allowed. We can also take that approach, so Thank you, Katie. Those are all my questions. Any other questions? um Katie, um, I had a question also about the uh second story decks balconies and um potentially roof decks as well. It's on page 114 of the staff packet um sub chapter 11 and this is 11 b The wording there, um Do you see where where I am? I mean it At what page at the top right at the page? Top right. Oh, yeah. Yeah, it's eight of 150 An item b it says, um a second story deck or balcony May not face an interior side parcel line A budding a lot with a single family dwelling um and um I think I understand most of that but the part that Kind of uh trip me up was where it says may not face um I could understand um if you just had um kind of an enclosed second story deck It looks out in one direction um But if you have a corner deck um or a wrap around deck Or or if you have a roof deck Which under certain circumstances would be allowed How you do determine in which way it faces? That's a great question. Um So With with this standard It's really we should probably clean that up to say That it most you cannot project from the side. I think that's what we're trying to get at is it can project from um The rear of the home or from the front of the home or from a street side, but when it's between two homes A deck should not face But I think a clean up there could be a second story deck or balcony may not project From an interior Okay, well, thanks. Thanks wall. Thank the structure. Would that be better? Well, just thank you for validating my confusion about Trying to figure that out. Um and determining under these various scenarios Which part of it face which way? Um And so, yeah, I I would think maybe more specific language just so you don't we don't get into future confusion about that um so That was my question Now I also need to make a disclosure Um concerning the monarch cove. Um, I have a conflicting Property interest since I live right behind it. And so I'm going to ask that that item be considered separately and discussed separately and Maybe vice mayor keiser We would have needed to have segmented the item um Before the discussion tonight We actually have to to segment the item. We actually have to take that portion of the item first And then segment it from the entire so my recommendation would be that if you have a conflict I I think you Probably need to recuse from the entire from the remainder of the discussion From the whole thing. Okay. Well um My apologies for not raising that Sooner, um, but I yeah, I didn't realize it was going to be Highlighted separately. Um, so well with that I will recuse myself for the rest of the item And then I will return. Thank you Do we Have any other everybody got their questions and any questions from the public? Or any on zoom I do actually have a hand on zoom Let me Peter wilk. I'm going to allow you to speak Go ahead and unmute yourself and Go right ahead Yes, we can hear you hear me Okay. Yeah, this is Peter wilk. I'm on the planning commission and I'm glad you brought up the second story deck issue because that was in fact very confusing for us And I think the facing the issue regarding facing the side of the house was was in fact handled by There's a figure that katie hasn't shown out that shows where decks are allowed And that kind of addresses What the facing issue is but my issue is It would be nice to have comments or guidance from our elected officials on this issue in general because There's some members of the commission who just assumed banned second story decks all the other For privacy reasons and then I had a hand say I've got no problem with second deck. Just let them be And it's it's kind of a privacy versus property rights kind of issue and So, you know the other there was obviously people in between and we struggled with compromise And and so we came up with a mismatch which is probably going to have to struggle with variances on every application So it would be nice to get something from The council as to just generally which direction we should be leaning to be leaning in terms of Yeah, second story decks are good. Let people enjoy their view. Enjoy their parties. Let's have you know freedom of property rights or You know, hey, you really have to be concerned of the neighbors. The privacy is a major issue So let's lean in favor of privacy And and so it'll be nice to know what you guys think of that because we are all over the map Thank you, thank you, peter anybody else on zoom No, okay Jack, did you have a comment? Yeah, I do have a comment. Thank you peter for bringing this up again So I think I don't know when this issue came before the plan commission, but We had a An application for a house next door to us that wanted a side facing deck that actually wrapped around and So when our neighbors talked Well, there was some division But the thing that resolved it was having an opaque piece of glass for the side viewing Um So I'm sort of in agreement. I don't I mean with you peter. I don't mind decks so much As long as there's some Some way to try to Give some sort of privacy Um, there's visual privacy and there's The fact that people are talking and maybe having parties and stuff like that Um, I think at least giving something to the issue of privacy Helps mitigates Objections So some way to speak to it But um, in general, I don't have any problem with that But you're going to have a new city council, which I will not be on And you may be right. This will come up for Alterations so to speak I come from san francisco and um In in particular parts of the city, there's a lot of upper decks even once on the roof And there's opaque screens that That prevent direct observation of neighbors And you can still see the sky or something along the distance a distant view, which is obviously one reason why people like decks They don't necessarily want to spy on their neighbors so It just sort of makes that a little bit Easier to handle having a little privacy. Well That's it. Um, thank you. Mr. Wilk for your comments. I um, I agree that this is a a topic that Sometimes needs to be customized based off of the situation and can be a challenge For for anyone deciding on the project and I hope that we don't have to deal with a lot of variants that's coming Uh, coming forward to us Um, but with that, I think we need to start somewhere and I appreciate the Robust conversation that all of you had during planning commission to find a compromise Um, I I would like to see some more clarity on the language that, um Mayor story Katie, I feel like I was looking for you. I see you on the screen, but um to see some clarity Based off of what mayor story talked about as well as for the screening And that I think No one wants to amend constantly a zoning code, but we are here today And I'm sure it's going to come back as things get updated Down the road. Um, and that if we need to readdress these more These more stringent Rules that we're applying for second story decks and balconies. We can do that at that time um In regards to every other item Mentioned today, um I am I'm in favor of I know you mentioned monarch co. Yeah, all the other things I am an approval or an agreement of at this time. Thank you Uh, and and I just want to note I am also not in favor of banning second story decks all together I feel like privacy finding privacy measures is a little more realistic than just not having second story decks Or you know in some houses Third story. Uh, well, maybe we shouldn't get into that. I don't know how I don't know where where that rabbit hole leads Yeah, um But um, yeah, otherwise Uh, I'm prepared to make a motion if there's no further comments I'll just uh quickly add, um, just thank you peter for addressing the council and um, creating a little bit of conversation for us as well. Um, I'm also in agreeance with the rest of council here. I I do think, um, Maybe fine tuning the verbiage if we need to Uh, the the second story decks I We do live in a beautiful town. This is why we're here, right? And uh, everybody has their rights to their beautiful views of the Scorges town. So, um, privacy, um, maybe maybe it just means like you got to talk to your neighbor You got to Have a friendly amendment with your neighbor. I you get the deck from six to nine and we'll be out. I don't know But I think that it can create Maybe more of a community thing. Um, if We're all kind of in agreeance there. Um, so thank you peter and um, yeah, if you want to go ahead Kristen with a motion. Yeah, I uh, will move the recommended action to Introduce by first reading introduced for first reading by title only waving further reading of the text in ordinance amending title 17 Zoning of capitol a municipal code amending the capitol a general plan land use map and amending the capitol a zoning map And to adopt the proposed resolution amending the general planned plan land use map I'll second that and I do have a comment Do I need to add something? Yeah, unfortunately The recommended the recommended action and Katie Katie's included the changes to the uh, the arborism pergolas. I was reading it off I was reading it off the agenda packet. All right, take two I'd like to motion that we introduce for first reading. Do I need to read the whole thing? Oh, okay I wanted you to though. Okay, then I would like to move recommended action as On the screen Okay, that was a a double a double movement and a double second Thank you shock. And you do have another comment I do You know, um, this reminds me of grammar school when you brought up to the front of the classroom And you were to read something and the whole idea was to be able to deliver Properly with good pronouncing. I used to be so good at that. I know Just reminds me of that. So, um I just have two comments. First of all all the work that Katie and staff has done along with the city planning and it's come to us Also, it's really unfortunate Katie. You can't be here. You know in a sense of alas for all you Everyone has put a lot of work in this but you know, you as a point person too bad. You're not here Also, I'd like to point out some members of the community that You know with a long struggle Working with their issues, which I think were very legitimate so they can retire Are here. That's a Bellagio family and I'd like to thank you for you know, working with our staff And I know personally that you reached out to a lot of neighbors and talk to them and to express your concerns and To me, that's the way governance should work. You you did everything right. Um I remember coming to your dining room and talking with you one day and uh, Bob brought me in and I know you reached out to other people so It's really good to see people and capital citizens and capital are willing to work with our staff But it also indicates to me that our staff is also Very open and willing to work with neighbors. So I appreciate that on both sides Those are my comments All right, I think we can go into roll call Councilmember brown I councilmember brooks I councilmember bertrand I agree and vice mayor kaiser I thank you And mayor story had to recuse himself. So that is unanimous and we can bring him back in I'd have to read the whole first one I am yeah So katie should I try sharing my screen or is it worth better if you you share? It's great when you share Give me a second here. I'll have it up in no time. Yeah, but you can share that We move it on to item 80 I can leave again and come back for adjournment Consider a permanent local housing allocation resolution The recommended action is the dot proposed resolution authorizing the city manager to execute a permanent local housing Allocation program application with a five-year plan The plha standard agreement and any subsequent amendments Are modifications there too as well as any other documents? Which are related to the program on the plha grant Award and I believe this is our second view of this item, right? It is Thank you mayor story. I I introduced this a couple weeks back It's a great new source of funding for affordable housing program It's tied to senate bill 2 and it's a 75 dollar recording fee on all real estate documents And so any real estate documents related to properties in capitol are are put towards This fund 70 percent of that is Goes directly to our city in order to reinvest in affordable housing. So great new Revenue stream for us to put towards affordable housing next slide, please The available funding is shown on this slide. It's just over 600,000 Next slide, please Um, the requirements for the application is that we have a five-year plan of how we'll utilize the funds We have to have a public hearing which is what we're doing this evening And then adopting a resolution and that will be submitted to the state next slide, please These are the 10 Um different qualifying Um projects that you can utilize their activities that you can utilize the funds for Um, of these we're choosing to utilize two of them the rental housing and uh for rental housing projects that are fully That are affordable free affordable units And then assisting persons at risk of homelessness next slide, please So for the rental housing projects this money can go towards pre-development development acquisition We have in preservation multi-family residential live work rental housing That is affordable to extremely low low very low From moderate income households including necessary operating subsidies We've had a couple different nonprofits reach out that are interested in different Properties within capitol. So I think there's a viable option to spend this money in the next few years Next slide, please That second item we're proposing is um to for assisting persons at risk of homelessness The city of capitol will participate in the housing for health partnership Program through the county currently we contribute 31 000 a year this funding can be utilized to Um contribute towards the h4 hp um And we're suggesting 35 000 uh starting to contribute 35 000 for the next two years Um, it's administered by the county of santa cruz. It supports year-round emergencies shelter operations Two of them the salvation army in Watsonville as well as housing matters in the city of santa cruz Next slide, please This breaks down the how we would utilize the funds by year. So we've already contributed towards the homeless shelters for 2020 2021 and 2022 so for the first three years We are suggesting utilizing that towards affordable rental projects Beginning in 2023 and 2024 we're suggesting putting 35 000 towards homeless and utilizing the remainder of that towards affordable rental projects Next slide, please So as stated by the mayor Previously our recommended action tonight is to adopt the proposed resolution authorizing the city manager to execute the permanent local housing allocations plha program application with a five-year plan The plha standard agreement and any subsequent amendments or modifications there too As well as any other documents which are related to the program or the plha grant award With that i'm available for any questions Look like there are no questions katie. Good job Oh, well, I spoke to soon councilmember bertrain I have to think a little bit first so In terms of trying to figure out um Who gets the money for the rental housing? How's that? Done or is it given to the county? I'm just trying to figure that out Or did you say? That'll be a decision of the city council In the next year. We'll be bringing Housing funds forward to the council And possible projects and asking how they'd like to allocate their funds. Okay I think I'm gonna have a conversation with you because I've got a few other questions, but not pertinent right now Okay, any other councilmember questions Seeing none. Are there any members of the public that would like to address the council on this item? Is anyone on zoom No, okay. I'll bring it back to the council for action. I'll move the recommendation Is there a second? Okay, there's a motion by councilmember bertrain seconded by councilmember brooks To pass the staff recommendation Can we have a roll call vote councilmember brown? Councilmember brooks. Aye councilmember bertrand. I agree vice mayor keiser. Aye and mayor storie I motion passes unanimously Which will bring us to item nine, which is adjournment and I will Rejurn this meeting to the next regularly scheduled. Well, it's not regular It's going to be on November the 22nd, which is a Tuesday evening Um in honor of Thanksgiving That week, um On um, so that'll be November 22nd Tuesday at 7 p.m. Good night everyone