 Before we begin our meeting, I'd like us all to recall that yesterday was the 5th anniversary of the murder of Butch Baker and Elizabeth Butler. I'd like to, one, first of all, before we begin our meeting, take this opportunity to let us all have a moment of silence. I want to just state that words cannot express the tremendous grief our city experienced and continues to memorialize on this 5th anniversary of the murder of two of our city's finest, our friends and our neighbors, Sergeant Lorne Butch Baker and Detective Elizabeth Butler. With families of their own, the bravery and love for our community which these two officers proudly served and gave their lives must not be in vain. Please join me in a moment of silence for Lorne Butch Baker, Elizabeth Butler and their friends and family. May our thoughts recall their sacrifice and may our actions here renew our commitment to Santa Cruz and help shape a future filled with promise and opportunity for our children. May we please now take this moment to be in thought. Thank you. I'd like to ask the, let me first begin to say good afternoon, welcome to our 2 p.m. session of the February 27th, 2018 meeting of the City Council. I'd like to ask the clerk to please call the roll. Thank you, Mayor, Councilmember Cron. Here. Matthews. Here. Chase. Brown. Here. Naroyan. Here. Vice Mayor Watkins. Here. And Mayor Tarazzoz. Here. Now, if the clerk would please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. To the flag of the United States of America. And to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God. Indivisible with liberty and justice for all. At this point in the agenda, we'll now have the introduction of new employees to the City of Santa Cruz. And I'd like to begin with our fire department as Chief Frawley here to introduce some new employees in his department. Good afternoon, Mayor Tarazzoz, Council. It is my distinct pleasure to introduce to you, Benji Hodges. She is a new administrative assistant for the fire department. She's taking, filling the spot that Kelly Kumick vacated when she moved over and became a permit technician in our fire prevention bureau. So some interesting things about Benji. One is she's been phenomenal, super energetic, really excited to be a part of the city. It's great to have her as a part of the family both in the fire department as well as the city. She is through and through Santa Cruz, born and raised here in, in the city. Actually born in the old Dominican hospital, which is now the Ristorante Italiano. She went to Harbor High School here, went to Gabriel, went to UCSC and graduated with a bachelor's in art history. She loves water sports and has done a lot with the, with the water and being in the water. So surfing, snorkeling, all sorts of stuff. And especially sailing. Her and her husband owned a business, a sales shop, which makes sales for the different sailboats here in town. She's got a son at 17. His name's Robbie. He's a senior at Harbor High. And I would just like to say that I'm excited to have her as a part of the, the fire department family. So please welcome Benji Hodges. Welcome. Next up is director of information technology, Laura Schmidt. Thank you, mayor and council. I'm very pleased to introduce Dennis Keabu, our new network and systems administrator. He brings 15 years of network and systems administration experience, 10 years of project management and eight years as an IT manager. He has a wide variety of technical skills, which I'm sure you'll be thrilled for me to list. Voice over internet protocol, virtualization, Cisco backup and recovery, Microsoft active directory and exchange. We're so excited we found him. Pretty cool. Dennis enjoys mountain biking and spending time with his wife and two boys. He and his boys sometimes play the ukulele together. Dennis grew up in another paradise in Oahu. So ask him about that lovely island. And I'm sure he'll have a lot to share. Welcome Dennis. Next up and seeing all the library. Yeah. Logos up front is direct deputy director of libraries, Janice Hedrisco. Good afternoon. It is my pleasure to introduce Miguel Vasquez Sanchez, who has joined the library IT team as an information technology specialist. Miguel, he's known as Mikey at the library. Mikey was born and raised in Watsonville. He served four years in the Navy aboard the USS Blue Ridge, which was based in Japan on board ship. He ran the he was a help desk technician and network administrator for the 1200 people assigned to the ship. He led missions of that supported multinational joint military exercises in the Pacific. So at the library, he is running the staff help desk. He troubleshoots PC and printer issues and he does. Tier one diagnostics and I'm sure that's really important. I don't know what that is. He is pursuing a degree, a bachelor's degree in computer technology, focusing on networking. And in his free time, he likes to play his guitar and write music. Please join me in welcoming Mikey to the library. Welcome Mikey. Thanks Janice. Next up is our director of parks and recreation Maro Garcia, who this morning was actually assembling some of the platforms in his suit and tie. And I just wanted to call that out. Yes, and my tie is still in one piece. I just screw it to one of the platforms. Maro Garcia Parks and Recreation. Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. It is my pleasure to introduce Mike Godsey. He is our new field supervisor and is assigned to the East Zone here in Santa Cruz. Mike was born in the Bay Area. He's a second of two children. Moved to Santa Cruz as a kindergartner and spent most of his childhood growing up here in Santa Cruz. As a teenager, he moved away to Half Moon Bay where he graduated high school and enjoyed playing soccer, surfing and riding dirt bikes. He returned after high school, Santa Cruz, where he eventually met his wife. And the two of them have three beautiful children, two of which are twins. He has a twin boy and a twin girl along with another little boy. Their careers took them back over the hill for a few years. He spent his last 10 years working with the City Slash County of San Francisco and honing his landscaping and horticultural skills before we decided to swipe him from them. In his off hours, he spends most of his time, imagine that, with his kids and their activities, a lot of dancing and baseball and that sort of stuff. In a little time he has himself, he likes to restore and build old bicycles and still likes to mountain bike and likes to road bike around Santa Cruz. And this is a quote from him and this may have been the deciding factor for us when we selected him. He said, this would be his dream come true job to be back in Santa Cruz and raise his kids the same way he was raised. He and his wife were both raised. So please join me in welcoming Mike Godsey. Director of Public Works, Mark Dettel. Good afternoon, Mark Dettel, Director of Public Works. It's my pleasure to introduce to you Chris Nutley. He's a new assistant engineer and he's been working for us as an inspector as a temporary position and we're glad to be able to offer him an assistant engineer position. Chris was born and raised in Stockton and he currently lives in Aptos. He has a degree, we went to Cabrillo and he has also a degree in civil engineering from UC Davis. He has a recent experience, four years working for DPR construction out of San Jose and San Francisco with his mainly in construction, a large building and park buildings and parking structures. When he's not working, he enjoys, he's an abalone diver. He likes to attempt to grow vegetables in his garden and he rides his motorcycle way too fast. I'll tell the police back there. He also owns 11 classic cars. Most of them are VWs and not a single one of them are running at the moment, but I do have a good news. They're not parked in Santa Cruz. They're parked outside the city on some property that he owns. So he currently has his EIT and he's going to be taking the PE exam in the fall. And the other thing, the last item is he's on the lookout for a silver Labrador puppy. So if anybody knows of one, he's in the lookout for that. So please join me in welcoming Chris. Welcome. Now it's my privilege to invite up director of water, Rosemary Bernard. I give the note about no vegetable planting this year because there's not going to be very much water. That should be obvious, right? Good afternoon, Mayor and Council. I'm pleased to be able to introduce to you Katie Fitzgerald, who's our new administrative assistant three. She's joined our staff over at our Locust Street office and we're really thrilled to have her. She spent the last five and a half years in Orange County working for a small business that both did parking lot sort of cleaning and maintenance and also working for a trash hauling business. She got a lot of really good experience with accounts receivable, accounts payable and also customer service working as also the glue that holds an organization together. And so that's the kind of job that she has with us and we're really thrilled to have it. She grew up in sunny Orange County, but her husband is a Santa Cruz native. And so for years they've been coming here to visit his family and he's been saying he wants to come back. And so she got the first job, he now has a job and they'll be reunited here shortly with their five-year-old son who's going to kindergarten next year. She is in school and she's working on an accounting degree and so we're thrilled with that too because that's a great process for her to be learning more as she's working for us. She's a serious cook and she loves it and that fits right in over with the culture that we have, the food culture we have over at the water department. And so if you have a new recipe that you'd like someone to try out, she's quite interested in that. And she loves reading and is really thrilled to be here so please help me welcome Katie Fitzgerald. Welcome. So we have a presentation and then some recognition that we'll take. So we'll start up first of all with a presentation. This is from Every Child Outdoors Foundation. I'd like to invite up Hannah Smith, the president and board member Heather Malloy to make a presentation on spotlight on Every Child Outdoors Foundation's work. Thank you so much for having us. My name's Hannah Smith and I'm the board president of Every Child Outdoors Foundation. And I'm Heather Malloy. I'm a board member at Every Child Outdoors and I'm also the director of the Outdoor Science School. Volunteer-run organization here in Santa Cruz, out of the Santa Cruz County Office of Education. And we are our board members and volunteers are primarily members of the environmental education community here in town. We have been around since 2007 and in that time we've funded or provided financial assistance for over 10 generations of fifth graders to participate in Outdoor Science. Outdoor educators, so we're used to just yelling. I need to be an indoor educator today. Okay, that sounds good. Just by show of hands in the council, how many of you have children or have attended or have heard of the Outdoor Science School program? Or have sent kiddos there? Excellent. So the Outdoor Science School, Every Child Outdoors partners with the Outdoor Science School program. And the Outdoor Science School is an immersive field experience for four or five days for fifth and sixth grade students. Students attend with their classroom teacher and with their classmates. They stay in cabins with their friends. And they go on daily field study classes to explore science and nature. The Outdoor Science School is a fee based program, which means that students, teachers, families, etc. Work hard to fundraise to cover the costs. Currently, the cost for in county students and students in Santa Cruz City area is $2.88 per student. And that's for a four day program. So to understand what that looks like for a family of a student who might be coming up to the Outdoor Science School. We could take a school that we work closely with, Anseldo Elementary in Watsonville. And at that school over 75% of families are enrolled in the federal free lunch program. Which means that if a student is a member of a family of four, their family is operating on a budget of less than $615 a week. So $288 plus transportation costs to get up to the Outdoor Science School, put that at about $300. That's half of the family's weekly budget. So that undeniably puts it out of reach for the majority of students at Anseldo Elementary. So last year we were lucky enough to meet a student at Anseldo Elementary who volunteered to, her and her mother volunteered to tell us their story. And we would like to show you the video right now. It's called Panda's New World because all of the students and staff at Outdoor Science School, we get nature names. And so she chose the nature name Panda when she came up to Outdoor Science School. If I have a dream I'll follow it. And I'll follow it until it comes true. I'm gonna remember my words. I'm gonna be like, never give up Joanna. Keep on trying. I'm inspired by my mom. When I need something she gives it to me. She wanted to come here to give me like a better life. She works hard. She's a helpful person. So that inspired me to help people or like animals or like become a nurse. Thank you, Joanna. I heard about science camp when we were in science and whoever like paid, could go. She's like, I hope I work very good so I can help you out with the money. And I said, okay, I'll try to help you as there's like ticket sales or like gather up money in my little piggy bank. Initially we had the kids do barbecues and sell chocolates and car washes. And to be honest, for us it's not effective. I thought, oh, maybe I might not be able to go. But then I couldn't believe what like Miss Martinez told me. This teacher that they still haven't told me who it was. She paid my camp. When we were like packing up, I was nervous because I was scared to go like away from my mom without her. I was like nervous but excited at the same time. I learned how to save animals. The biggest moment was when we did the ropes course. If I didn't do it, maybe that was going to be my only experience to do the ropes course. Okay, okay. You have to try to make the best out of it. Even though you can't do it, you still have to try. To go somewhere else is a new thing, to see a redwood tree is a new thing. It rewires the brain. I've been doing science camp for 20 years. I think it ends down the most important thing that we do all year. Science camp allows the kids to feel secure in a different environment. It's the first step. I really think this is the first step towards college. That's one reason why I do it. And this can only make things better in the future for California and for the kids. Science camp is so cool. So Joanna represents the hundreds of thousands of students that have participated in the outdoor science school program in the last 45 years that we've been in operation. Recently, just last year, we did a student survey to gauge what students' perception is about certain topics before they attend outdoor science school and after. And you can see some of the results here. Students who had participated in outdoor science school after that experience, they completed the survey. 81% of the students saw themselves as more interested in science. It actually isn't coming up here on the screen, but there's also an 88% of students who are more comfortable in the outdoors. So the huge percentage of that, of the youth who come to our program and then later on can say, I feel more comfortable in the outdoors than I did before I attended. You can see the 79%, which is the ecological behavior and measure of that is a student has the agency to turn off the water when they're brushing their teeth or take shorter baths. Those are ecological behaviors that they can engage in without anybody's help. You can see the rest of the results here. And these findings are in line with what researchers are discovering about environmental education on a much broader scale. The students who receive the Every Chat Outdoors Foundation scholarships are the ones for the most part who have never been to the Redwood Forest despite living maybe 20 minutes away. They've never seen a new turquist of a banana slug like we saw Joanna do. And usually this is because their parents are working extremely hard to make ends meet and don't have the time to make that possible. So the relative value of for these students, the impact this experience has to have these first experiences in the forest and in nature at outdoor science school is much higher. The value is much higher for those students compared to our more affluent students. In addition, many of these students don't have opportunities to attend summer camp programs. And there's so much, there's so much social emotional growth and progression and social progression that happens in summer camp programs. In all, we know that in order to be successful adults, students need to feel confident taking risks. They need to practice being outside of their comfort zone. And they need to be exposed to different kinds of experiences and different kinds of opportunities. So as you can see, this program is extremely impactful for students from all backgrounds. And we have students at schools all across our county whose families can't afford to pay the $288 for outdoor science school. And however, what happens that a lot of the schools in our county is, for example, at De La Vie Gallimentary, the programs like this are hugely reliant on PTA funds. And so the PTA is able to raise a large, enlarge enough amount of money to cover the cost of any students at that school whose families can't afford to pay. And then the entire class gets to go together and no students miss out. But for a lot of our schools, like in South County and at Galt and a few other schools in Santa Cruz, it is much more difficult. There just isn't the financial capital, the time and resources to do all that fundraising. Even the students are out there selling chocolate, selling candy, all kinds of things they shouldn't be selling. To fundraise for outdoor science school, they just can't raise enough money. And so that's where every child outdoors comes in. And we give 30,000 annually to 12 schools across our county and to supplement the cost and ensure that all students are able to go. So with this financial assistance that every child outdoors offers, we've been able to ensure that these 12 schools get to go every single year for the past 10 years. And this year in Santa Cruz County, for the first time in at least 10 years, one school was unable, an entire school was unable to participate in outdoor science school because of financial barriers. That means that none of those students got to go in their fifth grade year and they missed out. And so as an organization, we now are in the position where we need to increase our fundraising in order to gift more so that we can increase the amount of schools that we are giving to. And our current goal is to include 15 of the high-need schools in Santa Cruz County so that none of those students miss out. And that would mean that we are raising and gifting 45,000 annually. Our long-term goal right now is 90,000 annually. And that's doubled. The reason for that is because the price of outdoor science school inevitably rises every year. Let's do all these programs. And we want to make sure that we get ahead of that so that it doesn't get further and further out of reach for families and we're able to provide more assistance. We have a teacher who actually, her husband was just up here, Mike Duddle, so kind of serendipitous. Mary Duddle, one of our favorite teachers up at Vine Hill Elementary. She brings her students every year, and they always come from a school down in Watsonville. And the students come together. They are in cabins together. They learn and grow throughout the week. And she comments every year on how this program, outdoor science school, creates community right here in Santa Cruz County because it brings students from opposite ends of the county together around a care and appreciation for our collective environment. And if half of our county can't go, we don't have that experience. Those students miss out and we all lose out because of it. So we're not here to ask you for money. We do a lot of that already. But we are here because as an organization, we have a much bigger fundraising goal right now. And we're looking for support and connections that you all can make that can help us build our capacity and in relationships that you are able to help us out with so that we can, and we know in Santa Cruz County, like Heather said, this program has been around for 50 years, the outdoor science school program, which means that if you are younger than 60, more than likely you went, and if you have children, more than likely they participated. So there's a lot of people in our county who we believe would be willing to support this program and ensure that all students get to participate. And we would love your help and support in finding out who those people are and building some relationships for us. Thank you, Hannah. That was an outstanding presentation. Is any council member have any questions? Cynthia. So I'm actually on the website right now. So if people want to donate, is this specifically just for our county or is it a larger organization beyond our county? It is specifically for our county. So yeah, we only serve schools within the county. Thank you. Any other questions? Rachelle. So I did grow up in Santa Cruz and I'd be in the age range to possibly enjoy this. I don't remember going to Science Camp, but what I do remember is going to 6th grade camp. It's the same, it is the same thing. Okay, great. Well, then I have participated. So I noticed though that you said kids go when they're in 5th grade. Is that since changed over the years that we started a younger age? The change happened primarily when middle schools or junior highs became middle schools. And so it became the final elementary year. So we do still have some 6th grade groups. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions on the side? On the side? I'll just say I really appreciate you coming out and sharing that. It's nice to see the kids engaged in outdoor activities. I know our Parks and Recreation Department provides a lot of open space and park trails. So in addition to the camps that are offered, hopefully even expanding every child outdoors and other parts of the county as well. Also, one question was there was a state measure a few years back where it provided funding for outdoor education. Do you receive any state funds through that? No, there was a, you know, and I don't know the language exactly, but there was a stipulation that the money is available 10% per student in Title I schools when available, if that money were available. And so essentially the money is never available. Understood. Yeah. Thank you. Well, I appreciate you. Thank you for coming out today. Thank you for your time. We appreciate it. Yeah. Thank you so much. All right. Okay. I don't look familiar. It is my pleasure to invite up again Rosemary Renard, director of the Water Department for a very special presentation for Gar Item, 25-year service pin recognition. That's so cool. Good afternoon again, Mayor and Council. It's my pleasure to come here before you today to present to Gar Item, our chief ranger at Loch Lomond, his 25-year anniversary pin. And before I do that, I want to say a couple of things about him. So it's actually, it's very apropos that Gar's presentation when I follow the presentation we just heard because we've been doing a lot of work over the last few years with Gar's support and his encouragement and that of his staff on working with students in education and using Loch Lomond and the opportunity that we have for visitors to see a major piece of our water supply infrastructure as part of the science education in schools that are basically here in Santa Cruz in the county and also up in the valley. So that's a program that's so important and the leadership that we have at the staff at Loch Lomond is really, really an important element of making that happen. So Gar was born and raised here in Santa Cruz. We've been hearing a lot of that kind of good stuff today as new employees have been introduced and I think that brings a certain brand of interest in working for Santa Cruz and being a long-term employee of the City of Santa Cruz here that has led to him being here for 25 years. He started in 1988 as a temp doing event security at Civic. Then he moved on to maintenance and moved up the ladder until becoming a ranger at Loch Lomond in 2003. And in 2008 he moved back downtown to become an open space ranger for Parks and Rec. But in 2014 he came back to Loch Lomond to be our chief ranger. Among other interesting experiences he's had over the years, both downtown and out in the watershed, he helped out on the earthquake recovery downtown and was one of the last people to go inside the old Bookshop Santa Cruz and Cooper House buildings before they were demolished. We are grateful for his many contributions to at Loch Lomond and for his always keeping perspective on how his work contributes to the City's overall well-being for his great and calm demeanor, his ability to interact so successfully with our customers who come to Loch Lomond and use our facilities there. So with that I'd like to present Gar with his 25-year pen. If the City is making it a wonderful place to work for all these years. Thank you. It was nice to have that perspective that you started at the Civic and then also now we're out in the open space so you've seen it from all different parts of the City. Thank you for everything you've done over the last 25 years. Okay, next up I have a few announcements and then we'll move on to our regular meeting. Today's meeting is being broadcast live on Community Television Channel 25 and streaming on the City's website at CityofSantaCruise.com. All City Council members can be emailed at CityCouncilatCityofSantaCruise.com. If you would like to communicate with us about an agenda item, we'd like to receive your email by the Monday prior to the meeting at 5 p.m. This provides us with an opportunity to review your email, include it with the rest of our agenda packet. Please bear in mind that all items of correspondence with the City and City Council constitute public records and are generally subject to disclosure upon request by any member of the public. Accordingly, if you have sensitive or private information that you do not wish to be made public, you should not include that information in your correspondence. Our rules of decorum are on the window allege to my left, and it's my job to keep the meeting running without disruption, and we ask that you respect your fellow citizens when you're inside or outside of the chambers. I'd like to ask now if there's any Council members if they have any statements of disqualification. Seeing none, I'll move on to the next item and ask if there's any additions or deletions from the clerk. None. In regards to oral communications, oral communications is an opportunity for members of the community to speak with us on items that are not on the agenda. Oral communications will generally occur at the conclusion of afternoon business at or around 5.30 p.m., but may occur before that time. At this time, I'd like to call on the City Attorney for a report out on closed session. Thank you, Mayor Torazos, members of the City Council. There are three items on this afternoon's closed session, which began at 1 o'clock this afternoon in the Courtyard Conference Room. First was a public employee performance evaluation involving the City Manager. Second were two real property negotiations items. The real property owned by the City at 55 B, C, and D, Municipal Wharf, which is the location of the Vino Prima business. Second is city-owned property at Sky Park in Scotts Valley. I will not list the APN numbers for the record, but property does not have a CITUS address. Council received reports from and gave direction to the city's negotiator on those two real property items. There was no reportable action. Thank you. Next up is the City Manager's report. So we're going to do an update on the River Street Camp. Susan's here to do an update on that and answer questions from the Council. Good afternoon, Council. I was actually driving over to the camp and pulled back over, so I can give you this presentation. I apologize, Martine, about that scheduling conflict. So I'm happy to report that the River Street Camp is opened. We opened effective yesterday after hiring 27 staff members, including a program manager and two assistant program managers and obviously several campground hosts, including eight downtown streets team graduates, who six of them will be living at the camp, and eight of them will be working as hosts. After four days of outreach this last week, we have provided vouchers for 61 folks who are either at the Benchlands or other areas of the community. Those folks will be moving in over a phase period of time, about 10 per day. We have 19 actually moving in today. I think as we speak, there's probably folks that are setting up their tents. So we have a total of 61 campers that have been provided vouchers for this week, and actually that means that we are currently full. We have 48 spaces out there. You know, it was as we are doing outreach and figuring out who was interested in moving into the camp, there was less people that were interested in camping together two per tent than we expected. So we're at 61 campers, and at that point we're at full capacity with the 48 spaces that we have available out there. We've been working very diligently. I can't tell you how many people in the city and across our community have worked on this project. So just within the last couple weeks, city employees have just done a tremendous job in getting this ready. And including today during our media event, we had a media open house. I think the mayor commented that Mara, our Parks and Rec director, was out there building platforms. We had somebody out rolling down the decomposed granite. We had, you know, a number of folks working out there today. And that created a strong sense of community for the folks that were out there with the media as well as the campground hosts that are working out there really seeing how many people in the city are that are behind this. So I wanted to share that with you to signal my appreciation on behalf of city employees that have been working so hard on this for your support on this. Just on that pause I'll have to say all of the work you've done on this as well. I mean, you need to stand out and say, hey, thank you for all of your efforts. Thank you. So we have 12-hour shuttle service with five round trips per day, meal service, maintenance service, and intake schedules. As I mentioned, I think every city department has worked on this. And so the intake schedule, we will be providing daily intakes at the Santa Cruz Public Library at our downtown branch, except for the 7th of March from the 3rd to the 12th. It's at 4 p.m. So anybody who's interested in intaking into the facility, you know, we expect there's going to be attrition. We expect that there's, as the community is being built out there, that some folks might not necessarily work out it might not be a good fit for them. So we will have a wait list and people will be, you know, invited in as we have space available. We are working with the county on the program metrics. They are very excited to be out there. So they were out there for the immediate event as well. I'm talking about the services that are going to be provided. There is a whole host of services that are going to be provided. And so together with the city and the county, we'll be looking at metrics and defining success with this program. But we really feel like it's going to kind of run like a pilot with those measures of success and indicators being benefit retentions, connections to primary and behavioral health care, development of pathways to housing and or harm reduction, and the retention of those benefits and services upon exit from the campground. And so as I mentioned, we'll be working on the county with regard to HMIS intaking, working through the system that we have to track folks. A lot of the folks that are in the camp are already enrolled in county services so there is a good nexus there and we'll have more opportunities to grow and learn as we progress forward. But I did want to let you guys know that this has happened, it's opened, and it's just been a huge effort and I just wanted to express my appreciation across the city organization that the staff has done. Great. I also want to express my appreciation to Susie and all the city employees that really as Susie mentioned has been a tremendous effort from virtually every department in the city and so we will at the same time start the plan is with respect to the benchlands to start closing that down also starting tomorrow so that by the end of the week parks department can begin the maintenance activities at the park which need to be prepared for a special event that's starting in mid-March so they both will work together to open up the new camp and to close the existing benchlands camp. Any other questions? Chris. Thank you Susie. I really appreciate this. I think it's a huge step for Santa Cruz and maybe just a giant leap of appreciation of the city in doing this. This is like historic. I had a couple questions about logistics how long can people stay there? Is there a time limit? There isn't a time limit. The philosophy with this type of program is it's very low barrier to entry so we had folks walking in with their dogs today we have staff that have pets we're providing storage you can cohabitate with a partner but once you're in you are expected to connect with the services that are provided what I think we have noticed with in my research with other types of programs like this specifically navigation centers it's around 60 days that most people stay when you have that really intensive wrap around service provision people are connected to either housing or harm reduction or home or down for instance and so on average people stay in these types of programs for about 60 days but it will really be dependent on their interest in making those connections How many animals have signed up for the program? We didn't take separate we haven't provided vouchers for animals but there are quite a few pets that will be we don't know yet but I know that there's at least one that came today so I would expect there to be a number of animals When we get questions like drugs and alcohol is that going to be okay in this camp or how is that maintained or monitored? Yeah that's a really good question so drug use and alcohol use is not permitted in the camp and that is true for all of our shelter facilities in our community with that being said because we have access to drug and alcohol service we would expect that the demographic that we're serving would need that service and we want to provide that so it will really be important for the county staff that's there to be making those connections for folks who might be experiencing substance use disorder In the 49 which equals 61 people in 49 camping spaces I typically, I counted every week when over at the bench lands and I counted 40 to 65 tents over there what do you think will happen to the other remaining in we say 40 to 65 we probably mean you know how many people over 100 maybe? Yeah I think we've had about 56 tents sites I think and between 60 to 100 folks out of the bench lands per day depending on attrition and weather etc where folks will go it is really upon the city and our partners to provide those options for people that are out there there is still a capacity at the winter shelter we will on average they see about 75 to 80 percent full and sometimes much less than that so there is ongoing capacity at the winter shelter so we will be communicating that to folks that are out at the bench lands there were a number of people that were not interested at all so when our outreach coordinators went out last week they just walked away did not want to interact at all with our outreach coordinators and so I think through and Martine can speak to this as well really what it is going to come down to is providing these opportunities for folks getting as much information as we possibly can out there and then hopefully incentivizing people into the shelter beds that are available either at the river street camp or at the winter shelter the AFC association of faith communities also has a satellite shelter and a number of different locations in the community and really just wrapping all those services around that we possibly can and then when it comes down to people who are not interested in shelter then we are going to have to have a discussion about what that looks like and my other question for Martine how heavy do you think the presence will be in moving people out of the bench lands is it possible to give them a couple days of transition did they already get noticed a week or two or three ago that this is coming and get like subsequent notices the answer is yes the outreach has been offering I think for the last week or so so people have had plenty of notice and also an opportunity to sign up and collect vouchers so that's being pretty extensive so that the opportunity is provided to everyone that wishes to take advantage of it with respect to the process you know we expected to be an orderly process similarly we've had you know maintenance here so individuals are actually used to setting their stuff away and moving at least for a day since we have regular cleanups in the encampment at the bench lands now so we anticipate that the parks department will largely facilitate that process I don't know if you want to add anything more Suzy yeah so our expectation is it's going to be a wonderful seamless process of course and I think the point of phasing folks out and we're going to see how that goes over the next couple days is to give people an opportunity to move slowly into the camp how tomorrow has more direct experience with this but I think the moveouts at the bench lands have been fairly controlled and I think people have I think it will be hopefully a very similar process I notice they set up underneath the water street bridge when they moved out a couple times is that going to be a possibility now for folks who don't want to go to the camp no because that was an interim move so I think we tolerated people moving because recognizing that they moved back but at this time we really do need the park to be not used as an encampment even underneath the bridges and so forth so the answer is no I just want to say I just would hope we would be as careful and I think we will as possible in moving people out and knowing that we have really the most vulnerable population here and hopefully our deadline is a soft deadline and not necessarily like yes this is it you're out I just think that without causing issues I think that would be a better way to go to give people some time Sandy? I have two questions one is a follow up to an issue that came up when it came before us when we heard the full report I'm just wondering if you could give a little more information about the entry and exit so you said five shuttles a day and in terms of timing those are the only times people can move in and out how is that getting set up? so the move in and move out is a separate shuttle schedule okay so go through the intake process at the library get a voucher they will have a shuttle service time and pick up time in a location so that is handled somewhat separately daily schedule working with the camp host as well as some of the folks that have vouchers really understanding what their commitments are out in the community what we are trying to do is have a really pretty early morning exit so there will be an opportunity for people to get out into the community before a shift for instance and a late evening entrance and so those are kind of guaranteed on the book ends of the day and then three round trips shuttle stops in the middle and the idea is get folks to places where there is service provisions so we are making sure that people can get out for the soup kitchen at 12 o'clock daily so there is a shuttle service that leaves at 11.45 there is one that leaves so it is 7.15 10 o'clock 11.45, 3 and 6.15 and that is a round trip so pretty much 5.5 hours out of the day we will be providing shuttle service for folks and so with many different opportunities to hop on and hop off we have been continuing to explore where we can have some flexibility even got a proposal for a ped taxi with the idea that there could be some opportunity for us to pay an hourly rate at some of these times that might be more appropriate for folks but I think these next two weeks it is really important for us to think to understand the rhythm of the camp there might actually not be a whole lot of demand to leave the camp and so what we are trying to do now is just have some scheduled shuttle stops and then really make sure that we understand the rhythm of the camp and the need of the campers and then we will adjust so second question and it was somebody commented on this during our discussion the benefit of having people who are the campers be involved and have a role in responsibility for maintenance and management of the dynamics of the camp and some accountability about that and this may be premature and it may be a question for Chris Montieth when things get set up but I am just wondering if you had any discussions about some kind of structure for that or if it is just going to be kind of emerge naturally so there will be structure to provide assistance with maintaining the camp ground and so I am working with AFC and other nonprofit providers to really think about what an incentive or voucher program might look like for folks who want to work in the camp to help maintain it but in understanding Chris's intention it is going to be a very self sustaining camp and that is really the intention getting everybody behind that philosophy and focus upon him and his crew but that is what his intention is Councilman Bernouyan there might be some really good models for camp leadership and how campers themselves can lead their space during the Great Depression the federal government actually opened a lot of camp grounds for people who were looking for agricultural work in the state and they were we may already have a model to look at for suggestions on how that works and it was really successful during the Great Depression when you had people who were part of the leadership of running these camps so they felt they had some ownership and some investment in it and so it was really successful and the other point I want to make is I think we do need to have a hard deadline for San Lorenzo Park there is going to be an event there and you know there is other events that come after that and so I do think it is important because I do think the community wants to see San Lorenzo Park use the way it was intended to which were festivals and other events happening in that area so I do think it is important that the city do have a hard deadline for people to move on so we can use it like it was intended and there is going to be some time for cleanup and for recreation as we get to these events and as they start because don't we have one coming up March 9th and 10th we do the Santa Cruz music Fest is scheduled and you know we have been working with councils direction to close on the 28th from the last meeting and so and we have been you know working very hard to outreach folks from the Rangers to the River Street Camp staff to our police officers and so there has been essentially a soft closure for the last several days up to you know since the last meeting where we provide you know where you provided that direction so folks know that this is coming okay thank you Vice Mayor Walkins thank you Susie for your hard work and extend that to all those who have also contributed in the same way I know that you mentioned the indication I appreciate that for success and evaluation do you have a sense of when we will have a better understanding of the evaluation plan and can really understand the cost benefits and different strategies sure yeah so I think from the perspective of this phase one the River Street Camp in the next two to four weeks and I certainly can return to the council of interest to the council we do want to think about that within the context of phase two and phase three and understanding that there's probably a bit of a distinction between those phases but yeah absolutely we can return with that information in an FYI or an item that would be great thank you Susie thanks I just have three questions the first one was you mentioned is part of your presentation that the majority of those people that have enrolled to stay at the campsite are already receiving county services in one way or another I don't know if it's the majority but there are a number of folks who already have an HMIS number that I've seen on their entire form so how do we measure whether or not this is going to provide that opportunity to you know provide a pathway out if they're already receiving some form of service is there a way that the county can at least report out on what are some of those needs or unmet needs that are going to help address some of the concerns that have been impacting city parks or neighborhoods yeah so I think that would be rolled into what council member or vice mayor Watkins is talking about is looking at those combined metrics and certainly if folks that are already connected with county services are in need of shelter understanding what those barriers of housing and other services I think is important for us to understand the second question I was asked this morning by someone about the rollout of this next phase of the camp to have the transition and the budget numbers that were shown didn't include any allocation for services do we have any sort of estimate of how much will be invested by the county for providing those types of connections yeah so what the $6,000 a month does not include is those in kind resources from both the county and the city so the city providing security through first alarm and Santa Cruz PD the county providing those in kind services as well and so we can certainly report out on the cost of those the county is still figuring out the time and level of staff that would be out there they're starting next week so when that's finalized I can share that as well not so much the cost but the level of investment in terms of what actually is matching up with what the city is doing in that regard and then I just want to ask the city manager this last question this is kind of brings us to a certain phase how do you see this strategy playing out over the next several months as we look at what types of reporting we'll have back out to the council in terms of not only the measures of success but what you believe we'll need to do in order to make sure that we can kind of promote some of the improvements in our parks and open spaces to address the issues that have been reoccurring so with respect to the eventual goal of creating a navigation center or a more permanent facility for year round shelter as well as services we'll continue those conversations with the county and we'll need to come back to the council with respect to funding with respect to location and options and that sort of thing so as those develop further we'll bring those back to you to be able to identify what the options are there for funding you mean? for funding as well as what the options are with respect to phase 2 and phase 3 because those will be decisions that you'll have to make both from funding and from a location perspective so will you be bringing back a variety of options in terms of locations that could be considered by the council? yeah I think whatever options we can come up with there's not a lot of options but I think we've got a couple that we're working on and depending on whether they be feasible or not we'll bring those to you depending on what emerges in terms of the process do you have any timeline on when you anticipate that might take place? I think that probably maybe in a month or so we might have because we've been working on this already we've looked at some sites and we've are having some conversations with respect to some other sites I think as we further refine the possibilities and whether those options are viable or not and some of the costs associated with them and also the other thing we have to look at is what we already expend relative to shelter services and how that can be allocated again towards full service year-round type of arrangement that again I think the idea a big part of the goal of having a year-round shelter is to reduce the impacts of encampments on our community the other one that's really important that I think it's also we need to recognize is that the other goal is to be able to be better able to respond to nuisances and crime as well and have a more effective enforcement approach that you ask the question what about those individuals that choose not to take advantage of services well if they choose to become a nuisance I think our police department will have to enforce and I think it's more effective to be able to enforce and be able to separate those who choose to get services versus those that just simply don't want to and choose to make themselves a nuisance so the hope is that the police department obviously will be able to be responsive in that regard as well do you have any questions that concludes the City Manager's President Council Member Krohn just one comment to point out we are I think Susie you said 60 to 100 people have been staying at the benchmarks and we are at the very minimum now 61 capacity at 1220 River Street more people looking for spaces. From the bench lands or just in general in the community? Well, we've been able to accommodate at the bench lands and what would you say, Shelters, go ahead. I would say that through our outreach efforts, we've probably, we have provided vouchers for all that are interested in going to the River Street camp. So folks that were not interested in connecting with our outreach coordinators, I think it would make sense tomorrow to ensure that they understand what those other options are with regard to the Winter Shelter and the AFC Shelter and the ongoing intake schedule for the River Street camp. And what would you guesstimate our capacity is right now with the Faith Community Shelter and the Warming Center and 1220 River Street? Countywide? You know, I don't know that number. I know between, I think it was 210 before the River Street camp, I know that was in one of your- The Winter Shelter has like 110 and it usually is like an average, I guess that's 70%, so maybe 30, 40 additional, but it varies depending on whether the AFC, I'm not sure of what their numbers are, but I would guess- And the loft is about 40? Yeah, then there's the Polly Loft that has about 40 as well. And then there's other shelters, there's like Pauro Shelter in Watsonville. Yes, there's also the Family Shelter. So what we're focusing on is more the Emergency Shelter. There are homeless individuals also that go into the Cooperative Care Facilities as well. So just one follow-up on that in that, you know, we have seen that there's been vacancies at the Winter Shelter. And when anecdotally, you hear sometimes people that are here that may live here or been residing here don't have access to it because there might be others there. Do we look at any sort of screening so that someone maybe is coming from out of the area thinking that there might be housing here because it doesn't exist in an adjacent area. There's a way for us to at least reconnect them back to the city where they came from to try and connect them that way. One of the overarching seems to me, values of the Navigation Centers is to do just that, which is once you have provided stability for somebody through Emergency Shelter and connecting with them with services, you actually are developing that path to housing and it doesn't necessarily have to be in the community that the Navigation Center is. You really wanna connect folks with the community of support that they have around them. And so for instance, in San Francisco, the majority of their folks exit to Homeward Bound, not to housing, because housing is, you know, of extreme shortage there and here as well. And so, yeah, it would be something that, you know, with phase two and phase three and certainly with this, with the River Street Camp, we wanna be connecting folks with their, you know, with their connections as well. All right, thank you. Okay, so next up is our Consent Agenda. These items are Agenda items three through nine on our agenda. All items will be acted upon in one motion unless an item is pulled by Council Member for further discussion. Are there any Council Members who wish to pull any items? Item five and eight, and I have a comment on item nine. Okay. Did you just say you're pulling eight? Five and eight. And I have a comment on nine. All right. Any others? Okay. Yeah, I have a comment for three. I don't think it needs to be pulled. It's a minor correction to the minutes. Would you like me to pull that or just? I think if we can talk through the correction, I don't think it requires pulling. It's very simple. Can you communicate it to, what is it? It had to do with Council Member Cron and myself being recused from the evening discussion last time. And the minutes say, recuse themselves due to the fact that they are landlords and left the dais. I think it would be more accurate to say the fact that they own rental property that would be affected by the ordinance. It's technical. Yeah. I mean, I accept that if the minutes can state that if you would sword those to the City Clerk. Thank you. I spoke with Council Member Brown. She's pulled item six. I'll make a quick comment on the minutes too. And this was just a general comment, but whenever there is a friendly amendment with a motion and the maker of that accepts it, I want to make sure the minutes record when the seconder of that motion also accepts it. And in this particular minutes, it didn't show that. And that was just on recording, but I want to just clarify with Council Member Cron that on that last item, the one that's included in there that you had accepted that as a friendly amendment, there's a listing there. The friendly, for which item is it? I'd go to the minutes. It's from the agenda item from the 13th. It was on item number 21. And what page on the page? Page 3.13. Council Member Brown accepted the friendly amendment. I just, there were two friendly amendments just showing that Council Member Brown and Cron accepted the friendly amendment. Thanks. All right, so there's only two. So we're also the agenda item for number six for the FAA. I spoke with Council Member Brown. She'd like to also pull that. So five, six and eight have been pulled. Is there any member of the public who would like to speak on an agenda item other than five, six or eight? Five, six or eight. Any agenda item other than five, six or eight? Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the Council for discussion. And do you want to make your comment on nine or? Yeah, sure. I just wanted to, Director Dettel got back to me on this too and I just wanted to say that this has to do with gas tax money and I wanted us to be on the alert to promote as much as we can what we're doing with the gas tax money in I think creative ways that the public will get the message that it's benefiting greatly our community. And the closer we get to November which is on there I believe I don't know if they've counted all the signatures yet the repeal of the gas tax. So I just wanted to say thank you, Director Dettel for promoting this. And again, when we get kids involved sometimes too I see the art on the side of the garbage trucks and things like that and people take to it rather than doing it in like a public notice way or something, but nice creative ways that people get the message a little bit better but I just wanted to say that thank you. Okay, thank you. So motion to approve the consent agenda with exception of items five, six and eight. So moved. Okay, Vice Mayor Watkins made the motion seconded by Council Member Matthews. All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Okay, thank you that passes unanimously. So the first up item is number five and number five is the nomination of Council Member Matthews seat for Lila Kramer to the Commission of the Prevention of Violence Against Women and Council Member Cron, you had a question. Yeah, thank you very much, Mayor. I just want to, it's an issue about process that I want to get at here and I'm thinking concerning this item, I'm not sure why the nomination is on the consent agenda but when Council Member Brown and myself had nominees to the CPVAW it was a regular agenda item and again it went with our great fanfare and debate. I would agree of that future nominations from all Council Members to the CPVAW that they be treated the same, that they, if you're gonna put it on the consent agenda I think is the appropriate place actually for a nomination and that we trust Council Members with their choice. I support Council Member Matthews in selecting and choosing and making her own appointment to the Commission for the Prevention of Violence Against Women. I pulled this item to support the process and it's a process of each Council Member being able to appoint nominees to every Commission and that Council Members would trust the nominee process and the appointment process and to make another, if you want to pull somebody off that there could be a rule and a process for that as well and direct appointments for commissions I think is a very important issue here. I'm looking at both of the resumes that Ms. Kramer and Mr. Glover who became an issue drew Glover and they have a lot of the similar traits that they're, and I think that Ms. Kramer is gonna compliment greatly the current CPVAW. She's a strong, she is a woman's health advocate. She worked at Kaiser, increasing residents, she's interested in residents access to healthy eating habits and living. She wants to do safe places, make safe places for women in Santa Cruz. Mr. Glover, same thing, there's some really similarities between their resumes and I think she's gonna be a really good compliment. So I'm just pulling this item to point this out that I think we need to trust and I'm trusting Council Member Matthews' choice here and make a motion to have this go forward when you're ready. Let me answer your question because I was the one that placed this on the consent agenda. I felt it was a nomination directly from Council Member Matthews and I felt it appropriate to put on there and if there was a concern it could be pulled so I'll just answer that question. And in regards to the actual appointment, it's not a direct appointment, it's a nomination. So there's a difference in my mind when we have that process but here there's a nomination on the floor for Lila Kramer and I hope that answers your question in terms of the process and why I put it on consent. What you put on consent because? Because it was a nomination by the Council Member and I felt it was appropriate to do that. And I would agree with you but has that process been being followed throughout the last, since I've been on the Council, it was not on the consent agenda is what I'm pointing out and I think that's the appropriate place for it. Well, I mean that was a decision I made so I did that answer your question. Council Member Matthews. It was the Mayor's call. I think typically they have been on open session. I actually agree with you. I would like the privilege of moving the... We'll go first to the public comment. Okay, that's fine. Is there any member of the public that would like to speak on item number five? See none, I'll bring it back. Lila Kramer is my nomination. I think she will be a truly spectacular member of the CPVAW and I would like the privilege of moving her confirmation. Second. And I'll make a motion by Council Member Matthews. Second by Council Member Cron. Is there any further discussion? Okay, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. That passes unanimously. The next item is item number six, which is the Council direction on response to the FAA report. And I'll just ask if you have a question on that if you wanted to pose it or what concerns you have. I have, so I mean, I'm absolutely supportive of the move that we're making and I understand that this has been a long process and I haven't been involved in it as intimately as I perhaps could have been and some of it happened before my term on the Council but I pulled it with a bit of chagrin because I feel like it is such, this is a really big deal. I mean, we're getting a lot of input from the community. This has been a hotly debated issue in the community regionally in terms of our interactions with other local governments and the federal government. So I just thought it would be worth pulling it to have something of a bit of a conversation to make clear how serious this is to us. And so I have two questions. One is, and I read the FAA's report. I was more confused at the end of it than when I started. So I'm not really sure, for example, the agreement that was made when the select committee, and I don't know if these are questions that can be answered here today. We may need other actors, institutional actors. Three of those apparently are not of the nine are not intended to be implemented in the short term and so this is a sticking point that's part of our concern and the reason for the letter. But I don't know what those are. I can't figure out what it is. Are they, and I can't figure out if what the requirements are for the NEPA process. There seems to be some dispute about that. So those are kind of my two big questions that I'd love to get answered somehow. Not before we make, you know, vote on this today. I'm willing to move ahead, but I do want to figure it out. Do you want to comment? I can comment briefly. Don Lane was our main city appointee to this process. I was an alternate and followed it at that level. Basically the recommendation was made to support a change, but only if certain specific criteria could be met and they have not been met. And so I think, yes, and I thought that was in this material. If it's not, I'll find it and get it to you. It's quite specific. And basically the statement that we're making now is promises were being made about the process and have not been kept. And specifically the one that an environmental, full environmental review would be taken. And that's the point. And at least one of the members of the select committee said if he had known that the criteria approved were not going to be followed, he wouldn't have supported the initial recommendations. So, it's that point. I got all that. I just, I don't understand how the NEPA process. Okay, so that's what I was trying to say. I think I don't know if this will help clarify, but NEPA, and I'll just say what that stands for, the National Environmental Policies Act, one of the conditions on moving the flight path was that a NEPA hearing would be held with the community. And that has not been fulfilled. And there are people who are now saying that perhaps that's not really a requirement, but the one council member from Los Altos Hills who was on this commission said no, that was very clear that was one of the conditions. And that without the NEPA hearing being conditioned, he would not have voted for the change of the flight path. And his vote was needed, because you needed eight votes to actually solidify that action. So if he, you know, going back to the vote, he would not have voted for it, and therefore the flight path would not have changed. So that's where we are. And the bottom line for our action, I believe for number six is to get that NEPA hearing. That is like the main bottom line that we really want to see happen so the public can give their input. And also by having this public process, the FAA goes on alert that we're watching, that we do have concerns, and that the less likelihood that the FAA will use different ways of making planes enter our area, that will be less noisy, won't be adhered to if we don't have this process. So that was my impetus for supporting this and sponsoring this. I have a couple of questions since it's pulled. I know that, you know, I was involved when we first were going through this process, and I just want to say from the floor here, how much Don Lane did to really kind of spend a tremendous kind of personal energy. And we had numerous unanimous votes about our position on this matter. And I think what Council Member Brown is getting at is through that process, there were recommendations that were made that were process points to follow through. And I had an opportunity to meet with Congressman Panetta's office, both in DC and here. And I think there's some communications that have those process points that haven't been completed. And I think that it's important rather than call out specific actions, we look holistically at what are those areas that have not been completed yet through the select committee. And the second question, I know that in the gender report talked about the composition of the membership of the select committee. I understood that there was two members from the city council that were on the select committee because the Board of Supervisors had two committee members. There were two city council members, one designated from Santa Cruz and one from Capitola, and that was Ed Boatrop. Ed Boatrop, okay, so. I was an alternate for Don. Okay, yeah, so then the Board of Supervisors had two appointees to the select committee. So I think for me, looking at what those remaining action items as a process standpoint would be very helpful so that we can correspond with Congressman Panetta per the direction in the agenda and identify what are those areas that have not been completed. I know Santa Clara County's chapter of the League of Cities convenes meetings with stakeholders there to receive comments on this. We just don't have a similar structure in place to kind of have those types of comment periods. And so I wanna make sure that we thoughtfully look at this in a way where we can address where those areas are, where we can get some movement on the actions that the FAA select committee has provided direction. So the report also calls out some particular timelines. I wanna make sure that there's the motion that you have outlined doesn't call out a specific deadline for that. So as we look at these coming back at a later date would be something I would personally support. I think we don't need to specify that in the motion. That's right. We can just say that. Okay, great. So there's no other quite council member crone. Yeah, I noticed. I don't know if Tony wants to make a comment. Tony Slas from Supervisor John Leopold's office. I don't know if we had a conversation. I thought it was very helpful in explaining. You know, I'll have an opportunity if someone wants to make public comment on that. I'll call it up at that time. But I think, you know, that would be an opportunity for him to speak. If you, unless he has something to write, he'd like to submit to us to review. I'd like to recognize him from. I'd like to recognize you too. Thank you for being here. Okay, let's go to the floor to call this item. This is item number six. Are there any members of the public that would like to speak to this item? Mr. Slas, would you like to come up and speak to this item? Thank you. Thank you for being here. I'll echo council member Crohn's comments. Thanks, Tony Slas, 30 year county resident. And also, yes, I work in John Leopold's office. John was involved as one of the select committee members. And I was his primary aide supporting him in that role. So I've been pretty involved in this in March of 2015. So I hadn't really planned to make comments, but I could respond and maybe help clarify the nine criteria that went along with the recommendation to move the southern arrivals flight path back to the Big Sur ground track. They were developed by the elected members and with the intent to make the flight path as quiet or quieter than the original flight path. So those were their best take at sort of guiding the FAA to really make that happen. And a couple of the recommendations were pretty big asks. They asked that the Menlo way point be raised to 5,000. At the time, the FAA was saying, we're just not sure we can really do that, but we'll take a really good look at it. So far, they have now raised that elevation to 5,000 for two visual approaches to SFO. So they've sort of met it like halfway, the instrument approaches, they haven't changed those over yet. Another one is that member Gary Waldeck from Los Altos Hills had a problem with is that they in the draft report, the status report from the FAA, they say, well, we're not sure about altitudes. So he objected, that's not good enough, we said there was an altitude we wanted. And so far though, we haven't really seen the design yet. So to me, that one is still up in the air. We haven't seen the design for the new overlay, so we really don't know what the final altitude is going to be. I would say though that, and I think it's fair to say that the primary aim was to make it as quiet or quieter than it was. And that will be mostly affected by whether it's what they call an optimal profile descent out of time. So if we get that level flight out of there and make it a quiet idle power descent, we're going to meet that goal whether or not we're a few hundred feet above or below what it was. Thank you. If I could just maybe follow up on that. So just based on your comments, and I know you're probably not in a position to speak on behalf of the supervisor that you work for. But it sounds to me that you were also indicating that some of these process points have not been completed yet. Not at all. And so is it your opinion that then there should be no movement until those process points have been completed? You know, that's no movement. Like they need to keep the flight path where it is now before they make these changes that are being suggested because the FAA select committee gave particular direction. That's been our approach. We didn't want to foist undue noise on anybody else. And so that's why we've maintained that they need to make the fully designed route to meet that goal before they move the flight path. This recent flight path was a mistake. Yeah, thank you. So then would you be willing to have a letter of support to our direction to the congressman when we look at it, these process points to make sure that we do have that support from other electeds in our community, that we do not make this movement until those process points have been completed? I can certainly bring that to Supervisor Leopold. I mean, that's really been the clear statement. And come March 1st, the FAA tells us they'll be moving it back to Surfer. Well, thank you. I appreciate that. One last piece. On the NEPA environmental review, the FAA is always committed to doing their required environmental review. Sometimes that involves public hearings, sometimes it doesn't. So I feel like there could be some misunderstandings on that one. I never heard them promise to do, for example, what's called a full environmental review, sometimes it's less. Okay, yeah, I guess our city attorney and we'll look into what those process points are. But I appreciate you being here and thank you for those responses. Thank you. Okay, so I'm bringing it back to the floor for, this is item number six, FAA, yeah. Do you want to, that was the last item, but if you want, no problem. Come on, step right up, step right up, step right up. This is item number six, FAA. Yes, okay. Well, and I don't even know if my issue's going to be addressed by this. But anyway, I've just noticed I live on the west side of Santa Cruz that there is a continuous flow of airplanes going over our house. And I mean, one day I sat and timed every two to three minutes for a half an hour. It's not a horrible noise, but it's constant. And so I got really annoyed and I kind of put something out on nextdoor.com and Facebook and I put links to all the places to complain. And then coincidentally, I guess this was all coming up on the agenda. I don't know the history of the details. I just want to say I have been here for 20 something years. Absolutely notice a difference. Some people are not bothered by it, they don't hear it. But once you tune into it, it's like all I hear when I go outside. I can guarantee you almost any time I go out my door, I'm going to hear a plane going overhead. It's not a loud roar. Something's going on like air breaking, I don't know. But it's very annoying, it's frustrating, and you live by the ocean. You hope to hear waves, not planes. And it is continual for sometimes the entire day. Into the night, I've gone out there at midnight, I've heard it. I've gone at five o'clock in the morning, I've heard it. So it's not, I wouldn't even mind if it was once in a while if they spread it out. So a few times they go over our house in an hour instead of every two to three minutes. That's all I wanted to say. Hey, thank you. Thank you for coming over to speak. All right, so I'm going to bring it back to the council for further deliberation. Do you one more person standing up, the 11th hour here? Okay, let's- Point of order. There's three council members up here, Mayor, that have never been engaged in this process. And so to rush this through, I think is the wrong thing to do. And the fact that it's on the consent agenda. We need some time maybe to wrestle with these issues. And so I'm just, you know- Excuse me, one moment, let me just answer that first. I think that one of the reasons why I was actually moving this forward because there was no member of the public that wanted to speak to this item. This gentleman stood up at the last minute and I'm happy to hear his comments. It does come back to the council after we hear public comment for further discussion. So if you need additional time to weigh the issues that we've heard or to delve further into the report for the council members. And to hear from the public, yes. But if there's no other member of the public that's going to speak to it, I would bring it back to the floor for this discussion. So, but I appreciate it. Is there any member of the public after the gentleman who's standing before me that would like to speak to this item? Would you please line up and come forward now? Thank you. Sir, appreciate it. Okay, just stand up and come up. You may begin, thank you. All right, well, good afternoon. Would you line up there just so we know that's the last speaker? Unless someone else comes up before he's done. I'm sorry that the woman just left. I've been living under this surfer path, not the one that she's been talking about for three years now. And it's been pretty devastating for my family actually in ways that are hard to understand if you haven't suddenly woken up and had this happen. So I completely empathize with the people that are on the west side that are suddenly experiencing this now. It was really unexpected and it's certainly, you all need to know that what's happening right now, which is going to end next week probably, or a week or so, is not what anyone or any group has been abdicating for. This just sort of happened and it's going to end. You know, what I was going to say was more a general overview of everything and I'm sure that you'll be finding out things more. But I would like to kind of reemphasize some things that Tony said is that, you know, there's a lot of talk going on in the community, you know, saying that, you know, that the FAA isn't meeting these requirements and the thing is failing and this is what we voted for. And really, I mean, I can't emphasize enough that the fact of the matter is, is there is no published flight path yet for the return to the Big Sur flight path? So, you know, and the thing is every intention is to make it at least as quiet as it was before when it seemed to have no problems. Even the woman that was up here just now said she had lived on the west side for 20 years and it was never a problem. Well, three years ago it was there and obviously it wasn't a problem. So, that really is the goal is to get back to that. And whether it means something's, you know, 100 feet up this way or 100 feet down this way, I can really tell you from living in this environment is, my time's up I guess, is that it's the way that it flies. A jet that is at 12,000 feet will sound every bit as loud as a jet at 6,000 feet. It is all about how it flies. So, when you're looking into things about this, please remember that. So, thank you. So, I don't know if you mentioned it in your comment. Do you live in the city of Santa Cruz? I actually live in around Scotts Valley. Okay. So, and I can say too, I can hear both paths. So, and the one they're doing this week is just as loud as it's been for the past three years. So, it has no relevance to, you know, the final path has no relevance to what's going on right now. Thank you. Anyway, thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker. I'm Scott Anderson, Capitola, and I'm just, I just wanted to comment on all this. I didn't have a prepared statement. I just wanted to come and hear what was going on. But, yeah, I understand where everybody's coming from, everybody. I've lived under Surfer for three years, like has been said. And the intention is to make the flight path as quiet as it can be. You know, that the FAA is going to use OPD to bring the flights down. And, yeah, I don't know. It was a long process, even before. It was just, we went through, this was all published. We had a problem. We voiced our concerns right away, day after that it was implemented. And then there was a whole process, which was community meetings, the select committee, which I drove over the hill every time, sat there for three, four, five hours, not being able to talk, but just two. So I've been in this thing for a while. And I just wanted to say that I hope that everybody can come to some kind of resolution on this thing because it's tough. It's a big deal, like you said. It has, you know, the communities are different talk, you hear. So anyway, I just want to say I understand your position. But I would ask you also to understand the position that there was, you know, community input for a long time. There was plenty of meetings right over here in the Civic Center. And a great representation, if that's the correct way to say it, of people involved, a breakdown of the committee. They asked for an eight to four vote. I appreciate you speaking. Thank you. Is there any member of the public that would like to speak on this item? This is item number six. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the council. Is there any further discussion? I'll just say it's clear there are two different issues here. One is the dissent procedure and the noise that may be generated by different approaches and the flight path. Those are two different things. One of the core principles of the committee in its recommendations was that any change is not be a matter of simply moving the noise from one area to another. And I think intrinsic in that is one of the, well, the recommendations of the letter before a permanent, a no permanent shift of the flight path until the effectiveness of the dissent procedures have been studied and that there be a full NEPA procedure. So I feel very comfortable with the recommendation that's here. I think your request for some sense of timeline going forward. It is, we would hope, a fairly prompt timeline. So I would go ahead and move the recommendation before us. And I would also say appreciate, my God, this was a complicated process. And I understand you don't get it from a staff report. So to the extent that a briefing on the history of this would undoubtedly be helpful going forward. And I think that's something staff could accommodate. And I would suggest also that Don Lane be brought into that because he was our rep. And he really put a serious amount of good effort into it. So with- I'll also say staff and congressman Panetta's office was also willing to prevent. I'll second the motion. Okay, motion by Council Member Matthews, second by Council Member Narrowing. Council Member Brown. I would just ask that, and I'm obviously going to support it. That we, in the letter that, and I don't want to word Smith here right now. I don't think that this is the time or place. But that it's strongly worded request for Congress members, Eshoo and Panetta to address our concerns and be in detail to give us information about what they're doing to try to make this happen. So if we could, as you write, and I'm happy to look at it or, you know, I- I'll contact you. Okay, thanks. No parole with that. Yeah. And I just want to state, there was no ambiguity in the NEPA process being required as part of this. And so I know that maybe that, you mentioned that that wasn't necessarily clear, it was very clear that a NEPA hearing would be held with any change. You know, would you please restate the motion? Because I want to make sure I'm clear before I, you had, I mean, it's the motion that's on the- Direct the Mayor to write Congress Members Jimmy Panetta on Eshoo expressing concerns about the FAA report on phase two, the direct city attorney to research relevant national environmental policy issues. Okay. And my pages got scrambled here, but recommended Council action. Direct the Mayor to write a letter. That sounds, okay. That's the, that's the motion. Is that clear to the clerk also? Is that clear? Okay. That's a motion by Council Member Matthew, second by Council Member Naroyan. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. That passes unanimously. Okay, the next item is item number eight. Council Member Cron. Yeah, I had a question because I could not figure out. I went over to the location and I'm just wondering if we could get some clarification, I took a couple of pictures, I don't know if the city clerk wants to put them up, trying to figure out which piece of property this is and where the easement exactly will go. Sometimes these come out as thumbnail and I don't know why they always don't aren't as clear as they could be. So is this the, well, I want to get clarification on what the property is because there's two different properties there on Dubois Street. I have a overhead that'll clarify it if you'd like for her to show it to you. Sure, if it's a picture, sure. It's the lot that was formerly used to park the buses, as the metro buses, as they were building the station. So there's a couple vacant lots, it's the lot that's further known. Can you put my picture back up if you get a chance? Because I can't really tell from that picture, I'm sorry. It's not a picture, it's more of a, but can you just point out which one of these lots is? It's the one that's circled. No, but which one of these pictures is it? It is. Is it the Pampas grass or the fence? It's that one right there. It's that one. That lot right there. Okay. And where exactly is the easement going to go? Yes, currently the easement, we have an easement and it runs along the northern end of the property. I don't think the pointer goes along the blue. I don't think the pointer comes out on the two. So along that blue, you mean? So the current easement is on the northern end of the property. It's a 10 foot easement that runs from Dubois all the way up into Pogonit. And so what we would be doing is vacating that easement and pushing it over to the southern end of the property. It would be the same 10 foot easement along the southern end of the property. It would connect from Dubois all the way up to Pogonit. So just moving that from one side of the property to the other side of the property. Currently it's on the side closest to Kirby School. We would be putting it on the side closest to Harvey West Park. 10 feet for 10 feet. Currently it's not at, there's no path there or anything. No, there was a social path or kind of a social trail that had been on that property that people were using until a couple years ago when Metro took it over and used it as bus parking. But the easement is currently in place. We're just moving it from one side to the other. What are we getting for this? Is what I can't understand, is there something that the city is- Yeah, what we are getting is public access. Because currently the easement that is in place only allows for emergency access and for maintenance, so that's only city vehicles or emergency vehicles. What we've negotiated with the property owners is that in order to give that up and move it to the other side, we're willing to move it to the other side and we get full public access. So the folks from Plantronics, the folks from Kirby School will then be able to use that trail anytime during the open hours. I mean, I like it, I think, just how come we're not like maybe charging the property owner the five to 10,000 if we're assisting them in the project? Our goal was to get public access during this process and we've accomplished it. We don't anticipate the five to 10,000 being a big obstacle for us to put in a trail there. And so that wasn't really a consideration as we negotiated with them. Our main consideration was just ensuring that the general public had access. And to us, that was worth the moving the easement. Okay, Council Member Brown. So, and I think you've pretty much answered the question, but I did want to ask that question, what the public benefit is. If we're going to be using public money, I think it's a principle that I'm certainly committed to. And I believe my colleagues and staff are as well. So, knowing that there is, so you're confirming that there is a real public benefit to making this change. Absolutely, yeah, general public. Not just convenience for the developer. Absolutely. Okay, great, thanks. Because it was the limited, what we had there was a limited, very limited access. And so this is full public access, so that's the big difference. I'll just ask this, in the agenda report, I read this as it was an exchange of land, right? Because you're exchanging an easement. Yes, because we're vacating the easement that we have on the northern end of the property and we're replacing it with an easement on the southern end of the property. Okay, and then- There's just a swap. And then you're also, the easement now that connects with the Pogonep will be closed outside of the park hours. Is that correct? Correct. And will it be, will it be fenced or how do you? No, the facility that is going in there will include a fencing around the property. And so the gates will be closed at dusk and reopened in the morning. So, okay, are there any other questions from the council before I open it up to the public? Is there any member of the public that would like to speak to item eight? This is the summary vacation of an existing easement and approving a quick claim of easement. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the council. Is there a motion? I think an opportunity to secure full access for the public at this location is really a genuine public benefit. And so I'll move the motion before us. And I'll second that. So motion by Council Member Matthews, second by myself. All those in favor of this, please say aye. Aye. That motion passes unanimously with council member Naroyan absent. We'll move on to the next item, which is our public hearing item. This is the second reading final adoption of ordinance number 2018-02. Amending positions of Title 21 related to relocation assistance. Is there any questions from the council in regards to this item? And I'll open it up to the public. If there's anyone that would like to speak to item 10 in regards to this item. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the council, council member or city attorney. I just wanted to mention that there had been a question at the end of the hearing at the last meeting. When I think it was council member Naroyan asked about the possibility of establishing an exemption for owners of three or fewer properties or rental units. I just want to let the council know that I think I raised a question about whether or not that there would be an equal protection issue arising from that. I've looked at that. I don't think there's an equal protection argument, but as I thought about it further and discussed with the planning director, I think our sense was that given that you already have an ordinance that requires the payment of relocation assistance, whenever a unit is required to be vacated due to a hazardous condition or due to the fact that it's not legally established as a residential unit. And further given the fact that it was a single family residence that brought this issue to the fore and was kind of the poster child for this ordinance. We just thought that that would be a step in the completely opposite direction. And had some concerns about the rationale for that, why that would be a valuable thing to do. And if you'll just to put it in perspective, if there's a property owner with a single rental who for whatever reason is unable to maintain the residence in a condition that doesn't make it hazardous for its residents. Perhaps that property owner is in the wrong business. And we're just grappling with the rationale for creating an exemption in that circumstance. But that is something the council could explore. I don't think there's a legal impediment to doing that. That would be a policy decision for the council, but. And I could just explain my rationale for doing that is that somebody who owns a single unit normally doesn't have deep pockets, access to attorneys. To fight these accusations when as much as I trust the city, most of the time to be accurate in determining that a place is unsafe. I do also recognize that an individual who has one rental doesn't have the deep pockets like somebody who owns let's say 40 apartment complexes and is more of a corporate owner of units. So my concern was between some of the rent control measures and between this measure we would really be almost scaring people who own a smaller amount of rentals and maybe even prompting them to get out of the rental market. That was my rationale. But I also hear what you're saying and I can understand why we wouldn't have a different system for this in this case. This is the second reading of the ordinance before us. I know in the minutes for the last meeting we had this we wanted or I requested to have a look back so after six to nine months of implementation, we can at least have a review and get some feedback and start as what are some of the issues that come up. And I thought that might be an opportunity if we need to take a look at this. We could then make any sort of changes as a result of feedback that we receive. Yeah, that sounds great. Okay, so Council Member Cron. I know we're revisiting this yet again and I like some of the stuff that's in this ordinance. Originally this was relocation assistance from the city. This was suggested by on November 22nd that the city set up a fund for providing financial assistance to displace tenants and set up a program for placing a lien against non-compliant landlords. That we might help assist the tenants who were evicted because of health and safety. On the 22nd, it was sent out, it was recorded in our minutes that Council Member Cron requested that when renters are put out due to code compliance issues that staff give them information that tells them what they would be do. Council Member Brown accepted that friendly amendment. So in light of that, I still don't feel like maybe there's an intent here, but there's not the actual where we were going on this original motion. Well, motion. So I'm going to make a motion today that when the city of Santa Cruz vacates a building because of health and safety reasons, the tenants listed on the lease that they produce are entitled to relocation assistance from the city. The city will then place a lien on the property in order to recover tenant relocation expenses and any staff time involved in recouping expenses. Council Member Brown. Well, I'll second for the purposes of discussion and just remind us that this was part of the original motion made on November 22nd. And we as a council agreed to it. I know that there were subsequent conversations about the potential costs of doing so. But I do think it's important that we not lose that entirely from our agenda. So if it takes going back in six months and revisiting it, then I'm going to keep raising it because I think it is important. And the city should provide rent relief for tenants who have recalcitrant landlords or landlords who can't pay are not going to get anything. It doesn't really make a difference how many months of relocation assistance they get if they're not getting it. So I just think that's really important and I don't want to lose sight of it as we move forward. So just for the purposes of discussion here, that motion you're making now, are you looking at in what way just as a standalone item? I'd like to add it to what's before us, the ordinance that's before us. There's no motion on the floor right now. That's the motion I just made. I just made it. To adopt what's there and add that language in regards to the lien on the property with notice? That's correct. Okay, I just wanted to clarify that. And I'll call up the planning director. But I just asked, that would become a first reading then, wouldn't it? It would, I guess I would request that the council direct that specific language to be incorporated into the ordinance for purposes of introduction. If that was the intent of the motion, if it could be clarified to that effect, I think it would be helpful. Yeah, I would like it to be included in the actual ordinance, yes. Language. And you have that language written? Yeah. Okay, Council Member Matthews and then the planning director. Council Member Matthews. But again, my understanding is if it were incorporated then this would become the first reading. That's right. Yeah. Lee, did you want to? Good afternoon, Mayor and Council Members. Lee Butler, the planning director. And this is one of the items that we discussed at the second meeting in January. And staff had raised a series of concerns for the council's consideration. And a program like this would involve a substantial amount of time and would actually be a separate program. So we would have three divisions, I would say, within our Code Compliance group. And we estimated at that time based on a complete full-time code enforcement officer to address this as well as attorney support, a support from the finance department and various others that it would be over $200,000 per year that would need to be invested. There's also concerns about our ability to recoup many of those costs. So for example, the city would be under substantial pressure to help essentially these individuals who are in these scenarios. And they may be determined in a court of law at some point later in the future that the individual was not necessarily due this relocation assistance. And therefore it could be challenging for the city to recoup those costs from the renter that it granted it from, that it granted those monies to. There are also a series of concerns related to sub-leases, legal sub-leases versus not legal sub-leases, verbal leases, and so forth. So given all of those criteria, staff did spell out those concerns. And the direction from council at the last meeting was to not include those provisions as part of this ordinance. And I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have. We'll have to move around. Yeah, refresh my memory. How many, because we did get a presentation about this on the 22nd of November. But I can't remember the exact number, but it seems to me that it was a pretty small number of evictions due to health and safety code violations, which is the purpose of this ordinance change. So I'm just wondering how it just doesn't, it's $200,000 seems like a big price tag for a few of these cases in any given year. So just if you could remind me how many that was. And I see Alex in the back, he might know if you don't have that number. So we typically have less than 10 evictions that the city implements due to health safety violations. And so depending on the scope and scale of the program, that could vary in terms of the cost. It is, there's still some of those same challenges in relation to who's actually living there, what is the rent that they're paying, are the utilities included, how to sub leases be dealt, are they dealt with and so forth. I just have a follow up question. Are you aware of any city that has a similar type of program that has something like what's being suggested? There was one city that we found in our research that specified in their code that that was that the program would be in place. We did some research and we weren't able to track down how that was being implemented. And I don't know that we ever got a response from them on that. Okay. I see our assistant director shaking his head. He reached out to the individual who actually wrote the ordinance and did not find how that was implemented. I guess for the purposes of discussion here, I'm not prepared to support that motion on the floor because of the budget implications and knowing what the operational costs are. I mean, my preference would be to move forward on the second reading of the item that's on the floor and if there's further direction to provide to look into that, I mean, we'll hear how that would work. But that's where I'm at. I agree with you. I think the proposal that was just put on the floor was in fact discussed and not included in our previous action. I think the path that I would support now would be to oppose the revised proposal and go back and approve the second reading of what we have before us. And if I remember correctly, we also said we would sort of revisit in six months, sort of the progress. And I think at that time it would be really helpful to have a better sense of sort of the implications of scope in the next steps. Further discussion? Okay. So we've had discussion on the motion on the floor by Council Member Cron, second by Council Member Brown. All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. All those in favor for the motion on the floor by Council Member Brown and Council Member Cron, if you just show hands. Okay. All those opposed, please raise your hands. Okay. That fails with Council Member Brown and Council Member Cron in favor and Council Member Naroyan, Vice Mayor Watkins, Council Member Matthews, Council Member Chase, and myself opposed. Okay. We still have the main item on the floor. I'll move approval of the second reading. Okay. Motion on the floor by Council Member Matthews, second by Council Member Chase. Is there any further discussion on this item? I will add also that this, the second reading does contain substantially greater penalties for those recalcitrant landlords. And so with the, also the expectation that we'd have a report back. Let me dial, dial back on this. I want to just say that we, you know, we did have a robust discussion on this. Is there a member of the public that would like to speak to this item? Please step forward. But I've got to say about all this as we need. Start the timer, please. What I've got to say about all this is that we need to have relocation services available to pretty much anybody, not just to limits of people being evicted under certain tight guidelines. What I'm talking about, a house gets put up on the market and gets sold. People often move. House burns down. There goes your house. You know, so on and so forth. Anybody that needs help finding a new place that just lost their last place, that we need to offer it across the board to pretty much everybody. And a similar sense is like unemployment benefits, except this would be for housing versus jobs. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any member of the public that would like to speak to this item? Seeing none, I'll bring it back. And in regards to the main motion for the second reading, there's a motion on the floor by Council Member Matthews, second by Council Member Chase. Is there any further discussion? Other than I think what was already discussed in six months, we can revisit the need and revisit how we want to allocate resources to meet a potentially unmet need, and as suggested previously. And I would just add, yeah, I agree. And it would be helpful to actually get some additional information to help us understand what the cost might be, what that would entail staffing wise, because a pack of the envelope, $200,000, it does seem like a steep price tag. So it would just be helpful to understand where the cost might lie if we did pursue that in the future. I think it's like itemized kind of some sort of itemization. I'd like to see too. Yeah, thanks. I think Council Member Naroy and also brought up another suggested revisit in terms of what the impacts are. So okay, there's no further discussion. All those in favor of the motion on the floor, which is the second reading and final adoption of ordinance number 2018-02, amending portion of Title 21. Please say aye. Aye. Those opposed, please say no. Passes unanimously. So at this point, before we go into the next item 11, which is resolutions requesting the placement of sales use tax ballot on the June election. I'd like to just take, I mean, we take a three minute break, you guys step out and stretch your legs, and we'll come back to work. Okay, we're moving on to item number 11, the resolution requesting the placement of sales and use tax ballot on the 2018 special municipal election. Let's turn it over to the city manager and. Yes, so Marcus is going to do a quick overview. So as you'll recall last time, the Council considered whether to place ballot measures on the June election. The Council discussed two items, the sales tax, quarters and sales tax increase as well as a potential sort of tax. Subsequent to the Council direction, the ad hoc committee met again several times within that short two week period. Actually meeting actually on a city holiday to do some additional research relative to the various tax measures. And before you is a recommendation to at this time move forward with a sales tax measure. And in order to be able to do that, it also requires that the council adopt a resolution declaring a fiscal emergency in order to place a general purpose measure on the June ballot. Marcus will give a brief overview of our budget situation and then also, we don't have to, if you don't want to. I was just saying, you've had to overview the budget situation so many times, it's like, we know it's not. If you don't want to, that's fine. And the only thing I would note that's important is that with respect to the sales tax measure that I think a lot of people, with respect to how that would compare to what we have in place in Santa Cruz County. So the sales tax rate currently in the city of Santa Cruz is 9%. The city gets one and a half percent of that, that actually comes directly to the city. There's a 1% base and then there's a half percent that was measure H. And then this would add another quarter cents. We would receive 1.75 out of the existing 9.25. And so that would put us at the same rate as Watsonville. So we don't get the whole 9% or 9.25% just so people understand that the city's, most of it actually goes to the state, we get just a 1% base and then a half add on that we've, the voters have approved here previously and this would be another quarter cent add on. A question for the city manager. Go ahead, Chris. So just to clarify, the state gets 7.25% of our sales tax right now. Is that correct? Is that what you know? The state and other agencies, so County gets a portion of that 7.25%, yes. The state sets that as a statutory rate and. For some reason, I read this and I don't know what it means. It was 7.5 and then it just went down this past year to 7.25. Do you know what happened? Yeah, the state's been doing a lot of flips and flops over the last decade and this is one of their final to correct some changes they've done over the last decade. They also had a temporary sales tax increase, you'll recall, that expired. So that was the other change. Yeah, and I'm just wondering, we can't go more than two cents over the state's 7.25. So 9.25, we're getting 1.75, where's the other 2.25? So yeah, there's a 2% add on that can be added to the base. So currently it's the base is 7.25, we can add 2% to that. And that's just not the city, but other agencies within the region, right? So we have the add-ons that are in place right now. The Santa Cruz library system gets a quarter percent. The Measure D transportation funding gets a half percent. We get half percent and then Metro District gets half percent. So that's how it's all made up. There's a chart, a table in your report that covers that. But essentially, between the city and the library, Metro, and regional transportation measures, 1.75 of the 2% cap is already taken up. So all that remains is a quarter percent. So that would be the 2% then? Yes, that would take us to the 2%. We would be getting 0.5 as well as the other agencies. We would then be getting 0.75 of the add-on for a total of 1.75. Okay. Council Member Brown. I have a clarifying question, which I probably should already know, but I apologize. So in terms of the number of council members required to vote on the different elements of this combined recommendation, the fiscal emergency requires a unanimous vote, but placing a sales tax does not. Is that correct? Or are you- My understanding from city attorney is that it doesn't, however, we would prefer obviously that council unanimous on both the fact that we need to place a measure and what that measure would be, which at this time is just one item, which is the sales tax. Doesn't. That's not required legally. I'm just trying to clarify here, so. Well, I'll put it this way, is that it would be my preference to remove all uncertainty from that. Because the requirement that it be unanimous is based upon proposition 218, which requires the declaration of a fiscal emergency by unanimous vote. Prop 218 is not a model of clarity. So when there are uncertainties, I think it's wise to err on the side of caution because it's not uncommon for ballot measures supported by the city council to be challenged in court. Did that answer your question? Yep, thanks. Okay, so I'll turn it over for the presentation. I don't know, were you in a presenter? I think that that was it. There's the end of your, so Marcus? I can just do quick, quick hits. We'll have a slide deck that's available online and a lot of it's repeated, so there's nothing new. And I'll hit just a few things that are a quick snapshot. The ad hoc committee is recommending a core cent increase in the sales tax from nine to nine and a quarter percent. Watsonville is already at the state statutory limit at nine and a quarter percent. Other cities around us are either at nine or nine and a quarter percent, so we're going to be right in line with other agencies. As far as where this came from, there was some polling that was conducted in January. There's a repeat. The polling for the sales tax measure was very strong. The reasons for the poll, within the polling that came out that resonated with voters about why sales tax was keeping it local within our community so it doesn't get taken on by another overlapping district or another countywide entity that takes that quarter cent. That was a very meaningful concern of the community as well as making sure that our current existing programs stay funded and in place, including places to go for kids after school and during the summers, being able to maintain access to our park speeches and open spaces, keeping our park patrols and park maintenance in place, fire prevention and other critical services. This is a snapshot of data you saw at the last council meeting and just kind of concluding the sales tax where it comes into play. We have a $3 million estimated annual amount that this would bring into the city. If voters approve this and when council adopts a balanced budget for fiscal year 19 with some reductions and other changes, that still leaves a gap in our out year of $3.8 million and a bigger gap in two years out of $12.2 million. The sales tax measure, all the effort that's going to go into the next budget adoption is part of our long-term strategic plan. It's not all of it and so there are more work to be done. The highlights we wanted to hit in the rest of the slide. That's mostly repetitive that you've seen before. I'll first like to open it up to see if any members of the public that would like to speak to this item. Does any member of the public that would like to speak to this item? Thank you. Afternoon, Mayor, council members, members of the public. My name is Deborah Narviz. I'm the regional director for SCIU 521, representing our city, county, special districts, and non-profit members throughout Santa Cruz County. Here today, speaking on this agenda, as you know, some of our members for the past eight years have endured a lot, a lot to help the city get back on track during the hard hit recession years, furloughs, cuts, short of staff, program losses, all of which they've continued to participate and help to make sure that our city continues to thrive, but also to make sure that those services that our members and our public rely upon are still available because they take pride in the work that they do. After discussing and debating this with our member leaders, we're actually here in support of the general tax measure and we're in support of declaring the fiscal emergency by this council at this time to ensure that we are able to preserve these valuable services. As you know, demand from the public keeps increasing, especially with our parks, especially with our libraries and with our youth, and we want to be able to continue to provide those services as well as making sure that our infrastructure is there. With our public works employees and water department employees and sanitation department employees that are all there making sure that they do their part to make sure that we continue moving forward. So on behalf of our members of SCIU 521, we asked this council to approve declaring the fiscal emergency and invest in the community and put this on the ballot for June of 2018. We have an official letter here for the clerk of the council to take in as well. Thank you. Thank you. And we received also an electronic copy earlier today, so I appreciate it. So is there any member of the public that would like to speak to this item? This is item number 11. Sir, please step up. Is there any other member of the public that would like to speak to this item at this time? Okay. You step up. You may begin. Just like Bush Senior once said, no new taxes. Well, I don't like the idea of taxes going up. I mean, most people would agree with me on that and simply put, it's a very small increase, but a quarter of a percent. But even so, my personal opinion is that we don't need this. Thank you. Thank you. Kate, if there's no other member of the public that would like to speak at this time, we'll bring it back to the council for deliberation. Yes. I'd like to put the full recommendation on the floor. I think the case has been abundantly made that we face a really stark outlet for our financial situation. One of our city objectives is fiscal sustainability, and this is a part of it. To me, this is all about the issues that was mentioned by the SCIU representative about preserving city services. When we did the polling, we found that the things that were so important to the public, public safety parks, community services, opportunities for youth were, in fact, the kinds of city services that are supported by our general fund, which is exactly where this revenue would go. To my mind, this quarter cent sales tax is very much in sync with the priorities of the community. It's in sync with the council's state of objective of being fiscally responsible. For all of those reasons, I support putting this forward. I'll second. Okay. Motion on the floor by council member Matthews and second by council member Chase. City attorney. I'd like to be clear that the recommendation was the three items that are on it. Yeah, all three. Yeah, I said the full recommendation. I think we'll probably have some questions right now. One, if I could ask, and if you'd, Marcus, if you'd go back a couple slides, one of the ones that listed kind of the polling data on what people were suggesting support for this was that, you know, one of the things was safe places to go after school and during summer, you know, making sure that we maintain safety and security for families of our parks, beaches, and open spaces and areas throughout the city. And also reducing park patrols. We want to make sure we support the park patrols and maintenance as part of, like, their strong support for this tax measure. I just want to ask, how can we ensure, like, if one, there is that support and assuming that the council votes for that, that we are protecting those services that the public has stated for the reason they're supporting their position that this is an important way to fund those services? Well, the, I mean, it clearly is a general purpose measure, you know, largely intended to, you know, be able to maintain those critical services that you just described. And I think ultimately, you know, the decision will really come back to this council to be able to take this funding and to appropriately, you know, make those decisions insofar as being able to maintain those commitments. And obviously, in the general fund, when you look at the general fund and what it largely funds, it is largely public safety and parking and recreation services. That is really the bulk of what is in the budget. The other discretionary part in the general fund is community services. So those are really the big items that generally, when the council historically is confronted with budget decisions that you have to weigh. So I think obviously the strategy isn't just necessarily to look at revenue from this measure completely. We want to look at all options to be able to be responsive to the needs and also to be able to be responsive to changing needs. So ultimately, you know, as we go through the budget process, that this council will consider recommendations from the proposed budget as well as you just adopted on your consent agenda, the creation of an ad hoc committee that would also look at the budget in the coming year. And through the advice of the committee as well as the input from the community, then you would make ultimately those decisions. I guess my point was if we were hearing from the public here that these are priorities clearly, how do you incorporate that in terms of the preparation of the budget to make sure that those are reflected in the choices, the budgetary choices that are presented to the council as part of the budget review process. Now I ask the city manager that question. With respect to what you mean. So as you prepare the budget and look at what the priorities are that we're hearing from the community on these areas, as a result of this poll that was done to put a general purpose tax measure on the ballot, when you look at preparing a budget, how do we ensure that the budget that's presented reflects some of these priorities in consideration of potential new revenue sources that come in? Well, again, what we do is we look at the programs that we provide and then the community support with respect to those programs. When we did the polling, you know, it was a very, it was an objective clear poll, and we identified those areas that would be subject to potential reductions. Just again, from a purely budgetary perspective, when you look at the budget and you look at what you have to sort of be forced to look at, what would those be? So those were the items that we place, you know, when we did the polling that we asked the community about, if what they cared about, they told us in the polling some of the items that were of concern to them. They're not reflected right here, all of it. And so there's others. So we'll take obviously the input from the community, the input from yourselves, the council. We have budget hearings. And, you know, we're going to do some community outreach. There'll be a campaign around this as well. And so we'll take all that input to, you know, essentially in this particular case, we're trying to preserve, you know, the many of the existing programs that this council has already and this community has already determined our critical services that we have, you know, obviously parks maintenance, recreation programs, community facilities, that sort of thing. I guess you just want to make clear. My point is I'm going to support this because these poll results show that there's a strong community interest in supporting the programs that are listed there in terms of programs for our parks or beaches or open spaces to maintain parks patrols, park maintenance to also provide programs for youth in terms of our after school programs. And, you know, the motion's on the floor, but I just want to just point out that these poll results showed those strong results. And as the slide says, the poll results, the sales tax was supported because of those reasons. I want to make sure that that's incorporated into the preparation for the budget. Council Member Matthews. It certainly will be. And this does not represent the sum total of all the poll questions that were asked. And so there were some other high community priorities. These represent the arguments that would be most convincing in the ballot language. But certainly dealing with homelessness and public safety were very high at the top as well as housing issues. So this, I think, this fund does go to the general fund. And when you look, I think the most important thing is, if you look at we, if we don't achieve this, if we have to make deep cuts, it's parks that's going to get, we all know this from experience, parks are going to take the deepest cuts. So to the extent that one cares about maintaining our parks and our programs and so forth and community programs, those are the most vulnerable. Vice Mayor Watkins. I think, and I appreciate the comments. My comment is we want to maintain the integrity of what we're saying we're essentially trying to do and accomplish with the funding and being honest with our community members when we say we're going to ask for their tax dollars and how we anticipate using them that we're able to monitor that integrity. And that's essentially what I'm hearing. And if we find a way of how we want to do that, I think that's essential for maintaining the trust of the community, but also for the integrity of the process and for the dollars of, and accountability for us and the dollars how they're spent. Council Member Brown and Council Member Cron. Well, I feel like it's Groundhog Day and I may be a broken record to you all, or some of you who I've had ongoing conversations about this with, but I'm having a really hard time with this one. And I, so I just want to, I want to reiterate that, you know, we live in an increasingly inequitable community and a sales tax is a regressive tax. And I understand that we need to raise the revenues that to, to actually support the program. And I appreciate my colleagues' comments about really being honest about using that money to save services that are essential and important to people in our community that promote quality of life and public safety. So I don't disagree with any of that, but we live in an increasingly inequitable community. And I am just so dismayed that there was no consideration of placement of a progressive tax on this ballot. We're declaring a fiscal emergency. That's a very serious declaration in terms of how that looks in the community. It's, you know, it, it reflects the reality. I'm, I'm not suggesting that it doesn't, but it's a very serious matter to do that. And the fact that we are not asking tourists, second home owners who, you know, leave their home, their second home is vacant most of the year and maybe Airbnb them and come over the hill or from, fly in from wherever, you know, should be paying more for the privilege of being here and experiencing Santa Cruz. We pay for the infrastructure costs and the services for that increased traffic and population in our community. And I think it's really important that we acknowledge that. And so I'm not, you know, I'm, this is, I've really struggled with this. I don't think I'm prepared to support the motion unless we can include some language that directs staff to bring back to us as quickly as possible a month, six weeks, you know, two meetings from now, three meetings from now, you know, perhaps in line with our budget hearings proposals for progressive taxation measures to come to us for November. Because I think we are missing a serious opportunity here. And I understand that sequencing and timing of taxation measures, revenue enhancement measures is important. We can't just put, you know, a whole slew of taxation measures on any given ballot. And I understand the rationale for not wanting to do real estate related taxation measures in November because we have likely a housing bond coming, coming our way. But there are other taxation measures that were, they don't, they were in the grid, but don't seem to have been considered, really. So I just can't, I'm not going to be able to support it without something like that. Council Member Chase, Council Member Naroyan, and then I think Council Member Matthews. I thought you said I was right after Brown. You said Brown then Crone. Oh, yeah, I did. Sorry. Thank you. Thank you for that point of order. Thank you. Well, getting back to David's original point, it doesn't, you know, it's a general tax doesn't ensure, you know, we can talk about it, the integrity and let hopefully people will believe us. And that's the law of trust involved. If you want to designate stuff, it has to be two thirds. A general tax doesn't do it. You can't tie the hands of future councils. I think we've done a good job on some things that have been passed in our past on a general vote, and we're complying with that. But again, it doesn't ensure it unless you have a two, a two thirds vote. I was wondering if you could put up the data on the sweetened beverage tax. I can find it. I don't have it in this. Okay. Could you, could you find it? I'll just keep going then. Please. If you could be more specific, what is it? Well, we have this one. Don't you have one like that, the percentages that supported the sweetened beverage tax? I don't have that with me. I can. Oh. It was that 76, 78%. 76 to 78% for the green. What is the margin of error in this poll? Do you know? Is it 6% or is it 3% or is it? I think, Gene, around 5%. It's in the order of 3 to 4%, as I recall. So what makes me uncomfortable and what I've, you know, if we go back to, so with the motion that was made at the last council meeting, on what is it? 3.15 in our, in our minutes. The motion was Vice Mayor Watkins move seconded by Mayor Trosses to direct staff to return on February 27th with a resolution ordering a special election on June 5th 2018 and requesting consolidation of such election to place a general purpose one quarter of 1% sales tax ballot measure, which we're talking about right now, and two, a general purpose two cents per ounce sugar sweetened beverage tax ballot measure and place two cents per ounce sweetened beverage ballot tax measure and direct staff to draft advisory body language into the proposed 2000 June 2018 ballot measure and direct staff to consult with experts and review resources on best how to draft that language. Then we, you know, then the out of towners came, you know, Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Burrow and tried to talk to council members and then ended up basically, it seemed to me, threatening folks and like all rattling sabers and folks then came back in our last revenue committee. I don't remember, I don't recall a vote being taken and I didn't know that this was not going to appear that the beverage tax wasn't going to appear on the council agenda for the council to decide up or down yay or nay and the reason I was supporting and I joined council member Brown in the regressive nature of a quarter cent sales tax when you look at 76% of the 550 people who were polled saying yes on sweetened beverage tax, wow, you know, and it's a health related issue, you know, cities similar to ourselves, Boulder and Berkeley and San Francisco and Oakland all passed that and to me that would be the two on there was what I was advocating for but I'll, you know, and again it is, can be looked at as a regressive tax and you have to balance that off whether it's health related versus regressive and I think the health related aspect, the serious diabetes challenge that we're going through right now as a community and a society and to lower people's intake of sweetened beverages is really important. So what I'm just there's a couple issues here. One is why didn't it appear on our agenda here when we when the last direction of council February 13th was to have it come back to us and let's hold there so we can answer these in order. Okay. Do you want to answer that question as you manage your Martine Barnell? Sure. So the process was we went back as the ad hoc committee to look at this item again and we anticipated that after the first meeting that there would be some additional follow-up that could occur because since that was the first time that the item was placed before the council to consider and so the committee did do that and again spend quite a bit of time delving into the soda tax issue talking to those that have actually passed them those that actually worked on campaigns as well as the you know the American Heart Association you know looking at the national just did a lot of research and outreach we also consulted again with our pollster our pollster consulted with with the campaign folks from other cities and communities and then the committee discussed this again the at least our staff impression was that the committee's consensus was that we should focus on the sales tax at this time it didn't necessarily say that the soda tax was something that we shouldn't consider in the future it was just felt that at this time given the quick nature similarly also with respect to the hotel tax I think the feeling is that those are not taxes that shouldn't be considered and shouldn't be put forward however the amount of time that it requires to do a campaign between now and June is just so short it would be very difficult to run concurrent and multiple campaigns and so as a result of that that was what the committee recommended so you know staff put forward that assuming that that was what was the consensus of the committee and if however the council wishes to do something different you can the deadline is March 9 so theoretically if you wanted to hold a special meeting and consider something different you could do that however again I think that the overall thinking was that the sales tax measure being a consistent traditional tax measure that this this council has discussed for some time would be something that could be supported in June and the other taxes could be considered at a later time does that answer your question okay what's the next question the other the other question I had was I'm very uncomfortable with and so was if the pollster told us if we had to go two-thirds he would totally recommend against the two-thirds for this particular sales tax and looking at the numbers you know there's a margin of error of three or four was said and then the six percent who may or may not supported or don't were undecided during the poll it I kind of think it brings it down to you know if somebody decides to run a campaign it's going to be awfully close doesn't mean I don't support putting it on the ballot but I would like to run something else also that would give us a backup should if you remember we were told by one of the folks in our conversations in our revenue committee that San Francisco had the sales tax on at the same time it had the sweetened beverage tax on sales tax got killed and the beverage tax was overwhelmingly passed again of course in that case in San Francisco's case there probably would have gotten a lot more money out of the sales tax than they are the sweetened beverage tax in our case with two cents it could be even could be a little bit more for the sales tax I just like would like to see some backup here because I don't think this is assured a sure thing I guess we had a couple more comments there was council member chase council member noroyan and then we'll kind of continue deliberations council member trace well I I wanted to appreciate the points that council has made so far and I wanted to respond to council member brown's concern I also wanted to really acknowledge that you know the three of us were on the committee and we we met many times we looked at the details of many different types of taxes all the ones that we have discussed here we talked about the timing we talked about the impact in our city we talked about what else would be on the ballot at various points in other municipalities and regionally took into all those those factors into consideration really listened to the feedback we got from council in our last meeting as well as the public who reached out to us and let them let us know what their concerns were so I'm I'm sorry that we gave the impression in the report that we didn't thoughtfully consider all of those other things regressive and progressive and we actually spent a fair amount of time talking about that those concerns were expressed where I landed with this is really it is just about timing is this right now we had done the polling on this and that we have this huge deficit coming and we probably are going to be looking at taxes for a while on multiple ballots and so our other municipalities and the county as well and for right now where I felt the most comfortable with this was because we had the polling because we know we have this deficit coming and because that we only have that margin left and somebody's going to take it if we don't we really need to preserve city services and I appreciate that the union came SEIU came to speak in support of it today I think they get it more than many other people what it would mean if we didn't do that so I certainly and the other committee members spent a lot of time talking about progressive taxes I believe they will be coming to us it's really just about having the time to properly poll and properly prepare and I really appreciate the feedback that council member of vice mayor Watkins gave us last time around sugary beverage we learned a lot subsequent to our last meeting about what it takes for that type of ballot measure to be successful and it was really helpful to us and really impacted my thinking on this I think our polling looked fantastic and we really want whatever we put on the ballot to be successful so we've got some work to do to make sure that progressive or aggressive taxes whichever comes before whatever we decide to do that that we've really put proper due diligence in making those successful so that's why that's why I support the pathway that we're recommending right now and it doesn't say uh that we won't do something else in November or even the following election so I'll just put that up can I go to council member Roy and then council member Brown and then council member Matthews yeah I mean we're not operating in any sort of ideal situation here I mean in an ideal situation the council itself would be able to raise revenue without having to go to a ballot measure every single time without having to labor under this two-thirds requirement which is just absurd you know when do we ever get to a point is a democracy there were one-third is is supposed to be able to to lead in any vote so you know the fact that we aren't working in the ideal requires us I think to go forward on things that you know in a perfect situation we wouldn't necessarily be in favor of and uh I would rather do progressive taxes as well but we all know those are harder to pass the opposition for them are fierce when it comes to doing I mean we just saw I don't know about you but I think I received around four emails and maybe five voice messages from the American Beverage Corporation or whatever the heck they're called wanting to speak with me about this tax and I in no way Christopher felt intimidated by them I let them know full well how obnoxious their attempts were at getting me to call them back and I let them know that I would have more respect for their position if they actually lobbied for cities to have more rights to be able to raise revenue and that if maybe perhaps they could get on that side of things I could respect their position a little bit more I kind of went I call I don't know if you remember the character Julia sugar baker I kind of went a little Julia sugar baker on them and so I appreciate that yeah no I did because I just want you to know there was no intimidation I felt and I felt nothing but annoyance from them so I'm going to go ahead and vote for this because we aren't living in an ideal world and um to not raise this revenue and what we would have to cut and you know that includes looking at our community programs budget we've just started on a new endeavor to have a homeless camp that hopefully brings some dignity and some improvements to people's lives I don't want to risk those things and so I'm going to go ahead and support this council member brown and then council member matthews so um in response council member chase I appreciate your comments and I didn't mean to suggest that the the committee didn't just they just ignored all the other possibilities that were in the grid I'm sure you you had long conversations about them and um I guess I'm just still disturbed that some of the justifications that I've heard at least for not considering some of those progressive taxes now just seem a bit hollow to me let's say and um so I'm I just still remain really dismayed that we're here today in this situation um and so again I I'm not opposed to placing to declaring the fiscal emergency I think it's we we really should do it and I'm not opposed to placing the sales tax on the although I think it's misguided to not place any other taxation measures because I don't know that this one's going to win once the opposition comes out on it um I think we we would be better off having two taxation measures one progressive and the sales tax um at three percent increase in the tot for example would get us as much money as the sales tax and that money could be used for the things that you all some of you all have been in conversation with the cultural community I have not been in those conversations um you know one percent that you've been discussing with with them and then an additional two percent to be used for the things that we really need it for so you know again I'm just I'm just frustrated and I can't support this without some um you know I'm not going to just believe that those progressive taxes are coming our way you know in the future I need some direction to staff to really take this seriously and bring us back a plan in order to support this today councilmember matthews um there's a motion on the floor and I want to say I am I understand the where you're coming from also there there honestly was they were long detailed meetings and discussions held and the decision to move forward in this way was based on some very expert information that we got and also the timeline that confronts us but I would be willing to also add direction I don't think it's directing staff to come back I think it's directing the mayor to because our revenue committee sunsets right to um appoint a new revenue committee to look at possible measures for the November election and and honestly that was discussed in our committee as one of our recommendations understanding that we are in a brave new world of public finance in our community values it's community service municipal services and we want to be able to fulfill those expectations so I will include that as a fourth recommendation great thank you okay um point of order mayor just uh it says in our minutes that the revenue committee sunsets on 6 6 2018 so I don't know that's uh I think that date I mean we have to double check that because I think it was formed last year so it's I think yeah it's six months from when it from when it starts but however once you this work is completed yeah you know you've made your recommendation so I think I think that that's a new one can start but it would be for obviously a different measure I think for the next term vice mayor Watkins I just want to briefly speak to councilmember Crohn's comment about the sugary beverage tax and and I and I appreciate the conversation that was just had and then all the different input and I appreciate also the recommendation to move forward in ways that acknowledge your your concerns councilmember Brown um I too was able to speak with the number of folks up in the Bay Area and I appreciate the staff doing the research and reaching out to those folks as well and I think um what I was able to take away from that is that this felt rushed and not necessarily ready in terms of the sugary beverage tax and we want to get it right and um and I wasn't going to support it to be on our ballot in June personally um so um moving forward I think it would be important that we do do the groundwork so that it is successful and we identify the ways that it's going to best be re-invested in our community to meet the public health needs and uh those experts are incredibly informative and I just I I really want to thank the staff for reaching out and following up in that way because I know that was part of the motion so any other discussion comments councilmember Matthews one item two the third part of the recommendations excuse me can you put back the slide that has those recommendations the the motion okay motion um the third one is what where I was going with this it's to support the measure identify the authors and prepare the legal and fiscal analysis staff will do the legal and fiscal but um I would suggest that we ask the mayor to appoint uh up to three council members who could actually work with community as well at their discretion um and that's um identifying those people who appear as signers on the arguments in favor and um okay so I just designate okay ask that we ask the mayor to designate those those people okay to work on that yes councilmember crown I don't hear any firm language though that is going to address what councilmember brown's talking about coming back to us on measures of that of substantive issues that we're going to put tot we're going to put a sugar beverage tax on the november ballot um it'd be nice to get you know some assurances from the council that that's that's where we're headed and that's what we're doing and that's our intention I guess let me just and let me just say that I I looked over when councilmember Matthews from proposing the language and I thought I saw you affirming that you supported that so I just wanted to make sure that's clear the language that was presented by councilmember Matthews if I could clarify it would be really nice to have some kind of set report back date to the full council because um you know three months from now if the revenue new revenue enhancement committee does its business and we just get an agenda report that doesn't really explain much about the work that went into it we don't have a lot of information and we're asked to make decisions that's not going to work for me so it would be really nice to have us um updated more regularly with some detail about the progressive taxation measures by smear walkins my understanding is that we would have a pretty soon coming deadline to have the revenue committee report yes because the deadline to place a measure on the november ballot is uh early august but we take recess in july so typically we try to get it completed by june okay okay okay um councilmember crone follow up yeah councilmember brown talked about splitting the motion I don't know if you're still wanting to do that and so you don't have to vote for the quarter-cent sales tax if that's where you're you're at I think at this point I again I'm I think it's a misguided move but it's up to the voters to decide I think so I'll I'll be okay with just keeping it together councilmember Matthews I'll pass at this point okay I just want to say that before I go to the city attorney I really appreciate all the work of the committee members looked all these different revenue options we also had a fairly robust discussion at the last meeting which continued into this one um I think the one area that I feel I would like to see moving forward is that we spend as much time kind of polling the public in general about kind of our budgetary priorities as we do when we question them during tax time so that we're just looking at this on an ongoing basis are our funding funding priorities in alignment with what we're doing and sometimes the reactions that we have when there's when there's different issues that are posed in front of us may you know create these expenditures that sometimes can continue to grow and we need to make sure we're maintaining our our focus on our core city services because our parks our beaches our open spaces and programs for use sometimes get you know line items and not have the support because there's so many different options that are put up before us and it's important that we need to maintain some integrity in terms of our process so that we use good data and information in terms of as we prepare our budget in the future so see no other discussion could I interject some yeah first of all I'd like to just clarify because there is a little bit of difference between the language that's on the powerpoint and the language that's contained in the recommendation in your staff report specifically that the item three in the recommendation for the staff reported port is a motion supporting the measure for purposes of authorizing arguments provide direction regarding the authors directing city attorney to prepare the impartial analysis and providing direction to the city manager regarding the preparation of the fiscal analysis as appropriate that to me contemplates that the council will provide some direction on the on the preparation of arguments at this meeting the second was that the language requested by council member brown and and and include and offered as a friendly amendment by council member matthews was accepted by the maker of the second did you accept that okay thank you for clarifying that so council member matthews just in respect to your question about identifying the authors or preparation of arguments typically those arguments are based you only have 70 no it's 75 words that you guys work and we have that language here it's the argument in favor and but the length is 300 words and if there's an argument against then the rebuttal to the argument against and typically those do reflect the key polling issues and the realities and have up to five cosigners each representing a broad diversity of the community and so that's what I think we would ask the mayor to do would be to appoint a small group to work on those arguments and cosigners does that that would make sense yeah okay so we have motion on the floor in a second all those in favor please say aye aye those opposed say no that motion passes unanimously thank you for that discussion okay we're going to go to the next item that's the ucsc growth initiative that's item 12 council member matthews is the presenter on this item along with council members crone and chase and this is being brought to the council to put on the agenda on on the ballot because council member crone and I have been appointed to serve as the city's representatives to the ucsc community advisory committee regarding the long-range development plan for the future we've attended a couple of meetings and that process is on a pretty fast track the university is reaching out to the community with some opportunities to gain information and provide input they've said they want community input we've had experience I think everyone here in terms of for one length of time or another in understanding the the settlement agreement that was reached after the the previous long-range development plan there's been a significant amount of work on that and yet there are major challenges confronting us in in the current growth plan and the feeling was that the challenges presented by the projected growth of another 10 000 students the impact on our community would be mind-boggling and because we have been asked to uh council member crone and I to represent the city council on this advisory committee we felt it would be helpful to not only represent the council but the community at large and this is intended to provide the community at large to weigh in on this subject the long-range development adoption is a long process it's beginning and this election would take this vote would take place in June and would help inform not only the campus administration but I think more importantly as well the UC system and the regents who are the ultimate decision makers you all know and it we should just restate for the public the city council has no authority on the growth of the university but we hopefully can have input and can be directed by the community at large to do everything in our power to enforce the principles that are set forth here so that's what we're bringing forward for council to officially put on the ballot council member chase do you want to say anything on me I'll just briefly add and I appreciate working with again council members crone and Matthews on this we're kind of a team on this agenda today um and really it is for me the the university's impact on housing came up so many times during the housing listening session it is one of many factors that is impacting the housing crisis uh it is certainly not the only one and a lot of people like to uh oversimplify and say that that is the issue and it is not um it is many things but it was just so important I think for us to really say uh we need to give a strong message to the uc system to let them know as this process moves forward um the impact here and while we appreciate the uh incredible contributions that the university may uh makes to our community we also need to uh let them know the impacts that are negative to the community and do everything that we can to partner with the university to find some solutions that uh fit the community best council member crone thank you um I think we're fascinating this this 19 500 um if you go to the one of the websites they have it's nine it's over 19 000 um it's a uc sc uh website I think we're also um in line with the board of supervisors who have uh strongly uh supported I believe what we're doing here today at least letter they sent out previously along with our letter from from our mayor uh to the university um I think we have a unified community on this I I just want to I don't know city clerk did you get a chance to pass this out to our city council members um this is a resolution from the um student union assembly I was sent uh from uh Maxine uh Jimenez the president uh just to point out that um we're not anti-education we're not anti our young people this is about Oakland and about the uc regions and about the state of California providing resources to the towns that support uc and especially particular in particular this town Santa Cruz I wanted to point to um this is a resolution opposing uc Santa Cruz's enrollment plan for 2017-18 and it's passed by the student academic senate it's a student academic senate resolution and I wanted to go to the page um the uh page three with the therefore and it's the uh second therefore therefore the student union assembly is in full support of individuals who choose to stand against the actions of the governor uc office of the president uc regions uc administration specifically in regards to any mandate that requires uc sc to admit additional students when the uc sc campus resources are already inadequate and insufficient to support any additional students the next therefore the third second sentence to take action and stand against any and all additional enrollment measures as mandated by the governor uc office of the region uh the president and uc regions and the um the second to last therefore therefore be it resolved that the student union assembly demands that chancellor blumenthal vice chancellor uh and camp uh and campus provost trump publicly condemn any and all mandates by the governor uc office of the president and or regions to expand the enrollment of uc sc unless the campus has sufficient resources to accommodate the needs of every each and every additional student admitted excuse me so i think that we're pretty backed up as unified not only the community in town but also the community on the hill at least as represented by the student union assembly question customer brown well i'll just say i don't it's not a question so much i would just say you know i want to echo the comments of my colleagues and say thank you for um for putting the work in to bring this before us i am in full support i just wanted to add that i'm i'm glad that student the student voice is part of this as well because you know students experience you know we say uc sc is a problem but it doesn't mean that students are the problem right um and so they experience it in the same way that the rest of us do so i wanted to just acknowledge that um there's some language in the ordinance that i like about you know including quality of education and and acknowledging you know the students are our concern for what uc sc growth means for them as well so um that's that's my i just wanted to say yes i'm on board thanks any questions i have to remember norion when it comes time to um vote on this i do have some friendly amendments i like to put forth and so just wanted to let you know i'll be doing that after we take public comment and do our own deliberations but in the therefore be it resolved where it mentions you know um you know the student union assembly demands that the chancellor and that our um vice chancellor publicly condemn any and all mandates you know that don't include additional resources if you listen to the chancellor and the vice chancellor speak whenever they talk that's exactly what they're saying is they they are saying we really can't grow unless we do have this infrastructure so i hope that that's not lost that um you know folks that we may be looking to as maybe um trying to instigate this change are actually echoing these same concerns as well it's a student resolution i have a quick one i know this is one top of mind ever since that statement was made about future growth what do you hope will be like the outcome just a kind of validation of the position or what it would sure what you know by putting this on the uh on the ballot a clear message from the entire community a direction to the council uh officially to take whatever steps are necessary and i think you understand the steps that were taken uh following the previous l rdp um and um again just giving voice to the concerns the path beyond that is unclear one of the things i was just as a question if you've looked at this in terms of um whether there's been any kind of review of like what are the appropriate housing needs for the current suit or so that we're kind of having some data that shows like what are because i know that you know when we look at these things the the impacts we really kind of have insufficient amount of information to show what it means to have growth and what are you know in terms of we know what we feel it but i mean what are those needs if you had that in terms of housing what its impact on police and city services there there is language and i'm my eyes aren't following it on it right now that um there before any additional growth occurs that there be a full exploration of the needs for infrastructure which includes housing roads both on campus and off that will accommodate the increased demands before the enrollment is increased that that language is in here so it's it's exactly what you're talking about just want to make sure it's section four c thank you for finding it yeah section four one c and um just to to respond also david um you know although we don't have uh necessarily a seat at the region's table um what we're doing i think is is portraying reflecting as a council the severity of of what's going on in our community right now and sometimes people they have to hear it from multiple places um to you know it's just not anecdotal or or just you know but it's it we systematic as far as our housing goes we are losing we've lost lots of housing to and we have students who are coming to the university competing for for housing that you know is very scarce right now so i think if if we show a unity here and again with the students as well in that unity um the uc has been running this thing that you you know they keep sending students without resources and we're just saying yes resources a lot before students and then you build some housing and um before the students get here appreciate it all right well i'll go to the public to see if there's any members that like to speak to this item we're on item number 12 uc ucse growth initiative sir please step up anyone else who wants to speak please stand up so we can make sure we accommodate you during this period please step up now you may begin i guess i i guess i feel like i've done the math and uh 28 000 students if there were no population growth and that's that's actually like you know kind of a one thing to add to the mix uh because it illustrates you know how crazy it is to have 28 000 students that's that's more voting students than there are uh voting uh members of the public uh that's that's kind of bizarre i mean to just sort of add the university with the people uh but the community uh you know definitely it allows 2006 we had two two measures that were you know just very very firm and very very um directly that applied to the university that they were going a little bit probably you know probably should have this i i want to say i have three adjectives to apply to this uh prudent also necessary thank you next speaker please can you start the clock please on this issue it's very important and we understand that and we realize that and we're part of this community as well um we do have some concerns with the item before you today but that being said we think it's more important that we continue the dialogue and we hope that whatever happens today um it doesn't hinder our ability to um work together with you and with staff and with the community um we want to hear the input we want to hear the concerns we want to work together um so that's our message today um and i also in that spirit want to invite you and members of the public to come to um one of our upcoming community hearings um or our forums which is going to be held on monday march the fifth at the hotel paradox at seven p.m. um we hope we will come and share your comments and views um in addition to that you can learn more information about our long-range development planning process on our website at lrdp.ucse.edu so please take a visit you can also sign up there to receive future notices of public meetings thank you thank you next speaker please david yes uh council member matthews melissa uh i think you have three community input sessions scheduled correct there are um the one on march fifth is at the hotel paradox there's one on march sixth and that's in watsonville at the civic plaza community room and there's one on march eighth at the senior center in capitola great thank you thank you next speaker please can you put the mic around to speak into that thank you um my name is jenny i'm a student at ucsc i'm a third year um i'm part of a really large group of sustainable organizations um and this is a big thing that we've been talking about the lrdp the p3 and so we've been trying to like express our concerns for it but the university seems to be very like um they don't want to acknowledge the our concerns and they just keep kind of like promoting this other lrdp as something that's going to be great and it's going to help the whole community but at the same time it's you know there's already the housing crisis um of santa cruz county and just having this uh a new enrollment of 10 000 students is gonna you know affect the housing crisis even more you know you have uh account of homeless young people under 25 doubled in the last two years and 588 reported in 2017 most of those are probably students i myself went homeless for a while um and so just having those concerns out there is very essential for uh us students and for the community together so that we have this better relationship with you all um and yeah so i urge you to put this on on the ballot and so put it forth for election thank you thank you next speaker please is there any other member of the public that'd like to speak to this item okay this will be our last speaker uh members of the community and city council i'm robert north with homeless united for friendship and freedom a couple of the speakers including council member crone uh i didn't hear all the discussion i've talked about the importance of housing and the overreach of the university and its really negative impact on folks homeless and housed alike in the community but my real question is is this a substantive activity that the council is engaged in i mean you know concerns we have policies is there any substantive measure even being considered by this council like i don't know limiting water use or imposing new taxes or something that might actually hit ucsc in the pocketbook i am not at all educated on this issue but and i just walk into the room and i simply see this measure which you know sure but what about at a deeper level what's going on here i say this to the community because uh as this council knows and this community knows i have very little confidence in this city council our views are very different on a number of different views on a matter of different matters so i would really ask the members of the community and perhaps anyone in the council or staff who's interested in really considering what is actually being done to address and put some real pressure on the university other than uh token measures thank you thank you okay that concludes the public comment period on this item we'll bring it back to the council council member matthews or excuse me one moment city attorney i'd just like to make a brief comment and that is um the recommended action does not include a similar direction that was contained in the last matter involving preparation of an impartial analysis and arguments if the council determines that that's appropriate it would be appropriate also provide that direction for this and the following item on the measure k repeal thank you so i was going to move the motion right go council member crone and second did you make a motion earlier i was just about to make the motion and include the addition suggested okay motion by council member matthews and i heard council member crone second that is there any other discussion council member neroyan yeah i have um some friendly amendments that i hope will be friendly amendments um if bonnie could put that up on the board i'll also pass this out um as well just so we have our own copy at our desks um the items in red are what i'd like to add to these and i'll explain why you know the title of the ordinance i'd like to add in the california legislature i really believe the legislature needs to be mentioned in this what really drives these numbers and what drives the lack of infrastructure at these campuses really comes from our legislators wish to follow the california master plan for higher education and what's happened in the last 20 years is you know there's been an increase in our population the goal is that our top 12.5 percent high school students um we have spaces for them at our ucs and what's happened is is the populations increased that 12.5 percent numbers remain the same but yet the state of california has reduced its funding of uc operational expenses from 65 percent to 25 percent and so when we we have a state legislature in my opinion that shows a disconnect between actual resources needed when they keep demanding that more and more students become educated that they keep asking the universities to absorb more and more students and to stay by this 12.5 percent goal without providing any more uh infrastructure or money for it so uh section two under purposes i would just like to add and the california state legislature um to the other folks we already mentioned and then under findings in section three i put this here because i think it's really important and i know that we have other sections in this that show this that we are not against the california master plan for higher education that we do believe in um you know this wonderful program this wonderful system that was set up in the 60s before you know many of us on this council were even born and i have to say that it really you know set up my destiny as the first person in my family to go to college and the only person on my father's side of family to have a degree i i believe without the master plan i wouldn't be sitting here and i and i wouldn't be um college educated so i wanted to add this other section just to make the statement that we not only support the master plan for higher education but that we support the state reinvesting in the infrastructure and resources needed to continue meeting the goals of educating our state's top 12.5 percent um high school students and transfer students regardless of a student's personal wealth and i believe this goal will be impossible to meet without the state reinvesting in the infrastructure of current uc campuses and creating new campuses in the state let me take a pause there and see do you want to comment on that or no i have a i have another comment okay so is um and i'll bring it to the motion a maker of the motion and second um these look fine to me the only thing i might change is the word our concerns whether i think the language here is more kind of a third person oh it's it's just i know you're speaking from the heart but yeah i am i am but that's a trivial editing change so we're oh i see is these uh are you talking about under section three findings that clause um it's it's trivial we can figure out the words okay all right it doesn't change the substance yeah okay thank you council member brown i also as the second of the motion okay are you in fact the easiest thing is just to drop off the word our and just say concerns that's absolutely fine yeah that's what i did that's my brown well the last thing i want to do is start going through this and wordsmithing it because you'll put a tremendous amount of work into it clearly um but i do wonder if the maker of the motion and the second might consider striking section 4.1 b because so a says there shall be no additional enrollment growth at ucse beyond the 19 500 students allowed by the current 2005 l rdp that's a strong declarative statement we obviously can't make them not enroll more students but to then in b say if there is additional enrollment growth at ucse ucse should house the new net growth of students faculty and staff on campus it just seems like we're kind of conceding that there is going to be even though we're saying we don't want it and we can't control it so i'm i'm just wondering if it if we could strike that that one just just one 4.1 b personally think that's important because the growth is out of our hands and um i i got the feeling when the community advisory committee met that was one of the reactions of that whole room full of people and and the idea that ucse should house the net new growth of students faculty and staff because in the settlement agreement they did agree to house two we're not going to talk about the quality of housing but to house on campus two thirds of the additional growth but that still leaves one third of the additional growth plopped in the city of santa cruz so personally i think that's important with that i just wanted to i just seems like we're saying okay we you know we don't want you to do it but and you can do it um also since you mentioned that c says if there is additional enrollment growth it will only occur when the on campus and off campus infrastructure including on campus housing required to support the growth is provided prior to or concurrent with the growth so councilmember crown raises hand i would feel more comfortable with uh taking out the word concurrent there but um it seems a little bit weird to say no growth and then oh if you have some growth then you know i mean i i would agree i would make a separate motion then to um to include to exclude that language and be i just it doesn't make any sense um if we're asking them for no growth and then giving them an option i think it maybe it represents reality because of the fact that we don't have control over growth to say both things you know because we don't have complete control so it's it's like a clause to ensure two different scenarios that are you know one one one will happen and one won't and but to include both covers both bases let them say that let let them it's a negotiating thing right there we're saying no well you know it it it seems opposite or you know i'd like to ask the city attorney i just wanted to mention that there wasn't a second council's debating an amendment that hasn't been seconded correct i had um i thought it was i thought it was a friendly amendment the main motions on the floor and we had um discussion about oh yeah before the nobody's so councilman oroyan i would make it a motion then to um exclude that language as an amendment then right okay so do you state your motion and see if there's a second i would to exclude the language if there is an additional enrollment growth that ucsc ucsc should house the net the net new growth of students faculty and staff on campus so i'd like to exclude that from that language from the well since i raised the question i'll second it i but i have a feeling i know where this is going so so shall we vote on it i want to deal with reality why don't we call the question here so let's put this to vote um in terms of the um substitute motion to add this to the main motion those in favor of i'm sorry what i'm confused what do we vote are we motion on the floor by council member matthews right right go back so this is we're voting on on council member crohn's let me let me clarify okay all right there's a motion on the floor by council member matthews and council member crohn that is the motion to put this ballot on the measure you've they've already accepted your uh amendments that are outlined in this slide council member crohn made a subsequent motion to delete a section of language from this proposal that was seconded by council member brown right now we're going to vote because it was not accepted as a friendly amendment so we're going to take a vote of whether or not that's added to the main motion okay and and just to respond to you council member matthews um i mean we we've heard and been can we have a motion let's have a discussion oh wait i thought we're discussing go right ahead um i think folks are really feeling like 19 500 is um you know enough and and and give us a respite i mean can we can can we put in like three to five years or some sort of moratorium because if we let this opening here it just sounds like oh well go ahead you know they're going to put up 3000 beds we we need to have some like okay if that actually works the public private partnership what was going to stop them from putting two or three more 3000 bed facilities up there with traffic and transportation and water issues um which i'm not necessarily opposed in you know on the face of it of doing that but i don't think we are contemplating at all if they do in fact house thousands of more students as the the chancellor's anticipating and we're saying okay you house those 10 000 up there if they actually go forward with it and with that under that kind of thing and we're saying okay go ahead and do that they could build three of those facilities three three thousand bed facilities is nine thousand more students let's let's we have a motion um your your substitute motion on the floor um and i appreciate your comments is there any other discussion on that i'd like to put that to a vote now if there's no further discussion so all those in favor of the substitute motion that was um that a substitute amendment amendment a motion amendment by um council member crone seconded by council member brown those in favor of that motion please say aye those opposed please say no no okay that fails um with council member uh crone and council member brown supporting that council member matthews council member um chase council member noroy and vice mayor walkins and myself voting against so now we'll return to the main motion um we have the motion on the floor in a second is there any further discussion i just i don't have any further i don't have any further discussion other than that i i thank you for bringing this forward i recognize also the intention behind your comments and and amendment and recognize the reality and the counter to that i also just want to acknowledge that the university representative was here and i appreciate her comments and that this is not uh us against the university this is a bigger conversation with a bigger entity at play as um as mentioned by council member norion and um and i and i appreciate the opportunity for the city to weigh in in that way and for us to move forward in a way that's collaborative because we all share this wonderful city um students staff and everyone in between and i want to um really acknowledge that it we we will work when we work together there are often better outcomes and so i just really want to echo those comments that were mentioned earlier um as we move forward in this direction thanks okay we have motion on the floor in a second all those in favor please say aye aye those opposed please say no passes unanimously so the next item is um we're going to go to is oral communication right at the appointed hour so we're going to go to that right at 5 30 and then we're going to wait 30 seconds uh no i think i'm going to start it right now anybody who wants to speak to oral communication please step up and when uh the city clerk's available we'll start the timer okay please step up you're ready to go leave it i was joking i had kiddles and a cruise i brought this up before and you might wonder well why do you keep bringing it up well people keep bringing up all kinds of things we've been bringing up uh university growth for decades have we not yes we have say could you guys um possibly listen to what i'm saying would that be all right we are oh i guess you're writing stuff while you're listening to me is that how it goes yeah right so anyway israel did 9 11 that is a basic highly documentable fact which uh you i really wonder how many of you people actually know this and really don't want to go there anyway because there's plenty of evidence we no longer have to depend on fox news or npr or any of the controlled media to divert our attention from the facts that israel did 9 11 i get called a racist for pointing this out i am trying to prevent wars against muslims which have been raging at least ever since 9 11 is a direct result in 9 11 when george bush got up there on the uh rubble of 9 11 and said you know they're gonna pay for this you people are still going along with george bush and george bush did all that because he thinks the israel lobby is where his butter guest bread and he's right and so are all the politicians since then like obama and and uh trump hillary she had her top seven campaign donors were israel lobby billionaires every one of them wants a war with iran and by god they are determined to get that war you better believe they're determined to get that war and they play dirty trying to set things up so that we'll do that i urge you to look at bolin dot com b o l l y n an investigative reporter right here from santa pruce next speaker please next speaker thanks good evening my name is veronica lopez doran and i'm back to remind you that tomorrow is giving day and so we welcome you and the larger community in sharing in our effort to endow in a scholarship honoring officer elizabeth butler the scholarship or endowment if we get to that level in her name would support community studies students who follow in her footsteps by pursuing field study in santa cruse county last year alone community studies students contributed over 7000 hours to organizations in santa cruse county we will be turning 50 next year and so that can give you an idea of the kind of impact that our students have had over time in order to contribute the easiest ways to folk for folks to do that that are out in the public can go to community studies dot ucsc dot edu that is the easiest way to get to our giving day page also if you saw the newspaper this morning if you get the print or if you're online you could have seen that last night and you will also be able to access our link last year um like i said students contributed over 17 thousand hours 7000 hours and again it is my honor to be able to say that there's a generous donor who has agreed to provide a matching gift of up to $15,000 so i think this is really our opportunity as a community and ucsc and community as a whole to say this is an important scholarship that we want to endow in perpetuity and have her legacy live on into the future so once again community studies dot ucsc dot edu and thank you all for any personal sharing that you can do through your networks thank you Veronica thank you next speaker please hello i'm nathan kennedy and uh i've said this before so i'll say it again uh something i think we need to do is provide some alternative cars for the county to use as well as the police department even uh something i've always i've thought would make a really cool cop car actually would be the chevrolet volt which is an all electric vehicle but it does have a gas tank that will take petrochemicals uh gasoline and what it does is it uses the gasoline for electric generator that will then drive the car so you can be driving an electric car that still is using gas that way you're not stuck if you want to make a cross country trip you're not stuck in uh i o wyoming or something uh miles away from anywhere to charge the car and you you don't have to select the car sit for like hours and hours and hours just to charge up also i think if not just the chevrolet volt uh all the different hybrids that are out there i think there should be some research done for that and uh i've also said that it'd be pretty cool if we could get uh um government vehicles including cop cars but not just to be just a diesel engine because on a diesel engine you can run a biodiesel uh basically plant uh oils that run the car but one thing about doing that is that it gets really complicated i've looked it up on on mercedes-benz diesel online and what it what it turns out is that like yeah theoretically you can pour uh just good old corn oil into the gas tank and it'll run but uh the reality is it would gunk up the engine really fast and shorten the life of the vehicle nate alex kennedy nate alex dot kennedy at gmail.com 831 3469 888 thank you thank you for that update next speaker please uh nate's gonna want to hit um all the scary aspects of global warming if he wants the city to buy more hybrids um yeah i uh i want to say brent's not here tonight filming because he worked so hard at the warming center uh last night in wassenville uh his program is absolutely a one of a kind and it really it really hits the mark when it uh when it's trying to you know save lives um a few things i wanted to talk about um one thing uh yesterday was the 25th anniversary of something that happened in our nation kind of uh significant uh it was the first attack on the world trade centers and uh eight and a half years later uh the uncle of romsey osef the individual who had planned that attack uh he uh he planned and and executed the 9 11 attacks um christ you were mayor when that happened i'm sure you remember more well than most people of this on this body um so uh i just think it's interesting to look at how this one guy ksm uh there's a great book called the hunt for ksm uh you know he sent money to the original people in 93 and then uh later planned and executed uh with the the funding of sangoon line well okay i had an idea and i just wanted to share it with you folks i made a graphic because graphics are fun and exciting so this is the intersection of moracy you guys really successfully made two uh roundabout intersections over uh by the wharf and i lived in that area when you made those and it was a little bit inconvenient and interesting to see it all come together and people just really seemed to like it i mean the one bus driver who hated it no no no it seems to work for metro um but uh here's something i thought would be kind of cool if you had a roundabout at moracy you've got all these inputs right one two three four five six seven eight nine you know different directions if you had a roundabout there you could actually take this little section of poplar just do away with it and have you know smooth flow of traffic and it doesn't have to be perfectly round and just a thought just something that i thought would be fun and interesting to talk about thanks good thank you excuse me last piece of the day thank you last speaker council members and members of the community tomorrow cops and rangers will be driving survival campers away from the san lorenzo benchlands the only immediate campground alternative is a barbed wire yes it's still barbed wire uh fenced off space at the edge of town that is about one third the size of the current san lorenzo campground homeless people are considered too dangerous to be able to walk to and from this campground and it is reportedly according to people who are out at the campground today almost completely filled the other shelter alternative is the winter shelter program slated to end in mid april it involves body searches strict entering and leaving times and other aspects would make it unsuitable for many outside but even if it weren't it's clearly insufficient for even a simple majority of the homeless people around and it's currently limited to 110 people there are no plans for a summer shelter program other than the have you found a path to housing with cash and vouchers out at the homeless lack of services center given these sober facts it's nonsense to believe government claims that san lorenzo campers are being given a real alternative when they're driven out tomorrow into the neighborhoods the downtown and elsewhere much of the bali who around these shelter proposals seems simply to be a way of dressing up mass eviction and possible city crackdown on poor people and repeating the same failed policies that have been used for the last few decades and intensified by many members of the city council here it is the community that needs to step in and it needs to be of course homeless people themselves that organize in berkeley first they came for the homeless organize themselves into a group of people and continue to resist the attempted evictions of police departments and when they were evicted they moved to another area i encourage community members to support any homeless encampment people who are not given options into a community space to support them in their need to find their own space and use it for survival purposes thank you thank you that concludes oral communication this evening we're going to bring it back to the council for the next item on the agenda which is item number 13 it's the resolution include measure on the 2018 ballot for the repeal of measure k just thinking back to want to make sure that motion we had for the prior item for ucse growth initiative you provided some language about you know directing ballot language that was incorporated into the main motion i just want to make sure that that's the case i was going to just to be clean move the motion with that added language that the mayor designate people to work on the ballot language and signer okay so that was for the item 13 i'd like to just revote that just to make sure that's incorporated you understand what the the the motion that we vote on to add that so i'd just like to make sure that's clear for everyone try to put it at vote again the appropriate thing to be to do would be to have have a motion to reconsider and then to retake the vote but can't we just add the language to this and it's know which is motion to reconsider the item that we already did or we already taken action on the item number 12 growth measure i'll move it we reconsider yeah i'll second that all those in favor of reconsidering the motion for item 12 i i passes unanimously okay so back at item 12 we took action on this already and there's need to update some language council member matthews i guess the proper motion would be to reaffirm the action on item on the ucsc item 12 and clarify that we want for item 13 to similarly have the mayor designate um persons to develop the ballot language and signers for the repeal of measure k okay and that motion was council member crone do you support that yes okay so motion by council member matthews second by council member crone is there any further discussion not necessarily repeal right measure k that's the next item this is the this is for item 12 ucsc oh you said you measure k yeah just for clear because i know we're trying to clarify then we're going to get to measure k yeah also yes okay for the ucsc okay perfect sorry just trying to be efficient okay that it's it's the ordinance language that we received with the friendly amendments from council member new ryan the whole thing yeah and just and so it will be the the arguments in favor with signers and bonnie and i will talk after just to make sure we're all clear okay so it's clear yeah okay all those in favor please say aye hi that passes unanimously and so we're going to bring that back to item three 13 and this is the resolution to include a measure on the june 2018 ballot on the repeal of measure k um and i'll take turn it over to the city attorney for a brief presentation it's really uh very quickly um to give you a little bit of background as i understand the history of measure k is it was originally drafted as a citizen sponsored measure but there were certain provisions of it that were determined to conflict with the city's charter and so the city initiated legal action to seeking to remove those from the ballot measure and subsequently entered into an agreement with the proponents of the measure to modify the language of measure k the result being that um that the only really operative language of the measure directs the city police department to make enforcement of marijuana related offenses its lowest enforcement priority and creates a an oversight committee to monitor um the implementation of that policy it turned out that the oversight committee's function didn't really make sense in line of what actually the measure included and so the committee after a couple of meetings basically stopped meeting um and since then we've had statewide ballot measures and the city councils also taken action to establish regulations for um for the operation of recreational marijuana businesses and possession of cannabis in certain quantities is no longer a violation of state law so so the impetus for measure k no longer really makes sense and it also potentially could conflict to some extent with the city's own efforts to ensure that its regulations concerning recreational marijuana businesses are vigorously enforced and implemented so on that basis the recommendation is to adopt the resolution placing this measure on the ballot and i would also ask the council to consider giving direction on uh preparation of ballot arguments and uh requesting a preparation of an impartial analysis as well all right thank you i can answer any questions any questions at this time no uh council member i'd like to i'd like to ask the and members of the public they'd like to speak to this item too can you please stand up and come step forward you want to go first uh mr. Norse can you let them go first so apparently we have this measure k that was to make it uh much less of an offense and lower priority for the marijuana laws but uh what i've got to say to that is now that the legalization is passed doesn't that make most of measure k just null and void and uh you know it it's one of those things where i what i want to see a study of what problems could be uh could we could still see if we keep it on the books you know that that's a big question for me and uh the all right i got over a minute left uh i'll let robert have it well nope you can't do that so it's tough it's tough the time well yeah okay you can you can be good again thank you next speaker please so this measure was originally intended by the community because the city council refused to pass it under pressure from the police department they refused to even put it on the ballot it was an attempt to essentially monitor the police department's behavior which continued to be abusive towards people who are engaging in marijuana youth smoking and so forth and uh the issue was whether there will be an oversight body and the city took action to cripple the measure and then appointed people to it who would not enforce it the chair and the vice chair resigned from this body a year after it was created not as the city attorney states because it was uh pointless no what it was pointless but because pointless trying to deal with a staff member who is now the assistant city manager who essentially helped to cripple the measure that is say the issue was to hold the police accountable and to have their records looked at police department resisted this and essentially very little was ever done about this so my point is to sort of clarify the record on this and also to suggest to you the same drug war mentality is still stalking Santa Cruz and is embodying the city council's attempt to restrict marijuana consumption areas in retail businesses and refusal to allow for example a place where you can smoke marijuana or eat marijuana edibles within the city limits we need to have real action on measures about marijuana such as amnesty for any prosecutions and people still in jail for this kind of marijuana involvement that the city attorney has been involved with and i acknowledge most of this is done by the district attorney and also some indication of the costs and suffering caused you know by some of those great police department activists that are that are being celebrated otherwise like officers butler and baker who actually caused lots of suffering that this council never talks about and that's never attempted to rectify that's my point is there any other member of the public that would like to speak to this item bring it back to council for deliberation council anybody yeah i'll move the move the rec and the staff recommendation brown makes the motion direct direction to prepare ballot language analysis sorry i'm happy to second okay and second by council member neroy and thank you and so we have the standard language on the ballot thank you for that city attorney so then there's a motion on the floor and the second is there any further discussion no further discussion all those in favor of the motion please say aye those opposed please say nay no so it's uh passes unanimously okay we're going to go to the next item on the agenda which is the review of our meeting calendar any updates or changes i saw there was a special meeting that's coming up and i'm just curious when we solidify that uh it tentative right now but yeah okay what's the topic well we talked about it not recently there's a couple that we're going to do during the year and i think we'll get back with you on you know when that's finalized but there's three that we've talked about and the dates do you have the dates for them it's on the calendar there's haven't been secured yet so but we'll definitely provide a date well in advance when it occurs um ten may i think may is the first one okay at the water i think at one point didn't we hold all our we had the i mean they're still on my calendar so nothing in the immediate future nothing in the immediate future okay keep your keeping you enjoy that time okay so the next um the one is the uh next item on the agenda is any opportunities we've talked about every uh month instead of doing it every meeting for updates on what's occurred um during the since the last you know update you've had we've uh had a lot of activities here in the council but what you've been doing while you aren't here so anybody would like to talk about their meetings please uh take this opportunity to do so council member brown i was just gonna say i don't have any uh reports from since the last time that we reported out that i can think of okay the rts maybe our blueprint well yeah we constantly that's yeah that's true external stuff or yeah i don't have no i don't have anything that's a moment orion did you want to report on anything um no i'm good council member walk or vice mayor walkins um just that we had a live oak uh santa cruz youth violence prevention meeting finally and um had an opportunity to sort of revisit the effort and think about how we want to move forward and that will be still kind of forthcoming and we also had our city schools subcommittee um and was able to kind of collaborate with some of our school partners and understanding where they're at with some of the issues and other concerns and how to best work together but i don't need to get into details contact me if you want to know more great okay council member crown did you want to yeah um the next lrdp meeting is march 16th and you all should let council member matthews and i know if we're you know if you want something urgently brought up i i assume it might be a an interesting meeting um you let them know we're putting something on the june ballot yeah we'll let them know that if they don't know um the the um the next integrated waste task force meetings coming up as well as the um next week is the uh the climate action uh committee that i'm on but i did want to say a word how well this council was represented in san diego this past weekend council member martin Watkins and rachel neroy and myself we're all down in san diego and really it's a great place to uh visit with our representatives so um i think we all probably visited with mark stone and bill monning and many others a gavin newson on my part and uh it was i guess the shocking thing was that our senator did not receive uh uh the endorsement of the democratic party feinstein senator feinstein did not get it but uh kevin delion did i i didn't think they they gave anyone an endorsement i'm sorry i'm sorry he won the majority of the vote but yeah he didn't get one major that's that's your excuse that's what i read in the sentinel this morning i believe but i highly recommend it for people if you've never been to one it's a it's a great experience and it's you meet council members representatives from all over the place and uh this is a really really good experience council member matthews um in terms of metro uh council member chase and i both serve on that and um a couple of things of interest um they are as you know um eternally strapped for operating funds um and among other things they will be initiating a fair study it has the um fares haven't been revised in about 10 years or so and um are substantially below what other comparable um systems are charging currently um the idea being to both um provide uh subsidies or um benefits for those who are um most most at need while still increasing ultimately the fares and importantly um the metro has to hit a threshold of 20 percent of its income gained from fares in order to qualify for a lot of the matching funds so it's not a um just a hypothetical issue so that will begin and there they'll be holding study sessions throughout the county on that um i can get you all information on that um related to that the there will be a an election on campus at ucsc uh in may early may uh asking the students to renew and over time increase the student fee that goes to subsidizing metro that is absolutely critical to metro being able to um continue the level of service to campus that it needs uh including for example the articulated buses that have just been added and um i met with some of the students involved in that campus election so that also will be important to the overall financial situation for metro and um other other issues you want to report on that you've been involved with the uh facility plan so i'm on the capital committee for the metro um and also now the vice chair because we just had elections in our last meeting and um we're going to have meetings coming up soon about pacific station and um the amount the money that was set aside for pacific station has been getting repurposed for various things all things of important they were all board votes um but what was a 5.8 million dollars set aside for that project is now down to just about two uh so that that is going to change significantly what metro is able to contribute to a joint project uh we hope that um the metro board still is in support of a joint project because their partnership is really critical for um the not just the city um and our projects which really do rely on and want to support transit oriented development but it's also critical for metro as a district to have you know as one a system that works and also stations that are inviting and clean and welcoming and support transit that is more robust than the system that we have now so we're going to be some interesting discussions um you know our partnership is clear we really want to work with metro on this and we think it'll benefit the entire district as well as the city and and uh the region uh not sure if that is shared so it's going to be an uh interesting discussion and hopefully we'll get a lot of support from the community coming out and talking about what kind of district uh transit district they want to have and what they think transit's role is in our region and uh we hear a lot about that at metro and also at the regional transportation commission where people are pushing really hard on improvements to our transit system because that is something that could be done certainly much quicker than any other transportation options in our community so I hope that the community continues to be engaged uh on the options for transit there's a follow-up to that too I had asked council member chase about the articulated buses going up to campus I had not realized that the UCSC is paying for those buses 100 there's two of them right there's three three and that's only going to be until the end of June or maybe June 15th probably when the school's out and will not be renewed as council member Matthews just said if the students don't approve this uh transportation funding right so those will for sure go away unless the fees are supported by the students in which case then they will come back and they have been a huge success there's fewer students that are being passed by and it's really been very very successful but we do need the support from the students to keep that going I'll just say there's been variety things since the last meeting and some of you might have received that invite to go on a um ranger ride along where you go out on the rangers out in the field and I think I went on that and I think council member Dorian I'd highly recommend it you go out to some of the open spaces with some of the rangers and kind of see some of the issues that they're grappling with during the day it was a really good experience and I would encourage everyone to go and see not only in the downtown but also out in the open spaces and parks the other thing that's occurred since the last meeting is the county office of education does an annual high school mock trial and so judged earlier in the month and now tomorrow is the semifinal so I'll be doing that it's it's really wonderful to see these kids from all of the high schools come out and prepare and argue these cases they're really amazing and it's really special to get awarded you know these recognitions that you see a lot of the work they put into and it's really fun um one of the highlights though recently was um seeing council member crone as one of the biggest fans in the the kaiser arena or the kaiser arena rooting for the cuban team as they as they as they went to the to the locker room during halftime and a strong encouragement to greet uh you know jeff bong gundy who was coaching the usa team david took me up on that too he stood there and welcomed jeff to santa careers you know his captive audience right i couldn't see him but he does have a local connection as you might have read in the paper also so it was interesting and then last night the um usa v uh puerto rica played and it was really really amazing to have the first international basketball tournament here there's a really good crowd i think the puerto rican team was um brought an entire like rhythm section in the audience so had really good music by the fans uh bands and um it was a really great experience a lot of people were having a good time and then martin mentioned as part of her his presentation today um we've taken a couple tours of the uh temporary emergency shelter and i would encourage everyone to go out there and take a look at that just to see the work that went into it i know sometimes it's hard when you have these discussions here to see what the end results are but um i felt that it was very well organized at least how they have the the facility structured at this time and as we go into the details of the budget it's just important to see how it's laid out bonnie can you put up that picture just a more recent kind of more recent yeah from susie sent me a picture about maybe an hour ago okay oh there it is yeah jessica was there earlier i think yeah the um but also even going there to see some of the other facilities and how the intake process works i think would be helpful when you see the storage areas we talked earlier this morning about how maro is working on platforms he had a you know jacket and tie on he was like he was like uh kind of nailing together some of these platforms while we're there during this uh you know open house so if there's no other discussion of council member noroyan one item um just wanted to get a recap on there's aren't there going to be five community meetings at the police department's holding as they roll out neighborhood meeting pardon yeah the neighborhood plan right and then did did we mention the dates on that during this meeting i just think it might be a good idea to mention thank you for reminding i know i think it's on the city's website um and okay that's you know if there was a press release that went out and they're pretty but it yeah it'd be good also to have some sort of you know uh kind of update on those when they come up so that one for those not everyone can go to each of the meetings but get a preview of what it is you know to the council so we can see some of the changes yeah i mean i like to know what issues come up at each one and you know it's on our main our main website so you can click on it and those start though just to clarify i think they start march 6 is when the first one third saturday march 3rd that's right at the police community about the saturday one it's right there on the home page it's super easy to find yeah okay the first one is the downtown neighborhoods yeah also our website is really so much better than i mean i just really want to acknowledge that the changes have been really great it's very much external facing and very easy to navigate could we get the um city agendas pushed up to the top on the clerks page because people have told me so many times they didn't know they didn't scroll down to do the agenda they didn't know how to get it and so they go how do i do this and they have to guide them through it kind of thing and you just search agenda you do but you come to the page but you don't know to scroll way down oh yeah it's not intuitive i know what he's talking okay oh hey the other thing i'd like to know is when we have future updates for the website who they go to who's the webmaster to make those updates because i've seen there's some broken links and also i lean cross she's the web she's in charge of the website she'll get it to the right uh individual yeah okay great all right well that is the end of the day for all of us here so the most the meeting's adjourned good work david maybe for you it's the end of the day what's not the end of the day i said i said it's the end of the day here that's saturday there's so much going on uh-huh hi how's it going hold on a second