 Welcome. We're going to go ahead and begin tonight's meeting of the Capital City Council. Can we have a roll call please? Yes. Council Member Bertrand. Council Member Botsworth. Do you believe? Here. Council Member Story. Here. Vice Mayor Brooks. Here. Mayor Peterson. Here. And I believe that we're waiting for Council Member Bertrand to join by phone. We're having some technical difficulties, but he should be with us soon. In the meantime, please join us for the Pledge of Allegiance. 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. Great. Thank you. We're going to move on to a report on closed session. I believe our city attorney is calling in the moment, but there was two items listed on the closed session agenda, conference with labor negotiations, labor negotiators, excuse me. The city council met with labor negotiators and gave direction, took no reportable action. There are MOUs with most of the groups listed for labor negotiations on the open session agenda. The liability claim of Esther Phillips was discussed in closed session. It will be agendized for the next council meeting and open session. Do we have any additional materials for tonight's meeting? Yes, there were three additional materials sent out prior to the meeting. The staff report and supporting materials for item 7F. There was a public comment in support of item 8B and there was an updated staff report and attachments for item 8G. Great. Thank you. Are there any additions or deletions for tonight's agenda? Staff has no changes. Great. Thank you. Let's see. Now's the time for public comment, but before we move on, I think there was some instructions perhaps from staff on how to participate in tonight's meeting that I think would be helpful before we begin public comment. Do we have that information that we could share? We do. Thank you. So, in accordance with the current Santa Cruz County Shelter in Place order and the governor's executive order N2920, this meeting is not physically open to the public. As you can see, council and staff are meeting over Zoom and there are several ways for the public to watch and participate. As always, the City Council meeting is cable cast live on Charter Communications cable TV channel 8 and will be rebroadcast on the following Wednesday at 8am and on Saturdays following the first rebroadcast at 1pm on Charter Channel 71 and Comcast Channel 25. If you are watching on community TV and would instead prefer to join the Zoom webinar, please visit the City of Capitola homepage and click on City Council meeting under upcoming events as you see circled on the screen. As a webinar attendee, your microphone is muted for the entire meeting unless you request to be unmuted during a public comment period. You do not need a microphone, camera, screen or computer. If you want to listen to the meeting, the meeting is accessible by landline or mobile phone. To join the webinar using a telephone only dial any of the following numbers on the screen now. The webinar ID is also provided here. As the Mayor just mentioned, the Mayor will announce the public comment period for each item. There are several ways to make a public comment. If you are a Zoom webinar attendee, simply click raise your hand and wait to be unmuted by our moderator. If you've called into Zoom by phone, you can dial star 9 to raise your hand and again wait to be unmuted. You can also email public comment. Send your email to the address shown on the screen now. One comment made verbally or by email per person per item is allowed. If you send more than one email about the same item, the last received will be read and displayed. Comments received outside the public comment period will not be included in the record. Thank you. All right. Now is the time for members of the public to address the council on items not on tonight's agenda. I see we have a hand up already and I'll pass it over to Larry to moderate our public comment tonight. And I will leave it up to our staff that are present in chambers tonight to ensure our three-minute timer is going. We have a hand raise. Raymond Cansino. Good evening, Council. How are you? It's Ray Cansino, CEO of Community Bridges. Just wanted to have a public comment on last week's decision on the severe budget cuts to nonprofits. We're really disheartened that during the time of such increments and incredible need in our community, the council moved forward with the budget as suggested. We understand the current council's approach, but we really wish that the council took a different approach to try to solve the problem at hand. We hope that, as my public comments were stated last week, that you'll work with nonprofit organizations to try to figure out other creative ways to raise revenues and to increase the ability to potentially offset some of these potential cuts that will have a detrimental impact on our community. And we hope that you continue to work with us on having creative ways as we reopen and use tourism, which is the number one way capital raised funds to be able to also help offset and hopefully invest in our community and our community. So thank you for your time and thank you for your service. And I know these decisions are not easy and you do not take them lightly and we appreciate your partnership. Thank you, Raymond. We appreciate your comments. Are there any other public comments tonight? I do not see any, oh wait, I do see it. But I think that's for the item on the agenda. I can make sure, but I think it's for the, Laura, is that for the item 8G or just regular public comments? I have a couple emails that I will try and get read. Okay. Hello, Capitola City Council. I have learned that the BLM is planning a protest in our village on July 1st. I do not see it on your agenda, so I will submit in public comment. As a resident of Capitola, I am concerned about the group being allowed to assemble in the Monterey Park area. This is a neighborhood park where neighbors take their children to run in the grass and play. It is also in a residential area. As a nearby resident, I am not terribly excited about this decision to allow the meetup to be in the park. If this protest must take place, perhaps a better meeting area is in the lower city parking lot rather than our grassy neighborhood park in a residential area. The parking lot is paved and can handle the extra foot traffic that this indeed will bring rather than in a grassy park. I am confident you are planning the correct police presence to protect residents and the businesses in the village where these protesters will walk. I am particularly concerned, however, for the people using the outside dining areas in the streets of the village that has just recently been established. What particular attention will be paid to these visitors' protection? Thank you for your consideration. Cheryl Lynn Ulstad. Capitola resident. I have a couple more. Dear City Council members. Leah Samuels, Executive Director of the Human Care Alliance, here. We wish the Council took a different approach to solve the budget problem and hope that you will look to other ways to ensure you meet the growing needs of your constituents. We are not looking for handouts. We are a critical piece of public safety just like the police department. The ACLU has called for a divestment of police departments because they really aren't best equipped for much of the work they are tasked with. One suggesting made by the ACLU is to develop mobile crisis services, peer crisis services, and crisis hotlines and warmlines where people can call when they just need to talk to someone who understands what it's like to live with mental health problems to support people who have a behavioral or mental health crisis. This is the future of public safety. We are not here to attack you or question the good you have done in your life. We are here to work with you to make appropriate changes as new facts come out which should influence how you fund public safety. We are not here to attack the police. This is not a police v non-profits appeal. This is an appeal for you to start questioning if the status quo of how we respond to hard economic times is really in line with best practices for best outcomes. These are not easy changes to make logistically but it is easy to start working with us to try something new and be an example to other community leaders that you are brave enough to hear about the systemic inequities in our country and take action. Fighting inequity is not a community service it is our responsibility. It is the right thing to do and in the long run, it actually benefits everyone's public safety and finances. Thank you for your time. Leah Samuels. Executive Director. The Human Care Alliance. My name is Bob and I have lived in Capitola for 40 years. I've used meals on wheels for a number of years. I'm sad to hear that the city of Capitola is considering cutting funding for the program. I know it's one meal but it could be your only one meal of the day. It may seem funny living here in Capitola and needing assistance but the world is tough out there right now and it's very hard for seniors and disabled. I think it is a big mistake if you are considering cutting the program from audio transcription. My name is Sister Joan Dary and I am living in Capitola and I have been grateful to receive meals on wheels for the last five or six years. I'm aware that there is some kind of preparation or consideration that there's going to be a cut to the funding for the Capitola area. I feel very strongly that there are a number of people besides myself who are very needy for meals because of age and health. I hope that won't happen and it would be very detrimental for me and others. Besides helping me in terms of my health, financially I'm on a very strict budget so it has really been a great gift to me and I am very grateful for it. I just am hoping that there'll be no change and that the wonderful people I've met who have come to be of service will be able to continue. That is the last email. All right. There's no other hands raised. All right. Thank you all for your comments. We appreciate it. We're going to move on to City Council and staff comments now. If there's any member of the council that would like to make a comment, please use the raise hand function. We'll start with Vice Mayor Yvette Brooks. Thank you Mayor Peterson. So I just wanted to ask that staff bring back at our next City Council meeting some options in bringing back lifeguards. Now that our beaches are going to reopen, I'd like to see what some to revisit that. As mentioned, we would do so when we decide to not move on with that contract. And also I want to say that as a leader in our community, I feel it is necessary to remind our community that we must practice anti-racism in order to shift the paradigm of intolerance. Racism is real and it exists everywhere, even in Capitola. Therefore, we must take action to be part of the solution. If you are interested in joining the movement on July 1st at 5pm, there will be a Black Lives Matter march in Capitola. This peaceful protest is sponsored by the same group that put together the Padalao and March and Santa Cruz. For those concerned about safety, our police department and staff have been working directly with a group director. For those of you concerned about your health and safety in relation to COVID, there are many other ways to support the cause if you don't feel comfortable in attending such as shopping at Black-owned businesses or donating to organizations that support communities less fortunate than ours. And as I said in a previous council meeting, I will continue to exercise my privilege as an elected official to speak fearlessly and with cause. And I will continue to remind our community of my message at every city council meeting until the protest has end. When I look back at this time, I want to be proud of our history and changes that we made during my service. I want to be part of the solution and I hope our community does too. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Mayor Brooks. And let me, I don't see any other hands up from other council members. So, all right. So before we move on, I just want to thank you Vice Mayor Brooks for your comments. And the, we received a public comment about concerns for safety. I know we received an email about concerns that a protest would quote from the email go bad. In our discussions, in my discussions personally with the organizer, I have no reason to believe that that will be the case. In my understanding of the violence that has occurred in protest, that this has largely been determined to be from outside groups who are using the Black Lives Matter movement as a way to sow discord in communities. And it's not the protesters within the movement themselves causing this kind of damage and violence. So, I'm looking forward to supporting this movement. Thank you Vice Mayor Brooks for your support of this movement. And moving forward, I think this is going to be a good opportunity to support a social movement that's very much needed in this time. With that, I'm seeing no further comment from staff who are going to move on, or excuse me, from council. We'll move on to be a very staff comment tonight. I think all of our comments are wrapped up in the presentations and the COVID update. So no. All right. Great. Thank you. Okay. With that, we'll move on to item seven, which is our consent calendar. All of the items listed on the consent calendar will be enacted in one motion in the form listed on the agenda. There's no separate discussion on these individual items unless a motion, or excuse me, unless a member of the council or of the public, select a poll and item for separate discussion. I do see that council member Bosworth has his hand up. Are you looking to pull an item from consent, Council Member Bosworth? Thank you, Mayor. I do have a comment on one item, let's see, item E. I do plan to vote to support it. I just want to make a comment on that item. Okay. Well, let's go ahead and hear your comment. Okay. I know that at this time, it's important that the council scrutinizes every dollar that we spend and receive. I know that the restaurant and the work has been impacted during this time, and I can appreciate the generosity of staff making the recommendations. They're going to be opening on the 19th and we're not going to charge them for the rent. I just know that in other events that may happen later on this year, we've shown tremendous generosity to businesses and we may not be in that position moving forward to extend such generosity because we are making significant cuts and I think it affects everybody in our city. So I'm okay with supporting this measure, but I just want to come to the property that the city leases. We need to be very concerned about what gifts we give away at this time. Thank you, Mayor, for allowing me to make this comment. Thank you, Councilor Rochler. All right. Seeing no further hands up for many council members, we are looking for a motion to pass consent agenda. I move that we pass the consent agenda. I'll second. All right. We have a motion by Council Member Bertrand, a second by Council Member Storey. Can we have a roll call vote, please? Yes. Council Member Bertrand. Aye. Council Member Botsworth. Aye. Council Member Storey. Aye. Vice Mayor Brooks. Aye. And Mayor Peterson. Aye. Thank you. Thank you. We're going to move on to our general government and public hearing, beginning with item 8A, an update on the city's pandemic response. I will turn it over to staff for staff report. Mayor and Council, I want to apologize. I was trying to share my screen on the earlier introduction to the meeting and I realized after I done it that I was sharing the screen with only myself. So this time, let's see if I can more successfully share my screen and then pull up the slides. Okay. So I believe this is the seventh or eighth update we've done since the pandemic has begun. And one of the things we usually start with is taking a look at the situation here locally. I am sure as folks know that the last week, we certainly had a troublesome day several days ago where we had, I think it was 20 or maybe just over 20 cases recorded in the county, which was by far a new high. Here in Capitola, we have had a significant increase in cases. Last week, I think I reported that it was eight cases in Capitola. This week it's 13. Certainly the trend hasn't been great for us this last week. The overall, the County of Santa Cruz is doing well. This is a chart that shows the number of the percent of number of cases per 100,000 percent of the population that has been infected and compares the various counties in our state. And you can see that Santa Cruz County is still among the leaders, one of the lower case incident rates compared to other counties around the state. Statewide, I'm sure you've heard the news that the numbers have not been great. Again, we've been hitting some record highs, I think in terms of total cases where I think recently we saw 5,000 cases statewide. Maybe it was yesterday or the day before. So the overall trend is not looking positive. However, we just need to keep our eye on it and see how things progress as we move forward. Yesterday, the health officer issued an order that lifted the beach restrictions. So at this point now there are no restrictions on beach use. In addition, the health officer reissued her face covering order to more closely align with the state order so that they're basically the same order. So there wasn't any difference between the two. And as everyone knows, on June 18th, the governor issued an order that mandated face coverings be worn throughout California. I want to talk about a couple of different sort of funding pieces, one of which we have not yet talked about as a council, and then a second one will touch quickly on the CDBG funding. CARES Act funding, there is an allocation in the proposed state budget of about $12.28 per capita allocation to local cities. For Capitola, that would mean about $125,000. There was a formula for cities with populations over $300,000 where they would receive significantly more, but for cities under $300,000, it's the $12.28 per person. That obviously doesn't go very far in closing a $4.5 million budget deficit. And in addition, the revenues are restricted in what they can be used for. It really needs to be used for expenditures that were occurred as a direct response of the COVID-19 health crisis. They can't have been budgeted before the crisis began and they need to have been incurred between March 1st and the end of the year. So right now we've identified about $30,000 of COVID related expenditures that are clearly eligible for reimbursement. However, the final guidance from the state has not yet been issued. And so when that guidance is issued, I think we'll have a clear understanding about whether some of the police over time and the policing costs that we've expended, whether those are eligible or not. And so at our meeting in July, we plan to come back to the council with an update about whether there is more money in this $125,000 that we'll get from the state or whether it's already been expended on the existing response that we've had. The CDBG funding, we spent some time talking to the council about that. We were actually hoping to come with an update. You will recall that we applied for the CDBG funding. We appointed a subcommittee of council member, excuse me, Mayor Peterson and Vice Mayor Brooks. As a summary, we have $168,000 of CDBG funds that we can use during this first stage. That's comprised of both new grant funding as well as what we call CDBG reuse funds, which are repaid old loans. The issue at this point is that the CDBG guidance and training, they're still ongoing and there's still open questions about how many different grant recipients will be able to give money to and exactly how the funding needs to be administered. So the subcommittees met. They've come up with some preliminary recommendations and then we'll be bringing that to the July meeting for the council to get a more full update. And like I said, we were planning on doing it this evening, but the guidance was still in development and we realized there were still too many unanswered questions. So with that, I'd like to ask Chief McManus to give us a short update about the plans on July 4th. Obviously, when we were putting this together, we were thinking that the situation on the beach was going to be that we weren't going to have the daily closures. That's obviously no longer the case. So Chief McManus, can you talk to us briefly about the July 4th plans? Thank you. I can. Good evening, Mayor Peterson, council members. As we're all aware, the removal of the beach restrictions daily from 11 to 5 is effective at midnight tonight as mentioned. And so that changed our July 4th plans operational order minimally, but not significantly. The one significant change is that it will not be utilizing private security to staff many of the entrances to the beach as it was part of our early plan because they don't believe there's going to be a need for that without the restrictions on the beach. So when we talk about July 4th, as most of you know, that is by far the busiest holiday we have during the year here in the city. Not the busiest event for the year, but the busiest holiday in this year with the force fallen on Saturday, the first time in many years that the actual holiday has fallen on a weekend. We expect it is going to be even busier. In fact, it's a three-day operational period for us in the police department as opposed to a single-day operational period. So we will have all officers working on July 4th on that Saturday where the city is divided into two command locations, the beach command and the patrol command. We have a large number of officers assigned to the beach command, a seven total with two motor officers and two officers on bicycles, primarily working 11 in the morning until about nine at night with the beach closing as we always do at 10 o'clock p.m. on July 4th. And we will have an operational command post as we've done many of the years past up at New Brighton Middle School. I'll be up there with some of my supervisory staff out there on the school grounds. We're establishing, we did it for the first time last year, a fireworks hotline here at PD11 staff by a couple of our volunteers. I'll post that information out via social media at the beginning of the week next week so that we provide our citizens and others in the area the ability to directly contact us if they have concerns or complaints about illegal fireworks. By the way, as we all know, the only allowable fireworks by law are the safe and sane fireworks and those are only allowable on private property as a reminder. Thanks a lot to Public Works working with us on this plan. They will have the portable lighting out there to be utilized if needed. Late in the evening we'll have three lighting expansions on the beach area. We do not have lifeguards on duty for the July 4th weekend. However, we have made contact and are continuing to maintain our contact with Central Fire and their water rescue personnel. They have morning briefings and afternoon briefings. We'll be in touch with them Friday, Saturday and Sunday so that we can connect with regard to concerns, update on numbers, and certainly update on staffing needed, as well as most importantly the direct contact with those emergency services should be able to be for lifeguards on the beach. Public Works is working through the weekend as they always do with their staff. Thanks, Steve. Jess, they'll be working through the weekend with us to make sure that they're available to take care of some of the trash needs, the cleaning of the bathrooms, and then other issues that might come up during the weekend that require some Public Works response. And so we're looking forward to a busy, enjoyable weekend, a 3D operational period, Friday, Saturday and Sunday, with our maximum personnel or staffing taking place on Saturday and then plenty of officers available on both Friday and Sunday. And I'll turn it back over to the City Manager for questions. Thank you. So I just have one more slide before I wrap up this presentation. Just a summary of the open facilities at this point. City Hall, the Police Department, City Playgroup Parks, although the play structures, I believe, remain closed. The war from the beach are now open. The beach parking lots are open. The closed facilities are the community center, the museum. I know that they are working on an opening plan for the museum. And then the select parking along the Esplanade that's been closed for the outdoor dining. And with that, I'm available for questions. All right. Do any council members have questions? It looks like Council Member Bothorpe is your hand up for a question on this item? Sorry, Mayor, I've not taken my hand back down. Thank you for that. No, no problem. All right. Council Member Story. Yes, thank you, Mayor. My question is, you know, with public health officers open the beach, but at the same time, and with the state mandating face coverings, was my question was, what is our plan to enforce face coverings? And also to assure that the businesses are going to be requiring face coverings for the patrons and their premises are in line for their businesses. So I will reply to the first part of the question, which was about the beach. The face covering orders apply to when you are out of your home in public indoors and outdoors when social distancing cannot be observed. So being on the beach in and of itself without a face mask on is not a violation. It's being on the beach if it's crowded without a face mask. What we have been doing so far with the face coverings, and I believe that this is consistent with most jurisdictions in the state, is really operating almost like a code enforcement process that we will support businesses if they need help with a customer who refuses to wear one going into the store. But we have not had active patrols going out and looking for folks to sight outside of the face mask. So we offer, we make ourselves available to the individual stores. We have communicated with the stores about making sure that their employees understand what the stores policies are about the face mask and how they expect them to enforce it. And we certainly make our officers available should the store need help with enforcement. Chief McManus, do you have anything to add about the face mask, face covering enforcements? I think you just a couple of things. I think you touched on most of it. We will be visible on the beaches in an effort to gain compliance as it relates to both social distancing and facial coverings. Both for the public when they can't maintain the social distancing requirements. They should be wearing the mask, as was mentioned. We talked about that previously, as well as a resource for the businesses or an ability to or efforts to continue to communicate with the business to make sure that they are adhering to the requirements of the new outdoor dining specific to distancing and facial coverings. And those who aren't participating outdoor dining to the requirements that are laid out in say, and asking them to ensure, and most of them do, they have the proper signage and the proper employees and staff in place to communicate with their patrons. To gain compliance ensure that the patrons are complying with the official social distancing and facial covering laws. Thank you for that response. All right. Any other council members have questions? Seeing none, I will turn it over to Larry, our moderator, to help us out with public comments on this item. Mayor Peterson, I see one hand raised. Janelle. I would just like to know that if we are opening the beaches, why we do not have the required or any lifeguards on the beach. Thank you for your comment, Janelle. And when we return back to for council consideration, perhaps that's something we can discuss as a general rule. The comment is a time for comments to the council, but not for necessarily a back and forth between council and residents. We do hear your comments and I will do my best to try to address it when it returns back to council for further consideration and discussion. Okay, thank you. Larry, is there any further public comment? Seeing public comments, any more hands raised and I do not see anything in email. All right, with that we will bring it back to the council for further discussion and for a vote. So I just want to start off and I'll be brief because I know that Vice Mayor Brooks brought up the question about lifeguards. So that will be, I believe, agendized for future meeting. I want to again reiterate that the city had no, we were not the agency that made the determination that the beaches were closed and we weren't the agency that made the determination that the beaches would be reopened. And so we just received notice of that. I believe it was on Wednesday. And so by then it was only, well, that was yesterday. So we didn't have a lot of time for consideration of this, but I do appreciate the concern that was brought forward and Vice Mayor Brooks is ahead of the curve on that one and asking for us to consider a future meeting. So it's definitely worth the discussion. So I appreciate the public comment on that. And bring it back to other council members for any further discussion on this. And if not, then I believe we need a motion to determine that all hazards related to COVID-19 still exist. And there's a need to continue our action. Councilor Kvatorov. Motion to recommend approved staff recommendations to continue necessary action. Second. And the motion by Council Member Vatorov and a second by Vice Mayor Brooks. Can we have a roll call vote please? Council Member Bertrand. Thank you. Council Member Vatorov. Aye. Council Member Story. Aye. Vice Mayor Brooks. Aye. Mayor Peterson. Aye. Thank you. Second. We will move on to item 8B Real Property Negotiations Easement Grant to Pacific Gas and Electric Company at City Hall Property. And I'll turn it over to Staff 4 Staff Report. and I will be sharing my screen here. Mayor and council, the item before you is to grant an easement to specific gas and electric company for the installation of equipment and an antenna on city hall property. This is in response to the public safety power shutoffs that we experienced last fall. When city hall and properties on Capitol Avenue, Bay Avenue with were up without power during those public safety power strategies. Low background and fall last year, as I mentioned, see all commercial residential properties on Capitol Avenue and Depot Hill were affected by a power shutoff. These shutoffs were a result of high winds and Santa Cruz Mountains, not necessarily local capital conditions. At the request of city staff, PG&E has developed a project to interconnect the grid serving the village with the grid to north of Capitol Avenue, which will help alleviate that problem. And here's a map showing the outage areas and what they're proposing is a connection down here. This is Capitol Avenue City Hall is right here. So the village all had power and these, these outages from the trestle up and then expanding as we went above, there was no power. They're proposing to do an interconnect between these two micro grids, if you will, that will, as long as the local conditions allow, not second will eliminate the outages in this map area. In order to complete this project PG&E would like to obtain an easement from the city to install an underground vault, a background cabinet and an antenna on City Hall property. And you can see here's a street view, looking at City Hall from September Avenue, you can see where the proposed easement is located. We in discussions with PG&E, we asked them to look at other sites, mainly railroad property to see if there is an easement that would be less impactful to the frontage of City Hall in PG&E. Unfortunately, we're unable to secure any other easements. The railroad does not grant utility easements to any utilities. So there were definite no, they looked at some other properties, but due to utility conflicts in front of, in this general area was the only place that they were able to identify. This is a snapshot of, I don't know if it's exact, but very similar equipment. You can see this area here is the vault. This is the above ground skated cabinet that we used and this is a portion of the mass antenna. This is what we will see in front of City Hall if we move forward with this. Easement details, the easement grants PG&E the right to construct, maintain and operate this equipment. Grants from the right to trim, remove landscaping that may interfere with the equipment or their ability to access it. The city will be able to maintain some landscaping in the easement. And right now they have indicated, PG&E has indicated that they will let us paint the cabinet with their prior approvals. We have to submit a proposal to them. Painting cabinets is something we've done with our traffic signal, cabinets throughout the city and also several of our vaults along. Yes, but not. Concerns and backdrops. That's certainly the biggest concern is the, it's located right in front of City Hall Museum. It's going to be visible and permanent equipment that will remain there. The easement also does not limit the amount or the size of the equipment PG&E can place in the easement. So at this point, PG&E has indicated we could propose some language to them and we are working with the city attorney to propose that language that would probably limit the equipment to anything necessary to continue eliminating the power outages. The benefits is obviously the reduction of PSPS outages in Capitola. So our recommendation tonight is to authorize the city manager to negotiate the terms and executing even the granting specific gas and electric company and non-exclusive utility easements from the installation of new underground box above ground cabinet and an antenna on city-owned property located at 420 Capitol Avenue, APM 35-141-35, none of the City Hall property. As I report, I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Steve. I'll pull up the participants' panel here so I can get an idea if there's any questions. Mayor, if I may. Tina, Arnold, and Alexis Herrera are both in attendance at tonight's meeting aren't available from PG&E to answer any questions. Great. Thank you. It looks like we have Council Member Bertrand has a question and then after that we'll go to Council Member Story. So Mayor, I'm concerned about if the city is planning to do any construction or development or any kind of changes to that property and how that would affect us working with PG&E. So the easy answer is this is the reason we're granting to them. If we wanted to move that equipment, we would have to both provide a new spot for it that would work for PG&E and potentially pay to relocate that equipment to them. So this is a definite burden on the property there. Well, do we have that much that would cost? Usually working with PG&E is pretty difficult at best. I do not have a cost, but it would potentially cost to move this equipment. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Story, you had a question? Yes, I did. Thank you, Mayor. Maybe a couple of questions. Steve, if we improve this grant of easement, what level of assurance do we have that we will no longer be subject to those power outages? And my second question, a more technical question, but since we're the grantor on the grant deed, I understand that PG&E is paying us $3,700 for the easement. But on the grant deed, it says this is a conveyance where the consideration and value is less than $100. So I was wondering if somebody could reconcile those two facts for me. Thank you. Council Member Story, I'll ask one of the PG&E representatives to address the first question. And regarding the second question, we will work with the city attorney's office to reconcile any difference between the offer and the easement. So Gina or Alexis, can you answer the question regarding the likelihood of us having an audit again here in this area? Thank you. Yeah, good evening. This is Alexis Herrer. I'm the project manager and program manager for the PSPS program at PG&E. So the reason that it was developed for this specific area was to eliminate or alleviate at least the impact of the PSPS that impacted you from that map. We are very confident that if things progress like they did last year with the PSPS, which was a very kind of normal PSPS situation, that this would alleviate all of those outages within that area. Of course, we can't predict what might happen in the future for how PSPS might act, but the way that it was described, which is how the feed comes into the community was very accurate that was right on. And the feed that comes into the community, which is what was impacted, could very well likely be impacted again. And so in reaction to that, which is why we developed it where it was, we're very confident that it's greatly going to minimize the impact if not alleviate it all together. And again, I just want to stress that we can't predict what the PSPS event will look like, but we're very confident that this will alleviate future PSPS events. Yeah, thank you, Ms. Herrera, for that response. Council Member Bertrand, do you have your hand up again? You're muted right now, Council Member Bertrand. Yes, I do. I do have another question in there. This may be completely out of blind ignorance, which I admit, but why can't we just lease the property of some long term agreement? The issue I have is we've lost control over the use of our property by doing this particular easement. If we leave it, then we have some choice. I'll start the answer. Maybe one of the PGD representatives can help me out here. PGD has a standard practice of only investing the installation of equipment on permanent easements. That's what this is expressed to us, and I don't think they would proceed on anything with a permanent easement. That is correct. This project is solely at PGD's expense, and it can be very costly for us to do all of this installation work. Not just the actual construction part of it, but the design and the management, and then ultimately the installation and the maintenance of this equipment falls solely on PG&E. And again, that's very costly to PG&E to only then potentially be subject to have to remove this equipment. So PG&E does not enter into leases. This is a non-exclusive easement, which means that there is allowed to be a certain amount of things in that area. But we would not be able to enter into this agreement and put in this critical equipment without a full easement in lieu of a lease. We don't see any further council comments. I would just, oh wait, no wrong question. Let's go to public comment now then. With no further questions from the council, we will bring this to public comment. So this is a chance for members of the public to adjust the council on this item specifically. Turn it over to Larry. Larry, I don't see anyone on attendees, but maybe you can let me know if there's any emails that came in. You're right. I don't see any attendees. Let me check the emails. I do not see any emails on this item. All right then. With that, we're going to close public comment for this item, bring it back to the council and switch back over here, Council Member Bautour. Do you have a comment? I do, Madam Mayor. Thank you. I think this is a great project. The fact that PG&E has identified a way to bridge the gap in our city that divided our city sensibly for power, I think is fantastic. I think you should be mentioned that this was a tremendous effort by the City Manager and Public Works Director to reach out to PG&E and to make this happen. This is good for a lot of residents, a lot of businesses. This caused tremendous financial loss for the businesses and anguish of a lot of people. So I feel the sense of Council Member Bertrand about giving this space away to City Hall indefinitely. But I think the gains far outweigh the inciteliness of this and future ramifications. I think it's something we can live with and work with down the road. Like I said, the gains of this are far too hard to measure. So with that, I'm going to make a recommendation to our motion to approve staff recommendations. I'll second that motion and I do have a comment. Okay, we have a second by Council, excuse me, a motion by Council Member Bautour and a second by Council Member Bertrand. Discussion continues. Go ahead, Council Member Bertrand. Yeah, I'd like to echo its comments in terms of the benefit to the community. There are a lot of businesses. There's at least a couple of emails on that that lost money due to the brownouts, not brownouts, the loss of power, excuse me. So that could have a significant impact. So I think this is something that's very beneficial for the community in general. Thank you, Steve, I believe for reaching out to PG&E about this. Great, thank you. I don't see any additional Council comments. I would just like to share that while the Council is not in the business of assigning work to any of our committees, I imagine that should this above ground power outlet box be painted, that there may be some kind of input by the Art and Cultural Commission. And I would ask if they are willing that we offer the opportunity for either some or all of the museum Board of Trustees to have some kind of involvement of that, just because it will be directly in front of the museum and there is some art there already with a specific feel. So I would hope that we can at least offer them the opportunity to participate in this and not necessarily require that they do, but I hope that as we move forward that's something that staff will be willing to consider is offering the Historical Museum Board the opportunity to participate in deciding how the art fits in with the rest of the museum there on site. Otherwise, I agree. This is a great opportunity for the city to be less impacted as we were last year by the public safety power shut off, and I appreciate the work of the staff and of Alexis and Jennifer, their work on this. So with that, if we have no additional Council comments, then it doesn't look like we do. We have a motion and a second. So can I have a roll call vote please? Council Member Bertrand? Aye. Council Member Batwerf? Aye. Council Member Story? Aye. Vice Mayor Brooks? Aye. Mayor Peterson? Aye. Thank you, Council. We're going to move on to item 8C, a resolution for the levy of capital, a village and more business improvement area assessment for fiscal year 2021. Send it over to staff. Can you hear if I may? Go ahead. Before you start, Jim, I'm going to refuse myself since, you know, I'm a business owner in the village that's subject to this assessment. So I'm going to refuse myself from this action. Thank you, Council Member Story. All right. Jim? Okay, with that, the next item before you is to conduct our annual public hearing for consideration of the fiscal year 2021 capital village business improvement area assessments, as well as their annual planning budget. And with that, I will turn it over to Carter and Holler with the BIA to give a presentation. Good evening, Council. Obviously, this is a very unique year for the BIA and all of Capitola and Capitola village. And so I think I'm really most comfortable with responding to any questions or particular concerns that might occur to you because other than we're running a little late on electing new board members, that will happen next month. Hopefully next month we'll be hiring a new communication manager after the tragic loss of Ben Kelly, our former communications manager. Events are obviously on hold. No one knows what's happening there. We're not being aggressive about any advertising or social media promotion because we're not encouraging people to come from out of the area. I believe as we get closer to the holidays, we might think about advertising more to locals than we do normally because our mission is to promote capital village outside of the county, but we're not really pushing that right at the moment. And that's about it. Anthony was supposed to be here, so I don't know if he's signed in by phone and lurking somewhere because he was going to give a report on the street side dining. And so if it's possible, I'd love to just take any questions and see where we go from there. Thank you, Karen. Are there any council members that have any questions? Nice to hear both. You have your hands up. Yeah, thank you, Karen, for presenting today. Are you saying that we're going to hear from Anthony in a little while about the street side dining and how it's going? Apparently, he has not been able to log in. I don't know for what reason, so I'm certainly prepared to pass on the information that he has given me as a restaurateur. I thought it would be most appropriate for him to do that, but if he, you know, Larry would be able to see if he was there and I doubt that he's there. I can't see a right hand. I'm not sure if it's him, Larry. That's what I was going to ask you. I'm going to see if this is Anthony? Yes. Okay. Is that Anthony? Is this Anthony? Yes, Anthony. All right. Would you like me to adjust outside dining? Please, if you don't mind. Yeah, so basically the feedback is gotten. We have several residents and restaurants that are utilizing and they provided positive feedback that they've been able to extend out door seating and some have seemed busy. Others, we haven't had utilizing it very much or at all. The feedback I've gotten from them is either they have limited funds to, you know, purchase tables and chairs to put out there, or the other common one is they're two short staffed right now. And they're not able to implement it with, you know, using the staff to have with the county COVID-19 guidelines in terms of coming in and sanitizing. Just, you know, a lot of people haven't come back to work. So kind of a mixed reviews for the ones that are using it, you know, good things so far. Others, you know, hopefully they'll get with it within the next couple of weeks or, you know, by the July 4th or so. Mayor Peterson, may I follow up with a question? Yes, please. And are you, I'm not sure how you're allowed to use the funds in its entirety, but are you allowed to use the BIA funds to purchase tables or chairs or anything like that to support the businesses? We can't afford it right now? I mean, that's something that we brought up to the board to be voted upon and see what, you know, type of funds are available. You know, some of them, you know, some of them we can discuss with the businesses that want to do it, but that's kind of been the feedback. If you look on Aspinada, there's probably about three or four spaces right there that aren't being utilized and maybe a couple more around the village. You know, the thing is a short notice and getting people to kind of implement it quickly, it hasn't been the easiest thing. So I think right now everybody's trying to figure out their own business model one week at a time, the best of their abilities, getting their staff back in place following the COVID-19 guidelines. Now with the beach being open, that presents a sense, you know, new challenges and new hurdles that businesses can have to adapt to with an increase in the crowd. So, you know, hopefully we'll get some more feedback this next coming week on which ones we'll be able to, you know, open up the outdoor city or make the change as necessary. And how has, and maybe this could expand to Chiefess McManus too, are we seeing an influx of calls? Have you heard that businesses have had to make many calls to support the, those regulations that are in place, like the masks wearing? Have you received any feedback about that? I mean, from what I know, most of the businesses are having fortunate themselves. I know Zeld is a moderate developer. They've done an amazing job doing it themselves in the front door. We're telling our customers the same thing, wearing masks. Most of every business has the social distancing guidelines and the masks, you know, signs on their windows where it basically says no masks, no service, and implementing the best they can. It's not always the easiest. Not everybody wants to abide by those guidelines and rules, but we've been told not to serve them or allow them to order if they're not. And then my last question about traffic. We were, we had some concerns about traffic kind of backing up and people slowing down to look at those outdoor diners. Have you seen that to be an issue? Have you heard of any issues? I haven't seen any issues. Usually if I drive through the village and I go that way where there's traffic usually back them due to somebody waiting for a parking spot to fill in. But I haven't heard any feedback regarding too much traffic or backing up. And that's been on. And if I may, Vice Member Rucks, I can comment on the traffic piece of it as well. I think the congestion with the vehicle certainly a couple of weeks ago when we introduced the outdoor dining was a little bit more of concern than it seems to be currently. But there is a little more congestion because the vehicles are traveling at a slower rate. But I agree with Anthony that the majority of those cars are lining up waiting for available parking spots. And we try and monitor it as I talked about previously each day because there are times when we need to restrict access to the Esplanade from further vehicles because the congestion with vehicles and potentially pedestrians crossing the street is just too much for a period of time. That usually takes about 15 minutes to clear. But I think that it's very manageable. I'm not going to concerned about the congestion. The shorter or the reduced width entering the Esplanade is the probably most difficult area, but it's not unmanageable at all from the PD's perspective. Great. Thank you. Those are all my questions. Great. And don't see any further questions from Council. So we will open public comment on this item. If there's any member of the public that would like to look at Council. Turn it over to Larry. I do see someone with a with a comment. Hi, I just have a question. First of all, I'd like to thank your board for going ahead and approving or recommending a reduction to the assessment fees this year. 25% that's very appreciated for the businesses that are undergoing extreme stresses. And then the second thing that came to mind while hearing the discussion was that it sounds like there's a need for some of the businesses potentially to have assistance with the purchase of tables. And I don't know that something your council would like to consider the use of the CARES fund or the CDBG funds that might be an opportunity to offer that funding for those businesses that don't have available to purchase their outdoor seating. That's the end of my comment. Thank you. Larry, do we have any, I don't see any additional hands up? Yes, I don't see any hands and I do not see any emails on this item. All right. With that, we will bring it back to Council. I just want to acknowledge that we are considering the use of our CDBG CARES Act funding and how that will be used and a portion of it will be for small loans or grants for our business community. And that's something that we're still working on the details of, but that is a possibility for them to choose to use that funds if they receive it for that purpose. I'm going to see if there's any additional, come back to the panelists. Any additional comments from council members? Councilor Vautor, you're still muted. Councilor Vautor. Thank you. I just wanted to comment on the traffic that was brought up. I think that one thing we need to recognize is that with the opening of the beaches, I expect the traffic in the village to substantially increase. So this will give us a true test as to, you know, monitoring how traffic flows through there and how the congestion may affect the outside dining. I know that I have proposed a possible alternative to an express lane when we first set up the plan. I'm not ready to recommend that. I'm going to be watching this. I think we're all going to be watching to see how the opening of the beaches affects everything. And that I just want to let the VA know that that option, at least in my mind, is still on the table. And we're going to have to watch and see how the opening of the beaches and how this will put us into full swing and see how that goes. And like I said, if it turns out that it does create a problem for the outside dining, that's something I would like to bring back to the council in our next COVID update. So thank you. Thank you, Councilor Vautor. Any additional comments from council? Okay, seeing none, we were looking for a motion to make sure I'm on the right item here. Yes, so we were looking for a motion to accept the capital of village work, business improvement area, annual plan and budget. I still move. I'll second. Okay. Okay, okay. Thank you. So you have a motion by Council Member Berchand and a second by Council Member Botthorff. Can we have a roll call vote please? Yes. Council Member Bertrand. Aye. Council Member Botthorff. Aye. Council Member Story is recused. Vice Mayor Brooks and Mayor Peterson. for voting in favor and one recusal. Moving right along, do we have Cal's member story back with us? There he is, all right. Thank you. We're going to move on to item 8D, consider a resolution allocating to 2021 road maintenance and rehabilitation account funds. Meeting Mayor and Council once again, I'm going to reshare my screen. Mayor and Council, Adam for tonight is adopting a resolution regarding our road maintenance, real real rehabilitation funding that we get from the state of California. Hello, background here, the road, the road maintenance and rehabilitation account also knows the RMRA was enacted in 2017 and provides dedicated road funds to the city annually. The RMRA requires an annual adoption of a resolution specifying the projects to be funded. In fiscal year 2021, the city is expected to receive a little over $193,000 from this funding. A little history on the funding. The last two years of the RMRA funding went toward the recently completed Park Avenue sidewalk project. Looking at other sources of our use of project money, not necessarily RMRA, is the last significant road paving project the city has completed. It was in 2018, so two years ago, we did a $350,000 city-wide slurry. In 2016, we did a significant $1.3 million paving project at Park Avenue Kennedy Drive in Monterey Avenue and also in 2016. This was in conjunction with a sanitary sewer project that went through the area. We did paid Rosevale Avenue at the price of $267,000. Those are the improvements we've made to the pavement in the city of Capitola in the last few years. Looking at road funding in general, the city has three sources of dedicated road funding coming in in 2021. Of course, the RMRA was also the measure DRTC funds, which we anticipate $250,000 coming in. We've also, this year, the RTC granted the Regional Transportation Improvement Program funds on a formula basis rather than on a competitive grant basis. Over a three-year period, we have $505,000 from that fund, which we can spend on this project. We can spend it whenever we want. We have about three years to spend it. So that gives us almost $950,000 to spend on road funding this year, or transportation funding. These can be, as we did in the past, on sidewalk improvements. We built pre-bike lanes with those. We have done some gating with this money in the past. But given that we're supposed to be spending about $750,000 a year on just pavement improvements in the city of Capitola to maintain our pavement condition, at this point, we're recommending that we combine all three of these sources and develop a pavement management program project. It can be more than one project as we move forward. But I think it should all, my recommendation is that all goes into pavement restoration. Looking forward on how I want to move forward with this project, based on the input received tonight from Council, staff will complete a preliminary repair alternative study and cost analysis on the identified street segments. I would say over the last five years, the wage cities and jurisdictions are protecting their streets has changed. It used to be you either slurry sealed it, or you dug it up and put down new asphalt. We have seen a change in that, not for the worst streets, but some of the middle of ground streets where you can do more different kinds of layers and add different layers, a rubber layer or a bigger rock layer on top of some slurry. So we need to go through and do that analysis on whatever streets we decided to include in this project tonight. And then we'll return it when we've done that analysis and that'll finalize the scope of work. In the resolution, we're going to identify a bunch of streets that we're going to look at. But it's always possible for us to make either amendment resolution or as long as the streets are included on what we build, we will be fine with the state. Staff has proposed a list in the agenda report, I'll be going on that in a minute, but just be aware that the costs of the streets listed in the agenda report exceed what our funding is already. Council certainly can add or modify this list. Council can tell me what their priorities are. And adoption of the resolution does need to occur tonight. We are required to file a report by the middle of July with the state to secure our funding. So these are the lists that were projects that were included in the agenda report. 42nd Avenue, Simon Street and Ruby Court. We're all projects, street improvements that were delayed. They were funded at one point, but due to increase in cost, we're taking out every project. You can see here, the pavement condition index, again, that's from zero to 100 to 100 is a brand new street, like from where it is now. And so zero to 100, you can see these streets are in need of repairs and repayments. The cost of that from an estimate that was done, I believe, two years ago was 1.3 million dollars. So we're at 950. So it may be possible that we can find other treatments for these streets that doesn't require removal and replacement, but we need to look into that. 41st Avenue is always something I think we should look at funding. Highway 1 to Capitol Road is something we should look at, especially from Clairs to Highway 1. But of high importance, I think, is addressing the intersections at Clairs and Capitol Road, the 41st Avenue. Just referring to those intersections, $400,000. I've estimated pavement condition index on this. Our report doesn't break out intersections. When we look at it, it gives bigger sections. But I'm sure all of you have traveled those intersections and can see the wear and tear that has gone on on those intersections, and they're pretty dire needed for some attention. Clairs Street is another project that has a PCI of 18. We did apply for some CDBG grant money several years ago that we were unsuccessful on. We do have some money set aside in the CIP already. That's to do some pedestrian improvements, but to pay that it would be about $1.2 million if we need to repay that. Again, we need to look at and see if there's an alternate rehabilitation method that we can do. And then Bay Avenue and Capitol Avenue are both quite heavily traveled streets getting from the freeway to the village. Both of them are in need of repairs. Both of them have a PCI of about 80 at this point. Certainly there's some failed sections in there that we would need to get into, but it's something where a slurry seal or some advanced surfacing may work on those. Unfortunately, I can't give you an estimate of what those would cost at this time. Looking at additional considerations the Council may want to do is develop another city-wide slurry seal project like we've done in the past. It's usually around between $300,000 and $400,000. The streets would need to be determined. We would go through our list and look at the best ones to identify kind of on a city-wide basis. And if the Council wants they could expect the percent of funding that we want to put into that sort of seal project. The Council can also identify other street segments they want me to add to the list that we study. So this is a map from 2017. So last time we did a thorough study of our street segments. It shows the pavement condition index. Green is good. All the way down to red is very poor. So this guy gives you an idea of where we're at. I think overall the pavement condition index in the city is about a 60, which is only good to very good conditions. Our residential streets are doing better than our arterial streets. But so this is the map if we want to refer to any streets as we're going through our deliberations tonight. So our recommendation tonight is to receive direction from Council on the street list for this project and adopted proposed resolution allocating the 2021 road maintenance rehabilitation account funds to engineering and construction of pavement management program project. That's my report. I'd be happy to answer any questions. All right. Council members, are there any questions? I see Council Member Bertrand has his hand up. Yeah, I was just wanting to read some work on Capitol Avenue for the sewer redo. How does that affect the index right now to the 80? What would it be now, do you think? Well, they did trenching which lowers the index, but they will be slurry sealants. I see that as a net wash will probably remain in the 80 area with that project. Okay. So in a sense, it will get a complete read well in terms of slurry seal. They'll look pretty good. Correct. The other thing I was wondering about is clairs. That's been on the middle burner for a long time. And you're proposing for a complete redo of clairs. The thing I've been talking about is, and we received a lot of letters about this, is we need crosswalks there. The condition of road is one thing. I'm not sure that the speeding is such an issue. I last time was reported, there was no access. Maybe the Chief could talk about that in speeding citations. But the main thing I'm worried about, especially for the residents that are elderly, there's just no crosswalks. And we really need those. So that was going to be a Claire's light. I don't know where that stands at this point. So there was money identified in last year's project. There was $150,000 put into Claire's pedestrian improvements. We actually have a project at scope that has been put together. We are just trying to formulate how best to hold a community meeting at this time. It's kind of been held back because of the pandemic we're in holding a workshop. We're working on the best way to proceed with that. But we can't proceed with pedestrian Claire's light project without any additional funding at this time. So another question. So we could do the intersections at 41st and excuse me, Warf Road and Claire's light for the whole street. Independent projects. We could do the pedestrian improvements in the intersection. The pedestrian improvements on Claire's are already funded here regardless of tonight's funding. And then the intersections. Okay. Thank you. The intersections would be part of the pavement management program tonight. Thank you. Any additional questions from council? Thank you for the report. I'm just wondering why would projects be presented and included in the resolution if we can't afford them? If they, you know, that there's more than $985,000. At this point, as I mentioned in my report, we want to evaluate the exact cost. I don't think there's enough money to, for example, pay repaid Claire's street. But there may be some other treatment surfaces that we could do if that's the priority of the council we could afford. And I would like to be able to do that further analysis and report back to council as we finalize it. I will apologize that this resolution is coming to you in such kind of late notice. We kind of flipped with the pandemic. It should have come to you earlier. Unfortunately, we need to get the resolution to the council. So I'm putting in all the streets we can think of that we think we want to cover. And then we will address and come back and finalize that scope at a later date. I'm going back to your original slide. So there's going to be at least one project on there that will be within the $985,000 because there were some unknowns and then the others were over a million. So we're hoping that one of them will fall within that budget. Yes. And then can you tell me what, so this, I think, was before I was, I've been on council, was there a pending bike project, bike lane project that wasn't completed? Or was that all those green lanes? Was that, was that completed in Capitola? Was that just like, I'm not sure how that worked out. But I know that we could use these funds for that, for those purposes, for green bike lanes. And I was just curious why that wasn't on there. So the green, we did complete one of the first projects and I apologize, I don't remember if it was Measure D or SB1 money, but we did use the first year of those dedicated funds for the red, the green bike lane project that is at the highway over crossings on 41st quarter and 8th quarter and Park Avenue. That was about $150,000 worth of green lane projects that we did complete, approximately two or three years ago. And do any of those need to be repainted that we wouldn't need to put into the resolution just in case? No, I actually think they're applying now. We are adding more green bike lanes as part of the Bromer project, which is wrapping up right now. And we do not have any other identified areas as we go through. And do these projects, pavement projects, we will analyze whether a green bike lane would be appropriate. I would be included with the funding. So I don't think we need to separate out at this point any green lane projects. I think we may have, Vice Mayor Brooks may have frozen there. So we'll see if she can come back online. Any additional questions from Council? I do. What was that, Vice Mayor Brooks? Was that the end of your question or did you have more questions? I have a question. Thank you. Okay. All right. Thank you. Council Member Bertrand. No, I have another question. And I was thinking about the intersection of 41st with Clairs. We've had a lot of complaints about the turning right at the signal. And, you know, that was sort of a comment when we first changed that intersection, mostly coming from the direction of the bank and Burger King, changing how the turns went. The other thing I noticed is that coming out from behind the bank, that street is sort of that little alleyway, rather. You know, a lot of people are always waiting there and trying to make a left turn or a right turn. And so if you look at that intersection, can you extend that out a little bit so that it goes down to maybe Trotter so we could maybe improve that intersection if that's impossible. So it's part of the Clairs, the larger Clairs project we did do an analysis of that intersection. I don't think we made a whole lot of changes. It's a very busy intersection. A significant amount of traffic going. I mean, 41st is the busiest nonhighway street in the county. And that intersection is probably one of the busier intersections in the county. The safety improvements when we put the no right on red and change the turn lanes have significantly decreased the traffic accidents with that intersection. So from that point, we're always maybe frustrating, but it's safer, which is always our primary goal. We can certainly look at it if we do do an improvement project in that area and make sure it's as efficient as we can make it. Okay, but you know, coming out from that parking lot, that's an issue. I've seen a lot of problems there. You know, I walked that way a lot. So that's why I noticed them. So maybe happy with that. Thank you. All right. Steve, I have a quick question. Right now on CAP Ave, there's some construction going on kind of from City Hall to where it meets Bay, essentially. And I'm not sure exactly what's happening. Some kind of underground work it looks like. Do we anticipate that the pavement there is going to be as good as it was before the project when they're done? And I only bring that up now because as it stands right now, it's a nightmare on my suspension for my car. So I don't know about anyone else. Do we anticipate that it's going to go back to the way it was before the project in that particular strip of street? So I would say it's going to be better. So it was a county sewer project replacing a maintenance problem. They were having another sewer line. We have worked with the contractor and passed the worst areas on that street that weren't outside their trench. It's something the city worked with the contractor to do. And then they will be slowly sealing it, the entire length from City Hall up to Bay Avenue. All those improvements will make it smoother. But it's still an older road, and that's why it's kind of included in this project list that I've proposed tonight. But it will be better. It won't be worse. Okay. All right. Thank you. All right. Seeing no additional question from Council, we'll bring this item to public comment. Are there any members of the public that would like to address the Council on this item? Chair Peterson, I do not see any hands raised, and I do not see any emails. All right. In that case, we'll bring it back to the Council for deliberation and a vote. And I think I saw Council Member Batur's hand, and then we'll go to Council Member Story. Thank you, Mayor. Steve, thanks for putting this project together. I know this is always tough to figure out what to do. I have concerns. I know you're going to give us a presentation about what projects you think are best. But I know you and I have talked over the years about the 42nd Diamond Ruby Court area, and my concern is the further deterioration of that area to a point where, you know, it can't be saved. So, for whatever it's worth, I hope that I would like to see the money go in that area. And if the money's not enough to do all three, as Vice Mayor Brooks brought up, or even the deletion of Ruby Court would allow the other areas to get done. But I hear that you lobby in for the players and capital load intersections, but I do know that that area is crumbling, and I just worry about permanent deterioration. So, for my two cents, I like that project. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Story? Yes, thank you, Mayor. Well, one, I'd like to move that we accept staff recommendation. But I would like to make a pitch for a landmark. It's for, I think, for two decades. I mean, the map that Steve just showed, you know, it's red. It's been red for 20 years. And as a potential project, I know later we'll be trying to decide, you know, how the prior types and then which ones, maybe the other ones will have more priority. But I think that that landmark should be on the map. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Story. I just briefly would like to agree with that. It's been read on that map. And we'll have to have further discussion with the city attorney on if I would be able to vote on that based on my proximity to FAMR, or if I'm allowed to continue discussion because it's an overall pavement management plan. But before we get to that, I'll go to a Council Member Bertrand. I'd like to second the motion so you can continue, Mayor. Okay. Thank you. Oh, thank you. Yes, we have a motion and a second. Thank you. Well, thank you, Mary. So I think this list is pretty good. I'd like to see the analysis as the Director for Public Works is promising us. I believe that Capitol Avenue is going to be very serviceable with the arrangements that we have with sanitation. And you're already working with the contractor, so I'm glad you're doing that. Bay Avenue is a street that, you know, we've had plans. I remember when we were thinking about what to do with that street and having like a more of a boulevard look. Is that something that would be in your plans or just a straight, I'm sorry, I forgot this question, or would it just be a straight retaving and striping type thing? Right now it would be a pavement rehabilitation, probably a pavement and striping. It would not be a streetscape project. We do have, you know, our long range plans. We round about it with the intersection of Bay and Capitol Avenue. So we would not want to spend a lot of time and energy at the intersection. It spends a little bit beyond the intersection. So we would be focusing on the parts that aren't part of that project and would be, because of the funding we have available, we focus on pavement. Okay. So my main focus is on the streets that have a lot of traffic. You know, excuse me, Clairs is to me an issue that's a safety issue rather than just a surface road condition. And it gets a lot of traffic. So a lot of traffic and the issue of safety is a major problem for me. I think Bay Avenue is similar. We have a population at the housing unit off of Bay that go across the street to Nob Hill. I've had letters in the past about that. And also one of our Capitol Policemen got knocked up a bike there. So there's other issues there that I think come up to in terms of safety. So I'm definitely supporting Clairs and Bay Avenue's high use and safety. So for the final analysis, I look to your analysis of how much things are going to cost because that's the whole commission. Steve, can you clarify for us? Do we need to, you said this needs to happen tonight. So do we need to in just generally authorize the pavement management program project or do we need to give you specific streets right now? There are streets lifted in the existing resolution. And we send this to the streets that we intend to do the analysis on in this list. So if we want to add San Mar, we should add that to the resolution. Okay. Okay, before I make further comment on that, I'm going to ask our city attorney, because of my proximity to Fan Mar, is it appropriate for me to ask for a, is it appropriate for me to continue discussing the need for Fan Mar and to ask for a change to the most friendly amendment to the motion to include Fan Mar considering my proximity and living to it? So anytime I'm asked a complex question, right before or during the meeting, my response is as conservative as possible because complex issues are tricky. And I would much rather give you more conservative advice than less. And so my advice would be having not have the opportunity to fully analyze the question that you should either not request that or if one of your fellow council members would like to request it, you should recuse yourself for the discussion. Okay. Thank you. Yeah, this is a tough one because I mean, technically, all of us based on where we live in the city, you're probably in proximity to one of these streets. So that's difficult. So I guess I see council member Batur has his hand up again. Was that a new? That's new mayor. Yeah, thank you. Is it okay? Yeah, yeah, go ahead. Yeah, I think that the list that Steve has put together is a very good list that covers streets that serve a large number of people or either a high traffic. The fact of the matter is, is that we're only going to be able to do maybe one of those groups. My concern about San Mar is that and I think Steve can expound on this. The nature of the asphalt on San Mar is beyond repair. San Mar is a total rebuild. And I, there was a number that would come up at least the price per foot. The price per foot for doing San Mar is outrageous. And it serves, or I'm going to gender a guess, maybe 70, 80 homes at the most, probably not even that many. I don't think we get that for the buck on that. That's one of those things where where there's some grant comes along for some downtown village street or some company that we qualify for. But I just don't think it's a prudent investment of our money at this time. And when we're, as Jacques mentioned, you know, we have some concerns if we commit to Clare's Avenue. I think that's something we could all justify because of homes and volume of traffic. Whereas, you know, the traffic on San Mar is not that much. And I could say it doesn't serve that many residents. And Steve, I would like you to weigh in on what the anticipated cost of a San Mar rebuild is. Thank you. Councilman Vador, Steve, I don't recollect the final cost. One of the issues with addressing San Mar is the need to address drainage issues along that street. Right now, it re-enders more than anything. So we did have a preliminary design that addressed the pavement or the drainage on there. It also connects to Terrace, which is an equally bad shape in parts of San Jose. So it's easy to expand that project. Does I recollect the estimate for doing the drainage improvements and estimate for San Mar somewhere in the million dollar range? I have a comment. I believe Mayor Peterson might be frozen. So I'll go ahead and jump in. Go ahead, Councilmember Bertrand. Thank you, Vice Mayor. Diaco adds comments. And I hate to say it the other reason why I'm supporting different projects other than San Mar. It's mostly safety and how many cars actually use a road. So in the sense of how many people or vehicles will benefit. And so that's sort of my take on things at this point. It looks like Mayor Peterson was back for a second, but she's no longer back with us. So I see Councilmember Story turned up. Excuse me. Can you hear me now? Yes, thank you. I just wanted to respond to the comment about San Mar. I had asked that it be included as a potential item on the list. My apologies. I think I lost everyone there. Director? Yeah, you're back. You're back now. But, you know, this is what I've heard about San Mar for the last 20 years. We can't fix it because it's in too bad a shape. Based on that logic, you'd never consider it and you'd never do it and it just gets in worse and worse shape. So I think what we're talking about is putting it on the list of potential projects and to disregard it because it would be too hard to do it or because you prefer some other locale and to dismiss this out of hand as not even being up for consideration. I just don't agree with the logic of that. If it's not such a bad shape, then we should be dealing with it and not ignoring it and throwing our hands up. Thank you. So I would like to include with the motion that San Mar be included. Thank you, Council Member Story. Council Member Botsworth, you were the second on that motion. I'm not okay with accepting that on the list. So the motion dies for lack of a second. I'm going to go ahead and make a final amendment to include San Mar to the resolution. I'll go ahead and make a motion for the recommended action to include San Mar to the resolution and that's my recommendation. Am I cutting out? There it goes. Open for a second at this time. So Vice Mayor Brooks, my understanding is that Mayor Peterson is in the waiting room as an attendee. So it may be possible for the moderator to bring Vice Mayor Peterson back on? I just promoted her to panelists. Let's see. They don't see her at this time. I'm going to go ahead and continue since we have Council Member Story stand up. Oh, if you were looking for a second to that friendly amendment or asking whether the mover, the motion, accept the friendly amendment, I'll do either or both. Thank you. And then this is for our City Manager. Shall we go to Roll Call or should we wait for our Mayor to return? Larry, did you see Mayor Peterson on the attendee list? I saw her and promoted her but I don't see her anymore. She's definitely having some communication issue with wherever she is. I don't see her back on as attendee either. There she is. I'll give it a second. Mayor Peterson, you are muted. Yes, I'm back now. Sorry about that. I had some internet problems and I tried to rejoin, but it was joining me as an attendee and not a participant. So I am back now. My apologies. No problem. I'm just going to catch you up. There is a motion on the table to include fan mark to the resolution and we're waiting for you to come back. Okay. We have a motion in a second or just a motion? We have a motion and a second. Okay. In that case, I think out of abundance of caution because I'm right down the street from fan mark, I will recuse myself from this vote and I will hand it off to you Vice Mayor Brooks to continue this particular vote. Thank you, Mayor. We'll go ahead and go to roll call. Thank you. Council Member Bertrand? No. Council Member Botworth? No. Council Member Story? Yes. Vice Mayor Brooks? Aye. And the mayor is recused so that does not pass. Okay. So we can go back to deliberations at this point. Does anyone have any comments? I see Council Member Botworth can raise. Motion to approve staff recommendation as in I'll second that. Okay. We have a first and second. Can we have a roll call please? Yes. Council Member Bertrand? Aye. Council Member Botworth? Aye. Council Member Story? Aye. Vice Mayor Brooks? Aye. Thank you. And the mayor is recused. Excuse me. I'm sorry. I apologize. Mayor Peterson? Aye. Thank you. So this passes. Thank you. All right. And thank you for your patience with me. Thank you, Vice Mayor Brooks. Let's move on. We're going to move on to 8E now. Proving the plan specifications and construction estimate for the Flume and Jetty Rehabilitation Project. I want to begin. Good evening. One more item from me tonight. Sharing my screen. Tonight with you is the approval of the Flume and Jetty Rehabilitation Project. Proving the plan specifications and estimates and authorizing through Advertisement for Construction Bids. A little background. The Capital Improvement Program project list includes three projects that are funded by the Measure F Fund. This includes the Warf Rehabilitation Project, repairs to the Flume and repairs to the Jetty. The Flume and Jetty repairs since they're both on the beach have been combined into a single project and the permitting plans and specifications are all complete and the project is ready to bid. The Warf Project has recently completed its Sequel Review and Clarence and we are now entering the permitting stage for that project. I think that will take another year to get all the permits at which point we will be ready to proceed with that project. Flume and Jetty Scopes and Estimates. The goal of the project is to stop leakage in and out of the flume caused by cracks in the concrete and also to stop leakage that flows underneath the flume resulting in sink holes on top of the flume. Right now we need to go over the flume every morning to make sure we don't have any sink holes. We're also doing a repair to the structure, taking off the top of the flume, louse probably 40 feet and reinstalling it that is heavily worn as that's exposed to the waves. The flume improvements are projected to cost $560,250. The Jetty project is to re-establish the rock pile as it is to its original design size over the years. It has the rocks have settled into the sand and mud and it reduced its effectiveness. We will be restacking displaced rocks that the contractor is able to grab and put on there and he'll also be importing new additional rocks. The estimate for the Jetty recurs is $238,250 bringing the total project to $798,500. In 2019 the city submitted a grant to the Department of Boating and Waterways or Division of Boating and Waterways for beach restoration and erosion control funding. At that time in February 2019 we agreed to hold off on awarding and getting the project to see if we were successful on the grant award. Currently the proposed budget does not include any funding for this program and it's unlikely that any changes at this late date giving the state of the state budget with the COVID impact that the that funding program will be funded. If they do go forward with a future year program funding we would have to resubmit an application so that would be at least another two-year wait. So staff is now recommending that we proceed with the project using measure at funds. Looking at statistical impacts the existing funds this is cash available nothing to be extended this doesn't include any extended funds. So the program has a balance of 396,000 the Jetty has 543,000 bringing that sub-total of film and jetty funds to $940,065. The work has about $950,000 in it leaving a total of $1.9 million available for these measure F funds. The construction as we said for the film and jetty is estimated at $798,500 we will to do need to do some significant monitoring for wildlife and wildlife impacts. During the project we estimate that will cost $40,000 and we've included in here a 20 contingency which brings us slightly over the amount for the film and jetty but certainly if we have the work funding we have sufficient funds to move forward with the project at this time. So the project schedule is improving the plans and specifications that's tonight's meeting. We have scheduled a bid opening for July 29th. We will bring a contract award to the council on August 27th and the scheduling for the construction is a little different usually when we award a speed project or a sidewalk project you know we start within a month or so of awarding a contract and have a certain amount of working days. So it's going to be a little different because we're working in the beach environment. The first thing is we need to wait until the first rain to open up the creek so that when the flume is no longer in use as it is today that allows the contractor to get in and work on the flume without impacting the flows. So that's usually that opening of the creek usually happens in October or November the latest and then because they're going to be working in storm and in tide tidal environment they may have to stage different parts of work at different times and we've given them a completion time to complete the project prior to next summer so May of 2021. We anticipate each project to take about a month and then in and of itself so depending on how the contractor and the weather and tides all work out it's two months worth of work somewhere between November, we anticipate and May. So our recommendation tonight is to approve the plant specification and construction estimates so it's Lume and Judi rehabilitation project, authorize the public works department to advertise for construction visits and sets a bid opening date for July 29th 2020 at 11 a.m. That's my report I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you Steve apologies I'm trying to do this on my phone now so that my internet doesn't give out again my data can can back it up but it makes it a little bit trickier on my end so thank you uh thank you Steve we will uh bring this now to council um questions and we'll see I might have to rely on one of our staff members to tell me if someone's got their hand raised now because I'm on my phone and I cannot see that I will try to join from my laptop in the meantime but if one of our staff members could let me know if any of the council members have their hands raised for questions I don't see any hands raised at this time okay if there's no questions from council we'll bring this to public comment Mayor Peterson I do not see any hands up in the zoom meeting and I do not see any emails on the side okay and we'll bring it I think we lost Mayor Peterson again okay so we'll bring it back to council deliberation I see council member botch our hand up our our motion to approve staff recommendation I second great we have a person second can I have a roll call please yes council member Bertrand I council member botch or I council member story I hi and is the mayor back okay so that motion passes thank you thank you council and now we're moving on to item 8s and it this is katie's item good evening council and mayor hopefully is back for now thanks katie oh there you are okay so this evening I'm going to present to you an update on sp 743 can you see my slides okay and as these 743 I'll give you an overview of level of service and how it's how under sequel the new evaluation will be under vehicle miles traveled just a quick a quick reminder on sequel projects which will cause a significant environmental impact should not be approved under sequel as proposed that there are feasible alternatives or mitigated measures that would lessen those effects this evening we're going to get into the details really it'd be great to give you a 101 on sequel first but I think this first slide just knowing that what we're really talking about is whether or not there's a significant environmental impact associated with the project and how we're going to review that in terms of transportation in the future that's really what the overall goal is for this presentation so we'll start off with level of service this is the level of service is how we currently review traffic under sequel it's a measure of delay or congestion when you're stuck at a red light or you wait three times before you get through a traffic light that's a very low level of service under sequel auto delay and congestion is currently an environmental impact as of July 1st that will no longer be the standard so as I mentioned there's a grading system of A through F the longer the wait or the delay the lower the grade so an LOS of F is failure and on the slide as you can see an LOS of A kind of the early days of COVID I would say in Santa Cruz County and now LOS of F is you know what we've experienced for a few years along highway one and we hear that regularly that are interchange on 41st Avenue so and typically under LOS if you widen the streets your LOS improves so under the state there's now a movement to go to vehicle miles traveled under sequel so under vehicle miles traveled what we're looking at is the just as it states the amount of miles that are traveled and it's per the type of land use so on the first slide you're seeing a home and to calculate vehicle miles traveled you would look at within this home there's three residents there's a child going to school there are two adults one who goes shopping the other who goes to work when they calculate the vehicle miles traveled for this family their vehicle miles traveled is the average of 16.7 between the three residents and another the same idea for vehicle miles traveled that would be for a new home going and this would be for a new office going and when we look at a new office we're going to look at the employee trip to and from the office and that depends on the number of employees based on the size of the establishment we'll look at the customer trip to an office as well as suppliers but are bringing goods and supplies to the office so within this example there's 20 vehicle miles traveled per employee when they do the calculations so under and so vehicle miles traveled is really looking at each land use and the cumulative miles and it really looks at the environmental impact so what is SB 743 it was enacted in 2013 the state guidelines and rulemaking process took place between 2014 and 2018 in 2018 the office of planning and research adopted the rules state and within that there was a conversion from LOS standards within CEQA to vehicle miles traveled it becomes effective as I stated earlier on July 1st 2020 so under the CEQA determination under the new OPR guidance the focus is on vehicle miles traveled and a project's effect on the automobile delay shall not constitute a significant impact and as it has in the past what vehicle miles does this this shift and the goal of SB 743 it promotes infill development so within your city core is allowing development to take place within the core and it also focuses on reducing greenhouse gas emissions so not sending your development to the outskirts of your city and it doesn't no longer support brawl so look at the amount of greenhouse gases for smaller trips promotes my multimodal transit so it'll look at the bicycle, pedestrians, buses, trains also focus on how new development may influence the overall auto use it also promotes land diversity and it again it removes the focus on traffic at intersections and roadways I should say for that when we're looking at projects there's still within our general plan guidance towards minimizing impact intersections so that could be looked at under any proposal that comes in because it is in our general plan but in terms of CEQA review that will no longer be an indicator that can be looked at so how capital implement SB 743 I've been working on a country wide sorry countywide vehicle mile tool with our neighboring jurisdictions it's been about a year of meetings maybe every couple of months so we've put together some baseline vehicle mile travel modeling and I Kim Lee Horne has been the project contractor on this project and also Frederick Ventures on the call this evening so within that we set up baseline vehicle miles travel modeling set individual thresholds by city and county and then Kim Lee Horne has also been putting together a BMT calculator which you can see at the bottom of the slide the developer will be able to come in in the future and put together exactly what their land use is and their square footage and the location and this calculator will be able to quantify what the BMT is per the land use so pretty exciting stuff in terms of being able to calculate our footprint for new projects in the future so the steps for implementation under SB 743 is first to evaluate your land use the second step is to screen for non-significant transportation impacts so these are exceptions if a project falls within I think there's about six or seven non-significant transportation impacts then a project would not have to go through the BMT deep dive analysis one of those projects is the future for mall in terms of just the sequel analysis for transportation because there's a metro station on site also because of the there's a if there's a floor area ratio that's greater than 0.7 there are certain qualifiers in which you can make non-significant transportation impact findings that really are in support of mixed use multimodal transportation as well as exemptions for affordable housing development so next once you screen you determine the significance or threshold methodology and that's what we'll be talking about tonight is or what will be in the resolution of adopting our threshold and then the scope and analysis will be reviewed for the project and if we find that the project is over the threshold that has been set the applicant will have to provide mitigation and one of the really cool things about the tool that can we horn is putting together is the developer will be able to go in and see how much what percentage they're off by in terms of meeting the threshold and they can choose different mitigation mitigation strategies and based on the effectiveness of that mitigation strategy it will allow them to to see how their BMT is improved and know which one is best for them in order to meet the mitigated standard and then there's always with CEQA ongoing mitigation monitoring so from the OPR their recommendation to determine significance thresholds for new residential projects they've set the standard at 15 percent below the existing countywide average of vehicle miles travel per capita in your packet there is a residential map and on that you the majority of the map is green and a little bit of it is yellow but that's a really good sign because as projects come in the areas in green would be found to have no impact and could be they wouldn't have to be reviewed for vehicle miles travel the yellow may have to require a small bit of mitigation the next is for office at 15 percent the existing countywide BMT per employee this in the maps that were provided in your packet also showed in our major commercial corridor areas the majority of offices in yellow and what that means is that the trend has been for the for those residents working in the offices in capitol they tend to commute a longer distance so as new office land use came in there would be mitigation tied to those i think they're at about 10 percent not quite the 15 so there would need to be study done and then for retail you need to show no net increase in total existing BMT so what what would happen there is the we look at the regional vnt and so with the mall development i'll give that as an example most likely because the mall is in the center of the yeah well actually the mall would our intelligence would qualify for the exemptions but retail the majority of the time when i've talked to uh kim lee horn would be supported by our existing land use patterns and that by putting more retail in our commercial corridors we're most likely just going to reduce trips because we're making more options in the center of our city so rather than sprawling out skirts which we really lack within capitol so in this slide i have the the overall thresholds of significance that will place in the attachment the document and here's a list of common mitigation measures and there were a full list of mitigation members with the mitigation measures within the document provided by kim lee horn but typical mitigation includes parking mitigation transit education and encouragement commutative reduction shared mobility bike infrastructure and neighborhood enhancements um and that concludes my presentation this evening my the recommendation is to adopt a resolution establishing city of capitol of sequel guidelines and transportation thresholds of significance of 15 as listed in the prior slide in the attachment for purposes of complying with the senate bill 743 with that i'm here and project ventures here to answer any questions thank you thank you katie looks like councilmember batron has a question yeah i have a couple of questions so in doing this um i guess software uh tool there must be waiting you know certain factors are weighted and that sort gives you a sense of which things are being pushed rather than others is there anything of that sort there is in terms of mitigation the different mitigation strategies are weighted and frederick would you like to chime in i can't hear i'm sorry we can't hear frederick i'm sorry but frederick i'm just trying to get an idea of how the the tool is constructed well um for any mitigation strategy depending on the impact it would have on vehicle miles traveled if it has a greater impact on vehicle miles traveled it would be weighted more so it would take down the percentage more um it's all factored in yep it's all factored into the tool yeah hey katie can you me now i can okay sorry there's some software you say so good evening everyone um so so the tool um reads back to model inputting up and the travel demand model does it um estimates where people live and where they go do business shop and work and go to school um so so those trips are being um factored into what this tool does so if you say i have a retail site and it's located in this area the tool goes and geographically um finds that location and then calculates the actual distance that it travels um you know and then it takes um it trip generation information so if it is a house it's going to say there's um you know in trips per day for that house and then um it go and calculates what the actual bmp is for that specific so it is very detailed and it's very closely linked to the Santa Cruz county travel demand model i have one other question so um right now there's um directly initially a lot of people like working at homes another way to do that is um providing places business places like satellite that's in scott's valley in Santa Cruz provides an offsite place for people to go to instead of commuting to their place to work they go to a satellite office and work there um would that be an acceptable way to reduce the mt okay if you want me to go to absolutely it's one of the mitigation measures that we have is um working from home right so we call it telecommuting um you know and obviously covid is a great i don't know so i'm not going to pass in for a good sense but it's a great example of that it can be done um you know so we're going to see that happen in the future yes actually so if a developer may be available part of the square footage to be such a location that would provide a benefit to their project or the approval of their project um yes so they would have to provide sufficient evidence that that you know in in their application that um you know one can use that calculation to to determine the vnt reduction and then as the mitigation monitoring happens year after year um you know obviously um the city will then make sure that the developer implements that measure right so if they say hey we're going to have people work here it's a shorter distance or this number of people will work from home you know you can you can do some trip counts at mid-rideways and make sure that you actually do that it's a monitoring process process also to make sure the mitigation is implemented okay and i'm still trying to understand waiting so in a sense i would expect you'd give more weight to a bus which might transfer transport you know 50 people as opposed to a car is that a good way to understand waiting so that's uh we call that mode split um so it means that in the travel demand model right it will go and um and and based on current uh data and also future projections it will give a so let's say there's a hundred people that commute to an office and we say that five percent of those are going to take the bus and another six percent is going to take the bike and maybe some people that will parkour you know some of those elements are in the model it's not this model is unfortunately not very detailed but you can do off model calculations right so one of the mitigation tools is to if a developer comes back and say hey i would like to buy for the six people that would like to take the bus i will pay partially for the transit tickets right and that's the way you're going to mitigate and calculate that impact so if the model says the vnt is 10 vehicle miles um you know for for the for the staff and it's over right by by two miles and you say hey you need to reduce it by 20 to get below to get to eight miles a vehicle miles travel he needs to show you that he's purchased that tickets for the bus buses and then you can say that's your mitigation for your vnt impact okay and are you working with the embank on this we um so we've um used the actual so the embank model sort of gave some input but we've used the most recent Santa Cruz county travel demand model um but of course the embank model is sort of the basis of that because it helps to determine the external trips outside of Santa Cruz county um you've also used some big data for trips that specifically leave the county and actually goes over the or to the bay area too so pretty extensive exercise so is the Santa Cruz model with metro or cal trans metro where's that come from this will be a actual so it's a county model right now the the Santa Cruz county and between the county and RTC they sort of maintain yeah they maintain the county model okay thank you thank you it looks like council member story has his hand up now um yeah thank you mayor um it seems like a very significant change in our sequel analysis and um you know and it's kind of complicated to get your head around it but I guess the question I wanted to ask and trying to apply it to our real life situation coming up with the mall um and the long-guide development of the mall since the mall is a bus stop uh which has some incentives included with it there will be affordable housing which also has some incentives included with it it is going to be significant amount of retail which is I guess this soon to be neutral um so I guess my question is is this new standard going to tie our hands or our ability to require a long-guide to make infrastructure um um mitigations uh to 41st avenue and capital of road to address some of the significant uh vehicle of miles that are going to occur there in my view in spite of these particular incentives um so I guess I wanted to pose that question and maybe hear the staff response um and then also wanted to what is the extent of our discretion um on the side of it sounds like it's already been approached approved by the state um so I wonder too how much discretion we actually have with um you know abiding by uh sd 753 um so first I'll start with a discretion under sd 743 we are required to have standards in place and any new applications that come in after july 1 must be reviewed under the dmt um but we do have discretion in what our percentages are for if we didn't want to accept the 15 percent um regional standards which is what opr suggests and it actually I think is a good standard for capital where we're primarily uh we've got some healthy land use is going on we don't have much for all development it is all infill development so I do think vehicle miles travel is a help is a good standard in which to help with our um you know carbon reduction and for sequel purposes in terms of the you know future development so your discretion is in the percentages and if we wanted to modify those at all um and project can talk a little bit about what the other neighboring jurisdictions are doing but I think we've all decided to take the opr standards just whether or not we're looking at a regional methodology or just within our individual cities um and then in terms of the impacts associated with development within sequel there's um um I want to say 14 standards of review that will be looked at so it's not only your los when you're looking at traffic you're going to be looking at safety and noise um we'll be looking at under our general plan also we'll be looking at the project and we've got standards uh tied to los within our general plan and circulation but it just um in terms of sequel that analysis will not be available to tie back to the los but there are all the other elements that have to be looked at for environmental review within sequel that tie back to each project and Frederick do you want to add to that let me let me sure so let me jump in here sorry Katie I just I think I wanted to directly answer the question that Sam asked which was with the mall project does this limit our discretion or ability to offset some of the impacts and because the mall project is going to be is such a discretionary permit they're looking for a development agreement and a rezone as part of their project the city does have the same level of discretion in other words we're not relying on sequel to mitigate the project we're going to determine what the appropriate mitigations are and we're going to negotiate that as part of an overall development agreement so in the case of the mall project which is the large that's the elephant in the room in terms of the projects coming down the horizon we still have the same level of of analysis and mitigations that we can negotiate in terms of smaller projects where there isn't that level of discretionary control that's where the state switch from the los standard to the vmt standard will change the kinds of mitigations we can get off smaller projects did james correct so so we the discretion that you have is within your journal plan right so sequel is going to address the vmt impacts any other discretion so let's say you have a little so the mall adds traffic and the level of service fails and you you need to fix up that intersection that level of service deficiency that you want to fix is going to be within your journal plan that that's where you have a discretion you can actually go and apply that to to to the to the conditions of approval for the project then answer your question council member story yes it did okay thank you vice mayor brooks has your hand up thank you um this is specifically about the resolution on page 171 at the very end of page 171 it says that the city authorizes the community development director to update the vmt thresholds of significance and um i guess my question is how often do you anticipate these changes occurring um and is this something that other cities you know it's common that if there were any changes to the thresholds that it just is to the discretion of the community development director so i would anticipate as new technology comes out like the autonomous vehicles and as new you know new transportation um mitigations come out is when we would come in and update um and also because this is the first time around on this and i think we we are we've got a whole new tool um as we're working through projects and as we realize that if there's portions of this that need to be updated i would be um bringing it for uh to council for updates on the threshold so i don't i wouldn't um we could likely reword this to make it clear that it'd be the um community development director but i think in all of these circumstances i don't think it would be me in my office updating thresholds but reporting back to city council if any thresholds the significance were changed it usually also happens when there's a model update right so when the next regional transportation plan is compiled by rtc right there will be a new model so by then uh trip characteristics would have changed and they will be most likely new bmp so that's a very logical point or there's a general plan update so those are usually the points at which you will see bmp changes that threshold may change thank you i i would like to do some clarification just included in the language on the resolution this all fascinates me and i would just hope that it continues to come back to council for for discussion and updates that's that's my question thank you thank you council member story do you have your hand up again or was that from your previous question okay uh okay council member patron do you have a brief question before i move on to public comment yeah um there was just a mention of the general plan um i need to be reminded is vnt addressed in the general plan hello s i think is but is vnt addressed i i'm almost 100 certain that it is addressed in the general plan because that's really um the the way in which all transportation is going and you know we're talking about building in and infill development and not um supporting sprawl so i can i'd be happy to follow up with you on that question but i i don't have the general plan in front of me at this moment but we could discuss that i could follow up at a later date thank you very much i'll do that i think greenhouse greenhouse or greenhouse gas emissions and air quality calculations happen to be empty oh yes that's that is addressed that's true okay thanks very much all right saying no additional questions from the comments i will now open this item for public comment if there are any members of the public that would like to address the council turn it over to you larry here peterson i do not see anyone in with their hand raised and i do not see any emails on this item all right thank you we'll bring it back to council for discussion and a vote uh vice mayor books has her hand up yeah i still move that's recommendation with the edit to page 171 uh section that we just specify that it comes back to council thank you all second i'm sorry could i council or vice mayor works could you say again what question of the resolution you're proposing to edit yes the packet page 171 at the very bottom be it further resolved that the city of capitol authorizes the community development director to update the dmp i just wanted to make sure that it was clear it goes to council first and that the community development just doesn't do it without bringing it to council okay and sam under we had an updated packet so i mean all right is 174 at the bottom right okay thank you i i i have it i have that version okay so it would how would that that mortgage change you would just you're just proposing to insert um authorizes is necessary and appropriate um it seems like vice mayor brook are you proposing to simply strike that provision well you know what i'm so sorry i'm right now that i'm reading it out loud i fully apologize to waste your time it does say that the city of capitol authorizes the community development director which in other words means it does come back to city council so i apologize so i'll recent my original motion and just make a motion to adopt the staff recommendation my second again all right uh we have a motion by vice mayor brooks and a second by uh council member batron any additional comments saying none can we have a roll call vote please yes council member batron why council member botthorff hi council member story hi vice mayor brooks hi and mayor peterson hi thank you thank you motion carries unanimously we'll move on to the final item tonight uh 8g consider approval with memorandum of understanding with labor groups and adopt salary schedule for june 28 2020 through december 26 2020 uh before the city council this evening is part of this agenda item 8g is a recommendation to approve salary and benefit reductions for the following employee group capitol police officers association confidential mid management police captain and at will management employees the at will management employees consist of department heads and the city manager the employee agreements before the city council included six percent salary reduction effective june 28 2020 through december 26 2020 for the listed groups including at will management and the city manager all listed groups including at will management and the city manager will receive 40 hours of leave to be used before 1 1 2021 with that i'll turn it over to see if there's any additional information in the form of a staff report there is mayor thank you for that presentation as required by state law i'm going to go through very quickly several slides um this was a concession bargaining effort that we went into with our employee groups due to the fiscal crisis associated with the economic downturn from the pandemic council and the community will remember that we had a 4.5 million dollar budget deficit that we were trying to resolve this year in the budget the adopted budget closed that gap through 2.8 million dollars in reductions to non-personnel spending and a 1.5 million dollars in reductions to personnel costs and then 140 thousand dollars out of fund balance and recall that comes on top of about 1.5 million dollars in fund balance that we needed to use in the fiscal year we're still in today so the city and employee groups began good faith concession bargaining in april and then all all agreements other than the poa the police officers association agreements will expire at the end of this month we were able to reach six month agreements with all of the employee groups with the exception of the association of capitol uh excuse me association of capitol employees originally the city sought an eight percent furlough from all the groups which would have closed city hall facilities city facilities for one day per pay period however ultimately a closure plan was not going to work if we couldn't have agreement from all the groups it's impossible to uh have for example your management staff not working every friday and having the rest of your staff working so as a result of failing to get the eight percent closure we ended up furlough excuse me we ended up with a six percent reduction it was agreed to by mid management confidential the police captains and executive management so that the six percent is made up of a two percent trade reduction and pay and then four percent reduction associated with 40 hours of additional leave that has to be used for the end of the year the poa has also come to an agreement on a on a agreement with the city a two percent reduction in pay and then deferring their contracted two point two five percent cola which was planned for um the first of july to moving it out to january first the employee concessions that are included in the agreement will result in approximately 175 thousand dollars in savings over the first six months of the fiscal year and as a result of failing to reach agreement with ace the city issued layoff notices for three positions within the ace group the recommended action for this evening is to authorize the city manager to execute side letter agreements with from the existing mo use with the changes that would be in effect from june 26th through december 28th with the following groups the capitol police officers association the mid management employee bargaining unit the confidential employee bargaining unit and the police captains in addition recommending changes to the management compensation plan that covers department heads and approve a fifth amendment to the city manager's contract that makes the same changes as other employees lastly i'm recommending adoption of a resolution that approves the new salary schedule and then as a final step i would recommend individually attesting the council members would receive the same percent salary reduction as other employees with that i'm available for questions all right any members of the council have questions seeing none i will bring this item to public comment the public comment so this item is now open i'll turn it over to larry to determine if there's anyone uh speaking to speak or if there are any emails that have come in uh i do not see any hands raised to speak um i do know there's a couple emails that we will read um good evening mayor peterson vice mayor brooks and members of the city of capitol a council my name is morah hurley i am city of capitol a count i an acu pec local 792 member my layoff is tomorrow i have decided to comment here as i had not planned to comment at the end of the meeting as union members held three votes in regards to negotiations on our first vote our members reached consensus to forfeit vacation payouts and negotiate further with hope of an offer that would enable our members to work full time we opposed the furlough of ace employees and agreed to the suspension of vacation cashouts we asked that the city looked to other parts of the budget for the remaining $58,000 in savings we wanted to ensure our members can afford to live in santa cruz county we honestly thought that the city would give thorough thought and consideration to the fact that the damage to the economic stability of 24 employee households during a global health and economic crisis far outweighs $58,000 in value the city's first response was layoff notices ace members were given two days to change our decision or three positions will be laid off the total compensation for these three positions is far greater than the savings first proposed by the city the next day there was a tide vote in the union and a third vote was taken in person by secret ballot the vote was tied again resulting in the status quo no furlough i received my official layoff notice monday in the mail and my layoff is tomorrow not one member of my management team has contacted me i don't know if it is the finance director that dictates this behavior or if it is misguidance from the personnel department when i asked why the personnel officer told me once they gave the letter to the union they could not discuss it with me this simply is not true from the national labor review board quote you cannot bypass the union and deal directly with employees however you may communicate to your employees accurate information about your bargaining proposals website info nlrb.gov bargaining in good faith with employees union representative i have two other personnel experiences where the personnel officer has not followed through on his word with actions important personnel documents and administrative rules have not been brought before you as promised my good faith effort with personnel has spent 2.5 years and ends tonight with my layoff please listen to the association of capitol employees concerns with compassion thank you i have another email this is ryan heron ace labor representative the city manager approached ace in recent weeks and asked us to take an 8.1% reduction in work hours and pay as well as the elimination of vacation cashouts for a period of one year it was explained to us that these two items together would save the city an estimated $68,000 for the fiscal year 2020 slash 21 ace membership voted to approve the freezing of the vacation cash out for one year but rejected the work hour reduction and associated pay reduction ace does not dispute that there is a real crisis facing the city budget as a result of covet 19 we just believe there are other ways to balance the budget besides on the back of ace employees ace employees are the lowest paid full-time employees in the city an 8.1% reduction in pay for some ace employees could be the difference between being able to pay their bills and monthly rent slash mortgages for many ace members this was untenable and would require them to seek other employment outside the city other city employees such as mid management police and confidential slash executive management employees are higher paid in relation to ace employees and we believe it is not unreasonable for the city to expect those higher paid employees to take larger concessions than ace employees i am of the understanding that the previously agreed to furloughs for mid management and some other employees will not go forward as planned since ace rejected the furlough i do not believe there is any reason why the city cannot do higher furloughs on some units than on ace any refusal to do so would simply be a policy choice in my view in addition to ace employees being paid less than these other bargaining units ace employees are also already paid significantly less than their counterparts in neighboring public agencies as part of our current now the city performed a compensation study using selected comparator agencies in the area this study definitively showed that capitol is paying its employees less than the fair market rate for most positions for example accountant is compensated at 7.5 percent below market median for total compensation administrative assistant is 6.2 percent below assistant planner is 5.8 percent below building inspector 2 is 17.24 percent below maintenance worker 2 is 11.67 percent below mechanic is 8.5 percent below parking enforcement officer is 17.2 percent below receptionist is 13.5 percent below and recreation coordinator is 14.6 percent below the market median for total compensation ace was approaching now negotiations in 2020 with high hopes that we would bring these positions up to the market median rate however once covered 19 hit that all changed as a result of ace rejecting the furloughs the city manager has issued three layoff notices to ace employees as of last week i estimate the salary savings associated with these layoffs to be well in excess of 200 000 for the upcoming fiscal year i am struggling to understand why our rejection of a proposal to save the city 68 000 would necessitate layoffs that would save this much money one layoff of a full-time employee should give the city the necessary savings to cover ace's rejection of the furlough additionally in recent weeks of full-time receptionist at city hall unexpectedly quit her position this represents a large savings that is more than the total savings that was being asked of ace in the city's furlough proposal thank you ryan heron labor relations representative united public employees of california local 792 i do not see any additional emails all right with that we will bring it back to council for deliberation and are there any additional council comments or council member bachler oh i'm sorry there you are council member bachler yes please thank you there you know this was a difficult decision for everyone in the council and the city manager i think the message that was sent here was this was a time for the city to all dig deep and to try to get us through this uh as was mentioned in the letter you know when covid-19 came everything changed i think that hit the nail on the head none of this is an easy decision for any of us and i know that it impacts others more than than some others just because of the pay rate uh it's not an easy thing to do i'm trying to be optimistic by everything we're doing to try to help the merchants open up help the city open up with this solution turns around in six months and at that time i look forward to sitting down and renegotiating with these uh groups and trying to get back to normal but based on the information that i have available to me and the city manager presented the council i'm going to make a motion to approve staff recommendation we have a motion do we have a second i'll second okay for further discussion no additional discussion from the council i want to um i want to acknowledge that we do see that there are two attendees with their hands up right now but because we did close public comment already the time for a public comment would have been uh before the emails and also after the emails were read when we gave a moment for additional comments so i do want to acknowledge that you're you're not being ignored but the time for the public comment period has been has been closed so we do have a a motion and a second on the floor there's no additional comments we will uh oh sorry back to panelists council member boss of my apology mayor i i just raised my hand after acknowledging that there were people that raised their hand and due to the fact that this format for running a meeting might be difficult uh i think that two members want to weigh in i would make i would feel comfortable allowing them to speak if it's at the mayor's will though okay is that um i'll turn to our city manager and city attorney is that quite literally at the mayor's will is okay all right uh in that case i'm not reopening public comment for all i'm reopening public comment for barbara and ali who appeared to put their hands up right as we were closing public comment so we will allow them as the normal three minutes each to speak um barbara you can go ahead hi thank you for allowing us to speak i appreciate that i've been an employee can you guys hear me yes we can hear you okay i've been an employee for capital city for over eight years and i just want to convey to the city council we are more than just members we are families that are trying to make ends meet the layoffs and furloughs will cause employees and families to lose their health care during covet and the council needs to be held accountable for their choice to allow those layoffs the city's greatest asset is their employees not the turrets the council must be consider it in this time of great challenge and suffering we are in such a time right now i feel that something that we should consider that we are a very small city and we work within and around the city manager and assistant manager very closely and say it's a bit intimidating to voice our concerns when we work so closely to the manager is an understatement it's quite intimidating that being said i have worked here for nearly eight years and i have been a resident of capital for 35 years and i don't recall one time that the city employees have not agreed to off to the offer made by the city when it comes to negotiations this is really a challenging time and i just feel that especially our group is such a low paying group and to ask for eight percent cut in pay on the backs of these employees when management and the poa negotiated a far less and when we have so many employees that have recently left i just don't see the numbers of $68,000 and i just feel that as a council you should look at the entire picture of what the cost savings of these recent vacancies and consider that for these employees because so many of these employees that they're just barely making it and i just feel greatly that we should consider that thank you for your time thank you for ever we appreciate your comments i believe ali is the next person with their hander hi can you guys hear me okay i had actually emailed twice but i don't know how that never made it to larry anyways so my name is ali cliford i'm a recreation coordinator with the city of capital and my last day of work is tomorrow i have one of those three positions being laid off i have been with the city for just shy of nine years excuse me in a recreation coordinator for almost two i'm a three-quarter time employee i was responsible for all of our recreation classes independent contractor instructors our recreation brochure building rentals events marketing and social media i voted no on the furlough knowing my job was at stake because myself as well as my fellow as union employees are already so overworked and underpaid i just couldn't in good faith ask my fellow co-workers to take a pay cut to save my job the salary study done last year was proof of how underpaid many of us from within the city are my position in particular is already 14.6 below 14.6 percent below the market median if you were to take a look at a paycheck for myself or any other our union members you would see that the take-home pay is barely if even at all enough to be able to afford to live in scenic creek county i will soon be on unemployment and with the temporary extra six hundred dollars a week of federal stimulus i'll actually make more unemployment than i do now the proposed 8.1 percent furlough would have been too much too huge of a financial hit for many of my fellow co-workers we already struggle enough as it is we shouldn't have to struggle more than we already do i personally don't feel the city has been diligent enough or transparent enough in finding other alternatives besides these layoffs thank you thank you ali all right we're going to bring it back to the council uh councilmember story has his hand well thank you mayor um you know after uh hearing barbara and ali speak um i couldn't hold back and not acknowledge their pain and how difficult of a situation that is this is um for everyone concerned um and we certainly hate to see that it came to layoffs um and the ali in particular and any of the staff but you know everyone's in a dire strait um and all the other staff have agreed to reductions um and um you know it's unfortunate that you know we couldn't get other reductions from the a staff i understand their viewpoint um but you know i think it's important that everyone um kind of move together uh in that um and um i'm hoping um you know maybe it didn't need to be eight percent but i didn't i didn't hear or understand that there was any counteroffer made um but and so this is where we've ended up um if there's some way of ability to salvage um these layoffs i would certainly be open to it um but i'm really um you know i'm sorry that we have to lay out positions at this time um but um i think that we felt that we were kind of pushed into that position so um i just want to acknowledge and thank bob and ali for speaking up and thank you man thank you council member story are there any other comments from members of the council okay um i echo what council member story said in acknowledging the pain and the hurt that is clearly heard here tonight is understandable and justifiable that they there is that you are experiencing this pain and this frustration and i hesitate to say what i want to say next because i feel like it is um minimizes the the hurt that we just heard and that's not my intention in any way at all what i want to share is that we are also hearing from community grant recipients that we are causing pain we are also hearing from business owners that we have caused them pain we're hearing from residents that we have caused them pain and it's not anything that any one of us wanted to cause to any of those people and we are in such challenging times that i know that we are all feeling that challenge and these are very difficult decisions that we didn't come too lightly and i want to share that that we all well i don't speak for this for the whole council but i speak for myself and i speak for what i perceived in the discussions that were had that we were all feeling the weight of these choices council member chon has his hand up to you and i believe he has comment council member chon you're still needed sorry um just want to recognize that it is particularly hard for the people that are being laid off i've been in that position multiple talks in 30 to 40 years of my work experience and in many cases under very diverse circumstances where i didn't know we're going to be able to pay for things for our family so i totally understand what you're going through i'd also like to recognize that there's been a lot of sacrifices by the people of work for capitol part of the general employees for the city and so i want to also recognize their sacrifice too and um you know some may be paying more of the sacrifice thank you very much thank you i don't see any additional hands up from council members i believe and perhaps our city clerk can confirm for me that i believe we had a motion and a second already that is correct uh council member bautour was the mover and council member for trans seconded thank you uh there's no further comment from council uh can we get a roll call vote please yes council member for trans i council member bautour all right council member story um i vice mayor brooks hi and mayor peterson hi thank you thank you motion uh carries unanimously that brings us to the end of our meeting tonight um please take care of yourself physically and mentally and emotionally and take care of each other and we will see you again soon